called after some luminary in the Heavens, to which they paid divine honours: and these honours came, in time, to be transferred to the terrestrial name-sake. The same Historian had before told us, that the sons of Guenos, mortals like their father, were called by the names of the elements, light, fire, and flame, whose use they had discovered.*

2. As this adulation advanced into an Established worship, they turned the compliment the other way: And now the Planet or Luminary was called after the Hero; I suppose, the better to accustom the people, even in the act of Planet-worship, to this new adoration. Diodorus, in the passage quoted a little before, having told us that the SUN and MOON were the first Gods of Egypt, adds, THE FIRST OF WHICH, THEY CALLED OSIRIS, AND THE OTHER ISIS.+ But this was the general practice. So the Ammonites called the SUN, Moloch; the Syrians, Adad; the Arabs, Dionysius; the Assyrians, Belus; the Persians, Mithra; the Phoenicians, Saturn; the Carthaginians, Hercules; and the Palmyrians, Elegabalus. Again, the Moon, by the Phrygians was called Cybele, or the mother of the Gods; by the Athenians, Minerva; by the Cyprians, Venus; by the Cretans, Diana; by the Sicilians, Proserpine; by others, Hecate, Bellona, Urania, Vesta, Lucina,§ &c. Philo Byblius, in Eusebius, explains this practice: "It is remarkable" (says he) "that they [the ancient idolaters] imposed on the ELEMENTS, and on those parts of nature which they esteemed Gods, the NAMES OF THEIR KINGS: For the natural Gods, which they acknowledged, were only the Sun, Moon, Planets, Elements, and the like; they being, now, in the humour of having Gods of both classes, the MORTAL and the IMMORTAL." ||

3. As a further proof that Hero-worship was thus superinduced upon the planetary, let me add a very singular circumstance in the first formation of STATUES, consecrated to the Hero-Gods; of which circumstance, both ancient ¶ and modern ** writers have been at a loss to assign a reason. It is, that these first Statues were not of human form, but CONICAL and PYRAMIDAL. Thus the Scholiast, on the Vespa of Aristophanes, tells us, that the Statues of Apollo and

• Εξῆς, φησὶν, ἀπὸ Γένους γενηθῆναι αὖθις παῖδας θνητούς, οἷς εἶναι ὀνόματα, φως καὶ Πῦρ καὶ Φλόξ· οὗτοι, φησὶν, ἐκ παρατριβῆς ξύλων εὗρον πῦρ, καὶ τὴν χρῆσιν ἐδίδαξαν. -EUSEBI Præp. Evang. lib. i. cap. 10. † Υπολαβεῖν εἶναι θεοὺς ἀϊδίους τε καὶ πρώτους, τόν τε Ἥλιον καὶ Σελήνην, ὧν τὸν μὲν Οσιριν, τὴν δὲ Ἴσιν ὀνόμασαι. -Lib. i. 1 See MACROBI Saturnal. lib. i. cap. 17, et seq. § See APUL. Metamorph.

|| Εξαιρέτως δὲ καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν σφετέρων βασιλέων, τοῖς κοσμικοῖς στοιχείοις, καί τισι τῶν νομιζομένων θεῶν τὰς ὀνομασίας ἐπέθεσαν, φυσικοὺς δὲ, ἥλιον καὶ σελήνην, καὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς πλανήτας ἀστέρας, καὶ τὰ στοιχεῖα, καὶ τὰ τούτοις συναφῆ Θεοὺς μόνους ἐγίνωσκον· ὥστ ̓ αὐτοῖς τοὺς μὲν θνητούς, τοὺς δὲ ἀθενάτους θεοὺς εἶναι.— Prap. Evang. lib. i. cap. 9. See CLEMENS ALEX. Strom. lib. i. p. 348, Par. ed. SPENCER De Legibus Heb. Rit. lib. ii. cap. 28, sect. 3.

• See

Bacchus were conic pillars, or Obelisks: * and Pausanias, that the Statue of Jupiter Meilichius represented a Pyramid : † That of the Argive Juno did the same, as appears from a verse of Phoronis,‡ quoted by Clemens, intimating, that these pyramidal columns were the first Statues of the Gods: And this practice was universal, as well amongst the early Barbarians as the Greeks. Now it is well known that the Ancients represented the rays of Light under pillars of this form: And we find, from the fragment of Sanchoniatho, that Usous consecrated two COLUMNS to the Wind and Fire: Hence, the erecting them as representatives of their Hero-gods shews how These succeeded to the titles, rights, and honours of the natural and celestial Deities.

To explain this matter at large would require a volume: It is sufficient to have given this hint: which, if pursued, might perhaps direct us to the right end of the clew of that hitherto inexplicable labyrinth of PAGAN MYTHOLOGY. The Reader sees clearly, by what has been already said, that this unheeded, but very natural way of superinducing Hero-worship on the Planetary, easily confounded the different specieses and afforded a plausible pretence for the two Parties mentioned above, to make Either, SYMBOLICAL of the Other.

Here matters rested: and the vulgar Faith seems to have remained a long time undisturbed. But as the Age grew refined, and the Greeks became inquisitive and learned, the common MYTHOLOGY began to give offence. The Speculative and more Delicate were shocked at the absurd and immoral stories of their Gods; and scandalized, to find such things make an authentic part of their story. It may indeed be thought matter of wonder how such tales, taken up in a barbarous age, came not to sink into oblivion as the age grew more knowing; from mere abhorrence of their indecencies, and shame of their absurdities. Without doubt, this had been their fortune, but for an unlucky circumstance: The great POETS of Greece, who had most contributed to refine the public taste and manners, and were now grown into a kind of sacred authority, had sanctified these silly Legends by their writings, which Time had now consigned to immortality.

Vulgar Paganism, therefore, in such an Age as this, lying open to the attacks of curious and inquisitive men, would not, we may well think, be long at rest. It is true, FREE-THINKING then lay under great difficulties and discouragements. To insult the Religion of one's

Πρὸ τῶν θυρῶν ἔθος εἶχον κίονας εἰς ὀξὺ λήγοντας, ὡς ὀβελίσκους ἱδρύειν εἰς τιμὴν Απόλλωνος Αγυιέως—ἰδίους δὲ φασὶν αὐτοὺς εἶναι ̓Απόλλωνος· οἱ δὲ Διονύσου· οἱ δὲ ἀμφοῖν.—Σφηκές, ver. 870. t In Corin. p. 132.

† "Ηρης 'Αργείης, ἢ στέμμασι καὶ θυσάνοισι,

Πρώτη ἐκόσμιζεν περὶ κίονα μακρὸν ἀνάσσης.—Strom. lib. i.

Country, which is now the mark of learned distinction, was branded, in the ancient world, with public infamy. Yet Free-thinkers there were: Who (as is their wont) together with the public worship of their Country, threw off all reverence for Religion in general. Amongst these was EUHEMERUS, the Messenian; and, by what we can learn, the most distinguished of this tribe. This man, in mere wantonness of heart, began his attacks on Religion, by divulging the secret of the Mysteries. But as it was capital to do this directly and professedly, he contrived to cover his perfidy and malice by the intervention of a kind of Utopian Romance. He pretended, "that in a certain City, which he came to, in his travels, he found this GRAND SECRET, that the Gods were dead men deified, preserved in their sacred writings; and confirmed by monumental records, inscribed to the Gods themselves; who were there said to be interred." So far was not amiss. But then, in the genuine spirit of his Class, who never cultivate a truth but in order to graft a lye upon it, he pretended, "that DEAD MORTALS WERE THE FIRST GODS: And that an imaginary Divinity in these early Heroes and Conquerors created the idea of a superior Power; and introduced the practice of religious worship* amongst men." The learned reader sees below, that our Free-thinker is true to his cause, and endeavours to verify the fundamental principle of his Sect, that FEAR first made Gods, even in that very instance where the contrary passion seems to have been at its height, the time when men made Gods of their deceased BENEFACTORS. A little matter of address hides the shame of so perverse a piece of malice. He represents those Founders of Society, and Fathers of their Country, under the idea of destructive Conquerors, who by mere force and fear had brought men into subjection and slavery. On this account it was that indignant Antiquity concurred in giving EUHEMERUS the proper name of ATHEIST which, however, he would hardly have escaped, though he had done no more than divulge the Secret of the Mysteries; and had not poisoned his discovery with this impious and foreign addition, so contrary to the true spirit of that Secret.

This detection had been long dreaded by the orthodox Protectors of Pagan Worship: And they were provided of a temporary defence in their intricate, and properly perplexed, system of SYMBOLIC ADORATION. But this would do only to stop a breach for the present, till a better could be provided; and was too weak to stand alone, against so violent an attack. The PHILOSOPHERS, therefore,

Ενήμερος δὲ, ὁ ἐπικληθεὶς ̓́Αθεος, φησὶν ὅτ ̓ ἦν ἄτακτος ἀνθρώπων βίος, οἱ περιγενόμενοι τῶν ἄλλων ἰσχύι τε καὶ συνέσει ὥστε πρὸς τὰ ὑπ' αὐτῶν κελευόμενα πάντας βιοῦν, σπουδάζοντες μείζονος θαυμασμοῦ καὶ σεμνότητος τυχεῖν, ἀνέπλασαν περὶ αὐτοὺς ὑπερβάλλουσάν τινα καὶ θείαν δύναμιν, ἔνθεν καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἐνομίσθησαν θεοί.—SEXT. EMPIR. Adversus Mathem.

now took up the defence of Paganism, where the PRIESTS had left it And, to the other's SYMBOLS, added their own ALlegories, for a second cover to the absurdities of the ancient Mythology. So, MINUCIUS FELIX-"ZENON, interpretando Junonem Aëra, Jovem Cœlum, Neptunum Mare, Ignem esse Vulcanum, et ceteros similiter vulgi Deos elementa esse monstrando, publicum arguit graviter et revincit errorem. Eadem fere CHRYSIPPUS, vim divinam, rationalem naturam, et mundum interim, et fatalem necessitatem Deum credit: ZENONEMque interpretatione Physiologia in HESIODI, HOMERI, ORPHEIque carminibus imitatur. Babylonio etiam DIOGENI disciplina est exponendi et disserendi, Jovis partum et ortum Minervæ et hoc genus cetera, rerum vocabula esse non Deorum."* For, all the genuine Sects of Philosophy, as we have observed, were steady patriots; LEGISLATION making one essential part of their Philosophy. And, to legislate without the foundation of a national Religion, was, in their opinion, building castles in the air. So that we are not to wonder, they took the alarm; and opposed these Insultors of the public Worship with all their vigour. But, as they never lost sight of their proper character, they so contrived, that the defence of the national Religion should terminate in a recommendation of their philosophic speculations. Hence, their support of the public worship, and their evasion of Euhemerus's charge, turned upon this proposition, "That the whole ancient MYTHOLOGY was no other than the vehicle of PHYSICAL, MORAL, and DIVINE knowledge." And, to this it is that the learned Eusebius refers, where he says, "That a new race of men refined their old gross THEOLOGY, and gave it an honester look; and brought it nearer to the truth of things."+

However, this proved a troublesome work; and, after all, ineffectual for the security of men's PRIVATE MORALS; which, the example of the licentious story according to the letter, would not fail to influence, how well soever the allegoric interpretation was calculated to cover the PUBLIC HONOUR of Religion: So that the more ethical of the Philosophers grew peevish with what gave them so much trouble, and answered so little to the interior of religious practice this made them break out, from time to time, into hasty resentments against their capital Poets; unsuitable, one would think, to the dignity of the Authors of such noble recondite truths, as they would persuade us to believe were treasured up in their Writings. Hence it was that PLATO banished HOMER from his Republic: and that PYTHAGORAS, in one of his extramundane adventures, saw both HOMER and HESIOD doing penance in Hell, and hung up there, for † Τοιαῦτα ἦν τὰ τῆς παλαιᾶς Θεολογίας, ἣν μεταβαλόντες νέοι τινὲς, χθὲς καὶ πρώην ἐπιφυέντες, λογικώτερόν τε φιλοσοφεῖν αὐχοῦντες, τὴν δὴ φυσικωτέραν τῆς περὶ Θεῶν ἱστορίας δόξαν εἰσηγήσαντο, σεμνοτέρας εὑρεσιολογίας τοῖς μύθοις προσεπινοήσαντες. Prap. Evang. lib. ii. cap. 6.

Octavius, cap. xix.

examples, to be bleached and purified from the grossness and pollution of their ideas.

The first of these Allegorizers, as we learn from Laertius,* was Anaxagoras; who, with his friend Metrodorus, turned Homer's Mythology into a system of Ethics. Next came Heraclides Ponticus, and, of the same fables made as good a system of Physics: which, to shew us with what kind of spirit it was composed, he intitled ̓Αντίῤῥησις τῶν κατ ̓ αὐτοῦ [Ὁμήρου] βλασφημησάντων. And last of all, when the necessity became more pressing, Proclus undertook to shew that all Homer's Fables were no other than physical, ethical, and moral ALLEGORIES. For we are to observe, that the Philosophers INVENTED and REVIVED this way of interpretation, as at two different times, so on two different occasions.

1. It was invented to encounter such men as EUHEMERUS, who attempted to overthrow all Religion, by this pretended fact, That the FIRST Worship was paid to dead men deified; which they supported on a real one, namely, that the greater Gods of Greece were only deified Mortals; as appeared from HOMER and the other early Greek Poets: whose writings being become a kind of SCRIPTURE in the popular Religion, the Defenders of the common faith had it not in their power to REPUDIATE their fables as only the idle visions of a poetic fancy: Nothing was left but to SPIRITUALIZE the sense, by allegorical interpretations. And this proved so lucky an expedient, that, at the same time that it covered their fables from the attacks of their adversaries, it added new reverence and veneration both to them and their Authors. So TERTULLIAN. "Ipsa quoque vulgaris superstitio communis Idololatriæ, cum in simulacris de nominibus et fabulis veterum mortuorum pudet, ad interpretationem naturalium refugit, et dedecus suum ingenio obumbrat, figurans Jovem in substantiam fervidam, et Junonem ejus in aëream," + &c.

2. What These began for the sake of their THEOLOGERS, their successors continued for the sake of their THEOLOGY. For it is to be noted, that the first CHRISTIAN APOLOGISTS took up so much of the argument of EUHEMERUS and his Fellows, as concerned the real nature and original of the greater Gods of Greece. And as they had disencumbered this truth, of the false consequence with which those audacious Freethinkers had loaded it, they were enabled to urge it with superior force. But if the CHRISTIANS added new vigour to this attack, the PHILOSOPHERS became still more animated in their defence for they hated this new Sect as an enemy equally to the PHILOSOPHY and to the RELIGION of Greece. And their accidental advantages in the application of this revived method of allegory, were not inferior to their most studied arts of improving it: For their • Lib. ii. Anaxag. Vita. ↑ Adversus Marc. lib. i.

: