Edition Hide
Apologeticum

XXV.

[1] Satis quidem mihi videor probasse de falsa et vera divinitate, cum demonstravi quemadmodum probatio consistat, non modo disputationibus, nec argumentationibus, sed ipsorum etiam testimoniis quos deos creditis, ut nihil iam ad hanc causam sit retractandum. [2] Quoniam tamen Romani nominis proprie mentio occurrit, non omittam congressionem, quam provocat illa praesumptio dicentium Romanos pro merito religiositatis diligentissimae in tantum sublimitatis elatos, ut orbem occuparint, et adeo deos esse, ut praeter ceteros floreant qui illis officium praeter ceteros faciant.

[3] Scilicet ista merces a Romanis deis pro gratia expensa est. Sterculus et Mutunus et Larentina provexit imperium. Peregrinos enim deos non putem extraneae genti magis fautum voluisse quam suae, et patrium solum, in quo nati, adulti, nobilitati sepultique sunt, transfretanis dedisse. [4] Viderit Cybele, si urbem Romanam ut memoriam Troiani generis adamavit, vernaculi sui scilicet adversus Achivorum arma protecti, si ad ultores transire prospexit, quos sciebat Graeciam Phrygiae debellatricem subacturos. [5] Itaque maiestatis suae in urbem conlatae grande documentum nostra etiam aetate proposuit, cum Marco Aurelio apud Sirmium reipublicae exempto die sexto decimo Kalendarum Aprilium archigallus ille sanctissimus die nono Kalendarum earundem, quo sanguinem inpurum lacertos quoque castrando libabat, pro salute imperatoris Marci iam intercepti solita aeque imperia mandavit. [6] O nuntios tardos! o somniculosa diplomata! quorum vitio excessum imperatoris non ante Cybele cognovit, ne deam talem riderent Christiani. [7] Sed non statim et Iupiter Cretam suam Romanis fascibus concuti sineret, oblitus antrum illud Idaeum et aera Corybantia et iocundissimum illic nutricis suae odorem. Nonne omni Capitolio tumulum illum suum praeposuisset, ut ea potius orbi terra praecelleret quae cineres Iovis texit? [8] Vellet Iuno Punicam urbem posthabita Samo dilectam ab Aeneadarum gente deleri? Quod sciam

hic illius arma,

hic currus fuit, hoc regnum dea gentibus esse,

si qua fata sinant, iam tum tenditque fovetque.

Misera illa coniunx Iovis et soror adversus fata non valuit! Plane fato stat Iupiter ipse.

[9] Nec tantum tamen honoris fatis Romani dicaverunt dedentibus sibi Carthaginem adversus destinatum votumque Iunonis quantum prostitutissimae lupae Larentinae.

[10] Plures deos vestros regnasse certum est. Igitur si conferendi imperii tenent potestatem, cum ipsi regnarent, a quibus acceperant eam gratiam? Quem coluerat Saturnus et Iupiter? Aliquem, opinor, Sterculum. Sed postea Romani cum indigitamentis suis. [11] Etiam si qui non regnaverunt, tamen regnabantur ab aliis nondum cultoribus suis, ut qui nondum dei habebantur. Ergo aliorum est regnum dare, quia regnabatur multo ante quam isti dei inciderentur.

[12] Sed quam vanum est fastigium Romani nominis religiositatis meritis deputare, cum post imperium sive adhuc regnum religio profecerit. Nam etsi a Numa concepta est curiositas superstitiosa, nondum tamen aut simulacris aut templis res divina apud Romanos constabat. [13] Frugi religio et pauperes ritus et nulla Capitolia certantia ad caelum, sed temeraria de cespite altaria, et vasa adhuc Samia, et nidor ex illis, et deus ipse nusquam. Nondum enim tunc ingenia Graecorum atque Tuscorum fingendis simulacris urbem inundaverant. Ergo non ante religiosi Romani quam magni, ideoque non ob hoc magni, quia religiosi. [14] Atquin quomodo ob religionem magni, quibus magnitudo de inreligiositate provenit? Ni fallor enim, omne regnum vel imperium bellis quaeritur et victoriis propagatur. Porro bella et victoriae captis et eversis plurimum urbibus constant. Id negotium sine deorum iniuria non est. Eaedem strages moenium et templorum, pares caedes civium et sacerdotum, nec dissimiles rapinae sacrarum divitiarum et profanarum. [15] Tot igitur sacrilegia Romanorum quot tropaea, tot de deis quot de gentibus triumphi, tot manubiae quot manent adhuc simulacra captivorum deorum. [16] Et ab hostibus ergo suis sustinent adorari et illis imperium sine fine decernunt quorum magis iniurias quam adolationes remunerasse debuerant. Sed qui nihil sentiunt tam impune laeduntur quam frustra coluntur. [17] Certe non potest fidei convenire, ut religionis meritis excrevisse videantur qui, ut suggessimus, religionem aut laedendo creverunt aut crescendo laeserunt. Etiam illi quorum regna conflata sunt in imperii Romanii summam, cum ea amitterent, sine religionibus non fuerunt.

Translation Hide
The Apology

Chapter XXV.

I think I have offered sufficient proof upon the question of false and true divinity, having shown that the proof rests not merely on debate and argument, but on the witness of the very beings whom you believe are gods, so that the point needs no further handling. However, having been led thus naturally to speak of the Romans, I shall not avoid the controversy which is invited by the groundless assertion of those who maintain that, as a reward of their singular homage to religion, the Romans have been raised to such heights of power as to have become masters of the world; and that so certainly divine are the beings they worship, that those prosper beyond all others, who beyond all others honour them. ¹ This, forsooth, is the wages the gods have paid the Romans for their devotion. The progress of the empire is to be ascribed to Sterculus, the Mutunus, and Larentina! For I can hardly think that foreign gods would have been disposed to show more favour to an alien race than to their own, and given their own fatherland, in which they had their birth, grew up to manhood, became illustrious, and at last were buried, over to invaders from another shore! As for Cybele, if she set her affections on the city of Rome as sprung of the Trojan stock saved from the arms of Greece, she herself forsooth being of the same race,--if she foresaw her transference ² to the avenging people by whom Greece the conqueror of Phrygia was to be subdued, let her look to it (in regard of her native country's conquest by Greece). Why, too, even in these days the Mater Magna has given a notable proof of her greatness which she has conferred as a boon upon the city; when, after the loss to the State of Marcus Aurelius at Sirmium, on the sixteenth before the Kalends of April, that most sacred high priest of hers was offering, a week after, impure libations of blood drawn from his own arms, and issuing his commands that the ordinary prayers should be made for the safety of the emperor already dead. O tardy messengers! O sleepy despatches! through whose fault Cybele had not an earlier knowledge of the imperial decease, that the Christians might have no occasion to ridicule a goddess so unworthy. Jupiter, again, would surely never have permitted his own Crete to fall at once before the Roman Fasces, forgetful of that Idean cave and the Corybantian cymbals, and the sweet odour of her who nursed him there. Would he not have exalted his own tomb above the entire Capitol, that the land which covered the ashes of Jove might rather be the mistress of the world? Would Juno have desired the destruction of the Punic city, beloved even to the neglect of Samos, and that by a nation of AEneadae? As to that I know, "Here were her arms, here was her chariot, this kingdom, if the Fates permit, the goddess tends and cherishes to be mistress of the nations." ³ Jove's hapless wife and sister had no power to prevail against the Fates! "Jupiter himself is sustained by fate." And yet the Romans have never done such homage to the Fates, which gave them Carthage against the purpose and the will of Juno, as to the abandoned harlot Larentina. It is undoubted that not a few of your gods have reigned on earth as kings. If, then, they now possess the power of bestowing empire, when they were kings themselves, from whence had they received their kingly honours? Whom did Jupiter and Saturn worship? A Sterculus, I suppose. But did the Romans, along with the native-born inhabitants, afterwards adore also some who were never kings? In that case, however, they were under the reign of others, who did not yet bow down to them, as not yet raised to godhead. It belongs to others, then, to make gift of kingdoms, since there were kings before these gods had their names on the roll of divinities. But how utterly foolish it is to attribute the greatness of the Roman name to religious merits, since it was after Rome became an empire, or call it still a kingdom, that the religion she professes made its chief progress! Is it the case now? Has its religion been the source of the prosperity of Rome? Though Numa set agoing an eagerness after superstitious observances, yet religion among the Romans was not yet a matter of images or temples. It was frugal in its ways, its rites were simple, and there were no capitols struggling to the heavens; but the altars were offhand ones of turf, and the sacred vessels were yet of Samian earthen-ware, and from these the odours rose, and no likeness of God was to be seen. For at that time the skill of the Greeks and Tuscans in image-making had not yet overrun the city with the products of their art. The Romans, therefore, were not distinguished for their devotion to the gods before they attained to greatness; and so their greatness was not the result of their religion. Indeed, how could religion make a people great who have owed their greatness to their irreligion? For, if I am not mistaken, kingdoms and empires are acquired by wars, and are extended by victories. More than that, you cannot have wars and victories without the taking, and often the destruction, of cities. That is a thing in which the gods have their share of calamity. Houses and temples suffer alike; there is indiscriminate slaughter of priests and citizens; the hand of rapine is laid equally upon sacred and on common treasure. Thus the sacrileges of the Romans are as numerous as their trophies. They boast as many triumphs over the gods as over the nations; as many spoils of battle they have still, as there remain images of captive deities. And the poor gods submit to be adored by their enemies, and they ordain illimitable empire to those whose injuries rather than their simulated homage should have had retribution at their hands. But divinities unconscious are with impunity dishonoured, just as in vain they are adored. You certainly never can believe that devotion to religion has evidently advanced to greatness a people who, as we have put it, have either grown by injuring religion, or have injured religion by their growth. Those, too, whose kingdoms have become part of the one great whole of the Roman empire, were not without religion when their kingdoms were taken from them.