[178:1] Gibbon, chap. xxi, notes 161, 162.

[178:2] _Rise of the Greek Epic_, chap. i.

[180:1] ?d???? ?a? ?a?a?? pa???s?a.

[181:1] 'Many of his sections come straight from Plotinus: xiv and xv perhaps from Porphyry's _Letter to Marcella_, an invaluable doc.u.ment for the religious side of Neo-Platonism. A few things (prayer to the souls of the dead in iv, to the Cosmos in xvii, the doctrine of t???, in ix) are definitely un-Plotinian: probably concessions to popular religion.'--_E. R. D._

[188:1] S. Reinach, _Orpheus_, p. 273 (Engl. trans., p. 185).

[188:2] See Ammia.n.u.s, xxii. 12, on the bad effect of Julian's sacrifices. Sacrifice was finally forbidden by the emperor Theodosius in 391. It was condemned by Theophrastus, and is said by Porphyry (_De Abstinentia_, ii. 11) simply ?ae?? t?? ????? ?? ?d???a?.

[189:1] Sall.u.s.tius's view of sacrifice is curiously like the illuminating theory of MM. Hubert and Mauss, in which they define primitive sacrifice as a medium, a bridge or lightning-conductor, between the profane and the sacred. 'Essai sur la Nature et la Fonction du Sacrifice' (_Annee Sociologique_, ii. 1897-8), since republished in the _Melanges d'Histoire des Religions_, 1909.

[190:1] Cf. Minucius Felix, _Octavius_, p. 96, Ouzel (chap. 11, Boenig).

'Quid quod toti orbi et ipsi mundo c.u.m sideribus suis minantur incendium, ruinam moliuntur?' The doctrine in their mouths became a very different thing from the Stoic theory of the periodic re-absorption of the universe in the Divine Element. Ibid., pp. 322 ff. (34 Boenig).

[192:1] Even Epicurus himself held ??? st?e???? ? s?f??, e??a? a?t??

e?da???a. Diog. La. x. 118. See above, end of chap. iii.

[196:1] Geffcken in the _Neue Jahrbucher_, xxi. 162 f.

[197:1] Mullach, _Fragmenta Philosophorum_, iii. 7, from Stob. _Flor._ i. 85.

SALl.u.s.tIUS 'ON THE G.o.dS AND THE WORLD'[200:1]

I. _What the Disciple should be; and concerning Common Conceptions._

Those who wish to hear about the G.o.ds should have been well guided from childhood, and not habituated to foolish beliefs. They should also be in disposition good and sensible, that they may properly attend to the teaching.

They ought also to know the Common Conceptions. Common Conceptions are those to which all men agree as soon as they are asked; for instance, that all G.o.d is good, free from pa.s.sion, free from change. For whatever suffers change does so for the worse or the better: if for the worse, it is made bad; if for the better, it must have been bad at first.

II. _That G.o.d is unchanging, unbegotten, eternal, incorporeal, and not in s.p.a.ce._

Let the disciple be thus. Let the teachings be of the following sort.

The essences of the G.o.ds never came into existence (for that which always is never comes into existence; and that exists for ever which possesses primary force and by nature suffers nothing): neither do they consist of bodies; for even in bodies the powers are incorporeal.

Neither are they contained by s.p.a.ce; for that is a property of bodies.

Neither are they separate from the First Cause nor from one another, just as thoughts are not separate from mind nor acts of knowledge from the soul.

III. _Concerning myths; that they are divine, and why._

We may well inquire, then, why the ancients forsook these doctrines and made use of myths. There is this first benefit from myths, that we have to search and do not have our minds idle.

_That_ the myths are divine can be seen from those who have used them.

Myths have been used by inspired poets, by the best of philosophers, by those who established the mysteries, and by the G.o.ds themselves in oracles. But _why_ the myths are divine it is the duty of Philosophy to inquire. Since all existing things rejoice in that which is like them and reject that which is unlike, the stories about the G.o.ds ought to be like the G.o.ds, so that they may both be worthy of the divine essence and make the G.o.ds well disposed to those who speak of them: which could only be done by means of myths.

Now the myths represent the G.o.ds themselves and the goodness of the G.o.ds--subject always to the distinction of the speakable and the unspeakable, the revealed and the unrevealed, that which is clear and that which is hidden: since, just as the G.o.ds have made the goods of sense common to all, but those of intellect only to the wise, so the myths state the existence of G.o.ds to all, but who and what they are only to those who can understand.

They also represent the activities of the G.o.ds. For one may call the World a Myth, in which bodies and things are visible, but souls and minds hidden. Besides, to wish to teach the whole truth about the G.o.ds to all produces contempt in the foolish, because they cannot understand, and lack of zeal in the good; whereas to conceal the truth by myths prevents the contempt of the foolish, and compels the good to practise philosophy.

But why have they put in the myths stories of adultery, robbery, father-binding, and all the other absurdity? Is not that perhaps a thing worthy of admiration, done so that by means of the visible absurdity the Soul may immediately feel that the words are veils and believe the truth to be a mystery?

IV. _That the species of Myth are five, with examples of each._

Of myths some are theological, some physical, some psychic, and again some material, and some mixed from these last two. The theological are those myths which use no bodily form but contemplate the very essences of the G.o.ds: e. g. Kronos swallowing his children. Since G.o.d is intellectual, and all intellect returns into itself, this myth expresses in allegory the essence of G.o.d.

Myths may be regarded physically when they express the activities of the G.o.ds in the world: e. g. people before now have regarded Kronos as Time, and calling the divisions of Time his sons say that the sons are swallowed by the father.

The psychic way is to regard the activities of the Soul itself: the Soul's acts of thought, though they pa.s.s on to other objects, nevertheless remain inside their begetters.

The material and last is that which the Egyptians have mostly used, owing to their ignorance, believing material objects actually to be G.o.ds, and so calling them: e. g. they call the Earth Isis, moisture Osiris, heat Typhon, or again, water Kronos, the fruits of the earth Adonis, and wine Dionysus.

To say that these objects are sacred to the G.o.ds, like various herbs and stones and animals, is possible to sensible men, but to say that they are G.o.ds is the notion of madmen--except, perhaps, in the sense in which both the orb of the sun and the ray which comes from the orb are colloquially called 'the Sun'.[203:1]

The mixed kind of myth may be seen in many instances: for example they say that in a banquet of the G.o.ds Discord threw down a golden apple; the G.o.ddesses contended for it, and were sent by Zeus to Paris to be judged; Paris saw Aphrodite to be beautiful and gave her the apple. Here the banquet signifies the hyper-cosmic powers of the G.o.ds; that is why they are all together. The golden apple is the world, which, being formed out of opposites, is naturally said to be 'thrown by Discord'. The different G.o.ds bestow different gifts upon the world and are thus said to 'contend for the apple'. And the soul which lives according to sense--for that is what Paris is--not seeing the other powers in the world but only beauty, declares that the apple belongs to Aphrodite.

Theological myths suit philosophers, physical and psychic suit poets, mixed suit religious initiations, since every initiation aims at uniting us with the World and the G.o.ds.

To take another myth, they say that the Mother of the G.o.ds seeing Attis lying by the river Gallus fell in love with him, took him, crowned him with her cap of stars, and thereafter kept him with her. He fell in love with a nymph and left the Mother to live with her. For this the Mother of the G.o.ds made Attis go mad and cut off his genital organs and leave them with the Nymph, and then return and dwell with her.

Now the Mother of the G.o.ds is the principle that generates life; that is why she is called Mother. Attis is the creator of all things which are born and die; that is why he is said to have been found by the river Gallus. For Gallus signifies the Galaxy, or Milky Way, the point at which body subject to pa.s.sion begins.[204:1] Now as the primary G.o.ds make perfect the secondary, the Mother loves Attis and gives him celestial powers. That is what the cap means. Attis loves a nymph: the nymphs preside over generation, since all that is generated is fluid.

But since the process of generation must be stopped somewhere, and not allowed to generate something worse than the worst, the Creator who makes these things casts away his generative powers into the creation and is joined to the G.o.ds again. Now these things never happened, but always are. And Mind sees all things at once, but Reason (or Speech) expresses some first and others after. Thus, as the myth is in accord with the Cosmos, we for that reason keep a festival imitating the Cosmos, for how could we attain higher order?

And at first we ourselves, having fallen from heaven and living with the Nymph, are in despondency, and abstain from corn and all rich and unclean food, for both are hostile to the soul. Then comes the cutting of the tree and the fast, as though we also were cutting off the further process of generation. After that the feeding on milk, as though we were being born again; after which come rejoicings and garlands and, as it were, a return up to the G.o.ds.

The season of the ritual is evidence to the truth of these explanations.

The rites are performed about the Vernal Equinox, when the fruits of the earth are ceasing to be produced, and day is becoming longer than night, which applies well to Spirits rising higher. (At least, the other equinox is in mythology the time of the Rape of Kore, which is the descent of the souls.)

May these explanations of the myths find favour in the eyes of the G.o.ds themselves and the souls of those who wrote the myths.

V. _On the First Cause._

Next in order comes knowledge of the First Cause and the subsequent orders of the G.o.ds, then the nature of the world, the essence of intellect and of soul, then Providence, Fate, and Fortune, then to see Virtue and Vice and the various forms of social const.i.tution good and bad that are formed from them, and from what possible source Evil came into the world.

Each of these subjects needs many long discussions; but there is perhaps no harm in stating them briefly, so that a disciple may not be completely ignorant about them.

It is proper to the First Cause to be One--for unity precedes mult.i.tude--and to surpa.s.s all things in power and goodness. Consequently all things must partake of it. For owing to its power nothing else can hinder it, and owing to its goodness it will not hold itself apart.

If the First Cause were Soul, all things would possess Soul. If it were Mind, all things would possess Mind. If it were Being, all things would partake of Being. And seeing this quality (i. e. Being) in all things, some men have thought that it was Being. Now if things simply _were_, without being good, this argument would be true, but if things that are _are_ because of their goodness, and partake in the good, the First thing must needs be both beyond-Being and good. It is strong evidence of this that n.o.ble souls despise Being for the sake of the good, when they face death for their country or friends or for the sake of virtue.--After this inexpressible power come the orders of the G.o.ds.

VI. _On G.o.ds Cosmic and Hypercosmic._