Chap. xi.—of the origin, life, reign, name and death of jupiter, and of saturn and uranus.29    [Compare the remorseless satire of Arnobius, vol. vi. p. 498.]  

Who, then, is so senseless as to imagine that he reigns in heaven who ought not even to have reigned on earth? It was not without humour that a certain poet wrote of the triumph of Cupid: in which book he not only represented Cupid as the most powerful of the gods, but also as their conqueror. For having enumerated the loves of each, by which they had come into the power and dominion of Cupid, he sets in array a procession, in which Jupiter, with the other gods, is led in chains before the chariot of him, celebrating a triumph. This is elegantly pictured by the poet, but it is not far removed from the truth. For he who is without virtue, who is overpowered by desire and wicked lusts, is not, as the poet feigned, in subjection to Cupid, but to everlasting death. But let us cease to speak concerning morals; let us examine the matter, in order that men may understand in what errors they are miserably engaged. The common people imagine that Jupiter reigns in heaven; both learned and unlearned are alike persuaded of this. For both religion itself, and prayers, and hymns, and shrines, and images demonstrate this. And yet they admit that he was also descended from Saturn and Rhea. How can he appear a god, or be believed, as the poet says, to be the author of men and all things, when innumerable thousands of men existed before his birth—those, for instance, who lived during the reign of Saturn, and enjoyed the light sooner than Jupiter? I see that one god was king in the earliest times, and another in the times that followed. It is therefore possible that there may be another hereafter. For if the former kingdom was changed, why should we not expect that the latter may possibly be changed, unless by chance it was possible for Saturn to produce one more powerful than himself, but impossible for Jupiter so to do? And yet the divine government is always unchangeable; or if it is changeable, which is an impossibility, it is undoubtedly changeable at all times.  

Is it possible, then, for Jupiter to lose his kingdom as his father lost it? It is so undoubtedly. For when that deity had spared neither virgins nor married women, he abstained from Thetis only in consequence of an oracle which foretold that whatever son should be born from her would be greater than his father. And first of all there was in him a want of foreknowledge not befitting a god; for had not Themis related to him future events, he would not have known them of his own accord. But if he is not divine, he is not indeed a god; for the name of divinity is derived from god, as humanity is from man. Then there was a consciousness of weakness; but he who has feared, must plainly have feared one greater than himself. But he who does this assuredly knows that he is not the greatest, since something greater can exist. He also swears most solemnly by the Stygian marsh: “Which is set forth the sole object of religious dread to the gods above.” What is this object of religious dread? Or by whom is it set forth? Is there, then, some mighty power which may punish the gods who commit perjury? What is this great dread of the infernal marsh, if they are immortal? Why should they fear that which none are about to see, except those who are bound by the necessity of death? Why, then, do men raise their eyes to the heaven? Why do they swear by the gods above, when the gods above themselves have recourse to the infernal gods, and find among them an object of veneration and worship? But what is the meaning of that saying, that there are fates whom all the gods and Jupiter himself obey? If the power of the Parcæ is so great, that they are of more avail than all the heavenly gods, and their ruler and lord himself, why should not they be rather said to reign, since necessity compels all the gods to obey their laws and ordinances? Now, who can entertain a doubt that he who is subservient to anything cannot be greatest? For if he were so, he would not receive fates, but would appoint them. Now I return to another subject which I had omitted. In the case of one goddess only he exercised self-restraint, though he was deeply enamoured of her; but this was not from any virtue, but through fear of a successor. But this fear plainly denotes one who is both mortal and feeble, and of no weight: for at the very hour of his birth he might have been put to death, as his elder brother had been put to death; and if it had been possible for him to have lived, he would never have given up the supreme power to a younger brother. But Jupiter himself having been preserved by stealth, and stealthily nourished, was called Zeus, or Zen,30    Ζεὺς, or Ζη̑ν. [Quad sit auctor vitæ. Delphin note.]   not, as they imagine, from the fervor of heavenly fire, or because he is the giver of life, or because he breathes life into living creatures, which power belongs to God alone; for how can he impart the breath of life who has himself received it from another source? But he was so called because he was the first who lived of the male children of Saturn. Men, therefore, might have had another god as their ruler, if Saturn had not been deceived by his wife. But it will be said the poets feigned these things. Whoever entertains this opinion is in error. For they spoke respecting men; but in order that they might embellish those whose memory they used to celebrate with praises, they said that they were gods. Those things, therefore, which they spoke concerning them as gods were feigned, and not those which they spoke concerning them as men; and this will be manifest from an instance which we will bring forward. When about to offer violence to Danae, he poured into her lap a great quantity of golden coins. This was the price which he paid for her dishonour. But the poets who spoke about him as a god, that they might not weaken the authority of his supposed majesty, feigned that he himself descended in a shower of gold, making use of the same figure with which they speak of showers of iron when they describe a multitude of darts and arrows. He is said to have carried away Ganymede by an eagle; it is a picture of the poets. But he either carried him off by a legion, which has an eagle for its standard; or the ship on board of which he was placed had its tutelary deity in the shape of an eagle, just as it had the effigy of a bull when he seized Europa and conveyed her across the sea. In the same manner, it is related that he changed Io, the daughter of Inachus, into a heifer. And in order that she might escape the anger of Juno, just as she was, now covered with bristly hair, and in the shape of a heifer, she is said to have swam over the sea, and to have come into Egypt; and there, having recovered her former appearance, she became the goddess who is now called Isis. By what argument, then, can it be proved that Europa did not sit on the bull, and that Io was not changed into a heifer? Because there is a fixed day in the annals on which the voyage of Isis is celebrated; from which fact we learn that she did not swim across the sea, but sailed over. Therefore they who appear to themselves to be wise because they understand that there cannot be a living and earthly body in heaven, reject the whole story of Ganymede as false, and perceive that the occurrence took place on earth, inasmuch as the matter and the lust itself is earthly. The poets did not therefore invent these transactions, for if they were to do so they would be most worthless; but they added a certain colour to the transactions.31    [On the Poets, vol. i. cap. 2, p. 273.]   For it was not for the purpose of detraction that they said these things, but from a desire to embellish them. Hence men are deceived; especially because, while they think that all these things are feigned by the poets, they worship that of which they are ignorant. For they do not know what is the limit of poetic licence, how far it is allowable to proceed in fiction, since it is the business of the poet with some gracefulness to change and transfer actual occurrences into other representations by oblique transformations. But to feign the whole of that which you relate, that is to be foolish and deceitful rather than to be a poet.  

But grant that they feigned those things which are believed to be fabulous, did they also feign those things which are related about the female deities and the marriages of the gods? Why, then, are they so represented, and so worshipped? unless by chance not the poets only, but painters also, and statuaries, speak falsehoods. For if this is the Jupiter who is called by you a god, if it is not he who was born from Saturn and Ops, no other image but his alone ought to have been placed in all the temples. What meaning have the effigies of women? What the doubtful sex? in which, if this Jupiter is represented, the very stones will confess that he is a man. They say that the poets have spoken falsely, and yet they believe them: yes, truly they prove by the fact itself that the poets did not speak falsely; for they so frame the images of the gods, that, from the very diversity of sex, it appears that these things which the poets say are true. For what other conclusion does the image of Ganymede and the effigy of the eagle admit of, when they are placed before the feet of Jupiter in the temples, and are worshipped equally with himself, except that the memory of impious guilt and debauchery remains for ever? Nothing, therefore, is wholly invented by the poets: something perhaps is transferred and obscured by oblique fashioning, under which the truth was enwrapped and concealed; as that which was related about the dividing of the kingdoms by lot. For they say that the heaven fell to the share of Jupiter, the sea to Neptune, and the infernal regions to Pluto. Why was not the earth rather taken as the third portion, except that the transaction took place on the earth? Therefore it is true that they so divided and portioned out the government of the world, that the empire of the east fell to Jupiter, a part of the west was allotted to Pluto, who had the surname of Agesilaus; because the region of the east, from which light is given to mortals, seems to be higher, but the region of the west lower. Thus they so veiled the truth under a fiction, that the truth itself detracted nothing from the public persuasion. It is manifest concerning the share of Neptune; for we say that his kingdom resembled that unlimited authority possessed by Mark Antony, to whom the senate had decreed the power of the maritime coast, that he might punish the pirates, and tranquillize the whole sea. Thus all the maritime coasts, together with the islands, fell to the lot of Neptune. How can this be proved? Undoubtedly ancient stories attest it. Euhemerus, an ancient author, who was of the city of Messene, collected the actions of Jupiter and of the others, who are esteemed gods, and composed a history from the titles and sacred inscriptions which were in the most ancient temples, and especially in the sanctuary of the Triphylian Jupiter, where an inscription indicated that a golden column had been placed by Jupiter himself, on which column he wrote an account of his exploits, that posterity might have a memorial of his actions. This history was translated and followed by Ennius, whose words are these: “Where Jupiter gives to Neptune the government of the sea, that he might reign in all the islands and places bordering on the sea.”  

The accounts of the poets, therefore, are true, but veiled with an outward covering and show. It is possible that Mount Olympus may have supplied the poets with the hint for saying that Jupiter obtained the kingdom of heaven, because Olympus is the common name both of the mountain and of heaven. But the same history informs us that Jupiter dwelt on Mount Olympus, when it says: “At that time Jupiter spent the greatest part of his life on Mount Olympus; and they used to resort to him thither for the administration of justice, if any matters were disputed. Moreover, if any one had found out any new invention which might be useful for human life, he used to come thither and display it to Jupiter.” The poets transfer many things after this manner, not for the sake of speaking falsely against the objects of their worship, but that they may by variously coloured figures add beauty and grace to their poems. But they who do not understand the manner, or the cause, or the nature of that which is represented by figure, attack the poets as false and sacrilegious. Even the philosophers were deceived by this error; for because these things which are related about Jupiter appeared unsuited to the character of a god, they introduced two Jupiters, one natural, the other fabulous. They saw, on the one hand, that which was true, that he, forsooth, concerning whom the poets speak, was man; but in the case of that natural Jupiter, led by the common practise of superstition, they committed an error, inasmuch as they transferred the name of a man to God, who, as we have already said, because He is one only, has no need of a name. But it is undeniable that he is Jupiter who was born from Ops and Saturn. It is therefore an empty persuasion on the part of those who give the name of Jupiter to the Supreme God. For some are in the habit of defending their errors by this excuse; for, when convinced of the unity of God, since they cannot deny this, they affirm that they worship Him, but that it is their pleasure that He should be called Jupiter. But what can be more absurd than this? For Jupiter is not accustomed to be worshipped without the accompanying worship of his wife and daughter. From which his real nature is evident; nor is it lawful for that name to be transferred thither,32    Eo, i.e., to those.   where there is neither any Minerva nor Juno. Why should I say that the peculiar meaning of this name does not express a divine, but human power? For Cicero explains the names Jupiter and Juno as being derived from giving help;33    Juvando. [Nat. Deor., iii. 25, 26.]   and Jupiter is so called as if he were a helping father,—a name which is ill adapted to God: for to help is the part of a man conferring some aid upon one who is a stranger, and in a case where the benefit is small. No one implores God to help him, but to preserve him, to give him life and safety, which is a much greater and more important matter than to help.  

And since we are speaking of a father, no father is said to help his sons when he begets or brings them up. For that expression is too insignificant to denote the magnitude of the benefit derived from a father. How much more unsuitable is it to God, who is our true Father, by whom we exist, and whose we are altogether, by whom we are formed, endued with life, and enlightened, who bestows upon us life, gives us safety, and supplies us with various kinds of food! He has no apprehension of the divine benefits who thinks that he is only aided by God. Therefore he is not only ignorant, but impious, who disparages the excellency of the supreme power under the name of Jupiter. Wherefore, if both from his actions and character we have proved that Jupiter was a man, and reigned on earth, it only remains that we should also investigate his death. Ennius, in his sacred history, having described all the actions which he performed in his life, at the close thus speaks: Then Jupiter, when he had five times made a circuit of the earth, and bestowed governments upon all his friends and relatives, and left laws to men, provided them with a settled mode of life and corn, and given them many other benefits, and having been honoured with immortal glory and remembrance, left lasting memorials to his friends, and when his age34    Ætate pessum acta. [See plural Joves, Nat. Deor., iii. 16.]   was almost spent, he changed35    Commutavit; others read consummavit, “he completed.”   his life in Crete, and departed to the gods. And the Curetes, his sons, took charge of him, and honoured him; and his tomb is in Crete, in the town of Cnossus, and Vesta is said to have founded this city; and on his tomb is an inscription in ancient Greek characters, “Zan Kronou,” which is in Latin, “Jupiter the son of Saturn.” This undoubtedly is not handed down by poets, but by writers of ancient events; and these things are so true, that they are confirmed by some verses of the Sibyls, to this effect:—  

Cicero, in his treatise concerning the Nature of the Gods, having said that three Jupiters were enumerated by theologians, adds that the third was of Crete, the son of Saturn, and that his tomb is shown in that island. How, therefore, can a god be alive in one place, and dead in another; in one place have a temple, and in another a tomb? Let the Romans then know that their Capitol, that is the chief head of their objects of public veneration, is nothing but an empty monument.  

Let us now come to his father who reigned before him, and who perhaps had more power in himself, because he is said to be born from the meeting of such great elements. Let us see what there was in him worthy of a god, especially that he is related to have had the golden age, because in his reign there was justice in the earth. I find something in him which was not in his son. For what is so befitting the character of a god, as a just government and an age of piety? But when, on the same principle, I reflect that he is a son, I cannot consider him as the Supreme God; for I see that there is something more ancient than himself,—namely, the heaven and the earth. But I am in search of a God beyond whom nothing has any existence, who is the source and origin of all things. He must of necessity exist who framed the heaven itself, and laid the foundations of the earth. But if Saturn was born from these, as it is supposed, how can he be the chief God, since he owes his origin to another? Or who presided over the universe before the birth of Saturn? But this, as I recently said, is a fiction of the poets. For it was impossible that the senseless elements, which are separated by so long an interval, should meet together and give birth to a son, or that he who was born should not at all resemble his parents, but should have a form which his parents did not possess.  

Let us therefore inquire what degree of truth lies hid under this figure. Minucius Felix, in his treatise which has the title of Octavius,36    [Condensed from cap. xxii. See vol. iv. p. 186, this series.]   alleged these proofs: “That Saturn, when he had been banished by his son, and had come into Italy, was called the son of Cœlus (heaven), because we are accustomed to say that those whose virtue we admire, or those who have unexpectedly arrived, have fallen from heaven; and that he was called the son of earth, because we name those who are born from unknown parents sons of earth.” These things, indeed, have some resemblance to the truth, but are not true, because it is evident that even during his reign he was so esteemed. He might have argued thus: That Saturn, being a very powerful king, in order that the memory of his parents might be preserved, gave their names to the heaven and earth, whereas these were before called by other names, for which reason we know that names were applied both to mountains and rivers. For when the poets speak of the offspring of Atlas, or of the river Inachus, they do not absolutely say that men could possibly be born from inanimate objects; but they undoubtedly indicate those who were born from those men, who either during their lives or after their death gave their names to mountains or rivers. For that was a common practise among the ancients, and especially among the Greeks. Thus we have heard that seas received the names of those who had fallen into them, as the Ægean, the Icarian, and the Hellespont. In Latium, also, Aventinus gave his name to the mountain on which he was buried; and Tiberinus, or Tiber, gave his name to the river in which he was drowned. No wonder, then, if the names of those who had given birth to most powerful kings were attributed to the heaven and earth. Therefore it appears that Saturn was not born from heaven, which is impossible, but from that man who bore the name of Uranus. And Trismegistus attests the truth of this; for when he said that very few had existed in whom there was perfect learning, he mentioned by name among these his relatives, Uranus, Saturn, and Mercury. And because he was ignorant of these things, he gave another account of the matter; how he might have argued, I have shown. Now I will say in what manner, at what time, and by whom this was done; for it was not Saturn who did this, but Jupiter. Ennius thus relates in his sacred history: “Then Pan leads him to the mountain, which is called the pillar of heaven. Having ascended thither, he surveyed the lands far and wide, and there on that mountain he builds an altar to Cœlus; and Jupiter was the first who offered sacrifice on that altar. In that place he looked up to heaven, by which name we now call it, and that which was above the world which was called the firmament,37    Æther. [Tayler Lewis, Plato cont. Ath., pp. 126–129.]   and he gave to the heaven its name from the name of his grandfather; and Jupiter in prayer first gave the name of heaven to that which was called firmament,38    Æther. [Tayler Lewis, Plato cont. Ath., pp. 126–129.]   and he burnt entire the victim which he there offered in sacrifice.” Nor is it here only that Jupiter is found to have offered sacrifice. Cæsar also, in Aratus, relates that Aglaosthenes says that when he was setting out from the island of Naxos against the Titans, and was offering sacrifice on the shore, an eagle flew to Jupiter as an omen, and that the victor received it as a good token, and placed it under his own protection. But the sacred history testifies that even beforehand an eagle had sat upon his head, and portended to him the kingdom. To whom, then, could Jupiter have offered sacrifice, except to his grandfather Cœlus, who, according to the saying of Euhemerus,39    Euhemerus was a Sicilian author of the age of Alexander the Great. He wrote a sacred history containing an account of the several gods who were worshipped in Greece, whom he represents as having originally been men who had distinguished themselves by their exploits, or benefits conferred upon men, and who were therefore, after their death, worshipped as gods. The Christian writers frequently refer to Euhemerus as helping them to prove that the pagan mythology consisted only of fables invented by men. See Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography.   died in Oceania, and was buried in the town of Aulatia?  

CAPUT XI De Jovis ortu, vita, regno, nomine et morte, et de Saturno et Urano.

Quis est igitur tam excors, qui hunc in coelo regnare putet, qui ne in terra quidem debuit? Non insulse 0166A quidam poeta triumphum Cupidinis scripsit: quo in libro non modo potentissimum deorum Cupidinem, sed etiam victorem facit. Enumeratis enim amoribus singulorum, quibus in potestatem Cupidinis ditionemque venissent, instruit pompam, in qua Jupiter cum caeteris diis ante currum triumphantis ducitur catenatus. Eleganter id quidem a poeta figuratum: sed tamen non multum distat a vero. Qui enim virtutis est expers, qui a cupiditate ac libidinibus malis vincitur, non Cupidini (ut ille finxit), sed morti subjectus est sempiternae. Sed omittamus de moribus dicere: rem confideremus; ut intelligant homines, in quibus miseri versentur erroribus. Regnare in coelo Jovem vulgus existimat: id et doctis pariter et indoctis persuasum est. Quod et Religio 0166B ipsa, et precationes, et hymni, et delubra, et simulacra demonstrant. Eumdem tamen Saturno et Rhea genitum confitentur. Quomodo potest Deus videri, aut credi (ut ait poeta): . . . . . . . Hominum rerumque repertor,ante cujus ortum infinita hominum millia fuerunt? eorum scilicet, qui Saturno regnante vixerunt; ac priores luce, quam Jupiter, sunt potiti. Video alium Deum regem fuisse primis temporibus, alium consequentibus. Potest ergo fieri, ut alius sit postea futurus. Si enim regnum prius mutatum est: cur desperemus 0167A etiam posterius posse mutari? nisi forte Saturnus generare potuit fortiorem: Jupiter non potest. Atqui divinum imperium aut semper immutabile est: aut, si est mutabile, quod 0167A fieri non potest, semper utique mutabile est.

Potest ergo Jupiter regnum amittere, sicut pater ejus amisit? Ita plane. Nam cum idem neque virginibus, neque maritatis unquam pepercisset, abstinuit se tamen una Thetide, quod responsum fuit, majorem patre suo futurum, quisquis ex illa natus esset. Et primum imprudentia in eo non Dei, cui nisi Themis futura dixisset, ipse nesciret. Si autem divinus non sit, ne Deus quidem sit; unde ipsa divinitas nominatur, ut ab homine humanitas. Deinde conscientia imbecillitatis, qui timuit utique majorem: quod qui facit, scit profecto non esse se maximum: quondoquidem 0167B potest aliquid majus existere. Idem per Stygiam paludem sanctissime jurat. 0168A Vana superstitio, superis quae reddita divis.Quae est ista superstitio? aut a quo reddita? Est ergo aliqua potestas maxima, quae pejerantes deos puniat? quae tanta formido est paludis infernae, si sunt immortales? quid metuunt eam, quam visuri non sunt, nisi quos mori necesse est? Quid igitur homines oculos suos in coelum tollunt? quid per superos dejerant, cum ipsi superi ad inferos revolvantur, ibique habeant quod venerentur et adorent? Illud vero quale est? esse fata, quibus dii omnes, et ipse Jupiter pareat. Si Parcarum tanta vis est, ut plus possint quam coelestes universi, quamque ipse rector ac dominus, cur non illae potius regnare dicantur, quarum legibus ac statutis parere omnes deos necessitas cogit? Nunc cui dubium est, quin is, qui alicui rei obsequitur, 0168B maximus non sit? nam si sit, non accipiat fata, sed faciat. Nunc ad aliud, quod omiseram, redeo. In una 0169A itaque 0169A sola fuit continentior, cum eam deperiret; non virtute aliqua, sed metu successoris. Quae formido utique ejus est, qui sit et mortalis, et imbecillus, et nihili: quippe qui potuit et tunc, cum nasceretur, extingui, sicut frater ejus ante genitus, extinctus est: qui si vivere potuisset, nunquam minori concessisset imperium. Ipse autem furto servatus, furtimque nutritus, ζεὺς sive ζῆν appellatus est; non, ut isti putant, a fervore coelestis ignis, vel quod vitae sit dator, vel quod animantibus inspiret animas, quae virtus solius Dei est (quam enim possit inspirare animam, qui ipse accepit aliunde?), sed quod primus ex liberis Saturni maribus vixerit.

Potuerunt igitur homines alium deum habere rectorem, si Saturnus non fuisset ab uxore delusus. At 0169B enim poetae ista finxerunt. Errat quisquis hoc putat. 0170A Illi enim de hominibus loquebantur; sed ut eos ornarent, quorum memoriam laudibus celebrabant, deos esse dixerunt. Itaque illa potius ficta sunt, quae tamquam de diis, non illa quae tamquam de hominibus locuti sunt: quod clarum fiet exemplo, quod inferemus. Danaen violaturus, aureos nummos largiter in sinum ejus infudit. Haec stupri merces fuit. At poetae, qui quasi de Deo loquebantur, ne auctoritatem creditae majestatis infringerent, finxerunt ipsum in aureo imbre delapsum, eadem figura, qua imbres ferreos dicunt, cum multitudinem telorum sagittarumque describunt. Rapuisse dicitur in aquila Catamitum: poeticus color est. Sed aut per legionem rapuit, cujus insigne aquila est; aut navis, in qua est impositus, tutelam habuit in aquila figuratam, sicut 0170B taurum, cum rapuit et transvexit Europam. Eodem 0171A modo convertisse in bovem traditur Io Inachi filiam, quae, ut iram Junonis effugeret, ut erat jam setis obsita, jam bos tranasse dicitur mare, in Aegyptumque venisse, atque ibi, recepta pristina specie, dea facta quae nunc Isis vocatur. Quo igitur argumento probari potest, nec Europam 0171A in Tauro sedisse, nec Io factam bovem? Quod certus dies habetur in Fastis, quo Isidis navigium celebratur: quae res docet non tranasse illam, sed navigasse. Igitur qui sapere sibi videntur, quia intelligunt vivum terrenumque corpus in coelo esse non posse, totam Ganymedeam fabulam pro falso repudiant; ac sentiunt in terra id esse factum, quia res ac libido ipsa terrena est. Non ergo ipsas res gestas finxerunt poetae; quod si facerent, essent vanissimi: sed rebus gestis addiderunt quemdam colorem. Non enim obtrectantes illa dicebant, sed ornare 0171B cupientes. Hinc homines decipiuntur: maxime quod, dum haec omnia ficta esse arbitrantur a poetis, colunt quod ignorant. Nesciunt enim, qui sit poeticae licentiae modus; quousque progredi fingendo liceat: cum officium poetae sit in eo, ut ea, quae gesta sunt vere, in alias species obliquis figurationibus cum decore aliquo conversa traducat. Totum autem, quod referas, 0172A fingere, id est ineptum esse, et mendacem potius quam poetam.

Sed finxerint ista, quae fabulosa creduntur; num etiam illa, quae de diis foeminis, deorumque connubiis dicta sunt? Cur igitur sic figurantur, sic coluntur? nisi forte non tantum poetae, sed pictores etiam fictoresque imaginum mentiuntur. Si enim hic est Jupiter, qui a vobis dicitur deus, si non is est, qui ex Saturno et Ope natus est, non oportuit nisi solius simulacrum in templis omnibus collocari. Quid sibi mulierum effigies volunt? quid sexus infirmus? in quem si cecidit hic Jupiter, eum vero ipsi lapides hominem fatebuntur. Mentitos aiunt esse poetas, et his tamen credunt; immo vero non esse mentitos, re ipsa probant, ita enim deorum simulacra confingunt, ut ex ipsa diversitate sexus appareat, vera esse 0172B quae dicunt poetae. Nam quod aliud argumentum habet imago Catamiti, et effigies aquilae, cum ante pedes Jovis ponuntur in templis, et cum ipso pariter adorantur: nisi ut nefandi sceleris ac stupri memoria maneat in aeternum? Nihil igitur a poetis in totum fictum est: aliquid fortasse traductum, et obliqua figuratione obscuratum, quo veritas involuta tegeretur; 0173A sicut illud de sortitione regnorum. 0173A Aiunt enim Jovi coelum obtigisse, Neptuno mare, inferna Plutoni. Cur non terra potius in sortem tertiam venit; nisi quod in terra gesta res est. Ergo illud in vero est, quod regnum orbis ita partiti sortitique sunt, ut Orientis imperium Jovi cederet; Plutoni, cui cognomen Agesilao fuit, pars Occidentis obtingeret: eo quod plaga Orientis, ex qua lux mortalibus datur, superior; Occidentis autem inferior esse videatur. Sic veritatem mendacio velaverunt, ut veritas ipsa persuasioni publicae nihil derogaret. De Neptunii sorte manifestum est, cujus regnum tale fuisse dicimus, quale 0173B Marci Antonii fuit infinitum illud imperium; cui 0174A totius orae maritimae potestatem Senatus decreverat, ut praedones persequeretur, ac mare omne pacaret. Sic Neptuno maritima omnia cum insulis obvenerunt. Quomodo id probari potest? Nimirum veteres historiae docent. Antiquus auctor Euhemerus, qui fuit ex civitate Messene, res gestas Jovis, et caeterorum qui dii putantur, collegit, historiamque contexuit ex titulis, et inscriptionibus sacris, quae in antiquissimis templis habebantur, maximeque in fano Jovis Triphylii; ubi auream columnam positam esse ab ipso Jove titulus indicabat, in qua columna gesta sua perscripsit, ut monumentum esset posteris rerum 0174B suarum. Hanc historiam et intepretatus est Ennius, 0175A et secutus; 0175A cujus haec verba sunt: «Ubi Jupiter Neptuno imperium dat maris, ut in insulis omnibus et quae secundum mare loca essent, omnibus regnaret.»

Vera sunt ergo quae loquuntur poetae, sed obtentu aliquo specieque velata. Potest et mons Olympus figuram poetis dedisse, ut Jovem dicerent coeli regnum esse sortitum; quod Olympus ambiguum nomen est et montis, et coeli. In Olympo autem Jovem habitasse docet historia eadem, quae dicit: «Ea tempestate Jupiter in monte Olympo maximam partem vitae colebat, et eo ad eum in jus veniebant, si quae res in controversia erant. Item, si quis quid novi invenerat, quod ad vitam humanam utile esset, eo veniebat, atque Jovi ostendebat.» Multa in hunc modum poetae 0175B transferunt, non ut in eos mentiantur quos colunt, sed ut figuris versicoloribus venustatem ac leporem carminibus suis addant. Qui autem non intelligunt, quomodo aut quare quidque figuretur, poetas velut mendaces et sacrilegos insequuntur. Hoc errore decepti etiam philosophi, quod ea, quae de Jove feruntur, 0176A minime in Deum convenire videbantur, duos Joves fecerunt, unum naturalem, alterum fabulosum. Viderunt ex parte, quod erat verum, eum scilicet, de quo poetae loquuntur hominem fuisse: in illo autem naturali Jove, vulgari consuetudine religionis inducti, erraverunt, quod in Deum nomen hominis transtulerunt; qui (ut supra diximus) quia solus est, non indiget nomine. Jovem autem illum esse, qui sit ex Ope Saturnoque natus, negari non potest. Vana igitur persuasio est eorum, qui nomen Jovis summo Deo tribuunt. Solent enim quidam errores suos hac excusatione defendere; qui convicti de uno Deo, cum id negare non possunt, ipsum se colere affirmant, verum hoc sibi placere, ut Jupiter nominetur: quo quid absurdius? Jupiter enim sine contubernio conjugis filiaeque 0176B coli non solet. Unde quid sit, apparet: nec fas est id nomen eo transferri, ubi nec Minerva est ulla, nec Juno. Quid? quod hujus nominis proprietas non divinam vim exprimit, sed humanam? Jovem enim, Junonemque a juvando esse dictos, Cicero interpretatur. Et Jupiter, quasi Juvans pater dicitur; quod 0177A nomen in Deum minime congruit; quia juvare hominis est, opis aliquid conferentis in eum, qui sit alienus, et exigui beneficii. Nemo sic Deum precatur, ut se adjuvet; sed ut servet, ut vitam salutemque tribuat: quod multo plus ac majus est quam juvare.

Et quoniam de patre loquimur, nullus pater dicitur filios juvare, 0177A cum eos generat, aut educat. Illud enim levius est, quam ut eo verbo magnitudo paterni beneficii exprimatur. Quanto id magis inconveniens est Deo, qui verus est pater; per quem sumus, et cujus toti sumus, a quo fingimur, animamur, illuminamur; qui nobis vitam impertit, salutem tribuit, victum multiplicem subministrat. Non intelligit beneficia divina, qui se juvari tantummodo a Deo putat. Ergo non imperitus modo, sed etiam impius est, qui 0177B nomine Jovis virtutem summae potestatis imminuit. Quare si Jovem et ex rebus gestis et ex moribus hominem fuisse, in terraque regnasse deprehendimus, 0178A superest ut mortem quoque ejus investigemus. Ennius in sacra Historia, descriptis omnibus quae in vita sua gessit, ad ultimum sic ait: Deinde Jupiter, postquam quinquies terras circuivit, omnibusque amicis atque cognatis suis imperia divisit, reliquitque hominibus leges, mores frumentaque paravit, multaque alia bona fecit, immortali gloria, memoriaque affectus, sempiterna monimenta suis reliquit: aetate pessum acta, in Creta vitam commutavit, et ad deos abiit, eumque Curetes filii sui curaverunt, decoraveruntque eum; et sepulcrum ejus est in Creta et in oppido Cnosso, et dicitur Vesta hanc urbem creavisse; inque sepulcro ejus est inscriptum antiquis litteris graecis, ΖΑΝ ΚΡΟΝΟΥ, id est latine, Jupiter Saturni. Hoc certe non poetae tradunt, sed antiquarum 0178B rerum scriptores: quae adeo vera sunt, ut ea sybillinis versibus confirmentur; qui sunt tales: 0179A Δαίμονας ἀψύχους, νεκύων εἴδωλα καμόντων, Ὧν Χρήτη καύχημα τάφους0179A ἡ δύσμορος ἴσχει.Cicero de Natura deorum, cum tres Joves a theologis enumerari diceret, ait tertium fuisse Cretensem, Saturni filium, cujus in illa insula sepulcrum ostenditur. Quomodo igitur potest deus alibi esse vivus alibi mortuus, alibi habere templum, alibi sepulcrum? Sciant ergo Romani, Capitolium suum, id est summum caput religionum publicarum, nihil esse aliud quam inane monimentum.

Veniamus nunc ad ejus patrem, qui ante regnavit, et qui fortasse plus habebat in se, quod ex coitu tantorum elementorum genitus esse dicatur. Videamus quid in eo fuerit deo dignum: in primis illud, quod aureum saeculum narratur habuisse; quod justitia sub eo fuerit in terra. Teneo aliquid in hoc, 0179B quod in ejus filio non fuit. Quid enim tam conveniens deo, quam justum regimen, ac pium saeculum? Sed cum eadem ratione natum esse cogito, non possum 0180A putare Deum summum, quo videam esse aliquid antiquius, coelum scilicet atque terram. At ego Deum quaero, ultra quem nihil sit omnino, qui fons, et origo sit rerum. Hic sit necesse est, qui coelum ipsum condidit, terramque fundavit. Saturnus autem si ex his natus est (ut putatur) quemadmodum potest Deus esse principalis, qui aliis ortum suum debet? aut quis praefuit mundo, priusquam Saturnus gigneretur? Sed hoc poeticum est (ut dicebam paulo ante) figmentum. Nec enim fieri poterat, ut elementa insensibilia, tantoque intervallo separata, in unum coirent ac filium procrearent: aut is, qui natus esset, non potissimum genitoribus similis existeret; sed eam formam gereret, quam parentes sui non habebant.

0180B Quaeramus ergo quid veritatis sub hac figura lateat. Minucius Felix in eo libro, qui Octavius inscribitur, sic argumentatus est: «Saturnum, cum fugatus esset a filio in Italiamque venisset, Coeli filium 0181A dictum, quod soleamus eos quorum virtutem miremur, aut qui repentino advenerint, 0181A de coelo cecidisse dicere; terrae autem, quod ignotis parentibus natos, terrae filios nominemus.» Sunt haec quidem similia veri, non tamen vera: quia constat etiam tunc cum regnaret ita esse habitum. Potuit et sic argumentari: Saturnum, cum potentissimus rex esset, ad retinendam parentum suorum memoriam, nomina eorum coelo terraeque indidisse, cum haec prius aliis vocabulis appellarentur; qua ratione et montibus et fluminibus nomina scimus imposita. Neque enim cum dicunt poetae de progenie Atlantis, aut Inachi fluminis, id potissimum dicunt, homines ex rebus sensu carentibus potuisse generari; sed eos utique significant, qui nati sunt ex his hominibus, qui vel vivi, vel mortui, nomina montibus aut fluminibus indiderunt. 0181B Nam id apud veteres, maximeque Graecos, fuit usitatum. Sic maria eorum traxisse nomina accepimus, 0182A qui deciderant in ea, ut Aegeum, Icarium, Hellesponticum: et in Latio Aventinus, vocabulum monti dedit, in quo sepultus est; Tiberinus vel Tiberis, amni in quo mersus est.

Non ergo mirandum, si nomina eorum coelo terraeque attributa essent, qui reges genuerant potentissimos. Apparet ergo non ex coelo natum esse; quod fieri non potest: sed ex eo homine, cui nomen Urano fuit. Quod esse verum Trismegistus auctor est: qui cum diceret admodum paucos extitisse in quibus esset perfecta doctrina, in his Uranum, Saturnum, Mercurium cognatos suos nominavit. Haec ille quia ignoravit, alio traduxit historiam; qui quomodo potuerit argumentari, ostendi: nunc dicam, quomodo, ubi, a quo sit hoc factum; non enim Saturnus hoc, 0182B sed Jupiter fecit. In sacra Historia sic Ennius tradit: «Deinde Pan eum deducit in montem, qui vocatur 0183A coeli stela. 0183A Postquam eo ascendit, contemplatus est late terras, ibique eo in monte aram creat coelo; primusque in ea ara Jupiter sacrificavit: in eo loco suspexit in coelum quod nunc nos nominamus, idque quod supra mundum erat, quod aether vocabatur, de sui avi nomine coelo nomen indidit: idque Jupiter, quod aether vocatur, precans, primum coelum nominavit; eamque hostiam, quam ibi sacravit, totam adolevit.» Nec hic tantum sacrificasse Jupiter invenitur. Caesar quoque in Arato refert Aglaosthenem dicere, Jovem cum ex insula Naxo adversus Titanas proficisceretur, et sacrificium faceret in littore, aquilam ei in auspicium advolasse; quam victor bono omine acceptam tutelae suae subjugarit. Sacra vero 0183B Historia (scilicet Ennii) etiam ante consedisse illi aquilam 0184A in capite, atque illi regnum portendisse, testatur. Cui ergo sacrificare Jupiter potuit, nisi coelo avo? quem dicit Euhemerus in Oceania mortuum, et in oppido Aulacia sepultum.