BOOK SEVENTH.

Argument

IN THIS BOOK IT IS SHOWN THAT ETERNAL LIFE IS NOT OBTAINED BY THE
WORSHIP OF JANUS, JUPITER, SATURN, AND THE OTHER “SELECT GODS” OF
THE CIVIL THEOLOGY.

PREFACE.

It will be the duty of those who are endowed with quicker
and better understandings, in whose case the former books
are sufficient, and more than sufficient, to effect their intended
object, to bear with me with patience and equanimity whilst
I attempt with more than ordinary diligence to tear up and
eradicate depraved and ancient opinions hostile to the truth
of piety, which the long-continued error of the human race
has fixed very deeply in unenlightened minds; co-operating
also in this, according to my little measure, with the grace of
Him who, being the true God, is able to accomplish it, and
on whose help I depend in my work; and, for the sake of
others, such should not deem superfluous what they feel to be
no longer necessary for themselves. A very great matter is
at stake when the true and truly holy divinity is commended
to men as that which they ought to seek after and to worship;
not, however, on account of the transitory vapour of
mortal life, but on account of life eternal, which alone is
blessed, although the help necessary for this frail life we are
now living is also afforded us by it.

1. Whether, since it is evident that Deity is not to be found in the civil theology,
we are to believe that it is to be found in the select gods.

If there is any one whom the sixth book, which I have last
finished, has not persuaded that this divinity, or, so to speak,
deity—for this word also our authors do not hesitate to use,
in order to translate more accurately that which the Greeks
call θεότης;—if there is any one, I say, whom the sixth book
has not persuaded that this divinity or deity is not to be[Pg 259]
found in that theology which they call civil, and which
Marcus Varro has explained in sixteen books,—that is, that
the happiness of eternal life is not attainable through the
worship of gods such as states have established to be worshipped,
and that in such a form,—perhaps, when he has read
this book, he will not have anything further to desire in order
to the clearing up of this question. For it is possible that
some one may think that at least the select and chief gods,
whom Varro comprised in his last book, and of whom we have
not spoken sufficiently, are to be worshipped on account of
the blessed life, which is none other than eternal. In respect
to which matter I do not say what Tertullian said, perhaps
more wittily than truly, “If gods are selected like onions,
certainly the rest are rejected as bad.”[245] I do not say this,
for I see that even from among the select, some are selected
for some greater and more excellent office: as in warfare,
when recruits have been elected, there are some again elected
from among those for the performance of some greater military
service; and in the church, when persons are elected to be
overseers, certainly the rest are not rejected, since all good
Christians are deservedly called elect; in the erection of a
building corner stones are elected, though the other stones, which
are destined for other parts of the structure, are not rejected;
grapes are elected for eating, whilst the others, which we leave
for drinking, are not rejected. There is no need of adducing
many illustrations, since the thing is evident. Wherefore the
selection of certain gods from among many affords no proper
reason why either he who wrote on this subject, or the worshippers
of the gods, or the gods themselves, should be spurned.
We ought rather to seek to know what gods these are, and for
what purpose they may appear to have been selected.

2. Who are the select gods, and whether they are held to be exempt from the
offices of the commoner gods.

The following gods, certainly, Varro signalizes as select,
devoting one book to this subject: Janus, Jupiter, Saturn,
Genius, Mercury, Apollo, Mars, Vulcan, Neptune, Sol, Orcus,
father Liber, Tellus, Ceres, Juno, Luna, Diana, Minerva, Venus,[Pg 260]
Vesta; of which twenty gods, twelve are males, and eight
females. Whether are these deities called select, because of
their higher spheres of administration in the world, or because
they have become better known to the people, and more worship
has been expended on them? If it be on account of the
greater works which are performed by them in the world, we
ought not to have found them among that, as it were, plebeian
crowd of deities, which has assigned to it the charge of minute
and trifling things. For, first of all, at the conception of a
fœtus, from which point all the works commence which have
been distributed in minute detail to many deities, Janus himself
opens the way for the reception of the seed; there also
is Saturn, on account of the seed itself; there is Liber,[246] who
liberates the male by the effusion of the seed; there is Libera,
whom they also would have to be Venus, who confers this
same benefit on the woman, namely, that she also be liberated
by the emission of the seed;—all these are of the number
of those who are called select. But there is also the goddess
Mena, who presides over the menses; though the daughter
of Jupiter, ignoble nevertheless. And this province of the
menses the same author, in his book on the select gods, assigns
to Juno herself, who is even queen among the select gods; and
here, as Juno Lucina, along with the same Mena, her stepdaughter,
she presides over the same blood. There also are
two gods, exceedingly obscure, Vitumnus and Sentinus—the
one of whom imparts life to the fœtus, and the other sensation;
and, of a truth, they bestow, most ignoble though they
be, far more than all those noble and select gods bestow. For,
surely, without life and sensation, what is the whole fœtus
which a woman carries in her womb, but a most vile and
worthless thing, no better than slime and dust?

3. How there is no reason which can be shown for the selection of certain gods,
when the administration of more exalted offices is assigned to many inferior
gods.

What is the cause, therefore, which has driven so many
select gods to these very small works, in which they are
excelled by Vitumnus and Sentinus, though little known and[Pg 261]
sunk in obscurity, inasmuch as they confer the munificent
gifts of life and sensation? For the select Janus bestows an
entrance, and, as it were, a door[247] for the seed; the select
Saturn bestows the seed itself; the select Liber bestows on
men the emission of the same seed; Libera, who is Ceres or
Venus, confers the same on women; the select Juno confers
(not alone, but together with Mena, the daughter of Jupiter)
the menses, for the growth of that which has been conceived;
and the obscure and ignoble Vitumnus confers life, whilst the
obscure and ignoble Sentinus confers sensation;—which two
last things are as much more excellent than the others, as
they themselves are excelled by reason and intellect. For as
those things which reason and understand are preferable to
those which, without intellect and reason, as in the case of
cattle, live and feel; so also those things which have been
endowed with life and sensation are deservedly preferred to
those things which neither live nor feel. Therefore Vitumnus
the life-giver,[248] and Sentinus the sense-giver,[249] ought to have
been reckoned among the select gods, rather than Janus the
admitter of seed, and Saturn the giver or sower of seed, and
Liber and Libera the movers and liberators of seed; which
seed is not worth a thought, unless it attain to life and sensation.
Yet these select gifts are not given by select gods, but
by certain unknown, and, considering their dignity, neglected
gods. But if it be replied that Janus has dominion over all
beginnings, and therefore the opening of the way for conception
is not without reason assigned to him; and that Saturn
has dominion over all seeds, and therefore the sowing of the
seed whereby a human being is generated cannot be excluded
from his operation; that Liber and Libera have power over the
emission of all seeds, and therefore preside over those seeds
which pertain to the procreation of men; that Juno presides
over all purgations and births, and therefore she has also
charge of the purgations of women and the births of human
beings;—if they give this reply, let them find an answer to
the question concerning Vitumnus and Sentinus, whether they
are willing that these likewise should have dominion over all
things which live and feel. If they grant this, let them[Pg 262]
observe in how sublime a position they are about to place
them. For to spring from seeds is in the earth and of the
earth, but to live and feel are supposed to be properties even
of the sidereal gods. But if they say that only such things
as come to life in flesh, and are supported by senses, are
assigned to Sentinus, why does not that God who made all
things live and feel, bestow on flesh also life and sensation,
in the universality of His operation conferring also on fœtuses
this gift? And what, then, is the use of Vitumnus and Sentinus?
But if these, as it were, extreme and lowest things
have been committed by Him who presides universally over
life and sense to these gods as to servants, are these select
gods then so destitute of servants, that they could not find any
to whom even they might commit those things, but with all
their dignity, for which they are, it seems, deemed worthy to
be selected, were compelled to perform their work along with
ignoble ones? Juno is select queen of the gods, and the
sister and wife of Jupiter; nevertheless she is Iterduca, the
conductor, to boys, and performs this work along with a most
ignoble pair—the goddesses Abeona and Adeona. There they
have also placed the goddess Mena, who gives to boys a good
mind, and she is not placed among the select gods; as if anything
greater could be bestowed on a man than a good mind.
But Juno is placed among the select because she is Iterduca
and Domiduca (she who conducts one on a journey, and
who conducts him home again); as if it is of any advantage
for one to make a journey, and to be conducted home again, if
his mind is not good. And yet the goddess who bestows that
gift has not been placed by the selectors among the select
gods, though she ought indeed to have been preferred even to
Minerva, to whom, in this minute distribution of work, they
have allotted the memory of boys. For who will doubt that
it is a far better thing to have a good mind, than ever so great
a memory? For no one is bad who has a good mind;[250] but
some who are very bad are possessed of an admirable memory,
and are so much the worse, the less they are able to forget
the bad things which they think. And yet Minerva is among
the select gods, whilst the goddess Mena is hidden by a worthless[Pg 263]
crowd. What shall I say concerning Virtus? What concerning
Felicitas?—concerning whom I have already spoken
much in the fourth book,[251] to whom, though they held them
to be goddesses, they have not thought fit to assign a place
among the select gods, among whom they have given a place
to Mars and Orcus, the one the causer of death, the other the
receiver of the dead.

Since, therefore, we see that even the select gods themselves
work together with the others, like a senate with the people,
in all those minute works which have been minutely portioned
out among many gods; and since we find that far greater and
better things are administered by certain gods who have not
been reckoned worthy to be selected than by those who are
called select, it remains that we suppose that they were called
select and chief, not on account of their holding more exalted
offices in the world, but because it happened to them to become
better known to the people. And even Varro himself says,
that in that way obscurity had fallen to the lot of some father
gods and mother goddesses,[252] as it falls to the lot of men. If,
therefore, Felicity ought not perhaps to have been put among
the select gods, because they did not attain to that noble position
by merit, but by chance, Fortune at least should have been
placed among them, or rather before them; for they say that
that goddess distributes to every one the gifts she receives,
not according to any rational arrangement, but according as
chance may determine. She ought to have held the uppermost
place among the select gods, for among them chiefly it is that
she shows what power she has. For we see that they have
been selected not on account of some eminent virtue or rational
happiness, but by that random power of Fortune which the
worshippers of these gods think that she exerts. For that most
eloquent man Sallust also may perhaps have the gods themselves
in view when he says: “But, in truth, fortune rules in
everything; it renders all things famous or obscure, according
to caprice rather than according to truth.”[253] For they cannot[Pg 264]
discover a reason why Venus should have been made famous,
whilst Virtus has been made obscure, when the divinity of both
of them has been solemnly recognised by them, and their merits
are not to be compared. Again, if she has deserved a noble
position on account of the fact that she is much sought after—for
there are more who seek after Venus than after Virtus—why
has Minerva been celebrated whilst Pecunia has been
left in obscurity, although throughout the whole human race
avarice allures a far greater number than skill? And even
among those who are skilled in the arts, you will rarely find
a man who does not practise his own art for the purpose of
pecuniary gain; and that for the sake of which anything is
made, is always valued more than that which is made for the
sake of something else. If, then, this selection of gods has
been made by the judgment of the foolish multitude, why has
not the goddess Pecunia been preferred to Minerva, since there
are many artificers for the sake of money? But if this distinction
has been made by the few wise, why has Virtus been
preferred to Venus, when reason by far prefers the former?
At all events, as I have already said, Fortune herself—who,
according to those who attribute most influence to her, renders
all things famous or obscure according to caprice rather than
according to the truth—since she has been able to exercise so
much power even over the gods, as, according to her capricious
judgment, to render those of them famous whom she would,
and those obscure whom she would; Fortune herself ought to
occupy the place of pre-eminence among the select gods, since
over them also she has such pre-eminent power. Or must
we suppose that the reason why she is not among the select
is simply this, that even Fortune herself has had an adverse
fortune? She was adverse, then, to herself, since, whilst ennobling
others, she herself has remained obscure.

4. The inferior gods, whose names are not associated with infamy, have been better
dealt with than the select gods, whose infamies are celebrated.

However, any one who eagerly seeks for celebrity and renown,
might congratulate those select gods, and call them
fortunate, were it not that he saw that they have been selected
more to their injury than to their honour. For that low
crowd of gods have been protected by their very meanness[Pg 265]
and obscurity from being overwhelmed with infamy. We
laugh, indeed, when we see them distributed by the mere
fiction of human opinions, according to the special works
assigned to them, like those who farm small portions of the
public revenue, or like workmen in the street of the silversmiths,[254]
where one vessel, in order that it may go out perfect,
passes through the hands of many, when it might have been
finished by one perfect workman. But the only reason why
the combined skill of many workmen was thought necessary,
was, that it is better that each part of an art should be learned
by a special workman, which can be done speedily and easily,
than that they should all be compelled to be perfect in one
art throughout all its parts, which they could only attain
slowly and with difficulty. Nevertheless there is scarcely to
be found one of the non-select gods who has brought infamy
on himself by any crime, whilst there is scarce any one of the
select gods who has not received upon himself the brand of
notable infamy. These latter have descended to the humble
works of the others, whilst the others have not come up to
their sublime crimes. Concerning Janus, there does not
readily occur to my recollection anything infamous; and
perhaps he was such an one as lived more innocently than
the rest, and further removed from misdeeds and crimes. He
kindly received and entertained Saturn when he was fleeing;
he divided his kingdom with his guest, so that each of them
had a city for himself,[255]—the one Janiculum, and the other
Saturnia. But those seekers after every kind of unseemliness
in the worship of the gods have disgraced him, whose life they
found to be less disgraceful than that of the other gods, with an
image of monstrous deformity, making it sometimes with two
faces, and sometimes, as it were, double, with four faces.[256] Did
they wish that, as the most of the select gods had lost shame[257]
through the perpetration of shameful crimes, his greater innocence
should be marked by a greater number of faces?[258]

[Pg 266]

5. Concerning the more secret doctrine of the pagans, and concerning the
physical interpretations.

But let us hear their own physical interpretations by which
they attempt to colour, as with the appearance of profounder
doctrine, the baseness of most miserable error. Varro, in the
first place, commends these interpretations so strongly as to say,
that the ancients invented the images, badges, and adornments
of the gods, in order that when those who went to the mysteries
should see them with their bodily eyes, they might with the eyes
of their mind see the soul of the world, and its parts, that is,
the true gods; and also that the meaning which was intended
by those who made their images with the human form, seemed
to be this,—namely, that the mind of mortals, which is in a
human body, is very like to the immortal mind,[259] just as vessels
might be placed to represent the gods, as, for instance, a wine-vessel
might be placed in the temple of Liber, to signify wine,
that which is contained being signified by that which contains.
Thus by an image which had the human form the rational
soul was signified, because the human form is the vessel, as it
were, in which that nature is wont to be contained which they
attribute to God, or to the gods. These are the mysteries of
doctrine to which that most learned man penetrated in order
that he might bring them forth to the light. But, O thou
most acute man, hast thou lost among those mysteries that
prudence which led thee to form the sober opinion, that those
who first established those images for the people took away
fear from the citizens and added error, and that the ancient
Romans honoured the gods more chastely without images?
For it was through consideration of them that thou wast
emboldened to speak these things against the later Romans.
For if those most ancient Romans also had worshipped images,
perhaps thou wouldst have suppressed by the silence of fear
all those sentiments (true sentiments, nevertheless) concerning
the folly of setting up images, and wouldst have extolled more
loftily, and more loquaciously, those mysterious doctrines consisting
of these vain and pernicious fictions. Thy soul, so
learned and so clever (and for this I grieve much for thee),
could never through these mysteries have reached its God; that[Pg 267]
is, the God by whom, not with whom, it was made, of whom
it is not a part, but a work,—that God who is not the soul of
all things, but who made every soul, and in whose light alone
every soul is blessed, if it be not ungrateful for His grace.

But the things which follow in this book will show what is
the nature of these mysteries, and what value is to be set upon
them. Meanwhile, this most learned man confesses as his
opinion that the soul of the world and its parts are the true
gods, from which we perceive that his theology (to wit, that
same natural theology to which he pays great regard) has been
able, in its completeness, to extend itself even to the nature
of the rational soul. For in this book (concerning the select
gods) he says a very few things by anticipation concerning
the natural theology; and we shall see whether he has been
able in that book, by means of physical interpretations, to
refer to this natural theology that civil theology, concerning
which he wrote last when treating of the select gods. Now,
if he has been able to do this, the whole is natural; and
in that case, what need was there for distinguishing so carefully
the civil from the natural? But if it has been distinguished
by a veritable distinction, then, since not even this
natural theology with which he is so much pleased is true (for
though it has reached as far as the soul, it has not reached to
the true God who made the soul), how much more contemptible
and false is that civil theology which is chiefly occupied
about what is corporeal, as will be shown by its very interpretations,
which they have with such diligence sought out and
enucleated, some of which I must necessarily mention!

6. Concerning the opinion of Varro, that God is the soul of the world, which
nevertheless, in its various parts, has many souls whose nature is divine.

The same Varro, then, still speaking by anticipation, says
that he thinks that God is the soul of the world (which the
Greeks call κόσμος), and that this world itself is God; but as
a wise man, though he consists of body and mind, is nevertheless
called wise on account of his mind, so the world is called
God on account of mind, although it consists of mind and
body. Here he seems, in some fashion at least, to acknowledge
one God; but that he may introduce more, he adds that the
world is divided into two parts, heaven and earth, which are[Pg 268]
again divided each into two parts, heaven into ether and air,
earth into water and land, of all which the ether is the highest,
the air second, the water third, and the earth the lowest. All
these four parts, he says, are full of souls; those which are in
the ether and air being immortal, and those which are in the
water and on the earth mortal. From the highest part of the
heavens to the orbit of the moon there are souls, namely, the
stars and planets; and these are not only understood to be
gods, but are seen to be such. And between the orbit of the
moon and the commencement of the region of clouds and winds
there are aerial souls; but these are seen with the mind, not
with the eyes, and are called Heroes, and Lares, and Genii.
This is the natural theology which is briefly set forth in these
anticipatory statements, and which satisfied not Varro only, but
many philosophers besides. This I must discuss more carefully,
when, with the help of God, I shall have completed what
I have yet to say concerning the civil theology, as far as it
concerns the select gods.

7. Whether it is reasonable to separate Janus and Terminus as
two distinct deities.

Who, then, is Janus, with whom Varro commences? He
is the world. Certainly a very brief and unambiguous reply.
Why, then, do they say that the beginnings of things pertain
to him, but the ends to another whom they call Terminus?
For they say that two months have been dedicated to these
two gods, with reference to beginnings and ends—January to
Janus, and February to Terminus—over and above those ten
months which commence with March and end with December.
And they say that that is the reason why the Terminalia
are celebrated in the month of February, the same month
in which the sacred purification is made which they call
Februum, and from which the month derives its name.[260]
Do the beginnings of things, therefore, pertain to the world,
which is Janus, and not also the ends, since another god[Pg 269]
has been placed over them? Do they not own that all
things which they say begin in this world also come to an end
in this world? What folly it is, to give him only half power
in work, when in his image they give him two faces! Would
it not be a far more elegant way of interpreting the two-faced
image, to say that Janus and Terminus are the same, and that
the one face has reference to beginnings, the other to ends?
For one who works ought to have respect to both. For he
who in every forthputting of activity does not look back on
the beginning, does not look forward to the end. Wherefore
it is necessary that prospective intention be connected with
retrospective memory. For how shall one find how to finish
anything, if he has forgotten what it was which he had begun?
But if they thought that the blessed life is begun in this
world, and perfected beyond the world, and for that reason
attributed to Janus, that is, to the world, only the power of
beginnings, they should certainly have preferred Terminus to
him, and should not have shut him out from the number of
the select gods. Yet even now, when the beginnings and ends
of temporal things are represented by these two gods, more
honour ought to have been given to Terminus. For the greater
joy is that which is felt when anything is finished; but things
begun are always cause of much anxiety until they are brought
to an end, which end he who begins anything very greatly
longs for, fixes his mind on, expects, desires; nor does any one
ever rejoice over anything he has begun, unless it be brought
to an end.

8. For what reason the worshippers of Janus have made his image with two
faces, when they would sometimes have it be seen with four.

But now let the interpretation of the two-faced image be
produced. For they say that it has two faces, one before and
one behind, because our gaping mouths seem to resemble the
world: whence the Greeks call the palate οὐρανός, and some
Latin poets,[261] he says, have called the heavens palatum [the
palate]; and from the gaping mouth, they say, there is a way
out in the direction of the teeth, and a way in in the direction
of the gullet. See what the world has been brought to on
account of a Greek or a poetical word for our palate! Let[Pg 270]
this god be worshipped only on account of saliva, which has
two open doorways under the heavens of the palate,—one
through which part of it may be spitten out, the other through
which part of it may be swallowed down. Besides, what is
more absurd than not to find in the world itself two doorways
opposite to each other, through which it may either receive
anything into itself, or cast it out from itself; and to seek of
our throat and gullet, to which the world has no resemblance,
to make up an image of the world in Janus, because the world
is said to resemble the palate, to which Janus bears no likeness?
But when they make him four-faced, and call him
double Janus, they interpret this as having reference to the
four quarters of the world, as though the world looked out on
anything, like Janus through his four faces. Again, if Janus
is the world, and the world consists of four quarters, then the
image of the two-faced Janus is false. Or if it is true, because
the whole world is sometimes understood by the expression east
and west, will any one call the world double when north and
south also are mentioned, as they call Janus double when he
has four faces? They have no way at all of interpreting, in
relation to the world, four doorways by which to go in and to
come out as they did in the case of the two-faced Janus, where
they found, at any rate in the human mouth, something
which answered to what they said about him; unless perhaps
Neptune come to their aid, and hand them a fish, which,
besides the mouth and gullet, has also the openings of the
gills, one on each side. Nevertheless, with all the doors, no
soul escapes this vanity but that one which hears the truth
saying, “I am the door.”[262]

9. Concerning the power of Jupiter, and a comparison of Jupiter with Janus.

But they also show whom they would have Jove (who is
also called Jupiter) understood to be. He is the god, say
they, who has the power of the causes by which anything
comes to be in the world. And how great a thing this is,
that most noble verse of Virgil testifies:

“Happy is he who has learned the causes of things.”[263]

[Pg 271]

But why is Janus preferred to him? Let that most acute
and most learned man answer us this question. “Because,”
says he, “Janus has dominion over first things, Jupiter over
highest[264] things. Therefore Jupiter is deservedly held to be
the king of all things; for highest things are better than first
things: for although first things precede in time, highest
things excel by dignity.”

Now this would have been rightly said had the first parts
of things which are done been distinguished from the highest
parts; as, for instance, it is the beginning of a thing done to
set out, the highest part to arrive. The commencing to learn
is the first part of a thing begun, the acquirement of knowledge
is the highest part. And so of all things: the beginnings
are first, the ends highest. This matter, however, has
been already discussed in connection with Janus and Terminus.
But the causes which are attributed to Jupiter are things effecting,
not things effected; and it is impossible for them to be
prevented in time by things which are made or done, or by
the beginnings of such things; for the thing which makes is
always prior to the thing which is made. Therefore, though
the beginnings of things which are made or done pertain to
Janus, they are nevertheless not prior to the efficient causes
which they attribute to Jupiter. For as nothing takes place
without being preceded by an efficient cause, so without an
efficient cause nothing begins to take place. Verily, if the
people call this god Jupiter, in whose power are all the causes
of all natures which have been made, and of all natural things,
and worship him with such insults and infamous criminations,
they are guilty of more shocking sacrilege than if they should
totally deny the existence of any god. It would therefore
be better for them to call some other god by the name of
Jupiter—some one worthy of base and criminal honours;
substituting instead of Jupiter some vain fiction (as Saturn is
said to have had a stone given to him to devour instead of his
son), which they might make the subject of their blasphemies,
rather than speak of that god as both thundering and committing
adultery,—ruling the whole world, and laying himself out
for the commission of so many licentious acts,—having in his[Pg 272]
power nature and the highest causes of all natural things, but
not having his own causes good.

Next, I ask what place they find any longer for this Jupiter
among the gods, if Janus is the world; for Varro defined the
true gods to be the soul of the world, and the parts of it. And
therefore whatever falls not within this definition, is certainly
not a true god, according to them. Will they then say that
Jupiter is the soul of the world, and Janus the body—that is,
this visible world? If they say this, it will not be possible
for them to affirm that Janus is a god. For even, according
to them, the body of the world is not a god, but the soul of
the world and its parts. Wherefore Varro, seeing this, says
that he thinks God is the soul of the world, and that this
world itself is God; but that as a wise man, though he consists
of soul and body, is nevertheless called wise from the
soul, so the world is called God from the soul, though it
consists of soul and body. Therefore the body of the world
alone is not God, but either the soul of it alone, or the soul
and the body together, yet so as that it is God not by virtue
of the body, but by virtue of the soul. If, therefore, Janus
is the world, and Janus is a god, will they say, in order that
Jupiter may be a god, that he is some part of Janus? For
they are wont rather to attribute universal existence to
Jupiter; whence the saying, “All things are full of Jupiter.”[265]
Therefore they must think Jupiter also, in order that he may
be a god, and especially king of the gods, to be the world, that
he may rule over the other gods—according to them, his parts.
To this effect, also, the same Varro expounds certain verses
of Valerius Soranus[266] in that book which he wrote apart from
the others concerning the worship of the gods. These are the
verses:

“Almighty Jove, progenitor of kings, and things, and gods,

And eke the mother of the gods, god one and all.”

But in the same book he expounds these verses by saying that
as the male emits seed, and the female receives it, so Jupiter,
whom they believed to be the world, both emits all seeds from[Pg 273]
himself and receives them into himself. For which reason, he
says, Soranus wrote, “Jove, progenitor and mother;” and with
no less reason said that one and all were the same. For the
world is one, and in that one are all things.

10. Whether the distinction between Janus and Jupiter is a proper one.

Since, therefore, Janus is the world, and Jupiter is the world,
wherefore are Janus and Jupiter two gods, while the world is
but one? Why do they have separate temples, separate altars,
different rites, dissimilar images? If it be because the nature
of beginnings is one, and the nature of causes another, and the
one has received the name of Janus, the other of Jupiter; is
it then the case, that if one man has two distinct offices of
authority, or two arts, two judges or two artificers are spoken
of, because the nature of the offices or the arts is different?
So also with respect to one god: if he have the power of
beginnings and of causes, must he therefore be thought to be
two gods, because beginnings and causes are two things? But
if they think that this is right, let them also affirm that Jupiter
is as many gods as they have given him surnames, on account
of many powers; for the things from which these surnames
are applied to him are many and diverse. I shall mention a
few of them.

11. Concerning the surnames of Jupiter, which are referred not to many gods,
but to one and the same god.

They have called him Victor, Invictus, Opitulus, Impulsor,
Stator, Centumpeda, Supinalis, Tigillus, Almus, Ruminus, and
other names which it were long to enumerate. But these
surnames they have given to one god on account of diverse
causes and powers, but yet have not compelled him to be, on
account of so many things, as many gods. They gave him
these surnames because he conquered all things; because he
was conquered by none; because he brought help to the needy;
because he had the power of impelling, stopping, stablishing,
throwing on the back; because as a beam[267] he held together
and sustained the world; because he nourished all things;
because, like the pap,[268] he nourished animals. Here, we perceive,
are some great things and some small things; and yet[Pg 274]
it is one who is said to perform them all. I think that the
causes and the beginnings of things, on account of which they
have thought that the one world is two gods, Jupiter and
Janus, are nearer to each other than the holding together of
the world, and the giving of the pap to animals; and yet, on
account of these two works so far apart from each other, both
in nature and dignity, there has not been any necessity for
the existence of two gods; but one Jupiter has been called,
on account of the one Tigillus, on account of the other
Ruminus. I am unwilling to say that the giving of the pap
to sucking animals might have become Juno rather than
Jupiter, especially when there was the goddess Rumina to
help and to serve her in this work; for I think it may be
replied that Juno herself is nothing else than Jupiter, according
to those verses of Valerius Soranus, where it has been
said:

“Almighty Jove, progenitor of kings, and things, and gods,

And eke the mother of the gods,” etc.

Why, then, was he called Ruminus, when they who may perchance
inquire more diligently may find that he is also that
goddess Rumina?

If, then, it was rightly thought unworthy of the majesty of
the gods, that in one ear of corn one god should have the care
of the joint, another that of the husk, how much more unworthy
of that majesty is it, that one thing, and that of the
lowest kind, even the giving of the pap to animals that they
may be nourished, should be under the care of two gods, one
of whom is Jupiter himself, the very king of all things, who
does this not along with his own wife, but with some ignoble
Rumina (unless perhaps he himself is Rumina, being Ruminus
for males and Rumina for females)! I should certainly have
said that they had been unwilling to apply to Jupiter a
feminine name, had he not been styled in these verses “progenitor
and mother,” and had I not read among other surnames
of his that of Pecunia [money], which we found as a
goddess among those petty deities, as I have already mentioned
in the fourth book. But since both males and females have
money [pecuniam], why has he not been called both Pecunius
and Pecunia? That is their concern.

[Pg 275]

12. That Jupiter is also called Pecunia.

How elegantly they have accounted for this name! “He
is also called Pecunia,” say they, “because all things belong
to him.” Oh how grand an explanation of the name of a
deity! Yes; he to whom all things belong is most meanly
and most contumeliously called Pecunia. In comparison of all
things which are contained by heaven and earth, what are all
things together which are possessed by men under the name
of money?[269] And this name, forsooth, hath avarice given to
Jupiter, that whoever was a lover of money might seem to
himself to love not an ordinary god, but the very king of all
things himself. But it would be a far different thing if he had
been called Riches. For riches are one thing, money another.
For we call rich the wise, the just, the good, who have either
no money or very little. For they are more truly rich in
possessing virtue, since by it, even as respects things necessary
for the body, they are content with what they have. But we
call the greedy poor, who are always craving and always wanting.
For they may possess ever so great an amount of money;
but whatever be the abundance of that, they are not able
but to want. And we properly call God Himself rich; not,
however, in money, but in omnipotence. Therefore they who
have abundance of money are called rich, but inwardly needy
if they are greedy. So also, those who have no money are
called poor, but inwardly rich if they are wise.

What, then, ought the wise man to think of this theology,
in which the king of the gods receives the name of that thing
“which no wise man has desired?”[270] For had there been anything
wholesomely taught by this philosophy concerning eternal
life, how much more appropriately would that god who is the
ruler of the world have been called by them, not money, but
wisdom, the love of which purges from the filth of avarice, that
is, of the love of money!

13. That when it is expounded what Saturn is, what Genius is, it comes to
this, that both of them are shown to be Jupiter.

But why speak more of this Jupiter, with whom perchance[Pg 276]
all the rest are to be identified; so that, he being all, the
opinion as to the existence of many gods may remain as a
mere opinion, empty of all truth? And they are all to be
referred to him, if his various parts and powers are thought
of as so many gods, or if the principle of mind which they
think to be diffused through all things has received the names
of many gods from the various parts which the mass of this
visible world combines in itself, and from the manifold administration
of nature. For what is Saturn also? “One of the
principal gods,” he says, “who has dominion over all sowings.”
Does not the exposition of the verses of Valerius Soranus
teach that Jupiter is the world, and that he emits all seeds
from himself, and receives them into himself?

It is he, then, with whom is the dominion of all sowings.
What is Genius? “He is the god who is set over, and has
the power of begetting, all things.” Who else than the world
do they believe to have this power, to which it has been said:

“Almighty Jove, progenitor and mother?”

And when in another place he says that Genius is the
rational soul of every one, and therefore exists separately in
each individual, but that the corresponding soul of the world
is God, he just comes back to this same thing,—namely, that
the soul of the world itself is to be held to be, as it were, the
universal genius. This, therefore, is what he calls Jupiter.
For if every genius is a god, and the soul of every man a
genius, it follows that the soul of every man is a god. But if
very absurdity compels even these theologists themselves to
shrink from this, it remains that they call that genius god by
special and pre-eminent distinction, whom they call the soul
of the world, and therefore Jupiter.

14. Concerning the offices of Mercury and Mars.

But they have not found how to refer Mercury and Mars
to any parts of the world, and to the works of God which are
in the elements; and therefore they have set them at least
over human works, making them assistants in speaking and in
carrying on wars. Now Mercury, if he has also the power of
the speech of the gods, rules also over the king of the gods himself,[Pg 277]
if Jupiter, as he receives from him the faculty of speech,
also speaks according as it is his pleasure to permit him—which
surely is absurd; but if it is only the power over human
speech which is held to be attributed to him, then we say
it is incredible that Jupiter should have condescended to give
the pap not only to children, but also to beasts—from which
he has been surnamed Ruminus—and yet should have been
unwilling that the care of our speech, by which we excel the
beasts, should pertain to him. And thus speech itself both
belongs to Jupiter, and is Mercury. But if speech itself is
said to be Mercury, as those things which are said concerning
him by way of interpretation show it to be;—for he is said
to have been called Mercury, that is, he who runs between,[271]
because speech runs between men: they say also that the
Greeks call him Ἑρμῆς, because speech, or interpretation, which
certainly belongs to speech, is called by them ἑρμηνεία: also
he is said to preside over payments, because speech passes
between sellers and buyers: the wings, too, which he has on
his head and on his feet, they say, mean that speech passes
winged through the air: he is also said to have been called
the messenger,[272] because by means of speech all our thoughts
are expressed;[273]—if, therefore, speech itself is Mercury, then,
even by their own confession, he is not a god. But when
they make to themselves gods of such as are not even demons,
by praying to unclean spirits, they are possessed by such as
are not gods, but demons. In like manner, because they have
not been able to find for Mars any element or part of the
world in which he might perform some works of nature of
whatever kind, they have said that he is the god of war,
which is a work of men, and that not one which is considered
desirable by them. If, therefore, Felicitas should give perpetual
peace, Mars would have nothing to do. But if war
itself is Mars, as speech is Mercury, I wish it were as true
that there were no war to be falsely called a god, as it is true
that it is not a god.

15. Concerning certain stars which the pagans have called by the names
of their gods.

But possibly these stars which have been called by their[Pg 278]
names are these gods. For they call a certain star Mercury,
and likewise a certain other star Mars. But among those
stars which are called by the names of gods, is that one which
they call Jupiter, and yet with them Jupiter is the world.
There also is that one they call Saturn, and yet they give to
him no small property besides,—namely, all seeds. There also
is that brightest of them all which is called by them Venus,
and yet they will have this same Venus to be also the moon:—not
to mention how Venus and Juno are said by them to
contend about that most brilliant star, as though about another
golden apple. For some say that Lucifer belongs to Venus, and
some to Juno. But, as usual, Venus conquers. For by far the
greatest number assign that star to Venus, so much so that
there is scarcely found one of them who thinks otherwise.
But since they call Jupiter the king of all, who will not laugh to
see his star so far surpassed in brilliancy by the star of Venus?
For it ought to have been as much more brilliant than the
rest, as he himself is more powerful. They answer that it
only appears so because it is higher up, and very much farther
away from the earth. If, therefore, its greater dignity has
deserved a higher place, why is Saturn higher in the heavens
than Jupiter? Was the vanity of the fable which made
Jupiter king not able to reach the stars? And has Saturn
been permitted to obtain at least in the heavens, what he
could not obtain in his own kingdom nor in the Capitol?

But why has Janus received no star? If it is because he
is the world, and they are all in him, the world is also
Jupiter’s, and yet he has one. Did Janus compromise his case
as best he could, and instead of the one star which he does
not have among the heavenly bodies, accept so many faces
on earth? Again, if they think that on account of the stars
alone Mercury and Mars are parts of the world, in order that
they may be able to have them for gods, since speech and
war are not parts of the world, but acts of men, how is it
that they have made no altars, established no rites, built
no temples for Aries, and Taurus, and Cancer, and Scorpio,
and the rest which they number as the celestial signs, and
which consist not of single stars, but each of them of many
stars, which also they say are situated above those already[Pg 279]
mentioned in the highest part of the heavens, where a more
constant motion causes the stars to follow an undeviating
course? And why have they not reckoned them as gods, I
do not say among those select gods, but not even among
those, as it were, plebeian gods?

16. Concerning Apollo and Diana, and the other select gods whom they would
have to be parts of the world.

Although they would have Apollo to be a diviner and
physician, they have nevertheless given him a place as some
part of the world. They have said that he is also the sun;
and likewise they have said that Diana, his sister, is the
moon, and the guardian of roads. Whence also they will
have her be a virgin, because a road brings forth nothing.
They also make both of them have arrows, because those
two planets send their rays from the heavens to the earth.
They make Vulcan to be the fire of the world; Neptune the
waters of the world; Father Dis, that is, Orcus, the earthy
and lowest part of the world. Liber and Ceres they set over
seeds,—the former over the seeds of males, the latter over
the seeds of females; or the one over the fluid part of seed,
but the other over the dry part. And all this together is
referred to the world, that is, to Jupiter, who is called “progenitor
and mother,” because he emitted all seeds from himself,
and received them into himself. For they also make
this same Ceres to be the Great Mother, who they say is
none other than the earth, and call her also Juno. And
therefore they assign to her the second causes of things,
notwithstanding that it has been said to Jupiter, “progenitor
and mother of the gods;” because, according to them, the
whole world itself is Jupiter’s. Minerva, also, because they
set her over human arts, and did not find even a star in
which to place her, has been said by them to be either the
highest æther, or even the moon. Also Vesta herself they
have thought to be the highest of the goddesses, because she
is the earth; although they have thought that the milder
fire of the world, which is used for the ordinary purposes
of human life, not the more violent fire, such as belongs to
Vulcan, is to be assigned to her. And thus they will have
all those select gods to be the world and its parts,—some of[Pg 280]
them the whole world, others of them its parts; the whole
of it Jupiter,—its parts, Genius, Mater Magna, Sol and Luna,
or rather Apollo and Diana, and so on. And sometimes they
make one god many things; sometimes one thing many gods.
Many things are one god in the case of Jupiter; for both the
whole world is Jupiter, and the sky alone is Jupiter, and the
star alone is said and held to be Jupiter. Juno also is mistress
of second causes,—Juno is the air, Juno is the earth;
and had she won it over Venus, Juno would have been the
star. Likewise Minerva is the highest æther, and Minerva
is likewise the moon, which they suppose to be in the lowest
limit of the æther. And also they make one thing many
gods in this way. The world is both Janus and Jupiter;
also the earth is Juno, and Mater Magna, and Ceres.

17. That even Varro himself pronounced his own opinions regarding the gods
ambiguous.

And the same is true with respect to all the rest, as is true
with respect to those things which I have mentioned for the
sake of example. They do not explain them, but rather
involve them. They rush hither and thither, to this side or
to that, according as they are driven by the impulse of erratic
opinion; so that even Varro himself has chosen rather to
doubt concerning all things, than to affirm anything. For,
having written the first of the three last books concerning
the certain gods, and having commenced in the second of
these to speak of the uncertain gods, he says: “I ought not
to be censured for having stated in this book the doubtful
opinions concerning the gods. For he who, when he has
read them, shall think that they both ought to be, and can be,
conclusively judged of, will do so himself. For my own part,
I can be more easily led to doubt the things which I have
written in the first book, than to attempt to reduce all the
things I shall write in this one to any orderly system.” Thus
he makes uncertain not only that book, concerning the uncertain
gods, but also that other concerning the certain gods.
Moreover, in that third book concerning the select gods, after
having exhibited by anticipation as much of the natural theology
as he deemed necessary, and when about to commence[Pg 281]
to speak of the vanities and lying insanities of the civil
theology, where he was not only without the guidance of the
truth of things, but was also pressed by the authority of
tradition, he says: “I will write in this book concerning the
public gods of the Roman people, to whom they have dedicated
temples, and whom they have conspicuously distinguished
by many adornments; but, as Xenophon of Colophon
writes, I will state what I think, not what I am prepared
to maintain: it is for man to think those things, for God to
know them.”

It is not, then, an account of things comprehended and
most certainly believed which he promised, when about to
write those things which were instituted by men. He only
timidly promises an account of things which are but the
subject of doubtful opinion. Nor, indeed, was it possible for
him to affirm with the same certainty that Janus was the
world, and such like things; or to discover with the same
certainty such things as how Jupiter was the son of Saturn,
while Saturn was made subject to him as king:—he could,
I say, neither affirm nor discover such things with the
same certainty with which he knew such things as that the
world existed, that the heavens and earth existed, the heavens
bright with stars, and the earth fertile through seeds; or with
the same perfect conviction with which he believed that this
universal mass of nature is governed and administered by a
certain invisible and mighty force.

18. A more credible cause of the rise of pagan error.

A far more credible account of these gods is given, when it
is said that they were men, and that to each one of them
sacred rites and solemnities were instituted, according to his
particular genius, manners, actions, circumstances; which
rites and solemnities, by gradually creeping through the souls
of men, which are like demons, and eager for things which
yield them sport, were spread far and wide; the poets adorning
them with lies, and false spirits seducing men to receive
them. For it is far more likely that some youth, either impious
himself, or afraid of being slain by an impious father,
being desirous to reign, dethroned his father, than that (according[Pg 282]
to Varro’s interpretation) Saturn was overthrown by
his son Jupiter; for cause, which belongs to Jupiter, is before
seed, which belongs to Saturn. For had this been so, Saturn
would never have been before Jupiter, nor would he have
been the father of Jupiter. For cause always precedes seed,
and is never generated from seed. But when they seek to
honour by natural interpretation most vain fables or deeds
of men, even the acutest men are so perplexed that we are
compelled to grieve for their folly also.

19. Concerning the interpretations which compose the reason of the worship
of Saturn.

They said, says Varro, that Saturn was wont to devour all
that sprang from him, because seeds returned to the earth
from whence they sprang. And when it is said that a lump
of earth was put before Saturn to be devoured instead of
Jupiter, it is signified, he says, that before the art of ploughing
was discovered, seeds were buried in the earth by the
hands of men. The earth itself, then, and not seeds, should
have been called Saturn, because it in a manner devours what
it has brought forth, when the seeds which have sprung from
it return again into it. And what has Saturn’s receiving of
a lump of earth instead of Jupiter to do with this, that the
seeds were covered in the soil by the hands of men? Was
the seed kept from being devoured, like other things, by being
covered with the soil? For what they say would imply that
he who put on the soil took away the seed, as Jupiter is said
to have been taken away when the lump of soil was offered
to Saturn instead of him, and not rather that the soil, by
covering the seed, only caused it to be devoured the more
eagerly. Then, in that way, Jupiter is the seed, and not the
cause of the seed, as was said a little before.

But what shall men do who cannot find anything wise to
say, because they are interpreting foolish things? Saturn
has a pruning-knife. That, says Varro, is on account of
agriculture. Certainly in Saturn’s reign there as yet existed
no agriculture, and therefore the former times of Saturn are
spoken of, because, as the same Varro interprets the fables,
the primeval men lived on those seeds which the earth produced
spontaneously. Perhaps he received a pruning-knife[Pg 283]
when he had lost his sceptre; that he who had been a king,
and lived at ease during the first part of his time, should
become a laborious workman whilst his son occupied the
throne. Then he says that boys were wont to be immolated
to him by certain peoples, the Carthaginians for instance;
and also that adults were immolated by some nations, for
example the Gauls—because, of all seeds, the human race
is the best. What need we say more concerning this most
cruel vanity? Let us rather attend to and hold by this, that
these interpretations are not carried up to the true God,—a
living, incorporeal, unchangeable nature, from whom a blessed
life enduring for ever may be obtained,—but that they end
in things which are corporeal, temporal, mutable, and mortal.
And whereas it is said in the fables that Saturn castrated
his father Cœlus, this signifies, says Varro, that the divine
seed belongs to Saturn, and not to Cœlus; for this reason,
as far as a reason can be discovered, namely, that in heaven[274]
nothing is born from seed. But, lo! Saturn, if he is the son
of Cœlus, is the son of Jupiter. For they affirm times without
number, and that emphatically, that the heavens[275] are
Jupiter. Thus those things which come not of the truth, do
very often, without being impelled by any one, themselves
overthrow one another. He says that Saturn was called
Κρόνος, which in the Greek tongue signifies a space of time,[276]
because, without that, seed cannot be productive. These and
many other things are said concerning Saturn, and they are
all referred to seed. But Saturn surely, with all that great
power, might have sufficed for seed. Why are other gods
demanded for it, especially Liber and Libera, that is, Ceres?—concerning
whom again, as far as seed is concerned, he
says as many things as if he had said nothing concerning
Saturn.

20. Concerning the rites of Eleusinian Ceres.

Now among the rites of Ceres, those Eleusinian rites are
much famed which were in the highest repute among the
Athenians, of which Varro offers no interpretation except
with respect to corn, which Ceres discovered, and with respect
to Proserpine, whom Ceres lost, Orcus having carried her[Pg 284]
away. And this Proserpine herself, he says, signifies the
fecundity of seeds. But as this fecundity departed at a
certain season, whilst the earth wore an aspect of sorrow
through the consequent sterility, there arose an opinion that
the daughter of Ceres, that is, fecundity itself, who was called
Proserpine, from proserpere (to creep forth, to spring), had
been carried away by Orcus, and detained among the inhabitants
of the nether world; which circumstance was celebrated
with public mourning. But since the same fecundity again
returned, there arose joy because Proserpine had been given
back by Orcus, and thus these rites were instituted. Then
Varro adds, that many things are taught in the mysteries of
Ceres which only refer to the discovery of fruits.

21. Concerning the shamefulness of the rites which are celebrated in honour
of Liber.

Now as to the rites of Liber, whom they have set over
liquid seeds, and therefore not only over the liquors of fruits,
among which wine holds, so to speak, the primacy, but also
over the seeds of animals:—as to these rites, I am unwilling
to undertake to show to what excess of turpitude they had
reached, because that would entail a lengthened discourse,
though I am not unwilling to do so as a demonstration of the
proud stupidity of those who practise them. Among other
rites which I am compelled from the greatness of their number
to omit, Varro says that in Italy, at the places where roads
crossed each other, the rites of Liber were celebrated with
such unrestrained turpitude, that the private parts of a man
were worshipped in his honour. Nor was this abomination
transacted in secret, that some regard at least might be paid
to modesty, but was openly and wantonly displayed. For
during the festival of Liber, this obscene member, placed on
a car, was carried with great honour, first over the cross-roads
in the country, and then into the city. But in the town of
Lavinium a whole month was devoted to Liber alone, during
the days of which all the people gave themselves up to the
most dissolute conversation, until that member had been
carried through the forum and brought to rest in its own
place; on which unseemly member it was necessary that[Pg 285]
the most honourable matron should place a wreath in the
presence of all the people. Thus, forsooth, was the god Liber
to be appeased in order to the growth of seeds. Thus was
enchantment to be driven away from fields, even by a matron’s
being compelled to do in public what not even a harlot ought
to be permitted to do in a theatre, if there were matrons
among the spectators. For these reasons, then, Saturn alone
was not believed to be sufficient for seeds,—namely, that the
impure mind might find occasions for multiplying the gods;
and that, being righteously abandoned to uncleanness by the
one true God, and being prostituted to the worship of many
false gods, through an avidity for ever greater and greater
uncleanness, it should call these sacrilegious rites sacred
things, and should abandon itself to be violated and polluted
by crowds of foul demons.

22. Concerning Neptune, and Salacia, and Venilia.

Now Neptune had Salacia to wife, who they say is the
nether waters of the sea. Wherefore was Venilia also joined
to him? Was it not simply through the lust of the soul
desiring a greater number of demons to whom to prostitute
itself, and not because this goddess was necessary to the perfection
of their sacred rites? But let the interpretation of this
illustrious theology be brought forward to restrain us from
this censuring by rendering a satisfactory reason. Venilia,
says this theology, is the wave which comes to the shore,
Salacia the wave which returns into the sea. Why, then, are
there two goddesses, when it is one wave which comes and
returns? Certainly it is mad lust itself, which in its eagerness
for many deities resembles the waves which break on the
shore. For though the water which goes is not different from
that which returns, still the soul which goes and returns not
is defiled by two demons, whom it has taken occasion by this
false pretext to invite. I ask thee, O Varro, and you who
have read such works of learned men, and think ye have
learned something great,—I ask you to interpret this, I do not
say in a manner consistent with the eternal and unchangeable
nature which alone is God, but only in a manner consistent
with the doctrine concerning the soul of the world and its[Pg 286]
parts, which ye think to be the true gods. It is a somewhat
more tolerable thing that ye have made that part of the soul
of the world which pervades the sea your god Neptune. Is
the wave, then, which comes to the shore and returns to the
main, two parts of the world, or two parts of the soul of the
world? Who of you is so silly as to think so? Why, then,
have they made to you two goddesses? The only reason
seems to be, that your wise ancestors have provided, not that
many gods should rule you, but that many of such demons as
are delighted with those vanities and falsehoods should possess
you. But why has that Salacia, according to this interpretation,
lost the lower part of the sea, seeing that she was represented
as subject to her husband? For in saying that she
is the receding wave, ye have put her on the surface. Was
she enraged at her husband for taking Venilia as a concubine,
and thus drove him from the upper part of the sea?

23. Concerning the earth, which Varro affirms to be a goddess, because that soul
of the world which he thinks to be God pervades also this lowest part of
his body, and imparts to it a divine force.

Surely the earth, which we see full of its own living creatures,
is one; but for all that, it is but a mighty mass among
the elements, and the lowest part of the world. Why, then,
would they have it to be a goddess? Is it because it is fruitful?
Why, then, are not men rather held to be gods, who
render it fruitful by cultivating it; but though they plough
it, do not adore it? But, say they, the part of the soul of the
world which pervades it makes it a goddess. As if it were
not a far more evident thing, nay, a thing which is not called
in question, that there is a soul in man. And yet men are
not held to be gods, but (a thing to be sadly lamented), with
wonderful and pitiful delusion, are subjected to those who are
not gods, and than whom they themselves are better, as the
objects of deserved worship and adoration. And certainly the
same Varro, in the book concerning the select gods, affirms
that there are three grades of soul in universal nature. One
which pervades all the living parts of the body, and has not
sensation, but only the power of life,—that principle which
penetrates into the bones, nails, and hair. By this principle
in the world trees are nourished, and grow without being possessed[Pg 287]
of sensation, and live in a manner peculiar to themselves.
The second grade of soul is that in which there is
sensation. This principle penetrates into the eyes, ears,
nostrils, mouth, and the organs of sensation. The third grade
of soul is the highest, and is called mind, where intelligence
has its throne. This grade of soul no mortal creatures except
man are possessed of. Now this part of the soul of the world,
Varro says, is called God, and in us is called Genius. And the
stones and earth in the world, which we see, and which are
not pervaded by the power of sensation, are, as it were, the
bones and nails of God. Again, the sun, moon, and stars,
which we perceive, and by which He perceives, are His organs
of perception. Moreover, the ether is His mind; and by the
virtue which is in it, which penetrates into the stars, it also
makes them gods; and because it penetrates through them
into the earth, it makes it the goddess Tellus, whence again it
enters and permeates the sea and ocean, making them the god
Neptune.

Let him return from this, which he thinks to be natural
theology, back to that from which he went out, in order
to rest from the fatigue occasioned by the many turnings and
windings of his path. Let him return, I say, let him return
to the civil theology. I wish to detain him there a
while. I have somewhat to say which has to do with that
theology. I am not yet saying, that if the earth and stones
are similar to our bones and nails, they are in like manner
devoid of intelligence, as they are devoid of sensation. Nor
am I saying that, if our bones and nails are said to have intelligence,
because they are in a man who has intelligence, he
who says that the things analogous to these in the world are
gods, is as stupid as he is who says that our bones and nails
are men. We shall perhaps have occasion to dispute these
things with the philosophers. At present, however, I wish to
deal with Varro as a political theologian. For it is possible
that, though he may seem to have wished to lift up his head,
as it were, into the liberty of natural theology, the consciousness
that the book with which he was occupied was one concerning
a subject belonging to civil theology, may have caused
him to relapse into the point of view of that theology, and to[Pg 288]
say this in order that the ancestors of his nation, and other
states, might not be believed to have bestowed on Neptune an
irrational worship. What I am to say is this: Since the earth
is one, why has not that part of the soul of the world which
permeates the earth made it that one goddess which he calls
Tellus? But had it done so, what then had become of Orcus,
the brother of Jupiter and Neptune, whom they call Father
Dis?[277] And where, in that case, had been his wife Proserpine,
who, according to another opinion given in the same book, is
called, not the fecundity of the earth, but its lower part?[278]
But if they say that part of the soul of the world, when it
permeates the upper part of the earth, makes the god Father
Dis, but when it pervades the nether part of the same the
goddess Proserpine; what, in that case, will that Tellus be?
For all that which she was has been divided into these two
parts, and these two gods; so that it is impossible to find
what to make or where to place her as a third goddess, except
it be said that those divinities Orcus and Proserpine are the
one goddess Tellus, and that they are not three gods, but one
or two, whilst notwithstanding they are called three, held to
be three, worshipped as three, having their own several altars,
their own shrines, rites, images, priests, whilst their own false
demons also through these things defile the prostituted soul.
Let this further question be answered: What part of the earth
does a part of the soul of the world permeate in order to make
the god Tellumo? No, says he; but the earth being one and
the same, has a double life,—the masculine, which produces
seed, and the feminine, which receives and nourishes the seed.
Hence it has been called Tellus from the feminine principle,
and Tellumo from the masculine. Why, then, do the priests,
as he indicates, perform divine service to four gods, two others
being added,—namely, to Tellus, Tellumo, Altor, and Rusor?
We have already spoken concerning Tellus and Tellumo. But
why do they worship Altor?[279] Because, says he, all that
springs of the earth is nourished by the earth. Wherefore
do they worship Rusor?[280] Because all things return back
again to the place whence they proceeded.

[Pg 289]

24. Concerning the surnames of Tellus and their significations, which, although
they indicate many properties, ought not to have established the opinion
that there is a corresponding number of gods.

The one earth, then, on account of this fourfold virtue,
ought to have had four surnames, but not to have been considered
as four gods,—as Jupiter and Juno, though they have
so many surnames, are for all that only single deities,—for by
all these surnames it is signified that a manifold virtue belongs
to one god or to one goddess; but the multitude of surnames
does not imply a multitude of gods. But as sometimes
even the vilest women themselves grow tired of those crowds
which they have sought after under the impulse of wicked
passion, so also the soul, become vile, and prostituted to impure
spirits, sometimes begins to loathe to multiply to itself
gods to whom to surrender itself to be polluted by them, as
much as it once delighted in so doing. For Varro himself,
as if ashamed of that crowd of gods, would make Tellus to be
one goddess. “They say,” says he, “that whereas the one
great mother has a tympanum, it is signified that she is the
orb of the earth; whereas she has towers on her head, towns
are signified; and whereas seats are fixed round about her, it
is signified that whilst all things move, she moves not. And
their having made the Galli to serve this goddess, signifies
that they who are in need of seed ought to follow the earth,
for in it all seeds are found. By their throwing themselves
down before her, it is taught,” he says, “that they who cultivate
the earth should not sit idle, for there is always something
for them to do. The sound of the cymbals signifies the
noise made by the throwing of iron utensils, and by men’s
hands, and all other noises connected with agricultural operations;
and these cymbals are of brass, because the ancients
used brazen utensils in their agriculture before iron was discovered.
They place beside the goddess an unbound and
tame lion, to show that there is no kind of land so wild and
so excessively barren as that it would be profitless to attempt
to bring it in and cultivate it.” Then he adds that, because
they gave many names and surnames to mother Tellus, it
came to be thought that these signified many gods. “They
think,” says he, “that Tellus is Ops, because the earth is improved[Pg 290]
by labour; Mother, because it brings forth much;
Great, because it brings forth seed; Proserpine, because fruits
creep forth from it; Vesta, because it is invested with herbs.
And thus,” says he, “they not at all absurdly identify other
goddesses with the earth.” If, then, it is one goddess (though,
if the truth were consulted, it is not even that), why do they
nevertheless separate it into many? Let there be many
names of one goddess, and let there not be as many goddesses
as there are names.

But the authority of the erring ancients weighs heavily on
Varro, and compels him, after having expressed this opinion,
to show signs of uneasiness; for he immediately adds,
“With which things the opinion of the ancients, who thought
that there were really many goddesses, does not conflict.”
How does it not conflict, when it is entirely a different thing
to say that one goddess has many names, and to say that
there are many goddesses? But it is possible, he says, that
the same thing may both be one, and yet have in it a plurality
of things. I grant that there are many things in one man;
are there therefore in him many men? In like manner, in
one goddess there are many things; are there therefore also
many goddesses? But let them divide, unite, multiply, reduplicate,
and implicate as they like.

These are the famous mysteries of Tellus and the Great
Mother, all of which are shown to have reference to mortal
seeds and to agriculture. Do these things, then,—namely,
the tympanum, the towers, the Galli, the tossing to and fro
of limbs, the noise of cymbals, the images of lions,—do these
things, having this reference and this end, promise eternal
life? Do the mutilated Galli, then, serve this Great Mother
in order to signify that they who are in need of seed should
follow the earth, as though it were not rather the case that
this very service caused them to want seed? For whether do
they, by following this goddess, acquire seed, being in want of
it, or, by following her, lose seed when they have it? Is this
to interpret or to deprecate? Nor is it considered to what a
degree malign demons have gained the upper hand, inasmuch
as they have been able to exact such cruel rites without having
dared to promise any great things in return for them. Had[Pg 291]
the earth not been a goddess, men would have, by labouring,
laid their hands on it in order to obtain seed through it, and
would not have laid violent hands on themselves in order to
lose seed on account of it. Had it not been a goddess, it
would have become so fertile by the hands of others, that it
would not have compelled a man to be rendered barren by
his own hands; nor that in the festival of Liber an honourable
matron put a wreath on the private parts of a man in
the sight of the multitude, where perhaps her husband was
standing by blushing and perspiring, if there is any shame left
in men; and that in the celebration of marriages the newly-married
bride was ordered to sit upon Priapus. These things
are bad enough, but they are small and contemptible in comparison
with that most cruel abomination, or most abominable
cruelty, by which either set is so deluded that neither perishes
of its wound. There the enchantment of fields is feared; here
the amputation of members is not feared. There the modesty
of the bride is outraged, but in such a manner as that neither
her fruitfulness nor even her virginity is taken away; here
a man is so mutilated that he is neither changed into a woman
nor remains a man.

25. The interpretation of the mutilation of Atys which the doctrine of the
Greek sages set forth.

Varro has not spoken of that Atys, nor sought out any
interpretation for him, in memory of whose being loved by
Ceres the Gallus is mutilated. But the learned and wise
Greeks have by no means been silent about an interpretation
so holy and so illustrious. The celebrated philosopher Porphyry
has said that Atys signifies the flowers of spring, which
is the most beautiful season, and therefore was mutilated
because the flower falls before the fruit appears.[281] They
have not, then, compared the man himself, or rather that
semblance of a man they called Atys, to the flower, but his
male organs,—these, indeed, fell whilst he was living. Did
I say fell? nay, truly they did not fall, nor were they plucked
off, but torn away. Nor when that flower was lost did any
fruit follow, but rather sterility. What, then, do they say
is signified by the castrated Atys himself, and whatever remained[Pg 292]
to him after his castration? To what do they refer
that? What interpretation does that give rise to? Do they,
after vain endeavours to discover an interpretation, seek to
persuade men that that is rather to be believed which report
has made public, and which has also been written concerning
his having been a mutilated man? Our Varro has very properly
opposed this, and has been unwilling to state it; for it
certainly was not unknown to that most learned man.

26. Concerning the abomination of the sacred rites of the Great Mother.

Concerning the effeminates consecrated to the same Great
Mother, in defiance of all the modesty which belongs to men
and women, Varro has not wished to say anything, nor do I
remember to have read anywhere aught concerning them.
These effeminates, no later than yesterday, were going through
the streets and places of Carthage with anointed hair, whitened
faces, relaxed bodies, and feminine gait, exacting from the
people the means of maintaining their ignominious lives.
Nothing has been said concerning them. Interpretation
failed, reason blushed, speech was silent. The Great Mother
has surpassed all her sons, not in greatness of deity, but of
crime. To this monster not even the monstrosity of Janus is
to be compared. His deformity was only in his image; hers
was the deformity of cruelty in her sacred rites. He has a
redundancy of members in stone images; she inflicts the loss
of members on men. This abomination is not surpassed by
the licentious deeds of Jupiter, so many and so great. He,
with all his seductions of women, only disgraced heaven with
one Ganymede; she, with so many avowed and public effeminates,
has both defiled the earth and outraged heaven. Perhaps
we may either compare Saturn to this Magna Mater, or
even set him before her in this kind of abominable cruelty,
for he mutilated his father. But at the festivals of Saturn
men could rather be slain by the hands of others than mutilated
by their own. He devoured his sons, as the poets say,
and the natural theologists interpret this as they list. History
says he slew them. But the Romans never received,
like the Carthaginians, the custom of sacrificing their sons to
him. This Great Mother of the gods, however, has brought[Pg 293]
mutilated men into Roman temples, and has preserved that
cruel custom, being believed to promote the strength of the
Romans by emasculating their men. Compared with this
evil, what are the thefts of Mercury, the wantonness of Venus,
and the base and flagitious deeds of the rest of them, which
we might bring forward from books, were it not that they are
daily sung and danced in the theatres? But what are these
things to so great an evil,—an evil whose magnitude was only
proportioned to the greatness of the Great Mother,—especially
as these are said to have been invented by the poets?
as if the poets had also invented this, that they are acceptable
to the gods. Let it be imputed, then, to the audacity
and impudence of the poets that these things have been sung
and written of. But that they have been incorporated into
the body of divine rites and honours, the deities themselves
demanding and extorting that incorporation, what is that but
the crime of the gods? nay more, the confession of demons
and the deception of wretched men? But as to this, that
the Great Mother is considered to be worshipped in the appropriate
form when she is worshipped by the consecration of
mutilated men, this is not an invention of the poets, nay,
they have rather shrunk from it with horror than sung of it.
Ought any one, then, to be consecrated to these select gods,
that he may live blessedly after death, consecrated to whom
he could not live decently before death, being subjected to such
foul superstitions, and bound over to unclean demons? But
all these things, says Varro, are to be referred to the world.[282]
Let him consider if it be not rather to the unclean.[283] But
why not refer that to the world which is demonstrated to be
in the world? We, however, seek for a mind which, trusting
to true religion, does not adore the world as its god, but for
the sake of God praises the world as a work of God, and,
purified from mundane defilements, comes pure[284] to God Himself
who founded the world.[285]

27. Concerning the figments of the physical theologists, who neither worship the
true divinity, nor perform the worship wherewith the true divinity should
be served.

We see that these select gods have, indeed, become more[Pg 294]
famous than the rest; not, however, that their merits may be
brought to light, but that their opprobrious deeds may not
be hid. Whence it is more credible that they were men, as
not only poetic but also historical literature has handed down.
For this which Virgil says,

“Then from Olympus’ heights came down

Good Saturn, exiled from his throne

By Jove, his mightier heir;”[286]

and what follows with reference to this affair, is fully related
by the historian Euhemerus, and has been translated into
Latin by Ennius. And as they who have written before us
in the Greek or in the Latin tongue against such errors as
these have said much concerning this matter, I have thought
it unnecessary to dwell upon it. When I consider those physical
reasons, then, by which learned and acute men attempt to
turn human things into divine things, all I see is that they
have been able to refer these things only to temporal works
and to that which has a corporeal nature, and even though
invisible still mutable; and this is by no means the true God.
But if this worship had been performed as the symbolism of
ideas at least congruous with religion, though it would indeed
have been cause of grief that the true God was not announced
and proclaimed by its symbolism, nevertheless it could have
been in some degree borne with, when it did not occasion
and command the performance of such foul and abominable
things. But since it is impiety to worship the body or the
soul for the true God, by whose indwelling alone the soul is
happy, how much more impious is it to worship those things
through which neither soul nor body can obtain either salvation
or human honour? Wherefore if with temple, priest, and
sacrifice, which are due to the true God, any element of the
world be worshipped, or any created spirit, even though not
impure and evil, that worship is still evil, not because the
things are evil by which the worship is performed, but because
those things ought only to be used in the worship of Him to
whom alone such worship and service are due. But if any
one insist that he worships the one true God,—that is, the
Creator of every soul and of every body,—with stupid and[Pg 295]
monstrous idols, with human victims, with putting a wreath
on the male organ, with the wages of unchastity, with the
cutting of limbs, with emasculation, with the consecration of
effeminates, with impure and obscene plays, such a one does
not sin because he worships One who ought not to be worshipped,
but because he worships Him who ought to be worshipped
in a way in which He ought not to be worshipped.
But he who worships with such things,—that is, foul and
obscene things,—and that not the true God, namely, the
maker of soul and body, but a creature, even though not a
wicked creature, whether it be soul or body, or soul and body
together, twice sins against God, because he both worships
for God what is not God, and also worships with such things
as neither God nor what is not God ought to be worshipped
with. It is, indeed, manifest how these pagans worship,—that
is, how shamefully and criminally they worship; but what or
whom they worship would have been left in obscurity, had
not their history testified that those same confessedly base
and foul rites were rendered in obedience to the demands of
the gods, who exacted them with terrible severity. Wherefore
it is evident beyond doubt that this whole civil theology is
occupied in inventing means for attracting wicked and most
impure spirits, inviting them to visit senseless images, and
through these to take possession of stupid hearts.

28. That the doctrine of Varro concerning theology is in no part consistent
with itself.

To what purpose, then, is it that this most learned and most
acute man Varro attempts, as it were, with subtle disputation,
to reduce and refer all these gods to heaven and earth? He
cannot do it. They go out of his hands like water; they
shrink back; they slip down and fall. For when about to
speak of the females, that is, the goddesses, he says, “Since,
as I observed in the first book concerning places, heaven and
earth are the two origins of the gods, on which account they
are called celestials and terrestrials, and as I began in the former
books with heaven, speaking of Janus, whom some have said
to be heaven, and others the earth, so I now commence with
Tellus in speaking concerning the goddesses.” I can understand
what embarrassment so great a mind was experiencing.[Pg 296]
For he is influenced by the perception of a certain plausible
resemblance, when he says that the heaven is that which does,
and the earth that which suffers, and therefore attributes the
masculine principle to the one, and the feminine to the other,—not
considering that it is rather He who made both heaven
and earth who is the maker of both activity and passivity.
On this principle he interprets the celebrated mysteries of the
Samothracians, and promises, with an air of great devoutness,
that he will by writing expound these mysteries, which have
not been so much as known to his countrymen, and will send
them his exposition. Then he says that he had from many
proofs gathered that, in those mysteries, among the images
one signifies heaven, another the earth, another the patterns
of things, which Plato calls ideas. He makes Jupiter to
signify heaven, Juno the earth, Minerva the ideas. Heaven,
by which anything is made; the earth, from which it is made;
and the pattern, according to which it is made. But, with
respect to the last, I am forgetting to say that Plato attributed
so great an importance to these ideas as to say, not that anything
was made by heaven according to them, but that according
to them heaven itself was made.[287] To return, however,—it
is to be observed that Varro has, in the book on the select
gods, lost that theory of these gods, in whom he has, as it
were, embraced all things. For he assigns the male gods to
heaven, the females to earth; among which latter he has
placed Minerva, whom he had before placed above heaven
itself. Then the male god Neptune is in the sea, which
pertains rather to earth than to heaven. Last of all, father
Dis, who is called in Greek Πλούτων, another male god,
brother of both (Jupiter and Neptune), is also held to be
a god of the earth, holding the upper region of the earth
himself, and allotting the nether region to his wife Proserpine.
How, then, do they attempt to refer the gods to heaven, and
the goddesses to earth? What solidity, what consistency,
what sobriety has this disputation? But that Tellus is the
origin of the goddesses,—the great mother, to wit, beside whom
there is continually the noise of the mad and abominable
revelry of effeminates and mutilated men, and men who cut[Pg 297]
themselves, and indulge in frantic gesticulations,—how is it,
then, that Janus is called the head of the gods, and Tellus the
head of the goddesses? In the one case error does not make
one head, and in the other frenzy does not make a sane one.
Why do they vainly attempt to refer these to the world?
Even if they could do so, no pious person worships the world
for the true God. Nevertheless, plain truth makes it evident
that they are not able even to do this. Let them rather
identify them with dead men and most wicked demons, and
no further question will remain.

29. That all things which the physical theologists have referred to the world and
its parts, they ought to have referred to the one true God.

For all those things which, according to the account given
of those gods, are referred to the world by so-called physical
interpretation, may, without any religious scruple, be rather
assigned to the true God, who made heaven and earth, and
created every soul and every body; and the following is the
manner in which we see that this may be done. We worship
God,—not heaven and earth, of which two parts this world
consists, nor the soul or souls diffused through all living
things,—but God who made heaven and earth, and all things
which are in them; who made every soul, whatever be the
nature of its life, whether it have life without sensation and
reason, or life with sensation, or life with both sensation and
reason.

30. How piety distinguishes the Creator from the creatures, so that, instead of
one God, there are not worshipped as many gods as there are works of the
one author.

And now, to begin to go over those works of the one true
God, on account of which these have made to themselves
many and false gods, whilst they attempt to give an honourable
interpretation to their many most abominable and most
infamous mysteries,—we worship that God who has appointed
to the natures created by Him both the beginnings and the
end of their existing and moving; who holds, knows, and disposes
the causes of things; who hath created the virtue of
seeds; who hath given to what creatures He would a rational
soul, which is called mind; who hath bestowed the faculty and
use of speech; who hath imparted the gift of foretelling future[Pg 298]
things to whatever spirits it seemed to Him good; who also
Himself predicts future things, through whom He pleases,
and through whom He will removes diseases; who, when the
human race is to be corrected and chastised by wars, regulates
also the beginnings, progress, and ends of these wars;
who hath created and governs the most vehement and most
violent fire of this world, in due relation and proportion to
the other elements of immense nature; who is the governor
of all the waters; who hath made the sun brightest of all
material lights, and hath given him suitable power and
motion; who hath not withdrawn, even from the inhabitants
of the nether world, His dominion and power; who hath
appointed to mortal natures their suitable seed and nourishment,
dry or liquid; who establishes and makes fruitful the
earth; who bountifully bestows its fruits on animals and on
men; who knows and ordains, not only principal causes, but
also subsequent causes; who hath determined for the moon
her motion; who affords ways in heaven and on earth for
passage from one place to another; who hath granted also to
human minds, which He hath created, the knowledge of the
various arts for the help of life and nature; who hath
appointed the union of male and female for the propagation
of offspring; who hath favoured the societies of men with the
gift of terrestrial fire for the simplest and most familiar purposes,
to burn on the hearth and to give light. These are,
then, the things which that most acute and most learned man
Varro has laboured to distribute among the select gods, by I
know not what physical interpretation, which he has got from
other sources, and also conjectured for himself. But these
things the one true God makes and does, but as the same God,—that
is, as He who is wholly everywhere, included in no
space, bound by no chains, mutable in no part of His being,
filling heaven and earth with omnipresent power, not with a
needy nature. Therefore He governs all things in such a
manner as to allow them to perform and exercise their own
proper movements. For although they can be nothing without
Him, they are not what He is. He does also many things
through angels; but only from Himself does He beatify angels.
So also, though He send angels to men for certain purposes,[Pg 299]
He does not for all that beatify men by the good inherent in
the angels, but by Himself, as He does the angels themselves.

31. What benefits God gives to the followers of the truth to enjoy over and above
His general bounty.

For, besides such benefits as, according to this administration
of nature of which we have made some mention, He
lavishes on good and bad alike, we have from Him a great
manifestation of great love, which belongs only to the good.
For although we can never sufficiently give thanks to Him,
that we are, that we live, that we behold heaven and earth,
that we have mind and reason by which to seek after Him
who made all these things, nevertheless, what hearts, what
number of tongues, shall affirm that they are sufficient to
render thanks to Him for this, that He hath not wholly
departed from us, laden and overwhelmed with sins, averse to
the contemplation of His light, and blinded by the love of
darkness, that is, of iniquity, but hath sent to us His own
Word, who is His only Son, that by His birth and suffering
for us in the flesh, which He assumed, we might know how
much God valued man, and that by that unique sacrifice we
might be purified from all our sins, and that, love being shed
abroad in our hearts by His Spirit, we might, having surmounted
all difficulties, come into eternal rest, and the
ineffable sweetness of the contemplation of Himself?

32. That at no time in the past was the mystery of Christ’s redemption awanting,
but was at all times declared, though in various forms.

This mystery of eternal life, even from the beginning of the
human race, was, by certain signs and sacraments suitable to
the times, announced through angels to those to whom it was
meet. Then the Hebrew people was congregated into one
republic, as it were, to perform this mystery; and in that republic
was foretold, sometimes through men who understood
what they spake, and sometimes through men who understood
not, all that had transpired since the advent of Christ until now,
and all that will transpire. This same nation, too, was afterwards
dispersed through the nations, in order to testify to the
scriptures in which eternal salvation in Christ had been declared.
For not only the prophecies which are contained in words, nor
only the precepts for the right conduct of life, which teach[Pg 300]
morals and piety, and are contained in the sacred writings,—not
only these, but also the rites, priesthood, tabernacle or temple,
altars, sacrifices, ceremonies, and whatever else belongs to that
service which is due to God, and which in Greek is properly
called λατρεία,—all these signified and fore-announced those
things which we who believe in Jesus Christ unto eternal life
believe to have been fulfilled, or behold in process of fulfilment,
or confidently believe shall yet be fulfilled.

33. That only through the Christian religion could the deceit of malign spirits,
who rejoice in the errors of men, have been manifested.

This, the only true religion, has alone been able to manifest
that the gods of the nations are most impure demons, who
desire to be thought gods, availing themselves of the names of
certain defunct souls, or the appearance of mundane creatures,
and with proud impurity rejoicing in things most base and
infamous, as though in divine honours, and envying human
souls their conversion to the true God. From whose most
cruel and most impious dominion a man is liberated when he
believes on Him who has afforded an example of humility,
following which men may rise as great as was that pride by
which they fell. Hence are not only those gods, concerning
whom we have already spoken much, and many others belonging
to different nations and lands, but also those of whom we
are now treating, who have been selected as it were into the
senate of the gods,—selected, however, on account of the
notoriousness of their crimes, not on account of the dignity
of their virtues,—whose sacred things Varro attempts to
refer to certain natural reasons, seeking to make base things
honourable, but cannot find how to square and agree with
these reasons, because these are not the causes of those rites,
which he thinks, or rather wishes to be thought to be so. For
had not only these, but also all others of this kind, been real
causes, even though they had nothing to do with the true God
and eternal life, which is to be sought in religion, they would,
by affording some sort of reason drawn from the nature of
things, have mitigated in some degree that offence which was
occasioned by some turpitude or absurdity in the sacred rites,
which was not understood. This he attempted to do in
respect to certain fables of the theatres, or mysteries of the[Pg 301]
shrines; but he did not acquit the theatres of likeness to the
shrines, but rather condemned the shrines for likeness to the
theatres. However, he in some way made the attempt to
soothe the feelings shocked by horrible things, by rendering
what he would have to be natural interpretations.

34. Concerning the books of Numa Pompilius, which the senate ordered to be
burned, in order that the causes of sacred rites therein assigned should
not become known..

But, on the other hand, we find, as the same most learned
man has related, that the causes of the sacred rites which
were given from the books of Numa Pompilius could by no
means be tolerated, and were considered unworthy, not only
to become known to the religious by being read, but even to
lie written in the darkness in which they had been concealed.
For now let me say what I promised in the third book of this
work to say in its proper place. For, as we read in the same
Varro’s book on the worship of the gods, “A certain one
Terentius had a field at the Janiculum, and once, when his
ploughman was passing the plough near to the tomb of Numa
Pompilius, he turned up from the ground the books of Numa,
in which were written the causes of the sacred institutions;
which books he carried to the prætor, who, having read the
beginnings of them, referred to the senate what seemed to be
a matter of so much importance. And when the chief senators
had read certain of the causes why this or that rite was instituted,
the senate assented to the dead Numa, and the conscript
fathers, as though concerned for the interests of religion,
ordered the prætor to burn the books.”[288] Let each one believe
what he thinks; nay, let every champion of such impiety
say whatever mad contention may suggest. For my part, let
it suffice to suggest that the causes of those sacred things
which were written down by King Numa Pompilius, the
institutor of the Roman rites, ought never to have become
known to people or senate, or even to the priests themselves;
and also that Numa himself attained to these secrets of
demons by an illicit curiosity, in order that he might write
them down, so as to be able, by reading, to be reminded of
them. However, though he was king, and had no cause to[Pg 302]
be afraid of any one, he neither dared to teach them to any
one, nor to destroy them by obliteration, or any other form of
destruction. Therefore, because he was unwilling that any
one should know them, lest men should be taught infamous
things, and because he was afraid to violate them, lest he
should enrage the demons against himself, he buried them in
what he thought a safe place, believing that a plough could
not approach his sepulchre. But the senate, fearing to condemn
the religious solemnities of their ancestors, and therefore
compelled to assent to Numa, were nevertheless so convinced
that those books were pernicious, that they did not order
them to be buried again, knowing that human curiosity would
thereby be excited to seek with far greater eagerness after
the matter already divulged, but ordered the scandalous relics
to be destroyed with fire; because, as they thought it was now
a necessity to perform those sacred rites, they judged that the
error arising from ignorance of their causes was more tolerable
than the disturbance which the knowledge of them would
occasion the state.

35. Concerning the hydromancy through which Numa was befooled by certain
images of demons seen in the water.

For Numa himself also, to whom no prophet of God, no
holy angel was sent, was driven to have recourse to hydromancy,
that he might see the images of the gods in the water
(or, rather, appearances whereby the demons made sport of
him), and might learn from them what he ought to ordain and
observe in the sacred rites. This kind of divination, says
Varro, was introduced from the Persians, and was used by
Numa himself, and at an after time by the philosopher
Pythagoras. In this divination, he says, they also inquire at
the inhabitants of the nether world, and make use of blood;
and this the Greeks call νεκρομαντείαν. But whether it be
called necromancy or hydromancy it is the same thing, for in
either case the dead are supposed to foretell future things.
But by what artifices these things are done, let themselves
consider; for I am unwilling to say that these artifices were
wont to be prohibited by the laws, and to be very severely
punished even in the Gentile states, before the advent of our
Saviour. I am unwilling, I say, to affirm this, for perhaps[Pg 303]
even such things were then allowed. However, it was by
these arts that Pompilius learned those sacred rites which he
gave forth as facts, whilst he concealed their causes; for
even he himself was afraid of that which he had learned.
The senate also caused the books in which those causes were
recorded to be burned. What is it, then, to me, that Varro
attempts to adduce all sorts of fanciful physical interpretations,
which if these books had contained, they would certainly
not have been burned? For otherwise the conscript fathers
would also have burned those books which Varro published
and dedicated to the high priest Cæsar.[289] Now Numa is said
to have married the nymph Egeria, because (as Varro explains
it in the forementioned book) he carried forth[290] water
wherewith to perform his hydromancy. Thus facts are wont
to be converted into fables through false colourings. It was
by that hydromancy, then, that that over-curious Roman king
learned both the sacred rites which were to be written in the
books of the priests, and also the causes of those rites,—which
latter, however, he was unwilling that any one besides himself
should know. Wherefore he made these causes, as it were,
to die along with himself, taking care to have them written
by themselves, and removed from the knowledge of men by
being buried in the earth. Wherefore the things which are
written in those books were either abominations of demons,
so foul and noxious as to render that whole civil theology
execrable even in the eyes of such men as those senators, who
had accepted so many shameful things in the sacred rites
themselves, or they were nothing else than the accounts of
dead men, whom, through the lapse of ages, almost all the
Gentile nations had come to believe to be immortal gods;
whilst those same demons were delighted even with such rites,
having presented themselves to receive worship under pretence
of being those very dead men whom they had caused to be
thought immortal gods by certain fallacious miracles, performed
in order to establish that belief. But, by the hidden providence
of the true God, these demons were permitted to confess
these things to their friend Numa, having been gained by those
arts through which necromancy could be performed, and yet[Pg 304]
were not constrained to admonish him rather at his death to
burn than to bury the books in which they were written.
But, in order that these books might be unknown, the demons
could not resist the plough by which they were thrown up, or
the pen of Varro, through which the things which were done
in reference to this matter have come down even to our knowledge.
For they are not able to effect anything which they
are not allowed; but they are permitted to influence those
whom God, in His deep and just judgment, according to their
deserts, gives over either to be simply afflicted by them, or to
be also subdued and deceived. But how pernicious these
writings were judged to be, or how alien from the worship of
the true Divinity, may be understood from the fact that the
senate preferred to burn what Pompilius had hid, rather than
to fear what he feared, so that he could not dare to do that.
Wherefore let him who does not desire to live a pious life
even now, seek eternal life by means of such rites. But let
him who does not wish to have fellowship with malign demons
have no fear for the noxious superstition wherewith they are
worshipped, but let him recognise the true religion by which
they are unmasked and vanquished.

---

[Pg 305]