Apologetic writings of Tertullian

Tertullian's apologetic works include Ad nationes - To the pagans, Apologeticum (i.e. opus) - Apology, De testimonio animae - On the testimony of the soul and Ad Scapulam - To Scapula. Ad nations consists of two small books. The first book is of an apologetic nature. It is divided into two parts, of which the first embraces the first nine chapters, and the second the last eleven. In the first part of this book it is shown that public hatred of Christians is based on ignorance of them, that the proceedings of the Romans over Christians are not only different, but even opposite to their proceedings against pagan criminals (chap. 2-3), that it is extremely unfair to condemn Christians for their name alone or for the name of their Founder (chap. 3-4), also because some of them are bad (chap. 5), that the persecution of Christians has no proper basis in the laws (chapter 6), much less in popular rumor, which attributes terrible crimes to Christians, namely: infanticide, eating human flesh and incest (chapters 7–8), and that finally, Christians are unfairly considered to be the culprits of social disasters (chapter 9). In the second part of this book, Tertullian introduces the general idea that the accusers of Christians themselves commit all the crimes of which they accuse them; it is they who are guilty of the crime known as crimen laesae divinitatis (the crime of insulting the gods), since their gods are completely dependent on themselves, since they do not show them any preference over the dead and since they directly and openly ridicule them on the stage (chapter 10). They are also guilty of deifying those objects by which pagan sarcasm meant the Christian God, namely: the donkey, the cross and the sun (chap. 11-14). They are also far from free from the crimes of Thyestes and Oedipus (chap. 15-16) and from that crime which is known as crimen laesae majestatis (the crime of lese imperial majesty, ch. 17). Finally, heroes of extraordinary patience are not unknown among the pagans, for which they accused Christians (chap. 18–19). Therefore, Tertullian in chapter 20. this book exclaims with pathos the following: “So, if between us and you, most unjust pagans, there is no difference, if we and you are one and the same; then why do you not only not recognize your own, but even curse them? Since you do not hate what you yourself, then quickly give us your right hands, kiss us, embrace us, the bloodied - the bloody, the adulterers - the adulterers, the conspirators - the conspirators, the stubborn - the stubborn, and the superstitious - superstitious" (chapter 20). The second book of Tertullian's Ad nationes is polemical in nature. Here Tertullian criticizes both pagan polytheism in general and Roman polytheism in particular, to which he pays special attention. Hence this book is divided into two parts, of which the first contains the first eight chapters, which talk about pagan polytheism in general, and the second - the remaining nine, which talk about Roman polytheism. Varro, the most remarkable scientist of the ancient world, in his work “Rerum humanarum et divinarum libri” divides all pagan gods into three kinds - the physical ones, which are recognized by philosophers, the mythical ones, which are sung by poets, and the civil or folk gods, which the peoples have. But none of these kinds of gods have signs of divinity, which can be seen from the foundations on which their very origin is based (chapter 1). In particular, the physical gods are nothing more than the elements and what comes from them. A necessary attribute of the Divine is, among other things, eternity. What does not have this attribute is not divine. The elements, like the world in general, once did not exist. Therefore they are not eternal, and therefore not divine. But since the nature of the one being born must necessarily be the same as the nature of the one giving birth, then everything that is born from the elements is alien to the divine nature. Varro sees the basis for recognizing the elements as gods in the fact that without them no thing and man himself can exist, that they constantly have an effect on him, sometimes beneficial, sometimes harmful. But the elements act, says Tertullian, not actively, but passively. They are only submissive and unconscious organs of the all-providing divine power (chap. 2–6). Those who are recognized by poets, that is, mythical ones, are not gods either. These gods, according to the poets themselves, were people. They could not become gods from people even if there were such a Supreme Being who would make gods from people (chapter 7). Finally, not the gods and those who belong individually to one or another people from time immemorial, or the so-called municipal gods. The municipalities themselves do not know about these gods. Meanwhile, the true God must be generally known and ubiquitous (chapter 8). Actually, the Roman gods are divided by Tertullian into two types. The first includes general gods, that is, those whom the Romans idolized along with other peoples, and the second includes private or special gods, whom only the Romans worshiped. But both of them are not actually gods. In private deities, either a whole person, or some act or moment of his life and activity is deified (chapters 9–11). The common gods are not gods because the ancestor of all of them, Saturn, was a man, and therefore all the others who descended from him must have had human nature (chapter 12). Neither Saturn himself nor any of his descendants could become God after death (chap. 13-16). The opinion of the Romans, which they cite as proof of the objective existence of their gods, is unfair, that their gods granted them dominion over the whole world for their extraordinary religiosity (chapter 17). This is the content and this is the train of thought of Tertullian’s work “To the Gentiles.” It is closely and directly related, on the one hand, to the work of Tertullian, which is similar to it, to his “Apology,” and, on the other hand, to the work of Varro, already mentioned by us, to his “Rerum humanarum et divinarum libri.” In Tertullian’s work “To the Gentiles” and his “Apology” not only are most of the same thoughts expressed, not only are these thoughts supported by the same arguments, but there is often an almost word-for-word coincidence in sentences and periods. The following chapters of these works have such similarities. From this it can be seen that the entire first book of Ad nationes, with the exception of the fifth chapter, where it is said that it is unfair to blame all Christians for the fact that only some of them are bad, and the last chapter, where the conclusion of this book is located, completely coincide with the Apologeticum. From this it is also clear that the second book of Ad nationes has similarities with Apologeticum only in three chapters. Apologeticum differs from both books Ad nationes mainly in those chapters that deal with Christian doctrine and moral teaching (chapters 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23...). Ad nationes appeared earlier than Apologeticum, since Tertullian more than once indicates in them that he is writing. This includes the following places Ad nations. Analyzing in the first book of this work the proceedings of the Romans over Christians and showing that the basis for condemning the latter lies only in the name, Tertullian says: since this foundation (name) on which you rely when fighting against the name is considered in its place, then say; What is the fault of the name, what is its disadvantage and harm? (chapter 3). But this basis, that is, the name to which the court sentences alone pointed, is not considered anywhere by Tertullian, except in his Apology, where, however, he does not add anything new to refute it. Further, in the very first book of Ad nationes, having started talking about the resurrection of the dead, about eternal rewards and punishments, Tertullian interrupts his speech about this, saying: we learn about the reliability of this, since this is discussed in its place (chapter 7). Although Tertullian does not speak about the resurrection of the dead and specifically about the reliability of this resurrection in his Apology alone, nevertheless, it is of course here that it is, since of the writings addressed to the pagans, only it speaks about this (chap. 48 and 49). Both from this and from this passage of Ad nationes it is clear that at the same time as this work, Apologeticum was being compiled, which was late in its appearance, probably because it required more careful processing and finishing from the author. Asking the enemies of Christians, not without bile, that they now pour out all kinds of poison on them and shoot all sorts of satyr arrows at them, Tertullian then promises to refute all this with an exposition of Christian doctrine (chapter 10). But Tertullian does not speak about this for an apologetic purpose anywhere else, except in his Apology (chap. 17, 18...). Finally, in the very first book of Ad nationes, pursuing the idea that the pagans also committed homicide and infanticide, he expresses himself this way: if you have forgotten that you committed homicide and infanticide, then you will have to remember this in your own way, for we are now leaving a lot, so that it does not seem that we are saying the same thing everywhere (chap. 15). There is no doubt that Tertullian is pointing here to his Apologeticum (ch. 9). In the second book of Ad nationes, which is generally not as closely related to Apologeticum as the first, we find only one place indicating that this book also appeared before it. After examining the physical kind of gods, moving on to considering the mythical and mentioning the African Pug and Boeotas Amphiaraus, he continues: now we must touch on this kind of gods, a thorough consideration of which will be given in its place (chap. 7), which points to chs. 21 and 22. Apologies. The second book of Ad nations is in the closest and most direct relation to the work of Varro that we have already mentioned. Starting to criticize pagan polytheism in general and especially Roman polytheism, Tertullian, for the sake of brevity, dwells only on this one work. It, according to the testimony of Bl. Augustine, consisted of 41 books. In order to see exactly which books of this huge work the second book of Ad nations relates to, we consider it necessary to provide evidence of the blessed. Augustine about its content. He says: Varro wrote 41 books of antiquities, which he divided into human and divine, and devoted 25 books to the narration of human affairs, and 16 to divine affairs. The image of his division was as follows: in the narration of human affairs, he divided 25 books into 4 sections of 6 books in each, paying attention to who does, where he does, when he does, what he does. And therefore, in the first 6 books he wrote about people, in the next 6 - about places, in the next 6 - about times, and finally in the last 6 - about affairs (De civitate Dei VI, 3). Obviously, the second book “Ad nations” has nothing to do with this. The content of the second part of this work, which is divided into 16 books, is as follows: in the first book of this part, which constitutes the introduction to the further 15 books, there was talk about natural theology, and also, in all likelihood, there was talk about the threefold division of pagan theology, then in books 2, 3 and 4 it was said about sacred persons, namely: de pontificibus, de auguribus..., in 5, 6 and 7 books - about sacred places, namely: de sacellis, de sacris aedibus, de locis religiosis, in 8, 9 and 10 - about holidays, namely: de feriis, de ludis circensibus, de scenicis, in 11, 12 and 13 - about sacred rites, namely: de consecrationibus, de sacris publicis, de sacris privatis, and finally in 14, 15 and 16 - about the gods, namely: de diis certis, de diis incertis, de diis praecipuis atque selectis. It is not difficult to see from here that the second book of Tertullian’s Ad nationes relates not to all the books of the second part of Varro’s work mentioned by us, but only or almost only to the first and last three books of this work. Although this work, to the great regret of those interested in Roman antiquities, has not survived to us, it is nevertheless possible to determine with probability what exactly Tertullian drew from here for his second book Ad nations. From here, first of all, he drew the division of all pagan gods into three already known to us families and the image of each of them. Further, the division of Roman gods into three types is borrowed from here - known, unknown and chosen gods. Here we consider it necessary to pause a bit. This place in the Agobardian manuscript dating back to the 9th century is beyond any doubt spoiled. It is positively known that Varro divided the Roman gods into the three types we have indicated, while the manuscript contains the following: sed et Romanorum deos Varro bifariam disposuit in certos et electos. The context of the speech clearly shows that here bifariam stands instead of trifariam and that certos was omitted due to the ignorance of the copyist, who considered in certos and incertos to be identical expressions, and therefore used bifariam instead of trifariam. By known gods are meant those gods who ab initio, from time immemorial, were considered gods, and therefore they are otherwise called dii proprii, dii perpetui; under the unknown, on the contrary, those gods who were not gods before and became so later, thanks to consolidation or apotheosis; finally, under the elect - those who enjoyed special and predominant honor and had a public cult. This includes 12 male gods - Janus, Jupiter, Saturn, Genius, Mercury, Apollo, Mars, Vulcan, Neptune, Sun, Orcus, Liber, and 8 female gods - Tellus, Ceres, Juno, Luna, Diana, Minerva, Venus and Vesta. Finally, from here Tertullian also borrowed the image of representing the Roman gods themselves, which he divides, as we already know, contrary to Varro, into two types: general and particular. Particular attention is paid to private gods, in whom this or that individual act or moment in a person’s life is personified. These gods include, firstly, those who relate to man from the moment of his conception to birth, namely: Consevius, qui consationibus praesit; Fluviona, the goddess who holds back the monthly bleeding and thereby promotes the nutrition of the child in the womb; Vitumnus and Sentinus, of which the first gives life to the child, and the second - sensory sensation; Diespiter, god who brings a pregnant woman to birth; Candelifera, the goddess who guards the candle that was usually lit at birth; Postverta, Prosa and Carmenta, goddesses who promote relief from burdens. Secondly, this includes those gods who take care of a person from the moment of his birth to adulthood. Of these, the following are mentioned here by Tertullian: Levana, the goddess who raises the child from the ground, Cunina and Rumina, of whom the first lulls the newborn child and protects him from the evil eye, and the second takes care of the milk of the mother or mother; Potina and Educa, the first teaches the child to drink, and the second to eat; Farinus and Locutius, in whose care is the child's gift of speech; Abeona, Adeona and Statina, with the assistance of the first two the child moves, and with the assistance of the latter begins to stand; Domiduca, the goddess who first takes the child out of the house and then introduces him into it, and others. Finally, this includes the gods who accompany a person at his death, namely: Viduus, the god who separates the soul from the body; Caeculus, the god who takes away sight, and finally Mors, the goddess of death itself. Researchers of religious Roman antiquities value this information, although brief, especially because not only have the sacred Roman books, known under the name Indigitamenti, in which these gods were discussed, not survived to us, but even the work of Varro, from which Tertullian borrowed this information. This is precisely the basis for the significance of the second book of Ad nationes for Roman archaeology. The time of origin of the work of Tertullian we are considering can be determined quite accurately. Although this work contains chronological indications of the existence of Christianity, such indications cannot be used to determine the time of origin of this work, firstly because they are far from accurate, and secondly because they are inconsistent. Thus, in one place it is said that 250 years have not passed since the advent of Christianity, and in another – 300 years (1 book, chapters 7 and 16). Instead of the chronological indications found in this work, we will turn to the factual ones. The first book of Ad nationes mentions the prefect of Rome, Fuscian, who recently dealt with a shameful case (chapter 16). But Fuscian, according to Capitolinus, was prefect a little earlier than Pertinax (Curs. comps. ser. lat., t. I, pag. 768), who achieved the imperial crown in 193 and was killed three months after that. Further in the same book there is an indication of the defeat of Pescennius Nigra and Clodius Albinus. Hitherto, says Tertullian, there is the smell of corpses in Syria, and hitherto in Gaul they do not bathe in its Rhone (chapter 17). This passage clearly shows that the work Ad nationes appeared after the defeat of Pescennius Nigra and Clodius Albinus and some time passed after that. But when were Pescennius Niger and Clodius Albinus struck? About the time of the defeat of the first we will say categorically, without argumentation, that it falls on 194, but about the time of the defeat of the latter we will say in detail and with argumentation, since by determining this time the time of origin of Ad nations is more accurately determined. Some believe that Clodius Albinus was defeated by Septimius Severus in 197, while others attribute his defeat to 198. We adhere to the view of the first, as more fundamental in your opinion. It can be argued in three ways. Firstly, it is known that when the provinces learned that Didius Julian had acquired the Roman crown at auction, agreeing to pay each soldier more than the other contender for this crown, that is, Pertinax, the legions in Pannonia immediately declared Septimius Severus emperor, in Syria Pescennius Nigra, in Britain Clodius Albinus. Of course, after the death of the unfortunate Julian, which occurred in June 193, these three emperors had to come into conflict with each other, and Septimius Severus turned out to be the most energetic and far-sighted of all of them. Seeing that he could not wage war with both of his rivals at the same time, he recognized Clodius Albinus as his co-ruler, and fought with Pescennius Niger in the East. After the third battle, Niger was defeated, which, as we have already said, happened in 194. Then Septimius Severus decided to end the matter with Clodius Albinus, and therefore sent secret Sicarii to Gaul so that they would kill him. This departure falls at 195. However, the North did not achieve its goal. His intention was discovered by Albinus, and he then clearly rebelled against the North and his supporters. Having learned of the unsuccessful attempt to kill Albinus through the secret Sicarii, Severus immediately abandoned the siege of Byzantium and set off for Gaul with extraordinary haste. He, says Herodian, traveled continuously, not paying attention to holidays or any obstacles, constantly enduring cold and heat. The very haste with which the North leaves Byzantium and goes to Gaul gives reason to believe that this campaign should be dated back to 196, and not to 197. The war of the North with Albinus did not last very long: the next year the latter was defeated head and shoulders by the first. So, the defeat of Albinus falls on 197. Secondly, this same opinion can find confirmation in Dio Cassius’ description of the siege of Byzantium. According to him, the siege of Byzantium lasted three years, although incomplete, as is believed, and so that at the end of one year it began, and at the beginning of the third it was over, therefore, strictly speaking, it did not last even two years. The siege of Byzantium began during the life of Niger in 194, and therefore ended in 196. This city, as Mosheim believes on the basis of the testimony of Herodian, was taken in the very year in which the North set out from East to West, therefore in 196, and therefore the defeat of Albinus should fall on 197, and not on 198. Otherwise, it would turn out that the siege Byzantium lasted not three years, but four. Finally, this same opinion is confirmed by a comparison of the inscriptions with the narrations of historians regarding the time at which Caracalla, the eldest son of Severus, received the title of Augustus. From the inscriptions it is clear that he received this title in 198. According to historians, he was honored with this title in the year immediately following the Battle of Lyons, in which Albinus was defeated, which very clearly shows that this defeat refers to 197, and not 198. If the defeat of Albinus took place in 197, which, as it seems to us, is certain, then the origin of Ad nations must be attributed to 198–199. Finally, let's say something about the fate of this work. It was read by bl. Jerome and Bl. Augustine. The first, in his letter to Magnus, says this: quid Tertulliano eruditius? Quid accuratius? Apologeticus ejus et contra gentes libri cunctam saeculi obtinent disciplinam? (83 ep.). Although bl. Jerome calls this work not by the name that it now bears and which, in all likelihood, was given to him by Tertullian himself, but nevertheless, here it is this work that is meant, and not any other, because the names Contra gentes and Ad nationes are essentially the same. Without a doubt, bl. Augustine also has in mind Ad nationes when he quotes the following words of Tertullian, which seem to him more witty than true, namely: if the gods are chosen like onions, then, of course, those who are not chosen are considered unfit (De civit. Dei. L. VII, c. 1). In the Middle Ages, the essay Ad nations was not popular. While Tertullian’s homogeneous and in many respects similar work, namely his Apologeticum, has a significant number of manuscripts, Ad nationes has survived to us in only one Agobardian manuscript dating back to the ninth century. Unfortunately, this only manuscript has reached us in a damaged form; The text of the second book is especially damaged in it. But recently it has been significantly corrected by Reifferscheid and Vissova 1, according to whose review we made the following translation. Researchers of Latin Christian literature have paid relatively little attention to this work and have always preferred the Apologeticum to it. But researchers of Roman religious antiquities paid and still pay great attention to him. Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum editum consilio et impensis Academiae litterarum Caesareae Vindobonensis, vol. XX, pars 1, pag. 59–133.