v* 7 5
Ancient Christian writers 5 the
281.1 A 54 v. 7 5^-58538
Ancient Christian writers; tne
works of the Fathers .In trans-
lation.
Keep Your Card in This Pocket
Books will be issued only on presentation of proper
library cards.
Unless labeled otherwise, books may be retained
for two weeks. Borrowers finding books marked, de-
faced or mutilated are expected to report same at
library desk; otherwise the last borrower will be held
responsible for all imperfections discovered.
The card holder is responsible for all books drawn
on this card.
Penalty for over-due books 2c a day plus cost of
notices.
Lost cards and change of residence must be re-
ported promptly.
Public Library
Kansas City, Mo.
ARNOBIUS OF SICCA
THE CASE
AGAINST THE PAGANS
ADVERSUS NATIONES
ANCIENT CHRISTIAN
WRITERS
THE WORKS OF THE FATHERS IN TRANSLATION
EDITED BY
JOHANNES QUASTEN, S. T, D,
Professor of Ancient Church History
and Christian Archaeology
JOSEPH C. PLUMPE, PH.D.
Associate Professor of New Testament
Greek and Ecclesiastical Latin
The Catholic University of America
Washington, D, C,
No. 7
THE NEWMAN PRESS
WESTMINSTER, MABYtANB
1949
ARNOBIUS OF SICCA
THE CASE
AGAINST THE PAGANS
NEWLY TRANSLATED AND ANNOTATED
BY
GEORGE E. MoCRACKEN, PH.D, F.A.A.R.
Professor of Classics
Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa
VOLUME ONE
INTRODUCTION, BOOKS ONE -THREE
THE NEWMAN PRESS
WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND
1949
Nihil obstat:
JOHANNES QUASTEN, S, T. D.
Censor Deputatus
Imprimatur:
PATRICIUS A. O'BOYLE, D. D.
Arcliie-piscopus Washingtonensis
die 12 Fetruarii 1949
COPYRIGHT 1949
BY
REV, JOHANNES QUASTEN, S. T, D*
AND
RBV. JOSEPH C, PLUMPE, PH. D.
JPRXNTBD JN TUB UNfTBD STATES OF AMERICA
ST J, H. FimST COMPANY, BALTIMOEB, MARTtAND
CONTENTS
VOLUME ONE
PAGE
SAINT JEROME'S TESTIMONIES ON
ARNOBIUS 2
INTRODUCTION 3
TEXT 58
BOOK ONE: PAGAN SLANDERS OF THE CHRIS-
TIANS REFUTED 58
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY: THE
MORTALITY OF THE SOUL 114
BOOK THREE: PAGAN GODS ARE REALLY AN-
THROPOMORPHIC 192
NOTES . 229
INTRODUCTION 231
BOOK ONE 268
BOOK Two 301
BOOK THREE 348
(Index in Vol. 2)
ARNOBIUS OF SICCA
THE CASE
AGAINST THE PAGANS
SAINT JEROME'S TESTIMONIES ON ARNOBILIS
De viris illustrious 79: In the reign of Diocletian Arnobius taught
rhetoric most successfully at Sicca in Africa and wrote the books
Adversus gentes which are commonly available.
Chronicon (326-7 A. D.)- Arnobius enjoys great repute as a
rhetorician in Africa. While he was giving instruction in oratory to
the youth of Sicca and was yet a pagan., he was drawn as the result
of dreams to belief in Christianity. Failing, however, to obtain from
the bishop acceptance into the faith which he had hitherto always
attacked, he gave all his efforts to the composition of most splendid
books against his former religion; and with these as so many pledges
of his loyalty, he at last obtained the desired affiliation.
Epistula 70 (ad Magnum') 5: Arnobius published seven books
Adversus gentes and his pupil Lactantius the same number,
De viris illustribus 80 : ... Firmianus, who is also called Lactantius,
Arnobius* pupil, in the reign of Diocletian ....
Epistula 58 {ad Paulinum) 10: Arnobius is uneven and prolix
and without clear divisions in his work, resulting in confusion.
Epistula 6^ (ad Tranquillinum*) 2: I think Origen ought at times
to be read for his learning, in the same manner that we treat Tcrtul-
lian and Novatus, Arnobius and Apollinarius, and a number of
ecclesiastical writers both Greek and Latin: we should choose out
the good in them and shun what is contrary.
INTRODUCTION
In these two volumes we present in a new English dress
what is in many ways the most remarkable patristic document
now extant, the seven books of Arnobius Adversus nationes,
the last surviving apology composed before the end of the
persecutions. 1 Written from the point of view of a layman 2
not yet perfectly instructed concerning the nature of the
Christian faith, this surprising work is now of primary interest
because it affords us an opportunity to study the psychology
of an eccentric personality who, though living at a critical
moment in history, nevertheless seems to have been relatively
unaffected by his times.
Despite the fact that the learning of Arnobius is impressive
to many, 3 negative judgments are more frequently found.
Indeed, one scholar of first rank speaks of him as " misin-
formed, virulent, and to us tolerant moderns, somewhat re-
pulsive." 4 Another asserts that " the semi-philosophical,
semi-religious discussions of the partially-instructed Christian
. . . (are) . . . only the elegant refutation of an already dying
system, 5 and a rhetorical statement of Christian truth, both
incomplete and imperfectly apprehended." 7 Still another 8
maintains that Arnobius is not a systematic but a " popular "
philosopher, while a fourth * condemns him as neither a clear
thinker nor a skillful writer who made no deep study. Finally,
the book itself is, in the words of a great German scholar, 10
a " most infamous pamphlet " wliich compromised the Chris-
tian faith more than it helped.
While there is more than a grain of truth in all these severe
4 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
strictures, taken alone they are hardly fair to Arnobius who
in modern times has suffered much from undeserved neglect. 11
Indeed, thus far the only first-rate study giving a favorable
opinion on Arnobius' theological importance is a book by
Rapisarda published as recently as I945- 12 The Adversus
nationes has hitherto been translated into our tongue but once
and that as long ago as iS/i. 13 Though our writer bristles
with obscure allusions and unresolved problems which cry
aloud for exegesis, we have hitherto had to depend for ex-
tended commentaries upon one German and a few Latin
editions, the last of which appeared more than a century ago. 14
Actually, the treatise has much of value for us today.
Usually classified among the apologies 15 because it contains
a vigorous defense of Christianity from slanderous charges
brought by pagan opponents, it is, as a matter of fact, the most
intense and the most sustained of all extant counterattacks
upon the contemporary pagan cults. 10 When its testimony
upon such matters is subjected to critical control, this fact
makes it a mine of great richness for our knowledge of the
religion which Christianity supplanted in the fourth cen-
tury. 17 Indeed, the chief phase of that worship which Arno-
bius neglects to discuss is the cult of the emperors, an omis-
sion for which no convincing explanation has been offered. 18
Modern neglect of our author, however, has merely paral-
leled the example of antiquity, for only one ancient ivriter, St.
Jerome, who mentions him six times, tells us anything about
Arnobius. Of these six testimonies, which are given in full
on page 2, four are biographical; 10 the two which deal with
his style and content will be examined later*
The data contained in the four biographical testimonies are
not wholly consistent, nor are they in complete harmony with
internal evidence to be found in the text of the Adversus
INTRODUCTION 5
nationes as it has come down to us, yet no scholar now
seriously entertains doubt that Jerome is referring to the
treatise with which we are dealing. There was, of course,
another ancient writer of the same name, even more obscure,
called " Arnobius the Younger " to distinguish him from our
man, yet sometimes confused with him; 20 but since the
younger Arnobius lived in the middle of the fifth century, 21
Jerome cannot have known of him and in any case the state-
ments quoted do not fit his work at all.
Jerome is doubtless right in giving the name as ' Arnobius '
but the manuscript on which we uniquely rely for our
knowledge of the text (codex Parisinus 1661) regularly spells
it ' Arnovius/ 22 This, however, is only an apparent dis-
crepancy, to be easily explained as the result of confusion,
frequent in this manuscript, of the sounds of fc and v in Late
Latin. Etymologically, the name shows affinity with a num-
ber of Greek personal names, 23 but we cannot therefore con-
clude that Arnobius was himself of Greek origin, though he
may have been. So far as we know, he had no other name, 24
a fact which may argue that he was indeed Greek in race.
Note that in both instances where Jerome mentions the
title, he gives it as * Adversus gentes ' while the evidence from
the manuscript 25 shows it to be ( Adversus nationes.' While
both may be translated identically as " Against the Pagans/'
the witness of the manuscript has been generally thought
better by more-recent scholars, since it is easier to understand
how Jerome, perhaps citing from memory, could employ
gentes, a more or less precise synonym for nationes, than to
explain how a copyist could make the reverse substitution, 26
We should not, however, support this choice by alluding to
the Ad nationes of Tertullian for, if Arnobius was consciously
influenced by Tertullian's title, he might have used either
6 AKNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
noun with equal propriety. These verbal discrepancies are
seen, therefore, to be of no particular significance.
That Jerome is right in stating that Arnobius was a rheto-
rician, no one who has read the Adversus nationes would ever
doubt, since the style, of which we shall presently speak at
greater length, bears all the earmarks of the practitioner of
that profession. Moreover, although there are occasional
passages which appear to treat rhetoric with some disdain,
there are also instances in which the author's interest in that
subject is ill-concealed. 27 Finally, the incipit to Book Five 28
actually calls him " Arnobius Orator/' which furnishes addi-
tional corroboration, if more were needed. 29
But that it was at Sicca in Africa 80 that Arnobius taught
rhetoric is open to some question on two grounds, a point to
which attention has not been previously directed. Nowhere
does Arnobius mention Sicca, or for that matter any other
place, as his home, 31 a silence surprising in view of what
shall shortly appear.
The name of Sicca at first sight suggests that the town was
founded by the Sicels before the occupation of this territory
by the Phoenicians, and the site has been identified with
certainty as that of the modern Tunisian town of Schak
Benar el Kef, 82 some ninety miles southwest of Tunis, near
the Algerian border. From a study of several of Kiepert's
maps we may infer that Sicca was originally part of the king-
dom of Numidia, then became part of the proconsular pro-
vince bearing the same name, and at the reorganization of
the empire under Diocletian, found itself in the Province of
Numidia, a part of the Diocese of Africa* 88 Therefore,
Jerome's allusion to Sieca in Africa, though not precise, is
not incorrect.
Now we know rather little about Sicca. It is first men-
INTRODUCTION 7
tioned by Polybius, 34 who reports a revolt of the Carthaginian
mercenaries as having taken place there in the year 241 B. C.
According to Valerius Maximus, 35 writing in the first century
of our era, the town possessed a shrine of Venus in which the
Punic women used to practice temple prostitution. Arnobius'
complete silence on this social evil, which would have pro-
vided him with perhaps the most disgraceful single charge
which he could have brought against the pagans, is therefore
surprising. Other apologists do not hesitate to utilize a similar
charge, 36 and it seems difficult to believe that even a professor
of rhetoric could have been ignorant of the temple, had he
really lived in Sicca. It will not help much to point out that
in Halm's edition of Valerius Maximus, the passage in ques-
tion reads Cirtae and not Siccae, for the best palaeographical
evidence is definitely against this reading of Halm's. 87 Even
if it is right, the reference could still be to Sicca and not
Cirta, since the full Roman name of the town was Colonia
lulia Veneria Cirta Nova Sicca, 88 that is, Sicca was regarded
as a sort of New Cirta. But note that Valerius Maximus uses
the past tense, implying the discontinuance of the practice in
his day, 80 and we are probably justified in assuming that the
religions which Arnobius attacks were all current when he
wrote, Sicca may therefore really have been his home, as
Jerome says, but we do not know that he was also born
there, 40 though he may have been.
We have now to consider the important and vexed question
of Arnobius' date. In the two passages from the De viris
illustrious Arnobius is placed in the reign of Diocletian which
lasted from 284 to 304 A. D,, but the passage in the Chroni-
con of Eusebius it is the first item in the section which
Jerome added to this work is dated, according to the three
chronological systems here employed, 41 in the 2343^ year
8 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
from Abraham, 42 the twenty-first year of the reign of Con-
stantine, and the third year of the 2761(1 Olympiad, all of
which equal the latter part of 326 or the early part of 327
A. D. 43 Now it has been pointed out that " the Saint inserted
his notices with a lighthearted disregard for chronology/' 44
but this date of 327 A. D. not only is inconsistent with the
statements in the De viris illustrious but also runs counter to
the testimony of chronological deductions which can be made
from the text of the Adversus nationes itself. 45
Persecutions are there mentioned many times 4fl and while
the words do permit us in some instances to assume that at
the moment of writing a vigorous persecution was not actu-
ally in progress, there is not the slightest suggestion that the
period of the persecutions had ended. 47 There is no allusion,
not even a veiled one, to the Peace of the Church under
Maxentius in 31 1 A. D. 48 The year 311 therefore becomes a
terminus ante quern which is absolute: the entire work was
completed before that time. 49 This shows at least that the
date of the passage from the Chronicon must be an error no
or, if it is correct, then it is not the date of the composition of
the Adversus nationes but of something else unspecified. A
group of scholars 51 assumes it to be the year of Arnobius*
death, but Bardenhewcr ** questions this too-easy solution of
the problem. On the other hand, his doubts arc probably
based on the prevailing belief, for which there seems to be
no evidence, that Amobius xvas an old man when he wrote/ 3
Oehler takes the view, approved by Brycc-Campbcll as
probable, that the error derives from a confusion of the
vicennalia of Diocletian (304 A. D.) with those of Con-
stantino (celebrated in the East in 325 and in the West in
326), that is, that Jerome intended to date the entry in the
Chronicon in 304 but through error inserted it at the place
INTRODUCTION 9
of Constantine's vicennalia. On the contrary, it appears at
the next year and only after Jerome has inserted between the
entries for 326 and 327 a note to the effect that all entries
thereafter were written by himself. 55 If, on the other hand,
Oehler is right in thinking that Jerome was confused about
which emperor's vicennalia coincided with Arnobius' date,
then we could correct the error by transferring the item to the
year 304, and as we shall shortly see, there is some other
evidence tending to favor this period.
We should now examine additional chronological data to
be found in the Adversus nationes. In 1.13 Arnobius says
that " it is almost three hundred years, more or less, since we
began to be Christians and to be known on the earth/' 5Q
This calculation is doubtless computed from the Birth of
Christ D7 rather than the beginning of the Ministry or the
Crucifixion BS or the adoption at Antioch 59 of the name
' Christians ' to designate the followers of Christ, since the
last three alternatives would each give a date later than 311
A, D. which, as we have seen, is impossible. Arnobius has,
however, been studiously inexact and so we cannot use this
passage for fixing the date of composition more precisely than
in the reign of Diocletian, not much before or after 300.
A second chronological allusion is to be found in 2.71
where the age of the City of Rome is given as " a thousand
and fifty years . . . or not much less than that/* Here again
there is inexactness and an embarrassment of alternatives,
since the founding of Rome was variously dated 61 by L.
Cincius Alimentus 2 in 728 B. C. y by Q. Fabius Pictor 8S in
747, by Polybius * in 750, by M, Porcius Cato 65 in 752, and
by M. Terentius Varro 60 in 753 B. C. Depending upon
which of these dates is accepted as correct, Rome reached the
age of 1050 years in, respectively, 322, 303, 300, 298, or
io AKNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
By which system of chronology would Arnobius be likely
to compute his date? Here we can be almost certain, as
Bryce-Campbell 67 maintain, since not only was the Var-
ronian system by far the most popular in later times, being
regularly used in computing all dates ab urle condita, but
Arnobius actually does use it in 5. 8 where he says that
according to Varro there were, from the Deluge to the con-
sulship of Hirtius and Pansa (43 B. C.)> not quite two
thousand years. Frequent allusions elsewhere to Varro Oft also
support this contention.
On the other hand, there is in 4.36 a reference to burning
of Christian books and destruction of Christian meeting-
places which to many scholars C9 can only be an allusion to the
persecution of Diocletian in 303 A. D. described by Euse-
bius. 70 Arnobius' words are as follows: " For why, indeed,
have our writings deserved to be given to the flames? Why
should our meeting-places be savagely torn down? " n Per-
haps these scholars are right but the opinion is certainly not
unanimous r2 and the passage itself seems rather general in
its terms and application.
Let us here recapitulate the chronological evidence pre-
sented up to this point: so far as Book One is concerned \vc
can reach no more precise year than about 300 A. D, For
Book Two, the possibilities are many, depending on the
system of chronology chosen, ranging from 297 to 303, with
strong preference shown for the earlier date, but in any
case, no one year can be taken as exactly right, since the state-
ment is not precise, For Book Four, what evidence there is
points to 303 or thereafter, assuming the allusion in 4.36 to
be to the persecution of Diocletian. The other books contain
no chronological data at all 73 Such is the evidence upon
which Monceaux/* and Moricca n following him, base their
INTRODUCTION 1 1
theory of a divided composition. In their view f Books One
and Two are to be dated about 297 but the other books not
until 303 or thereafter.
There is something to be said for this compromise, yet all
conclusions based on the theory that the first two books were
composed as one unit and the last five as a separate and later
unit fall to the ground when the books themselves are
examined.
At the beginning of Book Two (2.1) and again at the
beginning of Book Three (3.2) there is unmistakable evi-
dence that Arnobius regarded Book Two as a sort of digres-
sion from the theme begun in Book One and resumed in
Book Three. Thus, the break between Book Two and Book
Three cannot be taken as a resumption of composition after
an interval if it is significant, it tends to show that Book Two
is an interpolation between One and Three, and any attempt
to see breaks in composition elsewhere must be regarded as
purely subjective. There are, to be sure, two passages which
suggest that composition was not continuous in the order in
which the books, or parts of books, now stand. There is an
allusion in 4.3 to something said " previously " but the sub-
ject has not been touched upon previously and it is probable,
as Bryce-Campbell think, that the author really refers to
4.8. In 4.37 and 7.9 there are locutions which seem to antici-
pate a story introduced later. While these passages tell us
something of the method of composition, they have no bear-
ing on the date of composition. The Monceaux theory there-
fore is unproven at best it is really highly improbable.
In view of the many questions that arise from the con-
sideration of the evidence just discussed, it is not surprising
that the dates assigned to our author by various writers show
a very wide divergence, covering the period from 296 to
iz ARNOEIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
313! 76 One of these scholars 77 would go so far as to assert
that Arnobius was martyred between 303 and 3 05. Har-
nack even maintains that his birth was before 250 A. D, 79
on the basis of the psychology of the work which indicates,
so he thinks, that Arnobius must have been sixty years of age
when he wrote. This view appears to me wholly subjective.
Others SQ put the birth as about 250 A. D. but we really do
not know when or where Arnobius was born; when, where,
or how he died. We do know that he wrote prior to 311
A. D. and probably in the reign of Diocletian, not much
before or after the year 300, and with the present evidence
we ought not to attempt any more precise dating,
Before passing to another topic we should note, however,
that except for the date given for the entry in the Chronicon,
which as we have seen must certainly be an error, all of the
chronological details of Jerome may have been derived from
internal evidence, but since Jerome's testimony also involves
other items which could not have been deduced from a read-
ing of the book itself, we need not assume that he was with-
out independent sources of information as to the date. Inas-
much as he was writing not quite a century later, ho may even
have derived his knowledge of Arnobius from oral tradition.
At any rate, he tells us also that Lactantius was Arnobius*
pupil. Though most scholars who have discussed this prob-
lem, in particular Micka, 81 the latest to deal with it at length,
find this statement not easy to accept, it has apparently been
rejected in toto only by Ffoulkes. 82 The stumbling-block
consists of the fact that Lactantius never mentions Arnobius,
a silence the more surprising since there is in the Divincte
institutiones a passage 83 in which its author mentions three
of his predecessors, Minucius Felix, Tertullian, and Cyprian,
in that order, which is chronological Had Lactantius merely
INTRODUCTION 1 3
heard of Arnobius, much less been his pupil, he might well
have added his name to the list.
This raises the question at once as to which of the two
works is earlier, a point on which we have no conclusive
evidence. It will help us little to assume, however, that
Lactantius is the earlier, for we shall then have to explain
why Arnobius does not mention Lactantius. This might be
somewhat easier to explain, since Arnobius mentions no
Christian predecessors by name. We do not, however, know
exactly when the Divinae institutions were written and the
date given by Micka, 84 304-13, is doubtless based in part on
the assumption that the work of a pupil would be later than
that of his teacher. Such an assumption may be right but we
have no way of proving it so, and it may actually be wrong.
Moreover, Micka's date may be in conflict with the testimony
of Jerome where the words " in the reign of Diocletian " 85
can apply either to Lactantius' school days, or to the date of
composition of his great work, or merely to his floruit.
In the absence of definite statements to the contrary, we
may with justification take it that Jerome means us to under-
stand that Lactantius was Arnobius' pupil when the latter
was teaching rhetoric at Sicca. Yet we do not know how
much older the master was than the pupil, if at all The
period of Arnobius' life during which on a priori grounds it
is possible that Lactantius studied under Arnobius may easily
have extended for fifty years. It is generally further assumed
that both master and pupil were still pagans at the time of
their association. The pupil may be presumed to have fin-
ished his course of study and then to have left Sicca, Later
the master became a Christian and wrote his remarkable
book, but by this time it is possible, even probable, that the
pupil was far away. Indeed, we know that Lactantius was at
14 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
Nicomedia in Bithynia as early as 290 A. D. 8C Therefore, he
may never have heard of his former teacher's conversion or
known that he had written a book. Much of this is mere
assumption but we have no way of disproving it and it
furnishes, at least, a possible explanation of Lactantius' failure
to mention Arnobius in the passage cited. 87
Though there are great differences between the two
writers, 88 as we should expect, some scholars have been im-
pressed by the resemblances. Both composed their works in
seven books, a parallel noted even by Jerome, and this makes
Brandt 80 think that Lactantius was writing his work as a sort
of silent protest against Arnobius. 00 Moricca 91 and Moli-
gnoni 2 attribute to Arnobius the love of metaphysical dis-
cussion displayed by Lactantius, 03 while Brandt, 04 Pohlenz, 95
and Micka 90 profess to see passages where the similarities
imply interdependence of some kind or other. The last
named, 07 who is sure that Lactantius could not have read the
Adver$us nationes, attempts to explain the resemblances as
follows:
The similar passages of Lactantius can be sufficiently explained by
the attestation that he knew of Arnobius' doctrine from the time he
spent with him as his pupil. 98 . . * And during the time he ( Atno-
bius) was Lactantius' teacher, the pupil readily became acquainted
with his teacher's views and what they involved. 00
While a pupil may often recall much of his master's teaching,
we are hardly justified in believing that Lactantius studied
under Arnobius any other subject than rhetoric. Note also
that Micka elsewhere 10 inconsistently suggests that the
failure to mention Arnobius may be motivated on grounds of
style, that is, that the fine taste of the " Christian Cicero " m
was repelled by the barbarisms of Arnobius. This view exag-
gerates the defects of Arnobius' style, and if Lactantius' taste
INTRODUCTION 1 5
were so sensitive, it is strange that he would have gone to
that very same man for instruction in the art of rhetoric.
Moreover, he does mention and criticize Tertullian whose
style is sometimes conceded to be inferior to that of Arnohius.
At a later point we shall discuss certain parallels between
the Adversus nationes and the Divinae institutiones which
may be thought to show interdependence. Here we may
anticipate the results of that discussion by stating that the
investigation hardly proves conclusive.
Let us now turn to the statement that dreams figured in
Arnobius' conversion. In the two allusions which our author
makes to his espousal of Christianity (i. 39, 3. 24), there is
no mention of the motive which led him to his act, much
less the suggestion that a dream figured in itthe point which
he drives home is the recency of his conversion, which we
should perhaps have expected him to conceal. Moreover, in
i . 46 he speaks of " empty, unsubstantial dreams/' and in
7. 39 he tells a pagan story in which Jupiter appears to a
man in a dream. 102 For these reasons Oehler 103 and Bryce-
Campbell 104 deny the possibility that the conversion was
caused by a dream or series of them. On the other hand,
Coxe 105 and Rand 10 accept the story at its face value. Other
writers explain the conversion differently: Freppel, 107 for
example, says that it was not brought about by reading
Scripture, a conclusion reached from the paucity of refer-
ences to the Scriptures, a point we shall discuss later. Ac-
cording to Freppel and Moule, 108 it was the heroism of the
martyrs that impressed the rhetorician. Gabarrou 109 thinks
that Arnobius was also greatly impressed by the miracles of
Christ and by the failure of philosophy, but that the dreams
won him finally. Cruttwell, 110 approving Neander's skepti-
cism on the story/ 11 says that the conversion must have been
1 6 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
the result of a long dissatisfaction with paganism, an element
surely present in every genuine conversion. Cumont 112 thinks
that the conversion was based on the fear of his soul's death.
Some scholars attempt to date the conversion: Gabarrou 11S
at about Arnobius' fiftieth year (295-6); de Labriolle 114 at
about his sixtieth year; Monceaux 115 and Moricca 110 in 295
or 296, while Bryce-Campbell 11T are sure that the conversion
did not take place in a time of persecution. This last con-
clusion is probably correct. Nock, 118 however, warns that the
statement of the details of the conversion as Arnobius gives
them should not be taken too literally, since the story agrees
with the style of other similar narratives elsewhere.
To sum up, the dream story is not really inconsistent with
what Arnobius says about the conversion, for he there does
not mention motives, and we now know that some dreams, at
least, are the subconscious repetition of ideas impressed upon
the mind during consciousness. There is no reason why
Arnobius, already drawn to Christianity by what he had
observed of its adherents or had been told of its nature during
his waking hours, should not have dreamed of it also, and
should thus have been led to take the final step leading to
his becoming a Christian,
In the testimony found in the Chronicon Jerome tells us
also that upon Arnobius' expressing his desire to be received
as a Christian, his sincerity was doubted by the bishop be-
cause he had always been an opponent of the Faith. So far
as I am aware, this is the only example of a Christian bishop
in the early period exhibiting such skepticism about the
profession of a convert, but that is no reason to reject the
story. On the other hand, it must be admitted that the very
act of wishing to become a Christian involved a prospective
convert in such great danger as to discourage the insincere
INTRODUCTION 1 7
trifler. There is, moreover, no allusion in the entire work to
the bishop nor to any other specific Christian, clerical or lay,
and the introductory chapters of Book One are completely
silent on any such stimulus to composition. Neander and
Schaff, 119 indeed, maintain that Arnobius wrote more from
an inward impulse than from outward occasion. The story
is treated with skepticism by Bryce-Campbell 12 and Rapi-
sarda, 121 and Sihler 122 regards it as very improbable. On the
other hand, it is accepted at its face value by LeNourry, 123
Freppel, 124 Rand, 125 Geffcken, 126 Salvatorelli, 127 and Ama-
tucci. 128 So also Moule 129 who says it was the church at
Sicca that demanded the pledge.
If the story is to be accepted, we can be sure that it was
really a bishop at Sicca and not the bishop of Carthage who
was involved, for we know that the church at Sicca had a
bishop of its own, suffragan to the See of Carthage, at least
as early as i September 256 A. D., when Castus of Sicca is
recorded as having attended the Seventh Council of Car-
thage. 130 That Bishop Castus had survived to the conversion
is, of course, extremely unlikely in view of the length of time
and the frequency of death in persecutions experienced by
Christians in those days.
The biographical details of Jerome's testimony which we
have thus far discussed may in general be accepted without
much question except for those three items contained only
in the entry in the Chronicon: (i) the date of 326-7; (2)
the dream; and (3) the attitude of the bishop. Inherently
these three items are such as to cause us the greatest diffi-
culty and they are unsupported elsewhere. Of the three the
date is the most easily explained and the least serious. Note
however, that though in the whole entry there are facts sup-
ported by other testimony, it possesses a somewhat romantic
1 8 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
flavor. Se non e vero, e ken trovato. Yet the imperfection of
Arnobius' knowledge of Christianity fits in rather well with
the passage. In fact, it may he that the story is a slightly
fictionalized version of deductions made by Jerome or his
source from the book itself, 131 Curiously enough, much the
same objections have also been raised again and again against
a similar biographical passage in the very same Chronicon,
that dealing with Arnobius' master, the Roman poet Lucre-
tius, 132 and perhaps there is an element of fiction in both. 138
Before passing to the work itself, we should note certain
other biographical details. The Benedictine loanncs Trithe-
mius m tells us categorically that our writer became a presbyter
and also wrote a work called De rhetorica. The second part
of this statement is apparently a misunderstanding of what
Jerome says, but there is now, at least, no ancient evidence for
the first, and Trithemius in the fifteenth century is unlikely
to have possessed a source since lost. The idea that Arnobius
received ordination is completely at variance with everything
in the Adversus nationes and we know nothing whatever of
the author's history subsequent to the completion of the book.
At the time of writing Arnobius was too ill-informed to have
become a presbyter; m indeed, it has been maintained that
he was then only a catechumen. 1 If so, he was a remarkable
catechumen indeed. This view, moreover, has been carried
to a completely untenable extreme by Colombo " T who sug-
gests that Arnobius was never a Christian at all and that the
Adversus nationes is merely a mighty rhetorical tour clc force,
a mere exercise in composition! No other scholar would
entertain such an idea for a moment. 1118
/ / -f
To learn more of Arnobius we must turn to the " most
splendid " books themselves in which, as Gabarrou m acutely
INTRODUCTION 19
remarks, his physiognomy is clearly revealed. For, while he is
most reticent about himself, the frankness with which he
handles his materials and the remarkable individuality of his
views permit us to use his unconscious self-revelations to
round out our picture of the man.
On the style Jerome tells us also that " Arnobius is uneven
and prolix and without clear divisions in his work, resulting
in confusion/' 14 He is certainly uneven and prolix but the
composition as a whole shows organic unity and each book
discusses in thorough fashion the topic assigned to it 141
Passing allusion, to be sure, is frequently made to topics
treated in great detail at other points, 142 but this is no defect.
The subjects discussed in the central part of the work (Books
Three to Five) are really parts of a larger whole, but the
author should hardly be criticized because the magnitude of
a topic extends beyond the limits of a single book.
Book One is devoted in general to a refutation of certain
charges brought against the Christians by pagans, 143 the
chief of which is the slander that the cause of certain calami-
ties which the opponents pretend to have noticed in recent
years is the anger of pagan gods at not having received their
proper worship from the Christians. Arnobius' refutation of
this charge, which seems considerably stronger than the de-
fense which St. Cyprian includes in his Ad Demetrianum,
may be summarized briefly as follows:
As a matter of fact, no new types of calamities have been
noticed and actually there have been fewer of the older types
in the Christian era, as well as times of relative prosperity.
The origin of the calamities may be possibly found in nature
itself. Moreover, such anger tends to demean the gods. Since
the Christians are really innocent of any wrongdoings, it is
the pagan priestlings who have stirred up the accusation be-
20 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
cause their income has been reduced. Indeed, the pagan gods
are ridiculous, a point which will form the general theme of
Books Three to Five.
A second charge to which attention is here directed is that
the Christians worship a human being and, at that, one who
has been crucified. The refutation is a demonstration 1-H
that Christ was divine, attested by His own miracles and
those of His disciples, as well as by the expansion of Chris-
tianity subsequent to the Crucifixion. The third and final
charge discussed in this Book is that Christian literature lacks
an exalted style, a stricture which we might think was chiefly
a reflection of Arnobius' experience as a rhetorician, were not
the same charge also quoted and refuted by Clement of
Alexandria. 145 The Book ends with some sections on the
Incarnation and the Crucifixion which have been thought to
have a Docetic ring, 148
Book Two, the longest and in many ways the most interest-
ing of the seven, is, as we have seen, regarded by its author as
a kind of digression from the main theme. 1 ' 17 After a pre-
liminary section which consists of praise of Christ, Arnobius
compares Him with the pagan philosophers to their discredit,
and he does this by a lengthy attack upon the Platonic doc-
trine of the immortality of the soul 1 ' 18 For Arnobius the soul
can only be mortal and he appears to be of the opinion that
this view is orthodox Christianity. Among the most interest-
ing parts of the Book is a section devoted to description of a
controlled experiment in which an attempt was to be made
to demonstrate that the soul at birth is what philosophers
since Locke call a talmla rasa. UQ This Book also contains a
denial of the value of philosophic and scientific investigation
which leads de Labriolle to remark that Arnobias is the
first of the apologists to found religious dogmatism upon
INTRODUCTION 2 1
philosophical Pyrrhonism. The Book ends with a demonstra-
tion that the charge against Christianity of heing recent in
origin may be refuted by showing the relative recency of the
pagan religions themselves. Book Two shows Arnobius at
the height of his powers; indeed, McGiffert, 151 who says that
only Books One and Two are of interest for us, admits that
they are very fresh and original and present an extreme
skepticism for his own day.
Following the digression in Book Two, Arnobius resumes
the argument by attacking the pagan conception of the gods
as anthropomorphic and centers his polemic in particular on
the fact that they were represented as having sex and sexual
characteristics and also as having a 'division of labor' by
which one god rules over a limited province and cannot
trespass on the territories of another, 152 The Book ends with
a description of various pagan gods whose very nature is
ridiculous.
The same argument is continued in Book Four where the
identical method is applied to the Roman deifications of ab-
stract qualities, to the indigetes, to the sinister gods, to ' mul-
tiple * deities (a syncretism of a number of local divinities into
an unharmonious whole), and, finally, to the disgraceful
legends concerning the great god Jupiter himself.
In Book Five this method of attack is turned against two
well-known myths, the story of Jupiter Elicius and Numa,
and the legends of Attis and the Great Mother of the Gods,
while the criticism of these myths is followed by a powerful
and devastating polemic against certain of the pagan mys-
teries. These three Books, while not attaining the sublimity
of the first two, received from Orelli m the high praise of
being called worthy of Lucian himself .
Book Six is devoted to an attack upon the pagan consecra-
22 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
tion of temples to the gods and upon the images erected
therein, while Book Seven involves a polemic against the
pagan rituals, in particular the blood sacrifices, and the offer-
ings of wine and incense.
We have already alluded to the question of the order of
the composition of the respective Books. 154 Kettner 155 is
probably right in claiming that the work was hastily put
together and Bryce-Campbell 156 that it was never revised and
finished. In 7. 44 appears a long passage which is a slightly-
differing variant of the preceding section. 157 The best ex-
planation of the repetition is that it is an alternative version
actually prepared by Arnobius himself and that, being pre-
served with his notes, it was erroneously included when the
individual pages were amalgamated into a finished manu-
script. Another section which in most editions appears as
7-35~37 seemed to Orelli so admirable a conclusion to the
whole work that, following the suggestion of an unknown
French scholar, he actually transposed it to the end, renum-
bering these chapters as 7. 49-5 1 . Indeed, the final chap-
ter (7.51=7.48 Orelli) appears to break off somewhat
abruptly." 8 Moreover, throughout the work the author so
frequently employs two almost synonymous words or phrases
for a single idea that many times I have wondered whether
such doublets were not intended to be eliminated in a final
revision by the ultimate selection of one of the alternatives. 1
While it is now my considered judgment that they arc but
an expression of a passion for redundancy apparent not only
in the locutions but also in the ideas &$ wcll, tno Arnobius 1
style betrays throughout a mind working at almost incredible
speed, a quality which I hope has been carried over into the
translation.
Earlier scholars 101 were apt to complain that Arnobius
INTRODUCTION 23
writes " impure Latin " but this lament is doubtless based on
the now-exploded theory that any deviation from the Cicero-
nian norm constitutes a blemish. The view of Julicher 1G2
that the books show disorder and bad style has been recently
challenged by Festugiere. 16 * A comment of Brandt 164 that
the style is wild is less open to objection. Freppel 165 finds it
impossible to approve Orelli's view that Arnobius is both
" sapiens et sobrius." Yet few would go so far as to attribute
to Arnobius, as does Foakes-Jackson/ 66 the best Latinity of
his age. In this connection we may do well to quote the words
of Bryce-Campbell: 16r
His style is, in point of fact, clear and lucid, rising at times into
genuine eloquence; 16S and its obscurity and harshness are generally
caused by an attempt to express a vague and indefinite idea. Indeed,
very considerable power of expression is manifested in the philo-
sophical reasonings of the second book, the keen satire of the fourth
and fifth, and the vigorous argument of the sixth and seventh.
De Labriolle 1QO also aptly refers to " son eloquence continue,
son Erudition compacte, son ironie massive/' and says he may
be compared with Voltaire but is less subtle. 170
Yet, in spite of the undeniable excellence of many pas-
sages/ 71 the defects of the style are precisely those which we
should expect to find in a book written, not by a great master,
but by a pedantic professor of rhetoric who uses all the tricks
of his trade, and sows constantly with the sack, rarely with
the hand. Arnobius is never content to make a point with
lightning thrust and then pass on he invariably continues to
drive home each argument with seemingly endless repeti-
tion, 172 The book would have profited much by the judicious
use of an editorial blue pencil.
As for language, Sihler 178 remarks that the style is con-
sciously archaic and the reader of the Notes will be impressed
24 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
by the number of parallels cited from Lucretius and other
early writers. The parallels to Lucretius, which display ap-
parent borrowings of both locutions and ideas, can hardly be
explained as accidental it is clear that Arnobius had read
Lucretius long and well. 174 But the archaistic tendency as
a whole, which was noticed by Freppel, 175 may be better
explained by his wise suggestion that many such locutions
had remained firmly fixed in the standard Latin of North
Africa to the end of the third century, though they had long
before become obsolete elsewhere. 176 That Arnobius writes
in the same style as the other Africans is pointed out by
Oehler, 177 yet in the words of the great expert on prose style,
Eduard Norden, 178 he exhibits a tendency to preserve a more
classical style than the others, Apuleius, for example. He
employs all the figures of speech and no one is so addicted to
rhetorical questions. 179
Scholars interested in the study of prose rhythms, notably
Stange, 180 Lorenz, 181 Lofstedt, 182 and Hagendahl, 183 have sub-
jected the Latin text of Arnobius to the minutest examina-
tions. They conclude that in ending his clauses Arnobius
observes the laws of metrical clausulae, Lorenz defining four
such patterns, Lofstedt only three, 184 Many text critics even
use such principles in textual emendation, a practice recently
criticized by Jones. 185
Jerome's final dictum on the content of the work needs
some comment: 18G " I think Origcn ought at times to be
read for his learning, in the same manner that we treat Tor-
tullian and Novatus, Arnobius and Apollinarius, and a num-
ber of ecclesiastical writers both Greek and Latin; we should
choose out the good in them and shun what is contrary/*
It is clear that Jerome was offended by what he read in
Arnobius, So also have been many others, and one of the
INTRODUCTION 25
chief complaints is that Arnobius, to use a phrase of Micka's, 187
appears to have a poor grasp of Christianity. This probably is
what Geffcken 188 means when he says that Arnobius begins
a secularizing tendency in the apologies.
Indeed, Arnobius is the only apologist who does not show
close familiarity with Scripture and does not appeal to the
authority of the prophets. 189 Not only does he never quote
from the Old Testament, there is good evidence to show that
he must have been largely ignorant of it. 190 It is universally
conceded that he does quote from the New Testament, 191
some scholars admitting one quotation, others two, but even
this statement needs to be qualified. In 2, 6 appears the
following: " Has that well-known saying never struck your
ears that the wisdom of man is foolishness with God who is
Chief? " The italicized words are a free translation of i
Corinthians 3. 19 which reads, The wisdom of this world is
foolishness with God. The divergence between Arnobius and
the extant New Testament manuscripts, both Greek and
Latin, forces us to choose between two alternatives: either
Arnobius is quoting exactly but from a different text of the
Epistle, or he is quoting from memory, inexactly. The first
alternative is actually accepted by Newton 192 but is less prob-
able than the second, Consider the phrase, t( that well-known
saying/' m which suggests that Arnobius knew of the words
only from hearsay: indeed, it is not even clear that he knew
the saying had the support of Apostolic authority behind it.
Moreover, the saying is exceedingly sententious, easily re-
membered, and apt to be frequently quoted by Christians.
Certainly, there is no proof here that he had read the
Epistle. 10 '
The second supposed quotation is even less exact and
consists of a sentence with which Reifferscheid 105 compares
26 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
four New Testament passages. Speaking of Christ, Arnobius
in i, 6 says: " we . . . have learned from His teachings that
evil should not be repaid with evil" The passages referred
to are Matthew 5. 44, where the correspondence is not very
close, and Romans iz. 17, i Thessalonians 5. ij, and i Peter
3. 9. Yet here also the phrase which we find in Arnobius is
so central a theme in Christian teaching that it is neither
necessary nor possible to assume a knowledge of the New
Testament to explain it/ 36 Doubtless, this Christian truth
was one of the first to be imparted to the new converts, if
indeed they had not already deduced it from observance of
Christian practice while yet pagans. 197
A word of caution must be inserted at this point. We must
not overdo the argwnentum ex silentio since the fundamental
purpose of Arnobius, to impress the pagans with their own
guilt, rather than to win them to Christianity, 198 would not
necessarily require him to make use of Scripture and other
evidence drawn from Christian sources. The pagans would
hardly admit such material as evidencetheir position must
be attacked on the basis of illogical elements inherent in it,
Yet this caveat will not fully explain the sparscncss of
Christian testimony in the Adversus nationes, for in addition
there is positive evidence to show that its author was defi-
nitely ignorant of the New Testament xou as well as of the
Old. 200
In 7. 7 it is objected against the pagan gocls that they have
never been seen: 201 could a Christian who knew that John
i. 1 8 states that no man hath seen God at any time have used
such an argument? Again, in 7. 16, with heightened sarcasm
Arnobius suggests to the pagans that they ought to offer their
gods sacrifices of cumin, cress, turnips, and other such vege-
tables: could a Christian knowing Matthew 23* 23 have
INTRODUCTION 27
employed such an argument? Possibly. The remarks in 7. 8
imply ignorance of the Redemption. 202 Finally, the long pas-
sage in i. 38 in which praise of Christ appears to have been
drawn not from the Gospels but from Lucretius' eulogy of
Epicurus, certainly implies genuine ignorance of the Gospel
narrative concerning the teaching of Christ. 203
The Adversus nationes is also singularly silent on the
stories of the Birth of Christ and of the Resurrection of which
nothing is said except that it was merely the human body that
died on the Cross. 1>0i Arnobius vacillates, according to Me-
Giffert, 205 between modalism 206 and ditheism. 207 This would
be evidence, if McGiffert is right, of an Arianizing tendency
noted also by Cruttwell. 203 Micka 209 merely says that in
Arnobius Christ is in some way subordinate to the Father,
while Brunner, 210 who attempts without much success to
show that Arnobius is orthodox, maintains that he clearly
distinguishes between the pre-existence of Christ and the
Incarnation. In any case, we look in vain for any reference
to the Third Person of the Trinity. 211 While in general
Arnobius takes a pessimistic 212 view of the depravity and
worthlessness of man, 213 Marchesi 214 maintains that he knows
nothing of original sin. At least, he never alludes to the
story of the Garden of Eden or its theological implications,
but Rapisarda, 215 on the other hand, cannot believe Arnobius
ignorant of this dogma and cites the ingenitae infirmitatis
vitium mentioned in i . 27.
At some points our writer appears to Cruttwell 216 to be
dangerously near agnosticism, but in this Cruttwell seems to
misunderstand his meaning; Arnobius denies that man can
know many things about God but he never doubts man's
ability to know that God exists. There is also evidence that
points suspiciously to Gnostic influences, but Marchesi 217
28 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
absolves him from the charge of being a Gnostic and Mc-
Giffert 218 wisely says on this point: " The accusation betrays
the inveterate habit of mistaking superficial resemblances for
real relationships, a habit which has wrought untold con-
fusion in history/' Few writers, indeed, have suffered so
much at the hands of those who read isolated passages and
then derive general conclusions therefrom without benefit of
a thorough examination of teaching elsewhere. 219
We find, moreover, nothing in this book on the Sacra-
ments. 220 There is nothing whatever on ecclesiastical polity.
Arnobius says nothing about forms of Christian worship save
that in the Christian meeting places (conventicula) the
Christians pray to the Supreme God asking peace and pardon
on behalf of those in authority, for armies, kings, friends and
enemies, the living and the dead. 221
There remain, however, two phases of Arnobius* thinking
which require more extended comment. The first is that
while Arnobius, unlike his pupil Lactantius, consecrated no
special book to the teaching of the Divine Anger, 222 he
repeatedly reiterates the belief that display of anger is wholly
inconsistent with divinity. This typically Arnobian doctrine
has been subjected to searching analysis in the masterly dis-
sertation of Micka which we have previously had occasion
to cite many times. Micka has convincingly demonstrated 22Jf
that this view, which is a corollary of Arnobius' doctrine o
' aloofness ' of God, 224 is out of harmony with Scripture. 225
Earlier Christian writers do not, it is shown by Micka, present
a united view on this doctrine. Indeed, there is a group
which includes 220 Aristkles, Athenagoras, Justin Martyr,
Theophilus of Antioch, Cyprian, and Commodian, xvho ex-
hibited no awareness that the problem of the Divine Anger
even existed. A second group of Fathers, 227 including Ire-
INTRODUCTION 29
naeus, Tertullian, Novatian, the author of the Pseudo-Clemen-
tine Recognitions, and Origen, concern themselves with
combatting the heretical view of Marcion 228 that there were
two Gods, one free from anger and one displaying anger, and
take the opposite view that the doctrine of the Divine Anger
is orthodox. Now Arnobius' teaching on this important point
ranges him neither with the first group, nor with the second,
nor even with the Marcionites. It is with the pagan phi-
losophers, 229 as distinct from the people, 230 that Arnobius'
view places him, particularly with Epicureanism m but also
to some extent with Stoicism. 232 There can be no doubt
whatever that Arnobius is unorthodox on this point, a charge
from which LeNourry 233 has vainly attempted to absolve
him. 234
Allusion has already been made to the frequent use which
Arnobius has made of the Epicurean poet Lucretius. 235 This
led Klussmann to suppose that Arnobius had actually been an
Epicurean and had failed to make the transition from Epi-
cureanism to Christianity complete. 236 There are, however,
in 1.31 some anti-Epicurean attacks, 287 which, to be sure,
might not necessarily vitiate Klussmann's view, but the allu-
sion to the conversion suggests that Arnobius had been a
C3C?
worshipper of fetishes and that hardly seems congruent with
the belief that he was actually an adherent of Epicureanism
itself. 288 Jessen 289 and Dal Pane, 240 however, take the strong
position that he had not been an Epicurean but was merely
an imitator of Epicurus and Lucretius, and in this view, they
are joined by Rohricht 241 who thinks that Lucretius was
probably the only source of Arnobius' Epicureanism. Rapi-
sarda 242 maintains, on the contrary, that many other con-
temporary sources existed and that while Arnobius uses
Epicurean arguments when they suit his purpose, he never
30 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
shares their position, and, indeed, Marchesi 2i3 maintains that
Arnobius was an "avversario sdegnoso" of Epicureanism,
while Atzberger 244 thinks that he stands midway between
Epicureanism and Neo-Platonism, an astute observation.
Whatever the explanation of the Epicureanism in Arnobius,
the fact that it exists is undeniable. Though there are traces
of Stoicism here and there, 2 '" 5 our author appears not to have
been much influenced by that school and Freppel 2lrt main-
tains that in Book Five he actually attacks the Stoic view.
Arnobius was, according to Micka,' 47 not an adherent of any
school but an eclectic philosopher. This is probably the truth
he did not construct a system of his own. 248 .
He lacks as a philosopher, so Cruttwell 2<i says, the meta-
physical depth of Origen, but when the same scholar also
maintains that he is without the uncompromising candor of
Tertullian, he certainly underestimates Arnobius. He fur-
ther complains that as a scientist Arnobius cannot distinguish
between the discoverable and the undiscoverable, but admits
that in some points " he is beyond his age, e. g. he sees the
possibility of contradictory ptopositions being put forward
with equal a priori plausibility on many important subjects,
e. g, the immortality of the soul, the corporeity of God,
&c." 25 Again, he points out 3Jil that Arnobius shows affinities
with non-Christian modes of thought and in that he is,
according to Cruttwell, a precursor of Calvinism. In any case,
Arnobius does not believe that the soul is by nature im-
mortal 282 though it is capable of becoming so by grace, 88 ' 1 and
on human nature he is sometimes pessimistic, sometimes
optimistic, 254 and a skeptic concerning the possibility of
knowledge. He is, according to HaIliday/ JM in harmony with
the prevailing trend of his time against rationalism.
An impressive group of scholars * mi charge our author with
INTRODUCTION 3 1
the mistaken belief that the pagan gods exist as a sort of
secondary divinity subordinate to the Christian God. This
opinion is by no means unanimous, 257 but dissenters are not
numerous. Cruttwell 25S and Leckelt 259 think that he identi-
fies these gods with the daemones, 2 but in every instance in
which this word appears 261 it is clear that he distinguishes
between them and the gods of the pagan cults. Our present
inquiry concerns, therefore, not the demons but the well-
known gods of the Graeco-Roman pantheon, Jupiter, Juno,
and the rest.
Examination of what Arnobius actually says about these
gods shows that in 3. 28-35, 4. 9, 4. n, 4. 27, 4. 28, 5. 44,
6. 2, and 6. 10 there is highly convincing evidence to support
the view that he is sure such gods cannot exist. To these
passages we should add two others (5. 2 and 5. 8) where the
same opinion is expressed about specific gods. In 3. 44, 7. 2,
and 7. 7 he expresses doubt as to their existence without
reaching the negative conclusion expected from an orthodox
and well-informed Christian, but there is nothing here that
suggests that he really believed the divinities exist. He al-
ludes to the fact that pagans " suppose " they exist in 6. 8
and 7. 35, while in 6. 2 he holds back from even imputing
virtues to the gods. The reference in 2. 3 to the " lesser
gods " occurs in a quotation from a supposed pagan opponent
and since he is regularly careful to compose these " quota-
tions " in complete harmony with the pagan view, if, indeed,
as some have thought, they are not actually borrowed from an
actual pagan attack upon Christianity, no evidence of Arno-
bius' own opinions may properly be deduced from a phrase
put into the mouth of a pagan. In 4. 13 there is an allusion
to one supreme god and the many who pretend to be gods;
in 3* 6 he expresses a willingness to worship the pagan gods
32, ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
but demands to know about them first, i. e. that they exist. An
allusion to the " gods who dwell in heaven " (5. 1 5) is prob-
ably only rhetorical. If these passages were all we had, no
one would have raised any question as to Arnobius' orthodoxy
on this point.
There are, on the other hand, several passages which,
taken at first glance, seem to favor the opposite view. In
7. 1 8 there is the concession: " So far as we are concerned,
let them (the pagan gods) be whatsoever they are believed to
be," In 3. 3 he maintains that though the Christians do not
worship the pagan gods, in their rendering homage to the
One God, the other gods are included" if they are royal in
descent and are sprung from the primal Head/' (Does not
the fact that admittedly the Christians do not worship the
pagan gods imply, at the very least, belief in their falsity?)
Again, he states: " If we all grant there is but one Father of
things, immortal, and alone unbegotten, and that nothing is
found prior to Him . . . , it follows that all those whom
human fancy has believed to be gods of mortal men, have
been either begotten by Him or brought forth by His com-
mand/' And again, 262 " since all the gods, be they true gods
or only said to be such by hearsay and conjecture, are im-
mortal and eternal by reason of His will," and " what greater
honor or distinction can we bestow upon them than to put
them in the same place as the Head and Lord of the uni-
verse and the Supreme King himself, to whom the gods, in
common with us, owe their consciousness of their own exist-
ence and that they are possessed of living substance? " aw
These are the passages which, read out of their context and
without due consideration of the impressive evidence to the
contrary, have led some scholars to assert that Arnobius be-
lieved that these pagan gods existed as a sort of lesser divinity
INTRODUCTION 33
subordinate to the God of the Christians. 26 * Such a view is
erroneous and unfair to Arnobius : in arguing with the pagans
he constantly does so on the basis of their own premises he
will concede for the sake of argument what he would
never positively maintain: on this point consider the follow-
ing judgment of Marchesi with which I am generally in
agreement: 265
Arnobius tends to believe, he even does believe, in the existence
of heavenly powers, subordinate to God and created by God and
by God made sharers in divine attributes; but in no passage does
he affirm that the pagan divinities are among these heavenly powers.
It is true that in no passage does he exclude them; 26 but the con-
stantly-dubitative tone which he uses in considering among the ' dii
minores ' the deities of paganism reveals to us a polemic concession
rather than a personal conviction. 267
Thus, the assertion that the pagan gods are included in the
worship of the True God is merely a concession of this kind.
Where our author is possibly at fault is in hastily stating that
the gods of human fancy " are begotten by Him or brought
forth by His command " and " are immortal and eternal by
reason of His will/'
While enough has been said to show that Arnobius is
hardly orthodox 2GS at every point, it would be quite another
thing to accuse him of being heretical. No evidence exists to
show that he was strongly influenced by any heretical sect,
and his divergence from accepted Christian belief is the
result, not of a willful choosing of views known to be dissi-
dent, but of an imperfect acquaintance with Christian teach-
ing and a tendency to carry over into the new faith certain
pagan ideas which he did not realize were incompatible with
Christianity.
Yet it is not surprising to find that in the sixth-century
Decretum de libris reciyiendis et non recipiendis 209 once
34 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
ascribed to Pope Gelasius I (492-96) the " opuscula Arno-
bii" are included among the apocrypha "a catholicis vi-
tanda." 27 In this respect, Arnobius enjoys the company of
both Tertullian and Origen. Bardenhewer 2T1 thinks that the
inclusion of Arnobius in this list is a reflection merely of the
criticism of St. Jerome already noted, but if so, it is surprising
to observe that neither Novatus nor Apollinarius, both also
mentioned by Jerome in that passage in an unfavorable light,
is condemned in the decretum.
y -f -f
We must now turn our attention to the much-vexed ques-
tion of the sources used in the compilation of the Adversus
nationes, a problem which has a double aspect 'since, while
Arnobius mentions many a pagan source, he never refers by
name to any of his Christian predecessors. Indeed, all Chris-
tian literature is lumped together in the extremely indefinite
phrase " res vestrae." 272
To begin with the Greek sources, the names of fifty-one
philosophers and writers are mentioned at least once each,
while Plato or one of his works is mentioned fourteen times, 878
and Aristotle, Sophocles, and the very obscure writers
Mnaseas of Patara, Myrtilus, and Posidippus, are each men-
tioned twice* Names which appear only once are the follow-
ing: Aethlius of Samos, Antiochus, Apollodorus, Arcesilas,
Archytas, Arrian, Butas, Carneades, Sextus Clodius,* 7 * Chry-
sippus, Crates of Mallos, Cronius the Neo-Platonist, Ctcsias,
Democritus, Diagoras of Melos, Ephorus, Epicharmus, Epic-
tetus, Euhemerus, Heraclitus, Hermippus, Hesiod, I lierony-
mus, Hippo of Melos, Homer, 275 Leandrius of Miletus, Leon
of Pella, Metrodorus, Nicagoras of Cyprus, Numenius the
Neo-Platonist, Panaetius, Panyassis of Halicarnassus, Patro-
cles of Thurium, Philostephanus, Pindar, Plutarch, Polemon,
INTRODUCTION 35
Ptolemaeus of Megalopolis, Pythagoras, Sosibius, Thales,
Theodorus of Gyrene, Timotheus, Zeno the Stoic, and Zeno
of Myndus. There is also an allusion to an unnamed Taren-
tine poet who has been thought by some to be Rhinthon, and
to such philosophers as the Epicureans and the proponents of
the Middle and New Academy. Moreover, the Orphica are
quoted and there is an allusion to Hermes Trismegistus. It
will be readily apparent from this list that some of the names
are household words among classicists but that others are
very obscure indeed. 276 .
Of Latin writers, M. Terentius Varro heads the list with
fifteen citations, and P. Nigidius Figulus and Granius Flaccus
follow with four each, 277 while M. Tullius Cicero, L. Cincius
Alimentus, Cornificius Longus, and T. Manilius appear as
authority three times each, and Ennius is once named and
once cited anonymously. Latin writers mentioned once only
are: Aelius Stilo, L. Caesellius Vindex, Caesius, Cornelius
Epicadus, Q. Fabius Pictor, a Flaccus who may be Granius
Flaccus or Verrius Flaccus (certainly not the poet Horace),
Lucretius, Nisus a grammarian, L. Calpurnius Piso Censor-
ius Frugi, Pomponius the writer of farces, Q. Serenus Sam-
monicus, Q. Terentius Scaurus, Trebatius, Valerianus, 278
Valerius Antias, and Verrius Flaccus. There are also occa-
sional references to anonymous writings such as the annales, 2
the memorialia scripta*** the theologians, 281 and unspecified
histories, 282 as well as to pseudonymous writings lilce the
libri Ackerontid 28S ascribed to Tages the Etruscan and the
Indigitamenta as * which bore the name of Numa Pompilius.
As in the Greek list, we have here a combination of well-
known writers with most obscure. 285
Considered alone, these two lists with fifty-one Greek
names and from twenty-two to twenty-four Latin names,
36 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
depending upon how one counts ' Flaccus ' and ' Valerianus,'
give the impression that the learning of Arnobius was both
broad and profound. Sihler, 286 for example, concludes that
Arnobius was in touch with the entire range of philosophy
and ancient literature. Probably he is right but the evidence
tends to suggest the wisdom of caution in deducing from a
casual reference to an ancient writer proof that Arnobius
himself had read the author's works, much less used them
as a source. (We have, of course, included in both lists
allusions to a philosopher or writer even when the context
suggests that he is mentioned merely by way of illustration.)
To give an example, in 4. 24 there is the familiar charge
against Aesculapius that he was slain because he became
greedy and tried to exact pay for his cures, Pindar the Boeo-
tian being cited as the source. We might conclude that
Arnobius was himself familiar with Pindar, were it not for
the fact that the same story is also told twice by Tertullian
and once by Clement of Alexandria, both of whom also cite
Pindar as their source. Either of these two apologists might
theoretically have been an intermediate source, though a
study of the parallels shows that it is unlikely that Tertullian
was here used. 287
A somewhat different type of aetiological problem is posed
by a phrase in 3. 31 concerning Aristotle. Here Arnobius'
choice of words suggests that he is unacquainted with Aris-
totle's works but has learned about him through the inter-
mediary source, Granius, whom he names. A pair of
passages in Cicero, 288 are so strikingly like the phrases of
Arnobius, except, of course, that Granius is not mentioned,
that we can be certain that ultimately the passage is to be
derived from Cicero.
Furthermore, when we compare Arnobius with such en-
INTRODUCTION 37
cyclopaedic writers as Clement of Alexandria and Lactantius,
we see clearly that he exhibits both a more superficial and a
narrower acquaintance with pagan literature than they. He
is more sparing in direct quotation, and there are relatively
fewer allusions which embroider the plain argument, less
that is incidental or digressive, by way of citation.
A glance at the lists will show some surprising omissions,
though we must not expect Arnobius to mention every
ancient writer known to us but only those who might pre-
sumably furnish good material for his purpose. Vergil is
never mentioned, for example, but three scholars 289 have
collected examples of Vergilian imitations and on a priori
grounds we should expect Arnobius to be well acquainted
with the poet. Herodotus, and, above all, Lucian, would have
furnished good ore for Arnobius' furnaces but they are never
mentioned and the same is true also of the Fasti of Ovid.
Arnobius' references to Plato and his works have been
subjected to close scrutiny by both Rohricht 29 and Gabar-
rou 291 who are united in concluding that the evidence shows
direct acquaintance with the Greek originals, rather than,
for example, with such a possible Latin intermediary as the
version of the Timaeus by Cicero. Neither of these two
scholars considers the possibility that Arnobius was following
closely, not Plato himself, but some book about Plato, perhaps
a Neo-Platonist work, which accurately represented Plato.
The number and character of the borrowings from Plato
render this possibility, however, rather unlikely. 292
Lucretius is cited but once but this is no indication of the
extent of the borrowings from the author of the De rerum
natural a debt so great, indeed, that, as we have seen, it
has given rise to the speculation that Arnobius had been prior
to his conversion a member of the cult of the Garden. Lu-
38 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
cretius is also a source, hardly, I think, the only one, of
Arnobius' idea that the gods cannot be angry and still exist.
The abundant proof that Arnobius utilized Varro presents
no special problem although it is possible that at least some
of the citations may have been derived indirectly. Indeed,
Arnobius has at times been given the soubriquet of the
" Christian Varro " 294 but the term might better have applied
to the learned Lactantius, also called the " Christian Cicero "
because of the excellence of his style.
As for Cicero, 295 it seems highly probable that his De
natura deorum and De divinatione have been exploited, and,
less certainly, the Tusculanae disputationes* To the first
of these works Arnobius refers once in a vague way but that
does not mean that he did not use it extensively, as will be
shown in the Notes. The failure to mention the De divina-
tione may, I think, possibly be attributed to the fact that it
contains a trenchant criticism by a pagan of one of the more
preposterous aspects of the pagan cult. 297 Yet Arnobius was
quite willing to allude to the similar criticism coming from
Euhemerus 298 and from Varro, 200 so this argument may be
somewhat weaker. It seems scarcely probable, however, that,
even giving due force both to the known decline in classical
culture growing -ever progressively greater in the first three
centuries of our era and to the fact that Arnobius was a pro-
vincial, a professor of rhetoric could have been ignorant of
the works of Cicero. 800
But the most complex of these aetiological problems is that
involved in the theory, until recently quite popular, that
among the more important sources was Cornelius Labeo,
known to us only from a few fragments a01 and never men-
tioned by Arnobius himself. 802 . The very date of this shadowy
figure is a matter of controversy, Bousset, 308 who thinks that
INTRODUCTION 39
Labeo utilized not the Neo-Platonist Porphyry but hermetism
and the Oracula Chaldaica, dating him in the second half of
the first century A. D. Boehm, 30 * who devotes an entire
dissertation to the question, concludes that the terminus ante
quern is 125 A. D. Niggetiet 305 and Kroll, 306 on the other
hand, favor a much later date and make Labeo a con-
temporary of Arnobius.
The partisans of the Labeo myth, 807 for such it has now
been recognized to be, have the following factual basis for
their position. In 3. 26 Arnobius distinguishes between dii
laevi and dii looni but ascribes this information to no source.
Now since St. Augustine 80S attributes a similar distinction
between ,numina loona and numina mala to Labeo (he does
not use the gentilicium 309 ) 7 the Labeonians immediately con-
clude that Arnobius must have derived his knowledge of
these divinities from Labeo. At this point we should admit
that Labeo is certainly a possible source but he is by no
means the only one.
Having concluded to their own satisfaction, however, that
Labeo is the source in 3. 26, these scholars proceed to see him
lurking behind many another passage in Arnobius for which
they are unable to suggest some other derivation! Fortunately
for them, so little is known of Labeo that they are never em-
barrassed by facts difficult to fit into their theory. Passages
in which one or another scholar have professed to see the
hand of Labeo include the following: 2. 13-62, 2. 35, 2. 36-
43> 3- 23 f., 3. 26, 3. 29-42, 3. 37, 3. 40, 3. 41, 4. 5, 4. 12,
4. 1 6, 5. 1 8, 7. 23 f., and the whole of Book Seven. I do not
propose to repeat here what I have said about these passages
in the Notes: it should be sufficient to state that the Labeo
myth has, in iny opinion, been thoroughly exploded in the
fundamental dissertation of Friedrich Tullius S1 and the ex-
40 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
cellent article on the special sources of Book Two by the
Dominican Festugiere. 311 Let us hope that the ghost of Labeo
has now been laid.
Tullius' dissertation consists of a detailed study of passage
after passage in Books Four to Six (as well as of some in Book
Three) in an attempt to identify the source of each. We shall
have occasion shortly to consider his conclusions in regard
to a possible use of the Protreyticus of Clement of Alexandria
here we need only state that he thinks the real source in
Books Three and Four is a theological manual in existence
at least as early as 100 A. D. and not by either Varro or
Labeo; 812 that in his estimation Arnobius used also a Liber
de mysteriis and a book on the allegorical interpretation of
the pagan myths; 81S and that he believes the source in 4. 25
is a mythographic handbook. 314 All of these sources are now
lost and were by unknown hands. Indeed, Tullius seems to
be constitutionally unable to admit that Arnobius could
possibly have used any source still preserved, Cicero, for
example.
While the care with which Tullius examines the text is
great, and his conclusions frequently seem valid, it should
be pointed out that his method does not, in my opinion,
allow sufficiently for any knowledge derived from personal
observation or previous reading, and Tullius' enthusiasm for
the theory of the lost source sometimes leads him to press a
point far too strongly. Moreover, his handling of this problem
in aetiology suggests that he cannot divest himself of the
" single-source " theory which in the nineteenth century pro-
duced such disastrous results in the criticism of Livy. I can-
not eliminate from my thinking the possibility that some of
the divergences which he thinks significant are merely the
reflection of personal differences which we should expect.
INTRODUCTION 41
From Tullius' point of view, nothing can have been added by
Arnobius himself every detail must have been found in the
source being followed. This seems to misunderstand the
method of literary composition and grossly to underestimate
our author.
To turn now to Festugiere, however, we find a very dif-
ferent story. Here the investigation is limited to Book Two,
which did not fall within the compass of Tullius' study, and
the writer proves, to my mind quite conclusively, that in that
Book Arnobius displays a considerable acquaintance with
hermetism, 815 Neo-Platonism, the Oracula Chaldaica, Gnosti-
cism (as reported in Plotinus), Zoroaster, Osthanes, and
magical papyri containing Mithraic liturgies. 316 Whether
this knowledge was the result of independent study or not,
is hard to say, but it seems clear that whatever the source,
Arnobius possessed it when he wrote the Adversus nationes.
This does not mean, nor does Festugiere maintain that it
does, that Arnobius was himself influenced by these intel-
lectual forces. In fact, he attacks the views which he cites.
We have already stated that Arnobius nowhere names a
single Christian predecessor, 817 from which silence we might
conclude at once that he knew none, or at least used none,
in the composition of the Adversus nationes but for the fact
that there are a great many passages which show resemblance
to one or another of the earlier apologists. These have led
many a scholar to conclude that he was acquainted with these
predecessors. Thus, Cruttwell S18 thinks that Arnobius had
read Justin Martyr; Colombo, 819 that he had surely read
Cyprian's Ad Demetrianum 2, Tertullian's Ad nationes i. 9
and Apologeticus 40; Coxe, 320 and Gabarrou, 321 that he had
learned of Tertullian and Cyprian; the latter, 822 that he had
read the De anima of Tertullian; de Labriolle, 823 that he
42 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
borrows from Tertullian; Amatucci, 324 that he knew Minu-
cius, Tertullian, Cyprian, and Clement; while Freppel 3 " 5
compares some of his ideas with the Contra Celsum of
Origen. GefFcken 326 says that he is a follower of Tertullian
in his attack on the gods and a precursor of Lactantius in his
use of Roman authors to refute the Roman cults. From many
passages in the Notes it will be seen that I am well aware of
many of these resemblances, some even in such writers as
Tatian, Athenagoras, and Theophilus of Antioch, who arc
not mentioned by my predecessors.
Yet we cannot demonstrate from passing resemblances that
Arnobius was really indebted to a given precursor. That a
great many other writers of the early Church also attacked
the ridiculousness and scandal which they saw in the pagan
cults makes it almost inevitable that just by chance more than
one would independently touch upon the same allusions,
utilize the same myth, make the same charge. Unless, there-
fore, there is in each instance some better reason to accept
interdependence as a fact, we can hardly afford to be
dogmatic.
In the case of the Protrepticus of Clement of Alexandria,
however, the resemblances are so numerous and so strikingly
parallel that many scholars have concluded the dependence
of Arnobius upon Clement is clearly proven. Thus, Le~
Nourry, 827 says that Arnobius borrows from Clement; Bryce-
Campbell, 828 that from Clement whole sentences have been
taken unchanged; Kettner, 829 that Books Four to Six show
the influence of the PwtreptmiS', Coxe, 880 that Arnobius
" economizes " (** condenses?) Clement; Brakman, 881 that the
five Minervas in 4. 14 are derived from Clement; and
others 8M either list Clement among the sources or allude
to Arnobius' indebtedness to him. The great exponent of this
INTRODUCTION 43
view, however, is Rohricht 333 who devotes his dissertation to
the problem of the relationship of Arnobius to Clement,
reaching the conclusion that Arnobius must have had
Clement before him as he wrote.
The evidence which he adduces is extremely impressive.
The parallels between the two authors are so exact that we
must accept one of two possibilities: either (i) Arnobius was
using Clement as a source, or (2) both were following a
common source. There can be no possibility of accidental
similarity such as might be suggested if we were dealing
with a few isolated passages. Except possibly for an inci-
dental remark of Bouchier, 334 no voice has been raised in
opposition to Rohricht's conclusion save that of Tullius in
the dissertation to which we have already alluded. After
minute examination of the parallel passages Tullius con-
vinces himself that Arnobius exhibits sufficient divergence
from Clement as to make it impossible for him to be follow-
ing Clement. He therefore is forced to believe that both
authors had a common source. 335
Following the appearance of Tullius' dissertation in 1934,
Hagendahl 83 briefly expressed his disagreement with Tul-
lius' method, but it was left to Rapisarda to publish a
thorough-going criticism of Tullius* conclusions in his book
Clemente fonte di Arndbio, which though published in 1939,
was not available to me until my own work was completed. 337
While Tullius is clearly right in seeing elements in Arno-
bius which cannot have been taken from Clement since they
are not there, he is wrong in concluding that Arnobius could
not know Clement or borrow from him. Tullius does not
allow sufficiently for two factors: the fund of knowledge
which Arnobius possessed and the possibility that he would,
even in copying, vary the phraseology to a considerable degree
44 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
in the interests of rhetoric and his own independence. That
Arnobius might easily have found a copy of Clement's
Protrepticus in one or another of the Christian libraries in
North Africa seems to me highly probable. I am therefore
inclined to think that the present state of our knowledge
points to a position more nearly that of Rohricht than Tullius.
Two apologists whom we might expect most to find among
Arnobius' sources are Minucius Felix and Tertullian. A care-
ful search of the Octavius has revealed a fair number of
parallel passages in which there is sufficient resemblance to
justify closer scrutiny. In a majority of these instances it is
possible to conclude either that evidence of dependence is
entirely lacking or that some concomitant feature suggests
another source at the point in question. 338 In four other
instances, however, we cannot eliminate the possibility of
dependence, though proof is lacking, 530 but three present
evidence adequate to prove that Arnobius had read the
Octavius.
When in 3. 29 Arnobius refers to the tradition that Janus
founded the Janiculum, he calls it a town (oppwfewn). The
error is interesting and I think came about through a mis-
reading of Minucius (Qctavius 21.6); itaque latebram
suam, quod tuto latuisset (sc. Saturnus*), vocari maluit
Latium, et urbem Saturniam idem de suo nomine et lani-
culum lanus ad memoriam uterque posteritatis reliquarunt, M
In this passage Saturn and Janus are coupled together as
having given each his name to something in Italy, Saturn to
the city of Saturnia, Janus to the Janiculum, the latter not
being specified as a hill. If Arnobius read the passage hur-
riedly, however, it is conceivable, that he might, having im-
planted in his mind the fact that Saturn named a city, carry
over this thought to the Janus clause and, not knowing or
INTRODUCTION 45
forgetting that the Janiculum was a hill, set down a word
that does not fit.
The second parallel which I think significant is found in
the opening sentence of 4. 32, a quotation from the presumed
pagan opponent: Sed poetarum, inquiunt, figmenta sunt haec
omnia et ad voluptatem compositae lusiones. With this com-
pare the Octavius 23. i : Has fabulas et error es, ita ah im-
peritis parentibus disdmus, et quod est gravius, ipsi studiis et
disciplinis elaboramus, carminibus praedpue poetarum, qui
plurimum quantum veritati ipsi auctoritate nocuerunt.
Finally, in 6. 16, which refers to the presence of vermin
in and around the pagan cult statues, there is a passage so
strikingly like the Octavius 24. i (which I have quoted at
length in the Notes ad Zoc.) that the resemblance appears
causal, as was rightly maintained by Orelli in his commen-
tary, by Heinze 341 and by Kroll, 8 " though as usual denied
by Tullius. 343
The number of parallels between Arnobius and Tertullian
is much greater. This might be expected from the relatively
larger bulk of Tertullian's writing, but, as we shall see, the
parallels are rather generally confined to the two shorter
works, the Apologeticus and Ad nationes, so the greater
percentage of resemblances carries weight.
Arnobius may have been influenced in his choice of title
by the Ad nationes, ^ Both authors make abundant use of
* retorsion/ the twisting back of an opponent's argument upon
himself. 8 * 5 Both also employ the device of an adversarius or
assumed opponent who is a sort of straw man set up to be
knocked down. 840
Moreover, a number of passages show extremely close
parallelism. Among these are the emphasis laid on the point
that Christ performed the Miracles by a single word; S4T a
46 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
very significant passage concerning the use by pagans of
expressions implying monotheism; 3 * 8 the allusion, in a single
sentence of Arnobius, to the relationships of slave-master,
wife-husband, and child-parent, with another sentence in
Tertullian in which the same relationships appear, though in
a different order (wife, child, slave); 3 * 9 an extremely striking
parallelism between Arnobius 2. 67 and the Apologeticus 6
in which a number of the illustrations are identical: the
conservative Roman respect for ancestral institutions, sumptu-
ary laws, the Roman view that a woman should abstain from
wine, and the fact that though the Christians are criticized
for bringing in something new, the pagans themselves
introduce novelties. Another passage in the same Book con-
tains ideas found in various places in Tertullian: Faunus is
the son of Picus, 3r>0 Saturn is the earliest god, 3f51 the pagan
gods are relatively recent in origin, 852 and in the consulship
of Piso and Gabinius the Egyptian divinities were expelled
from Rome. 853 Finally, both authors elsewhere 3Ci maintain
that the pagan gods have more reason to complain against the
pagans than against Christians.
To these parallels, which are so close that I regard it as
almost beyond doubt that Arnobius borrowed from Tertullian
in each instance, we may add another group where the
similarity is striking but dependence not so clearly proven.
A statement of Arnobius concerning the swallowing-up of
cities may be a condensation of several passages of Tertul-
lian. 355 There is a very close similarity between parallel state-
ments that the Christians were attacked for worshipping a
human being, but this idea is so commonplace that we must
not conclude dependence from it alone, 858 The idea for the
4 controlled experiment ' may have been suggested to Arno-
bius by the account of a somewhat similar experiment con-
INTRODUCTION 47
ducted by Psammetichus of Egypt, which Tertullian re-
lates, 357 and Tertullian is a possible source in the case of the
allusion to the ass's head. 358 While the examples cited in this
paragraph are by no means absolutely certain, they lend
cumulative support to the group described in the preceding
paragraph.
So also another group of parallels which are close but still
less certain: an allusion to the etymology of Cronus from
cforonos, 359 which is commonplace; a reference to Jove's love
for his sister; 36 references to the wounding of Venus and
the chaining of Mars/ 01 and to the services of gods rendered
to human masters; 362 a criticism of horse-racing; 36S and, less
clearly, an allusion to gods dwelling in the air. 364 Among the
rare words which Arnobius uses are two which Tertullian
employs in a single chapter, 365 and Tertullian's statement
that Christians should be punished if they fail to worship
real gods should be compared with several of Arnobius'
somewhat similar statements expressing beliefs in the exist-
ence of the gods. 863
We should note, however, certain evidences of sharp dif-
ference between Arnobius and Tertullian. Arnobius' doc-
trine of the impassibility of God is in direct conflict with the
orthodox position which appears in the De anima 16 where
both God and Christ are represented as capable of anger.
This difficulty should not trouble us it is merely evidence
that Arnobius had not read the De anima 7 Moreover,
despite Tertullian's willingness to have the pagan gods wor-
shipped, if they are real gods, Tertullian leaves no doubt that
he was sure they did not exist. 808 But this presents a difficulty
only if we take the view that Arnobius thought they did
exist. Finally, as we have noted, though Tertullian twice
presents a charge of greed against Aesculapius, it is more
48 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
probable that it was from the Protrepticus that Arnobius
borrowed the story. 369
In the light of the generally inadequate and inaccurate
information concerning Christianity which our author dis-
plays, this evidence that he almost certainly had read and
borrowed from the Protrepticus, and knew and utilized the
Octavius and Apologeticus and Ad nationes, or at least one
of these last, is somewhat surprising. Yet it seems quite
reasonable to suppose that when, soon after his conversion,
our author determined to write, knowing as yet rather little
about the faith which he had espoused, he took himself to
the libraries which were accessible. That he there found
copies of all these works I am convinced. Surely the Church
in North Africa would have possessed copies of the Protrepti-
cus and the Octavius, and even the fact that Tertullian had
in his later years fallen away from orthodoxy would not have
meant, in fact, did not mean, that books written in his
orthodox period were destroyed. But if Arnobius used the
work of these predecessors, why was he silent about their
names? The answer is that there was no point in naming
them. That Clement or Minucius or Tertullian had pre-
viously used a given argument has no real effect upon the
validity of the argument, and the modern conception of
plagiarism never bothered any ancient to the ancient, imi-
tation was the greatest compliment of all Yet he does cite
pagan authors in profusion. Quite so. That Euhemerus,
a pagan philosopher, had attacked the pagan cults heightens
the argument. Remember constantly that the Adversits na-
tiones is addressed to the pagans; indeed, the preposition
adversus itself means not only 'against' but also 'toward/ 870
In discussing the question of the date of Arnobius 8n we
have had occasion to mention the view of certain scholars
INTRODUCTION 49
that there is interdependence between Arnobius and the
Divinae institutiones of his pupil Lactantius which were
being composed at about the same time as the Adversus
nationes. Let us now examine the evidence on this point
which is to be found in nine pairs of parallel passages which
show some resemblance. 372 Two of the pairs have, to do with
the Miracles of Christ. Consider the following from Lac-
tantius: 373 " For as He Himself, when He was living among
men, put to flight all the demons by a word, and restored to
their former senses the minds of men which had been excited
and maddened by their evil attacks, so now His followers,
in the name of their Master and by the sign of His passion,
banish the same polluted spirits from men." Here, in briefer
form, is the content of Adversus nationes i. 50, in which our
author also emphasizes the fact that the miracles of the fol-
lowers of Christ were performed by verbal means, not by
magic. 374 The second passage referred to is too long for
quotation but is itself a shorter version of the same argument
which Arnobius uses in describing Christ's own Miracles. 370
Lactantius' account is in harmony with the Gospels, whereas
Arnobius attributes to Christ a miracle not there recorded. 376
While there is in general a fairly close harmony between the
two passages, the material which they here utilize must have
been of common knowledge in the Church, and so the resem-
blances, striking as they are, do not prove interdependence.
A comparison of passages 377 in which both writers cite
Sextus Clodius for a story about Fenta Fatua, and another
pair m in which they both tell the story of the sacrilegious
temple-robbing of Dionysius the Younger, tyrant of Syracuse,
will reveal in each instance that Arnobius' account is con-
siderably the shorter and that there is nothing in his version
not found in that of Lactantius which might not be attributed
50 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
to rhetorical differences. To judge from these passages alone,
Arnobius may well have been condensing Lactantius but it is
more probable that they are following a common source.
Here also the evidence is far from being conclusive.
In another pair of correspondences the same circumstances
do not obtain. In 2. 35 Arnobius unfolds his doctrine that
the souls are of a medium quality, that is, neither mortal nor
immortal, an idea also found in Lactantius, 370 The second
parallel is between a statement of Arnobius in 2. 51 that
surmise, rather than certainty, is all that philosophers can
reach by their investigations, and a similar statement in
Lactantius. 880 In these instances it is tempting to think that
one author had read the other but there is no way to deter-
mine which may claim priority, and in fact these parallels
glso may be purely accidental
Adversus nationes 2, 39-42 is a long and florid passage in
which the author asks whether die Creator sent the souls
into the world for the purpose of having them commit a large
variety of evil actsthe implication, of course, is that God
is not the Creator of the souls. This list of impious deeds
includes (in 2. 42) several that are parallel to items in a
similar list of vicious acts attributed by Lactantius 881 to the
worshipers of the pagan divinities. Crimes which appear in
both lists are: brigandage, forging of wills, poisoning, acts of
lust and of perversion, but the remainder of both lists differs
so much that we can hardly hold the resemblances as more
than accidental. Indeed, if two persons were asked to write
down a list of crimes, it is probable that independently they
would prepare lists more closely parallel than these.
Finally, we should note the striking use by both authors 8Ha
of the word caducus in the sense of mortal, and two ex-
ceedingly close clauses:
INTRODUCTION 5 1
Adversus nationes i . 62 : homo quern induerat et secum portabat
Divinae institutiones 4. 10: homini . . . quern induerat gerebat.
But these phrases are, I believe, commonplaces.
To summarize this evidence, probable common sources
may easily account for four of the nine passages, and two of
the others are either of no great significance or are common-
places. In only two out of nine are the parallels not easily
explainable, but note that both of these come from Book Two,
the sources of which, despite the able article by Festugiere,
are neither well-known nor sure. It is possible that even here
a common source is followed.
Particularly attractive is this view of the independence of
the two authors when we consider the implications of the
alternative. To believe in interdependence, as do Buonaiuti
and Rapisarda, 883 we must be able to show how either writer
might have seen the book of the other. Such a problem is
of no great difficulty in the case of Arnobius' knowledge of
Clement, Minucius, or Tertullian, but with Lactantius in
Nicomedia and Arnobius in Sicca, writing about the same
time, the difficulty of transporting a copy of the product
of either to the other sufficiently soon seems well-nigh
insurmountable.
f -f -f
And what of Arnobius' Nachleben? That a copy was avail-
able to St. Jerome, of course, is obvious and from his state-
ments concerning the volumina quae vulgo exstant we must
assume that the book had at least a moderate distribution by
his time. Yet, except for Jerome and the compilers of the
Decretum Gelasianum in the sixth century, no writer men-
tions Arnobius until the first edition of Trithemius' De
scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, published at Basel in I494. 884
52 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
Two scholars have noted parallels, chiefly linguistic in
character, between the Adversus nationes and the De errore
profanarum religionum of the Christian writer Firmicus
Maternus, and I myself have found parallels of subject mat-
ter as well. Ziegler 385 does not go so far as to maintain that
Firmicus Maternus had really read Arnobius he merely
cites the resemblances in the notes to his edition of Firmi-
cus. 886 But Brakman 3ST seems quite convinced that Firmicus
copied from the pages of Arnobius. I can hardly take so
extreme a position since too many of the parallels are of
dictions which might have been and probably were commonly
current in the period, and the similarities of content may be
presumed to come from frequent identity of topics, 888 It is
possible that the author of the De errore profanarum re-
ligionum had read Arnobius but it is not proven. Rapisarda
credits Arnobius with having given great impetus to a new
literary genre, the Quaestiones of later Christian writers, 880
and we should also cast a glance at a curious fragment pre-
served in one of the manuscripts of Tertullian 80 but long
recognized as certainly not by his hand. This is the De
execrandis gentium diis which has been convincingly dated
by Bickel, 801 after a masterly study of the text, in the sixth
century. The reason for mentioning this fragment here is
that it shows more remarkable parallels with Arnobius than
does even Clement of Alexandria, One wonders at once
whether the anonymous author had derived his information
from the Adversus nationes. Possibly so, but at least he had
before him some other source, since he refers in the fifth
chapter to four laws (the Lex Falcidia et Sempronia, Lex
Papinia, Lex lulia, and Lex Cornelia) which are not men-
tioned by Arnobius,
The failure of Vincent of Beauvais (f 1264) to mention
INTRODUCTION 53
Arnobius in the third part (Jftistoriale) of his Speculum
maius is puzzling to Colombo 392 but a silence much more
surprising is that of the celebrated Bishop of Hippo, The
many places in which Arnobius uses material also exploited
by St. Augustine in the De civitate Dei will be evident from
the frequent citations to that work in the Notes. Moreover,
we can hardly suppose that a work known to Jerome in many
copies was likely to have escaped the notice of his great con-
temporary, particularly one who lived in the vicinity of
Arnobius' home Sicca. St. Augustine may have been of-
fended by Arnobius for various reasons/ 93
Translators of previous volumes in this series have had the
good fortune to deal with relatively-sound texts and have thus
not been forced to pay much attention to matters of textual
criticism. Yet, despite the accumulated labors of a host of
scholars in the last four centuries, the text of Arnobius is
still in a lamentable state. This is largely the result of the
fact that since our knowledge of it is dependent upon a
single manuscript, the codex Parisinus 1661, now preserved
in the EiUiotheque Nationale in Paris/ 94 and usually re-
ferred to as ' P/ the numerous errors in that codex can be
eliminated only by the ingenuity of emendations.
What appears in P as the ' liber octavus ' or eighth book of
Arnobius is in reality the Octavius of Minucius Felix, first
correctly distinguished from the Adversus nationes by Fran-
ciscus Balduinus who published the earliest separate edition
of the Octavius at Heidelberg in I56o. 805
Besides codex P, there is preserved in the BiUiotheque
Koyale de Belgique in Brussels another codex of these same
two works bearing the collocation 10846-10847 (formerly
54 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
Burgundiacus D 685) which has been dated variously: in the
eleventh century, 396 in the eleventh or twelfth, 397 in the
twelfth, 898 and as late as the sixteenth. 399 Despite this dis-
agreement as to date, all scholars who profess to have seen
the manuscript are agreed that it is a copy of P. If such be
the case, the Brussels codex has no value as an independent
witness for the text. In any case, its testimony was made
available from a collation by F. Modius used by Godescalcus
Stewechius in the edition which he published at Antwerp in
1604 and another collation, transcribed in the nineteenth
century by L. Lersch, convinced Reiff erscheid that this manu-
script may be safely ignored. 400
The editio 'princess of the Adversus nationes was published
at Rome in the year 1 542, according to the colophon, or in
1543, the date of the preface, by Franciscus Sabaeus who
used as the basis of his text our codex P, then his private
property. Though Sabaeus was at the time in charge of the
Vatican Library, he had brought the codex, as it would appear
from statements in the preface which are not quite clear,
from somewhere in the north. In any case, soon after the
publication of the printed edition bearing a dedicatory epistle
to Francis I of France, the editor presented both a copy of
his edition and the codex itself to that monarch from whom it
ultimately passed to its present owner.
Since that day a total of at least twenty-eight editions of
the complete Latin text have been printed, 401 In addition,
there are separate editions of Book One, twice thereafter
reissued, and of Book Two/ 02
All earlier editions of the Advemts nationes were, however,
superseded by the excellent edition of August Reifferscheid
published as the fourth volume of the then newly-established
Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latmorum (Vienna 1875,
INTRODUCTION 55
reprinted 1890). For the first time the text of Arnobius was
firmly established on the basis of rigid principles of textual
criticism, being prepared from a fresh examination 40S of the
codex P in the light of the principal editions published
hitherto. 404 Reifferscheid did not however, hesitate to mark
many a lacuna with the asterisk (*) and many a locus
desperatus with the obelus (f) : the text was hardly yet in a
satisfactory condition.
In the years following the appearance of this text much
good work was done on the improvement of the more difficult
passages without, however, reaching general agreement. 405
This was the situation when Concetto Marchesi issued a new
text as volume 62 of the Corpus scriptorum latinorum Paravi-
anum (Turin I934). 406 Marchesi's text, which at first re-
ceived acclaim, 407 was marked by greater conservatism in
adhering to the reading of the manuscript and it had the
advantage of being able to include references to the work of
scholars who had written in the six decades since the Vienna
edition. In recent years, however, Marchesi's caution has
been under attack, chiefly from the brilliant Swedish school
of Wiman, Hagendahl, and Axelson, 408 from whom it is to
be hoped we may soon expect a new and better text. Their
chief complaint against Marchesi has been his failure to mark
palpable lacunae and to accept what they regard as certain
emendations. While I am inclined to think that they have
carried this criticism of Marchesi to extremes, in the main I
believe it to be sound.
In preparing the present translation the text of Marchesi
has been used as a base, but Reifferscheid's readings have
frequently been preferred, as have many appearing in critical
work published since 1875, which has been thoroughly ex-
amined. In addition, some emendations of my own, published
56 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
in the Vigiliae Christianae 3 (1949) 39'49, have been
adopted, but in every case where a reading different from
Marchesi's has been followed, that fact has been noted in the
commentary. Citations to critical work earlier than 1875
have been made on the basis of the apparatus provided by
the two editors usually without independent examination.
The eclectic Latin text thus created will be published, it is
hoped, together with the results of further critical study, in a
European series.
Notwithstanding the fact that the commentary has been
prepared entirely from original research, much help was
derived from the notes in the variorum Latin commentary in
Orelli's edition and reprinted in ML 5. This contains not
only the fruit of Ocelli's own studies but also a vast amount
which he copied, with due credit, from his predecessors/ 00
There is, in addition, a brief commentary in Oehler's edition
and longer ones will be found in Hildebrand's and in the
German translation of von Besnard mentioned below, but
these three commentaries have been consulted only when
occasion demanded.
The sole previous English translation, by Archdeacon
Hamilton Bryce and Hugh Campbell, The Seven Books of
Arnobius Adversus Gentes, which first appeared as volume
19 of the Ante-Nicene Christian Library edited by Alexander
Roberts and James Donaldson (Edinburgh 1871) and was
reprinted, with some additional notes and elucidations by
the Episcopal Bishop A, Cleveland Coxe, in volume 6 of
The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo 1886), though frequently
faulty and now completely outmoded, has proved invaluable,
On occasion reference has also been made to two German
translations, the first by Franz Anton von Besnard, Des
Afrikaners Arnokius sieben Eucher wider die Heiden,
INTRODUCTION 57
dem Lateinischen ubersetztunderlautert(Laudsliut
and the second by J. Allelcer, Arnobius sieben Biicher gegen
die Heiden, ins Deutsche ubersetzt (Trier 1858). No copy of
the only other translation known to me, that in Dutch by
Joachim Oudaan, Arnobius d Afrikaner tegen de Heydenen
vervat in zeven bocken (Harlingen 1 677) has been available.* 11
My sincerest thanks remain to be expressed to the many
who have contributed to the preparation of this book by
furnishing me bibliographical information at their disposal
or by making available for my use copies of their own pub-
lications or rare books owned by them. Professor Kevin
Guinagh of Antioch College very kindly lent me for an un-
limited period several volumes from his extensive collection
of Arnobiana. Through the courtesy of Professor Axel Boe-
thius of Goteborg I have received copies of articles from the
editors of Eranos and from Professors Bertil Axelson and
Gerhard Wiman; while, at the moment of going to press
Professor Emanuele Rapisarda provided me with a copy of
a work of his for which I had long searched in vain. 412 With-
out the assistance of these friends, the present translation and
commentary could not have been made.
BOOK ONE
PAGAN SLANDERS OF THE CHRISTIANS REFUTED
The charge: the Christians have brought calamities
upon mankind.
i . The claim has been made, as I Lave learned, by some
who believe profoundly in their own wisdom and speak in an
oracular fashion as if they were the mouthpiece of some god, 1
that after the Christian race began to exist on earth, the world
went to ruin, mankind was afflicted with many and varied
ills, and even the denizens of heaven themselves, as the
result of the abandonment of the ceremonial sacrifices by
which they were formerly induced to look after our affairs,
were exiled from the regions of the earth. For this reason I
have decided to oppose this prejudiced view, insofar as my
competence and my modest command of language permit, 2
and to refute these slanderous charges. These people must
not harbor the delusion that they have said something signifi-
cant when they have merely spread abroad common rumors,
or think that, if we on our side refrain from engaging in con-
troversy, they have won because our view is inherently de-
fective, when it really is only because of the silence of the
defenders. 8
I would never deny that the charge is most serious and
that we wholly deserve the odium of being public enemies, 4
if it were proved that we are the reason why the world has
wandered from the path of natural law, the gods have been
58
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 59
exiled far from us, or so great a swarm of mortal woes have
been brought upon mankind.
The refutation: no new calamities have occurred.
2. Let us therefore examine the precise significance of the
belief they hold, having laid aside entirely the spirit of con-
tention 5 which usually confuses or glosses over the consider-
ation of the facts, and let us weigh the merits of each side and
determine whether this statement be true or not.
It will surely be brought out by the juxtaposition of argu-
ments in logical sequence that not we but they, rather, are
shown to be godless and that they who profess to be wor-
shippers of the gods 6 and to be devoted to the ancient re-
ligious practices are themselves found guilty of that charge
they advance.
And first, in friendly and unimpassioned manner, we ask
of them answers to these questions :
After the name of the Christian religion began to be used
on earth, what phenomenon never before observed, or never
before recognized, or what sensation or experience contrary
to the laws laid down at the beginning of time, has ever come
to the so-called 'Nature of Things'? 7 Have any of those
primordial elements of which it is agreed all things are
composed ever gone through a transmutation of their basic
qualities? 8
Plas the construction of this massive mechanism ' which
covers us all and in which we are held inclosed 10 in any way
been shaken or destroyed? Has the revolution of the earth,
varying from the speed of its primal motion, begun to be
slower or to be accelerated in precipitate rotation?
Have the stars begun to rise where they formerly set and
have the constellations begun to set in the place they used to
60 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
rise'? Has the sun itself, the sovereign of the stars, with
whose light all things are clothed n and by whose warmth all
things are brought to life, blazed forth in greater heat, grown
less warm, and thus deteriorated by changing to opposite
conditions the well-regulated temperature it used to have?
Has the moon ceased to refashion herself and to recreate her
older contours by constant re-establishment of new ones?
Has winter, has summer, have the intervening seasons,
been destroyed by the mingling of seasons of unequal char-
acter? 12 Has winter begun to have long days and has the
summer's night begun to invite back the dawn at its tardiest
pace? 13
Have the winds ceased to blow? And have their blasts
died down so that the sky is not gathered together into clouds
and the fields do not submit 14 to be moistened by the storms?
Does the earth refuse to receive the seeds entrusted to it or
are the trees unwilling to leaf out? Has the flavor in edible
fruits or the vine with its juices been changed? Is foul gore
squeezed out from the olive berries and has the lamp, gone
out, lost its source of supply?
Do the animals accustomed to the land and those that pass
their life in the seas have no mating season? Do they fail to
protect, each according to its own habits and its own law of
instinct, the young which they have generated in their
wombs?
Finally, do men themselves, whom the first creation 18
scattered over the habitable 18 shores, not contract marriages
with the proper nuptial rites? Do they not beget children
they love most dearly? Do they not carry on public and
private and family business? Do they not, as each pleases,
direct their talents to varied arts and different kinds of
learning, and reap the profits of their cleverness and zeal?
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 61
Do those to whom fate 1T has given such privileges fail to
exercise rule, do they fail to issue commands? Do they fail
to experience daily advancement in honorable offices and
powers? Do they not preside over discussions in the courts
of law? Do they not give interpretations of laws and rights? 18
All other things by which human' life is encompassed and
in which it is contained men practice these, do they not, in
their own tribes after the established customs of their
ancestors? 19
Such calamities as have occurred are of a type long
familiar.
3. Since these are the facts and no unusual factor has
appeared to break 20 into the eternal succession of events by
disturbing their courses, why is it that it is said that a plague
was brought upon the earth after the Christian religion ap-
peared in the world and revealed the mysteries 21 of hidden
truth?
" But pestilence," they say, " and droughts, wars, famines,
locusts, mice, and hailstorms, and other harmful things with
which human affairs are visited, are brought upon us by the
gods in their anger at your wrongs and evil-doings/' 22
Now if in matters that are perfectly clear and need no
defense it were not stupid to delay longer, I would certainly
show by unfolding the story of former ages that those evils
you speak of were not unknown, and that these plagues did
not suddenly burst in upon us, and mortal affairs did not
begin to be infested by a variety of dangers after our race
merited the happiness of being called by this name. 28 If we
are to blame and it is for our punishment that these calamities
have been devised, from what source did men of old derive
bz ARNOBIUS: IHE UASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
the names of these misfortunes? Whence did they obtain a
word for wars? How could they have given meaning to
" pestilences " and " hailstorms " or introduced them among
the words that form lucid speech? If these ills are entirely
new and derive their existence from recent sins, how could
it happen that past generations created words for these things
which they neither knew themselves nor had learned that
they had been experienced in the times of any of their
ancestors?
" Poverty of agricultural produce," they say, " and scarcity
of grain have a more relentless grip on us/'
Were earlier centuries, even the most ancient, ever free at
any time from such periods of great need? Do not the very
names that label these evils bear witness and loudly testify
that no human being was ever immune to them? And if the
matter were really hard to believe, we could specify by the
testimony of authors how great the nations were that experi-
enced dire famine and perished in devastation piled on
devastation, and to what nations and how often it happened.
" Hail storms occur very frequently and ruin everything/'
Well, do we not find it expressly stated in ancient literature
that even showers of stones 24 demolished whole areas? ~ s
" Hard ~ rains cause the crops to die and bring on barren-
ness to the lands/' Was antiquity ever free from these evils
when we have known of mighty rivers drying up and the
mud parched? 27
" Contagious diseases consume the human race/' Run
through the annals 28 in various languages; you will learn
that whole nations have often been laid desolate and bereft
of their inhabitants. 29
" Every kind of crop is ruined and eaten by locusts, 30 by
mice." 81 Go through your own historical records and you
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 63
will be taught how often a former age was affected by these
pests and brought to the wretchedness of poverty,
" Shaken by violent earthquakes, cities totter to their de-
struction." What"? did not times gone by see cities with their
populations swallowed up by huge rifts? 82 Or were they
fortunate enough not to experience such disasters?
4. When was the human race ever destroyed by a flood? 8S
Was it not before our time? When was the world set on
fire 34 and reduced to coals and ashes? Was it not before our
time? When were magnificent cities engulfed by tidal
waves? 3C Was it not before our time? When were wars car-
ried on with wild beasts and struggles with lions? 3S Was it
not before our time? When was ruin brought on entire
populations by venomous serpents? 3T Was it not before our
time? Yes, as for this habit of yours to impute to us the
causes of frequent wars, the devastation of cities, the invasions
of Germans and Scythians you must pardon me for saying
it in your passion for calumnies you obviously fail to see
the actual facts behind your statements.
5. When ten thousand 38 years ago, as Plato tells us, 89
a great force of men who utterly destroyed and blotted out
countless nations broke forth from the island which is called
Neptune's * Atlantis, were we the cause? When between
the Assyrians 41 and the Bactrians under Ninus and Zoroaster 42
of old not only was there a conflict with the sword and with
brawn but even with the esoteric arts of the Magi and Chal-
daeans/ 8 was this cause for hostility to us? When Helen was
carried off under the leadership and instigation of the gods **
and became a dreadful bane to her own and later times, was
this charged against our religion? When that monstrous
Xerxes 40 let in the sea upon the land and walked across the
64 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
seas, was this brought about by any wrong on the part of our
people? When from the borders of Macedonia one young
man * G arose and conquered the kingdoms of the East, reduc-
ing their populations to the state of prisoners and slaves, was
this our doing and did we provoke the causes? When the
Romans more recently, like some mighty flood, submerged
and overran all nations, did we, indeed, urge the gods to this
madness? But if there is no man who would dare impute to
our times those things which took place long ago, in what
way can we be the causes of the present misfortunes, when
nothing new is taking place, but all these things are old and
were not unheard of by the ancients?
There have actually been fewer calamities since
Christians appeared.
6. Actually, regarding the wars which you say were begun
on account of hatred for our religion, it would not be dif-
ficult to prove that after Christ 47 was heard on earth, not only
did they not increase but in great measure were reduced as
a result of the repression of fierce passions. 48 For when we ?
so large a number as we are, have learned from His teachings
and His laws 49 that evil should not be repaid with evil;
that it is better to suffer wrong than be its cause, to pour forth
one's own blood rather than to stain our hands and conscience
with the blood of another: the world, ungrateful as it is, has
long had this benefit from Christ by whom the rage of mad-
ness has been softened and has begun to withhold hostile
hands from the blood of fellow beings.
And if all without exception who understand that <they>
are men, not through the form of their bodies but through the
power of reason, would for a little while be willing to lend an
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 65
ear to His wholesome and peaceful commandments, and
would believe not in their own arrogance and swollen conceit
tut rather in His admonitions, the whole world, long since
having diverted the use of iron 51 to more gentle pursuits,
would be passing its days in the most placid tranquillity and
would come together in wholesome harmony, having kept
the terms of treaties unbroken.
What is the origin of these calamities?
7. " But if," they say, " no inconvenience has come to
human affairs by your agency, what is the source of these
evils which have for a long time oppressed and afflicted pitiful
humanity? "
You ask me an opinion that has no pertinence to the matter
at issue. For I have not undertaken the present discussion
regarding it, to show or prove by what causes or for what
reasons each of these things took place but that I might show
that the reproaches for so great a crime lie far from our door.
And if I succeed if by reason of the fact C2 itself, or by most
formidable arguments, the truth of the matter is made mani-
fest -I care not whence these evils come or from what sources
or first causes they flow*
Perhaps the cause is in nature itself.
8. Still, lest when I am asked what I think about matters
of this kind I may seem to have no opinion at all, I can say: 58
What if that primal matter, which is diffused through the
four elements 54 of things, contains the causes of all these
misfortunes wrapped up in its very nature? What if the
motions of the heavenly bodies create these evils in certain
signs, 56 regions, seasons, and limits, and impose upon the
66 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
things beneath them the necessity of undergoing various
hazards? What if at stated times changes take place and,
as in the fluctuations of the tides, at one moment favorable
circumstances make you ride high and at another unfavor-
able ones bring you low again, good times alternating with
evil? What if the dirt we tread upon in walking has this
property given to it, of breathing forth the most harmful
exhalations by which the air is befouled and brings disease to
the body and cripples man's activities? What if and this is
nearest the truth 6C what seems adverse to us is not really
evil to the world itself, and that judging all things in terms
of our own advantage, we blame the results of nature because
of unproved opinions?
Plato, that sublime head and pillar C7 of philosophers, has
stated in his writings 68 that those dread floods and world-wide
conflagrations are a purification of the earth, and that wise
man was not afraid to call the overthrow of the human race
its destruction, ruin, death, and burial a renewal of things,
for * 9 by this reintegration of powers a certain youthfulness
was brought about.
9. " There is no rain from heaven/' my opponent says,
" and we suffer from an extraordinary lack of food/'
Well, do you insist that the elements serve your needs, and
to permit you to live more comfortably and extravagantly,
the obedient seasons are under obligation to give themselves
over to your conveniences? What if in this way a man who
wants very much to go sailing should complain that for a
long time now there have been no winds and that the breezes
of heaven have been stilled? Is it therefore to be said that
the tranquil sky is wicked because it hinders travelling
merchants from realizing their aspirations? What if some-
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 67
one, accustomed to sun himself and to dry out his body in
this manner/ 1 in like manner should complain that by the
prevalence of cloud the pleasure of a clear sky is taken away?
Would you have us say, then, that the clouds hang over the
sky with an injurious covering because one cannot at his ease
tan his skin to his taste and provide an excuse for drinking
bouts? All these events which take place and happen under
this mass of the universe are not for our creature comforts
but should be regarded as in the arrangements and plans
of nature itself.
10. If anything occurs which fosters us and our affairs
with but little happy success, it is not therefore an evil and
to be regarded as pernicious. The world either rains or does
not rain; it is for itself that it rains or does not rain, and
though perhaps you do not know it, it either evaporates
excessive moisture with drying heat or it moderates a long
spell of dryness by showers of rain. It produces pestilences,
diseases, famines, and other deadly forms of evil. How can
you tell whether it does not remove what exists in excess, to
this end that by forcing things to take losses, it may set moder-
ation upon their tendency to develop riotously?
1 1 . Would you venture to say that this and that thing in
the world, the origin and final cause of which you cannot
explain or analyze, is bad, and because winter possibly
hinders you from enjoying delights and pleasures, would you
say that it is a pernicious, austere thing? Does it follow that
because cold weather does not happen to agree with your
body and chills it and benumbs the warmth of your blood,
there must be no winter? And because you cannot bear or
put up with the hottest rays of the sun, ought summer to be
eliminated from the year and another plan of nature be set
68 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
up with other laws opposite in character? Hellebore is a
poison to men: 62 ought it For this reason not grow"? The
wolf 6S lies in wait at sheepfolds; is nature at all to blame
because it has created a beast most dangerous to the wool-
bearer? By its bite the serpent takes away life: would you
really condemn the foundation of things because it added
to living creatures monsters so fierce?
12, You are conceited in the extreme, considering that
you are not your own master and are even the property of
another, to want to dictate terms to the more powerful, so
that what you wish may take place, not what you have found
in the state of things made immutable by their ancient
constitution.
Therefore, if you wish your complaints to have a place for
consideration, you must, my good men, first tell us whence
and who you are; whether the world was produced and fash-
ioned for you, or whether you have come into it, as tenants
hailing from other regions. And seeing that it is not in your
power to say, and you cannot explain for what cause you
live beneath this vault of heaven, stop thinking anything
belongs to you, since those things which take place take place
not for the benefit of one individual but arise for the good of
the whole. 64
Not only calamities lout seasons of prosperity have
occurred,
13. " Because of the Christians/' 65 they say, '* the gods
contrive all these evils and destruction of crops is produced
by the heavenly deities/'
I ask, do you fail to see that when you say this you are
slandering us wickedly with open-faced and demonstrable
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 69
lies? It is almost three hundred years, 67 more or less, since
we 68 began to be Christians and to be known on the earth:
in all these years have wars been without interruption? Have
bad crops been continuous? Has there been no peace on
earth? Has there been no time at all when things have been
cheap and abundant? For this must first be made out by our
accuser, that these calamities have been continual and conse-
cutive, that never at all have mortal beings had a chance to
get their breath, and that without any days off, 69 as the
expression has it, they have passed through manifold critical
situations.
14. And do we not see that in these intervening years
and intervening seasons many victories over conquered
enemies have been won, that the boundaries of the empire
have been extended and nations with names hitherto un-
heard-of, have been brought under our sway; 70 that very
often there have been years with the most abundant produce;
that there have been so many periods of low prices and
abundance of commodities n as to cause an amazing paralysis
of all business undertakings by the low price level? T2 For
how could business be carried on and how could the race
of mortals endure to this day, had not the fruitfulness of
nature supplied all things requisite for life?
15. Of course, there were at times a few seasons of
scarcity, but these were again relieved by abundance. Cer-
tain wars were carried on contrary to what we should wish 78
but afterwards this situation was rectified by victories and
successes. Well, now, what are we to say that the gods were
at times mindful of our wrongdoings and at others unmind-
ful? If when there is a famine they are said to be angered at
us, it follows that when there is abundance, they are not
70 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
angry and harsh. And so it boils down to this that caprici-
ously they lay aside and take up their anger and are constantly
returning to their former attitude when the remembrance of
our sins has been laid aside.
1 6. Yet the true meaning of these statements cannot be
established by any logical reasoning. If they willed that the
Alamanni, 74 the Persians, and the Scythians be subdued be-
cause Christians lived and dwelt among those peoples, how
did it happen that they granted victory to the Romans 75
when Christians lived and dwelt among those peoples also"?
If they decreed mice and locusts to swarm forth in huge
numbers in Asia 7G and Syria because here, too, Christians
dwelt among those peoples, why was it that at the same time
nothing similar took place in Spain or Gaul, since innumer-
able Christians lived in these same provinces also? If among
the Gaetuli and the Zeugitani, 77 they for this reason sent
exceeding drought, why did they in that year grant to the
Mauri and the Nomads the fullest harvests, when again this
religion existed in these regions as well? If in any state you
wish to cite they have made many die of hunger because of
their hatred for our name, why have they in the same state
made richer, not only people who do not belong to our body,
but also Christians, some even very wealthy? 78 The conclu-
sion is: either all together should have gone without pros-
perity, if we are the cause of evils, for we are in all nations;
or when you see favorable circumstances mixed with unde-
sirable, cease to attribute to us what is harmful to your for-
tunes, since we in no way affect your blessings and prosperity.
If by my 70 agency your affairs turn out badly, why do I not
prevent them from ever turning out well? If what I am is
the cause of great dearth, why do I not prevent the greatest
of harvests from taking place? If when in wars a wound is
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 71
received, I am said to bring the misfortune, why, when
enemy warriors 80 perish, am I not a bad omen 81 and why do
I not bring evil to prosperity through my being an evil
portent?
The gods demean themselves by anger against
Christians.
1 7. And yet, you great devotees and priests of the deities,
do you assert that those most august gods are angered with
Christian peoples? Do you really not notice, do you not see
how shameful, how disgraceful are the mad feelings 82 which
you thus impute to the deities? What else is anger than
madness, than rage, than to be carried on to a lust for
vengeance and having become savage with the torments 83
of the grief of another, to revel in the senselessness 8 * of heart?
The great gods, then, know, suffer, and feel what wild beasts,
what monsters, what deadly snakes contain in their poisoned
fangs. It is claimed by you that that superior nature, which is
solidly based on eternal righteousness, knows the fickleness
of man and what is blameworthy in earthly life. And what
necessarily follows from your statement but that from their
eyes fiery flashes shine out, 85 their breast gives forth a pant,
foam rushes from their mouth, and from their burning words
their lips become dry and pale? 8J
1 8. But if this is true and it has been examined and
proven certain that the gods boil with anger and are shaken
by emotion and disturbance of this sort, they are not im-
mortal and eternal nor should they be thought to possess any
of the quality of divinity. For where there is any disturbance,
there, of necessity, as the philosophers think, must be passion;
and where passion exists, 87 there emotional excitement is a
72 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
logical consequence. Where emotional excitement is, there
grief and sorrow are; where grief and sorrow are, there is
room for lessening of powers and for decay, 88 and if these
two cause trouble, dissolution is near at hand death which
ends all and takes away life from every sentient being.
19. " Why? " Because in this way you represent them
as not only capricious and excitable but also something
agreed by all to be farthest from the gods that they are
unjust and evil and that they possess nothing at all of even
moderate fairness. 89 What is so unjust as to be angry at
some and to harm others; to complain about men and to ruin
the harmless crops of grain; to hate Christianity and to ruin
its worshippers with every loss to them?
20. But do they therefore rage also against you in order
that aroused by the wounds you yourselves 90 receive, you
may rise up for their avenging? If so, the gods are seeking
defense from human beings and, were they not protected by
your advocacy, they are themselves not competent, they are
not strong enough to repel the insults shown them, to defend
themselves. 01 Indeed, if it be true that they burn with anger,
let them have the power of defending themselves and let
them put forth and make trial of their own powers for the
avenging of their insulted majesty. They can slay us, if they
wish, with heat; they can slay us with most fell cold; they
can slay us with pestilential winds; they can slay us with the
most unheard-of diseases; they can consume us, and can exile
us completely from all human association; or if it is a bad
plan to attack us with violence, let them send forth some
sign of judgment from which it may be clear to all that we are
living under heaven most contrary to their pleasure.
BOOK ONE : REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 73
The gods appear to treat pagan and Christian alike.
2 1 . Let them give to you good health and to us bad, even
the worst. Let them water your farms with showers at the
proper time and from our tiny little fields let them drive
away all the rains even in the form of dew. Let them see
that your flocks of sheep are multiplied with many lambs:
let them bring to our folds luckless barrenness. From your
olive trees and vineyards let them make the autumn's harvest
full, but from ours let them forbid one little drop to be pressed
out from the vines. And as the very worst they can do, let
them decree that in your mouth fruits should keep their
natural taste but in ours, on the contrary, let honey be made
bitter, let the flowing oil of olives grow rancid, and let the
deceitful wine, passing from the cups to the lips, be suddenly
turned sour. 92
22. Well, since the facts themselves bear witness that
nothing like this ever takes place, and it is agreed that the
blessings of life reappear no less to us and no greater to you, 98
why is there such great desire to maintain that the gods are
hostile and unfriendly to the Christians who, as you see, in
the most unpleasant circumstances, as well as in joyful, differ
from you in no way? If you permit the truth to be told and
to be expressed without flattery, these are words, words only;
indeed, matters believed by accepting slanderous accusations,
not clearly proven by examining any witness.
True gods would react differently.
23. But the true gods and those who fully deserve to hold,
to bear the authority of this name, neither grow wrathful,
nor indulge a grudge, nor do they devise cunning stratagems
to harm any one. For it is truly profane and surpasses all
74 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
sacrilege to believe that that wise and most blessed nature
considers it a great thing for any one to bow down before it
in humble worship, and that if this be not done, it believes
that it is despised and has fallen from the topmost pinnacle.
It is childish, weak, and pitiful, and scarcely becoming to
those whom for a long time now the experience of the learned
has called daemones 94 and " wanderers/' 5 not to be ac-
quainted with heavenly matters 9Q and to concern themselves
with the coarser things of earth in place of their own natural
condition.
The criticism really originates from neglected
priestlings.
24. These are your thoughts, they are your ideas, con-
ceived with impiety and believed still more impiously. No,
rather, if I am to state this more truthfully, the diviners, 97
the interpreters of dreams, the soothsayers, the seers, and
the custodians of shrines, always vain, have contrived these
stories. In order that their own arts may not perish and that
they may not exact only paltry fees from those who now very
infrequently come to them for advice, whenever they find
you inclined to let their occupation come into disrepute, they
keep on screaming:
" The gods are neglected and in the temples attendance 08
is woefully slight! The ancient ceremonials are now laughed
at and the august old rituals formerly held sacred have fallen
under the superstitions of new religions! Rightly is the hu-
man race oppressed by so much misery and distress, tormented
by so many hardships and tribulations! And men, stupid
people and people unable because of their innate blindness
to see things in plain daylight, dare in their frenzy to assert
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 75
as true what you in your right senses do not blush to
believe! " "
Christians are guilty only of worshiping the true God.
25. And lest any one should think that we, through a
lack of confidence in our reply, grant the gods the gift of
tranquillity, and that we attribute to them minds that harbor
no harm and are far removed from every excitement, 100 let us
allow them, as you wish, to direct their anger against us, to
thirst after our blood, and let us admit that for a long time
they have wanted to remove us from the generations of
mortals. But if it is not troublesome, not too hard; if it is a
matter of duty, common to both, to discuss the points of this
discussion not according to one's pleasure but in accordance
with the truth, we demand to hear from you what is the
cause, what is the reason on account of which against us
alone the gods above rage, and men in their anger grow hot.
" You practice your wicked religions," they say, " and rites
unheard-of in the world/'
What statement is this that you, men who have a share of
reason, dare to make? What do you dare to blab out? What
are you trying to bring out through the recklessness of rash
speech? To worship God as the Ruler/ 01 the Master of all
the things that are, occupying the topmost peak of all the
heights; to call upon Him with obedient reverence; to cling to
Him, as it were, in all moments of weariness; 102 to love Him,
to look up to Him is this an accursed and unholy religion,
full of sacrilege and impiety, polluting by the superstition of
its newness the ceremonies established in olden times? 103
76 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
For this Christians are persecuted.
26. Is this, I ask, that bold and heinous crime on account
of which the supreme gods in heaven aim the sharp sting of
their wrath and indignation against us; on account of which
you yourselves, whenever the fierce passion enters you, de-
spoil 104 us of our goods; drive us from our ancestral homes;
inflict capital punishment upon us; torture, mangle, burn 105
us, and at last cast us to the wild animals and to the clawings
of monsters? Should whoever condemns that in us, or con-
siders that it ought to be held in some way against us, be
called by the name of man, even though he appears such to
himself? Or should he be believed a god, even though he
claims to be such through the mouths of a thousand prophets?
Does the Trophonian 10 or the Dodonian Jupiter lor call us
wicked, and will he himself be named a god and be thought
to belong to the number of deities, who places a charge of
impiety against the servants of the Most High King or is
tormented himself because His majesty and His worship are
preferred? Is Apollo, whether he be called Delian, 108 or
Clarian, Didymaean, Philesian, Pythian, Sminthian, to be
held a diviner, when he either does not know the Most High
Ruler 10 or is unaware that He is prayed to each day by us?
If he knew not the secrets of our hearts and was unacquainted
with the innermost feelings we possess, he could know by
using his ears, or could recognize by the tone of our voices
which we use in prayers, that we are invoking the Most High
God and that it is from Him we ask what we need,
27. This is not yet the place to show who or whence
come all those who condemn us; what their authority or their
knowledge may be; why they quaver at mention of Christ; uo
why they regard His disciples as hostile and hateful; but to
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 77
those who give promise of human intelligence let us set it
down in terms applicable to all of us: we Christians are
nothing more than worshippers of the Most High King and
Ruler m under Christ as Master. 112 If you think about it,
you will find nothing else is involved in that hated religion.
This is the sum total of every action; this is the ordained limit
of all religious duties, this is the end. Before Him we all
according to our custom fall down and worship; to Him we
pray in common supplications. From Him we ask just and
honorable things, worthy for Him to hear, not because He
Himself has need of us as suppliants or loves to see the
veneration of so many thousands laid before Him. Our
benefit is involved and our need. For we are prone to faults
and to varied passions and lusts because of the defect of our
innate weakness. He suffers Himself always to be com-
prehended in our thoughts so that when we pray to Him and
struggle to merit His bounties, we may receive a will to
purity and may cleanse ourselves from every spot by the
cutting-off of all sins.
^lle pagan gods are ridiculous and even wicked.
28. What do you say, you interpreters of sacred, of divine
law? Are they who worship the Lares Grundulii 113 the Aii
Locutii^ and Limentini, M possessed of a better case than
all of us who worship God, the Father of all things, and from
Him ask protection when we are tired and weary? Even
they seem to you shrewd, wise, and most sagacious, worthy
of no criticism, who worship Fauni Fatuae, and the genii
of cities; who worship Pavores and Bellonae. On the other
hand, we are pronounced dull, stupid, silly, obtuse, and
dumb, having surrendered ourselves to a God by whose nod
78 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
and judgment everything in existence has been formed and is
immovable in the eternity of His nature? Do you hand down
this opinion, do you establish this law, do you proclaim this
decree that anyone who shall worship your slaves shall be
decorated with the fullest honors and that whoever makes
a petition to you, the masters themselves, shall be worthy of
the extreme penalty, crucifixion?
In the greatest states and in the more powerful peoples
public sacrifices are made to harlots who formerly sold them-
selves and prostituted themselves to the passion of the mob, 117
yet in the gods this causes no swelling of indignation. 118
Temples with the loftiest roofs have been dedicated to cats, 119
beetles, and heifers. 120 The powers of the deities thus mocked
are silent and experience no envy when they see sacredness
attributed to base animals on a par with their own selves. To
us alone are they hostile? To us are they the bitterest enemies
because we worship their Father by whom, if they really
exist, 121 they began to be and have the substance of their
power and majesty; and having been allotted by Him, so to
speak, their very deity, they feel that they exist and realize
that they are numbered among the things that exist, and by
His will and decision they can both perish and be dissolved
and not perish and be not dissolved? For if we all agree
that there is only one Beginning before whom in the antiquity
of time nothing else comes, it follows of necessity that after
Him are all things born and put forth and have burst forth
into their own individual nature. And if this is established
and agreed upon, we will admit as a consequence that the
gods are creatures of birth and that they derive their begin-
nings from the primal fount of all creation. If they are born
and begotten, they in any case are exposed to destruction
and dangers, 122 Yet they are believed to be eternal, immortal,
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 79
and subject to no end. Hence, this is also the gift and bounty
of God the Father, that through unending ages they have
deserved to be the same, since they are by nature subject to
perishing and dissolution.
Praise of the true and eternal God and Creator.
29. Would 123 that it might be granted to me here to
address the whole world gathered together as in one assembly
and that I might be placed within hearing of the whole
human race. Are we therefore in your judgment guilty of
an impious religion, and because we worship the Head and
Pillar of things with reverent obedience are we to be pro-
nounced undesirables and godless, to use the terms of your
abuse? And who would more rightly bear the odium of such
words than the one who either acknowledges or asks about or
believes another god before this God of ours?
Do we not all owe to Him this as the very first obligation
the fact that we are; that we are called men; that as <souls>
either sent forth by Him or fallen 124 from Him, we are kept
in the blindness of this body? Does it not come from Him
that we walk, that we breathe and live, and by the very force
of living does He not cause us to be and to be moved by
animation? Do the causes not flow out from Him by which
our health is supported with the abundance of varied pleas-
ures? To whom does that world in which you live belong
and who granted you the right to keep its produce and its
possession? Who gave that common possession, light, by
which you may see, touch, and examine all things beneath it?
Who has established the fires of the sun to warm 125 the
vital elements and make things grow lest the elements of
life become listless through being held in a stupor of in-
80 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
activity? Since you believe the sun is a god, are you not
interested in his founder and maker? Since with you the
moon is a goddess, do you not care to know who begot and
fashioned her?
30. Has the idea not entered into your mind of reflecting,
of considering, in whose possessions you live; in whose prop-
erty you are; whose land that is which you wear out; whose
is that air which you breath in and out; whose springs you
consume, whose water; who has arranged for the blasts of
winds; who has devised the wavy clouds; who has granted
to the fruitful powers of seeds their special characteristics?
Does Apollo rain for you, does Mercury 12G rain for you; have
Aesculapius, 127 Hercules, or Diana arranged the plan of
showers and storms? And how can this be when you claim
that they were born on earth and that at a certain time they
acquired living senses? For in the ancient days the world
preceded them and before they were born nature was ac-
quainted with showers and storms. Those born afterwards
possess no right to send rain nor can they foist themselves
upon programs which they found here already in progress,
and derived from a greater Author.
31. O Greatest, 128 O Highest Procreator of <visible and> 120
invisible things! O Thou who art Thyself invisible and
never understood by the things of nature! Worthy, worthy
art Thou truly if only mortal lips may call Thee worthy
to whom all breathing and understanding nature should
never cease to be grateful and to give thanks; to whom
throughout the whole of life it should fall on bended knees
to pray to Thee with unending petitions. For Thou art the
first cause, the place and space 13 of things created, the basis
of all things whatsoever they be. Infinite, unbegotten, ever-
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 81
lasting, eternal alone art Thou, whom no shape may repre-
sent, no outline of tody define; 131 unlimited in nature and in
magnitude unlimited; without seat, motion, and condition,
concerning whom nothing can be said or expressed in the
words of mortals. To understand Thee, we must be silent;
and for fallible conjecture to trace Thee even vaguely, noth-
ing must even be whispered. Grant pardon, O King Most
High, to those who persecute Thy servants and by reason of
the kindliness which is part of Thy nature, forgive those who
flee from the worship of Thy name and religion.
It is not to be wondered at if Thou art unknown -it would
be a matter for greater marvel if Thou wert understood. Per-
haps some one dares for this remains for raging madness to
do to be in doubt, to be uncertain whether that God exists
or not; whether He is to be believed in by the proved truth of
faith or by the imaginings of vain rumors. For we hear that
some who give themselves to the study of philosophy deny 132
that there is any divine force, and that others daily inquire
whether it exists; 133 that others 184 construct the whole sum
of things by chance accidents and random collisions and
fashion it by the propulsion of different-shaped things. 135
With these we shall at this time engage in no controversy at
all regarding such obstinate theories. For those who have
good sense say that to oppose stupid views is greater stupidity.
32. Our discussion is with those who, agreeing that there
is a divine race, are in doubt about the greater ones, while
they confess that there are inferior and lower deities. Is the
conclusion, then, that we struggle and strive to arrive at
results of such great moment by arguments? Let such a
foolish idea depart from us and let this madness be far, far
hence, I say in the words of the old saying, 186 let it be averted
from us. For it is as dangerous to attempt to demonstrate
82 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
that God is Supreme as by reasoning of this kind to want to
know that He exists. It matters very little and makes no
difference whether you deny that He exists or assert and
admit that He does, since both an assertion of such a thing
and the denial of an unbelieving opponent are equally
blameworthy.
33. Is there any human being who has not entered the
day of his nativity with a knowledge of that Beginning? 137
To whom is it not an innate idea; in whom has it not been
impressed, indeed, almost stamped into him in his mother's
womb; in whom is it not deeply implanted that there is a
King and Lord and Regulator of all things which are? In
fact, if the dumb beasts themselves had the power to utter
thoughts, if they could enjoy the use of our tongues; yes, if
trees, clods, stones, animated by living perception, could
produce the sound of a voice and utter comprehensible
speech, would they not, following nature as their leader and
teacher with faith of a simple purity, understand that God
exists and cry out that He alone is Lord of all?
Jupiter is not the true and eternal God,
34. " But in vain/' says some one, " do you assail and at-
tack us with misrepresentation and a slanderous charge, as
if we were going to deny that there is a greater god, since
Jupiter is by us called and held to be both the Best and
Greatest, 138 and since to him we have dedicated the most
sacred seats and the huge Capitol."
You are trying to join unlike things together and to force
them into one group with resultant confusion. For it has
been unanimously agreed by the common consent of all mor-
tals that the Omnipresent God is known not to have been
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 83
begotten nor to have been brought forth to new light at any
<instance>of time nor in any age to have begun to be. For
He himself is the Source of things, the Sower of the ages and
seasons. They do not exist of themselves but from His eternal
perpetuity they move forever in unbroken line. Yet Jupiter, 139
as you say, has both father and mother, grandfathers, grand-
mothers, and brothers; now recently, <it is asserted,) 14 being
conceived in the womb of his mother, and being perfectly
developed in ten months, he burst, feeling life in him, into
the light hitherto unknown to him. Therefore, if this is a
fact, how can Jupiter be God when it is agreed that that God
is everlasting, 141 while the other is represented by you to have
had a birthday, and frightened by the new experience, to
have squalled like an infant? 142
35. But let them be one and the same, as you wish, and
not different in any power of divinity or majesty. For what
possible reason, then, do you persecute us with unjust
hatred? Why do you shudder at any mention of our name as
a very bad omen, if we also worship the god whom you wor-
ship? Or why do you in the same argument maintain that
the gods are your friends, but hostile and most antagonistic to
us? For if we and you have one religion in common, the
anger of the heaven dwellers is stopped. If they are hostile
to us alone, then it is clear that both you and they do not
know God; that God is not Jupiter is clear from the very
wrath of the deities.
But the Christians worship a human being and one
crucified.
36. " But," they say, " the gods are not hostile to you
because you worship the Omnipotent God but because you
84 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
maintain that a man/ 43 born a human being, and one who
suffered the penalty of crucifixion, 144 which even to the
lowest of men is a disgraceful 145 punishment, was God, and
you believe that He still exists and you worship Him in
daily prayers/'
If it is not asking too much, my friends, set forth which are
these gods which believe that Christ worshipped by us tends
to harm them. Is it Janus/ 46 the founder of the Janiculum/ 47
and Saturn 14S who established the Saturnian state? Is it
Fauna Fatua/ 49 the wife of Faunus/ 50 who is called the Good
Goddess 151 but is better and more praiseworthy when wine is
drunk? Is it those Indigetes 152 who crawl to the river and pass
their days in the shallows of the Numicius 153 with the frogs
and little fishes? Is it Aesculapius 154 or Father Liber/ 55 the
former the son of Coronis 15G and the latter struck out of his
mother's womb by lightning? Is it Mercury/ 57 the outpouring
of the womb of Maia 13S and, what is more divine, Maia the
bright? Is it the archers Diana 159 and Apollo, carried about
in the exile of their mother and in floating islands scarce
safe? Is it Venus 1CO of the race of Dione, mother of the
children of a Trojan man, and the advertiser of her personal
beauty? Is it Ceres 161 born in the land of Trinacria, and
Proserpina/ 02 seized while gathering flowers? Is it the The-
ban or the Tyrian Hercules/ 63 the latter buried within the
borders of Spain, the former burned up in the flames of
Mount Oeta? Is it the sons of Tyndareus, the Castors/ 64 the
one accustomed to taming horses, the other a good pugilist
and invincible with the rough boxing-gloves? Is it the
Titans 105 and the Moorish Bocchores and the Syrian gods 10
that were hatched from eggs? Is it Apis/ 07 betrayed in the
Peloponnesus and in Egypt called Serapis? 108 Is it Isis 1GO
burnt black by the Ethiopian suns, mourning her lost son and
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 85
her husband torn limb from limb? We pass by and step over
the royal offspring of Ops 17 which your writers have written
about in their books to explain to you who and what they
were.
Do these then hear with wounded 171 ears that Christ is
worshipped and accepted by us and regarded as a divine
being? And having forgotten what lot they had a little before
and what condition they then had, they want no one else to
share in what was granted to them? Is this the justice of
heaven's inhabitants, this the holy judgment of the gods?
Is it not a kind of envy and greed, a mean sort of disparage-
ment, to want only their own fortunes to prosper and those
of others to grow less and to be trodden upon in lowly
contempt?
The pagans have deified many human beings.
37. We worship one born a man. 172 What of that? Do
you worship no one born a man? Do you not worship one or
another, yes, countless others? Indeed, have you not elevated
from the level of mortals all those you now have in your
temples and made a gift of them to heaven and the stars? m
For if by chance it escapes you that they once were partakers
of human lot and condition, open up your most ancient
literature 174 and run through the writings of those who, being
near to antiquity, set forth everything without any flattery in
clear truth. Surely you will then learn from what fathers,
by what mothers each was procreated, where they were bom,
of what family; what they did, accomplished, suffered, were
employed in; what favorable or unfavorable fortunes they ex-
perienced in performing their exploits. If you, however,
knowing that they are the fruit of wombs and that they pre-
86 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
served their life by eating the products of the earth, neverthe-
less complain that we worship a human being, you are acting
very unjustly in condemning in us what you yourselves do
constantly, or what you allow to be right for you to do but
are unwilling for it to be right for others.
The teachings of Christ are divine.
38. But let us grant, yielding m to you for the moment,
that Christ was one of us 170 in mind, spirit, body, weakness,
and condition in life: is He not deserving of being called
God and being felt God m by us on account of the favor of
so many blessings?
For if you enrolled Liber 17S among the list of gods because
he found a use for wine; Ceres, because she discovered bread;
Aesculapius, 179 the use of herbs; Minerva, the use of the
olive; 18 Triptolemus, the invention of the plough; m Her-
cules because he subdued and restrained wild beasts, thieves,
and many-headed serpents: 182 with how many distinctions
should He be honored by us who has withdrawn us from
great errors by introducing truth to us; m who when we were
walking like blind men everywhere without a guide, drew
us back from the precipices, from the pathless tracks, to
smoother places; who has pointed out to us what is especially
fruitful and wholesome for the human race, what God is,
who He is, how great, and of what character; who has per-
mitted us and taught us to receive and understand, so far as
our moderate ability was able, His depths and indescribable
profundity; who, with the greatest of kindness has made it
known by what Founder, by what Father this world has been
established and made; who has explained 18 * the nature of its
birth and essential substance never before comprehended by
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 87
anyone; whence the life-giving warmth is added to the rays
of the sun; why the moon is forever in motion, and whether
from the same or other causes 185 she is believed to alternate
her periods of light and darkness; what is the origin of
animals; the law of seeds; who designed man himself; who
fashioned him or from what kind of material did He mold
together the very constructions of bodies; what the senses are,
what the soul, and whether it flew to us of its own will or
was planted and created within our very organs; whether it
lives with us a sharer in death, or has been endowed with
everlasting perpetuity; what state remains for us when we
have departed from our bodies relaxed in death; whether we
shall see or have no memory of our perceptions and recol-
lection; 18S who restrains our arrogance and has made our
necks, uplifted with pride, to confess that they have a measure
of weakness; who has shown that we are living beings with-
out form, trusting in vain imaginings, without understanding
of anything, knowing nothing, not seeing what is placed
before our eyes; who has led us from false religions to the
true one, a blessing which surpasses and exceeds all others;
who has uplifted us from the worship of statues inanimate
and formed from the vilest clay to the stars and heaven and
has made us to mingle the words of our prayers and the
conversations of our supplications with God, the Lord of the
universe!
Arnobius only recently became a Christian.
39. Recently, 187 O blindness, I worshipped images drawn
from furnaces, gods fashioned on anvils and with hammers,
elephant's bones, 188 paintings, ribbons on trees 189 hoary with
age. Whenever my gaze fell upon an anointed stone daubed
88 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
with olive oil, 190 I would, as if there were some power in it,
show great respect to it; I would speak to it, and ask blessings
of it though it was a hlock without feeling. And those very
gods of whose existence I had convinced myself, I treated
with the greatest slanders since I helieved that they were
sticks of wood, stones, and bones, or that they dwelt in matter
of this <kind>. But now, having been led into the paths of
truth by so great a Teacher, I know all those things for what
they really are. I have worthy feelings about things that are
worthy. 191 I offer no insult to any divine name; and what is
owed to each person or head, with clearly understood differ-
ences and distinctions, that I grant. Is Christ therefore not
to be deemed God by us and should <He> in no other way be
honored with divine worship, from whom for a long time we
have received so many gifts while we live and hope for more
when " the Day " comes?
192
Christ's crucifixion in no way lessens His divinity.
40. " But He died nailed to the cross." 198
How does that affect the argument? For the sort and dis-
grace of His death do not change His words or deeds, nor will
the authority of His teachings seem less, because He departed
from the bonds of the body not by a natural death but went
away because of the violence borne against Him.
Pythagoras m of Samos was burned to death in a temple
as the result of an unjust suspicion that he aimed at assum-
ing power. Did what he taught lose its peculiar effectiveness
because he breathed forth his spirit not willingly but as the
result of a cruel assault? Likewise, Socrates 19B paid the su-
preme penalty of death when he was condemned by the
courts of his city. Are his discussions about character, virtues,
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 89
and duties, made of no value because he was wrongly ban-
ished from life? Many another, prominent in fame or valor
or reputation, experienced the most bitter forms of death like
Aquilius, 196 Trebonius, Regulus. Were they therefore after
life judged shameful because they perished not by the com-
mon law of fate but torn and tortured by the most painful
kind of death? No guiltless person, foully slain, is ever dis-
graced thereby, nor is he stained by the mark of any shame-
fulness who suffered severe punishment without desert but
because of the savagery of his tormentor.
41 . And yet, you who laugh at us for worshipping a man
who died ignominiously, do you not also honor Father
Liber/ 97 whom the Titans tore limb from limb, by the dedi-
cation of shrines to him? Have you not proclaimed the
discoverer of medicines, Aesculapius, 198 the guardian and
protector of health, well-being, and safety, after he suffered
the penalty and punishment of being struck by lightning? 199
Do you not call upon the great Hercules himself with sacri-
fices, offerings, and incense, Hercules whom you yourselves
say was burned alive [after punishment] 20 and consumed on
funeral pyres? 201 Do you not bear witness, with the approval
of the Galli, 202 to the fact that that Phrygian Attis, mutilated
and deprived of his manhood, is a gracious god, a holy god,
in the shrines of the Great Mother? Do you not say that
Father Romulus 203 himself, who was torn to pieces by the
hands of a hundred senators, 204 is Quirinus Martius, 205 and
do you not honor him with priests and couches, and worship
him in great temples 20 and after all these things swear that
he went up into heaven? Therefore, either you are to be
laughed at also who think that men slain by the heaviest of
tortures are gods and worship them, or if there is a sure
po ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
basis for your thinking you should act as you do, then allow
us to know for what reasons and grounds you 207 do this.
Christ's teachings and miracles are proof of divinity.
42. " You worship one born a human being. "
Even if that were true, nevertheless, as has been said in
former passages, on account of the many gifts which have
come from Him to us, He ought to be called and addressed as
God. Since He really is God, and without the shadow of any
considerable doubt, do you think we shall deny that He is
worshipped by us as much as possible and that we call Him
the Protector 20S of our body?
" So, then/' some raving, angry, and excited man will say,
" is that Christ a god? " We shall answer: God and God of
the inner powers, 209 and what may torment unbelievers the
more with the bitterest pains it was for the greatest of
purposes that He was sent to us by the Most High King.
Perhaps he will ask, having become madder and more fren-
zied, whether what we have just said can be proved. No
greater proof exists than the credibility of His acts, than the
unusual quality of His miracles; 21 than all those ordinances
of fate broken and dissolved, which the peoples and tribes
saw brought to pass in broad daylight with not a single
disagreeing voice; nor will those whose ancient and ancestral
laws He showed to be full of vanity and the most empty
superstition dare to charge Him with falsity.
Christ's miracles were not performed with the aid
of magic.
43. Perhaps my opponent will return to the attack with
those many other childish slanders: " He was a Magian; by
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 91
secret arts He performed all these things; from the temples
of the Egyptians He stole the names 211 of powerful angels
and esoteric learning."
Why do you talk, you scholar-dunces, about things not
examined by you and prattle with a loose and rash tongue
about things you do not know? Were therefore those things
which were done the tricks of demons 212 and the stunts of
magic arts? Can you point out to us, show us from all those
Magi 213 who ever existed through the ages, any one that ever
did anything resembling what Christ did, even to the thou-
sandth part; who accomplished this without the assistance of
incantations, without the juice of herbs and grasses, without
any anxious observance of sacrifices, drink offerings, seasons?
We do not press the point and ask what they promise to do or
in what kind of acts all their teaching and experience are
usually comprised. Who is not aware that these men are
eager to know in advance what is about to happen, things
which will come to pass in any case, whether they wish it or
not, as a natural result of their inherent character; or to
inflict a deadly disease upon anyone at all, or to break up the
affections of families, or to open locked rooms without keys,
or to bind the mouth in silence, or to weaken, increase the
speed of horses in chariot races 214 or slow them, or to inspire
in the wives and children of others, both males and females,
the flames and frenzied passions of illicit love; or if they seem
to attempt anything useful, to be able to do it not by their
own force but by the power of those they pray to?
44. But it is agreed that Christ did all He did without any
paraphernalia, without the observance of any ritual or formula
but only through the power of His name, and as was proper,
becoming, and worthy of a true god, He granted with the
generosity of His benevolent power nothing harmful or hurt-
7 T
92 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
ful but only what was helpful, wholesome, and full of aids
for us.
A summation of Christ's miracles.
45. What do you say again, o you . . .? 215 Was He then
a mortal or one of us whose authority, whose voice, expressing
ordinary and daily speech, put to flight sicknesses, diseases,
fevers, and other torments of the body? 21G Was He one of us
whose presence, whose sight, that tribe of demons sunk into
the vitals of men could not bear, and terrified by the strange
power gave up possession of the body? 21T Was He one of us
to whose command ugly skin diseases 21S were obedient and
left a healthy color to flesh 219 formerly spotted? Was He one
of us at whose bare touch hemorrhages 22 stopped and stayed
their excessive flows? Was he one of us whose hands caused
the jaundiced fluids in the skin 221 to flee, hands which that
penetrating fluid avoided and because of which the swellings
of the abdomens went down with the relieving dryness? Was
He one of us who urged on the lame to run 222 and was it a
<small> accomplishment 22S that the withered stretched forth
their hands 22 ' 1 and unbent the movements of joints stiff
from birth; that paralytics rose, and those who a little while
before were borne on the shoulders of others now carried back
their beds; 225 that those deprived of sight saw, and those born
without eyes now looked upon the sky and light of day? 2 " G
46. Was He one of us, I say, who by a single intervention
once restored to health a hundred or more afflicted with
various weaknesses and diseases; 22r at whose mere voice the
raging and maddened seas stilled themselves, the whirlwinds
and storms subsided; 228 whose foot crossed over the deepest
whirlpools, not touched by water; 229 who trod the ridges of
the sea and the very waves themselves were amazed that
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 93
nature entered into bondage to Him; who fed to satiety five
thousand of His followers with <five> loaves, 230 and lest this
seem a trick to the unbelieving and hard of heart, piled up
the fragments in twice-six baskets? Was He one of us who
commanded the breath long since breathed out to return to
bodies, 231 and those who had been buried in tombs to come
forth, and the third day after burial to be unwrapped from
the shrouds of the undertakers? 232 Was He one of us who
clearly saw in the hearts of the silent what each one was
pondering, what they tried to conceal in their innermost
thought? 233 Was He one of us who when He uttered a
single word was thought by different peoples who speak in
languages of different sound to be uttering words familiar
to each and to be using the tongue that each spoke? 2M Was
He one of us who when He taught His followers the duties
of the religion established as true, then and there filled out
the entire world and by revealing the immensity of His
authority, showed His real greatness and His real identity? 235
Was He one of us who when His body had been laid away
revealed Himself to countless people in open day, who both
spoke and obviously listened to others speaking, who taught,
rebuked, admonished; who, lest they think they were led
astray by empty imaginings, showed Himself once, twice
and oftener, in conversation with His friends; 236 who ap-
pears even now to very righteous men of incorruptible char-
acter who love Him, not in empty unsubstantial dreams but
in an appearance of pure simplicity; whose name when heard
puts to flight harmful spirits, 287 imposes silence upon the
soothsayers, causes fortune-tellers to lack consultants, 238 nulli-
fies the deeds of boastful magicians, not by the dread power
of His name, as you say, but by the freedom of a higher
power?
94 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
Christ performed these miracles to reveal the nature
of God.
47. And this summary account has not been given in the
belief that the greatness of the One who did these things was
to be seen clearly in these miracles alone. For however great
these things, how light and trifling will they be found to be,
if it should be known, from what realms, as the minister of
what power, He has come! 239 Those things which were done
by Him were constantly performed, not that He might vaunt
Himself with idle display of power but that men hard of
heart and unbelieving might know that what was promised
was not false, and that from the kindliness of His deeds
they might be taught to imagine what a true God is. Likewise
we wish it to be known, that when, as was said, a list of His
deeds was given in summary form, not only could Christ do
what He did but He even overcame the laws of the fates.
For, if as is clear and agreed, ailments, and bodily sufferings,
[the deaf, the deformed, and the dumb], 240 and if shrivelling
of the sinews and loss of sight happen and are brought on by
the decrees of fate; 241 if Christ alone has corrected, restored,
and healed these ailments, it is clearer than the sun itself
that He was more powerful than the fates when He un-
loosened and overpowered those things which were bound
by everlasting knots and immovable necessity. 242
Similar claims for pagan gods are clearly false,
48. " But/' says some one, " in vain do you claim so much
for Christ, since we know and have heard of other gods, who
gave medicines to many sufferers and healed the diseases and
sicknesses of many men/' 24S
I do not inquire ; I dp not demand to know, what god or
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 95
when, to whom such assistance was given or what broken
man he restored to health this only do I desire to know:
whether it was without adding any substance, that is, any
medication, by mere touch, he bade the diseases to fly away
from men; commanded or brought it about that the cause of
the ailment ceased to exist and the bodies of the sick returned
to their natural state. For we know that Christ, by applying
His hand to the ailing part or by a single command, opened
the ears of the deaf, removed blindness from- eyes, gave speech
to the dumb, loosened the stiffness of joints, gave power to
walk to the paralytic, regularly healed with a word and cured
by a command skin diseases, agues, dropsical diseases, and
all other kinds of ailments which some evil, cruel power
willed the bodies of men to endure.
What similar act have all these gods done by whom you
say aid was borne to the sick and the critically ill? For if they
ever, as the story goes, ordered some to be given medicine, or
certain food to be taken, or a potion of any particular kind to
be drunk, or a poultice of juices of plants and grasses to be
laid on the places causing distress; or that persons should
walk, rest up, or refrain from anything harmful: then it is
clear this is no remarkable thing and deserves no respect at
all. If you care to give it attentive examination, you will dis-
cover that physicians heal in this same way, a creature born
of earth, not trusting to the truth of science, but employing
the art of guessing and wavering in conjecturing possibilities.
And no miracle is involved in removing conditions by
medical means. The beneficial qualities are inherent in the
things, they are not the powers of the healers, and though
it is praiseworthy to know by what drug or method it is suit-
able for persons to be healed, the occasion for this praise is
with man, not with the god. It is no disgrace that a person
96 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
should have improved the health of a man by things taken
from without it is a disgrace to the god that he is unable to
do these things of himself but that he grants health and
safety through the aid of external things.
49. And since you compare the other deities and Christ
with respect to the benefits of health given by them, how
many thousands of sick people do you want us to show you;
how many suffering from wasting diseases whom the applica-
tions of no medicine restored, although as suppliants they
went through all the temples; although they prostrated them-
selves before the faces of the gods and swept up the thresh-
olds themselves with kisses; 24i when, as long as life remained,
they wore out with their most piteous prayers and vows
Aesculapius himself, the giver as they call him of health?
Do we not know that some died of their ailments; others
grew old under the torments of their diseases; still others
began to conduct themselves wickedly, after they had worn
out their days and nights in continual prayer and hope for
clemency? What good is it, then, to show that one or another
was possibly cured when to so many thousands no helper
has come and all the shrines are full of the wretched and
unfortunate?
But, perhaps, you say that aid is brought by the gods to
the good and that the misfortunes of evil men are ignored.
Yet Christ gave assistance in equal measure to the good and
the evil and no one who in adversity asked aid against the
attack and wrongs of fortune was rejected by liim. 2 * 5 For it
is the property of a true God and of royal power, to deny this
kindness to none and not to give thought as to who is de-
serving or not, since it is natural weakness 24 that makes a
man a sinner, not will and 247 deliberate choice. To say, more-
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 97
over, that aid is borne by the gods to those who are meritorious
in their distresses, is to keep the question raised by your
assertion unanswered and doubtful, so that he who has been
cured seems to have been preserved by accident, and he who
has not may be believed to have been unable to banish sick-
ness through a heaven-sent <lack of> strength, not because
of his own deserts.
Christ also delegated His miraculous power to His
disciples.
50. Moreover, those miraculous deeds, which we have
listed above in summary form and not in accordance with the
importance of the matter, He not only performed by His own
power but, and this was more sublime, He has allowed many
others to attempt them and to do them in His name. 248 For
when He saw that you would be detractors of His deeds and
divine work, in order that there might survive no lurking
suspicion that He had bestowed these gifts and blessings by
using magical arts, He chose from the huge multitude of
people who with wonder pursued His favor, fishermen, work-
men, farmers, and that kind of uneducated people, those
who being sent through various nations, were to perform all
those miraculous deeds without any dissimulation and with-
out any material aids.
By a word 249 He soothed the torments of aching bodies,
and by a word they soothed the aches of maddening suf-
ferings. By one command He cast out demons from bodies
and to the lifeless He restored their senses; they also by no
different command returned to health and soundness those
laboring under the torments of these demons. He by apply-
ing only His hand wiped off the marks of the whitening skin
98 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
infections; they also by a touch no different restored the body
lines. He bade the watery swollen organs to recover their
natural dryness, and His servants in this way stayed the
wandering waters and ordered them to glide through their
proper courses without danger to the body. He within the
time of a single word curbed from incessant feeding sores of
large extent that refused to heal, and they no differently com-
pelled the stubbornness of the fierce cancer to confine itself
to a scar by limiting its ravages. He gave the power of walk-
ing to the lame, sight to blinded eyes, He called back the
dead to life: no less did they also loosen the tightness of
sinews, fill the eyes with light now lost and ordered the dead
to walk out of the tombs, in a reversal of the funeral services.
And nothing was ever done by Him to cause wonder 25 by
all who were amazed at it, which He has not granted to be
done completely by those humble and rustic men, and did
not put in their power.
The ^agan gods never delegated similar authority
and
51. What do you say, o minds unbelieving, stubborn,
hardened? Did that Jupiter Capitolinus 251 ever grant power
of this kind to any mortal? Did he ever grant this power to
any curio, 252 or to the pontifex maximus* or even to the
flamen Dialis, 2 ** because he is his creature? 20JS I shall not
say power to arouse the dead, to restore light to the blind, to
restore the natural state of the body to the bent and the
paralyzed, but to check either by a command of his voice or
a stroke of his hand a blister, a hangnail, a pimple? Was
this therefore a human power or could such a right be granted
by word of mouth? Could such a privilege come to one
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 99
nourished on the produce of fertile earth? Was it not rather
divine and sacred, or, if the hyperbole is in place, more than
divine and sacred? If you yourself do what you can and what
is consonant with your strength and power, there is no ex-
cuse for an exclamation of astonishment: you will have done
what you could and what your own power ought to have
accomplished, so that there should be a correspondence be-
tween the deed and its doer. To be able to transfer to a man
your own power and to grant and to share what you alone
can do with the weakest thing, this is the characteristic of
power established over all things, which holds subordinate
to itself the causes of all things, and the natures of methods
and means.
The magicians have loeen unable to perform such
miracles.
52. Well now, 256 if you will, let through the zone of fire 25T
come some magian Zoroaster, 258 from a far part of the world,
if we accept the authority of Hermippus. 259 And with him let
the Bactrian come whose deeds Ctesias relates in the first
book of his histories; 26 Armenius, 261 too, the grandson of
Zostrianus, and Pamphylus the friend of Cyrus; let Apol-
lonius, 262 Damigeron, 263 and Dardanus; 26 * Belus, 265 Juli-
anus, 266 and Baebulus, 267 and if there is any other who is
said to have primacy and repute in such magic. Let them
allow one of the people to have the power of causing the
mouths of the dumb to become articulate, to unstop the ears
of the deaf, to create for those bom without sight the powers
of the eye, and to restore feeling and animation to bodies long
cold. Or if that is too difficult and they cannot permit others
to possess the powers of such acts, let them themselves do
them, and let them do them with their own rites. Whatever
ioo ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
poisonous grasses the bosom of the earth nourishes; whatever
powers the muttering of words and the accompanying indis-
pensable incantations, let them addwe do not envy them
this; let them marshal themwe have no objections. Finally,
let them try and determine whether they can bring to pass
with the help of their gods what has been done time and time
again by uneducated Christians with bare commands.
Not magic but God in Christ performed the
miracles.
53. Cease, you men of no knowledge, to meet such great
deeds with curses which will in no way harm Him who did
them, but will bring danger to you; no small danger, I say,
but one based on great, on important considerations, if indeed
the soul is a valuable thing and no man can find anything
dearer than himself. There was nothing magical/ 08 as you
think, nothing human, deceitful or crafty; no deception
lurked in Christ, though you may jeer, as usual, and split
your sides with hilarious laughter. He was God sublime,
God from His innermost roots, God from realms unknown,
and was sent by God the Ruler 20 of all as a Savior, whom
neither the sun itself nor any stars, if they have feeling, nor
the rulers and princes of the world, nor the great gods, or
those who, making themselves out as such, try to frighten the
whole race of mortals, were able to know or even to guess
whence or who He was. And rightly so. But, freed from
the body which He carried about as a small part of Himself,
He afterwards suffered Himself to be seen and allowed it to
be known who and how great Fie was. All the elements of
the world were confused 27 with terror at the strange phe-
nomenon; the earth trembled, 271 the sea was stirred up to its
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 101
depths; the air was veiled with clouds of darkness; the fiery
orb of the sun was stopped and its heat became less. For
what remained to take place, after He who for a long time
had been reckoned to be one of us was recognized as God?
The miracles are well attested loy testimony of the
-witnesses.
54. Of course you do not believe these things. But those
who viewed them taking place and saw them happening
under their very eyes, the best witnesses and the surest
authorities, both believed them themselves and handed them
down to us their descendants with confirmation of no small
weight. You are interested to know who these are? Tribes,
peoples, nations indeed that skeptical human race which, if
the fact itself were not plain and, as the saying is, clearer than
day itself, would never give its corroborating assent to events
of this kind. But shall we say that the men of that time were
such deceivers and liars, 272 were so stupid and brutish, that
they imagined that they had seen what they had never seen,
and that they published by false testimony and corroborated
with childish assertions things that had never taken place at
all, and that when they were able to live in harmony with
you and to establish pleasant relations, they went out of their
way to incur hatred and to be held in contempt?
The expansion of Christianity corroborates the
testimony.
55. But if our writers are liars in relating this, as you
allege, how did it happen that in so short a time the whole
world was filled with that religion? How could nations settled
far from each other, separated by the winds and convexities
102 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
of heaven, 2 TS have come to unite on one conclusion? They
have been attracted by bare statements, led on to empty hopes,
and have been willing of their own accord to let themselves
in for the risks of capital punishment m by reason of their
rash desperation, although they had seen no such thing which
could have aroused them to adopt this worship as a result of
something strange and wonderful? No, but because they
saw all these things were done both by Himself and by His
heralds, 275 who, having been sent through the whole world
continually bore the blessings of the Father and God's gifts
to souls and bodies. 276 Conquered by the force of truth itself,
they surrendered to God and considered it a matter of no
weight that they cast their bodies before you and offered
their flesh to be torn,
56. But you say that our authors have put forth these
statements mendaciously; they have made too much of un-
important deeds, and have greatly exaggerated minor matters
with boastful pretense. But would that all things could have
been reduced to writing, both what had been done by Him-
self and what had been completed by His heralds with like
right and power! So great an array of miracles would make
you more skeptical, and perhaps you would be able to point
to a place to which it would seem highly probable that addi-
tions were made to facts and that false statements were inter-
polated in writings and commentaries. But in unknown
nations and those which did not possess the art of writing, 277
all the deeds could not have been written down or have
reached the ears of all men; or if any were entrusted to written
and connected forms, by the malevolence of demons and it
is their painstaking concern to kidnap this truth and of men
like them, certain insertions and additions, in some places
changes and omissions of words, syllables and letters, would
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 103
have been made, so that they might forestall acceptance of
them by the judicious and impair the authority of the deeds.
At any rate, 278 they will never be happy that the question
who Christ was, can be decided on the basis of written testi-
mony; and the only reason that His cause has been set down
in writing is that if what we say be accepted as true, it be
shown by the admission of all that He was God.
Truth of the Christian religion and falsity of the
pagan.
57. You do not believe our writings and we do not believe
yours. We, you say, fabricate falsehoods about Christ, and
you bandy about empty and false statements about your gods.
For no god has come down from heaven or with his own
hands has delineated your system 279 or in like manner has
discredited our religious system. Ours was written by men
yours also was written by men, expressed in human phrases,
and whatever you have in mind concerning our authors,
consider and remember that about yours the same has been
said with equal force. You want what is contained in your
writings to be true, and those things which are certified to in
our writings, you must admit of necessity that they are true.
You charge our system with falsity and we charge yours with
falsity.
" But/' you say, " ours is more ancient, and for this reason
fullest of trustworthiness and truth ": as if, indeed, antiquity
were not the most prolific mother of errors and did not her-
self bear those things which have in disgraceful stories placed
upon the gods the most shameful stigmas. Could not false
things be both heard and believed ten thousand years ago?
Or is it not most likely the truth that confidence may be
placed more upon those things which are near us in time
104 AUNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
than those which are remote because of the long space of time
that intervenes? For our position is based on witnesses, yours
upon opinions, and it is much more probable that there will
be less fiction in recent accounts than in those far removed
in the gloom of antiquity.
Pagan criticism of the style of Christian literature.
58. " But they were written by uneducated and ordinary
men and therefore they should not be believed without ques-
tion as soon as heard/'
Be careful, or this may prove all the more reason why they
have not been befouled with any lies, set forth as they are by
men of pure hearts who knew not how to embellish them
with meretricious ornaments.
" The language is commonplace and of low quality/' ~ 80
Never has truth given herself to rouge and lipstick nor
does she suffer what has been carefully examined and is sure,
to be led on into indirection and verbosity. Syllogisms," 81
enthymemes, definitions, and all those figures of speech by
which respect for a statement is sought, give assistance to
those trying to make statements, but they do not clearly
reveal the features of truth. On the other hand, one who
knows what he is talking about, neither defines, nor syllo-
gizes, nor goes after any other tricks of language, by which
audiences ordinarily are captivated, and are induced by
figures of speech to agree. 282
59. " Your narratives/' says some one, " are overrun with
barbarisms and solecisms and vitiated by ugly faults/'
A criticism that is childish and reveals a narrow mind, for
if we grant that it is valid, let us refrain from using certain
kinds of fruits because they grow with prickles on them and
other parts that must be cut out, which cannot contribute to
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 105
our nourishment, and yet on the other hand do not prevent
us from enjoying what is particularly excellent and what
nature has meant to be most wholesome for us. How, I ask
you, does it impede or how does it retard comprehension
whether something is expressed with clean-shaven smooth-
ness or with shaggy roughness; whether that is accented with
the acute which ought to be accented with the grave; 283 or
how is any statement less true if there is a mistake in number
or case, in preposition, participle, or conjunction? Let that
ostentation of diction and oratory according to rhetorical rules
be reserved for assemblies, for lawsuits, for the forum, and for
courts of justice, and let it be given to those who, seeking for
soothing pleasures, put their whole zeal into the brilliance of
words.
When the question at issue is far removed from mere dis-
play, what is said should be considered, not with how much
charm it is said, nor how it soothes the ears, but what profit
it brings to those who listen, especially since we know that
some who devote themselves to philosophy 2S4 not only threw
away refinements of style but even, when they could have
spoken with greater elegance and richness, zealously strove
after a commonplace and humble style, lest perchance they
might spoil the stern gravity and revel rather in sophistic
display. Indeed it is characteristic of a depraved heart to seek
for pleasure in matters of grave importance, and, when you
have to deal with persons in poor health and sick, to pour
forth upon upon their ears honeyed sounds, instead of apply-
ing medicine to their wounds.
Although, if you look at the truth, no kind of speech is
naturally perfect; likewise none is defective. For 285 what
natural reason is there or what law written in the constitution
of the world, that hie 286 should be used with paries and haec
io6 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
with sella, since neither noun has a sex which is indicated
by the male and female gender; nor can any good scholar in-
form me what hie and haec are, or why one of them designates
the male sex and what follows is used with feminines. These
things are human conventions and are certainly not indis-
pensable to all persons for use in creating language. For
paries could perhaps have been used with haec and sella
with hie without any complaint, if it had been agreed from
the beginning that this would be said, and if by following
ages this practice had been preserved in common speech.
And yet, you who charge our writings with the disgrace
of defective diction, do you not also have these your solecisms
in those very great and most wonderful books of yours? Do
you not say in one place 287 haec utria 288 and in another hos
utres; caelus 289 and caelum; likewise pileiis ~ and pileum,
crocus 291 and crocwm; fretus 202 and jretum} Have you not
also used hoc pane 293 and hie panis, hie sanguis 20 * and hoc
sanguen? Are not candelabrum 295 and iugulum in like
manner also written iugulus and candelaber? For if each
noun cannot have more than one gender and if nouns can-
not be of this gender and of that, for one gender cannot pass
into another, he sins as much who pronounces masculine
genders under the laws of feminines as the one who prefixes
feminine genders with masculine pronouns. Notwithstand-
ing we see you making masculine objects <into fcminincs>
and feminine objects into masculines, and what you call
neuter you use in this way and that with no distinction.
Therefore, it is no fault for us to use these words indifferently;
and in vain you say that our works are disfigured by the
impropriety of solecisms, or if the manner in which each
ought to be used is determined and fixed, you yourselves are
involved in the same faults, even though you have on your
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 107
side all such people as Epicadus, 296 Caesellius, Verrius,
Scaurus, and Nisus. 297
The Incarnation.
60. " But if Christ was God/' they say, " why did He
appear in human form? And why was He slain in the
manner of men? "
Could that invisible power which has no corporeal sub-
stance have in any other way brought itself to earth, adapted
itself to the world, and participated in the councils of men,
than by taking upon itself some covering of more substantial
material, which might receive the gaze of eyes and upon
which the eye of even the most unintelligent contemplation
could fasten itself? For who is there among mortals who
could have seen Him, who recognize Him, if He had decided
to come to earth such as He is in His primal nature and
such as He Himself has willed 20S to be in His own char-
acter and divinity? Therefore He took upon Himself 2 " the
form of man and under the likeness of our race he enclosed
His power, so that He could be seen and gazed upon, utter
words and teach, and might carry out all those things, for
whose accomplishment He had come into the world, having
preserved without impairment the sovereign power and
direction of the Most High King.
6 1 . " Well, now/' says our opponent, " was the Most
High King unable to accomplish all those things which He
had decreed should be done in the world, without pre-
tending 80 to be a man? "
If it were necessary for these things to be done in the way
you say, perhaps He would have done so because it was
unnecessary, He did otherwise. Why He willed it to be
io8 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
done in this way and not in that is unknown, shrouded in
mystery and scarcely to be comprehended by any. You might
perhaps have been able to understand these causes, had you
not long been prepared not to understand them and were
not boldly preparing yourself for unbelief before what you
sought to know and hear was explained to you.
Only Christ's human hody was crucified.
62. " But He was slain after the manner of men."
Not He Himself, for it is impossible that death fall upon
what is divine nor that that which is one and uncom-
pounded 801 and not created by the uniting of any parts,
should disappear in the breaking-up of death.
" Who then was seen hanging on the cross? Who, dead? "
The human form which He had put on and which He
carried about with Him. 302
" This saying is unbelievable and shrouded in blind
obscurity/'
If you please, it is not blind and it is established by
a very close analogy, If the Sibyl 803 when she was utter-
ing and pouring forth those prophesies and oracular re-
sponses, being filled, as you say, with the power of Apollo,
had been slain by wicked men and by robbers was bereft of
life, would Apollo be said to have been killed within her?
If Bacis, 804 if Helenus, if Marcius, and other soothsayers, had
been deprived of life and light while in the midst of their
prophesying, would anyone say that those who, speaking
through their mouths, had unfolded the ways of things to
inquirers had ceased to exist according to the laws of hu-
manity? That death of which you speak was of the human
form assumed, not His own; of the thing borne, not of the
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 109
bearer; and this a power so great would not have stooped to
suffer if so great 305 a thing did not have to take place and
the inscrutable plan o fate 30G did not have to be revealed in
hidden mysteries.
Christ chose voluntarily to suffer death on the cross.
63. " What/' you will say, " are these hidden and shadowy
mysteries which neither men nor even those who are called
gods of the world can at all fathom by imagination or thought,
except those upon whom He had thought it fitting to bestow
the blessings of such great understanding and to lead into
the hidden recesses of the inner treasury: 3 "
You do see, then, that if He had been unwilling that any-
one should lay hands upon Him, He ought to have struggled
to the utmost to repel His enemies from Him with all His
power"? Could He who had restored sight to the blind not
make enemies blind if that were necessary? Was it hard or
troublesome for one who had given strength to the weak to
render enemies weak? Did He who used to bid the lame to
walk not know how to tie up the movements of the limbs and
sinews of His enemies by making them stiff? Would it have
been difficult for Him who drew the dead out of their tombs
to decree death on whom He willed? But because reason
demanded that those things which had been foreordained
should take place both here in the world itself and in no other
way than it was done, that inconceivable and unbelieveable
gentleness, considering the wrongs of men suffered by Him
to be but childish trifles, permitted the most violent and
hardened soldiers 80T to lay their hands on Him. And He did
not think it worth while to consider what their temerity had
planned for Him, if only He might show His own people
what they ought to expect from Him.
no AHNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
For when, thinking much about the dangers of souls, and
also on the other hand, about their evil tendency to vice, 308
the Introducer, Master, and Founder directed His laws and
ordinances to the end of fitting duties, did He not destroy
the haughtiness of pride? Did He not quench the flames of
passion? Did He not suppress the craving of greed? Did
He not twist the weapons from their hands and cut them
off from the hotbeds of every vice? Finally, was He not Him-
self gentle, agreeable, easy to approach, friendly to address?
Was He not sympathetic to every human misery and to all
in any way afflicted with troubles and physical ailments and
diseases? Did He, pitying them with His unparalleled kind-
ness, not return and restore them to health?
Why do the pagans persecute Christ and His fol-
lowers alone?
64. What therefore forces you, what urges you on to
curse, to rail at Him, to show implacable hatred toward Flim
whom no man can accuse, can indict, as guilty of any crime?
Your tyrants and kings, who, having laid aside the fear of
the gods, plunder and pillage the votive treasuries of tem-
ples; 30 who, by proscriptions, 310 exiles, murders, denude a
state of its aristocracy; who, with licentious force ruin and
rob the chastity of married women and maidens 311 these you
call indigetes and divi* vz and to those whom you ought to
have attacked with most bitter hatred, you sacrifice with
couches, altars, temples, and other worship, and by observing
their birthdays with games.
And all 813 who by writing books attack in many forms
public morals with biting criticism; who slash, scorch, and
scourge your luxurious lives; 3U who hand down to posterity
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM in
through the permanence of writings the stigmas of their own
times; men who seek to persuade us that marriages should
be held in common; 315 who cohabit with boys, beautiful,
lustful, naked; 316 who proclaim 31T that you are brutes, run-
aways, exiles, slaves of the lowest type, mad and crazy all
these with wonder and approval you raise to the stars of
heaven, place them in .secret places in libraries, 318 endow
them with chariots and statues, and as far as in you lies,
grant them a certain kind of immortality, by the witness of
immortal titles.
Christ alone you wish to reproach, to tear in pieces, if you
can do so to a god. Indeed, if you could, you would gnaw
Him alone with bloody jaws after the manner of wild beasts,
and gulp down His shattered bones. On account of what
desert, I ask you, do you say this, because of what fault"?
What was done by Him to bend the course of justice and to
arouse you to hatred made fierce by the Furies' lashings?
Because He told you that He was sent by Him who alone
is King as a guardian for your souls? Because He brought to
you immortality which you are certain you already have,
persuaded by the statements of a few?
But even if you had the certainty that He spoke falsehoods,
that He even promised the most unfounded hopes, even so
I see no reason why you would have to hate Him, to
condemn Him with bitter reviling. Indeed, if your spirit
had been kind and gentle, you ought to embrace Him for
this alone, that He promised to you things which you might
wish for and which would be favorable to you; that He was
the messenger of good tidings; that He preached those things
which would harm no mind but rather fill all with less-
anxious hope.
ii2 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
65. O thankless and wicked age, prepared 319 for its own
destruction by the unbelievable stubbornness of its heart!
If any physician had come to you from far-away countries
and from regions never known to you, promising medicine
which would ward off from your bodies absolutely all kinds
of diseases and complaints, would you not all have run to him
vying with one another to reach him first"? Would you not
have received him within your family walls with every kind
of attention and showered him with honors? Would you
not want that kind of medicine to be very reliable, genuine,
which guaranteed that you would be free from innumerable
bodily ills even to the end of your lives? Even if the matter
were doubtful you would yet put yourselves in his care and
you would not hesitate to drink down the unknown dose,
induced to do so by the prospect set before you of gaining
health and by a love of security.
Like a bright light Christ appeared to us as the herald of
very great news, bringing also an omen of prosperity and a
message of good health 32 to those who believe. What is this
cruelty, what this great barbarity? Indeed, to speak truly,
what is this pride, arrogance, this tearing to pieces of the
herald and bearer of so great a gift not only with verbal
revilings but even with dread warfare, 821 and this pursuit
of Him with all the weapons that can be showered on Him
and with destruction? His words do not please you and it
hurts you to hear them so you put them down as a sooth-
sayer's 822 equivocations. You have Him speaking pure non-
sense and promising air castles so you laugh, you as men
of wisdom, and leave His stupidity to welter among the
errors it makes.
What is the meaning of this brutality, to repeat what I
have said so often? What is this passion, so bloodthirsty, to
BOOK ONE: REFUTATION OF PAGAN CRITICISM 113
declare implacable war on one who did not deserve it from
you; to want to tear Him limb from limb if you could, who
not only brought evil to no man, but spoke with equal kind-
ness to enemies concerning the salvation that was being
brought to them from God the Ruler; concerning what had
to be done so that they might escape death and receive an
immortality unknown to them? And when the strangeness
of these things and the unheard promises troubled the minds
of those who heard them and caused them to hesitate to
believe, the Lord of every power 323 and the Destroyer of
death itself, 824 allowed His human form to be killed, so that
from the results they might know that the hopes which they
had long entertained about the salvation of the soul were safe
and that in no other way could they avoid the danger of
death.
BOOK TWO
ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY: THE MORTALITY OF THE SOUL
What is the reason for the 'persecution of the
"blameless Christ?
i. At this point, if it were at all possible, I should like
to have a little talk with all those who hate the name of
Christ, digressing for a moment from that defense originally
set up. If you think it no disgrace to answer when asked a
question, tell us, and speak out: For what reason or for what
cause do you pursue Christ with such determined hostility?
Or what wrongs of His do you recall that at the mention of
His name you toil over with the heat of maddened hearts?
Did He ever, as He claimed royal power for Himself,
infest the whole world with fiercest legions, and of nations
at peace from the beginning did He destroy and exterminate
some and force others with necks bent under the yoke to be
obedient to Him? Did He ever, inflamed with greedy avarice,
claim by right of His own possession all the abundance with
which the human race strives eagerly to enrich itself? Did
He ever, impassioned by lust, forcefully break down the bars
of chastity or stealthily lay an ambush for the wife of
another? x Did He ever, swollen with arrogant conceit, per-
petrate wrongs and slanders right and left with no distinction
of persons?
2. Did He not rather extend 2 to all men the light of life
and remove the peril of ignorance? a If He did not deserve
114
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 115
your attention and belief, you should not have despised Him
precisely because He showed you things bound up with sal-
vation, 4 and because He chose 5 for you highways to heaven
and hopes for immortality.
Christ drove the yagan religions from the earth.
(< But, certainly, He deserves to be hated because He has
driven religions from the earth, because He has prevented
access to the worship of the gods/'
Is He then charged with being a destroyer of religion and
a promoter of impiety, who brought true religion into the
world, who opened the doors of piety to men blind and truly
living in impiety, and pointed out to whom they should be
submissive? Or is there any religion more true, more eager
to serve, 6 more powerful, more just, than to be acquainted
with the God the Beginning; to know how to pray to God
the Beginning who is the only Head and Fount of all good
things, the Father and Founder and Creator of lasting things,
through whom all that is on earth and everything in heaven
breathes and is given vitality 7 and whose non-existence would
surely imply that nothing would bear a name or have
substance?
3. Perhaps you doubt the existence of that Ruler 8 of
whom we speak, and rather believe that Apollo, Diana, Mer-
cury, Mars, 9 do exist. Put the decision up to a child 10 and
looking around at all these things we see, it will doubt more
whether the other gods exist than have any hesitation in the
case of the God whom we all know from nature, whether
when we cry out " O God! " u or when we make God the
witness of the wicked and raise our face to heaven as if He
saw us.
ii6 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
" But He forbade men to pray to the lesser gods/' 12
True but do you know who or where the lesser gods are"?
Has mistrust or mention of them at any time seized you so
that you justly are annoyed that worship has been taken from
them and they have been bereft of the granting of honor?
If in this matter conceit and what is called typhus 13 by the
Greeks did not stand in your way and impede you, long ago
could you have known what He forbade to be done or why;
within what limits He wanted true religion to stay; how much
danger arose for you from what you consider obedience or
out of what evils you would rise up if you were to renounce
your deadly delusion.
The truth of Christ's religion is clearly
demonstrated.
4. But all these things will be demonstrated more plainly
and more clearly when we shall proceed further. For we
shall show that Christ did not teach nations impiety but
that He delivered woefully ignorant and wretched men from
the worst bandits. 14
" We do not believe/' you say, " that what He says is true/'
Well, now, are you clear about the things you say are not
true, when lying in the future and having not yet taken
place, they can in no way be subjected to disproof?
" But He Himself does not prove what He promises/' 16
That is so, for, as I said, there can be no demonstration of
matters still to take place. Since, then, it is the nature of
things which are still in the future that they cannot be
grasped and understood by the touch of anticipation, is it not
better reasoning that, of two alternatives which are both un-
certain and hang in doubtful suspense, we should believe
the one which affords some hopes rather than the one which
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 117
offers none at all? 16 In the former case there is no danger
<if> what is said to be in the future proves vain and idle;
and in the latter there is the greatest loss, specifically the loss
of salvation, if when the time has come, it be made patent
that there was no deceit.
The extension of Christianity throughout the
world.
5. What can you say in your ignorance, you for whom we
might well shed tears of pity? Are you not very much afraid
that after all these things may be true which you despise and
which provide you with a reason to laugh? And do you not
at least in your own private ponderings give thought to the
possibility that because today in your stubborn perversity
you refuse to believe, time may later convict 17 you and un-
quenchable remorse punish you? 1S Do not even these con-
siderations give you faith to believe: the fact that through
all lands in such a short period of time the sacred doctrines 19
of this great name have been spread abroad; that there is now
no nation of so wild a character and so impervious to gentle
sentiments which has not under the influence of His love
softened its harshness, and, adopting tranquillity, passed over
into peaceful dispositions? that men endowed with great
ability orators, 20 grammarians, rhetoricians, lawyers, and phy-
sicians, even those who explore the profundities of philosophy
eagerly seek instruction in these things, having abandoned
those to which a little while before they were devoted? that
slaves choose to be tortured by their masters rather than to
follow their orders, 21 couples to be divorced, children to be
disinherited by their parents, rather than to break the Chris-
tion faith and desert their colors in the struggle for salva-
n8 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
tion? 22 that although you have established such a great variety
of punishments for those who follow the mandates of this
religion, the thing grows the more, and against every threat
and fearful prohibition the people struggle with even stouter
heart, and are spurred to greater zeal for belief, as if whipped
by the sting of this restriction?
Do you believe that these things take place at random and
by chance, 23 that these attitudes are the result of accidental
encounters? 24 Is this not, then, a case of something sacred
and divine? Or is God not present when minds are so
changed that, although the executioners' hooks and countless
other torments threaten, as we have said, those who believe,
with full comprehension they accept the conditions as if swept
away by a certain sweetness and a love of all virtues, and
prefer the friendship of Christ to all the things of the world?
Tlie pagans arrogantly claim wisdom as their
possession.
6. But perhaps those who now throughout the world are
acting in concert and uniting in agreement of " credulity " ~ 5
seem to you stupid and silly. But tell me: do you, alone
seasoned 20 with the pure potency of wisdom and understand-
ing, see something different and profound? You alone com-
prehend that all these things are trifles; you alone, that what
we declare will come from the King Supreme, are words and
childish stupidities. From what source, 27 I ask, has so much
wisdom been given you? Whence, so much penetration and
wit? Or from what teachings of science were you able to
acquire so much heart, to drink in so much power of pro-
phecy? Because you know how to inflect 28 verbs and nouns
through the cases and tenses; because you know how to avoid
barbarisms and solecisms; because you have learned how to
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 119
express yourselves in rhythmic, balanced, and properly-
arranged language or to know when it is unpolished; because
you keep sealed in your memory 29 the Fornix of Lucilius 30
and the Marsyas of Pomponius 31 ; because you know what the
points in dispute in law cases are, how many kinds of cases
there are, how many of speaking in court; what the genus is,
what the species; how an opposite differs from a contrary-
do you therefore think you know what is false, what is true;
what can take place or what cannot; what is the nature of the
lowest and the highest? Has that well-known saying never
struck your ears that the wisdom of man is foolishness with
God S2 who is Chief?
7. You yourselves, moreover, clearly see that whenever
you discuss subjects that are obscure and are eager to uncover
the mysteries of nature, you are ignorant of the very things
you talk about, affirm, and frequently maintain with deadly
earnestness; and that each one defends with obstinate opposi-
tion his own notions <as> proved and apprehended. For, if
I am to perceive the truth, how, though all the ages be made
available for searching out the facts, can we, left to ourselves,
have knowledge, we whom some unfortunate something with
ill will 3S brought forth into existence in such a condition of
blindness and pride that although we know absolutely noth-
ing, we nevertheless deceive ourselves and are raised to the
point of believing we do know by the swelling of our con-
ceited heart?
For example to pass over divine matters and those en-
veloped in obscurity by their nature is there anyone who can
explain what the famous Socrates could not understand in the
Phaedrus: 84 what man is and whence he is, wavering,
changeable, fickle, deceitful, manifold, and complex; for what
purposes he was brought forth; by whose genius he was
i2o ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
planned; what he is to do in the world; why he suffers so
many swarms of evils; whether the earth transformed by some
putrid slime brought him to life like worms, like mice; 35
or whether he received the outlines of his body and his face's
shape at the hands of some fashioner and maker?
Can he, I say, know these obvious things which have their
place in the experience of all: by what causes we sink into
sleep, by what we awaken; by what means dreams take place,
by what they are seen; indeed, a point about which Plato in
the Theaetetus 36 is in doubt, whether we ever are awake or
whether what is called being awake is a part of everlasting
slumber, and what we seem to be doing a dream; whether
when we say we see, we see by the extension of rays and
light 3T or images of objects fly to and light on our eyes;
whether flavor resides in the objects or takes place in contact
with the palate; by what causes the hairs lay aside their
natural blackness 3S and grow white, not all simultaneously
but one by one; why it is that all liquids when mixed make
one body and oil alone refuses to permit others to be dis-
solved into itself but remains always clearly suspended in its
own nature; finally, why the soul 39 itself which is said by
you to be immortal and divine, 40 is sick in sick people, dull in
little children, and having been worn out in old age, prattles 41
about things to come and things silly? 42 The weakness and
ignorance of these statements is the more pitiful because, 43
since it is possible for us by accident sometimes to say some-
thing true, we are yet uncertain even of this very point,
whether what we have said is true at all.
The pagans also are guilty of " credulity."
8. And 44 since you are accustomed to laugh at our faith,
and with witty jests to gibe at this our " credulity/' tell us,
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 121
jolly wits soaked and saturated with the unmixed * 5 draught
of wisdom, is there in life any sort of undertaking requiring
one to be right busy and active which the doers do not accept,
undertake, and begin, without an initial act of faith in it?
Do you go on trips, take voyages, not believing that you will
return home when the business has been successfully com-
pleted? Do you cut the earth with hoe and fill it with dif-
ferent kinds of seeds, not believing that you will receive a
harvest at the turn of the seasons? Do you unite in marriage,
not believing that it will be chaste and that the alliance will
confer benefit to the married parties? Do you undertake to
rear 46 children, not believing that they will come through
unharmed, and, passing through life's stations, will come to
the goal of old age? Do you entrust your bodies' ailments to
the hands of the physicians, not believing that the diseases
can be relieved by the lessening of their severity? Do you
carry on wars with enemies, not believing that you will come
back victorious from the battles? Do you worship and show
devotion to the gods, not believing that they exist and will
lend sympathetic ears to your prayers? 4T
9. And again, have you seen with your own eyes and have
you held those things in your own hands regarding which you
yourselves write, which are your daily reading, matters that
escape human understanding? Does each one of you not
believe this authority or that? What anyone has persuaded
himself another has truly said, does he not defend as if by an
agreement of faith*? Does 48 one who says that the origin of
all <things> is <fire,> or water, not show belief in Thales or
Heraclitus? 49 One who ascribes causes to numbers, in Pytha-
goras of Samos, in Archytas? 50 One who thinks of the soul
as distinct from the body, in the Socratic Plato? 51 One who
adds a fifth element 52 to the primary causes, in Aristotle,
122 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
father of the Peripatetics? 5S One who threatens the world
with fire and says that when the time comes, it will burn, 51
in Panaetius, Chrysippus, Zeno? 55 One who is always manu-
facturing worlds from atoms, and destroying them, in Epi-
curus, Democritus, Metrodorus? 56 One who <says> that
nothing is understood by man and also that all things are
shrouded in blind obscurity, in Arcesilas, 57 Carneades- in
somebody, in fine, who is a devotee of the old or later
Academy? 5S
10. Finally, do not the chief exponents and fathers of the
above-mentioned views say what they say on the basis of a
trust in their own guesswork? 59 Did Heraclitus see things
come into being through changes brought about by fires,
Thales by the condensing of water? Did Pythagoras see
numbers combining; Plato the bodiless forms; Democritus the
collisions of the atoms? Or do those who assert that nothing
at all can be understood, know whether what they say is true,
so that they may understand that the very thing which they
posit is a truthful declaration?
Since, therefore, you have learned and understand noth-
ing, and are led by " credulity " to assert all that you write
and " comprehend " in thousands of books : what is this
judgment, I ask you, which is so unjust as to let you make
fun of our faith 61 which you see you share in common with
our " credulity "? 62
But, of course, you " believe wise men and men well edu-
cated in all branches of learning/' Yes, men who accept
nothing and make no unified and harmonious declaration,
who wage wars on behalf of their opinions with their op-
ponents and constantly fight like swordsmen with stubborn
hostility; who overthrow, destroy, uproot the one the other's
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 123
conclusions, render everything doubtful and from their very
disagreement have shown that nothing can be known. 63
Christ possessed powers not held by the pagan
philosophers.
ii. But 64 let us grant that these things must <not>
hinder and in no way prevent you from believing and follow-
ing them in great measure: and what reason is there that in
this respect you should have more and we less? You believe
Plato, 65 Cronius, 66 Numenius, or any one you please: we
believe in and assent to Christ. How unfair it is, that when
both of us take our stand on authorities and both of us have
in common one and the same thing, namely, belief, you
should wish to be given the right to receive what is thus
said by them but are unwilling that we should hear and see
what is brought forth by Christ!
And yet if we should want to balance causes, sides with
sides, we are in a stronger position when we show what we
have followed in Christ, than you are in showing what you
have followed in the philosophers. And here is what we
have followed in Him: His glorious works and mighty
powers which He brought out publicly in various miracles,
so much so that anyone could be brought to the necessity of
belief and could confidently 6T decide that they were not
human but performed by some divine and unknown power.
What powers did you follow in the philosophers that you
ought to believe them more than we Christ? Could any
one 68 of them by a single word or by the bidding of a single
command I shall not say forbid, restrain the madness of the
sea and the ragings of the storms; restore light to the blind
or give it to those born without sight; call back the dead to
life; end the sufferings of years, but what is the easiest by
124 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
far to doheal by one rebuke a boil, an itch, 69 or sliver stuck
in hard skin? Not that we deny that they are praiseworthy
for the purity of their characters or that they are equipped
with every kind of research and learning: we know right well
that they speak in the most splendid 70 language and that they
are fluent in smooth T1 composition; that they draw up their
syllogisms most acutely; that they arrange their conclusions
in proper sequence; that they express, divide, and distinguish
their basic principles in definitions; that they have much to
say about the phases of mathematics, many things about
music, and that they also demonstrate the science of geometry
with its axioms and postulates.
But what does this have to do with the case? Do enthy-
memes, syllogisms, and other such things vouch that these
men know the truth, or are they therefore so worthy that one
must of necessity believe them on very obscure matters? A
comparison of persons must be weighed, not by the vigor
of eloquence, but by the miraculous power of the deeds they
have done. He is <not> to be called a good authority who
has expressed his meaning lucidly but the one who follows
up what he promises by the guarantee of divine works.
The pagans foolishly reject the testimony of
Christianity.
12. Propose your arguments 72 to us and your subtle
surmisings: if Christ Himself were to use these in the meet-
ings of the peoples let me beg His pardon for saying this
who would agree? Who would listen? Who would conclude
that He makes any clear promises, or who, when He bandied
about such gross and bare statements, would follow Him,
however naive and good-naturedly stupid he might be? His
miraculous powers have been set before your eyes and that
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 125
unheard-of power over nature, both those done in public
by Himself or practiced through the whole world by His
heralds. It 73 quenched the fires of passions and made races
and peoples and the most disparate nations hasten with one
mind to consent to one and the same faith.
For the deeds can be counted and numbered 7 * which were
done in India, 75 among the Seres, 76 Persians and Medes, in
Arabia, 77 Egypt, in Asia, Syria, among the Galatians, Par-
thians, Phrygians; in Achaea, Macedonia, Epirus; 7S in all the
islands 79 and provinces on which the rising and setting sun
shines, and, finally, in Rome, too, the mistress, where, though
there are men who give themselves to King Numa's arts 80
and superstitions, there was yet no tarrying in abandoning
the ancestral traditions 81 and identifying oneself with the
truth of Christianity. 82
For they 83 had seen the chariot of Simon Magus 84 and
the fiery four-horse team blown to pieces by the mouth of
Peter 85 and vanish at the mention of Christ's name. They
had seen him, I say, trusting in false gods and abandoned by
these same in their fear, hurled headlong by his own weight,
lying there with his legs broken; then afterwards carried to
Brunda, 86 exhausted by his sufferings and his disgrace, 87 again
casting himself down from the roof of a very high house.
All these happenings you neither know nor wanted to
know nor have you ever deemed them essential for you, and
while you trust your own hearts and call what is conceit
wisdom, you have given to impostors, to those criminals, I
say, who make it their business to discard the name of Christ,
an opportunity to cloud over and bury in darkness matters
of such capital importance; to rob you of faith and to replace
it with scorn, in order that, seeing as they do, that an end in
accord with their deserts threatens them, they might also give
you cause to approach danger and be bereft of God's mercy.
126 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
The pagans unfairly mock at Christianity.
13. Meanwhile, you who show surprise, who marvel at
the pronouncements of the learned and of philosophy, do you
not consider it most unfair to ride, to mock us, as if we were
saying stupidities and ineptitudes when you are found saying
the same or similar things at which you laugh when said or
stated by us? And here my concern is not with those who,
scattered through the various bypaths of the schools, 88 have
created this and that party by divergence of views. It is you
I address, you who follow after Mercury, 89 Plato, and Pythag-
oras, 90 and you others who are of the same view and march
with unity of sentiments through those same ways. You dare
to laugh at us because we worship and cherish the Father of
Creation and the Lord, and because we give and entrust our
hopes to Him?
What does your Plato say in the Theaetetus, to mention
him in particular? Does he not advise the soul to flee from
the earth and to busy itself as far as possible 91 in thought and
contemplation concerning Him? 92 Dare you laugh at us
because we say that there will be a resurrection of the dead, 93
a fact which we admit we say but maintain that you hear it
in a sense different from ours? What does that same Plato
say in the Politicus^ 9 * Does he not write that when the world
has begun to rise from the west and to incline towards the
turning point of the rising sun, men will again burst forth
from the earth's bosom old men, white-haired, worn out,
and when the remoter years begin to approach, they will
sink back through those same steps by which today they
advance in growth, to the cradles of their infancy? 95
Dare you laugh at us because we look out for the health
of our souls, that is, ourselves for ourselves? For what are we
BOOK Two; ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 127
human beings except souls shut up in todies? Is it not true
that you, all of you, 96 go to every limit in preserving them
unharmed? As for the fact that 9T you refrain from every fault
and passion, is not this the fear which possesses you, that you
may cling to your hodies as if nailed to them with spikes?
What is the meaning of those esoteric ceremonials 98 in which
you address powers I know not which to get them to be
propitious to you and not put any hindrances in your way
as you journey back to your ancestral homes?
Plato and Christ on the immortality of the soul.
1 4. Dare " you laugh at us, when we speak of Gehennas
and certain unquenchable fires into which we have learned
that souls are cast by their enemies and foes? 10 Does that
same Plato of yours in that book he wrote on the immortality
of the soul 101 not name the rivers Acheron, and Styx, and
Cocytus, and Pyriphlegethon, 102 in which he declares that
souls are rolled, sunk, consumed by fire? And a man of
wisdom not perverse 103 and of careful and balanced judg-
ment, he undertakes an insoluble question, with the result
that while saying that souls are immortal, everlasting, and
possessing no bodily substance, he yet says that they are
punished and are subject to a sense of pain. But what man
fails to see that what is immortal, what is uncompounded, 104
cannot be subject to any pain; that, however, what feels pain,
cannot have immortality? Nevertheless, his view does not
stray far from the truth. 105 For, although that gentle and
benevolent man believed it to be inhumane to sentence souls
to death, he yet not inconsistently entertained the view that
they are cast into rivers raging with balls of fire and loathsome
in their muddy abysses. They are hurled in, and being an-
128 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
nihilated, they vanish in the frustration of everlasting destruc-
tion. They are of intermediate character, 106 as is known from
Christ's teaching; and they are such as to perish if they fail
to know God, but can also be delivered from death to life,
if they have given heed to His warnings 107 and graces,
and ignorance is cleared up. This is the true death of a
human being, 108 this leaves nothing remaining behind for
that which is seen before one's eyes is merely an uncoupling
of the souls from the bodies, not the final end of destruction
this, I say, is the true death of a human being when the souls
which know not God shall be consumed in long-enduring
torments by fierce fire into which they shall be cast by
certain fiercely-savage beings 109 who were unknown before
Christ and unveiled only by the one who knows. 110
Critids-m of the view that the souls are immortal.
1 5. Wherefore 1:L1 there is no reason that we should be
deceived by what promises us vain hopes, something said by
certain upstarts 112 carried away by an extravagant opinion of
themselves, namely that souls are immortal, very near in
degree of rank to the Lord and Ruler of Creation, brought
forth by that Begetter and Father; divine, wise, learned, and
not touchable by any contact with the body. Because this is
true and certain and we have been brought forth by the
Perfect One in a perfection that is capable of no correction,
we are living blameless and therefore incapable of criticism;
good, just, and upright, possessing no faults. No passion
subdues us, no lust dishonors us. We preserve and renew
the practice of every virtue, and because the souls of all of
us have flowed out from a single source, therefore we feel
alike and are in agreement. We differ neither in morality
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 129
nor beliefs. We all know God 113 and there are not as many
opinions in the world as there are men/ 14 nor are these
divided by infinite variety.
1 6. And while we are sliding and hastening to our human
bodies, from the world's circles causes 11S pursue us by which
we are evil and most wicked; burn with passions and wrath-
fulness, pass our lives in shameful deeds and are con-
demned 11Q to public lust by prostitution of our bodies for
hire. But how can bodies unite with that which is bodiless,
or things created by God the Supreme be transformed by
weaker causes into degrading vices? Are you willing, gentle-
men, to lay aside that deep-seated arrogance 117 and conceit,
you men who claim God as your Father and maintain that
you have the same immortality as He? Are you willing to
inquire, to search out, to investigate 118 what you yourselves
are, whose you are, of what father you are thought to be,
what you are doing in the world, how you are born, in which
manner you leap into life? Are you willing, having laid aside
partiality, 119 to reach the conclusion in your silent thought
that we are animate beings either in all respects like the rest
or separated from them by no great difference? 12 After all,
what is there to show that we differ from them? Or what
extraordinary quality is there in us so that we should refuse
to be enrolled in the number of animals? 121
Their bodies are founded upon bones 122 and are bound
together by a network of sinews: and in like manner our
bodies are founded upon bones and are bound together by
sinews. They breathe in the air through nostrils and give it
out again in exhalations: and we in the same way draw in
our breath and breathe it out again in a continuous to-and-fro.
They are separated in female and male kinds: and we too
have been fashioned by our Creator into as many sexes. They
130 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
produce their young from wombs and beget them through
bodily union: 12S we, too, are born from bodily embraces and
are brought forth and sent out from the wombs of mothers.
By food they are sustained and by drink, and the impure
excess they cast out from the lower parts: we, too, are sus-
tained by food and by drink, and what nature is ready to
reject, we pour out by the same channels.
All of them take care to repel death-bringing hunger and
of necessity to watch for food. What else do we do in life's
great preoccupations except to seek for those things by which
the danger of hunger is avoided and unhappy anxiety is laid
aside? They feel diseases and starvation and in the end are
weakened by old age. Are we by any chance immune to
these evils and not broken in the same manner by the in-
convenience of diseases and destroyed by the decline of old
age?
But if this also is true, as is said in the more hidden
mysteries, that the souls of the wicked go 124 into cattle and
other beasts after they have been removed 126 from human
bodies, it is more clearly demonstrated that we are near them
and not removed from them by any appreciable difference;
for there is a factor in both us and them by reason of which
animate beings are said to exist and to have the power of
living motion.
Is man really superior to the animals because he has
reason?
17. " But we possess reason and surpass in understanding
every species of dumb animals/' 126
I would believe this to be most truly spoken, if all men
lived rationally and wisely, held to the course of duty, re-
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 131
framed from the forbidden, had nothing to do with base
activities, and no one through his depraved intellect and
blindness of ignorance asked for what is alien and even hostile
to himself. I should, however, like to know what this reason
is by which we are to be preferred to all species of animals.
Because we have made dwellings for ourselves in which we
can avoid the cold of winter and heat of summer? Do you
mean to say that other animate beings have no foresight of
this kind? Do we not see some building dwellings of nests
for themselves in places most suitable; others covering and
fortifying themselves in rocks and hanging crags; still others
burrowing into the soil of the earth and preparing in dug-out
pits places of protection and lairs for themselves? And if
Mother Nature had been willing to give them hands to help
them, there would be no doubt that they themselves would
also have built towering fortifications and would have struck
out new works of art. Yet even in those things which they
make with their beaks and claws, we see that there are many
images of reason and wisdom which we human beings are
unable to copy with any amount of thought, although we
have hands that work for us and are masters of every sort of
perfection.
1 8. "They have not learned to fashion clothing, chairs,
ships, and ploughs, nor the other equipment which daily life
demands."
These are not the blessings of knowledge but the inven-
tions of paupers necessity. 127 Nor did the arts drop down
with the souls from the innermost heart of heaven, but they
have all been carefully sought for and come to birth here on
earth and through painstaking thought have been devised
gradually in the progress of time. And if in this regard the
souls possessed the knowledge which a race that is divine and
132 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
immortal ought by all rights fittingly to have, all men would
have known all things from the beginning and there would
have been no age unacquainted with any art or not possessed
of the advantage of experience with things. But now a life
that is destitute and lacking many things, observing that cer-
tain things happen to its advantage by chance, while it imi-
tates, experiments, and tries, while it makes errors, revises,
makes changes, by a constant process of rejection has assem-
bled little smatterings in the arts and has brought them to
one issue, the joint improvements of many ages.
Skills in arts and crafts no proof of a divine soul.
19. Now if men either knew themselves through and
through or had received an understanding of God to the
extent of even the slightest conjecture, 128 never would they
claim for themselves a divine and immortal nature nor would
they think themselves something great because they have
made for themselves gridirons, basins, and bowls; because
they have made undershirts, linen jackets, 129 mantles, cloaks,
ceremonial robes, knives, breastplates, and swords; because
they have made rakes, hatchets, the ploughshare. Never, I
say, would they believe, exalted by their arrogance and con-
ceit, that they are deities of the first class and equals of the
Highest in His sublimity, just because they had begotten
grammar, music, oratory, and geometrical forms. 180 We do
not see what is so surprising in these arts that from their dis-
covery it should be believed that the souls are superior to the
sun and all the stars, surpassing in glory and substance this
whole world of which these things are only parts. 181
And what else can these promise to be able to assimilate
or to impart to others than that we may learn the rules and
differences of nouns, the tonal intervals of sounds; that we
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 133
may speak convincingly in lawsuits; that we may measure the
extent 132 of the lands? If the souls had brought these with
them from the heavenly regions, it would of necessity follow
that all should know them; long since they would be dealing
with them over the whole earth, nor would any race of men
be found which would not be uniformly and equally in-
structed in all these matters.
But now how few in the world are musicians, logicians,
and geometers, how few orators, poets, grammarians. 133 From
which it seems clear, as has been stated repeatedly, that these
things were discovered through pressure of times and places
and that the souls did not fly here divine and instructed,
because neither are they all learned nor can all learn, but
among them are many relatively dull-witted and stupid, and
are forced to apply themselves to a zeal for learning by the
coercion of stripes.
But if it were really true that what we learn are recol-
lections, 184 as has been accepted in ancient beliefs, it would
have been necessary for us all, coining as we do from a single
truth, to learn alike and to recall alike, not to have differing
beliefs nor to have a great number of inconsistent beliefs.
But as it is, seeing that we assert some one thing and some
another, it is at once manifest that we brought nothing from
heaven but learned what here came into being and make
claims for what has established itself in our thought.
A controlled experiment.
20. And that we may show you more clearly and more
patently of what worth is man whom you believe to be very
like the Higher Power, conceive this idea in your minds and,
because it can be done if we put ourselves to it, let us assume
134 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
we have and let us hold it by positing an analogy. 135 Let us
therefore take a place dug out in the ground, fit for habitation;
having the shape of a bedroom, enclosed by a roof and walls;
not cold in winter, not too warm in the hot season, but with
the temperature so regulated that we feel neither cold nor the
summer's strong heat. Here let no sound, no cry penetrate
at all, of bird, of beast, of storm, of man in fine, of any noise
or of heavy crashes of thunder. Let us then devise some way
to provide light, not from fire brought in or from exposure to
sunlight but something artificial, 136 to counterfeit daylight in
the darkness that has been introduced. Let there be only 13T
a single door, and there must not be a direct entrance; let
the approach be made through twists and windings; and let
it never be opened except when necessity demands.
21. Now that we have prepared a place for our idea, let
us next take some one just 13S born into this lodging which is
to contain no article of any kind and should be empty and
bare. Let it be some one of the race of Plato 139 or Pythag-
oras, or of some one of those who, they say, were of the
divine wit or were named most wise by the oracles of the
gods. 140 This done, it follows that he be given his necessary
nourishment and be brought up on suitable sustenance. Let
us therefore also provide a wet nurse who shall always come
to him naked, always silent, speaking not a word nor opening
her mouth and lips to say 141 anything, but when she has
nursed him and attended to the following duties, let her
leave him given over to sleep, close the door, and remain out-
side day and night, for usually a nurse's care is required to be
at hand and to watch his movements from time to time.
But when the child begins to require the support of solid
foods, they should be carried in by the same nurse, laying
aside her clothes, as we said, and preserving the practice of
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 135
silence. Moreover, let the food itself which is brought in be
always one and the same, not different in substance nor varied
by different flavors, but let it be gruel of millet or bread of
spelt, or, to copy the ancient centuries, acorns 142 taken from
the coals or berries from wild branches.
Let wine be absolutely unknown to him for drink and let
him be given nothing else for settling his thirst except pure
water untouched by the heat of fire, and, if it can be done,
this served to him by the hollow of the hands. For custom,
made familiar from habit, will become second nature and his
desire will interest itself no further, unaware that there is
anything further to be sought after,
The testing of the subject,
22. " Well, what is the purpose of all this"? "
Our purpose is that, since it has been believed that the
souls are divine and therefore 143 immortal, and that they fly
to the bodies of men with every kind of learning, we may
make a test from this person whom we have proposed to bring
up in this way, whether the thing can be believed or whether
it has been lightly accepted and taken for granted in conse-
quence of vain preoccupations. Let him grow up, then,
nourished by us in secluded isolation, to an age of your
choice: do you say twenty? thirty? Yes, let him reach forty
years, and then bring him to the assemblies of men and if it
is true that he is part and particle 14 * of the original being,
lives here sprung from fountains of such auspicious 145 life,
before he acquires knowledge of anything or is initiated to
human speech, let him give answer to the questions: who he
is and from what father, in what locality he was born, in
what way or by what method was he given sustenance, prac-
136 AKNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
ticing what work or business previously, he has come through
the period of his existence in the past.
Will he not stand there more stupid and duller than any
cattle, log, stone? When introduced to new experiences and
things never known to him before, will he not before all else
be ignorant of himself? Will he be able, if you ask, to show
what the sun is; the earth, seas, stars, clouds, mist, rains,
thunder, snow, hail? Will he be able to know what trees
are, plants or grasses, a bull, horse, or ram, a camel, elephant,
or kite? 146
23. If when he is hungry you give him a grape, a must-
cake, 147 an onion, an artichoke, a cucumber, a fig, will he
know that his hunger can be satisfied by all of these or of
what kind each ought to be for eating? If you made a bonfire
or surrounded him with poisonous creatures, would he not
go through the midst of flames, vipers, spiders, ignorant that
they are harmful and unaware of what fear itself is? And,
indeed, if you place in front of him clothing, utensils, both
for city and for country use, will he be able to distinguish, to
tell them apart, for what work each is fitted, for the discharge
of what service each is adapted?
Will he point out for what clothing purpose a coverlet 14S
was made, a turban, a chaplet, 149 a fillet, 150 a pillow, a hand-
kerchief, a cloak, a veil, 151 napkin, sheepskin, 152 slippers,
sandals, shoes? What if you go on to ask what a wheel is
or a flail, winnowing fan, jar, cask, oil mill, ploughshare, or
sieve, a millstone, plough-beam, or hoe; an armchair, a needle,
a strigil, a washbasin, an easy chair/ 58 a ladle, a platter, a
candlestick, a goblet, a broom, a cup, a bag?
What if you ask about a lute, a pipe, silver, bronze, gold,
a codex, 154 a rod, a roll? What if you ask about the other
articles which surround and sustain human life? Will he
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 137
not, as we have said, like an ox or an ass, a pig, or if there is
any animal more slow-witted, look indeed at these things,
examining their different shapes, 155 but be ignorant of what
they individually are and unaware of for what purpose they
are possessed? Should he by any necessity perforce utter a
sound, would he not, as is usual with mutes, 156 merely cry out
something inarticulate with gaping mouth?
Criticism of Plato's doctrine of recollection.
24. Why, Plato, do you in the Meno 157 seek to learn
certain things from a young slave, using the rational func-
tion, 158 and strive by his answers to prove that what we
learn we do not learn but return to a recollection of the things
which we knew in a time long past? If he 159 answers you
truly it would be unbecoming if we denied credence to what
you say he is led on not by a knowledge of the facts but by
his intelligence, and from the fact that he has some acquaint-
ance with numbers from his daily experience, it happens that
he understands the questions and the process of multiplication
itself constantly leads him on.
But if you are really certain that the souls when they fly
hither are immortal and full of knowledge, cease to question
that young fellow whom you see to be acquainted with the
facts and possessed of human faculties. Call to you that
forty-year-old and ask him not anything abstruse or com-
plicated, not about triangles or squares or what a cube is or a
power, the ratio of nine to eight or even of four to three, 160
but what is evident of itself: ask what sum twice two make,
what, twice three.
We are anxious to see, we are anxious to know, what he
would answer when asked, whether he finds a solution to the
138 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
posited problem. In such a state will he perceive, though
his ears he open, whether you say anything or ask anything,
or require that he answer you something? And will he not
stand there like a log or, as it is said, like Marpesian granite, 161
tongue-less and dumb, not understanding or knowing even
this whether it is with him or with another that you are
speaking, whether your conversation is with another or with
him, 162 whether that is speech which you utter or the sound
of a voice meaning nothing but drawn out to a vain purpose?
25. What do you say, gentlemen, who overreach your-
selves in claiming excellence which belongs to others? Is this
that learned soul you speak about immortal, perfect, divine,
holding fourth place after God the Master of things and
after the twin intellects 16S and flowing from living mixing
bowls? 164 This is that precious human being endowed with
the loftiest powers of reason, who is said to be a microcosm, 165
and formed and fashioned into the appearance and likeness
of the macrocosm 166 no better, as became apparent, than
cattle, more stupid than wood, stone? One who would be
unacquainted 16T with human beings and constantly live
and linger in silent isolation, he in his inert existence would
never be equal to the task of <identifying> anything at all, 168
though he were to live to numberless years and never be
released from the bonds of his body. But when he reaches
the schools and becomes educated through the instructions of
teachers, he is made wise, learned, and rids himself of the
ignorance which he recently had. Both an ass and an ox, as
well, learn, when forced by constant practice, to plough and
to turn the mill; a horse to bear the yoke and to recognize
changes in direction; a camel to kneel down when he takes
on or lays off loads; a dove 169 when set free to fly back to its
masters house; a dog, when it has found the quarry, to
BOOK Two; ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 139
repress and hold back the hark; a parrot to articulate speech
and a crow to utter names.
If the soul once had knowledge, why did it forget it?
2,6. But when I hear the soul called something out of the
ordinary, near and next to God, that it hurries here knowing
everything about former centuries, 170 1 do not want it to learn
but to teach, and not to step down, so to speak, from the
scholar's chair to the primary classes 171 but retaining what
it had, to bind itself to earthly bodies. For 'unless such is
done, how can it be discerned whether it recollects or learns
what it hears, since it is much easier to believe that it learns
what it does not know than that it has forgotten what it knew
a little while before?
" From the interposition of the body it loses remem-
brance 172 of former things."
And what has happened to that statement that bodiless 178
souls have no substance? 174 Evidently, that which is incor-
poreal is not hindered by the interposition of any second
thing nor can anything of itself 175 destroy that which is not
susceptible to the touch of anything set against it. Just as 5
for example, a number which has existence apart from
bodies, 176 even though it be buried in a thousand bodies, 177
remains untouched and secure, so it is necessary that souls,
if they are bodiless, as it is claimed, suffer 178 no forgetting of
former things, however thoroughly they may be encompassed
by material ties.
What of the fact that this same reasoning not only shows
they are not bodiless but also deprives them all of immortality
and subjects them to the normal limits of all life? Whatever
by the intervention of some cause is so changed and affected
that it cannot maintain its natural state, must of necessity be
10'
140 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
adjudged as passive by nature. But that which is liable to
and is exposed to suffering 179 declares itself subject to cor-
ruption by the very presence of its capacity for suffering.
27. If, therefore, souls lose everything they knew when
held by the fetters of the body, they of necessity suffer some-
thing which forces them to don the blindness of forgetfulness.
For, if they experience no change whatsoever, it is impossible
for them to part with factual knowledge and at the same
time preserve their previous identity, or to pass over to other
states of existence without incurring the risk of change in
themselves.
Be that as it may, we for ourselves think that what is one,
immortal, simple, always of necessity retains its own indi-
vidual nature, and is neither obligated or capable of suffering
anything, as long as it thinks it is everlasting and remains
steadfast within the bounds of the immortality that is its own.
For all suffering is the door 18 to ruin and destruction, a
path leading to death and bringing to things inescapable dis-
solution. If souls feel it and yield to its touch and attacks,
they have life on a basis of tenancy, 181 not handed over to
them by legal purchase, 182 however differently some conclude
and place confidence in their own arguments in regard to so
weighty a matter.
28. However, not to depart 183 from you without having
learned something what do you mean when you say that
souls, when enveloped in earthly bodies, have no recollection
of the past, while when they are actually placed in bodies and
are rendered almost incapable of feeling through their close
union with them, they retain with unfailing tenacity in their
memory things which a good many years before if you wish,
say eighty or more they either did, or suffered, or spoke, or
heard?
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 141
If it is brought about by the hindrance of the body that
they do not remember the things which they used to know a
long time ago before they were attached to a human body/ 84
so much the more 185 ought they to forget what, shut up
within bodies, they continue from time to time to do, than
those they did when existing apart, not yet yoked to human
forms. What withdraws recollection of former things from
what has entered it, ought likewise to obliterate by complete
forgetfulness the things done within it. One cause cannot
bring out two mutually exclusive effects, so as to deaden the
memories of some things and to permit others to be recollected
by the doer.
But if souls, as you call them, are prevented by the hin-
drance of their body's members from remembering their ac-
tivities, especially those of old, how is it that they remember 186
when established in those very bodies, and know that they
are souls and that they, exalted by their quality of immor-
tality, have no bodily substance; what rank they hold in the
world of things, in what order they have been set apart by
God the Father; by what means they have reached these
nethermost parts of the universe; what properties they have
acquired and from what circles while they were gliding 1S7
towards these places?
How, I say, do they know that they were very learned and
have lost what they knew through the hindrance of bodies?
For if it were true that union with the body brought some
deterioration, then, too, this is precisely the thing they were
bound not to know. To know what you were and what today
you are not, is no sign of a lost memory but a demonstrative
proof of one preserved.
ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
Belief in the souls immortality is destructive of
morality.
29. Since these are the facts, stop, I beg you, stop ap
praising at enormous values things that are little and of
trifling importance/ 88 Cease to assign man, seeing that he
is only of the proletariat, 189 to the highest classes; 19 and, to
the first ranks, seeing that he is merely counted by the head 191
because he is destitute, has only a poor Zar, 192 and a poor
shelter, and is never entitled to be declared of patrician 193
lustre. For while you as true 194 supporters of right and
integrity ought to subdue arrogance and conceit on the wings
of which we are all borne aloft and are puffed up with inane
vanity, you not only hesitate to strike at 195 these evils but
what is much more serious you have encouraged the increase
of vices and given permanence to the incorrigibility of
wickedness.
What man is there, although he be of a character that ever
flees from the realm of infamy and shame, who, when he
hears expressly stated by the wisest of men that souls are
immortal and not subject to the laws of the fates, would
not rush headlong into every kind of shameful deed 196
would not, free from fear and without qualms, engage in and
trespass into unlawful things would not, finally, gratify his
desires in everything commanded by incontinent 197 passion,
emboldened even still more by freedom from punishment?
What will prevent him from doing so? The fear of a power
above and divine judgment? And how will he be deterred by
the dread of any fear who has been convinced that he is
immortal just as is the Supreme God Himself and that by
Him no judgment against Himself can be passed, since there
is one and the same immortality in each and the one cannot
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 143
be troubled by the other in view of the identical nature of
the other? 19S
30. " But the well-known penalties in the lower world
and the many different kinds of punishment, what about
them? " 199
But who will be so lacking in sense and so unaware of the
consequences of events as to believe that when the souls are
incorruptible the shades of Tartarus can do any harm, or
rivers of fire, or swamps with muddy whirlpools, or the
twirlings of flying wheels? That which is not near and is
actually far removed from the laws of dissolution, may be
surrounded by all the flames of raging 20 rivers, rolled in
mud, 201 buried by falls of overhanging rocks and by the de-
struction of huge mountains, yet it must of necessity remain
uninjured and untouched and take to itself no sensation of
deadly suffering. 202
And, what is more, the conviction mentioned not only is a
stimulus for vices giving as it does free rein to sin, but it also
removes the raison d'etre of philosophy itself and shows the
futility of taking it up because of the difficulty that it
leads to nothing. For, if it is true that souls know no end and
march along with every century in the unbroken line of the
ages, what danger is there when the virtues, by which life
becomes somewhat limited and unattractive, are despised and
neglected and one surrenders himself to pleasures and permits
the untempered heat of wild desire to rampage through lust
of every kind? The danger of falling away under indulgence
and of being ruined by the enervation of vices? But how can
that be ruined which is immortal, which exists forever and
is not subject to any suffering? The danger of growing filthy
and defiled by the hideousness of shameful acts? But how
can that be befouled which has no corporeal substance? Or
144 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
where can corruption place itself when there is no place in
which the mark of this corruption can attach itself?
And again, if the souls approach the gates of death, as is
laid down in the doctrine of Epicurus, 203 even so there is no
cogent reason why philosophy should he sought out, even if
it is true that by it the souls are cleansed and become pure
from every uncleanness. 20i For if they pass away in com-
mon 205 and in the bodies themselves the sense of life dies
and is blown out, 206 not only is it a colossal mistake but stupid
blindness to curb innate passions, to restrict life within nar-
row limits, not to indulge nature, not to follow the behests
and urgings of desire: no rewards will await you for such
great toil when the day of death comes and you are freed
from the body's chains. 2
, 207
Souls possess a neutral or intermediate character.
31. A certain neutral character, therefore, and an unde-
fined and doubtful nature of the souls, has begotten a place
for philosophy and has invented a reason why it should be
sought after, while, you might say, that fellow 208 is fearful
of danger arising from evil deeds confessed by him and
another man entertains good hopes if he does no evil and
passes his life dutifully and righteously. Hence it is that
among scholars 209 and men endowed with superior ability
there is a controversy about the nature of the souls and some
say that they are mortal and cannot partake of divine sub-
stance, but others that they are everlasting and cannot de-
generate into mortal nature. This is the result of the law
according to which they 210 have a neutral character: some
have arguments ready at hand by which it is found they are
subject to suffering and perishable, and others on the con-
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 145
trary have arguments by which it is shown that they are
divine and immortal.
32. Since this is the case and since by the highest au-
thority 211 we have received the view that the souls are
established not far from the gaping jaws of death; that,
nevertheless, they can be made long-lived by the gift and
favor of the Supreme Ruler, if only they try and study to
understand Him for knowledge of Him 212 is a sort of
leaven of life and a glue to bind together in one elements
otherwise not cohesive let them, then, having laid aside
their wild and barbarous ways, take up more gentle natures,
so that they can be prepared for what will be given. 213 What
reason is there that we should be judged by you as stupid and
brutish, if on account of these fears we have surrendered and
delivered ourselves to God as liberator? Against harmful
blows and the poisoned bites of serpents we often look for
remedies and protect ourselves by lamina 214 brought from
Psylli 215 or Marsi or other peddlers and quacks, and to pre-
vent periods of cold and consuming heat from causing dis-
comforts, we provide with anxious care and foresight the
protection of houses and clothing.
Christian and pagan views of the soul compared,
33. Since the fear of death, that is, the destruction of our
souls, threatens us, is it not true that we act from an instinct
of what is good for us, an instinct by which we all love
ourselves, in holding fast to Him and embracing Him who
promises that He will free us from such danger, and pre-
ferring Him to our very souls, provided such transfer right
in itself is possible? You rest the safety of your souls on
your own selves and are confident that by your personal
146 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
effort you become divine; but we on the other hand promise
nothing to ourselves from our weakness, realizing that our
nature is powerless and by its own proclivities is defeated in
every struggle for anything. You, the moment you are freed
from the bonds of your bodies and depart, think wings will
be ready for you 216 to enable you to hasten to heaven and soar
to the stars; we shrink from such presumptions and do not
think it has been placed in our power to reach the world
above, holding as we do that even this is a doubtful matter,
whether we deserve to receive life and to be excepted from
the law of mortality. 217 You take it for granted that you will
return to the Lord's palace as to your own home, of your
own choice and with no one to stop you; but as for us, we
neither have hopes that this can be done without the Lord of
things nor believe that so much power and privilege is
granted any man.
34. Wherefore, since such is the case, why this unfair-
ness that we should seem to you stupid in that " credulity "
you criticize, when we see that you believe like things and
entertain the same hope? If we are thought deserving of
ridicule because we promise ourselves hope of this kind, the
same ridicule also awaits you who adopt for yourselves the
hope of immortality. If, moreover, you have and follow any
rational thinking, grant us also some portion of that rationality.
If Plato <in> the Phaedrus, or another of this tribe, 218 had
promised these joys to us, that is, a way to flee death, and
could provide it and redeem 219 his promises, it would have
been appropriate for us to undertake the worship of him
from whom we might expect so great a gift and favor. Now
since Christ has not only promised it but also has demon-
strated by His extraordinary powers 22 that it can be ful-
filled, what outlandishness do we practice or on what grounds
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 147
are we guilty of the charge of folly, if we prostrate ourselves
before His name and majesty, to whom we look for both,
power to flee a death of torture and to be granted life eternal?
Not only the souls but the pagan gods are of neutral
character.
35. <( But/' they say, "if the souls are mortal and of
neutral character, how can they become immortal from their
neutral character? "
If we should say that we do not know this and only be-
lieve what we have heard from a more powerful authority,
how will our " credulity " seem to have slipped if we be-
lieve that to the Omnipotent King nothing is hard, nothing
difficult; 221 if what is impossible for us to accomplish is
possible for Him and ready, as it were, to obey?
Is there anything which can oppose His desires, or does it
not necessarily follow that what He wills be done? Or shall
we possibly gather from our distinctions what can be done
or cannot? And shall we not believe that our powers of
reason are as mortal as we are ourselves and of no weight
with the Supreme?
And yet, listen, you who do not believe that the souls are
of neutral character and have their existence on the border-
line midway between life and death: are not absolutely all
whom fancy supposes to exist, gods, angels, demons 222 -or
whatever other name they have are not they also of a
neutral character, tottering in the condition of their doubtful
lot?
If we all grant 223 there is but one Father of things, im-
mortal and alone 224 unbegotten, and that nothing is found
prior to Him possessed of any name, it follows that all those
148 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
whom fancy has believed to be gods of mortal men 225 have
been either begotten by Him or brought forth by His com-
mand, 226 If they are brought forth and begotten, they are of
a later order and time; if of a later order and time, they must
necessarily have origin and beginnings of birth and life; and
as for what makes its entrance and has a beginning of
incipient life, it must necessarily have an end also. 22T
36. " But the gods are said to be immortal/'
Not by nature, as became clear, but by the will and favor
of God the Father. In that way, then, in which He granted
the gift of immortality to the gods who were on a certain
<day> brought forth, in the same manner will He deign to
grant immortality to the souls, although savage death seems
capable of blotting them out and of annihilating them in
immutable destruction.
That divine Plato, 228 who expresses many worthy opinions
about God which are not shared by the multitude, in that
dialogue which bears the title Timaeus, 22Q says that the gods
and the world are by nature corruptible and in no way free
from disintegration, but that by the will of God, the King
and Chief, they are preserved by an everlasting bond. 230 For,
as he states, what has been properly bound and tied together
with the most perfect knots, is preserved by the goodness of
God; and by no other than by Him who bound them can
they, according as the case requires, be destroyed, or given
the order of salvation. 231
Consequently, if these are the facts in the matter, and no
other opinion or belief is consonant with the facts, why do
you show astonishment that we speak of the souls as having
a neutral character, when Plato says that the deities them-
selves have neutral natures but that their life is made con-
tinuous and undying by the kindness of the Supreme Being?
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 149
But if by chance you do not know it and hitherto it was not
understood by you owing to its novelty, then at this late date
hear and learn it from Him who knows and has published
it abroad from Christ namely that the souls are not the
children 232 of the Supreme King, nor did they, begotten by
Him, as is stated, begin to identify themselves and speak of
themselves in terms of their essential origin 233 but that they
have some other creator, 234 removed from the Supreme Being
by a very great inferiority in rank and power, yet of His
court and ennobled by the sublimity of their highborn
stations. 235
" Immortal souls " need never have left Heaven.
37. But if, as the story goes, the souls were the Lord's
offspring and the descendants of the Supreme Power, 236
nothing would have been lacking for their perfection, since
they were begotten, in that case, by most perfect virtue; 23T
all would have been of one mind and one accord; they would
always dwell in the royal court, and they would not, leaving
behind the seats of blessedness in which they came to know
and remembered the most sublime teachings, unwisely seek
these earthly parts, only to pass their lives enveloped by
gloomy bodies amid phlegm 238 and blood these dung-sacks
and filthy urinals! 239
" But it was necessary that these parts, too, should be
populated and therefore Almighty God sent forth the souls
into so many colonies, as it were/'
And of what use are men in the world, and for what reason
are they essential, if we are not to believe that it was to no
purpose that they had to live in this region and tenant an
earthly body?
240
" They make a certain contribution to the completing of
150 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
the integration of this mass, and unless they are added to it,
this totality of the universe is imperfect and defective/' 241
Does it follow, then, that in the absence of men the world
ceases to function? Will the stars not pass through their
changes? Will there be no summers and winters? Will the
blasts of winds grow silent and will the clouds not gather and
hang low and showers not fall upon the earth to bring relief
in droughty seasons? No, on the contrary, all things must of
necessity travel through their courses and not depart from the
continuity of the established order, even though no name of
man be heard in the world and the earth remain still with
the silence of unpeopled solitude. How, therefore, can it be
boasted that an inhabitant had to be added to these areas,
when clearly man has no contribution to make to the world's
perfection, all his pursuits always look to his personal com-
fort, and he never deviates from his own advantage?
The earth receives no advantage from being
populated.
38. For, to begin with important matters, what advantage
is there to the world from the fact that mighty kings are
here? What advantage that there are tyrants, lords, and all
the countless other magnificent potentates; that there are
generals, masters of military science, experts in the taking
of cities; soldiers unyielding and utterly invincible in cavalry
battles or in infantry combat? What, that there are orators,
grammarians, poets; writers, dialecticians, musicians; panto-
mimes, mimics, actors, singers, trumpeters, flutists, and
pipers? That there are runners, boxers, charioteers, bareback
riders, stilt-walkers, rope dancers, jugglers? That there are
pitch vendors, 242 salt dealers, fishmongers, perfumers, gold-
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 151
smiths, fowlers, weavers of winnows and baskets? That there
are fullers, 243 wool combers, embroiderers, cooks, confection-
ers, muleteers, pimps, butchers, harlots? What do the other
kinds of dealers, of professors and of arts, 244 for listing which
the whole of life would be too short, contribute to the organi-
zation and constitution of the world, that it should be believed
that without mankind it could not have been founded and
that it would not have reached its completeness, unless the
struggle of a poor and useless animal had been added to it?
Did God send the souls so that they might be evil?
39. But 245 perhaps the King of the Universe 246 and
for human lips to say this is consummate rashness- for this
reason sent hither the souls begotten from Himself, that they
who had been divine 247 with Him, not having any share in
contact of body or the bounds of time, 248 should be sunk into
human seeds, spring forth from the wombs of women, give
forth and keep up the most stupid wailings, suck and drain
breasts, smear and spot themselves with their own filth, then
in their fright be hushed by the rocking of the nurse and by
the sound of rattles. 249
Did He send the souls 25 so that they who had recently
been possessed of purity and of innocent goodness, should
learn in human bodies 251 to pretend, to dissemble, 252 to lie,
to cheat, to deceive, to cajole by the false humility of the flat-
terer; to have in mind one thing, to promise another to a
man's face; 25S to lay snares, to deceive the unwary with
tricky traps; by countless arts to seek out the venoms of
malice and to meet the occasion, to put on the guise of fickle
flattery?
Did He send the souls so that passing their days in calm and
152 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
serene tranquillity, they might take on from bodies the causes
by which they might become fierce and savage, might carry
on hatred and enmities; sow wars among themselves; attack
and overthrow states; burden themselves with and surrender
themselves to the yoke of slavery; and at last become subject
the one to the other's power, having changed the status into
which they were born?
Did He send the souls so that being made unmindful of
the truth and having forgotten what God was, they should
pray to images that move not; address pieces of wood, of
bronze, and stones as divinities; beg from the gore of slaugh-
tered animals; make no mention of Himself; indeed, that
some of them should even doubt that they themselves exist,
or deny that anything whatever exists?
Did He send the souls so that they who in their proper
habitation had been of one mind, being equals in understand-
ing and knowledge, should, after they had put on mortal
forms, be separated by differences of opinions; that what is
just, useful, and right should seem to some to be one thing,
to others another; that they should fight about what should
be sought after and what shunned; that some should establish
the limits of goods and evils 2M in one way, others differently;
that desiring to know the truth of things they should be
opposed by obscurity, and as if bereft of the sight of their
eyes they should see nothing with certainty and be led
through doubtful paths by the error of their ideas?
40. Did He send the souls that while other living beings
were nourished on what sprang spontaneously into being and
was produced without seeding, and looked for no shelter or
covering of houses 255 or clothing, they should be burdened
with the wretched necessity of building houses for themselves
with the greatest expense and no end of sweat and toil;
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 153
fabricate coverings for their limbs; produce a variety of uten-
sils for their daily need; borrow aids for their weakness from
dumb animals; do violence to the earth and make it produce
not its own grasses but yield up the fruits commanded; and
when they had used up all their energies in subduing the
earth, they might be forced to lose the hopes they placed in
labor through rust, hail, drought, 256 and in the end, forced
by hunger, to take to human corpses; and by gradual deterio-
ration of the body to be alienated and separated from their
human forms?
Did He send the souls so that they who, as long as they
tarried with Him, never had had any longing for possessions,
should here become most greedy and with insatiable desire
be consumed by covetousness; that they should excavate lofty
mountains and turn the hidden bowels of the earth into ma-
terials of a different designation and purpose; that at the
risk of their heads they should force their way through
strange nations, and in the exchange of goods should always
be on the lookout for high and cheap prices; that they should
exact a greedy and most unfair rate of interest, and aggravate
their insomnia 25T by counting up the thousands coming from
the blood of the poor; that they should be forever extending
the bounds of their properties, 258 and although they were to
reduce whole provinces to a single country estate, should wear
away the forum by litigation for one tree, for one furrow,
and bring upon themselves feuds with their friends and
brothers that can never be settled?
41. Did He send the souls so that they who formerly
had been gentle and strangers to rousing savage passions,
should establish for themselves butcher shops and amphi-
theaters, places of blood and public wickedness, in the one of
which they should see human beings devoured and torn to
154 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
pieces by wild beasts see themselves slay others for no reason
of guilt but for the favor and delight of the spectators and
should pass those very days on which so heinous a deed was
committed in general enjoyment and consecrate the holidays
with gaiety; but in the other place they should tear up the
flesh of poor animals, some snatching one part, some another,
as is the practice of dogs and vultures; chew them up with
their teeth and give them over to their most cruel belly, and
that in the midst of such savage and horrid practices those
whom the stringencies of poverty forbade to enjoy such tables,
should bewail their lot; that they should be regarded as living
blissfully happy lives whose mouths and countenance such
barbarous spreads defiled?
Did He send the souls so that foregoing their divine great-
ness and dignity, they should get for themselves gems, pre-
cious stones, pearls, at the expense of their purity, should
wind these around their necks, pierce the lobes of their ears,
compress their foreheads with fillets, procure rouges to call
attention 259 to their bodies, darken their eyes with mascara, 260
and though bearing the features of males, should not blush to
curl 2G1 their hair with curlers, remove the wrinkles from the
body; 262 to walk with bare knees and with every other modish
fad to cast away the strength of manhood and to be enervated
by the manner and dalliance of women?
42. Did He send the souls so that some should infest the
highways and byways, others should lie in wait for the
unwary, forge false wills, 203 brew poisoned cups; that they
should break into homes at night, seduce, alienate, 264 lie and
betray; that they should strike out tasty dainties for the
palate; that in cooking fowls they should know how to catch
the dripping fat; that they should make twisted cakes and
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 155
sausages, 265 mince meat, tit-tits, 266 Lucanian sausages, with
these a sow's udder, and iced sausage?
Did He send the souls so that beings of a holy and most
noble race should here practice music and the arts of the
piper; that in blowing the flute, they should puff out their
cheeks; that they sing smutty songs; that they raise a din by
the rhythmic shakings of the castanets by which numbers of
other souls should want only to give themselves up to bizarre
motions of their bodies, dance, sing, jump around in circles 267
and, finally, raising their haunches and hips, should sway
with the rippling motion of their loins?
Did He send the souls so that among males they become
pederasts and in women harlots, sambucists, 268 harpists; that
they let their bodies for hire; that they make their vileness
public property ready in the brothels, to be met with in the
archways, willing to submit to anything, even ready for the
defilement of their sacred mouth? 269
If not, how did they then become evil?
43. What do you say, offspring and progeny of the Su-
preme Deity? Did then the souls, wise and sprung from their
first causes, learn to know these kinds of profligacies, crimes,
and iniquities and in order to practice, carry on, and con-
stantly repeat these evils, did they receive orders to depart
from thence 27 and dwell in these regions and be clothed with
the cloak of the human body?
And is there any mortal possessed of any sense of reason,
who thinks the world was established through them, and not
rather that it was made by them into a seat and home in
which daily every wrong might be perpetrated, all crimes
take place together conspiracies, impostures, deceits, greed,
robberies, assault, wickedness, audacity, obscenity, ignominy,
156 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
infamy, all the other evils which men the world over spawn
with wicked purpose and plot for each other's ruin? 2T1
Why did God not prevent the soul's degradation?
44. " But/' you say, " they came by their own desire, not
sent by the King."
And where was the Almighty Father, where the authority
of His royal sublimity, that He did not prevent their de-
parture and not allow them to fall into ruinous pleasures?
For if He knew that by changing places they would de-
generateas the Founder of all causes He should have known
or that something from without would influence them and
would cause them to forget their dignity and honor, then I
would ask Him a thousand pardons there is no other cause
of all these <errors> 272 than Himself; yes, indeed, He suffered
them freely to stray who, He foresaw, would not preserve
the state of innocence. And so the result is that it makes no
difference whether they came of their own free will or
whether they obeyed His command, since by not forbidding
what should have been forbidden, by His carelessness He
made the fault His own and by neglecting to hold them, He
first m allowed it.
45. But let the heinousness of this wicked idea depart far
away, that Almighty God, the Sower and the Founder of
great and invisible things, the Creator, should be thought to
have begotten souls so fickle; 274 souls possessing no serious-
ness, character, or steadfastness; prone to slip into vices; with
a proclivity for all kinds of sins; and, when He 1 knew that
they were such and of this kind, to have ordered them to go
into bodies, having put on which, they should in prisons 275
daily carry on under the blasts and storms of fortune, and now
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 157
do shameful things, now suffer shameful treatment; perish
in shipwrecks, catastrophes, the fires of holocausts; that
poverty should press hard on some, on others beggary; that
some should suffer to he torn to pieces by wild beasts; others
perish by the venom of tiny flies; that some should walk with
a limp, others lose their sight, others stay glued to their chairs
on account of stiff joints; and, in fine, should be subjected
to all the diseases which poor and pitiful mortality experiences
from the agony of different punishments. Then, at last, for-
getful that they are of a single source, of a single Father and
Head, they should uproot and shatter the rights of kinship,
overthrow their cities, lay waste their lands as enemies, en-
slave the free, do violence to virgins and the wives of others,
hate each other, covet the joys and good fortunes of others,
then, finally, all curse, revile, and mangle each other with
the teeth of savagery. 276
God did not do this because the souls are not
sprung from Him.
46. But, to say the same things over and over again, let
this idea, so monstrous and wicked, be far from us, that He
who is the Salvation of things, the Head of all virtues, and
the Acme 277 of benevolence, andto exalt Him with human
praise the Most Wise, the Just, who makes all things perfect
and retentive of the fullness of their perfection, either made
anything defective or not wholly appropriate, or was to any-
thing a cause for misfortunes or dangers or ordained, com-
manded, and enjoined the very acts by which human life is
spent and employed, to deflect from His dispositions.
These things are beneath Him and are destructive of the
power of His greatness and so far removed is He from the
158 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
thought that He should he the Author of such things that
the charge of blasphemous impiety 27S is incurred by anyone
who imagines that from Him is sprung man, a thing unhappy
and wretched, 279 who is sorry that he exists, who despises his
own condition and mourns, who understands that he was
begotten for no other purpose 28 than to prevent evils from
being without material for their diffusion and that always
there might be wretches on whose torments some lurking
power and cruelty adverse to man should feed. 281
Investigation of the true origin of the souls is
pointless.
47. " But if God/' you say, " is not the Parent and Father
of the souls, by what source were they begotten and in what
manner have they been brought forth? "
If you wish to hear the unvarnished truth, not spun out in
wordy display, we likewise admit that we do not know this, 282
are ignorant of it, and the knowledge of so great a matter, we
believe, transcends not only our weakness and frailty but
also that of all the powers that are in the world and which
in the minds of mortals have assumed the place of deities.
But because we deny that they are of God, are we obligated
to show whose they are? That does not necessarily follow at
all. If we were to deny that flies, beetles, and bugs, doormice,
weevils, and moths, are the work of the Almighty King, it
would not of consequence be demanded of us that we should
say who made them and gave them a place. For without
incurrring criticism we can be ignorant as to who gave them
their beginning and at the same time maintain that not by
the Higher God were they brought forth such useless, point-
less, purposeless creatures indeed, in some instances even
bringing harm and inescapable injuries.
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 159
48. So here also, in much the same manner, when we
deny that the souls are the offspring of God Supreme, it
does not forthwith follow that we must explain from what
parent they have been brought forth and by what causes they
have come into existence. After all, who is there to forbid us
either to be ignorant of whence they have taken birth and
being or to know that they are not the descendants of God?
" For what reason/' you say, " in what way? "
Because it is absolute truth and positive certainty that
nothing, as has often been said, is done, made, or determined
by the Supreme Being except what is right and becoming,
except what is whole and entire and finished in the perfection
of its integrity. 283
Further, we see that men, that is, the souls themselves
for what are men but souls bound to bodies? themselves
show by the perverseness of countless vices that they are not
of the noble lineage but are scions of ordinary families. 28 *
We see some harsh, criminal, bold, rash, reckless, blind, false,
deceitful, liars, haughty, overbearing, greedy, covetous, lust-
ful, fickle, weak, and unable to observe their own rules; which
they would certainly not be if nobility derived from the
Supreme Being 285 had begotten them and if they traced their
high descent from the Head of the universe. 286
Though a few men are goody the average of all men
is had.
49. " But/' you will say, " there are also good men 28T
in human-kindwise, just, of blameless and wholly irre-
proachable character."
We are not raising the question at all as to whether at any
time there were such in whom that same integrity which is
referred to was lacking in no respect. Granted that they were
160 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
exceptionally noble and praiseworthy, that they reached the
topmost peak of perfection and in their life they at no time
stumbled and fell into any fault: we would yet beg to hear
how many they are or were, that from the size of their number
we may gauge whether comparison has been made that is
fair or evenly balanced. One, two, three, four, ten, twenty,
a hundred: certainly they are limited in number and perhaps
capable of being accounted for by name.
But the proper thing is to appraise and weigh humanity
not by the standard of a very few good men, but by all the
rest. For the part is in the whole, not the whole in the part,
and the totality ought to account for the individual parts, and
the parts not serve as a standard for the totality. What if
you were to say, for example, that a man maimed in all his
limbs and shrieking from his agony was entirely well merely
because no pain was suffered in one little fingernail? Or
that the earth is made of gold because in a little eminence
of a single hill there are tiny grains which, when smelted,
yield gold and wonder is excited when it is laboriously
collected? 28S
It is the totality of the element that shows the material
it is made of, not tiny particles, fine enough to be blown
about, nor is the sea straightway sweet if you add or cast into
it a few drops of more palatable water. The minute quantity
is swallowed in its measureless mass; and that must be re-
garded <not> only as [not] 289 of little significance, but of
none whatever, which, being diffused through all, loses its
identity and is cut off in the great vastness of the body.
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 161
Even the few " good " men are proof of the soul's
mortality.
50. You may say that in the human race there are good
men, who are perhaps believed to he such as the result of
comparing them with the worst. Who are those men? Tell
us.
The philosophers, I suspect, who assert that they are alone
most wise and on the strength of this name 29 have raised
their eyebrows yes, those who fight daily with their passions
and struggle to drive out from their souls deep-seated desires
by the persistent opposition of their virtues; who, lest they
may be allured into vices by the stimulus of some opportunity,
flee from inheritance and wealth and remove from themselves
causes for stumbling. But when they do this and take pains
about it, most clearly do they show that the souls are subject
to falling and ready from weakness to plunge into vice.
In our view, however, what is good by nature requires no
correction or chastening; nay, it should not even know what
evil is, if the individual of each class is bent on the preserva-
tion of its own integrity; for a contrary cannot be implanted
in a contrary or equality <in> an unequal, or sweetness be
contained in bitterness. Hence the man who struggles to
correct the innate perverseness of souls, 291 most clearly proves
himself imperfect, 292 incapable of correction, although he may
strive with every effort and firmness on the other side.
The philosophers deal with surmises, not with
knowledge.
51 . But 293 you laugh at our reply, because when we deny
that the souls are royal progeny, we for our part do not
account for the causes and sources from which they have been
1 62, ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
produced. But what kind of crime is it either to be ignorant
of anything or to admit that you do not know what you do
not know, without any pretense? And who seems to you to
be the more deserving of derision, the one who claims for
himself no knowledge of some shadowy thing, or the one
who thinks that he himself, of himself, knows most clearly
what transcends human knowledge and what is wrapped up
in blind obscurities? 294
If the nature of everything were submitted to a searching
examination, your own case is similar to the one you criticize
in us. Because you say that the souls come down from the
King Himself and enter into human forms, 295 you are not
therefore stating anything as examined and placed in the
light of the clearest truth. You are merely guessing, not
knowing. You merely suspect, you do not understand. For if
to know is to retain in your mind what you yourself have seen
or learned, none of those things which you assert can you
say you ever saw, namely, that the souls come down from a
home and region above.
You therefore make use of surmise, not the trustworthiness
of knowledge achieved. And what is surmise except a doubt-
ful imagining of things and a casting of the mind upon
nothing that is available for examination? 29G He therefore
who surmises does not possess knowledge nor does he walk
in the light of it. But if this is true and certain, in the view
of judges who are really such and possessed of great wisdom,
that surmise of yours, in which you have confidence, must be
adjudged ignorance.
Further criticism of the ^agan position.
52. Now, lest you think that you alone can make use of
suppositions and surmises, we also can employ them since
what you ask concerns us both.
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 163
" From where/' you say, " do men come, and what and
whence are the souls of these same men? "
Whence are elephants, oxen, stags, mules, asses? Whence
are lions, horses, dogs, wolves, panthers, and what and
whence are the souls of these living beings? Certainly it is
not plausible that from that Platonic bowl 29T which Timaeus
prepares and mixes, their souls came or that the locust, mouse,
shrew, cockroach, frog, centipede should be believed to have
received the spark of life. For, what if 298 they actually have
the cause and origin of their coming into being from the
elements themselves, if there are present in these hidden and
wholly unrecognizable means for generating animals which
subsist in each of these? And here we see that some phi-
losophers say that the earth is the mother of men; that others
add water, that still others join the breath of air to those;
and that some claim the sun to be their artisan and that being
quickened by its heat, they are stirred by the activity of life. 299
What if it is not these either and it is something else some
other cause, some other system some other power, finally,
bearing a name unheard of by us and unknown to us, which
may have fashioned humankind and fitted it into the uni-
verse's planned arrangement? Is it not possible that men
could have originated in such a manner and that the author-
ship of their birth does not go back to the Supreme God?
What reason do we think motivated that great Plato, a
philosopher of goodness above reproach, when he took away
from the Supreme God the fashioning of man and gave it to
some sort of lesser gods, and when he would not have the
souls of the human race to be composed of that same pure
mixture so of which he had made the soul of that universe,
except that he thought the making of man unworthy of God
and the fashioning of something feeble as incompatible with
His exalted greatness?
164 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
53. Since, then, such is the case, it is not absurd and
foolish for us to believe that the souls of men are of neutral
character, 301 that is to say, they are not of the first rank, 302
subject to the law of death, of powers small and fallible; that
they are endowed with the gift of immortality <if > they base
their hope of so great a gift upon the Supreme God who
alone has the power to bestow such immunity from corruption.
But, of course, we are stupid for believing this. What is
that to you, you consummate fool, you simpleton? 303 Where
do we harm you or what wrong do we do or inflict on you, if
we are confident that Almighty God will have a regard for
us when we begin to depart from our bodies and will, as is
said, deliver us from the jaws of Hell? so4
The froUem of evil.
54. " Well, then," someone will say, " can anything hap-
pen without the will of God? " 805 We must carefully con-
sider and examine with not a few pains, lest, while we think
that we do honor to God by such a question, we fall into the
opposite sin by tearing down the primacy of His majesty.
" In what way? For what cause? "
Because, if all things take place in accordance with His
will, and without His assent nothing in the universe can
either succeed or fail, it follows of necessity that all evils also
are understood to arise by His will. But if, on the other hand,
we should wish to say, not referring to Him the causes of
evils, that He is aware of evil but the author of none, the
worst things will begin to make their appearance either
against His will or a thing monstrous to say- while He is
ignorant, unconscious, 806 and unaware of them.
And again, if we should choose to say that there are no
evils, as we have found has been thought and believed by
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 165
some, all races and all nations will protest loudly, showing us
their tribulations and the manifold types of dangers with
which at each moment the human race is harassed and
tormented.
Then they will ask of us: " Why, if there are no evils,
do you hold back from certain deeds and actions? Why do
you not do everything which impetuous passion bids and
commands? Why, finally, have you with most dreadful
legislation fixed punishments for the wicked? " After all, can
a more prodigious stupidity be found than to maintain that
there are no evils and to condemn sinners to destruction as
if they were evil?
55. When, 807 defeated, we agree that these exist and not
without reason 30S admit that all human affairs abound in
them, it will follow that they will ask:
" Why, then, does Almighty God not take away these evils
but suffers them to exist and to march on through all the ages
in steady continuance? "
If understanding comes to our aid from God the Supreme
Ruler and it is not our determination to wander through
unholy vagaries of conjecture, we must answer that we do
not know those things and what could not be grasped by any
powers we possess, we have not sought after or endeavored
to know. And your reasoning 809 will be better and prefer-
able, indeed even safer, 310 if you choose to plead ignorance
and inexperience, rather than to state that except for the will
of God nothing is made, which at once results in taking Him
both as the instigator of evils and the author.
" Whence, then/' you will say, " are all these evils? "
From the elements, say the philosophers, and from their
instability. But how it is possible that things which have
no sense or judgment are said to be malicious and pernicious,
1 66 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
or that not rather He is malicious and pernicious who in
order to bring about some result took on things which were
hound to be extremely bad and harmful this is a matter for
the scrutiny of such as make the statement.
What, then, are we? Whence are we? 311 There is no need
to answer. For whether we are able to give the answer, or
are unequal to the task and cannot, in either case it is a small
matter with us. Nor do we regard it as of any real significance
either to be ignorant of it or to know it. We are satisfied
to have established one thing only: that nothing comes from
God Supreme which is harmful and destructive. 312 This we
grasp, this we know, on this one truth of understanding and
knowledge we stand, that nothing is done by Him except
what is wholesome to all, what is pleasant, what is overflow-
ing with joy and gladness, what has boundless and undying
pleasures, what each asks in all his prayers to happen to
himself, and regarding which he thinks that everything else
is destructive and death-bringing,
Other philosophical questions need not loe
examined.
56. And all other matters, whatever they be, which usually
turn up when controversial problems are threshed out what
parents they have, or who gives them their being we neither
make any effort to know nor do we give any care to inquiry
and investigation of the subject; we leave all things to their
causes and we do not regard them as connected with or
involved in what we ask for ourselves, 818
What is there that human ingenuity with its penchant for
controversy dares not undermine, destroy, however clear and
evident and secured by the seal of truth that may be which
they endeavor to weaken? Or, again, what are they not able
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 167
to maintain with plausible arguments, even though it is most
clearly false, even though it is an evident and manifest lie?
When a person has convinced himself that something exists
or does not exist, he loves to assert his opinion and to outdo
others in subtlety, especially if the matter under discussion is
out of the ordinary and abstruse and of its nature obscure.
Certain philosophers think that the world has neither been
created nor will at any time perish; 314 some, 315 that it is im-
mortal, although they are authority for the statement that it
was bom and begotten; while a third group 316 are satisfied
that it was born and begotten, and that as the result of the
necessity common to all, it will perish. And although of these
three views only one can be true, nevertheless, all have argu-
ments by which to support their own opinions and destroy 317
and undermine the tenets of others. Regarding this same
world some teach and declare that it consists of four ele-
ments; 81S others that it is formed from twin elements; 319 a
third party that it is from one; 32 there are those who say
that it is from none of these but that atoms 321 are its sub-
stance and primary origin. And although of these only one
opinion is true, but none of them certain, here again in like
manner all have arguments to hand by which to establish the
truth of what they say and show up the falsehoods present
in the opinions of others. So, too, some deny categorically
that gods exist; 322 others say they doubt whether they exist
anywhere; 323 others, to be sure, that they exist but care
nothing for human affairs; 324 and others, of course, maintain
that they do take part in affairs of mortals and control events
on earth. 325
57. While this is so and it cannot be otherwise than that
only one of all these opinions is true, still they all battle with
arguments and none of them lack something plausible to say,
1 68 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
whether they state their own position or dispute the views of
others. It is not different and quite the same story when
these people discuss the character of souls. This one, for
example, thinks 32S they are both immortal and survive the
death of mortals; that one does not believe they survive but
perish with the bodies themselves. 327 The opinion of another
is that they suffer nothing immediately, but after the human
body has been put away, they are given a little longer to
live, 328 then come under the laws of mortality.
And while all these opinions cannot be identified with
truth, nevertheless all support them by so strong and so valid
demonstrations that you can find nothing which appears false
to you, although from all sides you see expressed a diversity
of views and the discord of controversies. This would as-
suredly not take place if human desire for knowledge could
achieve any certainty, or if what seems to have been dis-
covered by anyone might be demonstrated by the approval of
all others. Therefore it is a most inane thing and a purpose-
less task to bring something forward as if you knew it, or to
wish to maintain that you know something which, even if it
be true, you see can be refuted, or to accept as true what
perhaps is not, and is brought forth after the manner of men
deceived by their own delusions.
And this is so for a good reason. For we do not weigh and
guess at divine matters by divine but by human reasoning,
and just as we think something ought to have taken place,
so we maintain that it must have taken place.
Pagan philosophers are ignorant about many
questions.
58. Well, does it follow that we alone are ignorant, with-
out knowledge of who is the Creator of the souls, who their
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 169
Establishes what cause fashioned man, whence evils have
burst forth, or why the Supreme King suffers them to exist
and to be perpetrated and does not oust them, ward them off
from human affairs? Do you know any of these things as
the result of investigation and knowledge? If you care to
expose your reckless guesswork can you explain and dis-
close whether the world which holds us is <un>begotten
or was at some period of time established? If it was estab-
lished and made, by what kind of act or because of what
thing? 329 Can you bring forward and explain the reason why
it does not remain fixed and immobile but is constantly being
rotated in a circular path? Does it revolve of itself and by its
own choice, or is it turned by the propulsion of some
power? 88 What is the place itself and space 331 in which it
is located and continually revolves? Is it unlimited, limited,
void or solid? Does an axis, resting on pivots at its extremities,
support it, or does it rather keep itself aloft by air which is
carries within itself?
Can you, when you are asked, make clear 8S2 and demon-
strate from the fullness of your knowledge, what opens out
the snow into feathery flakes? For what reason and cause
the dawning day 3S3 should not rise from the regions where
the sun now sets and put out its light in the place where it
now rises? How the selfsame sun by one and the same touch
produces results so differing- even opposites? What the
moon is? What the stars? Why the former does not always
remain in the same shape, or why it was desirable and neces-
sary that in the case of the latter those little bits of fire 884
should stud the entire body of the universe? Why some of
these are smaller, others fuller and larger; why some have dim
light, others a clear and shining brightness?
59. If what we wish to know is at our beck and if science
ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
is an open matter, explain and tell us how and by what
system showers come about, so that in the upper regions and
in the midst of the air water is held in suspense, a thing
naturally subject to falling and so ready always to flow and
run downwards?
Explain, I say, and tell us what it is that hurls down hail,
what makes the rain fall in drops, what causes showers to fall,
spreads out the snowflakes into leafy foliage; 335 whence the
wind rises and what it is; why the changes of the seasons
were established, when one alone could have been insti-
tuted 338 and with it a single kind of climate, so that nothing
should be wanting to the undivided state 33T of the universe.
What is the cause, what the reason, that the seas are salty
or that of the waters of the land some are sweet <or warm>, 338
others are bitter or cold? From what kind of material has the
flesh 339 of human bodies grown compact and strong? Whence
have the bones become solid? What has given the intestines,
the veins their tubular shape and made them capable of being
passed through?
Why, when it would be more practical to furnish sight to
us by several eyes against the danger of blindness, are we
limited to only two? For what purpose have such limidess
and countless kinds of monsters and snakes been fashioned
or brought forth? What business do owls, falcons, hawks
have in the world? What place, the other winged creatures
and flying fowls? 84 What place, the different ants and
worms that grow into varied pests and dangers? What, fleas;
what, pesky flies, spiders, shrews, mice, bloodsuckers, water
spinners? What, thorns; what, brambles; what, wild oats; 341
what, tares? What, the seeds of grasses or shrubs either
sweet to the nostrils or disagreeable in smell? Yes, if you
think that anything is knowable or understandable, do tell
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 171
us what wheat is, what spelt, barley, millet, chickpea, beans,
lentils, honey, oil, wine, 342 the scallion, leek, onion. For
though they are useful to you and are established among the
ordinary kinds of foods, it is not a quick and easy matter to
know just what each kind is; why they have been shaped into
the forms they have; whether there was any need that they
should not have other tastes, other smells, other colors, than
the ones they severally have, or whether they could have
taken on others also. Finally, what are these very things,
taste, I mean [that is, taste], 343 and the others; from what
reasons do they derive distinctions of qualities'?
" From the elements/' you say, " and from the first begin-
nings of things/'
Well, are the elements bitter or sweet? Are they possessed
of a certain odor, <of a certain> s " color, that we should think
that from their union qualities were imparted to what grew
out of them, by which sweetness comes into being or some-
thing offensive to the senses is produced?
Christ taught us to disregard such futile questions.
60. While, therefore, the origins, the causes, the reasons,
of so great and so many things escape you yourselves also,
and you can neither say nor explain what has been made or
wherefore, or why it ought not to have been, you would pull
and tear apart our reserve, who confess that we do not know
what cannot be known, and have no desire to seek out or
investigate 345 what, it is most clear, cannot be understood,
though human conjecture should stretch and extend itself
through a thousand hearts.
And therefore Christ, 348 who, though that does not meet
with your approval, is God, Christ God yes, this must be
12 <
ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
stated often for the bursting and splitting of infidel ears-
spoke by command of the Supreme God, in human form:
knowing the nature of mortals to be blind and that it cannot
understand a single truth even of things placed squarely be-
fore the eyes, that it regards as ascertained and understood
whatever it persuades itself is so, and that on behalf of its
conjectures it does not hesitate to instigate and prolong quar-
relsome discussions, He taught us to leave behind and dis-
regard all those things, and not to spend our time on fruitless
consideration of those things which are far from our under-
standing. On the contrary, to the extent that is possible, we
are to approach the Lord of the universe with whole mind
and spirit, to be lifted up from these places and to commit to
Him the doubtful waverings of the heart, to be ever mindful
of Him; and although His true being escapes all imagination,
yet we should form some sort of image 34T of Him. For He
said 348 that of all things which are subsumed in the un-
fathomable mystery of exalted divinity, He alone is beyond
doubt; He alone is true, and about Him no one, except a
madman and one possessed of reckless desperation, can be in
doubt. To know Him is enough, though you have learned
nothing else; and if you have been intent upon the compre-
hension of God, the Head of the universe, 349 you have
achieved the true and greatest knowledge.
61. " What is it to you/' He says, 360 " to examine, to in-
vestigate who made man, what origin the souls have, who
conceived the causes of evils; whether the sun is larger than
the earth, or measures only a foot across; 251 whether the moon
shines by the light of another or by its own beams? 352
" There is no gain in knowing these things nor any loss in
not knowing them. Leave these things to God and allow Him
to know what, wherefore, and whence something is, whether
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 173
or not it had to be; whether something transcends birth 353
or has first beginnings; whether it should be annihilated or
preserved, whether consumed, dissolved, or be repeatedly
renewed. Your intellects are not free to involve you in such
things and to trouble themselves uselessly 354 about matters
so removed from you. Your own good is at stake, and I mean
the salvation of your souls; and unless you busy yourselves
in acquiring a knowledge of the Supreme God, grim death
awaits you when you are freed from the body's bonds, not
bringing sudden extinction but over a period of time con-
suming you by the bitterness of torturing punishment/'
Magic powers and prayers cannot make the soul
immortal,
62. And let not that which is said by some who have a
smattering of knowledge and take a great deal upon them-
selves, intrigue you or flatter you with vain hope, that they
are born of God and not subject to the laws of fate; that if
they lead a life of fair restraint, 355 His palace lies open to
them and that after the death of the body, they are brought
back without any hindrance at all to their ancestral seat,
as it were; nor what the magicians promise, 356 that they have
intercessory prayers, 357 moved by which certain powers pro-
vide easy routes for such as are anxious to fly to heaven; nor
those things which in Etruria 358 are promised in the Ache-
rontic 359 books, that when the blood of certain animals is
given to certain divinities, 360 the souls become divine and are
made immune to the laws of mortality/ 61 These are empty
delusions and the nutriment of empty desires.
No one except Almighty God can preserve souls nor is
there anyone else at all S62 who can make them long-lived
174 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
and grant to them the breath of eternity, except alone Him
who is immortal and eternal and limited hy the restriction of
no time. Since all the gods, be they true gods 363 or only said
to be such by hearsay and conjecture, are immortal and
eternal by reason of His will and the favor of His kindness,
how is it possible that they can impart to another 364 what
they themselves are, when actually they have this not as
their own but as something bestowed by the might of a
greater? 365
Let them sacrifice as many victims as they wish in Etruria;
let the philosophers deny themselves all that is human; let
the magicians appease and cajole all powers: unless souls
have received from the Lord of the universe what reason 36S
demands, and that by His command, there will some day,
when the feeling of death approaches, be great regret for
having been an object of derision.
The fate of the centuries before Christ came.
63. " But if," they say, " Christ was sent by God for this
purpose that He might free the unhappy souls from the
destruction of extinction, what were the former centuries
guilty of which before His coming were annihilated by the
lot of mortality? "
Well, now, are you in a position to know what has hap-
pened to the souls of mortals who belong to the most ancient
past, whether they too have not received help, care, and
foresight of some sort? 36T Can you, I say, know what could
have been learned had Christ taught it: whether the ages
which have passed since the human race began to be on earth
are unlimited or limited; when the souls were first united
with the bodies; who was the author of that union, yes,
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 175
indeed, who was the maker of man; whither the souls of
former men have departed; in which regions and sections of
the universe they were; whether they were corruptible or not;
whether they could have approached the danger of death, had
not Christ the Preserver appeared at the proper time?
Put aside these cares and leave off inquiries into things
you do not understand. The King's mercy has heen granted
also to them, and the divine "benefits have gone out to all
men alike. Their souls have been preserved, their souls have
been freed, and have laid aside the lot and condition of
mortality.
" How is that? What? When? "
If arrogance, if pride, if conceit, were strangers to you,
long since would you have been able to know these things
from <Christ> as your authority.
Christ is no respecter of persons.
64. " But if Christ came as the Preserver of the human
race, as S68 you say, why does He not free all without excep-
tion with equal kindness? "
Does He not free all alike who summons all alike? Or does
He thrust away or repel anyone from the Supreme Benevo-
lence who grants to one and all the privilege of coming to
Him to the mighty, the humble, slaves, women, children?
" The fountain of life/' He says, " is open to all S89 and no
one is denied the right to drink or turned away." 37 If this
has so little attraction for you that you refuse the kindness of
the proffered favor; yes, indeed, if you are so superior in
wisdom that you term what Christ offers farce and folly,
what can He expect to gain by continuously inviting you, 371
when His only function is to set before you the fruit of His
176 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
kindness? God, says Plato, 372 does not cause any man to
choose his lot in life, 373 nor can the will of another be rightly
imputed to anyone, since freedom of the will was placed in
the power of the same who willed it. 374 Or must you be
begged to deign to accept from God the bounty of salvation,
and must the grace of divine kindness be poured into your
lap while you reject it and flee far from it? Are you willing
to take what is offered and to turn it to your own purposes?
Then you will act to your own advantage. Do you disdain,
despise, and look down on it? Then you deprive yourself
of the advantage of the gift. God forces no one. He intimi-
dates none with fear that forces obedience. And, of course,
our salvation is not necessary to Him so that he would gain
anything or suffer loss, were He to make us gods S75 or allow
us to be annihilated in the destruction of corruption,
God grants free will to every soul and forces none.
65. " But I beg your pardon/' he says, " if God is power-
ful, merciful, a preserver, let Him change our minds and
make us to trust in His promises despite our unwillingness
to do so."
Such a thing is force, not kindliness or the generosity of
the Supreme God but a childish eagerness for mastery and
the straining of an empty spirit. 376 For what is so unfair as
to twist forcefully the desires of persons who are reluctant,
who are unwilling, to the opposite; to ram down into their
souls what they do not want and what they shrink from; to do
them harm rather than good, and having taken away a former
view to deliver them over to a view and opinion not their
own? You who wish yourself to be changed and to suffer
violence so that you may do and experience compulsion
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 177
to do what you do not want, why do you refuse to talce on
voluntarily what you desire to do on being changed and
transformed?
" I do not want to/' he says, " and I have no desire/'
Well, then, why do you accuse God as if He were remiss
in bringing aid to you when you long for it, He whose gifts
and favors you not only scornfully reject and flee but also
term them empty talk and make them the subject of witty
jokes'?
Christ is the only hope of salvation.
" Then, unless I become a Christian, I cannot have the
hope of salvation? "
Yes, just as you state. For the office 3T7 of granting salvation
and of giving to the souls what was proper to be bestowed
and necessary to be added, He alone holds it, as a trust and
commission from God the Father an arrangement based on
reasons that escape us in their profundity.
For as with you certain gods have certain spheres of in-
fluence, prerogatives, powers, and you do not demand of any
one of them what is not within his power and privilege, so
it is the power and right 37S of Christ alone to give salvation
to the souls and to assign them the breath of eternity.
To illustrate: if you believe that Father Liber 379 can give
a vintage, cannot give a cure; if you believe that Ceres can
give crops, Aesculapius 3SO health, Neptune one thing, Juno S81
another; that Fortuna, 382 Mercury, Vulcan, 383 are each givers
of certain and particular things: then you must also accept
this necessarily from us, that from no one can the souls receive
the power of life and of safety from harm except from Him
whom the Most High King has placed over this duty and
office. The Almighty Ruler has willed this to be the way
178 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
of salvation, this, as it were/ 84 to be the door 385 of life,
through which 388 alone is entrance to the light; and there is
no other possibility, either of creeping in or walking in:
everything else has been closed off and secured by an im-
pregnable bulwark. 387
The charge that Christianity is new is wholly
unfair.
66. Therefore, though you are pure and have been
cleansed from every stain of vices, have won over those
powers and prevailed upon them <not to> close the roads and
erect barriers to your passage on your return to heaven, you
will not be able to arrive at the reward of immortality by any
struggles unless you understand through Christ's gift what
constitutes immortality and have received admission to the
true life.
For in regard to the charge you are wont to throw up
against us, that our religion is a new one, 388 and arose only a
few days ago, as it were, and that we should not have
abandoned the religion of our fathers to be led over into bar-
barous and foreign rites, 889 this is urged entirely without
reason. For what would you say if in this manner we should
wish to throw blame on those ages of long ago because when
crops 89 were discovered, they despised acorns and rejected
wild berries; m because they stopped covering themselves
with barks of trees 892 and wrapping themselves in skins, once
woven clothing was devised, more useful and convenient to
wear; or because when houses were built and more elegant
dwellings were introduced, they lost their affection for their
little old huts and preferred not to lie under rocks and in
caves like the beasts?
BOOK Two: ATTACK: ON PHILOSOPHY 179
It is a trait shared by all men and handed down almost
from the cradle itself to prefer good things to bad, to place
the useful before the useless, and to strive after and to seek
for that which proves itself more valuable and pleasing, and
to base on it the hope of well-being and the things that
promote welfare.
The pagans have also been guilty of adopting
novelties.
67. And so, when you urge against us abandonment and
deviation 893 from former centuries, you should look at the
reason, not the fact, and not set forth against us what we have
abandoned but examine what in particular we have followed.
If it is any fault or crime at all to change an opinion, and
to leave behind ancient institutions for other things and bents
that are new, such an indictment also involves you who many
times have changed your manner of living and practice, who
have transferred to other habits and other ceremonies with
the condemnation of the past. 394
Do you, for instance, have the people divided into five
classes, as your ancestors formerly had them? 395 Do you
choose officials by popular vote? Do you know what military,
city, and popular assemblies S96 are? Do you observe the sky
and do you cause a cessation of public functions when adverse
omens are reported? 397 When you are preparing for war, do
you put out a standard on the citadel? 39S Or do you observe
the f etial laws? s " Do you by an official threat of war demand
the return of plunder? Or when in a crisis you turn to Mars,
do you take hope from the spearhead auspices? 40
When entering upon offices, do you observe the laws
relating to the appointed year? 401 In the matter of gifts,
180 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
presents, do you obey the Cincian laws? 402 In restricting
expenses, do you obey the laws of the censors? 40S Do you
maintain, as formerly, ever-burning fires on the innermost
hearths? 404 Do you consecrate tables by the placing of salt-
cellars 405 and with images of the gods? When you enter
wedlock, do you spread the couches with a toga and do you
invoke the genii of married couples? 406 Do you stroke the
hair of brides with the bachelor's lance? 407 Do you carry the
togas of the girls to the temple of Fortuna Virginalis? 40S Do
your matrons work in the atria of their homes displaying their
industry? 409 Do their relations by marriage and their kins-
men have a right to kiss them, 410 to prove that they are sober
and abstemious? 411
68. On the Alban Mountain 412 in ancient times it was not
permitted to sacrifice other than snow-white bulls: 413 have
you not changed that custom and observance and has it not
been enacted with the approval of the senate that reddish
ones may be offered? While during the reigns of Romulus
and Pompilius 414 the inner organs, thoroughly cooked and
made soft, 415 were burnt up to the gods, did you not begin
under King Tullus, 416 with disregard of the ancient custom,
to offer these to them half-raw and slightly warmed? 417
While prior to the coming of Hercules to Italy, at the
instance of Apollo sacrifice was made to Father Dis 418 and to
Saturn with human heads, have you not again with a bit of
clever deceit and some playing on words 419 changed this
custom? Since you yourselves have followed at one time
those customs, at another other usages, and when mistakes
were recognized and better things were observed as such,
you rejected, repudiated many things, what have we done
contrary to common sense and judgment, 420 if we have given
preference to the great and the certain, and have not suffered
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 181
ourselves to be held back by any religious scruples regarding
frauds?
Did not all things once have a 'beginning?
69. But our name is new and the religion which we fol-
low was born but a few days ago. To grant for the moment
that the objection made to us is not a false premise, what is
there in human affairs that is either done by the work of the
body and with the hands, or is mastered by the training and
perception of the mind alone, which did not at some time
have a beginning and enter into the practice, the experience
of mortals?
Medicine, philosophy, music, and all the other arts upon
which life is built and refined did these originate at the same
time as human beings? Rather, was it not in modern times
indeed, practically just a short time ago that these began to
be practiced, understood, and to receive universal recognition?
Before Tages 421 the Etruscan touched the shores of light, 422
was any man aware or did he trouble himself about knowing
and learning whether there was any significance in the fall
of thunderbolts or in the veins of the entrails? When did the
movements of the stars or the practice of horoscopy begin to
be known? Was it not after Theutis the Egyptian 423 or after
Atlas 424 as some say the bearer, carrier, pillar, and mainstay
of heaven?
Even the yagan gods had a beginning.
70. But why do I speak about such trifles? The immortal
gods themselves, whose shrines you now approach and whose
divine powers you pray to as suppliants, did not they, as is
stated in your records and in your beliefs, begin to exist, 425
1 82 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
to be known at definite times, and to be designated by the
nomenclature given them?
If, for example, it is true that from Saturn and his wife
Jupiter was begotten with his brothers, before Ops was mar-
ried and bore issue, Jupiter never existed, both the supreme
Jupiter and the Stygian; 42e nowhere was the lord 427 of the
sea, nowhere was Juno; nay, more, no one lived in the seats
of heaven save only the two parents, but from their embrace
they were conceived and born and drew the breath of life.
At a definite time, therefore, Jupiter began to exist as a god;
at a definite time to receive worship and sacrifices as his due;
at a definite time to be preferred before his brothers in powers.
And again, if Liber, Venus, Diana, Mercury, Apollo,
Hercules, the Muses/ 28 the Castors, sons of Tyndareus, 429 and
Vulcan, the lord of fire, were begotten by Father Jupiter and
fathered by a parent of Saturn's line, before Memoria/ 30 be-
fore Alcmene, 431 Maia/ 32 Juno/ 33 Latona, 434 Leda, 435 Dione, 436
and then also Semele, 437 became pregnant from cohabitation
with Diespiter, 438 then these, too, had no previous existence
anywhere 439 or in any part of the universe, but they were
begotten and born from intercourse with Jupiter and began
to have some consciousness of themselves. These, too, there-
fore, began to exist at a definite time and receive ritual invoca-
tion as belonging to the holy divinities, which same thing
we may say in like manner with regard to Minerva. If, as
you state, she sprang from the brain of Jupiter, unbegotten,
before Diespiter was generated and received the forms and
shape of his body in the womb of his mother, it is of course
certain that Minerva did not exist and was not counted among
things or as having any substance at all; but from the moment
she was born from Jupiter's head, she, too, began to be
something established in reality. She, therefore, has a primal
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 183
origin and at a definite time began to be called a goddess, set
up in holy temples, and to be consecrated by inviolable
religion.
Since these are the facts, when you speak of the novelty
of our religious observances, do your own not come to mind,
and do you not trouble yourselves to see when your gods
originated, what sort of origins they had, what caused them to
be, or from what roots they have burst forth into the light of
day? Moreover, how shameful, yes, how shameless to criti-
cize another for what you see yourself doing, to seek an
occasion for depreciation and incrimination which can in turn
be used as counter-charge against you!
The pagan religion is not more than two thoiisand
years old.
71. But what we are doing is new: and what you are
doing is outdated and too encumbered by antiquity. And how
does that either help you or detract from our cause and
argument? The thing which we cherish is new, and some
day it, too, will become old: what you are doing is old but in
the times when it began, it was new and suddenly there. The
authority of a religion, however, is not to be appraised in
terms of time but by the divinity it worships and it is proper
for you to examine not on what day you begin to worship
but what.
" Four 44 hundred years ago your religion," he says, " did
not exist/'
And your gods did not exist two thousand years ago.
" By what computations or what calculations can that be
deduced? "
Not by difficult ones, not by abstruse ones, but by those
184 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
which anyone may see and feel, as the saying goes, in his
hands. 441
Who Begot Jupiter with his brothers? 442
" Saturn/' as you say, " sprung from Caelus 443 and He-
cate/ 44 on the marriage couch with Ops/'
Who begot Picus, 445 father of Faunus and grandfather of
Latinus?
" Saturn/' as you likewise hand down in your writings and
authors. Therefore, if this is so, it follows that Picus and
Jupiter are united to each other by the ties of kinship, since
they were begotten from one blood and one seed.
" Obviously it is as said."
How many generations are there from Jupiter and Picus
down to Latinus?
" Three, as the line of descent shows/'
Are you willing to agree that Faunus, Latinus, and Picus,
lived a hundred and twenty years each? As you know, be-
yond this it is denied that the life of man can be prolonged. 446
" The reckoning is correct and clear."
There have been then full three hundred and sixty years
since their time?
" The fact is as the calculation shows."
Whose father-in-law was Latinus?
"Aeneas'."
Aeneas 447 was the father of whom?
" Of <Ascanius,> the founder of the town of Alba/'
How long was there a kingdom at Alba?
" Almost four hundred and twenty years."
What age do the annals indicate for the City of Rome?
" It is a thousand and fifty 448 years old, or not much less
than that."
Therefore, from Jupiter, who is the brother of Picus and
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 185
also the father of the lesser and the remaining gods, to the
present time, there are nearly two thousand years/ 49 or if
we give good measure, fully that.
Since this cannot be refuted, not only is the religion which
you follow shown to Le recently arisen, but the gods them-
selves, to whom you pile up bulls and other victims with the
risk of corruption, 450 hitherto are infants and small fry who
ought still to be fed from breasts and on drops of milk. 451
Christianity is not really new \)ut only recently
revealed.
72. But your religious observances precede the one we
espouse by many years, and for that reason they are truer
because fortified by the authority of age. And of what use
is it that they are senior by ever so many years, since they
began at a specific time, or of what length are two thousand
years compared with so many millennia?
And lest, however, we seem to betray our cause by such
long hedging, tell us, if it is not asking too much: does the
Almighty and First God seem to you to be something new,
and those who reverently worship Him to be devising and
introducing religious observances that are unheard of, un-
known, suddenly on the scene? Is there anything older than
He? Or can anything be found that precedes Him in being,
time, name? Is He not the only one uncreated, immortal,
and alone eternal? Who is the Head and Fountain of things?
Is not He Himself? To whom does eternity not owe the very
fact that it is called eternity? Is it not to Him?
Is not the fact that the ages proceed in infinite succession
effected from His eternity? This is beyond question and true.
Therefore, not what we follow is new, but late in time we
1 86 AKNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
have learned wKat we should follow <and> cherish, or where
it is proper to place our hope of safety and to apply the aids
leading to salvation. Not yet had He shone forth who was to
point out the way to the straying 452 and to let in the light of
understanding to those standing in deepest darkness/ 53 and
to strike away the blindness of their ignorance.
Foreign deities have been introduced into the
pagan pantheon.
73. But is a charge of this sort turned alone against <us>?
Tell me, did you after the consulship of Piso and Gabinius 464
not hring into the number of your gods the Egyptian divini-
ties named Serapis 455 and Isis? 456 Yes, did you not begin to
know and be acquainted with and to hallow with inviolable 45T
sanctity the Phrygian mother/ 58 said to have been founded by
Midas 459 or Dardanus, when the Punic Hannibal 46 was
plundering the wealth of Italy and claiming world dominion?
Is it not an established fact that the rites of Mother Ceres 461
are called " Greek," because they were unknown to you,
taken over a little while ago, their name witnessing to their
very newness? Do not the writings of the learned 462 contain
the fact that the rituals of Pompilius 463 are unacquainted
with the name of Apollo? From which fact it appears and is
clear that he was also unknown to you, but afterwards at
some later time began to be known.
Should anyone, therefore, ask you why you have so lately
undertaken the worship of those divinities to whom we have
made allusion, it is certain that you will answer either:
<( because we were recently unaware that they belonged to the
gods," or " because now we have been put in mind of them
by the seers," or " because in most adverse circumstances we
have been preserved by their kindness and assistance."
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 187
But if you consider this to be a proper answer, then con-
sider that from our side, too, a reply was made after the same
fashion. Our religion has just now come into existence, for
just now has He arrived who was sent to reveal it to us, to
lead us into its truth, to show us what God is, to call us away
from things that are merely imaginary to His worship.
The reason for the late revelation is unknown to man.
74. " And why/' he says, " did God the King and Prince
decide that barely a few hours ago, as it is said, Christ should
be sent from the heights of heaven as Savior? " 464
On the other hand, we ask you also: what cause, what
reason is there, that sometimes the seasons do not return in
their months, but winters occur later, summer and autumn
later also? 465 Why does it occasionally happen that after
the crops have been parched and the harvests destroyed, rains
fall, which should have come down while things were still
unharmed, serving the needs of the times? Rather, let us
ask this: if Hercules had to be born, if Aesculapius, 466
Mercury, Liber, and some others, so that they could be added
to the councils of the gods and bring something useful to
mortals, why were they given forth by Jupiter so late, that
only the period of those who came after would know them
while the past age of their predecessors remained unac-
quainted with them? You will say that there was some
reason. Here also there was a reason, therefore, why the
Savior of our race should come not recently but today.
" What, then, is the reason? "
We are not denying that we do not know. It is impossible
for anyone to see the mind of God, or how He has arranged
His affairs. Man, a blind animal and one who does not know
himself, has no means whatever by which to arrive at what
13 T
1 88 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
ought to be done, when, or in what manner; the Father of all
things Himself knows, the Ruler 467 and Lord alone knows.
Nor, if I shall be unable to explain to you the causes why
something takes place in this way or that, does it straightway
follow that what was done becomes undone and that a thing
loses its plausibility which was shown to be beyond doubt
by so many kinds of miracles 46S [and by the powers] of
powers.
Christ came in the fullness of time.
75. You may object and rejoin: "Why was the Savior
sent so late? "
In limitless, everlasting ages nothing at all must be called
late. Where there is no end and beginning, nothing is too
early, nothing late. For time is recognized as such from be-
ginnings and endings which a succession and unmeasured
duration of ages cannot have.
Moreover, what if the very situation/ 69 to which it was
necessary to bring help, demanded precisely that as the
opportune time? What if ancient times had one kind of
circumstances, following ages another? What if it was neces-
sary to give aid to the ancients in one way, to care for later
men in another? Do you not hear, remembering your own
writings, that there once were men who were demigods,
heroes, with enormously huge bodies? Do you not read of
infants a hundred feet long 470 giving forth a wail on the
breasts of their mothers, whose bones dug up 4T1 in different
parts of the world made their discoverers hardly credit them
as the remains of human limbs?
It can be, therefore, that Almighty God, who alone is God,
sent Christ forth only when the race of men began to be more
frail and our nature weaker. If what has been done today,
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 189
could have been done thousands of years ago, the Supreme
King 472 would have done it: or if these same thousands of
years hence it were necessary for what has been done today
to be fulfilled, nothing forced God to refrain from waiting
the necessary measures of time. His affairs are administered
in fixed ways and what once has been determined to be done
cannot be superseded in any way.
Why does God permit the persecution of the
Christians?
76. " Why, 473 therefore/' he says, " if you serve the Al-
mighty God and trust that he has care for your health and
safety, why does He suffer you to suffer through so many
persecutions and to undergo every kind of penalty and
punishment? "
And now let us ask in turn why, in the face of the fact
that you worship so many gods and establish for them holy
temples, fashion images of gold, slaughter herds of animals,
pile up all the boxes of incense upon full altars, why you
do not spend your days immune to so many dangers and
storms, by which fatal fortunes of so many kinds press you
each day. Why, I say, do your gods fail to avert from you
so many kinds of diseases and ailments, shipwrecks, catas-
trophes, fires, epidemics, barrenness, loss of what you have
pledged/ 74 and confiscation of property; dissensions, wars,
feuds; captures of cities and enslavements, with loss of free-
born rights?
But to us also God grants no help at all in such misfortunes.
The reason is plain and clear. Nothing has been promised
us by God in respect to this life, 475 nor has any aid been
pledged to us or help decreed to those established in the husk
of this petty flesh. 476 Indeed, we have been taught to consider
190 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
and value as of small import all the threats of fortune, what-
ever they are, and if ever any particularly serious How assails
usand this must come to an endto acquiesce willingly 477
in misfortune and not to fear or flee so that the more easilv
s
we may put off our bondage of body and escape the shadows
of blindness.
Persecution is really a deliverance from ike body.
77. And so that bitterness of persecution of which you
speak is our deliverance, not persecution, nor will our being
harassed bring punishment to us but will bring us out to the
light of freedom. It is the same as if some stupid dullard
should think that a man put into a prison <without> an
exit 478 was not receiving, when subjected to questioning by
torture, penalties sufficiently severe and frightful, unless he
rage against the prison itself, demolish it and burn the roof,
wall, doors, and strip off, throw down, dash down the other
parts of the building, ignorant of the fact that thus light was
being given to the one he thought he was injuring, and that
the accursed darkness was being removed. In the same way
you do not snatch life from us by flames, banishments, tor-
tures, beasts, with which you tear in pieces and rend our
bodies, but you take hides and skins, 479 unaware that to the
extent you attack and continue to rage against these our
shadows and forms, to that extent you free us from tight and
heavy bonds and, cutting through the knots, make us fly
upward to the light.
Amid persecutions let us entrust ourselves to God
alone.
78. Wherefore, men, cease by senseless investigations to
obstruct your hopes, nor if anything is otherwise than you
BOOK Two: ATTACK ON PHILOSOPHY 191
think, ought you to trust your own beliefs rather than an
august thing. The times, full of dangers, press us, and deadly
penalties threaten. 480 Let us flee to the God of salvation 481
and not insist on the reason for the gift offered. When it is
the salvation of our souls and ourselves that is involved, some-
thing must be done even without a reason, as Arrian 482
assents to what Epictetus said. Though we were to hesitate,
though we were to doubt and were to suspect that what is
said is not fully worthy of belief: let us entrust ourselves to
God, and let not our unbelief prevail more with us than the
greatness of His name and power. Otherwise, while we of
ourselves are seeking for ourselves arguments to make that
seem false which we want 483 to be and strive to make true,
the last day may steal upon us and we may be found in the
jaws of the enemy death. 4
484
BOOK THREE
PAGAN GODS ARE REALLY ANTHROPOMORPHIC
The Christian religion needs no defense from
'pagan witnesses.
1 . All these charges, or to label them for what they actu-
ally are, these diatribes, have long ago been answered with
all the detail and accuracy required, by men who are masters
in this field and who are entitled to know the truth in the
matter; * and no single point of any question has been passed
over without being subjected to rebuttal in a thousand ways
and on the strongest grounds. Therefore, there is no need to
linger longer on this part of the case. For neither is truth
unable to stand without supporters, nor will the fact that the
Christian religion has found many to agree with it and has
gained weight from human approval prove it true. It is satis-
fied to rest its case upon its own strength and upon the basis
of its own truth. It is not despoiled of its force though it have
no defender, no, not even if every tongue oppose it and
struggle against it and, united in hatred, conspire to destroy
faith in it.
Resumption of the argument after the digression
on the souL
2, Now let us go back to the point which we had to
abandon a little while ago, 2 to prevent our defense, if inter-
rupted any longer, from being said to have conceded to our
192
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 193
detractors the prize of a proven charge. They have this to
put forward:
" If religion means anything to you, why do you neither
worship the other gods with us nor reverence them nor join
our 3 nations in common sacrifices and a united religious
ceremonial? "
Tentatively we can say this: in attending to the worship of
the Godhead, the First God the First God, I repeat the
Father of things and the Lord, the Establisher and Governor
of all things, is enough for us. In Him we worship everything
that must be worshipped. We pray to what we ought to
pray to. We serve with the acts of reverence what demands
the homage of reverence. For when we hold to the Head of
divinity itself from which the divinity of everything divine is
derived, we think it superfluous to <go> through them all one
by one individually: we simply do not know who they really
are and what they are called and, furthermore, we cannot
clearly understand or establish how many they are.
If the gods really exist, Christians worship them in
rendering homage to the Supreme God.
3. And as in earthly kingdoms we are forced by no neces-
sity to show reverence by name to those who, along with the
sovereigns, compose the royal families, but whatever respect
is attached to them is tacitly understood to be implied in hom-
age to the kings themselves, so in precisely the same manner,
these gods, whoever they are whom you suggest for our wor-
ship, if they are royal in descent and are sprung from the
primal Head, though they receive no worship from us by
name, nevertheless understand that they receive homage in
common with their king and are included in acts of reverence
accorded Him.
194 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
And this, let me state, has been put thus only if it is clear
and agreed that in addition to the King and Prince Himself
there are other divine individuals 4 who when sorted out and
counted, form, as it were, a sort of plebeian mass.
And please do not show us, instead of gods themselves,
likenesses of gods in the holy temples and, at that, images
which you also understand but 5 refuse and are unwilling to
admit are shaped from the commonest clay and the childish
fabrications of craftsmen. And when we speak of what con-
cerns divinity, we demand you show us this, that there are
other gods, 6 in nature, power, name not such as are merely
represented in visible images which we see, but in that sub-
stance in which it is fitting that the power that goes with so
great a name ought to be believed to exist,
Where and how did the ^agan gods receive their
names?
4. But in this part of the discussion I do not purpose to
tarry lest we seem to be wishing to stir up conflicts of the
most serious proportions and to sow the seeds of riotous
contests.
Let the mob 7 of divinities exist, as you state; let there be
countless families of gods we agree, assent, shut our eyes,
nor do we by any form of questioning puncture the doubtful
and equivocal position which you hold. Nevertheless, we
demand to know from you and we ask you the source of
your information and how you came to grasp it whether
these gods in whose existence you believe and whom you
worship, are actually in heaven; or whether it is some others,
whose existence and identity still remain to be heard of.
For it is indeed possible that those you do not think of as
existing do exist and that those you are sure of are nowhere
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 195
to be found. You know, you have never flown up to the stars
of heaven, looked at the face and features of each, and,
remembering the gods you saw there, began to worship them
as known and seen.
But again we here ask also whether they got from you these
names by which you call them, or assumed them themselves
on the days of purification. 8 If these names are divine and
celestial, who told them to you? But if they got these names
of theirs from you, how could you give appellations to those
you never saw, 9 and of whom you did not have the slightest
knowledge as to what they were or who they were?
How many pagan gods are there?
5. But as you wish and believe and have persuaded
yourselves let these be gods; let them also be called by those
names by which the common herd 10 considers them 1X to be
listed. But how can you decide 12 if the ones known by names
complete the census of this class or whether there are any
unknown to you and who were never introduced to your
worship ls and acquaintance? Evidently, it is not readily
known whether their multitude is fixed and certain as to
number 14 or whether it is without any maximum number and
not limited at all. Let us, for example, imagine that you
worship a thousand gods no, let it be five thousand: but in
the universe 1S there are possibly a hundred thousand gods!
There can be more. Yes, as we said a moment ago, it is
possible that the sum total of the gods is unnumbered,
unlimited. 16
Therefore, either you also are lacking in piety who omit
your duties toward all but a few gods, or, if you ask pardon
for your ignorance of the others, you will win the same par-
196 AKNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
don for us also, when in precisely the same way we refrain
from worshipping those we do not know in the least.
Criticism of anthwpomorpliic gods.
6. And yet let no one think that we are perversely un-
willing to take upon ourselves allegiance to the other divini-
ties, whoever they are. For we raise up devout spirits and our
hands in supplication, and we do not refuse to go wherever
you invite us, provided only we learn who those " divine
beings " are whom you urge upon us and who may rightly
be associated with the Supreme King and Prince in worship.
" Saturn/' he says, " and Janus are such; Minerva, Juno,
Apollo, Venus, Triptolemus, Hercules, and the rest 17 to
whom antiquity in reverence dedicated magnificent temples
in almost all the cities/'
Perhaps you could have summoned us to the worship of
those " divinities/' had you not yourselves been the first to
fabricate such stories about them with the foulness of shame-
ful fancies, as not only to smear their reputation but to
demonstrate by the characters you assigned them the fact that
they do not exist at all. 18
For in the first place we cannot be induced to believe this,
that that 19 immortal and most extraordinary nature goes by
a division of sexes, one part males, the other part females. 20
This point, indeed, has long ago been fully expounded by
men of genius 21 both in the Roman and in the Greek lan-
guages, and Tullius, 22 before all others the most eloquent of
the Roman race, having feared no hostility from a charge of
impiety, has nobly, firmly, and freely shown with greater
piety what he felt about such fancy. Now, if you proceed to
accept from him judgments corresponding to fact rather than
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 197
his brilliant language, this case would have reached its con-
cluding phase, nor would it demand of us, who compared
with him are mere youngsters, any ' second pleadings/ 23 as
they are called.
Some would burn not only Christian books but also
Cicero's.
7. But why should I say that men seek him out for word-
catching 24 and brilliance of diction, when I know that there
are not a few who loathe and shun his books on this topic 25
and are unwilling to lend their ears to some reading which
would refute their prejudiced opinions; when I hear others
angrily muttering and saying that " the Senate ought to
decree the destruction 2S of those writings " by which the
truth of the Christian religion is demonstrated and the influ-
ence of antiquity is counteracted?
Yes, if you are certain that you are saying something about
your gods which has been shown by examination to be true,
then by all means convict Cicero of error; refute, rebut, and
prove that he is forever given to rash and impious talk. For
assuredly to do away with written works and to want to
suppress a text is not to defend the gods but to fear the
evidence of the truth.
Christians do not believe that God has sex.
8. Now, lest some heedless person should in turn falsely
accuse us, as though we believe God whom we worship to be
male 2T the reason being, of course, that when we speak of
Him we employ the masculine gender let him not under-
stand sex but that His name and designation is so expressed
according to the usage of everyday speech. For God is not
male 2S but His name is masculine in gender, something you
198 AKNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
in your religion cannot say. You are accustomed in your
prayers to say " whether thou art god or goddess/' 29 a doubt-
ful expression which makes clear from the very distinction
that you attribute sex to the gods.
We therefore cannot be induced to believe that the gods
have bodies; 30 for, if they are males and females, bodies must
be distinguished by separation of genders. 81 But who with
ever so small a trace of sense does not know that that Founder
of all earthly creatures has established and fashioned the
sexes of different genders for no other reason than that
through marital intercourse of bodies, a thing that is prone
to fall and lapse may be perpetuated and renewed through an
eternal succession? 32
9. Now, then, shall we say that gods beget, that gods are
born, and that they have been given reproductive organs to
make them equal to the task of bearing offspring, 33 and that
with the arrival of each new spawning, a recurring substitu-
tion might supply what the former age took away"? Well, if
such is the case, that is, if the gods above procreate and
under 34 these laws of sex live together and are immortal, not
growing impotent with the frigidity of old age, the whole
universe then ought to be full of gods and countless heavens
incapable of accommodating their multitude, for, on the one
hand, they themselves are constantly begetting, and, on the
other hand, increased through offspring of offspring, their
numberlessness is ever multiplied. Or if, as is proper, the
obscenity of intercourse is far from the gods, what cause or
reason will be pointed out why they are distinguished from
each other in those places by which the sexes customarily
recognize each other, prompted by their own desires? It is
improbable that these anatomical organs exist without a
purpose 3S or that nature wanted to play a wicked trick 3e on
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 199
them by affixing to them these parts for which there would
be no use. As hands, feet, eyes, and other members have
been established for certain purposes, each for its own duty,
so it is logical to believe that these parts have been provided
for the performance of their proper function; or one must
confess that in the bodies of the gods there is something
purposeless, fashioned vainly and uselessly.
10. What have you to say, you holy and undefiled priests
of the religions? Do the gods, then, have sexes, and do they
carry about them the hideousness of the genital organs, to
mention which by their names is disgraceful for modest
mouths? What, then, remains for us except to believe that
after the manner of filthy quadrupeds they are transported
into madnesses of passions, enter with raging desires into
mutual embraces and in the end, their bodies broken and
dissipated, become feeble through the disintegration of lust?
And since there are functions peculiar to the female sex,
we must then believe that goddesses, too, fulfill the conditions
that bind them when the months roll round, conceive and
remain pregnant with nausea, suffer miscarriages, 37 and in
premature delivery sometimes give birth to seven-month
infants.
O pure, o holy divinity, and separated and detached from
every blot of shame! Lust is eager and burns to see in those
great halls 3S and in the palaces of heaven, gods and goddesses
with bodies uncovered and naked Ceres, " full-breasted/' as
the muse of Lucretius 39 says, " from lacchus "; the Helles-
pontian Priapus 40 among the virgin and mother goddesses,
carrying about the things that are ever ready for the encounter
of battles. It is eager, I say, to see pregnant goddesses, god-
desses with child, with their bellies daily swelling in size;
some faltering with the irksomeness of their inner burden;
200 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
otters giving birth after long delay and seeking the midwife's
hands; still others shrieking, writhing as agonizing pangs and
acute pains stab them, and through it all imploring the aid
of Juno Lucina. 41
Is it not far better to abuse, to revile the gods and to heap
other indignities upon them than under pretense of piety to
stoop to imagining such monstrous ideas about them?
Not Christians lout pagans thus insult the gods,
1 1 . And you dare to charge us with offending the gods,
although, if the matter come to trial, it will be found that
such offense most certainly is on your side and that it in-
volves a disgrace <other> than you think! 42 For if the gods,
as you say, are moved with anger and mentally grow hot with
indignation, 43 why should we not think they take it badly,
very badly indeed, that you ascribe to them sexes with which
dogs and pigs are formed, and that, since you believe this,
this is precisely the way you represent them and that you
make a disgraceful spectacle of them?
Such, then, being the case, it is you who are the cause of
all woes, you urge on the gods, you arouse them to inflict
the lands with every evil and daily to raise up new misfor-
tunes by which they can take vengeance in irritation at suf-
fering so many wrongs and slanders from you. By slanders,
I say, and wrongs, which, partly in your shameful tales, partly
in the disgraceful beliefs, your theologians, 44 your poets, you
yourselves, too, celebrate in shameful ceremonies, you will
find that human affairs are ruined and that the gods have
thrown away the helm, if indeed the guidance and disposition
of men's fortunes is their concern. For with us they certainly
have no reason to be angry whom they see and perceive
neither worshipping nor mocking them, as it is said, and
BOOK THREE : THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 20 1
thinking, believing much more worthily than you concerning
the dignity of their name.
The shapes of the gods are anthropomorphic.
12. Enough about sex. 45 Now let us come to the appear-
ance 46 and shapes by which you believe that the gods above
are defined, yes, in which you fashion them and place them
in the most splendid quarters of the temples.
And here let no one bring up against us Jewish fables 47
and those of the sect of the Sadducees, 48 as though we also
attribute forms 49 to God, for this is thought to be said in
their writings and corroborated as if certain 50 and authori-
tative. These stories have nothing to do with us, absolutely
nothing in common with us, or if, <as> is thought, they do
share something with us, you must seek out teachers of
higher wisdom and learn from them how you may best
remove the clouds that obscure those writings.
Our opinion on this matter is as follows : all divine essence,
which neither at any time began to be nor at any time will
come to an end of life, is without features of body and pos-
sesses nothing like the forms by which the external delimita-
tion of members usually defines and bounds the body's frame.
For whatever is like this, we think is mortal and subject to
perishing, and we do not believe anything can attain to life
eternal which an unavoidable end hems in, however remote
the terms of its existence.
13. But as for you, you are not satisfied to enfold the gods
in the measured limits of forms you even confine them to
human shape, 51 and what is far more degrading, you restrain
them to the configuration 52 of earthly bodies.
What are we to say then? That the gods bear a head com-
202 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
pressed 53 into a smooth roundness, bound to the back and to
the chest by a network of muscles, and that for the necessary
bending of the neck it is supported by combinations of verte-
brae and by a bony foundation? Now, if we assent to this
as true, it follows that they have ears pierced by curved
windings, rolling eyeballs, shaded by fringes of eyebrows; a
raised conduit, 54 nostrils, through which the snivelling and
air may pass; teeth for the mastication of foods, of three
kinds 55 and adapted to a threefold function; hands to serve
for tasks, made facile of motion by jointed fingers and flexible
elbows; feet for supporting their bodies, regulating their
steps, and prompting the initial motions of walking.
But if there are these obvious things, logically there must
also be those which are hidden away under the framework of
the ribs by the skin and by the fatty membranes- the wind-
pipes, stomachs, spleens, lungs, bladders, livers, tracts of
winding intestines and the veins of scarlet blood coursing
through all the flesh and joined with the arteries which bear
the air. 56
1 4. Do the bodies of the denizens of heaven possibly lack
these ugly things? And because they abstain from mortal
foods, 57 are we to believe that like little ones they are tooth-
less, and are without all inner organs, inflated like bladders,
hanging there, because of the emptiness of their swollen
bodies? If this is so, you must ponder carefully whether the
gods are all alike or have different shapes and contours. 58
For if each and every one has an identical shape, it is not
unreasonable to suppose that they make mistakes and err in
recognizing each other. If, however, they differ in features,
one must then understand these dissimilarities to have been
given them for no other reason than that they might be able
to recognize each other by the peculiarities of distinguishing
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 203
marks. So it must be said that some among them are big-
heads, 59 beetle-brows, broad-heads, blubber-lips; 60 other are
long-chinned, have moles and big noses; some have broad
nostrils, others are snub-nosed; some with bulging jaws or
chubby-faced 61 by reason of their puffed cheeks; dwarfed,
tall, middling, lean, plump, fat; here some curly-locks with
crinkled hair; others with shining bald pates. Your workshops
also indicate and declare that our opinion is not false, since in
fashioning, forming the gods, you represent some with long
hair, others as smooth-shaven, [calm] 62 old men, youths,
boys, swarthy, fair-skinned, tawny, half -naked, uncovered, or,
lest cold cause discomfort, covered with flowing garments
thrown over them.
15. Does any man, affected even by a tinge of reason,
believe that hair and down grow on the bodies of the gods;
that among them there is the distinction of age; that they go
clad with various types of coverings and clothes and shield
themselves from heat and cold?
But whoever believes this true, necessarily also accepts
this as true, that the gods are fullers, 63 barbers, who wash
their sacred garments or trim the locks when matted with
the fleece of growing hairs. Is it not shameful, full of dis-
respect and impiety, to assign to the gods characteristics of
mortal and fallible creatures; to distinguish them with those
parts which no decent man would dare to mention, to dwell
on, or to picture in his imagination, without a shudder at
such height of indecency?
Is this that contempt you show, that proud wisdom, with
which you despise us as ignorant 6 * and think all knowledge
of things lies exposed to you? You laugh at the mysteries 65
of the Egyptians because upon the divine causes 68 they in-
grafted the forms of dumb creatures, and because they wor-
14 T
204 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
ship 67 these same images with much incense and with the
rest of the paraphernalia of rituals: you yourselves worship
images of men as if they were powers vested with divinity;
and you are not ashamed to give them the features of an
earthly creature, 68 to blame others for their stupid error, and
to he caught erring on the same point.
If the gods are not anthropomorphic, to represent
them as such is insulting.
1 6. But, 69 perchance, you will say that the gods of course
have other shapes and that you have attached to them the
appearance of mortals for the sake of honor and form. But
this is much more insulting than from ignorance to have made
some mistake. For, were you to say that you had given the
divine the shapes which your conjecture believed they pos-
sessed, it would have been less wrong to have made that
mistake upon a belief by presumption. But now, when you
believe one thing and fashion another, you both insult those
to whom you attribute what you admit does not exist in them,
and you reveal yourself as lacking in piety when you worship
what you fashion, not what you think exists and in very truth
really does exist.
If asses, dogs, pigs possessed something of human wisdom
and the skill of fashioning things, and at the same time
wished to do us reverence by some worship and to honor us
by the dedication of statues, how great flames of passion,
what storms of indignation would they arouse in us if they
wanted our images to bear the shape of their bodies? 70
How great flames of passion, I say, would they provoke,
would they fan, if the founder of the City, Romulus, were to
stand there with an ass's head; 71 if the holy Pompilius 72 had
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 205
a dog's head; if under the likeness of a pig the name of Cato 73
or Marcus Cicero were inscribed?
So, then, you think that your stupidity is not laughed at by
your divinities if they do laughor, since you think that
they are capable of anger, that they do not rage, do not grow
furious, and that for so great wrongs and insults they do not
wish to be avenged and to hurl upon you what wrath is wont
to hurl and the bitterness of hatred to threaten! How much
better to have given them the forms of elephants, panthers,
or tigers, bulls, and horses! For what is there beautiful in man
what, I ask, admirable or becoming, except that some writer
wanted him to possess in common with the ape? 7 *
The Christians really do not know many things
about God's shape, but are confident He is not
anthropomorphic.
1 7. " But if , ;> 75 they say, " you do not like our view, you
point out, you tell us, with what form a god is endowed."
If you wish to hear an opinion which is the true one God
either has no form, or if He is to be identified with some
form, we certainly do not know what it is. And assuredly we
consider it no disgrace not to know what we never saw, 76
nor are we therefore debarred from refuting the opinion of
others merely because on this point we ourselves have no
belief to offer. For just as, if the world should be said to
be made of glass, of silver, iron, or to be rolled together and
molded out of brittle clay, we would not hesitate to maintain
that this is false, although we do not know of what material
it is: so when the discussion involves the appearance of God,
we prove that it is not what you maintain, even though we
are unable to say what it is.
206 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
1 8. " But tell me, then/' some one will say, " does a god
not hear? Does he not speak? Does he not see? Does he not
observe what is placed before him? "
In His 7T own way, possibly, not in ours. For in a matter
so important we cannot know the truth at all or ferret it out
by guesswork, which, in our case, it is clear, is unfounded,
hazardous, and like empty dreams.
If, for example, we said that He sees in the same ways by
which we also see, one must then understand Him to have
lids above His eyeballs; that He winks, blinks, sees by rays
or images; or what is common to all eyes, sees nothing at all
without the presence of light from another source.
This same thing must be said in like fashion about hearing
and the form of speech and the utterance of words. If He
hears by ears, these He also has penetrated by winding
channels through which the sound can creep to report the
meaning of speech; or if His words pour forth from a mouth,
He has lips with teeth, by the manifold contact and motions
of which the tongue articulates sounds and fashions the voice
into words.
One must not even dare to impute virtues to God
because He is ineffable.
19. And if you do not refuse to listen to the conclusions
of our thought, far from attributing to God bodily character-
istics, we are even afraid to ascribe to so great a thing the
distinctions of soul and the very virtues in which it is scarcely
granted a few to excel.
Who will say, for instance, that God is brave, steadfast,
upright, wise? Who, that He has integrity; who, that He is
temperate; who, indeed, that He knows anything, under-
stands anything, takes care of anything? Who, that He
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 207
guides to definite moral ends of their duties the decisions by
which He acts? All these good qualities are human, and
because they are the opposites of the vices, have acquired
the praiseworthy reputation they have.
And who is so dullhearted, stupid, as to say that God is
great in terms of human good or that the reason why He sur-
passes all others in the majesty of His name is that He lacks
the ugliness of vices? Whatever you say about God, what-
ever you conceive in the silence of your mind, passes over and
is corrupted into human applications nor can it have the mark
of a meaning of its own because it is expressed in our own
words and words designed for human affairs. There is only
one thing most certainly understood by man concerning the
nature of God: your realization and conviction that mortal
man's speech is powerless to set forth anything about Him.
The second insult to the gods: that they are skilled
in arts and crafts.
20. And this insult about the shapes and sexes is the
first which you noble defenders, indeed, and guardians of
religion offer your divinities. But what implication is there
in what comes next, 78 your contention that some of the gods
are mechanics, 79 others physicians, 80 others wool-workers, 81
sailors, 82 guitar-players, 88 flute-players, 84 hunters, 86 shepherds, 86
and all that was wanting farmers! 87
" That god," he says, " is a musician, and this other one
is a soothsayer/' 88 Yes, indeed the other gods are not <rnu-
sicians> 89 and from their lack of skill and their ignorance of
the future they do not know how to foretell what will come
to pass! 90 One is instructed in the arts of midwifery, another
has been taught the learning of the physicians. Are they,
therefore, each competent in his own province and when
208 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
called to aid, can they give no assistance in other fields? This
one is eloquent of speech and quite adept in the construction
of periods, 91 but the others are stupid and cannot say any-
thing elegantly, if a speech is to be made?
21, And, I ask, what reason is there, what necessity so
relentless, what cause, that the gods above should know and
have these handicrafts like common mechanics? In heaven, 92
for instance, there is singing and playing of music, so that
the nine 93 graceful 94 sisters may harmonize pauses and
rhythms of tones. In the motions of the stars 95 there are
forests, there are thickets, there are groves, <that> Diana may
be regarded the mighty mistress of hunting expeditions. The
gods are ignorant of the future and they live and pass their
time according to the fates allotted to them, that the La-
toman 96 seer may unfold and reveal to them what tomorrow
or the hour may bring to them. He himself is inspired by
another god and is urged on and shaken by the power of a
O O / JU
greater divinity, so that he may rightly be said and held to be
a diviner. 97 The gods are seized by diseases and can be
wounded, 98 harassed by anything, so that in a given case the
Epidaurian helper " may give them aid. They labor, they
bear, so that Juno Lucina may soothe and take away the
trying pangs of childbirth. They occupy themselves with
farming or devote themselves to the military profession so
that Vulcan, the master of fire, may forge them swords 10
or hammer out the implements of the countryside. They
need the covering of garments so that the Tritonian maiden 101
may diligently weave cloth and give them to wear, as the
season demands, either triple-twilled tunics or silken ones.
They make accusations and refute charges so that Atlas'
descendant 102 may bear off the prize of eloquence, acquired
by assiduous practice.
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 209
22. " But you are mistaken/' he says, " and are in error,
for the gods are not themselves artisans but suggest these arts
to the talents of men and, so that life may be better provided
for, equipped, they hand on to mortals the knowledge
required/'
But he who gives any training to the unknowing and
ignorant, and strives to make him efficient in the knowledge
of some work, must first himself know what he has decided
the other should cultivate. For no one is capable of imparting
any science without having mastered the fundamentals of
what he teaches and without grasping its method through
incessant practice. 103
The gods are therefore the first artisans, whether because
they themselves, as you say, endow with knowledge, or be-
cause, being immortal and never begotten, 104 they surpass
everything on earth in the duration of time. 105
This, then, is the question: since there is no place or need
for these arts among the gods, and their nature requires no
ingenuity or knowledge of any craft, why should you say that
they are skilled, are experts, some in one capacity, <some>
in another, so that, owing to a distinction according to what
is known of the sciences, one is superior to the other?
Inconsistencies in the theory that the gods merely
preside over the arts and crafts hut do not practice
them.
23. Well, 106 perhaps you say the gods are not artisans;
but they preside over these arts, care for them; yes, everything
we perform, carry on, has been placed under their protection
and by their foresight they make sure that it has a good and
happy outcome.
This statement would, indeed, seem to have merit and
ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
plausibility, if everything we undertake, carry on, or all we
risk in human business, always progressed according to wish
and purpose. But since every day things turn out to the
contrary, and the results of actions do not correspond to the
desired aim, it is a delusion to say that over us as guardians
are gods who are but fictions of our imagination, whose
recognition is not that of certified truth.
<Matuta> m provides 10S safe voyages to those traversing
the seas; but 109 why has the raging sea so often cast up the
flotsam of dire shipwrecks? Consus 110 supplies our thoughts
with helpful and trustworthy advice; and yet, why does an
unexpected change constantly effect outcomes contrary to the
desired ones? Pales and Inuus llx preside as guardians over
flocks of cattle and sheep; and yet, why do they, with harm-
bringing inactivity, fail to see to it that fierce epidemics and
pestilent diseases are turned away from the summer pastures?
And that mother 112 Flora, venerated in lewd games, looks
after the blossoming of the fields; but why does the baneful
frost 113 daily sear buds and luscious vegetation and destroy
them? Juno has been made the patroness of childbirths and
gives aid to pregnant mothers; but why do thousands of them
perish each day, snatched away in murderous travails? To
Vulcan belongs the guardianship of fire and the stuff which
feeds it has been placed under his direction; but why are
holy edifices and sections of cities permitted to fall to ashes
devoured by flames?
The Pythian 1U grants the knowledge of divination to the
soothsayers; but why does he often give and pass off answers
that are equivocal, doubtful, and involved in misty obscuri-
ties? Aesculapius 115 is in charge of the profession and art of
healing; but why cannot more kinds of ailments and diseases
be brought through to recovery, whereas, instead, at the hands
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 211
of those who care for them, they even become worse: 5 Mer-
cury takes care of the arenas, 116 presides over boxing bouts
and wrestling matches; but why does he not make invincible
all over whom he has charge? 11T Why, when he is placed
over the duty of a single task, does he suffer some to share
in victory, others to be laughed at for the ignominy of their
weakness?
Criticism of the theory that the gods benefit only
worshippers.
24. " To the tutelar divinities/' he says, " no one makes
supplication and for this reason one after the other fails us
in the services and helps associated with them."
We may say, then, that unless they receive incense and
salted barley meal, the gods cannot do good, and unless they
see their little altars besmeared with the blood of cattle, they
abandon and abdicate their guardianships? 11S And yet, up
to very recently 119 I used to think that the benevolent acts
of the divinities were spontaneous and that from them flowed
the gifts of kindness, voluntary and unexpected. Yes and
the King of the Heavens, 120 is He perhaps solicited by any
libation or sacrifice to bestow upon the tribes of mortals all
those conveniences which go with life? Does God not grant
the life-giving heat of the sun and the nighttime, the winds,
rains, harvests to all alike, to the good, the wicked, <the
just>/ 21 the unjust, to slaves, the poor, the rich? This is the
property of a god powerful and true, to offer the benefactions
unasked to beings weary 122 and weak and ever hemmed in by
hardship of many kinds. Verily, to grant what you are asked
on the basis of sacrifices performed is not to help those who
ask but to sell the largess of your own kindness. We men play
and trifle about so great a matter, and having forgotten who
212 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
God is, and what the magnificence of His name, associate
with the tutelar divinities whatever base or sordid thing we
can invent in our morbid credulity.
The pagans worship gods disgraceful and ridiculous.
25. " Anointings/' he says, " are presided over by Unxia, 123
the loosening of bridal knots by Cinxia; the most holy
Victua 12i and Potua 125 take care of eating and drinking/' 126
O extraordinary and unique interpretation of the powers
of divinities! If brides did not smear the doorposts of their
husbands with greasy ointment, if bridegrooms, aglow with
passion, did not eagerly unloosen the maiden's bonds, if
human beings did not drink and eat, then the gods would
be without names? In addition, not satisfied to have subjected
and involved the gods in concerns so disgusting, you even
attribute 12T to them natures fierce, cruel, monstrous, ever
rejoicing in evils and in the destruction of humankind!
Evil deeds of the god Mars.
2,6. We shall not mention at this point Laverna, 128 goddess
of thieves, the Bellonae, 129 the Discordiae, 130 the Furies, 131 and
those unpropitious 132 deities which you set up we pass 13S by
in utter silence. Mars alone we shall bring up and that good-
looking mother of the Desires, 134 one of whom you place in
command of battles, the other of loves and the passion of
desire/ 35
" Mars/' he says, " has power over wars."
To cause those in progress to cease, or to stir them up when
things are quiet and peaceful"? If he is a calmer of martial
insanity, why is it that every day wars continue? If, on the
other hand, he is their instigator, 186 we should say that at the
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 213
inclination of his own pleasure the god sets the whole world
at variance; sows the seeds of discords and strife among far-
separated nations of the earth; brings together from different
places so many thousands of mortals and, hefore you can say
a single word, piles the fields with corpses; causes hloody
torrents to flow; destroys the most firmly established empires;
levels cities to the ground; takes away freedom from the free-
born and places on them the condition of slavery; rejoices in
civil strife, in the fratricidal slaughter of brothers 137 dying
together, and, finally, in the horror of murderous conflict
between sons and fathers.
Evil deeds of the goddess Venus.
2,7. This same argument we may apply to Venus in
"exactly the same way. For if, as you assert and believe, she
enkindles the flames of love in human minds, one must then
understand that to the wounds of Venus must be attributed
whatever disgrace or misdeed arises from such madness. Is it,
therefore, under compulsion from the goddess that even the
noble frequently surrender their honor to harlots of the worst
repute; that the firm ties of marriages gradually loosen; 138
that relationship by blood is inflamed <toward> incestuous
passions; 139 that mothers nurture a mad love for their chil-
dren; that fathers turn to themselves the longings of their
daughters; that flouting the dignity that goes with their age,
old men are filled with youthful passions for filthy gratifica-
tions; that wise and brave men, 140 living in dissipation of the
sinews of their manhood, exchange the demands of constancy
for effeminacy; that people hang themselves; 141 and, com-
monly enough, 142 cast themselves leaping deliberately from
the heights of jagged cliffs. 143
ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
No such god deserves the respect of worship,
28. Can any man exist possessed of even traces of in-
cipient reason, who could befoul or deface the essence 144 of
divinity with a morality so filthy? Who would credit the
gods with dispositions such as human gentleness often won
over and tamed down in the beasts of the field? Where, I ask
you, is that theory that the gods are far removed from dis-
turbing emotion, 145 that they are gentle, peaceful, mild; that
in the completeness of their virtue they preserve the peak of
perfection and the topmost summit of wisdom itself?
And why do we pray to them to avert from us things un-
favorable and hostile, if we find that they are the authors of
all the evils by which daily we are harassed? Call us wicked,
impious, or atheists, as much as you please never will you
make us believe in gods of loves, gods of wars; that there are
gods who sow strife, who stir up minds with the stings of
the furies' whips. Either in very truth they are gods and do
not do the things you tell about them <or, if they do> what
you say, without any doubt they are not gods.
Pagan testimony results in eliminating many of the
gods: Janus and Saturn.
29. And yet, 1 * 6 even so we might take from you these
ideas rife with wicked fabrications, were it not for the fact
that you yourself, by bringing forth about the gods many
statements inconsistent and mutually contradictory, force us
to refrain from agreement. For in your rivalry, one en-
deavoring to outshine the other in profundity 147 of knowl-
edge, you both remove those very gods whom you imagine
and supplant them with others who clearly do not exist; each
one says something different about identical things; and you
BOOK THREE : THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 2 1 5
put down those whom the consensus of men has always
accepted as individuals, as being infinite in number.
Accordingly, let us too, as is customary, begin with Father
Janus. 148 Some of you represent him to be the world, 149 some
the year, 150 some the sun. 151 Now if we are going to accept
this as true, the necessary conclusion follows that no Janus
ever existed, who, they say, sprang from Caelus 152 and
Hecate, was the first to rule in Italy, founded the town 153 of
Janiculum, was father of Fontus, 154 son-in-law of Vulturnus, 155
husband of Juturna; 158 and so you rub out the name of the
god whom you place first in all your prayers, 157 and whom
you believe obtains for you a hearing before the gods.
And again, if Janus is the year, it is once more impossible
for him to be a god. For who does not know that the year
is a fixed period of time and that that which is delineated by
the lapse and computation of months 158 does not have the
essence of divinity?
This very same point can be made similarly in the case of
Saturn. For if by this name time is meant, as the Greet
philologists declare, making Kronos identical with chronos^
then Saturn is no divinity at all. Who is so crazy as to say
that time is a god when it is merely the measuring of a certain
period included in a continuous perpetual succession? 16 And
so that fellow too, will be removed from the list of denizens of
heaven, one whom hoary antiquity declared and handed
down to the later ages as having Caelus for his father, to be
the progenitor of the " great gods," planter of the vine, 161
bearer of the pruning hook. 162
Jupiter and Juno are eliminated.
30. But what shall we say about Jupiter 16S himself, whom
wise men have frequently said is the sun, 164 driving winged
2i 6 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
chariots, followed by a crowd of deities; 165 some, that he is
ether burning with powerful flame 166 and with a tremendous
unquenchable fire? If this is an established fact, then accord-
ing to you there is no Jupiter at all, who, having Saturn for
his father and Ops 16T for his mother, is reported to have
been concealed in the territories of the Cretans 16S in order
to avoid the mad fury of his sire.
And now does not a similar line of reasoning remove Juno
from the list of the gods? If she is the air, a pun which by an
inversion of the Greek name you make a practice of stating
over and over again, 169 she is found to be no sister and
consort of all-powerful Jupiter, 170 no Fluvionia, no Pomana,
no Ossipagina, no Februtis, Populonia, Cinxia, Caprotina,
and so the fiction of that name of hers, spread abroad by the
popularity of a groundless belief, will be found to amount to
absolutely nothing.
Minerva, Neptune, and other gods are eliminated.
31. Aristotle, 171 , an unusually powerful intellect and an
extraordinary scholar, as Granius 172 tells us, shows by plausi-
ble arguments that Minerva is the Moon 17S and demonstrates
it by written authorities. Others have said that she is the crest
of ether and its utmost height; 174 some that she is memory,
whence the very name Minerva as if derived from memin-
erva. 1 But if this view is accepted, then there is no daughter
of Metis, 176 no Victory, 177 <no one> born 178 of the brain of
Jupiter, no discoverer of the olive, no accomplished mistress
of the arts and the various sciences.
" Neptune/' they say, " is addressed as such and has re-
ceived his name from the fact that he covers the earth with
water/'
Therefore, if the covering of water is the meaning of this
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 217
name, there is no god at all named Neptune, and so is ousted
and eliminated from the scene the full brother of the Styg-
ian 18 and of the Olympian Jupiter, armed with the iron
trident, lord of sea monsters and little fishes, king of the salty
depths and shaker of the trembling earth. 181
Mercury, Tellus, Ceres, and Vesta.
32. Mercury's name, too, means something like a kind of
go-between; 1S2 and because conversation runs between two
speakers 183 and speech is reciprocal, hence the agreement of
the character suggested by this name. Accordingly, if this is
the case, Mercury is not the name of a god but of speech and
the exchange of sound, and thus is blotted out and annihilated
that Cyllenian 184 bearer of the caduceus, 185 born on a cold
mountain, the deviser of words and names, the barterer of
market wares and merchandise.
The Earth, because it furnishes food to all living creatures,
some of you have said to be the Great Mother. 186 Others
declare that this same thing is Ceres 187 because it brings
forth crops of wholesome seeds; and some, that it is Vesta
because in the universe it alone stands still, 188 the other parts
being fixed in constant motion. 189
But if this is advanced and maintained on sure grounds,
again by your interpretation three divinities do not exist. No
Ceres, no Vesta will be reckoned in the roster of gods, nor,
finally, can the Mother of the gods herself, whom Nigidius 18
declares to have been married to Saturn, rightly be named a
goddess, if, indeed, these are all but names of the one earth
and in these designations it alone is meant.
2i 8 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
Vulcan, Venus, Proserpina, Liber, and Apollo.
33. To escape prolixity we pass at this point over Vulcan
whom you unanimously all declare to be fire; 191 Venus be-
cause she comes 192 to all, and Proserpina/ 93 so named because
plants steal forth, when planted, to the light where once
more you erase the heads of three divinities from the list, if,
indeed, the first is the name of an element, a word signifying
no sentient power; the second, a passion pervading all living
creatures; while the third means seeds raising themselves, and
upward movement of growing crops.
Moreover, when you maintain that Liber, Apollo, the
sun 194 are but one divinity multiplied by three names, is the
list of gods not shortened by your notions and does not the
stated belief collapse? For if it is true that the sun is the same
as Liber and the same as Apollo, it follows that in " the nature
of things " 195 there is no one such as Apollo or Liber, and
so by you yourselves is blotted out, obliterated, the son of
Semele, 186 the Pythian, 197 the one the giver of filthy merri-
ment, the other the bane of Sminthian mice. 198
Diana, Ceres, Luna.
34. Among you there are men who, neither uninformed
nor given to small talk, declare that Diana, Ceres, the moon,
are but one godhead in three-way union, 199 and that these
are not three distinct persons as there are three separate
names; that in them all it is the moon that is invoked and
that to her name the list of the other surnames has been
added on. But if this has been ascertained, if this is estab-
lished and the truth of the matter shows it so, once again
the name of Ceres is meaningless and that of Diana means
nothing, and so the matter is brought to the point that by
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 219
your own initiative and authority, that discoverer of grain, as
you call her, is nothing, and Apollo is robbed of his sister,
upon whom once, as she washed away the grime from her
body in the crystal clear fountain, that antlered hunter 20
gazed and paid the penalty for his curiosity.
Criticism of the deification of "parts of the universe.
35. Men noteworthy in the study of philosophy and men
whom your encomiums have placed on the pinnacle in that
discipline 201 declare with commendable earnestness that in
their deliberate opinion the whole mass of the world, by
whose expanses we are encompassed, are covered, and are
supported, is but a single living being 202 possessed of wisdom
and reason. 203 Now, if the opinion of these men is true and
established as certain, those whom a little while ago 20 * you
set up in its parts, with names unchanged, 205 straightway also
cease to be gods. As a single human being cannot, so long as
his body remains entire, be split into many human beings,
and again, many men, as long as the difference of their indi-
viduality is preserved, cannot be fused into the unity of a
single sentient being, 206 so, if the world is a single animate
being and is moved by the impulse of a single mind, it cannot
be dispersed into several divinities nor can particles of it, if
they are gods, be united and turned into the consciousness of
a single living being.
The moon, sun, earth, ether, stars, are members and parts
of the world. Now, if they are parts and members, they are
certainly not independent living creatures, for the parts of a
given thing cannot be the same as the whole, or think for
themselves or feel for themselves. This cannot be accom-
plished by any activity of their own without the cooperation
of the whole living organism; and this established and settled,
15 T
220 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
the whole matter boils down to this, that the sun is no god, 207
nor the moon, nor the ether, earth, and the rest. They merely
are parts of the world, not the proper names of divinities, and
so it is brought about by your muddling and meddling in all
things divine that the world is established as the one and
only god in the universe; 20S all others are driven out yes,
and that too, set up to no purpose, as vacuities and things
without reality.
It is the pagans who are responsible for the gods'
anger against men.
36. If in so many ways and by so many arguments we
were to undermine belief in your gods, there would be no
doubt that aroused to raging anger you would demand for us
fire, wild beasts, and swords, and the other death-dealing tor-
ments with which you are wont to slake your thirst in its
passion for our blood.
But while you yourselves with your ostentation of bril-
liance and scholarship do away with practically the entire race
of gods, you have the audacity to insist that it is because of
us that human affairs are oppressed by the gods, when as a
fact, if it is true that they exist at all and grow hot with the
flames of wrath, they would have no juster reason for raging
against you 209 than that you deny their existence and their
presence in nature.
Conflicting opinions concerning the Muses.
37. That 21 the Muses are the daughters of Tellus 211 and
Caelus is the view advanced by Mnaseas; 212 others declare
that they are Jupiter's by his wife Memory 213 or Mind. 214
Some write that they were virgins, others that they were
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 221
matrons. You see, we wish briefly to touch also upon those
points in which you show yourselves as holding different
opinions on one and the same matter, the one saying this,
the other that. Ephorus, 215 then, says that they are three in
number; Mnaseas, whom we mentioned, four; Myrtilus 216
brings in seven; eight are asserted by Crates; 217 finally,
Hesiod puts forth nine with names, enriching heaven and the
stars with gods. 218
Unless we are mistaken, this difference of opinion is a sign
of persons who know nothing about the truth, 219 and does
not derive from the truth of the case. If the fact at issue were
clearly known, the voice of all would be one and the agree-
ment of all would tend towards and reach the conclusion of
the same belief.
38. How, then, can you give 22 to religion the full force
of the power when you are in error concerning the gods
themselves? Or invite us to their reverential worship 221 when
you have nothing certain to teach us on the concept of the
divinities themselves? To say nothing about the authorities
intervening either the first one mentioned 222 strikes out and
slays six divine Muses, if it is agreed there are nine, or that
last one mentioned at the end 223 adds six who do not exist at
all to the three who in reality alone exist, with the result that
it cannot be known or understood which ones ought to be
added, which taken away; and the performance of religious
observance itself is forced to run the danger either of wor-
shipping what does not exist or perhaps of overlooking what
does exist.
The Novensiles.
Piso 224 believes that the Novensiles are nine gods set up
among the Sabines at Trebia. 225 Granius 228 thinks that these
222 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
are the Muses, which is in agreement with the view of
Aelius. 227 Varro 22S hands down to us that they are nine in
number because in undertaking anything that number is
always held to be the most powerful and greatest. 229 Corni-
ficius, 230 that they preside over renewals because by their care
things are renewed and endure. Manilius, 231 that they are
the nine gods whom alone Jupiter allowed to have the power
of hurling his thunderbolt. 232 Cincius 233 pronounces them to
be foreign divinities so called from their very newness; the
Romans, in fact, were accustomed in some instances to spread
the religions of conquered cities privately through the families
and in other cases they consecrated them publicly; and lest
through the great number of the gods and on account of
the fact that they were unknown, some of them might be
passed over, for the sake of brevity and economy all were
invoked alike under one name Novensiles. 2 * 4 *
39. There are, in addition, some 235 who say that those
who from being men were made gods are marked by this
name, as is Hercules, Romulus, Aesculapius, Liber, Aeneas.
These are all, it is clear, different opinions, and by the nature
of things it cannot be that people who differ in their beliefs
should all be regarded as authorities of one and the same
truth. If the opinion of Piso is true, Aelius and Granius are
mistaken; if what they say is certain, Varro, most learned as
he is, is mistaken, because in place of what is established
reality he substitutes the most inane and foolish. If the
number nine produces the name of Novensiles, Cornificius is
convicted of talking nonsense, in giving to the gods pre-
siding over renewal the force of another's power. But if the
opinion of Cornificius is true, Cincius is found to be ignorant
for associating the gods of conquered cities with the power of
the divinities called Novensiles. And if they are such as
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 223
Cincius says tKey are, Manilius will be found to be mistaken,
for he comprehends under that name such as hurl another's
thunderbolt. And if what Manilius asserts is verified as true,
they who think that mortals raised and consecrated to divine
honors are named thus 236 because of the newness of their
honor, are particularly mistaken. But if the Novensiles are
those who have merited to be exalted to the stars, after having
done with the mortality of life, then there are really no Di
Novensiles at all. As slaves, soldiers, teachers are not the
names of individuals underlying the words, but of duties,
ranks, and offices, so when we speak of Novensiles, if that is
the name of those who from being in the human state de-
served to be gods, it is at once obvious that no individuals are
specifically identified but that newness itself is named by the
designation of Novensiles.
The Penates.
40. Nigidius 23T taught that the di Penates are Neptune
and Apollo who once on fixed terms surrounded Ilium with
immortal 23S walls. The same man again in his sixteenth book
explains, following Etruscan 239 teaching, that there are four
kinds of Penates, and that some of these belong to Jupiter,
others to Neptune, a third group to the gods of the lower
world, a fourth class to mortal men a sort of statement that
is unintelligible. And Caesius, 240 of the same school, thinks
that they are Fortuna and Ceres, the Genius Jovialis and
Pales, but not that woman commonly understood but some
male attendant and bailiff of Jupiter. 2 * 1
Varro thinks they are the gods of whom we speak who are
within and in the innermost recesses of heaven, and that their
number and names are unknown. The Etruscans 242 say that
they are the Consentes 2 " and the Complices 244 and name
224 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
them because they rise together and sit together, 245 six males
and as many females, with unknown names and most sparing
of pity; 246 and that they are thought to be the counsellors and
princes 247 of highest Jupiter. And some wrote 248 that Jupiter,
Juno, and Minerva, were the di Penates, without whom we
cannot live and have intelligence and who guide our inner
selves with reason, warmth, and breath.
As you see, here, too, there is no agreement, nothing is
settled by a unanimous verdict, nor is there anything trust-
worthy on which the mind can stand, through conjecture
approaching near to the truth. 249 For the opinions are so
fallible and one idea is discredited by another, that there is
either no truth in them all or, if any one does utter it, it is
not so recognized amid the great diversity of statements.
The Lares.
41. We can, 250 if it is agreeable, briefly say something
also concerning the Lares, 251 whom the masses think are the
gods of streets 252 and roads 253 from the fact that Greece calls
streets laurai. 25 * In his various writings Nigidius <says> in
one place that they are the guardians of buildings and houses,
in another that they are the Curetes 255 who are asserted to
have concealed once upon a time by clanging their weapons
the baby cries of Jupiter; 256 in another the Samothracian
Digiti, which five, the Greeks say, are named the Idaean
Dactyli.
Varro with like hesitation states at one time that they are
the Manes and that therefore the mother of the Lares was
named Mania; 25S again, at another, that they are the gods
of the air 259 and are called heroes; at another, following the
opinion of the ancients, he says that the Lares are Larvae, 260
certain genii, as it were, and the souls of the departed dead.
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 225
The argument is finished: multiplicity of testimony
is useless.
42. It would be a tremendous and endless task to go
through each kind individually and to make it evident from
the books alone that there is no god conceived or believed in
by you concerning whom you have <not> given expression
to uncertain and conflicting notions reflecting a thousand
different points of view. But for brevity's sake and not to
become boresome, what has been said must suffice; and it
would prove too laborious to collect and mass a multitude of
things, seeing as we do that one or the other case makes it
manifestly clear that you are confused, hesitate, and that you
have nothing certain to say concerning these things which
you maintain*
But perhaps you will say: " Even if we do not personally
know who the Lares are, who the Novensiles are, who the
Penates, nevertheless the very agreement of the authorities
proves that they do exist and that among the number of the
heaven dwellers they are represented/'
And how is it possible to know whether a given god exists,
if there is utter ignorance as to what he is? Or how can a
petition for benefits avail anything in the first place, if it is
not ascertained and established who should be invoked for
each appeal? 261 Every one who seeks to obtain an answer
from some divinity, ought of necessity to know to whom he
is making supplication, on whom he is calling, from whom
he requests aid for human needs particularly as you your-
selves tell 262 us that not all the gods can grant all things and
that the wrath and anger of each are appeased by very unlike
ceremonials.
226 ARNOBIUS: THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS
Ritualistic perfection demands information not pos-
sessed by the pagans.
43. If, for example, this one requires a black/ 63 that one
a white hide; 264 to this one a person must sacrifice with head
veiled, to that with head bare; 265 that one is consulted about
marriages, 266 this grants remedies in cases of distress can it
be immaterial whether this one or that one is a Novensilis,
since ignorance of the facts and confusion of persons is
offensive to the gods and of necessity <forces> 26T the contrac-
tion of guilt?
Imagine that I myself because of some distress or the avoid-
ance of danger, were to make supplication to any of these
divinities, saying: "Help me, do help me, divine Penates
thou Apollo, and thou Neptune and remove 268 by the
clemency of your divine power all these evils with which I
am consumed, am terrified, 269 am harassed/' Will there be
any hope of getting aid from them if Ceres, Pales, Fortuna,
or Genius Jovialis 27 not Neptune and Apollo turn out to
be the di Penates?
Or if I call upon the Curetes in place of the Lares, whom
a group of your authorities say are the Samothracian Digiti,
how shall I be able to have them for helpers and patrons
when I have not given the latter their own names and have
given to the former names which do not belong to them?
Such is the urgency of the matter that we know the gods
individually and not be in uncertainty and doubt about the
power, the name of each one, <lest> if they should be invoked
by rites and designations not their own, they keep their ears
stopped and hold us bound in guilt that cannot be expiated.
44. Wherefore, if it is manifest to you that in the sub-
lime palaces of heaven there dwells, exists that multitude of
BOOK THREE: THE ANTHROPOMORPHIC GODS 227
gods you recount, it is for you to stand by the terms of one
declaration of opinion, 271 and not destroy by divers divergent
and self -contradictory notions confidence in these very things
which you are building up as a system. If Janus exists, let
Janus exist; if Liber exists, let Liber exist; if Summanus 272
exists, let Summanus exist: for this is to trust in, this to hold,
to be settled in the comprehension of something proven, not
to say after the manner of the blind and erring: " the
Novensiles are the Muses no, they are the gods of Trebia
no, their number is nine rather, they are the protectors of
cities overthrown "; and reduce things so important to this
danger, that while some you remove and you replace others,
it can rightly be doubted about all whether they exist
anywhere.
NOTES
INTRODUCTION
The following list of abbreviations and bibliography are designed
to eliminate unnecessary repetition in the references. An asterisk (* )
indicates that, in spite of diligent search, no copy of the work has
been found.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS:
ACW Ancient Christian Writers
ANCL The Ante-Nicene Christian Library
ANF The Ante-Nicene Fathers
CAH Cambridge Ancient History
CIL Corpus inscriptionum latinarum
CSEL Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum
Cumont F. Cumont, Les religions orientates dans le paganisme
romain C4th ed., Paris 1929)
DA Dictiormaire des antiquits grecques et romaines
DACL Dictiormaire d'archeologie chretienne et de liturgie
DBM Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology
DG Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography
DTC Dictiormaire de theologie catholique
Fowler W. Warde Fowler, The Roman Festivals of the Period of the
Republic (London 1899)
LM Ausfiihrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen
Mythologie
LTK Lexikon fur Theologie und Kirche
MG J. P. Migne, Patrologia graeca
ML J. P. Migne, Patrologia latina
P Codex Parisians 1661, containing the text of the Adversus
nationes of Arnobius and the Octavius of Minucius Felix
Pktner-Ashby S. B. Platner-T. Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary of
Ancient Rome (London 192,9}
RE Real-Enzyklopadie der classischen Alteruumswissenschaft
TLL Thesaurus linguae latinae
Wissowa G. Wissowa, Religion und Rultus der Romer (and ed.,
Munich 1912)
231
232 NOTES
BIBLIOGRAPHIES OF ARNOBIANA:
Schoenemann, K. T. G. Btbliotheca historico-literaria Patrum latinorum i
(Leipzig 1792) 147-76 = Orelli i. xLx-xlv = ML 5. 354-66 = Hildebrand
xix-xxxii [Very useful for earlier editions.]
Richardson, E. C. Bibliographical Synopsis [of Amobius], in ANF 10
(Buffalo 1887, repr. New York 1926) 76 f, [Useful but inaccurate,]
Ehrhard, A. Die altchristliche Litteratur und ikre Erforschung von 1884-
1900, in Strassb. theol. Stud. Suppl. i (Freiburg i. Br. 1900) 481-4.
Guinagh, K, " Amobiana," Class. Weekly 29 (1936) 69 f., 152.
EDITIONS OF THE LATIN TEXT:
Sabaeus, Faustus (Rome 1542 colophon; 1543 preface). [The editio
princess, containing, as Book Eight, the Octavius of Minucius FeHx. All
scholars agree that this was prepared from codex Parisinus 1661.]
Gelenius, Sigismundus (Basel 1546). [Contains Minucius. Cf. B. Ryba,
" Sigismundus Gelenius a jeho vydani Arnobia a Minucia," Listy Filologicke
52 (19^5) 1 3-23 9i-io8, 222-36, 337-41*]
Gelenius, Sigismundus (Basel 1560). [Reprint of the 1546 edition together
with the edition of the Commentary on the Psalms by Amobius the Younger,
edited by Erasmus, both works being ascribed to the same author.]
La Barre, Renatus Laurentius de (Paris 1580). [Contained in his edition
of Tertullian, 133-234. Includes Minucius. Apparently never examined by any
subsequent editor of Amobius.]
Canterus, Theodoras (Antwerp 1582). [Contains a commentary.]
[Ursinus, Fulvius] (Rome 1583). [So-called " second Roman " edition, with-
out commentary, but contains Minucius.]
Elmenhorst, Geverhardus (Hannover 1603). [Text is combination of
Gelenius and Ursinus. Also contains Minucius.]
Stewechius, Godescalcus (Antwerp 1604). [Contains commentary. Text
generally that of Ursinus and with Stewechius' notes and a collation of the
Brussels MS by F. Modius.]
Heraldus, Desiderius (Paris 1605). [Text largely based on Ursinus. Con-
tains 378 pages of text, 428 pages of commentary, with voluminous indices
to both. Also includes Minucius.]
Elmenhorst, Geverhardus (Hamburg 1610). [Text based on his 1603
edition with additions from Ursinus and Stewechius, not well chosen.
Contains Minucius.]
Canterus, Theodorus (Cologne 1618). In Margarinus de la Bigne (and
others), Magna bibliotheca veterum Patrum, etc., 3. 151 ff. [Not first edition
of this collection but earliest to contain Amobius.]
* Stewechius, Godescalcus (Douai 1634). [Contains summaries by Leander
de San Martino (pseud.) = John Jones.]
[Salmasius, Claudius] and Thysius, A. (Leyden 1651), [Salmasius 1 name
omitted from title where he is mentioned only as a ' vir celeberrimus.' Also
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 233
contains annotations by Canterus, Stewecnius, Elmenhorst, and Heraldus.
Long the standard edition.]
Canterus, Theodorus (Paris 1654). In Margarinus de la Bigne, Magna
bibliotheca veterum Patrwn, etc., 15. 1-63.
* Priorius, Philippus (Paris 1666). [Text based on Salmasius and typo-
graphical errors are copied from that edition. This is in Priorius' edition of
Cyprian.]
Priorius, Philippus (Lyons-Genoa 1677). In Margarinus de la Bigne,
Maxima bibliotheca veterum Patrum, etc., 3. 430-514.
* Canterus, Theodorus (Leyden 1680). In Sanct. bibliotheca Patrum, etc.
* Gallandius, A. (Venice 1768). In his Bibliotheca veterum Patrum, etc.
4. 133-2,24. [Text based on Salmasius' Leyden edition with errors preserved
and with addition of Priorius' notes. First edition to separate text into
chapters.]
Oberthur, C. (Wurzburg 1783). In his O'pera omnia sanctorum Patrum
latinorum 5. [Text is that of Canterus corrected from Salmasius. First
edition to contain the chapter divisions subsequently adopted by all editors.]
Orelli, Joseph Conrad (Leipzig 1816-7, 3 vols.). [Voluminous variorum
commentary third volume contains addenda only.]
Caillau, A. B. (Paris 1829). In his Collectio selecta SS. Ecclesiae Patrum
15-2,37-490.
* Anonymous (Paris 1836).
* Anonymous (Besangon 1838).
Hildebrand, G. F. (Halle 1844). [Contains commentary.]
Migne, J. P. (Paris 1844). In ML 5. 349-1372. [Contains complete ver-
batim reprint of Orelli, plus Schoenemann, plus LeNourry's Dissertatio
praevia.]
* Anonymous (Lyons-Paris 1845).
Oehler, Franciscus (Leipzig 1846). In E. G. Gersdorf, BiHiotheca Patrum
ecclesiasticorum selecta 12.. [Commentary very limited.]
Reifferscheid, Augustus (Vienna 1875). & CSEL 4 (Vienna 1875, repr.
1890). [First critical edition, in many ways still standard.]
Marchesi, Concetto (Turin 1934). In Corpus scrvptorum latinorum
Paravianum 62. [To some extent supersedes ReifTerscheid.]
PARTIAL EDITIONS OF LATIN TEXT :
Routh, Martin Joseph. Scrvptorum ecclesiasticorum oyuscula 'praecipua
auaedum (Oxford, ist ed. 1832, 2nd ed. 1840, 3rd ed. 1858). [The two
later editions contain Book One only no copy of ist ed. has been found.]
Anonymous (Padua 1929). [Book Two only. Text consists of reprint of
ReifTerscheid, disregarding apparatus and failing to correct in accordance with
his preface.]
TRANSLATIONS :
* Oudaan, Joachim. Arnol)ius ci' Afrikaner tegen ae Heydenen vervat in
zeven bocken (Harlingen 1677).
234 NOTES
Besnard, Franz A. v. Des Afrikaner's Arnobius sieben Bucher wider die
Heiden, aus dem Lateinischen ubersetzt und erlautert (Landshut 1842).
Alleker, J. Arnobius sieben Bucher gegen die Heiden, in Deutsch
ubersetzt (Trier 1858).
Bryce, Hamilton, and Campbell, Hugh. The Seven Books of Arnobius
Adversus Gentes, in ANCL 19 (Edinburgh 1871), repr. in ANF 6 (Buffalo
1886) 401-572, with slight additions by the editor, A. C. Coxe.
CRITICAL ARTICLES SINCE 1875:
Armini, H. " Textkritiska bidrag," Eranos 28 (1930) 34-39.
Axelson, B. " Zur Emendation alterer Kkchenschriftsteller," Eranos 39
(1941) 74-8i-
. " Randbemerkungen zu Arnobius," Eranos 40 (1942) 1821".
. " Textkritisches zu Floras, Minucius FeHx und Arnobius," K.
Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundets i Lund Arsb. 1944-5 No. i.
Baehrens, W. A. [Rev. of Lofstedt's Arnobiana], Berl. phil. Woch. 37
(1917) 1291-8.
. Berl. phil. Woch. 42 (1923) 352-4.
Bastgen, M. Quaestiones de locis ex Arnobii Adversus Nationes opere
selectis (diss. Miinster i. W. 1887).
Birt, T. " Marginalien zu lateinischen Prosaikern," Philologus 83 (1928)
164-82.
Brakman, C. Arnobiana (Leyden 1917).
. Miscella (Leyden 1912).
. Miscella alter a (Leyden 1913).
. Miscella tertia (Leyden 1917).
Corssen, P. " Zu Arnobius V 12 und 6," Berl. phil. Woch. 30 (1910} 382 .
Damste", P. H. "Emendatur Arnobius Adv. Nat. I 62," Mnemosyne 45
(1917) 165.
Ehwald, R. " Zu Arnobius und Cicero/' PMoIogws 51 (1892) 747.
Eitrem, S. " Varia," Nordisk Tidsskr. for Filol 10 (1922) 61.
Georges, K. E. " Kritische Bemerkungen," Philologus 33 (1874) 334.
Gomperz, H. "Zu Arnobius," Rhein. Mus. 64 (1909) 153-5.
Hagendahl, H. La prose metrique d'Arnoloe contributions a la connais-
sance de la prose litteraire de I'empire, in Goteborgs Hogskolas Arsskr. 42
(1936) No. i (Goteborg 1937).
, "En Ovidiusreminiscens hos Arnobius," Eranos 35 (1937) 36-40.
Havet, L. "Notes sur divers auteurs/' Rev. de Philol. n. s. i (1877) 281.
Hide"n, K. J. " Randbemerkungen zu Arnobius Adversus Nationes," in his
De Arnobii Adversus Nationes libris VII commentationes 2 (Helsingfors 1921)
extract from Ann. Acad. Scient. Fenn. ser. B, 15. 8.
Johnson, H. "Notes," Class. Rev. 23 (1909) 91 f.
Kirschwing, O. Qua ratione in ArnoTyii libris ars critica exercenda sit
(diss. Leipzig 1911).
Kistner, K. "Arnobiana" (Progr. St. Ingebert 1912).
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 235
Koch, H. " Zu Amobius und Lactantius," Philologus 80 (192.5) 467-72.
Kroll, W. " Arnobiusstudien," Rhein. Mus. n. F. 72 (1917) 62-112.
. [Rev. of Wiman's Textkritiska Studier], Phil. Woch. 52 (1932)
630 f.
. [Rev. o Marchesi's edition], fbid. 55 (1935) 1082-4.
Lofstedt, E. " Beitrage zur Kenntnisse der spateren Latinitat," in Uppsala
Univ. Arsskr. (Uppsala diss. Stockholm 1907).
. " Patristische Beitrage/' Eranos 10 (1910) 7-29.
. " Arnobiana: Textkritische und sprachliche Studien zu Arnobius"
(Lund-Leipzig 1917).
Marchesi, C. " Per una nuova edizione di Arnobio," Riv. FiL Istr. Cl. 60
(1932) 485-96.
McCracken, G. E. " Critical Notes to Arnobius' Adversus Nationes,"
Vigiliae Christianae 3 (1949) 39-49.
Meiser, K. " Studien zu Arnobius," Sitzungsb. d. k. bay* Akad. d. Wiss.,
philosoph.-philolog. und hist. Kl. 5 (1908) 19-40.
Pascal, C. " Emendationes Amobianae/' Riv. Fil. Istr. CL 32 (1904) 1-9.
* Pauly, F. Zeitschr. oestr. Gymn. 27 (1876) 900.
Phillimore, J. S. "Arnobiana," Mnemosyne n. s. 48 (1920) 388-91.
Polle, F. "Zu Amobius," Jahrb. f. class. Phil. 135 (1887) 87.
Reifferscheid, A. "Analecta critica et grammatica," Index lect. hih. 1877-8
(Breslau 1877).
Souter, A. [Review of Marchesi's edition], Class. Rev. 49 (1935) 209.
Stangl, T. "Arnobiana," Rerl. phil. Woch. 30 (1910) 126 f., 158 f.
. " Bobiensia," Rhein. Mus. 65 (1910) 93.
Thornell, A. " Patristica," Uppsala Univ. Arsskr. 1923 (Uppsala 1923)
1-21.
Thomas, P. " Observationes ad scriptores latinos: ad Arnobium/' Mnemo-
syne n. s. 49 (1921) 63 f.
Wassenberg, F. Quaestiones Arnobianae criticae (diss. Miinster i. W. 1877).
Wensky, H. "Zu Arnobius," Fleckeisens Jahrb. f. class. Phil. 28 (1882)
495 f.
Weyman, C. "Textkritische Bemerkungen zu Arnobius adversus nationes,"
Festschr. Sebastian Merkle zu seinem 60. Geburtstage gewidmet von Schillern
und Freunden (Diisseldorf 1922) 386-95.
Wiman, G. " Nagra Arnobius-stallen," Eranos 25 (1927) 278-80.
. Textkritiska studier till Arnolyius r in Svenskt Arkiv for hum.
Avhandl. 4 (Goteborg 1931).
. "Ad Arnobium," Eranos 45 (1947) 129-52.
Wolfflin, E. Archiv. f. lat. Lex. 2 (1885) 136.
ON ARNOBIUS AND HIS WORK:
Altaner, B. Patrologie (Freiburg i. Br. 1938) io9f.
. Patrologia (Rome 1944) n8f.
Amatucci, A. G. Storia delta letter atura latino, cristiana (Bari 1929) 111-4.
16 7
236 NOTES
Atzberger, L Geschichte der christlichen Eschatologie innerhalb der vorni-
cdnischen Zeit (Freiburg i, Br. 1896) 573-82.
Bardenhewer, O. Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur 2 (2nd ed.,
Freiburg i, Br. 1914) 517-26.
Baynes, N. H. CAH 12 (1939) 652 f.
Colombo, S. " Arnobio Afro e i suoi libri Adversus Nationes," Didaskaleion
9 (1930) i-iM'
Cmttwell, G T. A Literary History of Early Christianity 2 (London 1893)
630-42.
Ebert, A. Allgemeine Geschichte der Litteratur des Mittelalters im Abend-
lande i (Leipzig 1889) 64-72 = French trans, by J. Aymeric and J.
Condamin i (Paris 1883) 74-83-
Francke, K. B. Die Psychologie und Erkenntnisslehre des Arnobius (diss.
Leipzig 1883) 74-83.
Freppel, C. E. Commodien, Arnobe, Lactance, et autres fragments ingdits
(Paris 1893) 28-93. [The lecture on Arnobius was delivered in 1869.]
Gabarrou, F. Arnobe son oeuvre (diss. Toulouse: Paris 1921).
. Le latin d' Arnobe (Paris 1921).
Geffcken, J. Zwei griechische Apologeten (Leipzig-Berlin 1907) 287-90.
Godet, P. "Arnobe," DTC i (1930) 1895 f.
Goodspeed, E. J. A History of Early Christian Literature (Chicago 1942)
282-4.
Jirani, O. " Mythologicke* prameny Arnobiova spisu Adversus Nationes,"
Listy Filologicke 35 (1908) i-n, 83-97, 163-88, 323-39, 403-23.
Jordan, H. Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur (Leipzig 1911) 229 .
Jialicher, A. " Arnobius/' No. i, RE i (1894) I2o6.
Kriiger, G, "Amobius," New Schaff-Herzog Encycl. of Rel. KnowL
i (1908} 300 .
. "Amobius," Realencyd. f. <prot. Theol. 2 (1897) n6f.
* LabrioDe, P. de. " Le cas d ? Arnobe/* Eevue de Fribourg 40 (1909).
[Probably identical with a section in the next item bearing same tide.]
. Histoire de la litter ature latine chretienne (2nd ed., Paris 1924)
252-67 = History and Literature of Christianity from Tertullian to Boethius
(rr. by H. Wilson, New York 1925) 188-99, All citations, however, are to
the 3rd French edition revised by G. Bardy, i (Paris 1947) 274-90,
. "Arnobe," Diet, d'hist. et de geogr. eccUs. 4 (1930) 544.
Lardner, N. Works 2 (London 1815) 244-57; 3 (London 1831) 456-88.
Leckelt. "Ober das Arnobius Schrift: Adversus Nationes (Progr. Neisse
1884) 3-19.
LeNourry, N. "Dissertatio secunda in septem Arnobii disputationum
Adversus Gentes libros/' in his Apparatus ad bibliothecam maxi-mam veterum
yatrum etc., 2 (Paris 1715), cols. 257-570 = " Dissertatio praevia " in ML
5.365-714.
Lorenz, T, De clausulis Arnobianis (diss. Breslau 1910).
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 237
Marches!, C. "Question! arnobiane," Atti del R. 1st. Veneto di Scienze,
Lettere ed Ani 88 (1929) 1009-1032.
- . "II pessimismo di un apologeta cristiano," Pegaso 2 (1930) 536-50.
McCracken, G. E. "Arnobius Adversus Genera," Class. Jour. 42 (1947)
474 f.
McGiffert, A. C. A History of Christian Thought 2 (New York 1933)
39-45-
Micka, E. F. The Problem of Divine Anger in Arnobius and, Lactantius,
(Cath. Univ. Stud, in Christ Ant. 4, Washington 1943).
Migne, J. P. " De Arnobio afro notitia historica," ML 5. 349-66.
Monceaux, P. Histoire litter aire de VAjrique chretienne 3 Claris 1905)
241-85.
Moricca, U. Storia della letteratura latina cristiana i (Turin [1923]) 604-17.
M[oule], H. C. G. " Arnobius," in Wace and Piercy, A Dictionary of
Christian Biography and Literature (Boston 1911) 49-51.
Neander, A. General History of the Christian Religion and Church i
(7th Amer. ed., tr. by Joseph Torrey, Boston 1854) 887-9; 2- (Bohn ed.,
London 1853) 449-452.
Niccoli, M. " Arnobio," Encicl Ital 4 (1929) 551.
* Orsavai, F. Mysterium ok Arnohiusnal (diss. Budapest 1914).
Rand, E. K. CAH 12 (1939) 607-9.
Rapisarda, E. Clemente fonte di ArnoT^io (Turin 1939).
. Arnohio (Catania 1945). (See the review by G. Quispel, Vigiliae
Christianae 2 [1948]
Rohricht, A. De Clemente Alexandrino Arnobii in irridendo gentilium
cultu auctore (diss. Kiel: Hamburg 1892).
- . Die Seelenlehre des Arnohius nach ihren Quellen und ihrer
Entstehung untersucht (Hamburg 1893).
SalvatorelH, L. Storia della letteratura latina cristiana dalle origini alia meta
del VI secolo (Milan 1946) 105-7.
SchafiF, P. History of the Christian Church 2 (6th ed., New York 1892)
856-61.
Schanz, M., Hosius, C., and Kriiger, G. Geschichte der romischen Litteratur
3 (3rd ed., Munich 1922) 407-13.
Schamagl, J. De Arnol>ii Maioris latinitate: Pars i (Progr. Gorz, publ.
1895)-
Schram, D. Analysis oyeruw SS. Patrum et scriptorum ecclesiasticorum 7
(Augsburg 1784) 9T-250,
Schulze, E. F. D#s Ufbel in der Welt nach der Lehre des Arnol>ius f ein
Eeitrag zur Geschichte der yatristischen Philosophie (diss. Jena 1896).
Shahan, T. J. "Arnobius," Cath. Encycl i (1907) 746 .
Sihler, E. G. From Augustus to Augustine: Essays & Studies dealing with
the contact and conflict of classic paganism and Christianity (Cambridge
1923) 167-73 = BibL Rev. 5 (1920) 259-65.
Spindler, P. De Amobii genere dicendi (diss. Strassburg 1901).
238 NOTES
Stange, C. De Arno'bii oratione: i. De verbis ex vetusto et vulgari sermone
deprom'ptis', 2,. De clausulis Arnobianis (Progx. Saargemund 1893).
Tixeront, J. " Arnobe," Diet. prat, des conn. rel. i (1925) 397 f-
Tschiersch, W. De Arno'bii studiis latinis (Jena 1905).
Tullius, F. Die Quellen des Arnobius im 4-, 5. und 6. Buck seiner Schrift
Adversus Nationes (diss. Berlin: Bottrop 1934).
Weyman, C. " Arnobius der altere," LTK i (1930) 689.
Wright, F. A. Fathers of the Church (London 1928) 139-56-
NOTES
1 F. J. Foakes- Jackson, Studies in the Life of the Early Church
(New York 1924) 203, calls Arnobius the last ante-Nicene writer,
confusing him with Lactantius. He also says that Arnobius wrote
the best Latin of the age, another point in evidence of the confusion.
2 Cf , L. Salvatorelli, Storia della letteratura latina cristiana (Milan
1946) 107. F. Gabarrou, Le latin d'Arnobe (Paris 1921) i, says that
it is in Arnobius' spirit, nature, temperament that we are primarily
interested.
3 Orelli (i.iv) calls him "Varronem istum Ecclesiae Latinae," a
dictum he credits to no one but which may have been derived from
Voss to whom it is attributed by C. E. Freppel, Commodien, Arndbe,
Lactance, et autres fragments inedits (Paris 1893) 87. Cf. E. Rapi-
sarda, Arndbio (Catania 1945) 136. This highly important contribu-
tion to the literature on Arnobius became available to me only when
my own work was ready for the press but I have attempted to take
his conclusions into consideration wherever possible. While I dis-
agree with Rapisarda on many minor points, I find him thoroughly
sound in his effort to rehabilitate the reputation of Arnobius from
the skeptical assault made on it by scholars of the nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries. Conditions existing at the time he was
writing naturally explain and excuse his failure to mention im-
portant work by others (e. g. Festugiere) but the book has two serious
defects: (i) the author often allows his enthusiasm for polemic to
lead him to extremes, a fact which he himself recognizes (130); and
(2) the passages he adduces in support of his contention that Arno-
bius was influenced by an earlier writer or himself influenced a
later do not, in my estimation, always provide the necessary confirma-
tion. Nevertheless, there are many unforgettable passages of which I
quote the following (7) : " [in Arnobio] si accendono luci e si
stendono ombre, si illuminano speranze e si affaciano dubbi, che
ripercuotono il tormento di un' anima che va in cerca di Dio."
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 239
4 E. K. Rand, The Founders of the Middle Ages (Cambridge
1941) 41, but see his earlier view in CAR 12 (1939) 607. Cf. also
J. W. Mackail, Latin Literature (London 1930) 255.
5 Wisdom after the fact. Arnobius could hardly have realized that
he was living on the eve of a new era.
6 This criticism assumes that every work on Christianity must be
a full exposition of its teaching.
7 C. T. Cruttwell, A Literary History of Early Christianity 2
(London 1893) 641.
8 E, F. Schulze, D^s Ubel in tier Welt nach der Lehre des Arno-
bius, ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der yatristischen Philosophie (diss.
Jena 1896) 42.
9 G. Kriiger, New Schaff-Herzog Encycl i (1908) 301.
10 E. Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa 2 (Leipzig-Berlin 1909) 605
n. i. Cf. also his Die griechische und lateinische Literatur und
Spmche 2.2 (2nd ed., D. Kultur d. Gegenwart 1.8, Berlin-Leipzig
1907) 417 f. O. Bardenhewer, Geschichte der altkirchlichen Litera-
tur 2 (2nd ed., Freiburg i. Br. 1914) 517, also compares him unfavor-
ably with Cyprian. While this judgment is probably correct on
the whole, there are phases in which he is superior to Cyprian. For
still other unfavorable judgments, of which the most striking is the
dictum of Cecchelli, " formicolante di errori " (errors like ants), in
Africa romana (Milan 1935) 143, see Rapisarda, Arnob. 3-5. It is,
however, refreshing to compare this negative verdict of the " mod-
erns " with the perspicacity of Arnobius' first editor, Sabaeus, who in
I 543 ca lled him "pietatis christianae maximus dux et propagator/'
11 Freppel 39; Bryce-Campbell, ANCL 19 (1871) ix - ANF 6. 406.
Cruttwell (2. 541) does not agree that Arnobius' neglect is wholly
undeserved. H. B. Swete, Patristic Study (London 1909) 68, gives
him only a short paragraph and omits him entirely from the sug-
gested course of study (144-7) an( l fr m his article on "Fathers of
the Church" in Encycl "Brit. 10 (nth ed., 1911) 200 f.
12 Rapisarda, Arnobio (Catania 1945).
as For editions and translations consult the Bibliography (232-4)
and the end of the Introduction (j6fO. No translation has as yet
appeared or even been announced in the Loeb Classical Library.
14 J. C. Orelli's variorum commentary appeared at Leipzig in
1816-7 an d was reprinted in ML 5 (Paris 1844). I n trie latt er year
also G. F. Hildebrand published his edition at Halle. F. Oehler's
commentary in E. G. Gersdorfs BiH. Patrum eccles. seL 12 (Leipzig
1846) is more restricted in scope. Only one commentary has been
240 NOTES
published in any modern language, that accompanying the German
translation of F. A. v. Besnard (Landshut 1842,).
15 For an excellent discussion of Arnobius' place among the apolo-
gists, see J. Geffcken, Zivei griechische Ayologeten (Samml. wiss.
Kowment. zu griech. u. rom. Schriftstellern, Leipzig-Berlin 1907)
287-9.
16 Rapisarda (Arnob. 54) terms it the most violent Christian attack
on contemporary neo-Platonism.
17 Since Arnobius is by no means an unprejudiced witness, his
testimony must, of course, be handled with care. On the caution
which must be observed in dealing with the works of the apologists
as evidence for the pagan cults, see Cumont izf., 187$., and c.
also P. de Labriolle, Histoire de la literature latine ckretienne (3rd
ed. rev. by G. Bardy, Paris 1947) i. 179 f.
18 Yet other apologists boldly attacked the cult. Cf . Theophilus,
Ad. Autol i. u; Tertullian, ApoL 28-36. J. B. Lightfoot, The
Apostolic Fathers, Part 2 (2nd ed. ? London 1889) 3. 376, wrongly
cites Arnobius 7. 36 as testimony for the offering of incense to the
emperors.
19 St. Jerome, De vir. ill, 79; Arnobius sub Diocletiano principe
Siccae apud Africam florentissime rhetoricam docuit scripsitque ad-
versus gentes quae vulgo exstant volumina; Chron., GCS Eusebius
7. 23 1 . 14 Helm = 2. 191 Schoene =313 Fotheringham : Arnobius
rhetor in Africa clarus habetur. Qui cum Siccae ad declamandum
iuvenes erudiret et adhuc ethnicus ad credulitatem somniis compel-
leretur, neque ab episcopo impetraret fidem quam semper impug-
naverat, elucubravit adversum pristinam religionem luculentissimos
libros, et tandem veluti quibusdam obsidibus pietatis, foedus im-
petravit; Ejpist. ad Magnum') 70. 5 : septem libros adversus gentes
Arnobius edidit totidemque discipulus eius Lactantius; De vir. ill.
80 : Firmianus, qui et Lactantius, Arnobii discipulus, sub Diocletiano
principe ....
20 Chiefly by Trithemius (John of Trittenheim, 1462-1516) in his
De seriptoribus ecclesiasticis (ist ed, Basel 1494) 53, and by the
printer Froben of Basel who in 1560 reprinted in one volume as by
the same author, both Erasmus' edition of the Commentary on the
Psalms by the Younger Arnobius (preface dated i August 1522)
and Gelenius' edition of the Adversus nationes (preface dated i
January 1546).
21 On Arnobius the Younger, see M. SchanzG Hosius G. Krii-
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 241
ger, Geschichte der romischen Litteratur 4. 2 (Munich 1920) 533-6;
O. Bardenhewer 4. 605 f .
22 ARNOuii (gen.) see the explicits of each Book, folii 27, 64,
80, 9/b ? 120, i34b, 162. The name does not appear at the beginning
of Book One. Reifferscheid points out that this confusion is also
found elsewhere in the manuscript.
23 Cf. *Apveo?j 'Apvias, 'ApvidSas, "ApviTTTros, etc.; M??Aoj5ios ; ZyvofiLOS,
etc. See A. Reifferscheid, Analecta critica (ad, Arnobium), Index
Lect. Hib. (Breslau 1877) 9 f.; Bardenhewer 2. 518.
24 Modern writers frequently refer to him as ' Arnobius Afer/ or
as ' Arnobius Orator * (in the title to Oehler's edition) or as ' Arnobius
Maior ' (in the title to Scharnagl's article), but of these surnames
only ( Arnobius Orator/ which is found in the incipit to Book Five,
has ancient authority.
25 Folio 64, explicit of Book Two, the only place in the manuscript
where the title appears.
26 Adversus gentes appears as the tide of all editions down to that
of Salmasius (Leyden 1651). L. Duchesne, Histoire ancienne de
I'Eglise 2 (5th ed., Paris 1911) 52 n. i, mistakenly says that the title
is De errore profanarum religionum which he borrows from the
work of Firmicus Maternus. It must be admitted that this title
would have well fitted Arnobius' work.
27 In i. 58 f. Christian literature is defended from the charge of a
lack of style and in 2. 6 the pagans are berated for their literary
presumptions; but cf. 2. 5 and 4. 13.
28 Folio 97b.
29 1 do not know any evidence for saying that Amobius was
" official professor " of rhetoric at Sicca, as does Duchesne 2. 42.
30 Gabarrou (Oeuvre 7-10) makes a great deal of Arnobius' African
patriotism, citing i. 5, 5. i, 5. 18, 6.4, 7. 50, and 7.51, as well as
supporting statements from other African writers, but he admits (9)
that Arnobius does not parade it much. None of the Arnobian
passages cited furnishes good evidence for his point they all merely
criticize the Romans. In view of the general antagonism to Rome,
I am surprised to find that Geffcken (290) maintains that the hatred
of the warlike development of Rome found in earlier Christian
writers is absent in Arnobius.
31 Here and there we may note allusions to African places but too
few to be impressive and if we did not know of Jerome's testimony,
we might not see any significance in these scattered references.
32 S. P6trides, " Sicca Veneria," Cath. Encycl 13 (1912) 771, gives
242 NOTES
other Arabic forms of the name; Shikka Benar or Shak Banaria.
Obviously, Schak, Shak, Shikka = Sicca; Benar, Benar, and Banaria =
Veneria. El Kef means l the Rock ' which shows something of the
nature of the site. F. A. Wright, Fathers of the Church (London
1928) 139, renders Sicca as "Drytown."
33 H. Kiepert, Atlas antiquus (loth ed., Boston and New York, no
date; I2th ed., Berlin, no date), tabulae 7, 10, and 12.
34 Hist. i.46f.
35 Valerius Maximus 2. 6. 1 5.
36 Cf. Minucius 24. 3; Tertullian, ApoL 15. 7; Lactantius, Div. inst.
i. 17. None of them, of course, mentions this specific temple but
all refer to the practice of temple prostitution. A. W. Newton, " The
Adversus Gentes of Arnobius: a Study in Christian Apologetics/'
Proc. Lit. and Philosoph. Soc. of Liverpool 52 (1897-8) 156, says
that Arnobius was disgusted with the Venus worship but he derives
this from the general criticism of the cult, not from any special
passage.
37 Halm's 1865 edition of Valerius has at the passage cited not
Siccae but Cirtae and says in the apparatus that the former is to be
found in the ' deteriores ' and that the epitome of Nepotianus reads
apud Cirtenses. I have submitted this problem to Dr. Dorothy M.
Schullian, an expert on the text of Valerius Maximus, who has
kindly furnished me convincing evidence to show that the weight
of the manuscript authority really is with Siccae and not with Cirtae.
38 Cf. H. Dessau, "Sicca Veneria," RE 2 R., 2 (1923) 2187 f.;
S. Petrides, loc. cit.; T. Mommsen, CIL 8, p. 197, inscriptions 1632-
1775. Siccan bishops were suffragan to Carthage and the names of
those who held the see in 256, 348, 411, 484, and 649 are known.
Cf. also Gabarrou (Oeuvre 5); P. J. Mesnage, L'Afrique chretienne,
eveches et mines antiques (Paris 1912) 92.
39 We know that the Romans did permit the continuance of temple
prostitution at the temple of Venus Erycina in a Sicilian town see
W. W. Hyde, Paganism to Christianity in the Roman Empire
(Philadelphia 1946) 58 but it is probable that at the end of the
Third Punic War (149-146 B.C.) the cult was stamped out at
Sicca, not for reasons of a religious or moral nature but as the result
of the wholesale annihilation of the population.
40 P. Godet, " Arnobe Tancien," DTC i. 2 (1931) 1985 f., accepts
the connection of Arnobius with Sicca without question. That
Arnobius was also a native of Sicca is assumed by the following: T.
Mommsen, CIL 8, p. 197; E, K. Rand, CAH 12 (1939) 609; H.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 243
Leclercq, "Kef (El)," DACL 8. i (1928) 690, but Bryce-Campbell
(xiii) rightly note the possibility that he was not a native. I am
inclined, however, to believe that the weight of probability is that
he was born there, since Sicca was by no means an important city,
likely to attract a teacher from afar.
41 J. K. Fotheringham, Eusebii Pamphili Chronici Canones (Lon-
don 1923) 313.
42 A. Puech, Histoire de la litterature grecque chretienne 3 (Paris
1930) 177.
43 See W. L. R. Gates, "Chronology/' Encycl Brit. 6 (nth ed.,
191 1) 305-18, esp. 312. Since the basic date of Abraham was 2016-5
B. Q, the 2343rd year from Abraham could be either 326 or 327
A. D. So also in the case of the Olympiads and even the reign of
Constantino which began on 25 July 306.
44 F. H. Sandbach, " Lucre ti poemata and the Poet's Death," Class.
Rev. 54 (1940) 72-77, esp. 73. Cf. also J. W. Thompson B. J.
Holm, A History of Historical Writing i (New York 1942) 129.
45 S. Colombo, " Arnobio Afro e i suoi sette libri Adversus Na-
tiones," Didaskaleion 9 (1930) 3, admits the contradictions.
46 Cf. i. 26, i. 65, 2. 5, 2. 77 f., 3. 36, 4. 36, 5. 29, 6. 27.
47 A. Harnack, Die Chronologic der altchristlichen Litteratur "bis
Eusebius 2 (Leipzig 1904) 415, says 2. 5 and 4. 36 show the perse-
cutions had not stopped.
48 Optatus i. 1 8; P. Monceaux, Histoire litteraire de I'Afrique
chretienne 3 (Paris 1905) 247.
49 Bardenhewer 2. 521.
60 Harnack 2. 414.
51 Gabarrou (jOeuvre 6); U. Moricca, Storia delta letter atura latlna
cristiana i (Turin 1923) 610; S. Brandt, "Uber die dualistischen
Zusatze und die Kaiseranreden bei Lactantius," Sitzungsb. d. fe.
Akad. d. Wiss.j p'hilos.-'hist* CL, 120. 5 (Vienna 1890) 40.
52 Bardenhewer 2. 518.
53 This view is based solely on the master-pupil relationship of
Arnobius and Lactantius which will be discussed later.
54 Bryce-Campbell x.
55 On Jerome's additions to the Chronicon of Eusebius see R.
Helm, "Hieronymus' Zusatze in Eusebius' Chronik/' Philologus
Suppl. 21. 2 (1929) esp. 89 where Helm dates Arnobius in 303-310.
See also S. v, Sychowski, Hieronymus als Literarhistoriker (Kirchen-
gesch. Stud. 2. 2, Minister i. W. 1894).
244 NOTES
56 Cf. i. 13: Trecenti sunt anni ferme, minus vel plus aliquid, ex
quo coepimus esse Christian! et terrarum in orbe censeri.
67 Modern scholars are fairly well agreed that the calculation upon
which our present chronology is based was made by Dionysius
Exiguus in die sixth century. He equated the Birth of Christ with
the year we now call i B. C. and computed his own date therefrom.
While there is no unanimity as to when the historic Birth took place,
so far as our present investigation is concerned, it does not matter, for
if an error was destined to be made by Dionysius, that fact was
unknown to Arnobius.
58 Cf. Tertullian, Apol. 7.3: Census istius disciplinae, ut iam
edidimus, a Tiberio est; Lactantius, De mort. pers. 2.
59 Cf. Acts 11.26. See J. A. Kleist, ACW i (1946) 127 n. 153.
60 Bryce-Campbell ad loo. translate clumsily as 1 500 years but
correct this in the errata and it is given properly in ANF 6, ad loc.
61 See Gates, loc. cit. 313.
62 L. Cincius Alimentus, fr. 4 in H. Peter, Historicorum roman-
orum reliquiae i (Leipzig 1914) 41, quoted from Dionysius of
Halicarnassus, Ant. rom. i, 74. r : Ol. 12. 4 = 728 B. C.
63 Dionysius (ibid.*) quotes Fabius Pictor as giving the date as
OL 8.1=747 (see Peter, 1.19, fr. 6); also quoted by Syncellus,
Eusebius, and Solinus.
64 Quoted by Dion. Hal., Ant. rom. i . 74. 3 = Annales maximi, f r.
1, Peter 1.3. The same date is attributed to Q. Lutatius Carulus,
fr. 12 from Solinus 1.27 (Peter i. 194) and to Nepos and Eratos-
thenes and Apollodorus: Ol. 7. 2 = 750 B. C.
65 M. Porcius Cato, quoted by Dion. Hal., Ant. rom. i. 74. 2, says
Rome was founded 432 years after the fall of Troy = 752 B. C. See
Peter 1.61, fr. 17**.
66 M. Terentius Varro, according to Censorinus (De die not. 21),
and before him T. Pomponius Atticus 7 fr. i of his Annales (Peter
2. 7), also attributed to Cicero, give Ol. 6. 3 = 753 B. C. The same
date also appears in Plutarch (Romulus 12. 2), not mentioned by
Peter. For a compilation and discussion of all these dates, see F. K.
Ginzel, Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen Chronologie
2 (Leipzig 1911) 192-201. Ginzel cites evidence for still other dates,
all earlier.
67 ANF 6. 407.
68 Varro is cited by name twelve times in all (see index) and three
times is alluded to without being named (3. 1,3* 34, 4. 13).
69 Heraldus, cited by Orelli; Oehler xii; Bryce-Campbell xii; Crutt-
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 245
well 2.631; Monceaux 3.248; Bardenhewer 2.521; Sillier 173;
Colombo 4; Rapisarda (Arwofc. 131).
70 Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 8. 2. 14.
71 Cf. 4.36: Nam nostra quidem scripta cur ignibus meruerunt
dari? cur immaniter conventicula dirui?
72 LeNourry (Dzss. praev. in ML 5. 392 .) suggests that earlier
persecutions may have provided this information. Freppel (34)
thinks the tone too calm for the year 303. Colombo (5) emphasizes
the disturbance among the Christians at the outbreak of the persecu-
tion. Cf. Lactantius, De wort. pers. 34; Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 8. 17. 6.
73 In i. 5 Arnobius alludes to the invasion of the Mediterranean
basin by people from the lost Atlantis which he dates as "ten
thousand years ago." The source is Plato, Timaeus 236, where it is
said that Solon was told by the Egyptian priests that the invasion took
place nine thousand years before his time. Solon's dates are approxi-
mately 638-558 B. C., so Arnobius is therefore only roughly accurate
at this point.
74 Monceaux 3. 248.
75 Moricca i. 610, but on the same page he gives 284-311 as the
outer limits.
76 Dates of Arnobius by various writers are as follows: 296 A. D.:
H. F. Clinton, Fasti Romani i (London 1845) 339, 381; 2 (ibid.
1850) 433; J. Tixeront, Handbook of Patrology (tr. by S. Raemers
from 4th French ed., St. Louis 1939) 125. 297-298: LeNourry, ML
5. 393; N. Lardner, Works 2 (London 1815) 246; Freppel 33. 298:
Elmenhorst, citing Meursius, quoted by Orelli 1.292. About 300:
Sihler 171, 173 (?); Gabarrou, Oeuvre 6; McGiffert 2.39. 300-310
A. D.: Colombo 4. Just before 303: Newton 155. As late as 303:
Cruttwell 2. 631. During persecutions of 303: Rand, CAH 12. 609.
Either 297 or 303 (.preferably 303): Schaff 2.858. 303 A. D.:
Rapisarda (Arwok 241). 303-3 13: Moule 50 (but on 49 he says
Arnobius was still teaching in 303). After 303: Kriiger, New
Schaff-Herzog 1.300. 303-310 A. D. : Helm, loc. tit. 304-310: de
Labriolle 1.277 n. 2; C. Weyman 689; Micka 148 f. Probably
before 305: Bryce-Campbell xii. During persecution: Altaner,
Patrol. 109; Baynes, CAH 12. 652. 305 during or soon after perse-
cution: Bardenhewer 2.521. About 305: G. Brunner, Jahrb. f.
Liturgiew. 13 (1935) 178; Jordan 229 f. 306 A. D.: Schoenemann,
Orelli i.xxi. The correct date is, however, neatly set down by G.
Quispel (Vigiliae Christianae 2 [1948] 123) as " rfc 300 A. D/'
246 NOTES
77 Newton 155. B. Schmid, Grundlinien der Patrologie (2nd ed.,
Freiburg i. Br. 1886) 64, believes that he died after 325!
78 Bryce-Campbell (xiv) and Coxe (ANF 6. 405) think martyrdom
probable.
79 Harnack, Chron. 2.415.
80 Brandt, op. cit. 40; Moricca, i. 625.
81 Micka 146-7 n. 3, gives a long list of earlier scholars who accept
the pupil-teacher story. On the relationship of Lactantius to Arno-
bius, see Micka 145-7. C. Bailey, in his edition of Lucretius i (Ox-
ford 1947) 9, ii, says that Arnobius follows Lactantius in imputing
the words insanus, delirare, amens, to Lucretius. Since Arnobius
never applies these words to Lucretius, he can hardly be following
Lactantius in this respect.
82 E. Ffoulkes, " Lactantius," Smith and Wace, Diet, of Christ.
Biogr. 3 (London 1882) 613-7. B. Altaner, Patrologie (Freiburg i.
Br. 1938) no longer states (cf. Rauschen-Altaner, Patrologie [Frei-
burg i. Br. 1931] 153) that Jerome's assertion was made "wohl zu
Unrecht."
83 Lactantius, Div. inst. 5. i. 22 f. : Ex iis qui mihi noti sunt Minu-
cius Felix non ignobilis inter causidicos loci fuit. . . . Septimius
quoque Tertullianus fuit omni genere litterarum peritus, sed in
eloquendo parum facilis et minus comptus et multum obscurus fuit.
Ergo ne hie quidem satis celebritatis invenit. Unus igitur praecipuus
et clarus exstitit Cyprianus. Note the criticism of the style of Ter-
tullian, a point to which we shall revert a little later. Harnack
(Chron. 2. 414) is singularly in error in saying that Lactantius had
little reason to cite Arnobius.
84 Micka 149.
85 See above, pp. 2, 7.
86 Micka (150) says Arnobius was no longer in contact with
Lactantius who was called about 290 to Nicomedia and later to Gaul.
87 The view that Lactantius does not mention Arnobius because
he did not know of his work is accepted by the following: LeNourry
(ML 5. 862); N. Dufresnoy, Praef. in Lactantium 7 (ML 6. 59);
Brandt 19-21; Colombo i f. Bardenhewer 2. 531-3. McGiffert (2. 45)
says that the two works were being composed about the same time.
88 Freppel 92. Though the differences are many, a few may be
cited by way of example: (i) Lactantius shows a much broader and
much deeper knowledge of pagan literature; (2) Lactantius differs
strongly on such doctrines as the immortality of the soul and the
Divine Anger; and (3) Arnobius' attitude toward the Roman govern-
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 247
ment is one of opposition, whereas Lactantius boldly addresses Con-
stantine. Cf. C. N. Cochrane, Christianity and Classical Culture
(London-New York 1944) 191.
89 Brandt 19 f.
90 Micka 152 n. 15.
91 Moricca i. 649.
92 G. Molignoni, " Lattanzio apologeta," Didaskaleion 5 fasc. 3
(1927) 151.
93 Yet, as we have seen, some regard Arnobius as not a profound
thinker and such a resemblance in any case is hardly significant.
94 Brandt, loc. cit. and CSEL 19. i, pp. cii, 89, 181, and the index
of authors in CSEL 27. 2. 245.
95 M. Pohlenz, Vom Zorne Gottes (Forsch. z. Ret. u. Lit. d. alien
u. neuen Test. 12, Gottingen 1909) 49 n. i. He objects to Brandt's
views in regard to a comparison of Arnobius 2. 35 with Lactantius
2. 14.4; Arnobius 5. 18 with Lactantius 1.22.9.
96 Micka 152 n. 15 sees resemblances also between Arnobius 2. 51
and Lactantius; between Arnobius 3. 17 and De op. dei 17. 6, but
on 1 52 f . he thinks Brandt's and Pohlenz' view of the dependence of
Lactantius on Arnobius is not probable.
97 Cf. Micka 147 f. and 152-4, 156.
98 Micka 153. Cf. Monceaux 3.290.
"Micka 157.
100 Micka 151 n. 13.
101 De Labriolle (1.291) and Brandt (CSEL 19. xi) say it was
Pico della Mirandola that first called Lactantius this.
102 In 2. 7 there is a noncommittal reference to dreams as a subject
for investigation.
103 Oehler x.
104 Bryce-Campbell x.
106 CAH 12.609.
107 Freppel 32.
108 Moule 50.
109 Gabarrou, Oeu-vre yf v in reference to Arnobius 1.45 and the
argument against philosophy in Book Two.
110 Cruttwell 2. 631.
111 A. Neander, General History of the Christian Religion and
Church 2 (tr. by J. Torrey, London 1851) 449. He quite naively
speaks of the " free, independent manner in which he seems to have
248 NOTES
come to Christianity, through the reading of the New Testament,
especially the gospels."
112 Cumont 220 n. 55.
113 Oeuvre 5, derived from Monceaux 3. 245.
114 De Labriolle 254.
115 Monceaux 3. 245.
116 Moricca i. 609.
117 Bryce-Campbell xi-xii.
118 A. D. Nock, Conversion: the Old and the New in Religion
from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo (Oxford 1933) 258.
119 Neander 2. 450; Schaff 2, 858,
120 Bryce-Campbell x.
121 Sihler 167.
122 Rapisarda, Arnob. 7.
123 LeNourry 5. 391*
124 Freppel 32.
125 CAH 12. 609.
126 Geffcken 287.
127 Salvatorelli 105.
128 Cited by Rapisarda, Arnob. 7.
129 Moule 50.
130 Sententiae episcoporum numero LXXXVII de "kaereticis bapti-
zandis 28 * CSEL 3 (Cyprian) i. 447. 9-13 Hartel = ANF 7. 653. Cf.
Mesnage 92 .; H. Leclercq, "Kef (El)," DACL 8. i (1928) 690;
CIL 8, p. 197; RE 2. R., 2 (1923) 2187 f.; Gabarrou, Oeuvre 5.
131 Rapisarda, Arnob. 10.
132 On the credibility of Jerome's account of Lucretius see C,
Bailey's edition of the poet (Oxford 1947) i. i; 2. 1529, which is in
general skeptical. For the opposite view see J. Masson, Lucretius,
Epicurean and Poet (London 1907) 44: "It is one marked bias of
the scholar to be skeptical as to any recorded event which is not
conventional or commonplace, anything which transcends the ex-
perience of the persons among whom he moves."
133 Lardner (245) regards the story as an interpolation, as, of
course, it is, an interpolation by Jerome into Eusebius* Chronicon,
but that does not mean that it is false. Gwatkin (r. 195) believes
Arnobius* ignorance of Scripture shows that the Christians were
afraid of him, but see below.
134 Trithemus 53 (for the text, cf. below, n. 384). Moule (49)
actually takes Trithemius to be a valid source on Arnobius.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 249
135 Cruttwell (2. 642) says he was not a ^presbyter; McGiffert
(2. 43) that he was a layman.
136 ANF 6. 405; M. Richard, " Enfer," DTC 6. i (1939) 61.
137 Colombo 11-15.
138 It is condemned by Micka 42 n. 47, who merely says that
Arnobius shows a "marked tendency to cling to pagan ideas."
Moricca (1.613) savs Arnobius was more a philosopher than a
Christian. Monceaux (3. 242) thinks the references to the theater
are autobiographical but no more is meant than that as a pagan he
probably attended the theater.
139 Gabarrou, Oeuvre 7.
140 St. Jerome, Epistula 58 (Ad Paulinum) 10: Arnobius inaequalis
et nimius est et absque opens sui partitione confusus.
141 Freppel (35) comments on the regular plan of composition
throughout and objects to Jerome's criticism but he thinks Book Two
is moderately (" passablement ") confused. Salvatorelli (107) says
" Arnobio manca di sviluppo metodico delle idee/' a statement hardly
correct. Even Rapisarda, staunch defender of Arnobius as he is, says
(Amok, i) that the Adversus nationes is "un opera nelT insieme
poco ordinata."
142 Cf . the remarks on the ridiculous nature of the pagan gods in
i. 28, a topic developed in detail in Books Three to Five.
143 While it must be admitted that in later books Arnobius often
appears to be answering hypothetical objections of hypothetical
pagans in order to bring out his own contentions, it seems reasonably
clear that in Book One he is answering only actual objections.
144 Gwatkin (i. 194) calls this a most spirited answer though not
so deep as that of Origen.
145 Clement of Alexandria, Protr. 8. Cf. also Tertullian, Apol.
47 ff.; Ps.- Justin, Cohort, ad Gent. 35 f.
146 See Book One, nn. 299 f. Cf. Rapisarda, Arndb. 108.
147 Cf. 2. i, 3. 2 and p. u, above.
148 Duchesne (2. 42) speaks of Amobius' view of the immortality
[sic] of the soul in such a way as to make it appear that he believes
Arnobius espoused this doctrine but had an imperfect view of it.
149 Cf. 2. 20 ff. De Labriolle (1.281 f.) thinks this view of the
soul shows Stoic influence.
150 De Labriolle 1.284.
151 McGiffert 2. 39 f . In making the statement that only the first
two books are of interest " for us/' McGiffert may have meant the
quoted words to apply only to persons interested, as he was in that
2,50 NOTES
book, in the history of Christian thought, not in the broader aspects
of Arnobius.
152 A highly illuminating example of the truth of this charge is
to be found in the Hi^olytus of Euripides though the example is
not, in fact, used by Arnobius. Hippolytus is the unfortunate victim
of a conflict between the desire of Aphrodite to cause all men to
love and the contrary wish of Artemis to preserve Hippolytus'
chastity. Artemis clearly points out (1325-34) that she would have
been glad to interfere with Aphrodite's actions and save Hippolytus
from death but that there is among the gods a law that no god will
oppose the will of another but stand aside.
153 Orelli i.v.
154 See above, p. n.
155 Kettner, Introd.
ise Bryce-Campbell xii.
157 The transposition at the beginning of Book Two is of another
kind, palaeographic in character. See 2. 3 and n. 3.
158 But Bardenhewer (2.521) thinks the Adversus nationes is
probably complete.
159 1 do not refer to passages in which there are three synonyms
in a row, a rhetorical device characteristic of the period. Cf. E. S.
Bouchier, Life and Letters in Roman Africa (Oxford 1913) 101-3.
160 IInd. 10 1.
161 Bryce-Campbell xiv; Cruttwell 2. 641, but far superior to Ter-
tullian in clearness and neatness. Milton also thought the style of
Arnobius bad: see 1C E. Hartwell, Lactantius and Milton (Cam-
bridge, Mass. 1929) 40.
152 A. Julicher, RE i (1894) I2o6f.
163 A. J. Festugiere, Memorial Lagrange (Paris 1940) 101 n. 3.
164 Brandt 13.
165 Freppel 92. The following sentence doubtless reflects the
politics of the pre-Franco-Prussian War period: "II faut en verite"
un aplomb tout germanique pour oser vanter la sobriet6 du style
d'Arnobe." Orelli's dictum is found in ML 5. r29ic.
166 Foakes- Jackson 169, but he is probably confusing Arnobius
with Lactantius. See above, n. i.
167 Bryce-Campbell xiv-xv.
168 Cf., e. g,, 1.31 and Micka 40-42.
169 De Labriolle 1.277.
170 Ibid. i. 288. He suggests particularly Voltaire's Taureau "blanc
and the Lettres d'Amabed. To Wright (140) the irony is inferior
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 251
but Rapisarda (Amok. 196 f.) claims Amobius made large contribu-
tions to the development of Christian literature. He sees (229) none
of the pretended Semitic sources in the Latin but does see reflections
of a knowledge of Greek 083).
171 Rapisarda (Amok 256-8) thinks that if Arnobius modelled his
style on any author, it was Cicero, not Sallust.
172 The Arnobian nimietas, to use Jerome's trenchant criticism:
nimius est (cf. above, n. 140).
173 Sihler 168. On vocabulary paralleling that of Lucretius,
Plautus, Cato, and Varro, see W. Tschiersch, De Arnobii studiis
latinis (diss. Jena 1905). Tschiersch's belief that these archaistic
reflections stem only from frequent use of a lexicon, rather than from
reading of the authors, is preposterous.
174 For the evidence, see below, n. 293.
175 Freppel 90 f. No neologisms were noted by him but many
archaisms.
176 Compare the contention of H. L. Mencken, The American
Language (4th ed. New York 1936) 127^, that there are in
" American " many such locutions which have become archaic in the
English of the British Isles. I have deliberately refrained from dis-
cussing the much-vexed question of africitas.
177 Oehler ix.
178 Norden 2. 605 n. i.
179 On Arnobius' language, consult the following: LeNourry (ML
5.690-714); C. Stange, De Arnobii oratione (Progr. Saargemund
1893); J. Scharnagl, De Arnobii Maioris latinitate pars i (Progr.
Gorz 1894, printed 1895); P. Spindler, De Arnobii genere dicendi
(diss. Strassburg 1901); Tschiersch, loc. cit.; J. H. Schmalz, " Satzbau
und Negationen bei Arnobius," Glotta 5 (1914) 202-8; F. Gabarrou,
Le latin d'Arnobe (Paris 1921); K. J. Hiden, De casuum syntaxi
Arnobii, in his De Arnobii Adversus nationes libris VII commenta-
tiones 3 (Helsingfors 1921); H. Koch, " Zum Ablativgebrauch bei
Cyprian von Karthago und andern Schriftstellern," Rhein. Mus. 87
(1929) 427-432; Rapisarda, Arnob. 185-263.
180 C. Stange, De Arnobii oratione: II. De clausula Arnobiana
(Progr. Saargemund 1893), while still approved by Rapisarda (Arao-
Tzio 260), is strongly criticized by E. Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa
2 (Leipzig-Berlin 1909) 946. Norden maintains that Arnobius ob-
serves the rule of the clausulae before all stronger stops, almost all
of the weaker.
181 T. Lorenz, De clausulis arnobianis (diss, Breslau 1910).
17 T
252 NOTES
182 E. Ldfstedt, Arnobiana, Lunds Univ. Arsskr. (Lund 1917).
183 H. Hagendahl, La prose metrique d'Arnobe contributions a la
connaissance de la prose litteraire de I'empire, in Goteborgs Hog-
skolas Arsskr. 42 (1936) i (Goteborg 1937). See the reviews by B.
Axelson, Gnomon 15 (1939) 89-99, and by H. D. Broadhead, Class.
Rev, 52 (1938) 148, the latter unfavorable.
184 Their formulations of the clausulae are as follows:
Lorenz: I. - Lofstedt I. * - - - -
II. - - - - ~ ~ EL ^ ~ ^ ~ ~
HI. _ w - - w - ,- HI. * ~ ^ * ~ ~.
IV. s,
Cf. G. Wiman, Text Studier till Arnobius, Svenskt Arkiv /. hum.
Avhandl. 4 (Goteborg 1931) vi.
185 L. W. Jones, An Introduction to Divine and Human Readings
by Cassiodorus Senator (New York 1946) 39.
186 St. Jerome, Epistula 62 (Ad Tranquillinum) 2: Origenem
propter eruditionera sic interdum legendum arbitror, quo modo Ter-
tullianum, et Novarum, Arnobium, et Apollinarium et nonnullos
ecclesiasticos scriptores Graecos pariter et Latinos, ut bona eorum
eligamus vitemusque contraria (CSEL 54. 583 Hilberg).
187 Micka 158.
188 Geffcken 287.
189 On this point cf. Gwatkin i. 195; Moule 50; Micka 75-6; de
Labriolle i. 278-80; Moricca i. 611; Gabarrou, Oeuvre 64.
190 Cf. i. 17, 2. 58, 3. 10, 3. 12, 6. 2, 7. 5, 7. 8, 7. 36.
191 Schaff (2. 858) says that Arnobius quotes from the New Testa-
ment once (i Cor. 3. 19); Micka (74) that he knew the Scriptures,
at least the New Testament (cf, i. 74 .), but read little of it or did
not understand it well. Cf. Leckelt, tfber des Arnobius Schrift:
Adversus nationes (Progr. Neisse 1884) 7.
192 Newton 159.
193 Illud vulgatum.
194 Cf. Gwatkin i. 145. Marchesi, Questioni 1026, says he had not
read the Epistle.
195 Reifferscheid 8, 289.
196 Rapisarda (Amok. 9-11, 102) will have none of this theory of
Arnobius' ignorance of the Scriptures. Dr. Plumpe acutely remarks
that the silence is doubtless caused by lack of a copy of the Bible;
that numerous precious copies of the Bible were consumed by flames
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 253
during the persecution under Diocletian (cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl.
8. 2. 14); and that Arnobius himself very probably alludes to this
(4. 2,6) : nam nostra quidem scripta cur ignibus meruerunt dari?
197 That knowledge of New Testament passages could have been
obtained orally from other Christians or in catechetical instruction is
the view of Leckelt (8); Monceaux (3. 266). F. P. Badham 7 " Arno-
bius and the ' Gospel of Peter/ " Academy 49 (1896) 177 f., compares
i. 46 with Matthew 15. 30 f. and thinks Arnobius was here indebted
to the apocryphal Gospel of Peter.
198 De Labriolle (i. 285 f.) thinks that he had no thought of con-
verting the pagans, and, indeed, only a pagan already on the point
of conversion would have been likely to be greatly influenced by
Arnobius.
199 1 omit, as not quite in the same category, the inclusion in the
list of miracles in 1.45, one not recorded in the Gospels, which is
probably a confusion of the speaking with tongues at the Day of
Pentecost. This is an error, not evidence of ignorance.
200 Dr. Plumpe points out that something like this (Matt. 5. 44)
would be apt to stick in Arnobius' memory because it was based on
a principle diametrically opposed to the Jewish attitude, as indicated
by the Lord Himself in the preceding verse.
201 Arnobius conveniently forgets that, according to pagan wit-
nesses, various gods had actually appeared to human beings.
202 So Marchesi, Question* 1025, but for the opposite view, cf.
Rapisarda, Amok, n, 103, citing Nam quia proni . . . purgemus
(Adv. nat. 1.27).
203 In 7. 32 (see n. ad foe.) there is ignorance of Christmas and in
7. 26 the criticism of incense as used by the pagans implies that
either Arnobius did not know incense was used by Christians or that
it was not so used in his day. The latter alternative is certainly
correct.
204 Cf. 1.62.
205 McGiffert 2. 43 f .
206 The view that Christ is personally one with the Father and
indistinguishable from Him and the Sonship is only one of the
' modes ' or manifestations of God.
207 The view that the Father and Son are completely separate
beings.
208 Cruttwell 2. 633.
209 Micka 53, citing J. Alzog, Grundriss der Patrologie (4th ed,
Freiburg i. Br. 1888) 214.
254 NOTES
210 Brunner 174^ Rapisarda (Amok. 108) maintains on the con-
trary that the exposition of die Incarnation in i. 53 and i. 62 f. is not
clear.
211 Rapisarda (Amok 107, 124) thinks no occasion was offered for
mentioning the dogma of the Trinity. He admits that the epithets
of superiority frequently applied to God are intended to differentiate
Him not from Christ but from the pagan pantheon. Cf . Book One,
n. 101.
212 Gabarrou, Oeuvre 13.
213 Cf. 2. 49; Micka 61-65.
214 Marchesi, Questioni 1025.
215 Rapisarda, Arnob. 11, no, but cf. naf. On the Resurrection,
see ibid. 94.
216 Cruttwell 2. 638.
217 Marchesi, Questioni 1027. J. Hontheim, " Hell," Cath. Encycl.
7 (1910) 208, points out that Arnobius takes the view of the tem-
porariness of the punishment in Hell (called by some writers
' annihilationisrn '), in which he is like some of the Gnostics (the
Valentinians) but Hontheim does not make the point that he was
consciously influenced by the Valentinians. B. B. Warfield,
" Annihilationism," New Schaff-Herzog Encycl. i (1908) 184^,
calls Arnobius the earliest genuine annihilationist.
218 McGiffert 2. 44.
219 For example, one might conclude from 6.19 that Arnobius
had no conception of the all-pervading presence of God but for the
fact that in 6. 4 there is a peculiarly beautiful formulation of that
doctrine. Baynes (CAH 12. 652) says Arnobius denies Providence.
220 Gabarrou, Oeuvre 65, citing 6. 3, 7. i, 7. 26, 7. 28.
' 221 Cf. 4. 36: conventiculum; see Book 4, nn. 263 .
222 Micka 60.
223 For evidence on the Divine Anger in Scripture, see Micka 2-7.
I cannot agree with Schaff (2. 859) who says that Arnobius' doctrine
of God is scriptural,
224 Micka 46.
225 Micka 35-59, 65-74.
226 For the evidence, see Micka 17-21.
227 See Micka 25-30.
228 See again Micka 21-34.
229 p or fjjg p a g an view, see Micka 7-17, 34.
230 Micka (17) acutely remarks that the pagan position as exempli-
fied by the philosophers must be distinguished from that of the
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 255
common people who not only believed in the gods' anger but sought
to appease them. This point of view is expressed in the conversion
passage (1.39).
231 Micka 76.
232 Jvlicka 2.) savs the Stoics and Epicureans were the chief Greek
philosophers affecting Arnobius; elsewhere (8, 13) he makes them
the only ones. On the Divine Anger among pagans, see Cicero,
De off. 3. 28. 102: At hoc quidem commune est omnium philoso-
phorum numquam nee irasci Deum, nee nocere. For the view that
the gods dwell apart from humans, see Lucretius 2. 646-8; Cicero,
De nat. deor. 1.17. 45; i. 18. 8; i. 19. 51; i. 20. 54; Plutarch, De def.
orac. 19. 420 b; Seneca, De ben. 4. 19 f. On possible parallels with
Stoicism, see Rapisarda, Arnob* 46 f .
233 LeNourry (ML 5.469). Cf. Micka 54 n. 57; J. Tixeront,
History of Dogmas i (3rd English ed. tr. by H. L. B. from the 5th
French ed., St. Louis 1930) 413 f.
234 Micka (47, 59, 1 59) points out that Arnobius appears to have
no fear of contradicting himself and that this inconsistency saves
him from further errors. Cf. also de Labriolle i. 290.
235 See below, n. 293.
236 E. Klussmann, " Arnobius und Lucrez oder ein durchgang
durch den Epikuraismus zum Christenthum," Philologus 26 (1867)
362-6.
237 C. Bailey in his edition of Lucretius (vol. i, p. 8) says that
Arnobius " attacks " Lucretius but I nowhere find any evidence to
support this statement.
238 Gabarrou (Oeuvre 27-36) thinks Francke exaggerates the Epi-
cureanism in Arnobius.
239 Cf. J. Jessen, " Ober Lucrez und sein Verbal tnis zu Catull und
Spateren," Jahresloer. u* d. Kieler Gelehrtenschule 1 872, 1 7-20 : " Es
scheint dass Arnobius, bei dern der rhetor bedeutend mehr als der
philosoph hervortritt, den Lucrez mehr als stilmuster als wegen des
epikuraischen inhalts studiert hat/'
240 F. Dal Pane, " Se Arnobio si e stato un epicureo : Lucrezio e gli
apologeti cristiani Minucio Felice, Tertulliano, Cipriano, Lattanzio,"
Riv. di stor. antica 10 (1906) 403-35; n (1907) 222-36. I have been
unable to find a copy of his work, De Lucretii imitatione apud Arno-
bium (Florence 1901) in which he studied merely the literary imita-
tions. Cf. also Gabarrou, Oeuvre 27 ff.; Monceaux 3. 254, 262; G.
Kriiger, Realencycl. f. <prot. Theol. u. Kirche 2 (3rd ed. ? Leipzig
1897) 1 1 6.
256 NOTES
241 A. Rohricht, Die Seelenlehre des Arnobius nach ihren Quellen
und ihrer Entstehung untersucht (Hamburg 1893) 2-21: "Ver-
haltnis des Arnobius zu Lucrez und dem Epikuraismus "; also his
De Clemente Alexandrine Arnobii in irridendo gentilium cultu
auctore (diss. Kiel: Hamburg 1892) 40.
242 See the whole section (141-62). Elsewhere (174) he points
out the importance of Epicurus' first Principal Doctrine for this view.
243 Marchesi, Questioni 1024. Cf. H. Hagendahl, " De latinska
apologeterna och Lucretius," Eranos 35 (1937) 41-67, esp. 49-67 on
Arnobius.
244 Atzberger 573 f .
245 Geffcken 287. Cf, 2. 20 8., 2. 54.
246 Freppel 76.
247 Micka 76 f .
248 Rapisarda, Arnob. 25.
249 Cruttwell 2.641.
250 Ibid.
251 Ibid. i. 182. In 2. 640 Cruttwell would have it that Arnobius
hardly realized the exclusiveness of Christianity. G. Quispel, in his
review of Rapisarda, Vigiliae Christianize 2 (1949) 123, alludes to
affinities with Karl Earth.
252 See Book Two.
253 M. Leigh, " A Christian Skeptic of the Fourth Century: Some
Parallels between Arnobius and Pascal," Hibbert Jour. 19 (1920-1)
254 Rapisarda, Arnob. 68; G. Quispel, Vigiliae Christianae 2 (1948)
123.
255 \^ Q Halliday, The Pagan Background of Early Christianity
(Liverpool-London 1925) 170.
256 Shahan 747; Schaff 2.858; Altaner 10 (with some caution);
Rand, CAH 12. 609; A. Ebert, Allgemeine Geschichte der Litteratur
des Mittelalters im Abendlande i (Leipzig 1889) 71; Bardenhewer,
2. 522; Monceaux 3. 268; Moricca i. 612; A. Stockl, Geschichte der
christlichen Philoso'phie zur Zeit der Kirchenvater (Mainz 1891)
1 86; Micka 43 n, 10 (he thinks 'primus' and 'princeps' imply the
existence of other gods [2. 6, 2. 2], and cites the end of 3. 24 and
7- 23).
257 LeNourry 2. 4 (ML 5. 399); Leckelt 9; Marchesi, Questioni
1009-18.
258 Cruttwell 2. 640.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 257
259 Leckelt 9 f . Micka (42 f .) says Leckelt's arguments are not
cogent.
260 On the daemones cf. 1.23, 1.45, 1.50, 1.56, 2.25, 2,. 35.
Micka (42 f .) thinks it surprising that Arnobius did not equate the
daemones with the pagan gods and lists (43 n. 8) other Christian
writers who did.
261 In 2. 35 f.; cf. also 2. 62, 6. 3, 7. 35.
262 Cf . 2. 62.
263 Cf. 6. 3. Geffcken (290) thinks the idea of lesser gods comes
from PlotklUS TT^OS r. yvocrr. = Enn. 2. 9.
264 Even Micka (45 f.) says Amobius' teaching is "quite per-
plexing " and that no conclusion can be reached; Salvatorelli (107),
that on the existence of the gods Arnobius is vague.
265 Marchesi, Questioni 1016.
266 This is certainly wrong; cf . the evidence cited above.
267 1 am unable to agree with Micka C? 2 ) who says that the words
' God ' and * gods ' are used almost indiscriminately by Arnobius.
263 Micka (47) accuses LeNourry of trying to prove Arnobius
orthodox and of reading into his text what is not there. Leckelt (15)
and Dal Pane (228 f .) do not follow LeNourry, but Rapisarda
(Araofc. 2, 52, 79, 125 and passim) is to date the strongest defender
of Arnobius' orthodoxy.
269 E. v. Dobschiitz, Das Decretum Gelasianum de libris recipiendis
et -non recipiendis (Texte u. Unters. 3. R., 8. 3, Leipzig 1912) esp.
315; ML 59. 163 and 178. See Colombo 26.
270 V. Dobschiitz 12, line 320 of the text. In modern times a
similar criticism was voiced against our author by French Jesuits.
Cf. de Labriolle i. 290.
271 Bardenhewer 2. 521 f.
272 Cf. i. 59. It is the hypothetical pagan opponent who speaks
here.
273 For the places in which all these writers are cited, consult the
index. For a list of the authors cited, classified according to type of
writing, see Gabarrou, Oeuvre 1 1 .
274 Though this name is Roman, the work cited was in Greek.
275 Schaff (2. 858) says he quotes "freely" from Homer but there
is only a single citation. There are, however, several allusions to the
Trojan War and these may be what Schaff means. See following
note.
276 Rapisarda (Arrok 255) is sure Arnobius knew both the Iliad
and Odyssey, Pindar, Hesiod, and Euripides.
258 NOTES
277 If Flaccus is Granius Flaccus, then he is cited five times.
278 v Valerianus ' may be an error for ' Valerius Antias.'
279 In i. 3, 2. 71, 7. 9, 7. 38, 7. 44 (fcis), but I am not sure that
Arnobius had actually read the annales.
280 Cf. 6. 1 1.
281 Cf. 3. 11, 4. 14, 4. 15, 4. 18 (teO, 5. 5, 5. 8.
282 Cf. i. 3, 5. i, 5. 15, 5. 1 8, 5. 32, 7. 28, 7. 44, 7. 46, 7. 49.
283 Cf . 2. 62.
284 Cf. 2. 73.
285 Rapisarda is convinced that Arnobius knew Horace (242),
Vergil (248 f.), Ovid (253), Lucan (254) and Juvenal (254).
286 Sihler 168. Elsewhere (169) he maintains that Arnobius knew
Plato, Epicurus, Epictetus, Lucretius, and Hermippus well. He is
certainly right in regard to Plato and Lucretius, possibly right about
Epicurus (for which author I am more cautious than Rapisarda),
but we cannot be sure about the others.
287 See Book Four, n. 164.
288 Cicero, Tusc. i. 4. 7; i. 10. 22.
289 G. Burner, Vergils Einfluss bei den Kirchenschriftstellern der
vornikanischen Periode (diss. Erlangen 1902) 36-38 (merely a list,
not always sound); P. Spindler, De Arndbii genere dicendi (diss.
Strassburg 1901) 11-14; Rapisarda (Arnok 165) gives a list also.
290 Rohricht, Seelenlehre 22. Cf. Sihler 169.
291 Gabarrou, Oeuvre 17, 21-27. The same conclusion is affirmed
by Rapisarda (78).
292 For borrowings from Plato see the introductory note to Book
Two and the notes on the following chapters: Book One: 5, 8, 52,
64; Book Two: 7, 9, 13, 1 6, 19, 21, 24, 25, 30, 36, 52, 62, 64, 69;
Book Three: 30, 32, 35; Book Four: 16.
293 p or imitations and borrowings from Lucretius and Epicurus,
see the notes on the following chapters: Book One: 2, 3, u, 17, 20,
25> 3*> 33> 38, 39J Book Two: 2, 5-7, 9, 10, 14, 16, 20, 23, 26-30,
3 2 > 33. 37. 43> 55> 5?-59> 61, 66, 69; Book Three: 5, 9, 10, 13, 28,
32, 33, 41; Book Four: 2, 8, 21, 24, 35; Book Six: 8, 15, 20; Book
Seven: 4, 17, 27, 32, 43, 49. See also Spindler 3-11; Wassenberg
32 f.; Rohricht, Seelenlehre 2-19; Gabarrou, Oeuvre 17, 28-37; Sihler
169; Dal Pane opp. dtt.; H. Hagendahl, Eranos 35 (1937) 49-67.
Bailey in his edition of Lucretius (vol. i. 137) points out that in
Lucretius there are many words which elsewhere appear only in
Apuleius and Arnobius. On the resemblance of Arnobius to
Apuleius, see Bouchier 101-3.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 259
294 See above, n. 3. See 7. 16 for evidence that Arnobius was un-
acquainted with certain passages in Plutarch, Juvenal, and Ovid.
205 Hf Zielinski, Cicero im Wandel der Jahrhunderte (3rd ed. ?
Leipzig-Berlin 1912) 98, admits that Arnobius was indebted to
Cicero. Cf. also LeNourry (ML 5.397); Gabarrou, Oeuvre 17; de
Labriolle i. 287.
296 For dependence on Cicero's works, see the following chapters
and the corresponding Notes: De not. deor.: 3. 5, 3. 6, 3. 8-io 7 3. 12-
M> 3* J 7> 3- 22 > 3-38, 4- J 4> 4- 1 5> 4- J 8> 6.21; Tusc. disp.: 2.9,
n. 52; De div.: i. 63, n. 304.
297 For pagan criticism of the pagan cults, see the following: P.
Decharme, La critique des traditions religieuses chez les Grecs des
origines au temps de Phitarque (Paris 1904); B. v. Borries, Quid
veteres philosophi de idolatria senserint (diss. Gottingen 1918); de
Labriolle i . 286 f .
298 Cf . 4. 29.
299 Cf . 7. i f .
300 The reader will long have wondered whether a good deal of
the learning displayed by Arnobius is not derived from secondhand
reading of manuals available to him from earlier times. I think this
is a possibility but not in every case. Cf. the review, by W. H.
Stahl, of P. Courcelle: Les lettres grecques en Occident de Macrobe
a Cassiodore (Paris 1943), in Class. Weekly 41 (1947) 21: (The
seemingly erudite compilers of the period) "often pretend to be
drawing upon Plato and Aristotle, although it is evident that they
are not familiar with the original works but are repeating cliches
handed down through the centuries." The period described by Cour-
celle is somewhat later than that of Arnobius but the quotation is
perhaps apt for him also.
301 See M. Schanz C. Hosius G. Kriiger, Geschichte der ro-
mischen Litteratur 3 (3rd ed. ? Munich 1922) 181. For the fragments
see G. Kettner, Cornelius Labeo, em Beitrag zur Quellenkritik des
Arnobius (Prog. Pforta, Naumburg 1877), Part 3; Gabarrou, Oeuvre
46-53, cf. 17, 38-53; J. Miilleneisen, De C. Labeonis jragmentis,
studiis, adsectatorilous (diss. Marburg: Leipzig 1889). Cf. also W.
A. Baehrens, Cornelius Labeo atque eius commentarius Vergilianus
(Leipzig 1918).
302 ygjg silence, while not necessarily a conclusive argument
against the Labeonian theory, is very strong, and the Labeonians
have not attempted seriously to meet it. Bardenhewer (2. 532) and
Micka (154 nn. I9f.) maintain that both Lactantius and Arnobius
260 NOTES
do not ordinarily mention their sources, but I suspect that, so far as
Arnobius is concerned, they are basing their conclusion in large part
on the silence as to Labeo.
803 W. Bousset, rev. of J. Kroll, Die Lehren des Hermes Tris-
megistos (diss. Munster i. W. 1913), in Gott. Gelehrt. Anz. 176.12,
(1914) 697-755; "Zur Damonologie der spateren Antike," Archiv f.
Religions. 18 (1915) 134-75*
804 B. Boehm, De Cornelii Ldbeonis aetate (diss. Konigsberg 1913).
305 F. Niggetiet, De Cornelia Labeone (Munster i. W. 1908).
SOB \Y. Kroll, " Die Zeit des Cornelius Labeo," Rhein. Mus. n. F,
71 (1916) 309-57. F. Tullius, Die Quellen des Arnobius im 4., 5.
und 6. Buch seiner Schrift Adversus Nationes (diss. Berlin: Bottrop
1934) 68 n. 157, expresses extreme doubt as to the date of Labeo. It
should be said for Kroll that while he believes that Arnobius used
Labeo in 2. 62, he thinks it very improbable that Labeo is all he
used; and that Porphyry and the Oracula Chaldaica were among the
other sources (66 ff.).
307 Besides the other scholars already cited, see W. Kahl, " Cor-
nelius Labeo, ein Beitrag zur spat-romischen Litteraturgeschichte,"
Philologus SuppL 5, Heft 5 (1889) 717-807; Rohricht, Seelenlehre
30-42 : " Verhaltnis des Arnobius zu Cornelius Labeo "; F. Dal Pane,
" Sopra la fonte di un passo di Arnobio (V, 18)," Stud, ital. di flol.
d. 9 (1901) 30; Geffcken 289; R. Agahd, " M. Terenti Varronis
rerum divinarum libri I. XIV. XV. XVI," Jahrb. /. klass. Phil Suppl.
24 (1898) 123; de Labriolle 1.287 n. i; Cumont 278, nn. 49 f.;
Colombo 118-124; -A- S. Ferguson, in W. Scott, Hermetica 4 (Ox-
ford 1936) 474-83; Duchesne 2.42; F. J. Dolger, IX0Y2 2 (1922)
23 n. i.
308 St. Augustine, De civ. Dei 2. n; 3. 25; cf. also 9. i.
309 The gentilicium is supplied from Macrobius, Sat. 1.12.21,
i. 16. 28, i. 18. 21, 2. 4. 6,
310 See above, n. 306.
611 A. J. Festugiere, ' La doctrine des " Uiri noui " sur Torigine et
sur le sort des &mes d'apres Arnobe, II, n-66/ Memorial Lagrange
(Paris 1940) 97-132. G. Bardy, who prepared the 3rd edition of de
Labriolle's Histoire, remarks (287 n. i) that the influence of Labeo
on Arnobius has probably been " beaucoup exag6r6." Rapisarda, how-
ever, curiously enough, still holds (Anzofc. 77) to the antiquated
conclusions of Kettner and KahL
812 Tullius 73.
313 Tullius 57 f.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 261
314 Tullius 8- jo.
315 Gabarrou, Oeuvre 21-3.
316 Festugiere, table, 128 f.
317 Cf. Rapisarda, Arnob. 10.
318 Cruttwell (2. 642), but he also thinks that Arnobius had
hardly read Tertullian with whom he had little in common. Arno-
bius, he says, is unlike Minucius and not an imitator. He certainly
is original.
319 Colombo 28-30.
320 Coxe, ANF 6. 405.
521 Gabarrou, Oeuvre 17.
322 Ibid. 73. He also thinks (68) that Francke is wrong in saying
that Arnobius knew his predecessors well. I am glad to note that
J. H. Waszink, the latest editor of Quinti Septimi Florentis Tertul-
liani De anima (Amsterdam 1947) 48*, believes that that work
exerted no influence upon Arnobius whatever. See my review of
Waszink in Class. Jour. 44 (1949) no. 5.
323 De Labriolle 1.287.
824 His article in Africa romana (Milan 1935) 195 is cited by
Rapisarda, Arnob. 10.
325 Freppel 45.
326 Geffcken 287 f.
327 LeNourry (ML 5. 397),
328 Bryce-Campbell xvii.
329 Kettner 2.
330 Coxe, ANF 6. 405.
331 C. Brakman, Miscella tertia (Leyden 1917) 28.
332 Colombo 118-124; Gabarrou, Oeuvre 17; de Labriolle 1.287;
Micka 71 n. 30; Moricca i. 616; Geffcken 288 n. i.
83a Rohricht, De Clemente.
334 Bouchier 102. This remark may hardly amount to opposition
to Rohricht since he merely says Arnobius owes more to the pagans
than to Clement.
335 For example, he concludes (8-10) that in 6.6 Arnobius and
Clement had a common source, inferior to Clement in precision but
copied blindly by Arnobius. This source must have been later than
Sammonicus, the last author cited by Arnobius in the section
dependent upon it, and, of course, earlier than Clement who used it.
336 Hagendahl, Prose metrique 2. See the review of Tullius by B.
Reynders, Rech. theol. anc. med. 8 (1936) 109.
262 NOTES
337 E. Rapisarda, Clemente fonte di Arnoblo (Turin 1939). Cf.
also his Arndbio (Catania 1945) i, 10, 49, 63.
838 For the evidence, see the Notes on 3.30, 3.39, 4.21, 4.22,
4. 25, 4. 29, 5. i, 6. i, 6. 3, 6. 10, 6. 12, 7. 49.
339 For the evidence, see 1*39, n. 199; 3. 16, and 6.21. The re-
maining parallel is to be derived from the Octavius 34. 10 where
Minucius appears to favor the belief in the mortality of the soul, a
cardinal doctrine with Arnobius. Coxe (ANF 4. 198, Elucid. Ill)
denies, however, that this statement of Minucius is to be interpreted
in such fashion. I dissent.
340 Halm (CSEL2.3o).
341 R, Heinze, " Tertullians Apologeticum," Ber. sacks. Ges. d. W.
62. 10 (1910) 354 b. 2.
342 W. Kroll, " Amobiusstudien," Rhein. Mus. n. F. 72 (1917) 86.
343 Tullius 17.
344 This assumes that Adversus nationes is the right title and that
Adversus gentes is wrong, but there is really little doubt on the
point; see above, 5.
345 Several good examples may be found in Tertullian, Apol. 9.
In Arnobius the device is too frequent to require citation.
346 Cf., for example, Tertullian, Apol. 13. i: Sed nobis dei sunt,
inquis.
347 Tertullian, Apol. 21. 17 Arnobius i. 50.
348 Tertullian, Apol. 17. 5-6 Arnobius 2. 3.
349 Tertullian, Apol. 3. 4; Ad not. i. 4 Arnobius 2. 5.
350 Tertullian, Ad not. i. 10 Arnobius 2. 71.
351 Tertullian, Apol. 10. 6 Arnobius 2, 71,
352 Tertullian, Apol. 19 Arnobius 2. 71.
353 Tertullian, Apol. 6. 8 Arnobius 2. 73.
354 Tertullian, Apol. 15 Arnobius 3. u.
355 Tertullian, Apol. 20.2, 40. 3 ff.; Ad not. 1.9 Arnobius 1.3;
1.5.
ase Tertullian, Apol. 21. 3 Arnobius i. 36.
357 Tertullian, Ad not. i. 8 Arnobius 2. 20.
ass Tertullian, Ad not. i. n; Apol. 16. 1-4 Arnobius 3. 16.
359 Tertullian, Ad not. 2. 12 Arnobius 3. 29.
sec Tertullian, Apol. 14, 3; Ad nat. 2. n; Arnobius 4. 24.
361 Tertullian, Apol. 14. 2 f.; Ad nat. i. 10 Arnobius 4. 25.
362 Tertullian, Apol. 14. 4 Arnobius 4. 25.
363 Tertullian, De spect. 1 8 Arnobius 7. i.
364 Tertullian, Apol. 22. 10 Arnobius 3.41.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 263
365 Caccdbulum in Adv. nat. 6. 14; silicernium in 7. 24, both in
Tertullian, ApoL 13.4^ 7.
366 Tertullian, ApoL 10. 2 see above, pp. 30-3.
367 Cf. n. 322.
86 MpoI. 10.
369 Pindar, Pyth. 3. 54-58; Clement of Alexandria, Protr. 2. 30. i f.;
Tertullian, Ad nat. 2. 14; Apol. 14. 5.
370 Geffcken 288 : " So hat er im allgemeinen nicht allzu viel
Neues gebracht, so gute Quellen er gelegentlich benutzt; die
meisten Argumente der anderen Apologeten kehren, ohne dass wir,
wie es ja fast stets so geht, immer eine bestimmte Quelle anzugeben
imstande waren, hier wieder."
371 Ssee above, pp. 12-15.
372 1 omit from consideration passages in which there is some
resemblance but not a significant one. As an example of an in-
significant resemblance, cf . Div. inst. 5. 3. 9 where Lactantius alludes
in passing to the possibility, which he, of course, denies, that the
Miracles of Christ were performed by magic, with Adversus nationes
1.43.
373 Lactantius, Div. inst. 4. 27. 2: nam sicut ipse cum inter homines
ageret, universes daemonas verbo fugabat hominumque mentes
emotas et malis incursibus furiatas in sensus pristinos reponebat,
ita nunc sectatores eius eosdem spiritus inquinatos de hominibus et
nomine magistri sui et signo passionis excludunt. (The translation
in the text is a revision of that of W. Fletcher [ANF 7. 129].) The
words suggest that Lactantius may have himself been an eyewitness
of the practice, whereas those of Arnobius do not.
374 Note also some resemblance between Lactantius and a passage
of Tertullian (Apol. 21. 17) already cited.
375 Div. inst. 4. 15.6-8: Virtutes eius fuerunt quas Apollo por-
tentificas appellavit, quod quacumque iter faciebat, aegros ac debiles
et omni morborum genere laborantes uno verbo unoque momento
reddebat incolumes, adeo ut membris omnibus capti receptis repente
viribus roborati ipsi lectulos suos reportarent, in quibus fuerant paulo
ante delati. Claudis vero ac pedum vitio adflictis non modo gradiendi,
sed etiam currendi dabat facultatem. Turn quorum caeca lumina in
altissimis tenebris erant, eorum oculos in pristinum restituebat
aspectum. Mutorum quoque linguas in eloquium sermonemque
solvebat Item surdorum patefactis auribus insinuabat auditum, pol-
lutos et aspersos maculis repurgabat. Et haec omnia non manibus aut
264 NOTES
aliqua medella, sed verbo ac iussione faciebat, sicut etiam Sibylla
praedixerat :
Trdvra Aoyu> Trpdcrcrw Trdcrai/ re voaov tfepcwrevw.
376 This is probably an error, a confusion of Pentecost. See Book
One, n. 227.
377 Adv. nat. 5. 18 Div. inst. i. 22. i. See Book Five, n. ad loc. and
cf. Brandt aA loc. (89).
378 Adv. nat. 6. 21 Div. inst. 2. 4. 16-20. See Book Six, n. ad loc.
879 Lactantius, Div. inst. 2. 14. 3 f. : sic eos diabolus ex angelis dei
suos fecit satellites ac ministros. Qui autem sunt ex his procreati
quia neque angeli neque homines fuerunt, sed mediam quandam
naturam gerentes, non sunt ad inf eros recepti sicut in caelum parentes
eorum. Cf. Brandt ad loc. (163).
380 See the text in Book Two, n. 293. Cf. Brandt ad loc. (181).
881 Div. inst. 5. 9. 15-17.
382 Adv. nat. 3. 8 (see n. 30)- Div. inst. 3. 1 1. 12.
383 Rapisarda, Arnob. 161.
384 Joannes Trithemius, De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis 53 : Arnobius
presbyter, philosophus et rhetor insignis, cum adhuc gentilis rhe~
toricam doceret, divina miseratione vocatus, Christianum se coepit
profiteri, cumque ad episcopos accedens se baptizari expeteret, non
credebant, veriti ne vir saeculari tumens eloquentia, sacramentis fidei
conaretur illudere, et omnino sententiam differebant. Arnobius vero
cernens sibi fidem minime adhiberi, in argumentum sinceritatis suae
scripsit et obtulit episcopis insigne volumen :
Adversum Gentes Lib. VIII.
In Psalterium quoque Lib. I.
De Rhetorica institutione Lib. I.
Alia quoque multa edidit, quae ad notitiam meam non venerunt.
Docuit in Africa rhetoricam sub Diocletiano principe. Habuitque
multos egregios et nobiles discipulos qui viri doctissimi evaserunt.
Claruit ergo circa annos Domini nostri IESV Christi CCC. [This
text is based on that printed in the preface to Sabaeus' 1 542-3 edition
of Arnobius.]
385 K. Ziegler, lull Firmici Materni V. C. De errore yrofanarum
religionum (Leipzig 1907). Consult his notes at the bottom of the
page throughout.
886 A new edition of this work with Latin text and German trans-
lation is expected at the moment of going to press.
387 C. Brakman, Miscella tertia (Leyden 1917) 25-28.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 265
388 For possible borrowings by Firmicus Maternus, see the Notes on
the following chapters: Book One: 29, 34, 53; Book Three: 29, 30,
33, 80; Book Four: 14, 25, 26, 28; Book Five: 6, 19, 21, 26, 28, 33;
Book Six: 25; Book Seven: 3, 5, 12, 24, 28, 36. The quotation from
the Tarentine poet in Firmicus 26. i is not, however, borrowed from
Adv. not. 5. 26, since it is given in Greek, and the formula in
Firmicus 28. i is not derived from that in Adv. nat. 5. 26.
389 Rapisarda, Arnob. 29-30. Cf. Eusebius' lost Quaestiones evan-
gelicae; Ambrosiaster, Quaestiones Veteris et Novi Testament*. Rapi-
sarda also compares (78 f. and 94) Arnobius with Methodius of
Olympus.
390 Cod. Vat. 3852, membr. 4, fol. 130 (s. X).
391 E. Bickel, " Ps. Tertullian De execrandis gentium diis," Rhein.
Mus. 67 (1927) 394-417.
392 Colombo 23.
393 In Rapisarda's view (9, 30, 34, 42 f., 147), however, Augustine
had much in common with Arnobius though he never explicitly says
that the Bishop of Hippo read the rhetor of Sicca. See the long
list of passages C I 39) containing supposed parallels between the
Adversus nationes and the De civitate Dei. Upon close examination,
many of these do not appear to support Rapisarda's contention.
394 p or description of the MS, see the introductions in the editions
of Reifferscheid and Marches! discussed below in detail.
395 The date of P has been universally determined on the basis of
its minuscule script as the beginning of the ninth century and
there is evidence to show that the scribe had before him another
manuscript in the so-called ' cursive script ' which was hard to read
and was derived from a still earlier copy in the uncial script without
separation of words. The probability is that P was prepared in a
monastic scriptorium in either Switzerland or Germany. Corrections
appear in a number of hands, of which Reifferscheid distinguished
three and Marches! only two, all of these in the ninth century, but
in the sixteenth century an unknown scholar added others, utilizing
for that purpose at least two and possibly three of the early printed
editions, certainly Sabaeus (Rome 1542-3), Gelenius (Basel 1546),
and, perhaps, Canterus (Antwerp 1582).
396 Marches! v.
397 Oehler xx.
BOS j y an ( j en Q] ie y n? Catalogue des manuscrits de la Bibliotheque
Royale de Belgique 2 (Brussels 1902) p. 20, no. 923.
899 Reifferscheid viii. E. J. Goodspeed, A History of Early Chris-
266 NOTES
tian Literature (Chicago 1942) 284, overlooks this MS when he says
" only one manuscript has ever been found."
400 This conclusion needs to be verified.
401 Richardson (76) is probably wrong in listing an edition by
Muralto (Zurich 1856) which I have not found. I have learned to
be skeptical of his list, particularly when, as in this case, he marks
an entry with a question. The following errors should be noted:
(i) an edition by Stewechius (Antwerp 1586) which Oehler rightly
calls a 'fabula'; (2) an edition by Heraldus (Geneva 1597) which
is a misprint for 1599; (3) the edition he lists of Heraldus (Paris
1603) is an error for Elmenhorst's printed at Hannover in the same
year; (4) the edition of Jo. Meursius (Lugd. 1598) which he lists
is a real book; not, however, an edition but a work bearing the
title " Criticus Arnobianus tributus in libros septem "; (5) the edition
of Ernstius (Havre 1726??) should be H. Ernstius, Notae Irevis-
simae ad Arnobii liloros disputationum adv. Gentes (Copenhagen
1726, but the preface is dated 1651) and this too is not an edition.
Oehler (xxvii) lists two other ' ghost ' editions which never existed,
as he says, one alleged to have been published at Paris in 1626 by
the Benedictines of St. Maur, and another (London 1651) with
notes by " Carthesius " (= Descartes ?), obviously a mistake for Sal-
masius' edition (Leyden 1651) which was printed without the
editor's name on the title page.
402 Cf. above, Bibliogr., p. 233.
403 1 do not understand why Guinagh implies (Proc. Am. Phil
Assoc. 67 [1936] xxxviii) that Reifferscheid did not examine the
manuscript anew.
404 The only important edition overlooked by Reifferscheid is that
of Renatus Laurentius de la Barre (Paris 1580) which doubtless
escaped his notice because it is included in an edition of Tertullian.
The British Museum also contains a number of early editions having
manuscript notes by important scholars as follows: (i) Ant. Car-
pentarius in the edition of Sabaeus; (2) I. Casaubon in the edition
of Canterus (Antwerp 1582); (3) H. Estienne, same; (4) P. Sen-
verius, same; (5) T. J. Almeloveen, same, and (6) J. Walker, edition
of Salmasius (Leyden 1651). The Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris
contains similarly annotated editions: (i) Jacobus Dalechampius
Jacques Dalechamps, in Sabaeus' edition; (2) Jo. Passeratius = Jean
Passerat, same; (3) Franciscus Pithoeus = Francois Pithou, same;
(4) Nicholas Rigault, same; (5) L. Servin, Ursinus' edition (Rome
1583). Some of the latter series apparently were seen by Reiffer-
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: INTRODUCTION 267
scheid. The University of Illinois Library possesses a copy of Oehler's
edition with notes by Johannes Vahlen.
405 See the bibliography.
406 The entire publishers' stock of this edition was destroyed by
bombing.
407 The following reviews, generally favorable, have been noted:
(i) Anonymous, Supplement to the Bull. Bude 1935 152; (2) S.
Colombo, Riv. fit. istr. cl. 13 (1935) 390-2; (3) G. Costa, Nuova riv.
stor. 20 (1936) 25; (5) K. Guinagh, Class. Phil. 31 (1936) 371 f.
and (6) " Justifying the Newer Edition of Arnobius," Proc. Am. Phil.
Assoc. 67 (1936) xxxvii-xxxviii; (7) W. Kroll, Phil. Woch. 55
(1935) 1082-4; (8) E. Malcovati, Athenaeum 14 (1936) 112; (9)
A. Souter, Class. Rev. 49 (1935) 209; C IC O. Tescari, Convivium
7 O935) 476 f.; OO M. Valgimigli, Leonardo 6 (1935) 208.
408 Hagendahl, Prose -metrique 2; Wiman, Eranos 45 (1947) 129.
409 At this point I should like to speak a good word for Orelli's
commentary which Bryce-Campbell were inclined to criticize unduly.
His material is not, as they say, well digested, but contains much
information of great value,
410 Oehler (xxix) has this to say of von Besnard : " Ea conversio
tot vitiis verborumque stribiliginibus laborat, ut nisi textum latinum
adhibueris vix verbum intellegas."
411 C. F. Rossler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Vater in Uebersetzungen
und Auszugen 3 (Leipzig 1776) 308-44 contains, not a translation,
as might be supposed from the title, but an extract based on
Stewechius' edition (Antwerp 1604). My friend, Professor Keith C.
Seele, has kindly examined this work in the Library of the University
of Chicago.
412 1 am likewise indebted to the following friends who have
patiently suffered many importunate requests for bibliographical
assistance: Professor P. R. Coleman-Norton, Professor Lloyd W,
Daly, Dr. Glanville Downey, Professor Gerald F. Else, Lt. Thomas F.
Fawcett, Professor Revilo P. Oliver, Professor Keith C. Seele, and
Professor Gertrude Smith. The willing assistance of the staffs of the
Drake University Library and the Foreign Language Library of the
State University of Iowa should be gratefully acknowledged. At the
proper points in the Notes I have expressed my indebtedness to
other scholars who have courteously given expert advice on special
points.
18'
268 NOTES
BOOK ONE
The title, though missing in codex Parisinus 1661, appears in the
explicit to Book Two (folio 64, see n. 484 of that Book). There is,
however, no reason to believe that any part of the text has been lost.
The introductory sentences also contain no dedicatory reference to
any patron who suggested the writing of the work. This fact needs
to be considered in the light of the testimony of St. Jerome that
Arnobius composed the work as evidence of the sincerity of his
Christian profession (see Introduction 2, i6f.). Moreover, while
the customary protestation of modesty is not lacking, it is far more
restrained than one finds, for example, in such writers as Cyprian,
Ad Donatum i; Lactantius, De opificio Dei i; Divinae institutiones
3.1; Julianus Pomerius, De vita contemplative, i.i.f. (ACW
4. 14 f.).
Beginning with no reference to the Bishop of Sicca, Arnobius takes
his point of departure from a charge which he says he had heard
made by persons otherwise not specified (nonnullos) that the Chris-
tians were responsible for calamities then oppressing the world. So
far as the simple statement of the text goes, we might believe that
Arnobius had himself heard the charge made by opponents of
Christianity; but the same criticism had been made as early as
Tertullian's day (Ayol. 30, repeated substantially in Ad nat. 1.9;
cf. Ad Scap. 3). Cyprian also wrote his Ad Demetrianum (252
A. D.) to refute the same charge, but he adopts a defense quite
different from that of Arnobius: (a) the world was getting older
and therefore running down; (b) the real cause was that the pagans
did not worship the true God. (On this passage of Cyprian see the
penetrating remarks of A. J. Toynbee, A Study of History 4 [London
1939] 7f., in which the leading historian now living discusses the
significance of both Cyprian and the poet Lucretius on the decline
of civilizations.)
It is therefore at least a possibility that Arnobius had read Tertul-
lian and Cyprian and from them derived his point of departure. This
seems to be the view espoused by S. Colombo, "Arnobio Afro e i
suoi sette libri Adversus Nationes," Didaskaleion 9 (1930) 28, who
is sure that Arnobius had read Tertullian, Apol. 40, Ad nat. i. 9, and
Cyprian, Ad Demetr. 2 (see Introd. 41-51). The same charge against
the Christians is also met with in writers subsequent to Arnobius,
e. g. Lactantius, Div. inst. 5. 4. 3; Augustine, De civ. Dei 2. 3; 3. 31,
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 269
The whole of Book One is devoted in the main to the refutation
of this and other similar charges. In general, it is a Book which
appears to have benefitted by more thorough revision than some of
the others it presents almost no serious problems of interpretation.
Repeated study leads me to remark that Book One seems char-
acterized by the genius and personality of the author to a greater
degree than most of the others in which the problem of source is
more important.
1 The verbs insanire and bacchari, the full force of which can
hardly be rendered in English, suggest (a) that the critics of Christi-
anity spoke in such a manner as to convey the impression that they
believed themselves the mouthpieces of Apollo (cf. H. W. Parke, A
History of the Delphic Oracle [Oxford 1939]) or of Dionysus (cf.
Euripides' Bacchae'); (b) that they resembled the typical priestess of
these gods in that their words sounded either insane or drunken, and
CO that in Arnobius' opinion the critics were uttering statements
worth no more than the babblings of the mad and intoxicated. Cf.
Tertullian, Ad ux. 1.6.
2 Though Arnobius as a rhetorician might be expected to be
competent in this sphere, this expression of modesty follows the
convention. Cf. the passages cited in the Introductory Note to this
Book.
3 Cyprian, Ad Demetr. 2.
4 Cf. Tertullian, Apol. 10.2: Tune et Christiani puniendi, si
quos non colerent, quia putarent non esse, constaret illos deos esse.
5 He soon forgets his intention to be dispassionate.
6 The numina include not only the Olympian pantheon but all
the other lesser divinities see G. Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der
Romer (and ed., Munich 1912). In the subsequent attack on the
pagan deities, the only important omissions are the cult of the
emperors and Mithraism, though in Book Two there are some pas-
sages which have been thought to show evidence of the latter religion
Csee n. 64 of that Book).
7 A clear allusion to the De reru-m natura of T. Lucretius Cams
Cfirst century B. C.). See the two most recent editions of Lucretius:
(a) that of W. E. Leonard and S. B. Smith (Madison 1942) and
(b) that of C. Bailey (Oxford 1947). All references have been
checked against these two editions. See also below, 2. 70.
8 Probably not an allusion to alchemism.
8 Machinae hums et -molis. Cf. Lucretius 5. 96: moles et machina
mundi, and Bailey 's note ad loc.
270 NOTES
10 Cf. Acts 17. 2,8.
11 Cf. Lucretius 2. 147-9 and Bailey ad loc.\ Vergil, Aen. 6. 640 f.
Probably the source of the metaphor is Cicero's Arati Phaen. 294
(MiillerO
12 Arnobius doubtless ignores the astronomical fact that unless
periodic adjustments are made to the calendar, seasons will over a
period of time change perceptibly in relation to the calendar.
13 Again Arnobius is ignoring the reversed seasons of the Southern
Hemisphere. Note the denial of the existence of the antipodes in
Lactantius, Div. inst. 3. 24. i.
14 On this sentence see C. Weyman, " Textkritische Bemerkungen
zu Arnobius adversus nationes," Festschrift Sebastian Merkle (Diis-
seldorf 1922) 386f.
15 Prima incipiensque nativitas, a good example of Arnobius'
repetitive language.
16 The MS reading (mhabitabiles) has caused difficulty to many
editors for they take the prefix in- to be negative, a sense clearly
inappropriate here. No dictionary consulted lists the adjective
inhabitabilis = ' inhabitable ' except Forcellini (2. 841) where the only
citations are to this passage and to 7. 47 (Orelli's numbering in all
other editions it is 7. 50) but the MS reading there, inhabitabilia,
has been rightly emended to ab Italia by Oehler and editors subse-
quent to him. Dr. H. Haffter, of the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae,
in a letter dated 27 July 1947, kindly informs me that he has been
able to find no other example of inhabitabilis with a neutral prefix
in the unpublished collections of the TIX at his disposal. Yet this
interpretation of the prefix has been accepted by Orelli, Oehler,
Hildebrand, and Marchesi, the last pointing out that inhabitabilis
is derived from inhabito which as early as Seneca and Pliny some-
times = habito. A noncommittal position is taken by P. Thielmann,
Archiv f. lat. Lex. i (1884) 80. J. Svennung, Untersuchungen zu
Palladius (Uppsala 1935) 576 n. 3, cites an example of ininhabita-
bills in which the first in- is negative, the second intensive. This
seems strong confirmation, but B. Axelson, " Randbemerkungen zu
Amobius," Eranos 40 (1942) 182; " Textkritisches zu Floras, Minu-
cius Felix und Arnobius/* K. Humanist. Vetensha^pssamf. i Lund,
Arsb. 1944-5 No, i, 40, takes inhabitabiles to = ' unbewohnt * ('un-
inhabited and cites illacrimabilis which frequently has the sense of
' unwept ' and habitahilis = ' inhabited ' (Sil. ItaL i. 541). This view
is equally possible yet Rapisarda (Amok 1 5) translates * inospitali/
Much less plausible is the earlier view of Klussmann that what
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 271
Arnobius wrote was tres habitdbiles oras (i.e. Europe, Asia, Africa),
and that a copyist reading in some MS ' III INHABIT ABILES ' con-
fused ' III ' with ' IN/ Reifferscheid accepted this basic idea of
Klussmann's but subtly changed to duas habitabiles oras, which does
not improve much.
17 Rulers, in Arnobius' view, would appear to be chosen by fate,
not by divine right. Tertullian, on the other hand, seems to believe
that the emperor ruled by divine sanction : Et merito dixerim, noster
est magis Caesar, ut a nostro deo constitutus (Apol. 33. i).
18 Leges, enacted laws; iura, laws inherent in nature. For the view
that Arnobius is precise in his use of juristic terminology in this and
other passages, see C. Ferrini, "Die juristischen Kenntnisse des
Arnobius und Lactantius," Zeitschr. der Savigny-Stift. f. Rechts-
gesch. 15 (1894) 343-5 2 > esp. 343' 6 -
19 A reference to the Roman principle of mos maiorum. See J.
C. Plumpe, Wesen und Wirkung der Auctoritas Maiorum Toei
Cicero (diss. Minister: Bochum-Langendreer 1935) Ch. 5: "Mos
Maiorum/'
20 Gabarrou (Oeuvre 29) sees in this phrase an allusion to Lucre-
tius 2. 306, 3. 151, and 4. 926, but the parallels are not very striking.
21 Sacramenta. Cf . 2. 5 and Scharnagl 32.
22 Cf. Cyprian, Ad Demetr. 8.
23 Vocamen. Cf. 2. 35, 4. 3, 7. 46, and Lucretius 2. 657 and Bailey
ad loc.
24 See, for example, Livy i. 31, 21. 62, 23. 21, 25. 7, 39. 27. These
showers may have been either meteoric or volcanic cf. H. Jordan,
Topographic der Stadt Rom im Alterthum i. i (Berlin 1878) 120,
25 He can hardly mean the destruction of Pompeii, Herculaneum,
and Stabiae, by Vesuvius in 79 A. D. since this occurred in the
Christian area and that fact would vitiate the point. Tertullian
(Apol. 40. 8) also mentions the Etruscan town of Volsinii (modern
Orvieto) in the same connection (see Ad not. 1.9). Cf. Pliny, Nat.
hist. 2. 52; Volsinii oppidum Tuscorum opulentissimum concrematum
est fulmine.
26 Scharnagl 35 makes difficiles = rarae but it seems as well to take
it in the opposite sense.
27 Cf . Livy 4. 30. 7 f. Twice (Ad Scap. 4; Apol. 5. 6) Tertullian
tells the story that owing to prayers of Christians serving in the armies
of Marcus Aurelius, rain was obtained during a drought.
28 Cf. also 2. 71, 7. 9, 7. 38, 7. 39 and 7. 44.
29 Marchesi's insertion of <terras> in this sentence seems un-
NOTES
necessary. 'For description of the plague at Athens in 438 B. C M see
Thucydides 2.47-52; Lucretius 6.1138-286 and Bailey ad loc.:
Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 9. 8.
30 See Livy 42.10; Tacitus, Ann. 15.5; Pliny, Nat. hist. 8.29;
10. 65; 10. 85; Orosius 5. n; Augustine, De civ. Dei 3. 31.
31 The inhabitants of Gyara, an island in the Cyclades, were put
to flight by mice, according to Pliny, Nat. hist 8. 29. 104.
32 Tertullian, Afol. 20. 2: Quod terrae vorant urbes, quod insulas
maria fraudant; ibid. 40. 3 : Legimus Hieran, Anaphen et Delon et
Rhodon et Co insulas multis cum milibus hominum pessum abisse.
Cf . also Ad nat, 1.9 for the same story. Pagan writers (Pliny, Nat.
hist. 2. 87. 202, and Ammianus Marcellinus 17. 7. 13) reported that
the first four cities mentioned had come into existence through earth-
quakes. According to one explanation of the Lacus Curtius in the
Forum Romanum (see Platner-Ashby 3iof.) there had been a
yawning chasm even in Rome itself. Cyprian, Epist. 75. 10, reports
earthquakes in Cappadocia and Pontus during the reign of Alexander
Severus.
33 In addition to the account in the Bible (Gen. 6-8) which Arno-
bius probably did not know, the Greeks had a similar tradition,
Deucalion and Pyrrha corresponding to Noe and his family (cf.
5.8; Apollodorus, Eibl. 1.7.2; Ovid, Met. 1.244-415; Apollonius
Rhodius 3. 1058-89; H. Usener, Die Sintflutsagen [Bonn 1899]).
34 See Ovid, Met. i. 750-2; Nonnus, Dionys. Bk 38, for the fullest
accounts of Phaethon and the chariot of the sun which was said to
have set the world on fire. Cf. also Hyginus, Fab. 154; Plato,
Tim. 22.
35 See Ovid, Met. 15. 262 ff. Tertullian, Apol. 40. 4, speaks of the
sea tearing away a part of Lucania and thus forming the island of
Sicily; and remarks: Haec utique non sine iniuria incolentium
accidere potuerunt
36 Not fights in the arena but wars of extermination see Aelian,
De nat. animal. 17. 27.
87 Pliny, Nat. hist. 8. 29, reports an attack of snakes upon the
Spartan town of Amyclae. Rapisarda (Amok 254) thinks another
source may be Lucan 9. 891 ff. but there is really little resemblance.
38 Plato (Tim. 236) states that the Egyptian priests told Solon
(ca. 638-558 B. C.) that the events occurred 9,000 years before his
time. If Arnobius was writing under Diocletian, this statement is
roughly in harmony with Plato but not precise.
59 Plato (Tim. 24e-25d). His Critias contains a history of the
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 273
commonwealth of Atlantis. Rohricht (^Seelenlehre 22) lists the other
passages in which Plato is mentioned (cf. i. 8, 2. 7, 2. 13, 2. 24, 2. 36,
2. 52, 2. 64, 4. 1 6) and maintains that they are all genuinely Platonic
and that the possibility in most of them of direct acquaintance with
Plato " kaum zu umgehen ist." He raises the question of whether
Arnobius could not have known only the Timaeus of Cicero but con-
cludes (23 f.) that Arnobius is directly dependent on Plato or
Cicero.
40 Neither Plato nor Tertullian (Apol. 40.4; Ad nat. 1.9), who
refers to the destruction of Atlantis, mentions Neptune in this con-
nection, and it may be that in Arnobius' estimation the word has no
more force than to say that Atlantis was out in the ocean.
41 This war of Assyria under Ninus with Bactria under a king
called by some writers " Zoroaster/' was described in a lost work of
the historian Ctesias which Arnobius certainly knew, at least second-
hand (cf. 1.52), the history of the Assyrian Empire. E. Meyer,
Geschichte des Altertums 1.2 (Stuttgart-Berlin 1921) 347-9; "Bac-
tria," Encycl. Brit. 3 (nth ed., 1911) 180, states that the whole
history of Ctesias is a fantastic fiction and no such war ever took
place. See F. Jacoby, " Ktesias," RE n (1922) 2032-73; Diodorus
Siculus 2. 6; Orosius i. 4; Augustine, De civ. Dei 21. 14.
42 Since Ctesias* work is lost, we cannot be sure that the confusion
was not his. See i. 52.
43 Cf. 4. 13.
44 Greek tradition attributed the abduction of Helen to the bribe
of Paris (Alexander) by Aphrodite. Helen was harmful to later
times through the destruction of Troy.
45 Xerxes I, king of Persia, in his preparations for the second
invasion of Greece (480 B. G), caused a canal to be dug through
the promontory of Mt. Athos (Herodotus 7. 22), and also built a
bridge over the Hellespont (ibid. 7. 33).
46 Alexander the Great.
47 For other references to Christ, see the index.
48 Tertullian (Aj?oZ. 40. 13) makes a similar point. In Ad Scap. 3
there is an allusion to an instance when there was a failure of crops
owing to persecution of Christians.
49 On this passage see Gabarrou, Oeuvre 63, who cites Matthew
5. 49 and Tertullian, Apol. 40. Cf. Rapisarda, Arndb. 22.
50 ReiflFerscheid (index, p. 289) cites on this passage Matthew
5.44; Romans 12.17; i Thessalonians 5.15; i Peter 3.9, which
undeniably contain the same sentiment, but as these central truths
274 NOTES
of Christianity must have been well-known to all converts, as well
as to many pagans, the present passage is no certain proof that
Arnobius had read the New Testament.
51 Cf . Isaias 2. 4 but the idea is commonplace.
52 Reading with Marchesi the MS facto, rather than the corrector's
facia, adopted by Reifferscheid.
53 Tertullian, Ad Scap. 3, says that the calamities are signs of God's
impending wrath.
54 Earth, air, fire, water, Cf. Cicero, De not. deor. i. 18. 19: quern
ad modum autem oboedire et parere voluntati architect! aer ignis
aqua terra potuerunt? In ibid. 2. 23. 84 he lists earth, water, air, and
ether, not fire. In ibid. i. 18. 19 there is an allusion to the five
solids: pyramid (fire), cube (earth), octohedron (air), dodecahedron
(ether), eicosihedron (water), but they are not so specifically named.
55 Astrological terms.
56 In 1.47, however, the miseries are really viewed as adverse to
men, brought on by unalterable fate (fatalibus inroganturque de-
er etis). This passage has been cited by Micka (58) against Colombo
(109), who with reference to 7. 10 says that Arnobius does not
maintain that all human events do not take place by inexorable fate
but that Arnobius uses this idea for purposes of developing the theme
of human misery.
57 On columen, the topmost part of a building, see Vitruvius
4. 7. 100. Cicero often uses the word figuratively of persons (as
does Arnobius here): cf. Verr. 3.76. 176; Place. 17.41; Sest. 8. 19;
Phil. 1 2. 26. The word can also mean column or pillar : in Gal.
2. 9 St. Paul calls Peter and other Apostles pillars, orvAoi (Vulg. :
columna). Cf. also Clement of Rome 5. 2.
58 Timaeus 22b-22e. Arnobius was very familiar with at least the
introduction of this dialogue. See above, notes 38-40. Cf. Origen,
C. Cels. 4. 20, where Plato is specifically quoted.
59 Reading etenim (Reifferscheid) in place of et[in] (Marchesi)
and et in^sinuarey (Brakman). Marchesi's suggestion (in the ap-
paratus) of et ait is attractive but unproven.
60 Vectoribus - carriers.
61 As the following words make clear, the reason for drying the
body is to make room for more drink. Tertullian (ApoL 40. 1 5) has
a similar reference but with a different application: Nos vero
ieiuniis aridi et omni continentia expressi, etc. Cf. also Minucius
2. 3 : quod esset corpori meo siccandis umoribus de marinis lavacris
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 275
blanda et adposita curatio. Colombo (30) is right in maintaining
that Arnobius had certainly read the chapter of Tertullian.
62 To man but not to all animals. Cf. Lucretius 4. 640 f .; Pliny,
Nat. hist. 10. 72. 197; 25. 5. 59; Hesychius s.v. eAAe/fopos.
63 A Vergilian echo: cf. Aen. 9. 59.
64 Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 53. 133; 2. 60. 152-61. 153, states that
the gods have created the world for the sake of both gods and men.
65 Cf. Tertullian, Ad nat. 1.7, 1.9. See Colombo 32.
66 For the unreadable erunt of the MS Meiser suggests serunt
(contrive); Sabaeus adiierunt (= ?); a corrector of the MS f erunt
(bring); Klussmann eruunt (cast forth); Reifferscheid ingerunt (pile
up); Brakman creant (create).
67 Doubtless the computation is based on the Birth of Christ (see
Colombo 4). See Introduction. Note that Tertullian (Apol. 7. 3)
begins the Christian era in the reign of Tiberius: Census istius
disciplinae (Christianae), ut iam edidimus, a Tiberio est. Cf.
Lactantius, De mort. pers. 2.
68 A, C. Coxe (ANF 6.417) goes too far when he sees in this
word proof that Arnobius was baptized when he wrote.
69 Feriae = holidays.
70 Note that here at least Arnobius is quite willing to consider
himself a Roman citizen, but cf . 7.51,
71 Arnobius adopts the point of view of a consumer, not that of
a producer. He was a rhetorician, not a farmer.
72 Here is some awareness of the problems of economics. The
reign of Diocletian was a difficult time (cf. his famous edict of 301
A. D. establishing prices in the eastern half of the Empire). See
M. Rostovtzeff, The Social 6r Economic History of the Roman
Empire (Oxford 1926) 453; H. Mattingly, CAH 12 (1939) 342.
On the situation in Africa, see R. M. Hayward, in An Economic
Survey of Ancient Rome 4 (Baltimore 1938) 1-121, pp. 115-9 on the
period after 232 A. D. Though public works were built in this
province under Diocletian (see C. E. Van Sickle, " The public works
of Africa in the reign of Diocletian/' Class. Phil. 25 [1930] 173-9),
there is "no evidence of anything like an economic revival, . . .
Unfortunately, evidence for price levels during this period is very
rare." Cf. also Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 9. 8, for plague and famine in
the reign of Maximinus (307-313 A. D.); also Monceaux 3.247.
73 That is, not successfully from the start of hostilities.
74 A German tribe specified for the whole German nation. For
276 NOTES
further data on the expansion of Christianity by Arnobius' time,
see 2, 12.
75 C. Minucius 12.5: nonne sine vestro deo imperant, regnant,
fruuntur orbe toto vestrique dominantur?
76 The Roman provinces of Asia and Syria are meant.
77 The MS here reads cumaquitanos which seems to point to
Aquitania but this does not explain the cum and almost certainly
another African name is required. Brakman and Marchesi prefer
Zeugitanos, since Sicca, Arnobius' home, was near the region of
Zeugitana. See T. H. Dyer, "Zeugitana regio," DG 2 (London
1870) 1338. Other suggestions: turn aquitanos (Sabaeus); et
Tingitanos = Tangiers (Ursinus); Gammantas (Meiser); Quinquege-
tanos (Reifferscheid and Partsch).
78 S. J. Case, The Social Triumph of the Ancient Church (New
York-London 1933) 73, thinks that this is proof that Christian
merchants had grown wealthy "by trading in foodstuffs during a
period of high prices "; but all that our author says is that some
Christians had grown rich or even wealthy.
79 The change from plural to singular is probably only rhetorical.
80 Duelles = ' warriors' but they must here be hostile.
81 This use of the terminology of soothsayers is by no means an
inconsistency in Arnobius who elsewhere criticizes that tribe strongly*
He is here merely assuming their point of view for polemical
purposes, a frequent procedure with him.
82 This is the earliest reference in Arnobius to a doctrine repeated
in 3. 25, 6. 2, j. 5, and 7. 36, that God is never angry, and it is
one of the most convincing proofs that Arnobius was ignorant of the
Old Testament, a point emphasized by Gabarrou (Oeuvre 64) who
correctly states that our author had no conception of the relation-
ship of Judaism to Christianity (cf. also de Labriolle 2. 280), as
well as an imperfect acquaintance with the New Testament. For
evidence of the presence of the doctrine of Divine Anger in Holy
Scripture, see the interesting and exhaustive dissertation of E. F.
Micka, The Problem of Divine Anger in Arnobms and, Lac-
tantius (Stud, in Christ. Ant., 4 Washington 1943) 2-7, Micka
rightly attributes to pagan philosophy Arnobius' contention that God
cannot be angry and still be God, in particular to Stoicism and to an
even greater extent to Epicureanism (cf. Cicero, De off. 3. 28. 102:
At hoc quidem commune est omnium philosophorum . . . numquam
nee irasci deum, nee nocere; De nat. deor. i. 16- 42; 2. 28. 70; Micka
2, 8, 13, 76). This belief is a natural result of the peculiar view of
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 277
God's ' aloofness/ a fundamentally Epicurean concept, which is
central to Amobius' thinking, and to its corollary, the base condition
of man, both of which establish the incompatibility of Divine Anger
(Micka 65-74). Arnobius' doctrine of impassibility puts him into
company with the pagans rather than with his Christian predecessors,
of whom Micka distingiushes two groups: (a) writers who saw no
particular difficulty in taking over the pagan belief of impassibility
while aware of the many references to Divine Anger in the Bible,
e. g. the apologists Aristides, Athenagoras, Justin Martyr in the
first Apology (Micka, 17-21, cites the evidence), and (b) writers
who adopted an orthodox view on this doctrine in their efforts
to combat the heretical view of Marcion that the God of the
Old Testament is to be distinguished from that of the New (Marcion
eliminated all NT passages which conflicted with this view), e. g,
Irenaeus, Tertullian, Novatian, Pseudo-Clement of Rome's Recog-
nitiones, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen (see Micka 2,5-30),
While pagan philosophers rather generally adopted the doctrine of
the impassibility of God, the people, of course, believed heartily in
the opposite view (see Micka 17 n. 82). Amobius did not discuss
the subject completely and systematically; his contemporary and
pupil, Lactantius, did, however, devote a special work to the topic,
the De ira Dei (CSEL 27. i Brandt). On Lactantius' divergent view,
see Micka 81-145, 158-178; cf. also M. Pohlenz, Vom Zorne Gottes
(Gottingen 1909).
83 Reading crucibus with Zink and Reifferscheid rather than cruces
(Heraldus, Orelli, Marchesi).
84 Alienatione = the German ' Besinnungslosigkeit/ both here and
in 5. 2. Cf. Scharnagl 31.
85 Cf. Lucretius 3. 288 f.; Vergil, Aen. 12. 101 f.; Seneca, De ira
i. 1.4; Medea 387-9. Cf. Rapisarda, Arndb. 164.
86 Cf. Seneca, De ira 1.1.5; Vergil, Aen. 4. 499.
87 Amobius here follows the Stoics who distinguished between
adfectus, passio, yerturbatio. Cf. Seneca, De ira 2. 2. 5. Rapisarda
(Arnofc. 8 1, 176) points out the idea is not taken from Lucretius but
possibly from Neo-Platonism.
88 Since the Greeks regarded the gods as immortal, it followed that
not only did the whole being of a god resist dissolution but also the
parts. Thus, no food or drink was necessary to replace worn-out
cells, but in order to supply the pleasures of the table, the gods ate
ambrosia and drank nectar, instead of the life-giving food and drink.
278 NOTES
See W. H. Roscher, " Ambrosia/' LM i. 280-3. Cf. also Cicero, De
not. dear. 2. 23. 59: nee his escis aut potionibus vescuntur.
80 Plato (Rep. 377-8) banished poets from his ideal state because
they represented the gods in similarly low moral character. C.
Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 16. 42.
90 Intestinis, a Lucretian echo (2. 290 but see Bailey's note ad loo.
which takes the word as = ' internal '). Cf. also Arnobius i. 36, 6. 2,
6. io, 7. 43.
91 The same argument is found in Lactantius, Div. inst. 2. 4;
5. 21. 7, and there is a long passage on the impotence of the pagan
gods in Clement of Alexandria, Protr. 4. 52-56.
92 Something worse than ordinary " sour w wine.
93 Cf . Tertullian, Apol. 41.3: Aequalis est interim super omne
hominum genus, et indulgens et increpans; communia voluit esse
et commoda profanis et incommoda suis, ut pari consortio omnes et
lenitatem eius et severitatem experiremur.
94 The Greek word Shoves (= demons) is here used by Arnobius
for the first time. In classical Greek it had no connotation of evil but
was either equal to Oeoi (= gods) or a more general sense connoting
the divine power. Later, under the Christian influence, it came to be
equated with evil spirits. That is the sense here. Bryce-Campbell
translated " demigods " for what reason I do not know.
95 The MS errores is now clearly seen to be mistaken and has
been from both a palaeographical and theological point of view con-
vincingly emended to errones which in classical times denoted run-
away slaves who voluntarily returned to their masters. See Horace,
Serm. 2. 7. 113; Tibullus 2. 6. 6; Ulpian, Digest. 21. 117, who, after
defining the word, says : Quod bene arguteque congruit daemonibus
quoque qui apud Christianos scriptores ' vagi > appellantur. Among
the Christian writers, see Minucius 26. 7; Cyprian, Quod idola dii
non slnt 6; Commodian i. 3. 22.
96 In Cicero, De nat. deor. 3. 3738. 90, the statement is made that
the gods are not ignorant of what goes on but do not take note of
everything.
97 These worthies are, successively, the haruspices (diviners by
inspection of entrails), coniectores (dream interpreters), harioli
(same as haruspices) , vates (prophets), and fanatici (guardians of
jana or shrines). It is perhaps significant that Arnobius omits
augur es (experts on fortunetelling from the flight of birds). The
great source on these subjects is Cicero's De divinatione, but since
the second book contains a pagan criticism of divination, Arnobius
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 279
may possibly have refrained from citing the work. For other refer-
ences to haruspiceSj see i. 46, 4. 11,4. 12, 7. 38, 7. 40; on -vales, i. 46,
2. 73, 7. 38, 7.47. See also A. Bouche-Leclercq, " Haruspices," DA
3- I 7"335 C. Thulin, " Haruspices," RE 7 (1912) 2431-68.
98 Literally : " Sparse attendance is at its highest." Cf . Tertullian,
Apol. 42. 8 : Certe, inquitis, templorum vectigalia cottidie decoquunt;
stipes quotusquisque iam iactat?
99 It seems better to include this sentence in the soothsayer's words
but this is not certain.
100 An Epicurean concept. Cf . the Epicurean virtue of arapa^Ca
(calm). Cf. Cicero, De not. deor. i. 19. 51 : Nihil enim agit (deus),
nullis occupationibus est implicatus, nulla opera molitur.
101 Deum principem. Princess in this sense (= ' first/ * chief/ etc.,
not ' prince/ a later development) is frequently applied by Arnobius
to God in various ways: cf. deus princess in 2. 48, 2. 53, 2. 55, 2. 60,
2. 61, 2. 65; principe deo i. 53; deo principe 2. 16; deo principi 2. 2;
deus rex et princeps 2. 55; deo, regi ac principi 2. 74; sum-mi regis
ac principis i. 27, 3. 6; dei regis ac principis 2. 36; rerum princeps
2. 48; principali ab rege 2. 6; principali e capite 2. 3; and principals
2. 22. Cf. Introd., n. 211.
102 Fessis rebus, a phrase used again in i. 28, 3. 24; Vergil, Aen.
3. 145; Tacitus, Ann. 15. 50.
103 I cannot agree with Coxe (ANF 6. 419) when he maintains
that Arnobius was no longer among the catechumens when he wrote
these words. The passage is not evidence for so precise a conclusion.
104 If this is a reference to the persecution of Diocletian in 303
A. D., as some appear to think (see Introd. 10), one does not get
the impression that Arnobius momentarily expected the arrival of
the imperial police at his door.
105 Orelli prints a long note by Heraldus which maintains that
exurit refers not to " vivicomburium (cf . Tertullian, De an. 1.6 and
Waszink's note, p. 95) sed ad cruces et tormenta," but this view is
based on the false assumption that here is a series of gradual steps
leading up to execution, rather than a list of divers methods, two or
more of which, to be sure, may have been combined.
106 The MS reading profan-us (with either e or i erased) was
emended to profanos by Ursinus, in which case the translation should
be "Does the Dodonian or the . . . Jupiter call us profane/* etc.
Pithoeus, however, emended profan-us to Trophonius and is followed
by Marchesi. On this epithet of Zeus, see Cicero, De div. i . 34. 74;
De nat. deor. 3. 19. 49; Livy 45. 27. 8; Pliny, Nat. hist. 34. 8. 19;
280 NOTES
31. 2. ii. The shrine of Zeus Trophonius was at Lebadia in Boeotia.
Cf, A. B. Cook, Zeus 2 (Cambridge 1925) 1073-6 (appendix k).
107 Dodona in Epirus was a famous shrine of Zeus with an oracle
which used oak leaves. Cf. Cook, op. cit. i. 851; 2. 1333, for index
to references to this cult.
108 According to the myths, Apollo was born by Leto on Delos.
On this passage, see Clement of Alexandria, Protr. 2. 11.2 which
lists the following oracles: the Clarian, the Pythian, Didymaean, that
of Amphiaraus, the (Trophonian ?), and that of Amphilochus; but
the two lists seem independent of one another. At Claros near
Colophon in Ionia there was a spring used in inspiring oracular
responses from the god Apollo. Another existed at Didyma near
Miletus. According to O. Hofer, " Philesios," LM 3. 2304, " Phi-
lesian " was a cognomen of Apollo at the shrine in Didyma. Cf . L.
Preller-C. Robert, Griechische Mythologie, I : Theogonie und Cotter
(Berlin 1894) 2 ^3 n - 5- Apollo was also called " Pythian " from the
Pythia, the mouthpiece of Apollo at Delphi. Finally, the MS ethis
is unintelligible. One solution is to find another epithet of Apollo
and I have adopted Reifferscheid's suggestion of Smintheus (see his
apparatus). Other scholars give other suggestions.
109 The word is imyerator = ' general > (in republican Latin) or
' emperor ' (in imperial).
110 Cf . Prudentius, Apoth. 402 f . : torquetur Apollo nomine per-
cussus Christi; Lactantius, Div. inst. 5. 22.
111 Summi regis ac principis. See note 101.
112 Magister = ' teacher/
113 On the Lares Grunduli (or Grundules), see Wissowa 174. This
epithet of the traditional Roman household gods is thought by
Wissowa to bear some connection with graves of children. The
Lares Grunduli and the following divinities were doubtless chosen
as examples of trivial worship. On the Lares proper, see also 3. 41-43.
114 An altar to Aius Locutius (the speaking voice) stood on the
Palatine in Rome as a memorial of an unheeded voice which had
warned the Romans of danger. See Livy 3. 5. 32; 5. 50. 5; Cicero, De
div. i. 101; 2. 69; A. Gellius 16. 17; R. Peter in LM 2. 191; Wissowa
55; A. Aust, RE i (1894) 1130; K. Ziegler, "Palatium/' RE 18
(1948) offprint p. 14.
115 The limentinus was the god of the threshold. See Tertullian,
De idol. 15; De cor. 13; Augustine, De civ. Dei 4. 8, 6. 7; W. Schur,
RE 13 (1927) 571 f. Cf. also 4. 8.
116 On the worship of the shepherd god Faunus see Wissowa
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 281
208-19; W. Otto, RE 6 (1909) 2054-73; Fowler 256-65. On Fatua,
variant for Fauna, wife of Faunas, cf. Vergil, Aen. 5. 28; Lactantius,
Epit. 22; Wissowa 211; Fowler 103. The genius was to a city what
the lar was to a household (Wissowa 175-81). On Pavor, the god
of terror, see Wissowa 149. There were two goddesses named Bel-
lona: one a native goddess of war (Wissowa 151 .), the other an
importation from Cappadocia (ibid,. 348-50). See A. Aust, RE 3
(1899) 254-57; Fowler 95, 100 (Bona Dea = Maia), 123.
117 Elmenhorst (quoted by Salmasius ad loc. and Orelli 1.308 =
ML 5. 751), doubtless on the testimony of Lactantius, Div. inst.
1.20.1-7, which he cites among other authorities, suggests three
examples of the condemned practice: the Greek Leaena, the Roman
Laurentia and Flora, but the source of Arnobius is more probably
Minucius 25. 8. Only the first of the examples is even possibly
historical and all three are capable of interpretation as aetiological.
On divine honors actually paid to historical hetaerae, see W. S.
Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens (London 1911) 119; K. J. Beloch,
Griechische Geschichte 4. i (2nd ed., Berlin-Leipzig 1925) 434; W.
W. Tarn, CAH 6 (1927) 501; K. Schneider, " Hetairai," RE 8
118 Cf. Vergil, Aen. 8. 40.
119 The ancient Egyptian religion is meant. Clement of Alexan-
dria, Protr. 2. 39.2,5, lists various animals worshipped in Egypt. Cf.
Cicero, De not. deor. 1.36.101; 1.16.43; i. 29. 81 .; 3.19.47;
Theophilus, Ad Autol. i. 10; Origen, C. Cels. 1.20; Cyprian, Ad
Demetr. 12; Lactantius, Div. inst. 5. 20. 12.
120 Cf. Pliny, Nat. hist. 30. n. 99; Juvenal 15. 2; Lactantius, Div.
inst. 2. 5. 36; Martianus Capella 2. 170,
121 Micka (44) thinks this proviso (cf. i. 19, 6, i, 7. 2, 7. 35; W.
Kroll, Rhein. Mus. 72 [1917-8] 63 ff.) indicates that Arnobius was
attempting to steer a middle course, but it is probably nothing more
than a statement of a hypothesis : (< if the pagans are right in thinking
the gods exist, their actions are inconsistent and reprehensible."
122 Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 32. 91; Vergil, Aen. 6. 724-34.
123 Perhaps imitated by Firmicus Maternus, De errore yrof. rel.
8. i (cf. C. Brakman, Miscella tertia [Leyden 1917] 25).
124 Cf. 2. 1 6; 7.28.
125 Reading foturos with G. Wiman, Eranos 45 (1947) 129, in
preference to feturas (Axelson) or futures (P).
120 p or O ther references to these gods, see Index.
127 This testimonium is no. 290 f . in E. J. and L. Edelstein,
282 NOTES
Asdeyius: a Collection and Interpretation of the Testimonies (Pubs.
Inst. Hist, of Med., Johns Hopkins Univ. 2. ser., Texts and Doc.
2, Baltimore 1945) vol. i.
128 Colombo 11-15 points out that some elements of this beautiful
prayer (as Micka 42 calls it) might well have been taken from
pagan sources and that therefore it is a possibility that Arnobius was
never a Christian. This, Micka rightly says, is hardly sound.
129 The lacuna has been supplied by Marchesi to make sense.
Meiser (n) thinks that this chapter (and also 3. 19, 6. 2, 7. 15) are
in part echoes of Lucretius 2. 646-51.
130 This phrase, repeated in 2. 58, is clearly a reflection of Lucre-
tius i . 472 : nee locus ac spatium. See also Bryce-Campbell ad loo.
who call attention to the fact that the Peripatetics referred to God as
the TQTTOS Tra^rw.
131 The punctuation here follows Axelson (42).
132 The atheists meant may be Diagoras of Melos (fl. 420 B. C.)
and Theodorus of Cyrene (fl. 310 B. C.), both mentioned by Cicero
(De nat. dear. i. i. 2; i. 33. 63; i. 42. 117; 3. 37. 89), or Euhemerus
of Acragas (fl. 300 B. C.), Hippo of Melos (fifth cent.), Nicanor of
Cyprus, who, in addition, are mentioned by Clement of Alexandria,
Protr. 2. 24. 2. Minucius (8. 2) mentions Theodorus, Diagoras;
Lactantius (Dlv. inst. 1.2), Diagoras. The skeptic is of course
Protagoras of Abdera (see n. 133) who is mentioned by Cicero,
Clement, Minucius, and Lactantius. See A. B. Drachmann, Atheism
In Antiquity (London 1922) and cf, Justin Martyr, Ayol. i. 6, who
calls attention to the fact that the Christians were themselves termed
133 Protagoras of Abdera (jca. 480-02. 410 B.C.), a sophist, was
charged with impiety at Athens for having written a book which
began with the words: "As for the gods, I am unable to say
whether they exist or whether they do not exist."
134 The atomists: Leucippus, of whom little is known except that
he probably flourished in the fifth century B. C.; Democritus of
Abdera (fifth cent. B. C); Epicurus of Samos (342-270 B. C.), and
the Roman poet, T. Lucretius Carus (c#, 98-55 B. C.), whose influ-
ence on Arnobius is great. On Lucretius' view of the atom, see J.
Masson, Lucretius, Epicurean and Poet (London 1907) 76-141. On
Leucippus, see Stenzel, RE 12 (1925) 2266-77 (no. 13).
185 The text here reads diver sitatls i-m^etu (by propulsion of
diversity). One thinks, of course, of atoms but Arnobius does not
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 283
use the word atomus, common though it is in Latin. Bryce-Campbell
translate " atoms of different shapes." Perhaps so.
136 Averruncetur amentia^ a proverbial phrase which goes back to
one preserved from the poet Pacuvius by Varro (De ling. lot. 7. 102).
The phrase is also known to St. Ambrose (De fi.de i. 9. 60, i. 1 1. 73).
Cf. A. Otto, Die Sprichworter und sprichwortlichen Redensarten
der Romer (Leipzig 1890) 18.
13T In Arnobius' psychology the infant apparently is born with a
potential, if not an actual, awareness of where he came from and
this is what he means here. Cf . the reference to Epicurus' doctrine
of prolepsis in Cicero, De not. deor. i. 43.
138 The chief temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, the most im-
portant god of the Capitoline triad and indeed of the Roman
pantheon, was on the Capitoline Hill. See Platner-Ashby 297-302;
C. Thulin, " luppiter " no. 15, RE 10 (1919) 1135-9; Cicero, De nat.
deor. 2. 25. 64.
139 Zeus, the Greek counterpart of the Roman Jupiter, was the
son of Cronus and Rhea, his sister, and therefore was grandson of
Uranus and Gaea in both lines, having, as Arnobius overlooks, but
one pair of grandparents instead of the usual two. Hades and
Poseidon were his brothers. See E. Fehrle, LM 6. 578 ff.
140 This phrase is added here by Marchesi in place of dicitur,
inserted by Reifferscheid, following Klussmann, in the next clause.
Both seem redundant.
141 Here et, added by Sabaeus, is retained by Reifferscheid and
Marchesi; but it is unnecessary and disturbs the chiasmus.
142 Cf. 3.41.
143 Cf. Tertullian, ApoL 21. 3: Sed et vulgus iam scit Christum ut
hominem aliquem, qualem ludaei iudicaverunt: quo facilius quis
nos hominis cultores existimaverit.
144 Here the word crux is used but Arnobius employs it inter-
changeably with 'patibulum. The former denoted an instrument of
punishment as early as Plautus (Asm. 548; Miles gt 372; Mostell.
359-see TLL 4. 1255).
145 The same point is made by Lactantius, Div. inst. 4. 16. i.
146 Cf. 3. 6, 3. 29, 3. 44, 6. 25. On Janus, the two-headed god of
doors and gates, founder of the Janiculum, see Wissowa, 103-112;
W. H. Roscher, LM 2. 15-55.
147 In 3. 29 Arnobius wrongly calls the Janiculum a town. For a
possible explanation, see above, p. 44.
19 7
284 NOTES
148 On Saturn, god of com and father of Jupiter, see Wissowa
204-8; Thulin, RE 2. R., 2 (1923) 218-23. Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor.
3. 24. 63, and Arnobius 3. 29.
149 See above, n. 116.
150 Faunus is also mentioned in 2. 72, 5. i, 5. 2 (fcis).
151 On this syncretism of later Roman times, see Wissowa 216.
152 According to Wissowa (18 ff.) the indigitamenta were the
original gods of the Roman religion, as distinguished from novensiles
or newer additions taken over from other cults. See R. Peter, LM
2. 129-233; F. Richter, RE 9 (1916) 1334-67; Fowler 191 f., 341; G.
Wissowa, Hastings Encycl. 7 (1915) 217 f.
153 The allusion is to a passage of the Aeneid 12. 794 f, and
Servius' commentary ad loc. Cf. Livy i. 2; Ovid, Met. 14. 581-618;
Fasti 3. 647 and Frazer's note ad Zoc.; Tibullus 2. 5. 43 f.
154 The Greek god of healing, son of Apollo and the nymph
Coronis, slain by Zeus lest he make all men immortal. His most
important shrine was at Epidaurus in the eastern Peloponnesus. See
E. Thramer, JLM i. 615-40; RE 2 (1896) 1642-97 (no. 2); Edelstein
and Edelstein, testi-m. 290; Cicero, De nat. deor. 3. 22; Apollodorus,
Bibl. 3. 10. 7; Hyginus, Fab. 202.
155 The Roman god Liber was equated with the Greek Dionysus
(Bacchus), god of wine, and son of Zeus and Semele, daughter of
Cadmus, the legendary founder of Thebes which was the center
of the cult of Dionysus. At Semele's request, Zeus appeared to her
(as the god of lightning, however) before the birth of her child and
as a result she was killed but Dionysus was saved by Zeus (or
Hermes). See G. Wissowa, LM 2. 2021-9; W. Schur, RE 13 (1927)
68-76. Except for two references (4. 15, 6. 21) to this god as Dionysus
and two allusions to the Bacchanalia (5. 19 Hs), Arnobius always
uses the Roman name Liber.
156 Cf . 7. 44.
157 The Roman god Mercury, whose province was the protection of
commerce, was later equated with the Greek god Hermes, son of
Zeus and Maia, eldest of the Pleiades, the seven daughters of Atlas
and the Oceanid, Pleione. On the epithet Candida, cf. Vergil, Aen.
8. 138; Macrobius, SaL i. 12. 19 f,; Apollodorus, Bibl. 3. 10. i f. See
H. Steuding, LM 2.2802-31; F. M. Heichelheim, RE 15 (1932)
975-1016.
158 Cf. 2. 70, 4. 15, 4. 22, 6. 12.
159 Diana (= Greek Artemis) and Apollo were the children of
Zeus and Latona (Greek Leto). After they had been conceived, their
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 285
mother wandered about for a long time until she reached the island
of Delos where she gave them birth. Delos had previously been a
floating isle of rock but was now fixed to the bottom of the sea. They
are called archers (^arquitenentes*) because they slew with arrows
the giant Tityus for having insulted their mother. See T. Birt, LM
i. 1 002-1 1 ; G. Wissowa, RE 5 (1905) 326-38.
160 Venus (= Aphrodite), the goddess of love, perhaps taken over
from oriental cults, was by the Greeks regarded as daughter of Zeus
and Dione. She bore to the Trojan Anchises, king of Dardanus on
Mt. Ida, the hero Aeneas whose wanderings form the subject of
Vergil's Aeneid. She is called intestini decoris publicatrix to indicate
that like meretrices she made her body public property. Cf. Cicero,
De not. deor. 3. 24. 62; 2. 27. 69.
161 Ceres (= Demeter), daughter of Cronus and Rhea and therefore
sister to Zeus, nevertheless bore to Zeus, Proserpina (= Persephone)
who, gathering flowers on the Nysian plain, was carried off by Pluto
(= Hades, god of the lower world). (For another version, cf. 5. 24-
27.) This story gave rise to the beautiful explanation of the recur-
rence of the seasons; Ceres shared her daughter with Hades for six
months of each year. While Proserpina was with her mother, vege-
tation flourished; while she was with Hades, it died. For a different
view, see W. C. Greene, " The Return of Proserpina," Class. PfeiL
41 (1946) 105-7. See also T. Birt, LM 1.859-66.
162 Cf. 3.33, 4.15, 4.27, 5.21, 5.24, 5.32, 5.37, 5.40, 7.21.
IBS Hercules (= Heracles), the great national hero of the Greeks,
was the son of Zeus and Alcrnene, wife of Amphitryon, king of
Tiryns. His boyhood was spent in Thebes where his mother and her
husband passed an exile as the guest of King Creon. His life was a
succession of heroic exploits of which the celebrated Twelve Labors
were but a few. His wife Deianeira sent him as a gift a shirt daubed
on the inside with the blood of the centaur Nessus whom Hercules
had slain. Burned by the magic inherent in Nessus' blood, Hercules
in agony mounted on a funeral pyre on Mt. Oeta and died. On the
Tynan Hercules, see Cicero, De not. deor. 3. 42; Arrian 2. 16; Pom-
ponius Mela 3. 6; Pausanias 5. 25; cf. A. Furtwangler, " Herakles/'
LM 1.2135-52 and R. Peter, "Hercules/' ibid. 2253-98; F. Haug,
RE 8 (1913) 550-612.
164 Castor and Pollux, here referred to as frequently by the joint
name of "Castors/' were, with Helen and Clytaemnestra, the
children of Leda. Concerning their father, there are variant tradi-
tions: (a) Zeus, in the form of a swan, was father of all four; (b)
286 NOTES
Zeus was father of only Pollux and Helen, Tyndareus, king of
Sparta, being father of the others; (c) Zeus was the father only of
Helen; and (d) Tyndareus was father of all four. Arnobius attri-
butes both Castors to Tyndareus but elsewhere they are frequently
referred to as the Dioscuri (sons of Zeus). Castor was a horse-tamer,
Pollux a boxer, and when the mortal Castor was slain in battle, his
immortal brother shared life with him thereafter on alternate days.
See also 2. 70, 4. 15, 4. 25, and (as Dioscuri) 4. 22. See A. Furt-
wangler, LM i. 1154-77.
165 Marchesi reads Titanes, Reifferscheid Tisianes. W. Kroll, a
keen student of the text of Arnobius, inserted into RE 2. R. ? 12
(1937) 1478 a note on "Tisianes et Bucures," calling them, solely
on the basis of this passage, Moorish gods. Cf. also Oehler's note
ad. loc.
106 Undoubtedly a reference to the Dea Syria (Atargatis), identi-
fied by the Greeks with Aphrodite who, according to one legend,
was hatched from an egg found by some fish in the Euphrates.
The fish pushed the egg onto the river bank where it was cared for
by a dove. See Ovid, Fasti 2.459-74; Met. 5. 331; Cicero, De nat.
deor. 3. 15. 39; E. Meyer, LM i. 645-55; F. Cumont, RE 4 (1901)
2236-43; Cumont, Religions orientates 95-99; F. J. Dolger, IXOYS
2 (1922) 292; W. W. Hyde, Paganism to Christianity in the Roman
Empire (Philadelphia 1946) 55-59.
16T I have translated proditus as ' betrayed * rather than ' born '
which the other translations have, because there would be no stigma
attached to mere birth in the Peloponnesus. This sentence is in
harmony with, though almost certainly not derived from, a statement
in Apollodorus, BiH. 2, i. i (on which see Frazer's note ad loc.'). In
his account of the descendants of Inacchus, Apollodorus tells of the
children of Phoroneus and the nymph Teledice who were Apis and
Niobe. Apis became a tyrannical ruler and was betrayed by Thelxion
and Telchis and died childless. In Egypt he was equated with
Serapis. See also 6. 6. Cf. Eusebius, Chron. p. 41 Fotheringham;
Augustine, De civ. Dei 18. 5; Theophilus, Ad Autol. i. 9.
168 Cf. 2. 73, 4.29, 6.23.
169 Isis, the Egyptian goddess, wept for her brother-husband, Osiris,
slain by Seth, and for her son Horus. See Plutarch, De Is. et Oszr.;
Lactantius, Div. inst. 1.21.21. On Egyptian deities in Roman
religion, see Cumont 69-94; Hyde 49-55.
170 Ops was the wife of Saturn. Cf. also 2. 70, 2. 71, 3. 30, 4. 20.
Orelli cites a conjecture of Oudendorp (on Apuleius) which would,
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 287
he thinks, justify changing regias (royal) to egregias (out of the
ordinary) in an ironic sense, but this is unnecessary.
171 On wounding ears, cf. Vergil, Aen. 8. 582; Lactantius, Div. inst.
7. i. 14.
172 Note that there is no reason given for the Incarnation. Cf.
Monceaux 3, 2,68; Micka 53.
173 Pagans realized this and Euhemerus of Sicily (fl. 300 B. C.)
advanced the view that has since been known as euhemerism, i. e.
that the polytheistic deities came into being through the apotheosis
of heroes. Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. 1.42. 119. Cf. 4.29; Jacoby,
"Euemems" no. 3, RE 6 (1909) 952-72.
174 Arnobius means such writings as those of Euhemerus and the
others he mentions in 4. 29.
175 Manum . . . dantes, cf. Lucretius 2. 1043, where Leonard-Smith
and Bailey point out the military origin of the metaphor.
176 That is, a human being, not a god. E. Klussmann, " Arnobius
und Lucrez oder ein durchgang durch den Epicuraismus zum Chris-
tenthum," Philologus 26 (1867) 362-6, points out the very striking
parallelism between the praise of Christ in this chapter and a similar
eulogy of Epicurus in Lucretius (5. 1-54). In both mythological
references and in diction, the passages are similar. So also C.
Brakman, Miscella alter a (Ley den 1913). Only on the basis of a
belief in imitation of Lucretius by Arnobius can the remarkable state-
ments of the second half of the chapter be explained. There
Arnobius attributes to Christ many teachings having no counterpart
in the extant Gospels. Indeed, Christ is regarded as a kind of Greek
philosopher with a system which He taught to His disciples. Arno-
bius was apparently so recent a convert to Christianity that he was
unaware that the Man of Galilee had not given lectures on physics
and metaphysics. A more accurate picture of Christ's teaching
appears in other Christian writers, e. g. Clement of Alexandria,
Protr. 10. no. Whether the Epicureanism of this and other passages
is to be explained on the basis of Arnobius' own former adherence to
that school is a point we have discussed in the Introduction (see pp.
23 f., 29). I find it difficult, however, to follow Marchesi (Question!
1024) when he says that Arnobius was a "sdegnoso awersario"
of Epicureanism, maintaining (1022) that 2. 6of. is a contradiction
and retraction of i. 38 which in part it is.
177 Cf. Lucretius 5.8: deus ille fuit, deus. Cf. Cicero, De not.
deor. i . 1 6. 43 : venerari Epicurum et in eorum ipsorum numero de
z88 NOTES
quibus haec quaestio est habere debeat. Bailey ignores this passage
of Cicero in the note to Lucretius 5. 8.
178 So always in Arnobius. See Cumont 197.
179 Edelstein-Edelstein, testim. 367, vol. 2,141.
180 Athena (= Minerva) in her contest with Poseidon for possession
of Attica struck the earth of the Acropolis with her spear and an
olive-tree sprang forth. Cf. Vergil, Georg. i, 19. See A. Furtwangler,
" Athene/' LM i. 675-704 and G. Wissowa, " Minerva/' ibid. 2. 2982-
99; F. Diimmler, RE 2 (1896) 1941-2020.
181 Triptolemus, the first priest of Demeter, was the inventor of
agriculture. His name was explained as rpls vroXelv (three ploughings)
but a better etymology would derive it from T/>W TrroAe^etv (three
fights). Cf. also 3.6, 5.25; F. Schwenn, RE 2. R., 13 (1939)
213-30.
182 Cf. I. 36, 2. 3, 2. 13, 2. 65, 2. 70, 2. 74, 3. 24, 3. 32, 4. 14, 4. 17,
4.22, 4.24, 6. 12, 7. 21, 7.22.
183 To Colombo (20) the rest of this chapter has almost the flavor
of a litany; to Rapisarda (.Amok 137) the chapter resounds with
Isiac mysticism.
184 Marchesi (^Questioni 1022) points out the inconsistency be-
tween the apparent interest in scientific investigations shown here
and what is said in 2. 60 f.
185 The MS reads animali'bus'., the editors an aliis, but Hagendahl
recently has declared himself in favor of animalium or ammalHyus,
i. e. whether the moon alternates her light for the benefit of living
creatures. Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 16; Macrobius, Sat. i. 14.
186 Meiser calls attention to Plato, Apol. 4oc of which the present
passage may be an echo.
187 Usually nwper implies recent events but two passages in Horace
(Carm. 3.26. i; Ars poet. 227) use it in the sense of 'formerly/
'once/ Klussmann (Philologus 26 [1867] 366) sees a parallel to
Lucretius 5. 11948:. For another reference to the recency of the
conversion, see 3. 24. On this chapter, cf. Colombo 18,
188 That is, statues made of ivory, as were the flesh parts of the
great statue of Athena by Pheidias on the Acropolis.
189 On the worship of trees, stones, and springs, see Wissowa 100,
and the literature cited in his note 7. Cf. Servius on Vergil's Aen.
i. 374; Plutarch, Timol. 29. 3; Lucan i. 135-43.
190 Meiser wishes to add here " or with a wreath," citing a number
of passages in which these two elements of worship are joined. On
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 289
this passage, see Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 7.4; Gen. 28. 18;
3 1 - *3; 35- I 4? Theophrastus, Char. 16.
191 C. Pascal, Riv. Filol. Istr. Cl. 32 (1904) i, emends to digna
de divis (worthy feelings about the gods).
192 Moule (50) points out that this may be a doubtful allusion
to the Second Coming of Christ, but it is possible that the reference
is to rewards for righteous living to be received after death.
193 Patibulum, a forked stick on which lowest classes of criminals
were tied to be beaten or executed.
104 Modern opinion seems to be agreed that Pythagoras was
probably born in Samos about 582 B. C. and died in Metapontum
(southern Italy) late in the century, perhaps about 510 B. G It is
certain that the school bearing his name encountered opposition when
it began to engage in political activity so that it was stamped out
in the middle of the fifth century, the meeting houses of the Pytha-
goreans being everywhere sacked and burned. Of the various
accounts of Pythagoras' death, that in Diogenes Laertius (8. 39)
seems to be in harmony with Arnobius who mentions Pythagoras
also in 2.9, 2. 10, 2. 13. Cf. Plutarch, De Stoic, repugn. 2. 1051;
lamblichus i. 35; Suidas s. v. Hv&ayopas.
195 Socrates the Athenian (469-399 B. C.), known to us best
through the Dialogues of Plato, left no writings of his own.
196 The three have nothing in common except the violence of their
deaths. Aquilius = M/ Aquilius, consul in 101 B. C., put to death by
having molten lead poured down his throat (Appian, Mithr. 21
see E. Klebs, "Aquilius " no. n, RE 2 [1896] 324). Trebonius = C.
Trebonius, prominent in the age of Caesar, slaughtered in bed by
orders of Dolabella (Appian, Civ. 3. 26 see F. Miinzer, " Tre-
bonius" no. 6, RE 2. R., 6 [1937] 2274-82). Regulus = M. Atilius
Regulus, consul in 267 and 256 B. C., captured by the Carthaginians
and supposedly put to death by torture. To the Romans he was a
great hero (Livy, Ept. of Bk. 18; A. Gellius 7. 4) but the stories of
his life are suspected of being fictionalized (see E. Klebs, " Atilius "
no. 51, RE 2 [1896] 2086-92; cf. Minucius 37).
197 According to the tradition, the boy Dionysus, not the Theban
god but the son of Zeus and Persephone, was set upon while at play
by Titans sent by Hera. They tore him to pieces, cooked and ate
the limbs, and Hera gave the heart to Zeus to eat. This variant of
the myth was doubtless suggested by the epithet Zagreus C torn to
pieces')- Cf. Clement of Alexandria, Protr. 12. 1 8. See O. Kern,
RE 5 (1905) 1010-46.
290 NOTES
198 Edelstein-Edelstein, testi-m. 368, vol. 2, 141.
199 See now 153.
200 Words bracketed by Reifferscheid (praef . xv) and Marches! as
probably repeated in error.
201 See note 163.
202 These Galli (no inhabitants of Gaul, as Bryce-Campbell trans-
late) were castrated priests of the Phrygian god Attis whose worship
was connected with that of Magna Mater (see 5. 5-7). Cf. F.
Cumont, "Callus" no. 5, RE 7 (1912) 674-82.
203 Cf. 2.68,3.16,3.39, 4.3,7-36.
204 The story is told by Livy i. 16; Ovid, Fasti 2. 494; Cicero, De
rep. 1.41. See Wissowa 153-6.
205 Cf. 4. 3.
206 On what is known of the large temple of Quirinus in Rome,
which stood on the Quirinal Hill and had 76 Doric columns, dipteral-
octostyle, see Platner-Ashby 438 f.
207 Reading faciatis, with Axelson, for the MS faciamus.
208 Praesidem, sometimes translated ' president/ It is used fre-
quently in Book Three to denote the relationship of divinities to
their respective spheres of influence cf. 3. 23, 3. 38.
209 The phrase interiorum fotentiarwm is not clear. Orelli (^ad.
loc.) surmises that the angels may be referred to; or the hidden
powers of nature.
210 Virtutes is the regular Scriptural word for ' miracles ' and is
used in that sense here and in i. 65, 2. u. In 2. 58 the word is used
of the power that moves the earth in its orbit. Cf . the English phrase
" by virtue of."
211 Names of angels were part of the paraphernalia of magicians;
for some excellent examples, see J. Barbel, Christos Angelas (Theoph.
3, Bonn 1941) 219 f. For mention of angels by Arnobius, cf. 2. 35.
See Origen, C. CeZs. i. 22; Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 30; Geffcken 289.
212 Arnobius uses the word daemones also in 1.23, 1.45, 1.50,
1.56, 2.25, 2.35.
213 Cf. I. 46, 2. 62, 4. 12, 7. 24.
214 On affecting the results of horse racing by the use of magic,
see Jerome, Vita Hilar. 20; F. J. Dolger, Ant. u. Christ, i (1929) 219.
215 Aposiopesis.
216 Matt. 8. 28-33; Mark 5. 1-16; Luke 4. 41; 8. 2; 8. 26-39; 13. 32.
The references to the miracles in this chapter are hardly proof that
Arnobius had read the Gospels; if he had, he was citing the miracles
from memory.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 291
217 Matt. 8. 28-34; Mark 5. 6-17; Luke 8. 26-33.
218 Matt. 8. 2-3; 10. 8; ii. 5; 26. 6; Mark i. 40-42; 14. 3; Luke 5. 12-
13; 7.22; 17.12, Vitiligines = skin diseases marked by blotches,
including leprosy. My friend, Frederick L. Santee, M. EX, tells me
that the term " is still used by dermatologists to mean a disease not
well understood in which there are depigmented areas o the skin,
a leukoderma."
219 Reifferscheid's text has cutibus (skins) but in his preface (xv)
he restores the visceribus of the MS on the ground that Amobius
uses this word as equal to corpus or corpora. Rather it is used in the
sense of flesh, as in Lucretius i. 837.
220 Cf. Matt. 9. 20; Mark 5, 25; Luke 8. 43 f.
221 Dr. Santee writes: " Intercutes is, I believe, an adjective agree-
ing with undae. Taken literally (between skin) it can only mean
blisters or wheals. However, I suspect the fluid is really subcutaneous."
222 Matt. 11.5; 15.31; 21.14; Luke 7.22; 14.13; 13.2,1. F. P.
Badham, " Arnobius and the ' Gospel of Peter/ " Academy 49 (1896)
177, whose interest in the problem of the apocryphal Gospel accord-
ing to St. Peter led him to untenable beliefs, maintains that a com-
parison of Arnobius with the Acta Pilati and with Lactantius'
Divinae institutiones makes it clear that all three were following that
Gospel. Cf. Div. inst. 4. 15.
223 Reading with Wiman: et iam opens res erat <^parviy, in place
of Marchesi's et iam opens res erat', Reifierscheid's et iam j" operis res
erat', C. Weyman, " Textkritische Bernerkungen zu Arnobius ad-
versus nationes," Festschrift Sebastian Merkle (Diisseldorf 1922)
387 f.: et iam profecti operis res erat', Meiser: iam pes incedere
poterat.
224 Matt. 12. 10; Mark 3. 1-3; Luke 6. 6-8; John 5. 3. Badham is
inclined to see in the sentence a reference to the hunchback of the
Acta Pilati.
225 Matt. 9. 6; Mark 2. 9-11; John 5. 11-12.
226 Matt. 9. 27; ii. 5; 12. 22; 20. 30; Mark 8. 23; 9. 46; Luke 7. 21-
22; 4. 1 8; John 5.3, 9. i.
227 The particular occasion is not clear since none of the Gospels
specifies the exact number of healings except where single cases are
recorded. Badham suggests Matt. 15. 30 . and calls attention to
Lactantius, Div. inst. 4. 15. 5-8, which he likewise thinks was derived
from Pseudo-Peter. On the number and kinds of Christ's miracles,
see A. Wikenhauser, " Wunder," LTK 10 (1938) 984 f.
228 Matt. 8. 24-27; Mark 4. 37-41; Luke 8. 23-25.
292, NOTES
229 Matt. 14. 25-28. The detail that His feet were not made wet is
not in the Gospel.
230 Matt. 14. 17; Mark 6. 38; Luke 4. 13; John 6. 9.
231 Reading corpora, Sabaeus' correction of the MS corpora, now
approved by Wiman.
282 A syncretism of the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5;
Luke 8) with the raising of Lazarus (John 11-12) and details from
the Resurrection story.
233 p r obably a reference to the conversation at Sichar (John 4).
Cf. also John 2. 25.
234 No such miracle is recorded in the Gospels. Oehler's suggestion
that Arnobius is thinking of Pentecost has evident merit, particularly
since a search through apocryphal literature has had negative results.
236 If this is not a veiled reference to the Transfiguration, or the
Sermon on the Mount, then no specific event is meant but the
whole of the ministry.
236 Events on the road to Emmaus, at the tomb, etc.
237 As Christ had Himself foretold (Mark 16. 17): In my name
shall they cast out devils.
238 See n. 98.
239 Marchesi wrongly marks this sentence a question, a conclusion
which I had reached independently of the excellent discussion by
G. Wiman, Eranos 45 (1947) 130 f.
240 The three classes of unfortunates, not fitting the form of the
sentence, are bracketed by Reifferscheid as interpolated, though
Marchesi does not follow him. Badham (see 1.45) cited for the
remainder of this chapter Lactantius, Div. inst. 4.26; Acta Pilati i.
241 Colombo (109) says this passage and 7. 10 do not indicate
Arnobius' belief in fate but Micka (58) rightly objects.
242 Note the fatalism of this and other passages.
243 Aesculapius is meant.
544 Cf. F. J. Dolger, Ant. u. Christ. 2 (1930) 158; Edelstein-
Edelstein, testim. 576%, 584, vol. 2, pp. 134, 185. Cf. also Lucretius
5. 1200; Rapisarda, Amok. 175.
245 On the theology underlying this chapter see Marchesi, Questioni
1024-1032: "La responsibility del peccato" in which he maintains,
I think wrongly, that Arnobius does not know the doctrines of
original sin and redemption (1025); that Arnobius had not read the
Pauline Epistles (1026), a point on which he is probably right; and
that there is no relationship between Arnobius and Gnosticism
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 293
(1027). Note that there is a redundant qui in this sentence in the
MS.
246 A denial of free will and choice. Cf . Micka 64; LeNourry, ML
5- 463 f
247 The MS reads sed which is attacked by Micka 64 n. 9. Reiffer-
scheid reads sen which Micka prefers, but Marchesi changes to et,
citing an example in 1.42 of sed for et. Cf. also on this passage
LeNourry, ML 5. 464; Colombo 40 f.
248 The same point is made by Origen, C. Cels. i . 46; Lactantius,
Div. inst. 4. 27. 2. See also Ps.-Barnabas 5. 9 and J. A. Kleist's
remarks: ACW 6 (1948) 172 n. 51. Cf. Mark 9.38; Luke 9. 19;
Acts 3. i-io; 14. 8-10.
249 Tertullian, Apol. 21. 17, in describing the scene on the Cross,
uses the phrase cum verbo of the way in which Christ died : spiritum
cum verbo sponte dimisit. The point is different in the two writers
and the parallelism is doubtless illusory.
250 So the MS : per admirationem.
251 So called because his most important temple was on the
Capitoline.
252 A priest of a curia or division of the city population. Cf . B.
Kiibler, RE 4 (1901) 1836-8; Fowler 304; there was a curio maximus
(Fowler 303 f.).
253 The chief religious magistrate of Rome. The name, of course,
appears to mean 'bridge builder/ whether or not that was its
original significance. It was later adopted as a designation of the
Bishop of Rome at least as early as the third decade of the third
century (cf. Tertullian, De pud. i. 6217-222 A. D. ?).
254 The fLamen Dialis was a special priest of Jupiter. He is also
mentioned in 4. 35, 7. 43. See E, Samter, " flamines," RE 6 (1909)
2484-92; Fowler 86-8, 204, 221, 313.
255 Reifferscheid and Marchesi both retain the MS quod eius est
which has given much trouble to all editors. The reading adopted is
that of G. Wiman, Eranos 45 (1947) 131: quod (pecusy eius est
(cf. 7.43; Catullus 63. 13). Less preferable are Hagendahl (Prose
metr. 244): qui Diovis est, and Axelson (cf. n. 16): qui d^omesti-
cusy eius est.
256 According to A. J. Festugi&re, Memorial Lagrange (Paris 1940)
98 n. i, Arnobius is here indebted for the comments on the myth
of Er (in Plato's Rep. 10) to Numenius and Cronius whom he
mentions in 2, n. Cf. H. C. Puech, "Numenius d'Apame"e et les
294 NOTES
theologies orientales au second siecle," Melanges Bidez 2 (Brussels
1934) 747 n. 2.
257 Doubtless a reference to the legend that Zoroaster had appeared
from a hill blazing with fire.
258 Arnobius is here doubtless thinking of the founder of Zoroas-
trianism. Despite the passage of time, the very full notes on this
chapter in Orelli's edition (i. 342-6 = ML 5. 787-90) are still worth
reading.
259 Hermippus of Berytus (Beirut) see S. Heibges, RE 8 (1913)
853 f. wrote five books on dream interpretation. He flourished in
the reign of Hadrian.
260 Here Arnobius is confusing the founder of Zoroastrianism with
the Bactrian king (see nn. 41-42). W. Kroll, Oracula Chaldaica
(Breslau 1898) 28, demonstrates that this Zoroaster Armenius and
familiaris Pamiphylus Cyri is Er, the confusion going back to an
apocryphal work cited by Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 5. 14. 103. 3.
261 On Armenius, cf, E. Riess, "Armenius" no. i, RE 2 (1896)
1 1 88. See Plato, Rep. 61$.
262 Apollonius of Tyana, first century A. D. whose life by Philo-
stratus is extant. See J. Miller, " Apollonius" no. 98, RE 2 (1896)
146-8.
263 Damigeron the Magus (RE 4 [1901] 2055 f.) wrote (in the 2nd
cent. A. D.) a book on the power of stones. Cf. Apuleius, Apol.
90. 20; Tertullian, De an. 57. i (who mentions Osthanes, Typhon,
Dardanus, Damigeron, Nectabis, Berenice, and somewhat later,
Simon Magus),
264 On Dardanus, see Pliny, Nat. hist. 30. i. 9.
265 Belus is a proper name (cf. Baal) but nothing, apparently, is
known of this person.
266 This Julianus is either no, 8 or no. 9 of the list given in RE 10
(1919) 15 f. He was a " Chaldaean " of the age of Marcus Aurelius
see A. J. Festugiere, Mem. Lagrange (Paris 1940) 126.
267 On this Baebulus, see E. Riess, RE 2 (1896) 2734, where he is
briefly identified as an " Erzzauberer." Ochsner, cited by Orelli, says
that there is no reference to Baebulus in ancient literature.
268 The same point is made by Origen, C. Cels. i. 6; Lactantius,
Div. inst. 5. 3. 9,
269 Principe deo. See n. 101.
270 Elementa turbata, possibly imitated by Firmicus Maternus, De
err. prof. rel. 24. 2.
271 Note the dramatization of the Gospel narrative of the phe-
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 295
nomena accompanying Christ's death (Matt. 27. 51-54, Mark 15. 38,
Luke 23. 44 .), though the most remarkable detailthe rising of the
dead (Matt. 27. 52) is not mentioned. Cf. Tertullian, Apol. 21. 19-
21 : Eodem momento dies medium orbem signante sole subducta est.
. . , Sed ecce die tertia concussa repente terra, etc.
272 Cf . the same two words (vanus, mendax) in Vergil, Aen. 2. 79 .
273 That is 7 different regions under different parts of the heavens.
274 At least after the first persecution.
275 Praeconibus = apostolis.
276 The MS reads animis hominibusque (to souls and men) but
in Arnobius the word homo = corpus in several places (i. 62, i. 65,
2. 28). Wiman's swnmis hutnilibusque is unnecessary. See also
Tertullian, De an. 35. 6 and Waszink's note ad loc.
277 That is, no one outside these nations knew them and they
themselves could not make known their existence. Scharnagl (35)
is wrong in stating that the passive is here used for the active.
278 An exceedingly obscure sentence aside from possible corruptions
of the text. The MS and Marchesi read sed numquam fuerit which
is certainly not clear. Kroll suggested a lacuna and Bryce-Campbell
translated : " But it will never avail them that it be gathered from
written testimony <(only)>." Wiman ingeniously attempts to fill the
lacuna as follows: sed numquam fier^ri non potyerit.
279 Res, a word defying adequate translation.
280 This may be a reference to the Kowy Greek. Cf , Origen, C.
Cels. 2.26. Clement of Alexandria (Protr. 8.77. i) says that the
Scriptures are "bare of embellishment, of outward beauty of lan-
guage, of idle talk and flattery." The charge that the Christian
writings, notably the Bible versions, reeked with barbarisms of
language and style were common, and defense against the assertion,
commonplace: cf. Origen, In lesu Nave horn. 8. i; In Gen. horn.
15. i; De princ. 4. 26; Lactantius, Div.inst. 3. i; Jerome, Epist. 53. 10;
Isidore of Pelusium, Epist. 4. 28, etc. Cf. Geffcken 289; A. v.
Harnack, Die Mission und Aiisbreitung des Christentums in den
ersten drei Jahrhunderten i (4th ed., Leipzig 1924) 388 f.; Barden-
hewer 1.68-72. For other passages in which the fact that among
the evidences for Christianity was the testimony of quite uneducated
persons, see the note of J. H. Waszink to Tertullian's De an. 6. 7
(Amsterdam 1947) 141 f.
281 Collectiones = .crvXXoyio-^oi (cf. Scharnagl 31-43).
282 One wonders whether at his conversion Amobius renounced his
devotion to rhetoric.
296 NOTES
283 See the unsigned note by L. Havet, Rev. de Phil n, s. 2 (1878)
84, calling attention to the fact that this passage demonstrates that
the two accents were pronounced differently.
284 Reading sapientiae with the corrector of the MS rather than
<m> sapientia (Hildebrand, Reifferscheid). The allusion is proba-
bly to Epicurus: cf. Dion. Hal,, De camp. verb. 24 fin. (=fr. 230
Usener); Quintilian 2.17.15; 12.2.24; Diog. Laert. 10.6 (= fr.
33, p. 129 Bailey); 10. 13; Cicero, De fin. i. 5. 14; De not. deor.
i. 21. 59; R. Philippson, "Philodems Buch liber den Zorn," Rhein.
Mus, 71 (1916) 424-60, a study of Philodemus On Rhetoric. But cf.
J. S. Reid in J. Masson, Lucretius, Epicurean and Poet, comple-
mentary volume (London 1909) 191 f. Cf. also C. Bailey, Epicurus,
the Extant Remains (Oxford 1926) 149, from the Vita Epicuri 14:
" He uses current diction to expound his theory, but Aristophanes
the grammarian censures it as being too peculiar. But he was clear in
expression."
285 On this passage see G. E. McCracken, " Arnobius Adversus
Genera," Class. Jour. 42 (1947) 474-6; E. Schwentner, " Arnobius
liber das grammatische Geschlecht," Worter und Sachen, n. F. 20
(1939) 92 f. Schwentner merely quotes the passage without com-
ment. It should be noted that in expressing grammatical gender by
using the appropriate form of the demonstrative, Arnobius is follow-
ing a practice which began at least as early as the first century
B. C. Cf. G. Funaioli, Grammaticae Romanae fragmenta (Leipzig
1907), who cites hoc pollen (from Caesar, p. 153, fr. 17); hie naevus
(from Varro, p. 196, fr. 25); hos pugillares (from Asinius Pollio, p.
499, fr. 5); hos lodices (from Asinius, p. 500, fr. 8); and allecem
hanc (from Verrius Flaccus, p. 517, fr. 14). The practice lasted
long : cf . D. T. Starnes G. E. Noyes, The English Dictionary from
Cawdrey to Johnson, 1604-1755 (Chapel Hill 1946) 200, and E.
Coyle's review of it, Class. Weekly 41 (1947) 2 ^-
286 Hie (this) and paries (wall) are both masculine; haec (this)
and sella (chair) both feminine.
287 Coxe (ANF 6. 430 n. 3) appears to believe that these examples
of doubt as to gender are taken from the New Testament, for he
refers to testimony as to Biblical texts.
288 Haec utria = ' these wineskins/ The gender here is neuter and
was used by the dramatist Livius Andronicus in place of the more
usual masculine (hos utres). For references to passages in which the
anomalous forms cited in this chapter occur, see TLL (so far as this
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 297
has appeared), and Harpers Latin Dictionary, edited by Lewis and
Short.
289 Caelus, a masculine form for the more usual neuter, caelum
(heaven), is found in Lucretius, Vitruvius, and Petronius, as well as
in the grammarians Charisius and Diomedes. On the god Caelus
(= Uranus) see 2. 71, 3. 29, 3. 37, 4. 14, 4. 24. See TLL 3. 79.
290 Pileus = pilleus, the masculine form being more usually found
than the neuter pZetmz = piUeum (felt cap) which was, however,
used by Plautus.
291 This word means saffron. The masculine is found in Vergil,
Ovid, Propertius, and Juvenal; the neuter in Sallust, Celsus, Pliny,
Isidore of Seville, Servius, Diomedes, Charisius, while the word is
cited for the feminine form in Apuleius, Met. 10. 34. See TLL
4.1215.
292 Usually fretum (strait) is neuter but it was treated as masculine
by Lucilius, Naevius, Lucretius, Livy, Varro ? and Jordanes. See
TLL 6. 1311.
293 Hie panis (this bread) is the more normal but the neuter form
is cited as having been used by Plautus: Cure. 367. Cf. F. J.
Dolger, Ant. u. Christ, i (1929) 18.
294 Hie sanguis (this blood) is usual but hoc sanguen (neuter)
was used by Ennius, Cicero, Cato, Varro, Lucretius, and Petronius.
295 Apparently only Arnobius speaks of the masculine form here
used but there is evidence also for a variant candelabrus of which
he may have been thinking. lugulus is used by Juvenal; iugulum by
Cicero and Tacitus. Note the chiasmus.
296 All were grammarians : (a) Cornelius Epicadus, freedman of
Sulla, mentioned by Charisius, Keil's Grammatici Latini i. no;
(b) L. Caesellius Vindex, age of Hadrian (see G. Goetz, RE 3
[1889] 1305); (c) Verrius Flaccus who lived under Augustus (see
Schanz-Hosius, Geschic'hte der romischen Liter atur 2 [4th ed.,
Munich 1935] 361-7); (d) O. Terentius Scaurus, first half of second
century A. D. (see P. Wessner, RE 2. R., 5 [1934] 672-6); (e)
Nisus, briefly mentioned by a number of grammarians in Keil's
Grammatici Latini 1.26; 2.503; 7.76; 7.155. It is tempting to
believe that one of these lost grammarians was Arnobius' source,
and, indeed, A. Gellius (6. 2) presents evidence to show that Caesel-
lius, at least, did discuss the question of variable genders of nouns.
297 All these names are expressed in the plural, a favorite form of
intensification with Arnobius.
298 Axelson may be right in wanting this to be ( knew ' instead of
298 NOTES
' willed '; the MS reads nolmt which editors usually change to
voluit but the deletion of the letter I (= novit) is quite as simple a
change.
299 Adsumpsit. Cf. G. Brunner, Jahrb. f. Liturgiew. 13 (1935)
177: "Das adsumpsit des Arnobius ist der in der Theologie ublich
gewordene terminus technicus fur die Annahme der menschlichen
Natur durch den Logos an Stelle des accepit der Vulgata. Mit
tegmen gibt Arnobius das paulinische cr^a, was die Vulgata mit
habitus ubersetzt* Tegmen, jorma > similitude stehen bei Arnobius,
wie bei Paulus, im Unterscheid zur primigenia natura bzw. forma
Dei, die Christus besass, bevor er in der Fiille der Zeiten Mensch
wurde, oder, um es mit einem Worte des Arnobius auszudriicken, als
er noch in incognitis regnis weilte, von wo aus ihn der hochste
Gott in die Welt gesandt hat/'
300 Sine homine simulate has a Docetic ring (cf. McGiffert 2. 43),
but Brunner emphasizes the fact that this word is found in a quota-
tion and therefore does not represent Arnobius' own views. Cf . W.
Kroll, Rhein. Mus. 71 (1916) 333; Rapisarda, Arnob. 108.
301 Plato (jRep. 6nb) makes the same point: nothing synthesized
is immortal (see 2. 14). Cf. Tertullian, De an. 10.
302 Rapisarda (Arnofc. no) notes the striking parallel with Lac-
tantius (Div. inst. 4. 10): homini . . . quem induerat gerebat. Micka
(54) says of this passage that Arnobius " seems ... to be teaching
Docetism," but that his views are more akin to those of the later
Nestorius. He rightly objects to the view of Brunner (173) that on
the Incarnation Arnobius is correct. Colombo (18 ff.) says, however,
that Arnobius is merely describing Christ in terms of a pagan deity,
a view which has much that is attractive in it. Badham (see n. 222)
maintains that these statements show Arnobius to have been a Docetic
and is inclined to think that the source was the apocryphal Pseudo-
Peter. E. S. Bouchier, Life and Letters in Roman Africa (Oxford
1913) 102, thinks the chapter contains Gnostic errors.
303 The Pythian Sibyl-so Brunner (178).
30 *Bacis was a Boeotian prophet see Cicero, De div. i. 18.34;
Helenus, son of Priam, a Trojan prophet (JibiA. 1.40. 89); Marcius,
a Roman prophet (ibid. 1.50.115). This suggests strongly that
Arnobius was acquainted with the De divinatione although he never
cites it. He might have made the point stronger by alluding to
Helenus' sister Cassandra, also possessed of prophetic powers, since
she, according to the legend followed in Aeschylus' Agamemnon,
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK ONE 299
was slain by Clytaemnestra and Aegisthus while vainly attempting
to warn Agamemnon. On Bacis, see O. Kern, RE 2 (1896) 2801 f.
305 Reading, with Wiman, succubuisset vis tanta, <(tanta} si non
agenda res esset.
306 Yhis word fati is Gelenius' correction of the MS satis which
Axelson would retain. If he is right, then the translation should be
" the inscrutable plan did not have to be revealed in completely
hidden mysteries/'
307 Latrones = robbers, but, as Scharnagl (32 f .) says, in early Latin,
which Arnobius is fond of imitating (but see Introduction, p. 24),
the word = milites (cf . Plautus, Trinummus 599; Varro, De ling. lat.
j. 52). Cf. Forcellini 3. 40. Dr. Plumpe remarks that there may be a
confusion of the milites who crucified with the latrones (Matt.
27. 38) who were crucified with Christ.
308 An exceedingly corrupt passage, the MS reading: Cum enim
de animarum periculis multa, mala de illarum contra insinuator ? etc.
There appears to be a lacuna in which stood at the very least a
feminine noun in the ablative and some verb form which can govern
multa. Marchesi attempts to purify the sentence by changing mala
to multa, insinuator to msinuaret, and inserting ^salutey after
contra. This does not satisfy either me or Wiman whose alternative
is Cum enim de animarum periculis multa, mala de illarum contra
(indole vitiorum sollicite cogitans multa} insinuator, etc. This is
better since it keeps closer to the text as given in the MS, preserves
the word insinuator which certainly is right, but is open to the
objection that the expansion of the lacuna is very lengthy. I have,
however, followed it in the translation.
309 p or examples of UpocruXUa (temple robbing) see 6. 21; Cicero,
the Fourth Verrine Oration: De signis; De not. deor. 1.29.82;
1.31.86; 3.34.83; Suetonius, lulius 54; Caligula 57; Clement of
Alexandria, Protr. 4. 52.
810 A famous example was that of Antony and Octavian in which
both Marcus Cicero and his brother Quintus were among the victims
in 43 B. C.
811 The presence of indigetes immediately following suggests that
Arnobius was thinking of Roman examples, in which case we might
cite the rape of Rhea Silvia, daughter of King Numitor of Alba
Longa and herself a Vestal Virgin, by the god Mars.
31 ? Prior to the time of Diocletian, under whom Arnobius was
writing, the title of divus or diva had been officially conferred after
death upon Julius Caesar, thirty-four emperors, and twenty-seven
20*
300 NOTES
other members of the imperial family see R. Cagnat, Cours
graphie latine (4th ed., Paris 1914). If this is really a veiled refer-
ence to emperor worship, it is the only one in Arnobius.
813 A difficult sentence to interpret. The following are mentioned :
(a) critics of immorality and luxury (e. g. Juvenal ?); (b) proponents
of communistic marriage (e. g. Plato ?); (c) pederasts; (d) mis-
anthropes. One would have expected Arnobius to view the first with
approval, but if the second and third be taken as examples of the
vices, then there are only two classes, both hostile to the pagans and
yet treated with respect by them.
314 A clear case of hendiadys: the MS reads luxurias et vitas vestras,
which Reifferscheid did not improve by changing to vitia vestra.
315 Plato (Rep. 45yd) argued that the female guardians should
provide themselves as wives in communistic fashion for the male
guardians. He did not advocate communistic marriage for the
population.
316 Doubtless a reference to Socrates and Plato but see C. Murley,
"The Didactic Significance of Erotic Figures in Plato," Class.
Essays Pres. to James A. Kleist, S.J. (St. Louis 1946) 61-73, who
brings together evidence tending to prove that the references to
pederasty in Plato may usually, if not always, be taken in a non-
physical sense.
317 An early pagan criticism of the Christians was that they were
haters of the human race (Tacitus, Ann. 15. 44).
318 Stertinius Avitus, a contemporary of Martial, wished to put a
bust of the poet in his library (cf. the introductory epigram to
Martial, Bk. 9).
819 Brakman wishes to read duratum (hardened); Lorenz, pravatum
(depraved).
320 Praeconium salutare. Salus first meant health and then ac-
quired the religious sense of salvation. Here there is a play on both
senses.
821 Sihler (173) thinks that the persecution of 303 A. D. had not
yet started when Arnobius wrote this chapter and 2. 78.
522 Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. 1.26.71; in De div. 2.24.52 the
statement is attributed to Cato the Elder: "I wonder that a sooth-
sayer doesn't laugh when he sees another soothsayer/'
323 Virt u t um omnium dominus = ' Lord of every virtue ' but the
reference is probably also to miraculous power as well as to virtue.
See n. 210.
324 See 2 Tim. i. 10; Our Savior Jesus Christ who hath destroyed
death.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 301
BOOK TWO
With Book Two, the longest and in many ways the most important
and the most original, Arnobius reaches the height of his philosophic
and literary powers.
This Book was regarded by its author as a sort of digression from
his main theme (cf. 2. i and 3. 2) and may be briefly summarized as
an attack on the method and results of the philosophers, in particular
the idealism of Plato and the Neo-Platonists, and also the doctrine
of the novi viri which was a combination of hermetism (cf. Rapi-
sarda, Arnob. 136), Neo-Platonism, the Oracula Chaldaica, and
other writings of the period (see chapters n-66). Rapisarda (ibid.
76 f.) makes the interesting point that in the attack against Neo-
Platonism, Arnobius really limits himself to a criticism of the theories
of Plato himself, but elsewhere (41) emphasizes the importance of
the work as showing that contemporary African Christianity realized
the danger of Neo-Platonism. The extremely original controlled
experiment designed to refute Plato's doctrine of recollection (see
chapters 20 ff.) is worthy of considerable attention, but the cardinal
teaching of this Book is the important belief, surprising as it is, that
the human soul is not intrinsically immortal.
Attention is invited to the following special bibliography on Book
Two:
L. Atzberger, Geschichte der christlichen Eschatologie innerhalb
der vornicdnischen Zeit (Freiburg i. Br. 1 896) 573-82.
J. Carcopino, " Le tombeau de Lambiridi et Thermetisme africain,"
Rev, Arch. 15 (1922) 283-90.
. Aspects mythiques de la 'Rome yaienne (Paris 1941)
293-300. (Cf. de Labriolle i. 277.)
S. Colombo, "Arnobio e i suoi sette libri Adversus Nationes,"
Didaskaleion 9 (1930) esp. 45-74.
A. J. Festugiere, ' La doctrine des " Uiri noui " sur Torigine et sur
le sort des mes d'apres Arnobe, II, n-i6/ Memorial Lagrange
(Paris 1940) 97-132. [This is a most penetrating study of these
chapters.]
K. B. Francke, Die Psychologie und Erkenntnisslehre des Arnoljlus
(diss. Leipzig 1878).
H. W. Fulford, "Conditional Immortality/* Hastings Encycl. 3
(1913) 822-5.
O. Grillnberger, " Studien zur Philosophic der patristischen Zeit,
302 NOTES
II: Die Unsterblichkeitslehre des Arnobius," ]dhrb. f. Philos. u.
spek. Theol. 5 (1891) 1-14.
G. J. Joyce, " Annihilation/' Hastings Encycl. i (1913) 544-9.
C. Marchesi, " II pessimismo di un apologeta cristiano," Pegaso z
093) 53 6 -5 '
A. Rohricht, Die Seelenlehre des Arnobius nach ihren Quellen
und ihrer Entstehung untersucht. Ein Beitrag zum Verstandnis der
spateren Apologetik der alien Kirche (Hamburg 1893) es P- 43~64-
A. D. Nock A. J. Festugiere, Corpus Hermeticum (2 vols, 3 Paris
1946).
E. F. Schulze, Das Ubel in der Welt nach der Lehre des Arnobius.
Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der patristischen Philosophie (diss. Jena
1896).
1 Zeus and Alcmene are clearly meant. CL 2. 70, 4. 22, 4. 26, 5. 22,
7-33-
2 The verbs praetendit and amovit follow Reifferscheid and Wi-
man, rather than the praetenderit and amoverit of Marchesi's text.
3 At this point there is a transposition in the text, doubtless caused
by a loose leaf wrongly replaced, a dislocation which took place
prior to the compilation of P. The translation follows the rearrange-
ment of the pages found in both Reifferscheid and Marchesi. Wiman,
however, would begin chapter 2 with: et non omnium virtutum vi
cinctus et lumen praetendit vitae et periculum ignorationis amovit?
4 Salutaria = wholesome things.
5 So the MS (oytaret) which was changed by Meursius to aptaret
and by Heraldus, followed by Reifferscheid, to apertaret (opened),
but the MS is really intelligible.
6 Officiosior.
7 Motu . . . vitali. Cf . 2. 1 6 : motum . . . vitalem, and Lucretius
2. 717: vitalis motus,
B Imperator. See Book One, n. 109. The word is used again in
2.36.
9 Cf. 3. 26, 4. 2j, 4. 27, 5. 41, 5. 45, 6. 3, 6. ii, 6. 12.
10 Following Heraldus, Orelli, and Meiser, I have adopted Da
puerum iudicem for Da verum indicium, since otherwise dubitabit
lacks a subject. What Arnobius says is " Let even a child decide/*
11 Arnobius may here be imitating, with unwonted restraint, a
passage in Tertullian, Apol. 17. 5 f., which lists no fewer than six
colloquial expressions used by pagans in similar fashion : deus magnus,
deus bonus, quod deus dederit, deus videt, deo commendo, and deus
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 303
mihi reddet, or Minucius 18. 1 1 : Quid? quod omnium de isto habeo
consensum? Audio vulgus: cum ad caelum manus tendunt, nihil
aliud quam ' deum ' (note the single word, as in Arnobius) dicunt et
' deus magnus est ' et ' deus verus est ' et ' si deus dederit/
12 Rapisarda (Arnok 53) thinks this refers to angels, not to aeons.
13 The Greek word ru<os means vanity, as well as affectation,
humbug, delusion, and also serves as the name of four kinds of
fever. Arnobius is fond of it but uses it again only in this Book:
Chapters 12, 16, 19, and 63, which suggests that he may have
found it in a source used in Book Two only. J. Gibb-W. Mont-
gomery, The Confessions of Augustine (Cambr. Patr. Texts, Cam-
bridge 1908) 57, cite this example as the earliest they have found
of a usage common in Augustine. They call this rightly a conscious
use as a loan word. Neither Reifferscheid nor Marchesi print the
word in Greek characters, though the fact that five of the six
occurrences are corrupt suggests that a scribe, perhaps he who
produced P, had difficulty in reading the Greek word which he saw
before him. In 3. 29 both editors rightly print Greek characters
because in the MS the word xp vo< * appears with only one letter
(the n) clearly in Roman script. In 3. 41 they both print Aoupas
though P reads quite clearly in Roman script laude. I therefore
believe that the MS originally had Greek characters at this point,
though the fact does not become patent in a translation. See
Vigiliae Christianae 3 (1949) 40.
14 Latronibus which in i. 63 (see n. 307) has the sense of ' soldiers.'
15 Cf. Origen, C. Cels. 2, 10.
16 [C. E.] Freppel, Commodien, Arndbe, Lactance, et autres frag-
ments inedits (Paris 1893) 52, points out that this idea appears in
Pascal's Pensees, art. 10. i (148-53 Havet). Resemblances between
Arnobius and Pascal have also been noted by M. Leigh (see below,
n. 44).
17 Bryce-Campbell wrongly take redarguat to mean ' to show to be
true' because they went astray on the meaning of quod (because).
18 H. M. Gwatkin, Early Church History to A. D. 313, i (London
1912) 201, refers this passage to the argument of Gamaliel (Acts
5.38).
19 Sacramenta an early Christian loan word taken from the Roman
military sphere, where it = soldiers' oaths of allegiance. Like mys-
terium, with which it is frequently identical in meaning, it has a
very wide range of significance in early Christian literature (cf.
below, militiae sacramenta). Cf. the very illuminating notes of J. P.
304 NOTES
Christopher (ACW 2 , i 8f.) and J. H. Waszink (Tertullian's De
anima [Amsterdam 1947] 90 f.) and the voluminous bibliography
cited by both scholars. On the parallel with Mithraism, see Cumont
207 n. 5.
20 Note how the rhetorician gives first place to those professions
connected with his own experience.
21 This sentence closely parallels one of Tertullian, Apol. 3.4:
Uxorem iam pudicam maritus iam non zelotypus eiecit, filium iam
subiectum pater retro patiens abdicavit, servum iam fidelem dominus
olim mitis ab oculis relegavit: ut quisque hoc nomine emendatur,
offendit Cf. also Ad nat. 1.4. If in this passage Arnobius is imitating
Tertullian, then it is quite possible that he was writing before the
persecution of Diocletian, yet Colombo (4) maintains that this
sentence does refer to that persecution, perhaps rightly.
22 Salutaris militiae sacramenta deponere. When a Roman recruit
was inducted, a token of identification, signaculum, attached to a
chain or cord, was suspended from his neck. The signaculum bore
the name (or portrait?) of the emperor, and on this the military
oath was administered to the soldier. The entire ceremony constituted
a religious rite and was known as sacramenta militiae. Cf. F. J.
Dolger, "sacramentum militiae/' Ant. u. Christ, 2 (1930) 268-80.
To a Christian militiae sacramenta deponere meant to abandon the
allegiance sworn to Christ in baptism. The ancient Christian concept
of life as a war, struggle militia to obtain salvation, is the theme of
a famous study by A. Harnack, Militia Christi: die christliche Re-
ligion und der Soldatenstand in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten
(Leipzig 1905).
23 Inaniter ~ as an atom in the void, by chance alone.
24 An allusion to the Epicurean theory of atomic collisions.
25 This word credulitas has, when used by the pagan critics of
Christianity in a sarcastic tone, precisely the same meaning as its
English cognate. When used by Christians it has the sublime sense
of belief in Christ.
26 Conditi, so the MS, approved by Lofstedt, Stangl, and Mar-
chesi; contincti = ' sprinkled > (Wensky); aliti = ' nourished ' (Reif-
ferscheid); candidi = ' bright ' (Kistner); praediti - ' endowed ' (Mei-
ser). Weyman rightly maintains that conditi is derived from
cofadire, not from condere.
27 G. Bortolucci, " Arnobio, Adversus Nationes II, 6 ed una ipotesi
di Pietro Giordani," in Melanges de Droit Romain dedies a Georges
Cornil i (Gand-Paris 1926) 129-36, wrongly deduces from this
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 305
passage the conclusion that the pagans imputed to the Christians
" una estrema ignoranza e della grammatica e della letteratura e della
logica e del diritto, opponendo che se i Cristiani cotali cose ignora-
vano che tutti sanno, altre e migliori a piu important! ne conoscono e
piu atte alia disciplina dello spirito e del viver civile." All that may
rightly be derived is that Arnobius rebukes the pagans for foolishly
thinking that their command of knowledge in the fields specified
entitled them to special consideration.
28 Declinare. Note the several examples of chiasmus in the passage.
Cf. i. 59.
29 Obsignatum memoria tenetis, perhaps a Lucretian echo (cf .
2. 581 : obsignatum . . . habere, and Bailey ad loc.').
30 The point is that they were thoroughly learned in literature,
knowing even minor works. This is the only extant allusion to the
third satire of the 2pth book of Lucilius (oz. 180-103 B. C.) who is
also mentioned in 5. 18. Cf. F. Marx's edition of the fragments
(Leipzig 1904), fr. 1177, text in i. 80, commentary in 2. 372 f. See
also E. H. Warmington, Remains of Old Latin 3 (London-Cam-
bridge, Mass. 1938) 294 f. The latter translates Fornix as 'Brothel'
the word really means ' arch ' and its evil connotation (cf . ' forni-
cate was derived from the practice of vice near arches. See H.
Degering, " Fornix/ 3 RE 7 (1912) 8-12; I. Hilberg, " Der Fornix des
Lucilius und der Marsya des Pomponius," Wien. Stud. 25 (1903)
156-8.
31 The juxtaposition of the allusion to the satirist Lucilius makes
it highly probable that this is a reference to an otherwise unknown
work of the master of the so-called Atellan farce, Pomponius of
Bononia (fl. 80 B. C,), on whom see M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Ge-
schichte der romischen Litteratur i (4th ed., Munich 1927) 245-53;
J. W. Duff, A Literary History of Rome (London 1909) 220-2.
Bortolucci (Zoc. cit), however, gives considerable attention to a theory
of Pietro Giordani (b. 1774) that this Pomponius was the juris-
consult Sextus Pomponius who lived, according to Giordani, either
under Hadrian or under Alexander Severus. Giordani believed that
the clauses immediately following the name of Pomponius give the
contents of the work called Marsyas which took its name, he thought,
from the statue of the Phrygian satyr standing in the Forum ,(see
Platner-Ashby 499). But, as Bortolucci points out, the presence of
quid (because) directly following the name sets off the sentence from
what follows.
82 A clear reference to i Cor. 3. 19: For the wisdom of this world
306 NOTES
is foolishness with God. Note that Arnobius uses hominis in place
of mundi which is found in the Vulgate (agreeing with the Greek
manuscripts) and adds his own touch (jprimuwi) to make sure that
the Christian God will be clearly understood. Some earlier editions
eliminated the problem of this word by placing it in the next sen-
tence. On the epithet, see Micka 43 n. 10. It should be noted that
the words Hind vulgatum suggest that Arnobius knew the phrase in
common speech, rather than that he had read the Epistle. He might
have met it also in Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 5. i; Origen, C.
Cels. 1.13; Cyprian, Test. 3.69. On Arnobius' knowledge of
Scripture in general, see Introd. pp. 25-7.
33 A difficult passage: invidia may as well be taken as nominative
in which case there is a case of chiasmus.
34 In the first Alcibiades (1296), a dialogue which is sometimes
suspected of being spurious (cf. P. Shorey, What Plato Said [Chicago
1933] 415)7 Alcibiades is represented as not being able to explain
what man is; but Socrates at once brings him to the necessary con-
clusion ( see Bryce-Campbell ad Zoc.), LeNourry (cited by them)
thinks the reference is to Phaedms 2303 where Socrates says he
investigates himself, not mythological questions. Rohricht (Seelen-
lehre 25 f .) concludes from a study of these passages that Arnobius
used Plato directly.
35 The ancient theory of abiogenesis or spontaneous generation.
Cf, Lucretius 2. 871 and the notes of Leonard-Smith and Bailey
ad loc.
36 Theaetetus i58cd, but since Socrates is here developing Prota-
goras' theory from his point of view, it can hardly be said of Plato
that he is in doubt. See Bryce-Campbell's n. 3. Rohricht (Seelen-
lehre 27) says that this passage is derived from direct acquaintance
with Plato.
37 Cf. A. Gellius 5. 16. 2: Stoic! causas esse videndi dicunt radiorum
ex oculis in ea quae videri queunt emissionem aerisque simul
intentionem.
38 An African would probably overlook blond hair.
39 Here the word is animus, but in the discussion which makes up
the rest of Book Two, Arnobius regularly uses animae (feminine
plural). On Lucretius' use of these terms (animus = ' mind/ ' spirit/
'understanding'; anim.a = ' soul ' and 'life'), see J. Masson, Lucre-
tius, Epicurean and Poet (London 1907) 205, and the notes on the
two words in J. H. Waszink's edition of Tertullian's De an. (Am-
sterdam 1947) 201, 254.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 307
40 Deus = divinus (see nn. 232, 237, 375). Cf. Cicero, Tusc.
i. 26. 65; Somn. Sci'p. 8 = De re mibl. 6. 24. 26; also Dionysius Cato
(290 A. DO:
Si deus est animus, nobis ut carmina dicunt,
Hie tibi praecipue sit pura mente colendus.
E. Baehrens, Poetae latinae minor es 3. 216 = Oxford Book of Latin
Verse (Oxford 1944) p. 368, no. 211.
41 Reading defessus deliret futura et insana (Marchesi) but per-
haps Reifferscheid (defessus, delira ecfuttiat et insana'), following
Oehler, is right, and the translation should be: "prattles about crazy
and mad things." On this passage, see Lucretius 3. 444-71.
42 This passage, as Klussmann pointed out, reflects the well-known
lines of Lucretius 3. 445-69 which are used to demonstrate, in the
estimation of the poet, that the soul is mortal.
43 Reading quod (Reifferscheid) instead of ut (Marchesi).
44 M. Leigh, "A Christian Skeptic of the Fourth Century: Some
Parallels between Arnobius and Pascal/* HiUbert Jour. 19 (1920-21)
319-25, sees parallels between Pascal's Art. 23. 10 and this chapter,
as well as many other points of similarity between the two writers.
See above, n. 16.
45 The word meraco implies that the draught is not watered down
but is pure wine (wenira). Though I find it difficult to believe that
a rhetor like Arnobius could be unacquainted with Horace, I cannot
agree with Rapisarda (AraoK 242) that this is surely a conscious
imitation of Ep. 2. 2. 137.
46 A reference to the taking up of a newborn child from the ground
as a sign of recognition of its legitimacy.
47 This act of faith is also mentioned by Origen, C. Cels. i, n;
Theophilus, Ad Autol. i. 8.
48 Clement of Alexandria (Protr. 5. 64. i f.) has a passage some-
what like this. He mentions Thales, Anaximenes of Miletus, Dio-
genes of Apollonia, Parmenides of Elea, Hippasus of Metapontum,
Heraclitus of Ephesus, and Empedocles of Acragas. The passages
are similar but quite obviously independent of each other. Cf.
Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 10.25; which mentions Thales but apart
from this allusion lacks clear evidence of Arnobius' indebtedness to
Cicero. The same is true of a reference to Heraclitus on fire (ibid.
3- I4-35)-
49 Thales of Miletus (oz. 624-01. 550 B. C.) believed that all things
came from water (see W. T. Stace, A Critical History of Greek
308 NOTES
Philosophy [London 1920] 21; T. Gomperz, Greek Thinkers, a
History of Ancient Philosophy i [trans, by L. Magnus, New York
1901] 48); Heraclitus of Ephesus (ca. 535-02. 475 B. C.) taught that
the fundamental reality was fire (Stace 78, Gomperz i. 63). Hera-
clitus is also mentioned in 5. 29. On Thales, see W. Nestle, RE,
2. R. 5 (1934) 1210-12.
50 Pythagoras of Samos (L 6th century B. C.) whom Arnobius
thrice mentions (i. 40, 2. 10, 2. 13) was a famous mathmatician who
believed that number was the basic reality (Stace 34, Gomperz i. 99-
122; R. Scoon, Greek Philosophy before Plato [Princeton 1928]
35-50). Archytas of Taras, a contemporary of Plato, developed
mechanics on mechanical lines and was a geometer of considerable
ability (Scoon 273).
51 An allusion to the celebrated " Theory of Ideas."
52 This reference to the fifth element shows that Arnobius is
indebted to the following passage in Cicero, Tusc, i. 10.22: Aris-
toteles longe omnibus Platonem semper excipio praestans et in-
genio et diligentia, cum quattuor nota ilia genera principiorum esset
complexus, e quibus omnia orerentur, quintam quandam naturam
censet esse, e qua sit rhens; cogitare enim et providere et discere et
docere et invenire aliquid et meminisse, et tarn multa alia, amare
odisse, cupere timere, angi laetari; haec et similia eorum in horum
quattuor generum inesse nullo putat: quintum genus adhibet vacans
nomine et sic ipsum anirnum evSeAexciav appellat novo nomine quasi
quandam continuatam motionem et perennem. On the Greek word
see the very illuminating note in J. E. King's translation of Cicero,
Tusc., Loeb Classical Library (London-New York 1927) 28, and cf.
also the following passages in Aristotle: Metaphys. 4.2 (ioi3a);
Phys. 2. 3 (i94b); see W. D. Ross, Aristotle's Physics (Oxford 1936),
analysis, pp, 361 f,; and Bryce-CampbelFs note 2 (72).
53 The followers of Aristotle were called Peripatetics (from irspi-
irartlvj ' to walk about ')> either from his habit of walking about as
he lectured or from the Tre/nWros (a covered walk) of the Lyceum.
The chief Peripatetics were Theophrastus, Eudemus of Rhodes,
Strato of Lampsacus, Andronicus of Rhodes, and Alexander of
Aphrodisias.
54 Reading with Wiman arsuram for Marchesi's arsurum.
55 Chrysippus of Soli (ca. 280-206 B. C.) was a teacher of Zeno of
Tarsus. He was renowned as a dialectician and prodigious worker
(reputedly wrote 705 works!), Panaetius of Rhodes (second century
B. C.) came to Rome and taught philosophy there. Arnobius, or his
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 309
source, appears to be in error in including Zeno in this category,
since he is said not to have accepted the Stoic view of a final
conflagration.
56 Three representative atomists. On Metrodorus, cf . Cicero, De
nat. deor. i. 31. 86; i. 33. 93; i. 40. 113.
57 On Arcesilas of Pitane (316-241 B. C.), founder of the so-called
'Middle Academy/ see H. v. Arnim, "Arcesilas" no. 19, RE 2,
(1896) 1164-8. On Carneades (214-129 B.C.), a leader of the
Academics, see v. Arnim, ibid. 10 (1919) 1964-85.
58 On the Academics, see Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. i. 1-2; Academica,
passim. The chief difference between the older and later Academic
school was that the latter softened the pure skepticism of the former
by stating what was " probably " true.
59 Cf. Lucretius i. 635-704; Lactantius, Div. inst. i. 5. 15-18.
60 Comprehendere = both * comprehend ' and ' include/ a play on
words.
61 Fides, i. e. a willingness to believe (in a good sense), contrasted
with credulitas, which has the same meaning in a bad sense.
62 Reading nostra cum credulitate with Ursinus, Stewechius, and,
more recently, Lorenz, in place of the MS nostra in credulitate
(Marchesi).
63 This suggests the second principle of Gorgias of Leontini that
if anything exists, it cannot be recognized or known.
04 On the philosophical sources used by Arnobius in 2. 11-66, see
A. J. Festugi&re, Memorial Lagrange (Paris 1940) 97-132. From his
resume" the doctrine may be summarized as follows: (i) The soul
is the child of the First God, even a portion of his substance. (2)
In the hierarchy of primary divinities, the soul holds fourth place,
after the First God and the Two Intellects [see below n. 163]. (3)
Born the child of God, the soul is divine, immortal, incorporeal,
naturally omniscient and all-wise; endowed with an indestructible
perfection which causes it to practice all the moral virtues and renders
it incapable of sin; not subject to the laws of fate. (4) Sprung from
the same source, all the souls possess in common the same spirit, the
same conduct, the same judgment. (5) The soul descends to earth,
that is, enters human bodies, by virtue, apparently, of a spontaneous
choice. (6) During the descent, when the soul passes through the
circles of the spheres, it acquires ' active principles ' (.causae) which
render it the slave of all the passions and vices. (7) Man is therefore
composed of three elements: a) from his divine part he is endowed
with reason, is superior to the animals, and, of himself, immortal,
3 10 NOTES
omniscient, incapable of sin, not subject to fate; b) from the qualities
which he receives from the stars man becomes completely bad, but
the sins he commits should be charged against the astral causes, not
against the divine part of man, the real man, which remains incapable
of sin and necessarily immortal; and c) from his terrestrial body, man
is subject to death. (8) After the visible death, the soul flies back to
God its Father. (9) To obtain or facilitate the return, three methods
or ' ways' are offered to the soul: a) the way of the half -wise
(scioii) : to detach the divine part as much as possible from the
material; b) the way of the Magi: to learn prayers thanks to which
the soul will remove the evil powers which oppose its return, and
c) the way of the Etruscans: to provide, by the sacrifice of some
animal to some divinity, that the soul will become divine and not die.
In an elaborate table (128 f.) Festugiere lists passages in the Corpus
Hermeticum, Numenius, Porphyry, lamblichus, the Oracula Chal-
daica [cf, Cumont 115], the Gnostics in Plotinus, Enn. 2. 9, Zoroaster,
Osthanes, and others, and magical papyri (Mithraic liturgies) which
he believes correspond to the various elements of the doctrine of
the ' viri novi * here summarized.
It need not be pointed out that Arnobius accepts none of this
doctrine but opposes it whole-heartedly with Christian fervor, though
the result is not always orthodox. That hermetism inspired Arnobius
is also maintained by Cumont (238 n. 50), citing J. Carcopino, " Le
tombeau de Lambiridi et Thermetisme africain, Rev. Arch. 15 (1922)
283-90.
65 So the MS : Platoni, but Ursinus reads Plotino which Heraldus
and Bryce-Campbell preferred.
60 The MS reads Crotonio, i. e. either a man named Crotonius of
whom nothing is known or the ' man of Croton/ perhaps an allusion
to Pythagoras. But it is much more probable that Ursinus was right
in correcting to Cronio, an allusion to an eminent Pythagorean, also
mentioned by Eusebius, Hist, eccl 6.19.8; Porphyry, De ant.
nymph. 21; Vita Plotini 14; Longinus in Porphyry, Vita Plotini 20;
lamblichus in Stobaeus i, pp. 375, 380, where, as Festugiere points
out, Cronius' name is coupled with that of Numenius as here. Be-
cause Theodoret (Graec. aff. cur. serm. 2: De princ. 33 [MG
83.8526]) mentions in the same connection Plato, Plotinus, and
Numenius, Gelenius wanted to change Crotonio in the text to
Plotino, Orelli offers some other less probable suggestions. See
Festugiere 98 n. i. For the fragments of Numenius, see E, A.
Leemans, Studie over den wijsgeer Numenius van Apamea met
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 311
uitgave der fragmenten (Brussels 1937) 113-46; the fragments of
Cronius, 153-7. On Numenius, cf. Origen, C. Cels* 4.53; 5-57;
Rapisarda, Arnob. 46.
67 Fideliter = with faith or belief in their authenticity rather than
devotion to them.
68 Cf. i. 48 for similar questions asked about the pagan gods.
69 Scabies = either an itch or a scab. The point of callus (in place
of cwtis) is probably to indicate that a sliver may be more easily
removed from hard than from soft skin.
70 Luculentissimis, a word applied by St. Jerome (Chron. ann.
Abr. 2343 = 326-7 A. D.) to Arnobius' own books. See Introd. n. 19.
71 Levigatis has the possibility of an ironic sense, i. e. slippery, too
smooth, which is doubtless not wanted here.
72 Kistner suggests acumina (subtleties) which is tempting (cf.
Cicero, Orat. 31. no: argutiis et acumine) but is rejected by Mar-
chesi and Lofstedt.
73 The antecedent is vis (power).
74 All editors have resisted the temptation to insert a negative in
this sentence. What Arnobius means is that the deeds are so well-
known that, if he wished, he could specify them, not that their very
fewness would permit them to be counted. On the expansion of
Christianity at this period, see also Lactantius, Div. inst. 5. 13. i,
which, however, shows no dependence on Arnobius.
75 Orelli thinks this " India " = Ethiopia and he may be right, but
there is literary evidence in addition to support Arnobius' statement.
Cf. the third-century Acts of Thomas (see M. R. James, The Apo-
cryphal New Testament [Oxford 1924] 364-438), confirmed by the
apocryphal work on the Assumption (ibid. 203 f., 218) and the
Apostolic History of Abdias (see McGiffert and Wace in Schaff-
Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers i [New York 1890] 225 n. 6,
which tends to show that this " India " is not India proper), where
it is stated that Pantaenus went to " India " and found there a Hebrew
version of the first Gospel brought there by Bartholomew; and
Jerome, De vir. ill. 36 and Ep. 70 (Ad Magnum), which shows that
Jerome was thinking of India proper (cf. the reference to Brahmins).
A, Harnack, Mission and Expansion of Christianity 2 (2nd ed.,
London 1908) 152, appears to accept the evidence of the Acts of
Thomas at its face value. Not so H. W. Gwatkin, Early Church
History to A. D. 313, 2 (London 1912) 163, and K. S. Latourette,
History of the Expansion of Christianity i (New York 1937) 337,
both of whom favor an Arabian site. C, R. Beazley, "Christian
NOTES
Missions/' Hastings Encycl. 8 (1916) 705, takes a neutral position.
E, J. Rapson, Cambridge History of India i (New York 1922) 579 .,
points out the chronological possibility of the data in the Acts of
Thomas, but appears to be hesitant about accepting the tradition
they preserve. On this point I have applied for information concern-
ing possible archaeological evidence, tending to substantiate the
existence of Christianity in the Indian subcontinent prior to 300
A. D., to Father P. DeLetter, S. J., St. Mary's Theological College,
Kurseong, India. In a letter dated 10 May 1947, Father DeLetter
quotes the following statement of his colleague, Father J. Bayart,
Professor of Indian Religions: ". . . the viewpoint of Western
scholars has always been this (and not fully rightly) : the c India '
or ' Indi ' of early Christian writers (or of classical authors) is not
the real India, unless this can be proved; whereas the historical
evidence about trade relations between India and the West at the
beginning of the Christian era would rather justify the contrary:
' India ' means India unless the opposite be clearly proved."
76 The Seres were an ancient oriental people usually identified
with the Chinese, but Lucan 10. 29 makes them neighbors of the
Ethiopians, dwellers near the sources of the Nile. They are men-
tioned again in 6, 5. See Herrmann, " Seres," RE 2. Reihe, 2 (1923)
1678-83.
77 Cf. Eusebius, Hist, eccl 6. 19. 15 f.
78 Note the curious absence in this list of Africa (except Egypt),
and of Spain, Gaul, Britain, and northern Europe in general.
70 Tertullian (Adv. lud, 7) states that Christianity had spread to
such an extent that it was now possessed db omnibus gentibus supra
enumerates, which include: Parthians, Medes, Elamites; inhabitants
of Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Cappadocia; dwellers in Pontus,
Asia, Pamphylia, Egypt, trans-Cyrenaic Africa; the Jews in Jerusalem;
the Gaetuli, Mauri, Spaniards, Gauls, Britons, Sarmatians, Dacians,
Germans and Scythians. Note the absence of " India " in this list.
Cf. also the celebrated passage in Tertullian, ApoL 37. 4: Hesterni
sumus, et vestra omnia implevimus, urbes, insulas, castella, municipia,
conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias, palatium, senatum, forum.
Sola vobis reliquimus templa. Cf. Irenaeus, Adv, haer. i. 2 (Harvey).
80 According to Livy i. 19, Numa gave the Romans their religious
customs, The allusion is perhaps a veiled attack on augury which
Amobius, curiously enough, never mentions elsewhere. See Book
One, n, 97.
81 Res. This may possibly refer, on the other hand, not to the
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 313
religious traditions but to actual property rights which would have
to be abandoned at conversion. Cf. Clement of Alexandria, Protr. 10.
82 Cf. Minucius 31.7: et quod in dies nostri numerus augentur.
83 The context makes it seem certain that " they " are the people
of Rome and that Arnobius is viewing the contest as having taken
place there.
84 According to G. N. L. Hall, " Simon Magus/' Hastings Encycl
ii (1921) 514-25, Arnobius is the earliest writer to give a version
of the story in which Simon lived after his attempted flight. For
other writers who mention Simon, cf. H. Lietzmann, " Simon
Magus," RE, 2. Reihe, 5 (1927) 180-4; E. Amann, " Simon le
Magicien," DTC 14.2 (1941) 2130-40; and see Rapisarda, Amok.
5 1 f . Incidentally, by his offer of money for the power to give the
Holy Spirit (Acts 8. 17 ff.)> Simon fathered the term ' simony/
85 Cf. N. H. Baynes, CAH 12 (1939) 664, citing Eusebius, Hist,
eccl. 7. 10. 4.
86 Brunda = Brundisium (modern Brindisi). See C. Hiilsen,
" Bmndisium," RE 3 (1899) 902, where the Schol. Bern, to Lucan
2.609 is cited for the form ' Brunda.'
87 Pudore. A. Souter (Class. Rev. 49 [1935] 209), suggests yaedore
(' stench ') which gives a more vivid sense in connection with cru-
ciatibus. No doubt there was both yudor and paedor.
88 Secta has a basic meaning of the trodden path and there is a
play, doubtless, in the juxtaposition of it with deverticula.
89 Mercurius = Hermes Trismegistus on whom see J. Kroll, Die
Lehren des Hermes Trismegistos (2nd ed., Minister i. W. 1928).
According to Festugieie (99 n. O, Arnobius here distinguishes three
groups: (a) hermetism; (b) the Platomci-Pythagorici, and (c) the
* novi viri/ whom he mentions in 2. 1 5 : " et qui se croient issus du
mme premier Dieu Nous, ce que les rend n^cessairement o^ovoovvrss"
On the necessity of going back as far as Pythagoras, Festugiere cites
fr. 9 of Numenius (Leemans).
90 On the association of the three in this order, see lamblichus,
De my st. i. 2.
91 Festugire's 'first way' (loaf.) of facilitating the return of the
soul to God after death (see above, n. 64). The thought is repeated
in 2. 62 and 2. 66. Rohricht (Seelenlehre 27) thinks Plato was here
directly used.
92 Theaetetus 1736 where Plato merely says that the outer form
of the philosopher is in the city his mind is " flying all abroad "
as Pindar said, " measuring earth and heaven and the things which
314 NOTES
are under and on the earth and above the heaven, interrogating the
whole nature of each and all in their entirety, but not condescending
to anything which is within reach/' Cf . Cicero, Somn* Sczp. 3 = De
re publ. 6. 15.
93 Cf. Minucius 34; Origen, C. Cels. 1.7; and Rapisarda, Arndb. 94.
94 Rohricht (Seelenlehre 27) thinks Arnobius used Plato directly.
95 Politicus 27ode. Cf. Gabarrou, Oeuvre 21-3.
96 Wiman understands vos to refer to Platonici and this makes the
sentence logical.
97 Wiman transposes this word (quod*) from where it appears
between non and vitiis and places it before metus. He cites other
examples of such transpositions in 3. 43 (cogai), 5. 6 (forraas), 5. 35
(in) and 7. 15 (primum), to which I may add two other examples
of transposed non (2. 49 and 4. 32). But Professor A. D. Nock, in a
letter of 28 March 1948, dissents from Wiman's transposition and
believes quod means ' as for the fact that/ This I have followed
in the translation.
98 Festugi&re's ' second way ' (120 f.), repeated in 2. 62 but not in
2. 66, as he maintains. He also appears to be mistaken in attributing
to this chapter a reference to the ' third way/ sacrifice of animals.
I find no allusion to animal sacrifice here. He points out (99 n. 2)
that here Arnobius distinguishes between " eloignement des passions
(mati&re) et prieres theurgiques" as also in 2.62, 2.65. Cumont
(265 f., n. 91) expresses doubt as to Arnobius' dependence on Labeo
at this point.
99 Gabarrou (Oeuvre 31) sees in chapters 14, 26 f., much influence
of Lucretius, Cf. Lucretius 3. 459 f., 470, 668. Gabarrou also main-
tains (73) that the doctrine of the mortality of the soul, expounded
by Arnobius in Book Two, shows that he had read the De anima of
Tertullian. Apart from the fact that a careful comparison shows no
great similarity of treatment in the two works, Tertullian explicitly
states (16) that both God and Christ were angry. It seems difficult
to believe that anyone who knew that on occasion Christ had ex-
hibited anger could maintain, as Arnobius docs in i. 17 and else-
where, the belief that God is incapable of anger. Cf. Introd. n. 322.
100 Arnobius uses here both hostes (national enemies) and inimici
(personal foes). The idea of this sentence seems Gnostic.
101 Phaedo i I2a-i 143. It may be recorded here that in the assertion
of the mortality of the human soul which makes up the bulk of Book
Two, Arnobius is not followed by his brilliant pupil, Lactantius, Div.
inst. 3. 13; 8. 8f., Epit. 65, and De ira Dei, passim. Rohricht (De
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 315
Clemente 40) maintains that Arnobius is not attacking Plato here but
contemporary Neo-Platonists.
102 Festugiere (99 n. 3) points out that Plato speaks neither of
demons nor pain of fire.
103 Reading with the MS pravae in place of the emendation parvae
(small) adopted by Canterus and Reifferscheid. In either case the
word is complimentary to Plato as elsewhere (cf. 1.8).
104 See i. 62, n. 301; Cicero, De not. deor. 3. 14. 34: Etenim aut
simplex est natura animantis, ut vel terrena sit vel ignis vel animalis
vel umida, quod quale sit ne intellegi quidem potest; aut concreta ex
pluribus naturis, . . . nullum igitur animal est sempiternum; De
off. i. 30; Gregory Thaumaturgus, De an. 5.
105 Cf. Lactantius, Epit. 38; Theophilus, Ad Autol 3. 6.
106 Neither mortal nor immortal; they have a choice. Tatian (13)
maintains that the soul is mortal, and this seems to be a proper con-
clusion from Minucius 34. 10: sicut de nihilo nasci licuit, ita de
nihilo licere reparari? Cf. Justin Martyr, Apol. i. 18, where proofs
of the immortality of the soul are given; but in Dial. c. Tryph. 5
Justin admits that some souls are mortal. Note the sentence in the
celebrated chapter of the Ep. ad Diogn. 6 in which the Christian
relationship to the world is compared to the relationship of soul and
body (trans, by J. A. Kleist, ACW 6 [1948] 140: "Immortal, the
.soul is lodged in a mortal tenement; so, too, Christians, though
residing as strangers among corruptible things, look forward to the
incorruptibility that awaits them in heaven." Regarding the view
of the early Fathers on the human soul, see J. Bain vel, " Ame, III :
doctrines des trois premiers si&cles," DTC i. i (1930) 977-1001
(Arnobius: 999).
107 Minas of the MS; misericordias (Reifferscheid) and venias
(Kistner and Wensky). Festugiere (100 n. i) approves minas and
condemns misericordias as unnecessary. Doubtless, the difficulty
which has perplexed some scholars is that minas C threats ') is
thought too harsh to be used of Christ.
108 On this point see Corpus Hermeticum, Asclepius 27-29, vol. 2,
pp. 331-6 Nock-Festugire = W. Scott, Hermetica i (Oxford 1924)
364-370; A. J. Festugiere, " Une source herm&ique de Porphyre:
1'Egyptien du De abstinentia II, 47," Rev. des et. gr. 49 (1936) 586-
95, esp. 590 ff.
109 Here Bryce-Campbell maintain that Arnobius shows himself
ignorant of Jewish teaching on this point see I. Broyd&, " Demon-
ology," The Jewish EncycL 4. 514-21, and L. Blau, " Gehenna/' ibid.
21 T
316 NOTES
5. 582-4, but according to Festugiere (100 n. 3) the meaning is not
that the demons did not exist before Christ but that their true nature
was unknown.
110 Festugiere (100 n. 4): "sciens = 6 h yvwei, 6 yj/o>cmKo?, essen-
tiellement * celui qui connait Dieu/ etc."
111 Festugiere (ioof., plan of the thesis of the 'novi viri ' 101-5)
emphasizes the importance which Arnobius attaches to the view of
the ' novi viri ' the basis of which consists of 2. 1 5 and the first
sentence of the next chapter.
112 Novis viris: the Ms has nobis, emended to novis by Gelenius,
but cf . Orelli's bonis in an ironic sense which is in keeping with the
rest of the chapter. Novis is, of course, certainly right.
113 The MS has deum which Zink, Reifferscheid, and Marchesi
change to idem, but cf. Festugiere 105 n. 2. Cf. also Corpus
Hermeticum 18. 14.
114 An allusion to the well-known proverb : quot homines, tot
sententiae (first met with in Terence, Phorm. 454); cf. A. Otto, Die
Sprichworter und sprichwortlichen Redensarten der Rower (Leip-
zig 1890) 1 66 f.
115 Cf, Plato, Phaedo 8 ice; Cumont 302 n. 28.
116 Festugiere (105 n. 3) points out the juridical vocabulary and
remarks that the passage recalls a mode of condemnation often used
in regard to Christian virgins,
117 See n. 13. I cannot follow Wiman in eliminating this genuinely
Arnobian word typhus for institorium superciliumque even if the
translation of Irenaeus carries such an expression.
118 Festugiere (106 n. i) points out that such triads (other ex-
amples in 2. 43, 2. 45, 2. 48, 2, 54, 2. 64, and almost passim") are a
malady of the times found also in Minucius, Lactantius, and
Asclepius.
119 Favore, which Pascal emends to furore (' madness ')
120 Differitas, poetic for differentia, used by Lucretius 4. 636 for
metrical reasons (see Bailey ad Zoc.). Cf. Munro's note on Lucretius
i. 653 which lists other such forms used only by Lucretius " or his
constant imitator Arnobius" (Munro's 4th ed., Cambridge 1886).
The word also occurs in 5. 36, 7, 23, 7. 27.
121 Animantium numero, but the following sentence makes clear
that animals are meant.
122 Cf. Lucretius 2. 934-6, 5. 222-7, 5- 9 2 5"3J Rapisarda, Arndb.
7 I -3-
123 Conciliis, a Lucretian echo, Cf. Lucretius i. 183, 484, 517, 772,
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 317
1082; 2. i io ; i2o, 563, 564, 920, 935; 3. 805, and the Leonard-Smith
note on i. 183, which states that the noun is the Latin rendering of
oTry-K/jwrts (Epicurus i . 40) and is technically used by Lucretius o
the union of atoms. Here it has a more general sense. Cf. also
Bailey's notes on i. 183, 2. 120.
124 The theory of metempsychosis or transmigration of souls. Cf.
Micka 62.
125 Semotae (Souter) in preference to exutae = ' doffed ' (Reiffer-
scheid); seiunctae = ( disjoined ' (Klussmann, Marchesi).
126 Cf. Corpus Hermeticum, Ascleyius 37; Festugiere 106 n, 4.
127 Rapisarda (Arwofc. 71, 247) thinks this passage is influenced by
Lucretius 5. 228-34; Vergil, Georg. i. 145.
128 Susficio, in Arnobius, frequently means not ' suspicion ' but
some idea conceived by a human being through conjecture and not
proved by knowledge.
129 Suypara were linen garments worn, usually, by women (but cf.
Varro in Nonius 540. 15) and were shirts worn over undershirts.
See E. Saglio, " Supparum," DA 4. 1564,
130 Except for grammar which here occupies the place of arith-
metic, we have the four liberal arts of the medieval qttadrivium
which, with the trivium (grammar, rhetoric, and logic) made up the
seven liberal arts.
131 Cf. the Gnostics attacked by Plotinus, Enn. 2.9.8; 18, and
Festugiere 107 n. i.
132 Continentias = 7re/Dto^ (cf. Scharnagl 31).
133 This probably reflects rather accurately the state of affairs in
the age of Diocletian.
134 Plato, Phaedo 72e~74d; Tertullian, De an. 23, 6 (Waszink 302)
and Arnobius 2. 28. Waszink marks the word reminiscentia as
occurring only in Tertullian and Arnobius.
135 In this and the following chapters Arnobius anticipates by many
centuries the modern scientific ' controlled experiment/ Its defect lies
in his inability to contrive a method for achieving perfect isolation of
the subject from every outside contact. A somewhat similar experi-
ment, of an inferior character, is attributed by Herodotus (2. 2, cf ,
also Tertullian, Ad nat. i. 8 7 which Arnobius may have known) to
Psammetichus, king of Egypt, who, wishing to know which nation
was oldest, placed two new-born infants to be reared in isolation
from other human contact, particularly that of speech, by a shep-
herd. When the boys were examined at a later period, they stretched
forth their hands and said j&y/cos. Upon inquiry it was found that
3 1 8 NOTES
this was the Phrygian word for * bread.' Ergo, the Phrygians were the
oldest nation. But it is probable that the word spoken was merely the
boys' way of pronouncing the only utterance which they had ever
heard, that of the sheep. The whole purpose of Arnobius is to
show that the mind of the child is a tabula rasa, affected only by
its experiences, and that therefore the soul does not come from God.
136 Nothwm = spurious, bastard (King Darius II Nothus), arti-
ficial (cf. 5. 36 and Lucretius 5. 575: lunaque, sive notho fertur loca
lumine lustrans; Catullus 34. 1 5 f . : tu potens Trivia et nothos
[notho es] dicta lumine Luna). For references to other thinkers who
noted that the moon had no light of its own, see Leonard-Smith's
note on Lucretius 5. 575.
187 Reading modo (Zink) for non of the MS. There must be at
least one door. Kistner's sane has the right sense but is less satis-
factory palaeographically. See Vigiliae Christianae 3 (1949) 41.
138 Reifferscheid correctly suspected a lacuna at this point but it is
clear that it ought to be placed before natum and that the lost word
had the sense of 'newly/ I suggest that modo be inserted before
natum. It is true that mox means ' presently/ ' directly/ but I think
that should be taken with deinceps. See Vig. Christ., loc. cit.
130 Cf. Plato, Apol. 25a.
140 Plato, Afol 21 a.
141 Hagendahl would change alicuius to eloquium, L e. ' for speech '
instead of ' to say anything/
142 Cf. Lucretius 5. 1416.
143 The MS reads a deo. Vahlen's conjecture gives the right sense :
atque, but is palaeographically impossible. Wiman is certainly right;
et ideo (cf. 2. 15).
144 Reading yortionem particulamque. (Meiser).
145 Reading with Wiman tarn lautae for iam laetae. Laetus is also
sound for lautus in 7. 41.
146 Milvus: perhaps we should read 'mule/ following Stewechius'
conjecture of mulus.
147 A cake made of meal mixed with must, the unfermented juice
of the grape, was served at weddings. Carduus is here translated
' artichoke ' because if a thistle is meant, it must be an edible variety.
This word is sometimes masculine and sometimes neuter it might
well have been used in i. 59.
148 Stragula, used alone, is a pall or a horse-cloth; with vestis, as
here, the word appears to mean ' bedspread/ etc.
140 Strop hium: a band of some kind, either a chaplet or breast
band.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 319
150 Fascia; either a band for use as girdle or a religious ornament,
or a bandage, or swaddling clothes.
151 Calautica: a veil which covered both head and shoulders of a
woman.
152 Mastruca: a garment made from skins of wild sheep from
Sardinia.
153 Reading seliquastrum, first suggested by Meursius (cf. Festus
460 Lindsay) in place of siliquastrum = pepperwort, a kind of plant,
which seems out of place in this list.
154 An ancient book shaped like a modern book in distinction from
a liber = roll of parchment or papyrus.
155 Formatura: cf. Lucretius 4. 552.
156 Deaf-mutes cannot articulate through being unable first to
hear a situation exactly paralleling that of the subject of this
experiment.
157 By questioning an uneducated slave, Socrates (Meno 81-84)
brings out the principle of the Pythagorean theorem which proves,
he says, that the slave has ' recollected ' this knowledge from a pre-
vious existence. Cf. Cicero, Tusc. i. 24. 57 f. Rohricht (Seelenlehre
26) and Gabarrou (Oeuvre 26) rightly maintain that Arnobius
possessed direct knowledge of the Meno. For a similar confu-
tation of Plato's doctrine of recollection, see Tertullian, De an. 24
and the excellent discussion in the notes in J. H. Waszink's edition
(Amsterdam 1947) 303-7: "Still more important is the fact that
he (= Tertullian) misinterprets the essence . . . (of tne doctrine)
... by making it appear that this t renewed recollection J should lead
to an immediate and complete knowledge of the ' Forms '; he does
not in the least take into account the fact that . . . Plato understands
a faded remembrance of a former existence, which only gradually
may develop into real knowledge." Though Waszink does not say
so, precisely the same criticism may be brought against the confu-
tation by Arnobius.
158 Reading, with Wiman, rationis muneri admoto, in place of
Marchesi's rationibus numeri admota which is certainly not clear.
159 The slave in the Meno.
100 Both Reifferscheid and Marchesi read sesqueoactavus ant ses-
quetertius "j" ultimus, but Wiman is certainly right in brilliantly
suggesting sesquetertius ^syaltim. The scribe who produced P
found, according to Wiman's theory, sesquetertiusaltim, the letters
5s having been reduced to one by haplography. He therefore took
NOTES
the remainder, dtim, in which an a might easily be mistaken for u,
to be an abbreviation of ultimus.
161 Cf. Vergil, Aen. 6.471, Marpesian (= Parian) rock or granite
chosen merely as a stock example. Cf. Rapisarda, Arnob. 249.
162 Meursius marked this an interpolation but it is characteristic
of Arnobius to repeat in this fashion.
163 The MS here reads post mentes geminas (' after the twin intel-
lects and this reading is preserved by Orelli and defended in his
commentary. Klussmann's suggestion of daemonas et genios, adopted
by Reifferscheid, is rightly rejected by Marchesi who with little
more reason conjectures potentias geminas on the basis of other
references to potentiae in 2. 20, 7. 34. But the MS reading is really
correct, as was long ago pointed out by W. Kroll, De oraculis chal-
daicis (Breslau 1894) 28 n. 2, and reiterated in his review of Mar-
chesi's edition (Phil. Woch. 55 [1935] 1084). It has been more
recently approved, with convincing argument and independently, by
two scholars, Festugiere (108 n. 3) who prefers to translate as ' intel-
lects ' rather than as ' esprits/ and Wiman, citing Plotinus, Enn.
2. 3. 7; 2. 9; 5. i. 2, But cf. Plato, Phaedrus 246e-247a, where Plato
places Zeus first, followed in turn by an army of 0eot and ai//,oi/es,
after which man occupies fourth place. See Vigiliae Christianae 3
(1949) 41 f.
164 Ex crateribus vivis. A cratera is normally used in mixing wine
and water. The reference is to Plato, Timaeus 4 id, where the
Creator mixes the vital essences of the soul. Cf, Arnobius 2. 22: ex
fontibus vitae derivatum; J. H. Waszink on Tertullian, De an. 20. 6,
p. 290.
105 Mundus minor. M. Pohlenz, Vom Zorne Gottes (Gottingen
1909) 47 n. 2 (cf, Micka 62) makes the claim that so far as he
knows, Arnobius is the only writer of the early Church who calls
into doubt the description of man as a microcosm.
1GG Reading similitudinemque mundi with Reifferscheid.
167 Nesdat implies ignorance of their very existence, but how about
the nurse?
108 The translation here follows Wiman : . . . saxo? Qui nesciat
homines et in mutis semper solitudinilms degat dewioretfur, is
nnmquam ulli rei verum vocabidum^ iners valeat indere, quamvis,
etc. This involves only changing the MS inaere to indere and then
supplying an object for the infinitive. It is distinctly better than
Marchesi's valeat inaniter ('grows strong to no purpose'), and far
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 321
superior to any of the many other attempts to correct the unreadable
MS.
169 Arnobius appears to be ignorant of the fact that the homing
of the dove is instinctive, rather than the result of training.
170 Rigaltius' conjecture of circulis for saeculis has recently been
approved by W. Kroll, Phil Woch. 55 (1935) 1084, and it has
considerable merit. If correct, the text should read " about the higher
circles'*; but Festugiere (109 n, 2) would equate saeculis with
171 Ex docta, ut dititur, eletnentariam fieri: A. Otto, Die Sprich-
worter der Romer (Leipzig 1890) 123^, suggests, "aus einem
Professor ein Abcschiitze werden."
172 Except for 2. 28, where the word is repeated, repetentia is
found elsewhere only in Lucretius 3. 851. Retinentia, the suggestion
of Avancius and Lachmann (editors of Lucretius), is rejected by all
subsequent editors I have been able to consult. Bailey makes the
point that the use of the word twice by Arnobius is good evidence
that Lucretius used it. He means, of course, that it confirms the
evidence of the manuscripts of Lucretius.
173 Micka (49) maintains that the idea of the corporality of the
soul (cf. 2. 30, 7. 5; K. B. Francke, Die Psychologie und Erkenntnis-
lehre des Arnobius [Leipzig 1878] 16) was the only alternative to
the pre-existence of the soul. Leckelt, tlber des Arnobius Schrift:
Adversus Nationes (Progr. Neisse 1884) 16, explains the error by
saying that Arnobius may have confused the natural and the super-
natural life of the soul. Cf. M. Baumgartner in F. Ueberweg's
Gmndriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, II : Die mittlere oder die
patristische und scholastische Zeit (loth ed., Berlin 1915) H2f.; O.
Grillnberger, " Studien zur Philosophic der patristischen Zeit, II :
Die Unsterblichkeitslehre des Arnobius," ]ahrb. f. Philos. u. spek.
Theol 5 (1891) 1-14; LeNourry (ML 5. 484 f.).
171 Cf. Lucretius 3. 161-7, *75
175 The MS reading suaderi is suspect. Ursinus changed to videri\
Oehler and Reiffcrschcid to sua de vi, which, as Marchesi says, is
possibly right, but sua de re, suggested by Wiman is even better and
has been adopted.
170 The MS reads in corporibus, changed by the editors to sine
corporibus. Kroll and Festugiere reject this, the latter saying (109
n. 4) that it destroys the argument. But does it?
177 The argument is Platonic. Arnobius means, I think, that the
322, NOTES
number is a Platonic ' idea ' incarnated in a thousand bodies, yet
loses nothing of its identity, as indeed it does not.
178 Pati: the literal meaning of this word, here adopted because
there is no perfect English equivalent, means more nearly ' to ex-
perience/ with no connotation of good or evil, though sometimes the
latter sense is present and in this example and others in the next
few chapters the word bears something of the idea of ' subject to
dissolution and death through union with the body/ Cf . the excellent
note by R. B. Tollinton, Clement of Alexandria 2 (London 1914)
15 f., on the meaning of the Greek cognate W^os which likewise is
not perfectly translatable into English.
179 There is a play between passivum in the preceding sentence
and passioni here. Both have the same sense, i. e., anything which
is passive is subject to corruption.
180 Cf. Lucretius 1.1112: ianua Led; 2.960: Leti iam limine;
3. 67: Leti portas; 5. 373: Leti . . . ianua; 6. 762: Ianua . . . Orci.
Munro (note to i. 1112, vol. 2, p. 117 of his 4th ed. [Cambridge
1886]) says the same figure was adopted by Vergil, Ovid, Statius,
and Valerius Flaccus. " In this the poets have idealized the solid
stone doors of their tombs/' Cf. also Bailey, ad loc.
181 Literally, ' they have life for use/
182 A clear echo of Lucretius 3. 971 : vitaque mancipio nulli datur,
omnibus usu. See the very illuminating note in the Leonard-Smith
edition ad loc, on the difference between usus and mancipium; also
Bailey ad loc.
183 At this point the MS reads abeamus ne videamus (' depart lest
we see') which is manifestly impossible. The words ne videamus
have been omitted in the translation, following Castiglioni's unpub-
lished suggestion to Marchesi who brackets them as spurious. Assum-
ing that they are a corruption of a genuine reading, other scholars
have endeavored to emend: 'lest we be mocked' (Meursius and
Reifferscheid); 'lest we seem* (Sabaeus and Hildebrand); 'let us
hear' (Gelenius, combining the word with what follows); 'we are
eager to hear' (Ursinus); 'we are eager to know' (Salmasius); 'let
us inquire' (Kistner). Klussmann's suggestion (videamus ne audi-
amus^) seems to me impossible and I have no confidence that any
other is right.
184 Ante hominem: here and at the end of the sentence homo
means 'body ' and not 'man/ a frequent use in Arnobius. Cf. i. 55:
animis "hominibusque; i. 65: hominem suum (cf. 2. 57); 2. 62: post
hominis functionem. See Reifferscneid's index (324 .)
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 32,3
iS5 Magis est: cf. E. Lofstedt, "Arnobiana. Textkritische und
sprachliche Studien zu Arnobius," Lunds Univ. Arsskr. n. f. avd. i,
bd. 12, no. 5 (Lund 1917) 70; T. Stangl, " Bobiensia," Rhein. Mus.
65 (1910) 93.
186 Cf . Plotinus, Enn. 2. 9.
187 Cf. 2. 1 6, 2. 26, and n. 173.
I88 Momen, also used in 2.35, 2.50, 6.20 (Marches!: momine;
Reifferscheid: nomine), and Lucretius 3. 144, i88f.; Paulus-Festus
123 Lindsay. Leonard-Smith (n. to Lucretius 3. 144) and Bailey
(n. to 3. 189) think that the image may come from the balance.
iso Proletarii : men whose wealth was assessed at 1 500 asses librales
(A. Gellius 1 6. 10. 10) were tax-exempt and, except in critical situ-
ations, not subject to military service. Their designation suggests
that their only contribution to society was children, proles (cf. the
Marxian use of the term 'proletariat'). This class was the second-
lowest (cf. n. 191). See also the masterly note on the word in A. J.
Toynbee, A Study of History i (2nd ed., London 1935) 41. It is
quite impossible to reproduce in English translation the irony-laden
language borrowed in this section from the Roman fiscal terminology.
100 Classicus was originally an adjective applicable to any class of
Roman citizens in the census but came to be applied only to the first
or highest class of taxpayers (cf. A. Gellius 6. 13) and sometimes
metaphorically to literary excellence (Cell. 19. 8. 15) hence our
word 'classic.' Cf. B. Kiibler, RE 3 (1889) 2628 f.
191 Capite . . . censeatur: 'counted by the head/ since they pos-
sessed even less than the ^roletarii. Their rating was 375 asses
librales (A. Gellius 16. 10. 1 1-4). Marius was the first Roman general
to enroll the capite censi in the army.
192 The Roman household god of the hearth. A poor man had a
poor lar.
193 A reference to the patrician-plebian controversy in early Roman
history. Cf . 2. 48 : yatridi generis.
194 Reading veros with Lofstedt and Wiman.
195 Klussmann, followed by both Reifferscheid and Marchesi, inter-
polated <non> at this point, to which both Kroll and Wiman strongly
and rightly object. The latter, with Axelson, changes censetis to
cessatis and reads acddere with a long i; but see his later doubts in
Eranos 45 (1947) 136.
100 If the soul is immortal, why lead a virtuous life to protect it
from punishment by death? The argument overlooks the possibility
of painful punishment in an afterlife.
324 NOTES
197 Festugiere (in n. i) equates this (inpotens*) with Plato's
aKpaTtfs {Laws 734b, 886a).
198 Arnobjus is here thinking of the Epicurean theology and ethics,
which he mentions in the following chapter. Assuming that the soul
is immortal and the gods live apart and care little for men, why
should not men indulge their appetites?
199 An elliptical questionthe last three words must be supplied.
Arnobius' answer to this objection seems very weak the punishments
of the lower world were reputed to be very painful, either physically
or mentally, and it was a cardinal point of the Epicurean ethics to
avoid pain and disturbance (<lro/?a|ta).
200 Here torrentium has both its original and derived senses: the
water is hot and in addition a torrent.
201 The MS here reads non (out of normal position, however), and
it has rightly been deleted from the text.
202 Festugiere (in n. 3) says this is philosophical suffering: " <tat
de ce qui patit sous Faction d'une cause exterieure."
203 Cf. Lucretius 3.417-829 where the seventeen proofs that the
soul is mortal are discussed. The passage in Diogenes Laertius 10, 63-
8= p. 41, Bailey *s edition of the fragments of Epicurus, seems to be
the one referred to.
204 Cf. Plato, Phaedo 64^650, where the soul is represented as
thinking best when it is in least contact with the body,
205 Soul and body perish together.
206 In addition to the passage of Lucretius cited in n. 203, cf.
Lactantius, Div. inst. 7. 12.
207 Cf. Plotinus, Enn. 2.9.15, who reproaches the Gnostics for
always saying: /JAeVe Trpos <9eoi/ without ever practicing virtue or
curbing their passions.
208 The wicked man in the preceding chapter.
209 Bryce-Campbell pretend to see in this reference an allusion to
the Stoic doctrine that the soul must be material because, unless soul
and body were of the same substance, there could be no common
feeling (see Clean thes in Nemesianus, De not. horn. 2, p. 33) or to
another Stoic doctrine that only the souls of the wise remained after
death, and these only to the final conflagration (for this view Bryce-
Campbell cite Stobaeus, EcL phys. i. 101 Meineke) which awaits
the world and ends the Stoic great year. Other Stoics maintained
that the souls of the wise became demons and demi-gods (Diog.
Laert, 7. 151 and 157). But there is no need to go so far afield to
find examples. All that is needed is a reference to Plato's belief that
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 325
the soul is immortal as discussed in the Phaedo confronted with the
opposite view that it is mortal, as discussed in the third book of
Lucretius already cited.
210 Here and in the next sentence ' they ' ~ the souls.
211 This looks suspiciously like high praise for Epicurus, since, as
we have seen, the proof that the soul is mortal is derived from him
indirectly through Lucretius, but the word summus is used just
below of God and it may be that Arnobius thinks the normal mor-
tality of the soul is an essentially Christian doctrine. Cf. i. 38 where
there is a similar confusion of Christ with Epicurus.
212 Perhaps, as Orelli thought, a reference to John 17.3: Haec
est autem vita aeterna, ut congoscant te solum Deum verum et quern
misisti lesum Christum. Festugiere (112 n. 2) points out that im-
mortality, conditioned by the yv&cri<s Otov, is exactly what hermetism
teaches. Cf. Corpus Hermeticum 2.24-26; Harvard Theol. Rev. 31
(1938) i n. 4.
213 LeNourry and Bryce-Campbell following him rightly reject
Heraldus' attempt to see in these straightforward words a veiled
allusion to the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist.
214 Amulets. See L. Deubner, " Greek Amulets/' Hastings Encycl.
3 (1913) 433-9; R. Wiinsch, "Roman Amulets/' ibid. 461-5.
215 The Psylli were an African people living southwest of the
Syrtis Major, celebrated as snake charmers. See E. B. James,
" Psylli/' DG 2 (1870) 676 f. The Marsi, a people of Latium, were
famous for this accomplishment as well as for wizardry. Cf . Horace,
E<pod. 17. 29; Pliny, Nat. hist. 7.2; 21. 13; 25.2; 28. 3; Aelian, De
nat. animal. 1.57; Lucilius, fr. 605 f. in E. H. Warmington, Re-
mains of Early Latin 3 (London Cambridge, Mass. 1938) 190 f.
See also H. Philipp, " Marsi/' RE 14. 2 (193) *977~9-
210 According to Plotinus, Enn. 2. 9, the Gnostics believed that the
soul upon creation, that is, upon coming into contact with matter,
lost its wings.
217 Cf. 2.62: al) legibus mortalitatis; Lucretius 3.687: Leti lege.
218 Chorus, a dancing group. Cf . Dionysius Hal, De corny, verb.
24. 5 where the Greek word x^o? is used in a derogatory sense of
the Epicureans.
219 Here the MS has: atque ad in finem adducere. Most editors
refuse to believe that Arnobius could use two prepositions of practi-
cally the same sense before a single noun (with asyndeton) but
the reading, though bizarre, is correct, Cf. M. Leumann-J. B. Hof-
mann's edition of Stolz-Schmalz, Lateinische Grammatik (Munich
32,6 NOTES
1928) 541, who call the double preposition adin "erst mittelalterlich."
See Vigiliae Christianas 3 (1949) 42 f.
220 The usual word for miracles (yirtuti'bus'). Cf. Book One,
n. 210.
221 Cf. Horace, Carm. i. 2. 37: nil mortalibus ardui est
222 A. S. Ferguson in W. Scott, Hermetica 4 (Oxford 1936) 480
n. 7, maintains that this distinction " is known to have been made by
Labeo," but Festugiere (113 n. i) objects that the passage cited (cf.
Augustine, De civ. Dei 9. 19) says rather that Labeo named ' good
demons ' those whom others call ' angels.' Festugiere further objects
that the notion of angels as good demons or as superior demons could
have come to Arnobius from other sources (cf . F. Cumont, " Les
anges du paganisme," Rev. de Ihist. des Rel. 36 [1915] 159-82; F.
Andres, " Angelos," RE SuppL 3 [1918] 101-4) and that the distinc-
tion of gods, angels, demons, appears in a fragment of the De regr. an.
of Porphyry (Augustine, De. civ. Dei 10. 9).
223 Cf. Augustine, De civ. Dei 8.23: ille autem Aegyptius
(= Hermes Trismegistus) alios deos esse dicit a summo Deo factos,
alios ab hominibus; Lactantius, Div. inst. i. 6; Rapisarda, Arnob. 139.
224 The position of solum is as translated but perhaps it modifies
immortalem also.
225 y^ position of mortalium (hi omnes cjuos opinatio credidit
deos esse mortalium*) seems to preclude the possibility of taking it,
as do Bryce-Campbell, with opinatio, but the word seems redundant
if it is to be taken with deos.
226 Arnobius has of course been much criticized for this statement.
See Introd. pp. 30-3.
227 On this chapter, cf. Lactantius, Div. inst. 2. 14. 3 f. (CSEL
19. 162 Brandt-Laubmann) : Sic eos diabolus ex angelis dei suos
fecit satellites ac ministros. Qui autem sunt ex his procreati quia
neque angeli neque homines fuerunt, sed mediam quandam naturam
gerentes, non sunt ad inferos recepti sicut in caelum parentes eorum.
Cf. Pohlenz 49 n. i; Micka 152 n. 15.
228 Plato is mentioned by name, or by the specific citation of one
of his works, fifteen times in Arnobius. Usually this is without
special praise: cf. i. 5, 2. 7, 2. 9, 2. n, 2. 13 (bis), 2, 24, 2. 34, 2. 52,
2. 64, and 4. 1 6, but in addition to the present instance Plato is given
high praise in i. 8 and 2. 52,
229 Rohricht at first (De Clem. 40) expressed doubt as to whether
this passage was borrowed from Plato directly or from Cicero's
version of the Timaeus, but in Seelenlehre (22 f.) he concludes
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 327
that there is evidence of the direct use of Plato. The passages are
Plato's Timaeus 41 and Cicero's Timaeus n which are also com-
pared with this chapter hy Gabarrou (Qeuvre 23-27) who reaches
the same conclusion as Rohricht in his Seelenlehre.
230 Plato (Timaeus 41) represents the Creator as telling the gods
whom he has created that " that which is bound may be dissolved,
but only an evil being would dissolve that which is harmonious and
happy. And although you are not immortal you shall not die, for I
will hold you together" (Jowett). Cf. Cicero, De nut. deor. i. 8. 8.
231 The MS salutari iussione donari, here translated, has been much
emended. Reifferscheid thought a lacuna should be indicated before
donari in which something like dono immortalitatis is missing.
Gelenius and Lorenz prefer missione; Salmasius and Bastgen, vine-
tione-, Meiser, mansione; Hildebrand, nexione; while Brakman would
insert perpetuitatis before salutari " Alii alia/' says Marchesi, retain-
ing the MS reading, perhaps on the basis of Pascal's opinion in
Riv. fil. istr. cl. 32, (1904) 3.
232 Filias: the feminine is doubtless used because anima is feminine.
See other similar locutions in nn. 40, 247, 375. Rapisarda (Amok
43. 53) says Arnobius denies that God is the Creator of the souls
because he believes in filiation, rather than creation,
233 P has sententia but Ursinus, Reifferscheid, and Marchesi adopt
essentia.
234 Micka (48 f.) points out the inconsistency between this state-
ment, categorical though vague, and supported by the references to
the secondary beings (2. 53), and the emphatic profession of ignor-
ance earlier in 2. 47. On the Second Creator God, see W. Bousset,
rev. of J. Kroll, Die Lehren de$ Hermes Trismegistos, Gott. Gel. Anz.
176 (1914) 711-6.
235 E. S. Bouchier, Life and Letters in Roman Africa (Oxford
1913) 102, calls attention to the Gnostic errors in this chapter, as
does Cruttwell (2, 639) who also states that Arnobius is both un-
orthodox and historically inaccurate. The same comment is made
by Festugikte (114 n. i) who also points out that the vocabulary
is taken from the language of the Imperial Court at the end of the
third century. Cf. CAH 12 (1939) 361-3 (^ordo salutationis).
236 Potestatis 'principcdis. As Gabarrou (Oeuvre 37) remarks, this
passage probably owes something to the discussion, in Lucretius
5. 158-234, of the indifference of the gods to human affairs.
237 Virtute : here the word appears to have the more usual sense
328 NOTES
in place of that usually found in Arnobius (cf. Book One, n. 210).
Perhaps " the highest perfection " is the meaning here.
238 Pituitas which gives us ' pituitary/ There is an echo here of
the ancient physiological theory of four (the first two are mentioned
by Arnobius) humors or fluids determining a person's health and
temperament: phlegm, blood, yellow bile, and black bile.
239 Cf. Lucretius 4. 1026; 5. 174-6; Rapisarda, Arndb. 71 f.
240 Lucretius 5. 165-9; Lactantius, Div. inst. 7. 5. 6.
241 Oehler is right in regarding this sentence as a statement by the
opponent, whereas the editors wrongly mark it a question.
242 So Reifferscheid and Marchesi (pic^nos) but Sabaeus suggested
' drivers of two-horse teams ' and K. E. Georges, Philologus 33
(1874) 334, ' dealers in paints/
243 Cf . Plautus, Aul. 508 : stat fullo, phrygio, aurufex, lanarius.
244 Bastgen would makes this ' artisans.'
245 On the thought of this chapter, cf. 4. 21.
246 Rex mundi: so Marchesi; but Reifferscheid's reading, suggested
by Vahlen, is rerum domlnus ('Lord of things ')
247 Deae: cf. n. 232.
248 Reading temporariae, with Kroll, Phil. Woch. 55 (1935) 1084,
in place of tenariae (Reifferscheid and Marchesi).
249 Cf. Lucretius 5.229!:.:
Nee crepitacillis opus est, nee cuiquam adhibendast
Almae nutricis blanda atque infracta loquela.
250 H. Hagendahl, " En Ovidiusreminiscens hos Arnobius," Eranos
35 (1937) 36-40, sees in the repeated passages beginning with these
words reminiscences of Ovid, Met. i, 131; i. 138-40.
251 In hominibus.
252 Orelli thinks Arnobius was imitating Sallust, De con. Cat. 5 :
simulator ac dissimulator.
253 Cf. Sallust, Cat 10.5: aliud clausum in pectore, aliud in
lingua promptum habere (similarly, Augustine, Enchir. 6. 18).
254 Cf. Cicero's famous work, De finibus bonomm et malorum.
250 Essentially, if not strictly, true some species of animals do
build houses, e. g. the beaver, the bee, etc., and cf. what Arnobius
himself says, somewhat inconsistently, in 2. 1 7,
250 Here Arnobius seems to have a clear consciousness of the
travails of the farmers, as in i. 14 he appeared to appreciate the
point of view of the consumer.
257 Reading insomniam (Hildebrand and Marchesi) but in somnia
of the MS may be right.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 329
258 Cf. Horace's greedy capitalist: Carm. 2. 18. 23 ff.; also Julianus
Pomerius, De vita contempl. i, 13. 2. See C. Lecrivain, " Latifundia,"
DA 3. 956-71.
259 This clause appears in the MS at a point three clauses earlier
but it was restored to its proper place here by Heraldus.
260 Fuligine.
261 Vibrare = s to curl'; C. Vergil, Aen. 12. 100: crines vibratos-,
Pliny, Nat. hist. 2. 78. 80.
262 Q^ Firmicus Maternus, Math. 8. 7; Clem. Alex., De paed. 3. 3;
Tertullian, De app. fern. 2. 5-8.
263 Cf. Lactantius, Div. inst. 5. 9. 16: testamenta supponant.
264 This means to win away the loyalties of a slave as well as of
a wife.
265 Orelli says that lyotuli = German Blutwiirste; cf. Tertullian
mentioning (ApoZ. 9. 14) botulos cruore distentos.
266 Castellamenta. Cf. TLL 3.524: cuppedii carnei ut videtur
genus fortasse castelli specie factum (cites only Arnobius 2. 42);
Du Cange 2. 208 derives the word from catillare and concludes :
" Proprie vero ita vocasse videntur farcimina aut botulos minutis
carnibus inculcates, quod avide a Cartillonibus expererentur."
267 Cf. Cicero In Pisonem 10.22: cum ilium suum sanatorium
versaret orbem.
268 The ancient sambuca was a triangular stringed instrument. The
notes were shrill and unpleasant, the players reputed to be of bad
character.
209 The translation follows Marchesi's emendation of a corrupt
passage chiefly because no other suggestions seem better.
270 The MS reads habitare atque habitare. The text follows
Lofstedt's suggestion of abire, accepted by Marchesi, in place of the
first habitare. Other suggestions: visitor e (Meiser); aditare (Oehler);
abitare (Brakman).
271 Cf. Lucretius 2. 177-81; 5. 195-9.
272 Reading Wiman's (erronmiy in place of Marchesi's (malorumy.
Cf. evagandi immediately below.
273 Reading pn<w>ws, with Wiman, instead of prius which Mar-
chesi allows to stand at the end of the sentence. Prius was deleted
by W. Kroll; Axclson prefers peiiis.
271 Yet cf. i. 3, where God is said to be the highest procreator.
Cf. Micka 46 f. LeNourry (ML 5.483) says, however, that Arno-
bius did not mean God had no part in the creation of the souls but
was carried away by zeal at this point. Micka explains by recurrence
330 NOTES
to the idea that the ' aloofness ' of God was fundamental to Arnobius'
thinking. There is, of course, the possibility that the MS of the
Adversus nationes never underwent a thorough final revision to
eliminate inconsistencies of this kind.
275 On the figure, cf. Tertullian, De an. 53. 5 and the literature
cited by Waszink (545).
276 Perhaps an allusion to cannibalism?
277 Columen: a word used abundantly with names of people see
TLL 3. 1736-7-
278 Cf . Micka 52; U. Moricca, Storia della letteratum latina cristi-
ana i (Turin 1923) 612, 615; R. Pichon, Lactance, etude sur le
mouvement philosophique et religieux sous le regne de Constantin
(Paris 1901) 52 f.
279 A corollary of the excellence of God.
280 A. C. McGiffert, A History of Christian Thought, 2 (New
York 1933) 39 f. ? compares this view with a similar position taken by
Celsus in the second century.
281 Note the dualism cf. Micka 58, 61; P. Monceaux, Histoire
litteraire de I'Afrique chretienne, 3 (Paris 1905) 270. Cf. also
Minucius 26. 1 1, who attributes a similar view to Osthanes.
282 Inconsistent, as Micka (48 f.) says, with 2.46 and 2. 53. On
this chapter Rapisarda (Amok 139) would cite Augustine, De civ.
Dei 12. 25 (and 11.15 which appears to be a misprint).
283 In suae [et] integritatis perfectione finitum. Kistner would add
naturae after suae and keep et.
284 Ex mediocribus familiis where the adjective not only suggests
that their families are not highborn but also even insignificant
mediocre ') There is a suggestion also of the * neutral character '
. of the souls mentioned in previous chapters.
285 Generositas princi'palis.
286 Cayut rerum, a term used by Ovid (Met. 15. 736) to denote
Rome.
287 yjri y no t homines. This passage is doubtless an answer to the
view mentioned by Cicero (De nat. deor. 3. 5. 12) that the souls
(ani-mos*) of very famous men are divine and immortal.
288 Reading et admiratione <^quarum non nisi laboriosay congre-
gatione conquiritur, with Wiman, in place of adcuratiore congrega-
tione (Reifferscheid and Marchesi).
280 The word non here is clearly misplaced in the MS, hence it is
inserted before modo and bracketed before
290 Philosofhi = ' lovers of wisdom/
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 331
291 The MS reads animorum, corrected by Meursius to aniinarum
to conform to Arnobius' general usage, but doubtless our author may
be permitted some inconsistency.
292 The MS reads inperfectum inprobabilem and the first word is
marked as a gloss. Some editors delete inprobabilem (e. g. Sabaeus)
while others change to probabilem (Salmasius) but the sense is not
' needing no correction ' but as given in the translation.
293 Micka (152 n. 15) and Brandt (CSEL 19. i. 181) profess to
see resemblance between this chapter and Lactantius, Div. inst.
3.2.9: Non ergo sapientiae student qui philosophantur, sed ipsi
studere se putant, quia illut quo quaerunt ubi aut quale sit nesciunt.
Sive igitur sapientiae student sive non student, sapientes non sunt.
294 Cf . Cicero's statement (De nat. deor. i . i . i ) that the Academics
prudenter ... a rebus incertis adsensionem cohibuisse.
295 Cf . A. J. Festugiere, " Ets avOpwrov Wo^epeo-flat," Rev. de sc.
phil. et theol. 20 (1931) 476-82, a study of the passage in Clement
of Alexandria, Protr. 9. 82. 2: fyiels Se cfe Odvarov (Festugiere restores
avQpuTTov vTroipepea-Oe) . Cf. likewise Festugiere, "Tomber dans
I'homme," ibid. 26 (1937) 41 f.
296 An exceedingly dubious passage: et <(iny nihil expositum
iaculatio mentis illata? (Marches!); et f nihil ex positu iaculatio
mentis in latentia? (Reifferscheid); et nihil <(habens in lucey
positum iaculatio mentis intuta (Meiser); nihil exposta (Hiddn).
297 Cf. Plato, Timaeus 41 f. It is the Creator who does the mixing
but since the passage is contained in a speech by Timaeus, Arnobius
attributes the act to the one who tells the story. Gabarrou (Oemre
23-37) compares this passage with Plato's Timaeus 41 and Cicero's
Timaeus 12, and comes to the conclusion that Arnobius knew both
Plato and Cicero firsthand. The same conclusion was reached earlier
by Rohricht (Seelenlehre 23).
298 This is the reading of Thornell (Patristica 2) : mvere. Quid
enim, <si>, approved by Wiman, in place of Marches!: vivere,
qui<^a eaydem.
290 Cf. 2. 9 f., and Festugiere 118 n. 2.
300 Plato, Tvmaeus 41,
801 Micka (51) believes that Arnobius realized the difficulty caused
by the conflict of his view that the soul is mortal and the Christian
belief in a life after death and to get out of the dilemma, invented
the concept of the neutral character.
802 Ab rebus non principallbus : cf. Tertullian, De an. 23.
22 T
3 3 2 NOTES
303 In this sentence ' you ' (vos) is plural while the vocatives
(ineptissime, fatue) are singular. ' You ' therefore equals the pagan
party of which a single member is being addressed. Bryce-Campbell
translate these vocatives as adverbs : " What [is that] to you? [In
so believing, we act] most absurdly, sillily." For another example of
the use of the singular and plural second person in a single sentence,
cf, 4.31. G. Weyman, " Textkritische Bemerkungen zu Arnobius
adversus nationes," Festschrift S. Merkle (Diisseldorf 1922) 290,
wishes to regard ineptissime as an adverb and fatue as a vocative,
and cites examples in 2. 14 and 2. 52.
804 Ab Orci faucibus: cf. Vergil, Aen. 6. 273; Apuleius, Met. 7. 7.
so5 With this digression on the problem of evil (2. 54-60) compare
an earlier one (1.7-12). Geffcken (287) says that in the present
chapter Arnobius uses the Stoic argument, and Rapisarda ^Arnob.
139) sees parallels with Augustine, De civ. Dei 20. i.
306 Here the MS reads nesciente, ignaro ac nescio. Marchesi
bracketed nesciente on the advice of Castiglioni but it is almost
certain that Arnobius wrote three words. Cf. quaerere pervestigare
rimari (2. 16); turpitudinum criminum malitiarum (2.43); ut ex-
ercerent, ut gererent, ut percelebrarent (2.43); sator et conditor,
procreator (2. 45); agi fieri statui (2. 48); aspernaris, contemnis et
despicis (2. 64). Since nesciente . . . nescio is harsh, I am inclined
to think that either Orelli or Ursinus (with Reifferscheid) is right
in changing, respectively, to insciente or inscio. Cf. Festugi&re 106
n. i.
so7 Rohricht (Seelenlehre 7) thinks 2. 55-61 clearly stems from
Lucretius 2. 398-443, 631 ff.; 5. 574 f.
808 P has been thought to read nominaliter, but Lofstedt emphati-
cally maintains that the reading is not nominaliter but noninaliter.
For this reason Marchesi accepts non inaniter, the reading in the
Codex Bruxellensis, and so does Weyman (390) independently of
Marchesi, citing an impressive list of parallels. W. A. Baehrens,
BerZ. phil. Woch. 37 (1917) 1293 suggests unanimiter.
809 Reading ducetis with the MS and Marchesi, in place of du-
centes (Sabaeus, favored also by Wiman, while ducentis is preferred
by Axelson).
S1 The MS reads quinimmo potius tnagis. Reifferscheid attempted
to correct potius by suggesting optimum but this is bad palaeographi-
cally. The solution to the problem is furnished by Wiman who
transposes potius to an earlier position and reads tutius which he
derives from a sentence in 4, 16: nonne potius fbit domum seseque
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 333
abstinens ab negotiis talibus tutius esse arbitrabitur nihil hornm
contingere, etc.
311 Bryce-Campbell here mistranslate Quid ergo nos? unde? as
"What, then, do we say? whence?" and the German translators
(von Besnard and Alleker) similarly go astray. The questions under
discussion are (i) Quid sumus? (2) unde sumus?
312 The conclusion is reached (cf. Micka 55 .) as the result of the
aloofness of God and its corollary, the impassibility of God.
313 Bryce-Campbell profess to find these sentences exceedingly
obscure but the meaning seems to be that the question of the origin
of the soul has no pertinence in regard to the much more important
question, its salvation.
314 This evidently refers to the principle of the conservation of
matter as discussed by Lucretius i. 146-58; 2.294-307 (where see
Bailey's notes ad Zoc.) and the ancient sources cited by Orelli.
315 Doubtless the allusion is to Plato's Timaeus 41. Cf. 2. 52.
316 The Stoics. Cf. Diog. Laert. 7. 134 and 141; Seneca, Consol.
ad Polyb. 2.
317 Acceptance of subripiant (corrector of the MS and Marchesi)
involves the view that the philosophers pilfer each other's arguments
not to use them but to prevent their use by their opponents. How
this could be done is not clear. I have therefore accepted Ursinus'
suggestion of subruant which seems better than Sabaeus' subrum'pant.
818 Cf. Plato, Timaeus 32; Cicero, De nat. deor. 1.8.19: earth,
air, fire, water. See also Bailey's edition of Lucretius, vol. 2, p. 1032.
319 This is very likely an echo of Lucretius i. 712 f. :
Adde etiam qui conduplicant primordia rerum
Aera iugentes igni terramque liquori.
This is overlooked by Bryce-Campbell who attribute to Orelli more
than he says which is that the twin elements are earth and water.
They allude to Diog. Laert. 7. 134, where the elements (a/>X^O of
the world are given as two the active and passive, but in searching
for the source of allusions in Arnobius, the best rule is to look first
in Lucretius.
820 Ex singulis: the reference seems to be to the Eleatic monists,
especially Xenophanes (ca. 580) and Parmenides (c<z. 540). Plato
admired the latter greatly and named one of his dialogues after him.
821 Individua corpora : the founder of Atomism was Leucippus
(Miletus? ca. 475). The greatest exponent was Democritus of
Abdera (ca, 460-370), who was also a mathematician, physician, and
globe-trotter.
334 NOTES
322 The atheists, see i. 31.
323 E. g., Protagoras. See i, 31, n. 133.
324 The Epicureans.
325 Terrenas administrare rationes. Cf, Cicero, De nat. deor. i. i,
12, 19, 23, etc.
326 Plato will serve as an example.
327 The Epicureans again.
328 Aliquid els ad vitam darL This is the Stoic view. Cf . Cicero,
Tusc. 1.31: Stoici . . . diu mansuros aiunt; semper negant.
329 This chapter shows almost certainly that Arnobius was ignorant
of the opening chapters of Genesis.
330 Virtutis, a clear example of 'the use of this word in the sense
of power. Cf. Book One, n. 210.
331 A Lucretian echo; cf. 1.31, and Lucretius i. 472.
382 Perhaps a reminiscence of Lucretius 2.934: huic satis illud
erit planum facere atque probare. On the thought, cf. K A. Nor-
wood, " Attitude of the Ante-Nicene Fathers toward Greek Artistic
Achievement," Jour, of the Hist, of Ideas 8 (1947) 436.
333 Primus dies may possibly refer to the initial day rather than
the beginning of every day.
384 A clear allusion to Epicurean physics in which the stars were
regarded as being actually the same size as they appear to be. See
the very illuminating note by J. S. Reid in J. Masson, Lucretius,
Epicurean and Poet, Suppl. Vol. (London 1909) 189, with reference
to Masson's own pp. 1 58 f .
335 This passage has been much subjected to the tender mercies of
emendation (see Marchesfs apparatus). The best suggestion seems to
me Wiman's which I have translated: [quod] irribresve (quod nivem
in plumeas subaperiat crustulasy.
386 Arnobius, of course, had no idea of the variety of seasons at
different points on the globe. It should be pointed out that he had
a lively interest in scientific matters, despite the agnosticism which
he here expresses concerning natural phenomena. We should not
forget that while modern science has many "answers" for these
problems which he presents, the ultimate answer has no more been
achieved in our time than in his.
837 Integritas.
888 Klussmann, followed by Reifferscheid and Marchesi, added
these words to balance vel frigidae } but it is by no means certain that
Arnobius wrote them.
830 Viscera = ' flesh ' in Servius, Aen. 1.211: viscera non tantum
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 335
intestina dicimus, sed quicquid sub corio est, ut in Albano Latinis
visceratio dabatur, id est caro; 6. 263 : viscera sunt quicquid inter
ossa et cutem est.
340 Orelli thinks the allies were birds used in augury, the volucres
other birds, but this is unnecessary.
341 Avena means oats in general but must here be a wild variety.
Cf. Vergil, Georg. i. 153.
842 Reading mel oleum vinum with Wiman which is decidedly
better than Marchesi's melo cu-mmutn (P has meloneum vinum),
since cumin is hardly an ordinary article of food (cf. mediis in
generibus, immediately below). The passage may perhaps be an
imitation of Vergil, Georg. i. 152-4 (Rapisarda, Arnob. 249).
343 These words were first bracketed by Heraldus. They are clearly
a gloss and one which contributes nothing. On the thought, cf.
Lucretius 3. 267: est odor et quidam calor et sapor, where Bailey reads
color instead of calor see Arnobius, a little below.
844 ^Alicuiusy (Marchesi) is palaeographically better than <(vely
(all other editors since Gelenius).
345 Marchesi (Quest. 1022) says that this view of a lack of interest
in such investigations is a contradiction and retraction of what has
already been said in i. 38.
346 This statement (cf. also i. 42) contradicts the claim of Gabarrou
(^Oeuvre 61) that Arnobius nowhere states positively the divinity of
Christ. Cf . Micka 52 f .
847 Auras nescio quas eius sibi contemplations adfingere: on this
use of auras, cf. Lactantius, Div. inst. 2. 17. n. The force of sibi
escapes me, except it be used inadvertently for no"bis.
848 No such words are attributed to Christ by the Evangelists, but
doubtless they are a paraphrase of many passages in which claims
of supremacy are made.
840 Marchesi's text reads : in del rerum capitis [et] cognitione
defixus. The MS has a line over dei which is emended to deo
(Sabaeus), domino (Zink), domini (Pascal), dei domini (Kir*
schwing). Pascal would change capitis (MS capite) to captu making
this correlative with cognitione and keep et as genuine. If this be
right, then the translation should read: "intent upon the compre-
hension and understanding of the God of the universe."
850 The antecedent of the subject of inquit is clearly Christ, and
therefore Arnobius is here again placing his own words in the
mouth of the Divine Savior. Where the " quotation " was meant to
end is doubtful. The opening words of this chapter have been much
336 NOTES
emended, some suggestions eliminating the verb inquit entirely, e. e.
Pascal's quid est enim quid vobis, or changing it to first person, e. g.
Brakman's quid (ppusy est, inquam.
851 Cf. J. Masson, Lucretius, Epicurean and Poet (London 1907)
i58f., and J. S. Reid in the Supplementary Volume to the same
(London 1909) 189.
352 Cf. Lucretius 5. 575 f .; 705-750, and Bailey's long note on the
latter passage.
353 Supernatum probably means ' superior to the necessity of being
born ' and indeed Ursinus changed to super natum in this sense.
354 Marchesi reads in utilitate which gives the opposite sense from
what is needed. Reifferscheid : inutiliter adopts Sabaeus's rendering.
355 Festugi&re's (i2of.) 'first way/ also mentioned in 2. 13 and
2.66.
356 Cf . Plato, Rep. 2. 364, where Adeimantus (not Glaucon, as
Bryce-Campbell say) speaks of mendicant magi who go about making
claims for themselves and the powers which they say they possess,
357 Festugiere's (120 f.) ' second way/ repeated from 2. 13.
358 Other references to disciplina Etrusca in 3. 40 (bis), 5. 18.
359 These books were said (cf . Servius, Aen. 8. 399) to have been
composed by Tages (mentioned by Arnobius in 2. 69), and appear
to have contained directions for expiatory sacrifices. W. Kahl, " Cor-
nelius Labeo, ein Beitrag zur spatromischen Litteraturgeschichte,"
Philologus SuppL 5 (1889) 717-807, has a section on Arnobius' use
of Labeo (720-5) in which he maintains that this passage owes some-
thing to Labeo. An earlier writer, G. Kettner, Cornelius Labeo, ein
Beitrag zur Quellenkritik des Arnobius (Progr. Pforta: Naumburg
1877), cites many passages of Arnobius thought to have been de-
rived from Labeo but he overlooks this one. F. Niggetiet, De
Cornelio Labeone (Minister 1908) maintains that Arnobius 2. 13-62
goes back to Labeo, thinking that the latter had himself borrowed
the idea of the good and bad angels from Porphyry, De abstin.
2. 36-43. Niggetiet would date Labeo quite late, but B. A. Bohem,
De Cornelii Labeonis aetate (diss. Konigsberg 1913) demonstrates
that the terminus ante quern for Labeo must be 125 A. D. and denies
that 2. 13-62 could be derived from Labeo, the general spirit of
Labeo's fragments being in harmony with the later Stoicism. Next,
W. Bousset, rev. of J. Kroll, Die Lehren des Hermes Trismegistos,
Gott. gelehrt. Anz. 176 (1914) 753-5; " Zur Damonologie der spateren
Antike," Archiv f. Religions. 18 (1915) 134-75, attempts to re-
concile these divergent views by accepting both the earlier date for
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 337
Labeo and Arnobius' indebtedness to him for 2. 13-62 but maintains
that the ultimate source was not, as had been thought, Neo-Platonism
(Porphyry) but hermetism and the Oracula Chaldaica, which would
put the date back to the second half of the first century A. D. His
views appear to have found favor with A. S. Ferguson, in W. Scott,
Hermetica 4 (Oxford 1936) 474-83, but, meanwhile, an article by
W. Kroll, "Die Zeit des Cornelius Labeo/' Rhein. Mus. n. F. 71
(1916) 309-57, maintains that Arnobius used Labeo for the present
passage but that it is very improbable that Labeo is all he used; that
he certainly used Porphyry and through him without doubt the
Oracula Chaldaica; that if Labeo is to be dated in the first century,
then ' novi viri ' becomes absurd. A further attack on the " myth "
of Labeo has recently been published by Festugiere (122-4). His
principal objection concerns the date but he also points out that,
according to the Bousset-Ferguson theory, Arnobius borrows from
Labeo and he in turn from hermetism, a passage in which animal
sacrifice is suggested, yet this practice was wholly foreign to herme-
tism. Moreover, he sees difficulty in believing that a Roman of about
100 A. D. would couple the Magi and the haruspices together. He
therefore concluded that about all that one can attribute to Labeo
is the reference to the Etruscan method of divination. Whence, then,
did Arnobius derive the other two methods, asceticism and prayers
of appeasement? Festugiere (125-32) answers that Arnobius found
them in hermetism and Zoroastrianism, and cites a text of the
alchemist Zosimus of about the end of the third century (see his
article, " Alchymica/' L'ant. class. 8 [1939] 71-95). For the text see
R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres 103, and the other scholars listed by
Festugiere. He sees in this passage a number of parallels to Arno-
bius and concludes that Arnobius used this source. His final thesis
is that the ' novi viri ' is not a designation of a single sect but of a
great number of different sources listed in the table (128 .)
S6 Festugtere's (i2of.) 'third way/ Cf. n. 64.
8<31 Cf. 2.33.
802 Added by Wiman : omni^no niy si in place of eni siqui of the
MS.
83 Strong evidence to support the view that Arnobius believed
the pagan gods existed, but see the Introd. pp. 30-3.
so* Bryce-Campbell mistake this word (fllii) for a nominative plural
and are forced to explain in a note who the mythical "others"
might be.
see "Weak reasoning, for he overlooks the possibility of delegated
338 NOTES
authority which he himself strongly maintains in i. 50 where the
point is emphasized that the supernatural power of Christ to perform
miracles was passed on to His followers.
366 So the MS and the texts of both editors. Reifferscheid, how-
ever, suggests in his apparatus that for ratio we should read oratio
(prayer) and makes this an allusion to the petition in the Lord's
Prayer (Matt. 6. 13). He would at the same time insert Christi,
written X^ between per and mandatum. The idea is very tempting,
since what plausibility does a demand of reason have in this con-
nection and what is the meaning of the commandment?
367 Others, e. g. Justin Martyr (cf. Apol. i. 46), had taken up this
problem before.
368 Retaining ut with Marchesi, although Gelenius and Reiffer-
scheid deleted it, perhaps rightly, as Marchesi says.
369 Bryce-Campbell are right in maintaining that if there is no
precise reference to a specific place in the New Testament, the " quo-
tation " is in harmony with the whole of Christ's teaching. Cf . John
6.37: "Him that cometh to me, I will not cast out." They are,
however, with their usual virulence, unnecessarily hard on Orelli
who saw a parallel to the bread of life (John 6. 35). On the fountain
of life, fons vitae, see Apoc. 21. 6. The metaphor is quite popular in
the didactic books of the Old Testament. Cf. Ps. 35. 10; Prov. 13. 14,
14. 27, 1 6. 22; Eccli. 21. 1 6.
370 The idea of refusing permission to drink occurs in the Odyssey
1 1 . 49 f . where in the lower world Odysseus uses his sword to
prevent the shades from drinking of the blood of the sacrifices until
he has obtained the necessary information from Teiresias.
371 Qiiid invitans expectat, the reading of the MS, in preference to
expectat^ury, suggested by Reifferscheid and adopted by Marchesi.
372 Rohricht (Seelenlehre 25) compares with this passage Cicero,
De nat. deor. 3. 22. 56 and Plato, Phaedrus 2740 (cf. Philebus i8b),
and Arnobius 2. 7 with Phaedrus 23oa, Alciblades 1290, and con-
cludes (26) that there is evidence of direct use of Plato.
373 Plato (Rep. 2. 379) makes Socrates say that God is not the
author of all things but of a few only. Cf. Rep. 10. 617 where the
statement is made that the souls will choose their own genius, for
virtue is free. On man's freedom of choice cf. Justin, Dial. 102;
Irenaeus, Adv. haer. 4. 59 (Harvey); Tertullian, De exhort, cast.
2, etc*
374 An obscure passage.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 339
375 Deos = divinos. Cf. 2. 7: deus (= divinus*)-, z. 36: films (souls);
2. 39 : deas, in the same sense.
376 Marches!: <vaniy animi contentioli&tdly a satisfactory restora-
tion of a corrupt passage which has been much emended, usually in
the sense, if not the words, of Marchesi's text. Kroll, Phil Woch.
55 ( J 935) IQ 83> complains that this one is not rhythmical. Cf.
Wiman, Textkritiska Studier till Arnobius 28 f.
377 Note the anacoluthon in this sentence. Iniunctum and traditum
ought to be made to agree with Cartes (so Reifferchesid), but Kroll
and Marchesi prefer to keep the anacoluthon as possible evidence
of Arnobius' haste.
378 Pontificium, originally the power and right of a Roman
yontifex or priest, came as early as the time of A. Gellius (i. 13. 3:
cuius id negotium 'pontiftciutnque) to be used on occasions in a more
general sense. Under the early Church, of course, it was used more
specifically as the right and power of a bishop over his diocese. The
fact that Arnobius uses the word here of Christ is no indication that
he was familiar with the Epistle to the Hebrews 2. 17 where Christ
is also called a high-priest (Vulgate: pontifex). Cf. J. C. Plumpe,
" Pomeriana," Vigiliae Christianae i (1947) 2,27-33, esp. 227 f.; E.
Lofstedt, " Some Changes of Sense in Late Medieval Latin," Eranos
Rudbergianus = Eranos 44 (1946) 340-54, esp. 343-6.
370 Cf. i. 36, i. 38, i. 41, 2, 70, 2. 74, 3. 33, 3. 39, 3. 44, 4. 17, 4. 22,
4.29, 5.6, 5.11, 5.19, 5.28, 5.29, 5.39, 5.43, 5.45, 6.12, 6.23,
6. 25, 7. 21. See Book One, nn. 155, 197.
380 Edelstein-Edelstein, Testim. 29od.
881 On Juno, see Index.
382 On Fortuna, cf. 3. 40, 3. 43, 6. 25.
883 See Index.
384 Bryce-Campbell suggest that this qualifying phrase shows un-
familiarity with the Scriptural passage. They are strongly criticized
by Coxe (ANF 6. 540, Elucid. i) who rightly maintains, I think,
that the phrase qualifies the figure and not the passage.
885 Gabarrou (Oeuvre 64) professes to see here an allusion to John
10. 7-10; 14, 6.
386 Per hanc (Meursius, Reifferscheid, Marchesi) but yer hunc
is in the MS, i. e. through Christ
88T Cf , John 10.9, 14,6, which, if not clearly in the mind of
Arnobius as he wrote, certainly afford complete justification for his
statement.
* 88 C. i. 13, 1.58.
34 NOTES
389 In this phrase Arnobius overlooks the fact that the Roman
religion was in reality a syncretism o the " religion of Numa " with
the anthropomorphic polytheism of the Greeks and many foreign
and barbarous rites from the orient. In 2. 73, however, he alludes
to the syncretism but there is defending the Christians from the
charge of introducing something new rather than something bar-
barous and foreign. Had Christianity, or Judaism, not been intransi-
gently monotheistic, doubtless the pagans would have been quite
willing to take over or tolerate these religions as well. But such
acceptance or incorporation postulated a recognition of the Roman
state gods and religion, including emperor worship, a condition which
clashed with the very essence of the Christian credo and with which
no compromise whatever was possible. Christianity could only reject
the Roman state religion and this was ultimately interpreted as
serious treason against the state, and the persecutions arose as a
result. Cf. A. Bigelmair, " Christen verfolgungen," LTK 2 (1931)
912-17; W. R. Halliday, The Pagan Background of Early Christianity
(Liverpool-London 1925) 23 f.
390 Fruges, that is, cultivated plants, as opposed to those items of
diet growing wild.
391 What is here meant is not the superior fruit of the wild
strawberry which is the usual translation of arbuta (neut. pi., cf.
TLL 2. 431) but a berry or fruit consumed by primitive men before
they had learned to obtain better foods (cf . Pliny, Nat. hist. 1 5. 24.
28, 23. 8. 79; Varro, De re rust. 2. 1.4; Vergil, Georg. i. 148, 2. 520;
Lucretius 5.939-42; Servius, Georg. i. 148: arbuta , . . sunt rubra
poma silvarum, quae Plinius unedones vocat, quod asperitate sui
plura edi non possunt).
392 Cf. Lucretius 5. 953-7.
893 Reading, for the MS aversionem a religionem, the suggestion
of Wiman, aversionem et relictionem, approved by Kroll and now
reiterated in Eranos 45 (1947) 140, against Reifferscheid's and
Marchesi's aversionem a religione.
804 Cf . Tertullian, Apol. 6. 9 : Laudatis semper antiquitatem et
nove de die vivitis; Prudentius, C. Symmach. 2. 203-13.
895 An allusion to the five classes of citizens divided according to
wealth for military purposes, an institution ascribed (by Livy i. 43;
cf. also Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom. 4. 18) to King Servius Tullius, See
nn. 189-91.
890 Since no comitia militaria, urbana, or comtwwnxa are otherwise
known, it is probable that Arnobius is here referring to the comitia
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 341
centuriata, curiata, and tributa, respectively. On the comitia, see
W. Liebenam RE 4 (1901) 679-715; G. W. Botsford, The Roman
Assemblies from their Origin to the End of the Republic (New
York 1909) esp. 138.
397 For the neglect of such omens, see Cicero, De div. 2. 36. 76 f.;
De nat. deor. 2. 3.
398 Q a Vergil, Aen. 8.1: Ut belli signum Laurenti Turnus ab arce
extulit.
399 The f elides (hence ius jetiale) were an ancient Roman insti-
tutiona college of twenty priests, appointed for life, whose office
was the expediting of international law and relations; for example,
the conclusion of treaties and alliances, declarations of war, armi-
stices, extradition of criminals, etc. Cf. Wissowa 550-4; E. Samter,
RE 6 (1909) 2259-65. For the fetial ritual, see Livy i. 24; Polybius
3. 25 f .
400 The final act of the fetial was to cast a spear into the enemy
territory. The phrase discrimen Martium may be an imitation of
Lucan (3.336: discrimina Munis') as Rapisarda (Amok 254)
suggests.
401 A reference to the leges annales which prescribed the age of
eligibility (aetas legitima) and the order in which the various
magistracies (^certus ordo magistratuum) had to be held. Cf. Livy
40. 44, regarding the Lex Villia annalis (^annaria) of the year 180
B. C. : quot annos nati quemque magistratum peterent caperentque.
See A. H. J. Greenidge, Roman Public Life (London 1930) 186,
Under Vespasian the yrinceys was exempted from these laws (Ibid.
350). On the word, see TLL 2. 109 which cites examples only from
Festus (25 Lindsay): Annaria lex dicebatur ab antiquis ea, qua
finiuntur anni magistratus capiendi; also Larnpridius, Vita Corn-mod.
2.4.
402 On the Lex Cincia, cf. R. Leonhard, "Donatio," RE 5 (1905)
i535f. C. Ferrini, "Die juristischen Kenntnisse des Arnobius und
des Lactantius," Zeitschr. d. Sav.-Stift. f. Rechtsg. 15 (1894) 343-6,
cites this as an example of Arnobius' precise knowledge of legal terms.
Cf . Tertullian, Apol. 6. i f. : Nunc religiosissimi legum et paternorum
institutorum protectores et ultores respondeant velim de sua fide et
honore et obsequio erga maiorum consulta, si a nullo desciverunt,
si in nullo exorbitaverunt, si non necessaria et aptissima quaeque
disciplinae oblitteraverunt. Quoniam illae leges abierunt sumptum
et ambitionem comprimentes. He then goes on to give specific
examples of luxury.
NOTES
403 Numerous laws passed by the censors to curb luxury known
as leges sumptuariae. Cf. A. Gellius 2. 24.
404 Reading with Wiman : in penetralibus ut dim ignis perpetuos
fovetis focis?
405 The table as well as the hearth was sacred to the household
gods. The salt-cellar (salinum) which was never missing on the
table, was sacred to them. See Horace, Carm. 2. 16. 14; Livy 26.
36. 6. Cf. F. J. Dolger, Ant. u. Christ. 2 (1930) 216.
406 Maritorum genios may probably mean u genii of husbands " as
Bryce-Campbell translate it (cf. also Wissowa 176), but apparently
the significance of this remark is not well understood by the experts
on private antiquities. Cf. G Lecrivain, " Matrimonium (Roman)/'
DA 3. 1654-62, esp. 1655, where this passage is cited among examples
of obscurities.
407 The hasta caelibaris was not properly a spear but a small dart
or needle with which the bride's hair was divided into six plaits, the
sign of chastity. See Ovid, Fasti 2. 560; Plutarch, Romulus 15;
Aetia 87; Festus 55 (Lindsay); Pliny, Nat. hist. 28. 3. 7; L6crivain,
loc. cit. 1655; Klingmiiller, "Hasta," RE 7 (1912) 2503.
408 C. Lecrivain (loc. cxt) says that on the eve of the wedding
the future bride consecrated her toga yraetexta to some divinity,
probably to the lares of the family (Propertius 1.1133; Nonius
538. 14), but that according to Arnobius in this passage it was to
Fortuna Virginalis (cf. Wissowa, 257; J. G. Frazer, note on Ovid,
Fasti 6. 569, vol. 4, p. 295).
409 The womanly virtue of industry in the household tasks was
highly prized by both the Greeks (e. g. Penelope in the Odyssey')
and the Romans (e. g. Lucretia : see the account given by Livy
1.57.9).
410 Cf . Tertullian, A'poL 6. 4-6 : cum mulieres usque adeo vino
abstinerentur, ut matronam ob resignatos cellae vinariae loculos sui
inedia necarint. He then gives examples of primitive severity and
continues: At nunc in feminis . . . prae vino nullum liberum est
osculum; repudium vero iam et votum est, quasi matrimonii fructus.
411 Cf. A. Gellius 10. 23; Tertullian, Afol 6. 5,
412 The highest peak (943 m. above sea level) of the Alban
volcano, lying about seventeen miles southeast of Rome between the
Via Latina and the Via Appia. From the summit may be obtained a
magnificent view of the sea and the whole of the Carnpagna, and
on clear days St. Peter's is visible. Here were celebrated the Feriae
Latinae at the temple of Jupiter Latiaris (cf. Fowler, 95-7, 227 f.,
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 343
who, however, says nothing of the reddish bulls but speaks only of
a white heifer). Cf. Wissowa 40, 124^
413 Doubtless the same magnificent breed of cattle still used in
the neighborhood for agricultural purposes.
414 Pompiiius = Numa Pompilius, traditionally the second king
of Rome.
415 Madida = ' boiled ' but Kroll wants arida C dry '). Cf. Wiman,
Textkritiska Studier till Arnobius 3 1 f .
416 The MS reads Tullio = Servius Tullius, sixth king of Rome,
but both Reifferscheid and Marchesi correct to Tullo = Tullus Hos-
tilius, third king, on the basis of the previous references to the first
two.
417 Leviter animata: perhaps corrupt. Alleker's "fast lebend"
('almost alive') may suggest the right sense or perhaps animata
refers to blowing upon the coals.
418 Dis is mentioned also in 4. 26, 5. 28, 5. 32, 5. 35, 5. 40, 5. 43,
6. 3 .
419 Cf. 5. i and Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom. 1.30; Minucius 30; Lac-
tan tius, Div. inst. i. 21 ; Macrobius, Sat i. 7. 31.
420 On K06TW cvi/owu, cf . Tertullian, De an. 2. i and Waszink's
note ad loc. (100).
421 An Etruscan demon or divinity who taught the disciplina
Etrusca. Cf. 2. 62; Cicero, De div. 2. 23. 50; Censorinus, De die
natal. 4; Ovid, Met. 15. 553-9.
422 That is, after he emerged as a boy from the furrow that was
being ploughed; cf , Cicero, loc. cit.
428 According to Plato (Phaedrus 2740 Theuth was an Egyptian
god who invented numbers and arithmetic, geometry, astronomy,
draughts, dice, and letters. Gabarrou (^Oeuvre 23-37), w ^ compares
this passage in Plato with another reference to Theuth in Cicero,
De nat. deor. 3. 22. 56, concludes, rightly, I think, that it is the Greek
source which is followed by Arnobius.
424 Rohricht (Seelenlehre 25) thinks this allusion to Atlas stems
from tradition. Cf. Cicero, Tusc. 5. 3, 8; Vergil, Aen. i. 741; Ovid,
Met. 4. 631 ff.
425 Cf. 1.28.
420 Pluto, Cf. Vergil, Aen. 4.638, where Pluto is called the
Stygian Jupiter.
427 Neptune.
428 On the Muses, cf. 3. 2,1, 3. 37, 3. 38, 3. 44, 4. 15, 4- M-
420 Cf. 1,367 4- *5> 4- *5.
344 NOTES
430 Cf. 3. 37. Mnemosyne, mother of the Muses, is meant. See P.
Weizsacker, LM 2. 3076-80; S. Eitrem, RE 15 (1932) 2265-9; A. B.
Cook, Zeus 2 (Cambridge 1925) 1157. Cf. Hippolytus, Ref. 1.23;
Origen, C. Cels. 1.23.
431 The MS : Alchmena, changed to Alcmena, by all editors, but
Castiglioni suggested Alcumena in order to explain the error. Alc-
mene, wife of Amphitryon, bore Heracles to Zeus. Cf . also 4. 22,
4. 26, 5. 22, where she is again mentioned and 2. i and 7. 33 where
there are veiled allusions to her.
432 Mother of Mercury (Hermes).
433 Mother of Mars.
434 Mother of Apollo and Diana. On Latona, cf. 4. 22, 5. 22.
435 Mother of Castor, Pollux, Clytaemnestra, and Helen, but see
Book One, n. 164 and cf. H. W. Stall, O. Hofer and L. Bloch,
" Leda," LM 2. 1922-32. She is mentioned again in 4. 22, 5. 22, 7. 33.
436 Mother, according to variant traditions, of Aphrodite (Iliad
5.370), of Dionysus (Euripides, fr. 177), of Pelops and Niobe
(Hyginus, Fab. 9. 82).
437 Mother, according to another tradition, of Dionysus. On
Semele, see 3. 44, 4. 22, 5. 28, 5. 44.
438 J U piter. The MS reads dies patri but the a of patri has been
corrected from a to e and then to z. This form of the name also
appears again in the same chapter and in 4. 20, 5. 3, 5. 20. Rapisarda
(Arndb. 242) lists this use of the name as an imitation of Horace,
Carm. i. 34. 5. This is possible but not proven.
439 Brakman inserts queunt and changes fuere to fuisse, since
fuere is a poetic form. If he is right, the translation should read
" can they have been."
440 The MS has quadringentos which is surely right, though many
editors follow Ursinus in changing to trecentos. If in i . 13 Arnobius
indicates that three hundred years more or less have passed since
the origin of Christianity, then it could possibly have existed three
hundred years previously. It has escaped notice that this sentence is
taken from the remark of the adversary who must be presumed to be
ignorant of so fine a point as exactly how many years have elapsed
since Christianity began. Arnobius is careful to compose these
remarks of his adversary on the basis of the presumed knowledge of
such a person. Flow any one could accept trecentos here and still
date the Adversiis nationes in the fourth century, as many do, passes
understanding. Cf. Freppel 33. See also Zeno of Verona, Tract.
i. 5. 4: Quum ante annos ferme quadringentos vel eo amplius, etc,,
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 345
and M. F. Stepanich, The Christology of Zeno of Verona (diss.
Cath. Univ.: Washington 1948) 10. See Vigiliae Christianae 3
Ci949) 43 f-
441 Cf. Otto, Sprichworter 211.
442 Tertullian (ApoL 10.6) likewise begins with Saturn: Ante
Saturnum deus penes vos nemo est; ab illo census totius vel potioris
et notions divinitatis.
443 Uranus. Note that the dialogue is here Platonic in flavor.
Uranus is also mentioned in 3. 29 (bis), 3. 37, 4. 14 (bis'), 4. 24.
444 On Caelus and Hecate, as parents of Janus, cf. 3. 29.
445 Cf. 5. i and 5. 2. Picus is also the father of Faunus in Tertul-
lian, Ad nat. 2. 10.
446 This implies ignorance of the age of various ancients mentioned
in Genesis 5.
"'Of. 3. 39.
448 Bryce-Campbell (ANCL 19. 141) clumsily translate quinqua-
ginta et mille as ' fifteen hundred ' but correct the error in the errata
(so also in ANF ad Zoc.). In spite of this they say that it is " im-
portant to note that Arnobius is inconsistent." Not so he is merely
inexact, a far different thing. Assuming the year 753 as the date of
the founding of Rome (see Introd., nn. 60-66), 1050 less 753 gives
297 A. D. which is certainly one of the possible dates for the com-
position of the Adversus nationes (see Introd. pp. 7-12).
449 Lactantius' reckoning for Saturn (Dzv. inst. i. 23. 5, based on
Theophilus of Antioch cf. the notes in Waszink's edition of Ter-
tullian's De an., 254 f.) is not more than 1800 years; for Jupiter
(ibid, 2. 5. 2), 1700 years.
450 Periculo comiptionis : the latter word is not clear, but it seems
possible that it refers to putrefaction of unburnt parts of the sacri-
ficed animal. Cf. 7. 15 in sedem fabricata faetorum and 7. 16. It
must be remembered, however, that pagan priests at least at times
sold unburnt portions on the market (see Acts 15. 29 and i Cor. 8. 7).
451 Cf. Tertullian, Apol. 19.2: et (puto adhuc minus dicimus)
ipsos, inquam, deos vestros, ipsa templa et oracula et sacra unius
interim prophetae scrinium saeculis vincit, in quo videtur thesaurus
collocatus totius ludaici sacramenti, et inde iam et nostri.
452 Cf. Ennius in Cicero, De off. i. 51 (=fr. 398 Vahlen); Pro
Edbo 36:
Homo, qui erranti comiter monstrat viam,
Quasi lumen de suo lumine accendat, facit.
Nihilo minus ipsi lucet, cum illi accenderit.
346 NOTES
453 For the same thought, though not, in the Vulgate, the same
words, see Isa. 9. 2, quoted in Matt. 4. 16; cf. also Luke i. 74; Rom.
2.19.
454 Cf . Tertullian, Apol. 6. 8 : Serapidem et Isidem et Arpocratem
cum suo Cynocephalo (= Anubis, cf. Ad nat. i. 10 where Varro is
cited), Capitolio prohibitos infer ri, id est curia deorum pulsos, Piso
et Gabinius consules, non utique Christiani, eversis etiam aris eorum
abdicaverunt, etc. Piso and Gabinius were consuls in 58 B. C. The
reference to Varro as the source makes it possible that Arnobius is
following him either directly or through the Apologeticus.
455 See G. Lafaye, DA 4. 1248-51.
456 Cf. E, Meyer and W. Drexler, LM 2. 360-548; W. Ruge, RE
9 (1916) 2048-132; J. Burel, Isis et hiaques sous V empire romain
(Paris 1911).
457 Reading in[e]violabili for memorabili, with Axelson.
458 Cybele, the chief divinity of the Phrygians. Cf . A. Rapp,
"Kybde," LM 2.1638-72; F. Schwenn, "Kybele," RE n (1922)
2250-98; H. Graillot, Le culte de Cybele (Paris 1912).
459 Cf. 5.7, 5.18.
460 In the Second Punic War (218-202 B. G). The cult of Cybele
was introduced to Rome in the year 204 B. C., when her " sacred
black stone " was brought there from Pessinus. Cf. Wissowa 300 f.,
and Livy 29. 10. 4-11. 8; 15. 5 ff. Note that Arnobius, good Roman
as he frequently is, applies to Hannibal, his fellow- African, the
word f Punic ' (Poenus - Phoenician) which to the Romans must
have suggested poena = ' punishment > quite as much,
461 Cf. 1.36 and note ad loc. The reference seems to be to the
sacrum annlversarium Cereris, introduced shortly before the Hanni-
balic War and celebrated in August; its origin and character were
entirely Greek. J. G. Frazer (note on Ovid, Fasti 3. 308) seems to
be wrong in citing this passage as evidence that the Cerealia were
introduced not long after Cannae.
462 It is suspected that this refers to M. Terentius Varro; but
Gabarrou (Oeuvre 39) would have it be Cornelius Labco (cf.
Macrobius, Sat. i. 12. 21),
463 ]\j uma Pompilius, second king of Rome.
464 Sospitator, not salvator, is repeated in the present chapter and
in 2. 75.
405 Probably not a dislocation of the calendar, but a difference in
the weather,
460 Edelstein-Edelstein, Testim. 128.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK Two 347
467 Moderator.
468 Generibus virtutum tantis et [yotestatfbus] potestatum. Most
editors have bracketed potestatibus, but so good a scholar as Casti-
glioni thought the MS correct. It is clear that here as elsewhere in
Arnobius virtutes refers more to the miraculous power used than to
the beneficent result. See Book One, n. 210.
409 The moment of the Incarnation.
470 Sabaeus took this word (centenarios*) as modifying vagitus (his
form of the MS vagitum') and found it therefore necessary to change
to stentoreos, i. e. their cries were like the voice of Stentor, but it
really modifies infantes, as will be clear from the next note.
471 Herodotus (1.68, quoted by A. Gellius 3. 10) speaks of the
bones of Orestes as having been found when a well was dug and
proved to be seven cubits = 12.25 Roman feet (so Gellius) in length.
For the idea that human stature had declined, see Juvenal 1 5. 70.
472 Rex summus. The present passage sounds very much like a
limitation upon the power of God.
473 Cf. Minucius 12.4; Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 4.11;
Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.1.60.
474 Pignorum: I have kept the literal meaning because of the
legal flavor of the following phrase but it must be admitted that in
many writers from Ovid and Pliny onward pignus = ' pledge of love '
or children, and then, by transference, other dear ones. The presence
of sterilitatem immediately before amissionem strongly suggests the
latter alternative: the first misfortune is never to have children, the
second to lose those one has. Each reader must choose for himself.
475 Moule (50) emphasizes the unorthodoxy of this point.
476 On in canmculae huius folUoulo, see Orelli's useful note.
477 Reading voluntatem for voluptatem (P and Marches!). On this
idiom, cf. Cicero, Phil. 2. 32. 79: tu eius perfidiae voluntatem tuam
adscripsisti, and Wiman, Eranos 45 (1947) 141. It is dangerous,
however, to argue as he does, that because Christians have never been
taught to take pleasure in misfortune, Arnobius cannot have said that.
478 According to Reifferscheid's apparatus, the MS reads in egres-
sum which Marches! prints, although his apparatus indicates the MS
reads, rather, inegressum. Ursinus attempts to solve the difficulty
by omitting the word. Reifferscheid suggests in ingressu, Klussmann
lumine cassum, Meiser in yeryessu, Kistner ingravissimam, Wiman
vi fessum, and Castiglioni in aggressu. None of these seems to me
satisfactory and they are deficient in proportion as they abandon
what appears to me the necessary root, that of the verb egredior.
348 NOTES
For any prisoner, egress from his prison is the most important
thought. I therefore suggest that we read in carcerem datum
^syin<^ey egressu[m]. The e of egressu was omitted by haplography
after omission by oversight of the 5 of sine. Having overlooked the
presence of sine, the influence of a supposed in, together with the
idea of entrance in datum, suggested the accusative. While not
certain, this gives a better sense than any other suggestion. Dr.
Plumpe, who would make sine egressu mean 'without an outlet/
' without an opening/ comments: "In the following the escape of
the prisoner as the result of the berserk actions of the jailer is no
consideration; but the admission of light to dispel the gloom of the
prison cell is important for the analogy drawn." See Vigiliae Christi-
anae 3 (1949) 44-
479 Pelliculis . . . et cutilous.
480 This may be a more specific reference to the impending perse-
cution than that in the preceding chapter or in i. 26. Sihler (173)
thinks, however, that the persecution has not yet begun.
481 Ad, salutarem deum.
482 The historian, Flavius Arrianus, a Bithynian born ca. 95 A, D.,
was a pupil and friend of the Stoic philosopher Epictetus (ca. 60-
140 A. D.), whose lectures he copied down and later published.
The present passage is printed as fr. 181 in the Schweighauser edition
of Epictetus, as fr. Xa in the edition by Schenkl.
483 Volumus (Reifferscheid) is better than molimur (Meiser,
Marchesi); yonimus (Kroll); novimus (Wiman).
484 The explicit of Book Two and the intipit of Book Three are
as follows: ARNOUII ADUERS NATIONES LIB. II EXP. INCIPIT LIB,
III. This is the only place in the manuscript where the title of the
work appears.
BOOK THREE
In the estimation of its author (cf. 2. i and 3. 2) Book Three
marks a resumption of his main theme after the digression on the
mortality of the soul which consumes most of Book Two, and is
principally devoted to a vigorous attack on the anthropomorphic
conception of the pagan gods.
Here and there are passages which suggest some dependence upon
Cicero and there are scholars who believe that Cornelius Labeo is
one of Arnobius' sources in this Book (see the remarks on that
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 349
shadowy figure in the Introduction, 38-40). While Friedrich Tullius
generally confines his attention in his dissertation, Die Quellen des
Arnobius im 4., 5. und 6. Buck seiner Schrift Adversus Nationes
(diss. Berlin: Bottrop i. W. 1934), to later Books, he concludes
(73) that the real source in Books Three and Four was not Labeo
but a theological manual in existence as early as roo A. D>, not
written by M. Terentius Varro.
1 Rapisarda (Clemente i) thinks this an allusion to Minucius
Felix, Tertullian, and Cyprian, and he is probably right.
2 Probably a reference to 2. i although paulo ante might seem to
imply something still more recent.
3 Reading nostris (wris) for vestris (tins) with Axelson.
4 Alia numinum capita (Rigaltius) for alienum capita (P). The
statement in the previous sentence holds good only if such gods
as are mentioned really do exist On this question, see Introd. 30-33.
The discussion there should be kept clearly in mind throughout the
reading of this Book.
5 Etsi (Klussmann and Reifferscheid) for et (P, Marchesi); Was-
senberg would delete et.
6 Micka (43) cites this passage as referring to demons and says
that Arnobius found it difficult to come to a decision concerning
them.
7 Plebs. This passage seems to Micka (43 n. 10) to imply the
existence of other deities (cf. 7, 23). He also believes that the phrases
deus princeps (2. 2) and deus primus (2. 6) imply the existence of
other gods. Perhaps so in the latter instance but in the former
princeps need mean nothing more than that God is the Beginning.
8 The day of purification (dies lustricus) for Roman males was the
ninth, for females the eighth, after birth. On this day they also
received their name. Cf. Macrobius, Sat. 1,16.36; Festus, xoyf.
(Lindsay). For Greeks it was the tenth. Cf. also F. J. Dolger, Ant.
u. Christ, i (1929) 1 88.
9 Videbatis (P and Marchesi); videratis (Meursius, Reifferscheid).
10 Popularis vulgaritas.
11 Here the MS has popularem which, as it is meaningless as it
stands, has been omitted, following bracketing by Ursinus, Casti-
glioni, and Marchesi. Zink thinks something omitted; Reifferscheid
indicates a crux. Other suggestions: populares (Sabaeus), populatim
(Rigaltius), propriatim (Wensky), eorum (for eos) populum (Pas-
cal), populari censura . , , dicit (Meiser), personaliter (Wassenberg).
350 NOTES
12 An exceedingly corrupt passage which Marches! prints as fol-
lows: unde tamen vobis f quae nominibus huius censum complent
f an sint aliqiii vobis incogniti neque in usum aliquando notitiamque
yerlati? Wiman improves a great deal by changing as follows:
quae^sOj est scire, ordinis hine, qui noti sunty nominibus, huius
censum comple^a^nt an sint, etc. Compleant is due to Salmasius;
Meursius first suggested quaeso.
13 Usus is here taken by Orelli and accepted by Marches! as
equivalent to cultus, but Meursius and Reifferscheid read visum
(sight).
14 Numero for numeri (Bastgen).
15 In rerum natiira, a Lucretian echo.
16 Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 30. 84: numerus . . . deorum autem
innumerabilis.
17 Alii [et] ceteri, a characteristic of the overdone synonym,
repeated in alia cetera (6. n).
18 On the question of the existence of the pagan gods, see Introd.
PP- 3-3-
19 Illam appears to be the MS reading and ilia in Marches! a
misprint.
20 Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 34. 95: nam quod et maris deos et
feminas esse dicitis; Lactantius, Div> inst. i. 16.
21 Homines 'pectoris vivi.
22 M. Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.) was first called disertissimus
in a poetic note by Catullus 49. 1-3:
Disertissime Romuli nepotum,
Quot sunt quotque fuere, Marce Tulli,
Quotque post aliis erunt in annis.
Arnobius mentions him again in 3, 7 and 5. 38. Cf. Tertullian, ApoL
ii. 16: eloquentior Tullio.
23 Secundas ut dicitur actiones. Cf. Horace, Epist. i. 18. 14.
24 Aucupia verborum, a phrase which means literally, " setting
snares for, catching at words as if they were birds/' is used by Cicero
himself (Pro Caec. 23.65; Orat. 25.84; 58,197, in these last:
delectationis aucupiurn*).
25 De hoc is taken by Orelli to be the equivalent of yrofter hoc
(a meaning of de which is well-attested), but this would imply that
Cicero's writings were criticized for their verbal brilliance, a point
that seems very unlikely. The alternative is to render the phrase,
as do Bryce-Campbell, as "on this subject," the antecedent being
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 351
vaguely the skeptical position taken by Cicero in the De natura de-
arum, mentioned in the preceding chapter, rather than aucupia
verborum splendoremque sermonis.
26 Livy (40.29) records that in 181 B.C. a chest containing
certain books of religious and philosophic character was discovered
in a field below the Janiculum. These books were forged on the
name of Numa Pompilius, second king of Rome (cf. Livy i. ipf.).
Because of their Pythagorizing tendency, thought subversive of the
Roman religion, they were burnt in conspectu populi by decree o
the Senate. Cf. Plutarch, Numa 22; Val. Max. i. i. 12; Pliny, Nat.
hist. 13. 13. 84-7; Wissowa 68.
27 Arnobius returns to this subject of sex among the gods in 7. 19.
Cf. Lactantius, Epit. 6.
28 Lactantius, Div. inst. i. 8, takes the view that God has no body
and needs no sex; in i. 16 that beings who have sex cannot be gods.
20 Cf. A. Gellius 2. 28. 3: Eas ferias si quis polluisset piaculoque
ob hanc rem opus esset, hostiam " si deo, si deae " immolabant, idque
ita ex decreto pontificum observaturn esse M. Varro dicit, quoniam
et qua vi et per quern deorum dearumve terra tremeret incertum esset.
80 Cf. Cicero, De nat. dear. 2. 23. 59 f., where it is stated cate-
gorically that the gods do not have bodies. Earlier the Epicurean
spokesman (Ibid. i. 33. 92) has stated that the gods have no need of
limbs or organs, and there is a considerable passage (1.35.93) on
the question of the parts of the bodies of gods. Moreover, Zeno the
Stoic is cited as having stated the belief that the gods have only
semblance of body (i. 25. 71). In i. 27. 77 it is admitted that the
gods are represented in human form.
81 In significata et generum disiunctione (Marches!); insignificatam
esse generum disiunctionem (Reifferscheid), neither of which is
very clear.
82 Cicero, De nat. deor. a. 50. 127) makes the same point more
succinctly, fn this chapter Arnobius is thinking of sex; in i. 59 of
grammatical gender.
83 Sufficere prolem. Cf. Vergil, Georg. 3, 65; Lucretius 3. 704.
84 Reading supter (Castiglioni and Marchesi) for the MS super
(above). Other noteworthy suggestions: superi et inferi, gods above
and below (Pascal); superbas leges, proud laws (Wiman).
86 Cf, Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 33. 92: Habebit igitur linguam deus
et non loquetur, dentes palatum fauces nullum ad usum; quaeque
procreationis causa natura corpori adfinxit ea frustra habebit deus.
86 Reading improbum in illis lusum ludere, Haupt's correction,
NOTES
accepted by Reifferscheid. Kroll rightly criticizes Marchesi's version
(im'pro'vidam in illis suam ludere) as impossible. If improbum . . .
lusum is wrong, then inprovidentiam (the MS has imyrovida . . .
suam) is much better than improvidam. Of the other suggestions
none seems quite satisfactory.
87 Orelli takes this actively, " to cause an abortion," perhaps rightly.
38 Chalcidicis. Cl. 4.33. According to Platner-Ashby in, 603,
the Chalcidicum in Rome was an annex to the Curia Julia built by
Augustus and a sort of portictis, perhaps a repository for records.
Here the reference is by no means so specific : a part of the heavenly
curia is used for the whole. Cf. A. Mau, "Chalcidicum/' RE 3
(1899) 2039-42.
39 Despite his great indebtedness to Lucretius, this is the sole
reference in Arnobius to the Epicurean poet by name. Cf. Lucretius
4, 1 1 68: at tumida et mammosa ' Ceres ' est ' ipsa ab laccho/
40 A Hellenistic deity, son of Aphrodite and Dionysus, whose cult
originated at Lampsacus on the Hellespont. He was a god of
fruitfulness with whom art and literature (Prapea) often associated
lewdness in its crudest form. He was also used by the Romans as
a sort of scarecrow: cf. Horace, Serin, i. 8, and Lactantius, Div. inst.
2. 4. 1-4. See F. Cumont, DA 4. 645-7; O. Jessen, LM 3. 2967-90.
41 On Juno Lucina, the goddess of childbirth, see W. H. Roscher,
"luno," LM 2.581-5.
42 Cf. Tertullian, Apol. 15. 7: ... nescio, ne plus de vobis dei
vestri quam de Christianis querantur.
43 Cf. 1.3, 15-20.
44 The word (theologi) is also used of pagan writers in 4. 14, 15,
1 8 (ter), 5. 5, 8. See Cicero, De nat. deor. 3. 21. 53 f,
45 Gabarrou (^Oeuvre 65) cites on this chapter P. de Labriolle,
"Le cas d'Amobe," Revue de Frit? our g 40 (1909) 744 f., an article
not available to me unless it be identical with a section bearing the
same title in his Histoire de la literature latine chr&tienne i (3rd ed, 7
Paris 1947) 276 f.
46 On forms of gods, cf. Cicero, De nat. deor, i. 1.2; i. 12. 41:
Xenophon [Mem. 4. 3. 13] . . , facit Socratem disputantem formam
dei quaeri non oportere; i. 29. 80: Si una omnium fades est, florere
in caelo Academiam necesse est; si enim nihil inter deum et deum
differt, nulla est apud deos cognitio, nulla perceptio; i. 29. 81; where
much is said about specific appearances. See also Minucius 19. 13;
Lactantius, De ira Dei n. 13.
47 Miclca (75 f.) maintains that Arnobius had a poor opinion of
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 353
the Old Testament, citing de Labriolle 256 f. (= 3 rd ed.: 1.2,79^),
Moricca 1.611. LeNourry (ML 5.453) appears to divide Jewish
writings into two classes, those of the Sadducees, not pertaining
to Christianity, and the Old Testament, but Micka is rightly
unimpressed,
48 Bryce-Campbell are right in saying that Arnobius evidently con-
fuses the skeptical Pharisees with their opponents, the Sadducees
and Talmudists. Cf. E. G. Hirsch, "God," The Jewish Encyd.
6. 3-12,. The most recent works on the Pharisees are L. Finkelstein,
The Pharisees (Philadelphia 1938) and R. T. Herford, The Pharisees
(New York 1924). Cf. H. L. Strack-P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum
Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch 4 (Munich 1928)
334-52: 'Die Pharisaer und Sadduzaer in der altjiidischen Literatur.'
49 Reading tribuamus et nos (with the editors) for the MS tribuant
et nos. Salrnasius corrected nos to os ('they attribute shape and
countenance J ); Wiman and Kroll prefer annos (' shape and years ')-
50 For auctoritate of the MS Brakman prefers antiquitate and
Lofstedt ut (?) vetera, both having allusion to the authority of more
ancient testimony. Wirnan's suggestion: et revelat^ionis^ certa
antiqua auctoritate does not seem very good.
61 FilumcL Lucretius 2,. 341 (and Bailey, ad Zoo.), 4. 88, 5. 571,
5. 589; TLL 6. 763, citing Plautus, Merc. 755; Lucilius, fr. 816;
Nonius 313; Varro, De ling. lat. 10. 4, and others.
02 Cf. Lucretius 3. 220 f. (and Bailey, ad loc.); 4. 647.
53 Collectum. Marchesi declines to attempt a correction. Meiser
suggests con-fectum 'made'); Kistner thinks the place desperate.
Reifferscheid has colli erectum (' upright on the neck ')
54 Orelli quaintly remarks : " Eleganter comparat Arnobius nares
cum imbrice, id est tegula cava, quae tectis applicatur, ut per earn
defluat aqua, Dachrinne, Dachtraufe" Cf, also Cicero, De nat.
deor. 2. 57. 143; Aristotle, Hist, animal, i. n; Lactantius, De op. Dei
10.
65 The three kinds: (i) TO/*C, <primores (Pliny, Nat. hist. 7. 16)
or p-aecisores (Isidore, Etym. u. i. 52,) modern incisors; (2) KWO-
Soi/w, canini (Isidore, loc. cit.) canines or cuspids; (3) yojufrloi or
jtcuXot, molar es (Isidore), mollientes (Pliny), genuini (Cicero, De nat.
deor. 2. 54. 134) molars.
50 Arnobius' physiology is Ciceronian. Cf. De nat. deor. 2. 55. 138:
et sanguis per venas in omne corpus diffunditur et spiritus per
arterias; utraeque autem crebrae multaeque toto corpore intextae
vim quandam incredibilem artificiosi operis divinique testantur; A.
Gellius 1 8. 10.
354 NOTES
57 Eating, instead, ambrosia and drinking nectar. Cf . Book One,
n. 88.
68 Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 29. 80.
59 Here Arnobius imitates Cicero (jbid.*) : Ecquos si non tarn
strabones et paetulos esse arbitramur, ecquos naevum habere, ecquos
silos flaccos frontones capitones, quae sunt in nobis, but as usual sows
with the sack. Note how many of these descriptive adjectives and
phrases were used by the Romans for nomlna and cognomina:
Capito, Gilo (cf. cilunculus*), Pronto, Labeo, Men to, Naevius,
Nasica, Macer (cf. -macilentus*), Crassus, Crispus (cf. crisyulus),
Calvus (cf. activities'), Glabrio (cf. glabritas'), Aquila (from Aquilus
or aquilcf), Caesius, Ra villa (cf. ravus'). For a contrast drawn be-
tween the bald realism of Roman nomenclature and the idealism and
beauty found in Greek personal names, see J. C. Plumpe, " What's
in a Greek or Roman Personal Name," CZass. Bulletin 13 (1937)
57 f-
60 At this point P reads in his (translated earlier in the sentence
as "among them") but Reifferscheid changes to simos C having
snubbed noses '), without palaeographic probability; though, if he
is right, Roman comedy has a proper name, Simo, to match.
61 Here the text is defective, reading sacrivoces which, besides
being unattested, would have no sense C holy-voiced ') The trans-
lation follows Salmasius' conjecture of saccibucces. Acrivoces, the
conjecture of Reifferscheid, seems hardly better than sacrivoces.
62 Rightly bracketed by Marchesi, omitted by Reifferscheid, as a
MS reduplication not fitting the sense.
^ 3 By curious coincidence there has been preserved to our day at
Pompeii an instance of divine beings represented in art as fullers.
These are the cupids painted on the wall of a room in the house of
Cn. Poppaeus Habitus, believed to have been the proprietor of the
neighboring fuller's shop. From these cupids the house formerly was
named the " Casa degli Amorini Dorati." Arnobius, of course, could
have known nothing of these frescoes since they were buried by the
eruption of Vesuvius in 79 A. D. Cf. T. Warscher, Pompeji, ein
Fuhrer durch die Ruinen (Berlin-Leipzig 1925) 103-8, and her
English Pompeii (Rome 1930) 89-101; A. Mau, Pompeii, its Life
and Art (New York 1902) 333; A. Mau-W, Barthel, Fuhrer durch
Pompeii (5th ed., Leipzig 1910) 77-9.
64 Rudes, a term used by St. Augustine in his De catechizandis
rudfbus (see ACW 2. 4) for prospective converts.
05 Aenigmata, Cf. Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 5, 7. 41,2 ft
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 355
Scharnagl (31) lists this word among those which have unusual
senses in Arnobius.
res (cf. Scharnagl). See also 5.26 (rebus atque
omsis); 7. 3 (amsis et rebus*).
67 Accipiant, cf. 7.22: accipienda.
68 Animalis, the point being that there is little difference between
worshipping a dumb animal and a human being.
* 9 Nisi forte, etc., a favorite introduction, conveying irony or
sarcasm, to objections attributed to the opponents, occurs fourteen
times: 2.6, 2.39, 3.16, 3.23, 4.4, 4.19, 5.4, 5. Io , 5.36, 5.42,
6. 22, 6. 23, 7. 3, 7. 4 8.
70 Cf . Xenophanes of Colophon in Clement of Alexandria, Strom.
5- X 4- I0 9- 3 [=f r - 15 Diels]: 'Now if oxen <and horses> or lions
had hands so as to limn with these hands and make the works of
art that men make, then would they limn their gods-horses like
unto horses and oxen unto oxen-and sculpt them in the manner of
the frame they themselves bear.' Cf. Eusebius, Pra&p. ev. 13. 13
(MG 21. ii2iB); Theodoret, Grace, aff. cur. 3. 49 (MG 83. 885AB).
71 Curiously enough, Tertullian (ApoZ. 16.1-4; Ad nat> i- n)
reports the slander against the Christians that they did worship an
ass's head. Cf . also Minucius 9. 3, 28. 7. Whether Arnobius chose
to make this supposition because he had read these predecessors, we
cannot, of course, be certain, but they are strongly supported by
the discovery in 1856 on the Palatine Hill in Rome, in a building
along the western side known as the domus Gelotiana or the
Paedagogium, i. e. a school for pages in the imperial household, of a
graffito representing a caricature of the Crucifixion. It is a figure
with an ass's head hanging on the cross and adored by a youth
standing on the left. Underneath are the words: AAEEAMENO3
3EBETE TON EON (" Alexamenos worships his god"). See G.
Lugli, The Classical Monuments of Rome and its Vicinity i (trans.
by G. Bagnani, Rome 1929) 294-6, with a photograph; the same,
Roma Antica: il centro monumentale (Rome 1946) 52,1-3. For ready
reference, see also M. M. Hassett, "Ass/' Cath. Encycl. i (1907)
793; H. Leclercq, "Croix et crucifix," DACL 3.2 (1914) 3050-56.
The figure on the cross has been thought by some to represent not
Christ but the Egyptian god Seth.
72 Nurna Pompilius, second king of Rome.
78 More probably M. Porcius Cato of Tusculum (234-149 B. C.)
than his great-grandson who died a suicide at Utica in 46 B. C.
74 The allusion is undoubtedly to Ennius, quoted by Cicero, De
356 NOTES
nat. deor. 1.35.97 [= Sat. 23 Warmington] : atque, ut Ennius,
( simia quam similis turpissima bestia nobis.' Ennius is also men-
tioned and by name in 4. 29. Cf . W. C. McDermott, The Ape in
Antiquity (Johns Hopkins Univ. Stud, in Archaeology 27, Baltimore
1938) 141.
75 Micka (158 n. 15) professes to see correspondence between this
chapter and Lactantius, De op. Dei 17. 6.
76 Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. i. 31. 88.
77 The adversary is doubtless thinking in polytheistic terms, but
Arnobius answers him in monotheistic, as in the preceding chapter,
where the fact is a little more certain.
78 Lactantius, Div. inst. i. 18.21, carries this reductio ad absur-
dwn still further by suggesting that the pagans should worship gods
who are potters and shoemakers. Cf. also Epit. 2. 7.
79 E. g. Vulcan.
80 E. g. Aesculapius.
81 E. g. the fates who spin the thread of life.
82 Meursius found difficulty in nautas, since Neptune, though
having dominion over the sea, is not strictly a sailor. He therefore
suggested naccas = fullones, but no modern editor follows him. Cf .
the Castors and Portunus, sea divinities.
83 Apollo.
8 ' A Pan.
85 Diana.
8G Pan or Faunus.
87 Ceres, Pales. Marcliesi makes this sentence interrogatory,
88 Apollo, Zeus, Themis.
88 The MS and Marchesi read ceteri enitn dii non sunt to which
both Lofstedt (Arnobiana 79) and Wiman (Eranos 45 [1947] 142),
perhaps rightly, object. Both maintain that a word in the sense of
musici (Reifferscheid) is needed and the former inserts it after sunt,
while the latter suggests ceteri enim melici [or melii] non sunt.
Though I do not feel absolutely certain that the sentence must be
balanced, I tentatively suggest that dii may be at fault and should
have been di^ymyi. Confirmation may perhaps be supplied by the
fact that in Book Two (cf. n. 375) Arnobius has three examples of
the use of deus - divinus, deae divinae. The present use of dii
may be really a case in point, and represent no more than dii
divini, even when divinus means not * divine J but ' diviner/ See
Vigiliae Christianae 3 ( r 949) 44 f.
80 Lactantius, Div. inst i. n. 9 f., makes the same point, referring
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 357
to the fact that Jupiter refrained from a union with Thetis because
an oracle had foretold that her son would he greater than his father.
He also mentions Themis as foretelling to Jupiter events which he
would otherwise not have known. In ibid. i. 13. 4 he asks, apropos
of Saturn's attempt to prevent his son from becoming greater than
himself as a result of a similar oracle: cur enim responsum ab alio
potius accepit?
91 Mercury. Cf. 3.21.
92 Bryce-Campbell and von Besnaxd make the remaining sentences
of this chapter interrogatory. The nine subordinate clauses beginning
with ' that * (ut) prove them wrong, since these clauses answer the
initial question,
93 Arnobius is in harmony with the prevailing tradition that the
number of the Muses was nine, the second and third sets listed by
Cicero, De nat. deor. 3.21.54, which were, respectively, the
children either of Jupiter and Mnemosyne or of Pierus and Antiope
(cf. Pierides, Pieriae). The first set were four in number: Thelxinoe,
Aoede, Arche, and Melete, and were children of Cicero's " second
Jupiter." Cf. O. Bie, LM 2. 3238-95.
94 Scitulae but Oehler and Reifferscheid read scitule (' gracefully ')
with great probability.
85 In sidereis motibus : an obscure phrase which Sabaeus attempts
to change to montibus, Meursius to monies. The context suggests
that, whether the passage is corrupt or not, it denotes a place where
Diana, the moon goddess (cf. GIL 6. 124, Wissowa 251) may
conduct her hunts. Hence, the meaning must approximate "the
moon among the stars."
90 Apollo, son of Latona.
87 Apollo was inspired by Zeus, who in turn owed certain knowl-
edge of the future to Themis; cf. Lactantius, Div. inst. i. n. 10.
98 Diomedes wounded Aphrodite (Iliad 5, 334-42). Cf. also 4. 21,
4.25.
09 Aesculapius, whose chief seat of worship was at Epidaurus.
His cult was introduced in Rome in 292 B. C.
100 In the Iliad 18 Hephaestus (= Vulcan) appears as the forger
of the new shield of Achilles designed to replace the one stolen by
Hector from Patroclus.
101 Minerva, so called after several rivers (in Arcadia, Boeotia,
Crete) named Triton with which the myth of her birth was con-
nected. Cf. Vergil, Aen. 5. 704; Ovid, Met. 2. 783; 5. 250; 5. 270;
6. i; Fasti 6. 655. See also H. Kruse, " Tritogeneia," RE 2 R. 7. i.
(1937) M4 > r tne older version of her origin from the sea.
358 NOTES
102 Mercury, grandson of Atlas through his mother Maia. Cf .
Horace, Carm. i. 10. i; Rapisarda, Arnob. 242.
103 An obvious truth often lost sight of by modern educators.
104 Cf. Cicero, De not. deor. 1.32.90: di enim semper fuerunt,
nati numquam sunt, siquidem aeterni sunt futuri.
105 Note the caution of this sentence which prevents the point from
being disproven if the pagan gods are not really immortal.
106 It is maintained by W. Kahl, " Cornelius Labeo, ein Beitrag
zur spatromischen Litteraturgeschichte," PMol Suppl. 5 (1889)
720-5, that Arnobius uses Cornelius Labeo as his source in this and
the following chapter.
107 In the text as preserved by the MS no name of a divinity
appears: per maria tutissimas praestat commeantfbus navigationes,
but a corrector of the MS reads permarini for per maria which Oehler
suggested, perhaps independently, as equal to " sea gods," thus pro-
viding a subject for the verb. Sabaeus, however, inserted Portunus
(Matuta's son) after praestat. Reifferscheid inserted Mater Matuta
after maria and this is accepted by both Brakman and Marches!,
though they omit Mater. Both of them cite Cicero, Tusc. i. 12. 28,
where, however, nothing is said of Matuta as a sea-goddess. Nor does
Marchesi's reference to Lucretius 5. 654 (really 656) help out. But
his final reference, in which he alludes to Ovid, Fasti 6.543-7 (cf.
Frazer's note ad loc., vol. 4. 287-90), provides what is needed:
Nunien eris pelagi, natum quoque pontus habebit.
In vestris aliud sumite nomen aquis :
Leucothea Grais, Matuta vocabere nostris;
In portus nato ius erit omne tuo,
Quern nos Portunum, sua lingua Palaemona dicet.
It must be remembered, however, that palaeographically Matuta has
no support whatever.
108 Beginning at this chapter and continuing well into Book Four,
Arnobius appears to be following some source unknown to us, which
he exploits in an unsystematic fashion, since some of the gods re-
appear in Book Four. According to Kroll (66 ff.), this consisted of
(a) a source of unknown character; (b) an antiquarian source; and
(c) Cornelius Labeo, in whom Kroll recognizes Varronian elements,
Tullius (68) is inclined to think only one source involved, one
which R. Agahd, " M. Tercnti Varronis rerum divinarum libri L
XIV, XV, XVI," Jahrb. f. klass. PMol, Suppl. 24 (1898) 123,
thinks is Labeo. But Tullius (68 f .) is very skeptical of the theory
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 359
that Labeo was the source, chiefly because the principal connection
between Labeo and Arnobius is the distinction between numina hona
et mala which can be found in other possible sources. Analysis
of all the passages leads Tullius (73 f .) to the conclusion that the
real source was a systematic treatment of pagan theology by an
unknown author belonging at the latest to the first century A. D.,
since all the authorities cited by Arnobius in the section involved
belong to the end of the Republic or first half of the first century
A. D. The author was, according to him, neither Varro nor Labeo.
109 P has sedj an excellent reading which Gelenius, followed by
the editors, changed to et on the basis of an assumed parallelism with
the later phrases.
110 Consus was an ancient agrarian divinty, god of crops and their
safe transfer into bin and granary. His proper sphere of patronage
was early forgotten and misinterpreted: because on his feast day, the
Consualia, races with horses and mules took place, he came to be
regarded as a god of horses; and because his name (derived from
condere) was given a wrong etymology (Consus = deus consilii),
he came to be regarded so here by Arnobius as a god of counsel,
secret planning, etc. See Wissowa 201-3; A, Aust, "Consus," no. 2,
RE 4 (1901) 1147 f.
111 On Pales see G. Wissowa, LM 3.1276-80; on Inuus, H.
Steuding, LM 2. 262 f .
112 The MS here reads genetrix but Ursinus changed to meretrix,
probably on the basis of Lactantius, Div. inst. i , 20. 6; Minucius
25. 8, where Flora is clearly so called. Cf. H. Steuding, LM i. 1483-
7. Flora is mentioned again in 7. 33.
113 There is no special subject for adurit in P and Wassenberg
supplies ardor but Orelli cites abundant evidence (e. g. Vergil,
Georg. 1.93; Ovid, Fasti 1.680; Silius 4.68; Tacitus, Ann. 13.35)
to show that this verb can be used of cold and heat as well.
114 Apollo.
115 Edelstein-Edelstein, Testim. 343, vol. 2, p. 140.
110 Originally ceroma meant the oil used to anoint the body of the
wrestlers, then was extended to the place and even to the combat
itself. Cf. TLL 3. 877; Rapisarda, Amok 211.
117 An unfair objection on Arnobius' part. No solution of this
fundamental dualism in competition was achieved until the last cen-
tury when Alice in Wonderland said, " All have won and all shall
have prizes/* For another aspect of the same problem, see 4. 4.
118 Praesidatus,
360 NOTES
119 An allusion to Arnobius' recent conversion. Cf. i. 39.
120 Rex poll
121 Added here by Lofstedt, following Ursinus who also balances
servis with ingenuis, which Reifferscheid accepts, though Lofstedt
and Marchesi do not. Cf. also Weyman 390-2.
122 Fessis rebus: cf. also. i. 25, i. 28, and the notes.
123 Unxia and Cinxia were epithets given to Juno as the pro-
tectress of the bride in marriage. As the bride entered the house of
her husband, she consecrated herself to Juno Unxia by fastening
wool around the doorposts and anointing them with oil and fat.
As Cinxia the goddess presided over the untieing of the cingulum,
the girdle: she was to guard the bride's fidelity to her husband. See
Martianus Capella 2. 149. For Unxia, cf, H. Steuding, " Indigita-
menta," LM 2. 227; for Cinxia, Steuding, ibid. 2. 195; for both,
W. H, Roscher, " luno," ibid. 2. 589; L. v. Preller, Romische
Mythologie 2 (3rd ed, by H. Jordan, Berlin 1883) 2I 7* See also
below, 7. 21.
124 On Victua, see R. Peter, " Indigitamenta," LM 2.231.
125 On Potua, see Peter, ibid. 2,217. Doubtless these four di
indigetes were for illustration as examples of the ridiculous lengths
to which the old Roman religion went.
126 Kroll takes this passage to be from his " antiquarian source,"
while Agahd thinks it comes from Labeo.
127 Cf. the Epicurean position in Cicero, De nat. deor. r. 16.42:
. . . et quae poetarum vocibus fusa ipsa suavitate nocuerunt, qui et
ira inflammatos et libidine furentes induxerunt deos feceruntque
ut eorum bella proelia pugnas vulnera videremus, odia praeterea
discidia discordias, ortus interims, querellas lamentationes, effusas
in omni intemperantia libidines, adulteria vincula cum humano
genere concubitus mortalisque ex inmortali procreates, Cf, also 2. 28,
70: deorum cupiditates aegritudines iracundias.
128 Cf. 4. 24. See G. Wissowa, "Laverna," LM 2, 1917 f.
129 On Bellona, see A. Procksch, LM i. 774-7. Cf. i. 28.
180 Discordia is the Latin translation of the Greek Eris see W, H,
Roscher, LM 1. 1179, and on Eris, W. Deeckc, ibid* 1337-9. It is
also the Latin designation of an Etruscan goddess in the third region
of the heavenly temple of Martianus Capella (i. 45 ff.). See Dcccke,
ibid. i. 1139.
131 See A. Rapp, "Furiae," LM 1. 1159-64.
*Laeva numina: according to Kettner (8), Boehm (45), Miil-
leneisen (35), and Rohricht (Seelenlehre 31 f.), the source of this
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 361
chapter is Cornelius Labeo, since we know from Augustine (De civ.
Dei 2. ii, 3.25) that Labeo made the distinction between numina
lona and numina mala. But Tullius (68 f .) cited evidence that other
sources also made the same distinction and he therefore is skeptical
of Labeo as the source here. On gods of the left (laeva numina),
see also 4. 5, 7. 23, and Introd. pp. 38-40.
133 Most editors since Meursius have made this future (and in
5. r9 also), but Marchesi, following Brakman, preserves the present
of the MS in both places.
134 Cupidines. Cf. 4. 15.
135 Cf . Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 28. 70.
136 Concitor (Hildebrand, Kroll, Marchesi) for the MS conditor
(Reifferscheid). Cf. F. M. Heichelheim, "Mars," RE 14 (1930)
1919-64.
13T E. g., Eteocles and Polyneices in Aeschylus, Septem c. Thebas.
138 The figure is taken from the ripping open of the seam of a
garment.
139 If Arnobius is thinking in this clause and the following of any
well-known example, the allusion may be to the Oedipus legend.
x * Vm. Heraldus remarks that Arnobius is here speakina like
O i O
a Stoic.
141 E. g. 7 Phaedra in Euripides, Hiffolytus 777. It is quite possible
that here Arnobius means no specific example, known to history or
literature, but the general prevalence of suicide among adherents of
a faith that offered no hope of immortality as the reward for
righteous living.
142 Dido would doubtless be present in the mind of any African
as a famous example of this rather unusual method of suicide.
^ 3 Cf. Ovid, Her. 15. 164 ff.
144 Constantiam (P, Marchesi), substantia-m (Reifferscheid) but
Marchesi points out that constantia = essentia, Cf . also Scharnagl
(31); Lucretius i, 581 : constant = sunt; M. Zink, Fleckeiseris Jakrb.
in (1875) 869.
145 Epicurean theology.
140 According to Kahl (725) chapters 29-42 owe much to Cornelius
Labeo. So also Rohricht (Seelenlekre 35), but he admits the proof
is lacking,
147 Interioris: the figure may be taken from the wine cellar where
the older, and therefore the better, wine is in the jars farthest from
the front. Cf. Horace, Carm. 2. 3. 8: interiore nota Falerni.
148 See 1.36.
362 NOTES
149 Cf. Ovid, Fasti i. 117 ff.; Macrobius, Sat. i. 9; Joannes Lydus,
De mens. i , f .
150 The beginning of the day was sacred to him, hence he was
called Janus Matutinus; the beginning of the year was dedicated to
him, hence the name January. Cf. Martial 8. 2. i; Lucan 5. 6. As
people begin the year with January, so Arnobius begins with Janus.
151 A contemporary of Cicero, the scholar P. Nigidius Figulus,
thought that Janus was originally a sun-god; see Macrobius, Sat.
i. 9. 5 ff.; Wissowa 108.
152 On Caelus, see H. Steuding, LM i. 844 f; on Hecate, see W. H.
Roscher, ibid. 1.1885-1910. Cf. Cicero, De nat. dear. 2.24.63;
3.17.44.
153 Historically, the Janiculum was not a town, though its name
parallels those of some towns (e. g. Tusculum, Otriculum) but a hill,
the largest and most important of those opposite the site of primitive
Rome. In Vergil, Aen. 8. 358, and Ovid, Fasti i. 245, it is called an
arx which is what we should expect here. Cf . R. Gall, " laniculum,"
RE 9 (1916) 691 f. It seems hardly possible that Arnobius could
have had personal acquaintance with the Eternal City and still make
this mistake. He may have derived the error from a careless reading
of Minucius 21. 6: Itaque latebram suam, quod tuto latuisset, vocari
maluit Latium, et urbem Saturniam idem de suo nomine et laniculum
lanus ad memoriam uterque posteritatis reliquerunt. If he thought
that the word urbem applied equally to Saturn and Janus, then
Janiculum might become an oypidum. But note that in 4. 24 he tells
this same story about Saturn's giving his name to Latium (derived
from latere) and there does not include the derivation of Saturnia
from Saturn. Cf. Tertullian, AyoL 10. 8; Lactantius, Div. inst.
i- I3-9; 5-5-9-
154 On this god of springs, see H. Steuding, " Fons," LM i. 1496-8.
The form in Arnobius (Fontt) is taken by Steuding to be a genitive
and this gives rise to a nominative Fontus, but the god was elsewhere
called Fons, though there is epigraphic evidence for the nominative
as Fontanus (CIL 2. 150; 10. 6071). Cf. also Cicero, De leg. 2. 22.
56; De nat. dear. 3. 20. 52.
155 See G. Wissowa, "Volturnus," LM 6.370; G. Lafaye, DA
5. 965.
150 On Juturna, goddess of springs, see G. Wissowa, LM 2. 762-4.
157 Cf. Ovid, Fasti i. 171-4:
Mox ego: ' Cur, quamvis aliorum numina placern,
lane, tibi primum tura merumque fero? >
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 363
' Ut possis aditum per me, qui limina servo,
Ad quoscumque voles' inquit ' habere deos.'
Cf. also Frazer's note ad loc., vol. 2. in; Macrobius, Sat. i. 9.
158 Mensum may be taken either as the participle of metior or the
genitive plural of mensis, but mensum = mensium is well-attested in
early Latin which Arnobius is fond of imitating.
150 The Greek word xp^os- means ' time/ whereas the word Kpovos,
the name of the Greek father of Zeus (= Jupiter, son of Saturn) is
identical with it save for the aspiration of the initial letter. Cf.
Cicero, De nat. dear. 2. 24. 63; Plutarch, De Is. et Osir. 32. 363d;
Macrobius, Sat. i. 22. 8; Athenagoras, Apol. 22; Tertullian, Ad nat,
2. 12; Lactantius, Div. inst. i. 12. 9.
160 The phrase may be imitated by Firmicus Maternus, De errore
prof, rel. 16. 2 and 27. 2: perpetua continuatione. Brakman (Miscella
tertia 26) is quite sure Maternus is following Arnobius. See Introd.
p. 52.
161 Accius in Macrobius, Sat. 6. 5. 11; Vergil, Aen. 7. 179.
102 In 6. 12 Saturn is also called the cum obunca falce custos runs.
Cf. Cyprian, Quod, idola dii non sint 2.
163 Kroll (68), Boehm (32) , and Wahl (770) conjecture Labeo as
the source for the identification of Jupiter = Sol but their view is
attacked by Tullius (69).
164 Cf. Macrobius, Sat. 1.2,3. i; A. B. Cook, Zeus i (Cambridge
1914) 400, 429.
105 Plato (Phaedrus 246e-247a) represents Zeus as driving a winged
chariot, arranging all things and caring for all things, followed by
an army of gods in eleven squadrons.
100 Cicero, De nat. dear. i. 15.. 40; 2.28.66; Servius, Aen. 1.47;
Varro, De ling lat. 5. 70; Minucius 19. 10; Augustine, De civ. Dei
4. n,
107 See G. Wissowa, " Ops," LM 3. 931-7.
1<3S Cf. also 4. 25. See Lucretius 2. 624 ff.; Origen, C. Cels. 3. 141;
Athenagoras, A<pol 30; Eusebius, Praep. ev. 3. n. 37.
100 The name c/ H>a contains the same letters as the word <x^/>. See
Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 26, 66; Plutarch, De Is. et Osir. 32. 363d;
Minucius 19. 10; Firmicus Maternus, De errore prof. rel. 4. i;
Athenagoras, Apol 22; Servius, Aen. 7. 311; Augustine, De civ. Dei
4. 10; Macrobius, Sat. 3. 3.
170 Cf. Vergil, Aen. i. 46 f.: lovisque et soror et coniunx; Firmicus
Maternus, De errore prof. rel. 4. i. Regarding the cult-names
mentioned for Juno in the following: Fluvionia (or Fluonia) proba-
24 7
364 NOTES
bly designates Juno as goddess of menstruation (hence also Dea
Mena: cf. Augustine, De civ, Dei 7.2). See Martianus Capella
2. 149; W. H. Roscher, "luno," LM 2. 580 and R. Peter, "Indigita-
menta," ibid., 198 .; G. Wissowa, " Fluonia," RE 6 (1909) 2773 f.
Pomana appears to be a corruption of some cognomen whose
meaning is unknown. See O. Hofer, " Pomana," LM 3. 2747, and
G. Wissowa, " Pomona/' Ibid. 3. 2749. Ossipagina is the reading
here, but in 4. 7 and 4. 8 Ossipago is Canterus' correction of the
reading of P in both instances. Other emendations suggested:
Ossilago, Opigena. The word apparently reflects ossa and pangere,
i. e. the goddess who puts strength into the bones of children.
Februtis, probably from Februlis (Februa): Juno as goddess of
fruitfulness; see Wissowa 185. Populonia, venerated especially by
the Oscans and Sabellians; see Wissowa, ibid. 187 . Cinxia: see
3. 25 and n. 123. Caprotina, Juno as the protectress of woman's sex
life: see Varro, De ling. lat. 6. 18; Macrobius, Sat. 3. 2. 14; see W.
H. Roscher, LM 2. 588; Wissowa 184^
171 At first sight the reference to Granius suggests that Aristotle's
works were not directly known to Arnobius and that he gained his
opinion of the Stagirite entirely through Granius. But Aristotle is
mentioned in 2. 9, and when we compare the following sentence of
Cicero, (Tusc. 1.4.7): Sed ut Aristo teles, vir summo ingenio,
scientia, copia, and another (.ibid. 1,10.22): Aristoteles longe
omnibus Platonem semper excipio praestans et ingenio et diligentia,
with what Arnobius says, we see that the ultimate source is Cicero.
Cf. Lactantius, Div. inst. i. 5. 22.
172 This Granius was either Granius Flaccus or Grarxius Licinianus
if, indeed, these were not one and the same man. See G. Funaioli,
"Granius" nos. i2f., RE 7 (1912) 1819-22. That this sort of
equating of gods began long before the time of Labeo, whenever that
was, is shown by the reference to Aristotle. Cf. Tullius (69); Wis-
sowa (91 ff.) See other references to Granius in 3. 38 f., 6. 7 and
(as Flaccus?) 5. 18. Gabarrou (Qewvre 40) identifies this Granius
with the first-century historian Licinianus and is sure that Arnobius
read Labeo, his proof being the reference to Apollo in 3, 33,
173 Cf. Macrobius, Sat. i. 17.70.
174 Aetheriu-m verticem. Cf. Macrobius, Sat. 3.4.8; 1.17.70;
Augustine, De civ. Dei 7. 16.
175 G. Wissowa, " Minerva," LM 2. 2982 f., cites this and other
attempts to establish etymologies for the name Minerva (older
spelling: Menerva) and declares himself satisfied that the root is
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 365
related to the Sanskrit man and the Greek /-teW, Latin mens, memini,
moneo, etc. as did Orelli long ago. See Festus 109 Lindsay; Macro-
bius, Sat. i. 17; Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 26. 67; 3. 4. 62.
17G Metis (MTT), one of the daughters of Oceanus and Tethys,
according to Hesiod (Theog. 886), the first wife of Zeus and mother
of Athene. See P. Weizsacker, LM 2. 2938-41. Both Sabaeus and a
corrector read Mentis, and their view is supported by the reference
to Mens in 3. 37 and by a fragment of Afranius in A. Gellius 13. 8.
177 The MS reads Victoriae (' of Victory ') which Marchesi corrects
to Victoria est on the ground that Victoria (= NIK^) is a cognomen of
Athene. Reifferscheid suspects a lacuna and suggests something like
socia or genetrix. Brakman suggests Victoria era. Cf. also 4. i.
178 Reading, with Axelson, nulla lovis enata de cerebro, inventrix
oleae nulla, ^nullay, etc. Cf. L. W. Daly, Am. Jour. Phil. 69 (1948)
119.
179 Here Arnobius refers to existing etymologies of the name: e. g.
Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 26. 66 (= Firmicus Maternus, De errore 'prof.
rel. 17.2): Neptunus a nando, "Neptune is derived from 'to
swim ' " (!); cf. also Varro, De ling. lat. 5. 72.
180 In 2. 70 also Pluto is mentioned by this periphrasis.
181 Poseidon 'S&criyQuv or 3 Evo<nya&o?. Orelli thinks Arnobius is here
quoting some tragic or comic poet.
182 Medicurrius (medius + currere) = * one who runs back and
forth/ Arnobius is the earliest of three Christian writers who give
this derivation: Augustine, De civ. Dei 7. 14: nam ideo Mercurius
quasi medius currens dicitur appellatus, quod sermo currat inter
homines medius, etc., repeated in Isidore, Etym. 8. n. 45, who also
reports another derivation (from merx) which is given by Festus
(in Lindsay). Apparently no other author uses the word
medicurrius.
183 Because Mercury = Hermes is the god of eloquence.
18 *Cyllene, Hermes' birthplace, was a lofty mountain in north-
eastern Arcadia.
185 The caduceus, a herald's staff, was the symbol of Mercury. See
H. Steuding, " Mercurius/' LM 2. 2805 f ., illustration on 2825; E.
Samter, "Caduceus," RE 3 (1899) 1170 f. Cf. 4.22, 5.25, 6.25,
and notes ad locc.
180 Cf . Lucretius 2. 993 f , and Bailey ad loc. That this identifica-
tion, Magna Mater (the Asiatic Cybele) terra = Ceres = Vesta,
goes back to Labeo is denied by Tullius (69).
187 The derivation of the name of Ceres from the root gerere = ' to
366 NOTES
bear ' (see Varro, De ling. lat. 5. 64; Cicero, De not. deor. 2. 26. 67,
3. 20. 52, 3. 24. 62) is rejected by T. Birt (LM i. 860) who declares
for the root found in crescere and creare, confirming Orelli's deriva-
tion of cereo - creo.
IBS c pi at0j Phaedrus 147% (Hestia alone remains at home);
Dion. Hal., Ant. row. 2. 50, 64-8; Ovid, Fasti 6. 267 and Frazer's
note ad loc. vol. 4, p. 202; 6. 288 and Frazer's note p. 220; Isidore,
Etym. 8. n. 67 f.
ls9 Arnobius shares the pre-Copernican view of the fixity of the
earth.
190 P. Nigidius Figulus (cf. 3. 40 f.), friend and associate of Cicero
in suppressing the Catilinarian conspiracy, and after Varro, the most
learned of the Romans, was a Pythagorean. See W. Kroll, " Nigi-
dius " no. 2, RE 17 (1936) 200-212; Cumont 152.
191 Cf. Augustine, De civ. Dei 7. 16; Isidore, Etym. 8. 11.40-42.
192 Venus is derived, according to this etymology, from venire (' to
come ') Cf. Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 27. 69; Quae autem dea ad res
omnes veniret, Venerem nostri nominaverunt. Cf. also ibid. 3. 24. 62;
Varro, De ling. lat. 5. 62; Isidore, Etym. 8. n. 76-9.
103 This attempt to derive the name Proserpina from <proser<pinare
('to steal forth') is rightly rejected by J. B. Carter, LM 3. 3141-9,
following H. Usener, "Proserpina/' Rhein. Mus. 22 (1867) 435 >
who derives it from the Greek Tlepcrtcfrvvr) (cf, Cicero, De nat. deor.
2. 26. 66; Isidore, Etym. 8. u; Varro, De ling. lat. 5. 68).
194 Cf. also 4.14, 4.17, 4*2,2, 6.12; Macrobius, Sat. i.i7f.;
Augustine, De civ. Dei 7. 16; Varro, De ling, lat, 5. 68.
195 An allusion to Lucretius' poem? Cf. 1.2, 2. 70, 3. 35.
190 Liber, son of Semele.
197 Apollo.
198 On this epithet of Apollo, see Lactantius, Div. inst. 1.7.9;
Macrobius, Sat. 1.17; Ammianus 22.11; K. Wernicke, "Apollo
Smintheus," RE 2 (1896) 68 f.
199 For the MS tribiali Marchesi suggests triviali (' commonplace ').
Orelli points out that this is probably an allusion to the cognomen
of Diana Trivia. Tullius (69) again denies that Labco can be the
source.
200 Actaeon, son of Aristaeus and Autonoe, a famous Theban
hunter and hero trained by the Centaur Chiron, accidentally, rather
than purposely, as Arnobius implies, saw Artemis on Mount Ci-
thaeron in the circumstances mentioned and was changed by her into
a stag which was pursued and killed by his own fifty hounds. Cf.
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 367
Ovid, Met. 3.1555; Apollodorus, Bill 3,4; Hyginus, Fab. 180;
Fulgentius, Mythol 3.3; G. Wentzel, "Actaeon," RE i (1894)"
1209-12.
201 Cf, Cicero, De not. deor. i. n. 27, who says that Alcmaeon of
Croton attributed divinity to the sun, moon, and other heavenly
bodies and to the soul. Lactantius, Div. inst. 2. 5 f ., is devoted to the
refutation of the view that the stars and planets are gods.
202 Animans, Salmasius' conjecture for the MS animas.
203 Q 4 p} a to ? Timaeus 30; Augustine, De civ. Dei 4. 12, 7. 6;
Lactantius, Div. inst. 2. 6.
204 A reference to the relative recency in which the pagan gods
began to be worshipped. Cf. 2. 71.
205 That is, men deified parts of the universe (e. g. Sol. Luna, etc.)
without change of name.
200 In unius sensus simplicitatemque conflarij but Kistner suggests
^ani-miy sensum, Brakman sensus (fineiri}.
207 Cf. Cicero, De not. deor. 2. 27. 68; 3. 21. 54; Lactantius, Div.
inst. 2. 5; Firmicus Maternus, De errore yrof. rel. 17. i.
208 In rerum natura: see above, n. 195.
200 Vos (Sabaeus), nos (P).
210 The following passage is attributed to Labeo by Kahl (791 ff.)
and Rohricht (Seelenlehre 13), but this is denied by Tullius (70)
who prefers as a source some encyclopedic work.
211 Cf. 7. 22, 7. 32.
212 Not Mnaseas of Berytus but Mnaseas of Patara in Lycia, pupil
of Eratosthenes, who flourished in the 3rd and 2nd centuries B. C.
His fragments are found in C. Mliller, Fragm. gr. hist. 3. 149 f.,
where this is fr. 25a and 25b, See R. Laqueur, " Mnaseas Uerpeus,"
RE 15 (1932) 2250-2,
M Cf. 2. 70.
214 R, Peter, " Mens," LM 2. 2798-2800, thinks that the reference
in this passage is only a translation of Mijrt?. Mens was an ancient
goddess to whom the Romans prayed especially in times of distress,
e, g. after the defeat at Lake Trasimenus, Cf. Tertullian, Ad nat.
2. n; Lactantius, Div. inst. i, 20. 13; Cicero, De nat. deor. 2. 31. 79;
A. Marbach, "Mens," RE 15 (1932) 936 f.
ai This is fragm. 162 of Ephorus ; De inventis in C. Miiller,
Fragm. gr. hist. See E. Schwartz, "Ephoros" no. i, RE 6 (1909)
1-16, Pausanias (9.29.2) gives the three names as M^Xer^, 'AoiS^,
MwJjMiiy. Cf. also Hcsiod, Op. 6; Cicero, De nat. deor. 3. ax. 54: lam
Musae primae quattuor love altero natae, Thelxinoe Aocde Arche
368 .NOTES
Melete, secundae love tertio et Mnemosyne procreatae novem, tertiae
Piero natae et Antiopa, quas Pieridas et Pierias solent poetae appellare,
isdem nominibus et eodem numero quo proxime superiores.
216 Myrtilus (again mentioned in 4. 24) is probably no. 7 (dis-
cussed by R. Hanslik) in the list in RE 16 (1935) 1166. The seven
muses, according to Epicharmus, were Neilous, Tritone, Asopous,
Heptapolis, Achelois, Tipoplous, Rhodia.
217 Orelli thinks this was Crates of Mallos (see W. Kroll, " Crates "
no. 1 6, RE u [1922] 1634-1641) but it seems equally possible that
it was Crates of Athens (ibid. 1633, no. 12) or even Crates of Thebes
(j"bid. 1625-31, no. 6 Stenzel).
218 Cf . Hesiod, Theog. 75-9 : Clio, Euterpe, Thalia, Melpomene,
Terpsichore, Erato, Polyhymnia, Urania, Calliope, and cf. also the
names of the books of Herodotus. See Rapisarda, Arndb. 255.
219 Weak reasoning, since when there is a difference of opinion,
one may be right. Cf . Cicero, De not. deor. 1.2. 5 : Res enim nulla
est de qua tantopere non solum indocti sed etiam docti dissentiant;
quorum opiniones cum tarn variae sint tamque inter se dissidentes,
alterum fieri profecto potest ut earum nulla, alterum certe non potest
ut plus una vera sit.
220 Integrare. Cf. 2. 15.
221 Cf. Cicero, De not. deor. 2. 28. 71 : Cultus autcm deorurn est
optimus idemque castissimus atque sanctissimus plenissimusque
pietatis et eos semper pura integra incorrupta et mcnte ct voce
veneremur.
222 Ephorus.
223 Hesiod.
224 L. Calpurnius Piso Censorius Frugi, consul in 233 B. C., en-
acted the Lex Calptirnia de repetundis and was a writer of annals.
Cf. C. Cichorius, "Calpurnius" no. 96, RE 3 (1899) 1392-5. This
is fragm. 45 in H. Peter, Hist. row. fragm. (Leipzig 1883) p. 86
Hist. rom. rel, i (Leipzig 1914) 138 (on Piso, see ibid, clxxxi-cxcii).
On Novensiles, cf. also 3.39, 3. 42-4; S. Weinstock, "Novensides
di,"RE 17(1936) 1185-9.
225 Here Arnobius is doubtless referring to the Limb nan town of
Trebia (modem Trevi), rather than the place of the same name in
Latium, but locates it erroneously, either from ignorance or from
confusion with Trebula Mutuesca (modern Montelcone) which was
in Sabinis.
226 Cf. 3. 31 and n. 172.
227 L. Aelius Stilo Praeconinus, also mentioned in 3. 39, was a
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 369
Stoic teacher and speechwriter (153-73 B.C.) who taught both
Cicero (for his tribute see Brut. 56. 205-7) an d Varro, and is
mentioned by Varro and Gellius many times. See G. Goetz, " Aelius "
no. 144, RE i (1894) 532 f.
228 M. Terentius Varro, the celebrated antiquarian. See H. Dahl-
mann, " M. Terentius Varro," RE Suppl. 6 (1935) 1172-1277.
229 C. Censorinus, De die nat. 14.
230 Cornificius Longus, a grammarian, is also mentioned in 3. 39.
His date is determined approximately by the fact that he cites
Cicero and and is cited by Verrius Flaccus. Cf. G. Wissowa,
" Cornificius " no. n, RE 4 (1901) 1630 f.
231 T, Manilius, who was senator in 97 B. C. and lived in the age
of Sulla, of whom Pliny, Nat. hist. 10.2.4, says: maximis nobilis
doctrinis doctore nullo. See F. Miinzer, " Manilius " no. 4, RE 14
(1930) 1115.
232 Cf, Pliny, Nat. hist. 2. 53. 138; Seneca, Quaest. nat. 2. 41.
233 L. Cincius Alimentus, also mentioned in 3. 39, was praetor in
21 o B. C. and a well-known Roman historian. See F. Miinzer C.
Cichorius, " Cincius " no. 5, RE 3 (1899) 2556 f.
234 See Wissowa 1 8-20, 43-7.
235 Servius, Aen. 8.187: Sane quidem veteres deos Novensiles
dicunt, quibus merita virtutis dederint numinis dignitatem. Cf.
Cicero, De nat. dear. 2. 24. 62 (listing Hercules, Castor and Pollux,
Aesculapius, Liber, Romulus-Quirinus). Minucius 21.8-10 lists
Romulus and Juba. Cf. Cyprian, Quod idola dii non sint i.
230 If Marchesi is right in rejecting with hesitation (see his ap-
paratus) Reifferscheid's insertion of Novensiles at this point, then
some similar word must be inserted into the translation.
237 Macrobius, Sat. 3. 4. 6: Nigidius enim de dis libro nono decimo
requirit num di Penates sint Troianorum Apollo et Neptunus, qui
muros eis fccissc dicuntur, et num eos in Italiam Aeneas advexerit.
Cf, Scrvius, Aen. 3. 12. The partisans of the Cornelius Labeo
theory base their view that he is the source for this chapter on
Macrobius, Sat. 3.4.6 and Servius, Aen. 1*378, 2.296, 2.325,
3. 119, 3. 148. As Tullius (70) points out, in these passages Labeo
is mentioned only twice and each time in connection with other
writers on the Penates. He therefore concludes that Varro, who is
mentioned more often than Labeo, is more likely as a source, par-
ticularly since Arnobius mentions Varro and not Labeo. On the di
PcnateSj also mentioned in 3. 42 f ,, see Cicero, De nat. deor. z. 27. 68;
37 NOTES
Cyprian, Quod idola dii non sint 4; W. W. Hyde, Paganism to
Christianity in the Roman Empire (Philadelphia 1946) 15; G.
Wissowa, "Penates," LM 3. 1879-98; S. Weinstock, " Penates/' RE
*9 0937) 47-57-
238 Immortalibus: Reifferscheid's correction o the MS immor-
talium, in place of immortali (Marchesi), criticized by W. Kroll,
Phil. Woch. 55 (1935) 1084; "die conditio ist doch nicht
unsterblich."
239 Cf. C. Thulin, " Etrusca disciplina," RE 6 (1909) 725-30.
240 Who this Caesius was is not clear but he may have been
Caesius Bassus, a lyric poet of the age of Nero who is said to have
written a commentary on Aratus' Phaenomena (see Orelli's note).
241 On the Genius lovialis, see Wissowa 180, 280 f. Concerning
Pales and the unsolved problem whether or not there were two
divinities of this name, one male, one female, see Wissowa 199-201.
242 Cf. 2.62 and 5. 1 8.
243 A group of twelve gods, six of them male and six female,
supposedly acting as a council to Jupiter. See G. Wissowa, " Con-
sentes," LM 1.922^; Religion und Kultus 61; for a description of
the Portions Deorum Consentium at Rome, Platner-Ashby 421 f.
244 This term is understood by W. H. Roscher, LM i. 913 f., to be
synonymous with Consentes, though he speaks of the " etwas unklare
Notiz bei Arnobius." So also G. Wissowa, " Complices dii," RE 4
(1901) 795.
245 Quod una oriantur et occidant una: an extremely obscure
passage. The translation follows Orelli's suggestion that the verbs
may point forward to the activity of these divinities as Jupiter's
counsellors, as is set forth in a later clause.
246 Miserationis, so the MS. But cf. memorationis (Ursinus),
viscerationis (Scaliger), venerationis (Hildebrand), mire notionis
parcissimae (Wiman), nationis barbarissimae (Gelcnius).
247 Partitipes (Scaliger and Reifferscheid) is inferior to the MS
principes,
248 Cf. Macrobius, Sat. 3. 4. 8; Servius, Aen. 3. 12.
240 Veritati suae proximo, suspicione coniciens, a most obscure pas-
sage for which Meiser suggests veritatis vi promiscua suspicloncs
continens.
250 Here also the source is believed to be Labco by Kahl (791)
and Miilleneisen (39 f.) but Tullius (70) says this is without
ground. Cf. Hyde 15.
251 On these divinities, normally of the household, see G* Wissowa,
THE CASE AGAINST THE PAGANS: BOOK THREE 371
" Lares/ 7 LM 2. 1868-98, esp. 1887 where he lists occurrences of the
lares viales: Plautus, Merc, 865; Servius, Aen. 3. 302; CIL 2. 2417,
2518, 2572, 2987, suppl 5634, 5734; 3.1422; 8.9755; 11,3079;
12. 4320.
252 Vicus means either ' street/ ' row of houses/ or ' village/
'hamlet/ ' villa/
- 5a Here iter has lost its original sense of ' journey } and become a
synonym for the highway on which the journey is made. Cf. also
the word itinerare (hence our ' itinerary ') which in the late Empire
stood for a sort of guide listing the posting stations on the highways.
See Vegetius, De re mil. 3. 6, and cf. Varro, De ling. lot. 5. 22.
25<1 Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, rev. by H. S. Jones
and R. McKenzie (Oxford 1925-40), cites (1032) examples from
the Odyssey 22.128, 137; Pindar, Pyth. 8.86; Herodotus 1.180;
Hermesianax 7. 65; P. Oxy. 1449. 6 (3rd cent, A. D.), for the word
in the sense of ' alley/ ' lane/ ' passage/ and Theocritus, Ep. 4. i
for ' avenue '; in Plutarch, Crassus 4, * path/ and in P. Oxy. 242
(ist cent. A. D.), a block of houses.
2Gr> On the Curetes who lived in Crete and had a part in the wor-
ship of Jupiter, see the notes on Lucretius 2. 629 in Leonard-Smith
and Bailey. Lucretius appears to be confusing the Curetes with the
Corybantes, a fault not found in Arnobius or his source. See also
3. 43, 4. 24. Cf. Ovid, Fasti 4. 207 and Frazer's note ad loc., vol. 3,
pp. 208-13; Lactantius, Div, inst. i, 21. 38; Hyginus, Fab. 139.
200 Cf. Lucretius 2. 629-39 es p tne following lines:
633 Dictacos refcrunt Curctas, qui lovis ilium
634 Vagitum in Creta quondam occultasse feruntur,
# x *
637 Armatei in numcrum pulsarcnt aeribus aera.
257 The term Digiti Samothracii is equivalent in sense to Idaei
Dactyli, divinities associated with the Idaean Mother who were
smiths and sorcerers, They are called Samothracian because they
went to Samothrace as Orpheus' teacher (Diodorus 5. 64). Cf.
Cicero, De nat. deor. 3. 16.42-; Tertius est ex Idaeis Digitis, cui
infcrias adferunt. See L. von Sybel, "Daktyloi," LM 1.940 f.; O.
Kern, " Daktyloi/' RE 4 (1901) 2018 f.
258 On the Manes, the departed spirits of the dead, often referred
to in the inscriptions by the phrase Dis Manibus, see H. Steuding,
LM 2.2316-2323; A, Marbach, RE 14 (1930) 1050-1060. On the
37 2 NOTES
supposed old Roman goddess Mania, see G. Wissowa, LM 2. 2323 .;
A. Marbach, "Mania" no. 8, RE 14 (1930) mof.
259 Perhaps Tertullian (AyoL 22. 10) had something like this in
mind: Habent de incolatu aeris et de vicinia siderum et de com-
mercio nubium caelestes sapere paraturas.
260 These Larvae were not divinities but forms of the old Italic
superstition which in the lower world plagued the souls of the dead,
They have nothing to do with the Lares. See G. Wissowa, LM
2. 1901 f.; P. Kock, RE 12 (1925) 878-80.
201 Consolationem (P), consultationem (Sabaeus).
262 Refertis (P), referatis (Sabaeus) but as Brakman points out,
the indicative is often used by Arnobius, perhaps in conscious imi-
tation of early Latin, when the Ciceronian norm would require the
subjunctive.
263 1, e. one of the gods of the underworld di inferi : see Schol.
HOT. Cam. 3. 8; Servius, Aen. 6. 244; H. Steuding, " Inferi/' LM
2. 234-61; Wissowa 239 f.
264 One of the gods above di suyeri.
265 Saturn and Hercules. Cf. Vergil, Aen. 3. 405 and Servius ad
loc.; Festus 462 Lindsay; Macrobius, Sat. 3. 6. n.
266 Apollo. Cf. Cicero, De div. i. 46. 104,
207 The MS reads cogat offendat et necessario piaculum contrahi.
Oehler and Reifferscheid read offendi', Castiglioni and Marchcsi
transpose cogat to follow contrahi. This is approved by Wiman,
Eranos 45 (1947) 133.
203 Avernmcate, a word of great antiquity (cf. 1.32, 7*13),
peculiar to the language of prayers. There was a divinity Aver-
runcus or Auruncus (cf. TLL 2, 1316-7; Varro, De ling. lat. 7. 102;
A. Gellius 5. 12. 14).
209 P has terreor which is better than torreor (Gifanius, accepted
by Reifferscheid).
270 See 3. 40 and n. 241.
271 Proloquium, cf. 5. 3, 5. 37; Stilo in Varro, De ling. lat. 24; A.
Gellius 16.8.2.
272 Summanus was the god of light by night. See S. Weinstodk,
RE 2 R. 4 (1932) 897 f.; R. Peter, LM 4.1600-1601, See also
5. 37 and 6. 3.
130381
