Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Introductory Notice.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Introductory Notice
to
Arnobius.
————————————
[a.d.
297–303.] Arnobius appears before us, not as did the
earlier apologists, but as a token that the great struggle was nearing
its triumphant close. He is a witness that Minucius Felix and
Tertullian had not preceded him in vain. He is a representative
character, and stands forth boldly to avow convictions which were,
doubtless, now struggling into light from the hearts of every
reflecting pagan in the empire. In all probability it was the
alarm occasioned by tokens that could not be suppressed—of a
spreading and deepening sense of the nothingness of
Polytheism—that stimulated the Œcumenical rage of
Diocletian, and his frantic efforts to crush the Church, or, rather, to
overwhelm it in a deluge of flame and blood.
In our author rises before us another contributor
to Latin Christianity, which was still North-African in its literature,
all but exclusively. He had learned of Tertullian and Cyprian
what he was to impart to his brilliant pupil Lactantius. Thus the
way was prepared for Augustine, by whom and in whom Latin Christianity
was made distinctly Occidental, and prepared for the influence it has
exerted, to this day, under the mighty prestiges of his single
name.
And yet Arnobius, like Boethius afterwards, is
much discredited, and has even been grudged the name of a
Christian. Coleridge is one of the many who have disparaged
Arnobius, but he always talked like an inspired madman, and often
contradicted himself. Enough to say, that, emerging from gross
heathenism in mature life, and forced to learn as he could what is now
taught to Christian children, our author is a witness to the diffusion
of truth in his day. He shows also such a faculty of
assimilation, that, as a practical Christian, Coleridge himself does
not shine in comparison; and if, as is probable, he closed his life in
martyrdom, we may well be ashamed to deny him our gratitude and the
tribute of our praise. Our author is an interesting painter of
many features of paganism in conflict with the Church, which we gain
from no one else. Economizing Clement of Alexandria, he advances
to an assured position and form of assault. He persistently
impeaches Jove himself in a daring confidence that men will feel his
terrible charges to be true, and that the victory over heathenism is
more than half gained already.3192
| 3192
Lardner’s Testimony of Ancient Heathenism, Works,
vol. vii. p. 17. | I doubt not that, as a heathen, he
was influenced by a dream to study Christianity. As a believer,
he discarded dreams as vain. Converted late in life, we need not
wonder at some tokens of imperfect knowledge; but, on the whole, he
seems a well-informed disciple, and shows how thoroughly the
catechumens were trained. But what does he prove? In
short, he gives us a most fascinating insight into the mental processes
by which he, and probably Constantine soon after him, came to the
conclusion that heathenism was outworn and must disappear. He
proves that the Church was salt that had not “lost its
savour.” It is true, that, reasoning with pagans, he does
not freely cite the Scriptures, which had no force with them; yet his
references to the facts of Scripture show that he had studied them
conscientiously, and could present the truths of the Gospel
clearly and with
power. Lardner has demonstrated3193
this in a fair spirit and with
conclusive evidence. Referring the reader to his admirable
criticisms, I am glad to say that a full and satisfactory outline of
his career is presented in the following:—
Translator’s Introductory
Notice.
1. Arnobius has been
most unjustly neglected in modern times; but some excuse for this may
be found in the fact that even less attention seems to have been paid
to him in the ages immediately succeeding his own. We find no
mention of him in any author except Jerome; and even Jerome has left
only a few lines about him, which convey very little
information.
In his list of ecclesiastical writers he
says,3194
| 3194
Cat. Script. Eccl., lxxix. f. 121, Bened. ed. tom. iv. | “During
the reign of Diocletian, Arnobius taught rhetoric with the greatest
success, at Sicca, in Africa, and wrote against the heathen the books
extant;” and again speaks of this work more particularly when he
says,3195
| 3195 Ep.
lxxxiii. f. 656. | “Arnobius
published seven books against the heathen.” In his
Chronicon, however, he writes under the year 2342,3196
“Arnobius
is considered a distinguished rhetorician in Africa, who, while engaged
at Sicca in teaching young men rhetoric, was led by visions to the
faith; and not being received by the bishop as hitherto a persistent
enemy to Christ, composed very excellent books against his former
belief.” It must at once be seen that there is here a
mistake, for Arnobius is put some twenty-three years later than in the
former passage. Jerome himself shows us that the former date is
the one he meant, for elsewhere3197
| 3197
Cat. Script. Eccl., lxxx. f. 121, ep. lxxxiii. | he speaks of Lactantius as the disciple
of Arnobius. Lactantius, in extreme old age,3198
| 3198
Cat. Script. Eccl., lxxx. | was appointed tutor of
Constantine’s son Crispus; and this, we are told in the
Chronicon,3199
was in the
year 317. No one will suppose that if the disciple was a very old
man in 317, his master could have been in his prime in 326. It is
certain, therefore, that this date is not correct; and it seems very
probable that Oehler’s conjecture is true, who supposes that
Jerome accidentally transposed his words from the year 303 to the place
where we find them, misled by noticing the vicenalia of
Constantine when he was looking for those of Diocletian.
It is with some difficulty that we can believe
that Arnobius was led to embrace Christianity by dreams, as he speaks
of these with little respect,3200
| 3200 As
“vain.” [But see p. 405, supra.] | —which he could hardly have done if by
them the whole course of his life had been changed; but in our utter
ignorance we cannot say that this may not have been to some extent the
case. The further statement, that his apology for Christianity
was submitted as a proof of his sincerity to the bishop of Sicca, is
even less credible,—for these two reasons, that it is evidently
the fruit not of a few weeks’ but of protracted labour, and that
it is hardly likely that any bishop would have allowed some parts of it
to pass into circulation. It is just possible that the first or
third books may have been so presented; but it is not credible that any
pledge would be required of a man seeking to cast in his lot with the
persecuted and terrified Church referred to in the fourth.
2. If we learn but little from external
sources as to the life of Arnobius, we are not more fortunate when we
turn to his own writings. One or two facts, however, are made
clear; and these are of some importance. “But
lately,” he says, “O blindness, I worshipped images just
brought from the furnaces, gods made on anvils and forged with
hammers: now, led by so great a teacher into the ways of truth, I
know what all these things are.”3201
| 3201 Book
i. sec. 39, p. 423, infra. | We have thus his own assurance of
his conversion from heathenism. He speaks of himself, however, as
actually a Christian,—not as a waverer, not as one purposing to
forsake the ancient superstitions and embrace the new religion, but as
a firm believer, whose faith is already established, and whose side
has been taken and
stedfastly maintained. In a word, he refers to himself as once
lost in error, but now a true Christian.
Again, in different passages he marks pretty
accurately the time or times at which he wrote. Thus, in the
first book3202
he speaks of
about three hundred years as the time during which Christianity had
existed; and in the second,3203
of a thousand and fifty, or not many
less, having elapsed since the foundation of Rome. There has been
much discussion as to what era is here referred to; and it has been
pretty generally assumed that the Fabian must be intended,—in
which case 303 would be the year meant. If it is observed,
however, that Arnobius shows an intimate acquaintance with Varro, and
great admiration for him, it will probably be admitted that it is most
likely that the Varronian, or common, era was adopted by him; and in
this case the year referred to will be 297 a.d. This coincides sufficiently with the passage in
the first book, and is in harmony with the idea which is there
predominant,—the thought, that is, of the accusation so
frequently on the lips of the heathen, that Christianity was the cause
of the many and terrible afflictions with which the empire was
visited. These accusations, ever becoming more bitter and
threatening, would naturally be observed with care and attention by
thoughtful Christians towards the close of the third century; and
accordingly we find that the words with which Arnobius begins his
apology, express the feeling of awakening anxiety with which he viewed
the growth of this fear and hatred in the minds of the heathen.
He declares, in effect, that one great object—indeed the main
object—which he had proposed to himself, was to show that it was
not because of the Christians that fresh evils and terrible calamities
were continually assailing the state. And it must be remembered
that we cannot refer such a proposal to a later period than that
assigned. It would certainly not have occurred to a Christian in
the midst of persecution, with death overhanging him, and danger on
every side, to come forward and attempt calmly to show the heathen that
there was no reason for their complaints against the Christians.
In the later books there is a change in tone, upon which we cannot now
dwell, although it is marked. In one passage he asks
indignantly,3204
“Why
should our writings be given to the flames, our meetings be cruelly
broken up, in which prayer is offered to the supreme God, peace and
pardon are asked for all in authority, for soldiers, kings, friends,
enemies?” In the calm tranquillity of the last half of the
third century these words could hardly have been written, but they are
a striking testimony to the terms of the imperial edict issued in the
year 303 a.d. So, too, the popular
expression of anger and disgust at the anti-pagan character of some of
Cicero’s works3205
| 3205
Noticed in iii. 7, infra. |
belongs to the incipient stages of persecution.
Nor must it be supposed that the whole work may be
referred to the era which ensued after the abdication of Diocletian, in
305. From this time an apology for Christianity with such a
design would have been an anachronism, for it was no longer necessary
to disarm the fears of the heathen by showing that the gods could not
be enraged at the Christians. It has further to be noticed, that
although it is perfectly clear that Arnobius spent much time on his
apology, it has never been thoroughly revised, and does not seem to
have been ever finished.3206
| 3206 Cf.
note on book vii. sec. 36, infra. [It is not at all
improbable that some sketch of his convictions, written to assure the
bishop of his conversion, was the foundation of what afterwards grew
into a work.] |
We surely have in all this sufficient reason to
assign the composition of these books adversus Gentes to the end
of the third and beginning of the fourth centuries. Beyond this
we cannot go, for we have no data from which to derive further
inferences.
3. We have seen that the facts transmitted to us
are very few and scanty indeed; but, few as they are, they suggest an
interesting picture. Arnobius comes before us in Sicca; we are
made spectators of two scenes of his life there, and the rest—the
beginning and the end—are shrouded in darkness. Sicca Veneria was
an important town, lying on the Numidian border, to the south-west of
Carthage. As its name signifies, it was a seat of that vile
worship of the goddess of lust, which was dear to the Phœnician
race. The same cultus was found there which disgraced Corinth;
and in the temple of the goddess the maidens of the town were wont to
procure for themselves, by the sacrifice of their chastity, the dowries
which the poverty of their parents could not provide.
In the midst of traditions of such bestial foulness
Arnobius found himself,—whether as a native, or as one who had
been led to settle there. He has told us himself how true an
idolater he was, how thoroughly he complied with the ceremonial demands
of superstition; but the frequency and the vehemence of language with
which his abhorrence of the sensuality of heathenism is expressed, tell
us as plainly that practices so horrible had much to do in preparing
his mind to receive another faith.
In strong contrast to the filthy indulgences with which
paganism gratified its adherents, must have appeared the strict purity
of life which was enjoined by Christianity and aimed at by its
followers; and perhaps it was in such a place as Sicca that
considerations of this nature would have most influence. There,
too, the story of Cyprian’s martyrdom must have been well
known,—may indeed have been told in the nursery of the young
Arnobius,—and many traditions must have been handed down about
the persistency with which those of the new religion had held fast
their faith, in spite of exile, torture, and death. However
distorted such tales might be, there would always remain in them the
evidence of so exalted nobility of spirit, that every disclosure of the
meanness and baseness of the old superstition must have induced an
uneasy feeling as to whether that could be impiety which ennobled
men,—that piety which degraded them lower than the brutes.
For some time all went well with Arnobius.
He was not too pure for the world, and his learning and eloquence won
him fame and success in his profession. But in some way, we know
not how, a higher learning was communicated to him, and the admired
rhetorician became first a suspected, then a persecuted
Christian. He has left us in no doubt as to the reason of the
change. Upon his darkness, he says, there shone out a heavenly
light,3207
| 3207
[Conf. Constantine’s “vision.”] | a great teacher
appeared to him and pointed out the way of truth; and he who had been
an earnest worshipper of images, of stones, of unknown gods, was now as
earnest, as zealous in his service of the true God. Of the trials
which he must have endured we know nothing. A terrible
persecution swept over the world, and many a Christian perished in
it. Such a man as Arnobius must have been among the first to be
assailed, but we hear of him no more. With his learning and
talents he could not have failed to make himself a name in the Church,
or outside its pale, if he had lived. The conclusion seems
inevitable, that he was one of the victims of that last fiery trial to
which Christians under the Roman empire were exposed.
4. The vast range of learning shown in this
apology has been admitted on all sides. Even Jerome says that it
should at times be read on account of the learning displayed in
it.3208
| 3208
Ep. lxii. ad Tranquill. | In
another passage Jerome says,3209
| 3209 Ep.
xlix. ad Paulinum. |
“Arnobius is unequal and prolix, confused from want of
arrangement.” This may be admitted to a certain extent; but
although such defects are to be found in his work, they are certainly
not characteristic of Arnobius. So, too, many passages may be
found strangely involved and mystical, and it is at times hard to
understand what is really meant. Solecisms and barbarisms are
also met with, as Nourry has objected, so that it cannot be said that
Arnobius writes pure Latin. Still we must not be misled into
supposing that by enumerating these defects we have a fair idea of his
style.
If we remember that no man can wholly escape the
influences of his age, and that Arnobius was so warm an admirer of
Varro and Lucretius that he imitated their style and adopted their
vocabulary, we shall be able to
understand in what way he may be fairly spoken of as a good writer,
although not free from defects. His style is, in point of fact,
clear and lucid, rising at times into genuine eloquence; and its
obscurity and harshness are generally caused by an attempt to express a
vague and indefinite idea. Indeed very considerable power of
expression is manifested in the philosophical reasonings of the second
book, the keen satire of the fourth and fifth, and the vigorous
argument of the sixth and seventh.
Jerome’s last stricture is scarcely
applicable. Arnobius wrote adversus Gentes; he addressed
himself to meet the taunts and accusations of the heathen, and in so
doing he retorts upon them the charges which they preferred against the
Christians. His work must therefore be criticised from this
standpoint, not as a systematic exposition or vindication of
Christianity. Christianity is indeed defended, but it is by
attacking heathenism. We must consider, also, that evidently the
work was not revised as a whole, and that the last book would have been
considerably altered had Arnobius lived or found opportunity to correct
it.3210
| 3210
Cf. book vii. cap. 36, note, and Ib. cap. 51, note, with
the Appendix. | If we
remember these things, we shall find little to object to in the
arrangement.
After making all deductions, it may be said fairly that
in Arnobius the African Church found no unfitting champion.
Living amidst impurity and corruption, and seeing on every side the
effects of a superstitious and sensual faith, he stands forward to
proclaim that man has a nobler ideal set before him than the worship of
the foul imaginations of his depraved fancy, to call his fellows to a
purer life, and to point out that the Leader who claims that men should
follow Him is both worthy and able to guide. This he does with
enthusiasm, vigour, and effect; and in doing this he accomplishes his
end.
5. Various opinions have been entertained as to
the position which Arnobius occupied with regard to the Bible. We
cannot here enter into a discussion of these, and shall merely present
a brief statement of facts.
It is evident that with regard to the Jews and the
Old Testament Arnobius was in a state of perfect ignorance; for he
confounds the Sadducees with the Pharisees,3211
| 3211 Book
iii. cap. 12, note. | makes no allusion to the history of the
Israelites, and shows that he was not acquainted with their forms of
sacrifice.3212
| 3212 Cf.
book vii., on sacrifices generally. [Proves nothing.] |
He was evidently well acquainted with the life of
Christ and the history of the Church, and alludes at times to
well-known Christian sayings; but how far in so doing he quotes the
Gospels and Epistles, is not easily determined. Thus it has been
supposed, and with some probability, that in referring to the miracles
of Christ he must allude to the Gospels as recording them. But it
must be observed that he ascribes to Christ a miracle of which the New
Testament makes no mention,—of being understood by men of
different nations, as though He spoke in several languages at the same
moment.3213
| 3213
Book i. cap. 46, note. | So, too,
his account3214
| 3214 Book
i. cap. 53, note. | of the passion
differs from that of the New Testament. On the other hand, we
find that he speaks of Christ as having taught men “not to return
evil for evil,”3215
as “the way of salvation, the door of life, by whom alone
there is access to the light,”3216
| 3216 Book
ii. cap. 65, note. | and as having been seen by
“countless numbers of men” after His resurrection.3217
Still
further, he makes frequent references to accounts of Christ written by
the apostles and handed down to their followers,3218
and asks why their writings should be
burned.3219
In one
place,3220
also, he asks,
“Have the well-known words never rung in your ears, that the
wisdom of man is foolishness with God?” where the reference seems
to be very distinct;3221
but he nowhere says that he is quoting,
or mentions any books.
This is, however, less remarkable when we take into
account his mode of dealing with Clemens Alexandrinus and Cicero.
The fourth, fifth, and sixth books are based on these two authors, and from Clement, in particular,
whole sentences are taken unchanged.3222
| 3222
[Compare the Exhortation of Clement, vol. ii. p.
171, passim; and Tertullian, vol. iii. and
passim.] | Yet the only reference made to
either is the very general allusion in the third and fourth
books.3223
| 3223
Book iii. cap. 7, and book iv. cap. 13, note. |
On the other hand, he quotes frequently and refers
distinctly to many authors, and is especially careful to show that he
has good authority for his statements, as will be seen by observing the
number of books to which he refers on the mysteries and temples.
If we bear this in mind, the principle which guided him seems to have
been, that when he has occasion to quote an author once or twice, he
does so by name, but that he takes it for granted that every one knows
what are the great sources of information, and that it is therefore
unnecessary to specify in each case what is the particular
authority.
There are many interesting questions connected with his
subject, but these we must for the present leave untouched.
6. No other works by Arnobius have been
preserved, and only two mss. are known to
exist. Of these, the one in Brussels is merely a transcript of
that preserved in the public library at Paris, on which all editions
have been based. This is a ms. of the
ninth or tenth century, and contains the Octavius of Minucius
Felix immediately after the seventh book adversus Gentes, in
consequence of which that treatise was at first printed as the eighth
book of Arnobius. Although it has been collated several times, we
are still in doubt as to its true readings,—Hildebrand, who last
examined it, having done so with too little care.
The first3224
| 3224
Arnobii Disputationum adversus Gentes, libri octo, nunc primum
in lucem editi Romæ, apud Franc. Priscianum Florentinum, 1542. | edition was printed at Rome in 1542,
and was followed by that of Gelenius,3225
in which much was done for the
emendation of the text; but arbitrary conjectures were too frequently
admitted. Next in order follow those of Canterus,3226
who did
especial service by pointing out what use Arnobius has made of Clement,
Ursinus,3227
| 3227
Romæ, 1583. This is the second Roman edition, and
restores the Octavius to Minucius Felix. |
Elmenhorst,3228
Stewechius,3229
Heraldus,3230
| 3230
Paris, 1605. This edition, which is of great value, and shows
great learning and ability, was completed in two months, as Heraldus
himself tells us. | and the
Leyden3231
| 3231
Lugduni Batavorum 1651, containing the notes of Canterus, Elmenhorst,
Stewechius, and Heraldus. |
variorum edition, based on a recension of the text by
Salmasius.3232
| 3232
Salmasius purposed writing commentaries for this edition, but died
without doing more than beginning them. | The
later editions are those of Oberthür,3233
| 3233
Wirceburgi, 1783, 8vo, preceded by a rambling introductory epistle. | whose text is adopted by
Orelli,3234
| 3234
Lipsiæ, 1816–17, 8vo. |
Hildebrand,3235
| 3235
Halis Saxonum, 1844, 8vo. | and
Oehler.3236
Oberthür’s edition is of little importance, and that of
Orelli is valuable solely as a collection of notes gathered from many
sources into a crude and undigested mass. Hildebrand seems to
have taken too little pains with his work; and Oehler, whose critical
sagacity and industry might have given us a most satisfactory edition,
was unfortunately hampered by want of space.
No edition of Arnobius has been published in England;
and the one Englishman who has taken any pains with this author seems
to be John Jones, who, under the pseudonym of Leander de St. Martino,
prepared summaries, which were added to a reprint of Stewechius at
Douay, 1634. As this edition has not come into our hands, we are
unable to speak of it more particularly.
7. It will be observed that adversus
Gentes is the title of this work in all editions except those of
Hildebrand and Oehler, in which it is adversus Nationes.
The difference is very slight, but it may be well to mention that
neither can be said with certainty to be correct. The first is
the form used by Jerome in two passages of his writings;3237
| 3237
Cf. § 1, notes 2 and 3. | and as he
must have seen earlier mss. than that now extant, he is supposed to
give the title which he found in them. In the Paris ms., however, at the end of the second book, the
subscription is, “The second book of Arnobius adversus
Nationes ends;” and it has been argued that, as the copyist
would hardly have gone so far astray, while it is quite possible that
Jerome did not attempt to do more than indicate generally the purpose
of the book without quoting its titlepage, this must be the true
title. The first page of the existing ms.
is torn away, and the question remains therefore undecided:
fortunately its decision is not of the slightest importance.
8. This translation of Arnobius was begun in
the hope that it would be possible to adhere throughout to the text of
Orelli, and that very little attention to the various readings would be
found necessary. This was, however, found to be impossible, not
merely because Hildebrand’s collation of the Paris ms. showed how frequently liberties had been taken with the
text, but on account of the corrupt state of the text
itself.
It has therefore been thought advisable to lay
before the reader a close translation founded on the ms., so far as known. A conjectural reading has in no
case been adopted without notice.
Throughout the Work use has been made of four
editions,—Oehler’s, Orelli’s, Hildebrand’s, and
that of Leyden; other editions being consulted only for special
reasons.
It is to be regretted that our knowledge of the
single ms. of Arnobius is still incomplete; but
it is hoped that this will soon be remedied, by the publication of a
revised text, based upon a fresh collation of the ms., with a complete apparatus and a carefully
digested body of notes.3238
| 3238
[This section (8) appears as a “Preface” to the Edinburgh
edition.] | E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
