Apuleius, Apologia

Nam si, quod ego apud plurimos lego, Persarum lingua magus est qui nostra sacerdos, quod tandem est crimen, sacerdotem esse et rite nosse atque scire atque callere leges cerimoniarum, fas sacrorum, ius religionum, si quidem magia id est quod Plato interpretatur, cum commemorat, quibusnam disciplinis puerum regno adulescentem Persae imbuant—uerba ipsa diuini uiri memini, quae tu mecum, Maxime, recognosce: δὶς ἑπτὰ δὲ γενόμενον ἐτῶν τὸν παῖδα παραλαμβάνουσιν οὓς ἐκεῖνοι βασιλείους παιδαγωγοὺς ὀνομάζουσιν· εἰσὶν δὲ ἐξειλεγμένοι Περσῶν οἱ ἄριστοι δόξαντες ἐν ἡλικίᾳ τέτταρες, ὅ τε σοφώτατος καὶ ὁ δικαιότατος καὶ ὁ σωφρονέστατος καὶ ὁ ἀνδρειότατος. ὧν ὁ μὲν μαγείαν τε διδάσκει τὴν Ζωροάστρου τοῦ Ὠρομάζου· ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο θεῶν θεραπεία· διδάσκει δὲ καὶ τὰ βασιλικά.

For if, as I read in a great many authors, a magus in the Persian language is what a priest is in ours, what crime is it, after all, to be a priest and to know duly, to understand and to be skilled in the laws of ceremonies, the proper order of rites, the law of religious observance — if indeed magic is what Plato explains it to be when he records in which disciplines the Persians train a boy growing up to be king? I remember the very words of that divine man; go over them with me, Maximus: 'When the boy has reached twice seven years, those whom they call the royal tutors take him in charge. These are four men chosen from among the Persians, judged the best of those in their prime: the wisest, the most just, the most temperate and the bravest. Of these, one teaches the magic of Zoroaster son of Oromazes, and this is the worship of the gods; he also teaches the arts of kingship.'

auditisne magiam, qui eam temere accusatis, artem esse dis immortalibus acceptam, colendi eos ac uenerandi pergnaram, piam scilicet et diuini scientem, iam inde a Zoroastre et Oromaze auctoribus suis nobilem, caelitum antistitam, quippe qui inter prima regalia docetur nec ulli temere inter Persas concessum est magum esse, haud magis quam regnare. idem Plato in alia sermocinatione de Zalmoxi quodam Thraci generis, sed eiusdem artis uiro ita scriptum reliquit: τὰς δὲ ἐπῳδὰς εἶναι τοὺς λόγους τοὺς καλούς. quod si ita est, cur mihi nosse non liceat uel Zalmoxi bona uerba uel Zoroastri sacerdotia? sin uero more uulgari eum isti proprie magum existimant, qui communione loquendi cum deis immortalibus ad omnia quae uelit incredibilia quadam ui cantaminum polleat, oppido miror, cur accusare non timuerint quem posse tantum fatentur. neque enim tam occulta et diuina potentia caueri potest itidem ut cetera. sicarium qui in iudicium uocat, comitatus uenit; qui uenenarium accusat, scrupulosius cibatur; qui furem arguit, sua custodit. enimuero qui magum qualem isti dicunt in discrimen capitis deducit, quibus comitibus, quibus scrupulis, quibus custodibus perniciem caecam et ineuitabilem prohibeat? nullis scilicet; et ideo id genus crimen non est eius accusare, qui credit.

Do you hear, you who rashly accuse it, that magic is an art acceptable to the immortal gods, fully versed in how to worship and revere them, pious, of course, and knowing in things divine, renowned ever since Zoroaster and Oromazes, its founders, a high priestess of the heavenly powers? Indeed it is taught among the first lessons of kingship, and among the Persians no one is lightly allowed to be a magus, any more than to be king. The same Plato, in another dialogue, left this in writing about a certain Zalmoxis, a man of Thracian race but of the same art: 'and that the charms are the fair words.' If that is so, why should I not be allowed to know either the good words of Zalmoxis or the priestly lore of Zoroaster? But if these men, after the common fashion, think the true magus to be one who, through converse with the immortal gods, has the power to do all the incredible things he wishes by some force of incantations, I am utterly amazed that they were not afraid to accuse a man whom they admit to be so powerful. For so hidden and divine a power cannot be guarded against in the same way as other things. Whoever summons an assassin to court comes with an escort; whoever accuses a poisoner eats more cautiously; whoever charges a thief guards his belongings. But whoever brings a magus of the kind these men describe into peril of his life — with what escort, what precautions, what guards could he ward off a ruin unseen and inescapable? With none, of course; and so to bring a charge of that kind is not the act of a man who believes in it.

uerum haec ferme communi quodam errore imperitorum philosophis obiectantur, ut partim eorum qui corporum causas meras et simplicis rimantur irreligiosos putent eoque aiant deos abnuere, ut Anaxagoram et Leucippum et Democritum et Epicurum ceterosque rerum naturae patronos, partim autem, qui prouidentiam mundi curiosius uestigant et impensius deos celebrant, eos uero uulgo magos nominent, quasi facere etiam sciant quae sciant fieri, ut olim fuere Epimenides et Orpheus et Pythagoras et Ostanes, ac dein similiter suspectata Empedocli catharmoe, Socrati daemonion, Platonis τὸ ἀγαθόν. gratulor igitur mihi, cum et ego tot ac tantis uiris adnumeror.

But these charges are generally thrown at philosophers through a kind of common error of the ignorant: some of them, those who search out the pure and simple causes of bodies, they consider irreligious and so say they deny the gods, such as Anaxagoras and Leucippus and Democritus and Epicurus and the other champions of natural philosophy; others, however, who investigate the providence of the world more searchingly and honour the gods more devotedly, these the crowd calls magi, as if they also knew how to make happen what they know does happen, as once were Epimenides and Orpheus and Pythagoras and Ostanes; and afterwards, in the same way, the Purifications of Empedocles, the daemonion [divine sign] of Socrates, and the Good of Plato were held suspect. I congratulate myself, then, that I too am numbered among so many and such great men.

Audisti, Maxime, quorum pleraque scilicet legeras apud antiquos philosophorum. et memento de solis piscibus haec uolumina a me conscripta, qui eorum coitu progignantur, qui ex limo coalescant, quotiens et quid anni cuiusque eorum generis feminae subentant, mares suriant, quibus membris et causis discrerit natura uiuiparos eorum et ouiparos—ita enim Latine appello quae Graeci ζῳοτόκα et ᾠοτόκα—et, ne operose animalium genitum pergam, deinde de differentia et uictu et membris et aetatibus ceterisque plurimis scitu quidem necessariis, sed in iudicio alienis. pauca etiam de Latinis scribtis meis ad eandem peritiam pertinentibus legi iubebo, in quibus animaduertes cum memorabiles res et cognitu raras, tum nomina etiam Romanis inusitata et in hodiernum quod sciam infecta, ea tamen nomina labore meo et studio ita de Graecis prouenire, ut tamen Latina moneta percussa sint. uel dicant nobis, Aemiliane, patroni tui, ubi legerint Latine haec pronuntiata uocabula. de solis aquatilibus dicam nec cetera animalia nisi in communibus differentis attingam. ausculta igitur quae dicam. iam me clamabis magica nomina Aegyptio uel Babylonico ritu percensere: σελάχεια, μαλάκεια, μαλακόστρακα, χονδράκανθα, ὀστρακόδερμα, καρχαρόδοντα, ἀμφίβια, λεπιδωτά, φολιδωτά, δερμόπτερα, στεγανόποδα, μονήρη, συναγελαστικά—possum etiam pergere; sed non est operae in istis diem terere, ut sit mihi tempus adgredi ad cetera. haec interim quae dixi pauca recita Latine a me enuntiata.—

You have heard, Maximus, things most of which you had, of course, read in the ancient philosophers. And remember that these volumes were written by me about fishes alone: which of them are begotten by mating, which grow together out of mud; how often and at what time of year the females of each of their kinds come into heat and the males into rut; by what organs and for what reasons nature has distinguished the viviparous among them from the oviparous — for so I call in Latin what the Greeks call zōotoka and ōotoka — and, not to go laboriously through the generation of animals, then about their differences and diet and organs and ages and a great many other things, necessary indeed to know, but out of place in a court. I shall also have a few passages read from my Latin writings that concern the same expertise, in which you will notice both things worth recording and rarely known, and also names unused by the Romans and, so far as I know, uncoined to this day; yet these names, by my labour and study, come over from the Greek in such a way that they are nevertheless struck in Latin coinage. Or let your advocates, Aemilianus, tell us where they have read these terms expressed in Latin. I shall speak about water creatures alone, and touch on the other animals only in the differences they share. Listen, then, to what I shall say. Presently you will shout that I am reciting magical names in the Egyptian or Babylonian manner: selacheia [cartilaginous fishes], malakeia [soft-bodied creatures], malakostraka [soft-shelled creatures], chondrakantha [gristle-spined], ostrakoderma [shell-skinned], karcharodonta [saw-toothed], amphibia [living in both elements], lepidōta [scaled], pholidōta [plated], dermoptera [skin-winged], steganopoda [web-footed], monērē [solitary], synagelastika [shoaling] — I could even go on; but it is not worth wasting the day on these, so that I may have time to move on to the rest. Meanwhile, read out these few that I have named, as I rendered them in Latin. —

Nunc quoniam pisces horum satis patuerunt, accipe aliud pari quidem stultitia, sed multo tanta uanius et nequius excogitatum. scierunt et ipsi argumentum piscarium futile et nihil futurum, praeterea nouitatem eius ridiculam, (quis enim fando audiuit ad magica maleficia disquamari et exdorsari piscis solere?), potius aliquid de rebus peruulgatioribus etiam creditis fingendum esse. igitur ad praescriptum opinionis et famae confinxere puerum quempiam carmine cantatum remotis arbitris, secreto loco, arula et lucerna et paucis consciis testibus, ubi incantatus sit, corruisse, postea nescientem sui excitatum. nec ultra isti quidem progredi mendacio ausi; enim fabula ut impleretur, addendum etiam illud fuit, puerum eundem multa praesagio praedixisse. quippe hoc emolumentum canticis accipimus, praesagium et diuinationem, nec modo uulgi opinione, uerum etiam doctorum uirorum auctoritate hoc miraculum de pueris confirmatur. memini me apud Varronem philosophum, uirum accuratissime doctum atque eruditum, cum alia eiusdem modi, tum hoc etiam legere: Trallibus de euentu Mithridatici belli magica percontatione consultantibus puerum in aqua simulacrum Mercuri contemplantem quae futura erant CLX uersibus cecinisse. itemque Fabium, cum quingentos denarium perdidisset, ad Nigidium consultum uenisse; ab eo pueros carmine instinctos indicauisse, ubi locorum defossa esset crumina cum parti eorum, ceteri ut forent distributi; unum etiam denarium ex eo numero habere M. Catonem philosophum; quem se a pedisequo in stipe Apollinis accepisse Cato confessus est.

Now, since these men's fishes have been sufficiently exposed, hear another charge, of equal stupidity indeed, but devised many times more emptily and more wickedly. They knew themselves that the fish argument was futile and would come to nothing, and besides that its novelty was laughable (for who ever heard tell of fish being scaled and boned for magical sorceries?), and that they had better invent something from matters more widely known and also believed. So, following the pattern of popular opinion and rumour, they made up a story that a certain boy, enchanted with a spell, with onlookers sent away, in a secret place, with a little altar and a lamp and a few accomplices as witnesses, fell down where he had been enchanted, and was afterwards roused not knowing himself. Nor did they dare to go any further with the lie; yet for the story to be complete, this too ought to have been added: that the same boy foretold many things by prophecy. For this is the profit we are told chants bring, presage and divination; and this marvel concerning boys is confirmed not only by popular opinion but also by the authority of learned men. I remember reading in Varro the philosopher, a most precisely learned and erudite man, both other things of the same kind and this too: that when the people of Tralles were consulting by magical inquiry about the outcome of the Mithridatic war, a boy gazing at an image of Mercury in water sang in a hundred and sixty verses what was to come. And likewise that Fabius, when he had lost five hundred denarii, came to consult Nigidius; that boys inspired by him with a spell revealed where the purse had been buried with part of them, and how the rest had been dispersed; and that one denarius of that sum was even held by Marcus Cato the philosopher, who admitted that he had received it from an attendant as an offering to Apollo.

Haec et alia apud plerosque de magiis et pueris lego equidem, sed dubius sententiae sum, dicamne fieri posse an negem, quamquam Platoni credam inter deos atque homines natura et loco medias quasdam diuorum potestates intersitas, easque diuinationes cunctas et magorum miracula gubernare; quin et illud mecum reputo posse animum humanum, praesertim puerilem et simplicem, seu carminum auocamento siue odorum delenimento soporari et ad obliuionem praesentium externari et paulisper remota corporis memoria redigi ac redire ad naturam suam, quae est immortalis scilicet et diuina, atque ita uelut quodam sopore futura rerum praesagare. uerum enimuero, ut ista sese habent, si qua fides hisce rebus impertienda est, debet ille nescio qui puer prouidus, quantum ego audio, et corpore decorus atque integer deligi et animo sollers et ore facundus, ut in eo aut diuina potestas quasi bonis aedibus digne diuersetur, si tamen ea pueri corpore includitur, an ipse animus expergitus cito ad diuinationem suam redigatur, quae ei prompte insita et nulla obliuione saucia et hebes facile resumatur. non enim ex omni ligno, ut Pythagoras dicebat, debet Mercurius exculpi. quod si ita est, nominate, quis ille fuerit puer sanus, incolumis, ingeniosus, decorus, quem ego carmine dignatus sim initiare. ceterum Thallus, quem nominastis, medico potius quam mago indiget; est enim miser morbo comitiali ita confectus, ut ter an quater die saepe numero sine ullis cantaminibus corruat omniaque membra conflictationibus debilitet, facie ulcerosus, fronte et occipitio conquassatus, oculis hebes, naribus hiulcus, pedibus caducus. maximus omnium magus est, quo praesente Thallus diu steterit: ita plerumque morbo ceu somno uergens inclinatur.

These and other things about magic and boys I do read in many authors, but I am of two minds whether to say it can happen or to deny it, although I believe Plato that between gods and men, intermediate in nature and in place, there are set certain divine powers, and that these govern all divinations and the marvels of the magi; indeed I also reflect that the human soul, especially a child's and a simple one, may, whether through the diversion of chants or the soothing of scents, be lulled to sleep and carried away into forgetfulness of present things, and, the memory of the body being for a little while removed, be brought back and return to its own nature, which is, of course, immortal and divine, and so, as if in a kind of sleep, foretell the future. But truly, however that may be, if any credence is to be given to such things, that prophetic boy, whoever he is, ought, so far as I hear, to be chosen handsome and sound in body, quick in mind and fluent in speech, so that either the divine power may lodge worthily in him as in a good house — if indeed it is enclosed in a boy's body — or the soul itself, once awakened, may quickly be brought back to its own power of divination, which, being readily implanted in it and neither wounded nor dulled by any forgetfulness, may easily be taken up again. For, as Pythagoras used to say, a Mercury should not be carved from just any wood. If that is so, name who that boy was — healthy, unblemished, clever, handsome — whom I deemed worthy of initiating with a spell. But Thallus, whom you named, has need of a doctor rather than a magus; for the poor wretch is so worn down by epilepsy that three or four times a day, often, without any incantations, he falls down and wears out all his limbs with convulsions; his face is ulcerous, his forehead and the back of his head battered, his eyes dull, his nostrils gaping, his feet unsteady. The greatest magus of all is he in whose presence Thallus has stayed standing for long: so constantly does he droop and sink with the disease as if with sleep.

aut cur sisti postulabas tantam familiam? magiae accusans de XV seruis denuntiasti: quid, si de ui accusares, quot tandem seruos postulares? sciunt ergo aliquid XV serui et occultum est. an occultum non est et magicum est? alterum horum fatearis necesse est, aut inlicitum non fuisse in quo tot conscios non timuerim, aut si inlicitum fuit, scire tot conscios non debuisse. magia ista, quantum ego audio, res est legibus delegata, iam inde antiquitus XII tabulis propter incredundas frugum inlecebras interdicta, igitur et occulta non minus quam tetra et horribilis, plerumque noctibus uigilata et tenebris abstrusa et arbitris solitaria et carminibus murmurata, cui non modo seruorum, uerum etiam liberorum pauci adhibentur: et tu quindecim seruos uis interfuisse? nubtiaene illae fuerunt an aliud celebratum officium an conuiuium tempestiuum? XV serui sacrum magicum participant quasi XV uiri sacris faciundis creati? cui tamen rei tot numero adhibuissem, si conscientiae nimis multi sunt? XV liberi homines populus est, totidem serui familia, totidem uincti ergastulum. an adiutorio multitudo eorum necessaria fuit, qui diutine hostias lustralis tenerent? at nullas hostias nisi gallinas nominastis. an ut grana turis numerarent, an ut Thallum prosternerent?

Or why were you demanding that so large a household be produced? Accusing me of magic, you served notice concerning fifteen slaves: what if you were accusing me of violence — how many slaves, pray, would you demand? So fifteen slaves know something, and it is secret? Or is it not secret, and yet magical? You must admit one or the other of these: either that a thing in which I did not fear so many accomplices was not unlawful, or, if it was unlawful, that so many accomplices ought not to have known of it. This magic, as far as I hear, is a matter consigned to the laws, forbidden already from ancient times by the Twelve Tables because of incredible charms for luring away crops; therefore it is no less secret than foul and horrible, generally kept up through the nights, hidden in darkness, withdrawn from witnesses and murmured in chants; at it few are present, not only of slaves but even of free men: and you want fifteen slaves to have been present? Was that a wedding, or some other well-attended ceremony, or a banquet begun early? Do fifteen slaves take part in a magical rite as if they were the Fifteen Men appointed for performing sacred rites? But for what purpose would I have brought in so many, if they are too many to share a secret? Fifteen free men are a public assembly, as many slaves a household, as many in chains a slave-prison. Or was their number needed for help, to hold the victims of purification for a long time? But you have named no victims except hens. Or was it to count the grains of incense, or to throw Thallus down?

Tertium mendacium uestrum fuit macilentam uel omnino euisceratam formam diri cadaueris fabricatam, prorsus horribilem et larualem. quodsi compertum habebatis tam enuidens signum magiae, cur mihi ut exhiberem non denuntiastis? an ut possetis in rem absentem libere mentiri? cuius tamen falsi facultas opportunitate quadam meae consuetudinis uobis adempta est. nam morem mihi habeo, quoquo eam, simulacrum alicuius dei inter libellos conditum gestare eique diebus festis ture et mero et aliquando uictimas supplicare. dudum ergo cum audirem sceletum perquam impudenti mendacio dictitari, iussi, curriculo iret aliquis et ex hospitio meo Mercuriolum afferret, quem mihi Saturninus iste Oeae fabricatus est. cedo tu eum, uideant, teneant, considerent. em uobis, quem scelestus ille sceletum nominabat. auditisne reclamationem omnium qui adsunt? auditisne mendacii uestri damnationem? non uos tot calumniarum tandem dispudet? hiccine est sceletus, haeccine est larua, hoccine est quod appellitabatis daemonium? magicumne istud an sollemne et commune simulacrum est? accipe quaeso, Maxime, et contemplare; bene tam puris et tam piis manibus tuis traditur res consecrata. em uide, quam facies eius decora et suci palaestrici plena sit, quam hilaris dei uultus, ut decenter utrimque lanugo malis deserpat, ut in capite crispatus capillus sub imo pillei umbraculo appareat, quam lepide super tempora pares pinnulae emineant, quam autem festiue circa humeros uestis substricta sit. hunc qui sceletum audet dicere, profecto ille simulacra deorum nulla uidet aut omnia neglegit; hunc denique qui laruam putat, ipse est laruans.

Your third lie was that the figure of a dreadful corpse had been made, emaciated or completely disembowelled, utterly horrible and ghostly. If you had found out so evident a sign of magic, why did you not serve notice on me to produce it? Was it so that you could lie freely about something not present? Yet the means for that falsehood has been taken from you by a happy feature of my habits. For it is my custom, wherever I go, to carry the image of some god stored among my books, and on feast days to pray to it with incense and unmixed wine, and sometimes with victims. So a while ago, when I heard it repeatedly called a skeleton in a most shameless lie, I ordered someone to run and fetch from my lodging the little Mercury that Saturninus here made for me at Oea. Hand it to me, you; let them see it, hold it, examine it. There you are: the thing that scoundrel called a skeleton. Do you hear the outcry of everyone present? Do you hear the condemnation of your lie? Are you not ashamed at last of so many false charges? Is this the skeleton, is this the ghost, is this what you kept calling a demon? Is that a magical image, or a customary and ordinary one? Take it, I beg you, Maximus, and look at it; it is well that a consecrated object should be handed to hands as pure and as pious as yours. Look: how handsome its face is and full of the bloom of the wrestling-ground, how cheerful the god's expression, how becomingly the down spreads over the cheeks on either side, how the curled hair shows on the head beneath the lowest edge of the cap's brim, how charmingly the matching little wings stand out above the temples, and how gracefully the garment is gathered round the shoulders. Whoever dares to call this a skeleton surely either sees no images of the gods or neglects them all; and whoever thinks it a ghost is himself ghost-ridden.

Missa haec facio. uenio nunc ad ipsum stirpem accusationis, ad ipsam causam maleficii. respondeat Aemilianus et Rufinus, ob quod emolumentum, etsi maxime magus forem, Pudentillam carminibus et uenenis ad matrimonium pellexissem. atque ego scio plerosque reos alicuius facinoris postulatos, si fuisse quaepiam causae probarentur, hoc uno se tamen habunde defendisse, uitam suam procul ab huiusmodi sceleribus abhorrere nec id sibi obesse debere, quod uideantur quaedam fuisse ad maleficiundum inuitamenta; non enim omnia quae fieri potuerint pro factis habenda, rerum uices uarias euenire: certum indicem cuiusque animum esse; qui semper eodem ingenio ad uirtutem uel malitiam moratus firmum argumentum est accipiendi criminis aut respuendi. haec ego quamquam possim merito dicere, tamen uobis condono nec satis mihi duco, si me omnium quae insimulastis abunde purgaui, nisi nusquam passus sum uel exiguam suspicionem magiae consistere. reputate uobiscum, quanta fiducia innocentiae meae quantoque despectu uestri agam: si una causa uel minima fuerit inuenta, cur ego debuerim Pudentillae nubtias ob aliquod meum commodum appetere, si quamlibet modicum emolumentum probaueritis, ego ille sim Carmendas uel Damigeron uel † his Moses uel Iohannes uel Apollobex uel ipse Dardanus uel quicumque alius post Zoroastren et Hostanen inter magos celebratus est.

I let these things go. I come now to the very root of the accusation, to the very motive for the sorcery. Let Aemilianus and Rufinus answer: for what gain, even if I were ever so much a magus, would I have lured Pudentilla into marriage with spells and potions? And I know that many men arraigned for some crime, even when it was proved that there had been some motive, have nevertheless defended themselves amply with this one point: that their life was far removed from crimes of this kind, and that it should not count against them that there appear to have been certain inducements to wrongdoing; for not everything that could have been done is to be taken as done; the turns of events fall out variously; the sure indicator is each man's character, which, being always disposed with the same temper toward virtue or toward malice, is a firm argument for accepting a charge or rejecting it. Although I could rightly say this, I make you a present of it, and I do not think it enough to have fully cleared myself of all that you have alleged unless I have nowhere allowed even the slightest suspicion of magic to stand. Consider for yourselves with what confidence in my innocence and with what contempt for you I am acting: if a single reason, even the smallest, is found why I should have sought marriage with Pudentilla for some advantage of my own, if you prove any gain however modest, then let me be that famous Carmendas, or Damigeron, or † his Moses, or Iohannes, or Apollobex, or Dardanus himself, or whoever else has been celebrated among the magi since Zoroaster and Ostanes.