Carmen Fenechiu

Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

The term numen in Lucan’s The Civil War

Abstract: The present paper intends to investigate, as its title suggests, the uses of the term numen in Lucan’s epic: “The Civil War”. The morpho-syntactic analysis of the verses where numen is employed reveals three senses of this notion: “power”, “divinity”, “statue”. Moreover, the examination of these passages uncovers not only the meanings of numen, but also the Stoic conception which underlies the poem.

Keywords: Stoicism; Seneca; Lucan; numen; divine power; deification.

Determining such a complex and disputed concept as numen implies in the first place an analysis of its uses in the writings of Latin authors. This opinion, formulated in 1971 by Domenico Fasciano in his article: „Numen, reflexions sur sa nature et son rôle”[1], was applied by the same author in two of his later papers studying the meanings of the term in the poems of Ovid [2] and Vergil[3]. The present article, which is placed between similar coordinates, tries to investigate the utilization of numen also in the domain of poetry, but in an epic from the post Augustan age. In order to distinguish the senses of numen, the morfo-syntactic analysis will be used both at microcontextual and at macrocontextual level. The historical context will also be taken into consideration.

Lucan’s “The Civil War” is of interest mainly due to the high number of verses where the term numen appears. The recurrence of this notion, used almost exclusively in connection with the divine world, is surprising in an epic whose conception is different from the classical epos exactly through “the absence of the traditional miracle”[4]. Actually, as Pierre Grimal noticed, the fact that “the divinities do not intervene in the action” does not imply their absence from the epic, “they are not completely absent, but their presence is inner: in the heros’ souls” [5], in compliance with the conception of the poem[6].

The preponderance of instances where numen is used with the sense of “divinity” (“deity”) denotes the imposing of the secondary meaning, documented beginning with the Augustan age. The more ancient signification of “power” (when numen is connected with a divinity), respectively “divine power” (when numen is assigned to other concepts), is nevertheless attested, but in a reduced number of passages:

4.194-195 “Pro numine fata sinistro / Exigua requie tantas augentia clades!” (“a curse on Fortune, whose malignant power uses a brief respite to make great calamities still greater!” – Duff)[7]; numen’s sense of “divine power” is confirmed by the qualifying adjective sinistrum (“numine fata sinistro” – “Destiny of an ill-omened power”);

5.73-74 “Mons Phoebo Bromioque sacer, cui numine mixto / Delphica Thebanae referunt trieterica Bacchae” (“The mountain is sacred to Phoebus and to Bromios, in whose honour the Bacchants of Thebes, treating the two gods as one, hold their triennial festival at Delphi” – Duff).

No matter if numen is interpreted as ablativus qualitatis subordinate to the pronoun cui (“for whom, having a mixed power, the Bacchants of Thebes hold etc.”), or as a subject of an causal ablativus absolutus (“for whom, because of their mixed power, the Bacchants of Thebes hold etc.”), the meaning of the term remains the same (numen = “power”), the attribute “divine” would imply a tautology.

The sense “power” is also attested in the plural:

9.544-548 “Stabant ante fores populi, quos miserat Eos, / Cornigerique Iovis monitu nova fata petebant; / Sed Latio cessere duci, comitesque Catonem / Orant, exploret Libycum memorata per orbem / Numina, de fama tam longi iudicet aevi” (“Before the doors of the temple stood messengers from the East, seeking to learn tha future by the warning of horned Jupiter. But these gave place to the Roman general; and his officers begged Cato to test the deity so famous through all the land of Lybia, and to pass sentence on a reputation of such long standing” – Duff).

To attribute numina (pl.) to a single divinity (in this case, to Jupiter Ammon – “and the companions ask Cato to test this god’s powers renowned through all the land of Lybia”) copies a cliché documented since the Augustan period[8].

The poet grants numen (“divine power”), by extrapolation, to some original concepts: to a place and to the ancient customs.

1.605-608 “Dumque illi effusam longis anfractibus urbem / Circumeunt, Arruns dispersos fulminis ignes / Colligit et terrae maesto cum murmure condit / Datque locis numen” (“While the long procession winds its way round the wide city, Arruns collects the scattered fires of the thunderbold and hides them in the earth with doleful muttering. He gives sanctity to the spot” – Duff).

The assigning of numen to a place becomes explicit through the integration of the quoted verses in the episode which holds the description of the expiation ceremonies of some prodigia. Arruns, one of the Etruscan seers, called to avert the unfavourable predictions, burries – as part of the more complex expiation ritual, that includes the lustation and the slaughter of a bull – “the spreaded fires of the thunderbolt” and, through this, the place becomes a religious one, is charged with “divine power” (not an effective power, but one granted by the ritualic gestures “datque locis numen” – “he bestows divine power to the place”, a power characteristic to the gods). In this instance, the meaning of numen is very closed to that of “divine essence”, “divine nature”.

The dense and sometimes excessively synthetic style of the poem allows interferences in identifying the senses of the term numen, according to the syntactic content given to its determinative. For instance, in the passage

9.517-521 “Quamvis Aethiopum populis Arabumque beatis / Gentibus atque Indis unus sit Iuppiter Hammon, / Pauper adhuc deus est nullis violata per aevum / Divitiis delubra tenens, morumque priorum / Numen Romano templum defendit ab auro” (“Though the Ethiopians and Indians and wealthy Arabians have no god but Jupiter Ammon, yet the god is still poor, and his dwelling-place has remained for ages unblemished by wealth; and the deity, true to the good old fashion, defends his shrine against Roman gold” – Duff),

numen’s significance is:

a) “divine power”, if the genitive morum is considered as indicating the possession (“the divine power belonging to the ancient customs”) or

b) “divinity”, referring to Jupiter Ammon, if morum is interpreted as genitivus qualitatis („oldfashioned divinity”).

The majority of examples attests, as already mentioned, the use of numen with this latter sense: “divinity”. Even if sometimes the term is used as a synonym for deus, however, because numen is a very comprehensive concept, which can indicate different types of deities – not only gods, but demigods as well -, I find more advisable to translate numen by „divinity” or „deity” rather than by „god”.

From the very beginning of the poem, in the praise of Nero, numen is twice used, the first time in relation to the traditional gods (1.50), the second time in connection with Nero (1.63). The civil wars being considered necessary in order to establish the reign of Nero, “from whom Lucan expects to bring back on Earth the Golden Age”[9] and a new founding (not only of Rome, but of the Empire as well), the poet’s position regarding the deification post- and ante mortem of the emperor is not surprising.

If Nero’s transformation into a god after his dead is presented as a completely accepted fact:

1.50-53 “tibi numine ab omni / Cedetur, iurisque tui natura relinquet, / Quis deus esse velis, ubi regnum ponere mundi” („every god will give place to you, and Nature will leave it to you to determine what deity you wish to be, and where to establish your universal throne” – Duff),

on the contrary, granting the status of “divinity” during the emperor’s life is limited only to the poet himself, through the pronoun mihi:

1.63 “Sed mihi iam numen” („but to me you are divine already” – Duff. More precisely, “but to me you are already a deity”).

This rank of “divinity” is assigned, in Lucan’s epic, not only to Nero, but to the city of Rome as well, in the invocation pronounced at the crossing of the river Rubicon:

1.199-200 “summique o numinis instar, / Roma, fave coeptis” (“and thou, O Rome, as sacred name as any, smile on my enterprise” – Duff. Scilicet: “O Rome, similar to the highest deity, favour my enterprise”).

Though dominated by resentments once Nero’s attitude towards him changes, the poet’s opinion on the emperor’s apotheosis does not modify stricto-sensu the meanings of the term, which is used on with the sense of divinity”, but Lucan’s perception regarding the act of deification and, moreover, of the gods’ role is totally different, for is denied even the divinities’ interference in human life, an Epicurean idea:

7.445-447 “Sunt nobis nulla profecto / Numina: cum caeco rapiantur saecula casu, / Mentimur regnare Iovem” („In very truth there are no gods who govern mankind: though we say falsely that Jupiter reigns” – Duff; sc. “there are no deities for us”).

Emperors’ apotheosis is even considered a revenge against the gods, who did not intervene in order to put an end to the slaughter of Pharsalia:

7.454-459 “mortalia nulli / Sunt curata deo. Cladis tamen huius habemus / Vindictam, quantam terris dare numina fas est: / Bella pares superis facient civilia divos; / fulminibus manes radiisque ornabit et astris / Inque deum templis iurabit Roma per umbras” (“Man’s destiny has never been watched over by any god. Yet for this disaster we have revenge, so far as gods may give satisfaction to mortals: civil war shall make dead Caesars the peers of gods above; and Rome shall deck out dead men with thuderbolts and haloes and constellations, and in the temples of the gods shall swear by ghosts” – Duff).

With the same meaning (“divinity”), numen is found in a remark of Lucan inserted in the eight book of the epic:

8. 458-459 “si numina nasci / Credimus aut quemquam fas est coepisse deorum” (“if we believe that deities have birth, or it is lawful to hold that any of the gods had a beginning” – Duff).

As for the degree of determination, it clearly follows from some passages – either from the context or by the apposition (noun or adjective) – that by numen (in singular or in plural) is indicated a personal deity, with or without indications concerning its identity:

5.400 “Iliacae numen quod praesidet Albae” (“the god who presides over Trojan Alba” – Duff); referring to Jupiter Latiaris;

9.158 “Evolvam busto iam numen gentibus Isim” (“I shall rifle the grave of Isis, now worshipped over the world” – Duff; sc. “in her grave I will turn over Isis, now a deity for different people”);

8.142-143 “Accipe, numen, / Si quod adhuc mecum est, votorum extrema meorum” („Hear my last prayer, ye gods, if any god is still upon my side” – Duff);

2.43-44 “Nec non bella viri diversaque castra petentes / Effundunt iustas in numina saeva querellas”(“The men also, setting out for the war and for the camps of the rivals, poured out just complaints against the cruel gods” – Duff);

3.415-416 “non volgatis sacrata figuris / Numina sic metuunt” (“men feel less awe of deities worshipped under familiar forms” – Duff).

The acceptation of the term numen as personal “divinity” is sometimes confirmed by his topic proximity with words like deus (dei) or superi:

5.116-118 “Nam si qua deus sub pectora venit, / Numinis aut poena est mors immatura recepti / aut pretium” („For, if the god enters the bosom of any untimely death is her penalty, or her reward, for having received him” – Duff; sc. „untimely death is either the punishment or the reward of the received divinity”).

5.499-501 “Dum se desse deis ac non sibi numina credit, / Sponte per incautas audet temptare tenebras / Quod iussi timuere fretum”( “and, when he saw him still delay, believing that Heaven was more true to him than he to Heaven, he ventured in the dangerous darkness to defy the sea, thus doing of his own accord what others had feared to do when bidden” – Duff; sc. „believing that he is neglectful of the gods and not the divinities of him“).

6.523-525 “Nec superos orat nec cantu supplice numen/ Auxiliare vocat nec fibras illa litantes / novit” (“She adresses no prayer to Heaven, invokes no divine aid with suppliant hymn, and knows nothing of the organs of victims offered in sacrifice” – Duff; sc. “She does not pray to the celestial gods, summons no assistant divinity with suppliant hymn”).

6.598-9 “Vel numina torque / Vel tu parce deis et manibus exprime verum” (“Either put the gods to the question, or leave them alone and extort the truth from the dead” – Duff). Noticeable is the alternance of the contrasting verbs torque – parce.

The interest of the two last examples consists not only in the informations they give about numen, but also in the religious conceptions they express, the quotations being part of a larger passage (6. 413-830) dedicated to Thessalian magic. Lucan pays close attention to a session of necromancy carried out by Erichto at the demand of Pompey’s son, Sextus Pompeius. By describing the magical practices of the Thessalian witches, who succeed to attract and to submit the gods’ power and will, the poet traces a clear distinction between religion and magic, the latter being an insult to the gods and in conflict with the world’s order[10]. In this context too numen is placed on the same level, coordinated with dei, respectively with superi. Numen’s signification is nevertheless ambiguous; in 6.523-525, the sphere and the content of numen could also be interpreted as “divine power”, due to the adjective auxiliare. Slight differences can be noticed between the predicates: orat – vocat.

As terminus regens of an explanatory genitive, that indicates the region where the power of that specific divinity is manifested, numen is only spatially identified:

7.168-171: “At tu, quos scelerum superos, quas rite vocasti Eumenidas, Caesar? Stygii quae numina regni / Infernumque nefas et mersos nocte furores, / impia tam saeve gesturus bella litasti?” (“But Caesar – what powers of darkness, what fiends did he invoke without let or hindrance? What deities of the Stygian realm, what Horror of Hell, and Madness shrouded in gloom? Though he was soon to fight an infamous battle with such cruelty, his prayer was heard. – Duff)

Near passages that allow the interpretation of numen as personal, individualized divinity, perceived in accordance with traditional religious ideas, the epic includes also verses, where the dual conception of the Stoic philosophy about the divinity is also noticeable in the uses of the term numen. The equal acceptance of monotheism and polytheism creates complications in interpreting the notion of numen, especially when the term is employed in singular, because it is difficult to establish if the concept is used in connection to a personal, but not clearly identified god, or to that Stoic divinity, the pre-eminently God, identical with the nature, the universe and the destiny. For instance:

1.148-149 “Successus urguere suos, instare favori / Numinis” (“he followed up each success and snatched at the favor of Fortune” – Duff; sc. “he snatched at the deity’s favor”) or

6.314-315 “Deserit averso possessam numine sedem / Caesar et Emathias lacero petit agmine terras” (“Caesar abandoned a position he had occupied against the will of Heaven, and made for the land of Thessaly with his battered forces” – Duff; sc. “Caesar abandoned a position he had occupied without the divinity’s assent”).

This blend of old and new, tradition and innovation, myth and philosophy in a hazy mix is obvious in the episode of the Delphic oracle, especially in the description of the prophetic ecstasy by which the priestess is seized (5.64-236). The first verses describe, in agreement with the tradition, the taking into possession of the sanctuary by the god Apollo after Python is killed, but in the following verses the poet expresses his doubts regarding the identity of the divinity that manifests itself in this sanctuary:

5.86-88 “Quis latet superum? quod numen ab aethere pressum / Dignatur caecas inclusum habitare cavernas? / Quis terram caeli patitur deus” (“Which of the immortals is hidden here? What deity, descending from heaven, deigns to dwell pent up in these dark grottoes? What god of heaven endures the weight of earth” – Duff).

This questions, although in contradiction with the myth previously presented, make clear that this god is a celestial one: “quis superum”, “quis caeli deus”. This interpretation, consistent with the tradition, is immediately forsaken by the poet in favour of the Stoic doctrine that a large part of the divinity (generically named Jupiter) is integrated into the world and identical with it. As a result, Lucan introduces the idea that in this sanctuary would manifest itself a Jupiter in the Stoic conception:

5.93-98 “Forsan terris inserta regendis / Aere libratum vacuo quae sustinet orbem, / Totius pars magna Iovis Cirrhaea per antra / Exit et aetherio trahitur conexa Tonanti. / Hoc ubi virgineo conceptum est pectore numen / Humanam feriens animam sonat” („It may be that a large part of the whole divine element is embedded in the world to rule it, and supports the globe poised upon empty space; and this part issues forth through the caves of Cirrha, and is inhaled there, though closely linked to the Thunderer in heaven. When this inspiration has found a harbour in a maiden’s bosom, it strikes the human soul of the priestess audibly” – Duff; sc. „when this divinity enters the maiden’s bosom”).

In this instance, it is not possible to establish either to which god, or to what kind of divinity (Jupiter – non-personal, Apollo – personal) the syntagm hoc numen refers. (The term numen is used again a few verses later, but this time by numen is clearly indicated the god Apollo: 5.163 “insueto concepit pectore numen” – “and her bosom for the first time drew in the divine power” – Duff; sc. „she received the divinity in her bosom unaccustomed to this”).

A proof that by numen can be indicated an impersonal divinity constitutes Cato’s refusal to consult Jupiter Hamon’s oracle, refusal founded on the precepts of the Stoic philosophy. In Lucan’s epic this divinity is called Jupiter, as in Seneca („Naturales quaestiones” 2.45.1), but in equating this divinity with everything that is seen and that moves it is clear that the poet does not allude to a traditional Jupiter:

9.573-580 “Haeremus cuncti superis, temploque tacente / Nil facimus non sponte dei; nec vocibus ullis / Numen eget, dixitque semel nascentibus auctor / Quidquid scire licet. Sterilesne elegit harenas / Ut caneret paucis, mersitque hoc pulvere verum, / Estque dei sedes nisi terra et pontus et aer / Et caelum et virtus? superos quid quaerimus ultra? / Iuppiter est quodcumque vides, quodcumque moveris” (“We men are inseparable from the gods, and, even if the oracle be dumb, all our actions are predetermined by Heaven. The gods have no need to speak; for the Creator told us once for all at our birth whatever we are permitted to know. Did he choose these barren sands, that a few might hear his voice? did he bury truth in this desert? Has he any dwelling-place save earth and sea, the air of heaven and virtuous hearts? Why seek we further for deities? All that we see is God; every motion we make is God also” – Duff; sc. „the divinity has no need of voices”).

Beside these two already examined senses, numen is also used in this poem with a rarely (for instance, Vergil, “Aeneis”, 1.447) attested sense: simulacrum, “statue”.

1.379-380 “Si spoliare deos ignemque immitere templis, / Numina miscebit castrensis flamma monetae” („If you bid me plunder the gods and fire their temples, the furnace of the military mint shall melt down the statues of the deities” – Duff).

The uses of this notion in „The Civil War” reflect, on the one hand, changes at the level of religious beliefs, due to the influence of the philosophical schools (especially, the Stoic one), and, on the other hand, the spiritual and ideative affinity between Lucan and Seneca, manifested itself in the swing of the two authors between the traditional religious conceptions and the Stoic ones about divinity.