[Previous: lines 82-100]
Pilate has urged the Jewish elders to accept Jesus as their king. They insist they want him executed.
His dictis cunctis penitus dolor ossibus arsit------------
ingens. Infremuere omnes, gemitumque dedere.
Tum senior surgit fandi doctissimus Annas
in medio, et dictis exorsus talibus infit.
“Si tibi non aliis per se manifesta pateret [105]
res signis, Romane, vel hinc dignoscere promtum
cuique foret , teque in primis, dux, multa moveri
convenit, hue quum tot collectos undique cives
convenisse vides unius crimina contra.
Hic auctor fandi multos sermone fefellit: [110]
et facie (no cede dolis) mentitur honesta
virtutem: scelerum tegit alto in pectore amorem.
Nonne vides, haec relligio quo se nova vertat,
orgia quo, coetusque , et nocturni comitatus?
Seditione poteus Iudaeas suscitat urbes [115]
ausus se passim terrarum dicere regem
progeniemque patris summi, cui sidera parent.
Atque ideo veluti deus ultro crimima fassis
dat veniam, poenaeque metum post funera solvit,
quod scelus haud aliter poterit quam morte piare. [120]
Sic veteres sanxere. Sed et vetera ipse retractans
iura, novas figit simulato numine leges,
instituitque novos ritus, nova sacra per urbes,
quae servent seri ventura in secla nepotes.
Quin ipsas haud obscura, pro! Voce minatur [125]
deiecturum aras, seque igni templa daturum,
templa olim impensis tantorum structa laborum.
Et iam iam volet ipsum etiam restinguere solem,
sideraque obsesso verbis deducere caelo.
Haud scelus ille tamen fallaci pectore quivit [130]
dissimulare diu. Neque enim scelerata subire
tecta horret, nec se vetitis conventibus aufert
admonitus; sociique epulis capiuntur opimis.
Quin etiam, interdum si qua tota impius urbe
inventus fama ante alios ob crimina notus, [135]
contiuuo paribus gaudens adit impiger illum:
nec requies, donec sibi conciliarit amicum.
Tantus amor scelerum, tantum illi fallere cordi.
Tum festis, cum fas nihil exercere diebus
ipse tamen pellit morbos, aegrisque medetur. [140]
Quid memorem, ut socii vetitis impune per aedes
vescantur dapibus, cereremque et pocula tractent
haud prius ablutis manibus sine more, sine ullis
legibus immundi, contactuque omnia foedent?
Scilicet omnipotens placitos tot secula ritus [145]
retractet pater, et mentem sententia vertat.
Quae nova tempestas? Eane inconstantia caelo?
Dede neci! Ne turicremas, quibus imminet, aras
destruat, et posthac non ausit talia quisquam.
Dede neci! poenas sceleri impius hauriat aequas. [150]
A sacris prohibe infandos altaribus ignes.”
Dixerat; atque omnes eadem simul ore fremebant.
At these words his listeners felt bone-deep grievance------------
burning in them; they groaned aloud in fury.
Then the oldest, Annas, got up to speak
standing in their midst and accosting him thus:
“If this matter’s not self-evident to you, [105]
Roman, you should read the signs, follow our prompt
and see—it particularly concerns your role
as ruler—that so many citizens have
gathered here to oppose this one man’s crimes.
His glib eloquence has fooled many, as [110]
has (don’t fall for his tricks) his blithe-seeming
face: but in his heart is a deep love for crime.
Don’t you see the purpose of this new religion?
Its secret meetings, rites and nightly orgies?
His sedition rouses all the Jewish towns. [115]
Everywhere he declares himself world-king
son of the high Father whom the stars obey.
As such, he dares to judge our criminals
and grants them pardon, freeing them from pain
after death to those who have confessed their sin— [120]
our traditions forbid this! Such tradition
he abolishes, decreeing new laws
instituting new rites, new city sacraments,
to be observed down the ages—by his authority!
What is more, quite openly, he threatens [125]
to overturn the altars, burn down the temples
that our ancestors built with such great labour.
Soon enough he’ll want to extinguish the sun
blockade heaven and bring down the stars too!
But he can’t hide his sins in his lying heart [130]
for long, since he enters criminal homes
engages in unspeakable connections,
—though warned to stop!—while his disciples feast.
If there is any wicked man this whole the city,
someone specially known for villainy, [135]
he runs to him, like meeting like, rejoicing:
won’t rest, til he’s secured him as a friend.
So great his love of sin, so evil his heart!
Then, on holy days, when no work must be done
he cures disease and nurses the sick and ill. [140]
And do I need to say, his followers
take bread and wine in people’s homes without
first washing hands, as our custom decrees?
Unclean, impure, defiling all they touch?
As though those rites set centuries ago [145]
would be repealed by the Father—on a whim!
What new storm is this? Is heaven truant?
Kill him! Don’t let him wreck the incense-burning
altars, or inspire others to follow him in this.
Kill him! Let punishment equal the crime. [150]
Keep sacred shrines from unspeakable fire.”
He ended. The rest all roared their approval.
Line 147’s Quae nova tempestas? means ‘what is this new storm?’ In fact tempestas means ‘storm, tempest’ and ‘weather’ but also ‘season’; and Gardner translation prefers ‘what new age is being born?’ which may be better. Still I’m sticking with what I’ve done.
Here Vida engages in what, for want of a better word, we could call ‘irony’. I hesitate to apply it, accustomed as I am to subtler and more expressive mode of Romantic and post-Romantic (indeed, postmodern) ironizing. There’s nothing subtle here, really. The High Priest condemns Jesus for associating with criminals and the diseased—who but a criminal and a sick person would actively seek-out such company? The irony, if we want to call it that, inheres in our superior perspective on things. What do you call someone who joins a criminal gang? A criminal—unless ... he’s actually there to persuade them all to give up their lives of crime? Associate with the unclean and you become dirty—unless ... you are the principle of cleanliness itself! The danger with this kind of irony is that it is so clumsy it can prod the reader's is this all? into more destabilising contemplation. After all, as with Shylock's ‘hath not a Jew eyes?’ it's not possible entirely to shake the sense that the High Priest has a point, here. God chose the Jews as His people. Now, it seems, he has unchosen them, or chosen a new favourite. Isn't that a touch fickle of Him? Rather than accept God could be so changeable, would it not make sense to cleave harder to the old ways?
The image at the top is from a website called All About History, and it proposes to teach you all about the old Jewish priesthood. Click it, embiggen the image, and you can see for yourself.
[Next: lines 153-182]
No comments:
Post a Comment