Immagini della pagina
PDF
ePub

veyed the history of their science: and it was ever the way of Antiquity, to make the Gods a party, in order to give the greater reverence to the inventions of men. A design to commemorate the time of deification was so absurd a thing in the politics of a Pagan priest, that we can never believe he had any thing of that kind in view it was his business to throw the Godhead back before all time; or at least to place it from time immemorial. But admitting the maker of this fable intended to celebrate in general the history of these five gods, can we think that he, who was hunting after the marvelous, would confine his invention within the inclosure of dates? a matter too of so dangerous a nature to be insisted on. We know (and we now, partly, see the reason of it) that the ancient mythologists affected to confound all chronology; a mischief which hath so shaken the crazy edifice of ancient times, that the best chronologists have rather buried themselves in its ruins, than been able to lead others through it; besides, it is evident that new lies were every year told of their old Gods. Let him who doubts of this consider what additions following poets and theologers have made to the fables which Homer and Hesiod had recorded of the Gods; additions, seen, by their very circumstances, not to have been invented when those ancient bards sung of their intrigues. In these later fables we frequently find the Gods of Greece and Egypt concerned in adventures, whose dates, if measured by determined synchronisms, would bring down their births to ages even lower than their long established worship. The not attending to this has, as will be seen hereafter, egregiously misled the incomparable Sir Isaac Newton in his ancient Chronology. Thus the same author,* Plutarch, tells us, in the same place, of another Egyptian fable, which makes Typhon beget Hierosolymus and Judæus.† But what then? must we believe, that Typhon was no earlier than the name of Judæus ? must we not rather conclude, that this was a late story invented of him out of hatred and contempt of the Hebrews?

In a word, this practice of adding new mythology to their old divinity was so notorious, that the learned Connector of sacred and prophane history could not himself forbear taking notice of it: "The Egyptians" (says he) "having first called their heroes by the names of their siderial and elementary deities, ADDED IN TIME TO THE HISTORY OF THE LIFE AND ACTIONS OF SUCH HEROES, A MYTHOLOGICAL account of their philosophical opinions concerning the Gods whose names had been given to such heroes.

• Isis et Osir.

"But," says this writer, "had Osiris, Orus, Typho, Isis, and ↑ Tacitus seems to allude to this paltry fable: Quidam, regnante Iside, exundantem per Ægyptum multitudinem, ducibus Hierosolyma et Juda, proximas in terras exoneratam.-Historia, lib. v. cap. 2. "Connection," vol. ii. pp. 300,

301.

Nephthe, been esteemed deities before this additional length of the year was apprehended, we should not have had this, but some other fabulous account of their birth transmitted to us."* Here the premisses and conclusion are severally propped up by two false suppositions; the premisses, by this, that the fable was invented to commemorate the origin of these gods; and the conclusion, by this, that we have no other fabulous account of their birth.

From fact, the learned writer comes to reason; and speaking of the Egyptian Hero-Gods, who, he supposes, were ante-diluvian mortals, he says:-" But I do not imagine they were deified until about this time of correcting the year; for when this humour first began, it is not likely that they made Gods of men but just dead, of whose infirmities and imperfections many persons might be living witnesses : but they took the names of their first ancestors, whom they had been taught to honour for ages, and whose fame had been growing by the increase of tradition, and all whose imperfections had been long buried, that it might be thought they never had any. It is hard to be conceived that a set of men could ever be chosen by their contemporaries to have divine honours paid them, whilst numerous persons were alive, who knew their imperfections, or who themselves or their immediate ancestors might have as fair a pretence, and come in competition with them. Alexander the Great had but ill success in his attempt to make the world believe him the son of Jupiter Ammon; nor could Numa Pompilius, the second king of Rome, make Romulus's translation to heaven so firmly believed, as not to leave room for subsequent historians to report him killed by his subjects. Nor can I conceive that Julius Caesar's canonization, though it was contrived more politicly, would ever have stood long indisputable, if the light of Christianity had not appeared so soon after this time as it did, and impaired the credit of the heathen superstitions. The fame of deceased persons must have ages to grow up to heaven, and divine honours cannot be given with any shew of DECENCY, but by a late posterity."+

He says, it is not likely they made Gods of men but just dead, of whose infirmities and imperfections many persons might be living witnesses. How likely shall be considered presently; but that they did in fact do so, is too plain, methinks, to be denied. The learned Eusebius, a competent judge (if ever there was any) of ancient fact, delivers it as a notorious truth, that in the early ages, those who excelled in wisdom, strength, or valour, who had eminently contributed to the common safety, or had greatly advanced the arts of life, were either deified during life, or immediately on their decease:‡

"Connection," vol. ii. p. 284. + Idem, vol. ii. pp. 286, 287. 1 Τρίτοι δὲ ἄλλοι, σφᾶς αὐτοὺς ἐπὶ γῆς ῥίψαντες· τοὺς ἐπὶ συνέσει τῶν κατ ̓ αὐτοὺς προφέρειν μενο

This he had reason to believe, for he had good authority, the venerable history of Sanchoniathon the Phenician; which gives a very particular account of the origin of Hero-worship, and expresly says the deification was immediate: And surely, when men were become so foolish as to make Gods of their fellow-creatures, the likeliest, as well as most excusable season was, while the heat of gratitude, for new-invented blessings, kept glowing in their hearts; or, at least, while the sense of those blessings was yet fresh and recent in their memories; in a word, while they were warmed with that enthusiastic love and admiration which our great poet so sublimely describes : ""Twas virtue only (or in Arts or Arms, Diffusing blessings, or averting harms) The same, which in a sire the sons obey'd, A prince, the father of a people made. On him their second providence they hung, Their law his eye, their oracle his tongue. He from the wond'ring furrow call'd the food; Taught to command the fire, controul the flood, Draw forth the monsters of th' abyss profound, And fetch th' aerial eagle to the ground."

Was there any wonder in this, that he who taught mankind to subject all the elements to their use, should, by a rude admiring multitude, be adjudged a Being of a superior order?

But they took the names of their first ancestors, whose fame had been growing up by the increase of tradition. Without doubt, the ancestors, men deified, and which, as being extreme early, may be called the first, had a very large and spreading reputation. But how was this procured but by an early apotheosis? which, by making them the continual subject of hymns and panegyrics, preserved them from the oblivion of those unletter'd ages: And in fact, the fame of all, but those so deified, was very soon extinct and forgotten. -And all whose imperfections had been long buried, that it might be thought they never had any. By this, one would be apt to think that the Hero-Gods of Greece and Egypt, whose deification the learned writer would bring thus low, had nothing unseemly told of them in their Legends: Which, were it true, the argument would have some weight. But what school-boy has not read of the rogueries which the Pagan worshippers have every where recorded of their Gods? Are not these a convincing proof of their deification by that very age which saw both their virtues and their vices; but, with the fondness of times newly obliged, saw nothing but in an honourable light; † and so unhappily canonized both the good and μισμένους, ἢ καὶ ῥώμη σώματος, καὶ δυναστείας ἰσχύι τῶν πλειόνων ἐπικρατήσαντας, γίγαντάς τινας, ἢ τυράννους, ἢ καὶ γόητας, καὶ φαρμακέας ἄνδρας, ἔκ τινος τῶν θειοτέρων ἀποπτώσεως, τὰς κακοτέχνους γοητείας συνεσκευασμένους· ἢ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους κοινῆς τέ τινος καὶ βιωφελούς εὐεργεσίας προάρξαντας, ζῶντάς τε ἔτι καὶ μετὰ τελευτὴν Θεοὺς nephoav.-Præp. Evang. lib. ii. cap. 5.

"Essay on Man," ep. iii.

"Quæ ista justitia est, nobis succensere, quod talia dicimus de diis eorum; et sibi non succensere, qui hæc in Theatris libentissimè

the bad together, and, in that condition, delivered them all down to posterity? Not that I suppose (for I have just shewn the contrary) that late poets and mythologists did not add to the tales of their forefathers. I can hardly believe Jupiter to have been guilty of all the adulteries told of him in Ovid: But this one may safely say, that unless he had been a famed Adulterer in early tradition, his later worshippers had never dared to invent so many odious stories of the Sire of gods and men.

But, it is hard to be conceived that they should have divine honours immediately paid them, because their contemporaries might have as fair a pretence, and come in competition with them. I understood that none were deified but those whose benefits to their fellow-citizens, or to mankind at large, were very eminent; and that all with these pretensions were deified; so that I scarce know what to make of this observation.

-But Alexander and Cæsar's apotheoses were scorned and laughed at. And so they deserved. For if they, or their flatterers for them, would needs affect deification in a learned and enlightened age and place, no other could be expected from so absurd an attempt. But then those, who knew better how to lay a religious project, found no impediment from their nearness to its execution. Thus Odin,† about this very Cæsar's time, aspired to immediate worship amongst a rude and barbarous people (the only scene for playing the farce with success), and had as good fortune in it, as either Osiris, Jupiter, or Belus.

-Nor could Numa Pompilius make Romulus's translution to heaven so firmly believed, as not to leave room for subsequent historians to report him killed by his subjects. Here the writer conscious that Antiquity opposed his hypothesis of the late deification of their early heroes, with many glaring examples to the contrary, has thought fit to produce one which he fancied he could deal with. Romulus's translation was never so firmly believed but that SUBSEQUENT HISTORIANS, &c. As if at all times speculative men did not see the origin of their best established Hero-Gods: As if we could forget, what the learned writer himself takes care to tell us in this very place, that Euhemerus Messenius wrote a book to prove the ancient

spectant crimina deorum suorum? et quod esset incredibile, nisi contestatissime probaretur, hæc ipsa theatrica crimina deorum suorum IN HONOREM INSTITUTA SUNT eorundem deorum."-AUGUSTINUS De Civitate Dei, lib. iv. cap. 10.

• Plutarch uses this very argument against Euhemerus, to prove that their country gods never were mortal Men. Περὶ ΙΣ. καὶ ΟΣ. p. 641. † Odinus supremus

est et antiquissimus Asarum, qui omnes res gubernat; atque etiamsi cateri Dii potentes sint, omnes tamen ipsi inserviunt, ut patri liberi.—Cum Pompeius dux quidam Romanorum Orientem bellis infestaret, Odinus ex Asia huc in septentrionem fugiebat.—Edda Snorronis apud THOM. BARTHOLIN. De Antiq. Danic. pp. 648, 652.

XXX, at the end of this book.

↑ See note

gods of the heathen world to have been only their ancient kings and commanders.*

The fame of deceased persons (says he) must have ages to grow up to heaven. Must! that is, in spite of a barbarous multitude, who would make Gods of them out of hand: in spite of ancient Story, which tells us plainly, they had their wicked wills.

-And divine honours cannot be given with any shew of decency but by a late posterity. It must be 'confessed, the Ancients observed much decency when, in the number of their greater Gods, they admitted ravishers, adulterers, pathics, vagabonds, thieves, and murderers.

But now the learned writer, in toiling to bring hero-worship thus low, draws a heavier labour on himself; to invent some probable cause of the apotheosis: that warmth of gratitude for god-like benefits received, which ancient history had so satisfactorily assigned for the cause, being now quite out of date. For when gratitude is suffered to cool for many ages, there will want some very strong machine to draw these mortals up to heaven. However, our author has supplied them with a most splendid vehicle. "Some ages after" (says he) "they descended to worship heroes or dead men.-The most celebrated deities they had of this sort were Cronus, Rhea, Osiris, Orus, Typhon, Isis, and Nephthe; and these persons were said to be deified upon an opinion that, at their deaths, their souls migrated into some STAR, and became the animating spirit of some luminous and hea- . venly body: This the Egyptian priests expressly asserted.-Let us now see when the Egyptians first consecrated these hero-gods, or deified mortals. To this I answer, Not before they took notice of the appearances of the particular stars which they appropriated to them. Julius Cæsar was not canonized until the appearance of the Julium Sidus, nor could the Phenicians have any notion of the divinity of Cronus until they made some observations of the star which they imagined he was removed into."+

He says, the Egyptian priests EXPRESLY ASSERTED that these persons were said to be deified upon an opinion that at their death their souls migrated into some star. And for this he quotes a passage out of Plutarch's tract of Isis and Osiris; which I shall give the reader in Plutarch's own words, that he may judge for himself. Speaking of the tombs of the Gods, he says: But the priests affirm not only of these, but of all the other Gods, of that tribe which were not unbegotten nor immortal, that their dead bodies are deposited amongst them and preserved with great care, but that their souls illu

P. 288. See the first volume of "the Divine Legation," pp. 205, 207-209. ↑ "Connection," vol. ii. pp. 281–283.

[blocks in formation]
« IndietroContinua »