われわれの感情はわれわれを越えてゆくこと
Montaigne, Essais, Book I CHAPTER
III——THAT OUR AFFECTIONS CARRY THEMSELVES BEYOND US.
☆ ミシェル・ド・モンテーニュ『随想録（エセー）』の第1巻第3章より。
| CHAPTER
III——THAT OUR AFFECTIONS CARRY THEMSELVES BEYOND US. Such as accuse mankind of the folly of gaping after future things, and advise us to make our benefit of those which are present, and to set up our rest upon them, as having no grasp upon that which is to come, even less than that which we have upon what is past, have hit upon the most universal of human errors, if that may be called an error to which nature herself has disposed us, in order to the continuation of her own work, prepossessing us, amongst several others, with this deceiving imagination, as being more jealous of our action than afraid of our knowledge. We are never present with, but always beyond ourselves: fear, desire, hope, still push us on towards the future, depriving us, in the meantime, of the sense and consideration of that which is to amuse us with the thought of what shall be, even when we shall be no more.[1]— [1]Compare [Rousseau, Emile, livre ii.] “Calamitosus est animus futuri auxius.” [“The mind anxious about the future is unhappy.” —Seneca, Epist., 98.] We find this great precept often repeated in Plato, “Do thine own work, and know thyself.” Of which two parts, both the one and the other generally, comprehend our whole duty, and do each of them in like manner involve the other; for who will do his own work aright will find that his first lesson is to know what he is, and that which is proper to himself; and who rightly understands himself will never mistake another man’s work for his own, but will love and improve himself above all other things, will refuse superfluous employments, and reject all unprofitable thoughts and propositions. As folly, on the one side, though it should enjoy all it desire, would notwithstanding never be content, so, on the other, wisdom, acquiescing in the present, is never dissatisfied with itself. —[Cicero, Tusc. Quae., 57, v. 18.]—Epicurus dispenses his sages from all foresight and care of the future. |
第三章--われわれの感情はわれわれを超えていく 未来にあるものを追い求めることの愚かさを人類に非難し、現在あるものを利益とし、その上に安息を置くことを勧める人々は、過去にあるものに対して持って いるものよりも、これから来るものに対して持っているものの方が、はるかに少ないとして、人間の誤りの中で最も普遍的なものに当たっている。 恐怖、欲望、希望はなおもわれわれを未来に向かって突き進ませ、その間にわれわれから、たとえわれわれがもう存在しなくなるときでさえも、われわれを楽し ませてくれるであろう「あるべき姿」を思い浮かべる感覚と考察を奪ってしまうのである[1]。 [1]ルソー『エミール』第2章を比較せよ。 「災難は未来への不安である」[Calamitosus est animus futuri auxius. [未来を心配する心は不幸である。 -セネカ『エピスト』98。］ この偉大な戒律は、プラトンでもしばしば繰り返されている。自分の仕事を正しく行おうとする者は、その最初の教訓が、自分とは何か、自分自身にふさわしい ものは何かを知ることであることに気づくだろう。自分自身を正しく理解する者は、他人の仕事を自分の仕事と取り違えることは決してなく、他のどんなことよ りも自分自身を愛し、向上させ、余計な仕事を断り、あらゆる不都合な考えや提案を拒絶するだろう。一方では愚かさが、たとえ望むものをすべて享受したとし ても、決して満足することがないように、他方では知恵は、現在に満足しても、決して自分自身に不満を抱くことはない。-エピクロスは、賢人たちに未来に対 するあらゆる予見や心配をさせないようにしている。 |
| Amongst those laws that relate
to the dead, I look upon that to be very sound by which the actions of
princes are to be examined after their decease.—[Diodorus Siculus, i.
6.]— They are equals with, if not masters of the laws, and, therefore,
what justice could not inflict upon their persons, ‘tis but reason
should be executed upon their reputations and the estates of their
successors—things that we often value above life itself. ‘Tis a custom
of singular advantage to those countries where it is in use, and by all
good princes to be desired, who have reason to take it ill, that the
memories of the wicked should be used with the same reverence and
respect with their own. We owe subjection and obedience to all our
kings, whether good or bad, alike, for that has respect unto their
office; but as to esteem and affection, these are only due to their
virtue. Let us grant to political government to endure them with
patience, however unworthy; to conceal their vices; and to assist them
with our recommendation in their indifferent actions, whilst their
authority stands in need of our support. But, the relation of prince
and subject being once at an end, there is no reason we should deny the
expression of our real opinions to our own liberty and common justice,
and especially to interdict to good subjects the glory of having
reverently and faithfully served a prince, whose imperfections were to
them so well known; this were to deprive posterity of a useful example.
And such as, out of respect to some private obligation, unjustly
espouse and vindicate the memory of a faulty prince, do private right
at the expense of public justice. Livy does very truly say,—[xxxv.
48.]— “That the language of men bred up in courts is always full of
vain ostentation and false testimony, every one indifferently
magnifying his own master, and stretching his commendation to the
utmost extent of virtue and sovereign grandeur.” Some may condemn the
freedom of those two soldiers who so roundly answered Nero to his
beard; the one being asked by him why he bore him ill-will? “I loved
thee,” answered he, “whilst thou wert worthy of it, but since thou art
become a parricide, an incendiary, a player, and a coachman, I hate
thee as thou dost deserve.” And the other, why he should attempt to
kill him? “Because,” said he, “I could think of no other remedy against
thy perpetual mischiefs.” —[Tacitus, Annal., xv. 67.]—But the public
and universal testimonies that were given of him after his death (and
so will be to all posterity, both of him and all other wicked princes
like him), of his tyrannies and abominable deportment, who, of a sound
judgment, can reprove them? I am scandalised, that in so sacred a government as that of the Lacedaemonians there should be mixed so hypocritical a ceremony at the interment of their kings; where all their confederates and neighbours, and all sorts and degrees of men and women, as well as their slaves, cut and slashed their foreheads in token of sorrow, repeating in their cries and lamentations that that king (let him have been as wicked as the devil) was the best that ever they had;—[Herodotus, vi. 68.]—by this means attributing to his quality the praise that only belongs to merit, and that of right is due to supreme desert, though lodged in the lowest and most inferior subject. Aristotle, who will still have a hand in everything, makes a ‘quaere’ upon the saying of Solon, that none can be said to be happy until he is dead: “whether, then, he who has lived and died according to his heart’s desire, if he have left an ill repute behind him, and that his posterity be miserable, can be said to be happy?” Whilst we have life and motion, we convey ourselves by fancy and preoccupation, whither and to what we please; but once out of being, we have no more any manner of communication with that which is, and it had therefore been better said by Solon that man is never happy, because never so, till he is no more. “Quisquam Vix radicitus e vita se tollit, et eicit; Sed facit esse sui quiddam super inscius ipse, Nec removet satis a projecto corpore sese, et Vindicat.” [“Scarcely one man can, even in dying, wholly detach himself from the idea of life; in his ignorance he must needs imagine that there is in him something that survives him, and cannot sufficiently separate or emancipate himself from his remains” —Lucretius, iii. 890.] |
死者に関する法律の中で、私は、君主の死後にその行為を調査する法律が
非常に健全であると見ている。この習慣が使われている国々にとって、これは非常に有益な習慣であり、悪とする理由があるすべての善良な王子が望むことであ
る。われわれは、善人であれ悪人であれ、すべての王に服従し、従順であるべきである。われわれは、政治に対して、たとえ不相応であっても忍耐をもって耐え
忍び、その悪徳を隠し、その権威がわれわれの支持を必要としている間は、その無関心な行動に対してわれわれの推薦をもって援助することを認めよう。しか
し、王子と臣民の関係がいったん終わりを告げた以上、われわれが、われわれ自身の自由と共通の正義のために、われわれの本音を表明することを否定すべき理
由はない。また、私的な義務を重んじるあまり、不当に欠点だらけの王子を支持し、その思い出を擁護する者は、公的な正義を犠牲にして私的な正義を行うこと
になる。リヴィは実に真実に即して言う--「宮廷で育てられた人々の言葉は、常に虚飾と虚偽の証言に満ちており、誰もが自分の主人を無関心に誇示し、美徳
と君主の威光を最大限に引き伸ばして称賛する」。ネロのあごひげにきっぱりと答えた二人の兵士の自由を非難する人もいるかもしれない。「一人はネロに、な
ぜ彼に悪意を抱くのかと問われ、「私はあなたを愛していた。もう一人は、なぜ彼を殺そうとしたのか。「彼は言った、「私は汝の絶え間ない災難に対して、他
に解決策を思いつかなかったからだ」。-しかし、彼の死後、彼の暴君ぶりと忌まわしい行状について、公的かつ普遍的な証言がなされた（そしてそれは、彼と
同じような他のすべての邪悪な君主についても、後世のすべての人々にとっても同様であろう）。 私は、ラケサエモン人のような神聖な政府において、王の葬儀にこのような偽善的な儀式が混ぜられていたことに憤慨している。そこでは、彼らの同盟者、隣 人、あらゆる種類の男女、奴隷が、悲しみのしるしとして額を切り、切り裂き、叫びと嘆きの中で、あの王は（彼が悪魔のように邪悪であったとしても）、これ まで彼らが持っていた最高の王であったと繰り返すのである。68.]この手段によって、功労にのみ属する賞賛を彼の資質に帰するのであり、最も低く最も 劣った臣下に宿っているとはいえ、その権利は最高の砂漠にこそあるのである。 アリストテレスは、ソロンの「死ぬまでは誰も幸福とは言えない」という格言に「屁理屈」をこねている。「では、自分の心の望みどおりに生きて死んだ者が、 後世に悪評を残し、後世の者が悲惨であったとしても、幸福であると言えるだろうか」。生命と運動がある間は、空想と夢中によって自分自身をどこへでも好き なものへと運ぶが、ひとたび存在しなくなると、存在するものとのいかなるコミュニケーションもなくなる。それゆえ、ソロンは、「人間は、それ以上存在しな くなるまでは、決して幸福ではない。 「と言った。 人は幸福である； しかし、「汝 」は 「汝 」の上に 「汝 」が存在することになる、 汝、汝の肉体は、汝の肉体の上に、汝の肉体の上に、汝の肉体の上にある。 「挽回する。」 [死ぬ間際にさえ、生という観念から完全に自分を切り離すことができる者はほとんどいない。 無知であるがゆえに、彼は自分の中に自分が生き延びるものがあると想像しなければならない。 無知であるがゆえに、彼は自分のなかに自分が生き延びるものがあると想像しなければならない。 彼は無知であるがゆえに、自分のなかに自分の遺体から自分を切り離したり、解放したりすることができないのである。 -ルクレティウス、890.］ |
| Bertrand de Guesclin, dying at
the siege of the Castle of Rancon, near unto Puy, in Auvergne, the
besieged were afterwards, upon surrender, enjoined to lay down the keys
of the place upon the corpse of the dead general. Bartolommeo
d’Alviano, the Venetian General, happening to die in the service of the
Republic in Brescia, and his corpse being to be carried through the
territory of Verona, an enemy’s country, most of the army were inclined
to demand safe-conduct from the Veronese; but Theodoro Trivulzio
opposed the motion, rather choosing to make his way by force of arms,
and to run the hazard of a battle, saying it was by no means fit that
he who in his life was never afraid of his enemies should seem to
apprehend them when he was dead. In truth, in affairs of the same
nature, by the Greek laws, he who made suit to an enemy for a body to
give it burial renounced his victory, and had no more right to erect a
trophy, and he to whom such suit was made was reputed victor. By this
means it was that Nicias lost the advantage he had visibly obtained
over the Corinthians, and that Agesilaus, on the contrary, assured that
which he had before very doubtfully gained over the
Boeotians.—[Plutarch, Life of Nicias, c. ii.; Life of Agesilaus, c. vi.] These things might appear strange, had it not been a general practice in all ages not only to extend the concern of ourselves beyond this life, but, moreover, to fancy that the favour of Heaven does not only very often accompany us to the grave, but has also, even after life, a concern for our ashes. Of which there are so many ancient examples (to say nothing of those of our own observation), that it is not necessary I should longer insist upon it. Edward I., King of England, having in the long wars betwixt him and Robert, King of Scotland, had experience of how great importance his own immediate presence was to the success of his affairs, having ever been victorious in whatever he undertook in his own person, when he came to die, bound his son in a solemn oath that, so soon as he should be dead he should boil his body till the flesh parted from the bones, and bury the flesh, reserving the bones to carry continually with him in his army, so often as he should be obliged to go against the Scots, as if destiny had inevitably attached victory, even to his remains. John Zisca, the same who, to vindication of Wicliffe’s heresies, troubled the Bohemian state, left order that they should flay him after his death, and of his skin make a drum to carry in the war against his enemies, fancying it would contribute to the continuation of the successes he had always obtained in the wars against them. In like manner certain of the Indians, in their battles with the Spaniards, carried with them the bones of one of their captains, in consideration of the victories they had formerly obtained under his conduct. And other people of the same New World carry about with them, in their wars, the relics of valiant men who have died in battle, to incite their courage and advance their fortune. Of which examples the first reserve nothing for the tomb but the reputation they have acquired by their former achievements, but these attribute to them a certain present and active power. |
ベルトラン・ド・ゲスクランは、オーヴェルニュ地方のピュイ近郊にある
ランコン城の包囲戦で戦死したが、その後、包囲された側は降伏の際、戦死した将軍の亡骸の上に城の鍵を置くよう命じられた。ヴェネチアの将軍バルトロメ
オ・ダルヴィアーノが共和国のためにブレシアで戦死し、その死体が敵国であるヴェローナの領土を通過することになった；
しかし、テオドロ・トリヴルツィオはこの動きに反対し、むしろ武力によって道を切り開き、戦いの危険を冒すことを選んだ。実際、ギリシアの掟では、同じよ
うな場合、敵に遺体を埋葬するよう求めた者は勝利を放棄し、戦利品を建てる権利はなく、求められた者が勝利者とされた。プルターク『ニキアスの生涯』2
章、『アゲシラウスの生涯』6章。 これらのことが奇妙に見えるかもしれないが、もし、いつの時代にも、自分自身の関心を現世の彼方にまで広げるだけでなく、さらに、天の恩恵がしばしば墓場 まで私たちを連れて行くだけでなく、死後も私たちの灰を気にかけていると空想するのが一般的な習慣でなかったら、である。このことについては、（私たち自 身の観察によるものは言うに及ばず）あまりにも多くの古代の例があるので、これ以上主張する必要はないだろう。エドワード1世である、 イングランド王エドワード1世は、スコットランド王ロバートとの長い戦いの中で、自分の直属の部下がいかに重要な役割を果たすかを身をもって体験し、自ら の手で行ったすべてのことに勝利してきたが、死ぬ間際に息子に厳粛な誓いを立てた、 彼の死後すぐに、遺体を骨から肉が離れるまで煮沸し、肉は埋葬する。骨は、彼がスコットランド軍と戦わなければならなくなるたびに、常に軍に携行するため に取っておく。ジョン・ジスカは、ウィクリフの異端を正当化するために、ボヘミアの国家を悩ませ、死後、彼の皮を剥ぎ、その皮で鼓を作り、敵との戦いで持 ち運ぶように命じた。同じように、あるインディオたちは、スペイン人との戦いの際に、かつて彼の指揮の下で得た勝利に感謝して、自分たちの隊長の一人の骨 を携行した。同じ新世界の他の人々は、勇気を奮い立たせ、幸運をもたらすために、戦死した勇者の遺品を持ち運んでいる。これらの例のうち、最初のものは墓 のために何も蓄えないが、かつての功績によって得た名声のために蓄える。 |
| The proceeding of Captain Bayard
is of a better composition, who finding himself wounded to death with
an harquebuss shot, and being importuned to retire out of the fight,
made answer that he would not begin at the last gasp to turn his back
to the enemy, and accordingly still fought on, till feeling himself too
faint and no longer able to sit on his horse, he commanded his steward
to set him down at the foot of a tree, but so that he might die with
his face towards the enemy, which he did. I must yet add another example, equally remarkable for the present consideration with any of the former. The Emperor Maximilian, great-grandfather to the now King Philip,—[Philip II. of Spain.]—was a prince endowed throughout with great and extraordinary qualities, and amongst the rest with a singular beauty of person, but had withal a humour very contrary to that of other princes, who for the despatch of their most important affairs convert their close-stool into a chair of State, which was, that he would never permit any of his bedchamber, how familiar soever, to see him in that posture, and would steal aside to make water as religiously as a virgin, shy to discover to his physician or any other whomsoever those parts that we are accustomed to conceal. I myself, who have so impudent a way of talking, am, nevertheless, naturally so modest this way, that unless at the importunity of necessity or pleasure, I scarcely ever communicate to the sight of any either those parts or actions that custom orders us to conceal, wherein I suffer more constraint than I conceive is very well becoming a man, especially of my profession. But he nourished this modest humour to such a degree of superstition as to give express orders in his last will that they should put him on drawers so soon as he should be dead; to which, methinks, he would have done well to have added that he should be blindfolded, too, that put them on. The charge that Cyrus left with his children, that neither they, nor any other, should either see or touch his body after the soul was departed from it,—[Xenophon, Cyropedia, viii. 7.]—I attribute to some superstitious devotion of his; for both his historian and himself, amongst their great qualities, marked the whole course of their lives with a singular respect and reverence to religion. I was by no means pleased with a story, told me by a man of very great quality of a relation of mine, and one who had given a very good account of himself both in peace and war, that, coming to die in a very old age, of excessive pain of the stone, he spent the last hours of his life in an extraordinary solicitude about ordering the honour and ceremony of his funeral, pressing all the men of condition who came to see him to engage their word to attend him to his grave: importuning this very prince, who came to visit him at his last gasp, with a most earnest supplication that he would order his family to be there, and presenting before him several reasons and examples to prove that it was a respect due to a man of his condition; and seemed to die content, having obtained this promise, and appointed the method and order of his funeral parade. I have seldom heard of so persistent a vanity. |
バヤール大尉の行動はもっとよくできている。彼は、自分が水鉄砲の銃弾
で死ぬほど負傷し、戦いから退くよう懇願されたことに気づき、最後の一息で敵に背を向けるようなことは始めからしないと答え、それに従ってなお戦い続けた
が、あまりの気の弱さにもはや馬に座ることができないと感じ、執事に命じて木のふもとに倒すよう命じた。 もうひとつ、前例と同様に注目に値する例を挙げなければならない。皇帝マクシミリアンは、現在のスペイン王フィリップ2世の曽祖父にあたる。 マクシミリアンは、偉大で並外れた資質を全体的に備えた王子であり、なかでも人物の美しさは際立っていたが、その一方で、最も重要な事務を処理するために 身近な便所を国家の椅子に変えるような他の王子とはまったく逆のユーモアを持っていた、 どんなに親しい閨の者にも、その姿を見せることを許さず、処女のように信心深く水を汲むために脇へ忍び寄り、医師や他の誰に対しても、隠すのが慣例となっ ている部位を見せないのである。私自身は生意気な話し方をするが、それでも生来このように慎み深く、必要に迫られたり喜んだりしない限りは、習慣で隠すよ うに命じられている部分や行為を、誰の目にも触れることはほとんどない。しかし、彼はこの控えめなユーモアを迷信の域にまで高め、遺言で「死んだらすぐに 引き出しをかけるように」と明確に命じた。キュロスが子供たちに残した罪は、魂が肉体から離れた後は、彼らも他の誰一人として、彼の肉体を見たり触ったり してはならないというものであった。 私の親戚で、平時にも戦時にも非常に優れた功績を残した人物が、非常に高齢になってから石に激痛を感じて亡くなったという話を、私は非常に喜ばしく思って いたのだが、その人物は人生の最後の数時間を、葬儀の儀式と名誉のために並々ならぬ注意を払って過ごし、彼に会いに来たすべての身分の高い人物に、自分の 墓まで参列してくれるよう約束するよう迫ったという： 最期に息を引き取る間際に見舞いに来たこの王子に、自分の家族にも葬儀に参列するよう命じてほしいと懇願し、それが彼のような境遇の人物にふさわしい敬意 であることを証明するいくつかの理由と事例を示し、この約束を取り付け、葬儀のパレードの方法と順序を決めて満足そうに息を引き取った。これほど執拗な虚 栄心はめったに聞いたことがない。 |
| Another, though contrary
curiosity (of which singularity, also, I do not want domestic example),
seems to be somewhat akin to this, that a man shall cudgel his brains
at the last moments of his life to contrive his obsequies to so
particular and unusual a parsimony as of one servant with a lantern, I
see this humour commended, and the appointment of Marcus. Emilius
Lepidus, who forbade his heirs to bestow upon his hearse even the
common ceremonies in use upon such occasions. Is it yet temperance and
frugality to avoid expense and pleasure of which the use and knowledge
are imperceptible to us? See, here, an easy and cheap reformation. If
instruction were at all necessary in this case, I should be of opinion
that in this, as in all other actions of life, each person should
regulate the matter according to his fortune; and the philosopher Lycon
prudently ordered his friends to dispose of his body where they should
think most fit, and as to his funeral, to order it neither too
superfluous nor too mean. For my part, I should wholly refer the
ordering of this ceremony to custom, and shall, when the time comes,
accordingly leave it to their discretion to whose lot it shall fall to
do me that last office. “Totus hic locus est contemnendus in nobis, non
negligendus in nostris;”—[“The place of our sepulture is to be
contemned by us, but not to be neglected by our friends.”—Cicero, Tusc.
i. 45.]— and it was a holy saying of a saint, “Curatio funeris,
conditio sepultura: pompa exequiarum, magis sunt vivorum solatia, quam
subsidia mortuorum.”—[“The care of death, the place of sepulture, the
pomps of obsequies, are rather consolations to the living than succours
to the dead.” August. De Civit. Dei, i. 12.]—Which made Socrates answer
Crito, who, at death, asked him how he would be buried: “How you will,”
said he. “If I were to concern myself beyond the present about this
affair, I should be most tempted, as the greatest satisfaction of this
kind, to imitate those who in their lifetime entertain themselves with
the ceremony and honours of their own obsequies beforehand, and are
pleased with beholding their own dead countenance in marble. Happy are
they who can gratify their senses by insensibility, and live by their
death!” I am ready to conceive an implacable hatred against all popular domination, though I think it the most natural and equitable of all, so oft as I call to mind the inhuman injustice of the people of Athens, who, without remission, or once vouchsafing to hear what they had to say for themselves, put to death their brave captains newly returned triumphant from a naval victory they had obtained over the Lacedaemonians near the Arginusian Isles, the most bloody and obstinate engagement that ever the Greeks fought at sea; because (after the victory) they followed up the blow and pursued the advantages presented to them by the rule of war, rather than stay to gather up and bury their dead. And the execution is yet rendered more odious by the behaviour of Diomedon, who, being one of the condemned, and a man of most eminent virtue, political and military, after having heard the sentence, advancing to speak, no audience till then having been allowed, instead of laying before them his own cause, or the impiety of so cruel a sentence, only expressed a solicitude for his judges’ preservation, beseeching the gods to convert this sentence to their good, and praying that, for neglecting to fulfil the vows which he and his companions had made (with which he also acquainted them) in acknowledgment of so glorious a success, they might not draw down the indignation of the gods upon them; and so without more words went courageously to his death. |
もうひとつは、これとは相反する好奇心だが（その特異性も、私は国内の
例を望まない）、人が人生の最後の瞬間に、自分の葬儀を、提灯を持った一人の召使いのような、特別で異常な倹約のために、頭を悩ませるということに、いく
らか似ているように思われる。エミリウス・レピドゥスは、このような機会に行われる一般的な儀式でさえ、彼の柩に授けることを相続人に禁じた。私たちの目
には見えない出費や快楽を避けることが、節制であり倹約なのだろうか。簡単で安価な改革がここにある。このような場合に指導が必要であるとすれば、人生の
他のすべての行為と同様に、各人が自分の運勢に応じて問題を調整すべきだというのが私の意見である。哲学者リコンは、自分の遺体を最も適切と思われる場所
に処分するよう友人に命じ、葬儀については、余分でも卑小でもないように命じた。私としては、この儀式を執り行うことは完全に慣習に委ねるべきであり、時
が来れば、私に最後の務めを果たすのは誰の手になるかは、彼らの裁量に委ねることにしよう。「われわれの埋葬の場所は、われわれには軽蔑されるべきだが、
われわれの友人には軽蔑されるべきではない」-キケロ『トスクス』I.45.
「死の世話、葬儀の場所、葬儀の儀式は、死者を慰めるよりも、むしろ生者を慰めるものである」。August. De Civit. De
Civit. Dei, i. 12.]-ソクラテスは、死の間際、どのように埋葬されるかと尋ねたクリトに答えた：
「どのように埋葬されるか」と尋ねたクリトに、ソクラテスはこう答えた。「もし私が、このことに関して今以上の心配をするとしたら、この種の最大の満足と
して、生前、自分の葬儀の儀式と栄誉を前もって楽しみ、大理石の中に自分の死んだ顔を見ることに満足する人々の真似をしたくなるだろう。無感覚によって自
分の感覚を満足させ、死によって生きることができる者は幸福である」。 アテネの民衆の非人間的な不義を思い起こすと、私はあらゆる民衆支配に対して、最も自然で公平なものだと考えているが、アテネの民衆の非人間的な不義を思 い起こすと、彼らは赦されることもなく、一度も彼らの言い分を聞くこともなく、アルギヌス諸島の近くでラケサエモン人に勝利して凱旋したばかりの勇敢な船 長たちを死刑にした； 勝利の後、彼らは死者を集めて埋葬するために留まるのではなく、打撃を追撃し、戦争の規則によってもたらされた利点を追求したからである。ディオメドン は、死刑囚の一人であり、政治的にも軍事的にも最も高名な徳のある人物であったが、判決を聞いた後、それまで謁見が許されていなかったにもかかわらず、発 言しようとした、 この判決を神々に懇願し、この輝かしい成功を認めて彼とその仲間たちが立てた誓い（この誓いは彼も知っていた）の履行を怠ったために、神々の憤りを彼らの 上に引き下ろすことがないように祈った； そして、それ以上の言葉を発することなく、勇気をもって死に向かった。 |
| Fortune, a few years after,
punished them in the same kind; for Chabrias, captain-general of their
naval forces, having got the better of Pollis, Admiral of Sparta, at
the Isle of Naxos, totally lost the fruits of his victory, one of very
great importance to their affairs, in order not to incur the danger of
this example, and so that he should not lose a few bodies of his dead
friends that were floating in the sea, gave opportunity to a world of
living enemies to sail away in safety, who afterwards made them pay
dear for this unseasonable superstition:— “Quaeris, quo jaceas, post obitum, loco? Quo non nata jacent.” [“Dost ask where thou shalt lie after death? Where things not born lie, that never being had.”] Seneca, Tyoa. Choro ii. 30. This other restores the sense of repose to a body without a soul: “Neque sepulcrum, quo recipiatur, habeat: portum corporis, ubi, remissa human, vita, corpus requiescat a malis.” [“Nor let him have a sepulchre wherein he may be received, a haven for his body, where, life being gone, that body may rest from its woes.”—Ennius, ap. Cicero, Tusc. i. 44.] As nature demonstrates to us that several dead things retain yet an occult relation to life; wine changes its flavour and complexion in cellars, according to the changes and seasons of the vine from whence it came; and the flesh of—venison alters its condition in the powdering-tub, and its taste according to the laws of the living flesh of its kind, as it is said. |
数年後、幸運は同じような罰を彼らに与えた；
ナクソス島でスパルタのポリス提督に勝利した海軍大将のシャブリアスは、この例のような危険を冒さないために、また、海に浮かんでいた友人の死体数体を失
わないために、生きている敵の世界に、安全に航海する機会を与え、彼らはその後、この季節外れの迷信のために彼らに大きな代償を払わせた： 「クエリス、クオ・ジャセアス、ポスト・オビタム、ロコ？ Quaeris, quo jaceas, post obitum, loco? [汝は死後どこに横たわるかを問うのか？ 汝は死後どこに横たわろうとするのか？］ セネカ、Tyoa. Choro ii. 30. この他は、魂のない肉体に安息の感覚を回復させる： 「魂なき肉体に安息の感覚を取り戻す、 人間、生命、肉体は悪を必要とする。」 ["また、彼が受け入れられるような墓所も持たせない。 を持たせることもできない。 その肉体の災いから休むことができる。 Cicero, Tusc.］ 自然は、いくつかの死者が生とオカルト的な関係を保っていることを、われわれに示している。ワインは、それが由来するブドウの木の変化や季節に応じて、貯 蔵庫の中でその風味や色合いを変えるし、カラスミの肉は、粉にする桶の中でその状態を変え、その種類の生きている肉の法則に従ってその味を変える、と言わ れている。 |
| https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/3600/pg3600-images.html |
|
リ ンク
文 献
そ の他の情報
Copyleft, CC, Mitzub'ixi Quq Chi'j, 1996-2099
☆
☆