Intro to Proclus on the Theology of Plato

7/25/2019 Intro to Proclus on the Theology of Plato

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-to-proclus-on-the-theology-of-plato 1/47

Thomas Taylor's

introduction

to

Proclus

"On the Theology of Plato"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thomas_Taylor_portrait_by_Sir_Thomas_Lawrence.jpg



Introduction to the electronic edition ofProclus work "On the Theology of Plato".

The following text pertains to the lengthyintroduction of Thomas Taylor on Proclus' work "On

the theology of Plato".

Taylor gives a nice summary of some key tenets of theuniversal philosophy of ancient civilization, notaly!iddle#astern and $reek. Those civilizationsrecognized the universe as an organism that is alive.They acknowledged The One principle of principles, outof which arises several successive orders of eing.These are six in total, as is eautifully outlined inthe student edition "%eyond the &hadows", pulished yPrometheus Trust, an organization that is dedicated topromulgating the translations of Thomas Taylor of thefamous $reek and eoPlatonic authors of old.The "six causes", mentioned y Proclus in hiswritings, are also elucidated in the aove ooklet.%eing an important refinement of (ristotle's fourcauses, these give enough food for thought to ground awhole new science that is truly holistic in scope andintent)

The knowledge and insights expressed y Proclus cannote overestimated. *hen digested properly, it can helpreorient our perplexed civilization, so out of touchwith nature and deeper feelings, to the &pirit withineach of us, and, give help to the lost ones. *ithout

the guiding +ight of eason, or, true understanding,the world may very well spiral to selfdestruction,caused y wrong eliefs, economic overexploitation,materialistic philosophy, etc.There is hope, however, that some leaders of our worldwill have the courage to hold to a vision of a selfsustained economy, guided y a morality that isgrounded in natural order, and divine law, aspropounded y the eoPlatonic philosophers.The (ncients certainly would applaud such a move.

(s a help to understanding the following text, keep in

mind that the words-

Animal is generally descriptive of an ensouled eingfrom planets to the simplest organism that can moveitself.

Daemon or daimon does not mean a "demon", ut a kindof /half0god .

Occult means hidden to the /outer0 senses.

Intellectual means true understanding, deep insightand direct experience of the essence of things. ot to

e confused with the rainmind which plays a minorrole in Platonic philosophy.

http://www.prometheustrust.co.uk/

http://www.prometheustrust.co.uk/



$reek text has mostly een omitted, except wheredeemed important, from this text, since it contriuteslittle to the understanding of this text, exceptperhaps for specialized scholars, which have their ownresources anyway.

( few sparse elucidations have een inserted y me ins1uare rackets. Text has een reformatted for easierreading on computer screens.

!artin #user. ov.,2334.www.scrid.com5meusermeuser.awardspace.com

also see- ooks.google.com for more eoPlatonicworks.

6TO789T6O.

6 #:O69# in the opportunity which is afforded me ofpresenting the truly philosophic reader, in thepresent work, with a treasure of $recian theology ofa theology, which was first mystically andsymolically promulgated y Orpheus, afterwardsdisseminated enigmatically through images yPythagoras, and in the last place scientifically

unfolded y Plato and his genuine disciples.The peculiarity indeed, of this theology is, that itis no less scientific than sulime and that y ageometrical series of reasoning originating from themost selfevident truths, it developes all the deifiedprogressions from the ineffale principle of things,and accurately exhiits to our view all the links ofthat golden chain of which deity is the one extreme,and ody the other.

That also which is most admirale and laudale in thistheology is, that it produces in the mind properlyprepared for its reception the most pure, holy,

venerale, and exalted conceptions of the great causeof all.;or it celerates this immense principle as somethingsuperior even to eing itselfas exempt from the whole of things, of which it isnevertheless ineffaly the source, and does nottherefore think fit to connumerate it with any triad,or order of eings.6ndeed, it even apologises for attempting to give anappropriate name to this principle, which is inreality ineffale, and ascries the attempt to theimecility of human nature, which striving intently to

ehold it, gives the appellation of the most simple ofits conceptions to that which is eyond all knowledgeand all conception. <ence it denominates it the one,and the good y the former of these names indicating

http://books.google.com/

http://books.google.com/



its transcendent simplicity, and y the latter itssusistence as the o=ect of desire to all eings.;or all things desire good. (t the same time however,it asserts that these appellations are in realitynothing more than, the parturitions of the soul whichstanding as it were in the vestiules of the adytum ofdeity, announce nothing pertaining to the ineffale,

ut only indicate her spontaneous tendencies towardsit, and elong rather to the immediate offspring ofthe first $od, than to the first itself.

<ence, as the result of this most venerale conceptionof the supreme, when it ventures not only todenominate the ineffale, ut also to assert somethingof its relation to other things, it considers this aspreeminently its peculiarity, that it is theprinciple of principlesit eing necessary that the characteristic property ofprinciple, after the same manner as other things,should not egin from multitude, ut should e

collected into one monad as a summit, and which is theprinciple of all principles. 9onformaly to this,Proclus, in the second ook of this work >p. ?@4Asays, with matchless magnificence of diction- "+et usas it were celerate the first $od, not asestalishing the earth and the heavens, nor as givingsusistence to souls, and the generation of allanimalsfor he produced these indeed, ut among the last ofthings ut prior to these, let us celerate him asunfolding into light the whole intelligile andintellectual genus of $ods, together with all thesupermundane and mundane divinities as the $od of all

$ods, the unity of all unities, and eyond the firstadyta,B C as more ineffale than all silence, and moreunknown than all essence,C as holy among the holies,and concealed in the intelligile $ods."

B i. e. The highest order of intelligiles.

The scientific reasoning from which this dogma isdeduced is the following - (s the principle of allthings is the one, it is necessary that theprogression of eings should e continued, and that novacuum should intervene either in incorporeal orcorporeal natures.6t is also necessary that every thing which has anatural progression should proceed through similitude.6n conse1uence of this, it is likewise necessary thatevery producing principle should generate a numer ofthe same order with itself, viz. nature, a naturalnumersoul, one that is psychical /i. e. elonging to soul0and intellect, an intellectual numer.;or if whatever possesses a power of generating,generates similars prior to dissimilars, every causemust deliver its own form and characteristicpeculiarity to its progeny

and efore it generates that which gives susistenceto progressions far distant and separate from itsnature, it must constitute things proximate to itselfaccording to essence, and con=oined with it through



similitude.6t is therefore necessary from these premises, sincethere is one unity the principle of the universe, thatthis unity should produce from itself, prior to everything else, a multitude of natures characterized yunity, and a numer the most of all things allied toits cause and these natures are no other than the

$ods.

(ccording to this theology therefore, from the immenseprinciple of principles, in which all things causallysusist, asored in superessential light, andinvolved in unfathomale depths, a eauteous progenyof principles proceed, all largely partaking of theineffale, all stamped with the occult >hiddenAcharacters of deity, all possessing an overflowingfulness of good.;rom these dazzling summits, these ineffale lossoms,these divine propagations, eing, life, intellect,soul, nature, and ody depend monads suspended from

unities, deified natures proceeding from deities. #achof these monads too, is the leader of a series whichextends from itself to the last of things, and whichwhile it proceeds from, at the same time aides in,and returns, to its leader.(nd all these principles and all their progeny arefinally centered and rooted y their summits in thefirst great allcomprehending one. Thus all eingsproceed from, and are comprehended in the first eingall intellects emanate from one first intellect allsouls from one first soul all natures lossom fromone first nature and all odies proceed from thevital and luminous ody of the world. (nd lastly, all

these great monads are comprehended in the first one,from which oth they and all their depending seriesare unfolded into light. <ence this first one is trulythe unity of unities, the monad of monads, theprinciple of principles, the $od of $ods, one and allthings, and yet one prior to all.

o o=ections of any weight, no arguments ut such asare sophistical, can e urged against this mostsulime theory which is so congenial to theunperverted conceptions of the human mind, that it canonly e treated with ridicule and contempt indegraded, arren, and ararous ages. 6gnorance andpriestcraft, however, have hitherto conspired todefame those inestimale works, B in which this andmany other grand and important dogmas >teachingsA canalone e found and the theology of the $reeks haseen attacked with all the insane fury ofecclesiastical zeal, and all the imecil flashes ofmistaken wit, y men whose conceptions on the su=ect,like those of a man etween sleeping and waking, haveeen turbid and wild, phantastic and confused, preposterous and vain.

B Diz. the present and other works of Proclus,

together with those of Plotinus, Porphyry, :amlichus>6amlichusA, &yrianus, (mmonius, 7amascius,Olympiodorus, and &implicius.



6ndeed, that after the great incomprehensile cause ofall, a divine multitude susists, cooperating withthis cause in the production and government of theuniverse, has always een, and is still admitted yall nations, and all religions, however much they maydiffer in their opinions respecting the nature of the

suordinate deities, and the veneration which is to epaid to them y manand however ararous the conceptions of some nationson this su=ect may e when compared with those ofothers. <ence, says the elegant !aximus Tyrius, "Eouwill see one according law and assertion in all theearth, that there is one $od, the king and father ofall things, and many $ods, sons of $od, rulingtogether with him.This the $reek says, and the %ararian says, theinhaitant of the 9ontinent, and he who dwells nearthe sea, the wise and the unwise. (nd if you proceedas far as to the utmost shores of the ocean, there

also there are $ods, rising very near to some, andsetting very near to others." >7issert. 6. #dit.Princ.AThis dogma, too, is so far from eing opposed yeither the Old or ew Testament, that it is admittedy oth, though it forids the religious veneration ofthe inferior deities, and en=oins the worship of one$od alone, whose portion is :aco, and 6srael the lineof his inheritance. The following testimonies will, 6dout not, convince the lieral reader of the truth ofthis assertion.

6n the first place it appears from the @2d chapter of

7euteronomy, v. F. in the &eptuagint version, that"the division of the nations was made according to thenumber of the angels of God ," and not according to thenumer of the children of 6srael, as the present<erew text asserts.This reading was adopted y the most celeratedfathers of the 9hristian church, such as, among the$reeks, Origen, %asil, and 9hrysostom, and among the+atins, :erom and $regory.

That this too, is the genuine reading, is evident fromthe Gth chapter of the same ook and the ?4th verse,in which it is said, " (nd lest thou lift up thineeyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun and themoon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven,shouldst e driven to worship them, and serve them,which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nationsunder the whole heaven."

<ere it is said that the stars are divided to all thenations, which is e1uivalent to saying that thenations were divided according to the numer of thestars the :ewish legislator at the same time,considering his own nation as an exception, and aseing under the government of the $od of 6srael alone.

;or in the following verse it is added, " %ut the +ordhath taken you /i. e. the :ews0, and rought you forthout of the iron furnace, even out of #gypt, to e untohim a people of inheritance, as ye are to this day."



%y the angels of $od therefore /in 7euteron.@2. v. F.0the stars are signified and these in the same ook/chapter ?H. v. @.0 are expressly called $ods " (ndhath gone and served other $ods, and worshipped them,either the sun or moon, or any of the host of heaven,which I have not commanded " 6n the @d chapter also,

and the 2Gth verse, it is implied in the 1uestionwhich is there asked, that the $od of the :ews issuperior to all the celestial and terrestrial $ods -";or what $od is there in heaven, or in earth, thatcan do according to thy works, and according to thymightI"

(s the attention of the :ews was solely confined totheworship of the $od of (raham, 6saac, and :aco, theyut little regarded the powers whom they conceived toe suordinate to this $od, and considering all ofthem as merely the messengers of their $od, they gave

them the general appellation of angels though as weshall shortly prove from the testimony of the (postlePaul, they were not consistent in confounding angelsproperly so called with Gods.

%ut that the stars are not called $ods y the :ewishlegislator as things inanimate like statues fashionedof wood or stone, is evident from what is said in theook of :o, and the Psalms- "%ehold even the moon andit shineth not, yea the stars are not pure in hissight. <ow much less man that is a worm, and the sonof man which is a wormI" /:o. xxv. v. J. and K.0(nd, "*hen 6 consider thy heavens, the work of thy

fingers, the moon and the stars which thou hastordained what is man that thou art mindful of him,and the son of man that thou visitest him." /Psalmviii. v. @. and G.06t is evident therefore from these passages, that theheavens and the stars are more excellent than man utnothing inanimate can e more excellent than thatwhich is animated. To which may e added, that in thefollowing verse 7avid says, that $od has made man alittle lower than the angels. %ut the stars, as wehave shown, were considered y !oses as angels and$ods and conse1uently, they are animated eings, andsuperior to man.

;arther still, in the &eptuagint version of verse theGth of the ?4th Psalm, $od is said to have placed histabernacle in the sun, which is doutless the genuinereading, and not that of the vulgar translation, "6nthem /i. e. the heavens0 hath he set a taernacle forthe sun." ;or this is saying nothing more of the sunthan what may e said of any of the other stars, andproduces in us no exalted conception of the artificerof the universe. %ut to saythat $od dwells in the sun, gives us a magnificentidea oth of that glorious luminary, and the deity who

dwells enshrined, as it were, in dazzling splendor. Towhich we may add in confirmation of this version ofthe &eptuagint, that in Psalm xi. v. G. it is said,"The +ord's throne is in heaven."



(nd again in 6saiah lxvi, v. ?. "Thus saith the +ord,the heaven is my throne, and the earth is myfootstool." 6f therefore the heavens are the throne,and the sun the taernacle of deity, they mustevidently e deified. ;or nothing can come intoimmediate contact with divinity without eing divine.<ence, says &implicius, B "That it is connascent with

the human soul to think the celestial odies aredivine, is especially evident from those, /the :ews0who look to these odies through preconceptions aoutdivine natures. ;or they also say that the heavens arethe haitation of $od, and the throne of $od, and arealone sufficient to reveal the glory and excellence of$od to those who are worthy than which assertionswhat can e more veneraleI"

B 6n his commentary on the second ook of(ristotle's treatise On the <eavens.

6ndeed, that the heavens are not the inanimate throneand residence of deity, is also evident from theassertion in the ?4th Psalm, "That the heavens declarethe glory of $od." ;or . !oses, a very learned :ew,says, B "that the word saphar, to declare or setforth, is never attriuted to things inanimate." <encehe concludes, "that the heavens are not without somesoul, which, says he, is no other than that of thoselessed intelligences, who govern the stars, anddispose them into such letters as $od has ordaineddeclaring unto us men y means of this writing, whatevents we are to expect. (nd hence, this same writingis called y all the ancients chetab hamelachim, that

is to say, the writing of the angels."

The $ods therefore, which were distriuted to all thenations ut the :ews, were the sun and moon, and theother celestial odies, yet not so far as they areodies, ut so for as they are animated eings.<ence the <erew prophets never reproate and prohiitthe worship of the stars as things which neither see,nor hear, nor understand, as they do the worship ofstatues. Thus in 7euteron. iv. and 2F. "(nd there yeshall serve $ods the work of men's hands, wood andstone, which neither see nor hear, nor eat, norsmell."(nd the Psalmist, "They have a mouth ut speak not,Lc." These, and many other things of the like kind aresaid y the prophets of the :ews against the worshipof images and statues, ut never of the sun and moon,and the other stars. %ut when they lame the worshipof the heavenly odies, they assign as the cause thatthe people of 6srael are not attriuted to them asother nations are, in conse1uence of eing theinheritance of the $od that rought them out of theland of #gypt, and out of the house of ondage. Thisis evident from the efore cited passage in the Gthchapter of 7euteronomy, in which it is said that the

stars are divided unto all nations under the wholeheaven ut the :ews.

B &ee $affarel's 8nheardof 9uriosities, p. @3?.



6ndeed, as the emperor :ulian =ustly oserves >(pud9yrilA, " unless a certain ethnarchic $od presidesover every nation, and under this $od there is anangel, a daemon, and a peculiar genus of souls,suservient and ministrant to more excellent natures,from which the difference in laws and manners arises,C

unless this is admitted, let it e shown y any otherhow this difference is produced. ;or it is notsufficient to say, "$od said, and it was done," ut itis re1uisite that the natures of things which areproduced should accord with the mandates of divinity.%ut 6 will explain more clearly what 6 mean. $od, forinstance, commanded that fire should tend upward, andearthly masses downwardis it not therefore re1uisite, in order that themandate of $od may e accomplished, that the formershould e light, and the latter heavyI Thus also in asimilar manner in other things. Thus too, in divineconcerns. %ut the reason of this is, ecause the human

race is frail and corruptile.<ence also, the works of man are corruptile andmutale, and su=ect to allvarious revolutions. %ut$od eing eternal, it is also fit that his mandatesshould e eternal.(nd eing such, they are either the natures of things,or conformale to the natures of things. ;or how cannature contend with the mandate of divinityI <ow canit fall off from this concordI6f, therefore, as he ordered that there should e aconfusion of tongues, and that they should not accordwith each other, so likewise he ordered that thepolitical concerns of nations should e discordant

he has not only effected this y his mandate, ut hasrendered us naturally adapted to this dissonance. ;orto effect this, it would e re1uisite, in the firstplace, that the natures of those should e different,whose political concerns among nations are to edifferent.This, indeed, is seen in odies, if any one directshis attention to the $ermans and &cythians, andconsiders how much the odies of these differ fromthose of the +yians and #thiopians. 6s thistherefore, a mere mandate, and does the air contriutenothing, nor the relation and position of the regionwith respect to the celestial odiesI"

:ulian adds, "!oses, however, though he knew the truthof this, concealed it nor does he ascrie theconfusion of tongues to $od alone.;or he says, that not only $od descended, nor onealone with him, ut many, though he does not say whothey were. %ut it is very evident, that he conceivedthose who descended with $od to e similar to him. 6f,therefore, not the +ord only, ut those who were withhim contriuted to this confusion of tongues, they may=ustly e considered as the causes of thisdissonance."

6n short, that the heavens and the celestial odiesare animated y certain divine souls, was not only theopinion of the ancient poets and philosophers, ut



also of the most celerated fathers of the church, andthe most learned and acute of the schoolmen. Thus forinstance, this is asserted y :erom in his expositionof the Kth verse of the first chapter of #cclesiastes.(nd y Origen in his ook On Principles, who says thatthe heavenly odies must e animated, ecause they aresaid to receive the mandates of $od, which is only

consentaneous to a rational nature.This too is asserted y #useius in his Theological&olutions, and y (ugustine in his #nchiridion. (mongthe schoolmen too, this was the opinion of (lertus!agnus in his ook 7e 1uatuor 9oae1uaevis of Thomas(1uinas in his treatise 7e &piritualius 9reaturisand of :ohannes &cotus &uper &ecundo &ententiarum.To these likewise may e added, the most learned9ardinal icolaus 9usanus. (ureolus indeed strenuouslycontends for the truth of this opinion, and does noteven think it improper to venerate the celestialodies with outward worship /duliae cultu0 and toimplore

their favour and assistance. (nd Thomas (1uinas says,that he has no other o=ection to thisthan that it might e the occasion of idolatry. <ence,though it may seem ridiculous to most of the presenttime, that divine souls should e placed in the stars,and preside over regions and cities, tries andpeople, nations and tongues, yet it did not appear soto the more intelligent 9hristians of former times.

6 had almost forgotten however the wisest of theancient 9hristians, ut as he was the est of them, 6have done well in reserving him to the last and thisis no other than the Platonic ishop &ynesius. This

father of the church therefore,in his third hymn,sings as follows- >$reek omitted, ed.A

"Thee, father of the worlds, rather of the aeones B,artificer of the Gods, it is holy to praise. Thee, Oking, the intellectual $ods sing, thee, O lessed $od,the Cosmagi, those fulgid eyes, and starry intellects,celerate, round which the illustrious ody >of theworldA dances. (ll the race of the lessed sing thypraise, those that are aout, and those that are inthe world, the zonic $ods, and also the azonic,BB whogovern the parts of the world, wise itinerants,stationed aout the illustrious pilots >of theuniverse,A and which the angelic series pours forth.Thee too, the renowned genus of heroes celerates,which y occult >hiddenA paths pervades the works ofmortals, and likewise the soul which does not inclineto the regions of mortality, and the soul whichdescends into dark terrestrialmasses."

B *hat these are will e shortly explained, when wecome to speak of the (postle Paul.

BB &ynesius does not here speak conformaly to the9haldean theologists, from whom he has derived theseappellations. ;or the zonic and the azonic pertain to$ods, the former eing the divinities of the stars,



and the latter >azonosA forming that order of $odswhich is called y Proclus in the sixth ook of thiswork apolusis, lierated. >note slightly editted, ed.A%oth these orders therefore, are superior to theangelic series. This unscientific manner however ofcalling oth the highest and lowest divine powers ythe common name of angels, is not peculiar to &ynesius

and the :ews, ut to all the fathers of the church,and all the 9hristian divines that succeeded them.

6n another part also of the same hymn, he informs usthat he adored the powers that preside over Thrace and9halcedon.>$reek text omitted, ed.A, i. e. " 6 have supplicatedthe ministrant $ods that possess the Thracian soil,and also those that, in an opposite direction, governthe 9halcedonian land."

(nd in the last place he says /in <ymn 6.0>$reek text omitted, ed.AThe sustance of which is, "that incorruptileintellect which is wholly an emanation of divinity, istotally diffused through the whole world, convolvesthe heavens, and preserves the universe with which itis present distriuted in various forms. That one partof this intellect is distriuted among the stars, andecomes, as it were, their charioteer ut anotherpart among the angelic choirs and another part isound in a terrestrial form."

6 confess 6 am wholly at a loss to conceive what could

induce the moderns to controvert the dogma, that thestars and the whole world are animated, as it is anopinion of infinite anti1uity, and is friendly to themost unperverted, spontaneous, and accurateconceptions of the human mind.6ndeed, the re=ection of it appears to me to e =ustas asurd as it would e in a maggot, if it werecapale of syllogizing, to infer that man is a machineimpelled y some external force when he walks, ecauseit never saw any animated reptile so large.

The sagacious Mepler, for so he is called even y themost modern writers,B appears to have had a conceptionof this great truth ut as he was more an astronomerthan a philosopher, he saw this truth only partially,and he rather emraced it as suservient to his ownastronomical opinions, than as forming an essentialpart of the true theory of the universe. %ut from what? have seen of the writings of Mepler, 6 have nodout, if he had lived in the time of the $reeks, orif he had made the study of the works of Plato and(ristotle the usiness of his life, he would haveecome an adept in, and an illustrious and zealouschampion of their philosophy. Mepler then /in<armonices !undi, li. G, p. ?JF0 says, "That he does

not oppose the dogma, that there is a soul of theuniverse, though he shall say nothing aout it in thatook, <e adds, that if there is such a soul, it mustreside in the centre of the world, which, according to



him, is the sun, and from thence y the communicationof the rays of light, which are in the place ofspirits in an animated ody, is propagated into allthe amplitude of the world."BB6n the following passages also he confidently assertsthat the earth has a soul. ;or he says, "That thegloe of the earth is a ody such as is that of some

animal and that what its own soul is to an animal,that the sulunary nature which he investigates wille to the earth"BBB

B 7r. $regory, in the H3th proposition of the firstook of his #lements of (stronomy, says of Mepler,"That his archetypal ratios, geometrical concinnities,and harmonic proportions, show such a force of geniasas is not to e found in any of the writers ofphysical astronomy efore him. &o that :eremiah<orrox, a very competent =udge of these matters,though a little averse to Mepler, in the eginning of

his astronomical studies, after having in vain triedothers, entirely falling in with Mepler's doctrine andphysical reasons, thus addresses his reader- epler isa person whom I may !ustly admire above all mortalsbeside" I may call him great, divine, or evensomething more# since epler is to be valued above thewhole tribe of philosophers. $im alone let the bardssing of.%$im alone let the philosophers read# beingsatisfied of this, that he who has epler has allthings.

6 1uote this passage, not from the =ustness of theencomium it contains for it is extravagant, and y no

means true ut that the reader may see what anexalted opinion some of the greatest of the modernshave had of the genius of Mepler.

BB "#t primum 1uidem de anima totius universi etsi nonrepugno, nihil tamen hoc liro 6D. dicam. Didetur enim/si est talis ali1ua0 in centro mundi, 1uod mihi solest, residere, inde1ue in omnem e=us amplitudinemcommercio radiorum lucis, 1ui sint loco spirituum incorpora animali propagari."

BBB "7eni1ue terrae glous tale corpus erit, 1uale estalicu=us animalis- 1uod1ue animali est sua anima, hocerit telluri haec, 1uam 1uaerimus, natura sulunaris."

<e adds, "That he sees for the most part every thingwhich proceeding from the ody of an animal testifiesthat there is a soul in it, proceeds also from theody of the earth. ;or as the animated ody producesin the superficies of the skin hairs, thus also theearth produces >on its surfaceA plants and trees andas in the former lice are generated, so in the latterthe worms called erucae, grasshoppers, and variousinsects and marine monsters are produced. (s the

animated ody likewise produces tears, mucus, and thesecrement of the ears, and sometimes gum from thepustules of the face, thus also the earth producesamer and itumen. (s the ladder too produces urine,



thus likewise mountains pour forth rivers.(nd as the ody produces excrement of a sulphureousodour, and crepitus which may also e inflamed, so theearth produces sulphur, suterranean fires, thunder,and lightning. (nd as in the veins of an animal loodis generated, and together with it sweat which ise=ected out of the ody, so in the veins of the earth,

metals, and fossils, and a rainy vapour aregenerated."B (nd in cap. H, p. ?K2, after havingshown that there is in the earth the sense oftouching, that it respires, and is su=ect in certainparts to languors, and internal vicissitudes of theviscera, and that suterranean heat proceeds from thesoul of the earth, he adds, "That a certain image ofthe zodiac is resplendent in this soul, and thereforeof the whole firmament, and is the ond of thesympathy of things celestial and terrestrial."

%ishop %erkeley also was y no means hostile to thisopinion, that the world is one great animal, as is

evident from the following extract from his &iris, /p.?@?0.

"%lind fate and lind chance are at ottom much thesame thing, and one no more intelligile than theother. &uch isthe mutual relation, connection, motion,and sympathy of the parts of this world, that theyseem, as it were, animated and held together y onesoul- and such is their harmony, order, and regularcourse, as shows the soul to e governed and directedy a mind. 6t was an opinion of remote anti1uity thatthe world was an animal. 6f we may trust the <ermaicwritings, the (#gyptians thought all things did

partake of life. This opinion was also so general andcurrent among the $reeks, that Plutarch asserts allothers held the world to e an animal, and governed yprovidence, except +eucippus, 7emocritus, and#picurus. (nd although an animal containing all odieswithin itself, could not e touched or sensilyaffected from without yet it is plain they attriutedto it an inward sense and feeling, as well asappetites and aversions and that from all the varioustones, actions, and passions of the universe, theysupposed one symphony, one animal act and life toresult.

"6amlichus declares the world to e one animal, inwhich the parts, however distant each from other, arenevertheless related and connected y one commonnature. (nd he teaches, what is also a received notionof the Pythagoreans and Platonics, that there is nochasm in nature, ut a chain or scale of eings risingy gentle uninterrupted gradations from the lowest tothe highest, each nature eing informed and perfectedy the participation of a higher. (s air ecomesigneous, so the purest fire ecomes animal and theanimal soul ecomes intellectual, which is to eunderstood, not of the change of one nature into

another, ut of the connection of different natures,eae +ower nature eing, according to thosepiosopers, as it were, a receptacle or su=ect forthe



next aove it to reside and act in.

" 6t is also the doctrine of Platonic philosophers,that intellect is the very life of living things, thefirst principle and exemplar of all, from whence, ydifferent degrees, are derived the inferior classes oflife first the rational, then the sensitive, after

that the vegetale, ut so as in the rational animalthere is still somewhat intellectual, again in thesensitive there is somewhat rational, and in thevegetale somewhat sensitive, and lastly in mixedodies, as metals and minerals, somewhat ofvegetation. %y which means the whole is thought to emore perfectly connected. *hich doctrine implies thatall the faculties, instincts, and motions of inferioreings, in their severalrespective suordinations, are derived from, anddepend upon intellect.

"%oth &toics and Platonics held the world to e alive,

though sometimes it e mentioned as a sentient animal,sometimes as a plant or vegetale. &ut in this,notwithstanding what has been surmised by some learned men, there seems to be no atheism. 'or so long as theworld is supposed to be (uic)ened by elementary fireor spirit, which is itself animated by soul, anddirected by understanding, it follows that all partsthereof originally depend upon, and may be reducedunto, the same indivisible stem or principle, to wit,a supreme mind# which is the concurrent doctrine of*ythagoreans, *latonics, and +toics."

9ompare now the ewtonian with this theory, that the

heavenly odies are vitalized y their informingsouls, that their orderly motion is the result of thisvitality, and that the planets move harmonically roundthe sun, not as if urged y a centripetal force, utfrom an animated tendency to the principle andfountain of their light, and from a desire ofpartaking as largely as possile of his influence andpower. 6n the former theory all the celestial motionsare the effect of violence, in the latter they are allnatural. The former is attended with insuperaledifficulties, the latter, when the principle on whichit is founded is admitted, with none. (nd the formeris unscientific and merely hypothetical ut thelatter is the progeny of the most accurate science,and is founded on the most genuine and unpervertedconceptions of the human mind.

6 have said that 6 should prove from the testimony ofthe (postle Paul, that the :ews were not consistent inconfounding angels properly so called with $ods. (ndthis appears to me to e evident in the first placefrom the following passage in <erews ii. v. @. >$reektext omitted, ed.A This in the #nglish version iserroneously rendered "Through faith we understand,that the worlds were framed y the word of $od, so

that things which are seen, were not made of thingswhich do appear." 6 say this is erroneouslytranslated, ecause in the first place, the worlds isevidently a forced interpretation of Aionas >(eonsA#



and even admitting it is not, leaves the passage veryamiguous, from the uncertainty to what worlds Paulalludes. 6f we adopt ages, which is the general senseof the word in the ew Testament, we shall indeedavoid a forced and amiguous interpretation, ut weshall render the meaning of the (postle trifling inthe extreme. ;or as he has elsewhere said, " that all

things were framed y the word of $od,"what particularfaith does it re1uire to elieve, that y the sameword he framed the agesI

6n the second place, from the definition of faith,given in the first verse of this chapter, that it is"the evidence of things not seen" it is clear, thatPaul is speaking in this passage of somethinginvisible. &ince then aionas is neither worlds norages, what shall we say it isI 6 answer, the aeones ofthe Dalentinians. (nd agreealy to this, the wholepassage should e translated asfollows- " %y faith we understand, that the aeones

were framed y the word of $od, in order that thingswhich are seen, might e generated from such as do notappear /i.e. from things invisible0"#very one who is much conversant with $reek authors,must certainly e convinced that eis to means in orderthat and %ishop Pearson translates as 6 have done thelatter part of this verse.

ow we learn from the second ook of 6renaeus againstthe heretics, that according to the Dalentinians, allcreated things are the images of the aeones, residentin the pleroma, or fulness of deity. (nd does it notclearly follow from the aove version, that according

to Paul too, the aeones are the exemplars of visileor created thingsI To which we may add, that thissense of the passage clearly accords with theassertion that "faith is the evidence of things notseen." ;or here the things which do not appear are theaeones these, according to the Dalentinians,susisting in deity. &o that from our version, Paulmight say with great propriety, that "we understand yfaith, that the aeones were framed y the word of $od,in order that things which are seen, might egenerated from such as do not appear," for thisnaturally follows from his definition of faith.

6 farther add, that among these aeones of theDalentinians were nous, ythos, sige, aletheia,sophia, i.e. intellect, a profundity, silence, truth,and wisdom, which as $ale well oserves in his noteson 6amlichus de !ysteriis, Lc. prove their dogmas toe of 9haldaic origin. ;or these words perpetuallyoccur in the fragments of the 9haldaic oracles. (ndthe middle of the 9haldean intelligile triad isdenominated aeon,B i. e. eternity, and is alsoperfectly conformale to the theology of Plato, as isvery satisfactorily shown y Proclus in the third ookof the following work. (ccording to the 9haldeans

therefore, the aeones are $ods and considered as theexemplarsof the visile universe, they are analogous to theideas of Plato, which also are $ods, as is evident



from the Parmenides of that philosopher.BB (ccordingto Paul too, as the aeones are the faricators of thevisile world, they must e eings of a much higherorder than angels, and conse1uently must e $odsproductive power eing one of the greatcharacteristics of a divine nature.

B Proclus egins the sixth ook of the following workwith oserving that he has celerated in the precedingook the hedomadic aeon of the intellectual $ods. Theaeones therefore, though the cense of them exists inthe intelligile, properly elong to the intellectualorder and the 7emiurgus or artificer of the universesusists at the extremity of that order. %ut thedemiurgus according to Orpheus, prior to thefarication of the world asored in himself Phanestheexemplar of the universe. <ence he ecame full ofideas of which the forms in the sensile universe arethe images. (nd as all intellectual natures are in

each, it is evident that things which are seen weregenerated from the invisible aeones, conformaly tothe assertion of Paul.

BB 6 refer the reader who is desirous of eing fullyconvinced of this to the notes accompanying mytranslation of that dialogue, in vol. @ of my Plato.

(gain, in the #pistle to the #phesians, chap. i. v.2?. Paul says that $od has exalted 9hrist "far aoveevery principality, and power, and might, anddominion," >$reek text omitted, ed.A. (nd in the Kth

chapter and ?2th verse he con=oins with principalitiesand powers, the rulers of the world , i. e. the sevenplanets.>$reek text omitted, ed.A(ugustin B confesses that he is ignorant what thedifference is etween those four words, /principality,power, might, and dominion,0 in which the (postle Paulseems to comprehend all the celestial society. "Nuidinter se distent 1uatuor illa vocaula, 1uiusuniversam ipsam coelestem societatem videtur (postolusesse complexus, dicant 1ui possunt, si tamen possuntproare 1uod dicunt ego me ista ignorare fateor."6gnatius also /in #pist. ad Trallianos0 speaks of theangelic orders, the diversities of archangels andarmies, the differences of the orders characterised ymight and dominion, of thrones and powers, the magnificence of the aeones,BB and the transcendency of9heruim and &eraphim," >$reek text omitted, ed.A

B (d +aurentium, c. JF.BB <ere we see the aeones are acknowledged y 6renaeusto e eings of an order superior to angels.

The opinion of $rotiusB therefore, is highly proale,

that the :ews otained the names of Powers,7ominations, and Principalities, from their %ayloniccaptivity and $ale in his notes on 6amlichusBB says,that certain passages of oroaster and Ostanes cited



y the author of (rithm. Theolog. confirm this opinionof $rotius. 6ndeed, the appellation of Archaiprinciples, which arethe first of the four powers mentioned y Paul, wasgiven y the 9haldeans to that order of $ods called ythe $recian theologists supermundane and assimilative,the nature of which is unfolded y Proclus in the

sixth ook of the following work and Proclus in thefourth ook of his !&. 9ommentary On the Parmenides ofPlato shows that the order of $ods denominated noetos)ai noeros,intelligible and at the same time intellectual, isaccording to the 9haldean oraclesBBB principallycharacterized y domination. 6n proof of this, the twofollowing oracles are cited y him, the first,concerning the empyrean, and the second concerning thematerial &ynoches.BBBB

>$reek text omitted, ed.A i. e. (ll things yieldministrant to the intellectual presters of

intellectual fire, through the persuasive will Of /hefather."

(nd >$reek text omitted, ed.A i. e. " %ut likewisesuch as are in su=ection to the material &ynoches."

;urther still, Paul in the #pistle to the omans,chap. viii. v. @F, says, " ;or 6 am persuaded thatneither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, northings to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any othercreature, shall e ale to separate us from the loveof $od, etc."

;rom this arrangement therefore, it is evident thatprincipalities and powers are not the same withangels and as according to Paul they are eings soexalted, that in his #pistle to the #phesians, hecould not find any thing more magnificent to say of9hrist, than that he is raised even aove them, itfollows that they must e $ods, since they aresuperior to the angelic order.6t is remarkale too, that he coarranges height anddepth /upsoma kai athos0 with principalities andpowers and ythos is one of the aeones according tothe Dalentinians.

B (d 9ap. ?F. !atthaei.BB 7e !yst. p. 23K.BBB &ee my 9ollection of these Oracles in the old!onthly !agazine.BBBB The &ynoches form the second triad of theintelligile, and at the same time intellectual orderof $ods.

6n the first #pistle to the 9orinthians likewise,chap. viii. v. J. Paul expressly asserts that there isa divine multitude. ;or he says, "Though there e thatare called $ods, whether in heaven or in earth, /as



there e $ods many and +ords many0" in theparenthesis of which verse, it is incontrovertilyevident that he admits the existence of a plurality of$ods, though as well as the heathens he elieved thatone $od only was supreme and the father of all things.or am 6 singular in asserting that this was admittedy Paul. ;or the Pseudo7ionysius the (reopagite in

the second chapter of his treatise On the 7ivine amesoserves concerning what is here said y Paul asfollows - "(gain, from the deific energy of $od, ywhich every thing according to its ailityecomes deiform, many $ods are generated inconse1uence of which there appears and is said to e aseparation and multiplication of the one >supremeA$od. evertheless, $od himself, who is the chiefdeity, and is superessentially the supreme, is stillone $od, remaining impartile in the $ods distriutedfrom him, united to himself, unmingled with the many,and void of multitude."(nd he afterwards adds, "that this was in a

transcendent manner understood y Paul, who was theleader oth of him and his preceptor, to divineillumination," in the aove cited verse. (nd, "that indivine natures, unions van1uish and precedeseparations, and yet nevertheless they are united,after the separation which does not in proceedingdepart from the one, and is unical."Paul therefore, according to this 7ionysius,considered the $ods, conformaly to Plato and the estof his disciples, as deiform processions from the one,and which at the same time that they have a distinctsusistence from, are profoundly united to their greatproducing cause.

7ionysius also employs the very same expression whichProclus continually uses when speaking of theseparation of the $ods from their source for he saysthat the divine multitude >$reek text omitted, ed.A,i. e. does not depart from, ut aides in the one.<ence Proclus in the fifth ook of his !&. 9ommentaryOn the Parmenides of Plato, speaking of the divineunities says, "*hichever among these you assume, it isthe same with the others, ecause all of them are ineach other, and are rooted in the one. ;or as trees ytheir summits /i. e. their roots0 are fixed in theearth, and through these are earthly after the samemanner also divine natures are rooted y their summitsin the one, and each of them is a unity and one,through unconfused union with the one itself.">$reek text omitted, ed.A

This 7ionysius, who certainly lived posterior toProclus, ecause he continually orrows from hisworks, ararously confounding that scientificarrangement of these deiform processions from the one,which is so admiraly unfolded y Proclus in thefollowing work, classes them as follows. The firstorder, according to him, consists of &eraphim,9heruim, and Thrones. The second of the divine

essences characterized y dominion, might, and power.(nd the third of Principalities, (rchangels, and(ngels. <ence he has transferred the characteristicsof the intelligile triad of $ods to &eraphim,



9heruim, and Thrones. ;or symmetry, truths andeauty, which characterize this triad, are said yPlato in the Phileus to susist in the vestibule ofthe good and 7ionysius says of his first order that"it is as it were arranged in the vestibules ofdeity." $oodness, wisdom, and eauty also, are showny Proclus in the third ook of the following work to

elong to the intelligile triad goodness to itssummit, wisdom to the middle of it, and beauty to itsextremity.(nd 7ionysius says, that according to the <erews, theword 9heruim signifies a multitude of )nowledge, oran effusion of wisdom. The characteristics of the $ods called noetos )ainoeros intelligible and at the same timeintellectual,and of the $ods that are noerosintellectual alone, he appears to have transferred tohis middle triad which is characterized y dominion,might, and power. (nd he has adapted his third triadconsisting of *rincipalities, Archangels, and Angels,

to the supermundane, liberated, and mundane orders of$ods. ;or the supermundane $ods are called y Proclusin the sixth ook of the following work archai*rincipalities, or rulers, which is the word employedy 7ionysius and Paul.(nd the mundane $ods are said y Proclus /inParmenid.0 to e the sources of a winged life, andangels are celerated y 7ionysius as having wings.<ence it is evident that 7ionysius has accommodatedthe peculiarities of the different orders of $ods tothe nine orders which he denominates celestial powersand his arrangement has een adopted y all succeeding9hristian theologists.

Destiges therefore of the theology of Plato may eseen oth in the :ewish and 9hristian religion and ina similar manner, a resemlance in the religions ofall other nations to it might e easily pointed out,and its universality e clearly demonstrated. Omittinghowever, a discussion of this kind for the present, 6shall further oserve respecting this theology, thatthe deification of dead men, and, the worshipping menas $ods form no part of it when it is consideredaccording to its genuine purity. umerous instances ofthe truth of this might e adduced, ut 6 shallmention for this purpose, as unexceptionalewitnesses, the writings of Plato, the $oldenPythagoric verses,Band the treatise of Plutarch On 6sis and Osiris.

* "Diogenes Laertius says of Pythagoras, That he charged his

disciples not to give equal degrees of honour to the Gods and

heroes. Herodotus (in Euterpe) says of the Greeks, That they

worshipped Hercules two ways, one as an immortal deity and so

they sacrificed to him: and another as a Hero, and so they

celebrated his memory. Isocrates (Encom. Helen.) distinguishes

between the honours of heroes and Gods, when he speaks of

Menelaus and Helena. But the distinction is nowhere more fully

expressed than in the Greek inscription upon the statue of Regilla,

wife to Herodes Atticus, as Salmasius thinks, which was set up in



his temple at Triopium, and taken from the statue itself by

Sirmondus; where it is said, That she had neither the honour of a

mortal, nor yet that which was proper to the Gods . It seems by the

inscription of Herodes, and by the testament of Epicteta extant in

Greek in the Collection of Inscriptions, that it was in the power of

particular families to keep festival days in honour of some of their

own family, and to give heroical honours to them. In that nobleinscription at Venice, we find three days appointed every year to be

kept, and a confraternity established for that purpose with the laws

of it. The first day to be observed in honour of the Muses, and

sacrifices to be offercd to them as deities. The second and third days

in honour of the heroes of the family; between which honour and

that of deities, they shewed the difference by the distance of

time between them, and the preference given to the other. But

wherein soever the difference lay, that there was a distinction

acknowledged among them appears by this passage of Valerius in

his excellent oration extant in Dionysius Halicarnass. Antiq. Rom.lib. 11. p. 696. I call, says he,the Gods to witness,whose temples and

altars our family has worshipped with common sacrifices; and next

after them, I call the Genii of our ancestors, to whom we give the

second honours next to the Gods, as Celsus calls those the due

honours that belong to the lower demons. From which we take

notice, that the Heathens did not confound all degrees of divine

worship, giving to the lowest object the same which they supposed

to be due to the celestial deities, or the supreme God , So that if the

distinction of divine worship will excuse from idolatry, the

Heathens were not to blame for it." See Stiflingfleet's answer to abook entitled Catholics no Idolaters, p. 510,513, etc.

(ll the works of Plato indeed, evince the truth ofthis position, ut this is particularly manifest fromhis +aws. The $olden verses order, that the immortal$ods e honoured first, as they are disposed y lawafterwards the illustrious <eroes, under whichappellation, the author ofthe verses comprehends alsoangels and daemons properly so called- and in the lastplace the terrestrial daemons, i. e. such good men astranscend in virtues the rest of mankind. %ut to

honour the $ods as they are disposed y law, is, as<ierocles oserves, to reverence them as they arearranged y their faricator and father and this isto honour them as eings superior to man. <ence, tohonour men, however excellent they may e, as $ods, isnot to honour the $ods according to the rank in whichthey are placed y their 9reator, for it isconfounding the divine with the human nature, and isthus acting directly contrary to the Pythagoricprecept. Plutarch too in his aovementioned treatisemost forcily and clearly shows the impietyof worshipping men as $ods, as is evident from thefollowing extract-

" Those therefore, who think that things of this kind>i. e. faulous stories of the $ods as if they were



menA are ut so many commemorations of the actions anddisasters of kings and tyrants, who throughtranscendency in virtue or power, inscried the titleof divinity on their renown, and afterwards fell intogreat calamities and misfortunes, these employ themost easy method indeed ofeluding the story, and not adly transfer things of

evil report, from the $ods to menand they are assisted in so doing y the narrationsthemselves. ;or the #gyptians relate, that <ermes wasas to his ody, with one arm longer than the otherthat Typhon was in his complexion red ut Orus white,and Osiris lack, as if they had een y nature men.;arther still, they also call Osiris a commander, and9anopus a pilot, from whom they say the star of thatname was denominated.The ship likewise, which the $reeks call (rgo, eingthe image of the ark of Osiris, and which therefore inhonour of it is ecome a constellation, they make toride not far from Orion and the 7og of which they

consider the one as sacred to Orus, ut the other to6sis.

"6 fear, however, that this >according to the proverAwould e to move things immoveale, and to declarewar, not only, as &imonides says, against a greatlength of time, ut also against many nations andfamilies of mankind who are under the influence ofdivine inspiration through piety to these $ods andwould not in any respect fall short of transferringfrom heaven to earth, such greatand venerale names, and of therey shaking anddissolving that worship and elief, which has een

implanted in almost all men from their very irth,would e opening great doors to the trie of atheists,who convert divine into human concerns and wouldlikewise afford a large license to the impostures of#uemerus of !essina, who devised certain memoirs of anincredile and fictitious mythology,B and therebyspread every )ind of atheism through the globe, byinscribing all the received Gods, without anydiscrimination, by the names of generals, navalcaptains, and )ings, who lived in remote periods oftime.<e further adds, that they are recorded in goldencharacters, in a certain country called Panchoa, atwhich neither any %ararian or $recian ever arrived,except #uemerus alone, who, as it seems, sailed to thePanchoans and Triphyllians, that neither have, norever had a eing. (nd though the great actions of&emiramis are celerated y the (ssyrians, and thoseof &esostris in #gypt and though the Phrygians evento the present time, call all splendid and admiraleactions !anic, ecause a certain person named !aniswho was one of their ancient kings, whom some call!asdes, was a rave and powerful man and fartherstill, though 9yrus among the Persians, and (lexanderamong the !acedonians, proceeded in their victories,

almost as far as to the oundaries of the earth, yetthey only retain the name of good kings, and arerememered as such, >and not as $ods.A



B %oth (rnoius therefore and !inucius ;elix were veryunfortunate in 1uoting this impostor to prove that the$ods of the ancients had formerly een men. Did.(rno. li. G. (dversus $entes, et !inucii ;elicisOctavo, p. @J3. Fvo. Parisiis, ?K3J.

"%ut if certain persons, inflated y ostentation, as

Plato says, having their soul at one and the same timeinflamed with youth and ignorance, have insolentlyassumed the appellation of $ods, and had templeserected in their honour, yet this opinion of themflourished ut for a short time, and afterwards theywere charged with vanity and arrogance, in con=unctionwith impiety and lawlessconduct and thus,

+ike smoke they flew away with swiftpac'd fate.

(nd eing dragged from temples and altars likefugitive slaves, they have now nothing left them, ut

their monuments and toms. <ence (ntigonus the eldersaid to one <ermodotus, who had celerated him in hispoems as the offspring of the sun and a $od, 'he whoempties my closestoolpan knows no such thing of me.'Dery properly also, did +ysippus the sculptor lame(pelles the painter, for drawing the picture of(lexander with a thunderolt in his hand, whereashe had represented him with a spear, the glory ofwhich, as eing true and proper, no time would takeaway."

6n another part of the same work also, he admiraly

reproates the impiety of making the $ods to e thingsinanimate, which was very common with +atin writers ofthe (ugustan age, and of the ages that accompanied thedecline and fall of the oman empire. %ut what he sayson this su=ect is as follows-

"6n the second place, which is of still greaterconse1uence, men should e careful, and very muchafraid, lest efore they are aware, they tear inpieces and dissolve divine natures, into lasts ofwind, streams of water, seminations, earings of land,accidents of the earth, aud mutations of the seasons,as those do who make %acchus to e wine, and Dulcanflame. 9leanthes also somewheresays, that Persephone or Proserpine is the spirit orair that passes through the fruits of the earth, andis then slain. (nd a certain poet says of reapers,

Then when the youth the lims of 9eres cut.

;or these men do not in any respect differ from thosewho conceive the sails, the cales, and the anchor ofa ship, to e the pilot, the yarn and the we to ethe weaver, and the owl, or the mead, or the ptisan,to, e the physician. %ut they also produce dire and

atheistical opinions, y giving the names of $ods tonatures and things deprived of sense and soul, andthat are necessarilydestroyed y men, who are in want of and use them. ;or



it is not possile to conceive that these things are$ods since, neither can any thing e a $od to men,which is deprived of soul, or is su=ect to humanpower. ;rom these things however, we are led toconceive those eings to e $ods, who oth use themand impart them to us, and supply them perpetually andwithout ceasing.

or do we conceive that the $ods who estow these, aredifferent in different countries, nor that some ofthem are peculiar to the %ararians, ut others to the$recians, nor that some are southern, and othersnorthern ut as the sun and moon, the heavens, theland, and the sea, are common to all men, yet aredifferently denominated y different nationsso the one reason that adorns these things, and theone providence that administers them, and theministrant powers that preside over all nations, havedifferent appellations and honours assigned themaccording to law y different countries. Of those alsothat have een consecrated to their service, some

employ oscure, ut others clearer symols, notwithout danger thus conducting our intellectualconceptions to the apprehension of divine natures.;or some, deviating from the true meaning of thesesymols, have entirely slipt into superstition andothers again flying from superstition as a 1uagmire,have unaware fallen upon atheism as on a precipice.<ence, in order to avoid these dangers, it isespecially necessary that resuming the reasoning ofPhilosophy as our guide to mystic knowledge,we should conceive piously of every thing that is saidor done in religion lest that, as Theodorus said,while he extended his arguments with his right hand,

some of his auditors received them with their left, sowe should fall into dangerous errors, y receivingwhat the laws have well instituted aout sacrificesand festivals in a manner different from theiroriginal intention."

The #mperor :ulian, as well as Plutarch appears tohave een perfectly aware of this confusion in thereligion of the <eathens arising from the deificationof men, and in the fragments of his treatise againstthe 9hristians, preserved y 9yril, he speaks of it asfollows- "6f any one wishes to consider the truthrespecting you >9hristians,A he will find that yourimpiety is composed of the :udaic audacity, and theindolence and confusion of the $eathens.;or deriving from oth, not that which is mosteautiful, ut the worst, you have faricated a we ofevils. *ith the <erews indeed, there are accurate andvenerale laws pertaining to religion, and innumeraleprecepts which re1uire a most holy life and delieratechoice. %ut when the :ewish legislator forids theserving all the $ods, and en=oins the worship of onealone, whose portion is :aco, and6srael the line of his inheritance, and not only saysthis, ut also omits to add, 6 think, you shall not

revile the $ods, the detestale wickedness andaudacity of those in after times, wishing to take awayall religious reverence from the multitude, thoughtthat not to worship should e followed y



laspheming the $ods. This you have alone thencederived ut there is no similitude in anything elseetween you and them. <ence, from the innovation ofthe <erews, you have seized lasphemy towards thevenerale $ods but from our religion you have castaside reverence to every nature more e-cellent than man, and the love of paternal institutes."

"&o great an apprehension indeed, says 7r.&tillingfleet, B had the <eathens of the necessity ofappropriate acts of divine worship, that some of themhave chosen to die, rather than to give them to whatthey did not elieve to e $od. *e have a remarkalestory to this purpose in (rrian and 9urtiusBBconcerning 9allisthenes. (lexander arriving at thatdegree of vanity, as to desireto have divine worship given him, and the matter eingstarted out of design among the courtiers, either y(naxarchus, as (rrian, or 9leo the &icilian, as9urtius says and the way of doing it proposed, viz.

y incense and prostration 9allisthenes vehementlyopposed it, as that which would confound thedifference of human and divine worship, which had been preserved inviolable among them.The worship of the $ods had een kept up in temples,with altars, and images, and sacrifices, and hymns,and prostrations, and such like but it is by no meansfitting, says he,for us to confound these things,either by lifting up men to the honours of the Gods,or depressing the Gods to the honours of men. ;orneither would (lexander suffer any man to usurp hisroyal dignity y the votes of men how much more=ustly may the $ods disdain for any man to take their

honours to himself. (nd it appears y Plutarch,BBBthat the $reeks thought it a mean and ase thing forany of them, when sent on an emassy to the kings ofPersia, to prostrate themselves efore them, ecausethis was only allowed among them in divine adoration.Therefore, says he, when Pelopidas and 6smenias weresent to (rtaxerxes, Pelopidas did nothing unworthy,ut 6smenias let fall his ring to the ground, andstooping for that was thought to make his adorationwhich was altogether as good a shift as the :esuitsadvising the crucifix to e held in the !andarins'hands while they made their adorations in the <eathentemples in 9hina.

B (nswer to 9atholics no 6dolaters +ond. ?KHK. p. 2??.BB (rrian. de #xped. (lex. l. G. et 9urt. li. F.BBB Dit. (rtaxerx. (#lian. Dar. hist. li. ?. c. 2?.

"9ononB also refused to ma)e his adoration, as adisgrace to his city and 6socrates BB accuses thePersians for doing it, because herein they shewed,that they despised the Gods rather than men, by prostituting their honours to their princes.

B :ustin, li. K.BB Panegyr.



<erodotusB mentions &perchius and %ulis, who could notwith the greatest violence e rought to giveadoration to erxes, because it was againstthe law of their country to give divine honour to men.B (nd Dalerius !aximusBB says, the Athenians putimagoras to death for doing it so strong anapprehension had possessed them, that the manner of

worship which they used to their $ods, should epreserved sacred and inviolale."The philosopher &allust also in his treatise On the$ods and the *orld says,"6t is not unreasonale to suppose that impiety is aspecies of punishment, and that those who have had aknowledge of the $ods, and yet despised them, will inanother life e deprived of this knowledge. (nd it isre1uisite to make the punishment of those who havehonoured their kings as $ods to consist in eingexpelled from the $ods."

B +i. H.BB +i. K. 9ap. @.

*hen the ineffale transcendency of the first $od,which was considered as the grand principle in the<eathen theology, y its most ancient promulgatorsOrpheus, Pythagoras, and Plato, was forgotten, thisolivion was doutless the principal cause of dead meneing deified y the Pagans.<ad they properly directed their attention to thistranscendency they would have perceived it to e soimmense as to surpass eternity, infinity, self

susistence, and even essence itself, and that thesein reality elong to those venerale natures which areas it were first unfolded into light from theunfathomale depths of that truly mystic unknown,aout which all knowledge is refunded into ignorance.;or as &implicius =ustly oserves, " 6t is re1uisitethat he who ascends to the principle of things shouldinvestigate whether it is possile there can e anything etter than the supposed principle and ifsomething more excellent is found, the same en1uiryshould again e made respecting that, till we arriveat the highest conceptions, than which we have nolonger any more venerale. or should we stop in ourascent till we find this to e the case. ;or there isno occasion to fear that our progression will ethrough an unsustantial void, y conceiving somethingaout the first principles which is greater and moretranscendent than their nature. ;or it isnot possile for our conceptions to take such a mightyleap as to e1ual, and much less to pass eyond thedignity of the first principles of things." <e adds,"This therefore is one and the est extension >of thesoulA to >the highestA $od, and is as much as possileirreprehensile viz. to know firmly, that yascriing to him the most venerale excellencies we

can conceive, and the most holy and primary names andthings, we ascrie nothing to him which is suitale tohis dignity.



6t is sufficient however, to procure our pardon >forthe attempt,A that we can attriute to him nothingsuperior."B 6f it is not possile therefore to formany ideas e1ual to the dignity of the immediateprogeny of the ineffale, i. e. of the firstprinciples of things, how much less can ourconceptions reach that thrice unknown darkness, in the

reverential language of the #gyptians,BBwhich is even eyond theseI <ad the <eathens thereforeconsidered as they ought this transcendency of thesupreme $od, they would never have presumed toe1ualize the human with the divine nature, andconse1uently would never have worshipped men as $ods.Their theology, however, is not to e accused as thecause of this impiety, ut their forgetfulness of thesulimest of its dogmas, and the confusion with whichthis olivion was necessarily attended.

* Simplic. in Epict. Enchir. p. 207. Lond. 1670. 8vo.

BB Of the first principle, says 7amascius /in !. &.peri archon0 the #gyptians said notlung, utcelerated it asa darkness eyond all intellectual conception, athrice unknown darkness

6n the last place, 6 wish to adduce a few respectaletestimonies to prove that statues were not considerednor worshipped y any of the intelligent <eathens as$ods, ut as the resemlances of the $ods, asauxiliaries to the recollection of a divine nature,and the means of procuring its assistance and favour.;or this purpose, 6 shall first present the readerwith what the philosopher &allust says concerningsacrifices and the honours which were paid to thedivinities, in his golden treatise On the $ods and the*orld. " The honours, says he, which we pay to the$ods are performed for the sake of our advantage andsince the providence of the $ods is every whereextended, a certain haitude or fitness is all that isre1uisite in order to receive their eneficentcommunications. %ut all haitude is produced throughimitation and similitude. <ence temples imitate theheavens, ut altars the earth statues resemle life,

and on this account they are similar to animalsprayers imitate that which is intellectual utcharacters superior ineffale powers hers and stonesresemle matter and animals which are sacrificed theirrational life of our souls. %ut from all thesenothing happens to the $ods eyond what they alreadypossess for what accession can e made to a divinenatureI %ut a con=unction with our souls and the $odsis y these means produced.

"6 think however, it will e proper to add a fewthings concerning sacrifices. (nd in the first place,since we possess every thing from the $ods, and it is

ut =ust to offer the first fruits of gifts to thegivers hence, of our possessions we offer the firstfruits through consecrated gifts of our odiesthrough ornaments and of our life through sacrifices.



%esides, without sacrifices, prayers are words onlyut accompanied with sacrifices they ecome animatedwords the words indeed corroorating life, ut lifeanimating the words. (dd too, that the felicity ofevery thing is its proper perfection ut the properperfection of every thing consists in a con=unctionwith its cause. (nd on this account we pray that we

may e con=oined with the $ods. &ince therefore lifeprimarily susists in the $ods, and there is also acertain human life, ut the latter desires to eunited to the former, a medium is re1uired fornatures much distant from each other cannot econ=oined without a medium. (nd it is necessary thatthe medium should e similar to the connected natures.+ife therefore must necessarily e the medium of lifeand hence men of the present day that are happy, andall the ancients, have sacrificed animals. (nd thisindeed not rashly, ut in a manner accommodated toevery $od, with many other ceremonies respecting thecultivation of divinity."B

B &ee chap. ?J and ?K, of my translation of thisexcellent work.

6n the next place, the elegant !aximus Tyriusadmiraly oserves concerning the worship of statuesBas follows- "6t appears to me that as externaldiscourse has no need, in order to its composition, ofcertain Phoenician, or 6onian, or (ttic, or (ssyrian,or #gyptian characters, ut human imecility devisedthese marks, in which inserting its dulness, itrecovers from them its memory in like manner a divinenature has no need of statues or altars ut human

nature eing very imecile, and as much distant fromdivinity as earth from heaven, devised these symols,in which it inserted the names and the renown of the$ods. Those, therefore, whose memory is roust, andwho are ale, y directly extending their soul toheaven, to meet with divinity, have, perhapsBB no needof statues. This race is, however, rare among men, andin a whole nation you will not find one who recollectsdivinity, and who is not in want of this kind ofassistance, which resemles that devised y writingmasters for oys, who give them oscure marks ascopies y writing over which, their hand eing guidedy that of the master, they ecome, through memory,accustomed to the art. 6t appears to me therefore,that legislators devised these statues for men, as iffor a certain kind of oys, as tokens of the honourwhich should e paid to divinity, and a certainmanuduction as it were and path to reminiscence.

B &ee Dol. 2 of my translation of his 7issertations,7issertat. @F, the title of which is, "*hether statuesshould e dedicated to the $ods."

BB "The philosopher 6sidorus was a man of this

description, as we are informed y 7amascius in theextracts from his life preserved y Photius. ;or hesays of him- "<e was not willing to adore statues, utapproached to the $ods themselves, who are inwardly



concealed not in adyta, ut in the occult itself,whatever it may e of allperfect ignorance. <owtherefore to them eing such did he approachI Throughvehement love, this also eing occult >on the innerside of natureA. (nd what else indeed, could conducthim to them than a love which is also unknownI *hat mymeaning is those who have experienced this love know

ut it is impossile to reveal it y words, and it isno less difficult to understand what it is."

"Of statues however, there is neither one law, nor onemode, nor one art, nor one matter. ;or the $reeksthink it fit to honour the $ods from things the mosteautiful in the earth, from a pure matter, the humanform, and accurate art- and their opinion is notirrational who fashion statues in the humanresemlance. ;or if the human soul is most near andmost similar to divinity, it is not reasonale tosuppose that divinity would invest that which is mostsimilar to himself with a most deformed ody, ut

rather with one which would e an easy vehicle toimmortal souls, light, and adapted to motion. ;or thisalone, of all the odies on the earth, raises itssummit on high, is magnificent, super, and full ofsymmetry, neither astonishing through its magnitude,nor terrile through its strength, nor moved withdifficulty through its weight, nor slippery throughits smoothness, nor repercussive through its hardness,nor groveling through its coldness, nor precipitatethrough its heat, nor inclined to swim through itslaxity, nor feeding on raw flesh through its ferocity,nor on grass through its imecility ut isharmonically composed for its proper works, and is

dreadful to timid animals, ut mild to such as arerave. 6t is also adapted to walk y nature, utwinged y reason, capale of swimming y art, feeds oncorn and fruits, and cultivates the earth, is of agood colour, stands firm, has a pleasing countenance,and a graceful eard. 6n the resemlance of such aody, the $reeks think fit to honour the $ods."

<e then oserves, "that with respect to the%ararians, all of them in like manner admit thesusistence of divinity, ut different nations amongthese adopt different symols." (fter which he adds,"O many and allvarious statues) of which some arefashioned y art, and others are emraced throughindigence- some are honoured through utility, andothers are venerated through the astonishment whichthey excite some are considered as divine throughtheir magnitude, and others are celerated for theireauty) There is not indeed any race of men, neither%ararian nor $recian, neither maritime norcontinental, neither living a pastoral life, nordwelling in cities, which can endure to e withoutsome symols of the honour of the $ods. <ow,therefore, shall any one discuss the 1uestion whetherit is proper that statues of the $ods should e

faricated or notI;or if we were to give laws to other men recentlysprung from the earth, and dwelling eyond ouroundaries and our air, or who were fashioned y a



certain Prometheus, ignorant of life, and law, andreason, it might perhaps demand consideration, whetherthis race should e permitted to adore thesespontaneous statues alone, which are not fashionedfrom ivory or gold, and which are neither oaks norcedars, nor rivers, nor irds, ut the rising sun, thesplendid moon, the variegated heaven, the earth itself

and the air, all fire and all wateror shall we constrain these men also to the necessityof honouring wood, or stones or imagesI 6f, however,this is the common law of all men, let us make noinnovations, let us admit the conceptions concerningthe $ods, and preserve their symols as well as theirnames.

";or divinity indeed, the father and faricator of allthings, is more ancient than the sun and the heavens,more excellent than time and eternity, and everyflowing nature, and is a legislator without law,ineffale y voice, and invisile y the eyes. ot

eing ale, however, to comprehend his essence, weapply for assistance to words and names, to animals,and figures of gold and ivory and silver, to plantsand rivers, to the summits of mountains, and tostreams of waterdesiring indeed to understand his nature, ut throughimecility calling him y the names of such things asappear to us to e eautiful. (nd in thus acting, weare affected in the same manner as lovers, who aredelighted with surveying the images of the o=ects oftheir love, and with recollecting the lyre, the dart,and the seat of these, the circus in which they ran,and every thing in short, which excites the memory of

the eloved o=ect. *hat then remains for me toinvestigate and determine respecting statuesI only toadmit the susistence of deity.%ut if the art of Phidias excites the $reeks to therecollection of divinity, honour to animals the#gyptians, a river others, and fire others, 6 do notcondemn the dissonance- let them only know, let themonly love, let them only e mindful of the o=ect theyadore."

*ith respect to the worship of animals, Plutarchapologizes for it in the following excellent manner inhis treatise On 6sis and Osiris.

"6t now remains that we should speak of the utility ofthese animals to man, and of their symolical meaningsome of them partaking of one of these only, ut manyof them of oth. 6t is evident therefore that the#gyptians worshipped the ox, the sheep, and theichneumon, on account of their use and enefit, as the+emnians did larks, for discovering the eggs ofcaterpillars and reaking them and the Thessaliansstorks, ecause, as their land produced aundance ofserpents, the storks destroyed all of them as soon asthey appeared.

<ence also they enacted a law, that whoever killed astork should e anished. %ut the #gyptians honouredthe asp, the weezle, and the eetle, in conse1uence ofoserving in them certain dark resemlances of the



power of the $ods, like that of the sun in drops ofwater. ;or at present, many elieve and assert thatthe weezle engenders y the ear, and rings forth ythe mouth, eing thus an image of the generation ofreason, >or the productive principle of things.A%ut the genus of eetles has no femaleand all the males emit their sperm into a spherical

piece of earth, which they roll aout thrusting itackwards with their hind feet, while they themselvesmove forward=ust as the sun appears to revolve in a directioncontrary to that of the heavens, in conse1uence ofmoving from west to east. They also assimilated theasp to a star, as eing exempt from old age, andperforming its motions unassisted y organs withagility and ease. or was the crocodile honoured ythem without a proale cause ut is said to haveeen considered y them as a resemlance of divinity,as eing the only animal that is without a tongue.;or the divine reason is unindigent of voice, and

proceeding through a silent path, and accompanied with=ustice, conducts mortal affairs according to it. Theyalso say it is the only animal living in water thathas the sight of its eyes covered with a thin andtransparent film, which descends from his forehead, sothat he sees without eing seen, which is likewise thecase with the first $od.%ut in whatever place the female crocodile may lay hereggs, this may with certainty e concluded to e theoundary of the increase of the ile. ;or not eingale to lay their eggs in the water, and fearing tolay them far from it, they have such an accurate presensation of futurity, that though they en=oy the

enefit of the river in its access, during the time oftheir laying and hatching, yet they preserve theireggs dry and untouched y the water. They also laysixty eggs, are the same numer of days in hatchingthem, and those that are the longest lived among them,live =ust so many years which numer is the first ofthe measures employed y those who are conversant withthe heavenly odies.

"!oreover, of those animals that were honoured foroth reasons, we have efore spoken of the dog. %utthe iis, killing indeed all deadly reptiles, was thefirst that taught men the use of medical evacuation,in conse1uence of oserving that she is after thismanner washed and purified y herself. Those priestsalso, that are most attentive to the laws of sacredrites, when they consecrate water for lustration,fetch it from that place where the iis had eendrinking for she will neither drink nor come nearunwholesome or infected water ut with the distanceof her feet from each other, and her ill she makes ane1uilateral triangle. ;arther still, the variety andmixture of her lack wings aout the white representsthe moon when she is gious.

" *e ought not, however, to wonder if the #gyptianslove such slender similitudes, since the $reeks also,oth in their pictures and statues, employ many such



like resemlances of the $ods. Thus in 9rete, therewas a statue of :upiter without ears. ;or it is fitthat he who is the ruler and lord of all things,should hear no one >,i. e. &hould e perfectlyimpartialA.Phidias also placed a dragon y the statue of !inerva,and a snail y that of Denus at #lis, to show that

virgins re1uire a guard, and that keeping at home andsilence ecome married women. %ut the trident ofeptune is a symol of the third region of the world,which the sea possesses, having an arrangement afterthe heavens and the air. <ence also, they thusdenominated (mphitrite and the Tritons.

The Pythagoreans likewise adorned numers and figureswith the appellations of the $ods. ;or they called thee1uilateral triangle !inerva 9oryphagenes, or egottenfrom the summit, and Tritogeneia, ecause it isdivided y three perpendiculars drawn from the three

angles. %ut they called the one (pollo, eingpersuaded to this y the ovious meaning of the word(pollo >which signifies a privation of multitudeA andy the simplicity of the monad.The duad they denominated strife and audacity and thetriad =ustice. ;or since in=uring and eing in=uredare two extremes susisting according to excess anddefect, =ustice through e1uality has a situation inthe middle. %ut what is called the tetractys, eingthe numer @K, was, as is reported, their greatestoath, and was denominated the world. ;or this numeris formed from the composition of the four first even,and the four first odd numers, collected into one

sum.B

B ;or @QGQKQF R 23 and ?Q@QJQHR?K and 23Q?KR@K.

6f therefore the most approved of the philosophers didnot think it proper to neglect or despise any occultsignification of a divine nature when they perceivedit even in things which are inanimate and incorporeal,it appears to me, that they in a still greater degreevenerated those peculiarities depending on mannerswhich they saw in such natures as had sense, and wereendued with soul, with passion, and ethical haits. *emust emrace therefore, not those who honor thesekings, ut those who reverence divinity through these,as through most clear mirrors, and which are producedy nature, in a ecoming manner, conceiving them to ethe instruments or the art of the $od y whom allthings are perpetually adorned. >note ed.- adornmentis in $reek- MosmosA.%ut we ought to think that no inanimate eing can emore excellent than one that is animated, nor aninsensile than a sensitive eing, not even thoughsome one should collect together all the gold andemeralds in the universe. ;or the divinity is notingenerated either in colours, or figures, or

smoothness ut such things as neither ever did, norare naturally adapted to participate of life, have anallotment more ignole than that of dead odies.%ut the nature which lives and sees, and has the



principle of motion from itself, and a knowledge ofthings appropriate and foreign to its eing, hascertainly derived an efflux and portion of thatwisdom, which, as <eraclitus says, considers how othitself, and the universe is governed. <ence thedivinity is not worse represented in these animals,than in the workmanships of copper and stone, which in

a similar manner suffer corruption and decay, ut arenaturally deprived of all sense and consciousness.This then 6 consider as the est defence that can egiven of the adoration of animals y the #gyptians.

*ith respect however to the sacred vestments, those of6sis are of various hues for her power is aoutmatter, which ecomes and receives all things, aslight and darkness, day and night, fire and water,life and death, eginning and end ut those of Osirisare without a shade and have no variety of colours,ut have one only which is simple and luciform. <ence

when the latter have een once used, they are laidaside and preserved for the intelligile is invisileand intangile.%ut the vestments of 6sis are used fre1uently. ;orsensile things eing in daily use and at hand,present us with many developements and views of theirdifferent mutations- ut the intellectual perceptionof that which is intelligile, genuine, and holy,luminously darting through the soul like acoruscation, is attended with a simultaneous contactand vision of its o=ect.<ence Plato and (ristotle call this part of philosophyepoptic or intuitive, indicating that those who have

through the exercise of the reasoning power soaredeyond these doxastic, mingled and allvariousnatures, raise themselves to that first, simple, andimmaterial principle, and passing into contact withthe pure truth which susists aout it, they considerthemselves as having at length otained the end ofphilosophy.(nd that which the present devoted and veiled priestsoscurely manifest with great reverence and caution isthat this $od is the ruler and prince of the dead, andis not different from that divinity who is called ythe $reeks <ades and Pluto, the truth of whichassertion not eing understood, disturs themultitude, who suspect that the truly sacred and holyOsiris dwells in and under the earth, where the odiesof those are concealed who appear to have otained anend of their eing. %ut he indeed himself is at theremotest distance from the earth, unstained,unpolluted, and pure from every essence that receivescorruption and death.The souls of men however, eing here encompassed withodies and passions, cannot participate of divinityexcept as of an oscure dream y intellectual contactthrough philosophy. %ut when they are lierated fromthe ody, and pass into the invisile, impassive, and

pure region, this $od is then their leader and king,from whom they depend, insatialy eholding him, anddesiring to survey that eauty which cannot eexpressed or uttered y men and which 6sis, as the



ancient discourse evinces, always loving, pursuing,and en=oying fills such things in these lower regionsas participate of generation with every thingeautiful and good."

(nd lastly, the #mperor :ulian, in a fragment of anOration or #pistle on the duties of a priest, has the

following remarks on religiously venerating statues-"&tatues and altars, and the preservation ofunextinguished fire, and in short, all suchparticulars, have een estalished y our fathers assymols of the presence of the $ods not that weshould believe that these symbols are Gods, but thatthrough these we should worship the Gods.;or since we are connected with ody, it is alsonecessary that our worship of the $ods should eperformed in a corporeal manner ut they areincorporeal. (nd they indeed have exhiited to us asthe first of statues, that which ranks as the secondgenus of $ods from the first, and which circularly

revolves round the whole of heaven.B"&ince, however, a corporeal worship cannot even epaid to these, ecause they are naturally unindigent,a third kind of statues was devised on the earth, ythe worship of which we render the $ods propitious tous.;or as those who reverence the images of kings, whoare not in want of any such reverence, at the sametime attract to themselves their enevolence thusalso those who venerate the statues of the $ods, whoare not in want of any thing, persuade the $ods ythis veneration to assist and e favourale to them.;or alacrity in the performance of things in our power

is a document of true sanctity and it is very evidentthat he who accomplishes the former, will in a greaterdegree possess the latter. %ut he who despises thingsin his power, and afterwards pretends to desireimpossiilities, evidently does not pursue the latter,and overlooks the former. ;or though divinity is notin want of any thing, it does not follow that on thisaccount nothing is to e offered to him. ;or neitheris he in want of celeration through the ministry ofwords. *hat thenI 6s it therefore reasonale that heshould e deprived of thisI %y no means. eithertherefore is he to e deprived of the honour which ispaid him through wor)s which honour has een legallyestalished, not for three, or for three thousandyears, ut in all preceding ages, among all nations ofthe earth.

B !eaning those divine odies the celestial ors,which in conse1uence of participating a divine lifefrom the incorporeal powers, from which they aresuspended, may e very properly called secondary Gods.

"%ut >the $alilaeans will say,A O) you who haveadmitted into your soul every multitude of daemons,

whom, though according to you they are formless andunfigured, you have fashioned in a corporealresemlance, it is not fit that honour should e paidto divinity through such works.



$ow, then, do not we /heathens0 consider as wood andstones those statues which are fashioned by the handsof men1 O more stupid than even stones themselves2 Do you fancy that all men are to be drawn by the nose as you are drawn by e-ecrable daemons, so as to thin)that the artificial resemblances of the Gods are theGods themselvesI

+ooking therefore to the resemlances of the $ods, wedo not think them to e either stones or wood forneither do we think that the $ods are theseresemlances since neither do we say that royalimages are wood, or stone, or rass, nor that they arethe kings themselves, ut the images of kings.*hoever, therefore, loves his king, eholds withpleasure the image of his king whoever loves hischild is delighted with his image and whoever loveshis father surveys his image with delight.B

B 7r. &tillingfleet 1uotes this part of the extract,in his answer to a ook entitled 9atholics no

6dolaters, and, calls :ulian the devout emperor.

<ence also, he who is a lover of divinity gladlysurveys the statues and images of the $ods at thesame time venerating and fearing with a holy dread the$ods who invisily ehold him.' BB

BB "7io 9hrysostome /says 7r. &tillingfleet in theeforecited work, p. G?G0 at large deates the caseaout images, in his Olympic Oration wherein he first

shows, that all men have a natural apprehension of onesupreme $od the father of all thingsand that this $od was represented y the statue madey Phidias of :upiter Olympius, for so he said 3beforewhom we now are' and then descries him to e theking, ruler, and father of all, oth $ods and men.This image he calls the most lessed, the mostexcellent, the most eautiful, the most eloved imageof $od. <e says there are four ways of coming to theknowledge of $od, y nature, y the instructions ofthe poets, y the laws, and y images ut neitherpoets, nor lawgivers, nor artificers were the estinterpreters of the deity, ut only the philosopherswho oth understood and explained the divine naturemost truly and perfectly. (fter this, he supposesPhidias to e called to account for making such animage of $od, as unworthy of himwhen 6phitus, +ycurgus, and the old #leans, made noneat all of him, as eing out of the power of man toexpress his nature. To this Phidias replies, that noman can express mind and understanding y figures, orcolours, and therefore they are forced to fly to thatin which the soul inhaits, and from thence theyattriute the seat of wisdom and reason to $od, havingnothing etter to represent him y.

(nd y that means =oining power and art together, theyendeavour y something which may e seen and painted,to represent that which is invisile andinexpressile. %ut it may e said, we had etter then



have no image or representation of him at all.o, says he for mankind doth not love to worship $odat a distance, ut to come near and feel him, and withassurance to sacrifice to him and crown him. +ikechildren newly weaned from their parents, who put outtheir hands towards them in their dreams as if theywere still present

so do men out of the sense of $od's goodness and theirrelation to him, love to have him represented aspresent with them, and so to converse with him. Thencehave come all the representations of $od among theararous nations, in mountains, and trees, andstones."

The same conceptions also aout statues areentertained y the %rachmans in %enares on the $anges.;or !onsieur %ernier when he was at their university,and was discoursing with one of the most learned menamong them, proposed to him the 1uestion aout theadoration of their idols, and reproaching him with it

as a thing very unreasonale, received from him thisremarkale answer- "*e have indeed in our temples manydifferent statues, as those of %rahma, !ahaden,$enick, and $avani, who are some of the chief and mostperfect 7eutas /or 7eities0and we have also many others of less perfection, towhom we pay great honour, prostrating ourselves eforethem, and presenting them flowers, rice, oyles,saffron, and 6he like, with much ceremony. %ut we donot elieve these statues to e %rahma or %echen, Lc.themselves, ut only their images and representations,and we only give them that honour on account of theeings they represent. They are in our temples,

ecause it is necessary in order to pray well, to havesomething efore our eyes that may fix the mind. (ndwhen we pray, it is not the statue we pray to, ut hethat is represented y it."The %rahmans have also another way of defending theirworship of statues, of which the same author gives thefollowing account-"That $od, or that sovereign eing whom they call(char /immutale0 has produced or drawn out of his ownsustance, not only souls, ut also whatever ismaterial and corporeal in the universe, so that allthings in the world are ut one and the same thingwith $od himself, as all numers are ut one and thesame unity repeated." %ernier !emoires, tome @. p.?H?.?HF.

;rom this latter extract it appears that the %rachmansas well as the ancient #gyptians, elieve that thesupreme principle is all things. (ccording to the estof the Platonists likewise, this principle is allthings prior to all. ;or y eing the one, it is allthings after the most simple manner, i. e. so as totranscend all multitude.

The 9atholics have employed arguments similar tothese, in defence of the reverence which they pay tothe images of their saints. 6ndeed, it is the doctrineof the 9hurch of #ngland,B that the 9atholics form the



same opinions of the saints whose images they worshipas the <eathens did of their $odsand employ the same outward rites in honouring theirimages, as the <eathens did in the religiousveneration of their statues. Thus as the <eathens hadtheir tutelar $ods, such as were %elus to the%aylonians and (ssyrians, Osiris and 6sis to the

#gyptians, and Dulcan to the +emnians, thus also the9atholics attriute the defence of certain countriesto certain saints. <ave not the saints also to whomthe safeguard of particular cities is committed, thesame office as the Dii *resides of the <eathensI &uchas were at 7elphi, (polloat (thens, !inerva at 9arthage, :uno and at ome,Nuirinus. (nd do not the saints to whom churches areuilt and altars erected correspond to the 7ii Patroniof the <eathensI &uch as were in the 9apitol, :upiter,in the temple at Paphos, Denus, in the temple of#phesus, 7iana.(re not likewise, our +ady of *alsingham, our +ady of

6pswich, our +ady of *ilsdon, and the like, imitationsof 7iana (grotera, 7iana 9oriphea, 7iana #phesia,Denus 9ypria, Denus Paphia, Denus $nidia, and thelikeI The 9atholics too, have sustituted for themarine deities eptune, Triton, ereus, 9astor andPollux, Denus, Lc. &aint 9hristopher, &aint 9lement,and others, and especially our +ady, as she is calledy them, to whom seamen sing Ave 4aris stella.either has the fire escaped their imitation of thePagans. ;or instead of Dulcan and Desta, theinspective guardians of fire according to the<eathens, the 9atholics have sustituted &aint (gatha,on the day of whose nativity they make letters for the

purpose of extinguishing fire. #very artificerlikewise and profession has a special saint in theplace of a presiding $od. Thus scholars have &ainticholas and &aint $regory painters &aint +uke norare soldiers in want of a saint corresponding to !ars,nor lovers of one who is a sustitute for Denus.

B &ee its <omilies, tome 2. p. GK.

(ll diseases too have their special saints instead of$ods, who are invoked as possessing a healing power.Thus the venereal disease has &aint oche the fallingsickness &aint 9ornelius, the toothach &aint (pollin,Lc. %easts and cattle also have their presidingsaints- for &aint +oy /says the <omily0 is the horseleach, and &aint (ntony the swineherd, etc. The <omily adds,B "that in many points the Papistsexceed the $entiles in idolatry, and particularly inhonouring and worshipping the relics and ones ofsaints, which prove that they e mortal men and dead,and therefore no $ods to e worshipped, which the$entiles would never confess of their $ods for veryshame."(nd after enumerating many ridiculous practices of the9atholics in reference to these relics, the <omily

concludes with oserving, "that they are not only morewicked than the $entile idolaters, ut also no wiserthan asses, horses, and mules, which have nounderstanding."



B Tome 2. p. JG

6n the second place the <omilies shew /p. G40 that therites and ceremonies of the Papists in honouring andworshipping their images or saints, are the same withthe rites of the Pagans. "This, say they, is evident

in their pilgrimages to visit images which had moreholiness and virtue in them than others. 6n theircandlereligion, urning incense, offering up gold toimages, hanging up crutches, chairs, and ships, legs,arms, and whole men and women of war, efore images,as though y them, or saints /as they say0 they weredelivered from lameness, sickness, captivity, orshipwrack."6n spreading aroad after the manner of the <eathens,the miracles that have accompanied images, " &uch animage was sent from heaven, like the Palladium, or7iana of the #phesians. &uch an image was rought yangels. &uch a one came itself far from the east to

the west, as 7ame ;ortune fled to ome. &ome imagesthough they were hard and stony, yet for tenderheartand pity wept.&ome spake more monstrously than ever did %alaam'sass, who had life and reath in him. &uch a cripplecame and saluted this saint of oak, and y and y hewas made whole, and here hangeth his crutch. &uch aone in a tempest vowed to &aint 9hristopher, andscaped, and ehold here is his ship of war. &uch aone, y &aint +eonard's help, rake out of prison, andsee where his fetters hang. (nd infinite thousandsmore miracles y like, or more shameless lies werereported."

(fter all this, 6 appeal to every intelligent reader,whether the religion of the <eathens, according to itsgenuine purity as delineated in this 6ntroduction, andas professed and promulgated y the est and wisestmen of anti1uity, is not infinitely preferale to thatof the 9atholicsI(nd whether it is not more holy to reverence eingsthe immediate progeny of the ineffale principle ofall things, and which are eternally centered androoted in himand to elieve that in reverencing these, we at thesame time reverence the ineffable, ecause theypartake of his nature, and that through these as mediawe ecome united with him,B than to reverence men, andthe images of men, many of whom when living, were thedisgrace of human natureIThe 9hurch of #ngland as we see prefers the Pagans tothe Papists and 6 trust that every other sect ofProtestant 9hristians will unanimously suscrie toher decision. (nd thus much in defence of the theologyof Plato, and the religious worship of the <eathens.

B The ineffable principle of things, as is

demonstrated in the Elements of Theology in this work,is beyond self-subsistence. ence the first ineffablee!olution from him consists of self-subsistentnatures. s we therefore are only the dregs of the



rational nature, many media are necessary to con#oinus with a principle so immensely e$alted abo!e us. ndthese media are the golden chain of powers that ha!edeified summits, or that ha!e the ineffable unitedwith the effable.

6t now remains that 6 should speak of the following

work, of its author, and the translation. The workitself then is a scientific developement of thedeiform processions from the ineffale principle ofthings, and this, as it appears to me in the greatestperfection possile to man.;or the reasoning is every where consummatelyaccurate, and deduced from selfevident principlesand the conclusions are the result of what Platopowerfully calls geometrical necessities. To thereader of this work indeed, who has not een properlydisciplined in #leatic and (cademic studies, and whohas not a genius naturally adapted to such astrusespeculations, it will doutless appear to e perfectly

unintelligile, and in the language of critical cant,nothing ut =argon and revery.This, however, is what Plato the great hierophant ofthis theology predicted would e the case, if ever itwas unfolded to the multitude at large. ";or as itappears to me, says he, there are scarcely anyparticulars which will e considered y the multitudemore ridiculous than these nor again, any which willappear more wonderful and enthusiastic to those whoare naturally adapted to perceive them" /#pist. 2.0

6n his seventh epistle also he oserves as follows-"Thus much, however, 6 shall say respecting all those

who either have written or shall write, affirming thatthey know those things which are the o=ects of mystudy /whether they have heard them from me or fromothers, or whether they have discovered themthemselves0 that they have not heard any thing aoutthese things conformale to my opinion- for 6 neverhave written nor ever shall write aout them.B;or a thing of this kind cannot e expressed y wordslike other disciplines, ut y long familiarity, andliving in con=unction with the thing itself, a lightBBas it were leaping from a fire will on a sudden eenkindled in the soul, and there itself nourishitself."(nd shortly after he adds "%ut if it appeared to methat the particulars of which 6 am speaking could esufficiently communicated to the multitude y writingor speech, what could we accomplish more eautiful inlife than to impart a mighty enefit to mankind, andlead an intelligile nature into light, so as to eovious to all menI6 think, however, that an attempt of this kind wouldonly e eneficial to a few, who from some smallvestiges previously demonstrated are themselves aleto discover these astruse particulars. %ut withrespect to the rest of mankind, some it will fill with

a contempt y no means elegant, and others with alofty and arrogant hope that they shall now learncertain venerale things."



B Plato means y this, that he has never writtenperspicuously aout intelligibles or true beings, theproper o=ects of intellect.

BB This light is a thing of a very different kind from

that which is produced y the evidence arising fromtruths perceptile y the multitude, as those who haveexperienced it well know.

The prediction of Plato therefore, has een ut tootruly fulfilled in the fate which has attended thewritings of the est of his disciples, among whomProclus certainly maintains the most distinguishedrank.This indeed, these disciples well knew would e thecase ut perceiving that the hand of %araric anddespotic power was aout to destroy the schools of thephilosophers, and foreseeing that dreadful night of

ignorance and folly which succeeded so nefarious anundertaking, they enevolently disclosed in asluminous a manner as the su=ect would permit, thearcana of their master's doctrines, therey, as Platoexpresses it, giving assistance to Philosophy, andalso preserving it as a paternal and immortalinheritance, to the latest posterity.Proclus in the first ook of this work has enumeratedthe re1uisites which a student of it ought to possessand it is most certain that he who does not possessthem, will never fathom the depths of this theology,or perceive his mind irradiated with that admiralelight, mentioned y Plato in the foregoing extract,

and which is only to e seen y that eye of the soulwhich is etter worth saving than ten thousandcorporeal eyes.

*ith respect to the diction of Proclus in this work,its general character is that of purity, clearness,copiousness, and magnificence so that even thefastidious critic, who considers every $reek writer aspartially ararous who lived after the fall of the!acedonian empire, must, however unwillingly, eforced to acknowledge that Proclus is a splendidexception. The sagacious Mepler, whose decision onthis su=ect, outweighs in my opinion, that of a swarmof modern critics, after having made a long extractfrom the commentaries of Proclus on #uclid, gives thefollowing animated encomium of his diction."Oratio fluit ipsi torrentis instar, ripas inundans,et coeca duitationum vada gurgites1ue occultans, dummens plena ma=estatis tantarum rerum, luctatur inangustiis linguae, et conclusio nun1uam sii ipsiverorum copia satisfaciens, propositionumsimplicitatem excedit."i. e. "<is language flows like a torrent, inundatingits anks, and hiding the dark fords and whirlpools ofdouts, while his mind full of the ma=esty of things

of such a magnitude, struggles in the straits oflanguage, and the conclusion never satisfying him,exceeds y the copia of words, the simplicity of thepropositions."



6f we omit what Mepler here says aout the struggle ofthe mind of Proclus, and his never eing satisfiedwith the conclusion, the rest of his eulogy is e1uallyapplicale to the style of the present work, so far asit is possile for the eauties of diction to ecomined with the rigid accuracy of geometricalreasoning.

*ith respect to the life of Proclus, it has eenwritten with great elegance y his disciple !arinasand a translation of it y me prefixed to my versionof the commentaries of Proclus was pulished in ?HFF.;rom the edition of that life therefore, y ;aricius,the following particulars relative to this veryextraordinary man are extracted, for the informationof the reader who may not have the translation of itin his possession.(ccording to the accurate chronology then of;aricius, Proclus was orn at %yzantium in the yearof 9hrist G?2, on the Kth of the 6des of ;eruary, and

died in the one hundred and twentyfourth year afterthe reign of the emperor :ulian, on the seventeenthday of the (ttic !unichion, or the (pril of theomans, icagoras the =unior, eing at that time the(thenian archon.<is father Patricius, and his mother !arcella, wereoth of them of the +ycian nation, and were no letsillustrious for their virtue than their irth. (s soonas he was orn, his parents rought him to theirnative country anthus, which was sacred to (pollo.(nd this, says !arinus, happened to him y a certaindivine allotment. ";or, he adds, 6 think it wasnecessary that he who was to e the leader of all

sciences, should e nourished and educated under thepresiding deity of the !uses."The person of Proclus was uncommonly eautiful and henot only possessed all the moral and intellectualvirtues in the highest perfection, ut the vestigiesof them also, which are denominated the physicalvirtues, were clearly seen, says !arinus, in his lastand shelly vestment the ody.<ence he possessed a remarkale acuteness ofsensation, and particularly in the most honourale ofthe senses, sight and hearing, which, as Plato says,were imparted y the $ods to men for the purpose ofphilosophizing, and for the well eing of the animallife.6n the second place, he possessed so great a strengthof ody, that it was neither in=ured y cold, nor anyendurance of laours, though these were extreme, othy night and day.

6n the third place, he was, as we have eforeoserved, very eautiful. ";or not only, says!arinus, did his ody possess great symmetry, ut aliving light as it were eaming from his soul wasefflorescent in his ody, and shone forth with anadmirale splendor, which it is impossile to

descrie."

!arinus adds, " 6ndeed he was so eautiful, that nopainter could accurately exhiit his resemlance and



all the pictures of him which were circulated, thoughvery eautiful, were very inferior to the eauty ofthe original." (nd in the fourth place, he possessedhealth in such perfection, that he was not ill aovetwice or thrice in the course of so long a life asseventyfive years.

&uch then were the corporeal prerogatives whichProclus possessed, and which may e called theforerunners of the forms of perfect virtue. %ut hepossessed in a wonderful manner what Plato calls theelements of a philosophic genius.>&ee the sixth ookof the epulic of Plato.A;or he had an excellent memory, learned with facility,was magnificent and graceful, and the friend and allyof truth, =ustice, fortitude, and temperance. <avingfor a short space of time applied himself in +ycia togrammar, he went to (lexandria in #gypt, and was thereinstructed in rhetoric y +eonas who derived hislineage from 6saurus, and in grammar y Orion, whose

ancestors discharged the sacerdotal office among the#gyptians, and who composed elaorate treatises onthat art.

( certain good fortune however, says !arinas, roughthim ack to the place of his nativity. ;or on hisreturn his tutelar $oddess exhorted him to philosophy,and to visit the (thenian schools. <aving therefore,first returned to (lexandria and ade farewell torhetoric, and the other arts which he had formerlystudied, he gave himself up to the discourses of thephilosophers then resident at (lexandria.<ere, he ecame an auditor of Olympiodorus,B the most

illustrious of philosophers, for the sake of imiingthe doctrine of (ristotle and was instructed in themathematical disciplines y <ero, a religious man, andeminently skilful in teaching those sciences.Proclus however, not eing satisfied with the(lexandrian schools, went to (thens, " with a certainsplendid procession, says !arinus, of all elo1uenceand elegance, and attended y the $ods that presideover philosophy, and y eneficent daemons. ;or thatthe succession of philosophy, might e preservedlegitimate and genuine, the $ods led him to the cityover which its inspective guardian presides."

<ence Proclus was called by way of eminence, the*latonic +uccessor. (t (thens therefore, Proclusfortunately met with the first of philosophers,&yrianus,BB the son of Philoxenus, who not only muchassisted him in his studies, ut made him his domesticas to other concerns, and the companion of hisphilosophic life, having found him such an auditor andsuccessor as he had a long time sought for, and onewho was capale of receiving a multitude ofdisciplines and divine dogmas.

6n less than two whole years therefore, Proclus read

with &yrianus all the works of (ristotle, viz. hislogic, ethics, politics, physics, and theologicalscience. (nd eing sufficiently instructed in these asin certain proteleia, or things preparatory to



initiation, and lesser mysteries, &yrianus led him tothe mystic discipline of Plato, in an orderlyprogression, and not according to the 9haldean oraclewith a transcendent foot.<e likewise enaled Proclus to survey in con=unctionwith him, says !arinus, truly divine mysteries, withthe eyes of his soul free from material darkness, and

with undefiled intellectual vision.%ut Proclus employing sleepless exercise andattention, oth y night and y day, and synopticallyand =udiciously committing to writing what he heardfrom &yrianus, made so great a progress in a littletime, that y then he was twentyeight years of age,he had composed a multitude of works and among therest his commentaries on the Timaus which are trulyelegant and full of science. %ut from such adiscipline as this, his manners ecame more adornedand as he advanced in science he increased in virtue.

B This Olympiodorus is not the same with the

philosopher of that name whose learned commentaries oncertain dialogues of Plato are extant in manuscriptas in these, not only Proclus, ut 7amascius whoflourished after Proclus is celerated.

BB This truly great man appears to have een the firstwho thoroughly penetrated the profundity contained inthe writings of the more ancient philosophers,contemporary with and prior to Plato, and to havedemonstrated the admirale agreement of theirdoctrines with each other. 8nfortunately ut few ofhis works are extant.

!arinus after this, shows how Proclus possessed allthe virtues in the greatest possile perfection andhow he proceeded from the exercise of the politicalvirtues, which are produced y reason adorning theirrational part as its instrument, to the catharticvirtues which pertain to reason alone, withdrawingfrom other things to itself, throwing aside theinstruments of sense as vain, repressing also theenergies through these instruments, and lierating thesoul from the onds of generation.<e then adds, "Proclus having made a proficiency,through these virtues, as it were y certain mysticsteps, recurred from these to such as are greater andmore telestic, eing conducted to them y a prosperousnature and scientific discipline. ;or eing nowpurified, rising aove generation, and despising itsthyrsusearers,B he was agitated with a divinelyinspired fury, aout the first essences, and ecame aninspector of the truly lessed spectacles which theycontain. o longer collecting discursively anddemonstratively the science of them, ut surveyingthem as it were y simple intuition, and eholdingthrough intellectual energies the paradigms in adivine intellect, assuming a virtue which can no

longer e denominated prudence, ut which ought ratherto e called wisdom, or something still more veneralethan this.



The philosopher therefore energizing according to thisvirtue, easily comprehended all the theology of the$reeks and %ararians, and that which is adumrated inmythological fictions, and rought it into light, tothose who are willing and ale to understand it.<e explained likewise every thing in a moreenthusiastic manner, and rought the different

theologies to an harmonious agreement. (t the sametime also, investigating the writings of the ancients,whatever he found in them genuine, he =udiciouslyadopted ut if he found any thing of a spuriousnature, this, he entirely re=ected as erroneous. <ealso strenuously suverted y a diligent examinationsuch doctrines as were contrary to truth.6n his associations too with others, he employed noless force and perspicuity. ;or he was a man laoriouseyond measure as, in one day, he gave five, andsometimes more lectures, and wrote as many as sevenhundred verses. %esides this, he went to otherphilosophers, and spent the evening in conversation

with them. (nd all these employments he executed insuch a manner as not to neglect his nocturnal andvigilant piety to the $ods, and assiduouslysupplicating the sun when rising, when at his meridianaltitude, and when he sets."

B &ocrates in the Phaedo of Plato, Orphically callsthe multitude thyrsusearers as living Titannically.;or the thyrsus, says Olympiodorus, /in !&. comment inPhaed.0 is a symol of material and partilefarication, on account of its divulsed continuity,whence also it is a Titannic plant. ";or it isextended, says he, efore %acchus, instead of his

paternal sceptre, and through this they call him intoa partial nature. <e adds, "%esides the Titans arethyrsusearers and Prometheus concealed fire in areed, whether y this we are to understand that hedraws down celestial light into generation, or impelssoul into ody, or calls forth divine illumination,the whole of which is ungenerated, into generation."

!arinus farther oserves of this most extraordinaryman, "that he did not seem to e without divineinspiration. ;or words similar to the most white andthickfalling snowB proceeded from his wise mouth, hiseyes appeared to e filled with a fulgid splendor, andthe rest of his face to participate of divineillumination.<ence ufinus, a man illustrious in the epulic, andwho was also a man of veracity, and in other respectsvenerale, happening to e present with him when hewas lecturing, perceived that his head was surroundedwith a light. (nd when Proclus had finished hislecture, ufinus rising, adored him, and testified yan oath the truth of the divine vision which he hadseen."

!arinus also informs us, "that Proclus eing purified

in an orderly manner y the 9haldean purifications,was an inspector of the lucid <ecatic visions, as hehimself somewhere mentions in one of his writings. %yopportunely moving likewise a certain <ecatic



sphaerula,BB he procured showers of rain, and freed(thens from an unseasonale heat. %esides this, ycertain phylacteria or charms, he stopt an earth1uake,and had made trial of the divining energy of thetripod, having een instructed y certain versesrespecting its failure. ;or when he was in hisfortieth year, he appeared in a dream to utter the

following verses-

<igh aove aether there with radiance right,( pure immortal splendor wings its flight BBB*hose eams divine with vivid force aspire,(nd leap resounding from a fount of fire.

B (lluding to the eautiful description given of8lysses in the third ook of the 6liad, v. 22. whichis thus elegantly paraphrased y Pope.

%ut when he speaks what elocution flows)&oft as the fleeces of descending snows

The copious accents fall with easy art!elting they fall and sink into the heart.

BB icephorus in his commentary on &ynesius de6nsomniis, p. @K2. informs us that the <ecatic or isa golden sphere, which has a sapphire stone inclosedin its middle part, and through its whole extremitycharacters, and various figures. <e adds, that turningthis sphere round, the 9haldeans perform invocationswhich they call 6yngae. Thus too, according to &uidas,the magician :ulian of 9haldaea, and (rnuphis the#gyptian rought down showers of rain, y a magicalpower. (nd y an artifice of this kind, #mpedocles was

accustomed to restrain the fury of the winds on whichaccount he was called an e-peller of wind.

BBB This signifies that the divine splendor which isthe cause of the prophetic energy, would leave theearth, in conse1uence of the then existing inaptitudeof persons, places, and instruments, to receive it.

(nd in the eginning of his fortysecond year heappeared to himself to pronounce with a loud voicethese verses-

+o) on my soul a sacred fire descends,*hose vivid power the intellect extends;rom whence far eaming thro' dull ody's night,6t soars to aether deck'd with starry light(nd with soft murmurs thro' the azure round,The lucid regions of the $ods resound.

%esides, he clearly perceived that he elonged to the!ercurial series and was persuaded from a dream, thathe possessed the soul of icomachus the Pythagorean."B

B o opinion is more celerated, than that of the

metempsychosis of Pythagoras ut perhaps no doctrineis more generally mistaken. %y most of the present dayit is exploded as ridiculousand the few who retain some veneration for its



founder, endeavour to destroy the literal, and toconfine it to an allegorical meaning. %y some of theancients this mutation was limited to similar odiesso that they conceived the human soul mighttransmigrate into various human odies, ut not intothose of rutes. (nd this was the opinion of<ierocles, as may e seen in his 9ommentary on the

$olden Derses.

%ut why may not the human soul ecome connected withsuordinate, as well as with superior lives, y atendency of inclinationI 7o not similars love to eunitedand is there not in all kinds of life somethingsimilar and commonI <ence when the affections of thesoul verge to a aser nature, while connected with ahuman ody, these affections, on the dissolution ofsuch a ody, ecome enveloped as it were, in a rutalnature, and the rational eye, in this case, cloudedwith perturations, is oppressed y the irrational

energies of the rute, and surveys nothing ut thedark phantasms of a degraded imagination.%ut this doctrine is vindicated y Proclus with hisusual acuteness, in his admirale 9ommentaries on theTimaeus, li. J. p. @24, as follows- "6t is usual,says he, to en1uire how human souls can descend intorute animals. (nd some indeed, think that there arecertain similitudes of men to rutes, which they callsavage lives- for they y no means think it possilethat the rational essence can ecome the soul of asavage animal. On the contrary, others allow it may esent into rutes, ecause all souls are of one and thesame kind

so that they may ecome wolves and panthers, andichneumons. %ut true reason indeed, asserts that thehuman soul may e lodged in rutes, yet in such amanner, as that it may otain its own proper life, andthat the degraded soul may, as it were, e carriedaove it, and e ound to the aser nature y apropensity and similitude of affection. (nd that thisis the only mode of insinuation, we have proved y amultitude of arguments, in our 9ommentaries on thePhaedrus.6f however, it e re1uisite to take notice, that thisis the opinion of Plato, we add that in his epuliche says, that the soul of Thersites assumed an ape,ut not the ody of an ape- and in the Phaedrus, thatthe soul descends into a savage life, ut not into asavage ody. ;or life is con=oined with its propersoul. (nd in this place he says it is changed into arutal nature. ;or a rutal nature is not a rutalody, ut a rutal life."

6n the last place, !arinus adds, "that the lovers ofmore elegant studies may e ale to con=ecture fromthe position of the stars under which he was orn,that the condition of his life, was y no means amongthe last or middle, ut among the first orders, we

have thought fit to expose in this place the followingscheme of his nativity."

&ol ?KS 2K' (1uarius



!oon ?H 24 $emini&aturn 2G 2@ Taurus:upiter 2G G? Taurus!ars 24 J3 &agittariusDenus 2@ Pisces!ercurius G G2 (1uarius

<oros. F ?4 (ries

!id.<eaven. G G2 9apricorn

head of the dragon2G @@ &corpio

The new moon preceding his irthF J? (1uarius

(nd thus much for the life of Proclus.

*ith respect to the translation of the following work,On the Theology of Plato, 6 can only say that 6 haveendeavoured to render it as faithful as possile, andto preserve the manner as well as the matter of theauthor this eing indispensaly necessary, oth fromthe importance of the su=ect, and the scientificaccuracy of the reasoning with which it is discussed.

6 have added a seventh ook in order to render thework complete for without the developement of themundane $ods, and the more excellent genera their

perpetual attendants, it would oviously eincomplete. ;rom the catalogue of the manuscripts inthe late ;rench king's lirary, it is evident thatProclus had written a seventh ook,B as some chaptersof it are there said to e extant in that lirary.These 6 have endeavoured, ut without success, tootain. The want of this seventh ook y Proclus, willdoutless e considered y all the friends of $reekliterature, and particularly y all who are lovers ofthe doctrines of Plato, as a loss of no commonmagnitude.6t is, however, a fortunate circumstance, that in thecomposition of the seventh ook 6 have een ale tosupply the deficiency arising from the want of thatwhich was written y Proclus, in a great measure fromother works of Proclus himself, and particularly fromhis very elegant and scientific commentaries on theTimaeus of Plato.&o that 6 trust the loss is in some measure suppliedthough 6 am sensile, very inade1uately, could it ecompared with the ook which was written y a man ofsuch gigantic powers of mind as Proclus, and who hadalso sources of information on the su=ect, which atthe present period, it is impossile to otain.

B Proclus at the end of the first ook of this worksays, "that divine names will e accurately discussedy him, when he comes to speak of partial powers."This, however, is not done y him in any one of the



six ooks that are extant which shows that anotherook is wanting.

( translation of the #lements of Theology is added inorder to render the treatise On the Theology of Plato,more complete, and to assist the reader who wishes topenetrate the depths of that most astruse and sulime

work for the former elucidates, and is elucidated ythe latter.

6n translating the treatise of Proclus On Providenceand ;ate, 6 had great difficulties to encounter, asthe original $reek is lost, and nothing ut a +atintranslation, which ;aricius oserves, is all butbarbarous, remains. 6f the reader compares thattranslation with mine, he will at once acknowledge thetruth of my remark. 6ndeed, that translation is insome parts so ararous, that nothing ut an intimateac1uaintance with the writings of Proclus, and thephilosophy of Plato could enale any one to render

them intelligile in another language. The sameoservation is partially applicale to the translationof the #xtracts from two other treatises of Proclus.

The $reek text of Proclus aounds with errors, so thatthe emendations which 6 have made, and thedeficiencies which 6 have supplied in this volume,amount to more than four hundred. (nd the +atintranslation of Portus is so very faulty, as to ealmost eyond example ad. <aving discovered this toe the case, and having in so many places correctedthe original, 6 scarcely think that any of my criticalenemies will e hardy enough to say, that any part of

this volume was translated from the +atin, where the$reek could e otained.(s 6 am conscious however, that in what is now offeredto the pulic, 6 had no other view than to enefitthose who are capale of eing enefited y suchsulime speculations that wishing well to allmankind, and particularly to my country, 6 havelaoured to disseminate the philosophy and theology ofPlato, as highly favourale to the interests of pietyand good government, and most hostile to lawlessconduct and revolutionary principlesand that 6 have done my est to deserve the esteem ofthe wise and worthy part of mankind, 6 am whollyunconcerned as to the reception it may meet with fromthe malevolent, though 6 wish for the approation ofthe candid critics of the day. ;or in all my laours 6have invarialy oserved the following Pythagoricprecept- "7o those things which you =udge to eeautiful, though in doing them you should e withoutrenown for the rale is a ad =udge of a good thing./7emophilus0"

Documents

Intro to Proclus on the Theology of Plato