So again, in the same spirit, the Appian hymn says of Zeus:—

Ἓν κράτος, εἷς δαίμων γένετο μέγας οὐρανὸν αἴθων

Ἓν δὲ τὰ πάντα τέτυκται· ἐν ᾧ τάδε πάντα κυκλεῖται.

And Euripides exclaims, ‘Where is the house, the fabric reared by man,

that could contain the immensity of God?’

Ποῖος δ’ ἂν οἶκος, τεκτόνων πλασθεὶς ὑπὸ

Δέμας, τὸ Θεῖον περιβάλλοι τοίχων πτυχαῖς,

and adds that the true God needs no sacrifices on his altar. And

Æschylus, in like manner, says:—

Ζεύς ἐστιν αἰθὴρ, Ζεὺς δὲ γῆ, Ζεὺς δ’ οὐρανὸς,

Ζεύς τοι τὰ πάντα, χὥτι τῶν δ’ ὑπέρτερον.

And Sophocles, also in similar lines, proclaims the unity and

universality of God. And Theocritus, in his ‘Idylls,’ echoes the same

sentiment. The same cast of thought, the same lofty idea of God, is

found among the ancient Romans. Lucan exclaims in his ‘Pharsalia:’—

‘Jupiter est quod cumque vides, quo cumque moveris.’

Valerius Soranus makes him the one universal, omnipotent God, the

Father and Mother of us all:—

‘Jupiter omnipotens, regum rerumque deumque

_Progenitor genetrix_que deum deus unus et omnes.’[26]

Can any statement be larger and more inclusive than this?[27] Such

indeed was the true philosophic idea of Jupiter, as entertained by

the best and most exalted in ancient days. You must go to the highest

sources to learn what the highest notions of Deity are among any

people, and not grope among the popular superstitions and myths. Then,

again, what nobler expressions of our relation to an infinite and

universal spirit of God are to be found than in Epictetus and Seneca?

‘God is near you, is with you, is within you,’ Seneca writes. ‘A sacred

spirit dwells within us, the observer and guardian of all our evil and

all our good. There is no good man without God.’ And again: ‘Even from

a corner it is possible to spring up into heaven. Rise, therefore,

and form thyself into a fashion worthy of God.’ And again: ‘It is

no advantage that conscience is shut up within us. We lie open to

God.’ And still again: ‘Do you wish to render the gods propitious? Be

virtuous.’ One might cite such passages for hours from the writings of

these men. Can you, then, think that our notions of God and duty were

so low and so debased?

“Look, too, at our arts. Art and religion with us and the Greeks

went hand in hand. If you seek the true spirit of religion among any

people, you will always find it in the productions of their art. In

sculpture, the most ideal of the plastic arts, you will see the real

features of the gods. They are grand, calm, serene, dignified, and

above the taint of human passion; claiming reverence and love in their

beauty and perfection beyond the human. Here there is nothing mean or

low. So godlike are they even in the poorer specimens of their noble

figures that have come down to you, that you yourselves recognize in

them ideal grace and power. Read the reflection of our faith in their

forms and features, and you will find in it nothing vulgar, nothing

degrading. The best personifications of your own divinities in art

look poor beside them. God himself in your pictures is feeble compared

with the divine Jupiter of Phidias; the Madonna weak and tame beside

the august grandeur of his Athene. Christ in your art is pitiable

beside the splendor of Apollo; so far from being the highest type of

even man, he is almost the weakest, composed of pale negatives, and

with nothing very positive and grand; while your saints are affected,

cowardly, and cringing, compared with the heroic demigods of Greece.

In art, at least, the ancient deities still live and command reverence

from a serene world beyond change. Would you know what our faith was,

look at the great works of art and at the best thoughts of the greatest

minds we owned, and not at the corrupted text of popular superstition.

These, indeed, were worthy of reverence. They lifted the thoughts and

cleared the spirit, and filled it with a sense of beauty and of power.

Who could look at that magnificent impersonation of Zeus at Olympia,

by Phidias, so grand, so simple, so serene, with its golden robes

and hair, its divine expression of power and sweetness, its immense

proportions, its perfection of workmanship, and not feel that they were

in the presence of an august, tremendous, and impassionate power?”

“Ah!” I exclaimed, “that truly I wish I could have seen—what majesty,

what beauty, it must have had!”

“Ay!” he answered. “No one could see it and not be enlarged in spirit

by it.”

“Was, then, the Athena of the Parthenon,” I asked, “equal in merit?”

“It was very different. It wanted the power and massive grandeur of the

Zeus; but in its dignity and serenity it had a wondrous charm. It was

the true type of wisdom, calm above doubt, and with a gentle severity

of aspect, as if, undisturbed by the tormenting questions that vex

humanity, it saw the eternal truth of things. When I compare with these

wondrous statues your best representations of your divinities, I cannot

but feel how vast a difference there is; and when in your temples one

sees the prostrate figures of men and women clinging to vulgar and

degraded images of saints, imploring aid and protection from them, and

soliciting their interposition against the avenging hand of Deity, I

cannot see that you are better than we.”

“But, after all, through this there is a belief in a pure and infinite

Being beyond—a Being beyond all human passion; not imperfect and

subject to wild caprices, and capable of abominable acts.”

“You see, we go back to the same question,” he replied. “You profess

to worship a God above nature, and yet your prayers are to Christ,

the man; to the saints, who were lower men and women; and you cling

to these as mediators. Well; and we also believed in a spirit and

power undefined and above all, whose nature we could not grasp,

and who expressed himself in every living thing. Our gods were but

anthropomorphic symbols of special powers and developments of an

infinite and overruling power. They partly represent, in outward shape

and form, philosophic ideas and human notions about the infinite God,

and partly body forth the phenomena of nature, that hint at the great

ultimate cause behind them, of which they are, so to speak, the outward

garment, by which the Universal Deity is made visible to man. In our

religion nature was but the veil which half hid the divine powers.

Everywhere they peered out upon us, from grove and river, from night

and morning, from lightning and storm, from all the elements and all

the changes and mysteries of the living universe. It delighted us to

feel their absolute, active presence among us—not far away from us,

involved in utter obscurity, and beyond our comprehension. We saw the

Great Cause in its second plane, close to us, in the growing of the

flower, in the flowing of the stream, in the drifting of the cloud, in

the rising and setting of the sun. Our gods (representing the great

idea beyond, and doing its work) were anthropomorphic by necessity,

just as yours are in art. The popular fables are but the mythical

garb behind which lie great facts and truths. They are symbolical

representations of the great processes of nature, of the laws of

life and growth, of the changes of the seasons, of the strife of the

elements. Apollo was the life-giving sun; Artemis, the mysterious

moon; Ceres and Proserpine, the burial of the grain in the earth, and

its reappearance and fructification. So, on another plane, Minerva

was the philosophic mind of man; Venus, the impassioned embodiment of

human love, as Eros was of spiritual affections; Bacchus, the serene

and full enjoyment of nature. We but divided philosophically what

you sum up in one final cause; but all our divisions looked back to

that cause. In an imaginative people like the Greeks, there is also a

natural tendency to mythical embodiment of facts in history as well

as in nature; and in the early periods, when little was written down,

traditions easily assumed the myth form. Ideas were reduced to visible

shapes, and facts were etherealized into ideas and imaginatively

transformed. The story of Diana and Endymion, of Cupid and Psyche,

will always be true—not to the reason, but to the imagination. It

expresses poetically a sentiment which cannot die. So, also, what

matters it if Dædalus built a ship for Icarus, and Icarus was simply

drowned? Sublimed into poetry, it became a myth, and Icarus flew

on waxen wings across the sea. All poetry is thus allegorical. The

wind will always have wings until it ceases to blow. These myths are

simply poetic moulds of thought, in which vague sentiments, ideas,

and facts are wrought together into an express shape. Think what your

own literature or thought would be without the old Grecian poems. Let

the reason reject them as it will, and drive them out into the cold,

the imagination will run forth and bring them back again to warm and

cherish them on its breast. Facts, as facts, are but dead husks. The

spirit cannot live upon them. Besides, are not our myths enchanting?

Could anything take their place? Can science, peering into all things,

ever find the secrets of nature? After all its explorations, the final

element of life, the motive and inspiring element that is the essence

of all the organism it uses and without which all is mere material,

mere machinery, flees utterly beyond its reach, and leaves it at last

with only dust in its hands. Does not the little child that makes

playmates of the flowers, and the brooks, and the sands, find God there

better than any of us? The subtle divinity hides anywhere, entices

everywhere, is just out of reach everywhere. We catch glimpses of it,

breathe its odor, hear its dim voice, see the last flutter of its robe,

pursue it endlessly, and never can seize it. The poet is poet because

he loves this spirit in nature, and comes nearer it; but he cannot

grasp it; and for all his pursuit he comes back laden at last with a

secret he cannot quite tell, and shapes us a myth to express it as well

as he may.”

“But surely,” I answered, “we should distinguish between mere poetry

and fact—between science and fancy. So long as we admit the unreality

of merely fanciful creations and explanations of facts, we may be

pleased with them; but let us not be misled by them into a belief of

their scientific truth.”

“Ah, ’tis the old story! The little child has a bit of wood, which to

her, in the free play of her imagination, is a person with good and bad

qualities, who acts well or ill, whom she loves or despises. She whips

it; she caresses it; she scolds it; she sends it to school or to bed;

she forgives it and fondles it. All is real to the child; more real,

perhaps, than to the nurse who stands beside her and laughs at her,

and says, ‘How silly! come away! it is only a stick!’ Which is right?

The Greeks were the child, and you are the nurse. What is truth, which

is always on our lips—truth of history, truth of science, truth of any

kind? Who knows—history? Two persons standing together see the same

occurrence; is it the same to both? Far from it. The literal friend

is amazed to hear what the imaginative friend saw. Yet both may be

right in their report, only one saw what the other had no senses to

perceive. We only see and feel according to our natures. What we are

modifies what we see. Out of the camomile flower the physician makes

a decoction, and the poet a song. History is but a dried herbarium of

withered facts, unless the imagination interpret them. I cannot but

smile at what is called history; and of all history, that of our own

Roman world seems the strangest, because, perhaps, I know it best.”

“Ah!” I broke in, “how one wishes you had written us familiar memoirs

of your time, and given us some intimate insight into your life, your

thoughts, your daily doings. We have so to grope about in the dark for

any knowledge of you. And then, in the history of art, what dreadful

blanks! I do not feel assured, except from your ‘Meditations,’ as we

call them, and your letters, that we really know anything accurately

about you. About the Thundering Legion, for instance,—what is the

truth?”

“There,” he answered, “is an instance of the ease with which a fable

is made, and how a simple fact may be tortured into an untruth merely

to suit a purpose. When I was on my campaign against the Quadi, in the

year 174, the incident to which you refer happened. The spring had been

cold and late, and suddenly the heats of summer overtook us in the

enemy’s country. After a long and difficult march on a very hot day,

we suddenly came upon the enemy, who, descending from the mountains,

attacked us, overcome with fatigue, in the plains. The battle went

against us for some time, for my army suffered so from thirst and heat

and exhaustion that they were unable to repel the attack, and were

forced back. While they were in full retreat and confusion, suddenly

the sky became clouded over, and a drenching shower poured upon us. My

men, who were dying of thirst, stopped fighting, took off their helmets

and reversed their shields to catch the rain, and while they were thus

engaged the enemy renewed their assault with double fury. All seemed

lost, when suddenly, as sometimes occurs among the mountains, a fierce

wind swept down with terrible peals of thunder and vivid flashes of

lightning; the rain changed into hail, which was blown and driven with

such a fury into the faces of the enemy that they were confounded and

confused, and began in their turn to fall back. My own men, having the

storm only on their backs, refreshed by the rain they had drunken from

their shields and helmets, and cooled by their bath, now anew attacked,

and, pouring upon their foe with fury, cut them to pieces. Among my

soldiers at this time there was an old legion, organized in the time of

Augustus, named the Fulminata, from the fact that they bore on their

shields a thunderbolt; upon this simple fact was founded the story,

repeated by many early writers in the Christian Church, that this

legion was composed of Christians only, that the storm was a miraculous

interposition of their God in answer to their prayer, and that they

then received the name of Fulminata, in commemoration of this miracle.

This is the simple truth of the case. My men said that Jupiter Pluvius

came to their aid, and they sacrificed to him in gratitude; and on the

column afterwards dedicated to me by the Senate in commemoration of

my services, you will see the sculptured figure of Jupiter Pluvius,

from whose beard, arms, and head the water is streaming to refresh my

soldiers, while his thunderbolts are flashing against the barbarians.”

As he spoke these words, a flash of lightning, so intense as to blind

the lamps, gleamed through the room, followed by a startling peal of

thunder, which seemed to shake not only the house but the sky above us.

He smiled and said, “We should have said in older time that Jupiter

affirmed the truth of my statement; but you are above such puerilities,

I suppose.”

“Certainly I should not say it was a sign from Jupiter. The thunder was

on the left, and that was considered by you a good omen, was it not?

‘Et cœli genitor de parte serena

Intonuit lævum.’”

“This thunder on the left was considered a good omen. But what was

it you said after you asked the question? You seemed to be making a

quotation in a strange tongue—at least a tongue I never heard.”

“That was Latin,” I answered, blushing a little, “and from

Virgil—Virgilius, perhaps I ought to say, or perhaps Maro.”

“Ah! Latin, was it?” he said. “I beg your pardon; I thought it might

have been a charm to avert the Evil Eye that you were uttering.”

“As difficult to understand as the Eleusinian mysteries,” I said. “And,

by the way, what were the Eleusinian mysteries?”

“They were mysteries! I can merely say to you that they concealed

under formal rites the worship of the spirit of nature, as symbolized

in Demeter and Persephone and Dionysos. In their purest and hidden

meaning, they represented the transformation, purification, and

resurrection of humanity in a new form and in another existence. But I

am not at liberty to say more than this. The outward rites were for the

multitude, the inner meaning for the highest and most developed minds.

Were it permitted to me to explain them to you, I think you would not

take so low a view of our religious philosophy as you now seem to have.

What you hear and read of was merely the outward and mystical drama,

with its lustrations and fasting, and cakes of sesame and honey, and

processions—as symbolical in its way as your mass and baptism, and

having as pure a significance.

“But,” he continued, “to revert to the questions which we were

previously discussing. It seems to me that in certain respects your

faith is not even so satisfactory as ours; for its tendency is to

degrade the present in view of the future, and to debase humanity in

its own view. With us life was not considered disgraceful, nor man a

mean and contemptible creature. We did not systematically humiliate

ourselves and cringe before the divine powers, but strove to stand

erect, and not to forget that we were made by God after his own image.

We did not affect that false humility which in the view of the ancient

philosophers was contemptible—nay, even we thought that the pride of

humility was of all the most despicable. We sought to keep ourselves

just, obedient to our best instincts, temperate and simple, looking

upon life as a noble gift of the gods, to be used for noble purposes.

We believed, beside this, that virtue should be practiced for itself,

and not through any hope of reward or any fear of punishment here or

hereafter. To act up to our highest idea of what was right was our

principle, not out of terror or in the hope of conciliating God, but

because it was right; and to look calmly on death, not as an evil, but

as a step onward to another existence. To desire nothing too much; to

hold one’s self equal to any fate; to keep one’s self in harmony with

nature and with one’s own nature; calmly to endure what is inevitable,

steadily to abstain from all that is wrong; to remember that there is

no such thing as misfortune to the brave and wise, but only phantasms

that falsely assume these shapes to shake the mind; that when what

we wish does not happen, we should wish what does happen; that God

hath given us courage, magnanimity, and fortitude, so that we may

stand up against invasions of evil and bear misfortune,—such were our

principles, and they enabled us to live heroic lives, vindicating

the nobility of human nature, and not despising it as base and lost;

believing in the justice of God and not in his caprice and enmity to

any of us, and having no ignoble fear of the future.”

“But are not these principles for the most part ours?” I answered. “Do

we not believe that virtue is the grand duty of man? Do none of us seek

to live heroic lives, and sacrifice ourselves to do good to the world

and to our brothers?”

“Certainly, you lead heroic lives; but your great principle is

humility—your great motive, reward or fear. You profess to look on

this life as mean and miserable, and on yourselves as creatures of

the dust; and you declare that you have no claim to be saved from

eternal damnation by leading a just life, but only by a capricious

election hereafter. You profess that your God is a God of love, and you

attribute to Him enmity and injustice of which you yourself would be

ashamed. You think you are to be saved because Christ died on the cross

for you, and you are not sure of it even then. But with us every one

deserved to be tried on his own merits, and to expiate his own errors

and crimes.”

“It is supposed by some that you were half a Christian yourself. Is

this so?”

“If you mean that I reverenced the life and doctrines of Christ, and

saw in Him a pure man, I certainly did. But in my principles I was

a Stoic purely, and it is only as a philosopher that I admired the

character of Christ. You think the principles He preached were new;

they were really as old as the world, almost. His life was blameless,

and He sacrificed his life for his principles; and for this I reverence

Him, but no further. His followers, however, were far less pure and

self-denying, and they sought power and endeavored to overthrow the

state.”

“Was it for this you persecuted them?” I said.

“I did not persecute them,” he answered. “As Christians they were

perfectly free in Rome. All religions were free, and all admitted. No

one was interfered with merely for his religious belief and worship,

whether it were that of Isis, of Mithras, of Jehovah, or of any other

deity. It was only when the Christians endeavored to attain to power

and provoke disturbance in the state, to abuse authority and set at

defiance the laws, that it became necessary—or at all events was

considered necessary—to stop them. When they were not content with

worshiping according to their own creed, but aggressively denounced

the popular worship as damnable, and sought to cast public contempt

on all gods but their own, they outraged the public sense as much

as if any one now should denounce Christ as a vagabond, and seek by

abuse to overthrow your church by all sorts of blasphemous language.

Nor would it matter in the least in your own time that any person so

outraging decency should be absolutely honest in his intentions, and

assured in his own mind of the truth of his own doctrines. Suppose one

step further,—that any set of men should not only undertake to turn

Christ into ridicule publicly, but should also abuse the government and

conspire to overthrow the monarchy. You would then have a case similar

to that of the Christians in my day. At all events, it was believed

that it was a settled plan with them to overthrow the empire, and it

was for this that they were, as you call it, persecuted. For my own

part, I was sorry for it, deeming in such matters it was better to take

no measures so severe; but I personally had nothing to do with it.

It was the fanatical zeal of the government, who, acting without my

commands, took advantage of ancient laws to punish the Christians; and

this your own Tertullian will prove to you. They undoubtedly supposed

that the Christians were endeavoring to create a political and social

revolution,—that they were in fact Communists, as you would now call

them, intent upon overthrowing the state. I confess that there was

a good deal of color given to such a judgment by the conduct of the

Christians. But as for myself, as I said, I was opposed to any movement

against them, believing them all to be honest of purpose, though

perhaps somewhat excited and fanatical.”

“Why did you think that they were Communists?” I asked. “Had you any

sufficient grounds for such a belief?”

“Surely; the most ample grounds in the very teachings of Christ

himself. His system was essentially communistic, and nothing else.

His followers and disciples were all Communists; they all lived in

common, had a common purse, and no one was allowed to own anything.

They were ordered by Christ not to labor, but to live from day to day,

and take no heed of the future, and lay up nothing, but to sell all

they had, and live like the ravens. Christ himself denounced riches

constantly—not the wrong use of riches, but the mere possession of

them; and said it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a

needle, than for a rich man to inherit the kingdom of heaven,—not a

bad rich man, observe, but any rich man. So, too, his story of Lazarus

and Dives turns on the same point. It does not appear that Lazarus was

good, but only that he was poor; nor does it appear that Dives was bad,

but only that he was rich; and when Dives in Hades prays for a drop

of water, he is told that he had the good things in his lifetime, and

Lazarus the evil things, and that _therefore_ he is now tormented, and

Lazarus is comforted.”

“But, surely,” I answered, “it was intended to mean that Dives had not

used his riches properly?”

“Nothing is said of the kind, or even intimated; for all that appears,

Dives may have been a good man, and Lazarus not. The only apparent

virtue of Lazarus is, that he was a beggar; the only fault of Dives,

that he was rich. Do you not remember, also, the rich young man who

desired to become one of Christ’s followers, and asked what he should

do to be saved? Christ told him that doing the commandments, and being

virtuous and honest, was not enough; but that he must sell all that

he had, and give it to the poor, and then he could follow Him, and

not otherwise; and the rich good man was very sorrowful, and went

away. What does all this mean but Communism? Yes; the system He would

carry out was community of goods, and He would permit no one to have

possessions of his own. This struck at the roots of all established law

and rights of property, and naturally made his sect feared and hated

among certain classes in Rome.”

“I am astonished,” I said, “to find that you have so carefully studied

the records of the teachings and doctrines of Christ.”

“Is it not the duty of any man,” he answered, “especially of one

in a responsible position, carefully to consider the arguments and

doctrines of all who are sincere and earnest in their convictions,

and, however averse they may be from our preconceived opinions, to

weigh them, as far as possible, calmly, and without prejudice, and see

what they really are and what truth there may be in them? and was not

this peculiarly incumbent on me in the case of so noble and spiritual

a teacher as Christ? Was it not my duty to endeavor, as far as in me

lay, first to recognize the great principles of his teaching, and then

in their light to examine and weigh his very words as far as they

are authentically reported to us by his followers? It is this fixed

notion, from which we cannot easily free ourselves, that we in our

own views alone can be right, that shuts up the mind and encrusts our

faith with superstitions. We at our best are merely men, subject to

errors, short-sighted, fixed in prejudices, and seeing but a part of

anything. No system of religion ever embraced all truth; no system is

without gleams of it; all recognize a higher power above us and beyond

our comprehension; and nothing is more unbecoming than to scorn what

we have not even striven to understand, or to shut our ears and our

minds to any doctrine or faith which is earnestly, seriously propounded

and accepted by others. Unfortunately, it is this narrow-mindedness

and arrogance of opinion which has always impeded the growth and

development of truth. There is nothing so bitter as religious

controversy,—nothing which has so petrified our intelligence or has

begotten such crimes and such persecutions. Therefore it was that I

deemed it my duty to study and endeavor to understand the doctrine and

belief of all sincere minds, whether of those who worshiped Jehovah or

Zeus, Mithras or Christ, and not to reject them as wicked or erroneous

simply because they were averse from the faith in which I had been

educated. Will you excuse me if I say that what amazes me in regard to

the Christian faith is, that while it is claimed that Christ is God,

and therefore to be implicitly obeyed in all his commands, so little

intelligence is shown in studying those commands, and such willful

perversion in avoiding them even when they are plainly enunciated;

and again, that while claiming that love and forgiveness are the very

corner-stone of your faith, you Christians none the less not only

accept war and battle as arbitraments of right, but in the name of

your great founder,—nay, of your very God,—have endeavored at times to

enforce those doctrines by the most hideous of crimes, and by wholesale

slaughter of those who differed from you in minor particulars

of faith; and still more, do constantly even now exhibit such

narrow-minded adherence to mere words and texts, without consideration

of the great principles which underlie them and in the light of which

surely they are to be interpreted. You are all Christians now, in Rome.

You profess absolute faith in the teaching of Christ. You profess to

consider his life as the great exemplar for all men. Do you follow it?

Do you, for instance, think it in accordance with his teaching or his

example to devote your lives selfishly to the laying up of riches for

your own individual luxuries, to clothe yourselves in purple and fine

linen, to make broad your phylacteries, or to use vain repetitions in

your prayers as the heathen do, standing in the synagogues and at the

corners of the streets, and to play the part of Dives while Lazarus is

starving at your gates? Are you any better than we heathens, as you

call us, in all this? Do you think Christ would have done thus, or

smiled approval on all you do in his name? Ah! you say, it would be

impossible for us strictly to carry out this system of Christ. It is

beautiful, but ideal, and for us, in the present state of the world,

absolutely impracticable. But have you ever tried it? Have you ever

even sought to try it, and to hold a common purse for the interest of

all?”

I had to bow my head, and admit that in that high sense we are not

Christians. “But,” I said, “to follow exactly all these commands, to

carry out all these doctrines, even to imitate his example as set

before us in his life, would be to revolutionize the world.”

“But does not the world need revolutionizing,” he said, “according to

your own principles?”

“We do what we can, at least we endeavor to do so, as far as we are

able.”

“Are you sure even of that?” he replied. “Are you sure it is not mammon

that you really worship, and not Christ? But I will say no more. You

are but mortal men as we were; and man is fallible and weak, and our

knowledge is but half-knowledge at best, and our love and faith have

but feeble wings to lift us above the earth on which we dwell. Look

upon us, therefore, as you would be looked upon yourselves, and be

not too stern on our shortcomings. We had our vices and faults and

deficiencies as you have yours, but we had also our virtues, and were

on the whole as high of purpose, as self-sacrificing, as pure even as

you; but man neither then nor now has led an ideal life.

“But to return to what we were saying about our treatment of

Christians. Let me add in my own justification that I for myself never

had any hand in persecutions, either of Christians or of others, nor

was I ever aware that they were persecuted. I knew that persons who

happened to be Christians were punished for political offenses; and

that was all, I think, that happened. Believe me, my soul was averse

from all such things, nor would I ever allow even my enemies to be

persecuted, much less those who merely differed from me on moral and

philosophical theses. Nay, I may say they differed little from me even

on these points, as you may well see if you read my letters on the

subject of the proper treatment of one’s enemies, written to Lucius

Verus, or if you will refer to that little diary of mine in Pannonia,

wherein I was not so base as to lie to myself.”

“Indeed,” I cried; “that book is a precious record of the purest and

highest morality.”

“’Tis a poor thing,” he answered, “but sincere. I strove to act up to

my best principles; but life is difficult, and man is not wise, and our

opinions are often incorrect. Still, I strove to act according to my

nature; to do the things which were fit for me, and not to be diverted

from them by fear of any blame; to keep the divine part in me tranquil

and content; and to look upon death and life, honor and dishonor, pain

and pleasure, as neither good nor evil in themselves, but only in the

way in which we receive them. For fame I sought not; for what is fame

but a smoke that vanishes, a river that runs dry, a lamp that soon is

extinguished—a tale of a day, and scarcely even so much? Therefore,

it benefits us not deeply to consider it, but to pass on through the

little space assigned to us conformably to nature, and in content,

and to leave it at last grateful for what we have received, just as

an olive falls off when it is ripe, blessing nature which produced

it, and thanking the tree on which it grew. So, also, it is our duty

not to defile the divinity in our breast, but to follow it tranquilly

and obediently as a god, saying nothing contrary to truth, and doing

nothing contrary to justice. For our opinions are but running streams,

flowing in various ways; but truth and justice are ever the same, and

permanent, and our opinions break about them as the waves round a

rock, while they stand firm forever. For every accident of life there

is a corresponding virtue to exercise; and if we consult the divine

within us, we know what it is. As we cannot avoid the inevitable, we

should accept it without murmuring; for we cannot struggle against

the gods without injuring ourselves. For the good we do to others, we

have our immediate reward; for the evil that others do to us, if we

cease to think of it, there is no evil to us. It is by accepting an

offense, and entertaining it in our thoughts, that we increase it,

and render ourselves unhappy, and veil our reason, and disturb our

senses. As for our life, it should be given to proper objects, or it

will not be decent in itself; for a man is the same in quality as the

object that engages his thoughts. Our whole nature takes the color of

our thoughts and actions. We should also be careful to keep ourselves

from rash and premature judgments about men and things; for often a

seeming wrong done to us is a wrong only through our misapprehension,

and arising from our fault. And so, making life as honest as possible

and calmly doing our duty in the present, as the hour and the act

require, and not too curiously considering the future beyond us,

standing ever erect, and believing that the gods are just, we may make

our passage through this life no dishonor to the Power that placed us

here. Throughout the early portion of my life, my father, Antoninus

Pius,—I call him my father, for he was ever dear to me, and was like a

father,—taught me to be laborious and assiduous, to be serene and just,

to be sober and kind, to be brave and without envy or vanity; and on

his death-bed, when he felt the shadow coming over him, he ordered the

captain of the guard to transfer to me the golden statuette of Fortune,

and gave him his last watchword of ‘Equanimity.’ From that day to the

day when, in my turn, I left the cares of empire and of life, I ever

kept that watchword in my heart—equanimity; nor do I know a better one

for any man.”

“Oh, tell me, for you know,” I cried, “what is there behind this

dark veil which we call death? You have told me of your opinions and

thoughts and principles of life, here; but of that life hereafter you

have not said a word. What is it?”

There was a blank silence. I looked up—the chair was empty! That noble

figure was no longer there.

“Fool that I was!” I cried; “why did I discuss with him these narrow

questions belonging to life and history, and leave that stupendous

question unasked which torments us all, and of which he could have

given the solution?”

I rose from my chair, and after walking up and down the room several

minutes, with the influence of him who had left me still filling my

being as a refined and delicate odor, I went to the window, pushed wide

the curtains, and looked out upon the night. The clouds were broken,

and through a rift of deep, intense blue, the moon was looking out on

the earth. Far away, the heavy and ragged storm was hovering over the

mountains, sullen and black, and I recalled the words of St. Paul to

the Romans:—

“When the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things

contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto

themselves;” and “the doers of the law shall be justified.”

Excursions in Art and Letters · 第 26 / 33 题