Of the Asylum of Juno in Troy, Which Saved No One from the Greeks; And of the Churches of the Apostles, Which Protected from the Barbarians All Who Fled to Them.

Chapter 4.—Of the Asylum of Juno in Troy, Which Saved No One from the Greeks; And of the Churches of the Apostles, Which Protected from the Barbarians All Who Fled to Them.

Caput IV. De asylo Iunonis in Troia, quod neminem liberauit a Graecis, et basilicis apostolorum, quae omnes ad se confugientes a barbaris defenderunt.

Troy itself, the mother of the Roman people, was not able, as I have said, to protect its own citizens in the sacred places of their gods from the fire and sword of the Greeks, though the Greeks worshipped the same gods. Not only so, but

“Phoenix and Ulysses fell

Ipsa, ut dixi, Troia, mater populi Romani, sacratis locis deorum suorum munire non potuit ciues suos ab ignibus ferroque Graecorum, eosdem ipsos deos colentium; quin etiam Iunonis asylo Custodes lecti, Phoenix et dirus Ulixes, Praedam adseruabant; huc undique Troia gaza Incensis erepta adytis mensaeque deorum Crateresque auro solidi captiuaque uestis Congeritur.

In the void courts by Juno’s cell

Were set the spoils to keep;

Snatched from the burning shrines away,

There Ilium’s mighty treasure lay,

Rich altars, bowls of massy gold,

And captive raiment, rudely rolled

In one promiscuous heap;

While boys and matrons, wild with fear,

In long array were standing near.”

Pueri et pauidae longo ordine matres Stant circum.

In other words, the place consecrated to so great a goddess was chosen, not that from it none might be led out a captive, but that in it all the captives might be immured. Compare now this “asylum”—the asylum not of an ordinary god, not of one of the rank and file of gods, but of Jove’s own sister and wife, the queen of all the gods—with the churches built in memory of the apostles. Into it were collected the spoils rescued from the blazing temples and snatched from the gods, not that they might be restored to the vanquished, but divided among the victors; while into these was carried back, with the most religious observance and respect, everything which belonged to them, even though found elsewhere. There liberty was lost; here preserved. There bondage was strict; here strictly excluded. Into that temple men were driven to become the chattels of their enemies, now lording it over them; into these churches men were led by their relenting foes, that they might be at liberty. In fine, the gentle Greeks appropriated that temple of Juno to the purposes of their own avarice and pride; while these churches of Christ were chosen even by the savage barbarians as the fit scenes for humility and mercy. But perhaps, after all, the Greeks did in that victory of theirs spare the temples of those gods whom they worshipped in common with the Trojans, and did not dare to put to the sword or make captive the wretched and vanquished Trojans who fled thither; and perhaps Virgil, in the manner of poets, has depicted what never really happened? But there is no question that he depicted the usual custom of an enemy when sacking a city.

Electus est uidelicet locus tantae deae sacratus, non unde captiuos non liceret educere, sed ubi captiuos liberet includere. Conpara nunc asylum illud non cuiuslibet dei gregalis uel de turba plebis, sed Iouis ipsius sororis et coniugis et reginae omnium deorum cum memoriis nostrorum apostolorum. Illuc incensis templis et dis erepta spolia portabantur, non donanda uictis, sed diuidenda uictoribus; huc autem et quod alibi ad ea loca pertinere conpertum est cum honore et obsequio religiosissimo reportatum est. Ibi amissa, hic seruata libertas; ibi clausa, hic interdicta captiuitas; ibi possidendi a dominantibus hostibus premebantur, huc liberandi a miserantibus ducebantur: postremo illud Iunonis templum sibi elegerat auaritia et superbia leuium Graeculorum, istas Christi basilicas misericordia et humilitas etiam inmanium barbarorum. Nisi forte Graeci quidem in illa sua uictoria templis deorum communium pepercerunt adque illo confugientes miseros uictosque Troianos ferire uel captiuare non ausi sunt, sed Vergilius poetarum more illa mentitus est. Immo uero morem hostium ciuitates euertentium ille descripsit.

Chapter 5.—Cæsar’s Statement Regarding the Universal Custom of an Enemy When Sacking a City.

Caput V. De generali consuetudine hostium uictas ciuitates euertentium quid Cato senserit.

Even Cæsar himself gives us positive testimony regarding this custom; for, in his deliverance in the senate about the conspirators, he says (as Sallust, a historian of distinguished veracity, writes) “that virgins and boys are violated, children torn from the embrace of their parents, matrons subjected to whatever should be the pleasure of the conquerors, temples and houses plundered, slaughter and burning rife; in fine, all things filled with arms, corpses, blood, and wailing.” If he had not mentioned temples here, we might suppose that enemies were in the habit of sparing the dwellings of the gods. And the Roman temples were in danger of these disasters, not from foreign foes, but from Catiline and his associates, the most noble senators and citizens of Rome. But these, it may be said, were abandoned men, and the parricides of their fatherland.

Quem morem etiam Cato, sicut scribit Sallustius, nobilitatae ueritatis historicus, sententia sua, quam de coniuratis in senatu habuit, conmemorare non praetermittit: ‘rapi uirgines pueros, diuelli liberos a parentum conplexu, matres familiarum pati quae uictoribus conlibuisset, fana adque domos spoliari, caedem incendia fieri: postremo armis cadaueribus cruore adque luctu omnia conpleri’. Hic si fana tacuisset, deorum sedibus solere hostes parcere putaremus. Et haec non ab alienigenis hostibus, sed a Catilina et sociis eius, nobilissimis senatoribus et Romanis ciuibus, Romana templa metuebant. Sed hi uidelicet perditi et patriae parricidae.

Chapter 6.—That Not Even the Romans, When They Took Cities, Spared the Conquered in Their Temples.

Caput VI. Quod ne Romani quidem ita ullas ceperint ciuitates, ut in templis earum parcerent uictis.

Why, then, need our argument take note of the many nations who have waged wars with one another, and have nowhere spared the conquered in the temples of their gods? Let us look at the practice of the Romans themselves; let us, I say, recall and review the Romans, whose chief praise it has been “to spare the vanquished and subdue the proud,” and that they preferred “rather to forgive than to revenge an injury;” and among so many and great cities which they have stormed, taken, and overthrown for the extension of their dominion, let us be told what temples they were accustomed to exempt, so that whoever took refuge in them was free. Or have they really done this, and has the fact been suppressed by the historians of these events? Is it to be believed, that men who sought out with the greatest eagerness points they could praise, would omit those which, in their own estimation, are the most signal proofs of piety? Marcus Marcellus, a distinguished Roman, who took Syracuse, a most splendidly adorned city, is reported to have bewailed its coming ruin, and to have shed his own tears over it before he spilt its blood. He took steps also to preserve the chastity even of his enemy. For before he gave orders for the storming of the city, he issued an edict forbidding the violation of any free person. Yet the city was sacked according to the custom of war; nor do we anywhere read, that even by so chaste and gentle a commander orders were given that no one should be injured who had fled to this or that temple. And this certainly would by no means have been omitted, when neither his weeping nor his edict preservative of chastity could be passed in silence. Fabius, the conqueror of the city of Tarentum, is praised for abstaining from making booty of the images. For when his secretary proposed the question to him, what he wished done with the statues of the gods, which had been taken in large numbers, he veiled his moderation under a joke. For he asked of what sort they were; and when they reported to him that there were not only many large images, but some of them armed, “Oh,” says he, “let us leave with the Tarentines their angry gods.” Seeing, then, that the writers of Roman history could not pass in silence, neither the weeping of the one general nor the laughing of the other, neither the chaste pity of the one nor the facetious moderation of the other, on what occasion would it be omitted, if, for the honor of any of their enemy’s gods, they had shown this particular form of leniency, that in any temple slaughter or captivity was prohibited?

Quid ergo per multas gentes, quae inter se bella gesserunt et nusquam uictis in deorum suorum sedibus pepercerunt, noster sermo discurrat? Romanos ipsos uideamus, ipsos, inquam, recolamus respiciamusque Romanos, de quorum praecipua laude dictum est: ‘Parcere subiectis et debellare superbos, et quod accepta iniuria ignoscere quam persequi malebant: quando tot tantasque urbes, ut late dominarentur, expugnatas captasque euerterunt, legatur nobis quae templa excipere solebant, ut ad ea quisquis confugisset liberaretur. An illi faciebant et scriptores earundem rerum gestarum ista reticebant? Ita uero, qui ea quae laudarent maxime requirebant, ista praeclarissima secundum ipsos pietatis indicia praeterirent? Egregius Romani nominis Marcus Marcellus. qui Syracusas urbem ornatissimam cepit, refertur eam prius fleuisse ruituram et ante eius sanguinem suas illi lacrimas effudisse. Gessit et curam pudicitiae etiam in hoste seruandae. Nam priusquam oppidum uictor iussisset inuadi, constituit edicto, ne quis corpus liberum uiolaret. Euersa est tamen ciuitas more bellorum, nec uspiam legitur ab imperatore tam casto adque clementi fuisse praeceptum, ut quisquis ad illud uel illud templum fugisset haberetur inlaesus. Quod utique nullo modo praeteriretur, quando nec eius fletus nec quod edixerat pro pudicitia minime uiolanda potuit taceri. Fabius, Tarentinae urbis euersor, a simulacrorum depraedatione se abstinuisse. laudatur. Nam cum ei scriba suggessisset quid de signis deorum, quae multa capta fuerant, fieri iuberet, continentiam suam etiam iocando condiuit. Quaesiuit enim cuius modi essent, et cum ei non solum multa grandia, uerum etiam renuntiarentur armata, ⟨relinquamus⟩, inquit <Tarentinis deos […] Cum igitur nec illius fletum nec huius risum, nec illius c:Rtam misericordiam nec huius facetam continentiam Romanarum rerum gestarum scriptores tacere potuerint: quando praetermitteretur. si aliquibus hominibus in honorem cuiuspiam deorum suorum sic pepercissent, ut in quoquam templo caedem uel captiuitatem fieri prohiberent?

Chapter 7.—That the Cruelties Which Occurred in the Sack of Rome Were in Accordance with the Custom of War, Whereas the Acts of Clemency Resulted from the Influence of Christ’s Name.

Caput VII. Quod in euersione Urbis, quae aspere gesta sunt. de consuetudine acciderint belli; quae uero clementer, de potentia prouenerint nominis Christi.

All the spoiling, then, which Rome was exposed to in the recent calamity—all the slaughter, plundering, burning, and misery—was the result of the custom of war. But what was novel, was that savage barbarians showed themselves in so gentle a guise, that the largest churches were chosen and set apart for the purpose of being filled with the people to whom quarter was given, and that in them none were slain, from them none forcibly dragged; that into them many were led by their relenting enemies to be set at liberty, and that from them none were led into slavery by merciless foes. Whoever does not see that this is to be attributed to the name of Christ, and to the Christian temper, is blind; whoever sees this, and gives no praise, is ungrateful; whoever hinders any one from praising it, is mad. Far be it from any prudent man to impute this clemency to the barbarians. Their fierce and bloody minds were awed, and bridled, and marvellously tempered by Him who so long before said by His prophet, “I will visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquities with stripes; nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from them.”

Quidquid ergo uastationis trucidationis depraedationis concremationis adflictionis in ista recentissima Romana clade commissum est, fecit hoc consuetudo bellorum; quod autem nouo more factum est, quod inusitata rerum facie inmanitas barbara tam mitis apparuit, ut amplissimae basilicae inplendae populo cui parceretur eligerentur et decernerentur, ubi nemo feriretur, unde nemo raperetur, quo liberandi multi a miserantibus hostibus ducerentur, unde captiuandi ulli nec a crudelibus hostibus abducerentur: hoc Christi nomini, hoc Christiano tempori tribuendum quisquis non uidet, caecus, quisquis uidet nec laudat, ingratus, quisquis laudanti reluctatur, insanus est. Absit, ut prudens quisquam hoc feritati inputet barbarorum. Truculentissimas et saeuissimas mentes ille terruit, ille frenauit. e mirabiliter temperauit, qui per prophetam tanto ante dixit: isitabo in uirga iniquitates eorum et in flagellis peccata eorum; misericordiam autem meam non dispergam ab eis.