Part 2 — CHAPTER XIII. THE RELATION OF THE STOIC PHILOSOPHY TO RELIGION.
Oswald J. (Oswald Joseph) Reichel translation
B. The Allegorising Spirit. Even without accepting demons, there were not wanting in the Stoic system points with which the popular beliefs could be connected, if it was necessary to find in these beliefs some deeper meaning. It mattered not that these beliefs were often so distorted in the process of accommodation as to be no
Notes in this chapter
Note 1 · The well-known hymn to Zeus, in Stob. Ecl. i. 30, and the verses quoted p. 333, 1. Nor is the poetic form used by Cleanthes without importanNote 2 · Compare the celebrated dictum of the Stoic in Cic. N. D. ii. 28, 71: Cultus autem Deorum est optimus idemque castissimus plenissimusque pietNote 3 · M. Aurel. ix. 40: We ought not to pray the Gods to give us something, or to protect us from something, but only to pray: διδόναι αὐτοὺς τὸ μNote 4 · See p. 144, 2. Sext. Math. ix. 28, says that Rome of the younger Stoics (perhaps Posidonius, whose views on the primitive condition have beeNote 5 · In this spirit, Epict. Diss. ii. 20, 32, blames those who throw doubts on the popular Gods, not considering that by so doing they deprive maNote 6 · Characteristic are the utterances of the sceptic pontifex Cotta, in Cic. N. D. i. 22, 61; iii. 2. ↑Note 7 · Plut. Sto. Rep. 6, 1; Diog. vii. 33. See p. 322, 5. ↑Note 8 · Ep. 41, 1: Non sunt ad cœlum elevandæ manus nec exorandus ædituus, ut nos ad aures simulacri, quasi magis exaudiri possimus, admittat: propeNote 9 · Benef. iv. 19, 1: Deos nemo sanus timet. Furor est enim metuere salutaria nee quisquam amat quos timet. Not only do the Gods not wish to do Note 10 · Ep. 95, 47: Quomodo sint Di colendi, solet præcipi: accendere aliquem lucernas sabbatis prohibeamus, quoniam nec lumine Di egent et ne hominNote 11 · In Fr. 120 (in Lact. ii. 2, 14), Seneca shows how absurd it is to pray and kneel before images, the makers of which are thought little of inNote 12 · Fr. 119 (in Lact. i. 16, 10): Quid ergo est, quare apud poetas salacissimus Jupiter desierit liberos tollere? Utrum sexagenarius factus est,Note 13 · Augustin. l.c. Fr. 33: Quid ergo tandem? Veriora tibi videntur T. Tatii aut Romuli aut Tulli Hostilii somnia? Cloacinam Tatius dedicavit DeaNote 14 · N. D. ii. 24, 63: Alia quoque ex ratione et quidem physica fluxit multitudo Deorum; qui induti specie humana fabulas poetis suppeditaverunt Note 15 · Phædrus (Philodemus), col. 2 of his fragment, according to Petersen’s restoration. Conf. Cic. N. D. ii. 17, 45; Diog. vii. 147; both of whomNote 16 · The Epicurean in Cic. N. D. i. 14, 36. ↑Note 17 · Cic. l.c. 37. Conf. Krische, Forschung. i. 406 and 415. ↑Note 18 · Clem., indeed, says (Strom. vii. 720, D): οὐδὲ αἰσθησέων αὐτῷ [τῷ θεῷ] δεῖ, καθάπερ ἤρεσε τοῖς Στωῑκοῖς, μάλιστα ἀκοῆς καὶ ὄψεως· μὴ γὰρ δύνNote 19 · Plut. Plac. i. 6, 16, in a description of the Stoic theology, evidently borrowed from a good source: The Gods have been represented as beingNote 20 · Plut. Sto. Rep. 38, 5; C. Not. 31, 5; Def. Orac. 19, p. 420. ↑Note 21 · The numina, quæ singula adoramus et colimus, which are dependent on the Deus omnium Deorum, and whom ministros regni sui genuit. Sen. Fr. 26Note 22 · Diog. vii. 147. ↑Note 23 · See p. 206, 1. ↑Note 24 · Plut. De Fac. Lun. 6, 3. ↑Note 25 · Cic. N. D. i. 14, 36. ↑Note 26 · See p. 131. ↑Note 27 · Cic. N. D. i. 15, 39; ii. 26; Diog. vii. 147. ↑Note 28 · Plut. De Is. c. 66; Cic. l.c. ii. 23, 60; i. 15, 38, where this view is attributed, in particular, to Zeno’s pupil Persæus. Krische (ForschuNote 29 · Phædr. (Philodemus), Nat. De. col. 3, and Cic. N. D. i. 15, 38, attribute this assertion specially to Persæus and Chrysippus. Id. ii. 24, 64Note 30 · This is done in Plut. Plac. i. 6, 9. Belief in the Gods, it is there said, is held in three forms—the physical, the mythical, and the form eNote 31 · Plut. Com. Not. 31, 5: ἀλλὰ Χρύσιππος καὶ Κλεάνθης, ἐμπεπληκότες, ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν, τῷ λόγῳ θεῶν τὸν οὐρανὸν, τὴν γῆν, τὸν ἀέρα, τὴν θάλατταν,Note 32 · Conf. Wachsmuth, Die Ansichten der Stoiker über Mantik und Dämonen (Berl. 1860), pp. 29–39. ↑Note 33 · Tim. 90, A. ↑Note 34 · Posid. in Galen. Hipp. et Plat. v. 6, p. 469: τὸ δὴ τῶν παθῶν αἴτιον, τουτέστι τῆς τε ἀνομολογίας καὶ τοῦ κακοδαίμονος βίου, τὸ μὴ κατὰ πᾶν Note 35 · See the passage quoted from Diog. vii. 88, on p. 227, 3. (Diogenes had only just before named Chrysippus περὶ τέλους, as source), which receNote 36 · In this sense, the words of Sen. Ep. 110, 1, must be understood: Sepone in præsentia quæ quibusdam placent, unicuique nostrum pædagogum dariNote 37 · Conf. Sext. Math. ix. 86. Amongst other things, quoted p. 146, 1, it is there said: If living beings exist on the earth and in the sea, therNote 38 · Diog. vii. 151: φασὶ δ’ εἶναι καί τινας δαίμονας ἀνθρώπων συμπάθειαν ἔχοντας, ἐπόπτας τῶν ἀνθρωπείων πραγμάτων· καὶ ἥρωας τὰς ὑπολελειμμέναςNote 39 · Plut. Quæst. Rom. 51, p. 277: καθάπερ οἱ περὶ Χρύσιππον οἴονται φιλόσοφοι φαῦλα δαιμόνια περινοστεῖν, οἷς οἱ θεοὶ δημίοις χρῶνται καλασταῖς Note 40 · Plut. Sto. Rep. 37, 2. See p. 191, 2. ↑Note 41 · Tertull. Test. An. 3, after speaking of demons, adds: Aliqui Chrysippi sectator illudit ea. ↑Note 42 · The Stoics are not the first who resorted to allegorical explanations of myths. Just as, before philosophy had broken away from mythology, aNote 43 · Cic. N. D. 24, 63; iii. 24, 63, see p. 346, 3. ↑Note 44 · The definition of allegory: ὁ γὰρ ἄλλα μὲν ἀγορεύων τρόπος, ἕτερα δὲ ὧν λέγει σημαίνων, ἐπωνύμως ἀλληγορία καλεῖται (Heraclit. Alleg. Hom. cNote 45 · In this way Zeno treated all the poems of Homer and Hesiod (Dio Chrysost. Or. 53, p. 275; Diog. vii. 4; Krische, Forsch. 393), and so did ClNote 46 · Cic. N. D. iii. 24, 63. ↑Note 47 · Corn. c. 17, p. 80: δεῖ δὲ μὴ συγχεῖν τοὺς μύθους, μήδ’ ἐξ ἑτέρου τὰ ὀνόματα ἐφ’ ἕτερον μεταφέρειν, μηδ’ εἴ τι προσεπλάσθη ταῖς κατ’ αὐτοὺς Note 48 · Proofs may be found in abundance in Heraclitus and Cornutus. Conf. Sen. Nat. Qu. ii. 45, 1: The ancients did not believe that Jupiter hurledNote 49 · Dio Chrysost. Or. 53, p. 276, R. speaking of Zeno’s commentaries on Homer, says: ὁ δὲ Ζήνων οὐδὲν τῶν τοῦ Ὁμήρου λέγει, ἀλλὰ διηγούμενος καὶNote 50 · Special references are hardly necessary after those already quoted, p. 148, 1; 153, 2; 164, 2: 165, 5. Conf. the hymn of Cleanthes; ChrysippNote 51 · Πολυώνυμος, as he is called by Cleanthes, v. 1. Conf. Diog. 147; Corn. c. 9 and 26. The further expansion of this idea may be found in the NNote 52 · See Diog. l.c.; Cic. N. D. ii. 26, 66; Phæd. (Philodem.), Fragm. col. 2–5; Heracl. c. 25, p. 53. On Here, consult Heracl. c. 15 and 41, p. 8Note 53 · Sen. Benef. iv. 8, 1: Hunc [Jovem] et Liberum patrem et Herculem et Mercurium nostri putant. Liberum patrem, quia omnium parens sit.… HerculNote 54 · Heracl. c. 25, 52. Conf. Il. i. 395. ↑Note 55 · Heracl. c. 40, 83; Il. xv. 18. ↑Note 56 · Ibid. c. 37, 73; Il. viii. 18. ↑Note 57 · Heracl. c. 26, 54, who applies the same method of interpretation to the legend of Prometheus (otherwise interpreted by Corn. c. 18, 96), CorNote 58 · According to Eustath. in Il. p. 93, 46, probably following a Stoic interpretation, Here is the spouse of Zeus, because the air is surroundedNote 59 · Heracl. c. 39, 78 (conf. Plut. Aud. Po. p. 19), where this explanation is given very fully. The occurrence on Mount Ida is said to representNote 60 · See Diog. vii. 187; Proœm. 5; Orig. con. Cels. iv. 48; Theophil. ad Autol. iii. 8, p. 122, C; Clement. Homil. v. 18. ↑Note 61 · c. 64. Proteus, according to this explanation, denotes unformed matter; the forms which he assumes denote the four elements ↑Note 62 · See the description. Alleg. Hom. 43–51, p. 90, of which the above is a meagre abstract. ↑Note 63 · According to Heraclit. 53, 112. ↑Note 64 · We learn from Ps. Plut. De Fluv. 5, 3, p. 1003, that Cleanthes wrote a θεομαχία, a small fragment of which, containing a portion or the PromNote 65 · Further particulars on Hermes, Alleg. Hom. c. 72, 141. ↑Note 66 · Alleg. Hom. c. 54. ↑Note 67 · Conf. Heracl. c. 6, p. 11; Corn. 32, p. 191; 34, 206; Cic. N. D. ii. 27, 68; Phædr. (Philodem.) Nat. De. col. 5 and 2. In Phædrus, too, col.Note 68 · Plut. Fac. Lun. 5, 2, p. 922. The Stoics address the moon as Artemis and Athene. ↑Note 69 · See p. 147, 1. ↑Note 70 · The name Apollo is explained by Cleanthes, in Macrob. Sat. i. 17, ὡς ἀπ’ ἄλλων καὶ ἄλλων τόπων τὰς ἀνατολὰς ποιουμένου; by Chrysippus, as deNote 71 · The first of these stories is explained by Macrob. Sat. i. 17, down to the most minute details, in the sense of the cosmical views already gNote 72 · Cornutus, c. 2, p. 10, points to this in explaining Leto as Ληθὼ, and referring it to night, because everything is forgotten in sleep at nigNote 73 · c. 8, especially p. 16, 22, 28. Ibid. c. 12, p. 24, 28, the clang of Apollo’s arrows is explained to be the harmony of the spheres. ↑Note 74 · c. 15, p. 31. ↑Note 75 · Ibid. c. 19, 72, p. 39, 141. ↑Note 76 · See Corn. c. 20, 105, and Villoisin’s notes on the passage. The most varied derivations of Athene are given: from ἀθρεῖν by Heracl. c. 19, 4Note 77 · This explanation had been already given by Diogenes, according to Phædr. col. 6. Cornutus also mentions it (20, 108), but he prefers the derNote 78 · c. 33, p. 69. ↑Note 79 · It is to be found in Galen. Hipp. et Plat. iii. 8, pp. 349–353, but, according to Phædr. (Philodem.) l.c., conf. Cic. N. D. I. 15, 41, was aNote 80 · p. 349, 4, Corn. 30, p. 172. ↑Note 81 · See p. 359, 1, Plut. De Is. c. 40, Schl. p. 367: Demeter and Core are τὸ διὰ τῆς γῆς καὶ τῶν κάρπων διῆκον πνεῦμα. Phædr. col. 2: τὴν ΔήμητρNote 82 · Plut. l.c.: Dionysus is τὸ γόνιμον πνεῦμα καὶ τρόφιμον. ↑Note 83 · Macrob. Sat. i. 18: Cleanthes derived the name Dionysus from διανύσαι, because the sun daily completes his course round the world. It is welNote 84 · Corn. 30, discusses the point at large, referring both the story and the attributes of Dionysus to wine. He, and also Heracl. c. 35, p. 71, Note 85 · Corn. c. 28, p. 163, who also refers the legend and worship of Demeter, in all particulars, to agriculture; and the rape of Persephone, to tNote 86 · The legend of Triptolemus is explained by Cornutus, l.c. p. 161, as referring to the discovery of agriculture by Triptolemus. ↑Note 87 · Chrysippus, in Stob. i. 180; Eus. Pr. Ev. vi. 8, 7 (Theodoret. Cur. Gr. Aff. vi. 14, p. 87), see p. 171, 1. Conf. Plut. Sto. Rep. 47, 5; CorNote 88 · According to Sen. Benef. i. 3, 8; 4, 4, he had filled a whole book, probably of a treatise not otherwise mentioned on kind deeds, with theseNote 89 · Chrysippus, in Phædr. (Philodemus), col. 4. Further particulars in Sen. l.c., and Corn. 15, 55. Somewhat similar is the explanation of ΛιταίNote 90 · Corn. 14, 43, who, at the same time, mentions their names and number; Philodem. De Mus. Vol. Herc. i. col. 15; Erato indicates the importancNote 91 · Heracl. 31, 63; Plut. Am. 13, 15, p. 757. ↑Note 92 · Heracl. 28, 60; 30, 62, and above, p. 360. ↑Note 93 · Ibid. 69, 136. In this sense, Aphrodite might be identified with Zeus, which was really done by Phædr. Nat. De. col. 1: ἀνάλογον εὐν … θαι [Note 94 · The story of Ares, νείατον ἐς κενεῶνα, means, according to Heracl. 31, 64, that Diomedes, ἐπὶ τὰ κενὰ τῆς τῶν ἀντεπάλων τάξεως παρεισελθὼν, Note 95 · In Plut. Aud. Po. c. 4, p. 19, the connection of Ares and Aphrodite is explained as meaning a conjunction of the two planets. Heracl. 69, 13Note 96 · Corn. 27, 148; Plut. Krat. 408, C. ↑Note 97 · His lewdness was said to indicate the fulness of the σπερματικοὶ λόγοι in nature; his sojourn in the wilderness, the solitariness of the worNote 98 · Corn. 17, 91. Conf. Osann ad locum, who points out similar interpretations, probably of Stoic origin, in the Scholia to the theogony, and alNote 99 · Besides the etymologies of οὐρανὸς in Corn. c. 1, and the observation of Plut. Pl. i. 6, 9, that heaven is the father of all things, becauseNote 100 · See p. 292, 4, and Sen. Benef. i. 13, 3. ↑Note 101 · C. 31, 187. ↑Note 102 · Plut. De Is. 44, Schl. p. 367: He is τὸ πληκτικὸν καὶ διαιρετικὸν πνεῦμα. Sen. Benef. iv. 8, 1. See above, p. 359, 2, and what Villoisin quoNote 103 · Pers. Sat. v. 63. ↑Note 104 · Heraclit. c. 33, p. 67, who, in the introduction, expressly refers to δοκιμώτατοι Στωϊκῶν. ↑Note 105 · C. 70–75. ↑Note 106 · C. 70–73, p. 137. ↑Note 107 · Conf. the way in which Heraclitus, 74, 146, expresses himself as to Plato’s and Epicurus’s attacks upon Homer. ↑Note 108 · Conf. Wachsmuth’s treatise mentioned above, p. 351, 2. ↑Note 109 · Cic. Divin. i. 3, 6. He there mentions two books of Chrysippus on divination, which are also referred to (as Wachsmuth, p. 12, shows) by DioNote 110 · Diog. vii. 178, mentions a treatise of Sphærus περὶ μαντικῆς. Cic. (Divin. i. 3, 6; i. 38, 83; ii. 17, 41; 43, 90; 49, 101) mentions a treatNote 111 · Boëthus, in his commentary on Aratus, attempted to determine and explain the indications of a storm. Cic. Divin. i. 8, 14; ii. 21, 47. On PaNote 112 · Cic. Divin. i. 52, 118: Non placet Stoicis, singulis jecorum fissis aut avium cautibus interesse Deum; neque enim decorum est, nec Diis dignNote 113 · Conf. Diogenian, in Eus. Pr. Ev. iv. 3, 5: τὸ χρειῶδες αὐτῆς (divination) καὶ βιωφελὲς, δι’ ὃ καὶ μάλιστα Χρύσιππος δοκεῖ ὑμνεῖν τὴν μαντικήNote 114 · Cic. N. D. ii. 5, 13, where among the four reasons from which Cleanthes deduced belief in Gods, the first is præsensio rerum futurarum, extrNote 115 · Cic. Divin. i. 5, 9: Ego enim sic existimo: si sint ea genera divinandi vera, de quibus accepimus quæque colimus, esse Deos, vicissimque si Note 116 · Cic. Div. i. 55, 125: Primum mihi videtur, ut Posidonius facit, a Deo … deinde a fato, deinde a natura vis omnis divinandi ratioque repetendNote 117 · Cic. l.c. 55, 126. ↑Note 118 · Ibid. 57, 129. ↑Note 119 · See p. 370, 3; 371, 1. ↑Note 120 · Cic. Divin. i. 27, 56 (Suid. τιμωροῦντος), ii. 65, 135 (Suid. νεοττός), ii. 70, 144, quoting from Chrysippus; i. 54, 123, quoting from AntipNote 121 · Aristotle, in a somewhat different sense, had explained the marvellous by a reference to natural causes, even allowing the existence of presNote 122 · Cic. Divin. i. 3, 6, after the passage quoted: Sed a Stoicis vel princeps ejus disciplinæ Posidonii doctor discipulus Antipatri degeneravit Note 123 · Sen. Nat. Qu. ii. 32, 3: Nimis illum [Deum] otiosum et pusillæ rei ministrum facis, si aliis somnia aliis exta, disponit. Ista nihilominus dNote 124 · As in the passage quoted from Boëthus on p. 371, 2. ↑Note 125 · Conf. p. 374, 2; 379, 1, and Cic. Div. ii. 43, 90, according to whom Diogenes of Seleucia conceded so much to astrology as to allow that, frNote 126 · Sen. Nat. Qu. ii. 32, 5. ↑Note 127 · Cic. l.c. ii. 15, 35: Chrysippus, Antipater, and Posidonius assert: Ad hostiam deligendam ducem esse vim quandam sentientem atque divinam, qNote 128 · Cic. ii. 15, 35: Illud vero multum etiam melius, quod … dicitur ab illis (conf. i. 52, 118): cum immolare quispiam velit, tum fieri extorum Note 129 · Cic. i. 53, 120, defends auguries somewhat similarly by arguing: If an animal can move its limbs at pleasure, must not God have greater poweNote 130 · See p. 181. ↑Note 131 · Cic. Divin. ii. 8, 20; Diogenian, in Eus. Pr. Ev. iv. 3, 5; Alex. Aph. De Fat. 31, p. 96. ↑Note 132 · Upon the use of divination depends the whole argument for its reality, based on the divine kindness. Cic. i. 38, 83, and above, p. 372, 1. ↑Note 133 · Sen. Nat. Qu. ii. 37, 2; 38, 2: Effugiet pericula si expiaverit prædictas divinitus minas. At hoc quoque in fato est, ut expiet, &c. This anNote 134 · According to the definition in Sext. Math. ix. 132, which Cic. Divin. ii. 63, 130, attributes to Chrysippus, it is an ἐπιστήμη (Cic. more acNote 135 · Plut. Vit. Hom. 212, p. 1238: [τῆς μαντικῆς] τὸ μὲν τεχνικόν φασιν εἶναι οἱ Στωϊκοί. οἷον ἱεροσκοπίαν καὶ οἰωνοὺς καὶ τὸ περὶ φήμας καὶ κληδNote 136 · Conf. the fragment quoted in ‘Aristotle and the Peripatetics,’ p. 300, which throws light on old and well-known views in the spirit of the PNote 137 · Cic. Divin. i. 30, 64; ii. 10, 26: The naturale genus divinandi is, quod animos arriperet aut exciperet extrinsecus a divinitate, unde omnesNote 138 · Cic. Divin. i. 50, 115, and Plut. Compare the many Stoic stories of dreams and presentiments in Cic. i. 27, 56; 30, 64; ii. 65, 134; 70, 144Note 139 · See besides the passages just quoted, Cic. Divin. i. 49, 110; 50, 113; 51, 115; and in particular i. 57, 129. Hence the prophecies of the dyNote 140 · Conf. the quotations on p. 375, 4, from Cic. Divin. ii. 10, 26; 15, 35; and his remarks on the instinct us afflatusque divinus. Cic. i. 18, Note 141 · According to Cic. Divin. i. 30, 64, Posidonius thought prophetic dreams were realised in one of three ways: uno, quod prævideat animus ipse Note 142 · Amongst such external helps, the Stoic in Cic. Divin. i. 50, 114; 36, 79, enumerates the impression derived from music, natural scenery, mouNote 143 · Cic. i. 18, 34; 33, 72. ↑Note 144 · Ibid. i. 56, 127. ↑Note 145 · Cicero, ii. 11, 26, enumerates the above-named varieties, after having previously (i. 33) treated them separately. Similarly, Ps. Plut. V. HNote 146 · Cic. i. 55, 124; 56, 128. ↑Note 147 · Ibid. i. 56, 127. ↑Note 148 · Cic. i. 53, 121: Ut igitur qui se tradet quieti præparato animo cum bonis cogitationibus tunc rebus (for instance, nourishment; conf. c. 29,Note 149 · (1) Allegorical interpretation of myths. longer recognised. The process required a regular code of interpretation by means of which a philosNote 150 · (2) Interpretation of the myths respecting the gods. Proceeding further to enquire how this method was applied to particular stories, the fiNote 151 · In a similar way, the Homeric theomachy was explained by many to mean a conjunction of the seven planets, which would involve the world in gNote 152 · Far more plausible is the explanation given of the dialogue of Athene with Achilles, and of Hermes with Ulysses. These dialogues are stated Note 153 · The Fates (μοῖραι), as their name already indicates, stand for the righteous and invariable rule of destiny;87 the Graces (χάριτες), as to wNote 154 · In the case of another God, Pan, the idea of the Allnear was suggested simply by the name. His shaggy goat’s feet were taken to represent thNote 155 · (3) Allegory applied to heroic myths. Besides the legends of the Gods, the legends of the heroes attracted considerable attention in the StoNote 156 · C. Prophetic powers. The Stoic theology has engaged a good deal of our attention, not only because it is instructive to compare their views,Note 157 · (1) Divination. Illustrative of the attitude of the Stoics towards positive religion are their views on divination.108 The importance attachNote 158 · In what way, then, can the two facts be combined—the belief in prophecy, on the one hand, and, on the other, the denial of unearthly omens aNote 159 · The Stoics could not altogether suppress a suspicion that an unchangeable predestination of all events has rendered individual activity supeNote 160 · (3) Causes of divination. Divination, or soothsaying, consists in the capacity to read and interpret omens;134 and this capacity is, accordiNote 161 · Artificial prophesying, or the art of foretelling the future, depends upon observation and guess-work.143 One who could survey all causes inNote 162 · In all these questions the moral character of Stoic piety is ever to the fore, and great pains were taken by the Stoics to bring their belieNote 163 · A. Inner connection of the Stoic system. Having now investigated the Stoic system in detail, we are in a position to pass a definite judgmen