Chapter X: Part 10

(And now take the case of one who cultivates literature of any sort, and is himself young and therefore needs numerous guides and the abundant food and pure nourishment that is to be obtained from ancient writings, and then suppose that he should be deprived of all these all at once, is it, think you, slight assistance that he is asking? And is it slight payment that he deserves who comes to his aid? But perhaps he ought not even to attempt to make him any return for his zeal and kind actions? Perhaps he ought to imitate the famous Thales, that consummate philosopher, and that answer which we have all heard and which is so much admired? For when someone asked what fee he ought to pay him for knowledge he had acquired, Thales replied “If you let it be known that it was I who taught you, you will amply repay me.” Just so one who has not himself been the teacher, but has helped another in any way to gain knowledge, would indeed be wronged if he did not obtain gratitude and that acknowledgement of the gift which even the philosopher seems to have demanded. Well and good. But this gift of hers was both welcome and magnificent. And as for gold and silver I neither asked for them nor, were they in question, should I be willing thus to wear out your patience.)

Λόγον δὲ ὑμῖν εἰπεῖν ἐθέλω μάλα δή τι(589) ὑμῖν ἀκοῆς ἄξιον, εἰ μὴ τυγχάνομεν ἀπειρηκότες πρὸς τὸ μῆκος τῆς ἀδολεσχίας· τυχὸν δὲ(590) οὐδὲ τῶν ῥηθέντων ἠκρόασθε ξὺν ἡδονῇ ἅτε ἀνδρὸς ἰδιώτου καὶ σφόδρα ἀμαθοῦς λόγων, πλάττειν μὲν οὐδὲν οὐδὲ τεχνάζειν εἰδότος, φράζοντος δὲ ὅπως ἂν ἐπίῃ τάληθές· ὁ δὲ δὴ λόγος σχεδόν τι περὶ τῶν παρόντων ἐστί. φήσουσι γάρ, [C] οἶμαι, πολλοὶ παρὰ τῶν μακαρίων σοφιστῶν ἀναπειθόμενοι, ὅτι ἄρα μικρὰ καὶ φαῦλα πράγματα ἀναλεξάμενος ὡς δή τι σεμνὸν ὑμῖν ἀπαγγέλλω. τοῦτο δὲ οὐ φιλονεικοῦντες πρὸς τοὺς ἐμοὺς λόγους οὐδὲ ἐμὲ τῆς ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς ἀφαιρεῖσθαι δόξης ἐθέλοντες ἴσως ἂν εἴποιεν· ἴσασι γὰρ σαφῶς, ὅτι μήτε ἀντίτεχνος εἶναι βούλομαι τοῖς ἐκείνων λόγοις τοὺς ἐμαυτοῦ παρατιθείς, μήτε ἄλλως ἀπεχθάνεσθαι ἐκείνοις ἐθέλω· ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ οἶδα ὅντινα τρόπον [D] τοῦ μεγάλα λέγειν ἐκ παντὸς ὀρεγόμενοι χαλεπῶς ἔχουσι πρὸς τοὺς μὴ τἀκείνων ζηλοῦντας καὶ δι᾽ αἰτίας ἄγουσιν ὡς καθαιροῦντας τὴν τῶν λόγων ἰσχύν. μόνα γὰρ εἶναι τῶν ἔργων ζηλωτά φασι καὶ σπουδῆς ἄξια καὶ πολλῶν ἐπαίνων ὁπόσα διὰ μέγεθος ἤδη τισὶν ἄπιστα ἐφάνη, ὁποῖα δή τινα τὰ περὶ τῆς Ἀσσυρίας ἐκείνης γυναικός, ἣ μεταβαλοῦσα καθάπερ ῥεῖθρον εὐτελὲς τὸν διὰ τῆς Βαβυλῶνος ποταμὸν ῥέοντα βασίλειά [127] τε ᾠκοδόμησεν ὑπὸ γῆς πάγκαλα καὶ μεθῆκεν ὑπὲρ τῶν χωμάτων αὖθις. ὑπὲρ γὰρ δὴ ταύτης πολὺς μὲν λόγος, ὡς ἐναυμάχει ναυσὶ τρισχιλίαις, καὶ πεζῇ παρετάττετο μυριάδας ὁπλιτῶν τριακοσίας ἄγουσα, τό τε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι τεῖχος ᾠκοδόμει πεντακοσίων σταδίων μικρὸν ἀποδέον, καὶ τὰ περὶ τὴν πόλιν ὀρύγματα καὶ ἄλλα πολυτελῆ καὶ δαπανηρὰ κατασκευάσματα ἐκείνης ἔργα γενέσθαι [B] λέγουσι. Νίτωκρις δὲ ταύτης νεωτέρα καὶ Ῥοδογούνη καὶ Τώμυρις καὶ μυρίος δή τις ἐπιρρεῖ γυναικῶν ὄχλος ἀνδριζομένων οὐ λίαν εὐπρεπῶς. τινὰς δὲ ἤδη διὰ τὸ κάλλος περιβλέπτους καὶ ὀνομαστὰς γενομένας οὐ σφόδρα εὐτυχῶς, ἐπειδὴ ταραχῆς αἴτιαι καὶ πολέμων μακρῶν ἔθνεσι μυρίοις καὶ ἀνδράσιν, ὅσους ἦν εἰκὸς ἐκ τοσαύτης χώρας ἀθροίζεσθαι, γενέσθαι δοκοῦσιν, ὡς μεγάλων αἰτίας ὑμνοῦσι πράξεων. ὅστις δὲ τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν εἰπεῖν ἔχει, [C] καταγέλαστος εἶναι δοκεῖ ἅτε οὐκ ἐκπλήττειν οὐδὲ θαυματοποιεῖν ἐν τοῖς λόγοις σφόδρα ἐπιχειρῶν. βούλεσθε οὖν ἐπανερωτῶμεν αὐτούς, εἴ τις αὐτῶν γαμετὴν ἢ θυγατέρα οἱ τοιαύτην εὔχεται γενέσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ τὴν Πηνελόπην; καίτοι ἐπὶ ταύτης οὐδὲν Ὅμηρος εἰπεῖν ἔσχε πλέον τῆς σωφροσύνης καὶ τῆς φιλανδρίας καὶ τῆς ἐς τὸν ἑκυρὸν ἐπιμελείας καὶ τὸν παῖδα· ἔμελε δὲ ἄρα οὔτε τῶν ἀγρῶν ἐκείνῃ οὔτε τῶν ποιμνίων· στρατηγίαν δὲ ἢ δημηγορίαν οὐδὲ ὄναρ εἰκὸς(591) ἐκείνῃ παραστῆναί ποτε· [D] ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁπότε λέγειν ἐχρῆν εἰς τὰ μειράκια,

(But I wish to tell you a story very well worth your hearing, unless indeed you are already wearied by the length of this garrulous speech. Indeed it may be that you have listened without enjoyment to what has been said so far, seeing that the speaker is a layman and entirely ignorant of rhetoric, and knows neither how to invent nor how to use the writer’s craft, but speaks the truth as it occurs to him. And my story is about something almost of the present time. Now many will say, I suppose, persuaded by the accomplished sophists, that I have collected what is trivial and worthless, and relate it to you as though it were of serious import. And probably they will say this, not because they are jealous of my speeches, or because they wish to rob me of the reputation that they may bring. For they well know that I do not desire to be their rival in the art by setting my own speeches against theirs, nor in any other way do I wish to quarrel with them. But since, for some reason or other, they are ambitious of speaking on lofty themes at any cost, they will not tolerate those who have not their ambition, and they reproach them with weakening the power of rhetoric. For they say that only those deeds are to be admired and are worthy of serious treatment and repeated praise which, because of their magnitude, have been thought by some to be incredible, those stories for instance about that famous woman(592) of Assyria who turned aside as though it were an insignificant brook the river(593) that flows through Babylon, and built a gorgeous palace underground, and then turned the stream back again beyond the dykes that she had made. For of her many a tale is told, how she fought a naval battle with three thousand ships, and on land she led into the field of battle three million hoplites, and in Babylon she built a wall very nearly five hundred stades in length, and the moat that surrounds the city and other very costly and expensive edifices were, they tell us, her work. And Nitocris(594) who came later than she, and Rhodogyne(595) and Tomyris,(596) aye and a crowd of women beyond number who played men’s parts in no very seemly fashion occur to my mind. And some of them were conspicuous for their beauty and so became notorious, though it brought them no happiness, but since they were the causes of dissension and long wars among countless nations and as many men as could reasonably be collected from a country of that size, they are celebrated by the orators as having given rise to mighty deeds. And a speaker who has nothing of this sort to relate seems ridiculous because he makes no great effort to astonish his hearers or to introduce the marvellous into his speeches. Now shall we put this question to these orators, whether any one of them would wish to have a wife or daughter of that sort, rather than like Penelope? And yet in her case Homer had no more to tell than of her discretion and her love for her husband and the good care she took of her father‐in‐law and her son. Evidently she did not concern herself with the fields or the flocks, and as for leading an army or speaking in public, of course she never even dreamed of such a thing. But even when it was necessary for her to speak to the young suitors,)

ἄντα παρειάων σχομένη λιπαρὰ κρήδεμνα

(“Holding up before her face her shining veil”(597))

πρᾴως ἐφθέγγετο. καὶ οὐκ ἀπορῶν Ὅμηρος οἶμαι τηλικούτων ἔργων οὐδὲ ὀνομαστῶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς γυναικῶν ταύτην ὕμνησε διαφερόντως· ἐξῆν γοῦν αὐτῷ τὴν τῆς Ἀμαζόνος φιλοτίμως πάνυ στρατείαν διηγησαμένῳ τὴν ποίησιν ἅπασαν ἐμπλῆσαι τοιούτων διηγημάτων τέρπειν εὖ μάλα καὶ ψυχαγωγεῖν δυναμένων. [128] οὐ γὰρ δὴ τείχους μὲν αἵρεσιν, καὶ πολιορκίαν καὶ τρόπον τινὰ ναυμαχίαν εἶναι δοκοῦσαν, τὸν πρὸς τοῖς νεωρίοις πόλεμον, ἀνδρός τε ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ καὶ ποταμοῦ μάχην ἐπεισάγειν οἴκοθεν διενοεῖτο τῇ ποιήσει καινόν τι λέγειν ἐπιθυμῶν· τοῦτο δὲ εἴπερ ἦν, ὥσπερ οὖν φασι, σεμνότατον, ὀλιγώρως οὕτω παρέλιπε. τί ποτε οὖν ἄν τις αἴτιον λέγοι τοῦ κείνην μὲν ἐπαινεῖν προθύμως, τούτων δ᾽ οὐδ᾽(598) ἐπὶ σμικρὸν μνημονεύειν; ὅτι [B] διὰ μὲν τὴν ἐκείνης ἀρετὴν καὶ σωφροσύνην πολλὰ ἴδίᾳ τε(599) τοῖς ἀνθρώποις καὶ εἰς τὸ κοινὸν ἀγαθὰ συμβαίνει, ἐκ δὲ δὴ τῆς τούτων φιλοτιμίας ὄφελος μὲν οὐδὲ ἕν, συμφοραὶ δὲ ἀνήκεστοι. ἅτε δὴ ὢν οἶμαι σοφὸς καὶ θεῖος ποιητὴς ταύτην ἔκρινεν ἀμείνω καὶ δικαιοτέραν τὴν εὐφημίαν. ἆρ᾽ οὖν ἔτι προσῆκον(600) εὐλαβηθῆναι τοσοῦτον ἡγεμόνα ποιουμένοις, μή τις ἄρα μικροὺς ὑπολάβῃ καὶ φαύλους;

(it was in mild accents that she expressed herself. And it was not because he was short of such great deeds, or of women famous for them, that he sang the praises of Penelope rather than the others. For instance, he could have made it his ambition to tell the story of the Amazon’s(601) campaign and have filled all his poetry with tales of that sort, which certainly have a wonderful power to delight and charm. For as to the taking of the wall and the siege, and that battle near the ships which in some respects seems to have resembled a sea‐fight, and then the fight of the hero and the river,(602) he did not bring them into this poem with the desire to relate something new and strange of his own invention. And even though this fight was, as they say, most marvellous, he neglected and passed over the marvellous as we see. What reason then can anyone give for his praising Penelope so enthusiastically and making not the slightest allusion to those famous women? Because by reason of her virtue and discretion many blessings have been gained for mankind, both for individuals and for the common weal, whereas from the ambition of those others there has arisen no benefit whatever, but incurable calamities. And so, as he was, I think, a wise and inspired poet, he decided that to praise Penelope was better and more just. And since I adopt so great a guide, is it fitting that I should be afraid lest some person think me trivial or inferior?)

[C] Ἐγὼ δὲ ὑμῖν καὶ τὸν γενναῖον ἐκεῖνον ῥήτορα Περικλέα τὸν πάνυ, τὸν Ὀλύμπιον, μάρτυρα ἀγαθὸν ἤδη παρέξομαι. κολάκων γὰρ δή, φασὶ, ποτὲ τὸν ἄνδρα περιεστὼς δῆμος διελάγχανον τοὺς ἐπαίνους, ὁ μὲν ὅτι τὴν Σάμον ἐξεῖλεν, ἄλλος δὲ ὅτι τὴν Εὔβοιαν, τινὲς δὲ ἤδη τὸ περιπλεῦσαι τὴν Πελοπόννησον, ἦσαν δὲ οἱ τῶν ψηφισμάτων μεμνημένοι, τινὲς δὲ τῆς πρὸς τὸν Κίμωνα φιλοτιμίας, σφόδρα ἀγαθὸν πολίτην καὶ στρατηγὸν εἶναι δόξαντα γενναῖον. [D] ὁ δὲ τούτοις μὲν οὔτε ἀχθόμενος οὔτε γανύμενος δῆλος ἦν, ἐκεῖνο δὲ ἠξίου τῶν αὑτῷ πεπολιτευμένων ἐπαινεῖν, ὅτι τοσοῦτον χρόνον(603) ἐπιτροπεύσας τὸν Ἀθηναίων δῆμον οὐδενὶ θανάτου γέγονεν αἴτιος, οὐδὲ ἱμάτιον μέλαν τῶν πολιτῶν τις περιβαλόμενος Περικλέα γενέσθαι ταύτης αἴτιον αὐτῷ τῆς συμφορᾶς ἔφη. ἄλλου του, πρὸς φιλίου Διός, δοκοῦμεν ὑμῖν μάρτυρος δεῖσθαι, ὅτι μέγιστον ἀρετῆς σημείον [129] καὶ πάντων μάλιστα ἐπαίνων ἄξιον τὸ μηδένα κτεῖναι τῶν πολιτῶν μηδὲ ἀφελέσθαι τὰ χρήματα μηδὲ ἀδίκῳ φυγῇ περιβαλεῖν; ὅστις δὲ πρὸς τὰς τοιαύτας συμφορὰς αὑτὸν ἀντιτάξας καθάπερ ἰατρὸς γενναῖος οὐδαμῶς ἀποχρῆν ὑπέλαβεν αὑτῷ τὸ μηδενὶ νοσήματος αἰτίῳ γενέσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὴ πάντα εἰς δύναμιν ἰῷτο καὶ θεραπεύοι, οὐδὲν ἄξιον τῆς αὐτοῦ τέχνης ἔργον ὑπέλαβεν, ἆρα ὑμῖν δοκεῖ τῶν ἴσων ἐπαίνων ἐν δίκῃ τυγχάνειν; [B] καὶ οὐδὲν προτιμήσομεν οὔτε τὸν τρόπον οὔτε τὴν δύναμιν, ὑφ᾽ ἧς ἔξεστι μὲν αὐτῇ δρᾶν ὅ,τι ἂν ἐθέλῃ, θέλει δὲ ἅπασι τἀγαθά; τοῦτο ἐγὼ κεφάλαιον τοῦ παντὸς ἐπαίνου ποιοῦμαι, οὐκ ἀπορῶν ἄλλων θαυμασίων εἶναι δοκούντων καὶ λαμπρῶν διηγημάτων.

(But it is indeed a noble witness that I shall now bring forward, that splendid orator Pericles, the renowned, the Olympian. It is said(604) that once a crowd of flatterers surrounded him and were distributing his praises among them, one telling how he had reduced Samos,(605) another how he had recovered Euboea,(606) some how he had sailed round the Peloponnesus, while others spoke of his enactments, or of his rivalry with Cimon, who was reputed to be a most excellent citizen and a distinguished general. But Pericles gave no sign either of annoyance or exultation, and there was but one thing in all his political career for which he claimed to deserve praise, that, though he had governed the Athenian people for so long, he had been responsible for no man’s death, and no citizen when he put on black clothes had ever said that Pericles was the cause of his misfortune. Now, by Zeus the god of friendship, do you think I need any further witness to testify that the greatest proof of virtue and one better worth praise than all the rest put together is not to have caused the death of any citizen, or to have taken his money from him, or involved him in unjust exile? But he who like a good physician tries to ward off such calamities as these, and by no means thinks that it is enough for him not to cause anyone to contract a disease, but unless he cures and cares for everyone as far as he can, considers that his work is unworthy of his skill, do you think that in justice such a one ought to receive no higher praise than Pericles? And shall we not hold in higher honour her character and that authority which enables her to do what she will, since what she wills is the good of all? For this I make the sum and substance of my whole encomium, though I do not lack other narratives such as are commonly held to be marvellous and splendid.)

Εἰ γὰρ δή τις τὴν περὶ τῶν ἄλλων σιωπὴν ὑποπτεύσειεν ὡς ματαίαν οὖσαν προσποίησιν καὶ ἀλαζονείαν κενὴν καὶ αὐθάδη, οὔτι που καὶ τὴν ἔναγχος ἐπιδημίαν γενομένην αὐτῇ τὴν εις τὴν Ῥώμην, [C] ὁπότε ἐστρατεύετο βασιλεὺς ζεύγμασι καὶ ναυσὶ τὸν Ῥῆνον διαβὰς ἄγχου τῶν Γαλατίας ὁρίων, ψευδῆ καὶ πεπλασμένην ἄλλως ὑποπτεύσει. ἐξῆν δὴ οὖν, ὡς εἰκός, διηγουμένῳ ταῦτα τοῦ δήμου μεμνῆσθαι καὶ τῆς γερουσίας, ὅπως αὐτὴν ὑπεδέχετο σὺν χαρμονῇ, προθύμως ὑπαντῶντες καὶ δεξιούμενοι καθάπερ νόμος βασιλίδα, καὶ τῶν ἀναλωμάτων τὸ μέγεθος, ὡς ἐλευθέριον καὶ μεγαλοπρεπές, καὶ τῆς παρασκευῆς τὴν πολυτέλειαν, ὁπόσα τε ἔνειμε τῶν φυλῶν [D] τοῖς ἐπιστάταις καὶ ἑκατοντάρχαις τοῦ πλήθους ἀπαριθμήσασθαι. ἀλλ᾽ ἔμοιγε τῶν τοιούτων οὔτε ἔδοξέ ποτε ζηλωτὸν οὐδέν, οὔτε ἐπαινεῖν ἐθέλω πρὸ τῆς ἀρετῆς τὸν πλοῦτον. καίτοι με(607) οὐ λέληθεν ἡ τῶν χρημάτων ἐλευθέριος δαπάνη μετέχουσά τινος ἀρετῆς· ἀλλ᾽ οἶμαι κρεῖττον ἐπιείκειαν καὶ σωφροσύνην καὶ φρόνησιν καὶ ὅσα δὴ ἄλλα περὶ αὐτῆς λέγων πολλοὺς μὲν καὶ ἄλλους, [130] ἀτὰρ δὴ καὶ ἐμαυτὸν ὑμῖν καὶ τὰ ἐπ᾽ ἐμοὶ πραχθέντα παρεῖχον μάρτυρα. εἰ δὴ οὖν καὶ ἄλλοι τὴν ἐμὴν εὐγνωμοσύνην ζηλοῦν ἐπιχειρήσειαν, πολλοὺς ἔχει τε ἤδη καὶ ἕξει τοὺς ἐπαινέτας.

(For if anyone should suspect that my silence about the rest is vain affectation and empty and insolent pretension, this at least he will not suspect, that the visit which she lately made to Rome,(608) when the Emperor was on his campaign and had crossed the Rhine by bridges of boats near the frontiers of Galatia, is a false and vain invention. I could indeed very properly have given an account of this visit, and described how the people and the senate welcomed her with rejoicings and went to meet her with enthusiasm, and received her as is their custom to receive an Empress, and told the amount of the expenditure, how generous and splendid it was, and the costliness of the preparations, and reckoned up the sums she distributed to the presidents of the tribes and the centurions of the people. But nothing of that sort has ever seemed to me worth while, nor do I wish to praise wealth before virtue. And yet I am aware that the generous spending of money implies a sort of virtue. Nevertheless I rate more highly goodness and temperance and wisdom and all those other qualities of hers that I have described, bringing before you as witnesses not only many others but myself as well and all that she did for me. Now if only others also try to emulate my proper feeling, there are and there will be many to sing her praises.)

ORATION IV

Introduction To Oration IV

In the fourth century A.D. poetry was practically extinct, and hymns to the gods were almost always written in prose. Julian’s Fourth Oration is, according to the definition of the rhetorician Menander, a φυσικὸς ὕμνος, a hymn that describes the physical qualities of a god. Julian was an uncritical disciple of the later Neo‐Platonic school, and apparently reproduces without any important modification the doctrines of its chief representative, the Syrian Iamblichus, with whom begins the decadence of Neo‐Platonism as a philosophy. Oriental superstition took the place of the severe spiritualism of Plotinus and his followers, and a philosophy that had been from the first markedly religious, is now expounded by theurgists and the devotees of strange Oriental cults. It is Mithras the Persian sun‐ god, rather than Apollo, whom Julian identifies with his “intellectual god” Helios, and Apollo plays a minor part among his manifestations. Mithras worship, which Tertullian called “a Satanic plagiarism of Christianity,” because in certain of its rites it recalled the sacraments of the Christian church, first made its appearance among the Romans in the first century B.C.(609) Less hospitably received at first than the cults of Isis and Serapis and the Great Mother of Pessinus, it gradually overpowered them and finally dominated the whole Roman Empire, though it was never welcomed by the Hellenes. For the Romans it supplied the ideals of purity, devotion and self‐control which the other cults had lacked. The worshippers of Mithras were taught to contend against the powers of evil, submitted themselves to a severe moral discipline, and their reward after death was to become as pure as the gods to whom they ascend. “If Christianity,” says Renan, “had been checked in its growth by some deadly disease, the world would have become Mithraic.” Julian, like the Emperor Commodus in the second century, had no doubt been initiated into the Mysteries of Mithras, and the severe discipline of the cult was profoundly attractive to one who had been estranged by early associations from the very similar teaching of the Christians.

Julian followed Plotinus and Iamblichus in making the supreme principle the One (ἓν) or the Good (τὸ ἀγαθὸν) which presides over the intelligible world (νοητὸς κόσμος), where rule Plato’s Ideas, now called the intelligible gods (νοητοὶ θεοί). Iamblichus had imported into the Neo‐ Platonic system the intermediary world of intellectual gods (νοεροὶ θεοί). On them Helios‐Mithras, their supreme god and centre, bestows the intelligence and creative and unifying forces that he has received from his transcendental counterpart among the intelligible gods. The third member of the triad is the world of sense‐perception governed by the sun, the visible counterpart of Helios. What distinguishes Julian’s triad(610) from other Neo‐Platonic triads is this hierarchy of three suns in the three worlds: and further, the importance that he gives to the intermediary world, the abode of Helios‐Mithras. He pays little attention to the remote intelligible world and devotes his exposition to Helios, the intellectual god, and the visible sun. Helios is the link that relates the three members of the triad. His “middleness” (μεσότης) is not only local: he is in every possible sense the mediator and unifier. μεσότης is the Aristotelian word for the “mean,” but there is no evidence that it was used with the active sense of mediation before Julian. A passage in Plutarch however seems to indicate that the “middleness” of the sun was a Persian doctrine: “The principle of good most nearly resembles light, and the principle of evil darkness, and between both is Mithras; therefore the Persians called Mithras the Mediator” (μεσίτης).(611) Naville has pointed out the resemblance between the sun as mediator and the Christian Logos, which Julian may have had in mind. Julian’s system results in a practically monotheistic worship of Helios, and here he probably parts company with Iamblichus.

But though deeply influenced by Mithraism, Julian was attempting to revive the pagan gods, and if he could not, in the fourth century, restore the ancient faith in the gods of Homer he nevertheless could not omit from his creed the numerous deities whose temples and altars he had rebuilt. Here he took advantage of the identification of Greek, Roman, and Oriental deities which had been going on for centuries. The old names, endeared by the associations of literature, could be retained without endangering the supremacy of Helios. Julian identifies Zeus, Helios, Hades, Oceanus and the Egyptian Serapis. But the omnipotent Zeus of Greek mythology is now a creative force which works with Helios and has no separate existence. Tradition had made Athene the child of Zeus, but Julian regards her as the manifestation of the intelligent forethought of Helios. Dionysus is the vehicle of his fairest thoughts, and Aphrodite a principle that emanates from him. He contrives that all the more important gods of Greece, Egypt and Persia shall play their parts as manifestations of Helios. The lesser gods are mediating demons as well as forces. His aim was to provide the Hellenic counterpart of the positive revealed religion of Christianity. Hence his insistence on the inspiration of Homer, Hesiod, and Plato, and his statement(612) that the allegorical interpretations of the mysteries are not mere hypotheses, whereas the doctrines of the astronomers deserve no higher title.

The Oration is dedicated to his friend and comrade in arms Sallust who is probably identical with the Neo‐Platonic philosopher, of the school of Iamblichus, who wrote about 360 the treatise _On the Gods and the World_. Cumont calls this “the official catechism of the Pagan empire,” and Wilamowitz regards it as the positive complement of Julian’s pamphlet _Against the Christians_. Julian’s Eighth Oration is a discourse of consolation, παραμυθητικὸς, for the departure of Sallust when Constantius recalled him from Gaul in 358.

ΙΟΥΛΙΑΝΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΟΣ

(Julian, Caesar)

ΕΙΣ ΤΟΝ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΑ ΗΛΙΟΝ ΠΡΟΣ ΣΑΛΟΥΣΤΙΟΝ

(Hymn To King Helios. Dedicated To Sallust)

[B] Προσήκειν ὑπολαμβάνω τοῦ λόγου τοῦδε μάλιστα μὲν ἅπασιν,

(What I am now about to say I consider to be of the greatest importance for all things)

ὅσσα τε γαῖαν ἔπι πνείει τε καὶ ἕρπει,(613)

(“That breathe and move upon the earth,”)

καὶ τοῦ εἶναι καὶ λογικῆς ψυχῆς καὶ νοῦ μετείληφεν, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἐμαυτῷ· καὶ γάρ εἰμι τοῦ βασιλέως ὀπαδὸς Ἡλίου. [C] τούτου δὲ ἔχω μὲν οἴκοι παρ᾽ ἐμαυτῷ τὰς πίστεις ἀκριβεστέρας· ὃ δέ μοι θέμις εἰπεῖν καὶ ἀνεμέσητον, ἐντέτηκέ μοι δεινὸς ἐκ παίδων τῶν αὐγῶν τοῦ θεοῦ πόθος, καὶ πρὸς τὸ φῶς οὕτω δὴ τὸ αἰθέριον ἐκ παιδαρίου κομιδῇ τὴν διάνοιαν ἐξιστάμην, ὥστε οὐκ εἰς αὐτὸν μόνον ἀτενὲς ὁρᾶν ἐπεθύμουν, ἀλλὰ καί, εἴ ποτε νύκτωρ ἀνεφέλου καὶ καθαρᾶς αἰθρίας οὔσης προέλθοιμι, [D] πάντα ἀθρόως ἀφεὶς τοῖς οὐρανίοις προσεῖχον κάλλεσιν, οὐκέτι ξυνιεὶς οὐδὲν εἴ τις λέγοι τι πρός με οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ὅ τι πράττοιμι προσέχων. ἐδόκουν τε περιεργότερον ἔχειν πρὸς αὐτὰ καὶ πολυπράγμων τις εἶναι, καί μέ τις ἤδη [131] ἀστρόμαντιν ὑπέλαβεν ἄρτι γενειήτην. καίτοι μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς οὔποτε τοιαύτη βίβλος εἰς ἐμὰς ἀφῖκτο χεῖρας, οὐδὲ ἠπιστάμην ὅ τί ποτέ ἐστι τὸ χρῆμά πω τότε.(614) ἀλλὰ τί ταῦτα ἐγώ φημι, μείζω ἔχων εἰπεῖν, εἰ φράσαιμι ὅπως ἐφρόνουν τὸ τηνικαῦτα περὶ θεῶν; λήθη δὲ ἔστω τοῦ σκότους ἐκείνου. τοῦ(615) δὲ ὅτι με τὸ οὐράνιον πάντη περιήστραπτε φῶς ἤγειρέ τε καὶ παρώξυνεν ἐπὶ τὴν θέαν, ὥστε ἤδη καὶ τῆς σελήνης τὴν ἐναντίαν πρὸς τὸ πᾶν αὐτὸς ἀπ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ κίνησιν ξυνεῖδον, [B] οὐδενί πω ξυντυχὼν τῶν τὰ τοιαῦτα φιλοσοφούντων, ἔστω μοι τὰ ῥηθέντα σημεῖα. ζηλῶ μὲν οὖν ἔγωγε τῆς εὐποτμίας καὶ εἴ τῳ τὸ σῶμα παρέσχε θεὸς ἐξ ἱεροῦ καὶ προφητικοῦ συμπαγὲν σπέρματος ἀναλαβόντι σοφίας ἀνοῖξαι θησαυρούς· οὐκ ἀτιμάζω δὲ ταύτην, ἧς ἠξιώθην αὐτὸς παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦδε μερίδος, ἐν τῷ κρατοῦντι καὶ βασιλεύοντι τῆς γῆς γένει τοῖς κατ᾽ ἐμαυτὸν χρόνοις γενόμενος, [C] ἀλλ᾽ ἡγοῦμαι,(616) εἴπερ χρὴ πείθεσθαι τοῖς σοφοῖς, ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων εἶναι τοῦτον κοινὸν πατέρα. λέγεται γὰρ ὀρθῶς ἄνθρωπος ἄνθροπων γεννᾶν καὶ ἥλιος,(617) ψυχὰς οὐκ ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ παρὰ τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν σπείρων(618) εἰς γῆν,(619) ἐφ᾽ ὅ τι δὲ χρῆμα δηλοῦσιν αὗται τοῖς βίοις, οὗς προαιροῦνται. κάλλιστον μὲν οὖν, εἴ τῳ ξυνηνέχθη καὶ πρὸ τριγονίας ἀπὸ πολλῶν πάνυ προπατόρων ἐφεξῆς τῷ θεῷ δουλεῦσαι, μεμπτὸν δὲ οὐδὲ ὅστις, [D] ἐπεγνωκὼς ἑαυτὸν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦδε θεράποντα φύσει, μόνος ἐξ ἁπάντων ἢ ξὺν ὀλίγοις αὑτὸν ἐπιδίδωσι τῇ θεραπείᾳ τοῦ δεσπότου.

(and have a share in existence and a reasoning soul(620) and intelligence, but above all others it is of importance to myself. For I am a follower of King Helios. And of this fact I possess within me, known to myself alone, proofs more certain that I can give.(621) But this at least I am permitted to say without sacrilege, that from my childhood an extraordinary longing for the rays of the god penetrated deep into my soul; and from my earliest years my mind was so completely swayed by the light that illumines the heavens that not only did I desire to gaze intently at the sun, but whenever I walked abroad in the night season, when the firmament was clear and cloudless, I abandoned all else without exception and gave myself up to the beauties of the heavens; nor did I understand what anyone might say to me, nor heed what I was doing myself. I was considered to be over‐ curious about these matters and to pay too much attention to them, and people went so far as to regard me as an astrologer when my beard had only just begun to grow. And yet, I call heaven to witness, never had a book on this subject come into my hands; nor did I as yet even know what that science was. But why do I mention this, when I have more important things to tell, if I should relate how, in those days, I thought about the gods? However let that darkness(622) be buried in oblivion. But let what I have said bear witness to this fact, that the heavenly light shone all about me, and that it roused and urged me on to its contemplation, so that even then I recognised of myself that the movement of the moon was in the opposite direction to the universe, though as yet I had met no one of those who are wise in these matters. Now for my part I envy the good fortune of any man to whom the god has granted to inherit a body built of the seed of holy and inspired ancestors, so that he can unlock the treasures of wisdom; nor do I despise that lot with which I was myself endowed by the god Helios, that I should be born of a house that rules and governs the world in my time; but further, I regard this god, if we may believe the wise, as the common father of all mankind.(623) For it is said with truth that man and the sun together beget man, and that the god sows this earth with souls which proceed not from himself alone but from the other gods also; and for what purpose, the souls reveal by the kind of lives that they select. Now far the best thing is when anyone has the fortune to have inherited the service of the god, even before the third generation, from a long and unbroken line of ancestors; yet it is not a thing to be disparaged when anyone, recognising that he is by nature intended to be the servant of Helios, either alone of all men, or in company with but few, devotes himself to the service of his master.)

Φέρε οὖν, ὅπως ἂν οἷοί τε ὦμεν, ὑμνήσωμεν αὐτοῦ τὴν ἑορτήν, ἣν ἡ βασιλεύουσα πόλις ἐπετησίοις ἀγάλλει θυσίαις. ἔστι μὲν οὖν, εὖ οἶδα, χαλεπὸν καὶ τὸ ξυνεῖναι περὶ αὐτοῦ μόνον, ὁπόσος τίς ἐστιν ὁ ἀφανὴς [132] ἐκ τοῦ φανεροῦ λογισαμένῳ, φράσαι δὲ ἴσως ἀδύνατον, εἰ καὶ τῆς ἀξίας ἔλαττον ἐθελήσειέ τις. ἐφικέσθαι μὲν γὰρ τοῦ πρὸς ἀξίαν εὖ οἶδα ὅτι τῶν ἁπάντων οὐδεὶς ἂν δύναιτο, τοῦ μετρίου δὲ μὴ διαμαρτεῖν ἐν τοῖς ἐπαίνοις τὸ κεφάλαιόν ἐστι τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης ἐν τῷ δύνασθαι φράζειν δυνάμεως. ἀλλ᾽ ἔμοιγε τούτου παρασταίη βοηθὸς ὅ τε λόγιος(624) Ἑρμῆς ξὺν ταῖς Μούσαις ὅ τε Μουσηγέτης Ἀπόλλων,(625) [B] ἐπεὶ καὶ αὐτῷ προσήκει τῶν λόγων, καὶ δοῖεν δὲ εἰπεῖν ὁπόσα τοῖς θεοῖς φίλα λέγεσθαί τε καὶ πιστεύεσθαι περὶ αὐτῶν. τίς οὖν ὁ τρόπος ἔσται τῶν ἐπαίνων; ἢ δῆλον ὅτι περὶ τῆς οὐσίας αὐτοῦ καὶ ὅθεν προῆλθε καὶ τῶν δυνάμεων καὶ τῶν ἐνεργειῶν διελθόντες, ὁπόσαι φανεραὶ ὅσαι τ᾽ ἀφανεῖς, καὶ περὶ τῆς τῶν ἀγαθῶν δόσεως, ἣν κατὰ πάντας ποιεῖται τοὺς κόσμους, οὐ παντάπασιν ἀπᾴδοντα ποιησόμεθα τῷ θεῷ τὰ ἐγκώμια; [C] ἀρκτέον δὲ ἐνθένδε.

(Come then, let me celebrate, as best I may, his festival which the Imperial city(626) adorns with annual sacrifices.(627) Now it is hard, as I well know, merely to comprehend how great is the Invisible, if one judge by his visible self,(628) and to tell it is perhaps impossible, even though one should consent to fall short of what is his due. For well I know that no one in the world could attain to a description that would be worthy of him, and not to fail of a certain measure of success in his praises is the greatest height to which human beings can attain in the power of utterance. But as for me, may Hermes, the god of eloquence, stand by my side to aid me, and the Muses also and Apollo, the leader of the Muses, since he too has oratory for his province, and may they grant that I utter only what the gods approve that men should say and believe about them. What, then, shall be the manner of my praise? Or is it not evident that if I describe his substance and his origin, and his powers and energies, both visible and invisible, and the gift of blessings which he bestows throughout all the worlds,(629) I shall compose an encomium not wholly displeasing to the god? With these, then, let me begin.)

Ὁ θεῖος οὗτος καὶ πάγκαλος κόσμος ἀπ᾽ ἄκρας ἁψῖδος οὐρανοῦ μέχρι γῆς ἐσχάτης ὑπὸ τῆς ἀλύτου συνεχόμενος τοῦ θεοῦ προνοίας ἐξ ἀιδίου γέγονεν ἀγέννητος(630) ἔς τε τὸν ἐπίλοιπον χρόνον ἀίδιος, οὐχ ὑπ᾽ ἄλλου του φρουρούμενος ἢ προσεχῶς μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ πέμπτου σώματος, οὗ τὸ κεφάλαιόν ἐστιν ἀκτὶς ἀελίου,(631) βαθμῷ δὲ ὥσπερ δευτέρῳ τοῦ νοητοῦ κόσμου, πρεσβυτέρως δὲ ἔτι διὰ τὸν πάντων βασιλέα, περὶ ὃν πάντα ἐστίν. [D] οὗτος τοίνυν, εἴτε τὸ ἐπέκεινα τοῦ νοῦ καλεῖν αὐτὸν θέμις εἴτε ἰδέαν τῶν ὄντων, ὃ δή φημι τὸ νοητὸν ξύμπαν, εἴτε ἕν, ἐπειδὴ πάντων τὸ ἓν δοκεῖ πως πρεσβύτατον, εἴτε ὃ Πλάτων εἴωθεν ὀνομάζειν τἀγαθόν, αὕτη δὴ οὖν ἡ μονοειδὴς τῶν ὅλων αἰτία, πᾶσι τοῖς οὖσιν ἐξηγουμένη κάλλους τε καὶ τελειότητος ἑνώσεώς τε καὶ δυνάμεως ἀμηχάνου, κατὰ τὴν ἐν αὐτῇ μένουσαν πρωτουργὸν οὐσίαν μέσον ἐκ μέσων τῶν νοερῶν [133] καὶ δημιουργικῶν αἰτιῶν Ἥλιον θεὸν μέγιστον ἀνέφηνεν ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ πάντα ὅμοιον ἑαυτῷ· καθάπερ καὶ ὁ δαιμόνιος οἴεται Πλάτων, “Τοῦτον τοίνυν,” λέγων, “ἦν δ᾽ ἐγώ, φάναι με λέγειν τὸν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἔκγονον, ὃν τἀγαθὸν ἐγέννησεν ἀνάλογον ἑαυτῷ, ὅτιπερ αὐτὸ ἐν τῷ νοητῷ τόπῳ πρός τε νοῦν καὶ τὰ νοούμενα, τοῦτο τοῦτον ἐν τῷ ὁρατῷ πρός τε ὄψιν καὶ τὰ ὁρώμενα.”(632) ἔχει μὲν δὴ τὸ φῶς αὐτοῦ ταύτην οἶμαι τὴν ἀναλογίαν πρὸς τὸ ὁρατόν, ἥνπερ πρὸς τὸ νοητὸν ἁλήθεια.(633) αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ ξύμπας, ἅτε δὴ τοῦ πρώτου [B] καὶ μεγίστου τῆς ἐδέας τἀγαθοῦ γεγονὼς ἔκγονος, ὑποστὰς αὐτοῦ περὶ τὴν μόνιμον οὐσίαν ἐξ ἀιδίου καὶ τὴν ἐν τοῖς νοεροῖς θεοῖς παρεδέξατο δυναστείαν, ὧν τἀγαθόν ἐστι τοῖς νοητοῖς αἴτιον, ταῦτα αὐτὸς τοῖς νοεροῖς νέμων. ἔστι δ᾽ αἴτιον οἶμαι τἀγαθὸν τοῖς νοητοῖς θεοῖς κάλλους, οὐσίας, τελειότητος, ἑνώσεως, συνέχον αὐτὰ καὶ περιλάμπον ἀγαθοειδεῖ δυνάμει· ταῦτα δὴ καὶ τοῖς νοεροῖς [C] Ἥλιος δίδωσιν, ἄρχειν καὶ βασιλεύειν αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τἀγαθοῦ τεταγμένος, εἰ καὶ συμπροῆλθον αὐτῷ καὶ συνυπέστησαν, ὅπως οἶαμι καὶ τοῖς νοεροῖς θεοῖς ἀγαθοειδὴς αἰτία προκαθηγουμένη τῶν ἀγαθῶν πᾶσιν ἅπαντα κατὰ νοῦν εὐθύνῃ.

(This divine and wholly beautiful universe, from the highest vault of heaven to the lowest limit of the earth, is held together by the continuous providence of the god, has existed from eternity ungenerated, is imperishable for all time to come, and is guarded immediately by nothing else than the Fifth Substance(634) whose culmination is the beams of the sun; and in the second and higher degree, so to speak, by the intelligible world; but in a still loftier sense it is guarded by the King of the whole universe, who is the centre of all things that exist. He, therefore, whether it is right to call him the Supra‐Intelligible, or the Idea of Being, and by Being I mean the whole intelligible region, or the One, since the One seems somehow to be prior to all the rest, or, to use Plato’s name for him, the Good; at any rate this uncompounded cause of the whole reveals to all existence beauty, and perfection, and oneness, and irresistible power; and in virtue of the primal creative substance that abides in it, produced, as middle among the middle and intellectual, creative causes, Helios the most mighty god, proceeding from itself and in all things like unto itself. Even so the divine Plato believed, when he writes, “Therefore (said I) when I spoke of this, understand that I meant the offspring of the Good which the Good begat in his own likeness, and that what the Good is in relation to pure reason and its objects in the intelligible world, such is the sun in the visible world in relation to sight and its objects.” Accordingly his light has the same relation to the visible world as truth has to the intelligible world. And he himself as a whole, since he is the son of what is first and greatest, namely, the Idea of the Good, and subsists from eternity in the region of its abiding substance, has received also the dominion among the intellectual gods, and himself dispenses to the intellectual gods those things of which the Good is the cause for the intelligible gods. Now the Good is, I suppose, the cause for the intelligible gods of beauty, existence, perfection, and oneness, connecting these and illuminating them with a power that works for good. These accordingly Helios bestows on the intellectual gods also, since he has been appointed by the Good to rule and govern them, even though they came forth and came into being together with him, and this was, I suppose, in order that the cause which resembles the Good may guide the intellectual gods to blessings for them all, and may regulate all things according to pure reason.)

Ἀλλὰ καὶ τρίτος ὁ φαινόμενος οὑτοσί δίσκος ἐναργῶς αἴτιός ἐστι τοῖς αἰσθητοῖς τῆς σωτηρίας, καὶ ὅσων ἔφαμεν τοῖς νοεροῖς θεοῖς τὸν μέγαν Ἥλιον, τοσούτων αἴτιος(635) καὶ ὁ φαινόμενος ὅδε τοῖς φανεροῖς. τούτων δ᾽ ἐναργεῖς αἱ πίστεις ἐκ τῶν φαινομένων [D] τὰ ἀφανῆ σκοποῦντι.(636) φέρε δὴ πρῶτον αὐτὸ τὸ φῶς οὐκ εἶδός ἐστιν ἀσώματόν τι θεῖον τοῦ κατ᾽ ἐνέργειαν διαφανοῦς; αὐτὸ δὲ ὅ, τί ποτέ ἐστι τὸ διαφανές, πᾶσι μὲν ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν συνυποκείμενον τοῖς στοιχείοις καὶ ὂν αὐτῶν προσεχὲς εἶδος, οὐ σωματοειδὲς οὐδὲ συμμιγνύμενον οὐδὲ τὰς οἰκείας σώματι προσιέμενον ποιότητας. οὔκουν ἰδίαν αὐτοῦ θέρμην ἐρεῖς,(637) οὐ τὴν ἐναντίαν αὐτῇ ψυχρότητα, οὐ τὸ σκληρόν, οὐ τὸ μαλακὸν ἀποδώσεις, [134] οὐδ᾽ ἄλλην τινὰ τῶν κατὰ τὴν ἁφὴν διαφορῶν, οὔκουν οὐδὲ γεῦσιν οὐδὲ ὀδμήν, ὄψει δὲ μόνον ὑποπίπτει πρὸς ἐνέργειαν ὑπὸ τοῦ φωτὸς ἡ τοιαύτη φύσις ἀγομένη. τὸ δὲ φῶς εἶδός ἐστι ταύτης οἷον ὕλης ὑπεστρωμένης καὶ παρεκτεινομένης τοῖς σώμασιν. αὐτοῦ δὲ τοῦ φωτὸς ὄντος ἀσωμάτου ἀκρότης ἂν εἴη τις καὶ ὥσπερ ἄνθος ἀκτῖνες. ἡ μὲν οὖν τῶν Φοινίκων δόξα, σοφῶν τὰ θεῖα καὶ ἐπιστημόνων, ἄχραντον εἶναι ἐνέργειαν αὐτοῦ τοῦ καθαροῦ [B] νοῦ τὴν ἁπανταχῇ προϊοῦσαν αὐγὴν ἔφη· οὐκ ἀπᾴδει δὲ οὐδὲ ὁ λόγος, εἴπερ αὐτὸ τὸ φῶς ἀσώματον, εἴ τις αὐτοῦ μηδὲ τὴν πηγὴν ὑπολάβοι σῶμα, νοῦ δὲ ἐνέργειαν ἄχραντον εἰς τὴν οἰκείαν ἕδραν ἐλλαμπομένην, ἣ τοῦ παντὸς οὐρανοῦ τὸ μέσον εἴληχεν, ὅθεν ἐπιλάμπουσα πάσης μὲν εὐτονίας πληροῖ τοὺς οὐρανίους κύκλους, πάντα δὲ περιλάμπει θείῳ καὶ ἀχράντῳ φωτί. τὰ μέντοι ἐν τοῖς θεοῖς ἔργα προϊόντα παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ μετρίως γε(638) ἡμῖν ὀλίγῳ πρότερον εἴρηται(639) καὶ ῥηθήσεται μετ᾽ ὀλίγον. [C] ὄσα δὲ ὁρῶμεν αὐτῇ πρῶτον ὄψει ὄνομα μόνον ἐστὶν ἔργου τητώμενον, εἰ μὴ προσλάβοι τὴν τοῦ φωτὸς ἡγεμονικὴν βοήθειαν. ὁρατὸν δὲ ὅλως εἴη ἂν τί μὴ φωτὶ πρῶτον ὥσπερ ὕλη τεχνίτῃ προσαχθέν, ἵν᾽ οἶμαι τὸ εἶδος δέξηται; καὶ γὰρ τὸ χρυσίον ἁπλῶς οὑτωσὶ κεχυμένον ἔστι μὲν χρυσίον, οὐ μὴν ἄγαλμα οὐδὲ εἰκών, πρὶν ἂν ὁ τεχνίτης αὐτῷ περιθῇ τὴν μορφήν. οὐκοῦν καὶ ὅσα πέφυκεν ὁρᾶσθαι μὴ ξὺν [D] φωτὶ τοῖς ὁρῶσι προσαγόμενα τοῦ ὁρατὰ εἶναι παντάπασιν ἐστέρηται. διδοὺς οὖν τοῖς τε ὁρῶσι τὸ ὁρᾶν τοῖς τε ὁρωμένοις τὸ ὁρᾶσθαι δύο φύσεις ἐνεργείᾳ μιᾷ τελειοῖ, ὄψιν καὶ ὁρατόν· αἱ δὲ τελειότητες εἴδη τέ εἰσι καὶ οὐσία.

(But this visible disc also, third(640) in rank, is clearly, for the objects of sense‐perception the cause of preservation, and this visible Helios(641) is the cause for the visible gods(642) of just as many blessings as we said mighty Helios bestows on the intellectual gods. And of this there are clear proofs for one who studies the unseen world in the light of things seen. For in the first place, is not light itself a sort of incorporeal and divine form of the transparent in a state of activity? And as for the transparent itself, whatever it is, since it is the underlying basis, so to speak, of all the elements, and is a form peculiarly belonging to them, it is not like the corporeal or compounded, nor does it admit qualities peculiar to corporeal substance.(643) You will not therefore say that heat is a property of the transparent, or its opposite cold, nor will you assign to it hardness or softness or any other of the various attributes connected with touch or taste or smell; but a nature of this sort is obvious to sight alone, since it is brought into activity by light. And light is a form of this substance, so to speak, which is the substratum of and coextensive with the heavenly bodies. And of light, itself incorporeal, the culmination and flower, so to speak, is the sun’s rays. Now the doctrine of the Phoenicians, who were wise and learned in sacred lore, declared that the rays of light everywhere diffused are the undefiled incarnation of pure mind. And in harmony with this is our theory, seeing that light itself is incorporeal, if one should regard its fountainhead, not as corporeal, but as the undefiled activity of mind(644) pouring light into its own abode: and this is assigned to the middle of the whole firmament, whence it sheds its rays and fills the heavenly spheres with vigour of every kind and illumines all things with light divine and undefiled. Now the activities proceeding from it and exercised among the gods have been, in some measure at least, described by me a little earlier and will shortly be further spoken of. But all that we see merely with the sight at first is a name only, deprived of activity, unless we add thereto the guidance and aid of light. For what, speaking generally, could be seen, were it not first brought into touch with light in order that, I suppose, it may receive a form, as matter is brought under the hand of a craftsman? And indeed molten gold in the rough is simply gold, and not yet a statue or an image, until the craftsman give it its proper shape. So too all the objects of sight, unless they are brought under the eyes of the beholder together with light, are altogether deprived of visibility. Accordingly by giving the power of sight to those who see, and the power of being seen to the objects of sight, it brings to perfection, by means of a single activity, two faculties, namely vision and visibility.(645) And in forms and substance are expressed its perfecting powers.)

Ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν ἴσως λεπτότερον· ᾧ δὲ παρακολουθοῦμεν ξύμπαντες, ἀμαθεῖς καὶ ἰδιῶται, φιλόσοφοι καὶ λόγιοι, τίνα ἐν τῷ παντὶ δύναμιν ἀνίσχων ἔχει καὶ καταδυόμενος ὁ θεός; νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν ἐργάζεται καὶ μεθίστησι φανερῶς καὶ τρέπει τὸ πᾶν. [135] καίτοι τίνι τοῦτο τῶν ἄλλων ἀστέρων ὑπάρχει; πῶς οὖν οὐκ ἐκ τούτων ἤδη καὶ περὶ τῶν θειοτέρων πιστεύομεν, ὡς ἄρα καὶ τὰ ὑπὲρ τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀφανῆ καὶ θεῖα νοερῶν θεῶν γένη τῆς ἀγαθοειδοῦς ἀποπληροῦται παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ δυνάμεως, ᾧ πᾶς μὲν ὑπείκει χορὸς ἀστέρων, ἕπεται δὲ ἡ γένεσις ὑπὸ τῆς τούτου κυβερνωμένη προμηθείας; [B] οἱ μὲν γὰρ πλάνητες(646) ὅτι περὶ αὐτὸν ὥσπερ βασιλέα χορεύοντες ἔν τισιν ὡρισμένοις πρὸς αὐτὸν διαστήμασιν ἁρμοδιώτατα φέρονται κύκλῳ, στηριγμούς τινας ποιούμενοι καὶ πρόσω καὶ ὀπίσω πορείαν, ὡς οἱ τῆς σφαιρικῆς ἐπιστήμονες θεωρίας ὀνομάζουσι τὰ περὶ αὐτοὺς φαινόμενα, καὶ ὡς τὸ τῆς σελήνης αὔξεται καὶ λήγει φῶς, πρὸς τὴν ἀπόστασιν ἡλίου πάσχον, πᾶσί που δῆλον. πῶς οὖν οὐκ εἰκότως καὶ τὴν πρεσβυτέραν τῶν σωμάτων ἐν τοῖς νοεροῖς [C] θεοῖς διακόσμησιν ὑπολαμβάνομεν ἀνάλογον ἔχειν τῇ τοιαύτῃ τάξει;

(However, this is perhaps somewhat subtle; but as for that guide whom we all follow, ignorant and unlearned, philosophers and rhetoricians, what power in the universe has this god when he rises and sets? Night and day he creates, and before our eyes changes and sways the universe. But to which of the other heavenly bodies does this power belong? How then can we now fail to believe, in view of this, in respect also to things more divine that the invisible and divine tribes of intellectual gods above the heavens are filled with power that works for good by him, even by him to whom the whole band of the heavenly bodies yields place, and whom all generated things follow, piloted by his providence? For that the planets dance about him as their king, in certain intervals, fixed in relation to him, and revolve in a circle with perfect accord, making certain halts, and pursuing to and fro their orbit,(647) as those who are learned in the study of the spheres call their visible motions; and that the light of the moon waxes and wanes varying in proportion to its distance from the sun, is, I think, clear to all. Then is it not natural that we should suppose that the more venerable ordering of bodies among the intellectual gods corresponds to this arrangement?)

Λάβωμεν οὖν ἐξ ἁπάντων τὸ μὲν τελεσιουργὸν ἐκ τοῦ παντὸς ἀποφαίνειν ὁρᾶν τὰ ὁρατικά· τελειοῖ γὰρ αὐτὰ διὰ τοῦ φωτός· τὸ δὲ δημιουργικὸν καὶ γόνιμον(648) ἀπὸ τῆς περὶ τὸ ξύμπαν μεταβολῆς, τὸ δὲ ἐν ἑνὶ πόντων συνεκτικὸν ἀπὸ τῆς περὶ τὰς κινήσεις πρὸς ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ συμφωνίας, τὸ δὲ μέσον ἐξ αὐτοῦ(649) μέσου, τὸ δὲ τοῖς νοεροῖς αὐτὸν ἐνιδρύσθαι βασιλέα ἐκ τῆς ἐν τοῖς πλανωμένοις μέσης τάξεως. [D] εἰ μὲν οὖν ταῦτα περί τινα τῶν ἄλλων ἐμφανῶν ὁρῶμεν θεῶν ἢ τοσαῦτα ἕτερα, μή τοι τούτῳ τὴν περὶ τοὺς θεοὺς ἡγεμονίαν προσνείμωμεν· εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἔστιν οὐδὲν αὐτῷ κοινὸν πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους ἔξω τὴς ἀγαθοεργίας, ἧς καὶ αὐτῆς μεταδέδωσι τοῖς πᾶσι, μαρτυράμενοι τούς τε Κυπρίων ἱερέας, οἱ κοινοὺς ἀποφαίνουσι βωμοὺς Ἡλίῳ καὶ Διί, πρὸ τούτων δὲ ἔτι τὸν Ἀπόλλω(650) συνεδρεύοντα τῷ θεῷ τῷδε παρακαλέσαντες μάρτυρα· φησὶ γὰρ ὁ θεὸς οὗτος “Εἷς Ζεύς, εἷς Ἀίδης, [136] εἷς Ἥλιός ἐστι Σέραπις· κοινὴν ὑπολάβωμεν”, μᾶλλον δὲ μίαν Ἡλίου καὶ Διὸς ἐν τοῖς νοεροῖς θεοῖς δυναστείαν· ὅθεν μοι δοκεῖ καὶ Πλάτων οὐκ ἀπεικότως φρόνιμον θεὸν Ἅιδην ὀνομάσαι. καλοῦμεν δὲ τὸν αὐτὸν τοῦτον καὶ Σάραπιν, τὸν ἀιδῆ δηλονότι καὶ νοερόν, πρὸς ὅν φησιν(651) ἄνω πορεύεσθαι τὰς ψυχὰς τῶν ἄριστα βιωσάντων καὶ δικαιότατα. μὴ γὰρ δή τις ὑπολάβῃ τοῦτον, [B] ὃν οἱ μῦθοι πείθουσι φρίττειν, ἀλλὰ τὸν πρᾷον καὶ μείλιχον, ὃς ἀπολύει παντελῶς τῆς γενέσεως τὰς ψυχάς, οὐχὶ δὲ λυθείσας αὐτὰς σώμασιν ἑτέροις προσηλοῖ(652) κολάζων καὶ πραττόμενος δίκας, ἀλλὰ πορεύων ἄνω καὶ ἀνατείνων τὰς ψυχὰς ἐπὶ τὸν νοητὸν κόσμον. ὅτι δὲ οὐδὲ νεαρὰ παντελῶς ἐστιν ἡ δόξα, προύλαβον δὲ αὐτὴν οἱ πρεσβύτατοι τῶν ποιητῶν, Ὅμηρός τε καὶ Ἡσίοδος, εἴτε καὶ νοοῦντες οὅτως εἴτε καὶ ἐπιπνοίᾳ θείᾳ καθάπερ οἱ μάντεις ἐνθουσιῶντες πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν, [C] ἐνθένδ᾽ ἂν γίγνοιτο γνώριμον. ὁ μὲν γενεαλογῶν αὐτὸν Ὑπερίονος ἔφη καὶ Θείας, μόνον οὐχὶ διὰ τούτων αἰνιττόμενος τοῦ πάντων ὑπερέχοντος αὐτὸν ἔκγονον(653) γνήσιον φῦναι· ὁ γὰρ Ὑπερίων τίς ἂν ἕτερος εἴη παρὰ τοῦτον; ἡ Θεία δὲ αὐτὴ τρόπον ἕτερον οὐ τὸ θειότατον τῶν ὄντων λέγεται; μὴ δὲ συνδυασμὸν μηδὲ γάμους ὑπολαμβάνωμεν, ἄπιστα καὶ παράδοξα ποιητικῆς μούσης ἀθύρματα. [D] πατέρα δὲ αὐτοῦ καὶ γεννήτορα νομίζωμεν τὸν θειότατον καὶ ὑπέρτατον· τοιοῦτος δὲ τίς ἂν ἄλλος(654) εἴη τοῦ πάντων ἐπέκεινα καὶ περὶ ὃν πάντα καὶ οὗ ἕνεκα πάντα ἐστίν; Ὅμηρος δὲ αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς Ὑπερίονα καλεῖ,(655) καὶ δείκνυσί γε αὐτοῦ τὸ αὐτεξούσιον καὶ πάσης ἀνάγκης κρεῖττον. ὁ γάρ τοι Ζεύς, ὡς ἐκεῖνός φησιν, ἁπάντων ὢν κύριος τοὺς ἄλλους προσαναγκάζει· ἐν δὲ τῷ μύθῳ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦδε λέγοντος,(656) ὅτι ἄρα διὰ τὴν ἀσέβειαν τῶν Ὀδυσσέως ἑταίρων [137] ἀπολείψει τὸν Ὄλυμπον, οὐκέτι φησίν

(Let us therefore comprehend, out of all his functions, first his power to perfect, from the fact that he makes visible the objects of sight in the universe, for through his light he perfects them; secondly, his creative and generative power from the changes wrought by him in the universe; thirdly, his power to link together all things into one whole, from the harmony of his motions towards one and the same goal; fourthly, his middle station we can comprehend from himself, who is midmost; and fifthly, the fact that he is established as king among the intellectual gods, from his middle station among the planets. Now if we see that these powers, or powers of similar importance, belong to any one of the other visible deities, let us not assign to Helios leadership among the gods. But if he has nothing in common with those other gods except his beneficent energy, and of this too he gives them all a share, then let us call to witness the priests of Cyprus who set up common altars to Helios and Zeus; but even before them let us summon as witness Apollo, who sits in council with our god. For this god declares: “Zeus, Hades, Helios Serapis, three gods in one godhead!”(657) Let us then assume that, among the intellectual gods, Helios and Zeus have a joint or rather a single sovereignty. Hence I think that with reason Plato called Hades a wise god.(658) And we call this same god Hades Serapis also, namely the Unseen(659) and Intellectual, to whom Plato says the souls of those who have lived most righteously and justly mount upwards. For let no one conceive of him as the god whom the legends teach us to shudder at, but as the mild and placable, since he completely frees our souls from generation: and the souls that he has thus freed he does not nail to other bodies, punishing them and exacting penalties, but he carries aloft and lifts up our souls to the intelligible world. And that this doctrine is not wholly new, but that Homer and Hesiod the most venerable of the poets held it before us, whether this was their own view or, like seers, they were divinely inspired with a sacred frenzy for the truth, is evident from the following. Hesiod, in tracing his genealogy, said(660) that Helios is the son of Hyperion and Thea, intimating thereby that he is the true son of him who is above all things. For who else could Hyperion(661) be? And is not Thea herself, in another fashion, said to be most divine of beings? But as for a union or marriage, let us not conceive of such a thing, since that is the incredible and paradoxical trifling of the poetic Muse. But let us believe that his father and sire was the most divine and supreme being; and who else could have this nature save him who transcends all things, the central point and goal of all things that exist? And Homer calls him Hyperion after his father and shows his unconditioned nature, superior to all constraint. For Zeus, as Homer says, since he is lord of all constrains the other gods. And when, in the course of the myth, Helios says that on account of the impiety of the comrades of Odysseus(662) he will forsake Olympus, Zeus no longer says,)

Αὐτῇ κεν γαίῃ ἐρύσαιμ᾽ αὐτῇ τε θαλάσσῃ,

(“Then with very earth would I draw you up and the sea
withal,”(663))

οὐδὲ ἀπειλεῖ δεσμὸν οὐδὲ βίαν, ἀλλὰ τὴν δίκην φησὶν ἐπιθήσειν τοῖς ἡμαρτηκόσιν, αὐτὸν δὲ ἀξιοῖ φαίνειν ἐν τοῖς θεοῖς. ἆρ᾽ οὐξὶ διὰ τούτων πρὸς τῷ αὐτεξουσίῳ καὶ τελεσιουργὸν εἶναί φησι τὸν Ἥλιον; ἐπὶ τί γὰρ αὐτοῦ οἱ θεοὶ δέονται, πλὴν εἰ μὴ πρὸς τὴν οὐσίαν [B] καὶ τὸ εἶναι ἀφανῶς ἐναστράπτων ὧν ἔφαμεν ἀγαθῶν ἀποπληρωτικὸς τυγχάνοι; τὸ γὰρ

(nor does he threaten him with fetters or violence, but he says that he will inflict punishment on the guilty and bids Helios go on shining among the gods. Does he not thereby declare that besides being unconditioned, Helios has also the power to perfect? For why do the gods need him unless by sending his light, himself invisible, on their substance and existence, he fulfils for them the blessings of which I spoke? For when Homer says that)

Ἠέλιόν τ᾽ ἀκάμαντα βοῶπις πότνια Ἥρη
Πέμψεν ἐπ᾽ Ὠκεανοῖο ῥοὰς ἀέκοντα νέεσθαι(664)

(“Ox‐eyed Hera, the queen, sent unwearied Helios to go, all
unwilling, to the streams of Oceanus,”)

πρὸ τοῦ καιροῦ φησι νομισθῆναι τὴν νύκτα διὰ τινα χαλεπὴν ὁμίχλην. αὕτη γὰρ ἡ θεός που, καὶ ἄλλοθι τῆς ποιήσεώς φησιν,(665)

(he means that, by reason of a heavy mist, it was thought to be night before the proper time. And this mist is surely the goddess herself, and in another place also in the poem he says,)

ἠέρα δ᾽ Ἥρη
Πίτνα πρόσθε βαθεῖαν. [C]

(“Hera spread before them a thick mist.”)

ἁλλὰ τὰ μὲν τῶν ποιητῶν χαίρειν ἐάσωμεν· ἔχει γὰρ μετὰ τοῦ θείου πολὺ καὶ τἀνθρώπινον· ἃ δὲ ἡμᾶς ἔοικεν αὐτὸς ὁ θεὸς διδάσκειν ὑπέρ τε αὑτοῦ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων, ἐκεῖνα ἤδη διέλθωμεν.

(But let us leave the stories of the poets alone. For along with what is inspired they contain much also that is merely human. And let me now relate what the god himself seems to teach us, both about himself and the other gods.)

Ὁ περὶ γῆν τόπος ἐν τῷ γίνεσθαι τὸ εἶναι ἔχει. τίς οὖν ἐστιν ὁ τὴν ἀιδιότητα δωρούμενος αὐτῷ; ἆρ᾽ οὐχ ὁ ταῦτα μέτροις ὡρισμένοις συνέχων; ἄπειρον μὲν γὰρ [D] εἶναι φύσιν σώματος οὐχ οἷόν τ᾽ ἦν, ἐπεὶ μηδὲ ἀγέννητός ἐστι μηδὲ αὐθυπόστατος· ἑκ δὲ τῆς οὐσίας εἰ πάντως ἐγίνετό τι συνεχῶς, ἀνελύετο δὲ εἰς αὐτὴν μηδέν, ἐπέλειπεν ἂν τῶν γιγνομένων ἡ οὐσία. τὴν δὴ τοιαύτην φύσιν ὁ θεὸς ὅδε μέτρῳ κινούμενος προσιὼν μὲν ὀρθοῖ καὶ ἐγείρει, πόρρω δὲ ἀπιὼν ἐλαττοῖ καὶ φθείρει, μᾶλλον δὲ αὐτὸς ἀεὶ ζωοποιεὶ κινῶν καὶ ἐποχετεύων αὐτῇ τὴν ζωὴν· ἡ δὲ ἀπόλειψις αὐτοῦ καὶ ἡ πρὸς θάτερα [138] μετάστασις αἰτία γίνεται φθορᾶς τοῖς φθίνουσιν. ἀεὶ μὲν οὖν ἡ παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ τῶν ἀγαθῶν δόσις ἴση κάτεισιν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν· ἄλλοτε γὰρ ἄλλη δέχεται τὰ τοιαῦτα χώρα πρὸς τὸ μήτε τὴν γένεσιν ἐπιλείπειν μήτε τοῦ συνήθους ποτὲ τὸν θεὸν ἔλαττον ἢ πλέον εὖ ποιῆσαι τὸν παθητὸν κόσμον. ἡ γὰρ ταυτότης ὥσπερ τῆς οὐσίας, οὕτω δὲ καὶ τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐν τοῖς θεοῖς καὶ πρό γε τῶν ἄλλων παρὰ τῷ βασιλεῖ τῶν ὅλων Ἡλίῳ, ὃς καὶ τὴν κίνησιν ἁπλουστάτην ὑπὲρ ἅπαντας ποιεῖται τοὺς τῷ παντὶ [B] τὴν ἐναντίαν φερομένους· ὃ δὴ καὶ αὐτὸ τῆς πρὸς τοὺς ἄλλους ὑπεροχῆς αὐτοῦ σημεῖον ποιεῖται ὁ κλεινὸς Ἀριστοτέλης· ἀλλὰ καὶ παρὰ τῶν ἄλλων νοερῶν θεῶν οὐκ ἀμυδραὶ καθήκουσιν εἰς τὸν κόσμον τόνδε δυνάμεις. εἶτα τί τοῦτο; μὴ γὰρ ἀποκλείομεν τοὺς ἄλλους τούτῳ τὴν ἡγεμονίαν ὁμολογοῦντες δεδόσθαι; πολὺ δὲ πλέον ἐκ τῶν ἐμφανῶν ἀξιοῦμεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀφανῶν πιστεύειν. ὥσπερ [C] γὰρ τὰς ἐνδιδομένας ἅπασιν ἐκεῖθεν δυνάμεις εἰς τὴν γῆν οὗτος φαίνεται τελεσιουργῶν καὶ συναρμόζων πρός τε ἑαυτὸν καὶ τὸ πᾶν, οὕτω δὴ νομιστέον καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀφανέσιν αὐτῶν τὰς συνουσίας ἔχειν πρὸς ἀλλήλας, ἡγεμόνα μὲν ἐκείνην, συμφωνούσας δὲ πρὸς αὐτὴν τὰς ἄλλας ἅμα. ἐπεὶ καί, εί μέσον ἔφαμεν ἐν μέσοις ἱδρῦσθαι τὸν θεὸν τοῖς νοεροῖς θεοῖς, ποταπή τις ἡ μεσότης ἐστὶν ὧν αὖ χρὴ μέσον αὐτὸν ὑπολαβεῖν, αὐτὸς ἡμῖν ὁ βασιλεὺς εἰπεῖν Ἥλιος δοίη.