 |
The tradition of Servius. Criticism of the evidence
|
|
|
|
THE TRADITION OF SERVIUS
Servius, however, in his Commentary on Virgil’s Æ neid, vi. 714, hands on another tradition, in which the Spheres were regarded as inimical to the good of the soul, its evil propensities being ascribed to their energies. Some scholars are of opinion that Virgil in his famous Sixth Book is largely dependent on the ideas of popular Egyptian theology; 1 however that may be, Servius writes as follows:
“The philosophers tell us what the soul loses in its descent through the separate spheres. For which cause also the Mathematici imagine that our body and soul are knit together by the powers of the separate divinities, on the supposition that when souls descend, they bring with them the sluggishness of Saturn, the passionateness of Mars, the lustfulness of Venus, the cupidity of Mercury, and the desire for rule of Jupiter. And these things perturb souls, so that they are unable to use their own energy and proper powers. ”
It is to be noticed that the characteristics of the Sun and Moon are omitted, and this points to a doctrine in which Sun and Moon were treated as distinct from “the five. ” So also in the “Books of the Saviour” appended to the Pistis Sophia document we find (pp. 360, 366 ff. ) mention of only five planets. The
p. 419
tradition of this doctrine is exceedingly obscure, 1 and does not immediately concern us, as our text works on a “seven” basis.
CRITICISM OF THE EVIDENCE
I have done my best to discover some consistent scheme by which the contradictory data in Macrobius, Servius, and Hermes might be reconciled, but the tabularising of their indications only makes confusion worse confounded.
It is evident, however, that the main thing that Macrobius hands on, and which he attributes to Orphic-Pythagorean-Platonic tradition, contains in itself no suggestion that these philosophers attributed any evil tendencies to the characteristics of the spheres in themselves. The tradition of Macrobius is as follows:
| Saturn | { | τ ὸ θ ε ω ρ η τ ι κ ὸ ν τ ὸ λ ο γ ι σ τ ι κ ὸ ν | intelligentia. ratiocinatio. | |
| Jupiter | τ ὸ π ρ α κ τ ι κ ὸ ν | vis agendi. | ||
| Mars | τ ὸ θ υ μ ι κ ὸ ν | ardor animositatis. | ||
| Sun | { | τ ὸ α ἰ σ θ η τ ι κ ὸ ν τ ὸ φ α ν τ α σ τ ι κ ὸ ν | natura sentiendi. natura opinandi. | |
| Venus | τ ὸ ἐ π ι θ υ μ η τ ι κ ὸ ν | motus desiderii. | ||
| Mercury | τ ὸ ἑ ρ μ η ν ε υ τ ι κ ὸ ν | { | vis pronuntiandi et interpretandi quæ sentiantur. | |
| Moon | τ ὸ φ υ τ ι κ ὸ ν | { | natura plantandi et agendi corpora. |
The confusion between the “vis agendi” of Jupiter and that of the Moon may be resolved by supposing that the former was the application of the reasoning
|
|
|
p. 420
faculty to the practical things of life, while the latter was the power of moving one’s own physical body, if indeed the “et agendi” is not a gloss of Macrobius.
Servius, on the contrary, is following a tradition in which the spheres were regarded as the sources of evil tendencies; ethical considerations dominate the whole conception. Seeing, however, that it is a fivefold distribution, we are unable to equate it with the doctrine of Hermes, which is sevenfold. Nevertheless, there are some parallels.
The lustfulness (libido) of Servius is to be paralleled with the “guile of the desires” or “lustful error” (ἡ ἐ π ι θ υ μ η τ ι κ ὴ ἀ π ά τ η ) of Hermes. This is ascribed to the third zone by Hermes, and to Venus by Servius, Venus further coming third in Macrobius.
The “desire of rule” (desiderium regni) of Servius is clearly the “domineering arrogance” (ἡ ἀ ρ χ ο ν τ ι κ ὴ π ρ ο φ α ν ί α ) of Hermes. In Hermes this belongs to the middle zone (fourth); in Servius it is ascribed to Jupiter, presumably as the ruler of the age—the ruler of the previous age being Saturn, who has been deprived of his energy and so rendered “torpid. ”
The “passion” or “wrathfulness” (iracundia) of Servius is also to be paralleled to some extent with the “unholy daring” of Hermes. It is ascribed to the fifth zone by Hermes and to Jupiter by Servius, Mars also coming fifth in Macrobius.
Finally, the “love of gain” (lucri cupiditas) of Servius may be paralleled by the “striving for wealth by evil means” (α ἱ ἀ φ ο ρ μ α ὶ α ἱ κ α κ α ὶ τ ο ῦ π λ ο ύ τ ο υ ) of Hermes. Hermes attributes this to the sixth zone, and Servius to Mercury.
The remaining quality mentioned by Servius, “torpor, ” which he ascribes to Saturn, equates with nothing in Hermes, unless we can persuade ourselves that the
p. 421
“ensnaring falsehood” or “falsehood that lies in wait” (τ ὸ ἐ ν ε δ ρ ε ῦ ο ν ψ ε ῦ δ ο ς ) of Hermes has some connection with it.
The scheme of Hermes is septenary, and connected with the ideas of the ascent of the soul through seven zones, which we must locate as seven superimposed atmospheres extending from the surface of the earth to the moon’s orbit. There is no question here of the Celestial Spheres proper of the Philosophers, the characteristics of the energies of which are neither good nor evil in themselves; nor is there apparently any question of the “animal soul” proper, for the “passions and desires” are said to withdraw into the “nature which is void of reason. ” Though nothing more is said about this nature in this connection, in the general belief of the time its dominion was thought of as located below the earth-surface—as a Tartarus of seven zones, corresponding to those above, in which the “animal soul” or “vehicle of desire” was thought of as being gradually disintegrated, its energies finally going back to their source in the Depths of the Darkness, while the process of such disintegration or metamorphosis produced a parallel consciousness of chastisements and horrors. The seven zones of our text, however, are apparently the region of purification of the lower energies of the human soul; the mental energies led into error by the animal passions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
