In what way, then, can the two facts be combined—the belief in
prophecy, on the one hand, and, on the other, the denial of unearthly
omens arising [(2) Prophecy explained by a reference to natural
causes.] from an immediate divine influence? In answering this
question, the Stoics adopted the only course which their system
allowed. The marvellous, which, as such, they could not admit, was
referred to natural laws, [1003] from which it was speculatively
deduced. The admirable Panætius is the only Stoic who is reported to
have maintained the independence of his judgment by denying omens,
prophecy, and astrology. [1004] Just as in modern times Leibnitz and so
many others both before and after him thought to purge away from the
marvellous all that is accidental and superhuman, and to find in
wonders links in the general chain of natural causes, so, too, the
Stoics, by assuming a natural connection between the token and its
fulfilment, made an effort to rescue omens and divination, and to
explain portents as the natural symptoms of certain occurrences. [1005]
Nor did they confine themselves to cases in which the connection
between the prophecy and the event can be proved. [1006] They insisted
upon divination in cases in which it cannot possibly be verified. The
flight of birds and the entrails of victims are stated to be natural
indications of coming events; and there is said to be even a formal
connection between the positions of the stars and the individuals born
under those positions. [1007] If it is urged, that in this case omens
must be far more numerous than they are supposed to be, the Stoics
answered, that omens are countless, but that only the meaning of a few
is known to men. [1008] If the question is asked, how is it that, in
public sacrifices, the priest should always offer those very animals
whose entrails contain omens, Chrysippus and his followers did not
hesitate to affirm that the same sympathy which exists between objects
and omens also guides the sacrificer in the choice of a victim. [1009]
And yet so bald was this hypothesis, that they had, at the same time, a
second answer in reserve, viz. that the corresponding change in the
entrails did not take place until the victim had been chosen. [1010] In
support of such views, their only appeal was to the almighty power of
God; but, in making this appeal, the deduction of omens from natural
causes was at an end. [1011]
The Stoics could not altogether suppress a suspicion that an
unchangeable predestination of all events has rendered individual
activity superfluous, [1012] nor meet the objection [1013] that, on the
hypothesis of necessity, divination itself is unnecessary. [1014] They
quieted themselves, however, with the thought that divination, and the
actions resulting from divination, are included among the causes
foreordained by destiny. [1015]
[(3) Causes of divination.]
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