|
There is no ground, then, for representing the gods (by whom, as
they say, that empire stood, though they are proved to have been
conquered by the Greeks) as being enraged at the Trojan perjury.
Neither, as others again plead in their defence, was it indignation
at the adultery of Paris that caused them to withdraw their protection
from Troy. For their habit is to be instigators and instructors in
vice, not its avengers. "The city of Rome," says Sallust, "was
first built and inhabited, as I have heard, by the Trojans, who,
flying their country, under the conduct of Æneas, wandered about
without making any settlement." If, then, the gods were of opinion
that the adultery of Paris should be punished, it was chiefly the
Romans, or at least the Romans also, who should have suffered; for
the adultery was brought about by Æneas' mother. But how could they
hate in Paris a crime which they made no objection to in their own
sister Venus, who (not to mention any other instance) committed
adultery with Anchises, and so became the mother of Æneas? Is it
because in the one case Menelaus was aggrieved, while in the other
Vulcan connived at the crime? For the gods, I fancy, are so little
jealous of their wives, that they make no scruple of sharing them with
men. But perhaps I may be suspected of turning the myths into
ridicule, and not handling so weighty a subject with sufficient
gravity. Well, then, let us say that Æneas is not the son of
Venus. I am willing to admit it; but is Romulus any more the son of
Mars? For why not the one as well as the other? Or is it lawful for
gods to have intercourse with women, unlawful for men to have
intercourse with goddesses? A hard, or rather an incredible
condition, that what was allowed to Mars by the law of Venus, should
not be allowed to Venus herself by her own law. However, both cases
have the authority of Rome; for Caesar in modern times believed no
less that he was descended from Venus, than the ancient Romulus
believed himself the son of Mars.
|
|