The Complete Works of Julian the Apostate. Illustrated

Orations, Letters to Themistius, To the Senate and People of Athens, To a Priest, The Caesars and others

Julian the Apostate, Wilmer C. Wright

• Publisher: Strelbytskyy Multimedia Publishing
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9780880011471
• Topic: Literature
• Subtopic: Ancient & Classical Literary Collections
• Index: Literature

Julian was Roman emperor from 361 to 363, as well as a notable philosopher and author. His promotion of Neoplatonic Hellenism in its place, caused him to be remembered as Julian the Apostate in Christian tradition.Julian wrote several works in Greek, some of which have come down to us.One of the most important of his lost works is his Against the Galileans, intended to refute the Christian religion. The only parts of this work which survive are those excerpted by Cyril of Alexandria, who gives extracts from the three first books in his refutation of Julianum.Contents: ORATIONSLETTERS TO THEMISTIUSTO THE SENATE AND PEOPLE OF ATHENSTO A PRIESTTHE CAESARSMISOPOGONLETTERSEPIGRAMSAGAINST THE GALILAEANSFRAGMENTS

ORATIONS

Introduction to Oration I

Julian’s training in rhetoric left its mark on all his writings, but technically speaking his work as a Sophist is comprised in the three panegyrics (Orations 1–3) and the prose “Hymns” (Orations 4–5). Oration 1 was considered his masterpiece and was used as a model by Libanius. It was written and probably delivered in 355 a.d., before Julian went to Gaul. The excuse of being an amateur is a commonplace (τόπος) in this type of epideictic speech. He follows with hardly a deviation the rules for the arrangement and treatment of a speech in praise of an emperor (βασιλικὸς λόγος) as we find them in Menander’s handbook of epideictic oratory written in the third century a.d. The speech is easily analysed. First comes the prooemium to conciliate the audience and to give the threads of the argument, then the praises of the emperor’s native land, ancestors, early training, deeds in war (ὁ περὶ τῶν πράξεων λόγος) and in peace (ὁ περὶ τῆς εἰρήνης λόγος), and the stereotyped contrasts with the Persian monarchs, the Homeric heroes, and Alcibiades. In the two last divisions the virtues of Plato’s ideal king are proved to have been displayed by Constantius, his victories are exaggerated and his defeats explained away. Then comes a description of the happy state of the empire and the army under such a ruler, and the panegyric ends abruptly without the final prayer (εὐχή) for the continuance of his reign, recommended by Menander. This peroration has evidently been lost. The arrangement closely resembles that of Oration 3, the panegyric on the Empress Eusebia, and the “Evagoras” of Isocrates, which Julian frequently echoes. Julian’s praises were thoroughly insincere, a compulsory tribute to a cousin whom he hated and feared.

Panegyric in Honour of Constantius

I have long desired, most mighty Emperor, to sing the praises of your valour and achievements, to recount your campaigns, and to tell how you suppressed the tyrannies; how your persuasive eloquence drew away one usurper’s bodyguard; how you overcame another by force of arms. But the vast scale of your exploits deterred me, because what I had to dread was not that my words would fall somewhat short of your achievements, but that I should prove wholly unequal to my theme. That men versed in political debate, or poets, should find it easy to compose a panegyric on your career is not at all surprising. [2] Their practice in speaking, their habit of declaiming in public supplies them abundantly with a well-warranted confidence. But those who have neglected this field and chosen another branch of literary study which devotes itself to a form of composition little adapted to win popular favour and that has not the hardihood to exhibit itself in its nakedness in every theatre, no matter what, would naturally hesitate to make speeches of the epideictic sort. As for the poets, their Muse, and the general belief that it is she who inspires their verse, obviously gives them unlimited license to invent. To rhetoricians the art of rhetoric allows just as much freedom; fiction is denied them, but flattery is by no means forbidden, nor is it counted a disgrace to the orator that the object of his panegyric should not deserve it. Poets who compose and publish some legend that no one had thought of before increase their reputation, because an audience is entertained by the mere fact of novelty. Orators, again, assert that the advantage of their art is that it can treat a slight theme in the grand manner, and again, by the use of mere words, strip the greatness from deeds, and, in short, marshall the power of words against that of facts.

If, however, I had seen that on this occasion I should need their art, I should have maintained the silence that befits those who have had no practice in such forms of composition, and should leave your praises to be told by those whom I just now mentioned. Since, on the contrary, the speech I am to make calls for a plain narrative of the facts and needs no adventitious ornament, I thought that even I was not unfit, seeing that my predecessors had already shown that it was beyond them to produce a record worthy of your achievements. For almost all who devote themselves to literature attempt to sing your praises in verse or prose; some of them venture to cover your whole career in a brief narrative, [3] while others devote themselves to a part only, and think that if they succeed in doing justice to that part they have proved themselves equal to the task.

Yet one can but admire the zeal of all who have made you the theme of a panegyric. Some did not shrink from the tremendous effort to secure every one of your achievements from the withering touch of time; others, because they foresaw that they could not compass the whole, expressed themselves only in part, and chose to consecrate to you their individual work so far as they were able. Better this, they thought, than “the reward of silence that runs no risk.”

Now if I were one of those whose favourite pursuit is epideictic oratory, I should have to begin my speech by asking from you no less goodwill than I now feel towards yourself, and should beg you graciously to incline your ear to my words and not play the part of a severe and inexorable critic. But since, bred as I have been and educated in other studies, other pursuits, other conventions, I am criticised for venturing rashly into fields that belong to others, I feel that I ought to explain myself briefly on this head and begin my speech more after my own fashion.

There is an ancient maxim taught by him who first introduced philosophy to mankind, and it is as follows. All who aspire to virtue and the beautiful must study in their words, deeds, conversation, in short, in all the affairs of life, great and small, to aim in every way at beauty. Now what sensible man would deny that virtue is of all things the most beautiful? Wherefore those are bidden to lay firm hold on her who do not seek to blazon abroad her name in vain, appropriating that which in no way belongs to them. Now in giving this counsel, the maxim does not prescribe any single type of discourse, nor does it proclaim to its readers, like a god from the machine in tragedy, [4] “Ye must aspire to virtue and eschew evil.” Many are the paths that it allows a man to follow to this goal, if he desire to imitate the nature of the beautiful. For example, he may give good advice, or use hortatory discourse, or he may rebuke error without malice, or applaud what is well done, or condemn, on occasion, what is ill done. It permits men also to use other types of oratory, if they please, so as to attain the best end of speech, but it enjoins on them to take thought in every word and act how they shall give account of all they utter, and to speak no word that cannot be referred to the standard of virtue and philosophy. That and more to the same effect is the tenour of that precept.

And now, what am I to do? What embarrasses me is the fact that, if I praise you, I shall be thought simply to curry favour, and in fact, the department of panegyric has come to incur a grave suspicion due to its misuse, and is now held to be base flattery rather than trustworthy testimony to heroic deeds. Is it not obvious that I must put my faith in the merit of him whom I undertake to praise, and with full confidence devote my energies to this panegyric? What then shall be the prelude of my speech and the most suitable arrangement? Assuredly I must begin with the virtues of your ancestors through which it was possible for you to come to be what you are. Next I think it will be proper to describe your upbringing and education, since these contributed very much to the noble qualities that you possess, and when I have dealt with all these, I must recount your achievements, the signs and tokens, as it were, of the nobility of your soul, and finally, as the crown and consummation of my discourse, I shall set forth those personal qualities from which was evolved all that was noble in your projects and their execution. [5] It is in this respect that I think my speech will surpass those of all the others. For some limit themselves to your exploits, with the idea that a description of these suffices for a perfect panegyric, but for my part I think one ought to devote the greater part of one’s speech to the virtues that were the stepping-stones by which you reached the height of your achievements. Military exploits in most cases, nay in almost all, are achieved with the help of fortune, the body-guard, heavy infantry and cavalry regiments. But virtuous actions belong to the doer alone, and the praise that they inspire, if it be sincere, belongs only to the possessor of such virtue. Now, having made this distinction clear, I will begin my speech.

The rules of panegyric require that I should mention your native land no less than your ancestors. But I am at a loss what country I ought to consider peculiarly yours. For countless nations have long asserted their claim to be your country. The city that rules over them all was your mother and nurse, and in an auspicious hour delivered to you the imperial sceptre, and therefore asserts her sole title to the honour, and that not merely by resorting to the plea that has prevailed under all the emperors.

I mean that, even if men are born elsewhere, they all adopt her constitution and use the laws and customs that she has promulgated, and by that fact become Roman citizens. But her claim is different, namely that she gave your mother birth, rearing her royally and as befitted the offspring who were to be born to her. Then again, the city on the Bosporus which is named after the family of the Constantii, though she does not assert that she is your native place, but acknowledges that she became your adopted land by your father’s act, will think she is cheated of her rights if any orator should try to deprive her of at least this claim to kinship. Thirdly, the Illyrians, on whose soil you were born, will not tolerate it if anyone assign you a different fatherland and rob them of the fairest gift of fortune. [6] And now I hear some even of the Eastern provinces protest that it is unjust of me to rob them of the lustre they derive from you. For they say that they sent forth your grandmother to be the consort of your grandfather on the mother’s side. Almost all the rest have hit on some pretension of more or less weight, and are determined, on one ground or another, to adopt you for their own. Therefore let that country have the prize which you yourself prefer and have so often praised as the mother and teacher of the virtues; as for the rest, let each one according to her deserts obtain her due. I should be glad to praise them all, worthy as they are of glory and honour, but I am afraid that my compliments, however germane they may seem to my subject, might, on account of their length, be thought inappropriate to the present occasion. For this reason, then, I think it better to omit a eulogy of the others, but as for Rome, your imperial Majesty summed up her praises in two words when you called her the teacher of virtue, and, by bestowing on her the fairest of all encomiums, you have forestalled all that others might say. What praise of mine would come up to that? What indeed is left for anyone to say? So I feel that I, who naturally hold that city in reverence, shall pay her a higher honour if I leave her praise in your hands.

Now perhaps I ought at this point to say a few words about your noble ancestors. Only that here too I am at a loss where to begin. For all your ancestors, grandfathers, parents, brothers, cousins and kinsfolk were emperors, who had either acquired their power by lawful means or were adopted by the reigning house. Why should I recall ancient history or hark back to Claudius and produce proofs of his merit, which are manifest and known to all? To what end recount his campaigns against the barbarians across the Danube or how righteously and justly he won the empire? [7] How plainly he lived while on the throne! How simple was his dress, as may be seen to this day in his statues! What I might say about your grandparents is comparatively recent, but equally remarkable. Both of them acquired the imperial sceptre as the reward of conspicuous merit, and having assumed the command, they were on such good terms with each other and displayed such filial piety to him who had granted them a share in the empire, that he used to say that of all the safeguards designed by him for the realm, and they were many, this was his master-stroke. They, meanwhile, valued their mutual understanding more than undivided empire, supposing that it could have been bestowed on either of them separately. This was the temper of their souls, and nobly they played their part in action, while next to the Supreme Being they reverenced him who had placed authority in their hands. With their subjects they dealt righteously and humanely, and expelled the barbarians who had for years settled in our territory and had occupied it with impunity as though it were their own, and they built forts to hinder encroachment, which procured for those subjects such peaceful relations with the barbarians as, at that period, seemed to be beyond their dreams. This, however, is a subject that deserves more than a passing mention. Yet it would be wrong to omit the strongest proof of their unanimity, especially as it is related to my subject. Since they desired the most perfect harmony for their children, they arranged the marriage of your father and mother. On this point also I think I must say a few words to show that virtue was bequeathed to you as well as a throne. But why waste time in telling how your father, on his father’s death, became emperor both by the choice Of the deceased monarch and by the vote of all the armies? His military genius was made evident by his achievements and needs no words of mine. [8] He traversed the whole civilised world suppressing tyrants, but never those who ruled by right. His subjects he inspired with such affection that his veterans still remember how generous he was with largess and other rewards, and to this day worship him as though he were a god. As for the mass of the people, in town and country alike, they prayed that your father might be victorious over the tyrants, not so much because they would be delivered from that oppression as because they would then be governed by him. But when he had made his power supreme, he found that the tyrant’s greed had worked like a drought, with the result that money was very scarce, while there were great hoards of treasure in the recesses of the palace; so he unlocked its doors and on the instant flooded the whole country with wealth, and then, in less than ten years, he founded and gave his name to a city that as far surpasses all others as it is itself inferior to Rome; and to come second to Rome seems to me a much greater honour than to be counted first and foremost of all cities beside. Here it may be proper to mention Athens “the illustrious,” seeing that during his whole life he honoured her in word and deed. He who was emperor and lord of all did not disdain the title of General of the Athenians, and when they gave him a statue with an inscription to that effect he felt more pride than if he had been awarded the highest honours. To repay Athens for this compliment he bestowed on her annually a gift of many tens of thousands of bushels of wheat, so that while she enjoyed plenty, he won applause and reverence from the best of men.

Your father’s achievements were many and brilliant. Some I have just mentioned, and others I must omit for the sake of brevity. But the most notable of all, as I make bold to say and I think all will agree, [9] was that he begat, reared and educated you. This secured to the rest of the world the advantages of good government, and that not for a limited time but for a period beyond his own lifetime, as far as this is possible. At any rate your father seems still to be on the throne. This is more than Cyrus himself could achieve. When he died his son proved far inferior, so that while men called Cyrus “father,” his successor was called “master.” But you are even less stern than your father, and surpass him in many respects, as I well know and will demonstrate in my speech as occasion shall arise. Yet, in my opinion, he should have the credit of this as well, since it was he who gave you that admirable training concerning which I shall presently speak, but not till I have described your mother and brothers.

Your mother’s ancestry was so distinguished, her personal beauty and nobility of character were such that it would be hard to find her match among women. I have heard that saying of the Persians about Parysatis, that no other woman had been the sister, mother, wife, and daughter of kings. Parysatis, however, was own sister of her husband, since their law does not forbid a Persian to marry his sister. But your mother, while in accordance with our laws she kept pure and unsullied those ties of kinship, was actually the daughter of one emperor, the wife of another, the sister of a third, and the mother not of one emperor but of several. Of these one aided your father in his war against the tyrants; another conquered the Getae and secured for us a lasting peace with them; the third kept our frontiers safe from the enemy’s incursions, and often led his forces against them in person, so long at least as he was permitted by those who were so soon punished for their crimes against him. Though by the number and brilliance of their achievements they have indeed earned our homage, and though all the blessings of fortune were theirs in abundance, [10] yet in the whole tale of their felicity one could pay them no greater compliment than merely to name their sires and grandsires. But I must not make my account of them too long, lest I should spend time that I ought to devote to your own panegyric. So in what follows I will, as indeed I ought, endeavour — or rather, since affectation is out of place, let me say I will demonstrate — that you are far more august than your ancestors.

Now as for heavenly voices and prophecies and visions in dreams and all such portents as are common gossip when men like yourself have achieved brilliant and conspicuous success, Cyrus, for instance, and the founder of our capital, and Alexander, Philip’s son, and the like, I purposely ignore them. Indeed I feel that poetic license accounts for them all. And it is foolish even to state that at the hour of your birth all the circumstances were brilliant and suited to a prince. And now the time has come for me to speak of your education as a boy. You were of course bound to have the princely nurture that should train your body to be strong, muscular, healthy, and handsome, and at the same time duly equip your soul with courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom. But this cannot result from that loose indulgence which naturally pampers body and soul, weakening men’s wills for facing danger and their bodies for work. Therefore your body required training by suitable gymnastics, while you adorned your mind by literary studies. But I must speak at greater length about both branches of your education, since it laid the foundation of your later career. In your physical training you did not pursue those exercises that fit one merely for public display. What professional athletes love to call the pink of condition you thought unsuitable for a king who must enter for contests that are not make-believe. [11] Such a one must put up with very little sleep and scanty food, and that of no precise quantity or quality or served at regular hours, but such as can be had when the stress of work allows. And so you thought you ought to train yourself in athletics with a view to this, and that your exercises must be military and of many kinds, dancing and running in heavy armour, and riding. All these you have continued from early youth to practise at the right time, and in every exercise you have attained to greater perfection than any other hoplite. Usually a hoplite who is a good infantryman cannot ride, or, if he is an expert horseman, he shirks marching on foot to battle. But of you alone it can be said that you can put on the cavalry uniform and be a match for the best of them, and when changed into a hoplite show yourself stronger, swifter, and lighter on your feet than all the rest. Then you practised shooting at a mark, that even your hours of leisure might not be hours of ease or be found without the exercise of arms. So by work that was voluntary you trained your body to stand the exertions that you would be compelled to undertake.

Your mind, meanwhile, was trained by practice in public speaking and other studies suitable to your years. But it was not to be wholly without the discipline of experience, nor was it for you to listen merely to lectures on the virtues as though they were ballads or saga stories, and so wait all that time without actual acquaintance with brave works and undertakings. Plato, that noble philosopher, advised that boys should be furnished as it were with wings for flight by being mounted on horseback, and should then be taken into battle so that they may be spectators of the warfare in which they must soon be combatants. This, I make bold to say, was in your father’s mind when he made you governor and king of the Celtic tribes [12] while you were still a youth, or rather a mere boy in point of years, though in intelligence and endurance you could already hold your own with men of parts. Your father wisely provided that your experience of war should be free from risks, having arranged that the barbarians should maintain peace with his subjects. But he instigated them to internal feuds and civil war, and so taught you strategy at the expense of their lives and fortunes. This was a safer policy than the wise Plato’s. For, by his scheme, if the invading army were composed of infantry, the boys could indeed be spectators of their fathers’ prowess, or, if need arose, could even take part. But supposing that the enemy won in a cavalry engagement, then, on the instant, one would have to devise some means to save the boys, which would be difficult indeed. But to inure the boys to face the enemy, while the hazard belongs to others, is to take counsel that both suffices for their need and also secures their safety.

It was in this way then that you were first trained in manliness. But as regards wisdom, that nature with which you were endowed was your self-sufficing guide. But also, I think, the wisest citizens were at your disposal and gave you lessons in statecraft. Moreover, your intercourse with the barbarian leaders in that region gave you an acquaintance at first hand with the manners, laws, and usages of foreigners. Indeed, when Homer set out to prove the consummate wisdom of Odysseus, he called him “much-travelled,” and said that he had come to know the minds of many peoples and visited their cities, so that he might choose what was best in every one and be able to mix with all sorts and conditions of men. Yes, even Odysseus, who never ruled an empire, [13] needed experience of the many and divers minds of men. How much more necessary that one who was being brought up to guide an empire like this should not fit himself for the task in some modest dwelling apart; neither should he, like young Cyrus in his games, play at being emperor, nor give audiences to his playmates, as they say Cyrus did. Rather he ought to mix with nations and peoples, and give orders to his troops definitely indicating what is to be done, and generally he should be found wanting in none of those things which, when he comes to manhood, he must perform without fear.

Accordingly, when you had gained a thorough knowledge of the Celts, you crossed to the other continent and were given sole command against the Parthians and Medes. There were already signs that a war was smouldering and would soon burst into flame. You therefore quickly learned how to deal with it, and, as though you took as model the hardness of your weapons, steeled yourself to bear the heat of the summer season. I have heard say that Alcibiades alone, among all the Greeks, was naturally so versatile that when he cast in his lot with the Spartans he copied the self-restraint of the Lacedaemonians, then in turn Theban and Thracian manners, and finally adopted Persian luxury. But Alcibiades, when he changed his country changed his character too, and became so tainted with perversity and so ill-conditioned that he was likely to lose utterly all that he was born to. You, however, thought it your duty to maintain your severity of life wherever you might be, and by hard work inuring your constitution to change, you easily bore the march inland from Galatia to Parthia, more easily in fact than a rich man who lives now here, now there, according to the season, would bear it if he were forced to encounter unseasonable weather. I think Heaven smiled on you and willed that you should govern the whole world, and so from the first trained you in virtue, and was your guide when you journeyed to all points, and showed you the bounds and limits of the whole empire, the character of each region, the vastness of your territory, [14] the power of every race, the number of the cities, the characteristics of the masses, and above all the vast number of things that one who is bred to so great a kingship cannot afford to neglect. But I nearly forgot to mention the most important thing of all. From a boy you were taught to govern this great empire, but a better thing you learned, to be governed, submitting, yourself to the authority that is the best in the world and the most just, that is to say nature and law. I mean that both as son and subject you obeyed your father. Indeed, had he been only your father or only your king, obedience was his due.

Now what rearing and education for a king could one find in history better than this? Consider the Greeks. Not thus did the Spartans train the Heracleidae, though they are thought to have enjoyed the best form of government, that of their kings. As for the barbarians, not even the Carthaginians, though they were particularly well-governed by their kings, chose the best method of training their future rulers. The moral discipline and the studies prescribed by their laws were pursued by all alike, as though the citizens were brothers, all destined both to govern and be governed, and in the matter of education they made no difference between their princes and the rest of the citizens. Yet surely it is foolish to demand superlative excellence from one’s rulers when one takes no pains to make them better than other men. Among the barbarians, indeed, no man is debarred from winning the throne, so one can excuse them for giving the same moral training to all. But that Lycurgus, who tried to make the dynasty of the Heracleidae proof against all s...

Table of contents

• The Complete Works of Julian the Apostate
• Illustrated
• ORATIONS
• LETTERS TO THEMISTIUS
• TO THE SENATE AND PEOPLE OF ATHENS
• TO A PRIEST
• THE CAESARS
• MISOPOGON
• LETTERS
• EPIGRAMS
• AGAINST THE GALILAEANS
• FRAGMENTS