View source for Philosophy:Deorum injuriae diis curae

'''''Deorum injuriae diis curae'''''{{Efn|name=fnother|Alternatively spelled ''iniuriae'' and ''dis'', the latter some times capitalized, and some times separated with a comma: ''Deorum injuriae, Diis curae''.}} ([[Social:English language|English]]: "Injuries to the gods are the concern of the gods", or "let wrongs done to the gods be avenged by the gods") is a [[Social:Latin language|Latin]] maxim. It is often invoked in relation to questions of [[Religion:Blasphemy|blasphemy]], libel and free speech, positing that any insult to the divine should be left to divine vengeance rather than state punishment.<ref name="sherwood">{{cite book |last1=Sherwood |first1=Yvonne |title=Blasphemy: A Very Short Introduction |date=2021 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0198797579 |pages=53–54 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=i7Q6EAAAQBAJ&dq=deorum+injuriae+diis+curae&pg=PA54 |access-date=2 September 2023}}</ref>
==Background and origin==
In [[History:Ancient Rome|Ancient Rome]], insults to the gods were generally not considered a concern of the law, as opposed to insults to other citizens (defamation).<ref name="langer">{{cite book |last1=Langer |first1=Lorenz |title=Religious Offence and Human Rights: The Implications of Defamation of Religions |date=2014 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1107039575 |page=335 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-oDRAwAAQBAJ&dq=deorum+iniuriae+diis+curae&pg=PA335 |access-date=31 August 2023}}</ref><ref name="bechor">{{cite book |last1=Bechor |first1=Guy |title=God in the Courtroom: The Transformation of Courtroom Oath and Perjury between Islamic and Franco-Egyptian Law |date=2011 |publisher=Brill |isbn=978-9004217515 |page=356 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5egxAQAAQBAJ&dq=deorum+iniuriae+diis+curae&pg=PA356}}</ref> Due to the functioning of witnesses in Roman courts, [[Social:Perjury|perjury]] (false oath) was not subject to any penalty in Roman law (as opposed to false testimony, ''falsum testimonium'', which was severely punished) but was instead considered an insult to the gods – and therefore subject to divine not legal retribution.<ref name="bechor"/>

The phrase ''deorum injuriae diis curae'' appears in the first book of the ''Annals'' by Tacitus.<ref name="tacitus">{{Cws|title=The Annals by Tacitus, Book I.73|link=The Annals (Tacitus)/Book 1#73}}</ref> The ''lex majestatis'' (law of treason), which in the days of the republic had been used to try overt acts rather than words, was according to Tacitus revived by Augustus to deal with libels targeting him.<ref name="flint">{{cite journal |last1=Flint |first1=W. W. |title=The Delatores in the Reign of Tiberius, as Described by Tacitus |journal=The Classical Journal |date=October 1912 |volume=8 |issue=1 |pages=37–38 |jstor=3287410 |access-date=31 August 2023|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3287410}}</ref> His successor Tiberius was later faced with the cases of one Falanius and one Rubrius, the latter accused of having committed perjury after swearing by the name of Augustus. Tacitus quotes Tiberius as writing to the consuls that "his father had not [[Religion:Apotheosis|had a place in heaven decreed to him]] that the honor might be turned to the destruction of the citizens" and that, concerning the accusation of perjury, "the thing ought to be considered as if the man had deceived [[Religion:Jupiter (mythology)|Jupiter]]. Wrongs done to the gods were the gods' concern."<ref name="tacitus"/>

Similar views had earlier been expressed by [[Biography:Cicero|Cicero]], who contrasted divine and human punishment for perjury (death and dishonor respectively), and stated that the gods are the one to punish the crime.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Pujol |first1=Jordi |title=The Collapse of Freedom of Expression: Reconstructing the Ancient Roots of Modern Liberty |date=2023 |publisher=University of Notre Dame Press |isbn=978-0268203955 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=J511EAAAQBAJ&dq=deorum+iniurias+dis+curae&pg=PT347 |access-date=2 September 2023}}</ref>

==History==
With the ascent of Christianity in the Roman world, St. Augustine criticized this position in his ''[[Philosophy:The City of God|City of God]]'', believing it showed less respect to the gods than to men.<ref name="langer"/><ref>{{Cws|title=City of God by St. Augustine, Book II.12|link=Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book II/Chapter 12}}</ref>

French revolutionary and lawyer {{ill|Louis-Alexandre Devérité|fr}}, writing under the guise of an Englishman reacting to the execution of [[Biography:François-Jean de la Barre|François-Jean de la Barre]], writes that the maxim "will [in England] remain engraved in the hearts of [their] magistrates", although Devérité attributes it to [[Biography:Cicero|Cicero]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Devérité |first1=Louis-Alexandre |editor1-last=Warman |editor1-first=Caroline |title=Tolerance: The Beacon of the Enlightenment |date=2016 |publisher=Open Book Publishers |isbn=978-1783742035 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=o6M5CwAAQBAJ&dq=deorum+injuriae+diis+curae&pg=PA85}}</ref> Similarly Jonathan Swift, in an unfinished work titled ''Some Thoughts on Freethinking'', claimed some decades earlier that the public in England "seems to be of opinion with Tiberius".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Swift |first1=Jonathan |title=Delphi Complete Works of Jonathan Swift |date=2013 |publisher=Delphi Classics |isbn=978-1909496361 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=62gbAgAAQBAJ&dq=deorum+injuriae+diis+curae&pg=PT1222}}</ref>

Tiberius' maxim is cited by [[Biography:John Stuart Mill|John Stuart Mill]] in his ''On Liberty'' in opposition to legislation motivated by religion, with Mill contending that "[i]t remains to be proved that society or any of its officers holds a commission from on high to avenge any supposed offence to Omnipotence, which is not also a wrong to our fellow creatures."<ref>{{cite book |last1=John Stuart Mill |title=On Liberty |date=1999 |publisher=Broadview Press |isbn=177048213X |page=139 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eG2uYvZwjaMC&dq=deorum+injuriae+diis+curae&pg=PA139}}</ref>

At least since the middle of the 19th century, blasphemy has been framed less as a crime against ''divine'' sensibilities, but rather a crime against ''society'', public order or feelings of believers – representing a [[Philosophy:Secularization|secularization]] of blasphemy laws.<ref name="sherwood"/>

==Footnotes==
{{Notelist}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Latin philosophical phrases]]

{{Sourceattribution|Deorum injuriae diis curae}}