''mrnff >" lK^-^5^- '^~ - * : *. ^fft,v ^:~^5lt^i^\ ^^/UiV\\U\^ "r^.^- V>5 x:^,^./Lr ^"w s -r~^r7v, tfr fit ^- Ex Libris C. K. OGDEN / ^ mm /MWf/ . ^ s. lit N.SSSS THE General Prevalenc OF THE WORSHIP O F HUMAN SPIRITS, IN THE ANTIENT HEATHEN NATIONS, ASSERTED AND PROVED. By HUGH FARMER. ^hey changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible MAN. Rom. i. 23. Quinimo non omnes, quos jam templis habetis veftris, mortalium fuftuliftis ex numero, et coelo fideribufquc donaftis? Arnobius, adv. Gentes, p. ^\. LONDON: Printed by G A L A B I N and BAKER, FOB. J. BUCKLAND, and G. ROBINSON, in Pater- nofter Row, and T. CAD ELL, in the Strand. M.DCC.LXXXIII. THE INTRODUCTION. IT may, at firft view, feem to be a matter of no concern to Chriftians, in the prefent age, what the heathen gods were 5 whether the objects of nature, or human fpirits, or both; and, if both, whether they were worfhipped fo early as the days of Mofes. Equally unintereft- ing may it appear, whether idolatry un- derwent any change in the long inter- val between Mofes and the Mefliah. Ne,- verthelefs, a few reflections may ferve to convince us, that a critical knowledge of thefe fubje&s may anfwer many vajua^ ble purpofes. A % i. It i . It is evidently necefiary to imprefs us with a due fenfe of the high impor- tance of the Jewifh and Chriftian difperr- fations. One great defign of both thefe difpenfations was, the cure of idolatry. But, if we are not fenfible how great an evil the ancient idolatry was, how dif- honourable to the majefty of heaven, and how injurious both to the virtue and happinefs of mankind, we cannot pofli- bly fet a juft value upon our deliverance from it. In order to eftimate this aright, we mufl know what the objects, and alfo what the rites, of heathen worfhip, were ; what immoral actions are afcri- bed to the former -, what follies, pollu^ tions, and cruelties, conftituted the lat- ter. Examine the religion of Egypt and Phenicia, in the days of Mofes, and you will be fenfible that even the Jewifh dif- penfation, inferior as it is to the Chriftian, and though principally defigntd as a pre- paration for it, was, neverthelefs, in it- felf, an ineftimable bletfing, by direct- ing all religious worfhip to the only pro- per J)er object of it, the one true God, the om- nipotent Creator and righteous Governor of the whole world 3 and, by eflablifhing a ritual, that was chafte, inftru&ive, and, to a people fo difpofed and circumflanced as the Ifraeiites were, neceffary to pre- ferve them from idolatry. Thofe, whd are unhappily prejudiced againft divine revelation, endeavour, in order to de- preciate it, to keep out of fight the o- dious parts of the pagan religion, and are even lavifti in its praife. This makes it the more neceflkry,.that Chriftians, with an honeft difdam of all partiality, fliould inform themfelves what it really was. " 2. An accurate knowledge of the hea- then idolatry ferves to manifest the pe- culiar propriety of thofe extraordinary means, which were employed to accom- plifh our deliverance from it, and to in- troduce and eftablifh the religions of Mofes and the Meffiah. If the heathen gods were no other than the obje6h of nature*" and fuch human fpirits as were fuppofed to prefide over them, then the A 3 miracles, miracles, by which the miffions of the old and new Teftament prophets were con- firmed, were the moft proper that could be chofen ; becaufe they were famples of that abfolute dominion over nature", which Jehovah challenged as his peculiar prerogative ; and, confequently, a full confutation of all the claims of fictitious deities. 3 . The miracles of the old Teftament were defigned not merely for the confuta- tion, but alfo, in fome cafes, for the pn- nifhment, of idolatry. If this falfe wor- (hip was, what fome reprefent it, merely a fpeculative and innocent error, it will be difficult to vindicate the difpleafureof God againft it. But we know that it confift- ed in the practice of the very worft crimes ; luch as inceft*, fodomyf, beftiality, Thisfubjeftis well illuftrated by Dr. H. Owen, in his fermons at Mr. Boyle's lefture. * Compare Levit. xviii. and ch. xx. 19. f Patrick on i Kings, xiv. 24. $ In Egypt, Strabo, 1. 17, p. 1154. Herodot. 1. 2, c. 46. ./Elian. Animal, c. 19. Jn Canaan, Levit. xviii. 14. and C vii ) and every poflible fpecies of impurity j iri the murder alfo of innocent children, and various other cruelties. Every abomina* tion to Jehovah which he hafetb*, that iSj all thofe things which are moft oppofite to the rectitude of the divine nature, were rites of idolatrous worfhip, or what they did unto their gods. Such crimes as thefe are condemned by the light of reafon, and Were punifhed by the civil magif- ftrate, except when they were prefcribed by religion -, which vindicates the juftice, and demonftrates the neceffrty, of thofe fevere methods, ufed to reft rain the idol- atry of Egypt and Canaan. 4. Juft ideas of the antient idolatry will enable us todifcover a farther reafon. for the pumfhment of it : I mean only when the unerring Judge of the world takes the work into his own hands, or immediately and by undeniable miracles commiflions others to act as the minifters of his j uftice. As the rites of idolatry con* iifted in the indulgence of fenfnal and o* ther criminal paffions, fothe gods A 4 felves ( viii ) (elves Were examples b of the crimes prac* tifed in their worfhip. Now, whenever yice comes to be confidered as a divine quality as well as an aft of devotion, or, in other words, when it is pradifed both in honour, and in imitation, of the gods, it is hereby authorifed and fanftined j and men muft fink into the loweft degeneracy. Their very underftandings as well as their hearts muft be fo depraved, that no other evidence or arguments can pro- duce a powerful and feeling conviction of the purity of the divine Being, and of his abhorrence of idolatry with its attend- ant vices, but immediate and miraculous difplays of hisjuflice in its punifhment. If the judgements of the Almighty upon it, in the days of Mofes and Jofhua, did not reclaim the moft hardened offenders, they ferved as ufeful warnings to others. b Concerning the fhocking immoralities of the gods, fee below, p. 281. and Lucian, v. i. p. 326. ed. Amitel. Their vices are fo well known, that they need not be enumerated j and many of them were too grofs to be mentioned. Calumny itfelf could not afperfe the hea- then gods more than their own votaries have dojie. Their example was often pleaded in juftification of the worft crimes. 5. Idol* ( ix ) 5 . Idolatry, however, was not the means of moral corruption equally in all coun- Jries. Human facrifices c , for example, and, perhaps, fome other flagitious rites of idolatry d , were not fo common in Egypt as in Canaan. And this diffe rence accounts for the different dealings of God with thofe nations. The iov piety of Egypt, a country enlightened by fcience 6 , even in the days of Mofes, and its cruel oppreflion of the Ifraelites, defer- ved very fevere chaftifement 3 efpecially, after an obflinate refinance of the moil awakening and powerful means of con- c Notwithftanding what Herodotus (1. 2. c. 45.) has offered to the contrary, the Egyptians did fometimes (though not often) ftain their altars with human blood., See Eufebius, 1. 4. c. 16. Porphyry de Abftinent. 1. 2. .55. Theodoret, Serm. vii. p. 589. Butthishor- rid rite of idolatry was very frequently pra&ifed by the Canaanites, and withcircumftances of fingular barbari- ty ; as appears from the hiilory of their defcendents. at Carthage. Few are ftrangers to the account given of their cruel facrifices by Diodorus Siculus, Eufcbius, and other writers. It is abridged by Mr, Bryant, in his Qk- fervations, p. 278 et feq. d Herodotus tells us, that the Egyptians were the r;l who would not allow the ufe of women in their temples. L. 2. c. 64. Afts vii. 22. vi6Hon. Viftiori. But the Canaanites, befides re- Ming the fame, and even additional e- vidence, were funk into a deeper corrup- tion ; and were, for this reafon f , difpo- fefTed and deflroyed. Many nations, and the Jews in particular, have, in the courfe of God's common providence, fuffered an almoft total extirpation. But never did any people more deferve fuch an axv- ful ftroke of juftice than the Canaanites. Nor was this more an aft of juftice thail of mercy to a people fo refolutely bent upon their own definition. 6. A knowledge of the heathen deities is neceflary to juftify the cenfure pafled upon them by the prophets of God, and to vindicate the proofs of their own di- vine authority. In the Englifh tranfla- tion of the bible s , and in the writings of moft Chriflians, the pagan deities are re- prefented as devils ; and devils have been f The cruelty and pollutions of their worfhip are ex- prcifly affigned as the ground of their punilhment. Levit, xviii. 24, 25. Bcut. xii. 31. 8 Levit. xvii. 7. Deut. xxxvii. 17. 2 Chron. xi. 15. Pf. cyi. 37. t Cor. x. 30, 21. generally generally thought to have very great power over the natural world, and to be able to perform real, or (which, in effect, is the fame thing) feeming, miracles. Now, if the heathen gods have fuch ex- tenfive power, why does the fcripture fo often reproach them with utter impo- tence? To fuppofe, with a late writer h , that they are faid to be nothing in the fcriptures only as gods, is to pervert the obvious meaning, and even (unintentio- nally) to afperfe the character, of the pro- phets of God. The heathens afcribed, to the objects of their worfhip, prophecies and miracles, and the power of doing both good and evil to mankind ; and on this ground afferted their divinity. On the other hand, the prophets of God de- clare they had no fuch power, no more than their fenfelefs images ; and hence con- cluded that they were not gods; nay, they even allow that, in cafe they had the pow- ers afcribed to them by their votaries, they would be entitled to the worfhip of h Fell, Demoniacs, p. 60, fee alfo p. 57. Some pre- tend that devils perfonated the heathen gods : a point that is examined in Differt. on Mir. p. 2^0-247. mankind. mankind. Slew us things for to come her e- af(er y chat ive may know that ye are gods ; yea, do good or do evil, that we may be dif- mi.jcd, or " then ft all be ft ruck at once with a> "iir^tlon ana 7 terror 1 ." But, behold, ye are Icjs than nothing, and your operation is lefs tlar nought *. Let us fuppofe that the heathen ^ods had accepted this challenge, foretold future events, and done both good and evil to mankind, or either -, their votaries might have replied to the prophet, " Our gods have actually ex- " erted, and therefore certainly pofTefs, the <e powers and prerogatives we afcribe to " them, and which you deny them. Mori " falfely therefore do you affirm, that " they-)- and their operations are nothing^ " and lefs than nothing. They have given <e you the very proofs you required of their " being gods ; and therefore, upon your cc own principles, you ought now to ac- " knowledge them under this character. " To pretend, after the point is deci- " ded, that all you meant was, that If. xli. 23. Bp. Lowthin loc. * .24. Id. f Compare Jerem. xxxi. 15. cited below, p. xxxiii. " they ( .xUi C 5 they..are nothing 072fy as gods, is merepre- ' lf varication ; it is flying from your own c{ propofal,- and rejecting the evidence of " their .divinity you declared you would 1 <( admit," If the Scripture teaches any tiling with clearnefs and certainty, it is this ; that the heathen gods are abfolutely in- capable of interpofmg at all in human af- fairs V And the truth of this r^prefen- tation will be allowed by fuch as kno\y that thofe gods were no other than ei- .ther the objects of .nature or deified men ; "the ^former, being merely the paffive in- ilruments of.providence, and the latter having no intercourfe with this lower world 1 . If any of the rivals of the true God can perform or imitate real rnira^ cles, how can we vindicate the ufe which the Scripture makes of thefe works, as immediate divine atteftatiohs to the mif- fion and doctrine of a prophet ? 7. A right uncjerftanding of the change idolatry underwent, in the inter- * See DifTert. on Mir. p. 233-239. J Id. p. 161, et feq. val ^"between Mofes and the Mefliah, ferves to fhew how perfectly both their institutions correfponded to the diffe- rence, in the religious Hate of the world, in their refpeftive times. Polytheifm was originally founded in a falfe perfuafion of the divinity of na- ture and its constituent parts $ more particularly of the fun, moon, and ftars. This opinion was generally received in the early ages of the world, and had cer- tainly taken faft hold of the minds of men in the age of Mofes. At this pe- riod, therefore, it pleafed God to difplay his own fovereign dominion over nature, over all the elements, and the heavenly bodies j and to make nature herfelf, and all her powers, the inftruments of pu- nifhing thofe, who had fet them up as gods, in oppofition to himfelf. Hereby he afforded the world the moft feafona- ble as well as ftriking confutation of the claims of thofe gods, and demon- ilration of his own character, as fole monarch of the univerfe. He might have delivered delivered his people from the bondage of Egypt, and put them into the poffeflion of Canaan, by other methods ; but he chofe to do it at fuch a time, and in fuch a manner, as would convey the moft fui- table and necefTary inftruftion. And it was doubtlefs with the view of conveying this inftru6lion, and manifefting him- felf to mankind at this period by the miracles he performed in Egypt and Ca- naan, that he, to whom all his works are known from the beginning, placed the Ifraelites in fuch circumftances, and gave them fuch promifes, as would naturally call for thefe miracles. In the long interval between Mofes and the Mefliah, idolatry feems to have undergone a confiderable change ; not in- deed in it's outward form and appear- ance, but in the opinion entertained of the gods. When a fpirit of enquiry began to prevail in the civilized nations, the divi- nity of nature was called in queftkm. Even the fun, moon, and ftars, wereconfi- dered, by many of the Greek philofophers, as inanimate fubflances, long before the commencement C xvi ) commencement of the Chriftian sera, Cotta, who lived near it, diftinguifhes between the gods and the objects of na- ture, which had been confounded toge^ her. And Plutarch, who lived fomewhat later, argues largely againft thofe, wlip gave the names of gods to things that had neither fenfe nor foul". The doctrine of the divinity of nature had loft coniiderable ground in the time of Chrift ; not merely through the improvement of fcience, but alfo through the influence of another caufe, viz. the learned nations having made human fpirits the more immediate objects of their eftablifhed worfhip from the early ages of the world. Beiides, ma- ny eminent philofophers, and Plato in particular, had taught feveral centuries m Cotta objects againft the Eleufmian and other myf- teries, " that, being explained, and reduced to the itan- ' dardof reafon, we were made acquainted rather with " the nature of things than with *&?<&." Quibus ex- plicatis, ad rationemque revocatis, rerum magis natura cognofciturquamdeorum. Ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. 1, 0.42. " Plutarch. If. & Ofir, p. 377* before ( xvil ) before the coming of Chrift, that all in- tercourfe, between the celeftial gods and men on earth, was carried on by the me- diation of demons, who, on that ac- count, were to be worfhipped andinvoked. This doctrine was in fuch high reputa- tion, when the Gofpel was firft publifhed, that it was generally received by the de- vout Pagans, and even by many learned Jews, who afcribed to angels (that is, to fuch human fpirits as, in their opinion, became angels ) the fame offices which the Heathens did to demons-)-. In thefe circumflances there was a pe- culiar propriety in affording the world full evidence, that, as there is but one God, one univerfal fovereign of nature, (as Mofes had amply demonftrated, ) fo there is but one Lord*, even Jefus Chrift, who has all power given unto him both in heaven and on earth; to whom angels, principalities, and pow- ers, fpirits of every rank and order, are Diflert. on Mir. p. 181. f WhitbyonColoff.ii. 18. * i Cor. viii. 4, 5, 6. i Tim. ii. 5. b made ( xviii ) made fubjeft; and who is the on ly me- diator between God and man, the only perfon appointed to convey divine blef- fings to us, and in whofe name alone we are to prefent our addrefles to God. Chrift eftablifhed his claim to be Lord of mankind, without any rival, by the ex- ercife of a miraculous power over their bodies and minds, by rifing from the dead to take pofleilion of his univerfal kingdom j and by difpenfing divine gifts to his followers. Hereby he difgraced all the vain pretences of the heathen demons, who remained under the power of death, and had never given proof of their ha- ving any dominion over the human race. 8. The perfect correfpondence of the different inititutions of Mofes and the Meffiah to the flate of the world, at the refpective times of their being introduced, may be farther illurtrated on another im- portant article, that of a future Hate. The want of explicit information concerning this ftate, in the religion of Mofes, has been often urged as an objec- tion againfl it ; to which a knowledge of of the heathen idolatry will enable us id return a fatisfadlory anfwer, though it has, I apprehend, been hitherto over- looked. The worfhip of the dead ne- ceflarily implied a belief of the immorta- lity of the foul^ Now this fpecies of idolatry fprang up in Egypt and Pheni- cia, before the time of Mofes, and was even pra6lifed by the Ifraelites in the wildernefsj as will be fhewn hereafter* Confequently, the principle, upon which this practice was founded, mufi have been received by them in the days of the Jewifh legiflator. In thefe circumftan- ces, could it be necefTary to inculcate upon the Ifraelites the doctrine of the immortality of the foul, which they had already imbibed and greatly perverted ? It was much more becoming the wif- dom of God, becaufe more for the bene- fit of men, to rectify their miftakes con- cerning it. With this view, the Ifrael- P " The law, which commands thofe consecrated from. " amongit men to be worfhipped, ihews that that fouls of " all are immortal." Cicero, cited in the following fheets, together with others who hold the fame language. P. 303,304. b 2 ites were inftrufted, that death was not, in itfelf, the blefling they imagined, but was the penalty of man's difobedience, and a (landing monument of God's dif- pleafure againfl it j that it reduced to duft all of man that was taken from the duft, that is, his corporeal frame ; and, confequently, that, inftead of advancing him to divine dominion over the world, it deftroyed all his communication with it, whjch was maintained only by means of his bodily organs. At the fame time the Ifraelites were farther informed, that it was God's good pleafure to redeem mankind from the power of death, at a future period, by that diftinguifhed perfonage whom he fhould appoint, and who was to be, in a peculiar manner, the feed of the 'woman. Thus, while Mofes laid a foun- dation for faith in God and the hope of redemption, and warned men againft expecting this ineftimable bleffing in a courfe of difobedience, he fubverted the very foundation of the worfhip paid to the dead. In ( xxi .) In like manner, the account, which Mofes has given of God's creating the world by his almighty fiat, is calculated to deftroy that other fpecies of idolatry, the worfhip of the heavenly bodies. The do6lrine of the Jewifh prophet on both thefe points, befides it's general ufe, has the farther recommendation of a peculiar propriety, when confidered in its relation and fubferviency to that fyftem of reli- gion, which he was appointed to eftablifn upon the ruins of all polytheifm and i- dolatry. Though the immortality of the foul was the univerfal creed in the age of Mofes, the cafe was far other/wife in the days of Chrift. Many then taught, that the foul of man perifhes with his body, and, confequently, that there would be no refurre6rion of the-dead, nor flate of fu- ture retribution. God, therefore, who from the beginning had determined to ac- complifhthe redemption of man by Jefus Chrift, and by him to put the righteous into the poffeflion of that kingdom prepa- b 3 red ( xxii ) red for them before the foundation of the world, was pleafed to fend him into the world at this period, to publifh the doc- trine of eternal life, and to affert his own divine commiffion to difpenfethis bleflmg. And what more proper evidence of both could there be, than his raifing others to life, and his own refurretion and exalta- tion, as the reward of his obedient and be- nevolent death ? This was a demonftra- tion, adapted to every capacity, of the poffi- bility and certainty of ourrefurrectionand of aftate of future retribution. Themefhod of our redemption from death by Jefus Chrifl is no doubt the voluntary appoint- ment of God, and undifcoverable by rea- fon ; neverthelefs, fo far is it from over- turning, that it illuftrates and confirms, the natural proofs of a future ftate, drawn from the moral perfe<5lions of the Deity, and at the fame time removes every prefumption againft it, ariiing from the definition of our prefent corporeal frame. The publication of this doctrine, of life and immortality was never more necefTary than in the time of Chrifl; and this, ( xxiii ) this was one reafon amongft many others for his coming at that particular period. 9. A knowledge of the ancient ido- latry is, in many cafes, highly neceflary to explain the language of antiquity. Opinions have a neceflary influence upon language; and we are very liable to mi- take the latter, while we are ignorant of the former. I will illuftrate this article, as I did the laft, by examples relative to a future ftate, which is fo intimately connected with the fubjecl: of the fol- lowing fheets. It has be en faid, that, according to He* rodotus q , the Egyptians were the firfr. who afTerted the immortality of the foul of man. Hence, fome have been forward to conclude, that, in more ancient times, mankind believed that the foul perifhed 1 Herodot. 1. 2. C. 123. U^uroi $i xan rovSs rov >,oyo with ( xxiv ) with the body. But the meaning of He- rodotus is miftaken. This hiftorian, ha- ving pointed out a remarkable difference between the Greeks and Egyptians, in that the latter affigned to Ceres and Bacchus the fovereignty over the fhades below r , or over the region of the dead ; adds, that they alfo were the firfl who taught this doctrine concerning the immortality of the human foul, viz. that, upon the death of the body, it pafled into another animal, till, after having in the fpace of three thoufand years animated every fpe- cies of living creatures in the air, upon the earth, and in the fea, it returns again into a human body. He farther informs us, that feveral Grecians claimed this doctrine as their own invention. According to Maximus Tyrius', Pytha- goras was the firfl who had courage to broach it in Greece, grounding it upon r Tut xa,ru. " Diflert. xxviii. p. 286 ed. Davif. IlfSayogaj 3v e T TOtJ EAAlJO'H' EToA/X.VJC7)' EI7TEIV OT O.VTO TO [tey ?6J- , v> ot ^v%iti ouicnrTa-irst ct%r>p'i7a,i a3ai>;? y.xi a.- KKl /Xe EfKSH IT>JV TT^tV r.K'.V til-aa. the ( XXV ) the pre-exiftence of the foul. From this account it appears, that the do6lrine of the fubfiftence of feparate fouls in a fub- terraneous region was received by the E- gyptians before that of their tranfmigra- tion j and that the latter was an innova- tion, which was not relifhed by the Greeks when it was firfl publifhed. In- deed, long before the time of theSamian philofopher, the Greeks worfhipped their heroes, andconfequently believed the im- mortality of the foul. And, amongft the Egyptians, the doctrine of its migration from a human to a brutal body mufl have been later than theworfhip of their ancient kings, who were thought to be tranflated immediately from earth to hea- ven. But it is impoffible that the opi- nion of the everlafting duration of the foul fhould only be co-eval with that of it's tranfmigration : for the latter necefTa- rily prefuppofes a belief of the diftinclion between foul and body, and the perma 7 nence of the former, after the dhTolu- tion of the latter. If the foul perifhed with ( xxvi ) with the firft body, it could not enter a fecond'. What I principally propofed under this head was, to fhew how far a knowledge of the antiquity of the worfhip of dead men may enable us to fix the meaning of the word death -m the threatening denoun- ced againft Adam". If human fpirits were worfhipped (as it will be {hewn they * Some have pleaded that the belief of a future ftate took it's rife from the funeral rites of the Egyptians, de- fcribed by Diodorus Siculus*. It may be granted, that the fi&ions of the Greeks concerning the ferryman Charon, the river over which he was to carry the dead, the infer- nal judges, and Elyfian fields, were borrowed from the cuftoms of Egypt at the burial of their kings. But this was only an illu.Jira.tion or defcripthn of a future ftate, and was fo far from giving rife to, that it manifeftly prefuppofes, the belief of fome fuch ftate amongft the Greeks. Befides, the Egyptian cuftom of fitting in, judgement upon their dead kings could not be fo ancient as that of deifying them ; for it is fcarce to be fuppofed, that they would ufe fuch freedom with the objects of their worlhip. Indeed the very reafon of burying their kings in pleafant meadows was a prior perfuafion that after death the foul did often inhabit, at leaft for a time, the place where the body was depofited. * Lib. i. p. 102, 103, 107, ro8. Ed. Weff. " Gen. ii. 17. were) ( xxvii ) were) in the age of Mofes, particularly in Egypt and Phenicia, then the word death could not, at that time, and in thofe countries, denote more than the deflruction of the bodily life: for, had this term farther included in it the infenfi- bility or extinction of the foul, the dead would not have been honoured as gods. And, had Mofes ufed it in. this exten- five fenfe, he would (as he well knew) have been mifunderflood by the Egyp- tians, who aflerted the immortality of the foul w , and by the Hebrews, who dwelt amongft them, and had adopt- ed their fyftem of religion. He did not, however, in order to prevent their mif- taking him, give notice of his ufing the word in a new and fmgular fenfe ; and, therefore, he defigned to exprefs by it, what they did, the deftruftion of the bo- dy only, As this is a point on which v It appears from Herodotus that this principle was holdenin very ancient times by the Egyptians, but their worfhip demonflrates that they held it before the time of JVlofes. great ( xxviii ) great ftrefs is laid by different contend- ing parties, I will take the liberty to fug- geft a few confiderations, tending to confirm the foregoing interpretation of death. It may be obferved, in the firft place, that, although one great defign of Mofes, in giving an account of the introduction of death into the world, was to guard a- gainft the worfhip of departed fpirits, and, though nothing could have anfwer- ed this defign more effectually than re- prefenting the foul of Adam as a mere quality ', or as the refult of the peculiar flructure and organization of his body -, yet, fo far is he from fuppofmg this to be the cafe, that, according to him, after the body of the firft man was perfectly organized by the immediate hand of hea- ven, he did not become a living foul or perfon*, till God breathed into his nojlrih the breath of life 7 : a principle diftinct x That nephejh often fignifies per/on appears from Gen. xvii. 14. Levit. iv. 2. ch.vii. 20. and many other places. y Gen. ii. 7. from ( xxix ) from the duft out of which his body was formed, and, therefore, capable of fub- iifting in a ftate of feparation from it. Nor does Mofes ufe the fame language in relating the formation of any other living creatures ; which is a proof that the principle of life in man is of a fupe- rior kind to that in brutes. Secondly. The ancient patriarchs did not believe that the foul of man pe- rifhed with his body. The moft ancient opinion, concerning departed fpirits, that we meet with in the heathen re- cords, was, that they defcended into, a fubterraneous region, or a place /- oifible to human fight, called by the Hebrews, Jheol, and by the Greeks, hades*; and that, in this place, perfons of the fame nation, tribe, and family, and alfo thofe who were united in the bonds of friendfhip, afibciated, and dwelt toge- z The Greeks affigned to Pluto, the fon of Saturn, the fovereignty over the manfions of the dead : which fup- pofes a previous perfuafion, in the moft ancient times, that fouls had their abode in them. The regions of the dead are fpoken of in Homer and the moft ancient hea- then writers. ther. ( XXX ) ther*. The facred writers entertained the fame opinion, fuppofed the fouls of the dead to exift in Jheol or hades*, and that, in the distribution of them, regard was had to the former relation in which they flood to one another 6 . It is in ma- nifefl allufion to this opinion, that the facred Homer. Odyff. xi. paffinl. The ghofls of Achilles and his friend Patroclus were in company together, ib. v. 466, 467. Lucian fpeaks of the dead as divided x.ar T fSf>j jti 0sX. Necuomanteia, v. i. p, 334. b The references in Scripture to the abode of the fouls of the dead are exceeding numerous. Many of them are taken notice of in EJj'ay on the Demoniacs, p. 21 1 et feq. and below in note c . In Job, ch. xxvi. 5, it is faid in the original, The giants (probably the ghofts of thofe who perilhed in the flood) tremble under the wa- ters, together with their fellow inhabitants. This verlion, which was given in the EJfay, (ubi fupra,) has iince been confirmed by the higheft authority, fofar, I mean, as ferves my purpofe in this place : The mighty dead tremble from beneath : The waters, and they that dwelt therein* Bp Lowth's Ifaiah, Prelim. Differt. p. xv. c To this diftribution there is a reference in Ezek. xxxii. 22. and alfo in thofe words afcribed to Samuel, I Sam. xxviii. 19. Tomorrow Jhalt thou (Saul) and thy fons be with me, that .is, in Jhecl, or common receptacle of the dead. I cannot forbear obferving here, that there ( xxxi ) facred writers defcribe the dead as being gathered to their people, and that Jacob, under the diftreffing apprehenfion of the death of Jofeph, faid, I will go down into Jheol unto my fon*. When Jacob uttered thefe words, he believed that Jofeph had been devoured by wild beads -, and there- fore, by Jheol, he could not mean the grave, but the receptacle of the dead. As this language is recorded by Mofes, he mufl know that the patriarchs did not there was a ftriking refemblance in many particulars between the Jheol of the Hebrews and the hades of the Greeks. Under the general term Jheol the Hebrews included both paradife and gehenna, as the Greeks did elyjium and tartarus under hades. If the Greeks fuppo- fed the manfion of the dead to be fubterraneous, fo did the Hebrews : for what is faid, I Sam. xxviii. 14. of Samuel's afcending, that is, from the earth, was certain- ly fpoken agreeably to the prevailing opinion of thofe times. Amongft the Greeks, fouls, though they exifted in hades, were thought to be ignorant of what paffed in the world. According to Homer, Odyfi". 1. xi. v. 456. et feq. the phantom of Agamemnon defired to be informed by Ulyfles where his fon reigned. As to the Hebrews, their notion of the dead was the fame-. If. Ixiii. 1 6. In the Scriptures as well as in other wri- tings, the receptacle of the dead is figuratively defcri- bed as a houfc with its gates and keys. Job xxxviii. 17. Rev. xviii. d Gen. xxxvii. 35. conceive ( xxxii ) conceive death to import the utter ex- tinftion of the foul, and therefore, would not affix this meaning to it himfelf. Nay, Thirdly, we know, with certainty, that this prophet himfelf believed the fe- parate fubfiflence of the foul, and has even given it a divine fanclion : for he reprefents God, as making this promife to Abraham, fflou foalt go to thy fathers in peace*. Was it poffible for him, then, to maintain the oppofite opinion ? Fourthly, none of the facred writers do ever defcribe death in terms different from thofe ufed by perfons, who certain- ly acknowledged the continuance of the foul after it. If we read in the Pfalms f , that the dead (rephaim, the ghofls) pralfe not God> the fon of Sirach 5 affirms the fame thing, at a time when it is al- lowed that the Jews did believe the foul to be immortal. In Scripture, I ac- knowledge, death is defcribed by Jleep ; * Gen. xv. 15. f Pf. Ixxxviii. 10. 8 Ecclefiafdcus xvii. 28. but ( xxxiii ) but not to plead that fleep is not a ftate of non-exiftence, but of reft, it is well known that this foft image of death was commonly ufed to exprefs the thing it- felf by thofe who afTerted the exiltence of fouls in hades h . Other terms by which the flate of the dead is defcribed, fuch as filence> oblivion^ darknefs y and corruption, re- fer only to the body, or to the fuppofed flate of the foul while it was mjheol, and are not peculiar to the facred writers, but were common in all countries 1 , where both the popular belief and the eftablifhed worihip were inconfiflent with the notion of the foul's perifhing with the body. That ftrongexpreflionof Rachel upon the death of her children, they are nof k t no more imports the non-exiftence of their fouls than of the materials of their bodies- ; and means no more than that they were as totally loft to her and to this world as if they had no exiftence at all. The h See Homer, Iliad II. 454. ' 1 See Windet dc vita fimftorum ftatu, feft. 2. p. u. et feq. k Jerem. xxxi. 15. c foregoing ( xxxiv ) foregoing defcriptions of death eafily may, and necefTarily muft, be under- flood in a fenfe confiftent with that uni- verfal creed of the ancients, and parti- cularly of the facred writers, that the foul remains after the body is deftroyed. This interpretation will appear ftill more reafonable and necefTary, when we con- lider that many of the terms, by which death was defcribed in all countries, do clearly imply, and are built upon, a be- lief of the diftinclion between foul and body, and of their being feparated at death. As, according to the Greeks, to die was to depart\ to go away"; fo the writers of the New Teftament defcribe death by a departure* ', that is, of the foul from the body to another ftate. In this departure^ therefore, they mufl have thought death to confift : and confe- quently the great Jewilh prophet had the fame idea of it. It muft be obferved, n E|o& ? , Lukeix. 31. See Grotius, Whitby, and Wetftein, on this place. Fifthly, ( XXXV ) Fifthly, that the foregoing explica- tion of death will be greatly confirmed by confidering the meaning of life as op- pofed to it. Thofe, I apprehend, whofe departed fpirits exifled in Jheol, were not reprefented as being alive, or as //- ut'ng, except in refpect to the purpofe of God to reftore them to life. But, when their fouls were removed from fheol or hades, and united a fecond time to a hu- man body, then they were faid to live a- gain j being now reftored to a life fimi- lar to what they had loft. This appears from the writings both of the Heathens and of the Jews. Amongft the Celts, fays Diodorus Siculus, the doctrine of Pythagoras prevails ; who held that the fouls of men are immortal, that they pafs into other bodies, and, after a cer- tain determinate time, live again 9 . This refers to the period fpoken of by Herodotus, after which fouls returned ~Eviy%vt\ TTCIQ t/To; o Ili/Saya^a TvoySV, crt T? 4:pC*> TU * tuSfUTTuv aSa^ara? tt)<a a-vpJet^xt, x $S ITUV u^apwur no,- ?.!) *! si; STf^ov ffuif.u, TJJ 1 ] / t r pC'i$ ^ff^vo[i,mr,<;f DlOU. SlC. I. v. p. 352. Weff. C 2 to ( xxxvi ) to human bodies. The grand Lama was faid to die only in appearance ; becaufe he was fuppofed to be born in a new hu- man body, in die very inftant he quit- ted the old one p . It is of more importance ftill to examine the language and fentiments of the Jews on this fubjecT:. It is commonly allowed that the Jews, from the time of their re- turn from Babylon q , aflerted the feparate exiftence of the foul after death. This was the opinion not only of a few emi- nent individuals, fuch as Philo, but of thofe learned fefts amongft them, the ElTenes r and Pharifees 8 , and of the whole body p Above, p. 126. ^ That they ahvays held this principle appears from their imitation of the heathen idolatry, from their evoca- tion of the dead, and from the early references in Scrip- ture to the receptacle of departed fouls, and many other proofs. r Jofeph. Bell. Jud. 1. 2. c. 8. $. II. E^wrai ita.( ctv- * They believed that the foul was immortal ; tffyt'f raj r^f^aw; wr? atToic tv ; and that the fouls of good men had (^arw,* T avac^x) power to re-vive or liv? again* ( xxxvii ) body of the people 1 , almoft without ex- ception", in the time of our Saviour. To this principle the Pharifees (the moil numerous feel: amongft the Jews, and whofe doctrine formed the popular creed) added another, viz. the refur- reclion of the dead v . 1* hefe two prin- ciples were thought to be clofely con- nected. The Sadducees believed the extinction of the foul at death, and did not admit the refurrection : the Pharifees, on the other hand, admitted the latter and denied the former. I cannot find a fmgle example, before the time of Chrift, again. Jofeph Antiq. 1. 18. c. I. .3. The fame hif- t6riarr, in his Bel. }ud. 1. z. c. 8. . 14. confirms the above account of them : they believed that every foul was incorruptible ; but that the foul of the good alone went into another body ; ptTc<amn/ E*? STSJOX crwp* rw ruv ctyufyut porn*. * The people followed the Pharifees. u The Sadducees were the only exception. They taught that the foul perifhed with the body. Zaosy.ai<? Si T? 'jt'PC*? Xoy^ ffvta.$a.t\Zfi Ton; <rup.a,?i, Jofeph. Alt- tiq. 1. r8. C. 1. . 4. Tp%''7? ft TV* <hatu.orw etvet^syi. B. IX. I. 2. c. 8. $. 14. Aft. xxiii. w See above, note s , and Afts xxiii. 8. The Jews in general agreed with the Pharifees in maintaining a refurre&ion. Afts xxiv. 15. c 3 of ( xxxviii ) of a perfon, who believed the refur- reclion of the dead, that did not at the fame time allow the permanence of the foul after death. The Jews exprefled the refurreclion by the terms, revivif- cence, living again , that is, a return to the fame kind of life as their former one. This appears from a pafiage already cited x , and may be confirmed by many others. T*he king of the 'world Jhall raife us up unto eoerlafling life, faid one of the feven children fpok.cn of in the book of Maccabees 7 ; which is equivalent to that language of their mother, God will give you life and breath again 2 ". She alfo ap- plies to them thofe words of God, / ///, and I make alive. Thofe who died for the law were encouraged to expect a re- vivifcence* . The queftion here is, what is meant by this revivifcence, or return to life, by which the refurreftion is de& * See above, note*. * 2 Maccab. vii. 9. z Ib. v. 22. naXjyJJmna. Jofephus, de Maccab. p. 1101, E. F. ap, Whitby on Mat. x#ij. 30. p. 191. cribed ? ( xxxix ) cribed ? Did the Jews hereby mean cre- ating anew the foul that had been de- flroyed? If this be a thing poffible in it's nature, it could not poffibly be their meaning^ becaufe they did not allow that the former foul perifhed at death. Did they believe that man had no foul, and therefore that his refurrection con- fifted in the re-organization of his for- mer body or in furnifhing him with a new body, organized as that was ? This is a flat contradiction to their belief of the diflinction between foul and body, and the feparate exiftence of the former. What then did they or could they mean by the refurrection to life, but the reite- ration of that kind of life which they had loft, by the reunion of their fouls to a human body, either the very fame that they had before, or one in effeft the fame ? In virtue of this re-union, the dead man became a living man, the fame as he was before he died, with the fame con- fcioufnefs and recollection, the principle of confcioufnefs having never perifhed. c 4 Hence Hence they fpeak of the martyrs as be- ing received, dying" ', by Abraham ; and re- prefent the fouls of the righteous in the intermediate ftate as being in the hand of GoJ, and having hopes full df immortality* y or of a refurreftion to eternal life. Far- ther to confirm the preceding account of a refurreclion and revivifcence, I muft obferve that Jofephus, who on all occaiions after ted the feparate exiflence of the foui d , has himfelf explained thefe terms by the return of the foul of a dead perfonto it's body. Elijah, according to this hiflorian, having promifed to reftore a dead child to his mother alive', prayed to God to fend back his foul into him* find to grant him life\ and the child lived again*. b Whitby, ubi fupra. Wifdom, iii. i, 4. A Pofleffing demons, according to him, were the fouls of wicked men. Bel. Jud. I. 7. c. 6. .3. He was a Pharifee, and confequently had adopted the principles of his fedl. See above, note *, p. xxxvi. ' E^EITO TE T*i ^'J'^iV SlO~7T/x4/ai TJ-aXkl* TU TfOLMy V.tt.\ TTOt- t*<rj(jM a-^ru TO?^. Jofeph. Anti-j. 1. 8. c. 13. . 3. Comp. i Kings xvii. 21. * A(ow. I do I do not appeal to the Jews as au- thorities to determine points of doc- trine, nor can I aflent to all that they have faid concerning the condition of the foul in the interval between death and the refurrection, The onlyufel would make of them is to fhew, in what fenfe certain words were ufed in and near the time of Chrift, in order to ex- plain the language of Scripture. If, in the time here referred to, the terms, re- furretfion, revii)ifcence y or living again, as ufed both by Jews and Gentiles, de- noted the reunion of a foul to a human body; the fame terms, when adopted by Chrift and his apoftles, muft have the fame meaning. Every one would un- derftand them in their common and ordinary {ignification. If, in the inter- pretation of the language of the fa- cred writers, we are not guided and determined by the ufe of the fame lan- guage by their contemporaries, fancy alone muft be our interpreter. Now, if we know what life, when it expref- fes fes the refurrection, is, we cannot but underftand the meaning of death it's op- pofite j and, confequently, as the former lignifies the foul's return to a huma-i bo- dy, the latter denotes it's feparation. Both terms imply the continuance of the foul after death: a principle held univerfally in themoft ancient times' 1 , and which gives great probability to the doctrine of a refurrecrion: a doctrine of the higheft importance in the view of all Chriftians, and the grand object of their faith and hope. i o.I might proceed to fhew, that, with- out a clear knowledge of the ancient idola- try we cannot vindicate the laws of Mofes, nor do juftice to the character of that di- vine legiflator. But I cannot enlarge here upon this fubject without anticipa- ting what, I hope, will come under fu- ture confideration. The obfervations, that have been made on the great utility of being well ac- h It \vas holden, we have feen, by Heathens and Jews, by patriarchs and prophets, and by the people, parti- cularly in the times of Mofes and the Mefliah. quainted ( xliii ) quainted with the objefts and rites of hea- then worfhip, are equally applicable to al- mofl all the opinions and cuftoms 1 of anti- quity, to which the Scriptures continually refer. What an agreeable ufe has Mr. Harmer made of his extenfive knowledge of them, in a work, as inflru6tive as it is entertaining ! k For want of this know- ledge, Chriftians have miftaken pagan tenets for the genuine doclrines of the 'Gofpel. The language of the Fathers is unintelligible by thofe who are not well acquainted with the opinions which pre- vailed, before their times, in the fchools of the heathen philofophers. And the expofitors, who have thrown moft light upon the Scriptures, are fuch as had the largeft acquaintance with pagan anti- quity. The foregoing reflections, however de- feftivc, are, never thelefs, a fufficient a- pology for any attempt to bring thofe ac- 1 See the learned Mr. Parkhurft's Preface to his He- brew Lexicon. k Obfervations on divers pafiages of Scripture. quainted ( xliv ) quainted with the heathen religion, who have no leifure to fearch the records of antiquity. My defign is to lay before them fuch fads as (hall enable them to form a judgement for themfelves upon the fubjecl:, without relying upon the de- cifion of others. I propofe, I. To mew the general prevalence of the worfhip of human fpirits in the an- cient heathen world. II. To enquire into the grounds of this and every other fpecies of idolatry, or into the principles upon which the whole fyftem of polytheifm was built. III. To confider the high antiquity of idolatry, and more efpecially of that fpe- cies of it, the worfhip of human gods. And, I V . To examine how far the reprefenta- tion of the pagan gods, in Scripture, agrees with that made of them in the writings of the Heathens j or, how far the two accounts mutually ill uftrate and confirm each other. The firfl of thefe articles, alone, is the fubjecl: of the prefent publication ; and it it is eftablifhed upon evidence indepen- dent of the reft ; fo that it may be fitly confidered as a diiUnft treatife, fuch as might have been published by itfelf, though no other were to follow. But the other articles are in a ftate of great preparation for the prefs. The fubjecl of the following flieets was touched upon in a former publica- tion, but was then neceflarily circumlcri- bed within narrow bounds. Here it is examined at large : and a wider compafs is taken than any former writer, that I have feen, had done. A very pardona- ble zeal, to fupport the reputation of the antient nations, has of late difpofed fome learned writers to take pains to clear feve- ral of them from the reproach of worfliip- ing dead men. It has been faid by fome, that this worfhip did not obtain amongft the antient Perfians. Others have affirm- ed the fams concerning the Germans, before their conqueft by the Romans. A foreigner of great diclinftion, *Ja- i) has attempted to prove that dead men ( xlvi ) men were not worfhipped by the Egyp* ttans. Dr. Blackwell, in his Letters on Mythology , maintains that the gods of the greater nations were the deified parts and powers of the univerfe. And Mr. Bryant, fecond to none in the knowledge of anti- quity, though he could not but allow that the Heathens regarded their own gods as deified mortals, yet contends that they were miftaken 1 ". To thefe modern writers I might oppofe a great number of other moderns no way inferior to them ; but the queftion before us muft be deter- mined by evidence. There is another writer", whom I fhould never have thought of in any con- nection with thofe already mentioned, had he had not tranfcribed the objections of Dr. Blackwell ; which he has done without acknowledging his obligation. This gentleman has been pleafed to ho- 1 P. 276, 277, 278, et paffim. He can fcarce be un- derftood as fpeaking of the objefts of the eftabliihed worflnp. See p. 209. m Mr. Bryant's Mythology. V. I. p. 454, 455-. The Rev. J. Fell, in atreatife entitled Demoniacs. nour ( xlvii ) nour me with his notice, and to oblige me with an uncommon meafure of a- bufe. With equal candour and pene- tration he compliments me with finifter motives and difguifed infidelity . His cenfures may do me credit -, moil cer- tainly they difgrace none but himfelf: They difcover to the world what fpirit he is of, and what opinion he entertained of his own caufe, which he could not fup- port without the aid of calumny. There is another circumftance in his conduct which does him no honour, and farther ferves to (hew his diftrefs : I refer to hi? continually perverting my language from its natural and obvious meaning, and to his mifreprefenting my fentiments fo grofT- ly, that I fliould have often been at a lofs to know againft whom his performance was written, had he not informed us. Whether his mifreprefentations are wil- ful or not, let others form what judge- menttheypleafe : it is a matter of no con- cern to any one but himfelf : I barely Ib. p. 412, 413. flate ( xlviii ) ftate the fact. The account he has given, not only of my fentiments but even of thofe of the moft refpeclable writers of antiquity, is fo very remote from the truth, that, to whatever caufe it is to be afcribed, I determined from the firft never to write any thing merely in anfwer to him. Such anfwer mufl have entirely confifted in (hewing that he either could not or would not underftand the plaineft lan- guage j an undertaking which could yield neither pleafure nor benefit to the reader, nor throw any new light upon the con- troverfy. Neverthelefs, when I had re- folved,on reafons which had no relation to this gentleman, to lay before the public my view of the heathen gods, I judged it not improper to point out his errors up- on this fubjecl:, in order to furniih a fpecimen of his manner of writing, with- out which it would have appeared in- credible that any one could write in the manner he has done. That part of his performance here animadverted upon was fele&ed from the reft, on account of "( xlix ) of it's connexion with the fubject of the following fheets, and becaufe it has been thought to carry with it a greater face of probability than any other. It is cer- tainly liable to fewer objections. ControveHies, when properly con- ducted, are of eminent ufe to mankind. They arreft the attention more than ge- neral reafonings, and awaken a Ipirit of inquiry, to which, under God, we owe all our improvements in fcience, and e- very juftidea we have formed of religi- on. By occafioning a more perfect in- vefligation of fubject s, they affift in the detection of error and in the difcovery of truth. They have a natural tenden- cy to foften our prejudices againfl thofe who differ from us in opinion, by fliew- ing us how much they can offer in their own defence. By opening and enlar- ging the mind, they ferve to cure that bi- gotry, which is not peculiar to any one feet or party, but common to all who have ftrong paflions and prejudices, and nar- row views of things, and who never read d any ( 1 ) any thing that is written again ft their own favourite tenets. On the other hand, when controverfies degenerate in- to perfonal altercation and abufe, or are fupported by forced constructions and grofs mifreprefentations, they are a difgrace to the parties, and of no fer- vice to the public. Thofe mifreprefentations, which I have had fo much reafon to complain of in o- thers, I have ufed the utmoft caution to avoid myfelf. And it is no fmall pre- fumptionof my care in this refpect, that, notwithftanding my numerous citations both from ancient and modern writers, Dr. Worthington, a gentleman of real learning, whom I had cenfured for his mifreprefentations, (though he might be deemed quite accurate mcomparifon with Mr. Fell,) has not, if my memory does not fail me, retorted the charge, except in one {ingle inftance, for which there was no foundation 1 ". In f The following is the exaft ftate of the cafe. In let- ers to Dr, Worthington, p. 112, in a note, I faid, In all points of importance I have either cited the original words of my d 2 vouchers, Dr. Mill is pojiti-ve, they (the words rot tc^nwrot tov As- yeavix, him that had the legion, Mark v. 15.) are an in- terpolation. Dr. Worthington (in his Farther Enquiry, p. 164.) fays, " he turned to the place in Dr. Mill's " New Teftament ; and, to his great furprife, found " the 'very remerfe of what I had reprefented him to " have maintained." He adds, " Dr. Mill, in truth, " only tells you, that thefe words were wanting in a- *' bout five or fix ancient manufcripts ; that the SyriaC " and Arabic had them ; and that Grotius thought the <c paflage ought to be retained." Now, if Dr. Mill on the place has only told us what others thought of it, without making any mention of his own opinion con- cerning it, how could Dr. Worthington aflert he had found the <very re<verfe of what I had affirmed to be true ? To make good his aflertion, he mould have fhewn, that' Dr. Mill was pofitive the paflage was not an interpola- tion. But, 1 had aflerted that Dr. Mill was pofitive that it was, and Dr. Worthington charges the aflertion with deceit ; and concludes with this admonition, Let this author never more accufe others ofmifreprefentation, p. 165. Had Dr. Worthington looked into Dr. Mill's prolegomena, where he was more likely to find his fenti- ments of the paflage in queftion than upon the place where it was his proper bufmefs to ftate the fentiments of others concerning it, he would have found that Dr. Mill was, as I had affirmed, pofitive it <was an interpola- tion. He fays it CERTAINLY was a marginal glofs, anciU rejeds ( ffi ) vouchers, or made particular references to them. TKeir own words are cited in matters of the firfl moment, that hereby the reader may confult the vouchers him- feif, which he may have no other op- portunity of doing. Citations at length, from authors who wrote in the learned languages, and are the chief fupport of a caufe, are then peculiarly necefTary when the argument depends upon the exacl: rendering of the original words, and jeje&s the opinion of Grotius, in the following terms r Mar. v. 15. Tot ttrxTitorx TM Xtyiuta,, retinendum cenfet, cum agnofcant Syrus et Arabs. Verum abeft a Steph. $ Cantab. Colb. I. et codice Fulgati; et utcunque jam inlibrospropemodumomnesirrepferit, haudaliud CER- TE initio erat, quam marginale fcholion, adfcriptum e regione ra aip>yiop.tw, in quod quum incidiflet mox fcriba, textufque partem efle crederet, repofuit illud in. inferior! parte fententiae, loco non fuo. Prolegom, N* 1361. p. 146. ed. Kuiler. 1710. And in N4ii. he fays concerning the words in queftion, comment arius eft t non textus. Nullum ejus veftigium eft apud Lucam, Marki fedlatorem. However, in juftice to the deceafed, it ought to be obferved, that it is fome excufe for him that I had omitted to refer to Dr. Mill's Prolegomena ; which however he ought to have examined before he kitted his cenfure. and their meaning is either doubful or difputed: for, in this cafe, a ftrongdefire of fupporting an hypothecs may infen- iibly bias an honeft writer, and incline him to prefer that meaning of the words of his author, which, though lefs natu- ral, is moft favourable to his views. I am fo far therefore from making an a- pology for the long and frequent cita- tions from the authorities, appealed to on the principal points, that I confider them as the chief recommendation of this work. In matters of fecondary mo- ment, though I have not cited my au- thors at large, yet I have, as often as there was occafion, made fuch particu- lar references to them as will enable the reader to confult them with eafe and without lofs of time. This method on controverted points is moft for the be- nefit of readers, and precludes all fu- picion of unfair dealing on the part of the writer. The contrary proceeding is unfatif- faclory to thofe accuflomed to examine general general references. It leaves room to doubt of the accuracy of a writer, how- ever well allured we may be of his fidelity. And it is the moft likely way to efcape de- tection, if a writer can fo far forget his duty, and difregard his reputation, as to be willing to impofe upon the credu- lity of his readers. This indeed is a cafe that feldom happens, and can ne- ver happen where there is any degree ei- ther of honour or of prudence. How it fo fell out, there is no occafi- on to inquire, but certain it is in fact, that a late writer, though he fays 3 , He hopes feme allowance will be made for fre- quent and necejjary quotations, to make it e- vident that he does not impute to any author opinions 'which he never maintained > is remarkably defective in this refpecl. In- deed he could not but be fo in fome ca- fes ; I mean, when his own voucher did not contain the fentiment afcribedto him. But he fcarce ever cites the ancients in their own languages, even though the ar- * Fell's Demoniacs, Introduction, p. viii. gument gument depends upon the exaclnefs of the tranflation. As to his references, for the moft part they are only general, and cannot be eafily found by thofe who have moft occafion to confult them, fuch as have only a {lender acquaintance with ancient writers. In fome inflances, I acknowledge, his references are parti- cular and exact; but they happen to be quite otherwise when he imputes to au- thors, as we fhall fee he does, opinions 'which they never maintained. Be this the effect of accident or defign, it is cer- tainly a reafon for reading Mr. Fell with fingular caution. COR- CORRIGENDA. Page 125, note 1, line 2, for that read this. 140, line 13, for told Herodotus read faid. 142, note *, for 150 mz</ 156. 152, line 2, ra?^, after whom he was denomi- nated. 369, note*, line 17, for comical read conical. 402, note ', line I, for inert raz</ineft. 476, line 2, for has raz^have* D E L E N D A. 140, line 15, dele the oldeft of their gods. 177, line 6, dele ant! Egyptians. 183, note , line 6, <&& and the Egyptians. ADDENDA. 36, at the end of note c , add Voflius de Idolo. lat. I.I. c. 35, p. 134. 1 27, at the end of note y, add Voff. de Idolo lat. p. 95. 224, at the end of note , add ^ p. 147. 396, nott ! , line 2, after Commodo addy. 72. THE THE GENERAL PREVALENCE F T H E Worfliip of HUMAN SPIRITS, 1 N T H E ANCIENT HEATHEN NATIONS, ASSERTED AND PROVED. I offer any thing in proof of the general worfhip ^ human fpirits amongfl the ancient Heathens, it will be proper briefly to review the account I had given of their gods in a former pub- lication" 5 both that we may be able to 8 Difiertation on miracles, ch. III. feft. ii. B determine, 2 General Prevalence of the determine, whether there be any perti- nence or force in the objections which have been urged againft that account -, and that, at the fame time, the way may be prepared for what I propofe farther to advance on the fubjecl: of the pagan theology. I. It was not only admitted, but alfo by a variety of teftimonies largely proved, <c that the Heathens deified the world," together <c with it's moft illuflrious parts " and active principles, the elements, the " heavens and all their hoft" b . It was alfo allowed, that thefe natural gods " were the firft deities of all the idola- " trous nations" . And therefore to produce nw proofs of thefe points, (which it is eafy to do,) though it may- have the appearance of oppofmg, is in reality to confirm, the doctrine of the DifTertation on miracles concerning the heathen gods. It did not fall in with the defign of that performance, to treat more fully concerning the deification of the Mb. p. 169-172, c P. 172. objects Worjhip of human Spirits. 3 objects of nature. But more than e- nough* was faid upon the fubjecl:, to render it impoflible for any man to doubt, whether I allowed, that the Hea- thens afTerted the divinity of nature and it's component parts. II. It was farther fhewn d , that, be- fides the deified parts and powers of na- ture, the Heathens acknowledged de- mons : a term, with whatever latitude 6 it may be fometimes ufed, yet, when de- mons are contradirHnguifhed (as they were by me on this occafion f ) from the natural or celeflial gods, always denotes thofe ful Baiter -n deities, who were fuppofed to carry on all intercourfe between the celeftial gods and men, and to have the entire adminiftration of the government of this lower world committed to them ; and who hereby became the objects of immediate dependence and divine wor- fhip. In this fenfe the term was large- * Seep. 231. *P. 174, e Letters to Worthington, p. 29. * Differt. on mir. p. 169, 174, 175. B 2 ' ly 4 General Prevalence of the ly explained in the Dinertation*. Im- mediately after giving this explication, I proceeded to controvert the opinion of thofe, who teach, " that the de- <c mons of the Heathens were fpirits of " a higher origin than the human race" 8 : and then inferred, from the reflections which had been offered, that, though the Heathens, and particularly fome of the latefl philofophers, fancied there was a higher 11 order of demons, yet that <c this " higher order of them is not fo fre- " quently fpoken of as is generally fup- " pofedj and that the common hypo- " thefis is built upon weak grounds 1 ." I then added, (what clearly mews how far I rejected that hypothecs,) " I mail now affign thofe reafons " which induce me to think, that, by " demons, (fuch, I mean, as were the " more immediate objects of the ejlablifhed <f wojfiip amongft the ancient nations, ' P. I74.I75- 8 P. 176. h P. 183, note f . See alfo note 1 in p. 204, 220. *P. 183. <c particularly Worjhip of hitman Spirits. 5 <e particularly the Egyptians, Greeks, " and Romans,) we are to underfland " beings of an earthly origin, or fuch tc departed human fouls as were believed " to become demons" k . This is the proportion which I under- took to eftablifh. Here it is of great importance to obferve, i . That there is nothing in this pro- pofition inconfiflent with allowing (what had been before proved) that the Hea- thens acknowledged and worfhipped ce- leftial or natural gods. For, the only fubjecl: of the proportion is demons, con- fidered as a diftincl order of deities from thofe ftiled natural - 3 and therefore the latter could not be included in it. Nay, the very defcription of demons as the more immediate objects of worfhip does k P. 183, 184. It isfcarce neceflary to obferve, that the fame human fpirits that were called demons, when diftinguimed from elementary and fidereal deities, as they are above; yet, on other occafions, are frequently cal- led gods. And fometimes they are diftinguimed from each other by the different denominations of sods t de- mons t and heroes, according to their different ranks. B 7 itfelf 6 General Prevalence of the itfelf imply, that there were ultimate ob- jects of it, who could be no other than thofe celeftial gods, whofe agents and minifters ' the former were fuppofed to be. Farther, 2. The preceding proportion has no relation to the gods held only by the phi- lofophers. The theiftic philofophers not only afTerted the divinity of the parts and powers of nature, but explained phyjical- fyj what was underftood literally or hijlo- rically by the people refpecling the gods. It may be allowed, that the philofophers entertained very juft notions of the true God ; and that they defcribed him and the natural gods by the term demon; (which is indeed fometimes ufed in a large fenfe as equivalent to a deity".) But all thefe gods are out of the queftion. The term demons is ufed in the propofi- tion in a reftrained fenfe, to exprefs the fubaltern deities, and was fo explained. Jt is limited to fuch demons as were the J Piflert, on mir. p. 174, 175. Letters to Worthington, p, 29, objects Worfbip of human Spirits. objefts of the eflabtified worfiip j or (as it is elfewhefe expreffed) of popular ado- ration" and public devotion* to whom a-^$ : K l /0* /$* facrifces were offered, ('while tbe , , ctleftial gods were worjhipped only with a' iffyf' pure mind) or with hymns and praifes**) 3. The truth of the foregoing propo- iition cannot be afFe6led by the peculiar ^ Y/>4-7 do6lrine of the philofophers concerning de~*' mons> when they apply the term to fpi- ^ , (tftiUtsT rits who were fuppofed to hold a rniddie^ '.' \ i -. .^ rank between the gods and men. It was admitted and proved in the Diflertation/ thatfome of the philofophers did afTert thfc cxiftence of demons of a celeftial origin, or of fuch as had never been men . Many- more proofs of the fame point might haVt been produced, had the occafion required them . But the opinion of the philofophief s concerning the exiftence of celeftial de- mons, even fuppofmg it to be true, cannot difprove the truth of the propofition un- der confideration, unlefs it can be (hewn, * P. 1 86. c P. 176. P Note h above. B 4 that 8 General Prevalence of the that thefe demons were the objefts of the national eftablifhed worfhip amongft the Heathens. Nothing can be plainer, than that the proportion only affirms, that the demons defcribed in it were beings of an earthly origin. Every objeftion therefore, that is drawn from what any of the ancients taught concerning de- mons that do not anfwer to that de- fcription, muft be foreign from the point q . 4. When the propofition fpeaks of fuch demons as were the more immedi- ate objects of the eftablifhed worfhip a- mongft the ancient nations j this can refpect only thofe nations in which feme demons or fubaltern deities, either celef- tial or terreftrial, were acknowledged. The propofition fuppofes this to be the cafe in feveral nations, and particularly fpecifies the Egyptians, Greeks, and Ro-. mans, but without excluding all other people. It is capable of being extended i Cpmpare what is faid concerning the philosophers, Piflert, p. 189, 190, to Worjhip of human Spirits. 9 to all who, befides the natural gods, worfhipped demons. Neverthelefs, 1 had a more efpecial re- ference to the nations that were in the moft civilized ftate, and to thofe whofe demons are fpoken of in Scripture. It was faid in exprefs terms', " that my <c main defign would be anfwered, if it cc could be (hewn, that the more imme- C diate objects of divine worfhip in the <c moft poll/he d heathen nations were deified " mortals," And that I had a peculiar view to the nations whofe demons are fpoken of in Scripture, appears from the declaration s , that my main defign was to explain andjujllfy the Scripture reprefenta- tion of the heathen deities ; from the title of the feclion in which this fubjecl: is handled, The Scripture reprefentation of the nature and claims of the heathen gods, conjidered^j from the words that intro- duce the feftion, and ftate the fubjecl: of it, 'The gods of the Heathens taken notice of in Scripture 1 ; and from the apology" made / Piffert. p. 1 8$. Ibid. P. 169. tt P. 231. for I o General Prevalence of the for the ioTig account given of them, it's importance to a jufi defence of the Scripture. The nations, to whofe gods the Scriptures refer, are thofe which bordered upon Judea, or in which Chriftian churches were planted ; and thefe were of all o- thers the moft improved in fcience. To thefe nations my views were con- fined, and from them my proofs were drawn. Nor can the propofition be ex- tended to the nations ftiled barbarous., if they worfhipped only the natural gods. To fuch nations thefe gods were not the ultimate, but the fole y objects of worfhip. And no one could be fo abfurd as to fet himfelf to prove, that thofe, who had no demons of any kind, worfhipped one particular fpecies of demons. It was ad- mitted 1 ', that, in the opinion of Plato, many (notwoft, as Mr. Fell* mifmterprets the original y ) of the Barbarians in his time w Id. p. 173, note f . * P. 9. > IIoX\oi TO,- &otetui. Platon. Cratyl. torn. i. p. 397* C. ed. Serrani, 1578. This language may import no more than that, amongft the barbarous people bordering upon Worjhip of human Spirits. \\ time held only the natural gods. It could not be my intention to include fuch Barbarians in the proportion. Let us now examine whether a late writer has given a juft account of this fubjec~t. He has twice referred to the preceding proportion, and cited a part of it, but with fuch alterations or omif- fions as effectually difguife it's true meaning. When he is oppofing my notion of the heathen gods, he omits the word demons f though thefe fubaltern gods were, as I have fhewn, the only fubjects of the propofition. And, when he is pro- ving that the Heathens had demons of a different- kind from thofe of human ex- tract, (a point admitted by me,) he fup- preffes a all the words in the propofition upon Greece, there were feveral tribes which ftill wor- ftupped only the elements and heavenly bodies. This was not true concerning the great nations in general; (as will be fhewn in the fcquel;) to thefe therefore Plato cannot refer. His expreffion implies, that the polifhed nations acknowledged other gods beiides the natural j and that fome at leaft of the barbarians did fo too. * Fell, p. 30. 8 Fell, p. 91. Comp. Diflert. onmir. p. 183. which 12 General Prevalence of the which were inferted to fhew, that it re- fpefted onlyfuch demons as were the more immediate objects of the ejlablijhed worfiip in certain nations. To point out the limi- tation of the propofition to thefe demons, the words that exprefs it were printed in Italics, as they are above*. Neverthelefs, his objections proceed on the falfe fuppo- fition, that the propofition was to be underftood univerfally of all demons. Befides mutilating the propofition un- der confideration, in a manner that mufl miflead his readers in the judgement they formed of it, and confequently of the main point in debate j the gentleman has placed another propofition before them, and left them to fuppofe it to be mine in it's moft unlimited fignifica- tion. " No opinion," he obferves , <c can be more erroneous than this, That " all the -pagan deities had once been men" In what part of the Dijfertation, this, or any fuch, afTertion is to be found, the gentleman has not informed his readers : " P. 4. c F eU, p. 30. i an Worfiip of human Spirits. 13 an omiflion with which he is often charge- able. He might poffibly have in view here (as he has elfe where) the place d in which it is affirmed, that the writers of the Old Teftament " very properly defcribed the < heathen gods as dead perfons i" and that they were " nothing more." e Bat it is at the very fame time obferved, " that the " writers of the Old Teftament knew, <f that the Heathens believed in elemen- " tary and (idereal deities -, " and that the reafon why they defcribed their gods as dead perfons was, " becaufe it was to " fuch that the public worfliip was more " immediately directed. " f Under this li- mitation, or with refpecl to thofe de- mons whom I had defcribed as the more immediate objects of public worfliip, I niuft be underftood as fpeaking, when, upon the authority of the facred writers (as will be fhewn hereafter) I reprefented d D inert, p. 197. Ib. note h . f I might have added, that thefe gods did in a great meafure ingrofs the public devotion. (See Diflert. p. 176.) the 1 4 General Prevalence of the the heathen gods as nothing more than dead perfons. What was fpoken pro- fefTedly concerning one clafs or order of gods, as contradiftinguifhed from ano- ther, could not, by fair reafoning, be applied to both. If any fuch general ex- preffions as that we have been exami- ning, occur in any other part of the DiiTertation j which (if ever) they very rarely do, and then only incidentally, they ought in all reafon to be limited ta the fubjects of the proportion,, in which I was profefledly ftating the point I meant to ertablifh ; efpecially as terms expreflive of this limitation are altnoll always ufed, in order to guard againft nrifrakes ; and frequent explicit acknow- ledgements are made of the Heathens af- ferting the divinity of the elements and heavenly bodies*. Could I conceive it poflible, that I fhoulci be charged (as I am in effecl) with affirming, that the following heathen gods, the fun, moon, and ftars, and the elements of fire, air, earth, and water, were nothing more than * See Diflert. p. 231-233. dead Worfiip of human Spirits. 1 5 dead men ? No one can fallen fuch an abfurdity upon me, but by explaining the Difiertation, as too many do the Scriptures, as if it was compofed of dif- tincl: independent fentences, that have no connexion with each other. Farther, Mr. Fell frequently makes an addition to my text, and inferts into it the word /z//, without any war- rant ; particularly in the following paf- fage : " Mr. Farmer would make us be- " lieve, that Herodotus meant to fay, " that the Greeks looked upon all their " gods to have been of the human " race." 8 I muft add, that, when he h fpeaks of " the fyftem which reprefents " all demons as nothing more than the " fpirits of departed men" 5 he manifeftly refers to me, though my fyftem neither makes, nor requires, fuch areprefentation. By the feveral methods here fpecified, and others of a fimilar nature, the gen- tleman conveys into the minds of his e Fell, p. 27, 28. Biflert. p. 186, 187. k Fell's introduction, p. xv. readers 1 6 General Prevalence of the readers a falfe impreffion of the main point I undertook to eftablifh. This impreffion is continually renewed and ri- vetted by the general ftrain of his rea- foning j which fuppofes that I meant to prove, " that all the heathen gods were " human fpirits"; and not merely (as was the real cafe) " that the demons of a " certain defcription were fuch." There are but few fo very dull of apprehenfion, as not to perceive the difference between thefe two proportions ; or to want to be informed, that arguments, which may overturn the former, cannot affecl the latter. This mifreprefentation of the point upon which the whole argument turns (had there been no other inftance of mifreprefentation to produce) might well juflify me in faying, that I fhould not have known againft whom Mr. Fell was writing, had he fupprefled my name. Neverthelefs, the gentleman fets out (in a manner well calcula- ted to prevent all fufpicion of unfair dealing) with fhewing of what impor- tance Worjhip of human Spirits. ij tance it is, that thofe who differ in their fentimentSy when they write one againft an- other, Jhould calmly and EXACTLY ftate the particular articles concerning which they differ* Why did not the gentleman fol- low this ufeful and necefTary rule ? But I will not animadvert upon his conduct ; only, injuflice to myfelf, mud obferve, that his mutilating rriy propo- fition j his fubftituting another in it's room, without taking any notice of it's necefTary limitation ; and his making ad- ditions to my text ; thefe feveral circum- ftances are a tacit confeflion, that fye could not fupport his account of my feri- timents by any fair conftruction of my language. If his mifreprefentations are mere miflakes, they are (in fome fenfe) fortunate miftakes for him j being ap- parently necefTary to give a colour to his reafonings, and to procure for himfelf the appearance of a victory over his op- ponent : for, had the fubjeft been truly 1 Fell's introduction, p. viii. ix. C ftated, 1 8 General Prevalence of the ftated, thefe ends could not have been anfwered 5 and his readers would have fmiled at the fatisf action and confidence, with which he urges objections foreign from the purpofe. Mr. Fell k begins with appealing to the ancient theogonies, particularly that of Hefiod, in order to prove, that the greateji part of thofe deities to whom the Heathens facrificed were by them confidered as exift- ing prior to the creation of man. An argu- ment of this fort from the theogonies was fuggefted by the learned and inge- nious author of Letters concerning Mytho- logy* univerfally afcribed to Dr. Black- well, * P. i. 1 P. 211, 21 2, 213. Whoever is defirous of feeing how clofely Mr. Fell copies Dr. Blackwell, may com- pare together the following paflages. In p. 212, the doftor fays, He/tod's theogony isfubftantially the fame with Orpheus' 's holy word, in which be (Orpheus) explained points of no left importance than the births of the gods, the creation of the world, and formation of man. Mr. Fell, p. 5, adopts his language j (with only fuch an alteration of it as mews his defire of concealing his obligation;) His (Hefiod's) theogony contains the fame plan with that *fcribedto Orpheus They (Hefiod, Orpheus, and others) 40 Worjhip of human Spirits. 19 Well, but employed by him to a more reafonable purpofe than by Mr. Fell. The former, if I underfland him a^ right, urges it only to prove, that the Heathens deified nature and it's va- rious parts and powers, and that thefe Were their primary gods. Both thefe proportions were admitted by me j and the former of them is capable of the cleared proof m . But the argument, as ftated and applied by Mr. Fell, is not only founded upon a bold, not to fay falfe, afTertion n ; but has no relation to C 2 the nil attempt to explain things of no lefs moment than the ori* 'ginal of their gods } the creation of the world, and the for- mation of man. m See above, p. 2. n Mr* Fell afferts, <l that the greateft part of thofe ' deities, to whom the Heathens facrificed, were by " them confidered as exifting prior to the creation of *' man." The number of the heathen gods was com- paratively fmall at firft ; but they increafed afterwards^ to fuch a degree, that the wretched Atlas could fcarce fupport the weight of fo many new divinities. ' Contentaque iidera paucis Numinibus miferum urgebant Atlanta minori Pondere. Juvenal. Sat. xiii. v. 47. The so General Prevalence of the the proper point in difpute. The quef- tion is not, whether the Heathens belie- ved in gods of an earlier origin than the human race j but, whether fuch demons as were the more immediate objects of the eftablifhed worfhip in certain na- tions were not dead men. Hefiod him- felf (to whom Mr. Fell appeals) fhall decide the controverfy : for, (as our great chronologer obferves, ) Hefiod p , defcribing the four ages of the gods and demigods of Greece, reprefents them to be four generations of men. I add, that Plato q had long before taken notice, that all thofe 'who die valiantly in war are of Heflod's golden generation^ and become de- The men of the golden age, who became demons, were thirty thoufand, Hefiod. Oper. et Dier. 1. i. v. 250. But thefe were nothing in comparifon with the vaft number of human fpirits which were worfhipped in dif- ferent parts of the world : for moft nations facrificed at the tombs of their anceftors, and to their domeftic gods. See Varro, concerning the dii manes t ap. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 8, c. 26. Sir If. Newton, Chron. p. 162. v Oper. et Dier. 1. i, v. 108. 1 De Rep. 1. 5, p. 469. Diflert. on mir. p, 191. inons j Worfhlp of human Spirits. 2 1 mons ; and that we ought for ever to ivor- fhip and adore their fepulchres as the fepul- chres of demons. But I do not propofe to examine all the objections of this gentleman by themfelves. Opportunities of a- nimadverting upon them will occur in the execution of my plan, with- out my going out of the way to meet them. My defign is to fhew at large, that human fpirits were generally wor- fhipped by the ancient Heathens, The proofs of this point either refpecl: parti- cular nations, or are of a more general nature, and equally refpect all the moft celebrated nations of antiquity. It is with the objects of worfhip in the latter that we are beft acquainted ; and to them all men more peculiarly refer, when they fpeak in general of the heathen gods. In the courfe of our argument it will be fhewn, that, in thefe nations, not only were dead men and women dei- fied, but that fuch deities were confidered C 3 as 2 2 General Prevalence of tie as their great eft gods, and even as the file objects of the eftablifhed worfhip, al- moll, if not altogether, without excep- tion. I mean, that it was to human gods that the eftablifhed worfhip was more immediately and properly directed, in all, or almoft all, cafes whatlbever. What reference it had to the deified parts or powers of nature will not come under confideration here. I fhall begin with laying before the reader thofe proofs of the worfhip of hu- man fpirits, amongfl the ancient Hea- thens, which refpect particular nations. The ancient gentile nations may be divi- ded into two clafTes, fuch as are ufually accounted barbarous, and fuch as were polijhed by learning. And I propofe to prove, by heathen teftimonies, that in moft of the former, and in all the latter, divine honours were paid to the dead. CHAP, Worfoip of human Spirits* 23 CHAP. I. Proving, from the teftimonies of the Heathens y that they paid religious honours to dead men in the na- tions Jlikd barbarous^ or that were in an uncivilized ft ate* ^TpHOUGH in treating, in a former publication, . of fuch heathen de- mons as were the objects of eftabliflied worfhip, I had no direct view to the bar- barous nations ; and though the propo- fition I then undertook to prove could have no refpect to fuch of them as did not acknowledge any demons'; yet a late opponent fancied he fhould refute me, if he could fhew that fome of thefe nations worfhipped only the natural gods. The attempt was not very judi- cious 5 what his fuccefs is, will be feen Above, p. 8-1 1. C 4 hereafter. ?4 Worjhip of human Spirits hereafter. I fhall firft of all examine, whether human fpirits were worfhipped in the barbarous nations taken notice of by Mr. Fell j and then inquire how far this was the cafe with thofe which he has omitted f SECT. I. Shewing y from the tejlimony of 'the Heathens ', that moft even of thofe barbarous nations , which have been faid to ivorjhip only the natural gods i paid divine honours to &" ceafed men. TN the eight barbarous nations that follow, the Scythians, the MafTage- tes, the Getes, the Goths, the Germans, the Perfians, the Arabians, and the in- habitants of Meroe, no deceafed heroes were worfhipped, according to a late writer. I. With refpecl: to the Scythians, we are told by Herodotus 1 , that the only gods cu Tr,v t in barbarous Nations. 25 gods whom they all worfhipped, were principally Vefta, called by them 'Tahiti ; then Jupiter and his wife Gee the earth, denominating the firft Papceus y the fe- cond Apia -, and after thefe Apollo and the celeftial Venus (called in their language Oetofyrus and Artimpafa)', and Hercules and Mars. The hiftorian adds, that the royal Scythians facrifice alfo to Neptune. Mr. FelP, copying after Dr. Black- well*, confiders Oetofyrus and Artimpafa as the names of the fun and moon j and explains Hercules and Mars by the powers pfivar. Though I feel the weight of Dr. Blackwell's authority, yet it cannot, I apprehend, be proved from Herodotus, that the Scythians worfhipped the parts and powers of nature exclufively of hu- man fpirits, or even that the latter were not the immediate objects of their wor- ihip. Moft of the Scythian gods (if not TST8?, KO,\ A^ea* ot x&Sai xau tu Uufft^ium Stso-j. x. T. X. Hexodot. 4- c. 59. P. 8. * Mythol. p. 274, 275. &6 Worfhip of human Spirits all) fpecified by Herodotus were wor- fhipped by the Greeks, and by them were confidered as human perfonages. Now, inafmuch as Herodotus, we may well fuppofe, calls the gods of Scythia by the names of the correfpondent deities of Greece ; if the latter were deified men and women, the former muft be fo like- wife. This general reafon will be con- firmed by a diftmcl examination of each particular deity. The Scythians chal- lenged Jupiter as the progenitor of their king, and Vefta, their principal deity, for their queen 1 : a plain proof that they con- fidered them as having reigned over them upon earth. Gee being the wife of Ju- piter, was certainly conceived to be of the fame nature with him ; and feems to anfwer to the Herthum of the Germans, the Cybele of the Phrygians, and the goddefs Gee fpoken of by Sanchonia- thon, who will be feverally confidered in * Indathyrfus, king of Scythia, fays, //.;> Aa TE tyu tou.^u TOK /* -cr^oyofoy, xa* Qtut (3*rtf.fnx,v t patVi s\,au. Herodot. I. 4. c. 127. the 'in barbarous Nations. 27 the fequel 7 . It will likewife be fhewn that the celeftial Venus of the eaftern na- tions was a native of earth : fuch there- fore muft have been Apollo*, who is joined with her. With both thefe the hiftorian joins Hercules and Mars ; which fhews they could not be gods of different or- ders. That Mars at leaft was worfhip- ped by the Scythians under a human character, appears from their dedicating to him images* as well as altars and tem- ples. And as to Neptune, it will not be difputed that he was no other than a deified man. He will be fpoken of in the fequel. I add, that Lucian b , who had full y Herthum in article V. of this fedlion ; Cybele in the fecond feftion, under article III. and Gee in the fecond chapter, article Pbenidans. z Though Apollo, phyfically explained, was the fun, yet hiftorically underftood he was a diftincl deity, as is flvewn in Schedius, De Diis German, p. 94.. * AyXf/.aT<* Xe xa* j3/x,a$ xat *;$, K. T- A. Herodot. 1. ^. c. 59. See what is faid below concerning the Mars of the Goths and other northern nations under article JV. and concerning Hercules under article V. in this feftion. b ScythafeuHofpes, Qper. v. i. p. 591, 592, et feq. ed. 2$ Worjhif of human Spirits full information concerning the Scythi- ans, exprefsly teftifies, that they raifed Zamolxis, their ancient legiflator, and other illuftrious men into the rank of gods. II. <c TheMaffagtfesi their neigbours," fays Mr. Fell 6 , in agreement with Dr. Blackwell, u adored no gods but the fe fun." The MafTagetes were fava- ges upon the borders of the Cafpian fea d ; and there is no more reference to their gods in the DifTertation, than to thofe of the inhabitants of Otaheite. I cannot however help making the following ob- fervations. Herodotus 6 , who is the only author referred to by Dr. Blackwell, and after him by Mr. Fell, in proof of their a fertion, fpoke from report only. And it is generally allowed, that this hifto- rian, however faithful he may be in re- ed. Amftel. 1687. See alfo v. 2. p. 713. et Tertullian. de Anima, c. 2. c P. 8, 9. Compare Blackwell's Myth. p. 275. * Herodot. lib. i. c. 201, 204. e jUb. i, c. 216. lating in barbarous Nations. ig lating facts which came within his own knowledge, gave too eafy credit to what was reported to him by others : which renders his teftimony doubtful in the cafe before us. Befides, the MafTagetes might be faid to worfhip only the fun, in contradiftinction to the other celeftial luminaries, and not to mortal gods. Or the hiftorian might only mean, that the fun was eminently the object of their de- votion j in which fenfe, as we {hall fee, fimilar language was ufed concerning the Perfians. It is remarkable, that we find the MafTagetes fwearing by the fun un- der the character of their fovereign ( . It was an opinion propagated in the rude ages of the world, that the fouls of emi- nent perfons became celeftial luminaries. And thefe Barbarians might be led to be- lieve, that the fun was the foul of the firft founder and fovereign of their nati- on ; or, at leaft, that it was inhabited by fome beneficent patron who was ap- f HA*o i*oxjrvJt TO Toy MccpffcttTfut &VVOTM. Herodot. pointed 3 O Worfiip of human Spirits pointed to rule in it for their peculiar benefit. That they did not in any view whatever worfhip human fpirits, will fcarce appear credible to thofe who con- fider, that the Maflagetes were a part of the Celtes e , amongft whom this wor- fhip prevailed* If they were a tribe 1 of Scythians, as fome affirmed 11 , their patron-deity was Zamolxis. But thefe circumftances are urged rather as conjectures, than as decifive proofs 3 and it may be doubted, whether the peo- ple, of whom we are fpeaking, were worfhippers of dead men. Hitherto we have feen Mr. Fell copy- ing Dr. Blackwell j but, under the next article, he appears to me under the cha* rafter of a writer truly original. III. " The Getes," fays Mr. Fell 1 , <c efteemed the heavens to be the only " deity." In fupport of this afTertion, he makes a general reference to the Clio Seebelo^Sea. H. h Herodot. 1; i. c. 201. 'P. 9. of 'in barbarous Nations* % I of Herodotus, but without informing his readers in what particular chapter, or in what page, of that book he found it; though this, furely, would have been as eafy as to direct his readers to the very line k in Hefiod in which his ci- tations from him may be found. I have lately read over the whole hif-> tory of Herodotus ; and think I can affirm, with certainty, that there is no fuch paflage, in any part of this hifto- rian, as that which Mr. Fell quotes as his. That there can be no fuch paflage in him as that in queflion, is capable of very clear proof. The Getes were a part of the Thracians ! . Now, the latter, as will be fhewn in the fequel, did cer- tainly worfhip Zamolxis ; and therefore very probably the former did fo too. But, what is more material, and indeed quite decilive, it appears from Herodo- tus himfelf, to whom Mr. Fell appeals, k Fell, p. i, 2, 3, notes % b , c , *, e , f . J Herodot. 1. 4, c. 93. that 32 Worjhlp of human Spirits that the Getes propitiated m the god Za- molxis ; and, in time of thunder and lightning, threatened this deity, believing there was no other god but theirs ". Many other Greek writers, of the firft reputation, contradict Mr. Fell's afTer- tion, that the Getes efteemed the hea- vens to be the only deity. When Plato introduces a Thracian averting the di- vinity of their king Zamolxis, he is fuppofed to refer to the Getes, as well as to the other inhabitants of Thrace. Strabo p , in more places than one, fpeaks of Zamolxis the Pythagorean as a deity* and one acknowledged as fuch by the Getes. Lucian q makes mention of him ii>ai. Herodot. 1. 4. C. 94. n AwsiXsao'j ru SEW, ufarot aXAov Stoy VQp.iprrt$ uvau ti ^ FOIf (7^STgOK. Id. IB. * Zauc/?.;s \eyti, o r/^cETS^oj /3a(7tXtf{, $oj uv. Platon. CKarmid. p. 157, torn. 2. ed. H. Stephan. p, 276, ed. Ficini. P ZatyioX!*; Traga & TO; TsTatj w*o/xa^sto Seoj. L. 7. c. 457. See alfop.466, 1106, ed. Amftel. 9 Deor. Concil. Oper. torn. 2. p. 713. ed. AmfleL See below, near the end of the next fedtion, where the Thracians are fpoken of. as hi barbarous Nations. 33 as having rifen from the condition of a flave to divine honours. Diogenes La- ertiuS expreflly refers to the hiftory of Herodotus when he fays, that Pythago- ras had a flave named Zamolxis, to whom the Gefes facrifice \ And Jamblichus, in his life of Pythagoras, affirms, that the Getes regarded Zamolxis as the great eft of the gods ' s . I do not know that thefe teftimonies are contradicted by a fingle perfon, whe- ther ancient or modern, Mr. Fell alone excepted. But, notwithstanding feveral unfavourable appearances, and the li- berties he takes on other occcafions*, he may be able to clear himfelf from all fufpicion of having had recourfe to invention, in order to fupply his want of testimonies. As that is a matter that mufl be left to himfelf, I Diogen. Laert. Vit. Pythagor. 1. 8, fegm. 2. * Msytro? rut Sfwv tri wag' VTO{. Jamblich. .30. . * See above, p, 11-17. D {hall 34 Worfhip of human Spirits fhall only obferve, that, had he had any knowledge of the fentiments of Herodo- tus, and the other Greek writers, con- cerning the gods of the Getes, prudence, at leaft, would have reftrained him from afTerting a fa<5l> that was contradicted by all antiquity, and even by that very hif- torian to whom he appealed for it's fup- port. Mr. Fell, after fpeaking of the Getes, adds, IV. " The fame objects of religious < worfhip parTed from the ancient Scy- " thians to the Goths"*. With refpecl: to thefe people, our author has given us no authority but his own; the weight of which we need not now examine. Had he not been as entirely unacquainted with the Goths as with the Getes, he would have known there was as little reafon to rank the former, as (I have fhewn there was) the latter, amongfl the nations which worfhipped only the natural gods. A few extracts from Olaus Magnus* (him- u Fell, p. 9. w I refer to his Hifloria de Gentibus feptentrionali- bus, publifhed at Rome, 1555. in barbarous Nations. 3 5 felf a Goth, and archbifhop of Upfal) will ferve to prove, that the inhabitants of the northern countries in general, while they continued Heathens, wor- fhipped dead men. From this writer we learn, that many of thefe nations burnt their kings and princes, after their death, that they might become gods, or be ranked a- mongft the gods x . He farther informs us, that the three greater gods of the Goths were T#0r, Friga y and Odhen 7 . The laft of thefe, Odhen> was certainly of human extract ; for Olaus fays of him, that, while living, he was ac- knowledged as a god by all Europe, on account of his fuperiority in the art of war ; which, it was thought, gave rife to the opinion of the Goths, that Mars, whom antiquity confidered as the god of * Regfes ac principes fuos fatis exutos, ut vel dii fie^ rent, vel inter deos eveherentur, combuflerunt. Lib. 3, c.i, p. 97. f Vide c. 3, de tribus diis majoribus Gothorum. D 2 war, 5 6 Worjhip of human Spirits war, was born amongft them 2 . This god was appeafed by the Goths with the blood of their captive enemies' 1 . As to 7/for, the moft mighty, the prefident of the air, where he thunders", he feems to an- fwer to the Roman Jupiter c j and was z In page i oo, he fays, concerning Odhen, Quia vi- vus tot a Europa divihitatis titulum, quod nulli in arte militari cederet, afTecutus fuiffet ; hinc evenifle creditur, ut Gothi Martem, quern deum belli putavit anti- quitas, apud fe dicerent progenitum. * Jornandes (de rebus Goticis, cap. 5.) affirms, that the Goths Martem Temper afperrima placavere cul- tura. Nam vi&ima; ejus mortes fuere captivorum. This is confirmed by other writers. b Grotius (in his Proleg. Hift. Gott. et' Vandal, p. 21.) fays, Veteres Germani Deum cceli non alio no- mine quam 'Thorn vocarunt, quod eft tonans nunc etiam Danis. Michaelis (on the Influence of opinions on lan- guage, p. 19.) informs us, that, in fome of the pro- vinces of Germany, the peafantsj when it thunders, fay, The good old man is pajffing along the air. Did they not derive this language from their pagan anceftors, though they now apply it to God ? I take notice of thefe circumltances in this place, becaufe the Goths worlhipped nearly the fame gods as the Germans. c Thor, inquiunt, praefidet in acre ; qui tonitrua, et fulmina, ventos, imbrefque, ferena, et fruges, guber- nat., Thor cum fceptro Jovem exprimere videtur. M. Adamus Bremenfis de Sueonibus. confidered in barbarous Nations. 37 confidered as having once been a mortal man : for Olans fpeaks of fome who were thought to be the fons of Thor or Odhen. The defcription given of Frigga agrees with that of Venus ; but what reafon can be affigned, why a woman might not as well be confidered as the gcddefs of love, as a man be regarded as the god of war ? With refpeft to the leffer deities of the Goths and all the northern provinces, Methotin y Froe, Rofthicphus Finnonicns y they are reprefented by Glaus as men who had been eminent in their time, but afterwards became gods, or companions of the gods d , and were honoured with religious worfhip". It is needlefs to ob- ferve, that many others were thought worthy of divine honours. But I mull not omit to take notice, that there was a very magnificent temple of the northern gods near the river Sala, where Upfal . d Eofque deos, vel deorum complices, autumantes, Olaus, 9.4. p. iqi. * Id. ubi fupra, et c. 7. p. 106. P 3 now 38 Worjhip of human Spirits now {lands, famous even from the time of Ninus f . Thefe extracts from Olaus (which are in a great meafure confirmed by the learned authors g of the Ancient Univerfal Hiftory) ferve to {hew what gods were really worfhipped by the Goths, as well as to detect the falfehood of the account given of them by, Mr. Fell. With the Goths the gentleman joins V. The barbarous Germans h . If the barbarous Germans had, as our author's language h implies, the fame ob- jects of religious worftrip with the an-, cient Scythians and Goths, the former s Olaus, c. 6. p. 104. * t( The religion of the Goths feejns to have *' been the fame with that of the ancient inhabitants of *' Scandinavia and Saxony," " whofe chief gods " were the fun, the moon, the celebrated Woden, his *' fon Thor, (who prefides over the air,) his wife " Frigga or Fraea, Tuifto, Theutates, Hefus, Thara-. ' mis," &c. Ancient Univ. Hill, v. 19. p, 265, 177, 8vo. ed. 1748, h " The fame obje&s of religious worfhip pafled from *' the ancient Scythians to the Goths and barbarous f? Germans," Fell, p. 3. in barbarous Nations. 39 muft have been worfhippers of dead men ; becatife we have fhewn that fuch were both the latter. And, on the other hand, if it can be proved that the Germans dei- fied their heroes, this will confirm what has been advanced concerning the gods of the Goths and Scythians. Indeed, if it can be proved, concerning any one of thefe three nations, that human fpi- rits were worfhipped in it, the fame muft be true concerning the other two, provided they had all the fame objefts of religious worfhip. I allow, that, according to Caefar, as he is commonly understood, the Germans owned no other gods but the fun, VuU can, and the moon 1 . But Caefar, though well acquainted with the Gauls, whom he fubdued after a ten years' war, had very little knowledge of the Germans ; nor has he mentioned their religion, but * Deorum numero eos folos ducunt, quos cernunt, et quorum opibus aperte juvantur, Solem, et Vulcanum, et Lunam : reliquos ne fama quidcm acceperunt, Ca;far> & Bell. Gall. 1. 6, c. 20. DA i in 4O Worfoip of human Spirits in the moft tranfient manner. And he might imagine, as many others hav^ done, that the Germans did not worfhip the fpirits of deceafed men, becaufe (as we learn from Tacitus) they thought it unbecoming the majefty of the gods to be confined within temples, or reprefented under human forms k . The inference, however, isnotjuft: for, if we believe, upon the authority of Tacitus, that the Germans had neither temples, nor ima- ges in human form ; we muft, upon the fame authority, believe, that they wor- fhipped the fpirits of deceafed men ; as will be foon fhewn. Similar inftances will occur in the fequel. The firft accounts, given of the reli- gion of foreign countries, are often im- perfect and erroneous 5 but thefe ac- counts are generally corrected by farther enquiries, and a more improved ac- quaintance with the languages and cuf- k Nee cohibere parietibus deos, neque in ullam hu- mani oris fpeciem affimulare, ex magnitudine coeleftiuin Tacitus, de Mor. German, c. 9. toms in barbarous Nations. 41 toms of the people. How often were we told, that the honours, paid by the Chinefe to Confucius and their ancef- tors, were of a civil, rather than of a reli- gious, nature ? Neverthelefs it appear- ed, after the ftrifteft examination into the matter, that the worfhip paid to the fouls of their anceftors is idolatrous; and that the ceremonies ufed in honour of Con- fucius are the very fame with thofe per- formed in the worfhip of the celeflial and terreftrial fpirits of the Chinefe 1 . Thus (I apprehend) it is in the cafe before us : the defective m and (perhaps) erroneous view of the German gods,, ex- 1 See Moiheim's Ecclefiaftical Hift. v. 2. p. 298-300. qto. and his Memoirs of the Chriftian Church in China. m Caefar has omitted Jupiter, who neverthelefs was worfhipped by the Germans, under the German-Celtic denomination of Tbor, Thur, or Thunder. See the Rev. ;md learned Mr. Whitaker's Hift. of Manchefter, v. 2. P' 359- The name was originally Thoran, Thorn ; but the was omitted in the pronunciation. Id. ib. He was the Tharamis, or Taranis, who will be fpoken of under the article, Gauls. He was certainly a Celtic deity, hibited 42 Worjhip of human Spirits hibited by Caefar, is fuppiied or correU ed by the fuller information of Tacitus, who had thoroughly fludied their reli- gion, and has given a very particular ac- count of the objects of their worfhip ; both of thofe common to feveral nations of Germany, and thofe peculiar to each of them. According to this very accu- rate writer, the Germans worfhipped the fouls of dead men, and Hercules in par- ticular, whom, when they went to bat- tle, they extolled in their fongs above all other heroes" ; and they appealed him and Mars with the animals nfually allowed f or fa- crifice*. From the manner in which Mars is joined with Hercules, there can be no ground to doubt, but that the for- ( mer was of no higher an original than the latter. It is juft the fame thing as if the hiftorian had faid, though both had been men, both were raifed to the n Fuifle apud eos et Herculem memorant, primum- que omnium virorum fortium ituri in pralia canunt. Tacit, de Mor. Germ. c. 2. Herculem ac Martem conceflis animalibus placant. Jd. c. 9. Concerning Hercules, fee c, $4.. rank in barbarous Nations. 43 rank of gods, and worfhipped with the fame 'rites. And indeed who could the Mars of the Germans be, but the fame valiant hero and god of war who was worfhipped over all Europe* ? Several of the other German deities, mentioned by Tacitus, were alfo of hu- man extract. Such were (to fay nothing of Mercury q ) Tni/lo, a god fprung from the earth t (that is, the firil man', as they accounted him,) and his fon, Mannus ; the perfons from whom they were defcended> P Above, p. 36, note z . i Mercury will be fpoken of when we come to conli- der the cafe of the Gauls. r According to Tacitus, (Mor. Germ. c. 2.) the Germans were the original natives of their country, and neither derived from, nor mixed with, other people. They muft therefore have confidered Tuifto as the firil man. Ere&heus, an ancient king of Athens, to whom a temple was dedicated, was alfo faid to be born of the earth, (Herodot. 1. 8. c. 55.) and many others. Al- moft every nation pretended to be of equal duration with the earth itfelf. See Potter's Antiq. b. i. c. i. Compare Dr. Borlafe'$ Antiquities of Cornwall, b. i. **> . end 44 Worjhlp of human Spirits and the founders of the nation*. To thefe we may probably add Hertbum, that is, mother-earth, or the goddefs that prefi- ded over it, who was worfhipped by fe- veral people of Germany. She is defcri- bed as a goddefs who vifits countries, and is fometimes drawn about in a chariot, and afterwards wafhed and purified, together with her holy vehicle, in a fecret lake 1 . As tolfis, Caftor and Pollux, Velleda, and many more", it is impoflible to doubt of their being of human origin. Nor is there anyjuft reafon toconclude, that the Germans introduced a new fpe- cies of worfhip in the interval of time between Caefar and Tacitus. For the latter tells us, that their deifying Villeda and other women, in whom a fpirit of di- vination was thought to dwell, was a- 8 Celebrant Tuiftonem deum, terra editum, et filium Mannum, originem gentis, conditorefque. Tacit. Mor. Germ. c. 2. Communis opinio et fama eft, ho- mines terra prognatos, &c. Polyhiftor & Abydenus, as cited by Schedius de Diis Germ. p. 278. * Id. c. 40. C. 8, 9, 43. greeable in barbarous Nations. 45 greeable to the ancient ufage of the Ger- mans" ; not founded upon flattery, nor upon a notion that they could make dei- ties by performing certain rites of confe- cration, (which, as he infmuates, was the cafe among the Romans,) but upon a real belief that fuch women parti- cipated a divine quality*. The account given of the German gods by Tacitus is more authentic than Caefar's, and has been fo deemed by learned men y . But after all, there is perhaps no contradic- tion between thefe illuftrious writers. Caefar was too well acquainted with the genius of paganifm, to deny that the Germans worfhipped the heroes of their w Vetere apud Germanos more, quo plerafque faemi- narum fatidicas, et augefcente fuperftitione arbitrentitr deas. Tacit. Hift. 1. 4. c. 61. See what the fame author fays concerning Velleda, de Mor. Germ. c. 8. In the fame place he tells us, Olim Auriniam et com- plures alias venerati funt, non adulatione, nee tanquam facerent deas. x Inefle quinetiam fanftum aliquid et providum pu- tant. Id. ib. y See Tacit. Mor. Germ, c. 9. ed. Gronov. torn. 2. p. 602. own 46 Worfhip of human Spirits own country. Nor does his language import fuch a denial. He is fpeaking only of the gods acknowledged by the Germans in general, of fuch of their gods as they held in common with the Romans and other nations. For, after faying that the Germans owned no other gods but the fun, Vulcan, and the moon, he adds, of the reft they have ?iot Jo much as heard-^ that is, the reft of the gods generally worfhipped in other coun-* tries. On this natural fuppofitionj Cas- far had no view to the gods peculiar to the Germans in general, or to any parti- cular tribes of that people. But it is on thefe that Tacitus has enlarged. If we put the accounts of both thefe writers together, the Germans, like the northern nations, had gods both natural and mortal*. Let us proceed to confider, 2 See what is faid abbve, p. 38, note * s con- cerning the northern nations. Had Caefar thought that the Germans worshipped only the natural gods, he would have ufed the word/rf, inftead of Vulcan* VI. 'in barbarous Nations. 4^ VI. The cafe of the Perfiajis, to which t)r. Blackweir appeals, and after him iMr.FelP. The account given of the religion of the Periians by Herodotus is as follows: cc They do not erect either ftatues, or tc temples, or altars 5 and charge with cc extreme folly thofe who do. What I " take to be their reafon is, that they do e< not believe, like the Greeks, that the " gods are of the race qfmen c . They af- " cend the fummits of the mountains <c when they facrifice to Jupiter, by " which name they call the whole circum- " ference of heaven. They facrifice alfo " to the fun and moon, and to the earth, fc and to fire, water, and winds : and to " thefe alone they facrifice from the be- " ginning. But they have learnt from " the Aflyrians and Arabians to facrifice a Mythol. p. 272. c This meaning of the original word, et&tuitnqivtecs, will be vindicated in the next chapter, when confidering the gods of the Greeks. " alfo 48 Worjhip of human Spirits " alfo to Urania, or Venus, who by the " AfTyrians is called Mylitta, by the A- <c rabians Alitta, and by the Perfians " Mitra d . In juftice to the great fagacity of Mr. Fell, I mufl take notice, that he is plea- fed to fay e , " that I carefully omit the <c account which Herodotus has given " concerning the Perfian objects of wor- " fhip, becaufe that is a flat contradic- " tion to my repeated afTertions." The Perfians being a barbarous f nation in the ?&M xi TOUT* wo*t; OT ax #fc>7To^t;af evo va. O ^e <tyAacrt An agtuv a-vot.fttzu/ovTe<;> &uo - a? Ej^iVj TOC xuxXoi/ Traitroc. T& ov- Aia XAEOTSJ* St/atrt SE )7vfw TE xat traX^m, xai yj xos; x voetTt T.OH a.vt[Aow' Taroicrt //.EC 01: ^am i7i JE xcu TJ Ovgtsttuti S'fEU/, Traga xat AgajStwv' xa^ESirt ^E Ayav^cn TW A^go^i77> My Aga^tot SE, ATurla' ng<rt ^E, Mir^ay. Herodot. 1. I. .131. P. 7- f Herodotus perpetually ftiles them Barlarlaqt ; and the account he gives of them mews that they deferved the title, for a better reafon than their not being Gre- cians. age in barbarous Nations. 49 age of Herodotus, and there being no peculiar reference to their gods in Scrip- ture', they could not be included in my proportion ftated above h ; efpecially if it be true, that they had no demons, or fubaltern deities, of any kind; which they could not have, if, as Mr. Fell con- tends, they worfhipped only the natural gods. The account given of the gods of Perfia by Herodotus has not even the appearance of being a contradiction to my afTertions concerning thofe demons, who were the more immediate objects of public worfhip in other countries ; and whom I affirmed to be human fpi- rits : and confequently I could not be under any fuch temptation, as our author fuppofes, to omit that account. The fact is, that V cited as much of Herodotus as belonged to the fubject upon which I was fpeaking j and even that very part t The doftrine of the two principles alluded to i>y Ifaiah was not peculiar to the Perfians. "P. 4. * Difllrf. p. 186, 187. E of 50 Worfhlp of human Spirits of him which afferts, that the Perfians did not believe that the gods are of the race of men ; which is the only circumftance on which the pretence of a contradic- tion could be founded. Without taking at prefent any farther notice of an au- thor, who always lofes fight of the pro- per point in difpute, and who does not feem to have attended to the wide diffe- rence there is between traducing an op- ponent and confuting him, I proceed to examine the Perfian objects of worfhip, and the account given of them by Hero- dotus and other writers. There is no fubject on which learned men are more divided in their opinion than this ; and therefore I will conlider it at large. Let us diftinclly inquire, whether the ancient Perfians were idola*- ters ; and, if they were, whether they worfliipped any but the natural gods. Firft let us inquire whether the an- cient Perfians were idolaters. If we can rely on the authorities produced by Dr. Hyde, in his very learned treatife on the religion in barbarous Nations. 51 religion of the ancient Periians, it was at firft derived from Abraham, after- wards reformed by Zoroafter, and con- fifted in the fole worfhip of the one true God. To this reformation Sir Ifaac Newton k refers, when he fays, " The " various religions of the feveral na- " tions of Perfia, which confifled in " the worfhip of their ancient kings, <c were abolifhed, and the worfhip of one " God, at altars, without temples, fet " up in all Perfia, in the reign of Da- <c rius the fon of Hyflafpes, by the in- " fluence of Hyflafpes and Zoroafler > <c but in a fhort time afterwards the " Perfians worfliipped the fun, and the " fire, and dead men, and images, as ce the Egyptians, Phenicians, and Chal- " deans, had done before." Now, ac- cording to this hypothecs, the Perfians are to beconfidered as the worfliippers of hu- man fpirits in all the early ages of the world, excepting the interval between k Shore Chronicle, p. 40. Clironol. p. 352. E 2 the 52 Worjhip of human Spirits the reformation of their religion in the reign of Darius, and their fubfequent relapfe into idolatry j a period too fhort to be taken into account. But it has long been fufpecled, by writers of the firfl repuation 1 , that the Arabian and Periian authors, from whom Dr. Hyde draws his proofs, are too modern to difcover to us the religion of the old Perfians. And a gentleman well verfed in oriental learning" has more lately allured the world, <e that " the genuine works of Zoroafter are " loft; that the pretended fragments " of them, which Dr. Hyde has given " us under the title of S adder y are the " rhymes of a modern prieil who lived " about three centuries ago"; that no " books now exift in the ancient dialect <c of Perfia ; that the Arabian conquefts " proved a radical fubverfion of the Per- 1 Bafnage's Hift. of the Jews, b. iv. ch. 12. $. 13. m Richardfon, in his Difiertation on the languages, literature, and manners, of the eailern nations, 2d d. 3 P. 12, 25, 26. "P. 13. " fian in barbarous Nations. 53 cc fian religion 1 * as well as government ; <c and that the principal hiftorians of Per- " fia, now known in Europe, are all fub- " fequent to the Mohammedan aera" q . I muft add, that a gentleman, whofefmal- left praife it is to be the beft linguift of the age, and whofe fludies were for fome years directed to the improvement of eaft- ern literature 1 ", entertains the fame opi- nion of the authorities upon which Dr. Hyde grounds his fyflem as the ingenious writer laft referred to. As Dr. Hyde's witnefTes are very ex- ceptionable, fo the facts they atteft are highly improbable. The learned Dr. P P. 21, 22. * P. 42- r I need not fay, that I here refer to W. Jones, Efq. This gentleman did me the honour to fend me a letter, which he publifhed in the French language, in the year 1771, and which is now out of print ; wherein he mews that all the works afcribed to Zoroafter are fpurious. As to the Sadder, he fays, p. 28, Tous les etudians de la literature orientale favaient deja que les miferables poe'mes appelles Saddar et Ai'divirnf Nama etaient ecrits en langue Perfanne moderne, et feulement en carafteres ancicns. E 3 Prideaux, 54 Worjklp of human Spirits Prideaux', though he follows our au- thor in feveral particulars, yet, when fpeaking of Zoroafter's prophecies of Chrift, fays, " All this feems to be ta- f ken out of the legendary writings of the " eaftern Chriftians." Many other things related by Dr. Hyde feem to be extracted from fome writings equally le- gendary. Is it probable, that Abraham was fent by God to the Perfians, to deliver to them a fyftem of religion * ? Is it credi- ble, that this religion, after it was cor- rupted, was reftored by Zoroafter, and preferved in it's purity, for a fucceflion of ages, by a barbarous people ; though a long feries of ftupendous miracles could fcarce prevent the fundamental principle of it from being loft among the depen- dents of the pious patriarch ? There is a farther objection againfl Dr. Hyde's account of the Perfian reli- gion, viz. it's being contradicted by the teftimony of the Greek and Roman wri- * Connexion, v. i. p. 329, 330. 8vo. 1 Hyde, ch. 2. p. 28. ters j in barbarous Nations. 55 ters; many of whom vifited Perfia at the very time when that religion flourifhed, and who had certainly the befl opportu- nities of information. This was the cafe as to Herodotus and Xenophon in particular. They were withal inquifi- tive and candid, and under no tempta- tion to give a falfe account of the Perfian objects of worfhip. Befides, as after the reign of Xerxes there was a greater in- tercourfe between the Greeks and Per- fians than there had been, before , they could not have delivered to their coun- trymen a falfe account of the Perfian gods without being detected and expo- fed. I muft add, that their account of them is much more probable in it's own nature, I mean much more agreea- ble to what we know with certainty con- cerning the other heathen nations, and thofe in particular with which the Per- fians were connected, than that given by Dr. Hyde upon the authority of late writers. Plutarch. Vit. Themiftoclr, p. 126. E 4 For 56 Worjhip of human Spirits For the feveral foregoing reafons, I cannot but give the preference on this occafion to the teftimony of the former, ef- pecially as it is in a great degree confirmed by the latter. The Greek and Roman wri- ters tell us, that the Perlians worfhipped the fun w . And is not this in a great mea- fure admitted by thofe very authorities which are cited by Dr. Hyde to prove the contrary ? It is faid w , indeed, that the wor- fhip paid to the fun in Perfia was only of a civil, not of a religious , nature. But did the common people underftand theprecife difference between thefe two kinds of wor- fhip ? Or would they honour with prof- trations, falutations, and incenfe x , what in their conception had no power to in- terpofe for their benefit ? The diflinc- tion between civil and religious worfhip is probably made in this cafe, as we know it is in others 7 , merely to avoid v See Hyde, c. 4, x And with libations and facriiices, according to the Greeks. Hyde, p. 120. ed. 1700. 7 By the Indians, (as will be ftewn near the end of the zd fcftion,) and by the Chinefe. the in barbarous Nations. 57 thje odium of idolatry. The remains of the ancient Perfians, in different parts of the eaft, are under peculiar tempta- tions to reprefent their worfhip as confif- tent with the divine unity ; becaufe they live amongft the Mohammedans, who, though indulgent to all other religions, deteft and perfecute idolaters and the worfhippers of fire 2 . I fee no ground to doubt, but that the ancient Perfians (as well as others) did worfliip this element, and the fun as its chief receptacle; which feems to be intimated in the very plea fome have made for them, viz. that they worfhip the fun only as the habitation of the Deity. This, however, is no bet- ter an excufe than what the ancient philo- fophers made for that grofleft fpecies of i- dolatry, the paying religious honours to brute animals. It is evident that, in z Les Mahometans, tolerans pour toutes les autres religions, font intolerans pour les idolatres et les adora- teurs du feu ; et, fi quclques families de ces malheureux trouverent le moVen de fe retirer dans 1'Inde, ils ne parent conferver que quelques traditions imparfaites au fujet de leurs anciennes loix. Jones's Letter, p, 46. both 5 8 Worjkip of human Spirits both cafes alike, the worfhip would ter- minate in its more immediate objects. Hence many Chriftians chofe to fuffer the moft extreme punifhment rather than join with the Perfians in their adoration of the fun a . And if others, after ha- ving embraced the Gofpel, continued to practife fome of thofe rites, in honour of this celeftial luminary b , to which they had been long accuftomed, this might proceed from their defire of avoiding perfecution, or from the flrength and inveteracy of their former prejudices. Like caufes produced fimilar effects up- on the firft Chriftian converts ; fome of whom were not eafily got off from their fuperftitious reverence for i- dols c ; and others obferved the law of Mofes, either to avoid the difpleafure of the unbelieving Jews, or from a per- a Saporis juflu Simeon cum multis aliis, quod folem adorare recufaflent, ultimo fupplicio adfedti. Sozom. II. 8, 9, 12. Hyde, p. 110. b See Hyde, p. 109. c i Cor. viii. 7. fuafion in barbarous Nations. g fuafion of it's obligation. Here, in Bri- tain, a learned antiquary* 1 informs us, that, after Chriftianity took place, many continued to worfhip confecrated jftones, their former idols. Nay, the fondnefs for human victims remained for a confi- derable time amongfl fome who had em- braced the faith of ChrhV. Having affigned the reafons which in- duce me to think that the ancient Per- fians were idolaters, I 'proceed to exa- mine, in the fecond place, whether they worfhipped only the natural gods. He- rodotus, in the foregoing extracY from him, has been thought to affirm that they had no other gods but thefe. It may, however, be worth while to in- quire, whether, notwithstanding what is advanced by this hiftorian, the Per- fians might not worfhip human fpirits al- d Borlafe, Ant. of Cornwall, p. 162. e Francos, etfi Chriftum jam colerent, humanis ta- men ad fuum aevum hoftiis ufos. Procopius, 1. 2. de Bell. Goth. Lipfii not. in Tacit, de Mor. Germ. c. 9. Borlafe, p. 154. f P-*7- fol 60 Worfhip of human Spirits fo ; and whether there be any evidence that they did worfhip them. I will en- deavour to fhew, I. That the Perfians might worfhip human fpirits, notwithstanding what is contained in the foregoing extract from Herodotus. It was not the defign of this hiftorian to give a full account of the re- ligion of the Perlians, but principally to point out fome remarkable particu- lars in which it differed from that of Greece. When he fpeaks of their rites ofworfhip*) he fcarce touches on any but the mofl fmgular of them : and fo far is he from enumerating all their gods, that he has made no mention of Arimanius, who was certainly worfhipped by Xer- xes h . The Perfians therefore might have both many rites, and many objects, of worfhip, which it did not fall within the defign of Herodotus to mention in the comparative view which he has here given of their religion. B L. '. c. 132. b Plutarch. Vit. Themifloc. p. 126. A. He in barbarous Nations. 61 He begins with taking notice of a very Ariking difference between the religions of the Perfians and the Greeks ; the for- mer, contrary to the principles and practice of the latter, having no ftatues, temples, or altars, and condemning thofe who had. In order to account for this difference, he fays, be apprehended the reafon of it to be, that the Perfians did not believe, as the Greeks did, that the gods were of human defcent. This he mentions only as his own private opinion, and with fome degree of hefitation ; knowing, it may be prefumed, that the Germans h and others had neither temples nor fla- tues, though they worfhipped human fpirits. But it is more to our prefent purpofe to obferve, that the gods of Greece, here fpoken of, are not the he- roes and demons ! of that country, but h Above, p. 40. * See above, p. 5, note k . Heroes and demons are fometimes diftinguiflied from jWi, even when the latter, no left than the former, were fuppofci to hare been men. men 62 Worfoip of human Spirits men to whom the title of gods belonged eminently and by way of diftinftion ; to whom temples, as well as flatues and altars, were erected, and who were the objects of the higheft worfhip. The gods of Perfia, therefore, here con- trafted with them, muft be the princi- pal gods of that country. Now, it was a diftinction that well deferved to be mentioned, that the chief objects of wor- fhip in one country were not believed, as they were in the other, to be of the hu- man race : but it will not follow from hence, that the Perfians paid no religious honours to heroes, to whom there is no reference in this place. The hiflorian proceeds to inform us, that they facrificed to Jupiter upon the top of mountains j and then enumerates their other natural gods. The Greeks acknowledged the fame natural gods as the Perfians did ; that is, the elements and heavenly bodies. But, to thefe a- lone, the hiflorian adds, they (the Per- fians) facrifice from the beginning. In this in barbarous Nations. 63 this manner the original words are com- monly underftood -, and, if this be their true fenfe, they point out a farther dif- tin&ion between the religion of Greece and Perfia. Many of the heathen phi- lofophers taught, that the deified parts and powers of nature were reprefented under the form of men and women* -, or that the latter were fymbols of the for- mer. According to this account, the great gods of Greece, to whom Herodotus here refers, were both human perfonages and fymbolical reprefentations of the natural gods. It was under the former view however that they were confidered by the people, and were the objects of the pub- lic facrifices k . The victims were offered immediately, not to heaven or the aether, for example, but to Jupiter; who, though often put for heaven or the ae- ther, was a diftincl: deity from it 1 . But, in Perfia, the public facrifices, according to our hiftorian *, were offered imme- * See below, p.4i2etfeq. diately 1 Afpice hoc fublime candens, quern invocant om- nes Jovem. Quafi vero quifquam noftrum iftum, po- tiusquam Capitolinum, Jovem appellet. Id. 1. 3. c. 4. * Though I argue all along upon the fuppofition of the truth of his account of the great gods of Perfia ; yet 64. Worjbip of human Spirits diately to Jupiter, under the fmgle idfea of his being the whole circumference cf leaven. Now, though the Perfians fa- crificed to the natural gods alone ; that is, under their own proper characters, or exclufively of all thofe human fym- bols which intercepted the public devo- tion of Greece ; yet, befides thefe natu<- ral gods, they might alfo worfhip human fpirits j juft as the Greeks had demons and heroes, befides thofe great gods which were fuppofed by fome to be fym- bols of the natural. There were manyju- piters -, and the Perfians, befides him whom they called the circumference of heaven, might have, one or more, others whom they worfhipped. Suppofing this to be the cafe, the hiftorian would not have ta- ken notice of it here, becaufe it was a circumftance that was not peculiar to yet it could fcarce be built upon any certain informa- tion from the magi, who were far from being lefs felici- tous than other pagan priefts to conceal the nature and origin of the great gods. It might be no more than an inference unjuftly drawn from the Perfians not worfhip- ping them with ftatues and temples. Compare the cafe of the Germans, (above, p. 40.) who, like the Per- fians, were a Celtic nation. Probably the religion of both was the fame. the in barbarous Nations 65 the Perfians, but common both to them and the Greeks. But itdefervesto be confidered, whe- ther the common tranflation of the lafl- cited pafTage from Herodotus does truly exprefs the fenfe of the original, which may very well be rendered, " To thefe " principally* they facrifice from the be- <c ginning/' Now, they might cer- tainly have other gods befides thofe to whom they principally facrificed. Some think that Herodotus only meant to fay, that " the Perfians originally facrificed m TSTOK pt h /A8o<n. The word ^ovo? is often ufed as equivalent to chief or principal. Examples may be found in Horapollinis Hieroglyph. 1. i. c. 12. and De Pauw's notes, p. 295. Juftin fays, 1. i. c. 10. So- lem Perfae unum deum efle credunt. But Freinfhemius (in his note on Quintus Curtius, 1. iii. c. 3. p. 75. torn. I. ed. Snakenburg) conjectures, that, by unum deum, we are not to under/land folum atque unicum, fed potius unum ex a'iis. According to Hefychius, Mithras, or, as he explains it, the fun, was o wgwroj $105, the fu- preme god of the Perfians. Herodotus is certainly the beft expofitor of himfelf: now, he feems to ufe /^a?o? for thief or principal, 1. v. c. 7. which will be cited when we come to fpeak of the Thracians. F " to 66 Worjhlp of human Spirits " to thefe gods alone." According to every fair conftruclion of Herodotus, the Perfians might worfhip human fpi- rits. II. I proceed to fhew, that they did worfhip them. And, if Herodotus him- felf has furnifhed evidence of this point, it will overturn the common explication of the foregoing extract from him. i. I fhall begin with obferving, that the Perfians deified their kings in their mortal ftate upon earth. We are told, by Herodotus, that -they adored* their king, and attempted to compel fome Grecians to do the fame . They put their kings upon the fame level with their gods. Artabanus, the Perlian, thus addrefTes Themiftocles : We have many excellent laws, but none compara- ble to that which requires us to ivorjhip the king as the image of the God 'who pre ferves all things 9 . And Cleo commends a L. 3. c. 86. L. 7. c. 136. P n^ocntfysn' txoa Se, TS T Traura <rw^oTOf. Plut. Vk. Themift. p. 125. See the next note. the in barbarous Nations. 67 the cuftom of thePerfians in deifying their kings, as being both pious and prudent 1 . To their images r adoration was demanded, and alfo to their favourites ; for Morde- cai afligns this reafon for refufmg to pay the fame honours to Haman which o- thers did, That he 'would not ivorjhip any but God*. The cuftom of deifying kings was of great antiquity, and obtained in ./Ethiopia', Italy", and many other countries, as well as in Perfia. Now, if the Perfians paid religious honours to their kings in their ftate of mortality upon earth, would they not continue to pay thofe honours to 9 Perfas quidem non pie folum, fed etiam prudenter, reges fuos inter deos colere. Cleo, ap. Q^Curt. 1.8. c. 5. p. 595. ed. Snak. Briflbnius, here cited, fays : Quin in hanc ufque diem Perfarum rex pro deo colitur a fuis, appellaturque dominus, qui cesium ac fulciat fujlineatque. Which illuftrates the language of Artaba- nus, in note P. r See Philoftrat. Vit. Apollon. Tyan. 1. i. c. 27. p. 35. ed. Olear. * Apocrypha, Efther xiii. 14. * Strabo, 1. 17. p. 1177, A. u At Rome, Herat. 1. z. ep. i, v. 25. F 2 them 68 Worjhlp of human Spirits them after their fuppofed advancement to celeftial power and dignity ? In other countries it was cuftomary for thofe, who deified their kings while living, to wor- ihip them after their death. Why fhould it be thought that Perfia, fo remarkably diftinguifhed by a veneration for her monarchs, was an exception to this ge- neral rule ? 2. There are direct probfs of the Per- fians having mortal gods. Herodotus, immediately after he had enumerated their natural divinities, adds, But they have learnt from the Ajjyriam and Arabians to facrifice alfo to Urania, or Venus. By this goddefs we are not to underftand the moon, as fome have fuppofed w , becaufe diftinc~l mention had been before made of that planet. Strabo x likewife diftin- guifhes the goddefs Venus from the moon. Nor did Herodotus by Urania mean the planet Venus; becaufe the for- mer is diftinguifhed from the natural w Letters concerning Mythol. p. 273. >. P. 1064. gods in barbarous Nations. 69 gods of the Perfians, and her worfhip is mentioned as an exception to their gene- ral practice. Herodotus probably refers to the prefident of the planet Venus, or of the moon. In this view, the worfhip of Venus, as one of their chief deities, was a juft exception to their rule of fa- crificing to the celeftial luminaries apart, or by themfelves ; for in this inflance they paid diftinct worfhip to the prefi- dent of a celeftial luminary. That the female deity, of whom we are fpeaking, was worfhipped by the vulgar under a human character, I fee no ground to doubt y . Moft probably fhe was the Sy- F 3 rian 7 There were four Venufes, according to Cicero, (Nat. Deor. 1.3. c. 23.) and the philofophers allego- rized their hiftory ; (fee Apuleius, Metamorphof. 1. xi. p. 357, 358.) as they did that of other heathen deities. But the language of Cotta, when expofmg thofe alle- gorical explications, plainly fuppofes, that the public opinion concerning the deities, whofe hiftory was con- verted into allegory, was, that they were deified mor tals. Dicamus igitur, Balbe, oportet contra illos etiam, qui hos deos, ex hominumgenere in ccelum tranf- latos, non re, fed opinions, efle dicunt, quos auguftc ornne* 70 W "orjhip of human Spirits rian Aftarte 1 , to whom the planet Ve- nus was confecrated, and of whom there will be occafion to fpeak hereafter*. In Armenia, Venus was worfhipped under the name of Anaith* y and reprefented by an image of human form j which fhews what ideas were formed of her in the eaft. Here, then, is an inftance of the omnes fanfteque veneramur. Ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor, J. 3. c. 21. Amongft other deities, the four Venufes are fpecified, c. 23. And he concludes with obferving, that the notions entertained of thefe divinities arofe from old ftories fpread in Greece, which, for the credit of religion, ought to be difcouraged, but which the Stoics rather confirmed, than refuted, by their manner of explaining them. Atque hsc quidem ejufmodi ex vetere Graecias fama collegia funt : quibus intelli- gis refiftendum efle, ne perturbentur religiones. Veftri autem non modo haec non refellunt, verum etiam confirmant, interpretando quorfum quidque pertineat. Ibid. z Quarta, (fcil. Venus,) Syria, Tyroque concepta, quae Aftarte vocatur. Id. ib. * Under the article, Phoenicians, in the 2d ch. b Strabo introduces the mention of this fafl, by fay- ing, Asranra (* out ret TUV Tltgcrvv ^a X.B.I M>s^b xou Ap- ^xfnot T(Ti/4);xa(7. L. XX. p. 80^. c Clemens Alexandr. Cohort, ad Gentes, p. 57. ed, Potteri, with the notes of the learned editor, worfhip in barbarous Nations. j i worfhip of a human perfonage in Perfia, who feems to have been raifed to the fame rank with the natural gods. Amanus and Anandratus were de- mons of Perfia d , of human origin e , who were worfhipped not only in their own country, but alfo in Cappadocia, where there were many temples of the Per- fian gods*. We are told by Strabo, in moft exprefs terms, that the Per- fians celebrated the exploits of their gods and illuftrious men*. Thefe teftimonies are confirmed by, and ferve to confirm, the defcription which Quintus Curtius has given of the chariot of Darius. It was To TIJ? AyamJ-, xai TO rut trvpftupuv Sew, it^ey togv- AfJMta x A^av^ara, Tligo-muv Jat/xovw>. Strabo, J. xi. p. 779. See alfo 1. xv. p. 1065, 1066. e Alexander ab Alexandro, torn. 2. p. 446. after fpeaking of Amanus and Anandratus, and other hea- then gods, adds> Qui omnes ex hominibus pofl fu- nera divinitate donati, diique indigites poil confecra- tionem habiti funt. * HoMa ^ XKI'TUV UtffM iuv uga. Strabo, p. 1065. See p. 1066. ' E^ya Btuv rt, nou cttfyur ru a,^ruv, ai/ahhrrft' Strabo, J. 15. p. 1066. F 4 adorned 72 Worfoip of human Spirits adorned with the images of the gods in filver and gold j and upon the axle- tree were two images of gold, the one reprefenting Ninus, the other Belus s . This Belus is fuppofed to be the Nim- rod of the Bible, whom the Perfians ranked amongft the gods - 3 and, believing him to be tranflated into the ftars, cal- led him Orion h . We may proceed far- ther, and obferve, 3 . That the Perfians worshipped the gods of other nations that were of mortal origin. According to Herodotus, when Xerxes arrived with his army on the banks of the Scamander, he facrlficed a thouf and oxen to the III an Minerva* and the * Utrumque currus latus deorum fimulacra ex auro argentoque expreffa decorabant : Jugum, ex quo eminebant duo aurea limulacra cubitalia, quorum al- terum Nini, alterum Beli, gerebat effigiem. Q^ Curt. 1. 3. c. 3. p. 77. ed. Snaken. Freinfhemius obferves, Per Ninum Aflyrias, per Belum Babylonia?, imperium conjunftum innuebant currus Darii artifices. Toy NfjS^wa yiycmu. Toy iw Bufivhunoii/ xTiffxrT or fayairiv o^ Tliga'a.i aTroSewSayTa xa ysvo/^evon tv TCI? fgo; T fvtf, ovlmot xaXo-t fi^uvu. Chronicon Alexandria Hum, p. 84, in barbarous Nations. 73 magi poured out libations to the heroes 1 . The fame Perfian monarch fhewed a reli- gious reverence for the temple of Atha- mas k . Xenophon teftifies, that Cyrus implored the afliftance of the heroes, the guardians of Media ; and that he propi- tiated the gods and guardian heroes of Aflyria 1 , and other countries 01 . Thefe facts confirm the teftimonies that have been produced to {hew, that they ac- knowledged mortal gods. They likewife ferve to demonftrate, that, when the Perfians under Xerxes" burnt the tem- ples and images of the Grecian gods and he- roes, this did not proceed from a contempt of thofe gods and heroes, but from their difapprobation of temples and images. In 1 Tj ASiivam rrj TOIO-* tjgwo-i ^;ETO. Herodot. 1,7. 0.43. k Ken TO rs/xeyo; IO-E^TO. Id. 1. 7. C, 197 Tnv oijToga{ tvpem^tro. Xenophon, de Inftit. Cyri, 1.3. c. 3 . . ii. Particularly of Media. Id. 1.8. 0.3. . n. Herodot. 1. 8. c. 143. confirmation 74 Worjhip of human Spirits confirmation of all that has been offered, we may obferve, 4. That, notwithstanding a difference in fome particulars, there was a general agreement between the religion of the Perfians and that of the other idolatrous nations. This, exclufive of all teftimo- ny, is very prbbable in itfelf : for, the Perfians being the fame people with the Celtes , there could fcarcely be an effen- tial difference between them with refpect to the leading principles of religion. They are reprefented by Herodotus p as being prone to imitate the manners of fo- reigners, particularly the Greeks ; and this difpofition was likely to extend it's influence beyond the affairs of civil life, and to make them conformifls in religion. What is fo probable in theory is confirm- ed by fafts. The Perfians, like other nations, worfhipped the natural gods% See Pelloutier's Hift. of the Celtes, v. i. p. 19. L. i. c. 135. See above, p. 47. and in barbarous Nations. 75 and rivers in particular'. Their having no covered temples, nor any images of the gods, were cuftoms that were not pecu- liar to them, though they diftinguifhed them from the Greeks ; and hardly was any practice more common than to fa- crifice upon the tops of mountains. In many other refpects we find a re- markable refemblance between the theo- logy of the Perfians and that of other nations. As the Greeks, the Egyptians, the Phenicians, the Chaldeans, and o- ther ancient nations, had their theogo- nies, or accounts of the generation of the * It has been thought inconfiftent with the care the Perfians took to preferve the purity of the elements, (fee Strabo, p. 1066.) that, after facrificing white horfes to a river, they mould throw their carrafes into it : a circumftance related by Herodotus, 1. 7. c. 113. and which fome have ufed to difparage his teftimony. But the carcafes of thefe horfes were perhaps embalmed : which fome think Herodotus aflerts, c. 114. Befides, the horfes were confecrated to a religious purpofe. It was unlawful to throw a carcafe into the fire ; but this did not extend to facrifices. Hyde, p. 94. Fire and water were the principal objefts of their worihip, according to Strabo, 1. 15. p. 1065. gods, 7 6 Worjhip of human Spirits gods, fo likewife had the Perfians'. Now the ancient theogonies, and the Grecian in particular, mix with the phyfical an hiflorical relation of the ge- nealogy of the gods, and record the births even of thofe they ftile always exijl- ing, and immortal* j fuppofing them to be generated from pre-exiflent principles. This ill agrees with the fuppofition of the Perfians worfhipping one or more gods, under the character of underived and e- ternal beings. According to Herodotus", when Per- feus, the fon of Jupiter and Danae, was with Cepheus, the fon of Belus, he married his daughter, Andromeda ; and by her had a fon, whom he named Perfeus, from whom the Perfians took their name. Now is not this agreeable At their facrifices, one of the magi, ftanding up, E7n*iJ $icyoa, theogoniam accinit. Herodot. 1. I. c. 132. Compare Diogenes Laertius, procem. fegm. 9. where it is faid, I'pon the authority of Hecataeus, that, according to the magi, the gods were begotten. 1 Hefiod. Theogcn. v. 106. L. 7 . c.6i. to 'in barbarous Nations. 77 to the genealogy of the gods and heroes in other nations ? As the Perfians worfhipped the tutela- ry gods of other countries, fo they had fuch deities of their own* j agreeably to that principle, common to all the idola- trous nations, that each of them had it's peculiar guardian deity. And the guar- dian deities of kingdoms were fuppofed to w Xerxes thus addrefles the Perfians : Nt/ h hotjScti- U/JLW tTTtvZa.p.WM roicrt .&o<r rot Tlsgo-tXct yw XsXoy^ao-*. He- rodot. 1.7. 0.53. To one or more of thefe tutelary deities they feem to have given the name of Jupiter : for, befides the Jupiter whom they conceived of as the ivkole circumference of heaven, Xenophon fpeaks of ano- ther who was a local deity, king and patron of Perfia. Kt^os tvt A j3a<XH. De Inftitut. Cyri, 1.3. 0.3. .n. A va-T^uu sOhf. Id. ib. Vide 1. 8. c. 7. Probably for him it was that a chariot was provided, upon occafion of Xerxes's expedition againft Greece. Herodot. 1. 7. c. 40. The chariot was drawn by eight white horfes : an honour peculiar to Jupiter amongft the Romans. By the Jupiter, fpoken of by Xenophon, fome fuppofe we are to understand Belus. Xerxes alfo feems to have been called Jupiter : for Themiftocles told him, that he was direfted by Jupiter df Dodona to go to a perfon of the fame ri^gie with the god, opuwpot ra Sw, which he affigns as the reafon of coming to Xerxes; though Plu- tarch might only mean, that each was called the great king. Plutarch. Vit. Tiiemiftoclis, p. 126. A. be 7 8 Worjhip of human Spirits be the fpirits of thofe illuftrious men by whom they were founded or inlarged. This is a full proof of the Perfians worfhipping human fpirits, as the Greeks and other nations did. At the fame time it ac- counts for Mardonius's ufmg the Grecian rites of ivorjhip* . As a farther proof of the great confor- mity between the theology of Perlia and that of other idolatrous nations, it may be obferved, that the Perfians facrificed to Thetis and the Nereids -, and that the reafon of their facrificing to the former was their learning from the lonians, that Ihe was taken away by Peleus out of this country, and that all the coaft of Sepias is dedicated to her and the reft of the Nereids y . Many learned men have fup- pofed, that Nereus was a prince, an4 the Nereids princefles, who had impro- ved navigation 5 and confequently that they were human perfonages : which is much confirmed by the rapture of Thetis^ 3' * EXXwxcicrt i0ia tffitiTO. Herodot. 1. p." C. 36. y Herodot. 1. 7. c. 191. one in barbarous Nations. 79 one of the Nereids. The worfhip, there- fore, paid to thefe deities by the Per- fians, is not only a proof of the great conformity between their theology and that of the Grecians, but is alfo a new inftance, furnifhed by Herodotus him- felf, of the Perfians facrificing to hu- man fpirits. Too nearly did the Perfians conform to the other idolatrous nations in the moft barbarous a&s of worfhip. Du- ring a tempeft the magi offered up hu- man victims z , as well as endeavoured to charm the winds by magical enchant- ments. We are told, by Plutarch, that Ameftris, the wife of Xerxes, buried twelve people alive to Pluto on her own 2 Herodot. 1. 7. c. 191. I have followed Wefleling's tranflation of the original words, mopa, re TTOUWSJ. The phrafe does not neceflarily import the fpecies of the fa- crifice fpoken of; but it is applied to human viftims by Herodotus, 1. 2. c. 119. and is fo underftood here by H. Stephens, torn. III. p. 1401. as well as by Wefle- ling. See the note of the latter on Herodot. 1. 2. c. 119. Every one will recoiled that line of Virgil, -ffin.il. 116. Sanguine placafti ventos, et virgine caefa. account, 80 Worjhlp of human Spirits account*. And from Herodotus we learn ^ that fhe caufed fourteen children of the beft families in Perfia to be interred alive, as a gratification to the god faid to be beneath the earth b . The fame hiftorian informs us, that, when the army of Xer- xes came to a place called the Nine Ways, the magi took nine of the fons and daugh- ters of the inhabitants, and buried them alive, as the manner of the Perfians is*. It has been fuggefted, but without any good reafon, that Plutarch and Herodo- tus have reproached them unjuflly with offering human facrifices. But fuch fa- crifices were common amongft the an- cients, and fixed no peculiar fligma on the Perfians 6 . As to the cuftom of bu- rying a De Superftit. p. 171, D. A/wgrgi; &, v ta yvm t ^IwJisxa xotrugvi-ty ay$gftOTU{ ^y>raj vjrt% avrij? T A^ij. In his Ifis & Ofir. p. 369, E. he fays, the Perfians invo- ked Pluto. b Herod. 1.7. c. 114. Comp. 1. 3. c. 35. c In confirmation of the authorities produced above, to (hew that the Perfians were chargeable with offering human facrinces^ I would obferve, that, when the Gre- cians tit barbarous Nations. 8 1 rying human vic~lims alive, it obtained amongft the Romans*. The fa6ls, there- fore, laft flated, like many mentioned before, concerning the Perfians, are di- reel: proofs, not only of a general cor- refpondence between their religion and that of other nations, but alfo of their worfhipping dead men : for amongft this number Pluto 6 muft be reckoned. The fame conclufion may be drawn from their necromancy f , or divination by confulting the dead. This fuperfti- tion, which is fuppofed to have had it's cians adopted the Worfhip of Mithras, they offered him human vi&ims. Photius, in Vita Athanafii, p. 1446* Hyde, p. 112. < Liv. 1. II. c. 57. * See Letters to Worthingtori, p. 37, 42. f Quod genus divinationis Varro a Perfis dicit alla- tum, quo et ipfum Numam, et poftea Pythagoram phi- lofophum, ufum fuifle commemorant : ubi adhibito fanguine etiam inferos perhibet fcifcitari ; et rtxwo/*a-- TEiac Grasce dicit vocari : quae, five hydromantia, five necromantia, dicatur, id ipfum eft, ubi videntur mor- tui divinare. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 7. c. 35. How ill- does the account given of Zoroafter, by the modern writers cited by Dr. Hyde, agree with this very ancient teftimony of the learned Varro! G rife 82 Worjhip of human Spirits rife in Ferfia g , was very generally prac- tifed in the heathen nations ; and it was a fpecies of idolatry which had for it's objet the fpirits of departed men. Not to defcend into more particulars, Aga- thias quotes very ancient hiftorians, (Be- rofus the Babylonian, Athenocles, and Symmachus,) as affirming, that thePer- fian s worfhipped of old J upiter and S aturn , and all the other celebrated gods of Greece h , but under different names. It is time to clofe this article, which has been drawn out to fo great a length, on account of it's fmgular importance, and the very different view generally given of it by learned men. From all that has been offered, it appears, that, if we clear the Perfians from the charge of idolatry upon the evidence produced by Dr. Hyde, we adopt an e Magic, according to Pliny, (1. 30, c. I ,) was the invention of Zoroafter. h To / y.g TraAaiov, Ata re x.aj K^ovoc, xai TSTH? & 1. z. p. 58. ed. Lugd. Bat. 1594. hypothecs in barbarous Nations. 83 hypothecs very improbable in itfelf, and ill fupported. At the fame time we con- tradift the teftimony of numerous unex- ceptionable witneffes to the fafts here flated ; the truth of which might even have been prefumed from their own in- ternal credibility, confidering the difpo- fition and fituationof the Perflans. It farther appears, that the difference be- tween them and the Greeks, pointed out by Herodotus, is not fo confiderable as has been fuppofed -, and very probably did not fubfift for any great length of time after the age of that hiftorian'. This difference was perfectly confident with a general agreement in other refpects, and particularly with the deification of hu- man fpirits. Indeed, the ancient Perfians are one of the laft nations which can be fufpecled of not worfhipping the fpirits 1 We learn from Strabo, p. 1065, that in Cappado- cia, where there was a great number of the magi, there were alfo many temples of the Perfian gods, and zftatue of Omanus, p. 1066, a Perfian demon, p. 779. See above, p. 71* note *. G 2 Of 84 Worjhip of human Spirits of illuftrious men, if it be true, as is generally allowed, that they afferted the exiflence of divine genii, who aiTumed for a time the human nature. The foregoing obfervations are not offered as a vindication of any thing I had formerly advanced on the fubjec~l of the heathen gods, but are the refult of an unbiaffed inquiry. Whether they arejuft, others are more able to determine. VIL Concerning the Arabians, Mr. Fell* (copying Dr. Blackwell 1 ) fays, that " they acknowledged no other gods " befides the fun and moon." In proof of this aflertion we are referred to Herodotus. But the text of this hiftorian ought to have been given the reader, and not merely the comment upon it. His words are m , They acknoivlege no other gods than Dionyfus (or Bacchus) and Urania: k P. 8. 1 Mythol. p. 273. f Toy p Herodot. 1. 3. c. 8. they in barbarous Nations. 85 " they call the former Urotalt, and <c the latter Alilat" Had Mr. Fell, inftead of tranfcri- bing a modern author, confulted Hero- dotus, he would have found that this hiftorian could not, by Bacchus, under- ftand the fun, becaufe he fpeaks of it as no improbable conjecture of the Arabi- ans, that the cinnamon grew in the countries in which Bacchus was educa- ted". From other writers we have cer- tain information, that Bacchus was an illuftrious conqueror . Strabo p in par- ticular informs us, that Alexander, finding the Arabians had only two gods, (viz. Jupiter and Bacchus,) thought he had a right to be worfhipped as a third, B Id. c. in. Plutarch fpeaks of the nurfes of Bac- chus. Vit. Camilli, p. 131, C. Sir Ifaac Newton (Chronol. p. 98, 99.) takes Se- fac to be the Bacchus of the Arabians, and their Coe- lus, or Uranus, or Jupiter Uranius, to be the fame king of Egypt with his father Hammon, according to Lucan : Quamvis ^Ethiopum populis, Arabumque beatis Gentibus, atque Indis, unus fit Jupiter Ammon. P Lib, 16. p. 1076. G 3 provided 86 Worjhip of human Spirits provided he conquered, and reftored their former liberty. Arrian q confirms the teftimony of Straboj telling us, that the Arabians wor (hipped only Ura-* nus and Dionyfus r -, and afligning the reafon of their worfhipping the latter, viz. the fame of leading an army into India*\ in which refpect, he adds, Alexander did not think himfelf inferior to him, and therefore pleaded he had an equal right to their worfliip. As to the Urania or Alilat of the Arabs, whom Herodo- tus joins with Bacchus, fince the latter has been proved to be a human perfo- nage, we may reafonably conclude that fuch alfo the former was, She is probably the fame with the Alitta fpo- ken of above 1 , and confequently no other than the Syrian Aftarte -, of whom farther mention will be made 9 De Expedit. Alexand. p. 300. cd. Gronovii. r Comp. p. 85. note . * Kara ^o|a TK ff I^f rjarwej. P. 48, 68. in in barbarous Nations. 87 in i the fequel. Amongft the gods of this people, Tertullian * reckons Dy- fares ; Suidas, Mars, (which figni- fies the valiant* -J and Porphyry 1 , Du- matius, to whom they annually offered a human victim. If you choofe to fet afide the authority of the Greeks, and to rely rather on the oriental writers j one well acquainted with them has given us the names of fome of their antediluvian idols, or what were faid to be fuch, which the Arabs acknowleged as gods, having been men of great piety and merit in their times 1 . And, though the idols were not fuppofed to be fui juris, (or gods in their own na- tural right, but only companions of God,) yet they offered facrifices and other obla- tions to them as well as to God, who x Apol. c. 24. y Sir If. Newton's Chronol. p. 98. See above con cerning Mars, p. 27, 35. * De Abftinent. 1. 2. . 56. * Sale's Koran, preliminary Difc. p. 19. qto. G 4 was 88 Wor/hip of human Spirits was often put off with the leaft portion 1 *. Somewhat of this kind we obferve in po- pifti countries. The rofary afcribed to the Virgin Mary confifts of a hundred and fifty Aw-Marias, and only fifteen Pater-nofters. Should it be here objected, that the only gods of the Arabs taken notice of in the book of Job c are the fun and moon, and therefore that thefe were the fole ob- jects of idolatrous worfhip in the age in which that book was written j I anfwer, that, even fuppofing this to be the cafe in the land of Uz, where Job lived, it will not follow from hence that it was the fame every where elfe. Nay, had this been the cafe univerfally in the age here fpoken of, yet it might be quite other- wife in fucceeding ages. According to a late writer d , the defcription of idolatry in the book of Job is of greater antiquity than that given by Mofes. But the quef- * id. p. 16. c Ch. 3 i, 26. d Fell, p. 3 6 ? tion 'in barbarous Nations. 89 tion agitated in the DifTertation concer- ned only the gods of the Heathens ; that is, the nations contradiftinguifhed from the Ifraelites; a diftinction that could not take place before the time of Mofes, when the Ifraelites were firft formed in- to a nation. The queflion had no rela- tion to any times, or countries, but thofe in which fome demons were acknowledged as a diftincl: order of deities from the heavenly bodies. But, after all, the lan- guage of Job neither aflerts, nor implies, that there,, were .no other objects of ido- latrous worfhip in his age or in his coun- try befides the fun and moon. When he was aflerting his own freedom from ido- latry, he naturally obferved that he was not chargeable even with the mofl fpe- cious and alluring kind of it ; that nei- ther the fun when it Jhined^ nor the moon walking in brightnefs^ had tempted him to pay them any religious honours. So that the occafion led him to fpecify the fun and moon rather than any other ob- jects of idolatrous worfhip ; though there go Worfhip of human Spirits there might be in the land of Uz, even at the early period when he is fuppofed to have lived, many fuch, both other celeftiai luminaries and human fpirits. And it is with peculiar impropriety that the language of Job is urged to overturn the teftimonies to the worfhip of dead men and women in other countries and in later times. VIII. Mr. Fell 6 tells us, that " the " inhabitants of Meroe in ./Ethiopia " worshipped no other gods than Jupi- c< ter and Bacchus ; that is, the hea- " vens and the fun." This writer fhould have faid, " In this manner is Herodo- " tus explained by Dr. Blackwell"'. What the hiftorian really fays is, that the inhabitants of Meroe worfhipped no other gods than Jupiter and Bacchus, and had an oracle of Jupiter 8 : a plain proof that Jupiter here denotes a human P. s. f Mythol. p. 274. * Aia Stuv X.M AIOIWOK p Titoy Ato$ xTrrx.. Herodot. 1. 2. c. fpirit. in barbarous Nations. g i {pint. In the opinion of Sir Ifaac New- ton h , thefe two gods were Jupiter Am- mon and Ofiris, according to the lan- guage of Egypt. We are informed by Strabo, that the Ethiopians had both an immortal, and a mortal, god ! 5 that they commonly deified their benefactors and perfons of royal birth k ; that they re- garded their kings as the common favours and prefervers of all 1 -, and even worfhip- ped them as gods while living ". The inhabitants of Meroe in particular wor- h Chronol. p. 213. Strabo, 1. 17. p. 1177, 1178. k P. 1178. IJj 1 Kai TUTU* T j. Ib. araxXsirs? OT xat OJXB^? TO ffXio. P. 1177- This is confirmed by the teftimony of Diodorus Siculus, who fays, (1.3. p. 177. ed. Weffeling.) that, as foon as the king was chofen, the people worfhipped him as a god : Et$>j & xa ityxr- f K6tl Tip* KC&Ct'Ktg ScGC. Ihipped 92 Worjhip of human Spirits fhipped Hercules, Pan, and Ifis y with an- other foreign deity". Here the reader may paufe a moment, and review the ground he has been tread- ing. The heathen gods were of two forts ; the conftituent parts and princi- ples of the world, and demons. The Heathens afTerted the exiftence of de- mons of a celeftial origin ; but the Dif- fertation undertook to prove, that fuch demons, as were the more immediate objects of the eftablifhed worfhip in cer- tain nations, were natives of the earth. We have feen what induftry a late wri- ter exerted to difguife this propofition ; let us now confider, whether he attacks it with judgement and fuccefs, or even took his aim aright. The propofition was explained concerning the polijhed na- tions of the world j but the gentleman n Oi y it Mf^orj, xa Hgax^sa, v.a.\ Haya., nan lew, o-e- ^orrai, irgoj aAXw <rm Pa.$a.ixu. Strabo, 1. 17. p. 1178. This foreign god could not be either an elementary or fidereal deity, any more than Hercules, or Pan, or Ifis. P. 11-17. draws 'in barbarous Nations. 93 draws his objections from the fuppofed cafe of Barbarians, and the greateft fa- vages. The propofition refpefted only thofe nations in which, befides the na- tural gods, demons alfo, of one kind or other, were worfhipped j but the gen- tleman undertakes to confute it by the cafe of thofe people who, according to his account of them, had no demons at all. Had his facts been true, they would have been foreign from the point. But the fafts which he alleges are not true. There is pofitive evidence, that, out of the eight fore-mentioned nations, which he affirms acknowledged only the natural gods, feven * worfhipped human fpirits. Nay, fome of them had no o- other deities but thefe p . He not only adopts Dr. Blackwell's peculiar interpre- tations without acknowledging his ob- ligation, but copies his miftakes ; which is a fure proof that he took every thing upon truft, and had himfelf no knovv- * The cafe of the Maflagetes alone is doubtful. P. 28. p P. 32. ledge 94 Worjhip of human Spirits ledge of his fubje6l. When Mr. Fell de- ferts his guide, he is far from appearing to greater advantage : for then, inftead of mifinterpreting ancient authors, we find him boldly affirming fafts that are falfe, without producing any teftimony to fupport them, as in the cafe of the Goths 3 or appealing to the teftimony of writers who contradift their truth, as in the cafe of the Getes. Such is this gentleman's manner of writing ! It does equal credit to his candour, his judge- ment, and his learning. SECT. II. Shewing, from the teftimony of the Heathens, that many other barbarous nations, be* Jides thofe fpecified in the preceding fee** tion, paid divine honours to deceafed men. HOUGH, to avoid being tedious, I fhall purpofely omit many in- ftances of the worfhip of human ipirits n in barbarous Nations. <)j in fome of the barbarous nations pafled over by a late writer, yet the proofs of it in others, that will be here produced, added to thofe recited in the preceding feclion, will be fufficient to fhew how generally it prevailed in the continents of Africa, Europe, and Afia. I. I (hall begin with the mention of feveral barbarous nations in Africa, in which kings and heroes were ranked a- mongft the gods. Under the term, ^Ethiopia, the an- cients comprehended a large part of Middle Africa, with as much of the fouthern part of Africa as was then known. In this extenfive country, and particularly at Meroe, the metropolis of it, the inhabitants deified their princes and benefactors -, as was (hewn above 1 . There is a pafTage in Herodotus, (o- verlooked by Dr, Blackwell, and confe- quently not noticed by Mr. Fell, though more to his purpofe than any other,) in which this hiflorian, when fpeaking of i p. 9 o, 91, 92. fome 96 x Worjhlp of human Spirits fome of the Libyan nomades, fays, they facrifice to no other gods than the fun and moon r . He adds, to thefe all the Li by a?: s facrifice. It is here taken notice of, as a very fingular circumftance, that fome of the tribes of Libya worfhipped the fun and moon alone -, which fhews that the practice of the other tribes was different. According to the fame author, the ,/- by am always worfhipped Neptune s , who was the fon of Pontus ', and is thought to have been originally of Phenicia, and to have fettled afterwards upon the fea- coafts of Libya. Many writers confirm the opinion of his being a human per- fonage u . Pfaphon was deified by the Li- byans, for teaching birds to fing thefe words, ffle great god Pfaphon''. Thofe Libyans, who dwelt about the lake Tri- Herodot. 1.4. c. 188. * L. 2. c. 50. 1 Sanchoniathon, ap. Eufeb. Prsep. Ev. 1. 1. p. 384 Diodor. Sic. 1. 5. p. 386. ed. WeffeKng. Laftanf. Div. Inft. 1. i. c. 10. w Maxim. Tyr. Diflert. 19. tonis, in barbarous Nations. gj tonis, facrificed to Triton as well as Nep- tune, and principally to Minerva x . The Augilites had no other gods but the manes^ according to Pomponius Mela y , whofe teflimony is confirmed by Pliny *. The inhabitants of Cyrene wor- fhipped their king Battus, the founder of their kingdom a . In Africa Proprla> which lay between Cyrenaica and Mau- ritania, Mopfus, king of the Argives, was admitted into the number of the gods ". The Tynan ElifTa, the founder * Herodot. 1.4. c. 1 88. Coacerning Minerva, fee Eufeb. Prasp. Ev. p. 38. y Augilse manes tantum deos putant j per eos deje- fant ; eos ut oracula confulunt ; precatiqtie qu<e volunt, ubi tumulis incubuere> pro refponfis ferunt fomnia. Pomp. M. Li. c. 8. z Augilee inferos tantum colunt. Pliny, I. 5. C. 8. Compare what Herodotus fays of the Nafamones, 1. 4. c. 172. and Tertullian, de Anima, c. 57. 3 Herodot. 1.4. c. 161. b Quippe tantum eos deos appellant, qui, ex eodem numero jufte ac prudenter vitae curriculo gubernato, pro numine poftea ab hominibus proditi, fanis et cseremo- niis vulgo advertuntur : ut in Bceotia Amphiaraus, in Africa Mopfus, in ^Egypto Ofiris, alius aliubi gentium, ./Efculapius ulique. Apuleius, de Deo Socrat. p. 689, 690. torn. 2. ed. Delph. H of 98 Worfiip of human Spirits of Carthage, was worfhipped in that city, as long as it remained unconquer- ed c . In the fame city a temple was e- refted to ^Efculapius d . Tjje Carthagi- nians alfo facrificed to Amilcar 6 . We are here more directly examining the tef- timony of the Heathens themfelves con- cerning their own gods -, otherwife I might take notice, that Chriflian writers inform us, that the Mauritanians wor- fhipped their kings f . The Atlantiansi a people who inha- bited the weftern parts of Africa, boaft- ed that their country was the birth- place of the gods 8 . Their firfl king, Uranus, or Ccelus, whofe name was e Quamdiu Carthago invifta fuit, pro dea culta eft, Juftin. 1. 1 8. c.6. d Strabo, 1. 17, p. 1189. * Herodot. 1. 7. c. 167. f Unicuique etiam provincise et civitati fuus deus eft; ut Syria Aftarte, ut Arabia; Difares, ut Noricis Bele- nus, ut Africa? Czleftis, ut Mauritania reguli fui. Tertull. Apol. 0.24. Hac fcilicet ratione confecra- verunt et Mauri reges fuos, Laftant. 1. i. c. 15. t Diodor. Sic. 1. 3. p. 224. given in barbarous Nations \ 99 given to heaven, received divine honours after his death h -, and fo alfo did his wife Titaea, and fhe was called Gee, or the earth h .* Their daughter, Bafilea, married Hyperion, her brother, and by him had two children, Helion and Se- lene : names that from them were given to the fun and moon, and under which they received the honours of thofe ce- leftial luminaries 1 . Bafilea was wor- ihipped under the title of the great mo- ther of the gods, on account of the care fhe took of the education of her brothers and lifters, the Titans > one of whom, Atlas, was worshipped in the ftar that bears his name ; and another, Saturn, was the father of the Jupiter who was furnamed Olympian. They al- low, that there was another Jupiter, the brother of Uranus, and king of Crete k . To the nations of Africa that wor- fhipped human fpirits, already taken * P. 225. * p. 226. k p. 229, 230. H 2 notice ioo Worfoip of human Spirits notice of, the Egyptians might be ad- ded : but their cafe will more properly fall under confideration in the next chapter. II. As to Europe, it will not be im- proper to begin with obfervingy that this continent was by fome called Cel- tica ; a name which it derived from the Celtes, the defcendents of the Cimbri, part of whom came from Babylon into the weftern parts of the world. Under the term, Celtes, were comprehended all thofe nations which were fometimes diflinguifhed by the name of Scythians, Celto-Scythians, Getae, Gallacians, Gal- logrecians, Celtiberians, Teutones, Ger- mans, and Gauls. They were fpread, from the fea-fhores of Britain and Gaul, as far eaft as the Palus Maeotis, at the extremity of the Euxine fea ; and from the fouthernmofl parts of Spain to the northern fea, which lies off Archangel in Ruflia 1 . And, if we except the fouthern 1 See The Antiquities of Cornwall, by the very learned and judicious Dr. Borlafe, book i. ch. 4. p. 14- and compare in barbarous Nations. i o i fouthern parts of Italy, Greece, and the ifles of the ^Egean fea, all Europe may be juftly faid to have been peopled by the ancient Cimbri, or (as they were foon afterwards called) Celtas m . It has been fhewn already, that dead men were worfhipped by many nations of the Celtes, both in Afia and Europe, and particularly by the Scythians, the Getes, the Goths, and Germans. Now, it feems very reafonable to fuppofe, that the other Celtic nations worfhipped the fame gods, or at leafl did not defert the general principle of deifying their kings and heroes, maintained by thofe from whom they were defcended j efpecially as it is well known that the Heathens in ' compare Pezron's Antiquities of Nations, book I. and the Ancient Univrrfal Hiftory, v. 6. ch. 12. feel. x. 8vo. ed. 1747. m Pezron endeavours to fhew, that feveral nations of Greece and Italy were defcendents of the Titans, whom he taer to be the fame with the Celtas. Book i. But thefe countries and the iflands of the ^Egean fea were peopled from the Syrian continent, according to Dr, Borlafe, H 3 general IO2 Worjhip of human Spirits general were very tenacious of the reli- gion of their anceftors. Upon inquiry, it will appear, that the religion of all thefe nations was, in that eflential point which I have been endeavouring to ef- tablifh, one and the fame. The Celtes, under the title of Iberi- ans and Celtiberians, inhabited the country now called Spain n . The Acci- tani*, a people of this country, wor- fhipped an image of Mars, who could be no other than the god of the fame name amongft the Germans p , and the Odhen of the Goths q . The Lufitani- ans alfo facrificed to Mars r . The Mer- cury (or Teutates) of the Iberians was the fame with him who was worfhipped under that name by the Gauls, who will be fpoken of in the fequel. A tern- Pliny, 1.3, c.i, Accitani, Hifpana gens, fimulachrum Martls, ra- diis ornatum, maxima religione celebrant, Neton vo- cantes, Macrob, Sat. 1. I. c. 19, P Above, p. 43, * P. 35. ' Strabo, 1. 3, p. 33*. pic in barbarous Nations. 103 pie was creeled at Gades, or Cadiz, both to the Egyptian and Theban Hercules, but no ftatues ', as we learn from Phi- loftratus' and Silius Italicus". Even their god Pluto was probably no other than the fon of Chronos by Rhea, fpo- ken of by Sanchoniathon w . It is faid, that Spain fell to the lot of this prince*, and that the Celtes are the remote de- fcendents of the Titans r . Let us proceed to confider the objects of religious worfhip in Gaul. The in- habitants of this country were Celtes z , and were called by that name in the time * The Perfians and Germans alfo are faid to have had o ftatues of the gods. 1 Vit. Apol. Tyan. 1. 5, c. 4, 5. u Nulla effigies, fisnulachraque nota deorum, Majeftate locum, et facro implevere timore. Silius Italicus, 1. 3. w Apud Eufeb. Prap. Ev. 1. i. c. 10. p. 38. D. See above, p. 81. note". * See Ancient Univerfal Hift. v. 6. b. i. ch. 12. p. 50. x Callimach. Hymn, in Delum, v. 170. et feq. Cal- limachus calls the Celtes o^yow Td!>i;, the late pofte- rity of the Titans. See Pezron, b. ii. ch. i. * Plutarch, Vit. Camilli, p. 135. D, H 4 of IO4 Worjhip of human Spirits of Julius Caefar a . This affords reafon- able ground to conclude, that they wor- fhipped human fpirits as the other Cel- tic nations did. As a farther proof of this point, we may obferve, that they alfo claimed to be defcended from the god Pluto b , the Titan e prince juft now fpoken of. Much has been faid in praife of the religion of the Druids, both in Gaul and Britain ; and attempts have been made to clear them from the imputation not only of human facrifices, but even of polytheifm and idolatry, till they were conquered by the Romans. But, if we can rely on the moil authentic re- cords of antiquity, the public religion, which was praftifed under their fantfion\ * Qui ipforum lingua Celtas, noftra Galli, appellan- tnr. Caefar, de B. G. init. Their country was fome- times called Qeltogalatia, or Celtogallia. k Galli omnes ab Dite patre prognatos prasdicant, Caefar, B. G. 1.6. c. 17. e Anc. Univ. Hift. v. 6. p. 40. * E$vo & ct'x nv Aptfrut. Strabo, 1.4. p. 303. See alfo Diodorus Siculus, 1.5. p. 354. ed. Wefleling. and Csfar, 1, 6. c. 15. was in barbarous Nations. 105 was not more commendable than that of other nations. The Gauls were ex- ceedingly addicted to magic, divination*, and idolatry, in their moft horrid forms : witnefs their auguries f from the blood and entrails of the creatures they facri- ficed to falfe gods. According both to Diodorus Siculus 8 and Strabo h , men were facrificed for the purpofe of divi- nation, and the omens were the palpi- tation of their limbs after they were Slabbed, and the flowing of their blood. This had been their practice from the moft remote antiquity \ They appeafed their gods with human victims, burn- * Natio eft omnis Gallorum admodum dedita religi- onibus. Caefar, 1. 6. c. 15. Augurandi ftudio Galli prster casteros callent. Juftin. 1. 24. c. 4. * In aufpicia pugnas hofiias caedunt, quarum extis, &c. Juftin. 1. 26. c. 2, 1,5. p. 354. 11 V.i. p. 303. * UaAatia TIM x ffoXf^goyiw flra^aTJjglcrtl. Diodor, Sic, ubi fupra, ing io6 Wsrfoip of human Spirits ing to death men as well as beads k We may allow, that Cicero, to ferve his client, put the moft invidious conftruc- tion upon the conduct of the Gauls ; yet he fpeaks of their offering to the gods human victims in a manner that fhews the fact could not be denied 1 . The teflimony of other writers is liable to no exception. Caefar, in particular, had the beft opportunities of informa- tion, by his long refidence in Gaul j and he has not only affirmed the fact in quef- tion, but alfo explained the occafions * upon which they offered human iacri- k Caefar (1. 6. c. 15.) fays : Alii immani magnitu- dine fimulachra habent, quorum contexta viminibus membra vivis hominibus complent, quibus fuccenfis, circumvent! flamma exanimantur homines. Strabo, 1.4. p. 33* affirms, Boo-x/*Ta xat ctn^^uim^ w^o- KOOT8V. 1 Quis enim ignorat eos ufque ad hanc diem retinere Illam immanem ac barbaram confuetudinem hominum immolandorum ? Orat. pro Fonteio. Qui funt affefti gravioribus morbis, quique in pra- liis periculifque verfantur, aut pro viftimis homines im- molant, aut fe immolaturos vovent. Csefar, L6. 0.15, Compare Juftin, 1. 6. c. 2. fices. in barbarous Nations. 107 fices. He tells us, that criminals were the moft acceptable facrifices ; but at the fame time he informs us, that, when thefe were wanting, the innocent fupplied their place n ; which is a plain proof that they fuffered not as victims to the order of fociety, but to the ven- geance of the gods . To them they alfo facrificed their captives in war p . In cafes of extraordinary danger, they ftrove to avert the divine wrath by the (laughter even of their wives and chil- dren q . The Romans were far from be- ing free from the charge of offering hu- " Supplicia eorum, qui in furto, aut latrocinio, aut aliqua noxa, fint comprehend, gratiora diis immortali- bus effe arbitrantur. Sed, cum ejus generis copia de- ficit, etiam ad innocentium fupplicia defcendunt. Cas- far, 1. 6. c. 15. Compare Diodorus Siculus, 1. 5. p. 355. ed. Wefleling. Quod pro vita hominis, mil vita hominis reddatur, non pofle aliter deorum immortalium numen placari ar- bitrantur. Caefar, 1. 6. c. 15. P Xgwifra* SE ran; cujflxaXwroK #> itfftoif w^Of T{ TUV SfWC </**?. Diodor. Sic. 1. 5. p. 355. 1 Sperantes deorum minas expiari caede fuorum pofTe, Cpnjuges et liberos fuos trucidant. Juftin. 1. 26. c. 2. man io8 Worjhlp of human Spirits man facrifices; neverthelefs they were fhocked at the far greater excefs to which this practice was carried by the Gauls r j amongft whom it in fome mea- fure remained, even after various Ro- man edifts were patted to reftrain and abolifh it s . This is a plain proof, that this rite of worfhip had taken deep root amongft the Gauls ; and that their re- ligion was not corrupted, but reformed, by the Romans. Now, if the Gauls offered human facrifices, we may from hence infer, that thofe gods were war- * Religio apud Gallos dir<e immanltatit. See the next note. * The fuperftition of the Druids, which the Roman citizens were forbidden to pra&ife by Auguftus, Clau- dius attempted wholly to abolifh. Druidarum religi- onem apud Gallos diras immanitatis, et tantum civibus fub Augufto interdiftum, penitus abolevit. Suetonius, Vit. Claudii Caefaris, c. 25. See Pliny, 1. 30. c. I, concerning what was done againft the Druids by Tibe- rius. Strabo takes notice of the Romans drawing off the Gauls both from their cruel facrifices and divina- tions. Dr. Borlafe (Antiquities of Cornwall, p. 154.) has Ihewn, that their fondnefs for human viftims con- tinued even after their converfton to Chriitianity. riors 'in barbarous Nations. 109 riors and heroes , as will be fhewn in the fequel. Other proofs of this point are not wanting. I fay nothing of their tem- ples, mentioned by Suetonius and Stra- bo ; though (whether they were edi- fices, or, as fome fuppofe, only confe- crated woods and groves) they were pro- bably the fepulchres of their gods. The Jtatues and images * of their divinities af- ford more certain evidence that thofe divinities had been men. That feveral of them were of human extract, we fhall fee no ground to doubt, if we proceed to a diftincl: examination of them. Such unqueflionably was Hercules, whom the Gauls worfhipped on account of his being the firft who furmounted the difficulties of paffing the Alps ", which had been deemed infupe- rable. 1 Immani magnitudine fimnlachra habent. Cedar, 1.6. c. 15. Gens afpera, audax, bellicofa, qua? prima poft Herculem, cui ea res virtutis admirationem, et immor- talitatis no Worjhip of human Spirits rable. Their Apollo, or Belenus, was the tutelary god of Noricum w , and born, it is probable, in Aquileia x 5 from whence his worfhip was brought into Gaul. Thefe inflances of the worfhip of human ipirits cannot be difputed. Nor do I fee any reafonable ground to doubt concern- ing thofe that follow. The Jupiter, or tfharanis, of the Gauls, according to Caefar's y account of him, anfwers to the Thor of the Goths, the prefident of the air, and ruler of thunder z . To him hu- talitatis fidem, dedit, Alpium invi&a juga, et frigore intradabilia loca, tranfcendit. Juftin. 1. 24. c. 4. Eft locus Herculeis aris facer, fays Petronius Arbiter, when fpeaking of the place from whence Hercnlee croffed the Alps. * Above, p. 98. note { . * He is fpoken of as the ETHNIC; Szo; of the Aqui- leians, who called him Belis : BsXiv & xaXac-i rtrov, AwoMwxa aM tS XoT{. Herodian. Hift. 1. 8. c. 7. p. 271. ed. Oxon. 1704. Hence it appears, that Belis could not be the fun, as fome affirm. As to Apollo, fee above, p. 27. note z . y Jovem imperium cceleftium tenere. Csefar. 1. 6. c. 16. z Above, p. 36, man 'in barbarous Nations* 1 1 1 man facrifices a were offered. The cha- racter given of Mars, by the fame illuf- trious writer b , correfponds to that of the northern Odhen e . To this martial hero the firfl invention of armour is afcribed*; and to him captives in war were facrifi- ced *. He is thought to be the fame with Hefus, who was appeafed with human victims'. The god, whom both the Gauls and Germans principally wor- ihipped, was Mercury 8 . That the Her- mes or Mercury of Europe was the fame with the Thoth or Thoyth of Egypt, Below, note f . Martem bella regere. Caefar, 1. 6. c. 16. Above, p. 35. Diodor. Sic. 1. 5. c. 235. Catfar, 1.6. c. 16. Et quibus immitis placatur fanguine diro Teutates, horrenfque feris altaribus Hefus, Et Taranis Scythics non mitior ara Diatue. Lucan. 1. i. v. 444. Laftantius fays, (1. i. 21.) Galli Hefum atque Theu- taten humano cruore placabant. * Concerning the Gauls, Cafar (1. 6. c. 16.) fays, Deum maxime Mercurium coluni. Tacitus gives the fame account of the Germans : Deorum maxime Mer- curium colunt. Mor. Germ. c. 9, appears 112 Worjhlp of human Spirits appears from the teftimonies of Phild Byblius h , Plato *, Cicero k , and Ser- vius '. He inflrufted Gaul and Egypt in arts and commerce m . From his be- ing joined by the Germans with Mars ", it feems as if he was fometimes worfhip- ped under a military character. Per- haps they afcribed their victories to Mer- cury when they were gained by genius and ftratagem, and to Mars when they prevailed by open valour. His military . h Ap. Eufeb. Praep. Ev. 1. i. c. 9. p. 31. * In Phasdro, p. 274. In Philebo, p. 18. ed.Serrani. k See note m below. 1 In ^En. iv. 577. Mercurius dicitur Argum interemifie, ob eamque caufam in Egyptum profugifle, atque ^Egyptiis leges et literas tradidifTe. Hunc ^Egyptii Thoth appellant. Cicero, de Nat, Deor. 1.3. c. 22. Hunc (fcil. Mer- curium) omnium artium inventorem ferunt. Hunc ad quaeftus pecuniar mercaturafque habete vim maximam arbitrantur. Casfar, 1. 6. c. 16. Arnobius fpeaks to the fame purpofe, 1. 4. p. 170. *- Tertulliatt (de Coron. mil. c. 8.) fays, Mercurius literas enarravit neceflarias, et commercii rebus, et noftris erga deum ftudiis. n Diverfam aciem Marti et Mercuric facravere. Ta- cit. Annal. 1. 13. c. 57. character in barbarous Nations. 113 character accounts for his being appeafed with human blood . He is fuppofed to be the fame with the cruel Teutates p , the Phenician Taut or Thaut. His fe- pulchre was fliewn at Hermapolis q . The forementioned gods were ~wor-> fhipped by the Gauls, long before their conqueft by the Romans. After this period, it is well known, they dedicated temples, and raifed altars, to the Ro- man emperors ; and adopted all the gods of their conquerors. Nor is there any reafon to fuppofe, that this was the ef- fect of mere complaifance ; becaufe it was agreeable to the principles of the heathen religion. And we have feen, that they adhered to thofe principles, in oppofition to the Roman authority, even in a cafe in which they were moft re- pugnant to the cleareft dictates of rea- Tacit. Mor. German, c. 9. Gomp. Annal. 1. 13. c - 57- P Mentioned above, note f < 4 Clement, recogn. apud Patres apoftol. v. 1. p. 594. ed. Clerici. See alfo what is faid concerning Mercury, chap. II. under the article, Phenicians. I fon H4 Worflxp cf human Spirits fon and humanity : I refer to the bloody cuflom of offering to their gods human victims. I cannot forbear adding, that, inafmuch as it is generally allowed that the Gauls and Germans had the fame objects of worfhip, the diflinct accounts given of the gods of both mutually il- luftrate and confirm each other. Now, if, in Spain, Portugal, Gaul, Germany, and the more northern na- tions of Europe, human fpirits were deified, what reafon is there to believe, that the other nations of Europe had not the fame objects of worfhip ? Many of them were peopled by the Celtes r . This was the cafe as to Britain in parti- cular. And was the religion of Britain different from that of Gaul ? The very contrary is allowed to be true j nor could it be otherwife, becaufe both religions had their rife from the ancient idolatry of the Baft. The difcipline of the Dru- ids was common both to Gaul and Bri- r &ee above, p. 100. note J . tain. in barbarous Nations. i 1 5 tain *. The facrifices and arts of divi- nation in both countries were the fame : for the BritUh Druids took their omens from human victims, as we have feen the Gaulifh did*. Indeed, it would be eafy to produce diftinc~l proofs of the cuflom of human facrifices in moil na- tions of the world u , and of Europe in particular j which is itfelf evidence fuf- ficient of the worfhip of human fpirits in thofe nations. As to the fouthern Difciplina (fell. Di-uidum) in Britannia reperta^ atque inde in Galliam tranflata effe exiftimatur. Caefar, 1.6. c. 12. 1 Tacitus, fpeaking of the inhabitants of Anglefey, a Britifh ifland, fays : Praefidium poilhac impofitum viftisj exeifique luci, fevis fuperflitionibus facri : nam cruore captivo adolere aras, et hominum fibris ccnfulere decs, fas habebanti Tacit; Annal. 1. 14. c. zo. - From the foregoing obfervations it appears, that Origeo (on Ezek. iv.) was miftaken when he faid, (br rather, that he is mifmterpreted when he is reprefented as fay- ing,) that the Druids taught the Britons to believe there is but one God They probably acknowledged, as the other heathen nations did, one God who was fu- perior to the reft, or a fuprcme deity. u Ifta toto mundo confenfere, quamquam difcordi, et fibi ignoto. Pliny, 1. 30. c. i. I 2 parts i j 6 Worfhlp of human Spirits parts of Italy, Greece, and the eaftern iilands of Europe, if they were not peo- pled by the Celtes, they were by the Sy- rians w j and they derived their religion from them and the Egyptians, whofe gods will be confidered in the next chap- ter. As to the Macedonians, the name of one of their mortal deities is pre- ferved by Tertullian x , in a paflage which will be cited when I come to fpeak of Cilicia in Afia. Juftin fays, that the temple of Jupiter (of whom enough has been faid already) was r held in high ve- neration from the mod remote anti- quity. I cannot forbear taking particular no- tice of the T'hracians^ whom Herodotus z calls the great eft nation of any amongjl men, except the Indians. By fome they are reckoned amongft the Scythians j and it is certain that, like them, they were w See above, p. 101. note" 1 . * De Anima, c. 46. y Veterrimae Macedonum religionis. Juftin. 1. 24. C. 2. z L. 5. c. 3 . worlhippers in barbarous Nations. 1 17 worfhippers of Zamolxis. Proofs of this point were adduced above a ; one of which was the teflimony of a Thracian in Plato. I will here add a pafTage from Lucian b : The tfhracians facrifice to Za- moIxtSy a fugitive from Samos, ivho came to refide amongjl them. Befides their great legiflator, they deified Orpheus, and alfo Odryfus, (the founder of the nation, at leaft of a part of it,) and others e , ac- cording to the teithnony of Tertullian and Epiphanius. But, waving the au- thority of Chriftian writers, as not be- ing immediately to our prefent purpofe, I add, that the paffage in which Hero- dotus d is fuppofed to fay, " the Thra- " cians worfhipped only Mars, Bac- ':* chus, and Diana,' 1 may only import, uiTo-it * P. 32. Coqipare j). 27, 28. b Jupiter Tragoed. torn. 2. p. 152. c Tertullian. de Anima, c. 2. Photii Bibliotheca, XLV. Epiphanius, 1. i. p. 8. d 0? ^e o-fGotTat /xayaj TBO-^, A^ta, x Awvaov, xeu AgTtpm. Herodot. 1. 5. c. 7. Compare the paffage from Herodotus, cited p. 65. note w . I 3 that 1 1 8 Worfhip of human Spirits that thefe were their principal gods, They might be the onty gods worfhip- ped by all the different nations of Thrace, or the only gods they had in common with other nations. He could not mean, that no other gods but thefe were worfhipped by any of the people of Thrace ; for he knew that Zamolxis was acknowledged as a god by the Getes, a people of this country e : and he alfo in- forms us, that the Thracians of Abfyn- thus facrificed a Perfian to Pleltorus, a god of the country, according to their cuftom f . Much lefs did Herodotus mean, that the Thracians acknowledged only the natural gods ; for we learn from him, that Bacchus was educated in Arabia 3 . He alfo informs us, that the Thracians in Afia had, in their coun- try h , an oracle of Mars, who was cer- * Above, p. 32. * Herodot. 1. 9. c. Ii8 f Above, p. 85. note ". L. 7 . 0.76. tainly in barbarous Nations. 119 tainly a Thracian '. His fepulchre was fhewn in Thrace, according to Clemens Romanus, who makes mention of many other heathen gods whofe fepulchres were well known k . Each nation of Thrace feems to have had it's own pe- culiar divinity ; and their kings prided themfelves in their relation to Hermes : for Herodotus ', to the paflage cited from him above, fubjoins the following de- claration : Their kings, befides the national deities, adore Hermes with greater devotion than their other gods, fwear by him alone, and claim to be defcended from him m . Ha- ving given ample fpecimens of the wor- ihip of human fpirits in the different nations of Europe, III. Let us proceed to AJia. That dead men were deified in many parts of this vaft continent, particularly 1 Virgil calls Thrace, Rhefi Mavortia tellus. Georg. IV. 462. k Clemens, Recogn. 1. 10. c. 24, torn. i. p. 594. ed. Clerici. 'L. 5 . c.;. m Concerning Mercury, fee p. in. 14 in I2O Worjhip of human Spirits in Arabia, Perfia, and the boundlefs re- gions called Scythia, has been already fhewn. The fame will be proved con- cerning feveral other great nations of Ana 'in the next chapter, when the ob- jects of worfhip amongft the people po- lifhed by learning come under confidera- tion. But, befides the nations which will be there fpoken of, and thofe al- ready fpecified, there were many others in which human fpirits were worfhip- ped. It would be endlefs to recount all the rude and barbarous people who ac- knowledged fuch gods as thefe. The mention of fome of the moft confidera- ble will ferve as proper famples of the reft. In Sarmatia Afiatica n , near the Palus Mseotis, the hero Achilles was deified. Jn Colchis there was a temple and grove .dedicated to Phrixus . Medea was ef- teemed a goddefs in the fame place, as ? Strabo, 1. n. p. 756. Hie Phrixi templum et lucus. Mela, 1. i. p. 21. Athenagoras in barbarous Nations. 121 Athenagoras p affirms upon the authority of Alcman and Hefiod. Athenagoras, in his learned apology for the Chriftians, infifts largely upon this topic, that the Heathens, as appeared from their own records, or from fadls of the greateft notoriety, worfhipped gods that had once been men and women. He men- tions by name rnany fuch, (which I pafs over,) and fays, the time would fail him to enumerate all the reft q . I could not omit his teftimony in this place, be- caufe it is confirmed by the Heathens themfelves. . To return. Protefilaus was worfhipped in Abydena r ; Autoly- cus at Sinope in Paphlagonia, where he had an oracle * 3 and Iphigenia by the in- habitants of Taurus ' j Heftor and He- P Legat. pro Chriftian. p. 51, 52. Oxon. 1706. q Ear?.e4'E /^* 1 r^-.fa, ro w^So; xaTaXryoxra. Athenag. p. 5 2. 1 Sunt Protefilai ofla confecrato delubro. Mela, 1. 2. C. 2. * Strabo, 1. 12. p. 822. * Herodot. 1. 4. c, ^03. lena 122 Werfoip of human Spirit f lena at Ilium in Phrygia u ; Sarpedon*, Cybele, and Attis, at Troas * -, Achilles atSigaeum r i and, at Smyrna, Homer*. Divine honours were paid to Alabandus inCaria*; to Pandarus in Lycia b j to Niobe c and Mopfus d in Cilicia j to Ac- mon * in Cappadocia j in Pontus to Pa- troclus f ; in Armenia to Tanais or A- u Athenag. Legat. p. 50. * Pliny, 1. 13. c. 13. * See the hiftory of Cybele, in Diodor. Sic. 1. 3, e. 30. y Strabo, I. 13. p. 891. z Id. 1. 14. p. 956. I omit moft of the Grecian co- lonies in Afia, becaufe they do not fall under the de- fcription of Barbarians, and becaufe there can be no doubt about their having the fame objects of worfhip as Greece ; which will be confidered in the next chapter. a Cicero, de Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 15, 19. b Strabo, I. 14. p. 981. c Athenag. Legat. p. 52. d Nam et oraculis hoc genus ftipatus eft orbis ; ut Amphiarai apud Oropum, Amphilochi apud Mallum, Sarpedonis in Troade, Trophonii in Bceotia, Mopfi in Cilicia, Hermiones in Macedonia, Pafiphaes in Laco- nica. Tertullian. de Anima, c. 46. * Stephan. Byzant. in voc. Acmon. [ Clement. Recog. 1, 10. c, 25. naitis ; in barbarous Nations. 123 naitis c ; and in Media to Hephaeftion h . The haughty monarchs of Parthia were ftiled the brothers of the fun and moon , and were believed to mingle with the itars at death *. As the Parthians were fubjecl:, firft to the Medes, and afterwards to the Perfians ; and there was an intercourfe and alliance between the two latter ; it is very reafonable to fuppofc, that the religion of thefe three nations was very much the fame k : which confirms what was obferved above, concerning the gods of Perfia being the fame with thofe of the furrounding nations ; that is, both celeftial and terreftrial. If, from Perfia, we go into the re- moter regions of Afia, we fhall find that the cuftom of deifying human fpirits e Strabo, 1. n. p. 805. See above, p. 70. h Compare Quint. Curt. I. 10. c. 4. Juftin. 1. 12. c. 12. and Plutarch, in Alexandra. The Medes wor- ftiipped their kings while living. Strabo, 1. xi. p. 797. 1 Ammianus Marcellinus, 1. 23. c. 6. See alfo Martial, Ep. 72. k Strabo fays, (1. ir. p. 805.) that both the Medcs 2nd Armenians obferve the Perfian rites of worftiip. prevailed 1 24 Worfiip of human Spirits prevailed there from the earlier! ages : for Ammon and Bacchus were worfhip- ped in India l . Diodorus Siculus m makes the Indian Bacchus the moft ancient of all thofe who bore that name. He went from Aflyria into India, according to the account given by fome of the Indians to Apollonius n . One reafon affigned, by the Pendets of Indoftan, for worfhip- ping brute-animals, is, their being fup- pofed to contain in them the fouls of de- parted heroes . And a modern voyager p to the Indies allures us, that the Hea- thens adore their god Ram, though the 1 Concerning Bacchus and Ammon, fee above, p. 85. note . m L. 3. p. 232. ed. Wefleling. * Philoftrat. Vit. Apollon. Tyan. 1. 2. c. 9. p. 57. Bernier's Memoirs, torn. 3. p. 154, 155, 156. f Thevenot, Voyages des Indes, part. 3. liv. i. c. 38. Quand un Chretien leur parle de leur dieu Ram que les Gentils adorent, ils ne foutiennent point qu'il eft Dieu, et difent feulement que c'etoit un grand roi, dont la faintete et le fecour qu'il a donne aux hommes lui ont acquis une communication plus particuliere avec Dieu qu'autres faints, et qu'ainfi ils lui portent beau- coup plus de refpedl. Brachmans, in barbarous Nations. 125 Brachmans, in their converfation with Chriftians, pretend that they only ho- nour him with fingular refpecl: as a great q monarch, whofe extraordinary virtues and merit towards mankind give him a peculiar intereft in the favour of the Deity. The mofl ancient of all their gods was Perambramman, who was worfhipped together with his three fons r . To many other men they paid divine honours *, and ufed libations, fa- crifices, and various other rites, to ex- piate the manes of the dead *. Accord- * That is, I fuppofe, with a civil refpeft : an excufe like that was made for the Perfians, p. 56. and for the Chinefe, p. 41. r Parambramman nefcio quern deorum antiquiffimum colunt, et ex eo filios tres. Peter Maffeus, in his firil book Hiftoriarum Indicarum, p. 55. 9 Multis prasterea, non hominibus modo, fed brutis ctiam animantibus, cceleftes habent honores, et templa aidificant. Id. ib. They paid extraordinary devotion to oxen ; quod hominum vita funftorum animos in cam maxime belluam immigrare opinantur. P. 56. * Sacrificiis, libationibus, caeterifque nefariis ritibus, ad expiandos mortuorum manes, utuntur. Id. ib. ing 1 2 6 Worjhip of human Spirits ing to the editor of the Ezour Vedam u , Budda, the moft celebrated of the Sa- manean dolors, who was born near fe- ven hundred years before Chrift, was honoured as a god, and his doctrine was adopted, not only in India, but alfo in Japan, China, Siam, and Tartary. The Ezour Vedam itfelf is faid to aflert the unity, but confiders all the other gods as mortals. Every one has heard of the extraordinary devotion paid in T'ibet and other eaftern nations to the grand Lama^ whom they regard as omnifcient and immortal : for, when he dies in appear- ance, they imagine he only changes his abode, being born again in another bo- dy". If, from Tibet, you proceed to China, you will find, in that vaft empire, gods taken from amongft mankind. What L'Ezour Vedam, ou ancien commentaire du Ve- dam, contenant Pexpofition des opinions religieufes et philofophiques des Indiens, par M. de Sainte Croix. Monthly Review, appendix to vol. 61. p. 500. w See Bernier's Memoirs, v. 4. p. 127. and Com- plete Syftem of Geography, v. 2. p. 301. ed. 1747. was in barbarous Nations. 127 was only incidentally obferved above *, concerning the Chinefe, cannot be o- mitted in this place, to which it pro- perly belongs j viz. that they pay an idolatrous worfhip to the fouls of their anceftors, and honour Confucius with the fame religious ceremonies as they do their celeftial and terreftrial fpirits. At the very extremity of the Baft, in Japan, there are clear traces of the fame fuperftition. I need not take any parti- cular notice of their god Cambadaxi, of whom an account is given by Cafpar Vi- lela y . It is fufficient to obferve, in ge- neral, concerning the Japanefe, that they deified their kings and men of royal birth, and thofe alfo who had diirin- guiflied themfelves by ufeful inventions or any illuftrious deeds. Nay, (what is very remarkable,) the Japanefe, at fuch a diftance from Greece relate of thefe hero-gods the like abfurd, ridiculous, - p. 4 i. r In I. 3. Epiftolarum Japonicarum. and 128 Worjhip of human Spirits and immoral, flories, as the Greek po- ets fabled concerning Jupiter, Saturn, Bacchus, and their other fictitious de- ities z . This obfervation may be ap- plied, in a good meafure, to the Brach- mans of India a . I (hall not trouble the reader here with any remarks upon a late writer, whofe learning allowed him to affirm b , " that divine honours were not paid to <{ deceafed heroes in the eaftern nations ;" though the very contrary has been de- monftrated by the moft numerous tefli- rnonies. Two general remarks fhall clofe this feclion. 2 Reges olim ipfos, reguttique filios, aut invento quo- plain, infignive alio facinore, falfa; divinitatis gloriam confequutos. Horum de vita rebufque geftis, uti de Jove, Saturno, Libero, c^terifque inanibus diis, Graaci poetse abfurda quaedam, et ridenda, et turpia, fabu- lantur. Maffei Hiftor. Indie. 1. 12. p. 533. In the ifland of Taprobane, now called Ceylon, Venus was worfhipped. Dionyfii Periegefis, v. 592. a Multos habent foarum fuperftitionum libros quae nonnihil ad veteris Graeciae fabulas et auguralem Hetruriae difciplinam videntur accedere. MafFei Hiflor, Indie. 1. 1. p. 56. " Fell, P . 7. i. The in barbarous Nations. 129 i. The teftimonies, produced in this and the foregoing feftions, are fufficient to fhew, that the worfhip of human fpirits, in the nations (tiled barbarous, was very general. The known excep- tions are fo few, that they fcarcely deferve to be mentioned. Dr. Blackwell has furnifhed us only with one, if the cafe of the MafTagetes c be indeed an excep- tion. Having no fmifter defign to anf- wer, I did not conceal from the reader the cafe of fome of the Libyan No- mades d , (overlooked by that learned writer,) who worshipped only the natu- ral gods. I now add, that the fame has been affirmed concerning the Albani^ a people who bordered upon the Cafpian fea. But I queftion whether this can be inferred from the account given of them by Strabo c , who only fays : tfhey worjhip the gods $ the fun, ami 'Jupiter^ and the c Above, p. 28. d P. 95, 96. WS-IX' HAtor, xau Ax, xat EiT^jyjs*' &pi- vi. Strabo, 1. 11. p. 768. K moon ; 130 Worfoip of human Spirits moon ; principally the latter. Had this accurate writer, by Jupiter, here meant heaven, it would have been more natu- ral for him to have ufed the Greek term that exprefles it, efpecially in connexion with two other natural objects, the fun and moon. By Jupiter, therefore, he probably intended the prefident of the air : an office which the Heathens af- figned to a human fpirit. Befides, Strabo does not affirm, that the Albanians wor- fhipped no other gods but thofe whom he fpecified. He takes notice, indeed, of their (hewing no refpect to the dead f ; but this might be very confiflent with their worfhipping fuch men as antiquity had deified. I (hall only add, that if, in fome nations, the natural gods alone were acknowledged, we have feen that there were others in which they had no gods but deified men and women 2 . In moil of the nations, of which we are fpeaking, there were both natural and mortal gods. * Id. ib. s P. 32, 97. 2. The in barbarous Nations. 131 2. The foregoing tefti monies juftify the limited explication, given above 11 , of a pafTage in Plato, in which he fays, u Many of the Barbarians, in his time, " held only the natural gods." For moft of thefe teflimonies refer to times prior to thofe of this celebrated philofo- pher. And there will be occafion to (hew, in the fequel, that the worfhip of human fpirits very generally prevailed in the early ages of the world. h P. 10, note/. Compare Fell, p. 9. K 2 CHAP, 132 Worjhlp of human Spirits CHAP. II. Proving^ from the teftimonies of the Heathens ^ that they paid religious honours to dead men in the nations policed by learning. A MONGST the nations which anf- wer this defcription, we may reckon the Chaldeans, Babylonians, Syrians, Phenicians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Ro- mans. To thefe we muft add fuch Ara- bians as bordered upon Judea and E- It is to the gods of thefe nations, of fuch of them efpecially as were upon the confines of Canaan *, that the Scriptures refer, when they fpeak of the heathen deities. The knowledge of the gods of thefe nations, therefore, muft be highly ufeful to the lover of facred literature. * The Ifraelites went after the Heathen that were round about them. 2 Kings xvii. 15. My in polijhed Nations. 133 My more immediate defign at prefent is to fliew, that, in all k the fore-men- tioned nations, divine honours were paid to dead men and women. S. ECT. I. - * ' ' T Shall begin with confidering the cafe of the PHENICIANS j becaufe the ac- count given us of their gods will be of ufe to us in explaining thofe of the other polifhed nations. It has been faid, with no fmall degree of confidence, that " there can be no " doubt but that the Greeks themfelves " have declared, that the Phenicians ne- " ver worfhipped fuch gods as had been <c men 1 ." Who the Greeks are, that have made this declaration, is a fecret the gentleman has locked up in his own breaft, or rather is (I apprehend) a great fecret even to himfelf. As Sanchonia- k The gods of the Arabs were confidered above, p, 84. 1 Fell, p. 31. K 3 thon j 3 4 Worjhip of human Spirits thon is the author he had laft men- tioned, he probably miftook him for a Greek writer. But the hiftory of San^ choniathon was written in the Phenician language, as the learned well know ; and was only tranflated into Greek by Philo of Byblus, A part of that tranflation is preferred by Eufebius m . Philo, in his preface to it, has given us the following extract from his author ; introducing it with a declaration, that it was previoufly neceflary to the right underflanding of his hiftory , I fhall lay it before the reader, not for the fake of refuting the gentleman's unfupported afTertion, which thofe acquainted with antiquity muft know to be falfe ; but becaufe it will Prsep. Ev. I. i. n Whether the following citation be Philo's extraft from. Sanchcniathon, or the account which Philo him- felf thought it neceflary to give in order to the right understanding of his author, is a matter of no moment. It may be referred indifferently either to the one or the other. Eufeb. Praep. Ev. 1. i. p. 32. D. throw in polijhed Nations. 135 throw great light upon the general fub- jeft. Sanchoniathon, who is fuppofed to have approached near to the age of Mo- fes, writes as follows p . f The moft an- <c dent of the Barbarians, efpecially the' " Phenicians and Egyptians, from whom " other people derived this cuftom, accounted " thofe the GREATEST GOD S\ who lt had found out things moft neceffary and " ufeful in life, and had been benefactors to (t mankind. Thefe they worjhipped as {t gods r j and, applying their temples to this <c ufe, they confecrated to their names' pil- " lars and ft at ues of 'wood, which the Phe- *' nicians held in high veneration, and in- < ftituted the moft folemn fejiivals in their " honour. More efpecially did they give S( the names of their kings to the mundane " elements, and to other things to which {< they attributed divinity. For phyfical " beings alone, fuch as the fun, moon, " planets, and elements, and things of P Id. p. 32, 33. q a ? t 0/ *io /xf/trs?. K 4 tf the 136 Worjhip of human Spirits <c the fame kind, did they acknowledge "to be flrictly and properly gods'. <e So that fome of their gods were MOR- TAL, and others IMMORTAL 1 ." That part of this citation from San- choniathon, or Philo Byblius, here print- ed in Roman characters, was given in the Diflertation on Miracles " j as was alfo fo much of the other part w , here diftinguifhed by Italics, as was necefTary to {hew, that the Phenicians and other ancient nations worfhipped fuch men as had been benefactors to the human race. Neverthelefs Mr. Fell % (incre- dible as it may feem!) fupprefling that part of it which afTerts the deification of men, (though he quotes the words that * Some render, (pvcrm&s S'l *i\tov v.ct\ aiKvmv &{ ^c ? lyiyuffxov, " but the fun, moon, and planets, and " other things like thefe, they acknowledged as the " only pbyjical or natural gods." But Eufebius him- felf, p. 28. A, after enumerating the fame phyfical gods of the Phenicians, fays, that their firft naturalifts &iu{ IAMOV syivwcrxoy, acknowledged thefe alone to be gods. 1 I7r uvrtnf Ttf? [Am SUJTS;, TK^ $t aQa-Ycntis, Siaj MCH u P. 173. note f , p. 179. note '. w P. 187. * P. 30, 3'' immediately in polijhed Nations. immediately precede it y ,) and fetting be- fore his readers that part only which re- lates to the natural gods, reprefents the latter as fuch a contradiction to my af- fertions refpecting the more immediate objects of heathen worfhip, that he pro- fefles to be at a lofs what apology fa make for me, and defcribes me as a perfon with whom it is in vain to reafon. Can this writer make any apology for his own conduct ? He falfely charges me with grofs felf- contradiction, in a cafe in which there would not have appeared even a fhadow of it, had he had the ho- nefty to lay before his readers both the extracts from Philo Byblius ; which, ta- ken together, inflead of contradicting, do in the fulleft manner eftablifh, what I had afferted concerning the heathen gods. I appeal to every candid reader. Is it not evident, from the foregoing teftimony of Sanchoniathon, that, in the opinion of the Phenicians, particu- y Corop. Diflert. on Mir. p. 187. Fell, p. 31. larly 138 Worjhlp of human Spirits larly of their firfl naturalifts *, phyfical beings were the only gods j that is, in their own natural right a ? And is it not equally evident, from the fame teftimony, that the Phenicians worfhipped human fpirits as gods, even as their greateft gods, and with the mod folemn devotion ? To thefe their worfhip was more imme- diately directed, in their public temples ; and, from thefe, their natural gods re- ceived their denomination. So that the worfhip cf the latter mufl in a manner have been abforbed in that of the former, or both were worfhipped together. He alone who was capable of appealing to Herodotus, to vouch for a fact which that hiflorian contradicts, could be bold enough to tell the world, that the tefti- mony of Sanchoniathon was a contra- diction to my affertions, when that tef- timony does, in the cleareil terms, con- firm my opinion, and confute his. Had 2 O* ffgwroipwrmot, x. T. X. Eufeb. P. Ev. 1. I. p. 38. A. a Compare what is obferved above, from Mr. Sale, concerning the Arabians, p. 87. he in polified Nations. 139 he not been an entire flranger to San- choniathon, he muft have known that his hiftory was written with the exprefs defign of fhewing, that, though the parts and elements of the world were the original gods of the Phenicians and other nations, yet that the public devo- tion was directly addrefled to deified men and women b . And Eufebius tefti^ fies, that, even to his time, thefe were the gods worfhipped by all people, and in all cities and countries . r b r j . Mr. Fell affirms d , ttefe (the fun, moon, and the other natural gods) were the Cabirij or mighty gods of the eajlern. nations. The gentleman here, as on other occafions, follows Dr. Blackwell '. But the learned doctor's authority is of no weight, in a cafe of this kind, againft the teftimony of the ancients. The Ca- b See Sanchoniathon, apud Eufeh. P. Ev. 1. i. paf- fim, or Eufebius's Ihort account of him, p. 31. C. Id. ib. P. 10. * Mythol. p. 277. biri, 140 Worflnp of human Spirits bin, or potent gods of the Phenicians, were, according to Sanchoniathon, eight in number, and no other than men dei- fied after death. From Sydic defcended the Diofcuri, or Cabiri, or Corybantes, or Samothracian deities f . f fbefe, he adds, jirft invented the building of a Jhip. The Egyptian priefts feem to have envied Phenicia the honour of having given birth to thefe famous deities, (whofe rites were fo facred and myfterious, and fo generally obferved,) and claimed them as their own. For they told Herodo- tus g , that the Cabiri h were the fons of Vulcan, the oldeft of their gods. I will not enter into this difpute ; but muft obferve, that, though the Phenician Ca- birs are allegorized by many ancient as well as modern writers ', yet were they f Ex St ra Lvovx, Aioj-xa^ot, n KafSitgci, n Ko^jSarrij, ij i^c s -axi ? . Eufeb. Praep. Evan. 1. i. p. 36. A. See p. 39. B. C. s L. 3. c. 37. h See Hefych. in voce. 1 Letters on Mythol. p. 278. Jablonfki, Tantheon u^tgypt. torn. 2. Prolegom. p. 61. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 42. real in policed Nations . 141 real human perfonages, and worfhipped as fuch by the people. The fon of Tha- bion is faid to be the firft who turned their hiftory into allegory k . It will be proper to take notice of fome other Phenician deities, who were certainly of human extract. Sanchoni- athon l makes mention of Cbrvfor, (faid to be the fame with Vulcan,) as one who, for his ufeful inventions, was, af- ter his deceafe, worfhipped as a god : of Agrotes, who, for a like reafon, was honoured with a flatue and temple, and was eminently called the great eft of the gods m : of Dagon, who, having difco- vered bread- corn and the plough, was called Jupiter Aratrius " : of I'aaufus, (called by the Alexandrians Thoyth, and by the Greeks Hermes J the fon of Mifor, and the inventor of letters : of Elioun k Eufeb. Praep. Ev. 1. I. p. 39. 1 Apud Eufeb. Prsep. Ev. p. 35. Id. ib, n Id. p. 37. D. Hence Dagon was called Zr, that is, frumenti praefes, as it is explained by the edi- tor of Eufebius, p. 36. C. Id. p. 36. A. or 142 Worjhlp of human Spirits or Hypfiftus, to whom, after his death, his children offered facrifices and liba- tions p : of Our anus ^ from whom the ele- ment over us, by reafon of it's excellent beauty, is called Ouranus or heaven q : and of Gee, from whom earth took it's name r . Ouranus had, by his fitter Gee, ChronoSy who founded Byblus, and after his death was confecrated into the pla- net called, after his name, Chronos, or Saturn s . Many more examples of the fame kind might be produced from San^ choniathon ; but I fhall take notice only of two, Aftarte and Hercules. The celebrated AJlarte, according to this author *, was the daughter of Ou- ranus. She is called the greateft goddefs % and was the fame with Aphrodite, or Ve- p ib. i P. 36. B. r Concerning the deification of Ouranus and Gee, fee Diodorus Siculus, 1.3. p. 224, 225. ed. Wefleling. and La&antius, de Falf. Relig. 1. i. p. 52, 53. Gee feems to anfwer to Herthum, fpoken of above, p. 44. * Eufeb. P. E. p. 40. C. p. 150. D. Id. p. 37. Sanchon. ap. Eufeb. P.E. 1. I. p. 38. C. nus, 'in potijhed Nations, 1 43 nus, according to the Phenicians w . Plato alfo calls her the ancient and celejiial Ve- nus 5 and fpeaks of her, as Sanchonia- thon does, as the daughter of Uranus r . In Cicero likewife the Syrian Venus is called Aflarte Y . She was worfhipped by the Arabians, Perfians, AfTyrians, and Syrians ; and held in peculiar venera- tion at Tyre, Sidon, and Byblus z . This female deity reigned in Phenicia a , and was thought to be worfhipped by the Sidonians and Carthaginians under the name of Juno V Id. p. 38. C, D. Suidas fays, that Aftarte was called Ve- nus by the Greeks. * Plato, Sympof. p. 1 80. ed. Serran. y De Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 23. Venus quarta, Syria Tyroque concepta, quae Aftarte vocatur. Compare Herodot. 1. i. 0.105, I 3 1> and what was obferved a- bove concerning Urania, p. 68-71. See Herodian, 1.5. c. 15. p. 193. z Herodot. 1. i. c. 105, 131. Lucian. de Dea Syr. p. 657, 658. a Phenicia was called the land of Venus. ^Efchyl. Supplices, v. 563. b Virgil. ^En. I. 446, With 144 Worjtnp of human Spirits With regard to the Phenician Her- cules of Tyre, where he had a temple c erected to him, he was the fon of De- maroon, and was by the Phenicians cal- led Melcarthus *. He is thought by fome to be the older! of all the great heroes of the name of Hercules. His temple at Tyre was faid to be as old as the city d . In the fame city there was a temple de- dicated to Hercules under the title of Thafian \ The reader muft have obferved, that feveral of the foregoing proofs of the Phenicians paying religious worfhip to human fpirits are furnifhed by the Greek writers ; though we have been told% that the Greeks have, without doubt > de- clared the contrary. In confirmation of what has been urged, I muft obferve, that the cruel cuftom of offering human facrifices was praclifed in Phenicia more frequently, and with circumftances of e Herodot. 1. 2. c. 44. * Eufeb. P. E. p. 38. A. He was alfo called Malic, or king. Hefych. ' Id. ib. Fell, p. 31. greater in polified Nations . 145 greater barbarity, than in any other country. A colony of Phenicians, fet- tled at Carthage, when firft tranfplant- ed, facrificed to Saturn (whom we have fpoken of before) the fons of their moft eminent citizens -, though, in after- times, the children of the poor, bought and bred up for that purpofe, were fub- flituted in their room f . Two hundred fons of the nobility, together with three hundred other perfons, have been offer- ed up at one time 8 . The circumftances attending thefe barbarous rites are pre- ferved by Diodorus Siculus h , but are too fhocking to be recited. No wonder that a multitude of fuch facrifices, equally impious and inhuman, {hould be fpoken of in Scripture as the ground of God's fingular difpleafure againft the Canaan- ites, and of his purpofe to extirpate them. But they are taken notice of here, becaufe they furnifh a proof, (as will be (hewn hereafter,) that the Chro- f Diodor. Sic. 1. 29. p. 415. 8 Id. p. 415, 416. b P. 416. ed. Weff. L nus 146 Worfliip of human Spirits nus or Saturn, to whom they were of- fered, was the fame deified monarch of Phenicia who facrificed his own fon*. SECT. II. T ET us proceed to inquire, whether heroes and gods of earthly origin were worfhipped by the EGYPTIANS. We are now entering on a fubjet v of fingular importance. Whether Egypt derived it's religion from the eaflern na- tions, as fome j contend j or whether, as others a(Iert k , the eaflern nations deri- ved their religion from Egypt ; on either fuppofition, both religions were formed upon the fame model, and there muft * Eufeb. P. E. p. 38. * The eaftern writers. k Lucian afcribes to the Egyptians the firft know- ledge of the gods, and of their rites of worfhip ; and fays, it was derived from them to the AfTyrians. De Syria Dea, p. 656, 657. torn. 2. Eufebius affirms, that the polytheifin of the nations had it's firft rife in Phenicia and Egypt, and was from thence propagated into other countries, and Greece in particular. Prasp. Ev. 1. i. p. 30. C.D. have in polifhed Nations. 147 have been a great refemblance between them. As to the weilern nations, par- ticularly Greece and Italy, it is allowed by all, that they received their theology from Egypt and the eaft. The religion, therefore, of all the nations polifhed by learning muft have been the fame, in all it's eflential principles j and a knowledge of the gods of any one of them will aflifh us in forming our judgement concern- ing thofe of the others. But Egypt de- mands our particular attention, as well on account of her high reputation and extenfive influence amongft the ancient nations, as of the full information we have concerning her objedls of worfhip. The theology of Egypt is indeed the key to that of all the other countries here fpoken of. Not to add, that thofe wri- ters, who feem difpofed to refolve the great gods of the Heathens into a pby- fical jyftem y derive their chief arguments from the accounts which are given us of the Egyptian divinities. They will by no means allow, that fuch gods as had L 2 once 148 Worjhip of human Spirits once been men were ever worfhipped irt Egypt, whatever might be the cafe in other countries. There are, however, many prefump- tive proofs of the contrary. Thofe na- tions which derived their theology from Egypt (Greece, in particular, which borrowed from it the very names, l of their gods) did certainly worfhip human fpi- rits. Is it unnatural to conclude, from hence, that the Egyptians did the fame ? They were the firft who creeled ima- ges ra in honour of the gods : and were not images in human form reprefenta- tions of human beings ? They are faid to be the firft who held the immortality of the foul of man, which they explained 1 Herodot. 1. 2. c. 50. ** Id. 1.2. c. 4. Plato affirms, that the Egyptians had fculpture for ten thoufand years before his time. De Leg. 1. 2. p. 656. ed. Serrani. And, though Lucian thought that their moft ancient temples were without images, yet he allows, that afterwards the Aflyrians, who derived their theology from Egypt, placed images in their temples. De Dea Syr. p. 657. by in polijhed Nations. 1 49 by it's tranfmigration n : principles that either lay at the foundation of it's fu-, ture affociation with the gods, or that were intimately connected with it . According to Diodorus Siculus, they worfhipped their kings, while on p earth, as real gods. Cleopatra claimed to be n Herodot. 1. 2. c. 123. So clofely connected, in the idea of many of the ancients, were the immortality of the foul, and it's fu- ture deification or aflbciation with the gods, that Hero- dotus defcribes the Getes, becoming companions of Za- molxis, by faying, they immortalized : A-Sara-n^ac-t & TO & TO* TjOB-oc. L. -4. c. 94. Immortality feems to have been ufed almoft as fynonymous to deification in Dio- dorus Siculus, lib. 3. p. 243. lin. 4. ed. Weff. and alfo in p. 24. lin. 10. (which will be cited in the fe- quel,) and in many other writers. As to the doctrine of tranfmigration, it led them to believe, that the fame god might be often born ; as appears from the claim of Cleopatra and others. P ft? tr^ a*.r,$ua.r 9ra; Szs?. L. I. p. IOI. The fame thing is plainly intimated in the following lines of Virgil, Georg. IV. 210. Pneterea regem non fie ^Egyptus, et ingens Lydia, nee populi Parthorum, aut Indus Hydafpes, Obfervant. 3 150 Worjkip of kuman Spirits Ifis q herfelf, one of the principal objects of their devotion. If you a(k, how is it poflible that a nation, wife and learned as the Egyp- tians, fhould worfhip dead men and wo- men ? I anfwer, that, inafmuch as all allow, and cannot but allow, that they acknowledged gods whom they fed in the frail, nay, that grew in their gardens, why fhould it be thought incredible that they fhould deify beings of a more noble nature than brutes and vegetables ? Be- fides, it will be proved hereafter r , that the reafon why brutes were worfhipped was the notion of their being animated by the fouls of departed men. The foregoing confiderations may at leaft prepare us to receive the pofitive proofs, which I fhall now produce, of the worfhip of human fpirits in E- 9 Cleopatra iibi tantum adfumferat, ut fe I/in vellet videri. Servius, in ^En. VIII. 696. j. Hermes in polifted Nations. j \ i . Hermes Trifmegiftus h acknowledged, that the gods of Egypt were dead men ; that the art of making gods was invent- ed in this country -, and that human fouls were wormipped as demons in e- very city. Amongft the human perfon- ages confecrated into gods, Trifmegif- tus fpecifies, ' ./Efculapius, Ifis, and the elder Hermes, or Mercury ; three of the moft celebrated divinities of Egypt. The 5 Hermes ipfe decs ^Egypti homines mortuos cfTe teftatiir. Cum enim dixiffet proavos fuos in- venifle artem qua efficerent decs. Terrenis diis at- que mundanis facile eft irafci ; utpote qui fint ab homi- nibus ex utraque natura fa&i atque compofiti. Ex utra- que natara dicit, ex anima et corpore : ut pro anima fit daemon, pro corpore fimulachrum. Unde contigit, in- quit, ab ^Egyptiis hasc fanfta animalia nuncupari, co- lique per fmgulas civitates eorum animas, &e. Au- guft. Civ. Dei, 1.8. 0.26. p. 513, 514- 1 Ecce duos deos dicit homines fuiffe, JEfcuIapium et Mercurium. Addit, et dicit, Ifm vero uxorem (Ofiridis), quam multa bona prsflare propitiam, quantis fcimus obeffe iratam ? Deinde ut oftenderet ex hoc ge- nere efle deos, quos ilia arte homines faciunt : unde dat intelligi d&mones fe opinari ex hominum mortucrum animis extitifle. Id. p. 513. L 4 laft 1 52 Worfhip of human Spirits laft he calls his own grandfather, after whofe name he was called *.' 2. The teftimony of Sanchoniathon was produced above u ; and we have feen him affirming, that the Egyptians, * as well as the Phenicians, accounted thofe the great eft gods, who had been eminent be- nefactors to mankind. 3. My next appeal fhall be to Hero- dotuSy who had vifited Egypt, and fpared no pains to inform himfelf concerning the religion of that country. The very ingenious Dr. Blackweli w , and a fo- reigner * of diflinguifhed learning, would willingly infer, from a paflage in this hiflorian, that the Egyptians paid no re- ligious honours to heroes*. They feem, however, to have miftaken the meaning of their author, by not attending to the connexion of the paflage in queflion with the preceding context. Herodotus * Id. ib. n P. 135. w In Letters on Mythol. p. 209. ? Jablonlki, Pantheon^Egypt. torn. 2. Pjolegom. p. 37. y No/xj^acrj $ur A*ytirno a^ yguo-t tj^tv. L. 2. c. CJO. is in polijhed Nations . 153 is fpeaking of Neptune, and fhewing that the Greeks learnt the name of this god from the Libyans, not from the E- gyptians ; who, as this hiftorian elfe* where z informs us, affirmed, that they did not know the name of Neptune, nor ever received him into the number of their gods. Concerning Neptune alone Herodotus fpeaks, when he fays, the Egyptians did not honour him at all, as Gale renders the original a . But it is very probable, that the text is corrupt- ed, and that the true reading makes no mention of heroes, and only imports, that they do net facrifce b to him (Nep- tune) 3 that is, the Egyptians did nei- ther acknowledge his divinity, nor pay him any worfhip. Indeed the occafion did not lead Herodotus to fpeak about freroes ; for Neptune was advanced by the Libyans to the higher rank of gods, * L. 2. 0.43. a OtJ' ij<ri &?, nullo honore profequuntur. b Some copies read, ov <$) fyum &v. Variantes Lec- fiones ad librum ii. Herodot. p. 10. cura Galei. though 154 Wofjhip of human Spirits though originally a mere mortal. Nor was it poffible for the hiftorian to affirm, that the Egyptians paid no religious ho- nours to the fouls of dead men, with- out groffly contradicting himfelf. For, I lhall now proceed to prove, from the teftimony of this inquifitive traveller, that human fouls were worfhipped in Egypt. He affirms, that, at Chemmis % in the province of Thebes, Perfeus, the fon of Danae, had a temple c dedicated to him, in which his image was placed - 3 and that he was faid by the inhabitants frequently to appear rifing out of the earth d . The priefts informed him, that king Proteus, a native of Memphis, was honoured with a ftately temple in that city e . In this temple there was a cha- pel dedicated to Venus the Stranger, whom he fuppofed to be Helena, the daughter of Tyndarus f . Mars, who re^ c E return TJJ wo?u $- Tlfga-toi; rs Aa*r? ov. Herodot. 1. 2. C. 9!. d Ib. e Id. c. 112, 118, 119. * Cap. ir z, 113. Strabo refers to this Venus, 1. 17. p. 1161. turned in polijhed Nations. turned to his mother when he attained to the age of man E , was worfhipped at Pampremis h . And Hercules (of whom farther mention will be made) had a temple near the Canopian mouth of the river Nile, which, Herodotus fays, re- mained to his time 1 . Thefe inllances of the worfhip of human fpirits in E- gypt, recorded by Herodotus, were cer- tainly overlooked by thofe writers who affirmed, upon the fuppofed authority of this hiftorian, that the Egyptians paid no religious honours to any gods of earthly extract. But we may advance farther, and ob- ferve, that Herodotus has recorded fe- veral facts, which ferve to fhew, that fome at leaft of all the different orders of Egyptian gods were no other than men and women deified. He makes La- tona, who refided in Butus, one of the fight primary deities of Egypt*. Ac- s Cap. 64. h Cap. 59. Cap. 113. AVTV twa ?uv WTO Qiuv ray iTfurtiiv ytvoutiiuVf ow.iuau. $i iv Barot TrtTu. L. 2. c. 156. cording 156 Worjhlp of human Spirits cording to our author, Pan alfo was reckoned in this number by the Mende- fians \ and was confidered by fome as the oldefl of the eight primary gods M . Now, Pan, as we learn from hiftory n , accom- panied Ofiris in his fuccefsful expedition to the Indies. We are farther told by Herodotus, that the Cabiri were faid to be defcended from Vulcan * : and that, when the Egyptians added four more gods to the eight juft now fpoken of, Hercules made one of the twelve , whom the hiftorian confiders as a man -, as will be {hewn in the fequel. He like wife makes mention of a third order of gods, to which Bacchus belonged, as Hercules did to the fecond, and Pan to the firfl p . Now, Bacchus, we have feen, was edu- cated in Arabia q . But it is obje&ed, that, according to Herodotus, the priefts of Egypt affirm- ed, that, in eleven thoufand three hun- 1 Cap. 46. ra Cap. 145. * Diodor. Sic. p. 21. We/T. * Above, p. 140. * Herodot. 1. 2. c. 43, 145. P Cap. 145. * Above, p. 85. dred in polified Nations. 157 dred and forty years, there had been no god in the form of a man T : that, ac- cording to the fame author ', the priefts of Jupiter at Thebes would by no means allow, that a man could be begotten by a god, or that any one Piromis ' had been reputed either a god or a hero : and that the Theban priefts farther affirmed, that in the molt ancient times the gods had been the fovereigns of Egypt, the laft of whom was Orus, the fon of Ofiris ". From thefe circumftancs a learned wri- ter v concludes, that the Egyptians were flrangers to the deification of men. In anfwer to this objection, it may be obferved, ift. That, in reading Hero- dotus, we are carefully to diftinguifh between the fads which he affirms, or appears to credit, and thofe which he profefledly reports upon the teflimony of others. He himfelf has often pointed r Lib. 2. c. 142. Cap. 143, 144. * Piromis anfwers to xa*o; x'ySoj, according to He- rodotus. n Cap. 144. * Jablonfld, torn. 2. Prolsgom. p. 37. out 158 Worjhip of human Spirits out this diflinc~lion, particularly in the following pafTage : / am obliged to relate what isfaid, but I am not obliged to believe every thing without dijlinttion $ and I de^ Jire that this declaration may be attended to through the * courfe of my hiftory. Now, Herodotus does not affirm the truth of any one of the particulars which form the objection we are confidering, but profefTedly fpeaks of them as reports he received from the priefts y . His autho- rity therefore is improperly urged to prove, that the Egyptians did not wor- fhip mortal divinities. He knew the contrary to be true z . * Herodot. 1. 7. c. 152. y Herodotus does not, I allow, opeiily contradict thefe reports ; nor was he at liberty to do it, if he was initiated into the myfteries, as he probably was. With what referve he fpeaks of the gods, may be feen by con- fulting lib. 2. 0.3, 45, 65, 71. 2 See above, p. 154, 155, 156, and what is faid con- cerning Hercules below. He feems to have had no con- ception that there was any effcntial difference between the Egyptians and the generality of mankind refpeUng the gods, but Juppofed all men thought alike concerning than : on WEJI vnuit J7rir*0 v va. L. 2. 2dly. in polijhed Nafions. 1 59 adly. As to the priefts of Egypt, it may be prefumed, that they, like other heathen priefts, difcouraged all free in- quiry concerning the gods a : they might be inftrucled not to fpeak openly of the earthly origin of Serapis, liis b , and o- thers , and, as their gods had been their kings, they might pretend that their kings were gods j and thus involve the fubjecl: in obfcurity. Neverthelefs, the priefts themfelves could not but acknow- ledge, that they had gods of mortal ori- gin. This appears from the facts re- cited by Herodotus, upon their autho- rity. 4. We muft not pafs over the account given of the gods of Egypt by Manetbo> becaufe it is fuppofed to militate againft a It feems to have been a maxim with the devout Pagans : Sandtiufque ac reverentius vifum de adtis deorum credere quam fcire. Tacit. Mor. Germ. c. 34. b Quoniam fere in omnibus templis, ubi cokbatur Ifis et Serapis, crat etiam fimulachrum, quod digito labiis impreflb admonere videretur, ut filentium fieret : hoc fignificare idem Varro exiftimat, ut homines eos fuifl'e taceretur. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 18. c. 5. that 160 V/orjhip of human Spirits that which I have attempted to fupport, Manetho was chief-prieft of Egypt in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphia, and lias given c us a table of the gods and demi-gods who reigned there before thofe kings who were mere mortals ; of whom, we are told, Menes was the firfl d : and from hence fome have argued, that the Egyptians did not deify mere mortals. But the argument is inconclufive : For it would not follow, from their having had, in the mofl ancient times, gods for their kings, that they did not afterwards exalt their kings into gods. As to the facl: itfelf, the pretended reign of the gods, it is needlefs to point out the ab- furdity of it, or to difcredit the autho- rity by which it is fupported. What reduces it nearer! to the flandard of truth, is, the conjecture of a learned c See Manetho, apud Syncell. p. 18. and Eufeb. Chron. Grsec. p. 7. Compare the Old Chronicle cur- rent amongft the Egyptians, an imperfect copy of which is preferred by Syncellus, Chronograph, p. 51, jj2. * Kerodot. 1. 2. c. 4, 99. writer, in polified Nations. 1 6 1 writer % that, by the gods y we may un- derfland fome of the antediluvians ; and, by the demi-gods, the anceftors of the E- gyptians after the flood down to the time of Menes. 5. Whatever judgement we may form of the fragments of Manetho, yet there can be no objection againft the teftimony of Diodorus Siculus concerning the gods of Egypt. He lived in an age when many had courage to inquire into the grounds of the public religion, and to fpeak with freedom upon the fubjeclr. From this excellent writer we learn, that the Egyptians, befides the fun and moon, whom they called the Jirft and eternal gods f , acknowledged fuch as were taken from the earth j feveral of whom, he fays, had been kings of Egypt, and bore the fame e Jac. Perizon. ^Egypt. Origin, torn. i. p. 84. Ts$ Jsv KXT Atyvirroti a>S^W7rt?j TO waAaioy yitap.ii/af, tot xo<rp.oi/, KM TW TUV ohvv (v;tt xaT&- j, wirohoif3ttii tivtm ^o Bta$ atJia? TE T55* fitow. Dicdcr. Sic. p. 14. Weff. M names 1 62 Worjlnp of human Spirits names 'with the celeftial gods B . He parti- cularly fpecifies the eight great gods of Egypt h , Sol, Saturn^ Rhea, Jupiter, (cal- led alfo Ammon \) Juno, Vulcan, Vefla y and Mercury k . He adds, that Sol, whofe name was the fame with the fun in the firmament, was the firfl king of Egypt ; though fome thought the firfl king of that country to be Vulcan, the inventor of fire, or of the firfl ufe of it in work- ing metals ! . Saturn and Rhea, accord- ing to the fame author, reigned after- wards ; of whom (it was generally faid) were born Jupiter and Juno, from whom fprang the five following gods, Ofiris, Ifis, fyphon, Apollo m , and Venus. 8 AXXtfj ^'E>C TXTUI firtyimi; ytvxrSau (pew*, wagf-anraii; P.EV ^vr/TSj, uv is xou @ot,<ri>.is yiyovtvou XU.TO, T>JV Ai- ywrno*. Tmtt<; ptv o^uvv^^ wo.^^v rotj ttgaMoi;. Id. p. 17. Compare Eufeb. Prsep. Ev. p. 45. h Id. ib. 1 Herodotus alfo (1. 2. c. 42.) fays, A/^/XBV Aywnot y.A=y:ri Toy Ai. k He was fecretary to Ofiris. Diodor. Sic. lib. I. p. 19, 20, 24. 1 Diodor. Sic. 1.5. p. 390. m The fame as Orus. Herodot. 1. 2. c. 144. Ofiris in polijhed Nations. 163 Ofiris and His were the two princi- pal n divinities of Egypt, in the manner of whofe worfhip all the provinces of that country were agreed . Now, Dio- dorus informs us, that Ifis and Ofiris (who, as we have feen, were born of the fame parents) were king and queen of Egypt ; that Ofiris conquered the moft diftant nations p j that he deified his pa- rents q , and was himfelf deified in his n Plutarch, de If. et Ofir. p. 355. E. fays, that, as foon as Ofiris was born, a voice accompanied him, and proclaimed him, u.ira.nu- xt^o?, lord of all things. He was faid to be the fame as Bacchus. Herodot. 1. 2. c. 42, 144. Diodorus Siculus, 1. i. p. 17. ed. Weff. Plutarch makes Bacchus a different perfon from Ofiri?, but fpeaks of him as one who had been a man. Differt. on Mir. p. 182. As to Ifis, Herodotus, 1. 2. c. 40. tells us, that Jbe is the goddefs they (the Egyptians) ef- teem the grcatcjl. She was the fame with Ceres, ac- cording to the Egyptians, (Herodot. 1.2. 0.59. Diod. Sic. 1. I. p. 17.) who fay, Jhe firft invented bread-corn. Diodor. Sic. 1. i. p. 17, 18. Weff. Aug. Civ. Dei, 1. 8. c. 27. Herodot. 1. 2. c. 42. P Lib. i. p. 32. Compare Eufeb. Praep. Ev. 1. 2. c. i. * Diodor. Sic. p. 24, 25. Vide Auguft. Civ. Dei, J>8. c. 27. M 2 , turn, 164 Worfiip of human Spirits turn, and a third part of the lands ap- propriated to maintain his worihip r -, and that after his death he received equal honour with that paid to the celeftial gods s . He very juftly explodes the fable con- cerning the reign of gods and heroes in Egypt, and fpeaks of it as countenanced only by a part of the Egyptians '. And, when he is treating concerning feveral of their great gods, he fays, " the prieils " had perfect information concerning " their interment ; , which they concealed c< from the public, becaufe it was con- " fided to them as a fecret, and it was cc dangerous to divulge any fecret re- " fpecling the gods" \ 6. Amongft r Diodor. Sic. p. 24, 25. * Aa TO /AayiSo? rut ivtfy-ciuv cvfATrifc^iji.syuv Xa^tix Trxgat ircto'i Tfi* tt&o.ia.ffictv, v.a.\ Tr t c^i To; aio$ tittr,*, x. T. X. Diodor. Sic. p. 24. 1 MvSohoyscri y<x,vru* Ttvf? TO f*i TT^WTO* 5eB? Tt xa* r.^uots, x.. T- A. Id. p. 53* u T ^ ay iri^ TJ T^J TW> Star To raj ? 7ro in polifoed Nations. 165 6. Amongft all the ancient writers, who have given us an account of the re- ligion of Egypt, there is not one who had fludied the fubje<5l with more atten- tion, or who was more zealous to give his readers a favourable impreffion of it, than Plutarch. His learned treatife, en- titled, I/is and Ofiris, was written on pur- pofe to (hew, that there was nothing abfurd or extravagant in the religious rites of the Egyptians ; fome inftruclion in hiftory, morals, or philofophy, being couched under them w . Neverthelefs, from Plutarch we learn, that the priefts affirmed, that the bodies of their gods, ex- cept fuch as 'were incorruptible and immor- tal, lay buried 'with them x . M 3 As 7Tt TKTUV axfitiM, ftr, |3sAf<r&a T* atoSs? fxpsgEii* if THJ s an V.M xie^i<w fny.Hjs.ttuit TOIJ T a?ro^JiTa TTS^I Tt'v $6a) TUTUH {Awvcreio-k* ti? TJ op^Abj. Id. p. 32. w If. et Ofir. p. 353. E. * Plutarch, having fpoken of the tomb cf OJiris, and alluded to fome other .gods, adds : Ov /^OK ^ TUTUH o> De If. et'Ofir. p. 359. C. Never- thelefs, 1 66 Worjhip of human Spirits As to IJjs and OJlris in particular, Plu- tarch gives us at large the hiflory of their parentage, their births, their kindred, their exploits, their deaths y . He alle- gorizes fome part of their hiflory, and feems to think there was a hidden mean- ing in the whole of it, agreeably to the main defign of his work, which was to reconcile the Egyptian theology with the principles of reafon ; yet their hiftory was underftood literally by the people ; nor was it lawful to divulge the philo- fophical explication of it z . Agreeably to the repreientation Plutarch makes of Ofiris as a man, he tells us, that he was every where worflripped under a human form a . With refpecl: to Hermes, <Typbon> thelefs, Mr. Fell, in the ftile of a perfon well acquainted with Plutarch, fays, p. 83. that Plutarch was 'very careful never to attribute this opinion (viz. that the gods of Egypt had been men) to the Egyptian priejts. y As to the place of Oijris's burial, fee Plutarch de If. et Qfir. p. 359. z Id. ib. p. 360. E. F. a ITavrap^a om^^airo^o^ot Otn^n^oy ayafyca Ssmvvticrt, Plutarch, de If, et Ofir. p. 371, (the in polijhed Nations. 167 (the brother of Ofiris, whom he flew b ,) and Orus, as well as Ofirisy Plutarch ac- knowledges, that the defcription, given. by the Egyptians, of the figure and co- lour of their bodies, plainly fuppofed they had been mere men c . Concerning His and Ofiris, he fays, they were, for their 'virtue, changed from good demons into gods, as ivere Hercules and Bacchus after- ivardsy receiving the united honours both of gods and demons d . It would be endlefs to produce all the proofs of the worfhip of human fpirits, in Egypt, from heathen writers who only occafionally make mention of the gods of that country. Plato fpeaks of 'Theuthy who flourifhed in the reign of y king of Egypt, as one of the an- b Diodor. Sic. p. 24. c fij rrj (purn ytyovoras >9^(U9rj. Plutarch. If. et Ofir. p. 359. E. Eufeb. Prasp. Ev. 1. 3. c. 91. d Plutarch, de If. et Ofir. p. 361. Differt. on Mir. p. 182. I might add, that Venus- Beleftica, the flave of an Egyptian monarch, had a temple ere&ed to her at Alexandria. Plutarch, in Erotico, p. 753. E. F. M A. cient 1 68 Worjhip of human Spirits cient gods e . Lucian reprefents Alexan- der, after he was dead, as hoping to be buried in Egypt, that he might become one of the gods of that country f . In Egypt, fays Maximus fyrius, they fhew you at once the temple of a god and his tomb g . The Latin writers fpeak the fame language. Varro h confidered Ifis and Serapis as ha- ving once belonged to the human race. Apuleius ranks Ofiris amongfl thofe men who were raifed to the rank of gods ! . Lucan goes farther, and urges the mourn- ful or funeral rites, with which Ofiris was honoured by the Egyptians, as their teftimony to his having been a mortal TIV* SIM, K. r. X. Platonis Phaedrus, p. 274. c. ed. Serrani. Theuth is faid, in the fequel, to have invented arithmetic, geometry, aftronomy, and letters. See what is faid above concerning Mercury, p. m. and p. 141. { il? ywpw fj? ruv Ar/vwTwt Seuv. Lucian. Dialog. Mort. p. 291. & AsutvuTat Taj' avron; KCOV $, xa Ta^o; Sta. Maxi-. mus Tyrius, Diflert. 38. p. 398. h Cited above, p. 159. note b . 1 Above, p. 97. note b , man. in polijhed Nations* 169 man. His argument proves, that he was publicly worfhipped under that very character k . I would here clofe the evidence of the worfhip of human fpirits in Egypt, if it were not necefTary to confider the cha- racter of the Egyptian Hercules ; which I did not enter upon fooner, becaufe the proofs of his having been a man are f urnifhed, not by one only, but by fe- veralof the forementioned writers. He- rodotus ', in order to fhew that the k Tu plangens hominem teftarb Ofirin. Lucan. VIII. 833. This paflage, and others to the fame purpofe, were cited in the DifTertation on Mir. p. 194. 182. Lucan's judgement of Ofiris has alfo been confirmed here by frefh teflimonies. Neverthelefs Mr. Fell is pleafed to fay, p. 24. " It is not in my power to prove, that re- " Hgiojis honours were ever paid to any deceafed maji *' under the name of Ofiris." This language implies, that no proof of this point had been produced in the Diflertation ; that no proof of it could be produced ; and that Mr. Fell's knowledge of antiquity rendered him a competent judge of what could or could not be proved concerning Ofiris. I leave the reader to form his own judgement concerning thefe three propofitions. ' Lib, 2. c. 43, 44. Grecians 170 Wctrfoip of human Spirits Grecians borrowed the name of this god from the Egyptians, and not the Egyp- tians from the Grecians, obferves, that Hercules was one of the ancient gods of the Egyptians ; who faid, that, feven- teen thoufand years before the reign of Aniafis, the number of their gods, which had been eight, was increafed to twelve; and that Hercules was one of thefe. He farther informs us, that there was a temple dedicated to Hercules at Tyre, which was faid to have been built two thoufand three hundred years ; and that, in the fame city, there was a tem- ple creeled to Hercules under the name of rfhafian ; and that the fame god had a temple at Thafus, which was built by the Phenicians five generations before the public appearance of Hercules in Greece. Now, what is the inference which Herodotus draws from thefe pre- rnifes ? Why, that Hercules (meaning the Egyptian) was a 'very ancient god m ; m To. ptv vvv irogitptvct ^Xoi era,(piut; ncthouov SEOK rov H^a- ?, lonct. Lib. 2. 0.44. Herodotus makes mention cf z.ftatue of the Egyptian Hercules, c. 42. that in polijhed Nations. 171 that is, in comparifon with the Grecian. He defcribes the latter as the fon of Amphitryon and Alcmena ; and fays, that both his parents were of Egyptian defcent". Now, if he knew that the Grecian Hercules was a man, he cer- tainly believed the Egyptian to be fo too. Why, otherwife, did he compare their different ages together ? Would he take pains to (hew, that a natural, that is, an eternal , god was only fome thou- fand years older than one who, compa- ratively fpeaking, was but lately born ? Befides, according to Herodotus, there were eight gods in Egypt more ancient than Hercules. Nor does the hiftorian afcribe to him any pre-eminence above the fon of Amphitryon, except great fe- niority, and the higher rank to which he was exalted in confequence of it. For, from his greater antiquity, he n Lib. 2. 0.43. The ancients called the natural gods, i^aj xt ap$xfT?. Diodor. Siculus, Fragmenta ex lib. vi. p. 633. ed. Weff. draws 172 Worfoip of human Spirits draws this conclufion : therefore thofe Greeks a& right, who build temples to two of them i and fa orifice to one as an immor- tal god, under the name of Olympian, and honour the other as a hero p . We have here, fays a late writer ', two gods of the fame name j the one a natu- ral and immortal deity, Jliled Olympian ; the other an hero-god, acknowledged to have been once a mortal man ; each having fe- parate temples and diftinffi worfiip, agree- able to the fuppofed difference of their na- tures and characters. The gentleman would not have reafoned in this manner, had he been acquainted with the fenti- ments of antiquity on thefe fubjecls, or had he only confidered what was proved in the Differtation on Miracles r , and will he farther eflablifhed in the fequel ; viz. that, according to the Heathens, fome human fouls commenced firfl he- roes, and then demons, and were after- wards exalted into gods. Then they P Herodot. 1.2. 0.44. s Fell, p. 13. ' P. 182, 183, 214. were in polijhed Nations. 173 were received into the ftarry heaven, or arterial ' region, the feat of the immortal divinities, fometimes called Olympus*. The Hercules who attained to this ho- nour was, on this account, very pro- perly ftiled Olympian, to diftinguifh him from the other, while he had not yet ri- fen above the rank of a hero, and, as fuch, refided in the regions of the air i . i ' -. Varro, 1. 16. apud Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 7. c 6. fays : A fummo circuitu cceli, ufque ad circulum lunar, iethereae anima; funt aftra et ftell^e ; iique cceleftes dii non modo intelliguntur efle, fed etiam videntur. Inter luns vero gyrum, et nimborum ac ventorum cacumina, aereae funt animse : fed eae animo, non oculis, videu- tur ; et vocantur heroes, et lares, et genii. So Lucan alfo, 1. ix. v. 6. et feq. Quodque patet terras inter, ccelique meatus, Semidei manes habitant ; quos ignea virtus Innocuos vita, patientes atheris imi, Fecit, et sternos animam conlcgit in orbes. See below, note *. * Viam affe&at Olympo. Virg. iv. 562. MCMJ? wre- paffw OXti^js,-. Diodor. Sic. 1. 4. p. 261. ed. WefT. Anubis, who accompanied Ofirjs in his expedition, (id. 1. i. p. 21.) clothed in a dog's flcin, is reprefented by Plutarch as being both terreilrial and Olympic. If. et Ofir. p. 368. E. neareft 174 Worfiip of human Spirits neareil to the ftars. In length of time, the Grecian Hercules became a god, and was worfhipped as fuch u . The Roman writers exprelfly fpeak of Hercules as having been / man w , and yet rank him amongfl thofe who were received into the ftarry or aetherial heaven, and ad- mitted into the community of the great gods x . He is reprefented with Jupiter, on fome old altars and relievos, with an infcription y fully expreffive of this dig- nity. In like manner, the Egyptian Hercules was ranked with the great gods, though he alfo was of human ex- u Paufanias, Corinthiac. 1. 2..c. 10. p. 133. ed, Kuhnii. w The Roman law was : Eos, qui coelefles Temper habiti, colunto ; et olios quos endo coelo merita collo- caverunt, Herculem, &c. Cicero, de Legib. 1. 2. c. 8. Laws of the iz Tab. 2. fe&. 4.. * Poft ingentia fafta, dcorum in templa recepti. Ho- rat. Ep. l.z. ep. I. .7. Arces attigit igneas. Lib. 3. ode 3. v. 17. Hercules was one of the few, quos ar- deus evexit ad tetlera virtus, as Virgil fpeaks, ^En. VI. 130. See Silius Italicus, 1. 15. v. 83. y Diis magnis, to the great gods. Montfaucon, v. I. p. 16, 47. traft. in polijhed Nations. 1 7 5 traft. The Olympian Jupiter himfelf had been a man z . It is only neceffary to add farther, that the worfhip of heroes was different from that paid to fuch human fouls as were advanced to a more fublime degree a : and therefore the feparate temples and diftinft worfhip of the Olympian, and of the hero, Hercules, are improperly urged as proofs of their being originally of different natures from one another. For, if the Hercules of Egypt, though not fo old as fome other gods of that country, was neverthelefs much more ancient than the Hercules of Greece, and advanced to the dignity of the ce- leftial gods, Herodotus, on the fuppo- fition that both of them had been men, would conclude that the former ought to be worfhipped as an immortal or O- lympian divinity, and the latter merely z Diodor. Sic. 1.3. p. 229, 230. See Paufanias, p. 133. Diflert. cm Mir. p. 182, 183. The fubjeft will come under future confide- ration. with 176 Worfhip of 'human Spirits with the rites to which heroes were en- titled before they became gods. Ac- cording to Diodorus Siculus b , the Egyp- tian Hercules was not only older than the Grecian, but even than any other ; conquered a great part of the world, and fet up pillars in Afric. He was ge- neral of the forces of Ofiris c . Plutarch makes mention of him amongft thofe who, after death, were changed from good demons into gods d . But, though of human extract, Hercules was wor- fhipped in Egypt with the mofl facred and auguft ceremonies e . b Lib. 3. p. 243. c Id. p. 20. d Differ!, on Mir. p. 182. See Diodor. Sic. p. 5. e Deus Hercules religione quidem apud Tyron co- litur : verum facratiffima et auguftiffin a Egyptii reli- gione venerantur, ultraque memoriam (qua? apud illos retro longiflima eft) ut carentem initio colunt. Macrcb. Saturn. 1. I. c. 20. By Hercules we are to under- ftand the fun, according to Macrobius ; and this opi- nion has been adopted by fome learned moderns. But the civil theology fuppofed the truth of the literal hif- tory, and was indeed built upon it. Several gods bore the name of Hercules, (Cicero, Nat. Deor. 1.3. c. 16.) but they were reprefented to the people, and regarded by them, as having been men. I (hall 'in polijhed Nations. 1 77 I {hall produce no more heathen au- thorities in fupport of the point I un- dertook to eftablifh. If we reject the foregoing account given of the gods of Egypt by the Roman, Greek f , Phe- nician, and Egyptian, writers, moft of whom fpoke from their own perfonal knowledge, it will be difficult to fay on whofe teftimony we can fafely rely. Nor is there any reafon to aflert, as the learned Jablonfki e does, that the Greeks, during the reign of Alexander's fucceflbrs in Egypt, corrupted the reli- gion of that country, and that later wri- f The Greek writers, whofe teftimony has been urged above, are Herodotus, Plato, Diodortis'Sicu'lus, Plutarch, Lucian, and Maximus Tyrius. Mr. Fell muft have been unacquainted with all thefe tertimonies, (even with that of Diodorus Siculus, well known to every other writer upon this fubjeft,) when he affirmed, p. 31. " There " can be no doubt but that the Greeks themfelves have " declared, that the Egyptians never worshipped fuch " gods as had been men." But this gentleman is often fo unfortunate, as, in proof of his erroneous afieitions, to appeal to thofe very authorities which contradict them. See above, p. 30, 136. Prolegom. p. 42. N ters 178 Worjhip of human Spirits ters have mifreprefented it. No proof of this after tion has been produced. The Egyptians, when under the dominion of the Ptolemys, might adopt new gods h ; but this was perfectly confident with the general principles of the heathen reli- gion 1 . There is a perfect agreement between the accounts given of the E- gyptian gods, by thofe writers who lived long before the age of the firfl Ptolemy, and by thofe who lived after it. Their having two clafles of gods, one natural, the other mortal, is not more flrongly aflerted by Diodorus and Plutarch, than it is by Hermes Trifmegiflus and San- choniathon. And Herodotus, againft h Macrobius thought this to be the cafe with refpeft to Saturn and Serapis. Saturnal. 1. i. c. 7. p. 150. ed. Londini, 1694. But his memory feems to have failed him here. Serapis was worshipped in Egypt long before the time of Ptolemy, who introduced his worlhip amongft the Athenians. See Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 18. 0.5. and Paufanias, Attic, p. 42. ed. Kuhnii. Sa- turn was a god of great antiquity in Egypt and Phe- nicia. * See what was faid above concerning the Gauls, p. 113. whofe in polijhed Nations. whofe teftimony no objection is made, has recorded numerous examples of the worfhip of human fpirits in Egypt, upon the authority of the prieirs themfelves. But the objection muft fink under it's own weight : for, what Greece was to Rome, that Egypt was to Greece ; the revered fource of fcience and reli- gion. And it is as unreafonable to fup- pofe, that the Greeks, during the reign of the Ptolemys, changed the religion of Egypt, as it would be to fuppofe, that the Romans changed the religion of Greece, after their conquefl of that coun- try, which was likely to produce a con- trary effect k . The Egyptians obftinately adhered even to thofe parts of their re- ligion which gave moft offence to foreign nations : I refer to their worfhip of brutes and vegetables, which they practifed in a much higher degree than any other people. The foregoing teftimonies might be confirmed by arguments drawn from the k The Roman wt>rfiiip became gradually more and more conformable to the Grecian. Dionyf. Hal. Antiq. Rom. 1. 2. c. 18, 19, 20. N 2 religious 180 Worjhip of human Spirits religious rites ' of the Egyptians, from their myfteries, and pyramids ; and like- wife from the opinion of the Fathers and other Chriftian writers m . But thefe arguments will come under future con- 1 Particularly from human facrifices. It mull how- ever be acknowledged, to the honour of the Egyptians, that fuch facrifices were not fo common amongft them as they were in other nations. Herodotus (1. 2. c. 45.) thought it improbable that they ever offered them : but his reafon is not very conclufive. Macrobius (Saturnal. Li. 07. p. 150.) fays, they did not offer any bloody facrifice : but herein he contradicts Herodotus, ubi fu- pra. Plutarch relates, (De If. et Ofir. p. 380.) upon the authority of Manetho, that men were burnt alive in the city of Elithya. And Diodorus Siculus (1. i. p. 99. WefT.) mentions a very remarkable circumftance; viz. that they were facrificed at the tomb of Ofiris : which ihews to what gods fuch facrifices were offered. Human facrifices were abolifhed by Amofis. Porphyry, de Abilinentia, 1. 2. c. 223. ed. Lugdun. Eufeb. Prsep. Ev. 1. 4-. c. i6< p. 155. But they were revived by Bu- firis, to avert a national calamity. Apollodorus, Biblio- thec. 1. 2. p. 1 1 8, 119. " See, in particular, Eufeb. Prasp. Ev. 1. i. c. 6. p. 17. and 1. 3. c. 3. Auguft. de Civ. Dei, 1. 8. c. 5, 26. and 1. 18. c. 5. Suidas (in voc. Ea^aTnj) fays, that Apis was king of Memphis, and obtained, after death, divine honours for his liberality, in fupplying the citi- zens of Alexandria with corn, in time of famine. fideration. in potijhed Nations. 1 8 1 fideration. If I take notice of the an- cient Chriftians in this place, it is for the fake of clearing them from the charge of forgery : for, as a forgery of theirs, fome n confider the celebrated letter of Alexander to his mother j in which he is faid to have communicated to her the fecret of the myfteries, intruded to him by the high-prieil of Egypt, concerning the human origin of the great gods. But, fuppofing the letter in queftion to be a forgery, there is no more reafon for afcribing it to the Chriftians, than to thofe Heathens who openly afferted that their gods had once been men. It is not certain, however, that it was a forgery. Plutarch feems to refer to it when he fays, Alexander informed his mother in a letter, " that he had received " fome fecret anfwers, which, at his " return, he would communicate to her " only V The connexion of the place Jablonfki, p. 31. o Plutarch. Vit. Alexandri, p. 688. F. N 3 leads i8a Worfiip of human Spirits leads us to apply this to the origin of the gods : for Plutarch had been juft be- fore relating what the high-prieft faid to Alexander concerning his divine defcent. As to it's being pafled over in filence by Cicero, Diodorus Siculus, and fome o- ther heathen writers, (a circumftance on which great ftrefs is p laid,) the reafon of it plainly was, their having more au- thentic information concerning the great fecret q of the myfteries than a private letter, the genuinenefs of which might be fufpected, and the contents of which were probably preferved only by tradi- tion, and therefore varioufly reported. The credit given to it by the Fathers r muft be confidered as a proof of their opinion concerning the gods of Egypt. P Jablonfki, Prolegom. p. 32. * See Diodor. Sic. 1. i. p. 24. ed. Weff. r Athenag. Legat. pro ChrifHan. p. 24. Minut. Felix, Oftav. c. 21. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1.8. 0.5. and 1. 12. c. io. Cyprian, de Idol. Vanitat. p. 12. ed, Oxon. From in polifoed Nations. \ 8 3 From the various teftimonies ' which have been produced, in this and the pre- ceding feclion, it appears, that both the Phenicians and Egyptians, though they acknowledged elementary and fidereal de- ities, and aflerted more efpecially the di- vinity of the fun and moon, did alfo worfhip human fpirits : and that the E- gyptians worfhipped them under the dif- tinc"l characters of heroes, demons, and gods. It farther appears, that both the Phenicians and Egyptians account- ed their princes and eminent benefactors as the great eft gods. The twelve great gods of Egypt in particular, as well as the Cabirs of Phenicia and the eaftern na- tions, were dead men deified. Laftly, * Mr. Fell affirms, p. 22, 83. that " it is UNIVER- " SALLY KNOWN, that the Egyptians never paid " any religious honours to hero-gods." The reader may from hence judge how great a ftranger the gentle- man was to the Roman, the Greek, the Phenician, and the Egyptian, writers, and alfo to the Fathers. His ignorance of antiquity, both heathen and chriftian, would not have been noticed, had it not been proper that it fnould be -known what credit is due to his moft confident affertions. N 4 the 1 84 Wqrjhip of human Spirits the foregoing teftimonies prove, that deified men were the immediate objecls of the public eftablifhed worfhip in Er- gypt, as they alfo were in Phenicia, I am, however, far from denying, that, in the hiltory and worfhip of thefe terreilrial gods, there was an ultimate reference to the deified parts and powers of nature. And it is certain, that the civil or vulgar theology was explained pbyfically by the learned. Put with their explanations we have here no concern j and therefore I pafs over at prefent what occurs upon this fubject in Plutarch, Porphyry, Jamblichus, Macrobius, and other heathen writers. SECT. Ill, T Proceed to fhew, that the cuftom of deifying human fpirits prevailed a- mongft {he ASSYRIANS, CHALDEANS, BABYLONIANS. Very little is known of the religion of confidered as a kingdom diftin<5t from 'in polijhed Nations. 1 85 from that of Babylon. Both kingdoms were afterwards united into one mighty empire, which was called indifferently Aflyrian and Babylonian n . The Chal- deans in Babylon, according to Diodo- rus Siculus, were a colony of Egyp- tians v , carried there by Belus, the fon of Neptune and Libya, who granted the priefts the fame immunities as were en- joyed by thofe in Egypt x . This agrees with what Lucian teftifies y , that the AfTyrians derived their theology and re- ligious rites from the Egyptians, and in honour of the gods erected temples, and placed in them flatues and images (pro- per reprefentations of fuch gods as had been men). Now, if the religion of Aflyria and Babylon was derived from n The Aflyrians and Babylonians are the fame peo- ple. Herodot. 1. i. 0.199, 2O - Babylon is reckoned the principal city in Aflyria. Ib. c. 178. Strabo fays the fame thing. L. 16. fub init. Bifhop Lowth on If. 14,25. Compare the Anc. Uiiiverf. Hift. v. 4. p. 390. vo. 1747. w Diodor. Sic. 1. i, p. 92. ed. Weff. ? Id. ib. p. 32. y De Syr. Dea, p. 657. 1 86 Worjhip of human Spirits Egypt, the former mufl have been in a great meafure the fame with that of the latter, which confifted, in part, in the worfhip of human fpirits. It is on all hands allowed, that the Chaldean idolatry, called alfo the Sabian, confifted very much, at leaft originally, in the worfhip of the fun, moon, and ftars ; which were conceived to be feve- rally animated by a foul, in the fame manner as the human body is. Very probably they were alfo thought to be inhabited by the fpirits of illuftrious men : for it was an opinion generally received, that the fpirits of fuch men, when feparated from their bodies, re- turned to their native fkies : and, as va- rious rites were ufed to draw down fouls from the ftars into confecrated images and fhrines 2 , it is much more likely that thofe rites fhould refpecl: the fouls that only inhabited the celeftial orbs, than z See Hottinger's Hift. Orient. 1. i. 0.7. p. 296. et feq. and Pococke's notes on Abul-pharai, Specimen Hift. Arab. p. 138. et feq, fuch 'in polljhed Nation*. i 87 fuch as were united to them and animated them, as the human foul is united to, and animates, the body. Now, their facred fhrines were confulted as oracles, and worfhipped as gods z . The chief god of the Babylonians was Bel. The queftion here is, who this god was. Bel (called by the Greeks Be/us) in the Chaldee * dialecT: anfwers to the Hebrew Baa/, and to the Syriac b Beet, and fignifies lord. This term there- fore might be applied to the true God ; but it is commonly given in fcripture to thofe fictitious deities, who were falfely fuppofed to have dominion over man- kind 6 . 2 See note z in the preceding page. a Ifaiah xlvi. i. b Ez. iv. 8. c Populus Dei fatis pie eum Baalem fuum vocabant, priufquam, ob vocem illam ad pjrofana minima fre- quenter nimis traduftam, id ipfum Deus vetaret. Selden, de Diis Syr. Syntag. II. c. i. p. 196. And, in p. 200, 201. the fame learned writer fays : Belus enim primo fummum rerum gubernatorem denotabat graflante vero hominum errore, ad idola transfereba- turj et fe^ But 1 8 8 Worjhip of human Spirits But was the Bel, who was worfhip- ped at Babylon, the true God ? A late writer d cites from Dr. Cudworth e a paf- fage of Berofus, in which Bel is faid to have framed (or fet in order) the world, and formed (or perfected) the ftars and the fun f . It is here afked d , Can any one imagine, that he, who created the hea- ven and the earth, received his name from fome petty prince in the time of Abraham ? Surely not, fays the fame writer. It is impoffible here to forbear obferving, ift. That Berofus 8 was the prieft of Belus in the time of Alexander. Now, from the facred writings it appears, that for ma- ny ages before his time the Babylonians were grofs idolaters h $ and confequently * Fell, p. 23. P. 312. f To Jcai ra; vitrs Extrafts from Berofus were made by Africanus, A- pollodorus, Alexander Polyhiftor, and Abydenus. Of thefe extra&s, fragments have been preferred by Eufe- bius and Syncellus. h Jolh. xxiv. 2. not in foHJhed Nations. 189 not likely to worfhip the Creator of hea- ven and earth. 2dly. It is certain they did not worfhip him under the name of Be/, becaufe the Babylonian Bel is fpo- ken of in Scripture as a falfe god '. 3dly. No proof is produced to fhew, that the Belus, fpoken of by Berofus in the fore- cited pafTage, was worshipped at all by the Babylonians. Laftly. Had not the writer * alluded to above been unacquainted with the account given by Berofus of this god, he would not have patted him off upon his readers as the Creator of heaven and earth. Belus, according to Berofus ", (the very autho- rity appealed to by Mr. Fell*,) cut off his own head ; from the blood of which, 1 Bet bowetb down ; Nebo ftoopetb ; their idols, Sec. If. xlvi. l Babylon is taken ; Bel is confounded ; Me- rodacb is broken in pieces. Jerem. 1. 2. / will pvnijh Eel in Babylon. Ch. li. 44. Would God's prophets fay of the Creator of heaven and earth, He is bowed down, and confounded ; and reprefent God himfelf as threatening to punijh him ? * Fell, p. 23. k Ap. Eufeb. Chronicon, p. 5. et Syncelli Chrono- graph, p. 28. when 190 Worjhip of bunian Spirits when mixed with the earth by the gods, men were formed : but they could not bear the light, and therefore he or- dered one of the gods to cut oiF his head, which he himfelf had cut off be- fore, and to mix the blood with the earth, and from thence to form other men and animals. This experiment fucceeded better. There is nothing in this account that looks like creation^ as that word imports the bringing into being what had no exigence be- fore in any form. Nor indeed could any thing be more repugnant to the ideas of Berofus, concerning the genera^ tion of the world, than the creation of it. Leaft of all was it poffible for him to conceive, that a god, who had been be-; headed by other gods, was the Creator of heaven and earth. Bel was a name or title given to fe- veral princes j particularly to the founder of the Babylonian empire. We have already feen ', that a perfon of this name 1 P. 185. carried in polijhed Nations, igi carried colonies from Egypt into Baby- lonia. Abydenus m , whofe hiflory is extracted from the ancient records of the Chaldeans, fays, <e it is reported " that Belus compafied Babylon with a <c wall." We are told by Sanchonia- thon % that Saturn had three fons born in Peraea; viz. Saturn, fo called after his father, Jupiter Belus, and Apollo. Saturn, the father of Jupiter Belus, was a Phenician deity ; and this fon was perhaps the Babylonian Belus. It is certain that Belus, who built Babylon, is fometimes fpoken of as a Syrian -, par- ticularly by Dorotheus Sidonius p , cited by Julius Firmicus. But Paufanias * m Ap. Eufeb. P. E. 1. 9. 0,41. n Ap. eund. P. E. 1. 1. p. 37. D. p. 38. A. c As to the prefixing the term Jupiter to Belus, m- fiances of a fimilar nature frequently occur. We read of Jupiter Aratrius, above, p. 141. Jupiter Amrnon, p. 85. More examples will occur in the fequel. See alfo Sir If. Newton's Chronology, p. 150, 152, 162. and Jac. Perizon. ./Egypt. Orig. torn. i. p. 83. P A^aiu Ba/3Aw, Tr^is Ey^.oio Tro^y-pm. i L. 4 . c. 23. p. 337. lays, 192 Worjhlp of human Spirits fays, that he had his name from Bel us an Egyptian. Phenicia being fometimes confidered as belonging to Egypt, there may be no contradiction between Pau- fanias and Dorotheas. I do not take upon me to determine abfolutely who Belus was ; nor do I here inquire, whe- ther he be the Nimrod or the Pul fpo- ken of in Scripture T . It is fufficient for our purpofe, that there was fuch a per- fon, and that he was the founder of th Babylonian empire. Nebuchadnezzar 8 fpeaks of himfelf as defcended from him 5 and he is referred to by Virgil f , not as Dido's father, but as one of her r Jac. Perizon. Origin. Babylon, torn. 2. p. 152. ef feq. and Freinfhemius, in his notes on Quintus Cur- tius, 1.5. p. 310, 311. attempt to prove, that Belus was the Nimrod fpoken of Gen. x. 8. But the authors of the Univerfal Hift. v. 4. p. 352. think that Belus was the fame as Pul. See alfo p. 309. in the note. 8 O Tt Bi?Ao? feo$ TT^oyoj-o?, 5} t Ba<7Xi BrAti?. Eufetr. P. Ev. l.p. 0.41. p. 456. 1 Implevitque mero pateram, quam Belus et omnes A Bela foliti. ^En. I. 733. remote in polijhed Nations . 193 remote anceftors n . Servius, on the place, makes him the firft king of Af- fyria. Let us confider what evidence there is, that this Belus (whether he was an E- gyptian, a Phenician, or a Babylonian) was deified after his death. If he be, as fome fuppofe, the Nimrod of the Bible v , he was, as we have already fhewn x , ranked amongft the gods by the Per- fians, who fucceeded to his empire : a plain proof that he was firil worfhipped at Babylon. Dionyfius y expreffly in- u This is implied in the expreflion, omnes a Belo, all the dependents of Belus. Between Dido and her own fa- ther none intervened. w This hypothecs is favoured by the language of Ammianus Marcellinus, I. xxiii. c. 6. p. 286. Baby- lon > cujus moenia bitumine Semiramis ftruxit ; arcem enim antiquijjimus rex condidit Belus. ./Elian calls him, emphatically, TO* BajAov TO a^**'"* Belum ilium antiquum. Var. Hift. 1.13. c.^. And Orofius, II. 6. Babyloniam a Nimrod gigante fundatam ; a Nino vei Semiramide reparatam. x Above, p. 72. y Miyay ^o ncraro B)jXw. Dionyf, ntpnyie. C. 2$. v. 825. This temple of Belus was afterwards adorned by Nebuchadnezzar. Jofeph. Antiq. 1. 10. c. it. . I. O forms Worjhtp of human Spirits forms us, that a temple was erefted to him by Semiramis in that city. From the defcription, given of the temple of Belus by Herodotus z , it appears that it was built in the form of the Egyptian pyramids a . Now, as the latter were fe- pulchres b as well as temples, the former muft be confidered in this double view. The image of Jupiter Belus, which was placed on a throne, at a table, in the chapel which ftood below, within the temple, clearly fhews who was repre- fented by it. And, though there was a temple in the uppermofl tower, in which no image was placed, (from which cir- cumftance fome learned writers c have concluded, that " the honour of the " temple of Belus was meant to be di- " vided between him and the true god,") yet in the uppermoft temple there was a table, a bed, and a woman chofen by z Lib. i. c. 181. 8 Sir If. Newton's Chronology, p. 327, 328. b See below, ch. 3. e Anc. Univerfal Hift, vol. 4. p. 352, the. 'in poll foed Nations* 195 the god himfelf, who was fuppofed to come by night and lie in the bed d . Could this god be confidered by the Chaldeans as that eternal Spirit who created the tmiverfe ? Were not the accommoda- tions provided for him more fuitable to their ideas of human nature ? Certain it is in fact, that it was to deified men that the like provifion was made in other countries e . Were it poflible ftill to doubt, whe- ther the founder of the AfTyrian and Ba- bylonian empire was worfhipped in the d Herodot. 1. i. c. 182. * In the temple of the Trlphilian Jupiter, who is re- prefented as having been a man, there was a bed and a table. Diodor. Sic. 1. 5. p. 368. ed. Wefi*. The keeper of the temple of Hercules provided for him a bed, a fupper, and the beautiful Laurentia. Plutarch. Vit. Romuli, p. 20. In Indoftan the Heathens fupply their idol Jagannat with the faireft virgin they can pro- cure. Bernier's Memoirs, torn. 3. p. 112. Engl. Tranf- lat. And, in the temple of Jupiter, at Thebes in Egypt, there was a woman who was fuppofed to be vi- fited by the god at night, agreeably to the account given of Belus by the Babylonians. Herodot. 1. I. c- 181. Compare Strabo, 1. 17. p. 1171. O 2 temple 196 Worfhlp of human Spirits temple of Belus at Babylon, I might appeal to Eufebius f , who tells us, that Belus, the firft king of the AfTyrians, was deified after his death : to Jerome g , who, in more places than one, fpeaks of him as having been confecrated and ranked amongft the gods by his fon Ni- nus : and to Laftantius b , and the au- thors cited by him, who affirm, that Belus was worfhipped by the AfTyrians and Babylonians 1 . I do not affirm, that * Eufeb, Chronicon, 1. I. p. 9. Tharae anno 28. Af- fyriorum rex primus Belus mortuus eft, quern Aflyrii deurn, et alii dicunt Saturnum. s Idolum Baal, five Bel, et, ut apertius dicam, Beli, Aflyriorum religio eft, confecrata a Nino, Beli filio, in honorem patris. Hieronymus in Ezek. c. 23. Ninus in tantam pervenit gloriam, ut patrem fuum Belum re- ferret in deum, qui Hebraice dicitur Va. Hunc Sido- nii et Phcenices appellant ^#1. Id. in Ofea, c. 2. h Belus, quern Babylonii et Aflyrii colunt, antiquior Trojano bello fuifle invenitur trecentis viginti duobus annis : Belum autem Saturno aequalem fuifle, et u- trumque uno tempore adolevifle. Laftant. Div. Inftitut. 1. i. c. 23. * A gentleman, who often affumes the language of a perfon who has a comprehenfive view of the fubjeft on which in polijhed Nations. igj that the term Bel was never explained phyfically, and applied to the fun, by learned men, as Ofiris k alfo fometimes was : for the ancients gave the names of their deified kings to the heavenly bo- dies '. But the temple of Babylon was erefled in honour of a man who founded the Babylonian empire, agreeably to the cuftom of the Heathens in the like cafes. And this Belus was the god whom the Babylonians principally worfhipped m . As Jupiter Belus was the chief god of the Babylonians, fo their principal god- which he writes, roundly affirms, that if js not in my power to prove, that religious honours 'were ever paid to a deceafed man under the name of BeL Fell, p. 24. Some however may doubt, whether his knowledge of his fub- jecl be altogether anfwerable to the import of his lan- guage. He feems to have known as little of the Indian Bel as of the Babylonian. Cicero, when reckoning up the feveral gods who bore the name of Hercules, fays, Quintus in India, qui Belus dicitur. Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c.i6. k Diodor. Sic. 1. i. p. 14. ed. WefT. 1 See above, p. 135, 161, 162. m O jw,aAira &WV T-^uo-i BajSvtawot. Arrian. Exped. Alex. 1. 3. p. 127. ed. Gronov. O 3 defs 198 Worjhip of human Spirits defs was Venus or Mylitta n . She was the fame with the Perfian Mitra , the Phenician Aftarte p , and the great Sy- rian goddefs^j and therefore was cer- tainly worfhipped under a human cha- racter. The title of celejlial Venm ' was probably given her becaufe fhe was worr {hipped in the planet of that name, or in the moon, She is fometimes called Juno ; under which name fhe was a- dored by the Sidonians and Carthagini- ans 1 . Some have thought, that this goddefs was the famed Semiramis ', who, having extended her empire over a large part of the Eaft, was likely to receive divine honours from the nations of Afia. As to her being worfhipped under both B Herodot. 1. i. 0.131. cited above, p. 48. Above, p. 68. f P. 142. 9 See the next fe&ion. Tirn crcfitffScii rr,i ofganav Attic, c. 14. p. 36. * Hie templum Junoni ingens Sidonia Dido Condebat. Virgil. JEn. I. 446. ! Anc. Univerfal Hiil. vol. 4. p. 359, 360. fexes, in polijhed Nations. fexes, they account for this circum- ftance in the character of the queen of Babylon, which was that of a martial heroine and an " abandoned proftitute. Hence (he might be confidered both as a god of war, and the patronefs of plea- fure. The AfTyrians and Babylonians had feveral other gods of mortal origin ; particularly Thuras or T^hurras^ who fuc- ceeded Ninus. He was an eminent war- rior, and was called Mars, after the pla- net of that name, (and w Baal,) to whom the firft pillar was erefted *, Adrammelech and Anammelecb were Babylonian deities, to whom human facrifices were offered y . The names of fome of their other idols u Athenagoras, (Legat. p. 119.) calls Semiramis, *ayyo ? yvm x*t /x,a*fvo?, libidinofa et fanguinaria. As to the former part of her charafler, fee Agathias, p. 58. cd. 1594. w Slnpnvw UVTOV Baa>.. Suidas, in VOC. agaj. T firixt A^sj atsrvirotf irfUf^ j-^Xjjc o Atrcrv^cn, xa u; 5=o> Tr^ffiHwuv avTov, xeu tu<; TT ; J tvv x.aXfo-t IlefO-jr* TO BA Sso, o f$- laSttfuntvoptm AgK, W6?.4^,w SEC;. Chronicon Alexandrinum, p, 88. X 2 Kings xvii. 31. O 4 are 2oo Worfoip of human Spirits are preferved j but it is needlefs to de-? fcend into more particulars, becaufe their religion muft have been the fame with that of the Egyptians, Phenicians, and Syrians, of which a larger account is given by ancient authors. As they deified their fovereigns while living z , we might from this circumftance alone have inferred, that they worfhipped them when dead. The teflimonies that have been produced ferve to fhew, that 4ead men and women were the more imme- diate objects of the public devotion at Babylon, and were indeed honoured as their greater! gods. SECT. IV. T Come now to fhew, that human fpi- rits were deified by the SYRIANS. At Hierapolis flood the temple of the great Syrian goddefs, who was held in high veneration by the Egyptians, In- dians, Ethiopians, Medes, Armenians, f Dan. iii. and in potijhed Nations. 20 1 and Babylonians *. In this temple, as we learn from Lucian b , were placed the ftatues of many heathen gods, fuch as the Greeks called by the names of their own greateft deities, Jupiter, Juno, Mi- nerva, Venus, Apollo, Lucina or Di- ana, Mercury, and others : but there was no ftatue of the fun or moon, be- caufe they deemed it abfurd to make re- prefentations of gods that were fo con- fpicuous and refplendent, though very reafonable, on the other hand, to form ftatues of fuch as were invifible c . From this curious pafTage it appears, that the gods of Syria were of two forts : the one vifible, particularly the fun and moon j the other invifible, that is, hu- man fpirits, or fuch deities as corref- ponded to the idea the Greeks had formed * Lucian, de Dea Syr. p. 676. b P. 675. et feq. c Maa y<*g *iAia xcw ai^vaur,^ $zati/at y ttmtmUffi* Atyasr* TOIO-I /AIP <*Moi<r Stow* a & fft f i9/iocrt j Lucian, p. 676, 677. concerning 202 Worjhip of human Spirits concerning thofe objects of wormip that originally belonged to the human race, and were reprefented by flatues. It can- not reasonably be pretended, that Ju- piter, Juno, and the other Grecian dei- ties here enumerated, were natural gods , becaufe the former are diftinguifhed from the latter, Apollo and Diana, for example, cannot here denote the fun and moon j for the former had flatues as their reprefentatives, but not the latter. And it is very remarkable, that, even fo late as the age of Lucian, no flatues were erefted to the natural gods in Sy- ria ; of which circumftance notice will be taken in the fequel. As to the great Syrian goddefs her- felf, in whofe honour the temple was e- reeled, fhe could not be a natural di- vinity 3 as the flatue placed between Ju- piter and Juno was probably creeled in her honour. She feems to have been the fame with the Aflarte of the Pheni- cians, and the celeflial Venus, fo often fpoken of above, and to whom there was an in foUJhed Nations. 303 an ancient temple erefted at Afcalon, which is called by Herodotus d a city of Syria. Semiramis was worfhipped in this country c , and is thought by fome to be the Syrian goddefs herfelf, and the fame with the Derceto of Afcalon f , / Hiftory informs us, that Belus was worfhipped in Syria s , as well as at Ba- bylon. Adad or Hadad was a name common to all the Syrian kings h . One of them, whom Sanchoniathon calls A- dod, reigned in Phenicia, and was ftiled, king of the gods i j which is a full proof, d Lib. i. c, 105. * She made a law, that the Syrians fhould worlhip her as a goddefs, in preference to all the other divini- ties. Lucian, de Syr. Pea, p. 678. f Anc. Univerfal Hilt. vol. 4. p. 255, 259. We learn from Lucian, p. 676. that the ftatue between Ju- piter and Juno, with a golden dove on it's head, was thought by fome to be Semirami^. 8 O Zei/j, o BrXo? oiio^a^MExoj, * to -n? Awa//-n -njf "v- (iaj Ti/ita;|*oj. Xiphilin. in Caracalla, ia Excerpt, e Dione, 1. 78. p. 884. ed. Hanov. h Probably becaufe they confecrated all their kings into gods. 1 AOW&IJ, ^atnXtos SEW. Sanchoniathon, ap. Eufeb, P.Ev. l.i. p. 38. that, 204 Worfbip of human Spirits that, though the term Adad is explained phyfically by Macrobius*, and applied to the fun, the chief natural god, yet it was understood hiftorically by the peo- ple, and applied to their chief hero-god. Both Eenbadad and Hazael were wor- Ihipped by the Syrians, and reprefented to be of far greater antiquity than they really were 1 : a very common practice with the Heathens on other occafions. The Syrians, in honour of a king cal- led Datnafcus, (from whom the city of Damafcus derived it's name,) held fa- cred the fepulchre of his wife Arathes as a temple, and regarded her as a goddefs entitled to the molt facred worfhip M . What, therefore, has been before proved concerning the Aflyrians, Baby- lonians, Phenicians, and Egyptians, is alfo true of the Syrians j viz. that they * Saturnal. 1. i. c. 23. p. 217. 1 Jofeph. Antiq. 1. 9. c. 4. . 6. ra Nomen urbi a Damafco rege inditum ; in cujus honorem Syrii fepulchrum Arathis uxoris ejus pro tem- plo coluere ; deamque exiude fanftiffimae religionis ha- bent. Juftin. 1. 36. c. 2. deified in poliJJjed Nations. 205 deified dead men and women. The facts produced above farther prove, that thefe gods of mortal origin were the more im- mediate and the principal objects of the public and national worfhip. I have now finifhed what I intended to offer concerning the objects of public worfhip in the eaftern nations -, and have {hewn, that thefe nations, whether bar- barous or polifhed, (efpecially thofe of the moft diftinguifhed fame, fuch as A- rabia, Phenicia, Syria, Caria, Lycia, Cilicia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Sarmatia, Armenia, Chaldea, Babylonia, AfTyria, Pedia, Parthia, Media, India, Scythia, China, Japan, and others,) though they might acknowledge elementary and fide- real deities, did neverthelefs worfliip alfo human fpirits. But fo entirely unac- quainted was a late writer with the proofs of this point here produced, (to which others might be added,) that he* confidently affirms, ^ divine honours Fell, p. 7, " were 206 Worfiip of human Spirits <e were not paid to deceafed heroes in ce the eaflern nations" Left his readers fhould think there were any exceptions, he afTerts , that " the eajlern nations , " whether barbarous or polifhed, paid < no religious honours to deceafed men. v The gentleman has fhewn himfelf e- qually unacquainted with the religious ftate of the ancient nations of Europe and Africa : for, notwithstanding what has been proved to the contrary, he af- firms, that " the cuftom of the Greeks, " in paying religious honours to de- " parted heroes, was defpifed by ALL " the great nations amongft the Hea- " thens, the Romans exceptedV It is unbecoming in any one to fpeak upon a fubjeft, of which he is ignorant, in the decifive language of certain knowledge. In matters of fact this is more culpable than in fpeculative points ; for, in the former cafe, we do not rely on the judge- ment, but on the veracity, of the fpeaker, prefuming he would not affirm with F,ell, p. 14. P P. 29. confidence in polled Nations. confidence what he did not know to be true. SECT. V. Shewing that human Spirits 'were deified by the GREEKS. TT was elfewhere q proved, that the na- tural gods, the fun and moon in par- ticular, were adored by the Greeks, as well as by the Barbarians. But the pre- fent queflion concerns only their other objects of worfhip. All, who have any knowledge of the religion of the Greeks, know, that they worfhipped the firft founders of ftat6s and cities r ; thofe alfo who died in de- fence of their country ' 5 and fuch as were * Differt. on Mir, p. 172. note f . * The Cherfonefians facrifice to Miltiades, wj o o^f, exr. Herodot. 1. 6. c. 38. * Pericles, fpeaking of thcfe who fell in the battle at Samos, fays, they were become immortal as the gods , $a- aTa; iXfyt ytyoi/evsti, xaSaweg T? SEH?. He adds, We 'do not fee the gods them/elves ; (which cannot be underftood of 208 Worjhlp of human Spirits were greatly diftinguifhed by their ta- lents and exploits *. Some of thefe il- luftrious perfons were worfhipped only in the particular ftates to which they belonged n j and others by Greece in ge- neral w . It would be tedious, and it is unneceflary, to produce the various proofs of the deification of men in this country, which occur continually in He- of the natural gods ; fee above, p. 201. note ;) but, by thofe honours and good things <wbich they receive from us, we declare our belief of their being immortal. It is juft the fame tuith refpeft to thcfe 'who die for their country ; ta.vt cm vira^im xa Tot; t'wtg rt?f irctr^ $0$ aToSaa<7(v. Plutarch. Vit. Periclis, p. 156. D. E. See the paflage from Plato, cited in Diflert. on Mir. p. 191. note". 1 Such as the Theban Hercules. Cleades intercedes with Alexander to fpare the city of Thebes, which had not only produced men but gods, and had given birth its Hercules. Juftin. I. xi. c. 4. Concerning Hercules, and alfo concerning Caftor and Pollux, fee Ifbcrat. Opera, torn. 2. p. 17, 18. ed. Battie. u At Sparta they facrificed every year to Lycurgus, *>c Stw. Plutarchi Numa, p. 59. B. The Athenians honoured Thefeus ^uae.. Plutarchi Thefeus, p. 17. A. w Jam vero in Graecia multos habent ex hominibus deos; Alabandum, Alabandi; Tenedi, Tenem; Leu- cotheam, quae fuit Ino, et ejus Palaemonem filium, t*n8a Gr&cia. Cicero de Nat. Deor. 1.3. c. 15. rodotus,. in poll foe d Nations. 209 rodotus, Paufanias, Plutarch, and other Greek writers. The law ordained, that the gods, the demons, and the heroes, fhould be worshipped according to their refpeclive ranks x . The only queflion that can admit of a debate is, whether the twelve great gods of Greece, or, as they are fome- thnes called, the gods of the greater na- tions y , were of human extract. I fhall Ttfj Tf Ktx.T^3otif ffifii 3a^*ov{, tvvo^a, gt^av. Aurea Carmina, v. t, 2, 3. See what is faid concerning the immortal gods, p. 207. note s , and what occurs in the next fedlion concerning tke ancient gods of heaven. Tijixa TO ^atjU.ovo aa pit, pu}.ir& $t prrot. Tfl? wcXswj* vra ya% ^o|si? ct/^ix Tf Tof SEO; 9tm, xasi TOK o/*c; 6/^jW.fvnr. Ifocrat. Opera, torn. l. p. 23. To Jai/M.ooi/, i.e. irctv TO wffgjSi*o* TU* ufyuvm.y <pvo-n>, . five femidei illi fmt, five heroes, - inter deos relati. Wolfii not. in loc. Draco revived the following law at Athens : Lex efto antiquiflima, sternseque au&oritatis in Attica, vene- randos efle deos atque heroas patrios et indigenas. Sam. Petit. Comment, in Leg. Attic, p. 69. f l)zi majcntm gentium. P aflign 210 Worjkip of human Spirits aflign thofe reafons which incline me to believe they were. I. The Greeks derived their religion from Phenicia and Egypt ; more efpe- cially from the latter. Egypt, accord- ing to Lucian z , was the country that firft acquired the knowledge of the gods. His teilimony is confirmed by other writers *. Herodotus reprefents the E- gyptians as the jirft 'who gave names to the twefoe godsy and ere&ed altars,, images, and temples b . From Egypt and Phenicia religion was eafily propagated over the weftern world, partly by that intercourfe be- tween them which commerce created, but principally by colonies. Many of the firft princes of Greece were born ei- 2 Above, p. 146. note k . a Ammianus Marcellinus, 1.22. c. 16. p.268. fays: Hie (fcil. in ^Egypto) primum homines longe ante a- lios ad varia felligionum incunabula (ut dicitur) per- venerunt. Concerning the high antiquity of the hea- then gods, fuch as built their cities, fee Diodcrus Si- culus, p. 16. ed. Wefl". v Herodot. 1. 2. 0.4. ther /;/ polijhed Nations. 211 tlier in Phenicia or Egypt, fuch as Cad- mus, Cecrops, Danaus, EreclheiiSj and others ; and brought with them the re- ligion of their own country, and planted it in the refpeclive places in which they fettled. The Athenians are thought to have been a colony from the Egyptian Sais ; and reprefented Minerva by the fame armed image as was done in that city. Ereftheus, when made king of Athens, introduced there the Eleufmian myfte- ries, framed after the cuflom of Egypt. So great was the fame of this country for learning and religion, that many eminent perfons reforted to it for in^ ftruction. Orpheus, Mufaeus, Melam- pus, and others, who went there with this view, brought away moft of it's myfteries and facred ceremonies j fo that there was no difference between the myf- teries of Bacchus and Ofiris, or of Ce- res and Ifis, but the names of thofe dei- ties in whofe honour they were inftitu- P 2 ted. 2 1 2 Worjhlf of human Spirits ted c . Indeed the very names of the twelve gods d , and of almoft all the Gre- cian gods e , were originally derived from Egypt, according to Herodotus. To the fame country, according to this hif- torian, the Greeks were endebted for their oracles, facred feflivals, and many religious rites f . Had we been only informed, in gene- ral terms, that Greece derived it's reli- gion from Egypt, we mult have infer- red, that the principal objects of wor- fhip in the former country were of the fame kind with thofe in the latter -, and confequently were of human extraft. But, when we are farther told, that the number of the great gods in both coun- tries was twelve, and that the names of c Concerning the feveral foregoing particulars, fee Diodorus Siculus, 1. i. p. 32, 33, 34, 107, 109, no. ed. Weff. Platon. Crit. p. no. Plutarch. If. et Ofir. P- 354- AvuMxot. re SEWV twutvijuotf sXfyov Treuras Atyt>7maj vo- Herodot. 1. 2. e Id. c. 5 o. f Cap. 51, 54-58. the in polifhed Nations. 213 the gods of Greece were borrowed from thofe of Egypt, we gain new proofs that the gods of both countries were either the very fame * or fimilar ; that is, dei- fied men. If the reprefentation, made of the gods by images in human form, pointed out their relation to mankind in Egypt, the like reprefentation of them in Greece, in imitation of Egypt, muft anfwer the fame end, If oracles in one country were afcribed to human fpirits, they muft be afcribed to fuch fpiilts in the other. The rites of worfiip amongft the Heathens always bore a relation to the peculiar character of the gods in whofe honour they were inftituted ; and therefore the fame rites could not be per- formed in Egypt to dead men and wo- men, and in Greece to the natural gods, And if the myjieries in one country dif- clofed the earthly origin of the gods, Herodotus fays, lo-i? & n, xara TV EMwuv yKutr<rav t Lib. 2. c. 59. ,As lils was called, in the Greek language, Demeter, fo Orus was called Apollo; Bubaftis, Diana, c. 156. and Oliris, Bacchus, c. 144. P 3 they 214 Worfhip of human Spirits they muft do fo in the other. (And we know this to be the cafe with regard to both.) What is thus eftablifhed by the plaineft reafoning is confirmed by the cleareft teftimony. Eufebius, fpeaking of that moil corrupt fpecies of idolatry, which fucceeded the worfhip of the natural gods, (by which he means that of dead men,) reprefent^ it as fpringing up firft in Phenicia, and foon afterwards in E- gypt ; and immediately adds, that the myfteries of both countries were com- municated to the Greeks by Cadmus and Orpheus b . And Sanchoniathon i fays, that the cuftom of deifying kings and the benefactors of mankind, and of wor- fhipping them as the greatejl gods^ which obtained amongft the Phenicians and Egyptians in the moft early ages of the rot Tay^s, pt,tTotrfi<7*[Ato TO. itct^ A x.ou tf)emxx* TOJJ atTojj atya.'/iH. Ellfeb. P. Ev. p. 17, 1 8. Concerning Cadmus, fee Nonni Dionyiiaca, p. 79, 80. \ Cited above, p. 135. worldj in pdifhed Nations. 215 world, was from them derived to other nations. Now, amongft thefe nations, Greece, as we have feen, was certainly included. Confequently, the twelve gods of Greece, like the twelve gods of Egypt and the Cabirs of Phenicia, were of mor- talorigin. II. The fame point may be farther proved by the teflimony of Herodotus, who was certainly well acquainted with the Grecian obje&s of worfhip. This hiftorian k tells us, that the reafon why the Perfians did not erect temples, al- tars, and images, to the gods, (which the Greeks were known to do,) was, in his opinion, their not believing^ as the Greeks did, that the gods art of the race of men. This teftirnony, which was urged elfewhere" 1 , is excepted againft by Dr. Blackwell ", and after him by another writer ; but without any juft ground, k L. i. c. 131. cited above, p. 47. * Diflert. on Mir: p. 186, 187. ffl Mythol. p. 217. n Fell, p. 7, 27. P 4 The 216 Worjkip of human Spirits The Greek word in difpute ftriftly im- ports, either to be fprung from men y or to have human nature. The conclufion meant to be drawn from it is not affefted by the latter interpretation : for, to fay, the gods had human natures^ is equiva- lent to faying, they had been men. But I preferred the former interpretation, for two reafons : one was, it's having the fanclion of the beft editors p of Herodo- tus, and of all other writers, except thofe who had an end to ferve by rejecting it : the other reafon was, that this interpre- tation fuits well with the known opi- nion of the Greeks concerning the gods : for they did believe in gods fprung from men j but they did not admit, that the humanam naturam habens ; item, or- tum humanum habens. Scapula. Dr. Blackwell was juftly cenfured by the author of the Divine Legation, vol. i. p. 97. in the note, 4th ed. for explaining this word by ce^^Trc/xo^ipoj, as if it imported being made like a man. But the former word is of a very different im- port from the latter. Gale and Wefieling render the word, ex homiaibus crtoit fouls in polijhed Nations. 217 fouls of thefe men, in their deified flate, did ftill partake of human nature. Ort the contrary, they taught that this mu- table , pajflble, mortal, nature was chan- ged into a nature, immutable, impajfibkj and immortal^. But I lay very little ftrefs upon this argument, becaufe the word in queftion might be defigned to exprefs the nature which the gods had originally. The general meaning of He- rodotus is too plain to be eafily mifta- ken. The ftatues of the gods in human form were a proof of their having been men r . Herodotus therefore very natu- rally accounts for the Perfians differing fo far from the Greeks, as to have no facred ftatues, by faying, they had very different notions of the gods : for the Perfians did not believe, as the Greeks did, that the gods once had human na- tures, or were fprung from men. The Greeks indeed acknowledged the fame natural gods as the Perfians did ; 9 Diflert. on Mir. p. 214. note f . f See Piv. Legat. vol. i. p. 97, 98. in the note. but 2 1 8 Worfoip of human Spirits but there was this difference between them : in Perfia they worfhipped the na- tural gods themfelves, directly and im- mediately j whereas, in Greece, the more immediate objects of the public worship were deified human fpirits, to whom the adminiftration of the govern- ment of this lower world was thought to be committed. And, as thefe prefidents over nature did, as it were, intercept and engrofs the public devotion, Hero- dotus might juftly fay, in general terms, that the Greeks believed their gods were of human origin. It muft be obferved far^ ther, though there was occafion to make the fame obfervation before s , that Hero^ dotus is not here fpeaking of heroes or any of the inferior orders of deities, but of the principal objects of Grecian worfhip, or of thofe to whom the title of gods emi^ nently belonged, who had temples, cha- pels, images and altars, erected in their honour*. He mufl therefore include in Above, p. 61, 62, * See Porphyry, de Antro Nymph, p. 254. this in polijhed Nations. 219 this number the twelve great gods of Greece ; and confequently he affirms, that they were dead men and women deified. III. That the gods of the greater na- tions were deified mortals, is a point fully eflablifhed by the Sacred Hiftory of Euhe- merus of Meffina. Notice was taken of this argument elfewhere' ; but I fhall here enter into it more fully. Euhemerus relates, that, in one of the many voyages he undertook by or- der of CafTander, king of Macedonia, he came to an ifland called Panchaia, and there found, in the temple of the Tri- philian Jupiter, an authentic regifter of the births and deaths of the gods. A- mongft thefe gods he particularly fpeci- fies Uranus > his fons by Vefta, viz. Pan (or rather Titan V and Saturn , and his daughters, * Diflert. on Mir. p. 194. u Ladantius (Inftitut. Div. 1. i. .14.) has the fol- lowing extraft from Euhemerus himfelf, according to Ennius's tranflation of him : Exin Saturnus uxorem ducit Opem, Titan, qui major natu eraf, poftulat, ut ipfe reg- naret. 220 Worfoip of human Spirits daughters, Rhea and Ceres j the children of Saturn w and Rhea, viz. Jupiter, Juno, and Neptune ; and the offspring of Ju- piter by Juno, Ceres, and Themis, viz. the Curetes, Proferpine, and Minerva. The foregoing particulars, and feveral others concerning Euhemerus, are men- tioned by Diodorus Siculus, in a frag- ment preferved by Eufebius x . And the defign of the Sacred Hiftory was to fhew, that the gods were to be regarded as mor^ tal men y . This hiftory received the fanclion of the moil refpeclable writers of antiquity. It was tranflated into Latin and appro- aaret. Hi Vefta, mater eorum, et furores, Ceres at^ue Opis, fuadent Safurao, ut de regno ncn concedat fratri. There being here no mention of Pan, it feems probable that the reading in Diodorus fhould be Titan. See Weileling's Diodorus, torn. 2. p. 634. w Saturn fucceeded Uranus, and Jupiter fucceeded Saturn. * Diodor. Sic. Fragm. p. 633, 634. ed. WefT. Eufeb. P. Ey. 1. 2. c. 2. p. 59. Compare Cicero de Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 42. y Tavroe, zxi TO. rarot; z-x^ac.'jrt.iiyix, uq ftp Swruv ctv^^u- vw, vs^ ru Stuv h&Suv, Diodorus, torn. 2. p. 634. ved in polijhed Nations . 221 ved by Ennius z . Cicero alfo, whofe au- thority is of the greateft weight, adopted the fyftem of the Meffinian concerning the heathen gods ; as will be {hewn in the next feet ion. I fhall only obferve here, that, though he was fully fenfible of the abfurdity of worfhipping dead men % and of the evil tendency of re- prefenting the gods as fuch b , he does not controvert the truth of that repre- fentation. Diodorus Siculus c cites Eu- hemerus without cenfure j and, by the extracts he makes from his hiflory, plainly difcovers his opinion of it's fide- z Euhemerus, quern nofter et interpretatus et fecu- tus eft, prster czeteros, Ennius. Cicer. N. Deor. hi. c. 42. a He puts the following words into the mouth of Velleius, the Epicurean : Quo quid abfurdius quam homines jam morte deletes reponere in deos, quorum omnis cultus efTet futurus in luftu ? N. Deor, 1. i. c. 15. b He fays, in the perfon of Cotta, an Academic philofopher : Utrum igitur hie (Euhemerus) confir- mafTe videtur religionem, an penitus totam fuftulifle ? Id. ib. c. 42. e Vide 1. 5. p. 364. et feq. Fragment, ubi fupra. lity. 222 Wcrfbip of butnan Spirits lity. Eufebius d certainly entertained the fame opinion of it as Diodorus, and appeals to it as a fufficient authority for what he advances with refpecT: to the mean origin of the heathen gods. St. Auftin e affirms, that Euhemerus efta- blifhed his notion of them as mere mor- tals by careful refearches into ancient hiftory. Lactantius f , on different oc- cafions, d Prsep. Ev. I. 2. c. 2. p. 59. et feq. * Euhemerus, omnes tales deos, non fabulofa garru- litate, fed hiftorica diligentia, homines fuifie mortalef- que, confcripfit. Civ. Dei, 1. 6. .7. See alfo 1. 7. c. 26. * Antiquus autor, Euhemerus, qui fuit ex civitate Meflene, res geftas Jovis, et cazterorum qui dii putan- tur, collegit, hiftoriamque contexuit ex titulis et in- fcriptionibus facris quse in antiquiflimis templis habe- bantur, maximeque in fano Jovis Triphylii. Laftant, Div. Inftitut. 1. i. c. n. p. 49, 50. torn. i. ed. Du- frefnoy. Aperiamus qits in veris literis continentur* Ha;c Ennii verba funt, &c. Haec hiftoria quam <vera fit, docet Sibylla Erythraea, eadem fere dicens. Id. ib. c. 14. Ad hiftoriam veniamuSj qu fimul et rerum fide, et temporum nitituf vetuftate. Euhemerus fuit MefTenius, antiquiffimus fcriptor, qui de facris infcrip- tionibus veterum templorum et originem Jovis, et res geftas, omnemque progeniem, collegit ; item caetero- rum in polijhed Nations. 223 cafions, afferts the truth of his memoirs, and fays they were extracted from the monuments and facred infcriptions of the oldeft temples, and efpecially from thofe in the temple of the Triphylian Jupiter. And he affirms, that the moft ancient writers of Greece, thofe whom they called theologers, and the Romans, who copied from the Greeks, entertained the fame opinion of the gods <as Euhe- merus g . According to Minucius Fe- lix h , " he pointed out the places where " the gods were born, their countries > " and their fepulchres, in the different " provinces of the earth :" which furely muft afford every one an opportunity rum deorum parentes, patrias, aftus, imperia, obitus, fepulcra etiam, perfecutus eft. Id. Epitome J)iv. Infti- tut. 0.13. torn. 2. 8 Omnes, qui coluntur ut dii, homines fuerunt. Quod ciim vetufliirimi Grascias fcriptores, quos illi $- ^oya? nuncupant, turn etiam Romani, Grzecos fecuti et imitati, decent; quorum prsecipue Euhemerus, ac nof- ter Ennius. Id. de Ira Dei, c. xi. p. 152. h Euhemerus eorum natales, patrias, fepulchra, dinumerat, et per provincias monftrat. Min. Fel. Oc- tavius, CrXxir Of 224 Worjhlp of human Spirits of dete&ing his impofture, had he beeri chargeable with any. And Arnobius * tells the Heathens, he could prove, that all thofe whom they called gods had been men, from the writings either of Euhemerus, or Nicagoras, or PellaeuSj or Theodoras, or Hippo and Diagoras, or by a thoufand other authors, who had made the moft critical and diligent inquiry into this fubject, and, with an ingenuous freedom of mind, had brought to light things that were concealed from public view. But Euhemerus, it is faid, was brand- ed as an atheift ; and this circumilance has been urged to difcredit the truth of his doctrine concerning the humanity of the gods. In anfwer to this objection, it may be obferved, 1 PofTumus quidem hoc in loco omnes iftos, nobis quos inducitis atque appellatis deos, homines fuifle monftrare, vel Agragantino Euhemero replicator r- vel Nicagoro Cyprio, vel Pellso Leonte, vel Cyrenenfi Theodore, vel Hippone ac Diagora Meliis, vel au&ori- bus aliis mille, qui fcrupulofae diligentise cura in lucem res abditas libertate ingenua protulerunt. i. No in pblijhed Nations. 225 i. No man was deemed an atheift, by the Heathens, if he worfhipped any gods who interefted themfelves in the affairs of mankind, though they were only fuch as had been men* Such gods a- lone as thefe were worfhipped by the Getes and Augilites, who neverthelefs were not cenfured as atheifls *. The* Panchaians difcovered an extraordinary devotion to thofe divinities, whofe births and deaths were regiftered in their mod magnificent temple 1 . So far was the deification of men from implying athe- ifm, that it rather prefuppofed the exif- tence of the natural gods, with whom the deified men were aflbciated, and from whom they derived their power and authority m . The priefts, who cer- k Above, p. 32, 97. 1 Euhemerus reprdents them as tvo-tfaiet &psovTa?, xa ra? Seas riput/rcK; jwy7i,o7rgE9rtrT? Ss/'c-jaij, x. T. A. As to the celeftial gods, he fays, Uranus was the firil who honoured them with facrifices ; from which cir- cumftance he derived his name. Diod. Sic. Fragm. p. 633, 634. m DifTert. on Mir. p. 175. note '. Ci tainly 226 Worfoip of human tainly did not intend to promote athe- ifm, did themfelves reveal the human origin of the great gods to thofe initia- ted into the myfleries. And thofe phi- lofophers, who were concerned to fup- port the public religion, maintained that (even according to the rules of right reafon, as will be fhewn hereafter) vir- tuous men were advanced firft to the rank of heroes, next to that of demons, and afterwards to that of gods, having attained to a flate of the higheft perfec- tion and blefTednefs ". Euhemerus there- fore was not ranked amongft the athe- ifts merely for afTerting, that thofe wor- fhipped by the people as gods had once been men. 2. What the Heathens lay to the charge of Euhemerus is, his believing, that there were no gods y or none ivbo take n Ovbit a ^ TO, tru^xfa. rut ctyo&ui cnwasrE^Trux irct^oc, QVITHI ? gavo, aX^a raf agtTa? xa ra? Plutarchi Romulus, p. 36. A. care in polifoed Nations. 227 care of mankind . He was accufed of real atheifm ; but Theophilus Antiochenus p feems to intimate that he did notpublickly avow this principle at firft. And it might be charged upon him only as the appre- hended confequence of his rejecting the received notion of the popular gods ; juft as Socrates, for a fimilar reafon, Who, fays ./Elian, can forbear extolling the <vuifdom tif the Barbarians ? for none of them ever fell into aiheifm, cr doubted whether there are any gods, or any who take care of mankind. They never entertained the like fentiment as Euhemerus but uni<v erf ally afferted, that there are gods, and that they take care of us, Tt? x. an ETDJUEC-E rr, Tav @ot,((x.cuv cro^iav ; nye ^>jo(f ot-vrtuv ; u^tonrat ffE9T<7 E^I Siwv, ot^a, yt ttcrtv, j ax. Etat* xa.1 ago. ye s- Ovtfitf ysf en/otav e^a/Se ToiotVTrtVf 010,9 o t^UjUEgoy htyiipt ^i TUV fiaf&agun TT^OEJ^WEVOI, xan tivt&i $?, xa 9Tor<mv tipur. Var. Hift. 1. 2. .3!. See alfo Plutarch, de Placit. Philofoph. 1. i. c. 7. p. 880. P " After having had the courage to fpeak many '* things concerning the gods," (that is, I apprehend, to reprefent them as having been men,) " he at laft went " fo far as to affirm, that there were no gods at all, nor " any fuperintending providence, but that the world " was governed by chance." n^Aa yg my & roX- Theoph. Ant. ad Autolycura, 1. g. p. 293, 294. ed. Wolfii. \vas 228 Worjhip of human Spirits was deemed an atheift, though he was far from deferving fuch a reproach. Whatever Euhemerus's real charac- ter was, it is certain that one reafon of his being thought an atheift was his fpeaking of the gods as men who perifh- ed at death, and confequently were not really deified. We are cxpreffly told by Sextus Empiricus q , that he reprefented their pretended deification as the mere effec~b of the pride and policy of princes and great men, in order to procure a higher veneration for their perfons, and a more ready fubmiffion to their autho- rity. Now, if all thofe who were wor- fhipped as gods had been men, as Eu- hemerus afTerts, and thefe men were falfely fuppofed to become gods, the Heathens would regard him as one who 3 Evvpegoi; &, o i7riKAj)9et$ a,5iog, ty^cm, or* re araxTo; avS^uvuv oj, o TregtysyojuExoi ruv a,M.uv HT%VI re xat ervvea-n, cart wfo; ra vrr' etvruv xehevoftttot Tca,yta,t^ @mv, ffira^a.^ovre^ frt^ a.VT8<; $eo. Sextus Empiricus, adv. Phyficos, 1. 9. c. 2. . 17. p. 552. ed. Fabricii. Vid. . 51. believed 'in polljhed Nations. 229 believed there were no gods at all. Plu- tarch, in a paflage that will be quickly cited, grounds the charge of atheifm againft him, not upon his aflerting that the gods had been men, but upon his maintaining that they were nothing more than men long fmce dead. Nay, Plutarch, as we fhall fee *, diftinguifhes the former of thefe proportions from atheifm . The account here given of the MefTmian is con- firmed by Clemens Alexandrinus r , who fays, " that Euhemerus, Nicanor, Dia- " goras, Hippo, Theodorus, and others, " were called atheifts, becaufe they had 11 the fagacity to difcern the error of o- " ther men concerning the gods j" that is, they clearly faw they were not real divinities. Now, if Euhemerus would not have been accufed of atheifm by the Hea* * Below, p. 234. ITU TU1 XdTTWV . Clem. Alexandr. Cohort, ad Gentes, torn, I. p. 20, 21. ed. Potteri. thens, 230 Worfoip of human Spirits thens, had he merely aflerted, that the received gods had been mortal men, provided he had allowed their advance- ment, after death, to a deified flate : the objection we have been examining does not reach the point. And, if one ground, at leaft, of the charge of athe- ifm againfl him was his denying the real deification of men, this is a demon- flration that the Heathens acknow* ledged this principle ; and confequently the objection under confideration ella- blifhes the point it was meant to over- turn. The only plaufible objection againfl the hiflory of Euhemerus is that urged by Plutarch - 3 viz. that no one befides this hiflorian had ever feen the ifland of Panchaia s , Plutarch, as a priefl of the gods, could not but be di pleafed with the Meilinian for minute- ly inquiring into their character and ac- tions, and for publifhing to the whole If. etOfir. p. 360. A. B. world in poli fie d Nations. 231 world their earthly origin '. He was ftill more highly offended at his reprefenting them as men who were deftroyed by death. He himfelf was an advocate for the real deification of virtuous fouls ", for the phyfical explication of the ab- furd flories concerning the gods w , and for the exiftence of an order of celeftial demons x ; and, on thefe principles, he undertook the defence of the pagan re- ligion, at a time when it was warmly attacked, not only by the fceptical phi- lofophers, but by the Chriflians in every * It was a facred maxim, with the Heathens, " that " it was more their duty to believe the deeds of the " gods, than to knovj them ;" which they obferved e- ven with regard to thofe gods who bad been men. See above, p. 159. note :1 . Hercules is the god there fpo- ken of. To reveal the fecret of the myfteries was an aft of the higheft impiety. Hence Plutarch complains, that afferting the humanity of the gods was moving things which ought not to be moved. If. et QCir. p. 359. F In order to fupport their falfe religion, the pagan priefts found it neceflary to check curiolity, and pre- vent free inquiry, on the fubjeft. u Above, p. 226. note n . w If. et Ofir. paffim. x Ib. p. 360. part 232 W&rjhip of human Spirits part of the world, on account of it's confiding in the worfhip of dead men. That it did confift very much in fuch worfhip, they proved by many -argu- ments, and particularly by the teftimony of Euhemerus. Can we wonder then that Plutarch laboured to difparage it, when we confider that it overturned his favourite fpeculations, and left his reli- gion without the fhadow of a fupport ? But let us examine the weight of his obr jeftion. Even if there was no fuch iiland as Panchaia, the doctrine of Eu- hemerus might be true, becaufe it was fupported by other records befides thofe of the temple of the Triphylian Jupiter, which might be appealed to only to a- void the odium and danger of divulging the fecret of the myfteries. There is however no fufficient reafon to affirm, that the ifland of Panchaia had no exif- tence. It is mentioned by Pomponius Mela y , defcribed by Diodorus Sicu- ? L. 3. c. 8. 1. 63* with the notes of F. Voffius, f. 8 5 a, lus, in polijked Nations . 233 lus x , and it's exiftence, according to Vof- fms, eftablifhed beyond contradiction by the teftimony of Ptolemy Euergetes 3 . The hiftory of Euhemerus's voyage to it met with credit from many refpeclable wri- ters, who lived much nearer to the time of it's publication than Plutarch. And if, in the remote age of this philofo- pher, or even in that of Polybius b , it was not known that any one had ever feen Panchaia befides our voyager, let it be remembered, that he was more likely than any other to difcover this ifland, as he had failed much farther to the fouth of the Arabian gulph than mere traders had ever done, having been fent out by 2 L. 5. p. 364. el feq. Fragm. p. 633. a Ut omnem prorfus tollam dubitationem, fubjungam teftimonium omni exceptione majus, Ptolemsei nempe Euergetse, excerptum ex mcmuoiento Adulitico, in quo recenfentur gentes Ethiopicae, quas ipfe praefens fubjugavit. This monument mentions the Panchaites. Voffius, ubi fupra. b See Strabo, 1.2. p. 163. and 1. ^. p. 459. from whence it appears that Polybius did not credit the ac- f ount given of Panchaia. the 234 Worjhlp of human Spirits the king of Macedonia, on purpofe, as it fhould feem, to make new difcoveries. What has Plutarch done to refute the doctrine of Euhemerus ? To my ap- prehenfion, what he has admitted ferves fully to eftablifh it. He allows that the things related of the gods accord with the opinion of their having been men % and that thofe who hold this opi- nion have thefupport ofhiftory d ; though at the fame time he acknowledges it's ten- dency to produce atheifm ' ; or that a be- lief that the objects of their worfhip had been men led to a denial of their being re- ally gods e . What could Euhemerus him- felf defire more than fuch a conceflion from a learned and able adverfary ? After the foregoing obfervations, Plu- tarch immediately introduces the men- c See above, p. 166. ^ Ep^ac-tv TTO Tav ,-0^AEywv /SoiiS'E.aj. Plutarch, p. 359* ^* e It opened ^eyaAaj TU c&iu Asw xAKno&c?, a great v/mdow or door to atheiftic people. If. et Ofir. p. 360. This proves what was before afTerted, that Plutarch diitinguifhes between the humanity of the gods, and the e/ecl it might produce on perfons of reflection, tion in polijhed Nations. 235 tion of our author, and complains, " that he had fpread all manner of athe- <c ifm throughout the world, and ftruck " at the exigence of all the received gods " without diftinftion, whom he defcri- " bed merely as ancient generals, admi- " rals, and kings V This paffage ferves to ftiewj that Euhemerus gained many converts to his opinion. We are a(ked e , Did the Heathens receive bit doflrine ? If not, what have ive to do in this cafe with the groundlefs fuppofitions of an individual ? Could Plutarch juftly charge Euhemerus with fpreading atheifm throughout the world, if his doctrine had not been received throughout the world ? The reception of his doctrine was the caufe j atheifm was the effetf , and both mufl have been of equal extent. So that the doctrine of Euhemerus concerning the origin of the v. If. et Ofir. p. 360. A. 5 fell, p. 81. gods, 236 Worfhlp of human Spirits gods, which a late writer treats as the groundlcfi fuppojition of an INDIVIDUAL, was allowed to be generally received, as well as founded in uncontroverted facts, even by that great man who was moft offended at it's being breached. And it has been proved, that this doctrine was maintained and defended by Greek and Roman, by Heathen and Chriftian, wri- ters, and fupported by the authority of records in the mod ancient temples. Kow, if this doctrine of Euhemerus be true, then even the great gods of Greece were men and women, who were, without any reafon, fuppofed to become gods after death. This point will be farther confirmed by other teftimonies in the next fection, when the Roman gods come under con- fideration. And, were we to defcend to a particular enumeration of the feveral Grecian deities of which we are here fpeaking, we fhould find diftincl evi- dence of the human origin of each. But, as this would lead to a repetition of many things 'in polljhed Nations. 237 things already noticed, and to an anti- cipation of others which will occur in the fequel, I fhall only confider the cafe of the Grecian Jupiter, the father of gods and men h . The term 'Jupiter^ which, according to Cicero, denotes only a helping father \ was commonly ufed to exprefs the fu- preme pagan deity. The philofophers defcribed, by this term, their fupreme natural divinity j which, according to fome, was the world or foul of the world ; and, according to others, either the aether or the fun k . But the pre- fent h nar ctt\u TE Staves. Homer. Pater divumque hominumque. Latin poets, Cicero, Nat. Deor. 1. 2. c. 25. * Juvans pater. Id. ib. k The proofs of this point need not be produced here. I ihall only obferve, that, though Mr. Fell af- firms, p. 22. " that // is uni e u erf ally . known t that no " part of nature was ever considered by the Heathens " as their fupreme deity ; and that the fun, in parti-, " cular, was not fo confidered," p. 15. yet, in exprefs contradiction to himfelf, the fame writer maintains, p. 124. " that their (the Heathens) chief deities were " the 238 Worjhlp of human Spirits fent ' queftion concerns only that Jupi- ter who was the chief object of the efta- blifhed worfhip in the ancient nations, and particularly in Greece. " the aether, fun, moon, planets, and hods of hea- " ven;" nay, he pleads that fome nations adored no gods but the fun or the heavens, p. 8, 9. He fays, p. ng. (fee alfo p. 5.) (( that the Creator of all things " was acknowledged amongfl them (the Heathens) al- " moft every where." Could he be acknowledged by thofe whofe chief Deities were the fun and moon? More conformable to the real fadl: is the declaration of fcrip- ture. They facrificed not to God, Deut. xxxii. 17. When they knew (or had plain notices of) God, they glorified him not as God, but ferved the creature (irctgec,) rather than the Creator ; that is, paffing ly the Creator, (fee Beza in loc. and the Syriac and ^Ethiopic verfions, and the vulgar Latin,) or in oppofetion to him, (fo v^ Ton vopov, Acls xviii. 3. is contrary to law,) Rom. i. 21. But all that occurs in this writer, about the un- created God, p. 6. the created gods, p. 15, 16, 17. the Creator of the univerfe, and the creation, p. I, 5. fo far as this language refpefts the Heathens, ferves only fo mew he was not fenfible, that the Heathens, who lived before the coming of Chrift, denied a proper cre- ation, and afferted the generation of the gods and of the world. Now, " no generation," they faid, " is made " from what does not exift:" OVK tx. rs \*.-/\ om? v ytvi<ri$. Plutarch, de Anima; Procreat. p. 1014. B. 1 See above, p. 6. The in polifhed Nations. 239 The Arcadians m difputed with the Cretans the honour of giving birth to Jupiter j but it is fufficient to our pur- pofe to obferve, that the conteft itfelf proved his being regarded by both as a man. If he was not born in Crete, he was certainly educated there ; and was called Ditftean from a mountain in that ifland called Ditfe, the place of his edu- cation ". He died, at the age of an hun- dred and twenty , in the ifland of Crete p . Callimachus, indeed, will not Callimach. Hymn, in Jov. v. 6, 7. Cicero, Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 21. fays, the theologers reckoned three Jupiters ; two born in Arcadia ; the third in Crete, who was the fon of Saturn. See La&antius, 1. i. c, n. and Arnobius, 1. 4. p. 135. who affirm the fame con- cerning the Cretan Jupiter. n Virgil. Georg. IV. 152. Servius on ^En. III. 171. Suidas (voc. njjxo?) fays, Huxof, o *a Ziv$, TS~ \ivrei, w<7as K KCU tx.ce,Toi tf). Compare Chron. Alexand. p. 87, 89. Ennius (ap. Laclant. 1. i. c. u. p. 52.) fays of Jupiter, ^Etate peffum acla, in Creta vitam commutavit, et ad deos abiit. P See Laftantius, in the preceding note. allow 240 Worjhip of human Spirits allow that he died * ; yet, by reprefent- ing him as the offspring of Rhea, by pointing out the place of his nativity r , and making his ftrength and exploits the ground of his becoming king of the gods *, he plainly holds him forth under a human character. His tomb was o- penly fhewn in Crete * ; and Diodorus * Siculus 9 Callimach. Hymn, in Jov. v. 9. See fome juft ftri&ures on Callimachus, on account of his denying the death of Jupiter, in Athenagoras, Legal, pro Chriftian. p. 121, 122. ed. Oxon. * "En & <r Ila^a<rt>) Psm TSXE. In Parrhafia verote Rhea peperit. v. 10. See v. 15, 16, 17. * Ou ft Seuv to-trntu KO.\OI i(ret,v, t^ya, 5i %tor, } re /?>j> TO re XXOTOI;, x. T. h, V. 66, 67. Non te regem deorum fecerunt fortes, fed opera manu- um, tuaque vis et robur. - Thefe were the ufual grounds of deifying men. 1 Lucian. de facrificiis, torn. I. p. 367. ed. Amftel. 1687. Cicero, fpeaking of the Jupiter born in Crete, fays, Cujus in ilia infula fepulchrum oflenditur. Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 21. Pythagoras wrote upon the tomb of the Cretan Jupiter the following epigram : l$i Seti/un xiirai Zay, a Ala xtJttocrxatriv. Zan, whom men call Jupiter, lies here deceafed. Por- phyr. Vit. Pythagor. p. 187. ed. Cantab. 1655. Ac- cording to Euhemerus, the infcription upon Jupiter's tomb in polijhed Nations. 241 Siculus * relates, that the remains of it were to be feen in his time. He was highly celebrated for his wifdom and valour, and reigned over a large part of the earth. Having reftrained violence, eftablifhed laws, promoted the welfare of fociety, and rendered himfelf an emi- nent benefactor to his fubjefts and to mankind, he was judged worthy of an eternal kingdom, and a feat in Olympus, by the whole human race". R . The tomb was, Z K ? oa, Jupiter Saturni. La&ant. Epi- tome, torn. 2. 0.13. p. 10. ed. Dufrefnoy. Suidas fays, that, when he was dying, he ordered his body to be buried in the ifland of Crete ; and that the infcrip- tion upon his tomb was, $& xuras a.tut Unos o Zsw?. He adds, that very many writers made mention of his tomb. Suidas, voc. nw?. Apud infulam Cretam fepulturce traditus, fays Arnobius, p. 135. * L. 3. p. 230. ed. Weff.- u Euhemerus Jovem tradit, cum quinquies orbem circumiviffet, et amicis fuis atque cognatis diftribuiiTet imperia, legefque hominibus, multaque alia bona fecif- fet, immortali gloria memoriaque affedlum fempiterna, in Creta vitam commutafle, atque ad decs abiifle. Lac- tant. Epitome, c. 13^ torn. 2. p. 10. Diodorus Sicu- lus, 1. 5. p. 387, 388. after enumerating the bleffings of 242 Worjkip of human Spirits The Cretans, in particular, who gloried in having his tomb amongft them, ho- noured him with more excellent rites and facrifices than their other deities, regarded him as the ruler of all things in heaven j of fhowers, thunder and lightening, and of the temperature of the air, on which the fruits of the earth depend j and called him Zen, becaufe to him they owe their lives or the means of fubfirlence w . The reprefentation made of his reign, fays : At Si rt /xsysSoj rut tvs^yt<rni>t t KOU rr, virt^x*!* Tr,$ ^vtetj^ieg, tru^anus a,vr!J 'KAga, Trattruv vvy- tvru a"vtnXnf wtni> TJ ot,\- Xa? *7ra>T?, x.. T. A. Sacra etiam pras caeteris exquifita ipfi peragi inlHtutum ; et, poft migrationem e terris in ccelum, jufta mentibus hominum, in quos beneficia contulerat, perfuafio infixa eft, quod omnium quae in ccelo fiunt, imbrium, inquam, et tonitruum, fulmi- numque, et id genus aliorum, arbiter fit et moderator. Ideoque Zena ipfum vocant, propterea quod vivendi, quod Zen Graecis eft, autor efl'e, dum commoda aeris temperie fruftus ad maturitatem perducit, exiftimatur. Diod. Sic. p. 388. Compare the account which Dio- durus gives of the Jupiter of the Atlantians. He was called in folijked Nations. .2 4.3 made of the Grecian Jupiter by Homer, notwithftanding his magnificent defcrip- tions of him, is perfectly conformable to the account here given of his low ori- gin. If, according to Homer, Jupiter reigned over the gods, and fhook all heaven with his nod, yet, according to the fame poet, he wanted the affiflance of Briareus to fave him from the violence of Neptune, Juno, and Minerva x . The paffions and vices afcribed to him fhew that he partook of the nature of man. In Plato's Euthyphro, where he is filled, called Z,en, Jka TO cWi ra xoXwj y ; atro> yiyer-Sat TOIJ iw TS crv/>wraTo? xao-fxs. L. 3. p. 230. ed. WefT. As to Jupiter's ruling in the air, it is illuflrated by the account of Thor, given above, p. 36. note c . * See Differ t. on Mir. p. 177. Plutarch quotes the following lines from Homer, which well agree with what occurs in this reference. Speaking of Jupiter and Neptune, the poet fays : Beth of one line, both of one country, boaft ; But royal Jove's the eldeft, and knows ms/f. Plutarch. If. et Ofir. p. 351. R 2 the 244 Worjhip of human Spirits the beft and moji jufl y of the gods, he is at the fame time reprefented as holding his father in chains. In the very rites of his worfhip, there was a manifefl refe- rence to the hiftory of his infant condi- tion z . But it is needlefs to multiply proofs in fo plain a cafe. I muft not however omit to obferve, that the men- tion made by the Heathens, of his pa- rents and more remote anceftors, of his brethren, defcendents, and kindred*, is a farther proof of his belonging to the human race. And, if this was the cafe as to Jupiter, it muft be the fame as to the other gods and goddeffes who were y A*ro{ xt ^xaioraToj. Platon. Euthyphro, p. 5. torn. i. ed. Serrani. z Ipfius Cretici Jovis facra, quid aliud, quam quo- modo fit, aut fubtradlus patri, aut nutritus, oftendunt ? Capella eft Amalthese nymphas, quae uberibus fuis aluit infintem. Laftant. 1. i. c. 21. p. 100. a Arnobius thus addrefles the Heathens : At vero Jupiter, ut i/oj fertis, et patrem habet et matrem, a- vos, avias, fratres. Adv. Gentes. p. 19. See alfo p. 92, 93. and what Laftantius advances on this fub- jedt, upon the authority of Euhemerus and Ennius, lib. i. c. 14. and Epitome Div. Inftitut. torn. 2. c. 15. Of in polijked Nations. 245 of the fame family with him, and of whom he was chief b . R 3 From b It may not be improper to obfcrve, that, if the twelve gods of Greece had not been known to be of human defcent, Demades could never.have thought of adding Alexander to that number, and making him the thirteenth. It was becaufe Alexander thought him- felf not inferior to Dionyfus, that he pleaded his ha- ving an equal right with him to the worfhip of the A- rabians. Above, p. 85, 86. His hope of becoming cne cf the gods of Egypt (fee above, p. 168.) muft have been founded upon the fame principle ; and the condudl of Demades cannot be accounted for on any other. The Athenians indeed were offended with the orator ; but it was (OT Surrey etvrov $y tov AAir^n> o>r tny^s TO{ OAf/xTTi&i?) becaufe he enrolled Alexander, while he was {till a mere mortal man, amongft the gods who inhabited Olympus, or heaven. Though heaven was peopled from the earth, yet the Athenians judged it impious to decree thofe honours to any one while a man only, (for Alexander was now living,) which were peculiar to the oldeft of their gods. ^Elian. V?.r. Hift. 1. 5. c. 12. Comp. 1. 2. c. 19. The people of Cyzicum were fomewhat lefs fcrupulous ; for they cal- led Adrian, the thirteenth god, T^Krxa,^n>ae,rci> Sso. So- crat. Hift. Ecclef. 1. 3. c. 23. p. 205. What this hiftorian relates in this place concerning Cleomedes, that the oracle required men to honour him with facri- fices, ( jttjxm SMJTO ecvra, utpote qui non amplius fit mortalis, explains the motive, on which the Athenians aded, 246 Worfiip of human Spirits From the whole of what has been of- fered in this feclion, we may conclude, that, amongft the Greeks, however they might acknowledge the natural gods, yet the dead men and women, whom they ated, in a manner confident with the fuppofition of the twelve gods having been once men. Philip was cal- led Tgicrxat&KaTo? $eo s . Stob. Serm. 96, p. 534. Mr. Fell affirms, p. 24. " that I cannot bring any de- " cifive evidence to fhew, that fuch" (that is, religious) " worfhip was paid to a human fpirit under the term " Jupiter." I do not know how any writer could fur- nifh his readers with more decifive evidence, to fhew how little knowledge he had of the fubjeft, with which he would feem to be well acquainted. Without ap- pealing to the fads already flated, I would obferve, thatVarro (ap. Tertullian. Apol. 0.14.) reckoned up three hundred Jupiters ; and that probably there were many more ; it being cuilomary with the ancients to give this name to thofe eminent perfons who either firft founded a ftate, or contributed greatly to it's profpe- rity, and whom they raifed to the rank of gods, and worfhipped as fuch. Thus Ammon, Dagon, Belus, and ^Eneas, were feverally ftiled Jupiter. As almofl every country had it's Jupiter, fo fome countries had feveral. The Lacedaemonians beftowed upon their kings t<u>o priefthoods ; that of the Lacedaemonian, and that of the cehftial, Jupiter. Herodot. 1. 6. c. 68. Upon the fepulchre of Minos in Crete was this infcrip- tion, Ts A<o$, the fepulchre of Jupiter. Sir If. Newton's Short Chronicle, p. 22. vainly in polijhed Nations. 247 vainly deified, were the more immediate and principal objects of their public wor- fhip. SECT. VI. // remains to be fiewn, that human fpir its were worfhipped by the ROMANS. A S the Romans derived their religion from Greece, Egypt, and the Eaft, we are naturally led to expect a confor- mity between their objects of worfhip and thofe of the nations here fpecified ; in which it has been already proved, that dead men and women were deified. /Eneas, from whom the Romans claimed to be defcended, brought from Troy into Italy his houfehold gods', who were the fouls of his departed anceftoiV; R 4 and e Cum fociis, natoque, penatibus, et magnis dis. Virg. jEn.III. 12. See alfo VIII. 679. d The Phrygian penates, in their addrefs to ^Cneas, after making mention of Dardanus, add, genus a quo principe noftrum. Mn. III. 148, 168. See Servius in loc. This learned commentator fays, Penates funt om- nes 248 Worjkip of human Spirits and the great gods, who probably were the Samothracian deities ftiled Cabirs, or great and powerful divinities e (natives of Phenicia, fpoken of above f ). We are farther informed, that the Trojan prince eftablifhed religious ceremonies in ho^ nes dii qui domi coluntur. ^En. II. 514. They are fpoken of as the guardian deities of Troy, JEn.II. 293. More will be faid concerning the penates in this fe&ion. e The penates being called magni, JEn. IX. 258. and magni dii, Macrob. 1. 3. c. 4. fome fuppofe that the magni dii were the fame as the penates : (Servius, on JEn. III. 12.) but, in the paflage cited above, note c , they feem to be diflinguifhed. The Phenicians, who fettled in Samothrace, introduced there the worfhip of the Cabirs j and, from Samothrace, their myfteries were probably carried into Phrygia by Dardanus : (fee Plu- tarch's Camillus, p. 139.) and, as the Cabirs anfwer the import of Virgil's magni dii, they are probably here intended. Some think that, by the magni dii, Virgil means Jupiter, Minerva, and Mercury. Servius on JEn. VIII. 679. III. 264. ^Eneas, it was generally faid, brought into Italy the image of Pallas or Minerva ; (Plutarch, ubi fupra ;) who, according to Virgil, was the in-~ventrefs of oil. Georg. I. 15. ' P. 140. where it might have been obferved, that, Chough Herodotus mentions, he does not appear to fa- vour, the opinion of thofe who thought the Cabirs to be the fons of Vulcan. nour in polljhed Nations. 249 nour of his father's genius 8 ; inftrufted the people in the facred rites due to the dead g ; and was himfelf, after his deceafe, worfhipped under the title of Jupiter Indiges*. From thefe facts it appears, that, both in the country he had left, and amongft his own defcendents in Italy, gods of human origin were wor- fhipped, and reprefented by facred ima- ges '. 8 Ille patris genio folemnia dona ferebat : Hinc populi ritus edidicere pios. Ovid. Fafti, 1. II. 545. Concerning the wormip of Anchifes, fee Virg. JEn. VII. 133. and V. 58, 59. Compare Ladant. 1. i. c. 15. p. 66, 67. h Situs eft, (^Eneas,) quemcunque earn dicijusfaf- que eft, fuper Numicium flumen : Jo<vem indigetem ap- pellant. Liv. I. 2. Illic fanflus eris, quum te veneranda Numici Unda deum coelo miferit indigetem. Tibull. II. 5, 45. Concerning the worlhip of ^Eneas, fee Dionyf. Hali- carn. Antiq. Rom. p. 42. * The penates which .^Eneas brought into Italy are called lignea vel lapidtafigilla. Servius on^Sn. III. 148. from Varro. See Dionyf. Halicarn. Antiq. Rom. 1. 1. . 0.67. p. 53. ed. Oxon. The 250 Worfhip of human Spirits The Romans, it is true, were for- bidden by Numa to reprefent the gods either under a human or brutal form ; and accordingly had no fuch reprefenta- tions of them for the firft hundred and feventy years k . This feems to have given occafion to a late writer * to affert, " that the Grecian idolatry was not ad- < mitted amongft the Romans for above <e an hundred and feventy years after " Romulus." If, by the Grecian idola- try^ the gentleman means the worfhip of images, his aflertion could not anfwer his defign of refuting what was advanced concerning the heathen gods in the Dif- fertation on Miracles : but, if he thereby means the worfhip of deified men, (which his argument plainly requires,) he was certainly under a great miftake. Ro- mulus, who was killed in the thirty- k Plutarch! Numa, p. 65. Varro, ap. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1.4. 0.31. Statues and images were afterwards introduced at Rome. Floras, I. 5. Tertullian. Apol. c. 25. ' Fell, p. 14. feventh in polijked Nations. 251 feventh year of Rome, had divine ho- nours decreed to him by the people ; the fenate concurring in railing him to the rank of a god, though they abhor- red him as a king m . Nay, Numa, his immediate fucceiTor, (that very Numa who forbad the ufe of images, and is thought by fome to have accomplifhed fome fuch reformation, amongft the Ro- mans, as Zoroafter is faid to have done amongft the Perfians,) built a temple, appointed facrifices, and added a prieft, in honour of Romulus ". Amongft other laws refpecling reli- gion, he ordained the following : Let all honour the ancient gods of heaven, and thofe whofe merits have carried them thi- ther -, fuch as Hercules, Bacchus , Mfcu/a- m The fenators, who had murdered Romulus, per- fuaded the people that he was tranilated to the gods ; and that, having been an indulgent king, he would now be to them a propitious deity. Plutarchi Romulus, P- 34> 35- n Dionyf. Hal. vol. i. p. 119. Oxon. Plutarchi Numa, p. 64. C. Liv. I. 20. pius, 252 Worfoip of human Spirits pitts, Caflor^ Pollux, and Quirinus . By the ancient gods of heaven p , we are not to underftand gods that exifted from eter- nity q , but fuch as had been in heaven from Divos, et eos qui cceleftes Temper habiti, colunto, et olios quos endo ccelo merita vocaverint ; Herculem, Liberum, ^Efculapium, Caftorem, Pcllucem, Quiri- num. Cicero, de Legibus, 1. 2. c. 8. P So Hook (Roman Hiftory, vol. i. p. 59.) tranf- lates cosleftes femper babiti ; whom I have followed, be- caufe it does not appear he had any particular hypo- thefis to fupport by this tranflation. 1 Arnobius, adv. Gentes, p. 92, 93. well obferves : Ipfi dii immortales, quorum modo aditis templa, et nu- mina fuppliciter adoratis, ficut veftris literis atque opi- nionibus traditur, non efle, non fciri, ab temporibus coeperunt certis, et impofitis nominum appellationibus nuncupari ? Nam, fi verum eft, ex Saturno atque ejus uxore Jovem fuis cum fratribus procreatum ; ante nup- tias et partus Opis nufquam fuerat Jupiter tarn fupre- mus, quam Stygius : nufquam fali dominus, nufquam Juno. Rurfus vero, fi Liber, Venus, Diana, Mercurius, Apollo, Hercules, Mufa?, Tyndaridae Caf- tores, ignipotenfque Vulcanus, Jove patre funt pro- diti, et genitore Saturnio procreati, antequam Memo- ria, quam Alcmena, Maia, Juno, Latona, Leda, Di- one, turn et Semela, Diefpitri faftas funt comprefiio- nibus foetae, nufquam et hi gentium, nee in aliqua parte rerum fuere naturae, fed ex v conventu Jovis infe- minati et nati funt, et aliquem fenfum fui habere coe- perunt. in polijhed Nations. 253 from the beginning^ or from the earlieft ages. To thefe, fix more were added in later times, who are univerfally allowed to have been men, but who were emi- nently diftinguifhed from -many other heroes, by being admitted into the com- munity of the celeflial or Olympian gods. Both thefe orders of deities the people were required to worfhip by Nu- ma ; which is a demonstration that, in his time, notwithstanding his prohibi- tion of images, (which had been before allowed,) the Romans acknowledged mortal gods. This agrees with what has been obferved concerning the Ger- mans, Perfians, and Phenicians at Ga- perunt. Et hi quoque a tempore effe cceperunt certo, et, in numero numinum, facrorum ad cseremonias in- vocari. The natural gods were called eternal; (Diod. Sic. p. 14.) and to thefe Varro refers when he fays, Deos alios efle, qui ab initio certi et fempiterni funt. He adds, Alios, qui immortales ex hominibus fafti funt. Servius on Virg. JEn. VIII. 275. It is impoffible to admit the eternity of the ancient gods of heaven, becaufe they were tranflated thither from the earth j as will be fhewn immediately. des, 254 Worfbip of human Spirits des, who worfhipped human fpirits, though they had no images. The law of Numa, juft now cited, became a law of the twelve tables r , and remained in force in all fucceeding times. From hence it follows, that human fpi- rits were, in every age, worfhipped at Rome, and even were the principal ob- jects of the eftablifhed worfhip in that city. For the ancient gods of heaven, fpoken of in the laws of the twelve ta- bles, were no other than the following twelve fuperior gods of the Romans, Juno, Vefla, Minerva, Ceres, Diana, Venus, Mars, Mercurius, Jovis, Neptunus, Vulcanus, Apollo 5 ; and thefe were the fame with the twelve fuperior gods of the Greeks, who were proved in the lafl fecYion to be no other ' Laws of the twelve tables, tab. 2. fet.4. * Thefe gods were often fimply called the twelve gods. They -were termed cclcjlial and Olympian ; and, both in Greece and at Rome, were confidered as gods of the higheft rank and dignity. They were worfhip- ped in conjunction. We read of the altar of the 12 gods. Plutarch, in Nicia, p. 531. F. and of a fupper Sueton. Auguft. 70. than in poltjked Nations. 255 than deified men and women. All the arguments, ufed to eftablifh the huma- nity of the one, conclude equally with refpeft to the other. 1 fhall here pro- duce ibme proofs of the human origin of the twelve gods of the Romans, which will confirm what has been already of- fered concerning thofe of the Greeks. Cicero, the moft learned as well as eloquent of all the Romans, who had paid .particular attention to the fubjecb of the heathen theology, and was him- felf a prieft of high rank, contends, " that the whole heaven was almoft en- < tirely filled with the human race ; " that even the fuperior order of gods, <c or gods of the greater nations, were " originally natives of this lower " world, as could be proved from ** the writers of Greece ; that their fe- " pulchres were fhewn openly in that " country ; and that the traditions con- " cerning them were preferved in the " myfleries/' 256 Worfoip of human Spirits " myfteries V If thefe fafts had not been too notorious to be concealed, Ci- cero would not have appealed to them in this open manner ; knowing, as he did, the difcredit it brought upon the public religion. He himfelf has put the following language into the mouth of Cotta : " Are not thofe void of all " religion, who teach, that the brave, <c illuftrious, and potent, amongft men, " become gods after death ; and that " thefe very perfons are at this time the " objects of our prayers and folemn " worrnip"?" 1 Quid ? totum prope coelum, ne plures perfequar, nonne bumano genere completum eft ? Si vero fcrutari vetera, et ex his ea, qux fcriptorei Grajcice prodide- runt, eruere coner ; ipJi illi, majorum gentium dii qui habentur, hinc a nobis profedli in coelum reperientur. Quaere, quorum demonftrantur fepulchra in Grscia : reminifcere, quoniam es initiatus, qua traduntur in myfteriis : turn denique, quam late hoc pateat, intel- liges. Tufc. Qusft. 1. i. c. 12, u Quid ? qui aut fortes, aut claros, aut potentes vi- ros, tradunt poft mortem ad deos pervenifle, eofque efle ipfos, quos nos colere, precari, venerarique folea- mus, nonne expertes funt religionum omnium? Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 42, St. in polifhed Nations. 257 St. Auftin w confirms the teftimony of Cicero, when he fays : " You cannot " find, or can hardly find, in all the <c writings of the Heathens, any gods " but fuch as had been men 5 neverthe- " lefs to all of them they pay divine " honours, as if they had never be- " longed to the human race." And, though Varro endeavoured to apply what is related of the twelve fuperior gods, and many others, to the parts or ele- ments of the world, yet St. Auftin fays, they were difcovered to have been men x . And, indeed, if the twelve fuperior gods had not been fuch, how came it to pafs that fix men viz. Hercules, Bacchus, w Non attendunt, in omnibus literis paganorum, aut non inveniri, aut vix inveniri deos, qui non homines fuerint ; omnibus taraen honores ftudeant exhibere di- vinos, quafi nihil unquam humanitatis habuerint, Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 8. c. 26. x Ipfi etiam majorum gentium dii, quos Cicero, in Tufculanis, tacitis nominibus videtur attingere, Jupi- ter, Juno, Saturnus, Vulcanus, Vefta, et aliiplurimi, quos Varro conatur ad mundi partes five elementa tranf- ferre, homines fuifle produntur. Id, ib. c. 5. S ^Efculapius, 25 S Worjhlp of human Spirits j^fculapius, Caftor, Pollux, and Qui- rinus, were raifed to the fame rank with the twelve ? Cicero fpeaks of Romulus, and many others, as received into heaven, jufl as new citizens are enrolled amongjl the old 7 -, and, confequently, as becoming entitled to equal privileges with the an- cient celeftial gods. According to Pin- dar, Hercules dwelt with Jupiter z ; and both are reprefented together, on old al- tars, with this infcription, 70 the great gods a . And very probably there was no greater difference b , between the new and the old gods of heaven, than what might fubfift y Romulum noftri habent, aliofque complures, quos quafi novos et afcripticios cives in ccelum receptos pu tant. Cicero, Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 15. Romulus in coelo cum diis agit <evum. Ennius, ap. Cicer. I. Tufc. Q.. c. 12. Bacchus and Hercules were Itiled Olympian. Diodor. Sic. 1.4. p. 261. z T*o; A^x/xwaj, 05 OAf/xTrovJ' ej9a. Nt/ & Trag* Ayo^ aEt. Pindar. Ifthm. Od. IV. 94, 99. See above, p. 173. note*, p. 174. notes * and /. b The diiFerence that was made between the old and new celefiial gods was fometimes to the advantage of the in polijhed Nations, 2 59 fubfiil between the old gods them- felves. Three of the latter ('viz. Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva) feem to have been more diftinguifhed by the Romans c than the other nine. They were the penates or guardian deities of the Roman (late and people d . And though Macrobius, 82 as the latter. Quid ? Apollinem, Vulcanum, Mercu- rium, czeteros, deos effe dices: de Hercule, ^fcula- pio, Libero, Caftore, Polluce, dubitabis ? At hi qui- dem coluntur asque atque il!i ; apud quofdam etiam multo magis. Cicero, Nat. Deor. 1.3. c. 18. c Particularly by Cicero, in the clofe of his fpeech again ft Verres : Nunc te, Jupiter, Of time, Maxime, te- que, Juno regina, et Minerva ! And by Livy, 1. 3. . 17. Jupiter, Optimus, Maximus, Juno regina, et Minerva, alii dii dexque, obfidentur. Concerning thefe three deities Tertullian is fuppofed to fpeak : Ante has tres arae trinis diis parent, magnis, ^otentilus, <valenti~ Iu3. De Spediac. c. 4. d Macrobius ftiles thefe three deities penates. Saturn. 1. 3. c. 4. And Livy, (1. 3. . 17.) after mentioning Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, in his account of the Ca- pitol's being befieged, adds, Caftra fervorum publicos veftros penates tenent. Jupiter is called by Cicero cujtos hujus urlis, in Catil. 1. 3. . 162. The fame title is given to Minerva. Id. Orat. proDomo,57. And Juno i* 260 Wcrfiip of human Spirits as a philofopher, explains the penates phyiically e , as he alfo does the other hea- then gods j yet Servius fays, that they were human fouls y which^ by certain ceremonies, were converted into gods*. As to the of- fice which the Romans afligned to Ju- piter, Juno, and Minerva, as their guar- dian deities and prefervers of the empire, they afligned the fame to thofe emperors whom they reprefented on the reverfe of the medals of thefe three deities g . is ftllei coKfervatrzx in ancient infcriptions. Gruter. p. 25. Thefe three deities were joined together in the Capitol. Spence's Polymetis, p. 58. note 53. Livy (1. III. 17.) diftinguifties the penates into private and public. e Penates effe dixerunt, per quos penitus fpiramus, per quos habemus corpus, per quos rationem animi pofTidemus. EfTe autem medium aethera Jovem, Juno- nem vero imum ae'ra cum terra, et Minervam fummum xtheris cacumen. Macrob. Saturnal. 1. 3. c. 4. f According to Servius, (JEn. III. 168.) Labeo, in libris qui appellantur de diis animalibus, (quibus origo animalis eft,) ait, effe qutedamfacra, quibus anim<s bu- mante <vertantur in deos, qui appellantur animates, quod dt animi s fi ant. Hi autem funt dii peuates et viales. See Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1.9. c. n. B See Spence's Polymetj;, p. tj8. note 53. As in polijhed Nations. 261 As three of the twelve gods were more honoured by the Romans than the other nine, fo one of thefe three (viz. Jupiter) had fome pre-eminence af- figned him above the other two. He was generally ftiled, the BEST and the GREATEST h . But Cicero, who gives him both thefe titles, does neverthelefs rank him, as we have feen, amongft the natives of this lower world. Befides the general proofs, produced here and in the preceding feftion, to ihew that the whole band, of which Jupiter was chief, were of human defcent, there is diftincT: evidence that he himfelf in particular was confidered in this view by the Ro- mans, as well as by the Greeks. At Rome, as well as in Greece, he was de- fcribed as the fon of Saturn. In the very Capitol they placed the ftatue of his nurfe, and gave him the fhield cal- led agis, becauie made of the ikin of h Jupiter a majoribus noftris optlmus maximum dicitur. Cicero, de Nat. Deor. 1. 2. c. 25. S 3' the 262 Worjhip of human Spirits the {he-goat which afforded him nourifh- ment 1 . In the Capitol like wife they placed a cufliion or pallet on which he might repofe k himfelf, and provided for him a magnificent entertainment ! . Thefe circumllances, repugnant as they are to every rational conception of the Creator * Quid de ipfo Jove fenferunt, qui ejus nutricem in Capitolio pofuerunt ? Quid illic facit fcutum illud Jovis, quod appellant eegida? Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 6. c. 7. De Conf. Evang. 1. i. c. 23. k In Jovis epalo, num alibi quam in Capitolio, pul- vinar fufcipi poteft? Liv. V. 52. Habent dii le&os; atque, ut ftratis poffint mollioribus incubare, pulvi- norum tollitur atque excitatur impreffio. Arnob. adv. Gentes, p. 238. 1 Jovis epulum eras eft. Jupiter enim coenat, mag - nifque implendus eft dapibus, jamdudum inedia gefti- ens, et anniverfaria interjedione jejunus. Id. ib. . Maftant opimas ac pingues hoftias Deo, quafi efuri- enti ; profundunt vina, tanquam fitienti. Laft. Div". Inft. 1.6. c. 2. See alfo c. i. This pra&ice was founded upon an ancient opinion, that the ghofts of the dead really fed upon the provifion carried to their tombs. See Athenseus, p. 427. and Kennett's Roman Antiquities, p. 361. and Potter's Antiq. vol.2, p. 251, 257. When their bodies were burned, it was cufto- mary to throw brqad into the funeral pile. Terence, Eunuch. III. 2. 38. Catull. Carm. 60. Of in poltjhed Nations. 263 of the univerfe, accorded with their no- tion of gods that had been men j who, in the other world, were fuppofed to fland in need of the fame accommoda- tions which had been agreeable or ufe- ful to them in this ; and were accord- ingly fupplied with them by their fur- vivors. Befides the gods already fpecified, the Romans had others of the fame earthly origin. Janus , to whom they always offered the firft facrifices m , and whom they addrefled firft in all their prayers n , was an ancient king of Italy , who had this precedence in their worfhip, be- caufe he was the firft who built tem- ples, and inftituted the ceremonies of m Jane, tibi primo thura merumque fero. Ovid. Fafti, I. 171. See note P below. B Janus ' quern in cundtis anteponitis precibus. Arnob. adv. Gent. 1. 3. p. 117. See alfo Macrob. Sat. 1. i. .9. p. 158. Janum cum Saturno regnaffe memcravimus. Ma- crob. Sat. 1. I, c. 9. init. See below, notes, , w , X f *. S 4 religion. 264 Worjlnp of buman Spirits religion p . We are told by Plutarch, that he was faid to have changed the favage nature of man into a gentle and focial difpofition -, and that his being re- prefented with two faces had a reference to thefe two different forms and condi- tions of human life q . As to the phyfi- cal explications of this god, they are va- rious and contradictory j for he is faid to be the chaos, the world, the year, the fun, and many other things r . He might be explained as a fymbol of whatever the human fancy could fuggeft : but the received hiftory s of him exhibited him f Xenon, primo Italicon, tradit Janum in Italia pri- mum dis templa feciffe, et ritus inftituiffe facrorum ; ideo eum in facrificiis praefationem meruiffe perpetuam. Macrob. ubi fupra. 9 Plutarchi Numa, p. 72. Macrobius (ubi fupra) fays : Quidam ideo eum dici bifrontem putant, quod et prseterita fciverit, et futura provident. r See Arnob. p. 117. Macrob. Sat. 1. i. c. 9. . Ovid. Fafti, I. 103. * Arnobius (p. 117.) pleads that the phyfical expli- cations deftroyed the literal hiftory of Janus ; quern fe- runt, Caelo atque He cat a procreatum, in Italia regnajje pri- mum, Janiculi oppidi conditorem : atque ita per vos del nomen eraditur. under in potijhed Nations* 265 under the character of a king, who had divine honours decreed to him for his merit towards his fubjecls '. Even Sa- turn (before whom, Tertullian obferves, the Heathens had no god at all, and from whom they began their reckoning of all their gods, not excepting thofe of the greateft diftmction) is fpoken of in hif- tory no otherwife than as a man u . He arrived in Italy in the reign of Janus, and became a partner of his kingdom w . 1 Regnante Jano, omnium domos religione et fancti- tate fuifle munitas : idcircoque ei diviaos honores eile decretos. Macrob. Sat. 1. i. c. 9. u Ante Saturnum deus penes vos nemo eft. Ab illo cenfus totius, vel potioris, vel notions, divinitatis. Itaque quod de origine conftiterit, id et de pofteritate conveniet. Saturnum itaque, quantum liters: docent, neque Diodorus Graecus, aut Thallus, neqise Caffius Severus, aut Cornelius Nepos, neque ullus commen- tator hujufmodi antiquitatum, aliud quam hominem promulgaverunt. TertuiHan. Apol. c. 10. See above, p. 252. note <?. w Hie igitur Janus, cum Saturnum clafTe perveftum excepiffet hofpitio, et, ab eo edoclus peritiam ruris, ferum ilium et rudem ante fruges cognitas viftum in melius redegiffet, regni cum focietate muneravit. Macrob. Sat. 1. i. c. 7. p. 151. Under 266 Worfiip of human Spirits Under his equitable adminiftration, no one was a flave, and all things were common : which was the reafon why, in the Saturnalia, (laves fat down with their mailers, and all people were on a level*. Tertullian, in proof of Saturn's being a man, urges the Romans' afcri- bing to him the invention of writing, and coining money with the king's image y . Others relate, what equally ferves our purpofe, that Janus, the firft money he ftamped, imprefled on one fide the image of himfelf, and on the other a (hip, in memory of Saturn, who came to Italy by (hip z . It was alfo in honour of Saturn that Italy was called * Rex Saturnus tantse juftitiz fuifle traditur, ut ne que fervierit fub illo quifquam, &c. Juftin. 1. 43. c. I. y Ab ipfo primum tabulae, et imagine fignatus num- mus, et inde asrario przefidet. Tertull. Apol. c. 10. * Macrob. Sat. 1. i. c. 7. p. 151. Ovid. Fafti, I, 235-240. From this circumftance it appears, that Saturn, though he reigned in Italy, was a foreigner. Pezron maintains, that he was that Saturn who was the fon of Uranus, the firft king of the Titans, and who reigned over Europe, Afia, and part of Africa. Antiq. of Nations, b. I. ch. IO. Saturma. in polijhed Nations. 267 Saturnia a . Now, if the anceflor of the gods was a man, we cannot be at a lofs to know what his defcendents were b . That religious worfhip, which the Romans and other heathen nations paid to dead men, was not confined to fuch eminent perfons as thofe already men- tioned ; but feems, in fome degree, to have been extended to all. I fay no- thing of the philofophers who taught, that the fouls of men were demons c . It is more material to our prefent purpofe to obferve, that the civil theology, the pub- lic inftitutions of religion, and the cur- rent language, were founded upon the general belief of the fame opinion. The dead were denominated dii manes ; as ap- pears from the teftimony of the an- cients *, and the infcription upon their * Italia, regis nomine, Saturnia appellata eft. Juflin. ubi fupra. See alfo Tertullian, Apol. c. 10. b See p. 265. note u . * Plotinus, cited below, note . a Varro dicit, omnes ab his mortuos exiftimari ma- nes deos. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 8. c. 26. fepulchral 268 Worfiip of human Spirits fepulchral monuments e . Some learned men indeed have maintained, that the dii manes were certain gods who took care of fouls or ghofts ; but the phrafe does not import <f the gods of ghofts," but " the gods ghofts" ; and the ufe and application of it in ancient writers determine it to this fenfe f . Some of the ' The infcription was, D. M. or Dis Manibus. f The following paflages in Virgil clearly fhew that the word manes is applied to ghofts. Slant manibus arts. JEn. III. 63. Manifque -vocabat HeSoreum ad tumu- lum, 303. Nofturnos ciet manis. IV. 490. See alfo 387. Manifque Acheronte remij/os. V. 99. Magna manis ter *voce 'vocavi. VI. 506. In the fame fenfe is the word ufed by Juvenal. EJ/e aliquos manes, et fub~ terranea regna. Sat. II. 149. Hence manes is put for the place of the dead : Manefque prcfundi, Virg. Geor. I. 243. and for the remains of the deceafed, either his corpfe or his bones and aflies : Nunc non e manibus illis nafeentur viola ? Perfius, Sat. I. 38. Thofe who thought the foul periihed with the body faid, we fhould become cinis, et manes, et fabula. Ver. 152. Horace fpeaks the fame language : Fabula manes. L. I. Ode IV. 1 6. Manes cannot have a different mean- ing when the word dii is joined with it. The follow- ing paifage of Horace is a proof of this point : Petamque in potijlied Nation*. 269 the philofophers limited the word manes to good ghofts 8 ; but it feems to have been applied to all ghofls, both in Petamque vultus umbra curvis unguibus ;.^ r , . ]<. Quae vis deorum eft manium. Epod. V. 93. Compare Virg. Mn, IV. 385-388. When Seneca fays, (Ep. 86.) In ipfa Scipionis Africani villa jacens, b<ec tibi fcribo, adoratis manibus ejus, does he not mean that Scipio himfelf, or his ghoft, was the objeft of his worfhip ? See the next note. % Manes anima? dicuntur melioris meriti, quas in corpore noftro genii dicuntur. Servius, on Virg. JEn. III. 63. But this learned commentator iniffcikes in afcrlbing this fentiment to Apuleius ; who, after fay- ing that the good ghofts were called /ares, and the mif- chievous ones lar<vee, adds, Cum vero incertum eft quae cuique eorum fortitio evenerit, utrum lar fit, an larva ; nomine manem deum nuncupant. Scilicet et honoris gratia dei vocabulum additum eft. Quippe tantum eos deos appellant, &c. De Deo Socrat. torn. 2. p. 689. cd. Delph. Plotinus taught, Animas hominum dae- jnonas efTe, et ex hominibus fieri lares, fi meriti boni fint ; lemures, Jive larvas, (i mali : manes autem cum incertum eft bonorum eos, five malorum, efle merito- jrum. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1.9. c. II. Thofe who confidered the manes as good ghofts made them the fame as the lares. In lucis habitant manes piorum, qui lares viales funt. Servius on ^En. III. 302. common 270 Worjhlp of human Spirits common life h , and in performing the rites of religion '. It is not only from the titles^ given to the de- ceafed, that we may infer a belief of their divinity ; the fame conclufion may be drawn from the religious rites * inili- tuted in their honour, which were per- formed every day ', and more efpecially on the ninth * and on the thirtieth n day after their interment. They were like- wife appeafed annually, for twelve days h In this general fenfe manes is ufed by Ovid, Fafti, V. 422. Inferias tacitis manibus ilia dabunt. See above, note f . * Cum dixit uovies, Manes exite paterni. Id. ^.443. k Above, p. 249. note s. 1 In Plautus's Aulularia, Prolegom. the lar fays, Huic filia una eft ; ea mihi quotidie, Aut ture, aut vino, aut aliqui, femper fupplicat. n The ferias denicales were obferved on the ninth day, and therefore called novemdiales. See Jacobus Gutherius, de Jure Manium, 1. i. c. 15. in torn. 12. of Grasvius's Rom. Antiq. and the authors cited in the next note. n If the reader wants proofs of what is fo well known, he may confuh Bos's Antiq. of Greece, ch. 24. p. 433. and Potter's Antiq. v. 2. p. 258. together, in poHfoed Nations . together, with facrifices and expiations *, attended with feafts and games p . The feafons appointed for thefe folemnities were ililed koly-days : and from this cir- cumftance Cicero concludes, that the ancients reckoned amongfl the gods thofe who were departed out of the pre- fent life*. In honour of perfons of rank, their friends made libations of wine, and invoked their manes, while their funeral-piles were burning r . Chil- dren confecrated their parents '5 and See Potter's Antiq. v. 2. p. 258, 260. Kejinett, p. 360. f Potter, ib. p. 247, 257. Kennett, p. 304, 360. 1 Nee vero tarn denicales, quae a nece appellate funt, quia refidentur mortui, quam cjeterorum ccelef- tium quieti dies, ferite nominarentur, nifi majores eos, qui ex hac vita migraflent, in deorum numero effe vo- luifTent. Cicero de Legibus, 1. 2. c. 22. ' Homer. II. XXXIII. 220. ^Efchyl. Chjephor. v. 86, 128. See Feflus, in verb. Feralta, Guther. de Jure Ma- nium, 1. 2. c. 12. and Ovid. Fafti, I. 4. v. 533-570. Eft honor et tumulis ; animas placate paternas. Parva petunt manes. Here manes anfwers to animas paternas, fwore 272 Worjhip of kuman Spirits fwore by their afhes f , which were deemed facred. Now, an oath is a religious acl ' y and fuppofes the deity, to whom it appeals, to be both our witnefs and our judge. The fore-mentioned cuftoms were of great antiquity in the heathen world. And it was upon the principles of the ancient theology that the Roman people deified their emperors". Temples and altars were erect ecT to them while living v , .... u> 1 Offa tibi juro per matris et ofTa parentis. Propert. 1. 2. Eleg. 15. Ego fame morientem videbo, per cujus cineres juratus fum ? Seneca pater, 1. i. Controv. i. Guther. ubi fupra, p. 1170. Parents alfo confecrated their chil- dren. See Cicero's reafon for confecrating his daugh- ter, ap. La&ant. 1. i. c. 15. or in Cicero's works, torn. 3. p. 581. ed. Olivet. Genevae. Ad opinionem omnium mortalium confecrabo. u See the form of confecration, in Kennett, p. 363. and more fully in Alexander ab Alexandro, torn. 2. p. 446. w Praefenti tibi matures largimur honores, Jurandafque tuum per nomen (al. numen) ponimus aras. Horat.'Ep. II. i. See alfo Virg. Eel. I. 6. Horat. 1. III. Ode III. 10. Ode V. 2. Sueton. Vit. Auguft, c. 52. as m polifoed Nations. 273 as well as after their deaths, The Romans transferred the diftinguifhing attributes of their principal deities to the ftatues of their emperors. To put Jupiter's fulmen in the hand of the itatue of Auguftus was to acknowledge him ruler of the univerfe*. In a coin, in honour of Titus, Jupiter, born in Crete J ^ is placed amongft the ftars z . The emperors and their images were objects of equal worfhip with the ancient gods of heaven ; nay, the for- mer were diftinguifhed by a fuperior re- verence ; for it was more fafe to fwear falfely by the genius of Jupiter than of the king*. The cuftorri of deifying great princes was no innovation of the Romans $ but * Apelles had the fame meaning when he drew Alex- . ander's pifture with a thunderbolt in his hand. Plu- tarch. If. et Ofir. p. 360. y Ziv<; Kgurayivus. z Marfham's Chron. Can. p. 248. a Sic eorum (principum) numen invocant, ad imagi- nes fupplicant, genium, id eft, daemonem ejus, implo- rant ; et eft eis tutius per Jovis genium pejerare quam regis. Minuc. Pel. in Oftavio, c. 29. See alfo Ter- tullian. Apol. c. 27, 32. T was 274 Worjhip of human Spirits was an old fuperftition, which had ta- ken fuch deep root in the minds of men, that even the chriftian emperors per- mitted themfelves to be addrefled, as gods adored by the nations, to whom the 'whole world preferred their public and private wwSy and from 'whom the mariner ajked a calm, the traveller a fafe return^ and the foldier viftorf . Andfo far were thefe im- perial profelytes from being offended with fuch impious flattery, that they themfelves arrogated the titles and ho- b Even Theodofius the Great, fo celebrated for his piety, was addrefled in the following terms : Illud dicam quod intellexifle hominem et dixifle fas eft talem effe debere (imperatorem) qui a gentibus adoratur, cui toto orbe terrarum privata velpublica vota redduntur, a quo petit navigaturus ferenum, peregrinaturus reditum, pugnaturus aufpicium. Filefacus de Idololatria Politi- ca, p. 17. -Symmachus (1. x. ep.ai. quaeadThe- odofium et Arcadium Auguftos) ufes the following lan- guage : Praecipua quidem beneficia numinis veftri po- pulus Roxnanus expeftat, divi imperatores. Sed ea quafi debita repetit, qua? asternitas veftra fponte pro- mifit. nours in poUjbed Nations. 275 nours of divinity . Theodofius, indeed, admonifhed his fubje&s to referve for the fupreme God the homage which ex- ceeded the rank and dignity of men d : a very necefiary admonition, as the hea- then emperors had made no fuch diflinc- tion, .but affumed the moft facred titles, as well as received the moft folemn wor- ftrip. Domitian, when he dictated the form of a letter to be ufed by his procu- rators, began it thus : Our LORD and GOD thus commands us*. Thefe titles are c Sed imperatores Chriftianosvel divinitatis vel numi- nis appellationem fibi adrogaffe quis ferat? Noftram divinitatem dixere imperatores Theodofius et Vafend- nianus, 1. 3-. Cod. de Summ. Trinit. Nojlruta numeu was ufed by Honorius and Theodofius, 1. viii. & 1. xi. Cod. deSacrofanftisEcclef. Theodofius fuum nuinen vccat. Cod. Theodcf. 1. xi. tit. i. 1. xxxiii. Et mira- mur duitt hsec legimus in Novella Anthemii, A. tit. I. Julia quasdam preees aoftris fundat altaribus. File- facus, p. 9, 10. 45 Exeedens ealtora homrnitm dignitatem fupremo nu- mini refervetur. Theodofias, in Theodof. Cod. L. tit. iv. Cum procuratorum fuorum nomine formalem dila- ret epiftolam, fie ccrpit : Domixus et deus nojier JIc fcri j*let. Sueton. Vit. Domitian. c. 13. T 2 the 276 Worjblf of human Spirits the very fame with thofe by which the Gentiles defcribed their fupreme Jupiter*. It is needlefs to produce any farther e- vidence of the worfhip of mortal gods amongft the Romans. It has now been proved, by an induction of particulars, that the fame worfhip was eftablimed in all the nations polifhed by learning, and alfo in the far greater part of thofe na- tions ufually fliled barbarous. The dif- tinct proofs of this point, collected from all quarters of the globe, do mutually receive and reflect light upon one ano- ther. It deferves particular notice, that the teftimonies, produced in the foregoing fheets, not only eftablifh the fact, that dead men and women were worfhipped in the heathen nations, but do farther prove, that many of thefe human perfo- nages were worfhipped in all the civilized nations of the earth, if not in many others* * Compare the language of the Atlantians, cited above, p. 243, note w . as in poltjhed Nations. 277 as their greateft gods, and with the moil facred and auguft ceremonies 8 . It is ftill more remarkable, that feveral of the ancient writers cited above, though they could not be ignorant that the hea- thens regarded the elements and heavenly bodies as real divinities, do neverthelefs affirm, that all y or almoft all y their gods had once belonged to the human race.* Thefe writers cannot be fpeakingof fome obfcure tribes of Barbarians, who are faid to worfhip only the lights of hea- ven ; but manifeftly refer to the gods of the moft celebrated nations, which had propagated their religious creed and ceremonies over the largeft part of the then known world. And the language in queftion is to be farther * To the teftLmonies already cited we may add the fol- lowing : Quos augufte omnes fancleque venerantur, Cotta ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor. L j. c. 21. Cumvero ct mares et fceminas complures ex hominibus in deoraiq numero efle videamus, et eorum in urbibus acque agris auguftiffima delubra veneremur, &c. Cicero ap. La&suxt,, 1. 1. c. 15. p. 67. * See above, p. 223, 224, 255, 257, 265. T 3 ted 278 Worfoip of human Spirits ted to the objects of the popular and cfV tablifhed worfliip in thefe nations. Un- der thefe limitations, the propoii- tion holds true in general, and with comparatively few exceptions, that all the heathen gods had been men. The witnefles produced were competent jud- ges of the fa6l they atteft -, and, even fuppofing them to be miflaken in their opinion, yet what a late writer* affirms cannot be true, that all the world knew, that the heathen gods had never been men. The Heathens did certainly believe the con- trary j but our author was totally unac- quainted with their fentiments on this fubjecl. Fell, p. no. CHAP. in the ancient heathen World, 279 CHAP. III. Containing GENERAL proofs of the worjhip vf human fpirits in the ancient heathen world. '"Tp H E proofs of this fpecies of idola- try, adduced in the two preceding chapters, chiefly refpeft particular na- tions -, but thofe which will be farther offered are of a more general nature, and almofl equally refpeft the far greater part of the ancient world. They will be drawn from two fources : from the tefti- monies of the ancients, and from certain uncontro verted facts. SECT. I. General proofs of the worjhip of human fpi- rits amongst the Heathens, drawn from the TESTIMONIES of the ancients. T WILL here diftinftly examine the tef- timonies of the Heathens themfeives, T 4. whether 280 Worjhip of human Spirits whether poets, philofophers, or hifto- rians; and afterwards thofe of thechrif. tian Fathers. I. The heathen POETS, with what- ever lofty titles they dignify the objects of the eftablifhed worfhip, do neverthe^ lefs record their births, parentage, and kindred ; reprefent them as {landing to one another in the fame relations, of fa- thers and mothers, brothers and fitters, which fubfift among mankind ; afcribe to them the fame diftinftion of fexes, and the fame appetites and paflions, which belong to human nature, as well as all thofe vices which mofl difgrace it. They attribute to them the external forms of men and women ; defcribe their com- plexion, apparel, and ornaments ; and relate their wars, their wounds, their chains, their ages, their lamentations, and their deaths. Thefe feveral particu- lars are fo well known, that it cannot be neceffary to fupport them by pafTages from the poets -, efpecially as they are fufficiently warranted by the language which in tie ancient heathen World. aSi which Cicero has put into the mouths of Velleius and Balbus, cited below*. Equally needlefs would it be to fhew, either that the preceding defcriptions of the gods are not applicable to the ele- ments and heavenly bodies ; or that, on the other hand, they do entirely corref- pond to the nature and condition of the human race k . As to Jupiter, the fu- preme 1 Poetae, qui et ira inflammatos, etlibidine furen- tes, induxerunt deos ; feceruntque, ut eorum bella, praelia, pugnas, vulnera, videremus ; odia, prasterea, diffidia, difcordias, ortus, interitus, querelas, lamen- tationes, effufas in omni intemperantia libidines, adul- teria, vincula, cum humano genereconcubitus, morta- lefque ex immortalibus procreates. De Nat. Deor. 1. 1. C. 16. Formae nobis deorum, et zetates, et veftitus ornatufque notifunt: genera, praeterea, conjugia, cog- nationes, omniaque tradufta ad fimilitudinem imbecilli- tatis humanas. L. 2. c. 28. The argument from the human form of the gods will be conudered when we fpeak of their images. k See the preceding note a . As to Homer in par- ticular, Cicero (Tufcul. Difput. 1. I. 0.26.) fays, he afcribed to the gods the qualities peculiar to men, hu- mana ad deos transferebat : which anfwers to Plutarch's *!av94;9riom T Ssia, and to another expreffion, iro tuv when he is defcribing thofe 282 Wcrjhtp of human Spirits preme god of the poetical theology, he differed from others only as a father from his children, or as a fovcreign from fubje&s of the fame nature 1 , We thofe who tanght, that the gods had been men. 1C & Our. 2.360 A. p. 359 E. 1 To what has been obferved concerning Homer's Ju- piter inDiffert. on Mir. p. 176, 177. and above, p. 242, 245. I muft add, that, though the poet compliments tim with the title of the father of gcds and men t yet, agreeably to the antient theogonies, he calls Oceanus tbt parent of the gods ; fij*re TE Ssat ytnytv, xv p-nrtg/x T*9v. 11.14. v. 201. See Dr. Clarke's note, and Virg. Georg. iv. 382. According to Hefotl, (Theo- gon. v. 453, 490.) Jupiter was the youngeft fort of Rhea and Saturn. The fame poet reprefents him as addreffing the gods, not as his own offspring, but as the offspring of earth and heaven* TdtzKorz (j.iu, Taujj rt xau Ov^aw ctyhoM TEKKX. .443. In Virgil \ Jupiter is fublimely defcribed as fummi regnator Olympi, JEn. xii. 558, as divum pater, and hominum divumque ztemapoteftas, x. 2, 17. It is faid of him, torquet fidera mundi, ix. 93 ; ccelum ac terras numine torquet, Iv 296. Neverthelefs, according to this poet, Jupi- ter was nurfed upon mount Ida in Crete, Creta Jovis magni, iii. 104. and was the fon of Berecynthia, or Cybele, the mother of the gods : Ipfa deum fertur ge- netrix. O genetrix, quo fata vocas, ix. 82, 83, 93, 94. Alma parens Idsea dcum, x. 252. Cybele herfelf 'In the ancient heathen World. 283 We are told m , indeed, that it hath been affirmed, by very great names, that fittion and LTING are infepar able from poetry : a pofition, I imagine, which no one can ferioufly undertake to defend. Never- thelefs, as many, both of the ancient and modern advocates of the^ heathen religion, when at a lofs to fupport it's credit, have pretended that it was greatly corrupted by the fiftions of the poets, I (hall offer a herfelf alfo was a Cretan : Hinc mater cultrix Cybele, iii. in.-' According to Horace, that very Jupi- ter, qui mare et terras variifque mundum temperat ho- ris, was ortus Saturno. Lib. i. Ode 12. v. 15, 50. I mail only take notice of one poet more, viz. Ovid, who joins Jupiter and Auguftus together : Jupi- ter arces temperat aetherias ; terra fub Augufto. Pater eft et rector uterque. Metamorph. 1. 15. v. 859. The term pater was not appropriated to Jupiter, and often denotes only a ruler. According to Ovid, (Metamorph. 1, xi. v. 221.) Jupiter was divinely warned againft in- dulging his pafiion for Thetis, left he mould have a fon greater than himfelf, who would dethrone him as he had dethroned his father Saturn. Thus are the fublimeft defcriptions of the Jupiter of the popular and civil theology given us by the poets, intermingled with the plain characters of his humanity. ra Fell, Introduction, p. xiv. few Worjhip of human Spirits few general obfervations upon this fub- je6l, though with a peculiar view to the queftion now before us. i. Poetry was, perhaps, both the moft ancient and the moft admired fpe- cies of compofition. The laws of the Turdetani, faid to be the oldeft inhabi- tants of Spain, were written in verfe, fix thoufand years, as they affirmed, be- fore the age of Strabo". The firft infti- tutes of religion likewife were probably written in the fame manner. And the verfes, in both cafes, might be defigned merely to affift the memory in learning and retaining the rules eftablifhed for the direction of their political and religious conduct, or to recommend thefubjecls by the charms of poetry. To an fwerthefe ends, there was no more reafon ta have re- courfe to fiction with refpecl: to one of thefe fubjects than the other. Were the many interesting relations, concerning the Roman gods and goddeffes, contained^ * Strabo, 1. 3. p. 204., in In tbe ancient leaf ben World. 2%$ In Ovid's Fafti*. ever deemed fufpicious, merely becaufe that moft learned and irfeful of all his works was not written in profe ? 2. It was not the province of the poets, as fiich, to afiign to any man a place in heaven, and to erect temples and altars in his honour. Romulus, for example, was not indebted for his deification to Virgil, or Horace, or Ennius, or any more early poet, but to the fenate and people of Rome. Nor was the cafe diffe- rent as to the other gods taken from a- mongft men : for it was to the legifla- ture, in conjunction with the priefthood", that they were indebted for their fuppo- fed advancement to heaven, and for the worfhip paid them upon the earth. There were certain rites, which, moft probably, were performed by the priefts, by which human ibuls were converted into gods. See Servius, cited above, p. 260, note f . Arnobius, p 87, fays, Etruria libris in Acheronticis pollicetur, certorum animalium fangui- ne numinibus certis dato, divinas animas fieri, et ab legibus mortalitatis cduci. 3- 286 Worjhip of human Spirits 3. The proper province of the poets, under their peculiar character, was to ce- lebrate the praifes of the gods. If, in the difcharge of this office, they embel- lilhed the fubje6t with fome colouring of their own, and exceeded the truth -, (on which fide their temptation lay;) what is the moft natural inference from hence ? Surely not that they degraded their gods into men, but that they exalt- ed men into gods p . 4. Accordingly, thofe Heathens, who were moft offended with the poets, do not charge them with inventing the doc- trine of the humanity of the gods. Dio- dorus Siculus, at the very time that he reproaches Homer, Hefiod, and Or- pheus, with framing very monftrous fa- P Quibus igitur credemus, fi fidem laudantibus non habemus ? Laftant. 1. i. e.g. p. 38. Illi (fc. po- etse) de hominibus loquebantur : fed ut eos ornarent, quorum memoriam laudibus celebrabant, deosefledixe- runt, Id. 1. I. c. xi. p. 46. See more to the fame purpofe, p. 47, 48, &c. c. 19. p. 81, 82. & in torn. 2. c. II, 12. p. 8, 9. ed. Dufrefnoy. bles in tbe ancient heathen World. bles concerning them 41 , reprefents the moft ancient theologers as afTerting the exiftence of gods that were of earthly o- rigin r . 5. The reafon why Diodorus, Socra- tes, Plato, and others, reprefent the ab- furd and immoral ftories concerning the gods as mere inventions of the poets, is not any pofitive evidence of the fact, but a defire of preferving the credit of reli- gion and the morals of the people, which were in danger of being deftroyed by the profligate characters and examples of the objects of their worfhip*. 6. It is indeed abfurd, at leaft when we are fpeaking of very ancient times, to oppofe the theology of the poets to that of the philofophers, divines, nia- giflrates, and priefts : for they all made one body together. In Britain and Gaul 91-15* ^ eu * """'*>'"' Diodor. Sic. Fragm. torn. 2. p. 633. ed. Wefleling. r The paflage will be cited below, under the third article, where the hiftorians are fpoken of. * See Auguft Civ. Dei, 1.4. c. 27. 1.6. c. 5. Pla- ton. oper. p. 429, 430. ed.Lugd. p. 1590. they 288 Worjhip of human Spirit* they were included in the common denb* mination of Druids 1 . This junction of the bards, with thofe who framed, ef- tablifhed, and adminiftered, the public religion, is a demonflration that the theology of both muft be the fame, and fupported by the authority of the flate. Indeed, in fuch high reputation were the ancient poets, that Plutarch appeals to their authority in the fame manner as he does to that of the philofophers" ; and joins them with the oldeft theologers w . Socrates x , Plato y , and others z , fpeals of them as the divinely infpired prophets of the gods. The fame idea of them was, it is probable, generally entertained in * Strabo indeed diftinguifiies the Bards from the Dru- ids, 1. 4. p. 302, but the former were probably an or- der of the latter. See the writers upon the Druids. Plutarch. Amatorius, p. 770. A.B. w Oi fw crtpo^o. 9rAio Sto^oyo xat WOJT. De Orac* Defeft. p. 436. D. x Platon. Apol. Socrat. p. 360. G. y Io, p. 145. 2 Dio Chryfoftom, Orat. 36. p. 447. Lutetiz, 1604* 0; &toi TTimrxi ia3om; ex Mva-v*, x. T. A. the in tie ancient heathen World. 289 the early ages of the world ; and confe- quently their writings would be regarded as the canonical fyflem of religion. A fubveriion of this ancient fyflem, after it had taken ftrong hold of the paflions and prejudices of mankind, the poets of lat- ter ages were not able to effecl:, nor even likely to attempt 3 . 7. As to thofe poets in particular, whofe writings have been preferved from the injuries of time, it is as unreafona- ble to accufe them as their predeceflbrs of inventing or corrupting the civil the- ology. Herodotus thought that Hefiod and Homer were the perfons who framed * Sed poetarum, inquiuiit, figmenta funt haec oinnia, et ad voluptatem compofitae lufiones. Non eft quidem credibile homines minus brutos et vetuftatis remotiffi- mse veftigatores, aut non eas inferuifTe fuis carminibus fabulas, qua; in notionibus hominum fupereffent," atque in auribus collocatae ; aut ipfos libi tantum licentiofi voluifle juris adfcifcere, ut confingerent per ftultitiam res eas, quae nee ab infania procul eflent remotae, et <^uae illis ab diis metum, et periculum poflent ab hominibus, comparare. Arnob. adv. Gent. p. 148, 149. Lugd, Bat. 1651. U a theogony 290 Worfolp of human Spirits a theogony for the (ufe of the) Greeks*. But it will not follow from hence that it was their invention. It is much more probable, that they framed it upon the principles cf the theology of Egypt and Phoenicia, whofe gods were introduced into Greece by Cecrops and others, long before the time of thefe poets e . For any thing that appears to the contrary, the theogonies of Hefiod and Homer may be as faithful records of ancient tradi- tions as thofe of Sanchoniathon, or Be- rofus, or any other profe writer. With b Ot TTono-ctvrts Sioyonuv Etoj(7. Herodot. 1.2. .53. Did the hiflorian at this inltant forget that Orpheus and Mufseus were older theogonifts than Hefiod and Homer ? or did he rejeft the works afcribed to them as fpurious ? e Epiphanius, Hseres. 1. i. .7. See the Diflerta- tion de vita, &c. Hefiodi, prefixed to Robinfon's ed. p. xv. It may be obferved, that, whether the public religion of Greece was formed upon the poems of Ho- mer and Hefiod, or (which is more probable) whether their poems were formed into a correfpondence to the public religion, they are, on either fuppofition, to be confidered as authentic/^W^r^j whereby we are to regu- late our judgement concerning it. Would Homer's hymns have been fung in the public feftivals of the gods, if his theology had not correfponded to that of the ftate ? regard in the ancient heathen World. 291 regard to epic and dramatic poets, they cannot, without great impropriety, de- viate from the cuftoms of the ages of which they write j the merit of their works confuting very much in their being accurate reprefentations of life and man- ners d . The propriety of the fpeeches, which they frame for the perfons intro- duced into their compofitions, is to be wholly determined by their agreement with the known characters and princi- ples of the fpeakers. To make the fpeak- ers contradict the commonly-received fentiments concerning the gods would be more than an impropriety or an ab- furdity : it would be deemed profanenefs, and fhock the prejudices of mankind. Whenever therefore the poets, of whom we are now fpeaking, ufe the liberty of embellifhment, their very fictions muft be conformable to the received ftandard of the public religion. Who, then, can doubt whether Homer's fables * Diflert. on Mir. p. 1 88, 189. U 2 concerning 292 Worjhlf of human Spirits concerning the heathen gods were foun- ded in popular legends and ancient tra- ditions ? As to Virgil, he almoft every where difcovers the moft exact know- ledge of antiquity', and more efpecially in defcribing the religious opinions and cuftoms of it. Nor are more authentic monuments of them any where to be found than in the writings of the two great poets of Greece and Rome. 8. Laftly, the account, given of the heathen gods by the poets, did, in facl, conftitute both the popular and civil theology, or the religion received by the people and eftablifhed by the laws. We have already feen, that there is every reafon to fuppofe this to have been the cafe -, and that reafoning is confirmed by the teflimony of the moft credible wri- ters. The people, we are informed, were more difpofed to adopt the doftrine of the e Multas antiquitatis hominem fine oftentationis odio perifum. Aul. Gellius, 1. v. c. 12. poets in the ancient heathen World. 293 poets than any phyfical interpretations', and regarded their writings as the rule both of their faith and worlhip 5 . Even the moft abfurd fables, fuch as Coelus's being caflrated by his children, Saturn's devouring his, and Jupiter's imprifoning his father, were underilood literally, and received by the people with implicit faith, in Greece as well as other coun- tries h . U 3 The f Varro dicit, de generationibus deorum, magis ad poetas quam ad phyficos fuiflepopulos inclinatos. Ap. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1.4. c. 32. Quod de diisimmor- talibus philofophi difputant ferre non poflunt : quod vero poetae canunt, et hiftriones agunt, libenter au-, diunt. Auguft. de Civ. Dei, 1. 6. 0.5. * Dio Chryfoftom, p. 447, having aflerted the infpi- ration of the moft ancient poets, fays, that by them men were perfuaded to ereft altars to Jupiter under the character of king. Q$ weiSo^fw ot uifyuiroi Ao$ h Dionyfius Halicarnafienfis, Antiq, Rom. 1. 2. c. 1 8, 19, 20 -- Cicero has put the following language into the mouth of Balbus. Vetus haec opinio Gneciam opplevit, fcilicet exfeAum Coelum a filio Saturno, vinclum autem Saturnum ipfum a filio Jove. Balbus ap. Cicer. de Nat. Deor. 1. 2, c, 24, After fpeaking of 294 Worjhip of human Spirits The worfhip appointed by the laws was conformable to the poetic theology, and founded upon it. The games infti- tuted, and the plays acted, by the au- thority of the magiftrate, in honour of the gods, and with the exprefs defign of rendering them propitious, reprefent- ed or imitated all thofe flagitious actions which were afcribed to them by the po- ets 1 , and which reflect moft difhonour on human nature. Nay, it was a dan- gerous herefy to reject the fabulous or poetical theology*. Socrates mentions his rejection of the grofleft fables as the ground of the accufation againft him 1 , which coft him his life. Now, from this agreement of the popular and civil theology with the poetical, we may infer, of the fables of the poets at large, Balbusfays, Hasc et dicuntur et creduntur ftultiflime. Ib. c. 28- $ This fubjeft is handled to advantage by Auftin, de Civ. Dei, 1. 2. c. 25, 26, 27. 1. 4. c. 26. 1. 6, c. 5. and by Arnobius, 1. 7. p. 238. Seealfol.4. p. 140,, 149, 150. * Luciani Philopfeud. torn. 2. p. 328. ' Platon. Euthyphro, torn. I. p. 6. ed. Serraoi. that 'in the ancient heathen World. 295 that the reprefentation, made by the po- ets of the human origin of the gods, is a proof that the objects of the eftablifhed worfhip in the gentile nations had once been men. The painters and fculptors convey to us the fame idea of the heathen deities as the poets : for they reprefent them under hu- man figures, both male and female. The image even of the catamite, Ganymede, and the effigy of the eagle which carried him up to heaven, were placed in the public temples under the fanclion of the magiftracy and priefthood, and propofed to the people as objects of their adoration equally with Jupiter himfelf m . Is there a more abfurd and immoral fable in the poets than the rape of Ganymede, which neverthelefs we find made a part " Ita enim deorum fimulacra confingunt, ut ex ipfa diverfitate fexus appareat vera efle quae dicunt poetz. Nam quod aljud argumentum habet imago catamiti, et effigies aquilae, cum ante pedes Jovis ponuntur in tem- plis, et cum ipfo pariter adorantur, nifi ut nefandi fce- leris et ftupri memoria maneat in sternum ? Laftant. 1. I. c. II. p, 48. ed. Dufrefnoy. U 4 of 296 Worfotp of human Spirits of the public religion ? Moil unreafona^ ble, therefore, is it to treat this or any o^ ther fable as a fiction of the poets, mere^ ly on account of it's abfurdity and im- morality. The gods of the poets and thofe of the magiftrates were the fame 11 ; and therefore^ as the former were of hu- man origin, the latter muft be fo likewife, II. The PHILOSOPHERS are to be eonfidered in two views : as perfons who had opinions of their own concerning the gods ; and as perfons capable of tef- tifying what the gods publicly worfhip- ped really were. As to their own opinions concerning Deity, they were infinitely various. Some would not allow there were any gods at all ; others not only afTerted the exiftence, but had formed many juft and elevated conceptions, of the divine being j n Hence that obfervation concerning Zeno, that his phyfical interpretation of Hefiod's theogony overturned the eftablifhed notions of the gods. Tollit omnino pr<e- teptas infitafque cognltlones devrum. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. J. c. 14. ancj 'in the ancient heathen World. 297 and were offended with the vicious qua- lities afcribed to the objefts of popular worfhip. Many would neither allow the converfionof human fouls into demons, nor the exiftence of demons of a higher origin ; while feveral contended for both. But the religious creed of the philofo- phers cannot be the proper ftandard whereby to judge of the civil theology. The former was for the moft part utterly fubverfive of the latter. For this reafon it was that the DifTertation fpoke of the neceflity of ufing caution in reading the philofophers, and declared, in terms, "that we had there no concern with { their fpeculations." The queftion agi- tated in that place refpefted only the immediate objects of the eflablifhed wor- fhip in the heathen nations j and there- fore could have no relation to any gods or demons held only by the philofphers p . Neverthelefs a late writer has confounded thefe very different deities together. On Mir. p. 189, 190. f See above, p. 4-7. Some 298 Worjhip of human Spirt fs Some proofs having been offered q of the humanity of the Jupiter, or fupreme de- ity, of the popular and civil theology, a known parricide and ufurper ; the gen- tleman', after citing the nobleft defcrip- tion of Deity given us by Socrates', adds, Whether this be a proof , " that the "fupretne Deity of the Pagans had once been *' a mortal man" we leave our readers to judge. If we form our judgement of Mr. Fell by this language, we muft con- clude, that he did not know the diffe- rence between the Jupiter, or fupreme deity, of the Pagans, worfhipped in their temples, and him acknowledged only by the philofophers - 3 though the Heathens have clearly diftinguifhed the one from the other, as Seneca has done in the *Difl*ert. p. 176, 177. 'Fell, p. 104. * Mr. Fell, p. 104, very improperly refers to Xeno- phon the defcription of deity given by Socrates, though the former profefles merely to relate the fentiments of the latter. Memorabil. 1. i. c. 4. . 2. 1.4. c. 3. paffage in tie ancient heathen World. 299 paflage cited below'. By the fame rule of judging, our author was even ignorant that Socrates oppofed (and fufFered death for oppofing) the commonly-received no- tion of the gods, and of Jupiter in parti- cular, as one who put his father in chains"; and that this great innovator in religion was formally charged with introducing new gods". Mr. Fell's objection proceeds on the ftrange fuppofition, that the the- ology of Socrates was the fame with the popular and civil. Should any one aflert that the eflablifhed doftrineof the church of England istrtnitarian, would it be a per- tinent objection againft this aflertion to allege that Newton and Clarke were /- tartans ? Equally foreign from the point is the method taken by Mr. Fell to dif- credit the truth of the account I had gi- 1 Ne hoc quidem crediderunt, Jovem, qualem in capi- tclio et in c<eteris eedibus eolimus, mittere manu fulmina, fed eundem quern nos Jovem intelligunt, cuftodem redlo- remque univerfi. Senec. Nat. Quaeft. 1. 2. c. 45. Sec alfo Cicero de Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 4. Platon. Euthyphro, p. 2. ed. Serrani. * Id. ib. p. 6. ven ,300 Worjhip of human Spirits ven of the gods of the civil theology, and of Jupiter in particular, by fhewing that Socrates, who was known to diflent from that theology, acknowledged a dei- ty that had never been a man. Scarce could the gentleman have fhot wider of the mark, had he taken pains to mifs it. But, though the prefent queftion does not properly concern the gods and de- mons of the philofophers, yet it may be fitly determined by their teflimony con- cerning the objects of national worfhip. They were certainly competent judges, whether the heathen nations worfhipped fuch gods as had been men : for they had. the beft means of information concern- ing the religion of the refpective ages and countries in which they lived, and they had ftudied the fubjecl: with particu* lar attention. Many pofitive teftimonies of the philo- fophers to the public worfhip of human fpirits were referred to in a former publi- cation ; in the ancient heathen World. 301 cation* -, and feveral were cited at large", particularly that of Cicero 7 , which re- prefents almoft all the gods, and even the greater deities, as having been men. Thefe teftimonies, important and deci- five as they are, a late writer has paffed over in perfect iilence z ; which is the more remarkable, as, according to the account which he himfelf has given of the * Diflert. p. 191-193. See alfo p. 182, 183. y P. 192. z Nay, the* gentleman's language is manifeftly calcu- lated (though it might not be defigned) to miflead his readers into an opinion, that no fuch teftimonies had been produced. Speaking of the philofophers, he fays, Introduction, p. xiv. " It feems unreafonable to EX- " CLUDE the writings and opinions of the mcj} learned tf and judicious from what immediately relates to thei* " own times and to the fentiments of thofe amongft " whom they lived." And though afterwards, at fomediftance, he adds, in general terms, that " I very " freely admitted their information, whenever I thought it * 4 advantageous to my onvn caufe ;" his readers would never from hence infer, that I had availed myfelf of their information in the particular cafe, in which his lan- guage more than insinuates it had been e xduded, and in which, he pretends, the philofophers were on his fide of the (jueftion. philofophers, Worjhlp of human Spirits philofophers, they were the moft proper judges " of the fact which they atteft. To the teftimonies of the philofophers to the general worfhip of human fpirits, formerly produced, others have been oc- cafionally added in the two preceding chapters 6 . I will not repeat them in this place, however pertinent, but only con- firm them by a few more paflages of the fame import. Callifthenes, when he was oppofmg the deification of Alexander while living, affirms " that this favour was always " granted to great men by poflerity 6 ". Balbus alfo fpeaks of it as a general cujlom to exalt to heaven fuch excellent men as had deferved well of the public d . And the * See the preceding note. k See p. 151, 256, with many other places. e Intervallo opus eft, ut credatur deus, femperque hanc gratiam magnis viris pofteri reddunt. Q^ Curtius, 1. 8. c. 5. * Sufcepic vita hominum, confuetudoque communis, utbeneficiis excellentis virus in ccelum fama ac voluntate tollerent. Ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. 2. c. 24. It is fcarce neceflary to obferve, that, in the language of the Heathens, in the ancient heathen World. 303 the learned Pliny informs us, " that to " requite fuch men, by ranking them a- " mongfl the gods, was a cuftom of the " higbeft antiquity'". He adds, et that " the names of all the other gods, and " of the ftars, are derived from men " of diftinguifhed merit '. Nor was this the mere effect of private gratitude, but the appointment of the ftate. 'The law, fays Cicero, which com- mands thofe who were confecrated from a- mongfl men to be worjhipped> Jbeivs that the fcuhofall men are immortal, but that thofe of the brave and good are divine 8 . Seneca, in Heathens, to be an inhabitant of heaven, and to be a god, are the fame thing. Concerning Berecynthia, the mother of the gods, Virgil fays, Lsta<&;partu, centum complexa nepotes ; Omnes ccelicola$, omnes fupera alto, tenentes. jn. VI. 786. ' Hie enim eft antiquijfimut referendi bene merentibus gratiam mos, ut tales numinibus adfcribantur. Plin. 1. 2. c. 7. * Quippe et omnium aliorum nominadeorum, et qua: fupraretulifiderum, ex hominum nata funt meritis. K Quod autem ex hominum genere confecratos, ficut Herculem et cseteros, coli lex jubet, indicat omnium quidem 304 Worjhip cf human Spirits in like manner, draws a proof of the im- mortality of the foul from the agreement cf mankind in either fearing or worfoipping thefoades below*. This language of Sene- ca may be explained and confirmed by the teflimony of Apuleius 1 , when he re- prefents the ghofts of evil men as mif- chievous; but thofe of the wife and good as gods that were honoured with tem- ples and religious ceremonies. It is re- corded of Pericles, who might be called a philofopher as well as a ftatefman, that, in a funeral oration, (in which he was not likely to contradict the popular opinion,) he reprefented thofc who die in defence of their country as becoming immortal as the gods were". Other tefli- quidem animos immortales effe, fed fortium bonorum- quedivinos. Cicero de Legibus, 1.2. c. u. * Cum de animarum immortaliteloquimur, non leve momentum apud nos habet confenfus hominum, aut timentium inferos aut colentium. Seneca, ep. 1 17. 1 De deo Socrat. p. 689, ed. Parif. cited in letters to Worthington, p. 38. k Ap. Plutarch. Vit. Periclis, p. 156. D. ASaaT 5 ftoye ytyomai, x99rs Tt?s Styj. monies in the ancient heathen World. 305 monies 1 to the humanity of the popular gods might be produced* But it is fufficient to obferve, in gene- ral, that all the different feels of the philofophers eftablifh this faft. Would the epicurean* and academic* philofophers employ the whole force of their wit and fatire againft the worfhip of dead men, if it had not been prac"lifed by their countrymen and contemporaries ? The Stoics, though they had recourfe to a phyfical explication of the fables, allow- ed that they were literally underftood by the people . And their explications were condemned by the other fects as unnatu- ral and abfurd in the higheft degree j fo 1 Particularly that of Varro j which will be cited when the games inftituted in honour of the gods will be confidered. m In the perfon of Vellcius, ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. I. c. 15. " In the perfon of Cotta, ib. c. 4.2. Balbus ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. 2. c. 24. X as 3 o 6 Worjhip of human Spirits as rather to eftablifh than deflroy the cre- dit of the fables p . The Platonifts, and thofe who wifhed to conceal from public view the earthly origin of the gods, q though they -afferted the exigence of ceieftial demons ; yet knew that thefe demons were not the ob- jects of the eflablifhed worfhip r . And, after all their vain attempts, by their fyftem of demon ology, to fupport the credit of the public religion, they found it neceffary to efpoufe the principle upon which it was really grounded, the converfion of human fouls into gods : a principle that was alfo held by the Sto- PCotta ap. Cicer. N.D. 1.3.0.23. cited above, p. 70. note Y. Velleius alfo cenfures the ftoical explication of the fables as delirantium fomnia, non philofophorum ju- dicia, 1. 2. c. 16. See alfo c. 14. citedabove, p. 296. Cotta reproaches the Stoics with making thofe who were called gods merely natural things. Eos enim, qui di appellantur, rerum naturas efie, non figuras deo- rum. L. 3. c. 24. comp. 1. i. 0.42. .iSee above, p. 159, in the notes. * See above, p. 234. ics, in the ancient heathen World, 307 ics s , by Plutarch 1 , and by the theiftic" philofophers in general. -Nay, they un- dertook to defend it 'as agreeable to right reafon, and not merely as a political in- ilitution"; and accordingly recommend- ed the worfhip of human fpirits V The philofophers laid a farther foundation for this worfhip, by teaching that an inter- courfe between the celeftial gods and men/was carried on by the mediation of demons of terre.fr rial origin, who hereby became the more .immediate ob- jects of divine worfhip, as was fhewn elfewhere*. So that the philofophers, fome by their attacks upon the public religion, * See Cicero de Nat. Deor. 1. 2. c. 24. * See above, p. 165-167, and p. 234. Diflert. on Mir. p. 182. See alfo his life of Romulus, near the end. "Asto Plato, fee Divert, on Mir. p. 191. w See the authors referred to in the two preceding notes. Even Cotta thought it not improbable that the fouls of e- minent men were divine and eternal. Ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 5. * Differt. on Mir. p. 175. X z others 308 U^orjhip of human Spirits others by their defences of it, and all By their conceffions and teftimonies, efta^ blifh in the fullefl manner the fact in queftion, the general prevalence of the worfhip of mortal gods amongft: the an- cient Heathens. And their language, for the mod part, after ts or implies, that thefe gods were the principal objects of their religious worfhip r * III. The heathen HISTORIANS, befides bearing teftimony to the worfhip of human fpirits in particular countries, furnifh general proofs of the prevalence of this worftiip amongft the ancient Heathens. Diodorus Siculus, in a fragment pre- ferved by Eufebius, informs us*, that tbofc T Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 42. 1. 3. c. 21. avxTB in the ancient heathen World. 309 thofe of the highefl antiquity delivered to fof- terity two opinions refpetJing the gods. Some, they faid, were eternal and incor- ruptible , fuch as the fun, moon, and other Jlars ; the winds alfo, and things of a Jimi- lar nature j none of which have either be- ginning or end. They alfo maintained, thaf, befides thefe, there were terrejlrial gods, who were worjhipped for the benefits conferred upon mankind, fuch as Hercules, Bacchus^ and Arijl&us, and others. This teftimony of Diodorus is confir- med by one of the moft curious remain? of antiquity. I refer to the treaty made between Hannibal and the Carthaginians on the qne pa.it, and Xenophanes, the Athenian, minifter-plenipotentiary of Philip, king of Macedonia, in his own name and that of the Macedonians and their allies, on the Qther. Th.e treaty ex- prefTes, that it is folemnly entered into xat T? oXXw; raj rotartf? o^ioiwj. Diodor. p. 633, torn. 2. ed. Wefleling. X 3 3io Worfhip of human Spirits and ratified* in the prefence of Jupiter > Juno, and A^o:lo : in the prefence of the de- won of the. Carthaginians ,. and Hercules* and lolaus : hi the prefence of Mars, 'Tri- ton, Neptune :'. in the preface of the gods 'who accompanied them in the expedition, and of 'the fun , and the moon, and the earth : in the prefence. of the rivers, and the meadows, 'and the 'waters : in the prefence of all the gods 'who prefide over Carthage : in the pre- fence of all the gods, who prefide over Macedo- nia, and the reft of Greece : in the prefence of all the gods 'who prefide over the affairs of war, and are witnejjes to the prefent oath and engagement*, We ftcwf, x. T. A. Polyb. Hift. l.y. p. 699. torn. i. Am- ftel. 1670. b Virgil, who is to be confidered as an eminent anti quarkn as well as poet, has given an account of an oath taken by .ffineas, (after he had facrificed to the manes,) which agrees in a great meafure with the oath . cited from Polybius. He fwears by the fan and earth, by fountains and rivers, as well as by Juno, Jupiter, and Mars. ^En. XII. 173, 176, 181. Compare alfo the-oath of Latinus, v. 195-200. In their folemn oaths they in the ancient heathen World. 3 1 1 We have here an authentic document of the civil theology of the nations of A- fia, Europe, and Africa - y more particu- larly of the Carthaginians', and confe- quently of the Phenicians, from whom they were defcended ; of the Macedaniam -, of the Greeks j and, in one word, of all the parties to the treaty, together with their confederates and allies. And if we fuppofe, what feems very probable, that the treaty was drawn up. after the old forms, it fhews us what gods had been acknowledged in all thefe nations in very early times. J J . , The deities whom the treaty particu- larly fpecifies are, firft of all, Jupiter, Juno, and Apollo -, illuflrious human perfonages, who by the general confent of mankind had been advanced to divine honours, and were worfhipped as gods of the higheft order. Their being placed herein the foremoft rank is very agreeable to what we have before proved, that fome they fometimes fwore by all the gods. Homer. II. III. 376, 298. X 4 men 3 1 ^ Worjhip of human Spirits men and women were honoured as the greateft gods. Thefe deities were com- mon to all the parties concerned in the treaty 6 . The gods next mentioned are, the tutelary deity of the Carthaginians, (whofe name was probably kept fee ret to prevent his evocation,) and Hercules, and his nephew and afliftant, lolaus*, who no doubt were held in peculiar vene- ration at Carthage. Nothing need be faid to prove the humanity of thefe gods; nor of thofe who are fpoken of immediately after them, Mars, Triton, Neptune 6 : objects of general worfhip. The c On the eommuttes 4ii the reader may confult the commentators, and particularly Servius, on Virgil, ,/Eneid VIII. 275. XII. 118. That Hercules was one of them appears from the paflage here firft referred to, communem vocate deum. Thq penates of different countries were often the fame. Virgil (JEn. III. 15.) fpeaks of the focii penates of Thrace and Troy. - The fon of Iphiclus, one of the Argonaats, Hy- giniFab. 14. p. 33, * Neptune and Mars have been fpoken of before. As to Triton ; he, who\yas faid to appear to Jafon in a hu- man form near the lake Tritonis, was a prince in that place. 'In the ancient heathen World. 3 13 The treaty farther makes mention of the gods who accompany the expedition^ that is, whofe images f are carried with the army. Thefe are not particularly named ; but the defcription here given of them marl^s the clafs to which they belonged. The (divinities next fpecified are thofe filled natural by the philofophers : the fan, the moon, the earthy the rivers, the meadows^ and the waters. The objecls of nature are here diftinguifhed from all the foregoing deities, particularly from Jupiter, Juno, Mars, and Apollo. And therefore, though the laft is fp often faid to be the fun, and all of them have been reprefented as na- place. Bannier'sMythol. .4. 8.3. ch. 3. p. 50-5*. Engl. Tranflat. See V. I. p. 117, but efpecially V. *. p. 511, 512. i What gods were reprefented by images will be fliewn in the fequel. Eufebius fpeaks of the gods which the army of Licinius carried with them as nxfoiy n3WXa 5uwTv i f\J/^i5 a>oX/xcr. Vit. Conftantini, 1. 2. c. 16. p. 544. Thefe were the camp gods, or diimili- tares, fpoken of by Tertullian, Apol. c. 10. p. il. wljpre they are ranked amongft thofe that had been men. tural 314 Worfhip of human Spirits tural gods, yet they belonged to a diffe- rent clafs ; and the phyfical explication of them could not be agreeable to the civil theology of the ancient nations, which was the real creed of the vulgar, t and the religion profefled by all orders of the ftate. As to the natural objects themfelves here enumerated, it does not clearly appear, from this pafTage, that the civil theology confidered them fo much as being pofTefled of internal divi- nity, as being inhabited by prefiding deities.* The latter view, indeed, was not inconfiftent with the former; and the divine prefidents and the things preflded over are often confounded. Laftly, the treaty makes general men- tion, both of the guardian deities of Car- thage, Greece, and Macedon, who could be no other than the princes and heroes by whom thefe ftates and kingdoms were founded j and of the gods who pre- ' J& * See below, p. 318, note *. in the ancient heathen World. 315 jide over the affairs of 'war, of whom the principal was Mars*. 1 could not avoid taking this notice of the oath of Hannibal and Xenophanes ; becaufe it throws light upon our fubjeft, and has, I think, been overjopked by all other writers upon it whom I have hap- pened' to confult. But it is, I : prefume, needlefs to cite farther general tefti- moaies to the worfhip of human fpirits from the hiflorians ? as many proofs pf this point were produced fr : pm them when we were diflin6lly ihewing that fiich worfliip prevailed in the feveral na- tions of the world. I muu:, however. i r i i make one farther remark. The heathen religion entered into all thofe. public concerns which are the pro- vince of hiftory ; it was interwoven with the conftitution of ftates and kingdoms, and influenced all their councils and o- perations. If any law was to be enac"l- e ^ Tuque, inclyte Mavors, Cunda tuo qui bella, pater, fubnumine torques. Virg.^n.XII. 179. 3 1 6 Worjhip of human Spirits cd ; if any war was refblved upon, or concluded ; if any city was befieged or taken ; if any fignal calamity was fuffer- ed, or bleffing received ; the gods were confulted, fupplicated, and appeafed, by various ceremonies and facrifices ; and their imagined interpolation in fa- vour of their votaries was acknowledged by paying them the honours vowed in the day of danger and diftrefs. Hence it comes to pafs that the religion of the an- cient nations was fo much intermixed with their civil hiftory. Now to thofe who are acquainted with antiquity I leave it to determine, whe- ther the gods, to whom they decreed di- vine honours, ftatues, temples, altars, priefls, facrifices, feftivals, and all the apparatus of divinity, on the foregoing or other public occafion.s, wer$ folely, or even mofl ufually, ether, air, jire, 'water, the earth, the fea, the fun, and moon. Herodotus, during his long refi- dence in Egypt, was curious and inqui- fttive 2ft the ancient heathen World. fitive concerning the gods and religious ceremonies of the Egyptians ; yet where has he fpoken of the temples^ priefts, and rites, of the ftars and planets, a-^ mongft that people 11 ? We find, I allow, the Greeks, and Romans, and others, addrelfing prayers to the fun'j or fwearing by it k . At Rome a temple was erected to the fun and moon ' j and the fame thing might be done in other places. But the idea of thefe celeflial luminaries, which the mytholo- gy (on which the civil theology was founded) conveyed to the people, was h Even the learned Jab'lonfki, though it So ill agrees with his own fyftem, acknowledges, Herodotus, de planetarum templis, facerdotibus, et facris, nihil quicquam tamen unquam adfert. Eftqueetiam, prjeter cum, vix fcriptor alius, qui de cultu planetarum apud ^gyptios vel tantillum nos doceat. Tom. 2. Prolegom. . 27. p. Ixiii. i See Dido's prayer to the fun and the other gods, Virg. JEn. IV. 607. k Virg. ^n. XII. 176. Homer. II. III. 277. So- phocles, Oedipus Tyrannus, v. 674, 675. ' Rofinus, Antiq. Roman, p. 122. very 3 1 8 ffiorjhip of human Spirits very different from that entertained of them by the philofophers, who confi* deredtheni as natural divinities 1 ". The theologers make mention of feveral funs* One was the fon of Jupiter ; another, the fon of Hyperion; a third fprang from Vulcan ; a fourth was born of A- cantho ; and a fifth was the father of yEta and Circe. Cicer. de Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 21. In different nations, the fun was thought to be Belenus, Ofiris, Heliogaba- lusorElagabal. The laft was a Syrian deity, of whom it is faid, that he appeared to Aurelian in a human ihape, and was married to the goddefs Urania. His worihip was full introduced into Rome by his votary Heliogabalus, though a temple had been eredled to Sol many ages before. See Dion. Caff". V. 2. p. 1338, 1339, 1367, ed. Reimari. The Englilh reader may confult Crevier's Rom. Hift. V. 8. p. 228, 229. V. 9. p. 157. and Univerfal Hift. V. 15. p. 353. Now all thefe views of the fun are very different from thofe gi- ven of it by the philofophers, and, inftead of confuting, confirm our main dodtrine. As to the other natural divinities, the fields, for ex- ample ; they were not fo properly the immediate ob- jefts of public worfhip as the gods and goddeffes, who were confidered as the prefidents and guardians of the fields. Dique deaeque omnes, ftudium quibus arva tueri. Virg. Georg. I. zr. But this fubjeft cannot be farther profecuted in this place. It in the ancient heathen World. 3 1 9 It will, I apprehend, be found upon examination, that, according to the hi- torians, the public devotion was princi- pally directed towards gentilitial, tutela- ry, and local, deities, the guardians of particular nations a"nd people, fuch as had been the objects of their former care ; and to thofe greater gods whom we have before proved to' be men. It is with an account of their worfhip that hiftory fo much abounds. Hence ma- ny of the Heathens affirmed, that their gods were not gods by nature, but by art and certain laws ; and were different in different countries, according to the ap- pointment of legiflators/. From the feveral foregoing tefti monies of the pagan poets, philofophers, and hiftorians, we may conclude, that the more immediate .objects of the eftablifhed n a<, u fjtscr.u^t, timt <rrgvrov Qxo-iv ot/rct TI^MJ, ov Qvctt, aXAa TW voprn$'' xa rara,- atom; tMot?, ov* ixa$-o* tavrow emi/ufjt.^o^cree.t vo^eStTa^co. rlatO de LiG- ^ibus, 1. 10. p. 889. E. ed. Serrani. worfhip, 320 tforjhip of human Spirits worlhip, in the idolatrous nations^ Were, for the moft part, dead men and women j unlefs you can fuppofe that the Heathens of every clafs and order, and in every age, confpired to give a falfe ac- count of their own gods and demons. And, though the euftom of appealing to the fun and moon, and other gods filled natural, was on fome occafions ftill pre- fervedj yet the objects of thofe appeals, according to the civil theology, were not properly the elements and heavenly bo- dies themfelves, as conceived of by the theiflic philofophers, but rather human ipirits, as will be (hewn at large here- after. It ought not however to be concealed, that a very learned writer has attempted to deftroy the force of this argument* He allows, indeed, that the pagan gods were not only fuppofed by chriftian wri- ters to have been deified mortals ', 'who were 'worjhipped in the countries where they died ; but that this was the opinion of the Heathen themfehes, in the ancient heathen World. 321 themfefaes, the 'very people by whom thefe gods were honoured: yet Jlill> adds our author* // is a MISTAKE ; It is certainly no fmall prefumption of the truth of the account, given in the preceding meets, of the opinion the Heathens entertained concerning their own gods* that it is, in this explicit manner, confirmed by a writer whofe ex- tenfive knowledge of antiquity cannot be difputed ; efpecially as that account mi- litates fo ftrongly againft his own hypo- thefis. At the fame time I cannot eafily per- fuade myfelf, that the whole gentile world, not excepting the moft enlight- ened nations of it, and the moft illuftri- ous fages that adorned it, and who had made the civil theology their particular ftudy, lay under fuch a ftrange delufion, with refpec~l to their gods, as to believe they were deified mortals, and natives of the countries where they were wor- Bryant, Mythol. V. i. p. 454, 455. Y Shipped, 322 Worfhlp of human Spirits ihipped, if in reality they were not fo. As far as mere authority is concerned, that of any modern writer, whatever his learning and abilities may be, can, in this cafe, have no weight, when fet a^ gainft the fentirnents of the Heathens, who had not merely fuperior advantages for forming a right judgement on the point, but certain information concern- ing it, and who indeed could not be rniftaken in their opinion refpec~ring the plain matter of fact, viz. that thofe, to whom they paid divine honours, were princes and heroes whom they them- lelves had deified. Waving, therefore, on this occafion, Mr; Bryant's authori- ty, let us proceed to confider the force of his reafoning. It is not credible, fays our author p , however blind idolatry may have been, that people fljould enfirine perfons as immortal, where they had the plaineft evidence of their mortality, that is, at their tombs. The H4>.p.4 52 . Gentiles in the ancient heathen World. Gentiles believed, that the fouls of vir- tuous men, after the difTolution of their bodies, became immortal gods q ; and on this ground paid them divine honours* As to the reafon of worshipping them hi the places where they were buried, it will be taken notice of in the next fection r j and will, I am perfuaded, occur, on at moment's recollection, to Mr. Bryant. It! is farther urged 8 , that, if divine bo-> nours were conferred, they were the effetts of time. This was not the cafe always 1 ; as appears from the hiftory both of po- pifh and pagan idolatry : and facts can- not be overturned by any fpeculative reafonings. But indeed, at what time was it more likely that the fuperftitious part of mankind fliould pay divine ho^ * Diflert. on Mir. p. 182, 214. Comp. Bryantj V. i. p. 455. r At the end of the i ft' article. s Bryant, V. i. p. 452. * Eufeb, Praep. Ev, 1. 2. c. 5. p. 70. cited under the 4th article of this fe&ion, p. 344. Y 2 nours 3 24 Worfitp of human Spirits nours to a hero than immediately after his death, when the admiration of his godlike endowments, the remembrance of his recent benefits, and the glory of his illuftrious exploits, were frefh in their minds ; and while their paflionate grief, for the lofs they had fuftained, almoft unavoidably tranfported them be- yond the bounds of reafon ? After their refpect and affection were cooled by time, it would not be fo eafy to kindle their de- votion. Again, The gentleman objects", that Varro, according to rfertullian, makes the Jupiters x / in number three hundred, and mentions for- ty heroes of the name of Hercules. Our author allows, that many mountains 'were called by the name of Olympus*. But does this prove there was no fuch moun- tain ? Is it at all incredible, that diffe- rent men fhould be called by the fame name ? Or can the fact in queftion be vouched by a better authority than Var- " v - P- 457- Seealfop. 453, 454. * P. 239. ro? in the ancient heathen World. 325 ro ? His opinion is in a great degree con- firmed by other writers *. But it is faid y , men are not agreed when Jupiter lived. On a point of fuch high antiquity as the age of the firfl Ju- piter can we wonder there fhould be a difference amongft the learned ? They were the more likely not to agree on this point, as feveral perfons were called by the name of Jupiter who lived in diffe- rent ages. The cafe was the fame in o- ther inftances. Different heroes bore -the name of Hercules, for example, who were neither of the fame age nor coun- try : which has introduced much confu- fion into their hiftory. This confufion has been increafed by their afcribing to * See above, p. 246, in the note. It is fhewn, in Cic. de N. D. 1. 3. c. 16, 21, 22, 23, that there were many gods who bore the name of Hercules, feveral Jupiters, Suns, Vulcans, Mercurys, ^Efculapii, Apollos, Diana*, \/ Dionyfi, Venufes, Minervas, and Cupids. Nor was it an unufual thing for every king to be called Jupiter. Reges omnes Jiaj, reginas veroSeaj, appellari fuit foli- tum. Tzetzes, upon the authority of Ptolemy. Ap. J^a&ant. 1. 1 . c. 8. in the concluding note, ed. Dufrefuoy. y P. 457-460. Y 3 th 326 Worfolp of human Spirits the later heroes of one country the virtues and exploits of the more ancient heroes of another 2 . Mr. Bryant himfelffays, It is to be obferved, that, when colonies made any where a fettlement, they ingrafted their Antecedent hijlory upon the fubfequent events of the place*: that the Greeks adopted all fo- reign hijlory j and fuppofed it to have been of their own country* : and that their ori- ginal hiji or y was foreign., and ingrafted up- on the hijlory of the country where they Jet- tied*. Thefe obfervations not only remove the objection we are here confidering re- fpecting the age in which Jupiter lived, but another difficulty alfo on which great ftrefs is laid d , viz. that the heroes of one 2 Diodorus Siculus, 1. iii. p. 243. ed. WelT. takes notice of three heroes who bore the name of Bacchus, and of the fame number of eminent perfons who were called Hercules, the laft of whom was the fon of Jupi- ter by Alcmena. The hiftorian adds, that the exploits of the two former were folely afcribed to the laft, as if there had never been more than one Hercules, flj w$ H^axAsaj yEyocoTo; iv ira,ri fu TTPOTIPOII ai&m< See alfo 1. i. p. 28. and Bryant, V. 2. p. 57 & feq. a Preface, p.xii. xiii, b Mythol. V. I, p 175. ? P. 178. ^P-459- country in the ancient heathen World. 327 country had not only the fame names, but the fame relations and connexions, with thofe of another. The Heathens, we are farther told, differed from one another about the place where Jupiter was born y and where he was buried*. This might well be the cafe, fuppofing there were feveral Jupi- ters. Evdn without having recourfe to this folution, the objection is inconclu- five. Did not feven cities contend for the honour of giving birth to Homer ? Will you infer from thence that no fuch poet ever exifled ? But the tomb of Ju- piter, it is urged, was fuppofed to be in feveral places $ and the fame is alfo faid of the tombs of Ifis and Ofiris f . When our learned author made this objection, he did not recollect, that it was cufloma- ry with the ancients to erect monuments in honour of the dead which did not con- tain any of their remains. Thefe vacant monuments were raifed, not only for ' P. 459, 4 6o. ' P. 4 6i. Y 4 thofe, 328 Worjhip of human Spirit* thofe perfons who had not obtained funeral g , but alfo for thofe who had fuch a funeral in another place j of which we find frequent mention in Paufanias, who fpeaks of fuch honorary tombs dedicated to Euripides, Ariflomenes, Achilles, Dameon, Tirefias, and others h . At thefe tombs, though the bodies of the deceafed were not depofited in them, their ghofts were invoked, and thefe invoca- tions were thought to bring them to the habitations prepared for them 1 . Sacrifi- ces ajfo were offered, and libations pour- ed The ghofts of men unburied were thought to wan- der in mifery for a hundred years, unlefs an empty fe- pulchre was erefted to them. Potter's Gr. An. V. 2. B. 4. c. 7. p. 245. See Virg. JEn. VI. 371. h Potter ubi fupra, & Guther. de Jure Manium, 1.2. c. 1 8. Szepe in tumulisfme corpore nominalegi, Ovid. Metamorph. 1. u, v. 429. 1 With this view ./Eneas invoked the ghoft of Dei- phobus : Tune egomet tumulum Rhcetep in litore inanem Conftitui, etmagna manes tervoce vocavi. Virg. JEn. VI. 505, rgo inftauramufi Polydoro funtes, et ingens Adgeritur tumulo tellus : ftant manibus ane. Jnferiinus tepido fpum^ntia cymbia lafte, Stnguini-s in the ancient heathen WhrU. 329 edout, to their afhes k . It was cuftoma^ ry in the moft early ages to raife fepuU chres to perfons of eminent merit, mere, ly to preferve their memory and perpe- tuate their fame. Hence it came to pafs, that the fame perfon often had many fe- pulchres erefted to him in different pla- ces 1 . There might well therefore be a difference Sanguiniset facri pateras : animamquefepulchro Condimus, et magna fupremum voce ciemus. ^n. III. 62. Pelias recalled 'to his native country the foul of Phryxus, who died abroad. Pindar. Pythia, Ode IV. v. 284, gee the next note. k Virgil fays of Andromache : Libabat cineri Andromache, manifque vocahat Heftoreum ad tumulum : viridi quern cefpiteinanem Jit geminas, cauffam lacrimis, facraverat aras. Virg. ^En. III. 303. Concerning Drufus, who was buried in the Campus Martius, Suetonius fpeaks in the following terms: C'seterum exercitus honorarium ei tumulam excitavit : circa quern deinceps ftato die quotannis decurreret, et; Galliarum civitates publice facrificarent, al. fupplica- rent. Vit. Claudii, c. i. See Virg. ^En. III. 62-68, cited in part in the preceding note. 1 Vetuftiflimi moris fuit in honorem amici ac bene merit} cujufpiam viri fepulchrum illi ftatuere. Non quo4 330 Worjhip of human Spirits difference of opinion amongft the Hea- thens about the real places where thofe men were buried, whom they fo highly efteemed as to exalt into the rank of gods. At the fame time, the very con- tention, between different cities and countries, for the honour of having their tombs, fhews that all were agreed in this one point, that their gods were men who had died and been buried. Some have urged the abfurdities of the fables concerning the heathen gods with the fame view as Mr. Bryant does their inconjiflenctes. But mail we de- ny the exiflence of the popifh faints, merely becaufe their hiftory is filled with legendary llories as void of fenfe as they quod conditi efTent illic ejuscineres atque ofTa : fed me, morias tantum id tributum, illuftrandique ejus nominis gratia. Qua e re contigit ejufdem perfxpe viri diverfis in locis pluraetiam fepulchra inveniri. Jovian, lib. dc Mag. apud Pet. Moreftel. Pompa Feralis, 1. 10. c. i. The cuftom of raifing vacant fepulchres was very an- cient, as appears from the mention of them in Virgil, JEn. VI. 505. IX. 214, 215. Homer alfo makes men- tion of a cenotaph, or honorary tomb, Odyff. IV. 584, are 'in the ancient heathen World. 331 are of truth ? Many events that have re- ally happened have, as Paufanias m ob- ferves, been rendered incredible by thofe who have raifed a fuperftruclure of lies upon them. Befides, the abfurdity of the heathen fables concerning their gods is the lefs to be wondered at, as fomeof thofe fables might have a latent meaning, and were not to be literally underftood. To return to our author. He urges a farther objection againfl the human origin of the gods, drawn from the character of iheHelladian and o- ther Greek writers, who aflerted it. Ac- cording to him, the Grecians, who received their religion from Egypt and the eaft, mifcon- ftrited every thing that was imported \ and ad- ded to thefe abfurdities largely. They adopted 4eities to whofe pretended attributes they were totally grangers* The writers of Greece did not know the purport of the words which were found in their ancient hymns . The greatejlpart of the Grecian theology arofefrom 01 Paufanias, Arcad. p, 601. * V. i. p. 306. P. 85. Seep. 252. mifconceptions 3 3 2 Worfhlp of human Spirits mifconceptions and blunders ; and the Jlorie* concerning their gods and heroes 'were found" ed on terms mi/interpreted and abufed*. They miftook the Hebrew word cahen, which fignifies a prieft, for the Greek kuon> and mifconftrued it a dog* : they changed Omphi-El (which, according to our author, fignifies oracle of the fun) into omphalos, a navel r : and, fo little did they underftand their own language, that, from the word ra<po, (taphos,) which they adopted in a limited fenfe, (that is, as fignifying a tomb, ) they formed a notion of the gods having been buried in every place where there was a tumulus to their honour*, ^hey formed perfonages out of the names, of towers and other edifices* j and out of eve- ry obfolete term u : they conjlantly mijlook ti- tles for names ', and from thefe titles multi- V P. 453. See below, p. 336, where the reader will nd more of Mr. Bryant's cenfures of the Grecians. ^ See p. 329-352. Why might not the Egyptians worlhip dogs as well as other animals ? You have no more reafon to fet afide the teftimony of the antients in the one cafe than in the other. r P. 240. P. 453. t y. 2. p. I. V. I. p. 2. 'In tie ancient heathen World. 333 plied their deities and heroes". Out of every title they made a god * -, and miftobk temples for deities*. Our author might have made fhorter work with the Grecians, and called them at once perfeft idiots . B ut it feems it was only with refpect to the fubjecl: of reli- gion, on which their fentiments differed from his, that they difcovered fuch a to- tal want of underftanding. In all other rejpetfs, he admits, they were the wifeft of all thefons of men*. This commendation lenders his cenfure very improbable. The improbability of the cenfure will appear ftill greater, if you confider who were the firft founders of the Grecian theology. They were the natives or inha- bitants of Syria or Egypt 3 ; .who came V. i. p. 176. V. i. p. 307. V. i. p. 175. Comp.p.444, 445. V. i. p. 245. See above, p. 210, and Bryant, V. I. p. 182-186. The Helladians themfelves, he fays, came from Egypt and Syria, p. 150. witk 334 Worjhip of human Spirits with colonies into Greece, fettled in that country, and there eftablimed their own religion with the affiftance of the priefts who always attended fuch expeditions. * They afterwards fuperintended the reli- gion which they planted. Let every rea- der judge whether, under fuch inftruc- tors, the Greeks could fall into thofe grofs miftakes which are here imputed to them, but of which no proof is pro- duced. Moreover, if we inquire carefully in- to the matter of fact, we (hall find, that the Greeks did not mifconftrue every thing imported from Egypt and the eaft i for the general fyilem of religion in thefe feveral countries was the fame c , and their notions of the gods were not very different. Nay, the gentleman himfelf al- lows, <e that all the rites of the Hella- " dians, as well as their gods and heroes + " were imported from the eaft, and '* chiefly from Egypt'". Their theology, * Bryant, V. I, p. 281. c See above, p. 211,212. * V. I. p. 149, 150. See above, p. 331. therefore, 'in the ancient heathen World. therefore, did not arlfe from their own mifconceptiom and blunders. Neceflity alone could compel our au- thor to give fo unfavourable an account of the Greek writers. If their authority be. admitted, his hypothecs mufl fall to the ground. They, Mr. Bryant al- lows, confidered their gods as deified mortals -, but he fays they were miftaken> and that moji of the deified perfonages never exifted, but were mere titles of the deity, the fun*. It may perhaps be faid, that it was not neceffity, but irrefiflible evidence, that compelled Mr. Bryant to adopt an hypo- thefis fo deftruclive of the credit of all the Greek writers, and indeed of the whole heathen world. Let us enquire whether he produces any fuch evidence. His hypothecs refls principally upon two grounds. One of them is etymolo- gical deduction, a foundation far too flight to fupport an edifice of any mag- V. i. p. 452. Seep. 305 -317. nitude. 3 36 Worjhip of human Spirits nitudei But, two very learned writers f ha- ving pointed out fo many miflakes in Mr. Bryant's etymologies, nothing far- ther need be offered on the fubjeft, ex- cept it be that the gentleman himfelf has deftroyed his own argument. He fays 8 , that he has rendered ancient terms as they were expreffed by them> viz. the Grecians, who, according to our author 11 , changed every foreign term to fomething fimilar in their own language : to fomeihingjimilar in found, however remote In meaning, bring led fokly by the ear. On this ground his ety- mologies are built j and yet he affirms, that the Grecians could not articulate orfpelt the names of the deities they adopt ed y and did not know how to arrange the elements of which the words were compofed ! . If the Greeks did not underftand the language of their 1 foreign inftructors, yet the latter certain- ly underftood the language of the former^ * See Bibliotheca critica, parsprima, p. 53. printed, at Amfterdam, 1777; and Richardfon's DilTertation ori the languages of the eaftern nations, p. 104, & feq. & p. 380, zd ed. * Preface, p. xvi. h V* i. p^ 176. ' Id. p. 306.- otherwife in the ancient heathen World. 337 otherwife they could not have converfed together. Now, there being a language common to both, the Greeks, we may reafonably fuppofe, learned the meaning of the foreign terms they adopted. But, according to our author, they not only mif- underftood, but were unable to articulate^ thenames of the foreign gods. How, then, could they articulate their names when transferred into the Greek language, by words fimilar in found ? The articulation of words of the fame found, if impracti- cable in one language, muil be equally fo in every other. On the gentleman's prin- ciples, therefore, there could be no affini- ty in found, any more than in fenfe, between the ancient terms and the Grecian mode of expreffmg them -, and confequently no ar- gument can be drawn from the etymology of ancient terms as exprefled by the Greeks. The other ground, on which Mr. Bryant's hypothecs is built, is the wri- tings of the Greeks, thofe very Greeks whofe teftimony he had taken fo much pains to difparage. All our knowledge Z of 338 Worfbip of human Spirits of the gentile hi/lory, fays this learned wri- ter 16 , muft come either through the hands of the Grecians, or of the Romans who copied from them. But of what ufe can it be to our author to appeal to the Greeks, if they were fuch grofs blunderers as he repre- fents them ? And could he hope, by their authority, to eflablifh a fyftem, which, by his own confeffion, was op- pofite to that which they efpoufed ? Why, it feems, they did not know the pur- port of their own intelligence^ -, and he un- dertakes to deduce from their own hiftories many truths with which they were totally unacquainted '. That Mr. Bryant has gi- ven proofs of a fagacityas uncommon as his erudition, and by the aid of both thrown new light upon ancient writers, and in fome inftances difcovered their re- al meaning which had efcaped the ob- fervation of others, it is but juftice to him to acknowledge. Neverthelefs, the attempt to deduce, from authors, truths with which they themfelves were totally k Preface, p. ix.xvi. & p. 143. ' Preface, p. ix. unacquainted, in the ancient heathen World. 339 unacquainted, and to difcover meanings oppofite to thofe which they are acknow- ledged really to have had, was too hazar- dous an undertaking, and in which the imagination alone could properly engage. After all, had Mr. Bryant, upon any grounds whatever, eflablifhed his main point with refpect to the heathen gods, viz. that they were all titles of the fun, or refolvable into that one deity 1 "; he could not prove from hence, that the Heathens did not, in their own concep- tion, worfhip a deified mortal. He fays, the Cuthites, or Amonians, and the col- lateral branches of the family, having raifed Ham to a divinity, worfhipped him as the fun n , the deity which the Amoniam adored 9 . Now the Heathens, in worihip- ping the fun under this idea of it, may be confidered as worfhipping a human fpirit. m V. I. p. 305, 306, 309. Preface, p. xv. n Preface, p. vii. Ham 'was by his pofterity efteemed the fun, V.i. p. 244. &p. 239, 257. He makes the ora- cle of Ham and the fun to be the fame, p. 239, 243, 248, 258, 259, 273. Ib. p. xv. Z 2 In Worfiip of human Spirits In juftice to our learned author, as well as to our fubject, I cannot conclude without taking notice, that, though he argues againft the opinion which the Heathens entertained of their own gods, as being deified mortals, yet he himfelf maintains, that theworjhip of Ham was in- troduced by the Amonians in Phrygia and A- fa Minor*: that the Cuthites, wherever they came, were looked up to as a fuperior order of beings -, and hence were filed heroes and demons'* : and that the nations of the eajl ac- knowledged originally but one deity, the fun ; but, when they came to give the titles of O- rus, OJiris, and Cham, to fome of the heads of their family, they too in time were looked up to as gods, and federally worfiippedas the fun\ He affirms', By thefe terms, the ma- nes and lares, are fignijied dii Arkite, who were no other than their Arkite ancef- tors, the perfons preferred in the. ark. Speaking of the Greeks and Romans, he P V. i. p. 273, 274. i Preface, p. vii. V. i. p. 306. V. 2. p. 456. fays, in the ancient heathen World. 341 fays', The whole of their worfoip was confi- ned to a few deified men , thefe lares, manes, damorteS) of whom we have been treat- ing. They were no other than their Arkite ancejlors, the Baalim of the Scriptures : to thefe they offered, and to thefe they made their vows. In more general terms, he pofitively aflerts, The whole religion of the ancients conjifted in the worfoip of demons : and to thofe perfonages their theology continu- ally refers* They were, like the manes and lares of the Romans, fuppofed to be the fouls of men deceafed". Thefe conceflions, at the fame time that they difcover Mr, Bryant's candour, feem to me fully to confirm the opinion of the heathen gods which I have been attempting to eflablifh. IV. Let us proceed to confider the tef- timony of the Chriftian FATHERS to the general wormip of dead men in the ancient heathen nations. 1 V. 2. p. 459. " V. 2. p. 28O. Z 3 Many 342 Worjhlp of human Spirits Many testimonies of the Fathers, to the general worfhip of dead men amongft the Heathens, were produced in a for- mer publication*. Thefe learned writers have alfo been occafionally appealed to, in the preceding fheets, in order to con- firm fome particular articles ; though my principal defign has hitherto been to eftablifh the point in queftion by the au- thority of the Heathens themfelves. It could anfwer no end farther to multiply citations from the Fathers, merely to fhew that they thought the gods of the Gentiles were deified mor- tals : for this, I apprehend, is univer- fally admitted by learned men. Mr. Bryant x , in particular, allows, " that " this was the opinion of Clemens, Eu- " febius, Cyril, Tertullian, Athenago- " ras, Epiphanius, Laftantius, Arnq- " bius, Julius Firmicus, and many o- " thers." Some of thofe here omitted by Mr. Bryant were taken notice of in the Dif- w Diflert. onMir. p. 212, * Mythol.I. p. 455. fertation in the ancient heathen World. 343 fertation on Miracles y j particularly Cy- prian, Minucius Felix, and St. Auftin. But our learned author* affirms, <e that " the whole of their argument turns up- " on this point, the conceflions of the * f Gentiles. The more early writers " of the church were not making a Uriel: <{ chronological enquiry, but were la- * { bouring to convert the Heathen. f( They therefore argue with them upon <e their own principles, and confute <{ them from their own teftimony." " It matters not whether the notion," viz. of the Heathens, who thought their gods had been men, "were true; the <c Fathers fairly make ufe of it. They ct avail themfelves of thefe conceflions, " and prove from them the abfurdity ft of the Gentile worfhip, and the in- * c confiftency of their opinions." Thefe obfervations, being fpecious in themfelves, and fupported by fo great an authority as Mr. Bryant, deferve to be r P. 2iz, 213. * Mythol. I, p. 455. 2 4 maturely 344 Worfoip of human Spirits maturely examined. It is natural to fup- pofe that the Fathers would avail them- felves of the conceffions of the Heathens on the fubject before us ; *>ut the whole of their argument does not, to my ap- prehenfion, turn upon this point. They take upon themfelves to affirm it as a fact, that the heathen gods had been men ; and they eflablifh the fact by convincing evidence. i . They affirm the fact in the ftrongeft terms. Eufebius, who was a perfect matter of antiquity, maintains, that, in the early ages, thofe, who excelled o- thers in wifdom and power, or had emi- nently benefited mankind, were pro- claimed gods, both while living and after their deaths z . He declares he had pro- ved, by unqueftionable teftimonies, that the gods, worjhipped by all people, both in cities and villages, were the ghojls and ima- . 1. 2. 0.5. p. 70. D. in the ancient heathen World. 345 ges of dead men*. And he aflerts, that Sanchoniathon in particular had fliewn, that dead men and women, covered with all manner offices, t were advanced to the rank of gods ; and that thefe were the very fame gods as thofe univerfatly worfhipped in all ci- ties and countries in his time*. Arnobius, after particularly enumerating feveral de- ities who had been men, pofitively af- ferts, " that all the gods they had in ct their temples were fuch c ". The names of the gods whom you prof efs to worfiip, fays Theophilus Antiochenus to Autolycus, are the names of dead men*. La6lantius, as * NEX^WK EidWXa, xai etto^ut Ttctf.cii KOiroi^ofJiinui si>;oaj. Id. ib. A. b MctTvc;t ys TKTS? auras txtum; two.*, TJ st/rert x tvv $ESJ ira^a, TOI; irao-i ysvo/xKr^sirK; XU.TX rt ra; 7ro>.n?, x* raj %w?. Id. 1. I. c. 9. p. 31. C. SeeDemonft. Evang. 1. 8. p. 364. & Vit. Conftantini paffim. ? Vos hominem nullum colitis natum ? non unum et alium ? non innumeros alios ? quinimo non omnes, quos jam templis habetis veftris, mortalium fultuliftis ex nu- rriero,, et coelo fideribufque donaftis ? Adv. Gentes, p. 21. rf Ta fji.iv OO^T ait $1*11; crEteso'Sat Scut OVO/AUTOI sr nxguv av^iuwwy. Theophyl. ad Autolyc. I. i. c. 14. p. 36. Hamburg. 1724. we 346 Worjhip of human Spirits we have feen, adopted the fyftem of Eu- hemerus, which reprefented all the hea- then gods as mere mortals 6 . St. Auftin likewife has given his fanftion to that fyftem, and affirms that it was founded upon hiftorical evidence'. He maintains, that even the greater gods had been men*; and that it would be difficult to find, in all the writings of the Heathens, any one god of a different clafs h . Tertuilian 1 and Minucius Felix afTert, that all their gods, or the whole fw arm of heathen deities , were men, not excepting the chief of all, Jupiter and Saturn, before whom they had no gods k . There were no kings, fays Lactantius, e La&ant. Divin. Inftitut. 1. i. c. 14. tited above, p. 222. Seealfoc. n. p. 49. ed. Dufrefnoy. ( Auguft. de Civ. Dei, 1. 6. c. 7. cited above, p. 222. f Ib. 1. 8. c. 5. cited above, p. 257. h Id. ib. 1. 8. c. 26. cited above, p. 257. * Omnesiftos deos veftros homines fuifle. Tertuilian. Apol. c. 10. p. ii. k Saturnum enim principem hujus generis et-exami- nis omnes fcriptores vetuftatis, Graeci Romanique, ho- minem prodiderunt. Saturnus Creta profugus, &c. Minucius m the ancient heathen World. 347 Laftantius, before Saturn or Uranus 1 j and, royalty being the ground of deifi- cation ', thefe princes came to be regard- ed as the moft ancient divinities^ 2. At the fame time that the Fathers affert, irf general terms, the humanity of all the heathen gods, they eftablifh it by arguments of great weight, fuch as have convinced others of the truth of their opinion, and which probably therefore produced the fame effecl upon themfelves, Many of them have been touched upon in the preceding fheets ; others will come under examination in the next feclion : and therefore, to a- void repetition, I (hall barely mention them in this place, without enquiring into their force. Nor fhall I attempt to Minucius Felix, c. 22. p 113, 114. ed. Davif. Ante Saturnum deus penes vos nemo eft. Tertullian. Apol. c. 10. cited at large above, p. 265. See alfo Arnobius, p. 92, 93. cited above, p. 252. ? Latant. 1. i. c. 15. make 348 Worfeip of human Spirits make diftincl mention of all their argu- ments, but only touch upon fome of the principal. They appeal to ancient tradition and all the authentic records of pagan anti- quity m j to the diftincl: teftimonies of their poets and their hiftorians " ; to the difcovery of the earthly origin of the gods in the myfteries $ and to the report of thofe who had divulged this fecret to the world p . " The genealogies of your m Sienim forte vos fugit, fortis eos humane, et con- ditionis fuilTe communis ; replicate antiquiffimas lite- ras, et eorum fcripta percurrite, qui vetuftati vicini, fine ullis affentationibus cun&a veritate in liquida pro- diderunt. Arnobius, p. 21. - Non attendant in om- nibus literis paganorum, &c. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 8, c. 26. cited above, p. 257. B Quod fi quis dubitet, res eorum geftas, et fafta, confideret : quas univerfa turn poetas, turn hiftorici ve- teres, prodiderunt. Laclant. 1. i. c. 8. p. 35. P Particularly Leo, the Egyptian prieft. Minuc. Felix, p. 121, 122. Cyprian, de Idol. Vanit. p. 12. ed.Fell. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 8. ..5, 27. " gods", in the ancient heathen World. fc gods q ", faid the Fathers in their ad- drefies to the Heathens, " and their " marriages, their adulteries, and other " crimes', point out their participation " of human nature. They were kings " who were indebted for their divinity " to the adulation of their fubjecls*. " Their fathers and mothers, their <c country, their tribe and kindred, C their exploits and various fortunes, * Theophilus Ant. ad Autolyc. 1. 2. p. 72. is thus rendered by Wolfius. Etenim dum genealogias eorum percurritis, pro hominibus eos habetis ; paulo poft vero deos appellatis, et colitis, nee recogitantes, neque intelligentes, eos tales efle, quales natos legitis. Tatian (Orat. ad Grascos, c. 36. p. 79. ed. Worth) argues in the fame manner. Tinc-m Aeyvrs Qtuv, xi S>JTS? avTSj aTro^avEicrSE. * Tatian. ubi fupra, p. 30, 31. Tertullian, after enumerating the crimes imputed to the gods by their votaries, adds, At quin ut illos homines fuifle non poffitis negare, edam ilhe nota: accedunt. Apol. c. u. p. 12. s Quomodo ergo, inquiet aliquis, dii creditifunt? Nimirum quia reges maximi ac potentiffimi fuerint. La&r.nt. 1. i. c. 8. p. 35. In c. 15. he handles the fubjed more largely. Compare Cyprian de Idol. Va- nitat. iuit-. & Minucius Felix, 0.29. p. 147, 148. " arc 350 ffiorflxp of human Spirits " are all on record'. It is well known < in what cities they were born, and t where they were buried". And, <c if farther proofs of their humanity <e are defired, we appeal to the viands w " with which your gods are fupplied, to " the images" by which they are repre* C fented, and to the temples 7 in which " their remains are depofited. But the <e fact itfelf, that all thofe whom you 1 See above, note n , Auguft. Civ. D. 1. 8. c. 27* and Tertullian. Apol. c. 10. p. n. ed. Kigali I fhall fet down the words of Arnobius, p. 21. Jam profecto difcetis, quibus fmguli patribus, quibus ma- tribus, fuerint procreati, qua in nati regione, qua gente, quas fecerint, egerint, pertulerint, aftitarint, quas in rebus obeundis adverforum fenferint, fecun- dantiumque fortunas. u The heathen records teflified to his time, fays Tertullian, (Apol. c. 10. p. n.) et civitatibus in qui^. bus nati funt ; et regionibus in quibus aliquid operati veftigia reliquerunt, in quibus etiam fepulti denion- ftrantur. See Recogn. S. dementis, 1. 10. c. 23, 24, p. 594. ap. Patres Apoft. V. i. ed. Clerici. w Sin autem fcientes uteris effe geftatos, et frugibus eos viftitaffe terrenis. Arnob. p. 21. See the next feftion under the article of <worjbip* * See the next fe&ion, article V. ? Ib. artick II. ' c HOW in the ancient heathen World. 35* " now worfhip as gods had once been <c men, is fo notorious - that you " cannot deny it z . It is becaufe you <c cannot deny that the objects of your <f worfhip had been men, that you af- " firm them to be now advanced to the " rank of gods". Nor have you any o- " ther reafon, for flying to a phyfical " explication of the fables, than your <c being afhamed of the literal hiflory b ". This is the natural language of per- fons fully perfuaded of the truth of what they faid. Under this ftrong perfuafion, z Provocamus a vobis ad confcientiam veftram. Ilia nosjudicet, ilia nosdamnet, fipoteritnegareoOTw.riltos decs veftros homines finite. Tertullian. Apol. c. 10. p. n. * Et quoniam ficut illos homines fuifle non audetis denegare, ita poft mortem deos faftos inftituiftis afleve- rarp. Tertullian. Apol. c. u. p. n. b Ipfa quoque vulgaris fuperftitio communis idolola- triae, cum in fimulacris de nominibus et fabulis veterivn mortuorum pudet, ad interpretationem naturalium re- fugit, etdedecus fuum ingenio adumbrat. Tertullian. adv. Marcion. 1. i. p. 371, 372. ed. Rigalt. 1675. Ut fcriptorum tan tarn defend atis audaciara, allegorias res illas, et naturalis fcientix mentimini effe doftrinas. Arnobius, jp. 150. they 352 Worfiip of human Spirits they openly infult the public religion of their country, and juftify their non- conformity to it on account of it's pre- fctibing the worfhip of the dead. With great eloquence and flrength of reafon- ing do they expofe the abfurdity of that worfhip, and the folly and arrogance of pretending, by certain ceremonies, to convert mortal men into immortal gods, and to ad van ce them to celeftial dignity and power'. Thefe reproaches, had they not been well founded, would have been re- ceived with all the contempt they defer- ved j and thofe, who urged them with fo much confidence and triumph, would have appeared ridiculous in the eyes of all the world. But their reafonings ori this fubjecl: had a very different effect, and contributed greatly to the downfal of pagan idolatry. The opinion and teflimony of the Fa* thers, under the foregoing circumftan-^ ces, feem to me to be of great weight. c SeeLa&ant. I. I. c. 15. p, 69, 70. cd. Dufrefnoy. They in the ancient heathen World. 353 They were bred up in the heathen reli- gion, or lived in the times when it flourifhed ; and therefore were as com- petent judges of it as the Heathens themfelves could be. After the moft cri- tical examination of it, they confidently pronounced the objects of national wor- fhip to be human fpirits. They fupport- ed this opinion by arguments more than By the authority or conceflions of the Heathens. And, fo clear and cogent were their reafonings, that idolaters de- ferted the worfhip of their falfe gods, and adored only the creator of heaven and earth. A late writer, who would feem to be very jealous of the credit of the Fathers*, A a knew d In the Eflay on the Demoniacs, p. 53, 54, in the note, after citing from Jerome, in his own words, a paflage, which may be thus tranflated : Becaufe they (the Fathers) arefometimes compelled to fpeak t NOT WHAT THEY THINK, but what necejfity requires, they oppofe <what the Gentiles advance : I immediately added, When- ever they had an end to feri)e t no caution can be too great in following them. This obfervation is cenfured by Mr. Fell, (Demoniacs, p. 156.) and feems to have been the principal 354 Worjhip of human Spirits knew very little what pains he was ta- king to deftroy it. He not only oppofes their principal ground on which heaflts, p. 160, " Is not this " fuch an attack upon the common honefty of man- ' kind < as naturally deftroys the faith of all ' hiilory, while it leads to uni<verfal fcepticifm r" Here it is obvious to remark, i. That the charafter which is given the Fathers by Jerome, who was himfelf one of them, is confirmed by the teftimony of feveral others ; as the reader may find by confulting Daille, or a late learned publication (p. 83, &c.) by the Rev. Mr. Hen- ry Taylor, which contains many valuable reflections on the fifteenth chapter of the ift volume of Mr. Gib- bons's Hiftory. 2. The obfervation which Mr. Fell condemns is no more than a juft inference from that cha- racter which Jerome, a very competent and impartial judge, had given the Fathers. Neverthelefs Mr. Fell treats it as a groundlefs calumny ; nor could it be confi- dered in any other light by an unlearned reader j for our author has cited the obfervatien without taking any notice of Jerome, the authority upon which it was founded. The gentleman aflures us, in his title-page, that truth was his only objeft ; otherwife I mould have thought, that, on this as on almoft all other occafions, obloquy had been no fmall part of his defign. Can he point out the place where I have faid, what he (in p. 156) exprefsly reprefents me as faying, " That no ftrefs " is to be laid on their (the Fathers) general conduct?" The gentleman often honours me with fuch additions. 3. If the obfervation complained of dejlroys the faith of in the ancient heathen World. 35 5 their opinion, but labours to overturn th&rfc$mony. They affirm it as a faff, which none could controvert, that the heathen gods had been men. Mr. Fell, on the contrary, maintains 6 , that "all the all biftory, St. Jerome alorte (whofe language fully war- rants it, but whom our author has kept out of fight) is the perfon on whom the blame fhould be laid. The condu&of the Fathers is certainly liable to juftcenfure, whether the chara&er they give of themfelves be true or falfe. If it be true, who can juftifythem? If it be falfe, (which it would be abfurd to fuppofe.) you will find it neceflary in this inftanceto difbelieve them. But this by no means deftroys the faith of all hiftory. The de- ceptions to which we are liable are a ground of caution, to.Q\.Qfuni<verfalfcepticifm. Human teftimony, by which men determine concerning the lives and properties of o- thers in courts of judicature, is, under proper cirfumjtan- ces, a fure ground of dependence. The teftimony of the Fathers in particular > on every point of real importance to Chriftianity, is, I apprehend, confirmed by fuch cir- cumftantial evidence as prevents the very poflibility of deception. 4. The reafons I afligned for rejecting the profefled opinion of fome of the Fathers, concerning the poffejfing demons, (Eflay on Demoniacs, p. 49-56, and Introduction, p. 7, 8.) do not at all hold in the cafe of the teftimony they bear to the faft now before us, the human origin of the heathen gods. e P. no. A a 2 world 356 Worship of human Spirits world knew they had never been men." If this be true, the Fathers are chargea- ble, not with ignorance or error, but with wilful falfehood. I do not fay the gentleman really defigned to advance fb fevere a charge againft them. It does not appear, from his writings, that he had any acquaintance with their fentiments on the fubjec~l before us, or that he had fo much as read the extracts from them in the DhTertation which he undertook to anfwer. At leaft, he has taken no no- tice of thofe extracts ; and therefore, if he did read them, he did not judge them worthy of a reply. His filence mufl be confidered as expreffive either of his ignorance of the Fathers, or of his fovereign contempt of them ; unlefs we refolve it into fome prudential confidera- tion. I have now difKnctly examined the fentiments of the Gentiles and of the early Chriftians concerning the heathen gods ; and have fhewn that they both a- gree in affirming their earthly origin. The Fathers, //; the ancient heathen World. 3 57 Fathers, in particular, do often affert, in general terms, and without making any exceptions, that all the pagan deities had once been men. Neverthelefs, a late writer imagined f , that " no opinion <c could be more erroneous than this." I leave it to the reader to judge, whether the proportion here condemned be not, under a few obvious reflations, confir- med by the cleareft and flrongeft tefti- monies. ~But we fhall advance one Jftep farther under the next feftion, SECT. II. General proofs of the ivorjhip of human fpi- rifs, amongst the ancient Heathens, drawn from FACTS. T^VERY one muft have obferved, that the teflimony of competent and honeft witnefles, which in itfelf is a reafonable ground of dependence, may- be confirmed by fuch circumftantial evi- f Mr. Fell. See above, p. 12, A a 3 dence 358 Worjhlp of human Spirits dence as to remove every degree of doubt or fufpicion. This obfervation was never more applicable than to the cafe before us. The teftimonies to the worihip of human fpirits in particular nations, and to it's ge- neral prevalence, hitherto produced, re- ceivethe ftrongeft confirmation fromfacls and circumftances which cannot be con- troverted with any colour of reafon ; and yet cannot be accounted for but upon the fuppofition of the truth of thofe tef- timonies. This argument was urged in a former publication 5 , (though overlooked by the gentleman who wrote againft it j) but it well deferves a larger illuftration than was confident with the occalion on which it was there introduced. I. I fhall begin with taking notice, that divine honours were paid to the dead, according to their different ranks and characters when living, at all the SE- PULCHRES of the Heathens. * DifTertat. on Mir. p. 193. There in the ancient heathen World. 359 There has already been occafion to ob- ferve h , that facrifices and libations were offered in honour of all the dead at the places of their interment. Children were compelled by law to perform thefe rites to their parents ; and, where there were no children, heirs were laid under the fame obligation to do it 1 . No wonder, then, that religious ho- nours fhould be paid to perfons diftin- guifhed by their rank or merit. Alexan- der and Hephseftion offered facrifices at the tombs of Achilles and the Trojan heroes upon the plains of Troy k . The tombs of the ancients were fome- times built of flone, and called Karns 1 ; but were more commonly conical mounds of earth, well known here in England by the name of barrows, which were rai- h Above, p. 249, 270. Petit. Leg. Attic, p. 601, k Arrian. Exped. Alex. 1. i. c. 11. p. 25. ed. Gro- nov. Q^Curt. 1. 2. c. 4. Freinihera. Supplem. torn. j. p. 27. ed. Snakenburg. 1 Borhfe, Antiq.of Cornwal, p. 212. A a 4 fed 360 Worjhlp of human Spirits fed over the dead body, or, in cafe of it's being burned, over the bones and afhes. Thefe tumuli ', or fepulchral mounds, were fometimes built in the fhape of aU tars m , undoubtedly that they might be u- fed as fuch, as they alfo often were when not made in this particular fhape n . But, in moft cafes, altars, diftinct from the facred mounds, were raifed near them for the purpofe of worfhip, The Trojans creeled to Polydore not only a large tomb or mound of earth, but altars likewife, and facrificed to his manes . Andromache alfo raifed a va-r cant tomb, and confecrated two altars, toHeftor". Amongft perfons elevated above the level of the vulgar there was a great dif- tinction made, not only with refpeft to m The fepulchre of Themiftocles was fix punas;, ac- cording to the authors cited by Plutarch, Vit. Themift. p. 128. E. 11 See Borlafe, p. 222. Virg. ^En.lII. 62. cited above, p. 328, in note ?. P Id. ib. v. 303, cited above, p. 329, in note "-. the m the ancient heathen World. 361 the magnificence of their fepulchres, but alio in regard to the worfhip that was paid them. Herodotus relates of the A- xnathuiians, that they were admonifhed by an oracle, to facrifice annually to Onejilus as to a hero*. To Philippus, of Crotona, the Egiftans ere&edtbe monument of a hero upon his tomb, and propitiated him ivitbfa- crifices*. When heroes were exalted to the rank of gods, they were ftlll more ho- nourably diftinguimed. To what has been already 8 faid upon this fubjecl: I here add, that Caftor and Pollux received e- qual honours with the gods*: which implies that their honours were fuperior to thofe paid to heroes. The taphos, or tomb^ of Jupiter, built by the Magnefians, who thought he was buried in their country, was a flructure worthy of admiration* ; and every one knows he was the fupreme object of religious worfhip amongft the feveral nations of Greece. 9 Q'.ic-tf.ia 3s $vw, a>s gwV, cttu van fro?. Herodot. 1.5. c. 114. r Esn yaLg TOV rctipov wtov yiguav dgvo'aiu.itQi, Sv^nm ^rro tXao-xovTo. Id. ib. c. 47. P. 172-176. * T^a? <ro$? scr^9. Plutarchi Thefeus, 16. A. * Tettyov &ius *|io. Paufaniae Ccrinthiaca, p. 161. Princes 562 Worflsip of human Spirits Princes and great commarders had their fepulchres dignified by JT cromlech*,. which was compofed of a large flat (tone, in or near a horizontal poiition, fupported by erect flones*. The word denotes a confecratedfione* or table. The repafts pro- vided for the dead (confiftingcommonly of vegetables, bread, and eggs) were caked filicernia jx flippers uponaJtone.Thck tf one- tables were called altars 1 ', not merely on ac- count of their form, as fome fuppofe, but alfo on account of their ufe ; the fupper placed upon them being an offering to the dii manes. A learned writer allows, that the places round about them were the fcenes of theparentalia, or where the dead were wormipped 2 . Now, as this worfhip confuted, in part, in the celebra- tion of a feaft, it is natural to fuppofe, that the cromlech was the table or altar on which was laid that part of it which was defigned for the ufe of the departed. A Borlafe, p. 229. w Id. p. 223. * mV Cain. Rowland, p. 47, 214. Borlafe, p. 225. r Eorlafe, p. 228. 1 Wormius, p. 8. fpeaking of the cromlech, fays, Maxima ex parte fepulchro impofita effe folet, eo fine, in tie ancient heathen World. 363 A very learned writer contends, that cromlechs and barrows were not places where the gods were buried, but only where they were worfhipped. When fpeaking of thofe mounds, in Greece, that were fenced round with a border of {lone-work, upon the top of which a large ftone was placed, he fays 3 , They were lookedupcn as receptacles of the dead: but were high altars, with their f acred Tepevy, which had been erected for divine worfiip in the moji early times. The race/, (taphoi,) he affirm s b , were not tombs, but conical mounds of earth, on which, in the firft ages, offer- ings were made byjire. He reprefents the facred tupha of the Perfians as being fet apart as puratheia, for the celebration of the rites of this element". The word (rapo^) ta- phos is fometimes ufed, in a large fenfe, for a hillock; but it was, fays Mr. Bryant, in- terpreted by the Greeks a tomb\ And, a- dopting it in this limited fenfe, " they for- ut ibidem in memoriam defun&i quotannis facra pera- gantur. See Borlafe, p. 227, 229, 230. a Bryant, Mythol. v. i. p. 466. b P. 456. P. 467. "P. 453, 45'- " med 364 Worftrip of human Spirits < med a notion of their gods having been " buried in every place where there was a " tumulus to their honour" 6 . According to our author, tap&os, taph, or tupb, feems to have been a word current 'in many countries*. Now, might it not denote a fepulchral mound in other na- tions as well as in Greece ? That it was mifinterpreted by the Greeks, and by them alone, is a point which has not been proved, and ought not to be taken for granted. Befides, how improbable is it, that they fhould adopt this term into their own language without learning the meaning of it, efpecially as it was in fuch common ufe in the nations around them ? Our author affirms, that the practice of railing the taphoi, or mounds, in queftion, was tranfmitted from the Egyptians into Greece g ; and that many of them were raifed^ in different parts of that country by the Amonians h . Now if neither any inftruc"lion in the meaning of the term, nor even famples of the *P.453- f P.449,450. 88173111,0.467. b P-45 1 - thing in the ancient heathen World. 365 thing intended by it, could enable the Greeks to underftand it, though the plained in all their language, their ftu- pidity is without a parallel, and difcove- red itfelf on more fubjecls than the names of the foreign gods '. After all, if the Greeks were miftaken, in fuppo- fmg that the gods had been buried in the places where there were tumuli to their honour, they could not have fallen into fuch a miftake, if they had not firil learned, (from the Egyptians, Amo- nians, and others,) that the gods had been men. If we only confider the nature of the cromlechs, we fhall foon be con- vinced that they could not ferve as al- tars for facrifical fires ; becaufe no fire could be kindled upon them fufficient to confume the victim without fcorching the officiating prieft ; becaufe few, if a- ny, of them, could bear the intenfenefs of the facrifical fire j and becaufe the table- Hone of fome of them was fo very 1 See above, p. 331. &feq. gibbous, 366 Worfoip of human Spirits gibbous, that no pried could ftand on it, either to tend the fire or overfee the confumption of the vic~Km k . Their fize, and form, and quality, conclude equal- ly againft the notion of their being de- iigned for the celebration of the rites of fire. That the conical mounds of raifed earth were fepulchres, and the crom- lechs fepulchral tables or altars, on which oblations of food were made to the dead, cannot well be doubted by thofe who reflect, that the barrow was one of the moft ancient and common methods of interring the dead ' ; that the cromlechs are found upon 1 ", and of- ten furrounded with, barrows -, that the common people called them gravefanes* $ that k In proof of thefe poirfts, feeBorlafe, p. 226, 227. 1 Borlafe, p. 228. m Id. p. 229. On the hill Ridge, north of Pottifham, in Dorfet- fhire, is a cromlech, which ftands upon a tumulus, or barrow, and is called by the common people bell-ftone, that is, a grave-ftone . Helle fignifies fepulchrum. It is derived from kflan, to cover, or conceal j and therefore properly 'in the ancient heathen World. 367 that a fmall brook near this kind of mo- nument is called the ford of the graves ; that <e the area underneath the quoit is " very near the dimenfions of the hu- <e man body and every kind of farcopha- " gus of the ancients" p ; and, laftly, that underneath or near thefe monu- ments are found vaults, and human bones, and afhes q . It may be obferved, farther, that cir- cular monuments alfo, whether open or inclofed, were often fepulchral r $ and that fome of thefe circles were diflin- guifhedby a cromlech 8 , which certainly was an appendage to fepulchres. Such monuments, according to Mr. Borlafe', are found not only in Britain, and in the adjacent ifles, but in Ireland, France, properly exprefles tbegra*ve, that common covering, or concealment, of mankind. In the weft of England, a tiler is ftill called hellier, which is derived from the fame verb as belle. See the Hiftory and Antiq. of Dorfet, by the Rev. Mr. J. Hutchins, v. i. p. 554. Borlafe, p. 228. P Borlafe, p. 228. * P. 227, 229. Seealfo p. 193. * Id. p. 209. . P. 193. ' P. 193, 225. Germany, 368 Worjhlp of human Spirits Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and other countries. And Mr. Bryant" himfelf has proved, from Paufanias and Strabo, what might be more fully confirmed, that the Greeks had many facred mounds of earth, and monuments, which they (who certainly were the mofl competent judges) regarded as the tombs of depar- ted heroes. It is natural to fuppofe, that thofe conical mounds alfo, which have been found in Egypt, in Perfia, at Troas, and other places, and are taken notice of by Mr. Bryant w , were in like manner receptacles of the dead, notwithflanding what has been advanced to the contrary*. Clemens V.i. p. 45 1, 465, 466. w V. i. p. 449, 461-464, 466-469. * According to Mr. Bryant's conltruclion oftapb and ta- f/jos, p. 449, taph-OJirif muft denote the hill, or high al- tar, of Oiiris. But, all that can be hence inferred is, that this altar, or hill, was*confecrated to Ofiris, or that he was an object of religious worfhip ; which he might be, and certainly was, notwithflanding his having been a man. Accordingly, the Greeks, who derived all their know- ledge of dins* from the Egyptians, and without doubt adopted their idea of him, the Greeks by tapb Ojiris underftood 'in the ancient heathen World. 369 Clemens Alexandrinus informs us, that the places of fepulture 'which the Heathens wor/hippedwerc too numerous to be counted*. underitood the burying-place of the god Ofiris, (Plu- tarch's If. & Ofir. p. 359.) as the gentleman himfelf allows, p. 451, 4614 He lays great ftrefs upon the cafe of the Perfians, whom he reprefents, p. 466, 467, as adhering to the purer zaba'ifm, erefting the fame facred tupha as thd Grecians, dedicating them to Anait, the great fountain of light, and founding a kind of temple, of a comical figure, in honour of Anait, Omanus, and Anandrates. But it has been fhewn, that the Perfians worfhipped dead men, (fee above, ch. i. fed. i. p. 47. & feq. and below, fedl. 2. article 4. n i .) and that Anait, Oma- nus, and Anandrates, were nothing more than the tu- telary deities of Perfia, (fee above, p. 68-72.) As to the Perfians raifing a temple to them, and efpecially one that fo much refembled a tomb, it is rather a proof than a refutation of their humanity. It feems indeed to have been a kind of honorary tomb, (fee above, p. 327 & feq.) and was erected to teflify their devotion to thefe gods, to whom they afcribed their victory over the Sacse. Strabo, 1. n, p. 779. And, as our author admits that the Helladians and the Perfians were of the fame family, and had many fimilar rites, the tupha were certainly raifed by both with the fame view. ijt*oj ptv o { a* *gxn? ^8os. Clem. Alexandr. Cohort, ad Gent. p. 40. B b From Worjhlp of human Spirits From the facts that have been flated we may infer the general prevalence of the worfhip of human fpirits over the heathen world. All fepulchres, even thofe of private perfons, were places where divine honours were paid to the manes of the dead. Thofe tumuli and cromlechs, which have been reprefented merely as altars, were alfo the tombs and monuments of gods, and heroes, and other great men. The monuments were probably of Celtic origin, and were carried by that numerous people into all their fettlements y . Both the facred mounds and monuments are found in all countries. Their ufe was in all the fame ; and was fo obvious that it could not be miftaken. As to the Heathens worfhipping dead men at the geftibule of the cbarnel-houfe 3 which feems fo incredible to a learned writer*, the reafon of it, which was promifed to be affigned, is exceeding ob- 7 Borlafe, p. 225. * Bryant, v. i. p. 452. vious. in the ancient heathen World. 371 vious. Even the philofophers* maintain- ed, that the fouls of the deceafed prefer- ved an affection for their former bodies, and hovered about them, or the places where they were buried b . The fame opinion formed a part of the creed of the vulgar, and entered into the religion of the ftate e . B b 2 Now 8 See Macrobius, in Som. Scip. 1. i. c. 9. p. 35. c. 13. p. 45. K 2. c. 16. p. 125. ed. Londini, 1694.. Porphyr. de Abftinent. 1. 2. . 47. Pato ap. Origcn. c. Celf. p. 97. b The wandering fouls of thofe who were unbufied returned to the reft of the grave after the rites of fe- pulture were performed. Rite ergo reddita legitima fepultura, redit anima ad quietem fepulchri. Servius on Virg. JEn. III. 68. c Ita plane ; quemadmodum vulgus exifcimat, mor- tuorum animas circa tumulos et corporum fuorum reli- quias oberrare. La&ant. 1. 2. c. 2. p. 117, The Common perfuafion was, that ghofts were capable of feeling preffure from the earth that covered their bo- dies ; as appears from the cuftom of praying that the earth might lie light or prefs heavy upon them, as the petitioners were well or ill affe&ed towards the deceafed. Potter's Gr. Antiq. v. 2. b. 4. c. 7. p. 243. The general practice of confulting, fupplicating, and ap- peafing, the gods at their tombs, plainly fuppofes their dwelling there. " It may be objected, that emi- nent 372 Worfhip of human Spirits Now what could be more natural than for the Heathens, who worlhipped human fouls, to do it in the places where they were thought to refide ? Nor did they feel the difficulty with which our author was affected : for they paid di- vine honours to the carcaffes d , the bones % and afhes f , of men deceafed, nent men were thought to return at death to their native fky. The Heathens faw the difficulty, and attempted to folve it, by aflerting, that man was compounded of three (if not more) parts ; body, mind, and foul. The firft was committed to the grave ; the fecund either afcended into heaven or defcended into the lower re- gions ; the third remained near the fepulchre. Thofe who divided man into four parts remitted the manes to Orcus. Proofs of this point may be produced here- after. I fhall only here obferve, that, when Hercules was in heaven, (Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. 3. c. 16.) Ulyf- fes met his t\$iahw in the fhades below. Odyff. 1. xi. 600. d See above, p. 165, note x . x ' OfTa tibi juro per matris, et offaparentis. Propertius, 1. II. eleg. 20. v. 15. f Virg. &T\. III. 303. cited above, p. 329, note k . Cineribus hie locus facer was an infcription on a ftone at Rome. Guther. de Jure Manium, 1. 2. c. 19. and in the ancient heathen World. 373 and even to their very coffins 8 and fe- pulchres h ; notwithstanding their being moft unequivocal proofs of the mortal origin of their gods. II. The heathen TEMPLES were places of fepulture, and defigned as man- lions for fuch gods as had been men. Fond as the dead were fuppofed to be of their tombs and the adjacent places, the Heathens feem to have been appre- henfive that they might occafionally wander from them, or perhaps totally defert them, after the diflblution of their bodies. And therefore, the more effectu- ally to fecure their perpetual refidence, or at leaft to render it more agreeable, they raifed, over or near their fepulchres, houfes, or palaces, called temples., an- fwerable to the magnificence of their former condition ; and fupplied them with every thing that could gratify their 8 The Athenians received the coffin of Thefeus with pompous proceffions and facrifices ; iropwaui; rt ^ot^ie^a.^ tott-etrro y.a.\. 9t>nas. Plutarchi Thefeus, p. 17, & Divert on Mir. p. 191, note ". B b 3 defires. 374 Worjhip of human Spirits defires 1 . Thefe temples were confidered as the proper habitations* of the gods to whom they were dedicated : a circum- flance which demonftrates that they were not erected to the fun, moon, ftars, and elements j for whofe reception and ac- commodation they were no way adapt- ed. On the other hand, they corref- ponded entirely to the opinion entertain- ed of deified men, who preferved, as will be hereafter fhewn, all their former difpofitions, and whofe pride, confequent- ly, was highly flattered by fumptuous * See under article VI. k The Heathens called their temples T? xXu<; y.xt 70. tot &*>. Vid. Selden. de Synedr. 1. 3. c. 14. They applied to them the terms oix.ot & ^o*. Spencer de Leg. Heb. Rit. p. 891. Templum, inquit, hoc Martis eft, hoc Junonis, quid eft aliud dicere, quam domus haec Martis eft, hoec Junonis? &c. Arnobius, 1. 6. p. 191. Origen reprefents the heathen demons as taking up their ne/idence in temples and images, either from choice or through the allurement of magical rites ; and fpeaks of the heathen temples as the places where were 3i//,o ? ^s^o. Origen c. Celf. 1. 3. p. 131. He is fpeaking of deified men, whofe fouls the Gentiles called demons. Aon^tova? y.tv raj T&TUV 4' t 'X a ? jtaABrrsj. Clem. Alexandr. Strom. 1. 6. p. 755. palaces, in the ancient heathen World. -375 palaces, and all the attendance, and Hate, and pomp,- of royalty. Accordingly the early Chriftians, and Clemens Alexandrinus in particular, af- firmed, that the buildings, which the Heathens called by the honourable* name of temples, were in reality nothing elfe but the fepulchres of dead men l ; and that they placed their coffins in ma- ny of their temples as fo many flatues of their gods m . Eufebius n entertained the fame opinion of their temples as Cle- mens. Cyril alfo, and St. Auftin p , and Prudentius q , and other Chriftian wri- TS7E$-> TKJ Tfa; VEW? 7rx6KX!|w,>a$. Cohort, ad Gent. p. 39. ed. Potteri. See alfo p. 40, 74. . Stromat. 1.6. p. 755. . Ev. 1. 2. C. 6. He T Cyril. Alexandr. contra Julian. 1. 10. p. 342, 343. P Auguft. deCiv. Dei, 1.8. c. 26. 1. 18. c. 5. 1 Et tot templa deum Romae, quot in urbe fepulchra Heroum, numerare licet. Prudentius ad Symmachum, 1. I. B b 4 ters, 376 Worjhip of bum an Spirits ters, reprefent the heathen temples as places of fepulture. Arnobius not only fpeaks of them in the fame view r , but, in a paflage produced above, tells the Gentiles, that all the gods they had in their temples bad been men*. The language of the Heathens on the fubject before us agrees with that of the ancient Chriftians. Hermes Trifmegii- tus is reprefented as forefeeing, that, e- ven in Egypt, the temples of the gods would be filled with the tombs of the dead*. And Sanchoniathon relates, that the Egyptians, and other ancient nations, transferred, to the deified benefactors of the human race, the temples which * Quid? quod multa ex his templa, quae tholis funt aureis et fublimibus elata veftigiis, au&orum confcrip- tionibus comprobatur contegere cineres atque ofTa, et funftorum effe corporum fepulturas. Arnob. adv. Gent. P- 193- * P- 345- t Hermes ipfe, quafifutura praenunciando, deplo- rans ait: Tune terra ifta fanftiffima (fc.^Egyptus) fedes delubrorum atque templorum, fepulchrorum erit mor- tuorumque pleniffima. Ap. Angufl. Civ. Dei, 1. 8. c. 26. had in the ancient heathen World. 377 had been erected to the elements and planets". There are many facts on record which confirm the point we have been endeavouring to eftablifh. Temples were every where raifed to the gods of the higher order, whom we have already proved to be mere mortals. Vulcan, whofe own temple was at Memphis, e- rected feveral temples to his wife, who became the^ Cyfria and the dea Syria*. The u Et{ TO xgtuv xararai'Ta? >a? /x.ETao - jjt;ao > a//.voi. Ap. Eufeb. Prxp. Ev. 1. i. p. 32. D. This paflage and that in the preceding note imply, that temples had been ere&ed to other gods before men were wormipped in them. But, as the word temple was often ufed in a large fenfe, for a place confecratedto the gods, thefe paf- fages are very reconcileable with the opinion of thofe who think temples, properly fo called, were, from the firft, fepulchral monuments. w Newton's Chronology, p. 224, 225. As theHea-. thens erefted many temples as well as tombs to the fame god, and fuppofed him to be perfonally prefentin each, they mufthave afcribed to human fpirits a kind of ubi- quity ; in the fame manner as the Romanifts do in offer- ing prayers to the fame faint, in the fame inftant of 'fime, in every part of the world. Such was the doc- trine 378 Worfltp of human Spirits The Syrians worfhipped one of their queens, and ufed her fepulchre for a temple x . At Colchis there was a temple and a grove dedicated to Phrixus y . The bones of Protefilaus were depofited in a confecrated chapel 2 . Caflor and Pollux had temples erected to them not only at trine of Jerome; (adverf. Vigilantium, p. 42. ed. Parif. 1546.) Cumdiabolus et dsemones toto vagentur in orbe, et celeritate nimia ubique prafentes fint, mar- tyres poft cffufionem fanguinis fui area operientur in- clufi, et inde exire non poterint ? . * Juftin. 1. 36. c. 2. cited above, p. 204. The fe- pulchre is generally diftinguimed from the temple : Eft urbe egreffis tumulus, templumque vetuflum Defertae Cereris. Virg. jEn.II. 713. See alfo v. 742, and below, note z . y Above, t p. 1 20. z Ib. p. 121. Numerous inftances of perfons of high rank being buried within the precinfts of temples may be found in Clem. Alexandr. Cohort, ad Gent. p. 39. Arnob. p. 193. Cyril, contr. Julian, p. 342. I lhall only add, that Apries was buried in the fepulchre of his anceftors, erefted in the temple of Minerva. Herodotus, 1. 2. c. 169. The fame hiilorian fays of Amaiis, 1. 3. C. IO. Erapj T;<rt Tafnert T<n tv ?v )eu, raj as/To? oodb/A!<raTG. Sparta^ in the ancient heathen World. 379 Sparta, but at Athens 3 . And Maximus Tyrius, fpeakingof Egypt, fays, A god dies and is buried, and you arejhewn In the fame place his temple and his tomb*. Laftly, the reafon given by Herodotus for there being no temples in Perfia, viz. that their gods had not been men c a clear- ly fhews, that it was to fuch gods as had been men that thefe facred edifices were raifed in other countries. III. The PYRAMIDS were fepul- chral monuments and altars. The great pyramid" at Babylon was well known under the name of the tem- ple of Be/us, (the founder of the Babylo^ nian empire ;) which fufficiently fhews, that it was his fepulchral monument, and erected for his worfhip. The pyra- Theodoret (1. 8. Graecanicarum affeftionum) fays, x repei/a* sx E y%Kiicrciti. SUHVVTOU ita,^ aiirotf ugoi/ Sea, xa ra^oj SEB. Maxim. Tyr. DifTert. 38. p. 398. ed. Davif. Cantab. 1703. c Herodot. 1. i. c. 131. cited above, p. 48. . d See above, p. 194. mids 380 Worjhip of human Spirits raids built by Porfena, king of Etruria, near Clufium, and by Caeflius, at Rome, were alfo the fepulchres and monuments of the dead e . And, as thefe were imita- tions of thofe in Egypt, it is natural to fuppofe that both had the fame inten- tion. But, as fome will not allow that the Egyptian pyramids, more celebrated than any other, were places of fepul- ture, I fhall fubmit the following obfer- vations to the judgement of the reader. It was cuftomary with the ancients to raife mounds of an immenfe magnitude upon the graves of their monarchs and other perfons of great dirtincl:ion f . The Egyptians 8 , in particular, though not very Greave's Defcription of the Pyramids, p. 64, Univ. Hift. v. i. p. 430. 8vo, 1747. ( The mount raifed over Ninus was faid to be nine furlongs in height and ten in breadth. Ctefias ap. Diodor. Sic. 1. 2. p. 120. ed. Weffeling. The monu- ment of Hephasftion coft twelve thoufand talents. Juftin. 1. 12, c. 12. See Borlafe's Antiq. of Cornw. p. 218. s Et regum cineres exftru&o monte quiefcant. Lu- can. 1. 8. v. 695. Concerning the wonderful fepul- chres 'in the ancient heathen World. 381 very curious in building their houfes, as being but temporary habitations, ex- ceeded all imaginable magnificence in their fepulchres, confidering them as their eternal manfons*. They feem to have believed, that, as long as the body lafted, fo long the foul was prefent with it. It is natural, therefore, to fuppofe, that their attention would be very much employed in preferving the former from corruption, and in accommodating both with a durable habitation. Accordingly, the moft ancient and credible hiflorians reprefentthe pyramids as royal fepulchres. From Herodotus we learn, that the body of Cheops l was depofited under the pyramid which he himfelf had built k ; that his fon and chres of -the ancient kings of Egypt fee Diodor. Sic. 1. 2. p. 56, 57. h Tapsj ai'&as oxf ffgoo-ayogivatrw. Diodor. Sic. I. 1. p. 60, 61. 1 By Diodorus he is called Chemnis, 1. i. p. 72. k Herodot. 1.2. c. 124-127. In this pyramid there .(lands a tomb at this day. Univerfal Hift. v. i. p. 429, 438. daughter 3 82 Worjhlp of human Spirits daughter did each of them imitate their father in building a pyramid ! , (no doubt with the fame intention ;) that Afychis erected a pyramid of brick fop his mo- nument m ; and that the labyrinth, near the lake Mceris, a flrucTiure much more admirable even than the pyramids, con- tained the fepulchres of the kings who built it, and of the holy crocodiles". Strabo, fpeaking of the top of a moun- tain near Memphis, fays, that all the pyramids upon it were royal fepulchres . And Diodorus Siculus informs us, that the two pyramids, built by Chemnis and Cephres, werq by them defigned for their own fepulchres, though both were buried in other places p . To thefe tefti- monies 1 Herodot. ubi fupra. m Id. ib. c. 136. h Ib. c. 149. IIoXXoM j/.st 'iiv^a.M^t^ E(i7t, T*OJ Ttav @Fk}.eur, StlVi- bo, 1. 17, p. 1161. P Tut <h fatcnAewv tuv xT 'et&y.evffoiTur O.VTX/; eeivron; Diodor. Sic. 1. I. p. 73. But, though it fo fell out that neither of thefe kings was buried in the pyramid he in tie ancient heathen World. 383 monies I might add thofe of Lucan q , Statius', and Clemens Alexandrinus ' ; as alfo thofe of the Arabs, Copts, and Sabians* -, were they wanted in fo plain a cafe". The he erected, neverthelefs both the edifices might be ufcd as altars for their worfhip. As the afh.es of Germani- cus were carried through the cities of Italy, Tacitus fays, (Annal. 1. 3. c. 2.) Etiam quorum diverfa oppi- da, tamen obvii, et viftimas atque aras diis manibua ftatuentes, lacrimis et conclamationibus dolorem tefta- bantur, See what was obferved above concerning hono- rary tombs, p. 327 & feq. i Cum Ptolemsorum manes, feriemque pudendam, Pyramides claudant, indignaque maufolea. L. 8. v. 698. Pyramidum tumulis evnlfus Amafis. Id. 1. g. v. 155. Compare Pliny, Nat. Hift. 1. 36. p. 738. torn. 2. ed. Harduin. Atque utinam, Fortuna, dares mihi manibus aras, Par templis opus, aeriamque educere molem, Cyclopum fcopulos ultra, atque audacia faxa Pyramidum, et magno tumulum praitexere luco. Stat. Sylv. v. 3. 47. 9 Cohort, ad Gent. p. 44. ed. Potteri. 1 Univer. Hift. v. I. p. 427. See p. 445. See Dr. Pococke's account of the pyramids, Ob- fervations on Egypt, v. i. p. 40-67. Dr. Shaw (Tra- vels, p. 418, ift ed.) objedls againft the pyramids of Cepbren&s 3 84 Worjhip of human Spirits The pyramids were not only places of fepulture, but of religious worfhip. They were commonly called the co- lumns or altars of the gods w . On the top there was a platform*, where the facred rites might be celebrated ; and they were furrounded with buildings, which pro- bably were colleges for the priefls y . That the pyramids were altars is a point which cannot be difputed j but it is no juft inference from hence, that they were not alfo fepulchres. For altars were con- ftant appendages to the fepulchres of fuch Cfphrenes and Mycerinut being fepulchres, becaufe " no " paffage was left open into them as into the great py- " ramid." But the entrance into the great pyramid was at f.rft jbut up. Pococke, v. i. p. 234,240, 244. The cafe was probably the fame as to the other two. * See Kircher, (Oedipus vEgyptiacus, Syntag. iv. c. 12. p. 309, 310.) who cites feveral authorities to prove that the pyramids were altars, befides that line of the poet, Votaque pyramidum celfas folvuntur ad arasi The fteps, by which they afcended to the top, were called by fome gup&$, little altars. Herodot. 1. 2, c. 125. * Univ. Hift. ubi fupra, p. 432. y Id, ib. p. 440. men in the ancient heathen World. 385 men as were deified, if not of all other perfons z . They were fometimes placed upon the monument % which exactly anfwers to the cafe before us. In honour of the Grecian heroes, who fell in the defence of their country at Thermopylae, altars were ufed inftead of fepulchres b . Nay, funeral piles were conftrucled and deemed as altars . From the pyramids being altars, therefore, we may rather infer that they were alfo fepulchres than the contrary. Now, if they were royal fepulchres, monuments, and altars, they were certainly confecrated to the worfhip z Hence we read of the ara fepulchri, Virg. JEti. VI. 177. and of the arse fepulchrales, Ovid. Meta- morph; VIII. 480. See Virg. JEn. V. 47, 48. III. 305. Altars were fometimes only a heap of green turf: Araque gramineo viridi de cefpite fiat. Ovid. Trift. V. 9. And fuch altars were, it is probable, raifed at all graves. a In eo monumento folium porphyretici marmoris fuperftante Lunenfi ara. Sueton. Ner. c. 50. 5 Bupos ' o ra<po ? . Diodor. Sic. 1. xi. p. 412. eJ. Weffeling. c Pyra. qua; in modum ara: conftrui lignis folebat. Servius in Virg. JS,R. VI. 177- C c of 386 Worfoip of human Spirits of the Egyptian monarchs. At every common fepulchre, prayers, facrifices, and libations, were offered to the dead by the ancient nations : and, amongft the Egyptians in particular, as we have already feen, a temple and a tomb were creeled to the fame deity. The great height of the pyramids well agrees with the opinion of their being the fepulchral monuments and altars of the Egyptian monarchs. High columns and pyramids, over the tombs of perfons of the greateft diftinftion", correfponded to their former flate and dignity, and were defigned to announce their exaltation, after death, to the rank of the celeflial gods. Some * Servias, on Virg. JEn. XI. 489, fays, Apud ma- jores, nobiles, aut fub montibus altis, aut in ipfis mon- xtibus fepeliabantur ; unde natum eft, ut, fuper cada- vera, aut pyramides aut ingentes collocarentur colum- nse. See above, p. 380, note { . Concerning an ara fepulchri Virgil fays, ccelo educere certant. ^En. VI. 178. Every one knows that high altars were raifed to the celeftial gods, amongft whom we are to reckon fuch human gods as were fuppofed to be advanced to heaven. Jovi, omnibufque cceleltibus, excelfiffimar, (fc. arse) : Veftjc, in the ancient heathen "World. 3 87 Some writers, however, being defirous of difcovering, in every facred building and rite of the Heathens* an allufion to elementary and fidereal deities, have fancied, that the pyramids, refembling (as they allege) a riling flame, which from a broad bafe gradually leflens and terminates in a point % were fymbols of fire f 3 and hence have concluded, that they were confecrated to the fun g . Veftae, terrse,. marique humiles, in mediis aedibus conlK- tuerentur. Vitruv. 1. 4. c, 8. See Potter's Gr. Ant. VI. b. ii. ch.2.p.i;?8, 179. and below, p. 390, note . e Ad ignis fpeciem extenuatur in conum, Ammian. Marcellin. 1. 2.2. c. 15. p. 262. Some derive pyramid from the Greek word pur, fire. Others, who moro, properly look for the etymology of it in the Coptic lan- guage, derive it either from pourv, a king, and" mijl, a generation, (Univerf. Hift. ubi fupra, p. 425.) or from piromis, which, according to Herodotus, (1. 2. c. 143, 144.) denotes> in the language of Egypt, a worthy and Irave man. Perizon. ^Egypt. Orig. torn. i. p. 447* f Porphyr. ap. Eufeb. Prcep. Ev. 1.3. c.7- p. 98.0. Cones and obelifks, it is faid, were dedicated to the fun. Porphyr. ubi fupra. Hermatiles ap. Ter- tttllian. de fpeftaculis, c. 8. p. 76. ed. Rigalt. 1675. Plin. Hiit. Nat. 1. 36. c. 8. torn, 2. p. 735. ed. Har- duin. C c 2 But 3 88 Worfoip of human Spirits ~ But we are told, concerning the great pyramid, (what is probably true of the reft,) that it does not terminate in a point, as mathematical pyramids do, but in a flat, or fquare, confifting of e- leven large ftones h . The reafon, why they frequently made ufeof the pyramidal figure for thefe monuments, probably was it's being the moft permanent form offtructure 1 . However this may be, cer- tain it is in fact, that, though obelilks and pyramidal pillars might be originally confecrated to the elements k , they were afterwards creeled to fuch gods as had been men. Jupiter Meilichius, Juno, Apollo, Bacchus, Venus, and other de- ities of human origin, were worfhipped under the form of obeliiks and pyra- mids 1 . The mere figure, therefore, of the pyramids h Univ. Hift. p. 432. * Id. ib, p. 430. k According to Sanchoniathon, (ap. Eufeb. Prsp. Ev. 1. i. p. 35. A.) Uibus confecrated two columns to the iwWandyf/v. See above, note f . 1 Paufanias in Corinth, p. 132, 133. Maxim. Tyr. Diflert, 38. p. 401. ed. Davif. Clem. Alexandr. Stro- mat. In the ancient heathen World. pyramids of Egypt, creates no fort of pre- fumption that they were appropriated to the elements. And, even allowing them to have been intended as emblems of fire, in this view they well agree with the idea the ancients entertained of the fouls of their deified men, as originally taken from the igneous element in the heavenly- regions, and as being now returned to the celeftial luminaries, which were ima- gined to confift of fire m . But the objec- tion we are confidering was advanced, by fome of the heathen philofophers, mere- ly to throw a veil over that mocking ab- furdity, the worfhip of mortal gods, of which the pyramids furnifh the moft ftriking and lailing evidence. Not only were pyramids and temples, but, IV. The OTHER PLACES moflu- fually confecrated to the gods, in very an- mat. 1. i. p. 418. Scholiaft on the Vefpz of Arifto- phanes, v. 870. m Empedocles held m/giv* ttt ar?, (Plutarch. Placit. Philofoph. 1. 2. c. 13.) and fo did the ancients in ge- neral. Horace calls them igneas arces. C c 3 tient Worjbip of human Spirits tient times, were places of fepulture, where divine hounors were paid to the dead. This was the cafe more particularly with refpect to the caves, the houfes, the highways, the groves, and the mountains, where the gods were worfhipped. i . That, in the very early ages of the world, the Heathens paid their worfhip to the gods in caves and caverns, at the bottom of mountains and rocks, is a matter not fubject to difpute". The quef- tion here is, What gods were worfhip- ped in thefe places ? To which I anfwer, not the gods ftyledfupernal; becaufe they were worfhipped upon high altars , which were not fuited to a cave. The infernal gods, on the other hand, were * See Bryant's Mythol. v. i. p. 217 & feq. The caves, of which I here fpeak, are not to be confounded with the hollows and fifTures upon the tops of moun- tains and rocks, though the diftindtion between them has not been always attended to. Altaria ab altitudine di&a funt : quod antiqui diis fuperis in zedificiis a terra exaltatis facra faciebant. Pompon. Feftus. Schedius de diis German, p. 503. See above, p. 386. note rf . worfhipped 'in the ancient heathen World. 391 worfhipped without any altars, or upon very low ones p . To thefe gods, there- fore, it is reafonable to fuppofe, caves were appropriated'. Before men had furnifhed themfelves with more conve- nient habitations, they took fhelter in. caves and dens. Thefe were their dwel- lings while they lived, and their graves when they died r . And we have feen, that, wherever men were buried, there they were worfhipped. Confequently, caves being places of fepulture, they could not but be the fcenes where idola- ters worfhipped the dead. Indeed, what other gods were likely to refide in thofe repofitories of the dead but fuch as lay buried in them ? P Potter's Gr. Antiq.v. I. b. 2. c. 2. p. 178, 179. ^ Atque ut arae fuperis, ita antra erant diis inferi* deftinata. Tomafm. de Donariis veterum, c. 5. * Sepulchra fueruntolim veteribus, quz etiam antea domos przebuerunt, fpeltmca% Petit. Leg. Attic, p. 595. Bos (Antiq. of Greece, ch. 23. p. 426.) has &ewn that caves were fepulchres, C c 4 A 392 Worjhip of human Spirits A very learned writer* would perfuadc us, " that the reverence paid to caves " and grottos arofe from a notion, that (C they were a reprefentation of the world". And it muft be acknowledged, that this is the view given us of them by Porphy- ry*, in his treatife upon the grotto of the Nereids defcribed or invented by Homer 1 ? But Porphyry's explication of this grotto receives no fupport from Homer, and has been pronounced, by the mofl im^ partial and capable judges, a laboured and dijlant allegory*. It was, at beft, a mere fpeculation of the learned, remote from the conception and creed of the people : and therefore does not belong to our prefent fubjec~l. We are to pafs the fame judgement on what Porphyry fays, when he reprefents the Arcadians as Bryant, Mythol. v. I. p. 232. * Ei*oa pfonTOf <T7r;Xaty T xotr/xa. De Antro Nymph, P. 254. See alfop. 2^2, 262. 11 Odyff. 1. 13. v. 103. w Pope's Homer, in the note on v. 1 24. worfhipping m the ancient heathen World. 393 worfhipping the moon in caves'. He on- ly gives us his own phyfical ejfplication of (what was very different from it) the popular and civil theology. Nothing is fo likely to prevent us from forming juft Ideas of the eftablifhed religion of the Heathens as not conftantly diftinguifh- jng between that and the glories of the philofophers ; many of which were in- vented merely to fupport it's reputation, and were propagated with peculiar zeal after Chriflianity had raifed up new and powerful enemies againft it. It may be farther objected, that Mi- thras was worfhipped in a cave y , though, according to Hefychius 2 , Strabo", Sui- das b , and other writers, this Perfian de- ity was the fun. But Mithras, even fup- * Pbrphyr. d? Antoro Nyfiiph, p. 262, y Porphyr. de Antro Nymphar. p. 262. Bryant's Mythol. v.i. p. 217, 224. Kircher's Oedip. /Egypt. Syntag. 3. c. 7. p. 216. Statins, Theb. 1. I. v. 719. z In voc. M%*?, o *o? *r*?t flf<7-t{. * T^w<ri & x r,Xov, oc xef^aft M^. Strabo, 1. ^5. p. 1064. eti TO X*o. Suidas in VOC. pofing 394 Worjhlp of human Spirits pofing him to have been a man, might be put for the fun, as Apollo and Oliris were, though the former was one of the twelve greater gods, who were all natives of the earth, and the latter had been king of Egypt. It is not necefTary to in- quire here on what accounts' Mithras was put for the fun, though a human fpirit 5 but the idea of him here given is fupported by the authority of Statius, c Some human fouls were faid to be converted into celeftial luminaries. Diflert. on Mir. p. 214. note'. Sometimes the presiding demon was called by the name of the celeftial deity from whom he derived his autho- rity. Ib. p. 175, note 1 , p. 179, note f . Thofe, who confidered human figures as fymbols, fpoke of thofe fymbols as being the gods they reprefented. According to Julius Firmicus, the Perfians reprefented fire under the image of a man and woman : (Et niiri et fcemin<e Jimulacbra ignis fubjlantiam deputantes t p. 1 1 . ) Why then might not they reprefent the fun under a human figure? Thofe, who regarded Mithras as a fymbol of the fun, would call him by that name, though Mi- thras himfelf was the immediate objeft of worfhip to all, and to the people the fole object. who in the ancient heathen World. 395 who makes Apollo, Ofiris, and Mithras, to be one and the fame perfon d . That Mithras was not that aftrono- jnical body we call the fun appears from the accounts given of him by the an- tients. The Perfians, according to Xe- nophon, paid their worfhip to the fun upon the fummits of mountains': but Mithras was worfhipped in a cave, and therefore as one of the dii inferi. The fun, conlidered as a natural divinity, was, by the Heathens, thought to be eternal'. Mithras, on the other hand, according to the fabulous theogony of the Perfians, was born from a rock, and from that rock be- gat Diorphus g : a plain proof of their not ... Seu te rofeum Titana vocari Gentis Acheraeniae ritu, feu prasftatOfmn Frugiferum, feu Perfei fub rupibus antri Indignata fequi torquentem cornua Mitrara. Statius, Theb. I. 717. 3ee La&antius, as here cited, in Veenhufen's edition. e Xenophon, 1. viii. p. 233. f Diodorus Siculus, cited above, p. 308, note *. * Juftin. Martyr, cum Tryphone Dialog, p. 168. Mcntfauc. torn. I. p. 368. Borlafe, p. 145. confidering 396 Worjhip of human Spirits confideringhim as one of the natural gods.' Myfteries* were inftituted in honour of Mithras, and human facrtfict? were offered to him. Now both thefe circumftances, as will be (hewn in the fequel, are proofs of his being regarded as a human fpirit. Upon what ground could Tiridates fay, that he 'would worfhip Nero equally with Mithras*, if the latter had not been a man as well as the former ? There was a king of Egypt of the name of Me/tres, who reigned in Htliofdb's, or city of the fun\ and who is fuppofed by fome to be the fame with Mithras. Servius makes Mithras the fame as the younger Belus m . Both h Mention is made of his myfteries by Juftin Martyr in the place referred to in the preceding note, and many other writers. See Schedius de Diis German, p. 147, note **. * See Hyde, Rel.vet. Perf. p. 112. Ml. Lampr. in Commodo. Sacra Mithriaca homicidio vero polluit, k Eumperinde ac Mithrara fe adoraturum pronun- ciavit. Hyde, c. 4. p. 112. 1 Pliny, Nat. Hift. 1.36. c. 14. p. 735. ed. Harduin. m Belus minor, qui et Mithres. Servius on ./En. J. 646. The Perfians might receive his worlhip from the A/Tynans, in tie ancient heathen World. 397 Both thefe opinions fuppofe him to have been a man". I cannot conclude this head without obferving, that, according to Mr. Bry- ant , moft of the temples amongft the Perfians were caverns in rocks. Now, according to Hyde p and others, certain fa- cred grottos, hewn out of a rock, were tombs. Le Bruyn q likewife, and Theve- not q , confidered them as places of burial. It is probable therefore that the Periian temples were both temples and tombs ; Aflyrians, as they did that of Venus Urania. Hero- dot. 1. i. c. 131. II It may reconcile fome to this opinion to be inform- ed, that it was holden by fo eminent a writer as Mo- meim. He has fupported it by a train of reafoning dif- ferent from that here ufed, to which I refer the reader. See Mofheim's Latin tranflation of Cudworth, torn. I. p. 421, in the note, which is abridged by the learned Brucker, Hift. Critic. Philofoph. torn. I. p. 169, 170. Moiheim confidered Oromafdes andArimanius as being of human origin. According to Plutarch, Mithras was a mediator, or middle god, between them. If. & Ofir. p. 3 6 9- E - Mythol. v.i. p. 222, 223. P Rel. vet. Perf. c. 23. Bryant, p. 222. % Ap. Bryant, p. 224, 225. 398 Worjhip of human Spirits and confequently the gods, worfhipped in them, were departed heroes. This very much confirms what was advanced above 1 ", concerning the objects of wor- Ihip in Perfia. 2. When men quitted dens and caves, and, for their better accommodation, built houfeS) thefe became places of fe~ Jmlture, and confequently the fcenes of the parentalia, or of thofe divine ho- nours which the family paid to the ma ties of their anceflors 8 . Every one knows that the fire-hearths were facred to the houfehold-gods*, the dii penates^ or Ia~ res, the founders and guardians of the family. 3. Afterwards men were buried by the fides of high-ways" ; and then we read of * Ch. i. fehi. p. 47, &feq. * Apud majores, omnes in fuis domibus fepeliebaii* tur. Unde ortum eft ut lares colerentur in domibus. Servius on yn. VI. 152. See him alfo on V. 64. t See Plutarch, Vit. Alexand. p. 696. A. Comp Vit. Coriolan. p. 224. D. u SeeBos's Antiq. of Greece, ch. 23. p. 425. Pau- ftnias takes notice of the temples and fepulchres on the high-ways. in the ancient heathen World. of the lares wales, who were the ghofts of good men w ; of whom the traveller afked a profperous journey*, and whofe monuments were defigned to remind him of his own mortality 7 . Thefe manes were thought to be highly pleafed with the addrefles of the pafTengers, which was one reafon why the dead were bu- ried by the high-ways 2 . 4. Groves are frequently fpoken of, in the hiftory of all mankind, as places of religious worfhip. As fuch they were uied by the fervants of the true God", high- ways. Kara raj O^BJ er* re<a, xai yfvuv xa avJgwv raipoi. Attic. 1. I. C. 29. p. 70. w Manes piorum, qui lares viales funt. Servius on ^En. III. 302. * Invoco vos, lares viales, ut me bene juvetis* Plautus, Merc. v. a. y Monumenta a monendo quse funt in fepulchris. Et ideofecundum viam, quo praetereuntes admoneant et fe fuifle, et illos &ffe, mortales. Varro de Lingua Latina, 1. v. Moreftelli Pompa feralis, 1. 3. c. 12. ap. Gixv. torn. 12. p. 1414. * See Gather de Jure Manium, 1. a. 0.13. Grstv, ib. p. 1191. * Gen. 13. 18. ck, 21. 23. perhaps 4oo fflorfoip of human Spiritt perhaps on account of their folitude and folemnity, and the protection they af- forded from the fcorching heat of the fun, which was a great recommendation of them in hot climates. The Heathens creeled temples 5 and altars, and perfor- med the feveral rites of idolatry, in thick woods, which flruck the wormip- pers with awe, and gave the priefls art opportunity of carrying on their impof- tures. The groves and trees were confe- crated to particular divinities 6 , called by their names' 1 , and worfhipped e as their b Groves themfelves are fometimes fpokenof as tdm- ples, and were perhaps the molt antient ones. c Arborum genera numinibus fuis dicata perpetual fervantur. Pliny, Nat. Hift. 1. 12* c. 1. d Lucos ac nemora confecrant, deorumque nomiriI- bus appellant fecretum illud, quod fola reverentia vi- dent. Tacit, de Mor. Germ. c. $. e Sanchoniathon fays, (ap. Eufeb. Praep. Ev. 1. ii C. 1O. p. 34. B.) They confecrated the productions of the earth, tailed them gods, and wor/hipped them. Trees were addreffed as intelligent beings, and in the very fame ftyle as the gods themfelves to whom they were confecrated. Hsec facrata quercus, etquicquiddeorum^ ttudiat fcedus z vobis ruptum. Liv. L 3,. ; 25. fymbols in the ancient heathen World. 40 r fymbols and reprefentatives, or as having their refpec~live gods belonging to them. But the fingle queftion before us here is, Who the gods themfelves were whom the Heathens worfhipped in groves ? Now there is fcarce any point, in which the ancients are more generally agreed^ than they are in reprefenting facred groves as places of fepulture f , dedicated to the worfhip of hero-gods. Servius af- ierts, that the groves were confidered as the dwellings of the fouls of heroes 2 . Cicero appeals to the Alban tombs, and groves, and altars' 1 . And many inflances f Mortuorum fepulchra erant fubartnribus, lucifque circumfepta. La Cerda, ad ^En. VI. 763. It was a law amongft the antient Etrufcans, Si quis fepulckrunt proprium non ba&uerit, in nemorofa Jylva fepeliatur. E- tru-fc. Fragm. 1.3. p. 176. See Gen. 35. 8* 2 Kings 23. 15, 16. s Dicuntur heroum animaj lucbs tenere. Servius on ./En. I. 445. Lucum nunquam ponit Virgilius Jine.re- ligione : namque in ipfis habitant manes piorum. Id. on JEn. III. 302. h Vos, Albani tumuli atqueluci, vos, inquani, im- ploro atque ohteftor, vofque, Albanorum obrutae arse. Orat. pro Milone, c. 31. D d are 402 Worfhlp of human Spirits are on record of the dedication of woods, together with priefts and altars, to the fpirits of deified men and women 1 . Au- guftus confecrated one of thefe places to the dii manes* in general. Groves were coniidered as the habita- tions 1 of the gods, as we are expreffly in- formed, and might have inferred from their being the places of their burial. But they neither were, not could be, coniidered as the habitations of the fun," moon, and ftars, though they were a- dapted to the ideas the Gentiles had form- ed of the terreftrial gods. The fhade and coolnefs of groves'", the uncommon lof- 1 To Anchifes, Virg. JEn. V. 760. To Juno, I. 445. To Heftor, III. 302. To Egeria, who was the wife of Nuraa, Ovid.Fafti, III. 262-276. See Virg. -ffin.IX. 3, 4. &VII. 171. k Boiffard. Tcpogr. torn. I. p. 50. 1 Numen inert. Ovid. Fafti, III. 295. Habitat dens* Virg. ^En. VIII. 352. See^En. VI. 673. Ovid, Am. 1. 3. el. I. I. Lucan, III. 423 & feq. Seneca, ep. 41. m Lastiffimus umbra. Virg. JEn.I. 445. tinefs in the ancient heathen World. 403 tinefs and beauty of the trees" that com- pofed them, the fountains within them, or the rivers * that ran out of them, were intended and fuppofed to render them an agreeable abode to the dead*, having been the objects of their delight when living. Hence Virgil defcribes de- parted heroes as. faying', ; .. Unfettled, we remove, As pleafure calls, from verdant grove to grove ; Stretch'd on the flow'ry meads, at eafe, we lie, And hear the filver rills run bubbling by. Pitt. n The temple of Mercury had (&ogsa ga<y*i}y.a) frees that reached up to heaven, according to Herodotus, 1.2. c. 138. The grove of Neptune had trees <ita,n<S.<xa. HOMO? K\]/OJ T iai/xonwii. Platon. Critias, torn. 3. p. 117. ed. Serran. K* (Sri/Aon Kwf'ffctre tx a^tm Sij^ijEfT*, Ayx<> fiahn xg'i"?j fijAAoy. Homer. Hymn, in Apoll. See Horat. Art. poet. v. 16. P See Paufanias, Corinth, p. 198. 3 Nemora enim aptabant fepulchris ; ut in amoenitate animae forent poft vitam. Servius on Virg. ^n. V. 760. r Nulli certa domus. Lucis habitamus opacis, Riparumque'toros, et prata recentia rivis Incolimus. JEn. VI. 673. D d 2 c. 404 Worfhlp of human Spirits 5. Amongft the places confecrated to the heathen gods I muil not omit to mention the fummits of mountains*, whether formed by nature or conftrufted by art 1 . It has been imagined by fome, that thefe places were appropriated to the natural gods. But the miftake is owing to their not diftinguifhing between the natural gods and thofe ftyled celeftial. Under the latter are comprehended fuch men as were thought to have afcended into heaven, of whom Jupiter was the chief. To him every mountain was ef- teemed facred, according to Melanthes . If the reader be ignorant of the antient cuftom of worfhipping upon mountains, he may confult Paufanias, P- 1 7S 1 9^> 1 97> 892. Virg. ^En. V. 760. Potter, Gr. Antiq. v. 1. p. 179. v. 2. p. 238, 239. Freytag. de facris Gentium Montibus. Bryant's Myth. v. I. p. 119, 235, & feq. Sched. de Diis Germ. p. 502. Le Clerc and Patrick on Levit. xxvi. 30. * As to artificial mounts, fee above, p. 380, notes f , *, andGibbons'sHiftory, v. 3. p. 83. u De Sacrifices. TLuv & ego; ra A<oj 0^05 oto^a^sru^ Potter, v.i. p. 179. Bryant, v. i. p. 238, Kings in the ancient heathen World. 405 Kings and great men were buried up- on mountain s w , (though fometimes at the feet of them*. ) The places of their burial, in which they were thought to refide, were certainly the fcenes of their worfhip, agreeably to the conftant cuftom of an- tiquity, Accordingly we find, that facri- fices were offered to the dead, and their ghofls confulted, upon mountains 5 ". The reafon affigned by the Gentiles, for worfhipping the gods on thefe elevated fituations, determines who they were. Hills and mountains, they faid, brought men nearer to the gods, and thereby pro- cured for them the advantage of being better heard 2 : a reafon not at all adapted D d 3 to v Deut. xxxii. 50. Jolh. xxiv. 30, 33. See the next note. * - Fuit ingens monte fub alto Regis Dercenni terreno ex aggere buftum. JEn.XI. 849. Apud majores, nobiles, aut fub montibus altis, aut in ipfis montibus, fepeliebantur. Servius inloc, ' y See Spencer deLeg. Hebr. p. 382. z Tuv t>oX ay%o$6 wai'iw*, fc. ot $eoi. Lucian. de Syj. Dea, p. 672. ed. Amltel. This is the reafon affigned 40 6 Worjhip of human Spirits to the idea entertained of the natural gods : not of the air around them ; nei- ther of the earth nor fea beneath them 5 nor even of the fun above them, becaufe they conceived of that glorious luminary as feeing and hearing all things*. But, as to the gods taken from amongft men, whom they might naturally imagine to be incapable of hearing at a great dif- tance, it could not but be judged necef- fary to get as near to them as poffible, for the fake of being heard in their reli- gious addrefTes. It is probably for the fame reafon, that the modern Italians, like the idolaters of old times, choofe to affigned for worfliipping the gods upon mountains by the Syrians. That the common opinion of the gods was the fame with theirs appears from the following cenfure of it : Non exorandus eft asdituus, ut nos ad aures fi- mulachri, quafi magis exaudiri poffimus, admittat, Senec. ep. 41. p. 453, ed. Lipui. The Getes muft have thought their god quite out of the reach of hear- ing, even from the higheft mountain ; for they fent a meffenger to him every year to inform him of their wants. Herodot. 1. 4. c. 94. Horn. II. III. 277. worfhip in the ancient heathen World. 407 worfhip their faints upon high places b . I fhall only add, that the gods were fup- pofed to be highly delighted with emi- nences or mountains'; and thefe fitua- tions were rendered flill more agreeable to them, by temples, and groves, and fprings, and whatever elfe could gratify human ghofts that preferved all the dif- pofitions of their former Hate. To fuch ghofls, therefore, the worfhip upon high places was directed*. I have now (hewn to what gods divine honours were paid, at fepulchres, in temples, in pyramids, in caves, in hou- b Sharp's Letters from Italy, p. 305. c The Grecian Jupiter is thus defcribed : Atr5 ^ iv xogf^ijc-* xaSc^eTo xv5Vi yctiuv. Hom. II. VIII. C I. The pleafure the gods take in high places is given as the reafon of conftru&ing temples upon them in Japan. Kaemfer, Hiftory of Japan, v. 2. b. 5. 0.3. p. 417. Bryant, v. I. p. 238. d I acknowledge, that thofe, who thought the Per- iians and others worshipped only the natural gods, re- prejent them as performing that worfhip upon moun- tains : but, if we allow the faft, that the Perfians wor- fhipped only the natural -gods, they muft, in worfhipping them upon mountains, haveafted upon principles diffe- rent from thole Hated above. But the fact itfelf is dif- D d 4 fes, 40 8 WorJJoip of human Spirits fes, by the fide of high- ways, in groves, and upon mountains. Thefe were the places moft ufually confecrated to the gods in ancient times ; and they in a manner include all the reft. And, as in all the fore-mentioned places deified men and women were worfhipped, the prece- ding induction of particulars abundantly demonftrates the general prevalence of that worfhip over the heathen world. V. The STATUES and IMAGES of the gods, in human form, were re- prefentations of deified men and women. In the rude ages of antiquity, uncar^ ved ftones and pillars, boughs alfo and flumps of trees, and other pie- ces of wood, were confecrated to the gods e j to thofe flyled natural, as fome maintain, e Clem. Alexandr. Stromat. I. i, p. 418. Maxim. Tyr. Diflert. 38. p. 401. ed. Davif. Herodian. 1. 5. c. 5. Tacit. Hift. 1. 2. c. 3. Chron. Alexandr. p. 89. Schedius de Diis German, p- 505. Clemens Alexandrinus (in Cohort, ad Gentes, p. 40.) fays, O< wXKmot &'Jha, tcgvcvro irs^tyu.v'i), xai xwaj Q,ui hominum erant antiquiores UgHo. rigebant 'in the ancient heathen World. 409 maintain f , and certainly to thofe who had their original from mortality 8 . But thefe things were not defigned as refem- blances, but merely as figns and fynv- erigebant infignia, et columnas ponebant ex lapidilus. Many particular examples of both may be found in the places here referred to. f Sanchoniathon referred to above, p, 388, note fc , is fpeaking of the moft antient times. Of thofe times Maimonides alfo fpeaks, when he fays, Zabiierexerunt ftellis imagines. Mor. Nevoch. pars III. c. 29. p. 423. Mede however was of opinion, that both pillars and images were, by original inftitution, peculiar to de- jnons, though, through fome confufion, they were af- terwards alcribed to other deities. Works, p. 632. The miftake, if it was one, might be owing to their referring to the ftars themfelves the worfhip paid to the demons, or deified human fpirits, that were fuppofed to inhabit them. No miftake will appear more natural, if you confider how often a ftar and it's prrfiding de- jnon, or the ultimate and immediate objeft of worfliip, are confounded together. 8 TUTU* sui XT' ETC;. Sanchon. ap. Eufeb. Praep. Ev. 1. i. p. 35. B. Thefe pillars, or {tones, were fet up at fepulchres. Homer. II. xi. 371. xvii. 434. Pindar. Nem. Ode x. v. 125. See alfo Paufanias in Corin- thaic. c. 29. In Achaic. c. 22. In Bceot. c. 24. See Jikewife Borlafe's Antiq. of Cornwall, p. 186 &feq. bols a 410 Worfoip of human Spirits bols, of the gods. Neverthelefs, the Greeks, univerfally, and from the moft remote antiquity, paid the fame divine worfhip to thefe Jigm as to \hzjlatues of the gods h . When the arts of fculpture and ftatu- ary were invented, a human form was given to thefe fubflitutes of the heathen gods, that they might bear a refem- blance to the obje&s they reprefented. Thofe objefts, therefore, were men and women, not the elements and heavenly bodies ; the form of the one no way re- fembling that of the other 1 . There is the more reafon to believe, that the images of the gods in human form were intend- ed to rcprefent human perfonages, as the cuftom of making thefe images had h T & m Qiur aTi ayaX/xaTwn EX" a 7" XtSo*. Paufan. in A- chaicis, p. 579. Concerning the worfhip of confecra- ted ftones, the reader may confult Bp. Lowth's note on If. Ivii. 6. 1 When they aimed at making fome refemblance of the fun, the Pasonians reprefented him by a di&. Maxim. Tyr. DiiTert. 58. p. 4oz. it's In the ancient heathen World. 411 it's rife in Egypt" ; where dead men were worfhipped, firil <e in perfon, that is, in <e their mummies , which, when loft, con- " fumed, or deftroyed, were worfhipped ft by reprefentation, under an image made < c with it's legs bound up, in likenefs <c of the mummies 1 ." ThePerfians, who were faid to worfhip only, or principally, elementary and iiderial deities, had no ftatues of their gods at all ; and for this very reafon, becaufe they did not partake of human nature" 1 . Nay, fomc jiations, whofe gods were dead men, worfhipped them without ftatues n . And, where all the hero-gods had their ima- ges, yet there was even there no image of the fun or moon, becaufe their afpefts were confpicuous to all . It is natural to conclude, from thefe premifes, that k Herodot. 1. 2. c. 4. 1 Warburton's Div. Legat. v. 2. p. 290. ed. 1755. m See above, p. 47, concerning the Perfians. n As the Germans, and the Romans during the time of Numa. Above, p. 40, 250. See the account given of the Syrians, p. 201. the 412 Worjhtp of human Spirits the reprefentation of the gods under hu- man figures is a proof that thofe gods had once been men. The Fathers had very much the fame view of this fub- ject p . Balbus q , indeed, fays, " that from a cc phfaal reafon has proceeded a great " multitude of gods, who, being repre- " fentedin human form, have fupplied " the poets with fables". Varro alfo was of opinion, that the images of the gods were originally intended to direcl: fuch, as were acquainted with the fecret P Quid denique ipfa fimulacravolunt, quas aut mor- tuorum aut abfentium monimenta funt ? et feq. Lac- tant. Div. Inftitut. 1. 2. c. 2. p. 116, 117. Et ideo fimulacra conftituunt, quae quia funt mortuorum imagi-* nes, fimilia jnortuis funt ; omnienim fenfu carent. Id, ib. Dum reges fuos colunt religione, dum defundlos cos defiderant in imaginibus videre, &c. Minuc. Pel. p. I57 158. ed. Varior. 1672. Concerning the fenti- ments of Eufebius on this fubjeft, fee Div. Legat. v. j . p. 97, 98, in the note. i Ap. Cicer. Nat. Deor. 1. 2. 0.24. Aliaquoqueex j-atione, et quidem phyfica, magnafluxit multitude deo- rum : qui induti fpecie huraana fabulas poetis fuppedi- taverunt. doftrine, 'in tie ancient heathen World. .413 doctrine, to the contemplation of the real gods, the foul of the world, and it's conftituent parts ; the mind which is in the body of man bearing the nearefl re- femblance to the immortal (and univer- fal) mind r . And Maximus Tyrius largely defends the ufe of thefe images upon the fame ground ; and pleads, that, of all others, they are the mofl proper fymbols of the gods 8 . .../> '..'.'.: J;L * Interpretationes phyficas fie Varro commendat, uc dicat antiques fimulachra deorum, et infignia, orna- tufque confinxifle : quae cum oculis animadvertiflent hi, qui adiflent dodtrinas myfteria, poflent animam mundi ac partes ejus, id eft, decs veros, animo videre : quo- rum qui fimulachra fpecie hominis fecerunt, hoc videri fequutos, quod mortalium animus, qui eft in corpore humano, fimillimus eft immortalis animi ; tanquam fi vafa ponerentur caufa notandorum deorum, et in Libe- ri zede cenophorum fifteretur, quod fignificaret vinum, per id quod continet, id quod continetur : ita per fi- mulachrum, quod formam haberethumanam fignificari animam rationalem, quod eo velutvafe natura ifta foleat contineri, cujus nature deum volunt efle, vel deos. Varro ap. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 7. c. 5. Maxim. Tyr. Differ!. 38. Plotinus alfo fpeaks of itatues as defigned to fix men's thoughts on the foul of the world. Ennead. IV. 1.3. c. n. p. 380. This 414 Worjhip of human Spirits This platonic philofopher, and alfo the two Stoics, Varro and Balbus, were zealous advocates for the phyfical expli- cation of the fables, to which they al- ways had recourfe when preffed with the difficulties of their literal meaning. No wonder, then, that they fhould repre- fent images in human form as fymbols or emblems of the natural gods. How far this was the real cafe is a matter that may come under future confidera- tion. It is fufficient here to obferve, that the images, or human figures, of which we are fpeaking, reprefented real men and women, fuch as were fuppofed to be advanced to the rank of gods and goddefles, and were worfhipped as fuch : that thefe deities were the immediate ob- jects of the eftablifhed worfhip, not the natural gods, to whom there could be only a remote and ultimate reference : that this reference was underflood only by thofe who were inftructed in the myfteries of the heathen religion : that, confequently, the in the ancient heathen World. 41 r the common people worfliipped images, not as figns or emblems of the deified ob- jects of nature, but, as what they really were, reprefentations of deified men and women: and that the civil theology was founded upon this hypothefis, or upon, the literal hiftory of thofe fables which the philofophers converted into allegory. In a word, the very objection we are con- fidering, inftead of overturning, eftablifh- es, both the humanity of the direct objects of the eftablifhed worfhip amongft the Heathens, and the proof of it drawn from the reprefentation of them under human figures. Thefe figures, as well as the human perfonages whom they reprefented, were deemed gods, and worfhipped as fuch' j not, indeed, on account of the fenfelefs materials of which they were compofed, but, as the Heathens alleged, of their 1 Quisenim dubitat horum imagines confecratas vul- gusorare, et publice colere ? Minuc. Pel. p. 217. ed. Tar. Colitur pro Jove forma Jovis. Ovid. Ep. ex Ponto, I. 2. ep. viii. v. 62. divine 4 1 6 tVorfiip of human Spirits divine inhabitants". The priefts pre* tended, by certain rites of confecration, to allure or compel demons, that is, the manes of the dead, to enter into, and to animate, their flatues, and to detain them there*. And, though many ima- ges and flatues were creeled to the fame god, yet in each of them he was fuppo- fed to be perfonally prefent*. Now this idea of facred images, as the fixed reft- dence of the gods, deftroys the fuppofi- tion of their being immediately reprefen- tatives of the elements or planets ; and at the fame time correfponds to, and confirms, the opinion entertained of * Eos in his colimus, eofque x r eneramur, quos dedi- catio infertfacra, et fabrilibus efficit inhabitare fimula- cris. Arnob. 1.6. p. 203. See Celfus ap. Origen. contr. Celf. 1.7. p. 373. w Sometimes, to prevent his defection, the ftatue of the god was chained to its pedeftal. Diodor. Sic. 1. 17* p. 191. ed. Wcffeling. * Jnfimulacris dii habitant: finguline in fmgulis to- tis, an partiliter atque in membra divifi ? Nam neque cna$ deus in compluribus potis eft uno tempore ineffe ft- mulacris, neque rurfus in paries fedione intervenient* divifus, thenx in the ancient heathen World. 417 them by the Heathens, who made them, as bodie^ to be informed with demons, or the fpirits of departed men, as with fouls*. And, as the worfhip of images became almoft the univerfal religion of the gentile world, this affords an unde- niable proof of the human origin of the heathen gods, whofe bodily features thofe images were faid to reprefent*. VI. The WORSHIP of the heathen nations correfponded to their idea of hu- man ghofts, and was founded upon it. All religious worfhip among the Gen- tiles, and indeed among all other peo- ple, has ever been adapted to the opinion they formed of it's object. Thofe Gen- tiles who, by the fole ufe of their rational faculties, formed juft conceptions of the fpirituality and purity of the divine be- ing, thought that he was beft honoured by a pure mind. Such of them as regar- ded the luminaries of heaven, as benefi- cent and divine intelligences that gover- ned the world, worfhipped them with r Mede's works, p. 632. * Eufebius, ib. p. 680. E c tymm 4 1 8 Worfoip of human Spirits hymns andpraifes*, in teftimony of their gratitude j or by klffing the hand, and homing the head * to them, in acknow- ledgement of their fovereign dominion. This feems to have been the only ho- mage they received from mankind in the moft early ages of the world. At leaft, no other is taken notice of in the book of Job, or in the writings of Mofes. When dead men were deified, it became necefTary to frame a worfhip adapted to pleafe and gratify human ghofts, or ra- ther fuch fpirits as they were conceived to be. And I will here attempt to fhew, that the eftablifhed worfhip of the Hea- thens was built upon thefe conceptions, and that this circumftance points out the human origin of the more immediate objects of that worfhip. Mede's Works, p. 636. * If I beheld the fun, or the moon, and my mouth hath KJ/ed my hand. Job xxxi. 26, 27. The Israelites are forbidden to worjhip, or, as the original word imports, to btnd or bmv down to, the fun, moon, and ftars, Deuter. iv. 19. Before in the ancient heathen World. 419 Before we enter upon this argument, we mufl imagine ourfelves in the fame fituation as the ancient Heathens were, fill our minds with the fame ideas they had, and recollect more efpecially what were their notions of human ghofts, and of their future flate of exiilence. On the correfpondence of their worfhip to thefe notions the force of the argument depends. The obvious diftincrion between the foul and body of man, and the perma- nence of the former after the diflblution of the latter, could not but be admitted by all the nations that worfhipped the dead. Happy would it have been had they gone no farther, except to affert a future flate of retribution. But they gave an unbounded fcope to their imagi- nations. They not only afcribed to fe- parate fpirits, as indeed they juftly might, all their former mental affec- E e 2 tions, 420 Worfoip of human Spirits tions b , but all the fenfations c , appe- tites, and paflions, of their bodily ftate j fuch as hanger and thirfl d s and the pro- penfities founded upon the difference of fexes e . Ghofts were thought to be addicted to the fame exercifes and em- b Of the parental affection we have an amiable ex- ample in the ghoft of Anchifes. Virg. ^En. VI. 685. Proofs of the hatred ghofts bore to their enemies, both when living and after their deaths, are produced by Potter, B. 4. c. 8. p. 261. I mall add the following paffage from Ovid, in Ibidem, v. 139. Nee mors mihi finiet iras, Sasva fed in manes manibus armadabit: Tune quoque cum fuero vacuas dilapfus in auras, Exanimis manes oderit umbra tuos. See alfo Horace, Carm. V. 5. Virg. JEn. IV. 384. and the very chara&eriftic defcription of the ghoft of A- jax, Homer, Odyff. XI. 542. and of the other ghofts in the fame book. c Hence that prayer, taken notice of above, that the earth might lie light or heavy on the dead. d This appears from their being provided, as it will be (hewn they were, with the means of gratifying thefe appetites. * Hercules, though he feafted with the immortal gods, was wedded to Hebe. Homer, II. XL 602. Some have thought that ghofts could affume a humaiv body. ployments in the ancient heathen World. 421 ployments as had been their delight while men f . And, though they could not be felt and handled 8 , like bodies of flefh and blood, and were of a larger fize h ; yet they had the fame lineaments and features. Being an original part of the human frame, they were wounded whenever the body was, and retained the impreflion of their wounds ! . Their idea of men's future ftate of ex- iflence was formed upon the model of our prefent condition. They lent money in, this world upon bills payable in the 9 Pars in gramineis exercent membra palseftris, &c. Virg. ^En. VI. 642. Quas gratia currum Armorumque fuit vivis, quae cura nitentis Pafcere equos, eadem fequitur tellure repoftos. Id. ib. v. 653. Multo magis reftores quondam urbium recepti in coelum curam regendorum hominum non relinquunt. Macro- bius, in Somn. Scip. 1. i. c. 9. * Homer, OdyfT. XI. 205. k Et nunc magnamei fub terras ibit imago. Virg. ^En. IV. 654. Homer, Odyff. XI. 40. Virg. ^En. VI. 495- E e 3 next. 422 Worjhlp of human Spirits next 14 . Between both worlds there was thought to be an open intercourfe j de- parted fpirits beftowing favours upon their furvivors, and receiving from them gifts and prefents. Thefe gifts were fometimes fuppofed to be conveyed into the other world in their own natural form : for they put into the mouth of a dead man apiece of money, to pay Cha- ron for his paflage over Styx; and a cake, of which honey was the principal ingredient, to pacify the growling Cer- berus 1 . Thofe things, whofe natural outward form was deftroyed, did not al- together perifh, but pafTed into the other world. The fouls of brutes furvived the difTolution of their bodies ; and even in- animate fubftances, after they were con- k This is related of the Celts or Gauls. Pecunias jnutuas, quaehis apud inferos redderentur, dare folitos, Pythagoras approved the cuftom : for our author adds, Dicerem ftultos, nifiidem braccati fenfiffent, quod pal- liatus Pythagoras credidit. Valerius Maximus, lib. 2. C. 6. . 10. 1 J5os, Gr. Antiq. p. 410, fumed in the ancient heathen World. 423 fumed by fire, ftill, in fome degree, fub- fifted; images flying off from them, which as exaftly refembled them as a ghoft did the living man. Hence it was, that, upon the funeral piles of the dead, they were accuftomed to throw letters, in order to their being read by their de- parted friends". And being able, as they imagined, to tranfmit to the dead whatever gifts they pleafed, in one form, or otherj food", and raiment , and ar- mour p , were either depofited in their graves, or confumed in the fame fire with their own bodies, together with M Diodorus Siculus, 1. v. p. 352. relates this cir- cumftance of the Gauls. -. : 'V ! ' See below, under facrifices. Solon (according to Plutarch, vit. Solon, p. 90. C.) made a law to prevent the burying with the dead more than three garments. This law was afterwards adopted by the Romans, and inferted in the 12 tables. Sum- turn minuito ; tria, fi volet, ricinia adhibeto. The clothes of the dead were fometimes thrown upon the fu- neral pile. Bos, p. 422. Kennett, Rom. Antiq. p. 357- P The arms of foldiers were thrown upon their pyre. Bos, ch. 22. p. 422. E e 4 their 424 Worjhip of human Spirits their wives and concubines' 1 , their fa- vourite flaves r , and brute animals', and whatever elfe had been the object of their affection in life 1 . Accordingly we find the parrot of Corinna, after his death, in elyfium*. 9 This is ftill a cuftom in fome parts of the eaft, and jt is of great antiquity, Evadne (by Ovid called Iphi- as) threw herfelf upon the funeral pile of Capaneus, uttering this prayer : Recipe me, Capaneu. Ovid. Ars Am. 1. 3. v. 21. Statius, Thebaid. 1. 12. v. 801. Propertius, I. 15, 21. * Servi et clientes, quos ab iis dile&os efle confix bat, juftis funeribus confectis, una cremabantur. Cae- far, B. G. 1. 6. c. 18. It was the fame both in Mexi- co and Peru ; on the death of the emperors and other e- minent perfons, many of their attendants were put to death, that they might accompany them into the other world, and fupport their dignity. See Robertfon's Hilt, of North America, v. 3. p. 211, 259. * Caefar, ubi fupra. At the funeral of Patroclus, four horfes and nine favourite dogs were thrown upon the pyre. Homer, II. 23, v. 171. 1 Moris fuerat, ut cum his rebus homines fepelirentur quas dilexerant vivi. Servius on yEn. X. 827. See alfo Caefar, 1.6. c. 18. * Pfittacus has inter, nemorali fede receptus, Convertit volucres in fua verba pias. Ovid, Amor. 1. II, el. 6. v. 57. Orpheus, In tie ancient heathen World. 425 Orpheus, when in the fame happy abode, appears in his facerdotal robe, flriking his lyre ; and the warriors were furnifh- ed with their horfes, arms, and chariots, which Virgil calls inanes> empty -, atty t and unfubftantialy being fuch fhades and phan- toms of their former chariots as theghofts themfelves were of men". In a word, whatever was burnt or interred with the dead, their ghofts were thought to re- ceive and ufe. It is obfervable, that, as the ghoils appeared with the wounds made in them before their reparation from the body, fo the arms, that had been ftained with blood before they were burnt, appeared bloody afterwards*; and, in like manner, the money-bills and letters, that had been confumed in the flames, were certainly thought to retain the impreflion of what had been written in them. Such notions of feparate fpirits can indeed for the moil part be confidered n Virg. ^En. VI. 645-655. See above, note P. * Homer, Od. XI. 41. only 426 Worjlnp of human Spirits only as the childifh conceptions of untu- tored minds, in the infancy of the world, or in ages of grofs ignorance. Never- thelefs, being confecrated to the purpo- fes of fuperftition, and in length of time becoming venerable by their antiquity, they maintained their credit, in more enlightened ages, amongft the multitude, and, through policy, were patronized even by thofe who difcerned their abiur- dity. This general view, of the notions which the heathens entertained of hu- man ipirits, may prepare us to receive the farther account that will be given of them, and thereby of the ground of that particular kind of worfhip that was paid them. And, if the fame wor- fhip was paid to the gods as to human ipirits, and for the fame reafons, it will appear highly probable, that both were of the fame nature originally, though there was a difference of rank between them. in the ancient heathen World. 427 them. Let us now examine fome of the principal rites of the ancient idolatry. I fhall begin with taking notice of the facrifices and libations which made a con- derable part of the heathen worfhip. In order to underftand the ground of thefc rites, we muft confider in what manner the Gentiles (hewed their refpecl to dead men. They fupplied them, as was ob- ferved, with fuch things as had been agreeable or ufeful in life ; threw upon their funeral piles odours and perfumes', and animals 7 , and made libations of wine z . The daily and annual offerings, that were afterwards made them at their graves, were fimilar with thofe at their funerals, viz. flefh, blood, water, wine, x Bos, Gr. Antiq. Part 4. c. 22. Their tombs alfo were ftrewed with flowers. Id. p. 432. y Homer, II. 1. 23. v. 166. Odyff. 1. 24. v. 66. Virgil, ^En. XL 197. Herodian. 1.4. c. 14. p. 156. Oxon. 1704. Animals were flain at funerals partly to fupply the ghofts with blood, and in part to attend them in the other world. See page 424, note . * Bos, ubi fupra. milk, 428 Worjhip of human Spirits milk, and honey'. In carrying them meat and drink for their fuftenance the farentalia properly confided b . The ghofts were thought to come from their fubterraneous habitations, or from their graves, to partake of the entertainment provided for them 6 . Now the libations and facrifices, which were offered to the gods, were of the fame kind with thofe Bos, p. 432, 433. Potter, v. 2. p. 257, 258. Comp. Kennett, Rom. Antiq. p. 360, 361. Guther, de Jure Man. 1.2. c. n. And fee Ovid, Fafti, 1. 2. V. 535- and Plautus, cited above, p. 270. note ', Concerning the annual offerings of food and raiment, made by the Gauls to the manes of the dead, of which they were fuppofed to ftand in need, fee Borlafe, Antiq. of Corn. p. 114, k Guther de Jure Man, 1. 2. c. 12. e Potter, v. 2. p. 251. Kennett, Rom. Antiq. p. 361. Ovid defcribes the common opinion in the fol- lowing lines. Fafti, 1.2. v. 565. Nunc animae tenues, et corpora funfta fepulchris, Errant : nunc pofito pafcitur umbra cibo. As to the facrifices and libations, Lucian fays, (in his Charon, five Contemplantes, v. i. p. 358.) Verum illis perfuafum eft umbras ab inferis reduces, circum nido-* rem et fumum, quantum poflunt, volitando caenare, et ex fovea mulfum bibere. appointed in the ancient heathen World. 420 appointed for the dead d , and both had the fame intention. The gods were re- galed with the odour of incenfe, and the fruits of the earth ; they were refreihed and nourifhed with the fumes of drink- offerings , and the fleams of flaughtered animals afcending from their altars 6 . For the convenience of their receiving the grateful and beneficial exhalations from the meat and drink offerings, the altars were placed lower than their flatues and images. f See Bos, Part i. c. 6. or any other writer upon the facrifices which the Heathens offered to their gods. * That the Gentiles really thought their gods were gratified and fed by the odours, wine, blood, and flefli, which were prefented to them either in their own natural ftate, or when fpiritualized, as it were, and re- fined, by fire, is evident from the divine warning given the Ifraelites againft conceiving of Jehovah in the fame unworthy manner. Will 1 eat the flejh of bulls, or driak the blood of goats ? Pf. 1. 13. The Fathers often re- proach the heathen gods with their want of meat and drink, and with their intemperate ufe of both. See Arnobius, p. 229, 230, 236, 249. And not only did the vulgar Heathens fuppofe their gods were nourilhed by facrifices ; but the philofophic Julian alfo feems to have adopted the fame grofs notion, and he afcribes it to 43 o Worfiip of human Spirits images'. The oblations here fpoken of could not be intended for the life of the fun, moon, andftars; and we are expreffly told that thefe celeftial lumina- ries were nourifhed by the vapours of the ocean or of frefh water 5 . The fufte- nance which idolaters provided for their gods was perfectly adapted to their idea of human ghofts : which creates no fmall prefumption that both were confi- dered as having been partakers of the fame nature. Blood in particular was an acceptable libation to ghofls h , and more efpecially to Marcus Antoninus, as is allowed by his late panegy- rift. See Gibbon's Hift. v. 2. p. 363. * Potter, v. I. p. 178, 179. s Cicero, Nat. Deor. 1. 2. c. 15. 1. 3. c. 14. h Adfirmantur animze ladle et /anguine dele&ari. Servius on JEn. III. v. 66, 67. That the ancient Hea- thens thought ghofts were fond of blood fully appears from Homer," OdyfT. XI. paffim. Hence the victims \vere (lain at their fepulchres. Serv. ib. The blood was poured out there upon the ground or in trenches. Paufanias, Phocica, p. 807. To want this blood was cfteemed a great calamity. Potter, v. z. p. 258, 259. to in the ancient heathen World. 43 1 to the ghofts of heroes 1 . There is no- thing more certain than this faft, though it may feem ftrange to thofe who do not recolledl that the ancients drank blood k ; and confequently that, on their princi- ples, ftated above, men muil retain their love of it after death. It might be pe- culiarly agreeable to warriors, on ac- count of the iingular ferocity of their tempers. And it's being transferred into the worfhip of the gods', as every one * They brought to Polydore's tomb fanguinis facrl pa- teras. ^En. III. 67. At the funeral of Pallas the blood was fprinkled over the pile. Caefo fparfuros fanguine flammas. JSLn. XI. 82. fc Quinimo primis mundi ajtatibus fanguis bomini- bus potus erat, fi fidem promeretur Avitus. Geafius de Viftimis humanis. Pars 2. p. 404. That it was a common pra&ice to drink blood, or eat the flefh of ani- mals while the life, that is, the blood, was in it, ij implied in the prohibition of it. Gen. ix. 4. Learned men have Ihewn, that eating raw fleih, cut off while the creature was living, was an ancient rite of idolatry. See Maimon. More Nev. pars III. 0.48. Selden, de JureN. & G. VII. i. 1 To the celeftial or fnpernal gods the blood was offer- ed upon altars (Potter, v. I. b. 2. ch. 4. p. 203. Comp. Virg. ^En. VIII. 106.) for the fame reafon that it was poured upon the ground to the infernal, viz. in order to it's being near to the deity who was to partake of it. knows 43 2 Wcrflrip of human Spirits knows it was, naturally leads us to corl- iider thofe gods as deified heroes, who flill, in the opinion of the Heathens, preferved their relifh of it, as they did of every thing elfe they had loved before. The fhedding of human bloody to ap- peafe the heathen deities, is a new proof of their terreftrial origin. The brute a- nimals, which the Gentiles facrificed to their deities, were not always fuch as were agreeable to them -, they were often fuch as were odious, and whofe deftruc- tion gave them pleafure m . It was the fame as to men. Favourite flaves fuffer- ed death that they might ferve their maf- ters in another life. Conquered enemies were killed with a different view, to fa- tiate the malice and revenge of the ma- nes of warriors. The refinement of mo- dern times, owing principally to the fpi- rit of mildnefs and humanity which the m Ut cum Cereri porcam, Baccho capram, mafta- bant : quorum ilia fegeti, hsc vitibus, infefta eft. Pot- ter, Comment, in Lycophronis Cafland. v. 77. chriflian m the ancient heathen World. 433 chriftian religion has diffufed through the nations, makes it difficult for us to conceive how much cruelty entered into the compofition of heroes in the rude and barbarous ages. of antiquity. We may, perhaps, form fome imperfect idea of it from the favages in North Ameri- ca, who rack their invention in order to put their captives in war to a lingering death in the greateft poffible torment ; which they fufferamidftthejoyful acclama- tions of their enemies. The paffions, which men difcovered in life, the ancients, as we have feen, afcribedto them after death; and confequently conceded of the dead as cruel and vindictive, as envying" the happinefs, and delighting in the mifery, of thofe who had offended them. Hence, I apprehend, it is that idolaters pra6ti- fed all manner of cruelties upon them- B The human paffion of envy is often afcribed to the gods. Potter, v. 2. p. 221. Nothing could more mortify a human ghoft, when under the influence of ma- lice and refentment, than the profperity of a hated ob- jea. F f felves 434 Worjhip of human Spirits felves and one another, in the worfhip of Diana, Bellona, and other deities, that, by the fight of their fufferings, thefe deities might at length be induced to pity and fpare them. We are expreffly informed, that the blood, which flowed from thofe wounds which the Pagans made in their own flefh, was thought to appeafe the gods ghofts . It is with the fame view that men were put to death . The ghofts of fuch as were flain in war, or who flew themfelves, were fuppofed to be ftimulated by the ftrongeft revenge p , and could not be appeafed but by the deftruction of their enemies. We are certain, therefore, that human Varrodicit mulieres in. exequiis et ludu ideo folitas ora lacerare, ut fanguine oftenfo inferis fatisfaciant : quare etiam inftitutum eft, ut apud fepulchra et viftimas caedantur. Apudveteres, etiam homines interficieban- tur. Serviuson^n.III. 67. Quid poteft efle hac pie- tate clementius, quam mortuis humanas vidtimas immo- lare? La&ant. 1. 5. c. 10. P Nothing pierced Dido with fo keen anguifh, in the article of death, as the thought of perifhing unre- venged. Moriimur inultee ? Virg. JEn. IV. 659. victims in the ancient heathen World. 435 victims perfectly correfpondcd to the corrupt paffions afcribed to the ghofts of men. Accordingly we find, in fa, that the manes of warriors and heroes were propitiated with human viclims at their funerals. Achilles facrificed twelve Tro- jan heroes at the funeral of Patroclus, and then called upon him to rejoice, even in the gloomy realms of Pluto, at their be- ing burnt in the fame flames with his own corpfe 4 . Polyxena was (lain upon the tomb of Achilles to appeafe his ghoft, on which fubjecT: the Hecuba of Euripides is foun- ded. And jEneas, notwithstanding com- panion made fo diftinguiihing a part of his character, referved feveral young captives to offer them as viclims to the manes of Pallas r , who was (lain by F f 2 Turnus. Lalty.a. pit Tgwuv Tt? ecpa. cro ir*>ra; irv% icrSifi. Homer. II. XXIII. 179. * SulmoTve creates Quatuor hie juvenes j totidem, quos edocat Ufens, Viventis 43 6 Worjhip of bum an Spirits Turnus. He afterwards refuied to fpare Magus, who earneftly begged his life, becaufe, as he alleged, the fhade of An- chifes demanded his death*, even though no prior enmity had fubfifled between them. And the reafon which ^Eneas affigned for killing Turnus, a proftrate fuppliant for mercy, was, that the ghoft of Pallas, in revenge for his own death, required the facrifice of his blood'. If fuch were fuppofed to be the temper of fo amiable a hero as Pallas, there is reafon to conclude, that warriors, who had been long accuftomed to the havoc of the human fpecies,- wojild be thought to require a more am- Viventis rapit, inferias quos immolet umbris, Captivoque rogi perfundat fanguine flammas. Virg. ^En. X. 517. Id. ib. v. 533. * Pallas te, hoc vulnere Pallas, Immolat, et pcenam fcelerato ex fanguine fumit. ./En. XII. 948. The forementioned facrifices are to be confidered mere- ly as the effect of the cruel fuperftition of the times, and are no reflection upon ./Eneas, who afted from a pious care to placate the dead. pie in the ancient heathen World. 437 pie vengeance, and to take more fatis fac- tion in the punifhment of offenders, or even in the fufferings of the Innocent, from cruelty of difpofition. The com- bats of the gladiators were properly fu- neral rites u , and the blood fpilt in them was defigned to appeafe the manes of the dead w . Thefe fa6r.s are undeniable proofs that human facrifices were offered to de- ceafed heroes, and were adapted to their prefumed difpofition. The fame cruel rite, which was cele- brated at the funeral of heroes, was per- formed, ftatedly or occafionally, in the worfhip of the gods, and upon the fame ground, a fanguinary and revengeful u Plutarch calls the combats eflvr<piaj yut<;. Vit. Coriolani, p. 218. F. The combatants were called luftuarii, becaufe they fought at the buftum or fepuU chre of the dead. w The captives fent to the funeral of Junius Brutus, inftead of being flain in the ufual manner, were order- ed to fight. Servius on ./En. III. 6;. This method of deftroying them had the fame intention as the former, but was more fuitable than that to the temper and policy of a warlike people, and ferved to inure them to fcenes of blood and (laughter. F f 3 difpofition. 438 Worjhip of human Spirits difpofition. It has indeed been afTerted, that the natural gods were the objects of this worfhip. Let us therefore fee whether the facts on record do not prove that the direct and immediate objects of it were human fpirits. Only I would firft of all obferve, that thofe, who offered thefe coftly vi6tims to heroes, were not likely to withhold them from the fame heroes when they were exalted to the rank of gods. To whom were more human facrifices offered, in Phenicia, at Carthage, and other places, than to that monfler of cru- elty, Saturn, who not only made war upon his father, and maimed him, but facrificed his own children to him*? This barbarity to his offspring is aflign- ed as the reafon why, after his death and deification, he was appeafed with * Sanchoniathon, ap. Eufeb. Praep. Ev. 1. j. 0.38, 40. 1.4. c. 16. Porphyr. de Abftinent. 1.2. 0.56, Eufeb. de Laudibus Conltant. p. 756. Diodor. Sic. 1. 20. p. 415. torn. 2. ed. We/T. Marfham, Chronicus Canon, p. 76, 77. the in the ancient heathen World. 439 the facrifice of children y . The ancient philofophers fearched for a phyfical in- terpretation of Saturn*, and a learned modern* would willingly underftand by him the god of light ; but it has been al- ready (hewn, that hiftory reprefents him under a human character. His worfhip was founded upon that hiftory as literal- ly underftood by the people 2 , and was a- dapted to his bloody difpofition. His fon, Jupiter, who alfo was worfhipped with human blood b , is flyled the only 7 Nam Saturnus filios fuos non expofuit, fedvoravit. Merito ei in nonnullis Africae partibus a parendbus in- fantes immolabantur. Minuc. Felix, p. 291. ed. Var. cap. 30. p. 151. ed. Davif. Cum propriis filiis Sa- turnus non pepercit, extraneis ubique non parcendo perfeverabat, et feq. Tertullian. Apol. c. 8. p. 9. ed. Rigalt. Bryant, Obfervations, p. -279, 280. 2 Cicero, Nat. Deor. 1. 2. c. 24. Bryant's Obferv. p. 280. b Tertullian. Apol. p. 9. Minuc. Felix, c. 36. and the notes of Davis, p. 153. Laftant. 1. i. c. 21. An infant was flain upon the altar of Jupiter Lycaeus. Paufanias, Arcad. 1.2. p. 600. Jupiter Latialis alfo was worfhipped with human blood. Laftant. 1. I. c. 21. F f 4 fon 440 Worfilp of human Spirits fon and heir of his father in cruelty . Ofiris, called alfo Bufiris, was, like Ju- piter, a great conqueror, in an age when conqueft and cruelty were clofely allied ; and to him ftrangers were facrificed at his tomb 4 . Bacchus was worfhipped with the cruel rite of which we are fpea- king under the title of Omefles, the de- vour er*. Captives in war were devoted to death in honour of Mars*, who, ac- cording to Orpheus, was always contami- nated with Jlaughter\ and always delighted c O Jovem folum patris filium de crudelitate ! Tertuliian. ubi fupra. d ^Egyptio Bufiridi ritus fuit hofpites immolare. Minuc. Pel. c. 30. Compare what Plutarch fays con- cerning burning live men in Egypt. De If, et Ofir. p. 380. Men with light or red hair were facrificed at the tomb of Ofiris. Diodor. Sic. 1. I. p. 99. Plutarch, Vit, Themift. p. 119, A. f Hercdot. 1. 4. c. 62. Caefar, Comment. 1. 6. c, 16. See alfo Tomafmus de donariis veterum, c. 40. jind Tacitus, Annal. 1. 13. c. 57, with in the ancient heathen World. 441 'with human blood g . And Diana*, who was void of all the tendernefs of her fex, whofe chief pleafure confifted in the purfuit and (laughter of brute animals, .and to whom the fhows of wild beafls, fighting with one another or with men, were confecrated, had her altars flamed in the fame manner as the god of wan This goddefs, as well as Mars and Jupi- ter, belonged to the clafs of the twelve greater divinities who were tranflated from earth to heaven. To Juno, who alfo was one of that number, an oracle recommended the facrifice of a virgin annually, in order to flop a peflilence* which doubtlefs it was thought me had fent. To the foregoing examples more may be added. I mufl not omit to mention At/xan Orpheus, Oper. p. 264. ed. Gefner. h Virg. JEn. II. 116. Servius in loc. Laftant. 1. i. 2. See note % below; and Hyginus, Fab. 261. Plutarch, Parallel, p. 314. C. D. Hercules, 44 2 Worfoip of human Spirits Hercules*, who having through life made havoc of the human ipecies, it was pre- fumed he would be pleafed, after death, with feeing human victims bleeding or burning upon his altars. Iff-fgema 1 could not but refent her undergoing a vi- olent death to propitiate Diana; and therefore might well be fuppofed to re- ceive fatisfaftion from having her own ghoft atoned in the fame manner. The northern T&#r m , or T^or, (the fame, probably, with Taranis,) Feufafes, (or Mercury",) and Hefus , (fuppofed by fbme to be Mars himfelf, ) had probably deluged the earth with human blood be- fore it was offered to them in facrifice. * Pliny, 1. 36. c. 3. Marfham, p. 288, 289. * Virg. yEa.II. 116. Herodot. 1. 4. c. 103. m To Thur fanguinem maftabant hominum. Hif- toria? Normandorum fcrip tores antiqui. Paris, 1619. p. 62. n Tertullian. Apol. c. 9. * Et quibus immitis placaturfangume diro Theutates, horrenfque feris altaribus Hefus, Et Taranis Scythicse non mitior ara Dianae. Lucan. I. I. v. 44. This in the ancient heathen World. 443 This lift might have been fwelled with the names of Mithras 9 and other gods ; but I fhall only obferve, that the afto- nifhing cruelty of Froe and Roftatus is expreffly affigned as the reafon of their being propitiated with human victims' 1 . From the whole of what has been offered, with refpeft to thefe victims, it appears, that the ground of offering them was the cruel and revengeful difpo- fition of the objects of them r : that they correfponded P Mithras was worfhipped in Egypt as well as in Perfia ; and Socrates relates, that, in the temple at A- lexandria, in which his myfteries were celebrated, the Gentiles ^uvuf xunSvot, facrificed men. Hiftor. Ec- clef. 1. 3. c. 2. p. 173. It is to this author that the reference ftiould have been made above, p. 396. note ! , rather than to Zilius Lampridius, 1 Concerning Froe, Olaus Magnus fays, 1. 3, c. 4. p. 101. Cui tandem in numerum deorum relato, quia deus fanguinis haberetur, furvae hoftise immolabantur. The fame writer gives the following account of Rofta- tus : Cujus flupenda immanitas humani fanguinis facri- ncio ita placari voluit, ut fibi iliorum, quos cultore fui opprefTuri eflent, animasdedicarent. r This is confirmed by the teftimony of Sanchonia- thon, who fays, that, in great national calamities, it 444 Worfiip of human Spirits correfponded entirely to the fuppofed character of the ghofts of warriors and heroes, was cuftomary to facrifice the deareft children of the nobles TO? TI/A&/^O*J &z^/.oo-i. Ap. Eufrb. Praep. Ev. 1. 4. p. 156. D. The evil deities were dulinguifhed from die gocd by a diiferent worftrip ; according to I^abeo, ap. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 2. c. 2. Numiiu b-na a nmninibus malis ijla etiam cultus di-ve/jitate c-.:tingu- untur, utmalos deos propitiaricaedibus ec iriftibus fup- plicationibus aiTerat : bonos autem obfequiis lathis atque jucundis. In the Difiertation on Miracles, p. 249. it was faid, what, I prefume, has been fully proved, " that " the gods, worihipped by human facrifices, were the " great \varriorj who, in their mortal ftate, delighted ' in the {laughter of the human race." To this it has been objected, by Mr. Fell, p. 66. that there is not one injtance to be found on record, of men rarfedtodiiiine honours , If any people, becaufe of their paji delight in the jlaughter of their civn/pecies ; and YET this is here (that is, in the Difiertation) ajffigned to be the 'very reafon e wby thofe gods It clearly appears, from this language, that the gen- tleman did not perceive the obvious difference there is between the reafon of raifing men to divine honours, that is, (as I understand him,) of deifying them, and honouring them with fome kind of divine \vorfhip, and the reafon of worshipping them, when deified, with one fpecies of divine worfhip rather than another. Each god was honoured with peculiar ceremonies. Hence Plutarch conjectures, that Matuta was the fame with Leucothea, from the famenefs of their rites. Vid. Ca> mill. in the ancient heathen World. 44,5 heroes, and of hero-gods: that they were in fact offered both to heroes and to fuch gods as had been men, and, as mill. p. 131.3. The facrifices that were offered to diffe- rent gods were different, (as we have juft now feen from Labeo, and Eufebius has (hewn at large, [Prasp. Ev. I. 4. 0.9.] and in deed as every one muft know who is not a perfect ftrangerto the fubjeft,) agreeably to the diffe- rence of their refpeftivedifpofitions. The domeftic and friendly gods ghofts were gratified with wine, milk, and frankincenfe, (Ovid, Fafti, 1. ii. 533-54^.) though the indignant and revengeful fpirit of a warrior could not be appeafed without human blood. Revenge and cruelty, however, were not the reafon of his being raifed to divine honours, or of his being accounted a god ; nor did my language imply more than their being the reafon of that .peculiar hind of worfhip which was paid him by thofe who were previoufly perfuaded of his divinity. My reafoning, in the place referred to, was agreeable to that of the ancients, who, when doubtful who any particular god was, formed their judgement of him by the nature of hisworfhip. If the gen- tleman meant to fay, what alone could render his ob- jection pertinent, that there is not one inftance on re- cord of men being worfhipped with human facrifices for the reafon 1 had affigned, he mould have had a better acquaintance with antiquity before he ventured on fucH an aflertion. far 446 TP or flip of human Spirits far as we know, to fuch gods alone 1 . So that, when the only circumftance, related of any particular deity, is, that he was worfhipped with human facrifi- ces, we may reafonably conclude, that he was originally of the race of man. And, as thefe rites were univerfally ' 8 It has indeed been faid, by fome of the ancients, that human vi&ims were in Egypt offered to the fun. It was very natural for thofe to run into this miftakewho explained the hiftory of the gods phyfically. Human victims, wehavefeen, were offered to Ofiris ; andOfi- is, phyfically underftood, was the fun. Some of the ancients would the more readily fubftitute the one for the other, as, in their opinion, there was a real corref- pondence between the difpofitions of heroes and the qualities of the fun. But I queftion whether there were any, however fond they might be of applying the hifto- ry of the gods to natural objefts, who would not allow, that human facrifices were dire&ly and immediately of- fered only to hero-gods. 1 This is affirmed by Pliny, 1. 30. c. i. cited above; and has been proved to be true by many learned writers, ancient as well as modern : fuch as Porphyry, de Ab- ftinent. 1.2. Clemens Alexandrinus, Cohort, ad Gent. p. 36. ed. Potter. Eufebius, Pra:p. Ev. 1. 4. c. 16. Geufius, de Viftimis humanis, paflim ; and Mr. Bry- ant, in his Obfervations, p. 267.61 feq. pratlifed in the ancient heathen World. 44.7 praftifed in all the heathen nations, they afford a full proof of the univerfal preva- lence of the worfhip of human fpirits. Many of the gods here enumerated were the principal objecls of pagan devotion". There were other w rites of worfhip, befides thofe hitherto fpecified, which clearly When Meffkpits gave a mortal wound to king Anlef- tes, he exclaimed : H#c magnis melier data vi8im* Jivis. JEn. XII. 296. w The heathen religion was as remarkably didin- guifhed by it's licentioufnefs and pollution as by it's cru- elty. Drunkennefs was an effential part of the worfhip of Bacchus, and enjoined by law even at Athens. Pla- to de Legibus, 1. i. p. 570 ed. Ficmi, & p. 777 L Serrani. It generally accompanied the facrifices and folemnities of the other gods. ProiHtution was a reli- gious rite common to all nations j aad not owing, ia general, to a profligacy of character, but to a real per- fuafion of it's being an acceptable facrifice to the gods. Even fodomy, and beftiality, and other enormities, made a part of the pagan ritual, in Phenicia more efpe- cially. It would draw out the article of iuorjhip to too great a length, to produce the evidence of thefe fads in this place, and to (hew from what principles they pro- ceeded, which may be explained hereafter. It is fuffi- cient to obferve, at prefent, that the vkes here fpeci- fied are peculiar to the human fpecies, and were in fa 44 5 Worjhip of human Spirits clearly point out the mortal origin of the gods. I fhall take notice of three: mourning^ banquets^ and games. Mournings, and all the figns of the mofl extravagant grief, fuch as lamen- table cries and bodily lacerations, were the moft facred ceremonies of pagan worfhip*. Now thefe rites of idolatry pra&ifed in the worfhip of fuch gods as had once belonged to it. They were praftifed in imitation, as well as in ho- nour, of the gods. The rude heroes of antiquity, what- ever fervice they might do their country by their prow- efs, or to mankind in general by their ufeful inventions, laid no reftraint upon their paffions ; and, as they were believed to have more of divinity in them than other men , theirvices wereconfecrated as well as their perfons. When they were exalted into gods, they were thought to re- tain the fame difpofitions. The early Chriftians re- proach them with every fpecies of impurity ; and fo do the Heathens themfelves, many of whom were ever rea- dy to plead their examples as an excufe for all the vices that the bafeft and vileft of men could commit. x In adytis habent idolum Ofiridis fepultum : hoc an- nuis ludlibus plangunt, radunt capita, ut miferum ca- fum regis fui turpitudine dehoneftati defleant capitis ; tundunt peftus, lacerant lacertos, veterum vulnerum refecant cicatrices, ut annuis luclibus in animis eorum funeltae ac miferandas necis exitium renafcatur. Julius Firmicus, p. 4, 5. See alfo Spencer, Leg. Hebr. p. 574, 580. were in tie ancient heathen World. 449 were the very fame with thofe praclifed at funerals. It was cuflomary with the Heathens, at the death of their rela- tions, to make the moft mournful la- mentations, to rend their clothes, to cut, lance, and tear, their flefh y . Thefe doleful cries and cruel lacerations were carried to fuch excefs at Athens, a city greatly addicted to fuperftition and idolatry, that it became neceflary to prohibit them by law 2 . They are not to be confidered merely as expreffions of grief for the perfonal lofs which furvi- vors fuftained by the death of valuable relations ; they were-principally defigned for the benefit of the dead themfelves ; a matter that requires to be explained. y See Bos, Antiq. of Greece, p l 4. ch. 21. Levit. xix. 28. xxi. 5. Deut. xiv. j. Jerem. xvi. 6. xlviii. 37- z Mulieres genas neradunto, neve leflum funeris er- go habento. Petit, Leg. Attic, p. 600. Te Jhall not make any cuttings in your fojb for the dead. Levit. xix. 8. xxi. 5. Thefe cuttings are here forbidden as rites of idolatry. G g The 450 Worftip of human Spirits The foul of man, it was imagined, quit- ted the body mourning it's unhappy fate* y partly on account of the enjoyments it loft, and partly by reafon of it's en- trance into A'ideS) or Hades, a moft gloomy and uncomfortable region, in the general opinion of the ancient Hea- thens 5 . Befides forrow and regret, the dead, at going out of the world, were fuppofed to feel difpleafure and refent- ment, and in many cafes to pant after revenge 6 . It was to this flate of their minds that the mourning for them was adapted. The extraordinary grief and fympathy of their relations at their fune- rals might well be thought to foothe and confole them in fome degree under their hard lot 3 and, together with their s.. Homer. II. XVI. 857. b Homer reprefents all the ghofts in the fubterra- neous caverns as forronvful, irctcctt a^n.'f*ti. OdyfT. XI. 541. Even Achilles faid, he had rather be the meaneft Have upon earth than rule over all the departed. Homer, OdyfT. XI. 488. ^ As was fliewn above, p. 432. etfeq. wounds, in the ancient heathen World. 45 1 wounds, and the blood that iflued from them, were believed, as we have feen", to appeafe their rage and vengeance. The tranquillity of their minds being thus reftored, there was no evil or inju- ry to be dreaded from them on account of their having fuffered the lofs of their lives. With the negleft of the ufual figns and feafons of mourning they were fuppofed to be greatly offended 6 . Now let common fenfe determine, whether thefe funeral rites could be de- figned to honour or placate gods that are eternal and immortal, and can never tafte the bitternefs of death ? But we need not afk the queftion $ for the Hea- thens themfelves have told us, that mourning was a fpecies of wormip fuit- * Above, p. 434. note". * This is implied in the following pafTage of Apulei- us, Metamorph. 1. 8. p. 242. ed. Delph. Qua; res cum meum pudorem, turn etiam tuum falntarecommo- dum, refpicit : ne forte immaturitate nuptiarum, in- dignatione jufta manes acerbos mariti adexitium falutis tusfufcitemus. G g 2 able 452 Worjhip of human Spirits able to the dead f , and actually paid to fuch of them as were deified. A god dies, and is lamented*. The ancient advocates for this part of the pagan worfhip difco- vered, or pretended to difcover, a fecret reference in it to natural objects h . But this fecondary and myftical fenfe, if it was at all intended, was not underftood by the people, nor defigned to be fo ; and, inflead of fub verting, it rather pre- fuppofes, the literal and primary mean- ing of the rites in queftion. Plutarch, the great advocate for their phyfical inter- pretation, allows their being underflood f Quorum omnis cultus eflet futurus in luftu. Cice- ro, deNat. Deor. 1. i. c. 15. * Maxim. Tyr. Diflert. 38. p. 398. See Julius Firmicus, p. 4, 5. Sed in funeribus et luctibus, qua: vere funt funera, quae fadla funt < defenfores eorum volunt addere phyficam rationem. Julius Firmicus de Errore Prof. Relig. p. 5. In the fequel he explains this phyfical reafon, but it does not belong to this place. See Plu- tarch in the places referred to in the next note. of 'in the ancient heathen World. 453 of the births and deaths of the gods 1 . Accordingly we find the Heathens k , as well as the early Chriftians 1 , urging them as a proof that thofe gods had been mere mortals. The mourning, in the feftivals of the gods, was fucceeded by a banquet, in which the gods themfelves were fuppo- fed to ihare m . This circumftance alfo G g 3 agrees aAAa ttcu o/*fom. Plutarch. If. & Ofir. p_. 379. B. See alfo a little higher in the fame page, and comp. p. 359. k Tu plangent hominem teftaris Ofirin. Lucan, VIII. 833. 1 Lugete nortuos veftros, et feq. Julius Firmicus, p. 20. See p. 4, 5. m Notwithftanding ' their neftar and ambrofia, the gods retained their relifh of their former earthly viands. They all left heaven for the fake of feafting with the JE- thiopians, Jupiter himfelf leading the way, as we learn from Homer. Indeed they were invited as guefts to all en tertainm'ents, befides thofe made on purpofe for them, Et divos ipfumque vocamus In partem prsedamque Jovem. JEn. III. 222. The epulones, whofe bufinefs it was to prepare the facred banquets at the folemn games, and to fet up couches on which the gods lay at tables, were perfons of great dif- tinftion. 454 Worfhip of human Spirits agrees with the idea the ancients enter- tained of human fpirits, whom they not only ftate'dly fupplied with food, by daily facrifices, but for whom they alfo provided annually a magnificent feaft". Befides, the banquet, which fucceeded the folemn mourning in the worfhip of the gods, was a funeral rite : for after the obfequies there was an entertain- ment, part of which was confecrated to the manes of the deceafed, and carried to their tombs . Games were inftituted only in honour of the gods ; and they alfo were funeral rites, which were exhibited to almofl all the dead p . Hence it follows, that the dead tin&ion. See Guther de Jure Manium, 1. 2. c. 10. The beft meal put the gods into the beft humour to grant favours, and was called a fupplication. Witnefs the lec- tifternium. 11 See above, p. 427, 428. Bos, p. 431. P Omitto quod Varro dicit, omnes ab his mortuos exiftimari manes deos, et probat per ea facra, qua; om- nibus fere exhibentur mortuis, ubi et ludos commemorat funebres, in the ancient heathen World. 455 dead in general were confidered as gods, and were the fole objects of this fpecies ofworfhip. If, exclufive of all teftimony, we exa- mine the games themfelves, we fhall foon perceive, that, whatever natural inftruclion might be veiled under them, they were celebrated in honour of deified men. They were imitations, or fceni- cal reprefentations, of the actions, the fufferings, and lawlefs paflions*, of the gods, and indeed of their whole hiftory. It is of men alone that thefe fcenes could be juft reprefentations. It is to their ghofls only that they could be jud- ged acceptable, as memorials of their former condition. Thefe exhibitions were attended with all poflible magnifi- cence, in order to gratify their pride and vanity. funebres, tanquam hoc fit maximum divinitatis indi- cium, qu&d non foleant ludi nifi numinibus celebrari. Auguft. Civ. Dei, 1. 8. c. 26. i See Cyprian on this fubjeft, Ad Donatum, p. 5, 6. ed. Fell, Gg4 If 456 Worfhip of human Spirits If you flill doubt whether the games referred to the actions and events of hu- man beings, remember that, in the worfhip of Matuta, the mother, there was a reprefentation of whatever befel Bacchus's nurfe, and whatever Ino fuf- fered from the jealoufy of Juno r : and that, amongft other ceremonies in the worfhip of Ariadne, who died in child- bed, and to whom Thefeus ordered di- vine honours, a youth lay in bed, and counterfeited all the pains of a woman in travail 8 . In the feaft of Adonis, be- fides reprefenting funeral folemnities by lamentations and mournful fongs, they even expofed images refembling dead men carried out to their burial 1 , This feftival was celebrated throughout all Greece and Egypt -, all the cities putting themfelves .in mourning, which was de- T Plutarch. Vit. Camilli, p. 131. B. Plutarchi Thefeus, p.p. B. C. ' Plutarch. Vit. Alcibiad. p. 200. C. p. 532. B. See alfo Spencer, Leg. Heb. p. 575, 580, 581. Dio- dor. Sic. p. 24, 25. cd Wefi". Lucian. torn. 2. p. 658, 659. figned In the ancient heathen World. 457 figned to commemorate the death of A- donis, and in teftimony of their fympa- thy with Venus. Ofiris alfo being flain as Adonis was, the memory of his death was preferved by expofing a fimilar i- mage" of him in his feftival, as well as by other rites of burial. On the whole, though it is not affir- med, that the religious rites here fpe- cified had no manner of reference to the fyftem of nature, yet they cer- tainly correfponded to the idea the an- cients had formed of human ghofls, were of the fame kind with thofe which were paid to thefe ghofls, and even, in many cafes, were memorials and repre- fentations of the fufferings and death of the deities in whofe honour they were performed. This is a plain proof that thefe gods had been men, and even that they were worfhipped under the very idea of men that were dead. u See Julius Finnicus, p. 4, 5. cited above, p. 448. note *. In 45 8 Worfhip of human Spirits ' In fpeaking of the heathen worfhip, I cannot omit to make mention of the myjleries. In the celebration of thefe rites an explicit declaration was made of the mortal origin even of the princi- pal objects of national worfhip among the Gentiles ; as we learn from the tefti- monies both of heathen and chriftian writers*. The very learned Jablonjki does not controvert the fact, viz. that the humanity of the gods was aflerted in the myfleries ; but he fuppofes, that this was aflerted by the magillrate, contrary to his own private opinion, for the cre- dit of religion*. This conjecture is not only groundlefs, but improbable, being w Cicero, Tufcul. 1. i. c. 13. et de Nat. Deor. I. I. c. 42. Diodorus Siculus, 1. i. p. 24. ed. WefT. Auguftin. De Civ. Dei, 1. 8. c. 5. Cyprian. De I- dol. Van. p. 12. Thefe authors have been already cited. I add the following paffage from Julius Firmi- cus, p. 13. Sed adhuc fuperfunt alias fuperftitiones, quarum fecreta pandenda funt, Liberi et Liberse, quas omnia facris fenfibus veftris fpecialiter intimanda funt, ut et in iftis profanis religionibus fciatis mortes effe ho- jninum confecratas. x Jablonflci, Pantheon ^gyptiorum, torn. 2. Prole- gom. p. xxvii. inconfiflent in the ancient heathen World. 459 inconfiftent with all that we know of the conduct of magiftrates and of thofe who wifhed to fupport the religion of the flate. The magiftrate, whofe bufinefs it was to protect it, always acted in u- nion with the prieft j and indeed both offices, though diftinct, were very often united in the fame perfon, who did not oppofe in one capacity what he taught in another. Belides, thofe who molt con- fulted the credit of the public religion prudently difcouraged all enquiry concer- ning the origin of the greater gods, and, inftead of divulging, {trove to conceal, their humanity, either by infinuating at times that they were originally beings of a higher rank than mankind, or (what was more commonly thecafe) by applying their hillory to elementary and mundane deities . The following appears to me to be the true ftate of the cafe. The firft objects of idolatrous worfhip were the elements and heavenly bodies. When the wor- fhip of deified men was fuperinduced upon that of the planets and elements, much 460 Worjhlp of human Spirits much confufion was introduced into the heathen theology, and the original doc- trine concerning the gods was in danger of being loft. To prevent this, the myfteries were inftituted, and the true grounds of the pagan worfhip were pro- bably explained to fuch as were judged capable and worthy of fuch information. This could not be done without admit- ting that the popular or national gods Lad been removed from earth to heaven r . And this conceffion, which is all that be- longs to our prefent fubjecl, is a very ftrong confirmation of the point I have been attempting to eftablifh. It mufl be obferved farther, that, although the myfteries were the moft facred of all the heathen rites, they were inftituted only in honour of gods of mortal origin, fuch as Jupiter, Ofiris, Ifis, Mithras, Bacchus, Venus, Ceres, Proferpine., Vulcan, T " In the reprefentations of the myfteries," fays Plutarch, " the true nature of demons is held forth." See Warburtou's Div. Legat. v. i. p. 162. ed. 1755. Caftor in the ancient heathen World. 461 Caftor and Pollux, and others known to be of human defcent. VII. The heathen divinations and ora- cles were thought to proceed from de- mons or the manes of the dead. It has indeed been aflerted, that thole fuppofed to be prophets were all titles which related to one god* the fun* : an a- fertion which has the appearance of be- ing fupported by etymological conjec- tures, but which is contradicted by in- difputable fads. I (hall ftate the fubjecl in what appears to me to be it's true light. Several philofphers did afcribe o- racles in fome meafure to natural caufes, and particularly to certain prophetic ex- halations from the earth, which owed their virtue to a folar influence*. But this was merely the private opinion of a few learned men, to which the people z Bryant's Mythol. v. i. p. 253. fee from p. 239- 282. and p. 445. The gentleman's hypothefis is irre- concileable with the facred writings. See If. viii. 19. This is fliewn in Divert, on Mir. p. 259. note?. were 462 tyorfiip of human Spirits were ftrangers. Nay, thefe philofo-* phers themfelves allowed, that demons might be appointed to prelide over divi- nations and oracles b ; and that the foul itfelf is naturally endued with the fa- culty of divining*. The common perfuafion was, that departed fpirits had an oracular or pro- 'phetical quality. This clearly appears from thofe divinations by the dead, and by ghofts, called necromancy and necuo- mancy c , fo univerfally prevalent in the heathen world. Oracles, therefore, were certainly referred to dead men ; to fuch efpecially as had, when living, dif- covered a fuperior fagacity, or a greater infight into futurity, than d others. Di- * Diflert. ubi fupra, & p. 175. * Id. p. 259. note?. c Plutarch fpeaks of anKvopufltw, an oracle of ghofts, where they were raifed up to foretel future events. Vit* Cimon. p. 482. C. See the account which Maximus Tyrius (Diflert. 26. p. 265. ed. Davif.) has given of a cave near the lake Aornon, where, by prayers, facrifi* ces, and libations, a prophetic ghoft was raifed up. * See Paufanias, Attica, p. 83, 84. vination In tie ancient heathen World. 463 vination by the evocation of the dead was praclifed in the moft ancient times. In the Perfae of ^Efchylus, the ghoft of Darius is called up, and foretels his queen her deftiny. According to Ho- mer *, Ulyfles invoked the dead, and defcended into the infernal re- gions, that he might learn his future fortunes from the prophet Tirefias. With the fame view ^Eneas confulted Anchifes. Saul alfo applied to a ventri- loquift to call up Samuel : a practice that was as early as the age of Mofes". Now will any one affirm, that Darius, Tirefias, Anchifes, and Samuel, or any of the dead whom ventriloquifts preten- ded to confult, were titles of the fun ? Two confiderations ferve to mew that all oracles were referred to human ghofls : the known characters of the gods who had oracles, and the places where they were fet up. As to the gods themfelves here referred to, they were OdyfT. XI. Levit. xx. 6. known 464. Worjhip of human Spirits known to be human perfonages. Such was Ammon, fpoken of above, who had an oracle both at Thebes in Egypt, and in Libya 8 ; Apollo alfo, whofe ora- cle at Delphi was fo much celebrated, was one of twelve greater gods whofe mortal origin was difclofed in the myfte- ries. Themis, a Pelafgic deity h , and one of the Titanidae 1 , had an oracle at mount ParnafTus k ; Trophonius near the city of Lebadia'j Amphiaraus" in Bceotia, or in Attica"; Branchides in Milefia"; the daughter of Macarus at See Diodor. Sic. 1. 3. p. 241, 242. ed Wefl*. Herodot. 1. 2. c. 54, 55, 56. * Herodot. 1. 2. c. 50. 1 Diodor. Sic. 1. v. p. 383. Apollodorus de Diis, ]. i. init. k Herodot. ubi fupra. 1 Liv. xxv. 27. Maxim. Tyr. Differt. 26. p. 265. cd. Davif. Schol. ad Ariftoph. ad Nub. 508. m Herodot. 1. i. c. 52. Apuleius, torn. 2, p. 689. Paufanias, p. 84. n According to Bos, p. 97. Bos, p. 98. Pliny, v. 29. Mela, I. 17. 4. AmphifTa in the ancient heathen World. 465 AmphifTa in Phocis q ; Geryon near Pa- tavium r . Now all thefe oracular gods, as is evident at firft fight, were no other than dead men and women deified 1 . And fuch we muft pronounce all the o- ther oracular divinities to have been, till fome clear examples to the contrary are produced, which has not yet been done. The Augilites, who had no other gods but the ghofts of men, confulted them as oracles'. The heathen oracles were fet up at fepukhres, and in temples, which are on-r ly another name for fepulchral monu- ments creeled in honour of the dead. Their ghofts, therefore, were certainly the deities consulted in thefe places. And, as oracles were fet up in all the ancient nations, and were univerfally ' con- i Paufanias, 1. 10. p. 896, * Sueton. Tiber, c. 14. See Apuleius, ubi fupra ; and Maxim. Tyr. Dil fert. 26. p. 265. P.Mela, cited above, p. 97. note?. Sympof. p. 163. Oper. V. 5. ed. Wells. H h iulted, 466 Worjhlp of human Spirits fulted, on all occafions of importance, both by thofe who had the direction of the public concerns and by private perfons, and were alfo accompanied with Sacrifices*, luftrations, and other religious ceremonies, they afford full proof of the* very extenfive worfhip of human fpirits in the heathen world. If, notwithstanding all the evideh'ce of this point hitherto produced, whether from teftimony or from facls, it fhould ftill appear incredible that dead men and women fhould be generally worfhip- ped as gods, even in nations celebrated for their wifdom and learning, I might in fome meafure remove this prejudice, by (hewing upon what plaufible preten- ces that worfhip was founded. But the grounds and reafons of it are foreign from my prefent defign. I would only obferve, * With human facrifices, according to Servius on Virg. ^En. VI, 107. Quae fine horainis occifione non VIII. in the ancient heathen World. 467 VIII. That the remains of it at this day, amongft many profefled Chriftians, give credibility to the exiflence of it in former times amongft the Heathens. It is certain that the worfhip of the dead ftill prevails, and has long prevailed, a- mongft the former, in the fame manner it did amongft the latter. Some of the Gentile converts carried meat, bread, and wine, to the fepul- chres of the martyrs x , as they bad been accuftomed to do to the manes of their anceftors before their converfion y . As the Gentiles offered up prayers to the dead at their fepulchres z ; in like manner, according to Eufebius, Chrif- tians went to the tombs of the champions of true religion, and made their prayers * See Auftin, (1. 8, c. 27. de Civ. Dei, & 1. vi. Confeff. c. 2.) Illi enim ad fepulchra martyrum epiu las deferebant> pultem, panem, ctvinum. Gutherde Jure Manium, 1. 2. c. 12. y As to the heathen cuftom, fee Ovid's Fafti, 1. 2. v. 533-54- * Addc preces pofitis et fua verba focis. Id. ib. v. 542, H h 2 at 468 Worjhip of human Spirits at them, and honoured their lleffed fouls* ; believing them to have power to avert e- vils from mankind, and to beftow blef- fings upon them b : a power which the Gentiles afcribed to thofe gods who had been men. The fepulchres of faints and martyrs have been converted by Chriftians into churches, juft as the heathen fepulchres were into temples. Altars, annual fef- tivals, and other religious rites, have been inflituted to dead men, as well by many who live under the Gofpel e as by the more ancient idolaters, who were ftrangers to it. The worfhip of images is as familiar to papifts as it ever was to the Gentiles, and apologized for by both upon the fame grounds. By both alfo their gods are carried about in fhrines, * Eufeb. Prep. Ev. 1. 13. c. n. p. 663. b Mede, p. 641, 642. Newton on Daniel, c. 14. p. 215. Middleton's Letters, prefatory Difc. p. 51. c Middleton's Letters from Rome, prefatory Dif- eourfe, p. 25. Newton on Dan. ch. 14. and in the ancient heathen World. 469 and thought to be prefertt in every image and every edifice erected to their honour. The abfurdity of the papifts is more gla- ring than that of the Pagans, becaufe they believe that the whole bodily prefence of Chrift is in ten thoufand different pla- ces in the fame inftant of time, under the appearance of bread and wine. The Papifts dignify their faints with divine titles, as the pagans did their worthies d . Both affign to their deities the fame offices, confidering them as the guardians of towns, cities, and coun- tries, as prefidents overall the objects of nature, and over the various occupa- tions of human life". * If the emperor Domitian ftyled himfelf LORD and GOD, as was obferved above, p. 275. note 6 ; fo is the pope called GOD, the SUPREME DEITY on eartH, &d r diir LORD GOD. Chandler's Account of a Conference in Nicolas-lane, 1734. The Papifts fome- times plead that they only call their faints <#/, not dii. But thefe are equivalent terms. Servius on Virg. ^En. XII. 139- See Middleton's Letters, p. 153, 178. Prefat. Difc. p. 51. H h 3 If, 470 V " r ' : ^ rf ^uman Spirits If, amongft the Heathens, fome god- defTes were thought to have more power, or were in higher reputation in one place than in another; as Juno at Argos f , for example; it is juft the fame amongft Papifts with the lady of Loretto. The virgin Mary holds the firft rank amongft all the popifh faints, and feems indeed to be the principal objecl: of their devo- tion. To her the ftatelieft churches and the faireft altars are raifed ; to her the moft frequent addrefles are made, and the greateft number of miracles afcri- bed 8 . If the Heathens honoured a dei- fied woman as the mother of the gods, and queen of heaven* ; too many Chriftians apply thefe titles to Mary, calling her f Spence's Polymetis, p. 56. * Sir Edward Sandy's Survey of Religion, p. 4, 5, 6. h The regent of the moon was ftyled queen of hea-i ven ; and the mother of the gods was Rhea, who is faid to have appeared to Themiftocles in a dream* Plutarch. Vit.Themift. p. 127. A. tie in the ancient heathen World. 47 r the queen of heaven' 1 ., and the mother of God. Andflie' delights to be worfhipped under different titles", juft as the Heathen dei- fies did 1 . Demon- worfhip was thought to Be juftified amongft the Heathens by the orientation of oracles, the cure of difea- fes, and other miracles'". Herein they were imitated by Chriftians, who pre- tended, that the mira'clet performed in the times of ChrHl and his apoftles were renewed at the fepulchres of the mar- 1 Lipfius addrefles Mary in the following terms. O goddefs ! tbou art the queen of heaven, of the fea, and of the earth. Lipf. Oper, p. 1288. Tenifon of Idola- try, p. 290. Epiphanius fays of Chriftians in his time, *Ihey made a goddefs of the --virgin, and ojjertd a cake vnfo her as the queen of heaven. Mede, p. 636. k Chiftiul fays, (Travels., r>. 135, 6.) The virgin is not invoked under the fame character in all places and on all occafions, but is fplit into fo many difHn'ft 6bjfeftsof worlhip ; as the'fady de Victoria, 'i'C. She has numerous titles, (comp. p. 172, 173.) probably- according to her' diftinft offices. *! J C^n the"polybnomy of the heathen gods, fee Selden, Prolegom. c. 3. ****** 5. Sched. de Diis German, p. 87, 89, 175. " Mede, p. 680, 681. Newton, p;lif. - ^si'4^-i H ht- tyrs. 47 2 Worfolp of human Spirits tyrs". A miraculous power was attribu-< ted to their dead bodies, to their bones, and other reliques . It was not without reafon, therefore, that the gentile philofophers long ago reproached Chriftians with introducing new gods, fuch as were taken from a- mongft men p . Nay, Theodoret boafts that God had brought his dead (viz. the martyrs) into the place (the temples) of the heathen gods. For, inftead of the feafts of Jupiter and Bacchus, are now ce- lebrated thefejiivals of Peter and Paul, and of the holy martyrs*. If the Gentiles ferved the creature, paffing over the crea- tor r , the papifts, (I fpeak not of indivi- duals,) notwithstanding fome verbal ac- n Mede, ubi fupra ; and Middleton's Free Enquiry, p. 130. etfeq. Astopopifli miracles, fee Middleton's Prefatory Difcourfe to his Letters from Rome, p. 29. et feq. Newton on Daniel, p. 208. et feq. P Eunapius, Vit. Philofoph. p. 76. See Julian ap. Cyril, in Newton, p. 208. 9 Theodoret, 1. 8. ap. Mede, p, 642. Rom. i. 21. Bezain loc. knowledgements in the ancient heathen World. 473 knowledgements of him, do very much conceal him from public view, by direc- ting the attention of the people to many other objects of religious worfhip, by af- fociating with him the virgin Mary and other faints 5 , and by making the moil dimonourable reprefentations of him in the pictures with which their facred edi- fices are adorned. The figure of the ever-adorable and incomprehenlible Je- hovah, who inhabits eternity and fills immenfity, is generally that of an old man ; and, in fome places, he has upon him a night-gown a?id cap*. In the feve- ral foregoing particulars, and many more that might be mentioned, there is a ftriking refemblance between the idola- try of Papifts and Pagans. The for- mer know that the objects of their wor- fhip had been men, juft as the latter In the town of Znaim, in Moravia, there is an i- mage of the virgin, erefted on a fair pillar, with this infcription : Laus Deo, Mariteque virgini, fanftifjue/u- it. Chifhul's Travels, p. 131. 4 Id. ib. p. 116. did. 474 Worflnp of human Spirits did. Both perform their worfhip in the very fame places, on the high- ways, in groves, on mountains 6 \ and at fepukhres. Let us now briefly confider, how far the practice of the worfhip of dead men, in a large part of the chriftian church, proves the prior exiftence of it in the heathen world. Every refemblance between the cuf- toms, whether civil or religious, of dif- ferent nations, does not, I acknowledge, neceflarily argue imitation. A confide- rable refemblance has been difcovered between the cuftoms of different people who have had no intercourfe with one another ; and, where it is not purely ac- cidental, may be accounted , for by fome principles in human nature common to all. Let it then be fuppofed, what, however, cannot be granted, that the conformity between popery and pagan- ifm, in the feveral particulars Hated a- bove, and in a hundred others that have Middleton's Letters, p. 184, 185. been in the ancient heathen World. 475 been omitted, may be thus accounted for; it will flill ferve to fhew, that the fame fpecies of idolatry, praftifed iit a great part of the chriftian world, might, and probably did, prevail in the heather* world. To whatever common princi- ples you choofe to afcribe it's prevalence in both, they were likely to operate more ftrongly in the latter than in the fqr- m$r : for Chriflianity fo clearly and pa- thetically reprefents God as the only proper object of religious worfhip, that it is even hard to conceive how the pro- feffors of this religion fhould join any o- thers with him. At the fame time it gives us fuch a view of the ftate of the dead* as overturns the very foundation of all the devotion which has been paid them. Nay, it particularly warns us a- gainft this fpecies of idolatry, and brands it as an apoftacy from the chriftian faith x . Thefe confiderations are well a- dapted to preferve the prcfeflbrs of the * Diflert. on Mir. p. |6i ?tfeq, *i Tim. iv. i. Gofpel 476 Worjhip of human Spiri Gofpel from all idolatry, more efpecially from the worfhip of the dead j and has? a6hially produced this effect on multi- tudes both in ancient and modern times, though not on all. Now if reafon, even when aided by revelation, could not check the fuppofed natural propenfity to the worfliip of dead men 5 it cannot be i- magined that reafon alone could do it. E- very natural principle or bias will operate with the greateft force where there are the feweft and the weakeft powers of refift- ance. But the conformity between paganifrn and popery, with refpecl to the worfliip of the dead, holds in fo many particu-- lars, and fuch as have manifeftly no foundation in any appearance of reafon, or bias of nature, that it cannot be ac- counted for without fuppofing that Chriftians copied from the Heathens. Befides, we learn from hiflory, what we might have prefumed to be true from a knowledge of human nature, that the heathen m the ancient heathen World. 477 heathen as well as the jewifh converts to Chriftianity retained flrong prejudices in favour of many of the principles in which they had been educated. Of this there can be no flronger proof than a fact taken notice of above y , the continu- ance of the cuftom of offering human victims amongft the Chriftians in Gaul. From hiflory we likewife learn, that many paftors of the church, who were employed in bringing men over to the profeflion of the Gofpel, though they themfelves might havejuft conceptions of it, condefcended too far to the preju- dices of others. They could not flop the current of fuperftition, and therefore en- deavoured to direct it into a new channel; and were fure hereby to add to the wealth and grandeur of the church, though at the fame time they robbed it of it's purity and true glory. The mif- fionaries of Ireland and England, not y P. 108. note . Procopius (1. ii. de Bello Gothi- co.) memorat Francos etiam Chriftum colentes adfuum sevumfacrificafle homines. Toraafm. de Donariisvete- rum, c. 40. being 478 Worjhip of human Spirits being able to withdraw the people from paying a kind of adoration to {tones and barrows creeled to the dead z , cut crofles on the former, and dedicated the latter to chriftian faints j and then allowed the fuperftition. Thefe criminal complian- ces had been unneceflary, had not this fuperftition taken faft hold of the minds of the people before they became ac- quainted with Chriflianity. We may therefore juftly conclude, that the wor- fhip of dead men, in countries called chriftian, is a remnant of the pagan ido- latry*, and a demonftration of it's having exifted in general credit prior to the co- ining of Chrift, and even prevailed more before this period than it has done fince. Let us weigh the feveral facts that have been ftated in this fection, and fee what is the moft natural conclufion from them. The heathen gods were wor- fhipped at places of fepulture or at ho- 2 Borlafe's Antiq. of Cornw. p. 222, 223. * See Middleton's Letters from Rome, p, 225. f . norary In tie ancient heathen World. 479 norary tombs : they were reprefented by images in human form : the gifts pre- fented to them were adapted to the ap- prehended nature of human fpirits, and the ceremonies with which they were honoured refpe&ed their former mortal condition : and oracles, thofe boafted proofs of a divine fore-knowledge, were referred to the manes of the dead. Thefe facts clearly point to deceafed mortals as the objects of pagan worfhip. We are even eye-witneffes of the actual exiftence of a fimilar worfhip in the chriflian church, which, we know, was introdu- ced there by the converts from the hea- then religion. And, though the priefts endeavoured to conceal the mortal origin of their principal gods, yet they entruf- ted the fecret with fo many, that it was at laft openly divulged. I fhall offer no more proofs of the worfhip of human fpirits in this place. Some farther illuftrations of it may oc- cur in examining the grounds and rea- fons 4$o Worjhlp of human Spirits fbns of the Heathens deifying both the world and the fouls of men. I fhaU now conclude with a brief recapitulation of what has been already advanced. That gods, who had their original here below, were worshipped in moftr of the heathen nations commonly ftyled barbarous a , and in all thofe polifhed by learning 1 *, has been proved, by an in- duction of particulars, upon the tefti- mony of the Pagans themfelves, who certainly beft knew what the objects of their worfhip were. Befides the proofs of this point, which refpecl particular nations, others of a more general nature were produced, which equally refpecl all the learned na- tions, and all others which had adopted their fyftem of theology. The proofs were drawn from two fources : from the diftinct teftimonies of the heathen poets a philofophers, and hiftorians, and of the Ch. I. fe&. 1,2. Ch. II. chriftian in the ancient heathen World. 48 r fchriftian Fathers c ; and from certain facts, which cannot be controverted, and yet Cannot be accounted for but upon the fuppofition of the truth of thofe tef- timonies d . The tefti monies and the facts mutually illuftrate and confirm each o- ther $ and both, efpecially when taken together, fully demonftrate the general prevalence of the worfhip of human fpi- rits in the ancient heathen world : which is the point I undertook to eftablifh. But the arguments, which have car- ried us fo far, go farther, and prove, not only that human fpirits were gene^ rally worfhipped amongft the Heathens, but that fuch fpirits alone, or with few exceptions, were, in the nations with which we are beft acquainted, the direct and immediate objects of the eftablimed worfhip ; which confided in having fta- tues, temples, altars, priefts, facrifices, feftivals, games, and numerous ceremo- nies, dedicated to them by public de- * Ct. III. ftft. i. d Ch. III. feet. 2. I i crees. 482 Worfiip of human Spirits crees. In the nations here alluded to, idolatry was digefted into an artificial fyjlem ; which might indeed be built upon the fuppofition of there being two forts of gods, the natural and the human. Neverthelefs, the latter, being thought to be intrufted with the government of the world, and more efpecially of human affairs, became the grand objects of mens hopes, and fears, and depend- ence, and engrofied, as it were, the public devotion. If fome of thefe hero- gods were confidered, by thofe inflrucT:- ed in the fecret doctrine, as fymbols of the natural, yet the civil theology prefented the former to the people as be- ing themfelves true and real divinities, not as fymbols and reprefentatives of a- ny other c . Accordingly the Heathens f , the early Chriflians 2 , and to thefe we Above, p. 412-415. f P. 223, 224, 255, 256, 257, 263-267, 277. * P. *57> 344-347- may in the ancient heathen JVorld. 483 may add the ancient Jews h , and the fa- cred writers themfelves 1 , agree in repre- fenting all the gods of paganifm as de- ceafed mortals. This is certainly true, in general, with refpeft to the objects of national worfhip. Some, who would not undertake to affirm there were no ex- ceptions, confeffed that it was difficult to find any k j and others thought that there were none 1 . It muft be ob- ferved, farther, that the argument from the facts before mentioned, particu- larly from the reprefentation of the gods by images, and the places and rites of their worfhip, extends as far as the fore-cited tercimonies, and equally with h IR their greek verfion of Pf. xcv. 5. we read, DauTE? c $oi TWX &> &!,'/><>. ALL the gods of the Hea- then are demons, that is, men who after their deaths were fuppofed to become demons or deities. Demons here cannot denote apoftate angels ; becairfe, in this fenfe of the word, the" affertion is palpably falfe. * The Scripture reprefents the heathen gods as dead men, and confequently as nothing more than fuch, be- caufe it does not allow their real deification after their deaths. DifTert. on Mir. p. 197. Above, p. 13. * Above, p. 257. ' Jb. p. 265, 344^347- I i 2 them 484 Worflxp of human Spirits them ferve to fhew that all the heathen gods had once been men ; which is a full vindication of the opinion I had exprefTed of them in the fame terms.* Neverthe- lefs, a late writer declares no opinion can be more erroneous than this, and e- ven that all the world knew the heathen gods had never been men*. The Gentiles diftinguifhed the gods whom the laws commanded them to worfhip into two clafTes : the gods of the higher, and the lower, order", The lat- ter were by all known and acknowledged to be fuch as were natives of the earth, but believed to be advanced to heaven. As to the former, the priefts difcoura- ged all inquiry into their origin ; and Jbmetimes pretended that they were be- Above, p. 12, 13, 14. Fell, p. 30, no. Dii majorum, ef minorum, gentium. The word gen- tium is ufed here as it is in the following pafiage of Ci- cero : Cleantbes, qui quafi. majorum ejt gentium Stoicus, Acadera. II. 41. Jthas always been argued from in the preceding fheets in it's true fenfe ; though, in p. 209, it is, through mere inadvertence, rendered na- tl6/tl. ings in the ancient heathen World. 485 ings of a fuperior fpecies, a celeftial race, who had only condefcended to vifit this lower world, in the form of men and women, for a time. Neverthelefs, per- fons of underftanding faw through the delufion, and proved, from the hiftory of their birth and burial, (what the priefts themfelves difclofed, to thofe ini- tiated into the greater myfteries, under the feal of fecrecy,) that even thefe gods of the firft clafs were of human defcent". The Heathen3 not only declare, in ge- neral terms, that all their gods had no higher original, but affirm that this was the cafe in particular with refpect to their great eft gods., and the objects of their moft augufl ceremonies p . In examining the evidence of the hu- man origin of the national gods, I confi- dered the objections that have been raifed againft it by feveral writers as they came in the way, and particularly thofe urged P. 2 55 , 458-461. 1 Above, p. 135, 183, 257 267, 276, 277, 308. I i 3 by 486 Worjhlp of human Spirits by Dr. Blackwell and Mr. Bryant. The former was a learned and ingenious, but not always a correct, writer. And his Letters on Mythology are rather a flu- died apology for paganifm than an im- partial reprefentation of it. He was of opinion, that the gods of the greater nations (in which he muft include the learned ones) were the deified parts and powers of the univerfe. I have therefore largely fhewn that the gods of thefe na- tions were deified mortals. His objec- tions are retailed by a late writer q as his own, and have been diftinctly examU ned r . With regard to Mr. Bryant, it is impoflible 1 Mr, Fell. 1 In ch. I. feft. i, and other places, Mr. Fell at- tempted to refute that part of the Diflertation on Mira- cles which was intended to prove the following propofi- tion, viz. "that fucb demons, as were the more imnie- ft dlaie oljgeis of the ejlablijked ivorjhip among ft the " ancient nations, particularly the Egyptians, Greeks, ** and Romans, were fuch departed human fpirits as " were believed to become demons." Above, p. 4, 5. ^'his propofidoii is fully confirmed by \vhat has been of- fered in the ancient heathen World. 487 iriipoffible to forbear doing juftice to his abilities, his learning, his candour, and I i 4 his fered in the preceding fheets. Let us confider whether Mr. Fell has fucceeded in his attempt to refute it. I. Inflead of informing his readers, that my defsgn profefledly was to prove the truth of this propofition, (Difi*. Mir. p. 183,231.) he has, on the contrary, maim- ed and difguifed it, fo as to render it impoffible for any one to divine what the Diflertation aimed at on this fub- jeft, and to lead them to think it's aim was different from what it really was. Above, p. 11-18. 2. The fore-mentioned propofition was fupported by facts and teftimonies. How has the gentleman anfwer- ed thefe arguments ? by taking no notice at all of the argument from facts, and overlooking the principal tef- timonies, particularly thofe of the early Chriltians and of the philofophers, though the latter, in his own ac- count, were the moft competent witneffes. Above, p. 301, 302. But, if he did not overturn the proofs of the propofition, nor even examine the principal of them, yet it may be thought that he was able to urge fome plaufible objections againft it. This leads me to obferve, 3. That his objections are foreign from the purpofe. The propofition refpected demons, as contra-diftinguimed from the natural gods. Above, p. 5. Our author, in anfwer, tells us that the latter were worfhipped; which they might be, and yet the propofition be true. To refute it, he mould have fhewn, that fuch demons as it defcribes were beings originally fuperior to the human race ; but he has contented himfelf with tranfcribing, from 488 Worjhlp of human Spirits zeal to fupport Chriftianity. His knowledge of antiquity rendered him fully from thofe authors who wrote againft Dr. Sykes, pafia- ges in which the ancients fpeak of demons that do not come under this defcription. The propofition refpefts fuch demons as \verethe objects of the eftablijhed worjhip, which the gentleman hoped to refute by telling us, that the philofophers aflerted a fuperior order of demons, though the latter were not the objefts of the eflabliihed worfhip, and though the philofophers themfelves bear teftimony to the humanity of thofe who were.* It is juft the' fame when he is treating the fubjeft of demoniacal pofTeflion. Inftead of {hewing that thofe demons, to nvhom poffejjions <were referred, were a higher order of be- ings than human fpirits, (of which he has nvt produced ene Jingle example,) he only labours to prove, (svhat I had repeatedly allowed, though, from his manner of writing, his readers would imagine the contrary,) that fome did aflert this higher order of demons, to whom, however, pofleffions were never referred. The gentle- man fucceeds where he has no adverfary. Farther, the demons of the learned nations were the only fubjeft of the propofition ; the Egyptians, Greeks, and Ro. mans, being mentioned as the moil proper fpecimens of the reft. Above, p. 9, 10. To this the gentleman op- pofes the cafe of the barbarous nations, which, accor ding to him, worfhipped only the natural gods ; and confequently acknowledged no demons at all, in the re- ftrained fenfe of that word in the prapofition. Ib. p. jo, 2 3t * Above, p. 198, et /c. in the ancient heathen World. 489 fully fenfible of what he freely acknow- ledges, viz. that, "in the opinion of the Heathens 23. In a word, all his objections are quite foreign frm the purpofe, or elfe, 4. They are not founded in fat. His language ma- il ifeftly implies that the philofophers were on his fide, though the contrary has been demonftrated. Above, p, 300-308. He ftrongly infinuates that I had excluded their teftimonies, notwithftanding I had appealed to, and produced, them. Ib. p, 301. note z . In con- tradi&ion to all the foregoing teftimonies, he maintains that hero-gods were either rejefled or not known, even in the days of Plato, by the greateft part of the world; and, to give fome colour to his afTertion, he fubftitutes the word moft in the room of many, and thus corrupts, as well as groflly mifinterprets, this philofopher. Diflert. on Mir. p. 173, note f . Fell, p. 9. Above, p. 10, ri, 131. In moft of thofe very nations, in which he affirms di- vine honours were not paid to deceafed heroes, human fpirits were actually worlhipped. Above, ch. I. feft. i. p. 93,etpaffim. Sett. 2. p. i28.ch.II. feft. landz. In fome as the greatejl. Ib. p. 33, 183. In others, as the only gods. Ib. p. 32, 93. According to his arith- metic, the natural gods were the greatejl part of the heathen deities, contrary to the cleareft evidence. A- bove, p. 19, 267-272. In order to ferve his purpofe, he confounds the Belus, fpoken of by Berofus, with the Creator of heaven and earth, notwithftanding Berofus himfelf tells us, Belus's head was twice cut off. Above, p. 188-190. He makes the Phenicians and Egyptians (ft 490 Worfhip of human Spirits Heathens themfelves, their gods were deified to be worfhippers only of phyfical beings, by mutila- ting his author, who declares in the moft unequivocal terms, and in the very place appealed to, that they had gods both mortal and immortal, and that the former were accounted the greateft gods, though the latter were the only gods in their own natural right. Fell, p. 31. Above, p. 133, et feq. The gentleman has frequent re- courfe to fuch mutilations. That complained of above, p. 1 1, 12. is a juft fpecimen of his ufual manner of quoting my writings. He appeals to Herodo- tus to prove, that " the Getes efteemed the heavens to be the only deity," though this veryhiftorian (in agree- ment with all others) affirms, that they worfhipped Zamolxis. Nay, Herodotus fays, that the Getes le- lie<ued there ivas no other god but theirs. Above, p. 30- 34. According to Mr. Fell, " Plutarch was very care- ful never to attribute this opinion" (viz. That the gods of Egypt had been men) " to the Egyptian priefts ;" and yet this fame Plutarch declares, the priefts did affirm, that the bodies of their gods, except fuch as <were incorrup- tible and immortal, lay buried <vcith them" Above, p. 165, 166. Thus, Mr. Fell, notwithftanding his decla- ration to the contrary, Introduction, p. viii. does impute to author? opinions they never maintained, and even fuch as they clearly contradict or overturn. See above, p. i33,etfeq. and p. 144, 177, note f . No wonder the gentleman is rather fparing of his citations. What he did not know himfelf, he imagined others were equally ignorant of. He fpeaks as if no proof could be produ, ced in the ancient heathen World. 491 deified mortals'. But this conceffion, and other concefllons, together with his relying more on etymological deductions than ced of the humanity of Ofo-is, (above, p. 169, note k ,) or of theworfhip of a man under the name of Bel, ib.p. 196, note f ; and as if there were no decifive evidence of mens paying religious worfhip to a human fpirit under the term Jupiter, p. 246. in a note ; though proof of the humanity of Ofiris was placed before him, fee above, p. 169, and he mould have known that there was de- pifive evidence of the humanity both of Bel and of Jupiter. He confounds the Jupiter of the temples with, that of the philofophers. Jb. p. 298-500. With ref- pedl to Jupiter, fee alfo p. 237. He fpeaks of the doc- trine of Euhemerus as that of an individual, though it had fpread throughout the world. Tb. p, 235, 236. It is not of one or two particular branches of his fubje& that he was ignorant, but of the whole : witnefs his ge- neral declarations concerning the heathen gods. Ib. p. 484. But it is not juftifiable to affirm any thing as a fact, while we are ignorant whether it be true or falfe. Much lefs is it allowable to affirm what is clearly and cer- tainly falfe, in fuch afTured language as implies out knowing it to be certainly true. See ib. p. 205, 206. Yet this is his ufual ityle of writing. He reprefents the grofTefl errors as certain and evident truths. " There " can be no doubt but that the Greeks themfelves have > c declared, that the Egyptians never worfhipped fuch f c gods as had been men." Ib. p. 177, note'. He fpeaks s Above, p, 320, 492 Worjhip of human Spirits, than on the concurring teftimonies of all ages, feem to me infuperable difficulties upon his fide of the queftion. On whofe fide the weight of evidence preponderates is a matter that mufl be left to the judge- ment of the reader. fpeaks of it as a matter " univerfally known, that the " Egyptians never paid any religious honours to hero- " gods," in exprefs contradiction to the Creeks them- fel-ves, as well a? to the united teftimonies of other heathen and of chriftian writers. Ib. p. 183, note*. See ano- ther example, p. 37, note k . He even affirms that " all *' the world knew the heathen gods had never been " men." Fell's Demon, p. no, If the reader defires to fee what ungenerous methods this writer ufes to fup- port his groundlefs accufations, he may turn to p. 353, note d , in the preceding meets. The foregoing inftances, to which more might be added, are fufficient to mew what opinion we are to form of Mr. Fell, as a writer, even upon the fubjefl which he has been allowed to handle better than any other. And, as the other writers, whom he hath jnifreprefented or mifunderftood, are not chargeable with obfcurity, I hope it is not owing to any fuch caufp that he has given a falfe or erroneous account of my fen- timents on almoft every article of importance. THE END, ( 493 ) CONTENTS. THE account given of the heathen gods in the Dif- fertation on Miracles ftated, and cleared from .mifreprefentations, p. 1. The defign of the prefent publication to prove the gent- ral prevalence of the luorjhip of human fpirits in the an- cient heathen world, p. 21. The proofs either refpect particular nations, or are of a more general nature, and equally refpeft all the moft celebrated nations of antiquity, ibid. The ancient nations divided into two clafles, the barbarous and the learned, p. 22. CHAP. I. Proving, from the teftimonies of the Heathens, that human fpirits were worshipped in the nations ufually accounted barbarous, p. 23. SECT. I. Particularly in thofe which have been faid to hold only the natural gods, p. 24. i. The Scythi- ans, ibid. 2. The MafTagetes, p. 28. j. The Getes, p. 30. 4. The Goths, p. 34. 5. The Ger- mans, p. 38. 6. The Perfians, p. 47. 7. The Ara- bians, p. 84. 8. The Inhabitants of Meroe, p. 90. SECT. II. Other barbarous nations worihipped human fpirits, p. 94. In Africa, the ^Ethiopians, p. 95. Some of the Libyan Nomades, p. 96. The Augi- Iites> 494 CONTENTS. lites, p. 97. Carthaginians, Hid. Atlantians, p. 98. And others, p. 97-100. In Europe, p. 100. The Celts, Hid. The Iberians and Celtiberians, p. 102. The Gauls, p. 103. The Thracians, p. 1 16. In Alia, p. 119. The Inhabitants of it's nor- thern parts, p. 120. Of the middk and fouthern, p. 119-123. And of the eaftern, p. 123. The In- dians, p. 124. The Pundits of Indoftan, ibid. The The Brachmans, p. 124, 125. The people of Tar- tary, p. 126. Siam, ibid. Tibet, ibid. China, ibid. Japan, p. 127. The worfhip of dead men in the na- tions accounted barbarous was very general, p. 129. And almoft univerfal, and forae of them acknow- ledged no other gods, ibid. CHAP. II. Proving, from the teftimonies of the Heathens, that human fpirits were worfhipped in the nations poliftied by learning, p. 132. SECT. I. The Phenicians, p. 133. SECT. II. The E- gyptians, p. 146. SECT. III. The Affyrians, Chal- deans, and Babylonians, p. 184. SECT. IV. The Syrians, p. 200. SECT. V. The Greeks, p. 207. SECT. VI. The Romans, p. 247. In the foremen- tioned civilized nations, all or almojl all the objeds of the eftablilhed worlhip had once been men ; fuch. even their greatejt gods had been, p. 276-278. CHAP. III. Containing general proofs of the worfhip of human fpi- rits in the ancient heathen world, p. 279. Thefe proofs drawn from two fources, tcjiimonies ikid. CONTENTS. 495 SECT. I. Proofs from tejlimonies t ibid. I. The tefti- monies of the heathen poets, p. 280. II. Philofo- phers, p. 296. III. And hiitorians, p. 308. Mr. Bryant's objections propofed and anfwered, p. 320. IV. The teftimonies of the Chriftian Fathers, p. 341. SECT. II. Proofs from/**?/, p. 357. I. The heathen fepulchres, p. 358. II. Temples, p. 373. III. Py- ramids, p. 379. IV. Other places of fepulture and religious worftrip, p. 389. Caves, p. 590. (Mithras worfhipped in a cave, p. 393.) Houfes, p. 398. Highways, ibid. Groves, p. 399. Mountains, p. 404. V. The ftatues and images of the gods, p. 408. VI. The rites of heathen worfhip, p. 417. which were adapted to the idea the Heathens entertained of human ghofts, ibid. Sacrifices and libations, p. 427. Blood, p. 430. Human victims, p. 432. Other rites of worfhip, p. 447. Mournings, p. 448. Ban- quets, p. 453. Games, p. 454. Myfteries or fecret worihip, p. 45 8. VII. Divination and oracles, p. 46 1 . VIII. The remains of the fame kind of idolatrous worihip, in popifh countries, as that pra&ifed by the Heathens, p. 467. The arguments from fads, in proof of the humanity of the gods, as extenfive as thofe from teftimony, p. 483-. Recapitulation, p. 480 to the end. ft W - r f / ^ _ ^^ UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL IWWRY FAOUTY A 000035307 8 'S ^ ^:^?T.