Chapter XXIII.—Of the Follies Which the Pagans Have Indulged in Regarding Jupiter and Saturn.

31. These narratives of yours, say they, are but fables which have to be interpreted by the wise, or else they are fit only to be laughed at; but we revere that Jupiter of whom Maro says that

“All things are full of Jove,”

—Virgil’s Eclogues, iii. v. 60;

that is to say, the spirit of life80    Or, the breathed air—spiritum. that vivifies all things. It is not without some reason, therefore, that Varro thought that Jove was worshipped by the Jews; for the God of the Jews says by His prophet, “I fill heaven and earth.”81    Jer. xxiii. 24. But what is meant by that which the same poet names Ether? How do they take the term? For he speaks thus:

“Then the omnipotent father Ether, with fertilizing showers,

Came down into the bosom of his fruitful spouse.”

—Virgil’s Georgics, ii. 325.

They say, indeed, that this Ether is not spirit,82    Spiritum, breath. but a lofty body in which the heaven is stretched above the air.83    Aërem. Is liberty conceded to the poet to speak at one time in the language of the followers of Plato, as if God was not body, but spirit, and at another time in the language of the Stoics, as if God was a body? What is it, then, that they worship in their Capitol? If it is a spirit, or if again it is, in short, the corporeal heaven itself, then what does that shield of Jupiter there which they style the Ægis? The origin of that name, indeed, is explained by the circumstance that a goat84    Alluding to the derivation of the word Ægis = αἰγίς, a goatskin, from the Greek αἴξ = goat. nourished Jupiter when he was concealed by his mother. Or is this a fiction of the poets? But are the capitols of the Romans, then, also the mere creations of the poets? And what is the meaning of that, certainly not poetical, but unmistakeably farcical, variability of yours, in seeking your gods according to the ideas of philosophers in books, and revering them according to the notions of poets in your temples?

32. But was that Euhemerus also a poet, who declares both Jupiter himself, and his father Saturn, and Pluto and Neptune his brothers, to have been men, in terms so exceedingly plain that their worshippers ought all the more to render thanks to the poets, because their inventions have not been intended so much to disparage them as rather to dress them up? Albeit Cicero85    See the first book of his De Natura Deorum, c. 42. Compare also Lactantius, De Falsa Religione, i. 11; and Varro, De Re Rustica, i. 48. mentions that this same Euhemerus was translated into Latin by the poet Ennius.86    The father of Roman literature, born B.C. 239 at Rudiæ in Calabria, both a poet and a man of learning, and well versed, among other things, in Oscan, Latin, and Greek—linguistic accomplishments beyond his day. Of his writings we now possess only fragments, preserved by Cicero, Macrobius, Aulus Gellius, and others. Or was Cicero himself a poet, who, in counselling the person with whom he debates in his Tusculan Disputations, addresses him as one possessing knowledge of things secret, in the following terms: “If, indeed, I were to attempt to search into antiquity, and produce from thence the subjects which the writers of Greece have given to the world, it would be found that even those deities who are reckoned gods of the higher orders have gone from us into heaven. Ask whose sepulchres are pointed out in Greece: call to mind, since you have been initiated, the things which are delivered in the mysteries: then, doubtless, you will comprehend how widely extended this belief is.”87    Tusculan Disputations, Book i. 13. This author certainly makes ample acknowledgment of the doctrine that those gods of theirs were originally men. He does, indeed, benevolently surmise that they made their way into heaven. But he did not hesitate to say in public, that even the honour thus given them in general repute88    Honorem opinionis. was conferred upon them by men, when he spoke of Romulus in these words: “By good will and repute we have raised to the immortal gods that Romulus who founded this city.”89    From the Third Oration against Catiline, § 1. How should it be such a wonderful thing, therefore, to suppose that the more ancient men did with respect to Jupiter and Saturn and the others what the Romans have done with respect to Romulus, and what, in good truth, they have thought of doing even in these more recent times also in the case of Cæsar? And to these same Virgil has addressed the additional flattery of song, saying:

“Lo, the star of Cæsar, descendant of Dione, arose.”

—Eclogue, ix. ver. 47.

Let them see to it, then, that the truth of history do not turn out to exhibit to our view sepulchres erected for their false gods here upon the earth!and let them take heed lest the vanity of poetry, instead of fixing, may be but feigning90    Non figat sed fingat. stars for their deities there in heaven. For, in reality, that one is not the star of Jupiter, neither is this one the star of Saturn; but the simple fact is, that upon these stars, which were set from the foundation of the world, the names of those persons were imposed after their death by men who were minded to honour them as gods on their departure from this life. And with respect to these we may, indeed, ask how there should be such ill desert in chastity, or such good desert in voluptuousness, that Venus should have a star, and Minerva be denied one among those luminaries which revolve along with the sun and moon?

33. But it may be said that Cicero, the Academic sage, who has been bold enough to make mention of the sepulchres of their gods, and to commit the statement to writing, is a more doubtful authority than the poets; although he did not presume to offer that assertion simply as his own personal opinion, but put it on record as a statement contained among the traditions of their own sacred rites. Well, then, can it also be maintained that Varro either gives expression merely to an invention of his own, as a poet might do, or puts the matter only dubiously, as might be the case with an Academician, because he declares that, in the instance of all such gods, the matters of their worship had their origin either in the life which they lived, or in the death which they died, among men? Or was that Egyptian priest, Leon,91    On this Leo or Leon, see also Augustin’s City of God, viii. 5. Reference is often made to him by early Christian writers as a thinker agreeing so far with the principles of Euhemerus (in whose time, or perhaps somewhat before it, he flourished) as to teach that the gods of the old heathen world were originally men. He is mentioned by Arnobius, Adversus Gentes, iv. 29; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, i. 23; Tertullian, De Corona, c. 7; Tatian, etc. either a poet or an Academician, who expounded the origin of those gods of theirs to Alexander of Macedon, in a way somewhat different indeed from the opinion advanced by the Greeks, but nevertheless so far accordant therewith as to make out their deities to have been originally men?

34. But what is all this to us?92    Reading, with Migne, Sed quid ad nos? Dicant se Jovem, etc. Others give, Sed quid ad nos si decant, etc. = But what is it to us although they say that they worship, etc. The si, however, is wanting in the mss. Let them assert that they worship Jupiter, and not a dead man; let them maintain that they have dedicated their Capitol not to a dead man, but to the Spirit that vivifies all things and fills the world. And as to that shield of his, which was made of the skin of a she-goat in honour of his nurse, let them put upon it whatever interpretation they please. What do they say, however, about Saturn?93    Reading, with Migne, Quid dicunt de Saturno? Quem, etc. Others give, Quid dicunt de Saturno qui = What do those say about Saturn who worship Saturn? The mss. have quem. What is it that they worship under the name of Saturn? Is not this the deity that was the first to come down to us from Olympus (of whom the poet sings):

“Then from Olympus’ height came down

Good Saturn, exiled from his crown

By Jove, his mightier heir:

He brought the race to union first

Erewhile, on mountain-tops dispersed,

And gave them statutes to obey,

And willed the land wherein he lay

Should Latium’s title bear.”

—Virgil’s Æneid, viii. 320–324, Conington’s trans.

Does not his very image, made as it is with the head covered, present him as one under concealment?94    Quasi latentem indicat, in reference to the story introduced in the Virgilian passage, that the country got its name, Latium, from the disappearance of the god. Was it not he that made the practice of agriculture known to the people of Italy, a fact which is expressed by the reaping-hook?95    The statue of Saturn represented him with a sickle or pruning-knife in his hand. No, say they; for you may see whether the being of whom such things are recorded was a man,96    Migne’s text gives, on the authority of mss., the reading, Nam videris si fuit ille homo, etc. Others edit, Nam tametsi fuerit ille, etc. = For although he may have been a man…yet we interpret, etc. and indeed one particular king: we, however, interpret Saturn to be universal Time, as is signified also by his name in Greek: for he is called Chronus,97    For Kronos. which word, with the aspiration thus given it, is also the vocable for time: whence, too, in Latin he gets the name of Saturn, as if it meant that he is sated98    Saturetur—saturated, abundantly furnished.with years. But now, what we are to make of people like these I know not, who, in their very effort to put a more favourable meaning upon the names and the images of their gods, make the confession that the very god who is their major deity, and the father of the rest, is Time. For what else do they thus betray but, in fact, that all those gods of theirs are only temporal, seeing that the very parent of them all is made out to be Time?

35. Accordingly, their more recent philosophers of the Platonic school, who have flourished in Christian times, have been ashamed of such fancies, and have endeavoured to interpret Saturn in another way, affirming that he received the name Χρόνος99    Chronos, Kronos. in order to signify, as it were, the fulness of intellect; their explanation being, that in Greek fulness100    Or satiety. is expressed by the term χόρος,101    Choros. and intellect or mind by the term νοῦς;102    Nous. which etymology seems to be favoured also by the Latin name, on the supposition that the first part of the word (Saturnus) came from the Latin, and the second part from the Greek: so that he got the title Saturnus as an equivalent to satur, νοῦς.103    Full, mind. For they saw how absurd it was to have that Jupiter regarded as a son of Time, whom they either considered, or wished to have considered, eternal deity. Furthermore, however, according to this novel interpretation, which it is marvellous that Cicero and Varro should have suffered to escape their notice, if their ancient authorities really had it, they call Jupiter the son of Saturn, thus denoting him, it may be, as the spirit that proceedeth forth from that supreme mind—the spirit which they choose to look upon as the soul of this world, so to speak, filling alike all heavenly and all earthly bodies. Whence comes also that saying of Maro, which I have cited a little ago, namely, “All things are full of Jove”? Should they not, then, if they are possessed of the ability, alter the superstitions indulged in by men, just as they alter their interpretation; and either erect no images at all, or at least build capitols to Saturn rather than to Jupiter? For they also maintain that no rational soul can be produced gifted with wisdom, except by participation in that supreme and unchangeable wisdom of his; and this affirmation they advance not only with respect to the soul of a man, but even with respect to that same soul of the world which they also designate Jove. Now we not only concede, but even very particularly proclaim, that there is a certain supreme wisdom of God, by participation in which every soul whatsoever that is constituted truly wise acquires its wisdom. But whether that universal corporeal mass, which is called the world, has a kind of soul, or, so to speak, its own soul, that is to say, a rational life by which it can govern its own movements, as is the case with every sort of animal, is a question both vast and obscure. That is an opinion which ought not to be affirmed, unless its truth is clearly ascertained; neither ought it to be rejected, unless its falsehood is as clearly ascertained. And what will it matter to man, even should this question remain for ever unsolved, since, in any case, no soul becomes wise or blessed by drawing from any other soul but from that one supreme and immutable wisdom of God?

36. The Romans, however, who have founded a Capitol in honour of Jupiter, but none in honour of Saturn, as also these other nations whose opinion it has been that Jupiter ought to be worshipped pre-eminently and above the rest of the gods, have certainly not agreed in sentiment with the persons referred to; who, in accordance with that mad view of theirs, would dedicate their loftiest citadels104    Reading arces. Some editions give artes = arts. rather to Saturn, if they had any power in these things, and who most particularly would annihilate those mathematicians and nativity-spinners105    Genethliacos. by whom this Saturn, whom their opponents would designate the maker of the wise, has been placed with the character of a deity of evil among the other stars. But this opinion, nevertheless, has prevailed so mightily against them in the mind of humanity, that men decline even to name that god, and call him Ancient106    Senex.rather than Saturn; and that in so fearful a spirit of superstition, that the Carthaginians have now gone very near to change the designation of their town, and call it the town of the Ancient107    Vicus Senis. more frequently than the town of Saturn.108    Vicus Saturni.

CAPUT XXIII. De Jove et Saturno quid nugati sint Pagani.

31. Istae, inquiunt, fabulae sunt aut interpretandae a sapientibus, aut ridendae: nos autem Jovem colimus, de quo ait Maro, Jovis omnia plena; (Eclog. 3, v. 60.)id est, omnia vivificantem spiritum. Merito ergo et Varro Jovem opinatus est coli a Judaeis, quia dicit per prophetam, Coelum et terram ego impleo (Jerem. XXIII, 24). Quid illud quod idem poeta dicit aethera? quomodo accipiunt? Sic enim ait: Tum Pater omnipotens fecundis imbribus Aether, Conjugis in gremium laetae descendit. (Georg. lib. 2, vv. 324, 325.)Aetherem quippe non spiritum, sed corpus esse dicunt sublime, quo coelum super aerem distenditur. An poetae conceditur nunc secundum Platonicos, ut non corpus, sed spiritus, nunc secundum Stoicos loqui, ut corpus sit Deus? Quid igitur in Capitolio colunt? Si spiritum, si denique ipsum coelum corporeum, quid illic facit scutum illud Jovis, quod appellant Aegida? Nempe origo nominis hujus ita redditur, quia Jovem a matre occultatum capra nutrivit: an et hoc poetae mentiuntur? Numquid et Capitolia Romanorum, opera sunt poetarum? Quid sibi autem vult ista non poetica, sed plane mimica varietas, deos secundum philosophos in libris quaerere, secundum poetas in templis adorare?

32. Sed numquid etiam ille Euhemerus poeta fuit, qui et ipsum Jovem et Saturnum patrem ejus, et Plutonem atque Neptunum fratres ejus, ita planissime homines fuisse prodit, ut eorum cultores gratias magis poetis agere debeant, quia non ad eos dehonestandos, sed potius ad exornandos multa finxerunt? quamvis et ipsum Euhemerum ab Ennio poeta in latinam linguam esse conversum Cicero commemoret (Lib. 1 de Nat. Deor.). Numquid et ipse Cicero poeta fuit, qui eum, cum quo in Tusculanis disputat, tanquam secretorum conscium admonet dicens: Si vero scrutari vetera, et ex eis quae Scriptores Graeciae prodiderunt, eruere coner, ipsi illi majorum gentium dii qui habentur, hinc a nobis profecti in coelum reperientur. Quaere quorum demonstrentur sepulcra in Graecia; reminiscere, quoniam es initiatus, quae tradantur mysteriis: tum denique quam hoc late pateat intelliges (Tuscul. 1). Hic certe istorum deos homines fuisse satis confitetur, in coelum autem pervenisse benevole suspicatur: quanquam et hunc honorem opinionis ab hominibus eis esse delatum, non dubitavit publice dicere, cum de Romulo loqueretur: Qui hanc urbem, inquit, condidit, Romulum ad deos immortales benevolentia famaque sustulimus (In Catilin. orat. 3). Quid igitur mirum est, si hoc fecerunt antiquiores homines de Jove et Saturno et caeteris, quod Romani de Romulo, quod denique 1057 jam recentioribus temporibus etiam de Caesare facere voluerunt? Quibus et Virgilius adulationem carminis addidit, dicens: Ecce Dionaei processit Caesaris astrum. (Eclog. 9, v. 47.)Videant ergo ne forte historica veritas sepulcra falsorum deorum ostendat in terra; vanitas autem poetica stellas eorum non figat, sed fingat in coelo. Neque enim revera stella illa Jovis est, aut illa Saturni; sed post eorum mortem sideribus ab initio mundi conditis haec nomina imposuerunt homines, qui illos mortuos, quasi deos habere voluerunt. De quibus quid tantum mali castitas, aut quid tantum boni voluptas commeruit, ut inter astra, quae cum sole et luna circumeunt, Venus habeat stellam, et Minerva non habeat?

33. Sed fuerit et Cicero academicus incertior quam poetae, qui sepulcra deorum commemorare ausus est, litterisque mandare: quamvis hoc non ex opinione propria praesumpserit, sed ex ipsorum sacrorum traditione commemoraverit. Numquid et Varro vel tanquam poeta fingit, vel tanquam Academicus dubie ponit, quod dicit talium deorum sacra ex cujusque eorum vita vel morte, qua inter homines vixerunt vel obierunt, esse composita? Numquid et Leon ille sacerdos Aegyptius, poeta vel academicus fuit, qui Macedoni Alexandro, diversam quidem a Graecorum opinione istorum deorum originem, verumtamen ita prodit, ut eos homines fuisse declaret?

34. Sed quid ad nos ? Dicant se Jovem, non hominem mortuum colere, nec homini mortuo Capitolium dedicasse, sed spiritui vivificanti omnia, quo mundus impletur, et scutum ejus in honorem nutricis ejus factum de pelle caprina, interpretentur ut volunt. Quid dicunt de Saturno? quem Saturnum colunt? Nonne ille est qui primus ab Olympo venit, Arma Jovis fugiens, et regnis exsul ademptis. Qui genus indocile et dispersum montibus altis Composuit legesque dedit, Latiumque vocari Maluit, his quoniam latuisset tutus in oris? (Aeneid. lib. 8, v. 320-324.)Nonne ipsum ejus simulacrum, quod cooperto capite fingitur, quasi latentem indicat? nonne ipse Italis ostendit agriculturam, quod falce demonstrat? Non, inquiunt: nam videris si fuit ille homo et rex quidam, de quo ista narrantur; nos tamen Saturnum interpretamur Universum tempus, quod graecum etiam vocabulum ejus ostendit: vocatur enim χρόνος, quod aspiratione addita, etiam temporis nomen est; unde et latine Saturnus appellatur, quasi saturetur annis. Quid jam cum istis agendum sit, nescio, qui conantes in melius interpretari nomina et simulacra deorum suorum, fatentur majorem deum suum et patrem caeterorum tempus esse. Quid enim aliud indicant, quam omnes deos suos temporales esse, quorum patrem ipsum tempus constituunt?

35. Erubuerunt hinc philosophi eorum recentiores 1058 Platonici, qui jam christianis temporibus fuerunt; et Saturnum aliter interpretari conati sunt, dicentes appellatum χρόνον, velut a satietate intellectus, eo quod graece satietas χόρος, intellectus autem sive mens νοῦς dicitur: cui videtur suffragari et latinum nomen, quasi ex prima latina parte et graeca posteriore compositum, ut diceretur Saturnus, tanquam satur esset, νοῦς. Viderunt enim quam esset absurdum, si filius temporis Jupiter haberetur, quem deum aeternum vel putabant vel putari volebant. At vero secundum istam novellam interpretationem, quam veteres eorum si habuissent, mirum si Ciceronem Varronemque latuisset, Saturni filium Jovem dicunt, tanquam ab illa summa mente profluentem spiritum, quem volunt esse velut animam mundi hujus, omnia coelestia et terrena corpora implentem. Unde illud Maronis est, quod paulo ante commemoravi, Jovis omnia plena. Numquid non, si possent isti, sicut ipsam interpretationem, ita etiam superstitionem hominum commutarent, et aut nulla simulacra, aut certe Saturno potius quam Jovi Capitolia constituerent? Neque enim ullam animam rationalem sapientem fieri disputant, nisi participatione summae illius incommutabilisque sapientiae; non solum cujusquam hominis animam, sed ipsius etiam mundi, quam dicunt Jovem. Nos vero, esse quamdam summam Dei sapientiam, cujus participatione fit sapiens quaecumque anima fit vere sapiens, non tantum concedimus, verum etiam maxime praedicamus. Utrum autem universa ista corporalis moles, quae mundus appellatur, habeat quamdam animam, vel quasi animam suam, id est rationalem vitam, qua ita regatur sicut unumquodque animal, magna atque abdita quaestio est: nec affirmari debet ista opinio, nisi comperta quod vera sit; nec refelli, nisi comperta quod falsa sit. Quid autem hoc ad hominem, etiamsi semper eum lateat; quandoquidem nulla anima fit sapiens vel beata ex alia quacumque anima, sed ex illa sola summa atque incommutabili Dei sapientia?

36. Romani tamen, qui non Saturno, sed Jovi Capitolium condiderunt; vel aliae nationes, quae Jovem praecipue supra caeteros deos colendum esse putaverunt, non hoc quod isti senserunt: qui secundum istam suam novam opinionem, et summas arces , si quidquam in his rebus potestatis habuissent, Saturno potius dedicarent; et Mathematicos vel Genethliacos maxime delerent, qui Saturnum, quem sapientum effectorem isti dicerent, maleficum deum inter alia sidera constituerunt. Quae opinio tantum contra illos in animis humanis praevaluit, ut nec nominare illum velint, senem potius quam Saturnum appellantes: tam timida superstitione, ut jam Carthaginenses pene vico suo nomen mutaverint, Vicum senis crebrius, quam Vicum Saturni appellantes.