Delphi Complete Works of Dio Chrysostom

by Dio Chrysostom

  [38] Now to explain this digression — my argument is responsible, having turned aside of itself; for perhaps it is not easy to check the course of a philosopher’s thoughts and speech, no matter what direction they may take; for whatever suggests itself to his mind always seems profitable, nay indispensable, for his audience, and my speech has not been prepared to “suit the water-clock and the constraint of court procedure,” to use somebody’s expression, but allows itself a great deal of license. Well, it is not difficult to run back again, just as on a voyage it is not difficult for competent steersmen who have got a little off their course to get back upon it.

  [39] τῆς γὰρ περὶ τὸ θεῖον δόξης καὶ ὑπολήψεως πρώτην μὲν ἀτεχνῶς πηγὴν ἐλέγομεν τὴν ἔμφυτον ἅπασιν ἀνθρώποις ἐπίνοιαν, ἐξ αὐτῶν γιγνομένην τῶν ἔργων καὶ τἀληθοῦς, οὐ κατὰ πλάνην συστᾶσαν οὐδὲ ὡς ἔτυχεν, ἀλλὰ πάνυ ἰσχυρὰν καὶ ἀέναον ἐκ τοῦ παντὸς χρόνου καὶ παρὰ πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀρξαμένην καὶ διαμένουσαν, σχεδόν τι κοινὴν καὶ δημοσίαν τοῦ λογικοῦ γένους: δευτέραν δὲ λέγομεν [p. 166] τὴν ἐπίκτητον καὶ δι᾽ ἑτέρων ἐγγιγνομένην ταῖς ψυχαῖς λόγοις τε καὶ μύθοις καὶ ἔθεσι, τοῖς μὲν ἀδεσπότοις τε καὶ ἀγράφοις, τοῖς δὲ ἐγγράφοις καὶ σφόδρα γνωρίμους ἔχουσι τοὺς κυρίους.

  [39] To resume, then: Of man’s belief in the deity and his assumption that there is a god we were maintaining that the fountain-head, as we may say, or source, was that idea which is innate in all mankind and comes into being as the result of the actual facts and the truth, an idea that was not framed confusedly nor yet at random, but has been exceedingly potent and persistent since the beginning of time, and has arisen among all nations and still remains, being, one may almost say, a common and general endowment of rational beings.

  As the second source we designate the idea which has been acquired and indeed implanted in men’s souls through no other means than narrative accounts, myths, and customs, in some cases ascribed to no author and also unwritten, but in others written and having as their authors men of very great fame.

  [40] τῆς δὲ τοιαύτης ὑπολήψεως τὴν μέν τινα ἑκουσίαν καὶ παραμυθητικὴν φῶμεν, τὴν δὲ ἀναγκαίαν καὶ προστακτικήν. λέγω δὲ τοῦ μὲν ἑκουσίουκαὶ παραμυθίας ἐχομένην τὴν τῶν ποιητῶν, τοῦ δὲ ἀναγκαίου καὶ προστάξεως τὴν τῶν νομοθετῶν: τούτων γὰρ οὐδετέραν ἰσχῦσαι δυνατὸν μὴ πρώτης ἐκείνης ὑπούσης, δι᾽ ἣν βουλομένοις ἐγίγνοντο καὶ τρόπον τινὰ προειδόσιν αὐτοῖς αἵ τε προστάξεις καὶ παραμυθίαι, τῶν μὲν ὀρθῶς καὶ ξυμφώνως ἐξηγουμένων ποιητῶνκαὶ νομοθετῶν τῇ τε ἀληθείᾳ καὶ ταῖς ἐννοίαις, τῶν δὲ ἀποπλανωμένων ἔν τισιν.

  [40] Of this acquired notion of the divine being let us say that one part is voluntary and due to exhortation, another part compulsory and prescriptive. By the kind that depends upon voluntary acceptance and exhortation I mean that which is handed down by the poets, and by the kind that depends upon compulsion and prescription I mean that due to the lawgivers. I call these secondary because neither of them could possibly have gained strength unless that primary notion had been present to begin with; and because it was present, there took root in mankind, of their own volition and because they already possessed a sort of foreknowledge, the prescriptions of the lawgivers and the exhortations of the poets, some of them expounding things correctly and in consonance with the truth and their hearers’ notions, and others going astray in certain matters.

  [41] ἀμφοῖν δὲ τοῖν λεγομένοιν ποτέραν πρεσβυτέραν φῶμεν τῷ χρόνῳ παρά γε ἡμῖν τοῖς Ἕλλησι, ποίησιν ἢ νομοθεσίαν, οὐκ ἄν ἔχοιμι διατεινόμενος εἰπεῖν ἐν τῷ παρόντι. πρέπει δὲ ἴσως τὸ ἀζήμιον καὶ πειστικὸν ἀρχαιότερον εἶναι τοῦ

  [41] But which of the two influences mentioned should be called the earlier in time, among us Greeks at any rate, namely, poetry or legislation, I am afraid I cannot discuss at length on the present occasion; but perhaps it is fitting that the kind which depended, not upon penalties, but upon persuasion should be more ancient than the kind which employed compulsion and prescription.

  [42] μετὰ ζημίας καὶ προστάξεως. σχεδὸν οὖν μέχρι τοῦδε ὁμοίως πρόεισι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις τὰ περὶ τοῦ πρώτου καὶ ἀθανάτου γονέως, ὃν καὶ πατρῷον Δία καλοῦμεν οἱ τῆς Ἑλλάδος κοινωνοῦντες, καὶ τὰ περὶ τῶν θνητῶν καὶ ἀνθρωπίνων γονέων. καὶ γὰρ δὴ ἡ πρὸς ἐκείνους εὔνοια καὶ θεραπεία τοῖς ἐκγόνοις πρώτη μὲν ἀπὸ τῆσφύσεως καὶ τῆς εὐεργεσίας ἀδίδακτος ὑπάρχει, τὸ γεννῆσαν καὶ τρέφον καὶ στέργον τοῦ γεννηθέντος εὐθὺς ἀντιφιλοῦντος καὶ ἀντιθεραπεύοντος ὅπως ἂν ᾖ δυνατόν,

  [42] Now up to this point, we may almost say, the feelings of the human race towards their first and immortal parent, whom we who have a share in the heritage of Hellas call Ancestral Zeus, develop step by step along with those which men have toward their mortal and human parents. For in truth the goodwill and desire to serve which the offspring feel toward their parents is, in the first type, present in them, untaught, as a gift of nature and as a result of acts of kindness received,

  [43] δευτέρα δὲ καὶ τρίτη ποιητῶν καὶ νομοθετῶν, τῶν μὲν παραινούντων μὴ ἀποστερεῖν χάριν τὸ πρεσβύτερον καὶ ξυγγενές, ἔτι δὲ αἴτιον ζωῆς καὶ τοῦ εἶναι, τῶνδὲ ἐπαναγκαζόντων καὶ ἀπειλούντων κόλασιν τοῖς οὐ πειθομένοις, ἄνευ τοῦ διασαφεῖν καὶ δηλοῦν ὁποῖοί τινές εἰσιν οἱ γονεῖς καὶ τίνων εὐεργεσιῶν χρέος ὀφειλόμενον κελεύουσι μὴ ἀνέκτιτον ἐᾶν. ἐν τοῖς περὶ τῶν θεῶν λόγοις καὶ μύθοις μᾶλλον δὲ τοῦτο ἰδεῖν ἔστιν ἐπ᾽ ἀμφοτέρων γιγνόμενον. ὁρῶ μὲν οὖν ἔγωγε τοῖς πολλοῖς[p. 167] πανταχοῦ τὴν ἀκρίβειαν κοπῶδες καὶ τὰ περὶ τοὺς λόγους οὐδὲν ἧττον οἷς μέλει πλήθους μόνον, οὐδὲν δὲ προειπόντες οὐδὲ διαστειλάμενοι περὶ τοῦ πράγματος, οὐδὲ ἀπό τινος ἀρχῆς ἀρχόμενοι τῶν λόγων, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτό γε, ὥς φασιν, ἀπλύτοις ποσὶ διεξίασι τὰ φανερώτατα καὶ γυμνότατα. καὶ ποδῶν μὲν ἀπλύτων οὐ μεγάλη βλάβη διά τε πηλοῦ καὶ πολλῶν καθαρμάτων ἰόντων, γλώττης δὲ ἀνεπιστήμονος οὐ μικρὰ ζημία γίγνεται τοῖς ἀκροωμένοις. ἀλλὰ γὰρ εἰκὸς τοὺς πεπαιδευμένους, ὧν λόγον τινὰ ἔχειν ἄξιον, συνεξανύειν καὶ συνεκπονεῖν, μέχρις ἂν ὡς ἐκ καμπῆς τινος καὶ δυσχωρίας καταστήσωμεν εἰς εὐθεῖαν τοὺς λόγους. />
  [43] since that which has been begotten straightway from birth loves and cherishes in return, so far as it may, that which begat and nourishes and loves it, whereas the second and third types, which are derived from our poet and lawgivers, the former exhorting us not to withhold our gratitude from that which is older and of the same blood, besides being the author of life and being, the latter using compulsion and the threat of punishment for those who refuse obedience, without, however, making anything clear and showing plainly just who parents are and what the acts of kindness are for which they enjoin upon us not to leave unpaid a debt which is due. But to an even greater extent do we see this to be true in both particulars in their stories and myths about the gods.

  Now I am well aware that to most men strict exactness in any exposition is on every occasion irksome, and that exactness in a speech is no less so for those whose sole interest is in quantity alone; these without any preface whatever or any statements defining their subject-matter, nay, without even beginning their speeches with any beginning, but straight off ‘with unwashen feet,’ as the saying is, proceed to expound things most obvious and naked to the sight. Now as for ‘unwashen feet,’ though they do no great harm when men must pass through mud and piles of refuse, yet an ignorant tongue causes no little injury to an audience. However, we may reasonably expect that the educated men of the audience, of whom one ought to take some account, will keep up with us and go through the task with us until we merge from bypath and rough ground, as it were, and get our argument back upon the straight road.

  [44] τριῶν δὴ προκειμένων γενέσεων τῆς δαιμονίου παρ᾽ ἀνθρώποις ὑπολήψεως, ἐμφύτου, ποιητικῆς, νομικῆς, τετάρτην φῶμεν τὴν πλαστικήν τε καὶ δημιουργικὴν τῶν περὶ τὰ θεῖα ἀγάλματα καὶ τὰς εἰκόνας, λέγω δὲ γραφέων τε καὶ ἀνδριαντοποιῶν καὶ λιθοξόων καὶ παντὸς ἁπλῶς τοῦ καταξιώσαντος αὑτὸν ἀποφῆναι μιμητὴν διὰ τέχνης τῆς δαιμονίας φύσεως, εἴτε σκιαγραφίᾳ μάλα ἀσθενεῖ καὶ ἀπατηλῇ πρὸς ὄψιν, χρωμάτων μίξει καὶ γραμμῆς ὅρῳ σχεδὸν τὸ ἀκριβέστατον περιλαμβανούσῃ, εἴτε λίθων γλυφαῖς εἴτε ξοάνων ἐργασίαις, κατ᾽ ὀλίγον τῆς τέχνης ἀφαιρούσης τὸ περιττόν, ἕως ἂν καταλίπῃ αὐτὸ τὸ φαινόμενον εἶδος, εἴτε χωνείᾳ χαλκοῦ καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων ὅσα τίμια διὰ πυρὸς ἐλαθέντων ἢ ῥυέντων ἐπί τινας τύπους, εἴτε κηροῦ πλάσει ῥᾷστα ξυνακολουθοῦντος τῇ

  [44] Now that we have set before us three sources of man’s conception of the divine being, to wit, the innate, that derived from the poets, and that derived from the lawgivers, let us name as the fourth that derived from the plastic art and the work of skilled craftsmen who make statues and likenesses of the gods — I mean painters and sculptors and masons who work in stone, in a word, everyone who has held himself worthy to come forward as a portrayer of the divine nature through the use of art, whether (1) by means of a rough sketch, very indistinct or deceptive to the eye, or (2) by the blending of colours and by line-drawing, which produces a result which we can almost say is the most accurate of all, or (3) by the carving of stone, or (4) by the craft which makes images of wood, in which the artist little by little removes the excess of material until nothing remains but the shape which the observer sees, or (5) by the casting of bronze and the like precious metals, which are heated and then either beaten out or poured into moulds, or (6) by the moulding of wax, which most readily answers the artist’s touch and affords the greatest opportunity for change of intention.

  [45] τέχνῃ καὶ πλεῖστον ἐπιδεχομένου τὸ τῆς μετανοίας: οἷος ἦν Φειδίας τε καὶ Ἀλκαμένης καὶ Πολύκλειτος, ἔτι δὲ Ἀγλαοφῶν καὶ Πολύγνωτος καὶ Ζεῦξις καὶ πρότερος αὐτῶν ὁ Δαίδαλος. οὐ γὰρ ἀπέχρη τούτοις περὶ τἄλλα ἐπιδείκνυσθαι τὴν αὑτῶν δεινότητα καὶ σοφίαν, ἀλλὰ καὶ θεῶν εἰκόνας καὶ διαθέσεις παντοδαπὰς ἐπιδεικνύντες, ἰδίᾳ τε καὶ δημοσίᾳ χορηγοὺς τὰς πόλεις λαμβάνοντες, πολλῆς ἐνέπλησαν [p. 168] ὑπονοίας καὶ ποικίλης περὶ τοῦ δαιμονίου, οὐ παντελῶς διαφερόμενοι τοῖς ποιηταῖς καὶ νομοθέταις, τὸ μὲν ὅπως μὴ δοκῶσι παράνομοι καὶ ταῖς ἐπικειμέναις ἐνέχωνται ζημίαις, τὸ δὲ ὁρῶντες προκατειλημμένους αὐτοὺς ὑπὸ τῶν ποιητῶν καὶ πρεσβυτέραν οὖσαν τὴν ἐκείνων εἰδωλοποιίαν. οὔκουν ἐβούλοντο φαίνεσθαιτοῖς πολλοῖς ἀπίθανοι καὶ ἀηδεῖς καινοποιοῦντες.

  [45] To this class belong not only Pheidias but also Alcamenes and Polycleitus and further, Aglaophon and Polygnotus and Zeuxis and, earlier than all these, Daedalus. For these men were not satisfied to display their cleverness and skill on commonplace subjects, but by exhibiting all sorts of likenesses and representations of gods they secured for their patrons both private persons and the states, whose people they filled with an ample and varied conception of the divine; and here they did not differ altogether from the poets and lawgivers, in the one case that they might not be considered violators of the laws and thus make themselves liable to the penalties imposed upon such, and in the other case because they saw that they had been anticipated by the poets and that the poets’ image-making was the earlier.

  [46] τὰ μὲν οὖν πολλὰ τοῖς μύθοις ἑπόμενοι καὶ συνηγοροῦντες ἔπλαττον, τὰ δὲ καὶ παρ᾽ αὑτῶν εἰσέφερον, ἀντίτεχνοι καὶ ὁμότεχνοι τρόπον τινὰ γιγνόμενοι τοῖς ποιηταῖς, ὡς ἐκεῖνοι δι᾽ ἀκοῆς ἐπιδεικνύντες, ἀτεχνῶς καὶ αὐτοὶ δι᾽ ὄψεως ἐξηγούμενοι τὰ θεῖα τοῖς πλείοσι καὶ ἀπειροτέροισθεαταῖς. πάντα δὲ ταῦτα τὴν ἰσχὺν ἔσχεν ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης ἀρχῆς ἐκείνης, ὡς ἐπὶ τιμῇ καὶ χάριτι ποιούμενα τοῦ δαιμονίου.

  [46] Consequently they preferred not to appear to the many as untrustworthy and to be disliked for making innovations. In most matters, accordingly, they adhered to the myths and maintained agreement with them in their representations, but in some few cases they contributed their own ideas, becoming in a sense the rivals as well as fellow-craftsmen of the poets, since the latter appealed to the ear alone, whereas it was simply through the eye that they, for their part, interpreted the divine attributes to their more numerous and less cultivated spectators. And all these influences won strength from that primary impulse, as having originated with the honouring of the divine being and winning his favour.

  [47] καὶ μὴν δίχα γε τῆς ἁπλῆς καὶ πρεσβυτάτης ἐννοίας περὶ θεῶν καὶ ξυγγενῶς πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἅμα τῷ λόγῳ φυομένης πρὸς τοῖς τρισὶ τούτοις ἑρμηνεῦσι καὶ διδασκάλοις ποιητικῆς καὶ νομοθετικῆσκαὶ δημιουργικῆς τέταρτον ἀνάγκη παραλαβεῖν, οὐδαμῇ ῥᾴθυμον οὐδὲ ἀπείρως ἡγούμενον ἔχειν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν, λέγω δὲ τὸν φιλόσοφον ἄνδρα, ἢ λόγῳ ἐξηγητὴν καὶ προφήτην τῆς ἀθανάτου φύσεως ἀληθέστ�
�τον ἴσως καὶ τελειότατον.

  [47] And furthermore, quite apart from that simple and earliest notion of the gods which develops in the hearts of all men along with their reasoning power, in addition to those three interpreters and teachers, the poets, the lawgivers, and creative artists, we must take on a fourth one, who is by no means indifferent nor believes himself unacquainted with the gods, I mean the philosopher, the one who by means of reason interprets and proclaims the divine nature, most truly, perhaps, and most perfectly.

  [48] τὸν μὲν οὖν νομοθέτην ἐάσωμεν τὰ νῦν εἰς εὐθύνας ἄγειν, ἄνδρα αὐστηρὸν καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους αὐτὸν εὐθύνοντα: δέοι γὰρ ἂν αὐτὸν αὐτοῦ φείδεσθαι καὶ τῆς ὑμετέρας ἀσχολίας. ὑπὲρ δὲ τῶν λοιπῶν ἑκάστου γένους προχειρισάμενοι τὸν ἄκρον σκοπῶμεν, εἴ τινα ὠφέλειαν ἢ καὶ βλάβην φανήσονται πεποιηκότες πρὸς εὐσέβειαν τοῖς αὑτῶν ἔργοις ἢ λόγοις, ὅπως τε ἔχουσιν ὁμολογίας ἢτοῦ διαφέρεσθαι ἀλλήλοις, καὶ τίς αὐτῶν ξυνέπεται τῷ ἀληθεῖ μάλιστα, τῇ πρώτῃ καὶ ἀδόλῳ γνώμῃ σύμφωνος ὤν. πάντες τοιγαροῦν οὗτοι ξυνᾴδουσιν, ὥσπερ ἑνὸς ἴχνους λαβόμενοι, καὶ τοῦτο σῴζοντες, οἱ μὲν σαφῶς, οἱ δὲ ἀδηλότερον. οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἴσως δέοιτο παραμυθίας ὁ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ φιλόσοφος, εἰ μὴ πρὸς σύγκρισιν ἄγοιτο ποιηταῖς[p. 169] ἀγαλμάτων ἢ μέτρων, καὶ ταῦτα ἐν ὄχλῳ πανηγύρεως ἐκείνοις φίλων δικαστῶν.