Difference between revisions of "Directory:Logic Museum/Augustine City of God Book II"

MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Wednesday May 08, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
-----------------------------
+
-------------------
ON THE CITY OF GOD, BOOK III
+
ON THE CITY OF GOD, BOOK II
---------------------------
+
-------------------
 +
[[Directory:Logic Museum/Augustine City of God|Index]]
  
 
Translated by [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Dods_%28theologian%29 Marcus Dods]
 
Translated by [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Dods_%28theologian%29 Marcus Dods]
  
 
*[[#c0|Introduction]]
 
*[[#c0|Introduction]]
*[[#c1|Chapter 1]] Of the Ills Which Alone the Wicked Fear, and Which the World Continually Suffered, Even When the Gods Were Worshipped
+
*[[#c1|Chapter 1]] Of the Limits Which Must Be Put to the Necessity of Replying to an Adversary
*[[#c2|Chapter 2]] Whether the Gods, Whom the Greeks and Romans Worshipped in Common, Were Justified in Permitting the Destruction of Ilium
+
*[[#c2|Chapter 2]] Recapitulation of the Contents of the First Book
*[[#c3|Chapter 3]] That the Gods Could Not Be Offended by the Adultery of Paris, This Crime Being So Common Among Themselves
+
*[[#c3|Chapter 3]] That We Need Only to Read History in Order to See What Calamities the Romans Suffered Before the Religion of Christ Began to Compete with the Worship of the Gods
*[[#c4|Chapter 4]] Of Varro's Opinion, that It is Useful for Men to Feign Themselves the Offspring of the Gods
+
*[[#c4|Chapter 4]] That the Worshippers of the Gods Never Received from Them Any Healthy Moral Precepts, and that in Celebrating Their Worship All Sorts of Impurities Were Practiced
*[[#c5|Chapter 5]] That It is Not Credible that the Gods Should Have Punished the Adultery of Paris, Seeing They Showed No Indignation at the Adultery of the Mother of Romulus
+
*[[#c5|Chapter 5]] Of the Obscenities Practiced in Honor of the Mother of the Gods
*[[#c6|Chapter 6]] That the Gods Exacted No Penalty for the Fratricidal Act of Romulus
+
*[[#c6|Chapter 6]] That the Gods of the Pagans Never Inculcated Holiness of Life
*[[#c7|Chapter 7]] Of the Destruction of Ilium by Fimbria, a Lieutenant of Marius
+
*[[#c7|Chapter 7]] That the Suggestions of Philosophers are Precluded from Having Any Moral Effect, Because They Have Not the Authority Which Belongs to Divine Instruction, and Because Man's Natural Bias to Evil Induces Him Rather to Follow the Examples of the Gods Than to Obey the Precepts of Men
*[[#c8|Chapter 8]] Whether Rome Ought to Have Been Entrusted to the Trojan Gods
+
*[[#c8|Chapter 8]] That the Theatrical Exhibitions Publishing the Shameful Actions of the Gods, Propitiated Rather Than Offended Them
*[[#c9|Chapter 9]] Whether It is Credible that the Peace During the Reign of Numa Was Brought About by the Gods
+
*[[#c9|Chapter 9]] That the Poetical License Which the Greeks, in Obedience to Their Gods, Allowed, Was Restrained by the Ancient Romans
*[[#c10|Chapter 10]] Whether It Was Desirable that The Roman Empire Should Be Increased by Such a Furious Succession of Wars, When It Might Have Been Quiet and Safe by Following in the Peaceful Ways of Numa
+
*[[#c10|Chapter 10]] That the Devils, in Suffering Either False or True Crimes to Be Laid to Their Charge, Meant to Do Men a Mischief
*[[#c11|Chapter 11]] Of the Statue of Apollo at Cumж, Whose Tears are Supposed to Have Portended Disaster to the Greeks, Whom the God Was Unable to Succor
+
*[[#c11|Chapter 11]] That the Greeks Admitted Players to Offices of State, on the Ground that Men Who Pleased the Gods Should Not Be Contemptuously Treated by Their Fellows
*[[#c12|Chapter 12]] That the Romans Added a Vast Number of Gods to Those Introduced by Numa, and that Their Numbers Helped Them Not at All
+
*[[#c12|Chapter 12]] That the Romans, by Refusing to the Poets the Same License in Respect of Men Which They Allowed Them in the Case of the Gods, Showed a More Delicate Sensitiveness Regarding Themselves than Regarding the Gods
*[[#c13|Chapter 13]] By What Right or Agreement The Romans Obtained Their First Wives
+
*[[#c13|Chapter 13]] That the Romans Should Have Understood that Gods Who Desired to Be Worshipped in Licentious Entertainments Were Unworthy of Divine Honor
*[[#c14|Chapter 14]] Of the Wickedness of the War Waged by the Romans Against the Albans, and of the Victories Won by the Lust of Power
+
*[[#c14|Chapter 14]] That Plato, Who Excluded Poets from a Well-Ordered City, Was Better Than These Gods Who Desire to Be Honoured by Theatrical Plays
*[[#c15|Chapter 15]] What Manner of Life and Death the Roman Kings Had
+
*[[#c15|Chapter 15]] That It Was Vanity, Not Reason, Which Created Some of the Roman Gods
*[[#c16|Chapter 16]] Of the First Roman Consuls, the One of Whom Drove the Other from the Country, and Shortly After Perished at Rome by the Hand of a Wounded Enemy, and So Ended a Career of Unnatural Murders
+
*[[#c16|Chapter 16]] That If the Gods Had Really Possessed Any Regard for Righteousness, the Romans Should Have Received Good Laws from Them, Instead of Having to Borrow Them from Other Nations
*[[#c17|Chapter 17]] Of the Disasters Which Vexed the Roman Republic After the Inauguration of the Consulship, and of the Non-Intervention of the Gods of Rome
+
*[[#c17|Chapter 17]] Of the Rape of the Sabine Women, and Other Iniquities Perpetrated in Rome's Palmiest Days
*[[#c18|Chapter 18]] The Disasters Suffered by the Romans in the Punic Wars, Which Were Not Mitigated by the Protection of the Gods
+
*[[#c18|Chapter 18]] What the History of Sallust Reveals Regarding the Life of the Romans, Either When Straitened by Anxiety or Relaxed in Security
*[[#c19|Chapter 19]] Of the Calamity of the Second Punic War, Which Consumed the Strength of Both Parties
+
*[[#c19|Chapter 19]] Of the Corruption Which Had Grown Upon the Roman Republic Before Christ Abolished the Worship of the Gods
*[[#c20|Chapter 20]] Of the Destruction of the Saguntines, Who Received No Help from the Roman Gods, Though Perishing on Account of Their Fidelity to Rome
+
*[[#c20|Chapter 20]] Of the Kind of Happiness and Life Truly Delighted in by Those Who Inveigh Against the Christian Religion
*[[#c21|Chapter 21]] Of the Ingratitude of Rome to Scipio, Its Deliverer, and of Its Manners During the Period Which Sallust Describes as the Best
+
*[[#c21|Chapter 21]] Cicero's Opinion of the Roman Republic
*[[#c22|Chapter 22]] Of the Edict of Mithridates, Commanding that All Roman Citizens Found in Asia Should Be Slain
+
*[[#c22|Chapter 22]] That the Roman Gods Never Took Any Steps to Prevent the Republic from Being Ruined by Immorality
*[[#c23|Chapter 23]] Of the Internal Disasters Which Vexed the Roman Republic, and Followed a Portentous Madness Which Seized All the Domestic Animals
+
*[[#c23|Chapter 23]] That the Vicissitudes of This Life are Dependent Not on the Favor or Hostility of Demons, But on the Will of the True God
*[[#c24|Chapter 24]] Of the Civil Dissension Occasioned by the Sedition of the Gracchi
+
*[[#c24|Chapter 24]] Of the Deeds of Sylla, in Which the Demons Boasted that He Had Their Help
*[[#c25|Chapter 25]] Of the Temple of Concord, Which Was Erected by a Decree of the Senate on the Scene of These Seditions and Massacres
+
*[[#c25|Chapter 25]] How Powerfully the Evil Spirits Incite Men to Wicked Actions, by Giving Them the Quasi-Divine Authority of Their Example
*[[#c26|Chapter 26]] Of the Various Kinds of Wars Which Followed the Building of the Temple of Concord
+
*[[#c26|Chapter 26]] That the Demons Gave in Secret Certain Obscure Instructions in Morals, While in Public Their Own Solemnities Inculcated All Wickedness
*[[#c27|Chapter 27]] Of the Civil War Between Marius and Sylla
+
*[[#c27|Chapter 27]] That the Obscenities of Those Plays Which the Romans Consecrated in Order to Propitiate Their Gods, Contributed Largely to the Overthrow of Public Order
*[[#c28|Chapter 28]] Of the Victory of Sylla, the Avenger of the Cruelties of Marius
+
*[[#c28|Chapter 28]] That the Christian Religion is Health-Giving
*[[#c29|Chapter 29]] A Comparison of the Disasters Which Rome Experienced During the Gothic and Gallic Invasions, with Those Occasioned by the Authors of the Civil Wars
+
*[[#c29|Chapter 29]] An Exhortation to the Romans to Renounce Paganism
*[[#c30|Chapter 30]] Of the Connection of the Wars Which with Great Severity and Frequency Followed One Another Before the Advent of Christ
+
 
*[[#c31|Chapter 31]] That It is Effrontery to Impute the Present Troubles to Christ and the Prohibition of Polytheistic Worship Since Even When the Gods Were Worshipped Such Calamities Befell the People
 
  
 
 
 
{| border=1 cellpadding=10
 
{| border=1 cellpadding=10
!valign = top width=46%|Latin
+
!valign = top width=44%|Latin
!valign = top width=54%|Latin
+
!valign = top width=56%|Latin
|- valign = top
 
||<div id="c0"><b>BOOK III</b> [] ||The City of God (Book III) Argument-As in the foregoing book Augustin has proved regarding moral and spiritual calamities, so in this book he proves regarding external and bodily disasters, that since the foundation of the city the Romans have been continually subject to them; and that even when the false gods were worshipped without a rival, before the advent of Christ, they afforded no relief from such calamities.
 
|- valign = top
 
||<div id="c1"><b>BOOK III</b> [I] Iam satis dictum arbitror de morum malis et animorum, quae praecipue cavenda sunt, nihil deos falsos populo cultori suo, quo minus eorum malorum aggere premeretur, subvenire curasse, sed potius, ut maxime premeretur, egisse. Nunc de illis malis video dicendum, quae sola isti perpeti nolunt, qualia sunt fames morbus, bellum exspoliatio, captivitas trucidatio, et si qua similia iam in primo libro commemoravimus. Haec enim sola mali deputant mala, quae non faciunt malos; nec erubescunt inter bona, quae laudant, ipsi mali esse qui laudant, magisque stomachantur, si villam malam habeant, quam si vitam, quasi hoc sit hominis maximum bonum, habere bona omnia praeter se ipsum. Sed neque talia mala, quae isti sola formidant, dii eorum, quando ab eis libere colebantur, ne illis acciderent obstiterunt. Cum enim variis per diversa temporibus ante adventum Redemptoris nostri innumerabilibus nonnullisque etiam incredibilibus claudius genus contereretur humanum, quos alios quam istos deos mundus colebat, excepto uno populo Hebraeo et quibusdam extra ipsum populum, ubicumque gratia divina digni occultissimo atque iustissimo Dei iudicio fuerunt? Verum ne nimis longum faciam, tacebo aliarum usquequaque gentium mala gravissima: quod ad Romam pertinet Romanumque imperium tantum loquar, id est ad ipsam proprie civitatem et quaecumque illi terrarum vel societate coniunctae vel condicione subiectae sunt, quae sint perpessae ante adventum Christi, cum iam ad eius quasi corpus rei publicae pertinerent.  ||Of moral and spiritual evils, which are above all others to be deprecated, I think enough has already been said to show that the false gods took no steps to prevent the people who worshipped them from being overwhelmed by such calamities, but rather aggravated the ruin.  I see I must now speak of those evils which alone are dreaded by the heathen-famine, pestilence, war, pillage, captivity, massacre, and the like calamities, already enumerated in the first book.  For evil men account those things alone evil which do not make men evil; neither do they blush to praise good things, and yet to remain evil among the good things they praise.  It grieves them more to own a bad house than a bad life, as if it were man's greatest good to have everything good but himself.  But not even such evils as were alone dreaded by the heathen were warded off by their gods, even when they were most unrestrictedly worshipped.  For in various times and places before the advent of our Redeemer, the human race was crushed with numberless and sometimes incredible calamities; and at that time what gods but those did the world worship, if you except the one nation of the Hebrews, and, beyond them, such individuals as the most secret and most just judgment of God counted worthy of divine grace?  But that I may not be prolix, I will be silent regarding the heavy calamities that have been suffered by any other nations, and will speak only of what happened to Rome and the Roman empire, by which I mean Rome properly so called, and those lands which already, before the coming of Christ, had by alliance or conquest become, as it were, members of the body of the state.
 
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c2"><b>BOOK III</b> [II] Primum ipsa Troia vel Ilium, unde origo est populi Romani, (neque enim praetereundum aut dissimulandum est, quod et in primo libro adtigi) eosdem habens deos et colens cur a Graecis victum, captum atque deletum est? "Priamo, inquiunt, sunt reddita Laomedontea paterna periuria." Ergo verum est, quod Apollo atque Neptunus eidem Laomedonti mercennariis operibus seruierunt? Illis quippe promisisse mercedem falsumque iurasse perhibetur. Miror Apollinem nominatum divinatorem in tanto opificio laborasse nescientem quod Laomedon fuerat promissa negaturus. Quamquam nec ipsum Neptunum patruum eius, fratrem Iovis, regem maris, decuit ignarum esse futurorum. Nam hunc Homerus de stirpe Aeneae, a cuius posteris Roma est, cum ante illam urbem conditam idem poeta fuisse dicatur, inducit magnum aliquid divinantem, quem etiam nube rapuit, ut dicit, ne ab Achille occideretur, cuperet cum vertere ab imo, quod aput Vergilium confitetur, Structa suis manibus periurae moenia Troiae. Nescientes igitur tanti dii, Neptunus et Apollo, Laomedontem sibi negaturum esse mercedem structores moenium Troianorum gratis et ingratis fuerunt. Videant ne gravius sit tales deos credere quam diis talibus peierare. Hoc enim nec ipse Homerus facile credidit, qui Neptunum quidem contra Troianos, Apollinem autem pro Troianis pugnantem facit, cum illo periurio ambos fabula narret offensos. Si igitur fabulis credunt, erubescant talia colere numina; si fabulis non credunt, non obtemdant Troiana periuria, aut merentur deos periuria punisse Troiana, amasse Romana, Vnde enim coniuratio Catilinae in tanta tamque corrupta civitate habuit etiam eorum grandem copiam, quos manus atque lingua periurio aut sanguine civili alebat? Quid enim aliud totiens senatores corrupti in iudiciis, totiens populus in suffragiis vel in quibusque causis, quae apud eum contionibus agebantur, nisi etiam peierando peccabant? Namque corruptissimis moribus ad hoc mos iurandi servabatur antiquus, non ut ab sceleribus metu religionis prohiberentur, sed ut periuria quoque sceleribus ceteris adderentur.  ||First, then, why was Troy or Ilium, the cradle of the Roman people (for I must not overlook nor disguise what I touched upon in the first book), conquered, taken and destroyed by the Greeks, though it esteemed and worshipped the same gods as they?  Priam, some answer, paid the penalty of the perjury of his father Laomedon.  Then it is true that Laomedon hired Apollo and Neptune as his workmen.  For the story goes that he promised them wages, and then broke his bargain.  I wonder that famous diviner Apollo toiled at so huge a work, and never suspected Laomedon was going to cheat him of his pay.  And Neptune too, his uncle, brother of Jupiter, king of the sea, it really was not seemly that he should be ignorant of what was to happen.  For he is introduced by Homer (who lived and wrote before the building of Rome) as predicting something great of the posterity of Жneas, who in fact founded Rome.  And as Homer says, Nep tune also rescued Жneas in a cloud from the wrath of Achilles, though (according to Virgil)"All his will was to destroyHis own creation, perjured Troy."Gods, then, so great as Apollo and Neptune, in ignorance of the cheat that was to defraud them of their wages, built the walls of Troy for nothing but thanks and thankless people.  There may be some doubt whether it is not a worse crime to believe such persons to be gods, than to cheat such gods.  Even Homer himself did not give full credence to the story for while he represents Neptune, indeed, as hostile to the Trojans, he introduces Apollo as their champion, though the story implies that both were offended by that fraud.  If, therefore, they believe their fables, let them blush to worship such gods; if they discredit the fables, let no more be said of the "Trojan perjury;" or let them explain how the gods hated Trojan, but loved Roman perjury.  For how did the conspiracy of Catiline, even in so large and corrupt a city, find so abundant a supply of men whose hands and tongues found them a living by perjury and civic broils?  What else but perjury corrupted the judgments pronounced by so many of the senators?  What else corrupted the people's votes and decisions of all causes tried before them?  For it seems that the ancient practice of taking oaths has been preserved even in the midst of the greatest corruption, not for the sake of restraining wickedness by religious fear, but to complete the tale of crimes by adding that of perjury.  
+
||<div id="c0"><b>BOOK II</b> [] ||The City of God (Book II) Argument-In this book Augustin reviews those calamities which the Romans suffered before the time of Christ, and while the worship of the false gods was universally practised; and demonstrates that, far from being preserved from misfortune by the gods, the Romans have been by them overwhelmed with the only, or at least the greatest, of all calamities-the corruption of manners, and the vices of the soul.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c3"><b>BOOK III</b> [III] Nulla itaque causa est, quare dii, quibus, ut dicunt, steterat illud imperium, cum a Graecis praeualentibus probentur victi, Troianis peierantibus fingantur irati. Nec adulterio Paridis, ut rursus a quibusdam defenduntur, ut Troiam desererent, suscensuerunt. Auctores enim doctoresque peccatorum esse adsolent, non ultores. "Vrbem Romam, inquit Sallustius, sicuti ego accepi, condidere atque habuere initio Troiani, qui Aenea duce profugi sedibus incertis uagabantur." Si ergo adulterium Paridis vindicandum numinaa censuerunt, aut magis in Romanis aut certe etiam in Romanis puniendum fuit, quia Aeneae mater hoc fecit. Sed quo modo in illo illud flagitium oderant qui in sua socia Venere non oderant (ut alia omittam) quod cum Anchise commiserat, ex quo Aenean pepererat? An quia illud factum est indignante Menelao, illud autem concedente Vulcano? Dii enim, credo, non zelant coniuges suas, usque adeo ut eas etiam cum hominibus dignentur habere communes. Inridere fabulas fortassis existimor nec graviter agere tanti ponderis causam. Non ergo credamus, si placet, Aenean esse Veneris filium: ecce concedo, si nec Romulum Martis. Si autem illud, cur non et illud? An deos <fas est> hominibus feminis, mares autem homines deabus misceri nefas? Dura vel potius non credenda condicio, quod ex iure Veneris in concubitu Marti licuit, hoc in iure suo ipsi Veneri non licere. At utrumque firmatum est auctoritate Romana. Neque enim minus credidit recentior Caesar aviam Venerem quam patrem antiquior Romulus Martem.  ||There is no ground, then, for representing the gods (by whom, as they say, that empire stood, though they are proved to have been conquered by the Greeks) as being enraged at the Trojan perjury.  Neither, as others again plead in their defence, was it indignation at the adultery of Paris that caused them to withdraw their protection from TroyFor their habit is to be instigators and instructors in vice, not its avengers.  "The city of Rome," says Sallust, "was first built and inhabited, as I have heard, by the Trojans, who, flying their country, under the conduct of Жneas, wandered about without making any settlement." If, then, the gods were of opinion that the adultery of Paris should be punished, it was chiefly the Romans, or at least the Romans also, who should have suffered; for the adultery was brought about by Жneas' motherBut how could they hate in Paris a crime which they made no objection to in their own sister Venus, who (not to mention any other instance) committed adultery with Anchises, and so became the mother of Жneas?  Is it because in the one case Menelaus was aggrieved, while in the other Vulcan connived at the crime?  For the gods, I fancy, are so little jealous of their wives, that they make no scruple of sharing them with men.  But perhaps I may be suspected of turning the myths into ridicule, and not handling so weighty a subject with sufficient gravity.  Well, then, let us say that Жneas is not the son of VenusI am willing to admit it; but is Romulus any more the son of Mars?  For why not the one as well as the other?  Or is it lawful for gods to have intercourse with women, unlawful for men to have intercourse with goddesses?  A hard, or rather an incredible condition, that what was allowed to Mars by the law of Venus, should not be allowed to Venus herself by her own law.  However, both cases have the authority of Rome; for Cжsar in modern times believed no less that he was descended from Venus, than the ancient Romulus believed himself the son of Mars.  
+
||<div id="c1"><b>BOOK II</b> [I] Si rationi perspicuae veritatis infirmus humanae consuetudinis sensus non auderet obsistere, sed doctrinae salubri languorem suum tamquam medicinae subderet, donec divino adiutorio fide pietatis inpetrante sanaretur, non multo sermone opus esset ad conuincendum quemlibet uanae opinationis errorem his, qui recte sentiunt et sensa verbis sufficientibus explicant. Nunc vero quoniam ille est maior et taetrior insipientium morbus animorum, quo inrationabiles motus suos, etiam post rationem plene redditam, quanta homini ab homine debetur, sive nimia caecitate, qua nec aperta cernuntur, sive obstinatissima peruicacia, qua et ea quae cernuntur non feruntur, tamquam ipsam rationem veritatemque defendunt, fit necessitas copiosius dicendi plerumque res claras, velut eas non spectantibus intuendas, sed quodam modo tangendas palpantibus et coniventibus offeramus. Et tamen quis disceptandi finis erit et loquendi modus, si respondendum esse respondentibus semper existimemus? Nam qui vel non possunt intellegere quod dicitur, vel tam duri sunt adversitate mentis, ut, etiamsi intellexerint, non oboediant, respondent, ut scriptum est, et loquuntur iniquitatem atque infatigabiliter uani sunt. Quorum dicta contraria si totiens velimus refellere, quotiens obnixa fronte statuerint non cogitare quid dicant, dum quocumque modo nostris disputationibus contradicant, quam sit infinitum et aerumnosum et infructuosum vides. Quam ob rem nec te ipsum, &kt;mi> fili Marcelline, nec alios, quibus hic labor noster in Christi caritate utiliter ac liberaliter seruit, tales meorum scriptorum velim iudices, qui responsionem semper desiderent, cum his quae leguntur audierint aliquid contradici, ne fiant similes earum muliercularum, quas commemorat apostolus semper discentes et numquam ad veritatis scientiam pervenientes.  ||chapter 1. If the feeble mind of man did not presume to resist the clear evidence of truth, but yielded its infirmity to wholesome doctrines, as to a health-giving medicine, until it obtained from God, by its faith and piety, the grace needed to heal it, they who have just ideas, and express them in suitable language, would need to use no long discourse to refute the errors of empty conjectureBut this mental infirmity is now more prevalent and hurtful than ever, to such an extent that even after the truth has been as fully demonstrated as man can prove it to man, they hold for the very truth their own unreasonable fancies, either on account of their great blindness, which prevents them from seeing what is plainly set before them, or on account of their opinionative obstinacy, which prevents them from acknowledging the force of what they do seeThere therefore frequently arises a necessity of speaking more fully on those points which are already clear, that we may, as it were, present them not to the eye, but even to the touch, so that they may be felt even by those who close their eyes against themAnd yet to what end shall we ever bring our discussions, or what bounds can be set to our discourse, if we proceed on the principle that we must always reply to those who reply to us?  For those who are either unable to understand our arguments, or are so hardened by the habit of contradiction, that though they understand they cannot yield to them, reply to us, and, as it is written, "speak hard things," and are incorrigibly vainNow, if we were to propose to confute their objections as often as they with brazen face chose to disregard our arguments, and so often as they could by any means contradict our statements, you see how endless, and fruitless, and painful a task we should be undertaking.  And therefore I do not wish my writings to be judged even by you, my son Marcellinus, nor by any of those others at whose service this work of mine is freely and in all Christian charity put, if at least you intend always to require a reply to every exception which you hear taken to what you read in it; for so you would become like those silly women of whom the apostle says that they are "always learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Timothy 3:7 
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c4"><b>BOOK III</b> [IV] Dixerit aliquis: Itane tu ista credis? Ego vero ista non credo. Nam et vir doctissimus eorum Varro falsa haec esse, quamuis non audacter neque fidenter, paene tamen fatetur. Sed utile esse civitatibus dicit, ut se viri fortes, etiamsi falsum sit, diis genitos esse credant, ut eo modo animus humanus velut divinae stirpis fiduciam gerens res magnas adgrediendas praesumat audacius, agat uehementius et ob hoc impleat ipsa securitate felicius. Quae Varronis sententia expressa, ut potui, meis verbis cernis quam latum locum aperiat falsitati, ut ibi intellegamus plura iam sacra et quasi religiosa potuisse confingi, ubi putata sunt civibus etiam de ipsis diis prodesse mendacia.  ||Some one will say, But do you believe all this? Not I indeed.  For even Varro, a very learned heathen, all but admits that these stories are false, though he does not boldly and confidently say soBut he maintains it is useful for states that brave men believe, though falsely, that they are descended from the gods; for that thus the human spirit, cherishing the belief of its divine descent, will both more boldly venture into great enterprises, and will carry them out more energetically, and will therefore by its very confidence secure more abundant successYou see how wide a field is opened to falsehood by this opinion of Varro's, which I have expressed as well as I could in my own words; and how comprehensible it is, that many of the religions and sacred legends should be feigned in a community in which it was judged profitable for the citizens that lies should be told even about the gods themselves.  
+
||<div id="c2"><b>BOOK II</b> [II] Superiore itaque libro, cum de civitate Dei dicere instituissem, unde hoc universum opus illo adivuante in manus sumptum est, occurrit mihi resistendum esse primitus eis, qui haec bella, quibus mundus iste conteritur, maximeque Romanae urbis recentem a barbaris uastationem Christianae religioni tribuunt, qua prohibentur nefandis sacrificiis seruire daemonibus, cum potius hoc deberent tribuere Christo, quod propter eius nomen contra institutum moremque bellorum eis, quo confugerent, religiosa et amplissima loca barbari libera praebuerunt, atque in multis famulatum deditum Christo non solum verum, sed etiam timore confictum sic honoraverunt, ut, quod in eos belli iure fieri licuisset, inlicitum s.ibi esse iudicarent. Inde incidit quaestio, cur haec divina beneficia et ad impios ingratosque peruenerint, et cur illa itidem dura, quae hostiliter facta sunt, pios cum impiis pariter adflixerint? Quam quaestionem per multa diffusam (in omnibus enim cotidianis vel Dei muneribus vel hominum cladibus, quorum utraque bene ac male viventibus permixte atque indiscrete saepe accidunt, solet multos movere) ut pro suscepti operis necessitate dissoluerem, aliquantum inmoratus sum maxime ad consolandas sanctas feminas et pie castas, in quibus ab hoste aliquid perpetratum est, quod intulit verecundiae dolorem, etsi non abstulit pudicitiae firmitatem, ne paeniteat eas vitae, quas non est unde possit paenitere nequitiae. Deinde pauca dixi in eos, qui Christianos adversis illis rebus adfectos et praecipue pudorem humiliatarum feminarum quamuis castarum atque sanctarum proteruitate inpudentissima exagitant, cum sint nequissimi et inreuerentissimi, longe ab eis ipsis Romanis degeneres, quorum praeclara multa laudantur et litterarum memoria celebrantur, immo illorum gloriae uehementer adversi. Romam quippe partam ueterum auctamque laboribus foediorem stantem fecerant quam ruentem, quando quidem in ruina eius lapides et ligna, in istorum autem vita omnia non murorum, sed morum munimenta atque ornamenta ceciderunt, cum funestioribus eorum corda cupiditatibus quam ignibus tecta illius urbis arderent. Quibus dictis primum terminavi librum. Deinceps itaque dicere institui, quae mala civitas illa perpessa sit ab origine sua sive apud se ipsam sive in provinciis sibi iam subditis, quae omnia Christianae religioni tribuerent, si iam tunc euangelica doctrina adversus falsos et fallaces deos eorum testificatione liberrima personaret.  ||chapter 2. In the foregoing book, having begun to speak of the city of God, to which I have resolved, Heaven helping me, to consecrate the whole of this work, it was my first endeavor to reply to those who attribute the wars by which the world is being devastated, and especially the recent sack of Rome by the barbarians, to the religion of Christ, which prohibits the offering of abominable sacrifices to devils. I have shown that they ought rather to attribute it to Christ, that for His name's sake the barbarians, in contravention of all custom and law of war, threw open as sanctuaries the largest churches, and in many instances showed such reverence to Christ, that not only His genuine servants, but even those who in their terror feigned themselves to be so, were exempted from all those hardships which by the custom of war may lawfully be inflicted.  Then out of this there arose the question, why wicked and ungrateful men were permitted to share in these benefits; and why, too, the hardships and calamities of war were inflicted on the godly as well as on the ungodlyAnd in giving a suitably full answer to this large question, I occupied some considerable space, partly that I might relieve the anxieties which disturb many when they observe that the blessings of God, and the common and daily human casualties, fall to the lot of bad men and good without distinction; but mainly that I might minister some consolation to those holy and chaste women who were outraged by the enemy, in such a way as to shock their modesty, though not to sully their purity, and that I might preserve them from being ashamed of life, though they have no guilt to be ashamed ofAnd then I briefly spoke against those who with a most shameless wantonness insult over those poor Christians who were subjected to those calamities, and especially over those broken-hearted and humiliated, though chaste and holy women; these fellows themselves being most depraved and unmanly profligates, quite degenerate from the genuine Romans, whose famous deeds are abundantly recorded in history, and everywhere celebrated, but who have found in their descendants the greatest enemies of their glory.  In truth, Rome, which was founded and increased by the labors of these ancient heroes, was more shamefully ruined by their descendants, while its walls were still standing, than it is now by the razing of them.  For in this ruin there fell stones and timbers; but in the ruin those profligates effected, there fell, not the mural, but the moral bulwarks and ornaments of the city, and their hearts burned with passions more destructive than the flames which consumed their houses.  Thus I brought my first book to a close.  And now I go on to speak of those calamities which that city itself, or its subject provinces, have suffered since its foundation; all of which they would equally have attributed to the Christian religion, if at that early period the doctrine of the gospel against their false and deceiving gods had been as largely and freely proclaimed as now.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c5"><b>BOOK III</b> [V] Sed utrum potuerit Venus ex concubitu Ancisae Aenean parere vel Mars ex concubitu filiae Numitoris Romulum gignere, in medio relinguamus. Nam paene talis quaestio etiam de scripturis nostris oboritur, qua quaeritur, utrum praeuaricatores angeli cum filiabus hominum concubuerint, unde natis gigantibus, hoc est nimium grandibus ac fortibus viris, tunc terra completa est. Proinde ad utrumque interim <modo> nostra disputatio referatur. Si enim vera sunt, quae apud illos de matre Aeneae et de patre Romuli lectitantur, quo modo possunt diis adulteria displicere hominum, quae in se ipsis concorditer ferunt? Si autem falsa sunt, ne sic quidem possunt irasci veris adulteriis humanis, qui etiam falsis delectantur suis. Huc accedit, quoniam, si illud de Marte non creditur, ut hoc quoque de Venere non credatur, nullo divini concubitus obtentu matris romuli causa defenditur. Fuit autem sacerdos illa Vestalis ,et ideo dii magis in Romanos sacrilegum illud flagitium quam in Troianos Paridis adulterim vindicare debuerunt. Nam et ipsi Romani antiqui in stupro detectas Vestae sacerdotes vivas etiam defodiebant, adulteras autem feminas, quamuis aliqua damnatione, nulla tamen morte plectebant: usque adeo gravius quae putabant adyta divina quam humana cubilia vindicabant. ||But whether Venus could bear Жneas to a human father Anchises, or Mars beget Romulus of the daughter of Numitor, we leave as unsettled questionsFor our own Scriptures suggest the very similar question, whether the fallen angels had sexual intercourse with the daughters of men, by which the earth was at that time filled with giants, that is, with enormously large and strong menAt present, then, I will limit my discussion to this dilemma:  If that which their books relate about the mother of Жneas and the father of Romulus be true, how can the gods be displeased with men for adulteries which, when committed by themselves, excite no displeasure?  If it is false, not even in this case can the gods be angry that men should really commit adulteries, which, even when falsely attributed to the gods, they delight inMoreover, if the adultery of Mars be discredited, that Venus also may be freed from the imputation, then the mother of Romulus is left unshielded by the pretext of a divine seduction.  For Sylvia was a vestal priestess, and the gods ought to avenge this sacrilege on the Romans with greater severity than Paris' adultery on the Trojans.  For even the Romans themselves in primitive times used to go so far as to bury alive any vestal who was detected in adultery, while women unconsecrated, though they were punished, were never punished with death for that crime; and thus they more earnestly vindicated the purity of shrines they esteemed divine, than of the human bed.
+
||<div id="c3"><b>BOOK II</b> [III] Memento autem me ista commemorantem adhuc contra inperitos agere, ex quorum inperitia illud quoque ortum est uulgare proverbium: Pluuia defit, causa Christiani sunt. Narn qui eorum studiis liberalibus instituti amant historiam, facillime ista noverunt; sed ut nobis ineruditorum turbas infestissimas reddant, se nosse dissimulant atque hoc apud uulgus confirmare nituntur, clades, quibus per certa interualla locorum et temporum genus humanum oportet adfligi, causa accidere nominis Christiani, quod contra deos suos ingenti fama et praeclarissima celebritate per cuncta diffunditur. Recolant ergo nobiscum, antequam Christus venisset in carne, antequam eius nomen ea, cui frustra inuident, gloria populis innotesceret, quibus calamitatibus res Romanae multipliciter varieque contritae sint, et in his defendant, si possunt, deos suos, si propterea coluntur, ne ista mala patiantur cultores eorum; quorum si quid nunc passi fuerint, nobis inputanda esse contendunt. Cur enim ea, quae dicturus sum, permiserunt accidere cultoribus suis, antequam eos declaratum Christi nomen offenderet eorumque sacrificia prohiberet? ||chapter 3. But remember that, in recounting these things, I have still to address myself to ignorant men; so ignorant, indeed, as to give birth to the common saying, "Drought and Christianity go hand in hand." There are indeed some among them who are thoroughly well-educated men, and have a taste for history, in which the things I speak of are open to their observation; but in order to irritate the uneducated masses against us, they feign ignorance of these events, and do what they can to make the vulgar believe that those disasters, which in certain places and at certain times uniformly befall mankind, are the result of Christianity, which is being everywhere diffused, and is possessed of a renown and brilliancy which quite eclipse their own godsLet them then, along with us, call to mind with what various and repeated disasters the prosperity of Rome was blighted, before ever Christ had come in the flesh, and before His name had been blazoned among the nations with that glory which they vainly grudgeLet them, if they can, defend their gods in this article, since they maintain that they worship them in order to be preserved from these disasters, which they now impute to us if they suffer in the least degree.  For why did these gods permit the disasters I am to speak of to fall on their worshippers before the preaching of Christ's name offended them, and put an end to their sacrifices?
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c6"><b>BOOK III</b> [VI] Aliud adicio, quia, si peccata hominum illis numinibus displicerent, ut offensi Paridis facto desertam Troiam ferro ignibusque donarent, magis eos contra Romanos moveret Romuli frater occisus quam contra Troianos Graecus maritus inlusus; magis inritaret parricidium nascentis quam regnantis adulterium civitatis. Nec ad causam, quam nunc agimus, interest, utrum hoc fieri Romulus iusserit aut Romulus fecerit, quod multi inpudentia negant, multi pudore dubitant, multi dolore dissimulant. Nec nos itaque in ea re diligentius requirenda per multorum scriptorum perpensa testimonia demoremur: Romuli fratrem palam constat occisum, non ab hostibus, non ab alienis. Si aut perpetravit aut imperavit hoc Romulus, magis ipse fuit Romanorum quam Paris Troianorum caput; cur igitur Troianis iram deorum prouocavit ille alienae coniugis raptor, et eorumdem deorum tutelam Romanis inuitavit iste sui fratris extinctor? Si autem illud scelus a facto imperioque Romuli alienum est: quoniam debuit utique vindicari, tota hoc illa civitas fecit, quod tota contempsit, et non iam fratrem, sed patrem, quod est peius, occidit. Vterque enim fuit conditor, ubi alter scelere ablatus non permissus est esse regnator. Non est, ut arbitror, quod dicatur quid mali Troia meruerit, ut eam dii desererent, quo posset extingui, et quid boni Roma, ut eam dii inhabitarent, quo posset augeri; nisi quod victi inde fugerunt et se ad istos, quos pariter deciperent, contulerunt; immo vero et illic manserunt ad eos more suo decipiendos, qui rursus easdem terras habitarent, et hic easdem artem fallaciae suae magis etiam exercendo maioribus honoribus gloriati sunt. ||I add another instance: If the sins of men so greatly incensed those divinities, that they abandoned Troy to fire and sword to punish the crime of Paris, the murder of Romulus' brother ought to have incensed them more against the Romans than the cajoling of a Greek husband moved them against the Trojans:  fratricide in a newly-born city should have provoked them more than adultery in a city already flourishingIt makes no difference to the question we now discuss, whether Romulus ordered his brother to be slain, or slew him with his own hand; it is a crime which many shamelessly deny, many through shame doubt, many in grief disguiseAnd we shall not pause to examine and weigh the testimonies of historical writers on the subjectAll agree that the brother of Romulus was slain, not by enemies, not by strangers.  If it was Romulus who either commanded or perpetrated this crime; Romulus was more truly the head of the Romans than Paris of the Trojans; why then did he who carried off another man's wife bring down the anger of the gods on the Trojans, while he who took his brother's life obtained the guardianship of those same gods?  If, on the other hand, that crime was not wrought either by the hand or will of Romulus, then the whole city is chargeable with it, because it did not see to its punishment, and thus committed, not fratricide, but parricide, which is worseFor both brothers were the founders of that city, of which the one was by villainy prevented from being a rulerSo far as I see, then, no evil can be ascribed to Troy which warranted the gods in abandoning it to destruction, nor any good to Rome which accounts for the gods visiting it with prosperity; unless the truth be, that they fled from Troy because they were vanquished, and betook themselves to Rome to practise their characteristic deceptions there.  Nevertheless they kept a footing for themselves in Troy, that they might deceive future inhabitants who re-peopled these lands; while at Rome, by a wider exercise of their malignant arts, they exulted in more abundant honors.  
+
||<div id="c4"><b>BOOK II</b> [IV] Primo ipsos mores ne pessimos haberent, quare dii eorum curare noluerunt? Deus enim verus eos, a quibus non colebatur, merito neglexit; dii autem illi, a quorum cultu se prohiberi homines ingratissimi conqueruntur, cultores suos ad bene vivendum quare nullis legibus adivuerunt? Vtique dignum erat, ut, quo modo isti illorum sacra, ita illi istorum facta curarent. Sed respondetur, quod voluntate propria quisque malus est. Quis hoc negaverit? Verum tamen pertinebat ad consultores deos vitae bonae praecepta non occultare populis cultoribus suis, sed clara praedicatione praebere, per uates etiam convenire atque arguere peccantes, palam minari poenas male agentibus, praemia recte viventibus polliceri. Quid umquam tale in deorum illorum templis prompta et eminenti voce concrepuit? Veniebamus etiam nos aliquando adulescentes ad spectacula ludibriaque sacrilegiorum, spectabamus arrepticios, audiebamus symphoniacos, ludis turpissimis, qui diis deabusque exhibebantur, oblectabamur, Caelesti virgini et Berecynthiae matri omnium, ante cuius lecticam die sollemni lauationis eius talia per publicum cantitabantur a nequissimis scaenicis, qualia, non dico matrem deorum, sed matrem qualiumcumque senatorum vel quorumlibet honestorum virorum, immo vero qualia nec matrem ipsorum scaenicorum deceret audire. Habet enim quiddam erga parentes humana verecundia, quod nec ipsa nequitia possit auferre. Illam proinde turpitudinem obscenorum dictorum atque factorum sca e nicos ipsos domi suae proludendi causa coram matribus suis agere puderet, quam per publicum agebant coram deum matre spectante atque audiente utriusque sexus frequentissima multitudine. Quae si inlecta curiositate adesse potuit circumfusa, saltem offensa castitate debuit abire confusa. Quae sunt sacrilegia, si illa sunt sacra? aut quae inquinatio, si illa lauatio? Et haec fercula appellabantur, quasi celebraretur conuivium, quo velut suis epulis inmunda daemonia pascerentur. Quis enim non sentiat cuius modi spiritus talibus obscenitatibus delectentur, nisi vel nesciens, utrum omnino sint ulli inmundi spiritus deorum nomine decipientes, vel talem agens vitam, in qua istos potius quam Deum verum et optet propitios et formidet iratos? ||chapter 4. First of all, we would ask why their gods took no steps to improve the morals of their worshippers. That the true God should neglect those who did not seek His help, that was but justice; but why did those gods, from whose worship ungrateful men are now complaining that they are prohibited, issue no laws which might have guided their devotees to a virtuous life?  Surely it was but just, that such care as men showed to the worship of the gods, the gods on their part should have to the conduct of menBut, it is replied, it is by his own will a man goes astray.  Who denies it?  But none the less was it incumbent on these gods, who were men's guardians, to publish in plain terms the laws of a good life, and not to conceal them from their worshippersIt was their part to send prophets to reach and convict such as broke these laws, and publicly to proclaim the punishments which await evil-doers, and the rewards which may be looked for by those that do wellDid ever the walls of any of their temples echo to any such warning voice?  I myself, when I was a young man, used sometimes to go to the sacrilegious entertainments and spectacles; I saw the priests raving in religious excitement, and heard the choristers; I took pleasure in the shameful games which were celebrated in honor of gods and goddesses, of the virgin C_S lestis, and Berecynthia, the mother of all the gods.  And on the holy day consecrated to her purification, there were sung before her couch productions so obscene and filthy for the ear-I do not say of the mother of the gods, but of the mother of any senator or honest man-nay, so impure, that not even the mother of the foul-mouthed players themselves could have formed one of the audience.  For natural reverence for parents is a bond which the most abandoned cannot ignore.  And, accordingly, the lewd actions and filthy words with which these players honored the mother of the gods, in presence of a vast assemblage and audience of both sexes, they could not for very shame have rehearsed at home in presence of their own mothersAnd the crowds that were gathered from all quarters by curiosity, offended modesty must, I should suppose, have scattered in the confusion of shameIf these are sacred rites, what is sacrilege?  If this is purification, what is pollution?  This festivity was called the Tables, as if a banquet were being given at which unclean devils might find suitable refreshment.  For it is not difficult to see what kind of spirits they must be who are delighted with such obscenities, unless, indeed, a man be blinded by these evil spirits passing themselves off under the name of gods, and either disbelieves in their existence, or leads such a life as prompts him rather to propitiate and fear them than the true God.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c7"><b>BOOK III</b> [VII] Certe enim civilibus iam bellis scatentibus quid miserum commiserat Ilium, ut a Fimbria, Marianarum partium homine pessimo, euerteretur, multo ferocius atque crudelius quam olim a Graecis? Nam tunc et multi inde fugerunt et multi captivati saltem in seruitute vixerunt; porro autem Fimbria prius edictum proposuit, ne cui parceretur, atque urbem totam cunctosque in ea homines incendio concremavit. Hoc meruit Ilium non a Graecis quos sua inritaverat iniquitate, sed a Romanis quos sua calamitate propagaverat, diis illis communibus ad haec repellenda nihil ivuantibus seu, quod verum est, nihil valentibus. Numquid et tunc Abscessere omnes adytis arisque relictis Di, quibus illud oppidum steterat post antiquos Graecorum ignes ruinasque reparatum? Si autem abscesserant, causam requiro, et oppidanorum quidem quanto invenio meliorem, tanto deteriorem deorum. Illi enim contra Fimbriam portas clauserant, ut Sullae servarent integram civitatem; hinc eos iratus incendit vel potius penitus extinxit. Adhuc autem meliorum partium civilium Sulla dux fuit, adhuc armis rem publicam recuperare moliebatur; horum bonorum initiorum nondum malos euentus habuit. Quid ergo melius cives urbis illius facere potuerunt, quid honestius, quid fidelius, quid Romana parentela dignius quam meliori causae Romanorum civitatem servare et contra parricidam Romanae rei publicae portas claudere? At hoc eis in quantum exitium verterit, adtendant defensores deorum. Deseruerint dii adulteros Iliumque flammis Graecorum reliquerint, ut ex eius cineribus Roma castior naxceretur: cur et postea deseruerunt eandem civitatem Romanis cognatam, non rebellantem adversus Romam nobilem filiam, sed iustioribus eius partibus fidem constantissimam piissimamque servantem, eamque delendam reliquerunt non Graecorum viris fortibus, sed viro spurcissimo Romanorum? Aut si displicebat diis causa partium Sullanarum, cui servantes urbem miseri portas clauserant: cur eidem Sullae tanta bona promittebant et praenuntiabant? An et hic agnoscuntur adulatores felicium potius quam infelicium defensores? Non ergo Ilium etiam tunc, ab eis cum desereretur, euersum est. Nam daemones ad decipiendum semper vigilantissimi, quod potuerunt, fecerunt. Euersis quippe et incensis omnibus cum oppido simulacris solum Mineruae sub tanta ruina templi illius, ut scribit Livius, integrum stetisse perhibetur, non ut <diceretur>: Di patrii, quorum semper sub numine Troia est, ad eorum laudem, sed ne diceretur: Excessere omnes adytis arisque relictis Di, ad eorum defensionem. Illud enim posse permissi sunt, non unde probarentur potentes, sed unde praesentes conuincerentur. ||And surely we may ask what wrong poor Ilium had done, that, in the first heat of the civil wars of Rome, it should suffer at the hand of Fimbria, the veriest villain among Marius' partisans, a more fierce and cruel destruction than the Grecian sack.  For when the Greeks took it many escaped, and many who did not escape were suffered to live, though in captivity.  But Fimbria from the first gave orders that not a life should be spared, and burnt up together the city and all its inhabitantsThus was Ilium requited, not by the Greeks, whom she had provoked by wrong-doing; but by the Romans, who had been built out of her ruins; while the gods, adored alike of both sides, did simply nothing, or, to speak more correctly, could do nothing.  Is it then true, that at this time also, after Troy had repaired the damage done by the Grecian fire, all the gods by whose help the kingdom stood, "forsook each fane, each sacred shrine?"But if so, I ask the reason; for in my judgment, the conduct of the gods was as much to be reprobated as that of the townsmen to be applauded.  For these closed their gates against Fimbria, that they might preserve the city for Sylla, and were therefore burnt and consumed by the enraged general. Now, up to this time, Sylla's cause was the more worthy of the two; for till now he used arms to restore the republic, and as yet his good intentions had met with no reverses.  What better thing, then, could the Trojans have doneWhat more honorable, what more faithful to Rome, or more worthy of her relationship, than to preserve their city for the better part of the Romans, and to shut their gates against a parricide of his countryIt is for the defenders of the gods to consider the ruin which this conduct brought on Troy.  The gods deserted an adulterous people, and abandoned Troy to the fires of the Greeks, that out of her ashes a chaster Rome might arise.  But why did they a second time abandon this same town, allied now to Rome, and not making war upon her noble daughter, but preserving a most steadfast and pious fidelity to Rome's most justifiable faction?  Why did they give her up to be destroyed, not by the Greek heroes, but by the basest of the Romans?  Or, if the gods did not favor Sylla's cause, for which the unhappy Trojans maintained their city, why did they themselves predict and promise Sylla such successes?  Must we call them flatterers of the fortunate, rather than helpers of the wretched?  Troy was not destroyed, then, because the gods deserted it.  For the demons, always watchful to deceive, did what they could.  For, when all the statues were overthrown and burnt together with the town, Livy tells us that only the image of Minerva is said to have been found standing uninjured amidst the ruins of her temple; not that it might be said in their praise, "The gods who made this realm divine," but that it might not be said in their defence, They are "gone from each fane, each sacred shrine:"  for that marvel was permitted to them, not that they might be proved to be powerful, but that they might be convicted of being present.
+
||<div id="c5"><b>BOOK II</b> [V] Nequaquam istos, qui flagitiosissimae consuetudinis vitiis oblectari magis quam obluctari student, sed illum ipsum Nasicam Scipionem, qui vir optimus a senatu electus est, cuius manibus eiusdem daemonis simulacrum susceptum est in Vrbemque peruectum, habere de hac re iudicem vellem. Diceret nobis, utrum matrem suam tam optime de re publica vellet mereri, ut ei divini honores decernerentur; sicut et Graecos et Romanos aliasque gentes constat quibusdam decrevisse mortalibus, quorum erga se beneficia magnipenderant, eosque inmortales factos atque in deorum numerum receptos esse crediderant. Profecto ille tantam felicitatem suae matri, si fieri posset, optaret. Porro si ab illo deinde quaereremus, utrum inter eius divinos honores vellet illa turpia celebrari: nonne se malle clamaret, ut sua mater sine ullo sensu mortua iaceret, quam ad hoc dea viveret, ut illa libenter audiret? Absit, ut senator populi Romani ea mente praeditus, qua theatrum aedificari in urbe fortium virorum prohibuit, sic vellet coli matrem suam, ut talibus dea sacris propitiaretur, qualibus matrona verbis offenderetur. Nec ullo modo crederet verecundiam laudabilis feminae ita in contrarium divinitate mutari, ut honoribus eam talibus aduocarent cultores sui, qualibus conuiciis in quempiam iaculatis, cum inter homines viveret, nisi aures clauderet seseque subtraheret, erubescerent pro illa et propinqui et maritus et liberi. Proinde talis mater deum, qualem habere matrem puderet quemlibet etiam pessimum virum, Romanas occupatura mentes quaesivit optimum virum, non quem monendo et adivuando faceret, sed quem fallendo deciperet, ei similis de qua scriptum est: Mulier aottem virorum pretiosas animas captat, ut ille magnae indolis animus hoc velut divino testimonio sublimatus et vere se optimum existimans veram pietatem religionemque non quaereret, sine qua omne quamuis laudabile ingenium superbia uanescit et decidit. Quo modo igitur nisi insidiose quaereret dea illa optimum virum, cum talia quaerat in suis sacris, qualia viri optimi abhorrent suis affiibere conuiviis? ||chapter 5. In this matter I would prefer to have as my assessors in judgment, not those men who rather take pleasure in these infamous customs than take pains to put an end to them, but that same Scipio Nasica who was chosen by the senate as the citizen most worthy to receive in his hands the image of that demon Cybele, and convey it into the city.  He would tell us whether he would be proud to see his own mother so highly esteemed by the state as to have divine honors adjudged to her; as the Greeks and Romans and other nations have decreed divine honors to men who had been of material service to them, and have believed that their mortal benefactors were thus made immortal, and enrolled among the gods.  Surely he would desire that his mother should enjoy such felicity were it possible.  But if we proceeded to ask him whether, among the honors paid to her, he would wish such shameful rites as these to be celebrated, would he not at once exclaim that he would rather his mother lay stone-dead, than survive as a goddess to lend her ear to these obscenities? Is it possible that he who was of so severe a morality, that he used his influence as a Roman senator to prevent the building of a theatre in that city dedicated to the manly virtues, would wish his mother to be propitiated as a goddess with words which would have brought the blush to her cheek when a Roman matronCould he possibly believe that the modesty of an estimable woman would be so transformed by her promotion to divinity, that she would suffer herself to be invoked and celebrated in terms so gross and immodest, that if she had heard the like while alive upon earth, and had listened without stopping her ears and hurrying from the spot, her relatives, her husband, and her children would have blushed for herTherefore, the mother of the gods being such a character as the most profligate man would be ashamed to have for his mother, and meaning to enthral the minds of the Romans, demanded for her service their best citizen, not to ripen him still more in virtue by her helpful counsel, but to entangle him by her deceit, like her of whom it is written, "The adulteress will hunt for the precious soul." Proverbs 6:26  Her intent was to puff up this high- souled man by an apparently divine testimony to his excellence, in order that he might rely upon his own eminence in virtue, and make no further efforts after true piety and religion, without which natural genius, however brilliant, vapors into pride and comes to nothing.  For what but a guileful purpose could that goddess demand the best man seeing that in her own sacred festivals she requires such obscenities as the best men would be covered with shame to hear at their own tables?
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c8"><b>BOOK III</b> [VIII] Diis itaque Iliacis post Troiae ipsius documentum qua tandem prudentia Roma custodienda commissa est? Dixerit quispiam iam eos Romae habitare solitos, quando expugnante Fimbria cecidit Ilium. Vnde ergo stetit Mineruae simulacrum? Deinde, si apud Romam erant, quando Fimbria delevit Ilium, fortasse aput Ilium erant, quando a Gallis ipsa Roma capta et incensa est; sed ut sunt auditu acutissimi motuque celerrimi, ad vocem anseris cito redierunt, ut saltem Capitolinum collem, qui remanserat, turerentur; ceterum ad alia defendenda serus sunt redire commoniti.  ||Where, then, was the wisdom of entrusting Rome to the Trojan gods, who had demonstrated their weakness in the loss of Troy? Will some one say that, when Fimbria stormed Troy, the gods were already resident in Rome?  How, then, did the image of Minerva remain standing?  Besides, if they were at Rome when Fimbria destroyed Troy, perhaps they were at Troy when Rome itself was taken and set on fire by the Gauls.  But as they are very acute in hearing, and very swift in their movements, they came quickly at the cackling of the goose to defend at least the Capitol, though to defend the rest of the city they were too long in being warned.  
+
||<div id="c6"><b>BOOK II</b> [VI] Hinc est quod de vita et moribus civitatum atque populorum a quibus colebantur illa numina non curarunt, ut tam horrendis eos et detestabilibus malis non in agro et vitibus, non in domo atque pecunia, non denique in ipso corpore, quod menti subditur, sed in ipsa mente, in ipso rectore carnis animo, eos impleri ac pessimos fieri sine ulla sua terribili prohibitione permitterent. Aut si prohibebant, hoc ostendatur potius, hoc probetur. Nec nobis nescio quos susurros paucissimorum auribus anhelatos et arcana velut religione traditos iactent, quibus vitae probitas castitasque discatur; sed demonstrentur vel commemorentur loca talibus aliquando conventiculis consecrata, non ubi ludi agerentur obscenis vocibus et motibus histrionum, nec ubi Fugalia celebrarentur effusa omni licentia turpitudinem (et vere Fugalia, sed pudoris et honestatis); sed ubi populi audirent quid dii praeciperent de cohibenda auaritia, ambitione frangenda, luxuria refrenanda, ubi discerent miseri, quod discendum Persius increpat dicens: Discite, o miseri, et causas cognoscite rerum, Quid sumus et quidnam victuri gignimur, ordo Quis datus aut metae qua mollis flexus et unde, Quis modus argenti, quid fas optare, quid asper Vtile nummus habet, patriae carisque propinquis Quautum largiri deceat, quem te Deus esse Iussit et humana qua parte locatus es in re. Dicatur in quibus locis haec docentium deorum solebant praecepta recitari et a cultoribus eorum populis frequenter audiri, sicut nos ostendimus ad hoc ecclesias institutas, quaqua versum religio Christiana diffunditur.  ||chapter 6. This is the reason why those divinities quite neglected the lives and morals of the cities and nations who worshipped them, and threw no dreadful prohibition in their way to hinder them from becoming utterly corrupt, and to preserve them from those terrible and detestable evils which visit not harvests and vintages, not house and possessions, not the body which is subject to the soul, but the soul itself, the spirit that rules the whole man.  If there was any such prohibition, let it be produced, let it be proved.  They will tell us that purity and probity were inculcated upon those who were initiated in the mysteries of religion, and that secret incitements to virtue were whispered in the ear of the йlite; but this is an idle boast. Let them show or name to us the places which were at any time consecrated to assemblages in which, instead of the obscene songs and licentious acting of players, instead of the celebration of those most filthy and shameless Fugalia (well called Fugalia, since they banish modesty and right feeling), the people were commanded in the name of the gods to restrain avarice, bridle impurity, and conquer ambition; where, in short, they might learn in that school which Persius vehemently lashes them to, when he says:  "Be taught, you abandoned creatures, and ascertain the causes of things; what we are, and for what end we are born; what is the law of our success in life; and by what art we may turn the goal without making shipwreck; what limit we should put to our wealth, what we may lawfully desire, and what uses filthy lucre serves; how much we should bestow upon our country and our family; learn, in short, what God meant you to be, and what place He has ordered you to fill."  Let them name to us the places where such instructions were wont to be communicated from the gods, and where the people who worshipped them were accustomed to resort to hear them, as we can point to our churches built for this purpose in every land where the Christian religion is received.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c9"><b>BOOK III</b> [IX] Hi etiam Numam Pompilium successorem Romuli adivuisse creduntur, ut toto regni sui tempore pacem haberet et Iani portas, quae bellis patere adsolent, clauderet, eo merito scilicet, quia Romanis multa sacra constituit. Illi vero homini pro tanto otio gratulandum fuit, si modo id rebus salubribus scisset impendere et perniciosissima curiositate neglaecta Deum verum vera pietate perquirere. Nunc autem non ei dii contulerunt illud otium, sed eum minus fortasse decepissent, si otiosum minime repperissent. Quanto enim minus eum occupatum invenerunt, tanto magis ipsi occupaverunt. Nam quid ille molitus sit et quibus artibus deos tales sibi vel illi civitati consociare potuerit, Varro prodit, quod, si Domino placuerit, suo diligentius disseretur loco. Modo autem quia de beneficiis eorum quaestio est: magnum beneficium est pax, sed Dei veri beneficium est, plerumque etiam sicut sol, sicut pluuia vitaeque alia subsidia super ingratos et nequam. Sed si hoc tam magnum bonum dii illi Romae vel Pompilio contulerunt, cur imperio Romano per ipsa tempora laudabilia id numquam postea praestiterunt? An utiliora erant sacra, cum instituerentur, quam cum instituta celebrarentur? Atqui tunc nondum erant, sed ut essent addebantur; postea vero iam erant, quae ut prodessent custodiebantur. Quid ergo est, quod illi quadraginta tres vel, ut alii volunt, triginta et novem anni in tam longa pace transacti sunt regnante Numa, et postea sacris institutis diisque ipsis, qui eisdem sacris fuerant inuitati, iam praesidibus atque tutoribus vix post tam multos annos ab Vrbe condita usque ad Augustum pro magno miraculo unus commemoratur annus post primum bellum Punicum, quo belli portas Romani claudere potuerunt?  ||It is also believed that it was by the help of the gods that the successor of Romulus, Numa Pompilius, enjoyed peace during his entire reign, and shut the gates of Janus, which are customarily kept open during war. And it is supposed he was thus requited for appointing many religious observances among the Romans.  Certainly that king would have commanded our congratulations for so rare a leisure, had he been wise enough to spend it on wholesome pursuits, and, subduing a pernicious curiosity, had sought out the true God with true piety.  But as it was, the gods were not the authors of his leisure; but possibly they would have deceived him less had they found him busier.  For the more disengaged they found him, the more they themselves occupied his attention.  Varro informs us of all his efforts, and of the arts he employed to associate these gods with himself and the city; and in its own place, if God will, I shall discuss these mattersMeanwhile, as we are speaking of the benefits conferred by the gods, I readily admit that peace is a great benefit; but it is a benefit of the true God, which, like the sun, the rain, and other supports of life, is frequently conferred on the ungrateful and wickedBut if this great boon was conferred on Rome and Pompilius by their gods, why did they never afterwards grant it to the Roman empire during even more meritorious periods?  Were the sacred rites more efficient at their first institution than during their subsequent celebration?  But they had no existence in Numa's time, until he added them to the ritual; whereas afterwards they had already been celebrated and preserved, that benefit might arise from them.  How, then, is it that those forty-three, or as others prefer it, thirty-nine years of Numa's reign, were passed in unbroken peace, and yet that afterwards, when the worship was established, and the gods themselves, who were invoked by it, were the recognized guardians and pa trons of the city, we can with difficulty find during the whole period, from the building of the city to the reign of Augustus, one year-that, viz., which followed the close of the first Punic war-in which, for a marvel, the Romans were able to shut the gates of war?  
+
||<div id="c7"><b>BOOK II</b> [VII] An forte nobis philosophorum scholas disputationesque memorabunt? Primo haec non Romana, sed Graeca sunt; aut si propterea iam Romana, quia et Graecia facta est Romana provincia, non deorum praecepta sunt, sed hominum inventa, qui utcumque conati sunt ingeniis acutissimis praediti ratiocinando uestigare, quid in rerum natura latitaret, quid in moribus adpetendum esset atque fugiendum, quid in ipsis ratiocinandi regulis certa conexione traheretur, aut quid non esset consequens vel etiam repugnaret. Et quidam eorum quaedam magna, quantum divinitus adiuti sunt, invenerunt; quantum autem humanitus impediti sunt, erraverunt, maxime cum eorum superbiae iuste providentia divina resisteret, ut viam pietatis ab humilitate in superna surgentem etiam istorum comparatione monstraret; unde postea nobis erit in Dei veri Domini voluntate disquirendi ac disserendi locus. Verum tamen si philosophi aliquid invenerunt, quod agendae bonae vitae beataeque adipiscendae satis esse possit: quanto iustius talibus divini honores decernerentur! Quanto melius et honestius in Platonis templo libri eius legerentur, quam in templis daemonum Galli absciderentur, molles consecrarentur, insani secarentur, et quidquid aliud vel crudele vel turpe, vel turpiter crudele vel crudeliter turpe in sacris talium deorum celebrari solet! Quanto satius erat ad erudiendam iustitia ivuentutem publice recitari leges deorum quam laudari inaniter leges atque instituta maiorum! Omnes enim cultores talium deorum, mox ut eos libido perpulerit feruenti, ut ait Persius, tincta veneno, magis intuentur quid luppiter fecerit, quam quid docuerit Plato vel censuerit Cato. Hinc apud Terentium flagitiosus adulescens spectat tabulam quandam pictam in pariete, ubi inerat pictura haec, Iovem Quo pacto Danaae misisse aiunt quondam in gremium imbrem aureum, atque ab hac tanta auctoritate adhibet patrocinium turpitudini suae, cum in ea se iactat imitari deum. At quem deum! inquit; qui templa caeli summo sonitu concutit. Ego hcmuncio id non facerem? Ego vero illud feci ac libens. ||chapter 7. But will they perhaps remind us of the schools of the philosophers, and their disputations? In the first place, these belong not to Rome, but to Greece; and even if we yield to them that they are now Roman, because Greece itself has become a Roman province, still the teachings of the philosophers are not the commandments of the gods, but the discoveries of men, who, at the prompting of their own speculative ability, made efforts to discover the hidden laws of nature, and the right and wrong in ethics, and in dialectic what was consequent according to the rules of logic, and what was inconsequent and erroneousAnd some of them, by God's help, made great discoveries; but when left to themselves they were betrayed by human infirmity, and fell into mistakes.  And this was ordered by divine providence, that their pride might be restrained, and that by their example it might be pointed out that it is humility which has access to the highest regions.  But of this we shall have more to say, if the Lord God of truth permit, in its own placeHowever, if the philosophers have made any discoveries which are sufficient to guide men to virtue and blessedness, would it not have been greater justice to vote divine honors to them?  Were it not more accordant with every virtuous sentiment to read Plato's writings in a "Temple of Plato," than to be present in the temples of devils to witness the priests of Cybele mutilating themselves, the effeminate being consecrated, the raving fanatics cutting themselves, and whatever other cruel or shameful, or shamefully cruel or cruelly shameful, ceremony is enjoined by the ritual of such gods as these?  Were it not a more suitable education, and more likely to prompt the youth to virtue, if they heard public recitals of the laws of the gods, instead of the vain laudation of the customs and laws of their ancestors?  Certainly all the worshippers of the Roman gods, when once they are possessed by what Persius calls "the burning poison of lust," prefer to witness the deeds of Jupiter rather than to hear what Plato taught or Cato censured.  Hence the young profligate in Terence, when he sees on the wall a fresco representing the fabled descent of Jupiter into the lap of Danaл in the form of a golden shower, accepts this as authoritative precedent for his own licentiousness, and boasts that he is an imitator of God.  "And what God?" he says. "He who with His thunder shakes the loftiest temples.  And was I, a poor creature compared to Him, to make bones of it? No; I did it, and with all my heart."
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c10"><b>BOOK III</b> [X] An respondent, quod nisi assiduis sibique continuo succedentibus bellis Romanum imperium tam longe lateque non posset augeri et tam grandi gloria diffamari? Idonea vero causa! Vt magnum esset imperium, cur esse deberet inquietum? Nonne in corporibus hominum satius est modicam staturam cum sanitate habere quam ad molem aliquam giganteam perpetuis adflictionibus pervenire, nec cum perueneris requiescere, sed quanto grandioribus membris, tanto maioribus agitari malis? Quid autem mali esset, ac non potius plurimum boni, si ea tempora perdurarent, quae perstrinxit Sallustius, ubi ait: "Igitur initio reges (nam in terris nomen imperii id primum fuit) diversi pars ingenium, alii corpus exercebant; etiamtum vita hominum sine cupiditate agitabatur, sua cuique satis placebant." An ut tam multum augeretur imperium, debuit fieri quod Vergilius dedestatur, dicens: Deterior donec paulatim ac decolor aetas Et belli rabies et amor successit habendi? Sed plane pro tantis bellis susceptis et gestis iusta defensio Romanorum est, quod inruentibus sibi inportune inimicis resistere cogebat non aviditas adipiscendae laudis humanae, sed necessitas tuendae salutis et libertatis. Ita sit plane. Nam "postquam res eorum, sicut scribit ipse Sallustius, legibus moribus agris aucta satis prospera satisque pollens videbatur, sicut pleraque mortalium habentur, inuidia ex opulentia orta est. Igitur reges populique finitimi bello temptare; pauci ex amicis auxilio esse, nam ceteri metu perculsi a periculis aberant. At Romani domi militiaeque intenti festinare parare, alius alium hortari, hostibus obuiam ire, libertatem patriam parentesque armis tegere. Post ubi pericula virtute propulerant, sociis atque amicis auxilia portabant magisque dandis quam accipiendis beneficiis amicitias parabant." Decenter his artibus Roma crevit. Sed regnante Numa, ut tam longa pax esset, utrum inruebant inprobi belloque temptabant, an nihil eorum fiebat, ut posset pax illa persistere? Si enim bellis etiam tum Roma lacessebatur nec armis arma obuia ferebantur: quibus modis agebatur, ut nulla pugna superati, nullo Martio impetu territi sedarentur inimici, his modis semper ageretur et semper Roma clausis Iani portis pacata regnaret. Quod si in potestate non fuit, non ergo Roma pacem habuit, quamdiu dii eorum, sed quamdiu homines finitimi circumquaque voluerunt, qui eam nullo bello prouocaverunt; nisi forte dii tales etiam id homini vendere audebunt, quod alius homo voluit sive noluit. Interest quidem, iam vitio proprio, malas mentes quatenus sinantur isti daemones vel terrere vel excitare; sed si semper hoc possent nec aliud secretiore ac superiore potestate contra eorum conatum saepe aliter ageretur, semper in potestate haberent paces bellicasque victorias, quae semper fere per humanorum animorum motus accidunt; quas tamen plerumque contra eorum fieri voluntatem non solae fabulae multa mentientes et vix veri aliquid vel indicantes vel significantes, sed etiam ipsa Romana confitetur historia.  ||Do they reply that the Roman empire could never have been so widely extended, nor so glorious, save by constant and unintermitting wars?  A fit argument, truly! Why must a kingdom be distracted in order to be great?  In this little world of man's body, is it not better to have a moderate stature, and health with it, than to attain the huge dimensions of a giant by unnatural torments, and when you attain it to find no rest, but to be pained the more in proportion to the size of your members?  What evil would have resulted, or rather what good would not have resulted, had those times continued which Sallust sketched, when he says, "At first the kings (for that was the first title of empire in the world) were divided in their sentiments:  part cultivated the mind, others the body:  at that time the life of men was led without coveteousness; every one was sufficiently satisfied with his own!"  Was it requisite, then, for Rome's prosperity, that the state of things which Virgil reprobates should succeed:"At length stole on a baser ageAnd war's indomitable rage,And greedy lust of gain?"But obviously the Romans have a plausible defence for undertaking and carrying on such disastrous wars,-to wit, that the pressure of their enemies forced them to resist, so that they were compelled to fight, not by any greed of human applause, but by the necessity of protecting life and liberty.  Well, let that pass.  Here is Sallust's account of the matter:  "For when their state, enriched with laws, institutions, territory, seemed abundantly prosperous and sufficiently powerful, according to the ordinary law of human nature, opulence gave birth to envy.  Accordingly, the neighboring kings and states took arms and assaulted them.  A few allies lent assistance; the rest, struck with fear, kept aloof from dangers.  But the Romans, watchful at home and in war, were active, made preparations, encouraged one another, marched to meet their enemies,-protected by arms their liberty, country, parentsAfterwards, when they had repelled the dangers by their bravery, they carried help to their allies and friends, and procured alliances more by conferring than by receiving favors." This was to build up Rome's greatness by honorable means.  But, in Numa's reign, I would know whether the long peace was maintained in spite of the incursions of wicked neighbors, or if these incursions were discontinued that the peace might be maintained?  For if even then Rome was harassed by wars, and yet did not meet force with force, the same means she then used to quiet her enemies without conquering them in war, or terrifying them with the onset of battle, she might have used always, and have reigned in peace with the gates of Janus shut.  And if this was not in her power, then Rome enjoyed peace not at the will of her gods, but at the will of her neighbors round about, and only so long as they cared to provoke her with no war, unless perhaps these pitiful gods will dare to sell to one man as their favor what lies not in their power to bestow, but in the will of another manThese demons, indeed, in so far as they are permitted, can terrify or incite the minds of wicked men by their own peculiar wickedness.  But if they always had this power, and if no action were taken against their efforts by a more secret and higher power, they would be supreme to give peace or the victories of war, which almost always fall out through some human emotion, and frequently in opposition to the will of the gods, as is proved not only by lying legends, which scarcely hint or signify any grain of truth, but even by Roman history itself.  
+
||<div id="c8"><b>BOOK II</b> [VIII] At enim non traduntur ista sacris deorum, sed fabulis poetarum. Nolo dicere illa mystica quam ista theatrica esse turpiora; hoc dico, quod negantes conuincit historia, eosdem illos ludos, in quibus regnant figmenta poetarum, non per inperitum obsequium sacris deorum suorum intulisse Romanos, sed ipsos deos, ut sibi sollemniter ederentur et honori suo consecrarentur, acerbe imperando et quodam modo extorquendo fecisse; quod in primo libro brevi commemoratione perstrinxi.Nam ingravescente pestilentia ludi scaenici auctoritate pontificum Romae primitus instituti sunt. Quis igitur in agenda vita non ea sibi potius sectanda arbitreturЎЃ quae actitantur ludis auctoritate divina institutis, quam ea, quae scriptitantur legibus humano consilio promulgatis? Adulterum Iovem si poetae fallaciter prodiderunt, dii utique casti, quia tantum nefas per humanos ludos confictum est, non qui a neglectum, irasci ac vindicare debuerunt. Et haec sunt scaenicorum tolerabiliora ludorum, comoediae scilicet et tragoediae, hoc est fabulae poetarum agendae in spectaculis multa rerum turpitudine, sed nulla saltem, sicut alia multa, verborum obscenitate compositae; quas etiam inter studia, quae honesta ac liberalia vocantur, pueri legere et discere coguntur a senibus.  ||chapter 8. But, some one will interpose, these are the fables of poets, not the deliverances of the gods themselves. Well, I have no mind to arbitrate between the lewdness of theatrical entertainments and of mystic rites; only this I say, and history bears me out in making the assertion, that those same entertainments, in which the fictions of poets are the main attraction, were not introduced in the festivals of the gods by the ignorant devotion of the Romans, but that the gods themselves gave the most urgent commands to this effect, and indeed extorted from the Romans these solemnities and celebrations in their honorI touched on this in the preceding book, and mentioned that dramatic entertainments were first inaugurated at Rome on occasion of a pestilence, and by authority of the pontiffAnd what man is there who is not more likely to adopt, for the regulation of his own life, the examples that are represented in plays which have a divine sanction, rather than the precepts written and promulgated with no more than human authority?  If the poets gave a false representation of Jove in describing him as adulterous, then it were to be expected that the chaste gods should in anger avenge so wicked a fiction, in place of encouraging the games which circulated itOf these plays, the most inoffensive are comedies and tragedies, that is to say, the dramas which poets write for the stage, and which, though they often handle impure subjects, yet do so without the filthiness of language which characterizes many other performances; and it is these dramas which boys are obliged by their seniors to read and learn as a part of what is called a liberal and gentlemanly education.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c11"><b>BOOK III</b> [XI] Neque enim aliunde Apollo ille Cumanus, cum adversus Achivos regemque Aristonicum bellaretur, quadriduo flevisse nuntiatus est; quo prodigio haruspices territi cum id simulacrum in mare putavissent esse proiciendum, Cumani senes intercesserunt atque rettulerunt tale prodigium et Antiochi et Persis bello in eodem apparuisse figmento, et quia Romanis feliciter provenisset, ex senatus consulto eidem Apollini suo dona missa esse testati sunt. Tunc velut peritiores acciti haruspices responderunt simulacri Apollinis fletum ideo prosperum esse Romanis, quoniam Cumana colonia Graeca esset, suisque terris, unde accitus esset, id est ipsi Graeciae, luctum et cladem Apollinem significasse plorantem. Deinde mox regem Aristnicum victum et captum esse nuntiatum est, quem vinci utique Apollo nolebat et dolebat et hoc sui lapidis etiam lacrimis indicabat. Vnde non usquequaque incongrue quamuis fabulosis, tamen veritati similibus mores daemonum descirbuntur carminibus poetarum. Nam Camillam Diana doluit apud Vergilium et Pallantem moriturum Hercules flevit. Hinc fortassis et Numa Pompilius pace abundans, sed quo donante nesciens nec requirens, cum cogitaret otiosus, quibusnam diis tuendam Romanam salutem regnumque committeret, nec verum illum atque omnipotentem summum Deum curare opinaretur ista terrena, atque recoleret Troianos deos, quos Aeneas advexerat, neque Troianum neque Laviniense ab ipso Aenea conditum regnum diu conservare potuisse: alios providendos existimavit, quos illis prioribus, qui sive cum Romulo iam Romam transierant, sive quandoque Alba euersa fuerant transituri, vel tamquam fugitivis custodes adhiberet vel tamquam inualidis adiutores.  ||And it is still this weakness of the gods which is confessed in the story of the Cuman Apollo, who is said to have wept for four days during the war with the Achжans and King Aristonicus.  And when the augurs were alarmed at the portent, and had determined to cast the statue into the sea, the old men of Cumж interposed, and related that a similar prodigy had occurred to the same image during the wars against Antiochus and against Perseus, and that by a decree of the senate, gifts had been presented to Apollo, because the event had proved favorable to the RomansThen soothsayers were summoned who were supposed to have greater professional skill, and they pronounced that the weeping of Apollo's image was propitious to the Romans, because Cumж was a Greek colony, and that Apollo was bewailing (and thereby presaging) the grief and calamity that was about to light upon his own land of Greece, from which he had been broughtShortly afterwards it was reported that King Aristonicus was defeated and made prisoner,-a defeat certainly opposed to the will of Apollo; and this he indicated by even shedding tears from his marble image.  And this shows us that, though the verses of the poets are mythical, they are not altogether devoid of truth, but describe the manners of the demons in a sufficiently fit styleFor in Virgil, Diana mourned for Camilla, and Hercules wept for Pallas doomed to dieThis is perhaps the reason why Numa Pompilius, too, when, enjoying prolonged peace, but without knowing or inquiring from whom he received it, he began in his leisure to consider to what gods he should entrust the safe keeping and conduct of Rome, and not dreaming that the true, almighty, and most high God cares for earthly affairs, but recollecting only that the Trojan gods which Жneas had brought to Italy had been able to preserve neither the Trojan nor Lavinian kingdom rounded by Жneas himself, concluded that he must provide other gods as guardians of fugitives and helpers of the weak, and add them to those earlier divinities who had either come over to Rome with Romulus, or when Alba was destroyed.  
+
||<div id="c9"><b>BOOK II</b> [IX] Quid autem hinc senserint Romani ueteres, Cicero testatur in libris, quos de re publica scripsit, ubi Scipio disputans ait: m Numquam comoediae, nisi consuetudo vitae patereturЎЃ probare sua theatris flagitia potuissent. "Et Graeci quidem antiquiores vitiosae suae opinionis quandam convenientiam servarunt, apud quos fuit etiam lege concessum, ut quod vellet comoedia, de quo vellet, nominatim diceret. Itaque, sicut in eisdem libris loquitur Africanus," quem illa non adtigit, vel potius quem non uexavit, cui pepercit? Esto, populares homines inprobos, in re publica seditiosos, Cleonem, Cleophontem, Hyperbolum laesit. Patiamur, inquit, etsi eius modi cives a censore melius est quam a poeta notari. Sed Periclen, cum iam suae civitati maxima auctoritate plurimos annos domi et belli praefuisset, violari versibus et eos agi in scaena non plus decuit, quam si Plautus, inquit, noster voluisset aut Naevius Publio et Gn. Scipioni aut Caecilius Marco Catoni maledicere. "Dein paulo post:" Nostrae, inquit, contra duodecim tabulae cum perpaucas res capite sanxissent, in his hanc quoque sanciendam putaverunt, si quis occentavisset sive carmen condidisset, quod infamiam faceret flagitiumue alteri. Praeclare. Iudiciis enim magistratuum, disceptationibus legitimis propositam vitam, non poetarum ingeniis habere debemus, nec probrum audire nisi ea lege, ut respondere liceat et iudicio defendere. "Haec ex Ciceronis quarto de re publica libro ad verbum excerpenda arbitratus sum, nonnullis propter faciliorem intellectum vel praetermissis vel paululum commutatis. Multum enim ad rem pertinet, quam molior explicare, si potero. Dicit deinde alia et sic concludit hunc locum, ut ostendat ueteribus displicuisse Romanis vel laudari quemquam in scaena vivum hominem vel vituperari. Sed, ut dixi, hoc Graeci quamquam inverecundius, tamen convenientius licere voluerunt, cum viderent diis suis accepta et grata esse opprobria non tantum hominum, verum et ipsorum deorum in scaenicis fabulis, sive a poetis essent illa conficta, sive flagitia eorum vera commemorarentur et agerentur in theatris atque ab eorum cultoribus utinam solo risu, ac non etiam imitatione d i gn a viderentur. Nimis enim superbum fuit famae parcere pnncipum civitatis et civium, ubi suae famae parci numina noluerunt.  ||chapter 9. The opinion of the ancient Romans on this matter is attested by Cicero in his work De Republica, in which Scipio, one of the interlocutors, says, "The lewdness of comedy could never have been suffered by audiences, unless the customs of society had previously sanctioned the same lewdness." And in the earlier days the Greeks preserved a certain reasonableness in their license, and made it a law, that whatever comedy wished to say of any one, it must say it of him by name.  And so in the same work of Cicero's, Scipio says, "Whom has it not aspersed?  Nay, whom has it not worried?  Whom has it spared?  Allow that it may assail demagogues and factions, men injurious to the commonwealth-a Cleon, a Cleophon, a Hyperbolus.  That is tolerable, though it had been more seemly for the public censor to brand such men, than for a poet to lampoon them; but to blacken the fame of Pericles with scurrilous verse, after he had with the utmost dignity presided over their state alike in war and in peace, was as unworthy of a poet, as if our own Plautus or Nжvius were to bring Publius and Cneius Scipio on the comic stage, or as if Cжcilius were to caricature Cato."  And then a little after he goes on: "Though our Twelve Tables attached the penalty of death only to a very few offences, yet among these few this was one:  if any man should have sung a pasquinade, or have composed a satire calculated to bring infamy or disgrace on another person.  Wisely decreed.  For it is by the decisions of magistrates, and by a well-informed justice, that our lives ought to be judged, and not by the flighty fancies of poets; neither ought we to be exposed to hear calumnies, save where we have the liberty of replying, and defending ourselves before an adequate tribunal." This much I have judged it advisable to quote from the fourth book of Cicero's De Republica; and I have made the quotation word for word, with the exception of some words omitted, and some slightly transposed, for the sake of giving the sense more readily.  And certainly the extract is pertinent to the matter I am endeavoring to explainCicero makes some further remarks, and concludes the passage by showing that the ancient Romans did not permit any living man to be either praised or blamed on the stageBut the Greeks, as I said, though not so moral, were more logical in allowing this license which the Romans forbade; for they saw that their gods approved and enjoyed the scurrilous language of low comedy when directed not only against men, but even against themselves; and this, whether the infamous actions imputed to them were the fictions of poets, or were their actual iniquities commemorated and acted in the theatres.  And would that the spectators had judged them worthy only of laughter, and not of imitation!  Manifestly it had been a stretch of pride to spare the good name of the leading men and the common citizens, when the very deities did not grudge that their own reputation should be blemished.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c12"><b>BOOK III</b> [XII] Nec his sacris tamen Roma dignata est esse contenta, quae tam multa illic Pompilius constituerat. Nam ipsius summum templum nondum habebat Iovis; rex quippe Tarquinius ibi Capitolium fabricavit; Aesculapius autem ab Epidauro ambivit ad Romam, ut peritissimus medicus in urbe nobilissima artem gloriosius exerceret; mater etiam deum nescio unde a Pessinunte; indignum enim erat, ut, cum eius filius iam colli Capitolino praesideret, adhuc ipsa in loco ignobili latitaret. Quae tamen si omnium deorum mater est, non solum secuta est Romam quosdam filios suos, verum et alios praecessit etiam secuturos. Miror sane, si ipsa peperit Cynocephalum, qui longe postea venit ex Aegypto. Vtrum etiam dea Febris ex illa nata sit, viderit Aesculapius pronepos eius; sed undecumque nata sit, non, opinor, audebunt eam dicere ignobilem dii peregrini deam civem Romanam. Sub hoc tot deorum praesidio (quos numerare quis potest, indigenas et alienigenas, caelites terrestres, infernos marinos, fontanos fluuiales, et, ut Varro dicit, certos atque incertos, in omnibusque generibus deorum, sicut in animalibus, mares et feminas?)  _ - sub hoc ergo tot deorum praesidio constituta Roma non tam magnis et horrendis cladibus, quales ex multis paucas commemorabo, agitari adfligique debuit. Nimis enim multos deos grandi fumo suo tamquam signo dato ad tuitionem congregaverat, quibus tampla altaria, sacrificia sacerdotes instituendo atque paraebendo summum verum Deum, cui uni haec rite gesta debentur, offenderet. Et felicior quidem cum paucioribus vixit, sed quanto maior facta est, sicut navis nautas, tanto plures adhibendos putavit; credo, desperans pauciores illos, sub quibus in comparatione peioris vitae melius vixerat, non sufficere ad opitulandum granditati suae. Primo enim sub ipsis regibus, excepto Numa Pompilio, de quo iam supra locutus sum, quantum malum discordiosi certaminis fuit, quod fratrem Romuli coegit occidi! ||But though Pompilius introduced so ample a ritual, yet did not Rome see fit to be content with it. For as yet Jupiter himself had not his chief temple,-it being King Tarquin who built the Capitol.  And Жsculapius left Epidaurus for Rome, that in this foremost city he might have a finer field for the exercise of his great medical skill.  The mother of the gods, too, came I know not whence from Pessinuns; it being unseemly that, while her son presided on the Capitoline hill, she herself should lie hid in obscurity.  But if she is the mother of all the gods, she not only followed some of her children to Rome, but left others to follow her. I wonder, indeed, if she were the mother of Cynocephalus, who a long while afterwards came from Egypt. Whether also the goddess Fever was her offspring, is a matter for her grandson Жsculapius to decide.  But of whatever breed she be, the foreign gods will not presume, I trust, to call a goddess base-born who is a Roman citizen. Who can number the deities to whom the guardianship of Rome was entrusted?  Indigenous and imported, both of heaven, earth, hell, seas, fountains, rivers; and, as Varro says, gods certain and uncertain, male and female:  for, as among animals, so among all kinds of gods are there these distinctions.  Rome, then, enjoying the protection of such a cloud of deities, might surely have been preserved from some of those great and horrible calamities, of which I can mention but a fewFor by the great smoke of her altars she summoned to her protection, as by a beacon-fire, a host of gods, for whom she appointed and maintained temples, altars, sacrifices, priests, and thus offended the true and most high God, to whom alone all this ceremonial is lawfully due.  And, indeed, she was more prosperous when she had fewer gods; but the greater she became, the more gods she thought she should have, as the larger ship needs to be manned by a larger crew.  I suppose she despaired of the smaller number, under whose protection she had spent comparatively happy days, being able to defend her greatness. For even under the kings (with the exception of Numa Pompilius, of whom I have already spoken), how wicked a contentiousness must have existed to occasion the death of Romulus' brother!
+
||<div id="c10"><b>BOOK II</b> [X] Nam quod adfertur pro defensione, non illa vera in deos dici, sed falsa atque conficta, id ipsum est scelestius, si pietatem consulas religionis; si autem malitiam daemonum cogites, quid astutius ad decipiendum atque callidius? Cum enim probrum iacitur in principem patriae bonum atque utilem, nonne tanto est indignius, quanto a veritate remotius et a vita illius alienius? Quae igitur supplicia sufficiunt, cum deo fit ista tam nefaria, tam insignis iniuria? Sed maligni spiritus, quos isti deos putant, etiam flagitia, quae non admiserunt, de se dici volunt, dum tamen humanas mentes his opinionibus velut retibus induant et ad praedestinatum supplicium secum trahant, sive homines ista commiserint, quos deos haberi gaudent, qui humanis erroribus gaudent, pro quibus se etiam colendos mille nocendi fallendique artibus interponunt; sive etiam non ullorum hominum illa crimina vera sint, quae tamen de numinibus fingi libenter accipiunt fallacissimi spiritus, ut ad scelesta ac turpia perpetranda velut ab ipso caelo traduci in terras satis idonea videatur auctoritas. Cum igitur Graeci talium numinum seruos se esse sentirent, inter tot et tanta eorum theatrica opprobria parcendum sibi a poetis nullo modo putaverunt, vel diis suis etiam sic consimilari adpetentes, vel metuentes, ne honestiorem famam ipsi requirendo et eis se hoc modo praeferendo illos ad iracundiam prouocarent.  ||chapter 10. It is alleged, in excuse of this practice, that the stories told of the gods are not true, but false, and mere inventions, but this only makes matters worse, if we form our estimate by the morality our religion teaches; and if we consider the malice of the devils, what more wily and astute artifice could they practise upon men?  When a slander is uttered against a leading statesman of upright and useful life, is it not reprehensible in proportion to its untruth and groundlessness? What punishment, then, shall be sufficient when the gods are the objects of so wicked and outrageous an injustice? But the devils, whom these men repute gods, are content that even iniquities they are guiltless of should be ascribed to them, so long as they may entangle men's minds in the meshes of these opinions, and draw them on along with themselves to their predestinated punishment: whether such things were actually committed by the men whom these devils, delighting in human infatuation, cause to be worshipped as gods, and in whose stead they, by a thousand malign and deceitful artifices, substitute themselves, and so receive worship; or whether, though they were really the crimes of men, these wicked spirits gladly allowed them to be attributed to higher beings, that there might seem to be conveyed from heaven itself a sufficient sanction for the perpetration of shameful wickednessThe Greeks, therefore, seeing the character of the gods they served, thought that the poets should certainly not refrain from showing up human vices on the stage, either because they desired to be like their gods in this, or because they were afraid that, if they required for themselves a more unblemished reputation than they asserted for the gods, they might provoke them to anger.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c13"><b>BOOK III</b> [XIII] Quo modo nec Iuno, quae cum Iove suo iam fovebat Romanos rerum dominos gentemque togatam, nec Venus ipsa Aeneidas suos potuit adivuare, ut bono et aequo more coniungia mererentur, cladesque tanta inruit huius inopiae, ut ea dolo raperent moxque compellerentur pugnare cum soceris, ut miserae feminae nondum ex iniuria maritis conciliatae iam parentum sanguine dotarentur? At enim vicerunt in hac conflictione Romani vicinos suos. Quantis et quam multis utrimque uulneribus et funeribus tam propinquorum et confinium istae victoriae constiterunt! Propter unum Caesarem socerum et unum generum eius Pompeium iam mortua Caesaris filia, uxore Pompei, quanto et quam iusto doloris instinctu Lucanus exclamat: Bella per Emathios plus quam civilia campos Iusque datum sceleri canimus. Vicerunt ergo Romani, ut strage socerorum manibus cruentis ab eorum filiabus amplexus mierabiles extorquerunt, nec illae auderent flere patres occisos, ne offenderent victores maritos, quae adhuc illis pugnantibus pro quibus facerent vota nesciebant. Talibus nuptiis populum Romanum non Venus, sed Bellona donavit; aut fortassis Allecto illa inferna furia iam eis favente Iunone plus in illos habuit licentiae, quam cum eius precibus contra Aenean fuerat excitata. Andromacha felicius captivata est, quam illa coniugia Romana nupserunt. Licet seruiles, tamen post eius amplexus nullum Troianorum Pyrrhus occidit; Romani autem soceros interficiebant in proeliis, quorum iam filias amplexabantur in thalamis. Illa victori subdita dolere tantum suorum mortem potuit, non timere; illae sociatae bellantibus parentum suorum mortes procedentibus viris timebant, redeuntibus dolebant, nec timorem habentes liberum nec dolorem. Nam propter interitum civium propinquorum, fratrum parentum aut pie cruciabantur, aut crudeliter laetabantur victoriis maritorum. Huc accedebat, quod, ut sunt alterna bellorum, aliquae parentum ferro amiserunt viros, aliquae utrorumque ferro et parentes et viros. Neque enim et apud Romanos parua fuerunt illa discrimina, si quidem ad obsidionem quoque peruentum est civitatis clausisque portis se tuebantur; quibus dolo apertis admissisque hostibus intra moenia in ipso foro scelerata et nimis atrox inter generos socerosque pugna commissa est, et raptores illi etiam superabantur et crebro fugientes inter domos suas gravius foedabant pristinas, quamuis et ipsas pudendas lugendasque victorias. Hic tamen Romulus de suorum iam virtute desperans Iovem oravit ut starent, atque ille hac occasione nomen Statoris invenit; nec finis esset tanti mali, nisi raptae illae laceratis crinibus emicarent et prouolutae parentibus iram eorum iustissimam non armis victricibus, sed supplici pietate sedarent. Deinde Titum Tatium regem Sabinorum socium regni Romulus ferre compulsus est, germani consortis inpatiens: sed quando et istum diu toleraret, qui fratrem geminumque non pertulit? Vnde et ipso interfecto, ut maior deus esset, regnum solus obtinut. Quae sunt ista iura nuptiarum, quae inritamenta bellorum, quae foedera germanitatis adfinitatis, societatis divinitatis? quae postremo sub tot diis tutoribus vita civitatis? Vides quanta hinc dici et quam multa possent, nisi quae supersunt nostra curaret intentio et sermo in alia festinaret.  ||How is it that neither Juno, who with her husband Jupiter even then cherishedRome's sons, the nation of the gown,nor Venus herself, could assist the children of the loved Жneas to find wives by some right and equitable means? For the lack of this entailed upon the Romans the lamentable necessity of stealing their wives, and then waging war with their fathers-in-law; so that the wretched women, before they had recovered from the wrong done them by their husbands, were dowried with the blood of their fathers.  "But the Romans conquered their neighbors."  Yes; but with what wounds on both sides, and with what sad slaughter of relatives and neighbors!  The war of Cжsar and Pompey was the contest of only one father-in-law with one son-in-law; and before it began, the daughter of Cжsar, Pompey's wife, was already deadBut with how keen and just an accent of grief does Lucan exclaim:  "I sing that worse than civil war waged in the plains of Emathia, and in which the crime was justified by the victory!"The Romans, then, conquered that they might, with hands stained in the blood of their fathers-in-law, wrench the miserable girls from their embrace,-girls who dared not weep for their slain parents, for fear of offending their victorious husbands; and while yet the battle was raging, stood with their prayers on their lips, and knew not for whom to utter them. Such nuptials were certainly prepared for the Roman people not by Venus, but Bellona; or possibly that infernal fury Alecto had more liberty to injure them now that Juno was aiding them, than when the prayers of that goddess had excited her against Жneas.  Andromache in captivity was happier than these Roman brides. For though she was a slave, yet, after she had become the wife of Pyrrhus, no more Trojans fell by his hand; but the Romans slew in battle the very fathers of the brides they fondled.  Andromache, the victor's captive, could only mourn, not fear, the death of her people.  The Sabine women, related to men still combatants, feared the death of their fathers when their husbands went out to battle, and mourned their death as they returned, while neither their grief nor their fear could be freely expressed.  For the victories of their husbands, involving the destruction of fellow-townsmen, relatives, brothers, fathers, caused either pious agony or cruel exultationMoreover, as the fortune of war is capricious, some of them lost their husbands by the sword of their parents, while others lost husband and father together in mutual destruction.  For the Romans by no means escaped with impunity, but they were driven back within their walls, and defended themselves behind closed gates; and when the gates were opened by guile, and the enemy admitted into the town, the Forum itself was the field of a hateful and fierce engagement of fathers-in-law and sons-in-law. The ravishers were indeed quite defeated, and, flying on all sides to their houses, sullied with new shame their original shameful and lamentable triumphIt was at this juncture that Romulus, hoping no more from the valor of his citizens, prayed Jupiter that they might stand their ground; and from this occasion the god gained the name of StatorBut not even thus would the mischief have been finished, had not the ravished women themselves flashed out with dishevelled hair, and cast themselves before their parents, and thus disarmed their just rage, not with the arms of victory, but with the supplications of filial affection.  Then Romulus, who could not brook his own brother as a colleague, was compelled to accept Titus Tatius, king of the Sabines, as his partner on the throne.  But how long would he who misliked the fellowship of his own twin-brother endure a stranger?  So, Tatius being slain, Romulus remained sole king, that he might be the greater god.  See what rights of marriage these were that fomented unnatural wars.  These were the Roman leagues of kindred, relationship, alliance, religion.  This was the life of the city so abundantly protected by the gods.  You see how many severe things might be said on this theme; but our purpose carries us past them, and requires our discourse for other matters.  
+
||<div id="c11"><b>BOOK II</b> [XI] Ad hanc convenientiam pertinet, quod etiam scaenicos actores earundem fabularum non paruo civitatis honore dignos existimarunt, si quidem, quod in eo quoque de re publica libro commemoratur, et Aeschines Atheniensis, vir eloquentissimus, cum adulescens tragoedias actitavisset, rem publicam capessivit et Aristodemum, tragicum item actorem, maximus de rebus pacis ac belli legatum ad Philippum Athenienses saepe miserunt. Non enim consentaneum putabatur, cum easdem artes eosdemque scaenicos ludos etiam diis suis acceptos viderent, illos, per quos agerentur, infamium loco ac numero deputare. Haec Graeci turpiter quidem, sed sane diis suis omnino congruenter, qui nec vitam civium lacerandam linguis poetarum et histrionum subtrahere ausi sunt, a quibus cernebant deorum vitam eisdem ipsis diis volentibus et libentibus carpi, et ipsos homines, per quos ista in theatris agebantur, quae numinibus quibus subditi erant grata esse cognoverant, non solum minime spernendos in civitate, verum etiam maxime honorandos putarunt. Quid enim causae reperire possent, cur sacerdotes honorarent, quia per eos victimas diis acceptabiles offerebant, et scaenicos probrosos haberent, per quos illam voluptatem sive honorem diis exhiberi petentibus et, nisi fieret, irascentibus eorum admonitione didicerant? cum praesertim Labeo, quem huiusce modi rerum peritissimum praedicant, numina bona a numinibus malis ista etiam cultus diversitate distinguat, ut malos deos propitiari caedibus et tristibus supplicationibus asserat, bonos autem obsequiis laetis atque iucundis, qualia sunt, ut ipse ait, ludi conuivia lectisternia. Quod totum quale sit, postea, si Deus ivuerit, diligentius disseremus. Nunc ad rem praesentem quod adtinet, sive omnibus omnia tamquam bonis permixte tribuantur (neque enim esse decet deos malos, cum potius isti, quia inmundi sunt spiritus, omnes sint mali), sive certa discretione, sicut Labeoni visum est, illis illa, istis ista distribuantur obsequia, competentissime Graeci utrosque honori ducunt, et sacerdotes, per quos victimae ministrantur, et scaenicos, per quos ludi exhibentur, ne vel omnibus diis suis, si et ludi omnibus grati sunt, vel, quod est indignius, his, quos bonos putant, si ludi ab eis solis amantur, facere conuincantur iniuriam.  ||chapter 11. It was a part of this same reasonableness of the Greeks which induced them to bestow upon the actors of these same plays no inconsiderable civic honors. In the above-mentioned book of the De Republica, it is mentioned that Aeschines, a very eloquent Athenian, who had been a tragic actor in his youth, became a statesman, and that the Athenians again and again sent another tragedian, Aristodemus, as their plenipotentiary to PhilipFor they judged it unbecoming to condemn and treat as infamous persons those who were the chief actors in the scenic entertainments which they saw to be so pleasing to the gods.  No doubt this was immoral of the Greeks, but there can be as little doubt they acted in conformity with the character of their gods; for how could they have presumed to protect the conduct of the citizens from being cut to pieces by the tongues of poets and players, who were allowed, and even enjoined by the gods, to tear their divine reputation to tatters? And how could they hold in contempt the men who acted in the theatres those dramas which, as they had ascertained, gave pleasure to the gods whom they worshipped? Nay, how could they but grant to them the highest civic honors?  On what plea could they honor the priests who offered for them acceptable sacrifices to the gods, if they branded with infamy the actors who in behalf of the people gave to the gods that pleasure or honour which they demanded, and which, according to the account of the priests, they were angry at not receivingLabeo, whose learning makes him an authority on such points, is of opinion that the distinction between good and evil deities should find expression in a difference of worship; that the evil should be propitiated by bloody sacrifices and doleful rites, but the good with a joyful and pleasant observance, as, e.g. (as he says himself), with plays, festivals, and banquetsAll this we shall, with God's help, hereafter discussAt present, and speaking to the subject on hand, whether all kinds of offerings are made indiscriminately to all the gods, as if all were good (and it is an unseemly thing to conceive that there are evil gods; but these gods of the pagans are all evil, because they are not gods, but evil spirits), or whether, as Labeo thinks, a distinction is made between the offerings presented to the different gods the Greeks are equally justified in honoring alike the priests by whom the sacrifices are offered, and the players by whom the dramas are acted, that they may not be open to the charge of doing an injury to all their gods, if the plays are pleasing to all of them, or (which were still worse) to their good gods, if the plays are relished only by them.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c14"><b>BOOK III</b> [XIV] Quid deinde post Numam sub aliis regibus? Quanto malo non solum suo, sed etiam Romanorum in bellum Albani prouocati sunt, quia videlicet pax Numae tam longa viluerat! Quam crebrae strages Romani Allbanique exercitus fuerunt et utriusque comminutio civitatis! Alba namque illa, quam filius Aeneae creavit Ascanius, Romae mater propior ipsa quam Troia, a Tullo Hostilio rege prouocata conflixit, confligens autem et adflicta est et adflixit, donec multorum taederet pari defectione certaminum. Tunc euentum belli de tergeminis hinc atque inde fratribus placuit experiri: a Romanis tres Horatii, ab Albanis autem tres Curiatii processrunt; a Curiatiis tribus Horatii duo, ab uno autem Horatio tres Curiatii superati et extincti sunt. Ita Roma extitit victrix ea clade etiam in certamine extremo, ut de sex unus rediret domum. Cui damnum in utrisque, cui luctus, nisi Aeneae stirpi nisi Ascanii posteris, nisi proli Veneris nisi nepotibus Iovis? Nam et hoc plus quam civile bellum fuit, quando filia civitas cum civitate matre pugnavit. Accessit aliud huic tergeminorum pugnae ultimae atrox atque horrendum malum. Nam ut erant ambo populi prius amici (uicini quippe atque cognati), uni Curiatiorum desponsata fuerat Horatiorum soror; haec postea quam sponsi spolia in victore fratre conspexit, ab eodem fratre, quoniam flevit, occisa est. Humanior huius unius feminae quam universi populi Romani mihi fuisse videtur affectus. Illa quem virum iam fide media retinebat, aut forte etiam ipsum fratrem dolens, qui eum occiderat cui sororem promiserat, puto quod non culpabiliter fleuerit. Vnde enim aput Vergilium pius Aeneas laudabiliter dolet hostem etiam sua peremptum manu? Vnde Marcellus Syracusanam civitatem recolens eius paulo ante culmen et gloriam sub manus suas subito concidisse communem cogitans condicionem flendo miseratus est? Quaeso ab humano impetremus affectu, ut femina sponsum suum a fratre suo peremptum sine crimine fleuerit, si viri hostes a se victos etiam cum laude fleuerunt. Ergo sponso a fratre inlatam mortem quando femina illa flebat, tunc se contra matrem civitatem tanta strage bellasse et tanta hinc et inde cognati cruoris effusione vicisse Roma gaudebat. Quid mihi obtenditur nomen laudis nomenque victoriae? Remotis obstaculis insanae opinionis facinora nuda cernantur, nuda pensentur, nuda iudicentur. Causa dicatur Albae, sicut Troiae adulterium dicebatur. Nulla talis nulla similis invenitur; tantum ut resides moveret Tullus in arma viros et iam desueta triumphis Agmina. Illo itaque vitio tantum scelus perpetratum est socialis belli atque cognati, quod vitium Sallustius magnum transeunter adtingit. Cum enim laudans breviter antiquiora commemorasset tempora, quando vita hominum sine cupiditate agitabatur et sua cuique satis placebant: "Postea vero, inquit, quam in Asia Cyrus, in Graecia lacedaemonii et Athenienses coepere urbes atque nationes subigere, libidinem dominandi causam belli habere, maximam gloriam in maximo imperio putare", et cetera quae ipse instituerat dicere. Mihi huc usque satis sit eius verba posuisse. Libido ista dominandi magnis malis agitat et conterit humanum genus. Hac libidine Roma tunc victa Albam se vicisse triumphabat et sui sceleris laudem gloriam nominabat, quoniam laudatur, inquit scriptura nostra, peccator in desideriis animae suae et qui iniqua gerit benedicitur. Fallacia igitur tegmina et deceptoriae dealbationes auferantur a rebus, ut sincero inspiciantur examine. Nemo mihi dicat: Magnus ille atque ille, quia cum illo et illo pugnavit et vicit. Pugnant etiam gladiatores, vincunt et ipsi, habet praemia laudis et illa crudelitas; sed puto esse satius cuiuslibet inertiae poenas luere quam ilorum armorum quaerere gloriam. Et tamen si in harenam procederent pugnaturi inter se gladiatores, quorum alter filius, alter esset pater, tale spectaculum quis ferret? quis non auferret? Quo modo ergo gloriosum alterius matris, alterius filiae civitatis inter se armorum potuit esse certamen? An ideo diversum fuit, quod harena illa non fuit, et latiores campi non duorum gladiatorum, sed in duobus populis multorum funeribus implebantur, nec amphitheatro cingebantur illa certamina, sed universo obri, et tunc vivis et postris, quo usque ista fama porrigitur, impium spectaculum praebebatur? Vim tamen patiebantur studii sui dii illi praesides imperii Romani et talium certaminum tamquam theatrici spectatores, donec Horatiorum soror propter Curiatios tres peremptos etiam ipsa tertia ex altera parte fraterno ferro dubus fratribus adderetur, ne minus haberet mortium etiam Roma quae vicerat. Deinde ad fructum victoriae Alba subuersa est, ubi post Ilium, quod Graeci euerterunt, et post Lavinium, ubi Aeneas regnum peregrinum atque fugituum constituerat, tertio loco habitaverant numina illa Troiana. Sed more suo etiam inde iam fortasse migraverant, ideo deleta est. Discesserant videlicet omnes adytis arisque relictis di, quibus imperium illud steterat. Discesserant sane ecce iam tertio, ut eis quarta Roma providentissime crederetur. Displicuerat enim et Alba, ubi Amulius expulso fratre, et Roma placuerat, ubi Romulus occiso fratre regnaverat. Sed antequam Alba dirueretur, transfusus est, inquiunt, populus eius in Romam, ut ex tutraque una civitas fieret. Esto, ita factum sit; urbs tamen illa, Ascanii regnum et tertium domicilium Troianorum deorum, ab urbe filia mater euersa est; ut autem belli reliquiae ex duobus populis unum facerent, miserabile coagulum multus ante fusus utriusque sanguis fuit. Quid iam singillatim dicam sub ceteris regibus totiens eadem bella renouata, quae victoriis finita videbantur, et tantis stragibus iterum iterumque confecta, iterum iterumque post foedus et pacem inter soceros et generos et eorum stirpem posterosque repetita? non paruum indicium calamitatis huius fuit, quod portas belli nullus clausit illorum. Nullus ergo illorum sub tot diis praesidibus in pace regnavit. ||But what happened after Numa's reign, and under the other kings, when the Albans were provoked into war, with sad results not to themselves alone, but also to the Romans?  The long peace of Numa had become tedious; and with what endless slaughter and detriment of both states did the Roman and Alban armies bring it to an end!  For Alba, which had been founded by Ascanius, son of Жneas, and which was more properly the mother of Rome than Troy herself, was provoked to battle by Tullus Hostilius, king of Rome, and in the conflict both inflicted and received such damage, that at length both parties wearied of the struggle.  It was then devised that the war should be decided by the combat of three twin-brothers from each army:  from the Romans the three Horatii stood forward, from the Albans the three Curiatii.  Two of the Horatii were overcome and disposed of by the Curiatii; but by the remaining Horatius the three Curiatii were slain.  Thus Rome remained victorious, but with such a sacrifice that only one survivor returned to his home.  Whose was the loss on both sides?  Whose the grief, but of the offspring of Жneas, the descendants of Ascanius, the progeny of Venus, the grandsons of Jupiter?  For this, too, was a "worse than civil" war, in which the belligerent states were mother and daughter.  And to this combat of the three twin-brothers there was added another atrocious and horrible catastrophe.  For as the two nations had formerly been friendly (being related and neighbors), the sister of the Horatii had been betrothed to one of the Curiatii; and she, when she saw her brother wearing the spoils of her betrothed, burst into tears, and was slain by her own brother in his anger.  To me, this one girl seems to have been more humane than the whole Roman people.  I cannot think her to blame for lamenting the man to whom already she had plighted her troth, or, as perhaps she was doing, for grieving that her brother should have slain him to whom he had promised his sisterFor why do we praise the grief of Жneas (in Virgil) over the enemy cut down even by his own hand?  Why did Marcellus shed tears over the city of Syracuse, when he recollected, just before he destroyed, its magnificence and meridian glory, and thought upon the common lot of all things?  I demand, in the name of humanity, that if men are praised for tears shed over enemies conquered by themselves, a weak girl should not be counted criminal for bewailing her lover slaughtered by the hand of her brother.  While, then, that maiden was weeping for the death of her betrothed inflicted by her brother's hand, Rome was rejoicing that such devastation had been wrought on her mother state, and that she had purchased a victory with such an expenditure of the common blood of herself and the Albans.Why allege to me the mere names and words of "glory" and "victory?"  Tear off the disguise of wild delusion, and look at the naked deeds:  weigh them naked, judge them naked.  Let the charge be brought against Alba, as Troy was charged with adultery.  There is no such charge, none like it found:  the war was kindled only in order that there"Might sound in languid ears the cryOf Tullus and of victory."This vice of restless ambition was the sole motive to that social and parricidal war,-a vice which Sallust brands in passing; for when he has spoken with brief but hearty commendation of those primitive times in which life was spent without covetousness, and every one was sufficiently satisfied with what he had, he goes on"But after Cyrus in Asia, and the Lacedemonians and Athenians in Greece, began to subdue cities and nations, and to account the lust of sovereignty a sufficient ground for war, and to reckon that the greatest glory consisted in the greatest empire;" and so on, as I need not now quote.  This lust of sovereignty disturbs and consumes the human race with frightful ills.  By this lust Rome was overcome when she triumphed over Alba, and praising her own crime, called it glory.  For, as our Scriptures say, "the wicked boasts of his heart's desire, and blesses the covetous, whom the Lord abhors." Away, then, with these deceitful masks, these deluding whitewashes, that things may be truthfully seen and scrutinized.  Let no man tell me that this and the other was a "great" man, because he fought and conquered so and so.  Gladiators fight and conquer, and this barbarism has its meed of praise; but I think it were better to take the consequences of any sloth, than to seek the glory won by such arms.  And if two gladiators entered the arena to fight, one being father, the other his son, who would endure such a spectacle? who would not be revolted by it?  How, then, could that be a glorious war which a daughter-state waged against its mother?  Or did it constitute a difference, that the battlefield was not an arena, and that the wide plains were filled with the carcasses not of two gladiators, but of many of the flower of two nations; and that those contests were viewed not by the amphitheatre, but by the whole world, and furnished a profane spectacle both to those alive at the time, and to their posterity, so long as the fame of it is handed down?Yet those gods, guardians of the Roman empire, and, as it were, theatric spectators of such contests as these, were not satisfied until the sister of the Horatii was added by her brother's sword as a third victim from the Roman side, so that Rome herself, though she won the day, should have as many deaths to mourn.  Afterwards, as a fruit of the victory, Alba was destroyed, though it was there the Trojan gods had formed a third asylum after Ilium had been sacked by the Greeks, and after they had left Lavinium, where Жneas had founded a kingdom in a land of banishment.  But probably Alba was destroyed because from it too the gods had migrated, in their usual fashion, as Virgil says:"Gone from each fane, each sacred shrine,Are those who made this realm divine."Gone, indeed, and from now their third asylum, that Rome might seem all the wiser in committing herself to them after they had deserted three other cities.  Alba, whose king Amulius had banished his brother, displeased them; Rome, whose king Romulus had slain his brother, pleased them. But before Alba was destroyed, its population, they say, was amalgamated with the inhabitants of Rome so that the two cities were one.  Well, admitting it was so, yet the fact remains that the city of Ascanius, the third retreat of the Trojan gods, was destroyed by the daughter-city.  Besides, to effect this pitiful conglomerate of the war's leavings, much blood was spilt on both sides.  And how shall I speak in detail of the same wars, so often renewed in subsequent reigns, though they seemed to have been finished by great victories; and of wars that time after time were brought to an end by great slaughters, and which yet time after time were renewed by the posterity of those who had made peace and struck treaties?  Of this calamitous history we have no small proof, in the fact that no subsequent king closed the gates of war; and therefore with all their tutelar gods, no one of them reigned in peace.  
+
||<div id="c12"><b>BOOK II</b> [XII] At Romani, sicut in illa de re publica disputatione Scipio gloriatur, probris et iniuriis poetarum subiectam vitam famamque habere noluerunt, capite etiam sancientes, tale carmen condere si quis auderet. Quod erga se quidem satis honeste constituerunt, sed erga deos suos superbe et inreligiose; quos cum scirent non solum patienter, verum etiam libenter poetarum probris maledictisque lacerari, se potius quam illos huiusce modi iniuriis indignos esse duxerunt seque ab eis etiam lege munierunt, illorum autem ista etiam sacris sollemnitatibus miscuerunt. Itane tandem, Scipio, laudas hanc poetis Romanis negatam esse licentiam, ut cuiquam opprobrium infligerent Romanorum, cum videas eos nulli deorum pepercisse uestrorum? Itane pluris tibi habenda visa est existimatio curiae uestrae quam Capitolii, immo Romae unius quam caeli totius, ut linguam maledicam in cives tuos exercere poetae etiam lege prohiberentur, et in deos tuos securi tanta conuicia nullo senatore nullo censore, nullo principe nullo pontifice prohibente iacularentur? Indignum videlicet fuit, ut Plautus aut Naevius Publio et Gn. Scipioni aut Caecilius M. Catoni malediceret, et dignum fuit, ut Terentius uester flagitio lovis optimi maximi adulescentium nequitiam concitaret?  ||chapter 12. The Romans, however, as Scipio boasts in that same discussion, declined having their conduct and good name subjected to the assaults and slanders of the poets, and went so far as to make it a capital crime if any one should dare to compose such versesThis was a very honorable course to pursue, so far as they themselves were concerned, but in respect of the gods it was proud and irreligiousfor they knew that the gods not only tolerated, but relished, being lashed by the injurious expressions of the poets, and yet they themselves would not suffer this same handling; and what their ritual prescribed as acceptable to the gods, their law prohibited as injurious to themselvesHow then, Scipio, do you praise the Romans for refusing this license to the poets, so that no citizen could be calumniated, while you know that the gods were not included under this protection?  Do you count your senate-house worthy of so much higher a regard than the Capitol? Is the one city of Rome more valuable in your eyes than the whole heaven of gods, that you prohibit your poets from uttering any injurious words against a citizen, though they may with impunity cast what imputations they please upon the gods, without the interference of senator, censor, prince, or pontiff? It was, forsooth, intolerable that Plautus or Nжvus should attack Publius and Cneius Scipio, insufferable that Cжcilius should lampoon Cato; but quite proper that your Terence should encourage youthful lust by the wicked example of supreme Jove.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c15"><b>BOOK III</b> [XV] Ipsorum autem regum qui exitus fuerunt? De Romulo viderit adulatio fabulosa, qua perhibetur receptus in caelum; viderint quidam scriptores eorum, qui eum propter ferocitatem a senatu discerptum esse dixerunt subornatumque nescio quem Iulium Proculum, qui eum sibi apparuisse diceret eumque per se populo mandasse Romano, ut inter numina coleretur, eoque modo populum, qui contra senatum intumescere coeperat, repressum atque sedatum. Acciderat enim et solis defectio, quam certa ratione sui cursus effectam imperita nesciens multitudo meritis Romuli tribuebat. Quasi vero si luctus ile solis fuisset, non magis ideo credi deberet occisus ipsumque scelus aversione etiam diurni luminis indicatum; sicut re vera factum est, cum Dominus crucifixus est crudelitate atque impietate Iudaeorum. Quam solis obscrationem non ex canonico siderum cursu accidisse satis ostendit, quod tunc erat pascha Iudaeorum; namplena luna sollemniter agitur, regularis autem solis defectio non nisi lunae fine contingit. Satis et Cicero illam inter deos Romuli receptionem putatam magis significat esse quam factam, quando et laudans eum in libris de re publica Scipionisque sermone: "Tantum est, inquit, consecutus, ut, cum subito sole obscurato non comparuisset, deorum in numero conlocatus putaretur, quam opinionem nemo umquam mortalis assequi potuit sine eximia virtutis gloria." (Quod autem dicit eum subito non comparuisse, profecto ibi intellegitur aut violentia tempestatis aut caedis facionorisque secretum; nam et alii scriptores eorum defectioni solis addunt etiam subitam tempestatem, quae profecto aut occasionem sceleri praebuit aut Romulum ipsa consumpsit.) De tullo quippe etiam Hostilio, qui tertius a Romulo rex fuit, qui et ipse fulmine absumptus est, dicit in eisdem libris idem Cicero, propterea et istum non creditum in deos receptum tali morte, quia fortasse quod erat in Romulo probatu, id est persuasum, Romani uulgare noluerunt, id est vile facere, si hoc et alteri facile tribueretur. Dicit etiam aperte in invectivis: "Illum, qui hanc urbem condidit, Romulum ad deos immortales benivolentia famaque sustulimus", ut non vere factum, sed propter merita virtutis eius benivole iactatum diffamatumque monstraret. In Hortensio vero dialogo cum de solis canonicis defectionibus loqueretur: "Vt easem, inquit, tenebras efficiat, quas efficit <in> interitu Romuli, qui obscuratione solis est factus." Certe hic minime timuit hominis interitum dicere, quia disputator magis quam laudator fuit. Ceteri autem reges populi Romani, excepto Numa Pompilio et Anco Marcio, qui morbo interierunt, quam horrendos exitus habuerunt! Tullus, ut dixi, Hostilius, victor et euersor Albae, cum tota domo sua fulmine concrematus est. Priscus Tarquinius per sui decessoris filios interemptus est. Seruius Tullius generi sui Tarquinii Superbi, qui ei successit in rgunum, nefario scelere occisus est. Nec "discessere adytis arisque relictis di" tanto in optimum illius populi regem parricidio perpetrato, quos dicunt, ut hoc miserae Troiae facerent eamque graecis diruendam exurendamque relinquerent, adulterio Paridis fuisse commotos; sed insuper interfecto a se socero Tarquinius ipse sucessit. Hunc illi dii nefarium parricidam soceri interfectione regnantem, insuper multis bellis victoriisque gloriantem et de manubiis Capitolium fabricantem non abscedentes, sed praesentes manentesque viderunt et regem suum Iovem in illo altissimo templo, hoc est in opere parricidae, sibi praesidere atque regnare perpessi sunt. Neque enim adhuc innocens Capitolium struxit et postea malis meritis Vrbe pulsus est, sed ad ipsum regnum, in quo Capitolium fabricaret, inmanissimi sceleris perpetratione pervenit. Quod vero eum regno Romani postea depulerunt ac secluserunt moenibus civitatis, non ipsius de Lucretiae stupro, sed filii peccatum fuit illo non solum nesciente, sed etiam absente commissum. Ardeam civitatem tunc oppugnabat, pro populo Romano bellum gerebat; nescimus quid faceret, si ad eius notitiam flagitium filii deferretur; et tamen inexplorato iudicio eius et inexperto ei populus ademit imperium et recepto exercitu, a quo deseri iussus est, clausis deinde portis non sivit intrare redeuntem. At ille post bella gravissima, quibus eosdem Romanos concitatis finitimis adtrivit, postea quam desertus ab eis quorum fidebat auxilio regnum recipere non eualuit, in oppido Tusculo Romae vicino quttuordecim, ut fertur, annos privatam vitam quietus habuit et cum uxore consenuit, optabiliore fortassis exitu quam socer eius, generi sui facinore nec ignorante filia, sicut perhibetur, extinctus. Nec tamen istum Tarquinium Romani crudelem aut sceleratum, sed superbum appelaverunt, fortasse regios eius fastus alia superbia non ferentes. Nam scelus occisi ab eo soceri optimi regis sui usque adeo contempserunt, ut eum regem suum facerent; ubi miror, si non scelere graviore mercedem tantam tanto sceleri reddiderunt. Nec "discessere adytis arisque relictis di." Nisi forte quispiam sic defendat istos deos, ut dicat eos ideo mansisse Romae, quo possent magis Romanos punire suppliciis quam beneficiis adivuare, seducentes eos uanis victoriis et bellis gravissimis conterentes. Haec fuit Romanorum vita sub regibus laudabili tempore illius rei publicae usque ad expulsionem Tarquinii Superbi per ducentos ferme et squadraginta et tres annos, cum illae omnes victoriae tam multo sanguine et tantis emptae calamitatibus vix illud imperium intra viginti ab Vrbe milia dilataverint; quantum spatium absit ut saltem alicuius Getulae civitatis nunc terriotiro comparetur.  ||And what was the end of the kings themselves?  Of Romulus, a flattering legend tells us that he was assumed into heaven. But certain Roman historians relate that he was torn in pieces by the senate for his ferocity, and that a man, Julius Proculus, was suborned to give out that Romulus had appeared to him, and through him commanded the Roman people to worship him as a god; and that in this way the people, who were beginning to resent the action of the senate, were quieted and pacifiedFor an eclipse of the sun had also happened; and this was attributed to the divine power of Romulus by the ignorant multitude, who did not know that it was brought about by the fixed laws of the sun's course:  though this grief of the sun might rather have been considered proof that Romulus had been slain, and that the crime was indicated by this deprivation of the sun's light; as, in truth, was the case when the Lord was crucified through the cruelty and impiety of the Jews. For it is sufficiently demonstrated that this latter obscuration of the sun did not occur by the natural laws of the heavenly bodies, because it was then the Jewish Passover, which is held only at full moon, whereas natural eclipses of the sun happen only at the last quarter of the moonCicero, too, shows plainly enough that the apotheosis of Romulus was imaginary rather than real, when, even while he is praising him in one of Scipio's remarks in the De Republica, he says: "Such a reputation had he acquired, that when he suddenly disappeared during an eclipse of the sun, he was supposed to have been assumed into the number of the gods, which could be supposed of no mortal who had not the highest reputation for virtue."  By these words, "he suddenly disappeared," we are to understand that he was mysteriously made away with by the violence either of the tempest or of a murderous assaultFor their other writers speak not only of an eclipse, but of a sudden storm also, which certainly either afforded opportunity for the crime, or itself made an end of Romulus. And of Tullus Hostilius, who was the third king of Rome, and who was himself destroyed by lightning, Cicero in the same book says, that "he was not supposed to have been deified by this death, possibly because the Romans were unwilling to vulgarize the promotion they were assured or persuaded of in the case of Romulus, lest they should bring it into contempt by gratuitously assigning it to all and sundry."  In one of his invectives, too, he says, in round terms, "The founder of this city, Romulus, we have raised to immortality and divinity by kindly celebrating his services;" implying that his deification was not real, but reputed, and called so by courtesy on account of his virtuesIn the dialogue Hortensius, too, while speaking of the regular eclipses of the sun, he says that they "produce the same darkness as covered the death of Romulus, which happened during an eclipse of the sun."  Here you see he does not at all shrink from speaking of his "death," for Cicero was more of a reasoner than an eulogist.The other kings of Rome, too, with the exception of Numa Pompilius and Ancus Marcius, who died natural deaths, what horrible ends they had!  Tullus Hostilius, the conqueror and destroyer of Alba, was, as I said, himself and all his house consumed by lightning.  Priscus Tarquinius was slain by his predecessor's sons.  Servius Tullius was foully murdered by his son-in-law Tarquinius Superbus, who succeeded him on the throne. Nor did so flagrant a parricide committed against Rome's best king drive from their altars and shrines those gods who were said to have been moved by Paris' adultery to treat poor Troy in this style, and abandon it to the fire and sword of the Greeks.  Nay, the very Tarquin who had murdered, was allowed to succeed his father-in-lawAnd this infamous parricide, during the reign he had secured by murder, was allowed to triumph in many victorious wars, and to build the Capitol from their spoils; the gods meanwhile not departing, but abiding, and abetting, and suffering their king Jupiter to preside and reign over them in that very splendid Capitol, the work of a parricideFor he did not build the Capitol in the days of his innocence, and then suffer banishment for subsequent crimes; but to that reign during which he built the Capitol, he won his way by unnatural crime. And when he was afterwards banished by the Romans, and forbidden the city, it was not for his own but his son's wickedness in the affair of Lucretia,-a crime perpetrated not only without his cognizance, but in his absence.  For at that time he was besieging Ardea, and fighting Rome's battles; and we cannot say what he would have done had he been aware of his son's crime. Notwithstanding, though his opinion was neither inquired into nor ascertained, the people stripped him of royalty; and when he returned to Rome with his army, it was admitted, but he was excluded, abandoned by his troops, and the gates shut in his faceAnd yet, after he had appealed to the neighboring states, and tormented the Romans with calamitous but unsuccessful wars, and when he was deserted by the ally on whom he most depended, despairing of regaining the kingdom, he lived a retired and quiet life for fourteen years, as it is reported, in Tusculum, a Roman town, where he grew old in his wife's company, and at last terminated his days in a much more desirable fashion than his father-in-law, who had perished by the hand of his son-in-law; his own daughter abetting, if report be true.  And this Tarquin the Romans called, not the Cruel, nor the Infamous, but the Proud; their own pride perhaps resenting his tyrannical airsSo little did they make of his murdering their best king, his own father-in-law, that they elected him their own king. I wonder if it was not even more criminal in them to reward so bountifully so great a criminalAnd yet there was no word of the gods abandoning the altars; unless, perhaps, some one will say in defence of the gods, that they remained at Rome for the purpose of punishing the Romans, rather than of aiding and profiting them, seducing them by empty victories, and wearing them out by severe warsSuch was the life of the Romans under the kings during the much-praised epoch of the state which extends to the expulsion of Tarquinius Superbus in the 243d year, during which all those victories, which were bought with so much blood and such disasters, hardly pushed Rome's dominion twenty miles from the city; a territory which would by no means bear comparison with that of any petty Gжtulian state.  
+
||<div id="c13"><b>BOOK II</b> [XIII] Sed responderet mihi fortasse, si viveret: Quo modo nos ista inpunita esse nollemus, quae ipsi dii sacra esse voluerunt, cum ludos scaenicos, ubi talia celebrantur dictitantur actitantur, et Romanis moribus invexerunt et suis honoribus dicari exhiberique iusserunt? Cur non ergo hinc magis ipsi intellecti sunt non esse dii veri nec omnino digni, quibus divinos honores deferret illa res publica? Quos enim coli minime deceret minimeque oporteret, si ludos expeterent agendos conuiciis Romanorum, quo modo quaeso colendi putati sunt, quo modo non detestandi spiritus intellecti, qui cupiditate fallendi inter suos honores sua celebrari crimina poposcerunt? Itemque Romani, quamuis iam superstitione noxia premerentur, ut illos deos colerent, quos videbant sibi voluisse scaenicas turpitudines consecrari, suae tamen dignitatis memores ac pudoris actores talium fabularum nequaquam honoraverunt more Graecorum, sed, sicut apud Ciceronem idem Scipio loquitur," cum artem iudicram scaenamque totam in probro ducerent, genus id hominum non modo honore civium reliquorum carere, sed etiam tribu moveri notatione censoria voluerunt. "Praeclara sanc et Romanis laudibus adnumeranda prudentia; sed vellem se ipsa sequeretur, se imitaretur. Ecce enim recte, quisquis civium Romanorum esse scaenicus elegisset, non solum ei nullus ad honorem dabatur locus, verum etiam censoris nota tribum tenere propriam minime sinebatur. O animum civitatis laudis avidum germaneque Romanum! Sed respondeatur mihi: qua consentanea ratione homines scaenici ab omni honore repelluntur, et ludi scaenici deorum honoribus admiscentur? Illas theatricas artes diu virtus Romana non noverat, quae si ad oblectamentum voluptatis humanae quaererentur, vitio morum inreperent humanorum. Dii eas sibi exhiberi petierunt: quo modo ergo abicitur scaenicus, per quem colitur Deus? et theatricae illius turpitudinis qua fronte notatur actor, si adoratur exactor? In hac controversia Graeci Romanique concertent. Graeci putant recte se honorare homines scaenicos, quia colunt ludorum scaenicorum flagitatores deos; Romani vero hominibus scaenicis nec plebeiam tribum, quanto Ininus senatoriam curiam dehonestari sinunt. In hac disceptatione huiusce modi ratiocinatio summam quaestionis absolvit. Proponunt Graeci: Si dii tales colendi sunt, profecto etiam tales homines honorandi. Adsumunt Romani: Sed nullo modo tales homines honorandi sunt. Concludunt Christiani: Nullo modo igitur dii tales colendi sunt.  ||chapter 13. But Scipio, were he alive, would possibly reply:  "How could we attach a penalty to that which the gods themselves have consecrated?  For the theatrical entertainments in which such things are said, and acted, and performed, were introduced into Roman society by the gods, who ordered that they should be dedicated and exhibited in their honor." But was not this, then, the plainest proof that they were no true gods, nor in any respect worthy of receiving divine honours from the republic? Suppose they had required that in their honor the citizens of Rome should be held up to ridicule, every Roman would have resented the hateful proposalHow then, I would ask, can they be esteemed worthy of worship, when they propose that their own crimes be used as material for celebrating their praises? Does not this artifice expose them, and prove that they are detestable devils?  Thus the Romans, though they were superstitious enough to serve as gods those who made no secret of their desire to be worshipped in licentious plays, yet had sufficient regard to their hereditary dignity and virtue, to prompt them to refuse to players any such rewards as the Greeks accorded themOn this point we have this testimony of Scipio, recorded in Cicero: "They [the Romans] considered comedy and all theatrical performances as disgraceful, and therefore not only debarred players from offices and honors open to ordinary citizens, but also decreed that their names should be branded by the censor, and erased from the roll of their tribe."  An excellent decree, and another testimony to the sagacity of Rome; but I could wish their prudence had been more thorough-going and consistentFor when I hear that if any Roman citizen chose the stage as his profession, he not only closed to himself every laudable career, but even became an outcast from his own tribe, I cannot but exclaim:  This is the true Roman spirit, this is worthy of a state jealous of its reputation. But then some one interrupts my rapture, by inquiring with what consistency players are debarred from all honors, while plays are counted among the honors due to the gods? For a long while the virtue of Rome was uncontaminated by theatrical exhibitions; and if they had been adopted for the sake of gratifying the taste of the citizens, they would have been introduced hand in hand with the relaxation of mannersBut the fact is, that it was the gods who demanded that they should be exhibited to gratify them.  With what justice, then, is the player excommunicated by whom God is worshipped? On what pretext can you at once adore him who exacts, and brand him who acts these plays? This, then, is the controversy in which the Greeks and Romans are engagedThe Greeks think they justly honor players, because they worship the gods who demand plays; the Romans, on the other hand, do not suffer an actor to disgrace by his name his own plebeian tribe, far less the senatorial order.  And the whole of this discussion may be summed up in the following syllogismThe Greeks give us the major premise: If such gods are to be worshipped, then certainly such men may be honoredThe Romans add the minor:  But such men must by no means be honouredThe Christians draw the conclusion:  Therefore such gods must by no means be worshipped.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c16"><b>BOOK III</b> [XVI] Huic tempori adiciamus etiam tempus illud ,quo usque dicit Sallustius aequo et modesto iure agitatum, dum metus a Tarquinio et bellum grave cum Etruria positum est. Quamdiu enim Etrusci Tarquinio in regnum redire conanti opitulati sunt, gravi bello Roma concussa est. Ideo dicit aequo et modesto iure gestam rem publicam metu premente, non persuadente iustitia. In quo brevissimo tempore quam funestus ille annus fuit, quo primi consules creati sunt expulsa regia potestate! Annum quippe suum non compleuerunt. Nam Iunius Brutus exhonoratum eiecit Vrbe collegam Lucium Tarquinium Collatinum; deinde mox ipse in bello cecidit mutuis cum hoste uulneribus, occisis a se <ipso> primitus filiis suis et uxoris suae fratribus, quod eos pro restituendo Tarquinio coniurasse cognoverat. Quod factum Vergilius postea quam laudabiliter commemoravit, continuo clementer exhorruit. Cum enim dixisset: Natosque pater noua bella moventes Ad poenam pulchra pro libertate vocabit, mox deinde exclamavit et ait: Infelix, utcumque ferent ea facta minores. Quomodo libet, inquit, ea facta posteri ferant, id est praeferant et extollant, qui filios occidit, infelix est. Et tamquam ad consolandum infelicem subiunxit: Vincit amor patriae laudumque inmensa cupido. Nonne in hoc Bruto, quiet filios occidit et a se percusso hosti filio Tarquinii mutuo percussus superuivere non potuit eique potius ipse Tarquinius superuixit, Collatini collegae videtur innocentia vindicata, qui bonus civis hoc Tarquinio pulso passus est, quod tyrannus ipse Tarquinius? Nam et idem Brutus consanguineus Tarquinii fuisse perhibetur; sed Collatinum videlicet similitudo nominis pressit, quia etiam Tarquinius vocabatur. Multaere ergo nomen, non patriam cogeretur; postremo in eius nomine hoc vocabulum minus esset, L. Collatinus tantummodo vocaretur. Sed ideo non amisit quod sine ullo detrimento posset amittere, ut et honore primus consul et civitate bonus civis carere iuberetur. Etiamne ista est gloria, Iunii Bruti detestanda iniquitas et nihilo utilis rei publicae? Etiamne ad hanc perpetrandam "uicit amor patriae laudumque inmensa cupido"? Iam expulso utique Tarquinio tyranno consul cum Bruto creatus est maritus Lucretiae L. Tarquinius Collatinus. Quam iuste populus mores in cive, non nomen adtendit! Quam impie Brutus collegam primae ac nouae illius potestatis, quem posset, si hoc offendebatur, nomine tantum privare, et patria privavit et honore! Haec mala facta sunt, haec adversa acciderunt, quando in illa re publica "aequo et modesto iure agitatum est." Lucretius quoque, qui in locum Bruti fuerat subrogatus, morbo, antequam idem annus terminaretur, absumptus est. Ita P. Valerius, qui successerat Collatino, et M. Horatius, qui pro defuncto Lucretio suffectus fuerat, annum illum funereum atque tartareum, qui consules quinque habuit, compleuerunt, quo anno consulatus ipsius nouum honorem ac potestatem auspicata est Romana res publica. ||To this epoch let us add also that of which Sallust says, that it was ordered with justice and moderation, while the fear of Tarquin and of a war with Etruria was impending.  For so long as the Etrurians aided the efforts of Tarquin to regain the throne, Rome was convulsed with distressing war. And therefore he says that the state was ordered with justice and moderation, through the pressure of fear, not through the influence of equityAnd in this very brief period, how calamitous a year was that in which consuls were first created, when the kingly power was abolished!  They did not fulfill their term of officeFor Junius Brutus deprived his colleague Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus, and banished him from the city; and shortly after he himself fell in battle, at once slaying and slain, having formerly put to death his own sons and his brothers-in-law, because he had discovered that they were conspiring to restore TarquinIt is this deed that Virgil shudders to record, even while he seems to praise it; for when he says:"And call his own rebellious seedFor menaced liberty to bleed,"he immediately exclaims,"Unhappy father! howsoe'erThe deed be judged by after days;"that is to say, let posterity judge the deed as they please, let them praise and extol the father who slew his sons, he is unhappyAnd then he adds, as if to console so unhappy a man:"His country's love shall all o'erbear,And unextinguished thirst of praise."In the tragic end of Brutus, who slew his own sons, and though he slew his enemy, Tarquin's son, yet could not survive him, but was survived by Tarquin the elder, does not the innocence of his colleague Collatinus seem to be vindicated, who, though a good citizen, suffered the same punishment as Tarquin himself, when that tyrant was banished? For Brutus himself is said to have been a relative of Tarquin.  But Collatinus had the misfortune to bear not only the blood, but the name of TarquinTo change his name, then, not his country, would have been his fit penalty:  to abridge his name by this word, and be called simply L. Collatinus.  But he was not com pelled to lose what he could lose without detriment, but was stripped of the honor of the first consulship, and was banished from the land he lovedIs this, then, the glory of Brutus-this injustice, alike detestable and profitless to the republic? Was it to this he was driven by "his country's love, and unextinguished thirst of praise?"When Tarquin the tyrant was expelled, L. Tarquinius Collatinus, the husband of Lucretia, was created consul along with BrutusHow justly the people acted, in looking more to the character than the name of a citizen!  How unjustly Brutus acted, in depriving of honor and country his colleague in that new office, whom he might have deprived of his name, if it were so offensive to him!  Such were the ills, such the disasters, which fell out when the government was "ordered with justice and moderation." Lucretius, too, who succeeded Brutus, was carried off by disease before the end of that same year.  So P. Valerius, who succeeded Collatinus, and M. Horatius, who filled the vacancy occasioned by the death of Lucretius, completed that disastrous and funereal year, which had five consulsSuch was the year in which the Roman republic inaugurated the new honor and office of the consulship.
+
||<div id="c14"><b>BOOK II</b> [XIV] Deinde quaerimus, ipsi poetae talium fabularum compositores, qui duodecim tabularum lege prohibentur famam laedere civium, tam probrosa in deos conuicia iaculantes cur non ut scaenici habeantur inhonesti. Qua ratione rectum est, ut poeticorum figmentorum et ignominiosorum deorum infamentur actores, honorentur auctores? An forte Graeco Platoni potius palma danda est, qui cum ratione formaret, qualis esse civitas debeat, tamquam adversarios veritatis poetas censuit urbe pellendos? Iste vero et deorum iniurias indigne tulit et fucari corrumpique figmentis animos civium noluit. Confer nunc Platonis humanitatem a civibus decipiendis poetas urbe pellentem cum deorunI divinitate honori suo ludos scaenicos expetente. Ille, ne talia vel scriberentur, etsi non persuasit disputando, tamen suasit levitati lasciviaeque Graecorum; isti, ut talia etiam agerentur, iubendo extorserunt gravitati et modestiae Romanorum. Nec tantum haec agi voluerunt, sed sibi dicari, sibi sacrari, sibi sollemniter exhiberi. Cui tandem honestius divinos honores decerneret civitas? utrum Platoni haec turpia et nefanda prohibenti, an daemonibus hac hominum deceptione gaudentibus, quibus ille vera persuadere non potuit? Hunc Platonem Labeo inter semideos commemorandum putavit, sicut Herculem, sicut Romulum. Semideos autem heroibus anteponit; sed utrosque inter numina conlocat. Verum tamen istum, quem appellat semideum, non heroibus tantum, sed etiam diis ipsis praeferendum esse non dubito. Propinquant autem Romanorum leges disputationibus Platonis, quando ille cuncta poetica figmenta condemnat, isti autem poetis adimunt saltem in homines maledicendi licentiam; ille poetas ab urbis ipsius habitatione, isti saltem actores poeticarum fabularum removent a societate civitatis; et si contra deos ludorum scaenicorum expetitores aliquid auderent, forte undique removerent. Nequaquam igitur leges ad instituendos bonos aut corrigendos malos mores a diis suis possent accipere seu sperare Romani, quos legibus suis vincunt atque conuincunt. Illi enim honori suo deposcunt ludos scaenicos, isti ab honoribus omnibus repellunt homines scaenicos; illi celebrari sibi iubent figmentis poeticis opprobria deorum, isti ab opprobriis hominum deterrent inpudentiam poetarum. Semideus autem ille Plato et talium deorum libidini restitit, et ab indole Romanorum quid perficiendum esset ostendit, qui poeta s ipsos vel pro arbitrio mentientes vel hominibus miseris quasi deorum facta pessima imitanda proponentes omnino in civitate bene instituta vivere noluit. Nos quidem Platonem nec deum nec semideum perhibemus, nec ulli sancto angelo summi Dei nec veridico prophetae nec apostolo alicui nec cuilibet Christi martyri nec cuiquam Christiano homini comparamus; cuius nostrae sententiae ratio Deo prosperante suo loco explicabitur. Sed eum tamen, quando quidem ipsi volunt fuisse semideum, praeferendum esse censemus, si non Romulo et Herculi (quamuis istum nec fratrem occidisse, nec aliquod perpetrasse flagitium quisquam historicorum vel poetarum dixit aut finxit), certe vel Priapo vel alicui Cynocephalo, postremo vel Febri, quae Romani numina partim peregrina receperunt, paffim sua propria sacraverunt. Quo modo igitur tanta animi et morum mala bonis praeceptis et legibus vel inminentia prohiberent, vel insita extirpanda curarent dii tales, qui etiam seminanda et augenda flagitia curaverunt, talia vel sua vel quasi sua facta per theatricas celebritates populis innotescere cupientes, ut tamquam auctoritate divina sua sponte nequissima libido accenderetur humana, frustra hoc exclamante Cicerone, qui cum de poetis ageret: "Ad quos cum accessit, inquit, clamor et adprobatio populi quasi cuiusdam magni et sapientis magistri, quas illi obducunt tenebras, quos invehunt metus, quas inflammant cupiditates!" ||chapter 14. We have still to inquire why the poets who write the plays, and who by the law of the twelve tables are prohibited from injuring the good name of the citizens, are reckoned more estimable than the actors, though they so shamefully asperse the character of the gods?  Is it right that the actors of these poetical and God-dishonoring effusions be branded, while their authors are honored?  Must we not here award the palm to a Greek, Plato, who, in framing his ideal republic, conceived that poets should be banished from the city as enemies of the state? He could not brook that the gods be brought into disrepute, nor that the minds of the citizens be depraved and besotted, by the fictions of the poetsCompare now human nature as you see it in Plato, expelling poets from the city that the citizens be uninjured, with the divine nature as you see it in these gods exacting plays in their own honorPlato strove, though unsuccessfully, to persuade the light-minded and lascivious Greeks to abstain from so much as writing such plays; the gods used their authority to extort the acting of the same from the dignified and sober-minded Romans.  And not content with having them acted, they had them dedicated to themselves, consecrated to themselves, solemnly celebrated in their own honorTo which, then, would it be more becoming in a state to decree divine honors,-to Plato, who prohibited these wicked and licentious plays, or to the demons who delighted in blinding men to the truth of what Plato unsuccessfully sought to inculcate?This philosopher, Plato, has been elevated by Labeo to the rank of a demigod, and set thus upon a level with such as Hercules and Romulus.  Labeo ranks demigods higher than heroes, but both he counts among the deitiesBut I have no doubt that he thinks this man whom he reckons a demigod worthy of greater respect not only than the heroes, but also than the gods themselves.  The laws of the Romans and the speculations of Plato have this resemblance, that the latter pronounce a wholesale condemnation of poetical fictions, while the former restrain the license of satire, at least so far as men are the objects of it. Plato will not suffer poets even to dwell in his city:  the laws of Rome prohibit actors from being enrolled as citizens; and if they had not feared to offend the gods who had asked the services of the players, they would in all likelihood have banished them altogetherIt is obvious, therefore, that the Romans could not receive, nor reasonably expect to receive, laws for the regulation of their conduct from their gods, since the laws they themselves enacted far surpassed and put to shame the morality of the gods.  The gods demand stageplays in their own honor; the Romans exclude the players from all civic honors; the former commanded that they should be celebrated by the scenic representation of their own disgrace; the latter commanded that no poet should dare to blemish the reputation of any citizenBut that demigod Plato resisted the lust of such gods as these, and showed the Romans what their genius had left incomplete; for he absolutely excluded poets from his ideal state, whether they composed fictions with no regard to truth, or set the worst possible examples before wretched men under the guise of divine actions. We for our part, indeed, reckon Plato neither a god nor a demigod; we would not even compare him to any of God's holy angels; nor to the truth-speaking prophets, nor to any of the apostles or martyrs of Christ, nay, not to any faithful Christian man. The reason of this opinion of ours we will, God prospering us, render in its own placeNevertheless, since they wish him to be considered a demigod, we think he certainly is more entitled to that rank, and is every way superior, if not to Hercules and Romulus (though no historian could ever narrate nor any poet sing of him that he had killed his brother, or committed any crime), yet certainly to Priapus, or a Cynocephalus, or the Fever,-divinities whom the Romans have partly received from foreigners, and partly consecrated by home-grown ritesHow, then, could gods such as these be expected to promulgate good and wholesome laws, either for the prevention of moral and social evils, or for their eradication where they had already sprung up?-gods who used their influence even to sow and cherish profligacy, by appointing that deeds truly or falsely ascribed to them should be published to the people by means of theatrical exhibitions, and by thus gratuitously fanning the flame of human lust with the breath of a seemingly divine approbationIn vain does Cicero, speaking of poets, exclaim against this state of things in these words:  "When the plaudits and acclamation of the people, who sit as infallible judges, are won by the poets, what darkness benights the mind, what fears invade, what passions inflame it!"
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c17"><b>BOOK III</b> [XVII] Tunc iam deminuto paululum metu, non quia bella conquieuerant, sed quia non tam gravi pondere urgebant, finito scilicet tempore, quo aequo iure ac modesto agitatum est, secuta sunt quae idem Sallustius breviter explicat: "dein seruili imperio patres plebem exercere, de vita atque tergo regio more consulere, agro pellere et ceteris expertibus soli in imperio agere. Quibus saevitiis et maxime faenore oppressa plebes, cum assiduis bellis tributum et militiam simul toleraret, armata montem sacrum atque Aventinum insedit, tumque tribunos plebis et alia iura sibi paravit. Discordiarum et certaminis utrimque finis fuit secundum bellum Punicum." Quid itaque ego tantas moras vel scribens patiar, vel lecturis adferam? Quam misera fuerit illa res publica, tam longa aetate per toto annos usque ad secundum bellum Punicum bellis forinsecus inquietare non desistentibus et intus discordiis seditionibusque civilibus, a Sallustio breviter intimatum est. Proinde victoriae illae non solida beatorum gaudia fuerunt, sed inania solacia miserorum et ad alia atque alia sterilia mala subeunda inlecebrosa incitamenta minime quietorum. Nec nobis, quia hoc dicimus, boni Romani prudentesque suscenseant: quamquam de hac re nec petendi sint nec monendi, quando eos minime suscensuros esse certissimum est. Neque enim gravius vel graviora dicimus auctoribus eorum et stilo et otio multum impares; quibus tamen ediscendis et ipsi elaboraverunt et filios suos elaborare compellunt. Qui autem suscensent, quando me ferrent, si ego dicerem, quod Sallustius ait? "plurimae turbae, seditiones et ad postremum bella civilia orta sunt, dum pauci potentes, quorum in gratiam plerique concesserant, sub honesto patrum aut plebis nomine dominationes adfectabant; bonique et mali cives appellati, non ob merita in rem publicam, omnibus pariter corruptis, sed uti quisque locupletissimus et iniuria validior, quia praesentia defendebat, pro bono ducebatur." Porro si illi scriptores historiae ad honestam libertatem pertinere arbitrati sunt mala civitatis propriae non tacere, quam multis locis magno praeconio laudare compulsi sunt, cum aliam veriorem, quo cives aterni legendi sunt, non haberent: quid nos facere convenit, quorum spes quanto in Deo melior et certior, tanto maior debet esse libertas, cum mala praesentia Christo nostro inputant, ut infirmiores imperitioresque mentes alienentur ab ea civitate, in qua sola iugiter feliciterque vivendum est? Nec in deos eorum horribiliora nos dicimus, quam eorum identidem auctores, quos legunt et praedicant, quando quidem et ex ipsis quae diceremus accepimus, et nullo modo dicere vel talia vel cuncta sufficimus. Vbi ergo erant illi dii, qui propter exiguam fallacemque mundi huius felicitatem colendi existimantur, cum Romani, quibus se colendos mendacissima astutia venditabant, tantis calamitatibus uexarentur? Vbi erant, quando Valerius consul ab exulibus et seruis incensum Capitolium cum defensaret occisus est faciliusque ipse prodesse potuit aedi Iovis, quam illi turba tot numinum cum suo maximo atque optimo rege, cuius templum liberaverat, subvenire? Vbi erant, quando densissimis fatigata civitas seditionum malis, cum legatos Athenas missos ad leges mutuandas paululum quieta opperiretur, gravi fame pestilentiaque uastata est? Vbi erant, quando rursus populus, cum fame laboraret, praefectum annonae primum creavit, atque illa fame inualescente Spurius Maelius, quia esurienti multitudini frumenta largitus est, regni adfectati crimen incurrit et eiusdem praefecti instantia per dictatorem, L. Quintium aetate decrepitum a Quinto Seruilio magistro equitum cum maximo et periculosissimo tumultu civitatis occisus est? Vbi erant, quando pestilentia maxima exorta diis inutilibus populus diu multumque fatigatus noua lectisternia, quod numquam antea fecerat, exhibenda arbitratus est? Lecti autem sternebantur in honorem deorum, unde hoc sacrum vel potius sacrilegium nomen accepit. Vbi erant, quando per decem continuos annos male pugnando crebras et magnas clades apud Veios exercitus Romanus acceperat, nisi per Furium Camillum tandem subveniretur, quem postea civitas ingrata damnavit? Vbi erant, quando Galli Romam ceperunt spoliaverunt, incenderunt caedibus impleuerunt? Vbi erant, cum illa insignis pestilentia tam ingentem stragem dedit, qua et ille Furius Camillus extinctus est, qui rem publicam ingratam et a Veientibus ante defendit et de Gallis postea vindicavit? In hac pestilentia scaenicos ludos aliam nouam pestem non corporibus Romanorum, sed, quod est multo perniciosius, moribus intulerunt. Vbi erant, quando alia pestilentia gravis de venenis matronarum exorta credita est, quarum supra fidem multarum atque nobilium mores deprehensi sunt omni pestilentia graviores? vel quando in Caudinas furculas a Samnitibus obsessi ambo cum exercitu consules foedus cum eis foedum facere coacti sunt, ita ut equitibus Romanis sescentis obsidibus datis ceteri amissis armis aliisque spoliati privatique tegminibus sub iugum hostium in uestimentis singulis mitterentur? vel quando gravi pestilentia ceteris laborantibus multi etiam in exercitu icti fulmine perierunt? vel quando item alia intolerabili pestilentia Aesculapium ab Epidauro quasi medicum deum Roma aduocare atque adhibere compulsa est, quoniam regem omnium Iovem, qui iam diu in Capitolio sedebat, multa stupra, quibus adulescens uacaverat, non permiserant fortasse discere medicinam? vel cum conspirantibus uno tempore hostibus Lucanis, Bruttiis, Samnitibus, Etruscis et Senonibus Gallis primo ab eis legati perempti sunt, deinde cum praetore oppressus exercitus septem tribunis cum illo pereuntibus et militum tredecim milibus? vel quando post longas et graves Romae seditiones, quibus ad ultimum plebs in Ianiculum hostili diremptione secesserat, huius mali tam dira calamitas erat, ut eius rei causa, quod in extremis periculis fieri solebat, dictator crearetur Hortensius, qui plebe reuocata in eodem magistratu exspiravit, quod plebe reuocata in eodem magistratu exspiravit, quod nulli dictatori ante contigerat et quod illis diis iam praesente Aesculapio gravius crimen fuit? Tum vero tam multa bella ubique crebruerunt, ut inopia militum proletarii illi, qui eo, quod proli gignendae uacabant, ob egestatem militare non valentes hoc nomen acceperant, militiae conscriberentur. Accitus etiam a Tarentinis Pyrrhus, rex Graeciae, tunc ingenti gloria celebratus, Romanorum hostis effectus est. Cui sane de rerum futuro euentu consulenti satis urbane Apollo sic ambiguum oraculum edidit, ut, e duobus quidquid accidisset, ipse divinus haberetur (ait enim: "Dico te, Pyrrhe, vincere posse Romanos") atque ita, sive Pyrrhus a Romanis sive Romani a Pyrrho vincerentur, securus fatidicus utrumlibet expectaret euentum. Quae tunc et quam horrenda utriusque exercitus clades! In qua tamen superior Pyrrhus extitit, ut iam posset Apollinem pro suo intellectu praedicare divinum, nisi proxime alio proelio Romani abscederent superiores. Atque in tanta strage bellorum etiam pestilentia gravis exorta est mulierum. Nam priusquam maturos partus ederent, gravidae moriebantur. Vbi se, credo, Aesculapius excusabat, quod archiatrum, non obstetricem profitebatur. Pecudes quoque similiter interibant, ita ut etiam defecturum genus animalium crederetur. Quid? hiems illa memorabilis tam incredibili inmanitate saeviens, ut nivibus horrenda altitudine etiam in foro per dies quadraginta manentibus Tiberis quoque glacie duraretur, si nostris temporibus accidisset, quae isti et quanta dixissent! Quid? illa itidem ingens pestilentia, quamdiu saeviit, quam multos peremit! Quae cum in annum alium multo gravius tenderetur frustra praesente Aesculapio, aditum est ad libros Sibyllinos. In quo genere oraculorum, sicut Cicero in libris de divinatione commemorat, magis interpretibus ut possunt seu volunt dubia coniectantibus credi solet. Tunc ergo dictum est eam esse causam pestilentiae, quod plurimas aedes sacras multi occupatas privatim tenerent: sic interim a magno imperitiae vel desidiae crimine Aesculapius liberatus est. Vnde autem a multis aedes illae fuerant occupatae nemine prohibente, nisi quia tantae numinum turbae diu frustra fuerat supplicatum, atque ita paulatim loca deserebantur a cultoribus, ut tamquam uacua sine ullius offensione possent humanis saltem usibus vindicari? Namque tunc velut ad sedandam pestilentiam dilegenter repetita atque reparata nisi postea eodem modo neglecta atque usurpata latitarent, non utique magnae peritiae Varronis tribueretur, quod scribens de aedibus sacris tam multa ignorata commemorat. Sed tunc interim elegans non pestilentiae depulsio, sed deorum excusatio procurata est.  ||After this, when their fears were gradually diminished,-not because the wars ceased, but because they were not so furious,-that period in which things were "ordered with justice and moderation" drew to an end, and there followed that state of matters which Sallust thus briefly sketches:  "Then began the patricians to oppress the people as slaves, to condemn them to death or scourging, as the kings had done, to drive them from their holdings, and to tyrannize over those who had no property to lose. The people, overwhelmed by these oppressive measures, and most of all by usury, and obliged to contribute both money and personal service to the constant wars, at length took arms and seceded to Mount Aventine and Mount Sacer, and thus secured for themselves tribunes and protective laws.  But it was only the second Punic war that put an end on both sides to discord and strife."  But why should I spend time in writing such things, or make others spend it in reading them?  Let the terse summary of Sallust suffice to intimate the misery of the republic through all that long period till the second Punic war,-how it was distracted from without by unceasing wars, and torn with civil broils and dissensions.  So that those victories they boast were not the substantial joys of the happy, but the empty comforts of wretched men, and seductive incitements to turbulent men to concoct disasters upon disasters.  And let not the good and prudent Romans be angry at our saying this; and indeed we need neither deprecate nor denounce their anger, for we know they will harbor none. For we speak no more severely than their own authors, and much less elaborately and strikingly; yet they diligently read these authors, and compel their children to learn them.  But they who are angry, what would they do to me were I to say what Sallust says?  "Frequent mobs, seditions, and at last civil wars, became common, while a few leading men on whom the masses were dependent, affected supreme power under the seemly pretence of seeking the good of senate and people; citizens were judged good or bad without reference to their loyalty to the republic (for all were equally corrupt); but the wealthy and dangerously powerful were esteemed good citizens, because they maintained the existing state of things."  Now, if those historians judged that an honorable freedom of speech required that they should not be silent regarding the blemishes of their own state, which they have in many places loudly applauded in their ignorance of that other and true city in which citizenship is an everlasting dignity; what does it become us to do, whose liberty ought to be so much greater, as our hope in God is better and more assured, when they impute to our Christ the calamities of this age, in order that men of the less instructed and weaker sort may be alienated from that city in which alone eternal and blessed life can be enjoyed?  Nor do we utter against their gods anything more horrible than their own authors do, whom they read and circulate. For, indeed, all that we have said we have derived from them, and there is much more to say of a worse kind which we are unable to say.Where, then, were those gods who are supposed to be justly worshipped for the slender and delusive prosperity of this world, when the Romans, who were seduced to their service by lying wiles, were harassed by such calamities?  Where were they when Valerius the consul was killed while defending the Capitol, that had been fired by exiles and slaves?  He was himself better able to defend the temple of Jupiter, than that crowd of divinities with their most high and mighty king, whose temple he came to the rescue of were able to defend him.  Where were they when the city, worn out with unceasing seditions, was waiting in some kind of calm for the return of the ambassadors who had been sent to Athens to borrow laws, and was desolated by dreadful famine and pestilence?  Where were they when the people, again distressed with famine, created for the first time a prefect of the market; and when Spurius Melius, who, as the famine increased, distributed corn to the famishing masses, was accused of aspiring to royalty, and at the instance of this same prefect, and on the authority of the superannuated dictator L. Quintius, was put to death by Quintus Servilius, master of the horse,-an event which occasioned a serious and dangerous riot? Where were they when that very severe pestilence visited Rome, on account of which the people, after long and wearisome and useless supplications of the helpless gods, conceived the idea of celebrating Lectisternia, which had never been done before; that is to say, they set couches in honor of the gods, which accounts for the name of this sacred rite, or rather sacrilege?  Where were they when, during ten successive years of reverses, the Roman army suffered frequent and great losses among the Veians and would have been destroyed but for the succor of Furius Camillus, who was afterwards banished by an ungrateful country?  Where were they when the Gauls took sacked, burned, and desolated Rome?  Where were they when that memorable pestilence wrought such destruction, in which Furius Camillus too perished, who first defended the ungrateful republic from the Veians, and afterwards saved it from the Gauls?  Nay, during this plague, they introduced a new pestilence of scenic entertainments, which spread its more fatal contagion, not to the bodies, but the morals of the Romans?  Where were they when another frightful pestilence visited the city-I mean the poisonings imputed to an incredible number of noble Roman matrons, whose characters were infected with a disease more fatal than any plague?  Or when both consuls at the head of the army were beset by the Samnites in the Caudine Forks, and forced to strike a shameful treaty, 600 Roman knights being kept as hostages; while the troops, having laid down their arms, and being stripped of everything, were made to pass under the yoke with one garment each?  Or when, in the midst of a serious pestilence, lightning struck the Roman camp and killed many?  Or when Rome was driven, by the violence of another intolerable plague, to send to Epidaurus for Жsculapius as a god of medicine; since the frequent adulteries of Jupiter in his youth had not perhaps left this king of all who so long reigned in the Capitol, any leisure for the study of medicine?  Or when, at one time, the Lucanians, Brutians, Samnites, Tuscans, and Senonian Gauls conspired against Rome, and first slew her ambassadors, then overthrew an army under the prжtor, putting to the sword 13,000 men, besides the commander and seven tribunes?  Or when the people, after the serious and long-continued disturbances at Rome, at last plundered the city and withdrew to Janiculus; a danger so grave, that Hortensius was created dictator,-an office which they had recourse to only in extreme emergencies; and he, having brought back the people, died while yet he retained his office,-an event without precedent in the case of any dictator, and which was a shame to those gods who had now Жsculapius among them?At that time, indeed, so many wars were everywhere engaged in, that through scarcity of soldiers they enrolled for military service the proletarii, who received this name, because, being too poor to equip for military service, they had leisure to beget offspringPyrrhus, king of Greece, and at that time of widespread renown, was invited by the Tarentines to enlist himself against Rome.  It was to him that Apollo, when consulted regarding the issue of his enterprise, uttered with some pleasantry so ambiguous an oracle, that whichever alternative happened, the god himself should be counted divineFor he so worded the oracle that whether Pyrrhus was conquered by the Romans, or the Romans by Pyrrhus, the soothsaying god would securely await the issue.  And then what frightful massacres of both armies ensued!  Yet Pyrrhus remained conqueror, and would have been able now to proclaim Apollo a true diviner, as he understood the oracle, had not the Romans been the conquerors in the next engagement.  And while such disastrous wars were being waged, a terrible disease broke out among the women.  For the pregnant women died before delivery.  And Жsculapius, I fancy, excused himself in this matter on the ground that he professed to be arch-physician, not midwife.  Cattle, too, similarly perished; so that it was believed that the whole race of animals was destined to become extinct.  Then what shall I say of that memorable winter in which the weather was so incredibly severe, that in the Forum frightfully deep snow lay for forty days together, and the Tiber was frozen?  Had such things happened in our time, what accusations we should have heard from our enemies!  And that other great pestilence, which raged so long and carried off so many; what shall I say of it?  Spite of all the drugs of Жsculapius, it only grew worse in its second year, till at last recourse was had to the Sibylline books,-a kind of oracle which, as Cicero says in his De Divinatione, owes significance to its interpreters, who make doubtful conjectures as they can or as they wish.  In this instance, the cause of the plague was said to be that so many temples had been used as private residences.  And thus Жsculapius for the present escaped the charge of either ignominious negligence or want of skill.  But why were so many allowed to occupy sacred tenements without interference, unless because supplication had long been addressed in vain to such a crowd of gods, and so by degrees the sacred places were deserted of worshippers, and being thus vacant, could without offence be put at least to some human uses? And the temples, which were at that time laboriously recognized and restored that the plague might be stayed, fell afterwards into disuse, and were again devoted to the same human uses.  Had they not thus lapsed into obscurity, it could not have been pointed to as proof of Varro's great erudition, that in his work on sacred places he cites so many that were unknown.  Meanwhile, the restoration of the temples procured no cure of the plague, but only a fine excuse for the gods.
+
||<div id="c15"><b>BOOK II</b> [XV] Quae autem illic eligendorum deorum etiam ipsorum falsorum ratio ac non potius adulatio est? quando istum Platonem, quem semideum volunt, tantis disputationibus laborantem, ne animi malis, quae praecipue cavenda sunt, mores corrumperentur humani, nulla sacra aedicula dignum putarunt, et Romulum suum diis multis praetulerunt, quamuis et ipsum semideum potius quam deum ueIut secretior eorum doctrina commendet. Nam etiam flaminem illi instituerunt, quod sacerdotii genus adeo in Romanis sacris testante apice excelluit, ut tres solos flamines haberent tribus numinibus institutos, Dialem lovi, Martialem Marti, Quirinalem Romulo. Nam beneuolentia civium velut receptus in caelum Quirinus est postea nominatus. Ac per hoc et Neptuno et Plutoni, fratribus lovis, et ipsi Saturno, patri eorum, isto Romulus honore praelatus est, ut pro magno sacerdotium, quod lovi tribuerant, hoc etiam huic tribuerent, et Marti tamquam patri eius forsitan propter ipsum.  ||chapter 15. But is it not manifest that vanity rather than reason regulated the choice of some of their false gods? This Plato, whom they reckon a demigod, and who used all his eloquence to preserve men from the most dangerous spiritual calamities, has yet not been counted worthy even of a little shrine; but Romulus, because they can call him their own, they have esteemed more highly than many gods, though their secret doctrine can allow him the rank only of a demigodTo him they allotted a flamen, that is to say, a priest of a class so highly esteemed in their religion (distinguished, too, by their conical mitres), that for only three of their gods were flamens appointed,-the Flamen Dialis for Jupiter, Martialis for Mars, and Quirinalis for Romulus (for when the ardor of his fellow-citizens had given Romulus a seat among the gods, they gave him this new name Quirinus)And thus by this honor Romulus has been preferred to Neptune and Pluto, Jupiter's brothers, and to Saturn himself, their fatherThey have assigned the same priesthood to serve him as to serve Jove; and in giving Mars (the reputed father of Romulus) the same honor, is this not rather for Romulus' sake than to honor Mars?  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c18"><b>BOOK III</b> [XVIII] Iam vero Punicis bellis, cum inter utrumque imperium victoria diu anceps atque incerta penderet populique duo praeualidi impetus in alterutrum fortissimos et opulentissimos agerent, quot minutiora regna contrita sunt! quae urbes amplae nobilesque deletae, quot adflictae, quot perditae civitates! Quam longe lateque tot regiones terraeque uastate sunt! Quotiens victi hinc atque inde victores! Quid hominum concumptum est vel pugnantium militum vel ab armis uacantium populorum! Quanta vis navium marinis etiam proeliis oppressa et diversarum tempestatum varietate submersa est! Si enarrare vel commemorare conemur, nihil aliud quam scriptores etiam nos erimus historiae. Tunc magno metu perturbata Romana civitas ad remedia uana et redenda currebat. Instaurati sunt ex auctoritate librorum Sibyllinorum ludi saeculares, quorum celebritas inter centum annos fuerat instituta felicioribusque temporibus memoria neglegente perierat. Renouarunt etiam pontifices ludos sacros inferis et ipsos abolitos annis retrorsum melioribus. Nimirum enim, quando renouati sunt, tanta copia morientium ditatos inferos etiam ludere delectabat, cum profecto miseri homines ipsa rabida bella et cruentas animositates funereasque hinc atque inde victorias magnos agerent ludos daemonum et opimas epulas inferorum. Nihil sane miserabilius primo Punico bello accidit, quam quod ita Romani victi sunt, ut etiam Regulus ille caperetur, cuius in primo et in altero libro mentionem fecimus, vir plane magnus et victor antea domitorque Poenorum, qui etiam ipsum primum bellum Punicum confecisset, nisi aviditate nimia laudis et gloriae duriores condiciones, quam ferre possent, fessis Carthaginiensibus imperasset. Illius viri et captivitas inopinatissima et seruitus indignissima, et iuratio fidelissima et mors crudelissima si deos illos non cogit erubescere, verum est quod aerii sunt et non habetn sanguinem. Nec mala illo tempore gravissima intra moenia defuerunt. Nam exundante nimis ultra morem fluuio Tiberino paene omnia urbis plana subuersa sunt, aliis impetu quasi torrentis inpulsis, aliis velut stagno diuturno madefactis atque sublapsis. Istam deinde pestem ignis perniciosior subsecutus est, qui correptis circa forum quibusque celsioribus etiam templo Vestae suo familiarissimo non pepercit, ubi ei veluti vitam perpetuam diligentissima substitutione lignorum non tam honoratae quam damnatae virgines donare consuerant. Tunc vero illic ignis non tantum vivebat; sed etiam saeviebat. Cuius impetu exterritae virgines sacra illa fatalia, quae iam tres, in quibus fuerant, presserant civitates, cum ab illo incendio liberare non possent, Metullus pontifex suae quodam modo salutis oblitus inruens ea semiustus abripuit. Neque enim vel ipsum ignis agnovit, aut vero erat ibi numen, quod non etiam, si fuisset, fugisset. Homo igitur potius sacris Vestae quam illa homini prodesse potuerunt. Si autem a se ipsis ignem non repellebant, civitatem, cuius salutem tueri putabantur, quid contra illas aquas flammasque poterant adivuare? sicut etiam res ipsa nihil ea prorsus potuisse patefecit. Haec istis nequaquam obicerentur a nobis, si illa sacra dicerent non tuendis his bonis temporalibus instituta, sed significandis aeternis, et ideo, cum ea, quod corporalia visibiliaque essent, perire contingeret, nihil his rebus minui, propter quas fuerant instituta, et posse ad eosdem usus denuo reparari. Nunc vero caecitae mirabili eis sacris, quae perire possent, fieri potuisse existimant, ut salus terrena et temporalis felicitas civitatis perire non posset. Proinde cum illis etiam manentibus sacris vel salutis contritio vel infelicitas inruisse monstratur, mutare sententiam, quam defendere nequeunt, erubescunt.  ||In the Punic wars, again, when victory hung so long in the balance between the two kingdoms, when two powerful nations were straining every nerve and using all their resources against one another, how many smaller kingdoms were crushed, how many large and flourishing cities were demolished, how many states were overwhelmed and ruined, how many districts and lands far and near were desolated!  How often were the victors on either side vanquished!  What multitudes of men, both of those actually in arms and of others, were destroyed!  What huge navies, too, were crippled in engagements, or were sunk by every kind of marine disaster!  Were we to attempt to recount or mention these calamities, we should become writers of history.  At that period Rome was mightily perturbed, and resorted to vain and ludicrous expedients. On the authority of the Sibylline books, the secular games were re-appointed, which had been inaugurated a century before, but had faded into oblivion in happier times.  The games consecrated to the infernal gods were also renewed by the pontiffs; for they, too, had sunk into disuse in the better times.  And no wonder; for when they were renewed, the great abundance of dying men made all hell rejoice at its riches, and give itself up to sport:  for certainly the ferocious wars, and disastrous quarrels, and bloody victories-now on one side, and now on the other-though most calamitous to men, afforded great sport and a rich banquet to the devilsBut in the first Punic war there was no more disastrous event than the Roman defeat in which Regulus was taken.  We made mention of him in the two former books as an incontestably great man, who had before conquered and subdued the Carthaginians, and who would have put an end to the first Punic war, had not an inordinate appetite for praise and glory prompted him to impose on the worn-out Carthagians harder conditions than they could bear.  If the unlooked-for captivity and unseemly bondage of this man, his fidelity to his oath, and his surpassingly cruel death, do not bring a blush to the face of the gods, it is true that they are brazen and bloodless.Nor were there wanting at that time very heavy disasters within the city itselfFor the Tiber was extraordinarily flooded, and destroyed almost all the lower parts of the city; some buildings being carried away by the violence of the torrent, while others were soaked to rottenness by the water that stood round them even after the flood was gone.  This visitation was followed by a fire which was still more destructive, for it consumed some of the loftier buildings round the Forum, and spared not even its own proper temple, that of Vesta, in which virgins chosen for this honor, or rather for this punishment, had been employed in conferring, as it were, everlasting life on fire, by ceaselessly feeding it with fresh fuel.  But at the time we speak of, the fire in the temple was not content with being kept alive:  it ragedAnd when the virgins, scared by its vehemence, were unable to save those fatal images which had already brought destruction on three cities in which they had been received, Metellus the priest, forgetful of his own safety, rushed in and res cued the sacred things, though he was half roasted in doing so.  For either the fire did not recognize even him, or else the goddess of fire was there,-a goddess who would not have fled from the fire supposing she had been thereBut here you see how a man could be of greater service to Vesta than she could be to him.  Now if these gods could not avert the fire from themselves, what help against flames or flood could they bring to the state of which they were the reputed guardians?  Facts have shown that they were useless.  These objections of ours would be idle if our adversaries maintained that their idols are consecrated rather as symbols of things eternal, than to secure the blessings of time; and that thus, though the symbols, like all material and visible things, might perish, no damage thereby resulted to the things for the sake of which they had been consecrated, while, as for the images themselves, they could be renewed again for the same purposes they had formerly served.  But with lamentable blindness, they suppose that, through the intervention of perishable gods, the earthly well-being and temporal prosperity of the state can be preserved from perishing.  And so, when they are reminded that even when the gods remained among them this well-being and prosperity were blighted, they blush to change the opinion they are unable to defend.  
+
||<div id="c16"><b>BOOK II</b> [XVI] Si autem a diis suis Romani vivendi leges accipere potuissent, non aliquot annos post Romam conditam ab Atheniensibus mutuarentur leges Solonis, quas tamen non ut acceperunt <tenuerunt>, sed meliores et emendatiores facere conati sunt, quamuis Lycurgus Lacedaemoniis leges ex Apollinis auctoritate se instituisse confinxerit, quod prudenter Romani credere noluerunt, propterea non inde acceperunt. Numa Pompilius, qui Romulo successit in regnum, quasdam leges, quae quidem regendae civitati nequaquam sufficerent, condidisse fertur, qui eis multa etiam sacra constituit; non tamen perhibetur easdem leges a numinibus accepisse. Mala igitur animi, mala vitae, mala morum, quae ita magna sunt, ut his doctissimi eorum viri etiam stantibus urbibus res publicas perire confirment, dii eorum, ne suis cultoribus acciderent, minime curarunt; immo vero ut augerentur, sicut supra disputatum est, omni modo curarunt.  ||chapter 16. Moreover, if the Romans had been able to receive a rule of life from their gods, they would not have borrowed Solon's laws from the Athenians, as they did some years after Rome was founded; and yet they did not keep them as they received them, but endeavored to improve and amend themAlthough Lycurgus pretended that he was authorized by Apollo to give laws to the Lacedemonians, the sensible Romans did not choose to believe this, and were not induced to borrow laws from SpartaNuma Pompilius, who succeeded Romulus in the kingdom, is said to have framed some laws, which, however, were not sufficient for the regulation of civic affairsAmong these regulations were many pertaining to religious observances, and yet he is not reported to have received even these from the godsWith respect, then, to moral evils, evils of life and conduct,-evils which are so mighty, that, according to the wisest pagans, by them states are ruined while their cities stand uninjured,-their gods made not the smallest provision for preserving their worshippers from these evils, but, on the contrary, took special pains to increase them, as we have previously endeavored to prove.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c19"><b>BOOK III</b> [XIX] Secundo autem Punico bello nimis longum est commemorare clades duorum populorum tam longe secum lateque pugnantium, ita ut his quoque fatentibus, qui non tam narrare bella Romana quam Romanum imperium laudare instituerunt, similior victo fuerit ille qui vicit. Hannibale quippe ab Hispania surgente et Pyrenaeis montibus superatis, Gallia transcursa Alpibusque disruptis, tam longo circuitu auctis viribus cuncta uastando aut subigendo torrentis modo Italiae faucibus inruente quam cruenta proelia gesta sunt, quotiens Romani superati! quam multa ad hostem oppida defecerunt, quam multa capta et oppressa! quam dirae pugnae et totiens Hannibali Romana clade gloriosae! De Cannensi autem mirabiliter horrendo malo quid dicam, ubi Hannibal, cum esset crudelissimus, tamen tanta inimicorum atrocissimorum caede satiatus parci iussisse perhibetur? Vnde tres modios anulorum aureorum Carthaginem misit, quo intellegerunt tantam in illo proelio dignitatem cecidisse Romanam, ut facilius eam caperet mensura quam numerus, atque hinc strages turbae ceterae tanto utique numerosioris, quanto infirmioris, quae sine anulis iacebat, conicienda potius quam nuntianda putaretur. Denique tanta militum inopia secuta est, ut Romani reos facinorum proposita inpunitate colligerent, seruitia libertate donarent atque illis pudendus non tam suppleretur quam institueretur exercitus. Seruis itaque, immo, ne faciamus iniuriam, iam libertis, pro Romana re publica pugnaturis arma defuerunt. Detracta sunt templis, tamquam Romani diis suis dicerent: Ponite quae tam diu inaniter habuistis, ne forte aliquid utile inde facere possint nostra mancipia, unde nostra numina facere non potuistis. Tunc etiam stipendiis sufficiendis cum defecisset aerarium, in usus publicos opes venere privatae, adeo unoquoque id quod habuit conferente, ut praeter singulos anulos singulasque bullas, miserabilia dignitatis insignia, nihil sibi auri senatus ipse, quanto magis ceteri ordines tribusque relinquerent. Quis ferret istos, si nostris temporibus ad hanc inopiam cogerentur, cum eos modo vix feramus, quando pro superflua voluptate plura donantur histrionibus, quam tunc legionibus pro extrema salute conlata sunt? ||As to the second Punic war, it were tedious to recount the disasters it brought on both the nations engaged in so protracted and shifting a war, that (by the acknowledgment even of those writers who have made it their object not so much to narrate the wars as to eulogize the dominion of Rome) the people who remained victorious were less like conquerors than conqueredFor, when Hannibal poured out of Spain over the Pyrenees, and overran Gaul, and burst through the Alps, and during his whole course gathered strength by plundering and subduing as he went, and inundated Italy like a torrent, how bloody were the wars, and how continuous the engagements, that were foughtHow often were the Romans vanquished! How many towns went over to the enemy, and how many were taken and subdued! What fearful battles there were, and how often did the defeat of the Romans shed lustre on the arms of Hannibal! And what shall I say of the wonderfully crushing defeat at Cannж, where even Hannibal, cruel as he was, was yet sated with the blood of his bitterest enemies, and gave orders that they be spared?  From this field of battle he sent to Carthage three bushels of gold rings, signifying that so much of the rank of Rome had that day fallen, that it was easier to give an idea of it by measure than by numbers and that the frightful slaughter of the common rank and file whose bodies lay undistinguished by the ring, and who were numerous in proportion to their meanness, was rather to be conjectured than accurately reported.  In fact, such was the scarcity of soldiers after this, that the Romans impressed their criminals on the promise of impunity, and their slaves by the bribe of liberty, and out of these infamous classes did not so much recruit as create an armyBut these slaves, or, to give them all their titles, these freed-men who were enlisted to do battle for the republic of Rome, lacked armsAnd so they took arms from the temples, as if the Romans were saying to their gods:  Lay down those arms you have held so long in vain, if by chance our slaves may be able to use to purpose what you, our gods, have been impotent to use.  At that time, too, the public treasury was too low to pay the soldiers, and private resources were used for public purposes; and so generously did individuals contribute of their property, that, saving the gold ring and bulla which each wore, the pitiful mark of his rank, no senator, and much less any of the other orders and tribes, reserved any gold for his own use.  But if in our day they were reduced to this poverty, who would be able to endure their reproaches, barely endurable as they are now, when more money is spent on actors for the sake of a superfluous gratification, than was then disbursed to the legions?
+
||<div id="c17"><b>BOOK II</b> [XVII] An forte populo Romano propterea leges non sunt a numinibus constitutae, quia, sicut Sallustius ait," ius bonumque apud eos non legibus magis quam natura valebat w? Ex hoc iure ac bono credo raptas Sabinas. Quid enim iustius et melius quam filias alienas fraude spectaculi inductas non a parentibus accipi, sed vi, ut quisque poterat, auferri? Nam si inique facerent Sabini negare postulatas, quanto fuit iniquius rapere non datas! Iustius autem bellum cum ea gente geri potuit, quae filias suas ad matrimonium conregionalibus et confinalibus suis negasset petitas, quam cum ea, quae repetebat ablatas. Illud ergo potius fierit; ibi Mars filium suum pugnantem ivuaret, ut coniugiorum negatorum armis ulcisceretur iniuriam, et eo modo ad feminas, quas voluerat, perveniret. Aliquo enim fortasse iure belli iniuste negatas iuste victor auferret; nullo autem iure pacis non datas rapuit et iniustum bellum cum earum parentibus iuste suscensentibus gessit. Hoc sane utilius f e licius q ue successit, quod, etsi ad memoriam fraudis illius circensium spectaculum mansit, facinoris tamen in illa civitate et imperio non placuit exemplum, faciliusque Romani in hoc erraverunt, ut post illam iniquitatem deum sibi Romulum consecrarent, quam ut in feminis rapiendis factum eius imitandum lege ulla vel more permitterent. Ex hoc iure ac bono post expulsum cum liberis suis regem Tarquinium, cuius filius Lucretiam stupro violenter oppresserat, Iunius Brutus consul Lucium Tarquinium Collatinum, maritum eiusdem Lucretiae, collegam suum, bonum atque innocentem virum, propter nomen et propinquitatem Tarquiniorum coegit magistratu se abdicare nec vivere in civitate permisit. Quod scelus favente vel patiente populo fecit, a quo populo consulatum idem Collatinus sicut etiam ipse Brutus acceperat. Ex hoc iure ac bono Marcus Camillus, illius temporis vir egregius, qui Veientes, gravissimos hostes populi Romani, post decennale bellum, quo Romanus exercitus totiens male pugnando graviter adflictus est, iam ipsa Roma de salute dubitante atque trepidante facillime superavit eorumque urbem opulentissimam cepit, inuidia obtrectatorum virtutis suae et insolentia tribunorum plebis reus factus est tamque ingratam sensit quam liberaverat civitatem, ut de sua damnatione certissimus in exilium sponte discederet et decem milia aeris absens etiam damnaretur, mox iterum a Gallis vindex patriae futurus ingratae. Multa commemorare iam piget foeda et iniusta, quibus agitabatur illa civitas, cum potentes plebem sibi subdere conarentur plebsque illis subdi recusaret, et utriusque partis defensores magis studiis agerent amore vincendi, quam aequum et bonum quicquam cogitarent. ||chapter 17. But possibly we are to find the reason for this neglect of the Romans by their gods, in the saying of Sallust, that "equity and virtue prevailed among the Romans not more by force of laws than of nature."  I presume it is to this inborn equity and goodness of disposition we are to ascribe the rape of the Sabine womenWhat, indeed, could be more equitable and virtuous, than to carry off by force, as each man was fit, and without their parents' consent, girls who were strangers and guests, and who had been decoyed and entrapped by the pretence of a spectacleIf the Sabines were wrong to deny their daughters when the Romans asked for them, was it not a greater wrong in the Romans to carry them off after that denial? The Romans might more justly have waged war against the neighboring nation for having refused their daughters in marriage when they first sought them, than for having demanded them back when they had stolen them. War should have been proclaimed at first; it was then that Mars should have helped his warlike son, that he might by force of arms avenge the injury done him by the refusal of marriage, and might also thus win the women he desired. There might have been some appearance of "right of war" in a victor carrying off, in virtue of this right, the virgins who had been without any show of right denied him; whereas there was no "right of peace" entitling him to carry off those who were not given to him, and to wage an unjust war with their justly enraged parents.  One happy circumstance was indeed connected with this act of violence, viz., that though it was commemorated by the games of the circus, yet even this did not constitute it a precedent in the city or realm of Rome.  If one would find fault with the results of this act, it must rather be on the ground that the Romans made Romulus a god in spite of his perpetrating this iniquity; for one cannot reproach them with making this deed any kind of precedent for the rape of women.Again, I presume it was due to this natural equity and virtue, that after the expulsion of King Tarquin, whose son had violated Lucretia, Junius Brutus the consul forced Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus, Lucretia's husband and his own colleague, a good and innocent man, to resign his office and go into banishment, on the one sole charge that he was of the name and blood of the TarquinsThis injustice was perpetrated with the approval, or at least connivance, of the people, who had themselves raised to the consular office both Collatinus and Brutus.  Another instance of this equity and virtue is found in their treatment of Marcus CamillusThis eminent man, after he had rapidly conquered the Veians, at that time the most formidable of Rome's enemies, and who had maintained a ten years' war, in which the Roman army had suffered the usual calamities attendant on bad generalship, after he had restored security to Rome, which had begun to tremble for its safety, and after he had taken the wealthiest city of the enemy, had charges brought against him by the malice of those that envied his success, and by the insolence of the tribunes of the people; and seeing that the city bore him no gratitude for preserving it, and that he would certainly be condemned, he went into exile, and even in his absence was fined 10,000 asses.  Shortly after, however, his ungrateful country had again to seek his protection from the Gauls.  But I cannot now mention all the shameful and iniquitous acts with which Rome was agitated, when the aristocracy attempted to subject the people, and the people resented their encroachments, and the advocates of either party were actuated rather by the love of victory than by any equitable or virtuous consideration.
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c20"><b>BOOK III</b> [XX] Sed in his omnibus belli Punici secundi malis nihil miserabilius ac miserabili querella dignius quam exitium Saguntinorum fuit. Haec quippe Hispaniae civitas amicissima populi Romani, dum eidem populo fidem servat, euersa est. Hinc enim Hannibal fracto foedere Romanorum causas quaesivit, quibus eos inritaret ad bellum. Saguntum ergo ferociter obsidebat; quod ubi Romae auditum est, missi legati ad Hannibalem, ut ab eius obsidione discederet. Contempti Carthaginem pergunt querimoniamque deponunt foederis rupti infectoque negotio Romam redeunt. Dum hae morae aguntur, misera illa civitas opulentissima, suae rei publicae Romanaeque carissima, octauo vel nono a Poenis mense deleta est. Cuius interitum legere, quanto magis scribere, horroris est. Breviter tamen eum commemorabo; ad rem quippe quae agitur multum pertinet. Primo fame contabuit; nam etiam suorum cadaveribus a nonnullis pasta perhibetur. Deinde omnium fessa rerum, ne saltem captiva in manus Hannibalis perveniret, ingentem rogum publice struxit, in quem ardentem ferro etiam trucidatos omnes se suosque miserunt. Hic aliquid agerent dii helluones atque nebulones, sacrificiorum adipibus inhiantes et fallacium divinationum caligine decipientes; hic aliquid agerent, civitati populi Romani amicissimae subvenirent, fidei conservatione pereuntem perire non sinerent. Ipsi utique medii praefuerunt, cum Romanae rei publicae interiecto foedere copulata est. Custodiens itaque fideliter, quod ipsis praesidibus placito iunxerat, fide vinxerat, iuratione constrinxerat, a perfido obsessa oppressa consumpta est. Si ipsi dii tempestate atque fulminibus Hannibalem postea Romanis proximum moenibus terruerunt longeque miserunt: tunc primum tale aliquid facerent. Audeo quippe dicere honestius illos pro amicis Romanorum ideo periclitantibus, ne Romanis frangerent fidem, et nullam opem tunc habentibus quam pro ipsis Romanis, qui pro se pugnabant atque adversus Hannibalem opulenti erant, potuisse tempestate saevire. Si ergo tutores essent Romanae felicitatis et gloriae, tam grave ab ea crimen Saguntinae calamitatis averterent; nunc vero quam stulte creditur, diis illis defensoribus Romam victore Hannibale non perisse, qui Saguntinae urbi non potuerunt, ne pro eius periret amicitia, subvenire! Si Saguntinorum Christianus populus esset et huius modi aliquid pro fide euangelica pateretur, quamquam se ipse nec ferro nec ignibus corrupisset sed tamen si pro fide euangelica excidium pateretur: ea spe pateretur, qua in Christum crediderat, non mercede brevissimi temporis, sed aeternitatis interminae. Pro istis autem diis, qui propterea coli perhibentur, propterea colendi requiruntur, ut harum labentium atque transeuntium rerum felicitas tuta sit, quid nobis defensores et excusatores eorum de Saguntinis pereuntibus respondebunt, nisi quod de illo Regulo extincto? Hoc quippe interest, quod ille unus homo, haec tota civitas; utriusque tamen interitus causa conservatio fidei fuit. Propter hanc enim ad hostes et redire ille voluit, et noluit ista transire. Conservata ergo prouocat deorum iram fides? an possunt et diis propitiis perire non solum quique homines, verum etiam integrae civitates? Vtrum volunt, eligant. Si enim fidei servatae irascuntur illi dii, quaerant perfidos, a quibus colantur; si autem etiam illis propitiis multis gravibusque cruciatibus adflicti interire homines civitatesque possunt, nullo fructu felicitatis huius coluntur. Desinant igitur suscensere, qui sacris deorum suorum perditis se infelices esse factos putant. Possent enim illis non solum manentibus, verum etiam faventibus non sicut modo de miseria murmurare, sed sicut tunc Regulus et Saguntini excruciati horribiliter etiam penitus interire. ||But among all the disasters of the second Punic war, there occurred none more lamentable, or calculated to excite deeper complaint, than the fate of the SaguntinesThis city of Spain, eminently friendly to Rome, was destroyed by its fidelity to the Roman people.  For when Hannibal had broken treaty with the Romans, he sought occasion for provoking them to war, and accordingly made a fierce assault upon Saguntum.  When this was reported at Rome, ambassadors were sent to Hannibal, urging him to raise the siege; and when this remonstrance was neglected, they proceeded to Carthage, lodged complaint against the breaking of the treaty, and returned to Rome without accomplishing their object. Meanwhile the siege went on; and in the eighth or ninth month, this opulent but ill-fated city, dear as it was to its own state and to Rome, was taken, and subjected to treatment which one cannot read, much less narrate, without horrorAnd yet, because it bears directly on the matter in hand, I will briefly touch upon it.  First, then, famine wasted the Saguntines, so that even human corpses were eaten by some: so at least it is recordedSubsequently, when thoroughly worn out, that they might at least escape the ignominy of falling into the hands of Hannibal, they publicly erected a huge funeral pile, and cast themselves into its flames, while at the same time they slew their children and themselves with the swordCould these gods, these debauchees and gourmands, whose mouths water for fat sacrifices, and whose lips utter lying divinations,-could they not do anything in a case like this?  Could they not interfere for the preservation of a city closely allied to the Roman people, or prevent it perishing for its fidelity to that alliance of which they themselves had been the mediators? Saguntum, faithfully keeping the treaty it had entered into before these gods, and to which it had firmly bound itself by an oath, was besieged, taken, and destroyed by a perjured personIf afterwards, when Hannibal was close to the walls of Rome, it was the gods who terrified him with lightning and tempest, and drove him to a distance, why, I ask, did they not thus interfere before? For I make bold to say, that this demonstration with the tempest would have been more honorably made in defence of the allies of Rome-who were in danger on account of their reluctance to break faith with the Romans, and had no resources of their own-than in defence of the Romans themselves, who were fighting in their own cause, and had abundant resources to oppose Hannibal.  If, then, they had been the guardians of Roman prosperity and glory, they would have preserved that glory from the stain of this Saguntine disaster; and how silly it is to believe that Rome was preserved from destruction at the hands of Hannibal by the guardian care of those gods who were unable to rescue the city of Saguntum from perishing through its fidelity to the alliance of RomeIf the population of Saguntum had been Christian, and had suffered as it did for the Christian faith (though, of course, Christians would not have used fire and sword against their own persons), they would have suffered with that hope which springs from faith in Christ-the hope not of a brief temporal reward, but of unending and eternal blissWhat, then, will the advocates and apologists of these gods say in their defence, when charged with the blood of these Saguntines; for they are professedly worshipped and invoked for this very purpose of securing prosperity in this fleeting and transitory life?  Can anything be said but what was alleged in the case of Regulus' death?  For though there is a difference between the two cases, the one being an individual, the other a whole community, yet the cause of destruction was in both cases the keeping of their plighted troth.  For it was this which made Regulus willing to return to his enemies, and this which made the Saguntines unwilling to revolt to their enemiesDoes, then, the keeping of faith provoke the gods to anger?  Or is it possible that not only individuals, but even entire communities, perish while the gods are propitious to them?  Let our adversaries choose which alternative they will.  If, on the one hand, those gods are enraged at the keeping of faith, let them enlist perjured persons as their worshippers.  If, on the other hand, men and states can suffer great and terrible calamities, and at last perish while favored by the gods, then does their worship not produce happiness as its fruit.  Let those, therefore, who suppose that they have fallen into distress because their religious worship has been abolished, lay aside their anger; for it were quite possible that did the gods not only remain with them, but regard them with favor, they might yet be left to mourn an unhappy lot, or might, even like Regulus and the Saguntines, be horribly tormented, and at last perish miserably.
+
||<div id="c18"><b>BOOK II</b> [XVIII] Itaque habebo modum et ipsum Sallustium testem potius adhibebo, qui cum in laude Romanorum dixisset, unde nobis iste sermo ortus est:" lus bonumque apud eos non legibus. magis quam natura valebat, "praedicans illud tempus, quo expulsis regibus incredibiliter civitas brevi aetatis spatio plurimum crevit, idem tamen in primo historiae suae libro atque ipso eius exordio fatetur etiam tunc, cum ad consules a regibus esset translata res publica, post paruum interuallum iniurias validiorum et ob eas discessionem plebis a patribus aliasque in Vrbe dissensiones fuisse. Nam cum optimis moribus et maxima concordia populum Romanum inter secundum et postremum bellum Carthaginiense commemorasset egisse causamque huius boni non amorem iustitiae, sed stante Carthagine metum pacis infidae fuisse dixisset nunde et Nasica ille ad reprimendam nequitiam servandosque istos mores optimos, ut metu vitia cohiberentur, Carthaginem nolebat euertiJ: continuo subiecit idem Sallustius et ait:" At discordia et auaritia atque ambitio et cetera secundis rebus oriri sueta mala post Carthaginis excidium maxime aucta sunt, w ut intellegeremus etiam anteka et/ oriri solere et augeri. Vnde subnectens cur hoc dixerit:" Nam iniuriae, inquit, validiorum et ob eas discessio pleb is a patribus aliaeque dissensiones domi fuere iam inde a principio, neque amplius quam regibus exactis, dum metus a Tarquinio et bellum grave cum Etruria positum est, aequo et modesto iure agitatum. "Vides quem ad modum etiam illo tempore brevi, ut regibus exactis, id est eiectis, aliquantum aequo et modesto iure ageretur, metum dixit fuisse causam, quoniam metuebatur bellum, quod rex Tarquinius regno atque Vrbe pulsus Etruscis sociatus contra Romanos gerebat. Adtende itaque quid deinde contexat: "Dein, inquit, seruili imperio patres plebem exercere, de vita atque tergo regio more consulere, agro pellere et ceteris expertibus soli in imperio agere. Quibus saevitiis et maxime faenore oppressa plebes cum assiduis bellis tributum et militiam simul toleraret, armata montem sacrum atque Aventinum insedit, tumque tribunos plebis et alia iura sibi paravit. Discordiarum et certaminis utrimque finis fuit secundum bellum Punicum. "Cernis ex quo tempore, id est paruo interuallo post reges exactos, quales Romani fuerint, de quibus ait: "Ius bonumque apud eos non legibus magis quam natura valebat." Porro si illa tempora talia reperiuntur, quibus pulcherrima atque optima fuisse praedicatur Romana res publica, quid iam de consequenti aetate dicendum aut cogitandum arbitramur, cum" paulatim mutata, ut eiusdem historici verbis utar, ex pulcherrima atque optima pessima ac flagitiosissima facta est, "post Carthaginis videlicet, ut commemoravit, excidium? Quae tempora ipse Sallustius quem ad modum breviter recolat et describat, in eius historia legi potest; quantis malis morum, quae secundis rebus exorta sunt, usque ad bella civilia demonstret esse peruentum." Ex quo tempore, ut ait, maiorum mores non paulatim ut antea, sed torrentis modo praecipitati, adeo ivuentus luxu a tque au a ritia corrupta, ut merito dicatur genitos esse, qui neque ipsi habere possent res familiares neque alios pati. "Dicit deinde plura Sallustius de Sullae vitiis ceteraque foeditate rei publicae, et alii scriptores in haec consentiunt, quamuis eloquio multum impari. Cernis tamen, ut opinor, et q visquis adverterit, facillime perspicit, conluuie morum pess i mor u "quo illa civitas prolapsa fuerit ante nostri superni regis adventum. Haec enim gesta sunt non solum antequam Christus in carne praesens docere coepisset, verum etiam antequam de virgine natus esset. Cum igitur tot et tanta mala temporum illorum vel tolerabiliora superius, vel post euersam Carthaginem intoleranda et horrenda diis suis inputare non audeant, opiniones humanis mentibus, unde talia vitia siluescerent, astutia maligna inserentibus: cur mala praesentia Christo inputant, qui doctrina saluberrima et falsos ac fallaces deos coli uetat et istas hominum noxias flagitioSasque cupiditates divina auctoritate detestans atque condemnans his malis tabescenti ac labenti mundo ubique familiam suam sensim subtrahit, qua condat aeternam et non plausu uanitatis, sed iudicio veritatis gloriosissimam civitatem? ||chapter 18. I will therefore pause, and adduce the testimony of Sallust himself, whose words in praise of the Romans (that "equity and virtue prevailed among them not more by force of laws than of nature") have given occasion to this discussion.  He was referring to that period immediately after the expulsion of the kings, in which the city became great in an incredibly short space of timeAnd yet this same writer acknowledges in the first book of his history, in the very exordium of his work, that even at that time, when a very brief interval had elapsed after the government had passed from kings to consuls, the more powerful men began to act unjustly, and occasioned the defection of the people from the patricians, and other disorders in the city.  For after Sallust had stated that the Romans enjoyed greater harmony and a purer state of society between the second and third Punic wars than at any other time, and that the cause of this was not their love of good order, but their fear lest the peace they had with Carthage might be broken (this also, as we mentioned, Nasica contemplated when he opposed the destruction of Carthage, for he supposed that fear would tend to repress wickedness, and to preserve wholesome ways of living), he then goes on to say: "Yet, after the destruction of Carthage, discord, avarice, am bition, and the other vices which are commonly generated by prosperity, more than ever increased." If they "increased," and that "more than ever," then already they had appeared, and had been increasing. And so Sallust adds this reason for what he said"For," he says, "the oppressive measures of the powerful, and the consequent secessions of the plebs from the patricians, and other civil dissensions, had existed from the first, and affairs were administered with equity and well-tempered justice for no longer a period than the short time after the expulsion of the kings, while the city was occupied with the serious Tuscan war and Tarquin's vengeance." You see how, even in that brief period after the expulsion of the kings, fear, he acknowledges, was the cause of the interval of equity and good order.  They were afraid, in fact, of the war which Tarquin waged against them, after he had been driven from the throne and the city, and had allied himself with the Tuscans.  But observe what he adds: "After that, the patricians treated the people as their slaves, ordering them to be scourged or beheaded just as the kings had done, driving them from their holdings, and harshly tyrannizing over those who had no property to loseThe people, overwhelmed by these oppressive measures, and most of all by exorbitant usury, and obliged to contribute both money and personal service to the constant wars, at length took arms and seceded to Mount Aventine and Mount Sacer, and thus obtained for themselves tribunes and protective laws. But it was only the second Punic war that put an end on both sides to discord and strife."  You see what kind of men the Romans were, even so early as a few years after the expulsion of the kings; and it is of these men he says, that "equity and virtue prevailed among them not more by force of law than of nature."Now, if these were the days in which the Roman republic shows fairest and best, what are we to say or think of the succeeding age, when, to use the words of the same historian, "changing little by little from the fair and virtuous city it was, it became utterly wicked and dissolute?"  This was, as he mentions, after the destruction of Carthage.  Sallust's brief sum and sketch of this period may be read in his own history, in which he shows how the profligate manners which were propagated by prosperity resulted at last even in civil warsHe says:  "And from this time the primitive manners, instead of undergoing an insensible alteration as hitherto they had done, were swept away as by a torrent:  the young men were so depraved by luxury and avarice, that it may justly be said that no father had a son who could either preserve his own patrimony, or keep his hands off other men's." Sallust adds a number of particulars about the vices of Sylla, and the debased condition of the republic in general; and other writers make similar observations, though in much less striking language.However, I suppose you now see, or at least any one who gives his attention has the means of seeing, in what a sink of iniquity that city was plunged before the advent of our heavenly King.  For these things happened not only before Christ had begun to teach, but before He was even born of the VirginIf, then, they dare not impute to their gods the grievous evils of those former times, more tolerable before the destruction of Carthage, but intolerable and dreadful after it, although it was the gods who by their malign craft instilled into the minds of men the conceptions from which such dreadful vices branched out on all sides, why do they impute these present calamities to Christ, who teaches life-giving truth, and forbids us to worship false and deceitful gods, and who, abominating and condemning with His divine authority those wicked and hurtful lusts of men, gradually withdraws His own people from a world that is corrupted by these vices, and is falling into ruins, to make of them an eternal city, whose glory rests not on the acclamations of vanity, but on the judgment of truth?
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c21"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXI] Porro inter secundum et postremum bellum Carthaginiense, quando Sallustius optimis moribus et maxima concordia dixit egisse Romanos (multa enim praetereo suscepti operis modum cogitans), eodem ipso ergo tempore morum optimorum maximaeque concordiae Scipio ille Romae Italiaeque liberator eiusdemque belli Punici secundi tam horrendi, tam exitiosi, tam periculosi praeclarus mirabilisque confector, victor Hannibalis domitorque Carthaginis, cuius ab adulescentia vita describitur diis dedita templisque ntrita, inimicorum accusationibus cessit carensque patria, quam sua virtute saluam et liberam reddidit, in oppido Linternensi egit reliquam complevitque vitam, post insignem suum triumphum nullo illius urbis captus desiderio, ita ut iussisse perhebeatur, ne saltem mortuo in ingrata patria funus fieret. Deinde tunc primum per Gneum Manlium proconsulem de Gallograecis triumphantem Asiatica luxuria Romam omni hoste peior inrepsit. Tunc enim primum lecti aerati et pretiosa stragula visa perhibentur; tunc inductae in conuivia psaltriae et alia licentiosa nequitia. Sed nunc de his malis, quae intolerabiliter homines patiuntur, non de his, quae libenter faciunt, dicere institui. Vnde illud magis, quod de Scipione commemoravi, quod cedens inimicis extra patriam, quam liberavit, mortuus est, ad praesentem pertinet disputationem, quod ei Romana numina, a quorum templis avertit Hannibalem, non reddiderunt vicem, quae propter istam tantummodo coluntur felicitatem. Sed quia Sallustius eo tempore ibi dixit mores optimos fuisse, propterea hoc de Asiana luxuria commemorandum putavi, ut intellegatur etiam illud a Sallustio in comparationem aliorum temporum dictum, quibus temporibus peiores utique in gravissimis discordiis mores fuerunt. Nam tunc, id est inter secundum et postremum bellum Carthaginiense, lata est etiam lex illa Voconia, ne quis heredem feminam faceret, nec unicam filiam. Qua lege quid iniquius dici aut cogitari possit, ignoro. Verum tamen toto illo interuallo duorum bellorum Punicorum tolerabilior infelicitas fuit. Bellis tantummodo foris conterebatur exercitus, sed victoriis consolabatur; domi autem nullae, sicut alias, discordiae saeviebant. Sed ultimo bello Punico uno impetu alterius Scipionis, qui ob hoc etiam ipse Africani cognomen invenit, aemula imperii Romani ab stirpe deleta est, ac deinde tantis malorum aggeribus oppressa Romana res publica, ut prosperitate ac securitate rerum, unde nimium corruptis moribus mala illa congesta sunt, plus nocuisse monstretur tam cito euersa, quam prius nocuerunt tam diu adversa carthago. Hoc toto tempore usque ad Caesarem Augustum, qui videtur non adhuc vel ipsorum opinione gloriosam, sed contentiosaet exitiosam et plane iam eneruem ac languidam libertatem omni modo extorsisse Romanis et ad regale arbitrium cuncta reuocasse et quasi morbida uetustate conlapsam veluti instaurasse ac renouasse rem publicam; toto ergo isto tempore omitto ex aliis atque aliis causis etiam atque etiam bellicas clades et Numantinum foedus horrenda ignominia maculorsum; volaverant enim pulli de cavea et Mancino consuli, ut aiunt, augurium malum fecerant; quasi per tot annos, quibus illa exigua civitas Romanum circum sessa exercitum adflixerat ipsique Romanae rei publicae terrori esse iam coeperat, alii contra eam alio augurio processerunt.  ||Omitting many things, that I may not exceed the limits of the work I have proposed to myself, I come to the epoch between the second and last Punic wars, during which, according to Sallust, the Romans lived with the greatest virtue and concordNow, in this period of virtue and harmony, the great Scipio, the liberator of Rome and Italy, who had with surprising ability brought to a close the second Punic war-that horrible, destructive, dangerous contest-who had defeated Hannibal and subdued Carthage, and whose whole life is said to have been dedicated to the gods, and cherished in their temples,-this Scipio, after such a triumph, was obliged to yield to the accusations of his enemies, and to leave his country, which his valor had saved and liberated, to spend the remainder of his days in the town of Liternum, so indifferent to a recall from exile, that he is said to have given orders that not even his remains should lie in his ungrateful countryIt was at that time also that the pro-consul Cn. Manlius, after subduing the Galatians, introduced into Rome the luxury of Asia, more destructive than all hostile armies.  It was then that iron bedsteads and expensive carpets were first used; then, too, that female singers were admitted at banquets, and other licentious abominations were introduced.  But at present I meant to speak, not of the evils men voluntarily practise, but of those they suffer in spite of themselvesSo that the case of Scipio, who succumbed to his enemies, and died in exile from the country he had rescued, was mentioned by me as being pertinent to the present discussion; for this was the reward he received from those Roman gods whose temples he saved from Hannibal, and who are worshipped only for the sake of securing temporal happiness.  But since Sallust, as we have seen, declares that the manners of Rome were never better than at that time, I therefore judged it right to mention the Asiatic luxury then introduced, that it might be seen that what he says is true, only when that period is compared with the others during which the morals were certainly worse, and the factions more violent.  For at that time-I mean between the second and third Punic war-that notorious Lex Voconia was passed, which prohibited a man from making a woman, even an only daughter, his heir; than which law I am at a loss to conceive what could be more unjustIt is true that in the interval between these two Punic wars the misery of Rome was somewhat less.  Abroad, indeed, their forces were consumed by wars, yet also consoled by victories; while at home there were not such disturbances as at other times.  But when the last Punic war had terminated in the utter destruction of Rome's rival, which quickly succumbed to the other Scipio, who thus earned for himself the surname of Africanus, then the Roman republic was overwhelmed with such a host of ills, which sprang from the corrupt manners induced by prosperity and security, that the sudden overthrow of Carthage is seen to have injured Rome more seriously than her long-continued hostility.  During the whole subsequent period down to the time of Cжsar Augustus, who seems to have entirely deprived the Romans of liberty,-a liberty, indeed, which in their own judgment was no longer glorious, but full of broils and dangers, and which now was quite enervated and languishing,-and who submitted all things again to the will of a monarch, and infused as it were a new life into the sickly old age of the republic, and inaugurated a fresh rйgime;-during this whole period, I say, many military disasters were sustained on a variety of occasions, all of which I here pass by.  There was specially the treaty of Numantia, blotted as it was with extreme disgrace; for the sacred chickens, they say, flew out of the coop, and thus augured disaster to Mancinus the consul; just as if, during all these years in which that little city of Numantia had withstood the besieging army of Rome, and had become a terror to the republic, the other generals had all marched against it under unfavorable auspices.  
+
||<div id="c19"><b>BOOK II</b> [XIX] Ecce Romana res publica nquod non ego primus dico, sed auctores eorum, unde haec mercede didicimus, tanto ante dixerunt ante Christi adventum/ "paulatim mutata ex pulcherrima atque optima pessima ac flagitiosissima facta est. w Ecce ante Christi adventum, post deletam Carthaginem m maiorum mores non paulatim, ut antea, sed torrentis modo praecipitati, adeo ivuentus luxu atque auaritia corrupta est. w Legant nobis contra Iuxum et auaritiam praecepta deorum suorum populo Romano data; cui utinam tantum casta et modesta reticerent, ac non etiam ab illo probrosa et ignominiosa deposcerent, quibus per falsam divinitatem perniciosam conciliarent auctoritatem. Legant nostra et per prophetas et per sanctum euangelium, et per apostolicos actus et per epistulas tam multa contra auaritiam atque luxuriam ubique populis ad hoc congregatis quam excellenter, quam divine non tamquam ex philosophorum concertationibus strepere, sed tamquam ex oraculis et Dei nubibus intonare. Et tamen luxu atque auaritia saevisque ac turpibus moribus ante adventum Christi rem publicam pessimam ac flagitiosissimam factam non inputant diis suis; adflictionem vero eius, quamcumque isto tempore superbia deliciaeque eorum perpessae fuerint, religioni increpitant Christianae. Cuius praecepta de iustis probisque moribus si simul audirent atque curarent reges terrae et omnes populi, principes et omnes iudices terrae, ivuenes et virgines, seniores cum iunioribus, aetas omnis capax et uterque sexus, et quos baptista lohannes adloquitur, exactores ipsi atque milites: et terras vitae praesentis ornaret sua felicitate res publica, et vitae aeternae culmen beatissime regnatura conscenderet. Sed quia iste audit, ille contemnit, pluresque vitiis male blandientibus quam utili virtutum asperitati sunt amiciores: tolerare Christi famuli iubentur, sive sint reges sive principes sive iudices, sive milites sive provinciales, sive divites sive pauperes, sive liberi sive serui, utriuslibet sexus, etiam pessimam, si ita necesse est, flagitiosissimamque rem publicam et in illa angelorum quadam sanctissima atque augustissima curia caelestique re publica, ubi Dei voluntas lex est, clarissimum sibi locum etiam ista tolerantia comparare.  ||chapter 19. Here, then, is this Roman republic, "which has changed little by little from the fair and virtuous city it was, and has become utterly wicked and dissolute."  It is not I who am the first to say this, but their own authors, from whom we learned it for a fee, and who wrote it long before the coming of ChristYou see how, before the coming of Christ, and after the destruction of Carthage, "the primitive manners, instead of undergoing insensible alteration, as hitherto they had done, were swept away as by a torrent; and how depraved by luxury and avarice the youth were."  Let them now, on their part, read to us any laws given by their gods to the Roman people, and directed against luxury and avariceAnd would that they had only been silent on the subjects of chastity and modesty, and had not demanded from the people indecent and shameful practices, to which they lent a pernicious patronage by their so-called divinityLet them read our commandments in the Prophets, Gospels, Acts of the Apostles or Epistles; let them peruse the large number of precepts against avarice and luxury which are everywhere read to the congregations that meet for this purpose, and which strike the ear, not with the uncertain sound of a philosophical discussion, but with the thunder of God's own oracle pealing from the clouds.  And yet they do not impute to their gods the luxury and avarice, the cruel and dissolute manners, that had rendered the republic utterly wicked and corrupt, even before the coming of Christ; but whatever affliction their pride and effeminacy have exposed them to in these latter days, they furiously impute to our religionIf the kings of the earth and all their subjects, if all princes and judges of the earth, if young men and maidens, old and young, every age, and both sexes; if they whom the Baptist addressed, the publicans and the soldiers, were all together to hearken to and observe the precepts of the Christian religion regarding a just and virtuous life, then should the republic adorn the whole earth with its own felicity, and attain in life everlasting to the pinnacle of kingly glory.  But because this man listens and that man scoffs, and most are enamored of the blandishments of vice rather than the wholesome severity of virtue, the people of Christ, whatever be their condition-whether they be kings, princes, judges, soldiers, or provincials, rich or poor, bond or free, male or female-are enjoined to endure this earthly republic, wicked and dissolute as it is, that so they may by this endurance win for themselves an eminent place in that most holy and august assembly of angels and republic of heaven, in which the will of God is the law.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c22"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXII] Sed haec, inquam, omitto, quamuis illud nequaquam tacuerim, quod Mithridates rex Asiae ubique in Asia peregrinantes cives Romanos atque innumerabili copia suis negotiis intentos uno die occidi iussit; et factum est. Quam illa miserabilis rerum facies erat, subito quemque, ubicumque fuisset inventus, in agro in via in oppido, in domo in vico in foro, in templo in lecto in conuivio inopinate atque impie fuisse trucidatum! Quis gemitus morientium, quae lacrimae spectantium, fortasse etiam ferientium fuerunt! Quam dura necessitas hospitum non solum videndi nefarias illas caedes domi suae, verum, etiam perpetrandi, ab illa blanda comitate humanitatis repente mutatis uultibus ad hostile negotium in pace peragendum, mutuis dicam omnino uulneribus, cum percussus in corpore et percussor in animo feriretur! Num et isti omnes auguria contempserant? Num deos et domesticos et publicos, cum de sedibus suis ad illam inremeabilem peregrinationem profecti sunt, quos consulerent, non habebant? Hoc si ita est, non habent cur isti in hac causa de nostris temporibus conquerantur; olim Romani haec uana contemnunt. Si autem consuluerunt, respondeatur, quid ista profuerunt, quando per humanas dumtaxat leges nemine prohibente licuerunt.  ||These things, I say, I pass in silence; but I can by no means be silent regarding the order given by Mithridates, king of Asia, that on one day all Roman citizens residing anywhere in Asia (where great numbers of them were following their private business) should be put to death:  and this order was executedHow miserable a spectacle was then presented, when each man was suddenly and treacherously murdered wherever he happened to be, in the field or on the road, in the town, in his own home, or in the street, in market or temple, in bed or at table!  Think of the groans of the dying, the tears of the spectators, and even of the executioners themselvesFor how cruel a necessity was it that compelled the hosts of these victims, not only to see these abominable butcheries in their own houses, but even to perpetrate themto change their countenance suddenly from the bland kindliness of friendship, and in the midst of peace set about the business of war; and, shall I say, give and receive wounds, the slain being pierced in body, the slayer in spirit! Had all these murdered persons, then, despised auguries? Had they neither public nor household gods to consult when they left their homes and set out on that fatal journey? If they had not, our adversaries have no reason to complain of these Christian times in this particular, since long ago the Romans despised auguries as idle.  If, on the other hand, they did consult omens, let them tell us what good they got thereby, even when such things were not prohibited, but authorized, by human, if not by divine law.  
+
||<div id="c20"><b>BOOK II</b> [XX] Verum tales cultores et dilectores deorum istorum, quorum etiam imitatores in sceleribus et flagitiis se esse laetantur, nullo modo curant pessimam ac flagitiosissimam unonJ esse rem publicam. "Tantum stet, inquiunt, tantum fioreat copiis referta, victoriis gloriosa, vel, quod est felicius, pace secura sit. Et quid ad nos? Immo id ad nos magis pertinet, si divitias quisque augeat semper, quae cotidianis effusionibus suppetant, per quas sibi etiam infirmiores subdat quisque potentior. Obsequantur divitibus pauperes causa saturitatis atque ut eorum patrociniis quieta inertia perfruantur, divites pauperibus ad clientelas et ad ministerium sui fastus abutantur. Populi plaudant non consultoribus utilitatum suarum, sed largitoribus voluptatum. Non dura iubeantur, non prohibeantur inpura. Reges non curent quam bonis, sed quam subditis regnent. Provinciae regibus non tamquam rectoribus morum, sed tamquam rerum dominatoribus et deliciarum suarum provisoribus seruiant, eosque non sinceriter honorent, sed knequiter ac/ seruiliter timeant. Quid alienae vineae potius quam quid suae vitae quisque noceat, legibus advertatur. Nullus ducatur ad iudicem, nisi qui alienae rei domui saluti vel cuiquam inuito fuerit inportunus aut noxius; ceterum de suis vel cum suis vel cum quibusque volentibus faciat quisqu e quod libet. Abundent publica scorta vel propter omnes, quibus frui placuerit, vel propter eos maxime, qui habere privata non possunt. Exstruantur amplissimae atque ornatissimae domus, opipara conuivia frequententur, ubi cuique libuerit et potuerit, diu noctuque ludatur bibatur, vomatur diffluatur. Saltationes undique concrepent, theatra inhonestae laetitiae vocibus atque omni genere sive crudelissimae sive turpissimae voluptatis exaestuent. Ille sit publicus inimicus, cui haec felicitas displicet; quisquis eam mutare vel auferre temptaverit, eum libera multitudo avertat ab auribus, euertat a sedibus, auferat a viventibus. Illi habeantur dii veri, qui hanc adipiscendam populis procuraverint adeptamque servaverint. Colantur ut voluerint, ludos exposcant quales voluerint, quos cum suis vel de suis possint habere cultoribus: tantum efficiant, ut tali felicitati nihil ab hoste, nihil a peste, nihil ab ulla clade timeatur. "Quis hanc rem publicam sanus, non dicam Romano imperio, sed domui Sardanapali comparaverit? qui quondam rex ita fuit voluptatibus deditus, ut in sepulcro suo scribi fecerit ea sola se habere mortuum, quae libido eius, etiam cum viveret, hauriendo consumpserat. Quem regem si isti haberent sibi in talibus indulgentem nec in eis cuiquam ulla seueritate adversantem, huic libentius quam Romani ueteres Romulo templum et flaminem consecrarent.  ||chapter 20. But the worshippers and admirers of these gods delight in imitating their scandalous iniquities, and are nowise concerned that the republic be less depraved and licentious.  Only let it remain undefeated, they say, only let it flourish and abound in resources; let it be glorious by its victories, or still better, secure in peace; and what matters it to us?  This is our concern, that every man be able to increase his wealth so as to supply his daily prodigalities, and so that the powerful may subject the weak for their own purposesLet the poor court the rich for a living, and that under their protection they may enjoy a sluggish tranquillity; and let the rich abuse the poor as their dependants, to minister to their pride.  Let the people applaud not those who protect their interests, but those who provide them with pleasure.  Let no severe duty be commanded, no impurity forbidden.  Let kings estimate their prosperity, not by the righteousness, but by the servility of their subjects.  Let the provinces stand loyal to the kings, not as moral guides, but as lords of their possessions and purveyors of their pleasures; not with a hearty reverence, but a crooked and servile fear.  Let the laws take cognizance rather of the injury done to another man's property, than of that done to one's own personIf a man be a nuisance to his neighbor, or injure his property, family, or person, let him be actionable; but in his own affairs let everyone with impunity do what he will in company with his own family, and with those who willingly join him.  Let there be a plentiful supply of public prostitutes for every one who wishes to use them, but specially for those who are too poor to keep one for their private use.  Let there be erected houses of the largest and most ornate description:  in these let there be provided the most sumptuous banquets, where every one who pleases may, by day or night, play, drink, vomit, dissipate.  Let there be everywhere heard the rustling of dancers, the loud, immodest laughter of the theatre; let a succession of the most cruel and the most voluptuous pleasures maintain a perpetual excitement.  If such happiness is distasteful to any, let him be branded as a public enemy; and if any attempt to modify or put an end to it let him be silenced, banished, put an end to. Let these be reckoned the true gods, who procure for the people this condition of things, and preserve it when once possessed. Let them be worshipped as they wish; let them demand whatever games they please, from or with their own worshippers; only let them secure that such felicity be not imperilled by foe, plague, or disaster of any kind. What sane man would compare a republic such as this, I will not say to the Roman empire, but to the palace of Sardanapalus, the ancient king who was so abandoned to pleasures, that he caused it to be inscribed on his tomb, that now that he was dead, he possessed only those things which he had swallowed and consumed by his appetites while alive?  If these men had such a king as this, who, while self-indulgent, should lay no severe restraint on them, they would more enthusiastically consecrate to him a temple and a flamen than the ancient Romans did to Romulus.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c23"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXIII] Sed iam illa mala breviter, quantum possumus, commemoremus, quae quanto interiora, tanto miseriora exstiterunt: discordiae civiles vel potius inciviles, nec iam seditiones, sed etiam ipsa bella urbana, ubi tantus sanguis effusus est, ubi partium studia non contionum dissensionibus variisque vocibus in alterutrum, sed plane iam ferro armisque saeviebant; bella socialia, bella seruilia, bella civilia quantum Romanum cruorrem fuderunt, quantam Italiae uastationem desertionemque fecerunt! Namque antequam se adversus Romam sociale Latium commoveret, cuncta animalia humanis usibus subdita, canes equi, asini boves, et quaeque alia pecora sub hominum dominio fuerunt, subito efferata et domesticae lenitatis oblita relictis tectis libera uagabantur et omnem non solum aliorum, verum etiam dominorum aversabantur accessum, non sine exitio vel periculo audentis, si quis de proximo urgeret. Quanti mali signum fuit, si hoc signum fuit, quod tantum malum fuit, si etiam signum fuit! Hoc si nostris temporibus accidisset, rabidiores istos quam sua illi animalia pateremur.  ||But let us now mention, as succinctly as possible, those disasters which were still more vexing, because nearer home; I mean those discords which are erroneously called civil, since they destroy civil interestsThe seditions had now become urban wars, in which blood was freely shed, and in which parties raged against one another, not with wrangling and verbal contention, but with physical force and armsWhat a sea of Roman blood was shed, what desolations and devastations were occasioned in Italy by wars social, wars servile, wars civil! Before the Latins began the social war against Rome, all the animals used in the service of man-dogs, horses, asses, oxen, and all the rest that are subject to man-suddenly grew wild, and forgot their domesticated tameness, forsook their stalls and wandered at large, and could not be closely approached either by strangers or their own masters without dangerIf this was a portent, how serious a calamity must have been portended by a plague which, whether portent or no, was in itself a serious calamity! Had it happened in our day, the heathen would have been more rabid against us than their animals were against them.  
+
||<div id="c21"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXI] Sed si contemnitur qui Romanam rem publicam pessima" ac flagitiosissimam dixit, nec curant isti quanta morum pessimorum ac flagitiosorum labe ac dedecore impleatur, sed tantummodo ut consistat et maneat: audiant eam non, ut Sallustius narrat, pessimam ac flagitiosissimam factam, sed, sicut Cicero disputat, iam tunc prorsus perisse et nullam omnino remansisse rem publicam. Inducit enim Scipionem, eum ipsum qui Carthaginem extinxerat, de re publica disputantem, quand o pr a esentiebatur ea corruptione, quam describit Sallustius, iam iamque peritura. Eo quippe tempore disputatur, quo iam unus Gracchorum occisus fuit, a quo scribit seditiones graves coepisse Sallustius. Nam mortis eius fit in eisdem libris commemoratio. Cum autem Scipio in secundi libri fine dixisset, "ut in fidibus aut tibiis atque cantu ipso ac vocibus concentus est quidam tenendus ex distinctis sonis, quem inmutatum aut discrepantem aures eruditae ferre non possunt, isque concentus ex dissimillimarum vocum moderatione concors tamen efficitur et congruens: sic ex summis et infimis et mediis interiectis ordinibus, ut sonis, moderata ratione civitatem consensu dissimillimorum concinere, et quae harmonia a musicis dicitur in cantu, eam esse in civitate concordiam, artissimum atque optimum omni in re publica vinculum incolumitatis, eamque sine iustitia nullo pacto esse posse, "ac deinde cum aliquanto latius et uberius disseruisset, quantum prodesset iustitia civitati quantumque obesset, si afuisset, suscepit deinde Philus, unus eorum qui disputationi aderant, et poposcit, ut haec ipsa quaestio diligentius tractaretur ac de iustitia plura dicerentur, propter illud, quod iam uulgo ferebatur rem publicam regi sine iniuria non posse. Hanc proinde quaestionem discutiendam et enodandam esse adsensus est Scipio responditque nihil esse, quod adhuc de re publica dictum putaret, quo possent longius progredi, nisi esset confirmatum non modo falsum esse illud, sine iniuria non posse, sed hoc verissimum esse, sine summa iustitia rem publicam regi non posse. Cuius quaestionis explicatio cum in diem consequentem dilata esset, in tertio libro magna conflictione res acta est. Suscepit enim Philus ipse disputationem eorum, qui sentirent sine iniustitia geri non posse rem publicam, purgans praecipue, ne hoc ipse sentire crederetur, egitque sedulo pro iniustitia contra iustitiam, ut hanc esse utilem rei publicae, illam vero inutilem, veri similibus rationibus et exemplis velut conaretur ostendere. Tum Laelius rogantibus omnibus iustitiam defend ere a dgressus est adseruitque, quantum potuit, nihil tam inimicum quam iniustitiam civitati nec omnino nisi magna iustitia geri aut stare posse rem publicam. Qua quaestione, quantum satis visum est, pertractata Scipio ad intermissa reuertitur recolitque suam atque commendat breuem rei publicae definitionem, qua dixerat eam esse rem populi. Populum autem non omnem coetum multitudinis, sed coetum iuris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatum esse determinat. Docet deinde quanta sit in disputando definitionis utilitas, atque ex illis suis definitionibus colligit tunc esse rem publicam, id e st rem populi, cum bene ac iuste geritur sive ab uno rege sive a paucis optimatibus sive ab universo populo. Cum vero iniustus est rex, quem tyrannum more Graeco appellavit, aut iniusti optimates, quorum consensum dixit esse factionem, aut iniustus ipse populus, cui nomen usitatum non repperit, nisi ut etiam ipsum tyrannum vocaret: non iam vitiosam, sicut pridie fuerat disputatum, sed, sicut ratio ex illis definitionibus conexa docuisset, omnino nullam esse rem publicam, quoniam non esset res populi, cum tyrannus eam factiove capesseret, n ec ipse populus iam po p ul u s esset, si esset iniustus, quoniam non esset multitudo iuris consensu et utilitatis communione sociata, sicut populus fuerat definitus. Quando ergo res publica Romana talis erat, qualem illam describit Sallustius, non iam pessima ac flagitiosissima, sicut ipse ait, sed omnino nulla erat secundum istam rationem, quam disputatio de re publica inter magnos eius tum principes habita patefecit. Sicut etiam ipse Tullius no n Sc i pi oni s nec cuiusquam alterius, sed suo sermone loquens in prJncipio quinti libri commemorato prius Enni poetae versu, quo dixerat: Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque. m Quem quidem ille versum, inquit, vel brevitate vel veritate tamquam e x o raculo quodam mihi esse effatus videtur. Nam neque viri, nisi ita morata civitas fuisset, neque mores, nisi hi viri praefuissent, aut fundare aut tam diu tenere potuissent tantam et tam uaste lateque imperantem rem publicam. Itaque ante nostram memoriam et mos ipse patrius praestantes viros adhibebat, et ueterem morem ac maiorum instituta retinebant excellentes viri. Nostra vero aetas cum rem publicam sicut picturam accepisset egregiam, sed euanescentem uetustate, non modo eam coloribus isdem quibus fuerat renouare neglexit, sed ne id quidem curavit, ut formam saltem eius et extrema tamquam liniamenta servaret. Quid enim manet ex antiquis moribus, quibus ille dixit rem stare Romanam, quos ita oblivione obsoletos videmus, ut non modo non colantur, sed iam ignorentur? Nam de viris quid dicam? Mores enim ipsi interierunt virorum penuria, cuius tanti mali non modo reddenda ratio nobis, sed etiam tamquam reis capitis quodam modo dicenda causa est. Nostris enim vitiis, non casu aliquo, rem publicam verbo retinemus, re ipsa vero iam pridem amisimus. w Haec Cicero fatebatur, longe quidem post mortem Africani, quem in suis libris fecit de re publica disputare, adhuc tamen ante adventum Christi; quae si diffamata et praeualescente religione Christiana sentirentur atque dicerentur, quis non istorum ea Christianis inputanda esse censeret? Quam ob rem cur non curarunt dii eorum, ne tunc periret atque amitteretur illa res publica, quam Cicero longe, antequam Christus in carne venisset, tam lugubriter deplorat amissam? Viderint laudatores eius etiam illis antiquis viris et moribus qualis fuerit, utrum in ea viguerit vera iustitia an forte nec tunc fuerit viva moribus, sed picta coloribus; quod et ipse Cicero nesciens, cum eam praeferret, expressit. Sed alias, si Dneus voluerit, hoc videbimus. Enitar enim suo loco, ut ostendam secundum definitiones ipsius Ciceronis, quibus quid sit res publica et quid sit populus loquente Scipione breviter posuit (adtestantibus etiam multis sive ipsius sive eorum quos loqui fecit in eadem disputatione sententiis), numquam illam fuisse rem publicam, quia numquam in ea fuerit vera iustitia. Secundum probabiliores autem definitiones pro suo modo quodam res publica fuit, et melius ab antiquioribus Romanis quam a posterioribus administrata est; vera autem iustitia non est nisi in ea re publica, cuius conditor rectorque Christus est, si et ipsam rem publicam placet dicere, quoniam eam rem populi esse negare non possumus. Si autem hoc nomen, quod alibi aliterque uulgatum est, ab usu nostrae locutionis est forte remotius, in ea certe civitate est vera iustitia, de qua scriptura sancta dicit: Gloriosa dicta sunt de te, civitas Dei.  ||chapter 21. But if our adversaries do not care how foully and disgracefully the Roman republic be stained by corrupt practices, so long only as it holds together and continues in being, and if they therefore pooh-pooh the testimony of Sallust to its "utterly wicked and profligate" condition, what will they make of Cicero's statement, that even in his time it had become entirely extinct, and that there remained extant no Roman republic at all?  He introduces Scipio (the Scipio who had destroyed Carthage) discussing the republic, at a time when already there were presentiments of its speedy ruin by that corruption which Sallust describesIn fact, at the time when the discussion took place, one of the Gracchi, who, according to Sallust, was the first great instigator of seditions, had already been put to death.  His death, indeed, is mentioned in the same book.  Now Scipio, at the end of the second book, says:  "As among the different sounds which proceed from lyres, flutes, and the human voice, there must be maintained a certain harmony which a cultivated ear cannot endure to hear disturbed or jarring, but which may be elicited in full and absolute concord by the modulation even of voices very unlike one another; so, where reason is allowed to modulate the diverse elements of the state, there is obtained a perfect concord from the upper, lower, and middle classes as from various sounds; and what musicians call harmony in singing, is concord in matters of state, which is the strictest bond and best security of any republic, and which by no ingenuity can be retained where justice has become extinct." Then, when he had expatiated somewhat more fully, and had more copiously illustrated the benefits of its presence and the ruinous effects of its absence upon a state, Pilus, one of the company present at the discussion, struck in and demanded that the question should be more thoroughly sifted, and that the subject of justice should be freely discussed for the sake of ascertaining what truth there was in the maxim which was then becoming daily more current, that "the republic cannot be governed without injustice."  Scipio expressed his willingness to have this maxim discussed and sifted, and gave it as his opinion that it was baseless, and that no progress could be made in discussing the republic unless it was established, not only that this maxim, that "the republic cannot be governed without injustice," was false, but also that the truth is, that it cannot be governed without the most absolute justice.  And the discussion of this question, being deferred till the next day, is carried on in the third book with great animation.  For Pilus himself undertook to defend the position that the republic cannot be governed without injustice, at the same time being at special pains to clear himself of any real participation in that opinion.  He advocated with great keenness the cause of injustice against justice, and endeavored by plausible reasons and examples to demonstrate that the former is beneficial, the latter useless, to the republic. Then, at the request of the company, Lжlius attempted to defend justice, and strained every nerve to prove that nothing is so hurtful to a state as injustice; and that without justice a republic can neither be governed, nor even continue to exist.When this question has been handled to the satisfaction of the company, Scipio reverts to the original thread of discourse, and repeats with commendation his own brief definition of a republic, that it is the weal of the people.  "The people" he defines as being not every assemblage or mob, but an assemblage associated by a common acknowledgment of law, and by a community of interests.  Then he shows the use of definition in debate; and from these definitions of his own he gathers that a republic, or "weal of the people," then exists only when it is well and justly governed, whether by a monarch, or an aristocracy, or by the whole people.  But when the monarch is unjust, or, as the Greeks say, a tyrant; or the aristocrats are unjust, and form a faction; or the people themselves are unjust, and become, as Scipio for want of a better name calls them, themselves the tyrant, then the republic is not only blemished (as had been proved the day before), but by legitimate deduction from those definitions, it altogether ceases to be.  For it could not be the people's weal when a tyrant factiously lorded it over the state; neither would the people be any longer a people if it were unjust, since it would no longer answer the definition of a people-"an assemblage associated by a common acknowledgment of law, and by a community of interests."When, therefore, the Roman republic was such as Sallust described it, it was not "utterly wicked and profligate," as he says, but had altogether ceased to exist, if we are to admit the reasoning of that debate maintained on the subject of the republic by its best representatives.  Tully himself, too, speaking not in the person of Scipio or any one else, but uttering his own sentiments, uses the following language in the beginning of the fifth book, after quoting a line from the poet Ennius, in which he said, "Rome's severe morality and her citizens are her safeguard."  "This verse," says Cicero, "seems to me to have all the sententious truthfulness of an oracle.  For neither would the citizens have availed without the morality of the community, nor would the morality of the commons without outstanding men have availed either to establish or so long to maintain in vigor so grand a republic with so wide and just an empire.  Accordingly, before our day, the hereditary usages formed our foremost men, and they on their part retained the usages and institutions of their fathersBut our age, receiving the republic as a chef-d'oeuvre of another age which has already begun to grow old, has not merely neglected to restore the colors of the original, but has not even been at the pains to preserve so much as the general outline and most outstanding features.  For what survives of that primitive morality which the poet called Rome's safeguard?  It is so obsolete and forgotten, that, far from practising it, one does not even know it.  And of the citizens what shall I say?  Morality has perished through poverty of great men; a poverty for which we must not only assign a reason, but for the guilt of which we must answer as criminals charged with a capital crime.  For it is through our vices, and not by any mishap, that we retain only the name of a republic, and have long since lost the reality."This is the confession of Cicero, long indeed after the death of Africanus, whom he introduced as an interlocutor in his work De Republica, but still before the coming of Christ.  Yet, if the disasters he bewails had been lamented after the Christian religion had been diffused, and had begun to prevail, is there a man of our adversaries who would not have thought that they were to be imputed to the Christians?  Why, then, did their gods not take steps then to prevent the decay and extinction of that republic, over the loss of which Cicero, long before Christ had come in the flesh, sings so lugubrious a dirge?  Its admirers have need to inquire whether, even in the days of primitive men and morals, true justice flourished in it; or was it not perhaps even then, to use the casual expression of Cicero, rather a colored painting than the living reality?  But, if God will, we shall consider this elsewhere.  For I mean in its own place to show that-according to the definitions in which Cicero himself, using Scipio as his mouthpiece, briefly propounded what a republic is, and what a people is, and according to many testimonies, both of his own lips and of those who took part in that same debate-Rome never was a republic, because true justice had never a place in it.  But accepting the more feasible definitions of a republic, I grant there was a republic of a certain kind, and certainly much better administered by the more ancient Romans than by their modern representatives. But the fact is, true justice has no existence save in that republic whose founder and ruler is Christ, if at least any choose to call this a republic; and indeed we cannot deny that it is the people's weal.  But if perchance this name, which has become familiar in other connections, be considered alien to our common parlance, we may at all events say that in this city is true justice; the city of which Holy Scripture says, "Glorious things are said of you, O city of God."
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c24"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXIV] Initium autem civilium malorum fuit seditiones Gracchorum agrariis legibus excitatae. Volebant enim agros populo dividere, quos nobilitas perperam possidebat. Sed iam uetustam iniquitatem audere convellere periculosissimum, immo vero, ut res ipsa docuit, perniciosissimum fuit. Quae funera facta sunt, cum prior Gracchus occisus est! quae etiam, cum alius frater eius non longo interposito tempore? Neque enim legibus et ordine potestatum, sed turbis armorumque conflictibus nobiles ignobilesque necabantur. Post Gracchi alterius interfectionem Lucius Opimius consul, qui adversus eum intra Vrbem arma commoverat eoque cum sociis oppresso et extincto ingentem civium stragem fecerat, cum quaestionem haberet iam iudiciaria inquisitione ceteros persequens, tria milia hominum occidisse perhebetur. Ex quo intellegi potest, quantam multitudinem mortium habere potuerit turbidus conflictus armorum, quando tantam habuit iudiciorum velut examinata cognitio. Percussor Gracchi ipsius caput, quantum grave erat, tanto auri pondere consuli vendidit; haec enim pactio caedem praecesserat. In qua etiam occisus est cum liberis Marcus Fuluius consularis. ||The civil wars originated in the seditions which the Gracchi excited regarding the agrarian laws; for they were minded to divide among the people the lands which were wrongfully possessed by the nobilityBut to reform an abuse of so long standing was an enterprise full of peril, or rather, as the event proved, of destructionFor what disasters accompanied the death of the older Gracchus! what slaughter ensued when, shortly after, the younger brother met the same fate!  For noble and ignoble were indiscriminately massacred; and this not by legal authority and procedure, but by mobs and armed riotersAfter the death of the younger Gracchus, the consul Lucius Opimius, who had given battle to him within the city, and had defeated and put to the sword both himself and his confederates, and had massacred many of the citizens, instituted a judicial examination of others, and is reported to have put to death as many as 3000 menFrom this it may be gathered how many fell in the riotous encounters, when the result even of a judicial investigation was so bloodyThe assassin of Gracchus himself sold his head to the consul for its weight in gold, such being the previous agreementIn this massacre, too, Marcus Fulvius, a man of consular rank, with all his children, was put to death.
+
||<div id="c22"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXII] Sed quod pertinet ad praesentem quaestionem, quamlibet laudabilem dicant istam fuisse vel esse rem publicam, secundum eorum auctores doctissimos iam longe ante Christi adventum pessima ac f lagitio s issima facta erat; immo vero nulla erat atque omnino perierat perditissimis moribus. Vt ergo non periret, dii custodes eius populo cultori suo dare praecipue vitae ac morum praecepta debuerunt, a quo tot templis, tot sacerdotibus et sacrificiorum generibus, tam multiplicibus variisque sacris, tot festis sollemnitatibus, tot tantorumque ludorum celebritatibus colebantur; ubi nihil daemones nisi negotium suum egerunt, non curantes quem ad modum illi viverent, immo curantes ut etiam perdite viverent, dum tamen honori suo illa omnia metu subditi ministrarent. Aut si dederunt, proferatur ostendatur legatur, quas deorum leges illi civitati datas contempserint Gracchi, ut seditionibus cuncta turbarent, quas Marius et Cinna et Carbo, ut in bella etiam progrederentur civilia causis iniquissimis suscepta et crudeliter gesta crudeliusque finita, quas denique SmIa ipse, cuius vitam mores facta describente Sallustio aliisque scriptoribus historiae quis non exhorreat? quis illam rem publicam non tunc perisse fateatur? An forte propter huiusce modi civium mores ЎЃVergilianam illam sententiam, sicut solent, pro defensione deorum suorum opponere audebunt: Discessere omnes adytis arisque relictis Di, quibus imperium hoc steterat? Primum si ita est, non habent cur querantur de religione Christiana, quod hac offensi eos dii sui deseruerint, quoniam quidem maiores eorum iam pridem moribus suis ab Vrbis altaribus tam multos ac minutos deos tamquam muscas abegerunt. Sed tamen haec numinum turba ubi erat, cum longe antequam mores corrumperentur antiqui a Gallis Roma capta et incensa est? An praesentes forte dormiebant? Tunc enim tota Vrbe in hostium potestatem redacta solus collis Capitolinus remanserat, qui etiam ipse caperetur, nisi saltem anseres diis dormientibus vigilarent. Vnde paene in superstitionem Aegyptiorum bestias avesque colentium Roma deciderat, cum anseri sollemnia celebrabant. Verum de his adventiciis et corporis potius quam animi malis, quae vel ab hostibus vel alia clade accidunt, nondum interim disputo: nunc ago de labe morum, quibus primum paulatim decoloratis, deinde torrentis modo praecipitatis tanta quamuis integris tectis moenibusque facta est ruina rei publicae, ut magni auctores eorum eam tunc amissam non dubitent dicere. Recte autem abscesserant, ut amitteretur, omnes adytis arisque relictis di, si eorum de bona vita atque iustitia civitas praecepta contempserat. Nunc vero quales, quaeso, dii fuerunt, si noluerunt cum populo cultore suo vivere, quem male viventem non docuerant bene vivere? ||chapter 22. But what is relevant to the present question is this, that however admirable our adversaries say the republic was or is, it is certain that by the testimony of their own most learned writers it had become, long before the coming of Christ, utterly wicked and dissolute, and indeed had no existence, but had been destroyed by profligacyTo prevent this, surely these guardian gods ought to have given precepts of morals and a rule of life to the people by whom they were worshipped in so many temples, with so great a variety of priests and sacrifices, with such numberless and diverse rites, so many festal solemnities, so many celebrations of magnificent games.  But in all this the demons only looked after their own interest, and cared not at all how their worshippers lived, or rather were at pains to induce them to lead an abandoned life, so long as they paid these tributes to their honor, and regarded them with fearIf any one denies this, let him produce, let him point to, let him read the laws which the gods had given against sedition, and which the Gracchi transgressed when they threw everything into confusion; or those Marius, and Cinna, and Carbo broke when they involved their country in civil wars, most iniquitous and unjustifiable in their causes, cruelly conducted, and yet more cruelly terminated; or those which Sylla scorned, whose life, character, and deeds, as described by Sallust and other historians, are the abhorrence of all mankindWho will deny that at that time the republic had become extinct?Possibly they will be bold enough to suggest in defence of the gods, that they abandoned the city on account of the profligacy of the citizens, according to the lines of Virgil:"Gone from each fane, each sacred shrine,Are those who made this realm divine."But, firstly, if it be so, then they cannot complain against the Christian religion, as if it were that which gave offence to the gods and caused them to abandon Rome, since the Roman immorality had long ago driven from the altars of the city a cloud of little gods, like as many fliesAnd yet where was this host of divinities, when, long before the corruption of the primitive morality, Rome was taken and burnt by the Gauls?  Perhaps they were present, but asleep?  For at that time the whole city fell into the hands of the enemy, with the single exception of the Capitoline hill; and this too would have been taken, had not-the watchful geese aroused the sleeping gods!  And this gave occasion to the festival of the goose, in which Rome sank nearly to the superstition of the Egyptians, who worship beasts and birdsBut of these adventitious evils which are inflicted by hostile armies or by some disaster, and which attach rather to the body than the soul, I am not meanwhile disputing.  At present I speak of the decay of morality, which at first almost imperceptibly lost its brilliant hue, but afterwards was wholly obliterated, was swept away as by a torrent, and involved the republic in such disastrous ruin, that though the houses and walls remained standing the leading writers do not scruple to say that the republic was destroyedNow, the departure of the gods "from each fane, each sacred shrine," and their abandonment of the city to destruction, was an act of justice, if their laws inculcating justice and a moral life had been held in contempt by that city.  But what kind of gods were these, pray, who declined to live with a people who worshipped them, and whose corrupt life they had done nothing to reform?
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c25"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXV] Eleganti sane senatus consulto eo ipso loco, ubi funereus tumultus ille commissus est, ubi tot cives ordinis cuiusque ceciderunt, aedes Concordiae facta est, ut Gracchorum poenae testis contionantium oculos feriret memoriamque compungeret. Sed hoc quid aliud fuit quam inrisio deorum, illi deae templum construere, quae si esset in civitate, non tantis dissensionibus dilacerata conrueret? Nisi forte sceleris huius rea Concordia, quia deseruerat animos civium, meruit in illa aede tamquam in carcere includi. Cur enim, si rebus gestis congruere voluerunt, non ibi potius aedem Discordiae fabricarunt? An ulla ratio redditur, cur Concordia dea sit, et Discordia dea non sit, ut secundum Labeonis distinctionem bona sit ista, illa vero mala? Nec ipse aliud secutus videtur quam quod advertit Romae etiam Febri, sicut Saluti, templum constitutum. Eo modo igitur non solum Concordiae, verum etiam Discordiae constitui debuit. Periculose itque Romani tam mala dea irata vivere voluerunt nec Troianum excidium recoluerunt originem ab eius offensione sumpsisse. Ipsa quippe quia inter deos non fuerat inuitata, trium dearum litem aurei mali suppositione commenta est; unde rixa numinum et Venus victrix, et rapta Helena et Troia deleta. Quapropter, si forte indignata, quod inter deos in Vrbe nullum templum habere meruit, ideo iam turbabat tantis tumultibus civitatem, quanto atrocius potuit inritari, cum in loco illius caedis, hoc est in loco sui operis, adversariae suae constitutam aedem videret! Haec uana ridentibus nobis illi docti sapientesque stomachantur, et tamen numinum bonorum malorumque cultores de hac quaestione Concordiae Discordiaque non exeunt, sive praetermiserint harum dearum cultum eisque Febrem Bellonamque praetulerint, quibus antiqua fana fecerunt, sive et istas coluerint, cum sic eos discedente Concordia Discordia saeviens usque ad civilia bella perduxerit.  ||A pretty decree of the senate it was, truly, by which the temple of Concord was built on the spot where that disastrous rising had taken place, and where so many citizens of every rank had fallen. I suppose it was that the monument of the Gracchi's punishment might strike the eye and affect the memory of the pleadersBut what was this but to deride the gods, by building a temple to that goddess who, had she been in the city, would not have suffered herself to be torn by such dissensions?  Or was it that Concord was chargeable with that bloodshed because she had deserted the minds of the citizens, and was therefore incarcerated in that temple?  For if they had any regard to consistency, why did they not rather erect on that site a temple of DiscordOr is there a reason for Concord being a goddess while Discord is noneDoes the distinction of Labeo hold here, who would have made the one a good, the other an evil deity?-a distinction which seems to have been suggested to him by the mere fact of his observing at Rome a temple to Fever as well as one to HealthBut, on the same ground, Discord as well as Concord ought to be deifiedA hazardous venture the Romans made in provoking so wicked a goddess, and in forgetting that the destruction of Troy had been occasioned by her taking offence. For, being indignant that she was not invited with the other gods [to the nuptials of Peleus and Thetis], she created dissension among the three goddesses by sending in the golden apple, which occasioned strife in heaven, victory to Venus, the rape of Helen, and the destruction of Troy.  Wherefore, if she was perhaps offended that the Romans had not thought her worthy of a temple among the other gods in their city, and therefore disturbed the state with such tumults, to how much fiercer passion would she be roused when she saw the temple of her adversary erected on the scene of that massacre, or, in other words, on the scene of her own handiwork! Those wise and learned men are enraged at our laughing at these follies; and yet, being worshippers of good and bad divinities alike, they cannot escape this dilemma about Concord and Discord: either they have neglected the worship of these goddesses, and preferred Fever and War, to whom there are shrines erected of great antiquity, or they have worshipped them, and after all Concord has abandoned them, and Discord has tempestuously hurled them into civil wars.  
+
||<div id="c23"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXIII] Quid quod etiam videntur eorum adfuisse cupiditatibus implendis, et ostenduntur non praefuisse kreVfrenandis, qui enim Marium nouum hominem et ignobilem, cruentissimum auctorem bellorum civilium atque gestorem, ut septiens consul fieret adivuerunt atque ut in septimo suo consulatu moreretur, senex ne in manus Sullae futuri mox victoris inrueret. Si enim ad haec eum dii eorum non ivuerunt, non parum est quod fatentur etiam non propitiis diis suis posse accidere homini istam temporalem, quam nimis diligunt, tantam felicitatem et posse homines, sicut fuit Marius, salute viribus, opibus honoribus, dignitate longaevitate cumulari et perfrui diis iratis; posse etiam homines, sicut fuit Regulus, captivitate seruitute inopia, vigiliis doloribus excruciari et emori diis amicis. Quod si ita esse concedunt, compendio nihil eos prodesse et coli superfluo confitentur. Nam si virtutibus animi et probitati vitae, cuius praernia post mortem speranda sunt, magis contraria ut popuIus disceret institerunt; si nihil etianI in his transeuntibus et temporalibus bonis vel eis quos oderunt nocent, vel eis quos diligunt prosunt, ut quid coluntur, ut quid tanto studio colendi requiruntur? Cur laboriosis tristibusque temporibus, tamquam offensi abscesserint, murmuratur et propter eos Christiana religio conuiciis indignissimis laeditur? Si autem habent in his rebus vel beneficii vel maleficii potestatem, cur in eis adfuerunt pessimo viro Mario, et optimo Regulo defuerunt? An ex hoc ipsi intelleguntur iniustissimi et pessimi? Quod si propterea magis timendi et colendi putantur: neque hoc putentur; neque enim minus eos invenitur ReguIus coluisse q uam M arius. Nec ideo vita pessima eligenda videatur, quia magis Mario quam Regulo dii favisse existimantur. Metellus enim Romanorum laudatissimus, qui habuit quinque filios consulares, etiam rerum temporalium felix fuit, et Catilina pessimus oppressus inopia et in bello sui sceleris prostratus infelix, et verissima atque certissima felicitate praepollent boni Deum colentes, a quo solo conferri potest. Illa igitur res publica malis moribus cum periret, nihil dii eorum pro dirigendis vel pro corrigendis egerunt moribus, ne periret; immo deprauandis et corrumpendis addiderunt moribus, ut periret. Nec se bonos fingant, quod velut offensi civium iniquitate discesserint. Prorsus ibi erant; produntur, conuincuntur; nec subvenire praecipiendo nec latere tacendo potuerunt. Omitto quod Marius a miserantibus Minturnensibus Maricae deae in luco eius commendatus est, ut ei omnia prosperaret, et ex summa desperatione reuersus incolumis in Vrbem duxit crudelem crudelis exercitum; ubi quam cruenta, quam incivilis hostilique inmanior eius victoria fuerit, eos qui scripserunt legant qui volunt. Sed hoc, ut dixi, omitto, nec Maricae nescio cui tribuo Marii sanguineam felicitatem, sed occultae potius providentiae Dei ad istorum ora claudenda eosque ab errore liberandos, qui non studiis agunt, sed haec prudenter advertunt, quia, etsi aliquid in his rebus daemones possunt, tantum possunt, quantum secreto omnipotentis arbitrio permittuntur, ne magnipendamus terrenam felicitatem, quae sicut Mario malis etiam plerumque conceditur, nec eam rursus quasi malam arbitremur, cum ea multos etiam pios ac bonos unius veri Dei cultores inuitis daemonibus praepolluisse videamus, nec eosdem inmundissimos spiritus vel propter haec ipsa bona malave terrena propitiandos aut timendos existimemus, quia, sicut ipsi mali homines in terra, sic etiam illi non omnia quae volunt facere possunt, nisi quantum illius ordinatione sinitur, cuius plene iudicia nemo conprehendit, iuste nemo reprehendit.  ||chapter 23. But, further, is it not obvious that the gods have abetted the fulfilment of men's desires, instead of authoritatively bridling them?  For Marius, a low-born and self-made man, who ruthlessly provoked and conducted civil wars, was so effectually aided by them, that he was seven times consul, and died full of years in his seventh consulship, escaping the hands of Sylla, who immediately afterwards came into power.  Why, then, did they not also aid him, so as to restrain him from so many enormities? For if it is said that the gods had no hand in his success, this is no trivial admission that a man can attain the dearly coveted felicity of this life even though his own gods be not propitious; that men can be loaded with the gifts of fortune as Marius was, can enjoy health, power, wealth, honours, dignity, length of days, though the gods be hostile to him; and that, on the other hand, men can be tormented as Regulus was, with captivity, bondage, destitution, watchings, pain, and cruel death, though the gods be his friendsTo concede this is to make a compendious confession that the gods are useless, and their worship superfluous.  If the gods have taught the people rather what goes clean counter to the virtues of the soul, and that integrity of life which meets a reward after death; if even in respect of temporal and transitory blessings they neither hurt those whom they hate nor profit whom they love, why are they worshipped, why are they invoked with such eager homageWhy do men murmur in difficult and sad emergencies, as if the gods had retired in anger? and why, on their account, is the Christian religion injured by the most unworthy calumniesIf in temporal matters they have power either for good or for evil, why did they stand by Marius, the worst of Rome's citizens, and abandon Regulus, the best? Does this not prove themselves to be most unjust and wicked?  And even if it be supposed that for this very reason they are the rather to be feared and worshipped, this is a mistake; for we do not read that Regulus worshipped them less assiduously than MariusNeither is it apparent that a wicked life is to be chosen, on the ground that the gods are supposed to have favored Marius more than RegulusFor Metellus, the most highly esteemed of all the Romans, who had five sons in the consulship, was prosperous even in this life; and Catiline, the worst of men, reduced to poverty and defeated in the war his own guilt had aroused, lived and perished miserably.  Real and secure felicity is the peculiar possession of those who worship that God by whom alone it can be conferred.It is thus apparent, that when the republic was being destroyed by profligate manners, its gods did nothing to hinder its destruction by the direction or correction of its manners, but rather accelerated its destruction by increasing the demoralization and corruption that already existed.  They need not pretend that their goodness was shocked by the iniquity of the city, and that they withdrew in anger. For they were there, sure enough; they are detected, convicted:  they were equally unable to break silence so as to guide others, and to keep silence so as to conceal themselves.  I do not dwell on the fact that the inhabitants of Minturnж took pity on Marius, and commended him to the goddess Marica in her grove, that she might give him success in all things, and that from the abyss of despair in which he then lay he forthwith returned unhurt to Rome, and entered the city the ruthless leader of a ruthless army; and they who wish to know how bloody was his victory, how unlike a citizen, and how much more relentlessly than any foreign foe he acted, let them read the histories.  But this, as I said, I do not dwell upon; nor do I attribute the bloody bliss of Marius to, I know not what Minturnian goddess [Marica], but rather to the secret providence of God, that the mouths of our adversaries might be shut, and that they who are not led by passion, but by prudent consideration of events, might be delivered from error. And even if the demons have any power in these matters, they have only that power which the secret decree of the Almighty allots to them, in order that we may not set too great store by earthly prosperity, seeing it is oftentimes vouchsafed even to wicked men like Marius; and that we may not, on the other hand, regard it as an evil, since we see that many good and pious worshippers of the one true God are, in spite of the demons pre-eminently successful; and, finally, that we may not suppose that these unclean spirits are either to be propitiated or feared for the sake of earthly blessings or calamities:  for as wicked men on earth cannot do all they would, so neither can these demons, but only in so far as they are permitted by the decree of Him whose judgments are fully comprehensible, justly reprehensible by none.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c26"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXVI] Praeclarum vero seditionis obstaculum aedem Concordiae, testem caedis suppliciique Gracchorum, contionantibus opponendam putarunt. Quantum ex hoc profecerint, indicant secuta peiora. Laborarunt enim deinceps contionatores non exemplum devitare Gracchorum, sed superare propositum, Lucius Saturninus tribunus plebis et Gaius Seruilius praetor et multo post Marcus Drusus, quorum omnium seditionibus caedes primo iam tunc gravissimae, deinde socialia bella exarserunt, quibus Italia uehementer adflicta et ad uastitatem mirabilem desertionemque perducta est. Bellum deinde seruile successit et bella civilia. Quae proelia commissa sunt, quid sanguinis fusum, ut omnes fere Italae gentes, quibus Romanum maxime praepollebat imperium, tamquam saeua barbaries domarentur! Iam ex paucissimis, hoc est minus quam septuaginta, gladiatoribus quem ad modum bellum seruile contractum sit, ad quantum numerum et quam acrem ferocemque peruenerit, quos ille numerus imperatores populi Romani superaverit, quas et quo modo civitates regionesque, uastaverit, vix qui historiam conscripserunt satis explicare potuerunt. Neque id solum fuit seruile bellum, sed et Macedoniam provinciam prius seruitia depopulata sunt et deinde Siciliam oramque maritimam. Quanta etiam et quam horrenda commiserint primo latrocinia, deinde valida bella piratarum, quis pro magnitudine rerum valeat eloqui? ||But they supposed that, in erecting the temple of Concord within the view of the orators, as a memorial of the punishment and death of the Gracchi, they were raising an effectual obstacle to seditionHow much effect it had, is indicated by the still more deplorable wars that followedFor after this the orators endeavored not to avoid the example of the Gracchi, but to surpass their projects; as did Lucius Saturninus, a tribune of the people, and Caius Servilius the prжtor, and some time after Marcus Drusus, all of whom stirred seditions which first of all occasioned bloodshed, and then the social wars by which Italy was grievously injured, and reduced to a piteously desolate and wasted condition.  Then followed the servile war and the civil wars; and in them what battles were fought, and what blood was shed, so that almost all the peoples of Italy, which formed the main strength of the Roman empire, were conquered as if they were barbariansThen even historians themselves find it difficult to explain how the servile war was begun by a very few, certainly less than seventy gladiators, what numbers of fierce and cruel men attached themselves to these, how many of the Roman generals this band defeated, and how it laid waste many districts and cities. And that was not the only servile war:  the province of Macedonia, and subsequently Sicily and the sea-coast, were also depopulated by bands of slavesAnd who can adequately describe either the horrible atrocities which the pirates first committed, or the wars they afterwards maintained against Rome?
+
||<div id="c24"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXIV] Sulla certe ipse, cuius tempora talia fuerunt, ut superiora, quorum vindex esse videbatur, illorum comparatione quaererentur, cum primum ad Vrbem contra Marium castra movisset, adeo laeta exta immolanti fuisse scribit Livius, ut custodiri se Postumius haruspex voluerit capitis supplicium subiturus, nisi ea, quae in animo Sulla haberet, diis ivuantibus implevisset. Ecce non discesserant adytis atque aris relictis di, quando de rerum euentu praedicebant nihilque de ipsius Sullae correctione curabant. Promittebant praesagando felicitatem magnam nec malam cupiditatem minando frangebant. Deinde cum esset in Asia bellum Mithridaticum gerens, per Lucium Titium ei mandatum est a love, quod esset Mithridatem superaturus, et factum est. Ac postea molienti redire in Vrbem et suas amicorumque iniurias civili sanguine ulcisci, iterum mandatum est ab eodem love per militem quendam legionis sextae, prius se de Mithridate praenuntiasse victoriam, et tunc promittere daturum se potestatem, qua recuperaret ab inimicis rem publicam non sine multo sanguine. Tum percontatus Sulla, quae forma militi visa fuerit, cum ille indicasset, eam recordatus est, quam prius ab illo audierat, qui de Mithridatica victoria ab eodem mandata pertulerat. Quid hic responderi potest, quare dii curaverint ueIut felicia ista nuntiare, et nullus eorum curaverit Sullam monendo corrigere mala tanta facturum scelestis annis civilibus, qualia non foedarent, sed auferrent omnino rem pubficam? Nempe intelleguntur daemones, sicut saepe dixi notumque nobis est in litteris sacris resque ipsae satis indicant, negotium suum agere, ut pro diis habeantur et colantur, ut ea illis exhibeantur, quibus hi qui exhibent sociati unam pessimam causam cum eis habeant in iudicio Dei. Deinde cum venisset Tarentum Sulla atque ibi sacrificasset, vidit in capite vitulini iecoris similitudinem coronae aureae. Tunc Postumius haruspex ille respondit praeclaram significare victoriam iussitque ut extis illis solus uesceretur. Postea paruo interuallo seruus cuiusdam Luci Pontii uaticinando clamavit: "A Bellona nuntius venio, victoria tua est, Sulla. w Deinde adiecit arsurum esse Capitolium. Hoc cum dixisset, continuo egressus e castris postero ffie concitatior reuersus est et Capitolium arsisse clamavit. Arserat autem re vera Capitolium. Quod quidem daemoni et praevidere facile fuit et celerrime nuntiare. Illud sane intende, quod ad causam maxime pertinet, sub qualibus diis esse cupiant, qui blasphemant Saluatorem voluntates fidelium a dominatu daemonum liberantem. Clamavit homo uaticinando: "Victoria tua est, Sulla, "atque ut id divino spiritu clamare crederetur, nuntiavit etiam aliquid et prope futurum et mox factum, unde longe aberat per quem ille spiritus loquebatur; non tamen clamavit: m Ab sceleribu s parce, Sulla w, quae illic victor tam horrenda commisit, cui corona aurea ipsius victoriae inlustrissimum signum in vitulino iecore apparuit, qualia signa si dii iusti dare solerent ac non daemones impii, profecto illis extis nefaria potius atque ipsi Sullae graviter noxia mala futura monstrarent. Neque enim eius dignitati tantum profuit illa victoria, quantum nocuit cupiditati; qua factum est, ut inmoderatis inhians et secundis rebus elatus ac praecipitatus magis ipse periret in moribus, quam inimicos in corporibus perderet. Haec illi dii vere tristia vereque lugenda non extis, non auguriis, non cuiusquam somnio vel uaticinio praenuntiabant. Magis enim timebant ne corrigeretur quam ne vinceretur. Immo satis agebant, ut victor civium gloriosus victus atque captivus nefandis vitiis et r haec ipsis etiam daemonibus multo obstrictius subderetur. ||chapter 24. It is certain that Sylla-whose rule was so cruel that, in comparison with it, the preceding state of things which he came to avenge was regretted-when first he advanced towards Rome to give battle to Marius, found the auspices so favourable when he sacrificed, that, according to Livy's account, the augur Postumius expressed his willingness to lose his head if Sylla did not, with the help of the gods, accomplish what he designed.  The gods, you see, had not departed from "every fane and sacred shrine," since they were still predicting the issue of these affairs, and yet were taking no steps to correct Sylla himself.  Their presages promised him great prosperity but no threatenings of theirs subdued his evil passionsAnd then, when he was in Asia conducting the war against Mithridates, a message from Jupiter was delivered to him by Lucius Titius, to the effect that he would conquer Mithridates; and so it came to pass.  And afterwards, when he was meditating a return to Rome for the purpose of avenging in the blood of the citizens injuries done to himself and his friends, a second message from Jupiter was delivered to him by a soldier of the sixth legion, to the effect that it was he who had predicted the victory over Mithridates, and that now he promised to give him power to recover the republic from his enemies, though with great bloodshedSylla at once inquired of the soldier what form had appeared to him; and, on his reply, recognized that it was the same as Jupiter had formerly employed to convey to him the assurance regarding the victory over Mithridates.  How, then, can the gods be justified in this matter for the care they took to predict these shadowy successes, and for their negligence in correcting Sylla, and restraining him from stirring up a civil war so lamentable and atrocious, that it not merely disfigured, but extinguished, the republic?  The truth is, as I have often said, and as Scripture informs us, and as the facts themselves sufficiently indicate, the demons are found to look after their own ends only, that they may be regarded and worshipped as gods, and that men may be induced to offer to them a worship which associates them with their crimes, and involves them in one common wickedness and judgment of God.Afterwards, when Sylla had come to Tarentum, and had sacrificed there, he saw on the head of the victim's liver the likeness of a golden crown.  Thereupon the same soothsayer Postumius interpreted this to signify a signal victory, and ordered that he only should eat of the entrails. A little afterwards, the slave of a certain Lucius Pontius cried out, "I am Bellona's messenger; the victory is yours, Sylla!" Then he added that the Capitol should be burned.  As soon as he had uttered this prediction he left the camp, but returned the following day more excited than ever, and shouted, "The Capitol is fired!"  And fired indeed it was.  This it was easy for a demon both to foresee and quickly to announce.  But observe, as relevant to our subject, what kind of gods they are under whom these men desire to live, who blaspheme the Saviour that delivers the wills of the faithful from the dominion of devils.  The man cried out in prophetic rapture, "The victory is yours, Sylla!" And to certify that he spoke by a divine spirit, he predicted also an event which was shortly to happen, and which indeed did fall out, in a place from which he in whom this spirit was speaking was far distant.  But he never cried, "Forbear your villanies, Sylla!"-the villanies which were committed at Rome by that victor to whom a golden crown on the calf's liver had been shown as the divine evidence of his victory.  If such signs as this were customarily sent by just gods, and not by wicked demons, then certainly the entrails he consulted should rather have given Sylla intimation of the cruel disasters that were to befall the city and himself. For that victory was not so conducive to his exaltation to power, as it was fatal to his ambition; for by it he became so insatiable in his desires, and was rendered so arrogant and reckless by prosperity, that he may be said rather to have inflicted a moral destruction on himself than corporal destruction on his enemies.  But these truely woeful and deplorable calamities the gods gave him no previous hint of, neither by entrails, augury, dream, nor prediction.  For they feared his amendment more than his defeatYea, they took good care that this glorious conqueror of his own fellow-citizens should be conquered and led captive by his own infamous vices, and should thus be the more submissive slave of the demons themselves.
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c27"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXVII] Cum vero Marius civili sanguine iam cruentus multis adversarum sibi partium peremptis victus Vrbe profugisset, vix paululum respirante civitate, ut verbis Tullianis utar, "superavit postea Cinna cum Mario. Tum vero clarissimis viris interfectis lumina civitatis extincta sunt. Vltus est huius victoriae crudelitatem postea Sulla, ne dici quidem opus est quanta deminutione civium et quanta calamitate rei publicae." De hac enim vindicta, quae perniciosior fuit, quam si scelera quae puniebantur inpunita relinquerentur, ait et Lucanus: Excessit medicina modum nimiumque secuta est, Qua morbi duxere manum. Periere nocentes; Sed cum iam soli possent superesse nocentes. Illo bello Mariano atque Sullano exceptis his, qui foris in acie ceciderunt, in ipsa quoque Vrbe cadaveribus vici plateae fora theatra templa completa sunt, ut difficile iudicaretur, quando victores plus funerum ediderint, utrum prius ut vincerent, an postea quia vicissent; cum primum victoria mariana, quando de exilio se ipse restituit, exceptis passim quaque versum caedibus factis caput Octavii consulis poneretur in rostris, Caesares a Fimbria domibus trucidarentur suis, duo Crassi pater et filius in conspectu mutuo mactarentur, Baebius et Numitorius unco tracti sparsis visceribus interirent, Catulus hausto veneno se manibus inimocorum subtraheret, Merula flamen Dialis praecisis venis Iovi etiam suo sanguine litaret. In ipsius autem Marii oculis continuo feriebantur, quibus salutantibus dexteram porrigere noluisset.  ||But when Marius, stained with the blood of his fellow-citizens, whom the rage of party had sacrificed, was in his turn vanquished and driven from the city, it had scarcely time to breathe freely, when, to use the words of Cicero, "Cinna and Marius together returned and took possession of itThen, indeed, the foremost men in the state were put to death, its lights quenchedSylla afterwards avenged this cruel victory; but we need not say with what loss of life, and with what ruin to the republic." For of this vengeance, which was more destructive than if the crimes which it punished had been committed with impunity, Lucan says:  "The cure was excessive, and too closely resembled the disease.  The guilty perished, but when none but the guilty survived:  and then private hatred and anger, unbridled by law, were allowed free indulgence."  In that war between Marius and Sylla, besides those who fell in the field of battle, the city, too, was filled with corpses in its streets, squares, markets, theatres, and temples; so that it is not easy to reckon whether the victors slew more before or after victory, that they might be, or because they were, victorsAs soon as Marius triumphed, and returned from exile, besides the butcheries everywhere perpetrated, the head of the consul Octavius was exposed on the rostrum; Cжsar and Fimbria were assassinated in their own houses; the two Crassi, father and son, were murdered in one another's sight; Bebius and Numitorius were disembowelled by being dragged with hooks; Catulus escaped the hands of his enemies by drinking poison; Merula, the flamen of Jupiter, cut his veins and made a libation of his own blood to his godMoreover, every one whose salutation Marius did not answer by giving his hand, was at once cut down before his face.  
+
||<div id="c25"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXV] Illinc vero quis non intellegat, quis non videat, nisi qui tales deos imitari magis elegit quam divina gratia ab eorum societate separari, quantum moliantur maligni isti spiritus exemplo suo velut divinam auctoritatem praebere sceleribus? quod etiam in quadam Campaniae lata planitie, ubi non multo p ost civiles acies nefario proelio conflixerunt, ipsi inter se prius pugnare visi sunt. Namque ibi auditi sunt primum ingentes fragores, moxque multi se vidisse nuntiarunt per aliquot dies duas acies proeliari. Quae pugna ubi destitit, uestigia quoque velut hominum et equorum, quanta de illa conflictatione exprimi poterant, invenerunt. Si ergo veraciter inter se numina pugnaverunt, iam bella civilia excusantur humana; consideretur tamen quae sit talium deorum vel malitia vel miseria: si autem se pugnasse finxerunt, quid aliud egerunt, nisi ut sibi Romani bellando civiliter tamquam deorum exemplo nullum nefas admittere viderentur? Iam enim coeperant bella civilia, et aliquot nefandorum proeliorum strages execranda praecesserat. Iam multos moverat, quod miles quidam, dum occiso spolia detraheret, fratrem nudato cadavere agnovit ac detestatus bella civilia se ipsum ibi perimens fraterno corpori adiunxit. Vt ergo huius tanti mali minime taederet, sed armorum scelestorum magis magisque ardor incresceret, noxii daemones, quos illi deos putantes colendos et venerandos arbitrabantur, inter se pugnantes hominibus apparere voluerunt, ne imitari tales pugnas civica trepidaret affectio, sed potius humanum scelus divino excusaretur exemplo. Hac astutia maligni spiritus etiam ludos, unde multa iam dixi, scaenicos sibi dicari sacrarique iusserunt, ubi tanta deorum flagitia theatricis canticis atque fabularum actionibus celebrata et quisquis eos fecisse crederet et quisquis non crederet, sed tamen illos libentissime sibi talia exhiberi cerneret, securus imitaretur. Ne quis itaque existimaret in deos conuicia potius quam eis dignum aliquid scriptitasse, ubicumque illos inter se pugnasse poetae commemorarunt, ipsi ad decipiendos homines poetarum carmina firmaverunt, pugnas videlicet suas non solum per scaenicos in theatro, verum etiam per se ipsos in campo humanis oculis exhibentes. Haec dicere compulsi sumus, quoniam pessimis moribus civium Romanam rem publicam iam antea perditam fuisse nullamque remansisse ante adventum Christi Jesu domini nostri auctores eorum dicere et scribere minime dubitarunt. Quam perditionem diis suis non inputant, qui mala transitoria, quibus boni, seu vivant seu moriantur, perire non possunt, Christo nostro inputant: cum Christus noster tanta frequentet pro moribus optimis praecepta contra perditos mores; dii vero ipsorum nullis talibus praeceptis egerint aliquid cum suo cultore populo pro illa re publica, ne periret; immo eosdem mores velut suis exemplis auctoritate noxia corrumpendo egerunt potius, ut periret. Quam non ideo tunc perisse quisquam, ut arbitror, iam dicere audebit, quia "discessere omnes adytis arisque relictis di", velut amici virtutibus, cum vitiis hominum offenderentur; quia tot signis extorum auguriorum uaticiniorum, quibus se tamquam praescios futurorum adiutoresque proeliorum iactare et commendare gestiebant, conuincuntur fuisse praesentes; qui si vere abscessissent, mitius Romani in bella civilia suis cupiditatibus quam illorum instigationibus exarsissent.  ||chapter 25. Now, who does not hereby comprehend,-unless he has preferred to imitate such gods rather than by divine grace to withdraw himself from their fellowship,-who does not see how eagerly these evil spirits strive by their example to lend, as it were, divine authority to crime?  Is not this proved by the fact that they were seen in a wide plain in Campania rehearsing among themselves the battle which shortly after took place there with great bloodshed between the armies of Rome?  For at first there were heard loud crashing noises, and afterwards many reported that they had seen for some days together two armies engaged.  And when this battle ceased, they found the ground all indented with just such footprints of men and horses as a great conflict would leaveIf, then, the deities were veritably fighting with one another, the civil wars of men are sufficiently justified; yet, by the way, let it be observed that such pugnacious gods must be very wicked or very wretchedIf, however, it was but a sham-fight, what did they intend by this, but that the civil wars of the Romans should seem no wickedness, but an imitation of the gods? For already the civil wars had begun; and before this, some lamentable battles and execrable massacres had occurred.  Already many had been moved by the story of the soldier, who, on stripping the spoils of his slain foe, recognized in the stripped corpse his own brother, and, with deep curses on civil wars, slew himself there and then on his brother's body.  To disguise the bitterness of such tragedies, and kindle increasing ardor in this monstrous warfare, these malign demons, who were reputed and worshipped as gods, fell upon this plan of revealing themselves in a state of civil war, that no compunction for fellow-citizens might cause the Romans to shrink from such battles, but that the human criminality might be justified by the divine example.  By a like craft, too, did these evil spirits command that scenic entertainments, of which I have already spoken, should be instituted and dedicated to them.  And in these entertainments the poetical compositions and actions of the drama ascribed such iniquities to the gods, that every one might safely imitate them, whether he believed the gods had actually done such things, or, not believing this, yet perceived that they most eagerly desired to be represented as having done themAnd that no one might suppose, that in representing the gods as fighting with one another, the poets had slandered them, and imputed to them unworthy actions, the gods themselves, to complete the deception, confirmed the compositions of the poets by exhibiting their own battles to the eyes of men, not only through actions in the theatres, but in their own persons on the actual field.We have been forced to bring forward these facts, because their authors have not scrupled to say and to write that the Roman republic had already been ruined by the depraved moral habits of the citizens, and had ceased to exist before the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Now this ruin they do not impute to their own gods, though they impute to our Christ the evils of this life, which cannot ruin good men, be they alive or dead.  And this they do, though our Christ has issued so many precepts inculcating virtue and restraining vice; while their own gods have done nothing whatever to preserve that republic that served them, and to restrain it from ruin by such precepts, but have rather hastened its destruction, by corrupting its morality through their pestilent example.  No one, I fancy, will now be bold enough to say that the republic was then ruined because of the departure of the gods "from each fane, each sacred shrine," as if they were the friends of virtue, and were offended by the vices of men.  No, there are too many presages from entrails, auguries, soothsayings, whereby they boastingly proclaimed themselves prescient of future events and controllers of the fortune of war,-all which prove them to have been presentAnd had they been indeed absent the Romans would never in these civil wars have been so far transported by their own passions as they were by the instigations of these gods.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c28"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXVIII] Sullana vero victoria secuta, huius videlicet vindex crudelitatis, post tantum sanguinem civium, quo fuso fuerat comparata, finito iam bello inimicitiis viventibus crudelius in pace grassata est. Iam etiam post Marii maioris pristinas ac recentissimas caedes additae fuerant aliae graviores a Mario ivuene atque Carbone earundem partium Marianarum, qui Sulla imminente non solum victoriam, verum etiam ipsam desperantes salutem cuncta suis aliis caedibus impleuerunt. Nam praeter stragem late per diversa diffusam obsesso etiam senatu de ipsa curia, tamquam de carcere, producebantur ad gladium. Mucius Scaeuola pontifex, quoniam nihil apud Romanos templo Vestae sanctius habebatur, aram ipsam amplexus occisus est, ignemque illum, qui perpetua virginum cura semper ardebat, suo paene sanguine extinxit. Vrbem deinde Sulla victor intravit, qui in villa publica non iam bello, sed ipsa pace saeviente septem milia deditorum (unde utique inermia) non pugnando, sed iubendo prostraverat. In Vrbe autem tota quem vellet Sullanus quisque feriebat, unde tot funera numerari omnino non poterant, donec Sullae suggereretur sinendos esse aliquos vivere, ut essent quibus possent imperare qui vicerant. Tunc iam cohibita quae hac atque illac passim furibunda ferebatur licentia iugulandi, tabula illa cum magna gratulatione proposita est, quae hominum ex utroque ordine splendido, equestri scilicet atque senatorio, occidendorum ac proscribendorum duo milia continebat. Contristabat numerus, sed consolabatur modus; nec quia tot cadebant tantum erat maeroris, quantum laetitiae quia ceteri non timebant. Sed in quibus dam eorum, qui mori iussi erant, etiam ipsa licet crudelis ceterorum securitas genera mortium exquisita congemuit. Quendam enim sine ferro laniantium manus diripuerunt, inmanius homines hominem vivum, quam bestiae solent discerpere cadaver abiectum. Alius oculis effossis et particulatim membris amputatis in tantis cruciatibus diu vivere vel potius diu mori coactus est. Subhastatae sunt etiam, tamquam villae, quaedam nobiles civitates; una vero, velut unus reus duci iuberetur, sic tota iussa est trucidari. Haec facta sunt in pace post bellum, non ut acceleraretur obtinenda victoria, sed ne contemneretur obtenta. Pax cum bello de crudelitate certavit et vicit. Illud enim prostravit armatos, ista nudatos. Bellum rat, ut qui feriebatur, si posset, feriret; pax autem, non ut qui euaserat viveret, sed ut moriens non repugnaret. ||Then followed the victory of Sylla, the so-called avenger of the cruelties of Marius.  But not only was his victory purchased with great bloodshed; but when hostilities were finished, hostility survived, and the subsequent peace was bloody as the war.  To the former and still recent massacres of the elder Marius, the younger Marius and Carbo, who belonged to the same party, added greater atrocities.  For when Sylla approached, and they despaired not only of victory, but of life itself, they made a promiscuous massacre of friends and foes.  And, not satisfied with staining every corner of Rome with blood, they besieged the senate, and led forth the senators to death from the curia as from a prisonMucius Scжvola the pontiff was slain at the altar of Vesta, which he had clung to because no spot in Rome was more sacred than her temple; and his blood well-nigh extinguished the fire which was kept alive by the constant care of the virginsThen Sylla entered the city victorious, after having slaughtered in the Villa Publica, not by combat, but by an order, 7000 men who had surrendered, and were therefore unarmed; so fierce was the rage of peace itself, even after the rage of war was extinctMoreover, throughout the whole city every partisan of Sylla slew whom he pleased, so that the number of deaths went beyond computation, till it was suggested to Sylla that he should allow some to survive, that the victors might not be destitute of subjectsThen this furious and promiscuous licence to murder was checked, and much relief was expressed at the publication of the proscription list, containing though it did the death-warrant of two thousand men of the highest ranks, the senatorial and equestrianThe large number was indeed saddening, but it was consolatory that a limit was fixed; nor was the grief at the numbers slain so great as the joy that the rest were secureBut this very security, hard-hearted as it was, could not but bemoan the exquisite torture applied to some of those who had been doomed to die.  For one was torn to pieces by the unarmed hands of the executioners; men treating a living man more savagely than wild beasts are used to tear an abandoned corpseAnother had his eyes dug out, and his limbs cut away bit by bit, and was forced to live a long while, or rather to die a long while, in such torture.  Some celebrated cities were put up to auction, like farms; and one was collectively condemned to slaughter, just as an individual criminal would be condemned to deathThese things were done in peace when the war was over, not that victory might be more speedily obtained, but that, after being obtained, it might not be thought lightly of.  Peace vied with war in cruelty, and surpassed it:  for while war overthrew armed hosts, peace slew the defenceless.  War gave liberty to him who was attacked, to strike if he could; peace granted to the survivors not life, but an unresisting death.
+
||<div id="c26"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXVI] Quae cum ita sint, cum palam aperteque turpitudines crudelitatibus mixtae, opprobria numinum et crimina, sive prodita sive conficta, ipsis exposcentibus et nisi fieret irascentibus etiam certis et statutis sollemnitatibus consecrata illis et dicata claruerint atque ad omnium oculos, ut imitanda proponerentur, spectanda processerint: quid est, quod idem ipsi daemones, qui se huiusce modi voluptatibus inmundos esse spiritus confitentur, qui suis flagitiis et facinoribus, sive indicatis sive simulatis, eorumque sibi celebratione petita ab inpudentibus, extorta a pudentibus auctores se vitae scelestae inmundaeque testantur, perhibentur tamen in adytis suis secretisque penetralibus dare quaedam bona praecepta de moribus quibusdam velut electis sacratis suis? Quod si ita est, hoc ipso callidior advertenda est et conuincenda malitia spirituum noxiorum. Tanta enim vis est probitatis et castitatis, ut omnis vel paene omnis eius laude moveatur humana natura, nec usque adeo sit turpitudine vitiosa, ut totum sensum honestatis amiserit. Proinde malignitas daemonum, nisi alicubi se, quem ad modum scriptum in nostris litteris novimus, transfjguret in angelos lucis, non implet negotium deceptionis. Foris itaque populis celeberrimo strepitu impietas impura circumsonat, et intus paucis castitas simulata vix sonat; praebentur propatula pudendis et secreta laudandis; decus latet et dedecus patet; quod malum geritur omnes conuocat spectatores, quod bonum dicitur vix aliquos invenit auditores, tamquam honesta erubescenda sint et inhonesta glorianda. Sed ubi hoc nisi in daemonum templis? ubi nisi in fallaciae diversoriis? Illud enim fit, ut honestiores, qui pauci sunt, capiantur; hoc autem, ne plures, qui sunt turpissimi, corrigantur. Vbi et quando sacrati Caelestis audiebant castitatis praecepta, nescimus; ante ipsum tamen deIubrum, ubi simulacrum illud locatum conspiciebamus, universi undique confluentes et ubi quisque poterat stantes ludos qui agebantur intentissime spectabamus, intuentes alternante conspectu hinc meretriciam pompam, illinc virginem deam; illam suppliciter adorari, ante illam turpia celebrari; non ibi pudibundos mimos, nullam verecundiorem scaenicam vidimus; cuncta obscenitatis implebantur officia. Sciebatur virginali numini quid placeret, et exhibebatur quod de templo domum matrona doJctior reportaret. Nonnullae pudentiores avertebant faciem aIu impuris motibus scaenicorum et artem flagitii furtiva intentione discebant. Hominibus namque verecundabantur, ne auderent impudicos gestus ore libero cernere; sed multo minus audebant sacra eius, quam venerabantur, casto corde damnare. Hoc tamen palam discendum praebebatur in templo, ad quod perpetrandum saltem secretum quaerebatur in domo, mirante nimium, si ullus ibi erat, pudore mortalium, quod humana flagitia non libere homines committerent, quae apud deos etiam religiose discerent iratos habituri, nisi etiam exhibere curarent. Quis enim alius spiritus occulto instinctu nequissimas agitans mentes et instat faciendis adulteriis et pascitur factis, nisi qui etiam sacris talibus oblectatur, constituens in templis simulacra daemonum, amans in ludis simulacra vitiorum, susurrans in occulto verba iustitiae ad decipiendos etiam paucos bonos, equentans in aperto inuitamenta nequitiae ad possidendos innumerabiles malos? ||chapter 26. Seeing that this is so,-seeing that the filthy and cruel deeds, the disgraceful and criminal actions of the gods, whether real or feigned, were at their own request published, and were consecrated, and dedicated in their honor as sacred and stated solemnities; seeing they vowed vengeance on those who refused to exhibit them to the eyes of all, that they might be proposed as deeds worthy of imitation, why is it that these same demons, who by taking pleasure in such obscenities, acknowledge themselves to be unclean spirits, and by delighting in their own villanies and iniquities, real or imaginary, and by requesting from the immodest, and extorting from the modest, the celebration of these licentious acts, proclaim themselves instigators to a criminal and lewd life;-why, I ask, are they represented as giving some good moral precepts to a few of their own elect, initiated in the secrecy of their shrines?  If it be so, this very thing only serves further to demonstrate the malicious craft of these pestilent spiritsFor so great is the influence of probity and chastity, that all men, or almost all men, are moved by the praise of these virtues; nor is any man so depraved by vice, but he has some feeling of honor left in him.  So that, unless the devil sometimes transformed himself, as Scripture says, into an angel of light, 2 Corinthians 11:14 he could not compass his deceitful purposeAccordingly, in public, a bold impurity fills the ear of the people with noisy clamor; in private, a feigned chastity speaks in scarce audible whispers to a few:  an open stage is provided for shameful things, but on the praiseworthy the curtain falls:  grace hides disgrace flaunts:  a wicked deed draws an overflowing house, a virtuous speech finds scarce a hearer, as though purity were to be blushed at, impurity boasted of.  Where else can such confusion reign, but in devils' temples?  Where, but in the haunts of deceit?  For the secret precepts are given as a sop to the virtuous, who are few in number; the wicked examples are exhibited to encourage the vicious, who are countless.Where and when those initiated in the mysteries of C_S lestis received any good instructions, we know not.  What we do know is, that before her shrine, in which her image is set, and amidst a vast crowd gathering from all quarters, and standing closely packed together, we were intensely interested spectators of the games which were going on, and saw, as we pleased to turn the eye, on this side a grand display of harlots, on the other the virgin goddess; we saw this virgin worshipped with prayer and with obscene ritesThere we saw no shame-faced mimes, no actress over-burdened with modesty; all that the obscene rites demanded was fully complied with.  We were plainly shown what was pleasing to the virgin deity, and the matron who witnessed the spectacle returned home from the temple a wiser womanSome, indeed, of the more prudent women turned their faces from the immodest movements of the players, and learned the art of wickedness by a furtive regard.  For they were restrained, by the modest demeanor due to men, from looking boldly at the immodest gestures; but much more were they restrained from condemning with chaste heart the sacred rites of her whom they adoredAnd yet this licentiousness-which, if practised in one's home, could only be done there in secret-was practised as a public lesson in the temple; and if any modesty remained in men, it was occupied in marvelling that wickedness which men could not unrestrainedly commit should be part of the religious teaching of the gods, and that to omit its exhibition should incur the anger of the godsWhat spirit can that be, which by a hidden inspiration stirs men's corruption, and goads them to adultery, and feeds on the full-fledged iniquity, unless it be the same that finds pleasure in such religious ceremonies, sets in the temples images of devils, and loves to see in play the images of vices; that whispers in secret some righteous sayings to deceive the few who are good, and scatters in public invitations to profligacy, to gain possession of the millions who are wicked?
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c29"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXIX] Quae rabies exterarum gentium, quae saevitia barbarorum huic de civibus victoriae civium comparari potest? Quid Roma funestius taetrius amariusque vidit, utrum olim Gallorum et paulo ante Gothorum inruptionem an Marii et Sullae aliorumque in eorum partibus virorum clarissimorum tamquam suorum luminum in sua membra ferocitatem? Galli quidem trucidaverunt senatum, quidquid eius in Vrbe tota praeter arcem Capitolinam, quae sola utcumque defensa est, reperire potuerunt; sed in illo colle constitutis auro vitam saltem vendiderunt, quam etsi ferro rapere non possent, possent tamen obsidione consumere: Gothi vero tam multis senatoribus pepercerunt, ut magis mirum sit quod aliquos peremerunt. At vero Sulla vivo adhuc Mario ipsum Capitolium, quod a Gallis tutum fuit, ad decernendas caedes victor insedit, et cum fuga Marius lapsus esset ferocior cruentiorque rediturus, iste in Capitolio per senatus etiam consultum multos vita rebusque privavit: Marianis autem partibus Sulla absente quid sanctum cui parcerent fuit, quando Mucio civi senatori pontifici aram ipsam, ubi erant ut aiunt fata Romana, miseris ambienti amplexibus non pepercerunt? Sullana porro tabula illa postrema, ut omittamus alias innumerabiles mortes, plures iugulavit senatores, quam Gothi vel spoliare potuerunt.  ||What fury of foreign nations, what barbarian ferocity, can compare with this victory of citizens over citizens? Which was more disastrous, more hideous, more bitter to Rome:  the recent Gothic and the old Gallic invasion, or the cruelty displayed by Marius and Sylla and their partisans against men who were members of the same body as themselves?  The Gauls, indeed, massacred all the senators they found in any part of the city except the Capitol, which alone was defended; but they at least sold life to those who were in the Capitol, though they might have starved them out if they could not have stormed itThe Goths, again, spared so many senators, that it is the more surprising that they killed any.  But Sylla, while Marius was still living, established himself as conqueror in the Capitol, which the Gauls had not violated, and thence issued his death-warrants; and when Marius had escaped by flight, though destined to return more fierce and bloodthirsty than ever, Sylla issued from the Capitol even decrees of the senate for the slaughter and confiscation of the property of many citizensThen, when Sylla left, what did the Marian faction hold sacred or spare, when they gave no quarter even to Mucius, a citizen, a senator, a pontiff, and though clasping in piteous embrace the very altar in which, they say, reside the destinies of Rome?  And that final proscription list of Sylla's, not to mention countless other massacres, despatched more senators than the Goths could even plunder.  
+
||<div id="c27"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXVII] Vir gravis et philosophaster Tullius aedilis futurus clamat in auribus civitatis, inter cetera sui magistratus officia sibi Floram matrem ludorum celebritate placandam; qui ludi tanto deuotius, quanto turpius celebrari solent. Dicit alio loco iam consul in extremis periculis civitatis, et ludos per decem dies factos, neque rem ullam quae ad placandos deos pertineret praetermissam; quasi non satius erat tales deos inritare temperantia quam placare luxuria, et eos honestate etiam ad inimicitias prouocare quam tanta deformitate lenire. Neque enim gravius fuerant quamlibet crudelissima inmanitate nocituri homines, propter quos placabantur, quam nocebant ipsi, cum vitiositate foedissima placarentur. Quando quidem ut averteretur quod metuebatur ab hoste in corporibus, eo modo dii conciliabantur, quo virtus debellaretur in mentibus, qui non opponerentur defensores oppugnatoribus moenium, nisi prius fierent expugnatores morum bonorum. Hanc talium numinum placation em petulantissimam inpurissimam inpudentissimam nequissimam inmundissimam, cuius actores laudanda Romanae virtutis indoles honore privavit tribu movit, agnovit turpes fecit infames, hanc, inquam, pudendam veraeque religioni aversandam et detestandam talium numinum placationem, fabulas in deos inlecebrosa atque criminosas, haec ignominiosa deorum vel scelerate turpiterque facta vel sceleratius turpiusque conficta oculis et auribus publicis civitas tota discebat, haec commissa numinibus placere cernebat, et ideo non solum illis exhibenda, sed sibi quoque imitanda credebat, non illud nescio quid velut bonum et honestum, quod tam paucis et tam occulte dicebatur (si tamen dicebatur), ut magis ne innotesceret, quam ne non fieret, timeretur.  ||chapter 27. Cicero, a weighty man, and a philosopher in his way, when about to be made edile, wished the citizens to understand that, among the other duties of his magistracy, he must propitiate Flora by the celebration of games.  And these games are reckoned devout in proportion to their lewdness. In another place, and when he was now consul, and the state in great peril, he says that games had been celebrated for ten days together, and that nothing had been omitted which could pacify the gods:  as if it had not been more satisfactory to irritate the gods by temperance, than to pacify them by debauchery; and to provoke their hate by honest living, than soothe it by such unseemly grossness.  For no matter how cruel was the ferocity of those men who were threatening the state, and on whose account the gods were being propitiated, it could not have been more hurtful than the alliance of gods who were won with the foulest vices.  To avert the danger which threatened men's bodies, the gods were conciliated in a fashion that drove virtue from their spirits; and the gods did not enrol themselves as defenders of the battlements against the besiegers, until they had first stormed and sacked the morality of the citizensThis propitiation of such divinities,-a propitiation so wanton, so impure, so immodest, so wicked, so filthy, whose actors the innate and praiseworthy virtue of the Romans disabled from civic honors, erased from their tribe, recognized as polluted and made infamous;-this propitiation, I say, so foul, so detestable, and alien from every religious feeling, these fabulous and ensnaring accounts of the criminal actions of the gods, these scandalous actions which they either shamefully and wickedly committed, or more shamefully and wickedly feigned, all this the whole city learned in public both by the words and gestures of the actorsThey saw that the gods delighted in the commission of these things, and therefore believed that they wished them not only to be exhibited to them, but to be imitated by themselves.  But as for that good and honest instruction which they speak of, it was given in such secrecy, and to so few (if indeed given at all), that they seemed rather to fear it might be divulged, than that it might not be practised.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c30"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXX] Quia igitur fronte quo corde, qua inpudentia qua insipientia vel potius amentia illa diis suis non inputant, et haec nostro inputant Christo? Crudelia bella civilia, omnibus bellis hostilibus, auctoribus etiam eorum fatentibus, amariora, quibus illa res publica nec adflicta, sed omnino perdita iudicata est, longe ante adventum Christi exorta sunt ,et sceleratarum concatenatione causarum a bello Mariano atque Sullano ad bella Sertorii et Catilinae (quorum a Sulla fuerat ille proscriptus, ile nutritus), inde ad Lepidi et Catuli bellum (quorum alter gesta Sullana rescindere, alter defendere cupiebat), inde ad Pompei et Caesaris (quorum Pompeius sectator Sullae fuerat eiusque potentiam vel aequaverat vel iam etiam superaverat; Caesar autem Pompei potentiam non ferebat, sed quia non habebat, quam tamen illo victo interfectoque transcendit), hinc ad alium Caesarem, qui post Augustus appellatus est, peruenerunt, quo imperante natus est Christus. Nam et ipse Augustus cum multis gessit bella civilia, et in eis etiam multi clarissimi viri perierunt, inter quos et Cicero, disertus ille artifex regendae rei publicae. Pompei quippe victorem Gaium Caesarem, qui victoriam civilem clementer exercuit suisque adversariis vitam dignitatemque donavit, tamquam regni adpetitorem quorundam nobilium coniuratio senatorum velut pro rei publicae libertate in ipsa curia trucidavit. Huius deinde potentiam multum moribus dispar vitiisque omnibus inquinatus atque corruptus adfectare videbatur Antonius, cui uehementer pro eadem illa velut patriae libertate Cicero resistebat. Tunc emerserat mirabilis indolis adulescens ille alius Caesar, illius Gai Caesaris filius adoptivus, qui, ut dixi, postea est appellatus Augustus. Huic adulescenti Caesari, ut eius potentia contra Antonium nutriretur, Cicero favebat, sperans eum depulsa et oppressa Antoniii dominatione instauraturum rei publicae libertatem, usque adeo caecus atque inprovidus futurorum, ut ille ipse ivvenis, cuius dignitatem ac potestatem fovebat, et eundem Ciceronem occidendum Antonio quadam quasi concordiae pactione permitteret et ipsam libertatem rei publicae, pro qua multum ille clamaverat, dicioni propriae subiugaret.  ||With what effrontery, then, with what assurance, with what impudence, with what folly, or rather insanity, do they refuse to impute these disasters to their own gods, and impute the present to our Christ!  These bloody civil wars, more distressing, by the avowal of their own historians, than any foreign wars, and which were pronounced to be not merely calamitous, but absolutely ruinous to the republic, began long before the coming of Christ, and gave birth to one another; so that a concatenation of unjustifiable causes led from the wars of Marius and Sylla to those of Sertorius and Cataline, of whom the one was proscribed, the other brought up by Sylla; from this to the war of Lepidus and Catulus, of whom the one wished to rescind, the other to defend the acts of Sylla; from this to the war of Pompey and Cжsar, of whom Pompey had been a partisan of Sylla, whose power he equalled or even surpassed, while Cжsar condemned Pompey's power because it was not his own, and yet exceeded it when Pompey was defeated and slainFrom him the chain of civil wars extended to the second Cжsar, afterwards called Augustus, and in whose reign Christ was born.  For even Augustus himself waged many civil wars; and in these wars many of the foremost men perished, among them that skilful manipulator of the republic, Cicero.  Caius [Julius] Cжsar, when he had conquered Pompey, though he used his victory with clemency, and granted to men of the opposite faction both life and honors, was suspected of aiming at royalty, and was assassinated in the curia by a party of noble senators, who had conspired to defend the liberty of the republic.  His power was then coveted by Antony, a man of very different character, polluted and debased by every kind of vice, who was strenuously resisted by Cicero on the same plea of defending the liberty of the republicAt this juncture that other Cжsar, the adopted son of Caius, and afterwards, as I said, known by the name of Augustus, had made his dйbut as a young man of remarkable geniusThis youthful Cжsar was favored by Cicero, in order that his influence might counteract that of Antony; for he hoped that Cжsar would overthrow and blast the power of Antony, and establish a free state,-so blind and unaware of the future was he:  for that very young man, whose advancement and influence he was fostering, allowed Cicero to be killed as the seal of an alliance with Antony, and subjected to his own rule the very liberty of the republic in defence of which he had made so many orations.  
+
||<div id="c28"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXVIII] Ab istarum inmundissimarum potestatum tartareo iugo et societate poenali erui per Christi nomen homines et in lucem saluberrimae pietatis ab illa perniciosissimae impietatis nocte transferri queruntur et murmurant iniqui et ingrati et illo nefario spiritu altius obstrictiusque possessi, quia populi confluunt ad ecclesiam casta celebritate, honesta utriusque sexus discretione, ubi audiant quam bene hic ad tempus vivere debeant, ut post hanc vitam beate semperque vivere mereantur, ubi sancta scriptura iustitiaeque doctrina de superiore loco in conspectu omnium personante et qui faciunt audiant ad praemium, et qui non faciunt audiant ad iudicium. Quo etsi veniunt quidam talium praeceptorum inrisores, omnis eorum petulantia aut repentina mutatione deponitur, aut timore vel pudore comprimitur. Nihil enim eis turpe ac flagitiosum spectandum imitandumque proponitur, ubi veri Dei aut praecepta insinuantur aut miracula narrantur, aut dona laudantur aut beneficia p ostulantur.  ||chapter 28. They, then, are but abandoned and ungrateful wretches, in deep and fast bondage to that malign spirit, who complain and murmur that men are rescued by the name of Christ from the hellish thraldom of these unclean spirits, and from a participation in their punishment, and are brought out of the night of pestilential ungodliness into the light of most healthful pietyOnly such men could murmur that the masses flock to the churches and their chaste acts of worship, where a seemly separation of the sexes is observed; where they learn how they may so spend this earthly life, as to merit a blessed eternity hereafter; where Holy Scripture and instruction in righteousness are proclaimed from a raised platform in presence of all, that both they who do the word may hear to their salvation, and they who do it not may hear to judgmentAnd though some enter who scoff at such precepts, all their petulance is either quenched by a sudden change, or is restrained through fear or shameFor no filthy and wicked action is there set forth to be gazed at or to be imitated; but either the precepts of the true God are recommended, His miracles narrated, His gifts praised, or His benefits implored.  
 
|- valign = top
 
|- valign = top
||<div id="c31"><b>BOOK III</b> [XXXI] Deos suos accusent de tantis malis, qui Christo nostro ingrati sunt de tantis bonis. Certe quando illa mala fiebant, calebant arae numinum Sabaeo thure sertisque recentibus halabant, clarebant sacerdotia, fana renidebant, sacrificabatur ludebatur furebatur in templis, quando passim tantu civium sanguis a civibus non modo in ceteris locis, verum etiam inter ipsa deorum altaria fundebatur. Non elegit templum, quo confugeret Tullius, quia frustra elegerat Mucius. Hi vero qui multo indignius insultant temporibus Christianis, aut ad loca Christo dicatissima confugerunt, aut illuc eos ut viverent etiam ipsi barbari deduxerunt. Illud scio et hoc mecum, quisquis sine studio partium iudicat, facillime agnoscit (ut omittam cetera quae multa commemoravi et alia multo plura quae commemorae longum putavi): si humanum genus ante bella Punica Christianam reciperet disciplinam et consequeretur rerum tanta uastatio, quanta illis bellis Europam Africamque contrivit, nullus talium, quales nunc patimur, nisi Christianae religioni mala illa tribuisset. Multo autem minus eorum voces tolerarentur, quantum adtinet ad Romanos, si Christianae religionis receptionem et diffamationem vel inruptio <illa> Gallorum vel Tiberini fluminis igniumque illa depopulatio vel, quod cuncta mala praecedit, bella illa civilia sequerentur. Mala etiam alia, quae usque adeo incredibiliter acciderunt, ut inter prodigia numerarentur, si Christianis temporibus accidissent, quibus ea nisi Christianis hominibus tamquam crimina obicerent? Omitto quippe illa, quae magis fuerunt mira quam noxia, boves locutos, infantes nondum natos de uteris matrum quaedam verba clamasse, volasse serpentes, feminas et gallinas et homines in masculinum secum fuisse conversas et cetera huius modi, quae in eorum libris non fabulosis, sed historicis, seu vera seu falsa ssint, non inferunt hominibus perniciem, sed stuporem. Sed cum pluit terra, cum pluit creta, cum pluit lapidibus (non ut grando appellari solet hoc nomine, sed omnino lapidibus), haec profecto etiam graviter laedere potuerunt. Legimus apud eos Aetnaeis ignibus ab ipso montis vertice usque ad litus proximum decurrentibus ita mare ferbuisse, ut rupes urerentur, ut pices navium soluerentur. Hoc utique non leviter noxium fuit, quamuis incredibiliter mirum. Eodem rursus aestu ignium tanta vi favillae scripserunt oppletam esse Siciliam, ut Catinensis urbis tecta obruta et pressa dirueret; qua calamitate permoti misericorditer eiusdem anni tributum ei relaxavere Romani. Lucustarum etiam in Africa multitudinem prodigii similem fuisse, cum iam esset populi Romani provincia, litteris mandaverunt; consumptis enim fructibus foliisque lignorum ingenti atque inaestimabili nube in mare dicunt esse deiectam; qua mortua redditaque litoribus atque hinc aere corrupto tantam ortam pestilentiam, ut in solo regno Masinissae octingenta hominum milia perisse referantur et multo amplius in terris litoribus proximis. Tunc Vticae ex triginta milibus iuniorum, quae ibi erant, decem milia remansisse confirmant. Talis itaque uanitas, qualem ferimus eique respondere compellimur, quid horum non Christianae religioni tribueret, si temporibus Christianis videret? Et tamen diis suis ista non tribuunt, quorum cultum ideo requirunt, ne ista vel minora patiantur, cum ea maiora pertulerint a quibus antea colebantur.  ||Let those who have no gratitude to Christ for His great benefits, blame their own gods for these heavy disasters.  For certainly when these occurred the altars of the gods were kept blazing, and there rose the mingled fragrance of "Sabжan incense and fresh garlands;" the priests were clothed with honor, the shrines were maintained in splendor; sacrifices, games, sacred ecstasies, were common in the temples; while the blood of the citizens was being so freely shed, not only in remote places, but among the very altars of the godsCicero did not choose to seek sanctuary in a temple, because Mucius had sought it there in vain. But they who most unpardonably calumniate this Christian era, are the very men who either themselves fled for asylum to the places specially dedicated to Christ, or were led there by the barbarians that they might be safe.  In short, not to recapitulate the many instances I have cited, and not to add to their number others which it were tedious to enumerate, this one thing I am persuaded of, and this every impartial judgment will readily acknowledge, that if the human race had received Christianity before the Punic wars, and if the same desolating calamities which these wars brought upon Europe and Africa had followed the introduction of Christianity, there is no one of those who now accuse us who would not have attributed them to our religionHow intolerable would their accusations have been, at least so far as the Romans are concerned, if the Christian religion had been received and diffused prior to the invasion of the Gauls, or to the ruinous floods and fires which desolated Rome, or to those most calamitous of all events, the civil wars! And those other disasters, which were of so strange a nature that they were reckoned prodigies, had they happened since the Christian era, to whom but to the Christians would they have imputed these as crimes?  I do not speak of those things which were rather surprising than hurtful,-oxen speaking, unborn infants articulating some words in their mothers' wombs, serpents flying, hens and women being changed into the other sex; and other similar prodigies which, whether true or false, are recorded not in their imaginative, but in their historical works, and which do not injure, but only astonish menBut when it rained earth, when it rained chalk, when it rained stones-not hailstones, but real stones-this certainly was calculated to do serious damage.  We have read in their books that the fires of Etna, pouring down from the top of the mountain to the neighboring shore, caused the sea to boil, so that rocks were burnt up, and the pitch of ships began to run,-a phenomenon incredibly surprising, but at the same time no less hurtfulBy the same violent heat, they relate that on another occasion Sicily was filled with cinders, so that the houses of the city Catina were destroyed and buried under them,-a calamity which moved the Romans to pity them, and remit their tribute for that yearOne may also read that Africa, which had by that time become a province of Rome, was visited by a prodigious multitude of locusts, which, after consuming the fruit and foliage of the trees, were driven into the sea in one vast and measureless cloud; so that when they were drowned and cast upon the shore the air was polluted, and so serious a pestilence produced that in the kingdom of Masinissa alone they say there perished 800,000 persons, besides a much greater number in the neighboring districts.  At Utica they assure us that, of 30,000 soldiers then garrisoning it, there survived only tenYet which of these disasters, suppose they happened now, would not be attributed to the Christian religion by those who thus thoughtlessly accuse us, and whom we are compelled to answer?  And yet to their own gods they attribute none of these things, though they worship them for the sake of escaping lesser calamities of the same kind, and do not reflect that they who formerly worshipped them were not preserved from these serious disasters.  
+
||<div id="c29"><b>BOOK II</b> [XXIX] Haec potius concupisce, o indoles Romana laudabilis, o progenies Regulorum Scaeuolarum, Scipionum Fabriciorum; haec potius concupisce, haec ab illa turpissima uanitate et fallacissima daemonum malignitate discerne. Si quid in te laudabile naturaliter eminet, non nisi vera pietate purgatur atque perficitur, impietate autem disperditur et punitur. Nunc iam elige quid sequaris, ut non in te, sed in Deo vero sine ullo errore lauderis. Tunc enim tibi gloria popularis adfuit, sed occulto iudicio divinae providentiae vera religio quam eligeres defuit. Expergiscere, dies est, sicut experrecta es in quibusdam, de quorum virtute perfecta et pro fide vera etiam passionibus gloriamur, qui usquequaque adversus potestates inimicissimas confligentes easque fortiter moriendo vincentes m sanguine nobis hanc patriam peperere suo w. Ad quam patriam te inuitamus et exhortamur, ut eius adiciaris numero civium, cuius quodam modo asylum est vera remissio peccatorum. Non audias degeneres tuos Christo Christianisue detrahentes et accusantes velut tempora mala, cum quaerant tempora, quibus non sit quieta vita, sed potius secura nequitia. Haec tibi numquam nec pro terrena patria placuerunt. Nunc iam caelestem arripe, pro qua minimum laborabis, et in ea veraciter semperque regnabis. Illic enim tibi non Vestalis focus, non lapis Capitolinus, sed Deus unus et verus nec metas rerum nec tempora ponit, Imperium sine fine dabit. Noli deos falsos fallacesque requirere; abice potius atque contemne in veram emicans libertatem. Non sunt dii, maligni sunt spiritus, quibus aeterna tua felicitas poena est. Non tam luno Troianis, a quibus carnalem originem ducis, arces videtur inuidisse Romanas, quam isti daemones, quos adhuc deos putas, omni generi hominum sedes inuident sempiternas. Et tu ipsa non parua ex parte de talibus spiritibus iudicasti, quando ludis eos placasti, et per quos homines eosdem Iudos fecisti, infames esse voluisti. Patere asseri libertatem tuam adversus inmundos spiritus, qui tuis ceruicibus inposuerant sacrandam sibi et celebrandam ignominiam suam. Actores criminum divinorum removisti ab honoribus tuis: supplica Deo vero, ut a te removeat illos deos, qui delectantur criminibus suis, seu veris, quod ignominiosissimum est, seu falsis, quod malitiosissimum <est>. Bene, quod tua sponte histrionibus et scaenicis societatem civitatis patere noluisti; evigila plenius! Nullo modo his artibus placatur divina maiestas, quibus humana dignitas inquinatur. Quo igitur pacto deos, qui talibus delectantur obsequiis, haberi putas in numero sanctarum caelestium potestatum, cum homines, per quos eadem aguntur obsequia, non putasti habendos in numero qualiumcumque civium Romanorum? Incomparabiliter superna est civitas clarior, ubi victoria veritas, ubi dignitas saanctitas, ubi pax felicitas, ubi vita aeternitas. Multo minus habetin sua societate tales deos, si tu in tua tales homines habere erubuisti. Proinde si ad beatam pervenire desideras civitatem, devita daemonum societatem. Indigne ab honestis coluntur, qui per turpes placantur. Sic isti a tua pietate removeantur purgatione Christiana, quo modo illi a tua dignitate remoti sunt notatione censoria. De bonis autem carnalibus, quibus solis mali perfrui volunt, et de malis carnalibus, quae sola perpeti nolunt, quod neque in his habeant quam putantur habere isti daemones potestatem (quamquam si haberent, deberemus potius etiam ista contemnere, quam propter ista illos colere et eos colendo ad illa, quae nobis inuident, pervenire non posse), tamen nec in istis eos hoc valere, quod hi putant, qui propter haec eos coli oportere contendunt, deinceps videbimus, ut hic sit huius voluminis.  ||chapter 29. This, rather, is the religion worthy of your desires, O admirable Roman race,-the progeny of your Scжvolas and Scipios, of Regulus, and of Fabricius.  This rather covet, this distinguish from that foul vanity and crafty malice of the devils.  If there is in your nature any eminent virtue, only by true piety is it purged and perfected, while by impiety it is wrecked and punished.  Choose now what you will pursue, that your praise may be not in yourself, but in the true God, in whom is no error.  For of popular glory you have had your share; but by the secret providence of God, the true religion was not offered to your choiceAwake, it is now day; as you have already awaked in the persons of some in whose perfect virtue and sufferings for the true faith we glory: for they, contending on all sides with hostile powers, and conquering them all by bravely dying, have purchased for us this country of ours with their blood; to which country we invite you, and exhort you to add yourselves to the number of the citizens of this city, which also has a sanctuary of its own in the true remission of sins. Do not listen to those degenerate sons of yours who slander Christ and Christians, and impute to them these disastrous times, though they desire times in which they may enjoy rather impunity for their wickedness than a peaceful life.  Such has never been Rome's ambition even in regard to her earthly country.  Lay hold now on the celestial country, which is easily won, and in which you will reign truly and for ever.  For there shall you find no vestal fire, no Capitoline stone, but the one true God."No date, no goal will here ordain:But grant an endless, boundless reign."No longer, then, follow after false and deceitful gods; abjure them rather, and despise them, bursting forth into true liberty.  Gods they are not, but malignant spirits, to whom your eternal happiness will be a sore punishmentJuno, from whom you deduce your origin according to the flesh, did not so bitterly grudge Rome's citadels to the Trojans, as these devils whom yet ye repute gods, grudge an everlasting seat to the race of mankind. And you yourself hast in no wavering voice passed judgment on them, when you pacified them with games, and yet accounted as infamous the men by whom the plays were acted.  Suffer us, then, to assert your freedom against the unclean spirits who had imposed on your neck the yoke of celebrating their own shame and filthiness.  The actors of these divine crimes you have removed from offices of honor; supplicate the true God, that He may remove from you those gods who delight in their crimes,-a most disgraceful thing if the crimes are really theirs, and a most malicious invention if the crimes are feigned.  Well done, in that you have spontaneously banished from the number of your citizens all actors and players.  Awake more fully:  the majesty of God cannot be propitiated by that which defiles the dignity of manHow, then, can you believe that gods who take pleasure in such lewd plays, belong to the number of the holy powers of heaven, when the men by whom these plays are acted are by yourselves refused admission into the number of Roman citizens even of the lowest grade?  Incomparably more glorious than Rome, is that heavenly city in which for victory you have truth; for dignity, holiness; for peace, felicity; for life, eternity.  Much less does it admit into its society such gods, if you blush to admit such men into yoursWherefore, if you would attain to the blessed city, shun the society of devilsThey who are propitiated by deeds of shame, are unworthy of the worship of right-hearted men.  Let these, then, be obliterated from your worship by the cleansing of the Christian religion, as those men were blotted from your citizenship by the censor's mark.But, so far as regards carnal benefits, which are the only blessings the wicked desire to enjoy, and carnal miseries, which alone they shrink from enduring, we will show in the following book that the demons have not the power they are supposed to have; and although they had it, we ought rather on that account to despise these blessings, than for the sake of them to worship those gods, and by worshipping them to miss the attainment of these blessings they grudge usBut that they have not even this power which is ascribed to them by those who worship them for the sake of temporal advantages, this, I say, I will prove in the following book; so let us here close the present argument.  
  
 
|}
 
|}
  
[[Category:Logic Museum Parallel Texts]]
+
[[Category: Logic Museum Parallel Texts]]

Revision as of 11:47, 24 October 2009


ON THE CITY OF GOD, BOOK II


Index

Translated by Marcus Dods

  • Introduction
  • Chapter 1 Of the Limits Which Must Be Put to the Necessity of Replying to an Adversary
  • Chapter 2 Recapitulation of the Contents of the First Book
  • Chapter 3 That We Need Only to Read History in Order to See What Calamities the Romans Suffered Before the Religion of Christ Began to Compete with the Worship of the Gods
  • Chapter 4 That the Worshippers of the Gods Never Received from Them Any Healthy Moral Precepts, and that in Celebrating Their Worship All Sorts of Impurities Were Practiced
  • Chapter 5 Of the Obscenities Practiced in Honor of the Mother of the Gods
  • Chapter 6 That the Gods of the Pagans Never Inculcated Holiness of Life
  • Chapter 7 That the Suggestions of Philosophers are Precluded from Having Any Moral Effect, Because They Have Not the Authority Which Belongs to Divine Instruction, and Because Man's Natural Bias to Evil Induces Him Rather to Follow the Examples of the Gods Than to Obey the Precepts of Men
  • Chapter 8 That the Theatrical Exhibitions Publishing the Shameful Actions of the Gods, Propitiated Rather Than Offended Them
  • Chapter 9 That the Poetical License Which the Greeks, in Obedience to Their Gods, Allowed, Was Restrained by the Ancient Romans
  • Chapter 10 That the Devils, in Suffering Either False or True Crimes to Be Laid to Their Charge, Meant to Do Men a Mischief
  • Chapter 11 That the Greeks Admitted Players to Offices of State, on the Ground that Men Who Pleased the Gods Should Not Be Contemptuously Treated by Their Fellows
  • Chapter 12 That the Romans, by Refusing to the Poets the Same License in Respect of Men Which They Allowed Them in the Case of the Gods, Showed a More Delicate Sensitiveness Regarding Themselves than Regarding the Gods
  • Chapter 13 That the Romans Should Have Understood that Gods Who Desired to Be Worshipped in Licentious Entertainments Were Unworthy of Divine Honor
  • Chapter 14 That Plato, Who Excluded Poets from a Well-Ordered City, Was Better Than These Gods Who Desire to Be Honoured by Theatrical Plays
  • Chapter 15 That It Was Vanity, Not Reason, Which Created Some of the Roman Gods
  • Chapter 16 That If the Gods Had Really Possessed Any Regard for Righteousness, the Romans Should Have Received Good Laws from Them, Instead of Having to Borrow Them from Other Nations
  • Chapter 17 Of the Rape of the Sabine Women, and Other Iniquities Perpetrated in Rome's Palmiest Days
  • Chapter 18 What the History of Sallust Reveals Regarding the Life of the Romans, Either When Straitened by Anxiety or Relaxed in Security
  • Chapter 19 Of the Corruption Which Had Grown Upon the Roman Republic Before Christ Abolished the Worship of the Gods
  • Chapter 20 Of the Kind of Happiness and Life Truly Delighted in by Those Who Inveigh Against the Christian Religion
  • Chapter 21 Cicero's Opinion of the Roman Republic
  • Chapter 22 That the Roman Gods Never Took Any Steps to Prevent the Republic from Being Ruined by Immorality
  • Chapter 23 That the Vicissitudes of This Life are Dependent Not on the Favor or Hostility of Demons, But on the Will of the True God
  • Chapter 24 Of the Deeds of Sylla, in Which the Demons Boasted that He Had Their Help
  • Chapter 25 How Powerfully the Evil Spirits Incite Men to Wicked Actions, by Giving Them the Quasi-Divine Authority of Their Example
  • Chapter 26 That the Demons Gave in Secret Certain Obscure Instructions in Morals, While in Public Their Own Solemnities Inculcated All Wickedness
  • Chapter 27 That the Obscenities of Those Plays Which the Romans Consecrated in Order to Propitiate Their Gods, Contributed Largely to the Overthrow of Public Order
  • Chapter 28 That the Christian Religion is Health-Giving
  • Chapter 29 An Exhortation to the Romans to Renounce Paganism


Latin Latin
BOOK II []
The City of God (Book II) Argument-In this book Augustin reviews those calamities which the Romans suffered before the time of Christ, and while the worship of the false gods was universally practised; and demonstrates that, far from being preserved from misfortune by the gods, the Romans have been by them overwhelmed with the only, or at least the greatest, of all calamities-the corruption of manners, and the vices of the soul.
BOOK II [I] Si rationi perspicuae veritatis infirmus humanae consuetudinis sensus non auderet obsistere, sed doctrinae salubri languorem suum tamquam medicinae subderet, donec divino adiutorio fide pietatis inpetrante sanaretur, non multo sermone opus esset ad conuincendum quemlibet uanae opinationis errorem his, qui recte sentiunt et sensa verbis sufficientibus explicant. Nunc vero quoniam ille est maior et taetrior insipientium morbus animorum, quo inrationabiles motus suos, etiam post rationem plene redditam, quanta homini ab homine debetur, sive nimia caecitate, qua nec aperta cernuntur, sive obstinatissima peruicacia, qua et ea quae cernuntur non feruntur, tamquam ipsam rationem veritatemque defendunt, fit necessitas copiosius dicendi plerumque res claras, velut eas non spectantibus intuendas, sed quodam modo tangendas palpantibus et coniventibus offeramus. Et tamen quis disceptandi finis erit et loquendi modus, si respondendum esse respondentibus semper existimemus? Nam qui vel non possunt intellegere quod dicitur, vel tam duri sunt adversitate mentis, ut, etiamsi intellexerint, non oboediant, respondent, ut scriptum est, et loquuntur iniquitatem atque infatigabiliter uani sunt. Quorum dicta contraria si totiens velimus refellere, quotiens obnixa fronte statuerint non cogitare quid dicant, dum quocumque modo nostris disputationibus contradicant, quam sit infinitum et aerumnosum et infructuosum vides. Quam ob rem nec te ipsum, &kt;mi> fili Marcelline, nec alios, quibus hic labor noster in Christi caritate utiliter ac liberaliter seruit, tales meorum scriptorum velim iudices, qui responsionem semper desiderent, cum his quae leguntur audierint aliquid contradici, ne fiant similes earum muliercularum, quas commemorat apostolus semper discentes et numquam ad veritatis scientiam pervenientes.
chapter 1. If the feeble mind of man did not presume to resist the clear evidence of truth, but yielded its infirmity to wholesome doctrines, as to a health-giving medicine, until it obtained from God, by its faith and piety, the grace needed to heal it, they who have just ideas, and express them in suitable language, would need to use no long discourse to refute the errors of empty conjecture. But this mental infirmity is now more prevalent and hurtful than ever, to such an extent that even after the truth has been as fully demonstrated as man can prove it to man, they hold for the very truth their own unreasonable fancies, either on account of their great blindness, which prevents them from seeing what is plainly set before them, or on account of their opinionative obstinacy, which prevents them from acknowledging the force of what they do see. There therefore frequently arises a necessity of speaking more fully on those points which are already clear, that we may, as it were, present them not to the eye, but even to the touch, so that they may be felt even by those who close their eyes against them. And yet to what end shall we ever bring our discussions, or what bounds can be set to our discourse, if we proceed on the principle that we must always reply to those who reply to us? For those who are either unable to understand our arguments, or are so hardened by the habit of contradiction, that though they understand they cannot yield to them, reply to us, and, as it is written, "speak hard things," and are incorrigibly vain. Now, if we were to propose to confute their objections as often as they with brazen face chose to disregard our arguments, and so often as they could by any means contradict our statements, you see how endless, and fruitless, and painful a task we should be undertaking. And therefore I do not wish my writings to be judged even by you, my son Marcellinus, nor by any of those others at whose service this work of mine is freely and in all Christian charity put, if at least you intend always to require a reply to every exception which you hear taken to what you read in it; for so you would become like those silly women of whom the apostle says that they are "always learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Timothy 3:7
BOOK II [II] Superiore itaque libro, cum de civitate Dei dicere instituissem, unde hoc universum opus illo adivuante in manus sumptum est, occurrit mihi resistendum esse primitus eis, qui haec bella, quibus mundus iste conteritur, maximeque Romanae urbis recentem a barbaris uastationem Christianae religioni tribuunt, qua prohibentur nefandis sacrificiis seruire daemonibus, cum potius hoc deberent tribuere Christo, quod propter eius nomen contra institutum moremque bellorum eis, quo confugerent, religiosa et amplissima loca barbari libera praebuerunt, atque in multis famulatum deditum Christo non solum verum, sed etiam timore confictum sic honoraverunt, ut, quod in eos belli iure fieri licuisset, inlicitum s.ibi esse iudicarent. Inde incidit quaestio, cur haec divina beneficia et ad impios ingratosque peruenerint, et cur illa itidem dura, quae hostiliter facta sunt, pios cum impiis pariter adflixerint? Quam quaestionem per multa diffusam (in omnibus enim cotidianis vel Dei muneribus vel hominum cladibus, quorum utraque bene ac male viventibus permixte atque indiscrete saepe accidunt, solet multos movere) ut pro suscepti operis necessitate dissoluerem, aliquantum inmoratus sum maxime ad consolandas sanctas feminas et pie castas, in quibus ab hoste aliquid perpetratum est, quod intulit verecundiae dolorem, etsi non abstulit pudicitiae firmitatem, ne paeniteat eas vitae, quas non est unde possit paenitere nequitiae. Deinde pauca dixi in eos, qui Christianos adversis illis rebus adfectos et praecipue pudorem humiliatarum feminarum quamuis castarum atque sanctarum proteruitate inpudentissima exagitant, cum sint nequissimi et inreuerentissimi, longe ab eis ipsis Romanis degeneres, quorum praeclara multa laudantur et litterarum memoria celebrantur, immo illorum gloriae uehementer adversi. Romam quippe partam ueterum auctamque laboribus foediorem stantem fecerant quam ruentem, quando quidem in ruina eius lapides et ligna, in istorum autem vita omnia non murorum, sed morum munimenta atque ornamenta ceciderunt, cum funestioribus eorum corda cupiditatibus quam ignibus tecta illius urbis arderent. Quibus dictis primum terminavi librum. Deinceps itaque dicere institui, quae mala civitas illa perpessa sit ab origine sua sive apud se ipsam sive in provinciis sibi iam subditis, quae omnia Christianae religioni tribuerent, si iam tunc euangelica doctrina adversus falsos et fallaces deos eorum testificatione liberrima personaret.
chapter 2. In the foregoing book, having begun to speak of the city of God, to which I have resolved, Heaven helping me, to consecrate the whole of this work, it was my first endeavor to reply to those who attribute the wars by which the world is being devastated, and especially the recent sack of Rome by the barbarians, to the religion of Christ, which prohibits the offering of abominable sacrifices to devils. I have shown that they ought rather to attribute it to Christ, that for His name's sake the barbarians, in contravention of all custom and law of war, threw open as sanctuaries the largest churches, and in many instances showed such reverence to Christ, that not only His genuine servants, but even those who in their terror feigned themselves to be so, were exempted from all those hardships which by the custom of war may lawfully be inflicted. Then out of this there arose the question, why wicked and ungrateful men were permitted to share in these benefits; and why, too, the hardships and calamities of war were inflicted on the godly as well as on the ungodly. And in giving a suitably full answer to this large question, I occupied some considerable space, partly that I might relieve the anxieties which disturb many when they observe that the blessings of God, and the common and daily human casualties, fall to the lot of bad men and good without distinction; but mainly that I might minister some consolation to those holy and chaste women who were outraged by the enemy, in such a way as to shock their modesty, though not to sully their purity, and that I might preserve them from being ashamed of life, though they have no guilt to be ashamed of. And then I briefly spoke against those who with a most shameless wantonness insult over those poor Christians who were subjected to those calamities, and especially over those broken-hearted and humiliated, though chaste and holy women; these fellows themselves being most depraved and unmanly profligates, quite degenerate from the genuine Romans, whose famous deeds are abundantly recorded in history, and everywhere celebrated, but who have found in their descendants the greatest enemies of their glory. In truth, Rome, which was founded and increased by the labors of these ancient heroes, was more shamefully ruined by their descendants, while its walls were still standing, than it is now by the razing of them. For in this ruin there fell stones and timbers; but in the ruin those profligates effected, there fell, not the mural, but the moral bulwarks and ornaments of the city, and their hearts burned with passions more destructive than the flames which consumed their houses. Thus I brought my first book to a close. And now I go on to speak of those calamities which that city itself, or its subject provinces, have suffered since its foundation; all of which they would equally have attributed to the Christian religion, if at that early period the doctrine of the gospel against their false and deceiving gods had been as largely and freely proclaimed as now.
BOOK II [III] Memento autem me ista commemorantem adhuc contra inperitos agere, ex quorum inperitia illud quoque ortum est uulgare proverbium: Pluuia defit, causa Christiani sunt. Narn qui eorum studiis liberalibus instituti amant historiam, facillime ista noverunt; sed ut nobis ineruditorum turbas infestissimas reddant, se nosse dissimulant atque hoc apud uulgus confirmare nituntur, clades, quibus per certa interualla locorum et temporum genus humanum oportet adfligi, causa accidere nominis Christiani, quod contra deos suos ingenti fama et praeclarissima celebritate per cuncta diffunditur. Recolant ergo nobiscum, antequam Christus venisset in carne, antequam eius nomen ea, cui frustra inuident, gloria populis innotesceret, quibus calamitatibus res Romanae multipliciter varieque contritae sint, et in his defendant, si possunt, deos suos, si propterea coluntur, ne ista mala patiantur cultores eorum; quorum si quid nunc passi fuerint, nobis inputanda esse contendunt. Cur enim ea, quae dicturus sum, permiserunt accidere cultoribus suis, antequam eos declaratum Christi nomen offenderet eorumque sacrificia prohiberet?
chapter 3. But remember that, in recounting these things, I have still to address myself to ignorant men; so ignorant, indeed, as to give birth to the common saying, "Drought and Christianity go hand in hand." There are indeed some among them who are thoroughly well-educated men, and have a taste for history, in which the things I speak of are open to their observation; but in order to irritate the uneducated masses against us, they feign ignorance of these events, and do what they can to make the vulgar believe that those disasters, which in certain places and at certain times uniformly befall mankind, are the result of Christianity, which is being everywhere diffused, and is possessed of a renown and brilliancy which quite eclipse their own gods. Let them then, along with us, call to mind with what various and repeated disasters the prosperity of Rome was blighted, before ever Christ had come in the flesh, and before His name had been blazoned among the nations with that glory which they vainly grudge. Let them, if they can, defend their gods in this article, since they maintain that they worship them in order to be preserved from these disasters, which they now impute to us if they suffer in the least degree. For why did these gods permit the disasters I am to speak of to fall on their worshippers before the preaching of Christ's name offended them, and put an end to their sacrifices?
BOOK II [IV] Primo ipsos mores ne pessimos haberent, quare dii eorum curare noluerunt? Deus enim verus eos, a quibus non colebatur, merito neglexit; dii autem illi, a quorum cultu se prohiberi homines ingratissimi conqueruntur, cultores suos ad bene vivendum quare nullis legibus adivuerunt? Vtique dignum erat, ut, quo modo isti illorum sacra, ita illi istorum facta curarent. Sed respondetur, quod voluntate propria quisque malus est. Quis hoc negaverit? Verum tamen pertinebat ad consultores deos vitae bonae praecepta non occultare populis cultoribus suis, sed clara praedicatione praebere, per uates etiam convenire atque arguere peccantes, palam minari poenas male agentibus, praemia recte viventibus polliceri. Quid umquam tale in deorum illorum templis prompta et eminenti voce concrepuit? Veniebamus etiam nos aliquando adulescentes ad spectacula ludibriaque sacrilegiorum, spectabamus arrepticios, audiebamus symphoniacos, ludis turpissimis, qui diis deabusque exhibebantur, oblectabamur, Caelesti virgini et Berecynthiae matri omnium, ante cuius lecticam die sollemni lauationis eius talia per publicum cantitabantur a nequissimis scaenicis, qualia, non dico matrem deorum, sed matrem qualiumcumque senatorum vel quorumlibet honestorum virorum, immo vero qualia nec matrem ipsorum scaenicorum deceret audire. Habet enim quiddam erga parentes humana verecundia, quod nec ipsa nequitia possit auferre. Illam proinde turpitudinem obscenorum dictorum atque factorum sca e nicos ipsos domi suae proludendi causa coram matribus suis agere puderet, quam per publicum agebant coram deum matre spectante atque audiente utriusque sexus frequentissima multitudine. Quae si inlecta curiositate adesse potuit circumfusa, saltem offensa castitate debuit abire confusa. Quae sunt sacrilegia, si illa sunt sacra? aut quae inquinatio, si illa lauatio? Et haec fercula appellabantur, quasi celebraretur conuivium, quo velut suis epulis inmunda daemonia pascerentur. Quis enim non sentiat cuius modi spiritus talibus obscenitatibus delectentur, nisi vel nesciens, utrum omnino sint ulli inmundi spiritus deorum nomine decipientes, vel talem agens vitam, in qua istos potius quam Deum verum et optet propitios et formidet iratos?
chapter 4. First of all, we would ask why their gods took no steps to improve the morals of their worshippers. That the true God should neglect those who did not seek His help, that was but justice; but why did those gods, from whose worship ungrateful men are now complaining that they are prohibited, issue no laws which might have guided their devotees to a virtuous life? Surely it was but just, that such care as men showed to the worship of the gods, the gods on their part should have to the conduct of men. But, it is replied, it is by his own will a man goes astray. Who denies it? But none the less was it incumbent on these gods, who were men's guardians, to publish in plain terms the laws of a good life, and not to conceal them from their worshippers. It was their part to send prophets to reach and convict such as broke these laws, and publicly to proclaim the punishments which await evil-doers, and the rewards which may be looked for by those that do well. Did ever the walls of any of their temples echo to any such warning voice? I myself, when I was a young man, used sometimes to go to the sacrilegious entertainments and spectacles; I saw the priests raving in religious excitement, and heard the choristers; I took pleasure in the shameful games which were celebrated in honor of gods and goddesses, of the virgin C_S lestis, and Berecynthia, the mother of all the gods. And on the holy day consecrated to her purification, there were sung before her couch productions so obscene and filthy for the ear-I do not say of the mother of the gods, but of the mother of any senator or honest man-nay, so impure, that not even the mother of the foul-mouthed players themselves could have formed one of the audience. For natural reverence for parents is a bond which the most abandoned cannot ignore. And, accordingly, the lewd actions and filthy words with which these players honored the mother of the gods, in presence of a vast assemblage and audience of both sexes, they could not for very shame have rehearsed at home in presence of their own mothers. And the crowds that were gathered from all quarters by curiosity, offended modesty must, I should suppose, have scattered in the confusion of shame. If these are sacred rites, what is sacrilege? If this is purification, what is pollution? This festivity was called the Tables, as if a banquet were being given at which unclean devils might find suitable refreshment. For it is not difficult to see what kind of spirits they must be who are delighted with such obscenities, unless, indeed, a man be blinded by these evil spirits passing themselves off under the name of gods, and either disbelieves in their existence, or leads such a life as prompts him rather to propitiate and fear them than the true God.
BOOK II [V] Nequaquam istos, qui flagitiosissimae consuetudinis vitiis oblectari magis quam obluctari student, sed illum ipsum Nasicam Scipionem, qui vir optimus a senatu electus est, cuius manibus eiusdem daemonis simulacrum susceptum est in Vrbemque peruectum, habere de hac re iudicem vellem. Diceret nobis, utrum matrem suam tam optime de re publica vellet mereri, ut ei divini honores decernerentur; sicut et Graecos et Romanos aliasque gentes constat quibusdam decrevisse mortalibus, quorum erga se beneficia magnipenderant, eosque inmortales factos atque in deorum numerum receptos esse crediderant. Profecto ille tantam felicitatem suae matri, si fieri posset, optaret. Porro si ab illo deinde quaereremus, utrum inter eius divinos honores vellet illa turpia celebrari: nonne se malle clamaret, ut sua mater sine ullo sensu mortua iaceret, quam ad hoc dea viveret, ut illa libenter audiret? Absit, ut senator populi Romani ea mente praeditus, qua theatrum aedificari in urbe fortium virorum prohibuit, sic vellet coli matrem suam, ut talibus dea sacris propitiaretur, qualibus matrona verbis offenderetur. Nec ullo modo crederet verecundiam laudabilis feminae ita in contrarium divinitate mutari, ut honoribus eam talibus aduocarent cultores sui, qualibus conuiciis in quempiam iaculatis, cum inter homines viveret, nisi aures clauderet seseque subtraheret, erubescerent pro illa et propinqui et maritus et liberi. Proinde talis mater deum, qualem habere matrem puderet quemlibet etiam pessimum virum, Romanas occupatura mentes quaesivit optimum virum, non quem monendo et adivuando faceret, sed quem fallendo deciperet, ei similis de qua scriptum est: Mulier aottem virorum pretiosas animas captat, ut ille magnae indolis animus hoc velut divino testimonio sublimatus et vere se optimum existimans veram pietatem religionemque non quaereret, sine qua omne quamuis laudabile ingenium superbia uanescit et decidit. Quo modo igitur nisi insidiose quaereret dea illa optimum virum, cum talia quaerat in suis sacris, qualia viri optimi abhorrent suis affiibere conuiviis?
chapter 5. In this matter I would prefer to have as my assessors in judgment, not those men who rather take pleasure in these infamous customs than take pains to put an end to them, but that same Scipio Nasica who was chosen by the senate as the citizen most worthy to receive in his hands the image of that demon Cybele, and convey it into the city. He would tell us whether he would be proud to see his own mother so highly esteemed by the state as to have divine honors adjudged to her; as the Greeks and Romans and other nations have decreed divine honors to men who had been of material service to them, and have believed that their mortal benefactors were thus made immortal, and enrolled among the gods. Surely he would desire that his mother should enjoy such felicity were it possible. But if we proceeded to ask him whether, among the honors paid to her, he would wish such shameful rites as these to be celebrated, would he not at once exclaim that he would rather his mother lay stone-dead, than survive as a goddess to lend her ear to these obscenities? Is it possible that he who was of so severe a morality, that he used his influence as a Roman senator to prevent the building of a theatre in that city dedicated to the manly virtues, would wish his mother to be propitiated as a goddess with words which would have brought the blush to her cheek when a Roman matron? Could he possibly believe that the modesty of an estimable woman would be so transformed by her promotion to divinity, that she would suffer herself to be invoked and celebrated in terms so gross and immodest, that if she had heard the like while alive upon earth, and had listened without stopping her ears and hurrying from the spot, her relatives, her husband, and her children would have blushed for her? Therefore, the mother of the gods being such a character as the most profligate man would be ashamed to have for his mother, and meaning to enthral the minds of the Romans, demanded for her service their best citizen, not to ripen him still more in virtue by her helpful counsel, but to entangle him by her deceit, like her of whom it is written, "The adulteress will hunt for the precious soul." Proverbs 6:26 Her intent was to puff up this high- souled man by an apparently divine testimony to his excellence, in order that he might rely upon his own eminence in virtue, and make no further efforts after true piety and religion, without which natural genius, however brilliant, vapors into pride and comes to nothing. For what but a guileful purpose could that goddess demand the best man seeing that in her own sacred festivals she requires such obscenities as the best men would be covered with shame to hear at their own tables?
BOOK II [VI] Hinc est quod de vita et moribus civitatum atque populorum a quibus colebantur illa numina non curarunt, ut tam horrendis eos et detestabilibus malis non in agro et vitibus, non in domo atque pecunia, non denique in ipso corpore, quod menti subditur, sed in ipsa mente, in ipso rectore carnis animo, eos impleri ac pessimos fieri sine ulla sua terribili prohibitione permitterent. Aut si prohibebant, hoc ostendatur potius, hoc probetur. Nec nobis nescio quos susurros paucissimorum auribus anhelatos et arcana velut religione traditos iactent, quibus vitae probitas castitasque discatur; sed demonstrentur vel commemorentur loca talibus aliquando conventiculis consecrata, non ubi ludi agerentur obscenis vocibus et motibus histrionum, nec ubi Fugalia celebrarentur effusa omni licentia turpitudinem (et vere Fugalia, sed pudoris et honestatis); sed ubi populi audirent quid dii praeciperent de cohibenda auaritia, ambitione frangenda, luxuria refrenanda, ubi discerent miseri, quod discendum Persius increpat dicens: Discite, o miseri, et causas cognoscite rerum, Quid sumus et quidnam victuri gignimur, ordo Quis datus aut metae qua mollis flexus et unde, Quis modus argenti, quid fas optare, quid asper Vtile nummus habet, patriae carisque propinquis Quautum largiri deceat, quem te Deus esse Iussit et humana qua parte locatus es in re. Dicatur in quibus locis haec docentium deorum solebant praecepta recitari et a cultoribus eorum populis frequenter audiri, sicut nos ostendimus ad hoc ecclesias institutas, quaqua versum religio Christiana diffunditur.
chapter 6. This is the reason why those divinities quite neglected the lives and morals of the cities and nations who worshipped them, and threw no dreadful prohibition in their way to hinder them from becoming utterly corrupt, and to preserve them from those terrible and detestable evils which visit not harvests and vintages, not house and possessions, not the body which is subject to the soul, but the soul itself, the spirit that rules the whole man. If there was any such prohibition, let it be produced, let it be proved. They will tell us that purity and probity were inculcated upon those who were initiated in the mysteries of religion, and that secret incitements to virtue were whispered in the ear of the йlite; but this is an idle boast. Let them show or name to us the places which were at any time consecrated to assemblages in which, instead of the obscene songs and licentious acting of players, instead of the celebration of those most filthy and shameless Fugalia (well called Fugalia, since they banish modesty and right feeling), the people were commanded in the name of the gods to restrain avarice, bridle impurity, and conquer ambition; where, in short, they might learn in that school which Persius vehemently lashes them to, when he says: "Be taught, you abandoned creatures, and ascertain the causes of things; what we are, and for what end we are born; what is the law of our success in life; and by what art we may turn the goal without making shipwreck; what limit we should put to our wealth, what we may lawfully desire, and what uses filthy lucre serves; how much we should bestow upon our country and our family; learn, in short, what God meant you to be, and what place He has ordered you to fill." Let them name to us the places where such instructions were wont to be communicated from the gods, and where the people who worshipped them were accustomed to resort to hear them, as we can point to our churches built for this purpose in every land where the Christian religion is received.
BOOK II [VII] An forte nobis philosophorum scholas disputationesque memorabunt? Primo haec non Romana, sed Graeca sunt; aut si propterea iam Romana, quia et Graecia facta est Romana provincia, non deorum praecepta sunt, sed hominum inventa, qui utcumque conati sunt ingeniis acutissimis praediti ratiocinando uestigare, quid in rerum natura latitaret, quid in moribus adpetendum esset atque fugiendum, quid in ipsis ratiocinandi regulis certa conexione traheretur, aut quid non esset consequens vel etiam repugnaret. Et quidam eorum quaedam magna, quantum divinitus adiuti sunt, invenerunt; quantum autem humanitus impediti sunt, erraverunt, maxime cum eorum superbiae iuste providentia divina resisteret, ut viam pietatis ab humilitate in superna surgentem etiam istorum comparatione monstraret; unde postea nobis erit in Dei veri Domini voluntate disquirendi ac disserendi locus. Verum tamen si philosophi aliquid invenerunt, quod agendae bonae vitae beataeque adipiscendae satis esse possit: quanto iustius talibus divini honores decernerentur! Quanto melius et honestius in Platonis templo libri eius legerentur, quam in templis daemonum Galli absciderentur, molles consecrarentur, insani secarentur, et quidquid aliud vel crudele vel turpe, vel turpiter crudele vel crudeliter turpe in sacris talium deorum celebrari solet! Quanto satius erat ad erudiendam iustitia ivuentutem publice recitari leges deorum quam laudari inaniter leges atque instituta maiorum! Omnes enim cultores talium deorum, mox ut eos libido perpulerit feruenti, ut ait Persius, tincta veneno, magis intuentur quid luppiter fecerit, quam quid docuerit Plato vel censuerit Cato. Hinc apud Terentium flagitiosus adulescens spectat tabulam quandam pictam in pariete, ubi inerat pictura haec, Iovem Quo pacto Danaae misisse aiunt quondam in gremium imbrem aureum, atque ab hac tanta auctoritate adhibet patrocinium turpitudini suae, cum in ea se iactat imitari deum. At quem deum! inquit; qui templa caeli summo sonitu concutit. Ego hcmuncio id non facerem? Ego vero illud feci ac libens.
chapter 7. But will they perhaps remind us of the schools of the philosophers, and their disputations? In the first place, these belong not to Rome, but to Greece; and even if we yield to them that they are now Roman, because Greece itself has become a Roman province, still the teachings of the philosophers are not the commandments of the gods, but the discoveries of men, who, at the prompting of their own speculative ability, made efforts to discover the hidden laws of nature, and the right and wrong in ethics, and in dialectic what was consequent according to the rules of logic, and what was inconsequent and erroneous. And some of them, by God's help, made great discoveries; but when left to themselves they were betrayed by human infirmity, and fell into mistakes. And this was ordered by divine providence, that their pride might be restrained, and that by their example it might be pointed out that it is humility which has access to the highest regions. But of this we shall have more to say, if the Lord God of truth permit, in its own place. However, if the philosophers have made any discoveries which are sufficient to guide men to virtue and blessedness, would it not have been greater justice to vote divine honors to them? Were it not more accordant with every virtuous sentiment to read Plato's writings in a "Temple of Plato," than to be present in the temples of devils to witness the priests of Cybele mutilating themselves, the effeminate being consecrated, the raving fanatics cutting themselves, and whatever other cruel or shameful, or shamefully cruel or cruelly shameful, ceremony is enjoined by the ritual of such gods as these? Were it not a more suitable education, and more likely to prompt the youth to virtue, if they heard public recitals of the laws of the gods, instead of the vain laudation of the customs and laws of their ancestors? Certainly all the worshippers of the Roman gods, when once they are possessed by what Persius calls "the burning poison of lust," prefer to witness the deeds of Jupiter rather than to hear what Plato taught or Cato censured. Hence the young profligate in Terence, when he sees on the wall a fresco representing the fabled descent of Jupiter into the lap of Danaл in the form of a golden shower, accepts this as authoritative precedent for his own licentiousness, and boasts that he is an imitator of God. "And what God?" he says. "He who with His thunder shakes the loftiest temples. And was I, a poor creature compared to Him, to make bones of it? No; I did it, and with all my heart."
BOOK II [VIII] At enim non traduntur ista sacris deorum, sed fabulis poetarum. Nolo dicere illa mystica quam ista theatrica esse turpiora; hoc dico, quod negantes conuincit historia, eosdem illos ludos, in quibus regnant figmenta poetarum, non per inperitum obsequium sacris deorum suorum intulisse Romanos, sed ipsos deos, ut sibi sollemniter ederentur et honori suo consecrarentur, acerbe imperando et quodam modo extorquendo fecisse; quod in primo libro brevi commemoratione perstrinxi.Nam ingravescente pestilentia ludi scaenici auctoritate pontificum Romae primitus instituti sunt. Quis igitur in agenda vita non ea sibi potius sectanda arbitreturЎЃ quae actitantur ludis auctoritate divina institutis, quam ea, quae scriptitantur legibus humano consilio promulgatis? Adulterum Iovem si poetae fallaciter prodiderunt, dii utique casti, quia tantum nefas per humanos ludos confictum est, non qui a neglectum, irasci ac vindicare debuerunt. Et haec sunt scaenicorum tolerabiliora ludorum, comoediae scilicet et tragoediae, hoc est fabulae poetarum agendae in spectaculis multa rerum turpitudine, sed nulla saltem, sicut alia multa, verborum obscenitate compositae; quas etiam inter studia, quae honesta ac liberalia vocantur, pueri legere et discere coguntur a senibus.
chapter 8. But, some one will interpose, these are the fables of poets, not the deliverances of the gods themselves. Well, I have no mind to arbitrate between the lewdness of theatrical entertainments and of mystic rites; only this I say, and history bears me out in making the assertion, that those same entertainments, in which the fictions of poets are the main attraction, were not introduced in the festivals of the gods by the ignorant devotion of the Romans, but that the gods themselves gave the most urgent commands to this effect, and indeed extorted from the Romans these solemnities and celebrations in their honor. I touched on this in the preceding book, and mentioned that dramatic entertainments were first inaugurated at Rome on occasion of a pestilence, and by authority of the pontiff. And what man is there who is not more likely to adopt, for the regulation of his own life, the examples that are represented in plays which have a divine sanction, rather than the precepts written and promulgated with no more than human authority? If the poets gave a false representation of Jove in describing him as adulterous, then it were to be expected that the chaste gods should in anger avenge so wicked a fiction, in place of encouraging the games which circulated it. Of these plays, the most inoffensive are comedies and tragedies, that is to say, the dramas which poets write for the stage, and which, though they often handle impure subjects, yet do so without the filthiness of language which characterizes many other performances; and it is these dramas which boys are obliged by their seniors to read and learn as a part of what is called a liberal and gentlemanly education.
BOOK II [IX] Quid autem hinc senserint Romani ueteres, Cicero testatur in libris, quos de re publica scripsit, ubi Scipio disputans ait: m Numquam comoediae, nisi consuetudo vitae patereturЎЃ probare sua theatris flagitia potuissent. "Et Graeci quidem antiquiores vitiosae suae opinionis quandam convenientiam servarunt, apud quos fuit etiam lege concessum, ut quod vellet comoedia, de quo vellet, nominatim diceret. Itaque, sicut in eisdem libris loquitur Africanus," quem illa non adtigit, vel potius quem non uexavit, cui pepercit? Esto, populares homines inprobos, in re publica seditiosos, Cleonem, Cleophontem, Hyperbolum laesit. Patiamur, inquit, etsi eius modi cives a censore melius est quam a poeta notari. Sed Periclen, cum iam suae civitati maxima auctoritate plurimos annos domi et belli praefuisset, violari versibus et eos agi in scaena non plus decuit, quam si Plautus, inquit, noster voluisset aut Naevius Publio et Gn. Scipioni aut Caecilius Marco Catoni maledicere. "Dein paulo post:" Nostrae, inquit, contra duodecim tabulae cum perpaucas res capite sanxissent, in his hanc quoque sanciendam putaverunt, si quis occentavisset sive carmen condidisset, quod infamiam faceret flagitiumue alteri. Praeclare. Iudiciis enim magistratuum, disceptationibus legitimis propositam vitam, non poetarum ingeniis habere debemus, nec probrum audire nisi ea lege, ut respondere liceat et iudicio defendere. "Haec ex Ciceronis quarto de re publica libro ad verbum excerpenda arbitratus sum, nonnullis propter faciliorem intellectum vel praetermissis vel paululum commutatis. Multum enim ad rem pertinet, quam molior explicare, si potero. Dicit deinde alia et sic concludit hunc locum, ut ostendat ueteribus displicuisse Romanis vel laudari quemquam in scaena vivum hominem vel vituperari. Sed, ut dixi, hoc Graeci quamquam inverecundius, tamen convenientius licere voluerunt, cum viderent diis suis accepta et grata esse opprobria non tantum hominum, verum et ipsorum deorum in scaenicis fabulis, sive a poetis essent illa conficta, sive flagitia eorum vera commemorarentur et agerentur in theatris atque ab eorum cultoribus utinam solo risu, ac non etiam imitatione d i gn a viderentur. Nimis enim superbum fuit famae parcere pnncipum civitatis et civium, ubi suae famae parci numina noluerunt.
chapter 9. The opinion of the ancient Romans on this matter is attested by Cicero in his work De Republica, in which Scipio, one of the interlocutors, says, "The lewdness of comedy could never have been suffered by audiences, unless the customs of society had previously sanctioned the same lewdness." And in the earlier days the Greeks preserved a certain reasonableness in their license, and made it a law, that whatever comedy wished to say of any one, it must say it of him by name. And so in the same work of Cicero's, Scipio says, "Whom has it not aspersed? Nay, whom has it not worried? Whom has it spared? Allow that it may assail demagogues and factions, men injurious to the commonwealth-a Cleon, a Cleophon, a Hyperbolus. That is tolerable, though it had been more seemly for the public censor to brand such men, than for a poet to lampoon them; but to blacken the fame of Pericles with scurrilous verse, after he had with the utmost dignity presided over their state alike in war and in peace, was as unworthy of a poet, as if our own Plautus or Nжvius were to bring Publius and Cneius Scipio on the comic stage, or as if Cжcilius were to caricature Cato." And then a little after he goes on: "Though our Twelve Tables attached the penalty of death only to a very few offences, yet among these few this was one: if any man should have sung a pasquinade, or have composed a satire calculated to bring infamy or disgrace on another person. Wisely decreed. For it is by the decisions of magistrates, and by a well-informed justice, that our lives ought to be judged, and not by the flighty fancies of poets; neither ought we to be exposed to hear calumnies, save where we have the liberty of replying, and defending ourselves before an adequate tribunal." This much I have judged it advisable to quote from the fourth book of Cicero's De Republica; and I have made the quotation word for word, with the exception of some words omitted, and some slightly transposed, for the sake of giving the sense more readily. And certainly the extract is pertinent to the matter I am endeavoring to explain. Cicero makes some further remarks, and concludes the passage by showing that the ancient Romans did not permit any living man to be either praised or blamed on the stage. But the Greeks, as I said, though not so moral, were more logical in allowing this license which the Romans forbade; for they saw that their gods approved and enjoyed the scurrilous language of low comedy when directed not only against men, but even against themselves; and this, whether the infamous actions imputed to them were the fictions of poets, or were their actual iniquities commemorated and acted in the theatres. And would that the spectators had judged them worthy only of laughter, and not of imitation! Manifestly it had been a stretch of pride to spare the good name of the leading men and the common citizens, when the very deities did not grudge that their own reputation should be blemished.
BOOK II [X] Nam quod adfertur pro defensione, non illa vera in deos dici, sed falsa atque conficta, id ipsum est scelestius, si pietatem consulas religionis; si autem malitiam daemonum cogites, quid astutius ad decipiendum atque callidius? Cum enim probrum iacitur in principem patriae bonum atque utilem, nonne tanto est indignius, quanto a veritate remotius et a vita illius alienius? Quae igitur supplicia sufficiunt, cum deo fit ista tam nefaria, tam insignis iniuria? Sed maligni spiritus, quos isti deos putant, etiam flagitia, quae non admiserunt, de se dici volunt, dum tamen humanas mentes his opinionibus velut retibus induant et ad praedestinatum supplicium secum trahant, sive homines ista commiserint, quos deos haberi gaudent, qui humanis erroribus gaudent, pro quibus se etiam colendos mille nocendi fallendique artibus interponunt; sive etiam non ullorum hominum illa crimina vera sint, quae tamen de numinibus fingi libenter accipiunt fallacissimi spiritus, ut ad scelesta ac turpia perpetranda velut ab ipso caelo traduci in terras satis idonea videatur auctoritas. Cum igitur Graeci talium numinum seruos se esse sentirent, inter tot et tanta eorum theatrica opprobria parcendum sibi a poetis nullo modo putaverunt, vel diis suis etiam sic consimilari adpetentes, vel metuentes, ne honestiorem famam ipsi requirendo et eis se hoc modo praeferendo illos ad iracundiam prouocarent.
chapter 10. It is alleged, in excuse of this practice, that the stories told of the gods are not true, but false, and mere inventions, but this only makes matters worse, if we form our estimate by the morality our religion teaches; and if we consider the malice of the devils, what more wily and astute artifice could they practise upon men? When a slander is uttered against a leading statesman of upright and useful life, is it not reprehensible in proportion to its untruth and groundlessness? What punishment, then, shall be sufficient when the gods are the objects of so wicked and outrageous an injustice? But the devils, whom these men repute gods, are content that even iniquities they are guiltless of should be ascribed to them, so long as they may entangle men's minds in the meshes of these opinions, and draw them on along with themselves to their predestinated punishment: whether such things were actually committed by the men whom these devils, delighting in human infatuation, cause to be worshipped as gods, and in whose stead they, by a thousand malign and deceitful artifices, substitute themselves, and so receive worship; or whether, though they were really the crimes of men, these wicked spirits gladly allowed them to be attributed to higher beings, that there might seem to be conveyed from heaven itself a sufficient sanction for the perpetration of shameful wickedness. The Greeks, therefore, seeing the character of the gods they served, thought that the poets should certainly not refrain from showing up human vices on the stage, either because they desired to be like their gods in this, or because they were afraid that, if they required for themselves a more unblemished reputation than they asserted for the gods, they might provoke them to anger.
BOOK II [XI] Ad hanc convenientiam pertinet, quod etiam scaenicos actores earundem fabularum non paruo civitatis honore dignos existimarunt, si quidem, quod in eo quoque de re publica libro commemoratur, et Aeschines Atheniensis, vir eloquentissimus, cum adulescens tragoedias actitavisset, rem publicam capessivit et Aristodemum, tragicum item actorem, maximus de rebus pacis ac belli legatum ad Philippum Athenienses saepe miserunt. Non enim consentaneum putabatur, cum easdem artes eosdemque scaenicos ludos etiam diis suis acceptos viderent, illos, per quos agerentur, infamium loco ac numero deputare. Haec Graeci turpiter quidem, sed sane diis suis omnino congruenter, qui nec vitam civium lacerandam linguis poetarum et histrionum subtrahere ausi sunt, a quibus cernebant deorum vitam eisdem ipsis diis volentibus et libentibus carpi, et ipsos homines, per quos ista in theatris agebantur, quae numinibus quibus subditi erant grata esse cognoverant, non solum minime spernendos in civitate, verum etiam maxime honorandos putarunt. Quid enim causae reperire possent, cur sacerdotes honorarent, quia per eos victimas diis acceptabiles offerebant, et scaenicos probrosos haberent, per quos illam voluptatem sive honorem diis exhiberi petentibus et, nisi fieret, irascentibus eorum admonitione didicerant? cum praesertim Labeo, quem huiusce modi rerum peritissimum praedicant, numina bona a numinibus malis ista etiam cultus diversitate distinguat, ut malos deos propitiari caedibus et tristibus supplicationibus asserat, bonos autem obsequiis laetis atque iucundis, qualia sunt, ut ipse ait, ludi conuivia lectisternia. Quod totum quale sit, postea, si Deus ivuerit, diligentius disseremus. Nunc ad rem praesentem quod adtinet, sive omnibus omnia tamquam bonis permixte tribuantur (neque enim esse decet deos malos, cum potius isti, quia inmundi sunt spiritus, omnes sint mali), sive certa discretione, sicut Labeoni visum est, illis illa, istis ista distribuantur obsequia, competentissime Graeci utrosque honori ducunt, et sacerdotes, per quos victimae ministrantur, et scaenicos, per quos ludi exhibentur, ne vel omnibus diis suis, si et ludi omnibus grati sunt, vel, quod est indignius, his, quos bonos putant, si ludi ab eis solis amantur, facere conuincantur iniuriam.
chapter 11. It was a part of this same reasonableness of the Greeks which induced them to bestow upon the actors of these same plays no inconsiderable civic honors. In the above-mentioned book of the De Republica, it is mentioned that Aeschines, a very eloquent Athenian, who had been a tragic actor in his youth, became a statesman, and that the Athenians again and again sent another tragedian, Aristodemus, as their plenipotentiary to Philip. For they judged it unbecoming to condemn and treat as infamous persons those who were the chief actors in the scenic entertainments which they saw to be so pleasing to the gods. No doubt this was immoral of the Greeks, but there can be as little doubt they acted in conformity with the character of their gods; for how could they have presumed to protect the conduct of the citizens from being cut to pieces by the tongues of poets and players, who were allowed, and even enjoined by the gods, to tear their divine reputation to tatters? And how could they hold in contempt the men who acted in the theatres those dramas which, as they had ascertained, gave pleasure to the gods whom they worshipped? Nay, how could they but grant to them the highest civic honors? On what plea could they honor the priests who offered for them acceptable sacrifices to the gods, if they branded with infamy the actors who in behalf of the people gave to the gods that pleasure or honour which they demanded, and which, according to the account of the priests, they were angry at not receiving. Labeo, whose learning makes him an authority on such points, is of opinion that the distinction between good and evil deities should find expression in a difference of worship; that the evil should be propitiated by bloody sacrifices and doleful rites, but the good with a joyful and pleasant observance, as, e.g. (as he says himself), with plays, festivals, and banquets. All this we shall, with God's help, hereafter discuss. At present, and speaking to the subject on hand, whether all kinds of offerings are made indiscriminately to all the gods, as if all were good (and it is an unseemly thing to conceive that there are evil gods; but these gods of the pagans are all evil, because they are not gods, but evil spirits), or whether, as Labeo thinks, a distinction is made between the offerings presented to the different gods the Greeks are equally justified in honoring alike the priests by whom the sacrifices are offered, and the players by whom the dramas are acted, that they may not be open to the charge of doing an injury to all their gods, if the plays are pleasing to all of them, or (which were still worse) to their good gods, if the plays are relished only by them.
BOOK II [XII] At Romani, sicut in illa de re publica disputatione Scipio gloriatur, probris et iniuriis poetarum subiectam vitam famamque habere noluerunt, capite etiam sancientes, tale carmen condere si quis auderet. Quod erga se quidem satis honeste constituerunt, sed erga deos suos superbe et inreligiose; quos cum scirent non solum patienter, verum etiam libenter poetarum probris maledictisque lacerari, se potius quam illos huiusce modi iniuriis indignos esse duxerunt seque ab eis etiam lege munierunt, illorum autem ista etiam sacris sollemnitatibus miscuerunt. Itane tandem, Scipio, laudas hanc poetis Romanis negatam esse licentiam, ut cuiquam opprobrium infligerent Romanorum, cum videas eos nulli deorum pepercisse uestrorum? Itane pluris tibi habenda visa est existimatio curiae uestrae quam Capitolii, immo Romae unius quam caeli totius, ut linguam maledicam in cives tuos exercere poetae etiam lege prohiberentur, et in deos tuos securi tanta conuicia nullo senatore nullo censore, nullo principe nullo pontifice prohibente iacularentur? Indignum videlicet fuit, ut Plautus aut Naevius Publio et Gn. Scipioni aut Caecilius M. Catoni malediceret, et dignum fuit, ut Terentius uester flagitio lovis optimi maximi adulescentium nequitiam concitaret?
chapter 12. The Romans, however, as Scipio boasts in that same discussion, declined having their conduct and good name subjected to the assaults and slanders of the poets, and went so far as to make it a capital crime if any one should dare to compose such verses. This was a very honorable course to pursue, so far as they themselves were concerned, but in respect of the gods it was proud and irreligious: for they knew that the gods not only tolerated, but relished, being lashed by the injurious expressions of the poets, and yet they themselves would not suffer this same handling; and what their ritual prescribed as acceptable to the gods, their law prohibited as injurious to themselves. How then, Scipio, do you praise the Romans for refusing this license to the poets, so that no citizen could be calumniated, while you know that the gods were not included under this protection? Do you count your senate-house worthy of so much higher a regard than the Capitol? Is the one city of Rome more valuable in your eyes than the whole heaven of gods, that you prohibit your poets from uttering any injurious words against a citizen, though they may with impunity cast what imputations they please upon the gods, without the interference of senator, censor, prince, or pontiff? It was, forsooth, intolerable that Plautus or Nжvus should attack Publius and Cneius Scipio, insufferable that Cжcilius should lampoon Cato; but quite proper that your Terence should encourage youthful lust by the wicked example of supreme Jove.
BOOK II [XIII] Sed responderet mihi fortasse, si viveret: Quo modo nos ista inpunita esse nollemus, quae ipsi dii sacra esse voluerunt, cum ludos scaenicos, ubi talia celebrantur dictitantur actitantur, et Romanis moribus invexerunt et suis honoribus dicari exhiberique iusserunt? Cur non ergo hinc magis ipsi intellecti sunt non esse dii veri nec omnino digni, quibus divinos honores deferret illa res publica? Quos enim coli minime deceret minimeque oporteret, si ludos expeterent agendos conuiciis Romanorum, quo modo quaeso colendi putati sunt, quo modo non detestandi spiritus intellecti, qui cupiditate fallendi inter suos honores sua celebrari crimina poposcerunt? Itemque Romani, quamuis iam superstitione noxia premerentur, ut illos deos colerent, quos videbant sibi voluisse scaenicas turpitudines consecrari, suae tamen dignitatis memores ac pudoris actores talium fabularum nequaquam honoraverunt more Graecorum, sed, sicut apud Ciceronem idem Scipio loquitur," cum artem iudicram scaenamque totam in probro ducerent, genus id hominum non modo honore civium reliquorum carere, sed etiam tribu moveri notatione censoria voluerunt. "Praeclara sanc et Romanis laudibus adnumeranda prudentia; sed vellem se ipsa sequeretur, se imitaretur. Ecce enim recte, quisquis civium Romanorum esse scaenicus elegisset, non solum ei nullus ad honorem dabatur locus, verum etiam censoris nota tribum tenere propriam minime sinebatur. O animum civitatis laudis avidum germaneque Romanum! Sed respondeatur mihi: qua consentanea ratione homines scaenici ab omni honore repelluntur, et ludi scaenici deorum honoribus admiscentur? Illas theatricas artes diu virtus Romana non noverat, quae si ad oblectamentum voluptatis humanae quaererentur, vitio morum inreperent humanorum. Dii eas sibi exhiberi petierunt: quo modo ergo abicitur scaenicus, per quem colitur Deus? et theatricae illius turpitudinis qua fronte notatur actor, si adoratur exactor? In hac controversia Graeci Romanique concertent. Graeci putant recte se honorare homines scaenicos, quia colunt ludorum scaenicorum flagitatores deos; Romani vero hominibus scaenicis nec plebeiam tribum, quanto Ininus senatoriam curiam dehonestari sinunt. In hac disceptatione huiusce modi ratiocinatio summam quaestionis absolvit. Proponunt Graeci: Si dii tales colendi sunt, profecto etiam tales homines honorandi. Adsumunt Romani: Sed nullo modo tales homines honorandi sunt. Concludunt Christiani: Nullo modo igitur dii tales colendi sunt.
chapter 13. But Scipio, were he alive, would possibly reply: "How could we attach a penalty to that which the gods themselves have consecrated? For the theatrical entertainments in which such things are said, and acted, and performed, were introduced into Roman society by the gods, who ordered that they should be dedicated and exhibited in their honor." But was not this, then, the plainest proof that they were no true gods, nor in any respect worthy of receiving divine honours from the republic? Suppose they had required that in their honor the citizens of Rome should be held up to ridicule, every Roman would have resented the hateful proposal. How then, I would ask, can they be esteemed worthy of worship, when they propose that their own crimes be used as material for celebrating their praises? Does not this artifice expose them, and prove that they are detestable devils? Thus the Romans, though they were superstitious enough to serve as gods those who made no secret of their desire to be worshipped in licentious plays, yet had sufficient regard to their hereditary dignity and virtue, to prompt them to refuse to players any such rewards as the Greeks accorded them. On this point we have this testimony of Scipio, recorded in Cicero: "They [the Romans] considered comedy and all theatrical performances as disgraceful, and therefore not only debarred players from offices and honors open to ordinary citizens, but also decreed that their names should be branded by the censor, and erased from the roll of their tribe." An excellent decree, and another testimony to the sagacity of Rome; but I could wish their prudence had been more thorough-going and consistent. For when I hear that if any Roman citizen chose the stage as his profession, he not only closed to himself every laudable career, but even became an outcast from his own tribe, I cannot but exclaim: This is the true Roman spirit, this is worthy of a state jealous of its reputation. But then some one interrupts my rapture, by inquiring with what consistency players are debarred from all honors, while plays are counted among the honors due to the gods? For a long while the virtue of Rome was uncontaminated by theatrical exhibitions; and if they had been adopted for the sake of gratifying the taste of the citizens, they would have been introduced hand in hand with the relaxation of manners. But the fact is, that it was the gods who demanded that they should be exhibited to gratify them. With what justice, then, is the player excommunicated by whom God is worshipped? On what pretext can you at once adore him who exacts, and brand him who acts these plays? This, then, is the controversy in which the Greeks and Romans are engaged. The Greeks think they justly honor players, because they worship the gods who demand plays; the Romans, on the other hand, do not suffer an actor to disgrace by his name his own plebeian tribe, far less the senatorial order. And the whole of this discussion may be summed up in the following syllogism. The Greeks give us the major premise: If such gods are to be worshipped, then certainly such men may be honored. The Romans add the minor: But such men must by no means be honoured. The Christians draw the conclusion: Therefore such gods must by no means be worshipped.
BOOK II [XIV] Deinde quaerimus, ipsi poetae talium fabularum compositores, qui duodecim tabularum lege prohibentur famam laedere civium, tam probrosa in deos conuicia iaculantes cur non ut scaenici habeantur inhonesti. Qua ratione rectum est, ut poeticorum figmentorum et ignominiosorum deorum infamentur actores, honorentur auctores? An forte Graeco Platoni potius palma danda est, qui cum ratione formaret, qualis esse civitas debeat, tamquam adversarios veritatis poetas censuit urbe pellendos? Iste vero et deorum iniurias indigne tulit et fucari corrumpique figmentis animos civium noluit. Confer nunc Platonis humanitatem a civibus decipiendis poetas urbe pellentem cum deorunI divinitate honori suo ludos scaenicos expetente. Ille, ne talia vel scriberentur, etsi non persuasit disputando, tamen suasit levitati lasciviaeque Graecorum; isti, ut talia etiam agerentur, iubendo extorserunt gravitati et modestiae Romanorum. Nec tantum haec agi voluerunt, sed sibi dicari, sibi sacrari, sibi sollemniter exhiberi. Cui tandem honestius divinos honores decerneret civitas? utrum Platoni haec turpia et nefanda prohibenti, an daemonibus hac hominum deceptione gaudentibus, quibus ille vera persuadere non potuit? Hunc Platonem Labeo inter semideos commemorandum putavit, sicut Herculem, sicut Romulum. Semideos autem heroibus anteponit; sed utrosque inter numina conlocat. Verum tamen istum, quem appellat semideum, non heroibus tantum, sed etiam diis ipsis praeferendum esse non dubito. Propinquant autem Romanorum leges disputationibus Platonis, quando ille cuncta poetica figmenta condemnat, isti autem poetis adimunt saltem in homines maledicendi licentiam; ille poetas ab urbis ipsius habitatione, isti saltem actores poeticarum fabularum removent a societate civitatis; et si contra deos ludorum scaenicorum expetitores aliquid auderent, forte undique removerent. Nequaquam igitur leges ad instituendos bonos aut corrigendos malos mores a diis suis possent accipere seu sperare Romani, quos legibus suis vincunt atque conuincunt. Illi enim honori suo deposcunt ludos scaenicos, isti ab honoribus omnibus repellunt homines scaenicos; illi celebrari sibi iubent figmentis poeticis opprobria deorum, isti ab opprobriis hominum deterrent inpudentiam poetarum. Semideus autem ille Plato et talium deorum libidini restitit, et ab indole Romanorum quid perficiendum esset ostendit, qui poeta s ipsos vel pro arbitrio mentientes vel hominibus miseris quasi deorum facta pessima imitanda proponentes omnino in civitate bene instituta vivere noluit. Nos quidem Platonem nec deum nec semideum perhibemus, nec ulli sancto angelo summi Dei nec veridico prophetae nec apostolo alicui nec cuilibet Christi martyri nec cuiquam Christiano homini comparamus; cuius nostrae sententiae ratio Deo prosperante suo loco explicabitur. Sed eum tamen, quando quidem ipsi volunt fuisse semideum, praeferendum esse censemus, si non Romulo et Herculi (quamuis istum nec fratrem occidisse, nec aliquod perpetrasse flagitium quisquam historicorum vel poetarum dixit aut finxit), certe vel Priapo vel alicui Cynocephalo, postremo vel Febri, quae Romani numina partim peregrina receperunt, paffim sua propria sacraverunt. Quo modo igitur tanta animi et morum mala bonis praeceptis et legibus vel inminentia prohiberent, vel insita extirpanda curarent dii tales, qui etiam seminanda et augenda flagitia curaverunt, talia vel sua vel quasi sua facta per theatricas celebritates populis innotescere cupientes, ut tamquam auctoritate divina sua sponte nequissima libido accenderetur humana, frustra hoc exclamante Cicerone, qui cum de poetis ageret: "Ad quos cum accessit, inquit, clamor et adprobatio populi quasi cuiusdam magni et sapientis magistri, quas illi obducunt tenebras, quos invehunt metus, quas inflammant cupiditates!"
chapter 14. We have still to inquire why the poets who write the plays, and who by the law of the twelve tables are prohibited from injuring the good name of the citizens, are reckoned more estimable than the actors, though they so shamefully asperse the character of the gods? Is it right that the actors of these poetical and God-dishonoring effusions be branded, while their authors are honored? Must we not here award the palm to a Greek, Plato, who, in framing his ideal republic, conceived that poets should be banished from the city as enemies of the state? He could not brook that the gods be brought into disrepute, nor that the minds of the citizens be depraved and besotted, by the fictions of the poets. Compare now human nature as you see it in Plato, expelling poets from the city that the citizens be uninjured, with the divine nature as you see it in these gods exacting plays in their own honor. Plato strove, though unsuccessfully, to persuade the light-minded and lascivious Greeks to abstain from so much as writing such plays; the gods used their authority to extort the acting of the same from the dignified and sober-minded Romans. And not content with having them acted, they had them dedicated to themselves, consecrated to themselves, solemnly celebrated in their own honor. To which, then, would it be more becoming in a state to decree divine honors,-to Plato, who prohibited these wicked and licentious plays, or to the demons who delighted in blinding men to the truth of what Plato unsuccessfully sought to inculcate?This philosopher, Plato, has been elevated by Labeo to the rank of a demigod, and set thus upon a level with such as Hercules and Romulus. Labeo ranks demigods higher than heroes, but both he counts among the deities. But I have no doubt that he thinks this man whom he reckons a demigod worthy of greater respect not only than the heroes, but also than the gods themselves. The laws of the Romans and the speculations of Plato have this resemblance, that the latter pronounce a wholesale condemnation of poetical fictions, while the former restrain the license of satire, at least so far as men are the objects of it. Plato will not suffer poets even to dwell in his city: the laws of Rome prohibit actors from being enrolled as citizens; and if they had not feared to offend the gods who had asked the services of the players, they would in all likelihood have banished them altogether. It is obvious, therefore, that the Romans could not receive, nor reasonably expect to receive, laws for the regulation of their conduct from their gods, since the laws they themselves enacted far surpassed and put to shame the morality of the gods. The gods demand stageplays in their own honor; the Romans exclude the players from all civic honors; the former commanded that they should be celebrated by the scenic representation of their own disgrace; the latter commanded that no poet should dare to blemish the reputation of any citizen. But that demigod Plato resisted the lust of such gods as these, and showed the Romans what their genius had left incomplete; for he absolutely excluded poets from his ideal state, whether they composed fictions with no regard to truth, or set the worst possible examples before wretched men under the guise of divine actions. We for our part, indeed, reckon Plato neither a god nor a demigod; we would not even compare him to any of God's holy angels; nor to the truth-speaking prophets, nor to any of the apostles or martyrs of Christ, nay, not to any faithful Christian man. The reason of this opinion of ours we will, God prospering us, render in its own place. Nevertheless, since they wish him to be considered a demigod, we think he certainly is more entitled to that rank, and is every way superior, if not to Hercules and Romulus (though no historian could ever narrate nor any poet sing of him that he had killed his brother, or committed any crime), yet certainly to Priapus, or a Cynocephalus, or the Fever,-divinities whom the Romans have partly received from foreigners, and partly consecrated by home-grown rites. How, then, could gods such as these be expected to promulgate good and wholesome laws, either for the prevention of moral and social evils, or for their eradication where they had already sprung up?-gods who used their influence even to sow and cherish profligacy, by appointing that deeds truly or falsely ascribed to them should be published to the people by means of theatrical exhibitions, and by thus gratuitously fanning the flame of human lust with the breath of a seemingly divine approbation. In vain does Cicero, speaking of poets, exclaim against this state of things in these words: "When the plaudits and acclamation of the people, who sit as infallible judges, are won by the poets, what darkness benights the mind, what fears invade, what passions inflame it!"
BOOK II [XV] Quae autem illic eligendorum deorum etiam ipsorum falsorum ratio ac non potius adulatio est? quando istum Platonem, quem semideum volunt, tantis disputationibus laborantem, ne animi malis, quae praecipue cavenda sunt, mores corrumperentur humani, nulla sacra aedicula dignum putarunt, et Romulum suum diis multis praetulerunt, quamuis et ipsum semideum potius quam deum ueIut secretior eorum doctrina commendet. Nam etiam flaminem illi instituerunt, quod sacerdotii genus adeo in Romanis sacris testante apice excelluit, ut tres solos flamines haberent tribus numinibus institutos, Dialem lovi, Martialem Marti, Quirinalem Romulo. Nam beneuolentia civium velut receptus in caelum Quirinus est postea nominatus. Ac per hoc et Neptuno et Plutoni, fratribus lovis, et ipsi Saturno, patri eorum, isto Romulus honore praelatus est, ut pro magno sacerdotium, quod lovi tribuerant, hoc etiam huic tribuerent, et Marti tamquam patri eius forsitan propter ipsum.
chapter 15. But is it not manifest that vanity rather than reason regulated the choice of some of their false gods? This Plato, whom they reckon a demigod, and who used all his eloquence to preserve men from the most dangerous spiritual calamities, has yet not been counted worthy even of a little shrine; but Romulus, because they can call him their own, they have esteemed more highly than many gods, though their secret doctrine can allow him the rank only of a demigod. To him they allotted a flamen, that is to say, a priest of a class so highly esteemed in their religion (distinguished, too, by their conical mitres), that for only three of their gods were flamens appointed,-the Flamen Dialis for Jupiter, Martialis for Mars, and Quirinalis for Romulus (for when the ardor of his fellow-citizens had given Romulus a seat among the gods, they gave him this new name Quirinus). And thus by this honor Romulus has been preferred to Neptune and Pluto, Jupiter's brothers, and to Saturn himself, their father. They have assigned the same priesthood to serve him as to serve Jove; and in giving Mars (the reputed father of Romulus) the same honor, is this not rather for Romulus' sake than to honor Mars?
BOOK II [XVI] Si autem a diis suis Romani vivendi leges accipere potuissent, non aliquot annos post Romam conditam ab Atheniensibus mutuarentur leges Solonis, quas tamen non ut acceperunt <tenuerunt>, sed meliores et emendatiores facere conati sunt, quamuis Lycurgus Lacedaemoniis leges ex Apollinis auctoritate se instituisse confinxerit, quod prudenter Romani credere noluerunt, propterea non inde acceperunt. Numa Pompilius, qui Romulo successit in regnum, quasdam leges, quae quidem regendae civitati nequaquam sufficerent, condidisse fertur, qui eis multa etiam sacra constituit; non tamen perhibetur easdem leges a numinibus accepisse. Mala igitur animi, mala vitae, mala morum, quae ita magna sunt, ut his doctissimi eorum viri etiam stantibus urbibus res publicas perire confirment, dii eorum, ne suis cultoribus acciderent, minime curarunt; immo vero ut augerentur, sicut supra disputatum est, omni modo curarunt.
chapter 16. Moreover, if the Romans had been able to receive a rule of life from their gods, they would not have borrowed Solon's laws from the Athenians, as they did some years after Rome was founded; and yet they did not keep them as they received them, but endeavored to improve and amend them. Although Lycurgus pretended that he was authorized by Apollo to give laws to the Lacedemonians, the sensible Romans did not choose to believe this, and were not induced to borrow laws from Sparta. Numa Pompilius, who succeeded Romulus in the kingdom, is said to have framed some laws, which, however, were not sufficient for the regulation of civic affairs. Among these regulations were many pertaining to religious observances, and yet he is not reported to have received even these from the gods. With respect, then, to moral evils, evils of life and conduct,-evils which are so mighty, that, according to the wisest pagans, by them states are ruined while their cities stand uninjured,-their gods made not the smallest provision for preserving their worshippers from these evils, but, on the contrary, took special pains to increase them, as we have previously endeavored to prove.
BOOK II [XVII] An forte populo Romano propterea leges non sunt a numinibus constitutae, quia, sicut Sallustius ait," ius bonumque apud eos non legibus magis quam natura valebat w? Ex hoc iure ac bono credo raptas Sabinas. Quid enim iustius et melius quam filias alienas fraude spectaculi inductas non a parentibus accipi, sed vi, ut quisque poterat, auferri? Nam si inique facerent Sabini negare postulatas, quanto fuit iniquius rapere non datas! Iustius autem bellum cum ea gente geri potuit, quae filias suas ad matrimonium conregionalibus et confinalibus suis negasset petitas, quam cum ea, quae repetebat ablatas. Illud ergo potius fierit; ibi Mars filium suum pugnantem ivuaret, ut coniugiorum negatorum armis ulcisceretur iniuriam, et eo modo ad feminas, quas voluerat, perveniret. Aliquo enim fortasse iure belli iniuste negatas iuste victor auferret; nullo autem iure pacis non datas rapuit et iniustum bellum cum earum parentibus iuste suscensentibus gessit. Hoc sane utilius f e licius q ue successit, quod, etsi ad memoriam fraudis illius circensium spectaculum mansit, facinoris tamen in illa civitate et imperio non placuit exemplum, faciliusque Romani in hoc erraverunt, ut post illam iniquitatem deum sibi Romulum consecrarent, quam ut in feminis rapiendis factum eius imitandum lege ulla vel more permitterent. Ex hoc iure ac bono post expulsum cum liberis suis regem Tarquinium, cuius filius Lucretiam stupro violenter oppresserat, Iunius Brutus consul Lucium Tarquinium Collatinum, maritum eiusdem Lucretiae, collegam suum, bonum atque innocentem virum, propter nomen et propinquitatem Tarquiniorum coegit magistratu se abdicare nec vivere in civitate permisit. Quod scelus favente vel patiente populo fecit, a quo populo consulatum idem Collatinus sicut etiam ipse Brutus acceperat. Ex hoc iure ac bono Marcus Camillus, illius temporis vir egregius, qui Veientes, gravissimos hostes populi Romani, post decennale bellum, quo Romanus exercitus totiens male pugnando graviter adflictus est, iam ipsa Roma de salute dubitante atque trepidante facillime superavit eorumque urbem opulentissimam cepit, inuidia obtrectatorum virtutis suae et insolentia tribunorum plebis reus factus est tamque ingratam sensit quam liberaverat civitatem, ut de sua damnatione certissimus in exilium sponte discederet et decem milia aeris absens etiam damnaretur, mox iterum a Gallis vindex patriae futurus ingratae. Multa commemorare iam piget foeda et iniusta, quibus agitabatur illa civitas, cum potentes plebem sibi subdere conarentur plebsque illis subdi recusaret, et utriusque partis defensores magis studiis agerent amore vincendi, quam aequum et bonum quicquam cogitarent.
chapter 17. But possibly we are to find the reason for this neglect of the Romans by their gods, in the saying of Sallust, that "equity and virtue prevailed among the Romans not more by force of laws than of nature." I presume it is to this inborn equity and goodness of disposition we are to ascribe the rape of the Sabine women. What, indeed, could be more equitable and virtuous, than to carry off by force, as each man was fit, and without their parents' consent, girls who were strangers and guests, and who had been decoyed and entrapped by the pretence of a spectacle! If the Sabines were wrong to deny their daughters when the Romans asked for them, was it not a greater wrong in the Romans to carry them off after that denial? The Romans might more justly have waged war against the neighboring nation for having refused their daughters in marriage when they first sought them, than for having demanded them back when they had stolen them. War should have been proclaimed at first; it was then that Mars should have helped his warlike son, that he might by force of arms avenge the injury done him by the refusal of marriage, and might also thus win the women he desired. There might have been some appearance of "right of war" in a victor carrying off, in virtue of this right, the virgins who had been without any show of right denied him; whereas there was no "right of peace" entitling him to carry off those who were not given to him, and to wage an unjust war with their justly enraged parents. One happy circumstance was indeed connected with this act of violence, viz., that though it was commemorated by the games of the circus, yet even this did not constitute it a precedent in the city or realm of Rome. If one would find fault with the results of this act, it must rather be on the ground that the Romans made Romulus a god in spite of his perpetrating this iniquity; for one cannot reproach them with making this deed any kind of precedent for the rape of women.Again, I presume it was due to this natural equity and virtue, that after the expulsion of King Tarquin, whose son had violated Lucretia, Junius Brutus the consul forced Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus, Lucretia's husband and his own colleague, a good and innocent man, to resign his office and go into banishment, on the one sole charge that he was of the name and blood of the Tarquins. This injustice was perpetrated with the approval, or at least connivance, of the people, who had themselves raised to the consular office both Collatinus and Brutus. Another instance of this equity and virtue is found in their treatment of Marcus Camillus. This eminent man, after he had rapidly conquered the Veians, at that time the most formidable of Rome's enemies, and who had maintained a ten years' war, in which the Roman army had suffered the usual calamities attendant on bad generalship, after he had restored security to Rome, which had begun to tremble for its safety, and after he had taken the wealthiest city of the enemy, had charges brought against him by the malice of those that envied his success, and by the insolence of the tribunes of the people; and seeing that the city bore him no gratitude for preserving it, and that he would certainly be condemned, he went into exile, and even in his absence was fined 10,000 asses. Shortly after, however, his ungrateful country had again to seek his protection from the Gauls. But I cannot now mention all the shameful and iniquitous acts with which Rome was agitated, when the aristocracy attempted to subject the people, and the people resented their encroachments, and the advocates of either party were actuated rather by the love of victory than by any equitable or virtuous consideration.
BOOK II [XVIII] Itaque habebo modum et ipsum Sallustium testem potius adhibebo, qui cum in laude Romanorum dixisset, unde nobis iste sermo ortus est:" lus bonumque apud eos non legibus. magis quam natura valebat, "praedicans illud tempus, quo expulsis regibus incredibiliter civitas brevi aetatis spatio plurimum crevit, idem tamen in primo historiae suae libro atque ipso eius exordio fatetur etiam tunc, cum ad consules a regibus esset translata res publica, post paruum interuallum iniurias validiorum et ob eas discessionem plebis a patribus aliasque in Vrbe dissensiones fuisse. Nam cum optimis moribus et maxima concordia populum Romanum inter secundum et postremum bellum Carthaginiense commemorasset egisse causamque huius boni non amorem iustitiae, sed stante Carthagine metum pacis infidae fuisse dixisset nunde et Nasica ille ad reprimendam nequitiam servandosque istos mores optimos, ut metu vitia cohiberentur, Carthaginem nolebat euertiJ: continuo subiecit idem Sallustius et ait:" At discordia et auaritia atque ambitio et cetera secundis rebus oriri sueta mala post Carthaginis excidium maxime aucta sunt, w ut intellegeremus etiam anteka et/ oriri solere et augeri. Vnde subnectens cur hoc dixerit:" Nam iniuriae, inquit, validiorum et ob eas discessio pleb is a patribus aliaeque dissensiones domi fuere iam inde a principio, neque amplius quam regibus exactis, dum metus a Tarquinio et bellum grave cum Etruria positum est, aequo et modesto iure agitatum. "Vides quem ad modum etiam illo tempore brevi, ut regibus exactis, id est eiectis, aliquantum aequo et modesto iure ageretur, metum dixit fuisse causam, quoniam metuebatur bellum, quod rex Tarquinius regno atque Vrbe pulsus Etruscis sociatus contra Romanos gerebat. Adtende itaque quid deinde contexat: "Dein, inquit, seruili imperio patres plebem exercere, de vita atque tergo regio more consulere, agro pellere et ceteris expertibus soli in imperio agere. Quibus saevitiis et maxime faenore oppressa plebes cum assiduis bellis tributum et militiam simul toleraret, armata montem sacrum atque Aventinum insedit, tumque tribunos plebis et alia iura sibi paravit. Discordiarum et certaminis utrimque finis fuit secundum bellum Punicum. "Cernis ex quo tempore, id est paruo interuallo post reges exactos, quales Romani fuerint, de quibus ait: "Ius bonumque apud eos non legibus magis quam natura valebat." Porro si illa tempora talia reperiuntur, quibus pulcherrima atque optima fuisse praedicatur Romana res publica, quid iam de consequenti aetate dicendum aut cogitandum arbitramur, cum" paulatim mutata, ut eiusdem historici verbis utar, ex pulcherrima atque optima pessima ac flagitiosissima facta est, "post Carthaginis videlicet, ut commemoravit, excidium? Quae tempora ipse Sallustius quem ad modum breviter recolat et describat, in eius historia legi potest; quantis malis morum, quae secundis rebus exorta sunt, usque ad bella civilia demonstret esse peruentum." Ex quo tempore, ut ait, maiorum mores non paulatim ut antea, sed torrentis modo praecipitati, adeo ivuentus luxu a tque au a ritia corrupta, ut merito dicatur genitos esse, qui neque ipsi habere possent res familiares neque alios pati. "Dicit deinde plura Sallustius de Sullae vitiis ceteraque foeditate rei publicae, et alii scriptores in haec consentiunt, quamuis eloquio multum impari. Cernis tamen, ut opinor, et q visquis adverterit, facillime perspicit, conluuie morum pess i mor u "quo illa civitas prolapsa fuerit ante nostri superni regis adventum. Haec enim gesta sunt non solum antequam Christus in carne praesens docere coepisset, verum etiam antequam de virgine natus esset. Cum igitur tot et tanta mala temporum illorum vel tolerabiliora superius, vel post euersam Carthaginem intoleranda et horrenda diis suis inputare non audeant, opiniones humanis mentibus, unde talia vitia siluescerent, astutia maligna inserentibus: cur mala praesentia Christo inputant, qui doctrina saluberrima et falsos ac fallaces deos coli uetat et istas hominum noxias flagitioSasque cupiditates divina auctoritate detestans atque condemnans his malis tabescenti ac labenti mundo ubique familiam suam sensim subtrahit, qua condat aeternam et non plausu uanitatis, sed iudicio veritatis gloriosissimam civitatem?
chapter 18. I will therefore pause, and adduce the testimony of Sallust himself, whose words in praise of the Romans (that "equity and virtue prevailed among them not more by force of laws than of nature") have given occasion to this discussion. He was referring to that period immediately after the expulsion of the kings, in which the city became great in an incredibly short space of time. And yet this same writer acknowledges in the first book of his history, in the very exordium of his work, that even at that time, when a very brief interval had elapsed after the government had passed from kings to consuls, the more powerful men began to act unjustly, and occasioned the defection of the people from the patricians, and other disorders in the city. For after Sallust had stated that the Romans enjoyed greater harmony and a purer state of society between the second and third Punic wars than at any other time, and that the cause of this was not their love of good order, but their fear lest the peace they had with Carthage might be broken (this also, as we mentioned, Nasica contemplated when he opposed the destruction of Carthage, for he supposed that fear would tend to repress wickedness, and to preserve wholesome ways of living), he then goes on to say: "Yet, after the destruction of Carthage, discord, avarice, am bition, and the other vices which are commonly generated by prosperity, more than ever increased." If they "increased," and that "more than ever," then already they had appeared, and had been increasing. And so Sallust adds this reason for what he said. "For," he says, "the oppressive measures of the powerful, and the consequent secessions of the plebs from the patricians, and other civil dissensions, had existed from the first, and affairs were administered with equity and well-tempered justice for no longer a period than the short time after the expulsion of the kings, while the city was occupied with the serious Tuscan war and Tarquin's vengeance." You see how, even in that brief period after the expulsion of the kings, fear, he acknowledges, was the cause of the interval of equity and good order. They were afraid, in fact, of the war which Tarquin waged against them, after he had been driven from the throne and the city, and had allied himself with the Tuscans. But observe what he adds: "After that, the patricians treated the people as their slaves, ordering them to be scourged or beheaded just as the kings had done, driving them from their holdings, and harshly tyrannizing over those who had no property to lose. The people, overwhelmed by these oppressive measures, and most of all by exorbitant usury, and obliged to contribute both money and personal service to the constant wars, at length took arms and seceded to Mount Aventine and Mount Sacer, and thus obtained for themselves tribunes and protective laws. But it was only the second Punic war that put an end on both sides to discord and strife." You see what kind of men the Romans were, even so early as a few years after the expulsion of the kings; and it is of these men he says, that "equity and virtue prevailed among them not more by force of law than of nature."Now, if these were the days in which the Roman republic shows fairest and best, what are we to say or think of the succeeding age, when, to use the words of the same historian, "changing little by little from the fair and virtuous city it was, it became utterly wicked and dissolute?" This was, as he mentions, after the destruction of Carthage. Sallust's brief sum and sketch of this period may be read in his own history, in which he shows how the profligate manners which were propagated by prosperity resulted at last even in civil wars. He says: "And from this time the primitive manners, instead of undergoing an insensible alteration as hitherto they had done, were swept away as by a torrent: the young men were so depraved by luxury and avarice, that it may justly be said that no father had a son who could either preserve his own patrimony, or keep his hands off other men's." Sallust adds a number of particulars about the vices of Sylla, and the debased condition of the republic in general; and other writers make similar observations, though in much less striking language.However, I suppose you now see, or at least any one who gives his attention has the means of seeing, in what a sink of iniquity that city was plunged before the advent of our heavenly King. For these things happened not only before Christ had begun to teach, but before He was even born of the Virgin. If, then, they dare not impute to their gods the grievous evils of those former times, more tolerable before the destruction of Carthage, but intolerable and dreadful after it, although it was the gods who by their malign craft instilled into the minds of men the conceptions from which such dreadful vices branched out on all sides, why do they impute these present calamities to Christ, who teaches life-giving truth, and forbids us to worship false and deceitful gods, and who, abominating and condemning with His divine authority those wicked and hurtful lusts of men, gradually withdraws His own people from a world that is corrupted by these vices, and is falling into ruins, to make of them an eternal city, whose glory rests not on the acclamations of vanity, but on the judgment of truth?
BOOK II [XIX] Ecce Romana res publica nquod non ego primus dico, sed auctores eorum, unde haec mercede didicimus, tanto ante dixerunt ante Christi adventum/ "paulatim mutata ex pulcherrima atque optima pessima ac flagitiosissima facta est. w Ecce ante Christi adventum, post deletam Carthaginem m maiorum mores non paulatim, ut antea, sed torrentis modo praecipitati, adeo ivuentus luxu atque auaritia corrupta est. w Legant nobis contra Iuxum et auaritiam praecepta deorum suorum populo Romano data; cui utinam tantum casta et modesta reticerent, ac non etiam ab illo probrosa et ignominiosa deposcerent, quibus per falsam divinitatem perniciosam conciliarent auctoritatem. Legant nostra et per prophetas et per sanctum euangelium, et per apostolicos actus et per epistulas tam multa contra auaritiam atque luxuriam ubique populis ad hoc congregatis quam excellenter, quam divine non tamquam ex philosophorum concertationibus strepere, sed tamquam ex oraculis et Dei nubibus intonare. Et tamen luxu atque auaritia saevisque ac turpibus moribus ante adventum Christi rem publicam pessimam ac flagitiosissimam factam non inputant diis suis; adflictionem vero eius, quamcumque isto tempore superbia deliciaeque eorum perpessae fuerint, religioni increpitant Christianae. Cuius praecepta de iustis probisque moribus si simul audirent atque curarent reges terrae et omnes populi, principes et omnes iudices terrae, ivuenes et virgines, seniores cum iunioribus, aetas omnis capax et uterque sexus, et quos baptista lohannes adloquitur, exactores ipsi atque milites: et terras vitae praesentis ornaret sua felicitate res publica, et vitae aeternae culmen beatissime regnatura conscenderet. Sed quia iste audit, ille contemnit, pluresque vitiis male blandientibus quam utili virtutum asperitati sunt amiciores: tolerare Christi famuli iubentur, sive sint reges sive principes sive iudices, sive milites sive provinciales, sive divites sive pauperes, sive liberi sive serui, utriuslibet sexus, etiam pessimam, si ita necesse est, flagitiosissimamque rem publicam et in illa angelorum quadam sanctissima atque augustissima curia caelestique re publica, ubi Dei voluntas lex est, clarissimum sibi locum etiam ista tolerantia comparare.
chapter 19. Here, then, is this Roman republic, "which has changed little by little from the fair and virtuous city it was, and has become utterly wicked and dissolute." It is not I who am the first to say this, but their own authors, from whom we learned it for a fee, and who wrote it long before the coming of Christ. You see how, before the coming of Christ, and after the destruction of Carthage, "the primitive manners, instead of undergoing insensible alteration, as hitherto they had done, were swept away as by a torrent; and how depraved by luxury and avarice the youth were." Let them now, on their part, read to us any laws given by their gods to the Roman people, and directed against luxury and avarice. And would that they had only been silent on the subjects of chastity and modesty, and had not demanded from the people indecent and shameful practices, to which they lent a pernicious patronage by their so-called divinity. Let them read our commandments in the Prophets, Gospels, Acts of the Apostles or Epistles; let them peruse the large number of precepts against avarice and luxury which are everywhere read to the congregations that meet for this purpose, and which strike the ear, not with the uncertain sound of a philosophical discussion, but with the thunder of God's own oracle pealing from the clouds. And yet they do not impute to their gods the luxury and avarice, the cruel and dissolute manners, that had rendered the republic utterly wicked and corrupt, even before the coming of Christ; but whatever affliction their pride and effeminacy have exposed them to in these latter days, they furiously impute to our religion. If the kings of the earth and all their subjects, if all princes and judges of the earth, if young men and maidens, old and young, every age, and both sexes; if they whom the Baptist addressed, the publicans and the soldiers, were all together to hearken to and observe the precepts of the Christian religion regarding a just and virtuous life, then should the republic adorn the whole earth with its own felicity, and attain in life everlasting to the pinnacle of kingly glory. But because this man listens and that man scoffs, and most are enamored of the blandishments of vice rather than the wholesome severity of virtue, the people of Christ, whatever be their condition-whether they be kings, princes, judges, soldiers, or provincials, rich or poor, bond or free, male or female-are enjoined to endure this earthly republic, wicked and dissolute as it is, that so they may by this endurance win for themselves an eminent place in that most holy and august assembly of angels and republic of heaven, in which the will of God is the law.
BOOK II [XX] Verum tales cultores et dilectores deorum istorum, quorum etiam imitatores in sceleribus et flagitiis se esse laetantur, nullo modo curant pessimam ac flagitiosissimam unonJ esse rem publicam. "Tantum stet, inquiunt, tantum fioreat copiis referta, victoriis gloriosa, vel, quod est felicius, pace secura sit. Et quid ad nos? Immo id ad nos magis pertinet, si divitias quisque augeat semper, quae cotidianis effusionibus suppetant, per quas sibi etiam infirmiores subdat quisque potentior. Obsequantur divitibus pauperes causa saturitatis atque ut eorum patrociniis quieta inertia perfruantur, divites pauperibus ad clientelas et ad ministerium sui fastus abutantur. Populi plaudant non consultoribus utilitatum suarum, sed largitoribus voluptatum. Non dura iubeantur, non prohibeantur inpura. Reges non curent quam bonis, sed quam subditis regnent. Provinciae regibus non tamquam rectoribus morum, sed tamquam rerum dominatoribus et deliciarum suarum provisoribus seruiant, eosque non sinceriter honorent, sed knequiter ac/ seruiliter timeant. Quid alienae vineae potius quam quid suae vitae quisque noceat, legibus advertatur. Nullus ducatur ad iudicem, nisi qui alienae rei domui saluti vel cuiquam inuito fuerit inportunus aut noxius; ceterum de suis vel cum suis vel cum quibusque volentibus faciat quisqu e quod libet. Abundent publica scorta vel propter omnes, quibus frui placuerit, vel propter eos maxime, qui habere privata non possunt. Exstruantur amplissimae atque ornatissimae domus, opipara conuivia frequententur, ubi cuique libuerit et potuerit, diu noctuque ludatur bibatur, vomatur diffluatur. Saltationes undique concrepent, theatra inhonestae laetitiae vocibus atque omni genere sive crudelissimae sive turpissimae voluptatis exaestuent. Ille sit publicus inimicus, cui haec felicitas displicet; quisquis eam mutare vel auferre temptaverit, eum libera multitudo avertat ab auribus, euertat a sedibus, auferat a viventibus. Illi habeantur dii veri, qui hanc adipiscendam populis procuraverint adeptamque servaverint. Colantur ut voluerint, ludos exposcant quales voluerint, quos cum suis vel de suis possint habere cultoribus: tantum efficiant, ut tali felicitati nihil ab hoste, nihil a peste, nihil ab ulla clade timeatur. "Quis hanc rem publicam sanus, non dicam Romano imperio, sed domui Sardanapali comparaverit? qui quondam rex ita fuit voluptatibus deditus, ut in sepulcro suo scribi fecerit ea sola se habere mortuum, quae libido eius, etiam cum viveret, hauriendo consumpserat. Quem regem si isti haberent sibi in talibus indulgentem nec in eis cuiquam ulla seueritate adversantem, huic libentius quam Romani ueteres Romulo templum et flaminem consecrarent.
chapter 20. But the worshippers and admirers of these gods delight in imitating their scandalous iniquities, and are nowise concerned that the republic be less depraved and licentious. Only let it remain undefeated, they say, only let it flourish and abound in resources; let it be glorious by its victories, or still better, secure in peace; and what matters it to us? This is our concern, that every man be able to increase his wealth so as to supply his daily prodigalities, and so that the powerful may subject the weak for their own purposes. Let the poor court the rich for a living, and that under their protection they may enjoy a sluggish tranquillity; and let the rich abuse the poor as their dependants, to minister to their pride. Let the people applaud not those who protect their interests, but those who provide them with pleasure. Let no severe duty be commanded, no impurity forbidden. Let kings estimate their prosperity, not by the righteousness, but by the servility of their subjects. Let the provinces stand loyal to the kings, not as moral guides, but as lords of their possessions and purveyors of their pleasures; not with a hearty reverence, but a crooked and servile fear. Let the laws take cognizance rather of the injury done to another man's property, than of that done to one's own person. If a man be a nuisance to his neighbor, or injure his property, family, or person, let him be actionable; but in his own affairs let everyone with impunity do what he will in company with his own family, and with those who willingly join him. Let there be a plentiful supply of public prostitutes for every one who wishes to use them, but specially for those who are too poor to keep one for their private use. Let there be erected houses of the largest and most ornate description: in these let there be provided the most sumptuous banquets, where every one who pleases may, by day or night, play, drink, vomit, dissipate. Let there be everywhere heard the rustling of dancers, the loud, immodest laughter of the theatre; let a succession of the most cruel and the most voluptuous pleasures maintain a perpetual excitement. If such happiness is distasteful to any, let him be branded as a public enemy; and if any attempt to modify or put an end to it let him be silenced, banished, put an end to. Let these be reckoned the true gods, who procure for the people this condition of things, and preserve it when once possessed. Let them be worshipped as they wish; let them demand whatever games they please, from or with their own worshippers; only let them secure that such felicity be not imperilled by foe, plague, or disaster of any kind. What sane man would compare a republic such as this, I will not say to the Roman empire, but to the palace of Sardanapalus, the ancient king who was so abandoned to pleasures, that he caused it to be inscribed on his tomb, that now that he was dead, he possessed only those things which he had swallowed and consumed by his appetites while alive? If these men had such a king as this, who, while self-indulgent, should lay no severe restraint on them, they would more enthusiastically consecrate to him a temple and a flamen than the ancient Romans did to Romulus.
BOOK II [XXI] Sed si contemnitur qui Romanam rem publicam pessima" ac flagitiosissimam dixit, nec curant isti quanta morum pessimorum ac flagitiosorum labe ac dedecore impleatur, sed tantummodo ut consistat et maneat: audiant eam non, ut Sallustius narrat, pessimam ac flagitiosissimam factam, sed, sicut Cicero disputat, iam tunc prorsus perisse et nullam omnino remansisse rem publicam. Inducit enim Scipionem, eum ipsum qui Carthaginem extinxerat, de re publica disputantem, quand o pr a esentiebatur ea corruptione, quam describit Sallustius, iam iamque peritura. Eo quippe tempore disputatur, quo iam unus Gracchorum occisus fuit, a quo scribit seditiones graves coepisse Sallustius. Nam mortis eius fit in eisdem libris commemoratio. Cum autem Scipio in secundi libri fine dixisset, "ut in fidibus aut tibiis atque cantu ipso ac vocibus concentus est quidam tenendus ex distinctis sonis, quem inmutatum aut discrepantem aures eruditae ferre non possunt, isque concentus ex dissimillimarum vocum moderatione concors tamen efficitur et congruens: sic ex summis et infimis et mediis interiectis ordinibus, ut sonis, moderata ratione civitatem consensu dissimillimorum concinere, et quae harmonia a musicis dicitur in cantu, eam esse in civitate concordiam, artissimum atque optimum omni in re publica vinculum incolumitatis, eamque sine iustitia nullo pacto esse posse, "ac deinde cum aliquanto latius et uberius disseruisset, quantum prodesset iustitia civitati quantumque obesset, si afuisset, suscepit deinde Philus, unus eorum qui disputationi aderant, et poposcit, ut haec ipsa quaestio diligentius tractaretur ac de iustitia plura dicerentur, propter illud, quod iam uulgo ferebatur rem publicam regi sine iniuria non posse. Hanc proinde quaestionem discutiendam et enodandam esse adsensus est Scipio responditque nihil esse, quod adhuc de re publica dictum putaret, quo possent longius progredi, nisi esset confirmatum non modo falsum esse illud, sine iniuria non posse, sed hoc verissimum esse, sine summa iustitia rem publicam regi non posse. Cuius quaestionis explicatio cum in diem consequentem dilata esset, in tertio libro magna conflictione res acta est. Suscepit enim Philus ipse disputationem eorum, qui sentirent sine iniustitia geri non posse rem publicam, purgans praecipue, ne hoc ipse sentire crederetur, egitque sedulo pro iniustitia contra iustitiam, ut hanc esse utilem rei publicae, illam vero inutilem, veri similibus rationibus et exemplis velut conaretur ostendere. Tum Laelius rogantibus omnibus iustitiam defend ere a dgressus est adseruitque, quantum potuit, nihil tam inimicum quam iniustitiam civitati nec omnino nisi magna iustitia geri aut stare posse rem publicam. Qua quaestione, quantum satis visum est, pertractata Scipio ad intermissa reuertitur recolitque suam atque commendat breuem rei publicae definitionem, qua dixerat eam esse rem populi. Populum autem non omnem coetum multitudinis, sed coetum iuris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatum esse determinat. Docet deinde quanta sit in disputando definitionis utilitas, atque ex illis suis definitionibus colligit tunc esse rem publicam, id e st rem populi, cum bene ac iuste geritur sive ab uno rege sive a paucis optimatibus sive ab universo populo. Cum vero iniustus est rex, quem tyrannum more Graeco appellavit, aut iniusti optimates, quorum consensum dixit esse factionem, aut iniustus ipse populus, cui nomen usitatum non repperit, nisi ut etiam ipsum tyrannum vocaret: non iam vitiosam, sicut pridie fuerat disputatum, sed, sicut ratio ex illis definitionibus conexa docuisset, omnino nullam esse rem publicam, quoniam non esset res populi, cum tyrannus eam factiove capesseret, n ec ipse populus iam po p ul u s esset, si esset iniustus, quoniam non esset multitudo iuris consensu et utilitatis communione sociata, sicut populus fuerat definitus. Quando ergo res publica Romana talis erat, qualem illam describit Sallustius, non iam pessima ac flagitiosissima, sicut ipse ait, sed omnino nulla erat secundum istam rationem, quam disputatio de re publica inter magnos eius tum principes habita patefecit. Sicut etiam ipse Tullius no n Sc i pi oni s nec cuiusquam alterius, sed suo sermone loquens in prJncipio quinti libri commemorato prius Enni poetae versu, quo dixerat: Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque. m Quem quidem ille versum, inquit, vel brevitate vel veritate tamquam e x o raculo quodam mihi esse effatus videtur. Nam neque viri, nisi ita morata civitas fuisset, neque mores, nisi hi viri praefuissent, aut fundare aut tam diu tenere potuissent tantam et tam uaste lateque imperantem rem publicam. Itaque ante nostram memoriam et mos ipse patrius praestantes viros adhibebat, et ueterem morem ac maiorum instituta retinebant excellentes viri. Nostra vero aetas cum rem publicam sicut picturam accepisset egregiam, sed euanescentem uetustate, non modo eam coloribus isdem quibus fuerat renouare neglexit, sed ne id quidem curavit, ut formam saltem eius et extrema tamquam liniamenta servaret. Quid enim manet ex antiquis moribus, quibus ille dixit rem stare Romanam, quos ita oblivione obsoletos videmus, ut non modo non colantur, sed iam ignorentur? Nam de viris quid dicam? Mores enim ipsi interierunt virorum penuria, cuius tanti mali non modo reddenda ratio nobis, sed etiam tamquam reis capitis quodam modo dicenda causa est. Nostris enim vitiis, non casu aliquo, rem publicam verbo retinemus, re ipsa vero iam pridem amisimus. w Haec Cicero fatebatur, longe quidem post mortem Africani, quem in suis libris fecit de re publica disputare, adhuc tamen ante adventum Christi; quae si diffamata et praeualescente religione Christiana sentirentur atque dicerentur, quis non istorum ea Christianis inputanda esse censeret? Quam ob rem cur non curarunt dii eorum, ne tunc periret atque amitteretur illa res publica, quam Cicero longe, antequam Christus in carne venisset, tam lugubriter deplorat amissam? Viderint laudatores eius etiam illis antiquis viris et moribus qualis fuerit, utrum in ea viguerit vera iustitia an forte nec tunc fuerit viva moribus, sed picta coloribus; quod et ipse Cicero nesciens, cum eam praeferret, expressit. Sed alias, si Dneus voluerit, hoc videbimus. Enitar enim suo loco, ut ostendam secundum definitiones ipsius Ciceronis, quibus quid sit res publica et quid sit populus loquente Scipione breviter posuit (adtestantibus etiam multis sive ipsius sive eorum quos loqui fecit in eadem disputatione sententiis), numquam illam fuisse rem publicam, quia numquam in ea fuerit vera iustitia. Secundum probabiliores autem definitiones pro suo modo quodam res publica fuit, et melius ab antiquioribus Romanis quam a posterioribus administrata est; vera autem iustitia non est nisi in ea re publica, cuius conditor rectorque Christus est, si et ipsam rem publicam placet dicere, quoniam eam rem populi esse negare non possumus. Si autem hoc nomen, quod alibi aliterque uulgatum est, ab usu nostrae locutionis est forte remotius, in ea certe civitate est vera iustitia, de qua scriptura sancta dicit: Gloriosa dicta sunt de te, civitas Dei.
chapter 21. But if our adversaries do not care how foully and disgracefully the Roman republic be stained by corrupt practices, so long only as it holds together and continues in being, and if they therefore pooh-pooh the testimony of Sallust to its "utterly wicked and profligate" condition, what will they make of Cicero's statement, that even in his time it had become entirely extinct, and that there remained extant no Roman republic at all? He introduces Scipio (the Scipio who had destroyed Carthage) discussing the republic, at a time when already there were presentiments of its speedy ruin by that corruption which Sallust describes. In fact, at the time when the discussion took place, one of the Gracchi, who, according to Sallust, was the first great instigator of seditions, had already been put to death. His death, indeed, is mentioned in the same book. Now Scipio, at the end of the second book, says: "As among the different sounds which proceed from lyres, flutes, and the human voice, there must be maintained a certain harmony which a cultivated ear cannot endure to hear disturbed or jarring, but which may be elicited in full and absolute concord by the modulation even of voices very unlike one another; so, where reason is allowed to modulate the diverse elements of the state, there is obtained a perfect concord from the upper, lower, and middle classes as from various sounds; and what musicians call harmony in singing, is concord in matters of state, which is the strictest bond and best security of any republic, and which by no ingenuity can be retained where justice has become extinct." Then, when he had expatiated somewhat more fully, and had more copiously illustrated the benefits of its presence and the ruinous effects of its absence upon a state, Pilus, one of the company present at the discussion, struck in and demanded that the question should be more thoroughly sifted, and that the subject of justice should be freely discussed for the sake of ascertaining what truth there was in the maxim which was then becoming daily more current, that "the republic cannot be governed without injustice." Scipio expressed his willingness to have this maxim discussed and sifted, and gave it as his opinion that it was baseless, and that no progress could be made in discussing the republic unless it was established, not only that this maxim, that "the republic cannot be governed without injustice," was false, but also that the truth is, that it cannot be governed without the most absolute justice. And the discussion of this question, being deferred till the next day, is carried on in the third book with great animation. For Pilus himself undertook to defend the position that the republic cannot be governed without injustice, at the same time being at special pains to clear himself of any real participation in that opinion. He advocated with great keenness the cause of injustice against justice, and endeavored by plausible reasons and examples to demonstrate that the former is beneficial, the latter useless, to the republic. Then, at the request of the company, Lжlius attempted to defend justice, and strained every nerve to prove that nothing is so hurtful to a state as injustice; and that without justice a republic can neither be governed, nor even continue to exist.When this question has been handled to the satisfaction of the company, Scipio reverts to the original thread of discourse, and repeats with commendation his own brief definition of a republic, that it is the weal of the people. "The people" he defines as being not every assemblage or mob, but an assemblage associated by a common acknowledgment of law, and by a community of interests. Then he shows the use of definition in debate; and from these definitions of his own he gathers that a republic, or "weal of the people," then exists only when it is well and justly governed, whether by a monarch, or an aristocracy, or by the whole people. But when the monarch is unjust, or, as the Greeks say, a tyrant; or the aristocrats are unjust, and form a faction; or the people themselves are unjust, and become, as Scipio for want of a better name calls them, themselves the tyrant, then the republic is not only blemished (as had been proved the day before), but by legitimate deduction from those definitions, it altogether ceases to be. For it could not be the people's weal when a tyrant factiously lorded it over the state; neither would the people be any longer a people if it were unjust, since it would no longer answer the definition of a people-"an assemblage associated by a common acknowledgment of law, and by a community of interests."When, therefore, the Roman republic was such as Sallust described it, it was not "utterly wicked and profligate," as he says, but had altogether ceased to exist, if we are to admit the reasoning of that debate maintained on the subject of the republic by its best representatives. Tully himself, too, speaking not in the person of Scipio or any one else, but uttering his own sentiments, uses the following language in the beginning of the fifth book, after quoting a line from the poet Ennius, in which he said, "Rome's severe morality and her citizens are her safeguard." "This verse," says Cicero, "seems to me to have all the sententious truthfulness of an oracle. For neither would the citizens have availed without the morality of the community, nor would the morality of the commons without outstanding men have availed either to establish or so long to maintain in vigor so grand a republic with so wide and just an empire. Accordingly, before our day, the hereditary usages formed our foremost men, and they on their part retained the usages and institutions of their fathers. But our age, receiving the republic as a chef-d'oeuvre of another age which has already begun to grow old, has not merely neglected to restore the colors of the original, but has not even been at the pains to preserve so much as the general outline and most outstanding features. For what survives of that primitive morality which the poet called Rome's safeguard? It is so obsolete and forgotten, that, far from practising it, one does not even know it. And of the citizens what shall I say? Morality has perished through poverty of great men; a poverty for which we must not only assign a reason, but for the guilt of which we must answer as criminals charged with a capital crime. For it is through our vices, and not by any mishap, that we retain only the name of a republic, and have long since lost the reality."This is the confession of Cicero, long indeed after the death of Africanus, whom he introduced as an interlocutor in his work De Republica, but still before the coming of Christ. Yet, if the disasters he bewails had been lamented after the Christian religion had been diffused, and had begun to prevail, is there a man of our adversaries who would not have thought that they were to be imputed to the Christians? Why, then, did their gods not take steps then to prevent the decay and extinction of that republic, over the loss of which Cicero, long before Christ had come in the flesh, sings so lugubrious a dirge? Its admirers have need to inquire whether, even in the days of primitive men and morals, true justice flourished in it; or was it not perhaps even then, to use the casual expression of Cicero, rather a colored painting than the living reality? But, if God will, we shall consider this elsewhere. For I mean in its own place to show that-according to the definitions in which Cicero himself, using Scipio as his mouthpiece, briefly propounded what a republic is, and what a people is, and according to many testimonies, both of his own lips and of those who took part in that same debate-Rome never was a republic, because true justice had never a place in it. But accepting the more feasible definitions of a republic, I grant there was a republic of a certain kind, and certainly much better administered by the more ancient Romans than by their modern representatives. But the fact is, true justice has no existence save in that republic whose founder and ruler is Christ, if at least any choose to call this a republic; and indeed we cannot deny that it is the people's weal. But if perchance this name, which has become familiar in other connections, be considered alien to our common parlance, we may at all events say that in this city is true justice; the city of which Holy Scripture says, "Glorious things are said of you, O city of God."
BOOK II [XXII] Sed quod pertinet ad praesentem quaestionem, quamlibet laudabilem dicant istam fuisse vel esse rem publicam, secundum eorum auctores doctissimos iam longe ante Christi adventum pessima ac f lagitio s issima facta erat; immo vero nulla erat atque omnino perierat perditissimis moribus. Vt ergo non periret, dii custodes eius populo cultori suo dare praecipue vitae ac morum praecepta debuerunt, a quo tot templis, tot sacerdotibus et sacrificiorum generibus, tam multiplicibus variisque sacris, tot festis sollemnitatibus, tot tantorumque ludorum celebritatibus colebantur; ubi nihil daemones nisi negotium suum egerunt, non curantes quem ad modum illi viverent, immo curantes ut etiam perdite viverent, dum tamen honori suo illa omnia metu subditi ministrarent. Aut si dederunt, proferatur ostendatur legatur, quas deorum leges illi civitati datas contempserint Gracchi, ut seditionibus cuncta turbarent, quas Marius et Cinna et Carbo, ut in bella etiam progrederentur civilia causis iniquissimis suscepta et crudeliter gesta crudeliusque finita, quas denique SmIa ipse, cuius vitam mores facta describente Sallustio aliisque scriptoribus historiae quis non exhorreat? quis illam rem publicam non tunc perisse fateatur? An forte propter huiusce modi civium mores ЎЃVergilianam illam sententiam, sicut solent, pro defensione deorum suorum opponere audebunt: Discessere omnes adytis arisque relictis Di, quibus imperium hoc steterat? Primum si ita est, non habent cur querantur de religione Christiana, quod hac offensi eos dii sui deseruerint, quoniam quidem maiores eorum iam pridem moribus suis ab Vrbis altaribus tam multos ac minutos deos tamquam muscas abegerunt. Sed tamen haec numinum turba ubi erat, cum longe antequam mores corrumperentur antiqui a Gallis Roma capta et incensa est? An praesentes forte dormiebant? Tunc enim tota Vrbe in hostium potestatem redacta solus collis Capitolinus remanserat, qui etiam ipse caperetur, nisi saltem anseres diis dormientibus vigilarent. Vnde paene in superstitionem Aegyptiorum bestias avesque colentium Roma deciderat, cum anseri sollemnia celebrabant. Verum de his adventiciis et corporis potius quam animi malis, quae vel ab hostibus vel alia clade accidunt, nondum interim disputo: nunc ago de labe morum, quibus primum paulatim decoloratis, deinde torrentis modo praecipitatis tanta quamuis integris tectis moenibusque facta est ruina rei publicae, ut magni auctores eorum eam tunc amissam non dubitent dicere. Recte autem abscesserant, ut amitteretur, omnes adytis arisque relictis di, si eorum de bona vita atque iustitia civitas praecepta contempserat. Nunc vero quales, quaeso, dii fuerunt, si noluerunt cum populo cultore suo vivere, quem male viventem non docuerant bene vivere?
chapter 22. But what is relevant to the present question is this, that however admirable our adversaries say the republic was or is, it is certain that by the testimony of their own most learned writers it had become, long before the coming of Christ, utterly wicked and dissolute, and indeed had no existence, but had been destroyed by profligacy. To prevent this, surely these guardian gods ought to have given precepts of morals and a rule of life to the people by whom they were worshipped in so many temples, with so great a variety of priests and sacrifices, with such numberless and diverse rites, so many festal solemnities, so many celebrations of magnificent games. But in all this the demons only looked after their own interest, and cared not at all how their worshippers lived, or rather were at pains to induce them to lead an abandoned life, so long as they paid these tributes to their honor, and regarded them with fear. If any one denies this, let him produce, let him point to, let him read the laws which the gods had given against sedition, and which the Gracchi transgressed when they threw everything into confusion; or those Marius, and Cinna, and Carbo broke when they involved their country in civil wars, most iniquitous and unjustifiable in their causes, cruelly conducted, and yet more cruelly terminated; or those which Sylla scorned, whose life, character, and deeds, as described by Sallust and other historians, are the abhorrence of all mankind. Who will deny that at that time the republic had become extinct?Possibly they will be bold enough to suggest in defence of the gods, that they abandoned the city on account of the profligacy of the citizens, according to the lines of Virgil:"Gone from each fane, each sacred shrine,Are those who made this realm divine."But, firstly, if it be so, then they cannot complain against the Christian religion, as if it were that which gave offence to the gods and caused them to abandon Rome, since the Roman immorality had long ago driven from the altars of the city a cloud of little gods, like as many flies. And yet where was this host of divinities, when, long before the corruption of the primitive morality, Rome was taken and burnt by the Gauls? Perhaps they were present, but asleep? For at that time the whole city fell into the hands of the enemy, with the single exception of the Capitoline hill; and this too would have been taken, had not-the watchful geese aroused the sleeping gods! And this gave occasion to the festival of the goose, in which Rome sank nearly to the superstition of the Egyptians, who worship beasts and birds. But of these adventitious evils which are inflicted by hostile armies or by some disaster, and which attach rather to the body than the soul, I am not meanwhile disputing. At present I speak of the decay of morality, which at first almost imperceptibly lost its brilliant hue, but afterwards was wholly obliterated, was swept away as by a torrent, and involved the republic in such disastrous ruin, that though the houses and walls remained standing the leading writers do not scruple to say that the republic was destroyed. Now, the departure of the gods "from each fane, each sacred shrine," and their abandonment of the city to destruction, was an act of justice, if their laws inculcating justice and a moral life had been held in contempt by that city. But what kind of gods were these, pray, who declined to live with a people who worshipped them, and whose corrupt life they had done nothing to reform?
BOOK II [XXIII] Quid quod etiam videntur eorum adfuisse cupiditatibus implendis, et ostenduntur non praefuisse kreVfrenandis, qui enim Marium nouum hominem et ignobilem, cruentissimum auctorem bellorum civilium atque gestorem, ut septiens consul fieret adivuerunt atque ut in septimo suo consulatu moreretur, senex ne in manus Sullae futuri mox victoris inrueret. Si enim ad haec eum dii eorum non ivuerunt, non parum est quod fatentur etiam non propitiis diis suis posse accidere homini istam temporalem, quam nimis diligunt, tantam felicitatem et posse homines, sicut fuit Marius, salute viribus, opibus honoribus, dignitate longaevitate cumulari et perfrui diis iratis; posse etiam homines, sicut fuit Regulus, captivitate seruitute inopia, vigiliis doloribus excruciari et emori diis amicis. Quod si ita esse concedunt, compendio nihil eos prodesse et coli superfluo confitentur. Nam si virtutibus animi et probitati vitae, cuius praernia post mortem speranda sunt, magis contraria ut popuIus disceret institerunt; si nihil etianI in his transeuntibus et temporalibus bonis vel eis quos oderunt nocent, vel eis quos diligunt prosunt, ut quid coluntur, ut quid tanto studio colendi requiruntur? Cur laboriosis tristibusque temporibus, tamquam offensi abscesserint, murmuratur et propter eos Christiana religio conuiciis indignissimis laeditur? Si autem habent in his rebus vel beneficii vel maleficii potestatem, cur in eis adfuerunt pessimo viro Mario, et optimo Regulo defuerunt? An ex hoc ipsi intelleguntur iniustissimi et pessimi? Quod si propterea magis timendi et colendi putantur: neque hoc putentur; neque enim minus eos invenitur ReguIus coluisse q uam M arius. Nec ideo vita pessima eligenda videatur, quia magis Mario quam Regulo dii favisse existimantur. Metellus enim Romanorum laudatissimus, qui habuit quinque filios consulares, etiam rerum temporalium felix fuit, et Catilina pessimus oppressus inopia et in bello sui sceleris prostratus infelix, et verissima atque certissima felicitate praepollent boni Deum colentes, a quo solo conferri potest. Illa igitur res publica malis moribus cum periret, nihil dii eorum pro dirigendis vel pro corrigendis egerunt moribus, ne periret; immo deprauandis et corrumpendis addiderunt moribus, ut periret. Nec se bonos fingant, quod velut offensi civium iniquitate discesserint. Prorsus ibi erant; produntur, conuincuntur; nec subvenire praecipiendo nec latere tacendo potuerunt. Omitto quod Marius a miserantibus Minturnensibus Maricae deae in luco eius commendatus est, ut ei omnia prosperaret, et ex summa desperatione reuersus incolumis in Vrbem duxit crudelem crudelis exercitum; ubi quam cruenta, quam incivilis hostilique inmanior eius victoria fuerit, eos qui scripserunt legant qui volunt. Sed hoc, ut dixi, omitto, nec Maricae nescio cui tribuo Marii sanguineam felicitatem, sed occultae potius providentiae Dei ad istorum ora claudenda eosque ab errore liberandos, qui non studiis agunt, sed haec prudenter advertunt, quia, etsi aliquid in his rebus daemones possunt, tantum possunt, quantum secreto omnipotentis arbitrio permittuntur, ne magnipendamus terrenam felicitatem, quae sicut Mario malis etiam plerumque conceditur, nec eam rursus quasi malam arbitremur, cum ea multos etiam pios ac bonos unius veri Dei cultores inuitis daemonibus praepolluisse videamus, nec eosdem inmundissimos spiritus vel propter haec ipsa bona malave terrena propitiandos aut timendos existimemus, quia, sicut ipsi mali homines in terra, sic etiam illi non omnia quae volunt facere possunt, nisi quantum illius ordinatione sinitur, cuius plene iudicia nemo conprehendit, iuste nemo reprehendit.
chapter 23. But, further, is it not obvious that the gods have abetted the fulfilment of men's desires, instead of authoritatively bridling them? For Marius, a low-born and self-made man, who ruthlessly provoked and conducted civil wars, was so effectually aided by them, that he was seven times consul, and died full of years in his seventh consulship, escaping the hands of Sylla, who immediately afterwards came into power. Why, then, did they not also aid him, so as to restrain him from so many enormities? For if it is said that the gods had no hand in his success, this is no trivial admission that a man can attain the dearly coveted felicity of this life even though his own gods be not propitious; that men can be loaded with the gifts of fortune as Marius was, can enjoy health, power, wealth, honours, dignity, length of days, though the gods be hostile to him; and that, on the other hand, men can be tormented as Regulus was, with captivity, bondage, destitution, watchings, pain, and cruel death, though the gods be his friends. To concede this is to make a compendious confession that the gods are useless, and their worship superfluous. If the gods have taught the people rather what goes clean counter to the virtues of the soul, and that integrity of life which meets a reward after death; if even in respect of temporal and transitory blessings they neither hurt those whom they hate nor profit whom they love, why are they worshipped, why are they invoked with such eager homage? Why do men murmur in difficult and sad emergencies, as if the gods had retired in anger? and why, on their account, is the Christian religion injured by the most unworthy calumnies? If in temporal matters they have power either for good or for evil, why did they stand by Marius, the worst of Rome's citizens, and abandon Regulus, the best? Does this not prove themselves to be most unjust and wicked? And even if it be supposed that for this very reason they are the rather to be feared and worshipped, this is a mistake; for we do not read that Regulus worshipped them less assiduously than Marius. Neither is it apparent that a wicked life is to be chosen, on the ground that the gods are supposed to have favored Marius more than Regulus. For Metellus, the most highly esteemed of all the Romans, who had five sons in the consulship, was prosperous even in this life; and Catiline, the worst of men, reduced to poverty and defeated in the war his own guilt had aroused, lived and perished miserably. Real and secure felicity is the peculiar possession of those who worship that God by whom alone it can be conferred.It is thus apparent, that when the republic was being destroyed by profligate manners, its gods did nothing to hinder its destruction by the direction or correction of its manners, but rather accelerated its destruction by increasing the demoralization and corruption that already existed. They need not pretend that their goodness was shocked by the iniquity of the city, and that they withdrew in anger. For they were there, sure enough; they are detected, convicted: they were equally unable to break silence so as to guide others, and to keep silence so as to conceal themselves. I do not dwell on the fact that the inhabitants of Minturnж took pity on Marius, and commended him to the goddess Marica in her grove, that she might give him success in all things, and that from the abyss of despair in which he then lay he forthwith returned unhurt to Rome, and entered the city the ruthless leader of a ruthless army; and they who wish to know how bloody was his victory, how unlike a citizen, and how much more relentlessly than any foreign foe he acted, let them read the histories. But this, as I said, I do not dwell upon; nor do I attribute the bloody bliss of Marius to, I know not what Minturnian goddess [Marica], but rather to the secret providence of God, that the mouths of our adversaries might be shut, and that they who are not led by passion, but by prudent consideration of events, might be delivered from error. And even if the demons have any power in these matters, they have only that power which the secret decree of the Almighty allots to them, in order that we may not set too great store by earthly prosperity, seeing it is oftentimes vouchsafed even to wicked men like Marius; and that we may not, on the other hand, regard it as an evil, since we see that many good and pious worshippers of the one true God are, in spite of the demons pre-eminently successful; and, finally, that we may not suppose that these unclean spirits are either to be propitiated or feared for the sake of earthly blessings or calamities: for as wicked men on earth cannot do all they would, so neither can these demons, but only in so far as they are permitted by the decree of Him whose judgments are fully comprehensible, justly reprehensible by none.
BOOK II [XXIV] Sulla certe ipse, cuius tempora talia fuerunt, ut superiora, quorum vindex esse videbatur, illorum comparatione quaererentur, cum primum ad Vrbem contra Marium castra movisset, adeo laeta exta immolanti fuisse scribit Livius, ut custodiri se Postumius haruspex voluerit capitis supplicium subiturus, nisi ea, quae in animo Sulla haberet, diis ivuantibus implevisset. Ecce non discesserant adytis atque aris relictis di, quando de rerum euentu praedicebant nihilque de ipsius Sullae correctione curabant. Promittebant praesagando felicitatem magnam nec malam cupiditatem minando frangebant. Deinde cum esset in Asia bellum Mithridaticum gerens, per Lucium Titium ei mandatum est a love, quod esset Mithridatem superaturus, et factum est. Ac postea molienti redire in Vrbem et suas amicorumque iniurias civili sanguine ulcisci, iterum mandatum est ab eodem love per militem quendam legionis sextae, prius se de Mithridate praenuntiasse victoriam, et tunc promittere daturum se potestatem, qua recuperaret ab inimicis rem publicam non sine multo sanguine. Tum percontatus Sulla, quae forma militi visa fuerit, cum ille indicasset, eam recordatus est, quam prius ab illo audierat, qui de Mithridatica victoria ab eodem mandata pertulerat. Quid hic responderi potest, quare dii curaverint ueIut felicia ista nuntiare, et nullus eorum curaverit Sullam monendo corrigere mala tanta facturum scelestis annis civilibus, qualia non foedarent, sed auferrent omnino rem pubficam? Nempe intelleguntur daemones, sicut saepe dixi notumque nobis est in litteris sacris resque ipsae satis indicant, negotium suum agere, ut pro diis habeantur et colantur, ut ea illis exhibeantur, quibus hi qui exhibent sociati unam pessimam causam cum eis habeant in iudicio Dei. Deinde cum venisset Tarentum Sulla atque ibi sacrificasset, vidit in capite vitulini iecoris similitudinem coronae aureae. Tunc Postumius haruspex ille respondit praeclaram significare victoriam iussitque ut extis illis solus uesceretur. Postea paruo interuallo seruus cuiusdam Luci Pontii uaticinando clamavit: "A Bellona nuntius venio, victoria tua est, Sulla. w Deinde adiecit arsurum esse Capitolium. Hoc cum dixisset, continuo egressus e castris postero ffie concitatior reuersus est et Capitolium arsisse clamavit. Arserat autem re vera Capitolium. Quod quidem daemoni et praevidere facile fuit et celerrime nuntiare. Illud sane intende, quod ad causam maxime pertinet, sub qualibus diis esse cupiant, qui blasphemant Saluatorem voluntates fidelium a dominatu daemonum liberantem. Clamavit homo uaticinando: "Victoria tua est, Sulla, "atque ut id divino spiritu clamare crederetur, nuntiavit etiam aliquid et prope futurum et mox factum, unde longe aberat per quem ille spiritus loquebatur; non tamen clamavit: m Ab sceleribu s parce, Sulla w, quae illic victor tam horrenda commisit, cui corona aurea ipsius victoriae inlustrissimum signum in vitulino iecore apparuit, qualia signa si dii iusti dare solerent ac non daemones impii, profecto illis extis nefaria potius atque ipsi Sullae graviter noxia mala futura monstrarent. Neque enim eius dignitati tantum profuit illa victoria, quantum nocuit cupiditati; qua factum est, ut inmoderatis inhians et secundis rebus elatus ac praecipitatus magis ipse periret in moribus, quam inimicos in corporibus perderet. Haec illi dii vere tristia vereque lugenda non extis, non auguriis, non cuiusquam somnio vel uaticinio praenuntiabant. Magis enim timebant ne corrigeretur quam ne vinceretur. Immo satis agebant, ut victor civium gloriosus victus atque captivus nefandis vitiis et r haec ipsis etiam daemonibus multo obstrictius subderetur.
chapter 24. It is certain that Sylla-whose rule was so cruel that, in comparison with it, the preceding state of things which he came to avenge was regretted-when first he advanced towards Rome to give battle to Marius, found the auspices so favourable when he sacrificed, that, according to Livy's account, the augur Postumius expressed his willingness to lose his head if Sylla did not, with the help of the gods, accomplish what he designed. The gods, you see, had not departed from "every fane and sacred shrine," since they were still predicting the issue of these affairs, and yet were taking no steps to correct Sylla himself. Their presages promised him great prosperity but no threatenings of theirs subdued his evil passions. And then, when he was in Asia conducting the war against Mithridates, a message from Jupiter was delivered to him by Lucius Titius, to the effect that he would conquer Mithridates; and so it came to pass. And afterwards, when he was meditating a return to Rome for the purpose of avenging in the blood of the citizens injuries done to himself and his friends, a second message from Jupiter was delivered to him by a soldier of the sixth legion, to the effect that it was he who had predicted the victory over Mithridates, and that now he promised to give him power to recover the republic from his enemies, though with great bloodshed. Sylla at once inquired of the soldier what form had appeared to him; and, on his reply, recognized that it was the same as Jupiter had formerly employed to convey to him the assurance regarding the victory over Mithridates. How, then, can the gods be justified in this matter for the care they took to predict these shadowy successes, and for their negligence in correcting Sylla, and restraining him from stirring up a civil war so lamentable and atrocious, that it not merely disfigured, but extinguished, the republic? The truth is, as I have often said, and as Scripture informs us, and as the facts themselves sufficiently indicate, the demons are found to look after their own ends only, that they may be regarded and worshipped as gods, and that men may be induced to offer to them a worship which associates them with their crimes, and involves them in one common wickedness and judgment of God.Afterwards, when Sylla had come to Tarentum, and had sacrificed there, he saw on the head of the victim's liver the likeness of a golden crown. Thereupon the same soothsayer Postumius interpreted this to signify a signal victory, and ordered that he only should eat of the entrails. A little afterwards, the slave of a certain Lucius Pontius cried out, "I am Bellona's messenger; the victory is yours, Sylla!" Then he added that the Capitol should be burned. As soon as he had uttered this prediction he left the camp, but returned the following day more excited than ever, and shouted, "The Capitol is fired!" And fired indeed it was. This it was easy for a demon both to foresee and quickly to announce. But observe, as relevant to our subject, what kind of gods they are under whom these men desire to live, who blaspheme the Saviour that delivers the wills of the faithful from the dominion of devils. The man cried out in prophetic rapture, "The victory is yours, Sylla!" And to certify that he spoke by a divine spirit, he predicted also an event which was shortly to happen, and which indeed did fall out, in a place from which he in whom this spirit was speaking was far distant. But he never cried, "Forbear your villanies, Sylla!"-the villanies which were committed at Rome by that victor to whom a golden crown on the calf's liver had been shown as the divine evidence of his victory. If such signs as this were customarily sent by just gods, and not by wicked demons, then certainly the entrails he consulted should rather have given Sylla intimation of the cruel disasters that were to befall the city and himself. For that victory was not so conducive to his exaltation to power, as it was fatal to his ambition; for by it he became so insatiable in his desires, and was rendered so arrogant and reckless by prosperity, that he may be said rather to have inflicted a moral destruction on himself than corporal destruction on his enemies. But these truely woeful and deplorable calamities the gods gave him no previous hint of, neither by entrails, augury, dream, nor prediction. For they feared his amendment more than his defeat. Yea, they took good care that this glorious conqueror of his own fellow-citizens should be conquered and led captive by his own infamous vices, and should thus be the more submissive slave of the demons themselves.
BOOK II [XXV] Illinc vero quis non intellegat, quis non videat, nisi qui tales deos imitari magis elegit quam divina gratia ab eorum societate separari, quantum moliantur maligni isti spiritus exemplo suo velut divinam auctoritatem praebere sceleribus? quod etiam in quadam Campaniae lata planitie, ubi non multo p ost civiles acies nefario proelio conflixerunt, ipsi inter se prius pugnare visi sunt. Namque ibi auditi sunt primum ingentes fragores, moxque multi se vidisse nuntiarunt per aliquot dies duas acies proeliari. Quae pugna ubi destitit, uestigia quoque velut hominum et equorum, quanta de illa conflictatione exprimi poterant, invenerunt. Si ergo veraciter inter se numina pugnaverunt, iam bella civilia excusantur humana; consideretur tamen quae sit talium deorum vel malitia vel miseria: si autem se pugnasse finxerunt, quid aliud egerunt, nisi ut sibi Romani bellando civiliter tamquam deorum exemplo nullum nefas admittere viderentur? Iam enim coeperant bella civilia, et aliquot nefandorum proeliorum strages execranda praecesserat. Iam multos moverat, quod miles quidam, dum occiso spolia detraheret, fratrem nudato cadavere agnovit ac detestatus bella civilia se ipsum ibi perimens fraterno corpori adiunxit. Vt ergo huius tanti mali minime taederet, sed armorum scelestorum magis magisque ardor incresceret, noxii daemones, quos illi deos putantes colendos et venerandos arbitrabantur, inter se pugnantes hominibus apparere voluerunt, ne imitari tales pugnas civica trepidaret affectio, sed potius humanum scelus divino excusaretur exemplo. Hac astutia maligni spiritus etiam ludos, unde multa iam dixi, scaenicos sibi dicari sacrarique iusserunt, ubi tanta deorum flagitia theatricis canticis atque fabularum actionibus celebrata et quisquis eos fecisse crederet et quisquis non crederet, sed tamen illos libentissime sibi talia exhiberi cerneret, securus imitaretur. Ne quis itaque existimaret in deos conuicia potius quam eis dignum aliquid scriptitasse, ubicumque illos inter se pugnasse poetae commemorarunt, ipsi ad decipiendos homines poetarum carmina firmaverunt, pugnas videlicet suas non solum per scaenicos in theatro, verum etiam per se ipsos in campo humanis oculis exhibentes. Haec dicere compulsi sumus, quoniam pessimis moribus civium Romanam rem publicam iam antea perditam fuisse nullamque remansisse ante adventum Christi Jesu domini nostri auctores eorum dicere et scribere minime dubitarunt. Quam perditionem diis suis non inputant, qui mala transitoria, quibus boni, seu vivant seu moriantur, perire non possunt, Christo nostro inputant: cum Christus noster tanta frequentet pro moribus optimis praecepta contra perditos mores; dii vero ipsorum nullis talibus praeceptis egerint aliquid cum suo cultore populo pro illa re publica, ne periret; immo eosdem mores velut suis exemplis auctoritate noxia corrumpendo egerunt potius, ut periret. Quam non ideo tunc perisse quisquam, ut arbitror, iam dicere audebit, quia "discessere omnes adytis arisque relictis di", velut amici virtutibus, cum vitiis hominum offenderentur; quia tot signis extorum auguriorum uaticiniorum, quibus se tamquam praescios futurorum adiutoresque proeliorum iactare et commendare gestiebant, conuincuntur fuisse praesentes; qui si vere abscessissent, mitius Romani in bella civilia suis cupiditatibus quam illorum instigationibus exarsissent.
chapter 25. Now, who does not hereby comprehend,-unless he has preferred to imitate such gods rather than by divine grace to withdraw himself from their fellowship,-who does not see how eagerly these evil spirits strive by their example to lend, as it were, divine authority to crime? Is not this proved by the fact that they were seen in a wide plain in Campania rehearsing among themselves the battle which shortly after took place there with great bloodshed between the armies of Rome? For at first there were heard loud crashing noises, and afterwards many reported that they had seen for some days together two armies engaged. And when this battle ceased, they found the ground all indented with just such footprints of men and horses as a great conflict would leave. If, then, the deities were veritably fighting with one another, the civil wars of men are sufficiently justified; yet, by the way, let it be observed that such pugnacious gods must be very wicked or very wretched. If, however, it was but a sham-fight, what did they intend by this, but that the civil wars of the Romans should seem no wickedness, but an imitation of the gods? For already the civil wars had begun; and before this, some lamentable battles and execrable massacres had occurred. Already many had been moved by the story of the soldier, who, on stripping the spoils of his slain foe, recognized in the stripped corpse his own brother, and, with deep curses on civil wars, slew himself there and then on his brother's body. To disguise the bitterness of such tragedies, and kindle increasing ardor in this monstrous warfare, these malign demons, who were reputed and worshipped as gods, fell upon this plan of revealing themselves in a state of civil war, that no compunction for fellow-citizens might cause the Romans to shrink from such battles, but that the human criminality might be justified by the divine example. By a like craft, too, did these evil spirits command that scenic entertainments, of which I have already spoken, should be instituted and dedicated to them. And in these entertainments the poetical compositions and actions of the drama ascribed such iniquities to the gods, that every one might safely imitate them, whether he believed the gods had actually done such things, or, not believing this, yet perceived that they most eagerly desired to be represented as having done them. And that no one might suppose, that in representing the gods as fighting with one another, the poets had slandered them, and imputed to them unworthy actions, the gods themselves, to complete the deception, confirmed the compositions of the poets by exhibiting their own battles to the eyes of men, not only through actions in the theatres, but in their own persons on the actual field.We have been forced to bring forward these facts, because their authors have not scrupled to say and to write that the Roman republic had already been ruined by the depraved moral habits of the citizens, and had ceased to exist before the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now this ruin they do not impute to their own gods, though they impute to our Christ the evils of this life, which cannot ruin good men, be they alive or dead. And this they do, though our Christ has issued so many precepts inculcating virtue and restraining vice; while their own gods have done nothing whatever to preserve that republic that served them, and to restrain it from ruin by such precepts, but have rather hastened its destruction, by corrupting its morality through their pestilent example. No one, I fancy, will now be bold enough to say that the republic was then ruined because of the departure of the gods "from each fane, each sacred shrine," as if they were the friends of virtue, and were offended by the vices of men. No, there are too many presages from entrails, auguries, soothsayings, whereby they boastingly proclaimed themselves prescient of future events and controllers of the fortune of war,-all which prove them to have been present. And had they been indeed absent the Romans would never in these civil wars have been so far transported by their own passions as they were by the instigations of these gods.
BOOK II [XXVI] Quae cum ita sint, cum palam aperteque turpitudines crudelitatibus mixtae, opprobria numinum et crimina, sive prodita sive conficta, ipsis exposcentibus et nisi fieret irascentibus etiam certis et statutis sollemnitatibus consecrata illis et dicata claruerint atque ad omnium oculos, ut imitanda proponerentur, spectanda processerint: quid est, quod idem ipsi daemones, qui se huiusce modi voluptatibus inmundos esse spiritus confitentur, qui suis flagitiis et facinoribus, sive indicatis sive simulatis, eorumque sibi celebratione petita ab inpudentibus, extorta a pudentibus auctores se vitae scelestae inmundaeque testantur, perhibentur tamen in adytis suis secretisque penetralibus dare quaedam bona praecepta de moribus quibusdam velut electis sacratis suis? Quod si ita est, hoc ipso callidior advertenda est et conuincenda malitia spirituum noxiorum. Tanta enim vis est probitatis et castitatis, ut omnis vel paene omnis eius laude moveatur humana natura, nec usque adeo sit turpitudine vitiosa, ut totum sensum honestatis amiserit. Proinde malignitas daemonum, nisi alicubi se, quem ad modum scriptum in nostris litteris novimus, transfjguret in angelos lucis, non implet negotium deceptionis. Foris itaque populis celeberrimo strepitu impietas impura circumsonat, et intus paucis castitas simulata vix sonat; praebentur propatula pudendis et secreta laudandis; decus latet et dedecus patet; quod malum geritur omnes conuocat spectatores, quod bonum dicitur vix aliquos invenit auditores, tamquam honesta erubescenda sint et inhonesta glorianda. Sed ubi hoc nisi in daemonum templis? ubi nisi in fallaciae diversoriis? Illud enim fit, ut honestiores, qui pauci sunt, capiantur; hoc autem, ne plures, qui sunt turpissimi, corrigantur. Vbi et quando sacrati Caelestis audiebant castitatis praecepta, nescimus; ante ipsum tamen deIubrum, ubi simulacrum illud locatum conspiciebamus, universi undique confluentes et ubi quisque poterat stantes ludos qui agebantur intentissime spectabamus, intuentes alternante conspectu hinc meretriciam pompam, illinc virginem deam; illam suppliciter adorari, ante illam turpia celebrari; non ibi pudibundos mimos, nullam verecundiorem scaenicam vidimus; cuncta obscenitatis implebantur officia. Sciebatur virginali numini quid placeret, et exhibebatur quod de templo domum matrona doJctior reportaret. Nonnullae pudentiores avertebant faciem aIu impuris motibus scaenicorum et artem flagitii furtiva intentione discebant. Hominibus namque verecundabantur, ne auderent impudicos gestus ore libero cernere; sed multo minus audebant sacra eius, quam venerabantur, casto corde damnare. Hoc tamen palam discendum praebebatur in templo, ad quod perpetrandum saltem secretum quaerebatur in domo, mirante nimium, si ullus ibi erat, pudore mortalium, quod humana flagitia non libere homines committerent, quae apud deos etiam religiose discerent iratos habituri, nisi etiam exhibere curarent. Quis enim alius spiritus occulto instinctu nequissimas agitans mentes et instat faciendis adulteriis et pascitur factis, nisi qui etiam sacris talibus oblectatur, constituens in templis simulacra daemonum, amans in ludis simulacra vitiorum, susurrans in occulto verba iustitiae ad decipiendos etiam paucos bonos, equentans in aperto inuitamenta nequitiae ad possidendos innumerabiles malos?
chapter 26. Seeing that this is so,-seeing that the filthy and cruel deeds, the disgraceful and criminal actions of the gods, whether real or feigned, were at their own request published, and were consecrated, and dedicated in their honor as sacred and stated solemnities; seeing they vowed vengeance on those who refused to exhibit them to the eyes of all, that they might be proposed as deeds worthy of imitation, why is it that these same demons, who by taking pleasure in such obscenities, acknowledge themselves to be unclean spirits, and by delighting in their own villanies and iniquities, real or imaginary, and by requesting from the immodest, and extorting from the modest, the celebration of these licentious acts, proclaim themselves instigators to a criminal and lewd life;-why, I ask, are they represented as giving some good moral precepts to a few of their own elect, initiated in the secrecy of their shrines? If it be so, this very thing only serves further to demonstrate the malicious craft of these pestilent spirits. For so great is the influence of probity and chastity, that all men, or almost all men, are moved by the praise of these virtues; nor is any man so depraved by vice, but he has some feeling of honor left in him. So that, unless the devil sometimes transformed himself, as Scripture says, into an angel of light, 2 Corinthians 11:14 he could not compass his deceitful purpose. Accordingly, in public, a bold impurity fills the ear of the people with noisy clamor; in private, a feigned chastity speaks in scarce audible whispers to a few: an open stage is provided for shameful things, but on the praiseworthy the curtain falls: grace hides disgrace flaunts: a wicked deed draws an overflowing house, a virtuous speech finds scarce a hearer, as though purity were to be blushed at, impurity boasted of. Where else can such confusion reign, but in devils' temples? Where, but in the haunts of deceit? For the secret precepts are given as a sop to the virtuous, who are few in number; the wicked examples are exhibited to encourage the vicious, who are countless.Where and when those initiated in the mysteries of C_S lestis received any good instructions, we know not. What we do know is, that before her shrine, in which her image is set, and amidst a vast crowd gathering from all quarters, and standing closely packed together, we were intensely interested spectators of the games which were going on, and saw, as we pleased to turn the eye, on this side a grand display of harlots, on the other the virgin goddess; we saw this virgin worshipped with prayer and with obscene rites. There we saw no shame-faced mimes, no actress over-burdened with modesty; all that the obscene rites demanded was fully complied with. We were plainly shown what was pleasing to the virgin deity, and the matron who witnessed the spectacle returned home from the temple a wiser woman. Some, indeed, of the more prudent women turned their faces from the immodest movements of the players, and learned the art of wickedness by a furtive regard. For they were restrained, by the modest demeanor due to men, from looking boldly at the immodest gestures; but much more were they restrained from condemning with chaste heart the sacred rites of her whom they adored. And yet this licentiousness-which, if practised in one's home, could only be done there in secret-was practised as a public lesson in the temple; and if any modesty remained in men, it was occupied in marvelling that wickedness which men could not unrestrainedly commit should be part of the religious teaching of the gods, and that to omit its exhibition should incur the anger of the gods. What spirit can that be, which by a hidden inspiration stirs men's corruption, and goads them to adultery, and feeds on the full-fledged iniquity, unless it be the same that finds pleasure in such religious ceremonies, sets in the temples images of devils, and loves to see in play the images of vices; that whispers in secret some righteous sayings to deceive the few who are good, and scatters in public invitations to profligacy, to gain possession of the millions who are wicked?
BOOK II [XXVII] Vir gravis et philosophaster Tullius aedilis futurus clamat in auribus civitatis, inter cetera sui magistratus officia sibi Floram matrem ludorum celebritate placandam; qui ludi tanto deuotius, quanto turpius celebrari solent. Dicit alio loco iam consul in extremis periculis civitatis, et ludos per decem dies factos, neque rem ullam quae ad placandos deos pertineret praetermissam; quasi non satius erat tales deos inritare temperantia quam placare luxuria, et eos honestate etiam ad inimicitias prouocare quam tanta deformitate lenire. Neque enim gravius fuerant quamlibet crudelissima inmanitate nocituri homines, propter quos placabantur, quam nocebant ipsi, cum vitiositate foedissima placarentur. Quando quidem ut averteretur quod metuebatur ab hoste in corporibus, eo modo dii conciliabantur, quo virtus debellaretur in mentibus, qui non opponerentur defensores oppugnatoribus moenium, nisi prius fierent expugnatores morum bonorum. Hanc talium numinum placation em petulantissimam inpurissimam inpudentissimam nequissimam inmundissimam, cuius actores laudanda Romanae virtutis indoles honore privavit tribu movit, agnovit turpes fecit infames, hanc, inquam, pudendam veraeque religioni aversandam et detestandam talium numinum placationem, fabulas in deos inlecebrosa atque criminosas, haec ignominiosa deorum vel scelerate turpiterque facta vel sceleratius turpiusque conficta oculis et auribus publicis civitas tota discebat, haec commissa numinibus placere cernebat, et ideo non solum illis exhibenda, sed sibi quoque imitanda credebat, non illud nescio quid velut bonum et honestum, quod tam paucis et tam occulte dicebatur (si tamen dicebatur), ut magis ne innotesceret, quam ne non fieret, timeretur.
chapter 27. Cicero, a weighty man, and a philosopher in his way, when about to be made edile, wished the citizens to understand that, among the other duties of his magistracy, he must propitiate Flora by the celebration of games. And these games are reckoned devout in proportion to their lewdness. In another place, and when he was now consul, and the state in great peril, he says that games had been celebrated for ten days together, and that nothing had been omitted which could pacify the gods: as if it had not been more satisfactory to irritate the gods by temperance, than to pacify them by debauchery; and to provoke their hate by honest living, than soothe it by such unseemly grossness. For no matter how cruel was the ferocity of those men who were threatening the state, and on whose account the gods were being propitiated, it could not have been more hurtful than the alliance of gods who were won with the foulest vices. To avert the danger which threatened men's bodies, the gods were conciliated in a fashion that drove virtue from their spirits; and the gods did not enrol themselves as defenders of the battlements against the besiegers, until they had first stormed and sacked the morality of the citizens. This propitiation of such divinities,-a propitiation so wanton, so impure, so immodest, so wicked, so filthy, whose actors the innate and praiseworthy virtue of the Romans disabled from civic honors, erased from their tribe, recognized as polluted and made infamous;-this propitiation, I say, so foul, so detestable, and alien from every religious feeling, these fabulous and ensnaring accounts of the criminal actions of the gods, these scandalous actions which they either shamefully and wickedly committed, or more shamefully and wickedly feigned, all this the whole city learned in public both by the words and gestures of the actors. They saw that the gods delighted in the commission of these things, and therefore believed that they wished them not only to be exhibited to them, but to be imitated by themselves. But as for that good and honest instruction which they speak of, it was given in such secrecy, and to so few (if indeed given at all), that they seemed rather to fear it might be divulged, than that it might not be practised.
BOOK II [XXVIII] Ab istarum inmundissimarum potestatum tartareo iugo et societate poenali erui per Christi nomen homines et in lucem saluberrimae pietatis ab illa perniciosissimae impietatis nocte transferri queruntur et murmurant iniqui et ingrati et illo nefario spiritu altius obstrictiusque possessi, quia populi confluunt ad ecclesiam casta celebritate, honesta utriusque sexus discretione, ubi audiant quam bene hic ad tempus vivere debeant, ut post hanc vitam beate semperque vivere mereantur, ubi sancta scriptura iustitiaeque doctrina de superiore loco in conspectu omnium personante et qui faciunt audiant ad praemium, et qui non faciunt audiant ad iudicium. Quo etsi veniunt quidam talium praeceptorum inrisores, omnis eorum petulantia aut repentina mutatione deponitur, aut timore vel pudore comprimitur. Nihil enim eis turpe ac flagitiosum spectandum imitandumque proponitur, ubi veri Dei aut praecepta insinuantur aut miracula narrantur, aut dona laudantur aut beneficia p ostulantur.
chapter 28. They, then, are but abandoned and ungrateful wretches, in deep and fast bondage to that malign spirit, who complain and murmur that men are rescued by the name of Christ from the hellish thraldom of these unclean spirits, and from a participation in their punishment, and are brought out of the night of pestilential ungodliness into the light of most healthful piety. Only such men could murmur that the masses flock to the churches and their chaste acts of worship, where a seemly separation of the sexes is observed; where they learn how they may so spend this earthly life, as to merit a blessed eternity hereafter; where Holy Scripture and instruction in righteousness are proclaimed from a raised platform in presence of all, that both they who do the word may hear to their salvation, and they who do it not may hear to judgment. And though some enter who scoff at such precepts, all their petulance is either quenched by a sudden change, or is restrained through fear or shame. For no filthy and wicked action is there set forth to be gazed at or to be imitated; but either the precepts of the true God are recommended, His miracles narrated, His gifts praised, or His benefits implored.
BOOK II [XXIX] Haec potius concupisce, o indoles Romana laudabilis, o progenies Regulorum Scaeuolarum, Scipionum Fabriciorum; haec potius concupisce, haec ab illa turpissima uanitate et fallacissima daemonum malignitate discerne. Si quid in te laudabile naturaliter eminet, non nisi vera pietate purgatur atque perficitur, impietate autem disperditur et punitur. Nunc iam elige quid sequaris, ut non in te, sed in Deo vero sine ullo errore lauderis. Tunc enim tibi gloria popularis adfuit, sed occulto iudicio divinae providentiae vera religio quam eligeres defuit. Expergiscere, dies est, sicut experrecta es in quibusdam, de quorum virtute perfecta et pro fide vera etiam passionibus gloriamur, qui usquequaque adversus potestates inimicissimas confligentes easque fortiter moriendo vincentes m sanguine nobis hanc patriam peperere suo w. Ad quam patriam te inuitamus et exhortamur, ut eius adiciaris numero civium, cuius quodam modo asylum est vera remissio peccatorum. Non audias degeneres tuos Christo Christianisue detrahentes et accusantes velut tempora mala, cum quaerant tempora, quibus non sit quieta vita, sed potius secura nequitia. Haec tibi numquam nec pro terrena patria placuerunt. Nunc iam caelestem arripe, pro qua minimum laborabis, et in ea veraciter semperque regnabis. Illic enim tibi non Vestalis focus, non lapis Capitolinus, sed Deus unus et verus nec metas rerum nec tempora ponit, Imperium sine fine dabit. Noli deos falsos fallacesque requirere; abice potius atque contemne in veram emicans libertatem. Non sunt dii, maligni sunt spiritus, quibus aeterna tua felicitas poena est. Non tam luno Troianis, a quibus carnalem originem ducis, arces videtur inuidisse Romanas, quam isti daemones, quos adhuc deos putas, omni generi hominum sedes inuident sempiternas. Et tu ipsa non parua ex parte de talibus spiritibus iudicasti, quando ludis eos placasti, et per quos homines eosdem Iudos fecisti, infames esse voluisti. Patere asseri libertatem tuam adversus inmundos spiritus, qui tuis ceruicibus inposuerant sacrandam sibi et celebrandam ignominiam suam. Actores criminum divinorum removisti ab honoribus tuis: supplica Deo vero, ut a te removeat illos deos, qui delectantur criminibus suis, seu veris, quod ignominiosissimum est, seu falsis, quod malitiosissimum <est>. Bene, quod tua sponte histrionibus et scaenicis societatem civitatis patere noluisti; evigila plenius! Nullo modo his artibus placatur divina maiestas, quibus humana dignitas inquinatur. Quo igitur pacto deos, qui talibus delectantur obsequiis, haberi putas in numero sanctarum caelestium potestatum, cum homines, per quos eadem aguntur obsequia, non putasti habendos in numero qualiumcumque civium Romanorum? Incomparabiliter superna est civitas clarior, ubi victoria veritas, ubi dignitas saanctitas, ubi pax felicitas, ubi vita aeternitas. Multo minus habetin sua societate tales deos, si tu in tua tales homines habere erubuisti. Proinde si ad beatam pervenire desideras civitatem, devita daemonum societatem. Indigne ab honestis coluntur, qui per turpes placantur. Sic isti a tua pietate removeantur purgatione Christiana, quo modo illi a tua dignitate remoti sunt notatione censoria. De bonis autem carnalibus, quibus solis mali perfrui volunt, et de malis carnalibus, quae sola perpeti nolunt, quod neque in his habeant quam putantur habere isti daemones potestatem (quamquam si haberent, deberemus potius etiam ista contemnere, quam propter ista illos colere et eos colendo ad illa, quae nobis inuident, pervenire non posse), _ tamen nec in istis eos hoc valere, quod hi putant, qui propter haec eos coli oportere contendunt, deinceps videbimus, ut hic sit huius voluminis.
chapter 29. This, rather, is the religion worthy of your desires, O admirable Roman race,-the progeny of your Scжvolas and Scipios, of Regulus, and of Fabricius. This rather covet, this distinguish from that foul vanity and crafty malice of the devils. If there is in your nature any eminent virtue, only by true piety is it purged and perfected, while by impiety it is wrecked and punished. Choose now what you will pursue, that your praise may be not in yourself, but in the true God, in whom is no error. For of popular glory you have had your share; but by the secret providence of God, the true religion was not offered to your choice. Awake, it is now day; as you have already awaked in the persons of some in whose perfect virtue and sufferings for the true faith we glory: for they, contending on all sides with hostile powers, and conquering them all by bravely dying, have purchased for us this country of ours with their blood; to which country we invite you, and exhort you to add yourselves to the number of the citizens of this city, which also has a sanctuary of its own in the true remission of sins. Do not listen to those degenerate sons of yours who slander Christ and Christians, and impute to them these disastrous times, though they desire times in which they may enjoy rather impunity for their wickedness than a peaceful life. Such has never been Rome's ambition even in regard to her earthly country. Lay hold now on the celestial country, which is easily won, and in which you will reign truly and for ever. For there shall you find no vestal fire, no Capitoline stone, but the one true God."No date, no goal will here ordain:But grant an endless, boundless reign."No longer, then, follow after false and deceitful gods; abjure them rather, and despise them, bursting forth into true liberty. Gods they are not, but malignant spirits, to whom your eternal happiness will be a sore punishment. Juno, from whom you deduce your origin according to the flesh, did not so bitterly grudge Rome's citadels to the Trojans, as these devils whom yet ye repute gods, grudge an everlasting seat to the race of mankind. And you yourself hast in no wavering voice passed judgment on them, when you pacified them with games, and yet accounted as infamous the men by whom the plays were acted. Suffer us, then, to assert your freedom against the unclean spirits who had imposed on your neck the yoke of celebrating their own shame and filthiness. The actors of these divine crimes you have removed from offices of honor; supplicate the true God, that He may remove from you those gods who delight in their crimes,-a most disgraceful thing if the crimes are really theirs, and a most malicious invention if the crimes are feigned. Well done, in that you have spontaneously banished from the number of your citizens all actors and players. Awake more fully: the majesty of God cannot be propitiated by that which defiles the dignity of man. How, then, can you believe that gods who take pleasure in such lewd plays, belong to the number of the holy powers of heaven, when the men by whom these plays are acted are by yourselves refused admission into the number of Roman citizens even of the lowest grade? Incomparably more glorious than Rome, is that heavenly city in which for victory you have truth; for dignity, holiness; for peace, felicity; for life, eternity. Much less does it admit into its society such gods, if you blush to admit such men into yours. Wherefore, if you would attain to the blessed city, shun the society of devils. They who are propitiated by deeds of shame, are unworthy of the worship of right-hearted men. Let these, then, be obliterated from your worship by the cleansing of the Christian religion, as those men were blotted from your citizenship by the censor's mark.But, so far as regards carnal benefits, which are the only blessings the wicked desire to enjoy, and carnal miseries, which alone they shrink from enduring, we will show in the following book that the demons have not the power they are supposed to have; and although they had it, we ought rather on that account to despise these blessings, than for the sake of them to worship those gods, and by worshipping them to miss the attainment of these blessings they grudge us. But that they have not even this power which is ascribed to them by those who worship them for the sake of temporal advantages, this, I say, I will prove in the following book; so let us here close the present argument.