Chapter VII.

Let these dealers in crowns then recognize in the meantime the authority of Nature, on the ground of a common sense as human beings, and the certifications of their peculiar religion, as, according to the last chapter, worshippers of the God of nature; and, as it were, thus over and above what is required, let them consider those other reasons too which forbid us wearing crowns, especially on the head, and indeed crowns of every sort. For we are obliged to turn from the rule of Nature, which we share with mankind in general, that we may maintain the whole peculiarity of our Christian discipline, in relation also to other kinds of crowns which seem to have been provided for different uses, as being composed of different substances, lest, because they do not consist of flowers, the use of which nature has indicated (as it does in the case of this military laurel one itself), they may be thought not to come under the prohibition of our sect, since they have escaped any objections of nature. I see, then, that we must go into the matter both with more research, and more fully, from its beginnings on through its successive stages of growth to its more erratic developments. For this we need to turn to heathen literature, for things belonging to the heathen must be proved from their own documents. The little of this I have acquired, will, I believe, be enough.  If there really was a Pandora, whom Hesiod mentions as the first of women, hers was the first head the graces crowned, for she received gifts from all the gods whence she got her name Pandora. But Moses, a prophet, not a poet-shepherd, shows us the first woman Eve having her loins more naturally girt about with leaves than her temples with flowers.  Pandora, then, is a myth. And so we have to blush for the origin of the crown, even on the ground of the falsehood connected with it; and, as will soon appear, on the ground no less of its realities. For it is an undoubted fact that certain persons either originated the thing, or shed lustre on it. Pherecydes relates that Saturn was the first who wore a crown; Diodorus, that Jupiter, after conquering the Titans, was honoured with this gift by the rest of the gods. To Priapus also the same author assigns fillets; and to Ariadne a garland of gold and of Indian gems, the gift of Vulcan, afterwards of Bacchus, and subsequently turned into a constellation. Callimachus has put a vine crown upon Juno. So too at Argos, her statue, vine-wreathed, with a lion’s skin placed beneath her feet, exhibits the stepmother exulting over the spoils of her two step-sons. Hercules displays upon his head sometimes poplar, sometimes wild-olive, sometimes parsley. You have the tragedy of Cerberus; you have Pindar; and besides Callimachus, who mentions that Apollo, too when he had killed the Delphic serpent, as a suppliant, put on a laurel garland; for among the ancients suppliants were wont to be crowned. Harpocration argues that Bacchus the same as Osiris among the Egyptians, was designedly crowned with ivy, because it is the nature of ivy to protect the brain against drowsiness. But that in another way also Bacchus was the originator of the laurel crown (the crown) in which he celebrated his triumph over the Indians, even the rabble acknowledge, when they call the days dedicated to him the “great crown.” If you open, again, the writings of the Egyptian Leo, you learn that Isis was the first who discovered and wore ears of corn upon her head—a thing more suited to the belly. Those who want additional information will find an ample exposition of the subject in Claudius Saturninus, a writer of distinguished talent who treats this question also, for he has a book on crowns, so explaining their beginnings as well as causes, and kinds, and rites, that you find all that is charming in the flower, all that is beautiful in the leafy branch, and every sod or vine-shoot has been dedicated to some head or other; making it abundantly clear how foreign to us we should judge the custom of the crowned head, introduced as it was by, and thereafter constantly managed for the honour of, those whom the world has believed to be gods. If the devil, a liar from the beginning, is even in this matter working for his false system of godhead (idolatry), he had himself also without doubt provided for his god-lie being carried out. What sort of thing, then, must that be counted among the people of the true God, which was brought in by the nations in honour of the devil’s candidates, and was set apart from the beginning to no other than these; and which even then received its consecration to idolatry by idols and in idols yet alive?  Not as if an idol were anything, but since the things which others offer up to idols belong to demons. But if the things which others offer to them belong to demons how much more what idols offered to themselves, when they were in life! The demons themselves, doubtless, had made provision for themselves by means of those whom they had possessed, while in a state of desire and craving, before provision had been actually made.

7. Proinde coronarii isti agnoscant interim naturae auctoritatem communis sapientiae nomine, qua homines, sed propriae religionis pignore, qua Deum naturae de proximo colentes, atque ita uelut ex abundanti ceteras quoque rationes dispiciant, quae nostro priuatim capiti coronamentis, et quidem omnibus interdicunt. Nam et urguemur a communione naturalis disciplinae conuerti ad proprietatem christianam totam iam defendendam per ceteras quoque species coronarum, quae aliis usibus prospectae uidentur ut aliis substantiis structae, ne, quia non ex floribus constant, quorum usum natura signauit, ut ipsa haec laurea militaris, non credantur admittere sectae interdictionem quia euaserint naturae praescriptionem. Video igitur et curiosius et plenius agendum ab originibus usque ad profectus et excessus rei. Litterae ad hoc saeculares necessariae. De suis enim instrumentis saecularia probari necesse est. Quantulas attigi, credo, sufficient. Si fuit aliqua Pandora, quam primam feminarum memorat Hesiodus, hoc primum caput coronatum est a Charitibus, cum ab omnibus muneraretur, unde Pandora. Nobis uero Moyses, propheticus, non poeticus pastor, principem feminam Euam facilius pudenda foliis quam tempora floribus incinctam describit. Nulla ergo Pandora. Sed ut de mendacio erubescenda est coronae origo, iam nunc et de ueritatibus suis. Certe enim ceteros fuisse constat auctores rei uel illuminatores. Saturnum Pherecydes ante omnes refert coronatum, Iouem Diodorus post deuictos Titanas hoc munere a ceteris honoratum. Dat et Priapo taenias idem, et Ariadnae sertum ex auro et Indicis gemmis, Vulcani opus, ac post Liberi munus, postea sidus. Iunoni uitem Callimachus induxit. Ita et Argi signum eius palmite redimitum, subiecto pedibus corio leonino, insultantem ostentat nouercam de exuuiis utriusque priuigni. Hercules nunc populum capite praefert, nunc oleastrum, nunc apium. Habes tragoediam Cerberi, habes Pindarum atque Callimachum, qui et Apollinem memorat interfecto Delphico dracone lauream induisse, qua supplicem. Erant enim supplices coronati apud ueteres. Liberum, eundem apud Aegyptios Osirim, Harpocration industria ederatum argumentatur, quod ederae naturae sit cerebrum ab heluco defensare. Sed et alias Liberum principem coronae, plane laureae in qua ex Indis triumphauit, etiam uulgus agnoscit, cum dies in illum sollemnes Magnam appellat Coronam. Si et Leonis Aegyptii scripta euoluas, prima Isis repertas spicas capite circumtulit, rem magis uentris. Plura quaerentibus omnia exhibebit praestantissimus in hac quoque materia commentator Claudius Saturninus. Nam est illic de coronis liber, et origines et causas et species et sollemnitates earum ita edisserens ut nullam gratiam floris, nullam laetitiam frondis, nullum caespitem aut palmitem non alicuius capiti inuenias consecratum: quo satis instruamur quam alienum iudicare debeamus coronati capitis institutionem ab eis prolatam et in eorum deinceps honorem dispensatam, quos saeculum deos credidit. Si enim mendacium diuinitatis diabolus operatur, in hac etiam specie a primordio mendax, sine dubio et eos ipse prospexerat, in quibus id mendacium diuinitatis ageretur. Quale igitur habendum est apud homines Dei ueri quod agentibus candidatis diaboli introductum et ipsis a primordio dicatum est, quoque iam tunc idolis latriae initiabantur ab idolis et in idolis adhuc uiuis ? non quasi aliquid sit idolum, sed quoniam, quae idolis ab aliis fiunt ad daemonas pertinent. Porro si quae alii idolis faciunt ad daemonas pertinent, quanto magis quod ipsa sibi idola fecerunt, cum aduiuerent ? Ipsi scilicet sibi procurauerunt daemones, per eos in quibus esurierant ante quod procurauerunt.