Traduction Masquer
The City of God

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.

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!" ¹ Was it requisite, then, for Rome's prosperity, that the state of things which Virgil reprobates should succeed:

"At length stole on a baser age

And war's indomitable rage,

And greedy lust of gain?" ²

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, parents. Afterwards, 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." ³ 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 man. These 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.

Edition Masquer
De civitate Dei (CCSL)

Caput X: An optandum fuerit, ut tanta bellorum rabie Romanum augeretur imperium, cum eo studio, quo sub Numa actum est, et quietum esse potuisset et tutum.

An respondent, quod nisi adsiduis sibique continuo succedentibus bellis Romanum imperium tam longe lateque non posset augeri et tam grandi gloria diffamari? idonea uero causa ut 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 peruenire, 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 - diuersi pars ingenium, alii corpus exercebant; etiamtum uita hominum sine cupiditate agitabatur, sua cuique satis placebant. an ut tam multum augeretur imperium, debuit fieri quod Vergilius detestatur, dicens: deterior donec paulatim et 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 auiditas 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 uidebatur, sicut pleraque mortalium habentur, inuidia ex opulentia orta est. igitur reges populique finitimi bello tentare; 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 uirtute propulerant, sociis atque amicis auxilia portabant magisque dandis quam accipiendis beneficiis amicitias parabant. decenter his artibus Roma creuit. sed regnante Numa, ut tam longa pax esset, utrum inruebant inprobi belloque tentabant, an nihil eorum fiebat, ut posset pax illa persistere? si enim bellis etiamtum 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 di eorum, sed quamdiu homines finitimi circumquaque uoluerunt, qui eam nullo bello prouocauerunt; nisi forte di tales etiam id homini uendere audebunt, quod alius homo uoluit siue noluit. interest quidem iam uitio proprio, malas mentes quatenus sinantur isti daemones uel terrere uel excitare; sed si semper hoc possent nec aliud secretiore ac superiore potestate contra eorum conatum saepe aliter ageretur, semper in potestate haberent paces bellicasque uictorias, quae semper fere per humanorum animorum motus accidunt; quas tamen plerumque contra eorum fieri uoluntatem non solae fabulae multa mentientes et uix ueri aliquid uel indicantes uel significantes, sed etiam ipsa Romana confitetur historia.