Fate leads the willing and drags the unwilling.[30]

Thou mayest, moreover, assert that thou didst desire to renounce

thy life of ease, to break the toils in which wealth had enmeshed

thee, and, even though in utter destitution, to escape from such a

whirlpool. This defense was known also to the ancient historians,

and I who follow in their footsteps was not able to pass it over in

silence.[31] But if I concealed my innermost thoughts when defending

thee in public, dost thou suppose that now, when my words are

addressed directly to thee, I shall suppress what my indignation and

love of truth urge me to say? Come now, approach nearer, that no

stranger may overhear on becoming aware that time has not robbed us

of a knowledge of thy doings.

We have (thou must know) a most trustworthy authority, one who,

though writing of men in the highest station, was influenced neither

by fear nor favor, Suetonius Tranquillus. And dost thou know what

he says? That thou didst discourage Nero’s reading of the ancient

orators in order that thou mightest retain him the longer as an

admirer of thine own writings.[32] In other words, thou didst strive

with might and main to be dear to one to whom thou shouldst have

found some means of becoming an object of sovereign contempt and

derision, by either feigning to have, or else really possessing, an

irrepressible tongue. Am I not right? The first cause of all thy

misery was the shallowness of thy aim, not to say its worthlessness.

Though weighed down with years, thou didst pursue the elusive phantom

of glory entirely too joyously, I might almost say childishly. Let

us grant for the moment that it was the advice of another, or an

error on thy part, or even fate that made thee the teacher of that

ungovernable man--for in seeking to excuse our own faults we are wont

to lay the blame on fate. But it was _thy_ fault that thou didst

remain his sponsor. Thou canst not accuse fortune; thy prayers were

answered and thou obtainedst that which thou hadst so ardently longed

for.

But how was it all to end? Ah, thou wretched man! Since thou hadst

endeared thyself to that wild youth to such an extent as to render

it impossible for him to leave thee at will, shouldst thou not at

least have borne with greater resignation the yoke which thou hadst

assumed of thine own accord?[33] Shouldst thou not at least have

refrained from branding the name of thy master with everlasting

infamy?[34] Didst thou not know that tragedy is the most serious of

all compositions, as Naso says?[35] And we all know how biting, how

virulent, and how vehement is the tragedy that thou didst write

against him.[36] Receive my words in good part, O Seneca, and be

calm, for the more impatiently one listens to the truth the more

deeply is he wounded by it. Unless perchance I am wronging thee, and

the contention of some be true, that the author of those tragedies is

not thou, but another bearing the same name. For the Spaniards assert

both that Cordova produced two Senecas,[37] and that the name of

that tragedy (written against Nero) is _Octavia_. In this play there

is a passage that gives rise to the suspicion of authorship.[38] If

we accept the conclusions drawn therefrom, thou wilt be entirely

acquitted of having written the tragedy to avenge the burden of thy

yoke. As far as style is concerned, that other author (whoever he

is) is by no means thy inferior, although he is later than thou in

time and far behind thee in reputation. The more inadequate is the

attack on infamous conduct, the weaker is the intellectual power

of the writer. Indeed, beyond the attack on Nero there is (in my

opinion) no other excuse for the writing of that much-discussed

play. And the attack must be inadequate in this case, for I realize

that no bitterness of either thought or expression could be quite

commensurate with the abominable deeds of that man--if he be worthy

the name of man.

Consider, however, whether it was proper for thee to write of him as

thou didst, when the relationship between you was that of subject

and sovereign, subordinate and superior, teacher and pupil. Was it

fitting that thou shouldst write thus of him whom it was thy custom

to flatter, or rather (not to mince matters) by flattering, deceive?

Re-read the books which thou didst dedicate to him on the subject of

Mercy;[39] recollect the sentiments expressed in the volume which

thou didst address to Polybius on Consolation; finally, run over

thy other works, the fruit of many sleepless nights, provided that

the waters of Lethe have not wiped out all memory of them. Do as I

say, and (I am sure) thou wilt be ashamed of the praises thou didst

lavish upon thy pupil. I for one cannot comprehend thy effrontery in

penning such words of such a man; I cannot read them without a sense

of shame. But thou wilt have recourse to the customary defense, I

know. Thou wilt adduce the youth of the prince and his disposition,

which gave promise of much better results; and thou wilt endeavor to

defend the error of thy choice by his sudden and unexpected change

in life.[40] As if these arguments were unknown to us! But consider

this, how utterly inexcusable it was that a few, unimportant acts of

a charlatan prince, and his murmured hypocritical phrases on duty,

should have warped the mind and judgment of a man of thy discretion,

thy years, thy experience in life, and thy learning. Tell me, pray,

what deed of Nero pleased thee? I mean of course before he plunged

headlong into the abyss of disgraceful crimes--that earlier period

whose deeds some historians record (to use their own words)[41] with

no reproof, others with no inconsiderable amount of praise. Which of

them, I ask, pleased thee? Was it his fondness for contending in the

chariot-race,[42] or for playing on the cithern? We read, in fact,

that he diligently applied himself to these pursuits; that at first

he practiced in secret, in the presence of his slaves and the squalid

poor only, but that later he performed even in public, and, though

a monarch, drove his chariot in sight of all Rome like an ordinary

charioteer; and that, posing as a pre-eminent player, he worshiped

the cithern presented to him as if it had been a divinity.[43] At

last, elated at these successes, and as if not content with the

critical acumen of the Italians, he visited Achaia, and, puffed up

by the adulation of the art-loving Greeks, declared that only they

were worthy of being his listeners.[44] Ridiculous monster, savage

beast![45] Or, perhaps, didst thou consider the following a sure omen

of a good and conscientious ruler, that he consecrated on the Capitol

his first growth of beard, the first molting of his inhuman face?[46]

These surely are acts of thy Nero, O Seneca, and acts performed

by him at an age when the historians still reckoned him among

human beings, and when thou didst strive to set him among the gods

by commendations worthy neither of the one praising nor the one

praised. Indeed, thou didst not hesitate to rank him above that best

of rulers, the deified Augustus.[47] I do not know whether thou

art ashamed of this; I am. But I suppose thou didst deem Nero’s

deeds worthy of greater praise, in that he tortured the Christians,

a truly holy and harmless sect, but (as it seemed to him and to

Suetonius who tells the story) guilty of embracing a new and baneful

superstition.[48] Nero had now become the persecutor and the most

bitter enemy of all righteousness. In all seriousness, however, I

do not entertain such an evil opinion of thee, wherefore I wonder

all the more at thy earlier resolutions. And naturally so, because

the youthful deeds of Nero were too pitiful and vain, whereas his

persecution was execrable and frightful. This must have been thy

opinion, for in one of thy letters to the apostle Paul thou didst not

only intimate, but actually declare it.[49] Nor, I feel sure, couldst

thou have thought otherwise, once thou hadst given a willing ear to

his holy and heavenly teachings, and hadst embraced a friendship so

divinely held out to thee. Would that thou hadst been more steadfast

and that thou hadst not in the end been torn away from him! Would

that, together with that messenger of the Truth, thou hadst chosen

to die for the sake of that same Truth, for the promised reward in

heaven, and in honor of that great apostle!

The impulse of my subject, however, has taken me too far, and I

perceive that I have begun my sowing too late to entertain any hopes

of a good crop. So farewell forever.

_Written in the land of the living, in Cisalpine Gaul, between

the left bank of the greedy Enza and the right bank of the

bridge-shattering Parma, on the Kalends of Sextilis (August 1)

in the year from the birth of Him whom I am uncertain whether

thou didst know or not, the thirteen hundred and forty-eighth._

Petrarch's Letters to Classical Authors · 第 12 / 30 题