Chapter XII: Part 12

(I said then that Helios holds sway among the intellectual gods in that he unites into one, about his own undivided substance, a great multitude of the gods: and further, I demonstrated that among the gods whom we can perceive, who revolve eternally in their most blessed path, he is leader and lord; since he bestows on their nature its generative power, and fills the whole heavens not only with visible rays of light but with countless other blessings that are invisible; and, further, that the blessings which are abundantly supplied by the other visible gods are made perfect by him, and that even prior to this the visible gods themselves are made perfect by his unspeakable and divine activity. In the same manner we must believe that on this our world of generation certain gods have alighted who are linked together with Helios: and these gods guide the four‐fold nature of the elements, and inhabit, together with the three higher races,(744) those souls which are upborne by the elements. But for the divided souls(745) also, of how many blessings is he the cause! For he extends to them the faculty of judging, and guides them with justice, and purifies them by his brilliant light. Again, does he not set in motion the whole of nature and kindle life therein, by bestowing on it generative power from on high? But for the divided natures also, is not he the cause that they journey to their appointed end?(746) For Aristotle says that man is begotten by man and the sun together. Accordingly the same theory about King Helios must surely apply to all the other activities of the divided souls. Again, does he not produce for us rain and wind and the clouds in the skies, by employing, as though it were matter, the two kinds of vapour? For when he heats the earth he draws up steam and smoke, and from these there arise not only the clouds but also all the physical changes on our earth, both great and small.)

Τί οὖν περὶ(747) τῶν αὐτῶν ἐπέξειμι μακρότερα, ἐξὸν ἐπὶ τὸ πέρας ἤδη βαδίζειν ὑμνήσαντα πρότερον ὅσα ἔδωκεν ἀνθρώποις Ἥλιος ἀγαθά; γινόμενοι γὰρ ἐξ αὐτοῦ τρεφόμεθα παρ᾽ ἐκείνου. [B] τὰ μὲν οὖν θειότερα καὶ ὅσα ταῖς ψυχαῖς δίδωσιν ἀπολύων αὐτὰς τοῦ σώματος, εἶτα ἐπανάγων ἐπὶ τὰς τοῦ θεοῦ συγγενεῖς οὐσίας, καὶ τὸ λεπτὸν καὶ εὔτονον τῆς θείας αὐγῆς οἷον ὄχημα τῆς εἰς τὴν γένεσιν ἀσφαλοῦς διδόμενον καθόδου ταῖς ψυχαῖς ὑμνείσθω τε ἄλλοις ἀξίως καὶ ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν πιστευέσθω μᾶλλον ἢ δεικνύσθω· τὰ δὲ ὅσα γνώριμα πέφυκε τοῖς πᾶσιν οὐκ ὀκνητέον ἐπεξελθεῖν. οὐρανόν φησι Πλάτων(748) ἡμῖν γενέσθαι σοφίας διδάσκαλον. ἐνθένδε γὰρ [C] ἀριθμοῦ κατενοήσαμεν φύσιν, ἧς τὸ διαφέρον οὐκ ἄλλως ἢ διὰ τῆς ἡλίου περιόδου κατενοήσαμεν. φησί τοι καὶ αὐτὸς Πλάτων ἡμέραν καὶ νύκτα πρότερον. εἶτα ἐκ τοῦ φωτὸς τῆς σελήνης, ὃ δὴ δίδοται τῇ θεῷ ταύτῃ παρ᾽ ἡλίου, μετὰ τοῦτο προήλθομεν ἐπὶ πλέον τῆς τοιαύτης συνέσεως, ἁπανταχοῦ τῆς πρὸς τὸν θεὸν τοῦτον στοχαζόμενοι συμφωνίας. ὅπερ αὐτός πού φησιν,(749) ὡς ἄρα τὸ γένος ἡμῶν ἐπίπονον ὂν φύσει θεοὶ ἐλεήσαντες [D] ἔδωκαν ἡμῖν τὸν Διόνυσον καὶ τὰς Μούσας συγχορευτάς. ἐφάνη δὲ ἡμῖν Ἥλιος τούτων κοινὸς ἡγεμών, Διονύσου μὲν πατὴρ ὑμνούμενος, ἡγεμῶν δὲ Μουσῶν. ὁ δὲ αὐτῷ συμβασιλεύων Ἀπόλλων οὐ πανταχοῦ μὲν ἀνῆκε τῆς γῆς χρηστήρια, σοφίαν δὲ ἔδωκεν ἀνθρώποις ἔνθεον, ἐκόσμησε δὲ ἱεροῖς καὶ πολιτικοῖς τὰς πόλεις θεσμοῖς; οὗτος ἡμέρωσε μὲν διὰ τῶν Ἑλληνικῶν ἀποικιῶν τὰ πλεῖστα τῆς οἰκουμένης, παρεσκεύασε δὲ ῥᾷον ὑπακοῦσαι Ῥωμαίοις ἔχουσι καὶ αὐτοῖς οὐ [153] γένος μόνον Ἑλληνικόν, ἀλλὰ καὶ θεσμοὺς ἱεροὺς καὶ τὴν περὶ τοὺς θεοὺς εὐπιστίαν ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἰς τέλος Ἑλληνικὴν καταστησαμένοις τε καὶ φυλάξασι, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις καὶ τὸν περὶ τὴν πόλιν κόσμον οὐδεμιᾶς τῶν ἄριστα πολιτευσαμένων πόλεων καταστησαμένοις φαυλότερον, εἰ μὴ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπασῶν, ὅσαι γε ἐν χρήσει γεγόνασι πολιτεῖαι, κρείσσονα· ἀνθ᾽ ὧν οἶμαι καὶ αὐτὸς ἔγνων τὴν πόλιν Ἑλληνίδα γένος τε καὶ πολιτείαν.

(But why do I deal with the same questions at such length, when I am free at last to come to my goal, though not till I have first celebrated all the blessings that Helios has given to mankind? For from him are we born, and by him are we nourished. But his more divine gifts, and all that he bestows on our souls when he frees them from the body and then lifts them up on high to the region of those substances that are akin to the god; and the fineness and vigour of his divine rays, which are assigned as a sort of vehicle for the safe descent of our souls into this world of generation; all this, I say, let others celebrate in fitting strains, but let me believe it rather than demonstrate its truth. However, I need not hesitate to discuss so much as is known to all. Plato says that the sky is our instructor in wisdom. For from its contemplation we have learned to know the nature of number, whose distinguishing characteristics we know only from the course of the sun. Plato himself says that day and night were created first.(750) And next, from observing the moon’s light, which was bestowed on the goddess by Helios, we later progressed still further in the understanding of these matters: in every case conjecturing the harmony of all things with this god. For Plato himself says somewhere that our race was by nature doomed to toil, and so the gods pitied us and gave us Dionysus and the Muses as playfellows. And we recognised that Helios is their common lord, since he is celebrated as the father of Dionysus and the leader of the Muses. And has not Apollo, who is his colleague in empire, set up oracles in every part of the earth, and given to men inspired wisdom, and regulated their cities by means of religious and political ordinances? And he has civilised the greater part of the world by means of Greek colonies, and so made it easier for the world to be governed by the Romans. For the Romans themselves not only belong to the Greek race, but also the sacred ordinances and the pious belief in the gods which they have established and maintain are, from beginning to end, Greek. And beside this they have established a constitution not inferior to that of any one of the best governed states, if indeed it be not superior to all others that have ever been put into practice. For which reason I myself recognise that our city is Greek, both in descent and as to its constitution.)

[B] Τί ἔτι σοι λέγω, πῶς τῆς ὑγιείας καὶ σωτηρίας πάντων προυνόησε τὸν σωτῆρα τῶν ὅλων ἀπογεννήσας Ἀσκληπιόν, ὅπως δὲ ἀρετὴν ἔδωκε παντοίαν Ἀφροδίτην Ἀθηνᾷ συγκαταπέμψας ἡμῖν, κηδεμόνα μόνον οὐχὶ νόμον θέμενος, πρὸς μηδὲν ἕτερον χρῆσθαι τῇ μίξει ἢ πρὸς τὴν γέννησιν(751) τοῦ ὁμοίου; διά τοι τοῦτο καὶ κατὰ τὰς περιόδους αὐτοῦ πάντα τὰ φυόμενα καὶ τὰ παντοδαπῶν ζῴων φῦλα κινεῖται [C] πρὸς ἀπογέννησιν τοῦ ὁμοίου. τί χρὴ τὰς ἀκτῖνας αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ φῶς σεμνῦναι; νὺξ γοῦν ἀσέληνός τε καὶ ἄναστρος ὅπως ἐστὶ φοβερά, ἆρα ἐννοεῖ τις, ἵν᾽ ἐντεῦθεν, ὁπόσον ἔχομεν ἀγαθὸν ἐξ ἡλίου τὸ φῶς, τεκμήρηται; τοῦτο δὲ αὐτὸ συνεχὲς παρέχων καὶ ἀμεσολάβητον νυκτὶ ἐν οἷς χρὴ τόποις ἀπὸ τῆς σελήνης τοῖς ἄνω, ἐκεχειρίαν ἡμῖν διὰ τῆς νυκτὸς τῶν πόνων δίδωσιν. οὐδὲν ἂν γένοιτο πέρας τοῦ λόγου, εἰ πάντα ἐπεξιέναι [D] τις ἐθελήσειε τὰ τοιαῦτα. ἓν γὰρ οὐδέν ἐστιν ἀγαθὸν κατὰ τὸν βίον, ὃ μὴ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦδε λαβόντες ἔχομεν, ἤτοι παρὰ μόνου τέλειον, ἢ διὰ τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ τελειούμενον.

(Shall I now go on to tell you how Helios took thought for the health and safety of all men by begetting Asclepios(752) to be the saviour of the whole world? and how he bestowed on us every kind of excellence by sending down to us Aphrodite together with Athene, and thus laid down for our protection what is almost a law, that we should only unite to beget our kind? Surely it is for this reason that, in agreement with the course of the sun, all plants and all the tribes of living things are aroused to bring forth their kind. What need is there for me to glorify his beams and his light? For surely everyone knows how terrible is night without a moon or stars, so that from this he can calculate how great a boon for us is the light of the sun? And this very light he supplies at night, without ceasing, and directly, from the moon in those upper spaces where it is needed, while he grants us through the night a truce from toil. But there would be no limit to the account if one should endeavour to describe all his gifts of this sort. For there is no single blessing in our lives which we do not receive as a gift from this god, either perfect from him alone, or, through the other gods, perfected by him.)

Ἡμῖν δέ ἐστιν ἐρχηγὸς καὶ τῆς πόλεως. οἰκεῖ γοῦν αὐτῆς οὐ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν μόνον μετὰ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς καὶ Ἀφροδίτης Ζεὺς ὁ πάντων πατὴρ ὑμνούμενος, ἀλλὰ καὶ Ἀπόλλων ἐπὶ τῷ Παλλαντίῳ λόφῳ καὶ Ἥλιος αὐτὸς τοῦτο τὸ(753) κοινὸν ὄνομα πᾶσι καὶ γνώριμον. [154] ὅπως δὲ αὐτῷ πάντη καὶ πάντα προσήκομεν οἱ Ῥωμυλίδαι τε καὶ Αἰνεάδαι, πολλὰ ἔχων εἰπεῖν ἐρῶ βραχέα τὰ γνωριμώτατα. γέγονε, φασίν, ἐξ Ἀφροδίτης Αἰνείας, ἥπερ ἐστὶν ὑπουργὸς Ἡλίῳ καὶ συγγενής. αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν κτίστην ἡμῶν τῆς πόλεως Ἄρεως ἡ φήμη παρέδωκε παῖδα, πιστουμένη τὸ παράδοξον τῶν λόγων διὰ τῶν ὕστερον ἐπακολουθησάντων σημείων. ὑπέσχε γὰρ αὐτῷ, φασί, μαζὸν θήλεια λύκος. ἐγὼ δὲ ὅτι μὲν Ἄρης Ἄζιζος λεγόμενος ὑπὸ τῶν οἰκούντων τὴν Ἔμεσαν(754) [B] Σύρων Ἡλίου προπομπεύει, καίπερ εἰδὼς καὶ προειπὼν ἀφήσειν μοι δοκῶ. τοῦ χάριν δὲ ὁ λύκος Ἄρει μᾶλλον, οὐχὶ δὲ Ἡλίῳ προσήκει; καίτοι λυκάβαντά φασιν ἀπὸ τοῦ λύκου τὸυ ἐνιαύσιον χρόνον· ὀνομάζει δὲ αὐτὸν οὐχ Ὅμηρος μόνον οὐδὲ οἱ γνώριμοι τῶν Ἑλλήνων τοῦτο τὸ ὄνομα, πρὸς δὲ καὶ ὁ θεός· διανύων γάρ φησιν

(Moreover he is the founder of our city.(755) For not only does Zeus, who is glorified as the father of all things, inhabit its citadel(756) together with Athene and Aphrodite, but Apollo also dwells on the Palatine Hill, and Helios himself under this name of his which is commonly known to all and familiar to all. And I could say much to prove that we, the sons of Romulus and Aeneas, are in every way and in all respects connected with him, but I will mention briefly only what is most familiar. According to the legend, Aeneas is the son of Aphrodite, who is subordinate to Helios and is his kinswoman. And the tradition has been handed down that the founder of our city was the son of Ares, and the paradoxical element in the tale has been believed because of the portents which later appeared to support it. For a she‐wolf, they say, gave him suck. Now I am aware that Ares, who is called Azizos by the Syrians who inhabit Emesa, precedes Helios in the sacred procession, but I mentioned it before, so I think I may let that pass. But why is the wolf sacred only to Ares and not to Helios? Yet men call the period of a year “lycabas,”(757) which is derived from “wolf.” And not only Homer(758) and the famous men of Greece call it by this name, but also the god himself, when he says:)

Ὀρχηθμῷ λυκάβαντα δυωδεκάμηνα κέλευθα.

(“With dancing does he bring to a close his journey of twelve
months, even the lycabas.”)

[C] βούλει οὖν ἔτι σοι φράσω μεῖζον τεκμήριον, ὅτι ἄρα ὁ τῆς πόλεως ἡμῶν οἰκιστὴς οὐχ ὑπ᾽ Ἀρεως κατεπέμφθη μόνον, ἀλλ᾽ ἴσως αὐτῷ τῆς μὲν τοῦ σώματος κατασκευῆς συνεπελάβετο δαίμων ἀρήιος καὶ γενναῖος, ὁ λεγόμενος ἐπιφοιτῆσαι τῇ Σιλβίᾳ λουτρὰ τῇ θεῷ φερούσῃ, τὸ δὲ ὅλον ἐξ Ἡλίου κατῆλθεν ἡ ψυχὴ τοῦ θεοῦ Κυρίνου· πειστέον γὰρ οἶμαι τῇ φήμῃ. [D] σύνοδος ἀκριβὴς τῶν τὴν ἐμφανῆ κατανειμαμένων βασιλείαν Ἡλίου τε καὶ Σελήνης ὥσπερ οὖν εἰς τὴν γῆν κατήγαγεν, οὕτω καὶ ἀνήγαγεν ὃν(759) ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἐδέξατο, τὸ θνητὸν ἀφανίσασα πυρὶ κεραυνίῳ τοῦ σώματος. οὕτω προδήλως ἡ τῶν περιγείων δημιουργὸς ὑπὸ αὐτὸν ἄκρως γενομένη τὸν ἥλιον ἐδέξατο εἰς γῆν πεμπόμενον διὰ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς τῆς Προνοίας τὸν Κυρῖνον, ἀνιπτάμενόν τε αὖθις ἀπὸ γῆς ἐπὶ τὸν βασιλέα τῶν ὅλων ἐπανήγαγεν αὐτίκα Ἥλιον.

(Now do you wish me to bring forward a still greater proof that the founder of our city was sent down to earth, not by Ares alone, though perhaps some noble daemon with the character of Ares did take part in the fashioning of his mortal body, even he who is said to have visited Silvia(760) when she was carrying water for the bath of the goddess,(761) but the whole truth is that the soul of the god Quirinus(762) came down to earth from Helios; for we must, I think, believe the sacred tradition. And the close conjunction of Helios and Selene, who share the empire over the visible world, even as it had caused his soul to descend to earth, in like manner caused to mount upwards him whom it received back from the earth, after blotting out with fire from a thunderbolt(763) the mortal part of his body. So clearly did she who creates earthly matter, she whose place is at the furthest point below the sun, receive Quirinus when he was sent down to earth by Athene, goddess of Forethought; and when he took flight again from earth she led him back straightway to Helios, the King of the All.)

[155] Ἔτι σοι βούλει περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν φράσω τεκμήριον τοῦ Νόμα τοῦ βασιλέως ἔργον; ἄσβεστον ἐξ ἡλίου φυλάττουσι φλόγα παρθένοι παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἱεραὶ κατὰ τὰς διαφόρους ὥρας, αἳ δὴ τὸ γενόμενον(764) περὶ τὴν γῆν ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πῦρ φυλάττουσιν. ἔτι τούτων μεῖζον ἔχω σοι φράσαι τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦδε τεκμήριον, αὐτοῦ τοῦ θειοτάτου βασιλέως ἔργον. οἱ μῆνες ἅπασι μὲν τοῖς ἄλλοις ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς σελήνης ἀριθμοῦνται, [B] μόνοι δὲ ἡμεῖς καὶ Αἰγύπτιοι πρὸς τὰς ἡλίου κινήσεις ἑκάστου μετροῦμεν ἐνιαυτοῦ τὰς ἡμέρας. εἴ σοι μετὰ τοῦτο φαίην, ὡς καὶ τὸν Μίθραν τιμῶμεν καὶ ἄγομεν Ἡλίῳ τετραετηρικοὺς ἀγῶνας, ἐρῶ νεώτερα· βέλτιον δὲ ἴσως ἕν τι τῶν παλαιοτέρων προθεῖναι. τοῦ γὰρ ἐνιαυσιαίου κύκλου τὴν ἀρχὴν ἄλλος ἄλλοθεν ποιούμενος, οἱ μὲν τὴν ἐαρινὴν ἰσημερίαν, οἱ δὲ τὴν ἀκμὴν τοῦ θέρους, οἱ πολλοὶ δὲ φθίνουσαν ἤδη τὴν ὀπώραν, [C] Ἡλίου τὰς ἐμφανεστάτας ὑμνοῦσι δωρεάς ὁ μέν τις τὴν τῆς ἐργασίας ἐνδιδομένην εὐκαιρίαν, ὅτε ἡ γῆ θάλλει καὶ γαυριᾷ, φυομένων ἄρτι των καρπῶν ἁπάντων, γίνεται δὲ ἐπιτῆδεια πλεῖσθαι τὰ πελάγη καὶ τὸ τοῦ χειμῶνος ἀηδὲς καὶ σκυθρωπὸν ἐπὶ τὸ φαιδρότερον μεθίσταται, οἱ δὲ τὴν τοῦ θέρους ἐτίμησαν ὥραν,(765) ὡς ἀσφαλῶς τότε ὑπὶρ τῆς τῶν καρπῶν ἔχοντες θαρρῆσαι γενέσεως, τῶν μὲν σπερμάτων ἤδη συνειλεγμένων, ἀκμαίας δὲ οὔσης [D] τῆς ὀπώρας ἤδη και πεπαινομένων τῶν ἐπικειμένων καρπῶν τοῖς δένδροις. ἄλλοι δὲ τούτων ἔτι κομψότεροι τέλος ἐνιαυτοῦ ὑπέλαβον τὴν τελειοτάτην τῶν καρπῶν ἁπάντων ἀκμὴν καὶ φθίσιν· ταῦτά τοι καὶ φθινούσης ἤδη τῆς ὀπώρας ἄγουσι τὰς κατ᾽ ἐνιαυτὸν νουμηνίας. οἱ δὲ ἡμέτεροι προπάτορες ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ θειοτάτου βασιλέως τοῦ Νόμα μειζόνως ἔτι τὸν θεὸν τοῦτον σεβόμενοι τὰ μὲν τῆς χρείας ἀπέλιπον, ἅτε οἶμαι φύσει θεῖοι καὶ περιττοὶ τὴν διάνοιαν, αὐτὸν δὲ εἶδον τούτων τὸν αἴτιον [156] καὶ ἄγειν ἔταξαν συμφώνως ἐν τῇ παρούσῃ τῶν ὡρῶν τὴν νουμηνίαν, ὁπότε ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἥλιος αὖθις ἐπανάγει πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀφεὶς τῆς μεσημβρίας τὰ ἔσχατα καὶ ὥσπερ περὶ νύσσαν τὸν αἰγοκέρωτα κάμψας ἀπὸ τοῦ νότου πρὸς τὸν βορρᾶν ἔρχεται μεταδώσων ἡμῖν τῶν ἐπετείων ἀγαθῶν. ὅτι δὲ τοῦτο ἀκριβῶς ἐκεῖνοι διανοηθέντες οὕτως ἐνεστήσαντο τὴν ἐπέτειον νουμηνίαν, ἐνθένδ᾽ ἄν τις κατανοήσειεν. οὐ γὰρ οἶμαι καθ᾽ ἣν ἡμέραν ὁ θεὸς τρέπεται, καθ᾽ ἣν δὲ τοῖς [B] πᾶσιν ἐμφανὴς γίνεται χωρῶν ἀπὸ τῆς μεσημβρίας ἐς τὰς ἄρκτους ἄταξαν οὗτοι τὴν ἑορτήν. οὔπω μὲν γὰρ ἦν αὐτοῖς ἡ τῶν κανόνων λεπτότης γνώριμος, οὓς ἐξηῦρον μὲν Χαλδαῖοι καὶ Αἰγύπτιοι, Ἵππαρχος δὲ καὶ Πτολεμαῖος ἐτελειώσαντο, κρίνοντες δὲ αἰσθήσει τοῖς φαινομένοις ἠκολούθουν.

(Do you wish me to mention yet another proof of this, I mean the work of King Numa?(766) In Rome maiden priestesses(767) guard the undying flame of the sun at different hours in turn; they guard the fire that is produced on earth by the agency of the god. And I can tell you a still greater proof of the power of this god, which is the work of that most divine king himself. The months are reckoned from the moon by, one may say, all other peoples; but we and the Egyptians alone reckon the days of every year according to the movements of the sun. If after this I should say that we also worship Mithras, and celebrate games in honour of Helios every four years, I shall be speaking of customs that are somewhat recent.(768) But perhaps it is better to cite a proof from the remote past. The beginning of the cycle of the year is placed at different times by different peoples. Some place it at the spring equinox, others at the height of summer, and many in the late autumn; but they each and all sing the praises of the most visible gifts of Helios. One nation celebrates the season best adapted for work in the fields, when the earth bursts into bloom and exults, when all the crops are just beginning to sprout, and the sea begins to be safe for sailing; and the disagreeable, gloomy winter puts on a more cheerful aspect, others again award the crown to the summer season,(769) since at that time they can safely feel confidence about the yield of the fruits, when the grains have already been harvested and midsummer is now at its height, and the fruits on the trees are ripening. Others again, with still more subtlety, regard as the close of the year the time when all the fruits are in their perfect prime and decay has already set in. For this reason they celebrate the annual festival of the New Year in late autumn. But our forefathers, from the time of the most divine king Numa, paid still greater reverence to the god Helios. They ignored the question of mere utility, I think, because they were naturally religious and endowed with unusual intelligence; but they saw that he is the cause of all that is useful, and so they ordered the observance of the New Year to correspond with the present season; that is to say when King Helios returns to us again, and leaving the region furthest south and, rounding Capricorn as though it were a goal‐post, advances from the south to the north to give us our share of the blessings of the year. And that our forefathers, because they comprehended this correctly, thus established the beginning of the year, one may perceive from the following. For it was not, I think, the time when the god turns, but the time when he becomes visible to all men, as he travels from south to north, that they appointed for the festival. For still unknown to them was the nicety of those laws which the Chaldæans and Egyptians discovered, and which Hipparchus(770) and Ptolemy(771) perfected: but they judged simply by sense‐perception, and were limited to what they could actually see.)

Οὕτω δὲ ταῦτα καὶ παρὰ τῶν μεταγενεστέρων, ὡς ἔφην, ἔχοντα κατενοήθη. πρὸ τῆς νουμηνίας, εὐθέως μετὰ τὸν τελευταῖον τοῦ Κρόνου μῆνα, ποιοῦμεν Ἡλίῳ [C] τὸν περιφανέστατον ἀγῶνα, τὴν ἑορτὴν Ἡλίῳ καταφημίσαντες ἀνικήτῳ, μεθ᾽ ὃν οὐδὲν θέμις ὧν ὁ τελευταῖος μὴν ἔχει σκυθρωπῶν μέν, ἀναγκαίων δ᾽ ὅμως, ἐπιτελεσθῆναι θεαμάτων, ἀλλὰ τοῖς Κρονίοις οὖσι τελευταίοις εὐθὺς συνάπτει κατὰ τὸν κύκλον τὰ Ἡλίαια, ἃ δὴ πολλάκις μοι δοῖεν οἱ βασιλεῖς ὑμνῆσαι καὶ ἐπιτελέσαι θεοί, καὶ πρό γε τῶν ἄλλων αὐτὸς ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ὅλων Ἥλιος, ὁ περὶ τὴν τἀγαθοῦ γόνιμον οὐσίαν ἐξ ἁιδίου προελθὼν μέσος [D] ἐν μέσοις τοῖς νοεροῖς θεοῖς, συνοχῆς τε αὐτοὺς πληρώσας καὶ κάλλους μυρίου καὶ περιουσίας γονίμου καὶ τελείου νοῦ καὶ πάντων ἀθρόως τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἀχρόνως, καὶ ἐν τῷ νῦν ἐλλάμπων εἰς τὴν ἐμφανῆ μέσην τοῦ παντὸς οὐρανοῦ φερομένην ἕδραν οἰκείαν ἐξ ἀιδίου, καὶ μεταδιδοὺς τῷ φαινομένῳ παντὶ τοῦ νοητοῦ κάλλους, τὸν δὲ οὐρανὸν σύμπαντα πληρώσας τοσούτων θεῶν [157] ὁπόσων αὐτὸς ἐν ἑαυτῷ νοερῶς ἔχει, περὶ αὐτὸν ἀμερίστως πληθυνομένων καὶ ἑνοειδῶς αὐτῷ συνημμένων, οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν ὑπὸ τὴν σελήνην τόπον διὰ τῆς ἀειγενεσίας συνέχων καὶ τῶν ἐνδιδομένων ἐκ τοῦ κυκλικοῦ σώματος ἀγαθῶν, ἐπιμελόμενος τοῦ τε(772) κοινοῦ τῶν ἀνθρώπων γένους ἰδίᾳ τε τῆς ἡμετέρας πόλεως, ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ τὴν ἡμετέραν ἐξ ἀιδίου ψυχὴν ὑπέστησεν, ὀπαδὸν ἀποφήνας αὑτοῦ. ταῦτά τε οὖν, ὅσα [B] μικρῷ πρόσθεν ηὐξάμην, δοίη, καὶ ἔτι κοινῇ μὲν τῇ πόλει τὴν ἐνδεχομένην ἀιδιότητα μετ᾽ εὐνοίας χορηγῶν φυλάττοι, ἡμῖν δὲ ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον εὖ πρᾶξαι τά τε ἀνθρώπινα καὶ τὰ θεῖα δοίη, ἐφ᾽ ὅσον βιῶναι συγχωρεῖ, ζῆν δὲ καὶ ἐμπολιτεύεσθαι τῷ βίῳ δοίη ἐφ᾽ ὅσον αὐτῷ τε ἐκείνῳ φίλον ἡμῖν τε λώιον καὶ τοῖς κοινοῖς συμφέρον Ῥωμαίων πράγμασιν.

(But the truth of these facts was recognised, as I said, by a later generation. Before the beginning of the year, at the end of the month which is called after Kronos,(773) we celebrate in honour of Helios the most splendid games, and we dedicate the festival to the Invincible Sun. And after this it is not lawful to perform any of the shows that belong to the last month, gloomy as they are, though necessary. But, in the cycle, immediately after the end of the Kronia(774) follow the Heliaia. That festival may the ruling gods grant me to praise and to celebrate with sacrifice! And above all the others may Helios himself, the King of the All, grant me this, even he who from eternity has proceeded from the generative substance of the Good: even he who is midmost of the midmost intellectual gods; who fills them with continuity and endless beauty and superabundance of generative power and perfect reason, yea with all blessings at once, and independently of time! And now he illumines his own visible abode, which from eternity moves as the centre of the whole heavens, and bestows a share of intelligible beauty on the whole visible world, and fills the whole heavens with the same number of gods as he contains in himself in intellectual form. And without division they reveal themselves in manifold form surrounding him, but they are attached to him to form a unity. Aye, but also, through his perpetual generation and the blessings that he bestows from the heavenly bodies, he holds together the region beneath the moon. For he cares for the whole human race in common, but especially for my own city,(775) even as also he brought into being my soul from eternity, and made it his follower. All this, therefore, that I prayed for a moment ago, may he grant, and further may he, of his grace, endow my city as a whole with eternal existence, so far as is possible, and protect her; and for myself personally, may he grant that, so long as I am permitted to live, I may prosper in my affairs both human and divine; finally may he grant me to live and serve the state with my life, so long as is pleasing to himself and well for me and expedient for the Roman Empire!)

Ταῦτά σοι, ὦ φίλε Σαλούστιε, κατὰ τὴν τριπλῆν τοῦ θεοῦ δημιουργίαν [C] ἐν τρισὶ μάλιστα νυξὶν ὡς οἷόν τε ἦν ἐπελθόντα μοι τῇ μνήμῃ καὶ γράψαι πρὸς σὲ ἐτόλμησα, ἐπεί σοι καὶ τὸ πρότερον εἰς τὰ Κρόνια γεγραμμένον ἡμῖν οὐ παντάπασιν ἀπόβλητον ἐφάνη. τελειοτέροις δ᾽ εἰ βούλει περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν καὶ μυστικωτέροις λόγοις ἐπιστῆσαι, ἐντυχὼν τοῖς παρὰ τοῦ θείου γενομένοις Ἰαμβλίχου περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν τούτων συγγράμμασι τὸ τέλος ἐκεῖσε τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης [D] εὑρήσεις σοφίας. δοίη δ᾽ ὁ μέγας Ἥλιος μηδὲν ἔλαττόν με τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ γνῶναι, καὶ διδάξαι κοινῇ τε ἅπαντας, ἰδίᾳ δὲ τοὺς μανθάνειν ἀξίους. ἕως δέ μοι τοῦτο δίδωσιν ὁ θεός, κοινῇ θεραπεύωμεν τὸν τῷ θεῷ φίλον Ἰάμβλιχον, ὅθεν καὶ νῦν ὀλίγα ἐκ πολλῶν ἐπὶ νοῦν ἐλθόντα διεληλύθαμεν. ἐκείνου δὲ εὖ οἶδα ὡς οὐδεὶς ἐρεῖ τι τελειότερον, οὐδὲ εἰ πολλὰ πάνυ προσταλαιπωρήσας καινοτομήσειεν· ἐκβήσεται γάρ, ὡς εἰκός, [158] τῆς ἀληθεστάτης τοῦ θεοῦ νοήσεως. ἦν μὲν οὖν ἴσως μάταιον, εἰ διδασκαλίας χάριν ἐποιούμην τοὺς λόγους, αὐτὸν(776) μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνόν τι συγγράφειν, ἐπεὶ δὲ ὕμνον ἐθέλων διελθεῖν τοῦ θεοῦ χαριστήριον ἐν τούτῳ τόπον ὑπελάμβανον τοῦ(777) περὶ τῆς οὐσίας αὐτοῦ φράσαι κατὰ δύναμιν τὴν ἐμήν, οὐ μάτην οἶμαι πεποιῆσθαι τοὺς λόγους τούσδε, τὸ

(This discourse, friend Sallust,(778) I composed in three nights at most, in harmony with the three‐fold creative power of the god,(779) as far as possible just as it occurred to my memory: and I have ventured to write it down and to dedicate it to you because you thought my earlier work on the Kronia(780) was not wholly worthless. But if you wish to meet with a more complete and more mystical treatment of the same theme, then read the writings of the inspired Iamblichus on this subject,(781) and you will find there the most consummate wisdom which man can achieve. And may mighty Helios grant that I too may attain to no less perfect knowledge of himself, and that I may instruct all men, speaking generally, but especially those who are worthy to learn. And so long as Helios grants let us all in common revere Iamblichus, the beloved of the gods. For he is the source for what I have here set down, a few thoughts from many, as they occurred to my mind. However I know well that no one can utter anything more perfect than he, nay not though he should labour long at the task and say very much that is new. For he will naturally diverge thereby from the truest knowledge of the god. Therefore it would probably have been a vain undertaking to compose anything after Iamblichus on the same subject if I had written this discourse for the sake of giving instruction. But since I wished to compose a hymn to express my gratitude to the god, I thought that this was the best place in which to tell, to the best of my power, of his essential nature. And so I think that not in vain has this discourse been composed. For the saying)

Κὰδ δύναμιν δ᾽ ἕρδειν ἱέρ᾽ ἀθανάτοισι θεοῖσιν(782)

(“To the extent of your powers offer sacrifice to the immortal
gods,”)

οὐκ ἐπὶ τῶν θυσιῶν μόνον, [B] ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν εὐφημιῶν τῶν εἰς τοὺς θεοὺς ἀποδεχόμενος. εὔχομαι οὖν τρίτον ἀντὶ τῆς προθυμίας μοι ταύτης εὐμενῆ γενέσθαι τὸν βασιλέα τῶν ὅλων Ἥλιον, καὶ δοῦναι βίον ἀγαθὸν καὶ τελειοτέραν φρόνησιν καὶ θεῖον νοῦν ἀπαλλαγήν τε τὴν εἱμαρμένην ἐκ τοῦ βίου πρᾳοτάτην ἐν καιρῷ τῷ προσήκοντι, ἄνοδόν τε ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν [C] τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο καὶ μονὴν παρ᾽ αὐτῷ, μάλιστα μὲν ἀίδιον, εἰ δὲ τοῦτο μεῖζον εἴη τῶν ἐμοὶ βεβιωμένων, πολλὰς πάνυ καὶ πολυετεῖς περιίδους.

(I apply not to sacrifice only, but also to the praises that we offer to the gods. For the third time, therefore, I pray that Helios, the King of the All, may be gracious to me in recompense for this my zeal; and may he grant me a virtuous life and more perfect wisdom and inspired intelligence, and, when fate wills, the gentlest exit that may be from life, at a fitting hour; and that I may ascend to him thereafter and abide with him, for ever if possible, but if that be more than the actions of my life deserve, for many periods of many years!)

ORATION V

Introduction To Oration V

The cult of Phrygian Cybele the Mother of the Gods, known to the Latin world as the Great Mother, Magna Mater, was the first Oriental religion adopted by the Romans. In the Fifth Oration, which is, like the Fourth, a hymn, Julian describes the entrance of the Goddess into Italy in the third century B.C. In Greece she had been received long before, but the more civilised Hellenes had not welcomed, as did the Romans, the more barbarous features of the cult, the mutilated priests, the Galli, and the worship of Attis.(783) They preferred the less emotional cult of the Syrian Adonis. In Athens the Mother of the Gods was early identified with Gaia the Earth Mother, and the two became inextricably confused.(784) But Julian, in this more Roman than Greek, does not shrink from the Oriental conception of Cybele as the lover of Attis, attended by eunuch priests, or the frenzy of renunciation described by Catullus.(785) But he was first of all a Neo‐ Platonist, and the aim of this hymn as of the Fourth Oration is to adapt to his philosophy a popular cult and to give its Mysteries a philosophic interpretation.

The Mithraic religion, seeking to conciliate the other cults of the empire, had from the first associated with the sun‐god the worship of the Magna Mater, and Attis had been endowed with the attributes of Mithras. Though Julian’s hymn is in honour of Cybele he devotes more attention to Attis. Originally the myth of Cybele symbolises the succession of the seasons; the disappearance of Attis the sun‐god is the coming of winter; his mutilation is the barrenness of nature when the sun has departed; his restoration to Cybele is the renewal of spring. In all this he is the counterpart of Persephone among the Greeks and of Adonis in Syria. Julian interprets the myth in connection with the three worlds described in the Fourth Oration. Cybele is a principle of the highest, the intelligible world, the source of the intellectual gods. Attis is not merely a sun‐god: he is a principle of the second, the intellectual world, who descends to the visible world in order to give it order and fruitfulness. Julian expresses the Neo‐Platonic dread and dislike of matter, of the variable, the plural and unlimited. Cybele the intelligible principle would fain have restrained Attis the embodiment of intelligence from association with matter. His recall and mutilation symbolise the triumph of unity over multiformity, of mind over matter. His restoration to Cybele symbolises the escape of our souls from the world of generation.

Julian follows Plotinus(786) in regarding the myths as allegories to be interpreted by the philosopher and the theosophist. They are riddles to be solved, and the paradoxical element in them is designed to turn our minds to the hidden truth. For laymen the myth is enough. Like all the Neo‐ Platonists he sometimes uses phrases which imply human weakness or chronological development for his divinities and then withdraws those phrases, explaining that they must be taken in another sense. His attitude to myths is further defined in the Sixth(787) and Seventh Orations. The Fifth Oration can hardly be understood apart from the Fourth, and both must present many difficulties to a reader who is unfamiliar with Plotinus, Porphyry, the treatise _On the Mysteries_, formerly attributed to Iamblichus, Sallust, _On the Gods and the World_, and the extant treatises and fragments of Iamblichus. Julian composed this treatise at Pessinus in Phrygia, when he was on his way to Persia, in 362 A.D.

ΙΟΥΛΙΑΝΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΟΡΟΣ

(Julian, Caesar)

ΕΙΣ ΤΗΝ ΜΗΤΕΡΑ ΤΩΝ ΘΕΩΝ

(Hymn to the Mother of the Gods)

Ἆρά γε χρὴ φάναι καὶ ὑπὲρ τούτων; καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀρρήτων γράψομεν καὶ τὰ ἀνέξοιστα ἐξοίσομεν(788) καὶ τὰ ἀνεκλάλητα ἐκλαλήσομεν; [159] τίς μὲν ὁ Ἄττις ἤτοι Γάλλος, τίς δὲ ἡ τῶν θεῶν Μήτηρ, καὶ ὁ τῆς ἁγνείας ταυτησί τρόπος ὁποῖος, καὶ προσέτι τοῦ χάριν οὑτοσὶ(789) τοιοῦτος ἡμῖν ἐξ ἀρχῆς κατεδείχθη, παραδοθεὶς μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχαιοτάτων Φρυγῶν, παραδεχθεὶς δὲ πρῶτον ὑφ᾽ Ἑλλήνων, καὶ τούτων οὐ τῶν τυχόντων, ἀλλ᾽ Ἀθηναίων, ἔργοις διδαχθέντων, ὅτι μὴ καλῶς ἐτώθασαν ἐπὶ τῷ τελοῦντι τὰ ὄργια τῆς Μητρός; λέγονται γὰρ οὗτοι περιυβρίσαι [B] καὶ ἀπελάσαι τὸν Γάλλον ὡς τὰ θεῖα καινοτομοῦντα, οὐ ξυνέντες ὁποῖόν τι τῆς θεοῦ τὸ χρῆμα καὶ ὡς ἡ παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς τιμωμένη Δηὼ καὶ Ῥέα καὶ Δημήτηρ. εἶτα μῆνις τὸ ἐντεῦθεν τῆς θεοῦ καὶ θεραπεία τῆς μήνιδος. ἡ γὰρ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς καλοῖς ἡγεμὼν γενομένη τοῖς Ἕλλησιν, ἡ τοῦ Πυθίου πρόμαντις θεοῦ, τὴν τῆς Μητρὸς τῶν θεῶν μῆνιν ἐκέλευσεν ἱλάσκεσθαι· καὶ ἀνέστη, φασίν, ἐπὶ τούτῳ τὸ μητρῷον, οὗ τοῖς Ἀθηναίοις δημοσίᾳ πάντα ἐφυλάττετο τὰ γραμματεῖα. μετὰ δὴ [C] τοὺς Ἕλληνας αὐτα Ῥωμαῖοι παρεδέξαντο, συμβουλεύσαντος καὶ αὐτοῖς τοῦ Πυθίου ἐπὶ τὸν πρὸς Καρχηδονίους πόλεμον ἄγειν ἐκ Φρυγίας τὴν θεὸν σύμμαχον. καὶ οὐδὲν ἴσως κωλύει προσθεῖναι μικρὰν(790) ἱστορίαν ἐνταῦθα. μαθόντες γὰρ τὸν χρησμὸν στέλλουσιν οἱ τῆς θεοφιλοῦς οἰκήτορες Ῥώμης πρεσβείαν αἰτήσουσαν παρὰ τῶν Περγάμου βασιλέων, οἳ τότε ἐκράτουν τῆς Φρυγίας, καὶ παρ᾽ αὐτῶν δὲ τῶν Φρυγῶν τῆς θεοῦ [D] τὸ ἁγιώτατον ἄγαλμα. λαβόντες δὲ ἦγον τὸν ἱερὸν φόρτον ἐνθέντες εὐρείᾳ φορτίδι πλεῖν εὐπετῶς δυναμένῃ τὰ τοσαῦτα πελάγη. περαιωθεῖσα δὲ Αἴγαιόν τε καὶ Ἰόνιον, εἶτα περιπλεύσασα Σικελίαν τε καὶ τὸ Τυρρηνὸν πέλαγος ἐπὶ τὰς ἐκβολὰς τοῦ Τύβριδος κατήγετο· καὶ δῆμος ἐξεχεῖτο τῆς πόλεως σὺν τῇ γερουσίᾳ, ὑπήντων γε μὴν πρὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἱερεῖς τε καὶ ἱέρειαι πᾶσαι καὶ πάντες ἐν κόσμῳ τῷ πρέποντι κατὰ τὰ πάτρια, [160] μετέωροι πρὸς τὴν ναῦν οὐριοδρομοῦσαν ἀποβλέποντες, καὶ περὶ τὴν τρόπιν ἀπεσκόπουν τὸ ῥόθιον σχιζομένων τῶν κυμάτων· εἶτα εἰσπλέουσαν ἐδεξιοῦντο τὴν ναῦν προσκυνοῦντες ἕκαστος ὡς ἔτυχε προσεστὼς πόρρωθεν. ἡ δὲ ὥσπερ ἐνδείξασθαι τῷ Ῥωμαίων ἐθέλουσα δήμῳ, ὅτι μὴ ξόανον ἄγουσιν ἀπὸ τῆς Φρυγίας ἄψυχον, ἔχει δὲ ἄρα δύναμίν τινα μείζω καὶ θειοτέραν ὃ δὴ παρὰ τῶν Φρυγῶν λαβόντες ἔφερον, ἐπειδὴ τοῦ Τύβριδος ἥψατο, [B] τὴν ναῦν ἵστησιν ὥσπερ ῥιζωθεῖσαν ἐξαίφνης κατὰ τοῦ Τύβριδος. εἷλκον δὴ οὖν πρὸς ἀντίον τὸν ῥοῦν, ἡ δὲ οὐχ εἵπετο. ὡς(791) βραχέσι δὲ ἐντετυχηκότες ὠθεῖν ἐπειρῶντο τὴν ναῦν, ἡ δὲ οὐκ εἶκεν ὠθούντων. πᾶσα δὲ μηχανὴ προσήγετο τὸ ἐντεῦθεν, ἡ δὲ οὐχ ἧττον ἀμετακίνητος ἦν· ὥστε ἐμπίπτει κατὰ τῆς ἱερωμένης τὴν παναγεστάτην ἱερωσύνην παρθένου δεινὴ καὶ ἄδικος ὑποψία, καὶ τὴν Κλωδίαν ᾐτιῶντο· [C] τοῦτο γὰρ ὄνομα ἦν τῇ σεμνῇ παρθένῳ· μὴ παντάπασιν ἄχραντον μηδὲ καθαρὰν φυλάττειν ἑαυτὴν τῷ θεῷ· ὀργίζεσθαι οὖν αὐτὴν καὶ μηνίειν ἐμφανῶς· ἐδόκει γὰρ ἤδη τοῖς πᾶσιν εἶναι τὸ χρῆμα δαιμονιώτερον. ἡ δὲ τὸ μὲν πρῶτον αἰδοῦς ὑπεπίμηπλατο πρός τε τὸ ὄνομα καὶ τὴν ὑποψίαν· οὕτω πάνυ πόρρω ἐτύγχανε τῆς αἰσχρᾶς καὶ παρανόμου πράξεως. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἑώρα τὴν αἰτίαν ἤδη καθ᾽ ἑαυτῆς ἐξισχύουσαν, περιελοῦσα τὴν ζώνην [D] καὶ περιθεῖσα τῆς νεὼς τοῖς ἄκροις, ὥσπερ ἐξ ἐπιπνοίας τινὸς ἀποχωρεῖν ἐκέλευεν ἅπαντας, εἶτα ἐδεῖτο τῆς θεοῦ μὴ περιιδεῖν αὐτὴν(792) ἀδίκοις ἐνεχομένην βλασφημίας. βοῶσα δὲ ὥσπερ τι κέλευσμα, φασί, ναυτικόν, Δέσποινα Μῆτερ εἴπερ εἰμὶ σώφρων, ἕπου μοι, ἔφη. καὶ δὴ τὴν ναῦν οὐκ ἐκίνησε μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἵλκυσεν ἐπὶ πολὺ πρὸς τὸν ῥοῦν· καὶ δύο ταῦτα Ῥωμαίοις ἔδειξεν ἡ θεὸς οἶμαι κατ᾽ ἐκείνην τὴν ἡμέραν. [161] ὡς οὔτε μικροῦ τινος τίμιον ἀπὸ τῆς Φρυγίας ἐπήγοντο(793) φόρτον, ἀλλὰ τοῦ παντὸς ἄξιον, οὔτε ὡς ἀνθρώπινον τοῦτον, ἀλλὰ ὄντως θεῖον, οὔτε ἄψυχον γῆν, ἀλλὰ ἔμπνουν τι χρῆμα καὶ δαιμόνιον. ἓν μὲν δὴ τοιοῦτον ἔδειξεν αὐτοῖς ἡ θεός· ἕτερον δέ, ὡς τῶν πολιτῶν οὐδὲ εἶς λάθοι ἂν αὐτὴν χρηστὸς ἢ φαῦλος ὤν. κατωρθώθη μέντοι καὶ ὁ πόλεμος αὐτίκα Ῥωμαίοις πρὸς Καρχηδονίους, ὥστε τὸν τρίτον ὑπὲρ τῶν τειχῶν αὐτῆς μόνον Καρχηδόνος γενέσθαι.

(Ought I to say something on this subject also? And shall I write about things not to be spoken of and divulge what ought not to be divulged? Shall I utter the unutterable? Who is Attis(794) or Gallus,(795) who is the Mother of the Gods,(796) and what is the manner of their ritual of purification? And further why was it introduced in the beginning among us Romans? It was handed down by the Phrygians in very ancient times, and was first taken over by the Greeks, and not by any ordinary Greeks but by Athenians who had learned by experience that they did wrong to jeer at one who was celebrating the Mysteries of the Mother. For it is said that they wantonly insulted and drove out Gallus, on the ground that he was introducing a new cult, because they did not understand what sort of goddess they had to do with, and that she was that very Deo whom they worship, and Rhea and Demeter too. Then followed the wrath of the goddess and the propitiation of her wrath. For the priestess of the Pythian god who guided the Greeks in all noble conduct, bade them propitiate the wrath of the Mother of the Gods. And so, we are told, the Metroum was built, where the Athenians used to keep all their state records.(797) After the Greeks the Romans took over the cult, when the Pythian god had advised them in their turn to bring the goddess from Phrygia as an ally for their war against the Carthaginians.(798) And perhaps there is no reason why I should not insert here a brief account of what happened. When they learned the response of the oracle, the inhabitants of Rome, that city beloved of the gods, sent an embassy to ask from the kings of Pergamon(799) who then ruled over Phrygia and from the Phrygians themselves the most holy statue(800) of the goddess. And when they had received it they brought back their most sacred freight, putting it on a broad cargo‐boat which could sail smoothly over those wide seas. Thus she crossed the Aegean and Ionian Seas, and sailed round Sicily and over the Etruscan Sea, and so entered the mouth of the Tiber. And the people and the Senate with them poured out of the city, and in front of all the others there came to meet her all the priests and priestesses in suitable attire according to their ancestral custom. And in excited suspense they gazed at the ship as she ran before a fair wind, and about her keel they could discern the foaming wake as she cleft the waves. And they greeted the ship as she sailed in and adored her from afar, everyone where he happened to be standing. But the goddess, as though she desired to show the Roman people that they were not bringing a lifeless image from Phrygia, but that what they had received from the Phrygians and were now bringing home possessed greater and more divine powers than an image, stayed the ship directly she touched the Tiber, and she was suddenly as though rooted in mid‐stream. So they tried to tow her against the current, but she did not follow. Then they tried to push her off, thinking they had grounded on a shoal, but for all their efforts she did not move. Next every possible device was brought to bear, but in spite of all she remained immovable. Thereupon a terrible and unjust suspicion fell on the maiden who had been consecrated to the most sacred office of priestess, and they began to accuse Claudia(801)—for that was the name of that noble maiden(802)—of not having kept herself stainless and pure for the goddess; wherefore they said that the goddess was angry and was plainly declaring her wrath. For by this time the thing seemed to all to be supernatural. Now at first she was filled with shame at the mere name of the thing and the suspicion; so very far was she from such shameless and lawless behaviour. But when she saw that the charge against her was gaining strength, she took off her girdle and fastened it about the prow of the ship, and, like one divinely inspired, bade all stand aside: and then she besought the goddess not to suffer her to be thus implicated in unjust slanders. Next, as the story goes, she cried aloud as though it were some nautical word of command, “O Goddess Mother, if I am pure follow me!” And lo, she not only made the ship move, but even towed her for some distance up stream. Two things, I think, the goddess showed the Romans on that day: first that the freight they were bringing from Phrygia had no small value, but was priceless, and that this was no work of men’s hands but truly divine, not lifeless clay but a thing possessed of life and divine powers. This, I say, was one thing that the goddess showed them. And the other was that no one of the citizens could be good or bad and she not know thereof. Moreover the war of the Romans against the Carthaginians forthwith took a favourable turn, so that the third war was waged only for the walls of Carthage itself.(803))

[B] Τὰ μὲν οὖν τῆς ἱστορίας, εἰ καί τισιν ἀπίθανα δόξει καὶ φιλοσόφῳ προσήκειν οὐδὲν οὐδὲ θεολόγῳ, λεγέσθω μὴ μεῖον, κοινῇ μὲν ὑπὸ πλείστων ἱστοριογράφων ἀναγραφόμενα, σωζόμενα δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ χαλκῶν εἰκόνων ἐν τῇ κρατίστῃ καὶ θεοφιλεῖ Ῥώμῃ. καίτοι με οὐ λέληθεν ὅτι φήσουσιν αὐτά τινες τῶν λίαν σοφῶν ὕθλους εἶναι γρᾳδίων οὐκ ἀνεκτούς. ἐμοὶ δὲ δοκεῖ ταῖς πόλεσι πιστεύειν μᾶλλον τὰ τοιαῦτα ἢ τουτοισὶ τοῖς κομψοῖς, ὧν τὸ ψυχάριον δριμὺ μέν, ὑγιὲς δὲ οὐδὲ ἓν βλέπει.(804)

(As for this narrative, though some will think it incredible and wholly unworthy of a philosopher or a theologian, nevertheless let it here be related. For besides the fact that it is commonly recorded by most historians, it has been preserved too on bronze statues in mighty Rome, beloved of the gods.(805) And yet I am well aware that some over‐wise persons will call it an old wives’ tale, not to be credited. But for my part I would rather trust the traditions of cities than those too clever people, whose puny souls are keen‐sighted enough, but never do they see aught that is sound.)

Ὕπὲρ δὲ ὧν εἰπεῖν ἐπῆλθέ μοι παρ᾽ αὐτὸν ἄρτι τὸν τῆς ἁγιστείας καιρόν, ἀκούω μὲν ἔγωγε καὶ Πορφυρίῳ τινὰ πεφιλοσοφῆσθαι περὶ αὐτῶν, οὐ μὴν οἶδά γε, οὐ γὰρ ἐνέτυχον, εἰ καὶ συνενεχθῆναί που συμβαίη τῷ λόγῳ. τὸν Γάλλον δὲ ἐγὼ τουτονὶ καὶ τὸν Ἄττιν αὐτὸς οἴκοθεν ἐπινοῶ τοῦ γονίμου καὶ δημιουργικοῦ νοῦ τὴν ἄχρι τῆς ἐσχάτης ὕλης ἅπαντα γεννῶσαν οὐσίαν εἶναι, ἔχουσάν τε ἐν ἑαυτῇ πάντας τοὺς λόγους καὶ τὰς αἰτίας τῶν ἐνύλων εἰδῶν· [D] οὐ γὰρ δὴ πάντων ἐν πᾶσι τὰ εἴδη, οὐδὲ ἐν τοῖς ἀνωτάτω καὶ πρώτοις αἰτίοις τὰ τῶν ἐσχάτων καὶ τελευταίων, μεθ᾽ ἃ οὐδέν ἐστιν ἣ τὸ τῆς στερῆσεως ὄνομα μετὰ ἀμυδρᾶς ἐπινοίας. οὐσῶν δὴ πολλῶν οὐσιῶν καὶ πολλῶν πάνυ δημιουργῶν τοῦ τρίτου δημιουργοῦ, ὃς τῶν ἐνύλων εἰδῶν τοὺς λόγους ἐξῃρημένους ἔχει καὶ συνεχεῖς τὰς αἰτίας, ἡ τελευταία καὶ μέχρι γῆς ὑπὸ περιουσίας τοῦ γονίμου [162] διὰ τῆς ἄνωθεν παρὰ τῶν ἄστρων καθήκουσα φύσις ὁ ζητούμενός ἐστιν Ἀττις. ἴσως δὲ ὑπὲρ οὗ λέγω χρὴ διαλαβεῖν σαφέστερον. εἶναί τι λέγομεν ὕλην, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔνυλον εἶδος. ἀλλὰ τούτων εἰ μή τις αἰτία προτέτακται, λανθάνοιμεν ἂν ἑαυτοὺς εἰσάγοντες τὴν Ἐπικούρειον δόξαν. ἀρχαῖν γὰρ δυοῖν εἰ μηδέν ἐστι πρεσβύτερον, αὐτόματός τις αὐτὰς φορὰ καὶ τύχη συνεκλήρωσεν. ἀλλ᾽ ὁρῶμεν, φησὶ Περιπατητικός [B] τις ἀγχίνους ὥσπερ ὁ Ξέναρχος, τούτων αἴτιον ὂν τὸ πέμπτον καὶ κυκλικὸν σῶμα. γελοῖος δὲ καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης ὑπὲρ τούτων ζητῶν τε καὶ πολυπραγμονῶν, ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ Θεόφραστος· ἠγνόησε γοῦν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ φωνήν. ὥσπερ γὰρ εἰς τὴν ἀσώματον οὐσίαν ἐλθὼν καὶ νοητὴν ἔστη μὴ πολυπραγμονῶν τὴν αἰτίαν, ἀλλὰ φὰς οὕτω ταῦτα πεφυκέναι· χρῆν δὲ δήπουθεν καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ πέμπτου σώματος τὸ πεφυκέναι ταῦτῃ λαμβάνοντα μηκέτι ζητεῖν τὰς αἰτίας, ἵστασθαι δὲ ἐπὶ αὐτῶν καὶ μὴ πρὸς τὸ νοητὸν ἐκπίπτειν ὂν μὲν οὐδὲν [C] φύσει καθ᾽ ἑαυτό, ἔχον δὲ ἄλλως κενὴν ὑπόνοιαν. τοιαῦτα γὰρ ἐγὼ μέμνημαι τοῦ Ξενάρχου λέγοντος ἀκηκοώς. εἰ μὲν οὖν ὀρθῶς ἢ μὴ ταῦτα ἐκεῖνος ἔφη, τοῖς ἄγαν ἐφείσθω Περιπατητικοῖς ὀνυχίζειν, ὅτι δὲ οὐ προσηνῶς ἐμοὶ παντί που δῆλον, ὅπου γε καὶ τὰς Ἀριστοτελικὰς ὑποθέσεις ἐνδεεστέρως ἔχειν ὑπολαμβάνω, εἰ μή τις αὐτὰς ἐς ταὐτὸ τοῖς Πλάτωνος ἄγοι, [D] μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ταῦτα ταῖς ἐκ θεῶν δεδομέναις προφητείαις.

(I am told that on this same subject of which I am impelled to speak at the very season of these sacred rites, Porphyry too has written a philosophic treatise. But since I have never met with it I do not know whether at any point it may chance to agree with my discourse. But him whom I call Gallus or Attis I discern of my own knowledge to be the substance of generative and creative Mind which engenders all things down to the lowest plane of matter,(806) and comprehends in itself all the concepts and causes of the forms that are embodied in matter. For truly the forms of all things are not in all things, and in the highest and first causes we do not find the forms of the lowest and last, after which there is nothing save privation(807) coupled with a dim idea. Now there are many substances and very many creative gods, but the nature of the third creator,(808) who contains in himself the separate concepts of the forms that are embodied in matter and also the connected chain of causes, I mean that nature which is last in order, and through its superabundance of generative power descends even unto our earth through the upper region from the stars,—this is he whom we seek, even Attis. But perhaps I ought to distinguish more clearly what I mean. We assert that matter exists and also form embodied in matter. But if no cause be assigned prior to these two, we should be introducing, unconsciously, the Epicurean doctrine. For if there be nothing of higher order than these two principles, then a spontaneous motion and chance brought them together. “But,” says some acute Peripatetic like Xenarchus, “we see that the cause of these is the fifth or cyclic substance. Aristotle is absurd when he investigates and discusses these matters, and Theophrastus likewise. At any rate he overlooked the implications of a well‐known utterance of his. For just as when he came to incorporeal and intelligible substance he stopped short and did not inquire into its cause, and merely asserted that this is what it is by nature; surely in the case of the fifth substance also he ought to have assumed that its nature is to be thus; and he ought not to have gone on to search for causes, but should have stopped at these, and not fallen back on the intelligible, which has no independent existence by itself, and in any case represents a bare supposition.” This is the sort of thing that Xenarchus says, as I remember to have heard. Now whether what he says is correct or not, let us leave to the extreme Peripatetics to refine upon. But that his view is not agreeable to me is, I think, clear to everyone. For I hold that the theories of Aristotle himself are incomplete unless they are brought into harmony with those of Plato(809); or rather we must make these also agree with the oracles that have been vouchsafed to us by the gods.)

Ἐκεῖνο δὲ ἴσως ἄξιον πυθέσθαι, πῶς τὸ κυκλικὸν σῶμα δύναται τὰς ἀσωμάτους ἔχειν αἰτίας τῶν ἐνύλων εἰδῶν. ὅτι μὲν γὰρ δίχα τούτων ὑποστῆναι τὴν γένεσιν οὐκ ἐνδέχεται, πρόδηλόν ἐστί που καὶ σαφές. τοῦ χάριν γάρ ἐστι τοσαῦτα τὰ γιγνόμενα; πόθεν δὲ ἄρρεν καὶ θῆλυ; πόθεν δὲ ἡ κατὰ γένος τῶν ὄντων ἐν ὡρισμένοις εἴδεσι διαφορά, [163] εἰ μή τινες εἶεν προϋπάρχοντες καὶ προϋφεστῶτες(810) λόγοι αἰτίαι τε ἐν παραδείγματος λόγῳ προϋφεστῶσαι; πρὸς ἃς εἴπερ ἀμβλυώττομεν, ἔτι καθαιρώμεθα τὰ ὄμματα τῆς ψυχῆς. κάθαρσις δὲ ὀρθὴ στραφῆναι πρὸς ἑαυτὸν καὶ κατανοῆσαι, πῶς μὲν ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ ὁ ἔνυλος νοῦς ὥσπερ ἐκμαγεῖόν τι τῶν ἐνύλων εἰδῶν καὶ εἰκών ἐστιν. ἓν γὰρ οὐδέν ἐστι τῶν σωμάτων ἢ τῶν [B] περὶ τὰ σώματα γινομένων τε καὶ θεωρουμένων ἀσωμάτων, οὗ τὴν φαντασίαν ὁ νοῦς οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν ἀσωμάτως, ὅπερ οὔποτ᾽ ἂν ἐποίησεν, εἰ μή τι ξυγγενὲς εἶχεν αὐτοῖς φύσει. ταῦτά τοι καὶ Ἀριστοτέλης τὴν ψυχὴν τόπον εἰδῶν ἔφη, πλὴν οὐκ ἐνεργείᾳ, ἀλλὰ δυνάμει. τὴν μὲν οὖν τοιαύτην ψυχὴν καὶ τὴν ἐπεστραμμένην πρὸς τὸ σῶμα δυνάμει ταῦτα ἔχειν ἀναγκαῖον· εἰ δέ τις ἄσχετος εἴη καὶ ἀμιγὴς ταύτῃ, τοὺς λόγους οὐκέτι δυνάμει, [C] πάντας δὲ ὑπάρχειν ἐνεργείᾳ νομιστέον. λάβωμεν δὲ αὐτὰ σαφέστερον διὰ τοῦ παραδείγματος, ᾧ καὶ Πλάτων ἐν τῷ Σοφιστῇ(811) πρὸς ἕτερον μὲν λόγον, ἐχρήσατο δ᾽ οὖν ὅμως. τὸ παράδειγμα δὲ οὐκ εἰς ἀπόδειξιν φέρω τοῦ λόγου· καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲ ἀποδείξει χρὴ λαβεῖν αὐτόν,(812) ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιβολῇ μόνῃ, περὶ γὰρ τῶν πρώτων αἰτιῶν ἐστιν ἢ τῶν γε ὁμοστοίχων τοῖς πρώτοις, εἴπερ ἡμῖν ἐστιν, ὥσπερ οὖν ἄξιον νομίζειν, [D] καὶ ὁ Ἄττις θεός. τί δὲ καὶ ποῖόν ἐστι τὸ παράδειγμα; φησί(813) που Πλάτων, τῶν περὶ τὴν μίμησιν διατριβόντων εἰ μὲν ἐθέλοι τις μιμεῖσθαι, ὥστε καθυφεστάναι τὰ μιμητά, ἐργώδη τε εἶναι καὶ χαλεπὴν καὶ νὴ Δία γε τοῦ ἀδυνάτου πλησίον μᾶλλον, εὔκολον δὲ καὶ ῥᾳδίαν καὶ σφόδρα δυνατὴν τὴν διὰ τοῦ δοκεῖν τὰ ὄντα μιμουμένην. ὅταν οὖν τὸ κάτοπτρον λαβόντες περιφέρωμεν ἐκ πάντων τῶν ὄντων ῥᾳδίως ἀπομαξάμενοι, [164] δείκνυμεν ἑκάστου τοὺς τύπους. ἐκ τούτου τοῦ παραδείγματος ἐπὶ τὸ εἰρημένον μεταβιβάσωμεν τὸ ὁμοίωμα, ἵν᾽ ᾖ τὸ μὲν κάτοπτρον ὁ λεγόμενος ὑπὸ Ἀριστοτέλους δυνάμει τόπος εἰδῶν.

(But this it is perhaps worth while to inquire, how the cyclic substance(814) can contain the incorporeal causes of the forms that are embodied in matter. For that, apart from these causes, it is not possible for generation to take place is, I think, clear and manifest. For why are there so many kinds of generated things? Whence arise masculine and feminine? Whence the distinguishing characteristics of things according to their species in well‐defined types, if there are not pre‐existing and pre‐established concepts, and causes which existed beforehand to serve as a pattern?(815) And if we discern these causes but dimly, let us still further purify the eyes of the soul. And the right kind of purification is to turn our gaze inwards and to observe how the soul and embodied Mind are a sort of mould(816) and likeness of the forms that are embodied in matter. For in the case of the corporeal, or of things that though incorporeal come into being and are to be studied in connection with the corporeal, there is no single thing whose mental image the mind cannot grasp independently of the corporeal. But this it could not have done if it did not possess something naturally akin to the incorporeal forms. Indeed it is for this reason that Aristotle himself called the soul the “place of the forms,”(817) only he said that the forms are there not actually but potentially. Now a soul of this sort, that is allied with matter, must needs possess these forms potentially only, but a soul that should be independent and unmixed in this way we must believe would contain all the concepts, not potentially but actually. Let us make this clearer by means of the example which Plato himself employed in the Sophist, with reference certainly to another theory, but still he did employ it. And I bring forward the illustration, not to prove my argument; for one must not try to grasp it by demonstration, but only by apprehension. For it deals with the first causes, or at least those that rank with the first, if indeed, as it is right to believe, we must regard Attis also as a god. What then, and of what sort is this illustration? Plato says that, if any man whose profession is imitation desire to imitate in such a way that the original is exactly reproduced, this method of imitation is troublesome and difficult, and, by Zeus, borders on the impossible; but pleasant and easy and quite possible is the method which only seems to imitate real things. For instance, when we take up a mirror and turn it round we easily get an impression of all objects, and show the general outline of every single thing. From this example let us go back to the analogy I spoke of, and let the mirror stand for what Aristotle calls the “place of the forms” potentially.)