alone sufficient to determine this matter: Porphyry, giving the causes of the decay of the Pythagoric philosophy, assigns this for one, that their commentaries were written in Doric. "Επειτα διὰ τὸ καὶ τὰ γεγραμμένα Δωρίδι γεγράφθαι, p. 49. Kust. ed. This is the clearest comment on the

words in question, and determines them to the sense contended for. One would wonder, indeed, that so learned a critic could take them in any other. But the secret was this, Dr Bentley having pretended to discover, that Ocellus Lucanus did not write his book in the common dialect, as it is now extant, but in Doric; (Dissert. upon Phalaris, &c. p. 47,) his adversaries (Dissert. examined, p. 54,) charge him with having stolen this discovery from Vizzanius. This, Dr Bentley flatly denies; (Dissert. Defended, p. 384.) But the only proof he gives of his innocence is, that the Greek passage, quoted above from Jamblichus, on which both he and Vizzanius had founded their discoveries, is differently translated by them. "The thing, as I said it," says the Doctor, "is thus; the Pythagoreans enjoined all the Greeks that entered themselves into the society, to use every man his mother tongue (wvй xeñodas tỷ Targa. Ocellus, therefore, being a Dorian of Lucania, must have writ in the Doric. This I took to be Jamblichus's meaning. But Vizzanius has represented it thus: that they enjoined all that came to them to use the mother tongue of Crotona, which was the Doric. Whether Vizzanius or I have hit upon the true meaning of Jamblichus, perhaps all competent readers will not be of a mind." The diffidence of this conclusion would make one suspect the Doctor was now convinced, that Vizzanius's was the right meaning. Yet, I will venture to say, that the words of Jamblichus, as quoted by Vizzanius without the context, would have been understood by every man, skilled, as Dr Bentley was, in Greek, in the different sense he has given to them. From whence I conclude, that, when Dr Bentley wrote his Dissertation on Phalaris, he had seen the words of Jamblichus nowhere but in Vizzanius.

P. 198, C. Some have affected not to understand, where it is, in the foregoing passage, that Zaleucus inculcates this doctrine. The place, methinks, was not hard to find: it is, where wicked men are bid to set before themselves the dreadful hour of death. For how should a picture of this scene allure men to virtue, or deter them from vice, but as it opens to them a view of those rewards and punishments they are just going to receive? Hence, too, we learn what those hopes and fears were, which Plutarch, in the passage p. 199, says the ancient lawgivers impressed upon the minds of the people, to keep up the awe and reverence of religion: for Plato assures us it was their general practice, to inculcate the distinction between soul and body; and to teach, that, at their separation, the soul survived the body; and this, says he, we

should believe upon their word, unless we would be thought to be out of our senses.πιστεύειν δ ̓ αὖ καὶ τοῖς ΝΟΜΟΘΕΤΟΥΣΙ ταῦθ' οὕτως ἔχειν, ἄνπερ μὴ παντάπασιν ἄφρονες φαίνωνται. De Legg. lib. xi. But, in his next book, he informs us, more at large, why the ancient lawgivers inculcated that distinction. It was, in order to build upon it the belief of a future state of rewards and punishments: for he says, the lawgivers were to be believed, when they teach the total difference between soul and body, that the former is immortal, and that when it is on the point of departing for the regions of immortality (where it must give an account of its conduct in the body) the good man will meet death with courage and constancy, and the evil man with affright and terror. And then takes occasion to mention the punishments reserved for the latter: πείθεσθαι δ ̓ ἐστὶ τῷ νομοθέτῃ χρεὼν τάτε ἄλλα, καὶ λέγοντι ψυχὴν σώματος εἶναι τὸ πᾶν διαφέρουσαν.—τὸν δὲ ὄντα ἡμῶν ἕκαστον ὄντως ἀθάνατον εἶναι, ψυχὴν ἐπονομαζόμενον, παρὰ θεοὺς ἄλλους ἀπιέναι δώσοντα λόγον, καθάπες ὁ νόμος ὁ πάτριος λέγει, τῷ μὲν ἀγαθῷ θαῤῥαλέον, τῷ δὲ κακῷ μάλα φοβερὸν ἀτιμώτερος ἂν κακῶν ἁμαρτημάτων ἐγίγνετο τῶν μετὰ τὸν ἐνθάδε βίον. De Leg. lib. xii. t. ii. p. 959. A. B. C. edit. H. Steph. fol. And here let me observe, that Plato, in the words τῷ ἀγαθῷ θαῤῥαλέον, &c., seems to have had the very passage of Zaleucus in his eye, τίθεσθαι πρὸ ὀμμάτων τὸν καιρὸν τοῦτον, &c. But this cavil had been obviated, sect. 1, of this second book, pp. 172, 173.

THE

DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES

DEMONSTRATED.

BOOK II. CONTINUED.

SECT. IV.

THE NEXT step the legislator took, was to support and affirm the general doctrine of a PROVIDENCE, which he had delivered in his laws, by a very circumstantial and popular method of inculcating the belief of a future state of rewards and punishments.

This was by the institution of the MYSTERIES, the most sacred part of pagan religion; and artfully framed to strike deeply and forcibly into the minds and imaginations of the people.

I propose, therefore, to give a full and distinct account of this whole matter: and the rather, because it is a thing little known or attended to: the ancients, who wrote expressly on the mysteries, such as Melanthius, Menander, Hicesius, Sotades, and others, not being come down to us. So that the modern writers on this subject are altogether in the dark concerning their origin and end; not excepting Meursius himself: to whom, however, I am much indebted, for abridging my labour in the search of those passages of antiquity, which make mention of the ELEUSINIAN mysteries, and for bringing the greater part of them together under one view.*

To avoid ambiguity, it will be proper to explain the term. Each of the pagan gods had, besides the public and open, a secret worship† paid

* Eleusinia: sive de Cereris Eleusina sacro.

Strabo, in the tenth book of his Geography, p. 716, Gron. edit. writes thus:Κοινὸν δὴ τοῦτο, καὶ τῶν Ἑλλήνων καὶ τῶν βαρβάρων ἐστὶ, τὸ τὰς ἱεροποιΐας μετὰ ἀνέσεως ἑορτασ τικῆς ποιεῖσθαι, τὰς μὲν σὺν ἐνθουσιασμῷ, τὰς δὲ χωρίς· καὶ ταῖς μὲν μετά μουσικῆς, τὰς δὲ μή ΚΑΙ ΤΑΣ ΜΕΝ ΜΥΣΤΙΚΩΣ, ΤΑΣ ΔΕ ΕΝ ΦΑΝΕΡΩΙ· καὶ τοῦδ' ἡ φύσις οὕτως ὑπαγορεύει.

unto him: to which none were admitted but those who had been selected by preparatory ceremonies, called INITIATION. This secret worship w termed the MYSTERIES.

But though every god had, besides his open worship, the secret likewise; yet this latter did not everywhere attend the former; but only there, where he was the patron god, or in principal esteem. Thus, when in consequence of that intercommunity of paganism, which will be explained hereafter, one nation adopted the gods of another, they did not always take in at the same time the secret worship or mysteries of that god; so, in Rome, the public and open worship of Bacchus was in use long before his mysteries were admitted. But, on the other hand again, the worship of the strange god was sometimes introduced only for the sake of his mysteries: as, in the same city, that of Isis and Osiris. Thus stood the case in general; the particular exceptions to it will be seen in the sequel of this dissertation.

The first and original mysteries, of which we have any sure account, were those of Isis and Osiris in Egypt; from whence they were derived to the Greeks,* under the presidency of various gods,† as the institutor thought most for his purpose: Zoroaster brought them into Persia: Cadmus and Inachus into Greece at large; ‡ Orpheus into Thrace: Melampus into Argis; Trophonius into Boeotia; Minos into Crete; Cinyras into Cyprus; and Erechtheus into Athens. And as in Egypt

*Diod. Sic. lib. i. Eudoxus said, as Plutarch informs us, that the Egyptians invented this fable concerning Jupiter Ammon, or the supreme god,-That his legs being unseparated, very shame drove him into solitude; but that Isis split and divided them, and by that means set him at liberty to walk about the world. ì gì Toû Aids ó Eddožos, μυθολογεῖν Αἰγυπτίους, ὡς τῶν σκελῶν συμπεφυκότων αὐτῷ μὴ δυνάμενος βαδίζειν, ὑπ ̓ αἰσχύνης, ἐρημία διέτριβεν. Η δὲ Ἴσις διατεμοῦσα καὶ διαστήσασα τὰ μέρη ταῦτα του σώματος, ἀρτίποδα, càr megsíav zagiozu. De Is. et Osir. vol. i. p. 670, edit. Steph. 8vo. The moral of the fable is plainly this, as we shall see more plainly hereafter, that the FIRST CAUSE was kept unknown, till the Egyptian mysteries of Isis revealed him amongst their áæópinra; which mysteries were communicated to the Greeks, and, through them, to the rest of mankind. But the image under which the fable is conveyed, was taken from the form of the Egyptian statues of the gods, which the workmen made with their legs undivided. When the Greek artists first showed them how to form their gods in a walking posture, the attitude so alarmed their worshippers, that they bound them with chains, lest they should desert their own country. For the people imagined that their gods, on the least ill humour or disgust, had a strange propensity to show them a fair pair of heels.

† Ὅτι δὲ τῶν Διονυσίων, καὶ τῶν Παναθηναίων, καὶ μέντοι τῶν Θεσμοφορίων, καὶ τῶν Ελευσινίων τὰς τελετὰς Ορφεὺς, ἀνὴρ Οδρύσης, εἰς τὰς ̓Αθήνας εκόμισεν, καὶ εἰς ΑΙΓΥΠΤΟΝ ἀφικόμενος, τὰ τῆς Ισιδος καὶ τοῦ Οσίριδος εἰς τὰ τῆς Δηοῦς καὶ τοῦ Διονύσου μετατέθεικεν gy-Theodoretus, Therapeut. i.

† Ἐκεῖθεν δὲ ἀρχὴν ἔσχε τὰ παρ' Ἕλλησι μυστήριά τε καὶ τελεταί· πρότερον παρ' ΑΙΓΥΠΤΙΟΙΣ, καὶ παρὰ Φρυξὶ, καὶ Φοινιξὶ, καὶ Βαβυλονίοις, κακῶς ἐπινενοημένα μετενεχθέντα τε εἰς *Έλληνας ἀπὸ τῆς τῶν ΑΙΓΥΠΤΙΩΝ χώρας υπό Κάδμου καὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Ἰνάκου. "Απιδος πρότερον κληθέντης, καὶ οἰκοδομήσαντος τὴν Μέμφιν-Epiphan. adv. Haer. lib. i. Hæres, iv.

hey were to Isis and Osiris; so in Asia they were to Mithras; in Samothrace to the mother of the gods; in Boeotia to Bacchus; in Cyprus to Venus; in Crete to Jupiter; in Athens to Ceres and Proserpine; in Amphissa to Castor and Pollux; in Lemnos to Vulcan, and so to others, in other places, the number of which is incredible.*

But their end, as well as nature, was the same in all; to teach the doctrine of a FUTURE STATE. In this, Origen and Celsus agree; the two most learned writers of their several parties. The first, minding his adversary of the difference between the future life promised by the gospel, and that taught in paganism, bids him compare the Christian doctrine with what all the sects of philosophy, and all the mysteries, amongst Greeks and barbarians, taught concerning it:† and Celsus, in his turn, endeavouring to show that Christianity had no advantage over paganism in the efficacy of stronger sanctions, expresses himself to this purpose: "But now, after all, just as you believe eternal punishments, so do the ministers of the sacred rites, and those who initiate into, and preside in the mysteries."‡

They continued long in religious reverence: some were more famous and more extensive than others; to which many accidents concurred. The most noted were the ORPHIC, the BACCHIC, the ELEUSINIAN, the SAMOTHRACIAN, the CABIRIC, and the MITHRIAC.

Euripides makes Bacchus say, in his tragedy of that name, § that the orgies were celebrated by all foreign nations, and that he came to introduce them amongst the Greeks. And it is not improbable, but several barbarous nations might have learned them of the Egyptians long before they came into Greece. The Druids of Britain, who had, as well as the Brahmans of India, divers of their religious rites from thence, celebrated the orgies of Bacchus, as we learn from Dionysius the African. And Strabo having quoted Artemidorus for a fabulous story, subjoins, "But what he says of Ceres and Proserpine is more credible,

Postulat quidem magnitudo materiæ, atque ipsius defensionis officium, ut similiter cæteras turpitudinum species persequamur: vel quas produnt antiquitatis historiæ, vel mysteria illa continent sacra, quibus initiis nomen est, et quæ non omnibus vulgo, sed paucorum taciturnitatibus tradi licet. Sed Sacrorum innumeri ritus, atque affixa deformitas singulis, corporaliter prohibet universa nos exequi.-Arnob. adv. Gentes, lib. v. 165, edit. Plantini, Svo, 1582.

* Καθ' ἑκάστην φιλοσόφων αἵρεσιν ἐν Ἕλλησιν ἢ Βάρβαρος ή ΜΥΣΤΗΡΙΩΔΗ. Orig. cont. Cels. lib. iii. p. 160, Sp. ed.

* Μάλιστα μὲν, ὦ βέλτιστε, ὥσπερ σὺ κολάσεις αἰωνίους νομίζεις· οὕτω καὶ οἱ τῶν ἱερῶν ἐκείνων ἐξηγηταὶ τελεσταί τε καὶ μυσταγωγοί, lib. viii. p. 408. And that nothing very heterodox was taught in the mysteries concerning a future state, I collect from the answer Origen makes to Celsus, who had preferred what was taught in the mysteries of Bacchus on that point, to what the christian religion revealed concerning it—wigì μèv oïv râv Baxxınöv τελετῶν εἴτε τίς ἐστι πιθανὸς λόγος, εἴτε μηδεὶς τοιοῦτος—lib. iv. p. 167.

§ Act. II.