A — Amour nommé Socratique
Original French
Comment s’est-il pû faire qu’un vice, destructeur du genre-humain s’il était général, qu’un attentat infame contre la nature, soit pourtant si naturel? il paraît être le dernier degré de la corruption réfléchie, & cependant il est le partage ordinaire de ceux qui n’ont pas eu encor le temps d’être corrompus. Il est entré dans des cœurs tout neufs, qui n’ont connu encor ni l’ambition, ni la fraude, ni la soif des richesses; c’est la jeunesse aveugle, qui par un instinct mal démêlé se précipite dans ce désordre au sortir de l’enfance.
Le penchant des deux sexes l’un pour l’autre se déclare de bonne heure; mais quoi qu’on ait dit des Africaines & des femmes de l’Asie méridionale, ce penchant est généralement beaucoup plus fort dans l’homme que dans la femme; c’est une loi que la nature a établie pour tous les animaux. C’est toujours le mâle qui attaque la femelle.
Les jeunes mâles de nôtre espèce, élevés ensemble, sentant cette force que la nature commence à déployer en eux, & ne trouvant point l’objet naturel de leur instinct, se rejettent sur ce qui lui ressemble. Souvent un jeune garçon par la fraîcheur de son teint, par l’éclat de ses couleurs, & par la douceur de ses yeux, ressemble pendant deux ou trois ans à une belle fille; si on l’aime, c’est parce que la nature se méprend; on rend hommage au sexe en s’attachant à ce qui en a les beautés, & quand l’âge a fait évanouïr cette ressemblance, la méprise cesse.
Citraque juventamÆtatis breve ver & primos carpere flores.
On sçait assez que cette méprise de la nature est beaucoup plus commune dans les climats doux que dans les glaces du Septentrion, parce que le sang y est plus allumé, & l’occasion plus fréquente; aussi, ce qui ne paraît qu’une faiblesse dans le jeune Alcibiade, est une abomination dégoutante dans un matelot Hollandais, & dans un vivandier Moscovite.
Je ne peux souffrir qu’on prétende que les Grecs ont autorisé cette licence. On cite le législateur Solon, parce qu’il a dit en deux mauvais vers,
Tu chériras un beau garçon,Tant qu’il n’aura barbe au menton.
Mais en bonne foi, Solon était-il législateur quand il fit ces deux vers ridicules? il était jeune alors, & quand le débauché fut devenu sage, il ne mit point une telle infamie parmi les loix de sa république; c’est comme si on accusait Théodore de Bèze d’avoir prêché la pédérastie dans son Eglise, parce que dans sa jeunesse il fit des vers pour le jeune Candide, & qu’il dit:
Amplector hunc & illam.
On abuse du texte de Plutarque, qui dans ses bavarderies, au dialogue de l’amour, faire dire à un interlocuteur que les femmes ne sont pas dignes du véritable amour; mais un autre interlocuteur soutient le parti des femmes comme il le doit.
Il est certain, autant que la science de l’antiquité peut l’être, que l’amour Socratique n’était point un amour infame. C’est ce nom d’amour qui a trompé. Ce qu’on appellait les amants d’un jeune homme, étaient précisément ce que sont parmi nous les menins de nos princes; ce qu’étaient les enfans d’honneur, des jeunes gens attachés à l’éducation d’un enfant distingué, partageant les mêmes études, les mêmes travaux militaires; institution guerrière & sainte dont on abusa, comme des fêtes nocturnes, & des Orgies.
La troupe des amants institués par Laïus était une troupe invincible de jeunes guerriers, engagés par serment à donner leur vie les uns pour les autres; & c’est ce que la discipline antique a jamais eu de plus beau.
Sextus Empiricus & d’autres, ont beau dire que la pédérastie était recommandée par les loix de la Perse; qu’ils citent le texte de la loi, qu’ils montrent le Code des Persans; & s’ils le montrent, je ne le croirai pas encor, je dirai que la chose n’est pas vraye, par la raison qu’elle est impossible; non, il n’est pas dans la nature humaine de faire une loi qui contredit, & qui outrage la nature, une loi qui anéantirait le genre humain si elle était observée à la lettre; que des gens ont pris des usages honteux & tolérés dans un pays pour les loix du pays. Sextus Empiricus qui doutait de tout, devait bien douter de cette jurisprudence. S’il vivait de nos jours, & qu’il vit deux ou trois jeunes Jésuites abuser de quelques écoliers, aurait-il droit de dire que ce jeu leur est permis par les constitutions d’Ignace de Loyola?
L’amour des garçons était si commun à Rome qu’on ne s’avisait pas de punir cette fadaise dans laquelle tout le monde donnait tête baissée. Octave Auguste ce meurtrier débauché & poltron qui osa exiler Ovide, trouva très bon que Virgile chantat Alexis & qu’Horace fit de petites odes pour Ligurinus; mais l’ancienne loi Scantinia qui défend la pédérastie subsista toujours. L’Empereur Philippe la remit en vigueur & chassa de Rome les petits garçons qui faisoient le métier. Enfin je ne crois pas qu’il y ait jamais eu aucune nation policée qui ait fait des loix contre les mœurs.
Musean translation
Mouseia’s complete machine-assisted Musean translation of the 73 articles in the 1764 first edition, made directly from the French and reviewed against the scan-collated French text. The author’s notes, quotations and verse are retained. Historical ethnic labels, including offensive terms, are retained from the 1764 text.
How has it come about that a vice which, if universal, would destroy humankind—an infamous outrage against nature—should nevertheless be so natural? It seems the furthest degree of deliberate corruption, yet it commonly falls to those who have not had time to be corrupted. It has entered entirely fresh hearts that have known neither ambition, fraud, nor the thirst for riches. It is blind youth that, through a confused instinct, rushes into this disorder on emerging from childhood.
The attraction of the two sexes toward each other appears early. Yet whatever has been said about African women and the women of southern Asia, this inclination is generally much stronger in the man than in the woman. It is a law nature has established for all animals: the male always makes the advance upon the female.
Young males of our species, brought up together, feeling this power that nature is beginning to unfold within them and finding no natural object for their instinct, turn toward what resembles it. Often a boy, in the freshness of his complexion, the brightness of his coloring, and the softness of his eyes, resembles a beautiful girl for two or three years. If he is loved, it is because nature makes a mistake. One pays homage to the female sex by attaching oneself to what possesses its beauties; when age has erased the resemblance, the mistake ends.
And before manhood,To pluck life’s brief spring and its earliest flowers.
It is well known that this mistake of nature is much more common in mild climates than amid the ice of the North, because the blood is more inflamed and opportunity more frequent. Thus what seems only a weakness in young Alcibiades is a disgusting abomination in a Dutch sailor or a Muscovite army vendor.
I cannot bear the claim that the Greeks authorized this license. People cite Solon the lawgiver because he said in two bad verses:
You will cherish a handsome boy,As long as his chin has no beard.
But honestly, was Solon a lawgiver when he composed those two ridiculous lines? He was young then; when the libertine had become wise, he did not place such infamy among the republic’s laws. It would be like accusing Theodore Beza of preaching pederasty in his church because in his youth he wrote verses for young Candidus and said:
I embrace him and her.
People misuse Plutarch’s text, where, amid his ramblings in the dialogue on love, he makes one speaker say that women are unworthy of true love. But another speaker takes the women’s side, as he ought.
It is certain, as far as knowledge of antiquity can be certain, that Socratic love was not an infamous love. The word love has misled people. Those called a young man’s lovers were precisely what the companions of our princes are among us, what pages of honor were: young people attached to a distinguished child’s education, sharing the same studies and the same military exercises. It was a warlike and sacred institution, abused as night festivals and orgiastic rites were abused.
The troop of lovers instituted by Laius was an invincible troop of young warriors, bound by oath to give their lives for one another. It was the finest thing ancient discipline ever possessed.
Sextus Empiricus and others may say all they please that the laws of Persia recommended pederasty. Let them quote the law’s text; let them produce the Persians’ code. Even if they produced it, I would still not believe them. I would say the thing is untrue because it is impossible. No, it is not in human nature to make a law contradicting and outraging nature, a law that would annihilate humankind if literally observed. People have mistaken shameful practices tolerated in a country for that country’s laws. Sextus Empiricus, who doubted everything, should certainly have doubted this jurisprudence. If he lived in our day and saw two or three young Jesuits abusing some schoolboys, would he have the right to say that the constitutions of Ignatius of Loyola permitted this game?
Love of boys was so common in Rome that no one thought of punishing this folly, into which everyone plunged headlong. Octavian Augustus, that murderous, debauched coward who dared exile Ovid, thought it perfectly proper for Virgil to sing of Alexis and Horace to write little odes for Ligurinus. But the ancient Scantinian law prohibiting pederasty always remained in force. The emperor Philip enforced it again and drove from Rome the young boys engaged in that trade. In short, I do not believe there has ever been a civilized nation that made laws against morality.
Plain English translation
Mouseia’s complete machine-assisted Plain English translation of the same 73 articles, made directly from the French and reviewed against the scan-collated French text. The author’s notes, quotations and verse are retained. Historical ethnic labels, including offensive terms, are retained from the 1764 text.
How can a vice that would wipe out the human race if everyone practiced it, a shameful offense against nature, still be so natural? It looks like the final stage of deliberate corruption. Yet it commonly affects people who have not had time to be corrupted. It reaches fresh hearts that have never known ambition, deception, or greed for money. Blind young people, confused about their instinct, fall into this disorder as soon as they leave childhood.
The two sexes begin to feel attracted to each other early. But whatever people have said about women in Africa and southern Asia, this desire is generally much stronger in men than in women. Nature has made this a rule for all animals. The male always approaches the female first.
Young males brought up together feel the force that nature is beginning to develop in them. When they cannot find their instinct’s natural object, they turn to something that resembles it. For two or three years a boy’s fresh complexion, bright coloring, and gentle eyes can make him resemble a beautiful girl. If someone loves him, it is because nature has made a mistake. Attraction to someone with women’s beauty pays tribute to women. Once age removes the resemblance, the mistake stops.
And before reaching manhood,To pick life’s short springtime and its first flowers.
Everyone knows this mistake by nature is much more common in warm, mild regions than in the frozen North. The blood is more excited there, and there are more opportunities. So what looks like a mere weakness in the young Alcibiades is a revolting abomination in a Dutch sailor or an army supplier from Muscovy.
I cannot stand the claim that the Greeks gave permission for this behavior. People quote Solon, the lawgiver, because he wrote two bad lines:
You will love a handsome boyWhile he has no beard on his chin.
But was Solon honestly acting as a lawgiver when he wrote those two ridiculous lines? He was young at the time. When he stopped being a libertine and became wise, he did not include that shameful practice in the republic’s laws. It would be like claiming Theodore Beza preached pederasty in his church because, as a young man, he wrote poems for young Candidus and said:
I embrace him and her.
People also misuse a passage from Plutarch. In his rambling dialogue about love, one speaker says women do not deserve true love. But another speaker defends women, as he should.
As far as anything about the ancient world can be certain, Socratic love was not shameful love. The word love has caused the confusion. People called a young man’s lovers were really like the companions assigned to our princes, or the pages of honor. These were young people educated alongside a child of high rank, sharing his studies and military training. It was a sacred military institution that people abused, as they abused nighttime festivals and orgiastic religious rites.
Laius’s band of lovers was an unbeatable group of young warriors who swore to give their lives for one another. Ancient military discipline never produced anything finer.
Sextus Empiricus and others claim Persian law recommended pederasty. Let them quote the actual law and show us the Persian legal code. Even if they did, I would still not believe it. I would say it cannot be true because it is impossible. It is not in human nature to make a law that goes against nature and insults it, a law that would end the human race if followed literally. Some people have confused shameful customs that a country tolerates with that country’s laws. Sextus Empiricus doubted everything; he should have doubted this legal claim too. Suppose he lived today and saw two or three young Jesuits abusing some schoolboys. Would that entitle him to say the rules of Ignatius of Loyola allowed this game?
Love of boys was so widespread in Rome that nobody thought to punish a folly everyone rushed into. Octavian Augustus, the murderous, immoral coward who dared to exile Ovid, was perfectly happy for Virgil to write about Alexis and Horace to compose short odes to Ligurinus. Yet the old Scantinian law banning pederasty remained on the books. The emperor Philip enforced it again and expelled the young boys working in that trade from Rome. I do not believe any civilized nation has ever passed laws against moral behavior.
About this section
A — Amour nommé Socratique is part of Pocket Philosophical Dictionary by Voltaire. This page sets the French original beside 2 direct-source translations, so any line can be checked against the source. It is article 5 of 73 in the work, which is kept in the European tradition.
Open the work page for the full contents, every edition, and the download links, or go back to Explore to browse other complete works in the European tradition. The reader keeps your place when you are signed in and lets you compare the original with each translation, one edition at a time.