The Ancient History of the Egyptians, Carthaginians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians, Macedonians and Grecians (Vol. 1 of 6)Rollin, Charles
History
The Ancient History of the Egyptians, Carthaginians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians, Macedonians and Grecians (Vol. 1 of 6)
Rollin, Charles
History, Ancient
Cicero explains himself upon the subject of auguries without ambiguity or
reserve. Nobody was more capable of speaking pertinently upon it than
himself, (as M. Morin observes in his dissertation upon the same subject.)
As he was adopted into the college of augurs, he had made himself
acquainted with their most abstruse secrets, and had all possible
opportunity of informing himself fully in their science. That he did so,
sufficiently appears from the two books he has left us upon divination, in
which, it may be said, he has exhausted the subject. In the second,
wherein he refutes his brother Quintus, who had espoused the cause of the
augurs, he combats and defeats his false reasonings with a force, and at
the same time with so refined and delicate a raillery, as leaves us
nothing to wish; and he demonstrates by proofs, each more convincing than
the other, the falsity, contrariety, and impossibility of that art. But
what is very surprising, in the midst of all his arguments, he takes
occasion to blame the generals and magistrates, who on important
conjunctures had contemned the prognostics; and maintains, that the use of
them, as great an abuse as it was in his own opinion, ought nevertheless
to be respected, out of regard to religion, and the prejudices of the
people.(81)
All that I have hitherto said tends to prove, that Paganism was divided
into two sects, almost equally enemies of religion; the one by their
superstitious and blind regard for auguries, the other by their
irreligious contempt and derision of them.
The principle of the first, founded on one side upon the ignorance and
weakness of man in the affairs of life, and on the other upon the
prescience of the Divinity and his almighty providence, was true; but the
consequence deduced from it in favour of auguries, false and absurd. They
ought to have proved that it was certain, that the Divinity himself had
established these external signs to denote his intentions, and that he had
obliged himself to a punctual conformity to them upon all occasions: but
they had nothing of this in their system. These auguries and divinations
therefore were the effect and invention of the ignorance, rashness,
curiosity, and blind passions of man, who presumed to interrogate God, and
to oblige him to give answers upon every idle imagination and unjust
enterprise.
The others, who gave no real credit to any thing enjoined by the science
of augury, did not fail, however, to observe its trivial ceremonies
through policy, in order the better to subject the minds of the people to
themselves, and to reconcile them to their own purposes, by the assistance
of superstition: but by their contempt for auguries, and their inward
conviction of their falsity, they were led into a disbelief of the Divine
Providence, and to despise religion itself; conceiving it inseparable from
the numerous absurdities of this kind, which rendered it ridiculous, and
consequently unworthy a man of sense.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account