15 files changed, 48407 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/28312-0.txt b/28312-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e49745e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,5515 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Atheism in Pagan Antiquity by A. B.
+Drachmann
+
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no
+restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under
+the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or
+online at http://www.gutenberg.org/license
+
+
+
+Title: Atheism in Pagan Antiquity
+
+Author:
+A. B. Drachmann
+
+
+Release Date: March 11, 2009 [Ebook #28312]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+
+
+
+
+
+                        Atheism In Pagan Antiquity
+
+                                    By
+
+                             A. B. Drachmann
+
+     Professor of Classical Philology in the University of Copenhagen
+
+                                Gyldendal
+
+                      11 Hanover Square, London, W.1
+
+                                Copenhagen
+
+                               Christiania
+
+                                   1922
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+Preface
+Introduction
+Chapter I
+Chapter II
+Chapter III
+Chapter IV
+Chapter V
+Chapter VI
+Chapter VII
+Chapter VIII
+Chapter IX
+Notes
+Index
+Footnotes
+
+
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+The present treatise originally appeared in Danish as a University
+publication (_Kjœbenhavns Universitets Festskrift_, November 1919). In
+submitting it to the English public, I wish to acknowledge my profound
+indebtedness to Mr. G. F. Hill of the British Museum, who not only
+suggested the English edition, but also with untiring kindness has
+subjected the translation, as originally made by Miss Ingeborg Andersen,
+M.A. of Copenhagen, to a painstaking and most valuable revision.
+
+For an account of the previous treatments of the subject, as well as of
+the method employed in my investigation, the reader is referred to the
+introductory remarks which precede the Notes.
+
+A. B. DRACHMANN.
+CHARLOTTENLUND,
+_July 1922_.
+
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+
+The present inquiry is the outcome of a request to write an article on
+“Atheism” for a projected dictionary of the religious history of classical
+antiquity. On going through the sources I found that the subject might
+well deserve a more comprehensive treatment than the scope of a dictionary
+would allow. It is such a treatment that I have attempted in the following
+pages.
+
+A difficulty that occurred at the very beginning of the inquiry was how to
+define the notion of atheism. Nowadays the term is taken to designate the
+attitude which denies every idea of God. Even antiquity sometimes referred
+to atheism in this sense; but an inquiry dealing with the history of
+religion could not start from a definition of that kind. It would have to
+keep in view, not the philosophical notion of God, but the conceptions of
+the gods as they appear in the religion of antiquity. Hence I came to
+define atheism in Pagan antiquity as the point of view which _denies the
+existence of the ancient gods_. It is in this sense that the word will be
+used in the following inquiry.
+
+Even though we disregard philosophical atheism, the definition is somewhat
+narrow; for in antiquity mere denial of the existence of the gods of
+popular belief was not the only attitude which was designated as atheism.
+But it has the advantage of starting from the conception of the ancient
+gods that may be said to have finally prevailed. In the sense in which the
+word is used here we are nowadays all of us atheists. We do not believe
+that the gods whom the Greeks and the Romans worshipped and believed in
+exist or have ever existed; we hold them to be productions of the human
+imagination to which nothing real corresponds. This view has nowadays
+become so ingrained in us and appears so self-evident, that we find it
+difficult to imagine that it has not been prevalent through long ages;
+nay, it is perhaps a widely diffused assumption that even in antiquity
+educated and unbiased persons held the same view of the religion of their
+people as we do. In reality both assumptions are erroneous: our “atheism”
+in regard to ancient paganism is of recent date, and in antiquity itself
+downright denial of the existence of the gods was a comparatively rare
+phenomenon. The demonstration of this fact, rather than a consideration of
+the various intermediate positions taken up by the thinkers of antiquity
+in their desire to avoid a complete rupture with the traditional ideas of
+the gods, has been one of the chief purposes of this inquiry.
+
+Though the definition of atheism set down here might seem to be clear and
+unequivocal, and though I have tried to adhere strictly to it, cases have
+unavoidably occurred that were difficult to classify. The most
+embarrassing are those which involve a reinterpretation of the conception
+of the gods, _i.e._ which, while acknowledging that there is some reality
+corresponding to the conception, yet define this reality as essentially
+different from it. Moreover, the acknowledgment of a certain group of gods
+(the celestial bodies, for instance) combined with the rejection of
+others, may create difficulties in defining the notion of atheism; in
+practice, however, this doctrine generally coincides with the former, by
+which the gods are explained away. On the whole it would hardly be just,
+in a field of inquiry like the present, to expect or require absolutely
+clearly defined boundary-lines; transition forms will always occur.
+
+The persons of whom it is related that they denied the existence of the
+ancient gods are in themselves few, and they all belong to the highest
+level of culture; by far the greater part of them are simply professional
+philosophers. Hence the inquiry will almost exclusively have to deal with
+philosophers and philosophical schools and their doctrines; of religion as
+exhibited in the masses, as a social factor, it will only treat by
+exception. But in its purpose it is concerned with the history of
+religion, not with philosophy; therefore—in accordance with the definition
+of its object—it will deal as little as possible with the purely
+philosophical notions of God that have nothing to do with popular
+religion. What it aims at illustrating is a certain—if you like, the
+negative—aspect of ancient religion. But its result, if it can be
+sufficiently established, will not be without importance for the
+understanding of the positive religious sense of antiquity. If you want to
+obtain some idea of the hold a certain religion had on its adherents, it
+is not amiss to know something about the extent to which it dominated even
+the strata of society most exposed to influences that went against it.
+
+It might seem more natural, in dealing with atheism in antiquity, to adopt
+the definition current among the ancients themselves. That this method
+would prove futile the following investigation will, I hope, make
+sufficiently evident; antiquity succeeded as little as we moderns in
+connecting any clear and unequivocal idea with the words that signify
+“denial of God.” On the other hand, it is, of course, impossible to begin
+at all except from the traditions of antiquity about denial and deniers.
+Hence the course of the inquiry will be, first to make clear what
+antiquity understood by denial of the gods and what persons it designated
+as deniers, and then to examine in how far these persons were atheists in
+our sense of the word.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+
+Atheism and atheist are words formed from Greek roots and with Greek
+derivative endings. Nevertheless they are not Greek; their formation is
+not consonant with Greek usage. In Greek they said _atheos_ and
+_atheotes_; to these the English words ungodly and ungodliness correspond
+rather closely. In exactly the same way as ungodly, _atheos_ was used as
+an expression of severe censure and moral condemnation; this use is an old
+one, and the oldest that can be traced. Not till later do we find it
+employed to denote a certain philosophical creed; we even meet with
+philosophers bearing _atheos_ as a regular surname. We know very little of
+the men in question; but it can hardly be doubted that _atheos_, as
+applied to them, implied not only a denial of the gods of popular belief,
+but a denial of gods in the widest sense of the word, or Atheism as it is
+nowadays understood.
+
+In this case the word is more particularly a philosophical term. But it
+was used in a similar sense also in popular language, and corresponds then
+closely to the English “denier of God,” denoting a person who denies the
+gods of his people and State. From the popular point of view the interest,
+of course, centred in those only, not in the exponents of philosophical
+theology. Thus we find the word employed both of theoretical denial of the
+gods (atheism in our sense) and of practical denial of the gods, as in the
+case of the adherents of monotheism, Jews and Christians.
+
+Atheism, in the theoretical as well as the practical sense of the word,
+was, according to the ancient conception of law, always a crime; but in
+practice it was treated in different ways, which varied both according to
+the period in question and according to the more or less dangerous nature
+of the threat it offered to established religion. It is only as far as
+Athens and Imperial Rome are concerned that we have any definite knowledge
+of the law and the judicial procedure on this point; a somewhat detailed
+account of the state of things in Athens and Rome cannot be dispensed with
+here.
+
+In the criminal law of Athens we meet with the term _asebeia_—literally:
+impiety or disrespect towards the gods. As an established formula of
+accusation of _asebeia_ existed, legislation must have dealt with the
+subject; but how it was defined we do not know. The word itself conveys
+the idea that the law particularly had offences against public worship in
+view; and this is confirmed by the fact that a number of such
+offences—from the felling of sacred trees to the profanation of the
+Eleusinian Mysteries—were treated as _asebeia_. When, in the next place,
+towards the close of the fifth century B.C., free-thinking began to assume
+forms which seemed dangerous to the religion of the State, theoretical
+denial of the gods was also included under _asebeia_. From about the
+beginning of the Peloponnesian War to the close of the fourth century
+B.C., there are on record a number of prosecutions of philosophers who
+were tried and condemned for denial of the gods. The indictment seems in
+most cases—the trial of Socrates is the only one of which we know
+details—to have been on the charge of _asebeia_, and the procedure proper
+thereto seems to have been employed, though there was no proof or
+assertion of the accused having offended against public worship; as to
+Socrates, we know the opposite to have been the case; he worshipped the
+gods like any other good citizen. This extension of the conception of
+_asebeia_ to include theoretical denial of the gods no doubt had no
+foundation in law; this is amongst other things evident from the fact that
+it was necessary, in order to convict Anaxagoras, to pass a special public
+resolution in virtue of which his free-thinking theories became
+indictable. The law presumably dated from a time when theoretical denial
+of the gods lay beyond the horizon of legislation. Nevertheless, in the
+trial of Socrates it is simply taken for granted that denial of the gods
+is a capital crime, and that not only on the side of the prosecution, but
+also on the side of the defence: the trial only turns on a question of
+fact, the legal basis is taken for granted. So inveterate, then, at this
+time was the conception of the unlawful nature of the denial of the gods
+among the people of Athens.
+
+In the course of the fourth century B.C. several philosophers were accused
+of denial of the gods or blasphemy; but after the close of the century we
+hear no more of such trials. To be sure, our knowledge of the succeeding
+centuries, when Athens was but a provincial town, is far less copious than
+of the days of its greatness; nevertheless, it is beyond doubt that the
+practice in regard to theoretical denial of the gods was changed. A
+philosopher like Carneades, for instance, might, in view of his sceptical
+standpoint, just as well have been convicted of _asebeia_ as Protagoras,
+who was convicted because he had declared that he did not know whether the
+gods existed or not; and as to such a process against Carneades, tradition
+would not have remained silent. Instead, we learn that he was employed as
+the trusted representative of the State on most important diplomatic
+missions. It is evident that Athens had arrived at the point of view that
+the theoretical denial of the gods might be tolerated, whereas the law, of
+course, continued to protect public worship.
+
+In Rome they did not possess, as in Athens, a general statute against
+religious offences; there were only special provisions, and they were,
+moreover, few and insufficient. This defect, however, was remedied by the
+vigorous police authority with which the Roman magistrates were invested.
+In Rome severe measures were often taken against movements which
+threatened the Roman official worship, but it was done at the discretion
+of the administration and not according to hard-and-fast rules; hence the
+practice was somewhat varying, and a certain arbitrariness inevitable.
+
+No example is known from Rome of action taken against theoretical denial
+of the gods corresponding to the trials of the philosophers in Athens. The
+main cause of this was, no doubt, that free-thinking in the fifth century
+B.C. invaded Hellas, and specially Athens, like a flood which threatened
+to overthrow everything; in Rome, on the other hand, Greek philosophy made
+its way in slowly and gradually, and this took place at a time when in the
+country of its origin it had long ago found a _modus vivendi_ with popular
+religion and was acknowledged as harmless to the established worship. The
+more practical outlook of the Romans may perhaps also have had something
+to say in the matter: they were rather indifferent to theoretical
+speculations, whereas they were not to be trifled with when their national
+institutions were concerned.
+
+In consequence of this point of view the Roman government first came to
+deal with denial of the gods as a breach of law when confronted with the
+two monotheistic religions which invaded the Empire from the East. That
+which distinguished Jews and Christians from Pagans was not that they
+denied the existence of the Pagan gods—the Christians, at any rate, did
+not do this as a rule—but that they denied that they were gods, and
+therefore refused to worship them. They were practical, not theoretical
+deniers. The tolerance which the Roman government showed towards all
+foreign creeds and the result of which in imperial times was, practically
+speaking, freedom of religion over the whole Empire, could not be extended
+to the Jews and the Christians; for it was in the last resort based on
+reciprocity, on the fact that worship of the Egyptian or Persian gods did
+not exclude worship of the Roman ones. Every convert, on the other hand,
+won over to Judaism or Christianity was _eo ipso_ an apostate from the
+Roman religion, an _atheos_ according to the ancient conception. Hence, as
+soon as such religions began to spread, they constituted a serious danger
+to the established religion, and the Roman government intervened. Judaism
+and Christianity were not treated quite alike; in this connexion details
+are of no interest, but certain principal features must be dwelt on as
+significant of the attitude of antiquity towards denial of the gods. To
+simplify matters I confine myself to Christianity, where things are less
+complicated.
+
+The Christians were generally designated as _atheoi_, as deniers of the
+gods, and the objection against them was precisely their denial of the
+Pagan gods, not their religion as such. When the Christian, summoned
+before the Roman magistrates, agreed to sacrifice to the Pagan gods (among
+them, the Emperor) he was acquitted; he was not punished for previously
+having attended Christian services, and it seems that he was not even
+required to undertake not to do so in future. Only if he refused to
+sacrifice, was he punished. We cannot ask for a clearer proof that it is
+apostasy as such, denial of the gods, against which action is taken. It is
+in keeping with this that, at any rate under the earlier Empire, no
+attempt was made to seek out the Christians at their assemblies, to hinder
+their services or the like; it was considered sufficient to take steps
+when information was laid.
+
+The punishments meted out were different, in that they were left solely to
+the discretion of the magistrates. But they were generally severe: forced
+labour in mines and capital punishment were quite common. No
+discrimination was made between Roman citizens and others belonging to the
+Empire, but all were treated alike; that the Roman citizen could not
+undergo capital punishment without appeal to the Emperor does not affect
+the principle. This procedure has really no expressly formulated basis in
+law; the Roman penal code did not, as mentioned above, take cognizance of
+denial of the gods. Nevertheless, the sentences on the Christians were
+considered by the Pagans of the earlier time as a matter of course, the
+justice of which was not contested, and the procedure of the government
+was in principle the same under humane and conscientious rulers like
+Trajan and Marcus Aurelius as under tyrants like Nero and Domitian. Here
+again it is evident how firmly rooted in the mind of antiquity was the
+conviction that denial of the gods was a capital offence.
+
+To resume what has here been set forth concerning the attitude of ancient
+society to atheism: it is, in the first place, evident that the frequently
+mentioned tolerance of polytheism was not extended to those who denied its
+gods; in fact, it was applied only to those who acknowledged them even if
+they worshipped others besides. But the assertion of this principle of
+intolerance varied greatly in practice according to whether it was a
+question of theoretical denial of the gods—atheism in our sense—or
+practical refusal to worship the Pagan gods. Against atheism the community
+took action only during a comparatively short period, and, as far as we
+know, only in a single place. The latter limitation is probably explained
+not only by the defectiveness of tradition, but also by the fact that in
+Athens free-thinking made its appearance about the year 400 as a general
+phenomenon and therefore attracted the attention of the community. Apart
+from this case, the philosophical denier of God was left in peace all
+through antiquity, in the same way as the individual citizen was not
+interfered with, as a rule, when he, for one reason or another, refrained
+from taking part in the worship of the deities. On the other hand, as soon
+as practical refusal to believe in the gods, apostasy from the established
+religion, assumed dangerous proportions, ruthless severity was exercised
+against it.
+
+The discrimination, however, made in the treatment of the theoretical and
+practical denial of the gods is certainly not due merely to consideration
+of the more or less isolated occurrence of the phenomenon; it is rooted at
+the same time in the very nature of ancient religion. The essence of
+ancient polytheism is the worship of the gods, that is, cultus; of a
+doctrine of divinity properly speaking, of theology, there were only
+slight rudiments, and there was no idea of any elaborate dogmatic system.
+Quite different attitudes were accordingly assumed towards the
+philosopher, who held his own opinions of the gods, but took part in the
+public worship like anybody else; and towards the monotheist, to whom the
+whole of the Pagan worship was an abomination, which one should abstain
+from at any cost, and which one should prevail on others to give up for
+the sake of their own good in this life or the next.
+
+In the literature of antiquity we meet with sporadic statements to the
+effect that certain philosophers bore the epithet _atheos_ as a sort of
+surname; and in a few of the later authors of antiquity we even find lists
+of men—almost all of them philosophers—who denied the existence of the
+gods. Furthermore, we possess information about certain persons—these
+also, if Jews and Christians are excluded, are nearly all of them
+philosophers—having been accused of, and eventually convicted of, denial
+of the gods; some of these are not in our lists. Information of this kind
+will, as remarked above, be taken as the point of departure for an
+investigation of atheism in antiquity. For practical reasons, however, it
+is reasonable to include some philosophers whom antiquity did not
+designate as atheists, and who did not come into conflict with official
+religion, but of whom it has been maintained in later times that they did
+not believe in the existence of the gods of popular belief. Thus we arrive
+at the following list, in which those who were denoted as _atheoi_ are
+italicised and those who were accused of impiety are marked with an
+asterisk:
+
+      Xenophanes.
+      *Anaxagoras.
+_      Diogenes of Apollonia._
+_      Hippo of Rhegium._
+      *_Protagoras._
+_      Prodicus._
+_      Critias._
+      *_Diagoras of Melos._
+      *Socrates.
+      Antisthenes.
+      Plato.
+      *Aristotle.
+      Theophrastus.
+      *Stilpo.
+      *_Theodorus._
+      *_Bion._
+_      Epicurus._
+_      Euhemerus._
+
+The persons are put down in chronological order. This order will in some
+measure be preserved in the following survey; but regard for the
+continuity of the tradition of the doctrine will entail certain
+deviations. It will, that is to say, be natural to divide the material
+into four groups: the pre-Socratic philosophy; the Sophists; Socrates and
+the Socratics; Hellenistic philosophy. Each of these groups has a
+philosophical character of its own, and it will be seen that this
+character also makes itself felt in the relation to the gods of the
+popular belief, even though we here meet with phenomena of more isolated
+occurrence. The four groups must be supplemented by a fifth, a survey of
+the conditions in Imperial Rome. Atheists of this period are not found in
+our lists; but a good deal of old Pagan free-thinking survives in the
+first centuries of our era, and also the epithet _atheoi_ was bestowed
+generally on the Christians and sometimes on the Jews, and if only for
+this reason they cannot be altogether passed by in this survey.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+
+The paganism of antiquity is based on a primitive religion, _i.e._ it is
+originally in the main homogeneous with the religions nowadays met with in
+the so-called primitive peoples. It underwent, however, a long process of
+evolution parallel with and conditioned by the development of Greek and
+later Roman civilisation. This evolution carried ancient religion far away
+from its primitive starting-point; it produced numerous new formations,
+above all a huge system of anthropomorphic gods, each with a definite
+character and personality of his own. This development is the result of an
+interplay of numerous factors: changing social and economical conditions
+evoked the desire for new religious ideas; the influence of other peoples
+made itself felt; poetry and the fine arts contributed largely to the
+moulding of these ideas; conscious reflection, too, arose early and
+modified original simplicity. But what is characteristic of the whole
+process is the fact that it went on continuously without breaks or sudden
+bounds. Nowhere in ancient religion, as far as we can trace it, did a
+powerful religious personality strike in with a radical transformation,
+with a direct rejection of old ideas and dogmatic accentuation of new
+ones. The result of this quiet growth was an exceedingly heterogeneous
+organism, in which remains of ancient, highly primitive customs and ideas
+were retained along with other elements of a far more advanced character.
+
+Such a state of things need not in itself trouble the general
+consciousness; it is a well-established fact that in religion the most
+divergent elements are not incompatible. Nevertheless, among the Greeks,
+with their strong proclivity to reflective thought, criticism early arose
+against the traditional conceptions of the gods. The typical method of
+this criticism is that the higher conceptions of the gods are used against
+the lower. From the earliest times the Greek religious sense favoured
+absoluteness of definition where the gods are concerned; even in Homer
+they are not only eternal and happy, but also all-powerful and
+all-knowing. Corresponding expressions of a moral character are hardly to
+be found in Homer; but as early as Hesiod and Solon we find, at any rate,
+Zeus as the representative of heavenly justice. With such definitions a
+large number of customs of public worship and, above all, a number of
+stories about the gods, were in violent contradiction; thus we find even
+so old and so pious a poet as Pindar occasionally rejecting mythical
+stories which he thinks at variance with the sublime nature of the gods.
+This form of criticism of popular beliefs is continued through the whole
+of antiquity; it is found not only in philosophers and philosophically
+educated laymen, but appears spontaneously in everybody of a reflective
+mind; its best known representative in earlier times is Euripides. Typical
+of its popular form is in the first place its casualness; it is directed
+against details which at the moment attract attention, while it leaves
+other things alone which in principle are quite as offensive, but either
+not very obviously so, or else not relevant to the matter in hand.
+Secondly, it is naïve: it takes the gods of the popular belief for granted
+essentially as they are; it does not raise the crucial question whether
+the popular belief is not quite justified in attributing to these higher
+beings all kinds of imperfection, and wrong in attributing perfection to
+them, and still less if such beings, whether they are defined as perfect
+or imperfect, exist at all. It follows that as a whole this form of
+criticism is outside the scope of our inquiry.
+
+Still, there is one single personality in early Greek thought who seems to
+have proceeded still further on the lines of this naïve criticism, namely,
+Xenophanes of Colophon. He is generally included amongst the philosophers,
+and rightly in so far as he initiated a philosophical speculation which
+was of the highest importance in the development of Greek scientific
+thought. But in the present connexion it would, nevertheless, be
+misleading to place Xenophanes among those philosophers who came into
+conflict with the popular belief because their conception of Existence was
+based on science. The starting-point for his criticism of the popular
+belief is in fact not philosophical, but religious; he ranks with
+personalities like Pindar and Euripides—he was also a verse-writer
+himself, with considerable poetic gift—and is only distinguished from them
+by the greater consistency of his thought. Hence, the correct course is to
+deal with him in this place as the only eminent thinker in antiquity about
+whom it is known that—starting from popular belief and religious
+motives—he reached a standpoint which at any rate with some truth may be
+designated as atheism.
+
+Xenophanes lived in the latter part of the sixth and the beginning of the
+fifth centuries B.C. (according to his own statement he reached an age of
+more than ninety years). He was an itinerant singer who travelled about
+and recited poetry, presumably not merely his own but also that of others.
+In his own poems he severely attacked the manner in which Homer and
+Hesiod, the most famous poets of Greece, had represented the gods: they
+had attributed to them everything which in man’s eyes is outrageous and
+reprehensible—theft, adultery and deception of one another. Their accounts
+of the fights of the gods against Titans and Giants he denounced as
+“inventions of the ancients.” But he did not stop at that: “Men believe
+that the gods are born, are clothed and shaped and speak like themselves”;
+“if oxen and horses and lions could draw and paint, they would delineate
+their gods in their own image”; “the Negroes believe that their gods are
+flat-nosed and black, the Thracians that theirs have blue eyes and red
+hair.” Thus he attacked directly the popular belief that the gods are
+anthropomorphic, and his arguments testify that he clearly realised that
+men create their gods in their own image. On another main point, too, he
+was in direct opposition to the religious ideas of his time: he rejected
+Divination, the belief that the gods imparted the secrets of the future to
+men—which was deemed a mainstay of the belief in the existence of the
+gods. As a positive counterpart to the anthropomorphic gods, Xenophanes
+set up a philosophical conception of God: God must be One, Eternal,
+Unchangeable and identical with himself in every way (all sight, all
+hearing and all mind). This deity, according to the explicit statements of
+our earliest sources, he identified with the universe.
+
+If we examine more closely the arguments put forth by Xenophanes in
+support of his remarkable conception of the deity, we realise that he
+everywhere starts from the definitions of the nature of the gods as given
+by popular religion; but, be it understood, solely from the absolute
+definitions. He takes the existence of the divine, with its absolute
+attributes, for granted; it is in fact the basis of all his speculation.
+His criticism of the popular ideas of the gods is therefore closely
+connected with his philosophical conception of God; the two are the
+positive and negative sides of the same thing. Altogether his connexion
+with what I call the naïve criticism of the popular religion is
+unmistakable.
+
+It is undoubtedly a remarkable fact that we meet at this early date with
+such a consistent representative of this criticism. If we take Xenophanes
+at his word we must describe him as an atheist, and atheism in the sixth
+century B.C. is a very curious phenomenon indeed. Neither was it
+acknowledged in antiquity; no one placed Xenophanes amongst _atheoi_; and
+Cicero even says somewhere (according to Greek authority) that Xenophanes
+was the only one of those who believed in gods who rejected divination. In
+more recent times, too, serious doubt has been expressed whether
+Xenophanes actually denied the existence of the gods. Reference has
+amongst other things been made to the fact that he speaks in several
+places about “gods” where he, according to his view, ought to say “God”;
+nay, he has even formulated his fundamental idea in the words: “One God,
+the greatest amongst gods and men, neither in shape nor mind like unto any
+mortal.” To be sure, Xenophanes is not always consistent in his language;
+but no weight whatever ought to be attached to this, least of all in the
+case of a man who exclusively expressed himself in verse. Another theory
+rests on the tradition that Xenophanes regarded his deity and the universe
+as identical, consequently was a pantheist. In that case, it is said, he
+may very well have considered, for instance, the heavenly bodies as
+deities. Sound as this argument is in general, it does not apply to this
+case. When a thinker arrives at pantheism, starting from a criticism of
+polytheism which is expressly based on the antithesis between the unity
+and plurality of the deity—then very valid proofs, indeed, are needed in
+order to justify the assumption that he after all believed in a plurality
+of gods; and such proofs are wanting in the case of Xenophanes.
+
+Judging from the material in hand one can hardly arrive at any other
+conclusion than that the standpoint of Xenophanes comes under our
+definition of atheism. But we must not forget that only fragments of his
+writings have been preserved, and that the more extensive of them do not
+assist us greatly to the understanding of his religious standpoint. It is
+possible that we might have arrived at a different conclusion had we but
+possessed his chief philosophical work in its entirety, or at least larger
+portions of it. And I must candidly confess that if I were asked whether,
+in my heart of hearts, I believed that a Greek of the sixth century B.C.
+denied point-blank the existence of his gods, my answer would be in the
+negative.
+
+That Xenophanes was not considered an atheist by the ancients may possibly
+be explained by the fact that they objected to fasten this designation on
+a man whose reasoning took the deity as a starting-point and whose sole
+aim was to define its nature. Perhaps they also had an inkling that he in
+reality stood on the ground of popular belief, even if he went beyond it.
+Still more curious is the fact that his religious view does not seem to
+have influenced the immediately succeeding philosophy at all. His
+successors, Parmenides and Zeno, developed his doctrine of unity, but in a
+pantheistic direction, and on a logical, not religious line of argument;
+about their attitude to popular belief we are told practically nothing.
+And Ionic speculation took a quite different direction. Not till a century
+later, in Euripides, do we observe a distinct influence of his criticism
+of popular belief; but at that time other currents of opinion had
+intervened which are not dependent on Xenophanes, but might direct
+attention to him.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+
+Ancient Greek naturalism is essentially calculated to collide with the
+popular belief. It seeks a natural explanation of the world, first and
+foremost of its origin, but in the next place of individual natural
+phenomena. As to the genesis of the world, speculations of a mythical kind
+had already developed on the basis of the popular belief. They were not,
+however, binding on anybody, and, above all, the idea of the gods having
+created the world was altogether alien to Greek religion. Thus, without
+offence to them it might be maintained that everything originated from a
+primary substance or from a mixture of several primary substances, as was
+generally maintained by the ancient naturalists. On the other hand, a
+conflict arose as soon as the heavenly phenomena, such as lightning and
+thunder, were ascribed to natural causes, or when the heavenly bodies were
+made out to be natural objects; for to the Greeks it was an established
+fact that Zeus sent lightning and thunder, and that the sun and the moon
+were gods. A refusal to believe in the latter was especially dangerous
+because they were _visible_ gods, and as to the person who did not believe
+in their divinity the obvious conclusion would be that he believed still
+less in the invisible gods.
+
+That this inference was drawn will appear before long. But the epithet
+“atheist” was very rarely attached to the ancient naturalists; only a few
+of the later (and those the least important) were given the nickname
+_atheos_. Altogether we hear very little of the relation of these
+philosophers to the popular belief, and this very silence is surely
+significant. No doubt, most of them bestowed but a scant attention on this
+aspect of the matter; they were engrossed in speculations which did not
+bring them into conflict with the popular belief, and even their
+scientific treatment of the “divine” natural phenomena did not make them
+doubt the _existence_ of the gods. This is connected with a peculiarity in
+their conception of existence. Tradition tells us of several of them, and
+it applies presumably also to those of whom it is not recorded, that they
+designated their primary substance or substances as gods; sometimes they
+also applied this designation to the world or worlds originating in the
+primary substance. This view is deeply rooted in the Greek popular belief
+and harmonises with its fundamental view of existence. To these ancient
+thinkers the primary substance is at once a living and a superhuman power;
+and any living power which transcended that of man was divine to the
+Greeks. Hylozoism (the theory that matter is alive) consequently, when it
+allies itself with popular belief, leads straight to pantheism, whereas it
+excludes monotheism, which presupposes a distinction between god and
+matter. Now it is a matter of experience that, while monotheism is the
+hereditary foe of polytheism, polytheism and pantheism go very well
+together. The universe being divine, there is no reason to doubt that
+beings of a higher order than man exist, nor any reason to refuse to
+bestow on them the predicate “divine”; and with this we find ourselves in
+principle on the standpoint of polytheistic popular belief. There is
+nothing surprising, then, in the tradition that Thales identified God with
+the mind of the universe and believed the universe to be animated, and
+filled with “demons.” The first statement is in this form probably
+influenced by later ideas and hardly a correct expression of the view of
+Thales; the rest bears the very stamp of genuineness, and similar ideas
+recur, more or less completely and variously refracted, in the succeeding
+philosophers.
+
+To follow these variations in detail is outside the scope of this
+investigation; but it may be of interest to see the form they take in one
+of the latest and most advanced representatives of Ionian naturalism. In
+Democritus’s conception of the universe, personal gods would seem excluded
+_a priori_. He works with but three premises: the atoms, their movements,
+and empty space. From this everything is derived according to strict
+causality. Such phenomena also as thunder and lightning, comets and
+eclipses, which were generally ascribed to the gods, are according to his
+opinion due to natural causes, whereas people in the olden days were
+afraid of them because they believed they were due to the gods.
+Nevertheless, he seems, in the first place, to have designated Fire, which
+he at the same time recognised as a “soul-substance,” as divine, the
+cosmic fire being the soul of the world; and secondly, he thought that
+there was something real underlying the popular conception of the gods. He
+was led to this from a consideration of dreams, which he thought were
+images of real objects which entered into the sleeper through the pores of
+the body. Now, since gods might be seen in dreams, they must be real
+beings. He did actually say that the gods had more senses than the
+ordinary five. When he who of all the Greek philosophers went furthest in
+a purely mechanical conception of nature took up such an attitude to the
+religion of his people, one cannot expect the others, who were less
+advanced, to discard it.
+
+Nevertheless, there is a certain probability that some of the later Ionian
+naturalists went further in their criticism of the gods of popular belief.
+One of them actually came into conflict with popular religion; it will be
+natural to begin with him.
+
+Shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, Anaxagoras of
+Clazomenae was accused of impiety and had to leave Athens, where he had
+taken up his abode. The object of the accusation was in reality political;
+the idea being to hit Pericles through his friend the naturalist. What
+Anaxagoras was charged with was that he had assumed that the heavenly
+bodies were natural objects; he had taught that the sun was a red-hot
+mass, and that the moon was earth and larger than Peloponnese. To base an
+accusation of impiety on this, it was necessary first to carry a public
+resolution, giving power to prosecute those who gave natural explanations
+of heavenly phenomena.
+
+As to Anaxagoras’s attitude to popular belief, we hear next to nothing
+apart from this. There is a story of a ram’s head being found with one
+horn in the middle of the forehead; it was brought to Pericles, and the
+soothsayer Lampon explained the portent to the effect that, of the two
+men, Pericles and Thucydides, who contended for the leadership of Athens,
+one should prove victorious. Anaxagoras, on the other hand, had the ram’s
+head cut open and showed that the brain did not fill up the cranium, but
+was egg-shaped and lay gathered together at the point where the horn grew
+out. He evidently thought that abortions also, which otherwise were
+generally considered as signs from the gods, were due to natural causes.
+Beyond this, nothing is said of any attack on the popular belief on the
+part of Anaxagoras, and in his philosophy nothing occurred which logically
+entailed a denial of the existence of the gods. Add to this that it was
+necessary to create a new judicial basis for the accusation against
+Anaxagoras, and it can be taken as certain that neither in his writings
+nor in any other way did he come forward in public as a denier of the
+gods.
+
+It is somewhat different when we consider the purely personal point of
+view of Anaxagoras. The very fact that no expression of his opinion
+concerning the gods has been transmitted affords food for thought.
+Presumably there was none; but this very fact is notable when we bear in
+mind that the earlier naturalists show no such reticence. Add to this
+that, if there is any place and any time in which we might expect a
+complete emancipation from popular belief, combined with a decided
+disinclination to give expression to it, it is Athens under Pericles. Men
+like Pericles and his friends represent a high level, perhaps the zenith,
+in Hellenic culture. That they were critical of many of the religious
+conceptions of their time we may take for granted; as to Pericles himself,
+this is actually stated as a fact, and the accusations of impiety directed
+against Aspasia and Pheidias prove that orthodox circles were very well
+aware of it. But the accusations prove, moreover, that Pericles and those
+who shared his views were so much in advance of their time that they could
+not afford to let their free-thinking attitude become a matter of public
+knowledge without endangering their political position certainly, and
+possibly even more than that. To be sure, considerations of that kind did
+not weigh with Anaxagoras; but he was—and that we know on good authority—a
+quiet scholar whose ideal of life was to devote himself to problems of
+natural science, and he can hardly have wished to be disturbed in this
+occupation by affairs in which he took no sort of interest. The question
+is then only how far men like Pericles and himself may have ventured in
+their criticism. Though all direct tradition is wanting, we have at any
+rate circumstantial evidence possessing a certain degree of probability.
+
+To begin with, the attempt to give a natural explanation of prodigies is
+not in itself without interest. The mantic art, _i.e._ the ability to
+predict the future by signs from the gods or direct divine inspiration,
+was throughout antiquity considered one of the surest proofs of the
+existence of the gods. Now, it by no means follows that a person who was
+not impressed by a deformed ram’s head would deny, _e.g._, the ability of
+the Delphic Oracle to predict the future, especially not so when the
+person in question was a naturalist. But that there was at this time a
+general tendency to reject the art of divination is evident from the fact
+that Herodotus as well as Sophocles, both of them contemporaries of
+Pericles and Anaxagoras, expressly contend against attempts in that
+direction, and, be it remarked, as if the theory they attack was commonly
+held. Sophocles is in this connexion so far the more interesting of the
+two, as, on one hand, he criticises private divination but defends the
+Delphic oracle vigorously, while he, on the other hand, identifies denial
+of the oracle with denial of the gods. And he does this in such a way as
+to make it evident that he has a definite object in mind. That in this
+polemic he may have been aiming precisely at Anaxagoras is indicated by
+the fact that Diopeithes, who carried the resolution concerning the
+accusation of the philosopher, was a soothsayer by profession.
+
+The strongest evidence as to the free-thinking of the Periclean age is,
+however, to be met with in the historical writing of Thucydides. In his
+work on the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides completely eliminated the
+supernatural element; not only did he throughout ignore omens and
+divinations, except in so far as they played a part as a psychological
+factor, but he also completely omitted any reference to the gods in his
+narrative. Such a procedure was at this time unprecedented, and contrasts
+sharply with that of his immediate forerunner Herodotus, who constantly
+lays stress on the intervention of the gods. That is hardly conceivable
+except in a man who had altogether emancipated himself from the religious
+views of his time. Now, Thucydides is not only a fellow-countryman and
+younger contemporary of Pericles, but he also sees in Pericles his ideal
+not only as a politician but evidently also as a man. Hence, when
+everything is considered, it is not improbable that Pericles and his
+friends went to all lengths in their criticism of popular belief,
+although, of course, it remains impossible to state anything definite as
+to particular persons’ individual views. Curiously enough, even in
+antiquity this connexion was observed; in a biography of Thucydides it is
+said that he was a disciple of Anaxagoras and _accordingly_ was also
+considered something of an atheist.
+
+While Anaxagoras, his trial notwithstanding, is not generally designated
+an atheist, probably because there was nothing in his writings to which he
+might be pinned down, that fate befell two of his contemporaries, Hippo of
+Rhegium and Diogenes of Apollonia. Very little, however, is known of them.
+Hippo, who is said to have been a Pythagorean, taught that water and fire
+were the origin of everything; as to the reason why he earned the nickname
+_atheos_, it is said that he taught that Water was the primal cause of
+all, as well as that he maintained that nothing existed but what could be
+perceived by the senses. There is also quoted a (fictitious) inscription,
+which he is said to have caused to be put on his tomb, to the effect that
+Death has made him the equal of the immortal gods (in that he now exists
+no more than they). Otherwise we know nothing special of Hippo; Aristotle
+refers to him as shallow. As to Diogenes, we learn that he was influenced
+by Anaximenes and Anaxagoras; in agreement with the former he regarded Air
+as the primary substance, and like Anaxagoras he attributed reason to his
+primary substance. Of his doctrine we have extensive accounts, and also
+some not inconsiderable fragments of his treatise _On Nature_; but they
+are almost all of them of purely scientific, mostly of an anatomical and
+physiological character. In especial, as to his relation to popular
+belief, it is recorded that he identified Zeus with the air. Indirectly,
+however, we are able to demonstrate, by the aid of an almost contemporary
+witness, that there must have been some foundation for the accusation of
+“atheism.” For in _The Clouds_, where Aristophanes wants to represent
+Socrates as an atheist, he puts in his mouth scraps of the naturalism of
+Diogenes; that he would hardly have done, if Diogenes had not already been
+decried as an atheist.
+
+It is of course impossible to base any statement of the relation of the
+two philosophers to popular belief on such a foundation. But it is,
+nevertheless, worth noticing that while not a single one of the earlier
+naturalists acquired the designation atheist, it was applied to two of the
+latest and otherwise little-known representatives of the school. Take this
+in combination with what has been said above of Anaxagoras, and we get at
+any rate a suspicion that Greek naturalism gradually led its adherents
+beyond the naïve stage where many individual phenomena were indeed
+ascribed to natural causes, even if they had formerly been regarded as
+caused by divine intervention, but where the foundations of the popular
+belief were left untouched. Once this path has been entered on, a point
+will be arrived at where the final conclusion is drawn and the existence
+of the supernatural completely denied. It is probable that this happened
+towards the close of the naturalistic period. If so early a philosopher as
+Anaxagoras took this point of view, his personal contribution as a member
+of the Periclean circle may have been more significant in the religious
+field than one would conjecture from the character of his work.
+
+Before we proceed to mention the sophists, there is one person on our list
+who must be examined though the result will be negative, namely, Diagoras
+of Melos. As he appears in our records, he falls outside the
+classification adopted here; but as he must have lived, at any rate, about
+the middle of the fifth century (he is said to have “flourished” in 464)
+he may most fitly be placed on the boundary line between the Ionian
+philosophy and Sophistic.
+
+For later antiquity Diagoras is the typical atheist; he heads our lists of
+atheists, and round his person a whole series of myths have been formed.
+He is said to have been a poet and a pious man like others; but then a
+colleague once stole an ode from him, escaped by taking an oath that he
+was innocent, and afterwards made a hit with the stolen work. So Diagoras
+lost his faith in the gods and wrote a treatise under the title of
+_apopyrgizontes logoi_ (literally, destructive considerations) in which he
+attacked the belief in the gods.
+
+This looks very plausible, and is interesting in so far as it, if correct,
+affords an instance of atheism arising in a layman from actual experience,
+not in a philosopher from speculation. If we ask, however, what is known
+historically about Diagoras, we are told a different tale. There existed
+in Athens, engraved on a bronze tablet and set up on the Acropolis, a
+decree of the people offering a reward of one talent to him who should
+kill Diagoras of Melos, and of two talents to him who should bring him
+alive to Athens. The reason given was that he had scoffed at the
+Eleusinian Mysteries and divulged what took place at them. The date of
+this decree is given by a historian as 415 B.C.; that this is correct is
+seen from a passage in Aristophanes’s contemporary drama, _The Birds_.
+Furthermore, one of the disciples of Aristotle, the literary historian
+Aristoxenus, states that no trace of impiety was to be found in the works
+of the dithyrambic poet Diagoras, and that, in fact, they contained
+definite opinions to the contrary. A remark to the effect that Diagoras
+was instrumental in drawing up the laws of Mantinea is probably due to the
+same source. The context shows that the reference is to the earlier
+constitution of Mantinea, which was a mixture of aristocracy and
+democracy, and is praised for its excellence. It is inconceivable that, in
+a Peloponnesian city during the course of, nay, presumably even before the
+middle of the fifth century, a notorious atheist should have been invited
+to advise on the revision of its constitution. It is more probable that
+Aristoxenus adduced this fact as an additional disproof of Diagoras’s
+atheism, in which he evidently did not believe.
+
+The above information explains the origin of the legend. Two fixed points
+were in existence: the pious poet of _c._ 460 and the atheist who was
+outlawed in 415; a bridge was constructed between them by the story of the
+stolen ode. This disposes of the whole supposition of atheism growing out
+of a basis of experience. But, furthermore, it must be admitted that it is
+doubtful whether the poet and the atheist are one and the same person. The
+interval of time between them is itself suspicious, for the poet,
+according to the ancient system of calculation, must have been about forty
+years old in 464, consequently between eighty and ninety in 415. (There is
+general agreement that the treatise, the title of which has been quoted,
+must have been a later forgery.) If, in spite of all, I dare not
+absolutely deny the identity of the two Diagorases of tradition, the
+reason is that Aristophanes, where he mentions the decree concerning
+Diagoras, seems to suggest that his attack on the Mysteries was an old
+story which was raked up again in 415. But for our purpose, at any rate,
+nothing remains of the copious mass of legend but the fact that one
+Diagoras of Melos in 415 was outlawed in Athens on the ground of his
+attack on the Mysteries. Such an attack may have been the outcome of
+atheism; there was no lack of impiety in Athens at the end of the fifth
+century. But whether this was the case or not we cannot possibly tell; and
+to throw light on free-thinking tendencies in Athens at this time, we have
+other and richer sources than the historical notice of Diagoras.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+
+With the movement in Greek thought which is generally known as sophistic,
+a new view of popular belief appears. The criticism of the sophists was
+directed against the entire tradition on which Greek society was based,
+and principally against the moral conceptions which hitherto had been
+unquestioned: good and evil, right and wrong. The criticism was
+essentially negative; that which hitherto had been imagined as absolute
+was demonstrated to be relative, and the relative was identified with the
+invalid. Thus they could not help running up against the popular ideas of
+the gods, and treating them in the same way. A leading part was here
+played by the sophistic distinction between _nomos_ and _physis_, Law and
+Nature, _i.e._ that which is based on human convention, and that which is
+founded on the nature of things. The sophists could not help seeing that
+the whole public worship and the ideas associated with it belonged to the
+former—to the domain of “the law.” Not only did the worship and the
+conceptions of the gods vary from place to place in the hundreds of small
+independent communities into which Hellas was divided—a fact which the
+sophists had special opportunity of observing when travelling from town to
+town to teach; but it was even officially admitted that the whole
+ritual—which, popularly speaking, was almost identical with religion—was
+based on convention. If a Greek was asked why a god was to be worshipped
+in such and such a way, generally the only answer was: because it is the
+law of the State (or the convention; the word _nomos_ expresses both
+things). Hence it followed in principle that religion came under the
+domain of “the law,” being consequently the work of man; and hence again
+the obvious conclusion, according to sophistic reasoning, was that it was
+nothing but human imagination, and that there was no _physis_, no reality,
+behind it at all. In the case of the naturalists, it was the positive
+foundation of their system, their conception of nature as a whole, that
+led them to criticise the popular belief. Hence their criticism was in the
+main only directed against those particular ideas in the popular belief
+which were at variance with the results of their investigations. To be
+sure, the sophists were not above making use of the results of natural
+science in their criticism of the popular belief; it was their general aim
+to impart the highest education of their time, and of a liberal education
+natural science formed a rather important part. But their starting-point
+was quite different from that of the naturalists. Their whole interest was
+concentrated on man as a member of the community, and it was from
+consideration of this relation that they were brought into collision with
+the established religion. Hence their attack was far more dangerous than
+that of the naturalists; no longer was it directed against details, it
+laid bare the psychological basis itself of popular belief and clearly
+revealed its unstable character. Their criticism was fundamental and
+central, not casual and circumstantial.
+
+From a purely practical point of view also, the criticism of the sophists
+was far more dangerous than that of the old philosophers. They were not
+theorists themselves, but practitioners; their business was to impart the
+higher education to the more mature youth. It was therefore part of their
+profession to disseminate their views not by means of learned professional
+writings, but by the persuasive eloquence of oral discourse. And in their
+criticism of the existing state of things they did not start with special
+results which only science could prove, and the correctness of which the
+layman need not recognise; they operated with facts and principles known
+and acknowledged by everybody. It is not to be wondered at that such
+efforts evoked a vigorous reaction on the part of established society, the
+more so as in any case the result of sophistic criticism—though not
+consciously its object—was to liquefy the moral principles on which the
+social order was based.
+
+Such, in principle, appeared to be the state of things. In practice, here
+as elsewhere, the devil proved not so black as he was painted. First, not
+all the sophists—hardly even the majority of them—drew the logical
+conclusions from their views in respect of either morals or religion. They
+were teachers of rhetoric, and as such they taught, for instance, all the
+tricks by which a bad cause might be defended; that was part of the trade.
+But it must be supposed that Gorgias, the most distinguished of them,
+expressly insisted that rhetoric, just like any other art the aim of which
+was to defeat an opponent, should only be used for good ends. Similarly
+many of them may have stopped short in their criticism of popular belief
+at some arbitrary point, so that it was possible for them to respect at
+any rate something of the established religion, and so, of course, first
+and foremost the very belief in the existence of the gods. That they did
+not as a rule interfere with public worship, we may be sure; that was
+based firmly on “the Law.” But, in addition, even sophists who personally
+took an attitude radically contradictory to popular belief had the most
+important reasons for being careful in advancing such a view. They had to
+live by being the teachers of youth; they had no fixed appointment, they
+travelled about as lecturers and enlisted disciples by means of their
+lectures. For such men it would have been a very serious thing to attack
+the established order in its tenderest place, religion, and above all they
+had to beware of coming into conflict with the penal laws. This risk they
+did not incur while confining themselves to theoretical discussions about
+right and wrong, nor by the practical application of them in their
+teaching of rhetoric; but they might very easily incur it if attacking
+religion. This being the case, it is not to be wondered at that we do not
+find many direct statements of undoubtedly atheistical character handed
+down from the more eminent sophists, and that trials for impiety are rare
+in their case. But, nevertheless, a few such cases are met with, and from
+these as our starting-point we will now proceed.
+
+As to Protagoras of Abdera, one of the earliest and most famous of all the
+sophists, it is stated that he began a pamphlet treating of the gods with
+the words: “Concerning the gods I can say nothing, neither that they exist
+nor that they do not exist, nor of what form they are; because there are
+many things which prevent one from knowing that, namely, both the
+uncertainty of the matter and the shortness of man’s life.” On this
+account, it is said, he was charged with impiety at Athens and was
+outlawed, and his works were publicly burned. The date of this trial is
+not known for certain; but it is reasonably supposed to have coincided
+with that of Diagoras, namely, in 415. At any rate it must have taken
+place after 423-421, as we know that Protagoras was at that time staying
+in Athens. As he must have been born about 485, the charge overtook him
+when old and famous; according to one account, his work on the gods seems
+to belong to his earlier writings.
+
+To doubt the correctness of this tradition would require stronger reasons
+than we possess, although it is rather strange that the condemnation of
+Protagoras is mentioned neither in our historical sources nor in
+Aristophanes, and that Plato, who mentions Protagoras rather frequently as
+dead, never alludes to it. At any rate, the quotation from the work on the
+gods is certainly authentic, for Plato himself referred to it. Hence it is
+certain that Protagoras directly stated the problem as to the existence of
+the gods and regarded it as an open question. But beyond that nothing much
+can be deduced from the short quotation; and as to the rest of the book on
+the gods we know nothing. The meagre reasons for scepticism adduced
+probably do not imply any more than that the difficulties are objective as
+well as subjective. If, in the latter respect, the brevity of life is
+specially mentioned it may be supposed that Protagoras had in mind a
+definite proof of the existence of the gods which was rendered difficult
+by the fact that life is so brief; prediction of the future may be guessed
+at, but nothing certain can be stated.
+
+Protagoras is the only one of the sophists of whom tradition says that he
+was the object of persecution owing to his religious views. The trial of
+Socrates, however, really belongs to the same category when looked at from
+the accusers’ point of view; Socrates was accused as a sophist. But as his
+own attitude towards popular religion differed essentially from that of
+the sophists, we cannot consider him in this connexion. Protagoras’s trial
+itself is partly determined by special circumstances. In all probability
+it took place at a moment when a violent religious reaction had set in at
+Athens owing to some grave offences against the public worship and
+sanctuaries of the State (violation of the Mysteries and mutilation of the
+Hermae). The work on the gods had presumably been in existence and known
+long before this without causing scandal to anybody. But, nevertheless,
+the trial, like those of Anaxagoras and Socrates, plainly bears witness to
+the animosity with which the modern free-thought was regarded in Athens.
+This animosity did not easily manifest itself publicly without special
+reasons; but it was always there and might always be used in case of
+provocation.
+
+As to Protagoras’s personal attitude to the question of the existence of
+the gods, much may be guessed and much has been guessed; but nothing can
+be stated for certain. However, judging from the man’s profession and his
+general habit of life as it appears in tradition, we may take for granted
+that he did not give offence in his outward behaviour by taking a hostile
+attitude to public worship or attacking its foundations; had that been so,
+he would not for forty years have been the most distinguished teacher of
+Hellas, but would simply not have been tolerated. An eminent modern
+scholar has therefore advanced the conjecture that Protagoras
+distinguished between belief and knowledge, and that his work on the gods
+only aimed at showing that the existence of the gods could not be
+scientifically demonstrated.  Now such a distinction probably, if
+conceived as a conscious principle, is alien to ancient thought, at any
+rate at the time of Protagoras; and yet it may contain a grain of truth.
+When it is borne in mind that the incriminated passage represents the very
+exordium of the work of Protagoras, the impression cannot be avoided that
+he himself did not intend his work to disturb the established religion,
+but that he quite naïvely took up the existence of the gods as a subject,
+as good as any other, for dialectic discussion. All that he was concerned
+with was theory and theorising; religion was practice and ritual; and he
+had no more intention of interfering with that than the other earlier
+sophists of assailing the legal system of the community in their
+speculation as to relativity of right and wrong.
+
+All this, however, does not alter the fact that the work of Protagoras
+posed the very question of the existence of the gods as a problem which
+might possibly be solved in the negative. He seems to have been the first
+to do this. That it could be done is significant of the age to which
+Protagoras belongs; that it was done was undoubtedly of great importance
+for the development of thought in wide circles.
+
+Prodicus of Ceos, also one of the most famous sophists, advanced the idea
+that the conceptions of the gods were originally associated with those
+things which were of use to humanity: sun and moon, rivers and springs,
+the products of the earth and the elements; therefore bread was identified
+with Demeter, wine with Dionysus, water with Poseidon, fire with
+Hephaestus. As a special instance he mentioned the worship of the Nile by
+the Egyptians.
+
+In Democritus, who was a slightly elder contemporary of Prodicus, we have
+already met with investigation into the origin of the conceptions of the
+gods. There is a close parallel between his handling of the subject and
+that of Prodicus, but at the same time a characteristic difference.
+Democritus was a naturalist, hence he took as his starting-point the
+natural phenomena commonly ascribed to the influence of the gods.
+Prodicus, on the other hand, started from the intellectual life of man. We
+learn that he had commenced to study synonyms, and that he was interested
+in the interpretation of the poets. Now he found that Homer occasionally
+simply substituted the name of Hephaestus for fire, and that other poets
+went even further on the same lines. Furthermore, while it was common
+knowledge to every Greek that certain natural objects, such as the
+heavenly bodies and the rivers, were regarded as divine and had names in
+common with their gods, this to Prodicus would be a specially attractive
+subject for speculation. It is plainly shown by his instances that it is
+linguistic observations of this kind which were the starting-point of his
+theory concerning the origin of the conceptions of the gods.
+
+In the accounts of Prodicus it is taken for granted that he denied the
+existence of the gods, and in later times he is classed as _atheos_.
+Nevertheless we have every reason to doubt the correctness of this
+opinion. The case of Democritus already shows that a philosopher might
+very well derive the conceptions of the gods from an incorrect
+interpretation of certain phenomena without throwing doubt on their
+existence. As far as Prodicus is concerned it may be assumed that he did
+not believe that Bread, Wine or Fire were gods, any more than Democritus
+imagined that Zeus sent thunder and lightning; nor, presumably, did he
+ever believe that rivers were gods. But he need not therefore have denied
+the existence of Demeter, Dionysus and Hephaestus, much less the divinity
+of the sun and the moon. And if we consider his theory more closely it
+points in quite a different direction from that of atheism. To Prodicus it
+was evidently the conception of utility that mattered: if these objects
+came to be regarded as gods it was because they “benefited humanity.” This
+too is a genuinely sophistic view, characteristically deviating from that
+of the naturalist Democritus in its limitation to the human and social
+aspect of the question. Such a point of view, if confronted with the
+question of the existence of the gods, may very well, according to
+sophistic methods of reasoning, lead to the conclusion that primitive man
+was right in so far as the useful, _i.e._ that which “benefits humanity,”
+really is an essential feature of the gods, and wrong only in so far as he
+identified the individual useful objects with the gods. Whether Prodicus
+adopted this point of view, we cannot possibly tell; but the general body
+of tradition concerning the man, which does not in any way suggest
+religious radicalism, indicates as most probable that he did not connect
+the question of the origin of the conceptions of the gods with that of the
+existence of the gods, which to him was taken for granted, and that it was
+only later philosophers who, in their researches into the ideas of earlier
+philosophers about the gods, inferred his atheism from his speculations on
+the history of religion.
+
+Critias, the well-known reactionary politician, the chief of the Thirty
+Tyrants, is placed amongst the atheists on the strength of a passage in a
+satyric drama, _Sisyphus_. The drama is lost, but our authority quotes the
+objectionable passage _in extenso_; it is a piece of no less than forty
+lines. The passage argues that human life in its origins knew no social
+order, that might ruled supreme. Then men conceived the idea of making
+laws in order that right might rule instead of might. The result of this
+was, it is true, that wrong was not done openly; but it was done secretly
+instead. Then a wise man bethought himself of making men believe that
+there existed gods who saw and heard everything which men did, nay even
+knew their innermost thoughts. And, in order that men might stand in
+proper awe of the gods, he said that they lived in the sky, out of which
+comes that which makes men afraid, such as lightning and thunder, but also
+that which benefits them, sunshine and rain, and the stars, those fair
+ornaments by whose course men measure time. Thus he succeeded in bringing
+lawlessness to an end. It is expressly stated that it was all a cunning
+fraud: “by such talk he made his teaching most acceptable, veiling truth
+with false words.”
+
+In antiquity it was disputed whether the drama _Sisyphus_ was by Critias
+or Euripides; nowadays all agree in attributing it to Critias; nor does
+the style of the long fragment resemble that of Euripides. The question
+is, however, of no consequence in this connexion: whether the drama is by
+Critias or Euripides it is wrong to attribute to an author opinions which
+he has put into the mouth of a character in a drama. Moreover, _Sisyphus_
+was a satyric play, _i.e._ it belonged to a class of poetry the liberty of
+which was nearly as great as in comedy, and the speech was delivered by
+Sisyphus himself, who, according to the legend, is a type of the crafty
+criminal whose forte is to do evil and elude punishment. There is, in
+fact, nothing in that which we otherwise hear of Critias to suggest that
+he cherished free-thinking views. He was—or in his later years became—a
+fanatical adversary of the Attic democracy, and he was, when he held
+power, unscrupulous in his choice of the means with which he opposed it
+and the men who stood in the path of his reactionary policy; but in our
+earlier sources he is never accused of impiety in the theoretical sense.
+And yet there had been an excellent opportunity of bringing forward such
+an accusation; for in his youth Critias had been a companion of Socrates,
+and his later conduct was used as a proof that Socrates corrupted his
+surroundings. But it is always Critias’s political crimes which are
+adduced in this connexion, not his irreligion. On the other hand,
+posterity looked upon him as the pure type of tyrant, and the label
+atheist therefore suggested itself on the slightest provocation.
+
+But, even if the _Sisyphus_ fragment cannot be used to characterise its
+author as an atheist, it is, nevertheless, of the greatest interest in
+this connexion, and therefore demands closer analysis.
+
+The introductory idea, that mankind has evolved from an animal state into
+higher stages, is at variance with the earlier Greek conception, namely,
+that history begins with a golden age from which there is a continual
+decline. The theory of the fragment is expressed by a series of authors
+from the same and the immediately succeeding period. It occurs in
+Euripides; a later and otherwise little-known tragedian, Moschion,
+developed it in detail in a still extant fragment; Plato accepted it and
+made it the basis of his presentation of the origin of the State;
+Aristotle takes it for granted. Its source, too, has been demonstrated: it
+was presumably Democritus who first advanced it. Nevertheless the author
+of the fragment has hardly got it direct from Democritus, who at this time
+was little known at Athens, but from an intermediary. This intermediary is
+probably Protagoras, of whom it is said that he composed a treatise, _The
+Original State, i.e._ the primary state of mankind. Protagoras was a
+fellow-townsman of Democritus, and recorded by tradition as one of his
+direct disciples.
+
+In another point also the fragment seems to betray the influence of
+Democritus. When it is said that the wise inventors of the gods made them
+dwell in the skies, because from the skies come those natural phenomena
+which frighten men, it is highly suggestive of Democritus’s criticism of
+the divine explanation of thunder and lightning and the like. In this case
+also Protagoras may have been the intermediary. In his work on the gods he
+had every opportunity of discussing the question in detail. But here we
+have the theory of Democritus combined with that of Prodicus in that it is
+maintained that from the skies come also those things that benefit men,
+and that they are on this account also a suitable dwelling-place for the
+gods. It is obvious that the author of the fragment (or his source) was
+versed in the most modern wisdom.
+
+All this erudition, however, is made to serve a certain tendency: the
+well-known tendency to represent religion as a political invention having
+as its object the policing of society. It is a theory which in
+antiquity—to its honour be it said—is but of rare occurrence. There is a
+vague indication of it in Euripides, a more definite one in Aristotle, and
+an elaborate application of it in Polybius; and that is in reality all.
+(That many people in more enlightened ages upheld religion as a means of
+keeping the masses in check, is a different matter.) However, it is an
+interesting fact that the Critias fragment is not only the first evidence
+of the existence of the theory known to us, but also presumably the
+earliest and probably the best known to later antiquity. Otherwise we
+should not find reference for the theory made to a fragment of a farce,
+but to a quotation from a philosopher.
+
+This might lead us to conclude that the theory was Critias’s own
+invention, though, of course, it would not follow that he himself adhered
+to it. But it is more probable that it was a ready-made modern theory
+which Critias put into the mouth of Sisyphus. Not only does the whole
+character of the fragment and its scene of action favour this supposition,
+but there is also another factor which corroborates it.
+
+In the _Gorgias_ Plato makes one of the characters, Callicles—a man of
+whom we otherwise know nothing—profess a doctrine which up to a certain
+point is almost identical with that of the fragment. According to
+Callicles, the natural state (and the right state; on this point he is at
+variance with the fragment) is that right belongs to the strong. This
+state has been corrupted by legislation; the laws are inventions of the
+weak, who are also the majority, and their aim is to hinder the
+encroachment of the strong. If this theory is carried to its conclusion,
+it is obvious that religion must be added to the laws; if the former is
+not also regarded as an invention for the policing of society, the whole
+theory is upset. Now in the _Gorgias_ the question as to the attitude of
+the gods towards the problem of what is right and what is wrong is
+carefully avoided in the discussion. Not till the close of the dialogue,
+where Plato substitutes myth for scientific research, does he draw the
+conclusion in respect of religion. He does this in a positive form, as a
+consequence of _his_ point of view: after death the gods reward the just
+and punish the unjust; but he expressly assumes that Callicles will regard
+it all as an old wives’ tale.
+
+In Callicles an attempt has been made to see a pseudonym for Critias. That
+is certainly wrong. Critias was a kinsman of Plato, is introduced by name
+in several dialogues, nay, one dialogue even bears his name, and he is
+everywhere treated with respect and sympathy. Nowadays, therefore, it is
+generally acknowledged that Callicles is a real person, merely unknown to
+us as such. However that may be, Plato would never have let a leading
+character in one of his longer dialogues advance (and Socrates refute) a
+view which had no better authority than a passage in a satyric drama. On
+the other hand, there is, as shown above, difficulty in supposing that the
+doctrine of the fragment was stated in the writings of an eminent sophist;
+so we come to the conclusion that it was developed and diffused in
+sophistic circles by oral teaching, and that it became known to Critias
+and Plato in this way. Its originator we do not know. We might think of
+the sophist Thrasymachus, who in the first book of Plato’s _Republic_
+maintains a point of view corresponding to that of Callicles in _Gorgias_.
+But what we otherwise learn of Thrasymachus is not suggestive of interest
+in religion, and the only statement of his as to that kind of thing which
+has come down to us tends to the denial of a providence, not denial of the
+gods. Quite recently Diagoras of Melos has been guessed at; this is empty
+talk, resulting at best in substituting _x_ (or _NN_) for _y_.
+
+If I have dwelt in such detail on the _Sisyphus_ fragment, it is because
+it is our first direct and unmistakable evidence of ancient atheism. Here
+for the first time we meet with the direct statement which we have
+searched for in vain among all the preceding authors: that the gods of
+popular belief are fabrication pure and simple and without any
+corresponding reality, however remote. The nature of our tradition
+precludes our ascertaining whether such a statement might have been made
+earlier; but the probability is _a priori_ that it was not. The whole
+development of ancient reasoning on religious questions, as far as we are
+able to survey it, leads in reality to the conclusion that atheism as an
+expressed (though perhaps not publicly expressed) confession of faith did
+not appear till the age of the sophists.
+
+With the Critias fragment we have also brought to an end the inquiry into
+the direct statements of atheistic tendency which have come down to us
+from the age of the sophists. The result is, as we see, rather meagre. But
+it may be supplemented with indirect testimonies which prove that there
+was more of the thing than the direct tradition would lead us to
+conjecture, and that the denial of the existence of the gods must have
+penetrated very wide circles.
+
+The fullest expression of Attic free-thought at the end of the fifth
+century is to be found in the tragedies of Euripides. They are leavened
+with reflections on all possible moral and religious problems, and
+criticism of the traditional conceptions of the gods plays a leading part
+in them. We shall, however, have some difficulty in using Euripides as a
+source of what people really thought at this period, partly because he is
+a very pronounced personality and by no means a mere mouthpiece for the
+ideas of his contemporaries—during his lifetime he was an object of the
+most violent animosity owing, among other things, to his free-thinking
+views—partly because he, as a dramatist, was obliged to put his ideas into
+the mouths of his characters, so that in many cases it is difficult to
+decide how much is due to dramatic considerations and how much to the
+personal opinion of the poet. Even to this day the religious standpoint of
+Euripides is matter of dispute. In the most recent detailed treatment of
+the question he is characterised as an atheist, whereas others regard him
+merely as a dialectician who debates problems without having any real
+standpoint of his own.
+
+I do not believe that Euripides personally denied the existence of the
+gods; there is too much that tells against that theory, and, in fact,
+nothing that tells directly in favour of it, though he did not quite
+escape the charge of atheism even in his own day. To prove the correctness
+of this view would, however, lead too far afield in this connexion. On the
+other hand, a short characterisation of Euripides’s manner of reasoning
+about religious problems is unavoidable as a background for the treatment
+of those—very rare—passages where he has put actually atheistic
+reflections into the mouths of his characters.
+
+As a Greek dramatist Euripides had to derive his subjects from the heroic
+legends, which at the same time were legends of the gods in so far as they
+were interwoven with tales of the gods’ direct intervention in affairs. It
+is precisely against this intervention that the criticism of Euripides is
+primarily directed. Again and again he makes his characters protest
+against the manner in which they are treated by the gods or in which the
+gods generally behave. It is characteristic of Euripides that his
+starting-point in this connexion is always the moral one. So far he is a
+typical representative of that tendency which, in earlier times, was
+represented by Xenophanes and a little later by Pindar; in no other Greek
+poet has the method of using the higher conceptions of the gods against
+the lower found more complete expression than in Euripides. And in so far,
+too, he is still entirely on the ground of popular belief. But at the same
+time it is characteristic of him that he is familiar with and highly
+influenced by Greek science. He knows the most eminent representatives of
+Ionian naturalism (with the exception of Democritus), and he is fond of
+displaying his knowledge. Nevertheless, it cannot be said that he uses it
+in a contentious spirit against popular belief; on the contrary, he is
+inclined in agreement with the old philosophers to identify the gods of
+popular belief with the elements. Towards sophistic he takes a similar,
+but less sympathetic attitude. Sophistic was not in vogue till he was a
+man of mature age; he made acquaintance with it, and he made use of
+it—there are reflections in his dramas which carry distinct evidence of
+sophistic influence; but in his treatment of religious problems he is not
+a disciple of the sophists, and on this subject, as on others, he
+occasionally attacked them.
+
+It is against this background that we must set the reflections with an
+atheistic tone that we find in Euripides. They are, as already mentioned,
+rare; indeed, strictly speaking there is only one case in which a
+character openly denies the existence of the gods. The passage is a
+fragment of the drama _Bellerophon_; it is, despite its isolation, so
+typical of the manner of Euripides that it deserves to be quoted in full.
+
+“And then to say that there are gods in the heavens! Nay, there are none
+there; if you are not foolish enough to be seduced by the old talk. Think
+for yourselves about the matter, and do not be influenced by my words. I
+contend that the tyrants kill the people wholesale, take their money and
+destroy cities in spite of their oaths; and although they do all this they
+are happier than people who, in peace and quietness, lead god-fearing
+lives. And I know small states which honour the gods, but must obey
+greater states, which are less pious, because their spearmen are fewer in
+number. And I believe that you, if a slothful man just prayed to the gods
+and did not earn his bread by the work of his hands—” Here the sense is
+interrupted; but there remains one more line: “That which builds the
+castle of the gods is in part the unfortunate happenings ...” The
+continuation is missing.
+
+The argumentation here is characteristic of Euripides. From the injustice
+of life he infers the non-existence of the gods. The conclusion evidently
+only holds good on the assumption that the gods must be just; and this is
+precisely one of the postulates of popular belief. The reasoning is not
+sophistic; on the contrary, in their attacks the sophists took up a
+position outside the foundation of popular belief and attacked the
+foundation itself. This reasoning, on the other hand, is closely allied to
+the earlier religious thinking of the Greeks; it only proceeds further
+than the latter, where it results in rank denial.
+
+The drama of _Bellerophon_ is lost, and reconstruction is out of the
+question; if only for that reason it is unwarrantable to draw any
+conclusions from the detached fragment as to the poet’s personal attitude
+towards the existence of the gods. But, nevertheless, the fragment is of
+interest in this connexion. It would never have occurred to Sophocles or
+Aeschylus to put such a speech in the mouth of one of his characters. When
+Euripides does that it is a proof that the question of the existence of
+the gods has begun to present itself to the popular consciousness at this
+time. Viewed in this light other statements of his which are not in
+themselves atheistic become significant. When it is said: “If the gods act
+in a shameful way, they are not gods”—that indeed is not atheism in our
+sense, but it is very near to it. Interesting is also the introduction to
+the drama _Melanippe_: “Zeus, whoever Zeus may be; for of that I only know
+what is told.” Aeschylus begins a strophe in one of his most famous choral
+odes with almost the same words: “Zeus, whoe’er he be; for if he desire so
+to be called, I will address him by this name.” In him it is an expression
+of genuine antique piety, which excludes all human impertinence towards
+the gods to such a degree that it even forgoes knowing their real names.
+In Euripides the same idea becomes an expression of doubt; but in this
+case also the doubt is raised on the foundation of popular belief.
+
+It is not surprising that so prominent and sustained a criticism of
+popular belief as that of Euripides, produced, moreover, on the stage,
+called forth a reaction from the defenders of the established faith, and
+that charges of impiety were not wanting. It is more to be wondered at
+that these charges on the whole are so few and slight, and that Euripides
+did not become the object of any actual prosecution. We know of a private
+trial in which the accuser incidentally charged Euripides with impiety on
+the strength of a quotation from one of his tragedies, Euripides’s answer
+being a protest against dragging his poetry into the affair; the verdict
+on that belonged to another court. Aristophanes, who is always severe on
+Euripides, has only one passage directly charging him with being a
+propagator of atheism; but the accusation is hardly meant to be taken
+seriously. In _The Frogs_, where he had every opportunity of emphasising
+this view, there is hardly an indication of it. In _The Clouds_, where the
+main attack is directed against modern free-thought, Euripides, to be
+sure, is sneered at as being the fashionable poet of the corrupted youth,
+but he is not drawn into the charge of impiety. Even when Plato wrote his
+_Republic_, Euripides was generally considered the “wisest of all
+tragedians.” This would have been impossible if he had been considered an
+atheist. In spite of all, the general feeling must undoubtedly have been
+that Euripides ultimately took his stand on the ground of popular belief.
+It was a similar instinctive judgment in regard to religion which
+prevented antiquity from placing Xenophanes amongst the atheists. Later
+times no doubt judged differently; the quotation from _Melanippe_ is in
+fact cited as a proof that Euripides was an atheist in his heart of
+hearts.
+
+In Aristophanes we meet with the first observations concerning the change
+in the religious conditions of Athens during the Peloponnesian War. In one
+of his plays, _The Clouds_, he actually set himself the task of taking up
+arms against modern unbelief, and he characterises it directly as atheism.
+If only for that reason the play deserves somewhat fuller consideration.
+
+It is well known that Aristophanes chose Socrates as a representative of
+the modern movement. In him he embodies all the faults with which he
+wished to pick a quarrel in the fashionable philosophy of the day. On the
+other hand, the essence of Socratic teaching is entirely absent from
+Aristophanes’s representation; of that he had hardly any understanding,
+and even if he had he would at any rate not have been able to make use of
+it in his drama. We need not then in this connexion consider Socrates
+himself at all; on the other hand, the play gives a good idea of the
+popular idea of sophistic. Here we find all the features of the school,
+grotesquely mixed up and distorted by the farce, it is true, but
+nevertheless easily recognisable: rhetoric as an end in itself, of course,
+with emphasis on its immoral aspect; empty and hair-splitting dialectics;
+linguistic researches; Ionic naturalism; and first and last, as the focus
+of all, denial of the gods. That Aristophanes was well informed on certain
+points, at any rate, is clear from the fact that the majority of the
+scientific explanations which he puts into the mouth of Socrates actually
+represent the latest results of science at that time—which in all
+probability did not prevent his Athenians from considering them as
+exceedingly absurd and ridiculous.
+
+What matters here, however, is only the accusation of atheism which he
+made against Socrates. It is a little difficult to handle, in so far as
+Aristophanes, for dramatic reasons, has equipped Socrates with a whole set
+of deities. There are the clouds themselves, which are of Aristophanes’s
+own invention; there is also the air, which he has got from Diogenes of
+Apollonia, and finally a “vortex” which is supposed to be derived from the
+same source, and which at any rate has cast Zeus down from his throne. All
+this we must ignore, as it is only conditioned partly by technical
+reasons—Aristophanes had to have a chorus and chose the clouds for the
+purpose—and partially by the desire to ridicule Ionic naturalism. But
+enough is left over. In the beginning of the play Socrates expressly
+declares that no gods exist. Similar statements are repeated in several
+places. Zeus is sometimes substituted for the gods, but it comes to the
+same thing. And at the end of the play, where the honest Athenian, who has
+ventured on the ticklish ground of sophistic, admits his delusion, it is
+expressly said:
+
+“Oh, what a fool I am! Nay, I must have been mad indeed when I thought of
+throwing the gods away for Socrates’s sake!”
+
+Even in the verses with which the chorus conclude the play it is insisted
+that the worst crime of the sophists is their insult to the gods.
+
+The inference to be drawn from all this is simply that the popular
+Athenian opinion—for we may rest assured that this and the view of
+Aristophanes are identical—was that the sophists were atheists. That says
+but little. For popular opinion always works with broad categories, and
+the probability is that in this case, as demonstrated above, it was in the
+wrong, for, as a rule, the sophists were hardly conscious deniers of the
+gods. But, at the same time, at the back of the onslaught of Aristophanes
+there lies the idea that the teaching of the sophists led to denial of the
+gods; that atheism was the natural outcome of their doctrine and way of
+reasoning. And that there was some truth therein is proved by other
+evidence which can hardly be rejected.
+
+In the indictment of Socrates it is said that he “offended by not
+believing in the gods in which the State believed.” In the two apologies
+for Socrates which have come down to us under Xenophon’s name, the author
+treats this accusation entirely under the aspect of atheism, and tries to
+refute it by positive proofs of the piety of Socrates. But not one word is
+said about there being, in and for itself, anything remarkable or
+improbable in the charge. In Plato’s _Apology_, Plato makes Socrates ask
+the accuser point-blank whether he is of the opinion that he, Socrates,
+does not believe in the gods at all and accordingly is a downright denier
+of the gods, or whether he merely means to say that he believes in other
+gods than those of the State. He makes the accuser answer that the
+assertion is that Socrates does not believe in any gods at all. In Plato
+Socrates refutes the accusation indirectly, using a line of argument
+entirely differing from that of Xenophon. But in Plato, too, the
+accusation is treated as being in no way extraordinary. In my opinion,
+Plato’s _Apology_ cannot be used as historical evidence for details unless
+special reasons can be given proving their historical value beyond the
+fact that they occur in the _Apology_. But in this connexion the question
+is not what was said or not said at Socrates’s trial. The decisive point
+is that we possess two quite independent and unambiguous depositions by
+two fully competent witnesses of the beginning of the fourth century which
+both treat of the charge of atheism as something which is neither strange
+nor surprising at their time. It is therefore permissible to conclude that
+in Athens at this time there really existed circles or at any rate not a
+few individuals who had given up the belief in the popular gods.
+
+A dialogue between Socrates and a young man by name Aristodemus, given in
+Xenophon’s _Memorabilia_, makes the same impression. Of Aristodemus it is
+said that he does not sacrifice to the gods, does not consult the Oracle
+and ridicules those who do so. When he is called to account for this
+behaviour he maintains that he does not despise “the divine,” but is of
+the opinion that it is too exalted to need his worship. Moreover, he
+contends that the gods do not trouble themselves about mankind. This is,
+of course, not atheism in our sense; but Aristodemus’s attitude is,
+nevertheless, extremely eccentric in a community like that of Athens in
+the fifth century. And yet it is not mentioned as anything isolated and
+extraordinary, but as if it were something which, to be sure, was out of
+the common, but not unheard of.
+
+It is further to be observed that at the end of the fifth century we often
+hear of active sacrilegious outrages. An example is the historic trial of
+Alcibiades for profanation of the Mysteries. But this was not an isolated
+occurrence; there were more of the same kind at the time. Of the
+dithyrambic poet Cinesias it is said that he profaned holy things in an
+obscene manner. But the greatest stress of all must be laid on the
+well-known mutilation of the Hermae at Athens in 415, just before the
+expedition to Sicily. All the tales about the outrages of the Mysteries
+_may_ have been fictitious, but it is a fact that the Hermae were
+mutilated. The motive was probably political: the members of a secret
+society intended to pledge themselves to each other by all committing a
+capital crime. But that they chose just this form of crime shows quite
+clearly that respect for the State religion had greatly declined in these
+circles.
+
+What has so far been adduced as proof that the belief in the gods had
+begun to waver in Athens at the end of the fifth century is, in my
+opinion, conclusive in itself to anybody who is familiar with the more
+ancient Greek modes of thought and expression on this point, and can not
+only hear what is said, but also understand how it is said and what is
+passed over in silence. Of course it can always be objected that the
+proofs are partly the assertions of a comic poet who certainly was not
+particular about accusations of impiety, partly deductions _ex silentio_,
+partly actions the motives for which are uncertain. Fortunately, however,
+we have—from a slightly later period, it is true—a positive utterance
+which confirms our conclusion and which comes from a man who was not in
+the habit of talking idly and who had the best opportunities of knowing
+the circumstances.
+
+In the tenth book of his _Laws_, written shortly before his death, _i.e._
+about the middle of the fourth century, Plato gives a detailed account of
+the question of irreligion seen from the point of view of penal
+legislation. He distinguishes here between three forms, namely, denial of
+the existence of the gods, denial of the divine providence (whereas the
+existence of the gods is admitted), and finally the assumption that the
+gods exist and exercise providence, but that they allow themselves to be
+influenced by sacrifices and prayers. Of these three categories the last
+is evidently directed against ancient popular belief itself; it does not
+therefore interest us in this connexion. The second view, the denial of a
+providence, we have already met with in Xenophon in the character of
+Aristodemus, and in the sophist Thrasymachus; Euripides, too, sometimes
+alludes to it, though it was far from being his own opinion. Whether it
+amounted to denial of the gods or not was, in ancient times, the cause of
+much dispute; it is, of course, not atheism in our sense, but it is
+certainly evidence that belief in the gods is shaken. The first view, on
+the other hand, is sheer atheism. Plato consequently reckons with this as
+a serious danger to the community; he mentions it as a widespread view
+among the youth of his time, and in his legislation he sentences to death
+those who fail to be converted. It would seem certain, therefore, that
+there was, in reality, something in it after all.
+
+Plato does not confine himself to defining atheism and laying down the
+penalty for it; he at the same time, in accordance with a principle which
+he generally follows in the _Laws_, discusses it and tries to disprove it.
+In this way he happens to give us information—which is of special interest
+to us—of the proofs which were adduced by its followers.
+
+The argument is a twofold one. First comes the naturalistic proof; the
+heavenly bodies, according to the general (and Plato’s own) view the most
+certain deities, are inanimate natural objects. It is interesting to note
+that in speaking of this doctrine in detail reference is clearly made to
+Anaxagoras; this confirms our afore-mentioned conjectures as to the
+character of his work. Plato was quite in a position to deal with
+Anaxagoras on the strength not only of what he said, but of what he passed
+over in silence. The second argument is the well-known sophistic one, that
+the gods are _nomôi_, not _physei_, they depend upon convention, which has
+nothing to do with reality. In this connexion the argument adds that what
+applies to the gods, applies also to right and wrong; _i.e._ we find here
+in the _Laws_ the view with which we are familiar from Callicles in the
+_Gorgias_, but with the missing link supplied. And Plato’s development of
+this theme shows clearly just what a general historical consideration
+might lead us to expect, namely, that it was naturalism and sophistic that
+jointly undermined the belief in the old gods.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+
+With Socrates and his successors the whole question of the relation of
+Greek thought to popular belief enters upon a new phase. The Socratic
+philosophy is in many ways a continuation of sophistic. This is involved
+already in the fact that the same questions form the central interest in
+the two schools of thought, so that the problems stated by the sophists
+became the decisive factor in the content of Socratic and Platonic
+thought. The Socratic schools at the same time took over the actual
+programme of the sophists, namely, the education of adolescence in the
+highest culture. But, on the other hand, the Socratic philosophy was in
+the opposite camp to sophistic; on many points it represents a reaction
+against it, a recollection of the valuable elements contained in earlier
+Greek thought on life, especially human life, values which sophistic
+regarded with indifference or even hostility, and which were threatened
+with destruction if it should carry the day. This reactionary tendency in
+Socratic philosophy appears nowhere more plainly than in the field of
+religion.
+
+Under these circumstances it is a peculiar irony of fate that the very
+originator of the new trend in Greek thought was charged with and
+sentenced for impiety. We have already mentioned the singular prelude to
+the indictment afforded by the comedy of Aristophanes. We have also
+remarked upon the futility of looking therein for any actual enlightenment
+on the Socratic point of view. And Plato makes Socrates state this with
+all necessary sharpness in the _Apology_. Hence what we may infer from the
+attack of Aristophanes is merely this, that the general public lumped
+Socrates together with the sophists and more especially regarded him as a
+godless fellow. Unless this had been so, Aristophanes could not have
+introduced him as the chief character in his travesty. And without doubt
+it was this popular point of view which his accusers relied on when they
+actually included atheism as a count in their bill of indictment. It will,
+nevertheless, be necessary to dwell for a moment on this bill of
+indictment and the defence.
+
+The charge of impiety was a twofold one, partly for not believing in the
+gods the State believed in, partly for introducing new “demonic things.”
+This latter act was directly punishable according to Attic law. What his
+accusers alluded to was the _daimonion_ of Socrates. That they should have
+had any idea of what that was must be regarded as utterly out of the
+question, and whatever it may have been—and of this we shall have a word
+to say later—it had at any rate nothing whatever to do with atheism. As to
+the charge of not believing in the gods of the State, Plato makes the
+accuser prefer it in the form that Socrates did not believe in any gods at
+all, after which it becomes an easy matter for Socrates to show that it is
+directly incompatible with the charge of introducing new deities. As
+ground for his accusation the accuser states—in Plato, as before—that
+Socrates taught the same doctrine about the sun and moon as Anaxagoras.
+The whole of the passage in the _Apology_ in which the question of the
+denial of gods is dealt with—a short dialogue between Socrates and the
+accuser, quite in the Socratic manner—historically speaking, carries
+little conviction, and we therefore dare not take it for granted that the
+charge either of atheism or of false doctrine about the sun and moon was
+put forward in that form. But that something about this latter point was
+mentioned during the trial must be regarded as probable, when we consider
+that Xenophon, too, defends Socrates at some length against the charge of
+concerning himself with speculations on Nature. That he did not do so must
+be taken for certain, not only from the express evidence of Xenophon and
+Plato, but from the whole nature of the case. The accusation on this point
+was assuredly pure fabrication. There remains only what was no doubt also
+the main point, namely, the assertion of the pernicious influence of
+Socrates on the young, and the inference of irreligion to be drawn from
+it—an argument which it would be absurd to waste any words upon.
+
+The attack, then, affords no information about Socrates’s personal point
+of view as regards belief in the gods, and the defence only very little.
+Both Xenophon and Plato give an account of Socrates’s _daimonion_, but
+this point has so little relation to the charge of atheism that it is not
+worth examination. For the rest Plato’s defence is indirect. He makes
+Socrates refute his opponent, but does not let him say a word about his
+own point of view. Xenophon is more positive, in so far as in the first
+place he asserts that Socrates worshipped the gods like any other good
+citizen, and more especially that he advised his friends to use the
+Oracle; in the second place, that, though he lived in full publicity, no
+one ever saw him do or heard him say anything of an impious nature. All
+these assertions are assuredly correct, and they render it highly
+improbable that Socrates should have secretly abandoned the popular faith,
+but they tell us little that is positive about his views. Fortunately we
+possess other means of getting to closer grips with the question; the way
+must be through a consideration of Socrates’s whole conduct and his mode
+of thought.
+
+Here we at once come to the interesting negative fact that there is
+nothing in tradition to indicate that Socrates ever occupied himself with
+theological questions. To be sure, Xenophon has twice put into his mouth a
+whole theodicy expressing an elaborate teleological view of nature. But
+that we dare not base anything upon this is now, I think, universally
+acknowledged. Plato, in the dialogue _Euthyphron_, makes him subject the
+popular notion of piety to a devastating criticism; but this, again, will
+not nowadays be regarded as historical by anybody. Everything we are told
+about Socrates which bears the stamp of historical truth indicates that he
+restricted himself to ethics and left theology alone. But this very fact
+is not without significance. It indicates that Socrates’s aim was not to
+alter the religious views of his contemporaries. Since he did not do so we
+may reasonably believe it was because they did not inconvenience him in
+what was most important to him, _i.e._ ethics.
+
+We may, however, perhaps go even a step farther. We may venture, I think,
+to maintain that so far from contemporary religion being a hindrance to
+Socrates in his occupation as a teacher of ethics, it was, on the
+contrary, an indispensable support to him, nay, an integral component of
+his fundamental ethical view. The object of Socrates in his relations with
+his fellow-men was, on his own showing—for on this important point I think
+we can confidently rely upon Plato’s _Apology_—to make clear to them that
+they knew nothing. And when he was asked to say in what he himself
+differed from other people, he could mention only one thing, namely, that
+he was aware of his own ignorance. But his ignorance is not an ignorance
+of this thing or that, it is a radical ignorance, something involved in
+the essence of man as man. That is, in other words, it is determined by
+religion. In order to be at all intelligible and ethically applicable, it
+presupposes the conception of beings of whom the essence is knowledge. For
+Socrates and his contemporaries the popular belief supplied such beings in
+the gods. The institution of the Oracle itself is an expression of the
+recognition of the superiority of the gods to man in knowledge. But the
+dogma had long been stated even in its absolute form when Homer said: “The
+gods know everything.” To Socrates, who always took his starting-point
+quite popularly from notions that were universally accepted, this basis
+was simply indispensable. And so far from inconveniencing Socrates, the
+multiplicity and anthropomorphism of the gods seemed an advantage to
+him—the more they were like man in all but the essential qualification,
+the better.
+
+The Socratic ignorance has an ethical bearing. Its complement is his
+assertion that virtue is knowledge. Here again the gods are the necessary
+presupposition and determination. That the gods were good, or, as it was
+preferred to express it, “just” (the Greek word comprises more than the
+English word), was no less a popular dogma than the notion that they
+possessed knowledge. Now all Socrates’s efforts were directed towards
+goodness as an end in view, towards the ethical development of mankind.
+Here again popular belief was his best ally. To the people to whom he
+talked, virtue (the Greek word is at once both wider and narrower in sense
+than the English term) was no mere abstract notion; it was a living
+reality to them, embodied in beings that were like themselves, human
+beings, but perfect human beings.
+
+If we correlate this with the negative circumstance that Socrates was no
+theologian but a teacher of ethics, we can easily understand a point of
+view which accepted popular belief as it was and employed it for working
+purposes in the service of moral teaching. Such a point of view, moreover,
+gained extraordinary strength by the fact that it preserved continuity
+with earlier Greek religious thought. This latter, too, had been ethical
+in its bearing; it, too, had employed the gods in the service of its
+ethical aim. But its central idea was felicity, not virtue; its
+starting-point was the popular dogma of the felicity of the gods, not
+their justice. In this way it had come to lay stress on a virtue which
+might be termed modesty, but in a religious sense, _i.e._ man must
+recognise his difference from the gods as a limited being, subject to the
+vicissitudes of an existence above which the gods are raised. Socrates
+says just the same, only that he puts knowledge or virtue, which to him
+was the same thing, in the place of felicity. From a religious point of
+view the result is exactly the same, namely, the doctrine of the gods as
+the terminus and ideal, and the insistence on the gulf separating man from
+them. We are tempted to say that, had Socrates turned with hostile intent
+against a religion which thus played into his hands, the more fool he. But
+this is putting the problem the wrong way up—Socrates never stood
+critically outside popular belief and traditional religious thought
+speculating as to whether he should use it or reject it. No, his thought
+grew out of it as from the bosom of the earth. Hence its mighty religious
+power, its inevitable victory over a school of thought which had severed
+all connexion with tradition.
+
+That such a point of view should be so badly misunderstood as it was in
+Athens seems incomprehensible. The explanation is no doubt that the whole
+story of Socrates’s denial of the gods was only included by his accusers
+for the sake of completeness, and did not play any great part in the final
+issue. This seems confirmed by the fact that they found it convenient to
+support their charge of atheism by one of introducing foreign gods, this
+being punishable by Attic law. They thus obtained some slight hold for
+their accusation. But both charges must be presumed to have been so
+signally refuted during the trial that it is hardly possible that any
+great number of the judges were influenced by them. It was quite different
+and far weightier matters which brought about the conviction of Socrates,
+questions on which there was really a deep and vital difference of opinion
+between him and his contemporaries. That Socrates’s attitude towards
+popular belief was at any rate fully understood elsewhere is testified by
+the answer of the Delphic Oracle, that declared Socrates to be the wisest
+of all men. However remarkable such a pronouncement from such a place may
+appear, it seems impossible to reject the accounts of it as unhistorical;
+on the other hand, it does not seem impossible to explain how the Oracle
+came to declare itself as reported. Earlier Greek thought, which insisted
+upon the gulf separating gods and men, was from olden times intimately
+connected with the Delphic Oracle. It hardly sprang from there; more
+probably it arose spontaneously in various parts of Hellas. But it would
+naturally feel attracted toward the Oracle, which was one of the religious
+centres of Hellas, and it was recognised as legitimate by the Oracle.
+Above all, the honour shown by the Oracle to Pindar, one of the chief
+representatives of the earlier thought, testifies to this. Hence there is
+nothing incredible in the assumption that Socrates attracted notice at
+Delphi as a defender of the old-fashioned religious views approved by the
+Oracle, precisely in virtue of his opposition to the ideas then in vogue.
+
+If we accept this explanation we are, however, excluded from taking
+literally Plato’s account of the answer of the Delphic Oracle and
+Socrates’s attitude towards it. Plato presents the case as if the Oracle
+were the starting-point of Socrates’s philosophy and of the peculiar mode
+of life which was indissolubly bound up with it. This presentation cannot
+be correct if we are to regard the Oracle as historical and understand it
+as we have understood it. The Oracle presupposes the Socrates we know: a
+man with a religious message and a mode of life which was bound to attract
+notice to him as an exception from the general rule. It cannot, therefore,
+have been the cause of Socrates’s finding himself. On the other hand, it
+is difficult to imagine a man choosing a mode of life like that of
+Socrates without a definite inducement, without some fact or other that
+would lead him to conceive himself as an exception from the rule. If we
+look for such a fact in the life of Socrates, we shall look in vain as
+regards externals. Apart from his activities as a religious and ethical
+personality, his life was that of any other Attic citizen. But in his
+spiritual life there was certainly one point, but only one, on which he
+deviated from the normal, namely, his _daimonion_. If we examine the
+accounts of this more closely the only thing we can make of them is—or so
+at least it seems to me—that we are here in the presence of a
+form—peculiar, no doubt, and highly developed—of the phenomena which are
+nowadays classed under the concept of clairvoyance. Now Plato makes
+Socrates himself say that the power of avoiding what would harm him, in
+great things and little, by virtue of a direct perception (a “voice”),
+which is what constituted his _daimonion_, was given him from childhood.
+That it was regarded as something singular both by himself and others is
+evident, and likewise that he himself regarded it as something
+supernatural; the designation _daimonion_ itself seems to be his own. I
+think that we must seek for the origin of Socrates’s peculiar mode of life
+in this direction, strange as it may be that a purely mystic element
+should have given the impulse to the most rationalistic philosophy the
+world has ever produced. It is impossible to enter more deeply into this
+problem here; but, if my conjecture is correct, we have an additional
+explanation of the fact that Socrates was disposed to anything rather than
+an attack on the established religion.
+
+A view of popular religion such as I have here sketched bore in itself the
+germ of a further development which must lead in other directions. A
+personality like Socrates might perhaps manage throughout a lifetime to
+keep that balance on a razor’s edge which is involved in utilising to the
+utmost in the service of ethics the popular dogmas of the perfection of
+the gods, while disregarding all irrelevant tales, all myths and all
+notions of too human a tenor about them. This demanded concentration on
+the one thing needful, in conjunction with deep piety of the most genuine
+antique kind, with the most profound religious modesty, a combination
+which it was assuredly given to but one man to attain. Socrates’s
+successors had it not. Starting precisely from a Socratic foundation they
+entered upon theological speculations which carried them away from the
+Socratic point of view.
+
+For the Cynics, who set up virtue as the only good, the popular notions of
+the gods would seem to have been just as convenient as for Socrates. And
+we know that Antisthenes, the founder of the school, made ample use of
+them in his ethical teaching. He represented Heracles as the Cynical ideal
+and occupied himself largely with allegorical interpretation of the myths.
+On the other hand, there is a tradition that he maintained that “according
+to nature” there was only one god, but “according to the law” several—a
+purely sophistic view. He inveighed against the worship of images, too,
+and maintained that god “did not resemble any thing,” and we know that his
+school rejected all worship of the gods because the gods “were in need of
+nothing.” This conception, too, is presumably traceable to Antisthenes. In
+all this the theological interest is evident. As soon as this interest
+sets in, the harmonious relation to the popular faith is upset, the
+discord between its higher and lower ideas becomes manifest, and criticism
+begins to assert itself. In the case of Antisthenes, if we may believe
+tradition, it seems to have led to monotheism, in itself a most remarkable
+phenomenon in the history of Greek religion, but the material is too
+slight for us to make anything of it. The later Cynics afford interesting
+features in illustration of atheism in antiquity, but this is best left to
+a later chapter.
+
+About the relations of the Megarians to the popular faith we know next to
+nothing. One of them, Stilpo, was charged with impiety on account of a bad
+joke about Athene, and convicted, although he tried to save himself by
+another bad joke. As his point of view was that of a downright sceptic, he
+was no doubt an atheist according to the notions of antiquity; in our day
+he would be called an agnostic, but the information that we have about his
+religious standpoint is too slight to repay dwelling on him.
+
+As to the relation of the Cyrenaic school to the popular faith, the
+general proposition has been handed down to us that the wise man could not
+be “deisidaimon,” _i.e._ superstitious or god-fearing; the Greek word can
+have both senses. This does not speak for piety at any rate, but then the
+relationship of the Cyrenaics to the gods of popular belief was different
+from that of the other followers of Socrates. As they set up pleasure—the
+momentary, isolated feeling of pleasure—as the supreme good, they had no
+use for the popular conceptions of the gods in their ethics, nay, these
+conceptions were even a hindrance to them in so far as the fear of the
+gods might prove a restriction where it ought not to. In these
+circumstances we cannot wonder at finding a member of the school in the
+list of _atheoi_. This is Theodorus of Cyrene, who lived about the year
+300. He really seems to have been a downright denier of the gods; he wrote
+a work _On the Gods_ containing a searching criticism of theology, which
+is said to have exposed him to unpleasantness during a stay at Athens, but
+the then ruler of the city, Demetrius of Phalerum, protected him. There is
+nothing strange in a manifestation of downright atheism at this time and
+from this quarter. More remarkable is that interest in theology which we
+must assume Theodorus to have had, since he wrote at length upon the
+subject. Unfortunately it is not evident from the account whether his
+criticism was directed mostly against popular religion or against the
+theology of the philosophers. As it was asserted in antiquity that
+Epicurus used his book largely, the latter is more probable.
+
+Whereas in the case of the “imperfect Socratics” as well as of all the
+earlier philosophers we must content ourselves with more or less casual
+notes, and at the best with fragments, and for Socrates with second-hand
+information, when we come to Plato we find ourselves for the first time in
+the presence of full and authentic information. Plato belongs to those few
+among the ancient authors of whom everything that their contemporaries
+possessed has been preserved to our own day. There would, however, be no
+cause to speak about Plato in an investigation of atheism in antiquity,
+had not so eminent a scholar as Zeller roundly asserted that Plato did not
+believe in the Greek gods—with the exception of the heavenly bodies, in
+the case of which the facts are obvious. On the other hand, it is
+impossible here to enter upon a close discussion of so large a question; I
+must content myself with giving my views in their main lines, with a brief
+statement of my reasons for holding them.
+
+In the mythical portions of his dialogues Plato uses the gods as a given
+poetic motive and treats them with poetic licence. Otherwise they play a
+very inferior part in the greater portion of his works. In the
+_Euthyphron_ he gives a sharp criticism of the popular conception of
+piety, and in reality at the same time very seriously questions the
+importance and value of the existing form of worship. In his chief ethical
+work, the _Gorgias_, he subjects the fundamental problems of individual
+ethics to a close discussion without saying one word of their relation to
+religion; if we except the mythic part at the end the gods scarcely appear
+in the dialogue. Finally, in his _Republic_ he no doubt gives a detailed
+criticism of popular mythology as an element of education, and in the
+course of this also some positive definitions of the idea of God, but
+throughout the construction of his ideal community he entirely disregards
+religion and worship, even if he occasionally takes it for granted that a
+cult of some sort exists, and in one place quite casually refers to the
+Oracle at Delphi as authority for its organisation in details. To this may
+further be added the negative point that he never in any of his works made
+Socrates define his position in regard to the sophistic treatment of the
+popular religion.
+
+In Plato’s later works the case is different. In the construction of the
+universe described in the _Timaeus_ the gods have a definite and
+significant place, and in the _Laws_, Plato’s last work, they play a
+leading part. Here he not only gives elaborate rules for the organisation
+of the worship which permeate the whole life of the community, but even in
+the argument of the dialogue the gods are everywhere in evidence in a way
+which strongly suggests bigotry. Finally, Plato gives the above-mentioned
+definitions of impiety and fixes the severest punishment for it—for
+downright denial of the gods, when all attempts at conversion have failed,
+the penalty of death.
+
+On this evidence we are tempted to take the view that Plato in his earlier
+years took up a critical attitude in regard to the gods of popular belief,
+perhaps even denied them altogether, that he gradually grew more
+conservative, and ended by being a confirmed bigot. And we might look for
+a corroboration of this in a peculiar observation in the _Laws_. Plato
+opens his admonition to the young against atheism by reminding them that
+they are young, and that false opinion concerning the gods is a common
+disease among the young, but that utter denial of their existence is not
+wont to endure to old age. In this we might see an expression of personal
+religious experience.
+
+Nevertheless I do not think such a construction of Plato’s religious
+development feasible. A decisive objection is his exposition of the
+Socratic point of view in so early a work as the _Apology_. I at any rate
+regard it as psychologically impossible that a downright atheist, be he
+ever so great a poet, should be able to draw such a picture of a deeply
+religious personality, and draw it with so much sympathy and such
+convincing force. Add to this other facts of secondary moment. Even the
+close criticism to which Plato subjects the popular notions of the gods in
+his _Republic_ does not indicate denial of the gods as such; moreover, it
+is built on a positive foundation, on the idea of the goodness of the gods
+and their truth (which for Plato manifests itself in immutability).
+Finally, Plato at all times vigorously advocated the belief in providence.
+In the _Laws_ he stamps unbelief in divine providence as impiety; in the
+_Republic_ he insists in a prominent passage that the gods love the just
+man and order everything for him in the best way. And he puts the same
+thought into Socrates’s mouth in the _Apology_, though it is hardly
+Socratic in the strict sense of the word, _i.e._ as a main point in
+Socrates’s conception of existence. All this should warn us not to
+exaggerate the significance of the difference which may be pointed out
+between the religious standpoints of the younger and the older Plato. But
+the difference itself cannot, I think, be denied; there can hardly be any
+doubt that Plato was much more critical of popular belief in his youth and
+prime than towards the close of his life.
+
+Even in Plato’s later works there is, in spite of their conservative
+attitude, a very peculiar reservation in regard to the anthropomorphic
+gods of popular belief. It shows itself in the _Laws_ in the fact that
+where he sets out to _prove_ the existence of the gods he contents himself
+with proving the divinity of the heavenly bodies and quite disregards the
+other gods. It appears still more plainly in the _Timaeus_, where he gives
+a philosophical explanation of how the divine heavenly bodies came into
+existence, but says expressly of the other gods that such an explanation
+is impossible, and that we must abide by what the old theologians said on
+this subject; they being partly the children of gods would know best where
+their parents came from. It is observations of this kind that induced
+Zeller to believe that Plato altogether denied the gods of popular belief;
+he also contends that the gods have no place in Plato’s system. This
+latter contention is perfectly correct; Plato never identified the gods
+with the ideas (although he comes very near to it in the _Republic_, where
+he attributes to them immutability, the quality which determines the
+essence of the ideas), and in the _Timaeus_ he distinguishes sharply
+between them. No doubt his doctrine of ideas led up to a kind of divinity,
+the idea of the good, as the crown of the system, but the direct inference
+from this conception would be pure monotheism and so exclude polytheism.
+This inference Plato did not draw, though his treatment of the gods in the
+_Laws_ and _Timaeus_ certainly shows that he was quite clear that the gods
+of the popular faith were an irrational element in his conception of the
+universe. The two passages do not entitle us to go further and conclude
+that he utterly rejected them, and in the _Timaeus_, where Plato makes
+both classes of gods, both the heavenly bodies and the others, take part
+in the creation of man, this is plainly precluded. The playful turn with
+which he evades inquiry into the origin of the gods thus receives its
+proper limitation; it is entirely confined to their origin.
+
+Such, according to my view, is the state of the case. It is of fundamental
+importance to emphasise the fact that we cannot conclude, because the gods
+of popular belief do not fit into the system of a philosopher, that he
+denies their existence. In what follows we shall have occasion to point
+out a case in which, as all are now agreed, a philosophical school has
+adopted and stubbornly held to the belief in the existence of gods though
+this assumption was directly opposed to a fundamental proposition in its
+system of doctrine. The case of Plato is particularly interesting because
+he himself was aware and has pointed out that here was a point on which
+the consistent scientific application of his conception of the universe
+must fail. It is the outcome—one of many—of what is perhaps his finest
+quality as a philosopher, namely, his intellectual honesty.
+
+An indirect testimony to the correctness of the view here stated will be
+found in the way in which Plato’s faithful disciple Xenocrates developed
+his theology, for it shows that Xenocrates presupposed the existence of
+the gods of popular belief as given by Plato. Xenocrates made it his
+general task to systematise Plato’s philosophy (which had never been set
+forth publicly by himself as a whole), and to secure it against attack. In
+the course of this work he was bound to discover that the conception of
+the gods of popular belief was a particularly weak point in Plato’s
+system, and he attempted to mend matters by a peculiar theory which became
+of the greatest importance for later times. Xenocrates set up as gods, in
+the first place, the heavenly bodies. Next he gave his highest principles
+(pure abstracts such as oneness and twoness) and the elements of his
+universe (air, water and earth) the names of some of the highest
+divinities in popular belief (Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Demeter). These gods,
+however, did not enter into direct communication with men, but only
+through some intermediate agent. The intermediate agents were the
+“demons,” a class of beings who were higher than man yet not perfect like
+the gods. They were, it seems, immortal; they were invisible and far more
+powerful than human beings; but they were subject to human passions and
+were of highly differing grades of moral perfection. These are the beings
+that are the objects of the greater part of the existing cult, especially
+such usages as rest on the assumption that the gods can do harm and are
+directed towards averting it, or which are in other ways objectionable;
+and with them are connected the myths which Plato subjected to so severe a
+criticism. Xenocrates found a basis for this system in Plato, who in the
+_Symposium_ sets up the demons as a class of beings between gods and men,
+and makes them carriers of the prayers and wishes of men to the gods. But
+what was a passing thought with Plato serving only a poetical purpose was
+taken seriously and systematised by Xenocrates.
+
+It can hardly be said that Xenocrates has gained much recognition among
+modern writers on the history of philosophy for his theory of demons. And
+yet I cannot see that there was any other possible solution of the problem
+which ancient popular belief set ancient philosophy, if, be it understood,
+we hold fast by two hypotheses: the first, that the popular belief and
+worship of the ancients was based throughout on a foundation of reality;
+and second, that moral perfection is an essential factor in the conception
+of God. The only inconsistency which we may perhaps bring home to
+Xenocrates is that he retained certain of the popular names of the gods as
+designations for gods in his sense; but this inconsistency was, as we
+shall see, subsequently removed. In favour of this estimate of
+Xenocrates’s doctrine of demons may further be adduced that it actually
+was the last word of ancient philosophy on the matter. The doctrine was
+adopted by the Stoics, the Neo-Pythagoreans, and the Neo-Platonists. Only
+the Epicureans went another way, but their doctrine died out before the
+close of antiquity. And so the doctrine of demons became the ground on
+which Jewish-Christian monotheism managed to come to terms with ancient
+paganism, to conquer it in theory, as it were.
+
+This implies, however, that the doctrine of demons, though it arose out of
+an honest attempt to save popular belief philosophically, in reality
+brings out its incompatibility with philosophy. The religion and worship
+of the ancients could dispense with neither the higher nor the lower
+conceptions of its gods. If the former were done away with, recognition,
+however full, of the existence of the gods was no good; in the long run
+the inference could not be avoided that they were immoral powers and so
+ought not to be worshipped. This was the inference drawn by Christianity
+in theory and enforced in practice, ultimately by main force.
+
+Aristotle is among the philosophers who were prosecuted for impiety. When
+the anti-Macedonian party came into power in Athens after the death of
+Alexander, there broke out a persecution against his adherents, and this
+was also directed against Aristotle. The basis of the charge against him
+was that he had shown divine honour after his death to the tyrant Hermias,
+whose guest he had been during a prolonged stay in Asia Minor. This seems
+to have been a fabrication, and at any rate has nothing to do with
+atheism. In the writings of Aristotle, as they were then generally known,
+it would assuredly have been impossible to find any ground for a charge of
+atheism.
+
+Nevertheless, Aristotle is one of the philosophers about whose faith in
+the gods of popular religion well-founded doubts may be raised. Like
+Plato, he acknowledged the divinity of the heavenly bodies on the ground
+that they must have a soul since they had independent motion. Further, he
+has a kind of supreme god who, himself unmoved, is the cause of all
+movement, and whose constituent quality is reason. As regards the gods of
+popular belief, in his _Ethics_ and his _Politics_ he assumes public
+worship to be a necessary constituent of the life of the individual and
+the community. He gave no grounds for this assumption—on the contrary, he
+expressly declared that it was a question which ought not to be discussed
+at all: he who stirs up doubts whether honour should be paid to the gods
+is in need not of teaching but of punishment. (That he himself took part
+in worship is evident from his will.) Further, in his ethical works he
+used the conceptions of the gods almost in the same way as we have assumed
+that Socrates did, _i.e._ as the ethical ideal and determining the limits
+of the human. He never entered upon any elaborate criticism of the lower
+elements of popular religion such as Plato gave. So far everything is in
+admirable order. But if we look more closely at things there is
+nevertheless nearly always a little “but” in Aristotle’s utterances about
+the gods. Where he operates with popular notions he prefers to speak
+hypothetically or to refer to what is generally assumed; or he is content
+to use only definitions which will also agree with his own philosophical
+conception of God. But he goes further; in a few places in his writings
+there are utterances which it seems can only be interpreted as a radical
+denial of the popular religion. The most important of them deserves to be
+quoted _in extenso_:
+
+
+    “A tradition has been handed down from the ancients and from the
+    most primitive times, and left to later ages in the form of myth,
+    that these substances (_i.e._ sky and heavenly bodies) are gods
+    and that the divine embraces all nature. The rest consists in
+    legendary additions intended to impress the multitude and serve
+    the purposes of legislation and the common weal; for these gods
+    are said to have human shape or resemble certain other beings
+    (animals), and they say other things which follow from this and
+    are of a similar kind to those already mentioned. But if we
+    disregard all this and restrict ourselves to the first point, that
+    they thought that the first substances were gods, we must
+    acknowledge that it is a divinely inspired saying. And as, in all
+    probability, every art and science has been discovered many times,
+    as far as it is possible, and has perished again, so these
+    notions, too, may have been preserved till now as relics of those
+    times. To this extent only can we have any idea of the opinion
+    which was held by our fathers and has come down from the beginning
+    of things.”
+
+
+The last sentences, expressing Aristotle’s idea of a life-cycle and
+periods of civilisation which repeat themselves, have only been included
+in the quotation for the sake of completeness. If we disregard them, the
+passage plainly enough states the view that the only element of truth in
+the traditional notions about the gods was the divinity of the sky and the
+heavenly bodies; the rest is myth. Aristotle has nowhere else expressed
+himself with such distinctness and in such length, but then the passage in
+question has a place of its own. It comes in his _Metaphysics_ directly
+after the exposition of his philosophical conception of God—a position
+marked by profound earnestness and as it were irradiated by a quiet inner
+fervour. We feel that we are here approaching the _sanctum sanctorum_ of
+the thinker. In this connexion, and only here, he wished for once to state
+his opinion about the religion of his time without reserve. What he says
+here is a precise formulation of the result arrived at by the best Greek
+thinkers as regards the religion of the Greek people. It was not, they
+thought, pure fabrication. It contained an element of truth of the
+greatest value. But most of it consisted of human inventions without any
+reality behind them.
+
+A point of view like that of Aristotle would, I suppose, hardly have been
+called atheism among the ancients, if only because the heavenly bodies
+were acknowledged as divine. But according to our definition it is
+atheism. The “sky”-gods of Aristotle have nothing in common with the gods
+of popular belief, not even their names, for Aristotle never names them.
+And the rest, the whole crowd of Greek anthropomorphic gods, exist only in
+the human imagination.
+
+Aristotle’s successors offer little of interest to our inquiry.
+Theophrastus was charged with impiety, but the charge broke down
+completely. His theological standpoint was certainly the same as
+Aristotle’s. Of Strato, the most independent of the Peripatetics, we know
+that in his view of nature he laid greater stress on the material causes
+than Aristotle did, and so arrived at a different conception of the
+supreme deity. Aristotle had severed the deity from Nature and placed it
+outside the latter as an incorporeal being whose chief determining factor
+was reason. In Strato’s view the deity was identical with Nature and, like
+the latter, was without consciousness; consciousness was only found in
+organic nature. Consequently we cannot suppose him to have believed in the
+divinity of the heavenly bodies in Aristotle’s sense, though no direct
+statement on this subject has come down to us. About his attitude towards
+popular belief we hear nothing. A denial of the popular gods is not
+necessarily implied in Strato’s theory, but seems reasonable in itself and
+is further rendered probable by the fact that all writers seem to take it
+for granted that Strato knew no god other than the whole of Nature.
+
+We designated Socratic philosophy, in its relation to popular belief, as a
+reaction against the radical free-thought of the sophistic movement. It
+may seem peculiar that with Aristotle it develops into a view which we can
+only describe as atheism. There is, however, an important difference
+between the standpoints of the sophists and of Aristotle. Radical as the
+latter is at bottom, it is not, however, openly opposed to popular
+belief—on the contrary, to any one who did not examine it more closely it
+must have had the appearance of accepting popular belief. The very
+assumption that the heavenly bodies were divine would contribute to that
+effect; this, as we have seen, was a point on which the popular view laid
+great stress. If we add to this that Aristotle never made the existence of
+the popular gods matter of debate; that he expressly acknowledged the
+established worship; and that he consistently made use of certain
+fundamental notions of popular belief in his philosophy—we can hardly
+avoid the conclusion that, notwithstanding his personal emancipation from
+the existing religion, he is a true representative of the Socratic
+reaction against sophistic. But we see, too, that there is a reservation
+in this reaction. In continuity with earlier Greek thought on religion, it
+proceeded from the absolute definitions of the divine offered by popular
+belief, but when criticising anthropomorphism on this basis it did not
+after all avoid falling out with popular belief. How far each philosopher
+went in his antagonism was a matter of discretion, as also was the means
+chosen to reconcile the philosophical with the popular view. The theology
+of the Socratic schools thus suffered from a certain half-heartedness; in
+the main it has the character of a compromise. It would not give up the
+popular notions of the gods, and yet they were continually getting in the
+way. This dualism governs the whole of the succeeding Greek philosophy.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+
+During the three or four centuries which passed between the downfall of
+free Hellas and the beginning of the Roman Empire, great social and
+political changes took place in the ancient world, involving also vital
+changes in religion. The chief phenomenon in this field, the invasion of
+foreign, especially oriental, religions into Hellas, does not come within
+the scope of this investigation. On the one hand, it is an expression of
+dissatisfaction with the old gods; on the other, the intrusion of new gods
+would contribute to the ousting of the old ones. There is no question of
+atheism here; it is only a change within polytheism. But apart from this
+change there is evidence that the old faith had lost its hold on men’s
+minds to no inconsiderable extent. Here, too, there is hardly any question
+of atheism properly speaking, but as a background to the—not very
+numerous—evidences of such atheism in our period, we cannot well ignore
+the decline of the popular faith. Our investigation is rendered difficult
+on this point, and generally within this period, by the lack of direct
+evidence. Of the rich Hellenistic literature almost everything has been
+lost, and we are restricted to reports and fragments.
+
+In order to gain a concrete starting-point we will begin with a quotation
+from the historian Polybius—so to speak the only Greek prose author of the
+earlier Hellenistic period of whose works considerable and connected
+portions are preserved. Polybius wrote in the latter half of the second
+century a history of the world in which Rome took the dominant place. Here
+he gave, among other things, a detailed description of the Roman
+constitution and thus came to touch upon the state of religion in Rome as
+compared with that in Greece. He says on this subject:
+
+“The greatest advantage of the Roman constitution seems to me to lie in
+its conception of the gods, and I believe that what among other peoples is
+despised is what holds together the Roman power—I mean superstition. For
+this feature has by them been developed so far in the direction of the
+‘horrible,’ and has so permeated both private and public life, that it is
+quite unique. Many will perhaps find this strange, but I think they have
+acted so with an eye to the mass of the people. For if it were possible to
+compose a state of reasonable people such a procedure would no doubt be
+unnecessary, but as every people regarded as a mass is easily impressed
+and full of criminal instincts, unreasonable violence, and fierce passion,
+there is nothing to be done but to keep the masses under by vague fears
+and such-like hocus-pocus. Therefore it is my opinion that it was not
+without good reason or by mere chance that the ancients imparted to the
+masses the notions of the gods and the underworld, but rather is it
+thoughtless and irrational when nowadays we seek to destroy them.”
+
+As a proof of this last statement follows a comparison between the state
+of public morals in Greece and in Rome. In Greece you cannot trust a man
+with a few hundred pounds without ten notaries and as many seals and
+double the number of witnesses; in Rome great public treasure is
+administered with honesty merely under the safeguard of an oath.
+
+As we see, this passage contains direct evidence that in the second
+century in Hellas—in contradistinction to Rome—there was an attempt to
+break down the belief in the gods. By his “we” Polybius evidently referred
+especially to the leading political circles. He knew these circles from
+personal experience, and his testimony has all the more weight because he
+does not come forward in the rôle of the orthodox man complaining in the
+usual way of the impiety of his contemporaries; on the contrary, he speaks
+as the educated and enlightened man to whom it is a matter of course that
+all this talk about the gods and the underworld is a myth which nobody
+among the better classes takes seriously. This is a tone we have not heard
+before, and it is a strong indirect testimony to the fact that Polybius is
+not wrong when he speaks of disbelief among the upper classes of Greece.
+
+In this connexion the work of Polybius has a certain interest on another
+point. Where earlier—and later—authors would speak of the intervention of
+the gods in the march of history, he operates as a rule with an idea which
+he calls Tyche. The word is untranslatable when used in this way. It is
+something between chance, fortune and fate. It is more comprehensive and
+more personal than chance; it has not the immutable, the “lawbound”
+character of fate; rather it denotes the incalculability, the
+capriciousness associated, especially in earlier usage, with the word
+fortune, but without the tendency of this word to be used in a good sense.
+
+This Tyche-religion—if we may use this expression—was not new in Hellas.
+Quite early we find Tyche worshipped as a goddess among the other deities,
+and it is an old notion that the gods send good fortune, a notion which
+set its mark on a series of established phrases in private and public
+life. But what is of interest here is that shifting of religious ideas in
+the course of which Tyche drives the gods into the background. We find
+indications of it as early as Thucydides. In his view of history he lays
+the main stress, certainly, on human initiative, and not least on rational
+calculation, as the cause of events. But where he is obliged to reckon
+with an element independent of human efforts, he calls it Tyche and not
+“the immortal gods.” A somewhat similar view we find in another great
+political author of the stage of transition to our period, namely,
+Demosthenes. Demosthenes of course employs the official apparatus of gods:
+he invokes them on solemn occasions; he quotes their authority in support
+of his assertions (once he even reported a revelation which he had in a
+dream); he calls his opponents enemies of the gods, etc. But in his
+political considerations the gods play a negligible part. The factors with
+which he reckons as a rule are merely political forces. Where he is
+compelled to bring forward elements which man cannot control, he shows a
+preference for Tyche. He certainly occasionally identifies her with the
+favour of the gods, but in such a way as to give the impression that it is
+only a _façon de parler_. Direct pronouncements of a free-thinking kind
+one would not expect from an orator and statesman, and yet Demosthenes was
+once bold enough to say that Pythia, the mouthpiece of the Delphic Oracle,
+was a partisan of Macedonia, an utterance which his opponent Aeschines,
+who liked to parade his orthodoxy, did not omit to cast in his teeth. On
+the whole, Aeschines liked to represent Demosthenes as a godless fellow,
+and it is not perhaps without significance that the latter never directly
+replied to such attacks, or indirectly did anything to impair their force.
+
+During the violent revolutions that took place in Hellas under Alexander
+the Great and his successors, and the instability of social and political
+conditions consequent thereon, the Tyche-religion received a fresh
+impetus. With one stroke Hellas was flung into world politics. Everything
+grew to colossal proportions in comparison with earlier conditions. The
+small Hellenic city-states that had hitherto been each for itself a world
+shrank into nothing. It is as if the old gods could not keep pace with
+this violent process of expansion. Men felt a craving for a wider and more
+comprehensive religious concept to answer to the changed conditions, and
+such an idea was found in the idea of Tyche. Thoughtful men, such as
+Demetrius of Phalerum, wrote whole books about it; states built temples to
+Tyche; in private religion also it played a great part. No one reflected
+much on the relation of Tyche to the old gods. It must be remembered that
+Tyche is a real layman’s notion, and that Hellenistic philosophy regarded
+it as its task precisely to render man independent of the whims of fate.
+Sometimes, however, we find a positive statement of the view that Tyche
+ruled over the gods also. It is characteristic of the state of affairs;
+men did not want to relinquish the old gods, but could not any longer
+allow them the leading place.
+
+If we return for a moment to Polybius, we shall find that his conception
+of Tyche strikingly illustrates the distance between him and Thucydides.
+In the introduction to his work, on its first page, he points out that the
+universally acknowledged task of historical writing is partly to educate
+people for political activities, partly to teach them to bear the
+vicissitudes of fortune with fortitude by reminding them of the lot of
+others. And subsequently, when he passes on to his main theme, the
+foundation of the Roman world-empire, after having explained the plan of
+his work, he says: “So far then our plan. But the _co-operation of
+fortune_ is still needed if my life is to be long enough for me to
+accomplish my purpose.” An earlier—or a later—author would here either
+have left the higher powers out of the game altogether or would have used
+an expression showing more submission to the gods of the popular faith.
+
+In a later author, Pliny the Elder, we again find a characteristic
+utterance throwing light upon the significance of the Tyche-religion.
+After a very free-thinking survey of the popular notions regarding the
+gods, Pliny says: “As an intermediate position between these two views
+(that there is a divine providence and that there is none) men have
+themselves invented another divine power, in order that speculation about
+the deity might become still more uncertain. Throughout the world, in
+every place, at every hour of the day, Fortune alone is invoked and named
+by every mouth; she alone is accused, she bears the guilt of everything;
+of her only do we think, to her is all praise, to her all blame. And she
+is worshipped with railing words—she is deemed inconstant, by many even
+blind; she is fickle, unstable, uncertain, changeable; giving her favours
+to the unworthy. To her is imputed every loss, every gain; in all the
+accounts of life she alone fills up both the debit and the credit side,
+and we are so subject to chance that Chance itself becomes our god, and
+again proves the incertitude of the deity.” Even if a great deal of this
+may be put down to rhetoric, by which Pliny was easily carried away, the
+solid fact itself remains that he felt justified in speaking as if Dame
+Fortune had dethroned all the old gods.
+
+That this view of life must have persisted very tenaciously even down to a
+time when a strong reaction in the direction of positive religious feeling
+had set in, is proved by the romances of the time. The novels of the
+ancients were in general poor productions. Most of them are made after the
+recipe of a little misfortune in each chapter and great happiness in the
+last. The two lovers meet, fall in love, part, and suffer a series of
+troubles individually until they are finally united. The power that
+governs their fates and shapes everything according to this pattern is
+regularly Tyche, never the gods. The testimony of the novels is of special
+significance because they were read by the general mass of the educated
+classes, not by the select who had philosophy to guide them.
+
+Another testimony to the weakening of popular faith in the Hellenistic age
+is the decay of the institution of the Oracle. This, also, is of early
+date; as early as the fifth and fourth century we hear much less of the
+interference of the oracles in political matters than in earlier times.
+The most important of them all, the Delphic Oracle, was dealt a terrible
+blow in the Holy War (356-346 B.C.), when the Phocians seized it and used
+the treasures which had been accumulated in it during centuries to hire
+mercenaries and carry on war. Such proceedings would assuredly have been
+impossible a century earlier; no soldiers could have been hired with money
+acquired in such a way, or, if they could have been procured, all Hellas
+would have risen in arms against the robbers of the Temple, whereas in the
+Holy War most of the states were indifferent, and several even sided with
+the Phocians. In the succeeding years, after Philip of Macedonia had put
+an end to the Phocian scandal, the Oracle was in reality in his hands—it
+was during this period that Demosthenes stigmatised it as the mouthpiece
+of Philip. In the succeeding centuries, too, it was dependent on the
+various rulers of Hellas and undoubtedly lost all public authority. During
+this period we hear very little of the oracles of Hellas until the time
+before and after the birth of Christ provides us with definite evidence of
+their complete decay.
+
+Thus Strabo, who wrote during the reign of Augustus, says that the
+ancients attached more importance to divination generally and oracles more
+particularly, whereas people in his day were quite indifferent to these
+things. He gives as the reason that the Romans were content to use the
+Sibylline books and their own system of divination. His remark is made _a
+propos_ of the Oracle in Libya, which was formerly in great repute, but
+was almost extinct in his time. He is undoubtedly correct as to the fact,
+but the decline of the oracular system cannot be explained by the
+indifference of the Romans. Plutarch, in a monograph on the discontinuance
+of the oracles, furnishes us with more detailed information. From this it
+appears that not only the Oracle of Ammon but also the numerous oracles of
+Boeotia had ceased to exist, with one exception, while even for the Oracle
+at Delphi, which had formerly employed three priestesses, a single one
+amply sufficed. We also note the remark that the questions submitted to
+the Oracle were mostly unworthy or of no importance.
+
+The want of consideration sometimes shown to sacred places and things
+during the wars of the Hellenistic period may no doubt also be regarded as
+the result of a weakening of interest in the old gods. We have detailed
+information on this point from the war between Philip of Macedonia and the
+Aetolians in 220-217 B.C. The Aetolians began by destroying the temples at
+Dium and Dodona, whereupon Philip retaliated by totally wrecking the
+federal sanctuary of the Aetolians at Thermon. Of Philip’s admiral
+Dicaearchus we are told by Polybius that wherever he landed he erected
+altars to “godlessness and lawlessness” and offered up sacrifice on them.
+Judging by the way he was hated, his practice must have answered to his
+theory.
+
+One more phenomenon must be mentioned in this context, though it falls
+outside the limits within which we have hitherto moved, and though its
+connexion with free-thought and religious enlightenment will no doubt, on
+closer examination, prove disputable. This is the decay of the established
+worship of the Roman State in the later years of the Republic.
+
+In the preceding pages there has been no occasion to include conditions in
+Rome in our investigation, simply because nothing has come down to us
+about atheism in the earlier days of Rome, and we may presume that it did
+not exist. Of any religious thought at Rome corresponding to that of the
+Greeks we hear nothing, nor did the Romans produce any philosophy.
+Whatever knowledge of philosophy there was at Rome was simply borrowed
+from the Greeks. The Greek influence was not seriously felt until the
+second century B.C., even though as early as about the middle of the third
+century the Romans, through the performance of plays translated from the
+Greek, made acquaintance with Greek dramatic poetry and the religious
+thought contained therein. Neither the latter, nor the heresies of the
+philosophers, seem to have made any deep impression upon them. Ennius,
+their most important poet of the second century, was no doubt strongly
+influenced by Greek free-thinking, but this was evidently an isolated
+phenomenon. Also, by birth Ennius was not a native of Rome but half a
+Greek. The testimony of Polybius (from the close of the second century) to
+Roman religious conservatism is emphatic enough. Its causes are doubtless
+of a complex nature, but as one of them the peculiar character of the
+Roman religion itself stands out prominently. However much it resembled
+Greek religion in externals—a resemblance which was strengthened by
+numerous loans both of religious rites and of deities—it is decidedly
+distinct from it in being restricted still more to cultus and, above all,
+in being entirely devoid of mythology. The Roman gods were powers about
+the rites of whose worship the most accurate details were known or could
+be ascertained if need were, but they had little personality, and about
+their personal relations people knew little and cared less. This was,
+aesthetically, a great defect. The Roman gods afforded no good theme for
+poetry and art, and when they were to be used as such they were invariably
+replaced by loans from the Greeks. But, as in the face of Greek
+free-thought and Greek criticism of religion, they had the advantage that
+the vital point for attack was lacking. All the objectionable tales of the
+exploits of the gods and the associated ideas about their nature which had
+prompted the Greek attack on the popular faith simply did not exist in
+Roman religion. On the other hand, its rites were in many points more
+primitive than the Greek ones, but Greek philosophy had been very reserved
+in its criticism of ritual. We may thus no doubt take it for granted,
+though we have no direct evidence to that effect, that even Romans with a
+Greek education long regarded the Greek criticism of religion as something
+foreign which was none of their concern.
+
+That a time came when all this was changed; that towards the end of the
+Republic great scepticism concerning the established religion of Rome was
+found among the upper classes, is beyond doubt, and we shall subsequently
+find occasion to consider this more closely. In this connexion another
+circumstance demands attention, one which, moreover, has by some been
+associated with Greek influence among the upper classes, namely, the decay
+of the established worship of the Roman State during the last years of the
+Republic. Of the actual facts there can hardly be any doubt, though we
+know very little about them. The decisive symptoms are: that Augustus,
+after having taken over the government, had to repair some eighty
+dilapidated temples in Rome and reinstitute a series of religious rites
+and priesthoods which had ceased to function. Among them was one of the
+most important, that of the priest of Jupiter, an office which had been
+vacant for more than seventy-five years (87-11 B.C.), because it excluded
+the holder from a political career. Further, that complaints were made of
+private persons encroaching on places that were reserved for religious
+worship; and that Varro, when writing his great work on the Roman
+religion, in many cases was unable to discover what god was the object of
+an existing cult; and generally, according to his own statement he wrote
+his work, among other things, in order to save great portions of the old
+Roman religion from falling into utter oblivion on account of the
+indifference of the Romans themselves. It is obvious that such a state of
+affairs would have been impossible in a community where the traditional
+religion was a living power, not only formally acknowledged by everybody,
+but felt to be a necessary of life, the spiritual daily bread, as it were,
+of the nation.
+
+To hold, however, that the main cause of the decay of the established
+religion of Rome was the invasion of Greek culture, together with the fact
+that the members of the Roman aristocracy, from whom the priests were
+recruited and who superintended the cult, had become indifferent to the
+traditional religion through this influence, this, I think, is to go
+altogether astray. We may take it for granted that the governing classes
+in Rome would not have ventured to let the cult decay if there had been
+any serious interest in it among the masses of the population; and it is
+equally certain that Greek philosophy and religious criticism did not
+penetrate to these masses. When they became indifferent to the national
+religion, this was due to causes that had nothing to do with free-thought.
+The old Roman religion was adapted for a small, narrow and homogeneous
+community whose main constituent and real core consisted of the farmers,
+large and small, and minor artisans. In the last centuries of the Republic
+the social development had occasioned the complete decay of the Roman
+peasantry, and the free artisans had fared little better. In the place of
+the old Rome had arisen the capital of an empire, inhabited by a
+population of a million and of extraordinarily mixed composition. Not only
+did this population comprise a number of immigrant foreigners, but, in
+consequence of the peculiar Roman rule that every slave on being set free
+attained citizenship, a large percentage of the citizens must of necessity
+have been of foreign origin. Only certain portions of the Roman religion,
+more especially the cult of the great central deities of the State
+religion, can have kept pace with these changed conditions; the remainder
+had in reality lost all hold on Roman society as it had developed in
+process of time, and was only kept alive by force of habit. To this must
+be added the peculiar Roman mixture of mobility and conservatism in
+religious matters. The Roman superstition and uncertainty in regard to the
+gods led on the one hand to a continual setting up of new cults and new
+sanctuaries, and on the other hand to a fear of letting any of the old
+cults die out. In consequence thereof a great deal of dead and worthless
+ritual material must have accumulated in Rome in the course of centuries,
+and was of course in the way during the rapid development of the city in
+the last century of the Republic. Things must gradually have come to such
+a pass that a thorough reform, above all a reduction, of the whole cult
+had become a necessity. To introduce such a reform the republican
+government was just as unsuited as it was to carry out all the other tasks
+imposed by the development of the empire and the capital at that time. On
+this point, however, it must not be forgotten that the governing class not
+only lacked ability, for political reasons, to carry out serious reforms,
+but also the will to do so, on account of religious indifference, and so
+let things go altogether to the bad. The consequence was anarchy, in this
+as in all other spheres at that time; but at the same time the tendency
+towards the only sensible issue, a restriction of the old Roman
+State-cult, is plainly evident. The simultaneous strong infusion of
+foreign religions was unavoidable in the mixed population of the capital.
+That these influences also affected the lower classes of the citizens is
+at any rate a proof that they were not indifferent to religion.
+
+In its main outlines this is all the information that I have been able to
+glean about the general decline of the belief in the gods during the
+Hellenistic period. Judging from such information we should expect to find
+strong tendencies to atheism in the philosophy of the period. These
+anticipations are, however, doomed to disappointment. The ruling
+philosophical schools on the whole preserved a friendly attitude towards
+the gods of the popular faith and especially towards their worship,
+although they only accepted the existing religion with strict reservation.
+
+Most characteristic but least consistent and original was the attitude of
+the Stoic school. The Stoics were pantheists. Their deity was a substance
+which they designated as fire, but which, it must be admitted, differed
+greatly from fire as an element. It permeated the entire world. It had
+produced the world out of itself, and it absorbed it again, and this
+process was repeated to eternity. The divine fire was also reason, and as
+such the cause of the harmony of the world-order. What of conscious reason
+was found in the world was part of the divine reason.
+
+Though in this scheme of things there was in the abstract plenty of room
+for the gods of popular belief, nevertheless the Stoics did not in reality
+acknowledge them. In principle their standpoint was the same as
+Aristotle’s. They supposed the heavenly bodies to be divine, but all the
+rest, namely, the anthropomorphic gods, were nothing to them.
+
+In their explanation of the origin of the gods they went beyond Aristotle,
+but their doctrine was not always the same on this point. The earlier
+Stoics regarded mythology and all theology as human inventions, but not
+arbitrary inventions. Mythology, they thought, should be understood
+allegorically; it was the naïve expression partly of a correct conception
+of Nature, partly of ethical and metaphysical truths. Strictly speaking,
+men had always been Stoics, though in an imperfect way. This point of view
+was elaborated in detail by the first Stoics, who took their stand partly
+on the earlier naturalism which had already broken the ground in this
+direction, and partly on sophistic, so that they even brought into vogue
+again the theory of Prodicus, that the gods were a hypostasis of the
+benefits of civilisation. Such a standpoint could not of course be
+maintained without arbitrariness and absurdities which exposed it to
+embarrassing criticism. This seems to have been the reason why the later
+Stoics, and especially Poseidonius, took another road. They adopted the
+doctrine of Xenocrates with regard to demons and developed it in fantastic
+forms. The earlier method was not, however, given up, and at the time of
+Cicero we find both views represented in the doctrine of the school.
+
+Such is the appearance of the theory. In both its forms it is evidently an
+attempt to meet popular belief half-way from a standpoint which is really
+beyond it. This tendency is seen even more plainly in the practice of the
+Stoics. They recognised public worship and insisted on its advantages; in
+their moral reflections they employed the gods as ideals in the Socratic
+manner, regardless of the fact that in their theory they did not really
+allow for gods who were ideal men; nay, they even went the length of
+giving to their philosophical deity, the “universal reason,” the name of
+Zeus by preference, though it had nothing but the name in common with the
+Olympian ruler of gods and men. This pervading ambiguity brought much
+well-deserved reproof on the Stoics even in ancient times; but, however
+unattractive it may seem to us, it is of significance as a manifestation
+of the great hold popular belief continued to have even on the minds of
+the upper classes, for it was to these that the Stoics appealed.
+
+Far more original and consistent is the Epicurean attitude towards the
+popular faith. Epicurus unreservedly acknowledged its foundation, _i.e._
+the existence of anthropomorphic beings of a higher order than man. His
+gods had human shape but they were eternal and blessed. In the latter
+definition was included, according to the ethical ideal of Epicurus, the
+idea that the gods were free from every care, including taking an interest
+in nature or in human affairs. They were entirely outside the world, a
+fact to which Epicurus gave expression by placing them in the empty spaces
+between the infinite number of spherical worlds which he assumed. There
+his gods lived in bliss like ideal Epicureans. Lucretius, the only poet of
+this school, extolled them in splendid verse whose motif he borrowed from
+Homer’s description of Olympus. In this way Epicurus also managed to
+uphold public worship itself. It could not, of course, have any practical
+aim, but it was justified as an expression of the respect man owed to
+beings whose existence expressed the human ideal.
+
+The reasons why Epicurus assumed this attitude towards popular belief are
+simple enough. He maintained that the evidence of sensual perception was
+the basis of all knowledge, and he thought that the senses (through
+dreams) gave evidence of the existence of the gods. And in the popular
+ideas of the bliss of the gods he found his ethical ideal directly
+confirmed. As regards their eternity the case was more difficult. The
+basis of his system was the theory that everything was made of atoms and
+that only the atoms as such, not the bodies composed of the atoms, were
+eternal. He conceived the gods, too, as made of atoms, nevertheless he
+held that they were eternal. Any rational explanation of this postulate is
+not possible on Epicurus’s hypotheses, and the criticism of his theology
+was therefore especially directed against this point.
+
+Epicurus was the Greek philosopher who most consistently took the course
+of emphasising the popular dogma of the perfection of the gods in order to
+preserve the popular notions about them. And he was the philosopher to
+whom this would seem the most obvious course, because his ethical
+ideal—quietism—agreed with the oldest popular ideal of divine existence.
+In this way Epicureanism became the most orthodox of all Greek
+philosophical schools. If nevertheless Epicurus did not escape the charge
+of atheism the sole reason is that his whole theology was denounced
+off-hand as hypocrisy. It was assumed to be set up by him only to shield
+himself against a charge of impiety, not to be his actual belief. This
+accusation is now universally acknowledged to be unjustified, and the
+Epicureans had no difficulty in rebutting it with interest. They took
+special delight in pointing out that the theology of the other schools was
+much more remote from popular belief than theirs, nay, in spite of
+recognition of the existing religion, was in truth fundamentally at
+variance with it. But in reality their own was in no better case: gods who
+did not trouble in the least about human affairs were beings for whom
+popular belief had no use. It made no difference that Epicurus’s
+definition of the nature of the gods was the direct outcome of a
+fundamental doctrine of popular belief. Popular religion will not tolerate
+pedantry.
+
+In this connexion we cannot well pass over a third philosophical school
+which played no inconspicuous rôle in the latter half of our period,
+namely, Scepticism. The Sceptic philosophy as such dates from Socrates,
+from whom the so-called Megarian school took its origin, but it did not
+reach its greatest importance until the second century, when the Academic
+school became Sceptic. It was especially the famous philosopher Carneades,
+a brilliant master of logic and dialectic, who made a success by his
+searching negative criticism of the doctrines of the other philosophical
+schools (the Dogmatics). For such criticism the theology of the
+philosophers was a grateful subject, and Carneades did not spare it. Here
+as in all the investigations of the Sceptics the theoretical result was
+that no scientific certainty could be attained: it was equally wrong to
+assert or to deny the existence of the gods. But in practice the attitude
+of the Sceptics was quite different. Just as they behaved like other
+people, acting upon their immediate impressions and experience, though
+they did not believe that anything could be scientifically proved, _e.g._
+not even the reality of the world of the senses, so also did they
+acknowledge the existing cult and lived generally like good heathens.
+Characteristic though Scepticism be of a period of Greek spiritual life in
+which Greek thought lost its belief in itself, it was, however, very far
+from supporting atheism. On the contrary, according to the correct Sceptic
+doctrine atheism was a dogmatic contention which theoretically was as
+objectionable as its antithesis, and in practice was to be utterly
+discountenanced.
+
+A more radical standpoint than this as regards the gods of the popular
+faith is not found during the Hellenistic period except among the less
+noted schools, and in the beginning of the period. We have already
+mentioned such thinkers as Strato, Theodorus, and Stilpo; chronologically
+they belong to the Hellenistic Age, but in virtue of their connexion with
+the Socratic philosophy they were dealt with in the last chapter. A
+definite polemical attitude towards the popular faith is also a
+characteristic of the Cynic school, hence, though our information is very
+meagre, we must speak of it a little more fully.
+
+The Cynics continued the tendency of Antisthenes, but the school
+comparatively soon lost its importance. After the third century we hear no
+more about the Cynics until they crop up again about the year A.D. 100.
+But in the fourth and third centuries the school had important
+representatives. The most famous is Diogenes; his life, to be sure, is
+entangled in such a web of legend that it is difficult to arrive at a true
+picture of his personality. Of his attitude towards popular belief we know
+one thing, that he did not take part in the worship of the gods. This was
+a general principle of the Cynics; their argument was that the gods were
+“in need of nothing” (cf. above, pp. 60 and 41). If we find him accused of
+atheism, in an anecdote of very doubtful value, it may, if there is
+anything in it, be due to his rejection of worship. Of one of his
+successors, however, Bion of Borysthenes, we have authentic information
+that he denied the existence of the gods, with the edifying legend
+attached that he was converted before his death. But we also hear of Bion
+that he was a disciple of the atheist Theodorus, and other facts go to
+suggest that Bion united Cynic and Hedonistic principles in his mode of
+life—a compromise that was not so unlikely as might be supposed. Bion’s
+attitude cannot therefore be taken as typical of Cynicism. Another Cynic
+of about the same period (the beginning of the third century) was Menippus
+of Gadara (in northern Palestine). He wrote tales and dialogues in a
+mixture of prose and verse. The contents were satirical, the satire being
+directed against the contemporary philosophers and their doctrines, and
+against the popular notions of the gods. Menippus availed himself partly
+of the old criticism of mythology and partly of the philosophical attacks
+on the popular conception of the gods. The only novelty was the facetious
+form in which he concealed the sting of serious criticism. It is
+impossible to decide whether he positively denied the existence of the
+gods, but his satire on the popular notions and its success among his
+contemporaries at least testifies to the weakening of the popular faith
+among the educated classes. In Hellas itself he seems to have gone out of
+fashion very early; but the Romans took him up again; Varro and Seneca
+imitated him, and Lucian made his name famous again in the Greek world in
+the second century after Christ. It is chiefly due to Lucian that we can
+form an idea of Menippus’s literary work, hence we shall return to Cynic
+satire in our chapter on the age of the Roman Empire.
+
+During our survey of Greek philosophical thought in the Hellenistic period
+we have only met with a few cases of atheism in the strict sense, and they
+all occur about and immediately after 300, though there does not seem to
+be any internal connexion between them. About the same time there appeared
+a writer, outside the circle of philosophers, who is regularly listed
+among the _atheoi_, and who has given a name to a peculiar theory about
+the origin of the idea of the gods, namely, Euhemerus. He is said to have
+travelled extensively in the service of King Cassander of Macedonia. At
+any rate he published his theological views in the shape of a book of
+travel which was, however, wholly fiction. He relates how he came to an
+island, Panchaia, in the Indian Ocean, and in a temple there found a
+lengthy inscription in which Uranos, Kronos, Zeus and other gods recorded
+their exploits. The substance of the tale was that these gods had once
+been men, great kings and rulers, who had bestowed on their peoples all
+sorts of improvements in civilisation and had thus got themselves
+worshipped as gods. It appears from the accounts that Euhemerus supposed
+the heavenly bodies to be real and eternal gods—he thought that Uranos had
+first taught men to worship them; further, as his theory is generally
+understood, it must be assumed that in his opinion the other gods had
+ceased to exist as such after their death. This accords with the fact that
+Euhemerus was generally characterised as an atheist.
+
+The theory that the gods were at first men was not originated by
+Euhemerus, though it takes its name (Euhemerism) from him. The theory had
+some support in the popular faith which recognised gods (Heracles,
+Asclepius) who had lived as men on earth; and the opinion which was
+fundamental to Greek religion, that the gods had _come into existence_,
+and had not existed from eternity, would favour this theory. Moreover,
+Euhemerus had had an immediate precursor in the slightly earlier Hecataeus
+of Abdera, who had set forth a similar theory, with the difference,
+however, that he took the view that all excellent men became real gods.
+But Euhemerus’s theory appeared just at the right moment and fell on
+fertile soil. Alexander the Great and his successors had adopted the
+Oriental policy by which the ruler was worshipped as a god, and were
+supported in this by a tendency which had already made itself felt
+occasionally among the Greeks in the East. Euhemerus only inverted
+matters—if the rulers were gods, it was an obvious inference that the gods
+were rulers. No wonder that his theory gained a large following. Its great
+influence is seen from numerous similar attempts in the Hellenistic world.
+At Rome, in the second century, Ennius translated his works into Latin,
+and as late as the time of Augustus an author such as Diodorus, in his
+popular history of the world, served up Euhemerism as the best scientific
+explanation of the origin of religion. It is characteristic, too, that
+both Jews and Christians, in their attacks on Paganism, reckoned with
+Euhemerism as a well-established theory. As every one knows, it has
+survived to our day; Carlyle, I suppose, being its last prominent
+exponent.
+
+It is characteristic of Euhemerism in its most radical form that it
+assumed that the gods of polytheism did not exist; so far it is atheism.
+But it is no less characteristic that it made the concession to popular
+belief that its gods had once existed. Hereby it takes its place, in spite
+of its greater radicalism, on the same plane with most other ancient
+theories about the origin of men’s notions about the gods. The gods of
+popular belief could not survive in the light of ancient thought, which in
+its essence was free-thought, not tied down by dogmas. But the
+philosophers of old could not but believe that a psychological fact of
+such enormous dimensions as ancient polytheism must have something
+answering to it in the objective world. Ancient philosophy never got clear
+of this dilemma; hence Plato’s open recognition of the absurdity; hence
+Aristotle’s delight at being able to meet the popular faith half-way in
+his assumption of the divinity of the heavenly bodies; hence Xenocrates’s
+demons, the allegories of the Stoics, the ideal Epicureans of Epicurus,
+Euhemerus’s early benefactors of mankind. And we may say that the more the
+Greeks got to know of the world about them the more they were confirmed in
+their view, for in the varied multiplicity of polytheism they found the
+same principle everywhere, the same belief in a multitude of beings of a
+higher order than man.
+
+Euhemerus’s theory is no doubt the last serious attempt in the old pagan
+world to give an explanation of the popular faith which may be called
+genuine atheism. We will not, however, leave the Hellenistic period
+without casting a glance at some personalities about whom we have
+information enough to form an idea at first hand of their religious
+standpoint, and whose attitude towards popular belief at any rate comes
+very near to atheism pure and simple.
+
+One of them is Polybius. In the above-cited passage referring to the
+decline of the popular faith in the Hellenistic period, Polybius also
+gives his own theory of the origin of men’s notions regarding the gods. It
+is not new. It is the theory known from the Critias fragment, what may be
+called the political theory. In the fragment it appears as atheism pure
+and simple, and it seems obvious to understand it in the same way in
+Polybius. That he shows a leaning towards Euhemerism in another passage
+where he speaks about the origin of religious ideas, is in itself not
+against this—the two theories are closely related and might very well be
+combined. But we have a series of passages in which Polybius expressed
+himself in a way that seems quite irreconcilable with a purely atheistic
+standpoint. He expressly acknowledged divination and worship as justified;
+in several places he refers to disasters that have befallen individuals or
+a whole people as being sent by the gods, or even as a punishment for
+impiety; and towards the close of his work he actually, in marked contrast
+to the tone of its beginning, offers up a prayer to the gods to grant him
+a happy ending to his long life. It would seem as if Polybius at a certain
+period of his life came under the influence of Stoicism and in consequence
+greatly modified his earlier views. That these were of an atheistic
+character seems, however, beyond doubt, and that is the decisive point in
+this connexion.
+
+Cicero’s philosophical standpoint was that of an Academic, _i.e._ a
+Sceptic. But—in accord, for the rest, with the doctrines of the school
+just at this period—he employed his liberty as a Sceptic to favour such
+philosophical doctrines as seemed to him more reasonable than others,
+regardless of the school from which they were derived. In his philosophy
+of religion he was more especially a Stoic. He himself expressly insisted
+on this point of view in the closing words of his work on the _Nature of
+the Gods_. As he was not, and made no pretence of being, a philosopher,
+his philosophical expositions have no importance for us; they are
+throughout second-hand, mostly mere translations from Greek sources. That
+we have employed them in the foregoing pages to throw light on the
+theology of the earlier, more especially the Hellenistic, philosophy, goes
+without saying. But his personal religious standpoint is not without
+interest.
+
+As orator and statesman Cicero took his stand wholly on the side of the
+established Roman religion, operating with the “immortal gods,” with
+Jupiter Optimus Maximus, etc., at his convenience. In his works on the
+_State_ and the _Laws_ he adheres decidedly to the established religion.
+But all this is mere politics. Personally Cicero had no religion other
+than philosophy. Philosophy was his consolation in adversity, or he
+attempted to make it so, for the result was often indifferent; and he
+looked to philosophy to guide him in ethical questions. We never find any
+indication in his writings that the gods of popular belief meant anything
+to him in these respects. And what is more—he assumed this off-hand to be
+the standpoint of everybody else, and evidently he was justified. A great
+number of letters from him to his circle, and not a few from his friends
+and acquaintances to him, have been preserved; and in his philosophical
+writings he often introduces contemporary Romans as characters in the
+dialogue. But in all this literature there is never the faintest
+indication that a Roman of the better class entertained, or could even be
+supposed to entertain, an orthodox view with regard to the State religion.
+To Cicero and his circle the popular faith did not exist as an element of
+their personal religion.
+
+Such a standpoint is of course, practically speaking, atheism, and in this
+sense atheism was widely spread among the higher classes of the
+Graeco-Roman society about the time of the birth of Christ. But from this
+to theoretical atheism there is still a good step. Cicero himself affords
+an amusing example of how easily people, who have apparently quite
+emancipated themselves from the official religion of their community, may
+backslide. When his beloved daughter Tullia died in the year 45 B.C., it
+became evident that Cicero, in the first violence of his grief, which was
+the more overwhelming because he was excluded from political activity
+during Cæsar’s dictatorship, could not console himself with philosophy
+alone. He wanted something more tangible to take hold on, and so he hit
+upon the idea of having Tullia exalted among the gods. He thought of
+building a temple and instituting a cult in her honour. He moved heaven
+and earth to arrange the matter, sought to buy ground in a prominent place
+in Rome, and was willing to make the greatest pecuniary sacrifices to get
+a conspicuous result. Nothing came of it all, however; Cicero’s friends,
+who were to help him to put the matter through, were perhaps hardly so
+eager as he; time assuaged his own grief, and finally he contented himself
+with publishing a consolatory epistle written by himself, or, correctly
+speaking, translated from a famous Greek work and adapted to the occasion.
+So far he ended where he should, _i.e._ in philosophy; but the little
+incident is significant, not least because it shows what practical ends
+Euhemerism could be brought to serve and how doubtful was its atheistic
+character after all. For not only was the contemplated apotheosis of
+Tullia in itself a Euhemeristic idea, but Cicero also expressly defended
+it with Euhemeristic arguments, though speaking as if the departed who
+were worshipped as gods really had become gods.
+
+The attitude of Cicero and his contemporaries towards popular belief was
+still the general attitude in the first days of the Empire. It was of no
+avail that Augustus re-established the decayed State cult in all its
+splendour and variety, or that the poets during his reign, when they
+wished to express themselves in harmony with the spirit of the new régime,
+directly or indirectly extolled the revived orthodoxy. Wherever we find
+personal religious feeling expressed by men of that time, in the Epistles
+of Horace, in Virgil’s posthumous minor poems or in such passages in his
+greater works where he expresses his own ideals, it is philosophy that is
+predominant and the official religion ignored. Virgil was an Epicurean;
+Horace an Eclectic, now an Epicurean, then a Stoic; Augustus had a
+domestic philosopher. Ovid employed his genius in writing travesties of
+the old mythology while at the same time he composed a poem, serious for
+him, on the Roman cult; and when disaster befell him and he was cast out
+from the society of the capital, which was the breath of life to him, he
+was abandoned not only by men, but also by the gods—he had not even a
+philosophy with which to console himself. It is only in inferior writers
+such as Valerius Maximus, who wrote a work on great deeds—good and
+evil—under Tiberius, that we find a different spirit.
+
+Direct utterances about men’s relationship to the gods, from which
+conclusions can be drawn, are seldom met with during this period. The
+whole question was so remote from the thoughts of these people that they
+never mentioned it except when they assumed an orthodox air for political
+or aesthetic reasons. Still, here and there we come across something. One
+of the most significant pronouncements is that of Pliny the Elder, from
+whom we quoted the passage about the worship of Fortune. Pliny opens his
+scientific encyclopedia by explaining the structure of the universe in its
+broad features; this he does on the lines of the physics of the Stoics,
+hence he designates the universe as God. Next comes a survey of special
+theology. It is introduced as follows: “I therefore deem it a sign of
+human weakness to ask about the shape and form of God. Whoever God is, if
+any other god (than the universe) exists at all, and in whatever part of
+the world he is, he is all perception, all sight, all hearing, all soul,
+all reason, all self.” The popular notions of the gods are then reviewed,
+in the most supercilious tone, and their absurdities pointed out. A polite
+bow is made to the worship of the Emperors and its motives, the rest is
+little but persiflage. Not even Providence, which was recognised by the
+Stoics, is acknowledged by Pliny. The conclusion is like the beginning:
+“To imperfect human nature it is a special consolation that God also is
+not omnipotent (he can neither put himself to death, even if he would,
+though he has given man that power and it is his choicest gift in this
+punishment which is life; nor can he give immortality to mortals or call
+the dead to life; nor can he bring it to pass that those who have lived
+have not lived, or that he who has held honourable offices did not hold
+them); and that he has no other power over the past than that of oblivion;
+and that (in order that we may also give a jesting proof of our
+partnership with God) he cannot bring it about that twice ten is not
+twenty, and more of the same sort—by all which the power of Nature is
+clearly revealed, and that it is this we call God.”
+
+An opinion like that expressed here must without doubt be designated as
+atheism, even though it is nothing but the Stoic pantheism logically
+carried out. As we have said before, we rarely meet it so directly
+expressed, but there can hardly be any doubt that even in the time of
+Pliny it was quite common in Rome. At this point, then, had the educated
+classes of the ancient world arrived under the influence of Hellenistic
+philosophy.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+
+Though the foundation of the Empire in many ways inaugurated a new era for
+the antique world, it is, of course, impossible, in an inquiry which is
+not confined to political history in the narrowest sense of the word, to
+operate with anything but the loosest chronological divisions. Accordingly
+in the last chapter we had to include phenomena from the early days of the
+Empire in order not to separate things which naturally belonged together.
+From the point of view of religious history the dividing line cannot
+possibly be drawn at the Emperor Augustus, in spite of his restoration of
+worship and the orthodox reaction in the official Augustan poetry, but
+rather at about the beginning of the second century. The enthusiasm of the
+Augustan Age for the good old times was never much more than affectation.
+It quickly evaporated when the promised millennium was not forthcoming,
+and was replaced by a reserve which developed into cynicism—but, be it
+understood, in the upper circles of the capital only. In the empire at
+large the development took its natural tranquil course, unaffected by the
+manner in which the old Roman nobility was effacing itself; and this
+development did not tend towards atheism.
+
+The reaction towards positive religious feeling, which becomes clearly
+manifest in the second century after Christ, though the preparation for it
+is undoubtedly of earlier date, is perhaps the most remarkable phenomenon
+in the religious history of antiquity. This is not the place to inquire
+into its causes, which still remain largely unexplained; there is even no
+reason to enter more closely into its outer manifestations, as the thing
+itself is doubted by nobody. It is sufficient to mention as instances
+authors like Suetonius, with his naïve belief in miracles, and the
+rhetorician Aristides, with his Asclepius-cult and general
+sanctimoniousness; or a minor figure such as Aelian, who wrote whole books
+of a pronounced, nay even fanatical, devotionalism; or within the sphere
+of philosophy movements like Neo-Pythagoreanism and Neo-Platonism, both of
+which are as much in the nature of mystic theology as attempts at a
+scientific explanation of the universe. It is characteristic, too, that an
+essentially anti-religious school like that of the Epicureans actually
+dies out at this time. Under these conditions our task in this chapter
+must be to bring out the comparatively few and weak traces of other
+currents which still made themselves felt.
+
+Of the earlier philosophical schools Stoicism flowered afresh in the
+second century; the Emperor Marcus Aurelius himself was a prominent
+adherent of the creed. This later Stoicism differs, however, somewhat from
+the earlier. It limits the scientific apparatus which the early Stoics had
+operated with to a minimum, and is almost exclusively concerned with
+practical ethics on a religious basis. Its religion is that of ordinary
+Stoicism: Pantheism and belief in Providence. But, on the whole, it takes
+up a more sympathetic attitude towards popular religion than early
+Stoicism had done. Of the bitter criticism of the absurdities of the
+worship of the gods and of mythology which is still to be met with as late
+as Seneca, nothing remains. On the contrary, participation in public
+worship is still enjoined as being a duty; nay, more: attacks on belief in
+the gods—in the plain popular sense of the word—are denounced as
+pernicious and reprehensible. Perhaps no clearer proof could be adduced of
+the revolution which had taken place in the attitude of the educated
+classes towards popular religion than this change of front on the part of
+Stoicism.
+
+Contrary to this was the attitude of another school which was in vogue at
+the same time as the Stoic, namely, the Cynic. Between Cynicism and
+popular belief strained relations had existed since early times. It is
+true, the Cynics did not altogether deny the existence of the gods; but
+they rejected worship on the ground that the gods were not in need of
+anything, and they denied categorically the majority of the popular ideas
+about the gods. For the latter were, in fact, popular and traditional, and
+the whole aim of the Cynics was to antagonise the current estimate of
+values. A characteristic instance of their manner is provided by this very
+period in the fragments of the work of Oenomaus. The work was entitled
+_The Swindlers Unmasked_, and it contained a violent attack on oracles.
+Its tone is exceedingly pungent. In the extant fragments Oenomaus
+addresses the god in Delphi and overwhelms him with insults. But we are
+expressly told—and one utterance of Oenomaus himself verifies it—that the
+attack was not really directed against the god, but against the men who
+gave oracles in his name. In his opinion the whole thing was a priestly
+fraud—a view which otherwise was rather unfamiliar to the ancients, but
+played an important part later. Incidentally there is a violent attack on
+idolatry. The work is not without acuteness of thought and a certain
+coarse wit of the true Cynical kind; but it is entirely uncritical
+(oracles are used which are evidently inventions of later times) and of no
+great significance. It is even difficult to avoid the impression that the
+author’s aim is in some degree to create a sensation. Cynics of that day
+were not strangers to that kind of thing. But it is at any rate a proof of
+the fact that there were at the time tendencies opposed to the religious
+reaction.
+
+A more significant phenomenon of the same kind is to be found in the
+writings of Lucian. Lucian was by education a rhetorician, by profession
+an itinerant lecturer and essayist. At a certain stage of his life he
+became acquainted with the Cynic philosophy and for some time felt much
+attracted to it. From that he evidently acquired a sincere contempt of the
+vulgar superstition which flourished in his time, even in circles of which
+one might have expected something better. In writings which for the
+greater part belong to his later period, he pilloried individuals who
+traded (or seemed to trade) in the religious ferment of the time, as well
+as satirised superstition as such.  In this way he made an important
+contribution to the spiritual history of the age. But simultaneously he
+produced, for the entertainment of his public, a series of writings the
+aim of which is to make fun of the Olympian gods. In this work also he
+leant on the literature of the Cynics, but substituted for their grave and
+biting satire light causeries or slight dramatic sketches, in which his
+wit—for Lucian was really witty—had full scope. As an instance of his
+manner I shall quote a short passage from the dialogue _Timon_. It is Zeus
+who speaks; he has given Hermes orders to send the god of wealth to Timon,
+who has wasted his fortune by his liberality and is now abandoned by his
+false friends. Then he goes on: “As to the flatterers you speak of and
+their ingratitude, I shall deal with them another time, and they will meet
+with their due punishment as soon as I have had my thunderbolt repaired.
+The two largest darts of it were broken and blunted the other day when I
+got in a rage and flung it at the sophist Anaxagoras, who was trying to
+make his disciples believe that we gods do not exist at all. However, I
+missed him, for Pericles held his hand over him, but the bolt struck the
+temple of the Dioscuri and set fire to it, and the bolt itself was nearly
+destroyed when it struck the rock.” This sort of thing abounds in Lucian,
+even if it is not always equally amusing and to the point. Now there is
+nothing strange in the fact that a witty man for once should feel inclined
+to make game of the old mythology; this might have happened almost at any
+time, once the critical spirit had been awakened. But that a man, and
+moreover an essayist, who had to live by the approval of his public,
+should make it his trade, as it were, and that at a time of vigorous
+religious reaction, seems more difficult to account for. Lucian’s
+controversial pamphlets against superstition cannot be classed off-hand
+with his _Dialogues of the Gods_; the latter are of a quite different and
+far more harmless character. The fact is rather that mythology at this
+time was fair game. It was cut off from its connexion with religion—a
+connexion which in historical times was never very intimate and was now
+entirely severed. This had been brought about in part by centuries of
+criticism of the most varied kind, in part precisely as a result of the
+religious reaction which had now set in. If people turned during this time
+to the old gods—who, however, had been considerably contaminated with new
+elements—it was because they had nothing else to turn to; but what they
+now looked for was something quite different from the old religion. The
+powerful tradition which had bound members of each small community—we
+should say, of each township—to its familiar gods, with all that belonged
+to them, was now in process of dissolution; in the larger cities of the
+world-empire with their mixed populations it had entirely disappeared.
+Religion was no longer primarily a concern of society; it was a personal
+matter. In the face of the enormous selection of gods which ancient
+paganism came gradually to proffer, the individual was free to choose, as
+individual or as a member of a communion based upon religious, not
+political, sympathy. Under these circumstances the existence of the gods
+and their power and will to help their worshippers was the only thing of
+interest; all the old tales about them were more than ever myths of no
+religious value. On closer inspection Lucian indeed proves to have
+exercised a certain selection in his satire. Gods like Asclepius and
+Serapis, who were popular in his day, he prefers to say nothing about; and
+even with a phenomenon like Christianity he deals cautiously; he sticks to
+the old Olympian gods. Thus his derision of these constitutes an indirect
+proof that they had gone out of vogue, and his forbearance on other points
+is a proof of the power of the current religion over contemporary minds.
+As to ascribing any deeper religious conviction to Lucian—were it even of
+a purely negative kind—that is, in view of the whole character of his
+work, out of the question. To be sure, his polemical pamphlets against
+superstition show clearly, like those of Oenomaus, that the religious
+reaction did not run its course without criticism from certain sides; but
+even here it is significant that the criticism comes from a professional
+jester and not from a serious religious thinker.
+
+A few words remain to be said about the two monotheistic religions which
+in the days of the Roman Empire came to play a great, one of them indeed a
+decisive, part. I have already referred to pagan society’s attitude
+towards Judaism and Christianity, and pointed out that the adherents of
+both were designated and treated as atheists—the Jews only occasionally
+and with certain reservations, the Christians nearly always and
+unconditionally. The question here is, how far this designation was
+justified according to the definition of atheism which is the basis of our
+inquiry.
+
+In the preceding pages we have several times referred to the fact that the
+real enemy of Polytheism is not the philosophical theology, which
+generally tends more or less towards Pantheism, but Monotheism. It is in
+keeping with this that the Jews and the Christians in practice are
+downright deniers of the pagan gods: they would not worship them; whereas
+the Greek philosophers as a rule respected worship, however far they went
+in their criticism of men’s ideas of the gods. We shall not dwell here on
+this aspect of the matter; we are concerned with the theory only. Detailed
+expositions of it occur in numerous writings, from the passages in the Old
+Testament where heathenism is attacked, to the defences of Christianity by
+the latest Fathers of the Church.
+
+The original Jewish view, according to which the heathen gods are real
+beings just as much as the God of the Jews themselves—only Jews must not
+worship them—is in the later portions of the Old Testament superseded by
+the view that the gods are only images made of wood, stone or metal, and
+incapable of doing either good or evil. This point of view is taken over
+by later Jewish authors and completely dominates them. In those acquainted
+with Greek thought it is combined with Euhemeristic ideas: the images
+represent dead men. The theory that the gods are really natural
+objects—elements or heavenly bodies—is occasionally taken into account
+too. Alongside of these opinions there appears also the view that the
+pagan gods are evil spirits (demons). It is already found in a few places
+in the Old Testament, and after that sporadically and quite incidentally
+in later Jewish writings; in one place it is combined with the Old
+Testament’s account of the fallen angels. The demon-theory is not an
+instrument of Jewish apologetics proper, not even of Philo, though he has
+a complete demonology and can hardly have been ignorant of the
+Platonic-Stoic doctrine of demons.
+
+Apart from the few and, as it were, incidental utterances concerning
+demons, the Jewish view of the pagan gods impresses one as decidedly
+atheistic. The god is identical with the idol, and the idol is a dead
+object, the work of men’s hands, or the god is identical with a natural
+object, made by God to be sure, but without soul or, at any rate, without
+divinity. It is remarkable that no Jewish controversialist seriously
+envisaged the problem of the real view of the gods embodied in the popular
+belief of the ancients, namely, that they are personal beings of a higher
+order than man. It is inconceivable that men like Philo, Josephus and the
+author of the Wisdom of Solomon should have been ignorant of it. I know
+nothing to account for this curious phenomenon; and till some light has
+been thrown upon the matter, I should hesitate to assert that the Jewish
+conception of Polytheism was purely atheistic, however much appearance it
+may have of being so.
+
+It was otherwise with Christian polemical writing. As early as St. Paul
+the demon-theory appears distinctly, though side by side with utterances
+of seemingly atheistic character. Other New Testament authors, too,
+designate the gods as demons. The subsequent apologists, excepting the
+earliest, Aristides, lay the main stress on demonology, but include for
+the sake of completeness idolatry and the like, sometimes without caring
+about or trying to conciliate the contradictions. In the long run
+demonology is victorious; in St. Augustine, the foremost among Christian
+apologists, there is hardly any other point of view that counts.
+
+To trace the Christian demonology in detail and give an account of its
+various aspects is outside the scope of this essay. Its origin is a
+twofold one, partly the Jewish demonology, which just at the commencement
+of our era had received a great impetus, partly the theory of the Greek
+philosophers, which we have characterised above when speaking of
+Xenocrates. The Christian doctrine regarding demons differs from the
+latter, especially by the fact that it does not acknowledge good demons;
+they were all evil. This was the indispensable basis for the interdict
+against the worship of demons; in its further development the Christians,
+following Jewish tradition, pointed to an origin in the fallen angels, and
+thus effected a connexion with the Old Testament. While they at the same
+time retained its angelology they had to distinguish good and evil beings
+intermediate between god and man; but they carefully avoided designating
+the angels as demons, and kept them distinct from the pagan gods, who were
+all demons and evil.
+
+The application of demonology to the pagan worship caused certain
+difficulties in detail. To be sure, it was possible to identify a given
+pagan god with a certain demon, and this was often done; but it was
+impossible to identify the Pagans’ conceptions of their gods with the
+Christians’ conceptions of demons. The Pagans, in fact, ascribed to their
+gods not only demoniac (diabolical) but also divine qualities, which the
+Christians absolutely denied them. Consequently they had to recognise that
+pagan worship to a great extent rested on a delusion, on a misconception
+of the essential character of the gods which were worshipped. This view
+was corroborated by the dogma of the fallen angels, which was altogether
+alien to paganism. By identifying them with the evil spirits of the Bible,
+demon-names were even obtained which differed from those of the pagan gods
+and, of course, were the correct ones; were they not given in Holy Writ?
+In general, the Christians, who possessed an authentic revelation of the
+matter, were of course much better informed about the nature of the pagan
+gods than the Pagans themselves, who were groping in the dark. Euhemerism,
+which plays a great part in the apologists, helped in the same direction:
+the supposition that the idols were originally men existed among the
+Pagans themselves, and it was too much in harmony with the tendency of the
+apologists to be left unemployed. It was reconciled with demonology by the
+supposition that the demons had assumed the masks of dead heroes; they had
+beguiled mankind to worship them in order to possess themselves of the
+sacrifices, which they always coveted, and by this deception to be able to
+rule and corrupt men. The Christians also could not avoid recognising that
+part of the pagan worship was worship of natural objects, in particular of
+the heavenly bodies; and this error of worshipping the “creation instead
+of the creator” was so obvious that the Christians were not inclined to
+resort to demonology for an explanation of this phenomenon, the less so as
+they could not identify the sun or the moon with a demon. The conflict of
+these different points of view accounts for the peculiar vacillation in
+the Christian conception of paganism. On one hand, we meet with crude
+conceptions, according to which the pagan gods are just like so many
+demons; they are specially prominent when pagan miracles and prophecies
+are to be explained. On the other hand, there is a train of thought which
+carried to its logical conclusion would lead to conceiving paganism as a
+whole as a huge delusion of humanity, but a delusion caused indeed by
+supernatural agencies. This conclusion hardly presented itself to the
+early Church; later, however, it was drawn and caused a not inconsiderable
+shifting in men’s views and explanations of paganism.
+
+Demonology is to such a degree the ruling point of view in Christian
+apologetics that it would be absurd to make a collection from these
+writings of utterances with an atheistic ring. Such utterances are to be
+found in most of them; they appear spontaneously, for instance, wherever
+idolatry is attacked. But one cannot attach any importance to them when
+they appear in this connexion, not even in apologists in whose works the
+demon theory is lacking. No Christian theologian in antiquity advanced,
+much less sustained, the view that the pagan gods were mere phantoms of
+human imagination without any corresponding reality.
+
+Remarkable as this state of things may appear to us moderns, it is really
+quite simple, nay even a matter of course, when regarded historically.
+Christianity had from its very beginning a decidedly dualistic character.
+The contrast between this world and the world to come was identical with
+the contrast between the kingdom of the Devil and the kingdom of God. As
+soon as the new religion came into contact with paganism, the latter was
+necessarily regarded as belonging to the kingdom of the Devil; thus the
+conception of the gods as demons was a foregone conclusion. In the minds
+of the later apologists, who became acquainted with Greek philosophy, this
+conception received additional confirmation; did it not indeed agree in
+the main with Platonic and Stoic theory? Details were added: the
+Christians could not deny the pagan miracles without throwing a doubt on
+their own, for miracles cannot be done away with at all except by a denial
+on principle; neither could they explain paganism—that gigantic,
+millennial aberration of humanity—by merely human causes, much less lay
+the blame on God alone. But ultimately all this rests on one and the same
+thing—the supernatural and dualistic hypothesis. Consequently demonology
+is the kernel of the Christian conception of paganism: it is not merely a
+natural result of the hypotheses, it is the one and only correct
+expression of the way in which the new religion understood the old.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+
+In the preceding inquiry we took as our starting-point not the ancient
+conception of atheism but the modern view of the nature of the pagan gods.
+It proved that this view was, upon the whole, feebly represented during
+antiquity, and that it was another view (demonology) which was transmitted
+to later ages from the closing years of antiquity. The inquiry will
+therefore find its natural conclusion in a demonstration of the time and
+manner in which the conception handed down from antiquity of the nature of
+paganism was superseded and displaced by the modern view.
+
+This question is, however, more difficult to answer than one would perhaps
+think. After ancient paganism had ceased to exist as a living religion, it
+had lost its practical interest, and theoretically the Middle Ages were
+occupied with quite other problems than the nature of paganism. At the
+revival of the study of ancient literature, during the Renaissance, people
+certainly again came into the most intimate contact with ancient religion
+itself, but systematic investigations of its nature do not seem to have
+been taken up in real earnest until after the middle of the sixteenth
+century. It is therefore difficult to ascertain in what light paganism was
+regarded during the thousand years which had then passed since its final
+extinction. From the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, on the other
+hand, the material is extraordinarily plentiful, though but slightly
+investigated. Previous works in this field seem to be entirely wanting; at
+any rate it has not been possible for me to find any collective treatment
+of the subject, nor even any contributions worth mentioning towards the
+solution of the numerous individual problems which arise when we enter
+upon what might be called “the history of the history of religion.”(1) In
+this essay I must therefore restrict myself to a few aphoristic remarks
+which may perhaps give occasion for this subject, in itself not devoid of
+interest, to receive more detailed treatment at some future time.
+
+Milton, in the beginning of _Paradise Lost_, which appeared in 1667, makes
+Satan assemble all his angels for continued battle against God. Among the
+demons there enumerated, ancient gods also appear; they are, then, plainly
+regarded as devils. Now Milton was not only a poet, but also a sound
+scholar and an orthodox theologian; we may therefore rest assured that his
+conception of the pagan gods was dogmatically correct and in accord with
+the prevailing views of his time. In him, therefore, we have found a fixed
+point from which we can look forwards and backwards; as late as after the
+middle of the seventeenth century the early Christian view of the nature
+of paganism evidently persisted in leading circles.
+
+We seldom find definite heathen gods so precisely designated as demons as
+in Milton, but no doubt seems possible that the general principle was
+accepted by contemporary and earlier authors. The chief work of the
+seventeenth century on ancient religion is the _De Theologia Gentili_ of
+G. I. Voss; he operates entirely with the traditional view. It may be
+traced back through a succession of writings of the seventeenth and
+sixteenth centuries. They are all, or almost all, agreed that antique
+paganism was the work of the devil, and that idolatry was, at any rate in
+part, a worship of demons. From the Middle Ages I can adduce a pregnant
+expression of the same view from Thomas Aquinas; in his treatment of
+idolatry and also of false prophecy he definitely accepts the demonology
+of the early Church. On this point he appeals to Augustine, and with
+perfect right; from this it may presumably be assumed that the Schoolmen
+in general had the same view, Augustine being, as we know, an authority
+for Catholic theologians.
+
+In mediaeval poets also we occasionally find the same view expressed. As
+far as I have been able to ascertain, Dante has no ancient gods among his
+devils, and the degree to which he had dissociated himself from ancient
+paganism may be gauged by the fact that in one of the most impassioned
+passages of his poem he addresses the Christian God as “Great Jupiter.”
+But he allows figures of ancient mythology such as Charon, Minos and
+Geryon to appear in his infernal world, and when he designates the pagan
+gods as “false and _untruthful_,” demonology is evidently at the back of
+his mind. The mediaeval epic poets who dealt with antique subjects took
+over the pagan gods more or less. Sometimes, as in the Romance of Troy,
+the Christian veneer is so thick that the pagan groundwork is but slightly
+apparent; in other poems, such as the adaptation of the _Aeneid_, it is
+more in evidence. In so far as the gods are not eliminated they seem as a
+rule to be taken over quite naïvely from the source without further
+comment; but occasionally the poet expresses his view of their nature.
+Thus the French adapter of Statius’s _Thebaïs_, in whose work the
+Christian element is otherwise not prominent, cautiously remarks that
+Jupiter and Tisiphone, by whom his heroes swear, are in reality only
+devils. Generally speaking, the gods of antiquity are often designated as
+devils in mediaeval poetry, but at times the opinion that they are
+departed human beings crops up. Thus, as we might expect, the theories of
+ancient times still survive and retain their sway.
+
+There is a domain in which we might expect to find distinct traces of the
+survival of the ancient gods in the mediaeval popular consciousness,
+namely, that of magic. There does not, however, seem to be much in it; the
+forms of mediaeval magic often go back to antiquity, but the beings it
+operates with are pre-eminently the Christian devils, if we may venture to
+employ the term, and the evil spirits of popular belief. There is,
+however, extant a collection of magic formulae against various ailments in
+which pagan gods appear: Hercules and Juno Regina, Juno and Jupiter, the
+nymphs, Luna Jovis filia, Sol invictus. The collection is transmitted in a
+manuscript of the ninth century; the formulae mostly convey the impression
+of dating from a much earlier period, but the fact that they were copied
+in the Middle Ages suggests that they were intended for practical
+application.
+
+A problem, the closer investigation of which would no doubt yield an
+interesting result, but which does not seem to have been much noticed, is
+the European conception of the heathen religions with which the explorers
+came into contact on their great voyages of discovery. Primitive
+heathenism as a living reality had lain rather beyond the horizon of the
+Middle Ages; when it was met with in America, it evidently awakened
+considerable interest. There is a description of the religion of Peru and
+Mexico, written by the Jesuit Acosta at the close of the sixteenth
+century, which gives us a clear insight into the orthodox view of
+heathenism during the Renaissance. According to Acosta, heathenism is as a
+whole the work of the Devil; he has seduced men to idolatry in order that
+he himself may be worshipped instead of the true God. All worship of idols
+is in reality worship of Satan. The individual idols, however, are not
+identified with individual devils; Acosta distinguishes between the
+worship of nature (heavenly bodies, natural objects of the earth, right
+down to trees, etc.), the worship of the dead, and the worship of images,
+but says nothing about the worship of demons. At one point only is there a
+direct intervention of the evil powers, namely, in magic, and particularly
+in oracles; and here then we find, as an exception, mention of individual
+devils which must be imagined to inhabit the idols. The same conception is
+found again as late as the seventeenth century in a story told by G. I.
+Voss of the time of the Dutch wars in Brazil. Arcissewski, a Polish
+officer serving in the Dutch army, had witnessed the conjuring of a devil
+among the Tapuis. The demon made his appearance all right, but proved to
+be a native well known to Arcissewski. As he, however, made some true
+prognostications, Voss, as it seems at variance with Arcissewski, thinks
+that there must have been some supernatural powers concerned in the game.
+
+An exceptional place is occupied by the attempt made during the
+Renaissance at an actual revival of ancient paganism and the worship of
+its gods. It proceeded from Plethon, the head of the Florentine Academy,
+and seems to have spread thence to the Roman Academy. The whole movement
+must be viewed more particularly as an outcome of the enthusiasm during
+the Renaissance for the culture of antiquity and more especially for its
+philosophy rather than its religion; the gods worshipped were given a new
+and strongly philosophical interpretation. But it is not improbable that
+the traditional theory of the reality of the ancient deities may have had
+something to do with it.
+
+Simultaneously with demonology, and while it was still acknowledged in
+principle, there flourished more naturalistic conceptions of paganism,
+both in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. As remarked above, the
+way was already prepared for them during antiquity. In Thomas Aquinas we
+find a lucid explanation of the origin of idolatry with a reference to the
+ancient theory. Here we meet with the familiar elements: the worship of
+the stars and the cult of the dead. According to Thomas, man has a natural
+disposition towards this error, but it only comes into play when he is led
+astray by demons. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Devil is
+mentioned oftener than the demons (compare Acosta’s view of the heathenism
+of the American Indians); evidently the conception of the nature of evil
+had undergone a change in the direction of monotheism. In this way more
+scope was given for the adoption of naturalistic views in regard to the
+individual forms in which paganism manifested itself than when dealing
+with a multiplicity of demons that answered individually to the pagan
+gods, and we meet with systematic attempts to explain the origin of
+idolatry by natural means, though still with the Devil in the background.
+
+One of these systems, which played a prominent part, especially in the
+seventeenth century, is the so-called Hebraism, _i.e._ the attempt to
+derive the whole of paganism from Judaism. This fashion, for which the way
+had already been prepared by Jewish and Christian apologists, reaches its
+climax, I think, with Abbot Huet, who derived all the gods of antiquity
+(and not only Greek and Roman antiquity) from Moses, and all the goddesses
+from his sister; according to him the knowledge of these two persons had
+spread from the Jews to other peoples, who had woven about them a web of
+“fables.” Alongside of Hebraism, which is Euhemeristic in principle,
+allegorical methods of interpretation were put forward. The chief
+representative of this tendency in earlier times is Natalis Comes (Noël du
+Comte), the author of the first handbook of mythology; he directly set
+himself the task of allegorising all the myths. The allegories are mostly
+moral, but also physical; Euhemeristic interpretations are not rejected
+either, and in several places the author gives all three explanations side
+by side without choosing between them.  In the footsteps of du Comte
+follows Bacon, in his _De Sapientia Veterum_; to the moral and physical
+allegories he adds political ones, as when Jove’s struggle with Typhoeus
+is made to symbolise a wise ruler’s treatment of a rebellion. While these
+attempts at interpretation, both the Euhemeristic and the allegorical, are
+in principle a direct continuation of those of antiquity, another method
+points plainly in the direction of the fantastic notions of the Middle
+Ages. As early as the sixteenth century the idea arose of connecting the
+theology of the ancients with alchemy. The idea seemed obvious because the
+metals were designated by the names of the planets, which are also the
+names of the gods. It found acceptance, and in the seventeenth century we
+have a series of writings in which ancient mythology is explained as the
+symbolical language of chemical processes.
+
+Within the limits of the supernatural explanation the interest centred
+more and more in a single point: the oracles. As far back as in Aquinas,
+“false prophecy” is a main section in the chapter on demons, whose power
+to foretell the future he expressly acknowledges. In the sixteenth and
+seventeenth centuries, when the interest in the prediction of the future
+was so strong, the ancient accounts of true prognostications were the real
+prop of demonology. Hence demons generally play a great part in these
+explanations, even though in other cases the Devil fills the bill. Thus
+Acosta in his account of the American religions; thus Voss and numerous
+other writers of the seventeenth century; and it is hardly a mere
+accident, one would think, when Milton specially mentions Dodona and
+Delphi as the seats of worship of the Greek demons. Among a few of the
+humanists we certainly find an attempt to apply the natural explanation
+even here; thus Caelius Rhodiginus asserted that a great part (but not
+all!) of the oracular system might be explained as priestly imposture, and
+his slightly younger contemporary Caelius Calcagninus, in his dialogue on
+oracles, seems to go still further and to deny the power of predicting the
+future to any other being than the true God. An exceptional position is
+occupied by Pomponazzi, who in his little pamphlet _De Incantationibus_
+seems to wish to derive all magic, including the oracles, from natural
+causes, though ultimately he formally acknowledges demonology as the
+authoritative explanation. But these advances did not find acceptance; we
+find even Voss combating the view on which they were founded. It is
+characteristic of the power of demonology in this domain that in support
+of his point of view he can quote no less a writer than Machiavelli.
+
+The author who opened battle in real earnest against demonology was a
+Dutch scholar, one van Dale, otherwise little known. In a couple of
+treatises written about the close of the seventeenth century he tried to
+show that the whole of idolatry (as well as the oracles in particular) was
+not dependent on the intervention of supernatural beings, but was solely
+due to imposture on the part of the priests. Van Dale was a Protestant, so
+he easily got over the unanimous recognition of demonology by the Fathers
+of the Church. The accounts of demons in the Old and New Testaments proved
+more difficult to deal with; it is interesting to see how he wriggles
+about to get round them—and it illustrates most instructively the degree
+to which demonology affords the only reasonable and natural explanation of
+paganism on the basis of early Christian belief.
+
+Van Dale’s books are learned works written in Latin, full of quotations in
+Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and moreover confused and obscure in exposition,
+as is often the case with Dutch writings of that time. But a clever
+Frenchman, Fontenelle, took upon himself the task of rendering his work on
+the oracles into French in a popular and attractive form. His book called
+forth an answering pamphlet from a Jesuit advocating the traditional view;
+the little controversy seems to have made some stir in France about the
+year 1700. At any rate Banier, who, in the beginning of the eighteenth
+century, treated ancient mythology from a Euhemeristic point of view, gave
+some consideration to it. His own conclusion is—in 1738!—that demonology
+cannot be dispensed with for the explanation of the oracles. He gives his
+grounds for this in a very sensible criticism of van Dale’s priestly fraud
+theory, the absurdity of which he exposes with sound arguments.
+
+Banier is the last author to whom I can point for the demon-theory applied
+as an explanation of a phenomenon in ancient religion; I have not found it
+in any other mythologist of the eighteenth century, and even in Banier,
+with the exception of this single point, everything is explained quite
+naturally according to the best Euhemeristic models. But in the positive
+understanding of the nature of ancient paganism no very considerable
+advance had actually been made withal. A characteristic example of this is
+the treatment of ancient religion by such an eminent intellect as
+Giambattista Vico. In his _Scienza Nuova_, which appeared in 1725, as the
+foundation of his exposition of the religion of antiquity he gives a
+characterisation of the mode of thought of primitive mankind, which is so
+pertinent and psychologically so correct that it anticipates the results
+of more than a hundred years of research. Of any supernatural explanation
+no trace is found in him, though otherwise he speaks as a good Catholic.
+But when he proceeds to explain the nature of the ancient ideas of the
+gods in detail, all that it comes to is a series of allegories, among
+which the politico-social play a main part. Vico sees the earliest history
+of mankind in the light of the traditions about Rome; the Graeco-Roman
+gods, then, and the myths about them, become to him largely an expression
+of struggles between the “patricians and plebeians” of remote antiquity.
+
+Most of the mythology of the eighteenth century is like this. The
+Euhemeristic school gradually gave up the hypothesis of the Jewish
+religion as the origin of paganism; Banier, the chief representative of
+the school, still argues at length against Hebraism. In its place,
+Phoenicians, Assyrians, Persians and, above all, Egyptians, are brought
+into play, or, as in the case of the Englishman Bryant, the whole of
+mythology is explained as reminiscences of the exploits of an aboriginal
+race, the Cuthites, which never existed. The allegorist school gradually
+rallied round the idea of the cult of the heavenly bodies as the origin of
+the pagan religions; as late as the days of the French Revolution, Dupuis,
+in a voluminous work, tried to trace the whole of ancient religion and
+mythology back to astronomy. On the whole the movement diverged more and
+more from Euhemerism towards the conception of Greek religion as a kind of
+cult of nature; when the sudden awakening to a more correct understanding
+came towards the close of the century, Euhemerism was evidently already an
+antiquated view. Thus, since the Renaissance, by a slow and very devious
+process of development, a gradual approach had been made to a more correct
+view of the nature of ancient religion. After the Devil had more or less
+taken the place of the demons, the rest of demonology, the moral allegory,
+Hebraism and Euhemerism were eliminated by successive stages, and
+nature-symbolism was reached as the final stage.
+
+We know now that even this is not the correct explanation of the nature
+and origin of the conception of the gods prevailing among the ancients.
+Recent investigations have shown that the Greek gods, in spite of their
+apparent simplicity and clarity, are highly complex organisms, the
+products of a long process of development to which the most diverse
+factors have contributed. In order to arrive at this result another
+century of work, with many attempts in the wrong direction, has been
+required. The idea that the Greek gods were nature-gods really dominated
+research through almost the whole of the nineteenth century. If it has now
+been dethroned or reduced to the measure of truth it contains—for
+undoubtedly a natural object enters as a component into the essence of
+some Greek deities—this is in the first place due to the intensive study
+of the religions of primitive peoples, living or obsolete; and the results
+of this study were only applied to Greek religion during the last decade
+of the century. But the starting-point of modern history of religion lies
+much farther back: its beginnings date from the great revival of
+historical research which was inaugurated by Rousseau and continued by
+Herder. Henceforward the unhistorical methods of the age of enlightenment
+were abolished, and attention directed in real earnest towards the earlier
+stages of human civilisation.
+
+This, however, carries us a step beyond the point of time at which this
+sketch should, strictly speaking, stop. For by the beginning of the
+eighteenth century—but not before—the negative fact which is all important
+in this connexion had won recognition: namely, that there existed no
+supernatural beings latent behind the Greek ideas of their gods, and
+corresponding at any rate in some degree to them; but that these ideas
+must be regarded and explained as entirely inventions of the human
+imagination.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+
+At the very beginning of this inquiry it was emphasised that its theme
+would in the main be the religious views of the upper class, and within
+this sphere again especially the views of those circles which were in
+close touch with philosophy. The reason for this is of course in the first
+place that only in such circles can we expect to find expressed a point of
+view approaching to positive atheism. But we may assuredly go further than
+this. We shall hardly be too bold in asserting that the free-thinking of
+philosophically educated men in reality had very slight influence on the
+great mass of the population. Philosophy did not penetrate so far, and
+whatever degree of perception we estimate the masses to have had of the
+fact that the upper layer of society regarded the popular faith with
+critical eyes—and in the long run it could not be concealed—we cannot fail
+to recognise that religious development among the ancients did not tend
+towards atheism. Important changes took place in ancient religion during
+the Hellenistic Age and the time of the Roman Empire, but their causes
+were of a social and national kind, and, if we confine ourselves to
+paganism, they only led to certain gods going out of fashion and others
+coming in. The utmost we can assert is that a certain weakening of the
+religious life may have been widely prevalent during the time of
+transition between the two ages—the transition falls at somewhat different
+dates in the eastern and western part of the Empire—but that weakening was
+soon overcome.
+
+Now the peculiar result of this investigation of the state of religion
+among the upper classes seems to me to be this: the curve of intensity of
+religious feeling which conjecture leads us to draw through the spiritual
+life of the ancients as a whole, that same curve, but more distinct and
+sharply accentuated, is found again in the relations of the upper classes
+to the popular faith. Towards the close of the fifth century it looks as
+if the cultured classes that formed the centre of Greek intellectual life
+were outgrowing the ancient religion. The reaction which set in with
+Socrates and Plato certainly checked this movement, but it did not stop
+it. Cynics, Peripatetics, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, in spite of
+their widely differing points of view, were all entirely unable to share
+the religious ideas of their countrymen in the form in which they were
+cast in the national religion. However many allowances they made, their
+attitude towards the popular faith was critical, and on important points
+they denied it. It is against the background thus resulting from ancient
+philosophy’s treatment of ancient religion that we must view such
+phenomena as Polybius, Cicero, and Pliny the Elder, if we wish to
+understand their full significance.
+
+On the other hand, it is certain that this was not the view that conquered
+in the end among the educated classes in antiquity. The lower we come down
+in the Empire the more evident does the positive relation of the upper
+class to the gods of the popular faith become. Some few examples have
+already been mentioned in the preceding pages. In philosophy the whole
+movement finds its typical expression in demonology, which during the
+later Empire reigned undisputed in the one or two schools that still
+retained any vitality. It is significant that its source was the earlier
+Platonism, with its very conservative attitude towards popular belief, and
+that it was taken over by the later Stoic school, which inaugurated the
+general religious reaction in philosophy. And it is no less significant
+that demonology was swallowed whole by the monotheistic religion which
+superseded ancient paganism, and for more than a thousand years was the
+recognised explanation of the nature thereof.
+
+In accordance with the line of development here sketched, the inquiry has
+of necessity been focused on two main points: Sophistic and the
+Hellenistic Age. Now it is of peculiar interest to note what small traces
+of pure atheism can after all be found here, in spite of all criticism of
+the popular faith. We have surmised its presence among a few prominent
+personalities in fifth-century Athens; we have found evidence of its
+extension in the same place in the period immediately following; and in
+the time of transition between the fourth and third centuries we have
+thought it likely that it existed among a very few philosophers, of whom
+none are in the first rank. Everywhere else we find adjustments, in part
+very serious and real concessions, to popular belief. Not to mention the
+attitude towards worship, which was only hostile in one sect of slight
+importance: the assumption of the divinity of the heavenly bodies which
+was common to the Academics, Peripatetics, and Stoics is really in
+principle an acknowledgement of the popular faith, whose conception of the
+gods was actually borrowed and applied, not to some philosophical
+abstraction, but to individual and concrete natural objects. The
+anthropomorphic gods of the Epicureans point in the same direction. In
+spite of their profound difference from the beings that were worshipped
+and believed in by the ordinary Greek, they are in complete harmony with
+the opinion on which all polytheism is based: that there are individual
+beings of a higher order than man. And though the Stoics in theory
+confined their acknowledgment of this doctrine to the heavenly bodies, in
+practice—even if we disregard demonology—they consistently brought it to
+bear upon the anthropomorphic gods, in direct continuation of the Socratic
+reaction against the atheistic tendencies of Sophistic.
+
+If now we ask ourselves what may be the cause of this peculiar dualism in
+the relationship of ancient thought to religion, though admitting the
+highly complex nature of the problem, we can scarcely avoid recognising a
+certain principle. Ancient thought outgrew the ancient popular faith; that
+is beyond doubt. Hence its critical attitude. But it never outgrew that
+supernaturalist view which was the foundation of the popular faith. Hence
+its concessions to the popular faith, even when it was most critical, and
+its final surrender thereunto. And that it never outgrew the foundation of
+the popular faith is connected with its whole conception of nature and
+especially with its conception of the universe. We cannot indeed deny that
+the ancients had a certain feeling that nature was regulated by laws, but
+they only made imperfect attempts at a mechanical theory of nature in
+which this regulation of the world by law was carried through in
+principle, and with one brilliant exception they adhered implicitly to the
+geocentric conception of the universe. We may, I think, venture to assert
+with good reason that on such assumptions the philosophers of antiquity
+could not advance further than they did. In other words, on the given
+hypotheses the supernaturalist view was the correct one, the one that was
+most probable, and therefore that on which people finally agreed. A few
+chosen spirits may at any time by intuition, without any strictly
+scientific foundation, emancipate themselves entirely from religious
+errors; this also happened among the ancients, and on the first occasion
+was not unconnected with an enormous advance in the conception of nature.
+But it is certain that the views of an entire age are always decisively
+conditioned by its knowledge and interpretation of the universe
+surrounding it, and cannot in principle be emancipated therefrom.
+
+Seen from this point of view, our brief sketch of the attitude of
+posterity towards the religion of the pagan world will also not be without
+interest. If, after isolated advances during the mighty awakening of the
+Renaissance, it is not until the transition from the seventeenth to the
+eighteenth century that we find the modern atheistic conception of the
+nature of the gods of the ancients established in principle and
+consistently applied, we can scarcely avoid connecting this fact with the
+advance of natural science in the seventeenth century, and not least with
+the victory of the heliocentric system. After the close of antiquity the
+pagan gods had receded to a distance, practically speaking, because they
+were not worshipped any more. No one troubled himself about them. But in
+theory one had got no further, _i.e._ no advance had been made on the
+ancients, and no advance could be made as long as supernaturalism was
+adhered to in connexion with the ancient view of the universe. Through
+monotheism the notions of the divinity of the sun, moon and planets had
+certainly been got rid of, but not so the notion of the world—_i.e._ the
+globe enclosed within the firmament—as filled with personal beings of a
+higher order than man; and even the duty of turning the spheres to which
+the heavenly bodies were believed to be fastened was—quite
+consistently—assigned to some of these beings. As long as such notions
+were in operation, not only were there no grounds for denying the reality
+of the pagan gods, but there was every reason to assume it. So far we may
+rightly say that it was Copernicus, Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Kepler and
+Newton that did away with the traditional conception of ancient paganism.
+
+Natural science, however, furnishes only the negative result that the gods
+of polytheism are not what they are said to be: real beings of a higher
+order than man. To reveal what they are, other knowledge is required. This
+was not attained until long after the revival of natural science in the
+sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The vacillation in the eighteenth
+century between various theories of the explanation of the nature of
+ancient polytheism—theories which were all false, though not equally
+false—is in this respect significant enough; likewise the gradual progress
+which characterises research in the nineteenth century, and which may be
+indicated by such names as Heyne, Buttmann, K. O. Müller, Lobeck,
+Mannhardt, Rohde, and Usener, to mention only some of the most important
+and omitting those still alive. Viewed in this light the development
+sketched here within a narrowly restricted field is typical of the course
+of European intellectual history from antiquity down to our day.
+
+
+
+
+
+NOTES
+
+
+Of Atheism in Antiquity as defined here no treatment is known to me; but
+there exist an older and a newer book that deal with the question within a
+wider compass. The first of these is Krische, _Die theologischen Lehren
+der griechischen Denker_ (Göttingen, 1840); it is chiefly concerned with
+the philosophical conceptions of deity, but it touches also on the
+relations of philosophers to popular religion. The second is Decharme, _La
+critique des traditions religieuses chez les Grecs_ (Paris, 1904); it is
+not fertile in new points of view, but it has suggested several details
+which I might else have overlooked. Such books as Caird, _The Evolution of
+Theology in the Greek Philosophers_ (Glasgow, 1904), or Moon, _Religious
+Thought of the Greeks_ (Cambridge, Mass., 1919), barely touch on the
+relation to popular belief; of Louis, _Les doctrines religieuses des
+philosophes grecs_, I have not been able to make use. I regret that Poul
+Helms, _The Conception of God in Greek Philosophy_ (Danish, in _Studier
+for Sprog-og Oldtidsforskning_, No. 115), was not published until my essay
+was already in the press. General works on Atheism are indicated in
+Aveling’s article, “Atheism,” in the _Catholic Encyclopædia_, vol. ii.,
+but none of them seem to be found at Copenhagen. In the _Dictionary of
+Religion and Ethics_, ii., there is a detailed article on Atheism in its
+relation to different religions; the section treating of Antiquity is
+written by Pearson, but is meagre. Works like Zeller, _Philosophie der
+Griechen_, and Gomperz, _Griechische Denker_, contain accounts of the
+attitude of philosophers (Gomperz also includes others) towards popular
+belief; of these books I have of course made use throughout, but they are
+not referred to in the following notes except on special occasion.
+Scattered remarks and small monographs on details are naturally to be
+found in plenty. Where I have met with such and found something useful in
+them, or where I express dissent from them, I have noticed it; but I have
+not aimed at exhausting the literature on my subject. On the other hand I
+have tried to make myself completely acquainted with the first-hand
+material, wherever it gave a direct support for assuming Atheism, and to
+take my own view of it. In many cases, however, the argumentation has had
+to be indirect: it has been necessary to draw inferences from what an
+author does not say in a certain connexion when he might be expected to
+say it, or what he generally and throughout avoids mentioning, or from his
+general manner and peculiarities in his way of speaking of the gods. In
+such cases I have often had to be content with my previous knowledge and
+my general impression of the facts; but then I have as a rule made use of
+the important modern literature on the subject. In working out the sketch
+of the ideas after the end of Antiquity, I have been almost without any
+guidance in modern literature. I have accordingly had to try, on the basis
+of a superficial acquaintance with some of the chief types, to form for
+myself, as best I might, some idea of the course of the evolution; but I
+have not been able to go systematically through the immense material,
+however fruitful such a research appeared to be. In the meantime, between
+the publication of my Danish essay and this translation, there has
+appeared a work by Mr. Gruppe, _Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und
+Religionsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1921). My task in writing my last chapters
+would have been much easier if I could have made use of Mr. Gruppe’s
+learned and comprehensive treatment of the subject; but it would not have
+been superfluous, for Mr. Gruppe deals principally with the history of
+classical mythology, not with the history of the belief in the gods of
+antiquity. So I have ventured to let my sketch stand as it is, only
+reducing some of the notes (which I had on purpose made rather full, to
+aid others who might pursue the subject) by referring to Mr. Gruppe
+instead of to the sources themselves.
+
+For kindly helping me to find my bearings in out-of-the-way parts of my
+subject, I am indebted to my colleagues F. Buhl, I.L. Heiberg, I.C.
+Jacobsen and Kr. Nyrop, as well as to Prof. Martin P. Nilsson in Lund.
+
+P. 1. Definition of Atheism: see the article in the _Catholic Encycl._
+vol. ii.
+
+P. 5. Atheism: see Murray, _New Engl. Dict._, under Atheism and -ism. The
+word seems to have come up in the Renaissance.
+
+P. 6. Criminal Law at Athens: see Lipsius, _Das attische Recht und
+Rechtsverfahren_, i. p. 358.—The definition in Aristotle, _de virt. et
+vit._ 7, p. 1251_a_, has, I think, no legal foundation.
+
+P. 9. On the legal foundation for the trials of Christians, see Mommsen,
+_Der Religionsfreuel nach römischem Recht_ (_Ges. Schr._ iii. p.
+389).—Mommsen goes too far, I think, in supposing a legal foundation for
+the trials of Christians; above all, I do not believe that the defection
+from the Roman religion was ever considered as maiestas in the technical
+sense of the word, the more so as it is certain that, after the earliest
+period, no difference was made in the treatment of citizens and aliens.
+
+P. 13. Lists of atheists: Cicero, _de nat. deor._ 1. 1, 2 (comp. 1. 23,
+26). Sext. Emp. _hypotyp._ 3. 213; _adv. math._ 9. 50. Aelian, _v.h._ 2.
+31; _de nat. an._ 6. 40.—The predicate _atheos_ is once applied to
+Anaxagoras by a Christian author (Irenaeus: see Diels, _Vorsokr._ 46, A
+113; compare also Marcellinus, _vit. Thuc._, see below, note on p. 29). Of
+such isolated cases I have taken no account.
+
+P. 16. On the dualism in the Greek conception of the nature of gods see
+Nägelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p. 11.—Pindar: _Ol._ 1. 28, 9. 35; _Pyth._ 3.
+27.
+
+P. 17. Xenophanes: Einhorn, _Zeit- und Streitfragen der modernen
+Xenophanesforschung_ (_Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos._ xxxi.).
+
+P. 18. Xenophanes’s age: Diels, _Vorsokr._ 11, B 8.—His criticism of Homer
+and Hesiod: _ibid._ 11, 12.—Titans and Giants: _ibid._ 1. 22.—Criticism of
+Anthropomorphism: _ibid._ 14-16.—Divination: Cic. _de div._ 1. 3, 5.
+
+P. 19. On Xenophanes’s conception of God, comp. _Vorsokr._ 11, B 23-26; on
+the identification of God with the universe: _Vorsokr._ 11, A 30, 31,
+33-36.—Cicero: _de div._ 1. 3, 5.
+
+P. 21. For Xenophanes’s theology, comp. Freudenthal, _Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos._ i. p. 322, and Zeller’s criticism, _ibid._ p. 524. Agreeing with
+Freudenthal: Decharme, p. 46; Campbell, _Religion in Greek Literature_, p.
+293.
+
+P. 21. Parmenides does not even appear to have designated his “Being” as
+God (Zeller, i. p. 563).
+
+P. 23. In the eighteenth century people discussed diffusely the question
+whether Thales was an atheist (of course in the sense in which the word
+was taken at that time); comp. Tennemann, _Gesch. d. Philos._ i. pp. 62
+and 422. Tennemann remarks quite truly that the question is put wrongly.
+
+P. 24. Thales: Diels, _Vorsokr._ 1, A 22-23.—Attitude of Democritus
+towards popular belief: _Vorsokr._ 55, A 74-79; comp. 116, 117; B 166, and
+also B 30. Diels, _Ueber den Dämonenglauben des D._ (_Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos._ 1894, p. 154).
+
+P. 25. Trial of Anaxagoras: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 1, 17, 18, 19.
+
+P. 26. Ram’s head: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 16.
+
+P. 27. Geffcken (in _Hermes_, 42, p. 127) has tried to make out something
+about a criticism of popular belief by Anaxagoras from some passages in
+Aristophanes (_Nub._ 398) and Lucian (_Tim._ 10, etc.), but I do not think
+he has succeeded.—Pericles a free-thinker: Plut. _Pericl._ 6 and 38; comp.
+Decharme, p. 160.—Personality of Anaxagoras: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 30
+(Aristotle, _Eud. Ethics_, A 4, p. 1215_b_, 6).
+
+P. 28. Herodotus: 8, 77.—Sophocles: _Oed. rex._ 498, 863.—Diopeithes:
+Plut. _Pericl._ 32 (_Vorsokr._ 46, A 17).—Thucydides: Classen in the
+preface to his 3rd ed., p. lvii.
+
+P. 29. Thucydides, a disciple of Anaxagoras: Marcellinus, _vit. Thuc._
+22.—Generally Thucydides is thought to have been more conservative in his
+religious opinions than I consider probable; see Classen, _loc. cit._;
+Decharme, p. 83; Gertz in his preface to the Danish translation of
+Thucydides, p. xxvii.—Hippo: _Vorsokr._ 26, A 4, 6, 8, 9; B 2, 3.
+
+P. 30. Aristotle: _Vorsokr._ 26, A 7.—Diogenes an atheist: Aelian, _v.h._
+2, 31.—The air his god: _Vorsokr._ 51, A 8 (he thought that Homer
+identified Zeus with the air, and approved of this as οὐ μυθικῶς, ἀλλ᾽
+ἀληθῶς εἰρημενον); B 5, 7, 8.—Allusions to his doctrines by Aristophanes:
+_Nub._ 225, 828 (_Vorsokr._ 51, C 1, 2).
+
+P. 31. A chief representative of the naïvely critical view of natural
+phenomena is for us Herodotus. The _locus classicus_ is vii. 129; comp.
+Gomperz, _Griech. Denker_, i. p. 208; Heiberg, _Festskrift til Ussing_
+(Copenhagen, 1900), p. 91; Decharme, p. 69.—Principal passages about
+Diagoras: Sext. Emp. _adv. math._ 9, 53; Suidas, art. _Diagoras II._;
+schol. Aristoph. _Nub._ 830 (the legend); Suidas, art. _Diagoras I._;
+Aristoph. _Av._ 1071 with schol.; schol. Aristoph. _Ran._ 320; [Lysias]
+vi. 17; Diod. xiii. 16 (the decree); Philodem. _de piet._ p. 89 Gomp.
+(comments of Aristoxenus); Aelian, _v.h._ ii. 22 (legislation at
+Mantinea).—Wilamowitz (_Textgesch. d. Lyr._ p. 80) has tried to save the
+tradition by supposing that the _acme_ of Diagoras has been put too early.
+Comp. also his remarks, _Griech. Verskunst._ p. 426, where he has taken up
+the question again with reference to my treatment of it. As he has now
+conceded the possibility of referring the legislation to the earlier date,
+the difference between us is really very slight, and it is of course
+possible, perhaps even probable, that the acme of the poet has been
+antedated.—Aristoph. _Av._ 1071: “On this very day it is made public, that
+if one of you kills Diagoras from Melos, he shall have a talent, and if
+one kills one of the dead tyrants, he shall have a talent.” The parallel
+between the two decrees, of which the latter is of course an invention of
+Aristophanes, would be without point if the decree against Diagoras was
+not as futile as the decree against the tyrants (_i.e._ the sons of
+Peisistratus, who had been dead some three-quarters of a century), that
+is, if it did not come many years too late.—Wilamowitz (_Griech.
+Verskunst, loc. cit._) takes the sense to be: “You will not get hold of
+Diagoras any more than you did of the tyrants.” But this, besides being
+somewhat pointless, does not agree so well as my explanation with the
+introductory words: “On this very day.” On the other hand, I never meant
+to imply that Diagoras was dead in 415, but only that his offence was an
+old one—just as that of Protagoras probably was (see p. 39).
+
+P. 39. Trial of Protagoras: _Vorsokr._ 74, A 1-4, 23; the passage
+referring to the gods: _ibid._ B 4.—Plato: _Theaet._ p. 162_d_ (_Vorsokr._
+74, A 23).
+
+P. 41. Distinction between belief and knowledge by Protagoras: Gomperz,
+_Griech. Denker_, i. p. 359.
+
+P. 42. Prodicus: _Vorsokr._ 77, B 5. Comp. Norvin, _Allegorien i den
+græske Philosophi_ (_Edda_, 1919), p. 82. I cannot, however, quite adopt
+Norvin’s view of the theory of Protagoras.
+
+P. 44. Critias: _Vorsokr._ 81, B 25.—W. Nestle, _Jahrbb. f. Philol._ xi.
+(1903), pp. 81 and 178, gives an exhaustive treatment of the subject, but
+I cannot share his view of it.
+
+P. 46. Euripides: _Suppl._ 201.—Moschion: _Trag. Fragm._ ed. Nauck (2nd
+ed.), p. 813.—Plato: _Rep._ ii. 369b.
+
+P. 47. Democritus: Reinhardt in _Hermes_, xlvii (1912), p. 503 In spite of
+Wilamowitz’s objections (in his _Platon_, ii. p. 214), I still consider it
+probable that Plato alludes to a philosophical theory.—Protagoras on the
+original state: _Vorsokr._ 74, B 8_b_.
+
+P. 48. Euripides: _Electra, 737_ (Euripides does not believe in the tale
+that the sun reversed its course on account of Thyestes’s fraud against
+Atreus, and then adds: “Fables that terrify men are a profit to the
+worship of the gods”).—Aristotle: _Metaph._ A 8, 1074_b_; see text, p.
+85.—Polybius: vi. 56; see text pp. 90 and 114.—Plato’s _Gorgias_, p. 482
+and foll.
+
+P. 49.—Callicles: see _e.g._ Wilamowitz, _Platon_, i. p. 208.
+
+P. 50.—Thrasymachus: Plato, _Rep._ i. pp. 338_c_, 343_a_; comp. also ii.
+p. 358_b_. His remark on Providence (_Vorsokr._ 78, B 8) runs thus: “The
+gods do not see the things that are done among men; if they did, they
+would not overlook the greatest human good, justice. For we find that men
+do not follow it.” Comp. text, p. 61.—Diagoras as Critias’s source:
+Nestle, _Jahrbb._, 1903, p. 101.
+
+P. 51. Euripides: see W. Nestle, _Euripides_ (Stuttgart, 1901) pp. 51-152.
+Here, too, the material is set forth exhaustively; the results seem to me
+inadmissible. Browning’s theory (_The Ring and the Book_, x. 1661 foll.)
+that Euripides did believe in the existence of the gods, but did not
+believe them to be perfect, is a possible, perhaps even a probable,
+explanation of many of his utterances; but it will hardly fit all of them.
+I have examined the question in an essay, “Browning om Euripides” in my
+_Udvalgte Afhandlinger_, p. 55.
+
+P. 52. Gods identified with the Elements: _Bacch._ 274; fragm. 839. 877,
+941 (Nestle, p. 153).
+
+P. 53. Polemic against sophists: Nestle, p. 206.—_Bellerophon_: fragm.
+286.
+
+P. 54. “If the gods——”: fragm. 292, 7.
+
+P. 55. _Melanippe_: fragm. 480. The words are said to have given offence
+at the rehearsal, so that Euripides altered them at the production of the
+play (Plut. _Amat._ ch. 13).—Aeschylus: _Agam._ 160.—Aristophanes:
+_Thesmoph._ 450.—In the _Frogs_, 892, Euripides prays to the Ether and
+other abstractions, not to the gods.—_Clouds_: 1371.
+
+P. 56. Plato: _Republ._ viii. p. 568a.—Quotation from _Melanippe_: Plut.
+_Amat._ 13.
+
+P. 57. Aristophanes and Naturalism: see note to p. 30.
+
+P. 58. Denial of the gods in the _Clouds_, 247, 367, 380, 423, 627, 817,
+825, 1232.—Moral of the piece: 1452-1510.—In Aristophanes’s own travesties
+of the gods, scholars have found evidence for a weakening of popular
+belief, but this is certainly wrong; comp. Decharme, p. 109.—Words like
+“believe” and “belief” do not cover the Greek word νομίζειν, which
+signifies at once “believe” and “be in the habit,” “use habitually,” so
+that it covers both belief and worship—an ambiguity that is characteristic
+of Greek religion.—Xenophon: _Memorab._ i. 1; _Apol. Socr._ 10 and foll.
+
+P. 59. Plato: _Apol._ p. 24_b_ (the indictment); 26_b_ (the refutation).
+
+P. 60. Aristodemus: Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 4.—Cinesias: Decharme, p. 135.—The
+Hermocopidae: Decharme, p. 152. Beloch, _Hist. of Greece_, ii. 1, p. 360,
+has another explanation. To my argument it is of no consequence what
+special motive is assigned for the crime, as long as it is a political
+one.
+
+P. 61. Plato on impiety: _Laws_, x. p. 886b; comp. xii. p. 967_a_.
+Curiously enough, the same tripartition of the wrong attitude towards the
+gods occurs already in the _Republic_, ii. p. 365_d_, where it is
+introduced incidentally as well known and a matter of course.
+
+P. 62. Euripides: _e.g._ _Hecuba_, 488; _Suppl._ 608.—Reference to
+Anaxagoras: _Laws_, x. p. 886_d_; to Sophistic, 889_b_.
+
+P. 65. Plato in the _Apology_: p. 19_c_.—Socrates’s _daimonion_ a proof of
+_asebeia_: Xenoph. _Memorab._ i. 1, 2; _Apol_. _Socr._ 12; Plato, _Apol._
+p. 31_d_.
+
+P. 66. Accusation of teaching the doctrine of Anaxagoras: Plato, _Apol._
+p. 26_d_; comp. Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 1, 10.—Plato’s defence of Socrates:
+_Apol._ p. 27_a_.
+
+P. 67. Xenophon’s defence of Socrates: _Memor._ i. 1, 2; 6 foll., 10
+foll.—Teleological view of nature: Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 4; iv. 3.—On the
+religious standpoint of Socrates, comp. my _Udvalgte Afhandlinger_, p. 38.
+
+P. 68. Plato’s _Apology_, p. 21_d_, 23_a_ and _f_, etc.—The gods
+all-knowing: _Odyss._ iv. 379 and 468; comp. Nägelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p.
+18; _Nachhom. Theol._ p. 23.
+
+P. 69. The gods just: Nägelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p. 297; _Nachhom. Theol._
+p. 27.
+
+P. 71. The relation between early religious thought and Delphi has been
+explained correctly by Sam Wide, _Einleit. in die Altertumswissensch._,
+ii. p. 221; comp. also I. L. Heiberg in _Tilskueren_, 1919, ii. p.
+44.—Honours shown to Pindar at Delphi: schol. Pind. ed. Drachm. i. p. 2,
+14; 5, 6. Pausan, x. 24. 5.
+
+P. 72. Plato on the Delphic Oracle: _Apol._ p. 20_e_. On the following
+comp. I. L. Heiberg, _loc. cit._ p. 45.—Socrates on his _daimonion_:
+Plato, _Apol._ p. 31_c_.
+
+P. 74. Antisthenes: Ritter, _Hist. philos. Gr.__9_ 285.—On the later
+Cynics, especially Diogenes, see Diog. Laert. vi. 105 (the gods are in
+need of nothing); Julian, _Or._ vi. p. 199_b_ (Diogenes did not worship
+the gods).
+
+P. 75. Cyrenaics: Diog. Laert. ii. 91.—Date of Theodorus: Diog. Laert. ii.
+101, 103; his book on the gods: Diog. Laert. ii. 97, Sext. Emp. _adv.
+math._ ix. 55; his trial: Diog. Laert. ii. 101.
+
+P. 76. Theodorus’s book used by Epicurus: Diog. Laert. ii. 97.—Zeller:
+_Philos. d. Griechen_, ii. 1, p. 925.—Euthyphron: see especially p. 14_b_
+foll.
+
+P. 77. Criticism of Mythology in the _Republic_: ii. p. 377_b_ foll.;
+worship presupposed: _e.g._ iii. p. 415_e_; v. p. 459_e_, 461_a_, 468_d_,
+469_a_, 470_a_; vii. p. 540_b_; reference to the Oracle: iv. p.
+427_b_.—_Timaeus_: p. 40_d_ foll.—_Laws_, rules of worship: vi. p. 759_a_,
+vii. p. 967_a_ and elsewhere, x. p. 909_d_; capital punishment for
+atheists: x. p. 909_a_. Comp. above, on p. 61.
+
+P. 78. Atheism a sin of youth: _Laws_, x. p. 888_a_.—Goodness and truth of
+the gods: _Republ._ ii. p. 379_a_, 380_d_, 382_a_.—Belief in Providence:
+_Laws_, x. p. 885_c_, etc.; _Republ._ x. p. 612_e_; _Apol._ p. 41_d_.
+
+P. 79. _Laws_, x. p. 888_d_, 893_b_ foll., especially 899_c-d_; comp. also
+xii. p. 967_a-c._—_Timaeus_: p. 40_d-f_. Comp. _Laws_, xii. p. 948_b_.
+
+P. 80. The gods in the _Republic_, ii. p. 380_d_. This passage, taken
+together with Plato’s general treatment of popular belief, might lead to
+the hypothesis that it was Plato’s doctrine of ideas rather than the
+rationalism of his youth that brought about strained relations between his
+thought and popular belief. I incline to think that such is the case; but
+there is a long step even from such a state of things to downright
+atheism, and the stress Plato always laid on the belief in Providence is a
+strong argument in favour of his belief in the gods, for he could never
+make his ideas act in the capacity of Providence.—The gods as creators of
+mankind: _Timaeus_, p. 41_a_ foll.
+
+P. 81. Xenocrates: the exposition of his doctrine given in the text is
+based upon Heinze’s _Xenokrates_ (Leipzig, 1892).
+
+P. 83. Trial of Aristotle: Diog. Laert. v. 5; Athen. xv. p. 696.—The
+writings of Aristotle that have come down to us are almost all of them
+compositions for the use of his disciples, and were not accessible to the
+general public during his lifetime.
+
+P. 84. On the religious views of Aristotle see in general Zeller, ii. 2,
+p. 787 (Engl. transl. ii. p. 325); where the references to his writings
+are given in full. In the following I indicate only a few passages of
+special interest.—Discussion of worship precluded: _Top._ A, xi. p.
+105_a_, 5.—Aristotle’s Will: _Diog_. Laert. v. 15.—The gods as determining
+the limits of the human: _e.g._ _Nic. Eth._ K, viii. p. 1178b, 33: “(the
+wise) will also be in need of outward prosperity, as he is (only) a
+man.”—Reservations in speaking of the gods, _e.g._ _Nic. Eth._ K, ix. p.
+1179_a_, 13: “he who is active in accordance with reason ... must also be
+supposed to be the most beloved of the gods; for if the gods trouble
+themselves about human affairs—_and that they do so is generally taken for
+granted_—it must be probable that they take pleasure in what is best and
+most nearly related to themselves (_and that must be the reason_), and
+that they reward those who love and honour this most highly,” etc. The
+passage is typical both of the hypothetical way of speaking, and of the
+twist in the direction of Aristotle’s own conception of the deity (whose
+essence is reason); also of the Socratic manner of dealing with the gods.
+
+P. 85. The passage quoted is from the _Metaphysics_, A viii. p. 1074_a_,
+38. Comp. _Metaph._ B, ii. p. 997_b_, 8; iv. p. 1000_a_, 9.
+
+P. 86. Theophrastus: Diog. Laert. v. 37.
+
+P. 87. Strato: Diels, _Ueber das physikal. System des S., Sitzungsber. d.
+Berl. Akad._, 1893, p. 101.—His god the same as nature: _Cic. de nat.
+deor._ i. 35.
+
+P. 89. On the history of Hellenistic religion, see Wendland, _Die
+hellenistisch-römische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen z. Judentum u.
+Christentum_ (Tübingen, 1907).
+
+P. 90. The passage quoted is Polyb. vi. 56, 6.
+
+P. 92. On the Tyche-Religion, see Nägelsbach, _Nachhom. Theologie_, p.
+153; Lehrs, _Populäre Aufsätze_, p. 153; Rohde, _Griech. Roman_, p. 267
+(1st ed.); Wendland, p. 59.—Thucydides: see Classen in the introduction to
+his (3rd) edition, pp. lvii-lix, where all the material is collected. A
+conclusive passage is vii. 36, 6, where Thuc. makes the bigoted Nicias
+before a decisive battle express the hope that “Fortune” will favour the
+Athenians.—Demosthenes’s dream: _Aeschin._ iii. 77.—Demosthenes on Tyche:
+_Olynth._ ii. 22; _de cor._ 252.
+
+P. 93. Demosthenes and the Pythia: _Aesch._ iii. 130. Comp. _ibid._ 68,
+131, 152; Plutarch, _Dem._ 20.—Demetrius of Phalerum: Polyb. xxix.
+21.—Temples of Tyche: Roscher, _Mythol. Lex._, art. _Fortuna_.
+
+P. 94. Tyche mistress of the gods: _Trag. adesp. fragm._ 506, Nauck; [Dio
+Chrys.] lxiv. p. 331 R.—Polybius: i. 1; iii. 5, 7.—The reservations
+against Tyche as a principle for the explaining of historical facts, and
+the twisting of the notion in the direction of Providence found in certain
+passages in Polybius, do not concern us here; they are probably due to the
+Stoic influence he underwent during his stay at Rome. Comp. below, on p.
+114, and see Cuntz, _Polybios_ (Leipzig, 1902), p. 43.—Pliny: ii. 22 foll.
+
+P. 95. Tyche in the novels: Rohde, _Griech. Rom._ p. 280.
+
+P. 97. Strabo: xvii. p. 813.—Plutarch: _de def. or._ 5 and 7.
+
+P. 98. The Aetolians at Dium: Polyb. iv. 62; at Dodona, iv. 67; Philip at
+Thermon, v. 9; Dicaearchus, xviii. 54.—Decay of Roman worship: Wissowa,
+_Religion u. Kultus d. Römer_, p. 70 (2nd ed.). To this work I must refer
+for indications of the sources; but the polemic in the text is chiefly
+directed against Wissowa.
+
+P. 99. Ennius: comp. below, p. 112.
+
+P. 100. Varro: in Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, vi. 2.
+
+P. 103. Theology of the Stoics: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 309-45.
+
+P. 104. Demonology of the Stoics: Heinze, _Xenokrates_, p. 96.
+
+P. 105. Epicurus’s theology: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 427-38. Comp. Schwartz,
+_Charakterköpfe_, ii. p. 43.
+
+P. 106. Epicurus’s doctrine of the eternity of the gods criticised: Cic.
+_de nat. deor._ i. 68 foll.
+
+P. 107. The Sceptics: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 507 and 521.
+
+P. 109. Diogenes: see note on p. 74.—Bion: Diog. Laert. iv. 52 and 54.
+
+P. 110. Menippos: R. Helm, _Lukian u. Menipp_ (Leipzig and Berlin, 1906).
+
+P. 111. Euhemerus: Jacoby in Pauly-Wissowa’s _Realencyclop._, art.
+“Euemeros”; Wendland, _Hellenist. Kultur_, p. 70.—Euhemerism before
+Euhemerus: Lobeck, _Aglaophamus_, p. 9; Wendland, p. 67.
+
+P. 112. A Danish scholar, Dr. J. P. Jacobsen (_Afhandlinger og Artikler_,
+p. 490), seems to think that Euhemerus’s theory was influenced by the
+worship of heroes. But there is nothing to show that Euhemerus supposed
+his gods to have continued their existence after their death, though this
+would have been in accordance with Greek belief even in the Hellenistic
+period; he seems rather to have insisted that they were worshipped as gods
+during their lifetime (comp. Jacoby, _loc. cit._).
+
+P. 114. Euhemerism in Polybius: xxxiv. 2; comp. x. 10, 11.—Relapse into
+orthodoxy: xxxvii. 9 (the decisive passage); xxxix. 19, 2 (concluding
+prayer to the gods); xviii. 54, 7-10; xxiii. 10, 14 (the gods punish
+impiety; comp. xxxvii. 9, 16). There is a marked contrast between such
+passages and the way Polybius speaks of Philip’s destruction of the
+sanctuary at Thermon; he blames it severely, but merely on political, not
+on religious grounds (v. 9-12). Orthodox utterances in the older portions
+of the work (i. 84, 10; x. 2, 7) may be due to that accommodation to
+popular belief which Polybius himself acknowledges as justifiable (xvi.
+12, 9), but also to later revision.—Influence of Stoicism: Hirzel,
+_Untersuchungen zu Ciceros philos. Schriften_, ii. p. 841.
+
+P. 115. Cicero’s Stoicism in his philosophy of religion: _de nat. deor._
+iii. 40, 95.
+
+P. 116. Sanctuary to Tullia: Cic. _ad Att._ xii. 18 foll.; several of the
+letters (23, 25, 35, 36) show that Atticus disapproved of the idea, and
+that Cicero himself was conscious that it was unworthy of him.
+
+P. 117. Euhemeristic defence: _fragm. consol._ 14, 15.—Augustus’s
+reorganisation of the cults: Wissowa, _Religion u. Kultus d. Römer_, p.
+73. Recent scholars, especially when treating of Virgil (Heinze, _Vergils
+ep. Technik_, 3rd ed. p. 291; Norden, _Aeneis_, vi. 2nd ed. pp. 314, 318,
+362), speak of the reform of Augustus as if it involved a real revulsion
+of feeling in his contemporaries. This is in my opinion a complete
+misunderstanding of the facts. Virgil’s religious views: _Catal. v.,
+Georgics_, ii. 458.
+
+P. 118. Pliny: _hist. nat._ ii. 1-27. The passages translated are §§ 14
+and 27.
+
+P. 122. Seneca: fragm. 31-39, Haase.—Stoic polemic against atheism:
+Epictetus, _diss._ ii. 20, 21; comp. Marcus Aurelius, vi. 44.—Later
+Cynicism: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 763.—Oenomaus: only preserved in excerpts by
+Euseb. _praep. evang._ 5-6 (a separate edition is wanted).—His polemic
+directed against the priests: Euseb. 5, p. 213_c_; comp. Oenomaus himself,
+_ibid._ 6, p. 256_d_.
+
+P. 123. Lucian: see Christ, _Gesch. d. griech. Litt._ ii. 2, p. 550 (5th
+ed.), and R. Helm, _Lukian u. Menipp_ (see note to p. 110).
+
+P. 124. Timon: ch. x.
+
+P. 126. On Lucian’s caution in attacking the really popular gods, see
+Wilamowitz, in _Kultur d. Gegenwart_, i. 8, p. 248.—The Jews atheists:
+Harnack, _Der Vorwurf d. Atheismus in den 3 ersten Jahrh_. (_Texte u.
+Unters._, N.F., xiii. 4), p. 3.
+
+P. 127. I have met with no comprehensive treatment of Jewish and Christian
+polemic against Paganism; Geffcken, _Zwei griech. Apologeten_ (Leipzig,
+1907), is chiefly concerned with investigations into the sources. I shall
+therefore indicate the principal passages on which my treatment is
+based.—Polemic against images in the Old Testament: Isaiah 44.10 etc.; in
+later literature: Epistle of Jeremiah; Wisdom of Solomon 13 foll.; Philo,
+_de decal._ 65 foll., etc.—Euhemerism: Wisdom of Solomon 14.15; Epistle of
+Aristeas, 135; Sibyll. iii. 547, 554, 723.—Elements and celestial bodies:
+Wisdom of Solomon 13; Philo, _de decal._ 52 foll.—The tenacity of
+tradition is apparent from the fact that even Maimonides in his treatise
+of idolatry deals only with star-worship and image-worship. I know the
+treatise only from the Latin translation by D. Voss (in G. I. Voss’s
+_Opera_, vol. v.).—Demons: Deuteron. 32.17; Psalms 106.37; add (according
+to LXX.) Isaiah 65.11; Psalms 96.5. Later writers: Enoch 19.99, 7; Baruch
+4.7. Such passages as Jub. 22, 17 or Sibyll. prooem. 22 are possibly
+Euhemeristic.—Fallen angels: Enoch, 19.—Philo’s demonology: _de gig._
+6-18, etc.
+
+P. 128. St. Paul: 1 Cor. 10.20; comp. 8.4 and Rom. 1.23.
+
+P. 129. Image-worship and demon-worship not conciliated: _e.g._ Tertull.
+_Apologet._ 10-15 and 22-23, comp. 27.—Jewish demonology: Bousset,
+_Religion d. Judentums_, p. 326 (1st ed.).—Fallen angels: _e.g._ Athenag.
+24 foll.; Augustine, _Enchir._ 9, 28 foll.; _de civ. Dei_, viii. 22.
+
+P. 130. Euhemerism in the Apologists: _e.g._ Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, ii.
+10; vi. 7; vii. 18 and 33; viii. 26.—Euhemerism and demonology combined:
+_e.g._ Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, ii. 10; vii. 35; comp. vii. 28
+fin.—Worship of the heavenly bodies: _e.g._ Aristid. 3 foll.; Augustine,
+_de civ. Dei_, vii. 29 foll.
+
+P. 131. Paganism a delusion caused by demons: Thomas Aq. _Summa theol._ P.
+ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. below, note on p. 135.
+
+P. 133. For the following sketch I have found valuable material in
+Gedike’s essay, _Ueber die mannigfaltigen Hypothesen z. Erklärung d.
+Mythologie_ (_Verm. Schriften_, Berlin, 1801, p. 61).
+
+P. 134. Milton: _Paradise Lost_, i. 506. The theory that the pagan oracles
+fell mute at the rise of Christianity is also found in Milton, _Hymn on
+the Morning of Christ’s Nativity_, st. xviii. foll.
+
+P. 135. G. I. Voss; _De Theologia Gentili_, lib. i. (published,
+1642)—Voss’s view is in the main that idolatry as a whole is the work of
+the Devil. What is worshipped is partly the heavenly bodies, partly
+demons, partly (and principally) dead men; most of the ancient gods are
+identified with persons from the Old Testament. Demon-worship is dealt
+with in ch. 6; it is proved among other things by the true predictions of
+the oracles. Individual Greek deities are identified with demons in ch. 7,
+in a context where oracles are dealt with. On older works of the same
+tendency, see below, note on p. 140; on Natalis Comes, _ibid._ A fuller
+treatment of Voss’s theories is found in Gruppe’s work, § 25.—Thomas
+Aquinas: _Summa theol._ P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. also Q. 122, art.
+2.—Dante: Sommo Giove for God, _Purg._ vi. 118; his devils: Charon, _Inf._
+iii. 82 (109 expressly designated as “dimonio”); Minos, _Inf._ v. 4;
+Geryon, _Inf._ xviii. (there are more of the same kind).—“Dei falsi e
+bugiardi”: _Inf._ i. 72. (Plutus, who appears as a devil in _Inf._ vii.
+was probably taken by Dante for an antique god; but the name may also be a
+classicising translation of Mammon.)
+
+P. 136. Mediaeval epic poets: Nyrop, _Den oldfranske Heltedigtning_, p.
+255 and 260; Dernedde, _Ueber die den altfranzös. Dichtern bekannten
+Stoffe aus dem Altertum_ (Diss. Götting. 1887).—Confusion of ancient and
+Christian elements: Dernedde, p. 10; the gods are devils: Dernedde, pp.
+85, 88.—Euhemerism: Dernedde, p. 4.—I have tried to get a first-hand
+impression of the way the gods are treated by the old French epic poets,
+but the material is too large, and indexes suited to the purpose are
+wanting. The paganism of the original is taken over naïvely, _e.g._, by
+Veldeke, _Eneidt_, i. 45, 169.—On magic I have consulted Horst’s
+_Dämonomagie_ (Frankf. 1818); and his _Zauber-Bibliothek_ (Mainz,
+1821-26); Schindler, _Der Aberglaube des Mittelalters_ (Breslau, 1858);
+Maury, _La magie et l’astrologie dans l’antiquité et au moyen âge_ (Paris,
+1860). These authors all agree that mediaeval magic is dependent on
+antiquity, but that the pagan gods are superseded by devils (or the
+Devil). The connexion in substance with antiquity, on which Maury
+specially insists, is certain enough, but does not concern us here, where
+the question is about the theory. In the _Zauber-Bibl._ i. p. 137 (in the
+treatise _Pneumatologia vera et occulta_), the snake Python is put down
+among the demons, with the remark that Apollo was called after it.—Magic
+formulae with antique gods: Heim, _Incantamenta magica_ (in the _Neue
+Jahrbb. f. Philologie_, Suppl. xix. 1893, p. 557; I owe this reference to
+the kindness of my colleague, Prof. Groenbeck). Pradel, _Religionsgesch.
+Vers. u. __ Vorarb._ iii., has collected prayers and magic formulae from
+Italy and Greece; they do not contain names of antique gods.
+
+P. 137. Acosta: Joseph de Acosta, _Historia naturale e morale delle
+Indie_, Venice, 1596. I have used this Italian translation; the original
+work appeared in 1590.—Demons at work in oracles: bk. v. ch. 9; in magic:
+ch. 25.
+
+P. 138. Demon in Brazil: Voss, _Theol. Gent._ i. ch. 8.—Pagan worship in
+the Florentine and Roman Academies: Voigt, _Wiederbelebung d. klass.
+Altertums_, ii. p. 239 (2nd ed.); Hettner, _Ital. Studien_, p. 174.—On the
+conception of the antique gods in the earlier Middle Ages, see Gruppe, §
+4.—Thomas Aquinas: _Summa theol._ P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4.—Curious and
+typical of the mediaeval way of reasoning is the idea of seeking
+prototypes of the Christian history of salvation in pagan mythology. See
+v. Eicken, _Gesch. u. System d. mittelalt. Weltanschauung_ (Stuttg. 1887),
+p. 648, and (with more detail) F. Piper, _Mythologie u. Symbolik d.
+christl. Kunst_ (Weimar, 1847-51), i. p. 143; comp. also Gruppe, § 8 foll.
+Good instances are the myths in the _Speculum humanae salvationis_, chs. 3
+and 24.
+
+P. 139. On Hebraism in general, see Gruppe, § 19 and § 24 foll.; on Huet,
+§ 28. Nevertheless, Huet operates with demonology in connexion with the
+oracles (_Dem. evang._ ii. 9, 34, 4).
+
+P. 140. On Natalis Comes, see Gruppe, § 19. In bk. i. ch. 7, Natalis Comes
+gives an account of the origin of antiquity’s conceptions of the gods; it
+has quite a naturalistic turn. Nevertheless, we find in ch. 16 a remark
+which shows that he embraced demonology in its crudest form; compare also
+the theory set forth in ch. 10. His interpretations of myths are collected
+in bk. x.—On Bacon, see Gruppe, § 22. Typhoeus-myth: introduct. to _De
+sapientia veterum._—Alchemistic interpretations: Gedike, _Verm.
+Schriften_, p. 78; Gruppe, § 30. Of the works quoted by Gedike, I have
+consulted Faber’s _Panchymicum_ (Frankf. 1651) and Toll’s Fortuita
+(Amsterd. 1687). Faber has only some remarks on the matter in bk. i. ch.
+5; by Toll the alchemistic interpretation is carried through. Gedike
+quotes, moreover, a work by Suarez de Salazar, which must date from the
+sixteenth century; according to Jöcher (iv. 1913) it only exists in MS.,
+and I do not know where Gedike got his reference.—Thomas: _Summa_, P. ii.
+2, Q. 172, arts. 5 and 6.
+
+P. 141. Demonology as explanation of the oracles: see van Dale, _De
+oraculis_, p. 430 (Amsterd. 1700); he quotes numerous treatises from the
+sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I have glanced at Moebius, _De
+oraculorum ethnicorum origine_, etc. (Leipzig, 1656).—Caelius Rhodiginus:
+_Lectionum antiq._ (Leyden, 1516), lib. ii. cap. 12; comp. Gruppe, §
+15.—Caelius Calcagninus: _Oraculorum liber_ (in his _Opera_, Basle, 1544,
+p. 640). The little dialogue is not very easy to understand; it is
+evidently a satire on contemporary credulity; but that Caelius completely
+rejected divination seems to be assumed also by G. I. Voss, _Theol. Gent._
+i. 6.—Machiavelli: _Discorsi_, i. 56.—Van Dale: _De oraculis gentilium_
+(1st ed. Amsterd. 1683); _De idololatria_ (Amsterd. 1696). Difficulties
+with the biblical accounts of demons: _De idol._, dedication.—Fontenelle:
+_Histoire des oracles_ (Paris, 1687). The little book has an amusing
+preface, in which Fontenelle with naïve complacency (and with a sharp eye
+for van Dale’s deficiencies of style) gives an account of his
+popularisation of the learned work. On Fontenelle and the answer by the
+Jesuit, Balthus, see for further details Banier, _La mythologie et les
+fables expliquées par l’histoire_ (Paris, 1738), bk. iii. ch. 1. Van
+Dale’s book itself had called forth an answer by Moebius (included in the
+edition of 1690 of his work, _de orac. ethn. orig._).—On the influence
+exercised by van Dale and Fontenelle on the succeeding mythologists, see
+Gruppe, § 34.—Banier: see Gruppe, § 35.
+
+P. 143. Vico: _Scienza nuova_ (Milan, 1853), p. 168 (bk. ii. in the
+section, Della metafisica poetica); political allegories, _e.g._ p. 309
+(in the Canone mitologico). Comp. Gruppe, § 44.—Banier: in the work
+indicated above, bk. i. ch. 5.
+
+P. 144. On the mythological theories of the eighteenth century, comp.
+Gruppe, § 36 foll.; on Bryant, § 40; on Dupuis, § 41.—Polemic against
+Euhemerism from the standpoint of nature-symbolism: de la Barre, _Mémoires
+pour servir à l’histoire de la religion en Grèce_, in _Mém. de l’Acad. des
+Inscr._ xxiv. (1749; the treatise had already been communicated in 1737
+and 1738); a posthumous continuation in _Mém._ xxix. (1770) gives an idea
+of de la Barre’s own point of view, which was not a little in advance of
+his time. Comp. Gruppe, § 37.
+
+P. 145. A good survey of modern investigations in the field of the history
+of ancient religion is given by Sam Wide in the _Einleit. in die
+Altertumswissensch._ ii.; here also remarks on the mythology of older
+times. The later part of Gruppe’s work contains a very full treatment of
+the subject.
+
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+Absolute definitions of the divine, 16, 19, 68, 69, 82, 88.
+
+Academics, 149.
+
+Academy, later, 108, 114.
+
+Acosta, 137, 139, 141.
+
+Aelian, 121.
+
+Aeneid (mediaeval), 136.
+
+Aeschines, 93.
+
+Aeschylus, 54, 55.
+
+Aetolians, 97, 98.
+
+Alchemistic explanation of Paganism, 140.
+
+Alcibiades, 60.
+
+Alexander the Great, 93, 112.
+
+Allegorical interpretation, 104, 113, 139, 140, 143, 144.
+
+American Paganism, 137, 139, 141.
+
+Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, 7, 13, 25-29, 30, 31, 40, 62, 63, 66, 124.
+
+Anaximenes, 30.
+
+Angelology, 129.
+
+Anthropomorphism, 14, 18, 19, 69.
+
+Antisthenes, 13, 74, 109.
+
+Apologists, 128, 130, 132, 139.
+
+Arcissewsky, 138.
+
+Aristides the Apologist, 129.
+
+Aristides Rhetor, 121.
+
+Aristodemus, 60, 62.
+
+Aristophanes, 30, 32, 33, 39, 55, 56-58, 65.
+  _Birds_, 32.
+  _Clouds_, 30, 55, 56-58
+  _Frogs_, 55.
+
+Aristotle, 13, 30, 32, 46, 83-87, 104, 113.
+  _Ethics_, 84.
+  _Metaphysics_, 85-86.
+  _Politics_, 84.
+
+Aristoxenus, 32, 33.
+
+Asclepius, 111, 121, 126.
+
+_Asebeia_, 6, 7, 8.
+
+Aspasia, 27.
+
+Atheism (and Atheist) defined, 1;
+  rare in antiquity, 2, 133;
+  of recent origin, 2, 143;
+  origin of the words, 5;
+  lists of atheists, 13;
+  punishable by death in Plato’s _Laws_, 77;
+  sin of youth, 78.
+
+Athene, 74.
+
+Athens, its treatment of atheism, 6-8, 9, 12, 25, 39, 65 foll., 74, 75,
+            83, 86;
+  its view of sophistic, 58-59.
+
+_Atheos_ (_atheoi_), 2, 10, 13, 14, 19, 23, 29, 43, 75, 110.
+
+_Atheotes_, 2.
+
+Augustine, St., 129, 135.
+
+Augustus, 117;
+  religious reaction of, 100, 113, 117, 120.
+
+Aurelius, Marcus, 11, 121.
+
+Bacon, Francis (_De Sap. Vet._) 140.
+
+Banier, 142, 143.
+
+Bible, 130, 142.
+
+Bion, 13, 109.
+
+Brazil, 138.
+
+Bruno, Giordano, 151.
+
+Bryant, 144.
+
+Buttmann, 152.
+
+Caelius Calcagninus, 141.
+
+Caelius Rhodiginus, 141.
+
+Callicles, 48 foll., 63.
+
+Carlyle, 112.
+
+Carneades, 8, 108.
+
+Cassander of Macedonia, 111.
+
+Charon, 135.
+
+Christianity, 126, 128-32.
+
+Christians, their atheism, 9;
+  prosecutions of, 10;
+  demonology, 83.
+
+Cicero, 19, 105, 114-17, 147.
+  _Nature of the Gods_, 115.
+  _On the State_, 115.
+  _On the Laws_, 115.
+  _De consolatione_, 116.
+
+Cinesias, 60.
+
+Copernicus, 151.
+
+Critias, 13, 44-50.
+  _Sisyphus_, 44 f., 114.
+
+Criticism of popular religion, 16, 17, 19, 35 foll., 74, 78, 82, 84, 88,
+            90, 99, 104, 109, 110, 122, 124-26.
+
+Cuthites, 144.
+
+Cynics, 74, 109-10, 122, 124, 147.
+
+Cyrenaics, 75.
+
+_Daimonion_ of Socrates, 65, 66, 72-73.
+
+van Dale, 141-42.
+
+Dante, 135.
+
+Deisidaimon, 75.
+
+Demeter, 42, 43, 81.
+
+Demetrius of Phalerum, 75, 93.
+  _On Tyche_, 93.
+
+Democritus, 24, 42, 43, 44, 47, 52.
+
+Demonology, 81-83, 105, 113, 127-32, 134-42, 148, 149.
+
+Demosthenes, 92-93, 96.
+
+Devil, 132, 137, 139, 141, 144.
+
+Diagoras of Melos, 13, 31-34, 39, 50.
+  _Apopyrgizontes logoi_, 32, 33.
+
+Dicaearchus, 98.
+
+Diodorus Siculus, 112.
+
+Diogenes of Apollonia, 13, 29-30, 57.
+
+Diogenes the Cynic, 109.
+
+Dionysus, 42, 43.
+
+Diopeithes, 28.
+
+Dioscuri, 124.
+
+Dium, 98.
+
+Divination, 18, 20, 26, 27, 28, 40, 97, 114, 131, 135, 137, 140-42.
+  Comp. Oracle.
+
+Dodona, 98, 141.
+
+Dogmatics, 108.
+
+Domitian, 11.
+
+Dupuis, 144.
+
+Elements, divine, 23, 24, 30, 52 foll., 57, 81, 103, 127.
+
+Eleusinian Mysteries, 32, 33, 40, 60.
+
+Ennius, 99, 112.
+
+Epicureans, Epicurus, 13, 76, 80, 83, 105-7, 113, 147, 149.
+
+Euhemerus, Euhemerism, 13, 110-12, 113, 114, 117, 127, 130, 136, 137, 139,
+            140, 142, 143, 144.
+
+Euripides, 16, 17, 21, 45, 46, 48, 51-56, 62.
+  _Bellerophon_, 53.
+  _Melanippe_, 55, 56.
+
+Fallen angels, 128, 129, 130.
+
+Florentine Academy, 138.
+
+Foreign gods, 70, 89, 103.
+
+Fontenelle, 142.
+
+Geocentric view, 150.
+
+Geryon, 135.
+
+Giants, 18.
+
+Gorgias, 37.
+
+Hades, 81.
+
+Heavenly bodies, 2, 20, 22, 25, 43, 62, 66, 79, 80, 81, 84, 87, 104, 127,
+            128, 130, 137, 139, 144, 149, 151.
+
+Heavenly phenomena, 22.
+
+Hebraism, 139, 143, 144.
+
+Hecataeus of Abdera, 112.
+
+Heliocentric view, 151.
+
+Hellenistic philosophy, 94, 103-10, 119.
+
+Hephaestus, 42, 43.
+
+Heracles, 74, 111.
+
+Hercules, 136.
+
+Herder, 145.
+
+Hermae, 40, 60.
+
+Hermes, 124.
+
+Hermias, 83.
+
+Herodotus, 28, 29.
+
+Hesiod, 16, 18.
+
+Heyne, 152.
+
+Hippo of Rhegium, 13, 29-30.
+
+Holy War, 96.
+
+Homer, 16, 18, 43, 68, 106.
+
+Horace, 117.
+
+Huet, 139.
+
+Hylozoism, 23.
+
+Ideas, Platonic, 80.
+
+Idolatry attacked, 123.
+  See also Image Worship.
+
+Ignorance, Socratic, 68.
+
+Image Worship, 127, 128, 131-37.
+
+Jews, their atheism, 9, 126.
+
+Josephus, 128.
+
+Judaism, 126, 127-28, 129.
+
+Juno Regina, 136.
+
+Jupiter (in Dante), 135;
+  (in the Thebaïs,) 136.
+
+Jupiter-priest, 100.
+
+Kepler, 151.
+
+Kronos, 111.
+
+Lampon, 26.
+
+Lobeck, 152.
+
+Lucian, 110, 123-26.
+  _Timon_, 124.
+  _Dialogues of the Gods_, 125.
+
+Lucretius, 106.
+
+Luna Jovis filia, 136.
+
+Macedonia, 93.
+
+Machiavelli, 141.
+
+Magic, 136-37.
+
+Mannhardt, 152.
+
+Mantinea, constitution of, 32.
+
+Marcus Aurelius, 11, 121.
+
+Mediaeval epic poets, 136.
+
+Megarians, 74, 107.
+
+Menippus of Gadara, 110.
+
+Mexico, 137.
+
+Middle Ages, 133, 135-39.
+
+Milton (_Paradise Lost_), 134, 135, 141.
+
+Minos, 135.
+
+Miracles, pagan, 131, 132.
+
+Modesty, religions, 55, 70, 73.
+
+Moschion, 46.
+
+Moses and his sister, 139.
+
+Monotheism, 9, 12, 23, 74, 80, 83, 127 foll., 139, 148, 151.
+
+Müller, K. O., 152.
+
+Natalis Comes, 139 foll.
+
+Naturalism, Ionian, 21, 22-25, 30-31, 52, 57.
+
+Negroes, 18.
+
+Neo-Platonists, 83, 121.
+
+Neo-Pythagoreans, 83, 121.
+
+Nero, 11.
+
+Newton, 151.
+
+Nile, 42.
+
+_Nomos_ (and _Physis_), 35, 36, 38, 63, 74.
+
+Nymphs, 136.
+
+Oenomaus (_The Swindlers Unmasked_), 122-23, 126.
+
+Old Testament, 127, 129.
+
+Oracle of Ammon, 97; oracles of Boeotia, 97;
+  Delphic Oracle, 28, 60, 67, 68, 71, 72, 77, 93, 96, 97, 123, 141;
+  decay of oracles, 96-97;
+  oracles explained by priestly fraud, 123, 141-42.
+  Ovid, 117.
+
+Paganism of Antiquity, its character, 15.
+
+Panchaia, 111.
+
+Parmenides, 21.
+
+Pantheism, 20, 23, 103, 119, 122, 127.
+
+Paul, St., 128.
+
+Pericles, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 124.
+
+Peripatetics, 147, 149.
+
+Peru, 137.
+
+Pheidias, 27.
+
+Philip III. of Macedonia, 96.
+
+Philip V. of Macedonia, 97-98.
+
+Philo, 128.
+
+Phocians, 96.
+
+_Physis_ (and _Nomos_), 35, 36, 63, 74.
+
+Pindar, 16, 17, 52, 71.
+
+Plato, 13, 39, 48, 49, 50, 56, 59, 61-63, 65, 66, 72, 76-81, 82, 84, 113,
+            147.
+  _Apology_, 59, 65, 66, 68, 72, 78, 79.
+  _Euthyphron_, 67, 76.
+  _Gorgias_, 48 foll., 63, 77.
+  _Laws_, 61 foll., 77, 78, 79, 80.
+  _Republic_, 50, 56, 77, 78.
+  _Symposium_, 82.
+  _Timaeus_, 77, 79, 80.
+
+Platonism, 148.
+
+Plethon, 138.
+
+Pliny the Elder, 94, 95, 118, 147.
+
+Plutarch (_de def. orac._), 97.
+
+Polybius, 48, 90-91, 94, 99, 113-14, 147;
+  Stoicism in P., 114.
+
+Pomponazzi (_De Incantat._), 141.
+
+Poseidon, 42, 81.
+
+Poseidonius, 104.
+
+Prodicus of Ceos, 13, 42-44, 104.
+
+Protagoras of Abdera, 13, 39-42, 47.
+  _On the Gods_, 39 foll.
+  _Original State_, 47.
+
+Providence, 60, 61, 78, 105, 118, 122.
+
+Pythia, 93.
+
+Reaction, religious, of second century, 120-21, 125;
+  of Augustus, see Augustus.
+
+Reinterpretation of the conceptions of the gods, 2.
+  See also Allegorical interpretation.
+
+Religion a political invention, 47, 114.
+
+Religious thought, early, of Greece, 16-17, 52, 54, 55, 69-70, 71, 84, 88,
+            98, 107.
+
+Renaissance, 133, 138, 139 foll., 141.
+
+Rohde, 152.
+
+Roman Academy, 138.
+
+Roman religion, 90, 99-100, 101-2.
+
+Roman State-worship, decay of, 98-103.
+
+Romance of Troy, 136.
+
+Romances, 95-96.
+
+Rome’s treatment of atheism, 8-11.
+
+Rousseau, 145.
+
+Scepticism, 107-8, 114, 147.
+
+Schoolmen, 135.
+
+Seneca, 110, 122.
+
+Sibylline books, 97.
+
+Sisyphus, 45, 48.
+
+Socrates, 7, 13, 40, 46, 49, 56, 58, 64-73, 84, 107, 147. See also
+            _Daimonion_ of S.
+
+Socratic philosophy, 64, 87, 149.
+
+Socratic Schools, 73, 87-88.
+
+Sol invictus, 136.
+
+Solon, 16.
+
+Sophistic, 35-38, 57, 64, 87, 104, 148, 149.
+
+Sophocles, 28, 54.
+
+Stilpo, 13, 74, 108.
+
+Stoics, 83, 103-5, 113, 118, 119, 121-22, 147, 148, 149.
+
+Strabo, 97.
+
+Strato, 87, 108.
+
+Suetonius, 121.
+
+Supernaturalism, 149-51.
+
+Superstition, 75, 90, 102, 123, 126.
+
+Tapuis, 138.
+
+Thales, 24.
+
+Thebaïs (mediaeval), 136.
+
+Theodicy (Socratic), 67.
+
+Theodoras, 13, 75-76, 108, 109.
+  _On the Gods_, 75.
+
+Theophrastus, 13, 86.
+
+Thermon, 98.
+
+Thomas Aquinas, 131, 135, 138, 139, 140.
+
+Thracians, 18.
+
+Thrasymachus, 50, 62.
+
+Thucydides (the historian), 28-29, 92, 94.
+
+Thucydides (the statesman), 26.
+
+Tiberius, 118.
+
+Tisiphone, 136.
+
+Titans, 18.
+
+Tolerance in antiquity, 9, 11.
+
+Trajan, 11.
+
+Tullia, 116.
+
+Tyche, 91-96, 118.
+
+Typhoeus, 140.
+
+Uranos, 111.
+
+Usener, 152.
+
+Valerius Maximus, 118.
+
+Varro, 100, 110.
+
+Vico (_Scienza Nuova_), 143.
+
+Violation of sanctuaries, 40, 60, 97, 100.
+
+Virgil, 117.
+
+Voss, G. I., 135, 138, 141.
+
+Wisdom of Solomon, 128.
+
+Worship rejected, 9-13, 60, 74, 77, 84, 109, 123, 125.
+
+Xenocrates, 81-82, 105, 113, 129.
+
+Xenophanes of Colophon, 13, 17-21,
+52, 56.
+
+Xenophon, 58, 59, 62, 66, 67.
+  _Memorab._ 58, 60.
+  _Apology_, 58.
+
+Zeller, 76, 79.
+
+Zeno of Elea, 21.
+
+Zeus, 16, 22, 30, 43, 55, 57, 58, 81, 105, 111, 124.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FOOTNOTES
+
+
+    1 This was written before the appearance of Mr. Gruppe’s work,
+      _Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte_.
+      Compare _infra_, p. 154.
+
+
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+
+
+
+CREDITS
+
+
+March 11, 2009
+
+            Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1
+            Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, J.P.W. Fraser, David
+            King, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+            <http://www.pgdp.net/>.
+
+
+
+A WORD FROM PROJECT GUTENBERG
+
+
+This file should be named 28312-0.txt or 28312-0.zip.
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/1/28312/
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one — the old editions will be
+renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no one
+owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and
+you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission
+and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the
+General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
+distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the Project
+Gutenberg™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered
+trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you
+receive specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of
+this eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
+for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
+performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given away
+— you may do practically _anything_ with public domain eBooks.
+Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+
+
+_Please read this before you distribute or use this work._
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
+any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”),
+you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™
+License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.
+
+
+General Terms of Use & Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
+
+
+1.A.
+
+
+By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work,
+you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
+terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
+agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this
+agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of
+Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee
+for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work
+and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may
+obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set
+forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+
+1.B.
+
+
+“Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or
+associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
+bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
+do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying
+with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are
+a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you
+follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
+Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+
+1.C.
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or
+PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
+work is in the public domain in the United States and you are located in
+the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
+distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on
+the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
+course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of
+promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
+Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
+keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can
+easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
+same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you
+share it without charge with others.
+
+
+1.D.
+
+
+The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you
+can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant
+state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of
+your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
+downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
+derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work.
+The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of
+any work in any country outside the United States.
+
+
+1.E.
+
+
+Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+
+1.E.1.
+
+
+The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access
+to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever
+any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase
+“Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg”
+is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or
+distributed:
+
+
+    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+    almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
+    or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
+    included with this eBook or online at http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+1.E.2.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from the
+public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with
+permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and
+distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or
+charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
+phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you
+must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7
+or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
+trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.3.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
+with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
+by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
+Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the
+copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+
+1.E.4.
+
+
+Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License
+terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
+other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
+
+
+1.E.5.
+
+
+Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic
+work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying
+the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate
+access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.
+
+
+1.E.6.
+
+
+You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed,
+marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word
+processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than
+“Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted
+on the official Project Gutenberg™ web site (http://www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form.
+Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as
+specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+
+1.E.7.
+
+
+Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
+copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply
+with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.8.
+
+
+You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or
+distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that
+
+    - You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+      the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you
+      already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to
+      the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to
+      donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60
+      days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally
+      required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments
+      should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4,
+      “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+      Archive Foundation.”
+
+      You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+      you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+      does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License.
+      You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the
+      works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and
+      all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
+
+      You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
+      any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+      electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
+      receipt of the work.
+
+      You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+      distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
+
+
+1.E.9.
+
+
+If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
+work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this
+agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael Hart, the owner of the
+Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
+Section 3 below.
+
+
+1.F.
+
+
+1.F.1.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to
+identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these
+efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they
+may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
+incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright
+or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk
+or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot
+be read by your equipment.
+
+
+1.F.2.
+
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES — Except for the “Right of
+Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™
+trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™
+electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
+damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE
+NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
+OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
+FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
+WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
+PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY
+OF SUCH DAMAGE.
+
+
+1.F.3.
+
+
+LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND — If you discover a defect in this
+electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund
+of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to
+the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a
+physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation.
+The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect
+to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the
+work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose
+to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
+lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
+refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+
+1.F.4.
+
+
+Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
+paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ’AS-IS,’ WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+
+1.F.5.
+
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the
+exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
+limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state
+applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make
+the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state
+law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement
+shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+
+1.F.6.
+
+
+INDEMNITY — You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark
+owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of
+Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and
+any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
+of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs
+and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from
+any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of
+this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
+additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
+you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.
+
+
+           Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
+
+
+Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
+works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
+obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the
+efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks
+of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
+they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring
+that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for
+generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
+Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
+can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation web page at
+http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.
+
+
+   Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
+Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
+The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
+Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. Contributions to the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full
+extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
+
+The Foundation’s principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr.
+S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North
+1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact information
+can be found at the Foundation’s web site and official page at
+http://www.pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+
+
+    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+    Chief Executive and Director
+    gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.
+
+
+  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+                                Foundation
+
+
+Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread
+public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
+number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
+in machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment
+including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
+particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
+Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
+effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
+requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
+received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
+determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
+not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
+accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
+with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
+statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
+United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods
+and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
+checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please
+visit: http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.
+
+
+      General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works.
+
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg™
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
+anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™
+eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
+all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. unless a copyright
+notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance
+with any particular paper edition.
+
+Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook’s eBook
+number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII, compressed
+(zipped), HTML and others.
+
+Corrected _editions_ of our eBooks replace the old file and take over the
+old filename and etext number. The replaced older file is renamed.
+_Versions_ based on separate sources are treated as new eBooks receiving
+new filenames and etext numbers.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how
+to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
+how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
+newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+***FINIS***
+
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/28312-0.zip b/28312-0.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..312d275
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-0.zip
diff --git a/28312-8.txt b/28312-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b9736ce
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,5515 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Atheism in Pagan Antiquity by A. B.
+Drachmann
+
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no
+restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under
+the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or
+online at http://www.gutenberg.org/license
+
+
+
+Title: Atheism in Pagan Antiquity
+
+Author:
+A. B. Drachmann
+
+
+Release Date: March 11, 2009 [Ebook #28312]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO 8859-1
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+
+
+
+
+
+                        Atheism In Pagan Antiquity
+
+                                    By
+
+                             A. B. Drachmann
+
+     Professor of Classical Philology in the University of Copenhagen
+
+                                Gyldendal
+
+                      11 Hanover Square, London, W.1
+
+                                Copenhagen
+
+                               Christiania
+
+                                   1922
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+Preface
+Introduction
+Chapter I
+Chapter II
+Chapter III
+Chapter IV
+Chapter V
+Chapter VI
+Chapter VII
+Chapter VIII
+Chapter IX
+Notes
+Index
+Footnotes
+
+
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+The present treatise originally appeared in Danish as a University
+publication (_Kjoebenhavns Universitets Festskrift_, November 1919). In
+submitting it to the English public, I wish to acknowledge my profound
+indebtedness to Mr. G. F. Hill of the British Museum, who not only
+suggested the English edition, but also with untiring kindness has
+subjected the translation, as originally made by Miss Ingeborg Andersen,
+M.A. of Copenhagen, to a painstaking and most valuable revision.
+
+For an account of the previous treatments of the subject, as well as of
+the method employed in my investigation, the reader is referred to the
+introductory remarks which precede the Notes.
+
+A. B. DRACHMANN.
+CHARLOTTENLUND,
+_July 1922_.
+
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+
+The present inquiry is the outcome of a request to write an article on
+"Atheism" for a projected dictionary of the religious history of classical
+antiquity. On going through the sources I found that the subject might
+well deserve a more comprehensive treatment than the scope of a dictionary
+would allow. It is such a treatment that I have attempted in the following
+pages.
+
+A difficulty that occurred at the very beginning of the inquiry was how to
+define the notion of atheism. Nowadays the term is taken to designate the
+attitude which denies every idea of God. Even antiquity sometimes referred
+to atheism in this sense; but an inquiry dealing with the history of
+religion could not start from a definition of that kind. It would have to
+keep in view, not the philosophical notion of God, but the conceptions of
+the gods as they appear in the religion of antiquity. Hence I came to
+define atheism in Pagan antiquity as the point of view which _denies the
+existence of the ancient gods_. It is in this sense that the word will be
+used in the following inquiry.
+
+Even though we disregard philosophical atheism, the definition is somewhat
+narrow; for in antiquity mere denial of the existence of the gods of
+popular belief was not the only attitude which was designated as atheism.
+But it has the advantage of starting from the conception of the ancient
+gods that may be said to have finally prevailed. In the sense in which the
+word is used here we are nowadays all of us atheists. We do not believe
+that the gods whom the Greeks and the Romans worshipped and believed in
+exist or have ever existed; we hold them to be productions of the human
+imagination to which nothing real corresponds. This view has nowadays
+become so ingrained in us and appears so self-evident, that we find it
+difficult to imagine that it has not been prevalent through long ages;
+nay, it is perhaps a widely diffused assumption that even in antiquity
+educated and unbiased persons held the same view of the religion of their
+people as we do. In reality both assumptions are erroneous: our "atheism"
+in regard to ancient paganism is of recent date, and in antiquity itself
+downright denial of the existence of the gods was a comparatively rare
+phenomenon. The demonstration of this fact, rather than a consideration of
+the various intermediate positions taken up by the thinkers of antiquity
+in their desire to avoid a complete rupture with the traditional ideas of
+the gods, has been one of the chief purposes of this inquiry.
+
+Though the definition of atheism set down here might seem to be clear and
+unequivocal, and though I have tried to adhere strictly to it, cases have
+unavoidably occurred that were difficult to classify. The most
+embarrassing are those which involve a reinterpretation of the conception
+of the gods, _i.e._ which, while acknowledging that there is some reality
+corresponding to the conception, yet define this reality as essentially
+different from it. Moreover, the acknowledgment of a certain group of gods
+(the celestial bodies, for instance) combined with the rejection of
+others, may create difficulties in defining the notion of atheism; in
+practice, however, this doctrine generally coincides with the former, by
+which the gods are explained away. On the whole it would hardly be just,
+in a field of inquiry like the present, to expect or require absolutely
+clearly defined boundary-lines; transition forms will always occur.
+
+The persons of whom it is related that they denied the existence of the
+ancient gods are in themselves few, and they all belong to the highest
+level of culture; by far the greater part of them are simply professional
+philosophers. Hence the inquiry will almost exclusively have to deal with
+philosophers and philosophical schools and their doctrines; of religion as
+exhibited in the masses, as a social factor, it will only treat by
+exception. But in its purpose it is concerned with the history of
+religion, not with philosophy; therefore--in accordance with the definition
+of its object--it will deal as little as possible with the purely
+philosophical notions of God that have nothing to do with popular
+religion. What it aims at illustrating is a certain--if you like, the
+negative--aspect of ancient religion. But its result, if it can be
+sufficiently established, will not be without importance for the
+understanding of the positive religious sense of antiquity. If you want to
+obtain some idea of the hold a certain religion had on its adherents, it
+is not amiss to know something about the extent to which it dominated even
+the strata of society most exposed to influences that went against it.
+
+It might seem more natural, in dealing with atheism in antiquity, to adopt
+the definition current among the ancients themselves. That this method
+would prove futile the following investigation will, I hope, make
+sufficiently evident; antiquity succeeded as little as we moderns in
+connecting any clear and unequivocal idea with the words that signify
+"denial of God." On the other hand, it is, of course, impossible to begin
+at all except from the traditions of antiquity about denial and deniers.
+Hence the course of the inquiry will be, first to make clear what
+antiquity understood by denial of the gods and what persons it designated
+as deniers, and then to examine in how far these persons were atheists in
+our sense of the word.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+
+Atheism and atheist are words formed from Greek roots and with Greek
+derivative endings. Nevertheless they are not Greek; their formation is
+not consonant with Greek usage. In Greek they said _atheos_ and
+_atheotes_; to these the English words ungodly and ungodliness correspond
+rather closely. In exactly the same way as ungodly, _atheos_ was used as
+an expression of severe censure and moral condemnation; this use is an old
+one, and the oldest that can be traced. Not till later do we find it
+employed to denote a certain philosophical creed; we even meet with
+philosophers bearing _atheos_ as a regular surname. We know very little of
+the men in question; but it can hardly be doubted that _atheos_, as
+applied to them, implied not only a denial of the gods of popular belief,
+but a denial of gods in the widest sense of the word, or Atheism as it is
+nowadays understood.
+
+In this case the word is more particularly a philosophical term. But it
+was used in a similar sense also in popular language, and corresponds then
+closely to the English "denier of God," denoting a person who denies the
+gods of his people and State. From the popular point of view the interest,
+of course, centred in those only, not in the exponents of philosophical
+theology. Thus we find the word employed both of theoretical denial of the
+gods (atheism in our sense) and of practical denial of the gods, as in the
+case of the adherents of monotheism, Jews and Christians.
+
+Atheism, in the theoretical as well as the practical sense of the word,
+was, according to the ancient conception of law, always a crime; but in
+practice it was treated in different ways, which varied both according to
+the period in question and according to the more or less dangerous nature
+of the threat it offered to established religion. It is only as far as
+Athens and Imperial Rome are concerned that we have any definite knowledge
+of the law and the judicial procedure on this point; a somewhat detailed
+account of the state of things in Athens and Rome cannot be dispensed with
+here.
+
+In the criminal law of Athens we meet with the term _asebeia_--literally:
+impiety or disrespect towards the gods. As an established formula of
+accusation of _asebeia_ existed, legislation must have dealt with the
+subject; but how it was defined we do not know. The word itself conveys
+the idea that the law particularly had offences against public worship in
+view; and this is confirmed by the fact that a number of such
+offences--from the felling of sacred trees to the profanation of the
+Eleusinian Mysteries--were treated as _asebeia_. When, in the next place,
+towards the close of the fifth century B.C., free-thinking began to assume
+forms which seemed dangerous to the religion of the State, theoretical
+denial of the gods was also included under _asebeia_. From about the
+beginning of the Peloponnesian War to the close of the fourth century
+B.C., there are on record a number of prosecutions of philosophers who
+were tried and condemned for denial of the gods. The indictment seems in
+most cases--the trial of Socrates is the only one of which we know
+details--to have been on the charge of _asebeia_, and the procedure proper
+thereto seems to have been employed, though there was no proof or
+assertion of the accused having offended against public worship; as to
+Socrates, we know the opposite to have been the case; he worshipped the
+gods like any other good citizen. This extension of the conception of
+_asebeia_ to include theoretical denial of the gods no doubt had no
+foundation in law; this is amongst other things evident from the fact that
+it was necessary, in order to convict Anaxagoras, to pass a special public
+resolution in virtue of which his free-thinking theories became
+indictable. The law presumably dated from a time when theoretical denial
+of the gods lay beyond the horizon of legislation. Nevertheless, in the
+trial of Socrates it is simply taken for granted that denial of the gods
+is a capital crime, and that not only on the side of the prosecution, but
+also on the side of the defence: the trial only turns on a question of
+fact, the legal basis is taken for granted. So inveterate, then, at this
+time was the conception of the unlawful nature of the denial of the gods
+among the people of Athens.
+
+In the course of the fourth century B.C. several philosophers were accused
+of denial of the gods or blasphemy; but after the close of the century we
+hear no more of such trials. To be sure, our knowledge of the succeeding
+centuries, when Athens was but a provincial town, is far less copious than
+of the days of its greatness; nevertheless, it is beyond doubt that the
+practice in regard to theoretical denial of the gods was changed. A
+philosopher like Carneades, for instance, might, in view of his sceptical
+standpoint, just as well have been convicted of _asebeia_ as Protagoras,
+who was convicted because he had declared that he did not know whether the
+gods existed or not; and as to such a process against Carneades, tradition
+would not have remained silent. Instead, we learn that he was employed as
+the trusted representative of the State on most important diplomatic
+missions. It is evident that Athens had arrived at the point of view that
+the theoretical denial of the gods might be tolerated, whereas the law, of
+course, continued to protect public worship.
+
+In Rome they did not possess, as in Athens, a general statute against
+religious offences; there were only special provisions, and they were,
+moreover, few and insufficient. This defect, however, was remedied by the
+vigorous police authority with which the Roman magistrates were invested.
+In Rome severe measures were often taken against movements which
+threatened the Roman official worship, but it was done at the discretion
+of the administration and not according to hard-and-fast rules; hence the
+practice was somewhat varying, and a certain arbitrariness inevitable.
+
+No example is known from Rome of action taken against theoretical denial
+of the gods corresponding to the trials of the philosophers in Athens. The
+main cause of this was, no doubt, that free-thinking in the fifth century
+B.C. invaded Hellas, and specially Athens, like a flood which threatened
+to overthrow everything; in Rome, on the other hand, Greek philosophy made
+its way in slowly and gradually, and this took place at a time when in the
+country of its origin it had long ago found a _modus vivendi_ with popular
+religion and was acknowledged as harmless to the established worship. The
+more practical outlook of the Romans may perhaps also have had something
+to say in the matter: they were rather indifferent to theoretical
+speculations, whereas they were not to be trifled with when their national
+institutions were concerned.
+
+In consequence of this point of view the Roman government first came to
+deal with denial of the gods as a breach of law when confronted with the
+two monotheistic religions which invaded the Empire from the East. That
+which distinguished Jews and Christians from Pagans was not that they
+denied the existence of the Pagan gods--the Christians, at any rate, did
+not do this as a rule--but that they denied that they were gods, and
+therefore refused to worship them. They were practical, not theoretical
+deniers. The tolerance which the Roman government showed towards all
+foreign creeds and the result of which in imperial times was, practically
+speaking, freedom of religion over the whole Empire, could not be extended
+to the Jews and the Christians; for it was in the last resort based on
+reciprocity, on the fact that worship of the Egyptian or Persian gods did
+not exclude worship of the Roman ones. Every convert, on the other hand,
+won over to Judaism or Christianity was _eo ipso_ an apostate from the
+Roman religion, an _atheos_ according to the ancient conception. Hence, as
+soon as such religions began to spread, they constituted a serious danger
+to the established religion, and the Roman government intervened. Judaism
+and Christianity were not treated quite alike; in this connexion details
+are of no interest, but certain principal features must be dwelt on as
+significant of the attitude of antiquity towards denial of the gods. To
+simplify matters I confine myself to Christianity, where things are less
+complicated.
+
+The Christians were generally designated as _atheoi_, as deniers of the
+gods, and the objection against them was precisely their denial of the
+Pagan gods, not their religion as such. When the Christian, summoned
+before the Roman magistrates, agreed to sacrifice to the Pagan gods (among
+them, the Emperor) he was acquitted; he was not punished for previously
+having attended Christian services, and it seems that he was not even
+required to undertake not to do so in future. Only if he refused to
+sacrifice, was he punished. We cannot ask for a clearer proof that it is
+apostasy as such, denial of the gods, against which action is taken. It is
+in keeping with this that, at any rate under the earlier Empire, no
+attempt was made to seek out the Christians at their assemblies, to hinder
+their services or the like; it was considered sufficient to take steps
+when information was laid.
+
+The punishments meted out were different, in that they were left solely to
+the discretion of the magistrates. But they were generally severe: forced
+labour in mines and capital punishment were quite common. No
+discrimination was made between Roman citizens and others belonging to the
+Empire, but all were treated alike; that the Roman citizen could not
+undergo capital punishment without appeal to the Emperor does not affect
+the principle. This procedure has really no expressly formulated basis in
+law; the Roman penal code did not, as mentioned above, take cognizance of
+denial of the gods. Nevertheless, the sentences on the Christians were
+considered by the Pagans of the earlier time as a matter of course, the
+justice of which was not contested, and the procedure of the government
+was in principle the same under humane and conscientious rulers like
+Trajan and Marcus Aurelius as under tyrants like Nero and Domitian. Here
+again it is evident how firmly rooted in the mind of antiquity was the
+conviction that denial of the gods was a capital offence.
+
+To resume what has here been set forth concerning the attitude of ancient
+society to atheism: it is, in the first place, evident that the frequently
+mentioned tolerance of polytheism was not extended to those who denied its
+gods; in fact, it was applied only to those who acknowledged them even if
+they worshipped others besides. But the assertion of this principle of
+intolerance varied greatly in practice according to whether it was a
+question of theoretical denial of the gods--atheism in our sense--or
+practical refusal to worship the Pagan gods. Against atheism the community
+took action only during a comparatively short period, and, as far as we
+know, only in a single place. The latter limitation is probably explained
+not only by the defectiveness of tradition, but also by the fact that in
+Athens free-thinking made its appearance about the year 400 as a general
+phenomenon and therefore attracted the attention of the community. Apart
+from this case, the philosophical denier of God was left in peace all
+through antiquity, in the same way as the individual citizen was not
+interfered with, as a rule, when he, for one reason or another, refrained
+from taking part in the worship of the deities. On the other hand, as soon
+as practical refusal to believe in the gods, apostasy from the established
+religion, assumed dangerous proportions, ruthless severity was exercised
+against it.
+
+The discrimination, however, made in the treatment of the theoretical and
+practical denial of the gods is certainly not due merely to consideration
+of the more or less isolated occurrence of the phenomenon; it is rooted at
+the same time in the very nature of ancient religion. The essence of
+ancient polytheism is the worship of the gods, that is, cultus; of a
+doctrine of divinity properly speaking, of theology, there were only
+slight rudiments, and there was no idea of any elaborate dogmatic system.
+Quite different attitudes were accordingly assumed towards the
+philosopher, who held his own opinions of the gods, but took part in the
+public worship like anybody else; and towards the monotheist, to whom the
+whole of the Pagan worship was an abomination, which one should abstain
+from at any cost, and which one should prevail on others to give up for
+the sake of their own good in this life or the next.
+
+In the literature of antiquity we meet with sporadic statements to the
+effect that certain philosophers bore the epithet _atheos_ as a sort of
+surname; and in a few of the later authors of antiquity we even find lists
+of men--almost all of them philosophers--who denied the existence of the
+gods. Furthermore, we possess information about certain persons--these
+also, if Jews and Christians are excluded, are nearly all of them
+philosophers--having been accused of, and eventually convicted of, denial
+of the gods; some of these are not in our lists. Information of this kind
+will, as remarked above, be taken as the point of departure for an
+investigation of atheism in antiquity. For practical reasons, however, it
+is reasonable to include some philosophers whom antiquity did not
+designate as atheists, and who did not come into conflict with official
+religion, but of whom it has been maintained in later times that they did
+not believe in the existence of the gods of popular belief. Thus we arrive
+at the following list, in which those who were denoted as _atheoi_ are
+italicised and those who were accused of impiety are marked with an
+asterisk:
+
+      Xenophanes.
+      *Anaxagoras.
+_      Diogenes of Apollonia._
+_      Hippo of Rhegium._
+      *_Protagoras._
+_      Prodicus._
+_      Critias._
+      *_Diagoras of Melos._
+      *Socrates.
+      Antisthenes.
+      Plato.
+      *Aristotle.
+      Theophrastus.
+      *Stilpo.
+      *_Theodorus._
+      *_Bion._
+_      Epicurus._
+_      Euhemerus._
+
+The persons are put down in chronological order. This order will in some
+measure be preserved in the following survey; but regard for the
+continuity of the tradition of the doctrine will entail certain
+deviations. It will, that is to say, be natural to divide the material
+into four groups: the pre-Socratic philosophy; the Sophists; Socrates and
+the Socratics; Hellenistic philosophy. Each of these groups has a
+philosophical character of its own, and it will be seen that this
+character also makes itself felt in the relation to the gods of the
+popular belief, even though we here meet with phenomena of more isolated
+occurrence. The four groups must be supplemented by a fifth, a survey of
+the conditions in Imperial Rome. Atheists of this period are not found in
+our lists; but a good deal of old Pagan free-thinking survives in the
+first centuries of our era, and also the epithet _atheoi_ was bestowed
+generally on the Christians and sometimes on the Jews, and if only for
+this reason they cannot be altogether passed by in this survey.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+
+The paganism of antiquity is based on a primitive religion, _i.e._ it is
+originally in the main homogeneous with the religions nowadays met with in
+the so-called primitive peoples. It underwent, however, a long process of
+evolution parallel with and conditioned by the development of Greek and
+later Roman civilisation. This evolution carried ancient religion far away
+from its primitive starting-point; it produced numerous new formations,
+above all a huge system of anthropomorphic gods, each with a definite
+character and personality of his own. This development is the result of an
+interplay of numerous factors: changing social and economical conditions
+evoked the desire for new religious ideas; the influence of other peoples
+made itself felt; poetry and the fine arts contributed largely to the
+moulding of these ideas; conscious reflection, too, arose early and
+modified original simplicity. But what is characteristic of the whole
+process is the fact that it went on continuously without breaks or sudden
+bounds. Nowhere in ancient religion, as far as we can trace it, did a
+powerful religious personality strike in with a radical transformation,
+with a direct rejection of old ideas and dogmatic accentuation of new
+ones. The result of this quiet growth was an exceedingly heterogeneous
+organism, in which remains of ancient, highly primitive customs and ideas
+were retained along with other elements of a far more advanced character.
+
+Such a state of things need not in itself trouble the general
+consciousness; it is a well-established fact that in religion the most
+divergent elements are not incompatible. Nevertheless, among the Greeks,
+with their strong proclivity to reflective thought, criticism early arose
+against the traditional conceptions of the gods. The typical method of
+this criticism is that the higher conceptions of the gods are used against
+the lower. From the earliest times the Greek religious sense favoured
+absoluteness of definition where the gods are concerned; even in Homer
+they are not only eternal and happy, but also all-powerful and
+all-knowing. Corresponding expressions of a moral character are hardly to
+be found in Homer; but as early as Hesiod and Solon we find, at any rate,
+Zeus as the representative of heavenly justice. With such definitions a
+large number of customs of public worship and, above all, a number of
+stories about the gods, were in violent contradiction; thus we find even
+so old and so pious a poet as Pindar occasionally rejecting mythical
+stories which he thinks at variance with the sublime nature of the gods.
+This form of criticism of popular beliefs is continued through the whole
+of antiquity; it is found not only in philosophers and philosophically
+educated laymen, but appears spontaneously in everybody of a reflective
+mind; its best known representative in earlier times is Euripides. Typical
+of its popular form is in the first place its casualness; it is directed
+against details which at the moment attract attention, while it leaves
+other things alone which in principle are quite as offensive, but either
+not very obviously so, or else not relevant to the matter in hand.
+Secondly, it is na�ve: it takes the gods of the popular belief for granted
+essentially as they are; it does not raise the crucial question whether
+the popular belief is not quite justified in attributing to these higher
+beings all kinds of imperfection, and wrong in attributing perfection to
+them, and still less if such beings, whether they are defined as perfect
+or imperfect, exist at all. It follows that as a whole this form of
+criticism is outside the scope of our inquiry.
+
+Still, there is one single personality in early Greek thought who seems to
+have proceeded still further on the lines of this na�ve criticism, namely,
+Xenophanes of Colophon. He is generally included amongst the philosophers,
+and rightly in so far as he initiated a philosophical speculation which
+was of the highest importance in the development of Greek scientific
+thought. But in the present connexion it would, nevertheless, be
+misleading to place Xenophanes among those philosophers who came into
+conflict with the popular belief because their conception of Existence was
+based on science. The starting-point for his criticism of the popular
+belief is in fact not philosophical, but religious; he ranks with
+personalities like Pindar and Euripides--he was also a verse-writer
+himself, with considerable poetic gift--and is only distinguished from them
+by the greater consistency of his thought. Hence, the correct course is to
+deal with him in this place as the only eminent thinker in antiquity about
+whom it is known that--starting from popular belief and religious
+motives--he reached a standpoint which at any rate with some truth may be
+designated as atheism.
+
+Xenophanes lived in the latter part of the sixth and the beginning of the
+fifth centuries B.C. (according to his own statement he reached an age of
+more than ninety years). He was an itinerant singer who travelled about
+and recited poetry, presumably not merely his own but also that of others.
+In his own poems he severely attacked the manner in which Homer and
+Hesiod, the most famous poets of Greece, had represented the gods: they
+had attributed to them everything which in man's eyes is outrageous and
+reprehensible--theft, adultery and deception of one another. Their accounts
+of the fights of the gods against Titans and Giants he denounced as
+"inventions of the ancients." But he did not stop at that: "Men believe
+that the gods are born, are clothed and shaped and speak like themselves";
+"if oxen and horses and lions could draw and paint, they would delineate
+their gods in their own image"; "the Negroes believe that their gods are
+flat-nosed and black, the Thracians that theirs have blue eyes and red
+hair." Thus he attacked directly the popular belief that the gods are
+anthropomorphic, and his arguments testify that he clearly realised that
+men create their gods in their own image. On another main point, too, he
+was in direct opposition to the religious ideas of his time: he rejected
+Divination, the belief that the gods imparted the secrets of the future to
+men--which was deemed a mainstay of the belief in the existence of the
+gods. As a positive counterpart to the anthropomorphic gods, Xenophanes
+set up a philosophical conception of God: God must be One, Eternal,
+Unchangeable and identical with himself in every way (all sight, all
+hearing and all mind). This deity, according to the explicit statements of
+our earliest sources, he identified with the universe.
+
+If we examine more closely the arguments put forth by Xenophanes in
+support of his remarkable conception of the deity, we realise that he
+everywhere starts from the definitions of the nature of the gods as given
+by popular religion; but, be it understood, solely from the absolute
+definitions. He takes the existence of the divine, with its absolute
+attributes, for granted; it is in fact the basis of all his speculation.
+His criticism of the popular ideas of the gods is therefore closely
+connected with his philosophical conception of God; the two are the
+positive and negative sides of the same thing. Altogether his connexion
+with what I call the na�ve criticism of the popular religion is
+unmistakable.
+
+It is undoubtedly a remarkable fact that we meet at this early date with
+such a consistent representative of this criticism. If we take Xenophanes
+at his word we must describe him as an atheist, and atheism in the sixth
+century B.C. is a very curious phenomenon indeed. Neither was it
+acknowledged in antiquity; no one placed Xenophanes amongst _atheoi_; and
+Cicero even says somewhere (according to Greek authority) that Xenophanes
+was the only one of those who believed in gods who rejected divination. In
+more recent times, too, serious doubt has been expressed whether
+Xenophanes actually denied the existence of the gods. Reference has
+amongst other things been made to the fact that he speaks in several
+places about "gods" where he, according to his view, ought to say "God";
+nay, he has even formulated his fundamental idea in the words: "One God,
+the greatest amongst gods and men, neither in shape nor mind like unto any
+mortal." To be sure, Xenophanes is not always consistent in his language;
+but no weight whatever ought to be attached to this, least of all in the
+case of a man who exclusively expressed himself in verse. Another theory
+rests on the tradition that Xenophanes regarded his deity and the universe
+as identical, consequently was a pantheist. In that case, it is said, he
+may very well have considered, for instance, the heavenly bodies as
+deities. Sound as this argument is in general, it does not apply to this
+case. When a thinker arrives at pantheism, starting from a criticism of
+polytheism which is expressly based on the antithesis between the unity
+and plurality of the deity--then very valid proofs, indeed, are needed in
+order to justify the assumption that he after all believed in a plurality
+of gods; and such proofs are wanting in the case of Xenophanes.
+
+Judging from the material in hand one can hardly arrive at any other
+conclusion than that the standpoint of Xenophanes comes under our
+definition of atheism. But we must not forget that only fragments of his
+writings have been preserved, and that the more extensive of them do not
+assist us greatly to the understanding of his religious standpoint. It is
+possible that we might have arrived at a different conclusion had we but
+possessed his chief philosophical work in its entirety, or at least larger
+portions of it. And I must candidly confess that if I were asked whether,
+in my heart of hearts, I believed that a Greek of the sixth century B.C.
+denied point-blank the existence of his gods, my answer would be in the
+negative.
+
+That Xenophanes was not considered an atheist by the ancients may possibly
+be explained by the fact that they objected to fasten this designation on
+a man whose reasoning took the deity as a starting-point and whose sole
+aim was to define its nature. Perhaps they also had an inkling that he in
+reality stood on the ground of popular belief, even if he went beyond it.
+Still more curious is the fact that his religious view does not seem to
+have influenced the immediately succeeding philosophy at all. His
+successors, Parmenides and Zeno, developed his doctrine of unity, but in a
+pantheistic direction, and on a logical, not religious line of argument;
+about their attitude to popular belief we are told practically nothing.
+And Ionic speculation took a quite different direction. Not till a century
+later, in Euripides, do we observe a distinct influence of his criticism
+of popular belief; but at that time other currents of opinion had
+intervened which are not dependent on Xenophanes, but might direct
+attention to him.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+
+Ancient Greek naturalism is essentially calculated to collide with the
+popular belief. It seeks a natural explanation of the world, first and
+foremost of its origin, but in the next place of individual natural
+phenomena. As to the genesis of the world, speculations of a mythical kind
+had already developed on the basis of the popular belief. They were not,
+however, binding on anybody, and, above all, the idea of the gods having
+created the world was altogether alien to Greek religion. Thus, without
+offence to them it might be maintained that everything originated from a
+primary substance or from a mixture of several primary substances, as was
+generally maintained by the ancient naturalists. On the other hand, a
+conflict arose as soon as the heavenly phenomena, such as lightning and
+thunder, were ascribed to natural causes, or when the heavenly bodies were
+made out to be natural objects; for to the Greeks it was an established
+fact that Zeus sent lightning and thunder, and that the sun and the moon
+were gods. A refusal to believe in the latter was especially dangerous
+because they were _visible_ gods, and as to the person who did not believe
+in their divinity the obvious conclusion would be that he believed still
+less in the invisible gods.
+
+That this inference was drawn will appear before long. But the epithet
+"atheist" was very rarely attached to the ancient naturalists; only a few
+of the later (and those the least important) were given the nickname
+_atheos_. Altogether we hear very little of the relation of these
+philosophers to the popular belief, and this very silence is surely
+significant. No doubt, most of them bestowed but a scant attention on this
+aspect of the matter; they were engrossed in speculations which did not
+bring them into conflict with the popular belief, and even their
+scientific treatment of the "divine" natural phenomena did not make them
+doubt the _existence_ of the gods. This is connected with a peculiarity in
+their conception of existence. Tradition tells us of several of them, and
+it applies presumably also to those of whom it is not recorded, that they
+designated their primary substance or substances as gods; sometimes they
+also applied this designation to the world or worlds originating in the
+primary substance. This view is deeply rooted in the Greek popular belief
+and harmonises with its fundamental view of existence. To these ancient
+thinkers the primary substance is at once a living and a superhuman power;
+and any living power which transcended that of man was divine to the
+Greeks. Hylozoism (the theory that matter is alive) consequently, when it
+allies itself with popular belief, leads straight to pantheism, whereas it
+excludes monotheism, which presupposes a distinction between god and
+matter. Now it is a matter of experience that, while monotheism is the
+hereditary foe of polytheism, polytheism and pantheism go very well
+together. The universe being divine, there is no reason to doubt that
+beings of a higher order than man exist, nor any reason to refuse to
+bestow on them the predicate "divine"; and with this we find ourselves in
+principle on the standpoint of polytheistic popular belief. There is
+nothing surprising, then, in the tradition that Thales identified God with
+the mind of the universe and believed the universe to be animated, and
+filled with "demons." The first statement is in this form probably
+influenced by later ideas and hardly a correct expression of the view of
+Thales; the rest bears the very stamp of genuineness, and similar ideas
+recur, more or less completely and variously refracted, in the succeeding
+philosophers.
+
+To follow these variations in detail is outside the scope of this
+investigation; but it may be of interest to see the form they take in one
+of the latest and most advanced representatives of Ionian naturalism. In
+Democritus's conception of the universe, personal gods would seem excluded
+_a priori_. He works with but three premises: the atoms, their movements,
+and empty space. From this everything is derived according to strict
+causality. Such phenomena also as thunder and lightning, comets and
+eclipses, which were generally ascribed to the gods, are according to his
+opinion due to natural causes, whereas people in the olden days were
+afraid of them because they believed they were due to the gods.
+Nevertheless, he seems, in the first place, to have designated Fire, which
+he at the same time recognised as a "soul-substance," as divine, the
+cosmic fire being the soul of the world; and secondly, he thought that
+there was something real underlying the popular conception of the gods. He
+was led to this from a consideration of dreams, which he thought were
+images of real objects which entered into the sleeper through the pores of
+the body. Now, since gods might be seen in dreams, they must be real
+beings. He did actually say that the gods had more senses than the
+ordinary five. When he who of all the Greek philosophers went furthest in
+a purely mechanical conception of nature took up such an attitude to the
+religion of his people, one cannot expect the others, who were less
+advanced, to discard it.
+
+Nevertheless, there is a certain probability that some of the later Ionian
+naturalists went further in their criticism of the gods of popular belief.
+One of them actually came into conflict with popular religion; it will be
+natural to begin with him.
+
+Shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, Anaxagoras of
+Clazomenae was accused of impiety and had to leave Athens, where he had
+taken up his abode. The object of the accusation was in reality political;
+the idea being to hit Pericles through his friend the naturalist. What
+Anaxagoras was charged with was that he had assumed that the heavenly
+bodies were natural objects; he had taught that the sun was a red-hot
+mass, and that the moon was earth and larger than Peloponnese. To base an
+accusation of impiety on this, it was necessary first to carry a public
+resolution, giving power to prosecute those who gave natural explanations
+of heavenly phenomena.
+
+As to Anaxagoras's attitude to popular belief, we hear next to nothing
+apart from this. There is a story of a ram's head being found with one
+horn in the middle of the forehead; it was brought to Pericles, and the
+soothsayer Lampon explained the portent to the effect that, of the two
+men, Pericles and Thucydides, who contended for the leadership of Athens,
+one should prove victorious. Anaxagoras, on the other hand, had the ram's
+head cut open and showed that the brain did not fill up the cranium, but
+was egg-shaped and lay gathered together at the point where the horn grew
+out. He evidently thought that abortions also, which otherwise were
+generally considered as signs from the gods, were due to natural causes.
+Beyond this, nothing is said of any attack on the popular belief on the
+part of Anaxagoras, and in his philosophy nothing occurred which logically
+entailed a denial of the existence of the gods. Add to this that it was
+necessary to create a new judicial basis for the accusation against
+Anaxagoras, and it can be taken as certain that neither in his writings
+nor in any other way did he come forward in public as a denier of the
+gods.
+
+It is somewhat different when we consider the purely personal point of
+view of Anaxagoras. The very fact that no expression of his opinion
+concerning the gods has been transmitted affords food for thought.
+Presumably there was none; but this very fact is notable when we bear in
+mind that the earlier naturalists show no such reticence. Add to this
+that, if there is any place and any time in which we might expect a
+complete emancipation from popular belief, combined with a decided
+disinclination to give expression to it, it is Athens under Pericles. Men
+like Pericles and his friends represent a high level, perhaps the zenith,
+in Hellenic culture. That they were critical of many of the religious
+conceptions of their time we may take for granted; as to Pericles himself,
+this is actually stated as a fact, and the accusations of impiety directed
+against Aspasia and Pheidias prove that orthodox circles were very well
+aware of it. But the accusations prove, moreover, that Pericles and those
+who shared his views were so much in advance of their time that they could
+not afford to let their free-thinking attitude become a matter of public
+knowledge without endangering their political position certainly, and
+possibly even more than that. To be sure, considerations of that kind did
+not weigh with Anaxagoras; but he was--and that we know on good authority--a
+quiet scholar whose ideal of life was to devote himself to problems of
+natural science, and he can hardly have wished to be disturbed in this
+occupation by affairs in which he took no sort of interest. The question
+is then only how far men like Pericles and himself may have ventured in
+their criticism. Though all direct tradition is wanting, we have at any
+rate circumstantial evidence possessing a certain degree of probability.
+
+To begin with, the attempt to give a natural explanation of prodigies is
+not in itself without interest. The mantic art, _i.e._ the ability to
+predict the future by signs from the gods or direct divine inspiration,
+was throughout antiquity considered one of the surest proofs of the
+existence of the gods. Now, it by no means follows that a person who was
+not impressed by a deformed ram's head would deny, _e.g._, the ability of
+the Delphic Oracle to predict the future, especially not so when the
+person in question was a naturalist. But that there was at this time a
+general tendency to reject the art of divination is evident from the fact
+that Herodotus as well as Sophocles, both of them contemporaries of
+Pericles and Anaxagoras, expressly contend against attempts in that
+direction, and, be it remarked, as if the theory they attack was commonly
+held. Sophocles is in this connexion so far the more interesting of the
+two, as, on one hand, he criticises private divination but defends the
+Delphic oracle vigorously, while he, on the other hand, identifies denial
+of the oracle with denial of the gods. And he does this in such a way as
+to make it evident that he has a definite object in mind. That in this
+polemic he may have been aiming precisely at Anaxagoras is indicated by
+the fact that Diopeithes, who carried the resolution concerning the
+accusation of the philosopher, was a soothsayer by profession.
+
+The strongest evidence as to the free-thinking of the Periclean age is,
+however, to be met with in the historical writing of Thucydides. In his
+work on the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides completely eliminated the
+supernatural element; not only did he throughout ignore omens and
+divinations, except in so far as they played a part as a psychological
+factor, but he also completely omitted any reference to the gods in his
+narrative. Such a procedure was at this time unprecedented, and contrasts
+sharply with that of his immediate forerunner Herodotus, who constantly
+lays stress on the intervention of the gods. That is hardly conceivable
+except in a man who had altogether emancipated himself from the religious
+views of his time. Now, Thucydides is not only a fellow-countryman and
+younger contemporary of Pericles, but he also sees in Pericles his ideal
+not only as a politician but evidently also as a man. Hence, when
+everything is considered, it is not improbable that Pericles and his
+friends went to all lengths in their criticism of popular belief,
+although, of course, it remains impossible to state anything definite as
+to particular persons' individual views. Curiously enough, even in
+antiquity this connexion was observed; in a biography of Thucydides it is
+said that he was a disciple of Anaxagoras and _accordingly_ was also
+considered something of an atheist.
+
+While Anaxagoras, his trial notwithstanding, is not generally designated
+an atheist, probably because there was nothing in his writings to which he
+might be pinned down, that fate befell two of his contemporaries, Hippo of
+Rhegium and Diogenes of Apollonia. Very little, however, is known of them.
+Hippo, who is said to have been a Pythagorean, taught that water and fire
+were the origin of everything; as to the reason why he earned the nickname
+_atheos_, it is said that he taught that Water was the primal cause of
+all, as well as that he maintained that nothing existed but what could be
+perceived by the senses. There is also quoted a (fictitious) inscription,
+which he is said to have caused to be put on his tomb, to the effect that
+Death has made him the equal of the immortal gods (in that he now exists
+no more than they). Otherwise we know nothing special of Hippo; Aristotle
+refers to him as shallow. As to Diogenes, we learn that he was influenced
+by Anaximenes and Anaxagoras; in agreement with the former he regarded Air
+as the primary substance, and like Anaxagoras he attributed reason to his
+primary substance. Of his doctrine we have extensive accounts, and also
+some not inconsiderable fragments of his treatise _On Nature_; but they
+are almost all of them of purely scientific, mostly of an anatomical and
+physiological character. In especial, as to his relation to popular
+belief, it is recorded that he identified Zeus with the air. Indirectly,
+however, we are able to demonstrate, by the aid of an almost contemporary
+witness, that there must have been some foundation for the accusation of
+"atheism." For in _The Clouds_, where Aristophanes wants to represent
+Socrates as an atheist, he puts in his mouth scraps of the naturalism of
+Diogenes; that he would hardly have done, if Diogenes had not already been
+decried as an atheist.
+
+It is of course impossible to base any statement of the relation of the
+two philosophers to popular belief on such a foundation. But it is,
+nevertheless, worth noticing that while not a single one of the earlier
+naturalists acquired the designation atheist, it was applied to two of the
+latest and otherwise little-known representatives of the school. Take this
+in combination with what has been said above of Anaxagoras, and we get at
+any rate a suspicion that Greek naturalism gradually led its adherents
+beyond the na�ve stage where many individual phenomena were indeed
+ascribed to natural causes, even if they had formerly been regarded as
+caused by divine intervention, but where the foundations of the popular
+belief were left untouched. Once this path has been entered on, a point
+will be arrived at where the final conclusion is drawn and the existence
+of the supernatural completely denied. It is probable that this happened
+towards the close of the naturalistic period. If so early a philosopher as
+Anaxagoras took this point of view, his personal contribution as a member
+of the Periclean circle may have been more significant in the religious
+field than one would conjecture from the character of his work.
+
+Before we proceed to mention the sophists, there is one person on our list
+who must be examined though the result will be negative, namely, Diagoras
+of Melos. As he appears in our records, he falls outside the
+classification adopted here; but as he must have lived, at any rate, about
+the middle of the fifth century (he is said to have "flourished" in 464)
+he may most fitly be placed on the boundary line between the Ionian
+philosophy and Sophistic.
+
+For later antiquity Diagoras is the typical atheist; he heads our lists of
+atheists, and round his person a whole series of myths have been formed.
+He is said to have been a poet and a pious man like others; but then a
+colleague once stole an ode from him, escaped by taking an oath that he
+was innocent, and afterwards made a hit with the stolen work. So Diagoras
+lost his faith in the gods and wrote a treatise under the title of
+_apopyrgizontes logoi_ (literally, destructive considerations) in which he
+attacked the belief in the gods.
+
+This looks very plausible, and is interesting in so far as it, if correct,
+affords an instance of atheism arising in a layman from actual experience,
+not in a philosopher from speculation. If we ask, however, what is known
+historically about Diagoras, we are told a different tale. There existed
+in Athens, engraved on a bronze tablet and set up on the Acropolis, a
+decree of the people offering a reward of one talent to him who should
+kill Diagoras of Melos, and of two talents to him who should bring him
+alive to Athens. The reason given was that he had scoffed at the
+Eleusinian Mysteries and divulged what took place at them. The date of
+this decree is given by a historian as 415 B.C.; that this is correct is
+seen from a passage in Aristophanes's contemporary drama, _The Birds_.
+Furthermore, one of the disciples of Aristotle, the literary historian
+Aristoxenus, states that no trace of impiety was to be found in the works
+of the dithyrambic poet Diagoras, and that, in fact, they contained
+definite opinions to the contrary. A remark to the effect that Diagoras
+was instrumental in drawing up the laws of Mantinea is probably due to the
+same source. The context shows that the reference is to the earlier
+constitution of Mantinea, which was a mixture of aristocracy and
+democracy, and is praised for its excellence. It is inconceivable that, in
+a Peloponnesian city during the course of, nay, presumably even before the
+middle of the fifth century, a notorious atheist should have been invited
+to advise on the revision of its constitution. It is more probable that
+Aristoxenus adduced this fact as an additional disproof of Diagoras's
+atheism, in which he evidently did not believe.
+
+The above information explains the origin of the legend. Two fixed points
+were in existence: the pious poet of _c._ 460 and the atheist who was
+outlawed in 415; a bridge was constructed between them by the story of the
+stolen ode. This disposes of the whole supposition of atheism growing out
+of a basis of experience. But, furthermore, it must be admitted that it is
+doubtful whether the poet and the atheist are one and the same person. The
+interval of time between them is itself suspicious, for the poet,
+according to the ancient system of calculation, must have been about forty
+years old in 464, consequently between eighty and ninety in 415. (There is
+general agreement that the treatise, the title of which has been quoted,
+must have been a later forgery.) If, in spite of all, I dare not
+absolutely deny the identity of the two Diagorases of tradition, the
+reason is that Aristophanes, where he mentions the decree concerning
+Diagoras, seems to suggest that his attack on the Mysteries was an old
+story which was raked up again in 415. But for our purpose, at any rate,
+nothing remains of the copious mass of legend but the fact that one
+Diagoras of Melos in 415 was outlawed in Athens on the ground of his
+attack on the Mysteries. Such an attack may have been the outcome of
+atheism; there was no lack of impiety in Athens at the end of the fifth
+century. But whether this was the case or not we cannot possibly tell; and
+to throw light on free-thinking tendencies in Athens at this time, we have
+other and richer sources than the historical notice of Diagoras.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+
+With the movement in Greek thought which is generally known as sophistic,
+a new view of popular belief appears. The criticism of the sophists was
+directed against the entire tradition on which Greek society was based,
+and principally against the moral conceptions which hitherto had been
+unquestioned: good and evil, right and wrong. The criticism was
+essentially negative; that which hitherto had been imagined as absolute
+was demonstrated to be relative, and the relative was identified with the
+invalid. Thus they could not help running up against the popular ideas of
+the gods, and treating them in the same way. A leading part was here
+played by the sophistic distinction between _nomos_ and _physis_, Law and
+Nature, _i.e._ that which is based on human convention, and that which is
+founded on the nature of things. The sophists could not help seeing that
+the whole public worship and the ideas associated with it belonged to the
+former--to the domain of "the law." Not only did the worship and the
+conceptions of the gods vary from place to place in the hundreds of small
+independent communities into which Hellas was divided--a fact which the
+sophists had special opportunity of observing when travelling from town to
+town to teach; but it was even officially admitted that the whole
+ritual--which, popularly speaking, was almost identical with religion--was
+based on convention. If a Greek was asked why a god was to be worshipped
+in such and such a way, generally the only answer was: because it is the
+law of the State (or the convention; the word _nomos_ expresses both
+things). Hence it followed in principle that religion came under the
+domain of "the law," being consequently the work of man; and hence again
+the obvious conclusion, according to sophistic reasoning, was that it was
+nothing but human imagination, and that there was no _physis_, no reality,
+behind it at all. In the case of the naturalists, it was the positive
+foundation of their system, their conception of nature as a whole, that
+led them to criticise the popular belief. Hence their criticism was in the
+main only directed against those particular ideas in the popular belief
+which were at variance with the results of their investigations. To be
+sure, the sophists were not above making use of the results of natural
+science in their criticism of the popular belief; it was their general aim
+to impart the highest education of their time, and of a liberal education
+natural science formed a rather important part. But their starting-point
+was quite different from that of the naturalists. Their whole interest was
+concentrated on man as a member of the community, and it was from
+consideration of this relation that they were brought into collision with
+the established religion. Hence their attack was far more dangerous than
+that of the naturalists; no longer was it directed against details, it
+laid bare the psychological basis itself of popular belief and clearly
+revealed its unstable character. Their criticism was fundamental and
+central, not casual and circumstantial.
+
+From a purely practical point of view also, the criticism of the sophists
+was far more dangerous than that of the old philosophers. They were not
+theorists themselves, but practitioners; their business was to impart the
+higher education to the more mature youth. It was therefore part of their
+profession to disseminate their views not by means of learned professional
+writings, but by the persuasive eloquence of oral discourse. And in their
+criticism of the existing state of things they did not start with special
+results which only science could prove, and the correctness of which the
+layman need not recognise; they operated with facts and principles known
+and acknowledged by everybody. It is not to be wondered at that such
+efforts evoked a vigorous reaction on the part of established society, the
+more so as in any case the result of sophistic criticism--though not
+consciously its object--was to liquefy the moral principles on which the
+social order was based.
+
+Such, in principle, appeared to be the state of things. In practice, here
+as elsewhere, the devil proved not so black as he was painted. First, not
+all the sophists--hardly even the majority of them--drew the logical
+conclusions from their views in respect of either morals or religion. They
+were teachers of rhetoric, and as such they taught, for instance, all the
+tricks by which a bad cause might be defended; that was part of the trade.
+But it must be supposed that Gorgias, the most distinguished of them,
+expressly insisted that rhetoric, just like any other art the aim of which
+was to defeat an opponent, should only be used for good ends. Similarly
+many of them may have stopped short in their criticism of popular belief
+at some arbitrary point, so that it was possible for them to respect at
+any rate something of the established religion, and so, of course, first
+and foremost the very belief in the existence of the gods. That they did
+not as a rule interfere with public worship, we may be sure; that was
+based firmly on "the Law." But, in addition, even sophists who personally
+took an attitude radically contradictory to popular belief had the most
+important reasons for being careful in advancing such a view. They had to
+live by being the teachers of youth; they had no fixed appointment, they
+travelled about as lecturers and enlisted disciples by means of their
+lectures. For such men it would have been a very serious thing to attack
+the established order in its tenderest place, religion, and above all they
+had to beware of coming into conflict with the penal laws. This risk they
+did not incur while confining themselves to theoretical discussions about
+right and wrong, nor by the practical application of them in their
+teaching of rhetoric; but they might very easily incur it if attacking
+religion. This being the case, it is not to be wondered at that we do not
+find many direct statements of undoubtedly atheistical character handed
+down from the more eminent sophists, and that trials for impiety are rare
+in their case. But, nevertheless, a few such cases are met with, and from
+these as our starting-point we will now proceed.
+
+As to Protagoras of Abdera, one of the earliest and most famous of all the
+sophists, it is stated that he began a pamphlet treating of the gods with
+the words: "Concerning the gods I can say nothing, neither that they exist
+nor that they do not exist, nor of what form they are; because there are
+many things which prevent one from knowing that, namely, both the
+uncertainty of the matter and the shortness of man's life." On this
+account, it is said, he was charged with impiety at Athens and was
+outlawed, and his works were publicly burned. The date of this trial is
+not known for certain; but it is reasonably supposed to have coincided
+with that of Diagoras, namely, in 415. At any rate it must have taken
+place after 423-421, as we know that Protagoras was at that time staying
+in Athens. As he must have been born about 485, the charge overtook him
+when old and famous; according to one account, his work on the gods seems
+to belong to his earlier writings.
+
+To doubt the correctness of this tradition would require stronger reasons
+than we possess, although it is rather strange that the condemnation of
+Protagoras is mentioned neither in our historical sources nor in
+Aristophanes, and that Plato, who mentions Protagoras rather frequently as
+dead, never alludes to it. At any rate, the quotation from the work on the
+gods is certainly authentic, for Plato himself referred to it. Hence it is
+certain that Protagoras directly stated the problem as to the existence of
+the gods and regarded it as an open question. But beyond that nothing much
+can be deduced from the short quotation; and as to the rest of the book on
+the gods we know nothing. The meagre reasons for scepticism adduced
+probably do not imply any more than that the difficulties are objective as
+well as subjective. If, in the latter respect, the brevity of life is
+specially mentioned it may be supposed that Protagoras had in mind a
+definite proof of the existence of the gods which was rendered difficult
+by the fact that life is so brief; prediction of the future may be guessed
+at, but nothing certain can be stated.
+
+Protagoras is the only one of the sophists of whom tradition says that he
+was the object of persecution owing to his religious views. The trial of
+Socrates, however, really belongs to the same category when looked at from
+the accusers' point of view; Socrates was accused as a sophist. But as his
+own attitude towards popular religion differed essentially from that of
+the sophists, we cannot consider him in this connexion. Protagoras's trial
+itself is partly determined by special circumstances. In all probability
+it took place at a moment when a violent religious reaction had set in at
+Athens owing to some grave offences against the public worship and
+sanctuaries of the State (violation of the Mysteries and mutilation of the
+Hermae). The work on the gods had presumably been in existence and known
+long before this without causing scandal to anybody. But, nevertheless,
+the trial, like those of Anaxagoras and Socrates, plainly bears witness to
+the animosity with which the modern free-thought was regarded in Athens.
+This animosity did not easily manifest itself publicly without special
+reasons; but it was always there and might always be used in case of
+provocation.
+
+As to Protagoras's personal attitude to the question of the existence of
+the gods, much may be guessed and much has been guessed; but nothing can
+be stated for certain. However, judging from the man's profession and his
+general habit of life as it appears in tradition, we may take for granted
+that he did not give offence in his outward behaviour by taking a hostile
+attitude to public worship or attacking its foundations; had that been so,
+he would not for forty years have been the most distinguished teacher of
+Hellas, but would simply not have been tolerated. An eminent modern
+scholar has therefore advanced the conjecture that Protagoras
+distinguished between belief and knowledge, and that his work on the gods
+only aimed at showing that the existence of the gods could not be
+scientifically demonstrated.  Now such a distinction probably, if
+conceived as a conscious principle, is alien to ancient thought, at any
+rate at the time of Protagoras; and yet it may contain a grain of truth.
+When it is borne in mind that the incriminated passage represents the very
+exordium of the work of Protagoras, the impression cannot be avoided that
+he himself did not intend his work to disturb the established religion,
+but that he quite na�vely took up the existence of the gods as a subject,
+as good as any other, for dialectic discussion. All that he was concerned
+with was theory and theorising; religion was practice and ritual; and he
+had no more intention of interfering with that than the other earlier
+sophists of assailing the legal system of the community in their
+speculation as to relativity of right and wrong.
+
+All this, however, does not alter the fact that the work of Protagoras
+posed the very question of the existence of the gods as a problem which
+might possibly be solved in the negative. He seems to have been the first
+to do this. That it could be done is significant of the age to which
+Protagoras belongs; that it was done was undoubtedly of great importance
+for the development of thought in wide circles.
+
+Prodicus of Ceos, also one of the most famous sophists, advanced the idea
+that the conceptions of the gods were originally associated with those
+things which were of use to humanity: sun and moon, rivers and springs,
+the products of the earth and the elements; therefore bread was identified
+with Demeter, wine with Dionysus, water with Poseidon, fire with
+Hephaestus. As a special instance he mentioned the worship of the Nile by
+the Egyptians.
+
+In Democritus, who was a slightly elder contemporary of Prodicus, we have
+already met with investigation into the origin of the conceptions of the
+gods. There is a close parallel between his handling of the subject and
+that of Prodicus, but at the same time a characteristic difference.
+Democritus was a naturalist, hence he took as his starting-point the
+natural phenomena commonly ascribed to the influence of the gods.
+Prodicus, on the other hand, started from the intellectual life of man. We
+learn that he had commenced to study synonyms, and that he was interested
+in the interpretation of the poets. Now he found that Homer occasionally
+simply substituted the name of Hephaestus for fire, and that other poets
+went even further on the same lines. Furthermore, while it was common
+knowledge to every Greek that certain natural objects, such as the
+heavenly bodies and the rivers, were regarded as divine and had names in
+common with their gods, this to Prodicus would be a specially attractive
+subject for speculation. It is plainly shown by his instances that it is
+linguistic observations of this kind which were the starting-point of his
+theory concerning the origin of the conceptions of the gods.
+
+In the accounts of Prodicus it is taken for granted that he denied the
+existence of the gods, and in later times he is classed as _atheos_.
+Nevertheless we have every reason to doubt the correctness of this
+opinion. The case of Democritus already shows that a philosopher might
+very well derive the conceptions of the gods from an incorrect
+interpretation of certain phenomena without throwing doubt on their
+existence. As far as Prodicus is concerned it may be assumed that he did
+not believe that Bread, Wine or Fire were gods, any more than Democritus
+imagined that Zeus sent thunder and lightning; nor, presumably, did he
+ever believe that rivers were gods. But he need not therefore have denied
+the existence of Demeter, Dionysus and Hephaestus, much less the divinity
+of the sun and the moon. And if we consider his theory more closely it
+points in quite a different direction from that of atheism. To Prodicus it
+was evidently the conception of utility that mattered: if these objects
+came to be regarded as gods it was because they "benefited humanity." This
+too is a genuinely sophistic view, characteristically deviating from that
+of the naturalist Democritus in its limitation to the human and social
+aspect of the question. Such a point of view, if confronted with the
+question of the existence of the gods, may very well, according to
+sophistic methods of reasoning, lead to the conclusion that primitive man
+was right in so far as the useful, _i.e._ that which "benefits humanity,"
+really is an essential feature of the gods, and wrong only in so far as he
+identified the individual useful objects with the gods. Whether Prodicus
+adopted this point of view, we cannot possibly tell; but the general body
+of tradition concerning the man, which does not in any way suggest
+religious radicalism, indicates as most probable that he did not connect
+the question of the origin of the conceptions of the gods with that of the
+existence of the gods, which to him was taken for granted, and that it was
+only later philosophers who, in their researches into the ideas of earlier
+philosophers about the gods, inferred his atheism from his speculations on
+the history of religion.
+
+Critias, the well-known reactionary politician, the chief of the Thirty
+Tyrants, is placed amongst the atheists on the strength of a passage in a
+satyric drama, _Sisyphus_. The drama is lost, but our authority quotes the
+objectionable passage _in extenso_; it is a piece of no less than forty
+lines. The passage argues that human life in its origins knew no social
+order, that might ruled supreme. Then men conceived the idea of making
+laws in order that right might rule instead of might. The result of this
+was, it is true, that wrong was not done openly; but it was done secretly
+instead. Then a wise man bethought himself of making men believe that
+there existed gods who saw and heard everything which men did, nay even
+knew their innermost thoughts. And, in order that men might stand in
+proper awe of the gods, he said that they lived in the sky, out of which
+comes that which makes men afraid, such as lightning and thunder, but also
+that which benefits them, sunshine and rain, and the stars, those fair
+ornaments by whose course men measure time. Thus he succeeded in bringing
+lawlessness to an end. It is expressly stated that it was all a cunning
+fraud: "by such talk he made his teaching most acceptable, veiling truth
+with false words."
+
+In antiquity it was disputed whether the drama _Sisyphus_ was by Critias
+or Euripides; nowadays all agree in attributing it to Critias; nor does
+the style of the long fragment resemble that of Euripides. The question
+is, however, of no consequence in this connexion: whether the drama is by
+Critias or Euripides it is wrong to attribute to an author opinions which
+he has put into the mouth of a character in a drama. Moreover, _Sisyphus_
+was a satyric play, _i.e._ it belonged to a class of poetry the liberty of
+which was nearly as great as in comedy, and the speech was delivered by
+Sisyphus himself, who, according to the legend, is a type of the crafty
+criminal whose forte is to do evil and elude punishment. There is, in
+fact, nothing in that which we otherwise hear of Critias to suggest that
+he cherished free-thinking views. He was--or in his later years became--a
+fanatical adversary of the Attic democracy, and he was, when he held
+power, unscrupulous in his choice of the means with which he opposed it
+and the men who stood in the path of his reactionary policy; but in our
+earlier sources he is never accused of impiety in the theoretical sense.
+And yet there had been an excellent opportunity of bringing forward such
+an accusation; for in his youth Critias had been a companion of Socrates,
+and his later conduct was used as a proof that Socrates corrupted his
+surroundings. But it is always Critias's political crimes which are
+adduced in this connexion, not his irreligion. On the other hand,
+posterity looked upon him as the pure type of tyrant, and the label
+atheist therefore suggested itself on the slightest provocation.
+
+But, even if the _Sisyphus_ fragment cannot be used to characterise its
+author as an atheist, it is, nevertheless, of the greatest interest in
+this connexion, and therefore demands closer analysis.
+
+The introductory idea, that mankind has evolved from an animal state into
+higher stages, is at variance with the earlier Greek conception, namely,
+that history begins with a golden age from which there is a continual
+decline. The theory of the fragment is expressed by a series of authors
+from the same and the immediately succeeding period. It occurs in
+Euripides; a later and otherwise little-known tragedian, Moschion,
+developed it in detail in a still extant fragment; Plato accepted it and
+made it the basis of his presentation of the origin of the State;
+Aristotle takes it for granted. Its source, too, has been demonstrated: it
+was presumably Democritus who first advanced it. Nevertheless the author
+of the fragment has hardly got it direct from Democritus, who at this time
+was little known at Athens, but from an intermediary. This intermediary is
+probably Protagoras, of whom it is said that he composed a treatise, _The
+Original State, i.e._ the primary state of mankind. Protagoras was a
+fellow-townsman of Democritus, and recorded by tradition as one of his
+direct disciples.
+
+In another point also the fragment seems to betray the influence of
+Democritus. When it is said that the wise inventors of the gods made them
+dwell in the skies, because from the skies come those natural phenomena
+which frighten men, it is highly suggestive of Democritus's criticism of
+the divine explanation of thunder and lightning and the like. In this case
+also Protagoras may have been the intermediary. In his work on the gods he
+had every opportunity of discussing the question in detail. But here we
+have the theory of Democritus combined with that of Prodicus in that it is
+maintained that from the skies come also those things that benefit men,
+and that they are on this account also a suitable dwelling-place for the
+gods. It is obvious that the author of the fragment (or his source) was
+versed in the most modern wisdom.
+
+All this erudition, however, is made to serve a certain tendency: the
+well-known tendency to represent religion as a political invention having
+as its object the policing of society. It is a theory which in
+antiquity--to its honour be it said--is but of rare occurrence. There is a
+vague indication of it in Euripides, a more definite one in Aristotle, and
+an elaborate application of it in Polybius; and that is in reality all.
+(That many people in more enlightened ages upheld religion as a means of
+keeping the masses in check, is a different matter.) However, it is an
+interesting fact that the Critias fragment is not only the first evidence
+of the existence of the theory known to us, but also presumably the
+earliest and probably the best known to later antiquity. Otherwise we
+should not find reference for the theory made to a fragment of a farce,
+but to a quotation from a philosopher.
+
+This might lead us to conclude that the theory was Critias's own
+invention, though, of course, it would not follow that he himself adhered
+to it. But it is more probable that it was a ready-made modern theory
+which Critias put into the mouth of Sisyphus. Not only does the whole
+character of the fragment and its scene of action favour this supposition,
+but there is also another factor which corroborates it.
+
+In the _Gorgias_ Plato makes one of the characters, Callicles--a man of
+whom we otherwise know nothing--profess a doctrine which up to a certain
+point is almost identical with that of the fragment. According to
+Callicles, the natural state (and the right state; on this point he is at
+variance with the fragment) is that right belongs to the strong. This
+state has been corrupted by legislation; the laws are inventions of the
+weak, who are also the majority, and their aim is to hinder the
+encroachment of the strong. If this theory is carried to its conclusion,
+it is obvious that religion must be added to the laws; if the former is
+not also regarded as an invention for the policing of society, the whole
+theory is upset. Now in the _Gorgias_ the question as to the attitude of
+the gods towards the problem of what is right and what is wrong is
+carefully avoided in the discussion. Not till the close of the dialogue,
+where Plato substitutes myth for scientific research, does he draw the
+conclusion in respect of religion. He does this in a positive form, as a
+consequence of _his_ point of view: after death the gods reward the just
+and punish the unjust; but he expressly assumes that Callicles will regard
+it all as an old wives' tale.
+
+In Callicles an attempt has been made to see a pseudonym for Critias. That
+is certainly wrong. Critias was a kinsman of Plato, is introduced by name
+in several dialogues, nay, one dialogue even bears his name, and he is
+everywhere treated with respect and sympathy. Nowadays, therefore, it is
+generally acknowledged that Callicles is a real person, merely unknown to
+us as such. However that may be, Plato would never have let a leading
+character in one of his longer dialogues advance (and Socrates refute) a
+view which had no better authority than a passage in a satyric drama. On
+the other hand, there is, as shown above, difficulty in supposing that the
+doctrine of the fragment was stated in the writings of an eminent sophist;
+so we come to the conclusion that it was developed and diffused in
+sophistic circles by oral teaching, and that it became known to Critias
+and Plato in this way. Its originator we do not know. We might think of
+the sophist Thrasymachus, who in the first book of Plato's _Republic_
+maintains a point of view corresponding to that of Callicles in _Gorgias_.
+But what we otherwise learn of Thrasymachus is not suggestive of interest
+in religion, and the only statement of his as to that kind of thing which
+has come down to us tends to the denial of a providence, not denial of the
+gods. Quite recently Diagoras of Melos has been guessed at; this is empty
+talk, resulting at best in substituting _x_ (or _NN_) for _y_.
+
+If I have dwelt in such detail on the _Sisyphus_ fragment, it is because
+it is our first direct and unmistakable evidence of ancient atheism. Here
+for the first time we meet with the direct statement which we have
+searched for in vain among all the preceding authors: that the gods of
+popular belief are fabrication pure and simple and without any
+corresponding reality, however remote. The nature of our tradition
+precludes our ascertaining whether such a statement might have been made
+earlier; but the probability is _a priori_ that it was not. The whole
+development of ancient reasoning on religious questions, as far as we are
+able to survey it, leads in reality to the conclusion that atheism as an
+expressed (though perhaps not publicly expressed) confession of faith did
+not appear till the age of the sophists.
+
+With the Critias fragment we have also brought to an end the inquiry into
+the direct statements of atheistic tendency which have come down to us
+from the age of the sophists. The result is, as we see, rather meagre. But
+it may be supplemented with indirect testimonies which prove that there
+was more of the thing than the direct tradition would lead us to
+conjecture, and that the denial of the existence of the gods must have
+penetrated very wide circles.
+
+The fullest expression of Attic free-thought at the end of the fifth
+century is to be found in the tragedies of Euripides. They are leavened
+with reflections on all possible moral and religious problems, and
+criticism of the traditional conceptions of the gods plays a leading part
+in them. We shall, however, have some difficulty in using Euripides as a
+source of what people really thought at this period, partly because he is
+a very pronounced personality and by no means a mere mouthpiece for the
+ideas of his contemporaries--during his lifetime he was an object of the
+most violent animosity owing, among other things, to his free-thinking
+views--partly because he, as a dramatist, was obliged to put his ideas into
+the mouths of his characters, so that in many cases it is difficult to
+decide how much is due to dramatic considerations and how much to the
+personal opinion of the poet. Even to this day the religious standpoint of
+Euripides is matter of dispute. In the most recent detailed treatment of
+the question he is characterised as an atheist, whereas others regard him
+merely as a dialectician who debates problems without having any real
+standpoint of his own.
+
+I do not believe that Euripides personally denied the existence of the
+gods; there is too much that tells against that theory, and, in fact,
+nothing that tells directly in favour of it, though he did not quite
+escape the charge of atheism even in his own day. To prove the correctness
+of this view would, however, lead too far afield in this connexion. On the
+other hand, a short characterisation of Euripides's manner of reasoning
+about religious problems is unavoidable as a background for the treatment
+of those--very rare--passages where he has put actually atheistic
+reflections into the mouths of his characters.
+
+As a Greek dramatist Euripides had to derive his subjects from the heroic
+legends, which at the same time were legends of the gods in so far as they
+were interwoven with tales of the gods' direct intervention in affairs. It
+is precisely against this intervention that the criticism of Euripides is
+primarily directed. Again and again he makes his characters protest
+against the manner in which they are treated by the gods or in which the
+gods generally behave. It is characteristic of Euripides that his
+starting-point in this connexion is always the moral one. So far he is a
+typical representative of that tendency which, in earlier times, was
+represented by Xenophanes and a little later by Pindar; in no other Greek
+poet has the method of using the higher conceptions of the gods against
+the lower found more complete expression than in Euripides. And in so far,
+too, he is still entirely on the ground of popular belief. But at the same
+time it is characteristic of him that he is familiar with and highly
+influenced by Greek science. He knows the most eminent representatives of
+Ionian naturalism (with the exception of Democritus), and he is fond of
+displaying his knowledge. Nevertheless, it cannot be said that he uses it
+in a contentious spirit against popular belief; on the contrary, he is
+inclined in agreement with the old philosophers to identify the gods of
+popular belief with the elements. Towards sophistic he takes a similar,
+but less sympathetic attitude. Sophistic was not in vogue till he was a
+man of mature age; he made acquaintance with it, and he made use of
+it--there are reflections in his dramas which carry distinct evidence of
+sophistic influence; but in his treatment of religious problems he is not
+a disciple of the sophists, and on this subject, as on others, he
+occasionally attacked them.
+
+It is against this background that we must set the reflections with an
+atheistic tone that we find in Euripides. They are, as already mentioned,
+rare; indeed, strictly speaking there is only one case in which a
+character openly denies the existence of the gods. The passage is a
+fragment of the drama _Bellerophon_; it is, despite its isolation, so
+typical of the manner of Euripides that it deserves to be quoted in full.
+
+"And then to say that there are gods in the heavens! Nay, there are none
+there; if you are not foolish enough to be seduced by the old talk. Think
+for yourselves about the matter, and do not be influenced by my words. I
+contend that the tyrants kill the people wholesale, take their money and
+destroy cities in spite of their oaths; and although they do all this they
+are happier than people who, in peace and quietness, lead god-fearing
+lives. And I know small states which honour the gods, but must obey
+greater states, which are less pious, because their spearmen are fewer in
+number. And I believe that you, if a slothful man just prayed to the gods
+and did not earn his bread by the work of his hands--" Here the sense is
+interrupted; but there remains one more line: "That which builds the
+castle of the gods is in part the unfortunate happenings ..." The
+continuation is missing.
+
+The argumentation here is characteristic of Euripides. From the injustice
+of life he infers the non-existence of the gods. The conclusion evidently
+only holds good on the assumption that the gods must be just; and this is
+precisely one of the postulates of popular belief. The reasoning is not
+sophistic; on the contrary, in their attacks the sophists took up a
+position outside the foundation of popular belief and attacked the
+foundation itself. This reasoning, on the other hand, is closely allied to
+the earlier religious thinking of the Greeks; it only proceeds further
+than the latter, where it results in rank denial.
+
+The drama of _Bellerophon_ is lost, and reconstruction is out of the
+question; if only for that reason it is unwarrantable to draw any
+conclusions from the detached fragment as to the poet's personal attitude
+towards the existence of the gods. But, nevertheless, the fragment is of
+interest in this connexion. It would never have occurred to Sophocles or
+Aeschylus to put such a speech in the mouth of one of his characters. When
+Euripides does that it is a proof that the question of the existence of
+the gods has begun to present itself to the popular consciousness at this
+time. Viewed in this light other statements of his which are not in
+themselves atheistic become significant. When it is said: "If the gods act
+in a shameful way, they are not gods"--that indeed is not atheism in our
+sense, but it is very near to it. Interesting is also the introduction to
+the drama _Melanippe_: "Zeus, whoever Zeus may be; for of that I only know
+what is told." Aeschylus begins a strophe in one of his most famous choral
+odes with almost the same words: "Zeus, whoe'er he be; for if he desire so
+to be called, I will address him by this name." In him it is an expression
+of genuine antique piety, which excludes all human impertinence towards
+the gods to such a degree that it even forgoes knowing their real names.
+In Euripides the same idea becomes an expression of doubt; but in this
+case also the doubt is raised on the foundation of popular belief.
+
+It is not surprising that so prominent and sustained a criticism of
+popular belief as that of Euripides, produced, moreover, on the stage,
+called forth a reaction from the defenders of the established faith, and
+that charges of impiety were not wanting. It is more to be wondered at
+that these charges on the whole are so few and slight, and that Euripides
+did not become the object of any actual prosecution. We know of a private
+trial in which the accuser incidentally charged Euripides with impiety on
+the strength of a quotation from one of his tragedies, Euripides's answer
+being a protest against dragging his poetry into the affair; the verdict
+on that belonged to another court. Aristophanes, who is always severe on
+Euripides, has only one passage directly charging him with being a
+propagator of atheism; but the accusation is hardly meant to be taken
+seriously. In _The Frogs_, where he had every opportunity of emphasising
+this view, there is hardly an indication of it. In _The Clouds_, where the
+main attack is directed against modern free-thought, Euripides, to be
+sure, is sneered at as being the fashionable poet of the corrupted youth,
+but he is not drawn into the charge of impiety. Even when Plato wrote his
+_Republic_, Euripides was generally considered the "wisest of all
+tragedians." This would have been impossible if he had been considered an
+atheist. In spite of all, the general feeling must undoubtedly have been
+that Euripides ultimately took his stand on the ground of popular belief.
+It was a similar instinctive judgment in regard to religion which
+prevented antiquity from placing Xenophanes amongst the atheists. Later
+times no doubt judged differently; the quotation from _Melanippe_ is in
+fact cited as a proof that Euripides was an atheist in his heart of
+hearts.
+
+In Aristophanes we meet with the first observations concerning the change
+in the religious conditions of Athens during the Peloponnesian War. In one
+of his plays, _The Clouds_, he actually set himself the task of taking up
+arms against modern unbelief, and he characterises it directly as atheism.
+If only for that reason the play deserves somewhat fuller consideration.
+
+It is well known that Aristophanes chose Socrates as a representative of
+the modern movement. In him he embodies all the faults with which he
+wished to pick a quarrel in the fashionable philosophy of the day. On the
+other hand, the essence of Socratic teaching is entirely absent from
+Aristophanes's representation; of that he had hardly any understanding,
+and even if he had he would at any rate not have been able to make use of
+it in his drama. We need not then in this connexion consider Socrates
+himself at all; on the other hand, the play gives a good idea of the
+popular idea of sophistic. Here we find all the features of the school,
+grotesquely mixed up and distorted by the farce, it is true, but
+nevertheless easily recognisable: rhetoric as an end in itself, of course,
+with emphasis on its immoral aspect; empty and hair-splitting dialectics;
+linguistic researches; Ionic naturalism; and first and last, as the focus
+of all, denial of the gods. That Aristophanes was well informed on certain
+points, at any rate, is clear from the fact that the majority of the
+scientific explanations which he puts into the mouth of Socrates actually
+represent the latest results of science at that time--which in all
+probability did not prevent his Athenians from considering them as
+exceedingly absurd and ridiculous.
+
+What matters here, however, is only the accusation of atheism which he
+made against Socrates. It is a little difficult to handle, in so far as
+Aristophanes, for dramatic reasons, has equipped Socrates with a whole set
+of deities. There are the clouds themselves, which are of Aristophanes's
+own invention; there is also the air, which he has got from Diogenes of
+Apollonia, and finally a "vortex" which is supposed to be derived from the
+same source, and which at any rate has cast Zeus down from his throne. All
+this we must ignore, as it is only conditioned partly by technical
+reasons--Aristophanes had to have a chorus and chose the clouds for the
+purpose--and partially by the desire to ridicule Ionic naturalism. But
+enough is left over. In the beginning of the play Socrates expressly
+declares that no gods exist. Similar statements are repeated in several
+places. Zeus is sometimes substituted for the gods, but it comes to the
+same thing. And at the end of the play, where the honest Athenian, who has
+ventured on the ticklish ground of sophistic, admits his delusion, it is
+expressly said:
+
+"Oh, what a fool I am! Nay, I must have been mad indeed when I thought of
+throwing the gods away for Socrates's sake!"
+
+Even in the verses with which the chorus conclude the play it is insisted
+that the worst crime of the sophists is their insult to the gods.
+
+The inference to be drawn from all this is simply that the popular
+Athenian opinion--for we may rest assured that this and the view of
+Aristophanes are identical--was that the sophists were atheists. That says
+but little. For popular opinion always works with broad categories, and
+the probability is that in this case, as demonstrated above, it was in the
+wrong, for, as a rule, the sophists were hardly conscious deniers of the
+gods. But, at the same time, at the back of the onslaught of Aristophanes
+there lies the idea that the teaching of the sophists led to denial of the
+gods; that atheism was the natural outcome of their doctrine and way of
+reasoning. And that there was some truth therein is proved by other
+evidence which can hardly be rejected.
+
+In the indictment of Socrates it is said that he "offended by not
+believing in the gods in which the State believed." In the two apologies
+for Socrates which have come down to us under Xenophon's name, the author
+treats this accusation entirely under the aspect of atheism, and tries to
+refute it by positive proofs of the piety of Socrates. But not one word is
+said about there being, in and for itself, anything remarkable or
+improbable in the charge. In Plato's _Apology_, Plato makes Socrates ask
+the accuser point-blank whether he is of the opinion that he, Socrates,
+does not believe in the gods at all and accordingly is a downright denier
+of the gods, or whether he merely means to say that he believes in other
+gods than those of the State. He makes the accuser answer that the
+assertion is that Socrates does not believe in any gods at all. In Plato
+Socrates refutes the accusation indirectly, using a line of argument
+entirely differing from that of Xenophon. But in Plato, too, the
+accusation is treated as being in no way extraordinary. In my opinion,
+Plato's _Apology_ cannot be used as historical evidence for details unless
+special reasons can be given proving their historical value beyond the
+fact that they occur in the _Apology_. But in this connexion the question
+is not what was said or not said at Socrates's trial. The decisive point
+is that we possess two quite independent and unambiguous depositions by
+two fully competent witnesses of the beginning of the fourth century which
+both treat of the charge of atheism as something which is neither strange
+nor surprising at their time. It is therefore permissible to conclude that
+in Athens at this time there really existed circles or at any rate not a
+few individuals who had given up the belief in the popular gods.
+
+A dialogue between Socrates and a young man by name Aristodemus, given in
+Xenophon's _Memorabilia_, makes the same impression. Of Aristodemus it is
+said that he does not sacrifice to the gods, does not consult the Oracle
+and ridicules those who do so. When he is called to account for this
+behaviour he maintains that he does not despise "the divine," but is of
+the opinion that it is too exalted to need his worship. Moreover, he
+contends that the gods do not trouble themselves about mankind. This is,
+of course, not atheism in our sense; but Aristodemus's attitude is,
+nevertheless, extremely eccentric in a community like that of Athens in
+the fifth century. And yet it is not mentioned as anything isolated and
+extraordinary, but as if it were something which, to be sure, was out of
+the common, but not unheard of.
+
+It is further to be observed that at the end of the fifth century we often
+hear of active sacrilegious outrages. An example is the historic trial of
+Alcibiades for profanation of the Mysteries. But this was not an isolated
+occurrence; there were more of the same kind at the time. Of the
+dithyrambic poet Cinesias it is said that he profaned holy things in an
+obscene manner. But the greatest stress of all must be laid on the
+well-known mutilation of the Hermae at Athens in 415, just before the
+expedition to Sicily. All the tales about the outrages of the Mysteries
+_may_ have been fictitious, but it is a fact that the Hermae were
+mutilated. The motive was probably political: the members of a secret
+society intended to pledge themselves to each other by all committing a
+capital crime. But that they chose just this form of crime shows quite
+clearly that respect for the State religion had greatly declined in these
+circles.
+
+What has so far been adduced as proof that the belief in the gods had
+begun to waver in Athens at the end of the fifth century is, in my
+opinion, conclusive in itself to anybody who is familiar with the more
+ancient Greek modes of thought and expression on this point, and can not
+only hear what is said, but also understand how it is said and what is
+passed over in silence. Of course it can always be objected that the
+proofs are partly the assertions of a comic poet who certainly was not
+particular about accusations of impiety, partly deductions _ex silentio_,
+partly actions the motives for which are uncertain. Fortunately, however,
+we have--from a slightly later period, it is true--a positive utterance
+which confirms our conclusion and which comes from a man who was not in
+the habit of talking idly and who had the best opportunities of knowing
+the circumstances.
+
+In the tenth book of his _Laws_, written shortly before his death, _i.e._
+about the middle of the fourth century, Plato gives a detailed account of
+the question of irreligion seen from the point of view of penal
+legislation. He distinguishes here between three forms, namely, denial of
+the existence of the gods, denial of the divine providence (whereas the
+existence of the gods is admitted), and finally the assumption that the
+gods exist and exercise providence, but that they allow themselves to be
+influenced by sacrifices and prayers. Of these three categories the last
+is evidently directed against ancient popular belief itself; it does not
+therefore interest us in this connexion. The second view, the denial of a
+providence, we have already met with in Xenophon in the character of
+Aristodemus, and in the sophist Thrasymachus; Euripides, too, sometimes
+alludes to it, though it was far from being his own opinion. Whether it
+amounted to denial of the gods or not was, in ancient times, the cause of
+much dispute; it is, of course, not atheism in our sense, but it is
+certainly evidence that belief in the gods is shaken. The first view, on
+the other hand, is sheer atheism. Plato consequently reckons with this as
+a serious danger to the community; he mentions it as a widespread view
+among the youth of his time, and in his legislation he sentences to death
+those who fail to be converted. It would seem certain, therefore, that
+there was, in reality, something in it after all.
+
+Plato does not confine himself to defining atheism and laying down the
+penalty for it; he at the same time, in accordance with a principle which
+he generally follows in the _Laws_, discusses it and tries to disprove it.
+In this way he happens to give us information--which is of special interest
+to us--of the proofs which were adduced by its followers.
+
+The argument is a twofold one. First comes the naturalistic proof; the
+heavenly bodies, according to the general (and Plato's own) view the most
+certain deities, are inanimate natural objects. It is interesting to note
+that in speaking of this doctrine in detail reference is clearly made to
+Anaxagoras; this confirms our afore-mentioned conjectures as to the
+character of his work. Plato was quite in a position to deal with
+Anaxagoras on the strength not only of what he said, but of what he passed
+over in silence. The second argument is the well-known sophistic one, that
+the gods are _nom�i_, not _physei_, they depend upon convention, which has
+nothing to do with reality. In this connexion the argument adds that what
+applies to the gods, applies also to right and wrong; _i.e._ we find here
+in the _Laws_ the view with which we are familiar from Callicles in the
+_Gorgias_, but with the missing link supplied. And Plato's development of
+this theme shows clearly just what a general historical consideration
+might lead us to expect, namely, that it was naturalism and sophistic that
+jointly undermined the belief in the old gods.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+
+With Socrates and his successors the whole question of the relation of
+Greek thought to popular belief enters upon a new phase. The Socratic
+philosophy is in many ways a continuation of sophistic. This is involved
+already in the fact that the same questions form the central interest in
+the two schools of thought, so that the problems stated by the sophists
+became the decisive factor in the content of Socratic and Platonic
+thought. The Socratic schools at the same time took over the actual
+programme of the sophists, namely, the education of adolescence in the
+highest culture. But, on the other hand, the Socratic philosophy was in
+the opposite camp to sophistic; on many points it represents a reaction
+against it, a recollection of the valuable elements contained in earlier
+Greek thought on life, especially human life, values which sophistic
+regarded with indifference or even hostility, and which were threatened
+with destruction if it should carry the day. This reactionary tendency in
+Socratic philosophy appears nowhere more plainly than in the field of
+religion.
+
+Under these circumstances it is a peculiar irony of fate that the very
+originator of the new trend in Greek thought was charged with and
+sentenced for impiety. We have already mentioned the singular prelude to
+the indictment afforded by the comedy of Aristophanes. We have also
+remarked upon the futility of looking therein for any actual enlightenment
+on the Socratic point of view. And Plato makes Socrates state this with
+all necessary sharpness in the _Apology_. Hence what we may infer from the
+attack of Aristophanes is merely this, that the general public lumped
+Socrates together with the sophists and more especially regarded him as a
+godless fellow. Unless this had been so, Aristophanes could not have
+introduced him as the chief character in his travesty. And without doubt
+it was this popular point of view which his accusers relied on when they
+actually included atheism as a count in their bill of indictment. It will,
+nevertheless, be necessary to dwell for a moment on this bill of
+indictment and the defence.
+
+The charge of impiety was a twofold one, partly for not believing in the
+gods the State believed in, partly for introducing new "demonic things."
+This latter act was directly punishable according to Attic law. What his
+accusers alluded to was the _daimonion_ of Socrates. That they should have
+had any idea of what that was must be regarded as utterly out of the
+question, and whatever it may have been--and of this we shall have a word
+to say later--it had at any rate nothing whatever to do with atheism. As to
+the charge of not believing in the gods of the State, Plato makes the
+accuser prefer it in the form that Socrates did not believe in any gods at
+all, after which it becomes an easy matter for Socrates to show that it is
+directly incompatible with the charge of introducing new deities. As
+ground for his accusation the accuser states--in Plato, as before--that
+Socrates taught the same doctrine about the sun and moon as Anaxagoras.
+The whole of the passage in the _Apology_ in which the question of the
+denial of gods is dealt with--a short dialogue between Socrates and the
+accuser, quite in the Socratic manner--historically speaking, carries
+little conviction, and we therefore dare not take it for granted that the
+charge either of atheism or of false doctrine about the sun and moon was
+put forward in that form. But that something about this latter point was
+mentioned during the trial must be regarded as probable, when we consider
+that Xenophon, too, defends Socrates at some length against the charge of
+concerning himself with speculations on Nature. That he did not do so must
+be taken for certain, not only from the express evidence of Xenophon and
+Plato, but from the whole nature of the case. The accusation on this point
+was assuredly pure fabrication. There remains only what was no doubt also
+the main point, namely, the assertion of the pernicious influence of
+Socrates on the young, and the inference of irreligion to be drawn from
+it--an argument which it would be absurd to waste any words upon.
+
+The attack, then, affords no information about Socrates's personal point
+of view as regards belief in the gods, and the defence only very little.
+Both Xenophon and Plato give an account of Socrates's _daimonion_, but
+this point has so little relation to the charge of atheism that it is not
+worth examination. For the rest Plato's defence is indirect. He makes
+Socrates refute his opponent, but does not let him say a word about his
+own point of view. Xenophon is more positive, in so far as in the first
+place he asserts that Socrates worshipped the gods like any other good
+citizen, and more especially that he advised his friends to use the
+Oracle; in the second place, that, though he lived in full publicity, no
+one ever saw him do or heard him say anything of an impious nature. All
+these assertions are assuredly correct, and they render it highly
+improbable that Socrates should have secretly abandoned the popular faith,
+but they tell us little that is positive about his views. Fortunately we
+possess other means of getting to closer grips with the question; the way
+must be through a consideration of Socrates's whole conduct and his mode
+of thought.
+
+Here we at once come to the interesting negative fact that there is
+nothing in tradition to indicate that Socrates ever occupied himself with
+theological questions. To be sure, Xenophon has twice put into his mouth a
+whole theodicy expressing an elaborate teleological view of nature. But
+that we dare not base anything upon this is now, I think, universally
+acknowledged. Plato, in the dialogue _Euthyphron_, makes him subject the
+popular notion of piety to a devastating criticism; but this, again, will
+not nowadays be regarded as historical by anybody. Everything we are told
+about Socrates which bears the stamp of historical truth indicates that he
+restricted himself to ethics and left theology alone. But this very fact
+is not without significance. It indicates that Socrates's aim was not to
+alter the religious views of his contemporaries. Since he did not do so we
+may reasonably believe it was because they did not inconvenience him in
+what was most important to him, _i.e._ ethics.
+
+We may, however, perhaps go even a step farther. We may venture, I think,
+to maintain that so far from contemporary religion being a hindrance to
+Socrates in his occupation as a teacher of ethics, it was, on the
+contrary, an indispensable support to him, nay, an integral component of
+his fundamental ethical view. The object of Socrates in his relations with
+his fellow-men was, on his own showing--for on this important point I think
+we can confidently rely upon Plato's _Apology_--to make clear to them that
+they knew nothing. And when he was asked to say in what he himself
+differed from other people, he could mention only one thing, namely, that
+he was aware of his own ignorance. But his ignorance is not an ignorance
+of this thing or that, it is a radical ignorance, something involved in
+the essence of man as man. That is, in other words, it is determined by
+religion. In order to be at all intelligible and ethically applicable, it
+presupposes the conception of beings of whom the essence is knowledge. For
+Socrates and his contemporaries the popular belief supplied such beings in
+the gods. The institution of the Oracle itself is an expression of the
+recognition of the superiority of the gods to man in knowledge. But the
+dogma had long been stated even in its absolute form when Homer said: "The
+gods know everything." To Socrates, who always took his starting-point
+quite popularly from notions that were universally accepted, this basis
+was simply indispensable. And so far from inconveniencing Socrates, the
+multiplicity and anthropomorphism of the gods seemed an advantage to
+him--the more they were like man in all but the essential qualification,
+the better.
+
+The Socratic ignorance has an ethical bearing. Its complement is his
+assertion that virtue is knowledge. Here again the gods are the necessary
+presupposition and determination. That the gods were good, or, as it was
+preferred to express it, "just" (the Greek word comprises more than the
+English word), was no less a popular dogma than the notion that they
+possessed knowledge. Now all Socrates's efforts were directed towards
+goodness as an end in view, towards the ethical development of mankind.
+Here again popular belief was his best ally. To the people to whom he
+talked, virtue (the Greek word is at once both wider and narrower in sense
+than the English term) was no mere abstract notion; it was a living
+reality to them, embodied in beings that were like themselves, human
+beings, but perfect human beings.
+
+If we correlate this with the negative circumstance that Socrates was no
+theologian but a teacher of ethics, we can easily understand a point of
+view which accepted popular belief as it was and employed it for working
+purposes in the service of moral teaching. Such a point of view, moreover,
+gained extraordinary strength by the fact that it preserved continuity
+with earlier Greek religious thought. This latter, too, had been ethical
+in its bearing; it, too, had employed the gods in the service of its
+ethical aim. But its central idea was felicity, not virtue; its
+starting-point was the popular dogma of the felicity of the gods, not
+their justice. In this way it had come to lay stress on a virtue which
+might be termed modesty, but in a religious sense, _i.e._ man must
+recognise his difference from the gods as a limited being, subject to the
+vicissitudes of an existence above which the gods are raised. Socrates
+says just the same, only that he puts knowledge or virtue, which to him
+was the same thing, in the place of felicity. From a religious point of
+view the result is exactly the same, namely, the doctrine of the gods as
+the terminus and ideal, and the insistence on the gulf separating man from
+them. We are tempted to say that, had Socrates turned with hostile intent
+against a religion which thus played into his hands, the more fool he. But
+this is putting the problem the wrong way up--Socrates never stood
+critically outside popular belief and traditional religious thought
+speculating as to whether he should use it or reject it. No, his thought
+grew out of it as from the bosom of the earth. Hence its mighty religious
+power, its inevitable victory over a school of thought which had severed
+all connexion with tradition.
+
+That such a point of view should be so badly misunderstood as it was in
+Athens seems incomprehensible. The explanation is no doubt that the whole
+story of Socrates's denial of the gods was only included by his accusers
+for the sake of completeness, and did not play any great part in the final
+issue. This seems confirmed by the fact that they found it convenient to
+support their charge of atheism by one of introducing foreign gods, this
+being punishable by Attic law. They thus obtained some slight hold for
+their accusation. But both charges must be presumed to have been so
+signally refuted during the trial that it is hardly possible that any
+great number of the judges were influenced by them. It was quite different
+and far weightier matters which brought about the conviction of Socrates,
+questions on which there was really a deep and vital difference of opinion
+between him and his contemporaries. That Socrates's attitude towards
+popular belief was at any rate fully understood elsewhere is testified by
+the answer of the Delphic Oracle, that declared Socrates to be the wisest
+of all men. However remarkable such a pronouncement from such a place may
+appear, it seems impossible to reject the accounts of it as unhistorical;
+on the other hand, it does not seem impossible to explain how the Oracle
+came to declare itself as reported. Earlier Greek thought, which insisted
+upon the gulf separating gods and men, was from olden times intimately
+connected with the Delphic Oracle. It hardly sprang from there; more
+probably it arose spontaneously in various parts of Hellas. But it would
+naturally feel attracted toward the Oracle, which was one of the religious
+centres of Hellas, and it was recognised as legitimate by the Oracle.
+Above all, the honour shown by the Oracle to Pindar, one of the chief
+representatives of the earlier thought, testifies to this. Hence there is
+nothing incredible in the assumption that Socrates attracted notice at
+Delphi as a defender of the old-fashioned religious views approved by the
+Oracle, precisely in virtue of his opposition to the ideas then in vogue.
+
+If we accept this explanation we are, however, excluded from taking
+literally Plato's account of the answer of the Delphic Oracle and
+Socrates's attitude towards it. Plato presents the case as if the Oracle
+were the starting-point of Socrates's philosophy and of the peculiar mode
+of life which was indissolubly bound up with it. This presentation cannot
+be correct if we are to regard the Oracle as historical and understand it
+as we have understood it. The Oracle presupposes the Socrates we know: a
+man with a religious message and a mode of life which was bound to attract
+notice to him as an exception from the general rule. It cannot, therefore,
+have been the cause of Socrates's finding himself. On the other hand, it
+is difficult to imagine a man choosing a mode of life like that of
+Socrates without a definite inducement, without some fact or other that
+would lead him to conceive himself as an exception from the rule. If we
+look for such a fact in the life of Socrates, we shall look in vain as
+regards externals. Apart from his activities as a religious and ethical
+personality, his life was that of any other Attic citizen. But in his
+spiritual life there was certainly one point, but only one, on which he
+deviated from the normal, namely, his _daimonion_. If we examine the
+accounts of this more closely the only thing we can make of them is--or so
+at least it seems to me--that we are here in the presence of a
+form--peculiar, no doubt, and highly developed--of the phenomena which are
+nowadays classed under the concept of clairvoyance. Now Plato makes
+Socrates himself say that the power of avoiding what would harm him, in
+great things and little, by virtue of a direct perception (a "voice"),
+which is what constituted his _daimonion_, was given him from childhood.
+That it was regarded as something singular both by himself and others is
+evident, and likewise that he himself regarded it as something
+supernatural; the designation _daimonion_ itself seems to be his own. I
+think that we must seek for the origin of Socrates's peculiar mode of life
+in this direction, strange as it may be that a purely mystic element
+should have given the impulse to the most rationalistic philosophy the
+world has ever produced. It is impossible to enter more deeply into this
+problem here; but, if my conjecture is correct, we have an additional
+explanation of the fact that Socrates was disposed to anything rather than
+an attack on the established religion.
+
+A view of popular religion such as I have here sketched bore in itself the
+germ of a further development which must lead in other directions. A
+personality like Socrates might perhaps manage throughout a lifetime to
+keep that balance on a razor's edge which is involved in utilising to the
+utmost in the service of ethics the popular dogmas of the perfection of
+the gods, while disregarding all irrelevant tales, all myths and all
+notions of too human a tenor about them. This demanded concentration on
+the one thing needful, in conjunction with deep piety of the most genuine
+antique kind, with the most profound religious modesty, a combination
+which it was assuredly given to but one man to attain. Socrates's
+successors had it not. Starting precisely from a Socratic foundation they
+entered upon theological speculations which carried them away from the
+Socratic point of view.
+
+For the Cynics, who set up virtue as the only good, the popular notions of
+the gods would seem to have been just as convenient as for Socrates. And
+we know that Antisthenes, the founder of the school, made ample use of
+them in his ethical teaching. He represented Heracles as the Cynical ideal
+and occupied himself largely with allegorical interpretation of the myths.
+On the other hand, there is a tradition that he maintained that "according
+to nature" there was only one god, but "according to the law" several--a
+purely sophistic view. He inveighed against the worship of images, too,
+and maintained that god "did not resemble any thing," and we know that his
+school rejected all worship of the gods because the gods "were in need of
+nothing." This conception, too, is presumably traceable to Antisthenes. In
+all this the theological interest is evident. As soon as this interest
+sets in, the harmonious relation to the popular faith is upset, the
+discord between its higher and lower ideas becomes manifest, and criticism
+begins to assert itself. In the case of Antisthenes, if we may believe
+tradition, it seems to have led to monotheism, in itself a most remarkable
+phenomenon in the history of Greek religion, but the material is too
+slight for us to make anything of it. The later Cynics afford interesting
+features in illustration of atheism in antiquity, but this is best left to
+a later chapter.
+
+About the relations of the Megarians to the popular faith we know next to
+nothing. One of them, Stilpo, was charged with impiety on account of a bad
+joke about Athene, and convicted, although he tried to save himself by
+another bad joke. As his point of view was that of a downright sceptic, he
+was no doubt an atheist according to the notions of antiquity; in our day
+he would be called an agnostic, but the information that we have about his
+religious standpoint is too slight to repay dwelling on him.
+
+As to the relation of the Cyrenaic school to the popular faith, the
+general proposition has been handed down to us that the wise man could not
+be "deisidaimon," _i.e._ superstitious or god-fearing; the Greek word can
+have both senses. This does not speak for piety at any rate, but then the
+relationship of the Cyrenaics to the gods of popular belief was different
+from that of the other followers of Socrates. As they set up pleasure--the
+momentary, isolated feeling of pleasure--as the supreme good, they had no
+use for the popular conceptions of the gods in their ethics, nay, these
+conceptions were even a hindrance to them in so far as the fear of the
+gods might prove a restriction where it ought not to. In these
+circumstances we cannot wonder at finding a member of the school in the
+list of _atheoi_. This is Theodorus of Cyrene, who lived about the year
+300. He really seems to have been a downright denier of the gods; he wrote
+a work _On the Gods_ containing a searching criticism of theology, which
+is said to have exposed him to unpleasantness during a stay at Athens, but
+the then ruler of the city, Demetrius of Phalerum, protected him. There is
+nothing strange in a manifestation of downright atheism at this time and
+from this quarter. More remarkable is that interest in theology which we
+must assume Theodorus to have had, since he wrote at length upon the
+subject. Unfortunately it is not evident from the account whether his
+criticism was directed mostly against popular religion or against the
+theology of the philosophers. As it was asserted in antiquity that
+Epicurus used his book largely, the latter is more probable.
+
+Whereas in the case of the "imperfect Socratics" as well as of all the
+earlier philosophers we must content ourselves with more or less casual
+notes, and at the best with fragments, and for Socrates with second-hand
+information, when we come to Plato we find ourselves for the first time in
+the presence of full and authentic information. Plato belongs to those few
+among the ancient authors of whom everything that their contemporaries
+possessed has been preserved to our own day. There would, however, be no
+cause to speak about Plato in an investigation of atheism in antiquity,
+had not so eminent a scholar as Zeller roundly asserted that Plato did not
+believe in the Greek gods--with the exception of the heavenly bodies, in
+the case of which the facts are obvious. On the other hand, it is
+impossible here to enter upon a close discussion of so large a question; I
+must content myself with giving my views in their main lines, with a brief
+statement of my reasons for holding them.
+
+In the mythical portions of his dialogues Plato uses the gods as a given
+poetic motive and treats them with poetic licence. Otherwise they play a
+very inferior part in the greater portion of his works. In the
+_Euthyphron_ he gives a sharp criticism of the popular conception of
+piety, and in reality at the same time very seriously questions the
+importance and value of the existing form of worship. In his chief ethical
+work, the _Gorgias_, he subjects the fundamental problems of individual
+ethics to a close discussion without saying one word of their relation to
+religion; if we except the mythic part at the end the gods scarcely appear
+in the dialogue. Finally, in his _Republic_ he no doubt gives a detailed
+criticism of popular mythology as an element of education, and in the
+course of this also some positive definitions of the idea of God, but
+throughout the construction of his ideal community he entirely disregards
+religion and worship, even if he occasionally takes it for granted that a
+cult of some sort exists, and in one place quite casually refers to the
+Oracle at Delphi as authority for its organisation in details. To this may
+further be added the negative point that he never in any of his works made
+Socrates define his position in regard to the sophistic treatment of the
+popular religion.
+
+In Plato's later works the case is different. In the construction of the
+universe described in the _Timaeus_ the gods have a definite and
+significant place, and in the _Laws_, Plato's last work, they play a
+leading part. Here he not only gives elaborate rules for the organisation
+of the worship which permeate the whole life of the community, but even in
+the argument of the dialogue the gods are everywhere in evidence in a way
+which strongly suggests bigotry. Finally, Plato gives the above-mentioned
+definitions of impiety and fixes the severest punishment for it--for
+downright denial of the gods, when all attempts at conversion have failed,
+the penalty of death.
+
+On this evidence we are tempted to take the view that Plato in his earlier
+years took up a critical attitude in regard to the gods of popular belief,
+perhaps even denied them altogether, that he gradually grew more
+conservative, and ended by being a confirmed bigot. And we might look for
+a corroboration of this in a peculiar observation in the _Laws_. Plato
+opens his admonition to the young against atheism by reminding them that
+they are young, and that false opinion concerning the gods is a common
+disease among the young, but that utter denial of their existence is not
+wont to endure to old age. In this we might see an expression of personal
+religious experience.
+
+Nevertheless I do not think such a construction of Plato's religious
+development feasible. A decisive objection is his exposition of the
+Socratic point of view in so early a work as the _Apology_. I at any rate
+regard it as psychologically impossible that a downright atheist, be he
+ever so great a poet, should be able to draw such a picture of a deeply
+religious personality, and draw it with so much sympathy and such
+convincing force. Add to this other facts of secondary moment. Even the
+close criticism to which Plato subjects the popular notions of the gods in
+his _Republic_ does not indicate denial of the gods as such; moreover, it
+is built on a positive foundation, on the idea of the goodness of the gods
+and their truth (which for Plato manifests itself in immutability).
+Finally, Plato at all times vigorously advocated the belief in providence.
+In the _Laws_ he stamps unbelief in divine providence as impiety; in the
+_Republic_ he insists in a prominent passage that the gods love the just
+man and order everything for him in the best way. And he puts the same
+thought into Socrates's mouth in the _Apology_, though it is hardly
+Socratic in the strict sense of the word, _i.e._ as a main point in
+Socrates's conception of existence. All this should warn us not to
+exaggerate the significance of the difference which may be pointed out
+between the religious standpoints of the younger and the older Plato. But
+the difference itself cannot, I think, be denied; there can hardly be any
+doubt that Plato was much more critical of popular belief in his youth and
+prime than towards the close of his life.
+
+Even in Plato's later works there is, in spite of their conservative
+attitude, a very peculiar reservation in regard to the anthropomorphic
+gods of popular belief. It shows itself in the _Laws_ in the fact that
+where he sets out to _prove_ the existence of the gods he contents himself
+with proving the divinity of the heavenly bodies and quite disregards the
+other gods. It appears still more plainly in the _Timaeus_, where he gives
+a philosophical explanation of how the divine heavenly bodies came into
+existence, but says expressly of the other gods that such an explanation
+is impossible, and that we must abide by what the old theologians said on
+this subject; they being partly the children of gods would know best where
+their parents came from. It is observations of this kind that induced
+Zeller to believe that Plato altogether denied the gods of popular belief;
+he also contends that the gods have no place in Plato's system. This
+latter contention is perfectly correct; Plato never identified the gods
+with the ideas (although he comes very near to it in the _Republic_, where
+he attributes to them immutability, the quality which determines the
+essence of the ideas), and in the _Timaeus_ he distinguishes sharply
+between them. No doubt his doctrine of ideas led up to a kind of divinity,
+the idea of the good, as the crown of the system, but the direct inference
+from this conception would be pure monotheism and so exclude polytheism.
+This inference Plato did not draw, though his treatment of the gods in the
+_Laws_ and _Timaeus_ certainly shows that he was quite clear that the gods
+of the popular faith were an irrational element in his conception of the
+universe. The two passages do not entitle us to go further and conclude
+that he utterly rejected them, and in the _Timaeus_, where Plato makes
+both classes of gods, both the heavenly bodies and the others, take part
+in the creation of man, this is plainly precluded. The playful turn with
+which he evades inquiry into the origin of the gods thus receives its
+proper limitation; it is entirely confined to their origin.
+
+Such, according to my view, is the state of the case. It is of fundamental
+importance to emphasise the fact that we cannot conclude, because the gods
+of popular belief do not fit into the system of a philosopher, that he
+denies their existence. In what follows we shall have occasion to point
+out a case in which, as all are now agreed, a philosophical school has
+adopted and stubbornly held to the belief in the existence of gods though
+this assumption was directly opposed to a fundamental proposition in its
+system of doctrine. The case of Plato is particularly interesting because
+he himself was aware and has pointed out that here was a point on which
+the consistent scientific application of his conception of the universe
+must fail. It is the outcome--one of many--of what is perhaps his finest
+quality as a philosopher, namely, his intellectual honesty.
+
+An indirect testimony to the correctness of the view here stated will be
+found in the way in which Plato's faithful disciple Xenocrates developed
+his theology, for it shows that Xenocrates presupposed the existence of
+the gods of popular belief as given by Plato. Xenocrates made it his
+general task to systematise Plato's philosophy (which had never been set
+forth publicly by himself as a whole), and to secure it against attack. In
+the course of this work he was bound to discover that the conception of
+the gods of popular belief was a particularly weak point in Plato's
+system, and he attempted to mend matters by a peculiar theory which became
+of the greatest importance for later times. Xenocrates set up as gods, in
+the first place, the heavenly bodies. Next he gave his highest principles
+(pure abstracts such as oneness and twoness) and the elements of his
+universe (air, water and earth) the names of some of the highest
+divinities in popular belief (Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Demeter). These gods,
+however, did not enter into direct communication with men, but only
+through some intermediate agent. The intermediate agents were the
+"demons," a class of beings who were higher than man yet not perfect like
+the gods. They were, it seems, immortal; they were invisible and far more
+powerful than human beings; but they were subject to human passions and
+were of highly differing grades of moral perfection. These are the beings
+that are the objects of the greater part of the existing cult, especially
+such usages as rest on the assumption that the gods can do harm and are
+directed towards averting it, or which are in other ways objectionable;
+and with them are connected the myths which Plato subjected to so severe a
+criticism. Xenocrates found a basis for this system in Plato, who in the
+_Symposium_ sets up the demons as a class of beings between gods and men,
+and makes them carriers of the prayers and wishes of men to the gods. But
+what was a passing thought with Plato serving only a poetical purpose was
+taken seriously and systematised by Xenocrates.
+
+It can hardly be said that Xenocrates has gained much recognition among
+modern writers on the history of philosophy for his theory of demons. And
+yet I cannot see that there was any other possible solution of the problem
+which ancient popular belief set ancient philosophy, if, be it understood,
+we hold fast by two hypotheses: the first, that the popular belief and
+worship of the ancients was based throughout on a foundation of reality;
+and second, that moral perfection is an essential factor in the conception
+of God. The only inconsistency which we may perhaps bring home to
+Xenocrates is that he retained certain of the popular names of the gods as
+designations for gods in his sense; but this inconsistency was, as we
+shall see, subsequently removed. In favour of this estimate of
+Xenocrates's doctrine of demons may further be adduced that it actually
+was the last word of ancient philosophy on the matter. The doctrine was
+adopted by the Stoics, the Neo-Pythagoreans, and the Neo-Platonists. Only
+the Epicureans went another way, but their doctrine died out before the
+close of antiquity. And so the doctrine of demons became the ground on
+which Jewish-Christian monotheism managed to come to terms with ancient
+paganism, to conquer it in theory, as it were.
+
+This implies, however, that the doctrine of demons, though it arose out of
+an honest attempt to save popular belief philosophically, in reality
+brings out its incompatibility with philosophy. The religion and worship
+of the ancients could dispense with neither the higher nor the lower
+conceptions of its gods. If the former were done away with, recognition,
+however full, of the existence of the gods was no good; in the long run
+the inference could not be avoided that they were immoral powers and so
+ought not to be worshipped. This was the inference drawn by Christianity
+in theory and enforced in practice, ultimately by main force.
+
+Aristotle is among the philosophers who were prosecuted for impiety. When
+the anti-Macedonian party came into power in Athens after the death of
+Alexander, there broke out a persecution against his adherents, and this
+was also directed against Aristotle. The basis of the charge against him
+was that he had shown divine honour after his death to the tyrant Hermias,
+whose guest he had been during a prolonged stay in Asia Minor. This seems
+to have been a fabrication, and at any rate has nothing to do with
+atheism. In the writings of Aristotle, as they were then generally known,
+it would assuredly have been impossible to find any ground for a charge of
+atheism.
+
+Nevertheless, Aristotle is one of the philosophers about whose faith in
+the gods of popular religion well-founded doubts may be raised. Like
+Plato, he acknowledged the divinity of the heavenly bodies on the ground
+that they must have a soul since they had independent motion. Further, he
+has a kind of supreme god who, himself unmoved, is the cause of all
+movement, and whose constituent quality is reason. As regards the gods of
+popular belief, in his _Ethics_ and his _Politics_ he assumes public
+worship to be a necessary constituent of the life of the individual and
+the community. He gave no grounds for this assumption--on the contrary, he
+expressly declared that it was a question which ought not to be discussed
+at all: he who stirs up doubts whether honour should be paid to the gods
+is in need not of teaching but of punishment. (That he himself took part
+in worship is evident from his will.) Further, in his ethical works he
+used the conceptions of the gods almost in the same way as we have assumed
+that Socrates did, _i.e._ as the ethical ideal and determining the limits
+of the human. He never entered upon any elaborate criticism of the lower
+elements of popular religion such as Plato gave. So far everything is in
+admirable order. But if we look more closely at things there is
+nevertheless nearly always a little "but" in Aristotle's utterances about
+the gods. Where he operates with popular notions he prefers to speak
+hypothetically or to refer to what is generally assumed; or he is content
+to use only definitions which will also agree with his own philosophical
+conception of God. But he goes further; in a few places in his writings
+there are utterances which it seems can only be interpreted as a radical
+denial of the popular religion. The most important of them deserves to be
+quoted _in extenso_:
+
+
+    "A tradition has been handed down from the ancients and from the
+    most primitive times, and left to later ages in the form of myth,
+    that these substances (_i.e._ sky and heavenly bodies) are gods
+    and that the divine embraces all nature. The rest consists in
+    legendary additions intended to impress the multitude and serve
+    the purposes of legislation and the common weal; for these gods
+    are said to have human shape or resemble certain other beings
+    (animals), and they say other things which follow from this and
+    are of a similar kind to those already mentioned. But if we
+    disregard all this and restrict ourselves to the first point, that
+    they thought that the first substances were gods, we must
+    acknowledge that it is a divinely inspired saying. And as, in all
+    probability, every art and science has been discovered many times,
+    as far as it is possible, and has perished again, so these
+    notions, too, may have been preserved till now as relics of those
+    times. To this extent only can we have any idea of the opinion
+    which was held by our fathers and has come down from the beginning
+    of things."
+
+
+The last sentences, expressing Aristotle's idea of a life-cycle and
+periods of civilisation which repeat themselves, have only been included
+in the quotation for the sake of completeness. If we disregard them, the
+passage plainly enough states the view that the only element of truth in
+the traditional notions about the gods was the divinity of the sky and the
+heavenly bodies; the rest is myth. Aristotle has nowhere else expressed
+himself with such distinctness and in such length, but then the passage in
+question has a place of its own. It comes in his _Metaphysics_ directly
+after the exposition of his philosophical conception of God--a position
+marked by profound earnestness and as it were irradiated by a quiet inner
+fervour. We feel that we are here approaching the _sanctum sanctorum_ of
+the thinker. In this connexion, and only here, he wished for once to state
+his opinion about the religion of his time without reserve. What he says
+here is a precise formulation of the result arrived at by the best Greek
+thinkers as regards the religion of the Greek people. It was not, they
+thought, pure fabrication. It contained an element of truth of the
+greatest value. But most of it consisted of human inventions without any
+reality behind them.
+
+A point of view like that of Aristotle would, I suppose, hardly have been
+called atheism among the ancients, if only because the heavenly bodies
+were acknowledged as divine. But according to our definition it is
+atheism. The "sky"-gods of Aristotle have nothing in common with the gods
+of popular belief, not even their names, for Aristotle never names them.
+And the rest, the whole crowd of Greek anthropomorphic gods, exist only in
+the human imagination.
+
+Aristotle's successors offer little of interest to our inquiry.
+Theophrastus was charged with impiety, but the charge broke down
+completely. His theological standpoint was certainly the same as
+Aristotle's. Of Strato, the most independent of the Peripatetics, we know
+that in his view of nature he laid greater stress on the material causes
+than Aristotle did, and so arrived at a different conception of the
+supreme deity. Aristotle had severed the deity from Nature and placed it
+outside the latter as an incorporeal being whose chief determining factor
+was reason. In Strato's view the deity was identical with Nature and, like
+the latter, was without consciousness; consciousness was only found in
+organic nature. Consequently we cannot suppose him to have believed in the
+divinity of the heavenly bodies in Aristotle's sense, though no direct
+statement on this subject has come down to us. About his attitude towards
+popular belief we hear nothing. A denial of the popular gods is not
+necessarily implied in Strato's theory, but seems reasonable in itself and
+is further rendered probable by the fact that all writers seem to take it
+for granted that Strato knew no god other than the whole of Nature.
+
+We designated Socratic philosophy, in its relation to popular belief, as a
+reaction against the radical free-thought of the sophistic movement. It
+may seem peculiar that with Aristotle it develops into a view which we can
+only describe as atheism. There is, however, an important difference
+between the standpoints of the sophists and of Aristotle. Radical as the
+latter is at bottom, it is not, however, openly opposed to popular
+belief--on the contrary, to any one who did not examine it more closely it
+must have had the appearance of accepting popular belief. The very
+assumption that the heavenly bodies were divine would contribute to that
+effect; this, as we have seen, was a point on which the popular view laid
+great stress. If we add to this that Aristotle never made the existence of
+the popular gods matter of debate; that he expressly acknowledged the
+established worship; and that he consistently made use of certain
+fundamental notions of popular belief in his philosophy--we can hardly
+avoid the conclusion that, notwithstanding his personal emancipation from
+the existing religion, he is a true representative of the Socratic
+reaction against sophistic. But we see, too, that there is a reservation
+in this reaction. In continuity with earlier Greek thought on religion, it
+proceeded from the absolute definitions of the divine offered by popular
+belief, but when criticising anthropomorphism on this basis it did not
+after all avoid falling out with popular belief. How far each philosopher
+went in his antagonism was a matter of discretion, as also was the means
+chosen to reconcile the philosophical with the popular view. The theology
+of the Socratic schools thus suffered from a certain half-heartedness; in
+the main it has the character of a compromise. It would not give up the
+popular notions of the gods, and yet they were continually getting in the
+way. This dualism governs the whole of the succeeding Greek philosophy.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+
+During the three or four centuries which passed between the downfall of
+free Hellas and the beginning of the Roman Empire, great social and
+political changes took place in the ancient world, involving also vital
+changes in religion. The chief phenomenon in this field, the invasion of
+foreign, especially oriental, religions into Hellas, does not come within
+the scope of this investigation. On the one hand, it is an expression of
+dissatisfaction with the old gods; on the other, the intrusion of new gods
+would contribute to the ousting of the old ones. There is no question of
+atheism here; it is only a change within polytheism. But apart from this
+change there is evidence that the old faith had lost its hold on men's
+minds to no inconsiderable extent. Here, too, there is hardly any question
+of atheism properly speaking, but as a background to the--not very
+numerous--evidences of such atheism in our period, we cannot well ignore
+the decline of the popular faith. Our investigation is rendered difficult
+on this point, and generally within this period, by the lack of direct
+evidence. Of the rich Hellenistic literature almost everything has been
+lost, and we are restricted to reports and fragments.
+
+In order to gain a concrete starting-point we will begin with a quotation
+from the historian Polybius--so to speak the only Greek prose author of the
+earlier Hellenistic period of whose works considerable and connected
+portions are preserved. Polybius wrote in the latter half of the second
+century a history of the world in which Rome took the dominant place. Here
+he gave, among other things, a detailed description of the Roman
+constitution and thus came to touch upon the state of religion in Rome as
+compared with that in Greece. He says on this subject:
+
+"The greatest advantage of the Roman constitution seems to me to lie in
+its conception of the gods, and I believe that what among other peoples is
+despised is what holds together the Roman power--I mean superstition. For
+this feature has by them been developed so far in the direction of the
+'horrible,' and has so permeated both private and public life, that it is
+quite unique. Many will perhaps find this strange, but I think they have
+acted so with an eye to the mass of the people. For if it were possible to
+compose a state of reasonable people such a procedure would no doubt be
+unnecessary, but as every people regarded as a mass is easily impressed
+and full of criminal instincts, unreasonable violence, and fierce passion,
+there is nothing to be done but to keep the masses under by vague fears
+and such-like hocus-pocus. Therefore it is my opinion that it was not
+without good reason or by mere chance that the ancients imparted to the
+masses the notions of the gods and the underworld, but rather is it
+thoughtless and irrational when nowadays we seek to destroy them."
+
+As a proof of this last statement follows a comparison between the state
+of public morals in Greece and in Rome. In Greece you cannot trust a man
+with a few hundred pounds without ten notaries and as many seals and
+double the number of witnesses; in Rome great public treasure is
+administered with honesty merely under the safeguard of an oath.
+
+As we see, this passage contains direct evidence that in the second
+century in Hellas--in contradistinction to Rome--there was an attempt to
+break down the belief in the gods. By his "we" Polybius evidently referred
+especially to the leading political circles. He knew these circles from
+personal experience, and his testimony has all the more weight because he
+does not come forward in the r�le of the orthodox man complaining in the
+usual way of the impiety of his contemporaries; on the contrary, he speaks
+as the educated and enlightened man to whom it is a matter of course that
+all this talk about the gods and the underworld is a myth which nobody
+among the better classes takes seriously. This is a tone we have not heard
+before, and it is a strong indirect testimony to the fact that Polybius is
+not wrong when he speaks of disbelief among the upper classes of Greece.
+
+In this connexion the work of Polybius has a certain interest on another
+point. Where earlier--and later--authors would speak of the intervention of
+the gods in the march of history, he operates as a rule with an idea which
+he calls Tyche. The word is untranslatable when used in this way. It is
+something between chance, fortune and fate. It is more comprehensive and
+more personal than chance; it has not the immutable, the "lawbound"
+character of fate; rather it denotes the incalculability, the
+capriciousness associated, especially in earlier usage, with the word
+fortune, but without the tendency of this word to be used in a good sense.
+
+This Tyche-religion--if we may use this expression--was not new in Hellas.
+Quite early we find Tyche worshipped as a goddess among the other deities,
+and it is an old notion that the gods send good fortune, a notion which
+set its mark on a series of established phrases in private and public
+life. But what is of interest here is that shifting of religious ideas in
+the course of which Tyche drives the gods into the background. We find
+indications of it as early as Thucydides. In his view of history he lays
+the main stress, certainly, on human initiative, and not least on rational
+calculation, as the cause of events. But where he is obliged to reckon
+with an element independent of human efforts, he calls it Tyche and not
+"the immortal gods." A somewhat similar view we find in another great
+political author of the stage of transition to our period, namely,
+Demosthenes. Demosthenes of course employs the official apparatus of gods:
+he invokes them on solemn occasions; he quotes their authority in support
+of his assertions (once he even reported a revelation which he had in a
+dream); he calls his opponents enemies of the gods, etc. But in his
+political considerations the gods play a negligible part. The factors with
+which he reckons as a rule are merely political forces. Where he is
+compelled to bring forward elements which man cannot control, he shows a
+preference for Tyche. He certainly occasionally identifies her with the
+favour of the gods, but in such a way as to give the impression that it is
+only a _fa�on de parler_. Direct pronouncements of a free-thinking kind
+one would not expect from an orator and statesman, and yet Demosthenes was
+once bold enough to say that Pythia, the mouthpiece of the Delphic Oracle,
+was a partisan of Macedonia, an utterance which his opponent Aeschines,
+who liked to parade his orthodoxy, did not omit to cast in his teeth. On
+the whole, Aeschines liked to represent Demosthenes as a godless fellow,
+and it is not perhaps without significance that the latter never directly
+replied to such attacks, or indirectly did anything to impair their force.
+
+During the violent revolutions that took place in Hellas under Alexander
+the Great and his successors, and the instability of social and political
+conditions consequent thereon, the Tyche-religion received a fresh
+impetus. With one stroke Hellas was flung into world politics. Everything
+grew to colossal proportions in comparison with earlier conditions. The
+small Hellenic city-states that had hitherto been each for itself a world
+shrank into nothing. It is as if the old gods could not keep pace with
+this violent process of expansion. Men felt a craving for a wider and more
+comprehensive religious concept to answer to the changed conditions, and
+such an idea was found in the idea of Tyche. Thoughtful men, such as
+Demetrius of Phalerum, wrote whole books about it; states built temples to
+Tyche; in private religion also it played a great part. No one reflected
+much on the relation of Tyche to the old gods. It must be remembered that
+Tyche is a real layman's notion, and that Hellenistic philosophy regarded
+it as its task precisely to render man independent of the whims of fate.
+Sometimes, however, we find a positive statement of the view that Tyche
+ruled over the gods also. It is characteristic of the state of affairs;
+men did not want to relinquish the old gods, but could not any longer
+allow them the leading place.
+
+If we return for a moment to Polybius, we shall find that his conception
+of Tyche strikingly illustrates the distance between him and Thucydides.
+In the introduction to his work, on its first page, he points out that the
+universally acknowledged task of historical writing is partly to educate
+people for political activities, partly to teach them to bear the
+vicissitudes of fortune with fortitude by reminding them of the lot of
+others. And subsequently, when he passes on to his main theme, the
+foundation of the Roman world-empire, after having explained the plan of
+his work, he says: "So far then our plan. But the _co-operation of
+fortune_ is still needed if my life is to be long enough for me to
+accomplish my purpose." An earlier--or a later--author would here either
+have left the higher powers out of the game altogether or would have used
+an expression showing more submission to the gods of the popular faith.
+
+In a later author, Pliny the Elder, we again find a characteristic
+utterance throwing light upon the significance of the Tyche-religion.
+After a very free-thinking survey of the popular notions regarding the
+gods, Pliny says: "As an intermediate position between these two views
+(that there is a divine providence and that there is none) men have
+themselves invented another divine power, in order that speculation about
+the deity might become still more uncertain. Throughout the world, in
+every place, at every hour of the day, Fortune alone is invoked and named
+by every mouth; she alone is accused, she bears the guilt of everything;
+of her only do we think, to her is all praise, to her all blame. And she
+is worshipped with railing words--she is deemed inconstant, by many even
+blind; she is fickle, unstable, uncertain, changeable; giving her favours
+to the unworthy. To her is imputed every loss, every gain; in all the
+accounts of life she alone fills up both the debit and the credit side,
+and we are so subject to chance that Chance itself becomes our god, and
+again proves the incertitude of the deity." Even if a great deal of this
+may be put down to rhetoric, by which Pliny was easily carried away, the
+solid fact itself remains that he felt justified in speaking as if Dame
+Fortune had dethroned all the old gods.
+
+That this view of life must have persisted very tenaciously even down to a
+time when a strong reaction in the direction of positive religious feeling
+had set in, is proved by the romances of the time. The novels of the
+ancients were in general poor productions. Most of them are made after the
+recipe of a little misfortune in each chapter and great happiness in the
+last. The two lovers meet, fall in love, part, and suffer a series of
+troubles individually until they are finally united. The power that
+governs their fates and shapes everything according to this pattern is
+regularly Tyche, never the gods. The testimony of the novels is of special
+significance because they were read by the general mass of the educated
+classes, not by the select who had philosophy to guide them.
+
+Another testimony to the weakening of popular faith in the Hellenistic age
+is the decay of the institution of the Oracle. This, also, is of early
+date; as early as the fifth and fourth century we hear much less of the
+interference of the oracles in political matters than in earlier times.
+The most important of them all, the Delphic Oracle, was dealt a terrible
+blow in the Holy War (356-346 B.C.), when the Phocians seized it and used
+the treasures which had been accumulated in it during centuries to hire
+mercenaries and carry on war. Such proceedings would assuredly have been
+impossible a century earlier; no soldiers could have been hired with money
+acquired in such a way, or, if they could have been procured, all Hellas
+would have risen in arms against the robbers of the Temple, whereas in the
+Holy War most of the states were indifferent, and several even sided with
+the Phocians. In the succeeding years, after Philip of Macedonia had put
+an end to the Phocian scandal, the Oracle was in reality in his hands--it
+was during this period that Demosthenes stigmatised it as the mouthpiece
+of Philip. In the succeeding centuries, too, it was dependent on the
+various rulers of Hellas and undoubtedly lost all public authority. During
+this period we hear very little of the oracles of Hellas until the time
+before and after the birth of Christ provides us with definite evidence of
+their complete decay.
+
+Thus Strabo, who wrote during the reign of Augustus, says that the
+ancients attached more importance to divination generally and oracles more
+particularly, whereas people in his day were quite indifferent to these
+things. He gives as the reason that the Romans were content to use the
+Sibylline books and their own system of divination. His remark is made _a
+propos_ of the Oracle in Libya, which was formerly in great repute, but
+was almost extinct in his time. He is undoubtedly correct as to the fact,
+but the decline of the oracular system cannot be explained by the
+indifference of the Romans. Plutarch, in a monograph on the discontinuance
+of the oracles, furnishes us with more detailed information. From this it
+appears that not only the Oracle of Ammon but also the numerous oracles of
+Boeotia had ceased to exist, with one exception, while even for the Oracle
+at Delphi, which had formerly employed three priestesses, a single one
+amply sufficed. We also note the remark that the questions submitted to
+the Oracle were mostly unworthy or of no importance.
+
+The want of consideration sometimes shown to sacred places and things
+during the wars of the Hellenistic period may no doubt also be regarded as
+the result of a weakening of interest in the old gods. We have detailed
+information on this point from the war between Philip of Macedonia and the
+Aetolians in 220-217 B.C. The Aetolians began by destroying the temples at
+Dium and Dodona, whereupon Philip retaliated by totally wrecking the
+federal sanctuary of the Aetolians at Thermon. Of Philip's admiral
+Dicaearchus we are told by Polybius that wherever he landed he erected
+altars to "godlessness and lawlessness" and offered up sacrifice on them.
+Judging by the way he was hated, his practice must have answered to his
+theory.
+
+One more phenomenon must be mentioned in this context, though it falls
+outside the limits within which we have hitherto moved, and though its
+connexion with free-thought and religious enlightenment will no doubt, on
+closer examination, prove disputable. This is the decay of the established
+worship of the Roman State in the later years of the Republic.
+
+In the preceding pages there has been no occasion to include conditions in
+Rome in our investigation, simply because nothing has come down to us
+about atheism in the earlier days of Rome, and we may presume that it did
+not exist. Of any religious thought at Rome corresponding to that of the
+Greeks we hear nothing, nor did the Romans produce any philosophy.
+Whatever knowledge of philosophy there was at Rome was simply borrowed
+from the Greeks. The Greek influence was not seriously felt until the
+second century B.C., even though as early as about the middle of the third
+century the Romans, through the performance of plays translated from the
+Greek, made acquaintance with Greek dramatic poetry and the religious
+thought contained therein. Neither the latter, nor the heresies of the
+philosophers, seem to have made any deep impression upon them. Ennius,
+their most important poet of the second century, was no doubt strongly
+influenced by Greek free-thinking, but this was evidently an isolated
+phenomenon. Also, by birth Ennius was not a native of Rome but half a
+Greek. The testimony of Polybius (from the close of the second century) to
+Roman religious conservatism is emphatic enough. Its causes are doubtless
+of a complex nature, but as one of them the peculiar character of the
+Roman religion itself stands out prominently. However much it resembled
+Greek religion in externals--a resemblance which was strengthened by
+numerous loans both of religious rites and of deities--it is decidedly
+distinct from it in being restricted still more to cultus and, above all,
+in being entirely devoid of mythology. The Roman gods were powers about
+the rites of whose worship the most accurate details were known or could
+be ascertained if need were, but they had little personality, and about
+their personal relations people knew little and cared less. This was,
+aesthetically, a great defect. The Roman gods afforded no good theme for
+poetry and art, and when they were to be used as such they were invariably
+replaced by loans from the Greeks. But, as in the face of Greek
+free-thought and Greek criticism of religion, they had the advantage that
+the vital point for attack was lacking. All the objectionable tales of the
+exploits of the gods and the associated ideas about their nature which had
+prompted the Greek attack on the popular faith simply did not exist in
+Roman religion. On the other hand, its rites were in many points more
+primitive than the Greek ones, but Greek philosophy had been very reserved
+in its criticism of ritual. We may thus no doubt take it for granted,
+though we have no direct evidence to that effect, that even Romans with a
+Greek education long regarded the Greek criticism of religion as something
+foreign which was none of their concern.
+
+That a time came when all this was changed; that towards the end of the
+Republic great scepticism concerning the established religion of Rome was
+found among the upper classes, is beyond doubt, and we shall subsequently
+find occasion to consider this more closely. In this connexion another
+circumstance demands attention, one which, moreover, has by some been
+associated with Greek influence among the upper classes, namely, the decay
+of the established worship of the Roman State during the last years of the
+Republic. Of the actual facts there can hardly be any doubt, though we
+know very little about them. The decisive symptoms are: that Augustus,
+after having taken over the government, had to repair some eighty
+dilapidated temples in Rome and reinstitute a series of religious rites
+and priesthoods which had ceased to function. Among them was one of the
+most important, that of the priest of Jupiter, an office which had been
+vacant for more than seventy-five years (87-11 B.C.), because it excluded
+the holder from a political career. Further, that complaints were made of
+private persons encroaching on places that were reserved for religious
+worship; and that Varro, when writing his great work on the Roman
+religion, in many cases was unable to discover what god was the object of
+an existing cult; and generally, according to his own statement he wrote
+his work, among other things, in order to save great portions of the old
+Roman religion from falling into utter oblivion on account of the
+indifference of the Romans themselves. It is obvious that such a state of
+affairs would have been impossible in a community where the traditional
+religion was a living power, not only formally acknowledged by everybody,
+but felt to be a necessary of life, the spiritual daily bread, as it were,
+of the nation.
+
+To hold, however, that the main cause of the decay of the established
+religion of Rome was the invasion of Greek culture, together with the fact
+that the members of the Roman aristocracy, from whom the priests were
+recruited and who superintended the cult, had become indifferent to the
+traditional religion through this influence, this, I think, is to go
+altogether astray. We may take it for granted that the governing classes
+in Rome would not have ventured to let the cult decay if there had been
+any serious interest in it among the masses of the population; and it is
+equally certain that Greek philosophy and religious criticism did not
+penetrate to these masses. When they became indifferent to the national
+religion, this was due to causes that had nothing to do with free-thought.
+The old Roman religion was adapted for a small, narrow and homogeneous
+community whose main constituent and real core consisted of the farmers,
+large and small, and minor artisans. In the last centuries of the Republic
+the social development had occasioned the complete decay of the Roman
+peasantry, and the free artisans had fared little better. In the place of
+the old Rome had arisen the capital of an empire, inhabited by a
+population of a million and of extraordinarily mixed composition. Not only
+did this population comprise a number of immigrant foreigners, but, in
+consequence of the peculiar Roman rule that every slave on being set free
+attained citizenship, a large percentage of the citizens must of necessity
+have been of foreign origin. Only certain portions of the Roman religion,
+more especially the cult of the great central deities of the State
+religion, can have kept pace with these changed conditions; the remainder
+had in reality lost all hold on Roman society as it had developed in
+process of time, and was only kept alive by force of habit. To this must
+be added the peculiar Roman mixture of mobility and conservatism in
+religious matters. The Roman superstition and uncertainty in regard to the
+gods led on the one hand to a continual setting up of new cults and new
+sanctuaries, and on the other hand to a fear of letting any of the old
+cults die out. In consequence thereof a great deal of dead and worthless
+ritual material must have accumulated in Rome in the course of centuries,
+and was of course in the way during the rapid development of the city in
+the last century of the Republic. Things must gradually have come to such
+a pass that a thorough reform, above all a reduction, of the whole cult
+had become a necessity. To introduce such a reform the republican
+government was just as unsuited as it was to carry out all the other tasks
+imposed by the development of the empire and the capital at that time. On
+this point, however, it must not be forgotten that the governing class not
+only lacked ability, for political reasons, to carry out serious reforms,
+but also the will to do so, on account of religious indifference, and so
+let things go altogether to the bad. The consequence was anarchy, in this
+as in all other spheres at that time; but at the same time the tendency
+towards the only sensible issue, a restriction of the old Roman
+State-cult, is plainly evident. The simultaneous strong infusion of
+foreign religions was unavoidable in the mixed population of the capital.
+That these influences also affected the lower classes of the citizens is
+at any rate a proof that they were not indifferent to religion.
+
+In its main outlines this is all the information that I have been able to
+glean about the general decline of the belief in the gods during the
+Hellenistic period. Judging from such information we should expect to find
+strong tendencies to atheism in the philosophy of the period. These
+anticipations are, however, doomed to disappointment. The ruling
+philosophical schools on the whole preserved a friendly attitude towards
+the gods of the popular faith and especially towards their worship,
+although they only accepted the existing religion with strict reservation.
+
+Most characteristic but least consistent and original was the attitude of
+the Stoic school. The Stoics were pantheists. Their deity was a substance
+which they designated as fire, but which, it must be admitted, differed
+greatly from fire as an element. It permeated the entire world. It had
+produced the world out of itself, and it absorbed it again, and this
+process was repeated to eternity. The divine fire was also reason, and as
+such the cause of the harmony of the world-order. What of conscious reason
+was found in the world was part of the divine reason.
+
+Though in this scheme of things there was in the abstract plenty of room
+for the gods of popular belief, nevertheless the Stoics did not in reality
+acknowledge them. In principle their standpoint was the same as
+Aristotle's. They supposed the heavenly bodies to be divine, but all the
+rest, namely, the anthropomorphic gods, were nothing to them.
+
+In their explanation of the origin of the gods they went beyond Aristotle,
+but their doctrine was not always the same on this point. The earlier
+Stoics regarded mythology and all theology as human inventions, but not
+arbitrary inventions. Mythology, they thought, should be understood
+allegorically; it was the na�ve expression partly of a correct conception
+of Nature, partly of ethical and metaphysical truths. Strictly speaking,
+men had always been Stoics, though in an imperfect way. This point of view
+was elaborated in detail by the first Stoics, who took their stand partly
+on the earlier naturalism which had already broken the ground in this
+direction, and partly on sophistic, so that they even brought into vogue
+again the theory of Prodicus, that the gods were a hypostasis of the
+benefits of civilisation. Such a standpoint could not of course be
+maintained without arbitrariness and absurdities which exposed it to
+embarrassing criticism. This seems to have been the reason why the later
+Stoics, and especially Poseidonius, took another road. They adopted the
+doctrine of Xenocrates with regard to demons and developed it in fantastic
+forms. The earlier method was not, however, given up, and at the time of
+Cicero we find both views represented in the doctrine of the school.
+
+Such is the appearance of the theory. In both its forms it is evidently an
+attempt to meet popular belief half-way from a standpoint which is really
+beyond it. This tendency is seen even more plainly in the practice of the
+Stoics. They recognised public worship and insisted on its advantages; in
+their moral reflections they employed the gods as ideals in the Socratic
+manner, regardless of the fact that in their theory they did not really
+allow for gods who were ideal men; nay, they even went the length of
+giving to their philosophical deity, the "universal reason," the name of
+Zeus by preference, though it had nothing but the name in common with the
+Olympian ruler of gods and men. This pervading ambiguity brought much
+well-deserved reproof on the Stoics even in ancient times; but, however
+unattractive it may seem to us, it is of significance as a manifestation
+of the great hold popular belief continued to have even on the minds of
+the upper classes, for it was to these that the Stoics appealed.
+
+Far more original and consistent is the Epicurean attitude towards the
+popular faith. Epicurus unreservedly acknowledged its foundation, _i.e._
+the existence of anthropomorphic beings of a higher order than man. His
+gods had human shape but they were eternal and blessed. In the latter
+definition was included, according to the ethical ideal of Epicurus, the
+idea that the gods were free from every care, including taking an interest
+in nature or in human affairs. They were entirely outside the world, a
+fact to which Epicurus gave expression by placing them in the empty spaces
+between the infinite number of spherical worlds which he assumed. There
+his gods lived in bliss like ideal Epicureans. Lucretius, the only poet of
+this school, extolled them in splendid verse whose motif he borrowed from
+Homer's description of Olympus. In this way Epicurus also managed to
+uphold public worship itself. It could not, of course, have any practical
+aim, but it was justified as an expression of the respect man owed to
+beings whose existence expressed the human ideal.
+
+The reasons why Epicurus assumed this attitude towards popular belief are
+simple enough. He maintained that the evidence of sensual perception was
+the basis of all knowledge, and he thought that the senses (through
+dreams) gave evidence of the existence of the gods. And in the popular
+ideas of the bliss of the gods he found his ethical ideal directly
+confirmed. As regards their eternity the case was more difficult. The
+basis of his system was the theory that everything was made of atoms and
+that only the atoms as such, not the bodies composed of the atoms, were
+eternal. He conceived the gods, too, as made of atoms, nevertheless he
+held that they were eternal. Any rational explanation of this postulate is
+not possible on Epicurus's hypotheses, and the criticism of his theology
+was therefore especially directed against this point.
+
+Epicurus was the Greek philosopher who most consistently took the course
+of emphasising the popular dogma of the perfection of the gods in order to
+preserve the popular notions about them. And he was the philosopher to
+whom this would seem the most obvious course, because his ethical
+ideal--quietism--agreed with the oldest popular ideal of divine existence.
+In this way Epicureanism became the most orthodox of all Greek
+philosophical schools. If nevertheless Epicurus did not escape the charge
+of atheism the sole reason is that his whole theology was denounced
+off-hand as hypocrisy. It was assumed to be set up by him only to shield
+himself against a charge of impiety, not to be his actual belief. This
+accusation is now universally acknowledged to be unjustified, and the
+Epicureans had no difficulty in rebutting it with interest. They took
+special delight in pointing out that the theology of the other schools was
+much more remote from popular belief than theirs, nay, in spite of
+recognition of the existing religion, was in truth fundamentally at
+variance with it. But in reality their own was in no better case: gods who
+did not trouble in the least about human affairs were beings for whom
+popular belief had no use. It made no difference that Epicurus's
+definition of the nature of the gods was the direct outcome of a
+fundamental doctrine of popular belief. Popular religion will not tolerate
+pedantry.
+
+In this connexion we cannot well pass over a third philosophical school
+which played no inconspicuous r�le in the latter half of our period,
+namely, Scepticism. The Sceptic philosophy as such dates from Socrates,
+from whom the so-called Megarian school took its origin, but it did not
+reach its greatest importance until the second century, when the Academic
+school became Sceptic. It was especially the famous philosopher Carneades,
+a brilliant master of logic and dialectic, who made a success by his
+searching negative criticism of the doctrines of the other philosophical
+schools (the Dogmatics). For such criticism the theology of the
+philosophers was a grateful subject, and Carneades did not spare it. Here
+as in all the investigations of the Sceptics the theoretical result was
+that no scientific certainty could be attained: it was equally wrong to
+assert or to deny the existence of the gods. But in practice the attitude
+of the Sceptics was quite different. Just as they behaved like other
+people, acting upon their immediate impressions and experience, though
+they did not believe that anything could be scientifically proved, _e.g._
+not even the reality of the world of the senses, so also did they
+acknowledge the existing cult and lived generally like good heathens.
+Characteristic though Scepticism be of a period of Greek spiritual life in
+which Greek thought lost its belief in itself, it was, however, very far
+from supporting atheism. On the contrary, according to the correct Sceptic
+doctrine atheism was a dogmatic contention which theoretically was as
+objectionable as its antithesis, and in practice was to be utterly
+discountenanced.
+
+A more radical standpoint than this as regards the gods of the popular
+faith is not found during the Hellenistic period except among the less
+noted schools, and in the beginning of the period. We have already
+mentioned such thinkers as Strato, Theodorus, and Stilpo; chronologically
+they belong to the Hellenistic Age, but in virtue of their connexion with
+the Socratic philosophy they were dealt with in the last chapter. A
+definite polemical attitude towards the popular faith is also a
+characteristic of the Cynic school, hence, though our information is very
+meagre, we must speak of it a little more fully.
+
+The Cynics continued the tendency of Antisthenes, but the school
+comparatively soon lost its importance. After the third century we hear no
+more about the Cynics until they crop up again about the year A.D. 100.
+But in the fourth and third centuries the school had important
+representatives. The most famous is Diogenes; his life, to be sure, is
+entangled in such a web of legend that it is difficult to arrive at a true
+picture of his personality. Of his attitude towards popular belief we know
+one thing, that he did not take part in the worship of the gods. This was
+a general principle of the Cynics; their argument was that the gods were
+"in need of nothing" (cf. above, pp. 60 and 41). If we find him accused of
+atheism, in an anecdote of very doubtful value, it may, if there is
+anything in it, be due to his rejection of worship. Of one of his
+successors, however, Bion of Borysthenes, we have authentic information
+that he denied the existence of the gods, with the edifying legend
+attached that he was converted before his death. But we also hear of Bion
+that he was a disciple of the atheist Theodorus, and other facts go to
+suggest that Bion united Cynic and Hedonistic principles in his mode of
+life--a compromise that was not so unlikely as might be supposed. Bion's
+attitude cannot therefore be taken as typical of Cynicism. Another Cynic
+of about the same period (the beginning of the third century) was Menippus
+of Gadara (in northern Palestine). He wrote tales and dialogues in a
+mixture of prose and verse. The contents were satirical, the satire being
+directed against the contemporary philosophers and their doctrines, and
+against the popular notions of the gods. Menippus availed himself partly
+of the old criticism of mythology and partly of the philosophical attacks
+on the popular conception of the gods. The only novelty was the facetious
+form in which he concealed the sting of serious criticism. It is
+impossible to decide whether he positively denied the existence of the
+gods, but his satire on the popular notions and its success among his
+contemporaries at least testifies to the weakening of the popular faith
+among the educated classes. In Hellas itself he seems to have gone out of
+fashion very early; but the Romans took him up again; Varro and Seneca
+imitated him, and Lucian made his name famous again in the Greek world in
+the second century after Christ. It is chiefly due to Lucian that we can
+form an idea of Menippus's literary work, hence we shall return to Cynic
+satire in our chapter on the age of the Roman Empire.
+
+During our survey of Greek philosophical thought in the Hellenistic period
+we have only met with a few cases of atheism in the strict sense, and they
+all occur about and immediately after 300, though there does not seem to
+be any internal connexion between them. About the same time there appeared
+a writer, outside the circle of philosophers, who is regularly listed
+among the _atheoi_, and who has given a name to a peculiar theory about
+the origin of the idea of the gods, namely, Euhemerus. He is said to have
+travelled extensively in the service of King Cassander of Macedonia. At
+any rate he published his theological views in the shape of a book of
+travel which was, however, wholly fiction. He relates how he came to an
+island, Panchaia, in the Indian Ocean, and in a temple there found a
+lengthy inscription in which Uranos, Kronos, Zeus and other gods recorded
+their exploits. The substance of the tale was that these gods had once
+been men, great kings and rulers, who had bestowed on their peoples all
+sorts of improvements in civilisation and had thus got themselves
+worshipped as gods. It appears from the accounts that Euhemerus supposed
+the heavenly bodies to be real and eternal gods--he thought that Uranos had
+first taught men to worship them; further, as his theory is generally
+understood, it must be assumed that in his opinion the other gods had
+ceased to exist as such after their death. This accords with the fact that
+Euhemerus was generally characterised as an atheist.
+
+The theory that the gods were at first men was not originated by
+Euhemerus, though it takes its name (Euhemerism) from him. The theory had
+some support in the popular faith which recognised gods (Heracles,
+Asclepius) who had lived as men on earth; and the opinion which was
+fundamental to Greek religion, that the gods had _come into existence_,
+and had not existed from eternity, would favour this theory. Moreover,
+Euhemerus had had an immediate precursor in the slightly earlier Hecataeus
+of Abdera, who had set forth a similar theory, with the difference,
+however, that he took the view that all excellent men became real gods.
+But Euhemerus's theory appeared just at the right moment and fell on
+fertile soil. Alexander the Great and his successors had adopted the
+Oriental policy by which the ruler was worshipped as a god, and were
+supported in this by a tendency which had already made itself felt
+occasionally among the Greeks in the East. Euhemerus only inverted
+matters--if the rulers were gods, it was an obvious inference that the gods
+were rulers. No wonder that his theory gained a large following. Its great
+influence is seen from numerous similar attempts in the Hellenistic world.
+At Rome, in the second century, Ennius translated his works into Latin,
+and as late as the time of Augustus an author such as Diodorus, in his
+popular history of the world, served up Euhemerism as the best scientific
+explanation of the origin of religion. It is characteristic, too, that
+both Jews and Christians, in their attacks on Paganism, reckoned with
+Euhemerism as a well-established theory. As every one knows, it has
+survived to our day; Carlyle, I suppose, being its last prominent
+exponent.
+
+It is characteristic of Euhemerism in its most radical form that it
+assumed that the gods of polytheism did not exist; so far it is atheism.
+But it is no less characteristic that it made the concession to popular
+belief that its gods had once existed. Hereby it takes its place, in spite
+of its greater radicalism, on the same plane with most other ancient
+theories about the origin of men's notions about the gods. The gods of
+popular belief could not survive in the light of ancient thought, which in
+its essence was free-thought, not tied down by dogmas. But the
+philosophers of old could not but believe that a psychological fact of
+such enormous dimensions as ancient polytheism must have something
+answering to it in the objective world. Ancient philosophy never got clear
+of this dilemma; hence Plato's open recognition of the absurdity; hence
+Aristotle's delight at being able to meet the popular faith half-way in
+his assumption of the divinity of the heavenly bodies; hence Xenocrates's
+demons, the allegories of the Stoics, the ideal Epicureans of Epicurus,
+Euhemerus's early benefactors of mankind. And we may say that the more the
+Greeks got to know of the world about them the more they were confirmed in
+their view, for in the varied multiplicity of polytheism they found the
+same principle everywhere, the same belief in a multitude of beings of a
+higher order than man.
+
+Euhemerus's theory is no doubt the last serious attempt in the old pagan
+world to give an explanation of the popular faith which may be called
+genuine atheism. We will not, however, leave the Hellenistic period
+without casting a glance at some personalities about whom we have
+information enough to form an idea at first hand of their religious
+standpoint, and whose attitude towards popular belief at any rate comes
+very near to atheism pure and simple.
+
+One of them is Polybius. In the above-cited passage referring to the
+decline of the popular faith in the Hellenistic period, Polybius also
+gives his own theory of the origin of men's notions regarding the gods. It
+is not new. It is the theory known from the Critias fragment, what may be
+called the political theory. In the fragment it appears as atheism pure
+and simple, and it seems obvious to understand it in the same way in
+Polybius. That he shows a leaning towards Euhemerism in another passage
+where he speaks about the origin of religious ideas, is in itself not
+against this--the two theories are closely related and might very well be
+combined. But we have a series of passages in which Polybius expressed
+himself in a way that seems quite irreconcilable with a purely atheistic
+standpoint. He expressly acknowledged divination and worship as justified;
+in several places he refers to disasters that have befallen individuals or
+a whole people as being sent by the gods, or even as a punishment for
+impiety; and towards the close of his work he actually, in marked contrast
+to the tone of its beginning, offers up a prayer to the gods to grant him
+a happy ending to his long life. It would seem as if Polybius at a certain
+period of his life came under the influence of Stoicism and in consequence
+greatly modified his earlier views. That these were of an atheistic
+character seems, however, beyond doubt, and that is the decisive point in
+this connexion.
+
+Cicero's philosophical standpoint was that of an Academic, _i.e._ a
+Sceptic. But--in accord, for the rest, with the doctrines of the school
+just at this period--he employed his liberty as a Sceptic to favour such
+philosophical doctrines as seemed to him more reasonable than others,
+regardless of the school from which they were derived. In his philosophy
+of religion he was more especially a Stoic. He himself expressly insisted
+on this point of view in the closing words of his work on the _Nature of
+the Gods_. As he was not, and made no pretence of being, a philosopher,
+his philosophical expositions have no importance for us; they are
+throughout second-hand, mostly mere translations from Greek sources. That
+we have employed them in the foregoing pages to throw light on the
+theology of the earlier, more especially the Hellenistic, philosophy, goes
+without saying. But his personal religious standpoint is not without
+interest.
+
+As orator and statesman Cicero took his stand wholly on the side of the
+established Roman religion, operating with the "immortal gods," with
+Jupiter Optimus Maximus, etc., at his convenience. In his works on the
+_State_ and the _Laws_ he adheres decidedly to the established religion.
+But all this is mere politics. Personally Cicero had no religion other
+than philosophy. Philosophy was his consolation in adversity, or he
+attempted to make it so, for the result was often indifferent; and he
+looked to philosophy to guide him in ethical questions. We never find any
+indication in his writings that the gods of popular belief meant anything
+to him in these respects. And what is more--he assumed this off-hand to be
+the standpoint of everybody else, and evidently he was justified. A great
+number of letters from him to his circle, and not a few from his friends
+and acquaintances to him, have been preserved; and in his philosophical
+writings he often introduces contemporary Romans as characters in the
+dialogue. But in all this literature there is never the faintest
+indication that a Roman of the better class entertained, or could even be
+supposed to entertain, an orthodox view with regard to the State religion.
+To Cicero and his circle the popular faith did not exist as an element of
+their personal religion.
+
+Such a standpoint is of course, practically speaking, atheism, and in this
+sense atheism was widely spread among the higher classes of the
+Graeco-Roman society about the time of the birth of Christ. But from this
+to theoretical atheism there is still a good step. Cicero himself affords
+an amusing example of how easily people, who have apparently quite
+emancipated themselves from the official religion of their community, may
+backslide. When his beloved daughter Tullia died in the year 45 B.C., it
+became evident that Cicero, in the first violence of his grief, which was
+the more overwhelming because he was excluded from political activity
+during C�sar's dictatorship, could not console himself with philosophy
+alone. He wanted something more tangible to take hold on, and so he hit
+upon the idea of having Tullia exalted among the gods. He thought of
+building a temple and instituting a cult in her honour. He moved heaven
+and earth to arrange the matter, sought to buy ground in a prominent place
+in Rome, and was willing to make the greatest pecuniary sacrifices to get
+a conspicuous result. Nothing came of it all, however; Cicero's friends,
+who were to help him to put the matter through, were perhaps hardly so
+eager as he; time assuaged his own grief, and finally he contented himself
+with publishing a consolatory epistle written by himself, or, correctly
+speaking, translated from a famous Greek work and adapted to the occasion.
+So far he ended where he should, _i.e._ in philosophy; but the little
+incident is significant, not least because it shows what practical ends
+Euhemerism could be brought to serve and how doubtful was its atheistic
+character after all. For not only was the contemplated apotheosis of
+Tullia in itself a Euhemeristic idea, but Cicero also expressly defended
+it with Euhemeristic arguments, though speaking as if the departed who
+were worshipped as gods really had become gods.
+
+The attitude of Cicero and his contemporaries towards popular belief was
+still the general attitude in the first days of the Empire. It was of no
+avail that Augustus re-established the decayed State cult in all its
+splendour and variety, or that the poets during his reign, when they
+wished to express themselves in harmony with the spirit of the new r�gime,
+directly or indirectly extolled the revived orthodoxy. Wherever we find
+personal religious feeling expressed by men of that time, in the Epistles
+of Horace, in Virgil's posthumous minor poems or in such passages in his
+greater works where he expresses his own ideals, it is philosophy that is
+predominant and the official religion ignored. Virgil was an Epicurean;
+Horace an Eclectic, now an Epicurean, then a Stoic; Augustus had a
+domestic philosopher. Ovid employed his genius in writing travesties of
+the old mythology while at the same time he composed a poem, serious for
+him, on the Roman cult; and when disaster befell him and he was cast out
+from the society of the capital, which was the breath of life to him, he
+was abandoned not only by men, but also by the gods--he had not even a
+philosophy with which to console himself. It is only in inferior writers
+such as Valerius Maximus, who wrote a work on great deeds--good and
+evil--under Tiberius, that we find a different spirit.
+
+Direct utterances about men's relationship to the gods, from which
+conclusions can be drawn, are seldom met with during this period. The
+whole question was so remote from the thoughts of these people that they
+never mentioned it except when they assumed an orthodox air for political
+or aesthetic reasons. Still, here and there we come across something. One
+of the most significant pronouncements is that of Pliny the Elder, from
+whom we quoted the passage about the worship of Fortune. Pliny opens his
+scientific encyclopedia by explaining the structure of the universe in its
+broad features; this he does on the lines of the physics of the Stoics,
+hence he designates the universe as God. Next comes a survey of special
+theology. It is introduced as follows: "I therefore deem it a sign of
+human weakness to ask about the shape and form of God. Whoever God is, if
+any other god (than the universe) exists at all, and in whatever part of
+the world he is, he is all perception, all sight, all hearing, all soul,
+all reason, all self." The popular notions of the gods are then reviewed,
+in the most supercilious tone, and their absurdities pointed out. A polite
+bow is made to the worship of the Emperors and its motives, the rest is
+little but persiflage. Not even Providence, which was recognised by the
+Stoics, is acknowledged by Pliny. The conclusion is like the beginning:
+"To imperfect human nature it is a special consolation that God also is
+not omnipotent (he can neither put himself to death, even if he would,
+though he has given man that power and it is his choicest gift in this
+punishment which is life; nor can he give immortality to mortals or call
+the dead to life; nor can he bring it to pass that those who have lived
+have not lived, or that he who has held honourable offices did not hold
+them); and that he has no other power over the past than that of oblivion;
+and that (in order that we may also give a jesting proof of our
+partnership with God) he cannot bring it about that twice ten is not
+twenty, and more of the same sort--by all which the power of Nature is
+clearly revealed, and that it is this we call God."
+
+An opinion like that expressed here must without doubt be designated as
+atheism, even though it is nothing but the Stoic pantheism logically
+carried out. As we have said before, we rarely meet it so directly
+expressed, but there can hardly be any doubt that even in the time of
+Pliny it was quite common in Rome. At this point, then, had the educated
+classes of the ancient world arrived under the influence of Hellenistic
+philosophy.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+
+Though the foundation of the Empire in many ways inaugurated a new era for
+the antique world, it is, of course, impossible, in an inquiry which is
+not confined to political history in the narrowest sense of the word, to
+operate with anything but the loosest chronological divisions. Accordingly
+in the last chapter we had to include phenomena from the early days of the
+Empire in order not to separate things which naturally belonged together.
+From the point of view of religious history the dividing line cannot
+possibly be drawn at the Emperor Augustus, in spite of his restoration of
+worship and the orthodox reaction in the official Augustan poetry, but
+rather at about the beginning of the second century. The enthusiasm of the
+Augustan Age for the good old times was never much more than affectation.
+It quickly evaporated when the promised millennium was not forthcoming,
+and was replaced by a reserve which developed into cynicism--but, be it
+understood, in the upper circles of the capital only. In the empire at
+large the development took its natural tranquil course, unaffected by the
+manner in which the old Roman nobility was effacing itself; and this
+development did not tend towards atheism.
+
+The reaction towards positive religious feeling, which becomes clearly
+manifest in the second century after Christ, though the preparation for it
+is undoubtedly of earlier date, is perhaps the most remarkable phenomenon
+in the religious history of antiquity. This is not the place to inquire
+into its causes, which still remain largely unexplained; there is even no
+reason to enter more closely into its outer manifestations, as the thing
+itself is doubted by nobody. It is sufficient to mention as instances
+authors like Suetonius, with his na�ve belief in miracles, and the
+rhetorician Aristides, with his Asclepius-cult and general
+sanctimoniousness; or a minor figure such as Aelian, who wrote whole books
+of a pronounced, nay even fanatical, devotionalism; or within the sphere
+of philosophy movements like Neo-Pythagoreanism and Neo-Platonism, both of
+which are as much in the nature of mystic theology as attempts at a
+scientific explanation of the universe. It is characteristic, too, that an
+essentially anti-religious school like that of the Epicureans actually
+dies out at this time. Under these conditions our task in this chapter
+must be to bring out the comparatively few and weak traces of other
+currents which still made themselves felt.
+
+Of the earlier philosophical schools Stoicism flowered afresh in the
+second century; the Emperor Marcus Aurelius himself was a prominent
+adherent of the creed. This later Stoicism differs, however, somewhat from
+the earlier. It limits the scientific apparatus which the early Stoics had
+operated with to a minimum, and is almost exclusively concerned with
+practical ethics on a religious basis. Its religion is that of ordinary
+Stoicism: Pantheism and belief in Providence. But, on the whole, it takes
+up a more sympathetic attitude towards popular religion than early
+Stoicism had done. Of the bitter criticism of the absurdities of the
+worship of the gods and of mythology which is still to be met with as late
+as Seneca, nothing remains. On the contrary, participation in public
+worship is still enjoined as being a duty; nay, more: attacks on belief in
+the gods--in the plain popular sense of the word--are denounced as
+pernicious and reprehensible. Perhaps no clearer proof could be adduced of
+the revolution which had taken place in the attitude of the educated
+classes towards popular religion than this change of front on the part of
+Stoicism.
+
+Contrary to this was the attitude of another school which was in vogue at
+the same time as the Stoic, namely, the Cynic. Between Cynicism and
+popular belief strained relations had existed since early times. It is
+true, the Cynics did not altogether deny the existence of the gods; but
+they rejected worship on the ground that the gods were not in need of
+anything, and they denied categorically the majority of the popular ideas
+about the gods. For the latter were, in fact, popular and traditional, and
+the whole aim of the Cynics was to antagonise the current estimate of
+values. A characteristic instance of their manner is provided by this very
+period in the fragments of the work of Oenomaus. The work was entitled
+_The Swindlers Unmasked_, and it contained a violent attack on oracles.
+Its tone is exceedingly pungent. In the extant fragments Oenomaus
+addresses the god in Delphi and overwhelms him with insults. But we are
+expressly told--and one utterance of Oenomaus himself verifies it--that the
+attack was not really directed against the god, but against the men who
+gave oracles in his name. In his opinion the whole thing was a priestly
+fraud--a view which otherwise was rather unfamiliar to the ancients, but
+played an important part later. Incidentally there is a violent attack on
+idolatry. The work is not without acuteness of thought and a certain
+coarse wit of the true Cynical kind; but it is entirely uncritical
+(oracles are used which are evidently inventions of later times) and of no
+great significance. It is even difficult to avoid the impression that the
+author's aim is in some degree to create a sensation. Cynics of that day
+were not strangers to that kind of thing. But it is at any rate a proof of
+the fact that there were at the time tendencies opposed to the religious
+reaction.
+
+A more significant phenomenon of the same kind is to be found in the
+writings of Lucian. Lucian was by education a rhetorician, by profession
+an itinerant lecturer and essayist. At a certain stage of his life he
+became acquainted with the Cynic philosophy and for some time felt much
+attracted to it. From that he evidently acquired a sincere contempt of the
+vulgar superstition which flourished in his time, even in circles of which
+one might have expected something better. In writings which for the
+greater part belong to his later period, he pilloried individuals who
+traded (or seemed to trade) in the religious ferment of the time, as well
+as satirised superstition as such.  In this way he made an important
+contribution to the spiritual history of the age. But simultaneously he
+produced, for the entertainment of his public, a series of writings the
+aim of which is to make fun of the Olympian gods. In this work also he
+leant on the literature of the Cynics, but substituted for their grave and
+biting satire light causeries or slight dramatic sketches, in which his
+wit--for Lucian was really witty--had full scope. As an instance of his
+manner I shall quote a short passage from the dialogue _Timon_. It is Zeus
+who speaks; he has given Hermes orders to send the god of wealth to Timon,
+who has wasted his fortune by his liberality and is now abandoned by his
+false friends. Then he goes on: "As to the flatterers you speak of and
+their ingratitude, I shall deal with them another time, and they will meet
+with their due punishment as soon as I have had my thunderbolt repaired.
+The two largest darts of it were broken and blunted the other day when I
+got in a rage and flung it at the sophist Anaxagoras, who was trying to
+make his disciples believe that we gods do not exist at all. However, I
+missed him, for Pericles held his hand over him, but the bolt struck the
+temple of the Dioscuri and set fire to it, and the bolt itself was nearly
+destroyed when it struck the rock." This sort of thing abounds in Lucian,
+even if it is not always equally amusing and to the point. Now there is
+nothing strange in the fact that a witty man for once should feel inclined
+to make game of the old mythology; this might have happened almost at any
+time, once the critical spirit had been awakened. But that a man, and
+moreover an essayist, who had to live by the approval of his public,
+should make it his trade, as it were, and that at a time of vigorous
+religious reaction, seems more difficult to account for. Lucian's
+controversial pamphlets against superstition cannot be classed off-hand
+with his _Dialogues of the Gods_; the latter are of a quite different and
+far more harmless character. The fact is rather that mythology at this
+time was fair game. It was cut off from its connexion with religion--a
+connexion which in historical times was never very intimate and was now
+entirely severed. This had been brought about in part by centuries of
+criticism of the most varied kind, in part precisely as a result of the
+religious reaction which had now set in. If people turned during this time
+to the old gods--who, however, had been considerably contaminated with new
+elements--it was because they had nothing else to turn to; but what they
+now looked for was something quite different from the old religion. The
+powerful tradition which had bound members of each small community--we
+should say, of each township--to its familiar gods, with all that belonged
+to them, was now in process of dissolution; in the larger cities of the
+world-empire with their mixed populations it had entirely disappeared.
+Religion was no longer primarily a concern of society; it was a personal
+matter. In the face of the enormous selection of gods which ancient
+paganism came gradually to proffer, the individual was free to choose, as
+individual or as a member of a communion based upon religious, not
+political, sympathy. Under these circumstances the existence of the gods
+and their power and will to help their worshippers was the only thing of
+interest; all the old tales about them were more than ever myths of no
+religious value. On closer inspection Lucian indeed proves to have
+exercised a certain selection in his satire. Gods like Asclepius and
+Serapis, who were popular in his day, he prefers to say nothing about; and
+even with a phenomenon like Christianity he deals cautiously; he sticks to
+the old Olympian gods. Thus his derision of these constitutes an indirect
+proof that they had gone out of vogue, and his forbearance on other points
+is a proof of the power of the current religion over contemporary minds.
+As to ascribing any deeper religious conviction to Lucian--were it even of
+a purely negative kind--that is, in view of the whole character of his
+work, out of the question. To be sure, his polemical pamphlets against
+superstition show clearly, like those of Oenomaus, that the religious
+reaction did not run its course without criticism from certain sides; but
+even here it is significant that the criticism comes from a professional
+jester and not from a serious religious thinker.
+
+A few words remain to be said about the two monotheistic religions which
+in the days of the Roman Empire came to play a great, one of them indeed a
+decisive, part. I have already referred to pagan society's attitude
+towards Judaism and Christianity, and pointed out that the adherents of
+both were designated and treated as atheists--the Jews only occasionally
+and with certain reservations, the Christians nearly always and
+unconditionally. The question here is, how far this designation was
+justified according to the definition of atheism which is the basis of our
+inquiry.
+
+In the preceding pages we have several times referred to the fact that the
+real enemy of Polytheism is not the philosophical theology, which
+generally tends more or less towards Pantheism, but Monotheism. It is in
+keeping with this that the Jews and the Christians in practice are
+downright deniers of the pagan gods: they would not worship them; whereas
+the Greek philosophers as a rule respected worship, however far they went
+in their criticism of men's ideas of the gods. We shall not dwell here on
+this aspect of the matter; we are concerned with the theory only. Detailed
+expositions of it occur in numerous writings, from the passages in the Old
+Testament where heathenism is attacked, to the defences of Christianity by
+the latest Fathers of the Church.
+
+The original Jewish view, according to which the heathen gods are real
+beings just as much as the God of the Jews themselves--only Jews must not
+worship them--is in the later portions of the Old Testament superseded by
+the view that the gods are only images made of wood, stone or metal, and
+incapable of doing either good or evil. This point of view is taken over
+by later Jewish authors and completely dominates them. In those acquainted
+with Greek thought it is combined with Euhemeristic ideas: the images
+represent dead men. The theory that the gods are really natural
+objects--elements or heavenly bodies--is occasionally taken into account
+too. Alongside of these opinions there appears also the view that the
+pagan gods are evil spirits (demons). It is already found in a few places
+in the Old Testament, and after that sporadically and quite incidentally
+in later Jewish writings; in one place it is combined with the Old
+Testament's account of the fallen angels. The demon-theory is not an
+instrument of Jewish apologetics proper, not even of Philo, though he has
+a complete demonology and can hardly have been ignorant of the
+Platonic-Stoic doctrine of demons.
+
+Apart from the few and, as it were, incidental utterances concerning
+demons, the Jewish view of the pagan gods impresses one as decidedly
+atheistic. The god is identical with the idol, and the idol is a dead
+object, the work of men's hands, or the god is identical with a natural
+object, made by God to be sure, but without soul or, at any rate, without
+divinity. It is remarkable that no Jewish controversialist seriously
+envisaged the problem of the real view of the gods embodied in the popular
+belief of the ancients, namely, that they are personal beings of a higher
+order than man. It is inconceivable that men like Philo, Josephus and the
+author of the Wisdom of Solomon should have been ignorant of it. I know
+nothing to account for this curious phenomenon; and till some light has
+been thrown upon the matter, I should hesitate to assert that the Jewish
+conception of Polytheism was purely atheistic, however much appearance it
+may have of being so.
+
+It was otherwise with Christian polemical writing. As early as St. Paul
+the demon-theory appears distinctly, though side by side with utterances
+of seemingly atheistic character. Other New Testament authors, too,
+designate the gods as demons. The subsequent apologists, excepting the
+earliest, Aristides, lay the main stress on demonology, but include for
+the sake of completeness idolatry and the like, sometimes without caring
+about or trying to conciliate the contradictions. In the long run
+demonology is victorious; in St. Augustine, the foremost among Christian
+apologists, there is hardly any other point of view that counts.
+
+To trace the Christian demonology in detail and give an account of its
+various aspects is outside the scope of this essay. Its origin is a
+twofold one, partly the Jewish demonology, which just at the commencement
+of our era had received a great impetus, partly the theory of the Greek
+philosophers, which we have characterised above when speaking of
+Xenocrates. The Christian doctrine regarding demons differs from the
+latter, especially by the fact that it does not acknowledge good demons;
+they were all evil. This was the indispensable basis for the interdict
+against the worship of demons; in its further development the Christians,
+following Jewish tradition, pointed to an origin in the fallen angels, and
+thus effected a connexion with the Old Testament. While they at the same
+time retained its angelology they had to distinguish good and evil beings
+intermediate between god and man; but they carefully avoided designating
+the angels as demons, and kept them distinct from the pagan gods, who were
+all demons and evil.
+
+The application of demonology to the pagan worship caused certain
+difficulties in detail. To be sure, it was possible to identify a given
+pagan god with a certain demon, and this was often done; but it was
+impossible to identify the Pagans' conceptions of their gods with the
+Christians' conceptions of demons. The Pagans, in fact, ascribed to their
+gods not only demoniac (diabolical) but also divine qualities, which the
+Christians absolutely denied them. Consequently they had to recognise that
+pagan worship to a great extent rested on a delusion, on a misconception
+of the essential character of the gods which were worshipped. This view
+was corroborated by the dogma of the fallen angels, which was altogether
+alien to paganism. By identifying them with the evil spirits of the Bible,
+demon-names were even obtained which differed from those of the pagan gods
+and, of course, were the correct ones; were they not given in Holy Writ?
+In general, the Christians, who possessed an authentic revelation of the
+matter, were of course much better informed about the nature of the pagan
+gods than the Pagans themselves, who were groping in the dark. Euhemerism,
+which plays a great part in the apologists, helped in the same direction:
+the supposition that the idols were originally men existed among the
+Pagans themselves, and it was too much in harmony with the tendency of the
+apologists to be left unemployed. It was reconciled with demonology by the
+supposition that the demons had assumed the masks of dead heroes; they had
+beguiled mankind to worship them in order to possess themselves of the
+sacrifices, which they always coveted, and by this deception to be able to
+rule and corrupt men. The Christians also could not avoid recognising that
+part of the pagan worship was worship of natural objects, in particular of
+the heavenly bodies; and this error of worshipping the "creation instead
+of the creator" was so obvious that the Christians were not inclined to
+resort to demonology for an explanation of this phenomenon, the less so as
+they could not identify the sun or the moon with a demon. The conflict of
+these different points of view accounts for the peculiar vacillation in
+the Christian conception of paganism. On one hand, we meet with crude
+conceptions, according to which the pagan gods are just like so many
+demons; they are specially prominent when pagan miracles and prophecies
+are to be explained. On the other hand, there is a train of thought which
+carried to its logical conclusion would lead to conceiving paganism as a
+whole as a huge delusion of humanity, but a delusion caused indeed by
+supernatural agencies. This conclusion hardly presented itself to the
+early Church; later, however, it was drawn and caused a not inconsiderable
+shifting in men's views and explanations of paganism.
+
+Demonology is to such a degree the ruling point of view in Christian
+apologetics that it would be absurd to make a collection from these
+writings of utterances with an atheistic ring. Such utterances are to be
+found in most of them; they appear spontaneously, for instance, wherever
+idolatry is attacked. But one cannot attach any importance to them when
+they appear in this connexion, not even in apologists in whose works the
+demon theory is lacking. No Christian theologian in antiquity advanced,
+much less sustained, the view that the pagan gods were mere phantoms of
+human imagination without any corresponding reality.
+
+Remarkable as this state of things may appear to us moderns, it is really
+quite simple, nay even a matter of course, when regarded historically.
+Christianity had from its very beginning a decidedly dualistic character.
+The contrast between this world and the world to come was identical with
+the contrast between the kingdom of the Devil and the kingdom of God. As
+soon as the new religion came into contact with paganism, the latter was
+necessarily regarded as belonging to the kingdom of the Devil; thus the
+conception of the gods as demons was a foregone conclusion. In the minds
+of the later apologists, who became acquainted with Greek philosophy, this
+conception received additional confirmation; did it not indeed agree in
+the main with Platonic and Stoic theory? Details were added: the
+Christians could not deny the pagan miracles without throwing a doubt on
+their own, for miracles cannot be done away with at all except by a denial
+on principle; neither could they explain paganism--that gigantic,
+millennial aberration of humanity--by merely human causes, much less lay
+the blame on God alone. But ultimately all this rests on one and the same
+thing--the supernatural and dualistic hypothesis. Consequently demonology
+is the kernel of the Christian conception of paganism: it is not merely a
+natural result of the hypotheses, it is the one and only correct
+expression of the way in which the new religion understood the old.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+
+In the preceding inquiry we took as our starting-point not the ancient
+conception of atheism but the modern view of the nature of the pagan gods.
+It proved that this view was, upon the whole, feebly represented during
+antiquity, and that it was another view (demonology) which was transmitted
+to later ages from the closing years of antiquity. The inquiry will
+therefore find its natural conclusion in a demonstration of the time and
+manner in which the conception handed down from antiquity of the nature of
+paganism was superseded and displaced by the modern view.
+
+This question is, however, more difficult to answer than one would perhaps
+think. After ancient paganism had ceased to exist as a living religion, it
+had lost its practical interest, and theoretically the Middle Ages were
+occupied with quite other problems than the nature of paganism. At the
+revival of the study of ancient literature, during the Renaissance, people
+certainly again came into the most intimate contact with ancient religion
+itself, but systematic investigations of its nature do not seem to have
+been taken up in real earnest until after the middle of the sixteenth
+century. It is therefore difficult to ascertain in what light paganism was
+regarded during the thousand years which had then passed since its final
+extinction. From the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, on the other
+hand, the material is extraordinarily plentiful, though but slightly
+investigated. Previous works in this field seem to be entirely wanting; at
+any rate it has not been possible for me to find any collective treatment
+of the subject, nor even any contributions worth mentioning towards the
+solution of the numerous individual problems which arise when we enter
+upon what might be called "the history of the history of religion."(1) In
+this essay I must therefore restrict myself to a few aphoristic remarks
+which may perhaps give occasion for this subject, in itself not devoid of
+interest, to receive more detailed treatment at some future time.
+
+Milton, in the beginning of _Paradise Lost_, which appeared in 1667, makes
+Satan assemble all his angels for continued battle against God. Among the
+demons there enumerated, ancient gods also appear; they are, then, plainly
+regarded as devils. Now Milton was not only a poet, but also a sound
+scholar and an orthodox theologian; we may therefore rest assured that his
+conception of the pagan gods was dogmatically correct and in accord with
+the prevailing views of his time. In him, therefore, we have found a fixed
+point from which we can look forwards and backwards; as late as after the
+middle of the seventeenth century the early Christian view of the nature
+of paganism evidently persisted in leading circles.
+
+We seldom find definite heathen gods so precisely designated as demons as
+in Milton, but no doubt seems possible that the general principle was
+accepted by contemporary and earlier authors. The chief work of the
+seventeenth century on ancient religion is the _De Theologia Gentili_ of
+G. I. Voss; he operates entirely with the traditional view. It may be
+traced back through a succession of writings of the seventeenth and
+sixteenth centuries. They are all, or almost all, agreed that antique
+paganism was the work of the devil, and that idolatry was, at any rate in
+part, a worship of demons. From the Middle Ages I can adduce a pregnant
+expression of the same view from Thomas Aquinas; in his treatment of
+idolatry and also of false prophecy he definitely accepts the demonology
+of the early Church. On this point he appeals to Augustine, and with
+perfect right; from this it may presumably be assumed that the Schoolmen
+in general had the same view, Augustine being, as we know, an authority
+for Catholic theologians.
+
+In mediaeval poets also we occasionally find the same view expressed. As
+far as I have been able to ascertain, Dante has no ancient gods among his
+devils, and the degree to which he had dissociated himself from ancient
+paganism may be gauged by the fact that in one of the most impassioned
+passages of his poem he addresses the Christian God as "Great Jupiter."
+But he allows figures of ancient mythology such as Charon, Minos and
+Geryon to appear in his infernal world, and when he designates the pagan
+gods as "false and _untruthful_," demonology is evidently at the back of
+his mind. The mediaeval epic poets who dealt with antique subjects took
+over the pagan gods more or less. Sometimes, as in the Romance of Troy,
+the Christian veneer is so thick that the pagan groundwork is but slightly
+apparent; in other poems, such as the adaptation of the _Aeneid_, it is
+more in evidence. In so far as the gods are not eliminated they seem as a
+rule to be taken over quite na�vely from the source without further
+comment; but occasionally the poet expresses his view of their nature.
+Thus the French adapter of Statius's _Theba�s_, in whose work the
+Christian element is otherwise not prominent, cautiously remarks that
+Jupiter and Tisiphone, by whom his heroes swear, are in reality only
+devils. Generally speaking, the gods of antiquity are often designated as
+devils in mediaeval poetry, but at times the opinion that they are
+departed human beings crops up. Thus, as we might expect, the theories of
+ancient times still survive and retain their sway.
+
+There is a domain in which we might expect to find distinct traces of the
+survival of the ancient gods in the mediaeval popular consciousness,
+namely, that of magic. There does not, however, seem to be much in it; the
+forms of mediaeval magic often go back to antiquity, but the beings it
+operates with are pre-eminently the Christian devils, if we may venture to
+employ the term, and the evil spirits of popular belief. There is,
+however, extant a collection of magic formulae against various ailments in
+which pagan gods appear: Hercules and Juno Regina, Juno and Jupiter, the
+nymphs, Luna Jovis filia, Sol invictus. The collection is transmitted in a
+manuscript of the ninth century; the formulae mostly convey the impression
+of dating from a much earlier period, but the fact that they were copied
+in the Middle Ages suggests that they were intended for practical
+application.
+
+A problem, the closer investigation of which would no doubt yield an
+interesting result, but which does not seem to have been much noticed, is
+the European conception of the heathen religions with which the explorers
+came into contact on their great voyages of discovery. Primitive
+heathenism as a living reality had lain rather beyond the horizon of the
+Middle Ages; when it was met with in America, it evidently awakened
+considerable interest. There is a description of the religion of Peru and
+Mexico, written by the Jesuit Acosta at the close of the sixteenth
+century, which gives us a clear insight into the orthodox view of
+heathenism during the Renaissance. According to Acosta, heathenism is as a
+whole the work of the Devil; he has seduced men to idolatry in order that
+he himself may be worshipped instead of the true God. All worship of idols
+is in reality worship of Satan. The individual idols, however, are not
+identified with individual devils; Acosta distinguishes between the
+worship of nature (heavenly bodies, natural objects of the earth, right
+down to trees, etc.), the worship of the dead, and the worship of images,
+but says nothing about the worship of demons. At one point only is there a
+direct intervention of the evil powers, namely, in magic, and particularly
+in oracles; and here then we find, as an exception, mention of individual
+devils which must be imagined to inhabit the idols. The same conception is
+found again as late as the seventeenth century in a story told by G. I.
+Voss of the time of the Dutch wars in Brazil. Arcissewski, a Polish
+officer serving in the Dutch army, had witnessed the conjuring of a devil
+among the Tapuis. The demon made his appearance all right, but proved to
+be a native well known to Arcissewski. As he, however, made some true
+prognostications, Voss, as it seems at variance with Arcissewski, thinks
+that there must have been some supernatural powers concerned in the game.
+
+An exceptional place is occupied by the attempt made during the
+Renaissance at an actual revival of ancient paganism and the worship of
+its gods. It proceeded from Plethon, the head of the Florentine Academy,
+and seems to have spread thence to the Roman Academy. The whole movement
+must be viewed more particularly as an outcome of the enthusiasm during
+the Renaissance for the culture of antiquity and more especially for its
+philosophy rather than its religion; the gods worshipped were given a new
+and strongly philosophical interpretation. But it is not improbable that
+the traditional theory of the reality of the ancient deities may have had
+something to do with it.
+
+Simultaneously with demonology, and while it was still acknowledged in
+principle, there flourished more naturalistic conceptions of paganism,
+both in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. As remarked above, the
+way was already prepared for them during antiquity. In Thomas Aquinas we
+find a lucid explanation of the origin of idolatry with a reference to the
+ancient theory. Here we meet with the familiar elements: the worship of
+the stars and the cult of the dead. According to Thomas, man has a natural
+disposition towards this error, but it only comes into play when he is led
+astray by demons. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Devil is
+mentioned oftener than the demons (compare Acosta's view of the heathenism
+of the American Indians); evidently the conception of the nature of evil
+had undergone a change in the direction of monotheism. In this way more
+scope was given for the adoption of naturalistic views in regard to the
+individual forms in which paganism manifested itself than when dealing
+with a multiplicity of demons that answered individually to the pagan
+gods, and we meet with systematic attempts to explain the origin of
+idolatry by natural means, though still with the Devil in the background.
+
+One of these systems, which played a prominent part, especially in the
+seventeenth century, is the so-called Hebraism, _i.e._ the attempt to
+derive the whole of paganism from Judaism. This fashion, for which the way
+had already been prepared by Jewish and Christian apologists, reaches its
+climax, I think, with Abbot Huet, who derived all the gods of antiquity
+(and not only Greek and Roman antiquity) from Moses, and all the goddesses
+from his sister; according to him the knowledge of these two persons had
+spread from the Jews to other peoples, who had woven about them a web of
+"fables." Alongside of Hebraism, which is Euhemeristic in principle,
+allegorical methods of interpretation were put forward. The chief
+representative of this tendency in earlier times is Natalis Comes (No�l du
+Comte), the author of the first handbook of mythology; he directly set
+himself the task of allegorising all the myths. The allegories are mostly
+moral, but also physical; Euhemeristic interpretations are not rejected
+either, and in several places the author gives all three explanations side
+by side without choosing between them.  In the footsteps of du Comte
+follows Bacon, in his _De Sapientia Veterum_; to the moral and physical
+allegories he adds political ones, as when Jove's struggle with Typhoeus
+is made to symbolise a wise ruler's treatment of a rebellion. While these
+attempts at interpretation, both the Euhemeristic and the allegorical, are
+in principle a direct continuation of those of antiquity, another method
+points plainly in the direction of the fantastic notions of the Middle
+Ages. As early as the sixteenth century the idea arose of connecting the
+theology of the ancients with alchemy. The idea seemed obvious because the
+metals were designated by the names of the planets, which are also the
+names of the gods. It found acceptance, and in the seventeenth century we
+have a series of writings in which ancient mythology is explained as the
+symbolical language of chemical processes.
+
+Within the limits of the supernatural explanation the interest centred
+more and more in a single point: the oracles. As far back as in Aquinas,
+"false prophecy" is a main section in the chapter on demons, whose power
+to foretell the future he expressly acknowledges. In the sixteenth and
+seventeenth centuries, when the interest in the prediction of the future
+was so strong, the ancient accounts of true prognostications were the real
+prop of demonology. Hence demons generally play a great part in these
+explanations, even though in other cases the Devil fills the bill. Thus
+Acosta in his account of the American religions; thus Voss and numerous
+other writers of the seventeenth century; and it is hardly a mere
+accident, one would think, when Milton specially mentions Dodona and
+Delphi as the seats of worship of the Greek demons. Among a few of the
+humanists we certainly find an attempt to apply the natural explanation
+even here; thus Caelius Rhodiginus asserted that a great part (but not
+all!) of the oracular system might be explained as priestly imposture, and
+his slightly younger contemporary Caelius Calcagninus, in his dialogue on
+oracles, seems to go still further and to deny the power of predicting the
+future to any other being than the true God. An exceptional position is
+occupied by Pomponazzi, who in his little pamphlet _De Incantationibus_
+seems to wish to derive all magic, including the oracles, from natural
+causes, though ultimately he formally acknowledges demonology as the
+authoritative explanation. But these advances did not find acceptance; we
+find even Voss combating the view on which they were founded. It is
+characteristic of the power of demonology in this domain that in support
+of his point of view he can quote no less a writer than Machiavelli.
+
+The author who opened battle in real earnest against demonology was a
+Dutch scholar, one van Dale, otherwise little known. In a couple of
+treatises written about the close of the seventeenth century he tried to
+show that the whole of idolatry (as well as the oracles in particular) was
+not dependent on the intervention of supernatural beings, but was solely
+due to imposture on the part of the priests. Van Dale was a Protestant, so
+he easily got over the unanimous recognition of demonology by the Fathers
+of the Church. The accounts of demons in the Old and New Testaments proved
+more difficult to deal with; it is interesting to see how he wriggles
+about to get round them--and it illustrates most instructively the degree
+to which demonology affords the only reasonable and natural explanation of
+paganism on the basis of early Christian belief.
+
+Van Dale's books are learned works written in Latin, full of quotations in
+Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and moreover confused and obscure in exposition,
+as is often the case with Dutch writings of that time. But a clever
+Frenchman, Fontenelle, took upon himself the task of rendering his work on
+the oracles into French in a popular and attractive form. His book called
+forth an answering pamphlet from a Jesuit advocating the traditional view;
+the little controversy seems to have made some stir in France about the
+year 1700. At any rate Banier, who, in the beginning of the eighteenth
+century, treated ancient mythology from a Euhemeristic point of view, gave
+some consideration to it. His own conclusion is--in 1738!--that demonology
+cannot be dispensed with for the explanation of the oracles. He gives his
+grounds for this in a very sensible criticism of van Dale's priestly fraud
+theory, the absurdity of which he exposes with sound arguments.
+
+Banier is the last author to whom I can point for the demon-theory applied
+as an explanation of a phenomenon in ancient religion; I have not found it
+in any other mythologist of the eighteenth century, and even in Banier,
+with the exception of this single point, everything is explained quite
+naturally according to the best Euhemeristic models. But in the positive
+understanding of the nature of ancient paganism no very considerable
+advance had actually been made withal. A characteristic example of this is
+the treatment of ancient religion by such an eminent intellect as
+Giambattista Vico. In his _Scienza Nuova_, which appeared in 1725, as the
+foundation of his exposition of the religion of antiquity he gives a
+characterisation of the mode of thought of primitive mankind, which is so
+pertinent and psychologically so correct that it anticipates the results
+of more than a hundred years of research. Of any supernatural explanation
+no trace is found in him, though otherwise he speaks as a good Catholic.
+But when he proceeds to explain the nature of the ancient ideas of the
+gods in detail, all that it comes to is a series of allegories, among
+which the politico-social play a main part. Vico sees the earliest history
+of mankind in the light of the traditions about Rome; the Graeco-Roman
+gods, then, and the myths about them, become to him largely an expression
+of struggles between the "patricians and plebeians" of remote antiquity.
+
+Most of the mythology of the eighteenth century is like this. The
+Euhemeristic school gradually gave up the hypothesis of the Jewish
+religion as the origin of paganism; Banier, the chief representative of
+the school, still argues at length against Hebraism. In its place,
+Phoenicians, Assyrians, Persians and, above all, Egyptians, are brought
+into play, or, as in the case of the Englishman Bryant, the whole of
+mythology is explained as reminiscences of the exploits of an aboriginal
+race, the Cuthites, which never existed. The allegorist school gradually
+rallied round the idea of the cult of the heavenly bodies as the origin of
+the pagan religions; as late as the days of the French Revolution, Dupuis,
+in a voluminous work, tried to trace the whole of ancient religion and
+mythology back to astronomy. On the whole the movement diverged more and
+more from Euhemerism towards the conception of Greek religion as a kind of
+cult of nature; when the sudden awakening to a more correct understanding
+came towards the close of the century, Euhemerism was evidently already an
+antiquated view. Thus, since the Renaissance, by a slow and very devious
+process of development, a gradual approach had been made to a more correct
+view of the nature of ancient religion. After the Devil had more or less
+taken the place of the demons, the rest of demonology, the moral allegory,
+Hebraism and Euhemerism were eliminated by successive stages, and
+nature-symbolism was reached as the final stage.
+
+We know now that even this is not the correct explanation of the nature
+and origin of the conception of the gods prevailing among the ancients.
+Recent investigations have shown that the Greek gods, in spite of their
+apparent simplicity and clarity, are highly complex organisms, the
+products of a long process of development to which the most diverse
+factors have contributed. In order to arrive at this result another
+century of work, with many attempts in the wrong direction, has been
+required. The idea that the Greek gods were nature-gods really dominated
+research through almost the whole of the nineteenth century. If it has now
+been dethroned or reduced to the measure of truth it contains--for
+undoubtedly a natural object enters as a component into the essence of
+some Greek deities--this is in the first place due to the intensive study
+of the religions of primitive peoples, living or obsolete; and the results
+of this study were only applied to Greek religion during the last decade
+of the century. But the starting-point of modern history of religion lies
+much farther back: its beginnings date from the great revival of
+historical research which was inaugurated by Rousseau and continued by
+Herder. Henceforward the unhistorical methods of the age of enlightenment
+were abolished, and attention directed in real earnest towards the earlier
+stages of human civilisation.
+
+This, however, carries us a step beyond the point of time at which this
+sketch should, strictly speaking, stop. For by the beginning of the
+eighteenth century--but not before--the negative fact which is all important
+in this connexion had won recognition: namely, that there existed no
+supernatural beings latent behind the Greek ideas of their gods, and
+corresponding at any rate in some degree to them; but that these ideas
+must be regarded and explained as entirely inventions of the human
+imagination.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+
+At the very beginning of this inquiry it was emphasised that its theme
+would in the main be the religious views of the upper class, and within
+this sphere again especially the views of those circles which were in
+close touch with philosophy. The reason for this is of course in the first
+place that only in such circles can we expect to find expressed a point of
+view approaching to positive atheism. But we may assuredly go further than
+this. We shall hardly be too bold in asserting that the free-thinking of
+philosophically educated men in reality had very slight influence on the
+great mass of the population. Philosophy did not penetrate so far, and
+whatever degree of perception we estimate the masses to have had of the
+fact that the upper layer of society regarded the popular faith with
+critical eyes--and in the long run it could not be concealed--we cannot fail
+to recognise that religious development among the ancients did not tend
+towards atheism. Important changes took place in ancient religion during
+the Hellenistic Age and the time of the Roman Empire, but their causes
+were of a social and national kind, and, if we confine ourselves to
+paganism, they only led to certain gods going out of fashion and others
+coming in. The utmost we can assert is that a certain weakening of the
+religious life may have been widely prevalent during the time of
+transition between the two ages--the transition falls at somewhat different
+dates in the eastern and western part of the Empire--but that weakening was
+soon overcome.
+
+Now the peculiar result of this investigation of the state of religion
+among the upper classes seems to me to be this: the curve of intensity of
+religious feeling which conjecture leads us to draw through the spiritual
+life of the ancients as a whole, that same curve, but more distinct and
+sharply accentuated, is found again in the relations of the upper classes
+to the popular faith. Towards the close of the fifth century it looks as
+if the cultured classes that formed the centre of Greek intellectual life
+were outgrowing the ancient religion. The reaction which set in with
+Socrates and Plato certainly checked this movement, but it did not stop
+it. Cynics, Peripatetics, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, in spite of
+their widely differing points of view, were all entirely unable to share
+the religious ideas of their countrymen in the form in which they were
+cast in the national religion. However many allowances they made, their
+attitude towards the popular faith was critical, and on important points
+they denied it. It is against the background thus resulting from ancient
+philosophy's treatment of ancient religion that we must view such
+phenomena as Polybius, Cicero, and Pliny the Elder, if we wish to
+understand their full significance.
+
+On the other hand, it is certain that this was not the view that conquered
+in the end among the educated classes in antiquity. The lower we come down
+in the Empire the more evident does the positive relation of the upper
+class to the gods of the popular faith become. Some few examples have
+already been mentioned in the preceding pages. In philosophy the whole
+movement finds its typical expression in demonology, which during the
+later Empire reigned undisputed in the one or two schools that still
+retained any vitality. It is significant that its source was the earlier
+Platonism, with its very conservative attitude towards popular belief, and
+that it was taken over by the later Stoic school, which inaugurated the
+general religious reaction in philosophy. And it is no less significant
+that demonology was swallowed whole by the monotheistic religion which
+superseded ancient paganism, and for more than a thousand years was the
+recognised explanation of the nature thereof.
+
+In accordance with the line of development here sketched, the inquiry has
+of necessity been focused on two main points: Sophistic and the
+Hellenistic Age. Now it is of peculiar interest to note what small traces
+of pure atheism can after all be found here, in spite of all criticism of
+the popular faith. We have surmised its presence among a few prominent
+personalities in fifth-century Athens; we have found evidence of its
+extension in the same place in the period immediately following; and in
+the time of transition between the fourth and third centuries we have
+thought it likely that it existed among a very few philosophers, of whom
+none are in the first rank. Everywhere else we find adjustments, in part
+very serious and real concessions, to popular belief. Not to mention the
+attitude towards worship, which was only hostile in one sect of slight
+importance: the assumption of the divinity of the heavenly bodies which
+was common to the Academics, Peripatetics, and Stoics is really in
+principle an acknowledgement of the popular faith, whose conception of the
+gods was actually borrowed and applied, not to some philosophical
+abstraction, but to individual and concrete natural objects. The
+anthropomorphic gods of the Epicureans point in the same direction. In
+spite of their profound difference from the beings that were worshipped
+and believed in by the ordinary Greek, they are in complete harmony with
+the opinion on which all polytheism is based: that there are individual
+beings of a higher order than man. And though the Stoics in theory
+confined their acknowledgment of this doctrine to the heavenly bodies, in
+practice--even if we disregard demonology--they consistently brought it to
+bear upon the anthropomorphic gods, in direct continuation of the Socratic
+reaction against the atheistic tendencies of Sophistic.
+
+If now we ask ourselves what may be the cause of this peculiar dualism in
+the relationship of ancient thought to religion, though admitting the
+highly complex nature of the problem, we can scarcely avoid recognising a
+certain principle. Ancient thought outgrew the ancient popular faith; that
+is beyond doubt. Hence its critical attitude. But it never outgrew that
+supernaturalist view which was the foundation of the popular faith. Hence
+its concessions to the popular faith, even when it was most critical, and
+its final surrender thereunto. And that it never outgrew the foundation of
+the popular faith is connected with its whole conception of nature and
+especially with its conception of the universe. We cannot indeed deny that
+the ancients had a certain feeling that nature was regulated by laws, but
+they only made imperfect attempts at a mechanical theory of nature in
+which this regulation of the world by law was carried through in
+principle, and with one brilliant exception they adhered implicitly to the
+geocentric conception of the universe. We may, I think, venture to assert
+with good reason that on such assumptions the philosophers of antiquity
+could not advance further than they did. In other words, on the given
+hypotheses the supernaturalist view was the correct one, the one that was
+most probable, and therefore that on which people finally agreed. A few
+chosen spirits may at any time by intuition, without any strictly
+scientific foundation, emancipate themselves entirely from religious
+errors; this also happened among the ancients, and on the first occasion
+was not unconnected with an enormous advance in the conception of nature.
+But it is certain that the views of an entire age are always decisively
+conditioned by its knowledge and interpretation of the universe
+surrounding it, and cannot in principle be emancipated therefrom.
+
+Seen from this point of view, our brief sketch of the attitude of
+posterity towards the religion of the pagan world will also not be without
+interest. If, after isolated advances during the mighty awakening of the
+Renaissance, it is not until the transition from the seventeenth to the
+eighteenth century that we find the modern atheistic conception of the
+nature of the gods of the ancients established in principle and
+consistently applied, we can scarcely avoid connecting this fact with the
+advance of natural science in the seventeenth century, and not least with
+the victory of the heliocentric system. After the close of antiquity the
+pagan gods had receded to a distance, practically speaking, because they
+were not worshipped any more. No one troubled himself about them. But in
+theory one had got no further, _i.e._ no advance had been made on the
+ancients, and no advance could be made as long as supernaturalism was
+adhered to in connexion with the ancient view of the universe. Through
+monotheism the notions of the divinity of the sun, moon and planets had
+certainly been got rid of, but not so the notion of the world--_i.e._ the
+globe enclosed within the firmament--as filled with personal beings of a
+higher order than man; and even the duty of turning the spheres to which
+the heavenly bodies were believed to be fastened was--quite
+consistently--assigned to some of these beings. As long as such notions
+were in operation, not only were there no grounds for denying the reality
+of the pagan gods, but there was every reason to assume it. So far we may
+rightly say that it was Copernicus, Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Kepler and
+Newton that did away with the traditional conception of ancient paganism.
+
+Natural science, however, furnishes only the negative result that the gods
+of polytheism are not what they are said to be: real beings of a higher
+order than man. To reveal what they are, other knowledge is required. This
+was not attained until long after the revival of natural science in the
+sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The vacillation in the eighteenth
+century between various theories of the explanation of the nature of
+ancient polytheism--theories which were all false, though not equally
+false--is in this respect significant enough; likewise the gradual progress
+which characterises research in the nineteenth century, and which may be
+indicated by such names as Heyne, Buttmann, K. O. M�ller, Lobeck,
+Mannhardt, Rohde, and Usener, to mention only some of the most important
+and omitting those still alive. Viewed in this light the development
+sketched here within a narrowly restricted field is typical of the course
+of European intellectual history from antiquity down to our day.
+
+
+
+
+
+NOTES
+
+
+Of Atheism in Antiquity as defined here no treatment is known to me; but
+there exist an older and a newer book that deal with the question within a
+wider compass. The first of these is Krische, _Die theologischen Lehren
+der griechischen Denker_ (G�ttingen, 1840); it is chiefly concerned with
+the philosophical conceptions of deity, but it touches also on the
+relations of philosophers to popular religion. The second is Decharme, _La
+critique des traditions religieuses chez les Grecs_ (Paris, 1904); it is
+not fertile in new points of view, but it has suggested several details
+which I might else have overlooked. Such books as Caird, _The Evolution of
+Theology in the Greek Philosophers_ (Glasgow, 1904), or Moon, _Religious
+Thought of the Greeks_ (Cambridge, Mass., 1919), barely touch on the
+relation to popular belief; of Louis, _Les doctrines religieuses des
+philosophes grecs_, I have not been able to make use. I regret that Poul
+Helms, _The Conception of God in Greek Philosophy_ (Danish, in _Studier
+for Sprog-og Oldtidsforskning_, No. 115), was not published until my essay
+was already in the press. General works on Atheism are indicated in
+Aveling's article, "Atheism," in the _Catholic Encyclop�dia_, vol. ii.,
+but none of them seem to be found at Copenhagen. In the _Dictionary of
+Religion and Ethics_, ii., there is a detailed article on Atheism in its
+relation to different religions; the section treating of Antiquity is
+written by Pearson, but is meagre. Works like Zeller, _Philosophie der
+Griechen_, and Gomperz, _Griechische Denker_, contain accounts of the
+attitude of philosophers (Gomperz also includes others) towards popular
+belief; of these books I have of course made use throughout, but they are
+not referred to in the following notes except on special occasion.
+Scattered remarks and small monographs on details are naturally to be
+found in plenty. Where I have met with such and found something useful in
+them, or where I express dissent from them, I have noticed it; but I have
+not aimed at exhausting the literature on my subject. On the other hand I
+have tried to make myself completely acquainted with the first-hand
+material, wherever it gave a direct support for assuming Atheism, and to
+take my own view of it. In many cases, however, the argumentation has had
+to be indirect: it has been necessary to draw inferences from what an
+author does not say in a certain connexion when he might be expected to
+say it, or what he generally and throughout avoids mentioning, or from his
+general manner and peculiarities in his way of speaking of the gods. In
+such cases I have often had to be content with my previous knowledge and
+my general impression of the facts; but then I have as a rule made use of
+the important modern literature on the subject. In working out the sketch
+of the ideas after the end of Antiquity, I have been almost without any
+guidance in modern literature. I have accordingly had to try, on the basis
+of a superficial acquaintance with some of the chief types, to form for
+myself, as best I might, some idea of the course of the evolution; but I
+have not been able to go systematically through the immense material,
+however fruitful such a research appeared to be. In the meantime, between
+the publication of my Danish essay and this translation, there has
+appeared a work by Mr. Gruppe, _Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und
+Religionsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1921). My task in writing my last chapters
+would have been much easier if I could have made use of Mr. Gruppe's
+learned and comprehensive treatment of the subject; but it would not have
+been superfluous, for Mr. Gruppe deals principally with the history of
+classical mythology, not with the history of the belief in the gods of
+antiquity. So I have ventured to let my sketch stand as it is, only
+reducing some of the notes (which I had on purpose made rather full, to
+aid others who might pursue the subject) by referring to Mr. Gruppe
+instead of to the sources themselves.
+
+For kindly helping me to find my bearings in out-of-the-way parts of my
+subject, I am indebted to my colleagues F. Buhl, I.L. Heiberg, I.C.
+Jacobsen and Kr. Nyrop, as well as to Prof. Martin P. Nilsson in Lund.
+
+P. 1. Definition of Atheism: see the article in the _Catholic Encycl._
+vol. ii.
+
+P. 5. Atheism: see Murray, _New Engl. Dict._, under Atheism and -ism. The
+word seems to have come up in the Renaissance.
+
+P. 6. Criminal Law at Athens: see Lipsius, _Das attische Recht und
+Rechtsverfahren_, i. p. 358.--The definition in Aristotle, _de virt. et
+vit._ 7, p. 1251_a_, has, I think, no legal foundation.
+
+P. 9. On the legal foundation for the trials of Christians, see Mommsen,
+_Der Religionsfreuel nach r�mischem Recht_ (_Ges. Schr._ iii. p.
+389).--Mommsen goes too far, I think, in supposing a legal foundation for
+the trials of Christians; above all, I do not believe that the defection
+from the Roman religion was ever considered as maiestas in the technical
+sense of the word, the more so as it is certain that, after the earliest
+period, no difference was made in the treatment of citizens and aliens.
+
+P. 13. Lists of atheists: Cicero, _de nat. deor._ 1. 1, 2 (comp. 1. 23,
+26). Sext. Emp. _hypotyp._ 3. 213; _adv. math._ 9. 50. Aelian, _v.h._ 2.
+31; _de nat. an._ 6. 40.--The predicate _atheos_ is once applied to
+Anaxagoras by a Christian author (Irenaeus: see Diels, _Vorsokr._ 46, A
+113; compare also Marcellinus, _vit. Thuc._, see below, note on p. 29). Of
+such isolated cases I have taken no account.
+
+P. 16. On the dualism in the Greek conception of the nature of gods see
+N�gelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p. 11.--Pindar: _Ol._ 1. 28, 9. 35; _Pyth._ 3.
+27.
+
+P. 17. Xenophanes: Einhorn, _Zeit- und Streitfragen der modernen
+Xenophanesforschung_ (_Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos._ xxxi.).
+
+P. 18. Xenophanes's age: Diels, _Vorsokr._ 11, B 8.--His criticism of Homer
+and Hesiod: _ibid._ 11, 12.--Titans and Giants: _ibid._ 1. 22.--Criticism of
+Anthropomorphism: _ibid._ 14-16.--Divination: Cic. _de div._ 1. 3, 5.
+
+P. 19. On Xenophanes's conception of God, comp. _Vorsokr._ 11, B 23-26; on
+the identification of God with the universe: _Vorsokr._ 11, A 30, 31,
+33-36.--Cicero: _de div._ 1. 3, 5.
+
+P. 21. For Xenophanes's theology, comp. Freudenthal, _Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos._ i. p. 322, and Zeller's criticism, _ibid._ p. 524. Agreeing with
+Freudenthal: Decharme, p. 46; Campbell, _Religion in Greek Literature_, p.
+293.
+
+P. 21. Parmenides does not even appear to have designated his "Being" as
+God (Zeller, i. p. 563).
+
+P. 23. In the eighteenth century people discussed diffusely the question
+whether Thales was an atheist (of course in the sense in which the word
+was taken at that time); comp. Tennemann, _Gesch. d. Philos._ i. pp. 62
+and 422. Tennemann remarks quite truly that the question is put wrongly.
+
+P. 24. Thales: Diels, _Vorsokr._ 1, A 22-23.--Attitude of Democritus
+towards popular belief: _Vorsokr._ 55, A 74-79; comp. 116, 117; B 166, and
+also B 30. Diels, _Ueber den D�monenglauben des D._ (_Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos._ 1894, p. 154).
+
+P. 25. Trial of Anaxagoras: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 1, 17, 18, 19.
+
+P. 26. Ram's head: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 16.
+
+P. 27. Geffcken (in _Hermes_, 42, p. 127) has tried to make out something
+about a criticism of popular belief by Anaxagoras from some passages in
+Aristophanes (_Nub._ 398) and Lucian (_Tim._ 10, etc.), but I do not think
+he has succeeded.--Pericles a free-thinker: Plut. _Pericl._ 6 and 38; comp.
+Decharme, p. 160.--Personality of Anaxagoras: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 30
+(Aristotle, _Eud. Ethics_, A 4, p. 1215_b_, 6).
+
+P. 28. Herodotus: 8, 77.--Sophocles: _Oed. rex._ 498, 863.--Diopeithes:
+Plut. _Pericl._ 32 (_Vorsokr._ 46, A 17).--Thucydides: Classen in the
+preface to his 3rd ed., p. lvii.
+
+P. 29. Thucydides, a disciple of Anaxagoras: Marcellinus, _vit. Thuc._
+22.--Generally Thucydides is thought to have been more conservative in his
+religious opinions than I consider probable; see Classen, _loc. cit._;
+Decharme, p. 83; Gertz in his preface to the Danish translation of
+Thucydides, p. xxvii.--Hippo: _Vorsokr._ 26, A 4, 6, 8, 9; B 2, 3.
+
+P. 30. Aristotle: _Vorsokr._ 26, A 7.--Diogenes an atheist: Aelian, _v.h._
+2, 31.--The air his god: _Vorsokr._ 51, A 8 (he thought that Homer
+identified Zeus with the air, and approved of this as {~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON WITH PSILI~} {~GREEK SMALL LETTER MU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER THETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER KAPPA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMEGA WITH PERISPOMENI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~}, {~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK KORONIS~}
+{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER THETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMEGA WITH PERISPOMENI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~} {~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER MU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}); B 5, 7, 8.--Allusions to his doctrines by Aristophanes:
+_Nub._ 225, 828 (_Vorsokr._ 51, C 1, 2).
+
+P. 31. A chief representative of the na�vely critical view of natural
+phenomena is for us Herodotus. The _locus classicus_ is vii. 129; comp.
+Gomperz, _Griech. Denker_, i. p. 208; Heiberg, _Festskrift til Ussing_
+(Copenhagen, 1900), p. 91; Decharme, p. 69.--Principal passages about
+Diagoras: Sext. Emp. _adv. math._ 9, 53; Suidas, art. _Diagoras II._;
+schol. Aristoph. _Nub._ 830 (the legend); Suidas, art. _Diagoras I._;
+Aristoph. _Av._ 1071 with schol.; schol. Aristoph. _Ran._ 320; [Lysias]
+vi. 17; Diod. xiii. 16 (the decree); Philodem. _de piet._ p. 89 Gomp.
+(comments of Aristoxenus); Aelian, _v.h._ ii. 22 (legislation at
+Mantinea).--Wilamowitz (_Textgesch. d. Lyr._ p. 80) has tried to save the
+tradition by supposing that the _acme_ of Diagoras has been put too early.
+Comp. also his remarks, _Griech. Verskunst._ p. 426, where he has taken up
+the question again with reference to my treatment of it. As he has now
+conceded the possibility of referring the legislation to the earlier date,
+the difference between us is really very slight, and it is of course
+possible, perhaps even probable, that the acme of the poet has been
+antedated.--Aristoph. _Av._ 1071: "On this very day it is made public, that
+if one of you kills Diagoras from Melos, he shall have a talent, and if
+one kills one of the dead tyrants, he shall have a talent." The parallel
+between the two decrees, of which the latter is of course an invention of
+Aristophanes, would be without point if the decree against Diagoras was
+not as futile as the decree against the tyrants (_i.e._ the sons of
+Peisistratus, who had been dead some three-quarters of a century), that
+is, if it did not come many years too late.--Wilamowitz (_Griech.
+Verskunst, loc. cit._) takes the sense to be: "You will not get hold of
+Diagoras any more than you did of the tyrants." But this, besides being
+somewhat pointless, does not agree so well as my explanation with the
+introductory words: "On this very day." On the other hand, I never meant
+to imply that Diagoras was dead in 415, but only that his offence was an
+old one--just as that of Protagoras probably was (see p. 39).
+
+P. 39. Trial of Protagoras: _Vorsokr._ 74, A 1-4, 23; the passage
+referring to the gods: _ibid._ B 4.--Plato: _Theaet._ p. 162_d_ (_Vorsokr._
+74, A 23).
+
+P. 41. Distinction between belief and knowledge by Protagoras: Gomperz,
+_Griech. Denker_, i. p. 359.
+
+P. 42. Prodicus: _Vorsokr._ 77, B 5. Comp. Norvin, _Allegorien i den
+gr�ske Philosophi_ (_Edda_, 1919), p. 82. I cannot, however, quite adopt
+Norvin's view of the theory of Protagoras.
+
+P. 44. Critias: _Vorsokr._ 81, B 25.--W. Nestle, _Jahrbb. f. Philol._ xi.
+(1903), pp. 81 and 178, gives an exhaustive treatment of the subject, but
+I cannot share his view of it.
+
+P. 46. Euripides: _Suppl._ 201.--Moschion: _Trag. Fragm._ ed. Nauck (2nd
+ed.), p. 813.--Plato: _Rep._ ii. 369b.
+
+P. 47. Democritus: Reinhardt in _Hermes_, xlvii (1912), p. 503 In spite of
+Wilamowitz's objections (in his _Platon_, ii. p. 214), I still consider it
+probable that Plato alludes to a philosophical theory.--Protagoras on the
+original state: _Vorsokr._ 74, B 8_b_.
+
+P. 48. Euripides: _Electra, 737_ (Euripides does not believe in the tale
+that the sun reversed its course on account of Thyestes's fraud against
+Atreus, and then adds: "Fables that terrify men are a profit to the
+worship of the gods").--Aristotle: _Metaph._ A 8, 1074_b_; see text, p.
+85.--Polybius: vi. 56; see text pp. 90 and 114.--Plato's _Gorgias_, p. 482
+and foll.
+
+P. 49.--Callicles: see _e.g._ Wilamowitz, _Platon_, i. p. 208.
+
+P. 50.--Thrasymachus: Plato, _Rep._ i. pp. 338_c_, 343_a_; comp. also ii.
+p. 358_b_. His remark on Providence (_Vorsokr._ 78, B 8) runs thus: "The
+gods do not see the things that are done among men; if they did, they
+would not overlook the greatest human good, justice. For we find that men
+do not follow it." Comp. text, p. 61.--Diagoras as Critias's source:
+Nestle, _Jahrbb._, 1903, p. 101.
+
+P. 51. Euripides: see W. Nestle, _Euripides_ (Stuttgart, 1901) pp. 51-152.
+Here, too, the material is set forth exhaustively; the results seem to me
+inadmissible. Browning's theory (_The Ring and the Book_, x. 1661 foll.)
+that Euripides did believe in the existence of the gods, but did not
+believe them to be perfect, is a possible, perhaps even a probable,
+explanation of many of his utterances; but it will hardly fit all of them.
+I have examined the question in an essay, "Browning om Euripides" in my
+_Udvalgte Afhandlinger_, p. 55.
+
+P. 52. Gods identified with the Elements: _Bacch._ 274; fragm. 839. 877,
+941 (Nestle, p. 153).
+
+P. 53. Polemic against sophists: Nestle, p. 206.--_Bellerophon_: fragm.
+286.
+
+P. 54. "If the gods----": fragm. 292, 7.
+
+P. 55. _Melanippe_: fragm. 480. The words are said to have given offence
+at the rehearsal, so that Euripides altered them at the production of the
+play (Plut. _Amat._ ch. 13).--Aeschylus: _Agam._ 160.--Aristophanes:
+_Thesmoph._ 450.--In the _Frogs_, 892, Euripides prays to the Ether and
+other abstractions, not to the gods.--_Clouds_: 1371.
+
+P. 56. Plato: _Republ._ viii. p. 568a.--Quotation from _Melanippe_: Plut.
+_Amat._ 13.
+
+P. 57. Aristophanes and Naturalism: see note to p. 30.
+
+P. 58. Denial of the gods in the _Clouds_, 247, 367, 380, 423, 627, 817,
+825, 1232.--Moral of the piece: 1452-1510.--In Aristophanes's own travesties
+of the gods, scholars have found evidence for a weakening of popular
+belief, but this is certainly wrong; comp. Decharme, p. 109.--Words like
+"believe" and "belief" do not cover the Greek word {~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER MU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ZETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}, which
+signifies at once "believe" and "be in the habit," "use habitually," so
+that it covers both belief and worship--an ambiguity that is characteristic
+of Greek religion.--Xenophon: _Memorab._ i. 1; _Apol. Socr._ 10 and foll.
+
+P. 59. Plato: _Apol._ p. 24_b_ (the indictment); 26_b_ (the refutation).
+
+P. 60. Aristodemus: Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 4.--Cinesias: Decharme, p. 135.--The
+Hermocopidae: Decharme, p. 152. Beloch, _Hist. of Greece_, ii. 1, p. 360,
+has another explanation. To my argument it is of no consequence what
+special motive is assigned for the crime, as long as it is a political
+one.
+
+P. 61. Plato on impiety: _Laws_, x. p. 886b; comp. xii. p. 967_a_.
+Curiously enough, the same tripartition of the wrong attitude towards the
+gods occurs already in the _Republic_, ii. p. 365_d_, where it is
+introduced incidentally as well known and a matter of course.
+
+P. 62. Euripides: _e.g._ _Hecuba_, 488; _Suppl._ 608.--Reference to
+Anaxagoras: _Laws_, x. p. 886_d_; to Sophistic, 889_b_.
+
+P. 65. Plato in the _Apology_: p. 19_c_.--Socrates's _daimonion_ a proof of
+_asebeia_: Xenoph. _Memorab._ i. 1, 2; _Apol_. _Socr._ 12; Plato, _Apol._
+p. 31_d_.
+
+P. 66. Accusation of teaching the doctrine of Anaxagoras: Plato, _Apol._
+p. 26_d_; comp. Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 1, 10.--Plato's defence of Socrates:
+_Apol._ p. 27_a_.
+
+P. 67. Xenophon's defence of Socrates: _Memor._ i. 1, 2; 6 foll., 10
+foll.--Teleological view of nature: Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 4; iv. 3.--On the
+religious standpoint of Socrates, comp. my _Udvalgte Afhandlinger_, p. 38.
+
+P. 68. Plato's _Apology_, p. 21_d_, 23_a_ and _f_, etc.--The gods
+all-knowing: _Odyss._ iv. 379 and 468; comp. N�gelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p.
+18; _Nachhom. Theol._ p. 23.
+
+P. 69. The gods just: N�gelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p. 297; _Nachhom. Theol._
+p. 27.
+
+P. 71. The relation between early religious thought and Delphi has been
+explained correctly by Sam Wide, _Einleit. in die Altertumswissensch._,
+ii. p. 221; comp. also I. L. Heiberg in _Tilskueren_, 1919, ii. p.
+44.--Honours shown to Pindar at Delphi: schol. Pind. ed. Drachm. i. p. 2,
+14; 5, 6. Pausan, x. 24. 5.
+
+P. 72. Plato on the Delphic Oracle: _Apol._ p. 20_e_. On the following
+comp. I. L. Heiberg, _loc. cit._ p. 45.--Socrates on his _daimonion_:
+Plato, _Apol._ p. 31_c_.
+
+P. 74. Antisthenes: Ritter, _Hist. philos. Gr.__9_ 285.--On the later
+Cynics, especially Diogenes, see Diog. Laert. vi. 105 (the gods are in
+need of nothing); Julian, _Or._ vi. p. 199_b_ (Diogenes did not worship
+the gods).
+
+P. 75. Cyrenaics: Diog. Laert. ii. 91.--Date of Theodorus: Diog. Laert. ii.
+101, 103; his book on the gods: Diog. Laert. ii. 97, Sext. Emp. _adv.
+math._ ix. 55; his trial: Diog. Laert. ii. 101.
+
+P. 76. Theodorus's book used by Epicurus: Diog. Laert. ii. 97.--Zeller:
+_Philos. d. Griechen_, ii. 1, p. 925.--Euthyphron: see especially p. 14_b_
+foll.
+
+P. 77. Criticism of Mythology in the _Republic_: ii. p. 377_b_ foll.;
+worship presupposed: _e.g._ iii. p. 415_e_; v. p. 459_e_, 461_a_, 468_d_,
+469_a_, 470_a_; vii. p. 540_b_; reference to the Oracle: iv. p.
+427_b_.--_Timaeus_: p. 40_d_ foll.--_Laws_, rules of worship: vi. p. 759_a_,
+vii. p. 967_a_ and elsewhere, x. p. 909_d_; capital punishment for
+atheists: x. p. 909_a_. Comp. above, on p. 61.
+
+P. 78. Atheism a sin of youth: _Laws_, x. p. 888_a_.--Goodness and truth of
+the gods: _Republ._ ii. p. 379_a_, 380_d_, 382_a_.--Belief in Providence:
+_Laws_, x. p. 885_c_, etc.; _Republ._ x. p. 612_e_; _Apol._ p. 41_d_.
+
+P. 79. _Laws_, x. p. 888_d_, 893_b_ foll., especially 899_c-d_; comp. also
+xii. p. 967_a-c._--_Timaeus_: p. 40_d-f_. Comp. _Laws_, xii. p. 948_b_.
+
+P. 80. The gods in the _Republic_, ii. p. 380_d_. This passage, taken
+together with Plato's general treatment of popular belief, might lead to
+the hypothesis that it was Plato's doctrine of ideas rather than the
+rationalism of his youth that brought about strained relations between his
+thought and popular belief. I incline to think that such is the case; but
+there is a long step even from such a state of things to downright
+atheism, and the stress Plato always laid on the belief in Providence is a
+strong argument in favour of his belief in the gods, for he could never
+make his ideas act in the capacity of Providence.--The gods as creators of
+mankind: _Timaeus_, p. 41_a_ foll.
+
+P. 81. Xenocrates: the exposition of his doctrine given in the text is
+based upon Heinze's _Xenokrates_ (Leipzig, 1892).
+
+P. 83. Trial of Aristotle: Diog. Laert. v. 5; Athen. xv. p. 696.--The
+writings of Aristotle that have come down to us are almost all of them
+compositions for the use of his disciples, and were not accessible to the
+general public during his lifetime.
+
+P. 84. On the religious views of Aristotle see in general Zeller, ii. 2,
+p. 787 (Engl. transl. ii. p. 325); where the references to his writings
+are given in full. In the following I indicate only a few passages of
+special interest.--Discussion of worship precluded: _Top._ A, xi. p.
+105_a_, 5.--Aristotle's Will: _Diog_. Laert. v. 15.--The gods as determining
+the limits of the human: _e.g._ _Nic. Eth._ K, viii. p. 1178b, 33: "(the
+wise) will also be in need of outward prosperity, as he is (only) a
+man."--Reservations in speaking of the gods, _e.g._ _Nic. Eth._ K, ix. p.
+1179_a_, 13: "he who is active in accordance with reason ... must also be
+supposed to be the most beloved of the gods; for if the gods trouble
+themselves about human affairs--_and that they do so is generally taken for
+granted_--it must be probable that they take pleasure in what is best and
+most nearly related to themselves (_and that must be the reason_), and
+that they reward those who love and honour this most highly," etc. The
+passage is typical both of the hypothetical way of speaking, and of the
+twist in the direction of Aristotle's own conception of the deity (whose
+essence is reason); also of the Socratic manner of dealing with the gods.
+
+P. 85. The passage quoted is from the _Metaphysics_, A viii. p. 1074_a_,
+38. Comp. _Metaph._ B, ii. p. 997_b_, 8; iv. p. 1000_a_, 9.
+
+P. 86. Theophrastus: Diog. Laert. v. 37.
+
+P. 87. Strato: Diels, _Ueber das physikal. System des S., Sitzungsber. d.
+Berl. Akad._, 1893, p. 101.--His god the same as nature: _Cic. de nat.
+deor._ i. 35.
+
+P. 89. On the history of Hellenistic religion, see Wendland, _Die
+hellenistisch-r�mische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen z. Judentum u.
+Christentum_ (T�bingen, 1907).
+
+P. 90. The passage quoted is Polyb. vi. 56, 6.
+
+P. 92. On the Tyche-Religion, see N�gelsbach, _Nachhom. Theologie_, p.
+153; Lehrs, _Popul�re Aufs�tze_, p. 153; Rohde, _Griech. Roman_, p. 267
+(1st ed.); Wendland, p. 59.--Thucydides: see Classen in the introduction to
+his (3rd) edition, pp. lvii-lix, where all the material is collected. A
+conclusive passage is vii. 36, 6, where Thuc. makes the bigoted Nicias
+before a decisive battle express the hope that "Fortune" will favour the
+Athenians.--Demosthenes's dream: _Aeschin._ iii. 77.--Demosthenes on Tyche:
+_Olynth._ ii. 22; _de cor._ 252.
+
+P. 93. Demosthenes and the Pythia: _Aesch._ iii. 130. Comp. _ibid._ 68,
+131, 152; Plutarch, _Dem._ 20.--Demetrius of Phalerum: Polyb. xxix.
+21.--Temples of Tyche: Roscher, _Mythol. Lex._, art. _Fortuna_.
+
+P. 94. Tyche mistress of the gods: _Trag. adesp. fragm._ 506, Nauck; [Dio
+Chrys.] lxiv. p. 331 R.--Polybius: i. 1; iii. 5, 7.--The reservations
+against Tyche as a principle for the explaining of historical facts, and
+the twisting of the notion in the direction of Providence found in certain
+passages in Polybius, do not concern us here; they are probably due to the
+Stoic influence he underwent during his stay at Rome. Comp. below, on p.
+114, and see Cuntz, _Polybios_ (Leipzig, 1902), p. 43.--Pliny: ii. 22 foll.
+
+P. 95. Tyche in the novels: Rohde, _Griech. Rom._ p. 280.
+
+P. 97. Strabo: xvii. p. 813.--Plutarch: _de def. or._ 5 and 7.
+
+P. 98. The Aetolians at Dium: Polyb. iv. 62; at Dodona, iv. 67; Philip at
+Thermon, v. 9; Dicaearchus, xviii. 54.--Decay of Roman worship: Wissowa,
+_Religion u. Kultus d. R�mer_, p. 70 (2nd ed.). To this work I must refer
+for indications of the sources; but the polemic in the text is chiefly
+directed against Wissowa.
+
+P. 99. Ennius: comp. below, p. 112.
+
+P. 100. Varro: in Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, vi. 2.
+
+P. 103. Theology of the Stoics: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 309-45.
+
+P. 104. Demonology of the Stoics: Heinze, _Xenokrates_, p. 96.
+
+P. 105. Epicurus's theology: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 427-38. Comp. Schwartz,
+_Charakterk�pfe_, ii. p. 43.
+
+P. 106. Epicurus's doctrine of the eternity of the gods criticised: Cic.
+_de nat. deor._ i. 68 foll.
+
+P. 107. The Sceptics: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 507 and 521.
+
+P. 109. Diogenes: see note on p. 74.--Bion: Diog. Laert. iv. 52 and 54.
+
+P. 110. Menippos: R. Helm, _Lukian u. Menipp_ (Leipzig and Berlin, 1906).
+
+P. 111. Euhemerus: Jacoby in Pauly-Wissowa's _Realencyclop._, art.
+"Euemeros"; Wendland, _Hellenist. Kultur_, p. 70.--Euhemerism before
+Euhemerus: Lobeck, _Aglaophamus_, p. 9; Wendland, p. 67.
+
+P. 112. A Danish scholar, Dr. J. P. Jacobsen (_Afhandlinger og Artikler_,
+p. 490), seems to think that Euhemerus's theory was influenced by the
+worship of heroes. But there is nothing to show that Euhemerus supposed
+his gods to have continued their existence after their death, though this
+would have been in accordance with Greek belief even in the Hellenistic
+period; he seems rather to have insisted that they were worshipped as gods
+during their lifetime (comp. Jacoby, _loc. cit._).
+
+P. 114. Euhemerism in Polybius: xxxiv. 2; comp. x. 10, 11.--Relapse into
+orthodoxy: xxxvii. 9 (the decisive passage); xxxix. 19, 2 (concluding
+prayer to the gods); xviii. 54, 7-10; xxiii. 10, 14 (the gods punish
+impiety; comp. xxxvii. 9, 16). There is a marked contrast between such
+passages and the way Polybius speaks of Philip's destruction of the
+sanctuary at Thermon; he blames it severely, but merely on political, not
+on religious grounds (v. 9-12). Orthodox utterances in the older portions
+of the work (i. 84, 10; x. 2, 7) may be due to that accommodation to
+popular belief which Polybius himself acknowledges as justifiable (xvi.
+12, 9), but also to later revision.--Influence of Stoicism: Hirzel,
+_Untersuchungen zu Ciceros philos. Schriften_, ii. p. 841.
+
+P. 115. Cicero's Stoicism in his philosophy of religion: _de nat. deor._
+iii. 40, 95.
+
+P. 116. Sanctuary to Tullia: Cic. _ad Att._ xii. 18 foll.; several of the
+letters (23, 25, 35, 36) show that Atticus disapproved of the idea, and
+that Cicero himself was conscious that it was unworthy of him.
+
+P. 117. Euhemeristic defence: _fragm. consol._ 14, 15.--Augustus's
+reorganisation of the cults: Wissowa, _Religion u. Kultus d. R�mer_, p.
+73. Recent scholars, especially when treating of Virgil (Heinze, _Vergils
+ep. Technik_, 3rd ed. p. 291; Norden, _Aeneis_, vi. 2nd ed. pp. 314, 318,
+362), speak of the reform of Augustus as if it involved a real revulsion
+of feeling in his contemporaries. This is in my opinion a complete
+misunderstanding of the facts. Virgil's religious views: _Catal. v.,
+Georgics_, ii. 458.
+
+P. 118. Pliny: _hist. nat._ ii. 1-27. The passages translated are �� 14
+and 27.
+
+P. 122. Seneca: fragm. 31-39, Haase.--Stoic polemic against atheism:
+Epictetus, _diss._ ii. 20, 21; comp. Marcus Aurelius, vi. 44.--Later
+Cynicism: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 763.--Oenomaus: only preserved in excerpts by
+Euseb. _praep. evang._ 5-6 (a separate edition is wanted).--His polemic
+directed against the priests: Euseb. 5, p. 213_c_; comp. Oenomaus himself,
+_ibid._ 6, p. 256_d_.
+
+P. 123. Lucian: see Christ, _Gesch. d. griech. Litt._ ii. 2, p. 550 (5th
+ed.), and R. Helm, _Lukian u. Menipp_ (see note to p. 110).
+
+P. 124. Timon: ch. x.
+
+P. 126. On Lucian's caution in attacking the really popular gods, see
+Wilamowitz, in _Kultur d. Gegenwart_, i. 8, p. 248.--The Jews atheists:
+Harnack, _Der Vorwurf d. Atheismus in den 3 ersten Jahrh_. (_Texte u.
+Unters._, N.F., xiii. 4), p. 3.
+
+P. 127. I have met with no comprehensive treatment of Jewish and Christian
+polemic against Paganism; Geffcken, _Zwei griech. Apologeten_ (Leipzig,
+1907), is chiefly concerned with investigations into the sources. I shall
+therefore indicate the principal passages on which my treatment is
+based.--Polemic against images in the Old Testament: Isaiah 44.10 etc.; in
+later literature: Epistle of Jeremiah; Wisdom of Solomon 13 foll.; Philo,
+_de decal._ 65 foll., etc.--Euhemerism: Wisdom of Solomon 14.15; Epistle of
+Aristeas, 135; Sibyll. iii. 547, 554, 723.--Elements and celestial bodies:
+Wisdom of Solomon 13; Philo, _de decal._ 52 foll.--The tenacity of
+tradition is apparent from the fact that even Maimonides in his treatise
+of idolatry deals only with star-worship and image-worship. I know the
+treatise only from the Latin translation by D. Voss (in G. I. Voss's
+_Opera_, vol. v.).--Demons: Deuteron. 32.17; Psalms 106.37; add (according
+to LXX.) Isaiah 65.11; Psalms 96.5. Later writers: Enoch 19.99, 7; Baruch
+4.7. Such passages as Jub. 22, 17 or Sibyll. prooem. 22 are possibly
+Euhemeristic.--Fallen angels: Enoch, 19.--Philo's demonology: _de gig._
+6-18, etc.
+
+P. 128. St. Paul: 1 Cor. 10.20; comp. 8.4 and Rom. 1.23.
+
+P. 129. Image-worship and demon-worship not conciliated: _e.g._ Tertull.
+_Apologet._ 10-15 and 22-23, comp. 27.--Jewish demonology: Bousset,
+_Religion d. Judentums_, p. 326 (1st ed.).--Fallen angels: _e.g._ Athenag.
+24 foll.; Augustine, _Enchir._ 9, 28 foll.; _de civ. Dei_, viii. 22.
+
+P. 130. Euhemerism in the Apologists: _e.g._ Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, ii.
+10; vi. 7; vii. 18 and 33; viii. 26.--Euhemerism and demonology combined:
+_e.g._ Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, ii. 10; vii. 35; comp. vii. 28
+fin.--Worship of the heavenly bodies: _e.g._ Aristid. 3 foll.; Augustine,
+_de civ. Dei_, vii. 29 foll.
+
+P. 131. Paganism a delusion caused by demons: Thomas Aq. _Summa theol._ P.
+ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. below, note on p. 135.
+
+P. 133. For the following sketch I have found valuable material in
+Gedike's essay, _Ueber die mannigfaltigen Hypothesen z. Erkl�rung d.
+Mythologie_ (_Verm. Schriften_, Berlin, 1801, p. 61).
+
+P. 134. Milton: _Paradise Lost_, i. 506. The theory that the pagan oracles
+fell mute at the rise of Christianity is also found in Milton, _Hymn on
+the Morning of Christ's Nativity_, st. xviii. foll.
+
+P. 135. G. I. Voss; _De Theologia Gentili_, lib. i. (published,
+1642)--Voss's view is in the main that idolatry as a whole is the work of
+the Devil. What is worshipped is partly the heavenly bodies, partly
+demons, partly (and principally) dead men; most of the ancient gods are
+identified with persons from the Old Testament. Demon-worship is dealt
+with in ch. 6; it is proved among other things by the true predictions of
+the oracles. Individual Greek deities are identified with demons in ch. 7,
+in a context where oracles are dealt with. On older works of the same
+tendency, see below, note on p. 140; on Natalis Comes, _ibid._ A fuller
+treatment of Voss's theories is found in Gruppe's work, � 25.--Thomas
+Aquinas: _Summa theol._ P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. also Q. 122, art.
+2.--Dante: Sommo Giove for God, _Purg._ vi. 118; his devils: Charon, _Inf._
+iii. 82 (109 expressly designated as "dimonio"); Minos, _Inf._ v. 4;
+Geryon, _Inf._ xviii. (there are more of the same kind).--"Dei falsi e
+bugiardi": _Inf._ i. 72. (Plutus, who appears as a devil in _Inf._ vii.
+was probably taken by Dante for an antique god; but the name may also be a
+classicising translation of Mammon.)
+
+P. 136. Mediaeval epic poets: Nyrop, _Den oldfranske Heltedigtning_, p.
+255 and 260; Dernedde, _Ueber die den altfranz�s. Dichtern bekannten
+Stoffe aus dem Altertum_ (Diss. G�tting. 1887).--Confusion of ancient and
+Christian elements: Dernedde, p. 10; the gods are devils: Dernedde, pp.
+85, 88.--Euhemerism: Dernedde, p. 4.--I have tried to get a first-hand
+impression of the way the gods are treated by the old French epic poets,
+but the material is too large, and indexes suited to the purpose are
+wanting. The paganism of the original is taken over na�vely, _e.g._, by
+Veldeke, _Eneidt_, i. 45, 169.--On magic I have consulted Horst's
+_D�monomagie_ (Frankf. 1818); and his _Zauber-Bibliothek_ (Mainz,
+1821-26); Schindler, _Der Aberglaube des Mittelalters_ (Breslau, 1858);
+Maury, _La magie et l'astrologie dans l'antiquit� et au moyen �ge_ (Paris,
+1860). These authors all agree that mediaeval magic is dependent on
+antiquity, but that the pagan gods are superseded by devils (or the
+Devil). The connexion in substance with antiquity, on which Maury
+specially insists, is certain enough, but does not concern us here, where
+the question is about the theory. In the _Zauber-Bibl._ i. p. 137 (in the
+treatise _Pneumatologia vera et occulta_), the snake Python is put down
+among the demons, with the remark that Apollo was called after it.--Magic
+formulae with antique gods: Heim, _Incantamenta magica_ (in the _Neue
+Jahrbb. f. Philologie_, Suppl. xix. 1893, p. 557; I owe this reference to
+the kindness of my colleague, Prof. Groenbeck). Pradel, _Religionsgesch.
+Vers. u. __ Vorarb._ iii., has collected prayers and magic formulae from
+Italy and Greece; they do not contain names of antique gods.
+
+P. 137. Acosta: Joseph de Acosta, _Historia naturale e morale delle
+Indie_, Venice, 1596. I have used this Italian translation; the original
+work appeared in 1590.--Demons at work in oracles: bk. v. ch. 9; in magic:
+ch. 25.
+
+P. 138. Demon in Brazil: Voss, _Theol. Gent._ i. ch. 8.--Pagan worship in
+the Florentine and Roman Academies: Voigt, _Wiederbelebung d. klass.
+Altertums_, ii. p. 239 (2nd ed.); Hettner, _Ital. Studien_, p. 174.--On the
+conception of the antique gods in the earlier Middle Ages, see Gruppe, �
+4.--Thomas Aquinas: _Summa theol._ P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4.--Curious and
+typical of the mediaeval way of reasoning is the idea of seeking
+prototypes of the Christian history of salvation in pagan mythology. See
+v. Eicken, _Gesch. u. System d. mittelalt. Weltanschauung_ (Stuttg. 1887),
+p. 648, and (with more detail) F. Piper, _Mythologie u. Symbolik d.
+christl. Kunst_ (Weimar, 1847-51), i. p. 143; comp. also Gruppe, � 8 foll.
+Good instances are the myths in the _Speculum humanae salvationis_, chs. 3
+and 24.
+
+P. 139. On Hebraism in general, see Gruppe, � 19 and � 24 foll.; on Huet,
+� 28. Nevertheless, Huet operates with demonology in connexion with the
+oracles (_Dem. evang._ ii. 9, 34, 4).
+
+P. 140. On Natalis Comes, see Gruppe, � 19. In bk. i. ch. 7, Natalis Comes
+gives an account of the origin of antiquity's conceptions of the gods; it
+has quite a naturalistic turn. Nevertheless, we find in ch. 16 a remark
+which shows that he embraced demonology in its crudest form; compare also
+the theory set forth in ch. 10. His interpretations of myths are collected
+in bk. x.--On Bacon, see Gruppe, � 22. Typhoeus-myth: introduct. to _De
+sapientia veterum._--Alchemistic interpretations: Gedike, _Verm.
+Schriften_, p. 78; Gruppe, � 30. Of the works quoted by Gedike, I have
+consulted Faber's _Panchymicum_ (Frankf. 1651) and Toll's Fortuita
+(Amsterd. 1687). Faber has only some remarks on the matter in bk. i. ch.
+5; by Toll the alchemistic interpretation is carried through. Gedike
+quotes, moreover, a work by Suarez de Salazar, which must date from the
+sixteenth century; according to J�cher (iv. 1913) it only exists in MS.,
+and I do not know where Gedike got his reference.--Thomas: _Summa_, P. ii.
+2, Q. 172, arts. 5 and 6.
+
+P. 141. Demonology as explanation of the oracles: see van Dale, _De
+oraculis_, p. 430 (Amsterd. 1700); he quotes numerous treatises from the
+sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I have glanced at Moebius, _De
+oraculorum ethnicorum origine_, etc. (Leipzig, 1656).--Caelius Rhodiginus:
+_Lectionum antiq._ (Leyden, 1516), lib. ii. cap. 12; comp. Gruppe, �
+15.--Caelius Calcagninus: _Oraculorum liber_ (in his _Opera_, Basle, 1544,
+p. 640). The little dialogue is not very easy to understand; it is
+evidently a satire on contemporary credulity; but that Caelius completely
+rejected divination seems to be assumed also by G. I. Voss, _Theol. Gent._
+i. 6.--Machiavelli: _Discorsi_, i. 56.--Van Dale: _De oraculis gentilium_
+(1st ed. Amsterd. 1683); _De idololatria_ (Amsterd. 1696). Difficulties
+with the biblical accounts of demons: _De idol._, dedication.--Fontenelle:
+_Histoire des oracles_ (Paris, 1687). The little book has an amusing
+preface, in which Fontenelle with na�ve complacency (and with a sharp eye
+for van Dale's deficiencies of style) gives an account of his
+popularisation of the learned work. On Fontenelle and the answer by the
+Jesuit, Balthus, see for further details Banier, _La mythologie et les
+fables expliqu�es par l'histoire_ (Paris, 1738), bk. iii. ch. 1. Van
+Dale's book itself had called forth an answer by Moebius (included in the
+edition of 1690 of his work, _de orac. ethn. orig._).--On the influence
+exercised by van Dale and Fontenelle on the succeeding mythologists, see
+Gruppe, � 34.--Banier: see Gruppe, � 35.
+
+P. 143. Vico: _Scienza nuova_ (Milan, 1853), p. 168 (bk. ii. in the
+section, Della metafisica poetica); political allegories, _e.g._ p. 309
+(in the Canone mitologico). Comp. Gruppe, � 44.--Banier: in the work
+indicated above, bk. i. ch. 5.
+
+P. 144. On the mythological theories of the eighteenth century, comp.
+Gruppe, � 36 foll.; on Bryant, � 40; on Dupuis, � 41.--Polemic against
+Euhemerism from the standpoint of nature-symbolism: de la Barre, _M�moires
+pour servir � l'histoire de la religion en Gr�ce_, in _M�m. de l'Acad. des
+Inscr._ xxiv. (1749; the treatise had already been communicated in 1737
+and 1738); a posthumous continuation in _M�m._ xxix. (1770) gives an idea
+of de la Barre's own point of view, which was not a little in advance of
+his time. Comp. Gruppe, � 37.
+
+P. 145. A good survey of modern investigations in the field of the history
+of ancient religion is given by Sam Wide in the _Einleit. in die
+Altertumswissensch._ ii.; here also remarks on the mythology of older
+times. The later part of Gruppe's work contains a very full treatment of
+the subject.
+
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+Absolute definitions of the divine, 16, 19, 68, 69, 82, 88.
+
+Academics, 149.
+
+Academy, later, 108, 114.
+
+Acosta, 137, 139, 141.
+
+Aelian, 121.
+
+Aeneid (mediaeval), 136.
+
+Aeschines, 93.
+
+Aeschylus, 54, 55.
+
+Aetolians, 97, 98.
+
+Alchemistic explanation of Paganism, 140.
+
+Alcibiades, 60.
+
+Alexander the Great, 93, 112.
+
+Allegorical interpretation, 104, 113, 139, 140, 143, 144.
+
+American Paganism, 137, 139, 141.
+
+Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, 7, 13, 25-29, 30, 31, 40, 62, 63, 66, 124.
+
+Anaximenes, 30.
+
+Angelology, 129.
+
+Anthropomorphism, 14, 18, 19, 69.
+
+Antisthenes, 13, 74, 109.
+
+Apologists, 128, 130, 132, 139.
+
+Arcissewsky, 138.
+
+Aristides the Apologist, 129.
+
+Aristides Rhetor, 121.
+
+Aristodemus, 60, 62.
+
+Aristophanes, 30, 32, 33, 39, 55, 56-58, 65.
+  _Birds_, 32.
+  _Clouds_, 30, 55, 56-58
+  _Frogs_, 55.
+
+Aristotle, 13, 30, 32, 46, 83-87, 104, 113.
+  _Ethics_, 84.
+  _Metaphysics_, 85-86.
+  _Politics_, 84.
+
+Aristoxenus, 32, 33.
+
+Asclepius, 111, 121, 126.
+
+_Asebeia_, 6, 7, 8.
+
+Aspasia, 27.
+
+Atheism (and Atheist) defined, 1;
+  rare in antiquity, 2, 133;
+  of recent origin, 2, 143;
+  origin of the words, 5;
+  lists of atheists, 13;
+  punishable by death in Plato's _Laws_, 77;
+  sin of youth, 78.
+
+Athene, 74.
+
+Athens, its treatment of atheism, 6-8, 9, 12, 25, 39, 65 foll., 74, 75,
+            83, 86;
+  its view of sophistic, 58-59.
+
+_Atheos_ (_atheoi_), 2, 10, 13, 14, 19, 23, 29, 43, 75, 110.
+
+_Atheotes_, 2.
+
+Augustine, St., 129, 135.
+
+Augustus, 117;
+  religious reaction of, 100, 113, 117, 120.
+
+Aurelius, Marcus, 11, 121.
+
+Bacon, Francis (_De Sap. Vet._) 140.
+
+Banier, 142, 143.
+
+Bible, 130, 142.
+
+Bion, 13, 109.
+
+Brazil, 138.
+
+Bruno, Giordano, 151.
+
+Bryant, 144.
+
+Buttmann, 152.
+
+Caelius Calcagninus, 141.
+
+Caelius Rhodiginus, 141.
+
+Callicles, 48 foll., 63.
+
+Carlyle, 112.
+
+Carneades, 8, 108.
+
+Cassander of Macedonia, 111.
+
+Charon, 135.
+
+Christianity, 126, 128-32.
+
+Christians, their atheism, 9;
+  prosecutions of, 10;
+  demonology, 83.
+
+Cicero, 19, 105, 114-17, 147.
+  _Nature of the Gods_, 115.
+  _On the State_, 115.
+  _On the Laws_, 115.
+  _De consolatione_, 116.
+
+Cinesias, 60.
+
+Copernicus, 151.
+
+Critias, 13, 44-50.
+  _Sisyphus_, 44 f., 114.
+
+Criticism of popular religion, 16, 17, 19, 35 foll., 74, 78, 82, 84, 88,
+            90, 99, 104, 109, 110, 122, 124-26.
+
+Cuthites, 144.
+
+Cynics, 74, 109-10, 122, 124, 147.
+
+Cyrenaics, 75.
+
+_Daimonion_ of Socrates, 65, 66, 72-73.
+
+van Dale, 141-42.
+
+Dante, 135.
+
+Deisidaimon, 75.
+
+Demeter, 42, 43, 81.
+
+Demetrius of Phalerum, 75, 93.
+  _On Tyche_, 93.
+
+Democritus, 24, 42, 43, 44, 47, 52.
+
+Demonology, 81-83, 105, 113, 127-32, 134-42, 148, 149.
+
+Demosthenes, 92-93, 96.
+
+Devil, 132, 137, 139, 141, 144.
+
+Diagoras of Melos, 13, 31-34, 39, 50.
+  _Apopyrgizontes logoi_, 32, 33.
+
+Dicaearchus, 98.
+
+Diodorus Siculus, 112.
+
+Diogenes of Apollonia, 13, 29-30, 57.
+
+Diogenes the Cynic, 109.
+
+Dionysus, 42, 43.
+
+Diopeithes, 28.
+
+Dioscuri, 124.
+
+Dium, 98.
+
+Divination, 18, 20, 26, 27, 28, 40, 97, 114, 131, 135, 137, 140-42.
+  Comp. Oracle.
+
+Dodona, 98, 141.
+
+Dogmatics, 108.
+
+Domitian, 11.
+
+Dupuis, 144.
+
+Elements, divine, 23, 24, 30, 52 foll., 57, 81, 103, 127.
+
+Eleusinian Mysteries, 32, 33, 40, 60.
+
+Ennius, 99, 112.
+
+Epicureans, Epicurus, 13, 76, 80, 83, 105-7, 113, 147, 149.
+
+Euhemerus, Euhemerism, 13, 110-12, 113, 114, 117, 127, 130, 136, 137, 139,
+            140, 142, 143, 144.
+
+Euripides, 16, 17, 21, 45, 46, 48, 51-56, 62.
+  _Bellerophon_, 53.
+  _Melanippe_, 55, 56.
+
+Fallen angels, 128, 129, 130.
+
+Florentine Academy, 138.
+
+Foreign gods, 70, 89, 103.
+
+Fontenelle, 142.
+
+Geocentric view, 150.
+
+Geryon, 135.
+
+Giants, 18.
+
+Gorgias, 37.
+
+Hades, 81.
+
+Heavenly bodies, 2, 20, 22, 25, 43, 62, 66, 79, 80, 81, 84, 87, 104, 127,
+            128, 130, 137, 139, 144, 149, 151.
+
+Heavenly phenomena, 22.
+
+Hebraism, 139, 143, 144.
+
+Hecataeus of Abdera, 112.
+
+Heliocentric view, 151.
+
+Hellenistic philosophy, 94, 103-10, 119.
+
+Hephaestus, 42, 43.
+
+Heracles, 74, 111.
+
+Hercules, 136.
+
+Herder, 145.
+
+Hermae, 40, 60.
+
+Hermes, 124.
+
+Hermias, 83.
+
+Herodotus, 28, 29.
+
+Hesiod, 16, 18.
+
+Heyne, 152.
+
+Hippo of Rhegium, 13, 29-30.
+
+Holy War, 96.
+
+Homer, 16, 18, 43, 68, 106.
+
+Horace, 117.
+
+Huet, 139.
+
+Hylozoism, 23.
+
+Ideas, Platonic, 80.
+
+Idolatry attacked, 123.
+  See also Image Worship.
+
+Ignorance, Socratic, 68.
+
+Image Worship, 127, 128, 131-37.
+
+Jews, their atheism, 9, 126.
+
+Josephus, 128.
+
+Judaism, 126, 127-28, 129.
+
+Juno Regina, 136.
+
+Jupiter (in Dante), 135;
+  (in the Theba�s,) 136.
+
+Jupiter-priest, 100.
+
+Kepler, 151.
+
+Kronos, 111.
+
+Lampon, 26.
+
+Lobeck, 152.
+
+Lucian, 110, 123-26.
+  _Timon_, 124.
+  _Dialogues of the Gods_, 125.
+
+Lucretius, 106.
+
+Luna Jovis filia, 136.
+
+Macedonia, 93.
+
+Machiavelli, 141.
+
+Magic, 136-37.
+
+Mannhardt, 152.
+
+Mantinea, constitution of, 32.
+
+Marcus Aurelius, 11, 121.
+
+Mediaeval epic poets, 136.
+
+Megarians, 74, 107.
+
+Menippus of Gadara, 110.
+
+Mexico, 137.
+
+Middle Ages, 133, 135-39.
+
+Milton (_Paradise Lost_), 134, 135, 141.
+
+Minos, 135.
+
+Miracles, pagan, 131, 132.
+
+Modesty, religions, 55, 70, 73.
+
+Moschion, 46.
+
+Moses and his sister, 139.
+
+Monotheism, 9, 12, 23, 74, 80, 83, 127 foll., 139, 148, 151.
+
+M�ller, K. O., 152.
+
+Natalis Comes, 139 foll.
+
+Naturalism, Ionian, 21, 22-25, 30-31, 52, 57.
+
+Negroes, 18.
+
+Neo-Platonists, 83, 121.
+
+Neo-Pythagoreans, 83, 121.
+
+Nero, 11.
+
+Newton, 151.
+
+Nile, 42.
+
+_Nomos_ (and _Physis_), 35, 36, 38, 63, 74.
+
+Nymphs, 136.
+
+Oenomaus (_The Swindlers Unmasked_), 122-23, 126.
+
+Old Testament, 127, 129.
+
+Oracle of Ammon, 97; oracles of Boeotia, 97;
+  Delphic Oracle, 28, 60, 67, 68, 71, 72, 77, 93, 96, 97, 123, 141;
+  decay of oracles, 96-97;
+  oracles explained by priestly fraud, 123, 141-42.
+  Ovid, 117.
+
+Paganism of Antiquity, its character, 15.
+
+Panchaia, 111.
+
+Parmenides, 21.
+
+Pantheism, 20, 23, 103, 119, 122, 127.
+
+Paul, St., 128.
+
+Pericles, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 124.
+
+Peripatetics, 147, 149.
+
+Peru, 137.
+
+Pheidias, 27.
+
+Philip III. of Macedonia, 96.
+
+Philip V. of Macedonia, 97-98.
+
+Philo, 128.
+
+Phocians, 96.
+
+_Physis_ (and _Nomos_), 35, 36, 63, 74.
+
+Pindar, 16, 17, 52, 71.
+
+Plato, 13, 39, 48, 49, 50, 56, 59, 61-63, 65, 66, 72, 76-81, 82, 84, 113,
+            147.
+  _Apology_, 59, 65, 66, 68, 72, 78, 79.
+  _Euthyphron_, 67, 76.
+  _Gorgias_, 48 foll., 63, 77.
+  _Laws_, 61 foll., 77, 78, 79, 80.
+  _Republic_, 50, 56, 77, 78.
+  _Symposium_, 82.
+  _Timaeus_, 77, 79, 80.
+
+Platonism, 148.
+
+Plethon, 138.
+
+Pliny the Elder, 94, 95, 118, 147.
+
+Plutarch (_de def. orac._), 97.
+
+Polybius, 48, 90-91, 94, 99, 113-14, 147;
+  Stoicism in P., 114.
+
+Pomponazzi (_De Incantat._), 141.
+
+Poseidon, 42, 81.
+
+Poseidonius, 104.
+
+Prodicus of Ceos, 13, 42-44, 104.
+
+Protagoras of Abdera, 13, 39-42, 47.
+  _On the Gods_, 39 foll.
+  _Original State_, 47.
+
+Providence, 60, 61, 78, 105, 118, 122.
+
+Pythia, 93.
+
+Reaction, religious, of second century, 120-21, 125;
+  of Augustus, see Augustus.
+
+Reinterpretation of the conceptions of the gods, 2.
+  See also Allegorical interpretation.
+
+Religion a political invention, 47, 114.
+
+Religious thought, early, of Greece, 16-17, 52, 54, 55, 69-70, 71, 84, 88,
+            98, 107.
+
+Renaissance, 133, 138, 139 foll., 141.
+
+Rohde, 152.
+
+Roman Academy, 138.
+
+Roman religion, 90, 99-100, 101-2.
+
+Roman State-worship, decay of, 98-103.
+
+Romance of Troy, 136.
+
+Romances, 95-96.
+
+Rome's treatment of atheism, 8-11.
+
+Rousseau, 145.
+
+Scepticism, 107-8, 114, 147.
+
+Schoolmen, 135.
+
+Seneca, 110, 122.
+
+Sibylline books, 97.
+
+Sisyphus, 45, 48.
+
+Socrates, 7, 13, 40, 46, 49, 56, 58, 64-73, 84, 107, 147. See also
+            _Daimonion_ of S.
+
+Socratic philosophy, 64, 87, 149.
+
+Socratic Schools, 73, 87-88.
+
+Sol invictus, 136.
+
+Solon, 16.
+
+Sophistic, 35-38, 57, 64, 87, 104, 148, 149.
+
+Sophocles, 28, 54.
+
+Stilpo, 13, 74, 108.
+
+Stoics, 83, 103-5, 113, 118, 119, 121-22, 147, 148, 149.
+
+Strabo, 97.
+
+Strato, 87, 108.
+
+Suetonius, 121.
+
+Supernaturalism, 149-51.
+
+Superstition, 75, 90, 102, 123, 126.
+
+Tapuis, 138.
+
+Thales, 24.
+
+Theba�s (mediaeval), 136.
+
+Theodicy (Socratic), 67.
+
+Theodoras, 13, 75-76, 108, 109.
+  _On the Gods_, 75.
+
+Theophrastus, 13, 86.
+
+Thermon, 98.
+
+Thomas Aquinas, 131, 135, 138, 139, 140.
+
+Thracians, 18.
+
+Thrasymachus, 50, 62.
+
+Thucydides (the historian), 28-29, 92, 94.
+
+Thucydides (the statesman), 26.
+
+Tiberius, 118.
+
+Tisiphone, 136.
+
+Titans, 18.
+
+Tolerance in antiquity, 9, 11.
+
+Trajan, 11.
+
+Tullia, 116.
+
+Tyche, 91-96, 118.
+
+Typhoeus, 140.
+
+Uranos, 111.
+
+Usener, 152.
+
+Valerius Maximus, 118.
+
+Varro, 100, 110.
+
+Vico (_Scienza Nuova_), 143.
+
+Violation of sanctuaries, 40, 60, 97, 100.
+
+Virgil, 117.
+
+Voss, G. I., 135, 138, 141.
+
+Wisdom of Solomon, 128.
+
+Worship rejected, 9-13, 60, 74, 77, 84, 109, 123, 125.
+
+Xenocrates, 81-82, 105, 113, 129.
+
+Xenophanes of Colophon, 13, 17-21,
+52, 56.
+
+Xenophon, 58, 59, 62, 66, 67.
+  _Memorab._ 58, 60.
+  _Apology_, 58.
+
+Zeller, 76, 79.
+
+Zeno of Elea, 21.
+
+Zeus, 16, 22, 30, 43, 55, 57, 58, 81, 105, 111, 124.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FOOTNOTES
+
+
+    1 This was written before the appearance of Mr. Gruppe's work,
+      _Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte_.
+      Compare _infra_, p. 154.
+
+
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+
+
+
+CREDITS
+
+
+March 11, 2009
+
+            Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1
+            Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, J.P.W. Fraser, David
+            King, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+            <http://www.pgdp.net/>.
+
+
+
+A WORD FROM PROJECT GUTENBERG
+
+
+This file should be named 28312-8.txt or 28312-8.zip.
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/1/28312/
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one -- the old editions will be
+renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no one
+owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and
+you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission
+and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the
+General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
+distributing Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works to protect the Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered
+trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you
+receive specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of
+this eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
+for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
+performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given away
+-- you may do practically _anything_ with public domain eBooks.
+Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+
+
+_Please read this before you distribute or use this work._
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
+any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project Gutenberg"),
+you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.
+
+
+General Terms of Use & Redistributing Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works
+
+
+1.A.
+
+
+By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work,
+you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
+terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
+agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this
+agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee
+for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work
+and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may
+obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set
+forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+
+1.B.
+
+
+"Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or
+associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
+bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
+do with most Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works even without complying
+with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are
+a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works if you
+follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+
+1.C.
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" or
+PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
+work is in the public domain in the United States and you are located in
+the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
+distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on
+the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
+course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} mission of
+promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
+keeping the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} name associated with the work. You can
+easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
+same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License when you
+share it without charge with others.
+
+
+1.D.
+
+
+The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you
+can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant
+state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of
+your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
+downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
+derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work.
+The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of
+any work in any country outside the United States.
+
+
+1.E.
+
+
+Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+
+1.E.1.
+
+
+The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access
+to, the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License must appear prominently whenever
+any copy of a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work (any work on which the phrase
+"Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project Gutenberg"
+is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or
+distributed:
+
+
+    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+    almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
+    or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
+    included with this eBook or online at http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+1.E.2.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work is derived from the
+public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with
+permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and
+distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or
+charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you
+must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7
+or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.3.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work is posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
+with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
+by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License for all works posted with the permission of the
+copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+
+1.E.4.
+
+
+Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License
+terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
+other work associated with Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}.
+
+
+1.E.5.
+
+
+Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic
+work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying
+the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate
+access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License.
+
+
+1.E.6.
+
+
+You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed,
+marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word
+processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version posted
+on the official Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} web site (http://www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other form.
+Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License as
+specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+
+1.E.7.
+
+
+Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
+copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works unless you comply
+with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.8.
+
+
+You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or
+distributing Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works provided that
+
+    - You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+      the use of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works calculated using the method you
+      already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to
+      the owner of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} trademark, but he has agreed to
+      donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60
+      days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally
+      required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments
+      should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4,
+      "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+      Archive Foundation."
+
+      You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+      you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+      does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License.
+      You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the
+      works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and
+      all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works.
+
+      You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
+      any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+      electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
+      receipt of the work.
+
+      You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+      distribution of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works.
+
+
+1.E.9.
+
+
+If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic
+work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this
+agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael Hart, the owner of the
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
+Section 3 below.
+
+
+1.F.
+
+
+1.F.1.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to
+identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works in creating the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} collection. Despite these
+efforts, Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works, and the medium on which they
+may be stored, may contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to,
+incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright
+or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk
+or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot
+be read by your equipment.
+
+
+1.F.2.
+
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -- Except for the "Right of
+Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
+damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE
+NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
+OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
+FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
+WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
+PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY
+OF SUCH DAMAGE.
+
+
+1.F.3.
+
+
+LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND -- If you discover a defect in this
+electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund
+of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to
+the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a
+physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation.
+The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect
+to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the
+work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose
+to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
+lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
+refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+
+1.F.4.
+
+
+Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
+paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+
+1.F.5.
+
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the
+exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
+limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state
+applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make
+the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state
+law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement
+shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+
+1.F.6.
+
+
+INDEMNITY -- You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark
+owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and
+any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
+of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs
+and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from
+any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of
+this or any Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work, (b) alteration, modification, or
+additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work, and (c) any Defect
+you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.
+
+
+           Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+
+
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
+works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
+obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the
+efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks
+of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
+they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}'s goals and ensuring
+that the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} collection will remain freely available for
+generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} and future generations. To learn more about the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
+can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation web page at
+http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.
+
+
+   Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
+Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
+The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
+Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. Contributions to the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full
+extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr.
+S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North
+1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact information
+can be found at the Foundation's web site and official page at
+http://www.pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+
+
+    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+    Chief Executive and Director
+    gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.
+
+
+  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+                                Foundation
+
+
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread
+public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
+number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
+in machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment
+including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
+particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
+Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
+effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
+requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
+received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
+determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
+not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
+accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
+with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
+statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
+United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods
+and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
+checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please
+visit: http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.
+
+
+      General Information About Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works.
+
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
+anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
+all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. unless a copyright
+notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance
+with any particular paper edition.
+
+Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook's eBook
+number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII, compressed
+(zipped), HTML and others.
+
+Corrected _editions_ of our eBooks replace the old file and take over the
+old filename and etext number. The replaced older file is renamed.
+_Versions_ based on separate sources are treated as new eBooks receiving
+new filenames and etext numbers.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}, including how
+to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
+how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
+newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+***FINIS***
+
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/28312-8.zip b/28312-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7dbac85
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-8.zip
diff --git a/28312-h.zip b/28312-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..513a783
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-h.zip
diff --git a/28312-h/28312-h.html b/28312-h/28312-h.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d593147
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-h/28312-h.html
@@ -0,0 +1,8284 @@
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /><meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /><link rel="schema.DC" href="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" /><meta name="DC.Creator" content="&#10;        A. B. Drachmann&#10;      " /><meta name="DC.Title" content="Atheism in Pagan Antiquity" /><meta name="DC.Date" content="March 11, 2009" /><meta name="DC.Language" content="English" /><meta name="DC.Publisher" content="Project Gutenberg" /><meta name="DC.Identifier" content="http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/28312" /><meta name="DC.Rights" content="This text is in the public domain." /><title>The Project Gutenberg EBook of Atheism in Pagan Antiquity by 
+        A. B. Drachmann
+      </title><style type="text/css">/* 
+The Gnutenberg Press - default CSS2 stylesheet
+
+Any generated element will have a class "tei" and a class "tei-elem"
+where elem is the element name in TEI. 
+The order of statements is important !!! 
+*/
+
+.tei                            { margin: 0; padding: 0; 
+                                  font-size: 100%; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal }
+
+.block                          { display: block; }
+.inline                         { display: inline; }
+.floatleft                      { float: left;  margin: 1em 2em 1em 0; }
+.floatright                     { float: right; margin: 1em 0 1em 2em; }
+.shaded                         { margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; 
+                                  padding: 1em; background-color: #eee; }
+.boxed                          { margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; 
+                                  padding: 1em; border: 1px solid black; }
+
+body.tei		        { margin: 4ex 10%; text-align: justify }
+div.tei              	        { margin: 2em 0em }
+p.tei              	        { margin: 0em 0em 1em 0em; text-indent: 0em; }
+blockquote.tei	     	        { margin: 2em 4em }
+
+div.tei-lg                      { margin: 1em 0em; }
+div.tei-l		        { margin: 0em; text-align: left; }
+div.tei-tb                      { text-align: center; }
+div.tei-epigraph     	        { margin: 0em 0em 1em 10em; }
+div.tei-dateline	        { margin: 1ex 0em; text-align: right }
+div.tei-salute                  { margin: 1ex 0em; }
+div.tei-signed                  { margin: 1ex 0em; text-align: right }
+div.tei-byline                  { margin: 1ex 0em; }
+
+                                /* calculate from size of body = 80% */
+div.tei-marginnote		{ margin: 0em 0em 0em -12%; width: 11%; float: left; }
+
+div.tei-sp                      { margin: 1em 0em 1em  2em }
+div.tei-speaker	                { margin: 0em 0em 1em -2em;
+                        	  font-weight: bold; text-indent: 0em }
+div.tei-stage                   { margin: 1em 0em; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic }
+span.tei-stage	     	        { font-weight: normal; font-style: italic }
+
+div.tei-eg             	        { padding: 1em; 
+                     	          color: black; background-color: #eee }
+
+hr.doublepage	     	        { margin: 4em 0em; height: 5px; }
+hr.page            	        { margin: 4em 0em; height: 2px; }
+
+ul.tei-index                    { list-style-type: none }
+
+dl.tei                          { margin: 1em 0em }
+
+dt.tei-notelabel                { font-weight: normal; text-align: right; 
+                     	          float: left; width: 3em }
+dd.tei-notetext                 { margin: 0em 0em 1ex 4em }
+
+span.tei-pb                     { position: absolute; left: 1%; width: 8%;
+                                  font-style: normal; }
+
+span.code          	        { font-family: monospace; font-size: 110%; }
+
+ul.tei-castlist 		{ margin: 0em; list-style-type: none }
+li.tei-castitem		        { margin: 0em; }
+table.tei-castgroup     	{ margin: 0em; }
+ul.tei-castgroup		{ margin: 0em; list-style-type: none; 
+				  padding-right: 2em; border-right: solid black 2px; }
+caption.tei-castgroup-head	{ caption-side: right; width: 50%; text-align: left; 
+				  vertical-align: middle; padding-left: 2em; }
+*.tei-roledesc  		{ font-style: italic }
+*.tei-set			{ font-style: italic }
+
+table.rules                     { border-collapse: collapse; }
+table.rules caption,
+table.rules th,
+table.rules td                  { border: 1px solid black; }
+
+table.tei                       { border-collapse: collapse; }
+table.tei-list                  { width: 100% }
+
+th.tei-head-table	        { padding: 0.5ex 1em }
+
+th.tei-cell		        { padding: 0em 1em }
+td.tei-cell		        { padding: 0em 1em }
+
+td.tei-item		        { padding: 0; font-weight: normal; 
+                                  vertical-align: top; text-align: left; }
+th.tei-label,
+td.tei-label                    { width: 3em; padding: 0; font-weight: normal; 
+                                  vertical-align: top; text-align: right; }
+
+th.tei-label-gloss,
+td.tei-label-gloss              { text-align: left }
+
+td.tei-item-gloss,
+th.tei-headItem-gloss           { padding-left: 4em; }       
+
+img.tei-formula                 { vertical-align: middle; }
+
+</style></head><body class="tei">
+
+
+
+  
+
+  
+
+
+<div lang="en" class="tei tei-text" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em" xml:lang="en">
+  <div class="tei tei-front" style="margin-bottom: 6.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">
+    <div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+      <div id="pgheader" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em"><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em">The Project Gutenberg EBook of Atheism in Pagan Antiquity by 
+        A. B. Drachmann
+      </p></div><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost
+          and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it,
+          give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
+          Gutenberg License <a href="#pglicense" class="tei tei-ref">included with this
+          eBook</a> or online at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/license</a></p></div><pre class="pre tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em">Title: Atheism in Pagan Antiquity
+
+Author: 
+		A. B. Drachmann
+
+
+Release Date: March 11, 2009 [Ebook #28312]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+</pre></div>
+    </div>
+    <div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+      
+    </div>
+
+    <hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.73em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Atheism In Pagan Antiquity</span></p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">By</p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.44em"><span style="font-size: 144%">A. B. Drachmann</span></p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">Professor of Classical
+Philology in the University of Copenhagen</p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">Gyldendal</p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">11 Hanover Square, London, W.1</p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">Copenhagen</p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">Christiania</p>
+      <p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">1922</p>
+    </div>
+    <hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+      <h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Contents</span></h1>
+      <ul class="tei tei-index tei-index-toc"><li><a href="#toc1">Preface</a></li><li><a href="#toc3">Introduction</a></li><li><a href="#toc5">Chapter I</a></li><li><a href="#toc7">Chapter II</a></li><li><a href="#toc9">Chapter III</a></li><li><a href="#toc11">Chapter IV</a></li><li><a href="#toc13">Chapter V</a></li><li><a href="#toc15">Chapter VI</a></li><li><a href="#toc17">Chapter VII</a></li><li><a href="#toc19">Chapter VIII</a></li><li><a href="#toc21">Chapter IX</a></li><li><a href="#toc23">Notes</a></li><li><a href="#toc25">Index</a></li><li><a href="#toc27">Footnotes</a></li></ul>
+    </div>
+
+  </div>
+<div class="tei tei-body" style="margin-bottom: 6.00em; margin-top: 6.00em">
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="pagev">[pg v]</span><a name="Pgv" id="Pgv" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc1" id="toc1"></a>
+<a name="pdf2" id="pdf2"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Preface</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The present treatise originally appeared in Danish
+as a University publication (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Kjœbenhavns Universitets
+Festskrift</span></span>, November 1919). In submitting
+it to the English public, I wish to acknowledge my
+profound indebtedness to Mr. G. F. Hill of the British
+Museum, who not only suggested the English edition, but
+also with untiring kindness has subjected the translation,
+as originally made by Miss Ingeborg Andersen, M.A. of
+Copenhagen, to a painstaking and most valuable revision.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+For an account of the previous treatments of the subject,
+as well as of the method employed in my investigation,
+the reader is referred to the introductory remarks which
+precede the Notes.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A. B. DRACHMANN.<br />
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Charlottenlund</span></span>,<br />
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">July 1922</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page001">[pg 001]</span><a name="Pg001" id="Pg001" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc3" id="toc3"></a>
+<a name="pdf4" id="pdf4"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Introduction</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The present inquiry is the outcome of a
+request to write an article on <span class="tei tei-q">“Atheism”</span>
+for a projected dictionary of the religious
+history of classical antiquity. On going through
+the sources I found that the subject might well
+deserve a more comprehensive treatment than the
+scope of a dictionary would allow. It is such a
+treatment that I have attempted in the following
+pages.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A difficulty that occurred at the very beginning
+of the inquiry was how to define the notion of
+atheism. Nowadays the term is taken to designate
+the attitude which denies every idea of God. Even
+antiquity sometimes referred to atheism in this
+sense; but an inquiry dealing with the history of
+religion could not start from a definition of that
+kind. It would have to keep in view, not the
+philosophical notion of God, but the conceptions of
+the gods as they appear in the religion of antiquity.
+Hence I came to define atheism in Pagan antiquity
+as the point of view which <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">denies the existence of the
+ancient gods</span></em>. It is in this sense that the word will
+be used in the following inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Even though we disregard philosophical atheism,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page002">[pg 002]</span><a name="Pg002" id="Pg002" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the definition is somewhat narrow; for
+in antiquity mere denial of the existence of the
+gods of popular belief was not the only attitude
+which was designated as atheism. But it has the
+advantage of starting from the conception of the
+ancient gods that may be said to have finally prevailed.
+In the sense in which the word is used
+here we are nowadays all of us atheists. We do
+not believe that the gods whom the Greeks and the
+Romans worshipped and believed in exist or have
+ever existed; we hold them to be productions of
+the human imagination to which nothing real corresponds.
+This view has nowadays become so ingrained
+in us and appears so self-evident, that we
+find it difficult to imagine that it has not been
+prevalent through long ages; nay, it is perhaps a
+widely diffused assumption that even in antiquity
+educated and unbiased persons held the same
+view of the religion of their people as we do. In
+reality both assumptions are erroneous: our
+<span class="tei tei-q">“atheism”</span> in regard to ancient paganism is of
+recent date, and in antiquity itself downright denial
+of the existence of the gods was a comparatively
+rare phenomenon. The demonstration of this fact,
+rather than a consideration of the various intermediate
+positions taken up by the thinkers of
+antiquity in their desire to avoid a complete rupture
+with the traditional ideas of the gods, has been one
+of the chief purposes of this inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Though the definition of atheism set down here
+might seem to be clear and unequivocal, and though
+I have tried to adhere strictly to it, cases have
+unavoidably occurred that were difficult to classify.
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page003">[pg 003]</span><a name="Pg003" id="Pg003" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+The most embarrassing are those which involve a
+reinterpretation of the conception of the gods, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span>
+which, while acknowledging that there is some reality
+corresponding to the conception, yet define this
+reality as essentially different from it. Moreover,
+the acknowledgment of a certain group of gods (the
+celestial bodies, for instance) combined with the
+rejection of others, may create difficulties in defining
+the notion of atheism; in practice, however,
+this doctrine generally coincides with the former,
+by which the gods are explained away. On the
+whole it would hardly be just, in a field of inquiry
+like the present, to expect or require absolutely
+clearly defined boundary-lines; transition forms will
+always occur.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The persons of whom it is related that they
+denied the existence of the ancient gods are in
+themselves few, and they all belong to the highest
+level of culture; by far the greater part of them
+are simply professional philosophers. Hence the
+inquiry will almost exclusively have to deal with
+philosophers and philosophical schools and their
+doctrines; of religion as exhibited in the masses,
+as a social factor, it will only treat by exception.
+But in its purpose it is concerned with the history
+of religion, not with philosophy; therefore—in accordance
+with the definition of its object—it will
+deal as little as possible with the purely philosophical
+notions of God that have nothing to do with popular
+religion. What it aims at illustrating is a certain—if
+you like, the negative—aspect of ancient religion.
+But its result, if it can be sufficiently established,
+will not be without importance for the understanding
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page004">[pg 004]</span><a name="Pg004" id="Pg004" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the positive religious sense of antiquity.
+If you want to obtain some idea of the hold a
+certain religion had on its adherents, it is not amiss
+to know something about the extent to which it
+dominated even the strata of society most exposed
+to influences that went against it.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It might seem more natural, in dealing with
+atheism in antiquity, to adopt the definition current
+among the ancients themselves. That this method
+would prove futile the following investigation will,
+I hope, make sufficiently evident; antiquity succeeded
+as little as we moderns in connecting any
+clear and unequivocal idea with the words that
+signify <span class="tei tei-q">“denial of God.”</span> On the other hand, it is,
+of course, impossible to begin at all except from the
+traditions of antiquity about denial and deniers.
+Hence the course of the inquiry will be, first to make
+clear what antiquity understood by denial of the
+gods and what persons it designated as deniers, and
+then to examine in how far these persons were
+atheists in our sense of the word.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page005">[pg 005]</span><a name="Pg005" id="Pg005" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc5" id="toc5"></a>
+<a name="pdf6" id="pdf6"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter I</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Atheism and atheist are words formed from
+Greek roots and with Greek derivative
+endings. Nevertheless they are not
+Greek; their formation is not consonant with
+Greek usage. In Greek they said <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span> and
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheotes</span></span>; to these the English words ungodly
+and ungodliness correspond rather closely. In exactly
+the same way as ungodly, <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span> was used as an
+expression of severe censure and moral condemnation;
+this use is an old one, and the oldest that can
+be traced. Not till later do we find it employed
+to denote a certain philosophical creed; we even
+meet with philosophers bearing <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span> as a
+regular surname. We know very little of the men in
+question; but it can hardly be doubted that
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span>,
+as applied to them, implied not only a denial of the
+gods of popular belief, but a denial of gods in the
+widest sense of the word, or Atheism as it is nowadays
+understood.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In this case the word is more particularly a
+philosophical term. But it was used in a similar
+sense also in popular language, and corresponds
+then closely to the English <span class="tei tei-q">“denier of God,”</span> denoting
+a person who denies the gods of his people
+and State. From the popular point of view the
+interest, of course, centred in those only, not in the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page006">[pg 006]</span><a name="Pg006" id="Pg006" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+exponents of philosophical theology. Thus we
+find the word employed both of theoretical denial
+of the gods (atheism in our sense) and of practical
+denial of the gods, as in the case of the adherents
+of monotheism, Jews and Christians.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Atheism, in the theoretical as well as the practical
+sense of the word, was, according to the ancient
+conception of law, always a crime; but in practice
+it was treated in different ways, which varied both
+according to the period in question and according
+to the more or less dangerous nature of the threat
+it offered to established religion. It is only as far
+as Athens and Imperial Rome are concerned that
+we have any definite knowledge of the law and the
+judicial procedure on this point; a somewhat
+detailed account of the state of things in Athens
+and Rome cannot be dispensed with here.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the criminal law of Athens we meet with
+the term <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span>—literally: impiety or
+disrespect towards the gods. As an established formula
+of accusation of <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span> existed, legislation
+must have dealt with the subject; but how it was
+defined we do not know. The word itself conveys
+the idea that the law particularly had offences
+against public worship in view; and this is confirmed
+by the fact that a number of such offences—from
+the felling of sacred trees to the profanation of
+the Eleusinian Mysteries—were treated as
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span>.
+When, in the next place, towards the close of the
+fifth century <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>, free-thinking began to assume
+forms which seemed dangerous to the religion of
+the State, theoretical denial of the gods was also
+included under <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span>. From about the
+beginning
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page007">[pg 007]</span><a name="Pg007" id="Pg007" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the Peloponnesian War to the close of the
+fourth century <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>, there are on record a number
+of prosecutions of philosophers who were tried and
+condemned for denial of the gods. The indictment
+seems in most cases—the trial of Socrates is
+the only one of which we know details—to have
+been on the charge of <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span>, and the
+procedure proper thereto seems to have been employed,
+though there was no proof or assertion of the
+accused having offended against public worship;
+as to Socrates, we know the opposite to have been
+the case; he worshipped the gods like any other
+good citizen. This extension of the conception of
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span> to include theoretical denial of the
+gods no doubt had no foundation in law; this is amongst
+other things evident from the fact that it was necessary,
+in order to convict Anaxagoras, to pass a
+special public resolution in virtue of which his free-thinking
+theories became indictable. The law presumably
+dated from a time when theoretical denial of
+the gods lay beyond the horizon of legislation. Nevertheless,
+in the trial of Socrates it is simply taken
+for granted that denial of the gods is a capital crime,
+and that not only on the side of the prosecution, but
+also on the side of the defence: the trial only turns
+on a question of fact, the legal basis is taken for
+granted. So inveterate, then, at this time was the
+conception of the unlawful nature of the denial of
+the gods among the people of Athens.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the course of the fourth century <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span> several
+philosophers were accused of denial of the gods or
+blasphemy; but after the close of the century we
+hear no more of such trials. To be sure, our knowledge
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page008">[pg 008]</span><a name="Pg008" id="Pg008" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the succeeding centuries, when Athens was
+but a provincial town, is far less copious than of the
+days of its greatness; nevertheless, it is beyond
+doubt that the practice in regard to theoretical
+denial of the gods was changed. A philosopher
+like Carneades, for instance, might, in view of his
+sceptical standpoint, just as well have been convicted
+of <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span> as Protagoras, who was convicted
+because he had declared that he did not know
+whether the gods existed or not; and as to such a
+process against Carneades, tradition would not have
+remained silent. Instead, we learn that he was
+employed as the trusted representative of the State
+on most important diplomatic missions. It is
+evident that Athens had arrived at the point of view
+that the theoretical denial of the gods might be
+tolerated, whereas the law, of course, continued to
+protect public worship.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In Rome they did not possess, as in Athens, a
+general statute against religious offences; there
+were only special provisions, and they were, moreover,
+few and insufficient. This defect, however,
+was remedied by the vigorous police authority
+with which the Roman magistrates were invested.
+In Rome severe measures were often taken against
+movements which threatened the Roman official
+worship, but it was done at the discretion of the
+administration and not according to hard-and-fast
+rules; hence the practice was somewhat varying,
+and a certain arbitrariness inevitable.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+No example is known from Rome of action
+taken against theoretical denial of the gods corresponding
+to the trials of the philosophers in
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page009">[pg 009]</span><a name="Pg009" id="Pg009" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Athens. The main cause of this was, no doubt,
+that free-thinking in the fifth century <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span> invaded
+Hellas, and specially Athens, like a flood which threatened
+to overthrow everything; in Rome, on the
+other hand, Greek philosophy made its way in
+slowly and gradually, and this took place at a time
+when in the country of its origin it had long ago
+found a <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">modus vivendi</span></span> with popular religion and
+was acknowledged as harmless to the established
+worship. The more practical outlook of the
+Romans may perhaps also have had something to
+say in the matter: they were rather indifferent
+to theoretical speculations, whereas they were not
+to be trifled with when their national institutions
+were concerned.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In consequence of this point of view the Roman
+government first came to deal with denial of the
+gods as a breach of law when confronted with the
+two monotheistic religions which invaded the
+Empire from the East. That which distinguished
+Jews and Christians from Pagans was not that they
+denied the existence of the Pagan gods—the Christians,
+at any rate, did not do this as a rule—but
+that they denied that they were gods, and therefore
+refused to worship them. They were practical,
+not theoretical deniers. The tolerance which the
+Roman government showed towards all foreign
+creeds and the result of which in imperial times was,
+practically speaking, freedom of religion over the
+whole Empire, could not be extended to the Jews
+and the Christians; for it was in the last resort
+based on reciprocity, on the fact that worship of the
+Egyptian or Persian gods did not exclude worship
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page010">[pg 010]</span><a name="Pg010" id="Pg010" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the Roman ones. Every convert, on the other
+hand, won over to Judaism or Christianity was <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">eo
+ipso</span></span> an apostate from the Roman religion, an
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span> according to the ancient conception.
+Hence, as soon as such religions began to spread, they constituted
+a serious danger to the established religion,
+and the Roman government intervened. Judaism
+and Christianity were not treated quite alike; in
+this connexion details are of no interest, but
+certain principal features must be dwelt on as
+significant of the attitude of antiquity towards
+denial of the gods. To simplify matters I confine
+myself to Christianity, where things are less
+complicated.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The Christians were generally designated as
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheoi</span></span>, as deniers of the gods, and the
+objection against them was precisely their denial of the
+Pagan gods, not their religion as such. When the
+Christian, summoned before the Roman magistrates,
+agreed to sacrifice to the Pagan gods
+(among them, the Emperor) he was acquitted;
+he was not punished for previously having attended
+Christian services, and it seems that he
+was not even required to undertake not to do so in
+future. Only if he refused to sacrifice, was he
+punished. We cannot ask for a clearer proof that
+it is apostasy as such, denial of the gods, against
+which action is taken. It is in keeping with this
+that, at any rate under the earlier Empire, no attempt
+was made to seek out the Christians at their
+assemblies, to hinder their services or the like; it
+was considered sufficient to take steps when information
+was laid.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page011">[pg 011]</span><a name="Pg011" id="Pg011" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The punishments meted out were different, in
+that they were left solely to the discretion of
+the magistrates. But they were generally severe:
+forced labour in mines and capital punishment were
+quite common. No discrimination was made between
+Roman citizens and others belonging to the
+Empire, but all were treated alike; that the Roman
+citizen could not undergo capital punishment without
+appeal to the Emperor does not affect the principle.
+This procedure has really no expressly formulated
+basis in law; the Roman penal code did not, as
+mentioned above, take cognizance of denial of the
+gods. Nevertheless, the sentences on the Christians
+were considered by the Pagans of the earlier time
+as a matter of course, the justice of which was not
+contested, and the procedure of the government
+was in principle the same under humane and conscientious
+rulers like Trajan and Marcus Aurelius
+as under tyrants like Nero and Domitian. Here
+again it is evident how firmly rooted in the mind
+of antiquity was the conviction that denial of the
+gods was a capital offence.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+To resume what has here been set forth concerning
+the attitude of ancient society to atheism:
+it is, in the first place, evident that the frequently
+mentioned tolerance of polytheism was not extended
+to those who denied its gods; in fact, it was applied
+only to those who acknowledged them even if
+they worshipped others besides. But the assertion
+of this principle of intolerance varied greatly in
+practice according to whether it was a question of
+theoretical denial of the gods—atheism in our
+sense—or practical refusal to worship the Pagan
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page012">[pg 012]</span><a name="Pg012" id="Pg012" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+gods. Against atheism the community took action
+only during a comparatively short period, and, as
+far as we know, only in a single place. The latter
+limitation is probably explained not only by the
+defectiveness of tradition, but also by the fact that
+in Athens free-thinking made its appearance about
+the year 400 as a general phenomenon and therefore
+attracted the attention of the community. Apart
+from this case, the philosophical denier of God was
+left in peace all through antiquity, in the same way
+as the individual citizen was not interfered with, as
+a rule, when he, for one reason or another, refrained
+from taking part in the worship of the deities. On
+the other hand, as soon as practical refusal to believe
+in the gods, apostasy from the established
+religion, assumed dangerous proportions, ruthless
+severity was exercised against it.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The discrimination, however, made in the treatment
+of the theoretical and practical denial of the
+gods is certainly not due merely to consideration of
+the more or less isolated occurrence of the phenomenon;
+it is rooted at the same time in the very
+nature of ancient religion. The essence of ancient
+polytheism is the worship of the gods, that is, cultus;
+of a doctrine of divinity properly speaking, of
+theology, there were only slight rudiments, and
+there was no idea of any elaborate dogmatic system.
+Quite different attitudes were accordingly assumed
+towards the philosopher, who held his own opinions
+of the gods, but took part in the public worship like
+anybody else; and towards the monotheist, to whom
+the whole of the Pagan worship was an abomination,
+which one should abstain from at any cost, and
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page013">[pg 013]</span><a name="Pg013" id="Pg013" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+which one should prevail on others to give up for the
+sake of their own good in this life or the next.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the literature of antiquity we meet with
+sporadic statements to the effect that certain
+philosophers bore the epithet <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span> as a
+sort of surname; and in a few of the later authors of
+antiquity we even find lists of men—almost all of
+them philosophers—who denied the existence of
+the gods. Furthermore, we possess information
+about certain persons—these also, if Jews and
+Christians are excluded, are nearly all of them
+philosophers—having been accused of, and eventually
+convicted of, denial of the gods; some of
+these are not in our lists. Information of this kind
+will, as remarked above, be taken as the point of
+departure for an investigation of atheism in antiquity.
+For practical reasons, however, it is reasonable
+to include some philosophers whom antiquity
+did not designate as atheists, and who did not come
+into conflict with official religion, but of whom it
+has been maintained in later times that they did
+not believe in the existence of the gods of popular
+belief. Thus we arrive at the following list, in
+which those who were denoted as <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheoi</span></span>
+are italicised and those who were accused of impiety are marked
+with an asterisk:
+</p>
+
+<table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Xenophanes.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*Anaxagoras.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diogenes of Apollonia.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hippo of Rhegium.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Protagoras.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Prodicus.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Critias.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diagoras of Melos.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*Socrates.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Antisthenes.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Plato.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*Aristotle.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Theophrastus.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*Stilpo.</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Theodorus.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">*<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bion.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Epicurus.</span></span></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Euhemerus.</span></span></td></tr></tbody></table>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page014">[pg 014]</span><a name="Pg014" id="Pg014" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The persons are put down in chronological
+order. This order will in some measure be preserved
+in the following survey; but regard for the
+continuity of the tradition of the doctrine will
+entail certain deviations. It will, that is to say, be
+natural to divide the material into four groups:
+the pre-Socratic philosophy; the Sophists; Socrates
+and the Socratics; Hellenistic philosophy. Each
+of these groups has a philosophical character of its
+own, and it will be seen that this character also
+makes itself felt in the relation to the gods of the
+popular belief, even though we here meet with
+phenomena of more isolated occurrence. The four
+groups must be supplemented by a fifth, a survey
+of the conditions in Imperial Rome. Atheists of
+this period are not found in our lists; but a good
+deal of old Pagan free-thinking survives in the first
+centuries of our era, and also the epithet
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheoi</span></span> was
+bestowed generally on the Christians and sometimes
+on the Jews, and if only for this reason they cannot
+be altogether passed by in this survey.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page015">[pg 015]</span><a name="Pg015" id="Pg015" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc7" id="toc7"></a>
+<a name="pdf8" id="pdf8"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter II</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The paganism of antiquity is based on a
+primitive religion, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> it is originally in
+the main homogeneous with the religions
+nowadays met with in the so-called primitive
+peoples. It underwent, however, a long process of
+evolution parallel with and conditioned by the
+development of Greek and later Roman civilisation.
+This evolution carried ancient religion far away
+from its primitive starting-point; it produced
+numerous new formations, above all a huge system
+of anthropomorphic gods, each with a definite
+character and personality of his own. This development
+is the result of an interplay of numerous
+factors: changing social and economical conditions
+evoked the desire for new religious ideas; the
+influence of other peoples made itself felt; poetry
+and the fine arts contributed largely to the moulding
+of these ideas; conscious reflection, too, arose
+early and modified original simplicity. But what is
+characteristic of the whole process is the fact that
+it went on continuously without breaks or sudden
+bounds. Nowhere in ancient religion, as far as we
+can trace it, did a powerful religious personality
+strike in with a radical transformation, with a
+direct rejection of old ideas and dogmatic accentuation
+of new ones. The result of this quiet growth
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page016">[pg 016]</span><a name="Pg016" id="Pg016" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+was an exceedingly heterogeneous organism, in
+which remains of ancient, highly primitive customs
+and ideas were retained along with other elements of
+a far more advanced character.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Such a state of things need not in itself trouble
+the general consciousness; it is a well-established
+fact that in religion the most divergent elements
+are not incompatible. Nevertheless, among the
+Greeks, with their strong proclivity to reflective
+thought, criticism early arose against the traditional
+conceptions of the gods. The typical method of
+this criticism is that the higher conceptions of the
+gods are used against the lower. From the earliest
+times the Greek religious sense favoured absoluteness
+of definition where the gods are concerned;
+even in Homer they are not only eternal and happy,
+but also all-powerful and all-knowing. Corresponding
+expressions of a moral character are hardly
+to be found in Homer; but as early as Hesiod and
+Solon we find, at any rate, Zeus as the representative
+of heavenly justice. With such definitions a large
+number of customs of public worship and, above all,
+a number of stories about the gods, were in violent
+contradiction; thus we find even so old and so
+pious a poet as Pindar occasionally rejecting
+mythical stories which he thinks at variance with
+the sublime nature of the gods. This form of
+criticism of popular beliefs is continued through
+the whole of antiquity; it is found not only in
+philosophers and philosophically educated laymen,
+but appears spontaneously in everybody of a
+reflective mind; its best known representative in
+earlier times is Euripides. Typical of its popular
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page017">[pg 017]</span><a name="Pg017" id="Pg017" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+form is in the first place its casualness; it
+is directed against details which at the moment
+attract attention, while it leaves other things
+alone which in principle are quite as offensive,
+but either not very obviously so, or else not
+relevant to the matter in hand. Secondly, it is
+naïve: it takes the gods of the popular belief for
+granted essentially as they are; it does not raise
+the crucial question whether the popular belief is not
+quite justified in attributing to these higher beings
+all kinds of imperfection, and wrong in attributing
+perfection to them, and still less if such beings,
+whether they are defined as perfect or imperfect,
+exist at all. It follows that as a whole this form of
+criticism is outside the scope of our inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Still, there is one single personality in early
+Greek thought who seems to have proceeded still
+further on the lines of this naïve criticism, namely,
+Xenophanes of Colophon. He is generally included
+amongst the philosophers, and rightly in so far as
+he initiated a philosophical speculation which was
+of the highest importance in the development
+of Greek scientific thought. But in the present
+connexion it would, nevertheless, be misleading to
+place Xenophanes among those philosophers who
+came into conflict with the popular belief because
+their conception of Existence was based on science.
+The starting-point for his criticism of the popular
+belief is in fact not philosophical, but religious; he
+ranks with personalities like Pindar and Euripides—he
+was also a verse-writer himself, with considerable
+poetic gift—and is only distinguished from them
+by the greater consistency of his thought. Hence,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page018">[pg 018]</span><a name="Pg018" id="Pg018" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the correct course is to deal with him in this place
+as the only eminent thinker in antiquity about
+whom it is known that—starting from popular
+belief and religious motives—he reached a standpoint
+which at any rate with some truth may be
+designated as atheism.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Xenophanes lived in the latter part of the sixth
+and the beginning of the fifth centuries <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span> (according
+to his own statement he reached an age of more
+than ninety years). He was an itinerant singer who
+travelled about and recited poetry, presumably
+not merely his own but also that of others. In
+his own poems he severely attacked the manner
+in which Homer and Hesiod, the most famous poets
+of Greece, had represented the gods: they had
+attributed to them everything which in man's eyes
+is outrageous and reprehensible—theft, adultery and
+deception of one another. Their accounts of the
+fights of the gods against Titans and Giants he
+denounced as <span class="tei tei-q">“inventions of the ancients.”</span> But
+he did not stop at that: <span class="tei tei-q">“Men believe that the
+gods are born, are clothed and shaped and speak
+like themselves”</span>; <span class="tei tei-q">“if oxen and horses and lions
+could draw and paint, they would delineate their gods
+in their own image”</span>; <span class="tei tei-q">“the Negroes believe that
+their gods are flat-nosed and black, the Thracians
+that theirs have blue eyes and red hair.”</span> Thus he
+attacked directly the popular belief that the gods
+are anthropomorphic, and his arguments testify
+that he clearly realised that men create their gods
+in their own image. On another main point, too,
+he was in direct opposition to the religious ideas
+of his time: he rejected Divination, the belief that
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page019">[pg 019]</span><a name="Pg019" id="Pg019" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the gods imparted the secrets of the future to men—which
+was deemed a mainstay of the belief in the
+existence of the gods. As a positive counterpart
+to the anthropomorphic gods, Xenophanes set up
+a philosophical conception of God: God must be
+One, Eternal, Unchangeable and identical with
+himself in every way (all sight, all hearing and all
+mind). This deity, according to the explicit statements
+of our earliest sources, he identified with the
+universe.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+If we examine more closely the arguments put
+forth by Xenophanes in support of his remarkable
+conception of the deity, we realise that he everywhere
+starts from the definitions of the nature of
+the gods as given by popular religion; but, be it
+understood, solely from the absolute definitions.
+He takes the existence of the divine, with its absolute
+attributes, for granted; it is in fact the basis of all
+his speculation. His criticism of the popular ideas
+of the gods is therefore closely connected with his
+philosophical conception of God; the two are the
+positive and negative sides of the same thing.
+Altogether his connexion with what I call the naïve
+criticism of the popular religion is unmistakable.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is undoubtedly a remarkable fact that we
+meet at this early date with such a consistent
+representative of this criticism. If we take Xenophanes
+at his word we must describe him as an
+atheist, and atheism in the sixth century <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span> is a
+very curious phenomenon indeed. Neither was it
+acknowledged in antiquity; no one placed Xenophanes
+amongst <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheoi</span></span>; and Cicero even says
+somewhere (according to Greek authority) that
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page020">[pg 020]</span><a name="Pg020" id="Pg020" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Xenophanes was the only one of those who believed
+in gods who rejected divination. In more recent
+times, too, serious doubt has been expressed whether
+Xenophanes actually denied the existence of the
+gods. Reference has amongst other things been
+made to the fact that he speaks in several places
+about <span class="tei tei-q">“gods”</span> where he, according to his view,
+ought to say <span class="tei tei-q">“God”</span>; nay, he has even formulated
+his fundamental idea in the words: <span class="tei tei-q">“One God, the
+greatest amongst gods and men, neither in shape nor
+mind like unto any mortal.”</span> To be sure, Xenophanes
+is not always consistent in his language;
+but no weight whatever ought to be attached to
+this, least of all in the case of a man who exclusively
+expressed himself in verse. Another theory rests
+on the tradition that Xenophanes regarded his
+deity and the universe as identical, consequently
+was a pantheist. In that case, it is said, he may
+very well have considered, for instance, the heavenly
+bodies as deities. Sound as this argument is in
+general, it does not apply to this case. When a
+thinker arrives at pantheism, starting from a criticism
+of polytheism which is expressly based on the
+antithesis between the unity and plurality of the
+deity—then very valid proofs, indeed, are needed in
+order to justify the assumption that he after all
+believed in a plurality of gods; and such proofs are
+wanting in the case of Xenophanes.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Judging from the material in hand one can hardly
+arrive at any other conclusion than that the standpoint
+of Xenophanes comes under our definition of
+atheism. But we must not forget that only fragments
+of his writings have been preserved, and that
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page021">[pg 021]</span><a name="Pg021" id="Pg021" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the more extensive of them do not assist us
+greatly to the understanding of his religious standpoint.
+It is possible that we might have arrived
+at a different conclusion had we but possessed his
+chief philosophical work in its entirety, or at least
+larger portions of it. And I must candidly confess
+that if I were asked whether, in my heart of hearts,
+I believed that a Greek of the sixth century <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>
+denied point-blank the existence of his gods, my
+answer would be in the negative.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+That Xenophanes was not considered an atheist
+by the ancients may possibly be explained by the
+fact that they objected to fasten this designation on
+a man whose reasoning took the deity as a starting-point
+and whose sole aim was to define its nature.
+Perhaps they also had an inkling that he in reality
+stood on the ground of popular belief, even if he
+went beyond it. Still more curious is the fact that
+his religious view does not seem to have influenced
+the immediately succeeding philosophy at all. His
+successors, Parmenides and Zeno, developed his
+doctrine of unity, but in a pantheistic direction,
+and on a logical, not religious line of argument;
+about their attitude to popular belief we are told
+practically nothing. And Ionic speculation took a
+quite different direction. Not till a century later,
+in Euripides, do we observe a distinct influence of
+his criticism of popular belief; but at that time other
+currents of opinion had intervened which are not
+dependent on Xenophanes, but might direct attention
+to him.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page022">[pg 022]</span><a name="Pg022" id="Pg022" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc9" id="toc9"></a>
+<a name="pdf10" id="pdf10"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter III</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Ancient Greek naturalism is essentially
+calculated to collide with the popular
+belief. It seeks a natural explanation of
+the world, first and foremost of its origin, but in
+the next place of individual natural phenomena.
+As to the genesis of the world, speculations of a
+mythical kind had already developed on the basis
+of the popular belief. They were not, however,
+binding on anybody, and, above all, the idea of the
+gods having created the world was altogether alien
+to Greek religion. Thus, without offence to them
+it might be maintained that everything originated
+from a primary substance or from a mixture of
+several primary substances, as was generally maintained
+by the ancient naturalists. On the other
+hand, a conflict arose as soon as the heavenly
+phenomena, such as lightning and thunder, were
+ascribed to natural causes, or when the heavenly
+bodies were made out to be natural objects; for to
+the Greeks it was an established fact that Zeus sent
+lightning and thunder, and that the sun and the
+moon were gods. A refusal to believe in the latter
+was especially dangerous because they were <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">visible</span></em>
+gods, and as to the person who did not believe in
+their divinity the obvious conclusion would be that
+he believed still less in the invisible gods.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page023">[pg 023]</span><a name="Pg023" id="Pg023" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+That this inference was drawn will appear before
+long. But the epithet <span class="tei tei-q">“atheist”</span> was very rarely
+attached to the ancient naturalists; only a few of
+the later (and those the least important) were given
+the nickname <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span>. Altogether we hear very
+little of the relation of these philosophers to the
+popular belief, and this very silence is surely significant.
+No doubt, most of them bestowed but a
+scant attention on this aspect of the matter; they
+were engrossed in speculations which did not bring
+them into conflict with the popular belief, and even
+their scientific treatment of the <span class="tei tei-q">“divine”</span> natural
+phenomena did not make them doubt the <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">existence</span></em>
+of the gods. This is connected with a peculiarity in
+their conception of existence. Tradition tells us
+of several of them, and it applies presumably also
+to those of whom it is not recorded, that they
+designated their primary substance or substances
+as gods; sometimes they also applied this designation
+to the world or worlds originating in the primary
+substance. This view is deeply rooted in the Greek
+popular belief and harmonises with its fundamental
+view of existence. To these ancient thinkers the
+primary substance is at once a living and a superhuman
+power; and any living power which transcended
+that of man was divine to the Greeks.
+Hylozoism (the theory that matter is alive) consequently,
+when it allies itself with popular belief,
+leads straight to pantheism, whereas it excludes
+monotheism, which presupposes a distinction between
+god and matter. Now it is a matter of experience
+that, while monotheism is the hereditary
+foe of polytheism, polytheism and pantheism go
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page024">[pg 024]</span><a name="Pg024" id="Pg024" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+very well together. The universe being divine,
+there is no reason to doubt that beings of a higher
+order than man exist, nor any reason to refuse to
+bestow on them the predicate <span class="tei tei-q">“divine”</span>; and with
+this we find ourselves in principle on the standpoint
+of polytheistic popular belief. There is nothing
+surprising, then, in the tradition that Thales
+identified God with the mind of the universe and
+believed the universe to be animated, and filled with
+<span class="tei tei-q">“demons.”</span> The first statement is in this form
+probably influenced by later ideas and hardly a
+correct expression of the view of Thales; the rest
+bears the very stamp of genuineness, and similar
+ideas recur, more or less completely and variously
+refracted, in the succeeding philosophers.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+To follow these variations in detail is outside the
+scope of this investigation; but it may be of interest
+to see the form they take in one of the latest and
+most advanced representatives of Ionian naturalism.
+In Democritus's conception of the universe, personal
+gods would seem excluded <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">a priori</span></span>. He works
+with but three premises: the atoms, their movements,
+and empty space. From this everything is derived
+according to strict causality. Such phenomena
+also as thunder and lightning, comets and eclipses,
+which were generally ascribed to the gods, are
+according to his opinion due to natural causes,
+whereas people in the olden days were afraid of them
+because they believed they were due to the gods.
+Nevertheless, he seems, in the first place, to have
+designated Fire, which he at the same time recognised
+as a <span class="tei tei-q">“soul-substance,”</span> as divine, the cosmic
+fire being the soul of the world; and secondly,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page025">[pg 025]</span><a name="Pg025" id="Pg025" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+he thought that there was something real underlying
+the popular conception of the gods. He
+was led to this from a consideration of dreams,
+which he thought were images of real objects which
+entered into the sleeper through the pores of the
+body. Now, since gods might be seen in dreams,
+they must be real beings. He did actually say that
+the gods had more senses than the ordinary five.
+When he who of all the Greek philosophers went
+furthest in a purely mechanical conception of
+nature took up such an attitude to the religion of
+his people, one cannot expect the others, who were
+less advanced, to discard it.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Nevertheless, there is a certain probability
+that some of the later Ionian naturalists went
+further in their criticism of the gods of popular
+belief. One of them actually came into conflict
+with popular religion; it will be natural to begin
+with him.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian
+War, Anaxagoras of Clazomenae was accused
+of impiety and had to leave Athens, where he had
+taken up his abode. The object of the accusation
+was in reality political; the idea being to hit Pericles
+through his friend the naturalist. What Anaxagoras
+was charged with was that he had assumed
+that the heavenly bodies were natural objects; he
+had taught that the sun was a red-hot mass, and
+that the moon was earth and larger than Peloponnese.
+To base an accusation of impiety on this, it
+was necessary first to carry a public resolution,
+giving power to prosecute those who gave natural
+explanations of heavenly phenomena.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page026">[pg 026]</span><a name="Pg026" id="Pg026" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As to Anaxagoras's attitude to popular belief, we
+hear next to nothing apart from this. There is a
+story of a ram's head being found with one horn in
+the middle of the forehead; it was brought to
+Pericles, and the soothsayer Lampon explained the
+portent to the effect that, of the two men, Pericles
+and Thucydides, who contended for the leadership
+of Athens, one should prove victorious. Anaxagoras,
+on the other hand, had the ram's head cut
+open and showed that the brain did not fill up the
+cranium, but was egg-shaped and lay gathered
+together at the point where the horn grew out.
+He evidently thought that abortions also, which
+otherwise were generally considered as signs from
+the gods, were due to natural causes. Beyond this,
+nothing is said of any attack on the popular belief
+on the part of Anaxagoras, and in his philosophy
+nothing occurred which logically entailed a denial of
+the existence of the gods. Add to this that it was
+necessary to create a new judicial basis for the
+accusation against Anaxagoras, and it can be taken
+as certain that neither in his writings nor in any
+other way did he come forward in public as a denier
+of the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is somewhat different when we consider the
+purely personal point of view of Anaxagoras. The
+very fact that no expression of his opinion concerning
+the gods has been transmitted affords food for
+thought. Presumably there was none; but this
+very fact is notable when we bear in mind that
+the earlier naturalists show no such reticence. Add
+to this that, if there is any place and any time in
+which we might expect a complete emancipation
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page027">[pg 027]</span><a name="Pg027" id="Pg027" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+from popular belief, combined with a decided disinclination
+to give expression to it, it is Athens
+under Pericles. Men like Pericles and his friends
+represent a high level, perhaps the zenith, in Hellenic
+culture. That they were critical of many of the
+religious conceptions of their time we may take for
+granted; as to Pericles himself, this is actually
+stated as a fact, and the accusations of impiety
+directed against Aspasia and Pheidias prove that
+orthodox circles were very well aware of it.
+But the accusations prove, moreover, that Pericles
+and those who shared his views were so much in
+advance of their time that they could not afford
+to let their free-thinking attitude become a matter
+of public knowledge without endangering their
+political position certainly, and possibly even more
+than that. To be sure, considerations of that kind
+did not weigh with Anaxagoras; but he was—and
+that we know on good authority—a quiet scholar
+whose ideal of life was to devote himself to problems
+of natural science, and he can hardly have wished
+to be disturbed in this occupation by affairs in which
+he took no sort of interest. The question is then
+only how far men like Pericles and himself may have
+ventured in their criticism. Though all direct
+tradition is wanting, we have at any rate circumstantial
+evidence possessing a certain degree of
+probability.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+To begin with, the attempt to give a natural
+explanation of prodigies is not in itself without
+interest. The mantic art, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the ability to predict
+the future by signs from the gods or direct divine
+inspiration, was throughout antiquity considered
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page028">[pg 028]</span><a name="Pg028" id="Pg028" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+one of the surest proofs of the existence of the gods.
+Now, it by no means follows that a person who was
+not impressed by a deformed ram's head would
+deny, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span>, the ability of the Delphic Oracle to predict
+the future, especially not so when the person
+in question was a naturalist. But that there was
+at this time a general tendency to reject the art of
+divination is evident from the fact that Herodotus as
+well as Sophocles, both of them contemporaries of
+Pericles and Anaxagoras, expressly contend against
+attempts in that direction, and, be it remarked,
+as if the theory they attack was commonly held.
+Sophocles is in this connexion so far the more
+interesting of the two, as, on one hand, he criticises
+private divination but defends the Delphic oracle
+vigorously, while he, on the other hand, identifies
+denial of the oracle with denial of the gods. And
+he does this in such a way as to make it evident
+that he has a definite object in mind. That in
+this polemic he may have been aiming precisely
+at Anaxagoras is indicated by the fact that Diopeithes,
+who carried the resolution concerning the
+accusation of the philosopher, was a soothsayer by
+profession.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The strongest evidence as to the free-thinking of
+the Periclean age is, however, to be met with in
+the historical writing of Thucydides. In his work
+on the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides completely
+eliminated the supernatural element; not only did
+he throughout ignore omens and divinations, except
+in so far as they played a part as a psychological
+factor, but he also completely omitted any reference
+to the gods in his narrative. Such a procedure was
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page029">[pg 029]</span><a name="Pg029" id="Pg029" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+at this time unprecedented, and contrasts sharply
+with that of his immediate forerunner Herodotus,
+who constantly lays stress on the intervention of the
+gods. That is hardly conceivable except in a man
+who had altogether emancipated himself from the
+religious views of his time. Now, Thucydides is not
+only a fellow-countryman and younger contemporary
+of Pericles, but he also sees in Pericles his
+ideal not only as a politician but evidently also as a
+man. Hence, when everything is considered, it is
+not improbable that Pericles and his friends went
+to all lengths in their criticism of popular belief,
+although, of course, it remains impossible to state
+anything definite as to particular persons' individual
+views. Curiously enough, even in antiquity
+this connexion was observed; in a biography
+of Thucydides it is said that he was a disciple of
+Anaxagoras and <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">accordingly</span></em> was also considered
+something of an atheist.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+While Anaxagoras, his trial notwithstanding,
+is not generally designated an atheist, probably
+because there was nothing in his writings to which
+he might be pinned down, that fate befell two of his
+contemporaries, Hippo of Rhegium and Diogenes of
+Apollonia. Very little, however, is known of them.
+Hippo, who is said to have been a Pythagorean,
+taught that water and fire were the origin of everything;
+as to the reason why he earned the nickname
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span>, it is said that he taught that Water
+was the primal cause of all, as well as that he maintained
+that nothing existed but what could be perceived by
+the senses. There is also quoted a (fictitious) inscription,
+which he is said to have caused to be put on his
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page030">[pg 030]</span><a name="Pg030" id="Pg030" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+tomb, to the effect that Death has made him the
+equal of the immortal gods (in that he now exists
+no more than they). Otherwise we know nothing
+special of Hippo; Aristotle refers to him as shallow.
+As to Diogenes, we learn that he was influenced
+by Anaximenes and Anaxagoras; in agreement with
+the former he regarded Air as the primary substance,
+and like Anaxagoras he attributed reason to his
+primary substance. Of his doctrine we have extensive
+accounts, and also some not inconsiderable
+fragments of his treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">On Nature</span></span>; but
+they are almost all of them of purely scientific,
+mostly of an anatomical and physiological character.
+In especial, as to his relation to popular belief, it is
+recorded that he identified Zeus with the air. Indirectly,
+however, we are able to demonstrate, by
+the aid of an almost contemporary witness, that
+there must have been some foundation for the
+accusation of <span class="tei tei-q">“atheism.”</span> For in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Clouds</span></span>, where
+Aristophanes wants to represent Socrates as an
+atheist, he puts in his mouth scraps of the naturalism
+of Diogenes; that he would hardly have done, if
+Diogenes had not already been decried as an
+atheist.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is of course impossible to base any statement
+of the relation of the two philosophers to popular
+belief on such a foundation. But it is, nevertheless,
+worth noticing that while not a single one of the
+earlier naturalists acquired the designation atheist,
+it was applied to two of the latest and otherwise
+little-known representatives of the school. Take
+this in combination with what has been said above
+of Anaxagoras, and we get at any rate a suspicion
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page031">[pg 031]</span><a name="Pg031" id="Pg031" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+that Greek naturalism gradually led its adherents
+beyond the naïve stage where many individual
+phenomena were indeed ascribed to natural causes,
+even if they had formerly been regarded as caused
+by divine intervention, but where the foundations
+of the popular belief were left untouched. Once
+this path has been entered on, a point will be
+arrived at where the final conclusion is drawn and
+the existence of the supernatural completely denied.
+It is probable that this happened towards the close
+of the naturalistic period. If so early a philosopher
+as Anaxagoras took this point of view, his personal
+contribution as a member of the Periclean circle
+may have been more significant in the religious field
+than one would conjecture from the character of his
+work.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Before we proceed to mention the sophists, there
+is one person on our list who must be examined
+though the result will be negative, namely, Diagoras
+of Melos. As he appears in our records, he falls
+outside the classification adopted here; but as he
+must have lived, at any rate, about the middle
+of the fifth century (he is said to have <span class="tei tei-q">“flourished”</span>
+in 464) he may most fitly be placed on the
+boundary line between the Ionian philosophy and
+Sophistic.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+For later antiquity Diagoras is the typical
+atheist; he heads our lists of atheists, and round
+his person a whole series of myths have been formed.
+He is said to have been a poet and a pious man like
+others; but then a colleague once stole an ode from
+him, escaped by taking an oath that he was innocent,
+and afterwards made a hit with the stolen work.
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page032">[pg 032]</span><a name="Pg032" id="Pg032" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+So Diagoras lost his faith in the gods and wrote a
+treatise under the title of
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">apopyrgizontes logoi</span></span>
+(literally, destructive considerations) in which he
+attacked the belief in the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+This looks very plausible, and is interesting in
+so far as it, if correct, affords an instance of atheism
+arising in a layman from actual experience, not in a
+philosopher from speculation. If we ask, however,
+what is known historically about Diagoras, we are
+told a different tale. There existed in Athens,
+engraved on a bronze tablet and set up on the
+Acropolis, a decree of the people offering a reward
+of one talent to him who should kill Diagoras of
+Melos, and of two talents to him who should bring
+him alive to Athens. The reason given was that he
+had scoffed at the Eleusinian Mysteries and divulged
+what took place at them. The date of this decree
+is given by a historian as 415 <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>; that this is
+correct is seen from a passage in Aristophanes's contemporary
+drama, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Birds</span></span>. Furthermore, one of
+the disciples of Aristotle, the literary historian
+Aristoxenus, states that no trace of impiety was
+to be found in the works of the dithyrambic poet
+Diagoras, and that, in fact, they contained definite
+opinions to the contrary. A remark to the effect
+that Diagoras was instrumental in drawing up the
+laws of Mantinea is probably due to the same
+source. The context shows that the reference is
+to the earlier constitution of Mantinea, which
+was a mixture of aristocracy and democracy, and
+is praised for its excellence. It is inconceivable
+that, in a Peloponnesian city during the course
+of, nay, presumably even before the middle of
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page033">[pg 033]</span><a name="Pg033" id="Pg033" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the fifth century, a notorious atheist should
+have been invited to advise on the revision of its
+constitution. It is more probable that Aristoxenus
+adduced this fact as an additional disproof of
+Diagoras's atheism, in which he evidently did not
+believe.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The above information explains the origin of
+the legend. Two fixed points were in existence:
+the pious poet of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">c.</span></span> 460 and the atheist who was
+outlawed in 415; a bridge was constructed between
+them by the story of the stolen ode. This disposes
+of the whole supposition of atheism growing out of
+a basis of experience. But, furthermore, it must be
+admitted that it is doubtful whether the poet and
+the atheist are one and the same person. The
+interval of time between them is itself suspicious,
+for the poet, according to the ancient system of
+calculation, must have been about forty years old
+in 464, consequently between eighty and ninety in
+415. (There is general agreement that the treatise,
+the title of which has been quoted, must have been
+a later forgery.) If, in spite of all, I dare not absolutely
+deny the identity of the two Diagorases of
+tradition, the reason is that Aristophanes, where he
+mentions the decree concerning Diagoras, seems to
+suggest that his attack on the Mysteries was an
+old story which was raked up again in 415. But
+for our purpose, at any rate, nothing remains of the
+copious mass of legend but the fact that one
+Diagoras of Melos in 415 was outlawed in Athens on
+the ground of his attack on the Mysteries. Such an
+attack may have been the outcome of atheism;
+there was no lack of impiety in Athens at the end
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page034">[pg 034]</span><a name="Pg034" id="Pg034" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the fifth century. But whether this was the case
+or not we cannot possibly tell; and to throw light
+on free-thinking tendencies in Athens at this time,
+we have other and richer sources than the historical
+notice of Diagoras.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page035">[pg 035]</span><a name="Pg035" id="Pg035" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc11" id="toc11"></a>
+<a name="pdf12" id="pdf12"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter IV</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+With the movement in Greek thought which
+is generally known as sophistic, a new
+view of popular belief appears. The
+criticism of the sophists was directed against the
+entire tradition on which Greek society was based,
+and principally against the moral conceptions which
+hitherto had been unquestioned: good and evil,
+right and wrong. The criticism was essentially
+negative; that which hitherto had been imagined
+as absolute was demonstrated to be relative, and
+the relative was identified with the invalid. Thus
+they could not help running up against the popular
+ideas of the gods, and treating them in the same
+way. A leading part was here played by the
+sophistic distinction between <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">nomos</span></span> and
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">physis</span></span>,
+Law and Nature, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that which is based on human
+convention, and that which is founded on the nature
+of things. The sophists could not help seeing that
+the whole public worship and the ideas associated
+with it belonged to the former—to the domain of
+<span class="tei tei-q">“the law.”</span> Not only did the worship and the
+conceptions of the gods vary from place to place in
+the hundreds of small independent communities into
+which Hellas was divided—a fact which the sophists
+had special opportunity of observing when travelling
+from town to town to teach; but it was even
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page036">[pg 036]</span><a name="Pg036" id="Pg036" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+officially admitted that the whole ritual—which,
+popularly speaking, was almost identical with
+religion—was based on convention. If a Greek
+was asked why a god was to be worshipped in such
+and such a way, generally the only answer was:
+because it is the law of the State (or the convention;
+the word <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">nomos</span></span> expresses both things). Hence it
+followed in principle that religion came under the
+domain of <span class="tei tei-q">“the law,”</span> being consequently the work
+of man; and hence again the obvious conclusion,
+according to sophistic reasoning, was that it was
+nothing but human imagination, and that there was
+no <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">physis</span></span>, no reality, behind it at all. In
+the case of the naturalists, it was the positive foundation of their
+system, their conception of nature as a whole, that
+led them to criticise the popular belief. Hence their
+criticism was in the main only directed against those
+particular ideas in the popular belief which were at
+variance with the results of their investigations. To
+be sure, the sophists were not above making use of
+the results of natural science in their criticism of the
+popular belief; it was their general aim to impart
+the highest education of their time, and of a liberal
+education natural science formed a rather important
+part. But their starting-point was quite different
+from that of the naturalists. Their whole interest
+was concentrated on man as a member of the
+community, and it was from consideration of this
+relation that they were brought into collision with
+the established religion. Hence their attack was
+far more dangerous than that of the naturalists;
+no longer was it directed against details, it laid bare
+the psychological basis itself of popular belief and
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page037">[pg 037]</span><a name="Pg037" id="Pg037" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+clearly revealed its unstable character. Their criticism
+was fundamental and central, not casual and
+circumstantial.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+From a purely practical point of view also, the
+criticism of the sophists was far more dangerous
+than that of the old philosophers. They were not
+theorists themselves, but practitioners; their
+business was to impart the higher education to the
+more mature youth. It was therefore part of their
+profession to disseminate their views not by means
+of learned professional writings, but by the persuasive
+eloquence of oral discourse. And in their
+criticism of the existing state of things they did not
+start with special results which only science could
+prove, and the correctness of which the layman
+need not recognise; they operated with facts and
+principles known and acknowledged by everybody.
+It is not to be wondered at that such efforts evoked
+a vigorous reaction on the part of established society,
+the more so as in any case the result of sophistic
+criticism—though not consciously its object—was
+to liquefy the moral principles on which the social
+order was based.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Such, in principle, appeared to be the state of
+things. In practice, here as elsewhere, the devil
+proved not so black as he was painted. First, not
+all the sophists—hardly even the majority of them—drew
+the logical conclusions from their views in
+respect of either morals or religion. They were
+teachers of rhetoric, and as such they taught, for
+instance, all the tricks by which a bad cause might be
+defended; that was part of the trade. But it must
+be supposed that Gorgias, the most distinguished of
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page038">[pg 038]</span><a name="Pg038" id="Pg038" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+them, expressly insisted that rhetoric, just like any
+other art the aim of which was to defeat an opponent,
+should only be used for good ends. Similarly many of
+them may have stopped short in their criticism of
+popular belief at some arbitrary point, so that it was
+possible for them to respect at any rate something
+of the established religion, and so, of course, first
+and foremost the very belief in the existence of
+the gods. That they did not as a rule interfere
+with public worship, we may be sure; that was
+based firmly on <span class="tei tei-q">“the Law.”</span> But, in addition, even
+sophists who personally took an attitude radically
+contradictory to popular belief had the most
+important reasons for being careful in advancing
+such a view. They had to live by being the teachers
+of youth; they had no fixed appointment, they
+travelled about as lecturers and enlisted disciples
+by means of their lectures. For such men it would
+have been a very serious thing to attack the established
+order in its tenderest place, religion, and
+above all they had to beware of coming into conflict
+with the penal laws. This risk they did not incur
+while confining themselves to theoretical discussions
+about right and wrong, nor by the practical application
+of them in their teaching of rhetoric; but they
+might very easily incur it if attacking religion.
+This being the case, it is not to be wondered at
+that we do not find many direct statements of
+undoubtedly atheistical character handed down from
+the more eminent sophists, and that trials for
+impiety are rare in their case. But, nevertheless,
+a few such cases are met with, and from these as
+our starting-point we will now proceed.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page039">[pg 039]</span><a name="Pg039" id="Pg039" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As to Protagoras of Abdera, one of the earliest
+and most famous of all the sophists, it is stated that
+he began a pamphlet treating of the gods with the
+words: <span class="tei tei-q">“Concerning the gods I can say nothing,
+neither that they exist nor that they do not exist,
+nor of what form they are; because there are many
+things which prevent one from knowing that,
+namely, both the uncertainty of the matter and the
+shortness of man's life.”</span> On this account, it is said,
+he was charged with impiety at Athens and was
+outlawed, and his works were publicly burned. The
+date of this trial is not known for certain; but it is
+reasonably supposed to have coincided with that of
+Diagoras, namely, in 415. At any rate it must have
+taken place after 423-421, as we know that Protagoras
+was at that time staying in Athens. As he
+must have been born about 485, the charge overtook
+him when old and famous; according to one
+account, his work on the gods seems to belong to his
+earlier writings.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+To doubt the correctness of this tradition would
+require stronger reasons than we possess, although
+it is rather strange that the condemnation of
+Protagoras is mentioned neither in our historical
+sources nor in Aristophanes, and that Plato, who
+mentions Protagoras rather frequently as dead,
+never alludes to it. At any rate, the quotation
+from the work on the gods is certainly authentic,
+for Plato himself referred to it. Hence it is
+certain that Protagoras directly stated the problem
+as to the existence of the gods and regarded it as an
+open question. But beyond that nothing much
+can be deduced from the short quotation; and as
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page040">[pg 040]</span><a name="Pg040" id="Pg040" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+to the rest of the book on the gods we know nothing.
+The meagre reasons for scepticism adduced probably
+do not imply any more than that the difficulties
+are objective as well as subjective. If, in
+the latter respect, the brevity of life is specially mentioned
+it may be supposed that Protagoras had in
+mind a definite proof of the existence of the
+gods which was rendered difficult by the fact
+that life is so brief; prediction of the future
+may be guessed at, but nothing certain can be
+stated.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Protagoras is the only one of the sophists of
+whom tradition says that he was the object of persecution
+owing to his religious views. The trial of
+Socrates, however, really belongs to the same category
+when looked at from the accusers' point of
+view; Socrates was accused as a sophist. But as
+his own attitude towards popular religion differed
+essentially from that of the sophists, we cannot consider
+him in this connexion. Protagoras's trial
+itself is partly determined by special circumstances.
+In all probability it took place at a moment when
+a violent religious reaction had set in at Athens
+owing to some grave offences against the public
+worship and sanctuaries of the State (violation of
+the Mysteries and mutilation of the Hermae). The
+work on the gods had presumably been in existence
+and known long before this without causing scandal
+to anybody. But, nevertheless, the trial, like those
+of Anaxagoras and Socrates, plainly bears witness
+to the animosity with which the modern free-thought
+was regarded in Athens. This animosity
+did not easily manifest itself publicly without
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page041">[pg 041]</span><a name="Pg041" id="Pg041" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+special reasons; but it was always there and might
+always be used in case of provocation.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As to Protagoras's personal attitude to the
+question of the existence of the gods, much may be
+guessed and much has been guessed; but nothing
+can be stated for certain. However, judging from
+the man's profession and his general habit of life
+as it appears in tradition, we may take for granted
+that he did not give offence in his outward behaviour
+by taking a hostile attitude to public worship or
+attacking its foundations; had that been so, he would
+not for forty years have been the most distinguished
+teacher of Hellas, but would simply not have been
+tolerated. An eminent modern scholar has therefore
+advanced the conjecture that Protagoras
+distinguished between belief and knowledge, and
+that his work on the gods only aimed at showing
+that the existence of the gods could not be scientifically
+demonstrated.  Now such a distinction
+probably, if conceived as a conscious principle,
+is alien to ancient thought, at any rate at the
+time of Protagoras; and yet it may contain a
+grain of truth. When it is borne in mind that the
+incriminated passage represents the very exordium
+of the work of Protagoras, the impression cannot be
+avoided that he himself did not intend his work to
+disturb the established religion, but that he quite
+naïvely took up the existence of the gods as a subject,
+as good as any other, for dialectic discussion.
+All that he was concerned with was theory and
+theorising; religion was practice and ritual; and
+he had no more intention of interfering with that
+than the other earlier sophists of assailing the legal
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page042">[pg 042]</span><a name="Pg042" id="Pg042" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+system of the community in their speculation as to
+relativity of right and wrong.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+All this, however, does not alter the fact that the
+work of Protagoras posed the very question of
+the existence of the gods as a problem which might
+possibly be solved in the negative. He seems to
+have been the first to do this. That it could be
+done is significant of the age to which Protagoras
+belongs; that it was done was undoubtedly of
+great importance for the development of thought in
+wide circles.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Prodicus of Ceos, also one of the most famous
+sophists, advanced the idea that the conceptions
+of the gods were originally associated with
+those things which were of use to humanity: sun
+and moon, rivers and springs, the products of the
+earth and the elements; therefore bread was
+identified with Demeter, wine with Dionysus, water
+with Poseidon, fire with Hephaestus. As a special
+instance he mentioned the worship of the Nile by
+the Egyptians.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In Democritus, who was a slightly elder contemporary
+of Prodicus, we have already met with
+investigation into the origin of the conceptions of
+the gods. There is a close parallel between his
+handling of the subject and that of Prodicus, but
+at the same time a characteristic difference. Democritus
+was a naturalist, hence he took as his starting-point
+the natural phenomena commonly ascribed to
+the influence of the gods. Prodicus, on the other
+hand, started from the intellectual life of man. We
+learn that he had commenced to study synonyms,
+and that he was interested in the interpretation of
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page043">[pg 043]</span><a name="Pg043" id="Pg043" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the poets. Now he found that Homer occasionally
+simply substituted the name of Hephaestus for fire,
+and that other poets went even further on the same
+lines. Furthermore, while it was common knowledge
+to every Greek that certain natural objects,
+such as the heavenly bodies and the rivers, were
+regarded as divine and had names in common with
+their gods, this to Prodicus would be a specially
+attractive subject for speculation. It is plainly
+shown by his instances that it is linguistic observations
+of this kind which were the starting-point of
+his theory concerning the origin of the conceptions
+of the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the accounts of Prodicus it is taken for granted
+that he denied the existence of the gods, and in
+later times he is classed as <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span>.
+Nevertheless we have every reason to doubt the correctness of
+this opinion. The case of Democritus already shows
+that a philosopher might very well derive the conceptions
+of the gods from an incorrect interpretation
+of certain phenomena without throwing doubt on
+their existence. As far as Prodicus is concerned it
+may be assumed that he did not believe that Bread,
+Wine or Fire were gods, any more than Democritus
+imagined that Zeus sent thunder and lightning;
+nor, presumably, did he ever believe that rivers
+were gods. But he need not therefore have denied
+the existence of Demeter, Dionysus and Hephaestus,
+much less the divinity of the sun and the moon.
+And if we consider his theory more closely it points
+in quite a different direction from that of atheism.
+To Prodicus it was evidently the conception of
+utility that mattered: if these objects came to be
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page044">[pg 044]</span><a name="Pg044" id="Pg044" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+regarded as gods it was because they <span class="tei tei-q">“benefited
+humanity.”</span> This too is a genuinely sophistic
+view, characteristically deviating from that of the
+naturalist Democritus in its limitation to the
+human and social aspect of the question. Such a
+point of view, if confronted with the question of the
+existence of the gods, may very well, according to
+sophistic methods of reasoning, lead to the conclusion
+that primitive man was right in so far as
+the useful, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that which <span class="tei tei-q">“benefits humanity,”</span>
+really is an essential feature of the gods, and wrong
+only in so far as he identified the individual useful
+objects with the gods. Whether Prodicus adopted
+this point of view, we cannot possibly tell; but
+the general body of tradition concerning the man,
+which does not in any way suggest religious radicalism,
+indicates as most probable that he did not
+connect the question of the origin of the conceptions
+of the gods with that of the existence of the gods,
+which to him was taken for granted, and that it was
+only later philosophers who, in their researches into
+the ideas of earlier philosophers about the gods,
+inferred his atheism from his speculations on the
+history of religion.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Critias, the well-known reactionary politician,
+the chief of the Thirty Tyrants, is placed amongst
+the atheists on the strength of a passage in a satyric
+drama, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sisyphus</span></span>. The drama is lost, but our
+authority quotes the objectionable passage <span class="tei tei-foreign"><span style="font-style: italic">in
+extenso</span></span>; it is a piece of no less than forty lines.
+The passage argues that human life in its origins
+knew no social order, that might ruled supreme.
+Then men conceived the idea of making laws in
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page045">[pg 045]</span><a name="Pg045" id="Pg045" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+order that right might rule instead of might. The
+result of this was, it is true, that wrong was not done
+openly; but it was done secretly instead. Then a
+wise man bethought himself of making men believe
+that there existed gods who saw and heard everything
+which men did, nay even knew their innermost
+thoughts. And, in order that men might stand
+in proper awe of the gods, he said that they lived in
+the sky, out of which comes that which makes men
+afraid, such as lightning and thunder, but also that
+which benefits them, sunshine and rain, and the
+stars, those fair ornaments by whose course men
+measure time. Thus he succeeded in bringing lawlessness
+to an end. It is expressly stated that it
+was all a cunning fraud: <span class="tei tei-q">“by such talk he made
+his teaching most acceptable, veiling truth with
+false words.”</span>
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In antiquity it was disputed whether the drama
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sisyphus</span></span> was by Critias or Euripides; nowadays all
+agree in attributing it to Critias; nor does the style
+of the long fragment resemble that of Euripides.
+The question is, however, of no consequence in this
+connexion: whether the drama is by Critias or
+Euripides it is wrong to attribute to an author
+opinions which he has put into the mouth of a character
+in a drama. Moreover, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sisyphus</span></span> was a satyric
+play, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> it belonged to a class of poetry the liberty of
+which was nearly as great as in comedy, and the
+speech was delivered by Sisyphus himself, who,
+according to the legend, is a type of the crafty
+criminal whose forte is to do evil and elude punishment.
+There is, in fact, nothing in that which we
+otherwise hear of Critias to suggest that he cherished
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page046">[pg 046]</span><a name="Pg046" id="Pg046" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+free-thinking views. He was—or in his later years
+became—a fanatical adversary of the Attic democracy,
+and he was, when he held power, unscrupulous
+in his choice of the means with which he opposed
+it and the men who stood in the path of his reactionary
+policy; but in our earlier sources he is never
+accused of impiety in the theoretical sense. And
+yet there had been an excellent opportunity of
+bringing forward such an accusation; for in his
+youth Critias had been a companion of Socrates,
+and his later conduct was used as a proof that
+Socrates corrupted his surroundings. But it is
+always Critias's political crimes which are adduced
+in this connexion, not his irreligion. On the other
+hand, posterity looked upon him as the pure type of
+tyrant, and the label atheist therefore suggested
+itself on the slightest provocation.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+But, even if the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sisyphus</span></span> fragment cannot be
+used to characterise its author as an atheist, it is,
+nevertheless, of the greatest interest in this connexion,
+and therefore demands closer analysis.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The introductory idea, that mankind has
+evolved from an animal state into higher stages,
+is at variance with the earlier Greek conception,
+namely, that history begins with a golden age
+from which there is a continual decline. The theory
+of the fragment is expressed by a series of authors
+from the same and the immediately succeeding
+period. It occurs in Euripides; a later and otherwise
+little-known tragedian, Moschion, developed
+it in detail in a still extant fragment; Plato
+accepted it and made it the basis of his presentation
+of the origin of the State; Aristotle takes it for
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page047">[pg 047]</span><a name="Pg047" id="Pg047" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+granted. Its source, too, has been demonstrated:
+it was presumably Democritus who first advanced
+it. Nevertheless the author of the fragment has
+hardly got it direct from Democritus, who at this
+time was little known at Athens, but from an
+intermediary. This intermediary is probably Protagoras,
+of whom it is said that he composed a
+treatise, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Original State, i.e.</span></span> the primary state of
+mankind. Protagoras was a fellow-townsman of
+Democritus, and recorded by tradition as one of his
+direct disciples.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In another point also the fragment seems to
+betray the influence of Democritus. When it is
+said that the wise inventors of the gods made them
+dwell in the skies, because from the skies come
+those natural phenomena which frighten men, it is
+highly suggestive of Democritus's criticism of the
+divine explanation of thunder and lightning and the
+like. In this case also Protagoras may have been
+the intermediary. In his work on the gods he had
+every opportunity of discussing the question in
+detail. But here we have the theory of Democritus
+combined with that of Prodicus in that it is maintained
+that from the skies come also those things
+that benefit men, and that they are on this account
+also a suitable dwelling-place for the gods. It is
+obvious that the author of the fragment (or his
+source) was versed in the most modern wisdom.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+All this erudition, however, is made to serve
+a certain tendency: the well-known tendency to
+represent religion as a political invention having
+as its object the policing of society. It is a theory
+which in antiquity—to its honour be it said—is but
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page048">[pg 048]</span><a name="Pg048" id="Pg048" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of rare occurrence. There is a vague indication of
+it in Euripides, a more definite one in Aristotle, and
+an elaborate application of it in Polybius; and that
+is in reality all. (That many people in more enlightened
+ages upheld religion as a means of keeping
+the masses in check, is a different matter.) However,
+it is an interesting fact that the Critias fragment
+is not only the first evidence of the existence
+of the theory known to us, but also presumably the
+earliest and probably the best known to later antiquity.
+Otherwise we should not find reference for
+the theory made to a fragment of a farce, but to a
+quotation from a philosopher.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+This might lead us to conclude that the theory
+was Critias's own invention, though, of course, it
+would not follow that he himself adhered to it.
+But it is more probable that it was a ready-made
+modern theory which Critias put into the mouth
+of Sisyphus. Not only does the whole character
+of the fragment and its scene of action favour this
+supposition, but there is also another factor which
+corroborates it.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gorgias</span></span> Plato makes one of the characters,
+Callicles—a man of whom we otherwise know
+nothing—profess a doctrine which up to a certain
+point is almost identical with that of the fragment.
+According to Callicles, the natural state (and the
+right state; on this point he is at variance with the
+fragment) is that right belongs to the strong. This
+state has been corrupted by legislation; the laws
+are inventions of the weak, who are also the majority,
+and their aim is to hinder the encroachment of the
+strong. If this theory is carried to its conclusion,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page049">[pg 049]</span><a name="Pg049" id="Pg049" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+it is obvious that religion must be added to the
+laws; if the former is not also regarded as an
+invention for the policing of society, the whole
+theory is upset. Now in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gorgias</span></span> the question
+as to the attitude of the gods towards the problem of
+what is right and what is wrong is carefully avoided
+in the discussion. Not till the close of the dialogue,
+where Plato substitutes myth for scientific research,
+does he draw the conclusion in respect of religion.
+He does this in a positive form, as a consequence
+of <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">his</span></em> point of view: after death the gods reward
+the just and punish the unjust; but he expressly
+assumes that Callicles will regard it all as an old
+wives' tale.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In Callicles an attempt has been made to see a
+pseudonym for Critias. That is certainly wrong.
+Critias was a kinsman of Plato, is introduced by
+name in several dialogues, nay, one dialogue even
+bears his name, and he is everywhere treated with
+respect and sympathy. Nowadays, therefore, it is
+generally acknowledged that Callicles is a real
+person, merely unknown to us as such. However
+that may be, Plato would never have let a leading
+character in one of his longer dialogues advance
+(and Socrates refute) a view which had no better
+authority than a passage in a satyric drama. On
+the other hand, there is, as shown above, difficulty
+in supposing that the doctrine of the fragment was
+stated in the writings of an eminent sophist; so we
+come to the conclusion that it was developed and
+diffused in sophistic circles by oral teaching, and
+that it became known to Critias and Plato in this
+way. Its originator we do not know. We might
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page050">[pg 050]</span><a name="Pg050" id="Pg050" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+think of the sophist Thrasymachus, who in the first
+book of Plato's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span> maintains a point of view
+corresponding to that of Callicles in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gorgias</span></span>. But
+what we otherwise learn of Thrasymachus is not
+suggestive of interest in religion, and the only statement
+of his as to that kind of thing which has come
+down to us tends to the denial of a providence, not
+denial of the gods. Quite recently Diagoras of
+Melos has been guessed at; this is empty talk,
+resulting at best in substituting <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">x</span></span>
+(or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">NN</span></span>) for <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">y</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+If I have dwelt in such detail on the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Sisyphus</span></span>
+fragment, it is because it is our first direct and
+unmistakable evidence of ancient atheism. Here
+for the first time we meet with the direct statement
+which we have searched for in vain among all the
+preceding authors: that the gods of popular belief
+are fabrication pure and simple and without any
+corresponding reality, however remote. The nature
+of our tradition precludes our ascertaining whether
+such a statement might have been made earlier;
+but the probability is <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">a priori</span></span> that it was
+not. The whole development of ancient reasoning on religious
+questions, as far as we are able to survey it, leads in
+reality to the conclusion that atheism as an expressed
+(though perhaps not publicly expressed) confession
+of faith did not appear till the age of the sophists.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+With the Critias fragment we have also brought
+to an end the inquiry into the direct statements of
+atheistic tendency which have come down to us
+from the age of the sophists. The result is, as we see,
+rather meagre. But it may be supplemented with
+indirect testimonies which prove that there was
+more of the thing than the direct tradition would
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page051">[pg 051]</span><a name="Pg051" id="Pg051" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+lead us to conjecture, and that the denial of the
+existence of the gods must have penetrated very
+wide circles.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The fullest expression of Attic free-thought at the
+end of the fifth century is to be found in the tragedies
+of Euripides. They are leavened with reflections
+on all possible moral and religious problems,
+and criticism of the traditional conceptions of the
+gods plays a leading part in them. We shall,
+however, have some difficulty in using Euripides as a
+source of what people really thought at this period,
+partly because he is a very pronounced personality
+and by no means a mere mouthpiece for the ideas
+of his contemporaries—during his lifetime he was
+an object of the most violent animosity owing,
+among other things, to his free-thinking views—partly
+because he, as a dramatist, was obliged to
+put his ideas into the mouths of his characters, so
+that in many cases it is difficult to decide how much
+is due to dramatic considerations and how much to
+the personal opinion of the poet. Even to this day
+the religious standpoint of Euripides is matter of
+dispute. In the most recent detailed treatment of
+the question he is characterised as an atheist,
+whereas others regard him merely as a dialectician
+who debates problems without having any real
+standpoint of his own.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+I do not believe that Euripides personally denied
+the existence of the gods; there is too much that
+tells against that theory, and, in fact, nothing that
+tells directly in favour of it, though he did not quite
+escape the charge of atheism even in his own day.
+To prove the correctness of this view would, however,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page052">[pg 052]</span><a name="Pg052" id="Pg052" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+lead too far afield in this connexion. On the other
+hand, a short characterisation of Euripides's manner
+of reasoning about religious problems is unavoidable
+as a background for the treatment of those—very
+rare—passages where he has put actually atheistic
+reflections into the mouths of his characters.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As a Greek dramatist Euripides had to derive his
+subjects from the heroic legends, which at the same
+time were legends of the gods in so far as they were
+interwoven with tales of the gods' direct intervention
+in affairs. It is precisely against this intervention
+that the criticism of Euripides is primarily directed.
+Again and again he makes his characters protest
+against the manner in which they are treated by
+the gods or in which the gods generally behave.
+It is characteristic of Euripides that his starting-point
+in this connexion is always the moral one.
+So far he is a typical representative of that tendency
+which, in earlier times, was represented by Xenophanes
+and a little later by Pindar; in no other
+Greek poet has the method of using the higher conceptions
+of the gods against the lower found more
+complete expression than in Euripides. And in so far,
+too, he is still entirely on the ground of popular belief.
+But at the same time it is characteristic of him that
+he is familiar with and highly influenced by Greek
+science. He knows the most eminent representatives
+of Ionian naturalism (with the exception of
+Democritus), and he is fond of displaying his knowledge.
+Nevertheless, it cannot be said that he uses
+it in a contentious spirit against popular belief; on
+the contrary, he is inclined in agreement with the
+old philosophers to identify the gods of popular
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page053">[pg 053]</span><a name="Pg053" id="Pg053" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+belief with the elements. Towards sophistic he
+takes a similar, but less sympathetic attitude.
+Sophistic was not in vogue till he was a man of
+mature age; he made acquaintance with it, and he
+made use of it—there are reflections in his dramas
+which carry distinct evidence of sophistic influence;
+but in his treatment of religious problems he is not
+a disciple of the sophists, and on this subject, as on
+others, he occasionally attacked them.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is against this background that we must set
+the reflections with an atheistic tone that we find in
+Euripides. They are, as already mentioned, rare;
+indeed, strictly speaking there is only one case
+in which a character openly denies the existence of
+the gods. The passage is a fragment of the drama
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bellerophon</span></span>; it is, despite its isolation, so typical
+of the manner of Euripides that it deserves to be
+quoted in full.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+<span class="tei tei-q">“And then to say that there are gods in the
+heavens! Nay, there are none there; if you are
+not foolish enough to be seduced by the old talk.
+Think for yourselves about the matter, and do not be
+influenced by my words. I contend that the tyrants
+kill the people wholesale, take their money and
+destroy cities in spite of their oaths; and although
+they do all this they are happier than people who,
+in peace and quietness, lead god-fearing lives.
+And I know small states which honour the gods,
+but must obey greater states, which are less pious,
+because their spearmen are fewer in number. And
+I believe that you, if a slothful man just prayed to
+the gods and did not earn his bread by the work of
+his hands—”</span> Here the sense is interrupted;
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page054">[pg 054]</span><a name="Pg054" id="Pg054" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+but there remains one more line: <span class="tei tei-q">“That which
+builds the castle of the gods is in part the unfortunate
+happenings ...”</span> The continuation is missing.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The argumentation here is characteristic of
+Euripides. From the injustice of life he infers the
+non-existence of the gods. The conclusion evidently
+only holds good on the assumption that the gods
+must be just; and this is precisely one of the postulates
+of popular belief. The reasoning is not sophistic;
+on the contrary, in their attacks the sophists
+took up a position outside the foundation of popular
+belief and attacked the foundation itself. This
+reasoning, on the other hand, is closely allied to the
+earlier religious thinking of the Greeks; it only
+proceeds further than the latter, where it results in
+rank denial.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The drama of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bellerophon</span></span> is lost, and reconstruction
+is out of the question; if only for that reason
+it is unwarrantable to draw any conclusions from the
+detached fragment as to the poet's personal attitude
+towards the existence of the gods. But, nevertheless,
+the fragment is of interest in this connexion.
+It would never have occurred to Sophocles or
+Aeschylus to put such a speech in the mouth of one
+of his characters. When Euripides does that it
+is a proof that the question of the existence of the
+gods has begun to present itself to the popular
+consciousness at this time. Viewed in this light
+other statements of his which are not in themselves
+atheistic become significant. When it is said:
+<span class="tei tei-q">“If the gods act in a shameful way, they are not
+gods”</span>—that indeed is not atheism in our sense, but
+it is very near to it. Interesting is also the introduction
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page055">[pg 055]</span><a name="Pg055" id="Pg055" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+to the drama <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Melanippe</span></span>: <span class="tei tei-q">“Zeus, whoever
+Zeus may be; for of that I only know what is told.”</span>
+Aeschylus begins a strophe in one of his most famous
+choral odes with almost the same words: <span class="tei tei-q">“Zeus,
+whoe'er he be; for if he desire so to be called, I will
+address him by this name.”</span> In him it is an expression
+of genuine antique piety, which excludes
+all human impertinence towards the gods to such a
+degree that it even forgoes knowing their real names.
+In Euripides the same idea becomes an expression of
+doubt; but in this case also the doubt is raised on
+the foundation of popular belief.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is not surprising that so prominent and sustained
+a criticism of popular belief as that of Euripides,
+produced, moreover, on the stage, called forth
+a reaction from the defenders of the established
+faith, and that charges of impiety were not wanting.
+It is more to be wondered at that these charges on
+the whole are so few and slight, and that Euripides
+did not become the object of any actual prosecution.
+We know of a private trial in which the accuser
+incidentally charged Euripides with impiety on the
+strength of a quotation from one of his tragedies,
+Euripides's answer being a protest against dragging
+his poetry into the affair; the verdict on that belonged
+to another court. Aristophanes, who is always
+severe on Euripides, has only one passage directly
+charging him with being a propagator of atheism;
+but the accusation is hardly meant to be taken
+seriously. In <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Frogs</span></span>, where he had every opportunity
+of emphasising this view, there is hardly an
+indication of it. In <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Clouds</span></span>, where the main
+attack is directed against modern free-thought,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page056">[pg 056]</span><a name="Pg056" id="Pg056" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Euripides, to be sure, is sneered at as being the
+fashionable poet of the corrupted youth, but he is
+not drawn into the charge of impiety. Even when
+Plato wrote his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span>, Euripides was generally
+considered the <span class="tei tei-q">“wisest of all tragedians.”</span> This
+would have been impossible if he had been considered
+an atheist. In spite of all, the general feeling must
+undoubtedly have been that Euripides ultimately
+took his stand on the ground of popular belief. It
+was a similar instinctive judgment in regard to
+religion which prevented antiquity from placing
+Xenophanes amongst the atheists. Later times
+no doubt judged differently; the quotation from
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Melanippe</span></span> is in fact cited as a proof that Euripides
+was an atheist in his heart of hearts.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In Aristophanes we meet with the first observations
+concerning the change in the religious conditions
+of Athens during the Peloponnesian War.
+In one of his plays, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Clouds</span></span>, he actually set himself
+the task of taking up arms against modern unbelief,
+and he characterises it directly as atheism.
+If only for that reason the play deserves somewhat
+fuller consideration.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is well known that Aristophanes chose
+Socrates as a representative of the modern movement.
+In him he embodies all the faults with
+which he wished to pick a quarrel in the fashionable
+philosophy of the day. On the other hand, the
+essence of Socratic teaching is entirely absent from
+Aristophanes's representation; of that he had
+hardly any understanding, and even if he had he
+would at any rate not have been able to make use
+of it in his drama. We need not then in this
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page057">[pg 057]</span><a name="Pg057" id="Pg057" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+connexion consider Socrates himself at all; on the
+other hand, the play gives a good idea of the
+popular idea of sophistic. Here we find all the
+features of the school, grotesquely mixed up and
+distorted by the farce, it is true, but nevertheless
+easily recognisable: rhetoric as an end in itself, of
+course, with emphasis on its immoral aspect; empty
+and hair-splitting dialectics; linguistic researches;
+Ionic naturalism; and first and last, as the focus of
+all, denial of the gods. That Aristophanes was well
+informed on certain points, at any rate, is clear from
+the fact that the majority of the scientific explanations
+which he puts into the mouth of Socrates
+actually represent the latest results of science at that
+time—which in all probability did not prevent his
+Athenians from considering them as exceedingly
+absurd and ridiculous.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+What matters here, however, is only the accusation
+of atheism which he made against Socrates.
+It is a little difficult to handle, in so far as Aristophanes,
+for dramatic reasons, has equipped Socrates
+with a whole set of deities. There are the clouds
+themselves, which are of Aristophanes's own
+invention; there is also the air, which he has got
+from Diogenes of Apollonia, and finally a <span class="tei tei-q">“vortex”</span>
+which is supposed to be derived from the same
+source, and which at any rate has cast Zeus down
+from his throne. All this we must ignore, as it is
+only conditioned partly by technical reasons—Aristophanes
+had to have a chorus and chose
+the clouds for the purpose—and partially by the
+desire to ridicule Ionic naturalism. But enough is
+left over. In the beginning of the play Socrates
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page058">[pg 058]</span><a name="Pg058" id="Pg058" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+expressly declares that no gods exist. Similar
+statements are repeated in several places. Zeus is
+sometimes substituted for the gods, but it comes to
+the same thing. And at the end of the play, where
+the honest Athenian, who has ventured on the
+ticklish ground of sophistic, admits his delusion, it
+is expressly said:
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+<span class="tei tei-q">“Oh, what a fool I am! Nay, I must have been
+mad indeed when I thought of throwing the gods
+away for Socrates's sake!”</span>
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Even in the verses with which the chorus conclude
+the play it is insisted that the worst crime of
+the sophists is their insult to the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The inference to be drawn from all this is simply
+that the popular Athenian opinion—for we may rest
+assured that this and the view of Aristophanes are
+identical—was that the sophists were atheists.
+That says but little. For popular opinion always
+works with broad categories, and the probability
+is that in this case, as demonstrated above, it was in
+the wrong, for, as a rule, the sophists were hardly
+conscious deniers of the gods. But, at the same
+time, at the back of the onslaught of Aristophanes
+there lies the idea that the teaching of the sophists
+led to denial of the gods; that atheism was the
+natural outcome of their doctrine and way of reasoning.
+And that there was some truth therein is
+proved by other evidence which can hardly be
+rejected.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the indictment of Socrates it is said that he
+<span class="tei tei-q">“offended by not believing in the gods in which the
+State believed.”</span> In the two apologies for Socrates
+which have come down to us under Xenophon's
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page059">[pg 059]</span><a name="Pg059" id="Pg059" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+name, the author treats this accusation entirely
+under the aspect of atheism, and tries to refute it
+by positive proofs of the piety of Socrates. But
+not one word is said about there being, in and for
+itself, anything remarkable or improbable in the
+charge. In Plato's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>, Plato makes Socrates
+ask the accuser point-blank whether he is of the
+opinion that he, Socrates, does not believe in the
+gods at all and accordingly is a downright denier
+of the gods, or whether he merely means to say that
+he believes in other gods than those of the State.
+He makes the accuser answer that the assertion is
+that Socrates does not believe in any gods at all.
+In Plato Socrates refutes the accusation indirectly,
+using a line of argument entirely differing from that
+of Xenophon. But in Plato, too, the accusation
+is treated as being in no way extraordinary. In
+my opinion, Plato's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span> cannot be used as
+historical evidence for details unless special reasons
+can be given proving their historical value beyond
+the fact that they occur in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>. But in
+this connexion the question is not what was said or
+not said at Socrates's trial. The decisive point is
+that we possess two quite independent and unambiguous
+depositions by two fully competent witnesses
+of the beginning of the fourth century which
+both treat of the charge of atheism as something
+which is neither strange nor surprising at their time.
+It is therefore permissible to conclude that in Athens
+at this time there really existed circles or at any rate
+not a few individuals who had given up the belief
+in the popular gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A dialogue between Socrates and a young man
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page060">[pg 060]</span><a name="Pg060" id="Pg060" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+by name Aristodemus, given in Xenophon's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memorabilia</span></span>,
+makes the same impression. Of Aristodemus
+it is said that he does not sacrifice to the gods,
+does not consult the Oracle and ridicules those who
+do so. When he is called to account for this behaviour
+he maintains that he does not despise <span class="tei tei-q">“the
+divine,”</span> but is of the opinion that it is too exalted
+to need his worship. Moreover, he contends that
+the gods do not trouble themselves about mankind.
+This is, of course, not atheism in our sense; but
+Aristodemus's attitude is, nevertheless, extremely
+eccentric in a community like that of Athens in the
+fifth century. And yet it is not mentioned as
+anything isolated and extraordinary, but as if it were
+something which, to be sure, was out of the common,
+but not unheard of.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is further to be observed that at the end of the
+fifth century we often hear of active sacrilegious
+outrages. An example is the historic trial of Alcibiades
+for profanation of the Mysteries. But this
+was not an isolated occurrence; there were more of
+the same kind at the time. Of the dithyrambic
+poet Cinesias it is said that he profaned holy things
+in an obscene manner. But the greatest stress of
+all must be laid on the well-known mutilation of
+the Hermae at Athens in 415, just before the expedition
+to Sicily. All the tales about the outrages of
+the Mysteries <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">may</span></em> have been fictitious, but it is a
+fact that the Hermae were mutilated. The motive
+was probably political: the members of a secret
+society intended to pledge themselves to each other
+by all committing a capital crime. But that they
+chose just this form of crime shows quite clearly
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page061">[pg 061]</span><a name="Pg061" id="Pg061" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+that respect for the State religion had greatly
+declined in these circles.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+What has so far been adduced as proof that the
+belief in the gods had begun to waver in Athens at
+the end of the fifth century is, in my opinion, conclusive
+in itself to anybody who is familiar with the more
+ancient Greek modes of thought and expression on
+this point, and can not only hear what is said, but
+also understand how it is said and what is passed
+over in silence. Of course it can always be objected
+that the proofs are partly the assertions of a comic
+poet who certainly was not particular about accusations
+of impiety, partly deductions <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">ex silentio</span></span>,
+partly actions the motives for which are uncertain.
+Fortunately, however, we have—from a slightly
+later period, it is true—a positive utterance which
+confirms our conclusion and which comes from a
+man who was not in the habit of talking idly and
+who had the best opportunities of knowing the
+circumstances.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the tenth book of his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, written shortly
+before his death, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> about the middle of the fourth
+century, Plato gives a detailed account of the
+question of irreligion seen from the point of view
+of penal legislation. He distinguishes here between
+three forms, namely, denial of the existence of the
+gods, denial of the divine providence (whereas the
+existence of the gods is admitted), and finally the
+assumption that the gods exist and exercise providence,
+but that they allow themselves to be influenced
+by sacrifices and prayers. Of these three
+categories the last is evidently directed against
+ancient popular belief itself; it does not therefore
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page062">[pg 062]</span><a name="Pg062" id="Pg062" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+interest us in this connexion. The second view,
+the denial of a providence, we have already met with
+in Xenophon in the character of Aristodemus, and
+in the sophist Thrasymachus; Euripides, too,
+sometimes alludes to it, though it was far from
+being his own opinion. Whether it amounted to
+denial of the gods or not was, in ancient times, the
+cause of much dispute; it is, of course, not atheism
+in our sense, but it is certainly evidence that belief
+in the gods is shaken. The first view, on the other
+hand, is sheer atheism. Plato consequently reckons
+with this as a serious danger to the community;
+he mentions it as a widespread view among the
+youth of his time, and in his legislation he sentences
+to death those who fail to be converted. It would
+seem certain, therefore, that there was, in reality,
+something in it after all.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Plato does not confine himself to defining
+atheism and laying down the penalty for it; he
+at the same time, in accordance with a principle
+which he generally follows in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, discusses
+it and tries to disprove it. In this way he happens
+to give us information—which is of special interest
+to us—of the proofs which were adduced by its
+followers.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The argument is a twofold one. First comes
+the naturalistic proof; the heavenly bodies,
+according to the general (and Plato's own) view the
+most certain deities, are inanimate natural objects.
+It is interesting to note that in speaking of this
+doctrine in detail reference is clearly made to
+Anaxagoras; this confirms our afore-mentioned
+conjectures as to the character of his work. Plato
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page063">[pg 063]</span><a name="Pg063" id="Pg063" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+was quite in a position to deal with Anaxagoras on
+the strength not only of what he said, but of what
+he passed over in silence. The second argument
+is the well-known sophistic one, that the gods are
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">nomôi</span></span>, not
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">physei</span></span>, they depend upon convention,
+which has nothing to do with reality. In this
+connexion the argument adds that what applies
+to the gods, applies also to right and wrong; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span>
+we find here in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span> the view with which we are
+familiar from Callicles in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gorgias</span></span>, but with the
+missing link supplied. And Plato's development of
+this theme shows clearly just what a general historical
+consideration might lead us to expect, namely, that
+it was naturalism and sophistic that jointly undermined
+the belief in the old gods.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page064">[pg 064]</span><a name="Pg064" id="Pg064" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc13" id="toc13"></a>
+<a name="pdf14" id="pdf14"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter V</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+With Socrates and his successors the whole
+question of the relation of Greek thought
+to popular belief enters upon a new phase.
+The Socratic philosophy is in many ways a continuation
+of sophistic. This is involved already in
+the fact that the same questions form the central
+interest in the two schools of thought, so that the
+problems stated by the sophists became the decisive
+factor in the content of Socratic and Platonic
+thought. The Socratic schools at the same time
+took over the actual programme of the sophists,
+namely, the education of adolescence in the highest
+culture. But, on the other hand, the Socratic philosophy
+was in the opposite camp to sophistic; on
+many points it represents a reaction against it, a
+recollection of the valuable elements contained in
+earlier Greek thought on life, especially human life,
+values which sophistic regarded with indifference or
+even hostility, and which were threatened with
+destruction if it should carry the day. This reactionary
+tendency in Socratic philosophy appears
+nowhere more plainly than in the field of religion.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Under these circumstances it is a peculiar irony
+of fate that the very originator of the new trend in
+Greek thought was charged with and sentenced for
+impiety. We have already mentioned the singular
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page065">[pg 065]</span><a name="Pg065" id="Pg065" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+prelude to the indictment afforded by the comedy of
+Aristophanes. We have also remarked upon the
+futility of looking therein for any actual enlightenment
+on the Socratic point of view. And Plato
+makes Socrates state this with all necessary sharpness
+in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>. Hence what we may infer from
+the attack of Aristophanes is merely this, that the
+general public lumped Socrates together with the
+sophists and more especially regarded him as a
+godless fellow. Unless this had been so, Aristophanes
+could not have introduced him as the chief
+character in his travesty. And without doubt it
+was this popular point of view which his accusers
+relied on when they actually included atheism as a
+count in their bill of indictment. It will, nevertheless,
+be necessary to dwell for a moment on this bill
+of indictment and the defence.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The charge of impiety was a twofold one, partly
+for not believing in the gods the State believed in,
+partly for introducing new <span class="tei tei-q">“demonic things.”</span>
+This latter act was directly punishable according
+to Attic law. What his accusers alluded to was the
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">daimonion</span></span> of Socrates. That they should have
+had any idea of what that was must be regarded as utterly
+out of the question, and whatever it may have been—and
+of this we shall have a word to say later—it
+had at any rate nothing whatever to do with
+atheism. As to the charge of not believing in the
+gods of the State, Plato makes the accuser prefer it
+in the form that Socrates did not believe in any gods
+at all, after which it becomes an easy matter for
+Socrates to show that it is directly incompatible
+with the charge of introducing new deities. As
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page066">[pg 066]</span><a name="Pg066" id="Pg066" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+ground for his accusation the accuser states—in
+Plato, as before—that Socrates taught the same
+doctrine about the sun and moon as Anaxagoras.
+The whole of the passage in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span> in which the
+question of the denial of gods is dealt with—a short
+dialogue between Socrates and the accuser, quite
+in the Socratic manner—historically speaking,
+carries little conviction, and we therefore dare not
+take it for granted that the charge either of atheism
+or of false doctrine about the sun and moon was
+put forward in that form. But that something
+about this latter point was mentioned during the
+trial must be regarded as probable, when we consider
+that Xenophon, too, defends Socrates at some
+length against the charge of concerning himself with
+speculations on Nature. That he did not do so
+must be taken for certain, not only from the express
+evidence of Xenophon and Plato, but from the whole
+nature of the case. The accusation on this point
+was assuredly pure fabrication. There remains
+only what was no doubt also the main point,
+namely, the assertion of the pernicious influence of
+Socrates on the young, and the inference of irreligion
+to be drawn from it—an argument which
+it would be absurd to waste any words upon.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The attack, then, affords no information about
+Socrates's personal point of view as regards belief in
+the gods, and the defence only very little. Both
+Xenophon and Plato give an account of Socrates's
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">daimonion</span></span>, but this point has so little
+relation to the charge of atheism that it is not worth examination.
+For the rest Plato's defence is indirect. He
+makes Socrates refute his opponent, but does not
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page067">[pg 067]</span><a name="Pg067" id="Pg067" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+let him say a word about his own point of view.
+Xenophon is more positive, in so far as in the first
+place he asserts that Socrates worshipped the gods
+like any other good citizen, and more especially
+that he advised his friends to use the Oracle; in
+the second place, that, though he lived in full publicity,
+no one ever saw him do or heard him say
+anything of an impious nature. All these assertions
+are assuredly correct, and they render it highly
+improbable that Socrates should have secretly
+abandoned the popular faith, but they tell us little
+that is positive about his views. Fortunately we
+possess other means of getting to closer grips with
+the question; the way must be through a consideration
+of Socrates's whole conduct and his mode
+of thought.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Here we at once come to the interesting negative
+fact that there is nothing in tradition to indicate
+that Socrates ever occupied himself with theological
+questions. To be sure, Xenophon has twice put
+into his mouth a whole theodicy expressing an
+elaborate teleological view of nature. But that we
+dare not base anything upon this is now, I think,
+universally acknowledged. Plato, in the dialogue
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Euthyphron</span></span>, makes him subject the popular notion of
+piety to a devastating criticism; but this, again, will
+not nowadays be regarded as historical by anybody.
+Everything we are told about Socrates which bears
+the stamp of historical truth indicates that he
+restricted himself to ethics and left theology alone.
+But this very fact is not without significance. It
+indicates that Socrates's aim was not to alter the
+religious views of his contemporaries. Since he
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page068">[pg 068]</span><a name="Pg068" id="Pg068" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+did not do so we may reasonably believe it was
+because they did not inconvenience him in what
+was most important to him, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> ethics.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+We may, however, perhaps go even a step
+farther. We may venture, I think, to maintain
+that so far from contemporary religion being a
+hindrance to Socrates in his occupation as a teacher
+of ethics, it was, on the contrary, an indispensable
+support to him, nay, an integral component of his
+fundamental ethical view. The object of Socrates
+in his relations with his fellow-men was, on his own
+showing—for on this important point I think we can
+confidently rely upon Plato's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>—to make
+clear to them that they knew nothing. And when
+he was asked to say in what he himself differed from
+other people, he could mention only one thing,
+namely, that he was aware of his own ignorance.
+But his ignorance is not an ignorance of this thing
+or that, it is a radical ignorance, something involved
+in the essence of man as man. That is, in other
+words, it is determined by religion. In order to be
+at all intelligible and ethically applicable, it presupposes
+the conception of beings of whom the
+essence is knowledge. For Socrates and his contemporaries
+the popular belief supplied such beings
+in the gods. The institution of the Oracle itself is
+an expression of the recognition of the superiority
+of the gods to man in knowledge. But the dogma
+had long been stated even in its absolute form when
+Homer said: <span class="tei tei-q">“The gods know everything.”</span> To
+Socrates, who always took his starting-point quite
+popularly from notions that were universally accepted,
+this basis was simply indispensable. And
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page069">[pg 069]</span><a name="Pg069" id="Pg069" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+so far from inconveniencing Socrates, the multiplicity
+and anthropomorphism of the gods seemed an
+advantage to him—the more they were like man in
+all but the essential qualification, the better.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The Socratic ignorance has an ethical bearing.
+Its complement is his assertion that virtue is knowledge.
+Here again the gods are the necessary presupposition
+and determination. That the gods were
+good, or, as it was preferred to express it, <span class="tei tei-q">“just”</span>
+(the Greek word comprises more than the English
+word), was no less a popular dogma than the notion
+that they possessed knowledge. Now all Socrates's
+efforts were directed towards goodness as an end in
+view, towards the ethical development of mankind.
+Here again popular belief was his best ally. To the
+people to whom he talked, virtue (the Greek word
+is at once both wider and narrower in sense than the
+English term) was no mere abstract notion; it was a
+living reality to them, embodied in beings that were
+like themselves, human beings, but perfect human
+beings.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+If we correlate this with the negative circumstance
+that Socrates was no theologian but a teacher
+of ethics, we can easily understand a point of view
+which accepted popular belief as it was and employed
+it for working purposes in the service of moral teaching.
+Such a point of view, moreover, gained extraordinary
+strength by the fact that it preserved continuity
+with earlier Greek religious thought. This
+latter, too, had been ethical in its bearing; it, too,
+had employed the gods in the service of its ethical
+aim. But its central idea was felicity, not virtue; its
+starting-point was the popular dogma of the felicity
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page070">[pg 070]</span><a name="Pg070" id="Pg070" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the gods, not their justice. In this way it had
+come to lay stress on a virtue which might be
+termed modesty, but in a religious sense, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> man
+must recognise his difference from the gods as a
+limited being, subject to the vicissitudes of an
+existence above which the gods are raised. Socrates
+says just the same, only that he puts knowledge or
+virtue, which to him was the same thing, in the
+place of felicity. From a religious point of view the
+result is exactly the same, namely, the doctrine of
+the gods as the terminus and ideal, and the insistence
+on the gulf separating man from them. We are
+tempted to say that, had Socrates turned with
+hostile intent against a religion which thus played
+into his hands, the more fool he. But this is putting
+the problem the wrong way up—Socrates never
+stood critically outside popular belief and traditional
+religious thought speculating as to whether
+he should use it or reject it. No, his thought grew
+out of it as from the bosom of the earth. Hence its
+mighty religious power, its inevitable victory over a
+school of thought which had severed all connexion
+with tradition.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+That such a point of view should be so badly
+misunderstood as it was in Athens seems incomprehensible.
+The explanation is no doubt that the
+whole story of Socrates's denial of the gods was only
+included by his accusers for the sake of completeness,
+and did not play any great part in the final issue.
+This seems confirmed by the fact that they found it
+convenient to support their charge of atheism by one
+of introducing foreign gods, this being punishable by
+Attic law. They thus obtained some slight hold for
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page071">[pg 071]</span><a name="Pg071" id="Pg071" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+their accusation. But both charges must be presumed
+to have been so signally refuted during the
+trial that it is hardly possible that any great number
+of the judges were influenced by them. It was quite
+different and far weightier matters which brought
+about the conviction of Socrates, questions on which
+there was really a deep and vital difference of
+opinion between him and his contemporaries. That
+Socrates's attitude towards popular belief was at
+any rate fully understood elsewhere is testified by
+the answer of the Delphic Oracle, that declared
+Socrates to be the wisest of all men. However
+remarkable such a pronouncement from such a place
+may appear, it seems impossible to reject the
+accounts of it as unhistorical; on the other hand,
+it does not seem impossible to explain how the
+Oracle came to declare itself as reported. Earlier
+Greek thought, which insisted upon the gulf separating
+gods and men, was from olden times intimately
+connected with the Delphic Oracle. It hardly
+sprang from there; more probably it arose spontaneously
+in various parts of Hellas. But it would
+naturally feel attracted toward the Oracle, which
+was one of the religious centres of Hellas, and it was
+recognised as legitimate by the Oracle. Above all,
+the honour shown by the Oracle to Pindar, one of the
+chief representatives of the earlier thought, testifies
+to this. Hence there is nothing incredible in the
+assumption that Socrates attracted notice at Delphi
+as a defender of the old-fashioned religious views
+approved by the Oracle, precisely in virtue of his
+opposition to the ideas then in vogue.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+If we accept this explanation we are, however,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page072">[pg 072]</span><a name="Pg072" id="Pg072" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+excluded from taking literally Plato's account of
+the answer of the Delphic Oracle and Socrates's
+attitude towards it. Plato presents the case as if
+the Oracle were the starting-point of Socrates's
+philosophy and of the peculiar mode of life which
+was indissolubly bound up with it. This presentation
+cannot be correct if we are to regard the Oracle
+as historical and understand it as we have understood
+it. The Oracle presupposes the Socrates we
+know: a man with a religious message and a mode
+of life which was bound to attract notice to him as an
+exception from the general rule. It cannot, therefore,
+have been the cause of Socrates's finding himself.
+On the other hand, it is difficult to imagine a man
+choosing a mode of life like that of Socrates without
+a definite inducement, without some fact or other
+that would lead him to conceive himself as an
+exception from the rule. If we look for such a fact
+in the life of Socrates, we shall look in vain as regards
+externals. Apart from his activities as a religious
+and ethical personality, his life was that of any other
+Attic citizen. But in his spiritual life there was
+certainly one point, but only one, on which he
+deviated from the normal, namely, his
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">daimonion</span></span>.
+If we examine the accounts of this more closely the
+only thing we can make of them is—or so at least it
+seems to me—that we are here in the presence of a
+form—peculiar, no doubt, and highly developed—of
+the phenomena which are nowadays classed under
+the concept of clairvoyance. Now Plato makes
+Socrates himself say that the power of avoiding what
+would harm him, in great things and little, by virtue
+of a direct perception (a <span class="tei tei-q">“voice”</span>), which is what
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page073">[pg 073]</span><a name="Pg073" id="Pg073" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+constituted his <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">daimonion</span></span>, was given him
+from childhood. That it was regarded as something
+singular both by himself and others is evident, and
+likewise that he himself regarded it as something
+supernatural; the designation <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">daimonion</span></span>
+itself seems to be his own. I think that we must seek for
+the origin of Socrates's peculiar mode of life in this
+direction, strange as it may be that a purely mystic
+element should have given the impulse to the most
+rationalistic philosophy the world has ever produced.
+It is impossible to enter more deeply into this problem
+here; but, if my conjecture is correct, we have
+an additional explanation of the fact that Socrates
+was disposed to anything rather than an attack on
+the established religion.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A view of popular religion such as I have here
+sketched bore in itself the germ of a further development
+which must lead in other directions. A
+personality like Socrates might perhaps manage
+throughout a lifetime to keep that balance on a
+razor's edge which is involved in utilising to the
+utmost in the service of ethics the popular dogmas
+of the perfection of the gods, while disregarding all
+irrelevant tales, all myths and all notions of too
+human a tenor about them. This demanded concentration
+on the one thing needful, in conjunction
+with deep piety of the most genuine antique kind,
+with the most profound religious modesty, a combination
+which it was assuredly given to but one
+man to attain. Socrates's successors had it not.
+Starting precisely from a Socratic foundation they
+entered upon theological speculations which carried
+them away from the Socratic point of view.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page074">[pg 074]</span><a name="Pg074" id="Pg074" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+For the Cynics, who set up virtue as the only good,
+the popular notions of the gods would seem to have
+been just as convenient as for Socrates. And we
+know that Antisthenes, the founder of the school,
+made ample use of them in his ethical teaching. He
+represented Heracles as the Cynical ideal and occupied
+himself largely with allegorical interpretation
+of the myths. On the other hand, there is a
+tradition that he maintained that <span class="tei tei-q">“according to
+nature”</span> there was only one god, but <span class="tei tei-q">“according to
+the law”</span> several—a purely sophistic view. He inveighed
+against the worship of images, too, and
+maintained that god <span class="tei tei-q">“did not resemble any thing,”</span>
+and we know that his school rejected all worship of
+the gods because the gods <span class="tei tei-q">“were in need of nothing.”</span>
+This conception, too, is presumably traceable to
+Antisthenes. In all this the theological interest is
+evident. As soon as this interest sets in, the harmonious
+relation to the popular faith is upset, the
+discord between its higher and lower ideas becomes
+manifest, and criticism begins to assert itself. In
+the case of Antisthenes, if we may believe tradition,
+it seems to have led to monotheism, in itself a most
+remarkable phenomenon in the history of Greek
+religion, but the material is too slight for us to make
+anything of it. The later Cynics afford interesting
+features in illustration of atheism in antiquity, but
+this is best left to a later chapter.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+About the relations of the Megarians to the
+popular faith we know next to nothing. One of
+them, Stilpo, was charged with impiety on account
+of a bad joke about Athene, and convicted, although
+he tried to save himself by another bad joke. As
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page075">[pg 075]</span><a name="Pg075" id="Pg075" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+his point of view was that of a downright sceptic,
+he was no doubt an atheist according to the notions
+of antiquity; in our day he would be called an
+agnostic, but the information that we have about his
+religious standpoint is too slight to repay dwelling
+on him.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As to the relation of the Cyrenaic school to the
+popular faith, the general proposition has been
+handed down to us that the wise man could not be
+<span class="tei tei-q">“deisidaimon,”</span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> superstitious or god-fearing;
+the Greek word can have both senses. This does
+not speak for piety at any rate, but then the relationship
+of the Cyrenaics to the gods of popular
+belief was different from that of the other followers
+of Socrates. As they set up pleasure—the momentary,
+isolated feeling of pleasure—as the supreme
+good, they had no use for the popular conceptions
+of the gods in their ethics, nay, these conceptions
+were even a hindrance to them in so far as the fear
+of the gods might prove a restriction where it ought
+not to. In these circumstances we cannot wonder
+at finding a member of the school in the list of
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheoi</span></span>. This is Theodorus of Cyrene, who lived
+about the year 300. He really seems to have been
+a downright denier of the gods; he wrote a work
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">On the Gods</span></span> containing a searching criticism of
+theology, which is said to have exposed him to
+unpleasantness during a stay at Athens, but the then
+ruler of the city, Demetrius of Phalerum, protected
+him. There is nothing strange in a manifestation
+of downright atheism at this time and from this
+quarter. More remarkable is that interest in theology
+which we must assume Theodorus to have had,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page076">[pg 076]</span><a name="Pg076" id="Pg076" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+since he wrote at length upon the subject. Unfortunately
+it is not evident from the account whether his
+criticism was directed mostly against popular religion
+or against the theology of the philosophers. As it
+was asserted in antiquity that Epicurus used his book
+largely, the latter is more probable.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Whereas in the case of the <span class="tei tei-q">“imperfect Socratics”</span>
+as well as of all the earlier philosophers we must
+content ourselves with more or less casual notes, and
+at the best with fragments, and for Socrates with
+second-hand information, when we come to Plato
+we find ourselves for the first time in the presence
+of full and authentic information. Plato belongs
+to those few among the ancient authors of whom
+everything that their contemporaries possessed has
+been preserved to our own day. There would,
+however, be no cause to speak about Plato in an
+investigation of atheism in antiquity, had not so
+eminent a scholar as Zeller roundly asserted that
+Plato did not believe in the Greek gods—with the
+exception of the heavenly bodies, in the case of which
+the facts are obvious. On the other hand, it is
+impossible here to enter upon a close discussion of so
+large a question; I must content myself with giving
+my views in their main lines, with a brief statement
+of my reasons for holding them.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the mythical portions of his dialogues Plato
+uses the gods as a given poetic motive and treats
+them with poetic licence. Otherwise they play a
+very inferior part in the greater portion of his works.
+In the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Euthyphron</span></span> he gives a sharp criticism of the
+popular conception of piety, and in reality at the
+same time very seriously questions the importance
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page077">[pg 077]</span><a name="Pg077" id="Pg077" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+and value of the existing form of worship. In his
+chief ethical work, the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gorgias</span></span>, he subjects the fundamental
+problems of individual ethics to a close discussion
+without saying one word of their relation to
+religion; if we except the mythic part at the end the
+gods scarcely appear in the dialogue. Finally, in
+his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span> he no doubt gives a detailed criticism
+of popular mythology as an element of education,
+and in the course of this also some positive definitions
+of the idea of God, but throughout the construction
+of his ideal community he entirely disregards
+religion and worship, even if he occasionally
+takes it for granted that a cult of some sort exists,
+and in one place quite casually refers to the Oracle
+at Delphi as authority for its organisation in details.
+To this may further be added the negative point
+that he never in any of his works made Socrates
+define his position in regard to the sophistic treatment
+of the popular religion.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In Plato's later works the case is different. In
+the construction of the universe described in the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span> the gods have a definite and significant place,
+and in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, Plato's last work, they play a
+leading part. Here he not only gives elaborate
+rules for the organisation of the worship which permeate
+the whole life of the community, but even in
+the argument of the dialogue the gods are everywhere
+in evidence in a way which strongly suggests
+bigotry. Finally, Plato gives the above-mentioned
+definitions of impiety and fixes the severest punishment
+for it—for downright denial of the gods,
+when all attempts at conversion have failed, the
+penalty of death.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page078">[pg 078]</span><a name="Pg078" id="Pg078" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+On this evidence we are tempted to take the view
+that Plato in his earlier years took up a critical
+attitude in regard to the gods of popular belief,
+perhaps even denied them altogether, that he
+gradually grew more conservative, and ended by
+being a confirmed bigot. And we might look for a
+corroboration of this in a peculiar observation in the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>. Plato opens his admonition to the young
+against atheism by reminding them that they are
+young, and that false opinion concerning the gods is
+a common disease among the young, but that utter
+denial of their existence is not wont to endure to
+old age. In this we might see an expression of
+personal religious experience.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Nevertheless I do not think such a construction
+of Plato's religious development feasible. A decisive
+objection is his exposition of the Socratic point
+of view in so early a work as the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>. I at any
+rate regard it as psychologically impossible that a
+downright atheist, be he ever so great a poet, should
+be able to draw such a picture of a deeply religious
+personality, and draw it with so much sympathy
+and such convincing force. Add to this other facts
+of secondary moment. Even the close criticism
+to which Plato subjects the popular notions of the
+gods in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span> does not indicate denial of the
+gods as such; moreover, it is built on a positive
+foundation, on the idea of the goodness of the gods
+and their truth (which for Plato manifests itself in
+immutability). Finally, Plato at all times vigorously
+advocated the belief in providence. In the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span> he
+stamps unbelief in divine providence as impiety; in
+the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span> he insists in a prominent passage that
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page079">[pg 079]</span><a name="Pg079" id="Pg079" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the gods love the just man and order everything for
+him in the best way. And he puts the same thought
+into Socrates's mouth in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>, though it is
+hardly Socratic in the strict sense of the word, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> as
+a main point in Socrates's conception of existence.
+All this should warn us not to exaggerate the significance
+of the difference which may be pointed out
+between the religious standpoints of the younger and
+the older Plato. But the difference itself cannot, I
+think, be denied; there can hardly be any doubt
+that Plato was much more critical of popular belief
+in his youth and prime than towards the close of
+his life.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Even in Plato's later works there is, in spite of
+their conservative attitude, a very peculiar reservation
+in regard to the anthropomorphic gods of
+popular belief. It shows itself in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span> in the
+fact that where he sets out to <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">prove</span></span> the existence
+of the gods he contents himself with proving the
+divinity of the heavenly bodies and quite disregards
+the other gods. It appears still more plainly in the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span>, where he gives a philosophical explanation
+of how the divine heavenly bodies came into existence,
+but says expressly of the other gods that such
+an explanation is impossible, and that we must
+abide by what the old theologians said on this
+subject; they being partly the children of gods
+would know best where their parents came from.
+It is observations of this kind that induced Zeller
+to believe that Plato altogether denied the gods of
+popular belief; he also contends that the gods have
+no place in Plato's system. This latter contention is
+perfectly correct; Plato never identified the gods
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page080">[pg 080]</span><a name="Pg080" id="Pg080" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+with the ideas (although he comes very near to it
+in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span>, where he attributes to them immutability,
+the quality which determines the essence
+of the ideas), and in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span> he distinguishes
+sharply between them. No doubt his doctrine of
+ideas led up to a kind of divinity, the idea of the
+good, as the crown of the system, but the direct
+inference from this conception would be pure monotheism
+and so exclude polytheism. This inference
+Plato did not draw, though his treatment of the
+gods in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span> certainly
+shows that he was quite clear that the gods of the popular faith
+were an irrational element in his conception of the
+universe. The two passages do not entitle us to go
+further and conclude that he utterly rejected them,
+and in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span>, where Plato makes both classes of
+gods, both the heavenly bodies and the others, take
+part in the creation of man, this is plainly precluded.
+The playful turn with which he evades inquiry into
+the origin of the gods thus receives its proper
+limitation; it is entirely confined to their origin.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Such, according to my view, is the state of the
+case. It is of fundamental importance to emphasise
+the fact that we cannot conclude, because the gods
+of popular belief do not fit into the system of a
+philosopher, that he denies their existence. In
+what follows we shall have occasion to point out a
+case in which, as all are now agreed, a philosophical
+school has adopted and stubbornly held to the belief
+in the existence of gods though this assumption was
+directly opposed to a fundamental proposition in its
+system of doctrine. The case of Plato is particularly
+interesting because he himself was aware and has
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page081">[pg 081]</span><a name="Pg081" id="Pg081" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+pointed out that here was a point on which the consistent
+scientific application of his conception of the
+universe must fail. It is the outcome—one of
+many—of what is perhaps his finest quality as a
+philosopher, namely, his intellectual honesty.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+An indirect testimony to the correctness of the
+view here stated will be found in the way in which
+Plato's faithful disciple Xenocrates developed his
+theology, for it shows that Xenocrates presupposed
+the existence of the gods of popular belief as
+given by Plato. Xenocrates made it his general
+task to systematise Plato's philosophy (which had
+never been set forth publicly by himself as a whole),
+and to secure it against attack. In the course of
+this work he was bound to discover that the conception
+of the gods of popular belief was a particularly
+weak point in Plato's system, and he attempted
+to mend matters by a peculiar theory which became
+of the greatest importance for later times. Xenocrates
+set up as gods, in the first place, the heavenly
+bodies. Next he gave his highest principles (pure
+abstracts such as oneness and twoness) and the
+elements of his universe (air, water and earth) the
+names of some of the highest divinities in popular
+belief (Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Demeter). These
+gods, however, did not enter into direct communication
+with men, but only through some intermediate
+agent. The intermediate agents were the
+<span class="tei tei-q">“demons,”</span> a class of beings who were higher than
+man yet not perfect like the gods. They were, it
+seems, immortal; they were invisible and far more
+powerful than human beings; but they were subject
+to human passions and were of highly differing
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page082">[pg 082]</span><a name="Pg082" id="Pg082" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+grades of moral perfection. These are the beings
+that are the objects of the greater part of the existing
+cult, especially such usages as rest on the assumption
+that the gods can do harm and are directed towards
+averting it, or which are in other ways objectionable;
+and with them are connected the myths which
+Plato subjected to so severe a criticism. Xenocrates
+found a basis for this system in Plato, who
+in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Symposium</span></span> sets up the demons as a class of
+beings between gods and men, and makes them
+carriers of the prayers and wishes of men to the
+gods. But what was a passing thought with Plato
+serving only a poetical purpose was taken seriously
+and systematised by Xenocrates.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It can hardly be said that Xenocrates has
+gained much recognition among modern writers on
+the history of philosophy for his theory of demons.
+And yet I cannot see that there was any other
+possible solution of the problem which ancient
+popular belief set ancient philosophy, if, be it understood,
+we hold fast by two hypotheses: the first,
+that the popular belief and worship of the ancients
+was based throughout on a foundation of reality;
+and second, that moral perfection is an essential
+factor in the conception of God. The only inconsistency
+which we may perhaps bring home to
+Xenocrates is that he retained certain of the
+popular names of the gods as designations for gods
+in his sense; but this inconsistency was, as we shall
+see, subsequently removed. In favour of this
+estimate of Xenocrates's doctrine of demons may
+further be adduced that it actually was the last
+word of ancient philosophy on the matter. The
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page083">[pg 083]</span><a name="Pg083" id="Pg083" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+doctrine was adopted by the Stoics, the Neo-Pythagoreans,
+and the Neo-Platonists. Only the
+Epicureans went another way, but their doctrine
+died out before the close of antiquity. And so the
+doctrine of demons became the ground on which
+Jewish-Christian monotheism managed to come to
+terms with ancient paganism, to conquer it in
+theory, as it were.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+This implies, however, that the doctrine of
+demons, though it arose out of an honest attempt to
+save popular belief philosophically, in reality brings
+out its incompatibility with philosophy. The religion
+and worship of the ancients could dispense
+with neither the higher nor the lower conceptions of
+its gods. If the former were done away with,
+recognition, however full, of the existence of the
+gods was no good; in the long run the inference
+could not be avoided that they were immoral powers
+and so ought not to be worshipped. This was the
+inference drawn by Christianity in theory and enforced
+in practice, ultimately by main force.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Aristotle is among the philosophers who were
+prosecuted for impiety. When the anti-Macedonian
+party came into power in Athens after the death of
+Alexander, there broke out a persecution against
+his adherents, and this was also directed against
+Aristotle. The basis of the charge against him
+was that he had shown divine honour after his death
+to the tyrant Hermias, whose guest he had been
+during a prolonged stay in Asia Minor. This seems
+to have been a fabrication, and at any rate has
+nothing to do with atheism. In the writings of
+Aristotle, as they were then generally known, it
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page084">[pg 084]</span><a name="Pg084" id="Pg084" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+would assuredly have been impossible to find any
+ground for a charge of atheism.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Nevertheless, Aristotle is one of the philosophers
+about whose faith in the gods of popular religion
+well-founded doubts may be raised. Like Plato, he
+acknowledged the divinity of the heavenly bodies
+on the ground that they must have a soul since they
+had independent motion. Further, he has a kind of
+supreme god who, himself unmoved, is the cause of
+all movement, and whose constituent quality is
+reason. As regards the gods of popular belief, in
+his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ethics</span></span> and his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Politics</span></span> he assumes
+public worship to be a necessary constituent of the life of the individual
+and the community. He gave no grounds
+for this assumption—on the contrary, he expressly
+declared that it was a question which ought not to
+be discussed at all: he who stirs up doubts whether
+honour should be paid to the gods is in need not of
+teaching but of punishment. (That he himself took
+part in worship is evident from his will.) Further,
+in his ethical works he used the conceptions of the
+gods almost in the same way as we have assumed
+that Socrates did, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> as the ethical ideal and determining
+the limits of the human. He never entered
+upon any elaborate criticism of the lower elements
+of popular religion such as Plato gave. So far
+everything is in admirable order. But if we look
+more closely at things there is nevertheless nearly
+always a little <span class="tei tei-q">“but”</span> in Aristotle's utterances
+about the gods. Where he operates with popular
+notions he prefers to speak hypothetically or to refer
+to what is generally assumed; or he is content to
+use only definitions which will also agree with his
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page085">[pg 085]</span><a name="Pg085" id="Pg085" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+own philosophical conception of God. But he goes
+further; in a few places in his writings there are
+utterances which it seems can only be interpreted
+as a radical denial of the popular religion. The most
+important of them deserves to be quoted
+<span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">in extenso</span></span>:
+</p>
+
+<div class="block tei tei-quote" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em">
+<span class="tei tei-q"><span style="font-size: 90%">“</span><span style="font-size: 90%">A tradition has been handed down from
+the ancients and from the most primitive times,
+and left to later ages in the form of myth, that
+these substances (</span><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-size: 90%; font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span><span style="font-size: 90%"> sky and heavenly bodies)
+are gods and that the divine embraces all
+nature. The rest consists in legendary additions
+intended to impress the multitude and serve the
+purposes of legislation and the common weal; for
+these gods are said to have human shape or resemble
+certain other beings (animals), and they say other
+things which follow from this and are of a similar
+kind to those already mentioned. But if we disregard
+all this and restrict ourselves to the first
+point, that they thought that the first substances
+were gods, we must acknowledge that it is a divinely
+inspired saying. And as, in all probability, every
+art and science has been discovered many times, as
+far as it is possible, and has perished again, so these
+notions, too, may have been preserved till now as
+relics of those times. To this extent only can we
+have any idea of the opinion which was held by our
+fathers and has come down from the beginning of
+things.</span><span style="font-size: 90%">”</span></span>
+</div>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The last sentences, expressing Aristotle's idea of
+a life-cycle and periods of civilisation which repeat
+themselves, have only been included in the quotation
+for the sake of completeness. If we disregard them,
+the passage plainly enough states the view that the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page086">[pg 086]</span><a name="Pg086" id="Pg086" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+only element of truth in the traditional notions
+about the gods was the divinity of the sky and the
+heavenly bodies; the rest is myth. Aristotle has
+nowhere else expressed himself with such distinctness
+and in such length, but then the passage in
+question has a place of its own. It comes in his
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Metaphysics</span></span> directly after the exposition of his
+philosophical conception of God—a position marked
+by profound earnestness and as it were irradiated
+by a quiet inner fervour. We feel that we are here
+approaching the <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">sanctum sanctorum</span></span> of the
+thinker. In this connexion, and only here, he wished for once
+to state his opinion about the religion of his time
+without reserve. What he says here is a precise
+formulation of the result arrived at by the best
+Greek thinkers as regards the religion of the Greek
+people. It was not, they thought, pure fabrication.
+It contained an element of truth of the greatest
+value. But most of it consisted of human inventions
+without any reality behind them.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A point of view like that of Aristotle would, I
+suppose, hardly have been called atheism among the
+ancients, if only because the heavenly bodies were
+acknowledged as divine. But according to our definition
+it is atheism. The <span class="tei tei-q">“sky”</span>-gods of Aristotle
+have nothing in common with the gods of popular
+belief, not even their names, for Aristotle never
+names them. And the rest, the whole crowd of
+Greek anthropomorphic gods, exist only in the
+human imagination.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Aristotle's successors offer little of interest to
+our inquiry. Theophrastus was charged with
+impiety, but the charge broke down completely.
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page087">[pg 087]</span><a name="Pg087" id="Pg087" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+His theological standpoint was certainly the same
+as Aristotle's. Of Strato, the most independent of
+the Peripatetics, we know that in his view of nature
+he laid greater stress on the material causes than
+Aristotle did, and so arrived at a different conception
+of the supreme deity. Aristotle had severed
+the deity from Nature and placed it outside the
+latter as an incorporeal being whose chief determining
+factor was reason. In Strato's view the
+deity was identical with Nature and, like the latter,
+was without consciousness; consciousness was only
+found in organic nature. Consequently we cannot
+suppose him to have believed in the divinity of the
+heavenly bodies in Aristotle's sense, though no
+direct statement on this subject has come down to
+us. About his attitude towards popular belief we
+hear nothing. A denial of the popular gods is not
+necessarily implied in Strato's theory, but seems
+reasonable in itself and is further rendered probable
+by the fact that all writers seem to take it for granted
+that Strato knew no god other than the whole of
+Nature.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+We designated Socratic philosophy, in its relation
+to popular belief, as a reaction against the
+radical free-thought of the sophistic movement.
+It may seem peculiar that with Aristotle it develops
+into a view which we can only describe as atheism.
+There is, however, an important difference between
+the standpoints of the sophists and of Aristotle.
+Radical as the latter is at bottom, it is not, however,
+openly opposed to popular belief—on the contrary,
+to any one who did not examine it more closely it
+must have had the appearance of accepting popular
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page088">[pg 088]</span><a name="Pg088" id="Pg088" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+belief. The very assumption that the heavenly
+bodies were divine would contribute to that effect;
+this, as we have seen, was a point on which the
+popular view laid great stress. If we add to this
+that Aristotle never made the existence of the
+popular gods matter of debate; that he expressly
+acknowledged the established worship; and that
+he consistently made use of certain fundamental
+notions of popular belief in his philosophy—we can
+hardly avoid the conclusion that, notwithstanding
+his personal emancipation from the existing religion,
+he is a true representative of the Socratic
+reaction against sophistic. But we see, too, that
+there is a reservation in this reaction. In continuity
+with earlier Greek thought on religion, it
+proceeded from the absolute definitions of the divine
+offered by popular belief, but when criticising anthropomorphism
+on this basis it did not after all avoid
+falling out with popular belief. How far each philosopher
+went in his antagonism was a matter of
+discretion, as also was the means chosen to reconcile
+the philosophical with the popular view. The
+theology of the Socratic schools thus suffered from a
+certain half-heartedness; in the main it has the
+character of a compromise. It would not give up
+the popular notions of the gods, and yet they were
+continually getting in the way. This dualism
+governs the whole of the succeeding Greek philosophy.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page089">[pg 089]</span><a name="Pg089" id="Pg089" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc15" id="toc15"></a>
+<a name="pdf16" id="pdf16"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter VI</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+During the three or four centuries which
+passed between the downfall of free Hellas
+and the beginning of the Roman Empire,
+great social and political changes took place in the
+ancient world, involving also vital changes in religion.
+The chief phenomenon in this field, the
+invasion of foreign, especially oriental, religions
+into Hellas, does not come within the scope of this
+investigation. On the one hand, it is an expression
+of dissatisfaction with the old gods; on the other,
+the intrusion of new gods would contribute to the
+ousting of the old ones. There is no question of
+atheism here; it is only a change within polytheism.
+But apart from this change there is evidence
+that the old faith had lost its hold on men's
+minds to no inconsiderable extent. Here, too,
+there is hardly any question of atheism properly
+speaking, but as a background to the—not very
+numerous—evidences of such atheism in our
+period, we cannot well ignore the decline of the
+popular faith. Our investigation is rendered difficult
+on this point, and generally within this period,
+by the lack of direct evidence. Of the rich Hellenistic
+literature almost everything has been lost, and
+we are restricted to reports and fragments.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In order to gain a concrete starting-point we
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page090">[pg 090]</span><a name="Pg090" id="Pg090" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+will begin with a quotation from the historian
+Polybius—so to speak the only Greek prose author
+of the earlier Hellenistic period of whose works
+considerable and connected portions are preserved.
+Polybius wrote in the latter half of the second century
+a history of the world in which Rome took the
+dominant place. Here he gave, among other things,
+a detailed description of the Roman constitution
+and thus came to touch upon the state of religion in
+Rome as compared with that in Greece. He says
+on this subject:
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+<span class="tei tei-q">“The greatest advantage of the Roman constitution
+seems to me to lie in its conception of the
+gods, and I believe that what among other peoples is
+despised is what holds together the Roman power—I
+mean superstition. For this feature has by
+them been developed so far in the direction of
+the <span class="tei tei-q">‘horrible,’</span> and has so permeated both private
+and public life, that it is quite unique. Many
+will perhaps find this strange, but I think they
+have acted so with an eye to the mass of the people.
+For if it were possible to compose a state of reasonable
+people such a procedure would no doubt be
+unnecessary, but as every people regarded as a mass
+is easily impressed and full of criminal instincts,
+unreasonable violence, and fierce passion, there is
+nothing to be done but to keep the masses under by
+vague fears and such-like hocus-pocus. Therefore
+it is my opinion that it was not without good
+reason or by mere chance that the ancients imparted
+to the masses the notions of the gods and the
+underworld, but rather is it thoughtless and irrational
+when nowadays we seek to destroy them.”</span>
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page091">[pg 091]</span><a name="Pg091" id="Pg091" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As a proof of this last statement follows a comparison
+between the state of public morals in Greece
+and in Rome. In Greece you cannot trust a man
+with a few hundred pounds without ten notaries and
+as many seals and double the number of witnesses;
+in Rome great public treasure is administered with
+honesty merely under the safeguard of an oath.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As we see, this passage contains direct evidence
+that in the second century in Hellas—in contradistinction
+to Rome—there was an attempt to break
+down the belief in the gods. By his <span class="tei tei-q">“we”</span> Polybius
+evidently referred especially to the leading political
+circles. He knew these circles from personal experience,
+and his testimony has all the more weight
+because he does not come forward in the rôle of the
+orthodox man complaining in the usual way of the
+impiety of his contemporaries; on the contrary, he
+speaks as the educated and enlightened man to
+whom it is a matter of course that all this talk about
+the gods and the underworld is a myth which
+nobody among the better classes takes seriously.
+This is a tone we have not heard before, and it is a
+strong indirect testimony to the fact that Polybius
+is not wrong when he speaks of disbelief among the
+upper classes of Greece.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In this connexion the work of Polybius has a
+certain interest on another point. Where earlier—and
+later—authors would speak of the intervention
+of the gods in the march of history, he
+operates as a rule with an idea which he calls
+Tyche. The word is untranslatable when used in
+this way. It is something between chance, fortune
+and fate. It is more comprehensive and more
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page092">[pg 092]</span><a name="Pg092" id="Pg092" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+personal than chance; it has not the immutable,
+the <span class="tei tei-q">“lawbound”</span> character of fate; rather it
+denotes the incalculability, the capriciousness associated,
+especially in earlier usage, with the word
+fortune, but without the tendency of this word to
+be used in a good sense.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+This Tyche-religion—if we may use this expression—was
+not new in Hellas. Quite early we
+find Tyche worshipped as a goddess among the
+other deities, and it is an old notion that the gods
+send good fortune, a notion which set its mark on a
+series of established phrases in private and public
+life. But what is of interest here is that shifting
+of religious ideas in the course of which Tyche
+drives the gods into the background. We find
+indications of it as early as Thucydides. In his view
+of history he lays the main stress, certainly, on
+human initiative, and not least on rational calculation,
+as the cause of events. But where he is
+obliged to reckon with an element independent of
+human efforts, he calls it Tyche and not <span class="tei tei-q">“the
+immortal gods.”</span> A somewhat similar view we find
+in another great political author of the stage of
+transition to our period, namely, Demosthenes.
+Demosthenes of course employs the official apparatus
+of gods: he invokes them on solemn
+occasions; he quotes their authority in support of
+his assertions (once he even reported a revelation
+which he had in a dream); he calls his opponents
+enemies of the gods, etc. But in his political considerations
+the gods play a negligible part. The
+factors with which he reckons as a rule are merely
+political forces. Where he is compelled to bring
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page093">[pg 093]</span><a name="Pg093" id="Pg093" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+forward elements which man cannot control, he
+shows a preference for Tyche. He certainly occasionally
+identifies her with the favour of the gods,
+but in such a way as to give the impression that it is
+only a <span lang="fr" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="fr"><span style="font-style: italic">façon de parler</span></span>. Direct pronouncements
+of a free-thinking kind one would not expect from an
+orator and statesman, and yet Demosthenes was
+once bold enough to say that Pythia, the mouthpiece
+of the Delphic Oracle, was a partisan of
+Macedonia, an utterance which his opponent
+Aeschines, who liked to parade his orthodoxy,
+did not omit to cast in his teeth. On the whole,
+Aeschines liked to represent Demosthenes as a
+godless fellow, and it is not perhaps without significance
+that the latter never directly replied to such
+attacks, or indirectly did anything to impair their
+force.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+During the violent revolutions that took place
+in Hellas under Alexander the Great and his successors,
+and the instability of social and political
+conditions consequent thereon, the Tyche-religion
+received a fresh impetus. With one stroke Hellas
+was flung into world politics. Everything grew
+to colossal proportions in comparison with earlier
+conditions. The small Hellenic city-states that
+had hitherto been each for itself a world shrank into
+nothing. It is as if the old gods could not keep
+pace with this violent process of expansion. Men
+felt a craving for a wider and more comprehensive
+religious concept to answer to the changed conditions,
+and such an idea was found in the idea of Tyche.
+Thoughtful men, such as Demetrius of Phalerum,
+wrote whole books about it; states built temples to
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page094">[pg 094]</span><a name="Pg094" id="Pg094" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Tyche; in private religion also it played a great
+part. No one reflected much on the relation of
+Tyche to the old gods. It must be remembered
+that Tyche is a real layman's notion, and that
+Hellenistic philosophy regarded it as its task precisely
+to render man independent of the whims
+of fate. Sometimes, however, we find a positive
+statement of the view that Tyche ruled over the
+gods also. It is characteristic of the state of
+affairs; men did not want to relinquish the old
+gods, but could not any longer allow them the
+leading place.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+If we return for a moment to Polybius, we shall
+find that his conception of Tyche strikingly illustrates
+the distance between him and Thucydides.
+In the introduction to his work, on its first page,
+he points out that the universally acknowledged
+task of historical writing is partly to educate people
+for political activities, partly to teach them to bear
+the vicissitudes of fortune with fortitude by reminding
+them of the lot of others. And subsequently,
+when he passes on to his main theme, the
+foundation of the Roman world-empire, after having
+explained the plan of his work, he says: <span class="tei tei-q">“So far
+then our plan. But the <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">co-operation of fortune</span></em> is
+still needed if my life is to be long enough for me to
+accomplish my purpose.”</span> An earlier—or a later—author
+would here either have left the higher powers
+out of the game altogether or would have used an
+expression showing more submission to the gods of
+the popular faith.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In a later author, Pliny the Elder, we again find
+a characteristic utterance throwing light upon the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page095">[pg 095]</span><a name="Pg095" id="Pg095" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+significance of the Tyche-religion. After a very free-thinking
+survey of the popular notions regarding
+the gods, Pliny says: <span class="tei tei-q">“As an intermediate position
+between these two views (that there is a divine
+providence and that there is none) men have themselves
+invented another divine power, in order that
+speculation about the deity might become still more
+uncertain. Throughout the world, in every place,
+at every hour of the day, Fortune alone is invoked
+and named by every mouth; she alone is accused,
+she bears the guilt of everything; of her only do we
+think, to her is all praise, to her all blame. And
+she is worshipped with railing words—she is deemed
+inconstant, by many even blind; she is fickle, unstable,
+uncertain, changeable; giving her favours
+to the unworthy. To her is imputed every loss,
+every gain; in all the accounts of life she alone fills
+up both the debit and the credit side, and we are so
+subject to chance that Chance itself becomes our
+god, and again proves the incertitude of the deity.”</span>
+Even if a great deal of this may be put down to
+rhetoric, by which Pliny was easily carried away,
+the solid fact itself remains that he felt justified in
+speaking as if Dame Fortune had dethroned all the
+old gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+That this view of life must have persisted very
+tenaciously even down to a time when a strong
+reaction in the direction of positive religious feeling
+had set in, is proved by the romances of the time.
+The novels of the ancients were in general poor
+productions. Most of them are made after the
+recipe of a little misfortune in each chapter and
+great happiness in the last. The two lovers meet,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page096">[pg 096]</span><a name="Pg096" id="Pg096" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+fall in love, part, and suffer a series of troubles
+individually until they are finally united. The
+power that governs their fates and shapes everything
+according to this pattern is regularly Tyche,
+never the gods. The testimony of the novels is of
+special significance because they were read by the
+general mass of the educated classes, not by the
+select who had philosophy to guide them.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Another testimony to the weakening of popular
+faith in the Hellenistic age is the decay of the
+institution of the Oracle. This, also, is of early
+date; as early as the fifth and fourth century we
+hear much less of the interference of the oracles in
+political matters than in earlier times. The most
+important of them all, the Delphic Oracle, was dealt
+a terrible blow in the Holy War (356-346 <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>), when
+the Phocians seized it and used the treasures which
+had been accumulated in it during centuries to hire
+mercenaries and carry on war. Such proceedings
+would assuredly have been impossible a century
+earlier; no soldiers could have been hired with
+money acquired in such a way, or, if they could
+have been procured, all Hellas would have risen in
+arms against the robbers of the Temple, whereas
+in the Holy War most of the states were indifferent,
+and several even sided with the Phocians. In the
+succeeding years, after Philip of Macedonia had
+put an end to the Phocian scandal, the Oracle was
+in reality in his hands—it was during this period that
+Demosthenes stigmatised it as the mouthpiece of
+Philip. In the succeeding centuries, too, it was
+dependent on the various rulers of Hellas and undoubtedly
+lost all public authority. During this
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page097">[pg 097]</span><a name="Pg097" id="Pg097" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+period we hear very little of the oracles of Hellas
+until the time before and after the birth of Christ
+provides us with definite evidence of their complete
+decay.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Thus Strabo, who wrote during the reign of
+Augustus, says that the ancients attached more
+importance to divination generally and oracles more
+particularly, whereas people in his day were quite
+indifferent to these things. He gives as the reason
+that the Romans were content to use the Sibylline
+books and their own system of divination. His
+remark is made <span class="tei tei-foreign"><span style="font-style: italic">a propos</span></span> of the Oracle in Libya,
+which was formerly in great repute, but was almost
+extinct in his time. He is undoubtedly correct as
+to the fact, but the decline of the oracular system
+cannot be explained by the indifference of the
+Romans. Plutarch, in a monograph on the discontinuance
+of the oracles, furnishes us with more
+detailed information. From this it appears that not
+only the Oracle of Ammon but also the numerous
+oracles of Boeotia had ceased to exist, with one
+exception, while even for the Oracle at Delphi,
+which had formerly employed three priestesses, a
+single one amply sufficed. We also note the remark
+that the questions submitted to the Oracle were
+mostly unworthy or of no importance.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The want of consideration sometimes shown to
+sacred places and things during the wars of the
+Hellenistic period may no doubt also be regarded
+as the result of a weakening of interest in the old
+gods. We have detailed information on this point
+from the war between Philip of Macedonia and the
+Aetolians in 220-217 <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span> The Aetolians began by
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page098">[pg 098]</span><a name="Pg098" id="Pg098" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+destroying the temples at Dium and Dodona,
+whereupon Philip retaliated by totally wrecking the
+federal sanctuary of the Aetolians at Thermon. Of
+Philip's admiral Dicaearchus we are told by Polybius
+that wherever he landed he erected altars to <span class="tei tei-q">“godlessness
+and lawlessness”</span> and offered up sacrifice
+on them. Judging by the way he was hated, his
+practice must have answered to his theory.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+One more phenomenon must be mentioned in
+this context, though it falls outside the limits
+within which we have hitherto moved, and though
+its connexion with free-thought and religious enlightenment
+will no doubt, on closer examination,
+prove disputable. This is the decay of the established
+worship of the Roman State in the later years
+of the Republic.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the preceding pages there has been no occasion
+to include conditions in Rome in our investigation,
+simply because nothing has come down to us
+about atheism in the earlier days of Rome, and we
+may presume that it did not exist. Of any religious
+thought at Rome corresponding to that of the Greeks
+we hear nothing, nor did the Romans produce any
+philosophy. Whatever knowledge of philosophy
+there was at Rome was simply borrowed from the
+Greeks. The Greek influence was not seriously felt
+until the second century <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>, even though as early
+as about the middle of the third century the Romans,
+through the performance of plays translated from
+the Greek, made acquaintance with Greek dramatic
+poetry and the religious thought contained therein.
+Neither the latter, nor the heresies of the philosophers,
+seem to have made any deep impression
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page099">[pg 099]</span><a name="Pg099" id="Pg099" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+upon them. Ennius, their most important poet of
+the second century, was no doubt strongly influenced
+by Greek free-thinking, but this was evidently an
+isolated phenomenon. Also, by birth Ennius was
+not a native of Rome but half a Greek. The
+testimony of Polybius (from the close of the second
+century) to Roman religious conservatism is emphatic
+enough. Its causes are doubtless of a complex
+nature, but as one of them the peculiar character of
+the Roman religion itself stands out prominently.
+However much it resembled Greek religion in
+externals—a resemblance which was strengthened
+by numerous loans both of religious rites and of
+deities—it is decidedly distinct from it in being
+restricted still more to cultus and, above all, in
+being entirely devoid of mythology. The Roman
+gods were powers about the rites of whose worship
+the most accurate details were known or could be
+ascertained if need were, but they had little personality,
+and about their personal relations people
+knew little and cared less. This was, aesthetically,
+a great defect. The Roman gods afforded no good
+theme for poetry and art, and when they were to be
+used as such they were invariably replaced by loans
+from the Greeks. But, as in the face of Greek free-thought
+and Greek criticism of religion, they had the
+advantage that the vital point for attack was lacking.
+All the objectionable tales of the exploits of
+the gods and the associated ideas about their
+nature which had prompted the Greek attack on the
+popular faith simply did not exist in Roman religion.
+On the other hand, its rites were in many points more
+primitive than the Greek ones, but Greek philosophy
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page100">[pg 100]</span><a name="Pg100" id="Pg100" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+had been very reserved in its criticism of ritual.
+We may thus no doubt take it for granted, though
+we have no direct evidence to that effect, that even
+Romans with a Greek education long regarded the
+Greek criticism of religion as something foreign
+which was none of their concern.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+That a time came when all this was changed;
+that towards the end of the Republic great scepticism
+concerning the established religion of Rome
+was found among the upper classes, is beyond doubt,
+and we shall subsequently find occasion to consider
+this more closely. In this connexion another circumstance
+demands attention, one which, moreover,
+has by some been associated with Greek influence
+among the upper classes, namely, the decay of the
+established worship of the Roman State during the
+last years of the Republic. Of the actual facts
+there can hardly be any doubt, though we know
+very little about them. The decisive symptoms
+are: that Augustus, after having taken over the
+government, had to repair some eighty dilapidated
+temples in Rome and reinstitute a series of religious
+rites and priesthoods which had ceased to function.
+Among them was one of the most important, that
+of the priest of Jupiter, an office which had been
+vacant for more than seventy-five years (87-11 <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>),
+because it excluded the holder from a political career.
+Further, that complaints were made of private
+persons encroaching on places that were reserved
+for religious worship; and that Varro, when writing
+his great work on the Roman religion, in many cases
+was unable to discover what god was the object of an
+existing cult; and generally, according to his own
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page101">[pg 101]</span><a name="Pg101" id="Pg101" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+statement he wrote his work, among other things,
+in order to save great portions of the old Roman religion
+from falling into utter oblivion on account of
+the indifference of the Romans themselves. It is
+obvious that such a state of affairs would have been
+impossible in a community where the traditional
+religion was a living power, not only formally acknowledged
+by everybody, but felt to be a necessary
+of life, the spiritual daily bread, as it were, of the
+nation.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+To hold, however, that the main cause of the
+decay of the established religion of Rome was the
+invasion of Greek culture, together with the fact
+that the members of the Roman aristocracy, from
+whom the priests were recruited and who superintended
+the cult, had become indifferent to the traditional
+religion through this influence, this, I think,
+is to go altogether astray. We may take it for
+granted that the governing classes in Rome would
+not have ventured to let the cult decay if there had
+been any serious interest in it among the masses of
+the population; and it is equally certain that Greek
+philosophy and religious criticism did not penetrate
+to these masses. When they became indifferent to
+the national religion, this was due to causes that had
+nothing to do with free-thought. The old Roman
+religion was adapted for a small, narrow and homogeneous
+community whose main constituent and
+real core consisted of the farmers, large and small,
+and minor artisans. In the last centuries of the
+Republic the social development had occasioned the
+complete decay of the Roman peasantry, and the
+free artisans had fared little better. In the place
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page102">[pg 102]</span><a name="Pg102" id="Pg102" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the old Rome had arisen the capital of an empire,
+inhabited by a population of a million and of extraordinarily
+mixed composition. Not only did
+this population comprise a number of immigrant
+foreigners, but, in consequence of the peculiar
+Roman rule that every slave on being set free
+attained citizenship, a large percentage of the
+citizens must of necessity have been of foreign
+origin. Only certain portions of the Roman religion,
+more especially the cult of the great central deities
+of the State religion, can have kept pace with these
+changed conditions; the remainder had in reality lost
+all hold on Roman society as it had developed in
+process of time, and was only kept alive by force of
+habit. To this must be added the peculiar Roman
+mixture of mobility and conservatism in religious
+matters. The Roman superstition and uncertainty
+in regard to the gods led on the one hand to a
+continual setting up of new cults and new sanctuaries,
+and on the other hand to a fear of letting
+any of the old cults die out. In consequence thereof
+a great deal of dead and worthless ritual material
+must have accumulated in Rome in the course of
+centuries, and was of course in the way during the
+rapid development of the city in the last century
+of the Republic. Things must gradually have come
+to such a pass that a thorough reform, above all a
+reduction, of the whole cult had become a necessity.
+To introduce such a reform the republican government
+was just as unsuited as it was to carry out all
+the other tasks imposed by the development of the
+empire and the capital at that time. On this
+point, however, it must not be forgotten that the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page103">[pg 103]</span><a name="Pg103" id="Pg103" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+governing class not only lacked ability, for political
+reasons, to carry out serious reforms, but also the
+will to do so, on account of religious indifference,
+and so let things go altogether to the bad. The
+consequence was anarchy, in this as in all other
+spheres at that time; but at the same time the
+tendency towards the only sensible issue, a restriction
+of the old Roman State-cult, is plainly evident.
+The simultaneous strong infusion of foreign religions
+was unavoidable in the mixed population of
+the capital. That these influences also affected
+the lower classes of the citizens is at any rate a
+proof that they were not indifferent to religion.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In its main outlines this is all the information
+that I have been able to glean about the general
+decline of the belief in the gods during the Hellenistic
+period. Judging from such information we
+should expect to find strong tendencies to atheism
+in the philosophy of the period. These anticipations
+are, however, doomed to disappointment. The
+ruling philosophical schools on the whole preserved
+a friendly attitude towards the gods of the popular
+faith and especially towards their worship, although
+they only accepted the existing religion with strict
+reservation.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Most characteristic but least consistent and
+original was the attitude of the Stoic school. The
+Stoics were pantheists. Their deity was a substance
+which they designated as fire, but which, it must be
+admitted, differed greatly from fire as an element.
+It permeated the entire world. It had produced the
+world out of itself, and it absorbed it again, and
+this process was repeated to eternity. The divine
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page104">[pg 104]</span><a name="Pg104" id="Pg104" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+fire was also reason, and as such the cause of the
+harmony of the world-order. What of conscious
+reason was found in the world was part of the divine
+reason.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Though in this scheme of things there was in the
+abstract plenty of room for the gods of popular belief,
+nevertheless the Stoics did not in reality acknowledge
+them. In principle their standpoint was the
+same as Aristotle's. They supposed the heavenly
+bodies to be divine, but all the rest, namely, the
+anthropomorphic gods, were nothing to them.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In their explanation of the origin of the gods they
+went beyond Aristotle, but their doctrine was not
+always the same on this point. The earlier Stoics
+regarded mythology and all theology as human
+inventions, but not arbitrary inventions. Mythology,
+they thought, should be understood allegorically;
+it was the naïve expression partly of a correct
+conception of Nature, partly of ethical and metaphysical
+truths. Strictly speaking, men had always
+been Stoics, though in an imperfect way. This
+point of view was elaborated in detail by the first
+Stoics, who took their stand partly on the earlier
+naturalism which had already broken the ground
+in this direction, and partly on sophistic, so that
+they even brought into vogue again the theory of
+Prodicus, that the gods were a hypostasis of the
+benefits of civilisation. Such a standpoint could
+not of course be maintained without arbitrariness
+and absurdities which exposed it to embarrassing
+criticism. This seems to have been the reason why
+the later Stoics, and especially Poseidonius, took
+another road. They adopted the doctrine of
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page105">[pg 105]</span><a name="Pg105" id="Pg105" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Xenocrates with regard to demons and developed
+it in fantastic forms. The earlier method was not,
+however, given up, and at the time of Cicero we find
+both views represented in the doctrine of the school.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Such is the appearance of the theory. In both
+its forms it is evidently an attempt to meet popular
+belief half-way from a standpoint which is really
+beyond it. This tendency is seen even more plainly
+in the practice of the Stoics. They recognised
+public worship and insisted on its advantages; in
+their moral reflections they employed the gods as
+ideals in the Socratic manner, regardless of the fact
+that in their theory they did not really allow for
+gods who were ideal men; nay, they even went the
+length of giving to their philosophical deity, the
+<span class="tei tei-q">“universal reason,”</span> the name of Zeus by preference,
+though it had nothing but the name in common with
+the Olympian ruler of gods and men. This pervading
+ambiguity brought much well-deserved reproof on
+the Stoics even in ancient times; but, however unattractive
+it may seem to us, it is of significance as
+a manifestation of the great hold popular belief
+continued to have even on the minds of the upper
+classes, for it was to these that the Stoics appealed.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Far more original and consistent is the Epicurean
+attitude towards the popular faith. Epicurus
+unreservedly acknowledged its foundation,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the existence of anthropomorphic beings of a
+higher order than man. His gods had human
+shape but they were eternal and blessed. In the
+latter definition was included, according to the
+ethical ideal of Epicurus, the idea that the gods were
+free from every care, including taking an interest in
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page106">[pg 106]</span><a name="Pg106" id="Pg106" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+nature or in human affairs. They were entirely
+outside the world, a fact to which Epicurus gave
+expression by placing them in the empty spaces
+between the infinite number of spherical worlds
+which he assumed. There his gods lived in bliss
+like ideal Epicureans. Lucretius, the only poet of
+this school, extolled them in splendid verse whose
+motif he borrowed from Homer's description of
+Olympus. In this way Epicurus also managed to
+uphold public worship itself. It could not, of
+course, have any practical aim, but it was justified
+as an expression of the respect man owed to beings
+whose existence expressed the human ideal.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The reasons why Epicurus assumed this attitude
+towards popular belief are simple enough. He
+maintained that the evidence of sensual perception
+was the basis of all knowledge, and he thought that
+the senses (through dreams) gave evidence of the
+existence of the gods. And in the popular ideas of
+the bliss of the gods he found his ethical ideal
+directly confirmed. As regards their eternity the
+case was more difficult. The basis of his system
+was the theory that everything was made of atoms
+and that only the atoms as such, not the bodies
+composed of the atoms, were eternal. He conceived
+the gods, too, as made of atoms, nevertheless he held
+that they were eternal. Any rational explanation
+of this postulate is not possible on Epicurus's
+hypotheses, and the criticism of his theology was
+therefore especially directed against this point.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Epicurus was the Greek philosopher who most
+consistently took the course of emphasising the
+popular dogma of the perfection of the gods in order
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page107">[pg 107]</span><a name="Pg107" id="Pg107" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+to preserve the popular notions about them. And
+he was the philosopher to whom this would seem
+the most obvious course, because his ethical ideal—quietism—agreed
+with the oldest popular ideal of
+divine existence. In this way Epicureanism became
+the most orthodox of all Greek philosophical
+schools. If nevertheless Epicurus did not escape
+the charge of atheism the sole reason is that his
+whole theology was denounced off-hand as hypocrisy.
+It was assumed to be set up by him only to
+shield himself against a charge of impiety, not to
+be his actual belief. This accusation is now universally
+acknowledged to be unjustified, and the
+Epicureans had no difficulty in rebutting it with
+interest. They took special delight in pointing out
+that the theology of the other schools was much
+more remote from popular belief than theirs, nay, in
+spite of recognition of the existing religion, was in
+truth fundamentally at variance with it. But in
+reality their own was in no better case: gods who
+did not trouble in the least about human affairs were
+beings for whom popular belief had no use. It
+made no difference that Epicurus's definition of the
+nature of the gods was the direct outcome of a
+fundamental doctrine of popular belief. Popular
+religion will not tolerate pedantry.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In this connexion we cannot well pass over a third
+philosophical school which played no inconspicuous
+rôle in the latter half of our period, namely, Scepticism.
+The Sceptic philosophy as such dates from
+Socrates, from whom the so-called Megarian school
+took its origin, but it did not reach its greatest
+importance until the second century, when the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page108">[pg 108]</span><a name="Pg108" id="Pg108" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Academic school became Sceptic. It was especially
+the famous philosopher Carneades, a brilliant
+master of logic and dialectic, who made a success
+by his searching negative criticism of the doctrines
+of the other philosophical schools (the Dogmatics).
+For such criticism the theology of the philosophers
+was a grateful subject, and Carneades did not spare
+it. Here as in all the investigations of the Sceptics
+the theoretical result was that no scientific certainty
+could be attained: it was equally wrong to assert
+or to deny the existence of the gods. But in practice
+the attitude of the Sceptics was quite different.
+Just as they behaved like other people, acting upon
+their immediate impressions and experience, though
+they did not believe that anything could be scientifically
+proved, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> not even the reality of the world
+of the senses, so also did they acknowledge the
+existing cult and lived generally like good heathens.
+Characteristic though Scepticism be of a period of
+Greek spiritual life in which Greek thought lost its
+belief in itself, it was, however, very far from supporting
+atheism. On the contrary, according to the
+correct Sceptic doctrine atheism was a dogmatic
+contention which theoretically was as objectionable
+as its antithesis, and in practice was to be utterly
+discountenanced.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A more radical standpoint than this as regards
+the gods of the popular faith is not found during
+the Hellenistic period except among the less noted
+schools, and in the beginning of the period. We
+have already mentioned such thinkers as Strato,
+Theodorus, and Stilpo; chronologically they belong
+to the Hellenistic Age, but in virtue of their
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page109">[pg 109]</span><a name="Pg109" id="Pg109" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+connexion with the Socratic philosophy they were
+dealt with in the last chapter. A definite polemical
+attitude towards the popular faith is also a characteristic
+of the Cynic school, hence, though our information
+is very meagre, we must speak of it a little
+more fully.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The Cynics continued the tendency of Antisthenes,
+but the school comparatively soon lost its
+importance. After the third century we hear no
+more about the Cynics until they crop up again about
+the year <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 100. But in the fourth and third
+centuries the school had important representatives.
+The most famous is Diogenes; his life, to be sure,
+is entangled in such a web of legend that it is difficult
+to arrive at a true picture of his personality.
+Of his attitude towards popular belief we know one
+thing, that he did not take part in the worship of
+the gods. This was a general principle of the
+Cynics; their argument was that the gods were <span class="tei tei-q">“in
+need of nothing”</span> (cf. above, pp. <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref">60</a> and
+<a href="#Pg041" class="tei tei-ref">41</a>). If we
+find him accused of atheism, in an anecdote of very
+doubtful value, it may, if there is anything in it,
+be due to his rejection of worship. Of one of his
+successors, however, Bion of Borysthenes, we have
+authentic information that he denied the existence
+of the gods, with the edifying legend attached that
+he was converted before his death. But we also
+hear of Bion that he was a disciple of the atheist
+Theodorus, and other facts go to suggest that Bion
+united Cynic and Hedonistic principles in his mode
+of life—a compromise that was not so unlikely as
+might be supposed. Bion's attitude cannot therefore
+be taken as typical of Cynicism. Another
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page110">[pg 110]</span><a name="Pg110" id="Pg110" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Cynic of about the same period (the beginning of the
+third century) was Menippus of Gadara (in northern
+Palestine). He wrote tales and dialogues in a
+mixture of prose and verse. The contents were
+satirical, the satire being directed against the contemporary
+philosophers and their doctrines, and
+against the popular notions of the gods. Menippus
+availed himself partly of the old criticism of
+mythology and partly of the philosophical attacks
+on the popular conception of the gods. The only
+novelty was the facetious form in which he concealed
+the sting of serious criticism. It is impossible
+to decide whether he positively denied the
+existence of the gods, but his satire on the popular
+notions and its success among his contemporaries at
+least testifies to the weakening of the popular faith
+among the educated classes. In Hellas itself he seems
+to have gone out of fashion very early; but the
+Romans took him up again; Varro and Seneca
+imitated him, and Lucian made his name famous
+again in the Greek world in the second century after
+Christ. It is chiefly due to Lucian that we can form
+an idea of Menippus's literary work, hence we shall
+return to Cynic satire in our chapter on the age of
+the Roman Empire.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+During our survey of Greek philosophical thought
+in the Hellenistic period we have only met with a
+few cases of atheism in the strict sense, and they all
+occur about and immediately after 300, though
+there does not seem to be any internal connexion
+between them. About the same time there appeared
+a writer, outside the circle of philosophers, who is regularly
+listed among the <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheoi</span></span>, and who
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page111">[pg 111]</span><a name="Pg111" id="Pg111" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+has given a name to a peculiar theory about the
+origin of the idea of the gods, namely, Euhemerus.
+He is said to have travelled extensively in the
+service of King Cassander of Macedonia. At any
+rate he published his theological views in the shape
+of a book of travel which was, however, wholly
+fiction. He relates how he came to an island,
+Panchaia, in the Indian Ocean, and in a temple
+there found a lengthy inscription in which Uranos,
+Kronos, Zeus and other gods recorded their exploits.
+The substance of the tale was that these gods had
+once been men, great kings and rulers, who had
+bestowed on their peoples all sorts of improvements
+in civilisation and had thus got themselves worshipped
+as gods. It appears from the accounts
+that Euhemerus supposed the heavenly bodies to be
+real and eternal gods—he thought that Uranos had
+first taught men to worship them; further, as his
+theory is generally understood, it must be assumed
+that in his opinion the other gods had ceased to
+exist as such after their death. This accords with
+the fact that Euhemerus was generally characterised
+as an atheist.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The theory that the gods were at first men was
+not originated by Euhemerus, though it takes its
+name (Euhemerism) from him. The theory had
+some support in the popular faith which recognised
+gods (Heracles, Asclepius) who had lived as men on
+earth; and the opinion which was fundamental to
+Greek religion, that the gods had <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">come into existence</span></em>,
+and had not existed from eternity, would
+favour this theory. Moreover, Euhemerus had had
+an immediate precursor in the slightly earlier
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page112">[pg 112]</span><a name="Pg112" id="Pg112" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Hecataeus of Abdera, who had set forth a similar
+theory, with the difference, however, that he took
+the view that all excellent men became real gods.
+But Euhemerus's theory appeared just at the
+right moment and fell on fertile soil. Alexander
+the Great and his successors had adopted the Oriental
+policy by which the ruler was worshipped as a god,
+and were supported in this by a tendency which
+had already made itself felt occasionally among
+the Greeks in the East. Euhemerus only inverted
+matters—if the rulers were gods, it was an obvious
+inference that the gods were rulers. No wonder that
+his theory gained a large following. Its great influence
+is seen from numerous similar attempts in
+the Hellenistic world. At Rome, in the second
+century, Ennius translated his works into Latin,
+and as late as the time of Augustus an author such
+as Diodorus, in his popular history of the world,
+served up Euhemerism as the best scientific explanation
+of the origin of religion. It is characteristic,
+too, that both Jews and Christians, in their
+attacks on Paganism, reckoned with Euhemerism
+as a well-established theory. As every one knows,
+it has survived to our day; Carlyle, I suppose,
+being its last prominent exponent.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It is characteristic of Euhemerism in its most
+radical form that it assumed that the gods of polytheism
+did not exist; so far it is atheism. But it
+is no less characteristic that it made the concession
+to popular belief that its gods had once
+existed. Hereby it takes its place, in spite of its
+greater radicalism, on the same plane with most
+other ancient theories about the origin of men's
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page113">[pg 113]</span><a name="Pg113" id="Pg113" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+notions about the gods. The gods of popular belief
+could not survive in the light of ancient thought,
+which in its essence was free-thought, not tied
+down by dogmas. But the philosophers of old could
+not but believe that a psychological fact of such
+enormous dimensions as ancient polytheism must
+have something answering to it in the objective
+world. Ancient philosophy never got clear of this
+dilemma; hence Plato's open recognition of the
+absurdity; hence Aristotle's delight at being able
+to meet the popular faith half-way in his assumption
+of the divinity of the heavenly bodies; hence Xenocrates's
+demons, the allegories of the Stoics, the
+ideal Epicureans of Epicurus, Euhemerus's early
+benefactors of mankind. And we may say that the
+more the Greeks got to know of the world about them
+the more they were confirmed in their view, for in
+the varied multiplicity of polytheism they found the
+same principle everywhere, the same belief in a
+multitude of beings of a higher order than man.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Euhemerus's theory is no doubt the last serious
+attempt in the old pagan world to give an explanation
+of the popular faith which may be called
+genuine atheism. We will not, however, leave the
+Hellenistic period without casting a glance at some
+personalities about whom we have information
+enough to form an idea at first hand of their religious
+standpoint, and whose attitude towards
+popular belief at any rate comes very near to
+atheism pure and simple.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+One of them is Polybius. In the above-cited
+passage referring to the decline of the popular faith
+in the Hellenistic period, Polybius also gives his own
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page114">[pg 114]</span><a name="Pg114" id="Pg114" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+theory of the origin of men's notions regarding the
+gods. It is not new. It is the theory known from
+the Critias fragment, what may be called the political
+theory. In the fragment it appears as atheism
+pure and simple, and it seems obvious to understand
+it in the same way in Polybius. That he shows a
+leaning towards Euhemerism in another passage
+where he speaks about the origin of religious ideas, is
+in itself not against this—the two theories are closely
+related and might very well be combined. But we
+have a series of passages in which Polybius expressed
+himself in a way that seems quite irreconcilable with
+a purely atheistic standpoint. He expressly acknowledged
+divination and worship as justified; in
+several places he refers to disasters that have
+befallen individuals or a whole people as being sent
+by the gods, or even as a punishment for impiety;
+and towards the close of his work he actually, in
+marked contrast to the tone of its beginning, offers
+up a prayer to the gods to grant him a happy ending
+to his long life. It would seem as if Polybius at a
+certain period of his life came under the influence of
+Stoicism and in consequence greatly modified his
+earlier views. That these were of an atheistic
+character seems, however, beyond doubt, and that
+is the decisive point in this connexion.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Cicero's philosophical standpoint was that of an
+Academic, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> a Sceptic. But—in accord, for the
+rest, with the doctrines of the school just at this
+period—he employed his liberty as a Sceptic to
+favour such philosophical doctrines as seemed to
+him more reasonable than others, regardless of the
+school from which they were derived. In his
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page115">[pg 115]</span><a name="Pg115" id="Pg115" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+philosophy of religion he was more especially a Stoic.
+He himself expressly insisted on this point of view
+in the closing words of his work on the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nature of
+the Gods</span></span>. As he was not, and made no pretence
+of being, a philosopher, his philosophical expositions
+have no importance for us; they are throughout
+second-hand, mostly mere translations from Greek
+sources. That we have employed them in the foregoing
+pages to throw light on the theology of the
+earlier, more especially the Hellenistic, philosophy,
+goes without saying. But his personal religious
+standpoint is not without interest.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+As orator and statesman Cicero took his stand
+wholly on the side of the established Roman religion,
+operating with the <span class="tei tei-q">“immortal gods,”</span> with Jupiter
+Optimus Maximus, etc., at his convenience. In his
+works on the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">State</span></span> and the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span> he adheres
+decidedly to the established religion. But all this is mere
+politics. Personally Cicero had no religion other
+than philosophy. Philosophy was his consolation
+in adversity, or he attempted to make it so, for
+the result was often indifferent; and he looked to
+philosophy to guide him in ethical questions. We
+never find any indication in his writings that the
+gods of popular belief meant anything to him in these
+respects. And what is more—he assumed this off-hand
+to be the standpoint of everybody else, and
+evidently he was justified. A great number of
+letters from him to his circle, and not a few from his
+friends and acquaintances to him, have been preserved;
+and in his philosophical writings he often
+introduces contemporary Romans as characters in
+the dialogue. But in all this literature there is
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page116">[pg 116]</span><a name="Pg116" id="Pg116" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+never the faintest indication that a Roman of the
+better class entertained, or could even be supposed
+to entertain, an orthodox view with regard to the
+State religion. To Cicero and his circle the popular
+faith did not exist as an element of their personal
+religion.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Such a standpoint is of course, practically speaking,
+atheism, and in this sense atheism was widely
+spread among the higher classes of the Graeco-Roman
+society about the time of the birth of Christ.
+But from this to theoretical atheism there is still
+a good step. Cicero himself affords an amusing
+example of how easily people, who have apparently
+quite emancipated themselves from the official religion
+of their community, may backslide. When
+his beloved daughter Tullia died in the year 45 <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">b.c.</span></span>, it
+became evident that Cicero, in the first violence of
+his grief, which was the more overwhelming because
+he was excluded from political activity during
+Cæsar's dictatorship, could not console himself with
+philosophy alone. He wanted something more
+tangible to take hold on, and so he hit upon the idea
+of having Tullia exalted among the gods. He
+thought of building a temple and instituting a cult
+in her honour. He moved heaven and earth to
+arrange the matter, sought to buy ground in a
+prominent place in Rome, and was willing to make
+the greatest pecuniary sacrifices to get a conspicuous
+result. Nothing came of it all, however; Cicero's
+friends, who were to help him to put the matter
+through, were perhaps hardly so eager as he; time
+assuaged his own grief, and finally he contented
+himself with publishing a consolatory epistle written
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page117">[pg 117]</span><a name="Pg117" id="Pg117" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+by himself, or, correctly speaking, translated from a
+famous Greek work and adapted to the occasion.
+So far he ended where he should, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> in philosophy;
+but the little incident is significant, not least
+because it shows what practical ends Euhemerism
+could be brought to serve and how doubtful was
+its atheistic character after all. For not only was
+the contemplated apotheosis of Tullia in itself a
+Euhemeristic idea, but Cicero also expressly defended
+it with Euhemeristic arguments, though
+speaking as if the departed who were worshipped as
+gods really had become gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The attitude of Cicero and his contemporaries
+towards popular belief was still the general attitude
+in the first days of the Empire. It was of no avail
+that Augustus re-established the decayed State cult
+in all its splendour and variety, or that the poets
+during his reign, when they wished to express themselves
+in harmony with the spirit of the new régime,
+directly or indirectly extolled the revived orthodoxy.
+Wherever we find personal religious feeling expressed
+by men of that time, in the Epistles of Horace, in
+Virgil's posthumous minor poems or in such passages
+in his greater works where he expresses his own
+ideals, it is philosophy that is predominant and the
+official religion ignored. Virgil was an Epicurean;
+Horace an Eclectic, now an Epicurean, then a Stoic;
+Augustus had a domestic philosopher. Ovid employed
+his genius in writing travesties of the old
+mythology while at the same time he composed a
+poem, serious for him, on the Roman cult; and when
+disaster befell him and he was cast out from the
+society of the capital, which was the breath of life
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page118">[pg 118]</span><a name="Pg118" id="Pg118" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+to him, he was abandoned not only by men, but also
+by the gods—he had not even a philosophy with
+which to console himself. It is only in inferior
+writers such as Valerius Maximus, who wrote a work
+on great deeds—good and evil—under Tiberius, that
+we find a different spirit.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Direct utterances about men's relationship to
+the gods, from which conclusions can be drawn, are
+seldom met with during this period. The whole
+question was so remote from the thoughts of these
+people that they never mentioned it except when
+they assumed an orthodox air for political or
+aesthetic reasons. Still, here and there we come
+across something. One of the most significant
+pronouncements is that of Pliny the Elder, from
+whom we quoted the passage about the worship of
+Fortune. Pliny opens his scientific encyclopedia
+by explaining the structure of the universe in its
+broad features; this he does on the lines of the
+physics of the Stoics, hence he designates the universe
+as God. Next comes a survey of special
+theology. It is introduced as follows: <span class="tei tei-q">“I therefore
+deem it a sign of human weakness to ask about the
+shape and form of God. Whoever God is, if any
+other god (than the universe) exists at all, and in
+whatever part of the world he is, he is all perception,
+all sight, all hearing, all soul, all reason, all self.”</span>
+The popular notions of the gods are then reviewed,
+in the most supercilious tone, and their absurdities
+pointed out. A polite bow is made to the worship
+of the Emperors and its motives, the rest is little
+but persiflage. Not even Providence, which was
+recognised by the Stoics, is acknowledged by
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page119">[pg 119]</span><a name="Pg119" id="Pg119" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Pliny. The conclusion is like the beginning: <span class="tei tei-q">“To
+imperfect human nature it is a special consolation
+that God also is not omnipotent (he can
+neither put himself to death, even if he would,
+though he has given man that power and it is his
+choicest gift in this punishment which is life; nor
+can he give immortality to mortals or call the dead
+to life; nor can he bring it to pass that those who
+have lived have not lived, or that he who has held
+honourable offices did not hold them); and that he
+has no other power over the past than that of
+oblivion; and that (in order that we may also give
+a jesting proof of our partnership with God) he
+cannot bring it about that twice ten is not twenty,
+and more of the same sort—by all which the power
+of Nature is clearly revealed, and that it is this we
+call God.”</span>
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+An opinion like that expressed here must without
+doubt be designated as atheism, even though it is
+nothing but the Stoic pantheism logically carried
+out. As we have said before, we rarely meet it so
+directly expressed, but there can hardly be any
+doubt that even in the time of Pliny it was quite
+common in Rome. At this point, then, had the
+educated classes of the ancient world arrived under
+the influence of Hellenistic philosophy.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page120">[pg 120]</span><a name="Pg120" id="Pg120" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc17" id="toc17"></a>
+<a name="pdf18" id="pdf18"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter VII</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Though the foundation of the Empire in
+many ways inaugurated a new era for the
+antique world, it is, of course, impossible,
+in an inquiry which is not confined to political
+history in the narrowest sense of the word, to
+operate with anything but the loosest chronological
+divisions. Accordingly in the last chapter we had
+to include phenomena from the early days of the
+Empire in order not to separate things which
+naturally belonged together. From the point of
+view of religious history the dividing line cannot
+possibly be drawn at the Emperor Augustus, in spite
+of his restoration of worship and the orthodox
+reaction in the official Augustan poetry, but rather
+at about the beginning of the second century. The
+enthusiasm of the Augustan Age for the good old
+times was never much more than affectation. It
+quickly evaporated when the promised millennium
+was not forthcoming, and was replaced by a reserve
+which developed into cynicism—but, be it understood,
+in the upper circles of the capital only. In
+the empire at large the development took its natural
+tranquil course, unaffected by the manner in which
+the old Roman nobility was effacing itself; and this
+development did not tend towards atheism.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The reaction towards positive religious feeling,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page121">[pg 121]</span><a name="Pg121" id="Pg121" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+which becomes clearly manifest in the second century
+after Christ, though the preparation for it is
+undoubtedly of earlier date, is perhaps the most
+remarkable phenomenon in the religious history of
+antiquity. This is not the place to inquire into
+its causes, which still remain largely unexplained;
+there is even no reason to enter more closely into its
+outer manifestations, as the thing itself is doubted
+by nobody. It is sufficient to mention as instances
+authors like Suetonius, with his naïve belief in
+miracles, and the rhetorician Aristides, with his
+Asclepius-cult and general sanctimoniousness; or
+a minor figure such as Aelian, who wrote whole
+books of a pronounced, nay even fanatical, devotionalism;
+or within the sphere of philosophy movements
+like Neo-Pythagoreanism and Neo-Platonism,
+both of which are as much in the nature of mystic
+theology as attempts at a scientific explanation
+of the universe. It is characteristic, too, that an
+essentially anti-religious school like that of the
+Epicureans actually dies out at this time. Under
+these conditions our task in this chapter must be to
+bring out the comparatively few and weak traces of
+other currents which still made themselves felt.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Of the earlier philosophical schools Stoicism
+flowered afresh in the second century; the Emperor
+Marcus Aurelius himself was a prominent
+adherent of the creed. This later Stoicism differs,
+however, somewhat from the earlier. It limits the
+scientific apparatus which the early Stoics had
+operated with to a minimum, and is almost exclusively
+concerned with practical ethics on a
+religious basis. Its religion is that of ordinary
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page122">[pg 122]</span><a name="Pg122" id="Pg122" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Stoicism: Pantheism and belief in Providence.
+But, on the whole, it takes up a more sympathetic
+attitude towards popular religion than early
+Stoicism had done. Of the bitter criticism of the
+absurdities of the worship of the gods and of
+mythology which is still to be met with as late as
+Seneca, nothing remains. On the contrary, participation
+in public worship is still enjoined as being a
+duty; nay, more: attacks on belief in the gods—in
+the plain popular sense of the word—are denounced
+as pernicious and reprehensible. Perhaps no clearer
+proof could be adduced of the revolution which
+had taken place in the attitude of the educated
+classes towards popular religion than this change
+of front on the part of Stoicism.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Contrary to this was the attitude of another
+school which was in vogue at the same time as
+the Stoic, namely, the Cynic. Between Cynicism
+and popular belief strained relations had existed
+since early times. It is true, the Cynics did not
+altogether deny the existence of the gods; but they
+rejected worship on the ground that the gods were
+not in need of anything, and they denied categorically
+the majority of the popular ideas about the
+gods. For the latter were, in fact, popular and
+traditional, and the whole aim of the Cynics was
+to antagonise the current estimate of values. A
+characteristic instance of their manner is provided
+by this very period in the fragments of the work of
+Oenomaus. The work was entitled <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Swindlers
+Unmasked</span></span>, and it contained a violent attack on
+oracles. Its tone is exceedingly pungent. In the
+extant fragments Oenomaus addresses the god in
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page123">[pg 123]</span><a name="Pg123" id="Pg123" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Delphi and overwhelms him with insults. But we
+are expressly told—and one utterance of Oenomaus
+himself verifies it—that the attack was not really
+directed against the god, but against the men who
+gave oracles in his name. In his opinion the whole
+thing was a priestly fraud—a view which otherwise
+was rather unfamiliar to the ancients, but played
+an important part later. Incidentally there is a
+violent attack on idolatry. The work is not without
+acuteness of thought and a certain coarse wit of the
+true Cynical kind; but it is entirely uncritical
+(oracles are used which are evidently inventions of
+later times) and of no great significance. It is even
+difficult to avoid the impression that the author's
+aim is in some degree to create a sensation. Cynics
+of that day were not strangers to that kind of thing.
+But it is at any rate a proof of the fact that there
+were at the time tendencies opposed to the religious
+reaction.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A more significant phenomenon of the same kind
+is to be found in the writings of Lucian. Lucian was
+by education a rhetorician, by profession an itinerant
+lecturer and essayist. At a certain stage of his life
+he became acquainted with the Cynic philosophy
+and for some time felt much attracted to it. From
+that he evidently acquired a sincere contempt of
+the vulgar superstition which flourished in his
+time, even in circles of which one might have
+expected something better. In writings which for
+the greater part belong to his later period, he
+pilloried individuals who traded (or seemed to trade)
+in the religious ferment of the time, as well as
+satirised superstition as such.  In this way he
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page124">[pg 124]</span><a name="Pg124" id="Pg124" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+made an important contribution to the spiritual
+history of the age. But simultaneously he produced,
+for the entertainment of his public, a series of
+writings the aim of which is to make fun of the
+Olympian gods. In this work also he leant on the
+literature of the Cynics, but substituted for their
+grave and biting satire light causeries or slight
+dramatic sketches, in which his wit—for Lucian
+was really witty—had full scope. As an instance
+of his manner I shall quote a short passage from the
+dialogue <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timon</span></span>. It is Zeus who speaks; he has
+given Hermes orders to send the god of wealth to
+Timon, who has wasted his fortune by his liberality
+and is now abandoned by his false friends. Then
+he goes on: <span class="tei tei-q">“As to the flatterers you speak of and
+their ingratitude, I shall deal with them another
+time, and they will meet with their due punishment
+as soon as I have had my thunderbolt repaired.
+The two largest darts of it were broken and blunted
+the other day when I got in a rage and flung it at the
+sophist Anaxagoras, who was trying to make his
+disciples believe that we gods do not exist at all.
+However, I missed him, for Pericles held his hand
+over him, but the bolt struck the temple of the
+Dioscuri and set fire to it, and the bolt itself was
+nearly destroyed when it struck the rock.”</span> This
+sort of thing abounds in Lucian, even if it is not
+always equally amusing and to the point. Now
+there is nothing strange in the fact that a witty man
+for once should feel inclined to make game of the old
+mythology; this might have happened almost at
+any time, once the critical spirit had been awakened.
+But that a man, and moreover an essayist, who had
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page125">[pg 125]</span><a name="Pg125" id="Pg125" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+to live by the approval of his public, should
+make it his trade, as it were, and that at a time
+of vigorous religious reaction, seems more difficult
+to account for. Lucian's controversial pamphlets
+against superstition cannot be classed off-hand with
+his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dialogues of the Gods</span></span>; the latter are of a quite
+different and far more harmless character. The fact
+is rather that mythology at this time was fair game.
+It was cut off from its connexion with religion—a
+connexion which in historical times was never very
+intimate and was now entirely severed. This had
+been brought about in part by centuries of criticism
+of the most varied kind, in part precisely as a result
+of the religious reaction which had now set in. If
+people turned during this time to the old gods—who,
+however, had been considerably contaminated with
+new elements—it was because they had nothing
+else to turn to; but what they now looked for was
+something quite different from the old religion.
+The powerful tradition which had bound members
+of each small community—we should say, of each
+township—to its familiar gods, with all that belonged
+to them, was now in process of dissolution; in the
+larger cities of the world-empire with their mixed
+populations it had entirely disappeared. Religion
+was no longer primarily a concern of society; it was
+a personal matter. In the face of the enormous
+selection of gods which ancient paganism came
+gradually to proffer, the individual was free to
+choose, as individual or as a member of a communion
+based upon religious, not political, sympathy.
+Under these circumstances the existence of the gods
+and their power and will to help their worshippers
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page126">[pg 126]</span><a name="Pg126" id="Pg126" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+was the only thing of interest; all the old tales about
+them were more than ever myths of no religious
+value. On closer inspection Lucian indeed proves
+to have exercised a certain selection in his satire.
+Gods like Asclepius and Serapis, who were popular
+in his day, he prefers to say nothing about; and
+even with a phenomenon like Christianity he deals
+cautiously; he sticks to the old Olympian gods. Thus
+his derision of these constitutes an indirect proof
+that they had gone out of vogue, and his forbearance
+on other points is a proof of the power of the
+current religion over contemporary minds. As to
+ascribing any deeper religious conviction to Lucian—were
+it even of a purely negative kind—that is, in view
+of the whole character of his work, out of the question.
+To be sure, his polemical pamphlets against
+superstition show clearly, like those of Oenomaus, that
+the religious reaction did not run its course without
+criticism from certain sides; but even here it is significant
+that the criticism comes from a professional
+jester and not from a serious religious thinker.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A few words remain to be said about the two
+monotheistic religions which in the days of the
+Roman Empire came to play a great, one of them
+indeed a decisive, part. I have already referred
+to pagan society's attitude towards Judaism and
+Christianity, and pointed out that the adherents of
+both were designated and treated as atheists—the
+Jews only occasionally and with certain reservations,
+the Christians nearly always and unconditionally.
+The question here is, how far this designation was
+justified according to the definition of atheism which
+is the basis of our inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page127">[pg 127]</span><a name="Pg127" id="Pg127" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the preceding pages we have several times referred
+to the fact that the real enemy of Polytheism
+is not the philosophical theology, which generally
+tends more or less towards Pantheism, but Monotheism.
+It is in keeping with this that the Jews and
+the Christians in practice are downright deniers of
+the pagan gods: they would not worship them;
+whereas the Greek philosophers as a rule respected
+worship, however far they went in their criticism of
+men's ideas of the gods. We shall not dwell here on
+this aspect of the matter; we are concerned with
+the theory only. Detailed expositions of it occur
+in numerous writings, from the passages in the Old
+Testament where heathenism is attacked, to the
+defences of Christianity by the latest Fathers of the
+Church.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The original Jewish view, according to which the
+heathen gods are real beings just as much as the
+God of the Jews themselves—only Jews must not
+worship them—is in the later portions of the Old
+Testament superseded by the view that the gods are
+only images made of wood, stone or metal, and incapable
+of doing either good or evil. This point of
+view is taken over by later Jewish authors and
+completely dominates them. In those acquainted
+with Greek thought it is combined with Euhemeristic
+ideas: the images represent dead men. The
+theory that the gods are really natural objects—elements
+or heavenly bodies—is occasionally taken
+into account too. Alongside of these opinions there
+appears also the view that the pagan gods are evil
+spirits (demons). It is already found in a few places
+in the Old Testament, and after that sporadically
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page128">[pg 128]</span><a name="Pg128" id="Pg128" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+and quite incidentally in later Jewish writings; in
+one place it is combined with the Old Testament's
+account of the fallen angels. The demon-theory
+is not an instrument of Jewish apologetics proper,
+not even of Philo, though he has a complete demonology
+and can hardly have been ignorant of the
+Platonic-Stoic doctrine of demons.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Apart from the few and, as it were, incidental
+utterances concerning demons, the Jewish view of
+the pagan gods impresses one as decidedly atheistic.
+The god is identical with the idol, and the idol is a
+dead object, the work of men's hands, or the god
+is identical with a natural object, made by God to
+be sure, but without soul or, at any rate, without
+divinity. It is remarkable that no Jewish controversialist
+seriously envisaged the problem of the
+real view of the gods embodied in the popular belief
+of the ancients, namely, that they are personal
+beings of a higher order than man. It is inconceivable
+that men like Philo, Josephus and the author of
+the Wisdom of Solomon should have been ignorant
+of it. I know nothing to account for this curious
+phenomenon; and till some light has been thrown
+upon the matter, I should hesitate to assert that
+the Jewish conception of Polytheism was purely
+atheistic, however much appearance it may have
+of being so.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+It was otherwise with Christian polemical writing.
+As early as St. Paul the demon-theory appears
+distinctly, though side by side with utterances of
+seemingly atheistic character. Other New Testament
+authors, too, designate the gods as demons.
+The subsequent apologists, excepting the earliest,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page129">[pg 129]</span><a name="Pg129" id="Pg129" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Aristides, lay the main stress on demonology, but
+include for the sake of completeness idolatry and
+the like, sometimes without caring about or trying
+to conciliate the contradictions. In the long run
+demonology is victorious; in St. Augustine, the foremost
+among Christian apologists, there is hardly
+any other point of view that counts.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+To trace the Christian demonology in detail and
+give an account of its various aspects is outside the
+scope of this essay. Its origin is a twofold one,
+partly the Jewish demonology, which just at the
+commencement of our era had received a great
+impetus, partly the theory of the Greek philosophers,
+which we have characterised above when speaking
+of Xenocrates. The Christian doctrine regarding
+demons differs from the latter, especially by the fact
+that it does not acknowledge good demons; they
+were all evil. This was the indispensable basis for
+the interdict against the worship of demons; in
+its further development the Christians, following
+Jewish tradition, pointed to an origin in the fallen
+angels, and thus effected a connexion with the Old
+Testament. While they at the same time retained
+its angelology they had to distinguish good and
+evil beings intermediate between god and man;
+but they carefully avoided designating the angels
+as demons, and kept them distinct from the pagan
+gods, who were all demons and evil.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The application of demonology to the pagan
+worship caused certain difficulties in detail. To be
+sure, it was possible to identify a given pagan god
+with a certain demon, and this was often done; but
+it was impossible to identify the Pagans' conceptions
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page130">[pg 130]</span><a name="Pg130" id="Pg130" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of their gods with the Christians' conceptions of
+demons. The Pagans, in fact, ascribed to their
+gods not only demoniac (diabolical) but also divine
+qualities, which the Christians absolutely denied
+them. Consequently they had to recognise that
+pagan worship to a great extent rested on a delusion,
+on a misconception of the essential character of the
+gods which were worshipped. This view was corroborated
+by the dogma of the fallen angels, which
+was altogether alien to paganism. By identifying
+them with the evil spirits of the Bible, demon-names
+were even obtained which differed from those
+of the pagan gods and, of course, were the correct
+ones; were they not given in Holy Writ? In
+general, the Christians, who possessed an authentic
+revelation of the matter, were of course much better
+informed about the nature of the pagan gods than
+the Pagans themselves, who were groping in the
+dark. Euhemerism, which plays a great part in the
+apologists, helped in the same direction: the supposition
+that the idols were originally men existed
+among the Pagans themselves, and it was too much
+in harmony with the tendency of the apologists to
+be left unemployed. It was reconciled with demonology
+by the supposition that the demons had
+assumed the masks of dead heroes; they had beguiled
+mankind to worship them in order to possess
+themselves of the sacrifices, which they always
+coveted, and by this deception to be able to rule and
+corrupt men. The Christians also could not avoid
+recognising that part of the pagan worship was
+worship of natural objects, in particular of the
+heavenly bodies; and this error of worshipping the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page131">[pg 131]</span><a name="Pg131" id="Pg131" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+<span class="tei tei-q">“creation instead of the creator”</span> was so obvious
+that the Christians were not inclined to resort to
+demonology for an explanation of this phenomenon,
+the less so as they could not identify the sun or the
+moon with a demon. The conflict of these different
+points of view accounts for the peculiar vacillation
+in the Christian conception of paganism. On one
+hand, we meet with crude conceptions, according to
+which the pagan gods are just like so many demons;
+they are specially prominent when pagan miracles
+and prophecies are to be explained. On the other
+hand, there is a train of thought which carried to its
+logical conclusion would lead to conceiving paganism
+as a whole as a huge delusion of humanity, but a
+delusion caused indeed by supernatural agencies.
+This conclusion hardly presented itself to the early
+Church; later, however, it was drawn and caused
+a not inconsiderable shifting in men's views and
+explanations of paganism.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Demonology is to such a degree the ruling point
+of view in Christian apologetics that it would be
+absurd to make a collection from these writings of
+utterances with an atheistic ring. Such utterances
+are to be found in most of them; they appear
+spontaneously, for instance, wherever idolatry is
+attacked. But one cannot attach any importance
+to them when they appear in this connexion, not
+even in apologists in whose works the demon theory
+is lacking. No Christian theologian in antiquity
+advanced, much less sustained, the view that the
+pagan gods were mere phantoms of human imagination
+without any corresponding reality.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Remarkable as this state of things may appear
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page132">[pg 132]</span><a name="Pg132" id="Pg132" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+to us moderns, it is really quite simple, nay even a
+matter of course, when regarded historically. Christianity
+had from its very beginning a decidedly
+dualistic character. The contrast between this
+world and the world to come was identical with
+the contrast between the kingdom of the Devil
+and the kingdom of God. As soon as the new religion
+came into contact with paganism, the latter
+was necessarily regarded as belonging to the kingdom
+of the Devil; thus the conception of the gods as
+demons was a foregone conclusion. In the minds of
+the later apologists, who became acquainted with
+Greek philosophy, this conception received additional
+confirmation; did it not indeed agree in the
+main with Platonic and Stoic theory? Details were
+added: the Christians could not deny the pagan
+miracles without throwing a doubt on their own,
+for miracles cannot be done away with at all except
+by a denial on principle; neither could they explain
+paganism—that gigantic, millennial aberration of
+humanity—by merely human causes, much less lay
+the blame on God alone. But ultimately all this
+rests on one and the same thing—the supernatural
+and dualistic hypothesis. Consequently demonology
+is the kernel of the Christian conception of
+paganism: it is not merely a natural result of the
+hypotheses, it is the one and only correct expression
+of the way in which the new religion understood the
+old.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page133">[pg 133]</span><a name="Pg133" id="Pg133" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc19" id="toc19"></a>
+<a name="pdf20" id="pdf20"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter VIII</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In the preceding inquiry we took as our starting-point
+not the ancient conception of atheism
+but the modern view of the nature of the
+pagan gods. It proved that this view was, upon
+the whole, feebly represented during antiquity, and
+that it was another view (demonology) which was
+transmitted to later ages from the closing years of
+antiquity. The inquiry will therefore find its
+natural conclusion in a demonstration of the time
+and manner in which the conception handed down
+from antiquity of the nature of paganism was superseded
+and displaced by the modern view.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+This question is, however, more difficult to
+answer than one would perhaps think. After
+ancient paganism had ceased to exist as a living
+religion, it had lost its practical interest, and
+theoretically the Middle Ages were occupied with
+quite other problems than the nature of paganism.
+At the revival of the study of ancient literature,
+during the Renaissance, people certainly again
+came into the most intimate contact with ancient
+religion itself, but systematic investigations of its
+nature do not seem to have been taken up in
+real earnest until after the middle of the sixteenth
+century. It is therefore difficult to ascertain in what
+light paganism was regarded during the thousand
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page134">[pg 134]</span><a name="Pg134" id="Pg134" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+years which had then passed since its final extinction.
+From the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, on
+the other hand, the material is extraordinarily
+plentiful, though but slightly investigated. Previous
+works in this field seem to be entirely wanting;
+at any rate it has not been possible for me to find
+any collective treatment of the subject, nor even
+any contributions worth mentioning towards the
+solution of the numerous individual problems
+which arise when we enter upon what might be
+called <span class="tei tei-q">“the history of the history of religion.”</span><a id="noteref_1" name="noteref_1" href="#note_1"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">1</span></span></a> In
+this essay I must therefore restrict myself to a few
+aphoristic remarks which may perhaps give occasion
+for this subject, in itself not devoid of interest, to
+receive more detailed treatment at some future time.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Milton, in the beginning of <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Paradise Lost</span></span>, which
+appeared in 1667, makes Satan assemble all his
+angels for continued battle against God. Among
+the demons there enumerated, ancient gods also
+appear; they are, then, plainly regarded as devils.
+Now Milton was not only a poet, but also a sound
+scholar and an orthodox theologian; we may therefore
+rest assured that his conception of the pagan
+gods was dogmatically correct and in accord with
+the prevailing views of his time. In him, therefore,
+we have found a fixed point from which we can
+look forwards and backwards; as late as after
+the middle of the seventeenth century the early
+Christian view of the nature of paganism evidently
+persisted in leading circles.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page135">[pg 135]</span><a name="Pg135" id="Pg135" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+We seldom find definite heathen gods so precisely
+designated as demons as in Milton, but no
+doubt seems possible that the general principle
+was accepted by contemporary and earlier authors.
+The chief work of the seventeenth century on ancient
+religion is the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Theologia Gentili</span></span> of G. I. Voss; he
+operates entirely with the traditional view. It may
+be traced back through a succession of writings of
+the seventeenth and sixteenth centuries. They are
+all, or almost all, agreed that antique paganism was
+the work of the devil, and that idolatry was, at any
+rate in part, a worship of demons. From the
+Middle Ages I can adduce a pregnant expression of
+the same view from Thomas Aquinas; in his treatment
+of idolatry and also of false prophecy he
+definitely accepts the demonology of the early
+Church. On this point he appeals to Augustine,
+and with perfect right; from this it may presumably
+be assumed that the Schoolmen in general had the
+same view, Augustine being, as we know, an authority
+for Catholic theologians.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In mediaeval poets also we occasionally find the
+same view expressed. As far as I have been able to
+ascertain, Dante has no ancient gods among his
+devils, and the degree to which he had dissociated
+himself from ancient paganism may be gauged by the
+fact that in one of the most impassioned passages of
+his poem he addresses the Christian God as <span class="tei tei-q">“Great
+Jupiter.”</span> But he allows figures of ancient mythology
+such as Charon, Minos and Geryon to appear
+in his infernal world, and when he designates the
+pagan gods as <span class="tei tei-q">“false and <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">untruthful</span></em>,”</span> demonology
+is evidently at the back of his mind. The mediaeval
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page136">[pg 136]</span><a name="Pg136" id="Pg136" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+epic poets who dealt with antique subjects took over
+the pagan gods more or less. Sometimes, as in the
+Romance of Troy, the Christian veneer is so thick that
+the pagan groundwork is but slightly apparent; in
+other poems, such as the adaptation of the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aeneid</span></span>,
+it is more in evidence. In so far as the gods are
+not eliminated they seem as a rule to be taken
+over quite naïvely from the source without further
+comment; but occasionally the poet expresses his
+view of their nature. Thus the French adapter of
+Statius's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Thebaïs</span></span>, in whose work the Christian
+element is otherwise not prominent, cautiously
+remarks that Jupiter and Tisiphone, by whom his
+heroes swear, are in reality only devils. Generally
+speaking, the gods of antiquity are often designated
+as devils in mediaeval poetry, but at times the
+opinion that they are departed human beings crops
+up. Thus, as we might expect, the theories of
+ancient times still survive and retain their sway.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+There is a domain in which we might expect to
+find distinct traces of the survival of the ancient
+gods in the mediaeval popular consciousness,
+namely, that of magic. There does not, however,
+seem to be much in it; the forms of mediaeval magic
+often go back to antiquity, but the beings it operates
+with are pre-eminently the Christian devils, if we
+may venture to employ the term, and the evil spirits
+of popular belief. There is, however, extant a collection
+of magic formulae against various ailments
+in which pagan gods appear: Hercules and Juno
+Regina, Juno and Jupiter, the nymphs, Luna Jovis
+filia, Sol invictus. The collection is transmitted in
+a manuscript of the ninth century; the formulae
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page137">[pg 137]</span><a name="Pg137" id="Pg137" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+mostly convey the impression of dating from a much
+earlier period, but the fact that they were copied in
+the Middle Ages suggests that they were intended
+for practical application.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+A problem, the closer investigation of which
+would no doubt yield an interesting result, but which
+does not seem to have been much noticed, is the
+European conception of the heathen religions with
+which the explorers came into contact on their
+great voyages of discovery. Primitive heathenism
+as a living reality had lain rather beyond the
+horizon of the Middle Ages; when it was met with
+in America, it evidently awakened considerable
+interest. There is a description of the religion of
+Peru and Mexico, written by the Jesuit Acosta at
+the close of the sixteenth century, which gives us
+a clear insight into the orthodox view of heathenism
+during the Renaissance. According to Acosta,
+heathenism is as a whole the work of the Devil; he
+has seduced men to idolatry in order that he himself
+may be worshipped instead of the true God. All worship
+of idols is in reality worship of Satan. The
+individual idols, however, are not identified with
+individual devils; Acosta distinguishes between the
+worship of nature (heavenly bodies, natural objects
+of the earth, right down to trees, etc.), the worship
+of the dead, and the worship of images, but says
+nothing about the worship of demons. At one
+point only is there a direct intervention of the evil
+powers, namely, in magic, and particularly in
+oracles; and here then we find, as an exception,
+mention of individual devils which must be
+imagined to inhabit the idols. The same conception
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page138">[pg 138]</span><a name="Pg138" id="Pg138" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+is found again as late as the seventeenth
+century in a story told by G. I. Voss of the
+time of the Dutch wars in Brazil. Arcissewski,
+a Polish officer serving in the Dutch army,
+had witnessed the conjuring of a devil among the
+Tapuis. The demon made his appearance all right,
+but proved to be a native well known to Arcissewski.
+As he, however, made some true prognostications,
+Voss, as it seems at variance with Arcissewski,
+thinks that there must have been some supernatural
+powers concerned in the game.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+An exceptional place is occupied by the attempt
+made during the Renaissance at an actual revival of
+ancient paganism and the worship of its gods. It
+proceeded from Plethon, the head of the Florentine
+Academy, and seems to have spread thence to the
+Roman Academy. The whole movement must be
+viewed more particularly as an outcome of the
+enthusiasm during the Renaissance for the culture
+of antiquity and more especially for its philosophy
+rather than its religion; the gods worshipped were
+given a new and strongly philosophical interpretation.
+But it is not improbable that the traditional
+theory of the reality of the ancient deities may have
+had something to do with it.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Simultaneously with demonology, and while it
+was still acknowledged in principle, there flourished
+more naturalistic conceptions of paganism, both in
+the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. As
+remarked above, the way was already prepared for
+them during antiquity. In Thomas Aquinas we find
+a lucid explanation of the origin of idolatry with a
+reference to the ancient theory. Here we meet
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page139">[pg 139]</span><a name="Pg139" id="Pg139" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+with the familiar elements: the worship of the stars
+and the cult of the dead. According to Thomas,
+man has a natural disposition towards this error,
+but it only comes into play when he is led astray by
+demons. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries
+the Devil is mentioned oftener than the
+demons (compare Acosta's view of the heathenism
+of the American Indians); evidently the conception
+of the nature of evil had undergone a change in the
+direction of monotheism. In this way more scope
+was given for the adoption of naturalistic views in
+regard to the individual forms in which paganism
+manifested itself than when dealing with a multiplicity
+of demons that answered individually to the
+pagan gods, and we meet with systematic attempts
+to explain the origin of idolatry by natural means,
+though still with the Devil in the background.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+One of these systems, which played a prominent
+part, especially in the seventeenth century, is the
+so-called Hebraism, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the attempt to derive the
+whole of paganism from Judaism. This fashion,
+for which the way had already been prepared by
+Jewish and Christian apologists, reaches its climax,
+I think, with Abbot Huet, who derived all the gods
+of antiquity (and not only Greek and Roman
+antiquity) from Moses, and all the goddesses from
+his sister; according to him the knowledge of these
+two persons had spread from the Jews to other
+peoples, who had woven about them a web of
+<span class="tei tei-q">“fables.”</span> Alongside of Hebraism, which is Euhemeristic
+in principle, allegorical methods of
+interpretation were put forward. The chief representative
+of this tendency in earlier times is Natalis
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page140">[pg 140]</span><a name="Pg140" id="Pg140" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Comes (Noël du Comte), the author of the first
+handbook of mythology; he directly set himself the
+task of allegorising all the myths. The allegories
+are mostly moral, but also physical; Euhemeristic
+interpretations are not rejected either, and in several
+places the author gives all three explanations side
+by side without choosing between them.  In the
+footsteps of du Comte follows Bacon, in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
+Sapientia Veterum</span></span>; to the moral and physical
+allegories he adds political ones, as when Jove's
+struggle with Typhoeus is made to symbolise a wise
+ruler's treatment of a rebellion. While these attempts
+at interpretation, both the Euhemeristic and
+the allegorical, are in principle a direct continuation
+of those of antiquity, another method points plainly
+in the direction of the fantastic notions of the
+Middle Ages. As early as the sixteenth century the
+idea arose of connecting the theology of the ancients
+with alchemy. The idea seemed obvious because the
+metals were designated by the names of the planets,
+which are also the names of the gods. It found
+acceptance, and in the seventeenth century we have
+a series of writings in which ancient mythology is
+explained as the symbolical language of chemical
+processes.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Within the limits of the supernatural explanation
+the interest centred more and more in a single point:
+the oracles. As far back as in Aquinas, <span class="tei tei-q">“false
+prophecy”</span> is a main section in the chapter on
+demons, whose power to foretell the future he
+expressly acknowledges. In the sixteenth and
+seventeenth centuries, when the interest in the prediction
+of the future was so strong, the ancient
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page141">[pg 141]</span><a name="Pg141" id="Pg141" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+accounts of true prognostications were the real prop
+of demonology. Hence demons generally play a
+great part in these explanations, even though in
+other cases the Devil fills the bill. Thus Acosta in
+his account of the American religions; thus Voss and
+numerous other writers of the seventeenth century;
+and it is hardly a mere accident, one would think,
+when Milton specially mentions Dodona and Delphi
+as the seats of worship of the Greek demons.
+Among a few of the humanists we certainly find an
+attempt to apply the natural explanation even
+here; thus Caelius Rhodiginus asserted that a
+great part (but not all!) of the oracular system
+might be explained as priestly imposture, and his
+slightly younger contemporary Caelius Calcagninus,
+in his dialogue on oracles, seems to go still further
+and to deny the power of predicting the future to
+any other being than the true God. An exceptional
+position is occupied by Pomponazzi, who in his little
+pamphlet <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Incantationibus</span></span> seems to wish to derive
+all magic, including the oracles, from natural
+causes, though ultimately he formally acknowledges
+demonology as the authoritative explanation. But
+these advances did not find acceptance; we find
+even Voss combating the view on which they were
+founded. It is characteristic of the power of demonology
+in this domain that in support of his point of
+view he can quote no less a writer than Machiavelli.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+The author who opened battle in real earnest
+against demonology was a Dutch scholar, one
+van Dale, otherwise little known. In a couple of
+treatises written about the close of the seventeenth
+century he tried to show that the whole of idolatry
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page142">[pg 142]</span><a name="Pg142" id="Pg142" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+(as well as the oracles in particular) was not dependent
+on the intervention of supernatural beings, but
+was solely due to imposture on the part of the priests.
+Van Dale was a Protestant, so he easily got over
+the unanimous recognition of demonology by the
+Fathers of the Church. The accounts of demons in
+the Old and New Testaments proved more difficult
+to deal with; it is interesting to see how he wriggles
+about to get round them—and it illustrates most
+instructively the degree to which demonology affords
+the only reasonable and natural explanation of
+paganism on the basis of early Christian belief.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Van Dale's books are learned works written in
+Latin, full of quotations in Latin, Greek, and
+Hebrew, and moreover confused and obscure in
+exposition, as is often the case with Dutch writings
+of that time. But a clever Frenchman, Fontenelle,
+took upon himself the task of rendering his work on
+the oracles into French in a popular and attractive
+form. His book called forth an answering pamphlet
+from a Jesuit advocating the traditional view; the
+little controversy seems to have made some stir in
+France about the year 1700. At any rate Banier,
+who, in the beginning of the eighteenth century,
+treated ancient mythology from a Euhemeristic
+point of view, gave some consideration to it. His
+own conclusion is—in 1738!—that demonology
+cannot be dispensed with for the explanation of the
+oracles. He gives his grounds for this in a very
+sensible criticism of van Dale's priestly fraud
+theory, the absurdity of which he exposes with
+sound arguments.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Banier is the last author to whom I can point for
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page143">[pg 143]</span><a name="Pg143" id="Pg143" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+the demon-theory applied as an explanation of a
+phenomenon in ancient religion; I have not found
+it in any other mythologist of the eighteenth century,
+and even in Banier, with the exception of this single
+point, everything is explained quite naturally according
+to the best Euhemeristic models. But in
+the positive understanding of the nature of ancient
+paganism no very considerable advance had
+actually been made withal. A characteristic example
+of this is the treatment of ancient religion
+by such an eminent intellect as Giambattista Vico.
+In his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scienza Nuova</span></span>, which appeared in 1725, as
+the foundation of his exposition of the religion of
+antiquity he gives a characterisation of the mode of
+thought of primitive mankind, which is so pertinent
+and psychologically so correct that it anticipates the
+results of more than a hundred years of research.
+Of any supernatural explanation no trace is found
+in him, though otherwise he speaks as a good Catholic.
+But when he proceeds to explain the nature of
+the ancient ideas of the gods in detail, all that it
+comes to is a series of allegories, among which the
+politico-social play a main part. Vico sees the
+earliest history of mankind in the light of the
+traditions about Rome; the Graeco-Roman gods,
+then, and the myths about them, become to him
+largely an expression of struggles between the
+<span class="tei tei-q">“patricians and plebeians”</span> of remote antiquity.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Most of the mythology of the eighteenth century
+is like this. The Euhemeristic school gradually
+gave up the hypothesis of the Jewish religion as the
+origin of paganism; Banier, the chief representative
+of the school, still argues at length against Hebraism.
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page144">[pg 144]</span><a name="Pg144" id="Pg144" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+In its place, Phoenicians, Assyrians, Persians and,
+above all, Egyptians, are brought into play, or, as
+in the case of the Englishman Bryant, the whole
+of mythology is explained as reminiscences of the
+exploits of an aboriginal race, the Cuthites, which
+never existed. The allegorist school gradually
+rallied round the idea of the cult of the heavenly
+bodies as the origin of the pagan religions; as late
+as the days of the French Revolution, Dupuis, in a
+voluminous work, tried to trace the whole of ancient
+religion and mythology back to astronomy. On the
+whole the movement diverged more and more from
+Euhemerism towards the conception of Greek religion
+as a kind of cult of nature; when the sudden
+awakening to a more correct understanding came
+towards the close of the century, Euhemerism was
+evidently already an antiquated view. Thus, since
+the Renaissance, by a slow and very devious process
+of development, a gradual approach had been made
+to a more correct view of the nature of ancient
+religion. After the Devil had more or less taken the
+place of the demons, the rest of demonology, the
+moral allegory, Hebraism and Euhemerism were
+eliminated by successive stages, and nature-symbolism
+was reached as the final stage.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+We know now that even this is not the correct
+explanation of the nature and origin of the conception
+of the gods prevailing among the ancients.
+Recent investigations have shown that the Greek
+gods, in spite of their apparent simplicity and clarity,
+are highly complex organisms, the products of a long
+process of development to which the most diverse
+factors have contributed. In order to arrive at this
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page145">[pg 145]</span><a name="Pg145" id="Pg145" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+result another century of work, with many attempts
+in the wrong direction, has been required. The idea
+that the Greek gods were nature-gods really dominated
+research through almost the whole of the
+nineteenth century. If it has now been dethroned
+or reduced to the measure of truth it contains—for
+undoubtedly a natural object enters as a component
+into the essence of some Greek deities—this is in the
+first place due to the intensive study of the religions
+of primitive peoples, living or obsolete; and the
+results of this study were only applied to Greek
+religion during the last decade of the century.
+But the starting-point of modern history of religion
+lies much farther back: its beginnings date from
+the great revival of historical research which was
+inaugurated by Rousseau and continued by Herder.
+Henceforward the unhistorical methods of the age
+of enlightenment were abolished, and attention
+directed in real earnest towards the earlier stages
+of human civilisation.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+This, however, carries us a step beyond the
+point of time at which this sketch should, strictly
+speaking, stop. For by the beginning of the
+eighteenth century—but not before—the negative
+fact which is all important in this connexion had
+won recognition: namely, that there existed no
+supernatural beings latent behind the Greek ideas
+of their gods, and corresponding at any rate in some
+degree to them; but that these ideas must be
+regarded and explained as entirely inventions of the
+human imagination.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page146">[pg 146]</span><a name="Pg146" id="Pg146" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc21" id="toc21"></a>
+<a name="pdf22" id="pdf22"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter IX</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+At the very beginning of this inquiry it was
+emphasised that its theme would in the
+main be the religious views of the upper
+class, and within this sphere again especially the
+views of those circles which were in close touch with
+philosophy. The reason for this is of course in the
+first place that only in such circles can we expect
+to find expressed a point of view approaching to
+positive atheism. But we may assuredly go further
+than this. We shall hardly be too bold in asserting
+that the free-thinking of philosophically educated
+men in reality had very slight influence on the great
+mass of the population. Philosophy did not penetrate
+so far, and whatever degree of perception we
+estimate the masses to have had of the fact that the
+upper layer of society regarded the popular faith
+with critical eyes—and in the long run it could not
+be concealed—we cannot fail to recognise that
+religious development among the ancients did not
+tend towards atheism. Important changes took
+place in ancient religion during the Hellenistic Age
+and the time of the Roman Empire, but their causes
+were of a social and national kind, and, if we confine
+ourselves to paganism, they only led to certain
+gods going out of fashion and others coming in.
+The utmost we can assert is that a certain weakening
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page147">[pg 147]</span><a name="Pg147" id="Pg147" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the religious life may have been widely prevalent
+during the time of transition between the two ages—the
+transition falls at somewhat different dates in
+the eastern and western part of the Empire—but
+that weakening was soon overcome.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Now the peculiar result of this investigation of
+the state of religion among the upper classes seems
+to me to be this: the curve of intensity of religious
+feeling which conjecture leads us to draw through
+the spiritual life of the ancients as a whole, that
+same curve, but more distinct and sharply accentuated,
+is found again in the relations of the upper
+classes to the popular faith. Towards the close of
+the fifth century it looks as if the cultured classes
+that formed the centre of Greek intellectual life were
+outgrowing the ancient religion. The reaction
+which set in with Socrates and Plato certainly
+checked this movement, but it did not stop it.
+Cynics, Peripatetics, Stoics, Epicureans and
+Sceptics, in spite of their widely differing points of
+view, were all entirely unable to share the religious
+ideas of their countrymen in the form in which they
+were cast in the national religion. However many
+allowances they made, their attitude towards the
+popular faith was critical, and on important points
+they denied it. It is against the background thus
+resulting from ancient philosophy's treatment of
+ancient religion that we must view such phenomena
+as Polybius, Cicero, and Pliny the Elder, if we wish
+to understand their full significance.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+On the other hand, it is certain that this was not
+the view that conquered in the end among the
+educated classes in antiquity. The lower we come
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page148">[pg 148]</span><a name="Pg148" id="Pg148" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+down in the Empire the more evident does the positive
+relation of the upper class to the gods of the
+popular faith become. Some few examples have
+already been mentioned in the preceding pages. In
+philosophy the whole movement finds its typical
+expression in demonology, which during the later
+Empire reigned undisputed in the one or two schools
+that still retained any vitality. It is significant
+that its source was the earlier Platonism, with its
+very conservative attitude towards popular belief,
+and that it was taken over by the later Stoic school,
+which inaugurated the general religious reaction
+in philosophy. And it is no less significant that
+demonology was swallowed whole by the monotheistic
+religion which superseded ancient paganism,
+and for more than a thousand years was the recognised
+explanation of the nature thereof.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+In accordance with the line of development here
+sketched, the inquiry has of necessity been focused
+on two main points: Sophistic and the Hellenistic
+Age. Now it is of peculiar interest to note what small
+traces of pure atheism can after all be found here,
+in spite of all criticism of the popular faith. We
+have surmised its presence among a few prominent
+personalities in fifth-century Athens; we have
+found evidence of its extension in the same place
+in the period immediately following; and in the
+time of transition between the fourth and third
+centuries we have thought it likely that it existed
+among a very few philosophers, of whom none are in
+the first rank. Everywhere else we find adjustments,
+in part very serious and real concessions, to popular
+belief. Not to mention the attitude towards worship,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page149">[pg 149]</span><a name="Pg149" id="Pg149" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+which was only hostile in one sect of slight
+importance: the assumption of the divinity of
+the heavenly bodies which was common to the
+Academics, Peripatetics, and Stoics is really in
+principle an acknowledgement of the popular faith,
+whose conception of the gods was actually borrowed
+and applied, not to some philosophical abstraction,
+but to individual and concrete natural objects.
+The anthropomorphic gods of the Epicureans point
+in the same direction. In spite of their profound
+difference from the beings that were worshipped and
+believed in by the ordinary Greek, they are in
+complete harmony with the opinion on which all
+polytheism is based: that there are individual
+beings of a higher order than man. And though
+the Stoics in theory confined their acknowledgment
+of this doctrine to the heavenly bodies, in practice—even
+if we disregard demonology—they consistently
+brought it to bear upon the anthropomorphic gods,
+in direct continuation of the Socratic reaction against
+the atheistic tendencies of Sophistic.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+If now we ask ourselves what may be the cause
+of this peculiar dualism in the relationship of
+ancient thought to religion, though admitting the
+highly complex nature of the problem, we can
+scarcely avoid recognising a certain principle.
+Ancient thought outgrew the ancient popular faith;
+that is beyond doubt. Hence its critical attitude.
+But it never outgrew that supernaturalist view
+which was the foundation of the popular faith.
+Hence its concessions to the popular faith, even
+when it was most critical, and its final surrender
+thereunto. And that it never outgrew the foundation
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page150">[pg 150]</span><a name="Pg150" id="Pg150" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+of the popular faith is connected with its whole
+conception of nature and especially with its conception
+of the universe. We cannot indeed deny
+that the ancients had a certain feeling that nature
+was regulated by laws, but they only made imperfect
+attempts at a mechanical theory of nature in which
+this regulation of the world by law was carried
+through in principle, and with one brilliant exception
+they adhered implicitly to the geocentric conception
+of the universe. We may, I think, venture to
+assert with good reason that on such assumptions
+the philosophers of antiquity could not advance
+further than they did. In other words, on the given
+hypotheses the supernaturalist view was the correct
+one, the one that was most probable, and therefore
+that on which people finally agreed. A few chosen
+spirits may at any time by intuition, without any
+strictly scientific foundation, emancipate themselves
+entirely from religious errors; this also happened
+among the ancients, and on the first occasion
+was not unconnected with an enormous advance in
+the conception of nature. But it is certain that the
+views of an entire age are always decisively conditioned
+by its knowledge and interpretation of the
+universe surrounding it, and cannot in principle be
+emancipated therefrom.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Seen from this point of view, our brief sketch of
+the attitude of posterity towards the religion of the
+pagan world will also not be without interest. If,
+after isolated advances during the mighty awakening
+of the Renaissance, it is not until the transition
+from the seventeenth to the eighteenth century that
+we find the modern atheistic conception of the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page151">[pg 151]</span><a name="Pg151" id="Pg151" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+nature of the gods of the ancients established in
+principle and consistently applied, we can scarcely
+avoid connecting this fact with the advance of
+natural science in the seventeenth century, and not
+least with the victory of the heliocentric system.
+After the close of antiquity the pagan gods had receded
+to a distance, practically speaking, because
+they were not worshipped any more. No one
+troubled himself about them. But in theory one
+had got no further, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> no advance had been made
+on the ancients, and no advance could be made
+as long as supernaturalism was adhered to in
+connexion with the ancient view of the universe.
+Through monotheism the notions of the divinity
+of the sun, moon and planets had certainly been got
+rid of, but not so the notion of the world—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the
+globe enclosed within the firmament—as filled with
+personal beings of a higher order than man; and
+even the duty of turning the spheres to which the
+heavenly bodies were believed to be fastened was—quite
+consistently—assigned to some of these beings.
+As long as such notions were in operation, not only
+were there no grounds for denying the reality of the
+pagan gods, but there was every reason to assume it.
+So far we may rightly say that it was Copernicus,
+Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Kepler and Newton that
+did away with the traditional conception of ancient
+paganism.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Natural science, however, furnishes only the
+negative result that the gods of polytheism are not
+what they are said to be: real beings of a higher
+order than man. To reveal what they are, other
+knowledge is required. This was not attained until
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page152">[pg 152]</span><a name="Pg152" id="Pg152" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+long after the revival of natural science in the sixteenth
+and seventeenth centuries. The vacillation
+in the eighteenth century between various theories
+of the explanation of the nature of ancient polytheism—theories
+which were all false, though not equally
+false—is in this respect significant enough; likewise
+the gradual progress which characterises research
+in the nineteenth century, and which may be indicated
+by such names as Heyne, Buttmann, K. O.
+Müller, Lobeck, Mannhardt, Rohde, and Usener,
+to mention only some of the most important and
+omitting those still alive. Viewed in this light
+the development sketched here within a narrowly
+restricted field is typical of the course of European
+intellectual history from antiquity down to our day.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page153">[pg 153]</span><a name="Pg153" id="Pg153" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc23" id="toc23"></a>
+<a name="pdf24" id="pdf24"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Notes</span></h1>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+Of Atheism in Antiquity as defined here no treatment is known
+to me; but there exist an older and a newer book that deal with
+the question within a wider compass. The first of these is Krische,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Die theologischen Lehren der griechischen Denker</span></span> (Göttingen,
+1840); it is chiefly concerned with the philosophical conceptions of deity,
+but it touches also on the relations of philosophers to popular
+religion. The second is Decharme, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">La critique des traditions
+religieuses chez les Grecs</span></span> (Paris, 1904); it is not fertile in new points
+of view, but it has suggested several details which I might else
+have overlooked. Such books as Caird, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Evolution of Theology
+in the Greek Philosophers</span></span> (Glasgow, 1904), or Moon, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Religious
+Thought of the Greeks</span></span> (Cambridge, Mass., 1919), barely touch on
+the relation to popular belief; of Louis, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Les doctrines religieuses
+des philosophes grecs</span></span>, I have not been able to make use. I regret
+that Poul Helms, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Conception of God in Greek Philosophy</span></span>
+(Danish, in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Studier for Sprog-og Oldtidsforskning</span></span>, No. 115), was
+not published until my essay was already in the press. General works
+on Atheism are indicated in Aveling's article, <span class="tei tei-q">“Atheism,”</span> in the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Catholic Encyclopædia</span></span>, vol. ii., but none of them seem to be found
+at Copenhagen. In the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dictionary of Religion and Ethics</span></span>, ii.,
+there is a detailed article on Atheism in its relation to different
+religions; the section treating of Antiquity is written by Pearson,
+but is meagre. Works like Zeller, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philosophie der Griechen</span></span>, and
+Gomperz, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Griechische Denker</span></span>, contain accounts of the attitude of
+philosophers (Gomperz also includes others) towards popular
+belief; of these books I have of course made use throughout, but
+they are not referred to in the following notes except on special
+occasion. Scattered remarks and small monographs on details
+are naturally to be found in plenty. Where I have met with
+such and found something useful in them, or where I express
+dissent from them, I have noticed it; but I have not aimed at
+exhausting the literature on my subject. On the other hand I
+have tried to make myself completely acquainted with the first-hand
+material, wherever it gave a direct support for assuming
+Atheism, and to take my own view of it. In many cases, however,
+the argumentation has had to be indirect: it has been necessary
+to draw inferences from what an author does not say in a certain
+connexion when he might be expected to say it, or what he generally
+and throughout avoids mentioning, or from his general
+manner and peculiarities in his way of speaking of the gods. In
+such cases I have often had to be content with my previous knowledge
+and my general impression of the facts; but then I have
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page154">[pg 154]</span><a name="Pg154" id="Pg154" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+as a rule made use of the important modern literature on the
+subject. In working out the sketch of the ideas after the end of
+Antiquity, I have been almost without any guidance in modern
+literature. I have accordingly had to try, on the basis of a superficial
+acquaintance with some of the chief types, to form for myself,
+as best I might, some idea of the course of the evolution; but I
+have not been able to go systematically through the immense
+material, however fruitful such a research appeared to be. In
+the meantime, between the publication of my Danish essay and
+this translation, there has appeared a work by Mr. Gruppe,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte</span></span>
+(Leipzig, 1921). My task in writing my last chapters would have been
+much easier if I could have made use of Mr. Gruppe's learned
+and comprehensive treatment of the subject; but it would not
+have been superfluous, for Mr. Gruppe deals principally with the
+history of classical mythology, not with the history of the belief
+in the gods of antiquity. So I have ventured to let my sketch
+stand as it is, only reducing some of the notes (which I had on purpose
+made rather full, to aid others who might pursue the subject)
+by referring to Mr. Gruppe instead of to the sources themselves.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+For kindly helping me to find my bearings in out-of-the-way
+parts of my subject, I am indebted to my colleagues F. Buhl, I.L.
+Heiberg, I.C. Jacobsen and Kr. Nyrop, as well as to Prof. Martin
+P. Nilsson in Lund.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg001" class="tei tei-ref">1</a>. Definition of Atheism: see the article in the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Catholic Encycl.</span></span> vol. ii.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg005" class="tei tei-ref">5</a>. Atheism: see Murray, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">New Engl.
+Dict.</span></span>, under Atheism and -ism. The word seems to have come up in the Renaissance.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg006" class="tei tei-ref">6</a>. Criminal Law at Athens: see Lipsius,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Das attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren</span></span>, i. p. 358.—The
+definition in Aristotle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de virt. et vit.</span></span> 7, p.
+1251<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, has, I think, no legal foundation.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg009" class="tei tei-ref">9</a>. On the legal foundation for the trials of Christians, see
+Mommsen, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Der Religionsfreuel nach römischem Recht</span></span>
+(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ges. Schr.</span></span> iii. p. 389).—Mommsen goes too far, I think, in
+supposing a legal foundation for the trials of Christians; above all, I do not believe
+that the defection from the Roman religion was ever considered
+as maiestas in the technical sense of the word, the more so as it is
+certain that, after the earliest period, no difference was made in
+the treatment of citizens and aliens.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref">13</a>. Lists of atheists: Cicero, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de nat.
+deor.</span></span> 1. 1, 2 (comp. 1. 23, 26). Sext. Emp. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">hypotyp.</span></span> 3. 213;
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">adv. math.</span></span> 9. 50. Aelian, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">v.h.</span></span> 2. 31;
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de nat. an.</span></span> 6. 40.—The predicate
+<span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">atheos</span></span> is once applied to Anaxagoras by a
+Christian author (Irenaeus: see Diels, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span>
+46, A 113; compare also Marcellinus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">vit. Thuc.</span></span>, see below, note
+on p. 29). Of such isolated cases I have taken no account.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref">16</a>. On the dualism in the Greek conception of the nature of
+gods see Nägelsbach, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hom. Theol.</span></span> p. 11.—Pindar:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ol.</span></span> 1. 28, 9. 35; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pyth.</span></span> 3. 27.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg017" class="tei tei-ref">17</a>. Xenophanes: Einhorn, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Zeit- und
+Streitfragen der modernen Xenophanesforschung</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos.</span></span> xxxi.).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref">18</a>. Xenophanes's age: Diels,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 11, B 8.—His criticism of Homer and Hesiod:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> 11, 12.—Titans and Giants:
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page155">[pg 155]</span><a name="Pg155" id="Pg155" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> 1. 22.—Criticism of Anthropomorphism:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> 14-16.—Divination:
+Cic. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de div.</span></span> 1. 3, 5.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg019" class="tei tei-ref">19</a>. On Xenophanes's conception of God, comp.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 11, B 23-26; on the identification of God with the
+universe: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 11, A 30, 31, 33-36.—Cicero:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de div.</span></span> 1. 3, 5.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg021" class="tei tei-ref">21</a>. For Xenophanes's theology, comp. Freudenthal,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos.</span></span> i. p. 322, and Zeller's criticism,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> p. 524.
+Agreeing with Freudenthal: Decharme, p. 46; Campbell, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Religion
+in Greek Literature</span></span>, p. 293.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg021" class="tei tei-ref">21</a>. Parmenides does not even appear to have designated
+his <span class="tei tei-q">“Being”</span> as God (Zeller, i. p. 563).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg023" class="tei tei-ref">23</a>. In the eighteenth century people discussed diffusely
+the question whether Thales was an atheist (of course in the
+sense in which the word was taken at that time); comp. Tennemann,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gesch. d. Philos.</span></span> i. pp. 62 and 422. Tennemann remarks
+quite truly that the question is put wrongly.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg024" class="tei tei-ref">24</a>. Thales: Diels, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 1, A
+22-23.—Attitude of Democritus towards popular belief:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 55, A 74-79; comp.
+116, 117; B 166, and also B 30. Diels, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ueber den Dämonenglauben
+des D.</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos.</span></span> 1894, p. 154).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg025" class="tei tei-ref">25</a>. Trial of Anaxagoras: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span>
+46, A 1, 17, 18, 19.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg026" class="tei tei-ref">26</a>. Ram's head: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 46, A 16.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg027" class="tei tei-ref">27</a>. Geffcken (in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hermes</span></span>, 42, p. 127)
+has tried to make out something about a criticism of popular belief by Anaxagoras
+from some passages in Aristophanes (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nub.</span></span> 398) and Lucian
+(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tim.</span></span> 10, etc.), but I do not think he has
+succeeded.—Pericles a free-thinker: Plut. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pericl.</span></span> 6 and 38;
+comp. Decharme, p. 160.—Personality of Anaxagoras: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span>
+46, A 30 (Aristotle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Eud.
+Ethics</span></span>, A 4, p. 1215<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>, 6).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref">28</a>. Herodotus: 8, 77.—Sophocles:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Oed. rex.</span></span> 498, 863.—Diopeithes: Plut.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pericl.</span></span> 32 (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 46, A
+17).—Thucydides: Classen in the preface to his 3rd ed., p. lvii.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg029" class="tei tei-ref">29</a>. Thucydides, a disciple of Anaxagoras: Marcellinus,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">vit. Thuc.</span></span> 22.—Generally Thucydides is thought to have been
+more conservative in his religious opinions than I consider probable;
+see Classen, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">loc. cit.</span></span>; Decharme, p. 83; Gertz in his preface to
+the Danish translation of Thucydides, p. xxvii.—Hippo:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 26, A 4, 6, 8, 9; B 2, 3.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref">30</a>. Aristotle: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 26, A
+7.—Diogenes an atheist: Aelian, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">v.h.</span></span> 2, 31.—The air
+his god: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 51, A 8 (he thought
+that Homer identified Zeus with the air, and approved of this as
+οὐ μυθικῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀληθῶς εἰρημενον); B 5, 7, 8.—Allusions to his doctrines
+by Aristophanes: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nub.</span></span> 225, 828 (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span>
+51, C 1, 2).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg031" class="tei tei-ref">31</a>. A chief representative of the naïvely critical view of
+natural phenomena is for us Herodotus. The <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">locus classicus</span></span> is
+vii. 129; comp. Gomperz, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Griech. Denker</span></span>, i. p. 208; Heiberg,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Festskrift til Ussing</span></span> (Copenhagen, 1900), p. 91; Decharme, p.
+69.—Principal passages about Diagoras: Sext. Emp. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">adv.
+math.</span></span> 9, 53; Suidas, art. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diagoras II.</span></span>; schol. Aristoph.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nub.</span></span> 830 (the legend); Suidas, art. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diagoras
+I.</span></span>; Aristoph. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Av.</span></span> 1071 with schol.; schol.
+Aristoph. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ran.</span></span> 320; [Lysias] vi. 17; Diod. xiii. 16 (the decree);
+Philodem. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de piet.</span></span> p. 89 Gomp. (comments of Aristoxenus);
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page156">[pg 156]</span><a name="Pg156" id="Pg156" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Aelian, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">v.h.</span></span> ii. 22 (legislation at Mantinea).—Wilamowitz
+(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Textgesch. d. Lyr.</span></span> p. 80) has tried to save the tradition by
+supposing that the <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">acme</span></em> of Diagoras has been put too early. Comp. also his
+remarks, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Griech. Verskunst.</span></span> p. 426, where he has taken up the
+question again with reference to my treatment of it. As he has
+now conceded the possibility of referring the legislation to the
+earlier date, the difference between us is really very slight, and it
+is of course possible, perhaps even probable, that the acme of the
+poet has been antedated.—Aristoph. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Av.</span></span> 1071: <span class="tei tei-q">“On this
+very day it is made public, that if one of you kills Diagoras from Melos,
+he shall have a talent, and if one kills one of the dead tyrants, he
+shall have a talent.”</span> The parallel between the two decrees, of
+which the latter is of course an invention of Aristophanes, would
+be without point if the decree against Diagoras was not as futile
+as the decree against the tyrants (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the sons of Peisistratus,
+who had been dead some three-quarters of a century), that is, if it did
+not come many years too late.—Wilamowitz (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Griech. Verskunst,
+loc. cit.</span></span>) takes the sense to be: <span class="tei tei-q">“You will not get hold of Diagoras
+any more than you did of the tyrants.”</span> But this, besides being
+somewhat pointless, does not agree so well as my explanation
+with the introductory words: <span class="tei tei-q">“On this very day.”</span> On the other
+hand, I never meant to imply that Diagoras was dead in 415,
+but only that his offence was an old one—just as that of Protagoras
+probably was (see p. <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref">39</a>).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref">39</a>. Trial of Protagoras: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span>
+74, A 1-4, 23; the passage referring to the gods: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> B
+4.—Plato: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Theaet.</span></span> p. 162<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>
+(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 74, A 23).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg041" class="tei tei-ref">41</a>. Distinction between belief and knowledge by Protagoras:
+Gomperz, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Griech. Denker</span></span>, i. p. 359.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref">42</a>. Prodicus: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 77, B 5.
+Comp. Norvin, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Allegorien i den græske Philosophi</span></span>
+(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Edda</span></span>, 1919), p. 82. I cannot, however,
+quite adopt Norvin's view of the theory of Protagoras.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg044" class="tei tei-ref">44</a>. Critias: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 81, B
+25.—W. Nestle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jahrbb. f. Philol.</span></span> xi. (1903), pp. 81 and
+178, gives an exhaustive treatment of the subject, but I cannot share his view of it.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg046" class="tei tei-ref">46</a>. Euripides: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Suppl.</span></span>
+201.—Moschion: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trag. Fragm.</span></span> ed.
+Nauck (2nd ed.), p. 813.—Plato: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rep.</span></span> ii. 369b.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg047" class="tei tei-ref">47</a>. Democritus: Reinhardt in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hermes</span></span>,
+xlvii (1912), p. 503 In spite of Wilamowitz's objections (in his
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Platon</span></span>, ii. p. 214), I still consider it probable that Plato
+alludes to a philosophical theory.—Protagoras on the original state:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 74, B 8<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg048" class="tei tei-ref">48</a>. Euripides: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Electra, 737</span></span>
+(Euripides does not believe in the tale that the sun reversed its course on account of
+Thyestes's fraud against Atreus, and then adds: <span class="tei tei-q">“Fables that terrify men
+are a profit to the worship of the gods”</span>).—Aristotle:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Metaph.</span></span> A 8, 1074<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>; see text, p.
+85.—Polybius: vi. 56; see text pp. 90 and 114.—Plato's
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gorgias</span></span>, p. 482 and foll.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg049" class="tei tei-ref">49</a>.—Callicles: see <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span>
+Wilamowitz, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Platon</span></span>, i. p. 208.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg050" class="tei tei-ref">50</a>.—Thrasymachus: Plato, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Rep.</span></span>
+i. pp. 338<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">c</span></span>, 343<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>; comp.
+also ii. p. 358<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>. His remark on Providence
+(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vorsokr.</span></span> 78, B 8) runs
+thus: <span class="tei tei-q">“The gods do not see the things that are done among men;
+if they did, they would not overlook the greatest human good,
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page157">[pg 157]</span><a name="Pg157" id="Pg157" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+justice. For we find that men do not follow it.”</span> Comp. text,
+p. 61.—Diagoras as Critias's source: Nestle, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Jahrbb.</span></span>, 1903,
+p. 101.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg051" class="tei tei-ref">51</a>. Euripides: see W. Nestle,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Euripides</span></span> (Stuttgart, 1901)
+pp. 51-152. Here, too, the material is set forth exhaustively; the
+results seem to me inadmissible. Browning's theory (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">The Ring
+and the Book</span></span>, x. 1661 foll.) that Euripides did believe in the existence
+of the gods, but did not believe them to be perfect, is a possible,
+perhaps even a probable, explanation of many of his utterances;
+but it will hardly fit all of them. I have examined the question
+in an essay, <span class="tei tei-q">“Browning om Euripides”</span> in my <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Udvalgte
+Afhandlinger</span></span>, p. 55.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref">52</a>. Gods identified with the Elements:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bacch.</span></span> 274; fragm.
+839. 877, 941 (Nestle, p. 153).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg053" class="tei tei-ref">53</a>. Polemic against sophists: Nestle, p.
+206.—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Bellerophon</span></span>: fragm. 286.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg054" class="tei tei-ref">54</a>. <span class="tei tei-q">“If the gods——”</span>: fragm. 292, 7.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref">55</a>. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Melanippe</span></span>: fragm. 480. The words
+are said to have given offence at the rehearsal, so that Euripides altered them at
+the production of the play (Plut. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amat.</span></span> ch. 13).—Aeschylus:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Agam.</span></span> 160.—Aristophanes: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Thesmoph.</span></span>
+450.—In the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Frogs</span></span>, 892,
+Euripides prays to the Ether and other abstractions, not to the
+gods.—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Clouds</span></span>: 1371.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref">56</a>. Plato: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republ.</span></span> viii. p.
+568a.—Quotation from <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Melanippe</span></span>: Plut.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Amat.</span></span> 13.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg057" class="tei tei-ref">57</a>. Aristophanes and Naturalism: see note to p.
+<a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref">30</a>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg058" class="tei tei-ref">58</a>. Denial of the gods in the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Clouds</span></span>, 247, 367, 380, 423, 627,
+817, 825, 1232.—Moral of the piece: 1452-1510.—In Aristophanes's
+own travesties of the gods, scholars have found evidence for a
+weakening of popular belief, but this is certainly wrong; comp.
+Decharme, p. 109.—Words like <span class="tei tei-q">“believe”</span> and <span class="tei tei-q">“belief”</span> do not
+cover the Greek word νομίζειν, which signifies at once <span class="tei tei-q">“believe”</span>
+and <span class="tei tei-q">“be in the habit,”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“use habitually,”</span> so that it covers both
+belief and worship—an ambiguity that is characteristic of Greek
+religion.—Xenophon: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memorab.</span></span> i. 1;
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol. Socr.</span></span> 10 and foll.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg059" class="tei tei-ref">59</a>. Plato: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol.</span></span> p.
+24<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span> (the indictment); 26<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span> (the refutation).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref">60</a>. Aristodemus: Xenoph. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memor.</span></span> i.
+4.—Cinesias: Decharme, p. 135.—The Hermocopidae: Decharme, p. 152. Beloch,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. of Greece</span></span>, ii. 1, p. 360, has another explanation. To my
+argument it is of no consequence what special motive is assigned for
+the crime, as long as it is a political one.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg061" class="tei tei-ref">61</a>. Plato on impiety: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, x. p.
+886b; comp. xii. p. 967<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>.
+Curiously enough, the same tripartition of the wrong attitude
+towards the gods occurs already in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span>, ii. p.
+365<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>, where it is introduced incidentally as well known and a
+matter of course.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg062" class="tei tei-ref">62</a>. Euripides: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span>
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hecuba</span></span>, 488; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Suppl.</span></span> 608.—Reference
+to Anaxagoras: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, x. p. 886<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>; to
+Sophistic, 889<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg065" class="tei tei-ref">65</a>. Plato in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>: p.
+19<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">c</span></span>.—Socrates's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">daimonion</span></span>
+a proof of <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">asebeia</span></span>: Xenoph.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memorab.</span></span> i. 1, 2; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol</span></span>.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Socr.</span></span> 12; Plato, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol.</span></span> p.
+31<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg066" class="tei tei-ref">66</a>. Accusation of teaching the doctrine of Anaxagoras:
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page158">[pg 158]</span><a name="Pg158" id="Pg158" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Plato, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol.</span></span> p. 26<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>; comp. Xenoph.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memor.</span></span> i. 1, 10.—Plato's
+defence of Socrates: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol.</span></span> p. 27<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg067" class="tei tei-ref">67</a>. Xenophon's defence of Socrates:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memor.</span></span> i. 1, 2; 6 foll., 10 foll.—Teleological view of
+nature: Xenoph. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Memor.</span></span> i. 4; iv. 3.—On
+the religious standpoint of Socrates, comp. my <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Udvalgte
+Afhandlinger</span></span>, p. 38.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg068" class="tei tei-ref">68</a>. Plato's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>, p.
+21<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>, 23<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span> and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">f</span></span>,
+etc.—The gods all-knowing: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Odyss.</span></span> iv. 379 and 468; comp.
+Nägelsbach, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hom. Theol.</span></span>
+p. 18; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nachhom. Theol.</span></span> p. 23.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg069" class="tei tei-ref">69</a>. The gods just: Nägelsbach, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hom.
+Theol.</span></span> p. 297; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nachhom. Theol.</span></span> p. 27.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg071" class="tei tei-ref">71</a>. The relation between early religious thought and Delphi
+has been explained correctly by Sam Wide, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Einleit. in die
+Altertumswissensch.</span></span>, ii. p. 221; comp. also I. L. Heiberg in
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Tilskueren</span></span>, 1919, ii. p. 44.—Honours shown to Pindar at
+Delphi: schol. Pind. ed. Drachm. i. p. 2, 14; 5, 6. Pausan, x. 24. 5.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg072" class="tei tei-ref">72</a>. Plato on the Delphic Oracle:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol.</span></span> p. 20<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e</span></span>. On the
+following comp. I. L. Heiberg, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">loc. cit.</span></span> p. 45.—Socrates on
+his <span lang="el" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="el"><span style="font-style: italic">daimonion</span></span>: Plato,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol.</span></span> p. 31<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">c</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref">74</a>. Antisthenes: Ritter, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hist. philos.
+Gr.</span><span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic; vertical-align: super">9</span></span></span> 285.—On the
+later Cynics, especially Diogenes, see Diog. Laert. vi. 105 (the gods
+are in need of nothing); Julian, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Or.</span></span> vi. p.
+199<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span> (Diogenes did not worship the gods).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref">75</a>. Cyrenaics: Diog. Laert. ii. 91.—Date of Theodorus:
+Diog. Laert. ii. 101, 103; his book on the gods: Diog. Laert. ii. 97,
+Sext. Emp. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">adv. math.</span></span> ix. 55; his trial: Diog. Laert. ii. 101.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg076" class="tei tei-ref">76</a>. Theodorus's book used by Epicurus: Diog. Laert. ii.
+97.—Zeller: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Philos. d. Griechen</span></span>, ii. 1, p.
+925.—Euthyphron: see especially p. 14<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span> foll.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref">77</a>. Criticism of Mythology in the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span>: ii. p. 377<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span> foll.;
+worship presupposed: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> iii. p. 415<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e</span></span>; v.
+p. 459<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e</span></span>, 461<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, 468<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>,
+469<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, 470<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>; vii. p.
+540<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>; reference to the Oracle: iv. p.
+427<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>.—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span>:
+p. 40<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span> foll.—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, rules of worship:
+vi. p. 759<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, vii. p. 967<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span> and
+elsewhere, x. p. 909<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>; capital punishment for atheists: x. p.
+909<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>. Comp. above, on p. 61.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref">78</a>. Atheism a sin of youth: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, x.
+p. 888<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>.—Goodness and truth of the gods:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republ.</span></span> ii. p. 379<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>,
+380<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>, 382<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>.—Belief in
+Providence: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, x. p. 885<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">c</span></span>, etc.;
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republ.</span></span> x. p. 612<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e</span></span>;
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apol.</span></span> p. 41<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg079" class="tei tei-ref">79</a>. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, x. p.
+888<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>, 893<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span> foll., especially
+899<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">c-d</span></span>; comp. also xii. p.
+967<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a-c.</span></span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span>: p.
+40<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d-f</span></span>. Comp. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, xii. p.
+948<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg080" class="tei tei-ref">80</a>. The gods in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span>, ii.
+p. 380<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>. This passage,
+taken together with Plato's general treatment of popular belief,
+might lead to the hypothesis that it was Plato's doctrine of ideas
+rather than the rationalism of his youth that brought about strained
+relations between his thought and popular belief. I incline to
+think that such is the case; but there is a long step even from such
+a state of things to downright atheism, and the stress Plato always
+laid on the belief in Providence is a strong argument in favour of
+his belief in the gods, for he could never make his ideas act in the
+capacity of Providence.—The gods as creators of mankind:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span>, p. 41<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span> foll.
+</p>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page159">[pg 159]</span><a name="Pg159" id="Pg159" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref">81</a>. Xenocrates: the exposition of his doctrine given in the
+text is based upon Heinze's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Xenokrates</span></span> (Leipzig, 1892).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref">83</a>. Trial of Aristotle: Diog. Laert. v. 5; Athen. xv. p.
+696.—The writings of Aristotle that have come down to us are almost
+all of them compositions for the use of his disciples, and were not
+accessible to the general public during his lifetime.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref">84</a>. On the religious views of Aristotle see in general
+Zeller, ii. 2, p. 787 (Engl. transl. ii. p. 325); where the references to his
+writings are given in full. In the following I indicate only a few
+passages of special interest.—Discussion of worship precluded:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Top.</span></span> A, xi. p. 105<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, 5.—Aristotle's
+Will: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Diog</span></span>. Laert. v. 15.—The
+gods as determining the limits of the human: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span>
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nic. Eth.</span></span> K, viii. p. 1178b, 33: <span class="tei tei-q">“(the wise) will also be in
+need of outward prosperity, as he is (only) a man.”</span>—Reservations in speaking of
+the gods, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nic. Eth.</span></span> K, ix. p.
+1179<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, 13: <span class="tei tei-q">“he who is active in
+accordance with reason ... must also be supposed to be the most
+beloved of the gods; for if the gods trouble themselves about human
+affairs—<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">and that they do so is generally taken for granted</span></em>—it
+must be probable that they take pleasure in what is best and most
+nearly related to themselves (<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">and that must be the reason</span></em>), and
+that they reward those who love and honour this most highly,”</span>
+etc. The passage is typical both of the hypothetical way of speaking,
+and of the twist in the direction of Aristotle's own conception
+of the deity (whose essence is reason); also of the Socratic manner
+of dealing with the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg085" class="tei tei-ref">85</a>. The passage quoted is from the
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Metaphysics</span></span>, A viii. p. 1074<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, 38. Comp.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Metaph.</span></span> B, ii. p. 997<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">b</span></span>, 8; iv. p.
+1000<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">a</span></span>, 9.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg086" class="tei tei-ref">86</a>. Theophrastus: Diog. Laert. v. 37.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg087" class="tei tei-ref">87</a>. Strato: Diels, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ueber das physikal.
+System des S., Sitzungsber. d. Berl. Akad.</span></span>, 1893, p. 101.—His god the same as
+nature: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Cic. de nat. deor.</span></span> i. 35.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg089" class="tei tei-ref">89</a>. On the history of Hellenistic religion, see Wendland,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Die hellenistisch-römische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen z. Judentum
+u. Christentum</span></span> (Tübingen, 1907).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg090" class="tei tei-ref">90</a>. The passage quoted is Polyb. vi. 56, 6.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg092" class="tei tei-ref">92</a>. On the Tyche-Religion, see Nägelsbach,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Nachhom. Theologie</span></span>, p. 153; Lehrs, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Populäre
+Aufsätze</span></span>, p. 153; Rohde, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Griech.
+Roman</span></span>, p. 267 (1st ed.); Wendland, p. 59.—Thucydides: see
+Classen in the introduction to his (3rd) edition, pp. lvii-lix, where
+all the material is collected. A conclusive passage is vii. 36, 6,
+where Thuc. makes the bigoted Nicias before a decisive battle
+express the hope that <span class="tei tei-q">“Fortune”</span> will favour the Athenians.—Demosthenes's
+dream: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aeschin.</span></span> iii. 77.—Demosthenes on Tyche:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Olynth.</span></span> ii. 22; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de cor.</span></span> 252.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref">93</a>. Demosthenes and the Pythia:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aesch.</span></span> iii. 130. Comp. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> 68, 131, 152;
+Plutarch, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dem.</span></span> 20.—Demetrius of Phalerum:
+Polyb. xxix. 21.—Temples of Tyche: Roscher, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mythol. Lex.</span></span>,
+art. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Fortuna</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg094" class="tei tei-ref">94</a>. Tyche mistress of the gods: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Trag.
+adesp. fragm.</span></span> 506, Nauck; [Dio Chrys.] lxiv. p. 331 R.—Polybius: i. 1; iii.
+5, 7.—The reservations against Tyche as a principle for the explaining of
+historical facts, and the twisting of the notion in the direction of
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page160">[pg 160]</span><a name="Pg160" id="Pg160" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+Providence found in certain passages in Polybius, do not concern us
+here; they are probably due to the Stoic influence he underwent
+during his stay at Rome. Comp. below, on p. 114, and see Cuntz,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Polybios</span></span> (Leipzig, 1902), p. 43.—Pliny: ii. 22 foll.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg095" class="tei tei-ref">95</a>. Tyche in the novels: Rohde, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Griech.
+Rom.</span></span> p. 280.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref">97</a>. Strabo: xvii. p. 813.—Plutarch:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de def. or.</span></span> 5 and 7.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref">98</a>. The Aetolians at Dium: Polyb. iv. 62; at Dodona,
+iv. 67; Philip at Thermon, v. 9; Dicaearchus, xviii. 54.—Decay of
+Roman worship: Wissowa, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Religion u. Kultus d. Römer</span></span>, p. 70 (2nd
+ed.). To this work I must refer for indications of the sources; but
+the polemic in the text is chiefly directed against Wissowa.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg099" class="tei tei-ref">99</a>. Ennius: comp. below, p. 112.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg100" class="tei tei-ref">100</a>. Varro: in Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de civ.
+Dei</span></span>, vi. 2.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg103" class="tei tei-ref">103</a>. Theology of the Stoics: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 309-45.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref">104</a>. Demonology of the Stoics: Heinze,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Xenokrates</span></span>, p. 96.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref">105</a>. Epicurus's theology: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 427-38. Comp.
+Schwartz, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Charakterköpfe</span></span>, ii. p. 43.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg106" class="tei tei-ref">106</a>. Epicurus's doctrine of the eternity of the gods
+criticised: Cic. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de nat. deor.</span></span> i. 68 foll.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg107" class="tei tei-ref">107</a>. The Sceptics: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 507 and 521.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref">109</a>. Diogenes: see note on p. 74.—Bion: Diog. Laert.
+iv. 52 and 54.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref">110</a>. Menippos: R. Helm, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lukian u.
+Menipp</span></span> (Leipzig and Berlin, 1906).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref">111</a>. Euhemerus: Jacoby in Pauly-Wissowa's
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Realencyclop.</span></span>, art. <span class="tei tei-q">“Euemeros”</span>; Wendland,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hellenist. Kultur</span></span>, p. 70.—Euhemerism
+before Euhemerus: Lobeck, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aglaophamus</span></span>, p. 9; Wendland, p. 67.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg112" class="tei tei-ref">112</a>. A Danish scholar, Dr. J. P. Jacobsen
+(<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Afhandlinger og Artikler</span></span>, p. 490), seems to think that
+Euhemerus's theory was influenced by the worship of heroes. But there is nothing to show
+that Euhemerus supposed his gods to have continued their existence
+after their death, though this would have been in accordance
+with Greek belief even in the Hellenistic period; he seems rather
+to have insisted that they were worshipped as gods during their
+lifetime (comp. Jacoby, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">loc. cit.</span></span>).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref">114</a>. Euhemerism in Polybius: xxxiv. 2; comp. x. 10,
+11.—Relapse into orthodoxy: xxxvii. 9 (the decisive passage); xxxix.
+19, 2 (concluding prayer to the gods); xviii. 54, 7-10; xxiii. 10, 14
+(the gods punish impiety; comp. xxxvii. 9, 16). There is a marked
+contrast between such passages and the way Polybius speaks of
+Philip's destruction of the sanctuary at Thermon; he blames it
+severely, but merely on political, not on religious grounds (v. 9-12).
+Orthodox utterances in the older portions of the work (i. 84, 10;
+x. 2, 7) may be due to that accommodation to popular belief which
+Polybius himself acknowledges as justifiable (xvi. 12, 9), but also
+to later revision.—Influence of Stoicism: Hirzel, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Untersuchungen
+zu Ciceros philos. Schriften</span></span>, ii. p. 841.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg115" class="tei tei-ref">115</a>. Cicero's Stoicism in his philosophy of religion:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de nat. deor.</span></span> iii. 40, 95.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg116" class="tei tei-ref">116</a>. Sanctuary to Tullia: Cic. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ad
+Att.</span></span> xii. 18 foll.; several of the letters (23, 25, 35, 36) show that Atticus
+disapproved of the
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page161">[pg 161]</span><a name="Pg161" id="Pg161" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+idea, and that Cicero himself was conscious that it was unworthy
+of him.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref">117</a>. Euhemeristic defence: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">fragm.
+consol.</span></span> 14, 15.—Augustus's reorganisation of the cults: Wissowa,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Religion u. Kultus d. Römer</span></span>,
+p. 73. Recent scholars, especially when treating of Virgil (Heinze,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Vergils ep. Technik</span></span>, 3rd ed. p. 291; Norden,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Aeneis</span></span>, vi. 2nd ed.
+pp. 314, 318, 362), speak of the reform of Augustus as if it involved
+a real revulsion of feeling in his contemporaries. This is in my
+opinion a complete misunderstanding of the facts. Virgil's religious
+views: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Catal. v., Georgics</span></span>, ii. 458.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg118" class="tei tei-ref">118</a>. Pliny: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">hist. nat.</span></span> ii. 1-27.
+The passages translated are §§ 14 and 27.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref">122</a>. Seneca: fragm. 31-39, Haase.—Stoic polemic
+against atheism: Epictetus, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">diss.</span></span> ii. 20, 21; comp. Marcus
+Aurelius, vi. 44.—Later Cynicism: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 763.—Oenomaus: only
+preserved in excerpts by Euseb. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">praep. evang.</span></span> 5-6 (a separate
+edition is wanted).—His polemic directed against the priests: Euseb. 5,
+p. 213<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">c</span></span>; comp. Oenomaus himself, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> 6,
+p. 256<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">d</span></span>.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg123" class="tei tei-ref">123</a>. Lucian: see Christ, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gesch. d.
+griech. Litt.</span></span> ii. 2, p. 550 (5th ed.), and R. Helm, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lukian u.
+Menipp</span></span> (see note to p. 110).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref">124</a>. Timon: ch. x.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg126" class="tei tei-ref">126</a>. On Lucian's caution in attacking the really popular
+gods, see Wilamowitz, in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Kultur d. Gegenwart</span></span>, i. 8, p.
+248.—The Jews atheists: Harnack, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Der Vorwurf d. Atheismus in den
+3 ersten Jahrh</span></span>. (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Texte u. Unters.</span></span>, N.F., xiii. 4), p. 3.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref">127</a>. I have met with no comprehensive treatment of Jewish
+and Christian polemic against Paganism; Geffcken, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Zwei griech.
+Apologeten</span></span> (Leipzig, 1907), is chiefly concerned with investigations
+into the sources. I shall therefore indicate the principal passages
+on which my treatment is based.—Polemic against images in the
+Old Testament: Isaiah 44.10 etc.; in later literature: Epistle
+of Jeremiah; Wisdom of Solomon 13 foll.; Philo, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de decal.</span></span> 65 foll.,
+etc.—Euhemerism: Wisdom of Solomon 14.15; Epistle of Aristeas,
+135; Sibyll. iii. 547, 554, 723.—Elements and celestial bodies:
+Wisdom of Solomon 13; Philo, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de decal.</span></span> 52 foll.—The tenacity
+of tradition is apparent from the fact that even Maimonides in his
+treatise of idolatry deals only with star-worship and image-worship.
+I know the treatise only from the Latin translation by D. Voss
+(in G. I. Voss's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opera</span></span>, vol. v.).—Demons: Deuteron. 32.17;
+Psalms 106.37; add (according to LXX.) Isaiah 65.11; Psalms
+96.5. Later writers: Enoch 19.99, 7; Baruch 4.7. Such passages
+as Jub. 22, 17 or Sibyll. prooem. 22 are possibly Euhemeristic.—Fallen
+angels: Enoch, 19.—Philo's demonology: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de gig.</span></span> 6-18, etc.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref">128</a>. St. Paul: 1 Cor. 10.20; comp. 8.4 and Rom. 1.23.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref">129</a>. Image-worship and demon-worship not conciliated:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> Tertull. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Apologet.</span></span> 10-15 and 22-23,
+comp. 27.—Jewish demonology: Bousset, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Religion d. Judentums</span></span>,
+p. 326 (1st ed.).—Fallen angels: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> Athenag. 24 foll.;
+Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Enchir.</span></span> 9, 28 foll.;
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de civ. Dei</span></span>, viii. 22.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg130" class="tei tei-ref">130</a>. Euhemerism in the Apologists:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de civ.
+Dei</span></span>, ii. 10; vi. 7; vii. 18 and 33; viii. 26.—Euhemerism and
+demonology combined: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de civ.
+Dei</span></span>, ii. 10; vii. 35;
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page162">[pg 162]</span><a name="Pg162" id="Pg162" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+comp. vii. 28 fin.—Worship of the heavenly bodies: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span>
+Aristid. 3 foll.; Augustine, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de civ. Dei</span></span>, vii. 29 foll.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg131" class="tei tei-ref">131</a>. Paganism a delusion caused by demons: Thomas Aq.
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Summa theol.</span></span> P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. below, note on p. 135.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg133" class="tei tei-ref">133</a>. For the following sketch I have found valuable material
+in Gedike's essay, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ueber die mannigfaltigen Hypothesen z. Erklärung
+d. Mythologie</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Verm. Schriften</span></span>, Berlin, 1801, p. 61).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg134" class="tei tei-ref">134</a>. Milton: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Paradise Lost</span></span>, i. 506.
+The theory that the pagan oracles fell mute at the rise of Christianity is also found in
+Milton, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Hymn on the Morning of Christ's Nativity</span></span>, st. xviii. foll.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref">135</a>. G. I. Voss; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De Theologia
+Gentili</span></span>, lib. i. (published, 1642)—Voss's
+view is in the main that idolatry as a whole is the work of the
+Devil. What is worshipped is partly the heavenly bodies, partly
+demons, partly (and principally) dead men; most of the ancient
+gods are identified with persons from the Old Testament. Demon-worship
+is dealt with in ch. 6; it is proved among other things by
+the true predictions of the oracles. Individual Greek deities are
+identified with demons in ch. 7, in a context where oracles are
+dealt with. On older works of the same tendency, see below,
+note on p. 140; on Natalis Comes, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">ibid.</span></span> A fuller treatment of
+Voss's theories is found in Gruppe's work, § 25.—Thomas Aquinas:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Summa theol.</span></span> P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. also Q. 122, art.
+2.—Dante: Sommo Giove for God, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Purg.</span></span> vi. 118; his devils:
+Charon, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inf.</span></span> iii. 82 (109 expressly designated as <span class="tei tei-q">“dimonio”</span>);
+Minos, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inf.</span></span> v. 4; Geryon, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inf.</span></span> xviii.
+(there are more of the same kind).—<span class="tei tei-q">“Dei falsi e bugiardi”</span>:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inf.</span></span> i. 72. (Plutus, who appears as a
+devil in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Inf.</span></span> vii. was probably taken by Dante for an antique god;
+but the name may also be a classicising translation of Mammon.)
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref">136</a>. Mediaeval epic poets: Nyrop, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Den
+oldfranske Heltedigtning</span></span>, p. 255 and 260; Dernedde, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ueber die den
+altfranzös. Dichtern bekannten Stoffe aus dem Altertum</span></span> (Diss. Götting.
+1887).—Confusion of ancient and Christian elements: Dernedde, p. 10;
+the gods are devils: Dernedde, pp. 85, 88.—Euhemerism: Dernedde,
+p. 4.—I have tried to get a first-hand impression of the way
+the gods are treated by the old French epic poets, but the material
+is too large, and indexes suited to the purpose are wanting. The
+paganism of the original is taken over naïvely, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span>, by Veldeke,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Eneidt</span></span>, i. 45, 169.—On magic I have consulted Horst's
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dämonomagie</span></span> (Frankf. 1818); and his
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Zauber-Bibliothek</span></span> (Mainz, 1821-26); Schindler,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Der Aberglaube des Mittelalters</span></span> (Breslau, 1858); Maury,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">La magie et l'astrologie dans l'antiquité et au moyen âge</span></span> (Paris,
+1860). These authors all agree that mediaeval magic is dependent on
+antiquity, but that the pagan gods are superseded by devils (or the
+Devil). The connexion in substance with antiquity, on which
+Maury specially insists, is certain enough, but does not concern us
+here, where the question is about the theory. In the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Zauber-Bibl.</span></span>
+i. p. 137 (in the treatise <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Pneumatologia vera et occulta</span></span>), the
+snake Python is put down among the demons, with the remark that
+Apollo was called after it.—Magic formulae with antique gods:
+Heim, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Incantamenta magica</span></span> (in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Neue Jahrbb.
+f. Philologie</span></span>, Suppl. xix. 1893, p. 557; I owe this reference to the kindness of
+my colleague, Prof. Groenbeck). Pradel, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Religionsgesch. Vers. u.
+</span><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page163">[pg 163]</span><a name="Pg163" id="Pg163" class="tei tei-anchor"></a><span style="font-style: italic">
+Vorarb.</span></span> iii., has collected prayers and magic formulae from Italy
+and Greece; they do not contain names of antique gods.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref">137</a>. Acosta: Joseph de Acosta, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Historia
+naturale e morale delle Indie</span></span>, Venice, 1596. I have used this Italian translation;
+the original work appeared in 1590.—Demons at work in oracles:
+bk. v. ch. 9; in magic: ch. 25.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref">138</a>. Demon in Brazil: Voss, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Theol.
+Gent.</span></span> i. ch. 8.—Pagan
+worship in the Florentine and Roman Academies: Voigt, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Wiederbelebung
+d. klass. Altertums</span></span>, ii. p. 239 (2nd ed.); Hettner, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Ital.
+Studien</span></span>, p. 174.—On the conception of the antique gods in the
+earlier Middle Ages, see Gruppe, § 4.—Thomas Aquinas: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Summa
+theol.</span></span> P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4.—Curious and typical of the mediaeval
+way of reasoning is the idea of seeking prototypes of the Christian
+history of salvation in pagan mythology. See v. Eicken, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Gesch. u.
+System d. mittelalt. Weltanschauung</span></span> (Stuttg. 1887), p. 648, and (with
+more detail) F. Piper, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mythologie u. Symbolik d. christl. Kunst</span></span>
+(Weimar, 1847-51), i. p. 143; comp. also Gruppe, § 8 foll. Good instances
+are the myths in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Speculum humanae salvationis</span></span>, chs. 3 and 24.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref">139</a>. On Hebraism in general, see Gruppe, § 19 and § 24 foll.;
+on Huet, § 28. Nevertheless, Huet operates with demonology in
+connexion with the oracles (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Dem. evang.</span></span> ii. 9, 34, 4).
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref">140</a>. On Natalis Comes, see Gruppe, § 19. In bk. i. ch. 7,
+Natalis Comes gives an account of the origin of antiquity's conceptions
+of the gods; it has quite a naturalistic turn. Nevertheless,
+we find in ch. 16 a remark which shows that he embraced
+demonology in its crudest form; compare also the theory set forth
+in ch. 10. His interpretations of myths are collected in bk. x.—On
+Bacon, see Gruppe, § 22. Typhoeus-myth: introduct. to <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De
+sapientia veterum.</span></span>—Alchemistic interpretations: Gedike, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Verm.
+Schriften</span></span>, p. 78; Gruppe, § 30. Of the works quoted by Gedike, I
+have consulted Faber's <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Panchymicum</span></span> (Frankf. 1651) and Toll's
+Fortuita (Amsterd. 1687). Faber has only some remarks on the
+matter in bk. i. ch. 5; by Toll the alchemistic interpretation is
+carried through. Gedike quotes, moreover, a work by Suarez de
+Salazar, which must date from the sixteenth century; according
+to Jöcher (iv. 1913) it only exists in MS., and I do not know where
+Gedike got his reference.—Thomas: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Summa</span></span>, P. ii. 2, Q. 172,
+arts. 5 and 6.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref">141</a>. Demonology as explanation of the oracles: see van
+Dale, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De oraculis</span></span>, p. 430 (Amsterd. 1700); he quotes numerous
+treatises from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I have
+glanced at Moebius, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De oraculorum ethnicorum origine</span></span>, etc.
+(Leipzig, 1656).—Caelius Rhodiginus: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Lectionum antiq.</span></span>
+(Leyden, 1516), lib. ii. cap. 12; comp. Gruppe, § 15.—Caelius Calcagninus:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Oraculorum liber</span></span> (in his <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Opera</span></span>, Basle,
+1544, p. 640). The little dialogue is not very easy to understand; it is evidently a
+satire on contemporary credulity; but that Caelius completely rejected
+divination seems to be assumed also by G. I. Voss, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Theol. Gent.</span></span>
+i. 6.—Machiavelli: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Discorsi</span></span>, i. 56.—Van Dale:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De oraculis gentilium</span></span> (1st ed. Amsterd. 1683);
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De idololatria</span></span> (Amsterd. 1696). Difficulties with the biblical
+accounts of demons: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">De idol.</span></span>, dedication.—Fontenelle:
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Histoire des oracles</span></span> (Paris, 1687). The little book
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page164">[pg 164]</span><a name="Pg164" id="Pg164" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+has an amusing preface, in which Fontenelle with naïve complacency
+(and with a sharp eye for van Dale's deficiencies of style) gives
+an account of his popularisation of the learned work. On Fontenelle
+and the answer by the Jesuit, Balthus, see for further details
+Banier, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">La mythologie et les fables expliquées par l'histoire</span></span>
+(Paris, 1738), bk. iii. ch. 1. Van Dale's book itself had called forth an
+answer by Moebius (included in the edition of 1690 of his work,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">de orac. ethn. orig.</span></span>).—On the influence exercised by van
+Dale and Fontenelle on the succeeding mythologists, see Gruppe, § 34.—Banier:
+see Gruppe, § 35.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg143" class="tei tei-ref">143</a>. Vico: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Scienza nuova</span></span> (Milan,
+1853), p. 168 (bk. ii. in the section, Della metafisica poetica); political allegories,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">e.g.</span></span> p. 309
+(in the Canone mitologico). Comp. Gruppe, § 44.—Banier: in
+the work indicated above, bk. i. ch. 5.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref">144</a>. On the mythological theories of the eighteenth century,
+comp. Gruppe, § 36 foll.; on Bryant, § 40; on Dupuis, § 41.—Polemic
+against Euhemerism from the standpoint of nature-symbolism:
+de la Barre, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire de la
+religion en Grèce</span></span>, in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mém. de l'Acad. des Inscr.</span></span> xxiv.
+(1749; the treatise had already been communicated in 1737 and 1738); a
+posthumous continuation in <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Mém.</span></span> xxix. (1770) gives an idea of
+de la Barre's own point of view, which was not a little in advance
+of his time. Comp. Gruppe, § 37.
+</p>
+
+<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">
+P. <a href="#Pg145" class="tei tei-ref">145</a>. A good survey of modern investigations in the field of
+the history of ancient religion is given by Sam Wide in the <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Einleit.
+in die Altertumswissensch.</span></span> ii.; here also remarks on the mythology
+of older times. The later part of Gruppe's work contains a very full
+treatment of the subject.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page165">[pg 165]</span><a name="Pg165" id="Pg165" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<hr class="page" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+<a name="toc25" id="toc25"></a>
+<a name="pdf26" id="pdf26"></a>
+<h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Index</span></h1>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Absolute definitions of the divine, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>, <a href="#Pg019" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">19</a>, <a href="#Pg068" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">68</a>, <a href="#Pg069" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">69</a>, <a href="#Pg082" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">82</a>, <a href="#Pg088" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">88</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Academics, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Academy, later, <a href="#Pg108" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">108</a>, <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Acosta, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aelian, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aeneid (mediaeval), <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aeschines, <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">93</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aeschylus, <a href="#Pg054" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">54</a>, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aetolians, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>, <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">98</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Alchemistic explanation of Paganism, <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">140</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Alcibiades, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Alexander the Great, <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">93</a>, <a href="#Pg112" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">112</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<a name="index-allegorical-interpretation" id="index-allegorical-interpretation" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Allegorical interpretation, <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">104</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">140</a>, <a href="#Pg143" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">143</a>, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">American Paganism, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, <a href="#Pg007" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">7</a>, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg025" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">25-29</a>, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30</a>, <a href="#Pg031" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">31</a>, <a href="#Pg040" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">40</a>, <a href="#Pg062" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">62</a>, <a href="#Pg063" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">63</a>, <a href="#Pg066" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">66</a>, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Anaximenes, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Angelology, <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">129</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Anthropomorphism, <a href="#Pg014" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">14</a>, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>, <a href="#Pg019" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">19</a>, <a href="#Pg069" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">69</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Antisthenes, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">109</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Apologists, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>, <a href="#Pg130" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">130</a>, <a href="#Pg132" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">132</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Arcissewsky, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aristides the Apologist, <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">129</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aristides Rhetor, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aristodemus, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>, <a href="#Pg062" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">62</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aristophanes, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30</a>, <a href="#Pg032" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">32</a>, <a href="#Pg033" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">33</a>, <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">39</a>, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>, <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">56-58</a>, <a href="#Pg065" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">65</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Birds</span></span>, <a href="#Pg032" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">32</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Clouds</span></span>, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30</a>, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>, <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">56-58</a></div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Frogs</span></span>, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aristotle, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30</a>, <a href="#Pg032" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">32</a>, <a href="#Pg046" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">46</a>, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83-87</a>, <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">104</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Ethics</span></span>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Metaphysics</span></span>, <a href="#Pg085" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">85-86</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Politics</span></span>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aristoxenus, <a href="#Pg032" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">32</a>, <a href="#Pg033" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">33</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Asclepius, <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">111</a>, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>, <a href="#Pg126" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">126</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Asebeia</span></span>, <a href="#Pg006" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">6</a>, <a href="#Pg007" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">7</a>, <a href="#Pg008" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">8</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aspasia, <a href="#Pg027" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">27</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Atheism (and Atheist) defined, <a href="#Pg001" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">1</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">rare in antiquity, <a href="#Pg002" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">2</a>, <a href="#Pg133" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">133</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">of recent origin, <a href="#Pg002" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">2</a>, <a href="#Pg143" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">143</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">origin of the words, <a href="#Pg005" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">5</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">lists of atheists, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">punishable by death in Plato's <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">77</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">sin of youth, <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">78</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Athene, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Athens, its treatment of atheism, <a href="#Pg006" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">6-8</a>, <a href="#Pg009" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">9</a>, <a href="#Pg012" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">12</a>, <a href="#Pg025" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">25</a>, <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">39</a>, <a href="#Pg065" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">65</a> foll., <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75</a>, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>, <a href="#Pg086" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">86</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">its view of sophistic, <a href="#Pg058" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">58-59</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Atheos</span></span> (<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">atheoi</span></span>), <a href="#Pg002" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">2</a>, <a href="#Pg010" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">10</a>, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg014" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">14</a>, <a href="#Pg019" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">19</a>, <a href="#Pg023" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">23</a>, <a href="#Pg029" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">29</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75</a>, <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">110</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Atheotes</span></span>, <a href="#Pg002" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">2</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Augustine, St., <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">129</a>, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<a name="index-augustus" id="index-augustus" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Augustus, <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">117</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">religious reaction of, <a href="#Pg100" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">100</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">117</a>, <a href="#Pg120" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">120</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Aurelius, Marcus, <a href="#Pg011" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">11</a>, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Bacon, Francis (<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">De Sap. Vet.</span></span>) <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">140</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Banier, <a href="#Pg142" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">142</a>, <a href="#Pg143" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">143</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Bible, <a href="#Pg130" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">130</a>, <a href="#Pg142" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">142</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Bion, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">109</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Brazil, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Bruno, Giordano, <a href="#Pg151" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">151</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Bryant, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Buttmann, <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">152</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Caelius Calcagninus, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Caelius Rhodiginus, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Callicles, <a href="#Pg048" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">48</a> foll., <a href="#Pg063" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">63</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Carlyle, <a href="#Pg112" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">112</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Carneades, <a href="#Pg008" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">8</a>, <a href="#Pg108" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">108</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cassander of Macedonia, <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">111</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Charon, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Christianity, <a href="#Pg126" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">126</a>, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128-32</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Christians, their atheism, <a href="#Pg009" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">9</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">prosecutions of, <a href="#Pg010" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">10</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">demonology, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cicero, <a href="#Pg019" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">19</a>, <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">105</a>, <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114-17</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Nature of the Gods</span></span>, <a href="#Pg115" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">115</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">On the State</span></span>, <a href="#Pg115" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">115</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">On the Laws</span></span>, <a href="#Pg115" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">115</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">De consolatione</span></span>, <a href="#Pg116" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">116</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cinesias, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Copernicus, <a href="#Pg151" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">151</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Critias, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg044" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">44-50</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Sisyphus</span></span>, <a href="#Pg044" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">44</a> f., <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Criticism of popular religion, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>, <a href="#Pg017" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">17</a>, <a href="#Pg019" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">19</a>, <a href="#Pg035" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">35</a> foll., <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">78</a>, <a href="#Pg082" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">82</a>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>, <a href="#Pg088" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">88</a>, <a href="#Pg090" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">90</a>, <a href="#Pg099" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">99</a>, <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">104</a>, <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">109</a>, <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">110</a>, <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">122</a>, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124-26</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cuthites, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cynics, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">109-10</a>, <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">122</a>, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Cyrenaics, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page166">[pg 166]</span><a name="Pg166" id="Pg166" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<a name="index-daemonion" id="index-daemonion" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Daimonion</span></span> of Socrates, <a href="#Pg065" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">65</a>, <a href="#Pg066" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">66</a>, <a href="#Pg072" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">72-73</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">van Dale, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141-42</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dante, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Deisidaimon, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Demeter, <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">42</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Demetrius of Phalerum, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75</a>, <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">93</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">On Tyche</span></span>, <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">93</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Democritus, <a href="#Pg024" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">24</a>, <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">42</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>, <a href="#Pg044" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">44</a>, <a href="#Pg047" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">47</a>, <a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">52</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Demonology, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81-83</a>, <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">105</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127-32</a>, <a href="#Pg134" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">134-42</a>, <a href="#Pg148" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">148</a>, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Demosthenes, <a href="#Pg092" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">92-93</a>, <a href="#Pg096" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">96</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Devil, <a href="#Pg132" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">132</a>, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Diagoras of Melos, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg031" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">31-34</a>, <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">39</a>, <a href="#Pg050" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">50</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Apopyrgizontes logoi</span></span>, <a href="#Pg032" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">32</a>, <a href="#Pg033" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">33</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dicaearchus, <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">98</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Diodorus Siculus, <a href="#Pg112" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">112</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Diogenes of Apollonia, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg029" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">29-30</a>, <a href="#Pg057" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">57</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Diogenes the Cynic, <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">109</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dionysus, <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">42</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Diopeithes, <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">28</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dioscuri, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dium, <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">98</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Divination, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>, <a href="#Pg020" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">20</a>, <a href="#Pg026" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">26</a>, <a href="#Pg027" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">27</a>, <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">28</a>, <a href="#Pg040" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">40</a>, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>, <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114</a>, <a href="#Pg131" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">131</a>, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>, <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">140-42</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Comp. Oracle.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dodona, <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">98</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dogmatics, <a href="#Pg108" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">108</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Domitian, <a href="#Pg011" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">11</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Dupuis, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Elements, divine, <a href="#Pg023" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">23</a>, <a href="#Pg024" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">24</a>, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30</a>, <a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">52</a> foll., <a href="#Pg057" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">57</a>, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81</a>, <a href="#Pg103" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">103</a>, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Eleusinian Mysteries, <a href="#Pg032" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">32</a>, <a href="#Pg033" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">33</a>, <a href="#Pg040" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">40</a>, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ennius, <a href="#Pg099" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">99</a>, <a href="#Pg112" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">112</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Epicureans, Epicurus, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg076" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">76</a>, <a href="#Pg080" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">80</a>, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>, <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">105-7</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Euhemerus, Euhemerism, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">110-12</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114</a>, <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">117</a>, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127</a>, <a href="#Pg130" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">130</a>, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">140</a>, <a href="#Pg142" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">142</a>, <a href="#Pg143" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">143</a>, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Euripides, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>, <a href="#Pg017" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">17</a>, <a href="#Pg021" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">21</a>, <a href="#Pg045" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">45</a>, <a href="#Pg046" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">46</a>, <a href="#Pg048" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">48</a>, <a href="#Pg051" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">51-56</a>, <a href="#Pg062" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">62</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Bellerophon</span></span>, <a href="#Pg053" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">53</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Melanippe</span></span>, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>, <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">56</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Fallen angels, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>, <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">129</a>, <a href="#Pg130" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">130</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Florentine Academy, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Foreign gods, <a href="#Pg070" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">70</a>, <a href="#Pg089" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">89</a>, <a href="#Pg103" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">103</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Fontenelle, <a href="#Pg142" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">142</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Geocentric view, <a href="#Pg150" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">150</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Geryon, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Giants, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Gorgias, <a href="#Pg037" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">37</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hades, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Heavenly bodies, <a href="#Pg002" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">2</a>, <a href="#Pg020" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">20</a>, <a href="#Pg022" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">22</a>, <a href="#Pg025" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">25</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>, <a href="#Pg062" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">62</a>, <a href="#Pg066" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">66</a>, <a href="#Pg079" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">79</a>, <a href="#Pg080" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">80</a>, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81</a>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>, <a href="#Pg087" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">87</a>, <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">104</a>, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127</a>, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>, <a href="#Pg130" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">130</a>, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>, <a href="#Pg151" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">151</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Heavenly phenomena, <a href="#Pg022" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">22</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hebraism, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg143" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">143</a>, <a href="#Pg144" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">144</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hecataeus of Abdera, <a href="#Pg112" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">112</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Heliocentric view, <a href="#Pg151" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">151</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hellenistic philosophy, <a href="#Pg094" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">94</a>, <a href="#Pg103" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">103-10</a>, <a href="#Pg119" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">119</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hephaestus, <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">42</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Heracles, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">111</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hercules, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Herder, <a href="#Pg145" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">145</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hermae, <a href="#Pg040" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">40</a>, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hermes, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hermias, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Herodotus, <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">28</a>, <a href="#Pg029" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">29</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hesiod, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Heyne, <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">152</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hippo of Rhegium, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg029" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">29-30</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Holy War, <a href="#Pg096" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">96</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Homer, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>, <a href="#Pg068" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">68</a>, <a href="#Pg106" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">106</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Horace, <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">117</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Huet, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Hylozoism, <a href="#Pg023" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">23</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ideas, Platonic, <a href="#Pg080" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">80</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Idolatry attacked, <a href="#Pg123" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">123</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">See also <a href="#index-image-worship" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">Image Worship</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Ignorance, Socratic, <a href="#Pg068" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">68</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<a name="index-image-worship" id="index-image-worship" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Image Worship, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127</a>, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>, <a href="#Pg131" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">131-37</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Jews, their atheism, <a href="#Pg009" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">9</a>, <a href="#Pg126" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">126</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Josephus, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Judaism, <a href="#Pg126" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">126</a>, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127-28</a>, <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">129</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Juno Regina, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Jupiter (in Dante), <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">(in the Thebaïs,) <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Jupiter-priest, <a href="#Pg100" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">100</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Kepler, <a href="#Pg151" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">151</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Kronos, <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">111</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Lampon, <a href="#Pg026" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">26</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Lobeck, <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">152</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Lucian, <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">110</a>, <a href="#Pg123" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">123-26</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Timon</span></span>, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Dialogues of the Gods</span></span>, <a href="#Pg125" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">125</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Lucretius, <a href="#Pg106" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">106</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Luna Jovis filia, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Macedonia, <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">93</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Machiavelli, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Magic, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136-37</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Mannhardt, <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">152</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Mantinea, constitution of, <a href="#Pg032" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">32</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Marcus Aurelius, <a href="#Pg011" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">11</a>, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Mediaeval epic poets, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Megarians, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg107" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">107</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page167">[pg 167]</span><a name="Pg167" id="Pg167" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Menippus of Gadara, <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">110</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Mexico, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Middle Ages, <a href="#Pg133" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">133</a>, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135-39</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Milton (<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Paradise Lost</span></span>), <a href="#Pg134" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">134</a>, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Minos, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Miracles, pagan, <a href="#Pg131" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">131</a>, <a href="#Pg132" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">132</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Modesty, religions, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>, <a href="#Pg070" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">70</a>, <a href="#Pg073" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">73</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Moschion, <a href="#Pg046" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">46</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Moses and his sister, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Monotheism, <a href="#Pg009" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">9</a>, <a href="#Pg012" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">12</a>, <a href="#Pg023" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">23</a>, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg080" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">80</a>, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127</a> foll., <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg148" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">148</a>, <a href="#Pg151" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">151</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Müller, K. O., <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">152</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Natalis Comes, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a> foll.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Naturalism, Ionian, <a href="#Pg021" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">21</a>, <a href="#Pg022" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">22-25</a>, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30-31</a>, <a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">52</a>, <a href="#Pg057" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">57</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Negroes, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Neo-Platonists, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Neo-Pythagoreans, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Nero, <a href="#Pg011" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">11</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Newton, <a href="#Pg151" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">151</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Nile, <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">42</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Nomos</span></span> (and <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Physis</span></span>), <a href="#Pg035" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">35</a>, <a href="#Pg036" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">36</a>, <a href="#Pg038" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">38</a>, <a href="#Pg063" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">63</a>, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Nymphs, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Oenomaus (<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">The Swindlers Unmasked</span></span>), <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">122-23</a>, <a href="#Pg126" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">126</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Old Testament, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127</a>, <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">129</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Oracle of Ammon, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>; oracles of Boeotia, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Delphic Oracle, <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">28</a>, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>, <a href="#Pg067" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">67</a>, <a href="#Pg068" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">68</a>, <a href="#Pg071" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">71</a>, <a href="#Pg072" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">72</a>, <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">77</a>, <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">93</a>, <a href="#Pg096" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">96</a>, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>, <a href="#Pg123" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">123</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">decay of oracles, <a href="#Pg096" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">96-97</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">oracles explained by priestly fraud, <a href="#Pg123" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">123</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141-42</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Ovid, <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">117</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Paganism of Antiquity, its character, <a href="#Pg015" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">15</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Panchaia, <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">111</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Parmenides, <a href="#Pg021" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">21</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pantheism, <a href="#Pg020" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">20</a>, <a href="#Pg023" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">23</a>, <a href="#Pg103" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">103</a>, <a href="#Pg119" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">119</a>, <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">122</a>, <a href="#Pg127" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">127</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Paul, St., <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pericles, <a href="#Pg025" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">25</a>, <a href="#Pg026" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">26</a>, <a href="#Pg027" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">27</a>, <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">28</a>, <a href="#Pg029" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">29</a>, <a href="#Pg031" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">31</a>, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Peripatetics, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Peru, <a href="#Pg137" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">137</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pheidias, <a href="#Pg027" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">27</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Philip III. of Macedonia, <a href="#Pg096" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">96</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Philip V. of Macedonia, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97-98</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Philo, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Phocians, <a href="#Pg096" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">96</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Physis</span></span> (and <span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Nomos</span></span>), <a href="#Pg035" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">35</a>, <a href="#Pg036" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">36</a>, <a href="#Pg063" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">63</a>, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pindar, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>, <a href="#Pg017" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">17</a>, <a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">52</a>, <a href="#Pg071" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">71</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Plato, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">39</a>, <a href="#Pg048" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">48</a>, <a href="#Pg049" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">49</a>, <a href="#Pg050" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">50</a>, <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">56</a>, <a href="#Pg059" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">59</a>, <a href="#Pg061" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">61-63</a>, <a href="#Pg065" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">65</a>, <a href="#Pg066" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">66</a>, <a href="#Pg072" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">72</a>, <a href="#Pg076" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">76-81</a>, <a href="#Pg082" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">82</a>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>, <a href="#Pg059" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">59</a>, <a href="#Pg065" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">65</a>, <a href="#Pg066" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">66</a>, <a href="#Pg068" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">68</a>, <a href="#Pg072" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">72</a>, <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">78</a>, <a href="#Pg079" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">79</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Euthyphron</span></span>, <a href="#Pg067" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">67</a>, <a href="#Pg076" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">76</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Gorgias</span></span>, <a href="#Pg048" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">48</a> foll., <a href="#Pg063" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">63</a>, <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">77</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Laws</span></span>, <a href="#Pg061" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">61</a> foll., <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">77</a>, <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">78</a>, <a href="#Pg079" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">79</a>, <a href="#Pg080" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">80</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Republic</span></span>, <a href="#Pg050" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">50</a>, <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">56</a>, <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">77</a>, <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">78</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Symposium</span></span>, <a href="#Pg082" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">82</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Timaeus</span></span>, <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">77</a>, <a href="#Pg079" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">79</a>, <a href="#Pg080" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">80</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Platonism, <a href="#Pg148" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">148</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Plethon, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pliny the Elder, <a href="#Pg094" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">94</a>, <a href="#Pg095" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">95</a>, <a href="#Pg118" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">118</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Plutarch (<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">de def. orac.</span></span>), <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Polybius, <a href="#Pg048" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">48</a>, <a href="#Pg090" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">90-91</a>, <a href="#Pg094" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">94</a>, <a href="#Pg099" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">99</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113-14</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">Stoicism in P., <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pomponazzi (<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">De Incantat.</span></span>), <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Poseidon, <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">42</a>, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Poseidonius, <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">104</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Prodicus of Ceos, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg042" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">42-44</a>, <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">104</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Protagoras of Abdera, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">39-42</a>, <a href="#Pg047" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">47</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">On the Gods</span></span>, <a href="#Pg039" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">39</a> foll.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Original State</span></span>, <a href="#Pg047" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">47</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Providence, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>, <a href="#Pg061" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">61</a>, <a href="#Pg078" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">78</a>, <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">105</a>, <a href="#Pg118" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">118</a>, <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">122</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Pythia, <a href="#Pg093" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">93</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Reaction, religious, of second century, <a href="#Pg120" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">120-21</a>, <a href="#Pg125" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">125</a>;</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">of Augustus, see <a href="#index-augustus" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">Augustus</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Reinterpretation of the conceptions of the gods, <a href="#Pg002" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">2</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em">See also <a href="#index-allegorical-interpretation" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">Allegorical interpretation</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Religion a political invention, <a href="#Pg047" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">47</a>, <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Religious thought, early, of Greece, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16-17</a>, <a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">52</a>, <a href="#Pg054" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">54</a>, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>, <a href="#Pg069" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">69-70</a>, <a href="#Pg071" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">71</a>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>, <a href="#Pg088" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">88</a>, <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">98</a>, <a href="#Pg107" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">107</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Renaissance, <a href="#Pg133" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">133</a>, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a> foll., <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Rohde, <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">152</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Roman Academy, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Roman religion, <a href="#Pg090" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">90</a>, <a href="#Pg099" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">99-100</a>, <a href="#Pg101" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">101-2</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Roman State-worship, decay of, <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">98-103</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Romance of Troy, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Romances, <a href="#Pg095" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">95-96</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Rome's treatment of atheism, <a href="#Pg008" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">8-11</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Rousseau, <a href="#Pg145" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">145</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Scepticism, <a href="#Pg107" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">107-8</a>, <a href="#Pg114" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">114</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Schoolmen, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Seneca, <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">110</a>, <a href="#Pg122" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">122</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Sibylline books, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Sisyphus, <a href="#Pg045" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">45</a>, <a href="#Pg048" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">48</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Socrates, <a href="#Pg007" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">7</a>, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg040" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">40</a>, <a href="#Pg046" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">46</a>, <a href="#Pg049" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">49</a>, <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">56</a>, <a href="#Pg058" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">58</a>, <a href="#Pg064" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">64-73</a>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>, <a href="#Pg107" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">107</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>. See also <a href="#index-daemonion" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Daimonion</span></span> of S</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Socratic philosophy, <a href="#Pg064" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">64</a>, <a href="#Pg087" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">87</a>, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Socratic Schools, <a href="#Pg073" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">73</a>, <a href="#Pg087" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">87-88</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Sol invictus, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<span class="tei tei-pb" id="page168">[pg 168]</span><a name="Pg168" id="Pg168" class="tei tei-anchor"></a>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Solon, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Sophistic, <a href="#Pg035" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">35-38</a>, <a href="#Pg057" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">57</a>, <a href="#Pg064" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">64</a>, <a href="#Pg087" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">87</a>, <a href="#Pg104" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">104</a>, <a href="#Pg148" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">148</a>, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Sophocles, <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">28</a>, <a href="#Pg054" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">54</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Stilpo, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg108" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">108</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Stoics, <a href="#Pg083" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">83</a>, <a href="#Pg103" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">103-5</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg118" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">118</a>, <a href="#Pg119" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">119</a>, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121-22</a>, <a href="#Pg147" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">147</a>, <a href="#Pg148" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">148</a>, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Strabo, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Strato, <a href="#Pg087" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">87</a>, <a href="#Pg108" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">108</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Suetonius, <a href="#Pg121" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">121</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Supernaturalism, <a href="#Pg149" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">149-51</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Superstition, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75</a>, <a href="#Pg090" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">90</a>, <a href="#Pg102" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">102</a>, <a href="#Pg123" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">123</a>, <a href="#Pg126" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">126</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tapuis, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thales, <a href="#Pg024" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">24</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thebaïs (mediaeval), <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Theodicy (Socratic), <a href="#Pg067" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">67</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Theodoras, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75-76</a>, <a href="#Pg108" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">108</a>, <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">109</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">On the Gods</span></span>, <a href="#Pg075" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">75</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Theophrastus, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg086" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">86</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thermon, <a href="#Pg098" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">98</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thomas Aquinas, <a href="#Pg131" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">131</a>, <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>, <a href="#Pg139" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">139</a>, <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">140</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thracians, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thrasymachus, <a href="#Pg050" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">50</a>, <a href="#Pg062" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">62</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thucydides (the historian), <a href="#Pg028" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">28-29</a>, <a href="#Pg092" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">92</a>, <a href="#Pg094" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">94</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Thucydides (the statesman), <a href="#Pg026" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">26</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tiberius, <a href="#Pg118" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">118</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tisiphone, <a href="#Pg136" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">136</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Titans, <a href="#Pg018" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">18</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tolerance in antiquity, <a href="#Pg009" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">9</a>, <a href="#Pg011" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">11</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Trajan, <a href="#Pg011" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">11</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tullia, <a href="#Pg116" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">116</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Tyche, <a href="#Pg091" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">91-96</a>, <a href="#Pg118" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">118</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Typhoeus, <a href="#Pg140" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">140</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Uranos, <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">111</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Usener, <a href="#Pg152" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">152</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Valerius Maximus, <a href="#Pg118" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">118</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Varro, <a href="#Pg100" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">100</a>, <a href="#Pg110" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">110</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Vico (<span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Scienza Nuova</span></span>), <a href="#Pg143" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">143</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Violation of sanctuaries, <a href="#Pg040" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">40</a>, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>, <a href="#Pg097" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">97</a>, <a href="#Pg100" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">100</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Virgil, <a href="#Pg117" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">117</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Voss, G. I., <a href="#Pg135" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">135</a>, <a href="#Pg138" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">138</a>, <a href="#Pg141" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">141</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Wisdom of Solomon, <a href="#Pg128" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">128</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Worship rejected, <a href="#Pg009" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">9-13</a>, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>, <a href="#Pg074" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">74</a>, <a href="#Pg077" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">77</a>, <a href="#Pg084" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">84</a>, <a href="#Pg109" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">109</a>, <a href="#Pg123" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">123</a>, <a href="#Pg125" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">125</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Xenocrates, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81-82</a>, <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">105</a>, <a href="#Pg113" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">113</a>, <a href="#Pg129" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">129</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Xenophanes of Colophon, <a href="#Pg013" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">13</a>, <a href="#Pg017" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">17-21</a>,</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left"><a href="#Pg052" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">52</a>, <a href="#Pg056" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">56</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Xenophon, <a href="#Pg058" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">58</a>, <a href="#Pg059" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">59</a>, <a href="#Pg062" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">62</a>, <a href="#Pg066" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">66</a>, <a href="#Pg067" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">67</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Memorab.</span></span> <a href="#Pg058" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">58</a>, <a href="#Pg060" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">60</a>.</div>
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left; margin-left: 2.00em"><span class="tei tei-hi" style="text-align: left"><span style="font-style: italic">Apology</span></span>, <a href="#Pg058" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">58</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Zeller, <a href="#Pg076" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">76</a>, <a href="#Pg079" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">79</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Zeno of Elea, <a href="#Pg021" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">21</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="tei tei-lg" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em">
+<div class="tei tei-l" style="text-align: left">Zeus, <a href="#Pg016" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">16</a>, <a href="#Pg022" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">22</a>, <a href="#Pg030" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">30</a>, <a href="#Pg043" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">43</a>, <a href="#Pg055" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">55</a>, <a href="#Pg057" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">57</a>, <a href="#Pg058" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">58</a>, <a href="#Pg081" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">81</a>, <a href="#Pg105" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">105</a>, <a href="#Pg111" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">111</a>, <a href="#Pg124" class="tei tei-ref" style="text-align: left">124</a>.</div>
+</div>
+
+</div>
+
+</div>
+<hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-back" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 6.00em">
+  <div id="footnotes" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+    <a name="toc27" id="toc27"></a>
+    <a name="pdf28" id="pdf28"></a>
+    <h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Footnotes</span></h1>
+    <dl class="tei tei-list-footnotes"><dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_1" name="note_1" href="#noteref_1">1.</a></dt><dd class="tei tei-notetext">This was written
+before the appearance of Mr. Gruppe's work,
+<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte</span></span>.
+Compare <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">infra</span></span>, p. <a href="#Pg154" class="tei tei-ref">154</a>.</dd></dl>
+  </div>
+  <hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em">
+    <div id="pgfooter" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em"><pre class="pre tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em">***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+</pre><hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><a name="rightpageheader29" id="rightpageheader29"></a><a name="pgtoc30" id="pgtoc30"></a><a name="pdf31" id="pdf31"></a><h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">Credits</span></h1><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr><th class="tei tei-label tei-label-gloss">March 11, 2009  </th></tr><tr><td class="tei tei-item"><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item">Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1</td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><span class="tei tei-respStmt">
+        <span class="tei tei-name">
+            Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, J.P.W. Fraser, David King,
+            and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at &lt;http://www.pgdp.net/&gt;.
+        </span>
+      </span></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table></div><hr class="doublepage" /><div class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><a name="rightpageheader32" id="rightpageheader32"></a><a name="pgtoc33" id="pgtoc33"></a><a name="pdf34" id="pdf34"></a><h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">A Word from Project Gutenberg</span></h1><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This file should be named 
+          28312-h.html or 
+          28312-h.zip.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This and all associated files of various formats will be found
+          in: 
+
+            <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/1/28312/" class="block tei tei-xref" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><span style="font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span><span style="font-size: 90%">/dirs/2/8/3/1/28312/</span></a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Updated editions will replace the previous one — the old
+          editions will be renamed.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Creating the works from public domain print editions means that
+          no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
+          Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
+          States without permission and without paying copyright royalties.
+          Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this
+          license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
+          to protect the Project Gutenberg™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered
+          trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks,
+          unless you receive specific permission. If you do not charge
+          anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the rules is
+          very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
+          creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
+          They may be modified and printed and given away — you may do
+          practically <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">anything</span></em> with public domain eBooks.
+          Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
+          commercial redistribution.</p></div><hr class="page" /><div id="pglicense" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"><a name="rightpageheader35" id="rightpageheader35"></a><a name="pgtoc36" id="pgtoc36"></a><a name="pdf37" id="pdf37"></a><h1 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"><span style="font-size: 173%">The Full Project Gutenberg License</span></h1><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Please read this before you distribute or use this
+          work.</span></em></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
+          distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing
+          this work (or any other work associated in any way with the
+          phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span>), you agree to comply with all the terms
+          of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License (<a href="#pglicense" class="tei tei-ref">available with this file</a> or online
+          at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/license</a>).</p><div id="pglicense1" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 1.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">General Terms of Use &amp; Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
+            electronic works</span></h2><div id="pglicense1A" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.A.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic
+              work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+              and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
+              property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree
+              to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease
+              using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic
+              works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a
+              copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not
+              agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may
+              obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the
+              fee as set forth in paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8.</a></p></div><div id="pglicense1B" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.B.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or
+              associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
+              bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you
+              can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
+              full terms of this agreement. See paragraph <a href="#pglicense1C" class="tei tei-ref">1.C</a> below. There are a lot of things you can
+              do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
+              agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic
+              works. See paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E" class="tei tei-ref">1.E</a> below.</p></div><div id="pglicense1C" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.C.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (<span class="tei tei-q">“the Foundation”</span> or PGLAF), owns a compilation
+              copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
+              individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
+              United States. If an individual work is in the public domain in the
+              United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim
+              a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
+              displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all
+              references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support
+              the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+              freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
+              agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can
+              easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in
+              the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
+              without charge with others.</p></div><div id="pglicense1D" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.D.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+              what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
+              a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
+              the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+              before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+              creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work.
+              The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
+              of any work in any country outside the United States.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.E.</span></h3><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p><div id="pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.1.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+                access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any
+                copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span>
+                appears, or with which the phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> is associated) is
+                accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
+
+                    </p><div class="block tei tei-q" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em"><span style="font-size: 90%">This eBook is for the use of
+                    anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no
+                    restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
+                    away or re-use it under the terms of the Project
+                    Gutenberg License included with this eBook or
+                    online at </span><a href="http://www.gutenberg.org" class="tei tei-xref"><span style="font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span></a></p></div></div><div id="pglicense1E2" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.2.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from the public
+                domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with
+                permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and
+                distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or
+                charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with
+                the phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> associated with or appearing on the work, you
+                must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for
+                the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs
+                <a href="#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8</a> or 1.E.9.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E3" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.3.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission
+                of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both
+                paragraphs <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> through 1.E.7 and any
+                additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will
+                be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission
+                of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E4" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.4.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from
+                this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work
+                associated with Project Gutenberg™.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E5" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.5.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+                electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+                prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> with active links or immediate access
+                to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E6" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.6.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+                compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
+                any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
+                to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than
+                <span class="tei tei-q">“Plain Vanilla ASCII”</span> or other format used in the official
+                version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ web site (http://www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
+                no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
+                means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+                request, of the work in its original <span class="tei tei-q">“Plain Vanilla ASCII”</span> or
+                other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License
+                as specified in paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1.</a></p></div><div id="pglicense1E7" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.7.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
+                copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with
+                paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8</a> or 1.E.9.</p></div><div id="pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.8.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
+                or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that</p><table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"><tbody><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label">•  </th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+                  the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to
+                  calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the
+                  Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this
+                  paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
+                  following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
+                  prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
+                  marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in <a href="#pglicense4" class="tei tei-ref">Section 4, <span class="tei tei-q">“Information about donations to the
+                  Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”</span></a></p></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+                  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
+                  not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such
+                  a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a
+                  physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other
+                  copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.</p></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You provide, in accordance with paragraph <a href="#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">1.F.3</a>, a full refund of any money paid for a
+                  work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is
+                  discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the
+                  work.</p></td></tr><tr class="tei tei-labelitem"><th class="tei tei-label"></th><td class="tei tei-item"><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+                  distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><div id="pglicense1E9" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.E.9.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or
+                group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement,
+                you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+                Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
+                forth in <a href="#pglicense3" class="tei tei-ref">Section 3</a> below.</p></div></div><div id="pglicense1F" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h3 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">1.F.</span></h3><div id="pglicense1F1" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.1.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify,
+                do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread public domain works
+                in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
+                electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
+                contain <span class="tei tei-q">“Defects,”</span> such as, but not limited to, incomplete,
+                inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+                intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
+                medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be
+                read by your equipment.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F2" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.2.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES — Except for the <span class="tei tei-q">“Right of
+                Replacement or Refund”</span> described in <a href="#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">paragraph
+                1.F.3</a>, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any
+                other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement,
+                disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
+                legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+                LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+                PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK
+                OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO
+                YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL
+                DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.3.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND — If you discover a defect in
+                this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a
+                refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written
+                explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received
+                the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your
+                written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
+                defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+                refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+                providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+                receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
+                is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+                opportunities to fix the problem.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F4" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.4.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
+                <a href="#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">paragraph 1.F.3</a>, this work is provided
+                to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
+                IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR
+                FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F5" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.5.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
+                the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any
+                disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of
+                the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+                interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+                the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+                provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.</p></div><div id="pglicense1F6" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h4 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em">1.F.6.</h4><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">INDEMNITY — You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+                trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+                providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this
+                agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion
+                and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all
+                liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly
+                or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
+                (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration,
+                modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
+                Defect you cause.</p></div></div></div><div id="pglicense2" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section  2.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works
+            in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
+            obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the
+            efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks
+            of life.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+            assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™'s goals and
+            ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for
+            generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
+            secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn
+            more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
+            Sections <a href="#pglicense3" class="tei tei-ref">3</a> and <a href="#pglicense4" class="tei tei-ref">4</a> and the Foundation web page at <a href="http://www.pglaf.org" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.pglaf.org</a>.</p></div><div id="pglicense3" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 3.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation
+            organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax
+            exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or
+            federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter
+            is posted at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf</a>. Contributions
+            to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S.
+            federal laws and your state's laws.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr.
+            S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are
+            scattered throughout numerous locations. Its business office is
+            located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801)
+            596-1887, email business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date
+            contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
+            official page at <a href="http://www.pglaf.org" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.pglaf.org</a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">For additional contact information:
+
+              </p><div class="block tei tei-address" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style="font-size: 90%">Dr. Gregory B. Newby</span></span><br /><span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style="font-size: 90%">Chief Executive and Director</span></span><br /><span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style="font-size: 90%">gbnewby@pglaf.org</span></span><br /></div></div><div id="pglicense4" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 4.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread public
+            support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number
+            of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in
+            machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment
+            including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
+            particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the
+            IRS.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+            charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+            States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+            considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+            with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where
+            we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
+            DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
+            visit <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate</a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+            have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+            against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+            approach us with offers to donate.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+            any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+            outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods and
+            addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
+            checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please
+            visit: <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate" class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate</a></p></div><div id="pglicense5" class="tei tei-div" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"><span style="font-size: 144%">Section 5.</span></h2><h2 class="tei tei-head" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"><span style="font-size: 120%">General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic
+            works.</span></h2><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class="tei tei-name">Professor Michael S. Hart</span> is the
+            originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that
+            could be freely shared with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and
+            distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer
+            support.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of
+            which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. unless a copyright
+            notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
+            compliance with any particular paper edition.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook's
+            eBook number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII,
+            compressed (zipped), HTML and others.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Corrected <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">editions</span></em> of our eBooks replace the old file
+            and take over the old filename and etext number. The replaced older file
+            is renamed. <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Versions</span></em> based on separate sources are treated
+            as new eBooks receiving new filenames and etext numbers.</p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
+            facility: 
+            
+              <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org" class="block tei tei-xref" style="margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"><span style="font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span></a></p><p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to
+            make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and
+            how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p></div></div></div>
+  </div>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body></html>
diff --git a/28312-pdf.pdf b/28312-pdf.pdf
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0557249
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-pdf.pdf
@@ -0,0 +1,15537 @@
+%PDF-1.4
+%����
+3 0 obj <<
+/Length 1358      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -19.8 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -529.134 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(The)-229(Project)-229(Gutenberg)-229(EBook)-228(of)-229(Atheism)-229(in)-229(Pagan)-229(Antiquity)-229(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(A.)-250(B.)-250(Drachmann)]TJ 0 -29.913 Td[(This)-546(eBook)-546(is)-546(for)-546(the)-546(use)-546(of)-546(anyone)-546(anywhere)-546(a)-1(t)-546(no)-546(cost)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-470(with)-470(almost)-470(no)-470(restrictions)-470(whatsoever.)-910(You)-470(may)-470(copy)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it,)-565(give)-503(it)-502(away)-502(or)-502(re-use)-502(it)-503(under)-502(the)-502(terms)-502(of)-502(the)-503(Project)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)-633(License)-632(included)-633(with)-632(this)-633(eBook)-632(or)-633(online)-633(at)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(http://www.gutenberg.org/license)]TJ 0 -29.913 Td[(Title:)-500(Atheism)-500(in)-500(Pagan)-500(Antiquity)]TJ 0 -27.098 Td[(Author:)]TJ 2.728 -13.549 Td[(A.)-500(B.)-500(Drachmann)]TJ -2.728 -40.648 Td[(Release)-500(Date:)-500(March)-500(11,)-500(2009)-500([Ebook)-500(28312])]TJ 0 -27.098 Td[(Language:)-500(English)]TJ 0 -40.648 Td[(***START)-500(OF)-500(THE)-500(PROJECT)-500(GUTENBERG)-500(EBOOK)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ATHEISM)-500(IN)-500(PAGAN)-500(ANTIQUITY***)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+2 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 3 0 R
+/Resources 1 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 8 0 R
+/Annots [ 6 0 R 7 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+6 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.547 431.687 262.463 441.407]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense) >>
+>> endobj
+7 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [46.771 418.138 193.422 427.858]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org/license) >> 
+>> endobj
+4 0 obj <<
+/D [2 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+1 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+12 0 obj <<
+/Length 706       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 126.929 516.375 Td[(Atheism)-260(In)-260(Pagan)-260(Antiquity)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 106.541 -13.55 Td[(By)]TJ/F16 15.781 Tf -49.665 -20.515 Td[(A.)-274(B.)-273(Drachmann)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -58.286 -13.549 Td[(Professor)-256(of)-256(Classical)-256(Philology)-256(in)-256(the)-256(University)-256(of)]TJ 81.072 -13.549 Td[(Copenhagen)]TJ 10.521 -13.549 Td[(Gyldendal)]TJ -51.493 -13.549 Td[(11)-268(Hanover)-268(Square,)-273(London,)-273(W.1)]TJ 46.95 -13.55 Td[(Copenhagen)]TJ 3.327 -13.549 Td[(Christiania)]TJ 13.031 -13.549 Td[(1922)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+11 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 12 0 R
+/Resources 10 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 8 0 R
+>> endobj
+10 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+15 0 obj <<
+/Length 6008      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 46.771 479.321 Td[(Contents)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -32.422 Td[(Preface)-252(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 321.947 446.899 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -321.947 -446.899 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 321.947 446.899 Td[(2)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 446.899 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -446.899 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 433.35 Td[(Introduction)-556(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 321.947 433.35 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -321.947 -433.35 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 321.947 433.35 Td[(3)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 433.35 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -433.35 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 419.801 Td[(Chapter)-250(I)-251(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 321.947 419.801 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -321.947 -419.801 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 321.947 419.801 Td[(6)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 419.801 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -419.801 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 406.251 Td[(Chapter)-250(II)-668(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 316.492 406.251 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -316.492 -406.251 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 316.492 406.251 Td[(14)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 406.251 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -406.251 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 392.702 Td[(Chapter)-250(III)-335(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 316.492 392.702 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -316.492 -392.702 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 316.492 392.702 Td[(20)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 392.702 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -392.702 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 379.153 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-279(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 316.492 379.153 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -316.492 -379.153 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 316.492 379.153 Td[(30)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 379.153 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -379.153 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 365.604 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-612(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 316.492 365.604 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -316.492 -365.604 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 316.492 365.604 Td[(52)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 365.604 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -365.604 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 352.055 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-279(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 316.492 352.055 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -316.492 -352.055 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 316.492 352.055 Td[(72)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 352.055 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -352.055 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 338.505 Td[(Chapter)-250(VII)-696(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 316.492 338.505 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -316.492 -338.505 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 316.492 338.505 Td[(96)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 338.505 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -338.505 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 324.956 Td[(Chapter)-250(VIII)-363(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 311.038 324.956 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -311.038 -324.956 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 311.038 324.956 Td[(106)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 324.956 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -324.956 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 311.407 Td[(Chapter)-250(IX)-279(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 311.038 311.407 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -311.038 -311.407 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 311.038 311.407 Td[(117)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 311.407 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -311.407 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 297.858 Td[(Notes)-917(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 311.038 297.858 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -311.038 -297.858 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 311.038 297.858 Td[(122)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 297.858 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -297.858 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 284.309 Td[(Index)-973(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 311.038 284.309 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -311.038 -284.309 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 311.038 284.309 Td[(141)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 284.309 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -284.309 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 270.759 Td[(Footnotes)-805(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)-500(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 311.038 270.759 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -311.038 -270.759 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 311.038 270.759 Td[(157)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 270.759 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -231.977 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+14 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 15 0 R
+/Resources 13 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 8 0 R
+>> endobj
+13 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+18 0 obj <<
+/Length 126       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -510.152 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+17 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 18 0 R
+/Resources 16 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 8 0 R
+>> endobj
+16 0 obj <<
+/ProcSet [ /PDF ]
+>> endobj
+21 0 obj <<
+/Length 231       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -19.8 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -529.134 cm
+BT
+/F16 7.97 Tf 337.795 512.811 Td[([v])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+20 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 21 0 R
+/Resources 19 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 8 0 R
+>> endobj
+22 0 obj <<
+/D [20 0 R /XYZ 46.771 518.175 null]
+>> endobj
+19 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+23 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index1) >>
+endobj
+26 0 obj
+(Preface)
+endobj
+29 0 obj <<
+/Length 1978      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Preface)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -32.422 Td[(The)-198(present)-199(treatise)-198(originally)-199(appeared)-198(in)-198(Danish)-199(as)-198(a)-199(University)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(publication)-584(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 59.097 0 Td[(Kj)]TJ/F29 10.909 Tf 10.309 0 Td[(S)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 7.277 0 Td[(benhavns)-584(Universitets)-584(Festskrift)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 147.888 0 Td[(,)-668(November)]TJ -224.571 -13.549 Td[(1919\051.)-1271(In)-590(submitting)-590(it)-590(to)-591(the)-590(English)-590(public,)-675(I)-590(wish)-591(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(acknowledge)-526(my)-525(profound)-525(indebtedness)-526(to)-525(Mr.)-1077(G.)-525(F.)-526(Hill)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-460(the)-461(British)-460(Museum,)-513(who)-461(not)-460(only)-461(suggested)-460(the)-461(English)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(edition,)-709(but)-618(also)-617(with)-617(untiring)-618(kindness)-617(has)-617(subjected)-618(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(translation,)-210(as)-199(originally)-200(made)-199(by)-200(Miss)-199(Ingeborg)-200(Andersen,)-210(M.A.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(Copenhagen,)-250(to)-250(a)-250(painstaking)-250(and)-250(most)-250(valuable)-250(revision.)]TJ 11.956 -13.55 Td[(For)-352(an)-353(account)-352(of)-353(the)-352(previous)-352(treatments)-353(of)-352(the)-353(subject,)-378(as)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(well)-297(as)-296(of)-297(the)-296(method)-297(employed)-297(in)-296(my)-297(investigation,)-308(the)-297(reader)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-250(referred)-250(to)-250(the)-250(introductory)-250(remarks)-250(which)-250(precede)-250(the)-250(Notes.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(A.)-250(B.)-250(DRACHMANN.)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 7.277 0 Td[(HARLOTTENLUND)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 69.945 0 Td[(,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -77.222 -13.55 Td[(July)-250(1922)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.72 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -115.475 -29.53 Td[([001])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+28 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 29 0 R
+/Resources 27 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 8 0 R
+>> endobj
+24 0 obj <<
+/D [28 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+32 0 obj <<
+/D [28 0 R /XYZ 93.543 241.229 null]
+>> endobj
+27 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F29 31 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+33 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index2) >>
+endobj
+36 0 obj
+(Introduction)
+endobj
+39 0 obj <<
+/Length 4254      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 46.771 479.321 Td[(Introduction)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.407 Td[(The)-218(present)-218(inquiry)-219(is)-218(the)-218(outcome)-218(of)-219(a)-218(request)-218(to)-218(write)-218(an)-219(article)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(on)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 14.217 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Atheism)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.151 0 Td[(for)-303(a)-303(projected)-304(dictionary)-303(of)-303(the)-303(religious)-303(history)]TJ -64.182 -13.549 Td[(of)-267(classical)-266(antiquity.)-300(On)-267(going)-266(through)-267(the)-267(sources)-266(I)-267(found)-267(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-279(subject)-278(might)-279(well)-279(deserve)-278(a)-279(more)-279(comprehensive)-279(treatment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(than)-238(the)-239(scope)-238(of)-238(a)-239(dictionary)-238(would)-238(allow.)-246(It)-239(is)-238(such)-238(a)-239(treatment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-250(I)-250(have)-250(attempted)-250(in)-250(the)-250(following)-250(pages.)]TJ 11.956 -13.747 Td[(A)-252(difficulty)-252(that)-252(occurred)-253(at)-252(the)-252(very)-252(beginning)-252(of)-252(the)-253(inquiry)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(was)-289(how)-289(to)-289(define)-289(the)-288(notion)-289(of)-289(atheism.)-367(Nowadays)-289(the)-289(term)-289(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(taken)-309(to)-309(designate)-309(the)-309(attitude)-309(which)-309(denies)-309(every)-309(idea)-310(of)-309(God.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Even)-312(antiquity)-312(sometimes)-312(referred)-311(to)-312(atheism)-312(in)-312(this)-312(sense;)-343(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(an)-400(inquiry)-401(dealing)-400(with)-400(the)-401(history)-400(of)-401(religion)-400(could)-400(not)-401(start)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(from)-354(a)-353(definition)-354(of)-353(that)-354(kind.)-560(It)-354(would)-353(have)-354(to)-354(keep)-353(in)-354(view,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-313(the)-312(philosophical)-313(notion)-313(of)-312(God,)-329(but)-313(the)-312(conceptions)-313(of)-313(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-336(as)-336(they)-336(appear)-336(in)-336(the)-336(religion)-336(of)-336(antiquity.)-509(Hence)-336(I)-336(came)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-293(define)-294(atheism)-293(in)-293(Pagan)-294(antiquity)-293(as)-293(the)-294(point)-293(of)-293(view)-294(which)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(denies)-324(the)-324(existence)-323(of)-324(the)-324(ancient)-324(gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 176.918 0 Td[(.)-471(It)-324(is)-324(in)-323(this)-324(sense)-324(that)]TJ -176.918 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(word)-250(will)-250(be)-250(used)-250(in)-250(the)-250(following)-250(inquiry.)]TJ 11.956 -13.747 Td[(Even)-675(though)-675(we)-675(disregard)-675(philosophical)-674(atheism,)-1563(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 279.068 0 Td[([002])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(definition)-199(is)-199(somewhat)-199(narrow;)-216(for)-198(in)-199(antiquity)-199(mere)-199(denial)-199(of)-199(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(existence)-278(of)-279(the)-278(gods)-278(of)-279(popular)-278(belief)-278(was)-279(not)-278(the)-278(only)-279(attitude)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-359(was)-360(designated)-359(as)-359(atheism.)-578(But)-359(it)-360(has)-359(the)-359(advantage)-360(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(starting)-417(from)-418(the)-417(conception)-417(of)-417(the)-418(ancient)-417(gods)-417(that)-417(may)-418(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(said)-284(to)-284(have)-285(finally)-284(prevailed.)-352(In)-284(the)-285(sense)-284(in)-284(which)-284(the)-284(word)-285(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(used)-269(here)-268(we)-268(are)-269(nowadays)-268(all)-269(of)-268(us)-269(atheists.)-305(We)-269(do)-268(not)-269(believe)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-439(the)-439(gods)-439(whom)-438(the)-439(Greeks)-439(and)-439(the)-439(Romans)-439(worshipped)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-441(believed)-442(in)-441(exist)-441(or)-442(have)-441(ever)-442(existed;)-537(we)-441(hold)-441(them)-442(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-303(productions)-303(of)-303(the)-303(human)-303(imagination)-303(to)-303(which)-303(nothing)-303(real)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(corresponds.)-246(This)-237(view)-238(has)-237(nowadays)-238(become)-237(so)-238(ingrained)-237(in)-238(us)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-329(appears)-329(so)-330(self-evident,)-349(that)-329(we)-329(find)-329(it)-329(difficult)-329(to)-330(imagine)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+38 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 39 0 R
+/Resources 37 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 42 0 R
+>> endobj
+34 0 obj <<
+/D [38 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+41 0 obj <<
+/D [38 0 R /XYZ 305.549 215.183 null]
+>> endobj
+37 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+45 0 obj <<
+/Length 4921      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(4)-14030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(that)-204(it)-205(has)-204(not)-205(been)-204(prevalent)-205(through)-204(long)-205(ages;)-219(nay,)-214(it)-204(is)-205(perhaps)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-431(widely)-431(diffused)-432(assumption)-431(that)-431(even)-431(in)-431(antiquity)-432(educated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-263(unbiased)-264(persons)-263(held)-263(the)-263(same)-263(view)-264(of)-263(the)-263(religion)-263(of)-264(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(people)-283(as)-282(we)-283(do.)-348(In)-282(reality)-283(both)-282(assumptions)-283(are)-282(erroneous:)-316(our)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.55 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(atheism)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 33.938 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.733 0 Td[(in)-356(regard)-357(to)-356(ancient)-357(paganism)-356(is)-357(of)-356(recent)-357(date,)-383(and)]TJ -47.515 -13.549 Td[(in)-312(antiquity)-311(itself)-312(downright)-311(denial)-312(of)-311(the)-312(existence)-311(of)-312(the)-312(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-381(a)-380(comparatively)-381(rare)-380(phenomenon.)-642(The)-380(demonstration)-381(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-293(fact,)-303(rather)-293(than)-293(a)-293(consideration)-293(of)-293(the)-293(various)-293(intermediate)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(positions)-303(taken)-304(up)-303(by)-303(the)-304(thinkers)-303(of)-303(antiquity)-304(in)-303(their)-303(desire)-304(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(avoid)-314(a)-315(complete)-314(rupture)-315(with)-314(the)-315(traditional)-314(ideas)-315(of)-314(the)-315(gods,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(has)-250(been)-250(one)-250(of)-250(the)-250(chief)-250(purposes)-250(of)-250(this)-250(inquiry.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Though)-335(the)-336(definition)-336(of)-335(atheism)-336(set)-335(down)-336(here)-335(might)-336(seem)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(to)-340(be)-339(clear)-340(and)-340(unequivocal,)-362(and)-339(though)-340(I)-340(have)-339(tried)-340(to)-340(adhere)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(strictly)-251(to)-251(it,)-251(cases)-250(have)-251(unavoidably)-251(occurred)-251(that)-251(were)-251(difficult)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-328(classify.)-967(The)-328(most)-327(embarrassing)-328(are)-328(those)-328(which)-328(involve)-328(a)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([003])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.55 Td[(reinterpretation)-297(of)-296(the)-296(con)-1(ception)-296(of)-296(the)-297(gods,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 206.061 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.579 0 Td[(which,)-308(while)]TJ -223.64 -13.549 Td[(acknowledging)-383(that)-382(there)-383(is)-383(some)-382(re)-1(ality)-382(corresponding)-383(to)-383(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conception,)-390(yet)-362(define)-362(this)-362(reality)-362(as)-362(essentially)-362(different)-362(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it.)-615(Moreover,)-402(the)-372(acknowledgment)-371(of)-372(a)-372(certain)-371(group)-372(of)-372(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(\050the)-219(celestial)-220(bodies,)-225(for)-219(instance\051)-220(combined)-219(with)-219(the)-219(rejection)-220(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(others,)-281(may)-274(create)-275(difficulties)-275(in)-274(defining)-275(the)-274(notion)-275(of)-275(atheism;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-323(practice,)-341(however,)-341(this)-322(doctrin)-1(e)-322(generally)-323(coincides)-323(with)-323(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(former,)-387(by)-359(which)-360(the)-359(gods)-360(are)-359(e)-1(xplained)-359(away.)-579(On)-359(the)-360(whole)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-400(would)-400(hardly)-400(be)-400(just,)-438(in)-400(a)-400(field)-400(of)-400(inquiry)-400(like)-400(the)-400(present,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-366(expect)-366(or)-367(require)-366(absolutely)-366(clearly)-366(defined)-367(boundary-lines;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(transition)-250(forms)-250(will)-250(always)-250(occur.)]TJ 11.956 -16.003 Td[(The)-174(persons)-173(of)-174(whom)-174(it)-173(is)-174(related)-174(that)-174(they)-173(denied)-174(the)-174(existence)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(of)-253(the)-253(ancient)-252(god)-1(s)-252(are)-253(in)-253(themselves)-253(few,)-253(and)-253(they)-253(all)-253(belong)-253(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-335(highest)-335(level)-336(of)-335(culture;)-377(by)-336(far)-335(the)-335(greater)-335(part)-335(of)-335(them)-336(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(simply)-263(professional)-262(p)-1(hilosophers.)-288(Hence)-262(the)-263(inquiry)-263(will)-263(almost)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(exclusively)-445(have)-445(to)-445(deal)-445(with)-445(philosophers)-445(and)-446(philosophical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(schools)-540(and)-540(their)-540(doctrines;)-685(of)-540(religion)-540(as)-540(exhibited)-540(in)-540(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(masses,)-384(as)-358(a)-357(social)-357(factor,)-385(it)-357(will)-357(only)-358(treat)-357(by)-357(exception.)-573(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-384(its)-383(purpose)-384(it)-384(is)-383(concerned)-384(with)-384(the)-383(history)-384(of)-384(religion,)-417(not)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+44 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 45 0 R
+/Resources 43 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 42 0 R
+>> endobj
+46 0 obj <<
+/D [44 0 R /XYZ 146.935 326.032 null]
+>> endobj
+43 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+49 0 obj <<
+/Length 3713      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Introduction)-20281(5)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(with)-396(philosophy;)-470(therefore)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 119.734 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(in)-396(accordance)-396(with)-397(the)-396(definition)]TJ -130.643 -13.549 Td[(of)-399(its)-399(o)-1(bject)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 54.769 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(it)-399(will)-399(deal)-400(as)-399(little)-399(as)-399(possible)-400(with)-399(the)-399(purely)]TJ -65.678 -13.549 Td[(philosophical)-178(notions)-178(of)-178(God)-178(that)-178(have)-178(nothing)-178(to)-178(do)-179(with)-178(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion.)-257(What)-253(it)-252(aims)-252(at)-253(illustrating)-252(is)-252(a)-253(certain)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 206.004 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(if)-252(you)-253(like,)-253(the)]TJ -216.913 -13.55 Td[(negative)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.96 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(aspect)-323(of)-323(ancient)-323(religion.)-469(But)-323(its)-323(result,)-342(if)-323(it)-323(can)-323(be)]TJ -47.869 -13.549 Td[(sufficiently)-342(established,)-364(will)-341(not)-342(be)-341(without)-342(importance)-341(for)-342(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(understanding)-471(of)-236(the)-235(positive)-236(religious)-236(sense)-235(of)-236(antiquity.)-245(If)-236(you)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([004])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(want)-348(to)-347(obtain)-348(some)-348(idea)-348(of)-347(the)-348(hold)-348(a)-347(certain)-348(religion)-348(had)-348(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-260(adherents,)-263(it)-260(is)-260(not)-260(amiss)-260(to)-260(know)-260(something)-260(about)-260(th)-1(e)-260(extent)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-253(which)-253(it)-253(dominated)-253(even)-253(the)-253(strata)-253(of)-253(society)-253(most)-253(exposed)-253(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(influences)-250(that)-250(went)-250(against)-250(it.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(It)-564(might)-565(seem)-564(more)-564(natural,)-643(in)-565(dealing)-564(with)-564(atheism)-565(in)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(antiquity,)-516(to)-463(adopt)-462(the)-463(definition)-463(current)-462(among)-463(the)-463(ancients)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(themselves.)-476(That)-325(this)-326(method)-325(would)-326(prove)-325(futile)-325(the)-326(following)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(investigation)-372(will,)-402(I)-372(hope,)-403(make)-372(sufficiently)-372(evident;)-433(antiquity)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(succeeded)-351(as)-351(little)-351(as)-350(we)-351(moderns)-351(in)-351(connecting)-351(any)-351(clear)-351(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(unequivocal)-368(idea)-368(with)-368(the)-368(words)-368(that)-368(signify)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 205.653 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(denial)-368(of)-368(God.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 65.29 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.787 -13.549 Td[(On)-392(the)-392(other)-392(hand,)-427(it)-392(is,)-428(of)-391(course,)-428(impossible)-392(to)-392(begin)-392(at)-392(all)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(except)-282(from)-281(the)-282(traditions)-281(of)-282(antiquity)-281(about)-282(denial)-281(and)-282(deniers.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Hence)-267(the)-266(course)-267(of)-266(the)-267(inquiry)-266(will)-267(be,)-270(first)-267(to)-267(make)-266(clear)-267(what)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(antiquity)-433(understood)-432(by)-433(denial)-433(of)-432(the)-433(gods)-432(and)-433(what)-433(persons)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-354(designated)-355(as)-354(deniers,)-380(and)-355(then)-354(to)-354(examine)-355(in)-354(how)-354(far)-355(these)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(persons)-250(were)-250(atheists)-250(in)-250(our)-250(sense)-250(of)-250(the)-250(word.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -29.64 Td[([005])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+48 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 49 0 R
+/Resources 47 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 42 0 R
+>> endobj
+50 0 obj <<
+/D [48 0 R /XYZ 111.152 436.88 null]
+>> endobj
+51 0 obj <<
+/D [48 0 R /XYZ 46.771 190.453 null]
+>> endobj
+47 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+52 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index3) >>
+endobj
+55 0 obj
+(Chapter I)
+endobj
+58 0 obj <<
+/Length 4525      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(I)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.407 Td[(Atheism)-212(and)-212(atheist)-212(are)-211(words)-212(formed)-212(from)-212(Greek)-212(roots)-212(and)-212(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Greek)-247(derivative)-248(endings.)-249(Nevertheless)-247(they)-248(are)-247(not)-247(Greek;)-249(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(formation)-242(is)-242(not)-241(consonant)-242(with)-242(Greek)-242(usage.)-247(In)-242(Greek)-242(they)-242(said)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.97 0 Td[(and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 20.238 0 Td[(atheotes)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(;)-492(to)-411(these)-411(the)-411(English)-412(words)-411(ungodly)-411(and)]TJ -89.568 -13.549 Td[(ungodliness)-292(c)-1(orrespond)-292(rather)-292(closely.)-378(In)-292(exactly)-293(the)-292(same)-293(way)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-286(ungodly,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 53.914 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.604 0 Td[(was)-286(used)-286(as)-286(an)-286(expression)-286(of)-286(severe)-286(censure)]TJ -85.518 -13.549 Td[(and)-321(moral)-322(condemnation;)-357(this)-321(use)-321(is)-321(an)-322(old)-321(one,)-339(and)-321(the)-322(oldest)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-237(can)-237(be)-237(traced.)-246(Not)-237(till)-237(later)-237(do)-237(we)-237(find)-237(it)-237(employed)-237(to)-237(denote)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-349(certain)-349(philosophical)-349(creed;)-398(we)-349(even)-349(meet)-349(with)-349(philosophers)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bearing)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 35.73 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.498 0 Td[(as)-276(a)-277(regular)-276(surname.)-329(We)-276(know)-276(very)-276(little)-277(of)-276(the)]TJ -67.228 -13.549 Td[(men)-392(in)-392(question;)-464(but)-392(it)-392(can)-392(hardly)-392(be)-393(doubted)-392(that)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 235.666 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.484 0 Td[(,)-428(as)]TJ -264.15 -13.549 Td[(applied)-243(to)-244(them,)-244(implied)-243(not)-244(only)-243(a)-243(denial)-244(of)-243(the)-243(gods)-243(of)-244(popular)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(belief,)-351(but)-331(a)-330(denial)-331(of)-331(gods)-330(in)-331(the)-331(widest)-331(sense)-330(of)-331(the)-331(word,)-351(or)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Atheism)-250(as)-250(it)-250(is)-250(nowadays)-250(understood.)]TJ 11.955 -13.746 Td[(In)-211(this)-210(case)-210(the)-211(word)-210(is)-211(more)-210(particularly)-211(a)-210(philosophical)-211(term.)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(But)-442(it)-443(was)-442(used)-442(in)-443(a)-442(similar)-442(sense)-443(also)-442(in)-442(popular)-443(language,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-405(corresponds)-405(then)-405(closely)-405(to)-405(the)-405(English)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 204.244 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(denier)-405(of)-405(God,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 66.699 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.786 -13.55 Td[(denoting)-306(a)-306(person)-306(who)-306(denies)-306(the)-306(gods)-306(of)-306(his)-306(people)-307(and)-306(State.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(From)-238(the)-237(popular)-238(point)-237(of)-238(view)-237(the)-238(interest,)-240(of)-237(course,)-240(centred)-238(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(those)-226(only,)-231(not)-226(in)-226(the)-452(exponents)-226(of)-226(philosophical)-226(theology.)-242(Thus)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([006])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(we)-228(find)-228(the)-228(word)-227(em)-1(ployed)-227(both)-228(of)-228(theoretical)-228(denial)-228(of)-228(the)-228(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(\050atheism)-307(in)-308(our)-307(sense\051)-307(and)-307(of)-308(practical)-307(denial)-307(of)-307(the)-308(gods,)-321(as)-308(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-250(case)-250(of)-250(the)-250(adherents)-250(of)-250(monotheism,)-250(Jews)-250(and)-250(Christians.)]TJ 11.955 -13.746 Td[(Atheism,)-231(in)-226(the)-227(theoretical)-226(as)-227(well)-226(as)-226(the)-227(practical)-226(sense)-226(of)-227(the)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(word,)-358(was,)-358(according)-336(to)-336(the)-337(ancient)-336(conception)-336(of)-337(law,)-358(always)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-331(crime;)-372(but)-331(in)-331(practice)-331(it)-331(was)-331(treated)-331(in)-331(different)-331(ways,)-352(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(varied)-377(both)-378(according)-377(to)-377(the)-377(period)-378(in)-377(question)-377(and)-378(according)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-348(the)-348(more)-348(or)-348(less)-347(dangerous)-348(nature)-348(of)-348(the)-348(threat)-348(it)-348(offered)-348(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(established)-410(religion.)-731(It)-410(is)-410(only)-411(as)-410(far)-410(as)-410(Athens)-410(and)-411(Imperial)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+57 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 58 0 R
+/Resources 56 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 42 0 R
+>> endobj
+53 0 obj <<
+/D [57 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+59 0 obj <<
+/D [57 0 R /XYZ 186.834 188.282 null]
+>> endobj
+56 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+62 0 obj <<
+/Length 5605      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(I)-21476(7)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Rome)-251(are)-251(concerned)-251(that)-251(we)-251(have)-251(any)-251(definite)-251(knowledge)-251(of)-251(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(law)-216(and)-216(the)-216(judicial)-217(procedure)-216(on)-216(this)-216(point;)-227(a)-216(somewhat)-217(detailed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(account)-400(of)-399(the)-400(state)-399(of)-400(things)-399(in)-400(Athens)-399(and)-400(Rome)-399(cannot)-400(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dispensed)-250(with)-250(here.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(In)-619(the)-618(crim)-1(inal)-618(law)-619(of)-619(Athens)-619(we)-618(meet)-619(with)-619(the)-619(term)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -11.956 -13.549 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 33.328 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(literally:)-236(impiety)-222(or)-223(disrespect)-222(towards)-222(the)-222(gods.)-241(As)-223(an)]TJ -44.237 -13.55 Td[(established)-274(formula)-274(of)-273(accusation)-274(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 162.174 0 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.314 0 Td[(existed,)-280(legislation)]TJ -198.488 -13.549 Td[(must)-407(have)-408(dealt)-407(with)-408(the)-407(subject;)-486(but)-408(how)-407(it)-408(was)-407(defined)-408(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(do)-426(not)-425(know.)-777(The)-426(word)-426(itself)-425(conveys)-426(the)-426(idea)-425(that)-426(the)-426(law)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(particularly)-203(had)-202(offences)-203(against)-203(public)-202(worship)-203(in)-203(view;)-218(and)-203(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-323(confirmed)-323(by)-323(the)-323(fact)-323(that)-323(a)-323(number)-323(of)-324(such)-323(offences)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 248.514 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(from)]TJ -259.423 -13.55 Td[(the)-373(felling)-373(of)-373(sacred)-373(trees)-373(to)-373(the)-373(profanation)-373(of)-373(the)-373(Eleusinian)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Mysteries)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 43.026 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(were)-373(treated)-373(as)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 72.167 0 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.327 0 Td[(.)-618(When,)-404(in)-373(the)-372(next)-373(place,)]TJ -159.429 -13.549 Td[(towards)-350(the)-349(close)-350(of)-350(the)-349(fifth)-350(century)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 170.909 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.,)-375(free-thinking)-349(began)]TJ -184.267 -13.549 Td[(to)-295(assume)-295(forms)-295(which)-295(seemed)-295(dangerous)-295(to)-295(the)-295(religion)-295(of)-296(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(State,)-484(theoretical)-436(denial)-437(of)-437(the)-437(gods)-437(was)-437(also)-437(included)-437(under)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.55 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.327 0 Td[(.)-247(From)-242(about)-241(the)-242(beginning)-483(of)-242(the)-241(Peloponnesian)-242(War)-242(to)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 257.696 0 Td[([007])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.549 Td[(the)-246(close)-246(of)-246(the)-246(fourth)-246(century)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 133.641 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.317 0 Td[(.,)-247(there)-246(are)-246(on)-245(record)-246(a)-246(number)]TJ -147.001 -13.549 Td[(of)-293(prosecutions)-292(of)-293(philosophers)-292(who)-293(were)-292(tried)-293(and)-292(co)-1(ndemned)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-257(denial)-258(of)-257(the)-257(gods.)-273(The)-257(indictment)-257(seems)-258(in)-257(most)-257(c)-1(ases)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 256.389 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)]TJ -267.298 -13.549 Td[(trial)-339(of)-339(Socrates)-339(is)-338(the)-339(only)-339(one)-339(of)-339(which)-339(we)-339(know)-338(de)-1(tails)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 261.233 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(to)]TJ -272.142 -13.55 Td[(have)-362(been)-362(on)-362(the)-363(charge)-362(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 127.296 0 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.327 0 Td[(,)-390(and)-362(the)-362(procedure)-363(proper)]TJ -160.623 -13.549 Td[(thereto)-485(seems)-485(to)-485(have)-485(been)-485(employed,)-544(though)-485(there)-485(was)-485(no)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(proof)-260(or)-260(assertion)-260(of)-261(the)-260(accused)-260(having)-260(offended)-260(against)-261(public)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(worship;)-518(as)-429(to)-429(Socrates,)-473(we)-429(know)-429(the)-429(opposite)-429(to)-429(have)-429(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-380(case;)-446(he)-380(worshipped)-380(the)-380(gods)-381(like)-380(any)-380(other)-380(good)-381(citizen.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(This)-204(extension)-205(of)-204(the)-205(conception)-204(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 153.962 0 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.557 0 Td[(to)-204(include)-205(theoretical)]TJ -189.519 -13.55 Td[(denial)-384(of)-383(the)-384(gods)-383(no)-384(doubt)-383(had)-384(no)-383(foundation)-384(in)-384(law;)-450(this)-384(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(amongst)-248(other)-248(things)-248(evident)-247(from)-248(the)-248(fact)-248(that)-248(it)-248(was)-247(ne)-1(cessary,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-185(order)-186(to)-185(convict)-186(Anaxagoras,)-198(to)-186(pass)-185(a)-186(special)-185(public)-186(resolution)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-317(virtue)-317(of)-316(which)-317(his)-317(free-thinking)-317(theories)-317(became)-317(indictable.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(The)-322(law)-322(presumably)-321(dated)-322(from)-322(a)-322(time)-322(when)-322(theoretical)-322(denial)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-288(the)-289(gods)-288(lay)-289(beyond)-288(the)-288(horizon)-289(of)-288(legislation.)-365(Ne)-1(vertheless,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-306(the)-306(trial)-306(of)-306(Socrates)-306(it)-306(is)-306(simply)-306(taken)-306(for)-306(granted)-306(that)-306(denial)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+61 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 62 0 R
+/Resources 60 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 42 0 R
+>> endobj
+63 0 obj <<
+/D [61 0 R /XYZ 200.911 296.478 null]
+>> endobj
+60 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+66 0 obj <<
+/Length 4877      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(8)-14030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(of)-342(the)-342(gods)-342(is)-342(a)-342(capital)-342(crime,)-365(and)-342(that)-342(not)-342(only)-342(on)-342(the)-342(side)-342(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-233(prosecution,)-237(but)-233(also)-234(on)-233(the)-233(side)-234(of)-233(the)-233(defence:)-242(the)-233(trial)-234(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(turns)-216(on)-216(a)-217(question)-216(of)-216(fact,)-223(the)-216(legal)-216(basis)-216(is)-217(taken)-216(for)-216(granted.)-239(So)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(inveterate,)-290(then,)-291(at)-282(this)-283(time)-282(was)-282(the)-283(conception)-282(of)-282(the)-283(unlawful)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(nature)-250(of)-250(the)-250(denial)-250(of)-250(the)-250(gods)-250(among)-250(the)-250(people)-250(of)-250(Athens.)]TJ 11.956 -15.185 Td[(In)-339(the)-338(course)-339(of)-339(the)-338(fourth)-339(century)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 158.548 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)-339(several)-338(philosophers)]TJ -183.863 -13.55 Td[(were)-326(accused)-325(of)-326(denial)-325(o)-1(f)-325(the)-326(gods)-325(or)-326(blasphemy;)-363(but)-326(after)-326(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(close)-286(of)-286(the)-285(century)-286(we)-286(hear)-286(no)-285(more)-286(of)-286(such)-286(trials.)-357(To)-286(be)-286(sure,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(our)-341(knowledge)-682(of)-341(the)-341(succeeding)-341(centuries,)-364(when)-341(Athens)-341(was)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([008])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(but)-402(a)-403(provincial)-402(town,)-441(is)-402(far)-402(less)-403(copious)-402(than)-402(of)-403(the)-402(days)-403(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-353(greatness;)-405(nevertheless,)-379(it)-353(is)-353(beyond)-353(doubt)-353(that)-353(the)-354(practice)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-471(regard)-470(to)-471(theoretical)-470(denial)-471(of)-470(the)-471(gods)-470(was)-471(changed.)-912(A)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosopher)-336(like)-336(Carneades,)-358(for)-336(instance,)-357(might,)-358(in)-336(view)-336(of)-336(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sceptical)-251(standpoint,)-251(just)-250(as)-251(well)-251(have)-250(been)-251(convicted)-251(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 247.303 0 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -247.303 -13.549 Td[(as)-305(Protagoras,)-319(who)-305(was)-305(convicted)-305(because)-305(he)-305(had)-305(dec)-1(lared)-305(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-442(did)-441(not)-441(know)-442(whether)-441(the)-442(gods)-441(existed)-442(or)-441(not;)-538(and)-441(as)-442(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(such)-510(a)-510(process)-510(against)-510(Carneades,)-575(tradition)-510(would)-511(not)-510(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(remained)-314(silent.)-443(Instead,)-330(we)-314(learn)-314(that)-314(he)-314(was)-314(employed)-314(as)-315(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(trusted)-278(representative)-279(of)-278(the)-278(State)-279(on)-278(most)-278(important)-279(diplomatic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(missions.)-610(It)-370(is)-370(evident)-370(that)-370(Athens)-370(had)-370(arrived)-370(at)-370(the)-370(point)-370(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(view)-342(that)-343(the)-342(theoretical)-342(denial)-342(of)-343(the)-342(gods)-342(might)-342(be)-343(tolerated,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whereas)-250(the)-250(law,)-250(of)-250(course,)-250(continued)-250(to)-250(protect)-250(public)-250(worship.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(In)-288(Rome)-288(they)-288(did)-288(not)-288(possess,)-297(as)-288(in)-288(Athens,)-298(a)-288(general)-288(statute)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(against)-392(religious)-391(offences;)-463(there)-392(were)-391(only)-392(special)-392(provisions,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-447(they)-446(were,)-496(moreover,)-496(few)-446(and)-447(insufficient.)-840(This)-447(defect,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(however,)-432(was)-395(remedied)-396(by)-396(the)-395(vigorous)-396(police)-395(authority)-396(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-381(the)-382(Roman)-381(magistrates)-381(were)-381(invested.)-644(In)-381(Rome)-382(severe)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(measures)-255(were)-255(often)-256(taken)-255(against)-255(movements)-255(which)-256(threatened)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-290(Roman)-290(official)-290(worship,)-300(but)-290(it)-290(was)-290(done)-290(at)-290(the)-290(discretion)-290(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-171(administration)-172(and)-171(not)-171(according)-171(to)-172(hard-and-fast)-171(rules;)-198(hence)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-356(practice)-355(was)-356(somewhat)-355(varying,)-382(and)-356(a)-355(certain)-356(arbitrariness)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(inevitable.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(No)-447(example)-446(is)-447(known)-447(from)-447(Rome)-446(of)-447(action)-447(taken)-447(against)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(theoretical)-334(denial)-334(of)-334(the)-334(gods)-334(corresponding)-334(to)-334(the)-334(trials)-334(of)-334(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+65 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 66 0 R
+/Resources 64 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 42 0 R
+>> endobj
+67 0 obj <<
+/D [65 0 R /XYZ 163.393 408.145 null]
+>> endobj
+64 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+70 0 obj <<
+/Length 5099      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(I)-21476(9)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(philosophers)-297(in)-592(Athens.)-390(The)-296(main)-297(cause)-296(of)-297(this)-296(was,)-308(no)-297(doubt,)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([009])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(that)-374(free-thinking)-373(in)-374(the)-373(fifth)-374(century)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 171.091 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)-374(invaded)-373(Hellas,)-405(and)]TJ -184.45 -13.549 Td[(specially)-436(Athens,)-483(like)-436(a)-436(flood)-436(which)-436(threatened)-436(to)-436(overthrow)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(everything;)-248(in)-248(Rome,)-247(on)-248(the)-247(other)-247(hand,)-248(Greek)-247(philosophy)-248(made)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(its)-177(way)-176(in)-177(slowly)-176(and)-177(gradually,)-191(and)-177(this)-177(took)-176(place)-177(at)-176(a)-177(time)-177(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-231(the)-231(country)-231(of)-232(its)-231(origin)-231(it)-231(had)-231(long)-231(ago)-231(found)-231(a)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 218.12 0 Td[(modus)-231(vivendi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -218.12 -13.549 Td[(with)-291(popular)-291(religion)-291(and)-290(was)-291(acknowledged)-291(as)-291(harmless)-291(to)-291(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(established)-287(worship.)-360(The)-286(more)-287(practical)-287(outlook)-286(of)-287(the)-287(Romans)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(may)-281(perhaps)-280(also)-281(have)-280(had)-281(something)-280(to)-281(say)-280(in)-281(the)-281(matter:)-311(they)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(were)-290(rather)-289(indifferent)-290(to)-290(theoretical)-289(speculations,)-300(whereas)-290(they)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-295(not)-295(to)-295(be)-295(trifled)-295(with)-295(when)-295(their)-295(national)-295(institutions)-295(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(concerned.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(In)-299(consequence)-298(of)-299(this)-298(point)-299(of)-299(view)-298(the)-299(Roman)-299(government)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(first)-398(came)-398(to)-398(deal)-398(with)-398(denial)-398(of)-398(the)-398(gods)-398(as)-398(a)-398(br)-1(each)-398(of)-398(law)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(when)-517(confronted)-516(with)-517(the)-516(two)-517(monotheistic)-516(religions)-517(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(invaded)-414(the)-415(Empire)-414(from)-414(the)-415(East.)-743(That)-414(which)-415(distinguished)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Jews)-356(and)-356(Christians)-356(from)-356(Pagans)-356(was)-356(not)-356(that)-356(they)-357(denied)-356(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(existence)-423(of)-423(the)-423(Pagan)-423(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 128.743 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)-423(Christians,)-466(at)-424(any)-423(rate,)-466(did)]TJ -139.652 -13.549 Td[(not)-308(do)-309(this)-308(as)-308(a)-309(rule)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 88.325 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(but)-308(that)-309(they)-308(denied)-308(that)-308(they)-309(were)-308(gods,)]TJ -99.234 -13.549 Td[(and)-273(therefore)-273(refused)-273(to)-273(worship)-273(them.)-320(They)-273(were)-273(practical,)-279(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theoretical)-257(deniers.)-271(The)-257(tolerance)-257(which)-257(the)-258(Roman)-257(government)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(showed)-412(towards)-412(all)-412(foreign)-411(creeds)-412(and)-412(the)-412(result)-412(of)-412(which)-412(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(imperial)-432(times)-433(was,)-478(practically)-432(speaking,)-478(freedom)-432(of)-433(religion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(over)-330(the)-329(whole)-330(Empire,)-349(could)-330(not)-330(be)-329(extended)-330(to)-329(the)-330(Jews)-330(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-304(Christians;)-330(for)-304(it)-303(was)-304(in)-304(the)-303(last)-304(resort)-303(based)-304(on)-304(reciprocity,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-283(the)-283(fact)-282(that)-283(worship)-283(of)-283(the)-283(Egyptian)-282(or)-283(Persian)-283(gods)-283(did)-283(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(exclude)-414(worship)-827(of)-414(the)-414(Roman)-414(ones.)-741(Every)-414(convert,)-455(on)-414(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([010])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(other)-416(hand,)-457(won)-416(over)-415(to)-416(Judaism)-416(or)-415(Christianity)-416(was)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 247.612 0 Td[(eo)-416(ipso)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -247.612 -13.549 Td[(an)-419(apostate)-419(from)-418(the)-419(Roman)-419(religion,)-461(an)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 191.507 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.053 0 Td[(according)-419(to)]TJ -224.56 -13.549 Td[(the)-308(ancient)-307(conception.)-422(Hence,)-322(as)-308(soon)-307(as)-308(such)-307(religions)-308(began)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-389(spread,)-423(they)-389(constituted)-389(a)-389(serious)-388(danger)-389(to)-389(the)-389(established)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion,)-397(and)-368(the)-367(R)-1(oman)-367(government)-368(intervened.)-603(Judaism)-368(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Christianity)-202(were)-203(not)-202(treated)-203(quite)-202(alike;)-218(in)-203(this)-202(connexion)-203(details)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-240(of)-241(no)-240(interest,)-243(but)-240(certain)-240(principal)-241(features)-240(must)-241(be)-240(dwelt)-241(on)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+69 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 70 0 R
+/Resources 68 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 73 0 R
+>> endobj
+71 0 obj <<
+/D [69 0 R /XYZ 117.483 518.175 null]
+>> endobj
+72 0 obj <<
+/D [69 0 R /XYZ 124.876 160.986 null]
+>> endobj
+68 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+76 0 obj <<
+/Length 4778      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(10)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(as)-356(significant)-356(of)-356(the)-356(attitude)-356(of)-356(antiquity)-356(towards)-356(denial)-357(of)-356(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods.)-238(To)-213(simplify)-213(matters)-213(I)-212(confine)-213(myself)-213(to)-213(Christianity,)-221(where)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(things)-250(are)-250(less)-250(complicated.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(The)-221(Christians)-221(were)-221(generally)-220(designated)-221(as)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 193.2 0 Td[(atheoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.272 0 Td[(,)-227(as)-221(deniers)]TJ -232.428 -13.549 Td[(of)-329(the)-329(gods,)-349(and)-330(the)-329(objection)-329(against)-329(them)-329(was)-329(precisely)-330(their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(denial)-336(of)-337(the)-336(Pagan)-337(gods,)-358(not)-336(their)-336(religion)-337(as)-336(such.)-509(When)-337(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Christian,)-376(summoned)-351(before)-350(the)-351(Roman)-351(magistrates,)-376(agreed)-351(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sacrifice)-313(to)-313(the)-313(Pagan)-313(gods)-313(\050among)-313(th)-1(em,)-328(the)-313(Emperor\051)-314(he)-313(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acquitted;)-408(he)-355(was)-355(not)-356(punished)-355(for)-355(previously)-355(having)-356(attended)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Christian)-260(service)-1(s,)-263(and)-260(it)-260(seems)-261(that)-260(he)-261(was)-260(not)-261(even)-260(required)-261(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(undertake)-286(not)-287(to)-286(do)-286(so)-286(in)-287(future.)-358(Only)-287(if)-286(he)-286(refused)-286(to)-287(sacrifice,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-376(he)-375(punished.)-627(We)-376(cannot)-375(ask)-376(for)-376(a)-375(clearer)-376(proof)-375(that)-376(it)-376(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(apostasy)-425(as)-425(such,)-469(denial)-425(of)-425(the)-425(gods,)-469(against)-425(which)-425(actio)-1(n)-425(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(taken.)-279(It)-259(is)-260(in)-259(keeping)-260(with)-259(this)-260(that,)-262(at)-259(any)-260(rate)-259(under)-260(the)-260(earlier)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Empire,)-294(no)-285(attempt)-285(was)-285(made)-285(to)-285(seek)-285(out)-285(the)-285(Christians)-285(at)-285(their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(assemblies,)-248(to)-248(hinder)-248(their)-247(services)-248(or)-248(the)-248(like;)-248(it)-248(was)-248(considered)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sufficient)-250(to)-250(take)-250(steps)-250(when)-250(information)-250(was)-250(laid.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([011])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 84.711 -16.004 Td[(The)-300(punishments)-301(meted)-300(out)-301(were)-300(different,)-313(in)-301(that)-300(they)-301(were)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(left)-382(solely)-383(to)-382(the)-383(discretion)-382(of)-382(the)-383(magistrates.)-647(But)-382(they)-383(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(generally)-263(severe:)-277(forced)-263(labour)-263(in)-263(mines)-263(and)-263(capital)-264(punishment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-498(quite)-497(common.)-993(No)-498(discrimination)-497(was)-498(made)-498(between)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Roman)-248(citizens)-247(and)-248(others)-248(belonging)-248(to)-247(the)-248(Empire,)-248(but)-248(all)-248(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(treated)-335(alike;)-379(that)-335(the)-335(Roman)-336(citizen)-335(could)-336(not)-335(undergo)-336(capital)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(punishment)-365(without)-365(appeal)-365(to)-364(the)-365(Emperor)-365(does)-365(not)-365(affect)-365(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(principle.)-790(This)-429(procedure)-430(has)-430(really)-430(no)-430(expressly)-430(formulated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(basis)-232(in)-232(law;)-238(the)-232(Roman)-232(penal)-231(code)-232(did)-232(not,)-236(as)-232(mentioned)-232(above,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(take)-173(cognizance)-172(of)-173(denial)-172(of)-173(the)-173(gods.)-224(Nevertheless,)-188(the)-173(sentences)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(on)-351(the)-351(Christians)-350(were)-351(considered)-351(by)-351(the)-350(Pagans)-351(of)-351(the)-351(earlier)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(time)-204(as)-203(a)-204(matter)-203(of)-204(course,)-212(the)-204(justice)-203(of)-204(which)-204(was)-203(not)-204(contested,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-306(the)-307(procedure)-306(of)-306(the)-307(government)-306(was)-307(in)-306(principle)-306(the)-307(same)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(under)-320(humane)-321(and)-320(conscientious)-321(rulers)-320(like)-321(Trajan)-320(and)-321(Marcus)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Aurelius)-352(as)-351(under)-352(tyrants)-352(like)-351(Nero)-352(and)-352(Domitian.)-555(Here)-352(again)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(it)-297(is)-296(evident)-297(how)-296(firmly)-297(rooted)-296(in)-297(the)-296(mind)-297(of)-296(antiqu)-1(ity)-296(was)-297(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conviction)-250(that)-250(denial)-250(of)-250(the)-250(gods)-250(was)-250(a)-250(capital)-250(offence.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+75 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 76 0 R
+/Resources 74 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 73 0 R
+>> endobj
+77 0 obj <<
+/D [75 0 R /XYZ 93.543 296.566 null]
+>> endobj
+74 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+80 0 obj <<
+/Length 4901      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(I)-20976(11)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(To)-202(resume)-203(what)-202(has)-202(here)-203(been)-202(set)-203(forth)-202(concerning)-202(the)-203(attitude)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(of)-399(ancient)-400(society)-399(to)-399(atheism:)-549(it)-399(is,)-436(in)-400(the)-399(first)-399(place,)-437(evident)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-362(the)-362(frequently)-361(me)-1(ntioned)-361(tolerance)-362(of)-362(polytheism)-362(was)-362(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(extended)-369(to)-368(those)-369(who)-368(denied)-369(its)-369(gods;)-428(in)-368(fact,)-398(it)-369(was)-369(applied)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(only)-297(to)-297(those)-297(who)-297(acknowledged)-297(them)-297(even)-297(if)-297(they)-297(worshipped)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(others)-296(besides.)-388(But)-296(the)-296(assertion)-296(of)-296(this)-296(principle)-296(of)-296(intolerance)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(varied)-262(greatly)-262(in)-262(practice)-262(according)-262(to)-262(whether)-262(it)-262(was)-262(a)-262(question)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-508(theoretical)-507(denial)-508(of)-508(the)-507(g)-1(ods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 152.514 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(atheism)-508(in)-507(our)-508(sense)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 97.211 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(or)]TJ -271.543 -13.549 Td[(practical)-367(refusal)-366(to)-367(worship)-367(the)-366(Pagan)-734(gods.)-600(Against)-367(atheism)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([012])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.55 Td[(the)-396(community)-397(took)-396(action)-396(only)-397(during)-396(a)-396(comparatively)-397(short)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(period,)-266(and,)-266(as)-263(far)-263(as)-263(we)-263(know,)-266(only)-262(in)-263(a)-263(single)-263(place.)-289(The)-263(latter)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(limitation)-382(is)-383(probably)-382(explained)-383(not)-382(only)-383(by)-382(the)-382(defe)-1(ctiveness)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-427(tradition,)-470(but)-427(also)-427(by)-426(the)-427(fact)-427(that)-426(in)-427(Athens)-426(free-)-1(thinking)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(made)-207(its)-206(appearance)-207(about)-206(the)-207(year)-206(400)-207(as)-206(a)-207(general)-206(pheno)-1(menon)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-387(therefore)-387(attracted)-387(the)-386(attention)-387(of)-387(the)-387(community.)-661(Apart)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-251(this)-250(case,)-251(the)-251(philosophical)-250(denier)-251(of)-251(God)-250(wa)-1(s)-250(left)-251(in)-250(pe)-1(ace)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-329(through)-329(antiquity,)-349(in)-329(the)-329(same)-329(way)-329(as)-329(the)-329(individual)-329(citizen)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-366(not)-366(interfered)-367(with,)-395(as)-366(a)-366(rule,)-395(when)-367(he,)-395(for)-366(one)-366(reason)-367(or)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(another,)-278(refrained)-272(from)-273(taking)-272(part)-273(in)-272(the)-272(worship)-273(of)-272(the)-273(deities.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(On)-303(the)-303(other)-302(hand,)-316(as)-303(soon)-303(as)-303(practical)-302(refusal)-303(to)-303(believe)-303(in)-303(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods,)-234(apostasy)-230(from)-229(the)-230(established)-230(religion,)-234(assumed)-229(da)-1(ngerous)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(proportions,)-250(ruthless)-250(severity)-250(was)-250(exercised)-250(against)-250(it.)]TJ 11.955 -18.459 Td[(The)-409(discrimination,)-450(however,)-449(made)-409(in)-410(the)-409(treatment)-409(of)-410(the)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(theoretical)-334(and)-334(practical)-334(denial)-334(of)-334(the)-334(gods)-334(is)-334(certainly)-334(not)-334(du)-1(e)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(merely)-316(to)-315(consideration)-316(of)-316(the)-316(more)-315(or)-316(less)-316(isolated)-315(occurr)-1(ence)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-401(the)-402(phenomenon;)-477(it)-402(is)-401(rooted)-402(at)-401(the)-402(same)-401(time)-402(in)-401(the)-402(very)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nature)-387(of)-387(ancient)-387(religion.)-660(The)-387(essence)-387(of)-387(ancient)-387(polytheism)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-477(the)-477(worship)-476(of)-477(the)-477(gods,)-534(that)-476(is,)-534(cultus;)-590(of)-477(a)-477(doctrine)-477(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(divinity)-355(properly)-355(speaking,)-382(of)-355(theology,)-381(there)-355(were)-355(only)-356(slight)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(rudiments,)-506(and)-455(there)-455(was)-455(no)-455(idea)-455(of)-455(any)-455(elaborate)-455(dog)-1(matic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(system.)-1013(Quite)-504(different)-505(attitudes)-504(were)-504(accordingly)-504(a)-1(ssumed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(towards)-239(the)-239(philosopher,)-241(who)-239(held)-239(his)-239(own)-239(opinions)-239(of)-239(the)-240(gods,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(but)-180(took)-180(part)-180(in)-180(the)-181(public)-180(worship)-180(like)-180(anybody)-180(else;)-203(and)-181(towards)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-356(monotheist,)-383(to)-356(whom)-356(the)-356(whole)-356(of)-356(the)-356(Pagan)-356(worship)-357(was)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+79 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 80 0 R
+/Resources 78 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 73 0 R
+>> endobj
+81 0 obj <<
+/D [79 0 R /XYZ 221.645 409.782 null]
+>> endobj
+78 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+84 0 obj <<
+/Length 4065      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(12)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(an)-272(abomination,)-277(which)-271(one)-272(should)-272(abstain)-271(fro)-1(m)-271(at)-272(any)-272(cost,)-277(and)]TJ 3.735 -13.549 Td[(which)-342(one)-343(should)-342(prevail)-342(on)-343(others)-342(to)-342(give)-343(up)-342(for)-343(the)-342(sake)-342(of)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -76.49 0 Td[([013])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(their)-250(own)-250(good)-250(in)-250(this)-250(life)-250(or)-250(the)-250(next.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(In)-787(the)-788(literature)-787(of)-787(antiquity)-788(we)-787(meet)-787(with)-788(sporadic)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(statements)-612(to)-612(the)-612(effect)-612(that)-612(certain)-612(philosophers)-612(bore)-612(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(epithet)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 35.822 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 34.61 0 Td[(as)-562(a)-561(sort)-562(of)-562(surname;)-717(and)-562(in)-561(a)-562(few)-562(of)-561(the)]TJ -70.432 -13.549 Td[(later)-457(authors)-458(of)-457(antiquity)-457(we)-457(even)-458(find)-457(lists)-457(of)-458(men)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 240.627 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(almost)]TJ -251.536 -13.549 Td[(all)-549(of)-550(them)-549(philosophers)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 115.548 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(who)-549(denied)-550(the)-549(existence)-549(of)-550(the)]TJ -126.457 -13.549 Td[(gods.)-1343(Furthermore,)-705(we)-615(possess)-614(information)-614(about)-615(certain)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(persons)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 33.328 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(these)-414(also,)-456(if)-414(Jews)-414(and)-415(Christians)-414(are)-414(excluded,)-455(a)-1(re)]TJ -44.237 -13.549 Td[(nearly)-369(all)-368(of)-369(them)-369(philosophers)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 140.922 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(having)-369(been)-369(accused)-368(of,)-399(and)]TJ -151.831 -13.549 Td[(eventually)-362(convicted)-362(of,)-389(denial)-362(of)-362(the)-362(gods;)-417(some)-362(of)-362(these)-362(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-234(in)-234(our)-234(lists.)-245(Information)-234(of)-234(this)-233(kin)-1(d)-233(will,)-238(as)-234(remarked)-234(above,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-243(taken)-243(as)-243(the)-243(point)-243(of)-243(departure)-243(for)-243(an)-243(investigation)-244(of)-243(atheism)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-323(antiquity.)-469(For)-323(practical)-323(reasons,)-341(however,)-342(it)-323(is)-323(reasonable)-323(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(include)-292(some)-292(philosophers)-292(whom)-292(antiquity)-292(did)-292(not)-293(designate)-292(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atheists,)-205(and)-194(who)-193(did)-194(not)-194(come)-194(into)-193(conflict)-194(with)-194(official)-194(religion,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-306(of)-306(whom)-306(it)-306(has)-305(been)-306(maintained)-306(in)-306(later)-306(times)-306(that)-306(they)-306(did)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-306(believe)-306(in)-306(the)-306(existence)-306(of)-306(the)-306(gods)-306(of)-306(popular)-306(belief.)-419(Thus)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(we)-251(arrive)-250(at)-251(the)-250(following)-251(list,)-251(in)-250(which)-251(those)-250(who)-251(were)-251(denoted)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 12.672 0 Td[(atheoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.856 0 Td[(are)-329(italicised)-328(and)-329(those)-328(who)-329(were)-328(accused)-329(of)-328(impiety)]TJ -43.528 -13.549 Td[(are)-250(marked)-250(with)-250(an)-250(asterisk:)]TJ 21.818 -18.459 Td[(Xenophanes.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(*Anaxagoras.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(Diogenes)-250(of)-250(Apollonia.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Hippo)-250(of)-250(Rhegium.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(*)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(Protagoras.)]TJ -5.455 -13.55 Td[(Prodicus.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Critias.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(*)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(Diagoras)-250(of)-250(Melos.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -5.455 -13.549 Td[(*Socrates.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Antisthenes.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Plato.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(*Aristotle.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+83 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 84 0 R
+/Resources 82 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 73 0 R
+>> endobj
+85 0 obj <<
+/D [83 0 R /XYZ 93.543 504.626 null]
+>> endobj
+82 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+88 0 obj <<
+/Length 2863      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(I)-20976(13)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 68.59 518.175 Td[(Theophrastus.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(*Stilpo.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(*)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(Theodorus.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -5.454 -13.549 Td[(*)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(Bion.)]TJ -5.454 -13.55 Td[(Epicurus.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Euhemerus.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 269.205 -5.607 Td[([014])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -279.068 -13.397 Td[(The)-297(persons)-298(are)-298(put)-297(down)-298(in)-297(chronological)-298(order.)-392(This)-298(order)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(will)-298(in)-298(some)-298(measure)-299(be)-298(preserved)-298(in)-298(the)-298(following)-298(survey;)-323(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(regard)-439(for)-440(the)-439(continuity)-440(of)-439(the)-440(tradition)-439(of)-440(the)-439(doctrine)-440(will)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(entail)-415(certain)-415(deviations.)-745(It)-415(will,)-456(that)-415(is)-415(to)-414(say,)-457(be)-415(natural)-415(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(divide)-206(the)-206(material)-207(into)-206(four)-206(groups:)-228(the)-206(pre-Socratic)-206(philo)-1(sophy;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-257(Sophists;)-261(Socrates)-258(and)-257(the)-257(Socratics;)-261(Hellenistic)-257(philo)-1(sophy.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Each)-354(of)-353(these)-354(groups)-353(has)-354(a)-353(philosophical)-354(character)-353(of)-354(its)-354(own,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-380(it)-380(will)-380(be)-380(seen)-381(that)-380(this)-380(character)-380(also)-380(makes)-380(itself)-380(felt)-381(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-369(relation)-369(to)-369(the)-369(gods)-369(of)-369(the)-369(popular)-370(belief,)-398(even)-369(though)-370(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(here)-398(meet)-398(with)-398(phenomena)-399(of)-398(more)-398(isolated)-398(occurrence.)-695(The)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(four)-389(groups)-389(must)-388(be)-389(supplemented)-389(by)-389(a)-389(fifth,)-423(a)-389(survey)-389(of)-389(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conditions)-422(in)-422(Imperial)-422(Rome.)-766(Atheists)-422(of)-422(this)-422(period)-422(are)-423(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(found)-378(in)-379(our)-378(lists;)-443(but)-378(a)-379(good)-378(deal)-378(of)-379(old)-378(Pagan)-378(free)-1(-thinking)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(survives)-409(in)-408(the)-409(first)-408(centuries)-409(of)-409(our)-408(era,)-449(and)-408(also)-409(the)-409(epithet)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(atheoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.233 0 Td[(was)-271(bestowed)-272(generally)-271(on)-272(the)-271(Christians)-272(and)-271(sometimes)]TJ -30.233 -13.549 Td[(on)-243(the)-244(Jews,)-245(and)-243(if)-244(only)-243(for)-244(this)-243(reason)-244(they)-243(cannot)-244(be)-243(a)-1(ltogether)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(passed)-250(by)-250(in)-250(this)-250(survey.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.023 -29.651 Td[([015])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+87 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 88 0 R
+/Resources 86 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 73 0 R
+>> endobj
+89 0 obj <<
+/D [87 0 R /XYZ 46.771 444.822 null]
+>> endobj
+90 0 obj <<
+/D [87 0 R /XYZ 46.771 184.987 null]
+>> endobj
+86 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+91 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index4) >>
+endobj
+94 0 obj
+(Chapter II)
+endobj
+97 0 obj <<
+/Length 3837      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(II)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.572 Td[(The)-329(paganism)-329(of)-329(antiquity)-329(is)-329(based)-329(on)-329(a)-329(primitive)-329(religion,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 267.299 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -267.299 -13.549 Td[(it)-506(is)-507(originally)-506(in)-507(the)-506(main)-506(homogeneous)-507(with)-506(the)-507(religions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nowadays)-576(met)-575(with)-575(in)-576(the)-575(so-called)-576(primitive)-575(peoples.)-1227(It)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(underwent,)-390(however,)-390(a)-362(long)-362(process)-362(of)-362(evolution)-362(parallel)-362(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-309(conditioned)-310(by)-309(the)-310(development)-309(of)-309(Greek)-310(and)-309(later)-310(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(civilisation.)-826(This)-442(evolution)-442(carried)-442(ancient)-442(religion)-443(far)-442(away)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-499(its)-498(primitive)-499(starting-point;)-623(it)-498(produced)-499(numerous)-499(new)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(formations,)-360(above)-338(all)-339(a)-338(huge)-338(system)-338(of)-338(anthropomorphic)-339(gods,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(each)-318(with)-318(a)-317(definite)-318(character)-318(and)-318(personality)-318(of)-317(his)-318(own.)-454(This)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(development)-371(is)-371(the)-371(result)-371(of)-371(an)-371(interplay)-371(of)-372(numerous)-371(factors:)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(changing)-430(social)-429(and)-430(economical)-429(conditions)-430(evoked)-429(the)-430(desire)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(for)-435(new)-435(religious)-435(ideas;)-528(the)-435(influence)-435(of)-435(other)-435(peoples)-435(made)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(itself)-446(felt;)-545(poetry)-446(and)-447(the)-446(fine)-446(arts)-447(contributed)-446(largely)-446(to)-447(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(moulding)-362(of)-362(these)-362(ideas;)-417(conscious)-362(reflection,)-390(too,)-390(arose)-362(early)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-359(modified)-359(original)-358(simplicity.)-577(But)-358(what)-359(is)-359(characteristic)-359(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-223(whole)-222(process)-223(is)-222(the)-223(fact)-223(that)-222(it)-223(went)-222(on)-223(continuously)-223(without)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(breaks)-377(or)-376(sudden)-377(bounds.)-630(Nowhere)-376(in)-377(ancient)-377(religion,)-408(as)-377(far)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-405(we)-405(can)-406(trace)-405(it,)-444(did)-405(a)-405(powerful)-405(religious)-405(personality)-406(strike)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-373(with)-372(a)-373(radical)-372(transformation,)-404(with)-372(a)-373(direct)-372(rejection)-373(of)-373(old)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ideas)-276(and)-276(dogmatic)-276(accentuation)-276(of)-276(new)-276(ones.)-328(The)-276(res)-1(ult)-276(of)-276(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(quiet)-375(growth)-751(was)-376(an)-375(exceedingly)-375(heterogeneous)-376(organism,)-407(in)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([016])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.55 Td[(which)-389(remains)-388(of)-389(ancient,)-423(highly)-389(primitive)-388(customs)-389(and)-389(ideas)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-273(retained)-274(along)-273(with)-273(other)-273(elements)-274(of)-273(a)-273(far)-273(more)-274(advanced)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(character.)]TJ 11.956 -13.779 Td[(Such)-376(a)-375(state)-376(of)-375(things)-376(need)-376(not)-375(in)-376(itself)-375(trouble)-376(the)-376(general)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(consciousness;)-448(it)-382(is)-382(a)-382(well-established)-382(fact)-382(that)-382(in)-383(religion)-382(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(most)-445(divergent)-445(elements)-446(are)-445(not)-445(incompatible.)-836(Nevertheless,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(among)-510(the)-510(Greeks,)-575(with)-510(their)-510(strong)-510(proclivity)-510(to)-510(reflective)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thought,)-270(criticism)-266(early)-266(arose)-266(against)-266(the)-266(traditional)-267(conceptions)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+96 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 97 0 R
+/Resources 95 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 73 0 R
+>> endobj
+92 0 obj <<
+/D [96 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+98 0 obj <<
+/D [96 0 R /XYZ 154.457 174.765 null]
+>> endobj
+95 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+101 0 obj <<
+/Length 4807      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(II)-20643(15)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(of)-209(the)-208(gods.)-237(The)-208(typical)-209(method)-209(of)-208(this)-209(criticism)-209(is)-208(that)-209(the)-209(higher)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conceptions)-373(of)-373(the)-374(gods)-373(are)-373(used)-373(against)-374(the)-373(lower.)-619(From)-374(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(earliest)-390(times)-390(the)-390(Greek)-390(religious)-390(sense)-390(favoured)-390(absoluteness)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-476(definition)-476(where)-476(the)-476(gods)-476(are)-476(concerned;)-589(even)-477(in)-476(Homer)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(they)-356(are)-357(not)-356(only)-357(eternal)-356(and)-356(happy,)-383(but)-357(also)-356(all-powerful)-357(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all-knowing.)-722(Corresponding)-407(expressions)-407(of)-407(a)-407(moral)-408(character)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-397(hardly)-398(to)-397(be)-397(found)-397(in)-398(Homer;)-470(but)-398(as)-397(early)-397(as)-397(Hesiod)-398(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Solon)-217(we)-217(find,)-223(at)-217(any)-216(rate,)-224(Zeus)-217(as)-216(the)-217(representative)-217(of)-217(heavenly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(justice.)-812(With)-437(such)-438(definitions)-437(a)-437(large)-438(number)-437(of)-437(customs)-438(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(public)-420(worship)-420(and,)-462(above)-420(all,)-462(a)-420(number)-420(of)-420(stories)-420(about)-420(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods,)-238(were)-234(in)-235(violent)-234(contradiction;)-240(thus)-235(we)-234(find)-235(even)-234(so)-235(old)-235(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(so)-272(pious)-272(a)-273(poet)-272(as)-272(Pindar)-272(occasionally)-272(rejecting)-272(mythical)-273(stories)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-266(he)-265(thinks)-266(at)-266(variance)-265(with)-266(the)-266(sublime)-266(nature)-265(of)-266(the)-266(gods.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(This)-377(form)-377(of)-377(criticism)-377(of)-377(popular)-377(beliefs)-377(is)-378(continued)-377(through)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-311(whole)-310(of)-311(antiquity;)-341(it)-310(is)-311(found)-310(not)-311(only)-310(in)-311(philosophers)-311(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophically)-326(educated)-327(laymen,)-345(but)-327(appears)-326(spontaneously)-327(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(everybody)-271(of)-271(a)-272(reflective)-271(mind;)-282(its)-271(best)-271(known)-271(representative)-272(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(earlier)-304(times)-304(is)-304(Euripides.)-411(Typical)-304(of)-304(its)-304(popular)-608(form)-304(is)-304(in)-304(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([017])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(first)-206(place)-207(its)-206(casualness;)-221(it)-206(is)-206(directed)-207(against)-206(details)-206(which)-206(at)-207(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(moment)-200(attract)-200(attention,)-210(while)-200(it)-200(leaves)-200(other)-200(things)-201(alone)-200(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-280(principle)-281(are)-280(quite)-281(as)-280(offensive,)-288(but)-280(either)-281(not)-280(very)-281(obviously)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(so,)-202(or)-190(else)-190(not)-190(relevant)-189(to)-190(the)-190(matter)-190(in)-190(hand.)-230(Secondly,)-202(it)-190(is)-190(na\357ve:)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-309(takes)-308(the)-309(gods)-309(of)-308(the)-309(popular)-309(belief)-309(for)-308(granted)-309(essentially)-309(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they)-191(are;)-210(it)-191(does)-191(not)-191(raise)-191(the)-190(crucial)-191(question)-191(whether)-191(the)-191(popular)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(belief)-328(is)-328(not)-328(quite)-328(justified)-328(in)-328(attributing)-328(to)-328(these)-329(higher)-328(beings)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-287(kinds)-286(of)-287(imperfection,)-296(and)-286(wrong)-287(in)-286(attributing)-287(perfection)-287(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(them,)-356(and)-335(still)-336(less)-335(if)-335(such)-335(beings,)-356(whether)-335(they)-335(are)-336(defined)-335(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(perfect)-313(or)-313(imperfect,)-328(exist)-313(at)-313(all.)-439(It)-312(follows)-313(that)-313(as)-313(a)-313(whole)-313(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(form)-250(of)-250(criticism)-250(is)-250(outside)-250(the)-250(scope)-250(of)-250(our)-250(inquiry.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(Still,)-418(there)-384(is)-384(one)-384(single)-385(personality)-384(in)-384(early)-384(Greek)-385(thought)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(who)-562(seems)-562(to)-561(have)-562(proceeded)-562(still)-562(further)-561(on)-562(the)-562(lines)-562(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-490(na\357ve)-491(criticism,)-550(namely,)-550(Xenophanes)-491(of)-490(Colophon.)-971(He)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-375(generally)-375(included)-375(amongst)-375(the)-375(philosophers,)-407(and)-375(rightly)-375(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(so)-345(far)-345(as)-345(he)-345(initiated)-345(a)-345(philosophical)-345(speculation)-345(which)-346(was)-345(of)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+100 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 101 0 R
+/Resources 99 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 103 0 R
+>> endobj
+102 0 obj <<
+/D [100 0 R /XYZ 263.839 287.839 null]
+>> endobj
+99 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+106 0 obj <<
+/Length 5713      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(16)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(the)-376(highest)-376(importance)-375(in)-376(the)-376(development)-376(of)-376(Greek)-376(scientific)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thought.)-666(But)-388(in)-389(the)-389(present)-388(connexion)-389(it)-388(would,)-424(nevertheless,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-374(misleading)-374(to)-373(place)-374(Xenophanes)-374(among)-374(those)-374(philosophers)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(who)-439(came)-439(into)-439(conflict)-439(with)-439(the)-439(popular)-439(belief)-440(because)-439(their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(conception)-420(of)-421(Existence)-420(was)-420(based)-420(on)-421(science.)-760(The)-421(starting-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(point)-566(for)-566(his)-566(criticism)-566(of)-566(the)-566(popular)-566(belief)-566(is)-566(in)-567(fact)-566(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophical,)-546(but)-487(religious;)-606(he)-487(ranks)-487(with)-487(personalities)-487(like)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Pindar)-301(and)-302(Euripides)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 92.625 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(he)-301(was)-302(also)-301(a)-301(verse-writer)-302(himself,)-314(with)]TJ -103.535 -13.549 Td[(considerable)-209(poetic)-209(gift)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 101.505 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)-209(is)-209(only)-208(distinguished)-209(from)-209(them)-209(by)]TJ -112.414 -13.55 Td[(the)-232(greater)-233(consistency)-232(of)-233(his)-232(thought.)-244(Hence,)-472(the)-232(correct)-233(course)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([018])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(is)-329(to)-330(deal)-329(with)-329(him)-329(in)-330(this)-329(place)-329(as)-329(the)-330(only)-329(eminent)-329(thinker)-330(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(antiquity)-375(about)-376(whom)-375(it)-375(is)-376(known)-375(that)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 174.271 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(starting)-375(from)-376(popular)]TJ -185.18 -13.549 Td[(belief)-313(and)-314(religious)-313(motives)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 123.577 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(he)-313(reached)-314(a)-313(standpoint)-313(which)-314(at)]TJ -134.486 -13.549 Td[(any)-250(rate)-250(with)-250(some)-250(truth)-250(may)-250(be)-250(designated)-250(as)-250(atheism.)]TJ 11.955 -18.459 Td[(Xenophanes)-541(lived)-541(in)-541(the)-541(latter)-541(part)-541(of)-541(the)-541(sixth)-541(and)-541(the)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(beginning)-547(of)-546(the)-547(fifth)-547(centuries)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 154.039 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)-547(\050according)-546(to)-547(his)-547(own)]TJ -167.398 -13.55 Td[(statement)-420(he)-420(reached)-419(an)-420(age)-420(of)-420(more)-420(than)-419(ninety)-420(years\051.)-760(He)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-337(an)-338(itinerant)-337(singer)-337(who)-337(travelled)-338(about)-337(and)-337(recited)-338(poetry,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(presumably)-361(not)-362(merely)-361(his)-362(own)-361(but)-362(also)-361(that)-361(of)-362(others.)-584(In)-362(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(own)-212(poems)-212(he)-212(severely)-212(attacked)-212(the)-212(manner)-212(in)-212(which)-212(Homer)-212(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Hesiod,)-379(the)-353(most)-353(famous)-354(poets)-353(of)-353(Greece,)-379(had)-353(represented)-354(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods:)-235(they)-220(had)-220(attributed)-219(to)-220(them)-220(everything)-220(which)-220(in)-220(man's)-220(eyes)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-353(outrageous)-354(and)-353(reprehensible)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 141.232 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(theft,)-379(adultery)-354(and)-353(deception)]TJ -152.141 -13.549 Td[(of)-302(one)-302(another.)-405(Their)-302(accounts)-302(of)-302(the)-301(fights)-302(of)-302(the)-302(gods)-302(against)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Titans)-269(and)-270(Giants)-269(he)-269(denounced)-269(as)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 155.778 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(inventions)-269(of)-270(the)-269(ancients.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 115.165 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.786 -13.549 Td[(But)-270(he)-270(did)-271(not)-270(stop)-270(at)-270(that:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 120.255 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Men)-270(believe)-270(that)-271(the)-270(gods)-270(are)-270(born,)]TJ -125.099 -13.549 Td[(are)-251(clothed)-251(and)-250(shaped)-251(and)-251(speak)-251(like)-251(themselves)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 216.072 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(;)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 5.773 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(if)-251(oxen)-251(and)]TJ -231.533 -13.55 Td[(horses)-219(and)-220(lions)-219(could)-220(draw)-219(and)-220(paint,)-225(they)-220(would)-219(delineate)-220(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-319(in)-320(their)-319(own)-320(image)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 108.475 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(;)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 6.895 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(the)-319(Negroes)-320(believe)-319(that)-320(their)-319(gods)]TJ -125.057 -13.549 Td[(are)-237(flat-nosed)-237(and)-236(black,)-240(the)-237(Thracians)-236(that)-237(theirs)-237(have)-237(blue)-237(eyes)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-337(red)-337(hair.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 56.726 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.52 0 Td[(Thus)-337(he)-337(attacked)-337(directly)-337(the)-337(popular)-337(belief)-337(that)]TJ -65.246 -13.549 Td[(the)-281(gods)-280(are)-281(anthropomorphic,)-288(and)-281(his)-281(arguments)-280(testify)-281(that)-281(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(clearly)-354(realised)-353(that)-354(men)-353(create)-354(their)-353(gods)-354(in)-353(their)-354(own)-354(image.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(On)-349(another)-350(main)-349(point,)-374(too,)-374(he)-350(was)-349(in)-350(direct)-349(opposition)-349(to)-350(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+105 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 106 0 R
+/Resources 104 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 103 0 R
+>> endobj
+107 0 obj <<
+/D [105 0 R /XYZ 294.443 396.232 null]
+>> endobj
+104 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+110 0 obj <<
+/Length 5133      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(II)-20643(17)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(religious)-248(ideas)-247(of)-248(his)-247(time:)-249(he)-248(rejected)-247(Divination,)-248(the)-248(belief)-248(that)]TJ 3.148 -13.549 Td[(the)-288(gods)-289(imparted)-288(the)-289(secrets)-288(o)-1(f)-288(the)-289(future)-288(to)-289(men)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 219.801 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(which)-288(was)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 57.166 0 Td[([019])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.549 Td[(deemed)-264(a)-265(mainstay)-264(of)-265(the)-264(belief)-264(in)-265(the)-264(existence)-265(of)-264(the)-264(gods.)-294(As)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-226(positive)-227(counterpart)-226(to)-227(the)-226(anthropomorphic)-226(gods,)-231(Xen)-1(ophanes)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(set)-389(up)-390(a)-389(philosophical)-389(conception)-390(of)-389(God:)-529(God)-389(must)-389(be)-390(One,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Eternal,)-331(Unchangeable)-315(and)-315(identical)-315(with)-315(himself)-315(in)-315(every)-315(way)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(\050all)-279(sight,)-287(all)-279(hearing)-279(and)-279(all)-279(mind\051.)-338(This)-279(deity,)-286(according)-279(to)-280(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(explicit)-269(statements)-268(of)-269(our)-269(earliest)-268(sources,)-274(he)-268(identified)-269(with)-269(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(universe.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(If)-546(we)-545(examine)-546(more)-545(closely)-546(the)-546(arguments)-545(put)-546(forth)-546(by)]TJ -11.955 -13.55 Td[(Xenophanes)-201(in)-202(support)-201(of)-202(his)-201(remarkable)-201(conception)-202(of)-201(the)-202(deity,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-495(realise)-494(that)-495(he)-495(everywhere)-495(starts)-494(from)-495(the)-495(definitions)-495(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-370(nature)-370(of)-371(the)-370(gods)-370(as)-370(given)-370(by)-371(popular)-370(religion;)-430(but,)-400(be)-371(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(understood,)-393(solely)-364(from)-364(the)-365(absolute)-364(definitions.)-593(He)-364(takes)-365(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(existence)-300(of)-300(the)-301(divine,)-313(with)-300(its)-300(absolute)-300(attributes,)-313(for)-300(gra)-1(nted;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(it)-317(is)-317(in)-317(fact)-317(the)-316(basis)-317(of)-317(all)-317(his)-317(speculation.)-451(His)-317(criticism)-317(of)-317(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-414(ideas)-415(of)-414(the)-415(gods)-414(is)-414(therefore)-415(closely)-414(connected)-415(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-394(philosophical)-393(conception)-394(of)-394(God;)-466(the)-393(two)-394(are)-394(the)-394(positive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-306(negative)-306(sides)-306(of)-306(the)-306(same)-306(thing.)-418(Altogether)-306(his)-306(co)-1(nnexion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-404(what)-405(I)-404(call)-405(the)-404(na\357ve)-405(criticism)-404(of)-405(the)-404(popular)-405(religion)-405(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(unmistakable.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(It)-285(is)-285(undoubtedly)-285(a)-284(remarka)-1(ble)-284(fact)-285(that)-285(we)-285(meet)-285(at)-285(this)-285(early)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(date)-382(with)-382(such)-382(a)-381(consistent)-382(representative)-382(of)-382(this)-382(criticism.)-646(If)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-384(take)-385(Xenophanes)-384(at)-385(his)-384(word)-385(we)-384(m)-1(ust)-384(describe)-385(him)-384(as)-385(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atheist,)-395(and)-367(atheism)-366(in)-366(the)-366(sixth)-367(century)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 184.939 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)-366(is)-367(a)-366(very)-366(curious)]TJ -198.298 -13.549 Td[(phenomenon)-294(indeed.)-381(Neither)-294(was)-294(it)-294(acknowledged)-294(in)-294(antiquity;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(no)-203(one)-202(placed)-203(Xenophanes)-203(amongst)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 157.087 0 Td[(atheoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.273 0 Td[(;)-218(and)-203(Cicero)-203(even)-203(says)]TJ -184.36 -13.55 Td[(somewhere)-469(\050according)-470(to)-469(Greek)-470(authority\051)-470(that)-938(Xe)-1(nophanes)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.023 0 Td[([020])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.549 Td[(was)-374(the)-375(only)-374(one)-374(of)-375(those)-374(who)-374(believed)-375(in)-374(gods)-374(who)-375(rejected)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(divination.)-657(In)-386(more)-385(recent)-386(times,)-420(too,)-419(serious)-386(doubt)-386(has)-386(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(expressed)-287(whether)-287(Xenophanes)-287(actually)-287(denied)-287(the)-287(existence)-288(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-432(gods.)-798(Reference)-432(has)-432(amongst)-433(other)-432(things)-433(been)-432(made)-433(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-434(fact)-434(that)-435(he)-434(speaks)-434(in)-434(several)-435(places)-434(about)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 218.947 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 20.608 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.58 0 Td[(where)]TJ -253.978 -13.549 Td[(he,)-500(according)-450(to)-450(his)-450(view,)-500(ought)-450(to)-450(say)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 189.439 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(God)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 18.785 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(;)-550(nay,)-500(he)-450(has)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+109 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 110 0 R
+/Resources 108 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 103 0 R
+>> endobj
+111 0 obj <<
+/D [109 0 R /XYZ 46.771 504.626 null]
+>> endobj
+112 0 obj <<
+/D [109 0 R /XYZ 268.356 147.437 null]
+>> endobj
+108 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+115 0 obj <<
+/Length 5112      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(18)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(even)-306(formulated)-307(his)-306(fundamental)-306(idea)-306(in)-307(the)-306(words:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 232.758 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(One)-306(God,)]TJ -237.602 -13.549 Td[(the)-345(greatest)-346(amongst)-345(gods)-346(and)-345(men,)-369(neither)-345(in)-346(shape)-345(nor)-346(mind)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(like)-402(unto)-403(any)-402(mortal.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 95.891 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.233 0 Td[(To)-402(be)-403(sure,)-440(Xenophanes)-402(is)-403(not)-402(always)]TJ -105.124 -13.549 Td[(consistent)-319(in)-319(his)-320(language;)-353(but)-320(no)-319(weight)-319(whatever)-319(ought)-319(to)-320(be)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(attached)-251(to)-250(this,)-251(least)-250(of)-251(all)-250(in)-251(the)-250(case)-251(of)-250(a)-251(man)-250(who)-251(exclusively)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(expressed)-261(himself)-260(in)-261(verse.)-282(Another)-261(theory)-261(rests)-260(on)-261(the)-261(tradition)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-226(Xenophanes)-226(regarded)-227(his)-226(deity)-226(and)-226(the)-226(universe)-226(as)-227(identical,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(consequently)-382(was)-382(a)-382(pantheist.)-647(In)-382(that)-382(case,)-415(it)-382(is)-382(said,)-415(he)-383(may)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(very)-441(well)-440(have)-441(considered,)-488(for)-440(instance,)-489(the)-440(heavenly)-441(bodies)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-428(deities.)-786(Sound)-428(as)-429(this)-428(argument)-429(is)-428(in)-429(general,)-473(it)-428(does)-429(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(apply)-278(to)-277(this)-278(case.)-333(When)-278(a)-278(thinker)-277(arrives)-278(at)-278(pantheism,)-285(starting)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-317(a)-317(criticism)-317(of)-318(polytheism)-317(which)-317(is)-317(expressly)-317(based)-317(on)-318(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(antithesis)-217(between)-216(the)-217(unity)-217(and)-216(plurality)-217(of)-216(the)-217(deity)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 229.187 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(then)-217(very)]TJ -240.096 -13.549 Td[(valid)-193(proofs,)-204(indeed,)-204(are)-193(needed)-193(in)-193(order)-192(to)-193(justify)-193(the)-193(assumption)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-299(he)-300(after)-299(all)-300(believed)-299(in)-299(a)-300(plurality)-299(of)-300(gods;)-324(and)-299(such)-300(proofs)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-250(wanting)-250(in)-250(the)-250(case)-250(of)-250(Xenophanes.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Judging)-219(from)-219(the)-220(material)-219(in)-219(hand)-219(one)-220(can)-219(hardly)-219(arrive)-219(at)-220(any)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(other)-299(conclusion)-300(than)-299(that)-299(the)-300(standpoint)-299(of)-299(Xenophanes)-300(comes)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(under)-229(our)-229(definition)-229(of)-228(atheism.)-243(But)-229(we)-229(must)-229(not)-229(forget)-229(that)-229(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fragments)-210(of)-209(his)-210(writings)-209(have)-210(been)-210(preserved,)-217(and)-210(that)-419(the)-210(more)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([021])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.55 Td[(extensive)-334(of)-334(them)-333(do)-334(not)-334(assist)-334(us)-333(greatly)-334(to)-334(the)-334(understanding)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-405(his)-406(religious)-405(standpoint.)-716(It)-405(is)-405(possible)-406(that)-405(we)-405(might)-406(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(arrived)-295(at)-296(a)-295(different)-295(conclusion)-295(had)-296(we)-295(but)-295(possessed)-295(his)-296(chief)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophical)-238(work)-237(in)-238(its)-237(entirety,)-240(or)-238(at)-237(least)-238(larger)-237(portions)-238(of)-238(it.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(And)-257(I)-258(must)-257(candidly)-258(confess)-257(that)-257(if)-258(I)-257(were)-258(asked)-257(whether,)-259(in)-258(my)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(heart)-305(of)-305(hearts,)-319(I)-304(believed)-305(that)-305(a)-305(Greek)-305(of)-305(the)-305(sixth)-305(century)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 264.543 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.728 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ -277.903 -13.549 Td[(denied)-305(point-blank)-304(the)-305(existence)-305(of)-304(his)-305(gods,)-318(my)-305(answer)-305(would)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-250(in)-250(the)-250(negative.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(That)-182(Xenophanes)-181(was)-182(not)-181(considered)-182(an)-181(atheist)-182(by)-181(the)-182(ancients)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(may)-213(possibly)-212(be)-213(explained)-213(by)-212(the)-213(fact)-213(that)-213(they)-212(objected)-213(to)-213(fasten)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-423(designation)-422(on)-423(a)-423(man)-422(whose)-423(reasoning)-423(took)-422(the)-423(deity)-423(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-426(starting-point)-425(and)-426(whose)-425(sole)-426(aim)-425(was)-426(to)-425(define)-426(its)-426(nature.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Perhaps)-460(they)-460(also)-460(had)-460(an)-460(inkling)-460(that)-460(he)-460(in)-460(reality)-460(stood)-460(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-378(ground)-379(of)-378(popular)-378(belief,)-410(even)-379(if)-378(he)-378(went)-379(beyond)-378(it.)-635(Still)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+114 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 115 0 R
+/Resources 113 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 103 0 R
+>> endobj
+116 0 obj <<
+/D [114 0 R /XYZ 333.851 258.286 null]
+>> endobj
+113 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+119 0 obj <<
+/Length 1642      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(II)-20643(19)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(more)-274(curious)-273(is)-274(the)-273(fact)-274(that)-273(his)-274(religious)-273(view)-274(does)-274(not)-273(seem)-274(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-362(influenced)-362(the)-362(immediately)-362(succeeding)-362(philosophy)-362(at)-362(all.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(His)-403(successors,)-441(Parmenides)-402(and)-403(Zeno,)-441(developed)-403(his)-403(doctrine)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-425(unity,)-469(but)-426(in)-425(a)-425(pantheistic)-426(direction,)-469(and)-425(on)-425(a)-426(logical,)-469(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(religious)-294(line)-295(of)-294(argument;)-317(about)-294(their)-294(attitude)-295(to)-294(popular)-295(belief)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-382(are)-382(told)-382(practically)-382(nothing.)-645(And)-382(Ionic)-382(speculation)-382(took)-382(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(quite)-253(different)-252(direction.)-258(Not)-253(till)-253(a)-253(century)-252(later,)-254(in)-252(Euripides,)-254(do)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-240(observe)-239(a)-240(distinct)-239(influence)-240(of)-239(his)-240(criticism)-239(of)-240(popular)-240(belief;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-317(at)-318(that)-317(time)-317(other)-317(currents)-318(of)-317(opinion)-317(had)-317(intervened)-318(which)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(are)-305(not)-304(dependent)-305(on)-305(Xenophanes,)-318(but)-305(might)-304(direct)-305(attention)-305(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(him.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -27.371 Td[([022])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+118 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 119 0 R
+/Resources 117 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 103 0 R
+>> endobj
+120 0 obj <<
+/D [118 0 R /XYZ 46.771 355.312 null]
+>> endobj
+117 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+121 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index5) >>
+endobj
+124 0 obj
+(Chapter III)
+endobj
+127 0 obj <<
+/Length 4290      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(III)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.572 Td[(Ancient)-209(Greek)-209(naturalism)-209(is)-209(essentially)-209(calculated)-209(to)-210(collide)-209(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-343(popular)-343(belief.)-530(It)-343(seeks)-344(a)-343(natural)-343(explanation)-343(of)-343(the)-344(world,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(first)-224(and)-225(foremost)-224(of)-225(its)-224(origin,)-230(but)-224(in)-225(the)-224(next)-225(place)-224(of)-225(individual)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(natural)-268(phenomena.)-303(As)-268(to)-268(the)-268(genesis)-268(of)-267(the)-268(world,)-273(speculations)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-400(a)-399(mythical)-400(kind)-399(had)-400(already)-400(developed)-399(on)-400(the)-399(basis)-400(of)-400(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(popular)-362(belief.)-585(They)-362(were)-362(not,)-389(however,)-390(binding)-362(on)-362(anybody,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and,)-239(above)-236(all,)-240(the)-236(idea)-236(of)-237(the)-236(gods)-236(having)-237(created)-236(the)-236(world)-237(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(altogether)-234(alien)-233(to)-234(Greek)-234(religion.)-244(Thus,)-237(without)-234(offence)-234(to)-234(them)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-229(might)-229(be)-229(maintained)-229(that)-229(everything)-229(originated)-229(from)-229(a)-229(primary)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(substance)-365(or)-365(from)-365(a)-365(mixture)-365(of)-365(several)-365(primary)-365(substances,)-394(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-224(generally)-224(maintained)-224(by)-225(the)-224(ancient)-224(naturalists.)-241(On)-224(the)-225(other)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(hand,)-291(a)-282(conflict)-283(arose)-282(as)-283(soon)-282(as)-283(the)-282(heavenly)-283(phenomena,)-291(such)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-181(lightning)-182(and)-181(thunder,)-195(were)-182(ascribed)-181(to)-182(natural)-181(causes,)-195(or)-182(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-301(heavenly)-302(bodies)-301(were)-301(made)-302(out)-301(to)-302(be)-301(natural)-301(objects;)-327(for)-302(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-233(Greeks)-233(it)-233(was)-233(an)-232(established)-233(fact)-233(that)-233(Zeus)-233(sent)-233(lightning)-233(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thunder,)-304(and)-294(that)-293(the)-293(sun)-294(and)-293(the)-293(moon)-294(were)-293(gods.)-380(A)-293(refusal)-294(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(believe)-254(in)-254(the)-255(latter)-254(was)-254(especially)-254(dangerous)-254(because)-254(they)-255(were)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(visible)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.328 0 Td[(gods,)-378(and)-352(as)-353(to)-352(the)-353(person)-352(who)-353(did)-352(not)-352(believe)-353(in)-352(their)]TJ -32.328 -13.549 Td[(divinity)-346(the)-346(obvious)-346(conclusion)-346(would)-346(be)-346(that)-346(he)-346(believed)-346(still)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(less)-250(in)-250(the)-250(invisible)-250(gods.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([023])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 84.712 -13.779 Td[(That)-348(this)-348(inference)-348(was)-348(drawn)-348(will)-348(appear)-348(before)-348(long.)-545(But)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-489(epithet)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 53.686 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(atheist)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 28.483 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.174 0 Td[(was)-489(very)-488(rarely)-489(attached)-488(to)-489(the)-489(ancient)]TJ -97.187 -13.55 Td[(naturalists;)-242(only)-237(a)-238(few)-238(of)-237(the)-238(later)-237(\050and)-238(those)-237(the)-238(least)-238(important\051)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-301(given)-301(the)-302(nickname)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 114.326 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.484 0 Td[(.)-404(Altogether)-301(we)-301(hear)-301(very)-302(little)]TJ -142.81 -13.549 Td[(of)-356(the)-357(relation)-356(of)-356(these)-357(philosophers)-356(to)-356(the)-356(popular)-357(belief,)-383(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-341(very)-341(silence)-341(is)-341(surely)-341(significant.)-523(No)-341(doubt,)-364(most)-341(of)-341(them)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bestowed)-282(but)-282(a)-282(scant)-282(attention)-281(on)-282(this)-282(aspect)-282(of)-282(the)-282(matter;)-298(they)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(were)-377(engrossed)-377(in)-377(speculations)-377(which)-377(did)-377(not)-377(bring)-378(them)-377(into)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conflict)-162(with)-163(the)-162(popular)-163(belief,)-180(and)-162(even)-163(their)-162(scientific)-163(treatment)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+126 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 127 0 R
+/Resources 125 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 103 0 R
+>> endobj
+122 0 obj <<
+/D [126 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+128 0 obj <<
+/D [126 0 R /XYZ 93.543 185.937 null]
+>> endobj
+125 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+131 0 obj <<
+/Length 5147      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(III)-20310(21)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(of)-267(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 28.249 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(divine)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 27.273 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.759 0 Td[(natural)-267(phenomena)-268(did)-267(not)-267(make)-267(them)-268(doubt)-267(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -68.125 -13.549 Td[(existence)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.188 0 Td[(of)-202(the)-203(gods.)-234(This)-202(is)-202(connected)-202(with)-203(a)-202(peculiarity)-202(in)-202(their)]TJ -42.188 -13.549 Td[(conception)-202(of)-202(existence.)-234(Tradition)-202(tells)-203(us)-202(of)-202(several)-202(of)-202(them,)-212(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-326(applies)-326(presumably)-326(also)-327(to)-326(those)-326(of)-326(whom)-326(it)-326(is)-326(not)-327(recorded,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-424(they)-425(designated)-424(their)-425(primary)-424(substance)-425(or)-424(substances)-425(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods;)-307(sometimes)-289(they)-288(also)-288(applied)-289(this)-288(designation)-288(to)-288(the)-289(world)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(or)-417(worlds)-417(originating)-417(in)-417(the)-417(primary)-417(substance.)-751(This)-418(view)-417(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(deeply)-328(rooted)-328(in)-328(the)-328(Greek)-328(popular)-328(belief)-328(and)-328(harmonises)-328(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-426(fundamental)-425(view)-426(of)-426(existence.)-777(To)-425(these)-426(ancient)-426(thinkers)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-462(primary)-462(substance)-461(is)-462(at)-462(once)-462(a)-461(living)-462(and)-462(a)-462(superhuman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(power;)-519(and)-429(any)-429(living)-429(power)-429(which)-429(transcended)-429(that)-429(of)-430(man)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-322(divine)-322(to)-323(the)-322(Greeks.)-467(Hylozoism)-322(\050the)-322(theory)-322(that)-322(matter)-323(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(alive\051)-183(consequently,)-196(when)-183(it)-183(allies)-183(itself)-183(with)-182(popular)-183(belief,)-197(leads)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(straight)-365(to)-366(pantheism,)-394(whereas)-366(it)-365(excludes)-365(monotheism,)-395(which)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(presupposes)-332(a)-331(distinction)-331(between)-332(god)-331(and)-332(matter.)-494(Now)-332(it)-331(is)-332(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(matter)-207(of)-206(experience)-207(that,)-215(while)-207(monotheism)-207(is)-206(the)-207(hereditary)-207(foe)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-241(polytheism,)-243(polytheism)-241(and)-241(pantheism)-241(go)-482(very)-241(well)-241(together.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([024])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(The)-215(universe)-214(being)-215(divine,)-221(there)-215(is)-214(no)-215(reason)-214(to)-215(doubt)-214(that)-215(beings)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-398(a)-398(higher)-398(order)-398(than)-398(man)-398(exist,)-435(nor)-398(any)-398(reason)-399(to)-398(refuse)-398(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(bestow)-383(on)-383(them)-382(the)-383(predicate)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 137.826 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(divine)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 27.272 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(;)-449(and)-383(with)-383(this)-383(we)-382(find)]TJ -174.786 -13.549 Td[(ourselves)-334(in)-334(principle)-334(on)-333(the)-334(standpoint)-334(of)-334(polytheistic)-334(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(belief.)-715(There)-405(is)-405(nothing)-405(surprising,)-443(then,)-444(in)-405(the)-405(tradition)-405(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Thales)-217(identified)-218(God)-217(with)-217(the)-217(mind)-218(of)-217(the)-217(universe)-217(and)-218(believed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-272(universe)-273(to)-272(be)-272(animated,)-278(and)-272(filled)-273(with)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 193.799 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(demons.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.666 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.814 0 Td[(The)-272(first)]TJ -243.122 -13.55 Td[(statement)-301(is)-300(in)-301(this)-300(form)-301(probably)-300(influenced)-301(by)-300(later)-301(ideas)-301(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(hardly)-282(a)-282(correct)-283(expression)-282(of)-282(the)-282(view)-283(of)-282(Thales;)-298(the)-282(rest)-283(bears)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-406(very)-406(stamp)-405(of)-406(genuineness,)-445(and)-405(similar)-406(ideas)-406(recur,)-445(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(or)-436(less)-436(completely)-436(and)-437(variously)-436(refracted,)-482(in)-436(the)-437(succeeding)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophers.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(To)-234(follow)-234(these)-234(variations)-234(in)-234(detail)-234(is)-234(outside)-234(the)-235(scope)-234(of)-234(this)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(investigation;)-297(but)-282(it)-281(may)-282(be)-281(of)-282(interest)-281(to)-282(see)-281(the)-282(form)-281(they)-282(take)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-279(one)-278(of)-279(the)-278(latest)-279(and)-278(most)-279(advanced)-278(representatives)-279(of)-279(Ionian)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(naturalism.)-248(In)-245(Democritus's)-244(conception)-244(of)-245(the)-244(universe,)-246(personal)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-369(would)-368(seem)-368(excluded)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 125.758 0 Td[(a)-368(priori)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 34.936 0 Td[(.)-605(He)-369(works)-368(with)-369(but)-368(three)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+130 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 131 0 R
+/Resources 129 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 133 0 R
+>> endobj
+132 0 obj <<
+/D [130 0 R /XYZ 242.868 301.388 null]
+>> endobj
+129 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+136 0 obj <<
+/Length 4889      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(22)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(premises:)-381(the)-316(atoms,)-332(their)-316(movements,)-332(and)-315(empty)-316(space.)-447(From)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-431(everything)-431(is)-431(derived)-431(according)-431(to)-431(strict)-431(causality.)-794(Such)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(phenomena)-325(also)-325(as)-324(thunder)-325(and)-325(lightning,)-343(comets)-325(and)-325(eclipses,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-302(were)-303(generally)-302(ascribed)-302(to)-303(the)-302(gods,)-316(are)-302(according)-302(to)-303(his)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(opinion)-281(due)-280(to)-281(natural)-280(causes,)-288(whereas)-281(people)-280(in)-281(the)-280(olden)-281(days)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-445(afraid)-446(of)-445(them)-446(because)-445(they)-446(believed)-445(they)-446(were)-445(due)-446(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-421(gods.)-761(Nevertheless,)-463(he)-421(seems,)-463(in)-420(the)-421(first)-420(place,)-463(to)-421(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(designated)-476(Fire,)-532(which)-475(he)-476(at)-476(the)-475(same)-476(time)-475(recognised)-476(as)-476(a)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(soul-substance,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 66.96 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.578 0 Td[(as)-251(divine,)-250(the)-251(cosmic)-251(fire)-250(being)-251(the)-251(soul)-250(of)-251(the)]TJ -79.382 -13.55 Td[(world;)-338(and)-309(secondly,)-646(he)-309(thought)-308(that)-309(there)-308(was)-309(something)-309(real)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([025])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(underlying)-213(the)-213(popular)-213(conception)-213(of)-213(the)-212(gods.)-238(He)-213(was)-213(led)-213(to)-213(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-305(a)-305(consideration)-305(of)-305(dreams,)-318(which)-305(he)-305(thought)-305(were)-305(images)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-306(real)-307(objects)-306(which)-306(entered)-307(into)-306(the)-307(sleeper)-306(through)-306(the)-307(pores)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-386(the)-386(body.)-659(Now,)-420(since)-386(gods)-387(might)-386(be)-386(seen)-386(in)-386(dreams,)-421(they)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(must)-280(be)-280(real)-281(beings.)-340(He)-280(did)-280(actually)-281(say)-280(that)-280(the)-280(gods)-280(had)-281(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(senses)-383(than)-383(the)-383(ordinary)-384(five.)-649(When)-383(he)-383(who)-383(of)-383(all)-383(the)-384(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophers)-258(went)-258(furthest)-257(in)-258(a)-258(purely)-258(mechanical)-258(conception)-258(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nature)-266(took)-267(up)-266(such)-266(an)-266(attitude)-267(to)-266(the)-266(religion)-267(of)-266(his)-266(people,)-271(one)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(cannot)-250(expect)-250(the)-250(others,)-250(who)-250(were)-250(less)-250(advanced,)-250(to)-250(discard)-250(it.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Nevertheless,)-396(there)-366(is)-367(a)-366(certain)-367(probability)-366(that)-367(some)-366(of)-367(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(later)-256(Ionian)-256(naturalists)-257(went)-256(further)-256(in)-256(their)-256(criticism)-256(of)-256(the)-257(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-304(popular)-304(belief.)-411(One)-304(of)-304(them)-303(actually)-304(came)-304(into)-304(conflict)-304(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-250(religion;)-250(it)-250(will)-250(be)-250(natural)-250(to)-250(begin)-250(with)-250(him.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Shortly)-650(before)-650(the)-650(outbreak)-650(of)-650(the)-650(Peloponnesian)-650(War,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Anaxagoras)-459(of)-460(Clazomenae)-459(was)-460(accused)-459(of)-460(impiety)-459(and)-460(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-341(leave)-341(Athens,)-363(where)-341(he)-341(had)-340(taken)-341(up)-341(his)-341(abode.)-522(The)-341(object)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-364(the)-364(accusation)-364(was)-364(in)-364(reality)-364(political;)-421(the)-364(idea)-364(being)-364(to)-364(hit)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Pericles)-270(through)-270(his)-271(friend)-270(the)-270(naturalist.)-310(What)-270(Anaxagoras)-271(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(charged)-295(with)-295(was)-296(that)-295(he)-295(had)-295(assumed)-295(that)-295(the)-295(heavenly)-296(bodies)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-359(natural)-360(objects;)-414(he)-359(had)-359(taught)-360(that)-359(the)-360(sun)-359(was)-359(a)-360(red-hot)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mass,)-271(and)-267(that)-267(the)-267(moon)-267(was)-267(earth)-267(and)-267(larger)-267(than)-267(Peloponnese.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(To)-225(base)-224(an)-225(accusation)-225(of)-224(impiety)-225(on)-224(this,)-230(it)-225(was)-224(necessary)-225(first)-225(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(carry)-329(a)-329(public)-328(resolution,)-349(giving)-329(power)-328(to)-329(prosecute)-329(those)-329(who)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gave)-250(natural)-250(explanations)-250(of)-250(heavenly)-250(phenomena.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([026])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+135 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 136 0 R
+/Resources 134 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 133 0 R
+>> endobj
+137 0 obj <<
+/D [135 0 R /XYZ 189.867 396.232 null]
+>> endobj
+138 0 obj <<
+/D [135 0 R /XYZ 93.543 63.764 null]
+>> endobj
+134 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+141 0 obj <<
+/Length 4739      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(III)-20310(23)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(As)-264(to)-265(Anaxagoras's)-264(attitude)-265(to)-264(popular)-264(belief,)-268(we)-265(hear)-264(next)-265(to)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(nothing)-327(apart)-327(from)-327(this.)-480(There)-327(is)-327(a)-327(story)-327(of)-327(a)-327(ram's)-327(head)-327(being)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(found)-208(with)-207(one)-208(horn)-208(in)-207(the)-208(middle)-207(of)-208(the)-208(forehead;)-221(it)-208(was)-208(brought)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-409(Pericles,)-449(and)-409(the)-409(soothsayer)-409(Lampon)-409(explained)-409(the)-409(portent)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-454(the)-455(effect)-454(that,)-505(of)-455(the)-454(two)-454(men,)-506(Pericles)-454(and)-455(Thucydides,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(who)-341(contended)-341(for)-341(the)-341(leadership)-340(of)-341(Athens,)-364(one)-341(should)-341(prove)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(victorious.)-524(Anaxagoras,)-364(on)-341(the)-341(other)-342(hand,)-364(had)-341(the)-341(ram's)-342(head)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(cut)-318(open)-317(and)-318(showed)-317(that)-318(the)-317(brain)-318(did)-317(not)-318(fill)-318(up)-317(the)-318(cranium,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-251(was)-251(egg-shaped)-251(and)-250(lay)-251(gathered)-251(together)-251(at)-251(the)-251(point)-251(where)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-420(horn)-419(grew)-420(out.)-759(He)-419(evidently)-420(thought)-419(that)-420(abortions)-420(also,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-418(otherwise)-417(were)-418(generally)-418(considered)-418(as)-417(signs)-418(from)-418(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods,)-364(were)-342(due)-341(to)-342(natural)-341(causes.)-525(Beyond)-341(this,)-365(nothing)-341(is)-342(said)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-352(any)-352(attack)-351(on)-352(the)-352(popular)-352(belief)-351(on)-352(the)-352(part)-352(of)-352(Anaxagoras,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-278(in)-279(his)-278(philosophy)-278(nothing)-279(occurred)-278(which)-278(logically)-279(entailed)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-387(denial)-388(of)-387(the)-388(existence)-387(of)-387(the)-388(gods.)-662(Add)-387(to)-387(this)-388(that)-387(it)-388(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(necessary)-212(to)-212(create)-212(a)-212(new)-212(judicial)-212(basis)-212(for)-212(the)-213(accusation)-212(against)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Anaxagoras,)-436(and)-399(it)-399(can)-399(be)-399(taken)-398(as)-399(certain)-399(that)-399(neither)-399(in)-399(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(writings)-236(nor)-235(in)-236(any)-235(other)-236(way)-236(did)-235(he)-236(come)-235(forward)-236(in)-235(public)-236(as)-236(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(denier)-250(of)-250(the)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(It)-219(is)-218(somewhat)-219(different)-218(when)-219(we)-219(consider)-218(the)-219(purely)-219(personal)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(point)-327(of)-327(view)-327(of)-327(Anaxagoras.)-481(The)-327(very)-327(fact)-327(that)-328(no)-327(expression)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-285(his)-284(opinion)-285(concerning)-285(the)-284(gods)-285(has)-284(been)-285(transmitted)-285(affords)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(food)-284(for)-284(thought.)-351(Presumably)-284(there)-284(was)-283(none;)-301(but)-284(this)-284(very)-284(fact)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-248(notable)-248(when)-248(we)-248(bear)-248(in)-248(mind)-248(that)-248(the)-248(earlier)-249(naturalists)-248(show)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(no)-395(such)-395(reticence.)-684(Add)-394(to)-395(this)-395(that,)-431(if)-395(there)-394(is)-395(any)-395(place)-395(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(any)-408(time)-408(in)-408(which)-408(we)-408(might)-408(expect)-408(a)-409(complete)-408(emancipation)]TJ 4.681 -13.549 Td[(from)-429(popular)-429(belief,)-474(combined)-429(with)-429(a)-429(decided)-429(disinclinatio)-1(n)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 286.343 0 Td[([027])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(to)-366(give)-365(expression)-366(to)-365(it,)-395(it)-365(is)-366(Athens)-366(under)-365(Pericles.)-597(Men)-366(like)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Pericles)-206(and)-205(his)-205(friends)-206(represent)-205(a)-206(high)-205(level,)-215(perhaps)-205(the)-206(zenith,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-471(Hellenic)-470(culture.)-912(That)-470(they)-471(were)-470(critical)-471(of)-471(many)-470(of)-471(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religious)-445(conceptions)-445(of)-446(their)-445(time)-445(we)-445(may)-445(take)-445(for)-446(granted;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-362(to)-361(Pericles)-362(himself,)-389(this)-362(is)-361(actually)-362(stated)-361(as)-362(a)-362(fact,)-389(and)-362(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(accusations)-453(of)-453(impiety)-454(directed)-453(against)-453(Aspasia)-453(and)-454(Pheidias)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(prove)-443(that)-443(orthodox)-442(circles)-443(were)-443(very)-443(well)-443(aware)-442(of)-443(it.)-829(But)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+140 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 141 0 R
+/Resources 139 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 133 0 R
+>> endobj
+142 0 obj <<
+/D [140 0 R /XYZ 46.771 160.986 null]
+>> endobj
+139 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+145 0 obj <<
+/Length 5072      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(24)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(the)-408(accusations)-407(prove,)-448(moreover,)-447(that)-407(Pericles)-408(and)-408(those)-408(who)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(shared)-415(his)-415(views)-414(were)-415(so)-415(much)-415(in)-414(advance)-415(of)-415(their)-415(time)-415(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they)-267(could)-268(not)-267(afford)-267(to)-268(let)-267(their)-268(free-thinking)-267(attitude)-267(become)-268(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(matter)-334(of)-334(public)-334(knowledge)-334(without)-334(endangering)-335(their)-334(political)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(position)-257(certainly,)-259(and)-258(possibly)-257(even)-257(more)-257(than)-257(that.)-272(To)-257(be)-258(sure,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(considerations)-300(of)-300(that)-301(kind)-300(did)-300(not)-300(weigh)-300(with)-300(Anaxagoras;)-326(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-328(was)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 30.838 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(and)-328(that)-328(we)-327(know)-328(on)-328(good)-328(authority)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 162.653 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)-328(quiet)-328(scholar)]TJ -215.31 -13.549 Td[(whose)-268(ideal)-268(o)-1(f)-268(life)-268(was)-268(to)-268(devote)-269(himself)-268(to)-268(problems)-268(of)-269(natural)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(science,)-368(and)-345(he)-344(can)-344(hardly)-345(have)-344(wished)-345(to)-344(be)-345(disturbed)-344(in)-345(this)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(occupation)-327(by)-328(affairs)-327(in)-328(which)-327(he)-328(took)-327(no)-327(sort)-328(of)-327(interest.)-483(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(question)-253(is)-253(then)-253(only)-253(how)-253(far)-253(men)-253(like)-253(Pericles)-253(and)-253(himself)-253(may)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-367(ventured)-366(in)-367(their)-366(criticism.)-600(Though)-367(all)-366(direct)-367(tradition)-367(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(wanting,)-255(we)-255(have)-254(at)-254(any)-255(rate)-254(circumstantial)-254(evidence)-255(possessing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-250(certain)-250(degree)-250(of)-250(probability.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(To)-379(begin)-380(with,)-411(the)-380(attempt)-379(to)-379(give)-380(a)-379(natural)-379(explanation)-380(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(prodigies)-391(is)-391(not)-391(in)-390(itself)-391(without)-391(interest.)-673(The)-391(mantic)-391(art,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 267.299 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -267.299 -13.55 Td[(the)-297(ability)-296(to)-297(predict)-297(the)-297(future)-296(by)-297(signs)-297(from)-296(the)-297(gods)-297(or)-297(direct)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(divine)-480(inspiration,)-538(was)-481(throughout)-480(antiquity)-481(considered)-961(one)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([028])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(of)-395(the)-394(surest)-395(proofs)-395(of)-394(the)-395(existence)-395(of)-394(the)-395(gods.)-684(Now,)-431(it)-395(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(no)-410(means)-409(follows)-410(that)-409(a)-410(person)-410(who)-409(was)-410(not)-409(impressed)-410(by)-410(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(deformed)-249(ram's)-250(head)-249(would)-249(deny,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 150.379 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.753 0 Td[(,)-249(the)-250(ability)-249(of)-249(the)-250(Delphic)]TJ -166.132 -13.549 Td[(Oracle)-240(to)-241(predict)-240(the)-241(future,)-242(especially)-240(not)-241(so)-240(when)-241(the)-240(person)-241(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(question)-209(was)-209(a)-209(naturalist.)-236(But)-209(that)-209(there)-208(was)-209(at)-209(this)-209(time)-209(a)-209(general)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(tendency)-181(to)-181(reject)-181(the)-182(art)-181(of)-181(divination)-181(is)-181(evident)-181(from)-181(the)-181(fact)-182(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Herodotus)-244(as)-245(well)-244(as)-245(Sophocles,)-245(both)-244(of)-245(them)-244(contemporaries)-245(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Pericles)-305(and)-304(Anaxagoras,)-318(expressly)-305(contend)-304(against)-305(attempts)-305(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-345(direction,)-369(and,)-369(be)-345(it)-346(remarked,)-369(as)-345(if)-345(the)-345(theory)-345(they)-346(attack)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(was)-336(commonly)-336(held.)-508(Sophocles)-336(is)-336(in)-336(this)-336(connexion)-336(so)-336(far)-336(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-240(interesting)-240(of)-240(the)-240(two,)-242(as,)-242(on)-240(one)-240(hand,)-242(he)-240(criticises)-240(private)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(divination)-311(but)-312(defends)-311(the)-311(Delphic)-311(oracle)-312(vigorously,)-326(while)-312(he,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-320(the)-320(other)-319(hand,)-337(identifies)-320(denial)-320(of)-320(the)-319(oracle)-320(with)-320(denial)-320(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-308(gods.)-422(And)-308(he)-308(does)-307(this)-308(in)-307(such)-308(a)-308(way)-307(as)-308(to)-307(make)-308(it)-308(evident)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-228(he)-228(has)-228(a)-227(definite)-228(object)-228(in)-228(mind.)-242(That)-228(in)-228(this)-228(polemic)-228(he)-228(may)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-390(been)-389(aiming)-390(precisely)-390(at)-390(Anaxagoras)-389(is)-390(indicated)-390(by)-390(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+144 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 145 0 R
+/Resources 143 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 133 0 R
+>> endobj
+146 0 obj <<
+/D [144 0 R /XYZ 353.18 282.929 null]
+>> endobj
+143 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+149 0 obj <<
+/Length 4802      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(III)-20310(25)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(fact)-342(that)-342(Diopeithes,)-364(who)-342(carried)-342(the)-342(resolution)-342(concerning)-342(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(accusation)-250(of)-250(the)-250(philosopher,)-250(was)-250(a)-250(soothsayer)-250(by)-250(profession.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(The)-231(strongest)-231(evidence)-231(as)-231(to)-231(the)-231(free-thinking)-231(of)-231(the)-231(Periclean)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(age)-470(is,)-526(however,)-525(to)-470(be)-470(met)-470(with)-471(in)-470(the)-470(historical)-470(writing)-471(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Thucydides.)-268(In)-256(his)-256(work)-256(on)-256(the)-256(Peloponnesian)-256(War,)-258(Thucydides)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(completely)-270(eliminated)-270(the)-271(supernatural)-270(element;)-280(not)-270(only)-270(did)-271(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(throughout)-208(ignore)-208(omens)-208(and)-208(divinations,)-217(except)-208(in)-208(so)-208(far)-208(as)-208(they)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(played)-335(a)-335(part)-334(as)-335(a)-335(psychological)-334(factor,)-356(but)-335(he)-335(also)-335(completely)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(omitted)-494(any)-493(reference)-494(to)-494(the)-493(gods)-494(in)-493(his)-494(narrative.)-981(Such)-494(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(procedure)-245(was)-489(at)-244(this)-245(time)-245(unprecedented,)-245(and)-245(contrasts)-245(sharply)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([029])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(with)-219(that)-218(of)-219(his)-219(immediate)-218(forerunner)-219(Herodotus,)-225(who)-219(constantly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(lays)-507(stress)-508(on)-507(the)-507(intervention)-508(of)-507(the)-507(gods.)-1022(That)-507(is)-508(hardly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conceivable)-397(except)-397(in)-397(a)-397(man)-397(who)-397(had)-397(altogether)-397(emancipated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(himself)-302(from)-303(the)-302(religious)-302(views)-302(of)-302(his)-303(time.)-406(Now,)-316(Thucydides)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-348(not)-348(only)-348(a)-348(fellow-countryman)-348(and)-348(younger)-349(contemporary)-348(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Pericles,)-497(but)-448(he)-447(als)-1(o)-447(sees)-448(in)-448(Pericles)-447(his)-448(ideal)-448(not)-447(only)-448(as)-448(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(politician)-302(but)-303(evidently)-302(also)-303(as)-302(a)-302(man.)-408(Hence,)-315(when)-303(everything)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-334(considered)-1(,)-355(it)-334(is)-335(not)-334(improbable)-335(that)-334(Pericles)-335(and)-334(his)-335(friends)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(went)-283(to)-283(all)-283(lengths)-283(in)-283(their)-283(criticism)-283(of)-282(popu)-1(lar)-282(belief,)-292(although,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-318(course,)-335(it)-319(remains)-318(impossible)-318(to)-318(state)-318(anything)-318(definite)-318(as)-319(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(particular)-431(persons')-431(individual)-430(views.)-793(Curiously)-431(enough,)-476(even)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-458(antiquity)-458(this)-458(connexion)-458(was)-458(observed;)-562(in)-458(a)-459(biography)-458(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Thucydides)-329(it)-329(is)-329(said)-329(that)-328(he)-329(was)-329(a)-329(disciple)-329(of)-329(Anaxagoras)-329(and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(accordingly)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.84 0 Td[(was)-250(also)-250(considered)-250(something)-250(of)-250(an)-250(atheist.)]TJ -42.884 -16.004 Td[(While)-286(Anaxagoras,)-295(his)-286(trial)-286(notwithstanding,)-295(is)-286(not)-286(generally)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(designated)-436(an)-436(atheist,)-483(probably)-436(because)-436(there)-436(was)-436(nothing)-436(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-305(writings)-304(to)-305(which)-305(he)-305(might)-304(be)-305(pinned)-305(down,)-318(that)-305(fate)-305(befell)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(two)-305(of)-304(his)-305(contemporaries,)-318(Hippo)-305(of)-305(Rhegium)-304(and)-305(Diogenes)-305(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Apollonia.)-360(Very)-287(little,)-296(however,)-296(is)-286(known)-287(of)-287(them.)-360(Hippo,)-296(who)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-374(said)-374(to)-374(have)-375(been)-374(a)-374(Pythagorean,)-405(taught)-374(that)-374(water)-374(and)-375(fire)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-359(the)-360(origin)-359(of)-360(everything;)-414(as)-359(to)-360(the)-359(reason)-360(why)-359(he)-360(earned)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-271(nickname)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 61.655 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.484 0 Td[(,)-276(it)-271(is)-271(said)-271(that)-270(he)-271(taught)-271(that)-271(Water)-271(was)-271(the)]TJ -90.139 -13.55 Td[(primal)-359(cause)-359(of)-359(all,)-387(as)-359(well)-359(as)-359(that)-359(he)-359(maintained)-359(that)-360(nothing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(existed)-268(but)-267(what)-268(could)-268(be)-267(perceived)-268(by)-268(the)-267(senses.)-303(There)-268(is)-268(also)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+148 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 149 0 R
+/Resources 147 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 133 0 R
+>> endobj
+150 0 obj <<
+/D [148 0 R /XYZ 112.686 393.778 null]
+>> endobj
+147 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+153 0 obj <<
+/Length 5020      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(26)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(quoted)-275(a)-275(\050fictitious\051)-275(inscription,)-281(which)-275(he)-275(is)-275(said)-275(to)-275(have)-275(caused)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-254(be)-254(put)-254(on)-254(his)-508(tomb,)-255(to)-254(the)-254(effect)-254(that)-254(Death)-254(has)-254(made)-254(him)-254(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([030])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(equal)-301(of)-302(the)-301(immortal)-301(gods)-302(\050in)-301(that)-301(he)-301(now)-302(exists)-301(no)-301(more)-302(than)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they\051.)-529(Otherwise)-343(we)-344(know)-343(nothing)-343(special)-343(of)-343(Hippo;)-390(Aristotle)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(refers)-450(to)-449(him)-450(as)-450(shallow.)-849(As)-449(to)-450(Diogenes,)-500(we)-449(learn)-450(that)-450(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-351(influenced)-351(by)-351(Anaximenes)-352(and)-351(Anaxagoras;)-401(in)-352(agreement)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-340(the)-341(former)-340(he)-340(regarded)-341(Air)-340(as)-340(the)-340(primary)-341(substance,)-363(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(like)-352(Anaxagoras)-351(he)-352(attributed)-351(reason)-352(to)-351(his)-352(primary)-352(substance.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Of)-318(his)-319(doctrine)-318(we)-319(have)-318(extensive)-319(accounts,)-335(and)-319(also)-318(some)-319(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(inconsiderable)-277(fragments)-277(of)-277(his)-277(treatise)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 175.68 0 Td[(On)-277(Nature)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.658 0 Td[(;)-290(but)-277(they)-277(are)]TJ -222.338 -13.549 Td[(almost)-302(all)-302(of)-302(them)-302(of)-302(purely)-302(scientific,)-315(mostly)-302(of)-302(an)-302(anatomical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-411(physiological)-411(character.)-734(In)-411(especial,)-451(as)-411(to)-411(his)-411(relation)-412(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-263(belief,)-266(it)-263(is)-263(recorded)-263(that)-263(he)-263(identified)-263(Zeus)-263(with)-263(the)-263(air.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Indirectly,)-246(however,)-247(we)-245(are)-246(able)-246(to)-245(demonstrate,)-246(by)-246(the)-246(aid)-245(of)-246(an)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(almost)-362(contemporary)-362(witness,)-389(that)-362(there)-362(must)-362(have)-362(been)-362(some)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(foundation)-328(for)-327(the)-328(accusation)-328(of)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 146.33 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(atheism.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.665 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.419 0 Td[(For)-328(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 30.79 0 Td[(The)-328(Clouds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 50.855 0 Td[(,)]TJ -277.903 -13.549 Td[(where)-400(Aristophanes)-401(wants)-400(to)-400(represent)-401(Socrates)-400(as)-400(an)-401(atheist,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-311(puts)-311(in)-310(his)-311(mouth)-311(scraps)-310(o)-1(f)-310(the)-311(naturalism)-311(of)-310(Diogenes;)-342(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-367(would)-368(hardly)-367(have)-367(done,)-397(if)-367(Diogenes)-368(had)-367(not)-367(already)-368(been)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(decried)-250(as)-250(an)-250(atheist.)]TJ 11.956 -18.458 Td[(It)-239(is)-239(of)-240(course)-239(impossible)-239(to)-239(base)-240(any)-239(statement)-239(of)-239(the)-240(relation)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(of)-309(the)-309(two)-309(philosophers)-308(to)-309(popular)-309(belief)-309(on)-309(such)-309(a)-309(foundation.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(But)-409(it)-409(is,)-449(nevertheless,)-449(worth)-409(noticing)-409(that)-409(while)-409(not)-409(a)-409(single)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(one)-428(of)-428(the)-428(earlier)-428(naturalists)-428(acquired)-428(the)-428(designation)-428(atheist,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-400(was)-401(applied)-400(to)-401(two)-400(of)-401(the)-400(latest)-401(and)-400(otherwise)-401(little-known)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(representatives)-431(of)-431(the)-431(school.)-793(Take)-431(this)-431(in)-432(combination)-431(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(what)-267(has)-266(been)-267(said)-267(above)-267(of)-266(Anaxagoras,)-271(and)-267(we)-267(get)-266(at)-267(any)-267(rate)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-396(suspicion)-791(that)-396(Greek)-396(naturalism)-395(gradually)-396(led)-396(its)-396(adherents)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([031])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(beyond)-258(the)-258(na\357ve)-258(stage)-258(where)-258(many)-258(individual)-258(phenomena)-258(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(indeed)-455(ascribed)-455(to)-455(natural)-456(causes,)-506(even)-455(if)-455(they)-455(had)-456(formerly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(been)-359(regarded)-359(as)-359(caused)-359(by)-359(divine)-359(intervention,)-387(but)-359(where)-359(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(foundations)-261(of)-261(the)-260(popular)-261(belief)-261(were)-261(left)-260(untouch)-1(ed.)-282(Once)-261(this)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(path)-362(has)-362(been)-361(entered)-362(on,)-390(a)-362(point)-362(will)-361(be)-362(arrived)-362(at)-362(where)-362(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(final)-334(conclusion)-334(is)-335(drawn)-334(and)-334(the)-334(existence)-334(of)-334(the)-335(supernatural)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+152 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 153 0 R
+/Resources 151 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 133 0 R
+>> endobj
+154 0 obj <<
+/D [152 0 R /XYZ 163.763 504.626 null]
+>> endobj
+155 0 obj <<
+/D [152 0 R /XYZ 148.235 147.437 null]
+>> endobj
+151 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+158 0 obj <<
+/Length 4995      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(III)-20310(27)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(completely)-415(denied.)-743(It)-414(is)-415(probable)-414(that)-415(this)-414(happened)-415(towards)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-315(close)-314(of)-315(the)-315(naturalistic)-314(period.)-444(If)-315(so)-315(early)-314(a)-315(philosopher)-315(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Anaxagoras)-191(took)-191(this)-191(point)-191(of)-191(view,)-203(his)-191(personal)-191(contribution)-191(as)-191(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(member)-190(of)-190(the)-189(Periclean)-190(circle)-190(may)-190(have)-189(been)-190(more)-190(significant)-190(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-279(religious)-278(fie)-1(ld)-278(than)-279(one)-279(would)-278(conjecture)-279(from)-279(the)-279(character)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(his)-250(work.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(Before)-204(we)-204(proceed)-204(to)-204(mention)-204(the)-204(sophists,)-213(there)-205(is)-204(one)-204(person)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(on)-450(our)-450(list)-449(who)-450(must)-450(be)-450(examined)-449(thoug)-1(h)-449(the)-450(result)-450(will)-450(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(negative,)-492(namely,)-493(Diagoras)-444(of)-443(Me)-1(los.)-831(As)-444(he)-444(appears)-444(in)-444(our)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(records,)-230(he)-224(falls)-224(outside)-225(the)-224(classification)-225(adopted)-224(here;)-233(but)-224(as)-225(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(must)-227(have)-226(lived,)-232(at)-226(any)-227(rate,)-231(about)-227(the)-226(middle)-227(of)-226(the)-227(fifth)-227(century)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(\050he)-394(is)-394(said)-394(to)-394(have)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 89.354 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(flourished)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 44.236 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.141 0 Td[(in)-394(464\051)-394(he)-394(may)-394(most)-394(fitly)-394(be)]TJ -147.575 -13.549 Td[(placed)-291(on)-291(the)-291(boundary)-290(line)-291(between)-291(the)-291(Ionian)-291(philosophy)-291(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Sophistic.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(For)-223(later)-224(antiquity)-223(Diagoras)-223(is)-224(the)-223(typical)-224(atheist;)-232(he)-223(heads)-224(our)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(lists)-359(of)-359(atheists,)-386(and)-359(round)-359(his)-359(person)-359(a)-360(whole)-359(series)-359(of)-359(myths)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-339(been)-340(formed.)-518(He)-340(is)-339(said)-340(to)-339(have)-339(been)-340(a)-339(poet)-340(and)-339(a)-340(pious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(man)-215(like)-215(others;)-226(but)-215(then)-215(a)-215(colleague)-215(once)-214(stole)-215(an)-215(ode)-215(from)-215(him,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(escaped)-302(by)-303(taking)-302(an)-302(oath)-303(that)-302(he)-302(was)-303(innocent,)-315(and)-303(afterwards)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(made)-322(a)-322(hit)-322(with)-322(the)-323(stolen)-322(work.)-932(So)-322(Diagoras)-322(lost)-322(his)-323(faith)-322(in)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([032])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(the)-356(gods)-356(and)-357(wrote)-356(a)-356(treatise)-356(under)-356(the)-356(title)-356(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 213.965 0 Td[(apopyrgizontes)]TJ -213.965 -13.549 Td[(logoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.5 0 Td[(\050literally,)-289(destructive)-282(considerations\051)-282(in)-281(which)-282(he)-281(attacked)]TJ -25.5 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(belief)-250(in)-250(the)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(This)-305(looks)-305(very)-305(plausible,)-318(and)-305(is)-305(interesting)-305(in)-305(so)-304(far)-305(as)-305(it,)-319(if)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(correct,)-295(affords)-286(an)-286(instance)-286(of)-286(atheism)-286(arising)-286(in)-286(a)-287(layman)-286(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(actual)-312(expe)-1(rience,)-328(not)-312(in)-312(a)-313(philosopher)-312(from)-313(speculation.)-437(If)-313(we)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(ask,)-445(however,)-446(what)-406(is)-406(known)-407(historically)-406(about)-406(Diagoras,)-446(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-286(told)-287(a)-286(different)-286(tale.)-359(There)-287(existed)-286(in)-286(Athens,)-296(engraved)-286(on)-287(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bronze)-253(tablet)-253(and)-253(set)-253(up)-253(on)-253(the)-253(Acropolis,)-254(a)-253(decree)-253(of)-253(the)-253(people)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(offering)-283(a)-284(reward)-283(of)-284(one)-283(talent)-284(to)-283(him)-283(who)-284(should)-283(kill)-284(Diagoras)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-284(Melos,)-293(and)-284(of)-285(two)-284(talents)-284(to)-284(him)-285(who)-284(should)-284(bring)-284(him)-285(alive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-434(Athens.)-803(The)-435(reason)-434(given)-434(was)-435(that)-434(he)-435(had)-434(scoffed)-434(at)-435(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Eleusinian)-251(Mysteries)-250(and)-251(divulged)-250(what)-251(took)-250(place)-251(at)-250(them.)-252(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(date)-328(of)-329(this)-328(decree)-329(is)-328(given)-328(by)-329(a)-328(historian)-328(as)-329(415)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 221.792 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.;)-368(that)-328(this)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+157 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 158 0 R
+/Resources 156 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 160 0 R
+>> endobj
+159 0 obj <<
+/D [157 0 R /XYZ 196.867 257.467 null]
+>> endobj
+156 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+163 0 obj <<
+/Length 4858      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(28)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(is)-240(correct)-240(is)-241(seen)-240(from)-240(a)-240(passage)-240(in)-240(Aristophanes's)-241(contemporary)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(drama,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 32.692 0 Td[(The)-247(Birds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.7 0 Td[(.)-249(Furthermore,)-248(one)-247(of)-247(the)-247(disciples)-247(of)-248(Aristotle,)]TJ -75.392 -13.549 Td[(the)-275(literary)-274(historian)-275(Aristoxenus,)-281(states)-274(that)-275(no)-274(trace)-275(of)-275(impiety)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-291(to)-291(be)-291(found)-291(in)-291(the)-291(works)-291(of)-291(the)-291(dithyrambic)-291(poet)-291(Diagoras,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-230(that,)-235(in)-230(fact,)-234(they)-231(contained)-230(definite)-230(opinions)-231(to)-230(the)-231(contrary.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(A)-217(remark)-218(to)-217(the)-218(effect)-217(that)-218(Diagoras)-217(was)-218(instrumental)-217(in)-218(drawing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(up)-243(the)-244(laws)-243(of)-243(Mantinea)-243(is)-244(probably)-243(due)-243(to)-243(the)-244(same)-243(source.)-248(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(context)-306(shows)-307(that)-306(the)-306(reference)-306(is)-307(to)-306(the)-306(earlier)-306(constitution)-307(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Mantinea,)-378(which)-352(was)-352(a)-352(mixture)-352(of)-352(aristocracy)-352(and)-353(democracy,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-370(is)-370(praised)-370(for)-370(its)-370(excellence.)-610(It)-370(is)-370(inconceivable)-370(tha)-1(t,)-400(in)-370(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Peloponnesian)-323(city)-322(during)-323(the)-323(course)-322(of,)-341(nay,)-341(presumably)-323(even)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(before)-240(the)-241(middle)-240(of)-480(the)-240(fifth)-241(century,)-242(a)-240(notorious)-240(atheist)-241(should)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([033])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(have)-194(been)-194(invited)-194(to)-194(advise)-194(on)-194(the)-194(revision)-193(of)-194(its)-194(constitution.)-232(It)-194(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-198(probable)-199(that)-198(Aristoxenus)-198(adduced)-198(this)-199(fact)-198(as)-198(an)-199(additional)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(disproof)-393(of)-393(Diagoras's)-394(atheism,)-429(in)-393(which)-393(he)-393(evidently)-393(did)-394(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(believe.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(The)-246(above)-246(information)-246(explains)-245(the)-246(origin)-246(of)-246(the)-246(legend.)-249(Two)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(fixed)-405(points)-405(were)-406(in)-405(existence:)-560(the)-405(pious)-406(poet)-405(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 228.717 0 Td[(c.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.377 0 Td[(460)-405(and)]TJ -244.094 -13.549 Td[(the)-319(atheist)-320(who)-319(was)-320(outlawed)-319(in)-319(415;)-354(a)-320(bridge)-319(was)-320(constructed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(between)-447(them)-447(by)-447(the)-448(story)-447(of)-447(the)-447(stolen)-447(ode.)-841(This)-448(disposes)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-359(the)-359(whole)-359(supposition)-359(of)-359(atheism)-359(growing)-359(out)-359(of)-359(a)-359(basis)-359(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(experience.)-903(But,)-523(furthermore,)-522(it)-468(must)-467(be)-468(admitted)-468(that)-468(it)-468(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(doubtful)-319(whether)-319(the)-319(poet)-319(and)-318(the)-319(atheist)-319(are)-319(one)-319(and)-319(the)-319(same)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(person.)-501(The)-334(interval)-334(of)-334(time)-333(between)-334(them)-334(is)-334(itself)-334(suspicious,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-233(the)-234(poet,)-236(according)-234(to)-233(the)-233(ancient)-233(system)-234(of)-233(calculation,)-237(must)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-359(been)-359(about)-359(forty)-359(years)-359(old)-359(in)-358(464)-1(,)-386(consequently)-359(between)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(eighty)-341(and)-341(ninety)-341(in)-341(415.)-522(\050There)-341(is)-341(general)-341(agreement)-341(that)-341(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(treatise,)-405(the)-374(title)-373(of)-374(which)-374(has)-374(been)-373(quoted)-1(,)-404(must)-374(have)-374(been)-374(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(later)-444(forgery.\051)-832(If,)-492(in)-444(spite)-444(of)-444(all,)-493(I)-444(dare)-444(not)-444(absolutely)-444(deny)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-443(identity)-443(of)-443(the)-443(two)-443(Diagorases)-443(of)-443(tradition,)-491(the)-443(reason)-443(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-473(Aristophanes,)-530(where)-473(he)-473(mentions)-474(the)-473(decree)-474(concerning)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Diagoras,)-543(seem)-1(s)-484(to)-485(suggest)-485(that)-485(his)-484(attack)-485(on)-485(the)-485(Mysteries)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(was)-423(an)-423(old)-423(story)-423(which)-423(was)-423(raked)-423(up)-423(again)-423(in)-423(415.)-770(But)-423(for)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(our)-362(purpose,)-389(at)-362(any)-362(rate,)-389(nothing)-362(remains)-362(of)-361(the)-362(copious)-362(mass)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+162 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 163 0 R
+/Resources 161 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 160 0 R
+>> endobj
+164 0 obj <<
+/D [162 0 R /XYZ 184.611 369.134 null]
+>> endobj
+161 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+167 0 obj <<
+/Length 1377      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(III)-20310(29)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(of)-376(legend)-375(but)-376(the)-375(fact)-376(that)-375(one)-376(Diagoras)-375(of)-376(Melos)-376(in)-375(415)-376(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(outlawed)-235(in)-236(Athens)-235(on)-235(the)-236(ground)-235(of)-235(his)-236(attack)-235(on)-235(the)-236(Mysteries.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Such)-222(an)-222(attack)-222(may)-222(hav)-1(e)-222(been)-222(the)-222(outcome)-222(of)-222(atheism;)-231(there)-223(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(no)-263(lack)-262(of)-262(impiety)-263(in)-262(Athens)-263(at)-262(the)-263(end)-525(of)-262(the)-263(fifth)-262(century.)-288(But)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([034])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(whether)-290(this)-291(was)-290(the)-291(case)-290(or)-291(not)-290(we)-291(cannot)-290(possibly)-290(tell;)-311(and)-291(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(throw)-368(light)-367(on)-368(free-thinking)-368(tendencies)-368(in)-367(Athens)-368(at)-368(this)-368(time,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-390(have)-390(other)-389(and)-390(richer)-390(sources)-390(than)-389(the)-390(historical)-390(notice)-390(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Diagoras.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -29.651 Td[([035])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+166 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 167 0 R
+/Resources 165 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 160 0 R
+>> endobj
+168 0 obj <<
+/D [166 0 R /XYZ 220.402 477.528 null]
+>> endobj
+169 0 obj <<
+/D [166 0 R /XYZ 46.771 393.68 null]
+>> endobj
+165 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+170 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index6) >>
+endobj
+173 0 obj
+(Chapter IV)
+endobj
+176 0 obj <<
+/Length 4793      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.801 Td[(With)-272(the)-272(movement)-273(in)-272(Greek)-272(thought)-272(which)-272(is)-272(generally)-273(known)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-251(sophistic,)-250(a)-251(new)-251(view)-250(of)-251(popular)-251(belief)-250(appears.)-252(The)-251(criticism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-251(the)-250(sophists)-251(was)-250(directed)-251(against)-250(the)-251(entire)-250(tradition)-251(on)-251(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Greek)-517(society)-517(was)-517(based,)-583(and)-517(principally)-517(against)-517(the)-517(moral)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conceptions)-407(which)-407(hitherto)-407(had)-407(been)-407(unquestioned:)-564(good)-407(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(evil,)-208(right)-197(and)-197(wrong.)-233(The)-197(criticism)-197(was)-197(essen)-1(tially)-197(negative;)-215(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(which)-251(hitherto)-251(had)-250(been)-251(imagined)-251(as)-251(absolute)-251(was)-251(demonstrated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-364(be)-365(relative,)-393(and)-364(the)-365(relative)-364(was)-364(identified)-365(with)-364(the)-365(invalid.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Thus)-350(they)-351(could)-350(not)-351(help)-350(running)-351(up)-350(against)-351(the)-350(popular)-351(ideas)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-450(the)-449(gods,)-500(and)-449(treating)-450(them)-450(in)-449(the)-450(same)-449(way.)-849(A)-450(leading)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(part)-254(was)-253(here)-254(played)-254(by)-254(the)-253(sophistic)-254(distinction)-254(between)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 252.147 0 Td[(nomos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -252.147 -13.55 Td[(and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 19.092 0 Td[(physis)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.272 0 Td[(,)-320(Law)-306(and)-306(Nature,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 83.936 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.892 0 Td[(that)-306(which)-306(is)-306(based)-306(on)-306(human)]TJ -148.192 -13.549 Td[(convention,)-183(and)-165(that)-166(which)-165(is)-166(founded)-165(on)-166(the)-166(nature)-165(of)-166(things.)-222(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sophists)-239(could)-240(not)-239(help)-239(seeing)-239(that)-240(the)-239(whole)-239(public)-239(worship)-240(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-162(ideas)-161(associated)-162(with)-162(it)-161(belonged)-162(to)-162(the)-161(former)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 211.649 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(to)-162(the)-161(domain)]TJ -222.558 -13.549 Td[(of)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 12.868 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(the)-347(law.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 35.591 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.624 0 Td[(Not)-346(only)-347(did)-346(the)-347(worship)-346(and)-347(the)-346(concep)-1(tions)-346(of)]TJ -61.926 -13.55 Td[(the)-475(gods)-476(vary)-475(from)-475(place)-476(to)-475(place)-475(in)-476(the)-475(hundreds)-475(of)-476(small)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(independent)-231(communities)-231(into)-231(which)-231(Hellas)-231(was)-231(divided)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 246.006 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)-231(fact)]TJ -256.915 -13.549 Td[(which)-376(the)-375(sophists)-376(had)-375(special)-376(opportunity)-375(of)-376(observing)-376(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(travelling)-255(from)-255(town)-255(to)-254(town)-255(to)-255(teach;)-257(but)-255(it)-255(was)-255(even)-510(officially)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([036])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(admitted)-291(that)-292(the)-291(whole)-292(ritual)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 130.283 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(which,)-302(popularly)-291(speaking,)-302(was)]TJ -141.192 -13.55 Td[(almost)-359(identical)-359(with)-359(religion)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 131.744 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(was)-359(based)-359(on)-359(convention.)-576(If)-359(a)]TJ -142.653 -13.549 Td[(Greek)-315(wa)-1(s)-315(asked)-315(why)-316(a)-315(god)-316(was)-315(to)-316(be)-315(worshipped)-316(in)-315(such)-316(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(such)-257(a)-257(way,)-258(generally)-257(the)-257(only)-257(answer)-257(was:)-264(because)-257(it)-257(is)-257(the)-257(law)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-304(the)-303(State)-303(\050or)-304(the)-303(convention;)-331(the)-303(word)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 184.325 0 Td[(nomos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.795 0 Td[(expresses)-303(both)]TJ -216.12 -13.549 Td[(things\051.)-373(Hence)-291(it)-291(followed)-291(in)-291(principle)-291(that)-291(religion)-291(came)-291(under)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-326(domain)-325(of)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 65.803 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(the)-326(law,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 35.363 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.396 0 Td[(being)-326(consequently)-325(the)-326(work)-326(of)-325(man;)]TJ -114.406 -13.55 Td[(and)-315(hence)-314(again)-315(the)-315(obvious)-314(conclusion,)-331(according)-315(to)-315(sophistic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reasoning,)-335(was)-317(that)-318(it)-317(was)-318(nothing)-318(but)-317(human)-318(imagination,)-335(and)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+175 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 176 0 R
+/Resources 174 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 160 0 R
+>> endobj
+171 0 obj <<
+/D [175 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+177 0 obj <<
+/D [175 0 R /XYZ 331.4 188.085 null]
+>> endobj
+174 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+180 0 obj <<
+/Length 5000      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(31)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(that)-304(there)-304(was)-305(no)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 79.316 0 Td[(physis)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.273 0 Td[(,)-318(no)-304(reality,)-318(behind)-304(it)-304(at)-304(all.)-413(In)-304(the)-304(case)]TJ -106.589 -13.549 Td[(of)-278(the)-277(naturalists,)-284(it)-278(was)-277(the)-278(positive)-277(foundation)-278(of)-277(their)-278(system,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-320(conception)-320(of)-319(nature)-320(as)-320(a)-319(whole,)-338(that)-319(led)-320(them)-320(to)-320(criticise)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-350(popular)-350(belief.)-550(Hence)-350(their)-350(criticism)-350(was)-350(in)-351(the)-350(main)-350(only)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(directed)-211(against)-211(those)-210(particular)-211(ideas)-211(in)-210(the)-211(popular)-211(belief)-211(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-336(at)-336(variance)-337(with)-336(the)-336(results)-336(of)-337(their)-336(investigations.)-508(To)-337(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sure,)-380(the)-355(sophists)-354(were)-354(not)-354(above)-354(making)-355(use)-354(of)-354(the)-354(results)-355(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(natural)-206(science)-207(in)-206(their)-206(c)-1(riticism)-206(of)-206(the)-207(popular)-206(belief;)-221(it)-206(was)-207(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(general)-373(aim)-372(to)-373(impart)-372(the)-373(highest)-372(education)-373(of)-372(their)-372(time,)-404(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-304(a)-303(liberal)-304(education)-303(natural)-304(science)-303(formed)-304(a)-303(rather)-304(important)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(part.)-314(But)-271(their)-272(starting-point)-271(was)-271(quite)-271(different)-272(from)-271(that)-271(of)-272(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(naturalists.)-495(Their)-331(whole)-332(interest)-331(was)-332(concentrated)-331(on)-332(man)-331(as)-332(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(member)-242(of)-242(the)-242(community,)-244(and)-242(it)-242(was)-242(from)-242(consideration)-242(of)-242(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(relation)-217(that)-216(they)-217(were)-216(brought)-217(into)-216(collision)-217(with)-216(the)-217(established)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(religion.)-301(Hence)-267(their)-267(attack)-267(was)-267(far)-267(more)-267(dangerous)-267(than)-267(that)-267(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-341(naturalists;)-386(no)-341(longer)-341(was)-341(it)-341(directed)-340(against)-341(details,)-364(it)-341(laid)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bare)-290(the)-289(psychological)-290(basis)-290(itself)-289(of)-290(popular)-290(belief)-289(and)-580(clearly)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([037])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(revealed)-270(its)-269(unstable)-270(character.)-308(Their)-270(criticism)-269(was)-270(fundamental)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-250(central,)-250(not)-250(casual)-250(and)-250(circumstantial.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(From)-231(a)-232(purely)-231(practical)-231(point)-232(of)-231(view)-231(also,)-236(the)-231(criticism)-231(of)-232(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(sophists)-176(was)-175(far)-176(more)-175(dangerous)-176(than)-175(that)-176(of)-175(the)-176(old)-176(philosophers.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(They)-537(were)-538(not)-537(theorists)-538(themselves,)-609(but)-537(practitioners;)-682(their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(business)-290(was)-289(to)-289(impart)-290(the)-289(higher)-290(education)-289(to)-290(the)-289(more)-290(mature)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(youth.)-600(It)-367(was)-367(therefore)-367(part)-366(of)-367(their)-367(profession)-367(to)-367(disseminate)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-225(views)-225(not)-225(by)-225(means)-225(of)-225(learned)-225(professional)-225(writings)-1(,)-230(but)-225(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-218(persuasive)-217(eloquence)-218(of)-217(oral)-218(discourse.)-239(And)-218(in)-217(their)-218(criticism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-186(the)-185(existing)-185(state)-186(of)-185(things)-186(they)-185(did)-186(not)-185(start)-186(with)-185(special)-186(results)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(which)-371(only)-371(science)-371(could)-371(prove,)-401(and)-371(the)-372(correctness)-371(of)-371(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-435(layman)-435(need)-435(not)-435(recognise;)-528(they)-435(operated)-435(with)-435(facts)-435(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(principles)-206(known)-206(and)-206(acknowledged)-206(by)-206(everybody.)-236(It)-206(is)-206(not)-206(to)-206(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(wondered)-284(at)-284(that)-285(such)-284(efforts)-284(evoked)-284(a)-284(vigorous)-284(reaction)-284(on)-285(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(part)-285(of)-284(established)-285(society,)-293(the)-285(more)-284(so)-285(as)-284(in)-285(any)-284(case)-285(the)-285(result)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-352(sophistic)-353(criticism)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 93.747 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(though)-352(not)-353(consciously)-352(its)-352(object)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 148.101 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(was)]TJ -263.667 -13.549 Td[(to)-395(liquefy)-395(the)-395(moral)-395(principles)-395(on)-395(which)-395(the)-395(social)-396(order)-395(was)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+179 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 180 0 R
+/Resources 178 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 160 0 R
+>> endobj
+181 0 obj <<
+/D [179 0 R /XYZ 294.558 301.388 null]
+>> endobj
+178 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+184 0 obj <<
+/Length 5086      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(32)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(based.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(Such,)-505(in)-454(principle,)-505(appeared)-453(to)-454(be)-454(the)-454(state)-454(of)-454(things.)-862(In)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(practice,)-469(here)-426(as)-425(elsewhere,)-470(the)-425(devil)-426(proved)-425(not)-426(so)-425(black)-426(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-455(was)-456(painted.)-865(First,)-507(not)-455(all)-456(the)-455(sophists)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 197.988 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(hardly)-455(even)-456(the)]TJ -208.897 -13.549 Td[(majority)-216(of)-216(them)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 72.588 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(drew)-216(the)-216(logical)-216(conclusions)-216(from)-216(their)-216(views)]TJ -83.497 -13.549 Td[(in)-373(respe)-1(ct)-373(of)-373(either)-374(morals)-373(or)-374(religion.)-620(They)-374(were)-373(teachers)-374(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(rhetoric,)-345(and)-327(as)-326(such)-326(they)-326(taught,)-345(for)-327(instance,)-345(all)-326(the)-326(tricks)-327(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-253(a)-253(bad)-253(cause)-253(might)-253(be)-253(defended;)-254(that)-253(was)-253(part)-253(of)-253(the)-253(trade.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(But)-285(it)-286(must)-285(be)-286(supposed)-285(that)-285(Gorgias,)-294(the)-286(most)-285(distinguished)-286(of)]TJ 3.022 -13.549 Td[(them,)-284(expressly)-277(insisted)-277(that)-277(rhetoric,)-284(just)-277(like)-277(any)-277(other)-277(art)-277(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -75.777 0 Td[([038])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(aim)-364(of)-364(which)-364(was)-364(to)-364(defe)-1(at)-364(an)-364(opponent,)-392(should)-364(only)-364(be)-365(used)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(for)-290(good)-289(ends.)-370(Similarly)-289(many)-290(of)-290(them)-289(may)-290(have)-290(stopped)-290(short)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-394(their)-394(criticism)-394(of)-395(popular)-394(belief)-394(at)-394(some)-394(arbitrary)-394(point,)-431(so)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-384(it)-385(was)-384(possible)-384(for)-385(them)-384(to)-384(respect)-385(at)-384(any)-384(rate)-385(something)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-295(the)-294(established)-295(religion,)-305(and)-295(so,)-305(of)-295(course,)-306(first)-294(and)-295(foremost)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-477(very)-477(belief)-477(in)-477(the)-477(existence)-477(of)-477(the)-477(gods.)-931(That)-477(they)-477(did)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(not)-424(as)-423(a)-423(rule)-424(interfere)-423(with)-424(public)-423(worship,)-467(we)-424(may)-423(be)-424(sure;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-475(was)-476(based)-475(firmly)-476(on)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 122.279 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(the)-475(Law.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 40.63 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.029 0 Td[(But,)-532(in)-475(addition,)-532(even)]TJ -177.781 -13.549 Td[(sophists)-294(who)-295(personally)-294(took)-294(an)-295(attitude)-294(radically)-295(contradictory)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-195(popular)-195(belief)-195(ha)-1(d)-195(the)-195(most)-195(important)-195(reasons)-195(for)-195(being)-196(careful)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-238(advancing)-239(such)-238(a)-239(view.)-246(They)-238(had)-239(to)-238(live)-238(by)-239(being)-238(the)-239(teachers)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-370(youth;)-430(they)-371(had)-370(no)-370(fixed)-370(appointment,)-400(they)-370(travelled)-371(about)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-424(lecturers)-423(and)-424(enlisted)-424(disciples)-423(by)-424(means)-423(of)-424(their)-424(lectures.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(For)-306(such)-306(men)-306(it)-306(would)-306(have)-306(been)-306(a)-306(very)-306(serious)-306(th)-1(ing)-306(to)-306(attack)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-336(established)-335(order)-336(in)-335(its)-336(tenderest)-335(place,)-357(religion,)-357(and)-336(above)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-389(they)-390(had)-389(to)-390(beware)-389(of)-390(coming)-389(into)-389(conflict)-390(with)-389(the)-390(penal)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(laws.)-313(This)-272(risk)-271(they)-271(did)-271(not)-271(incur)-271(while)-271(confining)-271(themselves)-272(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theoretical)-175(discussions)-175(about)-175(right)-175(and)-175(wrong,)-190(nor)-175(by)-175(the)-175(practical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(application)-288(of)-287(them)-287(in)-288(their)-287(teaching)-288(of)-287(rhetoric;)-307(but)-287(they)-288(might)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(very)-246(easily)-245(incur)-245(it)-246(if)-245(attacking)-246(religion.)-248(This)-246(being)-245(the)-246(case,)-246(it)-246(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-232(to)-232(be)-232(wondered)-232(at)-232(that)-232(we)-232(do)-232(not)-232(find)-232(many)-232(direct)-232(statements)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-230(undoubtedly)-230(atheistical)-231(character)-230(handed)-230(down)-230(from)-230(the)-231(more)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(eminent)-227(s)-1(ophists,)-231(and)-228(that)-227(trials)-228(for)-227(impiety)-228(are)-227(rare)-228(in)-227(their)-228(case.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(But,)-251(nevertheless,)-251(a)-251(few)-250(such)-251(cases)-251(are)-250(me)-1(t)-250(with,)-251(and)-251(from)-251(these)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+183 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 184 0 R
+/Resources 182 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 160 0 R
+>> endobj
+185 0 obj <<
+/D [183 0 R /XYZ 93.543 391.323 null]
+>> endobj
+182 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+188 0 obj <<
+/Length 4977      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(33)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(as)-250(our)-250(starting-point)-250(we)-250(will)-250(now)-250(proceed.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([039])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -279.068 -16.004 Td[(As)-461(to)-461(Protagoras)-460(of)-461(Abdera,)-514(one)-460(of)-461(the)-461(earliest)-461(and)-461(most)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(famous)-307(of)-307(all)-307(the)-307(sophists,)-321(it)-307(is)-307(stated)-307(that)-308(he)-307(began)-307(a)-307(pamphlet)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(treating)-276(of)-276(the)-276(gods)-276(with)-276(the)-276(words:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 160.131 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Concerning)-276(the)-276(gods)-276(I)-276(can)]TJ -164.974 -13.549 Td[(say)-381(nothing,)-414(neither)-381(that)-381(they)-382(exist)-381(nor)-381(that)-381(they)-381(do)-381(not)-382(exist,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(nor)-268(of)-267(what)-268(form)-268(they)-268(are;)-276(because)-268(there)-267(are)-268(many)-268(things)-268(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(prevent)-283(one)-283(from)-282(knowing)-283(that,)-291(namely,)-291(both)-283(the)-283(uncertainty)-283(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-263(matter)-263(and)-263(the)-263(shortness)-263(of)-263(man's)-263(life.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 182.319 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.712 0 Td[(On)-263(this)-263(account,)-266(it)-263(is)]TJ -190.031 -13.549 Td[(said,)-298(he)-289(was)-288(charged)-289(with)-289(impiety)-288(at)-289(Athens)-288(and)-289(was)-289(outlawed,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-396(his)-396(works)-395(were)-396(publicly)-396(burned.)-687(The)-396(date)-395(of)-396(this)-396(trial)-396(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(not)-425(known)-425(for)-425(certain;)-513(but)-425(it)-425(is)-425(reasonably)-425(supposed)-426(to)-425(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(coincided)-316(with)-317(that)-316(of)-316(Diagoras,)-333(namely,)-333(in)-316(415.)-449(At)-316(any)-316(rate)-317(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(must)-220(have)-219(taken)-220(place)-220(after)-219(423-421,)-226(as)-220(we)-219(know)-220(that)-220(Protagoras)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-473(at)-472(that)-473(time)-472(staying)-473(in)-473(Athens.)-917(As)-473(he)-472(must)-473(have)-473(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(born)-280(about)-281(485,)-288(the)-280(charge)-281(overtook)-280(him)-280(when)-281(old)-280(and)-281(famous;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(according)-265(to)-266(one)-265(account,)-269(his)-266(work)-265(on)-265(the)-266(gods)-265(seems)-265(to)-266(belong)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-250(his)-250(earlier)-250(writings.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(To)-565(doubt)-565(the)-565(correctness)-565(of)-565(this)-565(tradition)-566(would)-565(require)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(stronger)-371(reasons)-371(than)-371(we)-370(possess,)-401(although)-371(it)-371(is)-371(rather)-371(strange)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-473(the)-473(condemnation)-473(of)-472(Protagoras)-473(is)-473(mentioned)-473(neither)-473(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(our)-335(historical)-336(sources)-335(nor)-335(in)-336(Aristophanes,)-356(and)-336(that)-335(Plato,)-357(who)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(mentions)-191(Protagoras)-191(rather)-191(frequently)-190(a)-1(s)-190(dead,)-203(never)-191(alludes)-191(to)-191(it.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(At)-253(any)-253(rate,)-253(the)-253(quotation)-252(from)-253(the)-253(work)-253(on)-252(the)-253(gods)-253(is)-253(certainly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(authentic,)-438(for)-400(Plato)-400(himself)-401(referred)-400(to)-400(it.)-701(Hence)-400(it)-400(is)-401(certain)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-262(Protagoras)-262(directly)-261(stated)-262(the)-262(problem)-262(as)-261(to)-262(the)-262(existence)-262(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-336(gods)-336(and)-336(regarded)-336(it)-335(a)-1(s)-335(an)-336(open)-336(question.)-508(But)-336(beyond)-336(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nothing)-296(much)-297(can)-296(be)-297(deduced)-296(from)-296(the)-297(short)-296(quotation;)-320(and)-296(as)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([040])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.55 Td[(to)-223(the)-224(rest)-223(of)-224(the)-223(book)-224(on)-223(the)-224(gods)-223(we)-223(know)-224(nothing.)-241(The)-224(meagre)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reasons)-260(for)-260(scepticism)-260(adduced)-260(probably)-260(do)-260(not)-260(imply)-260(any)-260(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(than)-329(that)-330(the)-329(difficulties)-329(are)-329(objective)-330(as)-329(well)-329(as)-330(subjective.)-488(If,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-305(the)-305(latter)-304(respect,)-319(the)-305(brevity)-304(of)-305(life)-305(is)-305(specially)-305(mentioned)-305(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(may)-253(be)-253(supposed)-253(that)-253(Protagoras)-253(had)-253(in)-253(mind)-253(a)-253(definite)-253(proof)-254(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-218(existence)-218(of)-218(the)-218(gods)-218(which)-218(was)-218(rendered)-218(difficult)-218(by)-218(the)-218(fact)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-319(life)-320(is)-319(so)-320(brief;)-354(prediction)-319(of)-319(the)-320(future)-319(may)-320(be)-319(guessed)-320(at,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+187 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 188 0 R
+/Resources 186 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 191 0 R
+>> endobj
+189 0 obj <<
+/D [187 0 R /XYZ 46.771 515.797 null]
+>> endobj
+190 0 obj <<
+/D [187 0 R /XYZ 327.401 160.986 null]
+>> endobj
+186 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+194 0 obj <<
+/Length 4672      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(34)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(but)-250(nothing)-250(certain)-250(can)-250(be)-250(stated.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Protagoras)-324(is)-324(the)-324(only)-324(one)-324(of)-324(the)-324(sophists)-324(of)-325(whom)-324(tradition)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(says)-268(that)-268(he)-268(was)-269(the)-268(object)-268(of)-268(persecution)-268(owing)-268(to)-268(his)-269(religious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(views.)-817(The)-439(trial)-439(of)-439(Socrates,)-486(however,)-487(really)-439(belongs)-439(to)-439(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(same)-277(category)-278(when)-277(looked)-277(at)-277(from)-278(the)-277(accusers')-277(point)-277(of)-278(view;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Socrates)-466(was)-465(accused)-466(as)-466(a)-466(sophist.)-897(But)-465(as)-466(his)-466(own)-466(attitude)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(towards)-438(popular)-439(religion)-438(differed)-438(essentially)-439(from)-438(that)-438(of)-439(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sophists,)-249(we)-249(cannot)-248(consider)-249(him)-249(in)-248(this)-249(connexion.)-250(Protagoras's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(trial)-326(itself)-327(is)-326(partly)-326(determined)-327(by)-326(special)-326(circumstances.)-479(In)-327(all)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(probability)-356(it)-356(took)-356(place)-356(at)-356(a)-356(moment)-356(when)-356(a)-356(violent)-356(religious)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(reaction)-462(had)-462(set)-462(in)-461(at)-462(Athens)-462(owing)-462(to)-462(some)-462(grave)-462(offences)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(against)-235(the)-235(public)-236(worship)-235(and)-235(sanctuaries)-235(of)-235(the)-235(State)-236(\050violation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-229(the)-229(Mysteries)-229(and)-230(mutilation)-229(of)-229(the)-229(Hermae\051.)-243(The)-229(work)-229(on)-230(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-316(had)-315(presumably)-316(been)-316(in)-315(existence)-316(and)-315(known)-316(long)-316(before)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-473(without)-472(causing)-473(scandal)-473(to)-472(anybody.)-918(But,)-529(nevertheless,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-377(trial,)-408(like)-376(those)-377(of)-376(Anaxagoras)-377(and)-376(Socrates,)-408(plainly)-377(bears)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(witness)-198(to)-198(the)-198(animosity)-198(with)-198(which)-198(the)-198(modern)-199(free-thought)-198(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(regarded)-255(in)-256(Athens.)-266(This)-256(animosity)-255(did)-255(not)-256(easily)-255(manifest)-256(itself)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(publicly)-367(without)-734(special)-367(reasons;)-425(but)-367(it)-367(was)-367(always)-367(there)-367(and)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([041])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(might)-250(always)-250(be)-250(used)-250(in)-250(case)-250(of)-250(provocation.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(As)-451(to)-452(Protagoras's)-451(personal)-451(attitude)-451(to)-452(the)-451(question)-451(of)-452(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(existence)-261(of)-260(the)-261(gods,)-263(much)-260(may)-261(be)-260(guessed)-261(and)-261(much)-260(has)-261(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(guessed;)-244(but)-240(nothing)-240(can)-240(be)-240(stated)-240(for)-241(certain.)-246(However,)-243(judging)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-454(the)-454(man's)-454(profession)-454(and)-453(his)-454(general)-454(habit)-454(of)-454(life)-454(as)-454(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(appears)-234(in)-234(tradition,)-238(we)-234(may)-234(take)-234(for)-234(granted)-234(that)-234(he)-234(did)-234(not)-235(give)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(offence)-312(in)-311(his)-312(outward)-312(behaviour)-311(by)-312(taking)-312(a)-311(hostile)-312(attitude)-312(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(public)-391(worship)-391(or)-390(attacking)-391(its)-391(foundations;)-461(had)-391(that)-391(been)-391(so,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(he)-351(would)-350(not)-351(for)-350(forty)-351(years)-350(have)-351(been)-350(the)-351(most)-351(distinguished)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(teacher)-264(of)-264(Hellas,)-268(but)-264(would)-264(simply)-265(not)-264(have)-264(been)-264(tolerated.)-293(An)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(eminent)-351(modern)-350(scholar)-351(has)-351(therefore)-350(advanced)-351(the)-351(conjecture)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-210(Protagoras)-210(distinguished)-210(between)-210(belief)-210(and)-211(knowledge,)-218(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-176(his)-177(work)-176(on)-176(the)-177(gods)-176(only)-176(aimed)-176(at)-177(showing)-176(that)-176(the)-177(existence)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-296(the)-296(gods)-296(could)-296(not)-296(be)-296(scientifically)-296(demonstrated.)-388(Now)-296(such)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-318(distinction)-318(probably,)-335(if)-317(conceived)-318(as)-318(a)-318(conscious)-318(principle,)-335(is)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+193 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 194 0 R
+/Resources 192 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 191 0 R
+>> endobj
+195 0 obj <<
+/D [193 0 R /XYZ 170.646 271.835 null]
+>> endobj
+192 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+198 0 obj <<
+/Length 4602      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(35)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(alien)-364(to)-364(ancient)-364(thought,)-393(at)-364(any)-364(rate)-364(at)-364(the)-364(time)-364(of)-365(Protagoras;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-259(yet)-259(it)-259(may)-259(contain)-259(a)-259(grain)-259(of)-259(truth.)-277(When)-259(it)-259(is)-259(borne)-259(in)-259(mind)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-390(the)-390(incriminated)-389(p)-1(assage)-389(represents)-390(the)-390(very)-390(exordium)-390(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-225(work)-225(of)-226(Protagoras,)-230(the)-225(impression)-225(cannot)-225(be)-225(avoided)-225(that)-226(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(himself)-186(did)-187(not)-186(intend)-186(his)-187(work)-186(to)-187(disturb)-186(the)-186(established)-187(religion,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-317(that)-316(he)-317(quite)-317(na\357vely)-316(took)-317(up)-317(the)-316(existence)-317(of)-317(the)-316(gods)-317(as)-317(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(subject,)-348(as)-328(good)-328(as)-328(any)-329(other,)-347(for)-329(dialectic)-328(discussion.)-484(All)-329(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-312(was)-312(concerned)-313(with)-312(was)-312(theory)-312(and)-312(theorising;)-343(religion)-313(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(practice)-320(and)-319(ritual;)-354(and)-320(he)-319(had)-320(no)-319(more)-320(intention)-319(of)-320(interfering)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(with)-379(that)-380(than)-379(the)-379(other)-379(earlier)-379(sophists)-380(of)-379(assailing)-379(the)-379(legal)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([042])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(system)-312(of)-311(the)-311(community)-312(in)-311(their)-312(speculation)-311(as)-312(to)-311(relativity)-312(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(right)-250(and)-250(wrong.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(All)-423(this,)-467(however,)-467(does)-423(not)-423(alter)-424(the)-423(fact)-424(that)-423(the)-423(work)-424(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Protagoras)-301(posed)-300(the)-301(very)-301(question)-300(of)-301(the)-301(existence)-300(of)-301(the)-301(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-240(a)-239(problem)-240(which)-240(might)-240(possibly)-239(be)-240(solved)-240(in)-239(the)-240(negative.)-247(He)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(seems)-297(to)-297(have)-298(been)-297(the)-297(first)-297(to)-297(do)-297(this.)-392(That)-297(it)-297(could)-297(be)-297(done)-298(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(significant)-351(of)-351(the)-351(age)-351(to)-351(which)-351(Protagoras)-351(belongs;)-402(that)-351(it)-351(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(done)-293(was)-292(undoubtedly)-293(of)-292(great)-293(importance)-292(for)-293(the)-293(development)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(thought)-250(in)-250(wide)-250(circles.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(Prodicus)-501(of)-501(Ceos,)-564(also)-502(one)-501(of)-501(the)-501(most)-501(famous)-502(sophists,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(advanced)-179(the)-178(idea)-179(that)-178(the)-179(conceptions)-178(of)-179(the)-178(gods)-179(were)-179(originally)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(associated)-250(with)-251(those)-250(things)-251(which)-250(were)-251(of)-250(use)-250(to)-251(humanity:)-251(sun)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-316(moon,)-332(rivers)-316(and)-316(springs,)-332(the)-316(products)-315(of)-316(the)-316(earth)-316(and)-316(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(elements;)-542(therefore)-445(bread)-444(was)-445(identified)-445(with)-444(Demeter,)-494(wine)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(with)-332(Dionysus,)-354(water)-332(with)-332(Poseidon,)-353(fire)-333(with)-332(Hephaestus.)-498(As)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-329(special)-329(instance)-329(he)-329(mentioned)-328(the)-329(worship)-329(of)-329(the)-329(Nile)-329(by)-329(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Egyptians.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(In)-465(Democritus,)-518(who)-465(was)-465(a)-464(slightly)-465(elder)-465(contemporary)-465(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Prodicus,)-171(we)-151(have)-152(already)-151(met)-151(with)-151(investigation)-152(into)-151(the)-151(origin)-152(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-229(conceptions)-230(of)-229(the)-229(gods.)-243(There)-229(is)-230(a)-229(close)-229(parallel)-229(between)-230(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(handling)-229(of)-229(the)-230(subject)-229(and)-229(that)-229(of)-229(Prodicus,)-234(but)-229(at)-229(the)-229(same)-230(time)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-350(characteristic)-351(difference.)-550(Democritus)-351(was)-350(a)-350(naturalist,)-376(hence)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(he)-341(took)-341(as)-340(his)-341(starting-point)-341(the)-341(natural)-341(phenomena)-341(commonly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ascribed)-409(to)-410(the)-409(influence)-409(of)-409(the)-409(gods.)-728(Prodicus,)-449(on)-409(the)-410(other)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+197 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 198 0 R
+/Resources 196 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 191 0 R
+>> endobj
+199 0 obj <<
+/D [197 0 R /XYZ 327.401 396.232 null]
+>> endobj
+196 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+202 0 obj <<
+/Length 4904      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(36)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(hand,)-301(started)-290(from)-290(the)-291(intellectual)-290(life)-291(of)-290(man.)-371(We)-291(learn)-290(that)-291(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(had)-317(commenced)-316(to)-317(study)-317(synonyms,)-333(and)-317(that)-316(he)-317(was)-317(interested)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-379(the)-378(interpretation)-379(of)-757(the)-379(poets.)-636(Now)-379(he)-378(found)-379(that)-379(Homer)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([043])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(occasionally)-525(simply)-524(substituted)-525(the)-524(name)-525(of)-524(Hephaestus)-525(for)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(fire,)-390(and)-362(that)-361(other)-362(poets)-362(went)-362(even)-361(further)-362(on)-362(the)-362(same)-362(lines.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Furthermore,)-373(while)-349(it)-348(was)-349(common)-348(knowledge)-349(to)-348(every)-349(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-286(certain)-286(natural)-286(objects,)-295(such)-286(as)-286(the)-286(heavenly)-286(bodies)-286(and)-286(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(rivers,)-302(were)-291(regarded)-292(as)-291(divine)-291(and)-292(had)-291(names)-292(in)-291(common)-292(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-202(gods,)-212(this)-202(to)-203(Prodicus)-202(would)-202(be)-203(a)-202(specially)-202(attractive)-203(subject)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(for)-387(speculation.)-661(It)-387(is)-387(plainly)-387(shown)-387(by)-387(his)-387(instances)-387(that)-387(it)-387(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(linguistic)-237(observations)-236(of)-237(this)-236(kind)-237(which)-236(were)-237(the)-237(starting-point)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-423(his)-423(theory)-423(concerning)-422(the)-423(origin)-423(of)-423(the)-423(conceptions)-423(of)-423(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(In)-431(the)-431(accounts)-432(of)-431(Prodicus)-431(it)-431(is)-432(taken)-431(for)-431(granted)-431(that)-432(he)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(denied)-271(the)-271(existence)-271(of)-271(the)-271(gods,)-276(and)-271(in)-271(later)-271(times)-271(he)-271(is)-271(classed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 14.247 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.484 0 Td[(.)-919(Nevertheless)-473(we)-473(have)-473(every)-473(reason)-473(to)-473(doubt)-473(the)]TJ -42.731 -13.55 Td[(correctness)-443(of)-442(this)-442(opinion.)-828(The)-442(case)-443(of)-442(Democritus)-443(already)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(shows)-248(that)-247(a)-248(philosopher)-247(might)-248(very)-247(well)-248(derive)-247(the)-248(conceptions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-199(the)-198(gods)-199(from)-198(an)-199(incorrect)-198(interpretation)-199(of)-198(certain)-199(phenomena)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(without)-271(throwing)-271(doubt)-272(on)-271(their)-271(existence.)-314(As)-271(far)-271(as)-271(Prodicus)-272(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(concerned)-266(it)-266(may)-265(be)-266(assumed)-266(that)-266(he)-265(did)-266(not)-266(believe)-266(that)-266(Bread,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Wine)-377(or)-377(Fire)-377(were)-377(gods,)-408(any)-377(more)-377(than)-377(Democritus)-377(imagined)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-381(Zeus)-381(sent)-381(thunder)-381(and)-381(lightning;)-446(nor,)-414(presumably,)-414(did)-381(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ever)-383(believe)-382(that)-383(rivers)-383(were)-383(gods.)-648(But)-382(he)-383(need)-383(not)-383(therefore)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-201(denied)-201(the)-202(existence)-201(of)-201(Demeter,)-211(Dionysus)-201(and)-202(Hephaestus,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(much)-431(less)-431(the)-431(divinity)-430(of)-431(the)-431(sun)-431(and)-431(the)-430(moon.)-793(And)-431(if)-431(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(consider)-406(his)-406(theory)-406(more)-406(closely)-406(it)-406(points)-406(in)-406(quite)-407(a)-406(different)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(direction)-281(from)-280(that)-280(of)-281(atheism.)-341(To)-281(Prodicus)-280(it)-281(was)-280(evidently)-281(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conception)-313(of)-313(utility)-313(that)-313(mattered:)-376(if)-313(these)-313(objects)-313(came)-313(to)-313(be)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([044])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(regarded)-232(as)-233(gods)-232(it)-233(was)-232(because)-232(they)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 161.942 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(benefited)-232(humanity.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 87.069 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.379 0 Td[(This)]TJ -261.234 -13.549 Td[(too)-435(is)-434(a)-435(genuinely)-435(sophistic)-434(view,)-481(characteristically)-435(deviating)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-422(that)-423(of)-422(the)-423(naturalist)-422(Democritus)-423(in)-422(its)-423(limitation)-422(to)-423(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(human)-308(and)-308(social)-308(aspect)-309(of)-308(the)-308(question.)-424(Such)-308(a)-308(point)-308(of)-309(view,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(if)-442(confronted)-443(with)-442(the)-442(question)-442(of)-443(the)-442(existence)-442(of)-442(the)-443(gods,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+201 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 202 0 R
+/Resources 200 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 191 0 R
+>> endobj
+203 0 obj <<
+/D [201 0 R /XYZ 199.75 491.077 null]
+>> endobj
+204 0 obj <<
+/D [201 0 R /XYZ 374.173 133.888 null]
+>> endobj
+200 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+207 0 obj <<
+/Length 5146      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(37)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(may)-215(very)-215(well,)-223(according)-215(to)-215(sophistic)-215(methods)-215(of)-215(reasoning,)-223(lead)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-352(the)-352(conclusion)-353(that)-352(primitive)-352(man)-352(was)-353(right)-352(in)-352(so)-352(far)-352(as)-353(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(useful,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 32.36 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 16.641 0 Td[(that)-268(which)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 48.869 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(benefits)-268(humanity,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 81.402 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.765 0 Td[(really)-268(is)-268(an)-267(essential)]TJ -191.88 -13.549 Td[(feature)-380(of)-380(the)-380(gods,)-412(and)-380(wrong)-380(only)-379(in)-380(so)-380(far)-380(as)-380(he)-380(identified)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-359(individual)-359(useful)-358(objects)-359(with)-359(the)-359(gods.)-576(Whether)-359(Prodicus)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(adopted)-166(this)-165(point)-166(of)-165(view,)-182(we)-166(cannot)-165(possibly)-166(tell;)-194(but)-165(the)-166(general)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(body)-220(of)-219(tradition)-220(concerning)-220(the)-219(man,)-226(which)-220(does)-220(not)-219(in)-220(any)-220(way)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(suggest)-315(religious)-314(radicalism,)-331(indicates)-314(as)-315(most)-314(pr)-1(obable)-314(that)-315(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(did)-304(not)-303(connect)-304(the)-303(question)-304(of)-303(the)-304(origin)-303(of)-304(the)-303(conceptions)-304(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-233(gods)-233(with)-233(that)-233(of)-233(the)-233(existence)-233(of)-233(the)-233(gods,)-237(which)-233(to)-233(him)-233(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(taken)-243(for)-242(granted,)-245(and)-242(that)-243(it)-243(was)-242(only)-243(later)-243(philosophers)-242(who,)-245(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-328(researches)-328(into)-328(the)-328(ideas)-328(of)-328(earlier)-328(philosophers)-329(about)-328(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods,)-230(inferred)-225(his)-225(atheism)-225(from)-225(his)-225(speculations)-225(on)-225(the)-225(history)-225(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(Critias,)-241(the)-238(well-known)-238(reactionary)-238(politician,)-241(the)-238(chief)-238(of)-239(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Thirty)-275(Tyrants,)-281(is)-275(placed)-275(amongst)-274(the)-275(atheists)-275(on)-275(the)-275(strength)-275(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-349(passage)-350(in)-349(a)-349(satyric)-349(drama,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 134.303 0 Td[(Sisyphus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.182 0 Td[(.)-548(The)-349(drama)-349(is)-349(lost,)-374(but)]TJ -172.485 -13.549 Td[(our)-272(authority)-271(quotes)-272(the)-272(objectionable)-271(passage)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 206.236 0 Td[(in)-272(extenso)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 44.167 0 Td[(;)-283(it)-271(is)-272(a)]TJ -250.403 -13.549 Td[(piece)-268(of)-267(no)-268(less)-268(than)-267(forty)-268(lines.)-303(The)-268(passage)-267(argues)-268(that)-268(human)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(life)-227(in)-228(its)-227(origins)-227(knew)-227(no)-228(social)-227(order,)-232(that)-227(might)-227(ruled)-228(supreme.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Then)-255(men)-255(conceived)-256(the)-255(idea)-255(of)-255(making)-256(laws)-255(in)-510(order)-255(that)-256(right)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([045])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(might)-246(rule)-245(instead)-246(of)-245(might.)-249(The)-246(result)-245(of)-246(this)-245(was,)-247(it)-246(is)-245(true,)-247(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(wrong)-380(was)-380(not)-380(done)-381(openly;)-445(but)-380(it)-380(was)-380(done)-380(secretly)-381(instead.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Then)-273(a)-273(wise)-272(man)-273(bethought)-273(himself)-273(of)-272(making)-273(men)-273(believe)-273(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(there)-209(existed)-209(gods)-209(who)-209(saw)-209(and)-209(heard)-209(everything)-209(which)-210(men)-209(did,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nay)-260(even)-259(knew)-260(their)-259(innermost)-260(thoughts.)-278(And,)-262(in)-260(order)-259(that)-260(men)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(might)-271(stand)-272(in)-271(proper)-271(awe)-272(of)-271(the)-271(gods,)-277(he)-271(said)-272(that)-271(they)-271(lived)-272(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-188(sky,)-201(out)-188(of)-189(which)-188(comes)-188(that)-189(which)-188(makes)-188(men)-189(afraid,)-200(such)-189(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(lightning)-176(and)-176(thunder,)-191(but)-176(also)-176(that)-176(which)-177(benefits)-176(them,)-191(sunshine)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-383(rain,)-416(and)-383(the)-383(stars,)-417(those)-383(fair)-383(ornaments)-383(by)-383(whose)-383(course)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(men)-326(measure)-325(time.)-477(Thus)-326(he)-326(succeeded)-325(in)-326(bringing)-326(lawlessness)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-317(an)-317(end.)-451(It)-317(is)-317(expressly)-317(stated)-317(that)-317(it)-317(was)-317(all)-318(a)-317(cunning)-317(fraud:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.55 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(by)-219(such)-220(talk)-219(he)-220(made)-219(his)-220(teaching)-219(most)-220(acceptable,)-225(veiling)-220(truth)]TJ -4.844 -13.549 Td[(with)-250(false)-250(words.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 74.837 0 Td[(\035)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+206 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 207 0 R
+/Resources 205 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 191 0 R
+>> endobj
+208 0 obj <<
+/D [206 0 R /XYZ 259.06 242.282 null]
+>> endobj
+205 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+211 0 obj <<
+/Length 5060      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(38)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 105.499 518.175 Td[(In)-305(antiquity)-304(it)-305(was)-305(disputed)-305(whether)-304(the)-305(drama)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 210.204 0 Td[(Sisyphus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.507 0 Td[(was)]TJ -263.667 -13.549 Td[(by)-362(Critias)-361(or)-361(Euripides;)-418(nowadays)-361(all)-362(agree)-361(in)-362(attributing)-361(it)-362(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Critias;)-457(nor)-388(does)-388(the)-388(style)-388(of)-388(the)-388(long)-388(fragment)-389(resemble)-388(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-362(Euripides.)-585(The)-362(question)-361(is,)-390(however,)-389(of)-362(no)-362(consequence)-362(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(this)-414(connexion:)-579(whether)-414(the)-415(drama)-414(is)-415(by)-414(Critias)-414(or)-415(Euripides)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-343(is)-343(wrong)-343(to)-343(attribute)-342(to)-343(an)-343(author)-343(opinions)-343(which)-343(he)-343(has)-343(put)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(into)-355(the)-355(mouth)-355(of)-355(a)-355(character)-355(in)-355(a)-355(drama.)-564(Moreover,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 242.448 0 Td[(Sisyphus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -242.448 -13.549 Td[(was)-451(a)-451(s)-1(atyric)-451(play,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 92.642 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 22.644 0 Td[(it)-451(belonged)-451(to)-452(a)-451(class)-451(of)-451(poetry)-452(the)]TJ -115.286 -13.549 Td[(liberty)-473(of)-473(which)-473(was)-473(nearly)-473(as)-472(great)-473(as)-473(in)-473(comedy,)-529(and)-473(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(speech)-388(was)-388(delivered)-388(by)-388(Sisyphus)-388(himself,)-422(who,)-423(according)-388(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-318(legend,)-334(is)-318(a)-317(type)-318(of)-317(the)-318(crafty)-318(criminal)-317(whose)-318(forte)-317(is)-318(to)-318(do)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(evil)-417(and)-417(elude)-417(punishment.)-751(There)-417(is,)-459(in)-417(fact,)-459(nothing)-417(in)-417(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-295(we)-295(otherwise)-296(hear)-295(of)-295(Critias)-295(to)-295(suggest)-295(that)-295(he)-296(cherished)]TJ 3.508 -13.549 Td[(free-thinking)-321(views.)-465(He)-321(was)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 126.899 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(or)-322(in)-321(his)-322(later)-321(years)-322(became)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 123.561 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -348.542 0 Td[([046])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.55 Td[(fanatical)-365(adversary)-365(of)-365(the)-365(Attic)-366(democracy,)-393(and)-366(he)-365(was,)-394(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-400(held)-399(power,)-437(unscrupulous)-400(in)-400(his)-399(choice)-400(of)-399(the)-400(means)-400(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-342(he)-342(opposed)-343(it)-342(and)-342(the)-342(men)-342(who)-343(stood)-342(in)-342(the)-342(path)-342(of)-343(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reactionary)-251(policy;)-251(but)-251(in)-251(our)-251(earlier)-251(sources)-251(he)-251(is)-251(never)-251(accused)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-345(impiety)-344(in)-345(the)-344(theoretical)-345(sense.)-534(And)-344(yet)-345(there)-344(had)-345(been)-345(an)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(excellent)-398(opportunity)-398(of)-397(bringing)-398(forward)-398(such)-398(an)-398(accusation;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-320(in)-319(his)-320(youth)-320(Critias)-319(had)-320(been)-320(a)-319(companion)-320(of)-320(Socrates,)-337(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-263(later)-264(conduct)-263(was)-263(used)-264(as)-263(a)-263(proof)-264(that)-263(Socrates)-263(corrupted)-264(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(surroundings.)-239(But)-215(it)-216(is)-215(always)-216(Critias's)-215(political)-216(crimes)-215(which)-216(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(adduced)-262(in)-261(this)-262(connexion,)-265(not)-262(his)-261(irreligion.)-285(On)-262(the)-262(other)-262(hand,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(posterity)-196(looked)-197(upon)-196(him)-196(as)-197(the)-196(pure)-196(type)-197(of)-196(tyrant,)-207(and)-196(the)-197(label)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atheist)-250(therefore)-250(suggested)-250(itself)-250(on)-250(the)-250(slightest)-250(provocation.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(But,)-741(even)-642(if)-643(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 88.195 0 Td[(Sisyphus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 45.192 0 Td[(fragment)-643(cannot)-642(be)-643(used)-642(to)]TJ -145.342 -13.549 Td[(characterise)-398(its)-398(author)-398(as)-398(an)-398(atheist,)-435(it)-398(is,)-435(nevertheless,)-435(of)-398(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(greatest)-254(interest)-255(in)-254(this)-254(connexion,)-256(and)-254(therefore)-254(demands)-255(closer)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(analysis.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(The)-471(introductory)-472(idea,)-527(that)-471(mankind)-471(has)-472(evolved)-471(from)-472(an)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(animal)-400(state)-399(into)-400(higher)-400(stages,)-437(is)-400(at)-399(variance)-400(with)-400(the)-400(earlier)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Greek)-440(conception,)-488(namely,)-488(that)-440(history)-440(begins)-440(with)-440(a)-441(golden)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(age)-332(from)-332(which)-331(there)-332(is)-332(a)-332(continual)-332(decline.)-495(The)-332(theory)-332(of)-332(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+210 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 211 0 R
+/Resources 209 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 191 0 R
+>> endobj
+212 0 obj <<
+/D [210 0 R /XYZ 93.543 342.036 null]
+>> endobj
+209 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+215 0 obj <<
+/Length 5021      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(39)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(fragment)-304(is)-304(expressed)-303(by)-304(a)-304(series)-304(of)-303(authors)-304(from)-304(the)-304(same)-304(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-209(immediately)-209(succeeding)-210(period.)-236(It)-209(occurs)-209(in)-210(Euripides;)-222(a)-210(later)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-262(otherwise)-262(little-known)-261(tragedian,)-265(Moschion,)-265(developed)-262(it)-262(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(detail)-246(in)-245(a)-246(still)-246(extant)-245(fragment;)-248(Plato)-245(accepted)-246(it)-246(and)-245(made)-246(it)-246(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(basis)-227(of)-227(his)-227(presentation)-227(of)-227(the)-227(origin)-227(of)-227(the)-227(State;)-235(Aristotle)-227(takes)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-362(for)-723(granted.)-584(Its)-362(source,)-389(too,)-390(has)-361(been)-362(demonstrated:)-473(it)-362(was)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([047])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(presumably)-288(Democritus)-288(who)-288(first)-287(advanced)-288(it.)-364(Nevertheless)-288(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(author)-265(of)-264(the)-265(fragment)-264(has)-265(hardly)-264(got)-265(it)-264(direct)-265(from)-265(Democritus,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(who)-537(at)-536(this)-537(time)-537(was)-537(little)-536(known)-537(at)-537(Athens,)-608(but)-537(from)-537(an)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(intermediary.)-231(This)-192(intermediary)-192(is)-192(probably)-192(Protagoras,)-204(of)-192(whom)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-262(is)-262(said)-261(that)-262(he)-262(composed)-262(a)-261(treatise,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 163.767 0 Td[(The)-262(Original)-262(State,)-264(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 103.532 0 Td[(the)]TJ -267.299 -13.549 Td[(primary)-374(state)-374(of)-375(mankind.)-622(Protagoras)-374(was)-374(a)-375(fellow-townsman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-405(Democritus,)-444(and)-405(recorded)-406(by)-405(tradition)-405(as)-405(one)-405(of)-405(his)-406(direct)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(disciples.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-163(another)-164(point)-163(also)-163(the)-164(fragment)-163(seems)-164(to)-163(betray)-163(the)-164(influence)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(of)-209(Democritus.)-236(When)-209(it)-209(is)-208(said)-209(that)-209(the)-209(wise)-208(inventors)-209(of)-209(the)-209(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(made)-225(them)-225(dwell)-225(in)-225(the)-224(skies,)-230(because)-225(from)-225(the)-225(skies)-225(come)-225(those)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(natural)-342(phenomena)-341(which)-341(frighten)-342(men,)-364(it)-342(is)-341(highly)-342(suggestive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-381(Democritus's)-381(criticism)-381(of)-381(the)-381(divine)-381(explanation)-381(of)-381(thunder)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-250(lightning)-251(and)-250(the)-251(like.)-251(In)-250(this)-251(case)-250(also)-251(Protagoras)-250(may)-251(have)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(been)-383(the)-383(intermediary.)-649(In)-383(his)-383(work)-383(on)-383(the)-383(gods)-383(h)-1(e)-383(had)-383(every)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(opportunity)-397(of)-397(discussing)-396(the)-397(question)-397(in)-397(detail.)-690(But)-397(here)-397(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-223(the)-223(theory)-222(of)-223(Democritus)-223(combined)-223(with)-222(that)-223(of)-223(Prodicus)-223(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-324(it)-323(is)-324(maintained)-323(that)-324(from)-323(the)-324(skies)-323(come)-324(also)-323(those)-324(things)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-239(benefit)-239(men,)-241(and)-238(that)-239(they)-239(are)-239(on)-238(this)-239(account)-239(also)-239(a)-239(suitable)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dwelling-place)-306(for)-306(the)-306(gods.)-418(It)-306(is)-306(obvious)-306(that)-306(the)-306(author)-306(of)-306(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(fragment)-226(\050or)-225(his)-226(source\051)-226(was)-225(versed)-226(in)-226(the)-225(most)-226(modern)-226(wisdom.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(All)-154(this)-154(erudition,)-173(however,)-173(is)-154(made)-154(to)-154(serve)-154(a)-154(certain)-154(tendency:)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-501(well-known)-501(tendency)-501(to)-500(represent)-501(religion)-501(as)-501(a)-501(political)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(invention)-413(having)-412(as)-413(its)-413(object)-412(the)-413(policing)-413(of)-412(society.)-738(It)-413(is)-413(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theory)-359(which)-359(in)-358(antiquity)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 113.556 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(to)-359(its)-359(honour)-358(be)-359(it)-359(said)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 103.209 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(is)-359(but)-717(of)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 52.441 0 Td[([048])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(rare)-270(occurrence.)-308(There)-270(is)-270(a)-269(vague)-270(indication)-269(of)-270(it)-270(in)-269(Euripides,)-275(a)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(more)-275(definite)-275(one)-275(in)-275(Aristotle,)-281(and)-275(an)-275(elabo)-1(rate)-275(application)-275(of)-275(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-256(Polybius;)-259(and)-256(that)-256(is)-256(in)-256(reality)-256(all.)-268(\050That)-256(many)-256(people)-256(in)-256(more)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+214 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 215 0 R
+/Resources 213 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 218 0 R
+>> endobj
+216 0 obj <<
+/D [214 0 R /XYZ 73.445 450.429 null]
+>> endobj
+217 0 obj <<
+/D [214 0 R /XYZ 314.4 106.79 null]
+>> endobj
+213 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+221 0 obj <<
+/Length 5100      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(40)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(enlightened)-156(ages)-157(upheld)-156(religion)-156(as)-156(a)-157(means)-156(of)-156(keeping)-156(the)-157(masses)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-400(check,)-436(is)-400(a)-399(different)-400(matter.\051)-698(However,)-437(it)-400(is)-399(an)-400(interesting)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fact)-389(that)-390(the)-389(Critias)-390(fragment)-389(is)-390(not)-389(only)-389(the)-390(first)-389(evidence)-390(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-251(existence)-250(of)-251(the)-250(theory)-251(known)-250(to)-250(us,)-251(but)-251(also)-250(presumably)-251(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(earliest)-197(and)-198(probably)-197(the)-198(best)-197(known)-197(to)-198(later)-197(antiquity.)-233(Otherwise)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-304(should)-304(not)-304(find)-304(reference)-303(for)-304(the)-304(theory)-304(made)-304(to)-304(a)-304(fragment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(a)-250(farce,)-250(but)-250(to)-250(a)-250(quotation)-250(from)-250(a)-250(philosopher.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(This)-351(might)-350(lead)-351(us)-350(to)-351(conclude)-350(that)-351(the)-350(theory)-351(was)-351(Critias's)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(own)-377(invention,)-409(though,)-408(of)-377(course,)-409(it)-377(would)-377(not)-377(follow)-377(that)-377(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(himself)-443(adhered)-443(to)-442(it.)-829(But)-442(it)-443(is)-443(more)-443(probable)-442(that)-443(it)-443(was)-443(a)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(ready-made)-315(modern)-316(theory)-315(which)-316(Critias)-315(put)-315(into)-316(the)-315(mouth)-316(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Sisyphus.)-661(Not)-387(only)-387(does)-387(the)-387(whole)-387(character)-387(of)-387(the)-387(fragment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-305(its)-304(scene)-305(of)-305(action)-305(favour)-304(this)-305(supposition,)-318(but)-305(there)-305(is)-305(also)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(another)-250(factor)-250(which)-250(corroborates)-250(it.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-215(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 27.1 0 Td[(Gorgias)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.101 0 Td[(Plato)-215(makes)-214(one)-215(of)-214(the)-215(characters,)-222(Callicles)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 187.72 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)]TJ -275.786 -13.549 Td[(man)-341(of)-341(whom)-341(we)-341(otherwise)-341(know)-341(nothing)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 190.182 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(profess)-341(a)-341(doctrine)]TJ -201.091 -13.55 Td[(which)-348(up)-347(to)-348(a)-347(certain)-348(point)-347(is)-348(almost)-347(identical)-348(with)-348(that)-347(of)-348(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fragment.)-289(According)-263(to)-263(Callicles,)-266(the)-263(natural)-263(state)-263(\050and)-263(the)-263(right)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(state;)-404(on)-353(this)-352(point)-353(he)-352(is)-353(at)-353(variance)-352(with)-353(the)-352(fragment\051)-353(is)-353(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(right)-401(belongs)-401(to)-401(the)-401(strong.)-702(This)-401(state)-401(has)-401(been)-401(corrupted)-401(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(legislation;)-441(the)-377(laws)-377(are)-377(inve)-1(ntions)-377(of)-377(the)-377(weak,)-409(who)-377(are)-378(also)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-290(majority,)-300(and)-290(their)-290(aim)-290(is)-290(to)-290(hinder)-290(the)-290(encroachment)-291(of)-290(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(strong.)-492(If)-331(this)-330(theory)-331(is)-331(carried)-330(to)-331(its)-331(conclusion,)-701(it)-331(is)-331(obvious)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([049])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(that)-277(religion)-277(must)-277(be)-277(added)-277(to)-278(the)-277(laws;)-290(if)-277(the)-277(former)-277(is)-278(not)-277(also)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(regarded)-340(as)-340(an)-340(invention)-340(for)-341(the)-340(policing)-340(of)-340(society,)-362(the)-341(whole)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theory)-204(is)-203(upset.)-235(Now)-204(in)-204(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 117.602 0 Td[(Gorgias)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.982 0 Td[(the)-204(question)-203(as)-204(to)-204(the)-204(attitude)]TJ -155.584 -13.549 Td[(of)-389(the)-390(gods)-389(towards)-389(the)-390(problem)-389(of)-389(what)-389(is)-390(right)-389(and)-389(what)-390(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(wrong)-240(is)-239(carefully)-240(avoided)-240(in)-240(the)-239(discussion.)-247(Not)-240(till)-239(the)-240(close)-240(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-201(dialogue,)-211(where)-201(Plato)-201(substitutes)-201(myth)-201(for)-201(scientific)-201(research,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(does)-280(he)-281(draw)-280(the)-281(conclusion)-280(in)-281(respect)-280(of)-280(religion.)-342(He)-280(does)-281(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-311(a)-312(positive)-311(form,)-327(as)-311(a)-311(consequence)-312(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 177.904 0 Td[(his)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 16.127 0 Td[(point)-311(of)-312(view:)-372(after)]TJ -194.031 -13.549 Td[(death)-422(the)-422(gods)-422(reward)-422(the)-421(just)-422(and)-422(punish)-422(the)-422(unjust;)-508(but)-422(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(expressly)-216(assumes)-217(that)-216(Callicles)-217(will)-216(regard)-217(it)-216(all)-216(as)-217(an)-216(old)-217(wives')]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(tale.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+220 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 221 0 R
+/Resources 219 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 218 0 R
+>> endobj
+222 0 obj <<
+/D [220 0 R /XYZ 315.241 215.183 null]
+>> endobj
+219 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+225 0 obj <<
+/Length 5259      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(41)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(In)-385(Callicles)-386(an)-385(attempt)-386(has)-385(been)-386(made)-385(to)-386(see)-385(a)-386(pseudonym)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(for)-445(Critias.)-834(That)-445(is)-445(certainly)-445(wrong.)-834(Critias)-445(was)-445(a)-445(kinsman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-357(Plato,)-383(is)-356(introduced)-357(by)-356(name)-356(in)-357(several)-356(dialogues,)-384(nay,)-383(one)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dialogue)-467(even)-468(bears)-467(his)-467(name,)-522(and)-467(he)-467(is)-467(everywhere)-468(treated)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(with)-275(respect)-274(and)-275(sympathy.)-323(Nowadays,)-281(therefore,)-281(it)-274(is)-275(generally)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acknowledged)-362(that)-362(Callicles)-362(is)-362(a)-362(real)-362(person,)-390(merely)-362(unknown)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-374(us)-374(as)-375(such.)-622(However)-374(that)-375(may)-374(be,)-405(Plato)-374(would)-374(never)-375(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(let)-379(a)-378(leading)-379(character)-379(in)-378(one)-379(of)-379(his)-378(longer)-379(dialogues)-379(advance)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(\050and)-301(Socrates)-301(refute\051)-301(a)-300(view)-301(which)-301(had)-301(no)-301(better)-301(authority)-301(than)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-394(passage)-395(in)-394(a)-394(satyric)-394(drama.)-683(On)-394(the)-394(othe)-1(r)-394(hand,)-430(there)-394(is,)-431(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(shown)-425(above,)-468(difficulty)-425(in)-424(supposing)-425(that)-425(the)-424(doctrine)-425(of)-425(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fragment)-388(was)-388(stated)-388(in)-388(the)-388(writings)-388(of)-388(an)-388(eminent)-388(sophist;)-457(so)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-258(come)-258(to)-258(the)-259(conclusion)-258(that)-258(it)-258(was)-258(developed)-258(and)-258(diffused)-259(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sophistic)-329(circles)-329(by)-330(oral)-329(teaching,)-349(and)-329(that)-329(it)-329(became)-329(known)-330(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Critias)-261(and)-260(Plato)-261(in)-261(this)-260(way.)-282(Its)-261(originator)-261(we)-260(do)-261(not)-261(know.)-282(We)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(might)-550(think)-275(of)-275(the)-275(sophist)-275(Thrasymachus,)-281(who)-275(in)-275(the)-275(first)-275(book)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([050])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(of)-339(Plato's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 45.109 0 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.475 0 Td[(maintains)-338(a)-339(point)-338(of)-339(view)-338(corre)-1(sponding)-338(to)]TJ -87.584 -13.549 Td[(that)-401(of)-401(Callicles)-401(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 89.613 0 Td[(Gorgias)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.76 0 Td[(.)-703(But)-400(what)-401(we)-401(otherwise)-401(learn)-401(of)]TJ -125.373 -13.549 Td[(Thrasymachus)-347(is)-346(not)-347(suggestive)-346(of)-347(interest)-347(in)-346(religion,)-371(and)-347(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(only)-366(statement)-366(of)-366(his)-366(as)-366(to)-366(that)-366(kind)-366(of)-366(thing)-366(wh)-1(ich)-366(has)-366(come)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(down)-271(to)-272(us)-271(tends)-272(to)-271(the)-271(denial)-272(of)-271(a)-272(providence,)-276(not)-272(denial)-271(of)-272(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods.)-245(Quite)-235(recently)-236(Diagoras)-235(of)-235(Melos)-236(has)-235(been)-235(guessed)-235(at;)-241(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-250(empty)-250(talk,)-250(resulting)-250(at)-250(best)-250(in)-250(substituting)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 198.502 0 Td[(x)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.571 0 Td[(\050or)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 15.447 0 Td[(NN)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.553 0 Td[(\051)-250(for)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.807 0 Td[(y)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(.)]TJ -250.768 -18.459 Td[(If)-410(I)-410(have)-409(dw)-1(elt)-409(in)-410(such)-410(detail)-410(on)-410(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 172.939 0 Td[(Sisyphus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.653 0 Td[(fragment,)-450(it)]TJ -227.547 -13.549 Td[(is)-428(because)-429(it)-428(is)-429(our)-428(first)-429(direct)-428(and)-429(unmistakable)-428(evidence)-429(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ancient)-298(atheism.)-392(Here)-298(for)-297(the)-298(first)-298(time)-297(we)-298(meet)-297(with)-298(the)-298(direct)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(statement)-429(which)-428(we)-429(have)-428(searched)-429(for)-428(in)-429(vain)-428(among)-429(all)-429(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(preceding)-248(authors:)-249(that)-247(the)-248(gods)-248(of)-247(popular)-248(belief)-248(are)-248(fabrication)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(pure)-240(and)-240(simple)-241(and)-240(without)-240(any)-240(corresponding)-240(reality,)-243(however)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(remote.)-577(The)-360(nature)-359(of)-359(our)-359(tradition)-359(precludes)-359(our)-359(asc)-1(ertaining)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whether)-277(such)-277(a)-278(statement)-277(might)-277(have)-277(been)-277(made)-278(earlier;)-290(but)-278(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(probability)-336(is)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 62.484 0 Td[(a)-336(priori)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.244 0 Td[(that)-336(it)-336(was)-336(not.)-507(The)-336(whole)-336(development)]TJ -100.728 -13.55 Td[(of)-251(ancient)-250(reasoning)-251(on)-251(religious)-251(questions,)-251(as)-250(far)-251(as)-251(we)-251(are)-251(able)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-280(survey)-280(it,)-287(leads)-280(in)-280(reality)-279(to)-280(the)-280(conclusion)-280(that)-280(atheism)-280(as)-280(an)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+224 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 225 0 R
+/Resources 223 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 218 0 R
+>> endobj
+226 0 obj <<
+/D [224 0 R /XYZ 75.232 314.937 null]
+>> endobj
+223 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+229 0 obj <<
+/Length 4916      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(42)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(expressed)-231(\050though)-231(perhaps)-232(not)-231(publicly)-231(expressed\051)-231(confession)-232(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(faith)-250(did)-250(not)-250(appear)-250(till)-250(the)-250(age)-250(of)-250(the)-250(sophists.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(With)-270(the)-269(Critias)-270(fragment)-269(we)-270(have)-270(also)-269(brought)-270(to)-269(an)-270(end)-270(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(inquiry)-417(into)-418(the)-417(direct)-417(statements)-418(of)-417(atheistic)-417(tendency)-418(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-316(come)-316(down)-316(to)-316(us)-316(from)-315(the)-316(age)-316(of)-316(the)-316(sophists.)-448(The)-316(result)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is,)-343(as)-325(we)-324(see,)-344(rather)-324(meagre.)-474(But)-324(it)-325(may)-324(be)-325(supplemented)-325(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(indirect)-217(testimonies)-218(which)-217(prove)-217(that)-217(there)-218(was)-217(more)-217(of)-217(the)-218(thing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(than)-354(the)-354(direct)-355(tradition)-354(would)-708(lead)-355(us)-354(to)-354(conjecture,)-380(and)-355(that)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([051])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(the)-233(denial)-233(of)-233(the)-233(existence)-233(of)-233(the)-233(gods)-233(must)-233(have)-234(penetrated)-233(very)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(wide)-250(circles.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(The)-308(fullest)-307(expre)-1(ssion)-307(of)-308(Attic)-308(free-thought)-308(at)-307(the)-308(end)-308(of)-308(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(fifth)-323(century)-323(is)-323(to)-324(be)-323(found)-323(in)-323(the)-323(tragedies)-323(of)-323(Euripides.)-470(They)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-266(leavened)-266(with)-267(reflections)-266(on)-266(all)-266(possible)-266(moral)-266(and)-267(religious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(problems,)-220(and)-213(criticism)-213(of)-212(the)-213(traditional)-213(conceptions)-212(of)-213(the)-213(gods)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(plays)-404(a)-404(leading)-404(part)-404(in)-403(them.)-712(We)-404(shall,)-442(however,)-443(have)-404(some)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(difficulty)-362(in)-362(using)-361(Euripides)-362(as)-362(a)-362(source)-361(of)-362(what)-362(people)-362(really)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thought)-362(at)-362(this)-361(period,)-390(partly)-362(because)-362(he)-361(is)-362(a)-362(very)-362(pronounced)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(personality)-263(and)-264(by)-263(no)-263(means)-264(a)-263(mere)-263(mouthpiece)-264(for)-263(the)-263(ideas)-264(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-285(contemporaries)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 83.09 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(during)-285(his)-284(lifetime)-285(he)-284(was)-285(an)-285(object)-284(of)-285(the)]TJ -94 -13.55 Td[(most)-329(violent)-329(animosity)-330(owing,)-349(among)-329(other)-329(things,)-349(to)-329(his)-330(free-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thinking)-316(views)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 65.27 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(partly)-316(because)-316(he,)-333(as)-316(a)-316(dramatist,)-332(was)-316(obliged)]TJ -76.179 -13.549 Td[(to)-434(put)-434(his)-434(ideas)-434(into)-434(the)-434(mouths)-434(of)-434(his)-434(characters,)-480(so)-434(that)-434(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(many)-269(cases)-269(it)-269(is)-269(difficult)-269(to)-269(decide)-269(how)-269(much)-269(is)-269(due)-269(to)-269(dramatic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(considerations)-209(and)-209(how)-209(much)-208(to)-209(the)-209(personal)-209(opinion)-209(of)-209(the)-209(poet.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Even)-218(to)-217(this)-218(day)-217(the)-218(religious)-217(standpoint)-218(of)-217(Euripides)-218(is)-217(matter)-218(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dispute.)-328(In)-276(the)-276(most)-276(recent)-276(detailed)-276(treatment)-276(of)-276(the)-276(question)-276(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-281(characterised)-281(as)-281(an)-281(atheist,)-289(whereas)-281(others)-281(regard)-281(him)-282(merely)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-297(a)-297(dialectician)-297(who)-297(debates)-297(problems)-297(without)-297(having)-298(any)-297(real)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(standpoint)-250(of)-250(his)-250(own.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(I)-225(do)-224(not)-225(believe)-224(that)-225(Euripides)-225(personally)-224(denied)-225(the)-225(existence)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(of)-277(the)-276(gods;)-290(there)-276(is)-277(too)-276(much)-277(that)-276(tells)-277(against)-276(that)-276(theory)-1(,)-283(and,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-200(fact,)-209(nothing)-200(that)-199(tells)-200(directly)-200(in)-199(favour)-200(of)-199(it,)-210(though)-199(he)-200(did)-200(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(quite)-214(escape)-214(the)-214(charge)-214(of)-214(atheism)-214(even)-214(in)-214(his)-214(own)-214(day.)-238(To)-214(prove)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-272(correctness)-272(of)-272(this)-272(view)-272(would,)-278(however,)-555(lead)-272(too)-272(far)-272(afield)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([052])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+228 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 229 0 R
+/Resources 227 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 218 0 R
+>> endobj
+230 0 obj <<
+/D [228 0 R /XYZ 234.064 421.694 null]
+>> endobj
+231 0 obj <<
+/D [228 0 R /XYZ 293.179 66.142 null]
+>> endobj
+227 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+234 0 obj <<
+/Length 4912      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(43)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(in)-372(this)-371(connexion.)-615(On)-371(the)-372(other)-372(hand,)-401(a)-372(short)-372(characterisation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-332(Euripides's)-333(manner)-332(of)-332(reasoning)-333(about)-332(religious)-332(problems)-333(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(unavoidable)-369(as)-369(a)-369(background)-369(for)-369(the)-369(treatment)-370(of)-369(those)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 250.336 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(very)]TJ -261.245 -13.549 Td[(rare)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 16.953 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(passages)-422(where)-422(he)-422(has)-422(put)-422(actually)-422(atheistic)-422(reflections)]TJ -27.862 -13.55 Td[(into)-250(the)-250(mouths)-250(of)-250(his)-250(characters.)]TJ 11.956 -18.458 Td[(As)-441(a)-440(Greek)-441(dramatist)-440(Euripides)-441(had)-441(to)-440(derive)-441(his)-441(subjects)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(from)-351(the)-351(heroic)-351(legends,)-376(which)-351(at)-351(the)-351(sam)-1(e)-351(time)-351(were)-351(legends)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-334(the)-334(gods)-334(in)-334(so)-333(far)-334(as)-334(they)-334(were)-334(interwoven)-334(with)-334(tales)-334(of)-334(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods')-391(direct)-390(intervention)-391(in)-391(affairs.)-672(It)-391(is)-390(precisely)-391(against)-391(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(intervention)-268(that)-268(the)-268(criticism)-268(of)-268(Euripides)-268(is)-268(primarily)-268(directed.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Again)-464(and)-464(again)-464(he)-463(makes)-464(his)-464(characters)-464(protest)-464(against)-464(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(manner)-371(in)-371(which)-371(they)-371(are)-371(treated)-371(by)-371(the)-371(gods)-371(or)-371(in)-371(which)-371(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-326(generally)-327(behave.)-479(It)-327(is)-326(characteristic)-326(of)-327(Euripides)-326(that)-327(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(starting-point)-427(in)-427(this)-427(connexion)-427(is)-427(always)-427(the)-427(moral)-427(one.)-782(So)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(far)-476(he)-475(is)-476(a)-476(typical)-476(representative)-475(of)-476(that)-476(tendency)-475(which,)-533(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(earlier)-347(times,)-371(was)-347(represented)-347(by)-347(Xenophanes)-348(and)-347(a)-347(little)-347(later)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(by)-335(Pindar;)-377(in)-335(no)-335(other)-335(Greek)-335(poet)-334(has)-335(the)-335(method)-335(of)-335(using)-335(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(higher)-414(conceptions)-415(of)-414(the)-414(gods)-414(against)-415(the)-414(lower)-414(found)-415(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(complete)-368(expression)-368(than)-369(in)-368(Euripides.)-604(And)-369(in)-368(so)-368(far,)-398(too,)-398(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-473(still)-472(entirely)-473(on)-472(the)-473(ground)-472(of)-473(popular)-472(belief.)-918(But)-472(at)-473(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(same)-445(time)-445(it)-445(is)-445(characteristic)-444(of)-445(him)-445(that)-445(he)-445(is)-445(familiar)-445(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-402(highly)-402(influenced)-402(by)-403(Greek)-402(science.)-706(He)-402(knows)-402(the)-403(most)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(eminent)-239(representatives)-239(of)-239(Ionian)-239(naturalism)-239(\050with)-240(the)-239(exception)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-434(Democritus\051,)-479(and)-434(he)-434(is)-434(fond)-433(of)-434(displaying)-434(his)-434(knowledge.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Nevertheless,)-386(it)-360(cannot)-359(be)-359(said)-359(that)-359(he)-359(uses)-359(it)-359(in)-359(a)-360(contentious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(spirit)-372(against)-372(popular)-372(belief;)-433(on)-372(the)-371(contrary,)-403(he)-372(is)-372(inclined)-372(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(agreement)-482(with)-482(the)-482(old)-482(philosophers)-482(to)-482(identify)-482(the)-482(gods)-482(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-598(belief)-299(with)-300(the)-299(elements.)-397(Towards)-299(sophistic)-299(he)-299(takes)-300(a)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([053])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(similar,)-231(but)-226(less)-227(sympathetic)-226(attitude.)-242(Sophistic)-227(was)-226(not)-226(in)-227(vogue)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(till)-311(he)-310(was)-311(a)-310(man)-311(of)-311(mature)-310(age;)-341(he)-311(made)-310(acquaintance)-311(with)-311(it,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-248(he)-248(m)-1(ade)-248(use)-248(of)-248(it)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 92.914 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(there)-248(are)-248(reflections)-249(in)-248(his)-248(dramas)-248(which)]TJ -103.823 -13.549 Td[(carry)-196(distinct)-196(evidence)-197(of)-196(sophistic)-196(influence;)-214(but)-196(in)-196(his)-197(treatment)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-271(religious)-270(problems)-271(he)-271(is)-271(not)-270(a)-271(disciple)-271(of)-270(the)-271(sophists,)-276(and)-271(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-250(subject,)-250(as)-250(on)-250(others,)-250(he)-250(occasionally)-250(attacked)-250(them.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+233 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 234 0 R
+/Resources 232 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 218 0 R
+>> endobj
+235 0 obj <<
+/D [233 0 R /XYZ 83.362 147.437 null]
+>> endobj
+232 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+238 0 obj <<
+/Length 5208      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(44)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 105.499 518.175 Td[(It)-319(is)-318(against)-319(this)-319(background)-318(that)-319(we)-319(must)-318(set)-319(the)-319(reflections)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(with)-378(an)-379(atheistic)-378(tone)-378(that)-379(we)-378(find)-378(in)-379(Euripides.)-635(They)-378(are,)-411(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(already)-337(mentioned,)-359(rare;)-381(indeed,)-359(strictly)-337(speaking)-337(there)-337(is)-338(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(one)-269(case)-268(in)-269(which)-268(a)-269(character)-269(openly)-268(denies)-269(the)-268(existence)-269(of)-269(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(gods.)-295(The)-264(passage)-265(is)-265(a)-265(fragment)-265(of)-265(the)-265(drama)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 201.734 0 Td[(Bellerophon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 53.935 0 Td[(;)-272(it)-265(is,)]TJ -255.669 -13.549 Td[(despite)-260(its)-260(isolation,)-263(so)-260(typical)-260(of)-261(the)-260(manner)-260(of)-260(Euripides)-260(that)-261(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(deserves)-250(to)-250(be)-250(quoted)-250(in)-250(full.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 11.956 -15.186 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(And)-210(then)-209(to)-210(say)-210(that)-210(there)-209(are)-210(gods)-210(in)-210(the)-209(heavens!)-237(Nay,)-218(there)]TJ -16.799 -13.549 Td[(are)-331(none)-330(there;)-371(if)-331(you)-330(are)-331(not)-331(foolish)-330(enough)-331(to)-330(be)-331(seduced)-331(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-320(old)-319(talk.)-459(Think)-319(for)-320(yourselves)-319(about)-320(the)-320(matter,)-336(and)-320(do)-320(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-353(influenced)-353(by)-353(my)-353(words.)-559(I)-353(contend)-353(that)-353(the)-353(tyrants)-353(kill)-353(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(people)-377(wholesale,)-408(take)-377(their)-377(money)-377(and)-376(destroy)-377(cities)-377(in)-377(spite)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-412(their)-413(oaths;)-493(and)-412(although)-413(they)-412(do)-412(all)-413(this)-412(they)-412(are)-413(happier)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(than)-268(people)-269(who,)-273(in)-268(peace)-268(and)-269(quietness,)-273(lead)-268(god-fearing)-269(lives.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(And)-295(I)-295(know)-294(small)-295(states)-295(which)-295(honour)-294(the)-295(gods,)-306(but)-295(must)-295(obey)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(greater)-313(states,)-328(which)-312(are)-313(less)-312(pious,)-328(because)-313(their)-312(spearmen)-313(are)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(fewer)-313(in)-313(number.)-438(And)-313(I)-312(believe)-313(that)-313(you,)-328(if)-313(a)-313(slothful)-313(man)-313(just)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(prayed)-266(to)-267(the)-266(gods)-266(and)-267(did)-266(not)-266(earn)-267(his)-266(bread)-266(by)-267(the)-266(work)-266(of)-267(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(hands)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.451 0 Td[(\024\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.369 0 Td[(Here)-332(the)-331(sense)-332(is)-331(interrupted;)-745(but)-331(there)-332(remains)-331(one)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -117.575 0 Td[([054])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(more)-235(line:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 47.021 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(That)-235(which)-235(builds)-235(the)-234(castle)-235(of)-235(the)-235(gods)-235(is)-235(in)-234(part)-235(the)]TJ -51.865 -13.549 Td[(unfortunate)-250(happenings)-250(...)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 113.618 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.571 0 Td[(The)-250(continuation)-250(is)-250(missing.)]TJ -109.234 -15.186 Td[(The)-333(argumentation)-333(here)-332(is)-333(characteristic)-333(of)-332(Eur)-1(ipides.)-498(From)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(the)-285(injustice)-285(of)-284(life)-285(he)-285(infers)-284(the)-285(non-existence)-285(of)-285(the)-284(gods.)-355(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conclusion)-247(evidently)-247(only)-248(holds)-247(good)-247(on)-247(the)-247(assumption)-247(that)-248(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(gods)-308(must)-308(be)-308(just;)-337(and)-308(this)-308(is)-308(precisely)-308(one)-308(of)-308(the)-309(postulates)-308(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-325(belief.)-476(The)-326(reasoning)-325(is)-325(not)-326(sophistic;)-363(on)-325(the)-326(contrary,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-534(their)-533(attacks)-534(the)-533(sophists)-534(took)-533(up)-534(a)-533(position)-534(outside)-534(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(foundation)-331(of)-330(popular)-331(belief)-331(and)-330(attac)-1(ked)-330(the)-331(foundation)-331(itself.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(This)-277(reasoning,)-284(on)-277(the)-277(other)-277(hand,)-284(is)-277(closely)-277(allied)-277(to)-277(the)-278(earlier)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(religious)-216(thinking)-216(of)-216(the)-217(Greeks;)-227(it)-216(only)-216(proceeds)-216(further)-216(than)-217(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(latter,)-250(where)-250(it)-250(results)-250(in)-250(rank)-250(denial.)]TJ 11.955 -15.185 Td[(The)-249(drama)-250(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 61.47 0 Td[(Bellerophon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 56.653 0 Td[(is)-249(lost,)-250(and)-249(reconstruction)-249(is)-249(out)-250(of)]TJ -130.078 -13.55 Td[(the)-165(question;)-193(if)-165(only)-165(for)-165(that)-164(reason)-165(it)-165(is)-165(unwarrantable)-165(to)-165(draw)-165(any)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conclusions)-240(from)-240(the)-240(detached)-240(fragment)-240(as)-240(to)-240(the)-241(poet's)-240(personal)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+237 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 238 0 R
+/Resources 236 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 218 0 R
+>> endobj
+239 0 obj <<
+/D [237 0 R /XYZ 273.224 272.653 null]
+>> endobj
+236 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+242 0 obj <<
+/Length 5376      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(45)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(attitude)-400(towards)-399(the)-400(existence)-400(of)-399(the)-400(gods.)-699(But,)-437(nevertheless,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-415(fragment)-415(is)-414(of)-415(interest)-415(in)-415(this)-415(connexion.)-744(It)-415(would)-415(never)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-340(occurred)-339(to)-340(Sophocles)-340(or)-339(Aeschylus)-340(to)-340(put)-339(such)-340(a)-340(speech)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-272(the)-272(mouth)-272(of)-272(one)-271(of)-272(his)-272(characters.)-316(When)-272(Euripides)-272(does)-272(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(it)-364(is)-363(a)-364(proof)-364(that)-363(the)-364(question)-364(of)-363(the)-364(existence)-364(of)-363(the)-364(gods)-364(has)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(begun)-270(to)-270(present)-270(itself)-269(to)-270(the)-270(popular)-270(consciousness)-270(at)-270(this)-270(time.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Viewed)-415(in)-414(this)-415(light)-414(other)-415(statements)-414(of)-415(his)-414(which)-415(are)-414(not)-415(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(themselves)-274(atheistic)-273(become)-274(significant.)-321(When)-273(it)-274(is)-274(said:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 252.205 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(If)-274(the)]TJ -257.049 -13.549 Td[(gods)-315(act)-315(in)-314(a)-315(shameful)-315(way,)-331(they)-315(are)-314(not)-315(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 205.287 0 Td[(\035\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.752 0 Td[(that)-315(indeed)-315(is)]TJ -221.039 -13.55 Td[(not)-318(atheism)-317(in)-318(our)-318(sense,)-334(but)-318(it)-317(is)-318(very)-318(near)-317(to)-318(it.)-453(Interesting)-318(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(also)-310(the)-311(introduction)-620(to)-310(the)-311(drama)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 157.011 0 Td[(Melanippe)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.658 0 Td[(:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 7.074 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Zeus,)-325(whoever)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 75.437 0 Td[([055])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(Zeus)-328(may)-328(be;)-368(for)-328(of)-328(that)-328(I)-329(only)-328(know)-328(what)-328(is)-328(told.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 226.759 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.424 0 Td[(Aeschylus)]TJ -235.183 -13.549 Td[(begins)-410(a)-409(strophe)-410(in)-409(one)-410(of)-409(his)-410(most)-409(famous)-410(choral)-409(odes)-410(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(almost)-350(the)-350(same)-349(words:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 110.891 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Zeus,)-375(whoe'er)-350(he)-349(be;)-400(for)-350(if)-350(he)-349(desire)]TJ -115.735 -13.55 Td[(so)-278(to)-277(be)-278(called,)-284(I)-278(will)-277(address)-278(him)-278(by)-277(this)-278(name.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 210.945 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.871 0 Td[(In)-278(him)-277(it)-278(is)-277(an)]TJ -218.816 -13.549 Td[(expression)-322(of)-321(genuine)-321(antique)-322(piety,)-339(which)-322(excludes)-321(all)-322(human)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(impertinence)-456(towards)-457(the)-456(gods)-456(to)-456(such)-457(a)-456(degree)-456(that)-456(it)-457(even)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(forgoes)-362(knowing)-362(their)-361(real)-362(names.)-585(In)-362(Euripides)-362(the)-362(same)-362(idea)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(becomes)-296(an)-297(expression)-296(of)-296(doubt;)-320(but)-296(in)-296(this)-297(case)-296(also)-296(the)-297(doubt)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-250(raised)-250(on)-250(the)-250(foundation)-250(of)-250(popular)-250(belief.)]TJ 11.956 -18.458 Td[(It)-246(is)-246(not)-247(surprising)-246(that)-246(so)-247(prominent)-246(and)-246(sustained)-246(a)-247(criticism)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(of)-201(popular)-200(belief)-201(as)-200(that)-201(of)-201(Euripides,)-210(produced,)-211(moreover,)-210(on)-201(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(stage,)-199(called)-185(forth)-186(a)-186(reaction)-186(from)-185(th)-1(e)-185(defenders)-186(of)-186(the)-186(established)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(faith,)-246(and)-246(that)-246(charges)-245(of)-246(impiety)-245(were)-246(not)-245(wanting.)-249(It)-245(is)-246(more)-246(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-316(wondered)-315(at)-316(that)-316(these)-315(charges)-316(on)-315(the)-316(whole)-316(are)-315(so)-316(few)-316(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(slight,)-230(and)-225(that)-224(Euripides)-225(did)-225(not)-225(become)-224(th)-1(e)-224(object)-225(of)-225(any)-225(actual)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(prosecution.)-648(We)-383(know)-382(of)-383(a)-382(private)-383(trial)-383(in)-382(which)-383(the)-383(accuser)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(incidentally)-362(charged)-361(Euripides)-362(with)-362(impiety)-362(on)-361(the)-362(strength)-362(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-309(quotation)-310(from)-309(one)-309(of)-310(his)-309(tragedies,)-324(Euripides's)-309(answer)-310(being)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-319(protest)-320(against)-319(dragging)-320(his)-319(poetry)-319(into)-320(the)-319(affair;)-354(the)-320(verdict)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-297(that)-298(belonged)-297(to)-298(another)-297(court.)-392(Aristophanes,)-310(who)-297(is)-298(always)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(severe)-477(on)-476(Euripides,)-533(has)-477(only)-476(one)-477(passage)-476(directly)-477(charging)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(him)-372(with)-372(being)-372(a)-373(propagator)-372(of)-372(atheism;)-433(but)-372(the)-372(accusation)-373(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(hardly)-282(meant)-282(to)-282(be)-282(taken)-282(seriously.)-346(In)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 170.385 0 Td[(The)-282(Frogs)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 45.501 0 Td[(,)-290(where)-282(he)-282(had)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+241 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 242 0 R
+/Resources 240 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 244 0 R
+>> endobj
+243 0 obj <<
+/D [241 0 R /XYZ 141.164 382.683 null]
+>> endobj
+240 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+247 0 obj <<
+/Length 5231      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(46)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(every)-353(opportunity)-352(of)-353(emphasising)-353(this)-352(view,)-379(there)-352(is)-353(hardly)-353(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(indication)-248(of)-248(it.)-249(In)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 81.432 0 Td[(The)-248(Clouds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 49.983 0 Td[(,)-248(where)-248(the)-248(main)-248(attack)-247(is)-248(directed)]TJ -131.415 -13.549 Td[(against)-345(modern)-345(free-thought,)-738(Euripides,)-369(to)-345(be)-345(sure,)-369(is)-346(sneered)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([056])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(at)-340(as)-339(being)-339(the)-340(fashionable)-339(poet)-340(of)-339(the)-340(corrupted)-339(youth,)-362(but)-340(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-280(not)-281(drawn)-280(into)-280(the)-281(charge)-280(of)-280(impiety.)-342(Even)-280(when)-280(Plato)-281(wrote)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 15.872 0 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.781 0 Td[(,)-297(Euripides)-288(was)-288(generally)-288(considered)-288(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 181.633 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(wisest)-288(of)]TJ -241.13 -13.549 Td[(all)-265(tragedians.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 61.359 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.729 0 Td[(This)-265(would)-264(have)-265(been)-264(impossible)-265(if)-264(he)-265(had)-264(been)]TJ -69.088 -13.549 Td[(considered)-364(an)-364(atheist.)-592(In)-364(spite)-363(of)-364(all,)-393(the)-364(general)-364(feeling)-364(must)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(undoubtedly)-313(have)-313(been)-313(that)-313(Euripides)-313(ultimately)-313(took)-313(his)-313(stand)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(on)-433(the)-434(ground)-433(of)-433(popular)-434(belief.)-799(It)-434(was)-433(a)-433(similar)-434(instinctive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(judgment)-355(in)-355(regard)-354(to)-355(religion)-355(which)-355(prevented)-355(antiquity)-355(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(placing)-292(Xenophanes)-292(amongst)-293(the)-292(atheists.)-376(Later)-292(times)-292(no)-293(doubt)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(judged)-265(differently;)-273(the)-265(quotation)-266(from)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 169.076 0 Td[(Melanippe)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 49.551 0 Td[(is)-265(in)-265(fact)-266(cited)]TJ -218.627 -13.549 Td[(as)-250(a)-250(proof)-250(that)-250(Euripides)-250(was)-250(an)-250(atheist)-250(in)-250(his)-250(heart)-250(of)-250(hearts.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-162(Aristophanes)-163(we)-162(meet)-163(with)-162(the)-163(first)-162(observations)-163(concerning)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(the)-501(change)-500(in)-501(the)-500(religious)-501(conditions)-500(of)-501(Athens)-500(during)-501(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Peloponnesian)-257(War.)-271(In)-257(one)-258(of)-257(his)-257(plays,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 177.354 0 Td[(The)-257(Clouds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 50.084 0 Td[(,)-259(he)-257(actually)]TJ -227.438 -13.549 Td[(set)-309(himself)-309(the)-309(task)-308(of)-309(taking)-309(up)-309(arms)-309(against)-309(modern)-309(unbelief,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-240(he)-240(characterises)-240(it)-240(directly)-240(as)-241(atheism.)-246(If)-240(only)-240(for)-240(that)-241(reason)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(play)-250(deserves)-250(somewhat)-250(fuller)-250(consideration.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(It)-576(is)-577(well)-576(known)-577(that)-576(Aristophanes)-576(chose)-577(Socrates)-576(as)-577(a)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(representative)-261(of)-260(the)-261(modern)-261(movement.)-282(In)-261(him)-260(he)-261(embodies)-261(all)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-158(faults)-158(with)-158(which)-158(he)-158(wished)-158(to)-158(pick)-158(a)-158(quarrel)-158(in)-158(the)-158(fashionable)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophy)-221(of)-220(the)-221(day.)-240(On)-220(the)-221(other)-220(h)-1(and,)-226(the)-220(essence)-221(of)-221(Socratic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(teaching)-388(is)-388(entirely)-387(absent)-388(from)-388(Aristophanes's)-388(representation;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-316(that)-317(he)-316(had)-317(hardly)-316(any)-316(u)-1(nderstanding,)-333(and)-316(even)-316(if)-317(he)-316(had)-317(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(would)-374(at)-373(any)-373(rate)-374(not)-373(have)-374(been)-373(able)-374(to)-373(make)-374(use)-373(of)-374(it)-373(in)-374(his)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(drama.)-509(We)-336(need)-336(not)-336(then)-337(in)-336(this)-672(connexion)-336(consider)-337(Socrates)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([057])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(himself)-323(at)-323(all;)-360(on)-323(the)-323(other)-323(hand,)-342(the)-323(play)-323(gives)-323(a)-323(good)-323(idea)-324(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-362(popular)-362(idea)-361(of)-362(sophistic.)-585(Here)-362(we)-362(find)-361(all)-362(the)-362(features)-362(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-258(school,)-259(grotesquely)-258(mixed)-258(up)-257(and)-258(distorted)-258(by)-258(the)-257(farce,)-260(it)-258(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(true,)-332(but)-316(nevertheless)-316(easily)-316(recognisable:)-381(rhetoric)-316(as)-316(an)-316(end)-316(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(itself,)-226(of)-221(course,)-226(with)-221(emphasis)-220(on)-221(its)-220(immoral)-221(aspect;)-230(empty)-221(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(hair-splitting)-339(dialectics;)-383(linguistic)-339(researches;)-383(Ionic)-339(naturalism;)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+246 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 247 0 R
+/Resources 245 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 244 0 R
+>> endobj
+248 0 obj <<
+/D [246 0 R /XYZ 225.982 491.077 null]
+>> endobj
+249 0 obj <<
+/D [246 0 R /XYZ 243.803 147.437 null]
+>> endobj
+245 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+252 0 obj <<
+/Length 5218      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(47)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(and)-351(first)-351(and)-350(last,)-376(as)-351(the)-351(focus)-350(of)-351(all,)-376(denial)-351(of)-351(the)-350(gods.)-553(That)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Aristophanes)-251(was)-250(well)-251(informed)-251(on)-250(certain)-251(points,)-251(at)-250(any)-251(rate,)-251(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(clear)-223(from)-223(the)-223(fact)-223(that)-223(the)-223(majority)-223(of)-223(the)-223(scientific)-223(explanations)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-306(he)-306(puts)-307(into)-306(the)-306(mouth)-306(of)-306(Socrates)-306(actually)-306(represent)-307(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(latest)-234(results)-234(of)-233(science)-234(at)-234(that)-234(time)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 151.642 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(which)-234(in)-233(all)-234(probability)-234(did)]TJ -162.551 -13.549 Td[(not)-244(prevent)-244(his)-243(Athenia)-1(ns)-243(from)-244(considering)-244(them)-244(as)-244(exceedingly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(absurd)-250(and)-250(ridiculous.)]TJ 11.956 -14.777 Td[(What)-224(matters)-223(here,)-229(however,)-229(is)-223(only)-224(the)-223(accus)-1(ation)-223(of)-224(atheism)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(which)-287(he)-287(made)-286(against)-287(Socrates.)-360(It)-287(is)-287(a)-286(little)-287(difficult)-287(to)-287(handle,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-400(so)-400(far)-400(as)-400(Aristophanes,)-437(for)-400(dramatic)-400(reasons,)-438(has)-400(equipped)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Socrates)-498(with)-499(a)-498(whole)-498(set)-499(of)-498(deities.)-995(There)-498(are)-498(the)-499(clouds)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(themselves,)-437(which)-400(are)-399(of)-400(Aristophanes's)-400(own)-399(invention;)-475(there)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-372(also)-371(the)-371(air,)-402(which)-372(he)-371(has)-372(got)-371(from)-372(Diogenes)-371(of)-372(Apollonia,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-278(finally)-279(a)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 58.192 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(vortex)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 27.873 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.881 0 Td[(which)-278(is)-279(supposed)-278(to)-279(be)-278(derived)-278(from)-279(the)]TJ -98.789 -13.549 Td[(same)-384(source,)-418(and)-384(which)-384(at)-384(any)-384(rate)-384(has)-384(cast)-384(Zeus)-384(d)-1(own)-384(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-386(throne.)-660(All)-386(this)-387(we)-386(must)-386(ignore,)-421(as)-386(it)-387(is)-386(only)-387(conditioned)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(partly)-286(by)-285(technical)-286(reasons)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 117.808 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Aristophanes)-286(had)-285(to)-286(have)-286(a)-285(chorus)]TJ -128.717 -13.55 Td[(and)-223(chose)-223(the)-223(clouds)-223(for)-223(the)-223(purpose)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 157.589 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)-223(partially)-223(by)-223(the)-223(desire)]TJ -168.498 -13.549 Td[(to)-421(ridicule)-421(Ionic)-421(naturalism.)-763(But)-421(enough)-421(is)-421(left)-421(over.)-763(In)-421(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(beginning)-312(of)-312(the)-311(play)-312(Socrates)-624(expressly)-311(declares)-312(that)-312(no)-312(gods)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([058])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(exist.)-627(Similar)-376(statements)-375(are)-376(repeated)-375(in)-376(several)-376(places.)-627(Zeus)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-314(sometimes)-315(substituted)-314(for)-315(the)-314(gods,)-331(but)-314(it)-314(comes)-315(to)-314(the)-315(same)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(thing.)-553(And)-351(at)-352(the)-351(end)-351(of)-351(the)-351(play,)-376(where)-351(the)-351(honest)-352(Athenian,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(who)-269(has)-270(ventured)-269(on)-269(the)-269(ticklish)-270(ground)-269(of)-269(sophistic,)-274(admits)-270(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(delusion,)-250(it)-250(is)-250(expressly)-250(said:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 11.956 -14.777 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Oh,)-377(what)-351(a)-351(fool)-351(I)-351(am!)-554(Nay,)-377(I)-351(must)-351(have)-351(been)-351(mad)-352(indeed)]TJ -16.799 -13.549 Td[(when)-250(I)-250(thought)-250(of)-250(throwing)-250(the)-250(gods)-250(away)-250(for)-250(Socrates's)-250(sake!)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 272.214 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -260.258 -14.776 Td[(Even)-259(in)-260(the)-259(ver)-1(ses)-259(with)-260(which)-259(the)-260(chorus)-259(conclude)-260(the)-259(play)-260(it)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(is)-333(insiste)-1(d)-333(that)-333(the)-334(worst)-333(crime)-334(of)-333(the)-334(sophists)-333(is)-334(their)-333(insult)-334(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -14.776 Td[(The)-421(inference)-421(to)-421(be)-421(drawn)-421(from)-421(all)-421(this)-421(is)-421(simply)-422(that)-421(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(popular)-229(Athenian)-229(opinion)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 111.656 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(for)-229(we)-229(may)-229(rest)-229(assured)-229(that)-229(this)-229(and)]TJ -122.565 -13.55 Td[(the)-410(view)-411(of)-410(Aristophanes)-411(are)-410(identical)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 174.471 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(was)-410(that)-411(the)-410(sophists)]TJ -185.38 -13.549 Td[(were)-334(atheists.)-501(That)-333(says)-334(but)-334(little.)-501(For)-333(popular)-334(opinion)-334(always)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+251 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 252 0 R
+/Resources 250 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 244 0 R
+>> endobj
+253 0 obj <<
+/D [251 0 R /XYZ 185.575 259.513 null]
+>> endobj
+250 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+256 0 obj <<
+/Length 5224      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(48)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(works)-345(with)-346(broad)-345(categories,)-369(and)-345(the)-346(probability)-345(is)-345(that)-345(in)-346(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(case,)-296(as)-287(demonstrated)-287(above,)-296(it)-287(was)-287(in)-287(the)-287(wrong,)-296(for,)-297(as)-287(a)-287(rule,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-318(sophists)-319(were)-318(hardly)-319(conscious)-318(deniers)-319(of)-318(the)-319(gods.)-455(But,)-336(at)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-230(same)-230(time,)-234(at)-230(the)-230(back)-230(of)-230(the)-230(onslaught)-230(of)-231(Aristophanes)-230(there)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(lies)-399(the)-398(idea)-399(that)-398(the)-399(teaching)-398(of)-399(the)-398(sophists)-399(led)-399(to)-398(denial)-399(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-277(gods;)-291(that)-277(atheism)-277(was)-277(the)-277(natural)-277(outcome)-277(of)-277(their)-277(doctrine)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-302(way)-302(of)-301(reasoning.)-406(And)-302(that)-302(there)-301(was)-302(some)-302(truth)-302(therein)-302(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(proved)-250(by)-250(other)-250(evidence)-250(which)-250(can)-250(hardly)-250(be)-250(rejected.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(In)-345(the)-346(indictment)-345(of)-345(Socrates)-346(it)-345(is)-345(said)-346(that)-345(he)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 210.383 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(offended)-345(by)]TJ -227.183 -13.549 Td[(not)-387(believing)-387(in)-386(the)-387(gods)-387(in)-387(which)-386(the)-387(State)-387(believed.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 244.93 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.063 0 Td[(In)-387(the)]TJ -253.993 -13.549 Td[(two)-317(apologies)-318(for)-317(Socrates)-317(which)-318(have)-317(come)-318(down)-317(to)-317(us)-318(under)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Xenophon's)-360(name,)-194(the)-179(author)-180(treats)-180(this)-180(accusation)-180(entirely)-180(under)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([059])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(the)-384(aspect)-384(of)-384(atheism,)-417(and)-384(tries)-383(to)-384(refute)-384(it)-384(by)-384(positive)-384(proofs)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-356(the)-355(piety)-356(of)-355(Socrates.)-567(But)-355(not)-356(one)-355(word)-356(is)-356(said)-355(about)-356(there)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(being,)-227(in)-222(and)-222(for)-222(itself,)-227(anything)-222(remarkable)-221(or)-222(improbable)-222(in)-222(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(charge.)-249(In)-246(Plato's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 77.601 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(,)-247(Plato)-246(makes)-245(Socrates)-246(ask)-246(the)-246(accuser)]TJ -113.961 -13.55 Td[(point-blank)-298(whether)-298(he)-298(is)-299(of)-298(the)-298(opinion)-298(that)-298(he,)-310(Socrates,)-311(does)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-415(believe)-414(in)-415(the)-414(gods)-415(at)-415(all)-414(and)-415(accordingly)-414(is)-415(a)-415(downright)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(denier)-458(of)-458(the)-458(gods,)-510(or)-458(whether)-458(he)-458(merely)-458(means)-458(to)-459(say)-458(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-417(believes)-417(in)-417(other)-418(gods)-417(than)-417(those)-417(of)-417(the)-417(State.)-751(He)-418(makes)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-373(accuser)-373(answer)-373(that)-373(the)-373(assertion)-373(is)-373(that)-373(Socrates)-373(does)-373(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(believe)-208(in)-207(any)-208(gods)-208(at)-207(all.)-236(In)-208(Plato)-208(Socrates)-207(refutes)-208(the)-208(accusation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(indirectly,)-341(using)-323(a)-322(line)-323(of)-323(argument)-322(entirely)-323(differing)-323(from)-323(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-228(Xenophon.)-243(But)-228(in)-228(Plato,)-233(too,)-232(the)-228(accusation)-228(is)-228(treated)-228(as)-229(being)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-281(no)-282(way)-281(extraordinary.)-344(In)-281(my)-282(opinion,)-289(Plato's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 212.118 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 39.429 0 Td[(cannot)]TJ -251.547 -13.549 Td[(be)-310(used)-309(as)-310(historical)-309(evidence)-310(for)-309(details)-310(unless)-309(special)-310(reasons)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(can)-317(be)-318(given)-317(proving)-317(their)-318(historical)-317(value)-318(beyond)-317(the)-317(fact)-318(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(they)-354(o)-1(ccur)-354(in)-354(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 80.3 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(.)-563(But)-355(in)-354(this)-355(connexion)-354(the)-355(question)]TJ -116.66 -13.549 Td[(is)-291(not)-291(what)-291(was)-291(said)-292(or)-291(not)-291(said)-291(at)-291(Socrates's)-291(trial.)-373(The)-292(decisive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(point)-235(is)-235(that)-235(we)-235(possess)-235(two)-235(quite)-235(independent)-235(and)-235(unambiguous)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(depositions)-341(by)-340(two)-341(fully)-341(competent)-341(witnesses)-340(of)-341(the)-341(beginning)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-228(the)-227(fourth)-228(century)-227(which)-228(both)-227(treat)-228(of)-227(the)-228(charge)-228(of)-227(atheism)-228(as)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(something)-318(which)-319(is)-318(neither)-319(strange)-318(nor)-318(surprising)-319(at)-318(their)-319(time.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(It)-253(is)-253(therefore)-253(permissible)-253(to)-253(conclude)-253(that)-253(in)-253(Athens)-253(at)-253(this)-253(time)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+255 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 256 0 R
+/Resources 254 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 244 0 R
+>> endobj
+257 0 obj <<
+/D [255 0 R /XYZ 147.16 364.224 null]
+>> endobj
+254 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+260 0 obj <<
+/Length 5150      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(49)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(there)-349(really)-350(existed)-349(circles)-349(or)-349(at)-349(any)-350(rate)-349(not)-349(a)-349(few)-350(individuals)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(who)-250(had)-250(given)-250(up)-250(the)-250(belief)-250(in)-250(the)-250(popular)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(A)-446(dialogue)-447(between)-447(Socrates)-447(and)-446(a)-447(young)-447(man)-893(by)-447(name)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 279.068 0 Td[([060])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(Aristodemus,)-612(given)-539(in)-539(Xenophon's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 167.181 0 Td[(Memorabilia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 56.967 0 Td[(,)-611(makes)-540(the)]TJ -224.148 -13.549 Td[(same)-415(impression.)-744(Of)-414(Aristodemus)-415(it)-414(is)-415(said)-415(that)-414(he)-415(does)-415(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sacrifice)-340(to)-340(the)-340(gods,)-363(does)-340(not)-340(consult)-340(the)-340(Oracle)-340(and)-341(ridicules)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(those)-238(who)-239(do)-238(so.)-246(When)-238(he)-239(is)-238(called)-238(to)-239(account)-238(for)-238(this)-239(behaviour)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-294(maintains)-295(that)-294(he)-295(does)-294(not)-294(despise)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 167.919 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(the)-294(divine,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 46.542 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.055 0 Td[(but)-294(is)-295(of)-294(the)]TJ -227.36 -13.549 Td[(opinion)-294(that)-295(it)-294(is)-294(too)-295(exalted)-294(to)-294(need)-295(his)-294(worship.)-383(Moreover,)-306(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(contends)-226(that)-225(th)-1(e)-225(gods)-226(do)-226(not)-225(trouble)-226(themselves)-226(about)-226(mankind.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(This)-335(is,)-356(of)-335(course,)-356(not)-335(atheism)-335(in)-335(our)-335(sense;)-378(but)-335(Aristodemus's)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(attitude)-214(is,)-222(nevertheless,)-221(extremely)-214(eccentric)-215(in)-214(a)-214(community)-215(like)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-237(of)-237(Athens)-237(in)-236(the)-237(fifth)-237(century.)-246(And)-236(yet)-237(it)-237(is)-237(not)-237(mentioned)-237(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(anything)-293(isolated)-292(and)-293(extraordinary,)-303(but)-293(as)-293(if)-292(it)-293(were)-293(something)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which,)-250(to)-250(be)-250(sure,)-250(was)-250(out)-250(of)-250(the)-250(common,)-250(but)-250(not)-250(unheard)-250(of.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(It)-279(is)-280(further)-279(to)-280(be)-280(observed)-279(that)-280(at)-279(the)-280(end)-279(of)-280(the)-279(fifth)-280(century)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(we)-262(often)-263(hear)-262(of)-262(active)-263(sacrilegious)-262(outrages.)-287(An)-262(example)-262(is)-263(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(historic)-276(trial)-276(of)-275(Alcibiades)-276(for)-276(profanation)-276(of)-275(the)-276(Mysteries.)-328(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-238(was)-238(not)-238(an)-237(isolated)-238(occurrence;)-242(there)-238(were)-238(more)-238(of)-238(the)-238(same)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(kind)-280(at)-280(the)-280(time.)-340(Of)-280(the)-280(dithyrambic)-280(poet)-280(Cinesias)-280(it)-280(is)-280(said)-280(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-295(profaned)-294(holy)-295(things)-294(in)-295(an)-294(obscene)-295(manner.)-384(But)-294(the)-295(greatest)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(stress)-374(of)-374(all)-374(must)-374(be)-374(laid)-374(on)-374(the)-374(well-known)-374(mutilatio)-1(n)-374(of)-374(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Hermae)-364(at)-365(Athens)-364(in)-364(415,)-393(just)-364(before)-365(the)-364(expedition)-364(to)-365(Sicily.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(All)-284(the)-283(tales)-284(about)-283(the)-284(outrages)-283(of)-284(the)-283(Mysteries)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 215.078 0 Td[(may)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 21.267 0 Td[(have)-283(bee)-1(n)]TJ -236.345 -13.55 Td[(fictitious,)-374(but)-349(it)-349(is)-349(a)-349(fact)-349(that)-349(the)-349(Hermae)-349(were)-349(mutilated.)-547(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(motive)-320(was)-320(probably)-320(political:)-390(the)-320(members)-320(of)-320(a)-321(secret)-320(society)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(intended)-346(to)-346(pledge)-347(themselves)-346(to)-346(each)-346(other)-346(by)-346(all)-347(committing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-438(capital)-439(crime.)-815(But)-439(that)-438(they)-438(chose)-439(just)-438(this)-439(form)-438(of)-439(crime)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(shows)-223(quite)-223(clearly)-446(that)-222(respect)-223(for)-223(the)-223(State)-223(religion)-223(had)-223(greatly)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([061])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(declined)-250(in)-250(these)-250(circles.)]TJ 11.956 -15.185 Td[(What)-326(has)-326(so)-326(far)-326(been)-326(adduced)-326(as)-326(proof)-326(that)-326(the)-327(belief)-326(in)-326(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(gods)-227(had)-227(begun)-227(to)-227(waver)-227(in)-227(Athens)-227(at)-227(the)-227(end)-227(of)-228(the)-227(fifth)-227(century)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is,)-240(in)-237(my)-237(opinion,)-240(conclusive)-237(in)-237(itself)-237(to)-237(anybody)-237(who)-237(is)-238(familiar)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-212(the)-212(more)-211(ancient)-212(Greek)-212(modes)-212(of)-211(thought)-212(and)-212(expression)-212(on)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+259 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 260 0 R
+/Resources 258 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 244 0 R
+>> endobj
+261 0 obj <<
+/D [259 0 R /XYZ 283.117 489.44 null]
+>> endobj
+262 0 obj <<
+/D [259 0 R /XYZ 132.839 135.525 null]
+>> endobj
+258 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+265 0 obj <<
+/Length 5059      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(50)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(this)-217(point,)-223(and)-217(can)-217(not)-217(only)-217(hear)-217(what)-217(is)-216(said,)-224(but)-217(also)-217(understand)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(how)-232(it)-232(is)-231(said)-232(and)-232(what)-231(is)-232(passed)-232(over)-232(in)-231(silence.)-244(Of)-232(course)-232(it)-232(can)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(always)-304(be)-304(objected)-303(that)-304(the)-304(proofs)-304(are)-303(partly)-304(the)-304(assertions)-304(of)-304(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(comic)-223(poet)-223(who)-223(certainly)-223(was)-223(not)-223(particular)-223(about)-224(accusations)-223(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(impiety,)-267(partly)-263(deductions)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 117.445 0 Td[(ex)-263(silentio)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 44.688 0 Td[(,)-267(partly)-263(actions)-264(the)-263(motives)]TJ -162.133 -13.549 Td[(for)-315(which)-316(are)-315(uncertain.)-446(Fortunately,)-332(however,)-331(we)-316(have)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 248.514 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(from)]TJ -259.423 -13.549 Td[(a)-461(slightly)-461(later)-460(period,)-514(it)-461(is)-460(true)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 148.606 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)-461(positive)-461(utterance)-460(which)]TJ -159.515 -13.549 Td[(confirms)-267(our)-268(conclusion)-267(and)-267(which)-268(comes)-267(from)-268(a)-267(man)-267(who)-268(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-213(in)-213(the)-214(habit)-213(of)-213(talking)-213(idly)-214(and)-213(who)-213(had)-213(the)-213(best)-214(opportunities)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-250(knowing)-250(the)-250(circumstances.)]TJ 11.956 -18.458 Td[(In)-482(the)-482(tenth)-482(book)-483(of)-482(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 119.431 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-540(written)-482(shortly)-483(before)-482(his)]TJ -154.427 -13.55 Td[(death,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 30.665 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.853 0 Td[(about)-366(the)-366(middle)-366(of)-366(the)-366(fourth)-366(century,)-395(Plato)-366(gives)]TJ -50.518 -13.549 Td[(a)-406(detailed)-407(account)-406(of)-406(the)-406(question)-407(of)-406(irreligion)-406(seen)-406(from)-407(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(point)-224(of)-224(view)-224(of)-224(penal)-224(legislation.)-241(He)-225(distinguishes)-224(here)-224(between)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(three)-305(forms,)-319(namely,)-318(denial)-305(of)-305(the)-305(existence)-305(of)-305(the)-305(gods,)-319(denial)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-470(the)-470(divine)-470(providence)-470(\050whereas)-470(the)-470(existence)-470(of)-471(the)-470(gods)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-509(admitted\051,)-573(and)-508(finally)-509(the)-508(assumption)-509(that)-509(the)-508(gods)-509(exist)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-377(exercise)-377(providence,)-408(but)-377(that)-377(they)-377(allow)-377(themselves)-377(to)-377(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(influenced)-343(by)-343(sacrifices)-342(and)-343(prayers.)-528(Of)-343(these)-343(three)-343(categories)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-241(last)-242(is)-241(evidently)-242(directed)-241(against)-241(ancient)-242(popular)-241(belief)-242(itself;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-319(does)-319(not)-318(therefore)-638(interest)-319(us)-319(in)-319(this)-318(connexion.)-457(The)-319(second)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([062])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.55 Td[(view,)-369(the)-345(denial)-345(of)-344(a)-345(providence,)-369(we)-345(have)-345(already)-345(met)-345(with)-345(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Xenophon)-377(in)-377(the)-376(character)-377(of)-377(Aristodemus,)-408(and)-377(in)-377(the)-377(sophist)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Thrasymachus;)-392(Euripides,)-368(too,)-368(some)-1(times)-344(alludes)-345(to)-344(it,)-369(though)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-392(was)-391(far)-392(from)-392(being)-391(his)-392(own)-391(opinion.)-675(Whether)-392(it)-392(amounted)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-327(denial)-326(of)-327(the)-326(gods)-327(or)-326(not)-327(was,)-346(in)-326(ancient)-327(times,)-345(the)-327(cause)-327(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(much)-357(dispute;)-411(it)-357(is,)-384(of)-357(course,)-384(not)-357(atheism)-357(in)-357(our)-358(sense,)-383(but)-358(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-306(certainly)-306(evidence)-306(that)-306(belief)-306(in)-306(the)-306(gods)-306(is)-306(shaken.)-419(The)-306(first)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(view,)-396(on)-366(the)-366(other)-367(hand,)-395(is)-367(sheer)-366(atheism.)-599(Plato)-367(consequently)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reckons)-467(with)-468(this)-467(as)-468(a)-467(serious)-467(danger)-468(to)-467(the)-468(community;)-576(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mentions)-316(it)-316(as)-316(a)-316(widespread)-316(view)-316(among)-316(the)-316(youth)-316(of)-317(his)-316(time,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-297(in)-296(his)-297(legislation)-297(he)-297(sentences)-296(to)-297(death)-297(those)-296(who)-297(fail)-297(to)-297(be)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(converted.)-557(It)-353(would)-352(seem)-353(certain,)-378(therefore,)-378(that)-352(there)-353(was,)-378(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reality,)-250(something)-250(in)-250(it)-250(after)-250(all.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+264 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 265 0 R
+/Resources 263 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 244 0 R
+>> endobj
+266 0 obj <<
+/D [264 0 R /XYZ 186.829 242.282 null]
+>> endobj
+263 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+269 0 obj <<
+/Length 3985      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IV)-20254(51)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(Plato)-255(does)-255(not)-256(confine)-255(himself)-255(to)-255(defining)-255(atheism)-255(and)-256(laying)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(down)-275(the)-274(penalty)-275(for)-274(it;)-287(he)-274(at)-275(the)-274(same)-275(time,)-281(in)-274(accordance)-275(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-389(principle)-388(which)-389(he)-389(generally)-388(follows)-389(in)-389(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 209.642 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-423(discusses)]TJ -232.682 -13.549 Td[(it)-395(and)-394(tries)-395(to)-395(disprove)-395(it.)-684(In)-394(this)-395(way)-395(he)-394(happen)-1(s)-394(to)-395(give)-395(us)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(information)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 51.513 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(which)-383(is)-382(of)-383(special)-382(interest)-383(to)-382(us)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 148.662 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(of)-383(the)-382(proofs)]TJ -221.993 -13.549 Td[(which)-250(were)-250(adduced)-250(by)-250(its)-250(followers.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(The)-348(argument)-348(is)-347(a)-348(twofold)-348(one.)-543(First)-348(comes)-348(the)-348(naturalistic)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(proof;)-258(the)-255(heavenly)-255(bodies,)-256(according)-255(to)-255(the)-255(general)-256(\050and)-255(Plato's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(own\051)-216(view)-216(the)-216(most)-216(certain)-216(deities,)-223(are)-216(inanimate)-216(n)-1(atural)-216(objects.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(It)-278(is)-278(interesting)-278(to)-278(note)-278(that)-278(in)-278(speaking)-278(of)-278(this)-278(do)-1(ctrine)-278(in)-278(detail)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reference)-210(is)-209(clearly)-210(made)-209(to)-210(Anaxagoras;)-223(this)-209(confirms)-210(our)-210(afore-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mentioned)-229(conjectures)-230(as)-229(to)-229(the)-229(character)-230(of)-229(his)-229(work.)-243(Plato)-459(was)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([063])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(quite)-324(in)-323(a)-324(position)-323(to)-324(deal)-324(with)-323(Anaxagoras)-324(on)-323(the)-324(strength)-324(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(only)-271(of)-270(what)-271(he)-270(said,)-276(but)-270(of)-271(what)-270(he)-271(passed)-270(over)-271(in)-270(silence.)-312(The)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(second)-293(argument)-292(is)-293(the)-292(well-known)-293(sophistic)-292(one,)-304(that)-292(the)-293(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.428 0 Td[(nom\364i)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.272 0 Td[(,)-294(not)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.978 0 Td[(physei)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.873 0 Td[(,)-294(they)-284(depend)-285(upon)-285(convention,)-294(which)-284(has)]TJ -94.551 -13.549 Td[(nothing)-294(to)-295(do)-294(with)-294(reality.)-383(In)-294(this)-295(connexion)-294(the)-294(argument)-295(adds)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-224(what)-223(applies)-224(to)-224(the)-224(gods,)-229(applies)-223(also)-224(to)-224(right)-223(and)-224(wrong;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 267.299 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -267.299 -13.549 Td[(we)-348(find)-348(here)-347(in)-348(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 89.858 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.834 0 Td[(the)-348(view)-348(with)-347(which)-348(we)-348(are)-348(familiar)]TJ -116.692 -13.55 Td[(from)-216(Callicles)-216(in)-216(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 90.636 0 Td[(Gorgias)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.76 0 Td[(,)-223(but)-216(with)-216(the)-216(missing)-216(link)-216(supplied.)]TJ -126.396 -13.549 Td[(And)-244(Plato's)-243(development)-244(of)-243(this)-244(theme)-243(shows)-244(clearly)-243(ju)-1(st)-243(what)-244(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(general)-244(historical)-243(consideration)-244(might)-244(lead)-243(us)-244(to)-244(expect,)-245(namely,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-309(it)-309(was)-309(naturalism)-309(and)-309(sophistic)-309(that)-309(jointly)-309(undermined)-309(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(belief)-250(in)-250(the)-250(old)-250(gods.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -29.651 Td[([064])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+268 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 269 0 R
+/Resources 267 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 272 0 R
+>> endobj
+270 0 obj <<
+/D [268 0 R /XYZ 307.937 369.134 null]
+>> endobj
+271 0 obj <<
+/D [268 0 R /XYZ 46.771 176.893 null]
+>> endobj
+267 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+273 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index7) >>
+endobj
+276 0 obj
+(Chapter V)
+endobj
+279 0 obj <<
+/Length 3927      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.572 Td[(With)-488(Socrates)-489(and)-488(his)-488(successors)-488(the)-489(whole)-488(question)-488(of)-489(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(relation)-373(of)-373(Greek)-373(thought)-373(to)-373(popular)-373(belief)-373(enters)-373(upon)-373(a)-373(new)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(phase.)-388(The)-295(Socra)-1(tic)-295(philosophy)-296(is)-296(in)-296(many)-296(ways)-296(a)-296(continuation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-540(sophistic.)-1119(This)-540(is)-539(involved)-540(already)-540(in)-539(the)-540(fact)-540(that)-540(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(same)-373(questions)-373(form)-372(the)-373(central)-373(interest)-373(in)-372(the)-373(two)-373(schools)-373(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(thought,)-315(so)-302(that)-302(the)-301(problems)-302(stated)-302(by)-302(the)-302(sophists)-302(became)-302(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(decisive)-337(factor)-337(in)-337(the)-337(content)-337(of)-337(Socratic)-337(and)-338(Platonic)-337(thought.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(The)-495(Socratic)-495(schools)-495(at)-495(the)-495(same)-495(time)-495(took)-495(over)-496(the)-495(actual)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(programme)-200(of)-200(the)-199(sophists,)-210(namely,)-210(the)-200(education)-200(of)-200(adolescence)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-462(the)-461(highest)-461(culture)-1(.)-884(But,)-514(on)-462(the)-461(other)-462(hand,)-514(the)-462(Socratic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophy)-470(was)-469(in)-470(the)-469(opposite)-470(camp)-469(to)-470(sophistic;)-579(on)-470(many)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(points)-411(it)-410(represents)-411(a)-410(reaction)-411(against)-410(it,)-451(a)-410(re)-1(collection)-410(of)-411(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(valuable)-435(elements)-435(contained)-435(in)-435(earlier)-435(Greek)-435(thought)-435(on)-435(life,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(especially)-504(human)-504(life,)-567(values)-503(which)-504(sophistic)-504(regarded)-504(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(indifference)-355(or)-356(even)-355(hostility,)-382(and)-355(which)-356(were)-355(threatened)-356(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(destruction)-281(if)-281(it)-281(should)-281(carry)-281(the)-281(day.)-343(This)-281(reactionary)-281(tendency)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-241(Socratic)-242(philosophy)-241(appears)-242(nowhere)-241(more)-241(plainly)-242(than)-241(in)-242(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(field)-250(of)-250(religion.)]TJ 11.956 -13.779 Td[(Under)-214(these)-214(circumstances)-215(it)-214(is)-214(a)-214(peculiar)-215(irony)-214(of)-214(fate)-214(that)-215(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(very)-323(originator)-323(of)-323(the)-323(new)-323(trend)-323(in)-323(Greek)-323(thought)-324(was)-323(charged)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-415(and)-414(sentenced)-415(for)-415(impiety.)-744(We)-414(have)-415(already)-415(mentioned)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-323(singular)-646(prelude)-322(to)-323(the)-323(indictment)-323(afforded)-323(by)-323(the)-323(comedy)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([065])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(of)-402(Aristophanes.)-707(We)-402(have)-402(also)-402(remarked)-402(upon)-402(the)-402(futility)-403(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(looking)-459(therein)-459(for)-459(any)-459(actual)-459(enlightenment)-459(on)-460(the)-459(Socratic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(point)-447(of)-447(view.)-841(And)-447(Plato)-447(makes)-447(Socrates)-447(state)-447(this)-448(with)-447(all)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(necessary)-327(sharpness)-326(in)-327(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 120.887 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(.)-480(Hence)-326(what)-327(we)-327(may)-326(infer)]TJ -157.247 -13.549 Td[(from)-324(the)-324(attack)-323(of)-324(Aristophanes)-324(is)-324(merely)-324(this,)-342(that)-324(the)-324(general)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(public)-480(lumped)-479(Socrates)-480(together)-480(with)-480(the)-479(sophists)-480(and)-480(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(especially)-407(regarded)-407(him)-407(as)-408(a)-407(godless)-407(fellow.)-721(Unless)-407(this)-408(had)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+278 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 279 0 R
+/Resources 277 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 272 0 R
+>> endobj
+274 0 obj <<
+/D [278 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+280 0 obj <<
+/D [278 0 R /XYZ 149.067 160.986 null]
+>> endobj
+277 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+283 0 obj <<
+/Length 5412      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(53)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(been)-214(so,)-221(Aristophanes)-214(could)-214(not)-213(have)-214(introduced)-214(him)-214(as)-214(the)-214(chief)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(character)-294(in)-295(his)-294(travesty.)-383(And)-295(without)-294(doubt)-294(it)-295(was)-294(this)-295(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(point)-356(of)-357(view)-356(which)-356(his)-356(accusers)-357(relied)-356(on)-356(when)-356(they)-357(actually)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(included)-342(atheism)-342(as)-342(a)-343(count)-342(in)-342(their)-342(bill)-342(of)-342(indictment.)-526(It)-343(will,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(nevertheless,)-300(be)-290(necessary)-290(to)-290(dwell)-290(for)-290(a)-290(moment)-290(on)-291(this)-290(bill)-290(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(indictment)-250(and)-250(the)-250(defence.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(The)-488(charge)-488(of)-488(impiety)-488(was)-488(a)-487(twofold)-488(one,)-548(partly)-488(for)-488(not)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(believing)-236(in)-237(the)-236(gods)-236(the)-236(State)-237(believed)-236(in,)-239(partly)-236(for)-237(introducing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(new)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 22.388 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(demonic)-386(things.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 71.183 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.057 0 Td[(This)-386(latter)-386(act)-387(was)-386(directly)-386(punishable)]TJ -107.472 -13.549 Td[(according)-383(to)-382(Attic)-383(law.)-647(What)-383(his)-382(accusers)-383(alluded)-383(to)-382(was)-383(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 50.286 0 Td[(of)-332(Socrates.)-494(That)-332(they)-331(should)-332(have)-331(had)-332(any)-331(idea)-332(of)]TJ -50.286 -13.55 Td[(what)-206(that)-206(was)-205(must)-206(be)-206(regarded)-206(as)-206(utterly)-206(out)-205(of)-206(the)-206(question,)-215(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whatever)-255(it)-256(may)-255(have)-255(been)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 117.166 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)-255(of)-256(this)-255(we)-255(shall)-255(have)-256(a)-255(word)-255(to)]TJ -128.075 -13.549 Td[(say)-210(later)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.22 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(it)-210(had)-210(at)-210(any)-211(rate)-210(nothing)-210(whatever)-210(to)-210(do)-210(with)-210(atheism.)]TJ -47.129 -13.549 Td[(As)-296(to)-297(the)-296(charge)-297(of)-296(not)-297(believing)-296(in)-297(the)-296(gods)-297(of)-296(the)-297(State,)-308(Plato)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(makes)-420(the)-420(accuser)-420(prefer)-420(it)-419(in)-420(the)-420(form)-420(that)-420(Socrates)-420(did)-420(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(believe)-262(in)-262(any)-262(gods)-262(at)-262(all,)-265(after)-262(which)-262(it)-262(becomes)-262(an)-262(easy)-262(matter)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-428(Socrates)-428(to)-429(show)-428(that)-428(it)-428(is)-428(directly)-428(incompatible)-428(with)-429(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(charge)-258(of)-257(introducing)-258(new)-257(deities.)-273(As)-515(ground)-257(fo)-1(r)-257(his)-258(accusation)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([066])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(the)-274(accuser)-275(states)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 76.264 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(in)-274(Plato,)-281(as)-274(before)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 79.64 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(that)-274(Socrates)-275(taught)-274(the)]TJ -177.722 -13.549 Td[(same)-194(doctrine)-195(about)-194(the)-194(sun)-194(and)-194(moon)-195(as)-194(Anaxagoras.)-231(The)-195(whole)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-241(the)-241(passage)-242(in)-241(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 91.32 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.992 0 Td[(in)-241(which)-241(the)-242(question)-241(of)-241(the)-241(denial)]TJ -130.312 -13.549 Td[(of)-396(gods)-395(is)-396(dealt)-396(with)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 94.842 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)-396(short)-395(dialogue)-396(between)-396(Socrates)-396(and)]TJ -105.751 -13.549 Td[(the)-239(accuser,)-241(quite)-239(in)-238(the)-239(Socratic)-239(manner)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 176.517 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(historically)-239(speaking,)]TJ -187.426 -13.549 Td[(carries)-411(little)-411(conviction,)-450(and)-411(we)-411(therefore)-411(dare)-410(not)-411(take)-411(it)-411(for)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(granted)-429(that)-428(the)-429(charge)-429(either)-428(of)-429(atheism)-429(or)-428(of)-429(false)-429(doctrine)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(about)-443(the)-442(sun)-443(and)-443(moon)-442(was)-443(put)-443(forward)-442(in)-443(that)-443(form.)-828(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-486(something)-487(about)-486(this)-487(latter)-486(point)-487(was)-486(mentioned)-487(during)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-367(trial)-368(must)-367(be)-367(regarded)-368(as)-367(probable,)-397(when)-367(we)-367(consider)-368(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Xenophon,)-529(too,)-528(defends)-473(Socrates)-473(at)-473(some)-473(length)-473(against)-473(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(charge)-276(of)-276(concerning)-275(himself)-276(with)-276(speculations)-276(on)-275(Nature.)-328(That)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-376(did)-376(not)-376(do)-377(so)-376(must)-376(be)-376(taken)-376(for)-376(certain,)-408(not)-376(only)-376(from)-377(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(express)-389(evidence)-389(of)-389(Xenophon)-389(and)-388(Plato,)-424(but)-389(from)-389(the)-389(whole)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nature)-341(of)-341(the)-341(case.)-522(The)-341(accusation)-341(on)-341(this)-341(point)-341(was)-341(assuredly)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+282 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 283 0 R
+/Resources 281 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 272 0 R
+>> endobj
+284 0 obj <<
+/D [282 0 R /XYZ 213.76 269.38 null]
+>> endobj
+281 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+287 0 obj <<
+/Length 4845      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(54)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(pure)-382(fabrication.)-646(There)-382(remains)-382(only)-382(what)-382(was)-382(no)-382(doubt)-382(also)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-254(main)-253(point,)-255(namely,)-254(the)-253(assertion)-254(of)-254(the)-253(pernicious)-254(influence)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-349(Socrates)-350(on)-349(the)-350(young,)-374(and)-349(the)-350(inference)-349(of)-350(irreligion)-349(to)-350(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(drawn)-284(from)-284(it)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 60.73 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(an)-284(argument)-284(which)-284(it)-284(would)-284(be)-284(absurd)-284(to)-284(waste)]TJ -71.639 -13.55 Td[(any)-250(words)-250(upon.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(The)-514(attack,)-580(then,)-580(affords)-514(no)-514(information)-515(about)-514(Socrates's)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(personal)-419(point)-418(of)-419(view)-418(as)-419(regards)-418(belief)-419(in)-418(the)-418(gods,)-461(and)-419(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(defence)-473(only)-472(very)-473(little.)-918(Both)-473(Xenophon)-473(and)-472(Plato)-473(give)-473(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(account)-489(of)-489(Socrates's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 102.188 0 Td[(daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.669 0 Td[(,)-549(but)-489(this)-489(point)-489(has)-489(so)-489(little)]TJ -148.857 -13.549 Td[(relation)-230(to)-230(the)-231(charge)-230(of)-230(atheism)-230(that)-231(it)-230(is)-230(not)-230(worth)-231(examination.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(For)-252(the)-252(rest)-252(Plato's)-252(defence)-251(is)-252(indirect.)-256(He)-252(makes)-252(Socrates)-252(refute)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-359(opponent,)-387(but)-359(does)-359(not)-719(let)-359(him)-359(say)-360(a)-359(word)-359(about)-359(his)-360(own)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([067])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(point)-239(of)-239(view.)-246(Xenophon)-239(is)-239(more)-239(positive,)-241(in)-239(so)-239(far)-239(as)-239(in)-239(the)-239(first)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(place)-234(he)-234(asserts)-234(that)-234(Socrates)-234(worshipped)-234(the)-234(gods)-234(like)-235(any)-234(other)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(good)-308(citizen,)-321(and)-308(more)-307(especially)-308(that)-308(he)-307(advised)-308(his)-307(friends)-308(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(use)-285(the)-284(Oracle;)-302(in)-285(the)-285(second)-284(place,)-294(that,)-293(though)-285(he)-284(lived)-285(in)-285(full)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(publicity,)-411(no)-379(one)-379(ever)-379(saw)-378(him)-379(do)-379(or)-379(heard)-379(him)-379(say)-379(anything)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-289(an)-288(impious)-289(nature.)-366(All)-288(these)-289(assertions)-288(are)-289(assuredly)-289(correct,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-322(they)-321(render)-322(it)-321(highly)-322(improbable)-322(that)-321(Socrates)-322(should)-322(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(secretly)-250(abandoned)-251(the)-250(popular)-251(faith,)-250(but)-251(they)-250(tell)-250(us)-251(little)-250(that)-251(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(positive)-261(about)-260(his)-261(views.)-281(Fortunately)-261(we)-260(possess)-261(other)-260(means)-261(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(getting)-201(to)-201(closer)-201(grips)-200(with)-201(the)-201(question;)-217(the)-201(way)-201(must)-201(be)-201(through)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-425(consideration)-425(of)-426(Socrates's)-425(whole)-425(conduct)-425(and)-425(his)-425(mode)-426(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thought.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Here)-194(we)-194(at)-194(once)-195(come)-194(to)-194(the)-194(interesting)-194(negative)-194(fact)-194(that)-195(there)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(is)-408(nothing)-408(in)-408(tradition)-408(to)-408(indicate)-408(that)-408(Socrates)-408(ever)-408(occupied)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(himself)-348(with)-348(theological)-348(questions.)-544(To)-348(be)-348(sure,)-373(Xenophon)-348(has)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(twice)-178(put)-179(into)-178(his)-178(mouth)-179(a)-178(whole)-178(the)-1(odicy)-178(expressing)-178(an)-179(elaborate)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(teleological)-304(view)-304(of)-303(nature.)-412(But)-304(that)-303(we)-304(dare)-304(not)-304(base)-304(anything)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(upon)-352(this)-352(is)-352(now,)-377(I)-352(think,)-377(universally)-352(acknowledged.)-556(Plato,)-378(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-288(dialogue)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 57.175 0 Td[(Euthyphron)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 51.513 0 Td[(,)-297(makes)-287(him)-288(subject)-287(the)-288(popular)-287(notion)]TJ -108.688 -13.549 Td[(of)-488(piety)-487(to)-488(a)-487(devastating)-488(criticism;)-606(but)-488(this,)-547(again,)-547(will)-488(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(nowadays)-292(be)-293(regarded)-292(as)-293(historical)-292(by)-293(anybody.)-377(Everything)-293(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-273(told)-273(about)-273(Socrates)-272(which)-273(bears)-273(the)-273(stamp)-273(of)-273(historical)-273(truth)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+286 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 287 0 R
+/Resources 285 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 272 0 R
+>> endobj
+288 0 obj <<
+/D [286 0 R /XYZ 217.378 366.679 null]
+>> endobj
+285 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+291 0 obj <<
+/Length 5040      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(55)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(indicates)-402(that)-402(he)-402(restricted)-401(himself)-402(to)-402(ethics)-402(and)-402(left)-402(theology)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(alone.)-334(But)-278(this)-279(very)-278(fact)-278(is)-278(not)-278(without)-278(significance.)-334(It)-279(indicates)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-393(Socrates's)-393(aim)-393(was)-394(not)-393(to)-393(alter)-393(the)-393(religious)-393(views)-393(of)-394(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(contemporaries.)-745(Since)-415(he)-829(did)-415(not)-415(do)-415(so)-415(we)-415(may)-415(reasonably)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([068])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(believe)-323(it)-323(was)-323(because)-322(they)-323(did)-323(not)-323(inconvenience)-323(him)-323(in)-323(what)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-250(most)-250(important)-250(to)-250(him,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 122.433 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 16.058 0 Td[(ethics.)]TJ -126.535 -18.459 Td[(We)-330(may,)-350(however,)-349(perhaps)-330(go)-330(even)-330(a)-330(step)-329(farther.)-490(We)-330(may)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(venture,)-554(I)-493(think,)-555(to)-493(maintain)-493(that)-494(so)-493(far)-493(from)-494(contemporary)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion)-423(being)-423(a)-423(hindrance)-422(to)-423(Socrates)-423(in)-423(his)-423(occupation)-423(as)-423(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(teacher)-519(of)-518(ethics,)-586(it)-518(was,)-586(on)-519(the)-518(contrary,)-586(an)-519(indispensable)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(support)-329(to)-330(him,)-349(nay,)-349(an)-330(integral)-329(component)-330(of)-329(his)-330(fundamental)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(ethical)-401(view.)-703(The)-400(object)-401(of)-401(Socrates)-401(in)-401(his)-401(relations)-401(with)-401(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fellow-men)-436(was,)-482(on)-435(his)-436(own)-436(showing)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 173.646 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(for)-436(on)-435(this)-436(important)]TJ -184.555 -13.549 Td[(point)-320(I)-320(think)-320(we)-320(can)-320(confidently)-320(rely)-320(upon)-320(Plato's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 224.874 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(to)]TJ -272.143 -13.549 Td[(make)-327(clear)-328(to)-327(them)-328(that)-327(they)-328(knew)-327(nothing.)-482(And)-328(when)-327(he)-328(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(asked)-330(to)-329(say)-330(in)-330(what)-330(he)-329(himself)-330(differed)-330(from)-329(other)-330(people,)-350(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(could)-282(mention)-282(only)-282(one)-282(thing,)-289(namely,)-290(that)-282(he)-282(was)-282(aware)-282(of)-282(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(own)-387(ignorance.)-661(But)-387(his)-387(ignorance)-387(is)-387(not)-387(an)-387(ign)-1(orance)-387(of)-387(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thing)-258(or)-257(that,)-260(it)-257(is)-258(a)-258(radical)-257(ignorance,)-260(something)-257(involved)-258(in)-258(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(essence)-272(of)-271(man)-272(as)-271(man.)-314(That)-272(is,)-277(in)-271(other)-272(words,)-277(it)-271(is)-272(determined)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-521(religion.)-1064(In)-521(order)-521(to)-522(be)-521(at)-521(all)-521(intelligible)-521(and)-522(ethically)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(applicable,)-258(it)-257(presupposes)-257(the)-256(conception)-257(of)-257(beings)-256(of)-257(whom)-257(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(essence)-309(is)-309(knowledge.)-427(For)-309(Socrates)-309(and)-309(his)-310(contemporaries)-309(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-301(belief)-301(supplied)-300(such)-301(beings)-301(in)-301(the)-301(gods.)-402(The)-301(institution)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-405(the)-404(Oracle)-405(itself)-405(is)-404(an)-405(expression)-405(of)-405(the)-404(recognition)-405(of)-405(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(superiority)-387(of)-387(the)-387(gods)-387(to)-386(man)-387(in)-387(knowledge.)-661(But)-387(the)-387(dogma)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(had)-445(long)-445(been)-445(stated)-445(even)-445(in)-445(its)-445(absolute)-445(form)-446(when)-445(Homer)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(said:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 26.888 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(The)-413(gods)-413(know)-413(everything.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 124.708 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.347 0 Td[(To)-413(Socrates,)-453(who)-413(always)]TJ -165.787 -13.549 Td[(took)-403(his)-403(starting-point)-404(quite)-403(popularly)-403(from)-403(notions)-403(that)-404(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(universally)-320(accepted,)-337(this)-319(basis)-320(was)-319(simply)-320(indispensable.)-459(And)]TJ 5.636 -13.549 Td[(so)-517(far)-516(from)-517(inconveniencing)-516(Socrates,)-584(the)-516(multiplicity)-517(and)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 285.388 0 Td[([069])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(anthropomorphism)-202(of)-202(the)-202(gods)-202(seemed)-202(an)-202(advantage)-203(to)-202(him)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 256.39 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)]TJ -267.299 -13.55 Td[(more)-230(they)-230(were)-230(like)-230(man)-230(in)-230(all)-230(but)-230(the)-230(essential)-230(qualification,)-234(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(better.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+290 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 291 0 R
+/Resources 289 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 272 0 R
+>> endobj
+292 0 obj <<
+/D [290 0 R /XYZ 168.466 477.528 null]
+>> endobj
+293 0 obj <<
+/D [290 0 R /XYZ 46.771 106.79 null]
+>> endobj
+289 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+296 0 obj <<
+/Length 5042      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(56)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 105.499 518.175 Td[(The)-211(Socratic)-212(ignorance)-211(has)-212(an)-211(ethical)-212(bearing.)-237(Its)-212(complement)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(is)-373(his)-373(assertion)-373(that)-374(virtue)-373(is)-373(knowledge.)-619(Here)-373(again)-373(the)-374(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-411(the)-412(necessary)-411(presupposition)-411(and)-411(determination.)-734(That)-412(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-288(were)-287(good,)-298(or,)-297(as)-287(it)-288(was)-288(preferred)-287(to)-288(express)-288(it,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 235.077 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(just)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 15.764 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.982 0 Td[(\050the)]TJ -263.667 -13.55 Td[(Greek)-242(word)-242(comprises)-243(more)-242(than)-242(the)-242(English)-242(word\051,)-244(was)-242(no)-243(less)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-244(popular)-245(dogma)-244(than)-245(the)-244(notion)-244(that)-245(they)-244(possessed)-245(knowledge.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Now)-265(all)-265(Socrates's)-265(efforts)-265(were)-265(directed)-265(towards)-265(goodness)-265(as)-265(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(end)-278(in)-278(view,)-284(towards)-278(the)-278(ethical)-278(development)-277(of)-278(mankind.)-334(Here)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(again)-243(popular)-243(belief)-244(was)-243(his)-243(best)-243(ally.)-248(To)-243(the)-243(people)-243(to)-243(whom)-244(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(talked,)-214(virtue)-204(\050the)-205(Greek)-204(word)-205(is)-205(at)-204(once)-205(both)-204(wider)-205(and)-205(narrower)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-321(sense)-320(than)-320(the)-321(English)-320(term\051)-321(was)-320(no)-321(mere)-320(abstract)-321(notion;)-356(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-320(a)-319(living)-320(reality)-319(to)-320(them,)-337(embodied)-319(in)-320(beings)-319(that)-320(were)-320(like)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(themselves,)-250(human)-250(beings,)-250(but)-250(perfect)-250(human)-250(beings.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(If)-586(we)-586(correlate)-587(this)-586(with)-586(the)-586(negative)-586(circumstance)-587(that)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Socrates)-492(was)-492(no)-492(theologian)-492(but)-492(a)-492(teacher)-492(of)-492(ethics,)-553(we)-492(can)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(easily)-273(understand)-272(a)-273(point)-272(of)-273(view)-272(which)-273(accepted)-272(popular)-273(belief)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-359(it)-359(was)-359(and)-360(employed)-359(it)-359(for)-359(working)-359(purposes)-359(in)-359(the)-360(service)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-458(moral)-459(teaching.)-875(Such)-458(a)-458(point)-458(of)-459(view,)-510(moreover,)-511(gained)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(extraordinary)-424(stre)-1(ngth)-424(by)-424(the)-425(fact)-424(that)-425(it)-424(preserved)-425(continuity)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-333(earlier)-332(Greek)-333(religious)-333(thought.)-498(This)-332(latter,)-354(too,)-353(had)-333(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ethical)-196(in)-196(its)-197(bearing;)-214(it,)-207(too,)-207(had)-196(employed)-196(the)-196(gods)-196(in)-196(the)-197(service)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-361(its)-362(ethical)-361(aim.)-585(But)-361(its)-362(central)-361(idea)-361(was)-362(felicity,)-389(not)-362(virtue;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-354(starting-point)-354(was)-354(the)-354(popular)-354(dogma)-354(of)-354(the)-354(felicity)-708(of)-354(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([070])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(gods,)-450(not)-410(their)-410(justice.)-731(In)-410(this)-410(way)-410(it)-410(had)-410(come)-410(to)-410(lay)-411(stress)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-344(a)-344(virtue)-345(which)-344(might)-344(be)-344(termed)-344(modesty,)-368(but)-344(in)-344(a)-345(religious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sense,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 29.378 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 16.763 0 Td[(man)-272(must)-271(recognise)-272(his)-271(difference)-272(from)-271(the)-272(gods)-271(as)-272(a)]TJ -46.141 -13.549 Td[(limited)-335(being,)-355(subject)-335(to)-335(the)-334(vicissitudes)-335(of)-334(an)-335(existence)-335(above)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(which)-409(the)-409(g)-1(ods)-409(are)-409(raised.)-728(Socrates)-409(says)-409(just)-409(the)-410(same,)-449(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-379(he)-379(puts)-379(knowledge)-378(or)-379(virtue,)-411(which)-379(to)-379(him)-379(was)-379(the)-379(same)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thing,)-270(in)-266(the)-266(place)-266(of)-266(felicity.)-297(From)-266(a)-266(religious)-266(point)-266(of)-266(view)-266(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(result)-354(is)-355(exactly)-354(the)-355(same,)-380(namely,)-381(the)-354(doctrine)-354(of)-355(the)-354(gods)-355(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-280(terminus)-281(and)-280(ideal,)-288(and)-281(the)-280(insistence)-280(on)-281(the)-280(gulf)-281(separating)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(man)-248(from)-248(them.)-249(We)-248(are)-248(tempted)-248(to)-248(say)-248(that,)-249(had)-248(Socrates)-248(turned)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-311(hostile)-312(intent)-311(against)-311(a)-312(religion)-311(which)-312(thus)-311(played)-311(into)-312(his)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+295 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 296 0 R
+/Resources 294 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 272 0 R
+>> endobj
+297 0 obj <<
+/D [295 0 R /XYZ 344.032 215.183 null]
+>> endobj
+294 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+300 0 obj <<
+/Length 4822      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(57)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(hands,)-452(the)-412(more)-411(fool)-412(he.)-735(But)-411(this)-412(is)-412(putting)-411(the)-412(problem)-412(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(wrong)-318(way)-319(up)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 63.903 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Socrates)-318(never)-319(stood)-318(critically)-318(outside)-319(popular)]TJ -74.812 -13.549 Td[(belief)-244(and)-243(traditional)-244(religious)-244(thought)-244(speculating)-243(as)-244(to)-244(whether)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-353(should)-353(use)-352(it)-353(or)-353(reject)-353(it.)-558(No,)-379(his)-353(thought)-352(grew)-353(out)-353(of)-353(it)-353(as)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(from)-292(the)-292(bosom)-292(of)-293(the)-292(earth.)-376(Hence)-292(its)-292(mighty)-292(religious)-293(power,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-234(inevitable)-234(victory)-234(over)-234(a)-234(school)-234(of)-234(thought)-234(which)-234(had)-234(severed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-250(connexion)-250(with)-250(tradition.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(That)-307(such)-308(a)-307(point)-308(of)-307(view)-308(should)-307(be)-308(so)-307(badly)-308(misunderstood)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(as)-364(it)-365(was)-364(in)-365(Athens)-364(seems)-365(incomprehensible.)-593(The)-365(explanation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-286(no)-287(doubt)-286(that)-286(the)-287(whole)-286(story)-286(of)-286(Socrates's)-287(denial)-286(of)-286(the)-287(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-276(only)-276(included)-275(by)-276(his)-276(accusers)-276(for)-275(the)-276(sake)-276(of)-276(completeness,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-371(did)-372(not)-371(play)-372(any)-371(great)-371(part)-372(in)-371(the)-372(final)-371(issue.)-614(This)-372(seems)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(confirmed)-162(by)-162(the)-162(fact)-163(that)-162(they)-162(found)-162(it)-162(convenient)-162(to)-162(support)-163(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(charge)-253(of)-254(atheism)-253(by)-253(one)-253(of)-254(introducing)-253(foreign)-253(gods,)-254(this)-254(being)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(punishable)-356(by)-357(Attic)-356(law.)-569(They)-356(thus)-357(obtained)-356(some)-356(slight)-357(hold)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-458(their)-229(accusation.)-244(But)-229(both)-229(charges)-229(must)-229(be)-229(presumed)-229(to)-230(have)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([071])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.55 Td[(been)-268(so)-268(signally)-268(refuted)-268(during)-268(the)-268(trial)-268(that)-268(it)-268(is)-268(hardly)-268(po)-1(ssible)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-365(any)-364(great)-365(number)-365(of)-364(the)-365(judges)-365(were)-364(influenced)-365(by)-365(them.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(It)-365(was)-365(quite)-365(different)-365(and)-365(far)-365(weightier)-365(matters)-365(which)-365(brough)-1(t)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(about)-311(the)-310(conviction)-311(of)-311(Socrates,)-326(questions)-310(on)-311(which)-311(there)-311(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(really)-223(a)-223(deep)-223(and)-223(vital)-223(difference)-223(of)-223(opinion)-223(between)-223(him)-223(and)-223(his)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(contemporaries.)-446(That)-315(Socrates's)-315(attitude)-315(towards)-315(popular)-316(belief)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-406(at)-406(any)-407(rate)-406(fully)-406(understood)-406(elsewhe)-1(re)-406(is)-406(testified)-406(by)-407(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(answer)-351(of)-351(the)-352(Delphic)-351(Oracle,)-376(that)-352(declared)-351(Socrates)-351(to)-351(be)-352(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(wisest)-326(of)-326(all)-326(men.)-477(However)-326(remarkable)-326(such)-326(a)-325(pronoun)-1(cement)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-438(such)-437(a)-438(place)-438(may)-437(appear,)-485(it)-438(seems)-437(impossible)-438(to)-438(reject)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-435(accounts)-435(of)-434(it)-435(as)-435(unhistorical;)-527(on)-435(the)-435(other)-435(hand,)-481(it)-435(does)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(not)-295(seem)-295(impossible)-295(to)-296(explain)-295(how)-295(the)-295(Oracle)-295(came)-295(to)-295(dec)-1(lare)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(itself)-234(as)-233(reported.)-245(Earlier)-234(Greek)-233(thought,)-237(which)-234(insisted)-234(upon)-234(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gulf)-304(se)-1(parating)-304(gods)-305(and)-304(men,)-318(was)-305(from)-304(olden)-305(times)-305(intimately)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(connected)-276(with)-276(the)-276(Delphic)-276(Oracle.)-328(It)-276(hardly)-276(sprang)-276(from)-276(the)-1(re;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-269(probably)-269(it)-269(arose)-270(spontaneously)-269(in)-269(various)-269(parts)-269(of)-270(Hellas.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(But)-371(it)-371(would)-371(naturally)-371(feel)-371(attracted)-371(toward)-370(the)-371(Oracle,)-402(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-256(one)-255(of)-256(the)-256(religious)-255(centres)-256(of)-255(He)-1(llas,)-257(and)-255(it)-256(was)-255(reco)-1(gnised)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+299 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 300 0 R
+/Resources 298 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 302 0 R
+>> endobj
+301 0 obj <<
+/D [299 0 R /XYZ 61.991 310.028 null]
+>> endobj
+298 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+305 0 obj <<
+/Length 5480      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(58)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(as)-265(legitimate)-265(by)-265(the)-266(Oracle.)-295(Above)-265(all,)-269(the)-265(honour)-265(shown)-265(by)-266(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Oracle)-330(to)-329(Pindar,)-350(one)-329(of)-330(the)-329(chief)-330(representatives)-329(of)-330(the)-330(earlier)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thought,)-256(testifies)-255(to)-255(this.)-264(Hence)-255(there)-255(is)-255(nothing)-255(incredible)-255(in)-255(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(assumption)-242(that)-241(Socrates)-242(attracted)-242(notice)-241(at)-242(Delphi)-241(as)-242(a)-242(defender)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-435(the)-435(old-fashioned)-435(religious)-435(views)-435(approved)-435(by)-435(the)-435(Oracle,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(precisely)-250(in)-250(virtue)-250(of)-250(his)-250(opposition)-250(to)-250(the)-250(ideas)-250(then)-250(in)-250(vogue.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(If)-449(we)-449(accept)-449(this)-450(explanation)-449(we)-449(are,)-499(however,)-998(excluded)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -84.711 0 Td[([072])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(from)-233(taking)-232(literally)-233(Plato's)-233(account)-232(of)-233(the)-233(answer)-232(of)-233(the)-233(Delphic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Oracle)-265(and)-264(Socrates's)-265(attitude)-264(towards)-265(it.)-294(Plato)-264(presents)-265(the)-265(case)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-289(if)-290(the)-289(Oracle)-290(were)-289(the)-289(starting-point)-290(of)-289(Socrates's)-290(philosophy)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-323(of)-323(the)-322(peculiar)-323(mode)-323(of)-323(life)-322(which)-323(was)-323(indissolubly)-323(bound)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(up)-229(with)-228(it.)-243(This)-229(presentation)-229(cannot)-228(be)-229(correct)-229(if)-229(we)-228(are)-229(to)-229(regard)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-256(Oracle)-257(as)-256(historical)-256(and)-257(understand)-256(it)-257(as)-256(we)-256(have)-257(understood)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it.)-335(The)-278(Oracle)-279(presupposes)-278(the)-278(Socrates)-279(we)-278(know:)-307(a)-278(man)-278(with)-279(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religious)-253(message)-253(and)-253(a)-254(mode)-253(of)-253(life)-253(which)-253(was)-253(bound)-253(to)-254(attract)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(notice)-334(to)-334(him)-334(as)-334(an)-333(exception)-334(from)-334(the)-334(general)-334(rule.)-502(It)-334(cannot,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(therefore,)-277(have)-272(been)-272(the)-272(cause)-272(of)-271(Socrates's)-272(finding)-272(himself.)-316(On)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-194(other)-194(hand,)-205(it)-194(is)-194(difficult)-194(to)-194(imagine)-194(a)-194(man)-194(choosing)-194(a)-194(mode)-194(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(life)-293(like)-292(that)-293(of)-292(Socrates)-293(without)-292(a)-293(definite)-292(inducement,)-304(without)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(some)-349(fact)-349(or)-349(other)-349(that)-349(would)-349(lead)-349(him)-349(to)-349(conceive)-350(himself)-349(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(an)-284(exception)-283(from)-284(the)-283(rule.)-351(If)-283(we)-284(look)-283(for)-284(such)-283(a)-284(fact)-284(in)-283(the)-284(life)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-373(Socrates,)-404(we)-373(shall)-373(look)-373(in)-373(vain)-373(as)-373(regards)-373(externals.)-620(Apart)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-291(his)-291(activities)-291(as)-292(a)-291(religious)-291(and)-291(ethical)-291(personality,)-301(his)-292(life)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-280(that)-280(of)-280(any)-280(other)-281(Attic)-280(citizen.)-340(But)-280(in)-280(his)-280(spiritual)-280(life)-281(there)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-222(certainly)-222(one)-221(point,)-228(but)-221(only)-222(one,)-228(on)-221(which)-222(he)-222(deviated)-222(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-280(normal,)-286(namely,)-287(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 106.896 0 Td[(daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.669 0 Td[(.)-339(If)-279(we)-280(examine)-279(the)-280(accounts)]TJ -153.565 -13.55 Td[(of)-287(this)-288(more)-287(closely)-288(the)-287(only)-288(thing)-287(we)-288(can)-287(make)-288(of)-287(them)-288(is)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 260.634 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(or)]TJ -271.543 -13.549 Td[(so)-431(at)-431(least)-432(it)-431(seems)-431(to)-431(me)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 120.341 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(that)-431(we)-431(are)-432(here)-431(in)-431(the)-431(presence)]TJ -131.25 -13.549 Td[(of)-408(a)-407(form)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 44.031 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(peculiar,)-447(no)-408(doubt,)-447(and)-407(highly)-408(developed)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 187.917 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(of)-408(the)]TJ -253.766 -13.549 Td[(phenomena)-390(which)-390(are)-390(nowadays)-390(classed)-390(under)-390(the)-391(concept)-390(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(clairvoyance.)-660(Now)-387(Plato)-387(makes)-387(Socrates)-386(himself)-387(say)-387(that)-387(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(power)-389(of)-388(avoiding)-389(what)-389(would)-388(harm)-389(him,)-424(in)-388(great)-389(things)-389(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(little,)-256(by)-255(virtue)-256(of)-255(a)-255(direct)-255(perception)-255(\050a)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 174.664 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(voice)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 23.629 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(\051,)-256(which)-255(is)-256(what)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -280.735 0 Td[([073])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(constituted)-277(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 66.663 0 Td[(daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.669 0 Td[(,)-284(was)-278(given)-277(him)-277(from)-278(childhood.)-332(That)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+304 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 305 0 R
+/Resources 303 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 302 0 R
+>> endobj
+306 0 obj <<
+/D [304 0 R /XYZ 329.349 431.97 null]
+>> endobj
+307 0 obj <<
+/D [304 0 R /XYZ 374.173 79.691 null]
+>> endobj
+303 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+310 0 obj <<
+/Length 5068      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(59)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(it)-223(was)-223(regarded)-222(as)-223(something)-223(singular)-223(both)-222(by)-223(himself)-223(and)-223(others)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-259(evident,)-260(and)-259(likewise)-259(that)-258(he)-259(himself)-259(regarded)-258(it)-259(as)-259(something)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(supernatural;)-437(the)-375(designation)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 133.53 0 Td[(daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 50.756 0 Td[(itself)-375(seems)-374(to)-375(be)-375(his)]TJ -184.286 -13.549 Td[(own.)-864(I)-454(think)-454(that)-455(we)-454(must)-455(seek)-455(for)-454(the)-455(origin)-454(of)-455(Socrates's)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(peculiar)-303(mode)-302(of)-303(life)-303(in)-302(this)-303(direction,)-316(strange)-302(as)-303(it)-302(may)-303(be)-303(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-373(purely)-372(mystic)-373(element)-373(should)-372(have)-373(given)-373(the)-372(impulse)-373(to)-373(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(most)-296(rationalistic)-296(philosophy)-296(the)-296(world)-295(has)-296(ever)-296(produced.)-388(It)-296(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(impossible)-336(to)-335(enter)-336(more)-336(deeply)-335(into)-336(this)-335(problem)-336(here;)-379(but,)-357(if)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(my)-341(conjecture)-341(is)-341(correct,)-364(we)-341(have)-341(an)-341(additional)-341(explanation)-341(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-378(fact)-379(that)-378(Socrates)-379(was)-378(disposed)-379(to)-378(anything)-379(rather)-378(than)-379(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(attack)-250(on)-250(the)-250(established)-250(religion.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(A)-280(view)-280(of)-280(popular)-280(religion)-280(such)-280(as)-280(I)-280(have)-280(here)-280(sketched)-280(bore)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(in)-445(itself)-445(the)-445(germ)-445(of)-445(a)-445(further)-445(development)-445(which)-446(must)-445(lead)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-370(other)-370(directions.)-610(A)-370(personality)-370(like)-370(Socrates)-370(might)-370(perhaps)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(manage)-338(throughout)-339(a)-338(lifetime)-338(to)-339(keep)-338(that)-339(balance)-338(on)-338(a)-339(razor's)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(edge)-329(which)-328(is)-329(involved)-328(in)-329(utilising)-328(to)-329(the)-328(utmost)-329(in)-328(the)-329(service)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-240(ethics)-241(the)-240(popular)-240(dogmas)-241(of)-240(the)-240(perfection)-241(of)-240(the)-240(gods,)-243(while)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(disregarding)-286(all)-285(irrelevant)-286(tales,)-295(all)-285(myths)-286(and)-286(all)-285(notions)-286(of)-286(too)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(human)-271(a)-271(tenor)-270(about)-271(them.)-312(This)-271(demanded)-271(concentration)-271(on)-271(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(one)-378(thing)-378(needful,)-409(in)-378(conjunction)-378(with)-378(deep)-377(piety)-378(of)-378(the)-378(most)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(genuine)-229(antique)-229(kind,)-233(with)-229(the)-229(most)-229(profoun)-1(d)-229(religious)-229(modesty,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-339(combination)-339(which)-338(it)-339(was)-339(assuredly)-339(given)-338(to)-339(but)-339(one)-339(man)-339(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(attain.)-456(Socrates's)-319(successors)-319(had)-319(it)-319(not.)-456(Starting)-319(precisely)-319(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-231(Socratic)-231(foundation)-231(they)-231(entered)-231(upon)-231(the)-1(ological)-231(speculations)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-250(carried)-250(them)-250(away)-250(from)-250(the)-250(Socratic)-250(point)-250(of)-250(view.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([074])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -279.068 -16.004 Td[(For)-204(the)-203(Cynics)-1(,)-213(who)-203(set)-204(up)-204(virtue)-204(as)-203(the)-204(only)-204(good,)-213(the)-204(popular)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(notions)-278(of)-279(the)-278(gods)-278(would)-278(seem)-278(to)-279(have)-278(been)-278(just)-278(as)-279(convenient)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-421(for)-421(Socrates.)-763(And)-421(we)-421(know)-421(that)-421(Antisthenes,)-464(the)-421(founder)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-342(the)-342(school,)-365(made)-341(am)-1(ple)-341(use)-342(of)-342(them)-342(in)-342(his)-342(ethical)-342(teaching.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(He)-536(represented)-536(Heracles)-536(as)-536(the)-536(Cynical)-536(ideal)-536(and)-536(occupied)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(himself)-309(largely)-309(with)-309(allegorical)-308(interpretation)-309(of)-309(the)-309(myths.)-427(On)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-530(other)-529(hand,)-600(there)-530(is)-529(a)-530(tradition)-530(that)-529(he)-530(maintained)-530(that)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.55 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(according)-264(to)-265(nature)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 84.532 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.728 0 Td[(there)-264(was)-265(only)-264(one)-265(god,)-268(but)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 124.297 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(according)-264(to)]TJ -226.244 -13.549 Td[(the)-259(law)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 31.91 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.67 0 Td[(several)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 30.894 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)-259(purely)-259(sophistic)-259(view.)-277(He)-259(inveighed)-259(against)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+309 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 310 0 R
+/Resources 308 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 302 0 R
+>> endobj
+311 0 obj <<
+/D [309 0 R /XYZ 46.771 188.161 null]
+>> endobj
+308 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+314 0 obj <<
+/Length 5557      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(60)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(the)-388(worship)-388(of)-388(images,)-422(too,)-423(and)-388(maintained)-388(that)-388(god)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 243.671 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(did)-388(not)]TJ -248.514 -13.549 Td[(resemble)-365(any)-364(thing,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 88.245 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.82 0 Td[(and)-365(we)-364(know)-365(that)-364(his)-365(school)-364(rejected)-365(all)]TJ -97.065 -13.549 Td[(worship)-241(of)-240(the)-241(gods)-240(because)-241(the)-241(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 165.012 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(were)-241(in)-240(need)-241(of)-240(nothing.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 105.93 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.786 -13.549 Td[(This)-274(conception,)-281(too,)-280(is)-275(presumably)-274(traceable)-274(to)-275(Antisthenes.)-323(In)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(all)-234(this)-234(the)-235(theological)-234(interest)-234(is)-234(evident.)-245(As)-234(soon)-234(as)-234(this)-235(interest)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sets)-277(in,)-284(the)-277(harmonious)-276(relation)-277(to)-277(the)-277(popular)-277(faith)-277(is)-277(upset,)-284(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(discord)-372(between)-373(its)-372(higher)-373(and)-372(lower)-373(ideas)-372(becomes)-373(manifest,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-315(criticism)-316(begins)-315(to)-315(assert)-316(itself.)-445(In)-316(the)-315(case)-315(of)-316(Antisthenes,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(if)-258(we)-258(may)-257(believe)-258(tradition,)-260(it)-258(seems)-257(to)-258(have)-258(led)-258(to)-258(monotheism,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-284(itself)-284(a)-284(most)-284(remarkable)-284(phenomenon)-284(in)-284(the)-284(history)-284(of)-284(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion,)-259(but)-257(the)-257(material)-257(is)-257(too)-257(slight)-257(for)-257(us)-257(to)-257(make)-258(anything)-257(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it.)-464(The)-321(later)-321(Cynics)-321(afford)-322(interesting)-321(features)-321(in)-321(illustration)-322(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atheism)-250(in)-250(antiquity,)-250(but)-250(this)-250(is)-250(best)-250(left)-250(to)-250(a)-250(later)-250(chapter.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(About)-313(the)-313(relations)-314(of)-313(the)-313(Megarians)-314(to)-313(the)-313(popular)-313(faith)-314(we)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(know)-355(next)-355(to)-354(nothing.)-565(One)-354(of)-355(them,)-381(Stilpo,)-381(was)-355(charged)-355(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(impiety)-316(on)-315(account)-316(of)-316(a)-316(bad)-315(joke)-316(about)-316(Athene,)-332(and)-316(convicted,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(although)-336(he)-335(tried)-336(to)-336(save)-335(himself)-336(by)-336(another)-336(bad)-335(joke.)-507(As)-672(his)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([075])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(point)-207(of)-207(view)-207(was)-207(that)-207(of)-207(a)-208(downright)-207(sceptic,)-215(he)-207(was)-207(no)-207(d)-1(oubt)-207(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atheist)-232(according)-232(to)-232(the)-233(notions)-232(of)-232(antiquity;)-238(in)-232(our)-232(day)-232(he)-233(would)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-245(called)-246(an)-245(agnostic,)-247(but)-245(the)-245(information)-246(that)-245(we)-246(have)-245(about)-246(his)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(religious)-250(standpoint)-250(is)-250(too)-250(slight)-250(to)-250(repay)-250(dwelling)-250(on)-250(him.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(As)-277(to)-277(the)-277(relation)-278(of)-277(the)-277(Cyrenaic)-277(school)-277(to)-277(the)-277(popular)-278(faith,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-223(general)-223(proposition)-222(has)-223(been)-223(handed)-223(down)-222(to)-223(us)-223(that)-223(the)-223(wise)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(man)-179(could)-179(not)-178(be)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 75.065 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(deisidaimon,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 56.062 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 6.793 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.799 0 Td[(superstitious)-179(or)-179(god-fearing;)]TJ -158.563 -13.549 Td[(the)-332(Greek)-332(word)-331(can)-332(have)-332(both)-332(senses.)-495(This)-332(does)-332(not)-332(speak)-332(for)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(piety)-364(at)-364(any)-364(rate,)-393(but)-364(then)-364(the)-364(relationship)-364(of)-364(the)-364(Cyrenaics)-365(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-354(gods)-354(of)-355(popular)-354(belief)-354(was)-354(different)-355(from)-354(that)-354(of)-354(the)-355(other)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(followers)-267(of)-268(Socrates.)-302(As)-267(they)-267(set)-268(up)-267(pleasure)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 201.056 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)-267(momentary,)]TJ -211.965 -13.549 Td[(isolated)-311(feeling)-311(of)-310(pleasure)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 119.841 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(as)-311(the)-311(supreme)-310(good,)-326(they)-311(had)-311(no)]TJ -130.75 -13.549 Td[(use)-302(for)-303(the)-302(popular)-303(conceptions)-302(of)-302(the)-303(gods)-302(in)-303(their)-302(ethics,)-316(nay,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(these)-255(conceptions)-256(were)-255(even)-256(a)-255(hindrance)-255(to)-256(them)-255(in)-255(so)-256(far)-255(as)-256(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fear)-294(of)-295(the)-294(gods)-295(might)-294(prove)-295(a)-294(restriction)-295(where)-294(it)-295(ought)-294(not)-295(to.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(In)-334(these)-335(circumstances)-334(we)-334(cannot)-334(wonder)-335(at)-334(finding)-334(a)-335(member)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-290(the)-290(school)-290(in)-290(the)-290(list)-290(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 117.292 0 Td[(atheoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.272 0 Td[(.)-370(This)-290(is)-290(Theodorus)-290(of)-290(Cyrene,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+313 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 314 0 R
+/Resources 312 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 302 0 R
+>> endobj
+315 0 obj <<
+/D [313 0 R /XYZ 357.78 298.933 null]
+>> endobj
+312 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+318 0 obj <<
+/Length 5073      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(61)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(who)-396(lived)-396(about)-396(the)-396(year)-395(30)-1(0.)-687(He)-396(really)-396(seems)-396(to)-396(have)-396(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-344(downright)-344(denier)-344(of)-344(the)-343(gods;)-391(he)-344(wrote)-344(a)-344(work)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 223.437 0 Td[(On)-344(the)-344(Gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -223.437 -13.549 Td[(containing)-401(a)-400(searching)-401(criticism)-401(of)-400(theology,)-439(which)-400(is)-401(said)-401(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-248(exposed)-247(him)-248(to)-248(unpleasantness)-248(during)-247(a)-248(stay)-248(at)-247(Athens,)-249(but)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-248(then)-248(ruler)-247(of)-248(the)-248(city,)-248(Demetrius)-248(of)-248(Phalerum,)-248(protected)-248(him.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(There)-229(is)-229(nothing)-229(strange)-229(in)-229(a)-229(manifestation)-229(of)-229(downright)-229(atheism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-461(this)-461(time)-461(and)-462(from)-461(this)-461(quarter.)-883(More)-461(remarkable)-461(is)-462(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(interest)-340(in)-340(theology)-340(which)-340(we)-340(must)-340(assume)-340(Theodorus)-341(to)-340(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(had,)-411(since)-195(he)-195(wrote)-194(at)-195(length)-195(upon)-194(the)-195(subject.)-231(Unfortunately)-195(it)-195(is)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([076])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(not)-285(evident)-284(fro)-1(m)-284(the)-285(account)-285(whether)-284(his)-285(criticism)-285(was)-285(directed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mostly)-396(against)-395(popular)-396(religion)-395(or)-396(against)-395(the)-396(theology)-395(of)-396(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophers.)-372(As)-291(it)-291(was)-291(asserted)-290(in)-291(antiquity)-291(that)-291(Epicurus)-291(used)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-250(book)-250(largely,)-250(the)-250(latter)-250(is)-250(more)-250(probable.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Whereas)-490(in)-491(the)-490(case)-491(of)-490(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 133.269 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(imperfect)-490(Socratics)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 87.146 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.194 0 Td[(as)-490(well)]TJ -247.408 -13.549 Td[(as)-482(of)-482(all)-483(the)-482(earlier)-482(philosophers)-482(we)-482(must)-482(content)-483(ourselves)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(with)-332(more)-332(or)-332(less)-332(casual)-332(notes,)-353(and)-332(at)-332(the)-332(best)-332(with)-332(fragments,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-301(fo)-1(r)-301(Socrates)-301(with)-302(second-hand)-301(information,)-315(when)-301(we)-302(come)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-460(Plato)-460(we)-460(find)-461(ourselves)-460(for)-460(the)-460(first)-460(time)-460(in)-460(the)-461(presence)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-586(full)-587(and)-586(authentic)-587(information.)-1259(Plato)-587(belongs)-586(to)-587(those)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(few)-390(among)-389(the)-390(ancient)-390(authors)-389(of)-390(whom)-389(everything)-390(that)-390(their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(contemporaries)-373(possessed)-372(has)-373(been)-372(preserved)-373(to)-372(our)-373(own)-373(day.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(There)-335(would,)-357(however,)-356(be)-335(no)-336(cause)-335(to)-335(speak)-335(about)-335(Plato)-335(in)-336(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(investigation)-185(of)-185(atheism)-186(in)-185(antiquity,)-198(had)-185(not)-185(so)-185(eminent)-185(a)-186(scholar)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-248(Zeller)-248(roundly)-248(asserted)-248(that)-248(Plato)-248(did)-248(not)-248(believe)-248(in)-249(the)-248(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 20.608 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(with)-286(the)-286(exception)-286(of)-285(the)-286(heavenly)-286(bodies,)-295(in)-286(the)-286(case)-286(of)]TJ -31.517 -13.549 Td[(which)-290(the)-290(facts)-291(are)-290(obvious.)-370(On)-291(the)-290(other)-290(hand,)-300(it)-290(is)-291(impossible)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(here)-362(to)-361(enter)-362(upon)-362(a)-361(close)-362(discussion)-362(of)-361(so)-362(large)-361(a)-362(question;)-418(I)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(must)-342(content)-342(myself)-342(with)-341(giving)-342(my)-342(views)-342(in)-342(their)-342(main)-342(lines,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-250(a)-250(brief)-250(statement)-250(of)-250(my)-250(reasons)-250(for)-250(holding)-250(them.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-307(the)-308(mythical)-307(portions)-307(of)-308(his)-307(dialogues)-308(Plato)-307(uses)-307(the)-308(gods)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(as)-409(a)-409(given)-409(poetic)-409(motive)-409(and)-409(treats)-409(them)-409(with)-409(poetic)-409(licence.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Otherwise)-263(they)-264(play)-263(a)-264(very)-263(inferior)-264(part)-263(in)-263(the)-264(greater)-263(portion)-264(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(his)-336(works.)-508(In)-335(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 81.069 0 Td[(Euthyphron)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 55.177 0 Td[(he)-336(gives)-336(a)-336(sharp)-336(criticism)-335(of)-336(the)]TJ -136.246 -13.549 Td[(popular)-260(c)-1(onception)-260(of)-260(piety,)-263(and)-261(in)-260(reality)-261(at)-260(the)-261(same)-260(time)-261(very)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+317 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 318 0 R
+/Resources 316 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 302 0 R
+>> endobj
+319 0 obj <<
+/D [317 0 R /XYZ 67.495 409.782 null]
+>> endobj
+316 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+322 0 obj <<
+/Length 5163      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(62)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(seriously)-420(questions)-421(the)-420(importance)-840(and)-421(value)-420(of)-420(the)-421(existing)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([077])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(form)-435(of)-435(worship.)-805(In)-435(his)-434(chie)-1(f)-434(ethical)-435(work,)-482(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 226.596 0 Td[(Gorgias)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.76 0 Td[(,)-481(he)]TJ -262.356 -13.549 Td[(subjects)-229(the)-229(fundamental)-229(problems)-229(of)-229(individual)-229(ethics)-229(to)-229(a)-229(close)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(discussion)-278(without)-278(saying)-279(one)-278(word)-278(of)-278(their)-278(relation)-278(to)-279(religion;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(if)-197(we)-198(except)-197(the)-197(mythic)-197(part)-198(at)-197(the)-197(end)-197(the)-198(gods)-197(scarcely)-197(appear)-198(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-204(dialogue.)-234(Finally,)-213(in)-204(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 120.042 0 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.005 0 Td[(he)-204(no)-204(doubt)-203(gives)-204(a)-204(detailed)]TJ -161.047 -13.549 Td[(criticism)-293(of)-292(popular)-293(mythology)-293(as)-292(an)-293(element)-293(of)-292(education,)-304(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-260(the)-259(course)-260(of)-260(this)-259(also)-260(some)-259(positive)-260(definitions)-260(of)-259(the)-260(idea)-260(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(God,)-281(but)-274(throughout)-274(the)-275(construction)-274(of)-274(his)-275(ideal)-274(community)-275(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(entirely)-261(disregards)-261(religion)-261(and)-261(worship,)-264(even)-261(if)-261(he)-261(occasionally)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(takes)-372(it)-372(for)-372(granted)-372(that)-372(a)-372(cult)-372(of)-372(some)-372(sort)-372(exists,)-403(and)-372(in)-372(one)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(place)-351(quite)-351(casually)-351(refers)-350(to)-351(the)-351(Oracle)-351(at)-351(Delphi)-351(as)-351(authority)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-306(its)-306(organisation)-306(in)-306(details.)-418(To)-306(this)-306(may)-306(further)-306(be)-306(added)-306(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(negative)-309(point)-308(that)-309(he)-309(never)-308(in)-309(any)-309(of)-309(his)-308(works)-309(made)-309(Socrates)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(define)-412(his)-411(position)-412(in)-411(regard)-412(to)-411(the)-412(sophistic)-411(treatment)-412(of)-412(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-250(religion.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-262(Plato's)-263(later)-262(works)-262(the)-262(case)-263(is)-262(different.)-287(In)-262(the)-263(construction)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(of)-233(the)-233(universe)-233(described)-233(in)-233(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 138.248 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 39.512 0 Td[(the)-233(gods)-233(have)-233(a)-233(definite)]TJ -177.76 -13.549 Td[(and)-376(significant)-375(p)-1(lace,)-407(and)-375(in)-376(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 150.063 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-407(Plato's)-376(last)-376(work,)-407(they)]TJ -173.103 -13.549 Td[(play)-229(a)-228(leading)-229(part.)-243(Here)-229(he)-228(not)-229(only)-229(gives)-229(elaborate)-228(rules)-229(for)-229(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(organisation)-234(of)-234(the)-234(worship)-234(which)-234(permeate)-234(the)-234(whole)-234(life)-235(of)-234(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(community,)-356(but)-334(even)-334(in)-335(the)-334(argument)-335(of)-334(the)-335(dialogue)-334(the)-335(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-390(everywhere)-390(in)-390(evidence)-389(in)-390(a)-390(way)-390(which)-390(strongly)-390(suggests)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bigotry.)-350(Finally,)-292(Plato)-283(gives)-283(the)-284(above-mentioned)-283(definitions)-284(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(impiety)-271(and)-272(fixes)-271(the)-272(severest)-271(punishment)-272(for)-271(it)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 209.193 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(for)-271(downright)]TJ -220.102 -13.55 Td[(denial)-299(of)-300(the)-299(gods,)-312(when)-299(all)-300(attempts)-299(at)-300(conversion)-299(have)-300(failed,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(penalty)-250(of)-250(death.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([078])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 84.711 -16.004 Td[(On)-330(this)-330(evidence)-331(we)-330(are)-330(tempted)-330(to)-331(take)-330(the)-330(view)-330(that)-331(Plato)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(in)-399(his)-398(earlier)-399(years)-399(took)-399(up)-398(a)-399(critical)-399(attitude)-398(in)-399(regard)-399(to)-399(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-433(of)-432(po)-1(pular)-432(belief,)-479(perhaps)-432(even)-433(denied)-433(them)-433(altogether,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-264(he)-265(gradually)-264(grew)-265(more)-264(conservative,)-268(and)-264(ended)-265(by)-264(being)-265(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(confirmed)-290(bigot.)-369(And)-290(we)-290(might)-290(look)-289(for)-290(a)-290(corroboration)-290(of)-290(this)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-212(a)-211(peculiar)-212(observation)-211(in)-212(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 135.038 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(.)-237(Plato)-212(opens)-211(his)-212(admonition)]TJ -158.078 -13.549 Td[(to)-373(the)-372(young)-373(against)-373(atheism)-372(by)-373(reminding)-373(them)-372(that)-373(they)-373(are)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+321 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 322 0 R
+/Resources 320 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 302 0 R
+>> endobj
+323 0 obj <<
+/D [321 0 R /XYZ 254.9 518.175 null]
+>> endobj
+324 0 obj <<
+/D [321 0 R /XYZ 93.543 161.063 null]
+>> endobj
+320 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+327 0 obj <<
+/Length 5294      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(63)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(young,)-301(and)-292(that)-291(false)-291(opinion)-291(concerning)-291(the)-291(gods)-291(is)-291(a)-292(common)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(disease)-184(among)-183(the)-184(young,)-197(but)-184(that)-183(utter)-184(denial)-184(of)-183(their)-184(existence)-184(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-228(wont)-228(to)-228(endure)-228(to)-228(old)-228(age.)-242(In)-228(this)-228(we)-228(might)-228(see)-228(an)-228(expression)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(personal)-250(religious)-250(experience.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Nevertheless)-458(I)-457(do)-457(not)-458(think)-457(such)-458(a)-458(construction)-457(of)-458(Plato's)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(religious)-516(development)-516(feasible.)-1048(A)-516(decisive)-516(objection)-516(is)-516(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(exposition)-244(of)-244(the)-244(Socratic)-244(point)-244(of)-244(view)-244(in)-244(so)-244(early)-244(a)-245(work)-244(as)-244(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(.)-600(I)-367(at)-366(any)-367(rate)-367(regard)-366(it)-367(as)-367(psychologically)-367(impossible)]TJ -36.36 -13.549 Td[(that)-353(a)-353(downright)-352(atheist,)-379(be)-353(he)-352(ever)-353(so)-353(great)-353(a)-352(poet,)-379(should)-353(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(able)-240(to)-241(draw)-240(such)-241(a)-240(picture)-241(of)-240(a)-240(deeply)-241(religious)-240(personality,)-243(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(draw)-262(it)-262(with)-262(so)-262(much)-262(sympathy)-262(and)-262(such)-262(convincing)-262(force.)-287(Add)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-230(this)-230(other)-229(facts)-230(of)-230(secondary)-230(moment.)-243(Even)-230(the)-230(close)-230(criticism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-374(which)-374(Plato)-374(subjects)-374(the)-374(popular)-374(notions)-374(of)-374(the)-374(gods)-374(in)-374(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.485 0 Td[(does)-248(not)-248(indicate)-247(denial)-248(of)-248(the)-248(gods)-247(as)-248(such;)-249(moreover,)]TJ -41.485 -13.549 Td[(it)-316(is)-316(built)-316(on)-316(a)-316(positive)-316(foundation,)-333(on)-316(the)-316(idea)-316(of)-316(the)-316(goodness)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-364(the)-364(gods)-364(and)-364(their)-364(truth)-364(\050which)-364(for)-364(Plato)-364(manifests)-365(itself)-364(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(immutability\051.)-530(Finally,)-366(Plato)-344(at)-343(all)-343(times)-343(vigorously)-344(advocated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-208(belief)-207(in)-207(providence.)-236(In)-208(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 134.162 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.303 0 Td[(he)-207(stamps)-208(unbelief)-207(in)-208(divine)]TJ -159.465 -13.549 Td[(providence)-277(as)-277(impiety;)-290(in)-277(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 130.99 0 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.802 0 Td[(he)-277(insists)-277(in)-276(a)-277(prominent)]TJ -172.792 -13.549 Td[(passage)-241(that)-483(the)-241(gods)-242(love)-241(the)-241(just)-241(man)-242(and)-241(order)-241(everything)-242(for)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([079])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(him)-203(in)-202(the)-203(best)-202(way.)-235(And)-202(he)-203(puts)-202(the)-203(same)-202(thought)-203(into)-203(Socrates's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mouth)-339(in)-339(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 60.8 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(,)-361(though)-340(it)-339(is)-339(hardly)-339(Socratic)-339(in)-339(the)-339(strict)]TJ -97.16 -13.549 Td[(sense)-308(of)-308(the)-309(word,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 84.798 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.961 0 Td[(as)-308(a)-308(main)-308(point)-309(in)-308(Socrates's)-308(conception)]TJ -102.759 -13.549 Td[(of)-461(existence.)-884(All)-461(this)-461(should)-461(warn)-461(us)-461(not)-461(to)-461(exaggerate)-462(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(significance)-229(of)-230(the)-229(difference)-230(which)-229(may)-229(be)-230(pointed)-229(out)-230(between)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-262(religious)-262(standpoints)-262(of)-262(the)-261(younger)-262(and)-262(the)-262(older)-262(Plato.)-286(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-301(difference)-302(itself)-301(cannot,)-314(I)-301(think,)-315(be)-301(denied;)-327(there)-301(can)-302(hardly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-248(any)-248(doubt)-248(that)-248(Plato)-248(was)-248(much)-248(more)-248(critical)-248(of)-249(popular)-248(belief)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-250(his)-250(youth)-250(and)-250(prime)-250(than)-250(towards)-250(the)-250(close)-250(of)-250(his)-250(life.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Even)-660(in)-660(Plato's)-659(later)-660(works)-660(there)-660(is,)-762(in)-660(spite)-660(of)-660(their)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(conservative)-423(attitude,)-466(a)-423(very)-422(peculiar)-423(reservation)-423(in)-423(regard)-423(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-357(anthropomorphic)-356(gods)-357(of)-356(popular)-357(belief.)-569(It)-357(shows)-356(itself)-357(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.04 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.75 0 Td[(in)-248(the)-249(fact)-248(that)-248(where)-249(he)-248(sets)-248(out)-249(to)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 154.658 0 Td[(prove)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.549 0 Td[(the)-248(existence)]TJ -223.997 -13.549 Td[(of)-445(the)-445(gods)-444(he)-445(contents)-445(himself)-445(with)-444(proving)-445(the)-445(divinity)-445(of)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+326 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 327 0 R
+/Resources 325 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 329 0 R
+>> endobj
+328 0 obj <<
+/D [326 0 R /XYZ 102.327 258.286 null]
+>> endobj
+325 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+332 0 obj <<
+/Length 5159      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(64)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(the)-473(heavenly)-473(bodies)-472(and)-473(quite)-473(disregards)-473(the)-473(other)-472(gods.)-919(It)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(appears)-470(still)-470(more)-470(plainly)-470(in)-470(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 154.999 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(,)-525(where)-470(he)-470(gives)-470(a)]TJ -191.97 -13.549 Td[(philosophical)-453(explanation)-453(of)-453(how)-453(the)-453(divine)-453(hea)-1(venly)-453(bodies)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(came)-378(into)-378(existence,)-410(but)-378(says)-378(expressly)-378(of)-378(the)-378(other)-378(gods)-378(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(such)-378(an)-378(explanation)-377(is)-378(impossible,)-410(and)-378(that)-377(we)-378(must)-378(abide)-378(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(what)-319(the)-319(old)-319(theologians)-319(said)-320(on)-319(this)-319(subject;)-353(they)-319(being)-320(partly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-290(children)-289(of)-290(gods)-290(would)-289(know)-290(best)-290(where)-289(their)-290(parents)-290(came)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from.)-239(It)-219(is)-218(observations)-218(of)-218(this)-219(kind)-218(that)-218(induced)-218(Zeller)-218(to)-219(believe)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-335(Plato)-335(altogether)-336(denied)-335(the)-335(gods)-335(of)-335(popular)-336(belief;)-377(he)-336(also)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(contends)-404(that)-405(the)-404(gods)-404(have)-405(no)-404(place)-404(in)-404(Plato's)-405(system.)-713(This)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(latter)-349(contention)-349(is)-349(perfectly)-349(correct;)-398(Plato)-349(never)-349(identified)-349(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-710(with)-355(the)-356(ideas)-355(\050although)-355(he)-355(comes)-355(very)-355(near)-355(to)-355(it)-355(in)-356(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([080])]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.782 0 Td[(,)-340(where)-323(he)-322(attributes)-322(to)-323(them)-322(immutability,)-340(the)-323(quality)]TJ -38.782 -13.549 Td[(which)-308(determines)-307(the)-308(essence)-308(of)-307(the)-308(ideas\051,)-322(and)-307(in)-308(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 243.659 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -243.659 -13.55 Td[(he)-250(distinguishes)-251(sharply)-250(between)-251(them.)-251(No)-250(doubt)-251(his)-250(doctrine)-251(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ideas)-165(led)-165(up)-164(to)-165(a)-165(kind)-165(of)-164(divinity,)-182(the)-165(idea)-165(of)-164(the)-165(good,)-182(as)-165(the)-165(crown)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-185(the)-186(system,)-198(but)-186(the)-185(direct)-186(inference)-185(from)-186(this)-185(conception)-186(would)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-292(pure)-293(monotheism)-292(and)-292(so)-292(exclude)-293(polytheism.)-376(This)-293(inference)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Plato)-257(did)-257(not)-257(draw,)-259(though)-257(his)-257(treatment)-257(of)-257(the)-257(gods)-257(in)-257(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 257.59 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -257.59 -13.55 Td[(and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 18.073 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 39.291 0 Td[(certainly)-213(shows)-212(that)-213(he)-213(was)-212(quite)-213(clear)-213(that)-212(the)-213(gods)]TJ -57.364 -13.549 Td[(of)-273(the)-273(popular)-273(faith)-273(were)-273(an)-273(irrational)-273(element)-273(in)-273(his)-273(conception)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-272(the)-273(universe.)-316(The)-273(two)-272(passages)-272(do)-272(not)-273(entitle)-272(us)-272(to)-272(go)-273(further)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-310(conclude)-311(that)-310(he)-310(utterly)-310(rejected)-311(them,)-325(and)-310(in)-310(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 240.932 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(,)]TJ -277.903 -13.549 Td[(where)-191(Plato)-191(makes)-191(both)-191(classes)-191(of)-191(gods,)-203(both)-191(the)-191(heavenly)-192(bodies)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-348(the)-348(others,)-373(take)-348(part)-349(in)-348(the)-348(creation)-348(of)-348(man,)-373(this)-348(is)-349(plainly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(precluded.)-509(The)-337(playful)-336(turn)-337(with)-336(which)-336(he)-337(evades)-336(inquiry)-337(into)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-383(origin)-383(of)-383(the)-383(gods)-383(thus)-384(receives)-383(its)-383(proper)-383(limitation;)-449(it)-384(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(entirely)-250(confined)-250(to)-250(their)-250(origin.)]TJ 11.955 -18.459 Td[(Such,)-436(according)-399(to)-399(my)-399(view,)-436(is)-399(the)-399(state)-399(of)-399(the)-399(case.)-697(It)-399(is)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(of)-266(fundamental)-267(importance)-266(to)-266(emphasise)-266(the)-267(fact)-266(that)-266(we)-267(cannot)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conclude,)-331(because)-315(the)-315(gods)-314(of)-315(popular)-315(belief)-315(do)-314(not)-315(fit)-315(into)-315(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(system)-300(of)-301(a)-300(philosopher,)-313(that)-301(he)-300(denies)-301(their)-300(existence.)-401(In)-301(what)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(follows)-412(we)-412(shall)-412(have)-413(occasion)-412(to)-412(point)-412(out)-412(a)-412(case)-412(in)-413(which,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-362(all)-362(are)-362(now)-361(agreed,)-390(a)-362(philosophical)-362(school)-362(has)-362(adopted)-362(and)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+331 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 332 0 R
+/Resources 330 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 329 0 R
+>> endobj
+333 0 obj <<
+/D [331 0 R /XYZ 118.025 369.134 null]
+>> endobj
+330 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+336 0 obj <<
+/Length 5056      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(65)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(stubbornly)-253(held)-253(to)-253(the)-253(belief)-252(in)-253(the)-253(existence)-253(of)-253(gods)-253(though)-253(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(assumption)-209(was)-209(directly)-209(opposed)-208(to)-209(a)-209(fundamental)-209(proposition)-209(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-194(system)-194(of)-194(doctrine.)-231(The)-194(case)-194(of)-195(Plato)-194(is)-194(particularly)-194(interesting)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(because)-400(he)-400(himself)-399(was)-400(aware)-400(and)-400(has)-799(pointed)-400(out)-400(that)-400(here)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([081])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(was)-289(a)-290(point)-289(on)-289(which)-290(the)-289(consistent)-290(scientific)-289(application)-289(of)-290(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conception)-304(of)-303(the)-304(universe)-304(must)-304(fail.)-411(It)-303(is)-304(the)-304(outcome)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 241.568 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(one)-304(of)]TJ -252.477 -13.549 Td[(many)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 24.24 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(of)-393(what)-392(is)-393(perhaps)-392(his)-393(finest)-392(quality)-393(as)-392(a)-393(philosopher,)]TJ -35.149 -13.549 Td[(namely,)-250(his)-250(intellectual)-250(honesty.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(An)-465(indirect)-466(testimony)-465(to)-466(the)-465(correctness)-465(of)-466(the)-465(view)-466(here)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(stated)-272(will)-272(be)-272(found)-272(in)-271(the)-272(way)-272(in)-272(which)-272(Plato's)-272(faithful)-272(disciple)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Xenocrates)-247(developed)-248(his)-247(theology,)-248(for)-247(it)-248(shows)-247(that)-248(Xenocrates)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(presupposed)-262(the)-262(existence)-262(of)-261(the)-262(gods)-262(of)-262(popular)-262(belief)-262(as)-262(given)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-417(Plato.)-752(Xenocrates)-417(made)-417(it)-417(his)-417(general)-417(task)-417(to)-418(systematise)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Plato's)-332(philosophy)-333(\050which)-332(had)-333(never)-332(been)-332(set)-333(forth)-332(publicly)-333(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(himself)-462(as)-463(a)-462(whole\051,)-515(and)-462(to)-463(secure)-462(it)-462(against)-463(attack.)-886(In)-463(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(course)-228(of)-228(this)-228(work)-228(he)-227(was)-228(bound)-228(to)-228(discover)-228(that)-228(the)-228(conception)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-369(the)-370(gods)-369(of)-369(popular)-370(belief)-369(was)-369(a)-370(particularly)-369(weak)-369(point)-370(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Plato's)-312(system,)-326(and)-312(he)-311(attempted)-312(to)-312(mend)-311(matters)-312(by)-311(a)-312(peculiar)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theory)-294(which)-294(became)-295(of)-294(the)-294(greatest)-294(importance)-294(for)-294(later)-295(times.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Xenocrates)-521(set)-520(up)-521(as)-520(gods,)-588(in)-521(the)-520(first)-521(place,)-588(the)-521(heavenly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bodies.)-358(Next)-286(he)-286(gave)-286(his)-286(highest)-286(principles)-286(\050pure)-286(abstracts)-286(such)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-348(oneness)-348(and)-348(twoness\051)-348(and)-348(the)-348(elements)-348(of)-348(his)-348(universe)-348(\050air,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(water)-324(and)-324(earth\051)-323(the)-324(names)-324(of)-324(some)-323(of)-324(the)-324(highest)-324(divinities)-324(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-342(belief)-342(\050Zeus,)-365(Hades,)-365(Poseidon,)-365(Demeter\051.)-526(These)-342(gods,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(however,)-269(did)-265(not)-265(enter)-265(into)-265(direct)-265(communication)-266(with)-265(men,)-269(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(only)-300(through)-300(some)-300(intermediate)-300(agent.)-400(The)-301(intermediate)-300(agents)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-256(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 40.11 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(demons,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.665 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.635 0 Td[(a)-256(class)-256(of)-256(beings)-255(who)-256(were)-256(higher)-256(than)-256(man)]TJ -89.254 -13.55 Td[(yet)-382(not)-381(perfect)-382(like)-381(the)-382(gods.)-645(They)-381(were,)-415(it)-381(seems,)-415(immortal;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they)-340(were)-341(invisible)-340(and)-340(far)-340(more)-341(powerful)-340(than)-340(human)-341(beings;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-428(they)-429(were)-428(subject)-428(to)-429(human)-428(passions)-429(and)-428(were)-428(of)-429(highly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(differing)-617(grades)-309(of)-309(moral)-308(perfection.)-426(These)-309(are)-308(the)-309(beings)-309(that)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([082])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(are)-280(the)-281(objects)-280(of)-280(the)-281(greater)-280(part)-281(of)-280(the)-280(existing)-281(cult,)-288(especially)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(such)-260(usages)-259(as)-260(rest)-260(on)-260(the)-259(assumption)-260(that)-260(the)-259(gods)-260(can)-260(do)-260(harm)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-290(are)-291(directed)-290(towards)-290(averting)-291(it,)-300(or)-290(which)-291(are)-290(in)-290(other)-291(ways)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+335 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 336 0 R
+/Resources 334 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 329 0 R
+>> endobj
+337 0 obj <<
+/D [335 0 R /XYZ 228.15 477.528 null]
+>> endobj
+338 0 obj <<
+/D [335 0 R /XYZ 88.309 106.79 null]
+>> endobj
+334 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+341 0 obj <<
+/Length 4698      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(66)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(objectionable;)-506(and)-421(with)-420(them)-421(are)-421(connected)-420(the)-421(myths)-421(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Plato)-427(subjected)-428(to)-427(so)-428(severe)-427(a)-428(criticism.)-782(Xenocrates)-427(found)-428(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(basis)-271(for)-270(this)-271(system)-271(in)-270(Plato,)-276(who)-271(in)-270(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 181.479 0 Td[(Symposium)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 52.643 0 Td[(sets)-271(up)-270(the)]TJ -234.122 -13.549 Td[(demons)-300(as)-300(a)-300(class)-300(of)-300(beings)-300(between)-300(gods)-300(and)-300(men,)-313(and)-300(makes)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(them)-280(carriers)-281(of)-280(the)-280(prayers)-280(and)-281(wishes)-280(of)-280(men)-280(to)-281(the)-280(gods.)-341(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(what)-356(was)-356(a)-356(passing)-356(thought)-356(with)-356(Plato)-356(serving)-356(only)-356(a)-356(poetical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(purpose)-250(was)-250(taken)-250(seriously)-250(and)-250(systematised)-250(by)-250(Xenocrates.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(It)-589(can)-589(hardly)-589(be)-589(said)-589(that)-589(Xenocrates)-589(has)-589(gained)-589(much)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(recognition)-292(among)-292(modern)-293(writers)-292(on)-292(the)-292(history)-292(of)-293(philosophy)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-494(his)-494(theory)-494(of)-495(demons.)-982(And)-494(yet)-494(I)-494(cannot)-494(see)-494(that)-495(there)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(was)-383(any)-384(other)-383(possible)-383(solution)-383(of)-384(the)-383(problem)-383(which)-384(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-376(belief)-376(set)-376(ancient)-376(philosophy,)-407(if,)-407(be)-376(it)-376(understood,)-408(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(hold)-245(fast)-245(by)-245(two)-245(hypotheses:)-248(the)-245(first,)-246(that)-245(the)-245(popular)-245(belief)-246(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(worship)-353(of)-352(the)-353(ancients)-352(was)-353(based)-352(throughout)-353(on)-352(a)-353(foundation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-496(reality;)-618(and)-496(second,)-557(that)-496(moral)-495(perfec)-1(tion)-495(is)-496(an)-496(essential)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(factor)-316(in)-316(the)-317(conception)-316(of)-316(God.)-449(The)-316(only)-316(inconsistency)-317(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-379(may)-378(perhaps)-379(bring)-378(home)-379(to)-378(Xenocrates)-379(is)-378(that)-379(he)-379(retained)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(certain)-440(of)-439(the)-440(popular)-439(names)-440(of)-439(the)-440(gods)-439(as)-440(designations)-440(for)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-361(in)-362(his)-361(sense;)-418(but)-361(this)-361(inconsistency)-362(was,)-389(as)-362(we)-361(shall)-362(see,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(subsequently)-223(removed.)-241(In)-222(favour)-223(of)-223(this)-222(estimate)-223(of)-223(Xenocrates's)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(doctrine)-507(of)-507(demons)-507(may)-507(further)-507(be)-507(adduced)-507(that)-507(it)-507(actually)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-404(the)-405(last)-404(word)-404(of)-404(ancient)-405(philosophy)-404(on)-404(the)-405(matter.)-712(The)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([083])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(doctrine)-310(was)-309(adopted)-310(by)-309(the)-310(Stoics,)-324(the)-310(Neo-Pythagoreans,)-325(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-305(Neo-Platonists.)-414(Only)-305(the)-305(Epicureans)-305(went)-304(another)-305(way,)-319(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-419(doc)-1(trine)-419(died)-419(out)-420(before)-419(the)-420(close)-419(of)-420(antiquity.)-758(And)-420(so)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-408(doctrine)-408(of)-409(demons)-408(became)-408(the)-408(ground)-408(on)-408(which)-409(Jewish-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Christian)-362(monotheism)-361(managed)-362(to)-361(come)-362(to)-361(terms)-362(with)-362(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(paganism,)-250(to)-250(conquer)-250(it)-250(in)-250(theory,)-250(as)-250(it)-250(were.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(This)-363(implies,)-392(however,)-392(that)-363(the)-363(doctrine)-364(of)-363(demons,)-392(though)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(it)-651(arose)-650(out)-651(of)-650(an)-651(honest)-650(attempt)-651(to)-650(save)-651(popular)-651(belief)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophically,)-528(in)-472(reality)-472(brings)-473(out)-472(its)-472(incompatibility)-473(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophy.)-893(The)-464(religion)-465(and)-464(worship)-465(of)-464(the)-464(ancients)-465(could)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(dispense)-256(with)-256(neither)-257(the)-256(higher)-256(nor)-256(the)-256(lower)-256(conceptions)-256(of)-257(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods.)-368(If)-290(the)-289(former)-290(were)-289(done)-290(away)-289(with,)-299(recognition,)-300(however)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+340 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 341 0 R
+/Resources 339 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 329 0 R
+>> endobj
+342 0 obj <<
+/D [340 0 R /XYZ 374.173 231.187 null]
+>> endobj
+339 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+345 0 obj <<
+/Length 4958      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(67)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(full,)-232(of)-228(the)-228(existence)-227(of)-228(the)-228(gods)-227(was)-228(no)-228(good;)-235(in)-228(the)-227(long)-228(run)-228(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(inference)-328(could)-328(not)-328(be)-328(avoided)-328(that)-328(they)-328(were)-329(immoral)-328(powers)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-218(so)-219(ought)-218(not)-219(to)-218(be)-218(worshipped.)-240(This)-218(was)-219(the)-218(inference)-219(drawn)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-275(Christianity)-274(in)-275(theory)-274(and)-275(enforced)-275(in)-274(practice,)-281(ultimately)-275(by)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(main)-250(force.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Aristotle)-280(is)-281(among)-280(the)-281(philosophers)-280(who)-281(were)-280(prosecuted)-281(for)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(impiety.)-560(When)-354(the)-353(anti-Macedonian)-354(party)-353(came)-354(into)-353(power)-354(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Athens)-180(after)-180(the)-181(death)-180(of)-180(Alexander,)-194(there)-180(broke)-180(out)-180(a)-181(persecution)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(against)-197(his)-197(adherents,)-208(and)-197(this)-197(was)-197(also)-197(directed)-197(against)-197(Aristotle.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(The)-209(basis)-209(of)-209(the)-209(charge)-208(against)-209(him)-209(was)-209(that)-209(he)-209(had)-209(shown)-209(divine)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(honour)-246(after)-245(his)-246(death)-245(to)-246(the)-245(tyrant)-246(Hermias,)-246(whose)-246(guest)-245(he)-246(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(been)-259(during)-259(a)-259(prolonged)-259(stay)-259(in)-259(Asia)-259(Minor.)-277(This)-259(seems)-259(to)-259(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(been)-199(a)-199(fabrication,)-209(and)-198(at)-199(any)-199(rate)-199(has)-198(noth)-1(ing)-198(to)-199(do)-199(with)-199(atheism.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-289(the)-288(writings)-289(of)-288(Aristotle,)-299(as)-288(they)-289(were)-288(then)-289(generally)-289(known,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-536(would)-268(assuredly)-269(have)-268(been)-268(impossible)-268(to)-268(find)-268(any)-268(ground)-269(for)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([084])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(a)-250(charge)-250(of)-250(atheism.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Nevertheless,)-215(Aristotle)-206(is)-207(one)-206(of)-207(the)-206(philosophers)-206(about)-207(whose)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(faith)-234(in)-234(the)-234(gods)-233(of)-234(popular)-234(religion)-234(well-founded)-234(doubts)-234(may)-234(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(raised.)-249(Like)-248(Plato,)-247(he)-248(acknowledged)-247(the)-248(divinity)-247(of)-247(the)-248(heavenly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bodies)-306(on)-306(the)-306(ground)-306(that)-306(they)-306(must)-306(have)-306(a)-306(soul)-306(since)-306(they)-306(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(independent)-436(motion.)-807(Further,)-482(he)-435(has)-436(a)-436(kind)-435(of)-436(supreme)-436(god)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(who,)-239(himself)-235(unm)-1(oved,)-238(is)-236(the)-236(cause)-236(of)-235(all)-236(movement,)-239(and)-236(whose)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(constituent)-407(quality)-407(is)-407(reason.)-721(As)-407(regards)-407(the)-407(god)-1(s)-407(of)-407(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(belief,)-322(in)-307(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 58.996 0 Td[(Ethics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.624 0 Td[(and)-307(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 35.187 0 Td[(Politics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.689 0 Td[(he)-307(assumes)-307(public)-308(worship)]TJ -161.496 -13.549 Td[(to)-395(be)-394(a)-395(necessary)-394(constituent)-395(of)-394(the)-395(life)-394(of)-395(the)-394(individual)-395(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-375(community.)-626(He)-376(gave)-375(no)-376(grounds)-375(for)-375(this)-376(assumption)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 258.812 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(on)]TJ -269.721 -13.549 Td[(the)-291(contrary,)-302(he)-292(expressly)-291(declared)-292(that)-291(it)-291(was)-292(a)-291(question)-292(which)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(ought)-280(not)-280(to)-281(be)-280(discussed)-280(at)-280(all:)-311(he)-280(who)-280(stirs)-280(up)-280(doubts)-281(whether)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(honour)-195(should)-195(be)-194(paid)-195(to)-195(the)-195(gods)-194(is)-195(in)-195(need)-195(not)-194(of)-195(teaching)-195(but)-195(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(punishment.)-225(\050That)-176(he)-176(himself)-176(took)-176(part)-177(in)-176(worship)-176(is)-176(evident)-176(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-323(will.\051)-469(Further,)-341(in)-323(his)-323(ethical)-323(works)-323(he)-323(used)-323(the)-323(conceptions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-380(the)-380(gods)-380(almost)-381(in)-380(the)-380(same)-380(way)-380(as)-380(we)-380(have)-380(assumed)-381(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Socrates)-303(did,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 60.373 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.777 0 Td[(as)-303(the)-302(ethical)-303(ideal)-302(and)-303(determining)-302(the)-303(limits)]TJ -78.15 -13.549 Td[(of)-387(the)-387(human.)-662(He)-387(never)-387(entered)-387(upon)-387(any)-387(elaborate)-388(criticism)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+344 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 345 0 R
+/Resources 343 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 329 0 R
+>> endobj
+346 0 obj <<
+/D [344 0 R /XYZ 55.762 326.032 null]
+>> endobj
+343 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+349 0 obj <<
+/Length 4960      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(68)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(of)-398(the)-398(lower)-398(elements)-397(of)-398(popular)-398(religion)-398(such)-398(as)-398(Plato)-398(gave.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(So)-379(far)-378(everything)-379(is)-379(in)-378(admirable)-379(order.)-636(But)-379(if)-378(we)-379(look)-379(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(closely)-240(at)-239(things)-240(there)-239(is)-240(nevertheless)-239(nearly)-240(always)-239(a)-240(little)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 257.001 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(but)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.941 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.786 -13.549 Td[(in)-275(Aristotle's)-274(utterances)-275(about)-275(the)-274(gods.)-325(Where)-274(he)-275(operates)-275(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(popular)-295(notions)-295(he)-296(prefers)-295(to)-295(speak)-295(hypothetically)-295(or)-295(to)-295(refer)-296(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(what)-191(is)-190(generally)-191(assumed;)-210(or)-190(he)-191(is)-191(content)-190(to)-191(use)-190(only)-191(definitions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-389(will)-390(also)-389(agree)-390(with)-389(his)-779(own)-389(philosophical)-390(conception)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([085])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(of)-406(God.)-716(But)-406(he)-405(goes)-406(further;)-483(in)-406(a)-405(few)-406(places)-405(in)-406(his)-406(writings)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(there)-373(are)-373(utterances)-374(which)-373(it)-373(seems)-373(can)-373(only)-373(be)-373(interpreted)-374(as)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-327(radical)-327(denial)-327(of)-327(the)-326(popular)-327(religion.)-481(The)-327(most)-327(important)-327(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(them)-250(deserves)-250(to)-250(be)-250(quoted)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 121.495 0 Td[(in)-250(extenso)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 43.931 0 Td[(:)]TJ/F30 9.863 Tf -145.789 -22.186 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 9.863 Tf 4.379 0 Td[(A)-411(tradition)-411(has)-411(been)-410(handed)-411(down)-411(from)-411(the)-411(ancients)-411(and)]TJ -4.379 -12.822 Td[(from)-376(the)-376(most)-376(primitive)-376(times,)-407(and)-376(left)-376(to)-376(later)-376(ages)-376(in)-376(the)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(form)-366(of)-367(myth,)-395(that)-366(these)-366(substances)-367(\050)]TJ/F28 9.863 Tf 152.626 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 9.863 Tf 17.959 0 Td[(sky)-366(and)-367(heavenl)1(y)]TJ -170.585 -12.822 Td[(bodies\051)-470(are)-469(gods)-470(and)-469(that)-470(the)-469(divine)-470(embraces)-469(all)-470(nature.)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(The)-323(rest)-323(consists)-323(in)-323(legendary)-323(additions)-323(intended)-323(to)-323(impress)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(the)-380(multitude)-380(and)-379(serve)-380(the)-380(purposes)-380(of)-379(legislation)-380(and)-380(the)]TJ 0 -12.821 Td[(common)-316(weal;)-350(for)-317(these)-316(gods)-317(are)-316(said)-317(to)-316(have)-317(human)-316(shape)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(or)-228(resemble)-229(certain)-228(other)-229(beings)-228(\050animals\051,)-233(and)-228(they)-229(say)-228(other)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(things)-391(which)-392(follow)-391(from)-392(this)-391(and)-392(are)-391(of)-392(a)-391(similar)-392(kind)-391(to)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(those)-419(already)-420(mentioned.)-758(But)-419(if)-420(we)-419(disregard)-419(all)-420(this)-419(and)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(restrict)-299(ourselves)-299(to)-298(the)-299(first)-299(point,)-311(that)-299(they)-298(thought)-299(that)-299(the)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(first)-294(substances)-293(were)-294(gods,)-304(we)-294(must)-294(acknowledge)-293(that)-294(it)-293(is)-294(a)]TJ 0 -12.821 Td[(divinely)-281(inspired)-282(saying.)-344(And)-282(as,)-289(in)-282(all)-281(probability,)-290(every)-281(art)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(and)-352(science)-351(has)-352(been)-351(discovered)-352(many)-352(times,)-377(as)-351(far)-352(as)-351(it)-352(is)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(possible,)-340(and)-323(has)-322(perished)-322(again,)-341(so)-322(these)-322(notions,)-341(too,)-340(may)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(have)-274(been)-273(preserved)-274(till)-274(now)-273(as)-274(relics)-274(of)-274(those)-273(times.)-321(To)-274(this)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(extent)-326(only)-326(can)-326(we)-326(have)-326(any)-327(idea)-326(of)-326(the)-326(opinion)-326(which)-326(was)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(held)-230(by)-230(our)-230(fathers)-230(and)-230(has)-231(come)-230(down)-230(from)-230(the)-230(beginning)-230(of)]TJ 0 -12.821 Td[(things.)]TJ/F30 9.863 Tf 26.58 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -34.261 -22.914 Td[(The)-315(last)-315(sentences,)-332(expressing)-315(Aristotle's)-315(idea)-315(of)-315(a)-316(life-cycle)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(and)-348(periods)-349(of)-348(civilisation)-349(which)-348(repeat)-348(themselves,)-373(have)-349(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(been)-318(included)-317(in)-318(the)-318(quotation)-318(for)-317(the)-318(sake)-318(of)-317(completeness.)-454(If)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-347(disregard)-347(them,)-371(the)-347(passage)-346(plainly)-347(enough)-347(states)-347(the)-347(view)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+348 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 349 0 R
+/Resources 347 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 329 0 R
+>> endobj
+350 0 obj <<
+/D [348 0 R /XYZ 235.986 436.88 null]
+>> endobj
+347 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+353 0 obj <<
+/Length 5010      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(69)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(that)-236(the)-473(only)-237(element)-236(of)-236(truth)-237(in)-236(the)-236(traditional)-237(notions)-236(about)-237(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([086])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(gods)-222(was)-222(the)-222(divinity)-221(of)-222(the)-222(sky)-222(and)-222(the)-222(heavenly)-222(bodies;)-231(the)-222(rest)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-261(myth.)-281(Aristotle)-261(has)-261(nowhere)-260(else)-261(expressed)-260(himself)-261(with)-261(such)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(distinctness)-275(and)-275(in)-274(such)-275(length,)-281(but)-275(then)-274(the)-275(passage)-275(in)-275(question)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(has)-417(a)-417(place)-417(of)-418(its)-417(own.)-751(It)-417(comes)-417(in)-417(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 188.218 0 Td[(Metaphysics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 59.085 0 Td[(directly)]TJ -247.303 -13.549 Td[(after)-341(the)-341(exposition)-341(of)-341(his)-341(philosophical)-341(conception)-341(of)-341(God)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 264.877 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(a)]TJ -275.787 -13.549 Td[(position)-186(marked)-186(by)-186(profound)-186(earnestness)-186(and)-186(as)-186(it)-187(were)-186(irradiated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-195(a)-194(quiet)-195(inner)-195(fervour.)-231(We)-195(feel)-194(that)-195(we)-195(are)-194(here)-195(approaching)-195(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(sanctum)-327(sanctorum)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 89.551 0 Td[(of)-327(the)-327(thinker.)-481(In)-327(this)-327(connexion,)-346(and)-327(only)]TJ -89.551 -13.55 Td[(here,)-337(he)-320(wished)-319(for)-320(once)-320(to)-319(state)-320(his)-320(opinion)-319(about)-320(the)-320(religion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-443(his)-443(time)-443(without)-443(reserve.)-828(What)-443(he)-443(says)-443(here)-443(is)-443(a)-443(precise)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(formulation)-258(of)-259(the)-258(result)-258(arrived)-258(at)-258(by)-259(the)-258(best)-258(Greek)-258(thinkers)-259(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(regards)-207(the)-207(religion)-207(of)-206(the)-207(Greek)-207(people.)-236(It)-206(was)-207(not,)-216(they)-207(thought,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(pure)-281(fabrication.)-342(It)-281(contained)-281(an)-281(element)-280(of)-281(truth)-281(of)-281(the)-281(greatest)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(value.)-271(But)-258(most)-257(of)-257(it)-257(consisted)-257(of)-257(human)-257(inventions)-257(without)-258(any)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reality)-250(behind)-250(them.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(A)-239(point)-238(of)-239(view)-239(like)-239(that)-238(of)-239(Aristotle)-239(would,)-241(I)-239(suppose,)-241(hardly)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(have)-220(been)-219(called)-220(atheism)-220(among)-219(the)-220(ancients,)-226(if)-219(only)-220(because)-220(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(heavenly)-368(bodies)-368(were)-369(acknowledged)-368(as)-368(divine.)-604(But)-369(according)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-280(o)-1(ur)-280(definition)-280(it)-281(is)-280(atheism.)-342(The)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 154.506 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(sky)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 15.153 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(-gods)-281(of)-280(Aristotle)-280(have)]TJ -179.346 -13.55 Td[(nothing)-389(in)-388(common)-389(with)-388(the)-389(gods)-389(of)-388(popular)-389(belief,)-423(not)-389(even)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-333(names,)-353(for)-333(Aristotle)-333(never)-333(names)-332(them.)-499(And)-332(the)-333(rest,)-354(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whole)-311(crowd)-310(of)-311(Greek)-311(anthropomorphic)-311(gods,)-325(exist)-311(only)-311(in)-311(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(human)-250(imagination.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Aristotle's)-442(successors)-442(offer)-441(little)-442(of)-442(interest)-442(to)-442(our)-442(inquiry.)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Theophrastus)-382(was)-382(charged)-383(with)-382(impiety,)-415(but)-382(the)-382(charge)-383(broke)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(down)-432(completely.)-1594(His)-432(theological)-432(standpoint)-432(was)-433(certainly)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([087])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(the)-331(same)-331(as)-331(Aristotle's.)-493(Of)-331(Strato,)-351(the)-331(most)-331(independent)-331(of)-331(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Peripatetics,)-331(we)-315(know)-315(that)-315(in)-314(his)-315(view)-315(of)-315(nature)-315(he)-315(laid)-315(greater)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(stress)-346(on)-345(the)-345(material)-346(causes)-345(than)-346(Aristotle)-345(did,)-370(and)-345(so)-346(arrived)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-417(a)-418(different)-417(conception)-417(of)-418(the)-417(supreme)-417(deity.)-752(Aristotle)-418(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(severed)-289(the)-288(deity)-289(from)-288(Nature)-289(and)-289(placed)-288(it)-289(outside)-288(the)-289(latter)-289(as)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(an)-234(incorporeal)-234(being)-233(who)-1(se)-233(chief)-234(determining)-234(factor)-234(was)-234(reason.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-404(Strato's)-403(view)-404(the)-404(deity)-404(was)-403(identical)-404(with)-404(Nature)-403(and,)-443(like)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+352 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 353 0 R
+/Resources 351 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 356 0 R
+>> endobj
+354 0 obj <<
+/D [352 0 R /XYZ 81.623 518.175 null]
+>> endobj
+355 0 obj <<
+/D [352 0 R /XYZ 135.625 160.986 null]
+>> endobj
+351 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+359 0 obj <<
+/Length 4892      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(70)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(the)-365(latter,)-394(was)-366(without)-365(consciousness;)-423(consciousness)-365(was)-366(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(found)-217(in)-218(organic)-217(nature.)-239(Consequently)-217(we)-218(cannot)-217(suppose)-217(him)-218(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-221(believed)-222(in)-221(the)-221(divinity)-222(of)-221(the)-222(heavenly)-221(bodies)-221(in)-222(Aristotle's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sense,)-244(though)-242(no)-242(direct)-242(statement)-242(on)-242(this)-242(subject)-242(has)-242(come)-242(down)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-245(us.)-248(About)-244(his)-245(attitude)-245(towards)-244(popular)-245(belief)-244(we)-245(hear)-245(nothing.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(A)-216(denial)-217(of)-216(the)-216(popular)-217(gods)-216(is)-216(not)-217(necessarily)-216(implied)-216(in)-217(Strato's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theory,)-461(but)-419(seems)-419(reasonable)-419(in)-419(itself)-419(and)-420(is)-419(further)-419(rendered)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(probable)-334(by)-334(the)-334(fact)-334(that)-334(all)-334(writers)-334(seem)-334(to)-334(take)-334(it)-334(for)-334(granted)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-250(Strato)-250(knew)-250(no)-250(god)-250(other)-250(than)-250(the)-250(whole)-250(of)-250(Nature.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(We)-296(designated)-296(Socratic)-296(philosophy,)-308(in)-296(its)-296(relation)-296(to)-297(popular)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(belief,)-612(as)-539(a)-539(reaction)-539(against)-540(the)-539(radical)-539(free-thought)-539(of)-540(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(sophistic)-381(movement.)-643(It)-381(may)-381(seem)-381(peculiar)-381(that)-381(with)-381(Aristotle)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-673(develops)-673(into)-673(a)-672(view)-673(which)-673(we)-673(can)-673(only)-673(describe)-673(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atheism.)-709(There)-403(is,)-441(however,)-442(an)-403(important)-403(difference)-403(between)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-336(standpoints)-336(of)-336(the)-336(sophists)-336(and)-336(of)-336(Aristotle.)-508(Radical)-336(as)-336(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(latter)-260(is)-260(at)-259(bottom,)-262(it)-260(is)-260(not,)-262(however,)-262(openly)-260(opposed)-260(to)-260(popular)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(belief)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 24.84 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(on)-245(the)-246(contrary,)-246(to)-246(any)-245(one)-245(who)-246(did)-245(not)-246(examine)-245(it)-246(more)]TJ -35.749 -13.549 Td[(closely)-362(it)-362(must)-362(have)-362(had)-362(the)-362(appearance)-362(of)-362(accepting)-362(popular)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([088])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(belief.)-237(The)-211(very)-211(assumption)-210(that)-211(the)-211(heavenly)-211(bodies)-211(were)-211(divine)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(would)-221(contribute)-221(to)-221(that)-221(effect;)-231(this,)-227(as)-221(we)-221(have)-221(seen,)-227(was)-221(a)-221(point)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-237(which)-237(the)-237(popular)-237(view)-237(laid)-237(great)-237(stress.)-246(If)-237(we)-237(add)-237(to)-237(this)-237(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Aristotle)-251(never)-251(made)-250(the)-251(existence)-251(of)-251(the)-250(popular)-251(gods)-251(matter)-251(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(debate;)-242(that)-239(he)-238(expressly)-239(acknowledged)-239(the)-238(established)-239(worship;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-229(that)-229(he)-229(consistently)-229(made)-229(use)-229(of)-229(certain)-230(fundamental)-229(notions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-402(popular)-402(belief)-402(in)-401(his)-402(philosophy)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 158.881 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(we)-402(can)-402(hardly)-401(avoid)-402(the)]TJ -169.791 -13.549 Td[(conclusion)-217(that,)-224(notwithstanding)-217(his)-217(personal)-217(emancipation)-218(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-340(existing)-340(religion,)-363(he)-340(is)-340(a)-340(true)-340(representative)-340(of)-340(the)-341(Socratic)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(reaction)-497(against)-497(sophistic.)-991(But)-498(we)-497(see,)-558(too,)-559(that)-497(there)-498(is)-497(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reservation)-442(in)-443(this)-442(reaction.)-827(In)-442(c)-1(ontinuity)-442(with)-442(earlier)-443(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thought)-355(on)-355(religion,)-381(it)-355(proceeded)-355(from)-355(the)-355(absolute)-355(definitions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-467(the)-467(divine)-467(offered)-467(by)-467(popular)-467(belief,)-521(but)-467(when)-467(criticising)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(anthropomorphism)-289(on)-289(this)-290(basis)-289(it)-289(did)-289(not)-289(after)-289(all)-289(avoid)-290(falling)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(out)-341(with)-341(popular)-340(belief.)-523(How)-341(far)-340(each)-341(philosopher)-341(went)-341(in)-341(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(antagonism)-373(was)-372(a)-373(matter)-372(of)-373(discretion,)-403(as)-373(also)-372(was)-373(the)-373(means)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+358 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 359 0 R
+/Resources 357 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 356 0 R
+>> endobj
+360 0 obj <<
+/D [358 0 R /XYZ 374.173 282.929 null]
+>> endobj
+357 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+363 0 obj <<
+/Length 1078      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(V)-20587(71)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(chosen)-231(to)-231(reconcile)-230(the)-231(philosophical)-231(with)-231(the)-230(popular)-231(view.)-244(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theology)-195(of)-196(the)-195(Socratic)-195(schools)-195(thus)-196(suffered)-195(from)-195(a)-195(certain)-196(half-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(heartedness;)-269(in)-263(the)-263(main)-263(it)-263(has)-263(the)-263(character)-263(of)-263(a)-263(compromise.)-289(It)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(would)-284(not)-285(give)-284(up)-284(the)-285(popular)-284(notions)-284(of)-285(the)-284(gods,)-293(and)-284(yet)-285(they)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(were)-341(continually)-342(getting)-341(in)-341(the)-342(way.)-524(This)-341(dualism)-341(governs)-342(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whole)-250(of)-250(the)-250(succeeding)-250(Greek)-250(philosophy.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -29.651 Td[([089])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+362 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 363 0 R
+/Resources 361 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 356 0 R
+>> endobj
+364 0 obj <<
+/D [362 0 R /XYZ 46.771 420.778 null]
+>> endobj
+361 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+365 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index8) >>
+endobj
+368 0 obj
+(Chapter VI)
+endobj
+371 0 obj <<
+/Length 4133      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -44.863 Td[(During)-433(the)-433(three)-433(or)-433(four)-433(centuries)-433(which)-433(passed)-434(between)-433(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(downfall)-242(of)-243(free)-242(Hellas)-242(and)-243(the)-242(beginning)-243(of)-242(the)-242(Roman)-243(Empire,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(great)-209(social)-209(and)-209(political)-209(changes)-209(took)-209(place)-209(in)-209(the)-210(ancient)-209(world,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(involving)-292(also)-292(vital)-292(ch)-1(anges)-292(in)-292(religion.)-376(The)-292(chief)-293(phenomenon)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-224(this)-224(field,)-230(the)-224(invasion)-224(of)-224(foreign,)-229(especially)-224(oriental,)-230(religions)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(into)-233(Hellas,)-237(does)-233(not)-234(come)-233(within)-233(the)-234(scope)-233(of)-233(this)-234(investigation.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(On)-196(the)-196(on)-1(e)-196(hand,)-207(it)-196(is)-196(an)-196(expression)-197(of)-196(dissatisfaction)-196(with)-196(the)-197(old)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods;)-236(on)-229(the)-229(other,)-234(the)-229(intrusion)-229(of)-229(new)-229(gods)-229(would)-229(contribute)-230(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-233(ousting)-234(of)-233(the)-233(old)-233(ones.)-245(There)-233(is)-233(no)-234(question)-233(of)-233(atheism)-234(here;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-229(is)-229(only)-229(a)-228(change)-229(within)-229(polytheism.)-243(But)-229(apart)-229(from)-229(this)-229(change)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(there)-397(is)-398(evidence)-397(that)-398(the)-397(old)-397(faith)-398(had)-397(lost)-397(its)-398(hold)-397(on)-398(men's)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(minds)-405(to)-405(no)-405(inconsiderable)-405(extent.)-716(Here,)-444(too,)-443(there)-405(is)-406(hardly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(any)-275(question)-274(of)-275(atheism)-275(properly)-275(speaking,)-280(but)-275(as)-275(a)-275(background)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-362(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.765 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(not)-362(very)-362(numerous)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 84.246 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(evidences)-362(of)-362(such)-361(atheism)-362(in)-362(our)]TJ -131.83 -13.549 Td[(period,)-373(we)-348(cannot)-348(w)-1(ell)-348(ignore)-348(the)-348(decline)-349(of)-348(the)-348(popular)-349(faith.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Our)-187(investigation)-188(is)-187(rendered)-188(difficult)-187(on)-188(this)-187(point,)-200(and)-188(generally)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(within)-366(this)-366(period,)-394(by)-366(the)-366(lack)-366(of)-366(direct)-366(evidence.)-597(Of)-366(the)-366(rich)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Hellenistic)-232(literature)-232(almost)-232(everything)-232(has)-231(been)-232(lost,)-236(and)-232(we)-232(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(restricted)-250(to)-250(reports)-250(and)-250(fragments.)]TJ 11.955 -16.037 Td[(In)-502(order)-502(to)-503(gain)-502(a)-502(concrete)-502(starting-point)-502(we)-1005(will)-502(begin)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -84.711 0 Td[([090])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(with)-377(a)-377(quotation)-377(from)-376(the)-377(historian)-377(Polybius)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 201.032 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(so)-377(to)-377(speak)-377(the)]TJ -211.941 -13.55 Td[(only)-495(Greek)-494(prose)-495(author)-495(of)-495(the)-494(earlier)-495(Hellenistic)-495(period)-495(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whose)-220(works)-219(considerable)-220(and)-220(connected)-219(portions)-220(are)-220(preserved.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Polybius)-299(wrote)-298(in)-299(the)-298(latter)-299(half)-298(of)-299(the)-298(second)-299(century)-298(a)-299(history)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-323(the)-323(world)-323(in)-323(whic)-1(h)-323(Rome)-323(took)-323(the)-323(dominant)-323(place.)-469(Here)-324(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gave,)-364(among)-341(other)-341(things,)-364(a)-342(detailed)-341(description)-341(of)-341(the)-342(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(constitution)-273(and)-273(thus)-273(came)-273(to)-273(touch)-273(upon)-273(the)-273(state)-273(of)-274(religion)-273(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Rome)-250(as)-250(compared)-250(with)-250(that)-250(in)-250(Greece.)-250(He)-250(says)-250(on)-250(this)-250(subject:)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+370 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 371 0 R
+/Resources 369 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 356 0 R
+>> endobj
+366 0 obj <<
+/D [370 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+372 0 obj <<
+/D [370 0 R /XYZ 322.003 174.536 null]
+>> endobj
+369 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+375 0 obj <<
+/Length 5343      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(73)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F30 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(The)-479(greatest)-479(adva)-1(ntage)-479(of)-479(the)-479(Roman)-479(constitution)-480(seems)]TJ -16.799 -13.549 Td[(to)-418(me)-418(to)-418(lie)-418(in)-418(its)-418(conception)-418(of)-418(the)-419(gods,)-460(and)-418(I)-418(believe)-418(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(what)-256(among)-256(other)-256(peoples)-256(is)-256(despised)-256(is)-256(what)-256(holds)-257(together)-256(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Roman)-217(power)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 61.149 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(I)-217(mean)-218(superstition.)-239(For)-217(this)-217(feature)-218(has)-217(by)-217(them)]TJ -72.058 -13.55 Td[(been)-296(developed)-297(so)-296(far)-296(in)-296(the)-296(direction)-297(of)-296(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 199.342 0 Td[(\030)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 3.633 0 Td[(horrible,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 37.265 0 Td[(\031)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 6.864 0 Td[(and)-296(has)]TJ -247.104 -13.549 Td[(so)-263(permeated)-263(both)-262(private)-263(and)-263(public)-263(life,)-266(that)-262(it)-263(is)-263(quite)-263(unique.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Many)-285(will)-285(perhaps)-285(find)-285(this)-285(strange,)-294(but)-285(I)-285(think)-285(they)-286(have)-285(acted)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(so)-280(with)-280(an)-280(eye)-279(to)-280(the)-280(mass)-280(of)-280(the)-280(people.)-339(For)-280(if)-280(it)-280(were)-280(possible)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-256(compo)-1(se)-256(a)-256(state)-257(of)-256(reasonable)-257(people)-256(such)-257(a)-256(procedure)-257(would)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(no)-235(doubt)-236(be)-235(unnecessary,)-239(but)-235(as)-235(every)-236(people)-235(regarded)-236(as)-235(a)-236(mass)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-348(easily)-349(impressed)-348(and)-348(full)-348(of)-349(criminal)-348(instincts,)-373(unreasonable)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(violence,)-350(and)-331(fierce)-330(passion,)-350(there)-330(is)-330(noth)-1(ing)-330(to)-330(be)-330(done)-330(but)-331(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(keep)-202(the)-201(masses)-202(under)-201(b)-1(y)-201(vague)-202(fears)-201(and)-202(such-like)-202(hocus-pocus.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Therefore)-334(it)-333(is)-334(my)-334(opinion)-333(that)-334(it)-334(was)-334(not)-333(without)-334(good)-334(reason)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(or)-319(by)-319(mere)-319(chance)-319(that)-318(the)-319(ancients)-319(imparted)-319(to)-319(the)-319(masses)-319(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(notions)-173(of)-173(the)-174(gods)-173(and)-173(the)-173(underworld,)-189(but)-173(rather)-173(is)-173(it)-174(thoughtless)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-250(irrational)-250(when)-250(nowadays)-250(we)-250(seek)-250(to)-250(destroy)-250(them.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 242.073 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 48.951 0 Td[([091])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -279.068 -16.004 Td[(As)-197(a)-196(proof)-197(of)-196(this)-197(last)-196(statement)-197(follows)-196(a)-197(comparison)-197(between)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-383(state)-383(of)-383(public)-384(morals)-383(in)-383(Greece)-383(and)-383(in)-383(Rome.)-649(In)-384(Greece)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(you)-314(cannot)-313(trust)-314(a)-313(man)-314(with)-314(a)-313(few)-314(hundred)-313(pounds)-314(without)-314(ten)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(notaries)-175(and)-175(as)-175(many)-175(seals)-175(and)-175(double)-175(the)-175(number)-176(of)-175(witnesses;)-200(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Rome)-272(great)-271(public)-272(treasure)-271(is)-272(administered)-271(with)-272(honesty)-272(merely)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(under)-250(the)-250(safeguard)-250(of)-250(an)-250(oath.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(As)-358(we)-358(see,)-385(this)-357(passage)-358(contains)-358(direct)-358(evidence)-358(that)-358(in)-358(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(second)-325(century)-325(in)-325(Hellas)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 110.005 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(in)-325(contradistinction)-325(to)-325(Rome)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 127 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(there)]TJ -258.823 -13.549 Td[(was)-228(an)-228(attempt)-228(to)-228(break)-228(down)-228(the)-228(belief)-228(in)-228(the)-228(gods.)-243(By)-228(his)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 258.223 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(we)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 12.72 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.786 -13.549 Td[(Polybius)-445(evidently)-445(referred)-446(especially)-445(to)-445(the)-445(leading)-446(political)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(circles.)-692(He)-397(knew)-398(these)-397(circles)-398(from)-397(personal)-397(experience,)-435(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-263(testimony)-263(has)-263(all)-264(the)-263(more)-263(weight)-263(because)-263(he)-263(does)-263(not)-264(come)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(forward)-228(in)-228(the)-227(r\364le)-228(of)-228(the)-228(orthodox)-227(man)-228(complaining)-228(in)-228(the)-228(usual)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(way)-367(of)-367(the)-367(impiety)-367(of)-366(his)-367(contemporaries;)-426(on)-367(the)-366(contrary,)-397(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(speaks)-176(as)-177(the)-176(educated)-177(and)-176(enlightened)-177(man)-176(to)-177(whom)-176(it)-177(is)-176(a)-177(matter)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-297(course)-296(that)-297(all)-297(this)-297(talk)-296(about)-297(the)-297(gods)-296(and)-297(the)-297(underworld)-297(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-318(myth)-319(which)-318(nobody)-319(among)-318(the)-319(better)-318(class)-1(es)-318(takes)-319(seriously.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+374 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 375 0 R
+/Resources 373 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 356 0 R
+>> endobj
+376 0 obj <<
+/D [374 0 R /XYZ 46.771 299.01 null]
+>> endobj
+373 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+379 0 obj <<
+/Length 5260      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(74)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(This)-220(is)-221(a)-220(tone)-220(we)-221(have)-220(not)-220(heard)-221(before,)-226(and)-220(it)-221(is)-220(a)-220(strong)-221(indirect)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(testimony)-273(to)-273(the)-273(fact)-273(that)-273(Polybius)-273(is)-273(not)-273(wrong)-273(when)-274(he)-273(speaks)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(disbelief)-250(among)-250(the)-250(upper)-250(classes)-250(of)-250(Greece.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-313(this)-313(connexion)-313(the)-314(work)-313(of)-313(Polybius)-313(has)-313(a)-313(certain)-314(interest)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(on)-504(another)-505(point.)-1013(Where)-505(earlier)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 153.279 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)-504(later)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 40.641 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(authors)-504(would)]TJ -215.738 -13.55 Td[(speak)-387(of)-387(the)-387(intervention)-387(of)-386(the)-387(gods)-387(in)-387(the)-387(march)-387(of)-387(history,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-372(operates)-371(as)-372(a)-372(rule)-371(with)-372(an)-372(idea)-371(whic)-1(h)-371(he)-372(calls)-372(Tyche.)-615(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(word)-359(is)-359(untranslatable)-359(when)-360(used)-359(in)-359(this)-359(way.)-577(It)-359(is)-360(something)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(between)-435(chance,)-482(fortune)-435(and)-435(fate.)-806(It)-435(is)-435(more)-436(comprehensive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-350(more)-699(personal)-350(than)-350(chance;)-400(it)-349(has)-350(not)-350(the)-350(immutable,)-375(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([092])]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.55 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(lawbound)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 43.025 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 6.833 0 Td[(character)-182(of)-183(fate;)-205(rather)-182(it)-182(denotes)-183(the)-182(incalculability,)]TJ -54.702 -13.549 Td[(the)-373(capriciousness)-374(associated,)-404(especially)-373(in)-373(earlier)-373(usage)-1(,)-404(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-369(word)-369(fortune,)-399(but)-369(without)-369(the)-369(tendency)-369(of)-369(this)-369(word)-369(to)-369(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(used)-250(in)-250(a)-250(good)-250(sense.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(This)-466(Tyche-religio)-1(n)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 89.318 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(if)-466(we)-467(may)-466(use)-467(this)-466(expression)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 140.575 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(was)]TJ -263.666 -13.549 Td[(not)-392(new)-392(in)-391(Hellas.)-676(Quite)-392(early)-391(we)-392(find)-392(Tyche)-392(worshipped)-392(as)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-352(goddess)-353(among)-352(the)-352(other)-353(deities,)-378(and)-352(it)-352(is)-353(an)-352(old)-352(notion)-353(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-458(gods)-458(send)-457(good)-458(fortune,)-510(a)-458(notion)-457(which)-458(set)-458(its)-458(mark)-458(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-392(series)-391(of)-392(established)-392(phrases)-392(in)-391(private)-392(and)-392(public)-391(life.)-676(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(what)-334(is)-333(of)-334(interest)-334(here)-334(is)-333(that)-334(shifting)-334(of)-333(religious)-334(ideas)-334(in)-334(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(course)-262(of)-262(which)-263(Tyche)-262(drives)-262(the)-262(gods)-263(into)-262(the)-262(background.)-287(We)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(find)-421(indications)-422(of)-421(it)-421(as)-422(early)-421(as)-421(Thucydide)-1(s.)-764(In)-421(his)-421(view)-422(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(history)-373(he)-373(lays)-374(the)-373(main)-373(stress,)-404(certainly,)-404(on)-373(human)-374(initiative,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-278(not)-278(least)-277(on)-278(rational)-278(calculation,)-284(as)-278(the)-278(cause)-278(of)-277(events.)-334(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(where)-356(he)-357(is)-356(obliged)-356(to)-356(reckon)-357(with)-356(an)-356(element)-356(independent)-357(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(human)-268(efforts,)-272(he)-268(calls)-268(it)-268(Tyche)-267(and)-268(not)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 177.633 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(the)-268(immortal)-268(gods.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 82.512 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.766 0 Td[(A)]TJ -272.754 -13.549 Td[(somewhat)-285(similar)-284(view)-285(we)-284(fin)-1(d)-284(in)-285(another)-284(great)-285(political)-285(author)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-356(the)-356(stage)-356(of)-355(transition)-356(to)-356(our)-356(period,)-382(namely,)-383(Demosthenes.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Demosthenes)-320(of)-321(course)-320(employs)-320(the)-321(official)-320(apparatus)-320(of)-321(gods:)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-288(in)-1(vokes)-288(them)-288(on)-289(solemn)-288(occasions;)-308(he)-289(quotes)-288(their)-289(authority)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-317(support)-318(of)-317(his)-318(assertions)-317(\050once)-318(he)-317(even)-318(reported)-317(a)-318(revelation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-393(he)-393(had)-393(in)-393(a)-393(dream\051;)-465(he)-393(calls)-393(his)-393(opponents)-393(enemies)-394(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-286(gods,)-295(etc.)-357(But)-286(in)-286(his)-286(political)-286(considerations)-286(the)-286(gods)-286(play)-286(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(negligible)-293(part.)-381(The)-293(factors)-294(with)-293(which)-293(he)-294(reckons)-293(as)-294(a)-293(rule)-294(are)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+378 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 379 0 R
+/Resources 377 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 356 0 R
+>> endobj
+380 0 obj <<
+/D [378 0 R /XYZ 139.346 393.778 null]
+>> endobj
+377 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+383 0 obj <<
+/Length 4858      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(75)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(merely)-248(political)-248(forces.)-249(Where)-248(he)-248(is)-248(compelled)-248(to)-248(bring)-496(forward)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([093])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(elements)-329(which)-329(man)-329(cannot)-329(control,)-349(he)-329(shows)-329(a)-329(prefer)-1(ence)-329(for)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Tyche.)-461(He)-320(certainly)-320(occasionally)-321(identifies)-320(her)-320(with)-320(the)-321(favour)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-258(the)-257(gods,)-259(but)-258(in)-257(such)-258(a)-258(way)-257(as)-258(to)-257(give)-258(the)-257(impression)-258(that)-257(it)-258(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(only)-218(a)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.987 0 Td[(fa\347on)-218(de)-217(parler)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 66.557 0 Td[(.)-239(Direct)-218(pronouncements)-217(of)-218(a)-217(free-thinking)]TJ -95.544 -13.549 Td[(kind)-373(one)-372(would)-373(not)-372(expect)-373(from)-373(an)-372(orator)-373(and)-372(statesman,)-404(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(yet)-329(Demosthenes)-329(was)-329(once)-329(bold)-329(enough)-330(to)-329(say)-329(that)-329(Pythia,)-349(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mouthpiece)-248(of)-248(the)-248(Delphic)-248(Oracle,)-248(was)-248(a)-248(partisan)-248(of)-248(Macedonia,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(an)-251(utterance)-251(which)-250(his)-251(opponent)-251(Aeschines,)-251(who)-251(liked)-251(to)-251(parade)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(his)-334(orthodoxy,)-355(did)-334(not)-334(omit)-334(to)-334(cast)-334(in)-334(his)-334(teeth.)-502(On)-334(the)-334(whole,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Aeschines)-338(liked)-337(to)-338(represent)-338(Demosthenes)-338(as)-337(a)-338(godless)-338(fellow,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-378(it)-379(is)-378(not)-378(perhaps)-379(without)-378(significance)-379(that)-378(the)-378(latter)-379(never)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(directly)-443(replied)-442(to)-443(such)-443(attacks,)-491(or)-442(indirectly)-443(did)-443(anything)-443(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(impair)-250(their)-250(force.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(During)-255(the)-256(violent)-255(revolutions)-255(that)-255(took)-256(place)-255(in)-255(Hellas)-256(under)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Alexander)-389(the)-389(Great)-389(and)-389(his)-388(successors,)-424(and)-389(the)-389(instability)-389(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(social)-381(and)-381(political)-381(conditions)-381(conseque)-1(nt)-381(thereon,)-413(the)-382(Tyche-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion)-352(received)-351(a)-352(fresh)-352(impetus.)-555(With)-352(one)-351(stroke)-352(Hellas)-352(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(flung)-179(into)-178(world)-178(politics.)-227(Everything)-178(grew)-179(to)-178(colossal)-179(proportions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-309(comparison)-309(with)-309(earlier)-308(conditions.)-427(The)-309(small)-309(Hellenic)-309(city-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(states)-324(that)-324(had)-324(hitherto)-324(been)-323(each)-324(for)-324(itself)-324(a)-324(world)-324(shrank)-324(into)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nothing.)-573(It)-358(is)-357(as)-358(if)-357(the)-358(old)-358(gods)-357(could)-358(not)-358(keep)-357(pace)-358(with)-358(this)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(violent)-259(process)-259(of)-260(expansion.)-277(Men)-259(felt)-260(a)-259(craving)-259(for)-259(a)-259(wider)-260(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-258(comprehensive)-258(religious)-258(concept)-258(to)-258(answer)-258(to)-258(the)-258(changed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conditions,)-421(and)-386(such)-386(an)-387(idea)-386(was)-387(found)-386(in)-386(the)-387(idea)-386(of)-387(Tyche.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Thoughtful)-342(men,)-365(such)-343(as)-342(Demetrius)-342(of)-342(Phalerum,)-365(wrote)-343(whole)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(books)-262(about)-262(it;)-267(states)-262(built)-262(temples)-262(to)-523(Tyche;)-268(in)-262(private)-262(religion)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([094])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.55 Td[(also)-248(it)-249(played)-248(a)-248(great)-248(part.)-250(No)-248(one)-248(reflected)-249(much)-248(on)-248(the)-248(r)-1(elation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-308(Tyche)-308(to)-308(the)-308(old)-308(gods.)-424(It)-308(must)-308(be)-308(remembered)-308(that)-308(Tyche)-308(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-279(real)-280(layman's)-279(notion,)-287(and)-279(that)-280(Hellenistic)-279(philosophy)-279(reg)-1(arded)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-319(as)-318(its)-319(task)-319(precisely)-318(to)-319(render)-319(man)-318(independent)-319(of)-319(the)-319(whims)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-248(fate.)-249(Sometimes,)-248(however,)-248(we)-248(find)-247(a)-248(positive)-247(statement)-248(of)-248(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(view)-310(that)-311(Tyche)-310(ruled)-311(over)-310(the)-311(gods)-310(also.)-431(It)-311(is)-310(characteristic)-311(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-279(state)-279(of)-280(affairs;)-294(men)-279(did)-279(not)-279(want)-280(to)-279(relinquish)-279(the)-279(old)-280(gods,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+382 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 383 0 R
+/Resources 381 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 386 0 R
+>> endobj
+384 0 obj <<
+/D [382 0 R /XYZ 290.17 518.175 null]
+>> endobj
+385 0 obj <<
+/D [382 0 R /XYZ 212.899 160.986 null]
+>> endobj
+381 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+389 0 obj <<
+/Length 5310      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(76)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(but)-250(could)-250(not)-250(any)-250(longer)-250(allow)-250(them)-250(the)-250(leading)-250(place.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(If)-304(we)-303(return)-304(for)-304(a)-304(moment)-304(to)-303(Polybius,)-318(we)-303(shall)-304(find)-304(that)-304(his)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(conception)-350(of)-350(Tyche)-350(strikingly)-350(illustrates)-350(the)-350(dis)-1(tance)-350(between)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(him)-427(and)-427(Thucydides.)-782(In)-427(the)-427(introduction)-427(to)-427(his)-427(work,)-471(on)-428(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(first)-305(page,)-318(he)-305(points)-304(out)-305(that)-305(the)-304(universally)-305(acknowledged)-305(task)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-482(historical)-482(writing)-482(is)-482(partly)-482(to)-482(educate)-482(people)-483(for)-482(political)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(activities,)-679(partly)-592(to)-593(teach)-593(them)-593(to)-593(bear)-593(the)-593(vicissitudes)-593(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fortune)-387(with)-386(fortitude)-387(by)-386(reminding)-387(them)-386(of)-387(the)-386(lot)-387(of)-387(others.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(And)-393(subsequently,)-429(when)-394(he)-393(passes)-393(on)-394(to)-393(his)-393(main)-393(theme,)-430(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(foundation)-328(of)-327(the)-328(Roman)-327(world-empire,)-347(after)-328(having)-328(explained)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-372(plan)-371(of)-372(his)-372(work,)-402(he)-372(says:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 141.239 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(So)-372(far)-371(then)-372(our)-372(plan.)-615(But)-372(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -146.083 -13.549 Td[(co-operation)-375(of)-375(fortune)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 108.64 0 Td[(is)-375(still)-375(needed)-376(if)-375(my)-375(life)-375(is)-375(to)-376(be)-375(long)]TJ -108.64 -13.549 Td[(enough)-430(for)-430(me)-430(to)-429(accomplish)-430(my)-430(purpose.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 195.687 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.532 0 Td[(An)-430(earlier)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 45.882 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(or)-430(a)]TJ -262.01 -13.549 Td[(later)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.386 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(author)-303(would)-304(here)-303(either)-304(have)-303(left)-303(the)-304(higher)-303(powers)-304(out)]TJ -30.295 -13.549 Td[(of)-184(the)-184(game)-184(altogether)-184(or)-184(would)-184(have)-184(used)-184(an)-185(expression)-184(showing)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(more)-250(submission)-250(to)-250(the)-250(gods)-250(of)-250(the)-250(popular)-250(faith.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-208(a)-207(later)-208(author,)-216(Pliny)-208(the)-208(Elder,)-216(we)-207(again)-208(find)-208(a)-208(characteristic)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(utterance)-408(throwing)-408(light)-409(upon)-408(the)-816(significance)-408(of)-408(the)-409(Tyche-)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([095])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(religion.)-244(After)-231(a)-230(very)-231(free-thinking)-231(survey)-231(of)-231(the)-231(popular)-231(notions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(regarding)-434(the)-433(gods,)-480(Pliny)-433(says:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 149.483 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(As)-434(an)-433(intermediate)-434(position)]TJ -154.327 -13.549 Td[(between)-317(thes)-1(e)-317(two)-317(views)-318(\050that)-317(there)-318(is)-317(a)-318(divine)-317(providence)-318(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-254(there)-254(is)-254(none\051)-253(men)-254(have)-254(themselves)-254(invented)-254(another)-254(divine)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(power,)-371(in)-347(order)-346(that)-347(speculation)-347(about)-346(the)-347(deity)-347(might)-347(become)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(still)-367(more)-366(uncertain.)-599(Throughout)-367(the)-366(world,)-396(in)-366(ev)-1(ery)-366(place,)-396(at)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(every)-459(hour)-460(of)-459(the)-459(day,)-512(Fortune)-459(alone)-460(is)-459(invoked)-459(and)-460(named)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-421(every)-421(mouth;)-506(she)-421(alone)-420(is)-421(accused,)-464(she)-420(bears)-421(the)-421(guilt)-421(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(everything;)-373(of)-331(her)-332(only)-332(do)-332(we)-331(think,)-353(to)-331(her)-332(is)-332(all)-332(praise,)-352(to)-332(her)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(all)-392(blame.)-675(And)-392(she)-392(is)-391(worshipped)-392(with)-392(railing)-392(words)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 243.629 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(she)-392(is)]TJ -254.538 -13.549 Td[(deemed)-295(inconstant,)-306(by)-295(many)-295(even)-295(blind;)-317(she)-295(is)-295(fickle,)-307(unstable,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(uncertain,)-361(changeable;)-382(giving)-339(her)-338(fa)-1(vours)-338(to)-339(the)-338(unworthy.)-516(To)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(her)-296(is)-297(imputed)-296(every)-296(loss,)-308(every)-296(gain;)-319(in)-297(all)-296(the)-296(accounts)-296(of)-297(life)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(she)-309(alone)-309(fills)-310(up)-309(both)-309(the)-309(debit)-310(and)-309(the)-309(credit)-309(side,)-324(and)-309(we)-310(are)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(so)-389(subject)-389(to)-389(chance)-389(that)-388(Chance)-389(itself)-389(becomes)-389(our)-389(god,)-424(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(again)-352(proves)-352(the)-351(incertitude)-352(of)-352(the)-352(deity.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 182.69 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.681 0 Td[(Even)-352(if)-352(a)-351(great)-352(deal)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+388 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 389 0 R
+/Resources 387 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 386 0 R
+>> endobj
+390 0 obj <<
+/D [388 0 R /XYZ 250.337 282.929 null]
+>> endobj
+387 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+393 0 obj <<
+/Length 5011      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(77)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(of)-307(this)-307(may)-307(be)-307(put)-307(down)-307(to)-307(rhetoric,)-321(by)-308(which)-307(Pliny)-307(was)-307(easily)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(carried)-265(away,)-270(the)-265(solid)-266(fact)-265(itself)-265(remains)-266(that)-265(he)-266(felt)-265(justified)-266(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(speaking)-250(as)-250(if)-250(Dame)-250(Fortune)-250(had)-250(dethroned)-250(all)-250(the)-250(old)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(That)-391(this)-391(view)-392(of)-391(life)-391(must)-391(have)-391(persisted)-391(very)-392(tenaciously)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(even)-325(down)-324(to)-325(a)-325(time)-324(when)-325(a)-324(strong)-325(reaction)-325(in)-324(the)-325(direction)-325(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(positive)-318(religious)-319(feeling)-318(had)-318(set)-318(in,)-336(is)-318(proved)-318(by)-318(the)-319(romances)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-396(the)-396(time.)-687(The)-396(novels)-396(of)-396(the)-396(ancients)-396(were)-396(in)-396(general)-396(poor)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(productions.)-508(Most)-336(of)-336(them)-336(are)-336(made)-336(after)-336(the)-336(recipe)-337(of)-336(a)-336(little)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(misfortune)-313(in)-313(each)-313(chapter)-314(and)-313(great)-313(happiness)-313(in)-313(the)-313(last.)-440(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(two)-509(lovers)-509(meet,)-1148(fall)-509(in)-509(love,)-574(part,)-574(and)-509(suffer)-509(a)-509(series)-510(of)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([096])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(troubles)-398(individually)-397(until)-398(they)-398(are)-397(finally)-398(united.)-693(The)-398(power)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-309(governs)-310(their)-309(fates)-310(and)-309(shapes)-309(everything)-310(according)-309(to)-310(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(pattern)-273(is)-273(re)-1(gularly)-273(Tyche,)-279(never)-273(the)-273(gods.)-320(The)-273(testimony)-273(of)-274(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(novels)-323(is)-323(of)-323(spe)-1(cial)-323(significance)-323(because)-323(they)-323(were)-323(read)-323(by)-324(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(general)-290(mass)-291(of)-290(the)-290(educated)-290(classes,)-300(not)-291(by)-290(the)-290(select)-290(who)-291(had)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(philosophy)-250(to)-250(guide)-250(them.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Another)-373(testimony)-372(to)-373(the)-372(weakenin)-1(g)-372(of)-373(popular)-372(faith)-373(in)-373(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Hellenistic)-470(age)-470(is)-470(the)-470(decay)-470(of)-470(the)-470(institution)-470(of)-471(the)-470(Oracle.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(This,)-528(also,)-529(is)-473(of)-472(early)-473(date;)-584(as)-473(early)-473(as)-472(the)-473(fifth)-473(and)-473(fourth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(century)-329(we)-330(hear)-329(much)-329(less)-329(of)-329(the)-330(interference)-329(of)-329(the)-329(oracles)-330(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(political)-392(matters)-392(than)-391(in)-392(earlier)-392(times.)-675(The)-392(most)-392(important)-392(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(them)-388(all,)-423(the)-389(Delphic)-388(Oracle,)-423(was)-388(dealt)-388(a)-389(terrible)-388(blow)-388(in)-389(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Holy)-294(War)-294(\050356-346)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 90.201 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.\051,)-305(when)-294(the)-293(Phocians)-294(seized)-294(it)-294(and)-294(used)]TJ -103.56 -13.549 Td[(the)-285(treasures)-285(which)-285(had)-284(been)-285(accumulated)-285(in)-285(it)-285(during)-285(centuries)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-317(hire)-316(mercenaries)-317(and)-316(carry)-317(on)-316(war.)-450(Such)-316(proceedings)-317(would)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(assuredly)-421(have)-421(been)-420(impossible)-421(a)-421(century)-421(earlier;)-506(no)-421(soldiers)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(could)-332(have)-332(been)-333(hired)-332(with)-332(money)-332(acquired)-332(in)-333(such)-332(a)-332(way,)-353(or,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(if)-266(they)-265(could)-266(have)-265(been)-266(procured,)-269(all)-266(Hellas)-265(would)-266(have)-265(risen)-266(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(arms)-215(against)-215(the)-214(robbers)-215(of)-215(the)-215(Temple,)-222(whereas)-214(in)-215(the)-215(Holy)-215(War)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(most)-163(of)-164(the)-163(states)-163(were)-163(indiffe)-1(rent,)-180(and)-163(several)-164(even)-163(sided)-163(with)-164(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Phocians.)-242(In)-227(the)-228(succeeding)-227(years,)-231(after)-227(Philip)-227(of)-228(Macedonia)-227(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(put)-220(an)-220(end)-220(to)-221(the)-220(Phocian)-220(scandal,)-226(the)-220(Oracle)-220(was)-220(in)-220(reality)-220(in)-221(his)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(hands)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.451 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(it)-318(was)-318(during)-318(this)-318(period)-318(that)-318(Demosthenes)-318(stigmatised)]TJ -36.36 -13.549 Td[(it)-228(as)-228(the)-228(mouthpiece)-228(of)-229(Philip.)-242(In)-228(the)-228(suc)-1(ceeding)-228(centuries,)-232(too,)-233(it)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+392 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 393 0 R
+/Resources 391 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 386 0 R
+>> endobj
+394 0 obj <<
+/D [392 0 R /XYZ 131.1 393.778 null]
+>> endobj
+391 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+397 0 obj <<
+/Length 4883      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(78)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(was)-309(dependent)-310(on)-309(the)-310(various)-309(rulers)-309(of)-310(Hellas)-309(and)-310(undoubtedly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(lost)-314(all)-315(public)-314(authority.)-444(During)-314(this)-629(period)-314(we)-315(hear)-314(very)-315(little)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([097])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(of)-306(the)-306(oracles)-307(of)-306(Hellas)-306(until)-306(the)-307(time)-306(before)-306(and)-306(after)-306(the)-307(birth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-377(Christ)-377(provides)-378(us)-377(with)-377(definite)-377(evidence)-377(of)-377(their)-378(complete)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(decay.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Thus)-177(Strabo,)-191(who)-177(wrote)-177(during)-177(the)-177(reign)-176(of)-177(Augustus,)-192(says)-177(that)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-398(ancients)-398(attached)-397(more)-398(importance)-398(to)-398(divination)-398(generally)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-359(oracles)-359(more)-359(particularly,)-387(whereas)-359(people)-359(in)-359(his)-359(day)-360(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(quite)-419(in)-1(different)-419(to)-419(these)-420(things.)-758(He)-420(gives)-419(as)-420(the)-419(reason)-420(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-373(Romans)-372(were)-373(content)-373(to)-372(use)-373(the)-373(Sibylline)-372(books)-373(and)-373(their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(own)-323(system)-323(of)-323(divination.)-469(His)-323(remark)-323(is)-323(made)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 211.883 0 Td[(a)-323(propos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.806 0 Td[(of)-323(the)]TJ -254.689 -13.549 Td[(Oracle)-378(in)-378(Libya,)-409(which)-378(was)-378(formerly)-378(in)-377(great)-378(repute,)-410(but)-378(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(almost)-340(extinct)-340(in)-340(his)-340(time.)-520(He)-340(is)-340(undoubtedly)-340(correct)-341(as)-340(to)-340(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fact,)-309(but)-297(the)-296(decline)-297(of)-297(the)-297(oracular)-297(system)-297(cannot)-297(be)-297(explained)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-381(the)-382(indifference)-381(of)-382(the)-381(Romans.)-644(Plutarch,)-415(in)-381(a)-382(monograph)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(on)-437(the)-437(discontinuance)-437(of)-437(the)-436(oracles,)-484(furnishes)-437(us)-437(with)-437(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(detailed)-462(information.)-888(From)-462(this)-463(it)-462(appears)-462(that)-463(not)-462(only)-463(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Oracle)-267(of)-268(Ammon)-267(but)-267(also)-268(the)-267(numerous)-268(oracles)-267(of)-267(Boeotia)-268(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ceased)-357(to)-356(exist,)-384(with)-356(one)-357(exception,)-383(while)-357(even)-356(for)-357(the)-357(Oracle)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-454(Delphi,)-504(which)-453(had)-454(formerly)-453(employed)-454(three)-453(priestesses,)-505(a)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(single)-410(one)-411(amply)-410(sufficed.)-731(We)-410(also)-410(note)-411(the)-410(remark)-410(that)-411(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(questions)-217(submitted)-217(to)-218(the)-217(Oracle)-217(were)-217(mostly)-217(unworthy)-217(or)-217(of)-218(no)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(importance.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(The)-274(want)-273(of)-274(consideration)-273(sometimes)-274(shown)-273(to)-274(sacred)-274(places)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(and)-197(things)-198(during)-197(the)-198(wars)-197(of)-198(the)-197(Hellenistic)-197(period)-198(may)-197(no)-198(doubt)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(also)-334(be)-334(regarded)-334(as)-334(the)-334(result)-334(of)-334(a)-334(weakening)-334(of)-334(interest)-335(in)-334(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(old)-331(gods.)-495(We)-331(have)-331(detailed)-332(information)-331(on)-331(this)-332(point)-331(from)-332(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(war)-291(between)-291(Philip)-291(of)-290(Macedonia)-291(and)-291(the)-291(Aetolians)-291(in)-291(220-217)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.728 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)-392(The)-392(Aetolians)-392(began)-392(by)-783(destroying)-392(the)-392(temples)-392(at)-392(Dium)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -86.115 0 Td[([098])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(and)-427(Dodona,)-471(whereupon)-427(Philip)-427(retaliated)-428(by)-427(totally)-427(wrecking)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-350(federal)-351(sanctuary)-350(of)-351(the)-350(Aetolians)-351(at)-350(Thermon.)-551(Of)-351(Philip's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(admiral)-347(Dicaearchus)-346(we)-347(are)-347(told)-346(by)-347(Polybius)-346(that)-347(wherever)-347(he)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(landed)-390(he)-390(erected)-390(altars)-390(to)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 124.262 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(godlessness)-390(and)-390(lawlessness)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 126.675 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.097 0 Td[(and)]TJ -264.877 -13.549 Td[(offered)-287(up)-287(sacrifice)-287(on)-287(them.)-361(Judging)-287(by)-287(the)-287(way)-287(he)-287(was)-287(hated,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+396 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 397 0 R
+/Resources 395 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 386 0 R
+>> endobj
+398 0 obj <<
+/D [396 0 R /XYZ 258.263 504.626 null]
+>> endobj
+399 0 obj <<
+/D [396 0 R /XYZ 226.743 133.888 null]
+>> endobj
+395 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+402 0 obj <<
+/Length 4870      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(79)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(his)-250(practice)-250(must)-250(have)-250(answered)-250(to)-250(his)-250(theory.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(One)-402(more)-401(phenomenon)-402(must)-402(be)-402(mentioned)-401(in)-402(this)-402(context,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(though)-311(it)-312(falls)-311(outside)-311(the)-312(limits)-311(within)-312(which)-311(we)-311(have)-312(hitherto)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(moved,)-225(and)-218(though)-219(its)-218(connexion)-219(with)-219(free-thought)-218(and)-219(religious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(enlightenment)-558(will)-558(no)-558(doubt,)-635(on)-558(closer)-558(examination,)-635(prove)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(disputable.)-948(This)-483(is)-483(the)-483(decay)-482(of)-483(the)-483(established)-483(worship)-483(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(Roman)-250(State)-250(in)-250(the)-250(later)-250(years)-250(of)-250(the)-250(Republic.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-291(the)-291(prece)-1(ding)-291(pages)-291(there)-291(has)-292(been)-291(no)-291(occasion)-291(to)-292(include)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(conditions)-240(in)-239(Rome)-240(in)-239(our)-240(investigation,)-241(simply)-240(because)-240(nothing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(has)-262(come)-262(down)-262(to)-262(us)-262(about)-262(atheism)-262(in)-262(the)-262(earlier)-263(days)-262(of)-262(Rome,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-179(we)-180(may)-179(presume)-179(that)-179(it)-180(did)-179(not)-179(exist.)-227(Of)-179(any)-179(religious)-180(thought)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(at)-199(Rome)-199(corresponding)-200(to)-199(that)-199(of)-199(the)-200(Greeks)-199(we)-199(hear)-199(nothing,)-210(nor)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(did)-312(the)-313(Romans)-312(produce)-313(any)-312(philosophy.)-437(Whatever)-313(knowledge)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-414(philosophy)-414(there)-415(was)-414(at)-414(Rome)-414(was)-414(simply)-414(borrowed)-415(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-281(Greeks.)-342(The)-281(Greek)-280(influence)-281(was)-281(not)-280(seriously)-281(felt)-281(until)-281(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(second)-364(century)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 70.958 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.,)-393(even)-364(though)-364(as)-365(early)-364(as)-364(about)-364(the)-364(middle)]TJ -84.317 -13.55 Td[(of)-419(the)-419(third)-419(century)-419(the)-419(Romans,)-461(through)-419(the)-419(performance)-419(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(plays)-281(tra)-1(nslated)-281(from)-281(the)-282(Greek,)-289(made)-282(acquaintance)-281(with)-282(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dramatic)-505(poetry)-505(and)-504(the)-505(religious)-505(thought)-505(contained)-505(therein.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Neither)-314(the)-314(latter,)-331(nor)-314(the)-314(heresies)-314(of)-314(the)-314(philosophers,)-330(seem)-315(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-282(made)-282(any)-282(deep)-283(impression)-564(upon)-282(them.)-346(Ennius,)-290(their)-283(most)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([099])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(important)-431(poet)-430(of)-431(the)-431(second)-431(century,)-475(was)-431(no)-431(doubt)-431(strongly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(influenced)-450(by)-449(Greek)-449(free-thinking,)-500(but)-449(this)-450(was)-449(evidently)-450(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(isolated)-376(phenomenon.)-629(Also,)-408(by)-376(birth)-377(Ennius)-376(was)-376(not)-376(a)-377(native)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-285(Rome)-284(but)-285(half)-284(a)-285(Greek.)-354(The)-284(testimony)-285(of)-284(Polybius)-285(\050from)-285(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(close)-266(of)-266(the)-266(second)-266(century\051)-266(to)-266(Roman)-266(religious)-267(conservatism)-266(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(emphatic)-299(enough.)-396(Its)-298(causes)-299(are)-299(doubtless)-299(of)-298(a)-299(complex)-299(nature,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-289(as)-288(one)-289(of)-288(them)-289(the)-289(peculiar)-288(character)-289(of)-288(the)-289(Roman)-289(religion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(itself)-224(stands)-225(out)-224(prominently.)-241(However)-225(much)-224(it)-224(resembled)-225(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion)-446(in)-446(externals)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 91.533 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)-446(resemblance)-445(w)-1(hich)-445(was)-446(strengthened)]TJ -102.442 -13.549 Td[(by)-373(numerous)-372(loans)-373(both)-372(of)-373(religious)-372(rites)-373(and)-372(of)-373(deities)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 252.315 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(it)-373(is)]TJ -263.224 -13.549 Td[(decidedly)-295(distinct)-295(from)-294(it)-295(in)-295(being)-295(restricted)-294(still)-295(more)-295(to)-295(cultus)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and,)-510(above)-458(all,)-511(in)-458(being)-458(entirely)-458(devoid)-458(of)-458(mythology.)-875(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Roman)-482(gods)-482(were)-483(powers)-482(about)-482(the)-482(rites)-482(of)-482(whose)-483(worship)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+401 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 402 0 R
+/Resources 400 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 386 0 R
+>> endobj
+403 0 obj <<
+/D [401 0 R /XYZ 190.614 242.282 null]
+>> endobj
+400 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+406 0 obj <<
+/Length 4814      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(80)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(the)-384(most)-383(accurate)-384(details)-384(were)-384(known)-383(or)-384(could)-384(be)-384(ascertained)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(if)-446(need)-447(were,)-495(but)-446(they)-447(had)-446(little)-446(personality,)-496(and)-446(about)-447(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(personal)-344(relations)-344(people)-344(knew)-344(little)-344(and)-344(cared)-344(less.)-533(This)-344(was,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(aesthetically,)-291(a)-283(great)-283(defect.)-348(The)-283(Roman)-283(gods)-283(afforded)-283(no)-283(good)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(theme)-425(for)-426(poetry)-425(and)-425(art,)-469(and)-426(when)-425(they)-425(were)-426(to)-425(be)-425(used)-426(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(such)-381(they)-380(were)-381(invariably)-381(replaced)-380(by)-381(loans)-380(from)-381(the)-381(Greeks.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(But,)-288(as)-281(in)-280(the)-280(face)-281(of)-280(Greek)-281(free-thought)-280(and)-281(Greek)-280(criticism)-281(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion,)-213(they)-205(had)-204(the)-204(advantage)-205(that)-204(the)-204(vital)-205(point)-204(for)-204(attack)-205(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(lacking.)-232(All)-197(the)-197(objectionable)-196(tales)-197(of)-197(the)-197(exploits)-196(of)-197(the)-197(gods)-197(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-316(associated)-315(ideas)-316(about)-316(their)-315(nature)-316(which)-315(had)-316(prompted)-316(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Greek)-268(attack)-268(on)-268(the)-268(popular)-268(faith)-268(simply)-268(did)-268(not)-268(exist)-269(in)-268(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion.)-434(On)-311(the)-311(other)-311(hand,)-327(its)-311(rites)-311(were)-311(in)-311(many)-311(points)-312(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(primitive)-308(than)-307(the)-308(Greek)-307(ones,)-322(but)-308(Greek)-307(philosophy)-615(had)-308(been)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([100])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(very)-353(reserved)-353(in)-353(its)-353(criticism)-353(of)-353(ritual.)-559(We)-353(may)-353(thus)-353(no)-353(doubt)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(take)-374(it)-374(for)-374(granted,)-406(though)-374(we)-374(have)-374(no)-374(direct)-374(evidence)-374(to)-375(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(effect,)-311(that)-299(even)-299(Romans)-299(with)-299(a)-299(Greek)-300(education)-299(long)-299(regarded)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-303(Greek)-303(criticism)-304(of)-303(religion)-303(as)-303(something)-303(foreign)-303(which)-304(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(none)-250(of)-250(their)-250(concern.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(That)-254(a)-255(time)-254(came)-254(when)-255(all)-254(this)-254(was)-254(ch)-1(anged;)-256(that)-254(towards)-255(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(end)-286(of)-285(the)-286(Republic)-285(great)-286(scepticism)-285(concerning)-286(the)-286(established)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion)-264(of)-264(Rome)-264(was)-264(found)-265(among)-264(the)-264(upper)-264(classes,)-267(is)-265(beyond)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(doubt,)-318(and)-305(we)-304(shall)-305(subsequently)-304(find)-305(occasion)-305(to)-304(consider)-305(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-313(closely.)-437(In)-313(this)-312(connexion)-313(another)-312(circumstance)-313(demands)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(attention,)-438(one)-400(which,)-437(moreover,)-438(has)-400(by)-400(some)-400(been)-400(associated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-196(Greek)-196(influence)-196(among)-196(the)-197(upper)-196(classes,)-207(namely,)-206(the)-197(decay)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-384(the)-384(established)-383(worship)-384(of)-384(the)-384(Roman)-383(State)-384(during)-384(the)-384(last)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(years)-475(of)-476(the)-475(Republic.)-926(Of)-475(the)-475(actual)-476(facts)-475(there)-475(can)-476(hardly)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(be)-454(any)-455(doubt,)-506(though)-454(we)-454(know)-455(very)-454(little)-455(about)-454(them.)-864(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(decisive)-338(symptoms)-338(are:)-425(that)-338(Augustus,)-359(after)-338(having)-338(taken)-338(over)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-342(government,)-364(had)-342(to)-341(repair)-342(some)-341(eighty)-342(dilapidated)-342(temples)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-228(Rome)-229(and)-228(reinstitute)-228(a)-228(series)-229(of)-228(religious)-228(rites)-228(and)-229(priesthoods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-255(had)-255(ceased)-254(to)-255(function.)-264(Among)-255(them)-255(was)-254(one)-255(of)-255(the)-255(most)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(important,)-272(that)-267(of)-268(the)-268(priest)-267(of)-268(Jupiter,)-271(an)-268(office)-268(which)-267(had)-268(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(vacant)-399(for)-399(more)-399(than)-399(seventy-five)-399(years)-400(\05087-11)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 218.896 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.728 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.\051,)-436(because)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+405 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 406 0 R
+/Resources 404 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 386 0 R
+>> endobj
+407 0 obj <<
+/D [405 0 R /XYZ 331.115 355.585 null]
+>> endobj
+404 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+410 0 obj <<
+/Length 4708      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(81)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(it)-470(excluded)-471(the)-470(holder)-471(from)-470(a)-470(political)-471(career.)-911(Further,)-526(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(complaints)-272(were)-272(made)-272(of)-272(private)-272(persons)-272(encroaching)-272(on)-272(places)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-331(were)-330(reserved)-331(for)-331(religious)-330(worship;)-371(and)-331(that)-331(Varro,)-351(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(writing)-400(his)-399(great)-400(work)-399(on)-400(the)-399(Roman)-400(religion,)-437(in)-399(many)-400(cases)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(was)-339(unable)-339(to)-339(discover)-339(what)-339(god)-339(was)-339(the)-339(object)-339(of)-339(an)-339(existing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(cult;)-247(and)-245(generally,)-246(according)-246(to)-245(his)-245(own)-491(statement)-245(he)-245(wrote)-246(his)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([101])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(work,)-296(among)-287(other)-286(things,)-296(in)-287(order)-287(to)-287(save)-286(great)-287(portions)-287(of)-287(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(old)-340(Roman)-340(religion)-340(from)-339(falling)-340(into)-340(utter)-340(oblivion)-340(on)-340(account)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-442(the)-443(indifference)-442(of)-443(the)-442(Romans)-443(themselves.)-827(It)-442(is)-443(obvious)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-445(such)-445(a)-445(state)-445(of)-445(affairs)-445(would)-445(have)-445(been)-445(imposs)-1(ible)-445(in)-445(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(community)-400(where)-400(the)-400(traditional)-400(religion)-400(was)-400(a)-400(living)-400(power,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-401(only)-401(formally)-400(acknowledged)-401(by)-401(everybody,)-438(but)-401(felt)-401(to)-401(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-357(necessary)-358(of)-357(life,)-385(the)-357(spiritual)-357(daily)-358(bread,)-384(as)-357(it)-358(were,)-384(of)-358(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nation.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(To)-394(hold,)-431(however,)-431(that)-394(the)-395(main)-394(cause)-395(of)-394(the)-395(decay)-394(of)-395(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(established)-275(religion)-276(of)-275(Rome)-276(was)-275(the)-275(invasion)-276(of)-275(Greek)-276(culture,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(together)-198(with)-198(the)-198(fact)-198(that)-198(the)-198(members)-198(of)-198(the)-198(Roman)-198(aristocracy,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-217(whom)-217(the)-217(priests)-217(were)-217(recruited)-217(and)-217(who)-217(superintended)-217(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(cult,)-381(had)-355(become)-355(indifferent)-355(to)-355(the)-356(traditional)-355(religion)-355(through)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-325(influence,)-344(this,)-344(I)-325(think,)-344(is)-325(to)-325(go)-325(altogether)-325(astray.)-475(We)-326(may)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(take)-412(it)-411(for)-412(granted)-412(that)-411(the)-412(governing)-412(classes)-411(in)-412(Rome)-412(would)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-404(have)-403(ventured)-403(to)-404(let)-403(the)-404(cult)-403(decay)-404(if)-403(there)-404(had)-403(been)-404(any)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(serious)-291(interest)-292(in)-291(it)-291(among)-292(the)-291(masses)-292(of)-291(the)-291(population;)-312(and)-292(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-320(equally)-320(certain)-320(that)-320(Greek)-320(philosophy)-320(and)-321(religious)-320(criticism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(did)-244(not)-245(penetrate)-244(to)-244(these)-245(masses.)-248(When)-244(they)-244(became)-245(indifferent)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-300(the)-300(national)-299(religion,)-312(this)-300(was)-300(due)-300(to)-299(causes)-300(that)-300(had)-300(nothing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-362(do)-361(with)-362(free-thought.)-585(The)-361(old)-362(Roman)-361(religion)-362(was)-362(adapted)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(for)-342(a)-341(small,)-365(narrow)-341(and)-342(homogeneous)-341(community)-342(whose)-342(main)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(constituent)-455(and)-455(real)-455(core)-456(consisted)-455(of)-455(the)-455(farmers,)-506(large)-456(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(small,)-347(and)-327(minor)-328(artisans.)-483(In)-327(the)-328(last)-327(centuries)-328(of)-327(the)-328(Republic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-383(social)-383(development)-383(had)-383(occasioned)-383(the)-383(complete)-383(decay)-383(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-240(Roman)-239(peasantry,)-242(and)-239(the)-240(free)-239(artisans)-240(had)-240(fared)-239(little)-240(better.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(In)-237(the)-236(place)-474(of)-236(the)-237(old)-237(Rome)-236(had)-237(arisen)-237(the)-237(capital)-236(of)-237(an)-237(empire,)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([102])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(inhabited)-433(by)-432(a)-433(population)-433(of)-432(a)-433(million)-432(and)-433(of)-433(extraordinarily)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+409 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 410 0 R
+/Resources 408 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 413 0 R
+>> endobj
+411 0 obj <<
+/D [409 0 R /XYZ 227.015 450.429 null]
+>> endobj
+412 0 obj <<
+/D [409 0 R /XYZ 99.953 79.691 null]
+>> endobj
+408 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+416 0 obj <<
+/Length 4911      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(82)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(mixed)-414(composition.)-742(Not)-414(only)-414(did)-414(this)-414(population)-415(comprise)-414(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(number)-473(of)-473(immigrant)-473(foreigners,)-529(but,)-529(in)-473(consequence)-473(of)-473(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(peculiar)-323(Roman)-323(rule)-323(that)-323(every)-323(slave)-323(on)-323(being)-323(set)-324(free)-323(attained)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(citizenship,)-326(a)-311(large)-311(percentage)-311(of)-311(the)-311(citizens)-311(must)-311(of)-311(necessity)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(have)-262(been)-262(of)-262(foreign)-263(origin.)-286(Only)-262(certain)-262(portions)-262(of)-262(the)-263(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion,)-205(more)-194(especially)-195(the)-194(cult)-194(of)-194(the)-194(great)-194(central)-194(deities)-194(of)-195(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(State)-213(religion,)-220(can)-213(have)-213(kept)-213(pace)-213(with)-213(these)-213(changed)-213(conditions;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-354(remainder)-354(had)-354(in)-354(reality)-354(lost)-354(all)-354(hold)-354(on)-354(Roman)-354(society)-354(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-409(had)-408(developed)-409(in)-408(process)-409(of)-408(time,)-448(and)-409(was)-409(only)-408(kept)-409(alive)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(by)-379(force)-378(of)-379(habit.)-636(To)-379(this)-378(must)-379(be)-379(added)-378(the)-379(peculiar)-379(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mixture)-314(of)-315(mobility)-314(and)-314(conservatism)-314(in)-315(religious)-314(matters.)-443(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Roman)-278(superstition)-279(and)-278(uncertainty)-278(in)-278(regard)-279(to)-278(the)-278(gods)-278(led)-279(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-417(one)-417(hand)-417(to)-418(a)-417(continual)-417(setting)-417(up)-417(of)-417(new)-417(cults)-417(and)-418(new)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sanctuaries,)-293(and)-284(on)-284(the)-284(other)-284(hand)-285(to)-284(a)-284(fear)-284(of)-284(letting)-284(any)-284(of)-285(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(old)-362(cults)-362(die)-361(out.)-586(In)-362(consequence)-362(thereof)-361(a)-362(great)-362(deal)-362(of)-362(dead)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-248(worthless)-247(ritual)-248(material)-247(must)-248(have)-247(accumulated)-248(in)-247(Rome)-248(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-271(course)-271(of)-271(centuries,)-277(and)-271(was)-271(of)-271(course)-271(in)-271(the)-271(way)-271(during)-272(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(rapid)-240(development)-241(of)-240(the)-241(city)-240(in)-241(the)-240(last)-240(century)-241(of)-240(the)-241(Republic.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Things)-258(must)-258(gradually)-258(have)-258(come)-258(to)-258(such)-258(a)-258(pass)-258(that)-259(a)-258(thorough)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(reform,)-375(above)-350(all)-349(a)-350(reduction,)-375(of)-350(the)-349(whole)-350(cult)-350(had)-350(become)-350(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(necessity.)-237(To)-209(introduce)-209(such)-210(a)-209(reform)-210(the)-209(republican)-210(government)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-398(just)-398(as)-397(unsuited)-398(as)-398(it)-398(was)-398(to)-398(carry)-397(out)-398(all)-398(the)-398(other)-398(tasks)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(imposed)-233(by)-233(the)-233(development)-233(of)-232(the)-233(empire)-233(and)-233(the)-233(capital)-233(at)-233(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(time.)-440(On)-314(this)-313(point,)-329(however,)-330(it)-313(must)-313(no)-1(t)-313(be)-313(forgotten)-314(that)-313(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([103])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.55 Td[(governing)-306(class)-306(not)-306(only)-306(lacked)-306(ability,)-320(for)-306(political)-307(reasons,)-320(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(carry)-290(out)-291(serious)-290(reforms,)-301(but)-290(also)-291(the)-290(will)-291(to)-290(do)-291(so,)-300(on)-291(account)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-351(religious)-351(indifference,)-376(and)-351(so)-350(let)-351(things)-351(go)-351(altogether)-351(to)-351(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bad.)-242(The)-226(consequence)-226(was)-227(anarchy,)-231(in)-226(this)-226(as)-226(in)-226(all)-226(other)-227(spheres)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-282(that)-281(time;)-297(but)-282(at)-281(the)-282(same)-281(time)-282(the)-281(tendency)-282(towards)-281(the)-282(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sensible)-198(issue,)-209(a)-198(restriction)-199(of)-198(the)-198(old)-198(Roman)-199(State-cult,)-208(is)-199(plainly)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(evident.)-566(The)-356(simultaneous)-355(strong)-355(infusion)-356(of)-355(foreign)-356(religions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-382(unavoidable)-382(in)-381(the)-382(mixed)-382(population)-382(of)-381(th)-1(e)-381(capital.)-646(That)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(these)-268(influences)-267(also)-268(affected)-267(the)-268(lower)-267(classes)-268(of)-267(the)-268(citizens)-268(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-250(any)-250(rate)-250(a)-250(proof)-250(that)-250(they)-250(were)-250(not)-250(indifferent)-250(to)-250(religion.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+415 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 416 0 R
+/Resources 414 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 413 0 R
+>> endobj
+417 0 obj <<
+/D [415 0 R /XYZ 374.173 206.544 null]
+>> endobj
+414 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+420 0 obj <<
+/Length 4645      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(83)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(In)-252(its)-251(main)-252(outlines)-251(this)-252(is)-251(all)-252(the)-251(information)-252(that)-252(I)-251(have)-252(been)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(able)-302(to)-301(glean)-302(about)-301(the)-302(general)-301(decline)-302(of)-301(the)-302(belief)-302(in)-301(the)-302(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(during)-399(the)-398(Hellenistic)-399(period.)-696(Judging)-398(from)-399(such)-399(information)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(we)-428(should)-429(expect)-428(to)-428(find)-428(strong)-429(tendencies)-428(to)-428(atheism)-428(in)-429(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(philosophy)-467(of)-467(the)-467(period.)-901(These)-467(anticipations)-466(are,)-522(however,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(doomed)-275(to)-275(disappointment.)-325(The)-275(ruling)-275(philosophical)-275(schools)-275(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-323(whole)-323(preserved)-323(a)-323(friendly)-323(attitude)-323(towards)-323(the)-323(gods)-323(of)-323(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-212(faith)-211(and)-212(especially)-211(towards)-212(their)-212(worship,)-219(although)-212(they)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(only)-250(accepted)-250(the)-250(existing)-250(religion)-250(with)-250(strict)-250(reservation.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(Most)-350(characteristic)-350(but)-349(least)-350(consistent)-350(and)-350(original)-350(was)-350(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(attitude)-338(of)-338(the)-338(Stoic)-338(school.)-514(The)-338(Stoics)-338(were)-338(pantheists.)-514(Their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(deity)-294(was)-294(a)-294(substance)-294(which)-294(they)-294(designated)-294(as)-294(fire,)-306(but)-294(which,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-303(must)-303(be)-303(admitted,)-316(differed)-303(greatly)-303(from)-303(fire)-303(as)-303(an)-303(element.)-409(It)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(permeated)-378(the)-378(entire)-378(world.)-634(It)-378(had)-378(produced)-378(the)-378(world)-378(out)-378(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(itself,)-308(and)-297(it)-296(absorbed)-297(it)-296(again,)-308(and)-297(this)-296(process)-297(was)-296(repeated)-297(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(eternity.)-334(The)-278(divine)-555(fire)-278(was)-278(also)-278(reason,)-285(and)-278(as)-278(such)-278(the)-278(cause)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([104])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(of)-362(the)-362(harmony)-362(of)-362(the)-361(world-order.)-586(What)-362(of)-362(conscious)-362(reason)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(was)-250(found)-250(in)-250(the)-250(world)-250(was)-250(part)-250(of)-250(the)-250(divine)-250(reason.)]TJ 11.956 -15.185 Td[(Though)-168(in)-169(this)-169(scheme)-168(of)-169(things)-168(there)-169(was)-168(in)-169(the)-168(abstract)-169(plenty)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(of)-346(room)-345(for)-345(the)-346(gods)-345(of)-346(popular)-345(belief,)-370(nevertheless)-345(the)-346(Stoics)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(did)-211(not)-210(in)-211(reality)-210(acknowledge)-211(them.)-237(In)-210(principle)-211(their)-211(standpoint)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-275(the)-274(same)-275(as)-274(Aristotle's.)-324(They)-275(supposed)-274(the)-275(heavenly)-275(bodies)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-261(be)-261(divine,)-263(but)-261(all)-260(the)-261(rest,)-264(namely,)-263(the)-261(anthropomorphic)-261(gods,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-250(nothing)-250(to)-250(them.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(In)-209(their)-209(explanation)-209(of)-209(the)-209(origin)-209(of)-209(the)-209(gods)-209(they)-209(went)-209(beyond)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Aristotle,)-464(but)-421(their)-421(doctrine)-422(was)-421(not)-421(always)-421(the)-421(same)-421(on)-422(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(point.)-577(The)-358(earlier)-359(Stoics)-359(regarded)-359(mythology)-359(and)-359(all)-359(theology)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-346(human)-347(inventions,)-370(but)-347(not)-346(arbitrary)-346(inventions.)-540(Mythology,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they)-482(thought,)-540(should)-483(be)-482(understood)-482(allegorically;)-598(it)-482(was)-483(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(na\357ve)-263(expression)-263(partly)-263(of)-263(a)-263(correct)-263(conception)-263(of)-263(Nature,)-267(partly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-354(ethical)-353(and)-353(metaphysical)-354(truths.)-560(Strictly)-354(speaking,)-379(men)-354(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(always)-431(been)-430(Stoics,)-476(though)-431(in)-431(an)-430(imperfect)-431(way.)-792(This)-431(point)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-379(view)-379(was)-379(elaborated)-378(in)-379(detail)-379(by)-379(the)-379(first)-379(Stoics,)-411(who)-379(took)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-402(stand)-402(partly)-402(on)-402(the)-402(earlier)-402(naturalism)-402(which)-403(had)-402(already)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+419 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 420 0 R
+/Resources 418 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 413 0 R
+>> endobj
+421 0 obj <<
+/D [419 0 R /XYZ 136.765 313.301 null]
+>> endobj
+418 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+424 0 obj <<
+/Length 4954      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(84)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(broken)-335(the)-335(ground)-335(in)-335(this)-335(direction,)-356(and)-335(partly)-335(on)-335(sophistic,)-357(so)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-298(they)-298(even)-297(brought)-298(into)-298(vogue)-298(again)-297(the)-298(theory)-298(of)-298(Prodicus,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-381(the)-381(gods)-381(were)-381(a)-381(hypostasis)-381(of)-381(the)-381(benefits)-382(of)-381(civilisation.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Such)-414(a)-414(standpoint)-414(could)-414(not)-414(of)-414(course)-414(be)-415(maintained)-414(without)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(arbitrariness)-374(and)-374(absurdities)-374(which)-374(exposed)-374(it)-374(to)-374(embarrassing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(criticism.)-786(This)-429(seems)-429(to)-429(have)-429(been)-428(the)-429(reason)-429(why)-429(the)-429(later)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Stoics,)-499(and)-450(especially)-449(Poseidonius,)-499(took)-449(another)-450(road.)-848(They)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(adopted)-306(the)-307(doctrine)-306(of)-613(Xenocrates)-306(with)-307(regard)-306(to)-306(demons)-307(and)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([105])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(developed)-420(it)-420(in)-419(fantastic)-420(forms.)-759(The)-420(earlier)-420(method)-420(was)-420(not,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(however,)-251(given)-250(up,)-251(and)-250(at)-251(the)-250(time)-251(of)-250(Cicero)-251(we)-251(find)-250(both)-251(views)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(represented)-250(in)-250(the)-250(doctrine)-250(of)-250(the)-250(school.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Such)-418(is)-419(the)-418(appearance)-418(of)-418(the)-419(theory.)-754(I)-1(n)-418(both)-418(its)-418(forms)-419(it)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(is)-427(evidently)-426(an)-427(attempt)-426(to)-427(meet)-427(popular)-426(belief)-427(half-way)-427(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-387(standpoint)-387(which)-387(is)-387(really)-387(beyond)-387(it.)-661(This)-387(tendency)-387(is)-387(seen)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(even)-267(more)-267(plainly)-266(in)-267(the)-267(practice)-267(of)-267(the)-266(Stoics.)-301(They)-267(recognised)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(public)-423(worship)-423(and)-423(insisted)-423(on)-423(its)-422(advantages;)-510(in)-423(their)-423(moral)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reflections)-476(they)-476(employed)-476(the)-476(gods)-476(as)-476(ideals)-476(in)-476(the)-476(Socratic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(manner,)-380(regardless)-355(of)-354(the)-354(fact)-355(that)-354(in)-354(their)-355(theory)-354(they)-354(did)-355(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(really)-298(allow)-298(for)-298(gods)-298(who)-298(were)-298(ideal)-298(men;)-322(nay,)-310(they)-298(even)-298(went)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-335(length)-334(of)-335(giving)-334(to)-334(their)-335(philosophical)-334(deity,)-356(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 235.794 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(universal)]TJ -240.637 -13.55 Td[(reason,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 31.2 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 6.485 0 Td[(the)-150(name)-151(of)-150(Zeus)-151(by)-150(preference,)-170(though)-151(it)-150(had)-151(nothing)-150(but)]TJ -37.685 -13.549 Td[(the)-276(name)-275(in)-276(common)-276(with)-275(the)-276(Olympian)-276(ruler)-276(of)-275(gods)-276(and)-276(men.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(This)-334(pervading)-335(ambiguity)-334(brought)-335(much)-334(well-deserved)-335(reproof)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-279(the)-279(Stoics)-279(even)-279(in)-278(ancient)-279(times;)-294(but,)-286(however)-279(unattractive)-279(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(may)-362(seem)-361(to)-362(us,)-389(it)-362(is)-361(of)-362(significance)-361(as)-362(a)-361(manifestation)-362(of)-362(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(great)-238(hold)-238(popular)-238(belief)-238(continued)-238(to)-238(have)-238(even)-238(on)-238(the)-238(minds)-238(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(upper)-250(classes,)-250(for)-250(it)-250(was)-250(to)-250(these)-250(that)-250(the)-250(Stoics)-250(appealed.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Far)-468(more)-468(original)-467(and)-468(consistent)-468(is)-468(the)-468(Epicurean)-468(attitude)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(towards)-275(the)-276(popular)-275(faith.)-326(Epicurus)-275(unreservedly)-276(acknowledged)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-335(foundation,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 67.835 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 18.825 0 Td[(the)-335(existence)-334(of)-335(anthropomorphic)-334(beings)-335(of)]TJ -86.66 -13.549 Td[(a)-362(higher)-361(order)-362(than)-361(man.)-585(His)-362(gods)-361(had)-362(human)-361(shape)-362(but)-362(they)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-334(eternal)-334(and)-334(blessed.)-502(In)-334(the)-334(latter)-334(definition)-335(was)-334(included,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(according)-275(to)-276(the)-275(ethical)-275(ideal)-276(of)-275(Epicurus,)-281(the)-276(idea)-275(that)-275(the)-276(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-246(free)-246(from)-245(every)-246(care,)-247(including)-246(taking)-245(an)-246(interest)-246(in)-492(nature)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([106])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+423 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 424 0 R
+/Resources 422 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 413 0 R
+>> endobj
+425 0 obj <<
+/D [423 0 R /XYZ 199.616 423.331 null]
+>> endobj
+426 0 obj <<
+/D [423 0 R /XYZ 344.23 66.142 null]
+>> endobj
+422 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+429 0 obj <<
+/Length 4714      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(85)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(or)-261(in)-261(human)-261(affairs.)-284(They)-261(were)-261(entirely)-261(outside)-261(the)-262(world,)-263(a)-262(fact)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-234(which)-234(Epicurus)-234(gave)-233(expression)-234(by)-234(placing)-234(them)-234(in)-234(the)-234(empty)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(spaces)-376(between)-376(the)-376(infinite)-376(number)-376(of)-376(spherical)-376(worlds)-376(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-288(assumed.)-362(There)-287(his)-288(gods)-287(lived)-288(in)-287(bliss)-288(like)-287(ideal)-288(Epicureans.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Lucretius,)-246(the)-244(only)-245(poet)-244(of)-245(this)-244(school,)-246(extolled)-245(them)-244(in)-245(splendid)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(verse)-444(whose)-443(motif)-444(he)-444(borrowed)-444(from)-443(Homer's)-444(description)-444(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Olympus.)-463(In)-321(this)-321(way)-321(Epicurus)-321(also)-321(managed)-321(to)-322(uphold)-321(public)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(worship)-344(itself.)-532(It)-343(could)-344(not,)-368(of)-344(course,)-367(have)-344(any)-344(practical)-344(aim,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-288(it)-287(was)-288(justified)-287(as)-288(an)-287(expression)-288(of)-287(the)-288(respect)-288(man)-287(owed)-288(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(beings)-250(whose)-250(existence)-250(expressed)-250(the)-250(human)-250(ideal.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(The)-535(reasons)-534(why)-535(Epicurus)-535(assumed)-534(this)-535(attitude)-535(towards)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(popular)-548(belief)-548(are)-548(simple)-547(enough.)-1144(He)-548(maintained)-548(that)-548(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(evidence)-325(of)-325(sensual)-325(perception)-325(was)-325(the)-325(basis)-325(of)-325(all)-325(knowledge,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-322(he)-322(thought)-322(that)-321(the)-322(senses)-322(\050through)-322(dreams\051)-322(gave)-322(evidence)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-383(the)-384(existence)-383(of)-384(the)-383(gods.)-650(And)-384(in)-383(the)-383(popular)-384(ideas)-383(of)-384(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(bliss)-348(of)-348(the)-347(gods)-348(he)-348(found)-348(his)-347(ethical)-348(ideal)-348(directly)-348(confirmed.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(As)-518(regards)-519(their)-518(eternity)-519(the)-518(case)-519(was)-518(more)-518(difficult.)-1056(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(basis)-299(of)-298(his)-299(system)-298(was)-299(the)-298(theory)-299(that)-298(everything)-299(was)-298(made)-299(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atoms)-265(and)-265(that)-266(only)-265(the)-265(atoms)-265(as)-265(such,)-269(not)-265(the)-265(bodies)-266(composed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-460(the)-460(atoms,)-512(were)-460(eternal.)-879(He)-460(conceived)-459(the)-460(gods,)-512(too,)-513(as)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(made)-476(of)-476(atoms,)-533(nevertheless)-476(he)-476(held)-476(that)-476(they)-476(were)-477(eternal.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Any)-463(rational)-464(explanation)-463(of)-463(this)-463(postulate)-464(is)-463(not)-463(possible)-464(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Epicurus's)-454(hypotheses,)-506(and)-454(the)-454(criticism)-455(of)-454(his)-454(theology)-455(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(therefore)-250(especially)-250(directed)-250(against)-250(this)-250(point.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Epicurus)-384(was)-384(the)-383(Greek)-384(philosopher)-384(who)-384(most)-384(consistently)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(took)-581(the)-581(course)-581(of)-580(emphasising)-581(the)-581(popular)-581(dogma)-581(of)-581(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(perfection)-640(of)-639(the)-640(gods)-640(in)-639(order)-1280(to)-639(preserve)-640(the)-640(popular)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([107])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(notions)-488(about)-487(them.)-963(And)-488(he)-488(was)-488(the)-487(philosopher)-488(to)-488(whom)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-389(would)-388(seem)-389(the)-389(most)-388(obvious)-389(course,)-423(because)-389(his)-389(ethical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ideal)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 21.208 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(quietism)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 37.582 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(agreed)-278(with)-279(the)-278(oldest)-279(popular)-278(ideal)-279(of)-278(divine)]TJ -80.608 -13.549 Td[(existence.)-394(In)-297(this)-298(way)-298(Epicureanism)-298(became)-298(the)-298(most)-298(orthodox)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-287(all)-287(Greek)-286(philosophical)-287(schools.)-360(If)-287(nevertheless)-287(Epicurus)-287(did)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(not)-228(escape)-227(the)-227(charge)-228(of)-227(atheism)-228(the)-227(sole)-228(reason)-227(is)-228(that)-227(his)-228(whole)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theology)-276(was)-276(denounced)-275(off-hand)-276(as)-276(hypocrisy.)-327(It)-276(was)-276(assumed)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+428 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 429 0 R
+/Resources 427 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 413 0 R
+>> endobj
+430 0 obj <<
+/D [428 0 R /XYZ 207.395 160.986 null]
+>> endobj
+427 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+433 0 obj <<
+/Length 4803      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(86)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(to)-355(be)-355(set)-355(up)-355(by)-355(him)-355(only)-355(to)-355(shield)-355(himself)-355(against)-356(a)-355(charge)-355(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(impiety,)-500(not)-450(to)-450(be)-450(his)-449(actual)-450(belief.)-850(This)-450(accusation)-450(is)-450(now)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(universally)-305(acknowledged)-304(to)-305(be)-304(unjustified,)-318(and)-305(the)-305(Epicureans)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(had)-294(no)-295(difficulty)-294(in)-294(rebutting)-295(it)-294(with)-294(interest.)-383(They)-294(took)-295(special)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(delight)-243(in)-242(pointing)-243(out)-243(that)-242(the)-243(theology)-243(of)-243(the)-242(other)-243(schools)-243(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(much)-282(more)-283(remote)-282(from)-282(popular)-283(belief)-282(than)-282(theirs,)-291(nay,)-290(in)-283(spite)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-194(recognition)-193(of)-194(the)-194(existing)-194(religion,)-204(was)-194(in)-194(truth)-194(fundamentally)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-237(variance)-237(with)-237(it.)-246(But)-237(in)-237(reality)-237(their)-237(own)-237(was)-237(in)-237(no)-237(better)-237(case:)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-314(who)-313(did)-314(not)-314(trouble)-313(in)-314(the)-314(least)-314(about)-313(human)-314(affairs)-314(were)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(beings)-202(for)-203(whom)-202(popular)-203(belief)-202(had)-203(no)-202(use.)-234(It)-203(made)-202(no)-203(difference)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-242(Epicurus's)-242(definition)-241(of)-242(the)-242(nature)-242(of)-241(the)-242(gods)-242(was)-242(the)-242(direct)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(outcome)-370(of)-370(a)-370(fun)-1(damental)-370(doctrine)-370(of)-370(popular)-370(belief.)-611(Popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion)-250(will)-250(not)-250(tolerate)-250(pedantry.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(In)-755(this)-756(connexion)-755(we)-756(cannot)-755(well)-755(pass)-756(over)-755(a)-756(third)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(philosophical)-509(school)-508(which)-509(played)-508(no)-509(inconspicuous)-508(r\364le)-509(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-367(latter)-366(half)-366(of)-367(our)-366(period,)-396(namely,)-396(Scepticism.)-599(The)-367(Sceptic)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(philosophy)-449(as)-449(such)-448(dates)-449(from)-449(Socrates,)-498(from)-449(whom)-449(the)-449(so-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(called)-364(Megarian)-364(school)-364(took)-364(its)-364(origin,)-392(but)-364(it)-364(did)-364(not)-364(reach)-364(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(greatest)-175(importance)-175(until)-176(the)-175(second)-175(century,)-190(when)-175(the)-351(Academic)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([108])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(school)-224(became)-225(Sceptic.)-241(It)-225(was)-224(especially)-225(the)-224(famous)-225(philosopher)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Carneades,)-379(a)-353(brilliant)-353(master)-353(of)-353(logic)-353(and)-354(dialectic,)-378(who)-354(made)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-408(success)-408(by)-409(his)-408(searching)-408(negative)-408(criticism)-408(of)-408(the)-409(doctrines)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-403(the)-404(other)-403(philosophical)-403(schools)-403(\050the)-404(Dogmatics\051.)-709(For)-404(such)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(criticism)-238(the)-239(theology)-238(of)-238(the)-238(philosophers)-239(was)-238(a)-238(grateful)-239(subject,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-204(Carneades)-204(did)-204(not)-204(spare)-204(it.)-235(Here)-204(as)-204(in)-204(all)-204(the)-204(investigations)-204(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-254(Sceptics)-254(the)-254(theoretical)-253(result)-254(was)-254(that)-254(no)-254(scientific)-254(certainty)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(could)-302(be)-302(attained:)-353(it)-302(was)-301(equally)-302(wrong)-302(to)-302(assert)-301(or)-302(to)-302(deny)-302(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(existence)-255(of)-255(the)-254(gods.)-264(But)-255(in)-255(practice)-255(the)-254(attitude)-255(of)-255(the)-255(Sceptics)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-460(quite)-460(d)-1(ifferent.)-880(Just)-460(as)-461(they)-460(behaved)-460(like)-460(other)-461(people,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acting)-235(upon)-234(their)-234(im)-1(mediate)-234(impressions)-234(and)-235(experience,)-238(though)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they)-244(did)-245(not)-244(believe)-245(that)-244(anything)-244(could)-245(be)-244(scientifically)-245(proved,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 24.427 0 Td[(not)-432(even)-431(the)-432(reality)-432(of)-432(the)-431(world)-432(of)-432(the)-432(senses,)-477(so)-431(also)]TJ -24.427 -13.55 Td[(did)-322(they)-321(acknowledge)-322(the)-322(existing)-321(cult)-322(and)-321(lived)-322(generally)-322(like)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(good)-298(heathens.)-393(Characteristic)-298(though)-298(Scepticism)-298(be)-298(of)-298(a)-298(period)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+432 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 433 0 R
+/Resources 431 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 413 0 R
+>> endobj
+434 0 obj <<
+/D [432 0 R /XYZ 328.037 269.38 null]
+>> endobj
+431 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+437 0 obj <<
+/Length 5145      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(87)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(of)-334(Greek)-334(spiritual)-333(life)-334(in)-334(which)-334(Greek)-333(thoug)-1(ht)-333(lost)-334(its)-334(belief)-334(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(itself,)-251(it)-250(was,)-251(however,)-250(very)-251(far)-251(from)-250(supporting)-251(atheism.)-251(On)-251(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(contrary,)-236(according)-232(to)-232(the)-232(correct)-232(Sceptic)-232(doctrine)-232(atheism)-232(was)-233(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dogmatic)-247(contention)-247(which)-247(theoretically)-247(was)-247(as)-247(objectionable)-247(as)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(its)-250(antithesis,)-250(and)-250(in)-250(practice)-250(was)-250(to)-250(be)-250(utterly)-250(discountenanced.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(A)-259(more)-260(radical)-260(standpoint)-259(than)-260(this)-259(as)-260(regards)-259(the)-260(gods)-259(of)-260(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(popular)-359(faith)-358(is)-359(not)-358(f)-1(ound)-358(during)-359(the)-358(Hellenistic)-359(period)-359(except)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(among)-227(the)-228(less)-227(noted)-227(schools,)-232(and)-227(in)-228(the)-227(beginning)-227(of)-227(the)-228(period.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(We)-278(have)-278(already)-278(mentioned)-277(such)-278(thinkers)-278(as)-278(Strato,)-285(Theodorus,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-326(Stilpo;)-363(chronologically)-326(they)-325(belong)-326(to)-325(the)-326(Hellenistic)-326(Age,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(but)-378(in)-378(virtue)-378(o)-1(f)-378(their)-756(connexion)-378(with)-378(the)-378(Socratic)-379(philosophy)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([109])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(they)-378(were)-378(dealt)-378(with)-378(in)-377(the)-378(last)-378(chapter.)-634(A)-378(definite)-378(polemical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(attitude)-334(towards)-334(the)-334(popular)-334(faith)-334(is)-334(also)-334(a)-334(characteristic)-335(of)-334(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Cynic)-251(school,)-251(hence,)-250(though)-251(our)-251(information)-250(is)-251(very)-251(meagre,)-251(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(must)-250(speak)-250(of)-250(it)-250(a)-250(little)-250(more)-250(fully.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(The)-397(Cynics)-397(continued)-398(the)-397(tendency)-397(of)-397(Antisthenes,)-434(but)-398(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(school)-364(comparatively)-365(soon)-364(lost)-364(its)-365(importance.)-593(After)-364(the)-365(third)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(century)-384(we)-385(hear)-384(no)-385(more)-384(about)-385(the)-384(Cynics)-384(until)-385(they)-384(crop)-385(up)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(again)-184(about)-185(the)-184(year)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 88.021 0 Td[(A)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.755 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(D)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.754 0 Td[(.)-184(100.)-229(But)-184(in)-184(the)-185(fourth)-184(and)-185(third)-184(centuries)]TJ -102.257 -13.549 Td[(the)-370(school)-370(had)-370(important)-370(representatives.)-610(The)-370(most)-370(famous)-370(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Diogenes;)-210(his)-189(life,)-202(to)-189(be)-189(sure,)-202(is)-189(entangled)-190(in)-189(such)-189(a)-190(web)-189(of)-190(legend)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-262(it)-261(is)-262(difficult)-261(to)-262(arrive)-261(at)-262(a)-261(true)-262(picture)-261(of)-262(his)-261(personality.)-285(Of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-345(attitude)-346(towards)-345(popular)-346(belief)-345(we)-345(know)-346(one)-345(thing,)-369(that)-346(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(did)-287(not)-288(take)-287(part)-288(in)-287(the)-288(worship)-287(of)-288(the)-287(gods.)-362(This)-288(was)-287(a)-288(general)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(principle)-330(of)-330(the)-330(Cynics;)-370(their)-330(argument)-330(was)-330(that)-330(the)-330(gods)-330(were)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(in)-390(need)-391(of)-390(nothing)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 84.288 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.103 0 Td[(\050cf.)-671(above,)-426(pp.)-671(60)-391(and)-390(41\051.)-672(If)-390(we)-391(find)]TJ -98.235 -13.549 Td[(him)-232(accused)-233(of)-232(atheism,)-236(in)-232(an)-232(anecdote)-233(of)-232(very)-232(doubtful)-233(value,)-236(it)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(may,)-250(if)-251(there)-250(is)-250(anything)-251(in)-250(it,)-251(be)-250(due)-250(to)-251(his)-250(rejection)-250(of)-251(worship.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Of)-201(one)-200(of)-201(his)-200(successors,)-211(however,)-210(Bion)-201(of)-201(Borysthenes,)-210(we)-201(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(authentic)-343(information)-344(that)-343(he)-343(denied)-343(the)-344(existence)-343(of)-343(the)-344(gods,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-322(the)-322(edifying)-322(legend)-322(attached)-322(that)-322(he)-322(was)-322(converted)-322(before)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-369(death.)-607(But)-369(we)-368(also)-369(hear)-369(of)-369(Bion)-369(that)-369(he)-369(was)-369(a)-369(disciple)-369(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-372(atheist)-373(Theodorus,)-403(and)-372(other)-373(facts)-372(go)-372(to)-373(suggest)-372(that)-373(Bion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(united)-371(Cynic)-371(and)-371(Hedonistic)-370(principles)-371(in)-371(his)-371(mode)-371(of)-371(life)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 264.877 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(a)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+436 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 437 0 R
+/Resources 435 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 441 0 R
+/Annots [ 439 0 R 440 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+439 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [221.548 172.157 232.457 181.91]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+440 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [256.729 172.157 267.638 181.91]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg041) >>
+>> endobj
+438 0 obj <<
+/D [436 0 R /XYZ 144.361 380.228 null]
+>> endobj
+435 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+444 0 obj <<
+/Length 4858      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(88)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(compromise)-466(that)-467(was)-466(not)-467(so)-466(unlikely)-466(as)-467(might)-466(be)-467(supposed.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Bion's)-262(attitude)-261(cannot)-262(therefore)-261(be)-262(taken)-261(as)-262(typical)-261(of)-262(Cynicism.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Another)-648(Cynic)-323(of)-324(about)-324(the)-324(same)-323(period)-324(\050the)-324(beginning)-324(of)-324(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([110])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(third)-317(century\051)-317(was)-317(Menippus)-317(of)-317(Gadara)-317(\050in)-317(northern)-317(Palestine\051.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(He)-367(wrote)-367(tales)-367(and)-367(dialogues)-366(in)-367(a)-367(mixture)-367(of)-367(prose)-367(and)-367(verse.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(The)-287(contents)-287(were)-287(satirical,)-296(the)-287(satire)-287(being)-287(directed)-287(against)-287(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(contemporary)-335(philosophers)-335(and)-336(their)-335(doctrines,)-356(and)-335(against)-336(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-271(notions)-270(of)-271(the)-270(gods.)-312(Menippus)-271(availed)-270(himself)-271(partly)-271(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-371(old)-370(criticism)-371(of)-371(mythology)-371(and)-370(partly)-371(of)-371(the)-371(philosophical)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(attacks)-271(on)-272(the)-271(popular)-271(conception)-272(of)-271(the)-271(gods.)-314(The)-271(only)-272(novelty)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-218(the)-218(facetious)-218(form)-218(in)-217(which)-218(he)-218(concealed)-218(the)-218(sting)-218(of)-218(serious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(criticism.)-248(It)-244(is)-244(impossible)-243(to)-244(decide)-244(whether)-244(he)-244(positively)-244(denied)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-339(existence)-340(of)-339(the)-339(gods,)-362(but)-339(his)-339(satire)-340(on)-339(the)-339(popular)-340(notions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-262(its)-261(success)-262(among)-262(his)-261(contemporaries)-262(at)-262(least)-261(testifies)-262(to)-262(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(weakening)-327(of)-326(the)-327(popular)-326(faith)-327(among)-326(the)-327(educated)-326(classes.)-480(In)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Hellas)-232(itself)-231(he)-232(seems)-231(to)-232(have)-231(gone)-232(out)-231(of)-232(fashion)-231(very)-232(early;)-238(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-274(Romans)-275(took)-274(him)-274(up)-274(again;)-287(Varro)-274(and)-274(Seneca)-274(imitated)-275(him,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-304(Lucian)-303(made)-304(his)-304(name)-303(famous)-304(again)-304(in)-304(the)-303(Greek)-304(world)-304(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-319(second)-319(century)-319(after)-319(Christ.)-456(It)-319(is)-319(chiefly)-319(due)-319(to)-319(Lucian)-319(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(we)-239(can)-240(form)-239(an)-239(idea)-240(of)-239(Menippus's)-239(literary)-240(work,)-241(hence)-239(we)-240(shall)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(return)-366(to)-367(Cynic)-366(satire)-366(in)-367(our)-366(chapter)-366(on)-366(the)-367(age)-366(of)-366(the)-367(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Empire.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(During)-509(our)-510(survey)-509(of)-510(Greek)-509(philosophical)-510(thought)-509(in)-510(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Hellenistic)-248(period)-248(we)-248(have)-249(only)-248(met)-248(with)-248(a)-248(few)-248(cases)-248(of)-249(atheism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-220(the)-220(strict)-219(sense,)-226(and)-220(they)-220(all)-219(occur)-220(about)-220(and)-220(immediately)-220(after)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(300,)-390(though)-361(there)-362(does)-362(not)-361(seem)-362(to)-362(be)-361(any)-362(internal)-362(connexion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(between)-400(them.)-699(About)-400(the)-400(same)-399(time)-400(there)-400(appeared)-400(a)-400(writer,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(outside)-257(the)-256(circle)-257(of)-256(philosophers,)-258(who)-257(is)-256(regularly)-257(listed)-257(among)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.017 0 Td[(atheoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.273 0 Td[(,)-247(and)-246(who)-493(has)-246(given)-246(a)-246(name)-246(to)-247(a)-246(peculiar)-246(theory)-246(about)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -116.045 0 Td[([111])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(the)-233(origin)-233(of)-232(the)-233(idea)-233(of)-233(the)-232(gods,)-237(namely,)-236(Euhemerus.)-244(He)-233(is)-233(said)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-359(have)-359(travelled)-359(extensively)-358(in)-359(the)-359(service)-359(of)-359(King)-359(Cassander)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-362(Macedonia.)-585(At)-361(any)-362(rate)-362(he)-362(published)-361(his)-362(theological)-362(views)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-388(the)-389(shape)-388(of)-388(a)-389(book)-388(of)-388(travel)-388(whic)-1(h)-388(was,)-423(however,)-423(wholly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fiction.)-548(He)-349(relates)-350(how)-349(he)-349(came)-349(to)-350(an)-349(island,)-374(Panchaia,)-374(in)-350(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+443 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 444 0 R
+/Resources 442 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 441 0 R
+>> endobj
+445 0 obj <<
+/D [443 0 R /XYZ 132.824 491.077 null]
+>> endobj
+446 0 obj <<
+/D [443 0 R /XYZ 182.164 133.888 null]
+>> endobj
+442 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+449 0 obj <<
+/Length 4963      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(89)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Indian)-291(Ocean,)-302(and)-291(in)-292(a)-291(temple)-291(there)-292(found)-291(a)-291(lengthy)-292(inscription)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-382(which)-383(Uranos,)-415(Kronos,)-416(Zeus)-382(and)-382(other)-383(gods)-382(recorded)-383(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(exploits.)-316(The)-272(substance)-271(of)-272(the)-272(tale)-272(was)-272(that)-272(these)-272(gods)-272(had)-272(once)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(been)-388(men,)-423(great)-388(kings)-389(and)-388(rulers,)-423(who)-388(had)-388(bestowed)-388(on)-389(their)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(peoples)-217(all)-217(sorts)-217(of)-217(improvements)-217(in)-217(civilisation)-217(and)-217(had)-217(thus)-217(got)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(themselves)-198(worshipped)-197(as)-198(gods.)-232(It)-198(appears)-197(from)-198(the)-197(accounts)-198(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Euhemerus)-297(supposed)-297(the)-298(heavenly)-297(bodies)-297(to)-297(be)-297(real)-297(and)-298(eternal)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 20.608 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(he)-352(thought)-353(that)-352(Uranos)-352(had)-352(first)-353(taught)-352(men)-352(to)-353(worship)]TJ -31.517 -13.549 Td[(them;)-372(further,)-351(as)-332(his)-331(theory)-331(is)-331(generally)-332(understood,)-351(it)-331(must)-332(be)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(assumed)-250(that)-251(in)-250(his)-251(opinion)-250(the)-250(other)-251(gods)-250(had)-250(ceased)-251(to)-250(exist)-251(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(such)-248(after)-248(their)-248(death.)-249(This)-248(accords)-248(with)-248(the)-248(fact)-248(that)-248(Euhemerus)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-250(generally)-250(characterised)-250(as)-250(an)-250(atheist.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(The)-275(theory)-274(that)-275(the)-275(gods)-274(were)-275(at)-275(first)-275(men)-274(was)-275(not)-275(originated)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(by)-469(E)-1(uhemerus,)-524(though)-469(it)-470(takes)-469(its)-470(name)-469(\050Euhemerism\051)-470(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(him.)-605(The)-369(theory)-368(had)-369(some)-368(support)-369(in)-368(the)-369(popular)-368(faith)-369(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(recognised)-269(gods)-269(\050Heracles,)-273(Asclepius\051)-269(who)-269(had)-269(lived)-269(as)-269(men)-269(on)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(earth;)-242(and)-238(the)-238(opinion)-238(which)-238(was)-238(fundamental)-238(to)-238(Greek)-238(religion,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-285(the)-285(gods)-286(had)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 78.498 0 Td[(come)-285(into)-285(existence)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 86.196 0 Td[(,)-294(and)-285(had)-285(not)-285(existed)-286(from)]TJ -164.694 -13.549 Td[(eternity,)-404(would)-374(favour)-374(this)-373(theory.)-621(Moreover,)-404(Euhemerus)-374(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(had)-284(an)-284(immediate)-285(precursor)-284(in)-284(the)-284(slightly)-284(earlier)-568(Hecataeus)-285(of)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([112])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.549 Td[(Abdera,)-307(who)-296(had)-296(set)-295(forth)-296(a)-296(similar)-296(theory,)-307(with)-296(the)-295(diffe)-1(rence,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(however,)-214(that)-204(he)-205(took)-204(the)-205(view)-204(that)-205(all)-204(excellent)-205(men)-204(became)-205(real)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods.)-278(But)-259(Euhemerus's)-260(theory)-259(appeared)-259(just)-260(at)-259(the)-259(right)-259(m)-1(oment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-175(fell)-176(on)-176(fertile)-175(soil.)-225(Alexander)-176(the)-175(Great)-176(and)-175(his)-176(successors)-175(h)-1(ad)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(adopted)-309(the)-310(Oriental)-309(policy)-310(by)-309(which)-309(the)-310(ruler)-309(was)-309(wo)-1(rshipped)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-348(a)-348(god,)-373(and)-348(were)-348(supported)-348(in)-348(this)-348(by)-348(a)-348(tendency)-348(which)-349(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(already)-390(made)-389(itself)-390(felt)-390(occasionally)-390(among)-389(the)-390(Greeks)-390(in)-390(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(East.)-269(Euhemerus)-256(only)-256(inverted)-256(matters)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 169.172 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(if)-256(the)-256(rulers)-257(were)-256(gods,)]TJ -180.081 -13.549 Td[(it)-224(was)-224(an)-224(obvious)-224(inference)-224(that)-224(the)-223(gods)-224(were)-224(rulers.)-242(No)-224(wonder)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-364(his)-364(theory)-364(gained)-364(a)-364(large)-364(following.)-592(Its)-364(great)-364(influence)-364(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(seen)-372(from)-372(numerous)-372(similar)-372(attempts)-372(in)-372(the)-372(Hellenistic)-372(w)-1(orld.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(At)-411(Rome,)-452(in)-411(the)-412(second)-411(century,)-452(Ennius)-411(translated)-411(his)-412(works)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(into)-357(Latin,)-384(and)-357(as)-357(late)-357(as)-357(the)-357(time)-357(of)-357(Augustus)-357(an)-357(author)-357(such)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-478(Diodorus,)-535(in)-478(his)-478(popular)-478(history)-478(of)-478(the)-478(world,)-535(served)-478(up)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+448 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 449 0 R
+/Resources 447 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 441 0 R
+>> endobj
+450 0 obj <<
+/D [448 0 R /XYZ 267.289 255.831 null]
+>> endobj
+447 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+453 0 obj <<
+/Length 4798      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(90)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Euhemerism)-377(as)-377(the)-378(best)-377(scientific)-377(explanation)-377(of)-377(the)-377(origin)-378(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion.)-447(It)-315(is)-316(characteristic,)-332(too,)-332(that)-316(both)-315(Jews)-316(and)-316(Christians,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-377(their)-377(attacks)-376(on)-377(Paganism,)-409(reckoned)-376(with)-377(Euhemerism)-377(as)-377(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(well-established)-288(theory.)-362(As)-288(every)-287(one)-288(knows,)-297(it)-287(has)-288(survived)-288(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(our)-250(day;)-250(Carlyle,)-250(I)-250(suppose,)-250(being)-250(its)-250(last)-250(prominent)-250(exponent.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(It)-422(is)-422(characteristic)-422(of)-422(Euhemerism)-422(in)-422(its)-422(most)-423(radical)-422(form)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(that)-422(it)-421(assumed)-422(that)-421(the)-422(gods)-422(of)-421(polytheism)-422(did)-422(not)-421(exist;)-508(so)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(far)-415(it)-415(is)-415(atheism.)-745(But)-415(it)-415(is)-415(no)-415(less)-415(characteristic)-415(that)-415(it)-415(made)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-326(concession)-325(to)-326(popular)-325(belief)-326(that)-325(its)-326(gods)-325(had)-326(once)-326(existed.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Hereby)-379(it)-378(takes)-379(its)-378(place,)-411(in)-379(spite)-378(of)-379(its)-378(greater)-379(radicalism,)-411(on)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-262(same)-261(plane)-262(with)-262(most)-261(other)-262(ancient)-262(theories)-261(about)-262(the)-262(origin)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-382(men's)-763(notions)-382(about)-382(the)-382(gods.)-645(The)-382(gods)-382(of)-382(popular)-382(belief)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([113])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(could)-384(not)-383(survive)-384(in)-383(the)-384(light)-383(of)-384(ancient)-384(thought,)-416(which)-384(in)-384(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(essence)-396(was)-396(free-thought,)-433(not)-396(tied)-397(down)-396(by)-396(dogmas.)-688(But)-397(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophers)-371(of)-371(old)-371(could)-370(not)-371(but)-371(believe)-371(that)-371(a)-371(psychological)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(fact)-369(of)-368(such)-369(enormous)-368(dimensions)-369(as)-368(ancient)-369(polytheism)-369(must)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-301(something)-301(answering)-301(to)-301(it)-301(in)-301(the)-301(objective)-301(world.)-403(Ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophy)-316(never)-317(got)-316(clear)-317(of)-316(this)-316(dilemma;)-350(hence)-316(Plato's)-317(open)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(recognition)-367(of)-366(the)-367(absurdity;)-425(hence)-367(Aristotle's)-366(delight)-367(at)-367(being)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(able)-434(to)-434(meet)-434(the)-433(popular)-434(faith)-434(half-way)-434(in)-434(his)-434(assumption)-434(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-259(divinity)-259(of)-259(the)-259(heavenly)-259(bodies;)-264(hence)-259(Xenocrates's)-259(demons,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-398(allegories)-398(of)-398(the)-397(Stoics,)-435(the)-398(ideal)-398(Epicureans)-398(of)-398(Epicurus,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Euhemerus's)-223(early)-222(benefactors)-223(of)-223(mankind.)-241(And)-222(we)-223(may)-223(say)-223(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-171(more)-172(the)-171(Greeks)-172(got)-171(to)-172(know)-171(of)-171(the)-172(world)-171(about)-172(them)-171(the)-172(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they)-280(were)-281(confirmed)-280(in)-281(their)-280(view,)-288(for)-280(in)-281(the)-280(varied)-281(multiplicity)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-423(polytheism)-422(they)-423(found)-422(the)-423(same)-422(principle)-423(everywhere,)-466(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(same)-250(belief)-250(in)-250(a)-250(multitude)-250(of)-250(beings)-250(of)-250(a)-250(higher)-250(order)-250(than)-250(man.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Euhemerus's)-262(theory)-261(is)-262(no)-262(doubt)-261(the)-262(last)-262(serious)-261(attempt)-262(in)-262(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(old)-203(pagan)-202(world)-203(to)-202(give)-203(an)-203(explanation)-202(of)-203(the)-202(popular)-203(faith)-203(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(may)-262(be)-261(called)-262(genuine)-262(atheism.)-285(We)-262(will)-262(not,)-264(however,)-265(leave)-262(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Hellenistic)-251(period)-250(without)-251(casting)-251(a)-250(g)-1(lance)-250(at)-251(some)-251(personalities)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(about)-238(whom)-238(we)-238(have)-238(information)-238(enough)-238(to)-238(form)-238(an)-238(idea)-238(at)-238(first)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(hand)-375(of)-375(their)-375(relig)-1(ious)-375(standpoint,)-406(and)-375(whose)-375(attitude)-376(towards)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(popular)-324(belief)-324(at)-324(any)-324(rate)-324(comes)-324(very)-324(near)-324(to)-324(atheism)-325(pure)-324(and)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+452 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 453 0 R
+/Resources 451 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 441 0 R
+>> endobj
+454 0 obj <<
+/D [452 0 R /XYZ 135.954 366.679 null]
+>> endobj
+451 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+457 0 obj <<
+/Length 5009      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(91)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(simple.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(One)-262(of)-262(them)-262(is)-263(Polybius.)-286(In)-262(the)-262(above-cited)-262(passage)-263(referring)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(to)-476(the)-475(decline)-476(of)-475(the)-476(popular)-475(faith)-476(in)-475(the)-476(Hellenistic)-476(period,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Polybius)-212(also)-212(gives)-212(his)-212(own)-424(theory)-212(of)-212(the)-212(origin)-212(of)-213(men's)-212(notions)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([114])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(regarding)-334(the)-333(gods.)-501(It)-334(is)-334(not)-333(new.)-501(It)-334(is)-334(the)-333(theory)-334(known)-334(from)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-404(Critias)-404(fragment,)-442(what)-404(may)-403(be)-404(called)-404(the)-404(political)-404(theory.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-394(the)-394(fragment)-393(it)-394(appears)-394(as)-394(atheism)-394(pure)-393(and)-394(simple,)-430(and)-394(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(seems)-414(obvious)-414(to)-415(understand)-414(it)-414(in)-414(the)-414(same)-414(way)-414(in)-415(Polybius.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(That)-217(he)-217(shows)-217(a)-216(leaning)-217(towards)-217(Euhemerism)-217(in)-217(another)-217(passage)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(where)-339(he)-340(speaks)-339(about)-340(the)-339(origin)-339(of)-340(religious)-339(ideas,)-362(is)-339(in)-340(itself)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(not)-303(against)-303(this)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 67.223 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)-303(two)-303(theories)-303(are)-303(closely)-303(related)-303(and)-303(might)]TJ -78.132 -13.549 Td[(very)-404(well)-405(be)-404(combined.)-714(But)-404(we)-404(have)-405(a)-404(series)-405(of)-404(passages)-405(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-445(Polybius)-445(expressed)-445(himself)-445(in)-445(a)-445(way)-445(that)-445(seems)-445(quite)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(irreconcilable)-362(with)-362(a)-362(purely)-361(atheistic)-362(standpoint.)-586(He)-362(expressly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acknowledged)-447(divination)-447(and)-447(worship)-447(as)-447(justified;)-546(in)-447(several)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(places)-345(he)-346(refers)-345(to)-345(disasters)-345(that)-346(have)-345(befallen)-345(individuals)-345(or)-346(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whole)-243(people)-244(as)-243(being)-244(sent)-243(by)-244(the)-243(gods,)-245(or)-243(even)-244(as)-243(a)-244(punishment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-369(impiety;)-428(and)-368(towards)-369(the)-369(close)-369(of)-368(his)-369(work)-369(he)-368(actually,)-399(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(marked)-315(contrast)-315(to)-315(the)-314(tone)-315(of)-315(its)-315(beginning,)-331(offers)-315(up)-315(a)-315(prayer)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-244(the)-244(gods)-244(to)-244(grant)-244(him)-244(a)-244(happy)-244(ending)-244(to)-244(his)-244(long)-244(life.)-248(It)-244(would)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(seem)-257(as)-257(if)-257(Polybius)-257(at)-257(a)-257(certain)-257(period)-257(of)-257(his)-257(life)-257(came)-257(under)-257(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(influence)-348(of)-348(Stoicism)-348(and)-348(in)-348(consequence)-348(greatly)-348(modified)-348(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(earlier)-344(views.)-534(That)-344(these)-345(were)-344(of)-344(an)-345(atheistic)-344(character)-345(seems,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(however,)-449(beyond)-409(doubt,)-449(and)-409(that)-409(is)-409(the)-409(decisive)-409(point)-410(in)-409(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(connexion.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Cicero's)-386(philosophical)-386(standpoint)-386(was)-386(that)-386(of)-386(an)-386(Academic,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -11.956 -13.549 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.395 0 Td[(a)-352(Sceptic.)-556(But)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 65.355 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(in)-352(accord,)-377(for)-352(the)-352(rest,)-378(with)-352(the)-352(doctrines)]TJ -95.659 -13.55 Td[(of)-359(the)-359(school)-359(just)-359(at)-359(this)-359(period)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 141.673 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(he)-359(employed)-359(his)-359(liberty)-359(as)-359(a)]TJ -152.582 -13.549 Td[(Sceptic)-260(to)-260(favour)-260(such)-259(philosophical)-260(doctrines)-260(as)-260(seemed)-260(to)-260(him)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-207(reasonable)-207(than)-206(others,)-216(regardless)-207(of)-206(the)-207(school)-207(from)-207(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(they)-336(were)-336(derived.)-508(In)-336(his)-672(philosophy)-336(of)-336(religion)-336(he)-336(was)-336(more)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([115])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(especially)-262(a)-262(Stoic.)-285(He)-262(himself)-262(expressly)-262(insisted)-262(on)-262(this)-262(point)-262(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(view)-233(in)-233(the)-234(closing)-233(words)-233(of)-233(his)-233(work)-234(on)-233(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 195.119 0 Td[(Nature)-233(of)-233(the)-234(Gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 82.784 0 Td[(.)]TJ -277.903 -13.549 Td[(As)-347(he)-348(was)-347(not,)-371(and)-348(made)-347(no)-347(pretence)-347(of)-348(being,)-371(a)-348(philosopher,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+456 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 457 0 R
+/Resources 455 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 441 0 R
+>> endobj
+458 0 obj <<
+/D [456 0 R /XYZ 168.65 475.073 null]
+>> endobj
+459 0 obj <<
+/D [456 0 R /XYZ 164.215 106.79 null]
+>> endobj
+455 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+462 0 obj <<
+/Length 4973      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(92)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(his)-215(philosophical)-216(expositions)-215(have)-215(no)-216(importance)-215(for)-215(us;)-227(they)-216(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(throughout)-380(second-hand,)-412(mostly)-380(mere)-380(translations)-380(from)-380(Greek)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sources.)-585(That)-362(we)-362(have)-362(employed)-361(them)-362(in)-362(the)-362(foregoing)-362(pages)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-265(throw)-266(light)-265(on)-265(the)-266(theology)-265(of)-265(the)-266(earlier,)-269(more)-265(especially)-266(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Hellenistic,)-375(philosophy,)-374(goes)-350(without)-349(saying.)-549(But)-350(his)-350(personal)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religious)-250(standpoint)-250(is)-250(not)-250(without)-250(interest.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(As)-471(orator)-472(and)-471(statesman)-471(Cicero)-471(took)-472(his)-471(stand)-471(wholly)-472(on)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-371(side)-370(of)-371(the)-370(established)-371(Roman)-371(religion,)-400(operating)-371(with)-371(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(immortal)-427(gods,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 67.994 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.499 0 Td[(with)-427(Jupiter)-427(Optimus)-426(Maximus,)-471(etc.,)-471(at)-427(his)]TJ -82.337 -13.549 Td[(convenience.)-1147(In)-549(his)-549(works)-549(on)-549(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 172.432 0 Td[(State)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.808 0 Td[(and)-549(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 41.063 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 29.029 0 Td[(he)]TJ -270.332 -13.55 Td[(adheres)-242(decidedly)-241(to)-242(the)-241(established)-242(religion.)-247(But)-242(all)-241(this)-242(is)-242(mere)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(politics.)-233(Personally)-197(Cicero)-197(had)-198(no)-197(religion)-198(other)-197(than)-198(philosophy.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Philosophy)-298(was)-299(his)-298(consolation)-299(in)-298(adversity,)-310(or)-299(he)-298(attempted)-299(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(make)-359(it)-360(so,)-386(for)-360(the)-359(result)-359(was)-360(often)-359(indifferent;)-414(and)-359(he)-360(looked)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-313(philosophy)-313(to)-312(guide)-313(him)-313(in)-313(ethical)-313(questions.)-438(We)-313(never)-313(find)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(any)-428(indication)-428(in)-429(his)-428(writings)-428(that)-428(the)-428(gods)-428(of)-428(popular)-429(belief)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(meant)-276(anything)-276(to)-276(him)-276(in)-275(these)-276(respects.)-328(And)-276(what)-276(is)-276(more)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 259.423 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(he)]TJ -270.332 -13.549 Td[(assumed)-197(this)-197(off-hand)-196(to)-197(be)-197(the)-197(standpoint)-197(of)-196(everybody)-197(else,)-208(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(evidently)-327(he)-327(was)-327(justified.)-480(A)-327(great)-327(number)-327(of)-327(letters)-327(from)-327(him)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-335(his)-334(circle,)-356(and)-335(not)-335(a)-334(few)-335(from)-335(his)-334(friends)-335(and)-335(acquaintances)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-342(him,)-364(have)-342(been)-342(preserved;)-387(and)-342(in)-341(his)-342(philosophical)-342(writings)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-355(often)-355(introduces)-356(contemporary)-355(Romans)-355(as)-355(characters)-355(in)-356(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dialogue.)-700(But)-400(in)-400(all)-400(this)-400(literature)-400(there)-400(is)-800(never)-400(the)-400(faintest)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([116])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(indication)-286(that)-286(a)-286(Roman)-285(of)-286(the)-286(better)-286(class)-286(entertained,)-295(or)-286(could)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(even)-302(be)-302(supposed)-302(to)-303(entertain,)-315(an)-302(orthodox)-302(view)-302(with)-302(regard)-303(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-280(State)-281(religion.)-341(To)-280(Cicero)-280(and)-281(his)-280(circle)-281(the)-280(popular)-280(faith)-281(did)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-250(exist)-250(as)-250(an)-250(element)-250(of)-250(their)-250(personal)-250(religion.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Such)-282(a)-282(standpoint)-281(is)-282(of)-282(course,)-290(practically)-282(speaking,)-290(atheism,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(and)-339(in)-340(this)-339(sense)-340(atheism)-339(was)-340(widely)-339(spread)-340(among)-339(the)-340(higher)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(classes)-278(of)-279(the)-278(Graeco-Roman)-279(society)-278(about)-279(the)-278(time)-279(of)-278(the)-279(birth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-218(Christ.)-240(But)-218(from)-219(this)-218(to)-218(theoretical)-219(atheism)-218(there)-218(is)-219(still)-218(a)-219(good)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(step.)-388(Cicero)-296(himself)-296(affords)-296(an)-296(amusing)-296(example)-296(of)-297(how)-296(easily)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(people,)-225(who)-218(have)-219(apparently)-218(quite)-219(emancipated)-218(themselves)-219(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-337(official)-338(religion)-337(of)-337(their)-337(community,)-360(may)-337(backslide.)-512(When)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+461 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 462 0 R
+/Resources 460 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 441 0 R
+>> endobj
+463 0 obj <<
+/D [461 0 R /XYZ 291.407 217.638 null]
+>> endobj
+460 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+466 0 obj <<
+/Length 4887      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(93)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(his)-337(beloved)-337(daughter)-336(Tullia)-337(died)-337(in)-337(the)-336(year)-337(45)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 214.851 0 Td[(B)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(C)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.316 0 Td[(.,)-358(it)-337(became)]TJ -228.21 -13.549 Td[(evident)-292(that)-291(Cicero,)-302(in)-292(the)-292(first)-291(violence)-292(of)-291(his)-292(grief,)-302(which)-292(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-272(more)-272(overwhelming)-272(because)-271(he)-272(was)-272(excluded)-272(from)-272(political)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(activity)-356(during)-356(C\346sar's)-356(dictatorship,)-382(could)-356(not)-356(console)-356(himself)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(with)-331(philosophy)-331(alone.)-493(He)-331(wanted)-331(something)-331(more)-331(tangible)-331(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(take)-229(hold)-228(on,)-233(and)-229(so)-229(he)-229(hit)-228(upon)-229(the)-229(idea)-228(of)-229(having)-229(Tullia)-229(exalted)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(among)-257(the)-257(gods.)-272(He)-257(thought)-257(of)-257(building)-257(a)-257(temple)-257(and)-258(instituting)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-400(cult)-401(in)-400(her)-400(honour.)-701(He)-400(moved)-400(heav)-1(en)-400(and)-400(earth)-400(to)-401(arrange)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-278(matter,)-284(sought)-277(to)-278(buy)-277(gr)-1(ound)-277(in)-278(a)-277(prominent)-278(place)-277(in)-278(Rome,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-290(was)-289(willing)-290(to)-290(make)-289(the)-290(greatest)-290(pecuniary)-289(sacrifices)-290(to)-290(get)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-304(conspicuous)-304(result.)-411(Nothing)-304(came)-303(of)-304(it)-304(all,)-317(however;)-331(Cicero's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(friends,)-368(who)-345(were)-345(to)-345(help)-344(him)-345(to)-345(put)-345(the)-344(matter)-345(through,)-369(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(perhaps)-444(hardly)-444(so)-444(eager)-444(as)-443(he;)-541(time)-444(assuaged)-444(his)-444(own)-444(grief,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-341(finally)-341(he)-340(conte)-1(nted)-340(himself)-341(with)-341(publishing)-341(a)-341(consolatory)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(epistle)-191(written)-383(by)-191(himself,)-203(or,)-203(correctly)-191(speaking,)-203(translated)-192(from)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([117])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(a)-379(famous)-379(Greek)-379(work)-379(and)-379(adapted)-378(to)-379(the)-379(occasion.)-637(So)-379(far)-379(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ended)-270(where)-270(he)-270(should,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 106.653 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 16.709 0 Td[(in)-270(philosophy;)-280(but)-270(the)-269(little)-270(incident)]TJ -123.362 -13.549 Td[(is)-443(significant,)-491(not)-443(least)-443(because)-442(it)-443(shows)-443(what)-443(practical)-443(ends)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Euhemerism)-245(could)-245(be)-245(brought)-245(to)-245(serve)-245(and)-245(how)-245(doubtful)-245(was)-245(its)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(atheistic)-321(character)-322(after)-321(all.)-465(For)-321(not)-321(only)-322(was)-321(the)-322(contemplated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(apotheosis)-431(of)-430(Tullia)-431(in)-431(itself)-431(a)-430(Euhemeristic)-431(idea,)-476(but)-431(Cicero)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(also)-266(expressly)-266(defended)-266(it)-266(with)-266(Euhemeristic)-266(argum)-1(ents,)-270(though)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(speaking)-273(as)-273(if)-273(the)-273(departed)-273(who)-273(were)-273(worshipped)-273(as)-274(gods)-273(really)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(had)-250(become)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(The)-197(attitude)-197(of)-198(Cicero)-197(and)-197(his)-197(contemporaries)-197(towards)-198(popular)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(belief)-211(was)-211(still)-211(the)-212(general)-211(attitude)-211(in)-211(the)-211(first)-211(days)-211(of)-211(the)-212(Empire.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(It)-245(was)-245(of)-245(no)-246(avail)-245(that)-245(Augustus)-245(re-established)-245(the)-245(decayed)-246(State)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(cult)-302(in)-303(all)-302(its)-303(splendour)-302(and)-303(variety,)-315(or)-303(that)-302(the)-303(poets)-302(during)-303(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reign,)-266(when)-262(they)-263(wished)-263(to)-262(express)-263(themselves)-262(in)-263(harmony)-263(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-351(spirit)-351(of)-351(the)-350(new)-351(r\351gime,)-376(directly)-351(or)-351(indirectly)-351(extolled)-351(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(revived)-276(orthodoxy.)-326(W)-1(herever)-275(we)-276(find)-275(personal)-276(religious)-276(feeling)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(expressed)-427(by)-427(men)-427(of)-426(that)-427(time,)-471(in)-427(the)-427(Epistles)-427(of)-427(Horace,)-471(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Virgil's)-449(posthumous)-450(minor)-449(poems)-450(or)-449(in)-449(such)-450(passages)-449(in)-450(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(greater)-214(works)-214(where)-214(he)-213(expresses)-214(his)-214(own)-214(ideals,)-221(it)-214(is)-214(philosophy)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+465 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 466 0 R
+/Resources 464 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 468 0 R
+>> endobj
+467 0 obj <<
+/D [465 0 R /XYZ 110.333 328.486 null]
+>> endobj
+464 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+471 0 obj <<
+/Length 5125      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(94)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(that)-281(is)-281(predominant)-280(and)-281(the)-281(official)-281(religion)-280(ignore)-1(d.)-342(Virgil)-281(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(an)-426(Epicurean;)-514(Horace)-426(an)-426(Eclectic,)-470(now)-426(an)-426(Epicurean,)-471(then)-426(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Stoic;)-254(Augustus)-253(had)-253(a)-253(domestic)-253(philosopher.)-259(Ovid)-253(employed)-253(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(genius)-384(in)-383(writing)-384(travesties)-384(of)-383(the)-384(old)-384(mythology)-383(while)-384(at)-384(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(same)-277(time)-277(he)-277(composed)-277(a)-277(poem,)-284(serious)-277(for)-277(him,)-284(on)-277(the)-277(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(cult;)-311(and)-290(when)-291(disaster)-290(befell)-291(him)-290(and)-291(he)-290(was)-291(cast)-291(out)-290(from)-291(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(society)-343(of)-343(the)-343(capital,)-367(which)-343(was)-343(the)-343(breath)-343(of)-343(life)-686(to)-343(him,)-367(he)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([118])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(was)-310(abandoned)-309(not)-310(only)-310(by)-310(men,)-324(but)-310(also)-310(by)-309(the)-310(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 240.292 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(he)-310(had)]TJ -251.201 -13.549 Td[(not)-293(even)-293(a)-293(philosophy)-293(with)-293(which)-293(to)-293(console)-293(himself.)-379(It)-293(is)-293(only)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-259(inferior)-259(writers)-259(such)-258(as)-259(Valerius)-259(Maximus,)-261(who)-259(wrote)-259(a)-259(work)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-323(great)-323(deeds)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 64.6 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(good)-323(and)-323(evil)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 60.977 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(under)-323(Tiberius,)-341(that)-323(we)-322(find)-323(a)]TJ -147.395 -13.549 Td[(different)-250(spirit.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(Direct)-342(utterances)-342(about)-341(men's)-342(relationship)-342(to)-342(the)-342(gods,)-365(from)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(which)-383(conclusions)-383(can)-382(be)-383(drawn,)-416(are)-383(seldom)-383(met)-383(with)-383(during)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-224(period.)-241(The)-224(whole)-223(question)-224(was)-224(so)-223(remote)-224(from)-224(the)-224(thoughts)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-345(these)-345(people)-345(tha)-1(t)-345(they)-345(never)-345(mentioned)-345(it)-345(except)-345(when)-346(they)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(assumed)-293(an)-294(orthodox)-293(air)-294(for)-293(political)-294(or)-293(aesthetic)-293(reasons.)-381(Still,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(here)-429(and)-429(there)-429(we)-429(come)-428(across)-429(something.)-787(One)-429(of)-429(the)-429(most)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(significant)-517(pronouncements)-516(is)-517(that)-516(of)-517(Pliny)-516(the)-516(Elder,)-584(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(whom)-200(we)-200(quoted)-200(the)-200(passage)-200(about)-200(the)-199(worship)-200(of)-200(Fortune.)-234(Pliny)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(opens)-313(his)-314(scientific)-313(encyclopedia)-313(by)-314(explaining)-313(the)-313(structure)-314(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-370(universe)-371(in)-370(its)-371(broad)-370(features;)-431(this)-370(he)-371(does)-370(on)-371(the)-370(lines)-371(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-383(physics)-384(of)-383(the)-384(Stoics,)-416(hence)-384(he)-383(designates)-384(the)-383(universe)-384(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(God.)-406(Next)-302(comes)-302(a)-302(survey)-302(of)-302(special)-302(theology.)-406(I)-1(t)-302(is)-302(introduced)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-373(follows:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 54.337 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(I)-373(therefore)-373(deem)-374(it)-373(a)-373(sign)-374(of)-373(human)-373(weakness)-374(to)]TJ -59.181 -13.549 Td[(ask)-329(about)-328(the)-329(shape)-328(and)-329(form)-328(of)-329(God.)-485(Whoever)-328(God)-329(is,)-348(if)-329(any)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(other)-315(god)-315(\050than)-315(the)-314(universe\051)-315(exists)-315(at)-315(all,)-331(and)-315(in)-315(whatever)-315(part)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-403(the)-403(world)-403(he)-403(is,)-441(he)-403(is)-403(all)-402(p)-1(erception,)-441(all)-403(sight,)-441(all)-403(hearing,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-386(soul,)-419(all)-386(reason,)-420(all)-385(self.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 125.098 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.051 0 Td[(The)-386(popular)-385(notions)-386(of)-386(the)-386(gods)]TJ -134.149 -13.549 Td[(are)-523(then)-522(reviewed,)-591(in)-523(the)-522(most)-523(supercilious)-522(tone,)-591(and)-523(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(absurdities)-382(pointed)-382(o)-1(ut.)-646(A)-382(polite)-382(bow)-383(is)-382(made)-382(to)-382(the)-383(worship)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-302(the)-302(Emperors)-303(and)-302(its)-302(motives,)-315(the)-303(rest)-302(is)-302(little)-302(but)-303(persiflage.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Not)-400(even)-400(Providence,)-437(which)-399(was)-400(recognised)-400(by)-400(the)-399(Stoics,)-438(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acknowledged)-321(by)-642(Pliny.)-463(The)-321(conclusion)-321(is)-321(like)-322(the)-321(beginning:)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([119])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+470 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 471 0 R
+/Resources 469 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 468 0 R
+>> endobj
+472 0 obj <<
+/D [470 0 R /XYZ 324.204 436.88 null]
+>> endobj
+473 0 obj <<
+/D [470 0 R /XYZ 174.468 66.142 null]
+>> endobj
+469 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+476 0 obj <<
+/Length 3085      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VI)-20254(95)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F30 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(To)-284(imperfect)-284(human)-284(nature)-284(it)-284(is)-284(a)-284(special)-284(consolation)-284(that)-284(God)]TJ -4.844 -13.549 Td[(also)-255(is)-256(not)-255(omnipotent)-256(\050he)-255(can)-255(neither)-256(put)-255(himself)-255(to)-256(death,)-257(even)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(if)-351(he)-351(would,)-376(though)-351(he)-351(has)-351(given)-351(man)-351(that)-351(power)-351(and)-351(it)-351(is)-351(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(choicest)-364(gift)-364(in)-364(this)-364(punishment)-363(which)-364(is)-364(life;)-421(nor)-364(can)-364(he)-364(give)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(immortality)-239(to)-240(mortals)-239(or)-240(call)-239(the)-239(dead)-240(to)-239(life;)-243(nor)-239(can)-240(he)-239(bring)-240(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-276(pass)-275(that)-276(those)-275(who)-276(have)-275(lived)-276(have)-275(not)-276(lived,)-282(or)-275(th)-1(at)-275(he)-276(who)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(has)-296(held)-297(honourable)-296(offices)-297(did)-296(not)-296(hold)-297(them\051;)-319(and)-297(that)-296(he)-297(has)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(no)-317(other)-317(power)-317(over)-317(the)-317(past)-318(than)-317(that)-317(of)-317(oblivion;)-350(and)-318(that)-317(\050in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(order)-359(that)-360(we)-359(may)-359(also)-359(give)-359(a)-360(jesting)-359(proof)-359(of)-359(our)-360(partnership)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(with)-299(God\051)-299(he)-299(cannot)-299(bring)-299(it)-299(about)-299(that)-299(twice)-299(ten)-299(is)-299(not)-299(twenty,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-269(more)-269(of)-269(the)-270(same)-269(sort)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 114.05 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(by)-269(all)-269(which)-269(the)-269(power)-270(of)-269(Nature)-269(is)]TJ -124.96 -13.549 Td[(clearly)-250(revealed,)-250(and)-250(that)-250(it)-250(is)-250(this)-250(we)-250(call)-250(God.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 205.113 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -193.157 -13.549 Td[(An)-385(opinion)-385(like)-385(that)-384(expressed)-385(here)-385(must)-385(without)-385(doubt)-385(be)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(designated)-372(as)-372(atheism,)-403(even)-372(though)-373(it)-372(is)-372(nothing)-372(but)-372(the)-373(Stoic)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(pantheism)-411(logically)-411(carried)-412(out.)-733(As)-411(we)-412(have)-411(said)-411(before,)-452(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(rarely)-285(meet)-286(it)-285(so)-285(directly)-286(expressed,)-294(but)-285(there)-286(can)-285(hardly)-285(be)-286(any)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(doubt)-412(that)-412(even)-413(in)-412(the)-412(time)-412(of)-413(Pliny)-412(it)-412(was)-412(quite)-412(common)-413(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Rome.)-239(At)-217(this)-217(point,)-224(then,)-223(had)-217(the)-217(educated)-217(classes)-218(of)-217(the)-217(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(world)-250(arrived)-250(under)-250(the)-250(influence)-250(of)-250(Hellenistic)-250(philosophy.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -29.651 Td[([120])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+475 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 476 0 R
+/Resources 474 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 468 0 R
+>> endobj
+477 0 obj <<
+/D [475 0 R /XYZ 46.771 244.639 null]
+>> endobj
+474 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+478 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index9) >>
+endobj
+481 0 obj
+(Chapter VII)
+endobj
+484 0 obj <<
+/Length 3966      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(VII)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.572 Td[(Though)-254(the)-253(found)-1(ation)-253(of)-254(the)-254(Empire)-253(in)-254(many)-254(ways)-254(inaugurated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-418(new)-419(era)-418(for)-419(the)-418(antique)-418(world,)-461(it)-418(is,)-461(of)-418(course,)-461(impossible,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-399(an)-399(inqu)-1(iry)-399(which)-399(is)-399(not)-399(confined)-400(to)-399(political)-399(history)-399(in)-400(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(narrowest)-373(sense)-372(of)-373(the)-372(word,)-404(to)-372(operate)-373(with)-372(anything)-373(but)-373(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(loosest)-306(chronological)-306(divisions.)-418(Accordingly)-306(in)-306(the)-307(last)-306(chapter)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(we)-253(had)-253(to)-254(include)-253(phenomena)-253(from)-253(the)-254(early)-253(days)-253(of)-253(the)-254(Empire)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-208(order)-207(not)-208(to)-207(separate)-208(things)-207(which)-208(naturally)-207(belonged)-208(together.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(From)-434(the)-433(point)-434(of)-433(view)-434(of)-433(religious)-434(history)-433(the)-434(dividing)-434(line)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(cannot)-455(possibly)-454(be)-455(drawn)-455(at)-455(the)-454(Emperor)-455(Augustus,)-506(in)-455(spite)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-389(his)-390(restoration)-389(of)-390(worship)-389(and)-390(the)-389(orthodox)-390(reaction)-389(in)-390(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(official)-395(Augustan)-395(poetry,)-431(but)-395(rather)-394(at)-395(about)-395(the)-395(beginning)-395(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-382(second)-382(century.)-646(The)-382(enthusiasm)-382(of)-382(the)-382(Augustan)-382(Age)-382(for)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-529(good)-528(old)-529(times)-528(was)-529(never)-528(much)-529(more)-528(than)-529(affectation.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(It)-396(quickly)-397(evaporated)-396(when)-397(the)-396(promised)-397(millennium)-396(was)-397(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(forthcoming,)-441(and)-403(was)-402(replaced)-403(by)-403(a)-402(reserve)-403(which)-403(developed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(into)-288(cynicism)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 59.504 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(but,)-297(be)-287(it)-288(understood,)-297(in)-287(the)-288(upper)-287(circles)-288(of)-287(the)]TJ -70.413 -13.55 Td[(capital)-406(only.)-716(In)-406(the)-405(empire)-406(at)-405(large)-406(the)-405(developm)-1(ent)-405(took)-406(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(natural)-341(tranquil)-341(course,)-364(unaffected)-341(by)-341(the)-341(manner)-341(in)-341(which)-341(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(old)-222(Roman)-221(nobility)-222(was)-221(effacing)-222(itself;)-231(and)-221(this)-222(development)-222(did)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-250(tend)-250(towards)-250(atheism.)]TJ 11.956 -13.779 Td[(The)-623(reaction)-623(towards)-623(positive)-624(religious)-623(feeling,)-1433(which)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -84.711 0 Td[([121])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(becomes)-470(clearly)-469(manifest)-470(in)-470(the)-470(second)-469(century)-470(after)-470(Christ,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(though)-498(the)-497(preparation)-498(for)-498(it)-497(is)-498(undoubtedly)-497(of)-498(earlier)-498(date,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-452(perhaps)-452(the)-452(most)-452(remarkable)-452(phenomenon)-452(in)-453(the)-452(religious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(history)-434(of)-434(antiquity.)-801(This)-434(is)-434(not)-434(the)-434(place)-434(to)-434(inquire)-434(into)-434(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(causes,)-301(which)-290(still)-291(remain)-290(largely)-291(unexplained;)-311(there)-290(is)-291(even)-291(no)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reason)-275(to)-275(enter)-275(more)-275(closely)-275(into)-275(its)-275(outer)-274(man)-1(ifestations,)-281(as)-275(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(thing)-410(itself)-410(is)-410(doubted)-410(by)-409(nobody.)-730(It)-410(is)-410(sufficient)-410(to)-410(mention)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-485(instances)-484(authors)-485(like)-485(Suetonius,)-543(with)-485(his)-484(na\357ve)-485(belief)-485(in)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+483 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 484 0 R
+/Resources 482 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 468 0 R
+>> endobj
+479 0 obj <<
+/D [483 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+485 0 obj <<
+/D [483 0 R /XYZ 339.696 174.536 null]
+>> endobj
+482 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+488 0 obj <<
+/Length 4758      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VII)-19921(97)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(miracles,)-376(and)-351(the)-350(rhetorician)-351(Aristides,)-376(with)-351(his)-351(Asclepius-cult)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-212(general)-213(sanctimoniousness;)-225(or)-212(a)-212(minor)-213(figure)-212(such)-212(as)-213(Aelian,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(who)-398(wrote)-398(whole)-398(books)-398(of)-398(a)-398(pronounced,)-435(nay)-399(even)-398(fanatical,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(devotionalism;)-434(or)-373(within)-372(the)-373(sphere)-372(of)-373(philosophy)-373(movements)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(like)-495(Neo-Pythagoreanism)-495(and)-496(Neo-Platonism,)-556(both)-495(of)-496(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-380(as)-380(much)-380(in)-381(the)-380(nature)-380(of)-380(mystic)-380(theology)-380(as)-380(attempts)-380(at)-381(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(scientific)-195(explanation)-195(of)-195(the)-194(universe.)-232(It)-195(is)-195(characteristic,)-206(too,)-206(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(an)-390(essentially)-389(anti-religious)-390(school)-389(like)-390(that)-389(of)-390(the)-390(Epicureans)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(actually)-359(dies)-359(out)-359(at)-360(this)-359(time.)-577(Under)-359(these)-359(conditions)-359(our)-360(task)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-329(this)-329(chapter)-328(must)-329(be)-329(to)-329(bring)-328(out)-329(the)-329(comparatively)-329(few)-329(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(weak)-250(traces)-250(of)-250(other)-250(currents)-250(which)-250(still)-250(made)-250(themselves)-250(felt.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Of)-273(the)-273(earlier)-273(philosophical)-273(schools)-273(Stoicism)-273(flowered)-273(afresh)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(in)-427(the)-428(second)-427(century;)-516(the)-427(Emperor)-427(Marcus)-427(Aurelius)-428(himself)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-468(a)-468(prominent)-467(adherent)-468(of)-468(the)-468(creed.)-903(This)-468(later)-468(Stoicism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(differs,)-611(however,)-612(somewhat)-539(from)-539(the)-539(earlier.)-1117(It)-539(limits)-539(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(scientific)-297(apparatus)-297(which)-297(the)-297(early)-297(Stoics)-297(had)-297(operated)-298(with)-297(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-308(minimum,)-322(and)-308(is)-308(almost)-308(exclusively)-308(concerned)-308(with)-308(practical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ethics)-477(on)-477(a)-476(religious)-477(basis.)-931(Its)-477(religion)-476(is)-477(that)-477(of)-477(ordinary)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([122])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(Stoicism:)-228(Pantheism)-207(and)-207(belief)-207(in)-206(Providence.)-236(But,)-215(on)-207(the)-207(whole,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-272(takes)-272(up)-273(a)-272(more)-272(sympathetic)-272(attitude)-272(towards)-272(popular)-273(religion)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(than)-452(early)-452(Stoicism)-451(had)-452(done.)-856(Of)-451(the)-452(bitter)-452(criticism)-452(of)-452(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(absurdities)-312(of)-311(the)-312(worship)-311(of)-312(the)-311(gods)-312(and)-311(of)-312(mythology)-312(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-263(still)-263(to)-263(be)-263(met)-263(with)-263(as)-263(late)-263(as)-263(Seneca,)-266(nothing)-264(remains.)-289(On)-263(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(contrary,)-220(participation)-213(in)-212(public)-213(worship)-212(is)-213(still)-212(enjoined)-213(as)-213(being)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-368(duty;)-427(nay,)-398(more:)-486(attacks)-368(on)-368(belief)-368(in)-368(the)-368(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 218.056 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(in)-368(the)-368(plain)]TJ -228.965 -13.55 Td[(popular)-425(sense)-424(of)-425(the)-425(word)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 120.324 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(are)-425(denounced)-424(as)-425(pernicious)-425(and)]TJ -131.234 -13.549 Td[(reprehensible.)-313(Perhaps)-272(no)-271(clearer)-271(proof)-271(could)-271(be)-271(adduced)-271(of)-272(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(revolution)-284(which)-284(had)-284(taken)-284(place)-284(in)-284(the)-284(attitude)-284(of)-285(the)-284(educated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(classes)-262(towards)-262(popular)-261(religion)-262(than)-262(this)-262(change)-261(of)-262(front)-262(on)-262(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(part)-250(of)-250(Stoicism.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Contrary)-168(to)-169(this)-169(was)-168(the)-169(attitude)-168(of)-169(another)-168(school)-169(which)-168(was)-169(in)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(vogue)-234(at)-234(the)-233(same)-234(time)-234(as)-234(the)-233(Stoic,)-237(namely,)-237(the)-234(Cynic.)-245(Between)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Cynicism)-272(and)-271(popular)-272(belief)-271(strained)-272(relations)-271(had)-272(existed)-272(since)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(early)-382(times.)-648(It)-382(is)-383(true,)-415(the)-382(Cynics)-383(did)-382(not)-383(altogether)-382(deny)-383(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+487 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 488 0 R
+/Resources 486 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 468 0 R
+>> endobj
+489 0 obj <<
+/D [487 0 R /XYZ 327.401 285.384 null]
+>> endobj
+486 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+492 0 obj <<
+/Length 5056      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(98)-13530(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(existence)-330(of)-330(the)-330(gods;)-370(but)-330(they)-330(rejected)-330(worship)-330(on)-330(the)-330(ground)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-433(the)-434(gods)-433(were)-433(not)-433(in)-434(need)-433(of)-433(anything,)-479(and)-433(they)-434(denied)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(categorically)-356(the)-355(majority)-356(of)-356(the)-355(popular)-356(ideas)-355(about)-356(the)-356(gods.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(For)-213(the)-214(latter)-213(were,)-221(in)-213(fact,)-221(popular)-213(and)-213(traditional,)-221(and)-213(the)-214(whole)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(aim)-456(of)-456(the)-456(Cynic)-1(s)-456(was)-456(to)-456(antagonise)-456(the)-456(current)-456(estimate)-457(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(values.)-373(A)-292(characteristic)-291(instance)-291(of)-291(their)-291(manner)-291(is)-291(provided)-292(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-263(very)-264(period)-263(in)-263(the)-264(fragments)-263(of)-263(the)-264(work)-263(of)-264(Oenomaus.)-290(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(work)-317(was)-316(entitled)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 82.472 0 Td[(The)-317(Swindlers)-316(Unmasked)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 112.356 0 Td[(,)-333(and)-317(it)-317(contained)-316(a)]TJ -194.828 -13.549 Td[(violent)-381(attack)-381(on)-380(oracles.)-643(Its)-381(tone)-381(is)-380(exceedingly)-381(pungent.)-643(In)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-228(extant)-229(fragments)-228(Oenomaus)-229(addresses)-228(the)-229(god)-228(in)-457(Delphi)-229(and)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([123])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(overwhelms)-353(him)-353(with)-354(insults.)-559(But)-353(we)-353(are)-353(expressly)-354(told)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 253.968 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)]TJ -264.877 -13.549 Td[(one)-355(utterance)-355(of)-355(Oenomaus)-355(himself)-355(verifies)-355(it)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 206.229 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(that)-355(the)-355(attack)]TJ -217.138 -13.549 Td[(was)-255(n)-1(ot)-255(really)-255(directed)-256(against)-255(the)-256(god,)-257(but)-255(against)-256(the)-255(men)-256(who)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gave)-370(oracles)-370(in)-370(his)-370(name.)-610(In)-370(his)-370(opinion)-370(the)-370(whole)-371(thing)-370(was)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-300(priestly)-299(fraud)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 67.128 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)-300(view)-299(which)-300(otherwise)-300(was)-299(rather)-300(unfamiliar)]TJ -78.037 -13.549 Td[(to)-322(the)-322(ancients,)-340(but)-323(played)-322(an)-322(important)-322(part)-322(later.)-467(Incidentally)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(there)-383(is)-383(a)-382(violent)-383(attack)-383(on)-383(idolatry.)-648(The)-383(work)-383(is)-383(not)-383(without)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acuteness)-258(of)-259(thought)-258(and)-258(a)-259(certain)-258(coarse)-258(wit)-259(of)-258(the)-258(true)-259(Cynical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(kind;)-529(but)-436(it)-436(is)-435(entirely)-436(uncritical)-436(\050oracles)-436(are)-436(used)-436(which)-436(are)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(evidently)-263(inventions)-263(of)-263(later)-263(times\051)-263(and)-263(of)-263(no)-264(great)-263(significance.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(It)-307(is)-307(even)-308(difficult)-307(to)-307(avoid)-307(the)-308(impression)-307(that)-307(the)-307(author's)-308(aim)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-280(in)-281(some)-280(degree)-280(to)-281(create)-280(a)-280(sensation.)-341(Cynics)-281(of)-280(that)-280(day)-281(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-325(strangers)-325(to)-325(that)-325(kind)-325(of)-325(thing.)-474(But)-325(it)-325(is)-325(at)-325(any)-325(rate)-325(a)-325(proof)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-288(the)-287(fact)-288(that)-288(there)-288(were)-287(at)-288(the)-288(time)-287(tendencies)-288(opposed)-288(to)-288(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(religious)-250(reaction.)]TJ 11.955 -18.458 Td[(A)-419(more)-418(significant)-419(phenomenon)-419(of)-418(the)-419(same)-419(kind)-418(is)-419(to)-419(be)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(found)-424(in)-424(the)-424(writings)-425(of)-424(Lucian.)-772(Lucian)-424(was)-424(by)-424(education)-425(a)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(rhetorician,)-353(by)-332(profession)-332(an)-332(itinerant)-332(lecturer)-332(and)-332(essayist.)-496(At)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-314(certain)-314(stage)-314(of)-313(his)-314(life)-314(he)-314(became)-314(acquainted)-314(with)-314(the)-314(Cynic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophy)-378(and)-377(for)-378(some)-378(time)-377(felt)-378(much)-377(attracted)-378(to)-378(it.)-633(From)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-501(he)-501(evidently)-501(acquired)-500(a)-501(sincere)-501(contempt)-501(of)-501(the)-501(vulgar)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(superstition)-202(which)-203(flourished)-202(in)-202(his)-203(time,)-211(even)-203(in)-202(circles)-202(of)-203(which)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(one)-231(might)-231(have)-230(expected)-231(something)-231(better.)-243(In)-231(writings)-231(which)-231(for)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-214(greater)-213(part)-214(belong)-214(to)-214(his)-213(later)-214(period,)-221(he)-214(pilloried)-214(individuals)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+491 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 492 0 R
+/Resources 490 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 468 0 R
+>> endobj
+493 0 obj <<
+/D [491 0 R /XYZ 323.742 396.232 null]
+>> endobj
+490 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+496 0 obj <<
+/Length 5435      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VII)-19921(99)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(who)-324(traded)-324(\050or)-324(seemed)-324(to)-324(trade\051)-324(in)-324(the)-324(religious)-324(ferment)-324(of)-324(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(time,)-416(as)-382(well)-382(as)-383(satirised)-382(superstition)-383(as)-382(such.)-647(In)-383(this)-382(way)-383(he)]TJ 4.065 -13.549 Td[(made)-373(an)-372(important)-373(contribution)-372(to)-373(the)-372(spiritual)-373(history)-372(of)-373(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 286.959 0 Td[([124])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(age.)-528(But)-343(simultaneously)-343(he)-342(produced,)-366(for)-343(the)-343(entertainment)-343(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(his)-309(public,)-324(a)-309(series)-309(of)-309(writings)-309(the)-309(aim)-309(of)-309(which)-309(is)-309(to)-310(make)-309(fun)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-238(the)-238(Olympia)-1(n)-238(gods.)-246(In)-238(this)-238(work)-238(also)-239(he)-238(leant)-238(on)-238(the)-239(literature)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-383(the)-383(Cynics,)-417(but)-383(substituted)-383(for)-384(their)-383(grave)-383(and)-383(biting)-384(satire)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(light)-244(causeries)-245(or)-244(slight)-244(dramatic)-244(sketches,)-246(in)-244(which)-244(his)-245(wit)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 257.001 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(for)]TJ -267.91 -13.549 Td[(Lucian)-322(was)-323(really)-322(witty)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 105.075 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(had)-322(full)-323(scope.)-466(As)-323(an)-322(instance)-322(of)-323(his)]TJ -115.984 -13.55 Td[(manner)-245(I)-245(shall)-246(quote)-245(a)-245(short)-245(passage)-246(from)-245(the)-245(dialogue)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 240.644 0 Td[(Timon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.884 0 Td[(.)-248(It)]TJ -268.528 -13.549 Td[(is)-251(Zeus)-250(who)-251(speaks;)-250(he)-251(has)-250(given)-251(Hermes)-250(or)-1(ders)-250(to)-251(send)-250(the)-251(god)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-260(wealth)-261(to)-260(Timon,)-263(who)-260(has)-260(wasted)-261(his)-260(fortune)-260(by)-260(his)-261(liberality)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-374(is)-375(now)-374(abandoned)-375(by)-374(his)-375(false)-374(friends.)-623(Then)-375(he)-374(goes)-375(on:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(As)-354(to)-355(the)-354(flatterers)-354(you)-355(speak)-354(of)-354(and)-355(their)-354(ingratitude,)-380(I)-355(shall)]TJ -4.844 -13.55 Td[(deal)-320(with)-319(them)-320(another)-319(time,)-337(and)-320(they)-319(will)-320(meet)-319(with)-320(their)-320(due)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(punishment)-281(as)-280(soon)-281(as)-281(I)-280(have)-281(had)-280(my)-281(thunderbolt)-281(repaired.)-342(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(two)-395(largest)-394(darts)-395(of)-394(it)-395(were)-395(broken)-394(and)-395(blunted)-394(the)-395(other)-395(day)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(when)-259(I)-259(got)-259(in)-259(a)-258(rage)-259(and)-259(flung)-259(it)-259(at)-259(the)-259(sophist)-258(Anaxagora)-1(s,)-261(who)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-404(trying)-405(to)-404(make)-405(his)-404(disciples)-405(believe)-404(that)-404(we)-405(gods)-404(do)-405(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(exist)-333(at)-332(all.)-499(However,)-353(I)-333(missed)-332(him,)-354(for)-332(Pericles)-333(held)-333(his)-333(hand)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(over)-303(him,)-315(but)-303(the)-302(bolt)-303(struck)-302(the)-303(temple)-302(of)-303(the)-303(Dioscuri)-302(and)-303(set)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fire)-285(to)-284(it,)-293(and)-285(the)-284(bolt)-285(itself)-284(was)-285(nearly)-284(destroyed)-285(when)-284(it)-285(struck)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-286(rock.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 38.564 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.963 0 Td[(This)-286(sort)-286(of)-286(thing)-286(abounds)-286(in)-286(Lucian,)-295(even)-286(if)-286(it)-286(is)-286(not)]TJ -46.527 -13.549 Td[(always)-308(equally)-308(amusing)-309(and)-308(to)-308(the)-308(point.)-425(Now)-308(there)-308(is)-309(nothing)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(strange)-265(in)-264(the)-264(fact)-265(that)-264(a)-265(witty)-264(man)-265(for)-264(once)-265(should)-264(feel)-265(inclined)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-314(make)-314(game)-314(of)-313(the)-314(old)-314(mythology;)-346(this)-314(might)-314(have)-314(happened)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(almost)-332(at)-332(any)-332(time,)-353(once)-332(the)-332(critical)-332(spirit)-332(had)-332(been)-332(awakened.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(But)-331(that)-330(a)-331(man,)-351(and)-330(moreover)-331(an)-331(essayist,)-350(who)-331(had)-661(to)-331(live)-331(by)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([125])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(the)-319(approval)-320(of)-319(his)-319(public,)-337(should)-319(make)-320(it)-319(his)-319(trade,)-337(as)-319(it)-320(were,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-400(that)-399(at)-400(a)-399(time)-400(of)-400(vigorous)-399(religious)-400(reaction,)-437(seems)-400(more)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(difficult)-240(to)-240(account)-240(for.)-247(Lucian's)-240(controversial)-240(pamphlets)-241(against)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(superstition)-229(cannot)-229(be)-229(classed)-229(off-hand)-229(with)-229(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 208.97 0 Td[(Dialogues)-229(of)-229(the)]TJ -208.97 -13.549 Td[(Gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.029 0 Td[(;)-407(the)-355(latter)-354(are)-355(of)-355(a)-354(quite)-355(different)-355(and)-354(far)-355(more)-355(harmless)]TJ -23.029 -13.549 Td[(character.)-731(The)-410(fact)-411(is)-410(rather)-410(that)-410(mythology)-411(at)-410(this)-410(time)-411(was)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+495 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 496 0 R
+/Resources 494 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 499 0 R
+>> endobj
+497 0 obj <<
+/D [495 0 R /XYZ 46.771 491.077 null]
+>> endobj
+498 0 obj <<
+/D [495 0 R /XYZ 280.821 152.347 null]
+>> endobj
+494 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+502 0 obj <<
+/Length 5265      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(100)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(fair)-373(game.)-620(It)-373(was)-373(cut)-373(o)-1(ff)-373(from)-373(its)-373(connexion)-373(with)-374(religion)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 264.877 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(a)]TJ -275.786 -13.549 Td[(connexion)-241(which)-242(in)-241(historical)-242(times)-241(was)-241(never)-242(very)-241(intimate)-242(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-318(now)-317(entirely)-318(severed.)-453(This)-318(had)-318(been)-317(brought)-318(about)-318(in)-318(part)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-209(centuries)-210(of)-209(criticism)-210(of)-209(the)-209(most)-210(varied)-209(kind,)-218(in)-209(part)-210(precisely)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-395(a)-396(result)-395(of)-395(the)-396(religious)-395(reaction)-395(which)-396(had)-395(now)-395(set)-396(in.)-686(If)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(people)-314(turned)-313(during)-314(this)-313(time)-314(to)-313(the)-314(old)-313(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 204.328 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(who,)-329(however,)]TJ -215.237 -13.549 Td[(had)-255(been)-255(considerably)-255(contaminated)-255(with)-255(new)-255(elements)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 243.911 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(it)-255(was)]TJ -254.82 -13.549 Td[(because)-417(they)-417(had)-417(nothing)-417(else)-418(to)-417(turn)-417(to;)-500(but)-417(what)-417(they)-418(now)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(looked)-319(for)-318(was)-319(something)-318(quite)-319(different)-318(from)-319(the)-318(old)-319(religion.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(The)-254(powerful)-254(tradition)-254(which)-253(had)-254(bound)-254(members)-254(of)-254(each)-254(small)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(community)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 49.702 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(we)-358(should)-358(say,)-384(of)-358(each)-358(township)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 147.969 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(to)-358(its)-358(familiar)]TJ -219.489 -13.549 Td[(gods,)-465(with)-422(all)-422(that)-421(belonge)-1(d)-421(to)-422(them,)-465(was)-422(now)-422(in)-422(process)-422(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dissolution;)-448(in)-382(the)-382(larger)-382(cities)-382(of)-382(the)-382(world-empire)-383(with)-382(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mixed)-298(populations)-297(it)-298(had)-298(entirely)-297(disappeared.)-393(Religion)-298(was)-298(no)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(longer)-312(primarily)-311(a)-312(concern)-311(of)-312(society;)-342(it)-312(was)-311(a)-312(personal)-312(matter.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-440(the)-439(face)-440(of)-440(the)-439(enormous)-440(selection)-440(of)-439(gods)-440(which)-440(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(paganism)-335(came)-335(gradually)-335(to)-335(proffer,)-356(the)-335(individual)-335(was)-335(free)-335(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(choose,)-201(as)-189(individual)-189(or)-189(as)-188(a)-189(member)-189(of)-189(a)-189(communion)-189(based)-189(upon)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religious,)-228(not)-223(political,)-228(sympathy.)-241(Under)-223(these)-223(circumstances)-223(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(existence)-450(of)-450(the)-450(gods)-450(and)-450(their)-450(power)-450(and)-450(will)-450(to)-451(help)-450(their)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(worshippers)-863(was)-432(the)-431(only)-432(thing)-431(of)-432(interest;)-522(all)-432(the)-431(old)-432(tales)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([126])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(about)-387(them)-387(were)-386(more)-387(than)-387(ever)-387(myths)-386(of)-387(no)-387(religious)-387(value.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(On)-334(closer)-335(inspection)-334(Lucian)-334(indeed)-334(proves)-335(to)-334(have)-334(exercised)-335(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(certain)-309(selection)-308(in)-309(his)-308(satire.)-426(Gods)-309(like)-308(Asclepius)-309(and)-309(Serapis,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(who)-209(were)-210(popular)-209(in)-210(his)-209(day,)-218(he)-209(prefers)-209(to)-210(say)-209(nothing)-210(about;)-223(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(even)-355(with)-354(a)-355(phenomenon)-355(like)-354(Christia)-1(nity)-354(he)-355(deals)-355(cautiously;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-331(sticks)-332(to)-331(the)-332(old)-331(Olympian)-332(gods.)-494(Thus)-331(his)-332(derision)-331(of)-332(these)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(constitutes)-220(an)-219(indirect)-220(proof)-220(that)-219(they)-220(had)-220(gone)-219(out)-220(of)-220(vogue,)-226(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-371(forbearance)-371(on)-371(other)-371(points)-371(is)-371(a)-371(proof)-371(of)-371(the)-371(power)-372(of)-371(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(current)-326(religion)-325(over)-326(contemporary)-326(minds.)-477(As)-325(to)-326(ascribing)-326(any)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(deeper)-285(religious)-285(conviction)-285(to)-284(Lucian)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 164.523 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(were)-285(it)-285(even)-285(of)-284(a)-285(purely)]TJ -175.432 -13.549 Td[(negative)-421(kind)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 60.953 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(that)-421(is,)-465(in)-421(view)-421(of)-422(the)-421(whole)-421(character)-422(of)-421(his)]TJ -71.862 -13.549 Td[(work,)-325(out)-311(of)-310(the)-311(question.)-431(To)-310(be)-310(sure,)-326(his)-310(polemical)-311(pamphlets)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(against)-329(superstition)-329(show)-329(clearly,)-349(like)-329(those)-329(of)-329(Oenomaus,)-349(that)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+501 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 502 0 R
+/Resources 500 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 499 0 R
+>> endobj
+503 0 obj <<
+/D [501 0 R /XYZ 151.574 247.191 null]
+>> endobj
+500 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+506 0 obj <<
+/Length 4768      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VII)-19421(101)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(the)-420(religious)-420(reaction)-421(did)-420(not)-420(run)-420(its)-420(course)-420(without)-421(criticism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-201(certain)-201(sides;)-217(but)-201(even)-201(here)-201(it)-202(is)-201(significant)-201(that)-201(the)-201(criticism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(comes)-229(from)-228(a)-228(professional)-229(jester)-228(and)-229(not)-228(from)-229(a)-228(serious)-229(religious)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thinker.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(A)-374(few)-374(words)-375(remain)-374(to)-374(be)-375(said)-374(about)-374(the)-374(two)-375(monotheistic)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(religions)-251(which)-250(in)-250(the)-251(days)-250(of)-251(the)-250(Roman)-251(Empire)-250(came)-251(to)-250(play)-251(a)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(great,)-224(one)-218(of)-217(them)-218(indeed)-218(a)-217(decisive,)-224(part.)-240(I)-217(have)-218(already)-218(referred)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-471(pagan)-471(society's)-470(attitude)-471(towards)-471(Judaism)-471(and)-471(Christianity,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-317(pointed)-318(out)-317(that)-317(the)-318(adherents)-317(of)-318(both)-317(were)-317(designated)-318(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(treated)-286(as)-285(atheists)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 77.729 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)-286(Jews)-285(only)-286(occasionally)-285(and)-286(with)-285(certain)]TJ -88.638 -13.549 Td[(reservations,)-373(the)-349(Christians)-349(nearly)-348(always)-349(and)-349(unconditionally.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(The)-485(question)-485(here)-484(is,)-544(how)-485(far)-484(this)-485(designation)-485(was)-485(justified)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(according)-314(to)-313(the)-314(definition)-313(of)-314(atheism)-314(which)-313(is)-314(the)-313(basis)-314(of)-314(our)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(inquiry.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([127])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -279.068 -15.186 Td[(In)-314(the)-313(preceding)-314(pages)-314(we)-313(have)-314(several)-314(times)-313(referred)-314(to)-314(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(fact)-345(that)-345(the)-345(real)-344(enemy)-345(of)-345(Polytheism)-345(is)-345(not)-345(the)-345(philosophical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theology,)-222(which)-215(generally)-215(tends)-215(more)-215(or)-215(less)-216(towards)-215(Pantheism,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-276(Monotheism.)-328(It)-276(is)-276(in)-276(keeping)-276(with)-276(this)-276(that)-276(the)-276(Jews)-276(and)-276(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Christians)-322(in)-321(pr)-1(actice)-321(are)-322(downright)-322(deniers)-321(of)-322(the)-322(pagan)-322(gods:)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(they)-203(would)-202(not)-203(worship)-203(them;)-218(whereas)-203(the)-202(Greek)-203(philosophers)-203(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-214(rule)-214(respected)-214(worship,)-221(however)-214(far)-214(they)-214(went)-215(in)-214(their)-214(criticism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-222(men's)-223(ideas)-222(of)-223(the)-222(gods.)-241(We)-222(shall)-223(not)-222(dwell)-222(here)-223(on)-222(this)-223(aspect)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-320(the)-319(matter;)-355(we)-319(are)-320(concerned)-319(with)-320(the)-319(theory)-320(only.)-459(Detailed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(expositions)-185(of)-186(it)-185(occur)-185(in)-185(numerous)-186(writings,)-198(from)-185(the)-185(passages)-186(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-232(Old)-232(Testament)-232(where)-232(heathenism)-232(is)-232(attacked,)-236(to)-232(the)-232(defences)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(Christianity)-250(by)-250(the)-250(latest)-250(Fathers)-250(of)-250(the)-250(Church.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(The)-438(original)-438(Jewish)-437(view,)-485(according)-438(to)-438(which)-438(the)-438(heathen)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(gods)-519(are)-519(real)-519(beings)-519(just)-519(as)-519(much)-519(as)-519(the)-519(God)-520(of)-519(the)-519(Jews)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(themselves)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 48.48 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(only)-334(Jews)-333(must)-334(not)-334(worship)-333(th)-1(em)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 150.932 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(is)-334(in)-333(the)-334(later)]TJ -221.23 -13.549 Td[(portions)-513(of)-513(the)-513(Old)-513(Testament)-513(superseded)-513(by)-513(the)-513(view)-513(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-398(gods)-398(are)-398(only)-398(images)-397(made)-398(of)-398(wood,)-435(stone)-398(or)-398(metal,)-435(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(incapable)-204(of)-204(doing)-204(either)-204(good)-204(or)-203(evil.)-235(This)-204(point)-204(of)-204(view)-204(is)-204(taken)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(over)-407(by)-407(later)-407(Jewish)-407(authors)-407(and)-407(completely)-407(dominates)-407(them.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-470(those)-469(acquainted)-470(with)-470(Greek)-469(thought)-470(it)-469(is)-470(combined)-470(with)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+505 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 506 0 R
+/Resources 504 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 499 0 R
+>> endobj
+507 0 obj <<
+/D [505 0 R /XYZ 46.771 338.021 null]
+>> endobj
+504 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+510 0 obj <<
+/Length 4831      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(102)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Euhemeristic)-289(ideas:)-327(the)-288(images)-289(represent)-289(dead)-288(men.)-366(The)-289(theory)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-376(the)-376(gods)-376(are)-376(really)-376(natural)-376(objects)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 174.268 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(elements)-376(or)-376(heavenly)]TJ -185.177 -13.549 Td[(bodies)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 28.484 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(is)-405(occasionally)-405(taken)-405(into)-404(account)-405(too.)-715(Alongside)-405(of)]TJ -39.393 -13.549 Td[(these)-340(opinions)-339(there)-340(appears)-339(also)-340(the)-339(view)-340(that)-339(the)-340(pagan)-340(gods)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(are)-210(evil)-210(spirits)-210(\050demons\051.)-237(It)-210(is)-210(already)-210(found)-210(in)-210(a)-210(few)-210(places)-211(in)-210(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Old)-219(Testament,)-226(and)-219(after)-219(that)-219(sporadically)-438(and)-219(quite)-220(incidentally)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([128])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(in)-241(later)-241(Jewish)-240(writings;)-244(in)-241(one)-241(place)-241(it)-240(is)-241(combined)-241(with)-241(the)-241(Old)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Testament's)-341(account)-341(of)-341(the)-341(fallen)-341(angels.)-523(The)-342(demon-theory)-341(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-188(an)-188(instrument)-188(of)-188(Jewish)-189(apologetics)-188(proper,)-200(not)-188(even)-188(of)-189(Philo,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(though)-240(he)-239(has)-240(a)-240(complete)-239(demonology)-240(and)-240(can)-239(hardly)-240(have)-240(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ignorant)-250(of)-250(the)-250(Platonic-Stoic)-250(doctrine)-250(of)-250(demons.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(Apart)-478(from)-477(the)-478(few)-478(and,)-534(as)-478(it)-477(were,)-535(incidental)-478(utterances)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(concerning)-194(demons,)-205(the)-194(Jewish)-194(view)-194(of)-194(the)-194(pagan)-194(gods)-194(impresses)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(one)-231(as)-232(decidedly)-231(atheistic.)-244(The)-231(god)-231(is)-232(identical)-231(with)-231(the)-232(idol,)-235(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-359(idol)-358(is)-358(a)-359(dead)-358(object,)-386(the)-359(work)-358(of)-359(men's)-358(hands,)-386(or)-358(the)-359(god)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(is)-339(identical)-340(with)-339(a)-339(natural)-340(object,)-361(made)-340(by)-339(God)-339(to)-340(be)-339(sure,)-362(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(without)-355(soul)-355(or,)-381(at)-354(any)-355(rate,)-381(without)-355(divinity.)-564(It)-355(is)-355(remarkable)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-310(no)-310(Jewish)-311(controversialist)-310(seriously)-310(envisaged)-310(the)-311(problem)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-227(the)-227(real)-227(view)-227(of)-227(the)-227(gods)-227(embodied)-227(in)-227(the)-227(popular)-227(belief)-228(of)-227(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ancients,)-264(namely,)-264(tha)-1(t)-261(they)-261(are)-262(personal)-261(beings)-261(of)-262(a)-261(higher)-262(order)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(than)-296(man.)-387(It)-295(is)-296(inconceivable)-296(that)-295(men)-296(like)-296(Philo,)-307(Josephus)-296(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-228(author)-229(of)-228(the)-228(Wisdom)-228(of)-229(Solomon)-228(should)-228(have)-228(been)-229(ignorant)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-341(it.)-522(I)-340(know)-341(nothing)-340(to)-341(account)-341(for)-340(this)-341(curious)-341(phenomenon;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-374(till)-374(some)-373(light)-374(has)-374(been)-374(thrown)-374(upon)-373(the)-374(matter,)-405(I)-374(should)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(hesitate)-322(to)-321(assert)-322(that)-321(the)-322(Jewish)-321(conception)-322(of)-321(Polytheism)-322(was)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(purely)-245(atheistic,)-246(however)-244(much)-245(appearance)-245(it)-244(may)-245(have)-245(of)-245(being)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(so.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(It)-344(was)-343(otherwise)-344(with)-344(Christian)-343(polemical)-344(writing.)-531(As)-344(early)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(as)-424(St.)-771(Paul)-424(the)-424(demon-theory)-424(appears)-424(distinctly,)-467(though)-424(side)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-331(side)-332(with)-331(utterances)-331(of)-332(seemingly)-331(atheistic)-332(character.)-494(Other)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(New)-470(Testament)-469(authors,)-525(too,)-524(designate)-470(the)-469(gods)-470(as)-470(demons.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(The)-451(subsequent)-452(apologists,)-501(excepting)-452(the)-451(earliest,)-1004(Aristides,)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([129])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.55 Td[(lay)-325(the)-324(main)-325(stress)-324(on)-325(demonology,)-343(but)-324(include)-325(for)-325(the)-324(sake)-325(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(completeness)-419(idolatry)-419(and)-420(the)-419(like,)-461(sometimes)-419(without)-420(caring)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+509 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 510 0 R
+/Resources 508 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 499 0 R
+>> endobj
+511 0 obj <<
+/D [509 0 R /XYZ 277.918 450.429 null]
+>> endobj
+512 0 obj <<
+/D [509 0 R /XYZ 326.58 93.24 null]
+>> endobj
+508 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+515 0 obj <<
+/Length 4554      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VII)-19421(103)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(about)-318(or)-317(trying)-318(to)-317(conciliate)-318(the)-317(contradictions.)-453(In)-318(the)-317(long)-318(run)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(demonology)-255(is)-256(victorious;)-258(in)-255(St.)-266(Augustine,)-257(the)-255(foremost)-256(among)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Christian)-269(apologists,)-275(there)-269(is)-269(hardly)-270(any)-269(other)-269(point)-270(of)-269(view)-270(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(counts.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(To)-508(trace)-509(the)-508(Christian)-509(demonology)-508(in)-508(detail)-509(and)-508(give)-509(an)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(account)-184(of)-185(its)-184(various)-184(aspects)-185(is)-184(outside)-184(the)-185(scope)-184(of)-184(this)-184(essa)-1(y.)-228(Its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(origin)-198(is)-199(a)-198(twofold)-198(one,)-209(partly)-198(the)-198(Jewish)-199(demonology,)-208(which)-199(just)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-337(the)-337(commencement)-337(of)-337(our)-337(era)-337(had)-337(received)-337(a)-338(great)-337(impetus,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(partly)-467(the)-467(theory)-467(of)-467(the)-467(Greek)-467(philosophers,)-522(which)-467(we)-467(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(characterised)-217(above)-216(when)-216(speaking)-217(of)-216(Xenocrates.)-239(The)-217(Christian)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(doctrine)-302(regarding)-301(demons)-301(differs)-302(from)-301(the)-302(latter,)-314(especially)-302(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-346(fact)-346(that)-346(it)-345(does)-346(not)-346(acknowledge)-346(good)-346(demons;)-394(they)-346(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-242(evil.)-247(This)-241(was)-242(the)-242(indispensable)-241(basis)-242(for)-241(the)-242(interdict)-242(against)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-212(worship)-212(of)-212(demons;)-225(in)-212(its)-212(further)-212(development)-212(the)-212(Christians,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(following)-449(Jewish)-448(tradition,)-498(pointed)-449(to)-448(an)-449(origin)-449(in)-448(the)-449(fallen)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(angels,)-360(and)-338(thus)-338(effected)-337(a)-338(connexion)-338(with)-338(the)-338(Old)-338(Testament.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(While)-401(they)-400(at)-401(the)-400(same)-401(time)-400(retained)-401(its)-400(angelology)-401(they)-401(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-396(distinguish)-397(good)-396(and)-396(evil)-397(beings)-396(intermediate)-396(between)-397(god)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-365(man;)-422(but)-364(they)-365(carefully)-365(avoided)-365(designating)-364(the)-365(angels)-365(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(demons,)-297(and)-288(kept)-287(them)-288(distinct)-287(from)-288(the)-287(pagan)-288(gods,)-297(who)-288(were)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(all)-250(demons)-250(and)-250(evil.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(The)-308(application)-308(of)-309(demonology)-308(to)-308(the)-308(pagan)-308(worship)-309(caused)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(certain)-193(difficulties)-193(in)-193(detail.)-231(To)-193(be)-193(sure,)-204(it)-193(was)-193(possible)-193(to)-193(identify)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-211(given)-210(pagan)-211(god)-210(with)-211(a)-210(certain)-211(demon,)-218(and)-211(this)-210(was)-211(often)-211(done;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-221(it)-222(was)-221(impossible)-221(to)-222(identify)-221(the)-221(Pagans')-222(conceptions)-442(of)-222(their)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([130])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(gods)-349(with)-349(the)-349(Christians')-349(conceptions)-349(of)-349(demons.)-548(The)-349(Pagans,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-419(fact,)-461(ascribed)-419(to)-419(their)-418(gods)-419(not)-419(only)-419(demoniac)-419(\050diabolical\051)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(but)-274(also)-274(divine)-274(qualities,)-280(which)-274(the)-274(Christians)-274(absolutely)-274(denied)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(them.)-577(Consequently)-358(they)-359(had)-359(to)-359(recognise)-359(that)-359(pagan)-359(worship)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-404(a)-403(great)-404(extent)-404(rested)-403(on)-404(a)-404(delusion,)-442(on)-403(a)-404(misconception)-404(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-261(essential)-261(character)-261(of)-261(the)-260(gods)-261(which)-261(were)-261(worshipped.)-283(This)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(view)-259(was)-259(corroborated)-259(by)-259(the)-259(dogma)-259(of)-259(the)-258(falle)-1(n)-258(angels,)-262(which)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(was)-301(altogether)-301(alien)-301(to)-301(paganism.)-402(By)-301(identifying)-301(them)-301(with)-301(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(evil)-219(spirits)-219(of)-219(the)-220(Bible,)-225(demon-names)-219(were)-219(even)-219(obtained)-220(which)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+514 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 515 0 R
+/Resources 513 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 499 0 R
+>> endobj
+516 0 obj <<
+/D [514 0 R /XYZ 293.489 188.085 null]
+>> endobj
+513 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+519 0 obj <<
+/Length 4848      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(104)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(differed)-326(from)-325(those)-326(of)-326(the)-326(pagan)-325(gods)-326(and,)-345(of)-325(course,)-345(were)-326(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(correct)-295(ones;)-318(were)-295(they)-295(not)-295(given)-295(in)-295(Holy)-295(Writ?)-385(In)-295(general,)-307(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Christians,)-293(who)-284(possessed)-285(an)-284(authentic)-284(revelation)-285(of)-284(the)-285(matter,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-418(of)-417(course)-418(much)-417(better)-418(informed)-417(about)-418(the)-417(nature)-418(of)-418(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(pagan)-219(gods)-220(than)-219(the)-220(Pagans)-219(themselves,)-226(who)-219(were)-220(groping)-219(in)-220(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dark.)-592(Euhemerism,)-393(which)-364(plays)-364(a)-364(great)-364(part)-364(in)-364(the)-365(apologists,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(helped)-271(in)-270(the)-271(same)-270(direction:)-292(the)-270(supposition)-271(that)-270(the)-271(idols)-271(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(originally)-251(men)-250(existed)-251(among)-250(the)-250(Pa)-1(gans)-250(themselves,)-251(and)-250(it)-251(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(too)-314(much)-313(in)-314(harmony)-313(with)-314(the)-313(tendency)-314(of)-313(the)-314(apologists)-313(to)-314(be)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(left)-437(unemployed.)-810(It)-436(was)-437(reconciled)-437(with)-436(demonology)-437(by)-437(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(supposition)-439(that)-438(the)-439(demons)-439(had)-439(assumed)-438(the)-439(masks)-439(of)-439(dead)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(heroes;)-330(they)-303(ha)-1(d)-303(beguiled)-303(mankind)-304(to)-303(worship)-303(them)-304(in)-303(order)-304(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(possess)-237(themselves)-237(of)-236(the)-237(sacrifices,)-239(which)-237(they)-237(always)-237(coveted,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-348(by)-347(this)-348(deception)-348(to)-347(be)-348(able)-348(to)-347(ru)-1(le)-347(and)-348(corrupt)-348(men.)-543(The)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Christians)-217(also)-217(could)-218(not)-217(avoid)-217(recognising)-217(that)-217(part)-217(of)-217(the)-218(pagan)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(worship)-479(was)-479(worship)-479(of)-479(natural)-479(objects,)-536(in)-479(particular)-479(of)-479(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(heavenly)-400(bodies;)-475(and)-400(this)-399(error)-400(of)-400(worshipping)-400(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 240.648 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(creation)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -318.247 0 Td[([131])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(instead)-328(of)-329(the)-328(creator)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 94.357 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.426 0 Td[(was)-328(so)-329(obvious)-328(that)-329(the)-328(Christians)-329(were)]TJ -102.783 -13.549 Td[(not)-334(inclined)-334(to)-333(resort)-334(to)-334(demonology)-334(for)-333(an)-334(explanation)-334(of)-334(this)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(phenomenon,)-399(the)-369(less)-368(so)-369(as)-369(they)-369(could)-369(not)-369(identify)-369(the)-369(sun)-369(or)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-345(moon)-346(with)-345(a)-346(demon.)-536(The)-345(conflict)-345(of)-346(these)-345(different)-346(points)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-439(view)-439(accounts)-439(for)-439(the)-439(peculiar)-439(vacillation)-439(in)-439(the)-439(Christian)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conception)-446(of)-445(paganism.)-838(On)-445(one)-446(hand,)-495(we)-445(meet)-446(with)-446(crude)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conceptions,)-308(according)-297(to)-297(which)-296(the)-297(pagan)-297(gods)-297(are)-296(just)-297(like)-297(so)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(many)-193(demons;)-212(they)-193(are)-193(specially)-193(prominent)-193(when)-193(pagan)-193(miracles)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-307(prophecies)-308(are)-307(to)-307(be)-307(explained.)-422(On)-307(the)-308(other)-307(hand,)-321(there)-308(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-306(train)-306(of)-306(thought)-306(which)-306(carried)-306(to)-306(its)-306(logical)-307(conclusion)-306(would)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(lead)-354(to)-354(conceiving)-354(paganism)-355(as)-354(a)-354(whole)-354(as)-354(a)-354(huge)-354(delusion)-355(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(humanity,)-205(but)-194(a)-194(delusion)-194(caused)-194(indeed)-194(by)-194(supernatural)-194(agencies.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(This)-219(conclusion)-218(hardly)-219(presented)-219(itself)-218(to)-219(the)-219(early)-218(Church;)-230(later,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(however,)-304(it)-292(was)-293(drawn)-293(and)-293(caused)-293(a)-293(not)-293(inconsiderable)-293(shifting)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-250(men's)-250(views)-250(and)-250(explanations)-250(of)-250(paganism.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(Demonology)-458(is)-457(to)-458(such)-457(a)-458(degree)-457(the)-458(ruling)-457(point)-458(of)-458(view)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(in)-517(Christian)-517(apologetics)-517(that)-517(it)-517(would)-517(be)-517(absurd)-517(to)-518(make)-517(a)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+518 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 519 0 R
+/Resources 517 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 499 0 R
+>> endobj
+520 0 obj <<
+/D [518 0 R /XYZ 329.83 301.388 null]
+>> endobj
+517 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+523 0 obj <<
+/Length 4552      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VII)-19421(105)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(collection)-189(from)-189(these)-189(writings)-189(of)-189(utterances)-189(with)-189(an)-189(atheistic)-189(ring.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Such)-374(utterances)-374(are)-373(to)-374(be)-374(found)-374(in)-374(most)-373(of)-374(them;)-436(they)-374(appear)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(spontaneously,)-353(for)-333(instance,)-353(wherever)-333(idolatry)-332(is)-333(attacked.)-498(But)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(one)-439(cannot)-439(attach)-440(any)-439(importance)-439(to)-439(them)-439(when)-439(they)-440(appear)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-405(this)-405(connexion,)-443(not)-405(even)-405(in)-404(apologists)-405(in)-405(whose)-405(works)-405(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(demon)-364(theory)-364(is)-365(lacking.)-592(No)-364(Christian)-364(theologian)-364(in)-365(antiquity)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(advanced,)-200(much)-187(less)-187(sustained,)-200(the)-187(view)-187(that)-187(the)-187(pagan)-187(gods)-188(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mere)-183(phantoms)-183(of)-184(human)-183(imagination)-183(without)-183(any)-184(corresponding)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reality.)]TJ 11.956 -13.55 Td[(Remarkable)-242(as)-242(this)-241(state)-242(of)-242(things)-242(may)-241(appear)-484(to)-242(us)-242(moderns,)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 279.068 0 Td[([132])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(it)-456(is)-456(really)-456(quite)-456(simple,)-507(nay)-456(even)-456(a)-456(matter)-455(of)-456(course,)-508(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(regarded)-270(historically.)-310(Christianity)-270(had)-270(from)-270(its)-270(very)-270(beginning)-270(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(decidedly)-356(dualistic)-356(character.)-567(The)-356(contrast)-356(between)-356(this)-356(world)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-328(the)-329(world)-328(to)-329(come)-328(was)-329(identical)-328(with)-329(the)-328(contrast)-329(between)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-396(kingdom)-395(of)-396(the)-395(Devil)-396(and)-396(the)-395(kingdom)-396(of)-395(God.)-687(As)-396(soon)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(as)-318(the)-319(new)-318(religion)-318(came)-319(into)-318(contact)-318(with)-319(paganism,)-335(the)-319(latter)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-421(necessarily)-420(regarded)-421(as)-420(belonging)-421(to)-420(the)-421(kingdom)-420(of)-421(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Devil;)-235(thus)-227(the)-227(conception)-227(of)-228(the)-227(gods)-227(as)-227(demons)-227(was)-227(a)-228(foregone)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conclusion.)-644(In)-381(the)-382(minds)-381(of)-381(the)-382(later)-381(apologists,)-414(who)-382(became)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(acquainted)-531(with)-531(Greek)-531(philosophy,)-601(this)-532(conception)-531(received)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(additional)-256(confirmation;)-258(did)-256(it)-256(not)-255(indeed)-256(agree)-256(in)-255(the)-256(main)-256(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Platonic)-362(and)-361(Stoic)-362(theory?)-585(Details)-361(were)-362(added:)-473(the)-362(Christians)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(could)-289(not)-290(deny)-289(the)-289(pagan)-290(miracles)-289(without)-290(throwing)-289(a)-289(doubt)-290(on)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-215(own,)-223(for)-215(miracles)-216(cannot)-215(be)-215(done)-216(away)-215(with)-215(at)-216(all)-215(except)-216(by)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-251(denial)-250(on)-251(principle;)-251(neither)-251(could)-250(they)-251(explain)-251(paganism)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 253.358 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(that)]TJ -264.267 -13.549 Td[(gigantic,)-357(millennial)-335(aberration)-335(of)-335(humanity)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 191.51 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(by)-335(merely)-335(human)]TJ -202.419 -13.549 Td[(causes,)-364(much)-341(less)-341(lay)-341(the)-341(blame)-341(on)-341(God)-341(alone.)-524(But)-341(ultimately)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-362(this)-361(rests)-362(on)-362(one)-361(and)-362(the)-362(same)-361(thing)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 178.824 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)-362(supernatural)-361(and)]TJ -189.733 -13.549 Td[(dualistic)-287(hypothesis.)-363(Consequently)-287(demonology)-287(is)-288(the)-287(kernel)-288(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-296(Christian)-296(conception)-296(of)-296(paganism:)-341(it)-296(is)-296(not)-296(merely)-296(a)-296(natural)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(result)-235(of)-235(the)-235(hypotheses,)-239(it)-235(is)-235(the)-235(one)-235(and)-235(only)-235(correct)-236(expression)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(the)-250(way)-250(in)-250(which)-250(the)-250(new)-250(religion)-250(understood)-250(the)-250(old.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -29.651 Td[([133])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+522 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 523 0 R
+/Resources 521 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 526 0 R
+>> endobj
+524 0 obj <<
+/D [522 0 R /XYZ 261.005 396.232 null]
+>> endobj
+525 0 obj <<
+/D [522 0 R /XYZ 46.771 68.499 null]
+>> endobj
+521 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+527 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index10) >>
+endobj
+530 0 obj
+(Chapter VIII)
+endobj
+533 0 obj <<
+/Length 3952      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(VIII)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -44.863 Td[(In)-384(the)-384(preceding)-384(inquiry)-383(we)-384(took)-384(as)-384(our)-384(starting-point)-384(not)-384(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ancient)-245(conception)-245(of)-246(atheism)-245(but)-245(the)-245(modern)-245(view)-245(of)-245(the)-246(nature)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-260(the)-260(pagan)-260(gods.)-281(It)-260(proved)-260(that)-260(this)-260(view)-261(was,)-262(upon)-260(the)-261(whole,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(feebly)-245(represented)-244(during)-245(antiquity,)-245(and)-245(that)-244(it)-245(was)-244(another)-245(view)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(\050demonology\051)-508(which)-507(was)-508(transmitted)-508(to)-508(later)-507(ages)-508(from)-508(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(closing)-402(years)-402(of)-402(antiquity.)-706(The)-402(inquiry)-402(will)-402(therefore)-402(find)-402(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(natural)-262(conclusion)-261(in)-262(a)-262(demonstration)-261(of)-262(the)-262(time)-261(and)-262(manner)-262(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-279(the)-278(conception)-279(handed)-278(down)-279(from)-278(antiquity)-279(of)-278(the)-279(nature)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(paganism)-250(was)-250(superseded)-250(and)-250(displaced)-250(by)-250(the)-250(modern)-250(view.)]TJ 11.956 -16.037 Td[(This)-308(question)-307(is,)-323(however,)-322(more)-308(difficult)-307(to)-308(answer)-308(than)-308(one)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(would)-459(perhaps)-459(think.)-877(After)-459(ancient)-459(paganism)-459(had)-460(ceased)-459(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(exist)-393(as)-393(a)-393(living)-392(religion,)-429(it)-393(had)-393(lost)-392(its)-393(practical)-393(interest,)-429(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theoretically)-397(the)-396(Middle)-397(Ages)-397(were)-397(occupied)-396(with)-397(quite)-397(other)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(problems)-218(than)-219(the)-218(nature)-218(of)-219(paganism.)-239(At)-218(the)-219(revival)-218(of)-218(the)-219(study)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-410(ancient)-411(literature,)-450(during)-410(the)-411(Renaissance,)-450(people)-411(certainly)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(again)-309(came)-309(into)-310(the)-309(most)-309(intimate)-309(contact)-309(with)-309(ancient)-310(religion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(itself,)-315(but)-301(system)-1(atic)-301(investigations)-302(of)-302(its)-302(nature)-301(do)-302(not)-302(seem)-302(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-329(been)-330(taken)-329(up)-330(in)-329(real)-329(earnest)-330(until)-329(after)-329(the)-330(middle)-329(of)-330(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sixteenth)-182(century.)-228(It)-182(is)-182(therefore)-182(difficult)-183(to)-182(ascertain)-182(in)-182(what)-183(light)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(paganism)-377(was)-378(regarded)-377(during)-378(the)-377(thousand)-755(years)-377(which)-378(had)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([134])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.55 Td[(then)-464(passed)-465(since)-464(its)-464(final)-465(extinction.)-893(From)-464(the)-465(seventeenth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-636(eighteenth)-637(centuries,)-733(on)-636(the)-637(other)-636(hand,)-733(the)-637(material)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-544(extraordinarily)-543(plentiful,)-618(though)-543(but)-544(slightly)-544(investigated.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Previous)-291(works)-292(in)-291(this)-292(field)-291(seem)-292(to)-291(be)-292(entirely)-291(wanting;)-312(at)-292(any)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(rate)-167(it)-167(has)-168(not)-167(been)-167(possible)-167(for)-168(me)-167(to)-167(find)-167(any)-167(collective)-168(treatment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-463(the)-462(subject,)-516(nor)-463(even)-463(any)-462(contributions)-463(worth)-463(mentioning)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(towards)-237(the)-236(solution)-237(of)-236(the)-237(numerous)-236(individual)-237(problems)-237(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(arise)-200(when)-199(we)-200(enter)-200(upon)-200(what)-199(might)-200(be)-200(called)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 203.196 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(the)-200(history)-199(of)-200(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+532 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 533 0 R
+/Resources 531 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 526 0 R
+>> endobj
+528 0 obj <<
+/D [532 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+534 0 obj <<
+/D [532 0 R /XYZ 296.39 174.536 null]
+>> endobj
+531 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+537 0 obj <<
+/Length 5221      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VIII)-19088(107)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(history)-207(of)-207(religion.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 80.569 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 4.844 3.959 Td[(1)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 6.739 -3.959 Td[(In)-207(this)-206(essay)-207(I)-207(must)-207(therefore)-207(restrict)-206(myself)]TJ -92.152 -13.549 Td[(to)-371(a)-372(few)-371(aphoristic)-371(remarks)-371(which)-372(may)-371(perhaps)-371(give)-372(occasion)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-316(this)-315(subject,)-333(in)-315(itself)-316(not)-316(devoid)-315(of)-316(interest,)-332(to)-316(receive)-316(more)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(detailed)-250(treatment)-250(at)-250(some)-250(future)-250(time.)]TJ 11.956 -13.813 Td[(Milton,)-271(in)-266(the)-267(beginning)-266(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 121.56 0 Td[(Paradise)-267(Lost)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 61.097 0 Td[(,)-271(which)-266(appeared)-267(in)]TJ -194.613 -13.549 Td[(1667,)-348(makes)-329(Satan)-329(assemble)-328(all)-329(his)-329(angels)-328(for)-329(continued)-329(battle)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(against)-470(God.)-910(Among)-470(the)-470(demons)-470(there)-470(enumerated,)-525(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-462(also)-462(appear;)-568(they)-461(are,)-515(then,)-515(plainly)-462(regarded)-462(as)-462(devils.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Now)-330(Milton)-329(was)-330(not)-330(only)-330(a)-329(poet,)-350(but)-330(also)-329(a)-330(sound)-330(scholar)-330(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(an)-336(orthodox)-335(theologian;)-378(we)-336(may)-335(therefore)-336(rest)-336(assured)-335(that)-336(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conception)-359(of)-359(the)-359(pagan)-358(gods)-359(was)-359(dogmatically)-359(correct)-359(and)-359(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(accord)-172(with)-173(the)-172(prevailing)-173(views)-172(of)-173(his)-172(time.)-224(In)-173(him,)-188(therefore,)-188(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(have)-294(found)-293(a)-294(fixed)-294(point)-293(from)-294(which)-294(we)-294(can)-293(look)-294(forwards)-294(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(backwards;)-247(as)-245(late)-245(as)-245(after)-246(the)-245(middle)-245(of)-245(the)-245(seventeenth)-246(century)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-439(early)-439(Christian)-439(view)-439(of)-439(the)-439(nature)-439(of)-439(paganism)-439(evidently)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(persisted)-250(in)-250(leading)-250(circles.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([135])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -279.068 -13.812 Td[(We)-239(seldom)-239(find)-238(definite)-239(heathen)-239(gods)-239(so)-239(precisely)-239(designated)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(as)-379(demons)-378(as)-379(in)-378(Milton,)-411(but)-379(no)-378(doubt)-379(seems)-378(possible)-379(that)-379(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(general)-517(principle)-518(was)-517(accepted)-517(by)-518(contemporary)-517(and)-518(earlier)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(authors.)-525(The)-342(chief)-341(work)-342(of)-342(the)-342(seventeenth)-341(century)-342(on)-342(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(religion)-340(is)-340(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 65.666 0 Td[(De)-340(Theologia)-340(Gentili)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 98.392 0 Td[(of)-340(G.)-340(I.)-339(Voss;)-385(he)-340(operates)]TJ -164.058 -13.549 Td[(entirely)-197(with)-197(the)-197(traditional)-197(view.)-232(It)-197(may)-197(be)-197(traced)-197(back)-197(through)-197(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(succession)-206(of)-205(writings)-206(of)-206(the)-205(sev)-1(enteenth)-205(and)-206(sixteenth)-206(centuries.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(They)-388(are)-389(all,)-422(or)-389(almost)-388(all,)-423(agreed)-388(that)-388(antique)-388(paganism)-389(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-308(work)-308(of)-308(the)-308(de)-1(vil,)-322(and)-308(that)-308(idolatry)-308(was,)-323(at)-308(any)-308(rate)-308(in)-309(part,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-387(worship)-388(of)-387(demons.)-662(From)-387(the)-387(Middle)-388(Ages)-387(I)-387(can)-387(adduce)-388(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(pregnant)-259(expression)-260(of)-259(the)-260(same)-259(view)-260(from)-259(Thomas)-259(Aquinas;)-265(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-256(treatment)-257(of)-256(idolatry)-256(and)-256(also)-257(of)-256(false)-256(prophecy)-256(he)-257(definitely)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(accepts)-463(the)-462(demonology)-463(of)-462(the)-463(early)-463(Church.)-887(On)-463(this)-463(point)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-439(appeals)-439(to)-439(Augustine,)-487(and)-439(with)-439(perfect)-439(right;)-533(from)-440(this)-439(it)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(may)-285(presumably)-284(be)-285(assumed)-285(that)-284(the)-285(Schoolmen)-284(in)-285(general)-285(had)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-341(same)-341(view,)-364(Augustine)-341(being,)-364(as)-341(we)-341(know,)-364(an)-341(authority)-341(for)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 84.933 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 0 2.59 cm
+q
+[]0 d
+0 J
+0.398 w
+0 0.199 m
+112.25 0.199 l
+S
+Q
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -87.523 cm
+BT
+/F16 5.978 Tf 52.998 80.91 Td[(1)]TJ/F16 8.966 Tf 5.729 -3.809 Td[(This)-283(was)-283(written)-283(before)-283(th)-1(e)-283(appearance)-283(of)-283(Mr.)-349(Gruppe's)-283(work,)]TJ/F28 8.966 Tf 228.837 0 Td[(Geschichte)]TJ -240.793 -10.959 Td[(der)-250(klassischen)-250(Mythologie)-250(u)-1(nd)-250(Religionsgeschichte)]TJ/F16 8.966 Tf 187.774 0 Td[(.)-250(Compare)]TJ/F28 8.966 Tf 39.596 0 Td[(infra)]TJ/F16 8.966 Tf 17.439 0 Td[(,)-250(p.)-250(154.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 62.854 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 0 -24.072 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+536 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 537 0 R
+/Resources 535 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 526 0 R
+/Annots [ 539 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+539 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [305.03 62.854 318.479 72.302]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg154) >>
+>> endobj
+538 0 obj <<
+/D [536 0 R /XYZ 46.771 312.296 null]
+>> endobj
+535 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+543 0 obj <<
+/Length 5155      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(108)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Catholic)-250(theologians.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-330(mediaeval)-329(poets)-330(also)-329(we)-330(occasionally)-330(find)-329(the)-330(same)-330(view)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(expressed.)-334(As)-278(far)-278(as)-278(I)-278(have)-278(been)-278(able)-278(to)-278(ascertain,)-285(D)-1(ante)-278(has)-278(no)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ancient)-315(gods)-315(among)-314(his)-315(devils,)-331(and)-315(the)-315(degree)-314(to)-315(which)-315(he)-315(had)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dissociated)-204(himself)-205(from)-204(ancient)-205(paganism)-204(may)-204(be)-205(gauged)-204(by)-205(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(fact)-344(that)-344(in)-344(one)-343(o)-1(f)-343(the)-344(most)-344(impassioned)-344(passages)-344(of)-344(his)-344(poem)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-242(addresses)-243(the)-242(Christian)-242(God)-243(as)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 149.172 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Great)-242(Jupiter.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 59.295 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.487 0 Td[(But)-242(he)-243(allows)]TJ -220.797 -13.549 Td[(figures)-225(of)-226(ancient)-225(mythology)-226(such)-225(as)-225(Charon,)-231(Minos)-225(and)-226(Geryon)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-465(appear)-465(in)-464(his)-465(infernal)-465(world,)-518(and)-465(when)-465(he)-465(designates)-465(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(pagan)-344(gods)-345(as)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 67.014 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(false)-344(and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 43.861 0 Td[(untruthful)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 43.647 0 Td[(,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.6 0 Td[(demonology)-344(is)-345(evidently)]TJ -170.693 -13.55 Td[(at)-356(the)-355(back)-356(of)-355(his)-356(mind.)-567(The)-356(mediaeval)-711(epic)-355(poets)-356(who)-356(dealt)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([136])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(with)-409(antique)-409(subjects)-409(took)-408(over)-409(the)-409(pagan)-409(gods)-409(more)-409(or)-409(less.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Sometimes,)-330(as)-314(in)-314(the)-314(Romance)-314(of)-314(Troy,)-330(the)-314(Christian)-314(veneer)-314(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(so)-335(thick)-335(that)-335(the)-335(pagan)-335(groundwork)-335(is)-335(but)-335(slightly)-335(apparent;)-378(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(other)-299(poems,)-312(such)-299(as)-300(the)-299(adaptation)-299(of)-300(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 190.166 0 Td[(Aeneid)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.294 0 Td[(,)-312(it)-299(is)-299(more)-300(in)]TJ -220.46 -13.55 Td[(evidence.)-424(In)-308(so)-309(far)-308(as)-308(the)-308(gods)-308(are)-308(not)-308(eliminated)-308(they)-308(seem)-309(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-390(rule)-389(to)-390(be)-389(taken)-390(over)-389(quite)-390(na\357vely)-389(from)-390(the)-389(source)-390(without)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(further)-349(comment;)-398(but)-349(occasionally)-349(the)-348(poet)-349(expresses)-349(his)-349(view)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-295(their)-294(nature.)-385(Thus)-294(the)-295(French)-295(adapter)-294(of)-295(Statius's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 231.53 0 Td[(Theba\357s)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 34.549 0 Td[(,)-306(in)]TJ -266.079 -13.549 Td[(whose)-358(work)-358(the)-359(Christian)-358(element)-358(is)-358(otherwise)-358(not)-359(prominent,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(cautiously)-469(remarks)-470(that)-469(Jupiter)-469(and)-470(Tisiphone,)-524(by)-469(whom)-470(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(heroes)-280(swear,)-287(are)-280(in)-279(reality)-280(only)-280(devils.)-339(Generally)-279(speaking,)-288(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-420(of)-421(antiquity)-420(are)-421(often)-420(designated)-420(as)-421(devils)-420(in)-421(mediaeval)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(poetry,)-417(but)-383(at)-383(times)-384(the)-383(opinion)-383(that)-384(they)-383(are)-383(departed)-384(human)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(beings)-189(crops)-189(up.)-230(Thus,)-201(as)-190(we)-189(might)-189(expect,)-201(the)-189(theories)-189(of)-190(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(times)-250(still)-250(survive)-250(and)-250(retain)-250(their)-250(sway.)]TJ 11.956 -16.003 Td[(There)-320(is)-320(a)-320(domain)-320(in)-320(which)-320(we)-320(might)-320(expect)-320(to)-320(find)-320(distinct)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(traces)-193(of)-192(the)-193(survival)-192(of)-193(the)-193(ancient)-192(gods)-193(in)-192(the)-193(mediaeval)-193(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(consciousness,)-273(namely)-1(,)-273(that)-269(of)-268(magic.)-307(There)-268(does)-269(not,)-274(however,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(seem)-456(to)-456(be)-455(much)-456(in)-456(it;)-559(the)-455(forms)-456(of)-456(mediaeval)-456(magic)-456(often)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(go)-418(back)-419(to)-418(antiquity,)-461(but)-418(the)-419(beings)-418(it)-418(operates)-419(with)-418(are)-419(pre-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(eminently)-269(the)-270(Christian)-269(devils,)-274(if)-270(we)-269(may)-269(venture)-270(to)-269(employ)-270(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(term,)-367(and)-344(the)-344(evil)-344(spirits)-344(of)-344(popular)-344(belief.)-531(There)-344(is,)-368(however,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(extant)-229(a)-229(collection)-229(of)-229(magic)-229(formulae)-229(against)-229(various)-230(ailments)-229(in)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+542 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 543 0 R
+/Resources 541 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 526 0 R
+>> endobj
+544 0 obj <<
+/D [542 0 R /XYZ 277.46 380.228 null]
+>> endobj
+541 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+547 0 obj <<
+/Length 4878      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VIII)-19088(109)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(which)-300(pagan)-299(gods)-300(appear:)-349(Hercules)-299(and)-300(Juno)-299(Regina,)-312(Juno)-300(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Jupiter,)-213(the)-204(nymphs,)-213(Luna)-203(Jovis)-204(filia,)-213(Sol)-203(invictus.)-235(The)-204(collection)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-266(transmitted)-267(in)-266(a)-266(manuscript)-267(of)-266(the)-266(ninth)-267(century;)-274(the)-267(formulae)]TJ 4.37 -13.549 Td[(mostly)-401(convey)-400(the)-401(impression)-400(of)-401(dating)-400(from)-401(a)-400(much)-401(earlier)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 286.654 0 Td[([137])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(period,)-405(but)-374(the)-374(fact)-374(that)-374(they)-374(were)-374(copied)-374(in)-374(the)-375(Middle)-374(Ages)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(suggests)-250(that)-250(they)-250(were)-250(intended)-250(for)-250(practical)-250(application.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(A)-276(problem,)-283(the)-276(closer)-276(investigation)-276(of)-276(which)-276(would)-276(no)-277(doubt)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(yield)-448(an)-449(interesting)-448(result,)-498(but)-448(which)-448(does)-449(not)-448(seem)-448(to)-449(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(been)-347(much)-347(noticed,)-371(is)-347(the)-347(European)-347(conception)-347(of)-347(the)-347(heathen)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religions)-167(with)-168(which)-167(the)-167(explorers)-168(came)-167(into)-168(contact)-167(on)-167(their)-168(great)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(voyages)-353(of)-354(discovery.)-559(Primitive)-354(heathenism)-353(as)-353(a)-353(living)-354(reality)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(had)-372(lain)-373(rather)-372(beyond)-372(the)-373(horizon)-372(of)-372(the)-373(Middle)-372(Ages;)-434(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-281(was)-281(met)-280(with)-281(in)-281(America,)-288(it)-281(evidently)-281(awakened)-281(considerable)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(interest.)-967(There)-489(is)-489(a)-489(description)-489(of)-489(the)-489(religion)-489(of)-489(Peru)-489(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Mexico,)-242(written)-240(by)-241(the)-240(Jesuit)-240(Acosta)-240(at)-241(the)-240(close)-240(of)-240(the)-241(sixteenth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(century,)-383(which)-356(gives)-356(us)-356(a)-357(clear)-356(insight)-356(into)-356(the)-356(orthodox)-357(view)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-421(heathenism)-420(during)-421(the)-420(Renaissance.)-762(According)-420(to)-421(Acosta,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(heathenism)-286(is)-286(as)-286(a)-287(whole)-286(the)-286(work)-286(of)-286(the)-286(Devil;)-304(he)-286(has)-287(seduced)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(men)-445(to)-445(idolatry)-445(in)-445(order)-445(that)-445(he)-445(himself)-445(may)-445(be)-445(worshipped)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(instead)-233(of)-233(the)-234(true)-233(God.)-244(All)-233(worship)-234(of)-233(idols)-233(is)-233(in)-233(reality)-234(worship)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-299(Satan.)-396(The)-299(individual)-298(ido)-1(ls,)-310(however,)-311(are)-299(not)-299(identified)-299(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(individual)-336(devils;)-378(Acosta)-336(distinguishes)-336(between)-335(the)-336(worship)-336(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(nature)-265(\050heavenly)-266(bodies,)-269(natural)-266(objects)-265(of)-265(the)-266(earth,)-269(right)-266(down)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-195(trees,)-205(etc.\051,)-206(the)-195(worship)-194(of)-195(the)-194(dead,)-206(and)-195(the)-194(worship)-195(of)-195(images,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-229(says)-229(nothing)-228(about)-229(the)-229(worship)-229(of)-228(demons.)-243(At)-229(one)-229(point)-229(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-473(there)-473(a)-472(direct)-473(intervention)-473(of)-473(the)-473(evil)-473(powers,)-528(namely,)-529(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(magic,)-317(an)-1(d)-303(particularly)-304(in)-304(oracles;)-331(and)-304(here)-304(then)-304(we)-304(find,)-318(as)-304(an)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(exception,)-248(mention)-246(of)-247(individual)-247(devils)-247(which)-247(must)-247(be)-247(imagined)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-272(inhabit)-272(the)-273(idols.)-316(The)-272(same)-272(conce)-1(ption)-544(is)-272(found)-272(again)-272(as)-273(late)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([138])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(as)-199(the)-199(seventeenth)-199(century)-198(in)-199(a)-199(story)-199(told)-199(by)-198(G.)-199(I.)-199(Voss)-199(of)-199(the)-199(time)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-214(the)-215(Dutch)-214(wars)-214(in)-214(Brazil.)-238(Arcissewski,)-222(a)-214(Polish)-214(officer)-215(serving)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-230(the)-230(Dutch)-230(army,)-234(had)-230(witnessed)-230(the)-230(conjuring)-230(of)-230(a)-230(devil)-230(among)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-220(Tapuis.)-241(The)-220(demon)-220(made)-221(his)-220(appearance)-221(all)-220(right,)-226(but)-221(proved)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-234(be)-234(a)-234(native)-234(well)-234(known)-234(to)-234(Arcissewski.)-244(As)-234(he,)-237(however,)-238(made)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+546 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 547 0 R
+/Resources 545 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 526 0 R
+>> endobj
+548 0 obj <<
+/D [546 0 R /XYZ 46.771 477.528 null]
+>> endobj
+549 0 obj <<
+/D [546 0 R /XYZ 231.359 133.888 null]
+>> endobj
+545 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+552 0 obj <<
+/Length 4619      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(110)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(some)-353(true)-353(prognostications,)-378(Voss,)-379(as)-353(it)-353(seems)-353(at)-353(variance)-353(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Arcissewski,)-236(thinks)-233(that)-233(there)-234(must)-233(have)-233(been)-233(some)-233(supernatural)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(powers)-250(concerned)-250(in)-250(the)-250(game.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(An)-268(exceptional)-268(place)-268(is)-267(occupied)-268(by)-268(the)-268(attempt)-268(made)-268(during)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-415(Renaissance)-414(at)-415(an)-414(actual)-415(revival)-414(of)-415(ancient)-414(paganism)-415(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-396(worship)-395(of)-396(its)-395(gods.)-687(It)-396(proceeded)-395(from)-396(Plethon,)-432(the)-396(head)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-291(the)-292(Florentine)-291(Academy,)-302(and)-291(seem)-1(s)-291(to)-291(have)-292(spread)-291(thence)-292(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-403(Roman)-404(Academy.)-710(The)-403(whole)-404(movement)-403(must)-403(be)-404(viewed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-383(particularly)-384(as)-383(an)-384(outcome)-383(of)-383(the)-384(enthusiasm)-383(during)-384(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Renaissance)-285(for)-285(the)-285(culture)-284(of)-285(antiquity)-285(and)-285(more)-285(especially)-285(for)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(its)-247(philosophy)-248(rather)-247(than)-247(its)-247(relig)-1(ion;)-248(the)-247(gods)-247(worshipped)-248(were)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(given)-316(a)-316(new)-316(and)-316(strongly)-316(philosophical)-316(interpretation.)-448(But)-316(it)-316(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-384(improbable)-384(that)-384(the)-383(traditional)-384(theory)-384(of)-384(the)-384(reality)-384(of)-384(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ancient)-250(deities)-250(may)-250(have)-250(had)-250(something)-250(to)-250(do)-250(with)-250(it.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Simultaneously)-574(with)-574(demonology,)-655(and)-574(while)-574(it)-575(was)-574(still)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(acknowledged)-460(in)-460(principle,)-513(there)-460(flourished)-460(more)-460(naturalistic)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(conceptions)-202(of)-203(paganism,)-211(bo)-1(th)-202(in)-202(the)-202(Middle)-203(Ages)-202(and)-202(during)-203(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Renaissance.)-286(As)-262(remarked)-262(above,)-265(the)-262(way)-262(was)-262(already)-262(prepared)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-336(them)-336(during)-336(antiquity.)-508(In)-336(Thomas)-336(Aquinas)-336(we)-336(fin)-1(d)-336(a)-336(lucid)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(explanation)-167(of)-168(the)-167(origin)-168(of)-167(idolatry)-168(with)-167(a)-167(reference)-168(to)-167(the)-168(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theory.)-463(Here)-321(we)-321(meet)-642(with)-321(the)-321(familiar)-321(elements:)-393(the)-321(worship)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([139])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.55 Td[(of)-270(the)-270(stars)-270(and)-270(the)-270(cult)-270(of)-270(the)-270(dead.)-310(According)-270(to)-270(Thomas,)-275(man)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(has)-378(a)-378(natural)-377(disposition)-378(towards)-378(this)-378(error,)-409(but)-378(it)-378(only)-378(comes)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(into)-426(play)-425(when)-426(he)-425(is)-426(led)-426(astray)-425(by)-426(demons.)-776(In)-426(the)-426(sixteenth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-383(seventeenth)-383(centuries)-383(the)-382(Devil)-383(is)-383(mentioned)-383(oftener)-383(than)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-407(demons)-406(\050com)-1(pare)-406(Acosta's)-407(view)-407(of)-406(the)-407(heathenism)-407(of)-407(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(American)-222(Indians\051;)-231(evidently)-222(the)-222(conception)-223(of)-222(the)-222(nature)-222(of)-222(evil)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(had)-285(undergone)-285(a)-286(change)-285(in)-285(the)-285(direction)-286(of)-285(monotheism.)-355(In)-286(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(way)-245(more)-245(scope)-246(was)-245(given)-245(for)-245(the)-245(adoption)-245(of)-245(naturalistic)-246(views)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-285(regard)-284(to)-285(the)-284(individual)-285(forms)-284(in)-285(which)-284(paganism)-285(manifested)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(itself)-507(than)-506(when)-507(dealing)-506(with)-507(a)-506(multiplicity)-507(of)-506(demons)-507(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(answered)-467(individually)-467(to)-466(th)-1(e)-466(pagan)-467(gods,)-521(and)-467(we)-467(meet)-467(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(systematic)-340(attempts)-340(to)-340(explain)-340(the)-340(origin)-340(of)-340(idolatry)-340(by)-340(natural)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(means,)-250(though)-250(still)-250(with)-250(the)-250(Devil)-250(in)-250(the)-250(background.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+551 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 552 0 R
+/Resources 550 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 526 0 R
+>> endobj
+553 0 obj <<
+/D [551 0 R /XYZ 194.825 242.282 null]
+>> endobj
+550 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+556 0 obj <<
+/Length 4923      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VIII)-19088(111)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(One)-636(of)-637(these)-636(systems,)-733(which)-636(played)-637(a)-636(prominent)-637(part,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(especially)-264(in)-265(the)-264(seventeenth)-265(century,)-267(is)-265(the)-264(so-called)-265(Hebraism,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.966 0 Td[(the)-308(attempt)-309(to)-308(derive)-308(the)-308(who)-1(le)-308(of)-308(paganism)-308(from)-309(Judaism.)]TJ -17.966 -13.549 Td[(This)-346(fashion,)-370(for)-345(which)-346(the)-346(way)-346(had)-345(already)-346(been)-346(prepared)-346(by)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Jewish)-250(and)-251(Christian)-250(apologists,)-251(reaches)-250(its)-250(climax,)-251(I)-250(think,)-251(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Abbot)-270(Huet,)-275(who)-270(der)-1(ived)-270(all)-270(the)-270(gods)-270(of)-270(antiquity)-270(\050and)-270(not)-271(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Greek)-281(and)-280(Roman)-281(antiquity\051)-281(from)-280(Moses,)-289(and)-280(all)-281(the)-281(goddesses)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-388(his)-388(sister;)-457(according)-388(to)-388(him)-388(the)-388(knowledge)-388(of)-389(these)-388(two)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(persons)-416(had)-416(spread)-416(from)-416(the)-416(Jews)-416(to)-416(other)-416(peoples,)-458(who)-416(had)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(woven)-365(about)-365(them)-365(a)-365(web)-365(of)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 131.142 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(fables.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 28.778 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.826 0 Td[(Alongside)-365(of)-365(Hebraism,)]TJ -173.589 -13.549 Td[(which)-603(is)-603(Euhemeristic)-604(in)-603(principle,)-691(allegorical)-603(methods)-604(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(interpretation)-467(were)-467(put)-468(forward.)-901(The)-467(chief)-467(representative)-468(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-215(tendency)-215(in)-215(earlier)-215(times)-215(is)-215(Natalis)-430(Comes)-215(\050No\353l)-216(du)-215(Comte\051,)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([140])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(the)-372(author)-372(of)-372(the)-373(first)-372(handbook)-372(of)-372(mythology;)-433(he)-372(directly)-373(set)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(himself)-407(the)-407(task)-407(of)-407(allegorising)-407(all)-407(the)-407(myths.)-721(The)-407(allegories)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-234(mostly)-233(moral,)-237(but)-233(also)-234(physical;)-239(Euhemeristic)-234(interpretations)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-405(not)-406(rejected)-405(either,)-444(and)-406(in)-405(several)-405(places)-406(the)-405(author)-406(gives)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(all)-431(three)-431(explanations)-432(side)-431(by)-431(side)-431(without)-431(choosing)-432(between)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(them.)-622(In)-374(the)-374(footsteps)-374(of)-374(du)-374(Comte)-374(follows)-374(Bacon,)-405(in)-374(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 267.91 0 Td[(De)]TJ -267.91 -13.55 Td[(Sapientia)-277(Veterum)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 81.195 0 Td[(;)-290(to)-277(the)-277(moral)-277(and)-277(physical)-277(allegories)-277(he)-277(adds)]TJ -81.195 -13.549 Td[(political)-351(ones,)-377(as)-351(when)-351(Jove's)-351(struggle)-351(with)-351(Typhoeus)-351(is)-352(made)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-487(symbolise)-486(a)-487(wise)-487(ruler's)-486(treatment)-487(of)-487(a)-487(rebellion.)-960(While)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(these)-369(attempts)-368(at)-369(interpretation,)-398(both)-368(the)-369(Euhemeristic)-368(and)-369(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(allegorical,)-514(are)-461(in)-461(principle)-461(a)-461(direct)-461(continuation)-461(of)-461(those)-461(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(antiquity,)-363(another)-341(method)-340(points)-340(plainly)-341(in)-340(the)-341(direction)-340(of)-341(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fantastic)-322(notions)-322(of)-323(the)-322(Middle)-322(Ages.)-467(As)-322(early)-322(as)-322(the)-323(sixteenth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(century)-245(the)-246(idea)-245(arose)-245(of)-245(connecting)-246(the)-245(theology)-245(of)-245(the)-246(ancients)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-442(alchemy.)-827(The)-443(idea)-442(seemed)-443(obvious)-442(because)-442(the)-443(metals)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-280(designated)-281(by)-280(the)-280(names)-281(of)-280(the)-281(planets,)-288(which)-280(are)-280(also)-281(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(names)-310(of)-309(the)-310(gods.)-429(It)-309(found)-310(acceptance,)-325(and)-309(in)-310(the)-310(seventeenth)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(century)-240(we)-239(have)-240(a)-239(series)-240(of)-239(writings)-240(in)-239(which)-240(ancient)-240(mythology)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-250(explained)-250(as)-250(the)-250(symbolical)-250(language)-250(of)-250(chemical)-250(processes.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(Within)-315(the)-315(limits)-315(of)-315(the)-315(supernatural)-315(explanation)-315(the)-315(interest)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(centred)-238(more)-238(and)-238(more)-238(in)-238(a)-238(single)-238(point:)-244(the)-238(oracles.)-246(As)-238(far)-238(back)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+555 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 556 0 R
+/Resources 554 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 558 0 R
+>> endobj
+557 0 obj <<
+/D [555 0 R /XYZ 216.509 355.585 null]
+>> endobj
+554 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+561 0 obj <<
+/Length 4919      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(112)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(as)-285(in)-286(Aquinas,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 66.093 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(false)-285(prophecy)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 64.301 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.955 0 Td[(is)-285(a)-285(main)-286(section)-285(in)-285(the)-285(chapter)]TJ -143.193 -13.549 Td[(on)-473(demons,)-529(whose)-473(power)-473(to)-473(foretell)-473(the)-473(future)-473(he)-473(expressly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acknowledges.)-316(In)-272(the)-272(sixteenth)-271(and)-272(seventeenth)-272(centuries,)-278(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-418(interest)-419(in)-418(the)-419(prediction)-418(of)-418(the)-419(future)-418(was)-419(so)-418(strong,)-461(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(ancient)-854(accounts)-427(of)-426(true)-427(prognostications)-427(were)-427(the)-427(real)-427(prop)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([141])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(of)-387(demonology.)-661(Hence)-387(demons)-387(generally)-387(play)-387(a)-387(gr)-1(eat)-387(part)-387(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(these)-253(explanations,)-254(even)-254(though)-253(in)-253(other)-254(cases)-253(the)-253(Devil)-253(fills)-254(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(bill.)-338(Thus)-279(Acosta)-279(in)-279(his)-280(account)-279(of)-279(the)-279(American)-280(religions;)-294(thus)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Voss)-431(and)-432(numerous)-431(other)-432(writers)-431(of)-432(the)-431(seventeenth)-432(century;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-301(it)-301(is)-302(hardly)-301(a)-301(mere)-301(accident,)-314(one)-301(would)-301(think,)-314(when)-302(Milton)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(specially)-228(mentions)-229(Dodona)-228(and)-228(Delphi)-229(as)-228(the)-229(seats)-228(of)-228(worship)-229(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-290(Greek)-290(demons.)-370(Among)-290(a)-290(few)-290(of)-290(the)-290(humanists)-290(we)-290(certainly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(find)-293(an)-293(attempt)-293(to)-293(apply)-293(the)-292(natur)-1(al)-292(explanation)-293(even)-293(here;)-315(thus)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Caelius)-376(Rhodiginus)-375(asserted)-375(that)-376(a)-375(great)-376(part)-375(\050but)-376(not)-375(all!\051)-627(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-400(oracular)-400(system)-400(might)-400(be)-400(explained)-400(as)-400(priestly)-400(imposture,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-327(his)-327(slightly)-328(younger)-327(contemporary)-327(Caelius)-327(Calcagninus,)-347(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-399(dialogue)-398(on)-399(oracles,)-436(seems)-398(to)-399(go)-398(still)-399(further)-398(and)-399(to)-399(deny)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-369(power)-370(of)-369(predicting)-369(the)-370(future)-369(to)-369(any)-370(other)-369(being)-369(than)-370(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(true)-317(God.)-452(An)-317(exceptional)-317(position)-317(is)-317(occupied)-317(by)-318(Pomponazzi,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(who)-439(in)-438(his)-439(little)-438(pamphlet)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 124.533 0 Td[(De)-438(Incantationibus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 90.774 0 Td[(seems)-438(to)-439(wish)]TJ -215.307 -13.549 Td[(to)-339(derive)-338(all)-338(magic,)-361(including)-339(the)-338(oracles,)-361(from)-338(natural)-339(causes,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(though)-501(ultimately)-501(he)-500(formally)-501(acknowledges)-501(demonology)-501(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-370(authoritative)-370(explanation.)-610(But)-370(these)-370(advances)-370(did)-370(not)-370(find)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(acceptance;)-205(we)-182(find)-181(even)-182(Voss)-182(combating)-182(the)-182(view)-182(on)-182(which)-182(they)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(were)-248(founded.)-249(It)-248(is)-248(characteristic)-248(of)-248(the)-248(power)-248(of)-248(demonology)-248(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-278(domain)-278(that)-278(in)-278(support)-278(of)-278(his)-278(point)-278(of)-278(view)-278(he)-279(can)-278(quote)-278(no)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(less)-250(a)-250(writer)-250(than)-250(Machiavelli.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(The)-718(author)-718(who)-718(opened)-718(battle)-718(in)-718(real)-719(earnest)-718(against)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(demonology)-512(was)-513(a)-512(Dutch)-512(scholar,)-578(one)-512(van)-513(Dale,)-578(otherwise)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(little)-419(kn)-1(own.)-758(In)-419(a)-420(couple)-419(of)-420(treatises)-419(written)-420(about)-419(the)-420(close)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-390(the)-389(seventeenth)-390(century)-389(he)-390(tried)-389(to)-390(show)-389(that)-390(the)-389(whole)-390(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(idolatry)-537(\050as)-268(well)-269(as)-268(the)-269(oracles)-268(in)-268(particular\051)-269(was)-268(not)-269(dependent)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([142])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.55 Td[(on)-259(the)-258(intervention)-259(of)-259(supernatural)-258(beings,)-261(but)-259(was)-258(solely)-259(due)-259(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(imposture)-287(on)-287(the)-286(part)-287(of)-287(the)-287(priests.)-360(Van)-287(Dale)-287(was)-287(a)-287(Protestant,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+560 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 561 0 R
+/Resources 559 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 558 0 R
+>> endobj
+562 0 obj <<
+/D [560 0 R /XYZ 129.705 463.978 null]
+>> endobj
+563 0 obj <<
+/D [560 0 R /XYZ 130.41 93.24 null]
+>> endobj
+559 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+566 0 obj <<
+/Length 4859      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VIII)-19088(113)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(so)-278(he)-279(easily)-278(got)-278(over)-278(the)-279(unanimous)-278(recognition)-278(of)-279(demonology)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-370(the)-370(Fathers)-370(of)-371(the)-370(Church.)-610(The)-370(accounts)-370(of)-370(demons)-370(in)-371(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Old)-232(and)-233(New)-232(Testaments)-232(proved)-232(more)-232(diff)-1(icult)-232(to)-232(deal)-232(with;)-238(it)-233(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(interesting)-234(to)-234(see)-234(how)-233(he)-234(wriggles)-234(about)-234(to)-234(get)-234(round)-234(them)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 253.968 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)]TJ -264.877 -13.55 Td[(it)-278(illustrates)-278(most)-279(instructively)-278(the)-278(degree)-278(to)-278(which)-279(demonology)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(affords)-258(the)-258(only)-258(reasonable)-258(and)-258(natural)-258(explanation)-258(of)-258(paganism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(on)-250(the)-250(basis)-250(of)-250(early)-250(Christian)-250(belief.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Van)-329(Dale's)-330(books)-329(are)-330(learned)-329(works)-330(written)-329(in)-330(Latin,)-349(full)-330(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(quotations)-247(in)-248(Latin,)-248(Greek,)-248(and)-247(Hebrew,)-248(and)-247(moreover)-248(confused)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-519(obscure)-519(in)-519(exposition,)-586(as)-518(is)-519(often)-519(the)-519(case)-519(with)-519(Dutch)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(writings)-294(of)-294(that)-294(time.)-381(But)-294(a)-294(clever)-294(Frenchman,)-305(Fontenelle,)-305(took)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(upon)-309(himself)-308(the)-309(task)-308(of)-309(rendering)-309(his)-308(work)-309(on)-308(the)-309(oracles)-309(into)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(French)-341(in)-341(a)-341(popular)-341(and)-340(attractive)-341(form.)-523(His)-341(book)-341(called)-341(forth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(an)-320(answering)-320(pamphlet)-321(from)-320(a)-320(Jesuit)-320(advocating)-320(the)-321(traditional)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(view;)-505(the)-419(little)-420(controversy)-420(seems)-420(to)-420(have)-419(made)-420(some)-420(stir)-420(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(France)-399(about)-398(the)-399(year)-399(1700.)-696(At)-399(any)-398(rate)-399(Banier,)-436(who,)-436(in)-399(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(beginning)-328(of)-327(the)-327(eighteenth)-328(century,)-347(treated)-327(ancient)-328(mythology)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-311(a)-310(Euhemeristic)-311(point)-311(of)-311(view,)-325(gave)-311(some)-311(consideration)-311(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it.)-510(His)-337(own)-337(conclusion)-336(is)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 113.862 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(in)-337(1738!)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 37.611 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(that)-337(demonology)-336(cannot)]TJ -173.291 -13.549 Td[(be)-341(dispensed)-341(with)-341(for)-341(the)-340(explanation)-341(of)-341(the)-341(oracles.)-523(He)-341(gives)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(his)-388(grounds)-388(for)-388(this)-389(in)-388(a)-388(very)-388(sensible)-388(criticism)-388(of)-388(van)-389(Dale's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(priestly)-407(fraud)-407(theory,)-446(the)-407(absurdity)-406(of)-407(which)-407(he)-407(exposes)-407(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sound)-250(arguments.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(Banier)-279(is)-280(the)-279(last)-279(author)-280(to)-279(whom)-279(I)-280(can)-279(point)-280(for)-558(the)-280(demon-)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 279.068 0 Td[([143])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(theory)-408(applied)-408(as)-409(an)-408(explanation)-408(of)-408(a)-408(phenomenon)-408(in)-409(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion;)-522(I)-431(have)-432(not)-431(found)-432(it)-431(in)-432(any)-431(other)-432(mythologist)-431(of)-432(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(eighteenth)-210(century,)-218(and)-211(even)-210(in)-210(Banier,)-218(with)-210(the)-210(exception)-210(of)-211(this)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(single)-240(point,)-242(everything)-240(is)-240(explained)-240(quite)-240(naturally)-240(according)-240(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-270(best)-270(Euhemeristic)-269(models.)-310(But)-269(in)-270(the)-270(positive)-270(understanding)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-279(the)-279(nature)-279(of)-278(ancient)-279(paganism)-279(no)-279(very)-279(considerable)-279(advance)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(had)-281(actually)-281(been)-281(made)-281(withal.)-343(A)-281(characteristic)-281(example)-282(of)-281(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-301(the)-300(treatment)-301(of)-300(ancient)-301(religion)-300(by)-301(such)-300(an)-301(eminent)-301(intellect)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-408(Giambattista)-408(Vico.)-723(In)-408(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 136.283 0 Td[(Scienza)-408(Nuova)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 66.259 0 Td[(,)-447(which)-408(appeared)]TJ -202.542 -13.549 Td[(in)-374(1725,)-405(as)-373(the)-374(foundation)-374(of)-374(his)-373(exposition)-374(of)-374(the)-374(religion)-374(of)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+565 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 566 0 R
+/Resources 564 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 558 0 R
+>> endobj
+567 0 obj <<
+/D [565 0 R /XYZ 274.648 201.634 null]
+>> endobj
+564 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+570 0 obj <<
+/Length 4849      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(114)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(antiquity)-334(he)-334(gives)-334(a)-334(characterisation)-334(of)-334(the)-334(mode)-334(of)-334(thought)-334(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(primitive)-261(mankind,)-263(which)-260(is)-261(so)-260(pertinent)-261(and)-260(psychologically)-261(so)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(correct)-213(that)-213(it)-213(anticipates)-213(the)-212(results)-213(of)-213(more)-213(than)-213(a)-213(hundred)-213(years)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-248(research.)-249(Of)-248(any)-248(supernatural)-248(explanation)-249(no)-248(trace)-248(is)-248(found)-248(in)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(him,)-313(though)-300(otherwise)-300(he)-301(speaks)-300(as)-300(a)-300(good)-301(Catholic.)-400(But)-301(when)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(he)-237(proceeds)-237(to)-236(explain)-237(the)-237(nature)-237(of)-237(the)-236(ancient)-237(ideas)-237(of)-237(the)-237(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-410(detail,)-451(all)-410(that)-411(it)-410(comes)-410(to)-411(is)-410(a)-410(series)-411(of)-410(allegories,)-451(among)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-262(the)-262(politico-social)-262(play)-263(a)-262(main)-262(part.)-286(Vico)-262(sees)-262(the)-263(earliest)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(history)-257(of)-258(mankind)-257(in)-258(the)-257(light)-258(of)-257(the)-258(traditions)-257(about)-257(Rome;)-262(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Graeco-Roman)-343(gods,)-366(then,)-366(and)-342(the)-343(myths)-343(about)-343(them,)-366(become)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-229(him)-229(largely)-230(an)-229(expression)-229(of)-229(struggles)-229(between)-229(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 233.372 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(patricians)]TJ -238.216 -13.549 Td[(and)-250(plebeians)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 59.684 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.571 0 Td[(of)-250(remote)-250(antiquity.)]TJ -55.299 -18.459 Td[(Most)-533(of)-533(the)-533(mythology)-533(of)-533(the)-533(eighteenth)-533(century)-533(is)-533(like)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(this.)-376(The)-293(Euhemeristic)-292(school)-292(gradually)-292(gave)-292(up)-292(the)-293(hypothesis)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-418(the)-419(Jewish)-418(religion)-419(as)-418(the)-419(origin)-418(of)-418(paganism;)-503(Banier,)-461(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(chief)-335(representative)-335(of)-334(the)-335(school,)-356(still)-335(argues)-335(at)-335(length)-335(against)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Hebraism.)-1039(In)-339(its)-340(place,)-362(Phoenicians,)-363(Assyrians,)-362(Persians)-340(and,)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([144])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(above)-289(all,)-299(Egyptians,)-298(are)-289(brought)-289(into)-289(play,)-299(or,)-299(as)-289(in)-289(the)-289(case)-289(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-280(Englishman)-281(Bryant,)-288(the)-280(whole)-281(of)-280(mythology)-281(is)-280(explained)-281(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reminiscences)-254(of)-254(the)-253(exploits)-254(of)-254(an)-253(aboriginal)-254(race,)-255(the)-254(Cuthites,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-473(never)-473(existed.)-919(The)-473(allegorist)-473(school)-473(gradually)-473(rallied)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(round)-261(the)-261(idea)-262(of)-261(the)-261(cult)-261(of)-261(the)-262(heavenly)-261(bodies)-261(as)-261(the)-261(origin)-262(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-240(pagan)-240(religions;)-244(as)-240(late)-240(as)-240(the)-240(days)-240(of)-240(the)-240(French)-241(Revolution,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Dupuis,)-223(in)-217(a)-216(voluminous)-217(work,)-223(tried)-216(to)-217(trace)-216(the)-217(whole)-216(of)-217(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religion)-372(and)-371(mythology)-372(back)-371(to)-372(astronomy.)-615(On)-371(the)-372(whole)-372(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(movement)-326(diverged)-327(more)-326(and)-326(more)-327(from)-326(Euhemerism)-327(towards)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-213(conception)-212(of)-213(Greek)-212(religion)-213(as)-213(a)-212(kind)-213(of)-212(cult)-213(of)-213(nature;)-225(when)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-439(sudden)-438(awakening)-439(to)-438(a)-439(more)-438(correct)-439(understanding)-439(came)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(towards)-450(the)-449(close)-449(of)-450(the)-449(century,)-500(Euhemerism)-449(was)-450(evidently)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(already)-417(an)-418(antiquated)-417(view.)-752(Thus,)-460(since)-417(the)-417(Renaissance,)-460(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-479(slow)-479(and)-479(very)-479(devious)-479(process)-479(of)-479(development,)-537(a)-479(gradual)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(approach)-365(had)-364(been)-365(made)-364(to)-365(a)-365(more)-364(correct)-365(view)-364(of)-365(the)-365(nature)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-336(ancient)-336(religion.)-508(After)-336(the)-336(Devil)-336(had)-336(more)-336(or)-336(less)-337(taken)-336(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(place)-236(of)-236(the)-237(demons,)-239(the)-236(rest)-236(of)-236(demonology,)-239(the)-236(moral)-237(allegory,)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+569 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 570 0 R
+/Resources 568 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 558 0 R
+>> endobj
+571 0 obj <<
+/D [569 0 R /XYZ 144.35 296.478 null]
+>> endobj
+568 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+574 0 obj <<
+/Length 4697      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(VIII)-19088(115)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Hebraism)-180(and)-179(Euhemerism)-180(were)-180(eliminated)-179(by)-180(successive)-180(stages,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-250(nature-symbolism)-250(was)-250(reached)-250(as)-250(the)-250(final)-250(stage.)]TJ 11.956 -22.779 Td[(We)-275(know)-274(now)-275(that)-275(even)-274(this)-275(is)-275(not)-275(the)-274(correct)-275(explanation)-275(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-373(nature)-373(and)-373(origin)-372(of)-373(the)-373(conception)-373(of)-373(the)-373(gods)-373(prevailing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(among)-320(the)-320(ancients.)-460(Recent)-320(investigations)-320(have)-320(shown)-320(that)-320(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Greek)-288(gods,)-297(in)-287(spite)-288(of)-288(their)-287(apparent)-288(simplicity)-288(and)-288(clarity,)-297(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(highly)-419(complex)-418(organisms,)-461(the)-419(products)-419(of)-418(a)-419(long)-419(process)-419(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(development)-234(to)-233(which)-233(the)-234(most)-233(diverse)-234(factors)-233(have)-234(contributed.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-362(order)-361(to)-362(arrive)-362(at)-362(this)-723(result)-362(another)-362(century)-361(of)-362(work,)-390(with)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([145])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(many)-352(attempts)-352(in)-352(the)-351(wrong)-352(direction,)-377(has)-352(been)-352(required.)-556(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(idea)-480(that)-480(the)-481(Greek)-480(gods)-480(were)-480(nature-gods)-480(really)-481(dominated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(research)-435(through)-435(almost)-435(the)-435(whole)-435(of)-435(the)-435(nineteenth)-435(century.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(If)-491(it)-490(has)-491(now)-491(been)-490(dethroned)-491(or)-491(reduced)-491(to)-490(the)-491(measure)-491(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(truth)-383(it)-384(contains)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 71.398 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(for)-383(undoubtedly)-384(a)-383(natural)-384(object)-383(enters)-383(as)-384(a)]TJ -82.307 -13.549 Td[(component)-234(into)-234(the)-234(essence)-233(of)-234(some)-234(Greek)-234(deities)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 217.21 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(this)-234(is)-234(in)-234(the)]TJ -228.119 -13.549 Td[(first)-248(place)-248(due)-248(to)-248(the)-247(intensive)-248(study)-248(of)-248(the)-248(religions)-248(of)-248(primitive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(peoples,)-422(living)-387(or)-387(obsolete;)-456(and)-388(the)-387(results)-388(of)-387(this)-387(study)-388(were)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(only)-462(applied)-462(to)-461(Greek)-462(religion)-462(during)-462(the)-461(last)-462(decade)-462(of)-462(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(century.)-297(But)-265(the)-266(starting-point)-265(of)-266(modern)-265(history)-266(of)-265(religion)-266(lies)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(much)-398(farther)-398(back:)-546(its)-398(beginnings)-398(date)-398(from)-398(the)-398(great)-398(revival)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-355(historical)-355(research)-356(which)-355(was)-355(inaugurated)-355(by)-355(Rousseau)-356(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(continued)-263(by)-264(Herder.)-289(Henceforward)-264(the)-263(unhistorical)-263(methods)-264(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-295(age)-294(of)-295(enlightenment)-295(were)-294(abolished,)-306(and)-295(attention)-295(directed)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-250(real)-250(earnest)-250(towards)-250(the)-250(earlier)-250(stages)-250(of)-250(human)-250(civilisation.)]TJ 11.956 -22.778 Td[(This,)-484(however,)-484(carries)-437(us)-437(a)-438(step)-437(beyond)-437(the)-437(point)-437(of)-438(time)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(at)-468(which)-467(this)-468(sketch)-467(s)-1(hould,)-522(strictly)-467(speaking,)-522(stop.)-903(For)-468(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-422(beginning)-421(of)-422(the)-421(eighteenth)-422(century)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 180.54 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(but)-421(not)-422(before)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 64.941 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)]TJ -267.299 -13.549 Td[(negative)-328(fact)-329(which)-328(is)-328(all)-328(important)-329(in)-328(this)-328(connexion)-328(had)-329(won)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(recognition:)-507(namely,)-411(that)-379(there)-379(existed)-378(no)-379(supernatural)-379(beings)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(latent)-341(behind)-341(the)-341(Greek)-341(ideas)-340(of)-341(their)-341(gods,)-364(and)-341(corresponding)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-379(any)-380(rate)-379(in)-379(some)-380(degree)-379(to)-379(them;)-444(but)-380(that)-379(these)-379(ideas)-380(must)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(be)-347(regarded)-346(and)-347(explained)-346(as)-347(entirely)-346(inventions)-347(of)-346(the)-347(human)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(imagination.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+573 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 574 0 R
+/Resources 572 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 558 0 R
+>> endobj
+575 0 obj <<
+/D [573 0 R /XYZ 160.12 400.552 null]
+>> endobj
+572 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+578 0 obj <<
+/Length 332       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(116)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 7.97 Tf 20.788 512.811 Td[([146])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+577 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 578 0 R
+/Resources 576 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 558 0 R
+>> endobj
+579 0 obj <<
+/D [577 0 R /XYZ 93.543 518.175 null]
+>> endobj
+576 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+580 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index11) >>
+endobj
+583 0 obj
+(Chapter IX)
+endobj
+586 0 obj <<
+/Length 4304      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 46.771 479.321 Td[(Chapter)-250(IX)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.572 Td[(At)-303(the)-304(very)-303(beginning)-303(of)-304(this)-303(inquiry)-303(it)-304(was)-303(emphasised)-303(that)-304(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theme)-405(would)-404(in)-405(the)-404(main)-405(be)-404(the)-405(religious)-404(views)-405(of)-404(the)-405(upper)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(class,)-288(and)-280(within)-281(this)-280(sphere)-281(again)-280(especially)-280(the)-281(views)-280(of)-281(those)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(circles)-321(which)-322(were)-321(in)-321(close)-322(touch)-321(with)-321(philosophy.)-464(The)-322(reason)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-368(this)-368(is)-368(of)-368(course)-368(in)-368(the)-368(first)-368(place)-368(that)-368(only)-368(in)-368(such)-368(circles)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(can)-401(we)-401(expect)-401(to)-400(find)-401(expressed)-401(a)-401(point)-401(of)-401(view)-401(approaching)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-488(positive)-488(atheism.)-963(But)-488(we)-487(may)-488(assuredly)-488(go)-488(further)-488(than)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this.)-828(We)-443(shall)-443(hardly)-442(be)-443(too)-443(bold)-443(in)-442(asserting)-443(that)-443(the)-443(free-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(thinking)-445(of)-445(philosophically)-445(educated)-445(men)-445(in)-445(reality)-446(had)-445(very)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(slight)-271(influence)-270(on)-271(the)-270(great)-271(mass)-270(of)-271(the)-270(population.)-312(Philosophy)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(did)-324(not)-324(penetrate)-325(so)-324(far,)-343(and)-324(whatever)-324(degree)-324(of)-324(perception)-325(we)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(estimate)-306(the)-306(masses)-307(to)-306(have)-306(had)-306(of)-307(the)-306(fact)-306(that)-306(the)-306(upper)-307(layer)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-459(society)-460(regarded)-459(the)-459(popular)-460(faith)-459(with)-459(critical)-460(eyes)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 253.968 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)]TJ -264.877 -13.549 Td[(in)-425(the)-425(long)-424(run)-425(it)-425(could)-425(not)-424(be)-425(concealed)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 190.987 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(we)-425(cannot)-425(fail)-424(to)]TJ -201.896 -13.549 Td[(recognise)-244(that)-243(religious)-244(development)-244(among)-244(the)-243(ancients)-244(did)-244(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(tend)-326(towards)-325(atheism.)-477(Important)-326(changes)-326(took)-325(place)-326(in)-326(ancient)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(religion)-339(during)-340(the)-339(Hellenistic)-339(Age)-340(and)-339(the)-340(time)-339(of)-339(the)-340(Roman)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Empire,)-263(but)-260(their)-261(causes)-260(were)-260(of)-260(a)-261(social)-260(and)-260(national)-261(kind,)-263(and,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(if)-199(we)-199(confine)-199(ourselves)-200(to)-199(paganism,)-209(they)-199(only)-199(led)-199(to)-199(certain)-200(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(going)-319(out)-319(of)-318(fashion)-319(and)-319(others)-318(coming)-319(in.)-456(The)-319(utmost)-319(we)-319(can)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(assert)-274(is)-274(that)-273(a)-274(certain)-274(weakening)-548(of)-273(the)-274(religious)-274(life)-274(may)-274(have)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([147])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.55 Td[(been)-291(widely)-291(prevalent)-291(during)-290(the)-291(time)-291(of)-291(transition)-291(between)-291(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(two)-272(ages)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 38.72 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(the)-272(transition)-273(falls)-272(at)-272(somewhat)-272(different)-273(dates)-272(in)-272(the)]TJ -49.629 -13.549 Td[(eastern)-236(and)-235(western)-236(part)-235(of)-236(the)-235(Empire)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 167.487 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(but)-236(that)-235(weakening)-236(was)]TJ -178.396 -13.549 Td[(soon)-250(overcome.)]TJ 11.956 -13.779 Td[(Now)-385(the)-386(peculiar)-385(result)-385(of)-386(this)-385(investigation)-386(of)-385(the)-385(state)-386(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(religion)-396(among)-396(the)-397(upper)-396(classes)-396(seems)-396(to)-397(me)-396(to)-396(be)-396(this:)-543(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(curve)-285(of)-284(intensity)-285(of)-285(religious)-285(feeling)-284(which)-285(conjecture)-285(leads)-285(us)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-266(draw)-267(through)-266(the)-267(spiritual)-266(life)-266(of)-267(the)-266(ancients)-266(as)-267(a)-266(whole,)-271(that)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+585 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 586 0 R
+/Resources 584 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 588 0 R
+>> endobj
+581 0 obj <<
+/D [585 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+587 0 obj <<
+/D [585 0 R /XYZ 194.957 174.765 null]
+>> endobj
+584 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+591 0 obj <<
+/Length 4650      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(118)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(same)-283(curve,)-291(but)-283(more)-283(distinct)-283(and)-283(sharply)-283(accentuated,)-291(is)-283(found)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(again)-352(in)-351(the)-352(relations)-351(of)-352(the)-352(upper)-351(classes)-352(to)-351(the)-352(popular)-352(faith.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Towards)-292(the)-292(close)-293(of)-292(the)-292(fifth)-292(century)-293(it)-292(looks)-292(as)-292(if)-292(the)-293(cultured)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(classes)-433(that)-433(formed)-434(the)-433(centre)-433(of)-433(Greek)-433(intellectual)-433(life)-434(were)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(outgrowing)-296(the)-296(ancient)-296(religion.)-388(The)-296(reaction)-296(which)-296(set)-296(in)-296(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Socrates)-335(and)-334(Plato)-335(certainly)-334(checked)-335(this)-335(movement,)-355(but)-335(it)-335(did)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-230(stop)-230(it.)-243(Cynics,)-234(Peripatetics,)-234(Stoics,)-234(Epicureans)-230(and)-230(Sceptics,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-245(spite)-246(of)-245(their)-246(widely)-245(differing)-246(points)-245(of)-245(view,)-247(were)-245(all)-246(entirely)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(unable)-395(to)-395(share)-395(the)-395(religious)-395(ideas)-395(of)-395(their)-395(countrymen)-396(in)-395(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(form)-299(in)-299(which)-300(they)-299(were)-299(cast)-299(in)-300(the)-299(national)-299(religion.)-398(However)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(many)-328(allowances)-329(they)-328(made,)-348(their)-328(attitude)-328(towards)-328(the)-329(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(faith)-349(was)-349(critical,)-373(and)-349(on)-349(important)-349(points)-349(they)-348(denied)-349(it.)-547(It)-349(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(against)-277(the)-276(background)-277(thus)-276(resulting)-277(from)-276(ancient)-277(philosophy's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(treatment)-235(of)-236(ancient)-235(religion)-235(that)-235(we)-236(must)-235(view)-235(such)-236(phenomena)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-197(Polybius,)-208(Cicero,)-207(and)-197(Pliny)-197(the)-197(Elder,)-208(if)-197(we)-197(wish)-197(to)-197(understand)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-250(full)-250(significance.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(On)-272(the)-273(other)-272(hand,)-278(it)-273(is)-272(certain)-273(that)-272(this)-273(was)-272(not)-273(the)-272(view)-273(that)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(conquered)-362(in)-362(the)-362(end)-361(among)-362(the)-362(educated)-362(classes)-362(in)-362(antiquity.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(The)-278(lower)-279(we)-278(come)-557(down)-278(in)-279(the)-278(Empire)-278(the)-279(more)-278(evident)-279(does)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([148])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(the)-250(po)-1(sitive)-250(relation)-250(of)-251(the)-250(upper)-251(class)-250(to)-251(the)-250(gods)-251(of)-250(the)-251(popular)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(faith)-254(become.)-261(Some)-253(few)-254(examples)-254(have)-253(already)-254(been)-254(mentioned)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-231(the)-230(preceding)-231(pages.)-243(In)-231(philosophy)-231(the)-230(whole)-231(movement)-231(finds)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(its)-456(typical)-456(expression)-456(in)-456(demonology,)-507(which)-456(during)-456(the)-456(later)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Empire)-361(reig)-1(ned)-361(undisputed)-361(in)-362(the)-361(one)-362(or)-361(two)-362(schools)-361(that)-362(still)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(retained)-186(any)-186(vitality.)-229(It)-186(is)-186(significant)-186(that)-186(its)-186(source)-186(was)-186(the)-187(earlier)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Platonism,)-414(with)-380(its)-381(very)-381(conservative)-381(attitude)-381(towards)-381(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(belief,)-239(and)-236(that)-236(it)-236(was)-237(taken)-236(over)-236(by)-236(the)-236(later)-236(Stoic)-237(school,)-239(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(inaugurated)-184(the)-184(general)-184(religious)-184(reaction)-184(in)-184(philosophy.)-228(And)-184(it)-184(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(no)-223(less)-222(significant)-223(that)-223(demonology)-223(was)-222(swallowed)-223(whole)-223(by)-223(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(monotheistic)-353(religion)-353(which)-353(superseded)-354(ancient)-353(paganism,)-379(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(for)-316(more)-315(than)-316(a)-316(thousand)-316(years)-315(was)-316(the)-316(recognised)-316(explanation)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-250(the)-250(nature)-250(thereof.)]TJ 11.956 -16.004 Td[(In)-416(accordance)-416(with)-417(the)-416(line)-416(of)-416(development)-416(here)-417(sketched,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(the)-356(inquiry)-356(has)-356(of)-356(necessity)-356(been)-356(focused)-356(on)-356(two)-357(main)-356(points:)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+590 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 591 0 R
+/Resources 589 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 588 0 R
+>> endobj
+592 0 obj <<
+/D [590 0 R /XYZ 183.843 271.835 null]
+>> endobj
+589 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+595 0 obj <<
+/Length 4835      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IX)-19754(119)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Sophistic)-191(and)-192(the)-191(Hellenistic)-191(Age.)-231(Now)-191(it)-191(is)-192(of)-191(peculiar)-191(interest)-192(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(note)-198(what)-197(small)-198(traces)-197(of)-198(pure)-197(atheism)-198(can)-197(after)-198(all)-198(be)-197(found)-198(here,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-224(spite)-223(of)-224(all)-223(criticism)-223(of)-224(the)-223(popular)-224(faith.)-241(We)-224(have)-223(surmised)-224(its)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(presence)-366(among)-366(a)-367(few)-366(prominent)-366(personalities)-366(in)-367(fifth-century)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Athens;)-465(we)-394(have)-393(found)-394(evidence)-393(of)-394(its)-393(extension)-394(in)-393(the)-394(same)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(place)-377(in)-378(the)-377(period)-378(immediately)-377(following;)-441(and)-377(in)-378(the)-377(time)-378(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(transition)-211(between)-210(the)-211(fourth)-211(and)-210(third)-211(centuries)-210(we)-211(have)-211(thought)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-260(likely)-261(that)-260(it)-260(existed)-260(among)-261(a)-260(very)-260(few)-260(philosophers,)-263(of)-261(whom)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(none)-269(are)-269(in)-270(the)-269(first)-269(rank.)-308(Everywhere)-269(else)-269(we)-269(find)-270(adjustments,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-287(part)-287(very)-287(serious)-286(and)-287(real)-287(concessions,)-296(to)-287(popular)-287(belief.)-361(Not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-236(mention)-236(the)-236(attitude)-236(towards)-236(worship,)-477(which)-236(was)-236(only)-236(hostile)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([149])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(in)-311(one)-311(sect)-311(of)-311(slight)-310(importance:)-372(the)-311(assumption)-311(of)-311(the)-311(divinity)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-362(the)-362(heavenly)-362(bodies)-361(which)-362(was)-362(common)-362(to)-362(the)-362(Academics,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Peripatetics,)-191(and)-176(Stoics)-176(is)-176(really)-176(in)-176(principle)-176(an)-176(acknowledgement)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-291(the)-292(popular)-291(faith,)-302(whose)-291(conception)-291(of)-292(the)-291(gods)-291(was)-292(actually)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(borrowed)-221(and)-222(applied,)-227(not)-221(to)-222(some)-221(philosophical)-221(abstraction)-1(,)-227(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-251(individual)-250(an)-1(d)-250(concrete)-251(natural)-251(objects.)-252(The)-251(anthropomorphic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-336(of)-336(the)-336(Epicureans)-336(point)-336(in)-335(the)-336(same)-336(direction.)-508(In)-336(spite)-336(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(their)-286(profound)-286(difference)-286(from)-285(the)-286(beings)-286(that)-286(were)-286(worshipped)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-438(believed)-438(in)-437(by)-438(the)-438(ordinary)-438(Greek,)-484(they)-438(are)-438(in)-438(complete)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(harmony)-445(with)-445(the)-444(opinion)-445(on)-445(which)-444(all)-445(polytheism)-445(is)-445(based:)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-470(there)-470(are)-471(individual)-470(beings)-470(of)-470(a)-470(higher)-470(order)-470(than)-471(man.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(And)-258(though)-257(the)-258(Stoics)-257(in)-258(theory)-257(confined)-258(their)-258(acknowledgment)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-308(this)-307(doctrine)-308(to)-307(the)-308(heavenly)-308(bodies,)-322(in)-307(practice)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 223.028 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(even)-308(if)-307(we)]TJ -233.937 -13.55 Td[(disregard)-191(demonology)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 97.223 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(they)-191(consistently)-191(brought)-191(it)-191(to)-191(bear)-191(upon)]TJ -108.132 -13.549 Td[(the)-261(anthropomorphic)-261(gods,)-263(in)-261(direct)-260(continuation)-261(of)-261(the)-261(Socratic)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(reaction)-250(against)-250(the)-250(atheistic)-250(tendencies)-250(of)-250(Sophistic.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(If)-201(now)-201(we)-201(ask)-201(ourselves)-201(what)-201(may)-201(be)-201(the)-201(cause)-202(of)-201(this)-201(peculiar)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(dualism)-238(in)-237(the)-238(relationship)-238(of)-237(ancient)-238(thought)-238(to)-237(religion,)-241(though)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(admitting)-437(the)-437(highly)-436(complex)-437(nature)-437(of)-437(the)-436(problem,)-484(we)-437(can)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(scarcely)-319(avoid)-319(recognising)-318(a)-319(certain)-319(principle.)-456(Ancient)-319(thought)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(outgrew)-313(the)-314(ancient)-313(popular)-313(faith;)-345(that)-314(is)-313(beyond)-314(doubt.)-440(Hence)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(its)-437(critical)-436(attitude.)-810(But)-436(it)-437(never)-436(outgrew)-437(that)-437(supernaturalist)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(view)-453(which)-452(was)-453(the)-453(foundation)-452(of)-453(the)-453(popular)-453(faith.)-858(Hence)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+594 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 595 0 R
+/Resources 593 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 588 0 R
+>> endobj
+596 0 obj <<
+/D [594 0 R /XYZ 224.961 382.683 null]
+>> endobj
+593 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+599 0 obj <<
+/Length 4751      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(120)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(its)-470(concessions)-470(to)-470(the)-470(popular)-470(faith,)-525(even)-470(when)-470(it)-470(was)-470(most)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(critical,)-519(and)-466(its)-465(final)-466(surrender)-465(thereunto.)-896(And)-466(that)-465(it)-466(never)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(outgrew)-345(the)-345(foundation)-690(of)-345(the)-345(popular)-345(faith)-345(is)-346(connected)-345(with)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([150])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(its)-229(whole)-229(conception)-229(of)-229(nature)-229(and)-229(especially)-229(with)-230(its)-229(conception)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-306(the)-306(universe.)-419(We)-306(cannot)-306(indeed)-307(deny)-306(that)-306(the)-306(ancients)-306(had)-307(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(certain)-308(feeling)-307(that)-308(nature)-307(w)-1(as)-307(regulated)-308(by)-307(laws,)-322(but)-308(they)-308(only)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(made)-439(imperfect)-439(attempts)-440(at)-439(a)-439(mechanical)-439(theory)-439(of)-439(nature)-440(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(which)-248(this)-248(regulation)-248(of)-248(the)-248(world)-248(by)-248(law)-248(was)-248(carried)-249(through)-248(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(principle,)-191(and)-176(with)-175(one)-176(brilliant)-176(exception)-176(they)-176(adhered)-176(implicitly)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-330(the)-330(geocentric)-330(conception)-330(of)-330(the)-330(universe.)-490(We)-330(may,)-350(I)-330(think,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(venture)-278(to)-279(assert)-278(with)-278(good)-278(reason)-279(that)-278(on)-278(such)-278(assumptions)-279(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(philosophers)-195(of)-195(antiquity)-195(could)-195(not)-195(advance)-195(further)-195(than)-196(they)-195(did.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-244(other)-245(words,)-245(on)-245(the)-244(given)-244(hypotheses)-245(the)-244(supernaturalist)-245(view)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-180(the)-180(correct)-180(one,)-195(the)-180(one)-180(that)-180(was)-180(most)-180(probable,)-194(and)-181(therefore)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-245(on)-246(which)-245(people)-245(finally)-246(agreed.)-248(A)-245(few)-246(chosen)-245(spirits)-245(may)-246(at)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(any)-291(time)-290(by)-291(intuition,)-301(without)-291(any)-290(strictly)-291(scientific)-291(foundation,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(emancipate)-358(themselves)-358(entirely)-359(from)-358(religious)-358(errors;)-412(this)-359(also)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(happened)-281(among)-280(the)-281(ancients,)-288(and)-280(on)-281(the)-280(first)-281(occasion)-280(was)-281(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(unconnected)-438(with)-439(an)-438(enormous)-439(advance)-438(in)-439(the)-438(conception)-439(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(nature.)-246(But)-237(it)-237(is)-237(certain)-237(that)-238(the)-237(views)-237(of)-237(an)-237(entire)-237(age)-237(are)-238(always)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(decisively)-216(conditioned)-216(by)-216(its)-216(knowledge)-216(and)-216(interpretation)-216(of)-216(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(universe)-281(surrounding)-281(it,)-289(and)-281(cannot)-281(in)-281(principle)-281(be)-282(emancipated)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(therefrom.)]TJ 11.956 -18.459 Td[(Seen)-306(from)-306(this)-306(point)-307(of)-306(view,)-320(our)-306(brief)-306(sketch)-306(of)-306(the)-307(attitude)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(of)-243(posterity)-243(towards)-243(the)-243(religion)-242(of)-243(the)-243(pagan)-243(world)-243(will)-243(also)-243(not)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-258(without)-258(interest.)-274(If,)-260(after)-258(isolated)-258(advances)-258(during)-258(the)-258(mighty)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(awakening)-286(of)-285(the)-286(Renaissance,)-295(it)-285(is)-286(not)-286(until)-285(the)-286(transition)-286(from)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-206(seventeenth)-207(to)-206(the)-206(eighteenth)-206(century)-207(that)-206(we)-206(find)-206(the)-207(modern)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(atheistic)-379(conception)-380(of)-379(the)-759(nature)-380(of)-379(the)-379(gods)-380(of)-379(the)-380(ancients)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 0 Td[([151])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -13.549 Td[(established)-212(in)-212(principle)-211(and)-212(consistently)-212(applied,)-219(we)-212(can)-212(scarcely)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(avoid)-371(connecting)-372(this)-371(fact)-371(with)-371(the)-372(advance)-371(of)-371(natural)-372(science)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-300(the)-300(seventeenth)-300(century,)-312(and)-300(not)-300(least)-300(with)-300(the)-300(victory)-300(of)-300(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(heliocentric)-291(system.)-373(After)-291(the)-291(close)-291(of)-291(antiquity)-291(the)-291(pagan)-291(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(had)-428(receded)-427(to)-428(a)-427(distance,)-472(practically)-428(speaking,)-472(because)-428(they)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+598 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 599 0 R
+/Resources 597 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 588 0 R
+>> endobj
+600 0 obj <<
+/D [598 0 R /XYZ 201.185 491.077 null]
+>> endobj
+601 0 obj <<
+/D [598 0 R /XYZ 216.746 133.888 null]
+>> endobj
+597 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+604 0 obj <<
+/Length 4983      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Chapter)-250(IX)-19754(121)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(were)-306(not)-306(worshipped)-306(any)-307(more.)-418(No)-306(one)-306(troubled)-306(himself)-307(about)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(them.)-364(But)-288(in)-288(theory)-288(one)-288(had)-288(got)-288(no)-288(further,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 194.645 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.302 0 Td[(no)-288(advance)-288(had)]TJ -211.947 -13.549 Td[(been)-364(made)-365(on)-364(the)-364(ancients,)-393(and)-365(no)-364(advance)-365(could)-364(be)-364(made)-365(as)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(long)-365(as)-365(supernaturalism)-365(was)-364(adhered)-365(to)-365(in)-365(connexion)-365(with)-365(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(ancient)-314(view)-315(of)-314(the)-314(universe.)-444(Through)-314(monotheism)-314(the)-315(notions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-315(the)-314(divinity)-315(of)-315(the)-314(sun,)-331(moon)-315(and)-315(planets)-314(had)-315(certainly)-315(been)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(got)-389(rid)-388(of,)-424(but)-388(not)-389(so)-389(the)-388(notion)-389(of)-388(the)-389(world)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 207.316 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 20.595 0 Td[(the)-389(globe)]TJ -238.82 -13.549 Td[(enclosed)-366(within)-366(the)-365(firmament)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 136.804 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(as)-366(filled)-366(with)-365(personal)-366(beings)]TJ -147.713 -13.549 Td[(of)-393(a)-393(higher)-392(order)-393(than)-393(man;)-464(and)-393(even)-393(the)-392(duty)-393(of)-393(turning)-393(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(spheres)-168(to)-167(which)-168(the)-167(heavenly)-168(bodies)-167(were)-168(believed)-167(to)-168(be)-168(fastened)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 16.964 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(quite)-300(consistently)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 77.213 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(assigned)-300(to)-300(some)-299(of)-300(these)-300(beings.)-400(As)]TJ -115.995 -13.549 Td[(long)-325(as)-324(such)-325(notions)-325(were)-324(in)-325(operation,)-343(not)-325(only)-324(were)-325(there)-325(no)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(grounds)-265(for)-266(denying)-265(the)-266(reality)-265(of)-266(the)-265(pagan)-265(gods,)-270(but)-265(there)-266(was)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(every)-280(reason)-280(to)-280(assume)-280(it.)-340(So)-280(far)-280(we)-280(may)-280(rightly)-280(say)-281(that)-280(it)-280(was)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Copernicus,)-350(Galileo,)-349(Giordano)-330(Bruno,)-350(Kepler)-329(and)-330(Newton)-330(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(did)-250(away)-250(with)-250(the)-250(traditional)-250(conception)-250(of)-250(ancient)-250(paganism.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(Natural)-346(science,)-369(however,)-370(furnishes)-346(only)-345(the)-346(negative)-346(result)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(that)-403(the)-403(gods)-404(of)-403(polytheism)-403(are)-403(not)-404(what)-403(they)-403(are)-403(said)-403(to)-404(be:)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(real)-405(beings)-404(of)-405(a)-404(higher)-405(order)-404(than)-405(man.)-713(To)-405(reveal)-404(what)-405(they)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(are,)-439(other)-401(knowledge)-401(is)-401(required.)-704(This)-401(was)-401(not)-401(attained)-402(until)]TJ 4.471 -13.549 Td[(long)-410(after)-410(the)-409(revival)-410(of)-410(natural)-410(science)-409(in)-410(the)-410(sixteenth)-410(and)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 286.553 0 Td[([152])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(seventeenth)-300(centuries.)-401(The)-300(vacillation)-300(in)-300(the)-300(eighteenth)-301(century)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(between)-464(various)-464(theories)-464(of)-463(the)-464(explanation)-464(of)-464(the)-464(nature)-464(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ancient)-373(polytheism)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 84.07 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(theories)-373(which)-374(were)-373(all)-374(false,)-404(though)-373(not)]TJ -94.979 -13.55 Td[(equally)-270(false)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 55.66 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(is)-270(in)-270(this)-271(respect)-270(significant)-270(enough;)-280(likewise)-270(the)]TJ -66.569 -13.549 Td[(gradual)-319(progress)-319(which)-319(characterises)-319(research)-319(in)-319(the)-319(nineteenth)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(century,)-332(and)-316(which)-316(may)-316(be)-316(indicated)-315(by)-316(such)-316(names)-316(as)-316(Heyne,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Buttmann,)-175(K.)-155(O.)-156(M\374ller,)-174(Lobeck,)-175(Mannhardt,)-174(Rohde,)-175(and)-156(Usener,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-295(mention)-294(only)-295(some)-294(of)-295(the)-294(most)-295(important)-294(and)-295(omitting)-295(those)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(still)-341(alive.)-524(Viewed)-342(in)-341(this)-341(light)-342(the)-341(development)-341(sketched)-342(here)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(within)-467(a)-468(narrowly)-467(restricted)-467(field)-468(is)-467(typical)-468(of)-467(the)-467(course)-468(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(European)-250(intellectual)-250(history)-250(from)-250(antiquity)-250(down)-250(to)-250(our)-250(day.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -29.651 Td[([153])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+603 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 604 0 R
+/Resources 602 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 588 0 R
+>> endobj
+605 0 obj <<
+/D [603 0 R /XYZ 46.771 247.191 null]
+>> endobj
+606 0 obj <<
+/D [603 0 R /XYZ 46.771 68.499 null]
+>> endobj
+602 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+607 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index12) >>
+endobj
+610 0 obj
+(Notes)
+endobj
+613 0 obj <<
+/Length 4736      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(Notes)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -33.801 Td[(Of)-295(Atheism)-295(in)-295(Antiquity)-295(as)-295(defined)-295(here)-295(no)-295(treatment)-295(is)-295(known)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-473(me;)-584(but)-473(there)-472(exist)-473(an)-473(older)-473(and)-473(a)-472(newer)-473(book)-473(that)-473(deal)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-401(the)-401(question)-401(within)-401(a)-400(wider)-401(compass.)-703(The)-401(first)-401(of)-401(these)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-351(Krische,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 51.855 0 Td[(Die)-351(theologischen)-350(Lehren)-351(der)-351(griechischen)-350(Denker)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -51.855 -13.549 Td[(\050G\366ttingen,)-255(1840\051;)-255(it)-254(is)-254(chiefly)-253(concerned)-254(with)-254(the)-254(philosophical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conceptions)-481(of)-481(deity,)-538(but)-481(it)-481(touches)-480(also)-481(on)-481(the)-481(relations)-481(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(philosophers)-348(to)-348(popular)-348(religion.)-545(The)-348(second)-348(is)-348(Decharme,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 269.11 0 Td[(La)]TJ -269.11 -13.549 Td[(critique)-321(des)-321(traditions)-322(religieuses)-321(chez)-321(les)-321(Grecs)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 220.27 0 Td[(\050Paris,)-339(1904\051;)]TJ -220.27 -13.549 Td[(it)-229(is)-228(not)-229(fertile)-229(in)-228(new)-229(points)-228(of)-229(view,)-233(but)-229(it)-228(has)-229(suggested)-229(several)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(details)-209(which)-209(I)-209(might)-209(else)-209(have)-209(overlooked.)-236(Such)-209(books)-209(as)-209(Caird,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(The)-247(Evolution)-247(of)-247(Theology)-247(in)-247(the)-247(Greek)-247(Philosop)-1(hers)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 235.488 0 Td[(\050Glasgow,)]TJ -235.488 -13.55 Td[(1904\051,)-353(or)-332(Moon,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 77.374 0 Td[(Religious)-332(Thought)-332(of)-333(the)-332(Greeks)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 148.416 0 Td[(\050Cambridge,)]TJ -225.79 -13.549 Td[(Mass.,)-342(1919\051,)-342(barely)-324(touch)-324(on)-324(the)-324(relation)-323(to)-324(popular)-324(belief;)-361(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Louis,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 31.917 0 Td[(Les)-368(doctrines)-368(religieuses)-369(des)-368(philosophes)-368(grecs)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 213.403 0 Td[(,)-398(I)-368(have)]TJ -245.32 -13.549 Td[(not)-496(been)-495(able)-496(to)-496(make)-496(use.)-987(I)-495(regret)-496(that)-496(Poul)-495(Helms,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 264.266 0 Td[(The)]TJ -264.266 -13.549 Td[(Conception)-292(of)-293(God)-292(in)-293(Greek)-292(Philosophy)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 180.944 0 Td[(\050Danish,)-303(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 52.249 0 Td[(Studier)-292(for)]TJ -233.193 -13.55 Td[(Sprog-og)-373(Oldtidsforskning)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 118.014 0 Td[(,)-404(No.)-619(115\051,)-404(was)-373(not)-373(published)-373(until)]TJ -118.014 -13.549 Td[(my)-332(essay)-331(was)-332(already)-332(in)-331(the)-332(press.)-495(General)-331(works)-332(on)-332(Atheism)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-438(indicated)-437(in)-438(Aveling's)-437(article,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 157.524 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Atheism,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 39.698 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.617 0 Td[(in)-438(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 31.365 0 Td[(Catholic)]TJ -243.048 -13.549 Td[(Encyclop\346dia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 61.811 0 Td[(,)-506(vol.)-864(ii.,)-506(but)-455(none)-455(of)-454(them)-455(seem)-455(to)-455(be)-455(found)]TJ -61.811 -13.549 Td[(at)-396(Copenhagen.)-688(In)-396(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 108.022 0 Td[(Dictionary)-396(of)-396(Religion)-396(and)-396(Ethics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 153.643 0 Td[(,)-432(ii.,)]TJ -261.665 -13.55 Td[(there)-324(is)-324(a)-323(detailed)-324(article)-324(on)-324(Atheism)-323(in)-324(its)-324(relation)-324(to)-324(different)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(religions;)-251(the)-250(section)-250(treating)-251(of)-250(Antiquity)-250(is)-251(written)-250(by)-251(Pearson,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-251(is)-250(meagre.)-252(Works)-250(like)-251(Zeller,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 146.69 0 Td[(Philosophie)-251(der)-250(Griechen)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 112.725 0 Td[(,)-251(and)]TJ -259.415 -13.549 Td[(Gomperz,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 46.921 0 Td[(Griechische)-314(Denker)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 88.244 0 Td[(,)-330(contain)-314(accounts)-314(of)-314(the)-314(attitude)]TJ -135.165 -13.549 Td[(of)-255(philosophers)-255(\050Gomperz)-255(also)-255(includes)-255(others\051)-255(towards)-255(popular)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(belief;)-258(of)-255(these)-256(books)-255(I)-255(have)-256(of)-255(course)-255(made)-256(use)-255(throughout,)-257(but)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(they)-289(are)-288(not)-289(referred)-288(to)-289(in)-289(the)-288(following)-289(notes)-288(except)-289(on)-289(special)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(occasion.)-623(Scattered)-374(remarks)-374(and)-374(small)-374(monographs)-374(on)-375(details)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+612 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 613 0 R
+/Resources 611 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 588 0 R
+>> endobj
+608 0 obj <<
+/D [612 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+611 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+616 0 obj <<
+/Length 4867      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(123)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(are)-439(naturally)-438(to)-439(be)-438(found)-439(in)-439(plenty.)-815(Where)-439(I)-438(have)-439(met)-439(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(such)-383(and)-384(found)-383(something)-384(useful)-383(in)-384(them,)-416(or)-384(where)-383(I)-384(express)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(dissent)-392(from)-392(them,)-428(I)-392(have)-392(noticed)-392(it;)-463(but)-392(I)-392(have)-392(not)-392(aimed)-392(at)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(exhausting)-229(the)-229(literature)-230(on)-229(my)-229(subject.)-243(On)-229(the)-229(other)-229(hand)-229(I)-230(have)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(tried)-320(to)-320(make)-321(myself)-320(completely)-320(acquainted)-320(with)-320(the)-321(first-hand)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(material,)-203(wherever)-191(it)-190(gave)-191(a)-191(direct)-191(support)-191(for)-191(assuming)-191(Atheism,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-383(to)-382(take)-383(my)-383(own)-382(view)-383(of)-383(it.)-648(In)-382(many)-383(cases,)-416(however,)-416(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(argumentation)-357(has)-356(had)-357(to)-357(be)-356(indirect:)-464(it)-357(has)-356(been)-357(necessary)-357(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(draw)-349(inferences)-350(from)-349(what)-349(an)-350(author)-349(does)-349(not)-350(say)-349(in)-349(a)-350(certain)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(connexion)-448(when)-448(he)-448(might)-448(be)-449(expected)-448(to)-448(say)-448(it,)-497(or)-449(what)-448(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(generally)-233(and)-233(throughout)-233(avoids)-233(mentioning,)-236(or)-233(from)-233(his)-233(general)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(manner)-420(and)-420(peculiarities)-420(in)-420(his)-420(way)-420(of)-420(speaking)-420(of)-421(the)-420(gods.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(In)-339(such)-338(cases)-339(I)-338(have)-339(often)-338(had)-339(to)-338(be)-339(content)-338(with)-339(my)-339(previous)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(knowledge)-367(and)-367(my)-367(general)-367(impression)-367(of)-367(the)-367(facts;)-426(but)-367(then)-367(I)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(have)-649(as)-325(a)-325(rule)-325(made)-324(use)-325(of)-325(the)-324(important)-325(modern)-325(literature)-325(on)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 0 Td[([154])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(the)-426(subject.)-777(In)-426(working)-425(out)-426(the)-426(sketch)-426(of)-425(the)-426(ideas)-426(after)-426(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(end)-367(of)-367(Antiquity,)-396(I)-367(have)-367(been)-367(almost)-367(without)-368(any)-367(guidance)-367(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(modern)-378(literature.)-632(I)-378(have)-377(accordingly)-378(had)-377(to)-378(try,)-409(on)-378(the)-378(basis)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-389(a)-389(superficial)-389(acquaintance)-389(with)-389(some)-389(of)-389(the)-389(chief)-389(types,)-424(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(form)-411(for)-410(myself,)-451(as)-410(best)-411(I)-410(might,)-451(some)-410(idea)-411(of)-411(the)-410(course)-411(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-452(evolution;)-552(but)-451(I)-452(have)-451(not)-452(been)-451(able)-452(to)-451(go)-452(systematically)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(through)-295(the)-295(immense)-294(material,)-306(however)-295(fruitful)-295(such)-295(a)-295(research)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(appeared)-406(to)-407(be.)-718(In)-406(the)-407(meantime,)-445(between)-406(the)-406(publication)-407(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(my)-264(Danish)-265(essay)-264(and)-264(this)-265(translation,)-267(there)-265(has)-264(appeared)-264(a)-265(work)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(by)-452(Mr.)-856(Gruppe,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 82.156 0 Td[(Geschichte)-452(der)-452(klassischen)-452(Mythologie)-452(und)]TJ -82.156 -13.549 Td[(Religionsgeschichte)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 90.171 0 Td[(\050Leipzig,)-271(1921\051.)-300(My)-266(task)-267(in)-267(writing)-266(my)-267(last)]TJ -90.171 -13.549 Td[(chapters)-274(would)-273(have)-274(been)-273(much)-274(easier)-274(if)-273(I)-274(could)-273(have)-274(made)-274(use)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-408(Mr.)-723(Gruppe's)-408(learned)-408(and)-408(comprehensive)-408(treatment)-408(of)-408(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(subject;)-270(but)-264(it)-263(would)-264(not)-263(have)-264(been)-264(superfluous,)-266(for)-264(Mr.)-291(Gruppe)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(deals)-429(principally)-429(with)-429(the)-428(history)-429(of)-429(classical)-429(mythology,)-474(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(with)-287(the)-288(history)-287(of)-287(the)-288(belief)-287(in)-287(the)-287(go)-1(ds)-287(of)-287(antiquity.)-362(So)-287(I)-288(have)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ventured)-211(to)-212(let)-211(my)-211(sketch)-212(stand)-211(as)-211(it)-211(is,)-219(only)-212(reducing)-211(some)-211(of)-212(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(notes)-215(\050which)-216(I)-215(had)-215(on)-216(purpose)-215(made)-215(rather)-215(full,)-223(to)-215(aid)-215(others)-216(who)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(might)-285(pursue)-286(the)-285(subject\051)-285(by)-286(referring)-285(to)-285(Mr.)-356(Gruppe)-285(instead)-286(of)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+615 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 616 0 R
+/Resources 614 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 617 0 R
+>> endobj
+540 0 obj <<
+/D [615 0 R /XYZ 70.91 328.486 null]
+>> endobj
+614 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+620 0 obj <<
+/Length 5594      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(124)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(to)-250(the)-250(sources)-250(themselves.)]TJ 11.956 -15.856 Td[(For)-292(kindly)-293(helping)-292(me)-292(to)-292(find)-293(my)-292(bearings)-292(in)-293(out-of-the-way)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(parts)-238(of)-239(my)-238(subject,)-241(I)-238(am)-239(indebted)-238(to)-239(my)-238(colleagues)-238(F.)-239(Buhl,)-241(I.L.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Heiberg,)-248(I.C.)-248(Jacobsen)-248(and)-248(Kr.)-249(Nyrop,)-248(as)-248(well)-248(as)-248(to)-247(Prof.)-250(Martin)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(P.)-250(Nilsson)-250(in)-250(Lund.)]TJ 11.956 -15.857 Td[(P.)-367(1.)-600(Definition)-367(of)-367(Atheism:)-484(see)-366(the)-367(article)-367(in)-367(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 231.092 0 Td[(Catholic)]TJ -243.048 -13.549 Td[(Encycl.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.139 0 Td[(vol.)-250(ii.)]TJ -23.183 -15.856 Td[(P.)-307(5.)-420(Atheism:)-364(see)-307(Murray,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 125.106 0 Td[(New)-307(Engl.)-421(Dict.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.18 0 Td[(,)-321(under)-307(Atheism)]TJ -209.242 -13.55 Td[(and)-250(-ism.)-250(The)-250(word)-250(seems)-250(to)-250(have)-250(come)-250(up)-250(in)-250(the)-250(Renaissance.)]TJ 11.956 -15.856 Td[(P.)-242(6)-1(.)-247(Criminal)-243(Law)-242(at)-243(Athens:)-246(see)-242(Lipsius,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 187.03 0 Td[(Das)-243(attische)-242(Recht)]TJ -198.986 -13.549 Td[(und)-288(Rechtsverfahren)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 91.005 0 Td[(,)-298(i.)-364(p.)-364(358.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 46.956 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(The)-288(definition)-288(in)-288(Aristotle,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 121.461 0 Td[(de)]TJ -270.332 -13.549 Td[(virt.)-250(et)-250(vit.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 47.575 0 Td[(7,)-250(p.)-250(1251)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 43.636 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(,)-250(has,)-250(I)-250(think,)-250(no)-250(legal)-250(foundation.)]TJ -84.71 -15.857 Td[(P.)-444(9.)-831(On)-444(the)-443(legal)-444(foundation)-444(for)-443(the)-444(trials)-444(of)-444(Christians,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(see)-214(Mommsen,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 68.079 0 Td[(Der)-214(Religionsfreuel)-214(nach)-215(r\366mischem)-214(Recht)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 189.228 0 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.632 0 Td[(Ges.)]TJ -260.939 -13.549 Td[(Schr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.456 0 Td[(iii.)-250(p.)-251(389\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 48.195 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Mommsen)-250(goes)-250(too)-251(far,)-250(I)-250(think,)-250(in)-250(supposing)]TJ -84.56 -13.55 Td[(a)-397(legal)-397(foundation)-397(for)-397(the)-397(trials)-397(of)-397(Christians;)-471(above)-397(all,)-434(I)-397(do)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-267(believe)-268(that)-267(the)-267(defection)-268(from)-267(the)-268(Roman)-267(religion)-267(was)-268(ever)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(considered)-373(as)-372(maiestas)-373(in)-373(the)-372(technical)-373(sense)-373(of)-373(the)-372(word,)-404(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(more)-203(so)-203(as)-203(it)-203(is)-202(certain)-203(that,)-213(after)-203(the)-202(earliest)-203(period,)-213(no)-203(difference)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-250(made)-250(in)-250(the)-250(treatment)-250(of)-250(citizens)-250(and)-250(aliens.)]TJ 11.956 -15.857 Td[(P.)-308(13.)-423(Lists)-307(of)-308(atheists:)-366(Cicero,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 142.491 0 Td[(de)-308(nat.)-423(deor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 62.279 0 Td[(1.)-423(1,)-322(2)-308(\050comp.)]TJ -216.726 -13.549 Td[(1.)-586(23,)-391(26\051.)-586(Sext.)-587(Emp.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 114.393 0 Td[(hypotyp.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 43.663 0 Td[(3.)-586(213;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 38.538 0 Td[(adv.)-586(math.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 55.82 0 Td[(9.)-586(50.)]TJ -252.414 -13.549 Td[(Aelian,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 35.395 0 Td[(v.h.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 20.536 0 Td[(2.)-439(31;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 30.662 0 Td[(de)-313(nat.)-438(an.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 53.583 0 Td[(6.)-439(40.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 26.602 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-313(predicate)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 63.771 0 Td[(atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.896 0 Td[(is)]TJ -273.354 -13.549 Td[(once)-265(applied)-265(to)-264(Anaxagoras)-265(by)-265(a)-265(Christian)-264(author)-265(\050Irenaeus:)-280(see)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Diels,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.542 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.742 0 Td[(46,)-255(A)-255(113;)-256(compare)-254(also)-254(Marcellinus,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 167.571 0 Td[(vit.)-263(Thuc.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.048 0 Td[(,)]TJ -277.903 -13.549 Td[(see)-246(below,)-247(note)-245(on)-246(p.)-249(29\051.)-249(Of)-245(such)-246(isolated)-246(cases)-246(I)-246(have)-246(taken)-246(no)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(account.)]TJ 11.956 -15.857 Td[(P.)-227(16.)-243(On)-227(the)-228(dualism)-227(in)-227(the)-228(Greek)-227(conception)-227(of)-228(the)-227(nature)-228(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(gods)-275(see)-275(N\344gelsbach,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 97.216 0 Td[(Hom.)-324(Theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 58.589 0 Td[(p.)-324(11.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.355 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(Pindar:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 34.783 0 Td[(Ol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.174 0 Td[(1.)-324(28,)-281(9.)]TJ -244.027 -13.549 Td[(35;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.669 0 Td[(Pyth.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.451 0 Td[(3.)-250(27.)]TJ -30.165 -15.856 Td[(P.)-507(17.)-1019(Xenophanes:)-763(Einhorn,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 148.461 0 Td[(Zeit-)-507(und)-506(Streitfragen)-507(der)]TJ -160.416 -13.55 Td[(modernen)-391(Xenophanesforschung)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 149.122 0 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.633 0 Td[(Arch.)-674(f.)-673(Gesch.)-674(d.)-674(Philos.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -152.755 -13.549 Td[(xxxi.\051.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+619 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 620 0 R
+/Resources 618 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 617 0 R
+/Annots [ 621 0 R 622 0 R 623 0 R 624 0 R 625 0 R 626 0 R 627 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+621 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.293 445.618 123.747 453.265]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg001) >>
+>> endobj
+622 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.639 414.031 123.093 423.903]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg005) >>
+>> endobj
+623 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.937 384.636 122.392 394.454]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg006) >>
+>> endobj
+624 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.132 341.67 124.586 351.39]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg009) >>
+>> endobj
+625 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.648 230.98 128.557 240.798]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+626 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.772 133.828 127.681 143.537]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+627 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.817 90.873 130.726 100.691]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg017) >>
+>> endobj
+618 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+630 0 obj <<
+/Length 6571      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(125)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(P.)-436(18.)-806(Xenophanes's)-436(age:)-621(Diels,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 156.832 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.678 0 Td[(11,)-482(B)-435(8.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 39.102 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(His)]TJ -265.477 -13.549 Td[(criticism)-500(of)-499(Homer)-500(and)-500(Hesiod:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 157.236 0 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.602 0 Td[(11,)-562(12.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 33.405 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Titans)-500(and)]TJ -232.152 -13.549 Td[(Giants:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 42.426 0 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.521 0 Td[(1.)-625(22.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 28.638 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Criticism)-375(of)-375(Anthropomorphism:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 152.434 0 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 30.095 0 Td[([155])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.549 Td[(14-16.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 28.178 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Divination:)-250(Cic.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 73.036 0 Td[(de)-250(div.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.811 0 Td[(1.)-250(3,)-250(5.)]TJ -131.979 -14.095 Td[(P.)-307(19.)-422(On)-307(Xenophanes's)-308(conception)-307(of)-307(God,)-322(comp.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 230.798 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -242.753 -13.549 Td[(11,)-473(B)-429(23-26;)-518(on)-428(the)-429(identification)-429(of)-428(God)-429(with)-429(the)-429(universe:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.55 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.603 0 Td[(11,)-250(A)-250(30,)-250(31,)-250(33-36.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 87.873 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Cicero:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 34.843 0 Td[(de)-250(div.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.811 0 Td[(1.)-250(3,)-250(5.)]TJ -194.084 -14.094 Td[(P.)-292(21.)-374(For)-292(Xenophanes's)-292(theology,)-302(comp.)-375(Freudenthal,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 244.74 0 Td[(Arch.)]TJ -256.695 -13.549 Td[(f.)-533(Gesch.)-533(d.)-533(Philos.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 97.804 0 Td[(i.)-533(p.)-533(322,)-368(and)-345(Zeller's)-344(criticism,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 149.126 0 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.518 0 Td[(p.)]TJ -272.448 -13.55 Td[(524.)-519(Agreeing)-340(with)-340(Freudenthal:)-429(Decharme,)-363(p.)-519(46;)-385(Campbell,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(Religion)-250(in)-250(Greek)-250(Literature)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 124.538 0 Td[(,)-250(p.)-250(293.)]TJ -112.583 -14.095 Td[(P.)-345(21.)-537(Parmenides)-345(does)-346(not)-345(even)-345(appear)-346(to)-345(have)-346(designated)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(his)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 15.458 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Being)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 26.062 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.571 0 Td[(as)-250(God)-250(\050Zeller,)-250(i.)-250(p.)-250(563\051.)]TJ -41.979 -14.094 Td[(P.)-229(23.)-243(In)-229(the)-230(eighteenth)-229(century)-229(people)-229(discussed)-229(diffusely)-230(the)]TJ -11.955 -13.55 Td[(question)-340(whether)-339(Thales)-340(was)-340(an)-339(atheist)-340(\050of)-340(course)-339(in)-340(the)-340(sense)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-326(which)-326(the)-326(word)-326(was)-326(taken)-326(at)-326(that)-326(time\051;)-364(comp.)-478(Tennem)-1(ann,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(Gesch.)-387(d.)-387(Philos.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 81.45 0 Td[(i.)-387(pp.)-387(62)-296(and)-296(422.)-387(Tennemann)-295(re)-1(marks)-295(quite)]TJ -81.45 -13.549 Td[(truly)-250(that)-250(the)-250(question)-250(is)-250(put)-250(wrongly.)]TJ 11.955 -14.095 Td[(P.)-445(24.)-834(Thales:)-640(Diels,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 106.617 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.979 0 Td[(1,)-493(A)-445(22-23.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 54.47 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Attitude)-445(of)]TJ -230.93 -13.549 Td[(Democritus)-492(towards)-491(popular)-492(belief:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 170.733 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 48.515 0 Td[(55,)-552(A)-492(74-79;)]TJ -219.248 -13.549 Td[(comp.)-856(116,)-502(117;)-553(B)-452(166,)-502(and)-452(also)-452(B)-452(30.)-856(Diels,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 232.684 0 Td[(Ueber)-452(den)]TJ -232.684 -13.55 Td[(D\344monenglauben)-338(des)-339(D.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 113.78 0 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.632 0 Td[(Arch.)-515(f.)-515(Gesch.)-515(d.)-514(Philos.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 126.559 0 Td[(1894,)-360(p.)]TJ -243.971 -13.549 Td[(154\051.)]TJ 11.955 -14.094 Td[(P.)-250(25.)-250(Trial)-250(of)-250(Anaxagoras:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 121.494 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.604 0 Td[(46,)-250(A)-250(1,)-250(17,)-250(18,)-250(19.)]TJ -162.098 -14.095 Td[(P.)-250(26.)-250(Ram's)-250(head:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 83.781 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.604 0 Td[(46,)-250(A)-250(16.)]TJ -124.385 -14.095 Td[(P.)-359(27.)-577(Geffcken)-359(\050in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 93.17 0 Td[(Hermes)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.927 0 Td[(,)-386(42,)-386(p.)-577(127\051)-359(has)-359(tried)-359(to)-359(make)]TJ -139.052 -13.549 Td[(out)-241(something)-242(about)-241(a)-242(criticism)-241(of)-241(popular)-242(belief)-241(by)-242(Anaxagoras)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-431(some)-431(passages)-431(in)-432(Aristophanes)-431(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 175.611 0 Td[(Nub.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 29.568 0 Td[(398\051)-431(and)-431(Lucian)]TJ -205.179 -13.549 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.632 0 Td[(Tim.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.282 0 Td[(10,)-359(etc.\051,)-359(but)-337(I)-337(do)-337(not)-338(think)-337(he)-337(has)-337(succeeded.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 206.268 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Pericles)]TJ -246.091 -13.55 Td[(a)-410(free-thinker:)-569(Plut.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 98.308 0 Td[(Pericl.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.34 0 Td[(6)-410(and)-409(38;)-490(comp.)-729(Decharme,)-449(p.)]TJ -135.648 -13.549 Td[(160.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Personality)-280(of)-281(Anaxagoras:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 122.816 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.595 0 Td[(46,)-288(A)-280(30)-280(\050Aristotle,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -194.411 -13.549 Td[(Eud.)-250(Ethics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 50.301 0 Td[(,)-250(A)-250(4,)-250(p.)-250(1215)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 59.695 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-250(6\051.)]TJ -103.495 -14.095 Td[(P.)-499(28.)-997(Herodotus:)-748(8,)-561(77.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 123.326 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Sophocles:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 56.039 0 Td[(Oed.)-997(rex.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 59.31 0 Td[(498,)]TJ -261.539 -13.549 Td[(863.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Diopeithes:)-1085(Plut.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 98.835 0 Td[(Pericl.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 45.777 0 Td[(32)-667(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.822 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.264 0 Td[(46,)-772(A)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+629 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 630 0 R
+/Resources 628 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 617 0 R
+/Annots [ 631 0 R 633 0 R 634 0 R 635 0 R 636 0 R 637 0 R 638 0 R 639 0 R 640 0 R 641 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+631 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.271 515.797 83.181 525.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+633 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.871 461.066 81.78 470.884]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg019) >>
+>> endobj
+634 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.701 419.862 81.61 429.691]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg021) >>
+>> endobj
+635 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.287 365.119 82.197 374.839]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg021) >>
+>> endobj
+636 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.02 337.475 80.929 347.195]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg023) >>
+>> endobj
+637 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.372 270.046 83.281 279.013]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg024) >>
+>> endobj
+638 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 200.892 81.156 210.765]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg025) >>
+>> endobj
+639 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 187.659 81.156 196.627]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg026) >>
+>> endobj
+640 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.435 172.714 82.344 182.423]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg027) >>
+>> endobj
+641 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.962 77.324 83.872 87.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+632 0 obj <<
+/D [629 0 R /XYZ 83.743 491.077 null]
+>> endobj
+628 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+644 0 obj <<
+/Length 7012      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(126)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(17\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 17.269 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(Thucydides:)-723(Classen)-486(in)-486(the)-487(preface)-486(to)-486(his)-487(3rd)-486(ed.,)-545(p)-1(.)]TJ -28.179 -13.549 Td[(lvii.)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(P.)-240(29.)-247(Thucydides,)-242(a)-241(disciple)-240(of)-240(Anaxagoras:)-245(Marcellinus,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 255.038 0 Td[(vit.)]TJ -266.994 -13.549 Td[(Thuc.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.201 0 Td[(22.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.636 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Generally)-278(Thucydides)-279(is)-278(thought)-278(to)-279(have)-278(been)-279(more)]TJ -52.746 -13.549 Td[(conservative)-320(in)-320(his)-320(religious)-320(opinions)-320(than)-320(I)-320(cons)-1(ider)-320(probable;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(see)-207(Classen,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 55.215 0 Td[(loc.)-236(cit.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.267 0 Td[(;)-222(Decharme,)-216(p.)-235(83;)-222(Gertz)-208(in)-207(his)-207(preface)-208(to)-207(the)]TJ -87.482 -13.55 Td[(Danish)-371(translation)-370(of)-371(Thucydides,)-400(p.)-612(xxvii.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 196.183 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Hippo:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 35.662 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -242.754 -13.549 Td[(26,)-250(A)-250(4,)-250(6,)-250(8,)-250(9;)-250(B)-250(2,)-250(3.)]TJ 11.955 -15.186 Td[(P.)-400(30.)-701(Aristotle:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 81.66 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 45.52 0 Td[(26,)-438(A)-400(7.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 38.835 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Diogenes)-400(an)-401(atheist:)]TJ -188.879 -13.549 Td[(Aelian,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 34.112 0 Td[(v.h.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 18.302 0 Td[(2,)-211(31.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 24.119 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-201(air)-201(his)-201(god:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 69.643 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.426 0 Td[(51,)-211(A)-201(8)-201(\050he)-201(thought)]TJ -197.511 -13.549 Td[(that)-280(Homer)-280(identified)-281(Zeus)-280(with)-280(the)-280(air,)-288(and)-280(approved)-280(of)-280(this)-281(as)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(\277)]TJ/F41 10.909 Tf 5.433 0 Td[(P)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 8.763 0 Td[(\274\305\270\271\272)]TJ/F41 10.909 Tf 25.626 0 Td[(\366)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 7.636 0 Td[(\302)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.451 0 Td[(,)]TJ/F41 10.909 Tf 5.96 0 Td[(\000)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 5.727 0 Td[(\273\273)]TJ/F41 10.909 Tf 11.52 0 Td[(\275)-296(\000)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 11.001 0 Td[(\273\267\270)]TJ/F41 10.909 Tf 17.029 0 Td[(\366)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 7.636 0 Td[(\302)-296(\265)]TJ/F41 10.909 Tf 12.265 0 Td[(0)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 3.208 0 Td[(\301\267\274\265\275\277\275)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.996 0 Td[(\051;)-320(B)-296(5,)-308(7,)-308(8.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 51.924 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Allusions)-296(to)]TJ -227.084 -13.549 Td[(his)-263(doctrines)-263(by)-262(Aristophanes:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 135.837 0 Td[(Nub.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 24.057 0 Td[(225,)-266(828)-263(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 44.854 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.02 0 Td[(51,)-266(C)-263(1,)]TJ -245.768 -13.549 Td[(2\051.)]TJ 11.955 -15.186 Td[(P.)-349(31.)-548(A)-349(chief)-349(representative)-349(of)-349(the)-349(na\357vely)-349(critical)-350(view)-349(of)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(natural)-341(phenomena)-342(is)-341(for)-342(us)-341(Herodotus.)-524(The)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 203.483 0 Td[(locus)-341(classicus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 69.871 0 Td[(is)]TJ -273.354 -13.55 Td[(vii.)-426(129;)-338(comp.)-425(Gomperz,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 120.43 0 Td[(Griech.)-426(Denker)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 69.771 0 Td[(,)-323(i.)-426(p.)-426(208;)-337(Heiberg,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -190.201 -13.549 Td[(Festskrift)-342(til)-342(Ussing)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 91.803 0 Td[(\050Copenhagen,)-365(1900\051,)-365(p.)-525(91;)-388(Decharme,)-364(p.)]TJ -91.803 -13.549 Td[(69.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Principal)-278(passages)-278(about)-278(Diagoras:)-307(Sext.)-334(Emp.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 209.412 0 Td[(adv.)-334(math.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -233.958 -13.549 Td[(9,)-434(53;)-471(Suidas,)-434(art.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 90.337 0 Td[(Diagoras)-397(II.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 55.541 0 Td[(;)-471(schol.)-692(Aristoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 89.929 0 Td[(Nub.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.459 0 Td[(830)]TJ -264.266 -13.549 Td[(\050the)-445(legend\051;)-543(Suidas,)-494(art.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 124.052 0 Td[(Diagoras)-445(I.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 52.431 0 Td[(;)-543(Aristoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 58.978 0 Td[(Av.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.351 0 Td[(1071)]TJ -258.812 -13.55 Td[(with)-484(schol.;)-601(schol.)-951(Aristoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 147.439 0 Td[(Ran.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.68 0 Td[(320;)-601([Lysias])-484(vi.)-951(17;)]TJ -178.119 -13.549 Td[(Diod.)-592(xiii.)-592(16)-364(\050the)-364(decree\051;)-421(Philodem.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 181.29 0 Td[(de)-364(piet.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 39.819 0 Td[(p.)-592(89)-364(Gomp.)]TJ -221.109 -13.549 Td[(\050comments)-346(of)-346(Aristoxenus\051;)-787(Aelian,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 168.937 0 Td[(v.h.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 21.616 0 Td[(ii.)-537(22)-346(\050legislation)-346(at)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -263.309 0 Td[([156])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(Mantinea\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 47.564 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Wilamowitz)-347(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 61.349 0 Td[(Textgesch.)-540(d.)-540(Lyr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 90.09 0 Td[(p.)-540(80\051)-347(has)-347(tried)]TJ -209.912 -13.549 Td[(to)-423(save)-423(the)-422(tradition)-423(by)-423(supposing)-423(that)-422(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 199.919 0 Td[(acme)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.63 0 Td[(of)-423(Diagoras)]TJ -227.549 -13.55 Td[(has)-512(been)-513(put)-512(too)-513(early.)-1037(Comp.)-1038(also)-512(his)-512(remark)-1(s,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 247.608 0 Td[(Griech.)]TJ -247.608 -13.549 Td[(Verskunst.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 52.769 0 Td[(p.)-643(426,)-414(where)-381(he)-381(has)-381(taken)-381(up)-381(the)-381(question)-381(again)]TJ -52.769 -13.549 Td[(with)-336(reference)-336(to)-336(my)-336(tre)-1(atment)-336(of)-336(it.)-508(As)-336(he)-336(has)-336(now)-337(conceded)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-291(possibility)-291(of)-292(referring)-291(the)-291(legislation)-291(to)-292(the)-291(earlier)-291(date,)-302(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(difference)-374(between)-374(us)-374(is)-375(really)-374(very)-374(slight,)-405(and)-374(it)-374(is)-374(of)-375(course)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(possible,)-370(perhaps)-346(even)-346(probable,)-370(that)-346(the)-346(acme)-346(of)-346(the)-346(poet)-346(has)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(been)-365(anteda)-1(ted.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 69.114 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Aristoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 47.415 0 Td[(Av.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 20.743 0 Td[(1071:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 30.097 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(On)-366(this)-365(very)-365(day)-366(it)-365(is)]TJ -183.121 -13.549 Td[(made)-354(public,)-381(that)-354(if)-354(one)-355(of)-354(you)-354(kills)-355(Diagoras)-354(from)-354(Melos,)-381(he)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+643 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 644 0 R
+/Resources 642 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 617 0 R
+/Annots [ 645 0 R 646 0 R 653 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+645 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.913 487.062 127.822 496.782]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg029) >>
+>> endobj
+646 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.658 404.13 129.567 413.959]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+653 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.1 321.199 129.009 330.919]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg031) >>
+>> endobj
+654 0 obj <<
+/D [643 0 R /XYZ 222.34 201.634 null]
+>> endobj
+642 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F40 649 0 R /F41 652 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+657 0 obj <<
+/Length 6693      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(127)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(shall)-343(have)-343(a)-343(talent,)-367(and)-343(if)-343(one)-343(kills)-343(one)-343(of)-343(the)-343(dead)-343(tyrants,)-367(he)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(shall)-386(have)-387(a)-386(talent.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 85.662 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.059 0 Td[(The)-386(parallel)-387(between)-386(the)-387(two)-386(decrees,)-421(of)]TJ -94.721 -13.549 Td[(which)-231(the)-231(latter)-230(is)-231(of)-231(course)-231(an)-230(invention)-231(of)-231(Aristophanes,)-235(would)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-273(without)-274(point)-273(if)-273(the)-274(decree)-273(against)-273(Diagoras)-274(was)-273(not)-273(as)-274(futile)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(as)-212(the)-213(decree)-212(against)-212(the)-212(tyrants)-213(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 142.336 0 Td[(i.e.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.921 0 Td[(the)-212(sons)-213(of)-212(Peisistratus,)-220(who)]TJ -158.257 -13.549 Td[(had)-260(been)-259(dead)-260(some)-259(three-quarters)-260(of)-259(a)-260(century\051,)-262(that)-260(is,)-261(if)-260(it)-260(did)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-207(come)-207(many)-207(years)-208(too)-207(late.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 128.549 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Wilamowitz)-207(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 59.826 0 Td[(Griech.)-236(Verskunst,)]TJ -199.284 -13.549 Td[(loc.)-236(cit.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.27 0 Td[(\051)-236(takes)-208(the)-209(sense)-208(to)-208(be:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 98.99 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(You)-208(will)-208(not)-209(get)-208(hold)-208(of)-208(Diagoras)]TJ -136.103 -13.549 Td[(any)-357(more)-356(than)-357(you)-356(did)-357(of)-356(the)-357(tyrants.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 169.328 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.733 0 Td[(But)-357(this,)-383(besides)-356(being)]TJ -178.061 -13.55 Td[(somewhat)-353(pointless,)-378(does)-353(not)-352(agree)-353(so)-353(well)-352(as)-353(my)-353(explanation)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(with)-344(the)-344(introductory)-344(words:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 132.39 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(On)-344(this)-344(very)-344(day.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 78.216 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.596 0 Td[(On)-344(the)-344(other)]TJ -224.046 -13.549 Td[(hand,)-256(I)-255(never)-255(meant)-255(to)-255(imply)-255(that)-255(Diagoras)-255(was)-255(dead)-255(in)-254(415,)-257(but)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(only)-288(that)-289(his)-288(offence)-289(was)-288(an)-289(old)-288(one)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 160.176 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(just)-288(as)-289(that)-288(of)-289(Protagoras)]TJ -171.085 -13.549 Td[(probably)-250(was)-250(\050see)-250(p.)-250(39\051.)]TJ 11.956 -14.251 Td[(P.)-451(39.)-852(Trial)-451(of)-451(Protagoras:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 133.58 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 47.177 0 Td[(74,)-501(A)-451(1-4,)-501(23;)-551(the)]TJ -192.713 -13.549 Td[(passage)-260(referring)-259(to)-259(the)-260(gods:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 131.802 0 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 22.739 0 Td[(B)-259(4.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 18.288 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Plato:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.396 0 Td[(Theaet.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.459 0 Td[(p.)-278(162)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 27.583 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.176 -13.549 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.633 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.604 0 Td[(74,)-250(A)-250(23\051.)]TJ -32.281 -14.251 Td[(P.)-687(41.)-1563(Distinction)-687(between)-687(belief)-688(and)-687(knowledge)-688(by)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Protagoras:)-250(Gomperz,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 98.466 0 Td[(Griech.)-250(Denker)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 67.854 0 Td[(,)-250(i.)-250(p.)-250(359.)]TJ -154.364 -14.251 Td[(P.)-272(42.)-316(Prodicus:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 73.26 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.321 0 Td[(77,)-277(B)-272(5.)-316(Comp.)-316(Norvin,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 108.035 0 Td[(Allegorien)]TJ -234.572 -13.549 Td[(i)-258(den)-258(gr\346ske)-258(Philosophi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 108.225 0 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.632 0 Td[(Edda)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.029 0 Td[(,)-260(1919\051,)-260(p.)-273(82.)-274(I)-258(cannot,)-260(however,)]TJ -134.886 -13.549 Td[(quite)-250(adopt)-250(Norvin's)-250(view)-250(of)-250(the)-250(theory)-250(of)-250(Protagoras.)]TJ 11.956 -14.251 Td[(P.)-379(44.)-637(Critias:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 71.182 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 44.826 0 Td[(81,)-411(B)-379(25.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 43.168 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(W.)-379(Nestle,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 52.247 0 Td[(Jahrbb.)-637(f.)]TJ -234.288 -13.549 Td[(Philol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.192 0 Td[(xi.)-256(\0501903\051,)-252(pp.)-256(81)-252(and)-252(178,)-253(gives)-252(an)-252(exhaustive)-252(treatment)]TJ -32.192 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(the)-250(subject,)-250(but)-250(I)-250(cannot)-250(share)-250(his)-250(view)-250(of)-250(it.)]TJ 11.956 -14.251 Td[(P.)-297(46.)-390(Euripides:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 78.517 0 Td[(Suppl.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.835 0 Td[(201.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Moschion:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 50.416 0 Td[(Trag.)-390(Fragm.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 64.881 0 Td[(ed.)]TJ -267.605 -13.549 Td[(Nauck)-250(\0502nd)-250(ed.\051,)-250(p.)-250(813.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 106.037 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Plato:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.189 0 Td[(Rep.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 22.418 0 Td[(ii.)-250(369b.)]TJ -155.597 -14.25 Td[(P.)-270(47.)-312(Democritus:)-291(Reinhardt)-270(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 143.297 0 Td[(Hermes)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.927 0 Td[(,)-276(xlvii)-270(\0501912\051,)-276(p.)-311(503)]TJ -189.18 -13.55 Td[(In)-335(spite)-335(of)-335(Wilamowitz's)-335(objections)-335(\050in)-335(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 194.205 0 Td[(Platon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 29.094 0 Td[(,)-356(ii.)-505(p.)-505(214\051,)]TJ -223.299 -13.549 Td[(I)-345(still)-344(consider)-345(it)-345(probable)-345(that)-345(Plato)-344(alludes)-345(to)-345(a)-345(philosophical)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(theory.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 30.6 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Protagoras)-250(on)-250(the)-250(original)-250(state:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 141.502 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.603 0 Td[(74,)-250(B)-250(8)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 31.822 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)]TJ -248.935 -14.251 Td[(P.)-297(48.)-391(Euripides:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 78.528 0 Td[(Electra,)-309(737)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 57.812 0 Td[(\050Euripides)-297(does)-297(not)-297(believe)-297(in)]TJ -148.296 -13.549 Td[(the)-267(tale)-267(that)-267(the)-268(sun)-267(reversed)-267(its)-267(course)-267(on)-267(account)-267(of)-268(Thyestes's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fraud)-258(against)-258(Atreus,)-260(and)-259(then)-258(adds:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 160.308 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Fables)-258(that)-258(terrify)-258(men)-259(are)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+656 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 657 0 R
+/Resources 655 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 617 0 R
+/Annots [ 658 0 R 659 0 R 660 0 R 661 0 R 662 0 R 663 0 R 664 0 R 665 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+658 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [139.171 339.657 150.08 349.377]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+659 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.438 325.407 83.347 335.236]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+660 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [75.018 284.058 85.927 293.778]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg041) >>
+>> endobj
+661 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.486 256.269 81.395 266.131]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+662 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.654 215.029 82.563 224.782]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg044) >>
+>> endobj
+663 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.756 173.571 81.666 183.389]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg046) >>
+>> endobj
+664 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.47 145.771 81.379 155.633]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg047) >>
+>> endobj
+665 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.758 90.873 81.667 100.691]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg048) >>
+>> endobj
+655 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+668 0 obj <<
+/Length 6906      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(128)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(a)-312(profit)-313(to)-312(the)-312(worship)-313(of)-312(the)-313(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 152.928 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 6.36 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Aristotle:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 45.302 0 Td[(Metaph.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 40.822 0 Td[(A)-312(8,)]TJ -261.165 -13.549 Td[(1074)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.819 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(;)-376(see)-334(text,)-354(p.)-502(85.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 74.954 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Polybius:)-418(vi.)-501(56;)-376(see)-334(text)-333(pp.)-502(90)-334(and)]TJ -113.136 -13.549 Td[(114.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Plato's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 31.364 0 Td[(Gorgias)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.76 0 Td[(,)-250(p.)-250(482)-250(and)-250(foll.)]TJ -85.168 -14.095 Td[(P.)-250(49.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.156 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Callicles:)-250(see)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 60.6 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 18.48 0 Td[(Wilamowitz,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 59.389 0 Td[(Platon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 29.094 0 Td[(,)-250(i.)-250(p.)-250(208.)]TJ -203.628 -14.095 Td[(P.)-289(50.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.585 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Thrasymachus:)-329(Plato,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 98.66 0 Td[(Rep.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.706 0 Td[(i.)-368(pp.)-368(338)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 43.79 0 Td[(c)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(,)-299(343)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.355 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(;)-309(comp.)]TJ -247.259 -13.549 Td[(also)-317(ii.)-450(p.)-449(358)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 64.182 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)-450(His)-317(remark)-316(on)-317(Providence)-316(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 131.12 0 Td[(Vorsokr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.784 0 Td[(78,)-333(B)-317(8\051)]TJ -243.541 -13.549 Td[(runs)-293(thus:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 46.869 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(The)-293(gods)-293(do)-293(not)-293(see)-294(the)-293(things)-293(that)-293(are)-293(done)-293(among)]TJ -51.713 -13.549 Td[(men;)-425(if)-367(they)-366(did,)-396(they)-367(would)-367(not)-366(overlook)-367(the)-367(greatest)-367(human)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(good,)-740(justice.)-538(For)-346(we)-346(find)-346(that)-346(men)-346(do)-346(not)-346(follow)-346(it.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 242.612 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.618 0 Td[(Comp.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -323.986 0 Td[([157])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.55 Td[(text,)-252(p.)-255(61.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 46.441 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Diagoras)-252(as)-251(Critias's)-252(source:)-253(Nestle,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 159.625 0 Td[(Jahrbb.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.633 0 Td[(,)-252(1903,)]TJ -250.608 -13.549 Td[(p.)-250(101.)]TJ 11.956 -14.095 Td[(P.)-331(51.)-494(Euripides:)-413(see)-331(W.)-332(Nestle,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 149.405 0 Td[(Euripides)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.04 0 Td[(\050Stuttgart,)-352(1901\051)]TJ -207.401 -13.549 Td[(pp.)-329(51-152.)-329(Here,)-283(too,)-283(the)-276(material)-276(is)-277(set)-276(forth)-276(exhaustively;)-290(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(results)-341(seem)-340(to)-341(me)-341(inadmissible.)-522(Browning's)-340(theory)-341(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 239.943 0 Td[(The)-341(Ring)]TJ -239.943 -13.549 Td[(and)-363(the)-363(Book)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 60.038 0 Td[(,)-391(x.)-590(1661)-363(foll.\051)-590(that)-363(Euripides)-363(did)-364(believe)-363(in)-363(the)]TJ -60.038 -13.549 Td[(existence)-304(of)-304(the)-303(gods,)-318(but)-304(did)-303(not)-304(believe)-304(them)-304(to)-304(be)-303(perfect,)-318(is)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-282(possible,)-291(perhaps)-282(even)-283(a)-282(probable,)-291(explanation)-282(of)-283(many)-282(of)-283(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(utterances;)-265(but)-260(it)-260(will)-260(hardly)-260(fit)-260(all)-260(of)-260(them.)-280(I)-260(have)-260(examined)-260(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(question)-275(in)-274(an)-275(essay,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 94.157 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Browning)-274(om)-275(Euripides)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 105.381 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.838 0 Td[(in)-274(my)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.417 0 Td[(Udvalgte)]TJ -240.637 -13.549 Td[(Afhandlinger)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 57.578 0 Td[(,)-250(p.)-250(55.)]TJ -45.622 -14.095 Td[(P.)-265(52.)-294(Gods)-265(identified)-264(with)-265(the)-265(Elements:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 184.333 0 Td[(Bacch.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.198 0 Td[(274;)-272(fragm.)]TJ -229.487 -13.549 Td[(839.)-250(877,)-250(941)-250(\050Nestle,)-250(p.)-250(153\051.)]TJ 11.956 -14.095 Td[(P.)-186(53.)-229(Polemic)-186(against)-187(sophists:)-218(Nestle,)-199(p.)-229(206.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 200.798 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Bellerophon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 53.934 0 Td[(:)]TJ -277.597 -13.549 Td[(fragm.)-250(286.)]TJ 11.956 -14.095 Td[(P.)-250(54.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 27.883 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(If)-250(the)-250(gods)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 46.658 0 Td[(\024\024\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.662 0 Td[(:)-250(fragm.)-250(292,)-250(7.)]TJ -106.047 -14.094 Td[(P.)-346(55.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 32.074 0 Td[(Melanippe)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.658 0 Td[(:)-442(fragm.)-538(480.)-538(The)-346(words)-346(are)-346(said)-346(to)-346(have)]TJ -90.688 -13.55 Td[(given)-302(offence)-303(at)-302(the)-302(rehearsal,)-316(so)-302(that)-303(Euripides)-302(altered)-302(them)-303(at)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-365(production)-366(of)-365(the)-366(play)-365(\050Plut.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 152.183 0 Td[(Amat.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.26 0 Td[(ch.)-596(13\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.798 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Aeschylus:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -232.15 -13.549 Td[(Agam.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.705 0 Td[(160.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Aristophanes:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 63.027 0 Td[(Thesmoph.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 50.101 0 Td[(450.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(In)-195(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 26.671 0 Td[(Frogs)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.062 0 Td[(,)-206(892,)]TJ -256.566 -13.549 Td[(Euripides)-373(prays)-372(to)-373(the)-372(Ether)-372(an)-1(d)-372(other)-372(abstractio)-1(ns,)-403(not)-372(to)-373(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 23.335 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Clouds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.916 0 Td[(:)-250(1371.)]TJ -53.204 -14.095 Td[(P.)-496(56.)-987(Plato:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 72.164 0 Td[(Republ.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 44.406 0 Td[(viii.)-988(p.)-987(568a.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 70.942 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Quotation)-496(from)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -210.377 -13.549 Td[(Melanippe)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.658 0 Td[(:)-250(Plut.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.8 0 Td[(Amat.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.484 0 Td[(13.)]TJ -91.986 -14.095 Td[(P.)-250(57.)-250(Aristophanes)-250(and)-250(Naturalism:)-250(see)-250(note)-250(to)-250(p.)-250(30.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+667 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 668 0 R
+/Resources 666 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 617 0 R
+/Annots [ 669 0 R 670 0 R 672 0 R 673 0 R 674 0 R 675 0 R 676 0 R 677 0 R 678 0 R 679 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+669 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.019 474.615 127.928 484.433]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg049) >>
+>> endobj
+670 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.448 460.509 128.357 470.382]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg050) >>
+>> endobj
+672 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.906 365.119 128.815 374.992]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg051) >>
+>> endobj
+673 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.179 242.631 128.088 252.504]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg052) >>
+>> endobj
+674 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.323 214.987 127.233 224.86]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg053) >>
+>> endobj
+675 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.019 187.343 127.928 197.216]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg054) >>
+>> endobj
+676 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.066 173.248 128.975 183.121]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+677 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.7 91.419 130.61 101.28]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+678 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.019 63.775 127.928 73.637]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg057) >>
+>> endobj
+679 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [326.691 63.775 337.6 73.637]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+671 0 obj <<
+/D [667 0 R /XYZ 122.125 408.691 null]
+>> endobj
+666 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+682 0 obj <<
+/Length 7650      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(129)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(P.)-459(58.)-878(Denial)-460(of)-459(the)-459(gods)-460(in)-459(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 161.012 0 Td[(Clouds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.916 0 Td[(,)-512(247,)-511(367,)-512(380,)]TJ -203.884 -13.549 Td[(423,)-271(627,)-272(817,)-271(825,)-272(1232.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 112.754 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Moral)-267(of)-267(the)-267(piece:)-285(1452-1510.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 136.971 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(In)]TJ -271.542 -13.549 Td[(Aristophanes's)-333(own)-334(travesties)-333(of)-333(the)-334(gods,)-354(scholars)-333(have)-334(found)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(evidence)-291(for)-292(a)-291(weakening)-292(of)-291(popular)-291(belief,)-302(but)-292(this)-291(is)-291(c)-1(ertainly)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(wrong;)-432(comp.)-614(Decharme,)-401(p.)-614(109.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 155.178 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Words)-371(like)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 53.547 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(believe)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 31.505 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.894 0 Td[(and)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf -264.877 -13.549 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(belief)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 24.84 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.219 0 Td[(do)-309(not)-310(cover)-309(the)-310(Greek)-309(word)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 131.731 0 Td[(\275\277\274)]TJ/F41 10.909 Tf 16.844 0 Td[(w)]TJ/F40 10.909 Tf 3.207 0 Td[(\266\265\271\275)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.673 0 Td[(,)-324(which)-310(signifies)]TJ -207.357 -13.549 Td[(at)-445(once)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 38.187 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(believe)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 31.506 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.7 0 Td[(and)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 20.61 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(be)-445(in)-445(the)-446(habit,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 71.233 0 Td[(\035)-445(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.545 0 Td[(use)-445(habitually,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 65.762 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.701 0 Td[(so)]TJ -270.932 -13.549 Td[(that)-463(it)-464(covers)-463(both)-464(belief)-463(and)-463(worship)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 176.371 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(an)-463(ambiguity)-464(that)-463(is)]TJ -187.28 -13.549 Td[(characteristic)-374(of)-375(Greek)-374(religion.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 142.813 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(Xenophon:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 53.921 0 Td[(Memorab.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 51.94 0 Td[(i.)-623(1;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -259.584 -13.55 Td[(Apol.)-250(Socr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 51.513 0 Td[(10)-250(and)-250(foll.)]TJ -39.557 -14.25 Td[(P.)-498(59.)-996(Plato:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 72.339 0 Td[(Apol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 34.195 0 Td[(p.)-996(24)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 29.951 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.893 0 Td[(\050the)-499(indictment\051;)-622(26)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 93.44 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.893 0 Td[(\050the)]TJ -263.667 -13.549 Td[(refutation\051.)]TJ 11.956 -14.251 Td[(P.)-462(60.)-887(Aristodemus:)-675(Xenoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 150.236 0 Td[(Memor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 43.908 0 Td[(i.)-887(4.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 23.618 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Cinesias:)]TJ -240.627 -13.549 Td[(Decharme,)-444(p.)-716(135.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 87.483 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-405(Hermocopidae:)-561(Decharme,)-444(p.)-716(152.)]TJ -98.391 -13.549 Td[(Beloch,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 37.166 0 Td[(Hist.)-427(of)-310(Greece)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 68.93 0 Td[(,)-324(ii.)-427(1,)-324(p.)-428(360,)-324(has)-309(another)-309(explanation.)]TJ -106.096 -13.55 Td[(To)-293(my)-294(argument)-293(it)-294(is)-293(of)-293(no)-294(consequence)-293(what)-294(special)-293(motive)-294(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(assigned)-250(for)-250(the)-250(crime,)-250(as)-250(long)-250(as)-250(it)-250(is)-250(a)-250(political)-250(one.)]TJ 11.955 -14.25 Td[(P.)-260(61.)-281(Plato)-260(on)-261(impiety:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 106.671 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-263(x.)-281(p.)-280(886b;)-266(comp.)-281(xii.)-281(p.)-280(967)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 130.782 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(.)]TJ -277.902 -13.549 Td[(Curiously)-422(enough,)-465(the)-423(same)-422(tripartition)-422(of)-422(the)-422(wrong)-423(attitude)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(towards)-375(the)-375(gods)-375(occurs)-376(already)-375(in)-375(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 179.52 0 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.782 0 Td[(,)-406(ii.)-626(p.)-625(365)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 54.146 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)]TJ -277.902 -13.549 Td[(where)-228(it)-228(is)-228(introduced)-227(incidentally)-228(as)-228(well)-228(known)-228(and)-228(a)-228(matter)-228(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(course.)]TJ 11.955 -14.251 Td[(P.)-304(62.)-413(Euripides:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 79.001 0 Td[(e.g.)-412(Hecuba)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.179 0 Td[(,)-318(488;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 29.203 0 Td[(Suppl.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.077 0 Td[(608.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Reference)]TJ -236.415 -13.549 Td[(to)-250(Anaxagoras:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 69.076 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-250(x.)-250(p.)-250(886)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 43.636 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(;)-250(to)-250(Sophistic,)-250(889)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 79.407 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(.)]TJ -214.113 -14.25 Td[(P.)-288(65.)-364(Plato)-288(in)-288(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 83.217 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(:)-326(p.)-364(19)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 29.653 0 Td[(c)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Socrates's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 46.31 0 Td[(daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 49.811 0 Td[(a)]TJ -275.786 -13.55 Td[(proof)-332(of)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 39.959 0 Td[(asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.327 0 Td[(:)-414(Xenoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 50.222 0 Td[(Memorab.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 50.552 0 Td[(i.)-496(1,)-352(2;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 35.751 0 Td[(Apol)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 20.607 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 8.137 0 Td[(Socr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.133 0 Td[(12;)]TJ -266.688 -13.549 Td[(Plato,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 27.883 0 Td[(Apol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.062 0 Td[(p.)-250(31)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.818 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)]TJ -69.263 -14.25 Td[(P.)-351(66.)-555(Accusation)-351(of)-351(teaching)-352(the)-351(doctrine)-351(of)-352(Anaxagoras:)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 279.068 0 Td[([158])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.55 Td[(Plato,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.703 0 Td[(Apol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.029 0 Td[(p.)-430(26)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 23.785 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(;)-340(comp.)-431(Xenoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 80.365 0 Td[(Memor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.927 0 Td[(i.)-430(1,)-326(10.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 35.82 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Plato's)]TJ -251.993 -13.549 Td[(defence)-250(of)-250(Socrates:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 91.178 0 Td[(Apol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.061 0 Td[(p.)-250(27)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.819 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(.)]TJ -132.557 -14.25 Td[(P.)-237(67.)-246(Xenophon's)-237(defence)-237(of)-237(Socrates:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 172.759 0 Td[(Memor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.912 0 Td[(i.)-246(1,)-239(2;)-242(6)-237(foll.,)]TJ -221.626 -13.549 Td[(10)-274(foll.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 31.777 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Teleological)-274(view)-274(of)-274(nature:)-298(Xenoph.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 168.111 0 Td[(Memor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.743 0 Td[(i.)-322(4;)-286(iv.)]TJ -248.54 -13.55 Td[(3.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 8.182 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(On)-247(the)-246(religious)-247(standpoint)-247(of)-247(Socrates,)-247(comp.)-249(my)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 221.546 0 Td[(Udvalgte)]TJ -240.637 -13.549 Td[(Afhandlinger)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 57.578 0 Td[(,)-250(p.)-250(38.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+681 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 682 0 R
+/Resources 680 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 692 0 R
+/Annots [ 683 0 R 684 0 R 685 0 R 686 0 R 687 0 R 688 0 R 689 0 R 691 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+683 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.53 515.797 83.439 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg058) >>
+>> endobj
+684 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.958 379.615 83.867 389.476]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg059) >>
+>> endobj
+685 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.563 351.815 83.472 361.524]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+686 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.359 283.356 81.268 293.076]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg061) >>
+>> endobj
+687 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.837 214.92 81.746 224.738]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg062) >>
+>> endobj
+688 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.662 187.12 81.571 196.982]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg065) >>
+>> endobj
+689 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.353 145.76 82.262 155.48]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg066) >>
+>> endobj
+691 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.105 104.422 81.014 114.131]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg067) >>
+>> endobj
+690 0 obj <<
+/D [681 0 R /XYZ 327.401 148.139 null]
+>> endobj
+680 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F40 649 0 R /F41 652 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+695 0 obj <<
+/Length 8089      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(130)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 105.499 518.175 Td[(P.)-388(68.)-663(Plato's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 66.763 0 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(,)-422(p.)-664(21)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 33.662 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-422(23)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 18.243 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.685 0 Td[(and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 19.983 0 Td[(f)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 3.033 0 Td[(,)-422(etc.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 22.781 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-388(gods)]TJ -238.829 -13.549 Td[(all-knowing:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 59.299 0 Td[(Odyss.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.339 0 Td[(iv.)-362(379)-287(and)-288(468;)-306(comp.)-362(N\344gelsbach,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 164.058 0 Td[(Hom.)]TJ -256.696 -13.549 Td[(Theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.306 0 Td[(p.)-250(18;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 27.578 0 Td[(Nachhom.)-250(Theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 77.574 0 Td[(p.)-250(23.)]TJ -123.502 -15.857 Td[(P.)-414(69.)-741(The)-414(gods)-414(just:)-578(N\344gelsbach,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 165.313 0 Td[(Hom.)-742(Theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 67.693 0 Td[(p.)-742(297;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -244.962 -13.549 Td[(Nachhom.)-250(Theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 77.575 0 Td[(p.)-250(27.)]TJ -65.619 -15.857 Td[(P.)-209(71.)-236(T)-1(he)-209(relation)-209(between)-209(early)-209(religious)-209(thought)-209(and)-210(Delphi)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(has)-490(been)-490(explained)-490(correctly)-490(by)-490(Sam)-490(Wide,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 211.061 0 Td[(Einleit.)-970(in)-490(die)]TJ -211.061 -13.549 Td[(Altertumswissensch.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 88.789 0 Td[(,)-427(ii.)-674(p.)-673(221;)-462(comp.)-674(also)-392(I.)-391(L.)-391(Heiberg)-392(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -88.789 -13.549 Td[(Tilskueren)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.058 0 Td[(,)-226(1919,)-226(ii.)-240(p.)-240(44.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 68.046 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Honours)-220(shown)-220(to)-219(Pindar)-220(at)-220(Delphi:)]TJ -125.013 -13.549 Td[(schol.)-250(Pind.)-250(ed.)-250(Drachm.)-250(i.)-250(p.)-250(2,)-250(14;)-250(5,)-250(6.)-250(Pausan,)-250(x.)-250(24.)-250(5.)]TJ 11.956 -15.857 Td[(P.)-370(72.)-612(Plato)-370(on)-371(the)-370(Delphic)-370(Oracle:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 167.969 0 Td[(Apol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.003 0 Td[(p.)-611(20)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 25.76 0 Td[(e)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(.)-611(On)-371(the)]TJ -240.532 -13.549 Td[(following)-287(comp.)-360(I.)-287(L.)-287(Heiberg,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 139.557 0 Td[(loc.)-360(cit.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.557 0 Td[(p.)-360(45.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.75 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Socrates)-287(on)-287(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -213.773 -13.549 Td[(daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.669 0 Td[(:)-250(Plato,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 33.644 0 Td[(Apol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.062 0 Td[(p.)-250(31)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.818 0 Td[(c)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(.)]TJ -121.08 -15.857 Td[(P.)-346(74.)-539(Antisthenes:)-442(Ritter,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 123.067 0 Td[(Hist.)-539(philos.)-538(Gr.)]TJ/F28 8.966 Tf 76.909 4.909 Td[(9)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.26 -4.909 Td[(285.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(On)-346(the)]TJ -250.192 -13.549 Td[(later)-293(Cynic)-1(s,)-304(especially)-293(Diogenes,)-305(see)-293(Diog.)-380(Laert.)-381(vi.)-380(105)-294(\050the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(gods)-296(are)-295(in)-296(need)-296(of)-295(nothing\051;)-319(Julian,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 163.842 0 Td[(Or.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.069 0 Td[(vi.)-387(p.)-387(199)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 44.203 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.68 0 Td[(\050Diogenes)]TJ -235.794 -13.549 Td[(did)-250(not)-250(worship)-250(the)-250(gods\051.)]TJ 11.956 -15.857 Td[(P.)-330(75.)-488(Cyrenaics:)-410(Diog.)-489(Laert.)-488(ii.)-489(91.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 171.199 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Date)-330(of)-329(Theodorus:)]TJ -194.064 -13.549 Td[(Diog.)-352(Laert.)-352(ii.)-352(101,)-293(103;)-301(his)-284(book)-284(on)-284(the)-284(gods:)-318(Diog.)-352(Laert.)-353(ii.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(97,)-250(Sext.)-250(Emp.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 67.277 0 Td[(adv.)-250(math.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 48.479 0 Td[(ix.)-250(55;)-250(his)-250(trial:)-250(Diog.)-250(Laert.)-250(ii.)-250(101.)]TJ -103.8 -15.857 Td[(P.)-337(76.)-512(Theodorus's)-337(book)-337(used)-337(by)-337(Epicurus:)-425(Diog.)-511(Laert.)-512(ii.)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(97.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Zeller:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 31.739 0 Td[(Philos.)-246(d.)-245(Griechen)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 84.745 0 Td[(,)-239(ii.)-246(1,)-240(p.)-245(925.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 57.559 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Euthyphron:)-243(see)]TJ -209.498 -13.549 Td[(especially)-250(p.)-250(14)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 68.171 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.182 0 Td[(foll.)]TJ -64.397 -15.857 Td[(P.)-349(77.)-547(Criticism)-349(of)-349(Mythology)-349(in)-349(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 171.247 0 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.782 0 Td[(:)-448(ii.)-547(p.)-547(377)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 53.191 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.176 -13.549 Td[(foll.;)-342(worship)-311(presupposed:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 124.821 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 20.487 0 Td[(iii.)-434(p.)-434(415)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 45.84 0 Td[(e)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(;)-342(v.)-434(p.)-434(459)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 48.959 0 Td[(e)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(,)-327(461)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.654 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(,)]TJ -277.903 -13.549 Td[(468)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.364 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-341(469)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.813 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(,)-341(470)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.813 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(;)-359(vii.)-469(p.)-469(540)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 55.976 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(;)-359(reference)-323(to)-323(the)-323(Oracle:)-396(iv.)-469(p.)]TJ -139.783 -13.549 Td[(427)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.364 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 2.728 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(:)-461(p.)-566(40)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 33.325 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.331 0 Td[(foll.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 17.88 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-382(rules)-355(of)-355(worship:)-461(vi.)-566(p.)]TJ -166.911 -13.55 Td[(759)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.364 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-258(vii.)-268(p.)-268(967)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 50.183 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.248 0 Td[(and)-256(elsewhere,)-258(x.)-268(p.)-268(909)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 106.277 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(;)-259(capital)-256(punishment)]TJ -191.981 -13.549 Td[(for)-250(atheists:)-250(x.)-250(p.)-250(909)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 92.116 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)-250(Comp.)-250(above,)-250(on)-250(p.)-250(61.)]TJ -85.615 -15.856 Td[(P.)-286(78.)-359(Atheism)-287(a)-286(sin)-287(of)-286(youth:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 137.004 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-295(x.)-360(p.)-359(888)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 46.514 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 2.728 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Goodness)]TJ -237.605 -13.549 Td[(and)-298(truth)-298(of)-297(the)-298(gods:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 99.183 0 Td[(Republ.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.924 0 Td[(ii.)-393(p.)-394(379)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 41.922 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-310(380)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.47 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(,)-310(382)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.469 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 2.727 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Belief)]TJ -253.968 -13.55 Td[(in)-281(Providence:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 67.065 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-289(x.)-342(p.)-343(885)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 46.078 0 Td[(c)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(,)-289(etc.;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 27.588 0 Td[(Republ.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.37 0 Td[(x.)-343(p.)-342(612)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 40.203 0 Td[(e)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 6.266 0 Td[(Apol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -257.296 -13.549 Td[(p.)-250(41)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.818 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+694 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 695 0 R
+/Resources 693 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 692 0 R
+/Annots [ 696 0 R 697 0 R 698 0 R 699 0 R 700 0 R 701 0 R 702 0 R 703 0 R 704 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+696 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.522 515.797 129.431 525.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg068) >>
+>> endobj
+697 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.806 472.842 129.715 482.671]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg069) >>
+>> endobj
+698 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.573 443.436 127.482 453.156]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg071) >>
+>> endobj
+699 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.332 373.394 129.241 383.212]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg072) >>
+>> endobj
+700 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.068 330.548 128.977 343.839]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+701 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.887 273.924 128.796 283.797]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+702 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.969 230.969 128.878 240.689]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg076) >>
+>> endobj
+703 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.098 188.014 129.007 197.843]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+704 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.415 104.411 128.324 114.131]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg078) >>
+>> endobj
+693 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+707 0 obj <<
+/Length 6707      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(131)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(P.)-282(79.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 29.263 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-290(x.)-344(p.)-345(888)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 46.138 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-290(893)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.25 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.527 0 Td[(foll.,)-290(especially)-281(899)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 86.827 0 Td[(c-d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.931 0 Td[(;)-297(comp.)]TJ -247.385 -13.549 Td[(also)-335(xii.)-505(p.)-504(967)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 71.033 0 Td[(a-c.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 16.658 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(:)-420(p.)-505(40)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 32.21 0 Td[(d-f)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 12.12 0 Td[(.)-505(Comp.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 43.14 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-356(xii.)-505(p.)]TJ -246.082 -13.549 Td[(948)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 16.364 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)]TJ -9.863 -14.777 Td[(P.)-335(80.)-504(The)-334(gods)-335(in)-335(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 105.569 0 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.782 0 Td[(,)-356(ii.)-504(p.)-504(380)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 50.942 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)-504(This)-335(passage,)]TJ -212.704 -13.549 Td[(taken)-343(together)-343(with)-343(Plato's)-343(general)-343(treatment)-343(of)-343(popular)-343(belief,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(might)-277(lead)-277(to)-277(the)-277(hypothesis)-276(that)-277(it)-277(was)-277(Plato's)-277(doctrine)-277(of)-277(ideas)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(rather)-167(than)-167(the)-168(rationalism)-167(of)-167(his)-167(youth)-167(that)-167(brought)-167(about)-168(strained)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(relations)-397(between)-397(his)-397(thought)-397(and)-397(popular)-397(belief.)-691(I)-397(incline)-397(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(think)-368(that)-367(such)-368(is)-368(the)-367(case;)-427(but)-368(there)-367(is)-368(a)-368(long)-367(step)-368(even)-368(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(such)-285(a)-285(state)-285(of)-285(things)-285(to)-284(downright)-285(atheism,)-294(and)-285(the)-285(stress)-285(Plato)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(always)-319(laid)-318(on)-319(the)-319(belief)-318(in)-319(Providence)-319(is)-319(a)-318(strong)-319(argument)-319(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(favour)-398(of)-398(his)-398(belief)-398(in)-398(the)-398(gods,)-435(for)-398(he)-398(could)-398(never)-398(make)-398(his)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(ideas)-231(ac)-1(t)-231(in)-231(the)-232(capacity)-231(of)-232(Providence.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 169.349 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-231(gods)-232(as)-231(creators)-232(of)]TJ -180.258 -13.549 Td[(mankind:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 43.942 0 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(,)-250(p.)-250(41)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 27.273 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.181 0 Td[(foll.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 174.657 0 Td[([159])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -279.068 -14.776 Td[(P.)-281(81.)-345(Xenocrates:)-313(the)-281(exposition)-281(of)-282(his)-281(doctrine)-282(given)-281(in)-282(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(text)-250(is)-250(based)-250(upon)-250(Heinze's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 121.037 0 Td[(Xenokrates)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 51.807 0 Td[(\050Leipzig,)-250(1892\051.)]TJ -160.888 -14.776 Td[(P.)-349(83.)-549(Trial)-349(of)-349(Aristotle:)-449(Diog.)-549(Laert.)-548(v.)-548(5;)-399(Athen.)-548(xv.)-549(p.)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(696.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-314(writing)-1(s)-314(of)-314(Aristotle)-315(that)-314(have)-315(come)-314(down)-315(to)-314(us)-315(are)]TJ -30 -13.55 Td[(almost)-270(all)-270(of)-270(them)-270(compositions)-270(for)-270(the)-270(use)-270(of)-270(his)-271(disciples,)-275(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(were)-250(not)-250(accessible)-250(to)-250(the)-250(general)-250(public)-250(during)-250(his)-250(lifetime.)]TJ 11.956 -14.776 Td[(P.)-209(84.)-236(On)-209(the)-209(religious)-209(views)-209(of)-209(Aristotle)-210(see)-209(in)-209(general)-209(Zeller,)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(ii.)-290(2,)-266(p.)-290(787)-263(\050Engl.)-289(transl.)-290(ii.)-289(p.)-290(325\051;)-270(where)-263(the)-263(references)-263(to)-264(his)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(writings)-280(are)-280(given)-281(in)-280(full.)-340(In)-281(the)-280(following)-280(I)-280(indicate)-280(only)-280(a)-281(few)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(passages)-293(of)-293(special)-292(interest.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 121.977 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Discussion)-293(of)-293(worship)-292(precluded:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -132.886 -13.549 Td[(Top.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.978 0 Td[(A,)-420(xi.)-758(p.)-759(105)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 67.493 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(,)-462(5.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 15.948 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Aristotle's)-420(Will:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 77.822 0 Td[(Diog)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 21.818 0 Td[(.)-759(Laert.)-758(v.)]TJ -227.423 -13.549 Td[(15.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-267(gods)-268(as)-267(determining)-267(the)-268(limits)-267(of)-267(the)-268(human:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 219.157 0 Td[(e.g.)-302(Nic.)]TJ -243.703 -13.549 Td[(Eth.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.384 0 Td[(K,)-396(viii.)-688(p.)-688(1178b,)-432(33:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 109.963 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(\050the)-396(wise\051)-396(will)-396(also)-396(be)-396(in)-396(need)]TJ -140.19 -13.55 Td[(of)-290(outward)-290(prosperity,)-299(as)-290(he)-290(is)-289(\050only\051)-290(a)-290(man.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 196.873 0 Td[(\035\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.753 0 Td[(Reservations)-290(in)]TJ -212.626 -13.549 Td[(speaking)-255(of)-254(the)-255(gods,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 95.662 0 Td[(e.g.)-264(Nic.)-264(Eth.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 60.157 0 Td[(K,)-255(ix.)-264(p.)-264(1179)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 60.36 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(,)-256(13:)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 22.29 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(he)-255(who)]TJ -248.768 -13.549 Td[(is)-189(active)-190(in)-189(accordance)-189(with)-190(reason)-189(...)-230(must)-189(also)-190(be)-189(supposed)-189(to)-190(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-272(most)-272(beloved)-272(of)-273(the)-272(gods;)-283(for)-272(if)-272(the)-272(gods)-272(trouble)-273(themselves)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(about)-284(human)-284(affairs)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 87.99 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(and)-284(that)-284(they)-284(do)-283(so)-284(is)-284(generally)-284(taken)-284(for)]TJ -98.899 -13.55 Td[(granted)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 34.233 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(it)-303(must)-304(be)-303(probable)-303(that)-304(they)-303(take)-303(pleasure)-304(in)-303(what)-304(is)]TJ -45.142 -13.549 Td[(best)-258(and)-258(most)-258(nearly)-258(related)-258(to)-258(themselves)-258(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 191.796 0 Td[(and)-258(that)-258(must)-258(be)-258(the)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+706 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 707 0 R
+/Resources 705 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 692 0 R
+/Annots [ 708 0 R 709 0 R 711 0 R 712 0 R 713 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+708 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.592 515.797 81.501 525.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg079) >>
+>> endobj
+709 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.17 473.922 82.079 483.751]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg080) >>
+>> endobj
+711 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.589 323.653 81.499 333.373]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+712 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.331 295.328 82.24 305.2]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+713 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [69.8 239.903 80.709 249.623]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+710 0 obj <<
+/D [706 0 R /XYZ 46.771 338.441 null]
+>> endobj
+705 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+716 0 obj <<
+/Length 6385      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(132)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F28 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(reason)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 29.695 0 Td[(\051,)-396(and)-368(that)-367(they)-367(reward)-367(those)-367(who)-367(love)-367(and)-367(honour)-368(this)]TJ -29.695 -13.549 Td[(most)-227(highly,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 54.302 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.317 0 Td[(etc.)-242(The)-227(passage)-227(is)-226(typical)-227(both)-227(of)-226(the)-227(hypothetical)]TJ -61.619 -13.549 Td[(way)-318(of)-319(speaking,)-335(and)-319(of)-318(the)-319(twist)-318(in)-318(the)-319(direction)-318(of)-319(Aristotle's)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(own)-325(conception)-325(of)-324(the)-325(deity)-325(\050whose)-325(essence)-325(is)-325(reason\051;)-362(also)-325(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-250(Socratic)-250(manner)-250(of)-250(dealing)-250(with)-250(the)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.956 -14.163 Td[(P.)-269(85.)-309(The)-270(passage)-269(quoted)-270(is)-269(from)-270(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 168.775 0 Td[(Metaphysics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.535 0 Td[(,)-274(A)-270(viii.)-308(p.)]TJ -235.266 -13.549 Td[(1074)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 21.819 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-250(38.)-250(Comp.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 53.945 0 Td[(Metaph.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.782 0 Td[(B,)-250(ii.)-250(p.)-250(997)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 51.524 0 Td[(b)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.454 0 Td[(,)-250(8;)-250(iv.)-250(p.)-250(1000)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 63.338 0 Td[(a)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(,)-250(9.)]TJ -233.815 -14.163 Td[(P.)-250(86.)-250(Theophrastus:)-250(Diog.)-250(Laert.)-250(v.)-250(37.)]TJ 0 -14.163 Td[(P.)-440(87.)-822(Strato:)-631(Diels,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 103.249 0 Td[(Ueber)-440(das)-441(physikal.)-821(System)-441(des)-440(S.,)]TJ -115.205 -13.549 Td[(Sitzungsber.)-296(d.)-295(Berl.)-296(Akad.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 118.156 0 Td[(,)-269(1893,)-269(p.)-296(101.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 63.639 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(His)-265(god)-265(the)-266(same)-265(as)]TJ -192.705 -13.549 Td[(nature:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 33.022 0 Td[(Cic.)-250(de)-250(nat.)-250(deor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 78.48 0 Td[(i.)-250(35.)]TJ -99.547 -14.163 Td[(P.)-165(89.)-222(On)-165(the)-165(history)-166(of)-165(Hellenistic)-165(religion,)-182(see)-166(Wendland,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 252.922 0 Td[(Die)]TJ -264.877 -13.549 Td[(hellenistisch-r\366mische)-261(Kultur)-261(in)-261(ihren)-261(Beziehungen)-261(z.)-283(Judentum)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(u.)-250(Christentum)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 67.582 0 Td[(\050T\374bingen,)-250(1907\051.)]TJ -55.627 -14.163 Td[(P.)-250(90.)-250(The)-250(passage)-250(quoted)-250(is)-250(Polyb.)-250(vi.)-250(56,)-250(6.)]TJ 0 -14.163 Td[(P.)-416(92.)-748(On)-416(the)-416(Tyche-Religion,)-457(see)-416(N\344gelsbach,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 224.133 0 Td[(Nachhom.)]TJ -236.088 -13.549 Td[(Theologie)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 43.637 0 Td[(,)-738(p.)-1420(1)-1(53;)-835(Lehrs,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 98.581 0 Td[(Popul\344re)-640(Aufs\344tze)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 84.559 0 Td[(,)-738(p.)-1421(153;)]TJ -226.777 -13.549 Td[(Rohde,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 38.146 0 Td[(Griech.)-1176(Roman)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 76.753 0 Td[(,)-636(p.)-1175(267)-559(\0501st)-559(ed.\051;)-712(Wendland,)-636(p.)]TJ -114.899 -13.55 Td[(59.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Thucydides:)-541(see)-395(Classe)-1(n)-395(in)-395(th)-1(e)-395(introduction)-396(to)-395(his)-396(\0503rd\051)]TJ -24.546 -13.549 Td[(edition,)-531(pp.)-924(lvii-lix,)-531(where)-474(all)-475(the)-474(material)-475(is)-475(collected.)-924(A)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(conclusive)-273(passage)-274(is)-273(vii.)-321(36,)-279(6,)-279(where)-273(Thuc)-1(.)-320(makes)-273(the)-274(bigoted)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Nicias)-334(before)-335(a)-334(decisive)-334(battle)-334(express)-335(the)-334(hope)-334(that)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 237.005 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Fortune)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 33.938 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.786 -13.549 Td[(will)-283(favour)-283(the)-283(Athenians.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 115.005 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Demosthenes's)-283(dream:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 101.816 0 Td[(Aeschin.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.075 0 Td[(iii.)]TJ -268.805 -13.55 Td[(77.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Demosthenes)-250(on)-250(Tyche:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 108.163 0 Td[(Olynth.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.149 0 Td[(ii.)-250(22;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 28.189 0 Td[(de)-250(cor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.022 0 Td[(252.)]TJ -217.114 -14.162 Td[(P.)-320(93.)-462(Demosthenes)-320(and)-321(the)-320(Pythia:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 164.485 0 Td[(Aesch.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.81 0 Td[(iii.)-461(130.)-462(Comp.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -210.25 -13.55 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 22.576 0 Td[(68,)-256(131,)-255(152;)-257(Plutarch,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 102.377 0 Td[(Dem.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.197 0 Td[(20.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Demetrius)-254(o)-1(f)-254(Phalerum:)]TJ -175.696 -13.549 Td[(Polyb.)-247(xxix.)-246(21.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 69.332 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Temples)-240(of)-240(Tyche:)-245(Roscher,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 125.981 0 Td[(Mythol.)-247(Lex.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.804 0 Td[(,)-242(art.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -261.026 -13.549 Td[(Fortuna)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.76 0 Td[(.)]TJ -23.805 -14.163 Td[(P.)-432(94.)-795(Tyche)-431(mistress)-432(of)-432(the)-431(gods:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 170.417 0 Td[(Trag.)-795(adesp.)-795(fragm.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -182.372 -13.549 Td[(506,)-448(Nauck;)-488([Dio)-409(Chrys.])-726(lxiv.)-725(p.)-726(331)-409(R.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 200.144 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Polybius:)-567(i.)-726(1;)]TJ -211.053 -13.549 Td[(iii.)-422(5,)-321(7.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.299 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-307(reservations)-308(against)-307(Tyche)-307(as)-307(a)-308(principle)-307(for)-307(the)]TJ -47.208 -13.549 Td[(explaining)-209(of)-209(historical)-210(facts,)-217(and)-209(the)-209(twistin)-1(g)-209(of)-209(the)-209(notion)-209(in)-210(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(direction)-197(of)-393(Providence)-197(found)-196(in)-197(certain)-197(passages)-197(in)-196(Polybius,)-208(do)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([160])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(not)-243(concern)-243(us)-243(here;)-245(they)-243(are)-243(probably)-243(due)-243(to)-243(the)-243(Stoic)-243(influence)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+715 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 716 0 R
+/Resources 714 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 692 0 R
+/Annots [ 717 0 R 718 0 R 719 0 R 720 0 R 721 0 R 722 0 R 723 0 R 724 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+717 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.231 447.437 128.14 457.31]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg085) >>
+>> endobj
+718 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.019 419.725 127.928 429.445]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg086) >>
+>> endobj
+719 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.096 405.682 130.005 415.391]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg087) >>
+>> endobj
+720 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.094 364.301 127.003 374.021]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg089) >>
+>> endobj
+721 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.019 323.04 127.928 332.912]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg090) >>
+>> endobj
+722 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.829 308.877 129.738 318.706]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg092) >>
+>> endobj
+723 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.787 186.32 128.696 196.149]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+724 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119 131.51 129.909 141.339]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg094) >>
+>> endobj
+725 0 obj <<
+/D [715 0 R /XYZ 145.704 79.691 null]
+>> endobj
+714 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+728 0 obj <<
+/Length 5266      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(133)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(he)-260(underwent)-260(during)-260(his)-260(stay)-260(at)-259(Rome.)-280(Comp.)-280(below,)-262(on)-260(p.)-280(114,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-331(see)-331(Cuntz,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 69.533 0 Td[(Polybios)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.795 0 Td[(\050Leipzig,)-351(1902\051,)-352(p.)-494(43.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 102.736 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Pliny:)-412(ii.)-494(22)]TJ -224.973 -13.549 Td[(foll.)]TJ 11.956 -14.868 Td[(P.)-250(95.)-250(Tyche)-250(in)-250(the)-250(novels:)-250(Rohde,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 153.327 0 Td[(Griech.)-250(Rom.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 61.199 0 Td[(p.)-250(280.)]TJ -214.526 -14.868 Td[(P.)-250(97.)-250(Strabo:)-250(xvii.)-250(p.)-250(813.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 114.556 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Plutarch:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 42.12 0 Td[(de)-250(def.)-250(or.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.963 0 Td[(5)-250(and)-250(7.)]TJ -214.548 -14.867 Td[(P.)-309(98.)-426(The)-308(Aetolians)-309(at)-309(Dium:)-367(Polyb.)-426(iv.)-426(62;)-339(at)-308(Dodona,)-324(iv.)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(67;)-325(Philip)-300(at)-301(Thermon,)-312(v.)-401(9;)-325(Dicaearchus,)-313(xviii.)-400(54.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 229.498 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Decay)-300(of)]TJ -240.407 -13.549 Td[(Roman)-311(worship:)-371(Wissowa,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 123.417 0 Td[(Religion)-311(u.)-432(Kultus)-311(d.)-432(R\366mer)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 127.124 0 Td[(,)-326(p.)-432(70)]TJ -250.541 -13.549 Td[(\0502nd)-202(ed.\051.)-234(To)-201(this)-202(work)-201(I)-202(must)-202(refer)-201(for)-202(indications)-201(of)-202(the)-202(sources;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(but)-250(the)-250(polemic)-250(in)-250(the)-250(text)-250(is)-250(chiefly)-250(directed)-250(against)-250(Wissowa.)]TJ 11.956 -14.868 Td[(P.)-250(99.)-250(Ennius:)-250(comp.)-250(below,)-250(p.)-250(112.)]TJ 0 -14.867 Td[(P.)-250(100.)-250(Varro:)-250(in)-250(Augustine,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 126.054 0 Td[(de)-250(civ.)-250(Dei)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.953 0 Td[(,)-250(vi.)-250(2.)]TJ -173.007 -14.868 Td[(P.)-250(103.)-250(Theology)-250(of)-250(the)-250(Stoics:)-250(Zeller,)-250(iii.)-250(1,)-250(p.)-250(309-45.)]TJ 0 -14.868 Td[(P.)-249(104.)-249(Demonology)-249(of)-249(the)-249(Stoics:)-249(Heinze,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 189.61 0 Td[(Xenokrates)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 49.08 0 Td[(,)-249(p.)-250(96.)]TJ -238.69 -14.867 Td[(P.)-273(105.)-318(Epicurus's)-273(theology:)-295(Zeller,)-279(iii.)-318(1,)-278(pp.)-318(427-38.)-319(Comp.)]TJ -11.955 -13.55 Td[(Schwartz,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 46.047 0 Td[(Charakterk\366pfe)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 68.476 0 Td[(,)-250(ii.)-250(p.)-250(43.)]TJ -102.568 -14.867 Td[(P.)-161(106.)-221(Epicurus's)-161(doctrine)-162(of)-161(the)-162(eternity)-161(of)-162(the)-161(gods)-162(criticised:)]TJ -11.955 -13.55 Td[(Cic.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 20.607 0 Td[(de)-250(nat.)-250(deor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 57.872 0 Td[(i.)-250(68)-250(foll.)]TJ -66.524 -14.867 Td[(P.)-250(107.)-250(The)-250(Sceptics:)-250(Zeller,)-250(iii.)-250(1,)-250(pp.)-250(507)-250(and)-250(521.)]TJ 0 -14.868 Td[(P.)-283(109.)-348(D)-1(iogenes:)-315(see)-283(note)-283(on)-283(p.)-349(74.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 160.958 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Bion:)-316(Diog.)-348(Laert.)-349(iv.)]TJ -183.822 -13.549 Td[(52)-250(and)-250(54.)]TJ 11.955 -14.868 Td[(P.)-302(110.)-406(Menippos:)-354(R.)-302(Helm,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 129.837 0 Td[(Lukian)-302(u.)-406(Menipp)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 82.83 0 Td[(\050Leipzig)-302(and)]TJ -224.622 -13.549 Td[(Berlin,)-250(1906\051.)]TJ 11.955 -14.868 Td[(P.)-956(111.)-2366(Euhemerus:)-1661(Jacoby)-956(in)-956(Pauly-Wissowa's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -11.955 -13.549 Td[(Realencyclop.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 61.494 0 Td[(,)-254(art.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 22.56 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Euemeros)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 43.625 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(;)-255(Wendland,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 56.142 0 Td[(Hellenist.)-259(Kultur)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 73.442 0 Td[(,)-254(p.)]TJ -266.951 -13.549 Td[(70.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.636 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Euhemerism)-264(before)-264(Euhemerus:)-277(Lobeck,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 182.26 0 Td[(Aglaophamus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 60 0 Td[(,)-267(p.)]TJ -266.805 -13.549 Td[(9;)-250(Wendland,)-250(p.)-250(67.)]TJ 11.955 -14.868 Td[(P.)-337(112.)-513(A)-337(Danish)-338(scholar,)-359(Dr.)-512(J.)-338(P.)-337(Jacobsen)-338(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 211.096 0 Td[(Afhandlinger)]TJ -223.051 -13.549 Td[(og)-413(Artikler)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 49.357 0 Td[(,)-454(p.)-741(490\051,)-454(seems)-413(to)-414(think)-413(that)-414(Euhemerus's)-413(theory)]TJ -49.357 -13.549 Td[(was)-345(influenced)-346(by)-345(the)-345(wors)-1(hip)-345(of)-345(heroes.)-536(But)-346(there)-345(is)-346(nothing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-383(show)-383(that)-383(Euhemerus)-384(supposed)-383(his)-383(gods)-383(to)-383(have)-384(continued)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(their)-280(existence)-281(after)-280(their)-281(death,)-288(though)-281(this)-280(would)-281(have)-280(been)-281(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(accordance)-301(with)-300(Greek)-301(belief)-301(even)-300(in)-301(the)-301(Hellenistic)-300(period;)-327(he)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+727 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 728 0 R
+/Resources 726 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 692 0 R
+/Annots [ 729 0 R 730 0 R 731 0 R 732 0 R 733 0 R 734 0 R 735 0 R 736 0 R 737 0 R 738 0 R 739 0 R 740 0 R 741 0 R 742 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+729 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 473.831 81.156 483.704]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg095) >>
+>> endobj
+730 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 458.974 81.156 468.836]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+731 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.887 444.095 81.796 453.815]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+732 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 375.042 81.156 384.751]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg099) >>
+>> endobj
+733 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 360.163 86.61 369.992]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg100) >>
+>> endobj
+734 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 345.296 86.61 355.168]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg103) >>
+>> endobj
+735 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.233 330.428 86.597 340.257]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+736 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.495 315.56 86.858 325.433]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg105) >>
+>> endobj
+737 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [69.281 287.143 85.644 296.863]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg106) >>
+>> endobj
+738 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 258.737 86.61 268.599]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg107) >>
+>> endobj
+739 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.605 243.859 86.969 253.579]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+740 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.814 215.442 87.177 225.271]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+741 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [77.944 187.025 94.307 196.745]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+742 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.201 131.63 87.564 141.339]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg112) >>
+>> endobj
+726 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+745 0 obj <<
+/Length 5305      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(134)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(seems)-267(rather)-268(to)-267(have)-267(insisted)-268(that)-267(they)-268(were)-267(worshipped)-267(as)-268(gods)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(during)-250(their)-250(lifetime)-250(\050comp.)-250(Jacoby,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 159.676 0 Td[(loc.)-250(cit.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.422 0 Td[(\051.)]TJ -180.142 -14.368 Td[(P.)-381(114.)-645(Euhemerism)-381(in)-382(Polybius:)-513(xxxiv.)-644(2;)-448(comp.)-644(x.)-645(10,)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(11.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Relapse)-325(into)-326(orthodoxy:)-401(xxxvii.)-476(9)-326(\050the)-325(decisive)-326(passage\051;)]TJ -24.546 -13.549 Td[(xxxix.)-584(19,)-389(2)-362(\050concluding)-361(prayer)-361(to)-362(the)-361(gods\051;)-417(xviii.)-584(54,)-390(7-10;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(xxiii.)-949(10,)-541(14)-483(\050the)-482(gods)-483(punish)-483(impiety;)-599(comp.)-949(xxxvii.)-949(9,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(16\051.)-843(There)-448(is)-448(a)-448(marked)-447(contrast)-448(between)-448(such)-448(passages)-448(and)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-283(way)-283(Polybius)-283(speaks)-283(of)-283(Philip's)-283(destruction)-283(of)-283(the)-283(sanctuary)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-487(Thermon;)-605(he)-487(blames)-487(it)-487(severely,)-547(but)-487(merely)-487(on)-487(political,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-463(on)-464(religious)-463(grounds)-464(\050v.)-890(9-12\051.)-890(Orthodox)-463(utterances)-464(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-440(older)-440(portions)-440(of)-440(the)-440(work)-441(\050i.)-820(84,)-487(10;)-536(x.)-820(2,)-487(7\051)-440(ma)-1(y)-440(be)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(due)-445(to)-445(that)-445(accommodation)-445(to)-445(popular)-445(belief)-445(which)-445(Polybius)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(himself)-434(acknowledges)-434(as)-434(justifiable)-434(\050xvi.)-802(12,)-480(9\051,)-480(but)-434(also)-434(to)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(later)-327(revision.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 60.824 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Influence)-327(of)-326(Stoicism:)-403(Hirzel,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 136.788 0 Td[(Untersuchungen)]TJ -208.521 -13.549 Td[(zu)-250(Ciceros)-250(philos.)-250(Schriften)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 120.611 0 Td[(,)-250(ii.)-250(p.)-250(841.)]TJ -108.655 -14.367 Td[(P.)-222(115.)-241(Cicero's)-222(Stoicism)-222(in)-222(his)-222(philosophy)-222(of)-222(religion:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 239.285 0 Td[(de)-222(nat.)]TJ -251.241 -13.55 Td[(deor.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.451 0 Td[(iii.)-250(40,)-250(95.)]TJ -13.495 -14.367 Td[(P.)-213(116.)-237(Sanctua)-1(ry)-212(to)-213(Tullia:)-232(Cic.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 141.647 0 Td[(ad)-213(Att.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.282 0 Td[(xii.)-238(18)-213(foll.;)-225(several)-213(of)]TJ -184.885 -13.549 Td[(the)-266(letters)-265(\05023,)-270(25,)-269(35,)-270(36\051)-266(show)-265(that)-266(Atticus)-266(disapproved)-265(of)-266(the)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.756 0 Td[([161])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(idea,)-230(and)-225(that)-225(Cicero)-225(himself)-225(was)-225(conscious)-225(that)-225(it)-226(was)-225(unworthy)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(of)-250(him.)]TJ 11.956 -14.367 Td[(P.)-647(117.)-1440(Euhemeristic)-647(defence:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 163.61 0 Td[(fragm.)-1440(consol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 91.428 0 Td[(14,)]TJ -266.994 -13.549 Td[(15.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Augustus's)-302(reorganisation)-303(of)-302(the)-302(cults:)-355(Wissowa,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 219.113 0 Td[(Religion)]TJ -243.659 -13.549 Td[(u.)-589(Kultus)-363(d.)-589(R\366mer)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 90.753 0 Td[(,)-391(p.)-589(73.)-589(Recent)-363(scholars,)-391(especially)-363(w)-1(hen)]TJ -90.753 -13.55 Td[(treating)-473(of)-472(Virgil)-473(\050Heinze,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 126.965 0 Td[(Vergils)-473(ep.)-918(Technik)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 94.252 0 Td[(,)-528(3rd)-473(ed.)-918(p.)]TJ -221.217 -13.549 Td[(291;)-457(Norden,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 64.435 0 Td[(Aeneis)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 29.083 0 Td[(,)-423(vi.)-664(2nd)-388(ed.)-664(pp.)-664(314,)-422(318,)-423(362\051,)-422(speak)]TJ -93.518 -13.549 Td[(of)-362(the)-361(reform)-362(of)-362(Augustus)-361(as)-362(if)-361(it)-362(involved)-362(a)-361(real)-362(revulsion)-362(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(feeling)-285(in)-285(his)-285(contemporaries.)-355(This)-285(is)-285(in)-285(my)-285(opinion)-286(a)-285(complete)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(misunderstanding)-239(of)-240(the)-239(facts.)-247(Virgil's)-239(religious)-239(views:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 240.665 0 Td[(Catal.)-246(v.,)]TJ -240.665 -13.55 Td[(Georgics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 39.993 0 Td[(,)-250(ii.)-250(458.)]TJ -28.038 -14.367 Td[(P.)-293(118.)-380(Pliny:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 64.967 0 Td[(hist.)-380(nat.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 43.443 0 Td[(ii.)-380(1-27.)-379(The)-294(passages)-293(translated)-293(are)]TJ -120.365 -13.549 Td[(\247\247)-250(14)-250(and)-250(27.)]TJ 11.955 -14.368 Td[(P.)-265(122.)-296(Seneca:)-281(fragm.)-296(31-39,)-269(Haase.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 163.494 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Stoic)-265(polemic)-266(against)]TJ -186.358 -13.549 Td[(atheism:)-341(Epictetus,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 87.361 0 Td[(diss.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.909 0 Td[(ii.)-386(20,)-306(21;)-318(comp.)-386(Marcus)-295(Aurelius,)-307(vi.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+744 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 745 0 R
+/Resources 743 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 692 0 R
+/Annots [ 746 0 R 747 0 R 748 0 R 750 0 R 751 0 R 752 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+746 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.453 487.88 134.817 497.6]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+747 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.713 310.922 133.077 320.795]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg115) >>
+>> endobj
+748 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.614 283.006 132.977 292.835]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg116) >>
+>> endobj
+750 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [121.347 228.111 137.711 237.82]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg117) >>
+>> endobj
+751 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.49 105.23 133.854 115.059]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg118) >>
+>> endobj
+752 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.186 77.313 133.549 87.033]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg122) >>
+>> endobj
+749 0 obj <<
+/D [744 0 R /XYZ 374.173 271.835 null]
+>> endobj
+743 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+755 0 obj <<
+/Length 6250      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(135)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(44.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Later)-339(Cynicism:)-427(Zeller,)-361(iii.)-516(1,)-361(p.)-516(763.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 171.425 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(Oenomaus:)-427(only)]TJ -206.881 -13.549 Td[(preserved)-328(in)-329(excerpts)-328(by)-329(Euseb.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 147.164 0 Td[(praep.)-485(evang.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 67.544 0 Td[(5-6)-328(\050a)-329(separate)]TJ -214.708 -13.549 Td[(edition)-433(is)-433(wanted\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 84.899 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(His)-433(polemic)-433(directed)-434(against)-433(the)-433(priests:)]TJ -95.808 -13.549 Td[(Euseb.)-250(5,)-250(p.)-250(213)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 70.298 0 Td[(c)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(;)-250(comp.)-250(Oenomaus)-250(himself,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 123.022 0 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 22.429 0 Td[(6,)-250(p.)-250(256)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 38.181 0 Td[(d)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 5.455 0 Td[(.)]TJ -252.273 -14.368 Td[(P.)-261(123.)-282(Lucian:)-271(see)-261(Christ,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 119.145 0 Td[(Gesch.)-282(d.)-282(griech.)-283(Litt.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 98.977 0 Td[(ii.)-282(2,)-264(p.)-282(550)]TJ -230.078 -13.549 Td[(\0505th)-250(ed.\051,)-250(and)-250(R.)-250(Helm,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 103.32 0 Td[(Lukian)-250(u.)-250(Menipp)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 79.996 0 Td[(\050see)-250(note)-250(to)-250(p.)-250(110\051.)]TJ -171.36 -14.368 Td[(P.)-250(124.)-250(Timon:)-250(ch.)-250(x.)]TJ 0 -14.367 Td[(P.)-369(126.)-608(On)-370(Lucian's)-369(caution)-369(in)-370(attacking)-369(the)-369(really)-370(popular)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(gods,)-189(see)-173(Wilamowitz,)-189(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 110.31 0 Td[(Kultur)-173(d.)-225(Gegenwart)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 89.494 0 Td[(,)-189(i.)-224(8,)-189(p.)-224(248.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 52.953 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(The)]TJ -263.667 -13.549 Td[(Jews)-186(atheists:)-218(Harnack,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 103.226 0 Td[(Der)-186(Vorwurf)-186(d.)-229(Atheismus)-186(in)-187(den)-186(3)-186(ersten)]TJ -103.226 -13.55 Td[(Jahrh)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 25.451 0 Td[(.)-250(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 9.088 0 Td[(Texte)-250(u.)-250(Unters.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 69.687 0 Td[(,)-250(N.F.,)-250(xiii.)-250(4\051,)-250(p.)-250(3.)]TJ -92.27 -14.367 Td[(P.)-492(127.)-975(I)-492(have)-492(met)-491(with)-492(no)-492(comprehensive)-492(treatment)-492(of)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Jewish)-251(and)-250(Christian)-251(polemic)-250(against)-251(Paganism;)-251(Geffcken,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 259.412 0 Td[(Zwei)]TJ -259.412 -13.549 Td[(griech.)-586(Apologeten)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 90.626 0 Td[(\050Leipzig,)-390(1907\051,)-390(is)-361(chiefly)-362(concerned)-362(with)]TJ -90.626 -13.55 Td[(investigations)-442(into)-443(the)-442(sources.)-827(I)-442(shall)-442(therefore)-442(indicate)-443(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(principal)-386(passages)-385(on)-386(which)-386(my)-385(treatment)-386(is)-386(based.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 233.961 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Polemic)]TJ -244.87 -13.549 Td[(against)-512(images)-513(in)-512(the)-512(Old)-513(Testament:)-774(Isaiah)-513(44.10)-512(etc.;)-644(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(later)-432(literature:)-613(Epistle)-432(of)-432(Jeremiah;)-522(Wisdom)-432(of)-432(Solomon)-432(13)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(foll.;)-403(Philo,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 55.198 0 Td[(de)-352(decal.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.566 0 Td[(65)-352(foll.,)-378(etc.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 54.924 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Euhemerism:)-454(Wisdom)-352(of)]TJ -167.597 -13.55 Td[(Solomon)-332(14.15;)-374(Epistle)-332(of)-333(Aristeas,)-353(135;)-373(Sibyll.)-497(iii.)-498(547,)-353(554,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(723.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.091 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Elements)-348(and)-347(celestial)-348(bodies:)-445(Wisdom)-347(of)-348(Solomon)-348(13;)]TJ -30 -13.549 Td[(Philo,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 29.78 0 Td[(de)-344(decal.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.222 0 Td[(52)-344(foll.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 32.545 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(The)-344(tenacity)-345(of)-344(tradition)-344(is)-344(apparent)]TJ -119.456 -13.549 Td[(from)-389(the)-390(fact)-389(that)-390(even)-389(Maimonides)-390(in)-389(his)-390(treatise)-389(of)-390(idolatry)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(deals)-414(on)-1(ly)-414(with)-414(star-worship)-415(and)-414(image-worship.)-744(I)-414(know)-415(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(treatise)-447(only)-448(from)-447(the)-448(Latin)-447(translation)-448(by)-447(D.)-447(Voss)-448(\050in)-447(G.)-448(I.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Voss's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 32.652 0 Td[(Opera)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.873 0 Td[(,)-468(vol.)-772(v.\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 47.463 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Demons:)-598(Deuteron.)-772(32.17;)-512(Psalms)]TJ -118.897 -13.549 Td[(106.37;)-552(add)-451(\050according)-451(to)-451(LXX.\051)-451(Isaiah)-452(65.11;)-551(Psalms)-452(96.5.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Later)-234(writers:)-242(Enoch)-234(19.99,)-237(7;)-240(Baruch)-234(4.7.)-244(Such)-234(pass)-1(ages)-234(as)-234(Jub.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(22,)-262(17)-259(or)-259(Sibyll.)-278(prooem.)-278(22)-260(are)-259(possibly)-260(Euhemeristic.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 242.448 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Fallen)]TJ -253.357 -13.55 Td[(angels:)-250(Enoch,)-250(19.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 80.596 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(Philo's)-250(demonology:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 92.279 0 Td[(de)-250(gig.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.422 0 Td[(6-18,)-250(etc.)]TJ -204.252 -14.367 Td[(P.)-250(128.)-250(St.)-250(Paul:)-250(1)-250(Cor.)-250(10.20;)-250(comp.)-250(8.4)-250(and)-250(Rom.)-250(1.23.)]TJ 0 -14.367 Td[(P.)-357(129.)-570(Image-worship)-357(and)-356(demon-worship)-357(not)-357(conciliated:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -11.955 -13.55 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 22.544 0 Td[(Tertull.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 39.212 0 Td[(Apologet.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 48.911 0 Td[(10-15)-374(and)-374(22-23,)-406(comp.)-622(27.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 129.359 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Jewish)]TJ -250.935 -13.549 Td[(demonology:)-708(Bousset,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 108.431 0 Td[(Religion)-479(d.)-937(Judentums)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 107.261 0 Td[(,)-536(p.)-938(326)-479(\0501st)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+754 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 755 0 R
+/Resources 753 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 762 0 R
+/Annots [ 756 0 R 757 0 R 758 0 R 759 0 R 760 0 R 761 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+756 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.364 460.793 86.727 470.655]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg123) >>
+>> endobj
+757 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 435.145 86.61 442.585]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+758 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.548 418.498 87.912 428.218]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg126) >>
+>> endobj
+759 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.884 363.494 89.248 373.203]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+760 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.247 105.241 86.61 114.95]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+761 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [71.411 90.862 87.774 100.582]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+753 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+765 0 obj <<
+/Length 6657      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(136)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(ed.\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 19.386 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Fallen)-292(angels:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 64.999 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.847 0 Td[(Athenag.)-375(24)-292(foll.;)-313(Augustine,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 133.067 0 Td[(Enchir.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -248.208 -13.549 Td[(9,)-250(28)-250(foll.;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 48.186 0 Td[(de)-250(civ.)-250(Dei)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.952 0 Td[(,)-250(viii.)-250(22.)]TJ -83.182 -14.531 Td[(P.)-249(130.)-249(Euhemerism)-249(in)-248(the)-249(Apologists:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 171.451 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 18.475 0 Td[(Augustine,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 50.29 0 Td[(de)-249(civ.)]TJ -252.172 -13.549 Td[(Dei)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.753 0 Td[(,)-372(ii.)-544(10;)-396(vi.)-544(7;)-397(vii.)-543(18)-348(and)-348(33;)-396(viii.)-544(26.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 179.276 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Euhemerism)-348(and)]TJ -205.938 -13.55 Td[(demonology)-309(combined:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 107.99 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 20.412 0 Td[(Augustine,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 51.106 0 Td[(de)-309(civ.)-427(Dei)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 49.529 0 Td[(,)-324(ii.)-427(10;)-338(vii.)]TJ -229.037 -13.549 Td[(35;)-756(comp.)-506(vii.)-506(28)-335(fin.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 103.859 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Worship)-335(of)-336(the)-335(heavenly)-335(bodies:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 150.109 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -337.633 0 Td[([162])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.756 -13.549 Td[(Aristid.)-250(3)-250(foll.;)-250(Augustine,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 117.884 0 Td[(de)-250(civ.)-250(Dei)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.952 0 Td[(,)-250(vii.)-250(29)-250(foll.)]TJ -152.881 -14.531 Td[(P.)-275(131.)-324(Paganism)-275(a)-274(delusion)-275(caused)-275(by)-275(demons:)-299(Thomas)-275(Aq.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -11.955 -13.549 Td[(Summa)-248(theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 62.08 0 Td[(P.)-247(ii.)-250(2,)-248(Q.)-247(94,)-248(art.)-249(4;)-249(comp.)-249(below,)-248(note)-247(on)-248(p.)-249(135.)]TJ -50.125 -14.531 Td[(P.)-507(133.)-1021(For)-507(the)-506(following)-507(sketch)-507(I)-507(have)-507(found)-507(valuable)]TJ -11.955 -13.55 Td[(material)-184(in)-183(Gedike's)-184(essay,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 116.462 0 Td[(Ueber)-184(die)-183(mannigfaltigen)-184(Hypothesen)]TJ -116.462 -13.549 Td[(z.)-516(Erkl\344rung)-339(d.)-516(Mytholo)-1(gie)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 128.348 0 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.632 0 Td[(Verm.)-516(Schriften)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 71.382 0 Td[(,)-361(Berlin,)-361(1801,)-361(p.)]TJ -203.362 -13.549 Td[(61\051.)]TJ 11.955 -14.531 Td[(P.)-359(134.)-576(Milton:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 75.928 0 Td[(Paradise)-359(Lost)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 62.104 0 Td[(,)-386(i.)-577(506.)-576(The)-359(theory)-359(that)-359(the)]TJ -149.987 -13.549 Td[(pagan)-237(oracles)-236(fell)-237(mute)-236(at)-237(the)-236(rise)-237(of)-236(Christianity)-237(is)-236(also)-237(found)-237(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Milton,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 35.16 0 Td[(Hymn)-250(on)-250(the)-250(Morning)-250(of)-250(Christ's)-250(Nativity)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 181.734 0 Td[(,)-250(st.)-250(xviii.)-250(foll.)]TJ -204.939 -14.532 Td[(P.)-321(135.)-462(G.)-320(I.)-321(Voss;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 89.116 0 Td[(De)-321(Theologia)-320(Gentili)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 94.269 0 Td[(,)-338(lib.)-462(i.)-462(\050published,)]TJ -195.34 -13.549 Td[(1642\051)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 25.451 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Voss's)-488(view)-488(is)-488(in)-488(the)-488(main)-488(that)-488(idolatry)-488(as)-488(a)-488(whole)]TJ -36.36 -13.549 Td[(is)-464(the)-464(work)-464(of)-464(the)-464(Devil.)-892(What)-464(is)-464(worshipped)-464(is)-465(partly)-464(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(heavenly)-403(bodies,)-441(partly)-402(demons,)-441(partly)-403(\050and)-403(principally\051)-403(dead)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(men;)-338(most)-309(of)-309(the)-308(ancient)-309(gods)-309(are)-308(identified)-309(with)-309(persons)-309(from)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-313(Old)-313(Testament.)-439(Demon-worship)-313(is)-313(dealt)-313(with)-312(in)-313(ch.)-439(6;)-345(it)-313(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(proved)-237(among)-237(other)-236(things)-237(by)-237(the)-237(true)-236(predictions)-237(of)-237(the)-237(oracles.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Individual)-300(Greek)-301(deities)-300(are)-300(identified)-301(with)-300(demons)-300(in)-301(ch.)-401(7,)-313(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-353(context)-354(where)-353(oracles)-353(are)-353(dealt)-354(with.)-559(On)-354(older)-353(works)-353(of)-354(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(same)-344(tendency,)-368(see)-345(below,)-368(note)-344(on)-345(p.)-533(140;)-392(on)-344(Natalis)-345(Comes,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.55 Td[(ibid.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 24.719 0 Td[(A)-320(fuller)-320(treatment)-320(of)-320(Voss's)-320(theories)-320(is)-320(found)-320(in)-320(Gruppe's)]TJ -24.719 -13.549 Td[(work,)-250(\247)-250(25.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 49.696 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Thomas)-250(Aquinas:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 80.003 0 Td[(Summa)-250(theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 62.125 0 Td[(P.)-250(ii.)-251(2,)-250(Q.)-250(94,)-251(art.)]TJ -202.733 -13.549 Td[(4;)-367(comp.)-483(also)-328(Q.)-328(122,)-348(art.)-483(2.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 130.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Dante:)-406(Sommo)-328(Giove)-328(for)-327(God,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -141.546 -13.549 Td[(Purg.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.729 0 Td[(vi.)-567(118;)-408(his)-356(devils:)-461(Charon,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 130.995 0 Td[(Inf.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 21.03 0 Td[(iii.)-567(82)-355(\050109)-356(expressly)]TJ -182.754 -13.549 Td[(designated)-319(as)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 62.711 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(dimonio)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.371 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(\051;)-354(Minos,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 44.808 0 Td[(Inf.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.84 0 Td[(v.)-458(4;)-354(Geryon,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 64.638 0 Td[(Inf.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.84 0 Td[(xviii.)]TJ -257.895 -13.549 Td[(\050there)-311(are)-312(more)-311(of)-312(the)-311(same)-311(kind\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 152.154 0 Td[(\024\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.752 0 Td[(Dei)-311(falsi)-312(e)-311(bugiardi)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 85.933 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 7.1 0 Td[(Inf.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -265.783 -13.55 Td[(i.)-436(72.)-436(\050Plutus,)-327(who)-312(appears)-312(as)-312(a)-312(devil)-312(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 182.878 0 Td[(Inf.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 19.602 0 Td[(vii.)-436(was)-312(probably)]TJ -202.48 -13.549 Td[(taken)-302(by)-302(Dante)-302(for)-302(an)-302(antique)-302(god;)-328(but)-302(the)-302(name)-302(may)-302(also)-302(be)-302(a)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+764 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 765 0 R
+/Resources 763 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 762 0 R
+/Annots [ 766 0 R 768 0 R 769 0 R 770 0 R 771 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+766 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.004 487.717 133.367 497.546]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg130) >>
+>> endobj
+768 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.288 418.989 133.652 428.709]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg131) >>
+>> endobj
+769 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.821 390.908 136.185 400.628]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg133) >>
+>> endobj
+770 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.206 335.73 134.57 345.602]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg134) >>
+>> endobj
+771 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.789 294.111 134.153 303.973]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+767 0 obj <<
+/D [764 0 R /XYZ 111.609 449.447 null]
+>> endobj
+763 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+774 0 obj <<
+/Length 5912      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(137)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(classicising)-250(translation)-250(of)-250(Mammon.\051)]TJ 11.956 -15.186 Td[(P.)-577(136.)-1232(Mediaeval)-577(epic)-577(poets:)-904(Nyrop,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 198.145 0 Td[(Den)-577(oldfranske)]TJ -210.101 -13.549 Td[(Heltedigtning)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 60 0 Td[(,)-614(p.)-1123(255)-541(and)-540(2)-1(60;)-686(Dernedde,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 152.482 0 Td[(Ueber)-541(die)-541(den)]TJ -212.482 -13.549 Td[(altfranz\366s.)-538(Dichtern)-346(bekannten)-346(Stoffe)-346(aus)-346(dem)-347(Altertum)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 254.874 0 Td[(\050Diss.)]TJ -254.874 -13.549 Td[(G\366tting.)-439(1887\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 69.031 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Confusion)-313(of)-313(ancient)-313(and)-313(Christian)-313(elements:)]TJ -79.94 -13.549 Td[(Dernedde,)-556(p.)-985(10;)-617(the)-495(gods)-495(are)-495(devils:)-740(Dernedde,)-556(pp.)-985(85,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(88.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.637 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Euhemerism:)-383(Dernedde,)-333(p.)-449(4.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 132.376 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(I)-316(have)-317(tried)-316(to)-316(get)-317(a)-316(first-)]TJ -167.832 -13.549 Td[(hand)-195(impression)-195(of)-195(the)-195(way)-195(the)-195(gods)-195(are)-195(treated)-195(by)-195(th)-1(e)-195(old)-195(French)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(epic)-364(poets,)-392(but)-364(the)-364(material)-364(is)-364(too)-364(large,)-393(and)-364(indexes)-364(suited)-364(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-313(purpose)-313(are)-313(wanting.)-439(The)-313(paganism)-313(of)-313(the)-313(origin)-1(al)-313(is)-313(taken)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(over)-346(na\357vely,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 62.033 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.753 0 Td[(,)-370(by)-345(Veldeke,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 64.549 0 Td[(Eneidt)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.483 0 Td[(,)-370(i.)-537(45,)-369(169.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 55.139 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(On)-346(magic)]TJ -236.866 -13.55 Td[(I)-300(have)-299(consulted)-300(Horst's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 109.563 0 Td[(D\344monomagie)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 67.5 0 Td[(\050Frankf.)-399(1818\051;)-324(and)-300(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -177.063 -13.549 Td[(Zauber-Bibliothek)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 82.099 0 Td[(\050Mainz,)-204(1821-26\051;)-212(Schindler,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 128.564 0 Td[(Der)-193(Aberglaube)]TJ -210.663 -13.549 Td[(des)-221(Mittelalters)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 70.277 0 Td[(\050Breslau,)-227(1858\051;)-231(Maury,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 107.447 0 Td[(La)-221(magie)-221(et)-221(l'astrologie)]TJ -177.724 -13.549 Td[(dans)-362(l'antiquit\351)-363(et)-362(au)-362(moyen)-363(\342ge)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 151.493 0 Td[(\050Paris,)-390(1860\051.)-587(These)-363(authors)]TJ -151.493 -13.549 Td[(all)-401(agree)-401(that)-400(mediaeval)-401(magic)-401(is)-401(dependent)-400(on)-401(antiquity,)-439(but)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(that)-263(the)-264(pagan)-263(gods)-264(are)-263(superseded)-264(by)-263(devils)-263(\050or)-264(the)-263(Devil\051.)-291(The)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(connexion)-204(in)-205(substance)-204(with)-204(antiquity,)-214(on)-204(which)-204(Maury)-205(specially)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(insists,)-370(is)-347(certain)-346(enough,)-370(but)-346(does)-347(not)-346(concern)-346(us)-346(here,)-371(where)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-328(question)-327(is)-328(about)-328(the)-327(theory.)-483(In)-328(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 178.457 0 Td[(Zauber-Bibl.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 61.33 0 Td[(i.)-483(p.)-483(137)]TJ -239.787 -13.549 Td[(\050in)-225(the)-226(treatise)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 64.333 0 Td[(Pneumatologia)-225(vera)-226(et)-225(occulta)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 133.42 0 Td[(\051,)-230(the)-226(snake)-225(Python)]TJ -197.753 -13.55 Td[(is)-410(put)-411(down)-410(among)-410(the)-410(demons,)-451(with)-410(the)-410(remark)-410(that)-411(Apollo)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(was)-319(called)-318(after)-319(it.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 82.22 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Magic)-319(formulae)-318(with)-319(antique)-318(gods:)-388(Heim,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -93.129 -13.549 Td[(Incantamenta)-273(magica)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 98.061 0 Td[(\050in)-273(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 31.407 0 Td[(Neue)-273(Jahrbb.)-319(f.)-319(Philologie)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 117.205 0 Td[(,)-279(Suppl.)]TJ -246.673 -13.549 Td[(xix.)-545(1893,)-372(p.)-545(557;)-397(I)-348(owe)-348(this)-349(reference)-348(to)-348(the)-348(kindness)-348(of)-349(my)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(colleague,)-322(Prof.)-423(Groenbeck\051.)-422(Pradel,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 167.109 0 Td[(Religionsgesch.)-423(Vers.)-422(u.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 123.915 0 Td[([163])]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -291.024 -13.549 Td[(Vorarb.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.9 0 Td[(iii.,)-234(has)-231(collected)-230(prayers)-230(and)-231(magic)-230(formulae)-231(from)-230(Italy)]TJ -36.9 -13.55 Td[(and)-250(Greece;)-250(they)-250(do)-250(not)-250(contain)-250(names)-250(of)-250(antique)-250(gods.)]TJ 11.955 -15.185 Td[(P.)-256(137.)-268(Acosta:)-263(Joseph)-256(de)-256(Acosta,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 151.203 0 Td[(Historia)-256(naturale)-256(e)-256(morale)]TJ -163.158 -13.55 Td[(delle)-235(Indie)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.185 0 Td[(,)-238(Venice,)-237(1596.)-245(I)-235(have)-234(used)-235(this)-235(Italian)-234(translation;)-240(the)]TJ -46.185 -13.549 Td[(original)-365(work)-366(appeared)-365(in)-366(1590.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 144.706 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Demons)-365(at)-366(work)-365(in)-366(oracles:)]TJ -155.615 -13.549 Td[(bk.)-250(v.)-250(ch.)-250(9;)-250(in)-250(magic:)-250(ch.)-250(25.)]TJ 11.955 -15.186 Td[(P.)-507(138.)-1020(Demon)-507(in)-506(Brazil:)-764(Voss,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 164.993 0 Td[(Theol.)-1020(Gent.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 73.769 0 Td[(i.)-1020(ch.)]TJ -250.717 -13.549 Td[(8.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 8.182 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Pagan)-449(worship)-449(in)-449(the)-449(Florentine)-449(and)-449(Roman)-450(Academies:)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+773 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 774 0 R
+/Resources 772 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 762 0 R
+/Annots [ 775 0 R 777 0 R 778 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+775 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [73.816 500.611 90.179 510.44]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+777 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.313 133.157 86.677 142.975]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+778 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [73.047 78.175 89.41 87.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+776 0 obj <<
+/D [773 0 R /XYZ 327.401 177.809 null]
+>> endobj
+772 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+781 0 obj <<
+/Length 5527      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(138)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Voigt,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 30.742 0 Td[(Wiederbelebung)-282(d.)-346(klass.)-346(Altertums)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 157.273 0 Td[(,)-290(ii.)-346(p.)-346(239)-282(\0502nd)-282(ed.\051;)]TJ -188.015 -13.549 Td[(Hettner,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 38.177 0 Td[(Ital.)-251(Studien)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 53.347 0 Td[(,)-251(p.)-251(174.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 35.473 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.91 0 Td[(On)-250(the)-251(conception)-250(of)-251(the)-250(antique)]TJ -137.907 -13.549 Td[(gods)-444(in)-443(the)-444(earlier)-444(Middle)-443(Ages,)-492(see)-444(Gruppe,)-492(\247)-444(4.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 234.572 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Thomas)]TJ -245.481 -13.549 Td[(Aquinas:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 47.229 0 Td[(Summa)-484(theol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.334 0 Td[(P.)-484(ii.)-953(2,)-542(Q.)-484(94,)-543(art.)-953(4.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 115.609 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Curious)]TJ -246.081 -13.55 Td[(and)-420(typical)-420(of)-420(the)-420(mediaeval)-419(way)-420(of)-420(reasoning)-420(is)-420(the)-420(idea)-420(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(seeking)-260(prototypes)-260(of)-259(the)-260(Christian)-260(history)-259(of)-260(salvation)-260(in)-260(pagan)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(mythology.)-794(See)-431(v.)-794(Eicken,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 134.193 0 Td[(Gesch.)-794(u.)-794(System)-431(d.)-794(mittelalt.)]TJ -134.193 -13.549 Td[(Weltanschauung)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 76.178 0 Td[(\050Stuttg.)-451(1887\051,)-334(p.)-451(648,)-334(and)-317(\050with)-317(more)-317(detail\051)]TJ -76.178 -13.549 Td[(F.)-383(Piper,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 43.264 0 Td[(Mythologie)-383(u.)-648(Symbolik)-383(d.)-648(christl.)-649(Kunst)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 195.868 0 Td[(\050Weimar,)]TJ -239.132 -13.55 Td[(1847-51\051,)-259(i.)-272(p.)-271(143;)-261(comp.)-271(also)-258(Gruppe,)-259(\247)-257(8)-257(foll.)-271(Good)-258(instances)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(are)-305(the)-305(myths)-304(in)-305(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 91.768 0 Td[(Speculum)-305(humanae)-305(salvationis)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 136.337 0 Td[(,)-319(chs.)-414(3)-305(and)]TJ -228.105 -13.549 Td[(24.)]TJ 11.955 -15.186 Td[(P.)-492(139.)-975(On)-492(Hebraism)-491(in)-492(general,)-552(see)-492(Gruppe,)-552(\247)-492(19)-492(and)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(\247)-434(24)-434(foll.;)-527(on)-434(Huet,)-480(\247)-434(28.)-803(Nevertheless,)-480(Huet)-434(operates)-435(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(demonology)-319(in)-319(connexion)-319(with)-319(the)-319(oracles)-318(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 196.608 0 Td[(Dem.)-457(evang.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 62.066 0 Td[(ii.)-457(9,)]TJ -258.674 -13.549 Td[(34,)-250(4\051.)]TJ 11.955 -15.186 Td[(P.)-535(140.)-1105(On)-534(Natalis)-535(Comes,)-606(see)-535(Gruppe,)-606(\247)-535(19.)-1105(In)-535(bk.)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(i.)-929(ch.)-928(7,)-533(Natalis)-476(Comes)-476(gives)-477(an)-476(account)-476(of)-476(the)-476(origin)-477(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(antiquity's)-416(conceptions)-415(of)-416(the)-416(gods;)-498(it)-416(has)-415(quite)-416(a)-416(naturalistic)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(turn.)-667(Nevertheless,)-423(we)-389(find)-389(in)-389(ch.)-667(16)-389(a)-389(remark)-389(which)-389(shows)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-277(he)-277(embraced)-277(demonology)-277(in)-277(its)-277(crudest)-277(form;)-291(compare)-277(also)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-334(theory)-333(set)-334(forth)-334(in)-334(ch.)-501(10.)-501(His)-333(interpretations)-334(of)-334(myths)-334(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(collected)-362(in)-361(bk.)-585(x.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 83.956 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(On)-362(Bacon,)-389(see)-362(Gruppe,)-389(\247)-362(22.)-585(Typhoeus-)]TJ -94.865 -13.549 Td[(myth:)-1091(introduct.)-1512(to)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 111.778 0 Td[(De)-671(sapientia)-670(veterum.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 105.219 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Alchemistic)]TJ -227.906 -13.55 Td[(interpretations:)-662(Gedike,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 113.04 0 Td[(Verm.)-868(Schriften)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 75.213 0 Td[(,)-507(p.)-868(78;)-559(Gruppe,)-507(\247)]TJ -188.253 -13.549 Td[(30.)-616(Of)-372(the)-372(works)-372(quoted)-372(by)-371(Gedike,)-403(I)-372(have)-372(consulted)-372(Faber's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(Panchymicum)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 67.396 0 Td[(\050Frankf.)-1039(1651\051)-513(and)-513(Toll's)-513(Fortuita)-513(\050Amsterd.)]TJ -67.396 -13.549 Td[(1687\051.)-718(Faber)-406(has)-406(only)-405(some)-406(remarks)-406(on)-406(the)-406(matter)-406(in)-406(bk.)-718(i.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ch.)-476(5;)-363(by)-325(Toll)-326(the)-325(alchemistic)-325(interpr)-1(etation)-325(is)-325(carried)-326(through.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Gedike)-336(quotes,)-358(moreover,)-358(a)-337(work)-336(by)-337(Suarez)-336(de)-337(Salazar,)-358(which)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(must)-368(date)-367(from)-368(the)-368(sixteenth)-367(century;)-427(according)-367(to)-368(J\366cher)-368(\050iv.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(1913\051)-244(it)-244(only)-243(exists)-244(in)-244(MS.,)-245(and)-244(I)-244(do)-243(not)-244(know)-244(where)-244(Gedike)-244(got)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(his)-250(reference.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 58.757 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Thomas:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 40.909 0 Td[(Summa)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.116 0 Td[(,)-250(P.)-250(ii.)-250(2,)-250(Q.)-250(172,)-250(arts.)-250(5)-250(and)-250(6.)]TJ -130.736 -15.186 Td[(P.)-515(141.)-1043(Demonology)-515(as)-514(explanation)-515(of)-514(the)-515(oracles:)-779(see)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+780 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 781 0 R
+/Resources 779 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 762 0 R
+/Annots [ 782 0 R 783 0 R 784 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+782 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.655 351.57 136.019 361.29]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+783 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [120.126 295.748 136.49 305.457]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+784 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.904 63.764 136.268 73.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+779 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+787 0 obj <<
+/Length 6251      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Notes)-21892(139)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(van)-447(Dale,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 49.362 0 Td[(De)-447(oraculis)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 53.355 0 Td[(,)-496(p.)-840(430)-447(\050Amsterd.)-841(1700\051;)-545(he)-447(quotes)]TJ -102.717 -13.549 Td[(numerous)-243(treatises)-243(from)-243(the)-243(sixteenth)-243(and)-243(seve)-1(nteenth)-243(centuries.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(I)-291(have)-291(glanced)-291(at)-292(Moebius,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 122.935 0 Td[(De)-291(oraculorum)-291(ethnicorum)-291(origine)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 154.968 0 Td[(,)]TJ -277.903 -13.549 Td[(etc.)-766(\050Leipzig,)-465(1656\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 96.745 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Caelius)-422(Rhodiginus:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 97.158 0 Td[(Lectionum)-422(antiq.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -204.812 -13.55 Td[(\050Leyden,)-306(1516\051,)-305(lib.)-383(ii.)-384(cap.)-383(12;)-316(comp.)-384(Gruppe,)-305(\247)-295(15.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 236.994 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Caelius)]TJ -247.903 -13.549 Td[(Calcagninus:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 62.189 0 Td[(Oraculorum)-364(liber)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 82.49 0 Td[(\050in)-364(his)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 32.799 0 Td[(Opera)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.873 0 Td[(,)-393(Basle,)-393(1544,)-393(p.)]TJ -205.35 -13.549 Td[(640\051.)-671(The)-390(little)-390(dialogue)-390(is)-390(not)-390(very)-391(easy)-390(to)-390(understand;)-460(it)-391(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(evidently)-394(a)-395(satire)-394(on)-395(contemporary)-394(credulity;)-467(but)-394(that)-395(Caelius)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(completely)-480(rejected)-480(divination)-479(seems)-480(to)-480(be)-480(assumed)-480(also)-480(by)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(G.)-489(I.)-488(Voss,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 58.148 0 Td[(Theol.)-966(Gent.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.581 0 Td[(i.)-966(6.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 24.476 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Machiavelli:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 63.077 0 Td[(Discorsi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(,)-548(i.)]TJ -266.162 -13.549 Td[(56.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.636 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Van)-282(Dale:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 48.319 0 Td[(De)-282(oraculis)-283(gentilium)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 98.937 0 Td[(\0501st)-282(ed.)-348(Amsterd.)-347(1683\051;)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -171.801 -13.549 Td[(De)-374(idololatria)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 67.56 0 Td[(\050Amsterd.)-622(1696\051.)-622(Difficulties)-374(with)-374(the)-374(biblical)]TJ -67.56 -13.549 Td[(accounts)-261(of)-260(demons:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 92.873 0 Td[(De)-261(idol.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.264 0 Td[(,)-263(dedication.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 53.774 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Fontenelle:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 52.049 0 Td[(Histoire)]TJ -244.869 -13.549 Td[(des)-473(oracles)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 56.968 0 Td[(\050Paris,)-528(1687\051.)-918(The)-473(little)-472(book)-945(has)-473(an)-472(amusing)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 234.055 0 Td[([164])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.023 -13.55 Td[(preface,)-297(in)-288(which)-288(Fontenelle)-288(with)-288(na\357ve)-288(complac)-1(ency)-288(\050and)-288(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-242(sharp)-242(eye)-242(for)-243(van)-242(Dale's)-242(deficiencies)-242(of)-242(style\051)-242(gives)-242(an)-243(account)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-257(his)-258(popularisation)-257(of)-258(the)-257(learned)-258(work.)-272(On)-258(Fontenelle)-257(and)-258(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(answer)-305(by)-305(the)-304(Jesuit,)-319(Balthus,)-319(see)-304(for)-305(further)-305(details)-305(Banier,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 269.109 0 Td[(La)]TJ -269.109 -13.549 Td[(mythologie)-339(et)-339(les)-339(fables)-339(expliqu\351es)-339(par)-339(l'histoire)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 220.332 0 Td[(\050Paris,)-361(1738\051,)]TJ -220.332 -13.55 Td[(bk.)-366(iii.)-365(ch.)-366(1.)-366(Van)-288(Dale's)-289(book)-289(itself)-288(had)-289(called)-288(forth)-289(an)-289(answer)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-413(Moebius)-414(\050included)-413(in)-413(the)-414(edition)-413(of)-413(1690)-414(of)-413(his)-413(work,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 270.331 0 Td[(de)]TJ -270.331 -13.549 Td[(orac.)-724(ethn.)-724(orig.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 80.947 0 Td[(\051.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 6.36 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(On)-408(the)-408(influence)-408(exercised)-408(by)-408(van)-408(Dale)]TJ -98.216 -13.549 Td[(and)-362(Fontenelle)-361(on)-362(the)-362(succeeding)-362(mythologists,)-389(see)-362(Gruppe,)-390(\247)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(34.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.636 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Banier:)-250(see)-250(Gruppe,)-250(\247)-250(35.)]TJ -12.59 -16.004 Td[(P.)-281(143.)-342(Vico:)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 62.315 0 Td[(Scienza)-281(nuova)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 66.114 0 Td[(\050Milan,)-288(1853\051,)-289(p.)-342(168)-281(\050bk.)-342(ii.)-342(in)]TJ -140.384 -13.549 Td[(the)-253(section,)-254(Della)-253(metafisica)-253(poetica\051;)-255(political)-253(allegories,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 253.865 0 Td[(e.g.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 18.583 0 Td[(p.)]TJ -272.448 -13.55 Td[(309)-273(\050in)-273(the)-273(Canone)-273(mitologico\051.)-319(Comp.)-319(Gruppe,)-279(\247)-273(44.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 237.604 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Banier:)]TJ -248.513 -13.549 Td[(in)-250(the)-250(work)-250(indicated)-250(above,)-250(bk.)-250(i.)-250(ch.)-250(5.)]TJ 11.955 -16.004 Td[(P.)-546(144.)-1139(On)-547(the)-546(mythological)-547(theories)-546(of)-546(the)-547(eighteenth)]TJ -11.955 -13.549 Td[(century,)-246(comp.)-248(Gruppe,)-246(\247)-245(36)-244(foll.;)-247(on)-245(Bryant,)-246(\247)-244(40;)-247(on)-245(Dupuis,)-246(\247)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(41.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 13.636 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.909 0 Td[(Polemic)-187(against)-187(Euhemerism)-188(from)-187(the)-187(standpoint)-187(of)-188(nature-)]TJ -24.545 -13.549 Td[(symbolism:)-326(de)-288(la)-288(Barre,)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 109.144 0 Td[(M\351moires)-288(pour)-288(servir)-288(\340)-288(l'histoire)-288(de)-289(la)]TJ -109.144 -13.55 Td[(religion)-325(en)-326(Gr\350ce)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 78.597 0 Td[(,)-344(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 18.519 0 Td[(M\351m.)-476(de)-325(l'Acad.)-477(des)-325(Inscr.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 127.712 0 Td[(xxiv.)-476(\0501749;)]TJ -224.828 -13.549 Td[(the)-216(treatise)-217(had)-216(already)-216(been)-217(communicated)-216(in)-216(1737)-217(and)-216(1738\051;)-228(a)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+786 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 787 0 R
+/Resources 785 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 762 0 R
+/Annots [ 789 0 R 790 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+789 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [70.582 188.172 86.945 198.034]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg143) >>
+>> endobj
+790 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [73.48 131.51 89.843 141.23]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+788 0 obj <<
+/D [786 0 R /XYZ 250.125 342.036 null]
+>> endobj
+785 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+793 0 obj <<
+/Length 1457      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(140)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(posthumous)-278(continuation)-278(in)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 124.869 0 Td[(M\351m.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.182 0 Td[(xxix.)-334(\0501770\051)-278(gives)-279(an)-278(idea)-278(of)]TJ -153.051 -13.549 Td[(de)-219(la)-219(Barre's)-219(own)-219(point)-220(of)-219(view,)-225(which)-219(was)-219(not)-219(a)-219(little)-219(in)-220(advance)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(his)-250(time.)-250(Comp.)-250(Gruppe,)-250(\247)-250(37.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(P.)-326(145.)-477(A)-325(good)-326(survey)-325(of)-326(modern)-326(investigations)-325(in)-326(the)-326(field)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(of)-352(the)-352(history)-353(of)-352(ancient)-352(religion)-352(is)-353(given)-352(by)-352(Sam)-352(Wide)-352(in)-353(the)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(Einleit.)-738(in)-412(die)-413(Altertumswissensch.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 167.521 0 Td[(ii.;)-494(here)-412(also)-413(remarks)-412(on)]TJ -167.521 -13.549 Td[(the)-335(mythology)-335(of)-335(older)-335(times.)-505(The)-335(later)-335(part)-335(of)-336(Gruppe's)-335(work)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(contains)-250(a)-250(very)-250(full)-250(treatment)-250(of)-250(the)-250(subject.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 -29.651 Td[([165])]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+792 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 793 0 R
+/Resources 791 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 762 0 R
+/Annots [ 794 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+794 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.844 475.149 134.207 485.022]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg145) >>
+>> endobj
+795 0 obj <<
+/D [792 0 R /XYZ 93.543 393.68 null]
+>> endobj
+791 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+796 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index13) >>
+endobj
+799 0 obj
+(Index)
+endobj
+802 0 obj <<
+/Length 1305      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 46.771 479.321 Td[(Index)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -37.144 Td[(Absolute)-250(definitions)-250(of)-250(the)-250(divine,)-250(16,)-250(19,)-250(68,)-250(69,)-250(82,)-250(88.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(Academics,)-250(149.)]TJ 0 -23.726 Td[(Academy,)-250(later,)-250(108,)-250(114.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(Acosta,)-250(137,)-250(139,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(Aelian,)-250(121.)]TJ 0 -23.726 Td[(Aeneid)-250(\050mediaeval\051,)-250(136.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(Aeschines,)-250(93.)]TJ 0 -23.726 Td[(Aeschylus,)-250(54,)-250(55.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(Aetolians,)-250(97,)-250(98.)]TJ 0 -23.726 Td[(Alchemistic)-250(explanation)-250(of)-250(Paganism,)-250(140.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(Alcibiades,)-250(60.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(Alexander)-250(the)-250(Great,)-250(93,)-250(112.)]TJ 0 -23.726 Td[(Allegorical)-250(interpretation,)-250(104,)-250(113,)-250(139,)-250(140,)-250(143,)-250(144.)]TJ 0 -23.725 Td[(American)-250(Paganism,)-250(137,)-250(139,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -23.726 Td[(Anaxagoras)-250(of)-251(Clazomenae,)-250(7,)-250(13,)-251(25-29,)-250(30,)-250(31,)-251(40,)-250(62,)-251(63,)-250(66,)]TJ 65.455 -13.549 Td[(124.)]TJ -65.455 -23.725 Td[(Anaximenes,)-250(30.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+801 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 802 0 R
+/Resources 800 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 847 0 R
+/Annots [ 803 0 R 804 0 R 805 0 R 806 0 R 807 0 R 808 0 R 809 0 R 810 0 R 811 0 R 812 0 R 813 0 R 814 0 R 815 0 R 816 0 R 817 0 R 818 0 R 819 0 R 820 0 R 821 0 R 822 0 R 823 0 R 824 0 R 825 0 R 827 0 R 828 0 R 829 0 R 830 0 R 831 0 R 832 0 R 833 0 R 834 0 R 835 0 R 836 0 R 837 0 R 838 0 R 839 0 R 840 0 R 841 0 R 842 0 R 843 0 R 844 0 R 845 0 R 846 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+803 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [198.887 440.661 209.797 449.519]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+804 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [215.251 440.661 226.16 449.519]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg019) >>
+>> endobj
+805 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [231.615 440.661 242.524 449.519]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg068) >>
+>> endobj
+806 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [247.978 440.661 258.887 449.519]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg069) >>
+>> endobj
+807 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [264.342 440.661 275.251 449.519]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg082) >>
+>> endobj
+808 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [280.705 440.661 291.615 449.519]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg088) >>
+>> endobj
+809 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [100.695 416.935 117.059 425.794]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+810 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.87 392.348 135.233 402.068]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg108) >>
+>> endobj
+811 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.688 392.348 157.051 402.068]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+812 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [82.521 369.485 98.884 378.343]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+813 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [104.339 369.485 120.702 378.343]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+814 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [126.157 369.485 142.52 378.343]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+815 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [81.31 345.759 97.673 354.617]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+816 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [138.56 321.619 154.924 330.892]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+817 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [97.062 298.308 107.971 307.166]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+818 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [97.673 273.721 108.582 283.594]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg054) >>
+>> endobj
+819 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [114.037 273.721 124.946 283.594]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+820 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [94.04 250.857 104.95 259.716]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+821 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [110.404 250.857 121.313 259.716]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+822 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [215.546 226.27 231.909 235.99]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+823 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [98.884 203.407 109.793 212.265]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+824 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.677 179.681 151.586 188.539]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+825 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [157.04 179.681 173.404 188.539]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg112) >>
+>> endobj
+827 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.811 155.094 179.175 164.814]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+828 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.629 155.094 200.993 164.814]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+829 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [206.447 155.094 222.811 164.814]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+830 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.266 155.094 244.629 164.814]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+831 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [250.084 155.094 266.447 164.814]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg143) >>
+>> endobj
+832 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [271.902 155.094 288.265 164.814]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+833 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.393 131.368 156.757 141.088]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+834 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.211 131.368 178.575 141.088]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+835 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.029 131.368 200.393 141.088]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+836 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.803 107.643 178.258 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg007) >>
+>> endobj
+837 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [183.716 107.643 194.625 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+838 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [200.083 107.643 225.534 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg025) >>
+>> endobj
+839 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [230.993 107.643 241.902 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+840 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [247.36 107.643 258.269 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg031) >>
+>> endobj
+841 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [263.728 107.643 274.637 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg040) >>
+>> endobj
+842 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [280.095 107.643 291.004 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg062) >>
+>> endobj
+843 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [296.462 107.643 307.371 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg063) >>
+>> endobj
+844 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [312.83 107.643 323.739 117.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg066) >>
+>> endobj
+845 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [112.226 96.374 128.59 103.814]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+846 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [106.76 71.23 117.67 80.088]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+797 0 obj <<
+/D [801 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+826 0 obj <<
+/D [801 0 R /XYZ 46.771 174.593 null]
+>> endobj
+800 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+850 0 obj <<
+/Length 1753      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(142)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Angelology,)-250(129.)]TJ 0 -27.788 Td[(Anthropomorphism,)-250(14,)-250(18,)-250(19,)-250(69.)]TJ 0 -27.789 Td[(Antisthenes,)-250(13,)-250(74,)-250(109.)]TJ 0 -27.789 Td[(Apologists,)-250(128,)-250(130,)-250(132,)-250(139.)]TJ 0 -27.788 Td[(Arcissewsky,)-250(138.)]TJ 0 -27.789 Td[(Aristides)-250(the)-250(Apologist,)-250(129.)]TJ 0 -27.788 Td[(Aristides)-250(Rhetor,)-250(121.)]TJ 0 -27.789 Td[(Aristodemus,)-250(60,)-250(62.)]TJ 0 -27.788 Td[(Aristophanes,)-250(30,)-250(32,)-250(33,)-250(39,)-250(55,)-250(56-58,)-250(65.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 -13.549 Td[(Birds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.64 0 Td[(,)-250(32.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -23.64 -13.55 Td[(Clouds)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.917 0 Td[(,)-250(30,)-250(55,)-250(56-58)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -30.917 -13.549 Td[(Frogs)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 26.062 0 Td[(,)-250(55.)]TJ -36.971 -27.788 Td[(Aristotle,)-250(13,)-250(30,)-250(32,)-250(46,)-250(83-87,)-250(104,)-250(113.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 -13.55 Td[(Ethics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.273 0 Td[(,)-250(84.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -27.273 -13.549 Td[(Metaphysics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.535 0 Td[(,)-250(85-86.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -54.535 -13.549 Td[(Politics)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.338 0 Td[(,)-250(84.)]TJ -44.247 -27.788 Td[(Aristoxenus,)-250(32,)-250(33.)]TJ 0 -27.789 Td[(Asclepius,)-250(111,)-250(121,)-250(126.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -27.789 Td[(Asebeia)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 34.538 0 Td[(,)-250(6,)-250(7,)-250(8.)]TJ -34.538 -27.788 Td[(Aspasia,)-250(27.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+849 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 850 0 R
+/Resources 848 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 847 0 R
+/Annots [ 851 0 R 852 0 R 853 0 R 854 0 R 855 0 R 856 0 R 857 0 R 858 0 R 859 0 R 860 0 R 861 0 R 862 0 R 863 0 R 864 0 R 865 0 R 866 0 R 867 0 R 868 0 R 869 0 R 870 0 R 871 0 R 872 0 R 873 0 R 874 0 R 875 0 R 876 0 R 877 0 R 878 0 R 879 0 R 880 0 R 881 0 R 882 0 R 883 0 R 884 0 R 885 0 R 886 0 R 887 0 R 888 0 R 889 0 R 890 0 R 891 0 R 892 0 R 893 0 R 894 0 R 895 0 R 896 0 R 897 0 R 898 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+851 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.511 515.797 166.874 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+852 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [185.06 488.019 195.969 497.728]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg014) >>
+>> endobj
+853 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [201.423 488.019 212.332 497.728]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+854 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [217.787 488.019 228.696 497.728]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg019) >>
+>> endobj
+855 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [234.15 488.019 245.059 497.728]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg069) >>
+>> endobj
+856 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.511 461.082 161.42 469.94]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+857 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [166.874 461.082 177.783 469.94]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+858 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [183.238 461.082 199.601 469.94]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+859 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.278 432.431 162.641 442.151]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+860 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [168.096 432.431 184.46 442.151]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg130) >>
+>> endobj
+861 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [189.914 432.431 206.278 442.151]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg132) >>
+>> endobj
+862 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [211.732 432.431 228.096 442.151]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+863 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [154.743 404.643 171.107 414.363]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+864 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [200.212 376.854 216.576 386.574]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+865 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [170.812 349.928 187.176 358.786]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+866 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [154.754 322.139 165.663 330.997]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+867 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [171.118 322.139 182.027 330.997]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg062) >>
+>> endobj
+868 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [156.565 293.5 167.474 303.361]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+869 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.929 293.5 183.838 303.361]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg032) >>
+>> endobj
+870 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [189.292 293.5 200.201 303.361]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg033) >>
+>> endobj
+871 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [205.656 293.5 216.565 303.361]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+872 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [222.019 293.5 232.929 303.361]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+873 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [238.383 293.5 263.834 303.361]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+874 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [269.288 293.5 280.198 303.361]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg065) >>
+>> endobj
+875 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [133.547 280.801 144.456 289.769]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg032) >>
+>> endobj
+876 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.823 267.252 151.732 276.263]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+877 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [157.187 267.252 168.096 276.263]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+878 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [173.55 267.252 199.001 276.263]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+879 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.969 252.961 146.878 262.714]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+880 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [137.18 225.914 148.089 234.772]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+881 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [153.543 225.914 164.452 234.772]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+882 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [169.907 225.914 180.816 234.772]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg032) >>
+>> endobj
+883 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [186.27 225.914 197.179 234.772]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg046) >>
+>> endobj
+884 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.634 225.914 228.085 234.772]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+885 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [233.539 225.914 249.903 234.772]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+886 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [255.358 225.914 271.721 234.772]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+887 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [137.18 212.365 148.089 221.332]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+888 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [164.441 198.074 189.892 207.827]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg085) >>
+>> endobj
+889 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [143.245 185.267 154.154 194.234]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+890 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [151.721 157.478 162.631 166.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg032) >>
+>> endobj
+891 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [168.085 157.478 178.994 166.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg033) >>
+>> endobj
+892 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.023 128.839 158.387 138.548]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+893 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.841 128.839 180.205 138.548]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+894 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [185.66 128.839 202.023 138.548]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg126) >>
+>> endobj
+895 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [133.536 101.901 138.991 110.868]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg006) >>
+>> endobj
+896 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.445 101.901 149.9 110.868]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg007) >>
+>> endobj
+897 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [155.354 101.901 160.809 110.868]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg008) >>
+>> endobj
+898 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [133.536 73.262 144.445 82.971]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg027) >>
+>> endobj
+848 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+901 0 obj <<
+/Length 2077      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Index)-21948(143)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Atheism)-250(\050and)-250(Atheist\051)-250(defined,)-250(1;)]TJ 10.91 -13.549 Td[(rare)-250(in)-250(antiquity,)-250(2,)-250(133;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-250(recent)-250(origin,)-250(2,)-250(143;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(origin)-250(of)-250(the)-250(words,)-250(5;)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(lists)-250(of)-250(atheists,)-250(13;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(punishable)-250(by)-250(death)-250(in)-250(Plato's)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 132.567 0 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.039 0 Td[(,)-250(77;)]TJ -155.606 -13.549 Td[(sin)-250(of)-250(youth,)-250(78.)]TJ -10.91 -24.841 Td[(Athene,)-250(74.)]TJ 0 -24.84 Td[(Athens,)-252(its)-252(treatment)-251(of)-252(atheism,)-252(6-8,)-252(9,)-252(12,)-252(25,)-252(39,)-252(65)-251(foll.,)-252(74,)]TJ 65.455 -13.55 Td[(75,)-250(83,)-250(86;)]TJ -54.545 -13.549 Td[(its)-250(view)-250(of)-250(sophistic,)-250(58-59.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -10.91 -24.84 Td[(Atheos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 32.422 0 Td[(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 3.633 0 Td[(atheoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.273 0 Td[(\051,)-250(2,)-250(10,)-250(13,)-250(14,)-250(19,)-250(23,)-250(29,)-250(43,)-250(75,)-250(110.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -63.328 -24.841 Td[(Atheotes)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.571 0 Td[(,)-250(2.)]TJ -37.571 -24.841 Td[(Augustine,)-250(St.,)-250(129,)-250(135.)]TJ 0 -24.84 Td[(Augustus,)-250(117;)]TJ 10.91 -13.549 Td[(religious)-250(reaction)-250(of,)-250(100,)-250(113,)-250(117,)-250(120.)]TJ -10.91 -24.841 Td[(Aurelius,)-250(Marcus,)-250(11,)-250(121.)]TJ 0 -24.841 Td[(Bacon,)-250(Francis)-250(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 71.804 0 Td[(De)-250(Sap.)-250(Vet.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.534 0 Td[(\051)-250(140.)]TJ -126.338 -24.84 Td[(Banier,)-250(142,)-250(143.)]TJ 0 -24.841 Td[(Bible,)-250(130,)-250(142.)]TJ 0 -24.841 Td[(Bion,)-250(13,)-250(109.)]TJ 0 -24.84 Td[(Brazil,)-250(138.)]TJ 0 -24.841 Td[(Bruno,)-250(Giordano,)-250(151.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+900 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 901 0 R
+/Resources 899 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 847 0 R
+/Annots [ 902 0 R 903 0 R 904 0 R 905 0 R 906 0 R 907 0 R 908 0 R 909 0 R 910 0 R 911 0 R 912 0 R 913 0 R 914 0 R 915 0 R 916 0 R 917 0 R 918 0 R 919 0 R 920 0 R 921 0 R 922 0 R 923 0 R 924 0 R 925 0 R 926 0 R 927 0 R 928 0 R 929 0 R 930 0 R 931 0 R 932 0 R 933 0 R 934 0 R 935 0 R 937 0 R 938 0 R 939 0 R 940 0 R 941 0 R 942 0 R 943 0 R 944 0 R 945 0 R 946 0 R 947 0 R 948 0 R 949 0 R 950 0 R 951 0 R 952 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+902 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.629 516.244 190.084 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg001) >>
+>> endobj
+903 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.822 502.248 138.277 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg002) >>
+>> endobj
+904 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [143.731 502.248 160.095 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg133) >>
+>> endobj
+905 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [130.39 488.699 135.844 498.419]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg002) >>
+>> endobj
+906 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.299 488.699 157.662 498.419]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg143) >>
+>> endobj
+907 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.459 475.149 151.913 485.022]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg005) >>
+>> endobj
+908 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.989 462.462 138.899 471.32]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+909 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [218.742 448.051 229.651 457.771]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+910 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [115.259 434.502 126.168 444.222]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg078) >>
+>> endobj
+911 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [83.731 410.523 94.64 419.381]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+912 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [191.401 385.682 205.942 394.693]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg006) >>
+>> endobj
+913 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [211.418 385.682 216.873 394.693]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg009) >>
+>> endobj
+914 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [222.349 385.682 233.258 394.693]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg012) >>
+>> endobj
+915 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [238.734 385.682 249.643 394.693]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg025) >>
+>> endobj
+916 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [255.119 385.682 266.028 394.693]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+917 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [271.505 385.682 282.414 394.693]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg065) >>
+>> endobj
+918 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [308.514 385.682 319.423 394.693]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+919 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [112.226 372.133 123.135 381.144]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+920 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.59 372.133 139.499 381.144]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+921 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.953 372.133 155.862 381.144]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg086) >>
+>> endobj
+922 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.713 357.733 176.164 367.595]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg058) >>
+>> endobj
+923 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.186 333.329 124.64 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg002) >>
+>> endobj
+924 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [130.095 333.329 141.004 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg010) >>
+>> endobj
+925 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.459 333.329 157.368 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+926 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.822 333.329 173.731 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg014) >>
+>> endobj
+927 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.186 333.329 190.095 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg019) >>
+>> endobj
+928 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [195.549 333.329 206.458 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg023) >>
+>> endobj
+929 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [211.913 333.329 222.822 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg029) >>
+>> endobj
+930 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.276 333.329 239.186 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+931 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [244.64 333.329 255.549 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+932 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [261.004 333.329 277.367 342.754]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+933 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [89.797 308.903 95.251 317.87]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg002) >>
+>> endobj
+934 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [114.353 283.2 130.717 293.073]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+935 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [136.171 283.2 152.535 293.073]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+937 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [93.44 258.36 109.804 268.08]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg117) >>
+>> endobj
+938 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.997 244.81 167.36 254.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg100) >>
+>> endobj
+939 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.815 244.81 189.178 254.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+940 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [194.633 244.81 210.997 254.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg117) >>
+>> endobj
+941 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [216.451 244.81 232.815 254.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg120) >>
+>> endobj
+942 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.968 220.832 138.877 229.69]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg011) >>
+>> endobj
+943 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.331 220.832 160.695 229.69]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+944 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.469 195.249 195.833 204.849]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+945 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [81.31 171.15 97.673 180.008]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg142) >>
+>> endobj
+946 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [103.128 171.15 119.491 180.008]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg143) >>
+>> endobj
+947 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [75.866 146.31 92.23 155.168]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg130) >>
+>> endobj
+948 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [97.684 146.31 114.048 155.168]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg142) >>
+>> endobj
+949 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [73.444 121.469 84.353 130.327]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+950 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [89.808 121.469 106.171 130.327]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+951 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [78.888 96.628 95.251 105.487]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+952 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [126.157 71.788 142.52 80.799]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg151) >>
+>> endobj
+936 0 obj <<
+/D [900 0 R /XYZ 46.771 277.554 null]
+>> endobj
+899 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+955 0 obj <<
+/Length 1675      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(144)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Bryant,)-250(144.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Buttmann,)-250(152.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Caelius)-250(Calcagninus,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Caelius)-250(Rhodiginus,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -24.946 Td[(Callicles,)-250(48)-250(foll.,)-250(63.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Carlyle,)-250(112.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Carneades,)-250(8,)-250(108.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Cassander)-250(of)-250(Macedonia,)-250(111.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Charon,)-250(135.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Christianity,)-250(126,)-250(128-32.)]TJ 0 -24.946 Td[(Christians,)-250(their)-250(atheism,)-250(9;)]TJ 10.909 -13.549 Td[(prosecutions)-250(of,)-250(10;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(demonology,)-250(83.)]TJ -10.909 -24.945 Td[(Cicero,)-250(19,)-250(105,)-250(114-17,)-250(147.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 -13.549 Td[(Nature)-250(of)-250(the)-250(Gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 83.335 0 Td[(,)-250(115.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -83.335 -13.55 Td[(On)-250(the)-250(State)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 53.935 0 Td[(,)-250(115.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -53.935 -13.549 Td[(On)-250(the)-250(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 55.157 0 Td[(,)-250(115.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -55.157 -13.549 Td[(De)-250(consolatione)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 71.204 0 Td[(,)-250(116.)]TJ -82.113 -24.945 Td[(Cinesias,)-250(60.)]TJ 0 -24.945 Td[(Copernicus,)-250(151.)]TJ 0 -24.946 Td[(Critias,)-250(13,)-250(44-50.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 -13.549 Td[(Sisyphus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.182 0 Td[(,)-250(44)-250(f.,)-250(114.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+954 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 955 0 R
+/Resources 953 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 847 0 R
+/Annots [ 956 0 R 957 0 R 958 0 R 959 0 R 960 0 R 961 0 R 962 0 R 963 0 R 964 0 R 965 0 R 966 0 R 967 0 R 968 0 R 969 0 R 970 0 R 971 0 R 972 0 R 973 0 R 974 0 R 975 0 R 976 0 R 977 0 R 978 0 R 979 0 R 980 0 R 981 0 R 982 0 R 983 0 R 984 0 R 985 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+956 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.692 515.797 145.056 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+957 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.034 491.714 158.398 500.724]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg152) >>
+>> endobj
+958 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [188.387 465.907 204.75 475.627]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+959 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.765 440.961 201.129 450.681]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+960 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [137.18 416.878 148.089 425.736]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg048) >>
+>> endobj
+961 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [174.15 416.878 185.06 425.736]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg063) >>
+>> endobj
+962 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [131.114 391.071 147.478 400.791]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg112) >>
+>> endobj
+963 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.434 366.988 149.889 375.846]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg008) >>
+>> endobj
+964 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [155.343 366.988 171.707 375.846]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg108) >>
+>> endobj
+965 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [206.845 342.042 223.209 350.901]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+966 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [131.114 317.097 147.478 326.108]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+967 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.521 291.29 166.885 301.01]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg126) >>
+>> endobj
+968 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.34 291.29 203.245 301.01]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+969 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [205.361 267.207 210.816 276.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg009) >>
+>> endobj
+970 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [176.867 252.807 187.776 262.516]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg010) >>
+>> endobj
+971 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [164.452 239.247 175.361 248.967]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+972 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.082 215.163 138.991 224.174]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg019) >>
+>> endobj
+973 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.445 215.163 160.809 224.174]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg105) >>
+>> endobj
+974 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [166.263 215.163 197.169 224.174]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+975 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.623 215.163 218.987 224.174]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+976 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [193.241 200.872 209.605 210.625]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg115) >>
+>> endobj
+977 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.841 188.065 180.205 197.076]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg115) >>
+>> endobj
+978 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [165.063 174.516 181.427 183.527]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg115) >>
+>> endobj
+979 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [181.111 160.967 197.474 169.934]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg116) >>
+>> endobj
+980 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.969 136.021 146.878 144.88]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+981 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [148.689 110.225 165.052 120.087]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg151) >>
+>> endobj
+982 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.092 86.131 139.001 95.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+983 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.456 86.131 169.907 95.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg044) >>
+>> endobj
+984 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [148.089 71.84 158.998 81.549]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg044) >>
+>> endobj
+985 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [173.54 71.84 189.903 81.549]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+953 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+988 0 obj <<
+/Length 1891      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Index)-21948(145)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Criticism)-250(of)-251(popular)-250(religion,)-251(16,)-250(17,)-251(19,)-250(35)-250(foll.,)-251(74,)-250(78,)-251(82,)-250(84,)]TJ 65.455 -13.549 Td[(88,)-250(90,)-250(99,)-250(104,)-250(109,)-250(110,)-250(122,)-250(124-26.)]TJ -65.455 -23.759 Td[(Cuthites,)-250(144.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Cynics,)-250(74,)-250(109-10,)-250(122,)-250(124,)-250(147.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Cyrenaics,)-250(75.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 -7.483 Td[([166])]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 72.755 -16.276 Td[(Daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 51.819 0 Td[(of)-250(Socrates,)-250(65,)-250(66,)-250(72-73.)]TJ -51.819 -23.759 Td[(van)-250(Dale,)-250(141-42.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Dante,)-250(135.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Deisidaimon,)-250(75.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Demeter,)-250(42,)-250(43,)-250(81.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Demetrius)-250(of)-250(Phalerum,)-250(75,)-250(93.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.91 -13.549 Td[(On)-250(Tyche)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.109 0 Td[(,)-250(93.)]TJ -53.019 -23.759 Td[(Democritus,)-250(24,)-250(42,)-250(43,)-250(44,)-250(47,)-250(52.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Demonology,)-250(81-83,)-250(105,)-250(113,)-250(127-32,)-250(134-42,)-250(148,)-250(149.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Demosthenes,)-250(92-93,)-250(96.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Devil,)-250(132,)-250(137,)-250(139,)-250(141,)-250(144.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Diagoras)-250(of)-250(Melos,)-250(13,)-250(31-34,)-250(39,)-250(50.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.91 -13.549 Td[(Apopyrgizontes)-250(logoi)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 93.032 0 Td[(,)-250(32,)-250(33.)]TJ -103.942 -23.759 Td[(Dicaearchus,)-250(98.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Diodorus)-250(Siculus,)-250(112.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Diogenes)-250(of)-250(Apollonia,)-250(13,)-250(29-30,)-250(57.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+987 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 988 0 R
+/Resources 986 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 847 0 R
+/Annots [ 989 0 R 990 0 R 991 0 R 992 0 R 993 0 R 994 0 R 995 0 R 996 0 R 997 0 R 998 0 R 999 0 R 1000 0 R 1001 0 R 1002 0 R 1003 0 R 1004 0 R 1005 0 R 1006 0 R 1007 0 R 1008 0 R 1009 0 R 1010 0 R 1011 0 R 1014 0 R 1015 0 R 1016 0 R 1017 0 R 1018 0 R 1019 0 R 1020 0 R 1021 0 R 1022 0 R 1023 0 R 1024 0 R 1025 0 R 1026 0 R 1027 0 R 1028 0 R 1029 0 R 1030 0 R 1031 0 R 1032 0 R 1033 0 R 1034 0 R 1035 0 R 1036 0 R 1037 0 R 1038 0 R 1039 0 R 1040 0 R 1041 0 R 1042 0 R 1043 0 R 1044 0 R 1045 0 R 1046 0 R 1047 0 R 1048 0 R 1049 0 R 1050 0 R 1051 0 R 1052 0 R 1053 0 R 1054 0 R 1055 0 R 1056 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+989 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [177.391 515.797 188.3 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+990 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [193.76 515.797 204.669 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg017) >>
+>> endobj
+991 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [210.128 515.797 221.037 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg019) >>
+>> endobj
+992 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [226.497 515.797 237.406 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg035) >>
+>> endobj
+993 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [263.476 515.797 274.385 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+994 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [279.845 515.797 290.754 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg078) >>
+>> endobj
+995 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [296.213 515.797 307.122 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg082) >>
+>> endobj
+996 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [312.582 515.797 323.491 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+997 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [112.226 503.11 123.135 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg088) >>
+>> endobj
+998 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.59 503.11 139.499 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg090) >>
+>> endobj
+999 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.953 503.11 155.862 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg099) >>
+>> endobj
+1000 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [161.317 503.11 177.68 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+1001 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [183.135 503.11 199.499 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+1002 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [204.953 503.11 221.317 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+1003 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [226.771 503.11 243.135 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg122) >>
+>> endobj
+1004 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [248.589 503.11 279.495 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+1005 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [88.597 479.351 104.96 488.209]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+1006 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [82.531 454.73 93.44 464.45]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1007 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [98.895 454.73 129.8 464.45]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+1008 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.255 454.73 151.619 464.45]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg122) >>
+>> endobj
+1009 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [157.073 454.73 173.437 464.45]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+1010 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [178.891 454.73 195.255 464.45]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1011 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [95.851 430.971 106.76 440.844]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+1014 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.819 408.074 163.728 417.085]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg065) >>
+>> endobj
+1015 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [169.182 408.074 180.091 417.085]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg066) >>
+>> endobj
+1016 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [185.546 408.074 210.997 417.085]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg072) >>
+>> endobj
+1017 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [91.302 384.315 122.208 393.173]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1018 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [78.277 360.556 94.64 369.567]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1019 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [107.982 336.797 118.891 345.808]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+1020 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [89.786 313.038 100.695 321.896]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+1021 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [106.15 313.038 117.059 321.896]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+1022 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [122.513 313.038 133.422 321.896]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1023 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [154.029 289.279 164.939 298.29]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+1024 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [170.393 289.279 181.302 298.29]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+1025 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [105.244 274.988 116.153 284.697]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+1026 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [103.128 251.971 114.037 260.982]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg024) >>
+>> endobj
+1027 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.491 251.971 130.4 260.982]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+1028 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.855 251.971 146.764 260.982]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+1029 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.219 251.971 163.128 260.982]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg044) >>
+>> endobj
+1030 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [168.582 251.971 179.491 260.982]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg047) >>
+>> endobj
+1031 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.946 251.971 195.855 260.982]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg052) >>
+>> endobj
+1032 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [109.193 227.35 134.644 237.223]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1033 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.099 227.35 156.462 237.223]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg105) >>
+>> endobj
+1034 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [161.917 227.35 178.28 237.223]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+1035 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [183.735 227.35 214.64 237.223]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1036 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [220.095 227.35 251 237.223]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg134) >>
+>> endobj
+1037 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [256.455 227.35 272.818 237.223]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg148) >>
+>> endobj
+1038 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [278.273 227.35 294.636 237.223]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1039 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [111.004 204.453 136.455 213.311]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg092) >>
+>> endobj
+1040 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.909 204.453 152.819 213.311]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg096) >>
+>> endobj
+1041 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [76.466 180.694 92.83 189.552]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg132) >>
+>> endobj
+1042 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [98.284 180.694 114.648 189.552]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+1043 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [120.102 180.694 136.466 189.552]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1044 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.92 180.694 158.284 189.552]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1045 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.738 180.694 180.102 189.552]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+1046 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [133.422 156.073 144.331 165.946]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1047 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [149.786 156.073 175.237 165.946]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg031) >>
+>> endobj
+1048 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [180.691 156.073 191.6 165.946]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+1049 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.055 156.073 207.964 165.946]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg050) >>
+>> endobj
+1050 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [156.168 142.644 167.077 152.353]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg032) >>
+>> endobj
+1051 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.531 142.644 183.44 152.353]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg033) >>
+>> endobj
+1052 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [106.139 119.627 117.048 128.485]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+1053 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.684 95.868 144.048 104.726]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg112) >>
+>> endobj
+1054 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [151.608 71.247 162.517 81.12]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1055 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [167.971 71.247 193.422 81.12]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg029) >>
+>> endobj
+1056 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [198.877 71.247 209.786 81.12]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg057) >>
+>> endobj
+1012 0 obj <<
+/D [987 0 R /XYZ 46.771 425.866 null]
+>> endobj
+1013 0 obj <<
+/D [987 0 R /XYZ 46.771 425.866 null]
+>> endobj
+986 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1059 0 obj <<
+/Length 1847      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(146)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Diogenes)-250(the)-250(Cynic,)-250(109.)]TJ 0 -23.556 Td[(Dionysus,)-250(42,)-250(43.)]TJ 0 -23.557 Td[(Diopeithes,)-250(28.)]TJ 0 -23.557 Td[(Dioscuri,)-250(124.)]TJ 0 -23.556 Td[(Dium,)-250(98.)]TJ 0 -23.557 Td[(Divination,)-261(18,)-260(20,)-261(26,)-260(27,)-261(28,)-261(40,)-260(97,)-261(114,)-260(131,)-261(135,)-261(137,)]TJ 65.455 -13.549 Td[(140-42.)]TJ -54.546 -13.549 Td[(Comp.)-250(Oracle.)]TJ -10.909 -23.557 Td[(Dodona,)-250(98,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -23.556 Td[(Dogmatics,)-250(108.)]TJ 0 -23.557 Td[(Domitian,)-250(11.)]TJ 0 -23.556 Td[(Dupuis,)-250(144.)]TJ 0 -23.557 Td[(Elements,)-250(divine,)-250(23,)-250(24,)-250(30,)-250(52)-250(foll.,)-250(57,)-250(81,)-250(103,)-250(127.)]TJ 0 -23.557 Td[(Eleusinian)-250(Mysteries,)-250(32,)-250(33,)-250(40,)-250(60.)]TJ 0 -23.556 Td[(Ennius,)-250(99,)-250(112.)]TJ 0 -23.557 Td[(Epicureans,)-250(Epicurus,)-250(13,)-250(76,)-250(80,)-250(83,)-250(105-7,)-250(113,)-250(147,)-250(149.)]TJ 0 -23.556 Td[(Euhemerus,)-252(Euhemerism,)-253(13,)-252(110-12,)-252(113,)-253(114,)-252(117,)-252(127,)-253(130,)]TJ 65.455 -13.55 Td[(136,)-250(137,)-250(139,)-250(140,)-250(142,)-250(143,)-250(144.)]TJ -65.455 -23.556 Td[(Euripides,)-250(16,)-250(17,)-250(21,)-250(45,)-250(46,)-250(48,)-250(51-56,)-250(62.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 -13.549 Td[(Bellerophon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 53.935 0 Td[(,)-250(53.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -53.935 -13.55 Td[(Melanippe)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 46.659 0 Td[(,)-250(55,)-250(56.)]TJ -57.568 -23.556 Td[(Fallen)-250(angels,)-250(128,)-250(129,)-250(130.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1058 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1059 0 R
+/Resources 1057 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 847 0 R
+/Annots [ 1060 0 R 1061 0 R 1062 0 R 1063 0 R 1064 0 R 1065 0 R 1066 0 R 1067 0 R 1068 0 R 1069 0 R 1070 0 R 1071 0 R 1072 0 R 1073 0 R 1074 0 R 1075 0 R 1076 0 R 1077 0 R 1078 0 R 1079 0 R 1080 0 R 1081 0 R 1082 0 R 1083 0 R 1084 0 R 1085 0 R 1086 0 R 1087 0 R 1088 0 R 1089 0 R 1090 0 R 1091 0 R 1092 0 R 1093 0 R 1094 0 R 1095 0 R 1096 0 R 1097 0 R 1098 0 R 1099 0 R 1100 0 R 1101 0 R 1102 0 R 1103 0 R 1104 0 R 1105 0 R 1106 0 R 1107 0 R 1108 0 R 1109 0 R 1110 0 R 1111 0 R 1112 0 R 1113 0 R 1114 0 R 1115 0 R 1116 0 R 1117 0 R 1118 0 R 1119 0 R 1120 0 R 1121 0 R 1122 0 R 1123 0 R 1124 0 R 1125 0 R 1126 0 R 1127 0 R 1128 0 R 1129 0 R 1130 0 R 1131 0 R 1132 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1060 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [185.049 515.797 201.412 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+1061 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.212 492.24 151.121 501.96]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+1062 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [156.576 492.24 167.485 501.96]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+1063 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.267 468.695 157.176 478.404]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+1064 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [136.569 445.989 152.932 454.847]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+1065 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [123.849 422.432 134.758 431.291]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+1066 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [145.782 398.876 156.692 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+1067 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.262 398.876 173.171 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg020) >>
+>> endobj
+1068 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [178.741 398.876 189.65 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg026) >>
+>> endobj
+1069 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [195.22 398.876 206.129 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg027) >>
+>> endobj
+1070 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [211.699 398.876 222.608 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+1071 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.178 398.876 239.087 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg040) >>
+>> endobj
+1072 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [244.657 398.876 255.567 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1073 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [261.137 398.876 277.5 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+1074 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [283.07 398.876 299.434 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg131) >>
+>> endobj
+1075 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [305.004 398.876 321.368 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1076 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [326.938 398.876 343.301 407.887]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+1077 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [158.998 386.701 189.903 394.185]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+1078 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [133.536 348.221 144.445 357.079]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+1079 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [149.9 348.221 166.263 357.079]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1080 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.267 323.802 162.631 333.522]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg108) >>
+>> endobj
+1081 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.212 301.108 151.121 309.966]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg011) >>
+>> endobj
+1082 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [130.514 276.7 146.878 286.409]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+1083 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.329 253.995 183.238 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg023) >>
+>> endobj
+1084 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [188.692 253.995 199.601 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg024) >>
+>> endobj
+1085 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [205.056 253.995 215.965 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+1086 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [221.419 253.995 232.329 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg052) >>
+>> endobj
+1087 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [258.39 253.995 269.299 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg057) >>
+>> endobj
+1088 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [274.754 253.995 285.663 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1089 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [291.117 253.995 307.481 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg103) >>
+>> endobj
+1090 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [312.936 253.995 329.299 263.005]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1091 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [190.809 229.576 201.718 239.296]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg032) >>
+>> endobj
+1092 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [207.172 229.576 218.081 239.296]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg033) >>
+>> endobj
+1093 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [223.536 229.576 234.445 239.296]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg040) >>
+>> endobj
+1094 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [239.899 229.576 250.808 239.296]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+1095 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [129.303 206.881 140.212 215.74]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg099) >>
+>> endobj
+1096 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [145.667 206.881 162.031 215.74]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg112) >>
+>> endobj
+1097 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [191.703 182.474 202.612 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1098 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [208.067 182.474 218.976 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg076) >>
+>> endobj
+1099 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [224.43 182.474 235.339 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg080) >>
+>> endobj
+1100 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [240.794 182.474 251.703 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+1101 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [257.158 182.474 282.608 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg105) >>
+>> endobj
+1102 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [288.063 182.474 304.427 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+1103 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [309.881 182.474 326.245 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1104 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [331.699 182.474 348.063 192.336]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1105 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [208.729 159.768 219.638 168.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1106 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [225.118 159.768 256.023 168.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+1107 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [261.503 159.768 277.867 168.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+1108 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [283.347 159.768 299.71 168.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+1109 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [305.19 159.768 321.554 168.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg117) >>
+>> endobj
+1110 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [327.034 159.768 343.398 168.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1111 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [348.878 159.768 365.241 168.626]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg130) >>
+>> endobj
+1112 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [158.998 146.219 175.362 155.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1113 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [180.816 146.219 197.18 155.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+1114 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.634 146.219 218.998 155.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1115 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [224.452 146.219 240.816 155.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+1116 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [246.27 146.219 262.634 155.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg142) >>
+>> endobj
+1117 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [268.089 146.219 284.452 155.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg143) >>
+>> endobj
+1118 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [289.907 146.219 306.27 155.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+1119 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [140.812 121.812 151.721 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+1120 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [157.176 121.812 168.085 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg017) >>
+>> endobj
+1121 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [173.54 121.812 184.449 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg021) >>
+>> endobj
+1122 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [189.903 121.812 200.812 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg045) >>
+>> endobj
+1123 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [206.267 121.812 217.176 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg046) >>
+>> endobj
+1124 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [222.63 121.812 233.539 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg048) >>
+>> endobj
+1125 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [238.994 121.812 264.445 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg051) >>
+>> endobj
+1126 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [269.899 121.812 280.808 131.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg062) >>
+>> endobj
+1127 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.841 108.372 174.751 118.124]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg053) >>
+>> endobj
+1128 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [156.565 94.822 167.474 104.575]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+1129 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.929 94.822 183.838 104.575]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+1130 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [156.871 71.146 173.234 80.866]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+1131 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [178.689 71.146 195.052 80.866]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+1132 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [200.507 71.146 216.87 80.866]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg130) >>
+>> endobj
+1057 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1135 0 obj <<
+/Length 1396      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Index)-21948(147)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Florentine)-250(Academy,)-250(138.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Foreign)-250(gods,)-250(70,)-250(89,)-250(103.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Fontenelle,)-250(142.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Geocentric)-250(view,)-250(150.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Geryon,)-250(135.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Giants,)-250(18.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Gorgias,)-250(37.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Hades,)-250(81.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Heavenly)-254(bodies,)-255(2,)-255(20,)-255(22,)-255(25,)-255(43,)-255(62,)-255(66,)-255(79,)-255(80,)-255(81,)-255(84,)-255(87,)]TJ 65.455 -13.55 Td[(104,)-250(127,)-250(128,)-250(130,)-250(137,)-250(139,)-250(144,)-250(149,)-250(151.)]TJ -65.455 -23.986 Td[(Heavenly)-250(phenomena,)-250(22.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Hebraism,)-250(139,)-250(143,)-250(144.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Hecataeus)-250(of)-250(Abdera,)-250(112.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Heliocentric)-250(view,)-250(151.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Hellenistic)-250(philosophy,)-250(94,)-250(103-10,)-250(119.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Hephaestus,)-250(42,)-250(43.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Heracles,)-250(74,)-250(111.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Hercules,)-250(136.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Herder,)-250(145.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Hermae,)-250(40,)-250(60.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1134 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1135 0 R
+/Resources 1133 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1184 0 R
+/Annots [ 1136 0 R 1137 0 R 1138 0 R 1139 0 R 1140 0 R 1141 0 R 1142 0 R 1143 0 R 1144 0 R 1145 0 R 1146 0 R 1147 0 R 1148 0 R 1149 0 R 1150 0 R 1151 0 R 1152 0 R 1153 0 R 1154 0 R 1155 0 R 1156 0 R 1157 0 R 1158 0 R 1159 0 R 1160 0 R 1161 0 R 1162 0 R 1163 0 R 1164 0 R 1165 0 R 1166 0 R 1167 0 R 1168 0 R 1169 0 R 1170 0 R 1171 0 R 1172 0 R 1173 0 R 1174 0 R 1175 0 R 1176 0 R 1177 0 R 1178 0 R 1179 0 R 1180 0 R 1181 0 R 1182 0 R 1183 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1136 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.604 515.797 157.968 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+1137 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [109.499 491.811 120.408 501.531]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg070) >>
+>> endobj
+1138 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.862 491.811 136.771 501.531]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg089) >>
+>> endobj
+1139 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.226 491.811 158.589 501.531]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg103) >>
+>> endobj
+1140 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [98.284 468.687 114.648 477.545]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg142) >>
+>> endobj
+1141 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [124.019 444.701 140.382 453.711]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg150) >>
+>> endobj
+1142 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [84.942 419.853 101.306 429.725]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1143 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [80.71 396.728 91.619 405.587]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+1144 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [86.764 371.881 97.673 381.601]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg037) >>
+>> endobj
+1145 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [79.488 348.756 90.397 357.614]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1146 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.339 323.908 130.793 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg002) >>
+>> endobj
+1147 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [136.302 323.908 147.211 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg020) >>
+>> endobj
+1148 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.72 323.908 163.629 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg022) >>
+>> endobj
+1149 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [169.138 323.908 180.048 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg025) >>
+>> endobj
+1150 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [185.557 323.908 196.466 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+1151 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [201.975 323.908 212.884 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg062) >>
+>> endobj
+1152 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [218.393 323.908 229.302 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg066) >>
+>> endobj
+1153 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [234.811 323.908 245.72 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg079) >>
+>> endobj
+1154 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [251.229 323.908 262.138 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg080) >>
+>> endobj
+1155 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [267.647 323.908 278.556 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1156 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [284.065 323.908 294.974 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+1157 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [300.483 323.908 311.393 333.781]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg087) >>
+>> endobj
+1158 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [112.226 311.221 128.59 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+1159 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [134.044 311.221 150.408 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1160 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [155.862 311.221 172.226 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+1161 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [177.68 311.221 194.044 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg130) >>
+>> endobj
+1162 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [199.499 311.221 215.862 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+1163 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [221.317 311.221 237.68 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1164 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [243.135 311.221 259.498 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+1165 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [264.953 311.221 281.317 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1166 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [286.771 311.221 303.135 320.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg151) >>
+>> endobj
+1167 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [147.048 286.373 157.957 296.093]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg022) >>
+>> endobj
+1168 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [94.64 263.249 111.004 272.107]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1169 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.459 263.249 132.822 272.107]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg143) >>
+>> endobj
+1170 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [138.277 263.249 154.64 272.107]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg144) >>
+>> endobj
+1171 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [143.699 239.263 160.062 248.121]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg112) >>
+>> endobj
+1172 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [130.084 215.277 146.448 224.288]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg151) >>
+>> endobj
+1173 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.713 190.429 161.622 200.149]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg094) >>
+>> endobj
+1174 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [167.077 190.429 197.982 200.149]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg103) >>
+>> endobj
+1175 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [203.437 190.429 219.8 200.149]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg119) >>
+>> endobj
+1176 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [102.517 166.454 113.426 176.163]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+1177 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.88 166.454 129.79 176.163]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+1178 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [90.386 143.319 101.295 152.177]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1179 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [106.75 143.319 123.113 152.177]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+1180 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [90.997 119.333 107.36 128.191]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1181 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [82.51 95.347 98.873 104.357]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg145) >>
+>> endobj
+1182 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [86.753 71.36 97.662 80.219]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg040) >>
+>> endobj
+1183 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [103.117 71.36 114.026 80.219]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+1133 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1187 0 obj <<
+/Length 1291      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(148)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Hermes,)-250(124.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Hermias,)-250(83.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Herodotus,)-250(28,)-250(29.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Hesiod,)-250(16,)-250(18.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Heyne,)-250(152.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Hippo)-250(of)-250(Rhegium,)-250(13,)-250(29-30.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Holy)-250(War,)-250(96.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Homer,)-250(16,)-250(18,)-250(43,)-250(68,)-250(106.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Horace,)-250(117.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Huet,)-250(139.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Hylozoism,)-250(23.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Ideas,)-250(Platonic,)-250(80.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Idolatry)-250(attacked,)-250(123.)]TJ 10.909 -13.549 Td[(See)-250(also)-250(Image)-250(Worship.)]TJ -10.909 -23.939 Td[(Ignorance,)-250(Socratic,)-250(68.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Image)-250(Worship,)-250(127,)-250(128,)-250(131-37.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Jews,)-250(their)-250(atheism,)-250(9,)-250(126.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Josephus,)-250(128.)]TJ 0 -23.939 Td[(Judaism,)-250(126,)-250(127-28,)-250(129.)]TJ 0 -23.94 Td[(Juno)-250(Regina,)-250(136.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1186 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1187 0 R
+/Resources 1185 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1184 0 R
+/Annots [ 1188 0 R 1189 0 R 1190 0 R 1191 0 R 1192 0 R 1193 0 R 1194 0 R 1195 0 R 1196 0 R 1197 0 R 1198 0 R 1199 0 R 1200 0 R 1201 0 R 1202 0 R 1203 0 R 1204 0 R 1205 0 R 1206 0 R 1207 0 R 1208 0 R 1209 0 R 1211 0 R 1212 0 R 1213 0 R 1214 0 R 1215 0 R 1216 0 R 1217 0 R 1218 0 R 1219 0 R 1220 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1188 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.925 516.659 149.289 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+1189 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.958 492.719 146.867 501.577]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+1190 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.445 468.78 155.354 477.638]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+1191 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [160.809 468.78 171.718 477.638]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg029) >>
+>> endobj
+1192 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [129.903 444.84 140.812 453.698]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+1193 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.267 444.84 157.176 453.698]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+1194 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.471 420.039 143.834 429.912]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg152) >>
+>> endobj
+1195 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [180.816 396.1 191.725 405.82]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1196 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.18 396.1 222.63 405.82]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg029) >>
+>> endobj
+1197 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.318 372.16 153.227 381.88]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg096) >>
+>> endobj
+1198 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [129.292 349.082 140.202 357.941]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+1199 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [145.656 349.082 156.565 357.941]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+1200 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.02 349.082 172.929 357.941]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+1201 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [178.383 349.082 189.292 357.941]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg068) >>
+>> endobj
+1202 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [194.747 349.082 211.11 357.941]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg106) >>
+>> endobj
+1203 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [130.492 325.143 146.856 334.001]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg117) >>
+>> endobj
+1204 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [120.205 301.203 136.569 310.062]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1205 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.878 276.402 157.787 286.122]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg023) >>
+>> endobj
+1206 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.231 253.325 174.14 262.183]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg080) >>
+>> endobj
+1207 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.612 228.523 188.976 238.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg123) >>
+>> endobj
+1208 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [143.234 214.974 210.794 224.694]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (index-image-worship) >>
+>> endobj
+1209 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [183.816 191.035 194.725 200.755]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg068) >>
+>> endobj
+1211 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [166.558 167.095 182.921 176.815]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1212 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [188.376 167.095 204.74 176.815]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+1213 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [210.194 167.095 241.099 176.815]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg131) >>
+>> endobj
+1214 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [182.321 144.017 187.776 152.876]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg009) >>
+>> endobj
+1215 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [193.23 144.017 209.594 152.876]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg126) >>
+>> endobj
+1216 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [138.391 119.227 154.754 128.936]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+1217 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [134.758 96.138 151.121 104.997]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg126) >>
+>> endobj
+1218 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [156.576 96.138 187.481 104.997]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1219 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [192.936 96.138 209.3 104.997]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+1220 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [153.238 71.337 169.601 81.057]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1210 0 obj <<
+/D [1186 0 R /XYZ 93.543 185.839 null]
+>> endobj
+1185 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1223 0 obj <<
+/Length 1450      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Index)-21948(149)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Jupiter)-250(\050in)-250(Dante\051,)-250(135;)]TJ 10.91 -13.549 Td[(\050in)-250(the)-250(Theba\357s,\051)-250(136.)]TJ -10.91 -23.76 Td[(Jupiter-priest,)-250(100.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Kepler,)-250(151.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Kronos,)-250(111.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Lampon,)-250(26.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Lobeck,)-250(152.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Lucian,)-250(110,)-250(123-26.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.91 -13.549 Td[(Timon)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 27.883 0 Td[(,)-250(124.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -27.883 -13.549 Td[(Dialogues)-250(of)-250(the)-250(Gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 97.876 0 Td[(,)-250(125.)]TJ -108.786 -23.76 Td[(Lucretius,)-250(106.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Luna)-250(Jovis)-250(filia,)-250(136.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Macedonia,)-250(93.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Machiavelli,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Magic,)-250(136-37.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Mannhardt,)-250(152.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Mantinea,)-250(constitution)-250(of,)-250(32.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Marcus)-250(Aurelius,)-250(11,)-250(121.)]TJ 0 -23.759 Td[(Mediaeval)-250(epic)-250(poets,)-250(136.)]TJ 0 -23.76 Td[(Megarians,)-250(74,)-250(107.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf 291.024 -7.483 Td[([167])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -291.024 -16.277 Td[(Menippus)-250(of)-250(Gadara,)-250(110.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1222 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1223 0 R
+/Resources 1221 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1184 0 R
+/Annots [ 1224 0 R 1225 0 R 1226 0 R 1227 0 R 1228 0 R 1229 0 R 1230 0 R 1231 0 R 1232 0 R 1233 0 R 1234 0 R 1235 0 R 1236 0 R 1237 0 R 1238 0 R 1239 0 R 1240 0 R 1241 0 R 1242 0 R 1243 0 R 1244 0 R 1245 0 R 1246 0 R 1248 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1224 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [129.179 515.808 145.542 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1225 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.211 502.695 148.575 511.968]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1226 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [109.793 478.499 126.157 488.208]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg100) >>
+>> endobj
+1227 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [81.91 454.739 98.273 464.601]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg151) >>
+>> endobj
+1228 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [84.342 431.831 100.706 440.689]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+1229 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [88.586 407.22 99.495 416.929]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg026) >>
+>> endobj
+1230 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [84.942 384.312 101.306 393.322]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg152) >>
+>> endobj
+1231 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [82.521 360.552 98.884 369.41]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+1232 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [104.339 360.552 135.244 369.41]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg123) >>
+>> endobj
+1233 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [91.019 347.003 107.382 355.861]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+1234 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [161.011 332.712 177.375 342.465]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg125) >>
+>> endobj
+1235 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [93.43 309.694 109.793 318.552]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg106) >>
+>> endobj
+1236 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [120.102 285.934 136.466 294.793]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1237 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [100.695 262.175 111.604 271.033]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+1238 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [104.339 238.415 120.702 247.273]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1239 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [80.099 213.794 111.004 223.514]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1240 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [100.095 190.896 116.459 199.907]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg152) >>
+>> endobj
+1241 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.222 167.136 173.131 175.995]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg032) >>
+>> endobj
+1242 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.24 143.377 136.15 152.235]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg011) >>
+>> endobj
+1243 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.604 143.377 157.968 152.235]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+1244 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.931 118.766 161.295 128.475]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1245 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [98.273 94.996 109.182 104.716]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1246 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [114.637 94.996 131 104.716]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg107) >>
+>> endobj
+1248 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.899 71.247 158.262 80.956]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+1247 0 obj <<
+/D [1222 0 R /XYZ 46.771 89.891 null]
+>> endobj
+1221 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1251 0 obj <<
+/Length 1615      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(150)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Mexico,)-250(137.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Middle)-250(Ages,)-250(133,)-250(135-39.)]TJ 0 -24.679 Td[(Milton)-250(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 36.066 0 Td[(Paradise)-250(Lost)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 60.916 0 Td[(\051,)-250(134,)-250(135,)-250(141.)]TJ -96.982 -24.678 Td[(Minos,)-250(135.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Miracles,)-250(pagan,)-250(131,)-250(132.)]TJ 0 -24.679 Td[(Modesty,)-250(religions,)-250(55,)-250(70,)-250(73.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Moschion,)-250(46.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Moses)-250(and)-250(his)-250(sister,)-250(139.)]TJ 0 -24.679 Td[(Monotheism,)-250(9,)-250(12,)-250(23,)-250(74,)-250(80,)-250(83,)-250(127)-250(foll.,)-250(139,)-250(148,)-250(151.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(M\374ller,)-250(K.)-250(O.,)-250(152.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Natalis)-250(Comes,)-250(139)-250(foll.)]TJ 0 -24.679 Td[(Naturalism,)-250(Ionian,)-250(21,)-250(22-25,)-250(30-31,)-250(52,)-250(57.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Negroes,)-250(18.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Neo-Platonists,)-250(83,)-250(121.)]TJ 0 -24.679 Td[(Neo-Pythagoreans,)-250(83,)-250(121.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Nero,)-250(11.)]TJ 0 -24.678 Td[(Newton,)-250(151.)]TJ 0 -24.679 Td[(Nile,)-250(42.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -24.678 Td[(Nomos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 33.033 0 Td[(\050and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.113 0 Td[(Physis)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 28.483 0 Td[(\051,)-250(35,)-250(36,)-250(38,)-250(63,)-250(74.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1250 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1251 0 R
+/Resources 1249 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1184 0 R
+/Annots [ 1252 0 R 1253 0 R 1254 0 R 1255 0 R 1256 0 R 1257 0 R 1258 0 R 1259 0 R 1260 0 R 1261 0 R 1262 0 R 1263 0 R 1264 0 R 1265 0 R 1266 0 R 1267 0 R 1268 0 R 1269 0 R 1270 0 R 1271 0 R 1272 0 R 1273 0 R 1274 0 R 1275 0 R 1276 0 R 1277 0 R 1278 0 R 1279 0 R 1280 0 R 1281 0 R 1282 0 R 1283 0 R 1284 0 R 1285 0 R 1286 0 R 1287 0 R 1288 0 R 1289 0 R 1290 0 R 1291 0 R 1292 0 R 1293 0 R 1294 0 R 1295 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1252 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.325 516.659 148.689 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+1253 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [155.66 491.119 172.023 500.991]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg133) >>
+>> endobj
+1254 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [177.478 491.119 208.383 500.991]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1255 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [199.612 466.887 215.976 476.313]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg134) >>
+>> endobj
+1256 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [221.43 466.887 237.794 476.313]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1257 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [243.248 466.887 259.612 476.313]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1258 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [126.881 442.624 143.245 451.635]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1259 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [168.674 417.084 185.038 426.803]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg131) >>
+>> endobj
+1260 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [190.492 417.084 206.856 426.803]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg132) >>
+>> endobj
+1261 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [180.816 392.405 191.725 402.278]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+1262 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.18 392.405 208.089 402.278]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg070) >>
+>> endobj
+1263 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [213.543 392.405 224.452 402.278]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg073) >>
+>> endobj
+1264 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.634 368.589 153.543 377.447]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg046) >>
+>> endobj
+1265 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [187.176 343.91 203.54 352.768]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1266 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [154.154 319.232 159.609 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg009) >>
+>> endobj
+1267 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [165.063 319.232 175.972 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg012) >>
+>> endobj
+1268 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [181.427 319.232 192.336 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg023) >>
+>> endobj
+1269 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.79 319.232 208.699 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1270 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [214.154 319.232 225.063 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg080) >>
+>> endobj
+1271 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [230.518 319.232 241.427 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+1272 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [246.881 319.232 263.245 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1273 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [289.307 319.232 305.67 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1274 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [311.125 319.232 327.488 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg148) >>
+>> endobj
+1275 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [332.943 319.232 349.306 328.243]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg151) >>
+>> endobj
+1276 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [158.081 294.554 174.445 303.564]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg152) >>
+>> endobj
+1277 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.936 269.875 179.3 278.733]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1278 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [180.805 245.197 191.714 254.208]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg021) >>
+>> endobj
+1279 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.169 245.197 222.619 254.208]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg022) >>
+>> endobj
+1280 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.074 245.197 253.525 254.208]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+1281 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [258.979 245.197 269.888 254.208]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg052) >>
+>> endobj
+1282 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [275.343 245.197 286.252 254.208]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg057) >>
+>> endobj
+1283 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.347 219.657 146.256 229.377]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+1284 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.241 195.84 174.15 204.698]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+1285 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.605 195.84 195.969 204.698]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+1286 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.583 170.3 190.492 180.02]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+1287 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [195.947 170.3 212.31 180.02]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+1288 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [120.805 146.483 131.714 155.342]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg011) >>
+>> endobj
+1289 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [133.536 121.805 149.9 130.816]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg151) >>
+>> endobj
+1290 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.783 97.127 128.692 105.985]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+1291 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [186.26 71.707 197.169 81.459]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg035) >>
+>> endobj
+1292 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.623 71.707 213.532 81.459]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg036) >>
+>> endobj
+1293 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [218.987 71.707 229.896 81.459]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg038) >>
+>> endobj
+1294 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [235.35 71.707 246.259 81.459]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg063) >>
+>> endobj
+1295 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [251.714 71.707 262.623 81.459]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1249 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1298 0 obj <<
+/Length 1722      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Index)-21948(151)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Nymphs,)-250(136.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Oenomaus)-250(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 53.019 0 Td[(The)-250(Swindlers)-250(Unmasked)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 110.901 0 Td[(\051,)-250(122-23,)-250(126.)]TJ -163.92 -23.609 Td[(Old)-250(Testament,)-250(127,)-250(129.)]TJ 0 -23.608 Td[(Oracle)-250(of)-250(Ammon,)-250(97;)-250(oracles)-250(of)-250(Boeotia,)-250(97;)]TJ 10.91 -13.55 Td[(Delphic)-254(Oracle,)-256(28,)-255(60,)-256(67,)-255(68,)-256(71,)-255(72,)-256(77,)-255(93,)-256(96,)-255(97,)-255(123,)]TJ 65.454 -13.549 Td[(141;)]TJ -65.454 -13.549 Td[(decay)-250(of)-250(oracles,)-250(96-97;)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(oracles)-250(explained)-250(by)-250(priestly)-250(fraud,)-250(123,)-250(141-42.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Ovid,)-250(117.)]TJ -10.91 -23.609 Td[(Paganism)-250(of)-250(Antiquity,)-250(its)-250(character,)-250(15.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Panchaia,)-250(111.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Parmenides,)-250(21.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Pantheism,)-250(20,)-250(23,)-250(103,)-250(119,)-250(122,)-250(127.)]TJ 0 -23.608 Td[(Paul,)-250(St.,)-250(128.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Pericles,)-250(25,)-250(26,)-250(27,)-250(28,)-250(29,)-250(31,)-250(124.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Peripatetics,)-250(147,)-250(149.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Peru,)-250(137.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Pheidias,)-250(27.)]TJ 0 -23.608 Td[(Philip)-250(III.)-250(of)-250(Macedonia,)-250(96.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Philip)-250(V.)-250(of)-250(Macedonia,)-250(97-98.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Philo,)-250(128.)]TJ 0 -23.609 Td[(Phocians,)-250(96.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1297 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1298 0 R
+/Resources 1296 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1184 0 R
+/Annots [ 1299 0 R 1300 0 R 1301 0 R 1302 0 R 1303 0 R 1304 0 R 1305 0 R 1306 0 R 1307 0 R 1308 0 R 1309 0 R 1310 0 R 1311 0 R 1312 0 R 1313 0 R 1314 0 R 1315 0 R 1316 0 R 1317 0 R 1318 0 R 1319 0 R 1320 0 R 1321 0 R 1322 0 R 1323 0 R 1324 0 R 1325 0 R 1326 0 R 1327 0 R 1328 0 R 1329 0 R 1330 0 R 1331 0 R 1332 0 R 1333 0 R 1334 0 R 1335 0 R 1336 0 R 1337 0 R 1338 0 R 1339 0 R 1340 0 R 1341 0 R 1342 0 R 1343 0 R 1344 0 R 1345 0 R 1346 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1299 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [89.197 515.797 105.56 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1300 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [219.778 492.635 250.684 502.017]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg122) >>
+>> endobj
+1301 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [256.138 492.635 272.502 502.017]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg126) >>
+>> endobj
+1302 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [116.764 469.441 133.128 478.299]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1303 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [138.582 469.441 154.946 478.299]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+1304 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [131.6 445.832 142.51 454.69]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1305 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [233.098 445.832 244.007 454.69]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1306 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [129.58 431.432 140.489 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+1307 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.003 431.432 156.913 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+1308 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.427 431.432 173.336 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg067) >>
+>> endobj
+1309 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [178.85 431.432 189.759 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg068) >>
+>> endobj
+1310 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [195.273 431.432 206.182 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg071) >>
+>> endobj
+1311 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [211.696 431.432 222.605 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg072) >>
+>> endobj
+1312 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.119 431.432 239.028 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+1313 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [244.542 431.432 255.451 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+1314 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [260.965 431.432 271.874 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg096) >>
+>> endobj
+1315 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [277.389 431.432 288.298 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1316 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [293.812 431.432 310.175 441.141]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg123) >>
+>> endobj
+1317 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [123.135 418.734 139.499 427.592]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1318 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [134.011 404.323 159.462 414.043]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg096) >>
+>> endobj
+1319 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [214.008 390.774 230.371 400.494]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg123) >>
+>> endobj
+1320 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [235.826 390.774 266.731 400.494]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1321 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [84.953 378.086 101.317 386.944]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg117) >>
+>> endobj
+1322 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [209.48 353.616 220.389 363.488]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg015) >>
+>> endobj
+1323 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [91.608 330.869 107.971 339.727]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+1324 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [103.128 307.26 114.037 316.118]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg021) >>
+>> endobj
+1325 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [97.684 283.651 108.593 292.509]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg020) >>
+>> endobj
+1326 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [114.048 283.651 124.957 292.509]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg023) >>
+>> endobj
+1327 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [130.411 283.651 146.775 292.509]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg103) >>
+>> endobj
+1328 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.229 283.651 168.593 292.509]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg119) >>
+>> endobj
+1329 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [174.048 283.651 190.411 292.509]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg122) >>
+>> endobj
+1330 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [195.866 283.651 212.229 292.509]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg127) >>
+>> endobj
+1331 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [88.902 260.042 105.266 268.9]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+1332 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [86.764 236.433 97.673 245.444]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg025) >>
+>> endobj
+1333 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [103.128 236.433 114.037 245.444]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg026) >>
+>> endobj
+1334 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [119.491 236.433 130.4 245.444]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg027) >>
+>> endobj
+1335 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.855 236.433 146.764 245.444]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+1336 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.218 236.433 163.128 245.444]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg029) >>
+>> endobj
+1337 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [168.582 236.433 179.491 245.444]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg031) >>
+>> endobj
+1338 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.946 236.433 201.309 245.444]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+1339 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [103.128 211.974 119.491 221.683]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1340 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [124.946 211.974 141.309 221.683]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1341 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [72.222 189.216 88.586 198.074]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg137) >>
+>> endobj
+1342 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [89.197 165.607 100.106 174.465]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg027) >>
+>> endobj
+1343 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [157.662 141.147 168.571 150.856]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg096) >>
+>> endobj
+1344 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [154.64 117.539 180.091 127.248]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1345 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [75.266 94.781 91.63 103.639]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+1346 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [91.619 71.172 102.528 80.03]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg096) >>
+>> endobj
+1296 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1349 0 obj <<
+/Length 2593      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(152)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F28 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Physis)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 31.211 0 Td[(\050and)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 22.113 0 Td[(Nomos)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 30.305 0 Td[(\051,)-250(35,)-250(36,)-250(63,)-250(74.)]TJ -83.629 -24.601 Td[(Pindar,)-250(16,)-250(17,)-250(52,)-250(71.)]TJ 0 -24.6 Td[(Plato,)-255(13,)-255(39,)-255(48,)-255(49,)-254(50,)-255(56,)-255(59,)-255(61-63,)-255(65,)-255(66,)-255(72,)-255(76-81,)-255(82,)]TJ 65.455 -13.549 Td[(84,)-250(113,)-250(147.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -54.546 -13.55 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(,)-250(59,)-250(65,)-250(66,)-250(68,)-250(72,)-250(78,)-250(79.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -36.36 -13.549 Td[(Euthyphron)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 51.513 0 Td[(,)-250(67,)-250(76.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -51.513 -13.549 Td[(Gorgias)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 35.76 0 Td[(,)-250(48)-250(foll.,)-250(63,)-250(77.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -35.76 -13.549 Td[(Laws)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 23.04 0 Td[(,)-250(61)-250(foll.,)-250(77,)-250(78,)-250(79,)-250(80.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -23.04 -13.549 Td[(Republic)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 38.782 0 Td[(,)-250(50,)-250(56,)-250(77,)-250(78.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -38.782 -13.55 Td[(Symposium)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 49.691 0 Td[(,)-250(82.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -49.691 -13.549 Td[(Timaeus)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.971 0 Td[(,)-250(77,)-250(79,)-250(80.)]TJ -47.88 -24.6 Td[(Platonism,)-250(148.)]TJ 0 -24.601 Td[(Plethon,)-250(138.)]TJ 0 -24.601 Td[(Pliny)-250(the)-250(Elder,)-250(94,)-250(95,)-250(118,)-250(147.)]TJ 0 -24.6 Td[(Plutarch)-250(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 42.72 0 Td[(de)-250(def.)-250(orac.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.535 0 Td[(\051,)-250(97.)]TJ -97.255 -24.601 Td[(Polybius,)-250(48,)-250(90-91,)-250(94,)-250(99,)-250(113-14,)-250(147;)]TJ 10.909 -13.549 Td[(Stoicism)-250(in)-250(P.,)-250(114.)]TJ -10.909 -24.601 Td[(Pomponazzi)-250(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 60.295 0 Td[(De)-250(Incantat.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 54.534 0 Td[(\051,)-250(141.)]TJ -114.829 -24.601 Td[(Poseidon,)-250(42,)-250(81.)]TJ 0 -24.6 Td[(Poseidonius,)-250(104.)]TJ 0 -24.601 Td[(Prodicus)-250(of)-250(Ceos,)-250(13,)-250(42-44,)-250(104.)]TJ 0 -24.601 Td[(Protagoras)-250(of)-250(Abdera,)-250(13,)-250(39-42,)-250(47.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 -13.549 Td[(On)-250(the)-250(Gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 55.146 0 Td[(,)-250(39)-250(foll.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -55.146 -13.549 Td[(Original)-250(State)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 62.127 0 Td[(,)-250(47.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1348 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1349 0 R
+/Resources 1347 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1184 0 R
+/Annots [ 1350 0 R 1351 0 R 1352 0 R 1353 0 R 1354 0 R 1355 0 R 1356 0 R 1357 0 R 1358 0 R 1359 0 R 1360 0 R 1361 0 R 1362 0 R 1363 0 R 1364 0 R 1365 0 R 1366 0 R 1367 0 R 1368 0 R 1369 0 R 1370 0 R 1371 0 R 1372 0 R 1373 0 R 1374 0 R 1375 0 R 1376 0 R 1377 0 R 1378 0 R 1379 0 R 1380 0 R 1381 0 R 1382 0 R 1383 0 R 1384 0 R 1385 0 R 1386 0 R 1387 0 R 1388 0 R 1389 0 R 1390 0 R 1391 0 R 1392 0 R 1393 0 R 1394 0 R 1395 0 R 1396 0 R 1397 0 R 1398 0 R 1399 0 R 1400 0 R 1401 0 R 1402 0 R 1403 0 R 1404 0 R 1405 0 R 1406 0 R 1407 0 R 1408 0 R 1409 0 R 1410 0 R 1411 0 R 1412 0 R 1413 0 R 1414 0 R 1415 0 R 1416 0 R 1417 0 R 1418 0 R 1419 0 R 1420 0 R 1421 0 R 1422 0 R 1423 0 R 1424 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1350 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [186.26 515.917 197.169 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg035) >>
+>> endobj
+1351 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.623 515.917 213.532 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg036) >>
+>> endobj
+1352 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [218.987 515.917 229.896 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg063) >>
+>> endobj
+1353 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [235.35 515.917 246.259 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1354 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.481 492.058 138.391 501.069]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+1355 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [143.845 492.058 154.754 501.069]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg017) >>
+>> endobj
+1356 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [160.209 492.058 171.118 501.069]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg052) >>
+>> endobj
+1357 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [176.572 492.058 187.481 501.069]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg071) >>
+>> endobj
+1358 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [121.48 467.457 132.389 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1359 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [137.897 467.457 148.806 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+1360 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [154.314 467.457 165.223 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg048) >>
+>> endobj
+1361 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [170.731 467.457 181.64 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg049) >>
+>> endobj
+1362 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [187.148 467.457 198.057 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg050) >>
+>> endobj
+1363 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [203.564 467.457 214.474 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+1364 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [219.981 467.457 230.89 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg059) >>
+>> endobj
+1365 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [236.398 467.457 261.849 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg061) >>
+>> endobj
+1366 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [267.357 467.457 278.266 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg065) >>
+>> endobj
+1367 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [283.774 467.457 294.683 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg066) >>
+>> endobj
+1368 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [300.191 467.457 311.1 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg072) >>
+>> endobj
+1369 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [316.607 467.457 342.058 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg076) >>
+>> endobj
+1370 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [347.566 467.457 358.475 476.468]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg082) >>
+>> endobj
+1371 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [158.998 453.908 169.907 462.766]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+1372 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [175.362 453.908 191.725 462.766]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+1373 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.18 453.908 213.543 462.766]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1374 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.267 439.617 157.176 449.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg059) >>
+>> endobj
+1375 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [162.631 439.617 173.54 449.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg065) >>
+>> endobj
+1376 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [178.994 439.617 189.903 449.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg066) >>
+>> endobj
+1377 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [195.358 439.617 206.267 449.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg068) >>
+>> endobj
+1378 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [211.721 439.617 222.63 449.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg072) >>
+>> endobj
+1379 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.085 439.617 238.994 449.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg078) >>
+>> endobj
+1380 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [244.449 439.617 255.358 449.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg079) >>
+>> endobj
+1381 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [161.42 426.068 172.329 435.777]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg067) >>
+>> endobj
+1382 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [177.783 426.068 188.692 435.777]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg076) >>
+>> endobj
+1383 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [145.667 412.519 156.576 422.119]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg048) >>
+>> endobj
+1384 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [182.638 412.519 193.547 422.119]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg063) >>
+>> endobj
+1385 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [199.001 412.519 209.91 422.119]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+1386 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.947 399.711 143.856 408.57]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg061) >>
+>> endobj
+1387 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [169.918 399.711 180.827 408.57]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+1388 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [186.281 399.711 197.19 408.57]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg078) >>
+>> endobj
+1389 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.645 399.711 213.554 408.57]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg079) >>
+>> endobj
+1390 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [219.009 399.711 229.918 408.57]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg080) >>
+>> endobj
+1391 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [148.689 385.42 159.598 395.173]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg050) >>
+>> endobj
+1392 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [165.052 385.42 175.961 395.173]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+1393 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [181.416 385.42 192.325 395.173]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+1394 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.78 385.42 208.689 395.173]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg078) >>
+>> endobj
+1395 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [159.598 371.871 170.507 381.471]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg082) >>
+>> endobj
+1396 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.878 359.064 157.787 367.922]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+1397 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.241 359.064 174.151 367.922]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg079) >>
+>> endobj
+1398 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.605 359.064 190.514 367.922]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg080) >>
+>> endobj
+1399 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.645 334.463 159.009 343.321]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg148) >>
+>> endobj
+1400 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.336 309.863 148.7 318.721]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+1401 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [164.452 284.4 175.361 294.273]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg094) >>
+>> endobj
+1402 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [180.816 284.4 191.725 294.273]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg095) >>
+>> endobj
+1403 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [197.179 284.4 213.543 294.273]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg118) >>
+>> endobj
+1404 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [218.998 284.4 235.361 294.273]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1405 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [199.885 259.919 210.794 269.628]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1406 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [137.191 235.199 148.1 244.919]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg048) >>
+>> endobj
+1407 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [153.554 235.199 179.005 244.919]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg090) >>
+>> endobj
+1408 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.46 235.199 195.369 244.919]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg094) >>
+>> endobj
+1409 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [200.823 235.199 211.732 244.919]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg099) >>
+>> endobj
+1410 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [217.187 235.199 248.092 244.919]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+1411 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [253.547 235.199 269.91 244.919]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1412 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [170.834 222.511 187.198 231.369]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+1413 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [217.46 197.06 233.823 206.769]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1414 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [139.001 173.31 149.911 182.168]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+1415 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [155.365 173.31 166.274 182.168]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1416 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [151.732 148.709 168.096 157.567]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+1417 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [173.54 124.109 184.449 132.967]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1418 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [189.903 124.109 215.354 132.967]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg042) >>
+>> endobj
+1419 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [220.809 124.109 237.172 132.967]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+1420 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [192.303 98.646 203.212 108.366]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1421 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [208.667 98.646 234.118 108.366]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+1422 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [239.572 98.646 250.481 108.366]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg047) >>
+>> endobj
+1423 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [165.052 85.959 175.961 94.926]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg039) >>
+>> endobj
+1424 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.034 71.668 182.943 81.377]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg047) >>
+>> endobj
+1347 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1427 0 obj <<
+/Length 1696      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Index)-21948(153)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Providence,)-250(60,)-250(61,)-250(78,)-250(105,)-250(118,)-250(122.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Pythia,)-250(93.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Reaction,)-250(religious,)-250(of)-250(second)-250(century,)-250(120-21,)-250(125;)]TJ 10.91 -13.55 Td[(of)-250(Augustus,)-250(see)-250(Augustus.)]TJ -10.91 -23.808 Td[(Reinterpretation)-250(of)-250(the)-250(conceptions)-250(of)-250(the)-250(gods,)-250(2.)]TJ 10.91 -13.549 Td[(See)-250(also)-250(Allegorical)-250(interpretation.)]TJ -10.91 -23.808 Td[(Religion)-250(a)-250(political)-250(invention,)-250(47,)-250(114.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Religious)-254(thought,)-255(early,)-255(of)-254(Greece,)-255(16-17,)-255(52,)-255(54,)-255(55,)-255(69-70,)]TJ 65.455 -13.55 Td[(71,)-250(84,)-250(88,)-250(98,)-250(107.)]TJ -65.455 -23.808 Td[(Renaissance,)-250(133,)-250(138,)-250(139)-250(foll.,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Rohde,)-250(152.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Roman)-250(Academy,)-250(138.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Roman)-250(religion,)-250(90,)-250(99-100,)-250(101-2.)]TJ 0 -23.809 Td[(Roman)-250(State-worship,)-250(decay)-250(of,)-250(98-103.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Romance)-250(of)-250(Troy,)-250(136.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Romances,)-250(95-96.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Rome's)-250(treatment)-250(of)-250(atheism,)-250(8-11.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Rousseau,)-250(145.)]TJ 0 -23.809 Td[(Scepticism,)-250(107-8,)-250(114,)-250(147.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Schoolmen,)-250(135.)]TJ 0 -23.808 Td[(Seneca,)-250(110,)-250(122.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1426 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1427 0 R
+/Resources 1425 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1472 0 R
+/Annots [ 1428 0 R 1429 0 R 1430 0 R 1431 0 R 1432 0 R 1433 0 R 1434 0 R 1435 0 R 1436 0 R 1437 0 R 1438 0 R 1439 0 R 1440 0 R 1441 0 R 1442 0 R 1443 0 R 1444 0 R 1445 0 R 1446 0 R 1447 0 R 1448 0 R 1449 0 R 1450 0 R 1451 0 R 1452 0 R 1453 0 R 1454 0 R 1455 0 R 1456 0 R 1457 0 R 1458 0 R 1459 0 R 1460 0 R 1461 0 R 1462 0 R 1463 0 R 1464 0 R 1465 0 R 1466 0 R 1467 0 R 1468 0 R 1469 0 R 1470 0 R 1471 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1428 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [101.306 516.659 112.215 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+1429 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [117.67 516.659 128.579 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg061) >>
+>> endobj
+1430 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [134.033 516.659 144.942 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg078) >>
+>> endobj
+1431 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.397 516.659 166.76 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg105) >>
+>> endobj
+1432 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.215 516.659 188.578 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg118) >>
+>> endobj
+1433 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [194.033 516.659 210.397 525.67]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg122) >>
+>> endobj
+1434 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [80.11 491.989 91.019 501.709]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg093) >>
+>> endobj
+1435 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [217.651 468.18 248.557 478.053]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg120) >>
+>> endobj
+1436 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [254.011 468.18 270.375 478.053]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg125) >>
+>> endobj
+1437 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.822 454.631 174.037 464.351]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (index-augustus) >>
+>> endobj
+1438 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [257.044 430.823 262.498 440.543]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg002) >>
+>> endobj
+1439 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [96.462 417.274 207.048 426.994]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (index-allegorical-interpretation) >>
+>> endobj
+1440 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.807 393.466 190.717 403.186]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg047) >>
+>> endobj
+1441 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [196.171 393.466 212.535 403.186]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+1442 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [205.781 369.657 231.232 379.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+1443 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [236.741 369.657 247.65 379.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg052) >>
+>> endobj
+1444 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [253.159 369.657 264.068 379.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg054) >>
+>> endobj
+1445 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [269.577 369.657 280.486 379.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+1446 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [285.994 369.657 311.445 379.53]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg069) >>
+>> endobj
+1447 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [112.226 356.97 123.135 365.828]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg071) >>
+>> endobj
+1448 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.59 356.97 139.499 365.828]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+1449 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.953 356.97 155.862 365.828]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg088) >>
+>> endobj
+1450 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [161.317 356.97 172.226 365.828]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+1451 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [177.68 356.97 194.044 365.828]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg107) >>
+>> endobj
+1452 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [106.15 333.162 122.513 342.02]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg133) >>
+>> endobj
+1453 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.968 333.162 144.331 342.02]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+1454 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [149.786 333.162 166.149 342.02]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1455 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [192.211 333.162 208.575 342.02]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1456 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [80.71 309.354 97.073 318.365]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg152) >>
+>> endobj
+1457 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.273 284.684 144.637 294.404]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+1458 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [120.408 260.875 131.317 270.595]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg090) >>
+>> endobj
+1459 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [136.771 260.875 167.677 270.595]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg099) >>
+>> endobj
+1460 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [173.131 260.875 198.582 270.595]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg101) >>
+>> endobj
+1461 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [189.778 237.067 220.684 246.787]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+1462 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [129.179 213.259 145.542 222.979]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1463 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [97.673 190.313 123.124 199.323]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg095) >>
+>> endobj
+1464 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [176.906 166.504 196.902 175.363]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg008) >>
+>> endobj
+1465 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [94.04 142.696 110.404 151.707]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg145) >>
+>> endobj
+1466 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [100.106 118.037 125.557 127.746]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg107) >>
+>> endobj
+1467 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [131.011 118.037 147.375 127.746]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg114) >>
+>> endobj
+1468 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.829 118.037 169.193 127.746]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1469 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [101.317 95.08 117.68 104.091]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1470 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [83.121 71.272 99.484 80.13]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+1471 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [104.939 71.272 121.302 80.13]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg122) >>
+>> endobj
+1425 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1475 0 obj <<
+/Length 1625      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(154)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Sibylline)-250(books,)-250(97.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Sisyphus,)-250(45,)-250(48.)]TJ 0 -23.963 Td[(Socrates,)-251(7,)-251(13,)-250(40,)-251(46,)-251(49,)-251(56,)-250(58,)-251(64-73,)-251(84,)-251(107,)-251(147.)-251(See)-251(also)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 65.455 -13.549 Td[(Daimonion)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 51.818 0 Td[(of)-250(S.)]TJ -117.273 -23.964 Td[(Socratic)-250(philosophy,)-250(64,)-250(87,)-250(149.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Socratic)-250(Schools,)-250(73,)-250(87-88.)]TJ 0 -23.963 Td[(Sol)-250(invictus,)-250(136.)]TJ/F16 7.97 Tf -72.755 -6.724 Td[([168])]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 72.755 -17.24 Td[(Solon,)-250(16.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Sophistic,)-250(35-38,)-250(57,)-250(64,)-250(87,)-250(104,)-250(148,)-250(149.)]TJ 0 -23.963 Td[(Sophocles,)-250(28,)-250(54.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Stilpo,)-250(13,)-250(74,)-250(108.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Stoics,)-250(83,)-250(103-5,)-250(113,)-250(118,)-250(119,)-250(121-22,)-250(147,)-250(148,)-250(149.)]TJ 0 -23.963 Td[(Strabo,)-250(97.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Strato,)-250(87,)-250(108.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Suetonius,)-250(121.)]TJ 0 -23.963 Td[(Supernaturalism,)-250(149-51.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Superstition,)-250(75,)-250(90,)-250(102,)-250(123,)-250(126.)]TJ 0 -23.963 Td[(Tapuis,)-250(138.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Thales,)-250(24.)]TJ 0 -23.964 Td[(Theba\357s)-250(\050mediaeval\051,)-250(136.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1474 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1475 0 R
+/Resources 1473 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1472 0 R
+/Annots [ 1476 0 R 1477 0 R 1478 0 R 1479 0 R 1480 0 R 1481 0 R 1482 0 R 1483 0 R 1484 0 R 1485 0 R 1486 0 R 1487 0 R 1488 0 R 1489 0 R 1490 0 R 1491 0 R 1492 0 R 1493 0 R 1494 0 R 1495 0 R 1496 0 R 1498 0 R 1499 0 R 1500 0 R 1501 0 R 1502 0 R 1503 0 R 1504 0 R 1505 0 R 1506 0 R 1507 0 R 1508 0 R 1509 0 R 1510 0 R 1511 0 R 1512 0 R 1513 0 R 1514 0 R 1515 0 R 1516 0 R 1517 0 R 1518 0 R 1519 0 R 1520 0 R 1521 0 R 1522 0 R 1523 0 R 1524 0 R 1525 0 R 1526 0 R 1527 0 R 1528 0 R 1529 0 R 1530 0 R 1531 0 R 1532 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1476 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [167.19 515.797 178.1 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1477 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [138.401 491.833 149.311 501.706]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg045) >>
+>> endobj
+1478 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [154.765 491.833 165.674 501.706]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg048) >>
+>> endobj
+1479 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [135.966 468.731 141.421 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg007) >>
+>> endobj
+1480 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.884 468.731 157.793 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1481 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [163.256 468.731 174.165 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg040) >>
+>> endobj
+1482 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.628 468.731 190.537 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg046) >>
+>> endobj
+1483 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [196 468.731 206.909 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg049) >>
+>> endobj
+1484 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [212.372 468.731 223.281 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+1485 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.744 468.731 239.653 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg058) >>
+>> endobj
+1486 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [245.116 468.731 270.567 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg064) >>
+>> endobj
+1487 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [276.029 468.731 286.939 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+1488 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [292.401 468.731 308.765 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg107) >>
+>> endobj
+1489 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [314.228 468.731 330.592 477.742]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1490 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [158.998 456.557 228.696 464.04]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (index-daemonion) >>
+>> endobj
+1491 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [185.965 430.357 196.874 440.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg064) >>
+>> endobj
+1492 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.329 430.357 213.238 440.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg087) >>
+>> endobj
+1493 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [218.692 430.357 235.056 440.077]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1494 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.023 407.255 182.932 416.113]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg073) >>
+>> endobj
+1495 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [188.387 407.255 213.838 416.113]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg087) >>
+>> endobj
+1496 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [150.827 383.291 167.19 392.149]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1498 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [124.46 359.328 135.369 368.186]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+1499 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [139.612 334.513 165.063 344.375]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg035) >>
+>> endobj
+1500 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [170.518 334.513 181.427 344.375]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg057) >>
+>> endobj
+1501 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [186.881 334.513 197.79 344.375]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg064) >>
+>> endobj
+1502 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [203.245 334.513 214.154 344.375]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg087) >>
+>> endobj
+1503 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [219.609 334.513 235.972 344.375]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg104) >>
+>> endobj
+1504 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [241.427 334.513 257.79 344.375]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg148) >>
+>> endobj
+1505 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [263.245 334.513 279.608 344.375]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1506 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [143.845 310.549 154.754 320.411]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+1507 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [160.209 310.549 171.118 320.411]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg054) >>
+>> endobj
+1508 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.071 286.586 135.98 296.295]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1509 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.434 286.586 152.343 296.295]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1510 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [157.798 286.586 174.161 296.295]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg108) >>
+>> endobj
+1511 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.671 263.473 136.58 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg083) >>
+>> endobj
+1512 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.034 263.473 167.485 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg103) >>
+>> endobj
+1513 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.94 263.473 189.303 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+1514 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [194.758 263.473 211.121 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg118) >>
+>> endobj
+1515 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [216.576 263.473 232.939 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg119) >>
+>> endobj
+1516 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [238.394 263.473 269.299 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+1517 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [274.754 263.473 291.117 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg147) >>
+>> endobj
+1518 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [296.572 263.473 312.936 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg148) >>
+>> endobj
+1519 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [318.39 263.473 334.754 272.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1520 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.481 239.509 138.391 248.368]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1521 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.06 215.546 135.969 224.404]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg087) >>
+>> endobj
+1522 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.423 215.546 157.787 224.404]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg108) >>
+>> endobj
+1523 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [142.034 191.582 158.398 200.44]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg121) >>
+>> endobj
+1524 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [170.507 166.768 201.412 176.629]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg149) >>
+>> endobj
+1525 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [151.732 142.804 162.641 152.666]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+1526 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [168.096 142.804 179.005 152.666]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg090) >>
+>> endobj
+1527 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [184.46 142.804 200.823 152.666]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg102) >>
+>> endobj
+1528 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [206.278 142.804 222.641 152.666]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg123) >>
+>> endobj
+1529 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [228.096 142.804 244.459 152.666]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg126) >>
+>> endobj
+1530 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.692 118.84 145.056 128.549]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+1531 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [128.082 95.727 138.991 104.586]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg024) >>
+>> endobj
+1532 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [188.365 71.349 204.729 80.622]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1497 0 obj <<
+/D [1474 0 R /XYZ 93.543 378.084 null]
+>> endobj
+1473 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1535 0 obj <<
+/Length 1344      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(Index)-21948(155)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(Theodicy)-250(\050Socratic\051,)-250(67.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Theodoras,)-250(13,)-250(75-76,)-250(108,)-250(109.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.91 -13.549 Td[(On)-250(the)-250(Gods)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 55.145 0 Td[(,)-250(75.)]TJ -66.055 -23.986 Td[(Theophrastus,)-250(13,)-250(86.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Thermon,)-250(98.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Thomas)-250(Aquinas,)-250(131,)-250(135,)-250(138,)-250(139,)-250(140.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Thracians,)-250(18.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Thrasymachus,)-250(50,)-250(62.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Thucydides)-250(\050the)-250(historian\051,)-250(28-29,)-250(92,)-250(94.)]TJ 0 -23.987 Td[(Thucydides)-250(\050the)-250(statesman\051,)-250(26.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Tiberius,)-250(118.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Tisiphone,)-250(136.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Titans,)-250(18.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Tolerance)-250(in)-250(antiquity,)-250(9,)-250(11.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Trajan,)-250(11.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Tullia,)-250(116.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Tyche,)-250(91-96,)-250(118.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Typhoeus,)-250(140.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Uranos,)-250(111.)]TJ 0 -23.986 Td[(Usener,)-250(152.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1534 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1535 0 R
+/Resources 1533 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1472 0 R
+/Annots [ 1536 0 R 1537 0 R 1538 0 R 1539 0 R 1540 0 R 1541 0 R 1542 0 R 1543 0 R 1544 0 R 1545 0 R 1546 0 R 1547 0 R 1548 0 R 1549 0 R 1550 0 R 1551 0 R 1552 0 R 1553 0 R 1554 0 R 1555 0 R 1556 0 R 1557 0 R 1558 0 R 1559 0 R 1560 0 R 1561 0 R 1562 0 R 1563 0 R 1564 0 R 1565 0 R 1566 0 R 1567 0 R 1568 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1536 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [139.171 515.797 150.08 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg067) >>
+>> endobj
+1537 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [98.273 492.673 109.182 501.684]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1538 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [114.637 492.673 140.088 501.684]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+1539 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [145.542 492.673 161.906 501.684]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg108) >>
+>> endobj
+1540 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [167.36 492.673 183.724 501.684]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+1541 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [118.28 479.123 129.19 488.134]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg075) >>
+>> endobj
+1542 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [111.004 454.287 121.913 463.996]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1543 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [127.368 454.287 138.277 463.996]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg086) >>
+>> endobj
+1544 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [92.219 431.151 103.128 440.01]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg098) >>
+>> endobj
+1545 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [126.462 406.314 142.826 416.176]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg131) >>
+>> endobj
+1546 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [148.28 406.314 164.644 416.176]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1547 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [170.099 406.314 186.462 416.176]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+1548 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [191.917 406.314 208.28 416.176]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg139) >>
+>> endobj
+1549 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [213.735 406.314 230.098 416.176]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+1550 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [95.24 383.179 106.15 392.037]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+1551 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [115.848 358.331 126.757 368.204]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg050) >>
+>> endobj
+1552 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [132.211 358.331 143.12 368.204]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg062) >>
+>> endobj
+1553 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [167.36 334.345 192.811 344.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg028) >>
+>> endobj
+1554 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [198.266 334.345 209.175 344.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg092) >>
+>> endobj
+1555 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [214.629 334.345 225.538 344.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg094) >>
+>> endobj
+1556 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [172.204 310.359 183.113 320.079]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg026) >>
+>> endobj
+1557 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [88.586 287.235 104.95 296.093]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg118) >>
+>> endobj
+1558 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [95.862 262.398 112.226 272.107]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg136) >>
+>> endobj
+1559 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [79.499 239.263 90.408 248.121]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg018) >>
+>> endobj
+1560 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [148.575 214.415 154.029 224.135]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg009) >>
+>> endobj
+1561 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [159.484 214.415 170.393 224.135]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg011) >>
+>> endobj
+1562 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [80.699 190.429 91.608 200.149]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg011) >>
+>> endobj
+1563 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [78.288 167.305 94.651 176.163]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg116) >>
+>> endobj
+1564 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [79.488 142.457 104.939 152.177]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg091) >>
+>> endobj
+1565 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [110.393 142.457 126.757 152.177]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg118) >>
+>> endobj
+1566 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [95.251 118.471 111.615 128.191]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg140) >>
+>> endobj
+1567 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [83.731 95.347 100.095 104.205]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+1568 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [83.121 71.36 99.484 80.371]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg152) >>
+>> endobj
+1533 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1571 0 obj <<
+/Length 1568      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(156)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(Valerius)-250(Maximus,)-250(118.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Varro,)-250(100,)-250(110.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Vico)-250(\050)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 27.568 0 Td[(Scienza)-250(Nuova)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 64.538 0 Td[(\051,)-250(143.)]TJ -92.106 -24.459 Td[(Violation)-250(of)-250(sanctuaries,)-250(40,)-250(60,)-250(97,)-250(100.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Virgil,)-250(117.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Voss,)-250(G.)-250(I.,)-250(135,)-250(138,)-250(141.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Wisdom)-250(of)-250(Solomon,)-250(128.)]TJ 0 -24.459 Td[(Worship)-250(rejected,)-250(9-13,)-250(60,)-250(74,)-250(77,)-250(84,)-250(109,)-250(123,)-250(125.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Xenocrates,)-250(81-82,)-250(105,)-250(113,)-250(129.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Xenophanes)-250(of)-250(Colophon,)-250(13,)-250(17-21,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(52,)-250(56.)]TJ 0 -24.459 Td[(Xenophon,)-250(58,)-250(59,)-250(62,)-250(66,)-250(67.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 10.909 -13.549 Td[(Memorab.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 47.869 0 Td[(58,)-250(60.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -47.869 -13.549 Td[(Apology)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 36.36 0 Td[(,)-250(58.)]TJ -47.269 -24.458 Td[(Zeller,)-250(76,)-250(79.)]TJ 0 -24.459 Td[(Zeno)-250(of)-250(Elea,)-250(21.)]TJ 0 -24.458 Td[(Zeus,)-250(16,)-250(22,)-250(30,)-250(43,)-250(55,)-250(57,)-250(58,)-250(81,)-250(105,)-250(111,)-250(124.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1570 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1571 0 R
+/Resources 1569 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1472 0 R
+/Annots [ 1572 0 R 1573 0 R 1574 0 R 1575 0 R 1576 0 R 1577 0 R 1578 0 R 1579 0 R 1580 0 R 1581 0 R 1582 0 R 1583 0 R 1584 0 R 1585 0 R 1586 0 R 1587 0 R 1588 0 R 1589 0 R 1590 0 R 1591 0 R 1592 0 R 1593 0 R 1594 0 R 1595 0 R 1596 0 R 1597 0 R 1598 0 R 1599 0 R 1600 0 R 1601 0 R 1602 0 R 1603 0 R 1604 0 R 1605 0 R 1606 0 R 1607 0 R 1608 0 R 1609 0 R 1610 0 R 1611 0 R 1612 0 R 1613 0 R 1614 0 R 1615 0 R 1616 0 R 1617 0 R 1618 0 R 1619 0 R 1620 0 R 1621 0 R 1622 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1572 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [179.9 516.659 196.263 525.517]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg118) >>
+>> endobj
+1573 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [124.438 492.2 140.802 501.059]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg100) >>
+>> endobj
+1574 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.256 492.2 162.62 501.059]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg110) >>
+>> endobj
+1575 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [194.736 467.328 211.1 476.6]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg143) >>
+>> endobj
+1576 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [203.223 443.284 214.132 452.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg040) >>
+>> endobj
+1577 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [219.587 443.284 230.496 452.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+1578 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [235.95 443.284 246.859 452.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg097) >>
+>> endobj
+1579 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [252.314 443.284 268.678 452.142]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg100) >>
+>> endobj
+1580 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.06 417.964 141.423 427.684]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg117) >>
+>> endobj
+1581 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [145.961 394.367 162.325 403.378]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg135) >>
+>> endobj
+1582 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [167.78 394.367 184.143 403.378]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg138) >>
+>> endobj
+1583 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [189.598 394.367 205.961 403.378]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg141) >>
+>> endobj
+1584 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [189.914 369.909 206.278 378.767]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg128) >>
+>> endobj
+1585 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [173.823 344.589 193.82 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg009) >>
+>> endobj
+1586 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [199.274 344.589 210.183 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+1587 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [215.638 344.589 226.547 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg074) >>
+>> endobj
+1588 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [232.001 344.589 242.91 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg077) >>
+>> endobj
+1589 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [248.365 344.589 259.274 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg084) >>
+>> endobj
+1590 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [264.728 344.589 281.092 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg109) >>
+>> endobj
+1591 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [286.547 344.589 302.91 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg123) >>
+>> endobj
+1592 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [308.365 344.589 324.728 354.462]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg125) >>
+>> endobj
+1593 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [148.067 320.993 173.518 330.003]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1594 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [178.972 320.993 195.336 330.003]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg105) >>
+>> endobj
+1595 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [200.79 320.993 217.154 330.003]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg113) >>
+>> endobj
+1596 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [222.609 320.993 238.972 330.003]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg129) >>
+>> endobj
+1597 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [210.5 295.683 221.409 305.392]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg013) >>
+>> endobj
+1598 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [226.863 295.683 252.314 305.392]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg017) >>
+>> endobj
+1599 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [93.543 282.985 104.452 291.996]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg052) >>
+>> endobj
+1600 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [109.907 282.985 120.816 291.996]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg056) >>
+>> endobj
+1601 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [144.445 257.676 155.354 267.538]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg058) >>
+>> endobj
+1602 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [160.809 257.676 171.718 267.538]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg059) >>
+>> endobj
+1603 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [177.172 257.676 188.081 267.538]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg062) >>
+>> endobj
+1604 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [193.536 257.676 204.445 267.538]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg066) >>
+>> endobj
+1605 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [209.9 257.676 220.809 267.538]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg067) >>
+>> endobj
+1606 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.321 244.978 163.231 253.989]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg058) >>
+>> endobj
+1607 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [168.685 244.978 179.594 253.989]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg060) >>
+>> endobj
+1608 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [146.267 230.687 157.176 240.439]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg058) >>
+>> endobj
+1609 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [125.049 206.97 135.958 215.828]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg076) >>
+>> endobj
+1610 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [141.412 206.97 152.321 215.828]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg079) >>
+>> endobj
+1611 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [155.343 182.512 166.252 191.37]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg021) >>
+>> endobj
+1612 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [120.205 158.054 131.114 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg016) >>
+>> endobj
+1613 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [136.569 158.054 147.478 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg022) >>
+>> endobj
+1614 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [152.932 158.054 163.841 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg030) >>
+>> endobj
+1615 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [169.296 158.054 180.205 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg043) >>
+>> endobj
+1616 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [185.66 158.054 196.569 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg055) >>
+>> endobj
+1617 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [202.023 158.054 212.932 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg057) >>
+>> endobj
+1618 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [218.387 158.054 229.296 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg058) >>
+>> endobj
+1619 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [234.75 158.054 245.659 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg081) >>
+>> endobj
+1620 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [251.114 158.054 267.478 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg105) >>
+>> endobj
+1621 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [272.932 158.054 289.296 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg111) >>
+>> endobj
+1622 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [294.75 158.054 311.114 167.065]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (Pg124) >>
+>> endobj
+1569 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1623 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index14) >>
+endobj
+1626 0 obj
+(Footnotes)
+endobj
+1629 0 obj <<
+/Length 238       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -19.8 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -529.134 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 46.771 479.321 Td[(Footnotes)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1628 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1629 0 R
+/Resources 1627 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1472 0 R
+>> endobj
+1630 0 obj <<
+/D [1628 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+1624 0 obj <<
+/D [1628 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+1627 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1633 0 obj <<
+/Length 126       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -510.152 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1632 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1633 0 R
+/Resources 1631 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1472 0 R
+>> endobj
+1631 0 obj <<
+/ProcSet [ /PDF ]
+>> endobj
+1636 0 obj <<
+/Length 322       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(***END)-500(OF)-500(THE)-500(PROJECT)-500(GUTENBERG)-500(EBOOK)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(ATHEISM)-500(IN)-500(PAGAN)-500(ANTIQUITY***)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1635 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1636 0 R
+/Resources 1634 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1638 0 R
+>> endobj
+1637 0 obj <<
+/D [1635 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+1634 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1641 0 obj <<
+/Length 126       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -510.152 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1640 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1641 0 R
+/Resources 1639 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1638 0 R
+>> endobj
+1639 0 obj <<
+/ProcSet [ /PDF ]
+>> endobj
+1642 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index15) >>
+endobj
+1645 0 obj
+(Credits)
+endobj
+1648 0 obj <<
+/Length 596       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 46.771 479.321 Td[(Credits)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -37.877 Td[(March)-250(11,)-250(2009)]TJ 21.819 -19.003 Td[(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(TEI)-250(edition)-250(1)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Produced)-579(by)-579(Marilynda)-580(Fraser-Cunliffe,)-661(J.P.W.)-579(Fr)-1(aser,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(David)-234(King,)-238(and)-235(the)-234(Online)-235(Distributed)-234(Proofreading)-235(Team)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-250(<http://www.pgdp.net/>.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1647 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1648 0 R
+/Resources 1646 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1638 0 R
+>> endobj
+1643 0 obj <<
+/D [1647 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+1646 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1651 0 obj <<
+/Length 126       
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -280.63 -510.152 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1650 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1651 0 R
+/Resources 1649 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1638 0 R
+>> endobj
+1649 0 obj <<
+/ProcSet [ /PDF ]
+>> endobj
+1652 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index16) >>
+endobj
+1655 0 obj
+(A Word from Project Gutenberg)
+endobj
+1658 0 obj <<
+/Length 3131      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 46.771 479.321 Td[(A)-250(Word)-250(from)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -32.422 Td[(This)-250(file)-250(should)-250(be)-250(named)-250(28312-pdf.pdf)-250(or)-250(28312-pdf.zip.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(This)-291(and)-291(all)-291(associated)-291(files)-291(of)-291(various)-291(formats)-291(will)-291(be)-291(found)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(in:)]TJ/F16 9.863 Tf 19.637 -22.64 Td[(http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/1/28312/)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -7.681 -23.368 Td[(Updated)-447(editions)-446(will)-447(replace)-447(the)-447(previous)-446(one)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 220.746 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.782 0 Td[(the)-447(old)]TJ -248.484 -13.549 Td[(editions)-250(will)-250(be)-250(renamed.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(Creating)-308(the)-308(works)-308(from)-308(public)-308(domain)-308(print)-308(editions)-308(means)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(that)-220(no)-220(one)-219(owns)-220(a)-220(United)-220(States)-220(copyright)-219(in)-220(these)-220(works,)-226(so)-220(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Foundation)-325(\050and)-324(you!\051)-473(can)-325(copy)-324(and)-325(distribute)-324(it)-325(in)-324(the)-325(United)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(States)-163(without)-163(permission)-163(and)-163(without)-163(paying)-164(copyright)-163(royalties.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Special)-298(rules,)-311(set)-298(forth)-298(in)-298(the)-298(General)-299(Terms)-298(of)-298(Use)-298(part)-298(of)-299(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(license,)-360(apply)-337(to)-338(copying)-338(and)-337(distributing)-338(Project)-338(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.549 Td[(electronic)-247(works)-246(to)-247(protect)-246(the)-247(Project)-246(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 214.88 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.381 0 Td[(concept)-247(and)]TJ -228.261 -13.549 Td[(trademark.)-243(Project)-228(Gutenberg)-228(is)-227(a)-228(registered)-228(trademark,)-233(and)-228(may)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(not)-394(be)-394(used)-394(if)-394(you)-393(charge)-394(for)-394(the)-394(eBooks,)-430(unless)-394(you)-394(receive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(specific)-377(permission.)-631(If)-376(you)-377(do)-377(not)-377(charge)-377(anything)-377(for)-377(copies)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-468(this)-468(eBook,)-523(complying)-468(with)-468(the)-468(rules)-468(is)-468(very)-468(easy.)-904(You)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(may)-329(use)-329(this)-329(eBook)-329(for)-329(nearly)-329(any)-329(purpose)-329(such)-329(as)-329(creation)-329(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(derivative)-251(works,)-252(reports,)-251(performances)-251(and)-251(research.)-253(They)-252(may)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(be)-152(modified)-152(and)-152(printed)-153(and)-152(given)-152(away)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 170.977 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 12.569 0 Td[(you)-152(may)-152(do)-152(practically)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf -183.546 -13.549 Td[(anything)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 41.786 0 Td[(with)-330(public)-331(domain)-330(eBooks.)-491(Redistribution)-331(is)-330(subject)]TJ -41.786 -13.549 Td[(to)-250(the)-250(trademark)-250(license,)-250(especially)-250(commercial)-250(redistribution.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1657 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1658 0 R
+/Resources 1656 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1638 0 R
+/Annots [ 1659 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1659 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [66.408 395.011 247.235 403.798]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/1/28312/) >> 
+>> endobj
+1653 0 obj <<
+/D [1657 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+9 0 obj <<
+/D [1657 0 R /XYZ 46.771 124.715 null]
+>> endobj
+1656 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F42 1660 0 R /F28 30 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1661 0 obj
+<< /S /GoTo /D (index17) >>
+endobj
+1664 0 obj
+(The Full Project Gutenberg License)
+endobj
+1667 0 obj <<
+/Length 3309      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 18.959 Tf 93.543 479.321 Td[(The)-250(Full)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(License)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 0 -31.684 Td[(Please)-250(read)-250(this)-250(before)-250(you)-250(distribute)-250(or)-250(use)-250(this)-250(work.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 11.956 -13.55 Td[(To)-269(protect)-269(the)-268(Project)-269(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 144.428 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.623 0 Td[(mission)-269(of)-269(promoting)-269(the)]TJ -170.007 -13.549 Td[(free)-225(distribution)-225(of)-226(electronic)-225(works,)-230(by)-225(using)-225(or)-225(distributing)-226(this)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(work)-304(\050or)-304(any)-303(other)-304(work)-304(associated)-304(in)-303(any)-304(way)-304(with)-304(the)-304(phrase)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -13.549 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Project)-270(Gutenberg)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 79.894 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(\051,)-275(you)-269(agree)-270(to)-270(comply)-269(with)-270(all)-270(the)-269(terms)-270(of)]TJ -89.582 -13.549 Td[(the)-268(Full)-269(Project)-268(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 116.649 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.617 0 Td[(License)-268(\050available)-269(with)-268(this)-268(file)-268(or)]TJ -130.266 -13.55 Td[(online)-250(at)-250(http://www.gutenberg.org/license\051.)]TJ/F16 15.781 Tf 0 -35.486 Td[(Section)-250(1.)]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 15.58 -44.421 Td[(General)-255(Terms)-254(of)-255(Use)-255(&)-254(Redistributing)-255(Project)]TJ 45.013 -17.095 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 13.151 Tf 55.509 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 16.415 0 Td[(electronic)-268(works)]TJ -132.517 -41.803 Td[(1.A.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -25.902 Td[(By)-583(reading)-583(or)-583(using)-583(any)-583(part)-583(of)-583(this)-584(Project)-583(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.549 Td[(electronic)-405(work,)-443(you)-404(indicate)-405(that)-404(you)-405(have)-404(read,)-444(understand,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(agree)-309(to)-309(and)-308(accept)-309(all)-309(the)-309(terms)-308(of)-309(this)-309(license)-309(and)-309(intellectual)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(property)-331(\050trademark/copyright\051)-332(agreement.)-493(If)-332(you)-331(do)-331(not)-332(agree)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-239(abide)-238(by)-239(all)-239(the)-238(terms)-239(of)-239(this)-239(agreement,)-241(you)-238(must)-239(cease)-239(using)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-195(return)-194(or)-195(destroy)-194(all)-195(copies)-194(of)-195(Project)-194(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 224.803 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 12.813 0 Td[(electronic)]TJ -237.616 -13.549 Td[(works)-268(in)-269(your)-268(possession.)-305(If)-268(you)-269(paid)-268(a)-268(fee)-269(for)-268(obtaining)-268(a)-269(copy)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-210(or)-209(access)-210(to)-210(a)-209(Project)-210(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 150.044 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 12.979 0 Td[(electronic)-210(work)-209(and)-210(you)-210(do)]TJ -163.023 -13.55 Td[(not)-307(agree)-307(to)-308(be)-307(bound)-307(by)-307(the)-307(terms)-308(of)-307(this)-307(agreement,)-321(you)-308(may)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(obtain)-292(a)-292(refund)-292(from)-293(the)-292(person)-292(or)-292(entity)-292(to)-292(whom)-292(you)-292(paid)-293(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fee)-250(as)-250(set)-250(forth)-250(in)-250(paragraph)-250(1.E.8.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1666 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1667 0 R
+/Resources 1665 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1638 0 R
+/Annots [ 1668 0 R 1669 0 R 1672 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1668 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [264.296 377.512 362.159 387.232]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense) >>
+>> endobj
+1669 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [134.147 363.963 280.798 373.683]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org/license) >> 
+>> endobj
+1672 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [217.743 63.764 243.499 73.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E8) >>
+>> endobj
+1662 0 obj <<
+/D [1666 0 R /XYZ 93.543 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+1670 0 obj <<
+/D [1666 0 R /XYZ 93.543 363.963 null]
+>> endobj
+1671 0 obj <<
+/D [1666 0 R /XYZ 93.543 254.119 null]
+>> endobj
+1665 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F42 1660 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1676 0 obj <<
+/Length 4467      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(The)-250(Full)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(License)-9894(165)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 13.151 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(1.B.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 0 -27.866 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Project)-352(Gutenberg)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 80.79 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.681 0 Td[(is)-352(a)-352(registered)-351(trademark.)-556(It)-351(may)-352(only)-352(be)]TJ -94.315 -13.549 Td[(used)-395(on)-394(or)-395(associated)-394(in)-395(any)-395(way)-394(with)-395(an)-394(electronic)-395(work)-395(by)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(people)-347(who)-346(agree)-347(to)-346(be)-347(bound)-347(by)-346(the)-347(terms)-346(of)-347(this)-347(agreement.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(There)-531(are)-531(a)-531(few)-531(things)-530(that)-531(you)-531(can)-531(do)-531(with)-531(most)-531(Project)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 46.048 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.674 0 Td[(electronic)-274(works)-273(even)-274(without)-273(complying)-274(with)-273(the)]TJ -59.722 -13.549 Td[(full)-229(terms)-228(of)-229(this)-228(agreement.)-243(See)-229(paragraph)-229(1.C)-228(below.)-243(There)-229(are)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-330(lot)-331(of)-330(things)-330(you)-331(can)-330(do)-330(w)-1(ith)-330(Project)-330(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 223.321 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.295 0 Td[(electronic)]TJ -237.616 -13.549 Td[(works)-193(if)-192(you)-193(follow)-192(the)-193(terms)-193(of)-192(this)-193(agreement)-192(and)-193(help)-193(preserve)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(free)-284(future)-283(access)-284(to)-283(Project)-284(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 171.772 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.784 0 Td[(electronic)-284(works.)-350(See)]TJ -185.556 -13.549 Td[(paragraph)-250(1.E)-250(below.)]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 0 -43.303 Td[(1.C.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -27.866 Td[(The)-686(Project)-687(Gutenberg)-686(Literary)-687(Archive)-686(Foundation)-687(\050)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 262.456 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(the)]TJ -267.299 -13.549 Td[(Foundation)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 49.702 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.901 0 Td[(or)-372(PGLAF\051,)-372(owns)-372(a)-372(compilation)-372(copyright)-372(in)-372(the)]TJ -58.603 -13.549 Td[(collection)-340(of)-339(Project)-340(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 140.176 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.395 0 Td[(electronic)-339(works.)-519(Nearly)-339(all)]TJ -154.571 -13.549 Td[(the)-233(individual)-232(works)-233(in)-233(the)-232(collection)-233(are)-233(in)-233(the)-232(public)-233(domain)-233(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-289(United)-289(States.)-366(If)-288(an)-289(individual)-289(work)-289(is)-288(in)-289(the)-289(public)-289(domain)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(in)-253(the)-253(United)-252(States)-253(and)-253(you)-252(are)-253(located)-253(in)-253(the)-252(United)-253(States,)-254(we)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(do)-332(not)-331(claim)-332(a)-331(right)-332(to)-332(prevent)-331(you)-332(from)-332(copying,)-352(distributing,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(performing,)-231(displaying)-226(or)-226(creating)-226(derivative)-226(works)-226(based)-226(on)-226(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(work)-232(as)-231(long)-232(as)-231(all)-232(references)-231(to)-232(Project)-231(Gutenberg)-232(are)-232(removed.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Of)-188(course,)-200(we)-187(hope)-188(that)-187(you)-188(will)-187(support)-188(the)-187(Project)-188(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.55 Td[(mission)-334(of)-334(promoting)-335(free)-334(access)-334(to)-334(electronic)-334(works)-334(by)-335(freely)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(sharing)-212(Project)-211(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 113.685 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 12.999 0 Td[(works)-212(in)-211(compliance)-212(with)-211(the)-212(terms)]TJ -126.684 -13.549 Td[(of)-441(this)-441(agreement)-441(for)-441(keeping)-441(the)-441(Project)-441(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 241.5 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.501 0 Td[(name)]TJ -257.001 -13.549 Td[(associated)-262(with)-262(the)-262(work.)-286(You)-262(can)-262(easily)-262(comply)-262(with)-263(the)-262(terms)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-283(this)-284(agreement)-283(by)-283(keeping)-284(this)-283(work)-283(in)-284(the)-283(same)-283(format)-284(with)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(its)-287(attached)-287(full)-287(Project)-287(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 151.285 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.821 0 Td[(License)-287(when)-287(you)-287(share)-287(it)]TJ -165.106 -13.549 Td[(without)-250(charge)-250(with)-250(others.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1675 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1676 0 R
+/Resources 1674 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1682 0 R
+/Annots [ 1678 0 R 1679 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1678 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [236.157 420.185 251.616 429.905]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1C) >>
+>> endobj
+1679 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [93.113 365.988 107.96 375.708]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E) >>
+>> endobj
+1677 0 obj <<
+/D [1675 0 R /XYZ 46.771 529.134 null]
+>> endobj
+1680 0 obj <<
+/D [1675 0 R /XYZ 46.771 354.098 null]
+>> endobj
+1681 0 obj <<
+/D [1675 0 R /XYZ 46.771 66.142 null]
+>> endobj
+1674 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F42 1660 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1686 0 obj <<
+/Length 3448      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(166)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 13.151 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(1.D.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -29.35 Td[(The)-468(copyright)-467(laws)-468(of)-467(the)-468(place)-467(where)-468(you)-467(are)-468(located)-468(also)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(govern)-267(what)-268(you)-267(can)-267(do)-268(with)-267(this)-267(wo)-1(rk.)-302(Copyright)-267(laws)-267(in)-268(most)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(countries)-366(are)-366(in)-366(a)-366(constant)-366(state)-366(of)-366(change.)-598(If)-366(you)-367(are)-366(outside)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-394(United)-394(States,)-431(check)-394(the)-394(laws)-394(of)-394(your)-394(country)-394(in)-395(addition)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-439(the)-440(terms)-439(of)-439(this)-439(agreement)-440(before)-439(downloading,)-487(copying,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(displaying,)-243(performing,)-243(distributing)-241(or)-241(creating)-241(derivative)-241(works)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(based)-269(on)-268(this)-268(work)-269(or)-268(any)-269(other)-268(Project)-269(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 221.57 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.62 0 Td[(work.)-305(The)]TJ -235.19 -13.549 Td[(Foundation)-344(makes)-343(no)-344(representations)-343(concerning)-344(the)-344(copyright)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(status)-250(of)-250(any)-250(work)-250(in)-250(any)-250(country)-250(outside)-250(the)-250(United)-250(States.)]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 0 -45.973 Td[(1.E.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -29.351 Td[(Unless)-250(you)-250(have)-250(removed)-250(all)-250(references)-250(to)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg:)]TJ 0 -27.168 Td[(1.E.1.)]TJ 0 -27.168 Td[(The)-259(following)-260(sentence,)-261(with)-260(active)-259(links)-259(to,)-262(or)-259(other)-260(immediate)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(access)-465(to)-1(,)-519(the)-465(full)-466(Project)-465(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 170.488 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.769 0 Td[(License)-465(must)-466(appear)]TJ -186.257 -13.55 Td[(prominently)-274(whenever)-275(any)-274(copy)-274(of)-275(a)-274(Project)-274(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 244.529 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.683 0 Td[(work)]TJ -258.212 -13.549 Td[(\050any)-421(work)-422(on)-421(which)-421(the)-422(phrase)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 148.755 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Project)-421(Gutenberg)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 81.549 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.44 0 Td[(appears,)]TJ -244.587 -13.549 Td[(or)-347(with)-346(which)-347(the)-346(phrase)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 115.849 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Project)-346(Gutenberg)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 80.732 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.624 0 Td[(is)-346(associated\051)-347(is)]TJ -210.049 -13.549 Td[(accessed,)-250(displayed,)-250(performed,)-250(viewed,)-250(copied)-250(or)-250(distributed:)]TJ/F16 9.863 Tf 19.637 -25.35 Td[(This)-432(eBook)-432(is)-432(for)-432(the)-432(use)-433(of)-432(anyone)-432(anywhere)-432(at)-432(no)-432(cost)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(and)-345(with)-344(almost)-345(no)-344(restrictions)-345(whatsoever.)-534(You)-344(may)-345(copy)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(it,)-437(give)-400(it)-400(away)-400(or)-400(re-use)-400(it)-400(under)-399(the)-400(terms)-400(of)-400(the)-400(Project)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(Gutenberg)-476(License)-476(included)-476(with)-475(this)-476(eBook)-476(or)-476(online)-476(at)]TJ 0 -12.821 Td[(http://www.gutenberg.org)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -19.637 -40.246 Td[(1.E.2.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1685 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1686 0 R
+/Resources 1684 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1682 0 R
+/Annots [ 1688 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1688 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [113.18 104.237 215.636 113.025]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org) >> 
+>> endobj
+1683 0 obj <<
+/D [1685 0 R /XYZ 93.543 364.976 null]
+>> endobj
+1687 0 obj <<
+/D [1685 0 R /XYZ 93.543 302.729 null]
+>> endobj
+1689 0 obj <<
+/D [1685 0 R /XYZ 93.543 91.16 null]
+>> endobj
+1684 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1692 0 obj <<
+/Length 3769      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(The)-250(Full)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(License)-9894(167)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(If)-295(an)-295(individual)-295(Project)-295(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 151.639 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.91 0 Td[(electronic)-295(work)-295(is)-295(derived)]TJ -165.549 -13.549 Td[(from)-228(the)-229(public)-228(domain)-228(\050does)-228(not)-229(contain)-228(a)-228(notice)-228(indicating)-229(that)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(it)-184(is)-183(posted)-184(with)-183(permission)-184(of)-183(the)-184(copyright)-184(holder\051,)-196(the)-184(work)-184(can)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-256(copied)-256(and)-256(distributed)-256(to)-256(anyone)-256(in)-256(the)-256(United)-256(States)-256(without)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(paying)-230(any)-230(fees)-230(or)-230(charges.)-243(If)-230(you)-231(are)-230(redistributing)-230(or)-230(providing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(access)-248(to)-248(a)-248(work)-248(with)-248(the)-248(phrase)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 143.745 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Project)-248(Gutenberg)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 79.658 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.548 0 Td[(associated)]TJ -235.794 -13.549 Td[(with)-410(or)-411(appearing)-410(on)-410(the)-411(work,)-450(you)-411(must)-410(comply)-410(either)-411(with)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-424(requireme)-1(nts)-424(of)-424(paragraphs)-425(1.E.1)-424(through)-425(1.E.7)-424(or)-425(obtain)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(permission)-281(for)-280(the)-280(use)-281(of)-280(the)-281(work)-280(and)-281(the)-280(Project)-281(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.55 Td[(trademark)-250(as)-250(set)-250(forth)-250(in)-250(paragraphs)-250(1.E.8)-250(or)-250(1.E.9.)]TJ 0 -38.607 Td[(1.E.3.)]TJ 0 -26.259 Td[(If)-344(an)-343(individual)-344(Project)-343(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 153.755 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.439 0 Td[(electronic)-344(work)-343(is)-344(posted)]TJ -168.194 -13.549 Td[(with)-551(the)-551(permission)-550(of)-551(the)-551(copyright)-551(holder,)-626(your)-551(use)-551(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(distribution)-429(must)-429(comply)-429(with)-429(both)-429(paragraphs)-429(1.E.1)-429(through)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(1.E.7)-251(and)-250(any)-251(additional)-250(terms)-251(imposed)-250(by)-251(the)-250(copyright)-251(holder.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Additional)-524(terms)-524(will)-523(b)-1(e)-523(linked)-524(to)-524(the)-524(Project)-524(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.55 Td[(License)-212(for)-211(all)-212(works)-212(posted)-211(with)-212(the)-212(permission)-211(of)-212(the)-212(copyright)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(holder)-250(found)-250(at)-250(the)-250(beginning)-250(of)-250(this)-250(work.)]TJ 0 -38.608 Td[(1.E.4.)]TJ 0 -26.258 Td[(Do)-275(not)-275(unlink)-275(or)-274(detach)-275(or)-275(remove)-275(the)-275(full)-275(Project)-275(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.549 Td[(License)-330(terms)-329(from)-330(this)-329(work,)-350(or)-330(any)-329(files)-330(containing)-329(a)-330(part)-330(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(this)-185(work)-185(or)-185(any)-185(other)-185(work)-185(associated)-185(with)-186(Project)-185(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 267.212 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.691 0 Td[(.)]TJ -277.903 -38.608 Td[(1.E.5.)]TJ 0 -26.258 Td[(Do)-457(not)-457(copy,)-508(display,)-509(perform,)-508(distribute)-457(or)-457(redistribute)-457(this)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(electronic)-441(work,)-488(or)-441(any)-441(part)-441(of)-441(this)-440(electronic)-441(work,)-489(without)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(prominently)-258(displaying)-257(the)-258(sentence)-258(set)-258(forth)-257(in)-258(paragraph)-258(1.E.1)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1691 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1692 0 R
+/Resources 1690 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1682 0 R
+/Annots [ 1693 0 R 1694 0 R 1696 0 R 1699 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1693 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [192.525 420.953 215.554 430.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E1) >>
+>> endobj
+1694 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [206.12 393.854 229.149 403.574]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E8) >>
+>> endobj
+1696 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [265.755 301.89 288.784 311.61]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E1) >>
+>> endobj
+1699 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [304.372 63.764 327.401 73.484]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E1) >>
+>> endobj
+1695 0 obj <<
+/D [1691 0 R /XYZ 46.771 381.505 null]
+>> endobj
+1697 0 obj <<
+/D [1691 0 R /XYZ 46.771 235.344 null]
+>> endobj
+1698 0 obj <<
+/D [1691 0 R /XYZ 46.771 143.379 null]
+>> endobj
+1690 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1702 0 obj <<
+/Length 3918      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(168)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(with)-394(active)-395(links)-394(or)-395(immediate)-394(access)-395(to)-394(the)-394(full)-395(terms)-394(of)-395(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Project)-250(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 79.68 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.418 0 Td[(License.)]TJ -93.098 -34.591 Td[(1.E.6.)]TJ 0 -24.07 Td[(You)-475(may)-476(convert)-475(to)-476(and)-475(distribute)-476(this)-475(work)-476(in)-475(any)-476(binary,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(compressed,)-556(marked)-495(up,)-556(nonproprietary)-495(or)-495(proprietary)-495(form,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(including)-439(any)-439(word)-439(processing)-439(or)-439(hypertext)-439(form.)-818(However,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(if)-595(you)-595(provide)-595(access)-595(to)-595(or)-595(distribute)-595(copies)-595(of)-596(a)-595(Project)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 46.048 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.484 0 Td[(work)-256(in)-256(a)-256(format)-256(other)-256(than)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 122.795 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.844 0 Td[(Plain)-256(Vanilla)-256(ASCII)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 88.615 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -275.786 -13.549 Td[(or)-253(other)-253(format)-253(used)-254(in)-253(the)-253(official)-253(version)-253(posted)-253(on)-253(the)-254(official)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Project)-361(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 80.888 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.627 0 Td[(web)-361(site)-360(\050http)-1(://www.gutenberg.org\051,)-388(you)]TJ -95.515 -13.549 Td[(must,)-351(at)-331(no)-331(additional)-331(cost,)-351(fee)-331(or)-331(expense)-331(to)-331(the)-330(user,)-352(provide)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(a)-357(copy,)-384(a)-358(means)-357(of)-357(exporting)-357(a)-358(copy,)-384(or)-357(a)-357(means)-357(of)-358(obtaining)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-344(copy)-345(upon)-344(request,)-368(of)-344(the)-344(work)-344(in)-345(its)-344(original)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 217.486 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Plain)-344(Vanilla)]TJ -222.329 -13.549 Td[(ASCII)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 28.484 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 7.286 0 Td[(or)-224(other)-224(form.)-241(Any)-224(alternate)-224(format)-224(must)-224(include)-224(the)-224(full)]TJ -35.77 -13.549 Td[(Project)-250(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 79.68 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.418 0 Td[(License)-250(as)-250(specified)-250(in)-250(paragraph)-250(1.E.1.)]TJ -93.098 -34.591 Td[(1.E.7.)]TJ 0 -24.07 Td[(Do)-672(not)-672(charge)-672(a)-671(fee)-672(for)-672(access)-672(to,)-777(viewing,)-778(displaying,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(performing,)-516(copying)-463(or)-463(distributing)-463(any)-463(Project)-463(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.549 Td[(works)-250(unless)-250(you)-250(comply)-250(with)-250(paragraph)-250(1.E.8)-250(or)-250(1.E.9.)]TJ 0 -34.591 Td[(1.E.8.)]TJ 0 -24.07 Td[(You)-440(may)-440(charge)-440(a)-439(reasonable)-440(fee)-440(for)-440(copies)-440(of)-440(or)-440(providing)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(access)-361(to)-361(or)-361(distributing)-361(Project)-361(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 192.388 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.628 0 Td[(electronic)-361(works)]TJ -207.016 -13.549 Td[(provided)-250(that)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 12.546 -18.615 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 9.272 0 Td[(You)-218(pay)-218(a)-219(royalty)-218(fee)-218(of)-218(20%)-219(of)-218(the)-218(gross)-218(profits)-218(you)-219(derive)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(from)-212(the)-211(use)-212(of)-212(Project)-211(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 146.666 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13 0 Td[(works)-212(calculated)-211(using)]TJ -159.666 -13.549 Td[(the)-431(method)-432(you)-431(already)-432(use)-431(to)-432(calculate)-431(your)-432(applicable)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(taxes.)-1231(The)-577(fee)-577(is)-577(owed)-577(to)-577(the)-577(owner)-577(of)-577(the)-577(Project)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1701 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1702 0 R
+/Resources 1700 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1682 0 R
+/Annots [ 1704 0 R 1706 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1704 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [334.776 294.546 360.532 304.266]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E1) >>
+>> endobj
+1706 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [275.943 208.786 298.972 218.506]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1E8) >>
+>> endobj
+1703 0 obj <<
+/D [1701 0 R /XYZ 93.543 491.727 null]
+>> endobj
+1705 0 obj <<
+/D [1701 0 R /XYZ 93.543 284.025 null]
+>> endobj
+1673 0 obj <<
+/D [1701 0 R /XYZ 93.543 198.265 null]
+>> endobj
+1700 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1709 0 obj <<
+/Length 4211      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(The)-250(Full)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(License)-9894(169)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 68.59 518.175 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 46.047 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 17.639 0 Td[(trademark,)-734(but)-637(he)-637(has)-637(agreed)-637(to)-637(donate)]TJ -63.686 -13.549 Td[(royalties)-501(under)-501(this)-501(paragraph)-501(to)-501(the)-501(Project)-501(Gutenberg)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Literary)-576(Archive)-576(Foundation.)-1228(Royalty)-576(payments)-576(must)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(be)-538(paid)-537(within)-538(60)-537(days)-538(following)-538(each)-537(date)-538(on)-538(which)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(you)-605(prepare)-606(\050or)-605(are)-606(legally)-605(required)-606(to)-605(prepare\051)-606(your)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(periodic)-374(tax)-374(returns.)-622(Royalty)-374(payments)-374(should)-374(be)-375(clearly)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(marked)-303(as)-304(such)-303(and)-303(sent)-303(to)-304(the)-303(Project)-303(Gutenberg)-304(Literary)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Archive)-517(Foundation)-516(at)-517(the)-517(address)-516(specified)-517(in)-517(Section)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(4,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 12.486 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Information)-366(about)-365(donations)-366(to)-366(the)-365(Project)-366(Gutenberg)]TJ -17.329 -13.55 Td[(Literary)-250(Archive)-250(Foundation.)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 128.159 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -128.159 -14.279 Td[(You)-425(provide)-425(a)-425(full)-424(refund)-425(of)-425(any)-425(money)-425(paid)-425(by)-425(a)-425(user)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(who)-339(notifies)-339(you)-340(in)-339(writing)-339(\050or)-339(by)-340(e-mail\051)-339(within)-339(30)-340(days)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-343(receipt)-343(that)-343(s/he)-343(does)-344(not)-343(agree)-343(to)-343(the)-343(terms)-343(of)-343(the)-344(full)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Project)-235(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 79.514 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.252 0 Td[(License.)-245(You)-235(must)-235(require)-234(such)-235(a)-235(user)]TJ -92.766 -13.55 Td[(to)-324(return)-324(or)-323(destroy)-324(all)-324(copies)-324(of)-323(the)-324(works)-324(possessed)-324(in)-324(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(physical)-322(medium)-321(and)-322(discontinue)-321(all)-322(use)-322(of)-321(and)-322(all)-322(access)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-250(other)-250(copies)-250(of)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 158.454 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.418 0 Td[(works.)]TJ -171.872 -14.279 Td[(You)-427(provide,)-472(in)-427(accordance)-428(with)-427(paragraph)-427(1.F.3,)-472(a)-428(full)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(refund)-215(of)-216(any)-215(money)-216(paid)-215(for)-216(a)-215(work)-216(or)-215(a)-216(replacement)-216(copy,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(if)-245(a)-246(defect)-245(in)-245(the)-246(electronic)-245(work)-245(is)-246(discovered)-245(and)-245(r)-1(eported)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(to)-250(you)-250(within)-250(90)-250(days)-250(of)-250(receipt)-250(of)-250(the)-250(work.)]TJ 0 -14.279 Td[(You)-278(comply)-279(with)-278(all)-279(other)-278(terms)-279(of)-278(this)-279(agreement)-278(for)-279(free)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(distribution)-250(of)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 144.534 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.418 0 Td[(works.)]TJ -179.77 -41.937 Td[(1.E.9.)]TJ 0 -28.107 Td[(If)-316(you)-315(wish)-316(to)-316(charge)-315(a)-316(fee)-316(or)-315(distribute)-316(a)-316(Project)-315(Gutenbe)-1(rg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.938 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.938 -13.55 Td[(electronic)-233(work)-233(or)-233(group)-234(of)-233(works)-233(on)-233(different)-233(terms)-233(than)-233(are)-234(set)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(forth)-346(in)-347(this)-346(agreement,)-371(you)-346(must)-346(obtain)-347(permission)-346(in)-347(writing)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(from)-161(both)-160(the)-161(Project)-160(Gutenberg)-161(Literary)-160(Archive)-161(Foundation)-161(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Michael)-287(Hart,)-297(the)-287(owner)-287(of)-287(the)-287(Project)-287(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 219.853 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.824 0 Td[(trademark.)]TJ -233.677 -13.549 Td[(Contact)-250(the)-250(Foundation)-250(as)-250(set)-250(forth)-250(in)-250(Section)-250(3)-250(below.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1708 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1709 0 R
+/Resources 1707 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1682 0 R
+/Annots [ 1710 0 R 1711 0 R 1712 0 R 1713 0 R 1715 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1710 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [294.674 420.963 327.401 430.673]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense4) >>
+>> endobj
+1711 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [46.771 407.403 327.401 417.156]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense4) >>
+>> endobj
+1712 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [46.771 393.854 201.593 403.607]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense4) >>
+>> endobj
+1713 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [272.441 284.001 294.87 293.721]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1F3) >>
+>> endobj
+1715 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [213.735 79.971 254.644 87.454]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense3) >>
+>> endobj
+1714 0 obj <<
+/D [1708 0 R /XYZ 46.771 201.696 null]
+>> endobj
+1716 0 obj <<
+/D [1708 0 R /XYZ 46.771 66.142 null]
+>> endobj
+1707 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1722 0 obj <<
+/Length 3600      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(170)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 13.151 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(1.F.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 0 -43.517 Td[(1.F.1.)]TJ 0 -27.775 Td[(Project)-1179(Gutenberg)-1179(volunteers)-1179(and)-1179(employees)-1180(expend)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(considerable)-684(effort)-684(to)-684(identify,)-793(do)-684(copyright)-684(research)-684(on,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(transcribe)-411(and)-410(proofread)-411(public)-411(domain)-411(works)-410(in)-411(creating)-411(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Project)-395(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 81.258 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.997 0 Td[(collection.)-684(Despite)-395(these)-394(efforts,)-431(Project)]TJ -96.255 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 46.048 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.444 0 Td[(electronic)-344(works,)-368(and)-344(the)-344(medium)-344(on)-344(which)-344(they)]TJ -60.492 -13.55 Td[(may)-317(be)-316(stored,)-334(may)-317(contain)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 126.832 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Defects,)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 36.044 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 8.299 0 Td[(such)-317(as,)-333(but)-317(not)-316(lim)-1(ited)]TJ -176.018 -13.549 Td[(to,)-274(incomplete,)-275(inaccurate)-269(or)-270(corrupt)-269(data,)-275(transcription)-269(errors,)-275(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(copyright)-235(or)-235(other)-234(intellectual)-235(property)-235(infringement,)-238(a)-235(defective)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(or)-210(damaged)-210(disk)-211(or)-210(other)-210(medium,)-218(a)-210(computer)-210(virus,)-218(or)-211(computer)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(codes)-250(that)-250(damage)-250(or)-250(cannot)-250(be)-250(read)-250(by)-250(your)-250(equipment.)]TJ 0 -41.336 Td[(1.F.2.)]TJ 0 -27.774 Td[(LIMITED)-451(WARRANTY,)-451(DISCLAIMER)-451(OF)-451(DAMAGES)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 269.721 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.721 -13.549 Td[(Except)-473(for)-473(the)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 71.832 0 Td[(\034)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 4.843 0 Td[(Right)-473(of)-473(Replacement)-474(or)-473(Refund)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 152.146 0 Td[(\035)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.006 0 Td[(described)]TJ -238.827 -13.55 Td[(in)-550(paragraph)-550(1.F.3,)-625(the)-550(Project)-550(Gutenberg)-550(Literary)-550(Archive)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Foundation,)-432(the)-395(owner)-396(of)-395(the)-396(Project)-395(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 218.673 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.004 0 Td[(trademark,)]TJ -233.677 -13.549 Td[(and)-805(any)-805(other)-806(party)-805(distributing)-805(a)-805(Project)-806(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.549 Td[(electronic)-573(work)-572(under)-573(this)-572(agreement,)-653(disclaim)-573(all)-573(liability)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-662(you)-663(for)-662(damages,)-766(costs)-662(and)-663(expenses,)-765(including)-663(legal)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(fees.)-1105(YOU)-534(AGREE)-535(THAT)-535(YOU)-534(HAVE)-535(NO)-535(REMEDIES)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(FOR)-645(NEGLIGENCE,)-645(STRICT)-645(LIABILITY,)-646(BREACH)-645(OF)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(WARRANTY)-812(OR)-811(BREACH)-812(OF)-811(CONTRACT)-812(EXCEPT)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(THOSE)-504(PROVIDED)-504(IN)-504(PARAGRAPH)-503(F3.)-1013(YOU)-504(AGREE)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(THAT)-423(TH)-1(E)-423(FOUNDATION,)-424(THE)-423(TRADEMARK)-424(OWNER,)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(AND)-590(ANY)-590(DISTRIBUTOR)-590(UNDER)-590(THIS)-590(AGREEMENT)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(WILL)-941(NOT)-941(BE)-942(LIABLE)-941(TO)-941(YOU)-941(FOR)-942(ACTUAL,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(DIRECT,)-592(INDIRECT,)-591(CONSEQUENTIAL)-1(,)-591(PUNITIVE)-592(OR)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1721 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1722 0 R
+/Resources 1720 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1682 0 R
+/Annots [ 1725 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1725 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [108.03 226.354 180.072 236.074]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1F3) >>
+>> endobj
+1723 0 obj <<
+/D [1721 0 R /XYZ 93.543 502.313 null]
+>> endobj
+1724 0 obj <<
+/D [1721 0 R /XYZ 93.543 309.001 null]
+>> endobj
+1720 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1728 0 obj <<
+/Length 3273      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(The)-250(Full)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(License)-9894(171)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(INCIDENTAL)-492(DAMAGES)-492(EVEN)-492(IF)-492(YOU)-492(GIVE)-492(NOTICE)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(OF)-250(THE)-250(POSSIBILITY)-250(OF)-250(SUCH)-250(DAMAGE.)]TJ 0 -35.704 Td[(1.F.3.)]TJ 0 -24.646 Td[(LIMITED)-421(RIGHT)-421(OF)-422(REPLACEMENT)-421(OR)-421(REFUND)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 257.859 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.506 0 Td[(If)]TJ -273.365 -13.549 Td[(you)-434(discover)-434(a)-434(defect)-434(in)-434(this)-434(electronic)-434(work)-434(within)-434(90)-434(days)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-335(receiving)-334(it,)-356(you)-335(can)-335(receive)-334(a)-335(refund)-335(of)-334(th)-1(e)-334(money)-335(\050if)-335(any\051)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(you)-369(paid)-369(for)-369(it)-370(by)-369(sending)-369(a)-369(written)-369(explanation)-369(to)-369(the)-370(person)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(you)-430(received)-430(the)-431(work)-430(from.)-790(If)-431(you)-430(received)-430(the)-430(work)-430(on)-431(a)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(physical)-231(medium,)-236(you)-231(must)-231(return)-232(the)-231(medium)-232(with)-231(your)-232(written)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(explanation.)-706(The)-402(person)-402(or)-402(entity)-402(that)-402(provided)-402(you)-402(with)-402(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(defective)-301(work)-301(may)-301(elect)-300(to)-301(provide)-301(a)-301(replacement)-301(copy)-301(in)-301(lieu)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-305(a)-305(refun)-1(d.)-415(If)-305(you)-306(received)-305(the)-305(work)-305(electronically,)-319(the)-306(person)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(or)-348(entity)-347(providing)-348(it)-347(to)-348(you)-347(may)-348(choose)-347(to)-348(give)-348(you)-347(a)-348(second)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(opportunity)-226(to)-226(receive)-225(the)-226(work)-226(electronically)-226(in)-225(lieu)-226(of)-226(a)-226(refund.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(If)-315(the)-315(second)-315(copy)-315(is)-315(also)-315(defective,)-331(you)-315(may)-315(demand)-315(a)-315(refund)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(in)-250(writing)-250(without)-250(further)-250(opportunities)-250(to)-250(fix)-250(the)-250(problem.)]TJ 0 -35.704 Td[(1.F.4.)]TJ 0 -24.646 Td[(Except)-618(for)-618(the)-618(limited)-618(right)-618(of)-618(replacement)-618(or)-619(refund)-618(set)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(forth)-485(in)-485(paragraph)-485(1.F.3,)-543(this)-485(work)-485(is)-485(provided)-485(to)-485(you)-485('AS-)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(IS,')-610(WITH)-610(NO)-610(OTHER)-610(WA)-1(RRANTIES)-610(OF)-610(ANY)-610(KIND,)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(EXPRESS)-339(OR)-339(IMPLIED,)-338(INCLUDING)-339(BUT)-339(NOT)-339(LIMITED)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(TO)-401(WARRANTIES)-400(OF)-401(MERCHANTIBILITY)-401(OR)-401(FITNESS)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(FOR)-250(ANY)-250(PURPOSE.)]TJ 0 -35.704 Td[(1.F.5.)]TJ 0 -24.646 Td[(Some)-155(states)-155(do)-155(not)-155(allow)-155(disclaimers)-155(of)-155(certain)-155(implied)-155(warranties)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(or)-541(the)-540(exclu)-1(sion)-540(or)-541(limitation)-541(of)-540(certain)-541(types)-541(of)-541(damages.)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(If)-587(any)-587(disclaimer)-587(or)-587(limitation)-587(set)-587(forth)-587(in)-587(this)-587(agreement)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1727 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1728 0 R
+/Resources 1726 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1732 0 R
+/Annots [ 1730 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1730 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [87.045 205.409 158.378 215.129]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense1F3) >>
+>> endobj
+1718 0 obj <<
+/D [1727 0 R /XYZ 46.771 493.425 null]
+>> endobj
+1729 0 obj <<
+/D [1727 0 R /XYZ 46.771 268.249 null]
+>> endobj
+1731 0 obj <<
+/D [1727 0 R /XYZ 46.771 142.39 null]
+>> endobj
+1726 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1735 0 obj <<
+/Length 3485      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(172)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(violates)-405(the)-405(law)-405(of)-405(the)-405(state)-405(app)-1(licable)-405(to)-405(this)-405(agreement,)-444(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(agreement)-251(shall)-251(be)-250(interpre)-1(ted)-250(to)-251(make)-251(the)-251(maximum)-251(disclaimer)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(or)-210(limita)-1(tion)-210(permitted)-210(by)-211(the)-210(applicable)-211(state)-210(law.)-237(The)-211(invalidity)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(or)-297(unenforceability)-297(of)-297(any)-297(provision)-297(of)-297(this)-297(agreement)-297(shall)-297(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(void)-250(the)-250(remaining)-250(provisions.)]TJ 0 -34.869 Td[(1.F.6.)]TJ 0 -24.209 Td[(INDEMNITY)]TJ/F30 10.909 Tf 69.759 0 Td[(\024)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 18.872 0 Td[(You)-730(agree)-730(to)-730(indemnify)-730(and)-730(hold)-730(the)]TJ -88.631 -13.549 Td[(Foundation,)-504(the)-454(trademark)-453(owner,)-505(any)-453(agent)-454(or)-453(employee)-454(of)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(the)-213(Foundation,)-220(anyone)-213(providing)-213(copies)-213(of)-213(Project)-213(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.549 Td[(electronic)-436(works)-437(in)-436(accordance)-436(with)-436(this)-437(agreement,)-482(and)-437(any)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(volunteers)-691(associated)-691(with)-690(the)-691(production,)-801(promotion)-691(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(distribution)-339(of)-338(Project)-339(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 147.433 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.384 0 Td[(electronic)-339(works,)-360(harmless)]TJ -161.817 -13.549 Td[(from)-330(all)-331(liability,)-350(costs)-330(and)-330(expenses,)-351(including)-330(legal)-330(fees,)-351(that)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(arise)-284(directly)-284(or)-284(indirectly)-284(from)-284(any)-284(of)-284(the)-284(following)-284(which)-284(you)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(do)-461(or)-461(cause)-461(to)-462(occur:)-672(\050a\051)-461(distribution)-461(of)-461(this)-461(or)-461(any)-462(Project)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 46.048 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.236 0 Td[(work,)-344(\050b\051)-325(alteration,)-344(modification,)-343(or)-325(additions)-326(or)]TJ -60.284 -13.549 Td[(deletions)-319(to)-319(any)-319(Project)-320(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 154.511 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.172 0 Td[(work,)-336(and)-320(\050c\051)-319(any)-319(Defect)]TJ -168.683 -13.549 Td[(you)-250(cause.)]TJ/F16 15.781 Tf 0 -46.636 Td[(Section)-250(2.)]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 32.422 -45.397 Td[(Information)-260(about)-259(the)-260(Mission)-260(of)-259(Project)]TJ 73.695 -17.096 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 13.151 Tf 55.509 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -161.626 -26.391 Td[(Project)-400(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 81.319 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 15.057 0 Td[(is)-400(synonymous)-400(with)-401(the)-400(free)-400(distribution)]TJ -96.376 -13.549 Td[(of)-408(electronic)-409(works)-408(in)-408(formats)-408(readable)-409(by)-408(the)-408(widest)-409(variety)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-514(computers)-513(including)-514(obsolete,)-580(old,)-579(middle-aged)-514(and)-514(new)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(computers.)-1070(It)-524(exists)-523(because)-524(of)-523(the)-523(efforts)-524(of)-523(hundreds)-524(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(volunteers)-250(and)-250(donations)-250(from)-250(people)-250(in)-250(all)-250(walks)-250(of)-250(life.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1734 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1735 0 R
+/Resources 1733 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1732 0 R
+>> endobj
+1736 0 obj <<
+/D [1734 0 R /XYZ 93.543 450.94 null]
+>> endobj
+1737 0 obj <<
+/D [1734 0 R /XYZ 93.543 242.82 null]
+>> endobj
+1733 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F30 40 0 R /F42 1660 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1740 0 obj <<
+/Length 3572      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(The)-250(Full)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(License)-9894(173)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 58.727 518.175 Td[(Volunteers)-162(and)-163(financial)-162(support)-162(to)-163(provide)-162(volunteers)-162(with)-163(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(assistance)-198(they)-199(need,)-209(is)-198(critical)-198(to)-199(reaching)-198(Project)-199(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 263.732 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.691 0 Td[('s)]TJ -274.423 -13.549 Td[(goals)-309(and)-308(ensuring)-309(that)-309(the)-308(Pro)-1(ject)-308(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 203.205 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.058 0 Td[(collection)-309(will)]TJ -217.263 -13.549 Td[(remain)-382(freely)-381(available)-382(for)-381(generations)-382(to)-382(come.)-644(In)-382(2001,)-415(the)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Project)-350(Gutenberg)-351(Literary)-350(Archive)-351(Foundation)-350(was)-350(created)-351(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(provide)-302(a)-303(secure)-302(and)-302(permanent)-303(future)-302(for)-302(Project)-303(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 269.939 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -269.939 -13.549 Td[(and)-609(future)-609(generations.)-1327(To)-609(learn)-609(more)-609(about)-610(the)-609(Project)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)-414(Literary)-414(Archive)-413(Foundation)-414(and)-414(how)-414(your)-414(efforts)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-245(donations)-246(can)-245(help,)-246(see)-246(Sections)-245(3)-245(and)-246(4)-245(and)-245(the)-246(Foundation)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(web)-250(page)-250(at)-250(http://www.pglaf.org.)]TJ/F16 15.781 Tf 0 -53.578 Td[(Section)-250(3.)]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 10.376 -52.34 Td[(Information)-253(about)-253(the)-253(Project)-253(Gutenberg)-253(Literary)]TJ 76.986 -17.096 Td[(Archive)-276(Foundation)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -87.362 -30.22 Td[(The)-438(Project)-439(Gutenberg)-438(Literary)-438(Archive)-439(Foundation)-438(is)-438(a)-439(non)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(profit)-176(501\050c\051\0503\051)-176(educational)-176(corporation)-176(organized)-176(under)-176(the)-176(laws)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-303(the)-304(state)-303(of)-304(Mississippi)-303(and)-304(granted)-303(tax)-303(exempt)-304(status)-303(by)-304(the)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Internal)-319(Revenue)-319(Service.)-457(The)-319(Foundation's)-319(EIN)-319(or)-319(federal)-319(tax)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(identification)-179(number)-179(is)-178(64-6221541.)-227(Its)-178(501\050c\051\0503\051)-179(letter)-179(is)-179(posted)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(at)-549(http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.)-1149(Contributions)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-404(the)-403(Project)-404(Gutenberg)-404(Literary)-404(Archive)-403(Foundation)-404(are)-404(tax)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(deductible)-306(to)-306(the)-307(full)-306(extent)-306(permitted)-306(by)-306(U.S.)-306(federal)-306(laws)-307(and)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(your)-250(state's)-250(laws.)]TJ 11.956 -14.265 Td[(The)-214(Foundation's)-214(principal)-214(office)-213(is)-214(located)-214(at)-214(4557)-214(Melan)-214(Dr.)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(S.)-297(Fairbanks,)-310(AK,)-297(99712.,)-309(but)-297(its)-298(volunteers)-297(and)-297(employees)-298(are)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(scattered)-343(throughout)-343(numerous)-344(locations.)-529(Its)-343(business)-343(office)-344(is)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(located)-197(at)-197(809)-197(North)-197(1500)-197(West,)-208(Salt)-197(Lake)-197(City,)-208(UT)-197(84116,)-208(\050801\051)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(596-1887,)-225(email)-218(business@pglaf.org.)-239(Email)-219(contact)-218(links)-218(and)-219(up)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1739 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1740 0 R
+/Resources 1738 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1732 0 R
+/Annots [ 1741 0 R 1742 0 R 1743 0 R 1744 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1741 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [208.573 407.414 214.028 417.123]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense3) >>
+>> endobj
+1742 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+/BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [0 1 1]
+/Rect [235.133 407.414 240.587 417.123]
+/Subtype /Link
+/A << /S /GoTo /D (pglicense4) >>
+>> endobj
+1743 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [101.6 393.854 193.717 403.574]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.pglaf.org) >> 
+>> endobj
+1744 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [60.641 172.873 252.139 182.593]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf) >> 
+>> endobj
+1719 0 obj <<
+/D [1739 0 R /XYZ 46.771 380.081 null]
+>> endobj
+1738 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1747 0 obj <<
+/Length 3247      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(174)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 518.175 Td[(to)-227(date)-227(contact)-227(information)-227(can)-227(be)-227(found)-227(at)-227(the)-228(Foundation's)-227(web)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(site)-250(and)-250(official)-250(page)-250(at)-250(http://www.pglaf.org)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(For)-250(additional)-250(contact)-250(information:)]TJ/F16 9.863 Tf 7.681 -22.095 Td[(Dr.)-250(Gregory)-250(B.)-250(Newby)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(Chief)-250(Executive)-250(and)-250(Director)]TJ 0 -12.822 Td[(gbnewby@pglaf.org)]TJ/F16 15.781 Tf -19.637 -58.864 Td[(Section)-250(4.)]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 26.999 -44.805 Td[(Information)-258(about)-258(Donations)-258(to)-258(the)-258(Project)]TJ 8.106 -17.096 Td[(Gutenberg)-260(Literary)-261(Archive)-260(Foundation)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -35.105 -26.095 Td[(Project)-329(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 80.543 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.28 0 Td[(depends)-329(upon)-329(and)-329(cannot)-329(survive)-329(without)]TJ -94.823 -13.549 Td[(wide)-217(spread)-217(public)-217(support)-217(and)-217(donations)-217(to)-217(carry)-217(out)-218(its)-217(mission)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(of)-334(increasing)-334(the)-334(number)-334(of)-334(public)-334(domain)-334(and)-335(licensed)-334(works)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(that)-192(can)-193(be)-192(freely)-193(distributed)-192(in)-192(machine)-193(readable)-192(form)-193(accessible)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(by)-261(the)-261(widest)-261(array)-261(of)-261(equipment)-261(including)-261(ou)-1(tdated)-261(equipment.)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(Many)-303(small)-302(donations)-303(\050$1)-303(to)-302($5,00)-1(0\051)-302(are)-303(particularly)-303(important)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(to)-250(maintaining)-250(tax)-250(exempt)-250(status)-250(with)-250(the)-250(IRS.)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(The)-460(Foundation)-461(is)-460(committed)-461(to)-460(complying)-461(with)-460(the)-461(laws)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(regulating)-353(charities)-352(and)-353(charitable)-352(donations)-353(in)-352(all)-353(50)-352(states)-353(of)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-430(United)-429(States.)-789(Compliance)-430(requirements)-429(are)-430(not)-430(uniform)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-389(it)-389(takes)-389(a)-389(considerable)-389(effort,)-424(much)-389(paperwork)-389(a)-1(nd)-389(many)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(fees)-489(to)-489(meet)-489(and)-489(keep)-489(up)-489(with)-489(these)-489(requirements.)-968(We)-489(do)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(not)-396(solicit)-395(donations)-396(in)-396(locations)-396(where)-395(we)-396(have)-396(not)-396(received)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(written)-234(confirmation)-233(of)-234(compliance.)-244(To)-234(SEND)-233(DONATIONS)-234(or)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(determine)-309(the)-310(status)-309(of)-310(compliance)-309(for)-309(any)-310(particular)-309(state)-310(visit)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate)]TJ 11.956 -13.549 Td[(While)-305(we)-304(cannot)-305(and)-304(do)-305(not)-305(solicit)-304(contributions)-305(from)-305(states)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(where)-323(we)-323(have)-322(not)-323(met)-323(the)-323(solicitation)-323(requirements,)-341(we)-323(know)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1746 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1747 0 R
+/Resources 1745 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1732 0 R
+/Annots [ 1748 0 R 1749 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1748 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [198.063 502.248 290.179 511.968]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.pglaf.org) >> 
+>> endobj
+1749 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [93.543 90.862 291.707 100.582]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate) >> 
+>> endobj
+1717 0 obj <<
+/D [1746 0 R /XYZ 93.543 420.153 null]
+>> endobj
+1745 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1752 0 obj <<
+/Length 3413      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 46.771 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -46.771 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 548.934 Td[(The)-250(Full)-250(Project)-250(Gutenberg)-250(License)-9894(175)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 327.401 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -327.401 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 46.771 518.175 Td[(of)-366(no)-365(prohibition)-366(against)-366(accepting)-365(unsolicited)-366(donations)-366(from)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(donors)-250(in)-250(such)-250(states)-250(who)-250(approach)-250(us)-250(with)-250(offers)-250(to)-250(donate.)]TJ 11.956 -14.186 Td[(International)-237(donations)-237(are)-237(gratefully)-238(accepted,)-239(but)-237(we)-238(cannot)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(make)-533(any)-532(statements)-533(concerning)-533(tax)-532(treatment)-533(of)-533(donations)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(received)-256(from)-255(outside)-256(the)-255(United)-256(States.)-267(U.S.)-255(laws)-256(alone)-256(swamp)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(our)-250(small)-250(staff.)]TJ 11.956 -14.186 Td[(Please)-413(check)-413(the)-412(Project)-413(Gutenberg)-413(Web)-413(pages)-413(for)-413(current)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(donation)-467(methods)-467(and)-467(addresses.)-900(Donations)-467(are)-467(accepted)-467(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(a)-517(number)-517(of)-516(other)-517(ways)-517(including)-516(checks,)-584(online)-517(payments)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(and)-884(credit)-884(card)-885(donations.)-2152(To)-885(donate,)-1042(please)-885(visit:)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate)]TJ/F16 15.781 Tf 0 -52.862 Td[(Section)-250(5.)]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf 12.158 -51.624 Td[(General)-254(Informat)1(ion)-254(About)-254(Project)-253(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 13.151 Tf 243.427 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 13.151 Tf -160.742 -17.096 Td[(electronic)-278(works.)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -94.843 -29.823 Td[(Professor)-596(Michael)-597(S.)-596(Hart)-596(is)-596(the)-597(originator)-596(of)-596(the)-597(Project)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 46.048 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 13.755 0 Td[(concept)-281(of)-281(a)-281(library)-281(of)-281(electronic)-281(works)-281(that)-281(could)]TJ -59.803 -13.549 Td[(be)-436(freely)-436(shared)-436(with)-436(anyone.)-807(For)-436(thirty)-436(years,)-483(he)-436(produced)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(and)-357(distributed)-357(Project)-358(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 151.064 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.588 0 Td[(eBooks)-357(with)-357(only)-358(a)-357(loose)]TJ -165.652 -13.549 Td[(network)-250(of)-250(volunteer)-250(support.)]TJ 11.956 -14.186 Td[(Project)-379(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 81.091 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 14.829 0 Td[(eBooks)-379(are)-380(often)-379(created)-380(from)-379(several)]TJ -107.876 -13.549 Td[(printed)-248(editions,)-248(all)-248(of)-247(which)-248(are)-248(confirmed)-247(as)-248(Public)-248(Domain)-248(in)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(the)-303(U.S.)-302(unless)-303(a)-303(copyright)-303(notice)-302(is)-303(included.)-408(Thus,)-316(we)-303(do)-303(not)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(necessarily)-216(keep)-217(eBooks)-216(in)-216(compliance)-217(with)-216(any)-216(particular)-217(paper)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(edition.)]TJ 11.956 -14.185 Td[(Each)-355(eBook)-356(is)-356(in)-355(a)-356(subdirectory)-355(of)-356(the)-355(same)-356(number)-355(as)-356(the)]TJ -11.956 -13.55 Td[(eBook's)-266(eBook)-266(number,)-269(often)-266(in)-266(several)-266(formats)-266(including)-266(plain)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(vanilla)-250(ASCII,)-250(compressed)-250(\050zipped\051,)-250(HTML)-250(and)-250(others.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 46.771 38.782 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1751 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1752 0 R
+/Resources 1750 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1732 0 R
+/Annots [ 1753 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1753 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [46.771 379.032 244.935 388.752]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate) >> 
+>> endobj
+1754 0 obj <<
+/D [1751 0 R /XYZ 46.771 365.577 null]
+>> endobj
+1750 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F42 1660 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1757 0 obj <<
+/Length 1832      
+>>
+stream
+1 0 0 1 93.543 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -93.543 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 93.543 548.934 Td[(176)-13030(Atheism)-250(in)-250(Pagan)-250(Antiquity)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 374.173 548.934 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 -374.173 -548.934 cm
+BT
+/F16 10.909 Tf 105.499 518.175 Td[(Corrected)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 45.766 0 Td[(editions)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 37.301 0 Td[(of)-252(our)-253(eBooks)-252(replace)-252(the)-252(old)-253(file)-252(and)-252(take)]TJ -95.023 -13.549 Td[(over)-286(the)-285(old)-285(filename)-286(and)-285(etext)-286(number.)-356(The)-286(replaced)-285(older)-286(file)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(is)-367(renamed.)]TJ/F28 10.909 Tf 58.126 0 Td[(Versions)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 42.185 0 Td[(based)-367(on)-367(separate)-367(sources)-367(are)-367(treated)-367(as)]TJ -100.311 -13.549 Td[(new)-250(eBooks)-250(receiving)-250(new)-250(filenames)-250(and)-250(etext)-250(numbers.)]TJ 11.956 -13.55 Td[(Most)-416(people)-416(start)-416(at)-416(our)-416(Web)-416(site)-416(which)-416(has)-416(the)-416(main)-416(PG)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(search)-250(facility:)]TJ/F16 9.863 Tf 19.637 -22.64 Td[(http://www.gutenberg.org)]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf -7.681 -23.367 Td[(This)-1077(Web)-1078(site)-1077(includes)-1077(information)-1077(about)-1078(Project)]TJ -11.956 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)]TJ/F42 10.909 Tf 46.048 0 Td[(")]TJ/F16 10.909 Tf 10.691 0 Td[(,)-418(including)-384(how)-384(to)-384(ma)-1(ke)-384(donations)-384(to)-384(the)-384(Project)]TJ -56.739 -13.549 Td[(Gutenberg)-397(Literary)-396(Archive)-397(Foundation,)-433(how)-396(to)-397(help)-397(produce)]TJ 0 -13.55 Td[(our)-230(new)-230(eBooks,)-234(and)-230(how)-230(to)-230(subscribe)-230(to)-230(our)-230(email)-230(newsletter)-230(to)]TJ 0 -13.549 Td[(hear)-250(about)-250(new)-250(eBooks.)]TJ
+ET
+1 0 0 1 93.543 322.811 cm
+0 g 0 G
+0 g 0 G
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 0 -284.029 cm
+0 g 0 G
+1 0 0 1 280.63 0 cm
+0 g 0 G
+endstream
+endobj
+1756 0 obj <<
+/Type /Page
+/Contents 1757 0 R
+/Resources 1755 0 R
+/MediaBox [0 0 419.528 595.276]
+/Parent 1732 0 R
+/Annots [ 1758 0 R ]
+>> endobj
+1758 0 obj <<
+/Type /Annot
+ /BS << /Type /Border /S /U >> /H /I /C [1 0.5 0.5] 
+/Rect [113.18 425.639 215.636 434.427]
+ /Subtype /Link /A << /Type /Action /S /URI /URI (http://www.gutenberg.org) >> 
+>> endobj
+1755 0 obj <<
+/Font << /F16 5 0 R /F28 30 0 R /F42 1660 0 R >>
+/ProcSet [ /PDF /Text ]
+>> endobj
+1759 0 obj <<
+/Type /Encoding
+/Differences [ 0 /uni2100/uni2101/uni2102/centigrade/uni2104/careof/uni2106/uni2107/uni2108/fahrenheit/uni210a/uni210b/uni210c/uni210d/uni210e/uni210f/uni2110/Ifraktur/uni2112/lsquare/uni2114/uni2115/numero/uni2117/weierstrass/uni2119/uni211a/uni211b/Rfraktur/uni211d/prescription/uni211f/uni2120/telephone/trademark/uni2123/uni2124/uni2125/Omega/uni2127/uni2128/uni2129/uni212a/angstrom/uni212c/uni212d/estimated/uni212f/uni2130/uni2131/uni2132/uni2133/uni2134/aleph/uni2136/uni2137/uni2138/uni2139/uni213a/uni213b/uni213c/uni213d/uni213e/uni213f/uni2140/uni2141/uni2142/uni2143/uni2144/uni2145/uni2146/uni2147/uni2148/uni2149/uni214a/uni214b/uni214c/uni214d/uni214e/uni214f/uni2150/uni2151/uni2152/onethird/twothirds/uni2155/uni2156/uni2157/uni2158/uni2159/uni215a/oneeighth/threeeighths/fiveeighths/seveneighths/uni215f/Oneroman/Tworoman/Threeroman/Fourroman/Fiveroman/Sixroman/Sevenroman/Eightroman/Nineroman/Tenroman/Elevenroman/Twelveroman/uni216c/uni216d/uni216e/uni216f/oneroman/tworoman/threeroman/fourroman/fiveroman/sixroman/sevenroman/eightroman/nineroman/tenroman/elevenroman/twelveroman/uni217c/uni217d/uni217e/uni217f/uni2180/uni2181/uni2182/uni2183/uni2184/uni2185/uni2186/uni2187/uni2188/uni2189/uni218a/uni218b/uni218c/uni218d/uni218e/uni218f/arrowleft/arrowup/arrowright/arrowdown/arrowboth/arrowupdn/arrowupleft/arrowupright/arrowdownright/arrowdownleft/uni219a/uni219b/uni219c/uni219d/uni219e/uni219f/uni21a0/uni21a1/uni21a2/uni21a3/uni21a4/uni21a5/uni21a6/uni21a7/arrowupdownbase/uni21a9/uni21aa/uni21ab/uni21ac/uni21ad/uni21ae/uni21af/uni21b0/uni21b1/uni21b2/uni21b3/uni21b4/carriagereturn/uni21b6/uni21b7/uni21b8/uni21b9/uni21ba/uni21bb/harpoonleftbarbup/uni21bd/uni21be/uni21bf/harpoonrightbarbup/uni21c1/uni21c2/uni21c3/arrowrightoverleft/arrowupleftofdown/arrowleftoverright/uni21c7/uni21c8/uni21c9/uni21ca/uni21cb/uni21cc/arrowleftdblstroke/uni21ce/arrowrightdblstroke/arrowleftdbl/arrowdblup/dblarrowright/arrowdbldown/dblarrowleft/uni21d5/uni21d6/uni21d7/uni21d8/uni21d9/uni21da/uni21db/uni21dc/uni21dd/pageup/pagedown/arrowdashleft/arrowdashup/arrowdashright/arrowdashdown/arrowtableft/arrowtabright/arrowleftwhite/arrowupwhite/arrowrightwhite/arrowdownwhite/capslock/uni21eb/uni21ec/uni21ed/uni21ee/uni21ef/uni21f0/uni21f1/uni21f2/uni21f3/uni21f4/uni21f5/uni21f6/uni21f7/uni21f8/uni21f9/uni21fa/uni21fb/uni21fc/uni21fd/uni21fe/uni21ff]
+>> endobj
+1660 0 obj <<
+/Type /Font
+/Subtype /Type1
+/Encoding 1759 0 R
+/BaseFont /Times-Roman
+>> endobj
+651 0 obj <<
+/Length1 7888
+/Length 7888      
+>>
+stream
+
+\headژo{
+
g
+i
+
l
+
$-3��
+L�F<mS1=k�V[�&486v4Uk6��,Y�\G�i@&>h�rTvO/
	;@DpQ��9o�mlǗZ��	I�:
+
+
$-3
+

>7A�B 
+
K?
+mHD9Y<
�4B&()(��EP)
+ -
+&
+9Zy
+
+
+)Ic:2bM0;aDHxt>	#j��
+
w
#
+
+by
+{����
+b
+
+�
+�
+






uni1F00uni1F30uni1F50uni1F61uni1F77uni1FBDuni1FF6alphauni1FBFiotaupsilonomegauni1FFEuni1FFDuni1FC0
+endobj
+652 0 obj <<
+/Type /Font
+/Subtype /TrueType
+/FirstChar 0
+/LastChar 246
+/Widths 1760 0 R
+/BaseFont /SGEAHO+Gentium
+/FontDescriptor 650 0 R
+>> endobj
+650 0 obj <<
+/Ascent 858
+/CapHeight 698
+/Descent -275
+/FontName /SGEAHO+Gentium
+/ItalicAngle 0
+/StemV 280
+/XHeight 454
+/FontBBox [-519 -297 1297 1059]
+/Flags 4
+/FontFile2 651 0 R
+>> endobj
+1760 0 obj
+[525 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 294 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 507 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 294 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 187 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 700 ]
+endobj
+648 0 obj <<
+/Length1 10864
+/Length 10864     
+>>
+stream
+
+\E
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
++ 4ܥv7�����WF[=%.G8%N^rIc�3+4!-MvX����w/?@
+('"
++V#'

.'AM\7"G$';6$=:;!#
b�����\�iFITS�1T>#>nV��#820
9=;
�4;(#0KH4��
+

>7A�B 
+
K?
+mHD9Y<
�4B&()(��EP)
+ -
+"���yF$	

2W,M@EfyfE
+\9B@n��8d���u!>�����Jg}C"&33E*3a����a-
+к
+
+3!R(!":L+ijQHo��_�',(
+
��#RF0
+!=4
�-,&	'I?�]L

+����
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+��`�k8-g�{kG�{hL*
+2(L��m
+	q�ύHJz�
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+901
#".#".
'>
54.'.54>7>
323263
1%&#
)9H+*C3%>`B<gK+5P7
+70)CT+:?>11M76|@ :;<"	
+}.(!*EY^[$8WF9-8H1P_i6C�.&7*(:Nd?G��v/-2

+
+&
+9Zy
+ 	9
+/

+by
+{����
+b
+�
+
+�
+�
+





uni0361epsilonzetaetathetaiotakappalambdauni03BCnuomicronrhosigma1upsilon
+
+
+endobj
+649 0 obj <<
+/Type /Font
+/Subtype /TrueType
+/FirstChar 181
+/LastChar 197
+/Widths 1761 0 R
+/BaseFont /WXYPSJ+Gentium
+/FontDescriptor 647 0 R
+>> endobj
+647 0 obj <<
+/Ascent 858
+/CapHeight 0
+/Descent -275
+/FontName /WXYPSJ+Gentium
+/ItalicAngle 0
+/StemV 0
+/XHeight 454
+/FontBBox [-519 -297 1297 1059]
+/Flags 4
+/FontFile2 648 0 R
+>> endobj
+1761 0 obj
+[420 399 534 499 294 510 528 539 507 0 498 0 478 408 0 0 507 ]
+endobj
+1762 0 obj <<
+/Type /Encoding
+/Differences [ 0 /uni2000/uni2001/enspace/uni2003/uni2004/uni2005/uni2006/uni2007/uni2008/uni2009/uni200a/zerowidthspace/zerowidthnonjoiner/afii301/afii299/afii300/hyphentwo/uni2011/figuredash/endash/emdash/horizontalbar/dblverticalbar/underscoredbl/quoteleft/quoteright/quotesinglbase/quotereversed/quotedblleft/quotedblright/quotedblbase/uni201f/dagger/daggerdbl/bullet/uni2023/onedotenleader/twodotleader/ellipsis/uni2027/uni2028/uni2029/uni202a/uni202b/afii61573/afii61574/afii61575/uni202f/perthousand/uni2031/minute/second/uni2034/primereversed/uni2036/uni2037/uni2038/guilsinglleft/guilsinglright/referencemark/exclamdbl/uni203d/overline/uni203f/uni2040/uni2041/asterism/uni2043/fraction/uni2045/uni2046/uni2047/uni2048/uni2049/uni204a/uni204b/uni204c/uni204d/uni204e/uni204f/uni2050/uni2051/uni2052/uni2053/uni2054/uni2055/uni2056/uni2057/uni2058/uni2059/uni205a/uni205b/uni205c/uni205d/uni205e/uni205f/uni2060/uni2061/uni2062/uni2063/uni2064/uni2065/uni2066/uni2067/uni2068/uni2069/uni206a/uni206b/uni206c/uni206d/uni206e/uni206f/zerosuperior/uni2071/uni2072/uni2073/foursuperior/fivesuperior/sixsuperior/sevensuperior/eightsuperior/ninesuperior/plussuperior/uni207b/equalsuperior/parenleftsuperior/parenrightsuperior/nsuperior/zeroinferior/oneinferior/twoinferior/threeinferior/fourinferior/fiveinferior/sixinferior/seveninferior/eightinferior/nineinferior/uni208a/uni208b/uni208c/parenleftinferior/parenrightinferior/uni208f/uni2090/uni2091/uni2092/uni2093/uni2094/uni2095/uni2096/uni2097/uni2098/uni2099/uni209a/uni209b/uni209c/uni209d/uni209e/uni209f/uni20a0/colonsign/cruzeiro/franc/lira/uni20a5/uni20a6/peseta/uni20a8/won/sheqelhebrew/dong/euro/uni20ad/uni20ae/uni20af/uni20b0/uni20b1/uni20b2/uni20b3/uni20b4/uni20b5/uni20b6/uni20b7/uni20b8/uni20b9/uni20ba/uni20bb/uni20bc/uni20bd/uni20be/uni20bf/uni20c0/uni20c1/uni20c2/uni20c3/uni20c4/uni20c5/uni20c6/uni20c7/uni20c8/uni20c9/uni20ca/uni20cb/uni20cc/uni20cd/uni20ce/uni20cf/uni20d0/uni20d1/uni20d2/uni20d3/uni20d4/uni20d5/uni20d6/uni20d7/uni20d8/uni20d9/uni20da/uni20db/uni20dc/uni20dd/uni20de/uni20df/uni20e0/uni20e1/uni20e2/uni20e3/uni20e4/uni20e5/uni20e6/uni20e7/uni20e8/uni20e9/uni20ea/uni20eb/uni20ec/uni20ed/uni20ee/uni20ef/uni20f0/uni20f1/uni20f2/uni20f3/uni20f4/uni20f5/uni20f6/uni20f7/uni20f8/uni20f9/uni20fa/uni20fb/uni20fc/uni20fd/uni20fe/uni20ff]
+>> endobj
+40 0 obj <<
+/Type /Font
+/Subtype /Type1
+/Encoding 1762 0 R
+/BaseFont /Times-Roman
+>> endobj
+1763 0 obj <<
+/Type /Encoding
+/Differences [ 0 /Amacron/amacron/Abreve/abreve/Aogonek/aogonek/Cacute/cacute/Ccircumflex/ccircumflex/Cdotaccent/cdotaccent/Ccaron/ccaron/Dcaron/dcaron/Dslash/dmacron/Emacron/emacron/Ebreve/ebreve/Edotaccent/edotaccent/Eogonek/eogonek/Ecaron/ecaron/Gcircumflex/gcircumflex/Gbreve/gbreve/Gdotaccent/gdotaccent/Gcommaaccent/gcommaaccent/Hcircumflex/hcircumflex/Hbar/hbar/Itilde/itilde/Imacron/imacron/Ibreve/ibreve/Iogonek/iogonek/Idotaccent/dotlessi/IJ/ij/Jcircumflex/jcircumflex/Kcommaaccent/kcommaaccent/kgreenlandic/Lacute/lacute/Lcommaaccent/lcommaaccent/Lcaron/lcaron/Ldotaccent/ldotaccent/Lslash/lslash/Nacute/nacute/Ncommaaccent/ncommaaccent/Ncaron/ncaron/quoterightn/Eng/eng/Omacron/omacron/Obreve/obreve/Ohungarumlaut/ohungarumlaut/OE/oe/Racute/racute/Rcommaaccent/rcommaaccent/Rcaron/rcaron/Sacute/sacute/Scircumflex/scircumflex/Scedilla/scedilla/Scaron/scaron/Tcommaaccent/tcommaaccent/Tcaron/tcaron/Tbar/tbar/Utilde/utilde/Umacron/umacron/Ubreve/ubreve/Uring/uring/Uhungarumlaut/uhungarumlaut/Uogonek/uogonek/Wcircumflex/wcircumflex/Ycircumflex/ycircumflex/Ydieresis/Zacute/zacute/Zdotaccent/zdotaccent/Zcaron/zcaron/slong/bstroke/Bhook/Btopbar/btopbar/Tonesix/tonesix/Oopen/Chook/chook/Dafrican/Dhook/Dtopbar/dtopbar/deltaturned/Ereversed/Schwa/Eopen/Fhook/florin/Ghook/Gammaafrican/hv/Iotaafrican/Istroke/Khook/khook/lbar/lambdastroke/Mturned/Nhookleft/nlegrightlong/Ocenteredtilde/Ohorn/ohorn/Oi/oi/Phook/phook/yr/Tonetwo/tonetwo/Esh/eshreversedloop/tpalatalhook/Thook/thook/Tretroflexhook/Uhorn/uhorn/Upsilonafrican/Vhook/Yhook/yhook/Zstroke/zstroke/Ezh/Ezhreversed/ezhreversed/ezhtail/twostroke/Tonefive/tonefive/glottalinvertedstroke/wynn/clickdental/clicklateral/clickalveolar/clickretroflex/DZcaron/Dzcaron/dzcaron/LJ/Lj/lj/NJ/Nj/nj/Acaron/acaron/Icaron/icaron/Ocaron/ocaron/Ucaron/ucaron/Udieresismacron/udieresismacron/Udieresisacute/udieresisacute/Udieresiscaron/udieresiscaron/Udieresisgrave/udieresisgrave/eturned/Adieresismacron/adieresismacron/Adotmacron/adotmacron/AEmacron/aemacron/Gstroke/gstroke/Gcaron/gcaron/Kcaron/kcaron/Oogonek/oogonek/Oogonekmacron/oogonekmacron/Ezhcaron/ezhcaron/jcaron/DZ/Dz/dz/Gacute/gacute/uni01f6/uni01f7/uni01f8/uni01f9/Aringacute/aringacute/AEacute/aeacute/Ostrokeacute/ostrokeacute]
+>> endobj
+31 0 obj <<
+/Type /Font
+/Subtype /Type1
+/Encoding 1763 0 R
+/BaseFont /Times-Italic
+>> endobj
+1764 0 obj <<
+/Type /Encoding
+/Differences [ 0 /uni0000/controlSTX/controlSOT/controlETX/controlEOT/controlENQ/controlACK/controlBEL/controlBS/controlHT/controlLF/controlVT/controlFF/controlCR/controlSO/controlSI/controlDLE/controlDC1/controlDC2/controlDC3/controlDC4/controlNAK/controlSYN/controlETB/controlCAN/controlEM/controlSUB/controlESC/controlFS/controlGS/controlRS/controlUS/spacehackarabic/exclam/quotedbl/numbersign/dollar/percent/ampersand/quotesingle/parenleft/parenright/asterisk/plus/comma/hyphen/period/slash/zero/one/two/three/four/five/six/seven/eight/nine/colon/semicolon/less/equal/greater/question/at/A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I/J/K/L/M/N/O/P/Q/R/S/T/U/V/W/X/Y/Z/bracketleft/backslash/bracketright/asciicircum/underscore/grave/a/b/c/d/e/f/g/h/i/j/k/l/m/n/o/p/q/r/s/t/u/v/w/x/y/z/braceleft/verticalbar/braceright/asciitilde/controlDEL/uni0080/uni0081/uni0082/uni0083/uni0084/uni0085/uni0086/uni0087/uni0088/uni0089/uni008a/uni008b/uni008c/uni008d/uni008e/uni008f/uni0090/uni0091/uni0092/uni0093/uni0094/uni0095/uni0096/uni0097/uni0098/uni0099/uni009a/uni009b/uni009c/uni009d/uni009e/uni009f/nonbreakingspace/exclamdown/cent/sterling/currency/yen/brokenbar/section/dieresis/copyright/ordfeminine/guillemotleft/logicalnot/softhyphen/registered/overscore/degree/plusminus/twosuperior/threesuperior/acute/mu1/paragraph/periodcentered/cedilla/onesuperior/ordmasculine/guillemotright/onequarter/onehalf/threequarters/questiondown/Agrave/Aacute/Acircumflex/Atilde/Adieresis/Aring/AE/Ccedilla/Egrave/Eacute/Ecircumflex/Edieresis/Igrave/Iacute/Icircumflex/Idieresis/Eth/Ntilde/Ograve/Oacute/Ocircumflex/Otilde/Odieresis/multiply/Oslash/Ugrave/Uacute/Ucircumflex/Udieresis/Yacute/Thorn/germandbls/agrave/aacute/acircumflex/atilde/adieresis/aring/ae/ccedilla/egrave/eacute/ecircumflex/edieresis/igrave/iacute/icircumflex/idieresis/eth/ntilde/ograve/oacute/ocircumflex/otilde/odieresis/divide/oslash/ugrave/uacute/ucircumflex/udieresis/yacute/thorn/ydieresis]
+>> endobj
+30 0 obj <<
+/Type /Font
+/Subtype /Type1
+/Encoding 1764 0 R
+/BaseFont /Times-Italic
+>> endobj
+5 0 obj <<
+/Type /Font
+/Subtype /Type1
+/Encoding 1764 0 R
+/BaseFont /Times-Roman
+>> endobj
+8 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1765 0 R
+/Kids [2 0 R 11 0 R 14 0 R 17 0 R 20 0 R 28 0 R]
+>> endobj
+42 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1765 0 R
+/Kids [38 0 R 44 0 R 48 0 R 57 0 R 61 0 R 65 0 R]
+>> endobj
+73 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1765 0 R
+/Kids [69 0 R 75 0 R 79 0 R 83 0 R 87 0 R 96 0 R]
+>> endobj
+103 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1765 0 R
+/Kids [100 0 R 105 0 R 109 0 R 114 0 R 118 0 R 126 0 R]
+>> endobj
+133 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1765 0 R
+/Kids [130 0 R 135 0 R 140 0 R 144 0 R 148 0 R 152 0 R]
+>> endobj
+160 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1765 0 R
+/Kids [157 0 R 162 0 R 166 0 R 175 0 R 179 0 R 183 0 R]
+>> endobj
+191 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1766 0 R
+/Kids [187 0 R 193 0 R 197 0 R 201 0 R 206 0 R 210 0 R]
+>> endobj
+218 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1766 0 R
+/Kids [214 0 R 220 0 R 224 0 R 228 0 R 233 0 R 237 0 R]
+>> endobj
+244 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1766 0 R
+/Kids [241 0 R 246 0 R 251 0 R 255 0 R 259 0 R 264 0 R]
+>> endobj
+272 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1766 0 R
+/Kids [268 0 R 278 0 R 282 0 R 286 0 R 290 0 R 295 0 R]
+>> endobj
+302 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1766 0 R
+/Kids [299 0 R 304 0 R 309 0 R 313 0 R 317 0 R 321 0 R]
+>> endobj
+329 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1766 0 R
+/Kids [326 0 R 331 0 R 335 0 R 340 0 R 344 0 R 348 0 R]
+>> endobj
+356 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1767 0 R
+/Kids [352 0 R 358 0 R 362 0 R 370 0 R 374 0 R 378 0 R]
+>> endobj
+386 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1767 0 R
+/Kids [382 0 R 388 0 R 392 0 R 396 0 R 401 0 R 405 0 R]
+>> endobj
+413 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1767 0 R
+/Kids [409 0 R 415 0 R 419 0 R 423 0 R 428 0 R 432 0 R]
+>> endobj
+441 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1767 0 R
+/Kids [436 0 R 443 0 R 448 0 R 452 0 R 456 0 R 461 0 R]
+>> endobj
+468 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1767 0 R
+/Kids [465 0 R 470 0 R 475 0 R 483 0 R 487 0 R 491 0 R]
+>> endobj
+499 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1767 0 R
+/Kids [495 0 R 501 0 R 505 0 R 509 0 R 514 0 R 518 0 R]
+>> endobj
+526 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1768 0 R
+/Kids [522 0 R 532 0 R 536 0 R 542 0 R 546 0 R 551 0 R]
+>> endobj
+558 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1768 0 R
+/Kids [555 0 R 560 0 R 565 0 R 569 0 R 573 0 R 577 0 R]
+>> endobj
+588 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1768 0 R
+/Kids [585 0 R 590 0 R 594 0 R 598 0 R 603 0 R 612 0 R]
+>> endobj
+617 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1768 0 R
+/Kids [615 0 R 619 0 R 629 0 R 643 0 R 656 0 R 667 0 R]
+>> endobj
+692 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1768 0 R
+/Kids [681 0 R 694 0 R 706 0 R 715 0 R 727 0 R 744 0 R]
+>> endobj
+762 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1768 0 R
+/Kids [754 0 R 764 0 R 773 0 R 780 0 R 786 0 R 792 0 R]
+>> endobj
+847 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1769 0 R
+/Kids [801 0 R 849 0 R 900 0 R 954 0 R 987 0 R 1058 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1184 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1769 0 R
+/Kids [1134 0 R 1186 0 R 1222 0 R 1250 0 R 1297 0 R 1348 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1472 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1769 0 R
+/Kids [1426 0 R 1474 0 R 1534 0 R 1570 0 R 1628 0 R 1632 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1638 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1769 0 R
+/Kids [1635 0 R 1640 0 R 1647 0 R 1650 0 R 1657 0 R 1666 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1682 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1769 0 R
+/Kids [1675 0 R 1685 0 R 1691 0 R 1701 0 R 1708 0 R 1721 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1732 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 6
+/Parent 1769 0 R
+/Kids [1727 0 R 1734 0 R 1739 0 R 1746 0 R 1751 0 R 1756 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1765 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 36
+/Parent 1770 0 R
+/Kids [8 0 R 42 0 R 73 0 R 103 0 R 133 0 R 160 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1766 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 36
+/Parent 1770 0 R
+/Kids [191 0 R 218 0 R 244 0 R 272 0 R 302 0 R 329 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1767 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 36
+/Parent 1770 0 R
+/Kids [356 0 R 386 0 R 413 0 R 441 0 R 468 0 R 499 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1768 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 36
+/Parent 1770 0 R
+/Kids [526 0 R 558 0 R 588 0 R 617 0 R 692 0 R 762 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1769 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 36
+/Parent 1770 0 R
+/Kids [847 0 R 1184 0 R 1472 0 R 1638 0 R 1682 0 R 1732 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1770 0 obj <<
+/Type /Pages
+/Count 180
+/Kids [1765 0 R 1766 0 R 1767 0 R 1768 0 R 1769 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1771 0 obj <<
+/Type /Outlines
+/First 25 0 R
+/Last 1663 0 R
+/Count 17
+>> endobj
+1663 0 obj <<
+/Title 1664 0 R
+/A 1661 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 1654 0 R
+>> endobj
+1654 0 obj <<
+/Title 1655 0 R
+/A 1652 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 1644 0 R
+/Next 1663 0 R
+>> endobj
+1644 0 obj <<
+/Title 1645 0 R
+/A 1642 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 1625 0 R
+/Next 1654 0 R
+>> endobj
+1625 0 obj <<
+/Title 1626 0 R
+/A 1623 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 798 0 R
+/Next 1644 0 R
+>> endobj
+798 0 obj <<
+/Title 799 0 R
+/A 796 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 609 0 R
+/Next 1625 0 R
+>> endobj
+609 0 obj <<
+/Title 610 0 R
+/A 607 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 582 0 R
+/Next 798 0 R
+>> endobj
+582 0 obj <<
+/Title 583 0 R
+/A 580 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 529 0 R
+/Next 609 0 R
+>> endobj
+529 0 obj <<
+/Title 530 0 R
+/A 527 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 480 0 R
+/Next 582 0 R
+>> endobj
+480 0 obj <<
+/Title 481 0 R
+/A 478 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 367 0 R
+/Next 529 0 R
+>> endobj
+367 0 obj <<
+/Title 368 0 R
+/A 365 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 275 0 R
+/Next 480 0 R
+>> endobj
+275 0 obj <<
+/Title 276 0 R
+/A 273 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 172 0 R
+/Next 367 0 R
+>> endobj
+172 0 obj <<
+/Title 173 0 R
+/A 170 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 123 0 R
+/Next 275 0 R
+>> endobj
+123 0 obj <<
+/Title 124 0 R
+/A 121 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 93 0 R
+/Next 172 0 R
+>> endobj
+93 0 obj <<
+/Title 94 0 R
+/A 91 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 54 0 R
+/Next 123 0 R
+>> endobj
+54 0 obj <<
+/Title 55 0 R
+/A 52 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 35 0 R
+/Next 93 0 R
+>> endobj
+35 0 obj <<
+/Title 36 0 R
+/A 33 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Prev 25 0 R
+/Next 54 0 R
+>> endobj
+25 0 obj <<
+/Title 26 0 R
+/A 23 0 R
+/Parent 1771 0 R
+/Next 35 0 R
+>> endobj
+1772 0 obj <<
+/Names [(Pg001) 32 0 R (Pg002) 41 0 R (Pg003) 46 0 R (Pg004) 50 0 R (Pg005) 51 0 R (Pg006) 59 0 R (Pg007) 63 0 R (Pg008) 67 0 R (Pg009) 71 0 R (Pg010) 72 0 R (Pg011) 77 0 R (Pg012) 81 0 R (Pg013) 85 0 R (Pg014) 89 0 R (Pg015) 90 0 R (Pg016) 98 0 R (Pg017) 102 0 R (Pg018) 107 0 R (Pg019) 111 0 R (Pg020) 112 0 R (Pg021) 116 0 R (Pg022) 120 0 R (Pg023) 128 0 R (Pg024) 132 0 R (Pg025) 137 0 R (Pg026) 138 0 R (Pg027) 142 0 R (Pg028) 146 0 R (Pg029) 150 0 R (Pg030) 154 0 R (Pg031) 155 0 R (Pg032) 159 0 R (Pg033) 164 0 R (Pg034) 168 0 R (Pg035) 169 0 R (Pg036) 177 0 R (Pg037) 181 0 R (Pg038) 185 0 R (Pg039) 189 0 R (Pg040) 190 0 R (Pg041) 195 0 R (Pg042) 199 0 R (Pg043) 203 0 R (Pg044) 204 0 R (Pg045) 208 0 R (Pg046) 212 0 R (Pg047) 216 0 R (Pg048) 217 0 R (Pg049) 222 0 R (Pg050) 226 0 R (Pg051) 230 0 R (Pg052) 231 0 R (Pg053) 235 0 R (Pg054) 239 0 R (Pg055) 243 0 R (Pg056) 248 0 R (Pg057) 249 0 R (Pg058) 253 0 R (Pg059) 257 0 R (Pg060) 261 0 R (Pg061) 262 0 R (Pg062) 266 0 R (Pg063) 270 0 R (Pg064) 271 0 R (Pg065) 280 0 R (Pg066) 284 0 R (Pg067) 288 0 R (Pg068) 292 0 R (Pg069) 293 0 R (Pg070) 297 0 R (Pg071) 301 0 R (Pg072) 306 0 R (Pg073) 307 0 R (Pg074) 311 0 R (Pg075) 315 0 R (Pg076) 319 0 R (Pg077) 323 0 R (Pg078) 324 0 R (Pg079) 328 0 R (Pg080) 333 0 R (Pg081) 337 0 R (Pg082) 338 0 R (Pg083) 342 0 R (Pg084) 346 0 R (Pg085) 350 0 R (Pg086) 354 0 R (Pg087) 355 0 R (Pg088) 360 0 R (Pg089) 364 0 R (Pg090) 372 0 R (Pg091) 376 0 R (Pg092) 380 0 R (Pg093) 384 0 R (Pg094) 385 0 R (Pg095) 390 0 R (Pg096) 394 0 R (Pg097) 398 0 R (Pg098) 399 0 R (Pg099) 403 0 R (Pg100) 407 0 R (Pg101) 411 0 R (Pg102) 412 0 R (Pg103) 417 0 R (Pg104) 421 0 R (Pg105) 425 0 R (Pg106) 426 0 R (Pg107) 430 0 R (Pg108) 434 0 R (Pg109) 438 0 R (Pg110) 445 0 R (Pg111) 446 0 R (Pg112) 450 0 R (Pg113) 454 0 R (Pg114) 458 0 R (Pg115) 459 0 R (Pg116) 463 0 R (Pg117) 467 0 R (Pg118) 472 0 R (Pg119) 473 0 R (Pg120) 477 0 R (Pg121) 485 0 R (Pg122) 489 0 R (Pg123) 493 0 R (Pg124) 497 0 R (Pg125) 498 0 R (Pg126) 503 0 R (Pg127) 507 0 R (Pg128) 511 0 R (Pg129) 512 0 R (Pg130) 516 0 R (Pg131) 520 0 R (Pg132) 524 0 R (Pg133) 525 0 R (Pg134) 534 0 R (Pg135) 538 0 R (Pg136) 544 0 R (Pg137) 548 0 R (Pg138) 549 0 R (Pg139) 553 0 R (Pg140) 557 0 R (Pg141) 562 0 R (Pg142) 563 0 R (Pg143) 567 0 R (Pg144) 571 0 R (Pg145) 575 0 R (Pg146) 579 0 R (Pg147) 587 0 R (Pg148) 592 0 R (Pg149) 596 0 R (Pg150) 600 0 R (Pg151) 601 0 R (Pg152) 605 0 R (Pg153) 606 0 R (Pg154) 540 0 R (Pg155) 632 0 R (Pg156) 654 0 R (Pg157) 671 0 R (Pg158) 690 0 R (Pg159) 710 0 R (Pg160) 725 0 R (Pg161) 749 0 R (Pg162) 767 0 R (Pg163) 776 0 R (Pg164) 788 0 R (Pg165) 795 0 R (Pg166) 1012 0 R (Pg167) 1247 0 R (Pg168) 1497 0 R (Pgv) 22 0 R (footnotes) 1630 0 R (index-allegorical-interpretation) 826 0 R (index-augustus) 936 0 R (index-daemonion) 1013 0 R (index-image-worship) 1210 0 R (index1) 24 0 R (index10) 528 0 R (index11) 581 0 R (index12) 608 0 R (index13) 797 0 R (index14) 1624 0 R (index15) 1643 0 R (index16) 1653 0 R (index17) 1662 0 R (index2) 34 0 R (index3) 53 0 R (index4) 92 0 R (index5) 122 0 R (index6) 171 0 R (index7) 274 0 R (index8) 366 0 R (index9) 479 0 R (pgfooter) 1637 0 R (pgheader) 4 0 R (pglicense) 9 0 R (pglicense1) 1670 0 R (pglicense1A) 1671 0 R (pglicense1B) 1677 0 R (pglicense1C) 1680 0 R (pglicense1D) 1681 0 R (pglicense1E) 1683 0 R (pglicense1E1) 1687 0 R (pglicense1E2) 1689 0 R (pglicense1E3) 1695 0 R (pglicense1E4) 1697 0 R (pglicense1E5) 1698 0 R (pglicense1E6) 1703 0 R (pglicense1E7) 1705 0 R (pglicense1E8) 1673 0 R (pglicense1E9) 1714 0 R (pglicense1F) 1716 0 R (pglicense1F1) 1723 0 R (pglicense1F2) 1724 0 R (pglicense1F3) 1718 0 R (pglicense1F4) 1729 0 R (pglicense1F5) 1731 0 R (pglicense1F6) 1736 0 R (pglicense2) 1737 0 R (pglicense3) 1719 0 R (pglicense4) 1717 0 R (pglicense5) 1754 0 R]
+/Limits [(Pg001) (pglicense5)]
+>> endobj
+1773 0 obj <<
+/Kids [1772 0 R]
+>> endobj
+1774 0 obj <<
+/Dests 1773 0 R
+>> endobj
+1775 0 obj <<
+/Type /Catalog
+/Pages 1770 0 R
+/Outlines 1771 0 R
+/Names 1774 0 R
+>> endobj
+1776 0 obj <<
+/Producer (pdfeTeX-1.30.5)
+ /Author ( A. B. Drachmann ) /Title (Atheism in Pagan Antiquity) 
+/Creator (TeX)
+/CreationDate (D:20090311114749-07'00')
+/PTEX.Fullbanner (This is pdfeTeX using libpoppler, Version 3.141592-1.30.5-2.2 (Web2C 7.5.5) kpathsea version 3.5.5)
+>> endobj
+xref
+0 1777
+0000000000 65535 f 
+0000002006 00000 n 
+0000001430 00000 n 
+0000000015 00000 n 
+0000001949 00000 n 
+0001016993 00000 n 
+0000001566 00000 n 
+0000001735 00000 n 
+0001017084 00000 n 
+0000930888 00000 n 
+0000002953 00000 n 
+0000002838 00000 n 
+0000002074 00000 n 
+0000009203 00000 n 
+0000009088 00000 n 
+0000003022 00000 n 
+0000009571 00000 n 
+0000009456 00000 n 
+0000009272 00000 n 
+0000010074 00000 n 
+0000009900 00000 n 
+0000009611 00000 n 
+0000010015 00000 n 
+0000010143 00000 n 
+0000012363 00000 n 
+0001022912 00000 n 
+0000010186 00000 n 
+0000012481 00000 n 
+0000012248 00000 n 
+0000010212 00000 n 
+0001016900 00000 n 
+0001014839 00000 n 
+0000012422 00000 n 
+0000012574 00000 n 
+0000017076 00000 n 
+0001022823 00000 n 
+0000012617 00000 n 
+0000017195 00000 n 
+0000016960 00000 n 
+0000012648 00000 n 
+0001012464 00000 n 
+0000017135 00000 n 
+0001017193 00000 n 
+0000022443 00000 n 
+0000022267 00000 n 
+0000017288 00000 n 
+0000022383 00000 n 
+0000026541 00000 n 
+0000026307 00000 n 
+0000022536 00000 n 
+0000026423 00000 n 
+0000026482 00000 n 
+0000026622 00000 n 
+0000031392 00000 n 
+0001022734 00000 n 
+0000026665 00000 n 
+0000031511 00000 n 
+0000031276 00000 n 
+0000026693 00000 n 
+0000031451 00000 n 
+0000037443 00000 n 
+0000037267 00000 n 
+0000031604 00000 n 
+0000037383 00000 n 
+0000042647 00000 n 
+0000042471 00000 n 
+0000037536 00000 n 
+0000042587 00000 n 
+0000048121 00000 n 
+0000047885 00000 n 
+0000042728 00000 n 
+0000048001 00000 n 
+0000048061 00000 n 
+0001017304 00000 n 
+0000053225 00000 n 
+0000053050 00000 n 
+0000048214 00000 n 
+0000053166 00000 n 
+0000058441 00000 n 
+0000058265 00000 n 
+0000053306 00000 n 
+0000058381 00000 n 
+0000062820 00000 n 
+0000062645 00000 n 
+0000058522 00000 n 
+0000062761 00000 n 
+0000066068 00000 n 
+0000065834 00000 n 
+0000062913 00000 n 
+0000065950 00000 n 
+0000066009 00000 n 
+0000066149 00000 n 
+0000070232 00000 n 
+0001022644 00000 n 
+0000066192 00000 n 
+0000070351 00000 n 
+0000070116 00000 n 
+0000066221 00000 n 
+0000070291 00000 n 
+0000075479 00000 n 
+0000075298 00000 n 
+0000070432 00000 n 
+0000075417 00000 n 
+0001017415 00000 n 
+0000081502 00000 n 
+0000081320 00000 n 
+0000075548 00000 n 
+0000081440 00000 n 
+0000087019 00000 n 
+0000086776 00000 n 
+0000081584 00000 n 
+0000086896 00000 n 
+0000086957 00000 n 
+0000092466 00000 n 
+0000092284 00000 n 
+0000087113 00000 n 
+0000092404 00000 n 
+0000094430 00000 n 
+0000094249 00000 n 
+0000092548 00000 n 
+0000094369 00000 n 
+0000094500 00000 n 
+0000099044 00000 n 
+0001022551 00000 n 
+0000094544 00000 n 
+0000099166 00000 n 
+0000098924 00000 n 
+0000094575 00000 n 
+0000099105 00000 n 
+0000104648 00000 n 
+0000104466 00000 n 
+0000099260 00000 n 
+0000104586 00000 n 
+0001017533 00000 n 
+0000109932 00000 n 
+0000109690 00000 n 
+0000104742 00000 n 
+0000109810 00000 n 
+0000109872 00000 n 
+0000114993 00000 n 
+0000114812 00000 n 
+0000110014 00000 n 
+0000114932 00000 n 
+0000120375 00000 n 
+0000120194 00000 n 
+0000115063 00000 n 
+0000120314 00000 n 
+0000125512 00000 n 
+0000125330 00000 n 
+0000120469 00000 n 
+0000125450 00000 n 
+0000130917 00000 n 
+0000130673 00000 n 
+0000125594 00000 n 
+0000130793 00000 n 
+0000130855 00000 n 
+0000136247 00000 n 
+0000136065 00000 n 
+0000131011 00000 n 
+0000136185 00000 n 
+0001017651 00000 n 
+0000141440 00000 n 
+0000141258 00000 n 
+0000136341 00000 n 
+0000141378 00000 n 
+0000143200 00000 n 
+0000142958 00000 n 
+0000141522 00000 n 
+0000143078 00000 n 
+0000143140 00000 n 
+0000143270 00000 n 
+0000148316 00000 n 
+0001022457 00000 n 
+0000143314 00000 n 
+0000148437 00000 n 
+0000148196 00000 n 
+0000143344 00000 n 
+0000148377 00000 n 
+0000153772 00000 n 
+0000153590 00000 n 
+0000148531 00000 n 
+0000153710 00000 n 
+0000159192 00000 n 
+0000159011 00000 n 
+0000153866 00000 n 
+0000159131 00000 n 
+0000164553 00000 n 
+0000164310 00000 n 
+0000159274 00000 n 
+0000164430 00000 n 
+0000164491 00000 n 
+0001017769 00000 n 
+0000169548 00000 n 
+0000169366 00000 n 
+0000164635 00000 n 
+0000169486 00000 n 
+0000174461 00000 n 
+0000174279 00000 n 
+0000169618 00000 n 
+0000174399 00000 n 
+0000179737 00000 n 
+0000179494 00000 n 
+0000174531 00000 n 
+0000179614 00000 n 
+0000179675 00000 n 
+0000185217 00000 n 
+0000185036 00000 n 
+0000179831 00000 n 
+0000185156 00000 n 
+0000190611 00000 n 
+0000190430 00000 n 
+0000185311 00000 n 
+0000190550 00000 n 
+0000196025 00000 n 
+0000195785 00000 n 
+0000190705 00000 n 
+0000195905 00000 n 
+0000195966 00000 n 
+0001017887 00000 n 
+0000201460 00000 n 
+0000201278 00000 n 
+0000196119 00000 n 
+0000201398 00000 n 
+0000207053 00000 n 
+0000206872 00000 n 
+0000201554 00000 n 
+0000206992 00000 n 
+0000212353 00000 n 
+0000212110 00000 n 
+0000207135 00000 n 
+0000212230 00000 n 
+0000212292 00000 n 
+0000217587 00000 n 
+0000217406 00000 n 
+0000212435 00000 n 
+0000217526 00000 n 
+0000223118 00000 n 
+0000222936 00000 n 
+0000217669 00000 n 
+0000223056 00000 n 
+0000228829 00000 n 
+0000228647 00000 n 
+0000223212 00000 n 
+0000228767 00000 n 
+0001018005 00000 n 
+0000234457 00000 n 
+0000234213 00000 n 
+0000228923 00000 n 
+0000234333 00000 n 
+0000234395 00000 n 
+0000240010 00000 n 
+0000239828 00000 n 
+0000234551 00000 n 
+0000239948 00000 n 
+0000245556 00000 n 
+0000245375 00000 n 
+0000240092 00000 n 
+0000245495 00000 n 
+0000251102 00000 n 
+0000250859 00000 n 
+0000245650 00000 n 
+0000250979 00000 n 
+0000251040 00000 n 
+0000256496 00000 n 
+0000256314 00000 n 
+0000251196 00000 n 
+0000256434 00000 n 
+0000260877 00000 n 
+0000260634 00000 n 
+0000256590 00000 n 
+0000260754 00000 n 
+0000260816 00000 n 
+0001018123 00000 n 
+0000260971 00000 n 
+0000265150 00000 n 
+0001022363 00000 n 
+0000261015 00000 n 
+0000265273 00000 n 
+0000265030 00000 n 
+0000261044 00000 n 
+0000265211 00000 n 
+0000271006 00000 n 
+0000270826 00000 n 
+0000265355 00000 n 
+0000270946 00000 n 
+0000276186 00000 n 
+0000276004 00000 n 
+0000271100 00000 n 
+0000276124 00000 n 
+0000281621 00000 n 
+0000281379 00000 n 
+0000276280 00000 n 
+0000281499 00000 n 
+0000281561 00000 n 
+0000286998 00000 n 
+0000286816 00000 n 
+0000281715 00000 n 
+0000286936 00000 n 
+0000292154 00000 n 
+0000291973 00000 n 
+0000287092 00000 n 
+0000292093 00000 n 
+0001018241 00000 n 
+0000298017 00000 n 
+0000297775 00000 n 
+0000292236 00000 n 
+0000297895 00000 n 
+0000297956 00000 n 
+0000303419 00000 n 
+0000303238 00000 n 
+0000298111 00000 n 
+0000303358 00000 n 
+0000309310 00000 n 
+0000309129 00000 n 
+0000303513 00000 n 
+0000309249 00000 n 
+0000314717 00000 n 
+0000314536 00000 n 
+0000309404 00000 n 
+0000314656 00000 n 
+0000320274 00000 n 
+0000320033 00000 n 
+0000314811 00000 n 
+0000320153 00000 n 
+0000320213 00000 n 
+0000325903 00000 n 
+0000325721 00000 n 
+0000320368 00000 n 
+0000325841 00000 n 
+0001018359 00000 n 
+0000331385 00000 n 
+0000331203 00000 n 
+0000325985 00000 n 
+0000331323 00000 n 
+0000336823 00000 n 
+0000336582 00000 n 
+0000331467 00000 n 
+0000336702 00000 n 
+0000336763 00000 n 
+0000341844 00000 n 
+0000341662 00000 n 
+0000336905 00000 n 
+0000341782 00000 n 
+0000347124 00000 n 
+0000346943 00000 n 
+0000341926 00000 n 
+0000347063 00000 n 
+0000352418 00000 n 
+0000352237 00000 n 
+0000347218 00000 n 
+0000352357 00000 n 
+0000357824 00000 n 
+0000357581 00000 n 
+0000352512 00000 n 
+0000357701 00000 n 
+0000357762 00000 n 
+0001018477 00000 n 
+0000363051 00000 n 
+0000362869 00000 n 
+0000357918 00000 n 
+0000362989 00000 n 
+0000364451 00000 n 
+0000364270 00000 n 
+0000363133 00000 n 
+0000364390 00000 n 
+0000364521 00000 n 
+0000368907 00000 n 
+0001022269 00000 n 
+0000364565 00000 n 
+0000369030 00000 n 
+0000368787 00000 n 
+0000364595 00000 n 
+0000368968 00000 n 
+0000374694 00000 n 
+0000374514 00000 n 
+0000369112 00000 n 
+0000374634 00000 n 
+0000380277 00000 n 
+0000380095 00000 n 
+0000374776 00000 n 
+0000380215 00000 n 
+0000385519 00000 n 
+0000385276 00000 n 
+0000380359 00000 n 
+0000385396 00000 n 
+0000385457 00000 n 
+0001018595 00000 n 
+0000391152 00000 n 
+0000390970 00000 n 
+0000385601 00000 n 
+0000391090 00000 n 
+0000396496 00000 n 
+0000396316 00000 n 
+0000391246 00000 n 
+0000396436 00000 n 
+0000401764 00000 n 
+0000401520 00000 n 
+0000396578 00000 n 
+0000401640 00000 n 
+0000401702 00000 n 
+0000406969 00000 n 
+0000406787 00000 n 
+0000401858 00000 n 
+0000406907 00000 n 
+0000412106 00000 n 
+0000411924 00000 n 
+0000407051 00000 n 
+0000412044 00000 n 
+0000417185 00000 n 
+0000416943 00000 n 
+0000412176 00000 n 
+0000417063 00000 n 
+0000417125 00000 n 
+0001018713 00000 n 
+0000422407 00000 n 
+0000422225 00000 n 
+0000417255 00000 n 
+0000422345 00000 n 
+0000427363 00000 n 
+0000427181 00000 n 
+0000422477 00000 n 
+0000427301 00000 n 
+0000432688 00000 n 
+0000432446 00000 n 
+0000427433 00000 n 
+0000432566 00000 n 
+0000432628 00000 n 
+0000437737 00000 n 
+0000437555 00000 n 
+0000432782 00000 n 
+0000437675 00000 n 
+0000442862 00000 n 
+0000442681 00000 n 
+0000437819 00000 n 
+0000442801 00000 n 
+0000448690 00000 n 
+0000448148 00000 n 
+0000442944 00000 n 
+0000448628 00000 n 
+0000448296 00000 n 
+0000448462 00000 n 
+0001018831 00000 n 
+0000453933 00000 n 
+0000453689 00000 n 
+0000448772 00000 n 
+0000453809 00000 n 
+0000453871 00000 n 
+0000459219 00000 n 
+0000459037 00000 n 
+0000454015 00000 n 
+0000459157 00000 n 
+0000464352 00000 n 
+0000464170 00000 n 
+0000459313 00000 n 
+0000464290 00000 n 
+0000469732 00000 n 
+0000469490 00000 n 
+0000464422 00000 n 
+0000469610 00000 n 
+0000469671 00000 n 
+0000475040 00000 n 
+0000474858 00000 n 
+0000469826 00000 n 
+0000474978 00000 n 
+0000480262 00000 n 
+0000480080 00000 n 
+0000475134 00000 n 
+0000480200 00000 n 
+0001018949 00000 n 
+0000485770 00000 n 
+0000485528 00000 n 
+0000480344 00000 n 
+0000485648 00000 n 
+0000485709 00000 n 
+0000489177 00000 n 
+0000488996 00000 n 
+0000485852 00000 n 
+0000489116 00000 n 
+0000489259 00000 n 
+0000493479 00000 n 
+0001022175 00000 n 
+0000489303 00000 n 
+0000493602 00000 n 
+0000493359 00000 n 
+0000489334 00000 n 
+0000493540 00000 n 
+0000498683 00000 n 
+0000498501 00000 n 
+0000493684 00000 n 
+0000498621 00000 n 
+0000504062 00000 n 
+0000503880 00000 n 
+0000498765 00000 n 
+0000504000 00000 n 
+0000509893 00000 n 
+0000509650 00000 n 
+0000504156 00000 n 
+0000509770 00000 n 
+0000509831 00000 n 
+0001019067 00000 n 
+0000515493 00000 n 
+0000515311 00000 n 
+0000509987 00000 n 
+0000515431 00000 n 
+0000520583 00000 n 
+0000520402 00000 n 
+0000515575 00000 n 
+0000520522 00000 n 
+0000525796 00000 n 
+0000525555 00000 n 
+0000520665 00000 n 
+0000525675 00000 n 
+0000525737 00000 n 
+0000530673 00000 n 
+0000530491 00000 n 
+0000525878 00000 n 
+0000530611 00000 n 
+0000535831 00000 n 
+0000535650 00000 n 
+0000530743 00000 n 
+0000535770 00000 n 
+0000540766 00000 n 
+0000540524 00000 n 
+0000535913 00000 n 
+0000540644 00000 n 
+0000540706 00000 n 
+0001019185 00000 n 
+0000540848 00000 n 
+0000545056 00000 n 
+0001022081 00000 n 
+0000540893 00000 n 
+0000545178 00000 n 
+0000544936 00000 n 
+0000540925 00000 n 
+0000545117 00000 n 
+0000550905 00000 n 
+0000550540 00000 n 
+0000545260 00000 n 
+0000550844 00000 n 
+0000550680 00000 n 
+0000628834 00000 n 
+0000556394 00000 n 
+0000556213 00000 n 
+0000550999 00000 n 
+0000556333 00000 n 
+0000561668 00000 n 
+0000561425 00000 n 
+0000556488 00000 n 
+0000561545 00000 n 
+0000561606 00000 n 
+0000566598 00000 n 
+0000566416 00000 n 
+0000561738 00000 n 
+0000566536 00000 n 
+0000571832 00000 n 
+0000571650 00000 n 
+0000566668 00000 n 
+0000571770 00000 n 
+0001019303 00000 n 
+0000577145 00000 n 
+0000576904 00000 n 
+0000571926 00000 n 
+0000577024 00000 n 
+0000577086 00000 n 
+0000582339 00000 n 
+0000582157 00000 n 
+0000577239 00000 n 
+0000582277 00000 n 
+0000587522 00000 n 
+0000587341 00000 n 
+0000582433 00000 n 
+0000587461 00000 n 
+0000592541 00000 n 
+0000592360 00000 n 
+0000587604 00000 n 
+0000592480 00000 n 
+0000593195 00000 n 
+0000593014 00000 n 
+0000592623 00000 n 
+0000593134 00000 n 
+0000593265 00000 n 
+0000597823 00000 n 
+0001021987 00000 n 
+0000593310 00000 n 
+0000597946 00000 n 
+0000597703 00000 n 
+0000593340 00000 n 
+0000597884 00000 n 
+0001019421 00000 n 
+0000602919 00000 n 
+0000602737 00000 n 
+0000598028 00000 n 
+0000602857 00000 n 
+0000608065 00000 n 
+0000607883 00000 n 
+0000602989 00000 n 
+0000608003 00000 n 
+0000613201 00000 n 
+0000612957 00000 n 
+0000608147 00000 n 
+0000613077 00000 n 
+0000613139 00000 n 
+0000618554 00000 n 
+0000618313 00000 n 
+0000613271 00000 n 
+0000618433 00000 n 
+0000618494 00000 n 
+0000618648 00000 n 
+0000623633 00000 n 
+0001021893 00000 n 
+0000618693 00000 n 
+0000623694 00000 n 
+0000623513 00000 n 
+0000618718 00000 n 
+0000628894 00000 n 
+0000628714 00000 n 
+0000623788 00000 n 
+0001019539 00000 n 
+0000635982 00000 n 
+0000634629 00000 n 
+0000628976 00000 n 
+0000634817 00000 n 
+0000634984 00000 n 
+0000635151 00000 n 
+0000635318 00000 n 
+0000635483 00000 n 
+0000635649 00000 n 
+0000635816 00000 n 
+0000644624 00000 n 
+0000642706 00000 n 
+0000636076 00000 n 
+0000642918 00000 n 
+0000644563 00000 n 
+0000643083 00000 n 
+0000643247 00000 n 
+0000643411 00000 n 
+0000643576 00000 n 
+0000643740 00000 n 
+0000643905 00000 n 
+0000644070 00000 n 
+0000644235 00000 n 
+0000644400 00000 n 
+0000652504 00000 n 
+0000651789 00000 n 
+0000644718 00000 n 
+0000651945 00000 n 
+0000652112 00000 n 
+0001009833 00000 n 
+0000998745 00000 n 
+0001009683 00000 n 
+0000998029 00000 n 
+0000989920 00000 n 
+0000997881 00000 n 
+0000652278 00000 n 
+0000652443 00000 n 
+0000660891 00000 n 
+0000659376 00000 n 
+0000652624 00000 n 
+0000659572 00000 n 
+0000659738 00000 n 
+0000659903 00000 n 
+0000660068 00000 n 
+0000660233 00000 n 
+0000660398 00000 n 
+0000660563 00000 n 
+0000660727 00000 n 
+0000669882 00000 n 
+0000667950 00000 n 
+0000660985 00000 n 
+0000668162 00000 n 
+0000668329 00000 n 
+0000669820 00000 n 
+0000668496 00000 n 
+0000668663 00000 n 
+0000668830 00000 n 
+0000668996 00000 n 
+0000669163 00000 n 
+0000669330 00000 n 
+0000669492 00000 n 
+0000669657 00000 n 
+0000679257 00000 n 
+0000677685 00000 n 
+0000669976 00000 n 
+0000677881 00000 n 
+0000678044 00000 n 
+0000678209 00000 n 
+0000678374 00000 n 
+0000678539 00000 n 
+0000678703 00000 n 
+0000678867 00000 n 
+0000679195 00000 n 
+0000679030 00000 n 
+0001019657 00000 n 
+0000689232 00000 n 
+0000687525 00000 n 
+0000679377 00000 n 
+0000687729 00000 n 
+0000687896 00000 n 
+0000688063 00000 n 
+0000688230 00000 n 
+0000688397 00000 n 
+0000688564 00000 n 
+0000688731 00000 n 
+0000688898 00000 n 
+0000689065 00000 n 
+0000697144 00000 n 
+0000696092 00000 n 
+0000689326 00000 n 
+0000696264 00000 n 
+0000696429 00000 n 
+0000697083 00000 n 
+0000696593 00000 n 
+0000696758 00000 n 
+0000696920 00000 n 
+0000705266 00000 n 
+0000703682 00000 n 
+0000697238 00000 n 
+0000703878 00000 n 
+0000704043 00000 n 
+0000704210 00000 n 
+0000704377 00000 n 
+0000704544 00000 n 
+0000704710 00000 n 
+0000704877 00000 n 
+0000705043 00000 n 
+0000705205 00000 n 
+0000713234 00000 n 
+0000710685 00000 n 
+0000705360 00000 n 
+0000710929 00000 n 
+0000711094 00000 n 
+0000711259 00000 n 
+0000711424 00000 n 
+0000711589 00000 n 
+0000711753 00000 n 
+0000711917 00000 n 
+0000712082 00000 n 
+0000712246 00000 n 
+0000712411 00000 n 
+0000712575 00000 n 
+0000712740 00000 n 
+0000712905 00000 n 
+0000713070 00000 n 
+0000719928 00000 n 
+0000718692 00000 n 
+0000713328 00000 n 
+0000718872 00000 n 
+0000719036 00000 n 
+0000719203 00000 n 
+0000719866 00000 n 
+0000719370 00000 n 
+0000719536 00000 n 
+0000719701 00000 n 
+0000727497 00000 n 
+0000726331 00000 n 
+0000720022 00000 n 
+0000726511 00000 n 
+0000726676 00000 n 
+0000726840 00000 n 
+0000727005 00000 n 
+0000727170 00000 n 
+0000727333 00000 n 
+0001019775 00000 n 
+0000735374 00000 n 
+0000734307 00000 n 
+0000727591 00000 n 
+0000734479 00000 n 
+0000735312 00000 n 
+0000734646 00000 n 
+0000734813 00000 n 
+0000734980 00000 n 
+0000735145 00000 n 
+0000742148 00000 n 
+0000741439 00000 n 
+0000735468 00000 n 
+0000741595 00000 n 
+0000742086 00000 n 
+0000741759 00000 n 
+0000741924 00000 n 
+0000748480 00000 n 
+0000747828 00000 n 
+0000742242 00000 n 
+0000747984 00000 n 
+0000748149 00000 n 
+0000748315 00000 n 
+0000755421 00000 n 
+0000754884 00000 n 
+0000748574 00000 n 
+0000755359 00000 n 
+0000755032 00000 n 
+0000755197 00000 n 
+0000757398 00000 n 
+0000757031 00000 n 
+0000755515 00000 n 
+0000757171 00000 n 
+0000757338 00000 n 
+0000757480 00000 n 
+0000766544 00000 n 
+0001021798 00000 n 
+0000757525 00000 n 
+0000766666 00000 n 
+0000758914 00000 n 
+0000757550 00000 n 
+0000759390 00000 n 
+0000759557 00000 n 
+0000759723 00000 n 
+0000759890 00000 n 
+0000760057 00000 n 
+0000760224 00000 n 
+0000760391 00000 n 
+0000760558 00000 n 
+0000760724 00000 n 
+0000760891 00000 n 
+0000761056 00000 n 
+0000761223 00000 n 
+0000761389 00000 n 
+0000761553 00000 n 
+0000761719 00000 n 
+0000761885 00000 n 
+0000762051 00000 n 
+0000762218 00000 n 
+0000762382 00000 n 
+0000762549 00000 n 
+0000762714 00000 n 
+0000762880 00000 n 
+0000763047 00000 n 
+0000766605 00000 n 
+0000763213 00000 n 
+0000763380 00000 n 
+0000763547 00000 n 
+0000763714 00000 n 
+0000763881 00000 n 
+0000764048 00000 n 
+0000764215 00000 n 
+0000764382 00000 n 
+0000764549 00000 n 
+0000764716 00000 n 
+0000764883 00000 n 
+0000765050 00000 n 
+0000765217 00000 n 
+0000765384 00000 n 
+0000765550 00000 n 
+0000765717 00000 n 
+0000765884 00000 n 
+0000766051 00000 n 
+0000766217 00000 n 
+0000766382 00000 n 
+0001019893 00000 n 
+0000777050 00000 n 
+0000768548 00000 n 
+0000766736 00000 n 
+0000769064 00000 n 
+0000769231 00000 n 
+0000769397 00000 n 
+0000769564 00000 n 
+0000769731 00000 n 
+0000769897 00000 n 
+0000770062 00000 n 
+0000770228 00000 n 
+0000770394 00000 n 
+0000770561 00000 n 
+0000770727 00000 n 
+0000770894 00000 n 
+0000771061 00000 n 
+0000771228 00000 n 
+0000771395 00000 n 
+0000771562 00000 n 
+0000771729 00000 n 
+0000771896 00000 n 
+0000772061 00000 n 
+0000772226 00000 n 
+0000772391 00000 n 
+0000772556 00000 n 
+0000772721 00000 n 
+0000772886 00000 n 
+0000773051 00000 n 
+0000773218 00000 n 
+0000773385 00000 n 
+0000773552 00000 n 
+0000773718 00000 n 
+0000773885 00000 n 
+0000774051 00000 n 
+0000774218 00000 n 
+0000774385 00000 n 
+0000774551 00000 n 
+0000774718 00000 n 
+0000774885 00000 n 
+0000775052 00000 n 
+0000775218 00000 n 
+0000775385 00000 n 
+0000775552 00000 n 
+0000775719 00000 n 
+0000775886 00000 n 
+0000776053 00000 n 
+0000776220 00000 n 
+0000776386 00000 n 
+0000776553 00000 n 
+0000776718 00000 n 
+0000776885 00000 n 
+0000788161 00000 n 
+0000779268 00000 n 
+0000777132 00000 n 
+0000779800 00000 n 
+0000779967 00000 n 
+0000780134 00000 n 
+0000780301 00000 n 
+0000780467 00000 n 
+0000780634 00000 n 
+0000780801 00000 n 
+0000780967 00000 n 
+0000781134 00000 n 
+0000781301 00000 n 
+0000781465 00000 n 
+0000781632 00000 n 
+0000781799 00000 n 
+0000781966 00000 n 
+0000782133 00000 n 
+0000782300 00000 n 
+0000782467 00000 n 
+0000782634 00000 n 
+0000782801 00000 n 
+0000782967 00000 n 
+0000783134 00000 n 
+0000783301 00000 n 
+0000783467 00000 n 
+0000783634 00000 n 
+0000783801 00000 n 
+0000783968 00000 n 
+0000784135 00000 n 
+0000784302 00000 n 
+0000784469 00000 n 
+0000784636 00000 n 
+0000784802 00000 n 
+0000784969 00000 n 
+0000785133 00000 n 
+0000785298 00000 n 
+0000788100 00000 n 
+0000785463 00000 n 
+0000785626 00000 n 
+0000785790 00000 n 
+0000785955 00000 n 
+0000786120 00000 n 
+0000786285 00000 n 
+0000786451 00000 n 
+0000786617 00000 n 
+0000786784 00000 n 
+0000786947 00000 n 
+0000787113 00000 n 
+0000787276 00000 n 
+0000787441 00000 n 
+0000787606 00000 n 
+0000787772 00000 n 
+0000787936 00000 n 
+0000795338 00000 n 
+0000789977 00000 n 
+0000788243 00000 n 
+0000790349 00000 n 
+0000790516 00000 n 
+0000790683 00000 n 
+0000790849 00000 n 
+0000791016 00000 n 
+0000791182 00000 n 
+0000791347 00000 n 
+0000791514 00000 n 
+0000791681 00000 n 
+0000791848 00000 n 
+0000792015 00000 n 
+0000792182 00000 n 
+0000792347 00000 n 
+0000792511 00000 n 
+0000792678 00000 n 
+0000792845 00000 n 
+0000793012 00000 n 
+0000793179 00000 n 
+0000793346 00000 n 
+0000793513 00000 n 
+0000793680 00000 n 
+0000793847 00000 n 
+0000794014 00000 n 
+0000794181 00000 n 
+0000794348 00000 n 
+0000794514 00000 n 
+0000794681 00000 n 
+0000794846 00000 n 
+0000795011 00000 n 
+0000795175 00000 n 
+0000809204 00000 n 
+0000797370 00000 n 
+0000795420 00000 n 
+0000798085 00000 n 
+0000798249 00000 n 
+0000798414 00000 n 
+0000798580 00000 n 
+0000798746 00000 n 
+0000798912 00000 n 
+0000799078 00000 n 
+0000799244 00000 n 
+0000799410 00000 n 
+0000799576 00000 n 
+0000799741 00000 n 
+0000799907 00000 n 
+0000800073 00000 n 
+0000800240 00000 n 
+0000800407 00000 n 
+0000800574 00000 n 
+0000800741 00000 n 
+0000800907 00000 n 
+0000801070 00000 n 
+0000801233 00000 n 
+0000801399 00000 n 
+0000801565 00000 n 
+0000801731 00000 n 
+0000809080 00000 n 
+0000809142 00000 n 
+0000801897 00000 n 
+0000802065 00000 n 
+0000802233 00000 n 
+0000802401 00000 n 
+0000802568 00000 n 
+0000802733 00000 n 
+0000802901 00000 n 
+0000803068 00000 n 
+0000803235 00000 n 
+0000803403 00000 n 
+0000803570 00000 n 
+0000803737 00000 n 
+0000803905 00000 n 
+0000804073 00000 n 
+0000804239 00000 n 
+0000804407 00000 n 
+0000804575 00000 n 
+0000804743 00000 n 
+0000804911 00000 n 
+0000805078 00000 n 
+0000805245 00000 n 
+0000805411 00000 n 
+0000805577 00000 n 
+0000805740 00000 n 
+0000805907 00000 n 
+0000806074 00000 n 
+0000806242 00000 n 
+0000806410 00000 n 
+0000806575 00000 n 
+0000806742 00000 n 
+0000806910 00000 n 
+0000807077 00000 n 
+0000807245 00000 n 
+0000807413 00000 n 
+0000807581 00000 n 
+0000807747 00000 n 
+0000807915 00000 n 
+0000808083 00000 n 
+0000808250 00000 n 
+0000808418 00000 n 
+0000808585 00000 n 
+0000808750 00000 n 
+0000808915 00000 n 
+0000824216 00000 n 
+0000811193 00000 n 
+0000809286 00000 n 
+0000811985 00000 n 
+0000812153 00000 n 
+0000812319 00000 n 
+0000812485 00000 n 
+0000812653 00000 n 
+0000812821 00000 n 
+0000812989 00000 n 
+0000813157 00000 n 
+0000813325 00000 n 
+0000813492 00000 n 
+0000813659 00000 n 
+0000813827 00000 n 
+0000813995 00000 n 
+0000814163 00000 n 
+0000814329 00000 n 
+0000814496 00000 n 
+0000814664 00000 n 
+0000814832 00000 n 
+0000815000 00000 n 
+0000815168 00000 n 
+0000815334 00000 n 
+0000815502 00000 n 
+0000815670 00000 n 
+0000815836 00000 n 
+0000816004 00000 n 
+0000816172 00000 n 
+0000816340 00000 n 
+0000816508 00000 n 
+0000816675 00000 n 
+0000816843 00000 n 
+0000817011 00000 n 
+0000817179 00000 n 
+0000817347 00000 n 
+0000817515 00000 n 
+0000817683 00000 n 
+0000817851 00000 n 
+0000818018 00000 n 
+0000818185 00000 n 
+0000818353 00000 n 
+0000818521 00000 n 
+0000818688 00000 n 
+0000818856 00000 n 
+0000819024 00000 n 
+0000819192 00000 n 
+0000819360 00000 n 
+0000819528 00000 n 
+0000819696 00000 n 
+0000819864 00000 n 
+0000820032 00000 n 
+0000820199 00000 n 
+0000820366 00000 n 
+0000820534 00000 n 
+0000820702 00000 n 
+0000820870 00000 n 
+0000821037 00000 n 
+0000821205 00000 n 
+0000821373 00000 n 
+0000821540 00000 n 
+0000821708 00000 n 
+0000821875 00000 n 
+0000822043 00000 n 
+0000822211 00000 n 
+0000822378 00000 n 
+0000822546 00000 n 
+0000822714 00000 n 
+0000822881 00000 n 
+0000823049 00000 n 
+0000823217 00000 n 
+0000823385 00000 n 
+0000823552 00000 n 
+0000823719 00000 n 
+0000823885 00000 n 
+0000824051 00000 n 
+0000834350 00000 n 
+0000825755 00000 n 
+0000824299 00000 n 
+0000826323 00000 n 
+0000826491 00000 n 
+0000826659 00000 n 
+0000826827 00000 n 
+0000826995 00000 n 
+0000827162 00000 n 
+0000827330 00000 n 
+0000827497 00000 n 
+0000827662 00000 n 
+0000827828 00000 n 
+0000827994 00000 n 
+0000828162 00000 n 
+0000828330 00000 n 
+0000828497 00000 n 
+0000828665 00000 n 
+0000828833 00000 n 
+0000829001 00000 n 
+0000829169 00000 n 
+0000829336 00000 n 
+0000829504 00000 n 
+0000829672 00000 n 
+0000829840 00000 n 
+0000830008 00000 n 
+0000830175 00000 n 
+0000830343 00000 n 
+0000830511 00000 n 
+0000830678 00000 n 
+0000830846 00000 n 
+0000831013 00000 n 
+0000831181 00000 n 
+0000831349 00000 n 
+0000831517 00000 n 
+0000831685 00000 n 
+0000831851 00000 n 
+0000832019 00000 n 
+0000832186 00000 n 
+0000832354 00000 n 
+0000832522 00000 n 
+0000832690 00000 n 
+0000832858 00000 n 
+0000833024 00000 n 
+0000833192 00000 n 
+0000833358 00000 n 
+0000833525 00000 n 
+0000833692 00000 n 
+0000833858 00000 n 
+0000834022 00000 n 
+0000834185 00000 n 
+0001020012 00000 n 
+0000841623 00000 n 
+0000835772 00000 n 
+0000834421 00000 n 
+0000836196 00000 n 
+0000836364 00000 n 
+0000836532 00000 n 
+0000836699 00000 n 
+0000836866 00000 n 
+0000837033 00000 n 
+0000837200 00000 n 
+0000837368 00000 n 
+0000837533 00000 n 
+0000837696 00000 n 
+0000837862 00000 n 
+0000838030 00000 n 
+0000838198 00000 n 
+0000838365 00000 n 
+0000838533 00000 n 
+0000838700 00000 n 
+0000838868 00000 n 
+0000839036 00000 n 
+0000839204 00000 n 
+0000839371 00000 n 
+0000839539 00000 n 
+0000839721 00000 n 
+0000841560 00000 n 
+0000839889 00000 n 
+0000840057 00000 n 
+0000840224 00000 n 
+0000840392 00000 n 
+0000840560 00000 n 
+0000840727 00000 n 
+0000840895 00000 n 
+0000841062 00000 n 
+0000841229 00000 n 
+0000841394 00000 n 
+0000847622 00000 n 
+0000843204 00000 n 
+0000841694 00000 n 
+0000843556 00000 n 
+0000843723 00000 n 
+0000843891 00000 n 
+0000844059 00000 n 
+0000844224 00000 n 
+0000844391 00000 n 
+0000844556 00000 n 
+0000844723 00000 n 
+0000844888 00000 n 
+0000845055 00000 n 
+0000845222 00000 n 
+0000845390 00000 n 
+0000845556 00000 n 
+0000845724 00000 n 
+0000845892 00000 n 
+0000846060 00000 n 
+0000846227 00000 n 
+0000846395 00000 n 
+0000846563 00000 n 
+0000846729 00000 n 
+0000846897 00000 n 
+0000847065 00000 n 
+0000847231 00000 n 
+0000847560 00000 n 
+0000847394 00000 n 
+0000857270 00000 n 
+0000849380 00000 n 
+0000847705 00000 n 
+0000849912 00000 n 
+0000850080 00000 n 
+0000850247 00000 n 
+0000850415 00000 n 
+0000850583 00000 n 
+0000850750 00000 n 
+0000850918 00000 n 
+0000851086 00000 n 
+0000851254 00000 n 
+0000851422 00000 n 
+0000851590 00000 n 
+0000851757 00000 n 
+0000851925 00000 n 
+0000852093 00000 n 
+0000852259 00000 n 
+0000852427 00000 n 
+0000852595 00000 n 
+0000852763 00000 n 
+0000852930 00000 n 
+0000853098 00000 n 
+0000853266 00000 n 
+0000853434 00000 n 
+0000853601 00000 n 
+0000853769 00000 n 
+0000853937 00000 n 
+0000854105 00000 n 
+0000854271 00000 n 
+0000854439 00000 n 
+0000854607 00000 n 
+0000854775 00000 n 
+0000854943 00000 n 
+0000855111 00000 n 
+0000855279 00000 n 
+0000855445 00000 n 
+0000855612 00000 n 
+0000855777 00000 n 
+0000855941 00000 n 
+0000856109 00000 n 
+0000856275 00000 n 
+0000856442 00000 n 
+0000856607 00000 n 
+0000856773 00000 n 
+0000856939 00000 n 
+0000857104 00000 n 
+0000867734 00000 n 
+0000859135 00000 n 
+0000857353 00000 n 
+0000859703 00000 n 
+0000859869 00000 n 
+0000860037 00000 n 
+0000860205 00000 n 
+0000860373 00000 n 
+0000860541 00000 n 
+0000860705 00000 n 
+0000860872 00000 n 
+0000861039 00000 n 
+0000861207 00000 n 
+0000861375 00000 n 
+0000861542 00000 n 
+0000861710 00000 n 
+0000861878 00000 n 
+0000862046 00000 n 
+0000862214 00000 n 
+0000862382 00000 n 
+0000862550 00000 n 
+0000862718 00000 n 
+0000862886 00000 n 
+0000863054 00000 n 
+0000863222 00000 n 
+0000863390 00000 n 
+0000863557 00000 n 
+0000863724 00000 n 
+0000863891 00000 n 
+0000864058 00000 n 
+0000864225 00000 n 
+0000864393 00000 n 
+0000864561 00000 n 
+0000864729 00000 n 
+0000864897 00000 n 
+0000865065 00000 n 
+0000865230 00000 n 
+0000865396 00000 n 
+0000865564 00000 n 
+0000865730 00000 n 
+0000865898 00000 n 
+0000866066 00000 n 
+0000866234 00000 n 
+0000866402 00000 n 
+0000866570 00000 n 
+0000866738 00000 n 
+0000866904 00000 n 
+0000867071 00000 n 
+0000867239 00000 n 
+0000867406 00000 n 
+0000867570 00000 n 
+0000883821 00000 n 
+0000870470 00000 n 
+0000867817 00000 n 
+0000871281 00000 n 
+0000871447 00000 n 
+0000871614 00000 n 
+0000871781 00000 n 
+0000871947 00000 n 
+0000872115 00000 n 
+0000872283 00000 n 
+0000872451 00000 n 
+0000872619 00000 n 
+0000872786 00000 n 
+0000872954 00000 n 
+0000873122 00000 n 
+0000873289 00000 n 
+0000873457 00000 n 
+0000873625 00000 n 
+0000873792 00000 n 
+0000873960 00000 n 
+0000874128 00000 n 
+0000874296 00000 n 
+0000874462 00000 n 
+0000874630 00000 n 
+0000874798 00000 n 
+0000874966 00000 n 
+0000875134 00000 n 
+0000875301 00000 n 
+0000875468 00000 n 
+0000875634 00000 n 
+0000875801 00000 n 
+0000875968 00000 n 
+0000876134 00000 n 
+0000876301 00000 n 
+0000876468 00000 n 
+0000876635 00000 n 
+0000876803 00000 n 
+0000876971 00000 n 
+0000877139 00000 n 
+0000877306 00000 n 
+0000877473 00000 n 
+0000877640 00000 n 
+0000877806 00000 n 
+0000877973 00000 n 
+0000878140 00000 n 
+0000878307 00000 n 
+0000878474 00000 n 
+0000878641 00000 n 
+0000878807 00000 n 
+0000878975 00000 n 
+0000879143 00000 n 
+0000879311 00000 n 
+0000879479 00000 n 
+0000879647 00000 n 
+0000879813 00000 n 
+0000879979 00000 n 
+0000880145 00000 n 
+0000880311 00000 n 
+0000880477 00000 n 
+0000880645 00000 n 
+0000880811 00000 n 
+0000880979 00000 n 
+0000881146 00000 n 
+0000881314 00000 n 
+0000881482 00000 n 
+0000881649 00000 n 
+0000881817 00000 n 
+0000881983 00000 n 
+0000882150 00000 n 
+0000882317 00000 n 
+0000882485 00000 n 
+0000882652 00000 n 
+0000882820 00000 n 
+0000882988 00000 n 
+0000883155 00000 n 
+0000883322 00000 n 
+0000883489 00000 n 
+0000883655 00000 n 
+0000893571 00000 n 
+0000885660 00000 n 
+0000883904 00000 n 
+0000886192 00000 n 
+0000886359 00000 n 
+0000886525 00000 n 
+0000886692 00000 n 
+0000886858 00000 n 
+0000887025 00000 n 
+0000887192 00000 n 
+0000887357 00000 n 
+0000887524 00000 n 
+0000887691 00000 n 
+0000887868 00000 n 
+0000888036 00000 n 
+0000888230 00000 n 
+0000888398 00000 n 
+0000888566 00000 n 
+0000888733 00000 n 
+0000888899 00000 n 
+0000889066 00000 n 
+0000889233 00000 n 
+0000889400 00000 n 
+0000889567 00000 n 
+0000889733 00000 n 
+0000889900 00000 n 
+0000890067 00000 n 
+0000890233 00000 n 
+0000890399 00000 n 
+0000890566 00000 n 
+0000890733 00000 n 
+0000890900 00000 n 
+0000891065 00000 n 
+0000891233 00000 n 
+0000891401 00000 n 
+0000891569 00000 n 
+0000891737 00000 n 
+0000891905 00000 n 
+0000892073 00000 n 
+0000892240 00000 n 
+0000892408 00000 n 
+0000892574 00000 n 
+0000892742 00000 n 
+0000892910 00000 n 
+0000893078 00000 n 
+0000893243 00000 n 
+0000893406 00000 n 
+0001020137 00000 n 
+0000905425 00000 n 
+0000895327 00000 n 
+0000893642 00000 n 
+0000895967 00000 n 
+0000896132 00000 n 
+0000896300 00000 n 
+0000896468 00000 n 
+0000896636 00000 n 
+0000896804 00000 n 
+0000896972 00000 n 
+0000897140 00000 n 
+0000897304 00000 n 
+0000897472 00000 n 
+0000897640 00000 n 
+0000897808 00000 n 
+0000897976 00000 n 
+0000898144 00000 n 
+0000898312 00000 n 
+0000898489 00000 n 
+0000898657 00000 n 
+0000898825 00000 n 
+0000898993 00000 n 
+0000899161 00000 n 
+0000899329 00000 n 
+0000905362 00000 n 
+0000899496 00000 n 
+0000899663 00000 n 
+0000899831 00000 n 
+0000899999 00000 n 
+0000900166 00000 n 
+0000900334 00000 n 
+0000900502 00000 n 
+0000900669 00000 n 
+0000900837 00000 n 
+0000901005 00000 n 
+0000901173 00000 n 
+0000901340 00000 n 
+0000901508 00000 n 
+0000901676 00000 n 
+0000901843 00000 n 
+0000902011 00000 n 
+0000902178 00000 n 
+0000902346 00000 n 
+0000902514 00000 n 
+0000902682 00000 n 
+0000902850 00000 n 
+0000903018 00000 n 
+0000903185 00000 n 
+0000903353 00000 n 
+0000903520 00000 n 
+0000903688 00000 n 
+0000903855 00000 n 
+0000904023 00000 n 
+0000904191 00000 n 
+0000904359 00000 n 
+0000904526 00000 n 
+0000904694 00000 n 
+0000904862 00000 n 
+0000905029 00000 n 
+0000905196 00000 n 
+0000912857 00000 n 
+0000906912 00000 n 
+0000905508 00000 n 
+0000907345 00000 n 
+0000907512 00000 n 
+0000907679 00000 n 
+0000907847 00000 n 
+0000908015 00000 n 
+0000908182 00000 n 
+0000908348 00000 n 
+0000908516 00000 n 
+0000908684 00000 n 
+0000908850 00000 n 
+0000909018 00000 n 
+0000909185 00000 n 
+0000909353 00000 n 
+0000909520 00000 n 
+0000909688 00000 n 
+0000909853 00000 n 
+0000910021 00000 n 
+0000910188 00000 n 
+0000910355 00000 n 
+0000910523 00000 n 
+0000910691 00000 n 
+0000910859 00000 n 
+0000911025 00000 n 
+0000911192 00000 n 
+0000911358 00000 n 
+0000911526 00000 n 
+0000911694 00000 n 
+0000911860 00000 n 
+0000912026 00000 n 
+0000912193 00000 n 
+0000912361 00000 n 
+0000912528 00000 n 
+0000912694 00000 n 
+0000923702 00000 n 
+0000914568 00000 n 
+0000912940 00000 n 
+0000915163 00000 n 
+0000915329 00000 n 
+0000915495 00000 n 
+0000915660 00000 n 
+0000915824 00000 n 
+0000915992 00000 n 
+0000916160 00000 n 
+0000916327 00000 n 
+0000916495 00000 n 
+0000916662 00000 n 
+0000916830 00000 n 
+0000916997 00000 n 
+0000917165 00000 n 
+0000917333 00000 n 
+0000917500 00000 n 
+0000917668 00000 n 
+0000917836 00000 n 
+0000918003 00000 n 
+0000918171 00000 n 
+0000918339 00000 n 
+0000918506 00000 n 
+0000918674 00000 n 
+0000918842 00000 n 
+0000919010 00000 n 
+0000919177 00000 n 
+0000919345 00000 n 
+0000919511 00000 n 
+0000919679 00000 n 
+0000919846 00000 n 
+0000920014 00000 n 
+0000920182 00000 n 
+0000920350 00000 n 
+0000920518 00000 n 
+0000920686 00000 n 
+0000920852 00000 n 
+0000921020 00000 n 
+0000921188 00000 n 
+0000921356 00000 n 
+0000921523 00000 n 
+0000921690 00000 n 
+0000921857 00000 n 
+0000922025 00000 n 
+0000922193 00000 n 
+0000922361 00000 n 
+0000922529 00000 n 
+0000922696 00000 n 
+0000922864 00000 n 
+0000923032 00000 n 
+0000923199 00000 n 
+0000923367 00000 n 
+0000923535 00000 n 
+0000923785 00000 n 
+0000924346 00000 n 
+0001021700 00000 n 
+0000923831 00000 n 
+0000924409 00000 n 
+0000924159 00000 n 
+0000923861 00000 n 
+0000924283 00000 n 
+0000924790 00000 n 
+0000924666 00000 n 
+0000924480 00000 n 
+0000925401 00000 n 
+0000925214 00000 n 
+0000924832 00000 n 
+0000925338 00000 n 
+0001020262 00000 n 
+0000925782 00000 n 
+0000925658 00000 n 
+0000925472 00000 n 
+0000925824 00000 n 
+0000926678 00000 n 
+0001021601 00000 n 
+0000925870 00000 n 
+0000926741 00000 n 
+0000926554 00000 n 
+0000925898 00000 n 
+0000927122 00000 n 
+0000926998 00000 n 
+0000926812 00000 n 
+0000927164 00000 n 
+0000930825 00000 n 
+0001021502 00000 n 
+0000927210 00000 n 
+0000930948 00000 n 
+0000930451 00000 n 
+0000927260 00000 n 
+0000930596 00000 n 
+0000989826 00000 n 
+0000931057 00000 n 
+0000935253 00000 n 
+0001021418 00000 n 
+0000931103 00000 n 
+0000935442 00000 n 
+0000934527 00000 n 
+0000931158 00000 n 
+0000934690 00000 n 
+0000934862 00000 n 
+0000935316 00000 n 
+0000935379 00000 n 
+0000935080 00000 n 
+0000954599 00000 n 
+0000940766 00000 n 
+0000940078 00000 n 
+0000935551 00000 n 
+0000940578 00000 n 
+0000940232 00000 n 
+0000940406 00000 n 
+0000940641 00000 n 
+0000940704 00000 n 
+0001020387 00000 n 
+0000944725 00000 n 
+0000944912 00000 n 
+0000944371 00000 n 
+0000940863 00000 n 
+0000944788 00000 n 
+0000944516 00000 n 
+0000944851 00000 n 
+0000949894 00000 n 
+0000948838 00000 n 
+0000945009 00000 n 
+0000949010 00000 n 
+0000949185 00000 n 
+0000949705 00000 n 
+0000949359 00000 n 
+0000949768 00000 n 
+0000949831 00000 n 
+0000949532 00000 n 
+0000954662 00000 n 
+0000953969 00000 n 
+0000949991 00000 n 
+0000954473 00000 n 
+0000954123 00000 n 
+0000954536 00000 n 
+0000954298 00000 n 
+0000960198 00000 n 
+0000959030 00000 n 
+0000954759 00000 n 
+0000959211 00000 n 
+0000959384 00000 n 
+0000959556 00000 n 
+0000959728 00000 n 
+0000960073 00000 n 
+0000959902 00000 n 
+0000960136 00000 n 
+0000980933 00000 n 
+0000968149 00000 n 
+0000976891 00000 n 
+0000964400 00000 n 
+0000963955 00000 n 
+0000960295 00000 n 
+0000964274 00000 n 
+0000964337 00000 n 
+0000964100 00000 n 
+0000968337 00000 n 
+0000967830 00000 n 
+0000964497 00000 n 
+0000968212 00000 n 
+0000967975 00000 n 
+0000968275 00000 n 
+0001020512 00000 n 
+0000972213 00000 n 
+0000971965 00000 n 
+0000968420 00000 n 
+0000972089 00000 n 
+0000972151 00000 n 
+0000976954 00000 n 
+0000975942 00000 n 
+0000972310 00000 n 
+0000976114 00000 n 
+0000976287 00000 n 
+0000976460 00000 n 
+0000976664 00000 n 
+0000980996 00000 n 
+0000980346 00000 n 
+0000977039 00000 n 
+0000980500 00000 n 
+0000980706 00000 n 
+0000984990 00000 n 
+0000984554 00000 n 
+0000981081 00000 n 
+0000984699 00000 n 
+0000984927 00000 n 
+0000987321 00000 n 
+0000986967 00000 n 
+0000985075 00000 n 
+0000987112 00000 n 
+0000987418 00000 n 
+0000998218 00000 n 
+0001010018 00000 n 
+0001010099 00000 n 
+0001012556 00000 n 
+0001014932 00000 n 
+0001020637 00000 n 
+0001020753 00000 n 
+0001020873 00000 n 
+0001020993 00000 n 
+0001021113 00000 n 
+0001021238 00000 n 
+0001021339 00000 n 
+0001022988 00000 n 
+0001026847 00000 n 
+0001026888 00000 n 
+0001026928 00000 n 
+0001027018 00000 n 
+trailer
+<< /Size 1777
+/Root 1775 0 R
+/Info 1776 0 R
+/ID [<D8B0FAD7C7C08B5ED094051A980B67AC> <D8B0FAD7C7C08B5ED094051A980B67AC>] >>
+startxref
+1027308
+%%EOF
diff --git a/28312-pdf.zip b/28312-pdf.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6eb9693
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-pdf.zip
diff --git a/28312-tei.zip b/28312-tei.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e61d81e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-tei.zip
diff --git a/28312-tei/28312-tei.tei b/28312-tei/28312-tei.tei
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8698e94
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312-tei/28312-tei.tei
@@ -0,0 +1,8025 @@
+<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
+
+<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "http://www.gutenberg.org/tei/marcello/0.4/dtd/pgtei.dtd" [
+
+<!ENTITY u5  "http://www.tei-c.org/Lite/">
+
+]>
+
+<TEI.2 lang="en">
+<teiHeader>
+  <fileDesc>
+    <titleStmt>
+      <title>Atheism in Pagan Antiquity</title>
+      <author>
+        <name reg="Drachmann, A. B.">A. B. Drachmann</name>
+      </author>
+      <respStmt>
+        <resp>Translated By</resp>
+        <name reg="Anderson, Ingeborg">Ingeborg Anderson</name>
+      </respStmt>
+      <respStmt>
+        <resp>Revised and Edited By</resp>
+        <name reg="Hill, G. F.">G. F. Hill</name>
+      </respStmt>
+    </titleStmt>
+    <editionStmt>
+      <edition n="1">Edition 1</edition>
+    </editionStmt>
+    <publicationStmt>
+      <publisher>Project Gutenberg</publisher>
+      <date>March 11, 2009</date>
+      <idno type="etext-no">28312</idno>
+      <availability>
+        <p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and
+        with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
+        away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
+        License online at www.gutenberg.org/license</p>
+      </availability>
+    </publicationStmt>
+    <sourceDesc>
+      <bibl>
+        Created electronically.
+      </bibl>
+    </sourceDesc>
+  </fileDesc>
+  <encodingDesc>
+  </encodingDesc>
+  <profileDesc>
+    <langUsage>
+      <language id="en"></language>
+      <language id="el"></language>
+      <language id="la"></language>
+      <language id="fr"></language>
+    </langUsage>
+  </profileDesc>
+  <revisionDesc>
+    <change>
+      <date value="2009-03-11">March 11, 2009</date>
+      <respStmt>
+        <name>
+            Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, J.P.W. Fraser, David King,
+            and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at &lt;http://www.pgdp.net/&gt;.
+        </name>
+      </respStmt>
+      <item>Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1</item>
+    </change>
+  </revisionDesc>
+</teiHeader>
+
+<pgExtensions>
+  <pgStyleSheet>
+    .boxed           { x-class: boxed }
+    .shaded          { x-class: shaded }
+    .rules           { x-class: rules; rules: all }
+    .indent          { margin-left: 2 }
+    .bold            { font-weight: bold }
+    .italic          { font-style: italic }
+    .smallcaps       { font-variant: small-caps }
+  </pgStyleSheet>
+
+  <pgCharMap formats="txt.iso-8859-1">
+    <char id="U0x2014">
+      <charName>mdash</charName>
+      <desc>EM DASH</desc>
+      <mapping>--</mapping>
+    </char>
+    <char id="U0x2003">
+      <charName>emsp</charName>
+      <desc>EM SPACE</desc>
+      <mapping>  </mapping>
+    </char>
+    <char id="U0x2026">
+      <charName>hellip</charName>
+      <desc>HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS</desc>
+      <mapping>...</mapping>
+    </char>
+  </pgCharMap>
+</pgExtensions>
+
+<text lang="en">
+  <front>
+    <div>
+      <divGen type="pgheader" />
+    </div>
+    <div>
+      <divGen type="encodingDesc" />
+    </div>
+
+    <div rend="page-break-before: always">
+      <p rend="font-size: xx-large; text-align: center">Atheism In Pagan Antiquity</p>
+      <p rend="text-align: center">By</p>
+      <p rend="font-size: x-large; text-align: center">A. B. Drachmann</p>
+      <p rend="text-align: center">Professor of Classical
+Philology in the University of Copenhagen</p>
+      <p rend="text-align: center">Gyldendal</p>
+      <p rend="text-align: center">11 Hanover Square, London, W.1</p>
+      <p rend="text-align: center">Copenhagen</p>
+      <p rend="text-align: center">Christiania</p>
+      <p rend="text-align: center">1922</p>
+    </div>
+    <div rend="page-break-before: always">
+      <head>Contents</head>
+      <divGen type="toc" />
+    </div>
+
+  </front>
+<body>
+
+<pb n='v'/><anchor id='Pgv'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Preface</head>
+
+<p>
+The present treatise originally appeared in Danish
+as a University publication (<hi rend='italic'>Kjœbenhavns Universitets
+Festskrift</hi>, November 1919). In submitting
+it to the English public, I wish to acknowledge my
+profound indebtedness to Mr. G. F. Hill of the British
+Museum, who not only suggested the English edition, but
+also with untiring kindness has subjected the translation,
+as originally made by Miss Ingeborg Andersen, M.A. of
+Copenhagen, to a painstaking and most valuable revision.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For an account of the previous treatments of the subject,
+as well as of the method employed in my investigation,
+the reader is referred to the introductory remarks which
+precede the Notes.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A. B. DRACHMANN.<lb/>
+<hi rend='smallcaps'>Charlottenlund</hi>,<lb/>
+<hi rend='italic'>July 1922</hi>.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='001'/><anchor id='Pg001'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Introduction</head>
+
+<p>
+The present inquiry is the outcome of a
+request to write an article on <q>Atheism</q>
+for a projected dictionary of the religious
+history of classical antiquity. On going through
+the sources I found that the subject might well
+deserve a more comprehensive treatment than the
+scope of a dictionary would allow. It is such a
+treatment that I have attempted in the following
+pages.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A difficulty that occurred at the very beginning
+of the inquiry was how to define the notion of
+atheism. Nowadays the term is taken to designate
+the attitude which denies every idea of God. Even
+antiquity sometimes referred to atheism in this
+sense; but an inquiry dealing with the history of
+religion could not start from a definition of that
+kind. It would have to keep in view, not the
+philosophical notion of God, but the conceptions of
+the gods as they appear in the religion of antiquity.
+Hence I came to define atheism in Pagan antiquity
+as the point of view which <emph>denies the existence of the
+ancient gods</emph>. It is in this sense that the word will
+be used in the following inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Even though we disregard philosophical atheism,
+<pb n='002'/><anchor id='Pg002'/>
+the definition is somewhat narrow; for
+in antiquity mere denial of the existence of the
+gods of popular belief was not the only attitude
+which was designated as atheism. But it has the
+advantage of starting from the conception of the
+ancient gods that may be said to have finally prevailed.
+In the sense in which the word is used
+here we are nowadays all of us atheists. We do
+not believe that the gods whom the Greeks and the
+Romans worshipped and believed in exist or have
+ever existed; we hold them to be productions of
+the human imagination to which nothing real corresponds.
+This view has nowadays become so ingrained
+in us and appears so self-evident, that we
+find it difficult to imagine that it has not been
+prevalent through long ages; nay, it is perhaps a
+widely diffused assumption that even in antiquity
+educated and unbiased persons held the same
+view of the religion of their people as we do. In
+reality both assumptions are erroneous: our
+<q>atheism</q> in regard to ancient paganism is of
+recent date, and in antiquity itself downright denial
+of the existence of the gods was a comparatively
+rare phenomenon. The demonstration of this fact,
+rather than a consideration of the various intermediate
+positions taken up by the thinkers of
+antiquity in their desire to avoid a complete rupture
+with the traditional ideas of the gods, has been one
+of the chief purposes of this inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Though the definition of atheism set down here
+might seem to be clear and unequivocal, and though
+I have tried to adhere strictly to it, cases have
+unavoidably occurred that were difficult to classify.
+<pb n='003'/><anchor id='Pg003'/>
+The most embarrassing are those which involve a
+reinterpretation of the conception of the gods, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>
+which, while acknowledging that there is some reality
+corresponding to the conception, yet define this
+reality as essentially different from it. Moreover,
+the acknowledgment of a certain group of gods (the
+celestial bodies, for instance) combined with the
+rejection of others, may create difficulties in defining
+the notion of atheism; in practice, however,
+this doctrine generally coincides with the former,
+by which the gods are explained away. On the
+whole it would hardly be just, in a field of inquiry
+like the present, to expect or require absolutely
+clearly defined boundary-lines; transition forms will
+always occur.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The persons of whom it is related that they
+denied the existence of the ancient gods are in
+themselves few, and they all belong to the highest
+level of culture; by far the greater part of them
+are simply professional philosophers. Hence the
+inquiry will almost exclusively have to deal with
+philosophers and philosophical schools and their
+doctrines; of religion as exhibited in the masses,
+as a social factor, it will only treat by exception.
+But in its purpose it is concerned with the history
+of religion, not with philosophy; therefore&mdash;in accordance
+with the definition of its object&mdash;it will
+deal as little as possible with the purely philosophical
+notions of God that have nothing to do with popular
+religion. What it aims at illustrating is a certain&mdash;if
+you like, the negative&mdash;aspect of ancient religion.
+But its result, if it can be sufficiently established,
+will not be without importance for the understanding
+<pb n='004'/><anchor id='Pg004'/>
+of the positive religious sense of antiquity.
+If you want to obtain some idea of the hold a
+certain religion had on its adherents, it is not amiss
+to know something about the extent to which it
+dominated even the strata of society most exposed
+to influences that went against it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It might seem more natural, in dealing with
+atheism in antiquity, to adopt the definition current
+among the ancients themselves. That this method
+would prove futile the following investigation will,
+I hope, make sufficiently evident; antiquity succeeded
+as little as we moderns in connecting any
+clear and unequivocal idea with the words that
+signify <q>denial of God.</q> On the other hand, it is,
+of course, impossible to begin at all except from the
+traditions of antiquity about denial and deniers.
+Hence the course of the inquiry will be, first to make
+clear what antiquity understood by denial of the
+gods and what persons it designated as deniers, and
+then to examine in how far these persons were
+atheists in our sense of the word.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='005'/><anchor id='Pg005'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter I</head>
+
+<p>
+Atheism and atheist are words formed from
+Greek roots and with Greek derivative
+endings. Nevertheless they are not
+Greek; their formation is not consonant with
+Greek usage. In Greek they said <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign> and
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheotes</foreign>; to these the English words ungodly
+and ungodliness correspond rather closely. In exactly
+the same way as ungodly, <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign> was used as an
+expression of severe censure and moral condemnation;
+this use is an old one, and the oldest that can
+be traced. Not till later do we find it employed
+to denote a certain philosophical creed; we even
+meet with philosophers bearing <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign> as a
+regular surname. We know very little of the men in
+question; but it can hardly be doubted that
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign>,
+as applied to them, implied not only a denial of the
+gods of popular belief, but a denial of gods in the
+widest sense of the word, or Atheism as it is nowadays
+understood.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In this case the word is more particularly a
+philosophical term. But it was used in a similar
+sense also in popular language, and corresponds
+then closely to the English <q>denier of God,</q> denoting
+a person who denies the gods of his people
+and State. From the popular point of view the
+interest, of course, centred in those only, not in the
+<pb n='006'/><anchor id='Pg006'/>
+exponents of philosophical theology. Thus we
+find the word employed both of theoretical denial
+of the gods (atheism in our sense) and of practical
+denial of the gods, as in the case of the adherents
+of monotheism, Jews and Christians.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Atheism, in the theoretical as well as the practical
+sense of the word, was, according to the ancient
+conception of law, always a crime; but in practice
+it was treated in different ways, which varied both
+according to the period in question and according
+to the more or less dangerous nature of the threat
+it offered to established religion. It is only as far
+as Athens and Imperial Rome are concerned that
+we have any definite knowledge of the law and the
+judicial procedure on this point; a somewhat
+detailed account of the state of things in Athens
+and Rome cannot be dispensed with here.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the criminal law of Athens we meet with
+the term <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign>&mdash;literally: impiety or
+disrespect towards the gods. As an established formula
+of accusation of <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign> existed, legislation
+must have dealt with the subject; but how it was
+defined we do not know. The word itself conveys
+the idea that the law particularly had offences
+against public worship in view; and this is confirmed
+by the fact that a number of such offences&mdash;from
+the felling of sacred trees to the profanation of
+the Eleusinian Mysteries&mdash;were treated as
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign>.
+When, in the next place, towards the close of the
+fifth century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>, free-thinking began to assume
+forms which seemed dangerous to the religion of
+the State, theoretical denial of the gods was also
+included under <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign>. From about the
+beginning
+<pb n='007'/><anchor id='Pg007'/>
+of the Peloponnesian War to the close of the
+fourth century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>, there are on record a number
+of prosecutions of philosophers who were tried and
+condemned for denial of the gods. The indictment
+seems in most cases&mdash;the trial of Socrates is
+the only one of which we know details&mdash;to have
+been on the charge of <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign>, and the
+procedure proper thereto seems to have been employed,
+though there was no proof or assertion of the
+accused having offended against public worship;
+as to Socrates, we know the opposite to have been
+the case; he worshipped the gods like any other
+good citizen. This extension of the conception of
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign> to include theoretical denial of the
+gods no doubt had no foundation in law; this is amongst
+other things evident from the fact that it was necessary,
+in order to convict Anaxagoras, to pass a
+special public resolution in virtue of which his free-thinking
+theories became indictable. The law presumably
+dated from a time when theoretical denial of
+the gods lay beyond the horizon of legislation. Nevertheless,
+in the trial of Socrates it is simply taken
+for granted that denial of the gods is a capital crime,
+and that not only on the side of the prosecution, but
+also on the side of the defence: the trial only turns
+on a question of fact, the legal basis is taken for
+granted. So inveterate, then, at this time was the
+conception of the unlawful nature of the denial of
+the gods among the people of Athens.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the course of the fourth century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi> several
+philosophers were accused of denial of the gods or
+blasphemy; but after the close of the century we
+hear no more of such trials. To be sure, our knowledge
+<pb n='008'/><anchor id='Pg008'/>
+of the succeeding centuries, when Athens was
+but a provincial town, is far less copious than of the
+days of its greatness; nevertheless, it is beyond
+doubt that the practice in regard to theoretical
+denial of the gods was changed. A philosopher
+like Carneades, for instance, might, in view of his
+sceptical standpoint, just as well have been convicted
+of <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign> as Protagoras, who was convicted
+because he had declared that he did not know
+whether the gods existed or not; and as to such a
+process against Carneades, tradition would not have
+remained silent. Instead, we learn that he was
+employed as the trusted representative of the State
+on most important diplomatic missions. It is
+evident that Athens had arrived at the point of view
+that the theoretical denial of the gods might be
+tolerated, whereas the law, of course, continued to
+protect public worship.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In Rome they did not possess, as in Athens, a
+general statute against religious offences; there
+were only special provisions, and they were, moreover,
+few and insufficient. This defect, however,
+was remedied by the vigorous police authority
+with which the Roman magistrates were invested.
+In Rome severe measures were often taken against
+movements which threatened the Roman official
+worship, but it was done at the discretion of the
+administration and not according to hard-and-fast
+rules; hence the practice was somewhat varying,
+and a certain arbitrariness inevitable.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+No example is known from Rome of action
+taken against theoretical denial of the gods corresponding
+to the trials of the philosophers in
+<pb n='009'/><anchor id='Pg009'/>
+Athens. The main cause of this was, no doubt,
+that free-thinking in the fifth century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi> invaded
+Hellas, and specially Athens, like a flood which threatened
+to overthrow everything; in Rome, on the
+other hand, Greek philosophy made its way in
+slowly and gradually, and this took place at a time
+when in the country of its origin it had long ago
+found a <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>modus vivendi</foreign> with popular religion and
+was acknowledged as harmless to the established
+worship. The more practical outlook of the
+Romans may perhaps also have had something to
+say in the matter: they were rather indifferent
+to theoretical speculations, whereas they were not
+to be trifled with when their national institutions
+were concerned.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In consequence of this point of view the Roman
+government first came to deal with denial of the
+gods as a breach of law when confronted with the
+two monotheistic religions which invaded the
+Empire from the East. That which distinguished
+Jews and Christians from Pagans was not that they
+denied the existence of the Pagan gods&mdash;the Christians,
+at any rate, did not do this as a rule&mdash;but
+that they denied that they were gods, and therefore
+refused to worship them. They were practical,
+not theoretical deniers. The tolerance which the
+Roman government showed towards all foreign
+creeds and the result of which in imperial times was,
+practically speaking, freedom of religion over the
+whole Empire, could not be extended to the Jews
+and the Christians; for it was in the last resort
+based on reciprocity, on the fact that worship of the
+Egyptian or Persian gods did not exclude worship
+<pb n='010'/><anchor id='Pg010'/>
+of the Roman ones. Every convert, on the other
+hand, won over to Judaism or Christianity was <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>eo
+ipso</foreign> an apostate from the Roman religion, an
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign> according to the ancient conception.
+Hence, as soon as such religions began to spread, they constituted
+a serious danger to the established religion,
+and the Roman government intervened. Judaism
+and Christianity were not treated quite alike; in
+this connexion details are of no interest, but
+certain principal features must be dwelt on as
+significant of the attitude of antiquity towards
+denial of the gods. To simplify matters I confine
+myself to Christianity, where things are less
+complicated.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Christians were generally designated as
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheoi</foreign>, as deniers of the gods, and the
+objection against them was precisely their denial of the
+Pagan gods, not their religion as such. When the
+Christian, summoned before the Roman magistrates,
+agreed to sacrifice to the Pagan gods
+(among them, the Emperor) he was acquitted;
+he was not punished for previously having attended
+Christian services, and it seems that he
+was not even required to undertake not to do so in
+future. Only if he refused to sacrifice, was he
+punished. We cannot ask for a clearer proof that
+it is apostasy as such, denial of the gods, against
+which action is taken. It is in keeping with this
+that, at any rate under the earlier Empire, no attempt
+was made to seek out the Christians at their
+assemblies, to hinder their services or the like; it
+was considered sufficient to take steps when information
+was laid.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='011'/><anchor id='Pg011'/>
+
+<p>
+The punishments meted out were different, in
+that they were left solely to the discretion of
+the magistrates. But they were generally severe:
+forced labour in mines and capital punishment were
+quite common. No discrimination was made between
+Roman citizens and others belonging to the
+Empire, but all were treated alike; that the Roman
+citizen could not undergo capital punishment without
+appeal to the Emperor does not affect the principle.
+This procedure has really no expressly formulated
+basis in law; the Roman penal code did not, as
+mentioned above, take cognizance of denial of the
+gods. Nevertheless, the sentences on the Christians
+were considered by the Pagans of the earlier time
+as a matter of course, the justice of which was not
+contested, and the procedure of the government
+was in principle the same under humane and conscientious
+rulers like Trajan and Marcus Aurelius
+as under tyrants like Nero and Domitian. Here
+again it is evident how firmly rooted in the mind
+of antiquity was the conviction that denial of the
+gods was a capital offence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To resume what has here been set forth concerning
+the attitude of ancient society to atheism:
+it is, in the first place, evident that the frequently
+mentioned tolerance of polytheism was not extended
+to those who denied its gods; in fact, it was applied
+only to those who acknowledged them even if
+they worshipped others besides. But the assertion
+of this principle of intolerance varied greatly in
+practice according to whether it was a question of
+theoretical denial of the gods&mdash;atheism in our
+sense&mdash;or practical refusal to worship the Pagan
+<pb n='012'/><anchor id='Pg012'/>
+gods. Against atheism the community took action
+only during a comparatively short period, and, as
+far as we know, only in a single place. The latter
+limitation is probably explained not only by the
+defectiveness of tradition, but also by the fact that
+in Athens free-thinking made its appearance about
+the year 400 as a general phenomenon and therefore
+attracted the attention of the community. Apart
+from this case, the philosophical denier of God was
+left in peace all through antiquity, in the same way
+as the individual citizen was not interfered with, as
+a rule, when he, for one reason or another, refrained
+from taking part in the worship of the deities. On
+the other hand, as soon as practical refusal to believe
+in the gods, apostasy from the established
+religion, assumed dangerous proportions, ruthless
+severity was exercised against it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The discrimination, however, made in the treatment
+of the theoretical and practical denial of the
+gods is certainly not due merely to consideration of
+the more or less isolated occurrence of the phenomenon;
+it is rooted at the same time in the very
+nature of ancient religion. The essence of ancient
+polytheism is the worship of the gods, that is, cultus;
+of a doctrine of divinity properly speaking, of
+theology, there were only slight rudiments, and
+there was no idea of any elaborate dogmatic system.
+Quite different attitudes were accordingly assumed
+towards the philosopher, who held his own opinions
+of the gods, but took part in the public worship like
+anybody else; and towards the monotheist, to whom
+the whole of the Pagan worship was an abomination,
+which one should abstain from at any cost, and
+<pb n='013'/><anchor id='Pg013'/>
+which one should prevail on others to give up for the
+sake of their own good in this life or the next.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the literature of antiquity we meet with
+sporadic statements to the effect that certain
+philosophers bore the epithet <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign> as a
+sort of surname; and in a few of the later authors of
+antiquity we even find lists of men&mdash;almost all of
+them philosophers&mdash;who denied the existence of
+the gods. Furthermore, we possess information
+about certain persons&mdash;these also, if Jews and
+Christians are excluded, are nearly all of them
+philosophers&mdash;having been accused of, and eventually
+convicted of, denial of the gods; some of
+these are not in our lists. Information of this kind
+will, as remarked above, be taken as the point of
+departure for an investigation of atheism in antiquity.
+For practical reasons, however, it is reasonable
+to include some philosophers whom antiquity
+did not designate as atheists, and who did not come
+into conflict with official religion, but of whom it
+has been maintained in later times that they did
+not believe in the existence of the gods of popular
+belief. Thus we arrive at the following list, in
+which those who were denoted as <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheoi</foreign>
+are italicised and those who were accused of impiety are marked
+with an asterisk:
+</p>
+
+<list type='simple'>
+<item>Xenophanes.</item>
+<item>*Anaxagoras.</item>
+<item><hi rend='italic'>Diogenes of Apollonia.</hi></item>
+<item><hi rend='italic'>Hippo of Rhegium.</hi></item>
+<item>*<hi rend='italic'>Protagoras.</hi></item>
+<item><hi rend='italic'>Prodicus.</hi></item>
+<item><hi rend='italic'>Critias.</hi></item>
+<item>*<hi rend='italic'>Diagoras of Melos.</hi></item>
+<item>*Socrates.</item>
+<item>Antisthenes.</item>
+<item>Plato.</item>
+<item>*Aristotle.</item>
+<item>Theophrastus.</item>
+<item>*Stilpo.</item>
+<item>*<hi rend='italic'>Theodorus.</hi></item>
+<item>*<hi rend='italic'>Bion.</hi></item>
+<item><hi rend='italic'>Epicurus.</hi></item>
+<item><hi rend='italic'>Euhemerus.</hi></item>
+</list>
+
+<pb n='014'/><anchor id='Pg014'/>
+
+<p>
+The persons are put down in chronological
+order. This order will in some measure be preserved
+in the following survey; but regard for the
+continuity of the tradition of the doctrine will
+entail certain deviations. It will, that is to say, be
+natural to divide the material into four groups:
+the pre-Socratic philosophy; the Sophists; Socrates
+and the Socratics; Hellenistic philosophy. Each
+of these groups has a philosophical character of its
+own, and it will be seen that this character also
+makes itself felt in the relation to the gods of the
+popular belief, even though we here meet with
+phenomena of more isolated occurrence. The four
+groups must be supplemented by a fifth, a survey
+of the conditions in Imperial Rome. Atheists of
+this period are not found in our lists; but a good
+deal of old Pagan free-thinking survives in the first
+centuries of our era, and also the epithet
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheoi</foreign> was
+bestowed generally on the Christians and sometimes
+on the Jews, and if only for this reason they cannot
+be altogether passed by in this survey.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='015'/><anchor id='Pg015'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter II</head>
+
+<p>
+The paganism of antiquity is based on a
+primitive religion, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> it is originally in
+the main homogeneous with the religions
+nowadays met with in the so-called primitive
+peoples. It underwent, however, a long process of
+evolution parallel with and conditioned by the
+development of Greek and later Roman civilisation.
+This evolution carried ancient religion far away
+from its primitive starting-point; it produced
+numerous new formations, above all a huge system
+of anthropomorphic gods, each with a definite
+character and personality of his own. This development
+is the result of an interplay of numerous
+factors: changing social and economical conditions
+evoked the desire for new religious ideas; the
+influence of other peoples made itself felt; poetry
+and the fine arts contributed largely to the moulding
+of these ideas; conscious reflection, too, arose
+early and modified original simplicity. But what is
+characteristic of the whole process is the fact that
+it went on continuously without breaks or sudden
+bounds. Nowhere in ancient religion, as far as we
+can trace it, did a powerful religious personality
+strike in with a radical transformation, with a
+direct rejection of old ideas and dogmatic accentuation
+of new ones. The result of this quiet growth
+<pb n='016'/><anchor id='Pg016'/>
+was an exceedingly heterogeneous organism, in
+which remains of ancient, highly primitive customs
+and ideas were retained along with other elements of
+a far more advanced character.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Such a state of things need not in itself trouble
+the general consciousness; it is a well-established
+fact that in religion the most divergent elements
+are not incompatible. Nevertheless, among the
+Greeks, with their strong proclivity to reflective
+thought, criticism early arose against the traditional
+conceptions of the gods. The typical method of
+this criticism is that the higher conceptions of the
+gods are used against the lower. From the earliest
+times the Greek religious sense favoured absoluteness
+of definition where the gods are concerned;
+even in Homer they are not only eternal and happy,
+but also all-powerful and all-knowing. Corresponding
+expressions of a moral character are hardly
+to be found in Homer; but as early as Hesiod and
+Solon we find, at any rate, Zeus as the representative
+of heavenly justice. With such definitions a large
+number of customs of public worship and, above all,
+a number of stories about the gods, were in violent
+contradiction; thus we find even so old and so
+pious a poet as Pindar occasionally rejecting
+mythical stories which he thinks at variance with
+the sublime nature of the gods. This form of
+criticism of popular beliefs is continued through
+the whole of antiquity; it is found not only in
+philosophers and philosophically educated laymen,
+but appears spontaneously in everybody of a
+reflective mind; its best known representative in
+earlier times is Euripides. Typical of its popular
+<pb n='017'/><anchor id='Pg017'/>
+form is in the first place its casualness; it
+is directed against details which at the moment
+attract attention, while it leaves other things
+alone which in principle are quite as offensive,
+but either not very obviously so, or else not
+relevant to the matter in hand. Secondly, it is
+naïve: it takes the gods of the popular belief for
+granted essentially as they are; it does not raise
+the crucial question whether the popular belief is not
+quite justified in attributing to these higher beings
+all kinds of imperfection, and wrong in attributing
+perfection to them, and still less if such beings,
+whether they are defined as perfect or imperfect,
+exist at all. It follows that as a whole this form of
+criticism is outside the scope of our inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Still, there is one single personality in early
+Greek thought who seems to have proceeded still
+further on the lines of this naïve criticism, namely,
+Xenophanes of Colophon. He is generally included
+amongst the philosophers, and rightly in so far as
+he initiated a philosophical speculation which was
+of the highest importance in the development
+of Greek scientific thought. But in the present
+connexion it would, nevertheless, be misleading to
+place Xenophanes among those philosophers who
+came into conflict with the popular belief because
+their conception of Existence was based on science.
+The starting-point for his criticism of the popular
+belief is in fact not philosophical, but religious; he
+ranks with personalities like Pindar and Euripides&mdash;he
+was also a verse-writer himself, with considerable
+poetic gift&mdash;and is only distinguished from them
+by the greater consistency of his thought. Hence,
+<pb n='018'/><anchor id='Pg018'/>
+the correct course is to deal with him in this place
+as the only eminent thinker in antiquity about
+whom it is known that&mdash;starting from popular
+belief and religious motives&mdash;he reached a standpoint
+which at any rate with some truth may be
+designated as atheism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Xenophanes lived in the latter part of the sixth
+and the beginning of the fifth centuries <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi> (according
+to his own statement he reached an age of more
+than ninety years). He was an itinerant singer who
+travelled about and recited poetry, presumably
+not merely his own but also that of others. In
+his own poems he severely attacked the manner
+in which Homer and Hesiod, the most famous poets
+of Greece, had represented the gods: they had
+attributed to them everything which in man's eyes
+is outrageous and reprehensible&mdash;theft, adultery and
+deception of one another. Their accounts of the
+fights of the gods against Titans and Giants he
+denounced as <q>inventions of the ancients.</q> But
+he did not stop at that: <q>Men believe that the
+gods are born, are clothed and shaped and speak
+like themselves</q>; <q>if oxen and horses and lions
+could draw and paint, they would delineate their gods
+in their own image</q>; <q>the Negroes believe that
+their gods are flat-nosed and black, the Thracians
+that theirs have blue eyes and red hair.</q> Thus he
+attacked directly the popular belief that the gods
+are anthropomorphic, and his arguments testify
+that he clearly realised that men create their gods
+in their own image. On another main point, too,
+he was in direct opposition to the religious ideas
+of his time: he rejected Divination, the belief that
+<pb n='019'/><anchor id='Pg019'/>
+the gods imparted the secrets of the future to men&mdash;which
+was deemed a mainstay of the belief in the
+existence of the gods. As a positive counterpart
+to the anthropomorphic gods, Xenophanes set up
+a philosophical conception of God: God must be
+One, Eternal, Unchangeable and identical with
+himself in every way (all sight, all hearing and all
+mind). This deity, according to the explicit statements
+of our earliest sources, he identified with the
+universe.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If we examine more closely the arguments put
+forth by Xenophanes in support of his remarkable
+conception of the deity, we realise that he everywhere
+starts from the definitions of the nature of
+the gods as given by popular religion; but, be it
+understood, solely from the absolute definitions.
+He takes the existence of the divine, with its absolute
+attributes, for granted; it is in fact the basis of all
+his speculation. His criticism of the popular ideas
+of the gods is therefore closely connected with his
+philosophical conception of God; the two are the
+positive and negative sides of the same thing.
+Altogether his connexion with what I call the naïve
+criticism of the popular religion is unmistakable.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is undoubtedly a remarkable fact that we
+meet at this early date with such a consistent
+representative of this criticism. If we take Xenophanes
+at his word we must describe him as an
+atheist, and atheism in the sixth century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi> is a
+very curious phenomenon indeed. Neither was it
+acknowledged in antiquity; no one placed Xenophanes
+amongst <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheoi</foreign>; and Cicero even says
+somewhere (according to Greek authority) that
+<pb n='020'/><anchor id='Pg020'/>
+Xenophanes was the only one of those who believed
+in gods who rejected divination. In more recent
+times, too, serious doubt has been expressed whether
+Xenophanes actually denied the existence of the
+gods. Reference has amongst other things been
+made to the fact that he speaks in several places
+about <q>gods</q> where he, according to his view,
+ought to say <q>God</q>; nay, he has even formulated
+his fundamental idea in the words: <q>One God, the
+greatest amongst gods and men, neither in shape nor
+mind like unto any mortal.</q> To be sure, Xenophanes
+is not always consistent in his language;
+but no weight whatever ought to be attached to
+this, least of all in the case of a man who exclusively
+expressed himself in verse. Another theory rests
+on the tradition that Xenophanes regarded his
+deity and the universe as identical, consequently
+was a pantheist. In that case, it is said, he may
+very well have considered, for instance, the heavenly
+bodies as deities. Sound as this argument is in
+general, it does not apply to this case. When a
+thinker arrives at pantheism, starting from a criticism
+of polytheism which is expressly based on the
+antithesis between the unity and plurality of the
+deity&mdash;then very valid proofs, indeed, are needed in
+order to justify the assumption that he after all
+believed in a plurality of gods; and such proofs are
+wanting in the case of Xenophanes.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Judging from the material in hand one can hardly
+arrive at any other conclusion than that the standpoint
+of Xenophanes comes under our definition of
+atheism. But we must not forget that only fragments
+of his writings have been preserved, and that
+<pb n='021'/><anchor id='Pg021'/>
+the more extensive of them do not assist us
+greatly to the understanding of his religious standpoint.
+It is possible that we might have arrived
+at a different conclusion had we but possessed his
+chief philosophical work in its entirety, or at least
+larger portions of it. And I must candidly confess
+that if I were asked whether, in my heart of hearts,
+I believed that a Greek of the sixth century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>
+denied point-blank the existence of his gods, my
+answer would be in the negative.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That Xenophanes was not considered an atheist
+by the ancients may possibly be explained by the
+fact that they objected to fasten this designation on
+a man whose reasoning took the deity as a starting-point
+and whose sole aim was to define its nature.
+Perhaps they also had an inkling that he in reality
+stood on the ground of popular belief, even if he
+went beyond it. Still more curious is the fact that
+his religious view does not seem to have influenced
+the immediately succeeding philosophy at all. His
+successors, Parmenides and Zeno, developed his
+doctrine of unity, but in a pantheistic direction,
+and on a logical, not religious line of argument;
+about their attitude to popular belief we are told
+practically nothing. And Ionic speculation took a
+quite different direction. Not till a century later,
+in Euripides, do we observe a distinct influence of
+his criticism of popular belief; but at that time other
+currents of opinion had intervened which are not
+dependent on Xenophanes, but might direct attention
+to him.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='022'/><anchor id='Pg022'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter III</head>
+
+<p>
+Ancient Greek naturalism is essentially
+calculated to collide with the popular
+belief. It seeks a natural explanation of
+the world, first and foremost of its origin, but in
+the next place of individual natural phenomena.
+As to the genesis of the world, speculations of a
+mythical kind had already developed on the basis
+of the popular belief. They were not, however,
+binding on anybody, and, above all, the idea of the
+gods having created the world was altogether alien
+to Greek religion. Thus, without offence to them
+it might be maintained that everything originated
+from a primary substance or from a mixture of
+several primary substances, as was generally maintained
+by the ancient naturalists. On the other
+hand, a conflict arose as soon as the heavenly
+phenomena, such as lightning and thunder, were
+ascribed to natural causes, or when the heavenly
+bodies were made out to be natural objects; for to
+the Greeks it was an established fact that Zeus sent
+lightning and thunder, and that the sun and the
+moon were gods. A refusal to believe in the latter
+was especially dangerous because they were <emph>visible</emph>
+gods, and as to the person who did not believe in
+their divinity the obvious conclusion would be that
+he believed still less in the invisible gods.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='023'/><anchor id='Pg023'/>
+
+<p>
+That this inference was drawn will appear before
+long. But the epithet <q>atheist</q> was very rarely
+attached to the ancient naturalists; only a few of
+the later (and those the least important) were given
+the nickname <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign>. Altogether we hear very
+little of the relation of these philosophers to the
+popular belief, and this very silence is surely significant.
+No doubt, most of them bestowed but a
+scant attention on this aspect of the matter; they
+were engrossed in speculations which did not bring
+them into conflict with the popular belief, and even
+their scientific treatment of the <q>divine</q> natural
+phenomena did not make them doubt the <emph>existence</emph>
+of the gods. This is connected with a peculiarity in
+their conception of existence. Tradition tells us
+of several of them, and it applies presumably also
+to those of whom it is not recorded, that they
+designated their primary substance or substances
+as gods; sometimes they also applied this designation
+to the world or worlds originating in the primary
+substance. This view is deeply rooted in the Greek
+popular belief and harmonises with its fundamental
+view of existence. To these ancient thinkers the
+primary substance is at once a living and a superhuman
+power; and any living power which transcended
+that of man was divine to the Greeks.
+Hylozoism (the theory that matter is alive) consequently,
+when it allies itself with popular belief,
+leads straight to pantheism, whereas it excludes
+monotheism, which presupposes a distinction between
+god and matter. Now it is a matter of experience
+that, while monotheism is the hereditary
+foe of polytheism, polytheism and pantheism go
+<pb n='024'/><anchor id='Pg024'/>
+very well together. The universe being divine,
+there is no reason to doubt that beings of a higher
+order than man exist, nor any reason to refuse to
+bestow on them the predicate <q>divine</q>; and with
+this we find ourselves in principle on the standpoint
+of polytheistic popular belief. There is nothing
+surprising, then, in the tradition that Thales
+identified God with the mind of the universe and
+believed the universe to be animated, and filled with
+<q>demons.</q> The first statement is in this form
+probably influenced by later ideas and hardly a
+correct expression of the view of Thales; the rest
+bears the very stamp of genuineness, and similar
+ideas recur, more or less completely and variously
+refracted, in the succeeding philosophers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To follow these variations in detail is outside the
+scope of this investigation; but it may be of interest
+to see the form they take in one of the latest and
+most advanced representatives of Ionian naturalism.
+In Democritus's conception of the universe, personal
+gods would seem excluded <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>a priori</foreign>. He works
+with but three premises: the atoms, their movements,
+and empty space. From this everything is derived
+according to strict causality. Such phenomena
+also as thunder and lightning, comets and eclipses,
+which were generally ascribed to the gods, are
+according to his opinion due to natural causes,
+whereas people in the olden days were afraid of them
+because they believed they were due to the gods.
+Nevertheless, he seems, in the first place, to have
+designated Fire, which he at the same time recognised
+as a <q>soul-substance,</q> as divine, the cosmic
+fire being the soul of the world; and secondly,
+<pb n='025'/><anchor id='Pg025'/>
+he thought that there was something real underlying
+the popular conception of the gods. He
+was led to this from a consideration of dreams,
+which he thought were images of real objects which
+entered into the sleeper through the pores of the
+body. Now, since gods might be seen in dreams,
+they must be real beings. He did actually say that
+the gods had more senses than the ordinary five.
+When he who of all the Greek philosophers went
+furthest in a purely mechanical conception of
+nature took up such an attitude to the religion of
+his people, one cannot expect the others, who were
+less advanced, to discard it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nevertheless, there is a certain probability
+that some of the later Ionian naturalists went
+further in their criticism of the gods of popular
+belief. One of them actually came into conflict
+with popular religion; it will be natural to begin
+with him.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian
+War, Anaxagoras of Clazomenae was accused
+of impiety and had to leave Athens, where he had
+taken up his abode. The object of the accusation
+was in reality political; the idea being to hit Pericles
+through his friend the naturalist. What Anaxagoras
+was charged with was that he had assumed
+that the heavenly bodies were natural objects; he
+had taught that the sun was a red-hot mass, and
+that the moon was earth and larger than Peloponnese.
+To base an accusation of impiety on this, it
+was necessary first to carry a public resolution,
+giving power to prosecute those who gave natural
+explanations of heavenly phenomena.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='026'/><anchor id='Pg026'/>
+
+<p>
+As to Anaxagoras's attitude to popular belief, we
+hear next to nothing apart from this. There is a
+story of a ram's head being found with one horn in
+the middle of the forehead; it was brought to
+Pericles, and the soothsayer Lampon explained the
+portent to the effect that, of the two men, Pericles
+and Thucydides, who contended for the leadership
+of Athens, one should prove victorious. Anaxagoras,
+on the other hand, had the ram's head cut
+open and showed that the brain did not fill up the
+cranium, but was egg-shaped and lay gathered
+together at the point where the horn grew out.
+He evidently thought that abortions also, which
+otherwise were generally considered as signs from
+the gods, were due to natural causes. Beyond this,
+nothing is said of any attack on the popular belief
+on the part of Anaxagoras, and in his philosophy
+nothing occurred which logically entailed a denial of
+the existence of the gods. Add to this that it was
+necessary to create a new judicial basis for the
+accusation against Anaxagoras, and it can be taken
+as certain that neither in his writings nor in any
+other way did he come forward in public as a denier
+of the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is somewhat different when we consider the
+purely personal point of view of Anaxagoras. The
+very fact that no expression of his opinion concerning
+the gods has been transmitted affords food for
+thought. Presumably there was none; but this
+very fact is notable when we bear in mind that
+the earlier naturalists show no such reticence. Add
+to this that, if there is any place and any time in
+which we might expect a complete emancipation
+<pb n='027'/><anchor id='Pg027'/>
+from popular belief, combined with a decided disinclination
+to give expression to it, it is Athens
+under Pericles. Men like Pericles and his friends
+represent a high level, perhaps the zenith, in Hellenic
+culture. That they were critical of many of the
+religious conceptions of their time we may take for
+granted; as to Pericles himself, this is actually
+stated as a fact, and the accusations of impiety
+directed against Aspasia and Pheidias prove that
+orthodox circles were very well aware of it.
+But the accusations prove, moreover, that Pericles
+and those who shared his views were so much in
+advance of their time that they could not afford
+to let their free-thinking attitude become a matter
+of public knowledge without endangering their
+political position certainly, and possibly even more
+than that. To be sure, considerations of that kind
+did not weigh with Anaxagoras; but he was&mdash;and
+that we know on good authority&mdash;a quiet scholar
+whose ideal of life was to devote himself to problems
+of natural science, and he can hardly have wished
+to be disturbed in this occupation by affairs in which
+he took no sort of interest. The question is then
+only how far men like Pericles and himself may have
+ventured in their criticism. Though all direct
+tradition is wanting, we have at any rate circumstantial
+evidence possessing a certain degree of
+probability.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To begin with, the attempt to give a natural
+explanation of prodigies is not in itself without
+interest. The mantic art, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> the ability to predict
+the future by signs from the gods or direct divine
+inspiration, was throughout antiquity considered
+<pb n='028'/><anchor id='Pg028'/>
+one of the surest proofs of the existence of the gods.
+Now, it by no means follows that a person who was
+not impressed by a deformed ram's head would
+deny, <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>, the ability of the Delphic Oracle to predict
+the future, especially not so when the person
+in question was a naturalist. But that there was
+at this time a general tendency to reject the art of
+divination is evident from the fact that Herodotus as
+well as Sophocles, both of them contemporaries of
+Pericles and Anaxagoras, expressly contend against
+attempts in that direction, and, be it remarked,
+as if the theory they attack was commonly held.
+Sophocles is in this connexion so far the more
+interesting of the two, as, on one hand, he criticises
+private divination but defends the Delphic oracle
+vigorously, while he, on the other hand, identifies
+denial of the oracle with denial of the gods. And
+he does this in such a way as to make it evident
+that he has a definite object in mind. That in
+this polemic he may have been aiming precisely
+at Anaxagoras is indicated by the fact that Diopeithes,
+who carried the resolution concerning the
+accusation of the philosopher, was a soothsayer by
+profession.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The strongest evidence as to the free-thinking of
+the Periclean age is, however, to be met with in
+the historical writing of Thucydides. In his work
+on the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides completely
+eliminated the supernatural element; not only did
+he throughout ignore omens and divinations, except
+in so far as they played a part as a psychological
+factor, but he also completely omitted any reference
+to the gods in his narrative. Such a procedure was
+<pb n='029'/><anchor id='Pg029'/>
+at this time unprecedented, and contrasts sharply
+with that of his immediate forerunner Herodotus,
+who constantly lays stress on the intervention of the
+gods. That is hardly conceivable except in a man
+who had altogether emancipated himself from the
+religious views of his time. Now, Thucydides is not
+only a fellow-countryman and younger contemporary
+of Pericles, but he also sees in Pericles his
+ideal not only as a politician but evidently also as a
+man. Hence, when everything is considered, it is
+not improbable that Pericles and his friends went
+to all lengths in their criticism of popular belief,
+although, of course, it remains impossible to state
+anything definite as to particular persons' individual
+views. Curiously enough, even in antiquity
+this connexion was observed; in a biography
+of Thucydides it is said that he was a disciple of
+Anaxagoras and <emph>accordingly</emph> was also considered
+something of an atheist.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+While Anaxagoras, his trial notwithstanding,
+is not generally designated an atheist, probably
+because there was nothing in his writings to which
+he might be pinned down, that fate befell two of his
+contemporaries, Hippo of Rhegium and Diogenes of
+Apollonia. Very little, however, is known of them.
+Hippo, who is said to have been a Pythagorean,
+taught that water and fire were the origin of everything;
+as to the reason why he earned the nickname
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign>, it is said that he taught that Water
+was the primal cause of all, as well as that he maintained
+that nothing existed but what could be perceived by
+the senses. There is also quoted a (fictitious) inscription,
+which he is said to have caused to be put on his
+<pb n='030'/><anchor id='Pg030'/>
+tomb, to the effect that Death has made him the
+equal of the immortal gods (in that he now exists
+no more than they). Otherwise we know nothing
+special of Hippo; Aristotle refers to him as shallow.
+As to Diogenes, we learn that he was influenced
+by Anaximenes and Anaxagoras; in agreement with
+the former he regarded Air as the primary substance,
+and like Anaxagoras he attributed reason to his
+primary substance. Of his doctrine we have extensive
+accounts, and also some not inconsiderable
+fragments of his treatise <hi rend='italic'>On Nature</hi>; but
+they are almost all of them of purely scientific,
+mostly of an anatomical and physiological character.
+In especial, as to his relation to popular belief, it is
+recorded that he identified Zeus with the air. Indirectly,
+however, we are able to demonstrate, by
+the aid of an almost contemporary witness, that
+there must have been some foundation for the
+accusation of <q>atheism.</q> For in <hi rend='italic'>The Clouds</hi>, where
+Aristophanes wants to represent Socrates as an
+atheist, he puts in his mouth scraps of the naturalism
+of Diogenes; that he would hardly have done, if
+Diogenes had not already been decried as an
+atheist.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is of course impossible to base any statement
+of the relation of the two philosophers to popular
+belief on such a foundation. But it is, nevertheless,
+worth noticing that while not a single one of the
+earlier naturalists acquired the designation atheist,
+it was applied to two of the latest and otherwise
+little-known representatives of the school. Take
+this in combination with what has been said above
+of Anaxagoras, and we get at any rate a suspicion
+<pb n='031'/><anchor id='Pg031'/>
+that Greek naturalism gradually led its adherents
+beyond the naïve stage where many individual
+phenomena were indeed ascribed to natural causes,
+even if they had formerly been regarded as caused
+by divine intervention, but where the foundations
+of the popular belief were left untouched. Once
+this path has been entered on, a point will be
+arrived at where the final conclusion is drawn and
+the existence of the supernatural completely denied.
+It is probable that this happened towards the close
+of the naturalistic period. If so early a philosopher
+as Anaxagoras took this point of view, his personal
+contribution as a member of the Periclean circle
+may have been more significant in the religious field
+than one would conjecture from the character of his
+work.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Before we proceed to mention the sophists, there
+is one person on our list who must be examined
+though the result will be negative, namely, Diagoras
+of Melos. As he appears in our records, he falls
+outside the classification adopted here; but as he
+must have lived, at any rate, about the middle
+of the fifth century (he is said to have <q>flourished</q>
+in 464) he may most fitly be placed on the
+boundary line between the Ionian philosophy and
+Sophistic.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For later antiquity Diagoras is the typical
+atheist; he heads our lists of atheists, and round
+his person a whole series of myths have been formed.
+He is said to have been a poet and a pious man like
+others; but then a colleague once stole an ode from
+him, escaped by taking an oath that he was innocent,
+and afterwards made a hit with the stolen work.
+<pb n='032'/><anchor id='Pg032'/>
+So Diagoras lost his faith in the gods and wrote a
+treatise under the title of
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>apopyrgizontes logoi</foreign>
+(literally, destructive considerations) in which he
+attacked the belief in the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This looks very plausible, and is interesting in
+so far as it, if correct, affords an instance of atheism
+arising in a layman from actual experience, not in a
+philosopher from speculation. If we ask, however,
+what is known historically about Diagoras, we are
+told a different tale. There existed in Athens,
+engraved on a bronze tablet and set up on the
+Acropolis, a decree of the people offering a reward
+of one talent to him who should kill Diagoras of
+Melos, and of two talents to him who should bring
+him alive to Athens. The reason given was that he
+had scoffed at the Eleusinian Mysteries and divulged
+what took place at them. The date of this decree
+is given by a historian as 415 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>; that this is
+correct is seen from a passage in Aristophanes's contemporary
+drama, <hi rend='italic'>The Birds</hi>. Furthermore, one of
+the disciples of Aristotle, the literary historian
+Aristoxenus, states that no trace of impiety was
+to be found in the works of the dithyrambic poet
+Diagoras, and that, in fact, they contained definite
+opinions to the contrary. A remark to the effect
+that Diagoras was instrumental in drawing up the
+laws of Mantinea is probably due to the same
+source. The context shows that the reference is
+to the earlier constitution of Mantinea, which
+was a mixture of aristocracy and democracy, and
+is praised for its excellence. It is inconceivable
+that, in a Peloponnesian city during the course
+of, nay, presumably even before the middle of
+<pb n='033'/><anchor id='Pg033'/>
+the fifth century, a notorious atheist should
+have been invited to advise on the revision of its
+constitution. It is more probable that Aristoxenus
+adduced this fact as an additional disproof of
+Diagoras's atheism, in which he evidently did not
+believe.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The above information explains the origin of
+the legend. Two fixed points were in existence:
+the pious poet of <hi rend='italic'>c.</hi> 460 and the atheist who was
+outlawed in 415; a bridge was constructed between
+them by the story of the stolen ode. This disposes
+of the whole supposition of atheism growing out of
+a basis of experience. But, furthermore, it must be
+admitted that it is doubtful whether the poet and
+the atheist are one and the same person. The
+interval of time between them is itself suspicious,
+for the poet, according to the ancient system of
+calculation, must have been about forty years old
+in 464, consequently between eighty and ninety in
+415. (There is general agreement that the treatise,
+the title of which has been quoted, must have been
+a later forgery.) If, in spite of all, I dare not absolutely
+deny the identity of the two Diagorases of
+tradition, the reason is that Aristophanes, where he
+mentions the decree concerning Diagoras, seems to
+suggest that his attack on the Mysteries was an
+old story which was raked up again in 415. But
+for our purpose, at any rate, nothing remains of the
+copious mass of legend but the fact that one
+Diagoras of Melos in 415 was outlawed in Athens on
+the ground of his attack on the Mysteries. Such an
+attack may have been the outcome of atheism;
+there was no lack of impiety in Athens at the end
+<pb n='034'/><anchor id='Pg034'/>
+of the fifth century. But whether this was the case
+or not we cannot possibly tell; and to throw light
+on free-thinking tendencies in Athens at this time,
+we have other and richer sources than the historical
+notice of Diagoras.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='035'/><anchor id='Pg035'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter IV</head>
+
+<p>
+With the movement in Greek thought which
+is generally known as sophistic, a new
+view of popular belief appears. The
+criticism of the sophists was directed against the
+entire tradition on which Greek society was based,
+and principally against the moral conceptions which
+hitherto had been unquestioned: good and evil,
+right and wrong. The criticism was essentially
+negative; that which hitherto had been imagined
+as absolute was demonstrated to be relative, and
+the relative was identified with the invalid. Thus
+they could not help running up against the popular
+ideas of the gods, and treating them in the same
+way. A leading part was here played by the
+sophistic distinction between <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>nomos</foreign> and
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>physis</foreign>,
+Law and Nature, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> that which is based on human
+convention, and that which is founded on the nature
+of things. The sophists could not help seeing that
+the whole public worship and the ideas associated
+with it belonged to the former&mdash;to the domain of
+<q>the law.</q> Not only did the worship and the
+conceptions of the gods vary from place to place in
+the hundreds of small independent communities into
+which Hellas was divided&mdash;a fact which the sophists
+had special opportunity of observing when travelling
+from town to town to teach; but it was even
+<pb n='036'/><anchor id='Pg036'/>
+officially admitted that the whole ritual&mdash;which,
+popularly speaking, was almost identical with
+religion&mdash;was based on convention. If a Greek
+was asked why a god was to be worshipped in such
+and such a way, generally the only answer was:
+because it is the law of the State (or the convention;
+the word <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>nomos</foreign> expresses both things). Hence it
+followed in principle that religion came under the
+domain of <q>the law,</q> being consequently the work
+of man; and hence again the obvious conclusion,
+according to sophistic reasoning, was that it was
+nothing but human imagination, and that there was
+no <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>physis</foreign>, no reality, behind it at all. In
+the case of the naturalists, it was the positive foundation of their
+system, their conception of nature as a whole, that
+led them to criticise the popular belief. Hence their
+criticism was in the main only directed against those
+particular ideas in the popular belief which were at
+variance with the results of their investigations. To
+be sure, the sophists were not above making use of
+the results of natural science in their criticism of the
+popular belief; it was their general aim to impart
+the highest education of their time, and of a liberal
+education natural science formed a rather important
+part. But their starting-point was quite different
+from that of the naturalists. Their whole interest
+was concentrated on man as a member of the
+community, and it was from consideration of this
+relation that they were brought into collision with
+the established religion. Hence their attack was
+far more dangerous than that of the naturalists;
+no longer was it directed against details, it laid bare
+the psychological basis itself of popular belief and
+<pb n='037'/><anchor id='Pg037'/>
+clearly revealed its unstable character. Their criticism
+was fundamental and central, not casual and
+circumstantial.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+From a purely practical point of view also, the
+criticism of the sophists was far more dangerous
+than that of the old philosophers. They were not
+theorists themselves, but practitioners; their
+business was to impart the higher education to the
+more mature youth. It was therefore part of their
+profession to disseminate their views not by means
+of learned professional writings, but by the persuasive
+eloquence of oral discourse. And in their
+criticism of the existing state of things they did not
+start with special results which only science could
+prove, and the correctness of which the layman
+need not recognise; they operated with facts and
+principles known and acknowledged by everybody.
+It is not to be wondered at that such efforts evoked
+a vigorous reaction on the part of established society,
+the more so as in any case the result of sophistic
+criticism&mdash;though not consciously its object&mdash;was
+to liquefy the moral principles on which the social
+order was based.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Such, in principle, appeared to be the state of
+things. In practice, here as elsewhere, the devil
+proved not so black as he was painted. First, not
+all the sophists&mdash;hardly even the majority of them&mdash;drew
+the logical conclusions from their views in
+respect of either morals or religion. They were
+teachers of rhetoric, and as such they taught, for
+instance, all the tricks by which a bad cause might be
+defended; that was part of the trade. But it must
+be supposed that Gorgias, the most distinguished of
+<pb n='038'/><anchor id='Pg038'/>
+them, expressly insisted that rhetoric, just like any
+other art the aim of which was to defeat an opponent,
+should only be used for good ends. Similarly many of
+them may have stopped short in their criticism of
+popular belief at some arbitrary point, so that it was
+possible for them to respect at any rate something
+of the established religion, and so, of course, first
+and foremost the very belief in the existence of
+the gods. That they did not as a rule interfere
+with public worship, we may be sure; that was
+based firmly on <q>the Law.</q> But, in addition, even
+sophists who personally took an attitude radically
+contradictory to popular belief had the most
+important reasons for being careful in advancing
+such a view. They had to live by being the teachers
+of youth; they had no fixed appointment, they
+travelled about as lecturers and enlisted disciples
+by means of their lectures. For such men it would
+have been a very serious thing to attack the established
+order in its tenderest place, religion, and
+above all they had to beware of coming into conflict
+with the penal laws. This risk they did not incur
+while confining themselves to theoretical discussions
+about right and wrong, nor by the practical application
+of them in their teaching of rhetoric; but they
+might very easily incur it if attacking religion.
+This being the case, it is not to be wondered at
+that we do not find many direct statements of
+undoubtedly atheistical character handed down from
+the more eminent sophists, and that trials for
+impiety are rare in their case. But, nevertheless,
+a few such cases are met with, and from these as
+our starting-point we will now proceed.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='039'/><anchor id='Pg039'/>
+
+<p>
+As to Protagoras of Abdera, one of the earliest
+and most famous of all the sophists, it is stated that
+he began a pamphlet treating of the gods with the
+words: <q>Concerning the gods I can say nothing,
+neither that they exist nor that they do not exist,
+nor of what form they are; because there are many
+things which prevent one from knowing that,
+namely, both the uncertainty of the matter and the
+shortness of man's life.</q> On this account, it is said,
+he was charged with impiety at Athens and was
+outlawed, and his works were publicly burned. The
+date of this trial is not known for certain; but it is
+reasonably supposed to have coincided with that of
+Diagoras, namely, in 415. At any rate it must have
+taken place after 423-421, as we know that Protagoras
+was at that time staying in Athens. As he
+must have been born about 485, the charge overtook
+him when old and famous; according to one
+account, his work on the gods seems to belong to his
+earlier writings.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To doubt the correctness of this tradition would
+require stronger reasons than we possess, although
+it is rather strange that the condemnation of
+Protagoras is mentioned neither in our historical
+sources nor in Aristophanes, and that Plato, who
+mentions Protagoras rather frequently as dead,
+never alludes to it. At any rate, the quotation
+from the work on the gods is certainly authentic,
+for Plato himself referred to it. Hence it is
+certain that Protagoras directly stated the problem
+as to the existence of the gods and regarded it as an
+open question. But beyond that nothing much
+can be deduced from the short quotation; and as
+<pb n='040'/><anchor id='Pg040'/>
+to the rest of the book on the gods we know nothing.
+The meagre reasons for scepticism adduced probably
+do not imply any more than that the difficulties
+are objective as well as subjective. If, in
+the latter respect, the brevity of life is specially mentioned
+it may be supposed that Protagoras had in
+mind a definite proof of the existence of the
+gods which was rendered difficult by the fact
+that life is so brief; prediction of the future
+may be guessed at, but nothing certain can be
+stated.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Protagoras is the only one of the sophists of
+whom tradition says that he was the object of persecution
+owing to his religious views. The trial of
+Socrates, however, really belongs to the same category
+when looked at from the accusers' point of
+view; Socrates was accused as a sophist. But as
+his own attitude towards popular religion differed
+essentially from that of the sophists, we cannot consider
+him in this connexion. Protagoras's trial
+itself is partly determined by special circumstances.
+In all probability it took place at a moment when
+a violent religious reaction had set in at Athens
+owing to some grave offences against the public
+worship and sanctuaries of the State (violation of
+the Mysteries and mutilation of the Hermae). The
+work on the gods had presumably been in existence
+and known long before this without causing scandal
+to anybody. But, nevertheless, the trial, like those
+of Anaxagoras and Socrates, plainly bears witness
+to the animosity with which the modern free-thought
+was regarded in Athens. This animosity
+did not easily manifest itself publicly without
+<pb n='041'/><anchor id='Pg041'/>
+special reasons; but it was always there and might
+always be used in case of provocation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to Protagoras's personal attitude to the
+question of the existence of the gods, much may be
+guessed and much has been guessed; but nothing
+can be stated for certain. However, judging from
+the man's profession and his general habit of life
+as it appears in tradition, we may take for granted
+that he did not give offence in his outward behaviour
+by taking a hostile attitude to public worship or
+attacking its foundations; had that been so, he would
+not for forty years have been the most distinguished
+teacher of Hellas, but would simply not have been
+tolerated. An eminent modern scholar has therefore
+advanced the conjecture that Protagoras
+distinguished between belief and knowledge, and
+that his work on the gods only aimed at showing
+that the existence of the gods could not be scientifically
+demonstrated.  Now such a distinction
+probably, if conceived as a conscious principle,
+is alien to ancient thought, at any rate at the
+time of Protagoras; and yet it may contain a
+grain of truth. When it is borne in mind that the
+incriminated passage represents the very exordium
+of the work of Protagoras, the impression cannot be
+avoided that he himself did not intend his work to
+disturb the established religion, but that he quite
+naïvely took up the existence of the gods as a subject,
+as good as any other, for dialectic discussion.
+All that he was concerned with was theory and
+theorising; religion was practice and ritual; and
+he had no more intention of interfering with that
+than the other earlier sophists of assailing the legal
+<pb n='042'/><anchor id='Pg042'/>
+system of the community in their speculation as to
+relativity of right and wrong.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+All this, however, does not alter the fact that the
+work of Protagoras posed the very question of
+the existence of the gods as a problem which might
+possibly be solved in the negative. He seems to
+have been the first to do this. That it could be
+done is significant of the age to which Protagoras
+belongs; that it was done was undoubtedly of
+great importance for the development of thought in
+wide circles.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Prodicus of Ceos, also one of the most famous
+sophists, advanced the idea that the conceptions
+of the gods were originally associated with
+those things which were of use to humanity: sun
+and moon, rivers and springs, the products of the
+earth and the elements; therefore bread was
+identified with Demeter, wine with Dionysus, water
+with Poseidon, fire with Hephaestus. As a special
+instance he mentioned the worship of the Nile by
+the Egyptians.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In Democritus, who was a slightly elder contemporary
+of Prodicus, we have already met with
+investigation into the origin of the conceptions of
+the gods. There is a close parallel between his
+handling of the subject and that of Prodicus, but
+at the same time a characteristic difference. Democritus
+was a naturalist, hence he took as his starting-point
+the natural phenomena commonly ascribed to
+the influence of the gods. Prodicus, on the other
+hand, started from the intellectual life of man. We
+learn that he had commenced to study synonyms,
+and that he was interested in the interpretation of
+<pb n='043'/><anchor id='Pg043'/>
+the poets. Now he found that Homer occasionally
+simply substituted the name of Hephaestus for fire,
+and that other poets went even further on the same
+lines. Furthermore, while it was common knowledge
+to every Greek that certain natural objects,
+such as the heavenly bodies and the rivers, were
+regarded as divine and had names in common with
+their gods, this to Prodicus would be a specially
+attractive subject for speculation. It is plainly
+shown by his instances that it is linguistic observations
+of this kind which were the starting-point of
+his theory concerning the origin of the conceptions
+of the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the accounts of Prodicus it is taken for granted
+that he denied the existence of the gods, and in
+later times he is classed as <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign>.
+Nevertheless we have every reason to doubt the correctness of
+this opinion. The case of Democritus already shows
+that a philosopher might very well derive the conceptions
+of the gods from an incorrect interpretation
+of certain phenomena without throwing doubt on
+their existence. As far as Prodicus is concerned it
+may be assumed that he did not believe that Bread,
+Wine or Fire were gods, any more than Democritus
+imagined that Zeus sent thunder and lightning;
+nor, presumably, did he ever believe that rivers
+were gods. But he need not therefore have denied
+the existence of Demeter, Dionysus and Hephaestus,
+much less the divinity of the sun and the moon.
+And if we consider his theory more closely it points
+in quite a different direction from that of atheism.
+To Prodicus it was evidently the conception of
+utility that mattered: if these objects came to be
+<pb n='044'/><anchor id='Pg044'/>
+regarded as gods it was because they <q>benefited
+humanity.</q> This too is a genuinely sophistic
+view, characteristically deviating from that of the
+naturalist Democritus in its limitation to the
+human and social aspect of the question. Such a
+point of view, if confronted with the question of the
+existence of the gods, may very well, according to
+sophistic methods of reasoning, lead to the conclusion
+that primitive man was right in so far as
+the useful, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> that which <q>benefits humanity,</q>
+really is an essential feature of the gods, and wrong
+only in so far as he identified the individual useful
+objects with the gods. Whether Prodicus adopted
+this point of view, we cannot possibly tell; but
+the general body of tradition concerning the man,
+which does not in any way suggest religious radicalism,
+indicates as most probable that he did not
+connect the question of the origin of the conceptions
+of the gods with that of the existence of the gods,
+which to him was taken for granted, and that it was
+only later philosophers who, in their researches into
+the ideas of earlier philosophers about the gods,
+inferred his atheism from his speculations on the
+history of religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Critias, the well-known reactionary politician,
+the chief of the Thirty Tyrants, is placed amongst
+the atheists on the strength of a passage in a satyric
+drama, <hi rend='italic'>Sisyphus</hi>. The drama is lost, but our
+authority quotes the objectionable passage <foreign rend='italic'>in
+extenso</foreign>; it is a piece of no less than forty lines.
+The passage argues that human life in its origins
+knew no social order, that might ruled supreme.
+Then men conceived the idea of making laws in
+<pb n='045'/><anchor id='Pg045'/>
+order that right might rule instead of might. The
+result of this was, it is true, that wrong was not done
+openly; but it was done secretly instead. Then a
+wise man bethought himself of making men believe
+that there existed gods who saw and heard everything
+which men did, nay even knew their innermost
+thoughts. And, in order that men might stand
+in proper awe of the gods, he said that they lived in
+the sky, out of which comes that which makes men
+afraid, such as lightning and thunder, but also that
+which benefits them, sunshine and rain, and the
+stars, those fair ornaments by whose course men
+measure time. Thus he succeeded in bringing lawlessness
+to an end. It is expressly stated that it
+was all a cunning fraud: <q>by such talk he made
+his teaching most acceptable, veiling truth with
+false words.</q>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In antiquity it was disputed whether the drama
+<hi rend='italic'>Sisyphus</hi> was by Critias or Euripides; nowadays all
+agree in attributing it to Critias; nor does the style
+of the long fragment resemble that of Euripides.
+The question is, however, of no consequence in this
+connexion: whether the drama is by Critias or
+Euripides it is wrong to attribute to an author
+opinions which he has put into the mouth of a character
+in a drama. Moreover, <hi rend='italic'>Sisyphus</hi> was a satyric
+play, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> it belonged to a class of poetry the liberty of
+which was nearly as great as in comedy, and the
+speech was delivered by Sisyphus himself, who,
+according to the legend, is a type of the crafty
+criminal whose forte is to do evil and elude punishment.
+There is, in fact, nothing in that which we
+otherwise hear of Critias to suggest that he cherished
+<pb n='046'/><anchor id='Pg046'/>
+free-thinking views. He was&mdash;or in his later years
+became&mdash;a fanatical adversary of the Attic democracy,
+and he was, when he held power, unscrupulous
+in his choice of the means with which he opposed
+it and the men who stood in the path of his reactionary
+policy; but in our earlier sources he is never
+accused of impiety in the theoretical sense. And
+yet there had been an excellent opportunity of
+bringing forward such an accusation; for in his
+youth Critias had been a companion of Socrates,
+and his later conduct was used as a proof that
+Socrates corrupted his surroundings. But it is
+always Critias's political crimes which are adduced
+in this connexion, not his irreligion. On the other
+hand, posterity looked upon him as the pure type of
+tyrant, and the label atheist therefore suggested
+itself on the slightest provocation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+But, even if the <hi rend='italic'>Sisyphus</hi> fragment cannot be
+used to characterise its author as an atheist, it is,
+nevertheless, of the greatest interest in this connexion,
+and therefore demands closer analysis.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The introductory idea, that mankind has
+evolved from an animal state into higher stages,
+is at variance with the earlier Greek conception,
+namely, that history begins with a golden age
+from which there is a continual decline. The theory
+of the fragment is expressed by a series of authors
+from the same and the immediately succeeding
+period. It occurs in Euripides; a later and otherwise
+little-known tragedian, Moschion, developed
+it in detail in a still extant fragment; Plato
+accepted it and made it the basis of his presentation
+of the origin of the State; Aristotle takes it for
+<pb n='047'/><anchor id='Pg047'/>
+granted. Its source, too, has been demonstrated:
+it was presumably Democritus who first advanced
+it. Nevertheless the author of the fragment has
+hardly got it direct from Democritus, who at this
+time was little known at Athens, but from an
+intermediary. This intermediary is probably Protagoras,
+of whom it is said that he composed a
+treatise, <hi rend='italic'>The Original State, i.e.</hi> the primary state of
+mankind. Protagoras was a fellow-townsman of
+Democritus, and recorded by tradition as one of his
+direct disciples.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In another point also the fragment seems to
+betray the influence of Democritus. When it is
+said that the wise inventors of the gods made them
+dwell in the skies, because from the skies come
+those natural phenomena which frighten men, it is
+highly suggestive of Democritus's criticism of the
+divine explanation of thunder and lightning and the
+like. In this case also Protagoras may have been
+the intermediary. In his work on the gods he had
+every opportunity of discussing the question in
+detail. But here we have the theory of Democritus
+combined with that of Prodicus in that it is maintained
+that from the skies come also those things
+that benefit men, and that they are on this account
+also a suitable dwelling-place for the gods. It is
+obvious that the author of the fragment (or his
+source) was versed in the most modern wisdom.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+All this erudition, however, is made to serve
+a certain tendency: the well-known tendency to
+represent religion as a political invention having
+as its object the policing of society. It is a theory
+which in antiquity&mdash;to its honour be it said&mdash;is but
+<pb n='048'/><anchor id='Pg048'/>
+of rare occurrence. There is a vague indication of
+it in Euripides, a more definite one in Aristotle, and
+an elaborate application of it in Polybius; and that
+is in reality all. (That many people in more enlightened
+ages upheld religion as a means of keeping
+the masses in check, is a different matter.) However,
+it is an interesting fact that the Critias fragment
+is not only the first evidence of the existence
+of the theory known to us, but also presumably the
+earliest and probably the best known to later antiquity.
+Otherwise we should not find reference for
+the theory made to a fragment of a farce, but to a
+quotation from a philosopher.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This might lead us to conclude that the theory
+was Critias's own invention, though, of course, it
+would not follow that he himself adhered to it.
+But it is more probable that it was a ready-made
+modern theory which Critias put into the mouth
+of Sisyphus. Not only does the whole character
+of the fragment and its scene of action favour this
+supposition, but there is also another factor which
+corroborates it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the <hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi> Plato makes one of the characters,
+Callicles&mdash;a man of whom we otherwise know
+nothing&mdash;profess a doctrine which up to a certain
+point is almost identical with that of the fragment.
+According to Callicles, the natural state (and the
+right state; on this point he is at variance with the
+fragment) is that right belongs to the strong. This
+state has been corrupted by legislation; the laws
+are inventions of the weak, who are also the majority,
+and their aim is to hinder the encroachment of the
+strong. If this theory is carried to its conclusion,
+<pb n='049'/><anchor id='Pg049'/>
+it is obvious that religion must be added to the
+laws; if the former is not also regarded as an
+invention for the policing of society, the whole
+theory is upset. Now in the <hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi> the question
+as to the attitude of the gods towards the problem of
+what is right and what is wrong is carefully avoided
+in the discussion. Not till the close of the dialogue,
+where Plato substitutes myth for scientific research,
+does he draw the conclusion in respect of religion.
+He does this in a positive form, as a consequence
+of <emph>his</emph> point of view: after death the gods reward
+the just and punish the unjust; but he expressly
+assumes that Callicles will regard it all as an old
+wives' tale.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In Callicles an attempt has been made to see a
+pseudonym for Critias. That is certainly wrong.
+Critias was a kinsman of Plato, is introduced by
+name in several dialogues, nay, one dialogue even
+bears his name, and he is everywhere treated with
+respect and sympathy. Nowadays, therefore, it is
+generally acknowledged that Callicles is a real
+person, merely unknown to us as such. However
+that may be, Plato would never have let a leading
+character in one of his longer dialogues advance
+(and Socrates refute) a view which had no better
+authority than a passage in a satyric drama. On
+the other hand, there is, as shown above, difficulty
+in supposing that the doctrine of the fragment was
+stated in the writings of an eminent sophist; so we
+come to the conclusion that it was developed and
+diffused in sophistic circles by oral teaching, and
+that it became known to Critias and Plato in this
+way. Its originator we do not know. We might
+<pb n='050'/><anchor id='Pg050'/>
+think of the sophist Thrasymachus, who in the first
+book of Plato's <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi> maintains a point of view
+corresponding to that of Callicles in <hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi>. But
+what we otherwise learn of Thrasymachus is not
+suggestive of interest in religion, and the only statement
+of his as to that kind of thing which has come
+down to us tends to the denial of a providence, not
+denial of the gods. Quite recently Diagoras of
+Melos has been guessed at; this is empty talk,
+resulting at best in substituting <hi rend='italic'>x</hi>
+(or <hi rend='italic'>NN</hi>) for <hi rend='italic'>y</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If I have dwelt in such detail on the <hi rend='italic'>Sisyphus</hi>
+fragment, it is because it is our first direct and
+unmistakable evidence of ancient atheism. Here
+for the first time we meet with the direct statement
+which we have searched for in vain among all the
+preceding authors: that the gods of popular belief
+are fabrication pure and simple and without any
+corresponding reality, however remote. The nature
+of our tradition precludes our ascertaining whether
+such a statement might have been made earlier;
+but the probability is <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>a priori</foreign> that it was
+not. The whole development of ancient reasoning on religious
+questions, as far as we are able to survey it, leads in
+reality to the conclusion that atheism as an expressed
+(though perhaps not publicly expressed) confession
+of faith did not appear till the age of the sophists.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+With the Critias fragment we have also brought
+to an end the inquiry into the direct statements of
+atheistic tendency which have come down to us
+from the age of the sophists. The result is, as we see,
+rather meagre. But it may be supplemented with
+indirect testimonies which prove that there was
+more of the thing than the direct tradition would
+<pb n='051'/><anchor id='Pg051'/>
+lead us to conjecture, and that the denial of the
+existence of the gods must have penetrated very
+wide circles.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The fullest expression of Attic free-thought at the
+end of the fifth century is to be found in the tragedies
+of Euripides. They are leavened with reflections
+on all possible moral and religious problems,
+and criticism of the traditional conceptions of the
+gods plays a leading part in them. We shall,
+however, have some difficulty in using Euripides as a
+source of what people really thought at this period,
+partly because he is a very pronounced personality
+and by no means a mere mouthpiece for the ideas
+of his contemporaries&mdash;during his lifetime he was
+an object of the most violent animosity owing,
+among other things, to his free-thinking views&mdash;partly
+because he, as a dramatist, was obliged to
+put his ideas into the mouths of his characters, so
+that in many cases it is difficult to decide how much
+is due to dramatic considerations and how much to
+the personal opinion of the poet. Even to this day
+the religious standpoint of Euripides is matter of
+dispute. In the most recent detailed treatment of
+the question he is characterised as an atheist,
+whereas others regard him merely as a dialectician
+who debates problems without having any real
+standpoint of his own.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+I do not believe that Euripides personally denied
+the existence of the gods; there is too much that
+tells against that theory, and, in fact, nothing that
+tells directly in favour of it, though he did not quite
+escape the charge of atheism even in his own day.
+To prove the correctness of this view would, however,
+<pb n='052'/><anchor id='Pg052'/>
+lead too far afield in this connexion. On the other
+hand, a short characterisation of Euripides's manner
+of reasoning about religious problems is unavoidable
+as a background for the treatment of those&mdash;very
+rare&mdash;passages where he has put actually atheistic
+reflections into the mouths of his characters.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As a Greek dramatist Euripides had to derive his
+subjects from the heroic legends, which at the same
+time were legends of the gods in so far as they were
+interwoven with tales of the gods' direct intervention
+in affairs. It is precisely against this intervention
+that the criticism of Euripides is primarily directed.
+Again and again he makes his characters protest
+against the manner in which they are treated by
+the gods or in which the gods generally behave.
+It is characteristic of Euripides that his starting-point
+in this connexion is always the moral one.
+So far he is a typical representative of that tendency
+which, in earlier times, was represented by Xenophanes
+and a little later by Pindar; in no other
+Greek poet has the method of using the higher conceptions
+of the gods against the lower found more
+complete expression than in Euripides. And in so far,
+too, he is still entirely on the ground of popular belief.
+But at the same time it is characteristic of him that
+he is familiar with and highly influenced by Greek
+science. He knows the most eminent representatives
+of Ionian naturalism (with the exception of
+Democritus), and he is fond of displaying his knowledge.
+Nevertheless, it cannot be said that he uses
+it in a contentious spirit against popular belief; on
+the contrary, he is inclined in agreement with the
+old philosophers to identify the gods of popular
+<pb n='053'/><anchor id='Pg053'/>
+belief with the elements. Towards sophistic he
+takes a similar, but less sympathetic attitude.
+Sophistic was not in vogue till he was a man of
+mature age; he made acquaintance with it, and he
+made use of it&mdash;there are reflections in his dramas
+which carry distinct evidence of sophistic influence;
+but in his treatment of religious problems he is not
+a disciple of the sophists, and on this subject, as on
+others, he occasionally attacked them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is against this background that we must set
+the reflections with an atheistic tone that we find in
+Euripides. They are, as already mentioned, rare;
+indeed, strictly speaking there is only one case
+in which a character openly denies the existence of
+the gods. The passage is a fragment of the drama
+<hi rend='italic'>Bellerophon</hi>; it is, despite its isolation, so typical
+of the manner of Euripides that it deserves to be
+quoted in full.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<q>And then to say that there are gods in the
+heavens! Nay, there are none there; if you are
+not foolish enough to be seduced by the old talk.
+Think for yourselves about the matter, and do not be
+influenced by my words. I contend that the tyrants
+kill the people wholesale, take their money and
+destroy cities in spite of their oaths; and although
+they do all this they are happier than people who,
+in peace and quietness, lead god-fearing lives.
+And I know small states which honour the gods,
+but must obey greater states, which are less pious,
+because their spearmen are fewer in number. And
+I believe that you, if a slothful man just prayed to
+the gods and did not earn his bread by the work of
+his hands&mdash;</q> Here the sense is interrupted;
+<pb n='054'/><anchor id='Pg054'/>
+but there remains one more line: <q>That which
+builds the castle of the gods is in part the unfortunate
+happenings ...</q> The continuation is missing.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The argumentation here is characteristic of
+Euripides. From the injustice of life he infers the
+non-existence of the gods. The conclusion evidently
+only holds good on the assumption that the gods
+must be just; and this is precisely one of the postulates
+of popular belief. The reasoning is not sophistic;
+on the contrary, in their attacks the sophists
+took up a position outside the foundation of popular
+belief and attacked the foundation itself. This
+reasoning, on the other hand, is closely allied to the
+earlier religious thinking of the Greeks; it only
+proceeds further than the latter, where it results in
+rank denial.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The drama of <hi rend='italic'>Bellerophon</hi> is lost, and reconstruction
+is out of the question; if only for that reason
+it is unwarrantable to draw any conclusions from the
+detached fragment as to the poet's personal attitude
+towards the existence of the gods. But, nevertheless,
+the fragment is of interest in this connexion.
+It would never have occurred to Sophocles or
+Aeschylus to put such a speech in the mouth of one
+of his characters. When Euripides does that it
+is a proof that the question of the existence of the
+gods has begun to present itself to the popular
+consciousness at this time. Viewed in this light
+other statements of his which are not in themselves
+atheistic become significant. When it is said:
+<q>If the gods act in a shameful way, they are not
+gods</q>&mdash;that indeed is not atheism in our sense, but
+it is very near to it. Interesting is also the introduction
+<pb n='055'/><anchor id='Pg055'/>
+to the drama <hi rend='italic'>Melanippe</hi>: <q>Zeus, whoever
+Zeus may be; for of that I only know what is told.</q>
+Aeschylus begins a strophe in one of his most famous
+choral odes with almost the same words: <q>Zeus,
+whoe'er he be; for if he desire so to be called, I will
+address him by this name.</q> In him it is an expression
+of genuine antique piety, which excludes
+all human impertinence towards the gods to such a
+degree that it even forgoes knowing their real names.
+In Euripides the same idea becomes an expression of
+doubt; but in this case also the doubt is raised on
+the foundation of popular belief.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is not surprising that so prominent and sustained
+a criticism of popular belief as that of Euripides,
+produced, moreover, on the stage, called forth
+a reaction from the defenders of the established
+faith, and that charges of impiety were not wanting.
+It is more to be wondered at that these charges on
+the whole are so few and slight, and that Euripides
+did not become the object of any actual prosecution.
+We know of a private trial in which the accuser
+incidentally charged Euripides with impiety on the
+strength of a quotation from one of his tragedies,
+Euripides's answer being a protest against dragging
+his poetry into the affair; the verdict on that belonged
+to another court. Aristophanes, who is always
+severe on Euripides, has only one passage directly
+charging him with being a propagator of atheism;
+but the accusation is hardly meant to be taken
+seriously. In <hi rend='italic'>The Frogs</hi>, where he had every opportunity
+of emphasising this view, there is hardly an
+indication of it. In <hi rend='italic'>The Clouds</hi>, where the main
+attack is directed against modern free-thought,
+<pb n='056'/><anchor id='Pg056'/>
+Euripides, to be sure, is sneered at as being the
+fashionable poet of the corrupted youth, but he is
+not drawn into the charge of impiety. Even when
+Plato wrote his <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi>, Euripides was generally
+considered the <q>wisest of all tragedians.</q> This
+would have been impossible if he had been considered
+an atheist. In spite of all, the general feeling must
+undoubtedly have been that Euripides ultimately
+took his stand on the ground of popular belief. It
+was a similar instinctive judgment in regard to
+religion which prevented antiquity from placing
+Xenophanes amongst the atheists. Later times
+no doubt judged differently; the quotation from
+<hi rend='italic'>Melanippe</hi> is in fact cited as a proof that Euripides
+was an atheist in his heart of hearts.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In Aristophanes we meet with the first observations
+concerning the change in the religious conditions
+of Athens during the Peloponnesian War.
+In one of his plays, <hi rend='italic'>The Clouds</hi>, he actually set himself
+the task of taking up arms against modern unbelief,
+and he characterises it directly as atheism.
+If only for that reason the play deserves somewhat
+fuller consideration.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is well known that Aristophanes chose
+Socrates as a representative of the modern movement.
+In him he embodies all the faults with
+which he wished to pick a quarrel in the fashionable
+philosophy of the day. On the other hand, the
+essence of Socratic teaching is entirely absent from
+Aristophanes's representation; of that he had
+hardly any understanding, and even if he had he
+would at any rate not have been able to make use
+of it in his drama. We need not then in this
+<pb n='057'/><anchor id='Pg057'/>
+connexion consider Socrates himself at all; on the
+other hand, the play gives a good idea of the
+popular idea of sophistic. Here we find all the
+features of the school, grotesquely mixed up and
+distorted by the farce, it is true, but nevertheless
+easily recognisable: rhetoric as an end in itself, of
+course, with emphasis on its immoral aspect; empty
+and hair-splitting dialectics; linguistic researches;
+Ionic naturalism; and first and last, as the focus of
+all, denial of the gods. That Aristophanes was well
+informed on certain points, at any rate, is clear from
+the fact that the majority of the scientific explanations
+which he puts into the mouth of Socrates
+actually represent the latest results of science at that
+time&mdash;which in all probability did not prevent his
+Athenians from considering them as exceedingly
+absurd and ridiculous.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What matters here, however, is only the accusation
+of atheism which he made against Socrates.
+It is a little difficult to handle, in so far as Aristophanes,
+for dramatic reasons, has equipped Socrates
+with a whole set of deities. There are the clouds
+themselves, which are of Aristophanes's own
+invention; there is also the air, which he has got
+from Diogenes of Apollonia, and finally a <q>vortex</q>
+which is supposed to be derived from the same
+source, and which at any rate has cast Zeus down
+from his throne. All this we must ignore, as it is
+only conditioned partly by technical reasons&mdash;Aristophanes
+had to have a chorus and chose
+the clouds for the purpose&mdash;and partially by the
+desire to ridicule Ionic naturalism. But enough is
+left over. In the beginning of the play Socrates
+<pb n='058'/><anchor id='Pg058'/>
+expressly declares that no gods exist. Similar
+statements are repeated in several places. Zeus is
+sometimes substituted for the gods, but it comes to
+the same thing. And at the end of the play, where
+the honest Athenian, who has ventured on the
+ticklish ground of sophistic, admits his delusion, it
+is expressly said:
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<q>Oh, what a fool I am! Nay, I must have been
+mad indeed when I thought of throwing the gods
+away for Socrates's sake!</q>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Even in the verses with which the chorus conclude
+the play it is insisted that the worst crime of
+the sophists is their insult to the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The inference to be drawn from all this is simply
+that the popular Athenian opinion&mdash;for we may rest
+assured that this and the view of Aristophanes are
+identical&mdash;was that the sophists were atheists.
+That says but little. For popular opinion always
+works with broad categories, and the probability
+is that in this case, as demonstrated above, it was in
+the wrong, for, as a rule, the sophists were hardly
+conscious deniers of the gods. But, at the same
+time, at the back of the onslaught of Aristophanes
+there lies the idea that the teaching of the sophists
+led to denial of the gods; that atheism was the
+natural outcome of their doctrine and way of reasoning.
+And that there was some truth therein is
+proved by other evidence which can hardly be
+rejected.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the indictment of Socrates it is said that he
+<q>offended by not believing in the gods in which the
+State believed.</q> In the two apologies for Socrates
+which have come down to us under Xenophon's
+<pb n='059'/><anchor id='Pg059'/>
+name, the author treats this accusation entirely
+under the aspect of atheism, and tries to refute it
+by positive proofs of the piety of Socrates. But
+not one word is said about there being, in and for
+itself, anything remarkable or improbable in the
+charge. In Plato's <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>, Plato makes Socrates
+ask the accuser point-blank whether he is of the
+opinion that he, Socrates, does not believe in the
+gods at all and accordingly is a downright denier
+of the gods, or whether he merely means to say that
+he believes in other gods than those of the State.
+He makes the accuser answer that the assertion is
+that Socrates does not believe in any gods at all.
+In Plato Socrates refutes the accusation indirectly,
+using a line of argument entirely differing from that
+of Xenophon. But in Plato, too, the accusation
+is treated as being in no way extraordinary. In
+my opinion, Plato's <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi> cannot be used as
+historical evidence for details unless special reasons
+can be given proving their historical value beyond
+the fact that they occur in the <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>. But in
+this connexion the question is not what was said or
+not said at Socrates's trial. The decisive point is
+that we possess two quite independent and unambiguous
+depositions by two fully competent witnesses
+of the beginning of the fourth century which
+both treat of the charge of atheism as something
+which is neither strange nor surprising at their time.
+It is therefore permissible to conclude that in Athens
+at this time there really existed circles or at any rate
+not a few individuals who had given up the belief
+in the popular gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A dialogue between Socrates and a young man
+<pb n='060'/><anchor id='Pg060'/>
+by name Aristodemus, given in Xenophon's <hi rend='italic'>Memorabilia</hi>,
+makes the same impression. Of Aristodemus
+it is said that he does not sacrifice to the gods,
+does not consult the Oracle and ridicules those who
+do so. When he is called to account for this behaviour
+he maintains that he does not despise <q>the
+divine,</q> but is of the opinion that it is too exalted
+to need his worship. Moreover, he contends that
+the gods do not trouble themselves about mankind.
+This is, of course, not atheism in our sense; but
+Aristodemus's attitude is, nevertheless, extremely
+eccentric in a community like that of Athens in the
+fifth century. And yet it is not mentioned as
+anything isolated and extraordinary, but as if it were
+something which, to be sure, was out of the common,
+but not unheard of.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is further to be observed that at the end of the
+fifth century we often hear of active sacrilegious
+outrages. An example is the historic trial of Alcibiades
+for profanation of the Mysteries. But this
+was not an isolated occurrence; there were more of
+the same kind at the time. Of the dithyrambic
+poet Cinesias it is said that he profaned holy things
+in an obscene manner. But the greatest stress of
+all must be laid on the well-known mutilation of
+the Hermae at Athens in 415, just before the expedition
+to Sicily. All the tales about the outrages of
+the Mysteries <emph>may</emph> have been fictitious, but it is a
+fact that the Hermae were mutilated. The motive
+was probably political: the members of a secret
+society intended to pledge themselves to each other
+by all committing a capital crime. But that they
+chose just this form of crime shows quite clearly
+<pb n='061'/><anchor id='Pg061'/>
+that respect for the State religion had greatly
+declined in these circles.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+What has so far been adduced as proof that the
+belief in the gods had begun to waver in Athens at
+the end of the fifth century is, in my opinion, conclusive
+in itself to anybody who is familiar with the more
+ancient Greek modes of thought and expression on
+this point, and can not only hear what is said, but
+also understand how it is said and what is passed
+over in silence. Of course it can always be objected
+that the proofs are partly the assertions of a comic
+poet who certainly was not particular about accusations
+of impiety, partly deductions <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>ex silentio</foreign>,
+partly actions the motives for which are uncertain.
+Fortunately, however, we have&mdash;from a slightly
+later period, it is true&mdash;a positive utterance which
+confirms our conclusion and which comes from a
+man who was not in the habit of talking idly and
+who had the best opportunities of knowing the
+circumstances.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the tenth book of his <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, written shortly
+before his death, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> about the middle of the fourth
+century, Plato gives a detailed account of the
+question of irreligion seen from the point of view
+of penal legislation. He distinguishes here between
+three forms, namely, denial of the existence of the
+gods, denial of the divine providence (whereas the
+existence of the gods is admitted), and finally the
+assumption that the gods exist and exercise providence,
+but that they allow themselves to be influenced
+by sacrifices and prayers. Of these three
+categories the last is evidently directed against
+ancient popular belief itself; it does not therefore
+<pb n='062'/><anchor id='Pg062'/>
+interest us in this connexion. The second view,
+the denial of a providence, we have already met with
+in Xenophon in the character of Aristodemus, and
+in the sophist Thrasymachus; Euripides, too,
+sometimes alludes to it, though it was far from
+being his own opinion. Whether it amounted to
+denial of the gods or not was, in ancient times, the
+cause of much dispute; it is, of course, not atheism
+in our sense, but it is certainly evidence that belief
+in the gods is shaken. The first view, on the other
+hand, is sheer atheism. Plato consequently reckons
+with this as a serious danger to the community;
+he mentions it as a widespread view among the
+youth of his time, and in his legislation he sentences
+to death those who fail to be converted. It would
+seem certain, therefore, that there was, in reality,
+something in it after all.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Plato does not confine himself to defining
+atheism and laying down the penalty for it; he
+at the same time, in accordance with a principle
+which he generally follows in the <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, discusses
+it and tries to disprove it. In this way he happens
+to give us information&mdash;which is of special interest
+to us&mdash;of the proofs which were adduced by its
+followers.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The argument is a twofold one. First comes
+the naturalistic proof; the heavenly bodies,
+according to the general (and Plato's own) view the
+most certain deities, are inanimate natural objects.
+It is interesting to note that in speaking of this
+doctrine in detail reference is clearly made to
+Anaxagoras; this confirms our afore-mentioned
+conjectures as to the character of his work. Plato
+<pb n='063'/><anchor id='Pg063'/>
+was quite in a position to deal with Anaxagoras on
+the strength not only of what he said, but of what
+he passed over in silence. The second argument
+is the well-known sophistic one, that the gods are
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>nomôi</foreign>, not
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>physei</foreign>, they depend upon convention,
+which has nothing to do with reality. In this
+connexion the argument adds that what applies
+to the gods, applies also to right and wrong; <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi>
+we find here in the <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi> the view with which we are
+familiar from Callicles in the <hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi>, but with the
+missing link supplied. And Plato's development of
+this theme shows clearly just what a general historical
+consideration might lead us to expect, namely, that
+it was naturalism and sophistic that jointly undermined
+the belief in the old gods.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='064'/><anchor id='Pg064'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter V</head>
+
+<p>
+With Socrates and his successors the whole
+question of the relation of Greek thought
+to popular belief enters upon a new phase.
+The Socratic philosophy is in many ways a continuation
+of sophistic. This is involved already in
+the fact that the same questions form the central
+interest in the two schools of thought, so that the
+problems stated by the sophists became the decisive
+factor in the content of Socratic and Platonic
+thought. The Socratic schools at the same time
+took over the actual programme of the sophists,
+namely, the education of adolescence in the highest
+culture. But, on the other hand, the Socratic philosophy
+was in the opposite camp to sophistic; on
+many points it represents a reaction against it, a
+recollection of the valuable elements contained in
+earlier Greek thought on life, especially human life,
+values which sophistic regarded with indifference or
+even hostility, and which were threatened with
+destruction if it should carry the day. This reactionary
+tendency in Socratic philosophy appears
+nowhere more plainly than in the field of religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Under these circumstances it is a peculiar irony
+of fate that the very originator of the new trend in
+Greek thought was charged with and sentenced for
+impiety. We have already mentioned the singular
+<pb n='065'/><anchor id='Pg065'/>
+prelude to the indictment afforded by the comedy of
+Aristophanes. We have also remarked upon the
+futility of looking therein for any actual enlightenment
+on the Socratic point of view. And Plato
+makes Socrates state this with all necessary sharpness
+in the <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>. Hence what we may infer from
+the attack of Aristophanes is merely this, that the
+general public lumped Socrates together with the
+sophists and more especially regarded him as a
+godless fellow. Unless this had been so, Aristophanes
+could not have introduced him as the chief
+character in his travesty. And without doubt it
+was this popular point of view which his accusers
+relied on when they actually included atheism as a
+count in their bill of indictment. It will, nevertheless,
+be necessary to dwell for a moment on this bill
+of indictment and the defence.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The charge of impiety was a twofold one, partly
+for not believing in the gods the State believed in,
+partly for introducing new <q>demonic things.</q>
+This latter act was directly punishable according
+to Attic law. What his accusers alluded to was the
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>daimonion</foreign> of Socrates. That they should have
+had any idea of what that was must be regarded as utterly
+out of the question, and whatever it may have been&mdash;and
+of this we shall have a word to say later&mdash;it
+had at any rate nothing whatever to do with
+atheism. As to the charge of not believing in the
+gods of the State, Plato makes the accuser prefer it
+in the form that Socrates did not believe in any gods
+at all, after which it becomes an easy matter for
+Socrates to show that it is directly incompatible
+with the charge of introducing new deities. As
+<pb n='066'/><anchor id='Pg066'/>
+ground for his accusation the accuser states&mdash;in
+Plato, as before&mdash;that Socrates taught the same
+doctrine about the sun and moon as Anaxagoras.
+The whole of the passage in the <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi> in which the
+question of the denial of gods is dealt with&mdash;a short
+dialogue between Socrates and the accuser, quite
+in the Socratic manner&mdash;historically speaking,
+carries little conviction, and we therefore dare not
+take it for granted that the charge either of atheism
+or of false doctrine about the sun and moon was
+put forward in that form. But that something
+about this latter point was mentioned during the
+trial must be regarded as probable, when we consider
+that Xenophon, too, defends Socrates at some
+length against the charge of concerning himself with
+speculations on Nature. That he did not do so
+must be taken for certain, not only from the express
+evidence of Xenophon and Plato, but from the whole
+nature of the case. The accusation on this point
+was assuredly pure fabrication. There remains
+only what was no doubt also the main point,
+namely, the assertion of the pernicious influence of
+Socrates on the young, and the inference of irreligion
+to be drawn from it&mdash;an argument which
+it would be absurd to waste any words upon.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The attack, then, affords no information about
+Socrates's personal point of view as regards belief in
+the gods, and the defence only very little. Both
+Xenophon and Plato give an account of Socrates's
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>daimonion</foreign>, but this point has so little
+relation to the charge of atheism that it is not worth examination.
+For the rest Plato's defence is indirect. He
+makes Socrates refute his opponent, but does not
+<pb n='067'/><anchor id='Pg067'/>
+let him say a word about his own point of view.
+Xenophon is more positive, in so far as in the first
+place he asserts that Socrates worshipped the gods
+like any other good citizen, and more especially
+that he advised his friends to use the Oracle; in
+the second place, that, though he lived in full publicity,
+no one ever saw him do or heard him say
+anything of an impious nature. All these assertions
+are assuredly correct, and they render it highly
+improbable that Socrates should have secretly
+abandoned the popular faith, but they tell us little
+that is positive about his views. Fortunately we
+possess other means of getting to closer grips with
+the question; the way must be through a consideration
+of Socrates's whole conduct and his mode
+of thought.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Here we at once come to the interesting negative
+fact that there is nothing in tradition to indicate
+that Socrates ever occupied himself with theological
+questions. To be sure, Xenophon has twice put
+into his mouth a whole theodicy expressing an
+elaborate teleological view of nature. But that we
+dare not base anything upon this is now, I think,
+universally acknowledged. Plato, in the dialogue
+<hi rend='italic'>Euthyphron</hi>, makes him subject the popular notion of
+piety to a devastating criticism; but this, again, will
+not nowadays be regarded as historical by anybody.
+Everything we are told about Socrates which bears
+the stamp of historical truth indicates that he
+restricted himself to ethics and left theology alone.
+But this very fact is not without significance. It
+indicates that Socrates's aim was not to alter the
+religious views of his contemporaries. Since he
+<pb n='068'/><anchor id='Pg068'/>
+did not do so we may reasonably believe it was
+because they did not inconvenience him in what
+was most important to him, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> ethics.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We may, however, perhaps go even a step
+farther. We may venture, I think, to maintain
+that so far from contemporary religion being a
+hindrance to Socrates in his occupation as a teacher
+of ethics, it was, on the contrary, an indispensable
+support to him, nay, an integral component of his
+fundamental ethical view. The object of Socrates
+in his relations with his fellow-men was, on his own
+showing&mdash;for on this important point I think we can
+confidently rely upon Plato's <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>&mdash;to make
+clear to them that they knew nothing. And when
+he was asked to say in what he himself differed from
+other people, he could mention only one thing,
+namely, that he was aware of his own ignorance.
+But his ignorance is not an ignorance of this thing
+or that, it is a radical ignorance, something involved
+in the essence of man as man. That is, in other
+words, it is determined by religion. In order to be
+at all intelligible and ethically applicable, it presupposes
+the conception of beings of whom the
+essence is knowledge. For Socrates and his contemporaries
+the popular belief supplied such beings
+in the gods. The institution of the Oracle itself is
+an expression of the recognition of the superiority
+of the gods to man in knowledge. But the dogma
+had long been stated even in its absolute form when
+Homer said: <q>The gods know everything.</q> To
+Socrates, who always took his starting-point quite
+popularly from notions that were universally accepted,
+this basis was simply indispensable. And
+<pb n='069'/><anchor id='Pg069'/>
+so far from inconveniencing Socrates, the multiplicity
+and anthropomorphism of the gods seemed an
+advantage to him&mdash;the more they were like man in
+all but the essential qualification, the better.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Socratic ignorance has an ethical bearing.
+Its complement is his assertion that virtue is knowledge.
+Here again the gods are the necessary presupposition
+and determination. That the gods were
+good, or, as it was preferred to express it, <q>just</q>
+(the Greek word comprises more than the English
+word), was no less a popular dogma than the notion
+that they possessed knowledge. Now all Socrates's
+efforts were directed towards goodness as an end in
+view, towards the ethical development of mankind.
+Here again popular belief was his best ally. To the
+people to whom he talked, virtue (the Greek word
+is at once both wider and narrower in sense than the
+English term) was no mere abstract notion; it was a
+living reality to them, embodied in beings that were
+like themselves, human beings, but perfect human
+beings.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If we correlate this with the negative circumstance
+that Socrates was no theologian but a teacher
+of ethics, we can easily understand a point of view
+which accepted popular belief as it was and employed
+it for working purposes in the service of moral teaching.
+Such a point of view, moreover, gained extraordinary
+strength by the fact that it preserved continuity
+with earlier Greek religious thought. This
+latter, too, had been ethical in its bearing; it, too,
+had employed the gods in the service of its ethical
+aim. But its central idea was felicity, not virtue; its
+starting-point was the popular dogma of the felicity
+<pb n='070'/><anchor id='Pg070'/>
+of the gods, not their justice. In this way it had
+come to lay stress on a virtue which might be
+termed modesty, but in a religious sense, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> man
+must recognise his difference from the gods as a
+limited being, subject to the vicissitudes of an
+existence above which the gods are raised. Socrates
+says just the same, only that he puts knowledge or
+virtue, which to him was the same thing, in the
+place of felicity. From a religious point of view the
+result is exactly the same, namely, the doctrine of
+the gods as the terminus and ideal, and the insistence
+on the gulf separating man from them. We are
+tempted to say that, had Socrates turned with
+hostile intent against a religion which thus played
+into his hands, the more fool he. But this is putting
+the problem the wrong way up&mdash;Socrates never
+stood critically outside popular belief and traditional
+religious thought speculating as to whether
+he should use it or reject it. No, his thought grew
+out of it as from the bosom of the earth. Hence its
+mighty religious power, its inevitable victory over a
+school of thought which had severed all connexion
+with tradition.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That such a point of view should be so badly
+misunderstood as it was in Athens seems incomprehensible.
+The explanation is no doubt that the
+whole story of Socrates's denial of the gods was only
+included by his accusers for the sake of completeness,
+and did not play any great part in the final issue.
+This seems confirmed by the fact that they found it
+convenient to support their charge of atheism by one
+of introducing foreign gods, this being punishable by
+Attic law. They thus obtained some slight hold for
+<pb n='071'/><anchor id='Pg071'/>
+their accusation. But both charges must be presumed
+to have been so signally refuted during the
+trial that it is hardly possible that any great number
+of the judges were influenced by them. It was quite
+different and far weightier matters which brought
+about the conviction of Socrates, questions on which
+there was really a deep and vital difference of
+opinion between him and his contemporaries. That
+Socrates's attitude towards popular belief was at
+any rate fully understood elsewhere is testified by
+the answer of the Delphic Oracle, that declared
+Socrates to be the wisest of all men. However
+remarkable such a pronouncement from such a place
+may appear, it seems impossible to reject the
+accounts of it as unhistorical; on the other hand,
+it does not seem impossible to explain how the
+Oracle came to declare itself as reported. Earlier
+Greek thought, which insisted upon the gulf separating
+gods and men, was from olden times intimately
+connected with the Delphic Oracle. It hardly
+sprang from there; more probably it arose spontaneously
+in various parts of Hellas. But it would
+naturally feel attracted toward the Oracle, which
+was one of the religious centres of Hellas, and it was
+recognised as legitimate by the Oracle. Above all,
+the honour shown by the Oracle to Pindar, one of the
+chief representatives of the earlier thought, testifies
+to this. Hence there is nothing incredible in the
+assumption that Socrates attracted notice at Delphi
+as a defender of the old-fashioned religious views
+approved by the Oracle, precisely in virtue of his
+opposition to the ideas then in vogue.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If we accept this explanation we are, however,
+<pb n='072'/><anchor id='Pg072'/>
+excluded from taking literally Plato's account of
+the answer of the Delphic Oracle and Socrates's
+attitude towards it. Plato presents the case as if
+the Oracle were the starting-point of Socrates's
+philosophy and of the peculiar mode of life which
+was indissolubly bound up with it. This presentation
+cannot be correct if we are to regard the Oracle
+as historical and understand it as we have understood
+it. The Oracle presupposes the Socrates we
+know: a man with a religious message and a mode
+of life which was bound to attract notice to him as an
+exception from the general rule. It cannot, therefore,
+have been the cause of Socrates's finding himself.
+On the other hand, it is difficult to imagine a man
+choosing a mode of life like that of Socrates without
+a definite inducement, without some fact or other
+that would lead him to conceive himself as an
+exception from the rule. If we look for such a fact
+in the life of Socrates, we shall look in vain as regards
+externals. Apart from his activities as a religious
+and ethical personality, his life was that of any other
+Attic citizen. But in his spiritual life there was
+certainly one point, but only one, on which he
+deviated from the normal, namely, his
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>daimonion</foreign>.
+If we examine the accounts of this more closely the
+only thing we can make of them is&mdash;or so at least it
+seems to me&mdash;that we are here in the presence of a
+form&mdash;peculiar, no doubt, and highly developed&mdash;of
+the phenomena which are nowadays classed under
+the concept of clairvoyance. Now Plato makes
+Socrates himself say that the power of avoiding what
+would harm him, in great things and little, by virtue
+of a direct perception (a <q>voice</q>), which is what
+<pb n='073'/><anchor id='Pg073'/>
+constituted his <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>daimonion</foreign>, was given him
+from childhood. That it was regarded as something
+singular both by himself and others is evident, and
+likewise that he himself regarded it as something
+supernatural; the designation <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>daimonion</foreign>
+itself seems to be his own. I think that we must seek for
+the origin of Socrates's peculiar mode of life in this
+direction, strange as it may be that a purely mystic
+element should have given the impulse to the most
+rationalistic philosophy the world has ever produced.
+It is impossible to enter more deeply into this problem
+here; but, if my conjecture is correct, we have
+an additional explanation of the fact that Socrates
+was disposed to anything rather than an attack on
+the established religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A view of popular religion such as I have here
+sketched bore in itself the germ of a further development
+which must lead in other directions. A
+personality like Socrates might perhaps manage
+throughout a lifetime to keep that balance on a
+razor's edge which is involved in utilising to the
+utmost in the service of ethics the popular dogmas
+of the perfection of the gods, while disregarding all
+irrelevant tales, all myths and all notions of too
+human a tenor about them. This demanded concentration
+on the one thing needful, in conjunction
+with deep piety of the most genuine antique kind,
+with the most profound religious modesty, a combination
+which it was assuredly given to but one
+man to attain. Socrates's successors had it not.
+Starting precisely from a Socratic foundation they
+entered upon theological speculations which carried
+them away from the Socratic point of view.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='074'/><anchor id='Pg074'/>
+
+<p>
+For the Cynics, who set up virtue as the only good,
+the popular notions of the gods would seem to have
+been just as convenient as for Socrates. And we
+know that Antisthenes, the founder of the school,
+made ample use of them in his ethical teaching. He
+represented Heracles as the Cynical ideal and occupied
+himself largely with allegorical interpretation
+of the myths. On the other hand, there is a
+tradition that he maintained that <q>according to
+nature</q> there was only one god, but <q>according to
+the law</q> several&mdash;a purely sophistic view. He inveighed
+against the worship of images, too, and
+maintained that god <q>did not resemble any thing,</q>
+and we know that his school rejected all worship of
+the gods because the gods <q>were in need of nothing.</q>
+This conception, too, is presumably traceable to
+Antisthenes. In all this the theological interest is
+evident. As soon as this interest sets in, the harmonious
+relation to the popular faith is upset, the
+discord between its higher and lower ideas becomes
+manifest, and criticism begins to assert itself. In
+the case of Antisthenes, if we may believe tradition,
+it seems to have led to monotheism, in itself a most
+remarkable phenomenon in the history of Greek
+religion, but the material is too slight for us to make
+anything of it. The later Cynics afford interesting
+features in illustration of atheism in antiquity, but
+this is best left to a later chapter.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+About the relations of the Megarians to the
+popular faith we know next to nothing. One of
+them, Stilpo, was charged with impiety on account
+of a bad joke about Athene, and convicted, although
+he tried to save himself by another bad joke. As
+<pb n='075'/><anchor id='Pg075'/>
+his point of view was that of a downright sceptic,
+he was no doubt an atheist according to the notions
+of antiquity; in our day he would be called an
+agnostic, but the information that we have about his
+religious standpoint is too slight to repay dwelling
+on him.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As to the relation of the Cyrenaic school to the
+popular faith, the general proposition has been
+handed down to us that the wise man could not be
+<q>deisidaimon,</q> <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> superstitious or god-fearing;
+the Greek word can have both senses. This does
+not speak for piety at any rate, but then the relationship
+of the Cyrenaics to the gods of popular
+belief was different from that of the other followers
+of Socrates. As they set up pleasure&mdash;the momentary,
+isolated feeling of pleasure&mdash;as the supreme
+good, they had no use for the popular conceptions
+of the gods in their ethics, nay, these conceptions
+were even a hindrance to them in so far as the fear
+of the gods might prove a restriction where it ought
+not to. In these circumstances we cannot wonder
+at finding a member of the school in the list of
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheoi</foreign>. This is Theodorus of Cyrene, who lived
+about the year 300. He really seems to have been
+a downright denier of the gods; he wrote a work
+<hi rend='italic'>On the Gods</hi> containing a searching criticism of
+theology, which is said to have exposed him to
+unpleasantness during a stay at Athens, but the then
+ruler of the city, Demetrius of Phalerum, protected
+him. There is nothing strange in a manifestation
+of downright atheism at this time and from this
+quarter. More remarkable is that interest in theology
+which we must assume Theodorus to have had,
+<pb n='076'/><anchor id='Pg076'/>
+since he wrote at length upon the subject. Unfortunately
+it is not evident from the account whether his
+criticism was directed mostly against popular religion
+or against the theology of the philosophers. As it
+was asserted in antiquity that Epicurus used his book
+largely, the latter is more probable.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Whereas in the case of the <q>imperfect Socratics</q>
+as well as of all the earlier philosophers we must
+content ourselves with more or less casual notes, and
+at the best with fragments, and for Socrates with
+second-hand information, when we come to Plato
+we find ourselves for the first time in the presence
+of full and authentic information. Plato belongs
+to those few among the ancient authors of whom
+everything that their contemporaries possessed has
+been preserved to our own day. There would,
+however, be no cause to speak about Plato in an
+investigation of atheism in antiquity, had not so
+eminent a scholar as Zeller roundly asserted that
+Plato did not believe in the Greek gods&mdash;with the
+exception of the heavenly bodies, in the case of which
+the facts are obvious. On the other hand, it is
+impossible here to enter upon a close discussion of so
+large a question; I must content myself with giving
+my views in their main lines, with a brief statement
+of my reasons for holding them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the mythical portions of his dialogues Plato
+uses the gods as a given poetic motive and treats
+them with poetic licence. Otherwise they play a
+very inferior part in the greater portion of his works.
+In the <hi rend='italic'>Euthyphron</hi> he gives a sharp criticism of the
+popular conception of piety, and in reality at the
+same time very seriously questions the importance
+<pb n='077'/><anchor id='Pg077'/>
+and value of the existing form of worship. In his
+chief ethical work, the <hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi>, he subjects the fundamental
+problems of individual ethics to a close discussion
+without saying one word of their relation to
+religion; if we except the mythic part at the end the
+gods scarcely appear in the dialogue. Finally, in
+his <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi> he no doubt gives a detailed criticism
+of popular mythology as an element of education,
+and in the course of this also some positive definitions
+of the idea of God, but throughout the construction
+of his ideal community he entirely disregards
+religion and worship, even if he occasionally
+takes it for granted that a cult of some sort exists,
+and in one place quite casually refers to the Oracle
+at Delphi as authority for its organisation in details.
+To this may further be added the negative point
+that he never in any of his works made Socrates
+define his position in regard to the sophistic treatment
+of the popular religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In Plato's later works the case is different. In
+the construction of the universe described in the
+<hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi> the gods have a definite and significant place,
+and in the <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, Plato's last work, they play a
+leading part. Here he not only gives elaborate
+rules for the organisation of the worship which permeate
+the whole life of the community, but even in
+the argument of the dialogue the gods are everywhere
+in evidence in a way which strongly suggests
+bigotry. Finally, Plato gives the above-mentioned
+definitions of impiety and fixes the severest punishment
+for it&mdash;for downright denial of the gods,
+when all attempts at conversion have failed, the
+penalty of death.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='078'/><anchor id='Pg078'/>
+
+<p>
+On this evidence we are tempted to take the view
+that Plato in his earlier years took up a critical
+attitude in regard to the gods of popular belief,
+perhaps even denied them altogether, that he
+gradually grew more conservative, and ended by
+being a confirmed bigot. And we might look for a
+corroboration of this in a peculiar observation in the
+<hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>. Plato opens his admonition to the young
+against atheism by reminding them that they are
+young, and that false opinion concerning the gods is
+a common disease among the young, but that utter
+denial of their existence is not wont to endure to
+old age. In this we might see an expression of
+personal religious experience.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nevertheless I do not think such a construction
+of Plato's religious development feasible. A decisive
+objection is his exposition of the Socratic point
+of view in so early a work as the <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>. I at any
+rate regard it as psychologically impossible that a
+downright atheist, be he ever so great a poet, should
+be able to draw such a picture of a deeply religious
+personality, and draw it with so much sympathy
+and such convincing force. Add to this other facts
+of secondary moment. Even the close criticism
+to which Plato subjects the popular notions of the
+gods in his <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi> does not indicate denial of the
+gods as such; moreover, it is built on a positive
+foundation, on the idea of the goodness of the gods
+and their truth (which for Plato manifests itself in
+immutability). Finally, Plato at all times vigorously
+advocated the belief in providence. In the <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi> he
+stamps unbelief in divine providence as impiety; in
+the <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi> he insists in a prominent passage that
+<pb n='079'/><anchor id='Pg079'/>
+the gods love the just man and order everything for
+him in the best way. And he puts the same thought
+into Socrates's mouth in the <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>, though it is
+hardly Socratic in the strict sense of the word, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> as
+a main point in Socrates's conception of existence.
+All this should warn us not to exaggerate the significance
+of the difference which may be pointed out
+between the religious standpoints of the younger and
+the older Plato. But the difference itself cannot, I
+think, be denied; there can hardly be any doubt
+that Plato was much more critical of popular belief
+in his youth and prime than towards the close of
+his life.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Even in Plato's later works there is, in spite of
+their conservative attitude, a very peculiar reservation
+in regard to the anthropomorphic gods of
+popular belief. It shows itself in the <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi> in the
+fact that where he sets out to <hi rend='italic'>prove</hi> the existence
+of the gods he contents himself with proving the
+divinity of the heavenly bodies and quite disregards
+the other gods. It appears still more plainly in the
+<hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi>, where he gives a philosophical explanation
+of how the divine heavenly bodies came into existence,
+but says expressly of the other gods that such
+an explanation is impossible, and that we must
+abide by what the old theologians said on this
+subject; they being partly the children of gods
+would know best where their parents came from.
+It is observations of this kind that induced Zeller
+to believe that Plato altogether denied the gods of
+popular belief; he also contends that the gods have
+no place in Plato's system. This latter contention is
+perfectly correct; Plato never identified the gods
+<pb n='080'/><anchor id='Pg080'/>
+with the ideas (although he comes very near to it
+in the <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi>, where he attributes to them immutability,
+the quality which determines the essence
+of the ideas), and in the <hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi> he distinguishes
+sharply between them. No doubt his doctrine of
+ideas led up to a kind of divinity, the idea of the
+good, as the crown of the system, but the direct
+inference from this conception would be pure monotheism
+and so exclude polytheism. This inference
+Plato did not draw, though his treatment of the
+gods in the <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi> certainly
+shows that he was quite clear that the gods of the popular faith
+were an irrational element in his conception of the
+universe. The two passages do not entitle us to go
+further and conclude that he utterly rejected them,
+and in the <hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi>, where Plato makes both classes of
+gods, both the heavenly bodies and the others, take
+part in the creation of man, this is plainly precluded.
+The playful turn with which he evades inquiry into
+the origin of the gods thus receives its proper
+limitation; it is entirely confined to their origin.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Such, according to my view, is the state of the
+case. It is of fundamental importance to emphasise
+the fact that we cannot conclude, because the gods
+of popular belief do not fit into the system of a
+philosopher, that he denies their existence. In
+what follows we shall have occasion to point out a
+case in which, as all are now agreed, a philosophical
+school has adopted and stubbornly held to the belief
+in the existence of gods though this assumption was
+directly opposed to a fundamental proposition in its
+system of doctrine. The case of Plato is particularly
+interesting because he himself was aware and has
+<pb n='081'/><anchor id='Pg081'/>
+pointed out that here was a point on which the consistent
+scientific application of his conception of the
+universe must fail. It is the outcome&mdash;one of
+many&mdash;of what is perhaps his finest quality as a
+philosopher, namely, his intellectual honesty.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+An indirect testimony to the correctness of the
+view here stated will be found in the way in which
+Plato's faithful disciple Xenocrates developed his
+theology, for it shows that Xenocrates presupposed
+the existence of the gods of popular belief as
+given by Plato. Xenocrates made it his general
+task to systematise Plato's philosophy (which had
+never been set forth publicly by himself as a whole),
+and to secure it against attack. In the course of
+this work he was bound to discover that the conception
+of the gods of popular belief was a particularly
+weak point in Plato's system, and he attempted
+to mend matters by a peculiar theory which became
+of the greatest importance for later times. Xenocrates
+set up as gods, in the first place, the heavenly
+bodies. Next he gave his highest principles (pure
+abstracts such as oneness and twoness) and the
+elements of his universe (air, water and earth) the
+names of some of the highest divinities in popular
+belief (Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Demeter). These
+gods, however, did not enter into direct communication
+with men, but only through some intermediate
+agent. The intermediate agents were the
+<q>demons,</q> a class of beings who were higher than
+man yet not perfect like the gods. They were, it
+seems, immortal; they were invisible and far more
+powerful than human beings; but they were subject
+to human passions and were of highly differing
+<pb n='082'/><anchor id='Pg082'/>
+grades of moral perfection. These are the beings
+that are the objects of the greater part of the existing
+cult, especially such usages as rest on the assumption
+that the gods can do harm and are directed towards
+averting it, or which are in other ways objectionable;
+and with them are connected the myths which
+Plato subjected to so severe a criticism. Xenocrates
+found a basis for this system in Plato, who
+in the <hi rend='italic'>Symposium</hi> sets up the demons as a class of
+beings between gods and men, and makes them
+carriers of the prayers and wishes of men to the
+gods. But what was a passing thought with Plato
+serving only a poetical purpose was taken seriously
+and systematised by Xenocrates.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It can hardly be said that Xenocrates has
+gained much recognition among modern writers on
+the history of philosophy for his theory of demons.
+And yet I cannot see that there was any other
+possible solution of the problem which ancient
+popular belief set ancient philosophy, if, be it understood,
+we hold fast by two hypotheses: the first,
+that the popular belief and worship of the ancients
+was based throughout on a foundation of reality;
+and second, that moral perfection is an essential
+factor in the conception of God. The only inconsistency
+which we may perhaps bring home to
+Xenocrates is that he retained certain of the
+popular names of the gods as designations for gods
+in his sense; but this inconsistency was, as we shall
+see, subsequently removed. In favour of this
+estimate of Xenocrates's doctrine of demons may
+further be adduced that it actually was the last
+word of ancient philosophy on the matter. The
+<pb n='083'/><anchor id='Pg083'/>
+doctrine was adopted by the Stoics, the Neo-Pythagoreans,
+and the Neo-Platonists. Only the
+Epicureans went another way, but their doctrine
+died out before the close of antiquity. And so the
+doctrine of demons became the ground on which
+Jewish-Christian monotheism managed to come to
+terms with ancient paganism, to conquer it in
+theory, as it were.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This implies, however, that the doctrine of
+demons, though it arose out of an honest attempt to
+save popular belief philosophically, in reality brings
+out its incompatibility with philosophy. The religion
+and worship of the ancients could dispense
+with neither the higher nor the lower conceptions of
+its gods. If the former were done away with,
+recognition, however full, of the existence of the
+gods was no good; in the long run the inference
+could not be avoided that they were immoral powers
+and so ought not to be worshipped. This was the
+inference drawn by Christianity in theory and enforced
+in practice, ultimately by main force.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Aristotle is among the philosophers who were
+prosecuted for impiety. When the anti-Macedonian
+party came into power in Athens after the death of
+Alexander, there broke out a persecution against
+his adherents, and this was also directed against
+Aristotle. The basis of the charge against him
+was that he had shown divine honour after his death
+to the tyrant Hermias, whose guest he had been
+during a prolonged stay in Asia Minor. This seems
+to have been a fabrication, and at any rate has
+nothing to do with atheism. In the writings of
+Aristotle, as they were then generally known, it
+<pb n='084'/><anchor id='Pg084'/>
+would assuredly have been impossible to find any
+ground for a charge of atheism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Nevertheless, Aristotle is one of the philosophers
+about whose faith in the gods of popular religion
+well-founded doubts may be raised. Like Plato, he
+acknowledged the divinity of the heavenly bodies
+on the ground that they must have a soul since they
+had independent motion. Further, he has a kind of
+supreme god who, himself unmoved, is the cause of
+all movement, and whose constituent quality is
+reason. As regards the gods of popular belief, in
+his <hi rend='italic'>Ethics</hi> and his <hi rend='italic'>Politics</hi> he assumes
+public worship to be a necessary constituent of the life of the individual
+and the community. He gave no grounds
+for this assumption&mdash;on the contrary, he expressly
+declared that it was a question which ought not to
+be discussed at all: he who stirs up doubts whether
+honour should be paid to the gods is in need not of
+teaching but of punishment. (That he himself took
+part in worship is evident from his will.) Further,
+in his ethical works he used the conceptions of the
+gods almost in the same way as we have assumed
+that Socrates did, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> as the ethical ideal and determining
+the limits of the human. He never entered
+upon any elaborate criticism of the lower elements
+of popular religion such as Plato gave. So far
+everything is in admirable order. But if we look
+more closely at things there is nevertheless nearly
+always a little <q>but</q> in Aristotle's utterances
+about the gods. Where he operates with popular
+notions he prefers to speak hypothetically or to refer
+to what is generally assumed; or he is content to
+use only definitions which will also agree with his
+<pb n='085'/><anchor id='Pg085'/>
+own philosophical conception of God. But he goes
+further; in a few places in his writings there are
+utterances which it seems can only be interpreted
+as a radical denial of the popular religion. The most
+important of them deserves to be quoted
+<foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>in extenso</foreign>:
+</p>
+
+<quote rend='display'>
+<q>A tradition has been handed down from
+the ancients and from the most primitive times,
+and left to later ages in the form of myth, that
+these substances (<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> sky and heavenly bodies)
+are gods and that the divine embraces all
+nature. The rest consists in legendary additions
+intended to impress the multitude and serve the
+purposes of legislation and the common weal; for
+these gods are said to have human shape or resemble
+certain other beings (animals), and they say other
+things which follow from this and are of a similar
+kind to those already mentioned. But if we disregard
+all this and restrict ourselves to the first
+point, that they thought that the first substances
+were gods, we must acknowledge that it is a divinely
+inspired saying. And as, in all probability, every
+art and science has been discovered many times, as
+far as it is possible, and has perished again, so these
+notions, too, may have been preserved till now as
+relics of those times. To this extent only can we
+have any idea of the opinion which was held by our
+fathers and has come down from the beginning of
+things.</q>
+</quote>
+
+<p>
+The last sentences, expressing Aristotle's idea of
+a life-cycle and periods of civilisation which repeat
+themselves, have only been included in the quotation
+for the sake of completeness. If we disregard them,
+the passage plainly enough states the view that the
+<pb n='086'/><anchor id='Pg086'/>
+only element of truth in the traditional notions
+about the gods was the divinity of the sky and the
+heavenly bodies; the rest is myth. Aristotle has
+nowhere else expressed himself with such distinctness
+and in such length, but then the passage in
+question has a place of its own. It comes in his
+<hi rend='italic'>Metaphysics</hi> directly after the exposition of his
+philosophical conception of God&mdash;a position marked
+by profound earnestness and as it were irradiated
+by a quiet inner fervour. We feel that we are here
+approaching the <foreign lang='la' rend='italic'>sanctum sanctorum</foreign> of the
+thinker. In this connexion, and only here, he wished for once
+to state his opinion about the religion of his time
+without reserve. What he says here is a precise
+formulation of the result arrived at by the best
+Greek thinkers as regards the religion of the Greek
+people. It was not, they thought, pure fabrication.
+It contained an element of truth of the greatest
+value. But most of it consisted of human inventions
+without any reality behind them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A point of view like that of Aristotle would, I
+suppose, hardly have been called atheism among the
+ancients, if only because the heavenly bodies were
+acknowledged as divine. But according to our definition
+it is atheism. The <q>sky</q>-gods of Aristotle
+have nothing in common with the gods of popular
+belief, not even their names, for Aristotle never
+names them. And the rest, the whole crowd of
+Greek anthropomorphic gods, exist only in the
+human imagination.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Aristotle's successors offer little of interest to
+our inquiry. Theophrastus was charged with
+impiety, but the charge broke down completely.
+<pb n='087'/><anchor id='Pg087'/>
+His theological standpoint was certainly the same
+as Aristotle's. Of Strato, the most independent of
+the Peripatetics, we know that in his view of nature
+he laid greater stress on the material causes than
+Aristotle did, and so arrived at a different conception
+of the supreme deity. Aristotle had severed
+the deity from Nature and placed it outside the
+latter as an incorporeal being whose chief determining
+factor was reason. In Strato's view the
+deity was identical with Nature and, like the latter,
+was without consciousness; consciousness was only
+found in organic nature. Consequently we cannot
+suppose him to have believed in the divinity of the
+heavenly bodies in Aristotle's sense, though no
+direct statement on this subject has come down to
+us. About his attitude towards popular belief we
+hear nothing. A denial of the popular gods is not
+necessarily implied in Strato's theory, but seems
+reasonable in itself and is further rendered probable
+by the fact that all writers seem to take it for granted
+that Strato knew no god other than the whole of
+Nature.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We designated Socratic philosophy, in its relation
+to popular belief, as a reaction against the
+radical free-thought of the sophistic movement.
+It may seem peculiar that with Aristotle it develops
+into a view which we can only describe as atheism.
+There is, however, an important difference between
+the standpoints of the sophists and of Aristotle.
+Radical as the latter is at bottom, it is not, however,
+openly opposed to popular belief&mdash;on the contrary,
+to any one who did not examine it more closely it
+must have had the appearance of accepting popular
+<pb n='088'/><anchor id='Pg088'/>
+belief. The very assumption that the heavenly
+bodies were divine would contribute to that effect;
+this, as we have seen, was a point on which the
+popular view laid great stress. If we add to this
+that Aristotle never made the existence of the
+popular gods matter of debate; that he expressly
+acknowledged the established worship; and that
+he consistently made use of certain fundamental
+notions of popular belief in his philosophy&mdash;we can
+hardly avoid the conclusion that, notwithstanding
+his personal emancipation from the existing religion,
+he is a true representative of the Socratic
+reaction against sophistic. But we see, too, that
+there is a reservation in this reaction. In continuity
+with earlier Greek thought on religion, it
+proceeded from the absolute definitions of the divine
+offered by popular belief, but when criticising anthropomorphism
+on this basis it did not after all avoid
+falling out with popular belief. How far each philosopher
+went in his antagonism was a matter of
+discretion, as also was the means chosen to reconcile
+the philosophical with the popular view. The
+theology of the Socratic schools thus suffered from a
+certain half-heartedness; in the main it has the
+character of a compromise. It would not give up
+the popular notions of the gods, and yet they were
+continually getting in the way. This dualism
+governs the whole of the succeeding Greek philosophy.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='089'/><anchor id='Pg089'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter VI</head>
+
+<p>
+During the three or four centuries which
+passed between the downfall of free Hellas
+and the beginning of the Roman Empire,
+great social and political changes took place in the
+ancient world, involving also vital changes in religion.
+The chief phenomenon in this field, the
+invasion of foreign, especially oriental, religions
+into Hellas, does not come within the scope of this
+investigation. On the one hand, it is an expression
+of dissatisfaction with the old gods; on the other,
+the intrusion of new gods would contribute to the
+ousting of the old ones. There is no question of
+atheism here; it is only a change within polytheism.
+But apart from this change there is evidence
+that the old faith had lost its hold on men's
+minds to no inconsiderable extent. Here, too,
+there is hardly any question of atheism properly
+speaking, but as a background to the&mdash;not very
+numerous&mdash;evidences of such atheism in our
+period, we cannot well ignore the decline of the
+popular faith. Our investigation is rendered difficult
+on this point, and generally within this period,
+by the lack of direct evidence. Of the rich Hellenistic
+literature almost everything has been lost, and
+we are restricted to reports and fragments.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In order to gain a concrete starting-point we
+<pb n='090'/><anchor id='Pg090'/>
+will begin with a quotation from the historian
+Polybius&mdash;so to speak the only Greek prose author
+of the earlier Hellenistic period of whose works
+considerable and connected portions are preserved.
+Polybius wrote in the latter half of the second century
+a history of the world in which Rome took the
+dominant place. Here he gave, among other things,
+a detailed description of the Roman constitution
+and thus came to touch upon the state of religion in
+Rome as compared with that in Greece. He says
+on this subject:
+</p>
+
+<p>
+<q>The greatest advantage of the Roman constitution
+seems to me to lie in its conception of the
+gods, and I believe that what among other peoples is
+despised is what holds together the Roman power&mdash;I
+mean superstition. For this feature has by
+them been developed so far in the direction of
+the <q>horrible,</q> and has so permeated both private
+and public life, that it is quite unique. Many
+will perhaps find this strange, but I think they
+have acted so with an eye to the mass of the people.
+For if it were possible to compose a state of reasonable
+people such a procedure would no doubt be
+unnecessary, but as every people regarded as a mass
+is easily impressed and full of criminal instincts,
+unreasonable violence, and fierce passion, there is
+nothing to be done but to keep the masses under by
+vague fears and such-like hocus-pocus. Therefore
+it is my opinion that it was not without good
+reason or by mere chance that the ancients imparted
+to the masses the notions of the gods and the
+underworld, but rather is it thoughtless and irrational
+when nowadays we seek to destroy them.</q>
+</p>
+
+<pb n='091'/><anchor id='Pg091'/>
+
+<p>
+As a proof of this last statement follows a comparison
+between the state of public morals in Greece
+and in Rome. In Greece you cannot trust a man
+with a few hundred pounds without ten notaries and
+as many seals and double the number of witnesses;
+in Rome great public treasure is administered with
+honesty merely under the safeguard of an oath.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As we see, this passage contains direct evidence
+that in the second century in Hellas&mdash;in contradistinction
+to Rome&mdash;there was an attempt to break
+down the belief in the gods. By his <q>we</q> Polybius
+evidently referred especially to the leading political
+circles. He knew these circles from personal experience,
+and his testimony has all the more weight
+because he does not come forward in the rôle of the
+orthodox man complaining in the usual way of the
+impiety of his contemporaries; on the contrary, he
+speaks as the educated and enlightened man to
+whom it is a matter of course that all this talk about
+the gods and the underworld is a myth which
+nobody among the better classes takes seriously.
+This is a tone we have not heard before, and it is a
+strong indirect testimony to the fact that Polybius
+is not wrong when he speaks of disbelief among the
+upper classes of Greece.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In this connexion the work of Polybius has a
+certain interest on another point. Where earlier&mdash;and
+later&mdash;authors would speak of the intervention
+of the gods in the march of history, he
+operates as a rule with an idea which he calls
+Tyche. The word is untranslatable when used in
+this way. It is something between chance, fortune
+and fate. It is more comprehensive and more
+<pb n='092'/><anchor id='Pg092'/>
+personal than chance; it has not the immutable,
+the <q>lawbound</q> character of fate; rather it
+denotes the incalculability, the capriciousness associated,
+especially in earlier usage, with the word
+fortune, but without the tendency of this word to
+be used in a good sense.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This Tyche-religion&mdash;if we may use this expression&mdash;was
+not new in Hellas. Quite early we
+find Tyche worshipped as a goddess among the
+other deities, and it is an old notion that the gods
+send good fortune, a notion which set its mark on a
+series of established phrases in private and public
+life. But what is of interest here is that shifting
+of religious ideas in the course of which Tyche
+drives the gods into the background. We find
+indications of it as early as Thucydides. In his view
+of history he lays the main stress, certainly, on
+human initiative, and not least on rational calculation,
+as the cause of events. But where he is
+obliged to reckon with an element independent of
+human efforts, he calls it Tyche and not <q>the
+immortal gods.</q> A somewhat similar view we find
+in another great political author of the stage of
+transition to our period, namely, Demosthenes.
+Demosthenes of course employs the official apparatus
+of gods: he invokes them on solemn
+occasions; he quotes their authority in support of
+his assertions (once he even reported a revelation
+which he had in a dream); he calls his opponents
+enemies of the gods, etc. But in his political considerations
+the gods play a negligible part. The
+factors with which he reckons as a rule are merely
+political forces. Where he is compelled to bring
+<pb n='093'/><anchor id='Pg093'/>
+forward elements which man cannot control, he
+shows a preference for Tyche. He certainly occasionally
+identifies her with the favour of the gods,
+but in such a way as to give the impression that it is
+only a <foreign lang='fr' rend='italic'>façon de parler</foreign>. Direct pronouncements
+of a free-thinking kind one would not expect from an
+orator and statesman, and yet Demosthenes was
+once bold enough to say that Pythia, the mouthpiece
+of the Delphic Oracle, was a partisan of
+Macedonia, an utterance which his opponent
+Aeschines, who liked to parade his orthodoxy,
+did not omit to cast in his teeth. On the whole,
+Aeschines liked to represent Demosthenes as a
+godless fellow, and it is not perhaps without significance
+that the latter never directly replied to such
+attacks, or indirectly did anything to impair their
+force.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+During the violent revolutions that took place
+in Hellas under Alexander the Great and his successors,
+and the instability of social and political
+conditions consequent thereon, the Tyche-religion
+received a fresh impetus. With one stroke Hellas
+was flung into world politics. Everything grew
+to colossal proportions in comparison with earlier
+conditions. The small Hellenic city-states that
+had hitherto been each for itself a world shrank into
+nothing. It is as if the old gods could not keep
+pace with this violent process of expansion. Men
+felt a craving for a wider and more comprehensive
+religious concept to answer to the changed conditions,
+and such an idea was found in the idea of Tyche.
+Thoughtful men, such as Demetrius of Phalerum,
+wrote whole books about it; states built temples to
+<pb n='094'/><anchor id='Pg094'/>
+Tyche; in private religion also it played a great
+part. No one reflected much on the relation of
+Tyche to the old gods. It must be remembered
+that Tyche is a real layman's notion, and that
+Hellenistic philosophy regarded it as its task precisely
+to render man independent of the whims
+of fate. Sometimes, however, we find a positive
+statement of the view that Tyche ruled over the
+gods also. It is characteristic of the state of
+affairs; men did not want to relinquish the old
+gods, but could not any longer allow them the
+leading place.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If we return for a moment to Polybius, we shall
+find that his conception of Tyche strikingly illustrates
+the distance between him and Thucydides.
+In the introduction to his work, on its first page,
+he points out that the universally acknowledged
+task of historical writing is partly to educate people
+for political activities, partly to teach them to bear
+the vicissitudes of fortune with fortitude by reminding
+them of the lot of others. And subsequently,
+when he passes on to his main theme, the
+foundation of the Roman world-empire, after having
+explained the plan of his work, he says: <q>So far
+then our plan. But the <emph>co-operation of fortune</emph> is
+still needed if my life is to be long enough for me to
+accomplish my purpose.</q> An earlier&mdash;or a later&mdash;author
+would here either have left the higher powers
+out of the game altogether or would have used an
+expression showing more submission to the gods of
+the popular faith.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In a later author, Pliny the Elder, we again find
+a characteristic utterance throwing light upon the
+<pb n='095'/><anchor id='Pg095'/>
+significance of the Tyche-religion. After a very free-thinking
+survey of the popular notions regarding
+the gods, Pliny says: <q>As an intermediate position
+between these two views (that there is a divine
+providence and that there is none) men have themselves
+invented another divine power, in order that
+speculation about the deity might become still more
+uncertain. Throughout the world, in every place,
+at every hour of the day, Fortune alone is invoked
+and named by every mouth; she alone is accused,
+she bears the guilt of everything; of her only do we
+think, to her is all praise, to her all blame. And
+she is worshipped with railing words&mdash;she is deemed
+inconstant, by many even blind; she is fickle, unstable,
+uncertain, changeable; giving her favours
+to the unworthy. To her is imputed every loss,
+every gain; in all the accounts of life she alone fills
+up both the debit and the credit side, and we are so
+subject to chance that Chance itself becomes our
+god, and again proves the incertitude of the deity.</q>
+Even if a great deal of this may be put down to
+rhetoric, by which Pliny was easily carried away,
+the solid fact itself remains that he felt justified in
+speaking as if Dame Fortune had dethroned all the
+old gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That this view of life must have persisted very
+tenaciously even down to a time when a strong
+reaction in the direction of positive religious feeling
+had set in, is proved by the romances of the time.
+The novels of the ancients were in general poor
+productions. Most of them are made after the
+recipe of a little misfortune in each chapter and
+great happiness in the last. The two lovers meet,
+<pb n='096'/><anchor id='Pg096'/>
+fall in love, part, and suffer a series of troubles
+individually until they are finally united. The
+power that governs their fates and shapes everything
+according to this pattern is regularly Tyche,
+never the gods. The testimony of the novels is of
+special significance because they were read by the
+general mass of the educated classes, not by the
+select who had philosophy to guide them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Another testimony to the weakening of popular
+faith in the Hellenistic age is the decay of the
+institution of the Oracle. This, also, is of early
+date; as early as the fifth and fourth century we
+hear much less of the interference of the oracles in
+political matters than in earlier times. The most
+important of them all, the Delphic Oracle, was dealt
+a terrible blow in the Holy War (356-346 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>), when
+the Phocians seized it and used the treasures which
+had been accumulated in it during centuries to hire
+mercenaries and carry on war. Such proceedings
+would assuredly have been impossible a century
+earlier; no soldiers could have been hired with
+money acquired in such a way, or, if they could
+have been procured, all Hellas would have risen in
+arms against the robbers of the Temple, whereas
+in the Holy War most of the states were indifferent,
+and several even sided with the Phocians. In the
+succeeding years, after Philip of Macedonia had
+put an end to the Phocian scandal, the Oracle was
+in reality in his hands&mdash;it was during this period that
+Demosthenes stigmatised it as the mouthpiece of
+Philip. In the succeeding centuries, too, it was
+dependent on the various rulers of Hellas and undoubtedly
+lost all public authority. During this
+<pb n='097'/><anchor id='Pg097'/>
+period we hear very little of the oracles of Hellas
+until the time before and after the birth of Christ
+provides us with definite evidence of their complete
+decay.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Thus Strabo, who wrote during the reign of
+Augustus, says that the ancients attached more
+importance to divination generally and oracles more
+particularly, whereas people in his day were quite
+indifferent to these things. He gives as the reason
+that the Romans were content to use the Sibylline
+books and their own system of divination. His
+remark is made <foreign rend='italic'>a propos</foreign> of the Oracle in Libya,
+which was formerly in great repute, but was almost
+extinct in his time. He is undoubtedly correct as
+to the fact, but the decline of the oracular system
+cannot be explained by the indifference of the
+Romans. Plutarch, in a monograph on the discontinuance
+of the oracles, furnishes us with more
+detailed information. From this it appears that not
+only the Oracle of Ammon but also the numerous
+oracles of Boeotia had ceased to exist, with one
+exception, while even for the Oracle at Delphi,
+which had formerly employed three priestesses, a
+single one amply sufficed. We also note the remark
+that the questions submitted to the Oracle were
+mostly unworthy or of no importance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The want of consideration sometimes shown to
+sacred places and things during the wars of the
+Hellenistic period may no doubt also be regarded
+as the result of a weakening of interest in the old
+gods. We have detailed information on this point
+from the war between Philip of Macedonia and the
+Aetolians in 220-217 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi> The Aetolians began by
+<pb n='098'/><anchor id='Pg098'/>
+destroying the temples at Dium and Dodona,
+whereupon Philip retaliated by totally wrecking the
+federal sanctuary of the Aetolians at Thermon. Of
+Philip's admiral Dicaearchus we are told by Polybius
+that wherever he landed he erected altars to <q>godlessness
+and lawlessness</q> and offered up sacrifice
+on them. Judging by the way he was hated, his
+practice must have answered to his theory.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+One more phenomenon must be mentioned in
+this context, though it falls outside the limits
+within which we have hitherto moved, and though
+its connexion with free-thought and religious enlightenment
+will no doubt, on closer examination,
+prove disputable. This is the decay of the established
+worship of the Roman State in the later years
+of the Republic.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In the preceding pages there has been no occasion
+to include conditions in Rome in our investigation,
+simply because nothing has come down to us
+about atheism in the earlier days of Rome, and we
+may presume that it did not exist. Of any religious
+thought at Rome corresponding to that of the Greeks
+we hear nothing, nor did the Romans produce any
+philosophy. Whatever knowledge of philosophy
+there was at Rome was simply borrowed from the
+Greeks. The Greek influence was not seriously felt
+until the second century <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>, even though as early
+as about the middle of the third century the Romans,
+through the performance of plays translated from
+the Greek, made acquaintance with Greek dramatic
+poetry and the religious thought contained therein.
+Neither the latter, nor the heresies of the philosophers,
+seem to have made any deep impression
+<pb n='099'/><anchor id='Pg099'/>
+upon them. Ennius, their most important poet of
+the second century, was no doubt strongly influenced
+by Greek free-thinking, but this was evidently an
+isolated phenomenon. Also, by birth Ennius was
+not a native of Rome but half a Greek. The
+testimony of Polybius (from the close of the second
+century) to Roman religious conservatism is emphatic
+enough. Its causes are doubtless of a complex
+nature, but as one of them the peculiar character of
+the Roman religion itself stands out prominently.
+However much it resembled Greek religion in
+externals&mdash;a resemblance which was strengthened
+by numerous loans both of religious rites and of
+deities&mdash;it is decidedly distinct from it in being
+restricted still more to cultus and, above all, in
+being entirely devoid of mythology. The Roman
+gods were powers about the rites of whose worship
+the most accurate details were known or could be
+ascertained if need were, but they had little personality,
+and about their personal relations people
+knew little and cared less. This was, aesthetically,
+a great defect. The Roman gods afforded no good
+theme for poetry and art, and when they were to be
+used as such they were invariably replaced by loans
+from the Greeks. But, as in the face of Greek free-thought
+and Greek criticism of religion, they had the
+advantage that the vital point for attack was lacking.
+All the objectionable tales of the exploits of
+the gods and the associated ideas about their
+nature which had prompted the Greek attack on the
+popular faith simply did not exist in Roman religion.
+On the other hand, its rites were in many points more
+primitive than the Greek ones, but Greek philosophy
+<pb n='100'/><anchor id='Pg100'/>
+had been very reserved in its criticism of ritual.
+We may thus no doubt take it for granted, though
+we have no direct evidence to that effect, that even
+Romans with a Greek education long regarded the
+Greek criticism of religion as something foreign
+which was none of their concern.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+That a time came when all this was changed;
+that towards the end of the Republic great scepticism
+concerning the established religion of Rome
+was found among the upper classes, is beyond doubt,
+and we shall subsequently find occasion to consider
+this more closely. In this connexion another circumstance
+demands attention, one which, moreover,
+has by some been associated with Greek influence
+among the upper classes, namely, the decay of the
+established worship of the Roman State during the
+last years of the Republic. Of the actual facts
+there can hardly be any doubt, though we know
+very little about them. The decisive symptoms
+are: that Augustus, after having taken over the
+government, had to repair some eighty dilapidated
+temples in Rome and reinstitute a series of religious
+rites and priesthoods which had ceased to function.
+Among them was one of the most important, that
+of the priest of Jupiter, an office which had been
+vacant for more than seventy-five years (87-11 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>),
+because it excluded the holder from a political career.
+Further, that complaints were made of private
+persons encroaching on places that were reserved
+for religious worship; and that Varro, when writing
+his great work on the Roman religion, in many cases
+was unable to discover what god was the object of an
+existing cult; and generally, according to his own
+<pb n='101'/><anchor id='Pg101'/>
+statement he wrote his work, among other things,
+in order to save great portions of the old Roman religion
+from falling into utter oblivion on account of
+the indifference of the Romans themselves. It is
+obvious that such a state of affairs would have been
+impossible in a community where the traditional
+religion was a living power, not only formally acknowledged
+by everybody, but felt to be a necessary
+of life, the spiritual daily bread, as it were, of the
+nation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To hold, however, that the main cause of the
+decay of the established religion of Rome was the
+invasion of Greek culture, together with the fact
+that the members of the Roman aristocracy, from
+whom the priests were recruited and who superintended
+the cult, had become indifferent to the traditional
+religion through this influence, this, I think,
+is to go altogether astray. We may take it for
+granted that the governing classes in Rome would
+not have ventured to let the cult decay if there had
+been any serious interest in it among the masses of
+the population; and it is equally certain that Greek
+philosophy and religious criticism did not penetrate
+to these masses. When they became indifferent to
+the national religion, this was due to causes that had
+nothing to do with free-thought. The old Roman
+religion was adapted for a small, narrow and homogeneous
+community whose main constituent and
+real core consisted of the farmers, large and small,
+and minor artisans. In the last centuries of the
+Republic the social development had occasioned the
+complete decay of the Roman peasantry, and the
+free artisans had fared little better. In the place
+<pb n='102'/><anchor id='Pg102'/>
+of the old Rome had arisen the capital of an empire,
+inhabited by a population of a million and of extraordinarily
+mixed composition. Not only did
+this population comprise a number of immigrant
+foreigners, but, in consequence of the peculiar
+Roman rule that every slave on being set free
+attained citizenship, a large percentage of the
+citizens must of necessity have been of foreign
+origin. Only certain portions of the Roman religion,
+more especially the cult of the great central deities
+of the State religion, can have kept pace with these
+changed conditions; the remainder had in reality lost
+all hold on Roman society as it had developed in
+process of time, and was only kept alive by force of
+habit. To this must be added the peculiar Roman
+mixture of mobility and conservatism in religious
+matters. The Roman superstition and uncertainty
+in regard to the gods led on the one hand to a
+continual setting up of new cults and new sanctuaries,
+and on the other hand to a fear of letting
+any of the old cults die out. In consequence thereof
+a great deal of dead and worthless ritual material
+must have accumulated in Rome in the course of
+centuries, and was of course in the way during the
+rapid development of the city in the last century
+of the Republic. Things must gradually have come
+to such a pass that a thorough reform, above all a
+reduction, of the whole cult had become a necessity.
+To introduce such a reform the republican government
+was just as unsuited as it was to carry out all
+the other tasks imposed by the development of the
+empire and the capital at that time. On this
+point, however, it must not be forgotten that the
+<pb n='103'/><anchor id='Pg103'/>
+governing class not only lacked ability, for political
+reasons, to carry out serious reforms, but also the
+will to do so, on account of religious indifference,
+and so let things go altogether to the bad. The
+consequence was anarchy, in this as in all other
+spheres at that time; but at the same time the
+tendency towards the only sensible issue, a restriction
+of the old Roman State-cult, is plainly evident.
+The simultaneous strong infusion of foreign religions
+was unavoidable in the mixed population of
+the capital. That these influences also affected
+the lower classes of the citizens is at any rate a
+proof that they were not indifferent to religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In its main outlines this is all the information
+that I have been able to glean about the general
+decline of the belief in the gods during the Hellenistic
+period. Judging from such information we
+should expect to find strong tendencies to atheism
+in the philosophy of the period. These anticipations
+are, however, doomed to disappointment. The
+ruling philosophical schools on the whole preserved
+a friendly attitude towards the gods of the popular
+faith and especially towards their worship, although
+they only accepted the existing religion with strict
+reservation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Most characteristic but least consistent and
+original was the attitude of the Stoic school. The
+Stoics were pantheists. Their deity was a substance
+which they designated as fire, but which, it must be
+admitted, differed greatly from fire as an element.
+It permeated the entire world. It had produced the
+world out of itself, and it absorbed it again, and
+this process was repeated to eternity. The divine
+<pb n='104'/><anchor id='Pg104'/>
+fire was also reason, and as such the cause of the
+harmony of the world-order. What of conscious
+reason was found in the world was part of the divine
+reason.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Though in this scheme of things there was in the
+abstract plenty of room for the gods of popular belief,
+nevertheless the Stoics did not in reality acknowledge
+them. In principle their standpoint was the
+same as Aristotle's. They supposed the heavenly
+bodies to be divine, but all the rest, namely, the
+anthropomorphic gods, were nothing to them.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In their explanation of the origin of the gods they
+went beyond Aristotle, but their doctrine was not
+always the same on this point. The earlier Stoics
+regarded mythology and all theology as human
+inventions, but not arbitrary inventions. Mythology,
+they thought, should be understood allegorically;
+it was the naïve expression partly of a correct
+conception of Nature, partly of ethical and metaphysical
+truths. Strictly speaking, men had always
+been Stoics, though in an imperfect way. This
+point of view was elaborated in detail by the first
+Stoics, who took their stand partly on the earlier
+naturalism which had already broken the ground
+in this direction, and partly on sophistic, so that
+they even brought into vogue again the theory of
+Prodicus, that the gods were a hypostasis of the
+benefits of civilisation. Such a standpoint could
+not of course be maintained without arbitrariness
+and absurdities which exposed it to embarrassing
+criticism. This seems to have been the reason why
+the later Stoics, and especially Poseidonius, took
+another road. They adopted the doctrine of
+<pb n='105'/><anchor id='Pg105'/>
+Xenocrates with regard to demons and developed
+it in fantastic forms. The earlier method was not,
+however, given up, and at the time of Cicero we find
+both views represented in the doctrine of the school.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Such is the appearance of the theory. In both
+its forms it is evidently an attempt to meet popular
+belief half-way from a standpoint which is really
+beyond it. This tendency is seen even more plainly
+in the practice of the Stoics. They recognised
+public worship and insisted on its advantages; in
+their moral reflections they employed the gods as
+ideals in the Socratic manner, regardless of the fact
+that in their theory they did not really allow for
+gods who were ideal men; nay, they even went the
+length of giving to their philosophical deity, the
+<q>universal reason,</q> the name of Zeus by preference,
+though it had nothing but the name in common with
+the Olympian ruler of gods and men. This pervading
+ambiguity brought much well-deserved reproof on
+the Stoics even in ancient times; but, however unattractive
+it may seem to us, it is of significance as
+a manifestation of the great hold popular belief
+continued to have even on the minds of the upper
+classes, for it was to these that the Stoics appealed.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Far more original and consistent is the Epicurean
+attitude towards the popular faith. Epicurus
+unreservedly acknowledged its foundation,
+<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> the existence of anthropomorphic beings of a
+higher order than man. His gods had human
+shape but they were eternal and blessed. In the
+latter definition was included, according to the
+ethical ideal of Epicurus, the idea that the gods were
+free from every care, including taking an interest in
+<pb n='106'/><anchor id='Pg106'/>
+nature or in human affairs. They were entirely
+outside the world, a fact to which Epicurus gave
+expression by placing them in the empty spaces
+between the infinite number of spherical worlds
+which he assumed. There his gods lived in bliss
+like ideal Epicureans. Lucretius, the only poet of
+this school, extolled them in splendid verse whose
+motif he borrowed from Homer's description of
+Olympus. In this way Epicurus also managed to
+uphold public worship itself. It could not, of
+course, have any practical aim, but it was justified
+as an expression of the respect man owed to beings
+whose existence expressed the human ideal.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The reasons why Epicurus assumed this attitude
+towards popular belief are simple enough. He
+maintained that the evidence of sensual perception
+was the basis of all knowledge, and he thought that
+the senses (through dreams) gave evidence of the
+existence of the gods. And in the popular ideas of
+the bliss of the gods he found his ethical ideal
+directly confirmed. As regards their eternity the
+case was more difficult. The basis of his system
+was the theory that everything was made of atoms
+and that only the atoms as such, not the bodies
+composed of the atoms, were eternal. He conceived
+the gods, too, as made of atoms, nevertheless he held
+that they were eternal. Any rational explanation
+of this postulate is not possible on Epicurus's
+hypotheses, and the criticism of his theology was
+therefore especially directed against this point.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Epicurus was the Greek philosopher who most
+consistently took the course of emphasising the
+popular dogma of the perfection of the gods in order
+<pb n='107'/><anchor id='Pg107'/>
+to preserve the popular notions about them. And
+he was the philosopher to whom this would seem
+the most obvious course, because his ethical ideal&mdash;quietism&mdash;agreed
+with the oldest popular ideal of
+divine existence. In this way Epicureanism became
+the most orthodox of all Greek philosophical
+schools. If nevertheless Epicurus did not escape
+the charge of atheism the sole reason is that his
+whole theology was denounced off-hand as hypocrisy.
+It was assumed to be set up by him only to
+shield himself against a charge of impiety, not to
+be his actual belief. This accusation is now universally
+acknowledged to be unjustified, and the
+Epicureans had no difficulty in rebutting it with
+interest. They took special delight in pointing out
+that the theology of the other schools was much
+more remote from popular belief than theirs, nay, in
+spite of recognition of the existing religion, was in
+truth fundamentally at variance with it. But in
+reality their own was in no better case: gods who
+did not trouble in the least about human affairs were
+beings for whom popular belief had no use. It
+made no difference that Epicurus's definition of the
+nature of the gods was the direct outcome of a
+fundamental doctrine of popular belief. Popular
+religion will not tolerate pedantry.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In this connexion we cannot well pass over a third
+philosophical school which played no inconspicuous
+rôle in the latter half of our period, namely, Scepticism.
+The Sceptic philosophy as such dates from
+Socrates, from whom the so-called Megarian school
+took its origin, but it did not reach its greatest
+importance until the second century, when the
+<pb n='108'/><anchor id='Pg108'/>
+Academic school became Sceptic. It was especially
+the famous philosopher Carneades, a brilliant
+master of logic and dialectic, who made a success
+by his searching negative criticism of the doctrines
+of the other philosophical schools (the Dogmatics).
+For such criticism the theology of the philosophers
+was a grateful subject, and Carneades did not spare
+it. Here as in all the investigations of the Sceptics
+the theoretical result was that no scientific certainty
+could be attained: it was equally wrong to assert
+or to deny the existence of the gods. But in practice
+the attitude of the Sceptics was quite different.
+Just as they behaved like other people, acting upon
+their immediate impressions and experience, though
+they did not believe that anything could be scientifically
+proved, <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> not even the reality of the world
+of the senses, so also did they acknowledge the
+existing cult and lived generally like good heathens.
+Characteristic though Scepticism be of a period of
+Greek spiritual life in which Greek thought lost its
+belief in itself, it was, however, very far from supporting
+atheism. On the contrary, according to the
+correct Sceptic doctrine atheism was a dogmatic
+contention which theoretically was as objectionable
+as its antithesis, and in practice was to be utterly
+discountenanced.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A more radical standpoint than this as regards
+the gods of the popular faith is not found during
+the Hellenistic period except among the less noted
+schools, and in the beginning of the period. We
+have already mentioned such thinkers as Strato,
+Theodorus, and Stilpo; chronologically they belong
+to the Hellenistic Age, but in virtue of their
+<pb n='109'/><anchor id='Pg109'/>
+connexion with the Socratic philosophy they were
+dealt with in the last chapter. A definite polemical
+attitude towards the popular faith is also a characteristic
+of the Cynic school, hence, though our information
+is very meagre, we must speak of it a little
+more fully.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The Cynics continued the tendency of Antisthenes,
+but the school comparatively soon lost its
+importance. After the third century we hear no
+more about the Cynics until they crop up again about
+the year <hi rend='smallcaps'>a.d.</hi> 100. But in the fourth and third
+centuries the school had important representatives.
+The most famous is Diogenes; his life, to be sure,
+is entangled in such a web of legend that it is difficult
+to arrive at a true picture of his personality.
+Of his attitude towards popular belief we know one
+thing, that he did not take part in the worship of
+the gods. This was a general principle of the
+Cynics; their argument was that the gods were <q>in
+need of nothing</q> (cf. above, pp. <ref target="Pg060">60</ref> and
+<ref target="Pg041">41</ref>). If we
+find him accused of atheism, in an anecdote of very
+doubtful value, it may, if there is anything in it,
+be due to his rejection of worship. Of one of his
+successors, however, Bion of Borysthenes, we have
+authentic information that he denied the existence
+of the gods, with the edifying legend attached that
+he was converted before his death. But we also
+hear of Bion that he was a disciple of the atheist
+Theodorus, and other facts go to suggest that Bion
+united Cynic and Hedonistic principles in his mode
+of life&mdash;a compromise that was not so unlikely as
+might be supposed. Bion's attitude cannot therefore
+be taken as typical of Cynicism. Another
+<pb n='110'/><anchor id='Pg110'/>
+Cynic of about the same period (the beginning of the
+third century) was Menippus of Gadara (in northern
+Palestine). He wrote tales and dialogues in a
+mixture of prose and verse. The contents were
+satirical, the satire being directed against the contemporary
+philosophers and their doctrines, and
+against the popular notions of the gods. Menippus
+availed himself partly of the old criticism of
+mythology and partly of the philosophical attacks
+on the popular conception of the gods. The only
+novelty was the facetious form in which he concealed
+the sting of serious criticism. It is impossible
+to decide whether he positively denied the
+existence of the gods, but his satire on the popular
+notions and its success among his contemporaries at
+least testifies to the weakening of the popular faith
+among the educated classes. In Hellas itself he seems
+to have gone out of fashion very early; but the
+Romans took him up again; Varro and Seneca
+imitated him, and Lucian made his name famous
+again in the Greek world in the second century after
+Christ. It is chiefly due to Lucian that we can form
+an idea of Menippus's literary work, hence we shall
+return to Cynic satire in our chapter on the age of
+the Roman Empire.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+During our survey of Greek philosophical thought
+in the Hellenistic period we have only met with a
+few cases of atheism in the strict sense, and they all
+occur about and immediately after 300, though
+there does not seem to be any internal connexion
+between them. About the same time there appeared
+a writer, outside the circle of philosophers, who is regularly
+listed among the <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheoi</foreign>, and who
+<pb n='111'/><anchor id='Pg111'/>
+has given a name to a peculiar theory about the
+origin of the idea of the gods, namely, Euhemerus.
+He is said to have travelled extensively in the
+service of King Cassander of Macedonia. At any
+rate he published his theological views in the shape
+of a book of travel which was, however, wholly
+fiction. He relates how he came to an island,
+Panchaia, in the Indian Ocean, and in a temple
+there found a lengthy inscription in which Uranos,
+Kronos, Zeus and other gods recorded their exploits.
+The substance of the tale was that these gods had
+once been men, great kings and rulers, who had
+bestowed on their peoples all sorts of improvements
+in civilisation and had thus got themselves worshipped
+as gods. It appears from the accounts
+that Euhemerus supposed the heavenly bodies to be
+real and eternal gods&mdash;he thought that Uranos had
+first taught men to worship them; further, as his
+theory is generally understood, it must be assumed
+that in his opinion the other gods had ceased to
+exist as such after their death. This accords with
+the fact that Euhemerus was generally characterised
+as an atheist.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The theory that the gods were at first men was
+not originated by Euhemerus, though it takes its
+name (Euhemerism) from him. The theory had
+some support in the popular faith which recognised
+gods (Heracles, Asclepius) who had lived as men on
+earth; and the opinion which was fundamental to
+Greek religion, that the gods had <emph>come into existence</emph>,
+and had not existed from eternity, would
+favour this theory. Moreover, Euhemerus had had
+an immediate precursor in the slightly earlier
+<pb n='112'/><anchor id='Pg112'/>
+Hecataeus of Abdera, who had set forth a similar
+theory, with the difference, however, that he took
+the view that all excellent men became real gods.
+But Euhemerus's theory appeared just at the
+right moment and fell on fertile soil. Alexander
+the Great and his successors had adopted the Oriental
+policy by which the ruler was worshipped as a god,
+and were supported in this by a tendency which
+had already made itself felt occasionally among
+the Greeks in the East. Euhemerus only inverted
+matters&mdash;if the rulers were gods, it was an obvious
+inference that the gods were rulers. No wonder that
+his theory gained a large following. Its great influence
+is seen from numerous similar attempts in
+the Hellenistic world. At Rome, in the second
+century, Ennius translated his works into Latin,
+and as late as the time of Augustus an author such
+as Diodorus, in his popular history of the world,
+served up Euhemerism as the best scientific explanation
+of the origin of religion. It is characteristic,
+too, that both Jews and Christians, in their
+attacks on Paganism, reckoned with Euhemerism
+as a well-established theory. As every one knows,
+it has survived to our day; Carlyle, I suppose,
+being its last prominent exponent.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It is characteristic of Euhemerism in its most
+radical form that it assumed that the gods of polytheism
+did not exist; so far it is atheism. But it
+is no less characteristic that it made the concession
+to popular belief that its gods had once
+existed. Hereby it takes its place, in spite of its
+greater radicalism, on the same plane with most
+other ancient theories about the origin of men's
+<pb n='113'/><anchor id='Pg113'/>
+notions about the gods. The gods of popular belief
+could not survive in the light of ancient thought,
+which in its essence was free-thought, not tied
+down by dogmas. But the philosophers of old could
+not but believe that a psychological fact of such
+enormous dimensions as ancient polytheism must
+have something answering to it in the objective
+world. Ancient philosophy never got clear of this
+dilemma; hence Plato's open recognition of the
+absurdity; hence Aristotle's delight at being able
+to meet the popular faith half-way in his assumption
+of the divinity of the heavenly bodies; hence Xenocrates's
+demons, the allegories of the Stoics, the
+ideal Epicureans of Epicurus, Euhemerus's early
+benefactors of mankind. And we may say that the
+more the Greeks got to know of the world about them
+the more they were confirmed in their view, for in
+the varied multiplicity of polytheism they found the
+same principle everywhere, the same belief in a
+multitude of beings of a higher order than man.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Euhemerus's theory is no doubt the last serious
+attempt in the old pagan world to give an explanation
+of the popular faith which may be called
+genuine atheism. We will not, however, leave the
+Hellenistic period without casting a glance at some
+personalities about whom we have information
+enough to form an idea at first hand of their religious
+standpoint, and whose attitude towards
+popular belief at any rate comes very near to
+atheism pure and simple.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+One of them is Polybius. In the above-cited
+passage referring to the decline of the popular faith
+in the Hellenistic period, Polybius also gives his own
+<pb n='114'/><anchor id='Pg114'/>
+theory of the origin of men's notions regarding the
+gods. It is not new. It is the theory known from
+the Critias fragment, what may be called the political
+theory. In the fragment it appears as atheism
+pure and simple, and it seems obvious to understand
+it in the same way in Polybius. That he shows a
+leaning towards Euhemerism in another passage
+where he speaks about the origin of religious ideas, is
+in itself not against this&mdash;the two theories are closely
+related and might very well be combined. But we
+have a series of passages in which Polybius expressed
+himself in a way that seems quite irreconcilable with
+a purely atheistic standpoint. He expressly acknowledged
+divination and worship as justified; in
+several places he refers to disasters that have
+befallen individuals or a whole people as being sent
+by the gods, or even as a punishment for impiety;
+and towards the close of his work he actually, in
+marked contrast to the tone of its beginning, offers
+up a prayer to the gods to grant him a happy ending
+to his long life. It would seem as if Polybius at a
+certain period of his life came under the influence of
+Stoicism and in consequence greatly modified his
+earlier views. That these were of an atheistic
+character seems, however, beyond doubt, and that
+is the decisive point in this connexion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Cicero's philosophical standpoint was that of an
+Academic, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> a Sceptic. But&mdash;in accord, for the
+rest, with the doctrines of the school just at this
+period&mdash;he employed his liberty as a Sceptic to
+favour such philosophical doctrines as seemed to
+him more reasonable than others, regardless of the
+school from which they were derived. In his
+<pb n='115'/><anchor id='Pg115'/>
+philosophy of religion he was more especially a Stoic.
+He himself expressly insisted on this point of view
+in the closing words of his work on the <hi rend='italic'>Nature of
+the Gods</hi>. As he was not, and made no pretence
+of being, a philosopher, his philosophical expositions
+have no importance for us; they are throughout
+second-hand, mostly mere translations from Greek
+sources. That we have employed them in the foregoing
+pages to throw light on the theology of the
+earlier, more especially the Hellenistic, philosophy,
+goes without saying. But his personal religious
+standpoint is not without interest.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+As orator and statesman Cicero took his stand
+wholly on the side of the established Roman religion,
+operating with the <q>immortal gods,</q> with Jupiter
+Optimus Maximus, etc., at his convenience. In his
+works on the <hi rend='italic'>State</hi> and the <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi> he adheres
+decidedly to the established religion. But all this is mere
+politics. Personally Cicero had no religion other
+than philosophy. Philosophy was his consolation
+in adversity, or he attempted to make it so, for
+the result was often indifferent; and he looked to
+philosophy to guide him in ethical questions. We
+never find any indication in his writings that the
+gods of popular belief meant anything to him in these
+respects. And what is more&mdash;he assumed this off-hand
+to be the standpoint of everybody else, and
+evidently he was justified. A great number of
+letters from him to his circle, and not a few from his
+friends and acquaintances to him, have been preserved;
+and in his philosophical writings he often
+introduces contemporary Romans as characters in
+the dialogue. But in all this literature there is
+<pb n='116'/><anchor id='Pg116'/>
+never the faintest indication that a Roman of the
+better class entertained, or could even be supposed
+to entertain, an orthodox view with regard to the
+State religion. To Cicero and his circle the popular
+faith did not exist as an element of their personal
+religion.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Such a standpoint is of course, practically speaking,
+atheism, and in this sense atheism was widely
+spread among the higher classes of the Graeco-Roman
+society about the time of the birth of Christ.
+But from this to theoretical atheism there is still
+a good step. Cicero himself affords an amusing
+example of how easily people, who have apparently
+quite emancipated themselves from the official religion
+of their community, may backslide. When
+his beloved daughter Tullia died in the year 45 <hi rend='smallcaps'>b.c.</hi>, it
+became evident that Cicero, in the first violence of
+his grief, which was the more overwhelming because
+he was excluded from political activity during
+Cæsar's dictatorship, could not console himself with
+philosophy alone. He wanted something more
+tangible to take hold on, and so he hit upon the idea
+of having Tullia exalted among the gods. He
+thought of building a temple and instituting a cult
+in her honour. He moved heaven and earth to
+arrange the matter, sought to buy ground in a
+prominent place in Rome, and was willing to make
+the greatest pecuniary sacrifices to get a conspicuous
+result. Nothing came of it all, however; Cicero's
+friends, who were to help him to put the matter
+through, were perhaps hardly so eager as he; time
+assuaged his own grief, and finally he contented
+himself with publishing a consolatory epistle written
+<pb n='117'/><anchor id='Pg117'/>
+by himself, or, correctly speaking, translated from a
+famous Greek work and adapted to the occasion.
+So far he ended where he should, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> in philosophy;
+but the little incident is significant, not least
+because it shows what practical ends Euhemerism
+could be brought to serve and how doubtful was
+its atheistic character after all. For not only was
+the contemplated apotheosis of Tullia in itself a
+Euhemeristic idea, but Cicero also expressly defended
+it with Euhemeristic arguments, though
+speaking as if the departed who were worshipped as
+gods really had become gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The attitude of Cicero and his contemporaries
+towards popular belief was still the general attitude
+in the first days of the Empire. It was of no avail
+that Augustus re-established the decayed State cult
+in all its splendour and variety, or that the poets
+during his reign, when they wished to express themselves
+in harmony with the spirit of the new régime,
+directly or indirectly extolled the revived orthodoxy.
+Wherever we find personal religious feeling expressed
+by men of that time, in the Epistles of Horace, in
+Virgil's posthumous minor poems or in such passages
+in his greater works where he expresses his own
+ideals, it is philosophy that is predominant and the
+official religion ignored. Virgil was an Epicurean;
+Horace an Eclectic, now an Epicurean, then a Stoic;
+Augustus had a domestic philosopher. Ovid employed
+his genius in writing travesties of the old
+mythology while at the same time he composed a
+poem, serious for him, on the Roman cult; and when
+disaster befell him and he was cast out from the
+society of the capital, which was the breath of life
+<pb n='118'/><anchor id='Pg118'/>
+to him, he was abandoned not only by men, but also
+by the gods&mdash;he had not even a philosophy with
+which to console himself. It is only in inferior
+writers such as Valerius Maximus, who wrote a work
+on great deeds&mdash;good and evil&mdash;under Tiberius, that
+we find a different spirit.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Direct utterances about men's relationship to
+the gods, from which conclusions can be drawn, are
+seldom met with during this period. The whole
+question was so remote from the thoughts of these
+people that they never mentioned it except when
+they assumed an orthodox air for political or
+aesthetic reasons. Still, here and there we come
+across something. One of the most significant
+pronouncements is that of Pliny the Elder, from
+whom we quoted the passage about the worship of
+Fortune. Pliny opens his scientific encyclopedia
+by explaining the structure of the universe in its
+broad features; this he does on the lines of the
+physics of the Stoics, hence he designates the universe
+as God. Next comes a survey of special
+theology. It is introduced as follows: <q>I therefore
+deem it a sign of human weakness to ask about the
+shape and form of God. Whoever God is, if any
+other god (than the universe) exists at all, and in
+whatever part of the world he is, he is all perception,
+all sight, all hearing, all soul, all reason, all self.</q>
+The popular notions of the gods are then reviewed,
+in the most supercilious tone, and their absurdities
+pointed out. A polite bow is made to the worship
+of the Emperors and its motives, the rest is little
+but persiflage. Not even Providence, which was
+recognised by the Stoics, is acknowledged by
+<pb n='119'/><anchor id='Pg119'/>
+Pliny. The conclusion is like the beginning: <q>To
+imperfect human nature it is a special consolation
+that God also is not omnipotent (he can
+neither put himself to death, even if he would,
+though he has given man that power and it is his
+choicest gift in this punishment which is life; nor
+can he give immortality to mortals or call the dead
+to life; nor can he bring it to pass that those who
+have lived have not lived, or that he who has held
+honourable offices did not hold them); and that he
+has no other power over the past than that of
+oblivion; and that (in order that we may also give
+a jesting proof of our partnership with God) he
+cannot bring it about that twice ten is not twenty,
+and more of the same sort&mdash;by all which the power
+of Nature is clearly revealed, and that it is this we
+call God.</q>
+</p>
+
+<p>
+An opinion like that expressed here must without
+doubt be designated as atheism, even though it is
+nothing but the Stoic pantheism logically carried
+out. As we have said before, we rarely meet it so
+directly expressed, but there can hardly be any
+doubt that even in the time of Pliny it was quite
+common in Rome. At this point, then, had the
+educated classes of the ancient world arrived under
+the influence of Hellenistic philosophy.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='120'/><anchor id='Pg120'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter VII</head>
+
+<p>
+Though the foundation of the Empire in
+many ways inaugurated a new era for the
+antique world, it is, of course, impossible,
+in an inquiry which is not confined to political
+history in the narrowest sense of the word, to
+operate with anything but the loosest chronological
+divisions. Accordingly in the last chapter we had
+to include phenomena from the early days of the
+Empire in order not to separate things which
+naturally belonged together. From the point of
+view of religious history the dividing line cannot
+possibly be drawn at the Emperor Augustus, in spite
+of his restoration of worship and the orthodox
+reaction in the official Augustan poetry, but rather
+at about the beginning of the second century. The
+enthusiasm of the Augustan Age for the good old
+times was never much more than affectation. It
+quickly evaporated when the promised millennium
+was not forthcoming, and was replaced by a reserve
+which developed into cynicism&mdash;but, be it understood,
+in the upper circles of the capital only. In
+the empire at large the development took its natural
+tranquil course, unaffected by the manner in which
+the old Roman nobility was effacing itself; and this
+development did not tend towards atheism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The reaction towards positive religious feeling,
+<pb n='121'/><anchor id='Pg121'/>
+which becomes clearly manifest in the second century
+after Christ, though the preparation for it is
+undoubtedly of earlier date, is perhaps the most
+remarkable phenomenon in the religious history of
+antiquity. This is not the place to inquire into
+its causes, which still remain largely unexplained;
+there is even no reason to enter more closely into its
+outer manifestations, as the thing itself is doubted
+by nobody. It is sufficient to mention as instances
+authors like Suetonius, with his naïve belief in
+miracles, and the rhetorician Aristides, with his
+Asclepius-cult and general sanctimoniousness; or
+a minor figure such as Aelian, who wrote whole
+books of a pronounced, nay even fanatical, devotionalism;
+or within the sphere of philosophy movements
+like Neo-Pythagoreanism and Neo-Platonism,
+both of which are as much in the nature of mystic
+theology as attempts at a scientific explanation
+of the universe. It is characteristic, too, that an
+essentially anti-religious school like that of the
+Epicureans actually dies out at this time. Under
+these conditions our task in this chapter must be to
+bring out the comparatively few and weak traces of
+other currents which still made themselves felt.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Of the earlier philosophical schools Stoicism
+flowered afresh in the second century; the Emperor
+Marcus Aurelius himself was a prominent
+adherent of the creed. This later Stoicism differs,
+however, somewhat from the earlier. It limits the
+scientific apparatus which the early Stoics had
+operated with to a minimum, and is almost exclusively
+concerned with practical ethics on a
+religious basis. Its religion is that of ordinary
+<pb n='122'/><anchor id='Pg122'/>
+Stoicism: Pantheism and belief in Providence.
+But, on the whole, it takes up a more sympathetic
+attitude towards popular religion than early
+Stoicism had done. Of the bitter criticism of the
+absurdities of the worship of the gods and of
+mythology which is still to be met with as late as
+Seneca, nothing remains. On the contrary, participation
+in public worship is still enjoined as being a
+duty; nay, more: attacks on belief in the gods&mdash;in
+the plain popular sense of the word&mdash;are denounced
+as pernicious and reprehensible. Perhaps no clearer
+proof could be adduced of the revolution which
+had taken place in the attitude of the educated
+classes towards popular religion than this change
+of front on the part of Stoicism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Contrary to this was the attitude of another
+school which was in vogue at the same time as
+the Stoic, namely, the Cynic. Between Cynicism
+and popular belief strained relations had existed
+since early times. It is true, the Cynics did not
+altogether deny the existence of the gods; but they
+rejected worship on the ground that the gods were
+not in need of anything, and they denied categorically
+the majority of the popular ideas about the
+gods. For the latter were, in fact, popular and
+traditional, and the whole aim of the Cynics was
+to antagonise the current estimate of values. A
+characteristic instance of their manner is provided
+by this very period in the fragments of the work of
+Oenomaus. The work was entitled <hi rend='italic'>The Swindlers
+Unmasked</hi>, and it contained a violent attack on
+oracles. Its tone is exceedingly pungent. In the
+extant fragments Oenomaus addresses the god in
+<pb n='123'/><anchor id='Pg123'/>
+Delphi and overwhelms him with insults. But we
+are expressly told&mdash;and one utterance of Oenomaus
+himself verifies it&mdash;that the attack was not really
+directed against the god, but against the men who
+gave oracles in his name. In his opinion the whole
+thing was a priestly fraud&mdash;a view which otherwise
+was rather unfamiliar to the ancients, but played
+an important part later. Incidentally there is a
+violent attack on idolatry. The work is not without
+acuteness of thought and a certain coarse wit of the
+true Cynical kind; but it is entirely uncritical
+(oracles are used which are evidently inventions of
+later times) and of no great significance. It is even
+difficult to avoid the impression that the author's
+aim is in some degree to create a sensation. Cynics
+of that day were not strangers to that kind of thing.
+But it is at any rate a proof of the fact that there
+were at the time tendencies opposed to the religious
+reaction.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A more significant phenomenon of the same kind
+is to be found in the writings of Lucian. Lucian was
+by education a rhetorician, by profession an itinerant
+lecturer and essayist. At a certain stage of his life
+he became acquainted with the Cynic philosophy
+and for some time felt much attracted to it. From
+that he evidently acquired a sincere contempt of
+the vulgar superstition which flourished in his
+time, even in circles of which one might have
+expected something better. In writings which for
+the greater part belong to his later period, he
+pilloried individuals who traded (or seemed to trade)
+in the religious ferment of the time, as well as
+satirised superstition as such.  In this way he
+<pb n='124'/><anchor id='Pg124'/>
+made an important contribution to the spiritual
+history of the age. But simultaneously he produced,
+for the entertainment of his public, a series of
+writings the aim of which is to make fun of the
+Olympian gods. In this work also he leant on the
+literature of the Cynics, but substituted for their
+grave and biting satire light causeries or slight
+dramatic sketches, in which his wit&mdash;for Lucian
+was really witty&mdash;had full scope. As an instance
+of his manner I shall quote a short passage from the
+dialogue <hi rend='italic'>Timon</hi>. It is Zeus who speaks; he has
+given Hermes orders to send the god of wealth to
+Timon, who has wasted his fortune by his liberality
+and is now abandoned by his false friends. Then
+he goes on: <q>As to the flatterers you speak of and
+their ingratitude, I shall deal with them another
+time, and they will meet with their due punishment
+as soon as I have had my thunderbolt repaired.
+The two largest darts of it were broken and blunted
+the other day when I got in a rage and flung it at the
+sophist Anaxagoras, who was trying to make his
+disciples believe that we gods do not exist at all.
+However, I missed him, for Pericles held his hand
+over him, but the bolt struck the temple of the
+Dioscuri and set fire to it, and the bolt itself was
+nearly destroyed when it struck the rock.</q> This
+sort of thing abounds in Lucian, even if it is not
+always equally amusing and to the point. Now
+there is nothing strange in the fact that a witty man
+for once should feel inclined to make game of the old
+mythology; this might have happened almost at
+any time, once the critical spirit had been awakened.
+But that a man, and moreover an essayist, who had
+<pb n='125'/><anchor id='Pg125'/>
+to live by the approval of his public, should
+make it his trade, as it were, and that at a time
+of vigorous religious reaction, seems more difficult
+to account for. Lucian's controversial pamphlets
+against superstition cannot be classed off-hand with
+his <hi rend='italic'>Dialogues of the Gods</hi>; the latter are of a quite
+different and far more harmless character. The fact
+is rather that mythology at this time was fair game.
+It was cut off from its connexion with religion&mdash;a
+connexion which in historical times was never very
+intimate and was now entirely severed. This had
+been brought about in part by centuries of criticism
+of the most varied kind, in part precisely as a result
+of the religious reaction which had now set in. If
+people turned during this time to the old gods&mdash;who,
+however, had been considerably contaminated with
+new elements&mdash;it was because they had nothing
+else to turn to; but what they now looked for was
+something quite different from the old religion.
+The powerful tradition which had bound members
+of each small community&mdash;we should say, of each
+township&mdash;to its familiar gods, with all that belonged
+to them, was now in process of dissolution; in the
+larger cities of the world-empire with their mixed
+populations it had entirely disappeared. Religion
+was no longer primarily a concern of society; it was
+a personal matter. In the face of the enormous
+selection of gods which ancient paganism came
+gradually to proffer, the individual was free to
+choose, as individual or as a member of a communion
+based upon religious, not political, sympathy.
+Under these circumstances the existence of the gods
+and their power and will to help their worshippers
+<pb n='126'/><anchor id='Pg126'/>
+was the only thing of interest; all the old tales about
+them were more than ever myths of no religious
+value. On closer inspection Lucian indeed proves
+to have exercised a certain selection in his satire.
+Gods like Asclepius and Serapis, who were popular
+in his day, he prefers to say nothing about; and
+even with a phenomenon like Christianity he deals
+cautiously; he sticks to the old Olympian gods. Thus
+his derision of these constitutes an indirect proof
+that they had gone out of vogue, and his forbearance
+on other points is a proof of the power of the
+current religion over contemporary minds. As to
+ascribing any deeper religious conviction to Lucian&mdash;were
+it even of a purely negative kind&mdash;that is, in view
+of the whole character of his work, out of the question.
+To be sure, his polemical pamphlets against
+superstition show clearly, like those of Oenomaus, that
+the religious reaction did not run its course without
+criticism from certain sides; but even here it is significant
+that the criticism comes from a professional
+jester and not from a serious religious thinker.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A few words remain to be said about the two
+monotheistic religions which in the days of the
+Roman Empire came to play a great, one of them
+indeed a decisive, part. I have already referred
+to pagan society's attitude towards Judaism and
+Christianity, and pointed out that the adherents of
+both were designated and treated as atheists&mdash;the
+Jews only occasionally and with certain reservations,
+the Christians nearly always and unconditionally.
+The question here is, how far this designation was
+justified according to the definition of atheism which
+is the basis of our inquiry.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='127'/><anchor id='Pg127'/>
+
+<p>
+In the preceding pages we have several times referred
+to the fact that the real enemy of Polytheism
+is not the philosophical theology, which generally
+tends more or less towards Pantheism, but Monotheism.
+It is in keeping with this that the Jews and
+the Christians in practice are downright deniers of
+the pagan gods: they would not worship them;
+whereas the Greek philosophers as a rule respected
+worship, however far they went in their criticism of
+men's ideas of the gods. We shall not dwell here on
+this aspect of the matter; we are concerned with
+the theory only. Detailed expositions of it occur
+in numerous writings, from the passages in the Old
+Testament where heathenism is attacked, to the
+defences of Christianity by the latest Fathers of the
+Church.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The original Jewish view, according to which the
+heathen gods are real beings just as much as the
+God of the Jews themselves&mdash;only Jews must not
+worship them&mdash;is in the later portions of the Old
+Testament superseded by the view that the gods are
+only images made of wood, stone or metal, and incapable
+of doing either good or evil. This point of
+view is taken over by later Jewish authors and
+completely dominates them. In those acquainted
+with Greek thought it is combined with Euhemeristic
+ideas: the images represent dead men. The
+theory that the gods are really natural objects&mdash;elements
+or heavenly bodies&mdash;is occasionally taken
+into account too. Alongside of these opinions there
+appears also the view that the pagan gods are evil
+spirits (demons). It is already found in a few places
+in the Old Testament, and after that sporadically
+<pb n='128'/><anchor id='Pg128'/>
+and quite incidentally in later Jewish writings; in
+one place it is combined with the Old Testament's
+account of the fallen angels. The demon-theory
+is not an instrument of Jewish apologetics proper,
+not even of Philo, though he has a complete demonology
+and can hardly have been ignorant of the
+Platonic-Stoic doctrine of demons.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Apart from the few and, as it were, incidental
+utterances concerning demons, the Jewish view of
+the pagan gods impresses one as decidedly atheistic.
+The god is identical with the idol, and the idol is a
+dead object, the work of men's hands, or the god
+is identical with a natural object, made by God to
+be sure, but without soul or, at any rate, without
+divinity. It is remarkable that no Jewish controversialist
+seriously envisaged the problem of the
+real view of the gods embodied in the popular belief
+of the ancients, namely, that they are personal
+beings of a higher order than man. It is inconceivable
+that men like Philo, Josephus and the author of
+the Wisdom of Solomon should have been ignorant
+of it. I know nothing to account for this curious
+phenomenon; and till some light has been thrown
+upon the matter, I should hesitate to assert that
+the Jewish conception of Polytheism was purely
+atheistic, however much appearance it may have
+of being so.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+It was otherwise with Christian polemical writing.
+As early as St. Paul the demon-theory appears
+distinctly, though side by side with utterances of
+seemingly atheistic character. Other New Testament
+authors, too, designate the gods as demons.
+The subsequent apologists, excepting the earliest,
+<pb n='129'/><anchor id='Pg129'/>
+Aristides, lay the main stress on demonology, but
+include for the sake of completeness idolatry and
+the like, sometimes without caring about or trying
+to conciliate the contradictions. In the long run
+demonology is victorious; in St. Augustine, the foremost
+among Christian apologists, there is hardly
+any other point of view that counts.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+To trace the Christian demonology in detail and
+give an account of its various aspects is outside the
+scope of this essay. Its origin is a twofold one,
+partly the Jewish demonology, which just at the
+commencement of our era had received a great
+impetus, partly the theory of the Greek philosophers,
+which we have characterised above when speaking
+of Xenocrates. The Christian doctrine regarding
+demons differs from the latter, especially by the fact
+that it does not acknowledge good demons; they
+were all evil. This was the indispensable basis for
+the interdict against the worship of demons; in
+its further development the Christians, following
+Jewish tradition, pointed to an origin in the fallen
+angels, and thus effected a connexion with the Old
+Testament. While they at the same time retained
+its angelology they had to distinguish good and
+evil beings intermediate between god and man;
+but they carefully avoided designating the angels
+as demons, and kept them distinct from the pagan
+gods, who were all demons and evil.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The application of demonology to the pagan
+worship caused certain difficulties in detail. To be
+sure, it was possible to identify a given pagan god
+with a certain demon, and this was often done; but
+it was impossible to identify the Pagans' conceptions
+<pb n='130'/><anchor id='Pg130'/>
+of their gods with the Christians' conceptions of
+demons. The Pagans, in fact, ascribed to their
+gods not only demoniac (diabolical) but also divine
+qualities, which the Christians absolutely denied
+them. Consequently they had to recognise that
+pagan worship to a great extent rested on a delusion,
+on a misconception of the essential character of the
+gods which were worshipped. This view was corroborated
+by the dogma of the fallen angels, which
+was altogether alien to paganism. By identifying
+them with the evil spirits of the Bible, demon-names
+were even obtained which differed from those
+of the pagan gods and, of course, were the correct
+ones; were they not given in Holy Writ? In
+general, the Christians, who possessed an authentic
+revelation of the matter, were of course much better
+informed about the nature of the pagan gods than
+the Pagans themselves, who were groping in the
+dark. Euhemerism, which plays a great part in the
+apologists, helped in the same direction: the supposition
+that the idols were originally men existed
+among the Pagans themselves, and it was too much
+in harmony with the tendency of the apologists to
+be left unemployed. It was reconciled with demonology
+by the supposition that the demons had
+assumed the masks of dead heroes; they had beguiled
+mankind to worship them in order to possess
+themselves of the sacrifices, which they always
+coveted, and by this deception to be able to rule and
+corrupt men. The Christians also could not avoid
+recognising that part of the pagan worship was
+worship of natural objects, in particular of the
+heavenly bodies; and this error of worshipping the
+<pb n='131'/><anchor id='Pg131'/>
+<q>creation instead of the creator</q> was so obvious
+that the Christians were not inclined to resort to
+demonology for an explanation of this phenomenon,
+the less so as they could not identify the sun or the
+moon with a demon. The conflict of these different
+points of view accounts for the peculiar vacillation
+in the Christian conception of paganism. On one
+hand, we meet with crude conceptions, according to
+which the pagan gods are just like so many demons;
+they are specially prominent when pagan miracles
+and prophecies are to be explained. On the other
+hand, there is a train of thought which carried to its
+logical conclusion would lead to conceiving paganism
+as a whole as a huge delusion of humanity, but a
+delusion caused indeed by supernatural agencies.
+This conclusion hardly presented itself to the early
+Church; later, however, it was drawn and caused
+a not inconsiderable shifting in men's views and
+explanations of paganism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Demonology is to such a degree the ruling point
+of view in Christian apologetics that it would be
+absurd to make a collection from these writings of
+utterances with an atheistic ring. Such utterances
+are to be found in most of them; they appear
+spontaneously, for instance, wherever idolatry is
+attacked. But one cannot attach any importance
+to them when they appear in this connexion, not
+even in apologists in whose works the demon theory
+is lacking. No Christian theologian in antiquity
+advanced, much less sustained, the view that the
+pagan gods were mere phantoms of human imagination
+without any corresponding reality.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Remarkable as this state of things may appear
+<pb n='132'/><anchor id='Pg132'/>
+to us moderns, it is really quite simple, nay even a
+matter of course, when regarded historically. Christianity
+had from its very beginning a decidedly
+dualistic character. The contrast between this
+world and the world to come was identical with
+the contrast between the kingdom of the Devil
+and the kingdom of God. As soon as the new religion
+came into contact with paganism, the latter
+was necessarily regarded as belonging to the kingdom
+of the Devil; thus the conception of the gods as
+demons was a foregone conclusion. In the minds of
+the later apologists, who became acquainted with
+Greek philosophy, this conception received additional
+confirmation; did it not indeed agree in the
+main with Platonic and Stoic theory? Details were
+added: the Christians could not deny the pagan
+miracles without throwing a doubt on their own,
+for miracles cannot be done away with at all except
+by a denial on principle; neither could they explain
+paganism&mdash;that gigantic, millennial aberration of
+humanity&mdash;by merely human causes, much less lay
+the blame on God alone. But ultimately all this
+rests on one and the same thing&mdash;the supernatural
+and dualistic hypothesis. Consequently demonology
+is the kernel of the Christian conception of
+paganism: it is not merely a natural result of the
+hypotheses, it is the one and only correct expression
+of the way in which the new religion understood the
+old.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='133'/><anchor id='Pg133'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter VIII</head>
+
+<p>
+In the preceding inquiry we took as our starting-point
+not the ancient conception of atheism
+but the modern view of the nature of the
+pagan gods. It proved that this view was, upon
+the whole, feebly represented during antiquity, and
+that it was another view (demonology) which was
+transmitted to later ages from the closing years of
+antiquity. The inquiry will therefore find its
+natural conclusion in a demonstration of the time
+and manner in which the conception handed down
+from antiquity of the nature of paganism was superseded
+and displaced by the modern view.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This question is, however, more difficult to
+answer than one would perhaps think. After
+ancient paganism had ceased to exist as a living
+religion, it had lost its practical interest, and
+theoretically the Middle Ages were occupied with
+quite other problems than the nature of paganism.
+At the revival of the study of ancient literature,
+during the Renaissance, people certainly again
+came into the most intimate contact with ancient
+religion itself, but systematic investigations of its
+nature do not seem to have been taken up in
+real earnest until after the middle of the sixteenth
+century. It is therefore difficult to ascertain in what
+light paganism was regarded during the thousand
+<pb n='134'/><anchor id='Pg134'/>
+years which had then passed since its final extinction.
+From the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, on
+the other hand, the material is extraordinarily
+plentiful, though but slightly investigated. Previous
+works in this field seem to be entirely wanting;
+at any rate it has not been possible for me to find
+any collective treatment of the subject, nor even
+any contributions worth mentioning towards the
+solution of the numerous individual problems
+which arise when we enter upon what might be
+called <q>the history of the history of religion.</q><note place='foot'>This was written
+before the appearance of Mr. Gruppe's work,
+<hi rend='italic'>Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte</hi>.
+Compare <hi rend='italic'>infra</hi>, p. <ref target="Pg154">154</ref>.</note> In
+this essay I must therefore restrict myself to a few
+aphoristic remarks which may perhaps give occasion
+for this subject, in itself not devoid of interest, to
+receive more detailed treatment at some future time.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Milton, in the beginning of <hi rend='italic'>Paradise Lost</hi>, which
+appeared in 1667, makes Satan assemble all his
+angels for continued battle against God. Among
+the demons there enumerated, ancient gods also
+appear; they are, then, plainly regarded as devils.
+Now Milton was not only a poet, but also a sound
+scholar and an orthodox theologian; we may therefore
+rest assured that his conception of the pagan
+gods was dogmatically correct and in accord with
+the prevailing views of his time. In him, therefore,
+we have found a fixed point from which we can
+look forwards and backwards; as late as after
+the middle of the seventeenth century the early
+Christian view of the nature of paganism evidently
+persisted in leading circles.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='135'/><anchor id='Pg135'/>
+
+<p>
+We seldom find definite heathen gods so precisely
+designated as demons as in Milton, but no
+doubt seems possible that the general principle
+was accepted by contemporary and earlier authors.
+The chief work of the seventeenth century on ancient
+religion is the <hi rend='italic'>De Theologia Gentili</hi> of G. I. Voss; he
+operates entirely with the traditional view. It may
+be traced back through a succession of writings of
+the seventeenth and sixteenth centuries. They are
+all, or almost all, agreed that antique paganism was
+the work of the devil, and that idolatry was, at any
+rate in part, a worship of demons. From the
+Middle Ages I can adduce a pregnant expression of
+the same view from Thomas Aquinas; in his treatment
+of idolatry and also of false prophecy he
+definitely accepts the demonology of the early
+Church. On this point he appeals to Augustine,
+and with perfect right; from this it may presumably
+be assumed that the Schoolmen in general had the
+same view, Augustine being, as we know, an authority
+for Catholic theologians.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In mediaeval poets also we occasionally find the
+same view expressed. As far as I have been able to
+ascertain, Dante has no ancient gods among his
+devils, and the degree to which he had dissociated
+himself from ancient paganism may be gauged by the
+fact that in one of the most impassioned passages of
+his poem he addresses the Christian God as <q>Great
+Jupiter.</q> But he allows figures of ancient mythology
+such as Charon, Minos and Geryon to appear
+in his infernal world, and when he designates the
+pagan gods as <q>false and <emph>untruthful</emph>,</q> demonology
+is evidently at the back of his mind. The mediaeval
+<pb n='136'/><anchor id='Pg136'/>
+epic poets who dealt with antique subjects took over
+the pagan gods more or less. Sometimes, as in the
+Romance of Troy, the Christian veneer is so thick that
+the pagan groundwork is but slightly apparent; in
+other poems, such as the adaptation of the <hi rend='italic'>Aeneid</hi>,
+it is more in evidence. In so far as the gods are
+not eliminated they seem as a rule to be taken
+over quite naïvely from the source without further
+comment; but occasionally the poet expresses his
+view of their nature. Thus the French adapter of
+Statius's <hi rend='italic'>Thebaïs</hi>, in whose work the Christian
+element is otherwise not prominent, cautiously
+remarks that Jupiter and Tisiphone, by whom his
+heroes swear, are in reality only devils. Generally
+speaking, the gods of antiquity are often designated
+as devils in mediaeval poetry, but at times the
+opinion that they are departed human beings crops
+up. Thus, as we might expect, the theories of
+ancient times still survive and retain their sway.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+There is a domain in which we might expect to
+find distinct traces of the survival of the ancient
+gods in the mediaeval popular consciousness,
+namely, that of magic. There does not, however,
+seem to be much in it; the forms of mediaeval magic
+often go back to antiquity, but the beings it operates
+with are pre-eminently the Christian devils, if we
+may venture to employ the term, and the evil spirits
+of popular belief. There is, however, extant a collection
+of magic formulae against various ailments
+in which pagan gods appear: Hercules and Juno
+Regina, Juno and Jupiter, the nymphs, Luna Jovis
+filia, Sol invictus. The collection is transmitted in
+a manuscript of the ninth century; the formulae
+<pb n='137'/><anchor id='Pg137'/>
+mostly convey the impression of dating from a much
+earlier period, but the fact that they were copied in
+the Middle Ages suggests that they were intended
+for practical application.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+A problem, the closer investigation of which
+would no doubt yield an interesting result, but which
+does not seem to have been much noticed, is the
+European conception of the heathen religions with
+which the explorers came into contact on their
+great voyages of discovery. Primitive heathenism
+as a living reality had lain rather beyond the
+horizon of the Middle Ages; when it was met with
+in America, it evidently awakened considerable
+interest. There is a description of the religion of
+Peru and Mexico, written by the Jesuit Acosta at
+the close of the sixteenth century, which gives us
+a clear insight into the orthodox view of heathenism
+during the Renaissance. According to Acosta,
+heathenism is as a whole the work of the Devil; he
+has seduced men to idolatry in order that he himself
+may be worshipped instead of the true God. All worship
+of idols is in reality worship of Satan. The
+individual idols, however, are not identified with
+individual devils; Acosta distinguishes between the
+worship of nature (heavenly bodies, natural objects
+of the earth, right down to trees, etc.), the worship
+of the dead, and the worship of images, but says
+nothing about the worship of demons. At one
+point only is there a direct intervention of the evil
+powers, namely, in magic, and particularly in
+oracles; and here then we find, as an exception,
+mention of individual devils which must be
+imagined to inhabit the idols. The same conception
+<pb n='138'/><anchor id='Pg138'/>
+is found again as late as the seventeenth
+century in a story told by G. I. Voss of the
+time of the Dutch wars in Brazil. Arcissewski,
+a Polish officer serving in the Dutch army,
+had witnessed the conjuring of a devil among the
+Tapuis. The demon made his appearance all right,
+but proved to be a native well known to Arcissewski.
+As he, however, made some true prognostications,
+Voss, as it seems at variance with Arcissewski,
+thinks that there must have been some supernatural
+powers concerned in the game.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+An exceptional place is occupied by the attempt
+made during the Renaissance at an actual revival of
+ancient paganism and the worship of its gods. It
+proceeded from Plethon, the head of the Florentine
+Academy, and seems to have spread thence to the
+Roman Academy. The whole movement must be
+viewed more particularly as an outcome of the
+enthusiasm during the Renaissance for the culture
+of antiquity and more especially for its philosophy
+rather than its religion; the gods worshipped were
+given a new and strongly philosophical interpretation.
+But it is not improbable that the traditional
+theory of the reality of the ancient deities may have
+had something to do with it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Simultaneously with demonology, and while it
+was still acknowledged in principle, there flourished
+more naturalistic conceptions of paganism, both in
+the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. As
+remarked above, the way was already prepared for
+them during antiquity. In Thomas Aquinas we find
+a lucid explanation of the origin of idolatry with a
+reference to the ancient theory. Here we meet
+<pb n='139'/><anchor id='Pg139'/>
+with the familiar elements: the worship of the stars
+and the cult of the dead. According to Thomas,
+man has a natural disposition towards this error,
+but it only comes into play when he is led astray by
+demons. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries
+the Devil is mentioned oftener than the
+demons (compare Acosta's view of the heathenism
+of the American Indians); evidently the conception
+of the nature of evil had undergone a change in the
+direction of monotheism. In this way more scope
+was given for the adoption of naturalistic views in
+regard to the individual forms in which paganism
+manifested itself than when dealing with a multiplicity
+of demons that answered individually to the
+pagan gods, and we meet with systematic attempts
+to explain the origin of idolatry by natural means,
+though still with the Devil in the background.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+One of these systems, which played a prominent
+part, especially in the seventeenth century, is the
+so-called Hebraism, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> the attempt to derive the
+whole of paganism from Judaism. This fashion,
+for which the way had already been prepared by
+Jewish and Christian apologists, reaches its climax,
+I think, with Abbot Huet, who derived all the gods
+of antiquity (and not only Greek and Roman
+antiquity) from Moses, and all the goddesses from
+his sister; according to him the knowledge of these
+two persons had spread from the Jews to other
+peoples, who had woven about them a web of
+<q>fables.</q> Alongside of Hebraism, which is Euhemeristic
+in principle, allegorical methods of
+interpretation were put forward. The chief representative
+of this tendency in earlier times is Natalis
+<pb n='140'/><anchor id='Pg140'/>
+Comes (Noël du Comte), the author of the first
+handbook of mythology; he directly set himself the
+task of allegorising all the myths. The allegories
+are mostly moral, but also physical; Euhemeristic
+interpretations are not rejected either, and in several
+places the author gives all three explanations side
+by side without choosing between them.  In the
+footsteps of du Comte follows Bacon, in his <hi rend='italic'>De
+Sapientia Veterum</hi>; to the moral and physical
+allegories he adds political ones, as when Jove's
+struggle with Typhoeus is made to symbolise a wise
+ruler's treatment of a rebellion. While these attempts
+at interpretation, both the Euhemeristic and
+the allegorical, are in principle a direct continuation
+of those of antiquity, another method points plainly
+in the direction of the fantastic notions of the
+Middle Ages. As early as the sixteenth century the
+idea arose of connecting the theology of the ancients
+with alchemy. The idea seemed obvious because the
+metals were designated by the names of the planets,
+which are also the names of the gods. It found
+acceptance, and in the seventeenth century we have
+a series of writings in which ancient mythology is
+explained as the symbolical language of chemical
+processes.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Within the limits of the supernatural explanation
+the interest centred more and more in a single point:
+the oracles. As far back as in Aquinas, <q>false
+prophecy</q> is a main section in the chapter on
+demons, whose power to foretell the future he
+expressly acknowledges. In the sixteenth and
+seventeenth centuries, when the interest in the prediction
+of the future was so strong, the ancient
+<pb n='141'/><anchor id='Pg141'/>
+accounts of true prognostications were the real prop
+of demonology. Hence demons generally play a
+great part in these explanations, even though in
+other cases the Devil fills the bill. Thus Acosta in
+his account of the American religions; thus Voss and
+numerous other writers of the seventeenth century;
+and it is hardly a mere accident, one would think,
+when Milton specially mentions Dodona and Delphi
+as the seats of worship of the Greek demons.
+Among a few of the humanists we certainly find an
+attempt to apply the natural explanation even
+here; thus Caelius Rhodiginus asserted that a
+great part (but not all!) of the oracular system
+might be explained as priestly imposture, and his
+slightly younger contemporary Caelius Calcagninus,
+in his dialogue on oracles, seems to go still further
+and to deny the power of predicting the future to
+any other being than the true God. An exceptional
+position is occupied by Pomponazzi, who in his little
+pamphlet <hi rend='italic'>De Incantationibus</hi> seems to wish to derive
+all magic, including the oracles, from natural
+causes, though ultimately he formally acknowledges
+demonology as the authoritative explanation. But
+these advances did not find acceptance; we find
+even Voss combating the view on which they were
+founded. It is characteristic of the power of demonology
+in this domain that in support of his point of
+view he can quote no less a writer than Machiavelli.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+The author who opened battle in real earnest
+against demonology was a Dutch scholar, one
+van Dale, otherwise little known. In a couple of
+treatises written about the close of the seventeenth
+century he tried to show that the whole of idolatry
+<pb n='142'/><anchor id='Pg142'/>
+(as well as the oracles in particular) was not dependent
+on the intervention of supernatural beings, but
+was solely due to imposture on the part of the priests.
+Van Dale was a Protestant, so he easily got over
+the unanimous recognition of demonology by the
+Fathers of the Church. The accounts of demons in
+the Old and New Testaments proved more difficult
+to deal with; it is interesting to see how he wriggles
+about to get round them&mdash;and it illustrates most
+instructively the degree to which demonology affords
+the only reasonable and natural explanation of
+paganism on the basis of early Christian belief.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Van Dale's books are learned works written in
+Latin, full of quotations in Latin, Greek, and
+Hebrew, and moreover confused and obscure in
+exposition, as is often the case with Dutch writings
+of that time. But a clever Frenchman, Fontenelle,
+took upon himself the task of rendering his work on
+the oracles into French in a popular and attractive
+form. His book called forth an answering pamphlet
+from a Jesuit advocating the traditional view; the
+little controversy seems to have made some stir in
+France about the year 1700. At any rate Banier,
+who, in the beginning of the eighteenth century,
+treated ancient mythology from a Euhemeristic
+point of view, gave some consideration to it. His
+own conclusion is&mdash;in 1738!&mdash;that demonology
+cannot be dispensed with for the explanation of the
+oracles. He gives his grounds for this in a very
+sensible criticism of van Dale's priestly fraud
+theory, the absurdity of which he exposes with
+sound arguments.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Banier is the last author to whom I can point for
+<pb n='143'/><anchor id='Pg143'/>
+the demon-theory applied as an explanation of a
+phenomenon in ancient religion; I have not found
+it in any other mythologist of the eighteenth century,
+and even in Banier, with the exception of this single
+point, everything is explained quite naturally according
+to the best Euhemeristic models. But in
+the positive understanding of the nature of ancient
+paganism no very considerable advance had
+actually been made withal. A characteristic example
+of this is the treatment of ancient religion
+by such an eminent intellect as Giambattista Vico.
+In his <hi rend='italic'>Scienza Nuova</hi>, which appeared in 1725, as
+the foundation of his exposition of the religion of
+antiquity he gives a characterisation of the mode of
+thought of primitive mankind, which is so pertinent
+and psychologically so correct that it anticipates the
+results of more than a hundred years of research.
+Of any supernatural explanation no trace is found
+in him, though otherwise he speaks as a good Catholic.
+But when he proceeds to explain the nature of
+the ancient ideas of the gods in detail, all that it
+comes to is a series of allegories, among which the
+politico-social play a main part. Vico sees the
+earliest history of mankind in the light of the
+traditions about Rome; the Graeco-Roman gods,
+then, and the myths about them, become to him
+largely an expression of struggles between the
+<q>patricians and plebeians</q> of remote antiquity.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Most of the mythology of the eighteenth century
+is like this. The Euhemeristic school gradually
+gave up the hypothesis of the Jewish religion as the
+origin of paganism; Banier, the chief representative
+of the school, still argues at length against Hebraism.
+<pb n='144'/><anchor id='Pg144'/>
+In its place, Phoenicians, Assyrians, Persians and,
+above all, Egyptians, are brought into play, or, as
+in the case of the Englishman Bryant, the whole
+of mythology is explained as reminiscences of the
+exploits of an aboriginal race, the Cuthites, which
+never existed. The allegorist school gradually
+rallied round the idea of the cult of the heavenly
+bodies as the origin of the pagan religions; as late
+as the days of the French Revolution, Dupuis, in a
+voluminous work, tried to trace the whole of ancient
+religion and mythology back to astronomy. On the
+whole the movement diverged more and more from
+Euhemerism towards the conception of Greek religion
+as a kind of cult of nature; when the sudden
+awakening to a more correct understanding came
+towards the close of the century, Euhemerism was
+evidently already an antiquated view. Thus, since
+the Renaissance, by a slow and very devious process
+of development, a gradual approach had been made
+to a more correct view of the nature of ancient
+religion. After the Devil had more or less taken the
+place of the demons, the rest of demonology, the
+moral allegory, Hebraism and Euhemerism were
+eliminated by successive stages, and nature-symbolism
+was reached as the final stage.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+We know now that even this is not the correct
+explanation of the nature and origin of the conception
+of the gods prevailing among the ancients.
+Recent investigations have shown that the Greek
+gods, in spite of their apparent simplicity and clarity,
+are highly complex organisms, the products of a long
+process of development to which the most diverse
+factors have contributed. In order to arrive at this
+<pb n='145'/><anchor id='Pg145'/>
+result another century of work, with many attempts
+in the wrong direction, has been required. The idea
+that the Greek gods were nature-gods really dominated
+research through almost the whole of the
+nineteenth century. If it has now been dethroned
+or reduced to the measure of truth it contains&mdash;for
+undoubtedly a natural object enters as a component
+into the essence of some Greek deities&mdash;this is in the
+first place due to the intensive study of the religions
+of primitive peoples, living or obsolete; and the
+results of this study were only applied to Greek
+religion during the last decade of the century.
+But the starting-point of modern history of religion
+lies much farther back: its beginnings date from
+the great revival of historical research which was
+inaugurated by Rousseau and continued by Herder.
+Henceforward the unhistorical methods of the age
+of enlightenment were abolished, and attention
+directed in real earnest towards the earlier stages
+of human civilisation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+This, however, carries us a step beyond the
+point of time at which this sketch should, strictly
+speaking, stop. For by the beginning of the
+eighteenth century&mdash;but not before&mdash;the negative
+fact which is all important in this connexion had
+won recognition: namely, that there existed no
+supernatural beings latent behind the Greek ideas
+of their gods, and corresponding at any rate in some
+degree to them; but that these ideas must be
+regarded and explained as entirely inventions of the
+human imagination.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='146'/><anchor id='Pg146'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Chapter IX</head>
+
+<p>
+At the very beginning of this inquiry it was
+emphasised that its theme would in the
+main be the religious views of the upper
+class, and within this sphere again especially the
+views of those circles which were in close touch with
+philosophy. The reason for this is of course in the
+first place that only in such circles can we expect
+to find expressed a point of view approaching to
+positive atheism. But we may assuredly go further
+than this. We shall hardly be too bold in asserting
+that the free-thinking of philosophically educated
+men in reality had very slight influence on the great
+mass of the population. Philosophy did not penetrate
+so far, and whatever degree of perception we
+estimate the masses to have had of the fact that the
+upper layer of society regarded the popular faith
+with critical eyes&mdash;and in the long run it could not
+be concealed&mdash;we cannot fail to recognise that
+religious development among the ancients did not
+tend towards atheism. Important changes took
+place in ancient religion during the Hellenistic Age
+and the time of the Roman Empire, but their causes
+were of a social and national kind, and, if we confine
+ourselves to paganism, they only led to certain
+gods going out of fashion and others coming in.
+The utmost we can assert is that a certain weakening
+<pb n='147'/><anchor id='Pg147'/>
+of the religious life may have been widely prevalent
+during the time of transition between the two ages&mdash;the
+transition falls at somewhat different dates in
+the eastern and western part of the Empire&mdash;but
+that weakening was soon overcome.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Now the peculiar result of this investigation of
+the state of religion among the upper classes seems
+to me to be this: the curve of intensity of religious
+feeling which conjecture leads us to draw through
+the spiritual life of the ancients as a whole, that
+same curve, but more distinct and sharply accentuated,
+is found again in the relations of the upper
+classes to the popular faith. Towards the close of
+the fifth century it looks as if the cultured classes
+that formed the centre of Greek intellectual life were
+outgrowing the ancient religion. The reaction
+which set in with Socrates and Plato certainly
+checked this movement, but it did not stop it.
+Cynics, Peripatetics, Stoics, Epicureans and
+Sceptics, in spite of their widely differing points of
+view, were all entirely unable to share the religious
+ideas of their countrymen in the form in which they
+were cast in the national religion. However many
+allowances they made, their attitude towards the
+popular faith was critical, and on important points
+they denied it. It is against the background thus
+resulting from ancient philosophy's treatment of
+ancient religion that we must view such phenomena
+as Polybius, Cicero, and Pliny the Elder, if we wish
+to understand their full significance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+On the other hand, it is certain that this was not
+the view that conquered in the end among the
+educated classes in antiquity. The lower we come
+<pb n='148'/><anchor id='Pg148'/>
+down in the Empire the more evident does the positive
+relation of the upper class to the gods of the
+popular faith become. Some few examples have
+already been mentioned in the preceding pages. In
+philosophy the whole movement finds its typical
+expression in demonology, which during the later
+Empire reigned undisputed in the one or two schools
+that still retained any vitality. It is significant
+that its source was the earlier Platonism, with its
+very conservative attitude towards popular belief,
+and that it was taken over by the later Stoic school,
+which inaugurated the general religious reaction
+in philosophy. And it is no less significant that
+demonology was swallowed whole by the monotheistic
+religion which superseded ancient paganism,
+and for more than a thousand years was the recognised
+explanation of the nature thereof.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+In accordance with the line of development here
+sketched, the inquiry has of necessity been focused
+on two main points: Sophistic and the Hellenistic
+Age. Now it is of peculiar interest to note what small
+traces of pure atheism can after all be found here,
+in spite of all criticism of the popular faith. We
+have surmised its presence among a few prominent
+personalities in fifth-century Athens; we have
+found evidence of its extension in the same place
+in the period immediately following; and in the
+time of transition between the fourth and third
+centuries we have thought it likely that it existed
+among a very few philosophers, of whom none are in
+the first rank. Everywhere else we find adjustments,
+in part very serious and real concessions, to popular
+belief. Not to mention the attitude towards worship,
+<pb n='149'/><anchor id='Pg149'/>
+which was only hostile in one sect of slight
+importance: the assumption of the divinity of
+the heavenly bodies which was common to the
+Academics, Peripatetics, and Stoics is really in
+principle an acknowledgement of the popular faith,
+whose conception of the gods was actually borrowed
+and applied, not to some philosophical abstraction,
+but to individual and concrete natural objects.
+The anthropomorphic gods of the Epicureans point
+in the same direction. In spite of their profound
+difference from the beings that were worshipped and
+believed in by the ordinary Greek, they are in
+complete harmony with the opinion on which all
+polytheism is based: that there are individual
+beings of a higher order than man. And though
+the Stoics in theory confined their acknowledgment
+of this doctrine to the heavenly bodies, in practice&mdash;even
+if we disregard demonology&mdash;they consistently
+brought it to bear upon the anthropomorphic gods,
+in direct continuation of the Socratic reaction against
+the atheistic tendencies of Sophistic.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+If now we ask ourselves what may be the cause
+of this peculiar dualism in the relationship of
+ancient thought to religion, though admitting the
+highly complex nature of the problem, we can
+scarcely avoid recognising a certain principle.
+Ancient thought outgrew the ancient popular faith;
+that is beyond doubt. Hence its critical attitude.
+But it never outgrew that supernaturalist view
+which was the foundation of the popular faith.
+Hence its concessions to the popular faith, even
+when it was most critical, and its final surrender
+thereunto. And that it never outgrew the foundation
+<pb n='150'/><anchor id='Pg150'/>
+of the popular faith is connected with its whole
+conception of nature and especially with its conception
+of the universe. We cannot indeed deny
+that the ancients had a certain feeling that nature
+was regulated by laws, but they only made imperfect
+attempts at a mechanical theory of nature in which
+this regulation of the world by law was carried
+through in principle, and with one brilliant exception
+they adhered implicitly to the geocentric conception
+of the universe. We may, I think, venture to
+assert with good reason that on such assumptions
+the philosophers of antiquity could not advance
+further than they did. In other words, on the given
+hypotheses the supernaturalist view was the correct
+one, the one that was most probable, and therefore
+that on which people finally agreed. A few chosen
+spirits may at any time by intuition, without any
+strictly scientific foundation, emancipate themselves
+entirely from religious errors; this also happened
+among the ancients, and on the first occasion
+was not unconnected with an enormous advance in
+the conception of nature. But it is certain that the
+views of an entire age are always decisively conditioned
+by its knowledge and interpretation of the
+universe surrounding it, and cannot in principle be
+emancipated therefrom.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Seen from this point of view, our brief sketch of
+the attitude of posterity towards the religion of the
+pagan world will also not be without interest. If,
+after isolated advances during the mighty awakening
+of the Renaissance, it is not until the transition
+from the seventeenth to the eighteenth century that
+we find the modern atheistic conception of the
+<pb n='151'/><anchor id='Pg151'/>
+nature of the gods of the ancients established in
+principle and consistently applied, we can scarcely
+avoid connecting this fact with the advance of
+natural science in the seventeenth century, and not
+least with the victory of the heliocentric system.
+After the close of antiquity the pagan gods had receded
+to a distance, practically speaking, because
+they were not worshipped any more. No one
+troubled himself about them. But in theory one
+had got no further, <hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> no advance had been made
+on the ancients, and no advance could be made
+as long as supernaturalism was adhered to in
+connexion with the ancient view of the universe.
+Through monotheism the notions of the divinity
+of the sun, moon and planets had certainly been got
+rid of, but not so the notion of the world&mdash;<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> the
+globe enclosed within the firmament&mdash;as filled with
+personal beings of a higher order than man; and
+even the duty of turning the spheres to which the
+heavenly bodies were believed to be fastened was&mdash;quite
+consistently&mdash;assigned to some of these beings.
+As long as such notions were in operation, not only
+were there no grounds for denying the reality of the
+pagan gods, but there was every reason to assume it.
+So far we may rightly say that it was Copernicus,
+Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Kepler and Newton that
+did away with the traditional conception of ancient
+paganism.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Natural science, however, furnishes only the
+negative result that the gods of polytheism are not
+what they are said to be: real beings of a higher
+order than man. To reveal what they are, other
+knowledge is required. This was not attained until
+<pb n='152'/><anchor id='Pg152'/>
+long after the revival of natural science in the sixteenth
+and seventeenth centuries. The vacillation
+in the eighteenth century between various theories
+of the explanation of the nature of ancient polytheism&mdash;theories
+which were all false, though not equally
+false&mdash;is in this respect significant enough; likewise
+the gradual progress which characterises research
+in the nineteenth century, and which may be indicated
+by such names as Heyne, Buttmann, K. O.
+Müller, Lobeck, Mannhardt, Rohde, and Usener,
+to mention only some of the most important and
+omitting those still alive. Viewed in this light
+the development sketched here within a narrowly
+restricted field is typical of the course of European
+intellectual history from antiquity down to our day.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='153'/><anchor id='Pg153'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Notes</head>
+
+<p>
+Of Atheism in Antiquity as defined here no treatment is known
+to me; but there exist an older and a newer book that deal with
+the question within a wider compass. The first of these is Krische,
+<hi rend='italic'>Die theologischen Lehren der griechischen Denker</hi> (Göttingen,
+1840); it is chiefly concerned with the philosophical conceptions of deity,
+but it touches also on the relations of philosophers to popular
+religion. The second is Decharme, <hi rend='italic'>La critique des traditions
+religieuses chez les Grecs</hi> (Paris, 1904); it is not fertile in new points
+of view, but it has suggested several details which I might else
+have overlooked. Such books as Caird, <hi rend='italic'>The Evolution of Theology
+in the Greek Philosophers</hi> (Glasgow, 1904), or Moon, <hi rend='italic'>Religious
+Thought of the Greeks</hi> (Cambridge, Mass., 1919), barely touch on
+the relation to popular belief; of Louis, <hi rend='italic'>Les doctrines religieuses
+des philosophes grecs</hi>, I have not been able to make use. I regret
+that Poul Helms, <hi rend='italic'>The Conception of God in Greek Philosophy</hi>
+(Danish, in <hi rend='italic'>Studier for Sprog-og Oldtidsforskning</hi>, No. 115), was
+not published until my essay was already in the press. General works
+on Atheism are indicated in Aveling's article, <q>Atheism,</q> in the
+<hi rend='italic'>Catholic Encyclopædia</hi>, vol. ii., but none of them seem to be found
+at Copenhagen. In the <hi rend='italic'>Dictionary of Religion and Ethics</hi>, ii.,
+there is a detailed article on Atheism in its relation to different
+religions; the section treating of Antiquity is written by Pearson,
+but is meagre. Works like Zeller, <hi rend='italic'>Philosophie der Griechen</hi>, and
+Gomperz, <hi rend='italic'>Griechische Denker</hi>, contain accounts of the attitude of
+philosophers (Gomperz also includes others) towards popular
+belief; of these books I have of course made use throughout, but
+they are not referred to in the following notes except on special
+occasion. Scattered remarks and small monographs on details
+are naturally to be found in plenty. Where I have met with
+such and found something useful in them, or where I express
+dissent from them, I have noticed it; but I have not aimed at
+exhausting the literature on my subject. On the other hand I
+have tried to make myself completely acquainted with the first-hand
+material, wherever it gave a direct support for assuming
+Atheism, and to take my own view of it. In many cases, however,
+the argumentation has had to be indirect: it has been necessary
+to draw inferences from what an author does not say in a certain
+connexion when he might be expected to say it, or what he generally
+and throughout avoids mentioning, or from his general
+manner and peculiarities in his way of speaking of the gods. In
+such cases I have often had to be content with my previous knowledge
+and my general impression of the facts; but then I have
+<pb n='154'/><anchor id='Pg154'/>
+as a rule made use of the important modern literature on the
+subject. In working out the sketch of the ideas after the end of
+Antiquity, I have been almost without any guidance in modern
+literature. I have accordingly had to try, on the basis of a superficial
+acquaintance with some of the chief types, to form for myself,
+as best I might, some idea of the course of the evolution; but I
+have not been able to go systematically through the immense
+material, however fruitful such a research appeared to be. In
+the meantime, between the publication of my Danish essay and
+this translation, there has appeared a work by Mr. Gruppe,
+<hi rend='italic'>Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte</hi>
+(Leipzig, 1921). My task in writing my last chapters would have been
+much easier if I could have made use of Mr. Gruppe's learned
+and comprehensive treatment of the subject; but it would not
+have been superfluous, for Mr. Gruppe deals principally with the
+history of classical mythology, not with the history of the belief
+in the gods of antiquity. So I have ventured to let my sketch
+stand as it is, only reducing some of the notes (which I had on purpose
+made rather full, to aid others who might pursue the subject)
+by referring to Mr. Gruppe instead of to the sources themselves.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+For kindly helping me to find my bearings in out-of-the-way
+parts of my subject, I am indebted to my colleagues F. Buhl, I.L.
+Heiberg, I.C. Jacobsen and Kr. Nyrop, as well as to Prof. Martin
+P. Nilsson in Lund.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg001">1</ref>. Definition of Atheism: see the article in the
+<hi rend='italic'>Catholic Encycl.</hi> vol. ii.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg005">5</ref>. Atheism: see Murray, <hi rend='italic'>New Engl.
+Dict.</hi>, under Atheism and -ism. The word seems to have come up in the Renaissance.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg006">6</ref>. Criminal Law at Athens: see Lipsius,
+<hi rend='italic'>Das attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren</hi>, i. p. 358.&mdash;The
+definition in Aristotle, <hi rend='italic'>de virt. et vit.</hi> 7, p.
+1251<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, has, I think, no legal foundation.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg009">9</ref>. On the legal foundation for the trials of Christians, see
+Mommsen, <hi rend='italic'>Der Religionsfreuel nach römischem Recht</hi>
+(<hi rend='italic'>Ges. Schr.</hi> iii. p. 389).&mdash;Mommsen goes too far, I think, in
+supposing a legal foundation for the trials of Christians; above all, I do not believe
+that the defection from the Roman religion was ever considered
+as maiestas in the technical sense of the word, the more so as it is
+certain that, after the earliest period, no difference was made in
+the treatment of citizens and aliens.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>. Lists of atheists: Cicero, <hi rend='italic'>de nat.
+deor.</hi> 1. 1, 2 (comp. 1. 23, 26). Sext. Emp. <hi rend='italic'>hypotyp.</hi> 3. 213;
+<hi rend='italic'>adv. math.</hi> 9. 50. Aelian, <hi rend='italic'>v.h.</hi> 2. 31;
+<hi rend='italic'>de nat. an.</hi> 6. 40.&mdash;The predicate
+<foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>atheos</foreign> is once applied to Anaxagoras by a
+Christian author (Irenaeus: see Diels, <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi>
+46, A 113; compare also Marcellinus, <hi rend='italic'>vit. Thuc.</hi>, see below, note
+on p. 29). Of such isolated cases I have taken no account.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>. On the dualism in the Greek conception of the nature of
+gods see Nägelsbach, <hi rend='italic'>Hom. Theol.</hi> p. 11.&mdash;Pindar:
+<hi rend='italic'>Ol.</hi> 1. 28, 9. 35; <hi rend='italic'>Pyth.</hi> 3. 27.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg017">17</ref>. Xenophanes: Einhorn, <hi rend='italic'>Zeit- und
+Streitfragen der modernen Xenophanesforschung</hi> (<hi rend='italic'>Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos.</hi> xxxi.).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>. Xenophanes's age: Diels,
+<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 11, B 8.&mdash;His criticism of Homer and Hesiod:
+<hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 11, 12.&mdash;Titans and Giants:
+<pb n='155'/><anchor id='Pg155'/>
+<hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 1. 22.&mdash;Criticism of Anthropomorphism:
+<hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 14-16.&mdash;Divination:
+Cic. <hi rend='italic'>de div.</hi> 1. 3, 5.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg019">19</ref>. On Xenophanes's conception of God, comp.
+<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 11, B 23-26; on the identification of God with the
+universe: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 11, A 30, 31, 33-36.&mdash;Cicero:
+<hi rend='italic'>de div.</hi> 1. 3, 5.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg021">21</ref>. For Xenophanes's theology, comp. Freudenthal,
+<hi rend='italic'>Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos.</hi> i. p. 322, and Zeller's criticism,
+<hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> p. 524.
+Agreeing with Freudenthal: Decharme, p. 46; Campbell, <hi rend='italic'>Religion
+in Greek Literature</hi>, p. 293.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg021">21</ref>. Parmenides does not even appear to have designated
+his <q>Being</q> as God (Zeller, i. p. 563).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg023">23</ref>. In the eighteenth century people discussed diffusely
+the question whether Thales was an atheist (of course in the
+sense in which the word was taken at that time); comp. Tennemann,
+<hi rend='italic'>Gesch. d. Philos.</hi> i. pp. 62 and 422. Tennemann remarks
+quite truly that the question is put wrongly.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg024">24</ref>. Thales: Diels, <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 1, A
+22-23.&mdash;Attitude of Democritus towards popular belief:
+<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 55, A 74-79; comp.
+116, 117; B 166, and also B 30. Diels, <hi rend='italic'>Ueber den Dämonenglauben
+des D.</hi> (<hi rend='italic'>Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos.</hi> 1894, p. 154).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg025">25</ref>. Trial of Anaxagoras: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi>
+46, A 1, 17, 18, 19.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg026">26</ref>. Ram's head: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 46, A 16.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg027">27</ref>. Geffcken (in <hi rend='italic'>Hermes</hi>, 42, p. 127)
+has tried to make out something about a criticism of popular belief by Anaxagoras
+from some passages in Aristophanes (<hi rend='italic'>Nub.</hi> 398) and Lucian
+(<hi rend='italic'>Tim.</hi> 10, etc.), but I do not think he has
+succeeded.&mdash;Pericles a free-thinker: Plut. <hi rend='italic'>Pericl.</hi> 6 and 38;
+comp. Decharme, p. 160.&mdash;Personality of Anaxagoras: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi>
+46, A 30 (Aristotle, <hi rend='italic'>Eud.
+Ethics</hi>, A 4, p. 1215<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>, 6).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg028">28</ref>. Herodotus: 8, 77.&mdash;Sophocles:
+<hi rend='italic'>Oed. rex.</hi> 498, 863.&mdash;Diopeithes: Plut.
+<hi rend='italic'>Pericl.</hi> 32 (<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 46, A
+17).&mdash;Thucydides: Classen in the preface to his 3rd ed., p. lvii.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg029">29</ref>. Thucydides, a disciple of Anaxagoras: Marcellinus,
+<hi rend='italic'>vit. Thuc.</hi> 22.&mdash;Generally Thucydides is thought to have been
+more conservative in his religious opinions than I consider probable;
+see Classen, <hi rend='italic'>loc. cit.</hi>; Decharme, p. 83; Gertz in his preface to
+the Danish translation of Thucydides, p. xxvii.&mdash;Hippo:
+<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 26, A 4, 6, 8, 9; B 2, 3.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>. Aristotle: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 26, A
+7.&mdash;Diogenes an atheist: Aelian, <hi rend='italic'>v.h.</hi> 2, 31.&mdash;The air
+his god: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 51, A 8 (he thought
+that Homer identified Zeus with the air, and approved of this as
+οὐ μυθικῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀληθῶς εἰρημενον); B 5, 7, 8.&mdash;Allusions to his doctrines
+by Aristophanes: <hi rend='italic'>Nub.</hi> 225, 828 (<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi>
+51, C 1, 2).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg031">31</ref>. A chief representative of the naïvely critical view of
+natural phenomena is for us Herodotus. The <hi rend='italic'>locus classicus</hi> is
+vii. 129; comp. Gomperz, <hi rend='italic'>Griech. Denker</hi>, i. p. 208; Heiberg,
+<hi rend='italic'>Festskrift til Ussing</hi> (Copenhagen, 1900), p. 91; Decharme, p.
+69.&mdash;Principal passages about Diagoras: Sext. Emp. <hi rend='italic'>adv.
+math.</hi> 9, 53; Suidas, art. <hi rend='italic'>Diagoras II.</hi>; schol. Aristoph.
+<hi rend='italic'>Nub.</hi> 830 (the legend); Suidas, art. <hi rend='italic'>Diagoras
+I.</hi>; Aristoph. <hi rend='italic'>Av.</hi> 1071 with schol.; schol.
+Aristoph. <hi rend='italic'>Ran.</hi> 320; [Lysias] vi. 17; Diod. xiii. 16 (the decree);
+Philodem. <hi rend='italic'>de piet.</hi> p. 89 Gomp. (comments of Aristoxenus);
+<pb n='156'/><anchor id='Pg156'/>
+Aelian, <hi rend='italic'>v.h.</hi> ii. 22 (legislation at Mantinea).&mdash;Wilamowitz
+(<hi rend='italic'>Textgesch. d. Lyr.</hi> p. 80) has tried to save the tradition by
+supposing that the <emph>acme</emph> of Diagoras has been put too early. Comp. also his
+remarks, <hi rend='italic'>Griech. Verskunst.</hi> p. 426, where he has taken up the
+question again with reference to my treatment of it. As he has
+now conceded the possibility of referring the legislation to the
+earlier date, the difference between us is really very slight, and it
+is of course possible, perhaps even probable, that the acme of the
+poet has been antedated.&mdash;Aristoph. <hi rend='italic'>Av.</hi> 1071: <q>On this
+very day it is made public, that if one of you kills Diagoras from Melos,
+he shall have a talent, and if one kills one of the dead tyrants, he
+shall have a talent.</q> The parallel between the two decrees, of
+which the latter is of course an invention of Aristophanes, would
+be without point if the decree against Diagoras was not as futile
+as the decree against the tyrants (<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> the sons of Peisistratus,
+who had been dead some three-quarters of a century), that is, if it did
+not come many years too late.&mdash;Wilamowitz (<hi rend='italic'>Griech. Verskunst,
+loc. cit.</hi>) takes the sense to be: <q>You will not get hold of Diagoras
+any more than you did of the tyrants.</q> But this, besides being
+somewhat pointless, does not agree so well as my explanation
+with the introductory words: <q>On this very day.</q> On the other
+hand, I never meant to imply that Diagoras was dead in 415,
+but only that his offence was an old one&mdash;just as that of Protagoras
+probably was (see p. <ref target="Pg039">39</ref>).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg039">39</ref>. Trial of Protagoras: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi>
+74, A 1-4, 23; the passage referring to the gods: <hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> B
+4.&mdash;Plato: <hi rend='italic'>Theaet.</hi> p. 162<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>
+(<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 74, A 23).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg041">41</ref>. Distinction between belief and knowledge by Protagoras:
+Gomperz, <hi rend='italic'>Griech. Denker</hi>, i. p. 359.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg042">42</ref>. Prodicus: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 77, B 5.
+Comp. Norvin, <hi rend='italic'>Allegorien i den græske Philosophi</hi>
+(<hi rend='italic'>Edda</hi>, 1919), p. 82. I cannot, however,
+quite adopt Norvin's view of the theory of Protagoras.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg044">44</ref>. Critias: <hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 81, B
+25.&mdash;W. Nestle, <hi rend='italic'>Jahrbb. f. Philol.</hi> xi. (1903), pp. 81 and
+178, gives an exhaustive treatment of the subject, but I cannot share his view of it.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg046">46</ref>. Euripides: <hi rend='italic'>Suppl.</hi>
+201.&mdash;Moschion: <hi rend='italic'>Trag. Fragm.</hi> ed.
+Nauck (2nd ed.), p. 813.&mdash;Plato: <hi rend='italic'>Rep.</hi> ii. 369b.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg047">47</ref>. Democritus: Reinhardt in <hi rend='italic'>Hermes</hi>,
+xlvii (1912), p. 503 In spite of Wilamowitz's objections (in his
+<hi rend='italic'>Platon</hi>, ii. p. 214), I still consider it probable that Plato
+alludes to a philosophical theory.&mdash;Protagoras on the original state:
+<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 74, B 8<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg048">48</ref>. Euripides: <hi rend='italic'>Electra, 737</hi>
+(Euripides does not believe in the tale that the sun reversed its course on account of
+Thyestes's fraud against Atreus, and then adds: <q>Fables that terrify men
+are a profit to the worship of the gods</q>).&mdash;Aristotle:
+<hi rend='italic'>Metaph.</hi> A 8, 1074<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>; see text, p.
+85.&mdash;Polybius: vi. 56; see text pp. 90 and 114.&mdash;Plato's
+<hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi>, p. 482 and foll.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg049">49</ref>.&mdash;Callicles: see <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>
+Wilamowitz, <hi rend='italic'>Platon</hi>, i. p. 208.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg050">50</ref>.&mdash;Thrasymachus: Plato, <hi rend='italic'>Rep.</hi>
+i. pp. 338<hi rend='italic'>c</hi>, 343<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>; comp.
+also ii. p. 358<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>. His remark on Providence
+(<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 78, B 8) runs
+thus: <q>The gods do not see the things that are done among men;
+if they did, they would not overlook the greatest human good,
+<pb n='157'/><anchor id='Pg157'/>
+justice. For we find that men do not follow it.</q> Comp. text,
+p. 61.&mdash;Diagoras as Critias's source: Nestle, <hi rend='italic'>Jahrbb.</hi>, 1903,
+p. 101.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg051">51</ref>. Euripides: see W. Nestle,
+<hi rend='italic'>Euripides</hi> (Stuttgart, 1901)
+pp. 51-152. Here, too, the material is set forth exhaustively; the
+results seem to me inadmissible. Browning's theory (<hi rend='italic'>The Ring
+and the Book</hi>, x. 1661 foll.) that Euripides did believe in the existence
+of the gods, but did not believe them to be perfect, is a possible,
+perhaps even a probable, explanation of many of his utterances;
+but it will hardly fit all of them. I have examined the question
+in an essay, <q>Browning om Euripides</q> in my <hi rend='italic'>Udvalgte
+Afhandlinger</hi>, p. 55.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg052">52</ref>. Gods identified with the Elements:
+<hi rend='italic'>Bacch.</hi> 274; fragm.
+839. 877, 941 (Nestle, p. 153).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg053">53</ref>. Polemic against sophists: Nestle, p.
+206.&mdash;<hi rend='italic'>Bellerophon</hi>: fragm. 286.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg054">54</ref>. <q>If the gods&mdash;&mdash;</q>: fragm. 292, 7.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>. <hi rend='italic'>Melanippe</hi>: fragm. 480. The words
+are said to have given offence at the rehearsal, so that Euripides altered them at
+the production of the play (Plut. <hi rend='italic'>Amat.</hi> ch. 13).&mdash;Aeschylus:
+<hi rend='italic'>Agam.</hi> 160.&mdash;Aristophanes: <hi rend='italic'>Thesmoph.</hi>
+450.&mdash;In the <hi rend='italic'>Frogs</hi>, 892,
+Euripides prays to the Ether and other abstractions, not to the
+gods.&mdash;<hi rend='italic'>Clouds</hi>: 1371.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg056">56</ref>. Plato: <hi rend='italic'>Republ.</hi> viii. p.
+568a.&mdash;Quotation from <hi rend='italic'>Melanippe</hi>: Plut.
+<hi rend='italic'>Amat.</hi> 13.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg057">57</ref>. Aristophanes and Naturalism: see note to p.
+<ref target="Pg030">30</ref>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg058">58</ref>. Denial of the gods in the
+<hi rend='italic'>Clouds</hi>, 247, 367, 380, 423, 627,
+817, 825, 1232.&mdash;Moral of the piece: 1452-1510.&mdash;In Aristophanes's
+own travesties of the gods, scholars have found evidence for a
+weakening of popular belief, but this is certainly wrong; comp.
+Decharme, p. 109.&mdash;Words like <q>believe</q> and <q>belief</q> do not
+cover the Greek word νομίζειν, which signifies at once <q>believe</q>
+and <q>be in the habit,</q> <q>use habitually,</q> so that it covers both
+belief and worship&mdash;an ambiguity that is characteristic of Greek
+religion.&mdash;Xenophon: <hi rend='italic'>Memorab.</hi> i. 1;
+<hi rend='italic'>Apol. Socr.</hi> 10 and foll.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg059">59</ref>. Plato: <hi rend='italic'>Apol.</hi> p.
+24<hi rend='italic'>b</hi> (the indictment); 26<hi rend='italic'>b</hi> (the refutation).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>. Aristodemus: Xenoph. <hi rend='italic'>Memor.</hi> i.
+4.&mdash;Cinesias: Decharme, p. 135.&mdash;The Hermocopidae: Decharme, p. 152. Beloch,
+<hi rend='italic'>Hist. of Greece</hi>, ii. 1, p. 360, has another explanation. To my
+argument it is of no consequence what special motive is assigned for
+the crime, as long as it is a political one.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg061">61</ref>. Plato on impiety: <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, x. p.
+886b; comp. xii. p. 967<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>.
+Curiously enough, the same tripartition of the wrong attitude
+towards the gods occurs already in the <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi>, ii. p.
+365<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>, where it is introduced incidentally as well known and a
+matter of course.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg062">62</ref>. Euripides: <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>
+<hi rend='italic'>Hecuba</hi>, 488; <hi rend='italic'>Suppl.</hi> 608.&mdash;Reference
+to Anaxagoras: <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, x. p. 886<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>; to
+Sophistic, 889<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg065">65</ref>. Plato in the <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>: p.
+19<hi rend='italic'>c</hi>.&mdash;Socrates's <hi rend='italic'>daimonion</hi>
+a proof of <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>asebeia</foreign>: Xenoph.
+<hi rend='italic'>Memorab.</hi> i. 1, 2; <hi rend='italic'>Apol</hi>.
+<hi rend='italic'>Socr.</hi> 12; Plato, <hi rend='italic'>Apol.</hi> p.
+31<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg066">66</ref>. Accusation of teaching the doctrine of Anaxagoras:
+<pb n='158'/><anchor id='Pg158'/>
+Plato, <hi rend='italic'>Apol.</hi> p. 26<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>; comp. Xenoph.
+<hi rend='italic'>Memor.</hi> i. 1, 10.&mdash;Plato's
+defence of Socrates: <hi rend='italic'>Apol.</hi> p. 27<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg067">67</ref>. Xenophon's defence of Socrates:
+<hi rend='italic'>Memor.</hi> i. 1, 2; 6 foll., 10 foll.&mdash;Teleological view of
+nature: Xenoph. <hi rend='italic'>Memor.</hi> i. 4; iv. 3.&mdash;On
+the religious standpoint of Socrates, comp. my <hi rend='italic'>Udvalgte
+Afhandlinger</hi>, p. 38.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg068">68</ref>. Plato's <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>, p.
+21<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>, 23<hi rend='italic'>a</hi> and <hi rend='italic'>f</hi>,
+etc.&mdash;The gods all-knowing: <hi rend='italic'>Odyss.</hi> iv. 379 and 468; comp.
+Nägelsbach, <hi rend='italic'>Hom. Theol.</hi>
+p. 18; <hi rend='italic'>Nachhom. Theol.</hi> p. 23.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg069">69</ref>. The gods just: Nägelsbach, <hi rend='italic'>Hom.
+Theol.</hi> p. 297; <hi rend='italic'>Nachhom. Theol.</hi> p. 27.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg071">71</ref>. The relation between early religious thought and Delphi
+has been explained correctly by Sam Wide, <hi rend='italic'>Einleit. in die
+Altertumswissensch.</hi>, ii. p. 221; comp. also I. L. Heiberg in
+<hi rend='italic'>Tilskueren</hi>, 1919, ii. p. 44.&mdash;Honours shown to Pindar at
+Delphi: schol. Pind. ed. Drachm. i. p. 2, 14; 5, 6. Pausan, x. 24. 5.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg072">72</ref>. Plato on the Delphic Oracle:
+<hi rend='italic'>Apol.</hi> p. 20<hi rend='italic'>e</hi>. On the
+following comp. I. L. Heiberg, <hi rend='italic'>loc. cit.</hi> p. 45.&mdash;Socrates on
+his <foreign lang='el' rend='italic'>daimonion</foreign>: Plato,
+<hi rend='italic'>Apol.</hi> p. 31<hi rend='italic'>c</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>. Antisthenes: Ritter, <hi rend='italic'>Hist. philos.
+Gr.<hi rend='vertical-align: super'>9</hi></hi> 285.&mdash;On the
+later Cynics, especially Diogenes, see Diog. Laert. vi. 105 (the gods
+are in need of nothing); Julian, <hi rend='italic'>Or.</hi> vi. p.
+199<hi rend='italic'>b</hi> (Diogenes did not worship the gods).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>. Cyrenaics: Diog. Laert. ii. 91.&mdash;Date of Theodorus:
+Diog. Laert. ii. 101, 103; his book on the gods: Diog. Laert. ii. 97,
+Sext. Emp. <hi rend='italic'>adv. math.</hi> ix. 55; his trial: Diog. Laert. ii. 101.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg076">76</ref>. Theodorus's book used by Epicurus: Diog. Laert. ii.
+97.&mdash;Zeller: <hi rend='italic'>Philos. d. Griechen</hi>, ii. 1, p.
+925.&mdash;Euthyphron: see especially p. 14<hi rend='italic'>b</hi> foll.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>. Criticism of Mythology in the
+<hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi>: ii. p. 377<hi rend='italic'>b</hi> foll.;
+worship presupposed: <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> iii. p. 415<hi rend='italic'>e</hi>; v.
+p. 459<hi rend='italic'>e</hi>, 461<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, 468<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>,
+469<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, 470<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>; vii. p.
+540<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>; reference to the Oracle: iv. p.
+427<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>.&mdash;<hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi>:
+p. 40<hi rend='italic'>d</hi> foll.&mdash;<hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, rules of worship:
+vi. p. 759<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, vii. p. 967<hi rend='italic'>a</hi> and
+elsewhere, x. p. 909<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>; capital punishment for atheists: x. p.
+909<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>. Comp. above, on p. 61.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg078">78</ref>. Atheism a sin of youth: <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, x.
+p. 888<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>.&mdash;Goodness and truth of the gods:
+<hi rend='italic'>Republ.</hi> ii. p. 379<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>,
+380<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>, 382<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>.&mdash;Belief in
+Providence: <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, x. p. 885<hi rend='italic'>c</hi>, etc.;
+<hi rend='italic'>Republ.</hi> x. p. 612<hi rend='italic'>e</hi>;
+<hi rend='italic'>Apol.</hi> p. 41<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg079">79</ref>. <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, x. p.
+888<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>, 893<hi rend='italic'>b</hi> foll., especially
+899<hi rend='italic'>c-d</hi>; comp. also xii. p.
+967<hi rend='italic'>a-c.</hi>&mdash;<hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi>: p.
+40<hi rend='italic'>d-f</hi>. Comp. <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, xii. p.
+948<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg080">80</ref>. The gods in the <hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi>, ii.
+p. 380<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>. This passage,
+taken together with Plato's general treatment of popular belief,
+might lead to the hypothesis that it was Plato's doctrine of ideas
+rather than the rationalism of his youth that brought about strained
+relations between his thought and popular belief. I incline to
+think that such is the case; but there is a long step even from such
+a state of things to downright atheism, and the stress Plato always
+laid on the belief in Providence is a strong argument in favour of
+his belief in the gods, for he could never make his ideas act in the
+capacity of Providence.&mdash;The gods as creators of mankind:
+<hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi>, p. 41<hi rend='italic'>a</hi> foll.
+</p>
+
+<pb n='159'/><anchor id='Pg159'/>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg081">81</ref>. Xenocrates: the exposition of his doctrine given in the
+text is based upon Heinze's <hi rend='italic'>Xenokrates</hi> (Leipzig, 1892).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>. Trial of Aristotle: Diog. Laert. v. 5; Athen. xv. p.
+696.&mdash;The writings of Aristotle that have come down to us are almost
+all of them compositions for the use of his disciples, and were not
+accessible to the general public during his lifetime.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>. On the religious views of Aristotle see in general
+Zeller, ii. 2, p. 787 (Engl. transl. ii. p. 325); where the references to his
+writings are given in full. In the following I indicate only a few
+passages of special interest.&mdash;Discussion of worship precluded:
+<hi rend='italic'>Top.</hi> A, xi. p. 105<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, 5.&mdash;Aristotle's
+Will: <hi rend='italic'>Diog</hi>. Laert. v. 15.&mdash;The
+gods as determining the limits of the human: <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>
+<hi rend='italic'>Nic. Eth.</hi> K, viii. p. 1178b, 33: <q>(the wise) will also be in
+need of outward prosperity, as he is (only) a man.</q>&mdash;Reservations in speaking of
+the gods, <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> <hi rend='italic'>Nic. Eth.</hi> K, ix. p.
+1179<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, 13: <q>he who is active in
+accordance with reason ... must also be supposed to be the most
+beloved of the gods; for if the gods trouble themselves about human
+affairs&mdash;<emph>and that they do so is generally taken for granted</emph>&mdash;it
+must be probable that they take pleasure in what is best and most
+nearly related to themselves (<emph>and that must be the reason</emph>), and
+that they reward those who love and honour this most highly,</q>
+etc. The passage is typical both of the hypothetical way of speaking,
+and of the twist in the direction of Aristotle's own conception
+of the deity (whose essence is reason); also of the Socratic manner
+of dealing with the gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg085">85</ref>. The passage quoted is from the
+<hi rend='italic'>Metaphysics</hi>, A viii. p. 1074<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, 38. Comp.
+<hi rend='italic'>Metaph.</hi> B, ii. p. 997<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>, 8; iv. p.
+1000<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, 9.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg086">86</ref>. Theophrastus: Diog. Laert. v. 37.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg087">87</ref>. Strato: Diels, <hi rend='italic'>Ueber das physikal.
+System des S., Sitzungsber. d. Berl. Akad.</hi>, 1893, p. 101.&mdash;His god the same as
+nature: <hi rend='italic'>Cic. de nat. deor.</hi> i. 35.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg089">89</ref>. On the history of Hellenistic religion, see Wendland,
+<hi rend='italic'>Die hellenistisch-römische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen z. Judentum
+u. Christentum</hi> (Tübingen, 1907).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg090">90</ref>. The passage quoted is Polyb. vi. 56, 6.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg092">92</ref>. On the Tyche-Religion, see Nägelsbach,
+<hi rend='italic'>Nachhom. Theologie</hi>, p. 153; Lehrs, <hi rend='italic'>Populäre
+Aufsätze</hi>, p. 153; Rohde, <hi rend='italic'>Griech.
+Roman</hi>, p. 267 (1st ed.); Wendland, p. 59.&mdash;Thucydides: see
+Classen in the introduction to his (3rd) edition, pp. lvii-lix, where
+all the material is collected. A conclusive passage is vii. 36, 6,
+where Thuc. makes the bigoted Nicias before a decisive battle
+express the hope that <q>Fortune</q> will favour the Athenians.&mdash;Demosthenes's
+dream: <hi rend='italic'>Aeschin.</hi> iii. 77.&mdash;Demosthenes on Tyche:
+<hi rend='italic'>Olynth.</hi> ii. 22; <hi rend='italic'>de cor.</hi> 252.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>. Demosthenes and the Pythia:
+<hi rend='italic'>Aesch.</hi> iii. 130. Comp. <hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 68, 131, 152;
+Plutarch, <hi rend='italic'>Dem.</hi> 20.&mdash;Demetrius of Phalerum:
+Polyb. xxix. 21.&mdash;Temples of Tyche: Roscher, <hi rend='italic'>Mythol. Lex.</hi>,
+art. <hi rend='italic'>Fortuna</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg094">94</ref>. Tyche mistress of the gods: <hi rend='italic'>Trag.
+adesp. fragm.</hi> 506, Nauck; [Dio Chrys.] lxiv. p. 331 R.&mdash;Polybius: i. 1; iii.
+5, 7.&mdash;The reservations against Tyche as a principle for the explaining of
+historical facts, and the twisting of the notion in the direction of
+<pb n='160'/><anchor id='Pg160'/>
+Providence found in certain passages in Polybius, do not concern us
+here; they are probably due to the Stoic influence he underwent
+during his stay at Rome. Comp. below, on p. 114, and see Cuntz,
+<hi rend='italic'>Polybios</hi> (Leipzig, 1902), p. 43.&mdash;Pliny: ii. 22 foll.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg095">95</ref>. Tyche in the novels: Rohde, <hi rend='italic'>Griech.
+Rom.</hi> p. 280.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>. Strabo: xvii. p. 813.&mdash;Plutarch:
+<hi rend='italic'>de def. or.</hi> 5 and 7.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg098">98</ref>. The Aetolians at Dium: Polyb. iv. 62; at Dodona,
+iv. 67; Philip at Thermon, v. 9; Dicaearchus, xviii. 54.&mdash;Decay of
+Roman worship: Wissowa, <hi rend='italic'>Religion u. Kultus d. Römer</hi>, p. 70 (2nd
+ed.). To this work I must refer for indications of the sources; but
+the polemic in the text is chiefly directed against Wissowa.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg099">99</ref>. Ennius: comp. below, p. 112.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg100">100</ref>. Varro: in Augustine, <hi rend='italic'>de civ.
+Dei</hi>, vi. 2.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg103">103</ref>. Theology of the Stoics: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 309-45.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>. Demonology of the Stoics: Heinze,
+<hi rend='italic'>Xenokrates</hi>, p. 96.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg105">105</ref>. Epicurus's theology: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 427-38. Comp.
+Schwartz, <hi rend='italic'>Charakterköpfe</hi>, ii. p. 43.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg106">106</ref>. Epicurus's doctrine of the eternity of the gods
+criticised: Cic. <hi rend='italic'>de nat. deor.</hi> i. 68 foll.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg107">107</ref>. The Sceptics: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 507 and 521.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg109">109</ref>. Diogenes: see note on p. 74.&mdash;Bion: Diog. Laert.
+iv. 52 and 54.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg110">110</ref>. Menippos: R. Helm, <hi rend='italic'>Lukian u.
+Menipp</hi> (Leipzig and Berlin, 1906).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>. Euhemerus: Jacoby in Pauly-Wissowa's
+<hi rend='italic'>Realencyclop.</hi>, art. <q>Euemeros</q>; Wendland,
+<hi rend='italic'>Hellenist. Kultur</hi>, p. 70.&mdash;Euhemerism
+before Euhemerus: Lobeck, <hi rend='italic'>Aglaophamus</hi>, p. 9; Wendland, p. 67.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg112">112</ref>. A Danish scholar, Dr. J. P. Jacobsen
+(<hi rend='italic'>Afhandlinger og Artikler</hi>, p. 490), seems to think that
+Euhemerus's theory was influenced by the worship of heroes. But there is nothing to show
+that Euhemerus supposed his gods to have continued their existence
+after their death, though this would have been in accordance
+with Greek belief even in the Hellenistic period; he seems rather
+to have insisted that they were worshipped as gods during their
+lifetime (comp. Jacoby, <hi rend='italic'>loc. cit.</hi>).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>. Euhemerism in Polybius: xxxiv. 2; comp. x. 10,
+11.&mdash;Relapse into orthodoxy: xxxvii. 9 (the decisive passage); xxxix.
+19, 2 (concluding prayer to the gods); xviii. 54, 7-10; xxiii. 10, 14
+(the gods punish impiety; comp. xxxvii. 9, 16). There is a marked
+contrast between such passages and the way Polybius speaks of
+Philip's destruction of the sanctuary at Thermon; he blames it
+severely, but merely on political, not on religious grounds (v. 9-12).
+Orthodox utterances in the older portions of the work (i. 84, 10;
+x. 2, 7) may be due to that accommodation to popular belief which
+Polybius himself acknowledges as justifiable (xvi. 12, 9), but also
+to later revision.&mdash;Influence of Stoicism: Hirzel, <hi rend='italic'>Untersuchungen
+zu Ciceros philos. Schriften</hi>, ii. p. 841.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg115">115</ref>. Cicero's Stoicism in his philosophy of religion:
+<hi rend='italic'>de nat. deor.</hi> iii. 40, 95.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg116">116</ref>. Sanctuary to Tullia: Cic. <hi rend='italic'>ad
+Att.</hi> xii. 18 foll.; several of the letters (23, 25, 35, 36) show that Atticus
+disapproved of the
+<pb n='161'/><anchor id='Pg161'/>
+idea, and that Cicero himself was conscious that it was unworthy
+of him.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg117">117</ref>. Euhemeristic defence: <hi rend='italic'>fragm.
+consol.</hi> 14, 15.&mdash;Augustus's reorganisation of the cults: Wissowa,
+<hi rend='italic'>Religion u. Kultus d. Römer</hi>,
+p. 73. Recent scholars, especially when treating of Virgil (Heinze,
+<hi rend='italic'>Vergils ep. Technik</hi>, 3rd ed. p. 291; Norden,
+<hi rend='italic'>Aeneis</hi>, vi. 2nd ed.
+pp. 314, 318, 362), speak of the reform of Augustus as if it involved
+a real revulsion of feeling in his contemporaries. This is in my
+opinion a complete misunderstanding of the facts. Virgil's religious
+views: <hi rend='italic'>Catal. v., Georgics</hi>, ii. 458.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg118">118</ref>. Pliny: <hi rend='italic'>hist. nat.</hi> ii. 1-27.
+The passages translated are §§ 14 and 27.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg122">122</ref>. Seneca: fragm. 31-39, Haase.&mdash;Stoic polemic
+against atheism: Epictetus, <hi rend='italic'>diss.</hi> ii. 20, 21; comp. Marcus
+Aurelius, vi. 44.&mdash;Later Cynicism: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 763.&mdash;Oenomaus: only
+preserved in excerpts by Euseb. <hi rend='italic'>praep. evang.</hi> 5-6 (a separate
+edition is wanted).&mdash;His polemic directed against the priests: Euseb. 5,
+p. 213<hi rend='italic'>c</hi>; comp. Oenomaus himself, <hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 6,
+p. 256<hi rend='italic'>d</hi>.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg123">123</ref>. Lucian: see Christ, <hi rend='italic'>Gesch. d.
+griech. Litt.</hi> ii. 2, p. 550 (5th ed.), and R. Helm, <hi rend='italic'>Lukian u.
+Menipp</hi> (see note to p. 110).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>. Timon: ch. x.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg126">126</ref>. On Lucian's caution in attacking the really popular
+gods, see Wilamowitz, in <hi rend='italic'>Kultur d. Gegenwart</hi>, i. 8, p.
+248.&mdash;The Jews atheists: Harnack, <hi rend='italic'>Der Vorwurf d. Atheismus in den
+3 ersten Jahrh</hi>. (<hi rend='italic'>Texte u. Unters.</hi>, N.F., xiii. 4), p. 3.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg127">127</ref>. I have met with no comprehensive treatment of Jewish
+and Christian polemic against Paganism; Geffcken, <hi rend='italic'>Zwei griech.
+Apologeten</hi> (Leipzig, 1907), is chiefly concerned with investigations
+into the sources. I shall therefore indicate the principal passages
+on which my treatment is based.&mdash;Polemic against images in the
+Old Testament: Isaiah 44.10 etc.; in later literature: Epistle
+of Jeremiah; Wisdom of Solomon 13 foll.; Philo, <hi rend='italic'>de decal.</hi> 65 foll.,
+etc.&mdash;Euhemerism: Wisdom of Solomon 14.15; Epistle of Aristeas,
+135; Sibyll. iii. 547, 554, 723.&mdash;Elements and celestial bodies:
+Wisdom of Solomon 13; Philo, <hi rend='italic'>de decal.</hi> 52 foll.&mdash;The tenacity
+of tradition is apparent from the fact that even Maimonides in his
+treatise of idolatry deals only with star-worship and image-worship.
+I know the treatise only from the Latin translation by D. Voss
+(in G. I. Voss's <hi rend='italic'>Opera</hi>, vol. v.).&mdash;Demons: Deuteron. 32.17;
+Psalms 106.37; add (according to LXX.) Isaiah 65.11; Psalms
+96.5. Later writers: Enoch 19.99, 7; Baruch 4.7. Such passages
+as Jub. 22, 17 or Sibyll. prooem. 22 are possibly Euhemeristic.&mdash;Fallen
+angels: Enoch, 19.&mdash;Philo's demonology: <hi rend='italic'>de gig.</hi> 6-18, etc.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>. St. Paul: 1 Cor. 10.20; comp. 8.4 and Rom. 1.23.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>. Image-worship and demon-worship not conciliated:
+<hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> Tertull. <hi rend='italic'>Apologet.</hi> 10-15 and 22-23,
+comp. 27.&mdash;Jewish demonology: Bousset, <hi rend='italic'>Religion d. Judentums</hi>,
+p. 326 (1st ed.).&mdash;Fallen angels: <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> Athenag. 24 foll.;
+Augustine, <hi rend='italic'>Enchir.</hi> 9, 28 foll.;
+<hi rend='italic'>de civ. Dei</hi>, viii. 22.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg130">130</ref>. Euhemerism in the Apologists:
+<hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> Augustine, <hi rend='italic'>de civ.
+Dei</hi>, ii. 10; vi. 7; vii. 18 and 33; viii. 26.&mdash;Euhemerism and
+demonology combined: <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> Augustine, <hi rend='italic'>de civ.
+Dei</hi>, ii. 10; vii. 35;
+<pb n='162'/><anchor id='Pg162'/>
+comp. vii. 28 fin.&mdash;Worship of the heavenly bodies: <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>
+Aristid. 3 foll.; Augustine, <hi rend='italic'>de civ. Dei</hi>, vii. 29 foll.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg131">131</ref>. Paganism a delusion caused by demons: Thomas Aq.
+<hi rend='italic'>Summa theol.</hi> P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. below, note on p. 135.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg133">133</ref>. For the following sketch I have found valuable material
+in Gedike's essay, <hi rend='italic'>Ueber die mannigfaltigen Hypothesen z. Erklärung
+d. Mythologie</hi> (<hi rend='italic'>Verm. Schriften</hi>, Berlin, 1801, p. 61).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg134">134</ref>. Milton: <hi rend='italic'>Paradise Lost</hi>, i. 506.
+The theory that the pagan oracles fell mute at the rise of Christianity is also found in
+Milton, <hi rend='italic'>Hymn on the Morning of Christ's Nativity</hi>, st. xviii. foll.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>. G. I. Voss; <hi rend='italic'>De Theologia
+Gentili</hi>, lib. i. (published, 1642)&mdash;Voss's
+view is in the main that idolatry as a whole is the work of the
+Devil. What is worshipped is partly the heavenly bodies, partly
+demons, partly (and principally) dead men; most of the ancient
+gods are identified with persons from the Old Testament. Demon-worship
+is dealt with in ch. 6; it is proved among other things by
+the true predictions of the oracles. Individual Greek deities are
+identified with demons in ch. 7, in a context where oracles are
+dealt with. On older works of the same tendency, see below,
+note on p. 140; on Natalis Comes, <hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> A fuller treatment of
+Voss's theories is found in Gruppe's work, § 25.&mdash;Thomas Aquinas:
+<hi rend='italic'>Summa theol.</hi> P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. also Q. 122, art.
+2.&mdash;Dante: Sommo Giove for God, <hi rend='italic'>Purg.</hi> vi. 118; his devils:
+Charon, <hi rend='italic'>Inf.</hi> iii. 82 (109 expressly designated as <q>dimonio</q>);
+Minos, <hi rend='italic'>Inf.</hi> v. 4; Geryon, <hi rend='italic'>Inf.</hi> xviii.
+(there are more of the same kind).&mdash;<q>Dei falsi e bugiardi</q>:
+<hi rend='italic'>Inf.</hi> i. 72. (Plutus, who appears as a
+devil in <hi rend='italic'>Inf.</hi> vii. was probably taken by Dante for an antique god;
+but the name may also be a classicising translation of Mammon.)
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>. Mediaeval epic poets: Nyrop, <hi rend='italic'>Den
+oldfranske Heltedigtning</hi>, p. 255 and 260; Dernedde, <hi rend='italic'>Ueber die den
+altfranzös. Dichtern bekannten Stoffe aus dem Altertum</hi> (Diss. Götting.
+1887).&mdash;Confusion of ancient and Christian elements: Dernedde, p. 10;
+the gods are devils: Dernedde, pp. 85, 88.&mdash;Euhemerism: Dernedde,
+p. 4.&mdash;I have tried to get a first-hand impression of the way
+the gods are treated by the old French epic poets, but the material
+is too large, and indexes suited to the purpose are wanting. The
+paganism of the original is taken over naïvely, <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>, by Veldeke,
+<hi rend='italic'>Eneidt</hi>, i. 45, 169.&mdash;On magic I have consulted Horst's
+<hi rend='italic'>Dämonomagie</hi> (Frankf. 1818); and his
+<hi rend='italic'>Zauber-Bibliothek</hi> (Mainz, 1821-26); Schindler,
+<hi rend='italic'>Der Aberglaube des Mittelalters</hi> (Breslau, 1858); Maury,
+<hi rend='italic'>La magie et l'astrologie dans l'antiquité et au moyen âge</hi> (Paris,
+1860). These authors all agree that mediaeval magic is dependent on
+antiquity, but that the pagan gods are superseded by devils (or the
+Devil). The connexion in substance with antiquity, on which
+Maury specially insists, is certain enough, but does not concern us
+here, where the question is about the theory. In the <hi rend='italic'>Zauber-Bibl.</hi>
+i. p. 137 (in the treatise <hi rend='italic'>Pneumatologia vera et occulta</hi>), the
+snake Python is put down among the demons, with the remark that
+Apollo was called after it.&mdash;Magic formulae with antique gods:
+Heim, <hi rend='italic'>Incantamenta magica</hi> (in the <hi rend='italic'>Neue Jahrbb.
+f. Philologie</hi>, Suppl. xix. 1893, p. 557; I owe this reference to the kindness of
+my colleague, Prof. Groenbeck). Pradel, <hi rend='italic'>Religionsgesch. Vers. u.
+<pb n='163'/><anchor id='Pg163'/>
+Vorarb.</hi> iii., has collected prayers and magic formulae from Italy
+and Greece; they do not contain names of antique gods.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>. Acosta: Joseph de Acosta, <hi rend='italic'>Historia
+naturale e morale delle Indie</hi>, Venice, 1596. I have used this Italian translation;
+the original work appeared in 1590.&mdash;Demons at work in oracles:
+bk. v. ch. 9; in magic: ch. 25.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>. Demon in Brazil: Voss, <hi rend='italic'>Theol.
+Gent.</hi> i. ch. 8.&mdash;Pagan
+worship in the Florentine and Roman Academies: Voigt, <hi rend='italic'>Wiederbelebung
+d. klass. Altertums</hi>, ii. p. 239 (2nd ed.); Hettner, <hi rend='italic'>Ital.
+Studien</hi>, p. 174.&mdash;On the conception of the antique gods in the
+earlier Middle Ages, see Gruppe, § 4.&mdash;Thomas Aquinas: <hi rend='italic'>Summa
+theol.</hi> P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4.&mdash;Curious and typical of the mediaeval
+way of reasoning is the idea of seeking prototypes of the Christian
+history of salvation in pagan mythology. See v. Eicken, <hi rend='italic'>Gesch. u.
+System d. mittelalt. Weltanschauung</hi> (Stuttg. 1887), p. 648, and (with
+more detail) F. Piper, <hi rend='italic'>Mythologie u. Symbolik d. christl. Kunst</hi>
+(Weimar, 1847-51), i. p. 143; comp. also Gruppe, § 8 foll. Good instances
+are the myths in the <hi rend='italic'>Speculum humanae salvationis</hi>, chs. 3 and 24.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>. On Hebraism in general, see Gruppe, § 19 and § 24 foll.;
+on Huet, § 28. Nevertheless, Huet operates with demonology in
+connexion with the oracles (<hi rend='italic'>Dem. evang.</hi> ii. 9, 34, 4).
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg140">140</ref>. On Natalis Comes, see Gruppe, § 19. In bk. i. ch. 7,
+Natalis Comes gives an account of the origin of antiquity's conceptions
+of the gods; it has quite a naturalistic turn. Nevertheless,
+we find in ch. 16 a remark which shows that he embraced
+demonology in its crudest form; compare also the theory set forth
+in ch. 10. His interpretations of myths are collected in bk. x.&mdash;On
+Bacon, see Gruppe, § 22. Typhoeus-myth: introduct. to <hi rend='italic'>De
+sapientia veterum.</hi>&mdash;Alchemistic interpretations: Gedike, <hi rend='italic'>Verm.
+Schriften</hi>, p. 78; Gruppe, § 30. Of the works quoted by Gedike, I
+have consulted Faber's <hi rend='italic'>Panchymicum</hi> (Frankf. 1651) and Toll's
+Fortuita (Amsterd. 1687). Faber has only some remarks on the
+matter in bk. i. ch. 5; by Toll the alchemistic interpretation is
+carried through. Gedike quotes, moreover, a work by Suarez de
+Salazar, which must date from the sixteenth century; according
+to Jöcher (iv. 1913) it only exists in MS., and I do not know where
+Gedike got his reference.&mdash;Thomas: <hi rend='italic'>Summa</hi>, P. ii. 2, Q. 172,
+arts. 5 and 6.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>. Demonology as explanation of the oracles: see van
+Dale, <hi rend='italic'>De oraculis</hi>, p. 430 (Amsterd. 1700); he quotes numerous
+treatises from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I have
+glanced at Moebius, <hi rend='italic'>De oraculorum ethnicorum origine</hi>, etc.
+(Leipzig, 1656).&mdash;Caelius Rhodiginus: <hi rend='italic'>Lectionum antiq.</hi>
+(Leyden, 1516), lib. ii. cap. 12; comp. Gruppe, § 15.&mdash;Caelius Calcagninus:
+<hi rend='italic'>Oraculorum liber</hi> (in his <hi rend='italic'>Opera</hi>, Basle,
+1544, p. 640). The little dialogue is not very easy to understand; it is evidently a
+satire on contemporary credulity; but that Caelius completely rejected
+divination seems to be assumed also by G. I. Voss, <hi rend='italic'>Theol. Gent.</hi>
+i. 6.&mdash;Machiavelli: <hi rend='italic'>Discorsi</hi>, i. 56.&mdash;Van Dale:
+<hi rend='italic'>De oraculis gentilium</hi> (1st ed. Amsterd. 1683);
+<hi rend='italic'>De idololatria</hi> (Amsterd. 1696). Difficulties with the biblical
+accounts of demons: <hi rend='italic'>De idol.</hi>, dedication.&mdash;Fontenelle:
+<hi rend='italic'>Histoire des oracles</hi> (Paris, 1687). The little book
+<pb n='164'/><anchor id='Pg164'/>
+has an amusing preface, in which Fontenelle with naïve complacency
+(and with a sharp eye for van Dale's deficiencies of style) gives
+an account of his popularisation of the learned work. On Fontenelle
+and the answer by the Jesuit, Balthus, see for further details
+Banier, <hi rend='italic'>La mythologie et les fables expliquées par l'histoire</hi>
+(Paris, 1738), bk. iii. ch. 1. Van Dale's book itself had called forth an
+answer by Moebius (included in the edition of 1690 of his work,
+<hi rend='italic'>de orac. ethn. orig.</hi>).&mdash;On the influence exercised by van
+Dale and Fontenelle on the succeeding mythologists, see Gruppe, § 34.&mdash;Banier:
+see Gruppe, § 35.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg143">143</ref>. Vico: <hi rend='italic'>Scienza nuova</hi> (Milan,
+1853), p. 168 (bk. ii. in the section, Della metafisica poetica); political allegories,
+<hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi> p. 309
+(in the Canone mitologico). Comp. Gruppe, § 44.&mdash;Banier: in
+the work indicated above, bk. i. ch. 5.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>. On the mythological theories of the eighteenth century,
+comp. Gruppe, § 36 foll.; on Bryant, § 40; on Dupuis, § 41.&mdash;Polemic
+against Euhemerism from the standpoint of nature-symbolism:
+de la Barre, <hi rend='italic'>Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire de la
+religion en Grèce</hi>, in <hi rend='italic'>Mém. de l'Acad. des Inscr.</hi> xxiv.
+(1749; the treatise had already been communicated in 1737 and 1738); a
+posthumous continuation in <hi rend='italic'>Mém.</hi> xxix. (1770) gives an idea of
+de la Barre's own point of view, which was not a little in advance
+of his time. Comp. Gruppe, § 37.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+P. <ref target="Pg145">145</ref>. A good survey of modern investigations in the field of
+the history of ancient religion is given by Sam Wide in the <hi rend='italic'>Einleit.
+in die Altertumswissensch.</hi> ii.; here also remarks on the mythology
+of older times. The later part of Gruppe's work contains a very full
+treatment of the subject.
+</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<pb n='165'/><anchor id='Pg165'/>
+
+<div rend='page-break-before: always'>
+<index index='toc'/>
+<index index='pdf'/>
+<head>Index</head>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Absolute definitions of the divine, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>, <ref target="Pg019">19</ref>, <ref target="Pg068">68</ref>, <ref target="Pg069">69</ref>, <ref target="Pg082">82</ref>, <ref target="Pg088">88</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Academics, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Academy, later, <ref target="Pg108">108</ref>, <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Acosta, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aelian, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aeneid (mediaeval), <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aeschines, <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aeschylus, <ref target="Pg054">54</ref>, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aetolians, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>, <ref target="Pg098">98</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Alchemistic explanation of Paganism, <ref target="Pg140">140</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Alcibiades, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Alexander the Great, <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>, <ref target="Pg112">112</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<anchor id="index-allegorical-interpretation"/>
+<lg>
+<l>Allegorical interpretation, <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg140">140</ref>, <ref target="Pg143">143</ref>, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>American Paganism, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, <ref target="Pg007">7</ref>, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg025">25-29</ref>, <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>, <ref target="Pg031">31</ref>, <ref target="Pg040">40</ref>, <ref target="Pg062">62</ref>, <ref target="Pg063">63</ref>, <ref target="Pg066">66</ref>, <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Anaximenes, <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Angelology, <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Anthropomorphism, <ref target="Pg014">14</ref>, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>, <ref target="Pg019">19</ref>, <ref target="Pg069">69</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Antisthenes, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg109">109</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Apologists, <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>, <ref target="Pg130">130</ref>, <ref target="Pg132">132</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Arcissewsky, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aristides the Apologist, <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aristides Rhetor, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aristodemus, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>, <ref target="Pg062">62</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aristophanes, <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>, <ref target="Pg032">32</ref>, <ref target="Pg033">33</ref>, <ref target="Pg039">39</ref>, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>, <ref target="Pg056">56-58</ref>, <ref target="Pg065">65</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Birds</hi>, <ref target="Pg032">32</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Clouds</hi>, <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>, <ref target="Pg056">56-58</ref></l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Frogs</hi>, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aristotle, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>, <ref target="Pg032">32</ref>, <ref target="Pg046">46</ref>, <ref target="Pg083">83-87</ref>, <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Ethics</hi>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Metaphysics</hi>, <ref target="Pg085">85-86</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Politics</hi>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aristoxenus, <ref target="Pg032">32</ref>, <ref target="Pg033">33</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Asclepius, <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>, <ref target="Pg126">126</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l><hi rend='italic'>Asebeia</hi>, <ref target="Pg006">6</ref>, <ref target="Pg007">7</ref>, <ref target="Pg008">8</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aspasia, <ref target="Pg027">27</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Atheism (and Atheist) defined, <ref target="Pg001">1</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>rare in antiquity, <ref target="Pg002">2</ref>, <ref target="Pg133">133</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>of recent origin, <ref target="Pg002">2</ref>, <ref target="Pg143">143</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>origin of the words, <ref target="Pg005">5</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>lists of atheists, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>punishable by death in Plato's <hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>sin of youth, <ref target="Pg078">78</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Athene, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Athens, its treatment of atheism, <ref target="Pg006">6-8</ref>, <ref target="Pg009">9</ref>, <ref target="Pg012">12</ref>, <ref target="Pg025">25</ref>, <ref target="Pg039">39</ref>, <ref target="Pg065">65</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>, <ref target="Pg086">86</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>its view of sophistic, <ref target="Pg058">58-59</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l><hi rend='italic'>Atheos</hi> (<hi rend='italic'>atheoi</hi>), <ref target="Pg002">2</ref>, <ref target="Pg010">10</ref>, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg014">14</ref>, <ref target="Pg019">19</ref>, <ref target="Pg023">23</ref>, <ref target="Pg029">29</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>, <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>, <ref target="Pg110">110</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l><hi rend='italic'>Atheotes</hi>, <ref target="Pg002">2</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Augustine, St., <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<anchor id="index-augustus"/>
+<lg>
+<l>Augustus, <ref target="Pg117">117</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>religious reaction of, <ref target="Pg100">100</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg117">117</ref>, <ref target="Pg120">120</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Aurelius, Marcus, <ref target="Pg011">11</ref>, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Bacon, Francis (<hi rend='italic'>De Sap. Vet.</hi>) <ref target="Pg140">140</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Banier, <ref target="Pg142">142</ref>, <ref target="Pg143">143</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Bible, <ref target="Pg130">130</ref>, <ref target="Pg142">142</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Bion, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg109">109</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Brazil, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Bruno, Giordano, <ref target="Pg151">151</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Bryant, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Buttmann, <ref target="Pg152">152</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Caelius Calcagninus, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Caelius Rhodiginus, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Callicles, <ref target="Pg048">48</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg063">63</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Carlyle, <ref target="Pg112">112</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Carneades, <ref target="Pg008">8</ref>, <ref target="Pg108">108</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Cassander of Macedonia, <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Charon, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Christianity, <ref target="Pg126">126</ref>, <ref target="Pg128">128-32</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Christians, their atheism, <ref target="Pg009">9</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>prosecutions of, <ref target="Pg010">10</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>demonology, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Cicero, <ref target="Pg019">19</ref>, <ref target="Pg105">105</ref>, <ref target="Pg114">114-17</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Nature of the Gods</hi>, <ref target="Pg115">115</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>On the State</hi>, <ref target="Pg115">115</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>On the Laws</hi>, <ref target="Pg115">115</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>De consolatione</hi>, <ref target="Pg116">116</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Cinesias, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Copernicus, <ref target="Pg151">151</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Critias, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg044">44-50</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Sisyphus</hi>, <ref target="Pg044">44</ref> f., <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Criticism of popular religion, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>, <ref target="Pg017">17</ref>, <ref target="Pg019">19</ref>, <ref target="Pg035">35</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg078">78</ref>, <ref target="Pg082">82</ref>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>, <ref target="Pg088">88</ref>, <ref target="Pg090">90</ref>, <ref target="Pg099">99</ref>, <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>, <ref target="Pg109">109</ref>, <ref target="Pg110">110</ref>, <ref target="Pg122">122</ref>, <ref target="Pg124">124-26</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Cuthites, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Cynics, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg109">109-10</ref>, <ref target="Pg122">122</ref>, <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Cyrenaics, <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<pb n='166'/><anchor id='Pg166'/>
+
+<anchor id="index-daemonion"/>
+<lg>
+<l><hi rend='italic'>Daimonion</hi> of Socrates, <ref target="Pg065">65</ref>, <ref target="Pg066">66</ref>, <ref target="Pg072">72-73</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>van Dale, <ref target="Pg141">141-42</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dante, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Deisidaimon, <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Demeter, <ref target="Pg042">42</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>, <ref target="Pg081">81</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Demetrius of Phalerum, <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>, <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>On Tyche</hi>, <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Democritus, <ref target="Pg024">24</ref>, <ref target="Pg042">42</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>, <ref target="Pg044">44</ref>, <ref target="Pg047">47</ref>, <ref target="Pg052">52</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Demonology, <ref target="Pg081">81-83</ref>, <ref target="Pg105">105</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg127">127-32</ref>, <ref target="Pg134">134-42</ref>, <ref target="Pg148">148</ref>, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Demosthenes, <ref target="Pg092">92-93</ref>, <ref target="Pg096">96</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Devil, <ref target="Pg132">132</ref>, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Diagoras of Melos, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg031">31-34</ref>, <ref target="Pg039">39</ref>, <ref target="Pg050">50</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Apopyrgizontes logoi</hi>, <ref target="Pg032">32</ref>, <ref target="Pg033">33</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dicaearchus, <ref target="Pg098">98</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Diodorus Siculus, <ref target="Pg112">112</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Diogenes of Apollonia, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg029">29-30</ref>, <ref target="Pg057">57</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Diogenes the Cynic, <ref target="Pg109">109</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dionysus, <ref target="Pg042">42</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Diopeithes, <ref target="Pg028">28</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dioscuri, <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dium, <ref target="Pg098">98</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Divination, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>, <ref target="Pg020">20</ref>, <ref target="Pg026">26</ref>, <ref target="Pg027">27</ref>, <ref target="Pg028">28</ref>, <ref target="Pg040">40</ref>, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>, <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>, <ref target="Pg131">131</ref>, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>, <ref target="Pg140">140-42</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Comp. Oracle.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dodona, <ref target="Pg098">98</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dogmatics, <ref target="Pg108">108</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Domitian, <ref target="Pg011">11</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Dupuis, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Elements, divine, <ref target="Pg023">23</ref>, <ref target="Pg024">24</ref>, <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>, <ref target="Pg052">52</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg057">57</ref>, <ref target="Pg081">81</ref>, <ref target="Pg103">103</ref>, <ref target="Pg127">127</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Eleusinian Mysteries, <ref target="Pg032">32</ref>, <ref target="Pg033">33</ref>, <ref target="Pg040">40</ref>, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Ennius, <ref target="Pg099">99</ref>, <ref target="Pg112">112</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Epicureans, Epicurus, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg076">76</ref>, <ref target="Pg080">80</ref>, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>, <ref target="Pg105">105-7</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Euhemerus, Euhemerism, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg110">110-12</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>, <ref target="Pg117">117</ref>, <ref target="Pg127">127</ref>, <ref target="Pg130">130</ref>, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg140">140</ref>, <ref target="Pg142">142</ref>, <ref target="Pg143">143</ref>, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Euripides, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>, <ref target="Pg017">17</ref>, <ref target="Pg021">21</ref>, <ref target="Pg045">45</ref>, <ref target="Pg046">46</ref>, <ref target="Pg048">48</ref>, <ref target="Pg051">51-56</ref>, <ref target="Pg062">62</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Bellerophon</hi>, <ref target="Pg053">53</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Melanippe</hi>, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>, <ref target="Pg056">56</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Fallen angels, <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>, <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>, <ref target="Pg130">130</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Florentine Academy, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Foreign gods, <ref target="Pg070">70</ref>, <ref target="Pg089">89</ref>, <ref target="Pg103">103</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Fontenelle, <ref target="Pg142">142</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Geocentric view, <ref target="Pg150">150</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Geryon, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Giants, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Gorgias, <ref target="Pg037">37</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hades, <ref target="Pg081">81</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Heavenly bodies, <ref target="Pg002">2</ref>, <ref target="Pg020">20</ref>, <ref target="Pg022">22</ref>, <ref target="Pg025">25</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>, <ref target="Pg062">62</ref>, <ref target="Pg066">66</ref>, <ref target="Pg079">79</ref>, <ref target="Pg080">80</ref>, <ref target="Pg081">81</ref>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>, <ref target="Pg087">87</ref>, <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>, <ref target="Pg127">127</ref>, <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>, <ref target="Pg130">130</ref>, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>, <ref target="Pg151">151</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Heavenly phenomena, <ref target="Pg022">22</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hebraism, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg143">143</ref>, <ref target="Pg144">144</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hecataeus of Abdera, <ref target="Pg112">112</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Heliocentric view, <ref target="Pg151">151</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hellenistic philosophy, <ref target="Pg094">94</ref>, <ref target="Pg103">103-10</ref>, <ref target="Pg119">119</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hephaestus, <ref target="Pg042">42</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Heracles, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hercules, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Herder, <ref target="Pg145">145</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hermae, <ref target="Pg040">40</ref>, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hermes, <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hermias, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Herodotus, <ref target="Pg028">28</ref>, <ref target="Pg029">29</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hesiod, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Heyne, <ref target="Pg152">152</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hippo of Rhegium, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg029">29-30</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Holy War, <ref target="Pg096">96</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Homer, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>, <ref target="Pg068">68</ref>, <ref target="Pg106">106</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Horace, <ref target="Pg117">117</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Huet, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Hylozoism, <ref target="Pg023">23</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Ideas, Platonic, <ref target="Pg080">80</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Idolatry attacked, <ref target="Pg123">123</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>See also <ref target="index-image-worship">Image Worship</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Ignorance, Socratic, <ref target="Pg068">68</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<anchor id="index-image-worship"/>
+<lg>
+<l>Image Worship, <ref target="Pg127">127</ref>, <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>, <ref target="Pg131">131-37</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Jews, their atheism, <ref target="Pg009">9</ref>, <ref target="Pg126">126</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Josephus, <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Judaism, <ref target="Pg126">126</ref>, <ref target="Pg127">127-28</ref>, <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Juno Regina, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Jupiter (in Dante), <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>(in the Thebaïs,) <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Jupiter-priest, <ref target="Pg100">100</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Kepler, <ref target="Pg151">151</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Kronos, <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Lampon, <ref target="Pg026">26</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Lobeck, <ref target="Pg152">152</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Lucian, <ref target="Pg110">110</ref>, <ref target="Pg123">123-26</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Timon</hi>, <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Dialogues of the Gods</hi>, <ref target="Pg125">125</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Lucretius, <ref target="Pg106">106</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Luna Jovis filia, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Macedonia, <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Machiavelli, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Magic, <ref target="Pg136">136-37</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Mannhardt, <ref target="Pg152">152</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Mantinea, constitution of, <ref target="Pg032">32</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Marcus Aurelius, <ref target="Pg011">11</ref>, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Mediaeval epic poets, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Megarians, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg107">107</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<pb n='167'/><anchor id='Pg167'/>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Menippus of Gadara, <ref target="Pg110">110</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Mexico, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Middle Ages, <ref target="Pg133">133</ref>, <ref target="Pg135">135-39</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Milton (<hi rend='italic'>Paradise Lost</hi>), <ref target="Pg134">134</ref>, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Minos, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Miracles, pagan, <ref target="Pg131">131</ref>, <ref target="Pg132">132</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Modesty, religions, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>, <ref target="Pg070">70</ref>, <ref target="Pg073">73</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Moschion, <ref target="Pg046">46</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Moses and his sister, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Monotheism, <ref target="Pg009">9</ref>, <ref target="Pg012">12</ref>, <ref target="Pg023">23</ref>, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg080">80</ref>, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>, <ref target="Pg127">127</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg148">148</ref>, <ref target="Pg151">151</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Müller, K. O., <ref target="Pg152">152</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Natalis Comes, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref> foll.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Naturalism, Ionian, <ref target="Pg021">21</ref>, <ref target="Pg022">22-25</ref>, <ref target="Pg030">30-31</ref>, <ref target="Pg052">52</ref>, <ref target="Pg057">57</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Negroes, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Neo-Platonists, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Neo-Pythagoreans, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Nero, <ref target="Pg011">11</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Newton, <ref target="Pg151">151</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Nile, <ref target="Pg042">42</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l><hi rend='italic'>Nomos</hi> (and <hi rend='italic'>Physis</hi>), <ref target="Pg035">35</ref>, <ref target="Pg036">36</ref>, <ref target="Pg038">38</ref>, <ref target="Pg063">63</ref>, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Nymphs, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Oenomaus (<hi rend='italic'>The Swindlers Unmasked</hi>), <ref target="Pg122">122-23</ref>, <ref target="Pg126">126</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Old Testament, <ref target="Pg127">127</ref>, <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Oracle of Ammon, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>; oracles of Boeotia, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Delphic Oracle, <ref target="Pg028">28</ref>, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>, <ref target="Pg067">67</ref>, <ref target="Pg068">68</ref>, <ref target="Pg071">71</ref>, <ref target="Pg072">72</ref>, <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>, <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>, <ref target="Pg096">96</ref>, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>, <ref target="Pg123">123</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>decay of oracles, <ref target="Pg096">96-97</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>oracles explained by priestly fraud, <ref target="Pg123">123</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141-42</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Ovid, <ref target="Pg117">117</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Paganism of Antiquity, its character, <ref target="Pg015">15</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Panchaia, <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Parmenides, <ref target="Pg021">21</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Pantheism, <ref target="Pg020">20</ref>, <ref target="Pg023">23</ref>, <ref target="Pg103">103</ref>, <ref target="Pg119">119</ref>, <ref target="Pg122">122</ref>, <ref target="Pg127">127</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Paul, St., <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Pericles, <ref target="Pg025">25</ref>, <ref target="Pg026">26</ref>, <ref target="Pg027">27</ref>, <ref target="Pg028">28</ref>, <ref target="Pg029">29</ref>, <ref target="Pg031">31</ref>, <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Peripatetics, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Peru, <ref target="Pg137">137</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Pheidias, <ref target="Pg027">27</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Philip III. of Macedonia, <ref target="Pg096">96</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Philip V. of Macedonia, <ref target="Pg097">97-98</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Philo, <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Phocians, <ref target="Pg096">96</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l><hi rend='italic'>Physis</hi> (and <hi rend='italic'>Nomos</hi>), <ref target="Pg035">35</ref>, <ref target="Pg036">36</ref>, <ref target="Pg063">63</ref>, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Pindar, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>, <ref target="Pg017">17</ref>, <ref target="Pg052">52</ref>, <ref target="Pg071">71</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Plato, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg039">39</ref>, <ref target="Pg048">48</ref>, <ref target="Pg049">49</ref>, <ref target="Pg050">50</ref>, <ref target="Pg056">56</ref>, <ref target="Pg059">59</ref>, <ref target="Pg061">61-63</ref>, <ref target="Pg065">65</ref>, <ref target="Pg066">66</ref>, <ref target="Pg072">72</ref>, <ref target="Pg076">76-81</ref>, <ref target="Pg082">82</ref>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>, <ref target="Pg059">59</ref>, <ref target="Pg065">65</ref>, <ref target="Pg066">66</ref>, <ref target="Pg068">68</ref>, <ref target="Pg072">72</ref>, <ref target="Pg078">78</ref>, <ref target="Pg079">79</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Euthyphron</hi>, <ref target="Pg067">67</ref>, <ref target="Pg076">76</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi>, <ref target="Pg048">48</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg063">63</ref>, <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Laws</hi>, <ref target="Pg061">61</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>, <ref target="Pg078">78</ref>, <ref target="Pg079">79</ref>, <ref target="Pg080">80</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Republic</hi>, <ref target="Pg050">50</ref>, <ref target="Pg056">56</ref>, <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>, <ref target="Pg078">78</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Symposium</hi>, <ref target="Pg082">82</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi>, <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>, <ref target="Pg079">79</ref>, <ref target="Pg080">80</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Platonism, <ref target="Pg148">148</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Plethon, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Pliny the Elder, <ref target="Pg094">94</ref>, <ref target="Pg095">95</ref>, <ref target="Pg118">118</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Plutarch (<hi rend='italic'>de def. orac.</hi>), <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Polybius, <ref target="Pg048">48</ref>, <ref target="Pg090">90-91</ref>, <ref target="Pg094">94</ref>, <ref target="Pg099">99</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113-14</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>Stoicism in P., <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Pomponazzi (<hi rend='italic'>De Incantat.</hi>), <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Poseidon, <ref target="Pg042">42</ref>, <ref target="Pg081">81</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Poseidonius, <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Prodicus of Ceos, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg042">42-44</ref>, <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Protagoras of Abdera, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg039">39-42</ref>, <ref target="Pg047">47</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>On the Gods</hi>, <ref target="Pg039">39</ref> foll.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Original State</hi>, <ref target="Pg047">47</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Providence, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>, <ref target="Pg061">61</ref>, <ref target="Pg078">78</ref>, <ref target="Pg105">105</ref>, <ref target="Pg118">118</ref>, <ref target="Pg122">122</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Pythia, <ref target="Pg093">93</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Reaction, religious, of second century, <ref target="Pg120">120-21</ref>, <ref target="Pg125">125</ref>;</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>of Augustus, see <ref target="index-augustus">Augustus</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Reinterpretation of the conceptions of the gods, <ref target="Pg002">2</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'>See also <ref target="index-allegorical-interpretation">Allegorical interpretation</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Religion a political invention, <ref target="Pg047">47</ref>, <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Religious thought, early, of Greece, <ref target="Pg016">16-17</ref>, <ref target="Pg052">52</ref>, <ref target="Pg054">54</ref>, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>, <ref target="Pg069">69-70</ref>, <ref target="Pg071">71</ref>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>, <ref target="Pg088">88</ref>, <ref target="Pg098">98</ref>, <ref target="Pg107">107</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Renaissance, <ref target="Pg133">133</ref>, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref> foll., <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Rohde, <ref target="Pg152">152</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Roman Academy, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Roman religion, <ref target="Pg090">90</ref>, <ref target="Pg099">99-100</ref>, <ref target="Pg101">101-2</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Roman State-worship, decay of, <ref target="Pg098">98-103</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Romance of Troy, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Romances, <ref target="Pg095">95-96</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Rome's treatment of atheism, <ref target="Pg008">8-11</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Rousseau, <ref target="Pg145">145</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Scepticism, <ref target="Pg107">107-8</ref>, <ref target="Pg114">114</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Schoolmen, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Seneca, <ref target="Pg110">110</ref>, <ref target="Pg122">122</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Sibylline books, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Sisyphus, <ref target="Pg045">45</ref>, <ref target="Pg048">48</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Socrates, <ref target="Pg007">7</ref>, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg040">40</ref>, <ref target="Pg046">46</ref>, <ref target="Pg049">49</ref>, <ref target="Pg056">56</ref>, <ref target="Pg058">58</ref>, <ref target="Pg064">64-73</ref>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>, <ref target="Pg107">107</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>. See also <ref target="index-daemonion"><hi rend='italic'>Daimonion</hi> of S</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Socratic philosophy, <ref target="Pg064">64</ref>, <ref target="Pg087">87</ref>, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Socratic Schools, <ref target="Pg073">73</ref>, <ref target="Pg087">87-88</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Sol invictus, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<pb n='168'/><anchor id='Pg168'/>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Solon, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Sophistic, <ref target="Pg035">35-38</ref>, <ref target="Pg057">57</ref>, <ref target="Pg064">64</ref>, <ref target="Pg087">87</ref>, <ref target="Pg104">104</ref>, <ref target="Pg148">148</ref>, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Sophocles, <ref target="Pg028">28</ref>, <ref target="Pg054">54</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Stilpo, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg108">108</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Stoics, <ref target="Pg083">83</ref>, <ref target="Pg103">103-5</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg118">118</ref>, <ref target="Pg119">119</ref>, <ref target="Pg121">121-22</ref>, <ref target="Pg147">147</ref>, <ref target="Pg148">148</ref>, <ref target="Pg149">149</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Strabo, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Strato, <ref target="Pg087">87</ref>, <ref target="Pg108">108</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Suetonius, <ref target="Pg121">121</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Supernaturalism, <ref target="Pg149">149-51</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Superstition, <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>, <ref target="Pg090">90</ref>, <ref target="Pg102">102</ref>, <ref target="Pg123">123</ref>, <ref target="Pg126">126</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Tapuis, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thales, <ref target="Pg024">24</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thebaïs (mediaeval), <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Theodicy (Socratic), <ref target="Pg067">67</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Theodoras, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg075">75-76</ref>, <ref target="Pg108">108</ref>, <ref target="Pg109">109</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>On the Gods</hi>, <ref target="Pg075">75</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Theophrastus, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg086">86</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thermon, <ref target="Pg098">98</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thomas Aquinas, <ref target="Pg131">131</ref>, <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>, <ref target="Pg139">139</ref>, <ref target="Pg140">140</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thracians, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thrasymachus, <ref target="Pg050">50</ref>, <ref target="Pg062">62</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thucydides (the historian), <ref target="Pg028">28-29</ref>, <ref target="Pg092">92</ref>, <ref target="Pg094">94</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Thucydides (the statesman), <ref target="Pg026">26</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Tiberius, <ref target="Pg118">118</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Tisiphone, <ref target="Pg136">136</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Titans, <ref target="Pg018">18</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Tolerance in antiquity, <ref target="Pg009">9</ref>, <ref target="Pg011">11</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Trajan, <ref target="Pg011">11</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Tullia, <ref target="Pg116">116</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Tyche, <ref target="Pg091">91-96</ref>, <ref target="Pg118">118</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Typhoeus, <ref target="Pg140">140</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Uranos, <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Usener, <ref target="Pg152">152</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Valerius Maximus, <ref target="Pg118">118</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Varro, <ref target="Pg100">100</ref>, <ref target="Pg110">110</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Vico (<hi rend='italic'>Scienza Nuova</hi>), <ref target="Pg143">143</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Violation of sanctuaries, <ref target="Pg040">40</ref>, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>, <ref target="Pg097">97</ref>, <ref target="Pg100">100</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Virgil, <ref target="Pg117">117</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Voss, G. I., <ref target="Pg135">135</ref>, <ref target="Pg138">138</ref>, <ref target="Pg141">141</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Wisdom of Solomon, <ref target="Pg128">128</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Worship rejected, <ref target="Pg009">9-13</ref>, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>, <ref target="Pg074">74</ref>, <ref target="Pg077">77</ref>, <ref target="Pg084">84</ref>, <ref target="Pg109">109</ref>, <ref target="Pg123">123</ref>, <ref target="Pg125">125</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Xenocrates, <ref target="Pg081">81-82</ref>, <ref target="Pg105">105</ref>, <ref target="Pg113">113</ref>, <ref target="Pg129">129</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Xenophanes of Colophon, <ref target="Pg013">13</ref>, <ref target="Pg017">17-21</ref>,</l>
+<l><ref target="Pg052">52</ref>, <ref target="Pg056">56</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Xenophon, <ref target="Pg058">58</ref>, <ref target="Pg059">59</ref>, <ref target="Pg062">62</ref>, <ref target="Pg066">66</ref>, <ref target="Pg067">67</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Memorab.</hi> <ref target="Pg058">58</ref>, <ref target="Pg060">60</ref>.</l>
+<l rend='margin-left: 2'><hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>, <ref target="Pg058">58</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Zeller, <ref target="Pg076">76</ref>, <ref target="Pg079">79</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Zeno of Elea, <ref target="Pg021">21</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+<lg>
+<l>Zeus, <ref target="Pg016">16</ref>, <ref target="Pg022">22</ref>, <ref target="Pg030">30</ref>, <ref target="Pg043">43</ref>, <ref target="Pg055">55</ref>, <ref target="Pg057">57</ref>, <ref target="Pg058">58</ref>, <ref target="Pg081">81</ref>, <ref target="Pg105">105</ref>, <ref target="Pg111">111</ref>, <ref target="Pg124">124</ref>.</l>
+</lg>
+
+</div>
+
+</body>
+<back rend="page-break-before: right">
+  <div id="footnotes">
+    <index index="toc" />
+    <index index="pdf" />
+    <head>Footnotes</head>
+    <divGen type="footnotes"/>
+  </div>
+  <div rend="page-break-before: right">
+    <divGen type="pgfooter" />
+  </div>
+</back>
+</text>
+</TEI.2>
diff --git a/28312.txt b/28312.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..954a835
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,5515 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Atheism in Pagan Antiquity by A. B.
+Drachmann
+
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no
+restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under
+the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or
+online at http://www.gutenberg.org/license
+
+
+
+Title: Atheism in Pagan Antiquity
+
+Author:
+A. B. Drachmann
+
+
+Release Date: March 11, 2009 [Ebook #28312]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: US-ASCII
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+
+
+
+
+
+                        Atheism In Pagan Antiquity
+
+                                    By
+
+                             A. B. Drachmann
+
+     Professor of Classical Philology in the University of Copenhagen
+
+                                Gyldendal
+
+                      11 Hanover Square, London, W.1
+
+                                Copenhagen
+
+                               Christiania
+
+                                   1922
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+Preface
+Introduction
+Chapter I
+Chapter II
+Chapter III
+Chapter IV
+Chapter V
+Chapter VI
+Chapter VII
+Chapter VIII
+Chapter IX
+Notes
+Index
+Footnotes
+
+
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+The present treatise originally appeared in Danish as a University
+publication (_Kjoebenhavns Universitets Festskrift_, November 1919). In
+submitting it to the English public, I wish to acknowledge my profound
+indebtedness to Mr. G. F. Hill of the British Museum, who not only
+suggested the English edition, but also with untiring kindness has
+subjected the translation, as originally made by Miss Ingeborg Andersen,
+M.A. of Copenhagen, to a painstaking and most valuable revision.
+
+For an account of the previous treatments of the subject, as well as of
+the method employed in my investigation, the reader is referred to the
+introductory remarks which precede the Notes.
+
+A. B. DRACHMANN.
+CHARLOTTENLUND,
+_July 1922_.
+
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+
+The present inquiry is the outcome of a request to write an article on
+"Atheism" for a projected dictionary of the religious history of classical
+antiquity. On going through the sources I found that the subject might
+well deserve a more comprehensive treatment than the scope of a dictionary
+would allow. It is such a treatment that I have attempted in the following
+pages.
+
+A difficulty that occurred at the very beginning of the inquiry was how to
+define the notion of atheism. Nowadays the term is taken to designate the
+attitude which denies every idea of God. Even antiquity sometimes referred
+to atheism in this sense; but an inquiry dealing with the history of
+religion could not start from a definition of that kind. It would have to
+keep in view, not the philosophical notion of God, but the conceptions of
+the gods as they appear in the religion of antiquity. Hence I came to
+define atheism in Pagan antiquity as the point of view which _denies the
+existence of the ancient gods_. It is in this sense that the word will be
+used in the following inquiry.
+
+Even though we disregard philosophical atheism, the definition is somewhat
+narrow; for in antiquity mere denial of the existence of the gods of
+popular belief was not the only attitude which was designated as atheism.
+But it has the advantage of starting from the conception of the ancient
+gods that may be said to have finally prevailed. In the sense in which the
+word is used here we are nowadays all of us atheists. We do not believe
+that the gods whom the Greeks and the Romans worshipped and believed in
+exist or have ever existed; we hold them to be productions of the human
+imagination to which nothing real corresponds. This view has nowadays
+become so ingrained in us and appears so self-evident, that we find it
+difficult to imagine that it has not been prevalent through long ages;
+nay, it is perhaps a widely diffused assumption that even in antiquity
+educated and unbiased persons held the same view of the religion of their
+people as we do. In reality both assumptions are erroneous: our "atheism"
+in regard to ancient paganism is of recent date, and in antiquity itself
+downright denial of the existence of the gods was a comparatively rare
+phenomenon. The demonstration of this fact, rather than a consideration of
+the various intermediate positions taken up by the thinkers of antiquity
+in their desire to avoid a complete rupture with the traditional ideas of
+the gods, has been one of the chief purposes of this inquiry.
+
+Though the definition of atheism set down here might seem to be clear and
+unequivocal, and though I have tried to adhere strictly to it, cases have
+unavoidably occurred that were difficult to classify. The most
+embarrassing are those which involve a reinterpretation of the conception
+of the gods, _i.e._ which, while acknowledging that there is some reality
+corresponding to the conception, yet define this reality as essentially
+different from it. Moreover, the acknowledgment of a certain group of gods
+(the celestial bodies, for instance) combined with the rejection of
+others, may create difficulties in defining the notion of atheism; in
+practice, however, this doctrine generally coincides with the former, by
+which the gods are explained away. On the whole it would hardly be just,
+in a field of inquiry like the present, to expect or require absolutely
+clearly defined boundary-lines; transition forms will always occur.
+
+The persons of whom it is related that they denied the existence of the
+ancient gods are in themselves few, and they all belong to the highest
+level of culture; by far the greater part of them are simply professional
+philosophers. Hence the inquiry will almost exclusively have to deal with
+philosophers and philosophical schools and their doctrines; of religion as
+exhibited in the masses, as a social factor, it will only treat by
+exception. But in its purpose it is concerned with the history of
+religion, not with philosophy; therefore--in accordance with the definition
+of its object--it will deal as little as possible with the purely
+philosophical notions of God that have nothing to do with popular
+religion. What it aims at illustrating is a certain--if you like, the
+negative--aspect of ancient religion. But its result, if it can be
+sufficiently established, will not be without importance for the
+understanding of the positive religious sense of antiquity. If you want to
+obtain some idea of the hold a certain religion had on its adherents, it
+is not amiss to know something about the extent to which it dominated even
+the strata of society most exposed to influences that went against it.
+
+It might seem more natural, in dealing with atheism in antiquity, to adopt
+the definition current among the ancients themselves. That this method
+would prove futile the following investigation will, I hope, make
+sufficiently evident; antiquity succeeded as little as we moderns in
+connecting any clear and unequivocal idea with the words that signify
+"denial of God." On the other hand, it is, of course, impossible to begin
+at all except from the traditions of antiquity about denial and deniers.
+Hence the course of the inquiry will be, first to make clear what
+antiquity understood by denial of the gods and what persons it designated
+as deniers, and then to examine in how far these persons were atheists in
+our sense of the word.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+
+Atheism and atheist are words formed from Greek roots and with Greek
+derivative endings. Nevertheless they are not Greek; their formation is
+not consonant with Greek usage. In Greek they said _atheos_ and
+_atheotes_; to these the English words ungodly and ungodliness correspond
+rather closely. In exactly the same way as ungodly, _atheos_ was used as
+an expression of severe censure and moral condemnation; this use is an old
+one, and the oldest that can be traced. Not till later do we find it
+employed to denote a certain philosophical creed; we even meet with
+philosophers bearing _atheos_ as a regular surname. We know very little of
+the men in question; but it can hardly be doubted that _atheos_, as
+applied to them, implied not only a denial of the gods of popular belief,
+but a denial of gods in the widest sense of the word, or Atheism as it is
+nowadays understood.
+
+In this case the word is more particularly a philosophical term. But it
+was used in a similar sense also in popular language, and corresponds then
+closely to the English "denier of God," denoting a person who denies the
+gods of his people and State. From the popular point of view the interest,
+of course, centred in those only, not in the exponents of philosophical
+theology. Thus we find the word employed both of theoretical denial of the
+gods (atheism in our sense) and of practical denial of the gods, as in the
+case of the adherents of monotheism, Jews and Christians.
+
+Atheism, in the theoretical as well as the practical sense of the word,
+was, according to the ancient conception of law, always a crime; but in
+practice it was treated in different ways, which varied both according to
+the period in question and according to the more or less dangerous nature
+of the threat it offered to established religion. It is only as far as
+Athens and Imperial Rome are concerned that we have any definite knowledge
+of the law and the judicial procedure on this point; a somewhat detailed
+account of the state of things in Athens and Rome cannot be dispensed with
+here.
+
+In the criminal law of Athens we meet with the term _asebeia_--literally:
+impiety or disrespect towards the gods. As an established formula of
+accusation of _asebeia_ existed, legislation must have dealt with the
+subject; but how it was defined we do not know. The word itself conveys
+the idea that the law particularly had offences against public worship in
+view; and this is confirmed by the fact that a number of such
+offences--from the felling of sacred trees to the profanation of the
+Eleusinian Mysteries--were treated as _asebeia_. When, in the next place,
+towards the close of the fifth century B.C., free-thinking began to assume
+forms which seemed dangerous to the religion of the State, theoretical
+denial of the gods was also included under _asebeia_. From about the
+beginning of the Peloponnesian War to the close of the fourth century
+B.C., there are on record a number of prosecutions of philosophers who
+were tried and condemned for denial of the gods. The indictment seems in
+most cases--the trial of Socrates is the only one of which we know
+details--to have been on the charge of _asebeia_, and the procedure proper
+thereto seems to have been employed, though there was no proof or
+assertion of the accused having offended against public worship; as to
+Socrates, we know the opposite to have been the case; he worshipped the
+gods like any other good citizen. This extension of the conception of
+_asebeia_ to include theoretical denial of the gods no doubt had no
+foundation in law; this is amongst other things evident from the fact that
+it was necessary, in order to convict Anaxagoras, to pass a special public
+resolution in virtue of which his free-thinking theories became
+indictable. The law presumably dated from a time when theoretical denial
+of the gods lay beyond the horizon of legislation. Nevertheless, in the
+trial of Socrates it is simply taken for granted that denial of the gods
+is a capital crime, and that not only on the side of the prosecution, but
+also on the side of the defence: the trial only turns on a question of
+fact, the legal basis is taken for granted. So inveterate, then, at this
+time was the conception of the unlawful nature of the denial of the gods
+among the people of Athens.
+
+In the course of the fourth century B.C. several philosophers were accused
+of denial of the gods or blasphemy; but after the close of the century we
+hear no more of such trials. To be sure, our knowledge of the succeeding
+centuries, when Athens was but a provincial town, is far less copious than
+of the days of its greatness; nevertheless, it is beyond doubt that the
+practice in regard to theoretical denial of the gods was changed. A
+philosopher like Carneades, for instance, might, in view of his sceptical
+standpoint, just as well have been convicted of _asebeia_ as Protagoras,
+who was convicted because he had declared that he did not know whether the
+gods existed or not; and as to such a process against Carneades, tradition
+would not have remained silent. Instead, we learn that he was employed as
+the trusted representative of the State on most important diplomatic
+missions. It is evident that Athens had arrived at the point of view that
+the theoretical denial of the gods might be tolerated, whereas the law, of
+course, continued to protect public worship.
+
+In Rome they did not possess, as in Athens, a general statute against
+religious offences; there were only special provisions, and they were,
+moreover, few and insufficient. This defect, however, was remedied by the
+vigorous police authority with which the Roman magistrates were invested.
+In Rome severe measures were often taken against movements which
+threatened the Roman official worship, but it was done at the discretion
+of the administration and not according to hard-and-fast rules; hence the
+practice was somewhat varying, and a certain arbitrariness inevitable.
+
+No example is known from Rome of action taken against theoretical denial
+of the gods corresponding to the trials of the philosophers in Athens. The
+main cause of this was, no doubt, that free-thinking in the fifth century
+B.C. invaded Hellas, and specially Athens, like a flood which threatened
+to overthrow everything; in Rome, on the other hand, Greek philosophy made
+its way in slowly and gradually, and this took place at a time when in the
+country of its origin it had long ago found a _modus vivendi_ with popular
+religion and was acknowledged as harmless to the established worship. The
+more practical outlook of the Romans may perhaps also have had something
+to say in the matter: they were rather indifferent to theoretical
+speculations, whereas they were not to be trifled with when their national
+institutions were concerned.
+
+In consequence of this point of view the Roman government first came to
+deal with denial of the gods as a breach of law when confronted with the
+two monotheistic religions which invaded the Empire from the East. That
+which distinguished Jews and Christians from Pagans was not that they
+denied the existence of the Pagan gods--the Christians, at any rate, did
+not do this as a rule--but that they denied that they were gods, and
+therefore refused to worship them. They were practical, not theoretical
+deniers. The tolerance which the Roman government showed towards all
+foreign creeds and the result of which in imperial times was, practically
+speaking, freedom of religion over the whole Empire, could not be extended
+to the Jews and the Christians; for it was in the last resort based on
+reciprocity, on the fact that worship of the Egyptian or Persian gods did
+not exclude worship of the Roman ones. Every convert, on the other hand,
+won over to Judaism or Christianity was _eo ipso_ an apostate from the
+Roman religion, an _atheos_ according to the ancient conception. Hence, as
+soon as such religions began to spread, they constituted a serious danger
+to the established religion, and the Roman government intervened. Judaism
+and Christianity were not treated quite alike; in this connexion details
+are of no interest, but certain principal features must be dwelt on as
+significant of the attitude of antiquity towards denial of the gods. To
+simplify matters I confine myself to Christianity, where things are less
+complicated.
+
+The Christians were generally designated as _atheoi_, as deniers of the
+gods, and the objection against them was precisely their denial of the
+Pagan gods, not their religion as such. When the Christian, summoned
+before the Roman magistrates, agreed to sacrifice to the Pagan gods (among
+them, the Emperor) he was acquitted; he was not punished for previously
+having attended Christian services, and it seems that he was not even
+required to undertake not to do so in future. Only if he refused to
+sacrifice, was he punished. We cannot ask for a clearer proof that it is
+apostasy as such, denial of the gods, against which action is taken. It is
+in keeping with this that, at any rate under the earlier Empire, no
+attempt was made to seek out the Christians at their assemblies, to hinder
+their services or the like; it was considered sufficient to take steps
+when information was laid.
+
+The punishments meted out were different, in that they were left solely to
+the discretion of the magistrates. But they were generally severe: forced
+labour in mines and capital punishment were quite common. No
+discrimination was made between Roman citizens and others belonging to the
+Empire, but all were treated alike; that the Roman citizen could not
+undergo capital punishment without appeal to the Emperor does not affect
+the principle. This procedure has really no expressly formulated basis in
+law; the Roman penal code did not, as mentioned above, take cognizance of
+denial of the gods. Nevertheless, the sentences on the Christians were
+considered by the Pagans of the earlier time as a matter of course, the
+justice of which was not contested, and the procedure of the government
+was in principle the same under humane and conscientious rulers like
+Trajan and Marcus Aurelius as under tyrants like Nero and Domitian. Here
+again it is evident how firmly rooted in the mind of antiquity was the
+conviction that denial of the gods was a capital offence.
+
+To resume what has here been set forth concerning the attitude of ancient
+society to atheism: it is, in the first place, evident that the frequently
+mentioned tolerance of polytheism was not extended to those who denied its
+gods; in fact, it was applied only to those who acknowledged them even if
+they worshipped others besides. But the assertion of this principle of
+intolerance varied greatly in practice according to whether it was a
+question of theoretical denial of the gods--atheism in our sense--or
+practical refusal to worship the Pagan gods. Against atheism the community
+took action only during a comparatively short period, and, as far as we
+know, only in a single place. The latter limitation is probably explained
+not only by the defectiveness of tradition, but also by the fact that in
+Athens free-thinking made its appearance about the year 400 as a general
+phenomenon and therefore attracted the attention of the community. Apart
+from this case, the philosophical denier of God was left in peace all
+through antiquity, in the same way as the individual citizen was not
+interfered with, as a rule, when he, for one reason or another, refrained
+from taking part in the worship of the deities. On the other hand, as soon
+as practical refusal to believe in the gods, apostasy from the established
+religion, assumed dangerous proportions, ruthless severity was exercised
+against it.
+
+The discrimination, however, made in the treatment of the theoretical and
+practical denial of the gods is certainly not due merely to consideration
+of the more or less isolated occurrence of the phenomenon; it is rooted at
+the same time in the very nature of ancient religion. The essence of
+ancient polytheism is the worship of the gods, that is, cultus; of a
+doctrine of divinity properly speaking, of theology, there were only
+slight rudiments, and there was no idea of any elaborate dogmatic system.
+Quite different attitudes were accordingly assumed towards the
+philosopher, who held his own opinions of the gods, but took part in the
+public worship like anybody else; and towards the monotheist, to whom the
+whole of the Pagan worship was an abomination, which one should abstain
+from at any cost, and which one should prevail on others to give up for
+the sake of their own good in this life or the next.
+
+In the literature of antiquity we meet with sporadic statements to the
+effect that certain philosophers bore the epithet _atheos_ as a sort of
+surname; and in a few of the later authors of antiquity we even find lists
+of men--almost all of them philosophers--who denied the existence of the
+gods. Furthermore, we possess information about certain persons--these
+also, if Jews and Christians are excluded, are nearly all of them
+philosophers--having been accused of, and eventually convicted of, denial
+of the gods; some of these are not in our lists. Information of this kind
+will, as remarked above, be taken as the point of departure for an
+investigation of atheism in antiquity. For practical reasons, however, it
+is reasonable to include some philosophers whom antiquity did not
+designate as atheists, and who did not come into conflict with official
+religion, but of whom it has been maintained in later times that they did
+not believe in the existence of the gods of popular belief. Thus we arrive
+at the following list, in which those who were denoted as _atheoi_ are
+italicised and those who were accused of impiety are marked with an
+asterisk:
+
+      Xenophanes.
+      *Anaxagoras.
+_      Diogenes of Apollonia._
+_      Hippo of Rhegium._
+      *_Protagoras._
+_      Prodicus._
+_      Critias._
+      *_Diagoras of Melos._
+      *Socrates.
+      Antisthenes.
+      Plato.
+      *Aristotle.
+      Theophrastus.
+      *Stilpo.
+      *_Theodorus._
+      *_Bion._
+_      Epicurus._
+_      Euhemerus._
+
+The persons are put down in chronological order. This order will in some
+measure be preserved in the following survey; but regard for the
+continuity of the tradition of the doctrine will entail certain
+deviations. It will, that is to say, be natural to divide the material
+into four groups: the pre-Socratic philosophy; the Sophists; Socrates and
+the Socratics; Hellenistic philosophy. Each of these groups has a
+philosophical character of its own, and it will be seen that this
+character also makes itself felt in the relation to the gods of the
+popular belief, even though we here meet with phenomena of more isolated
+occurrence. The four groups must be supplemented by a fifth, a survey of
+the conditions in Imperial Rome. Atheists of this period are not found in
+our lists; but a good deal of old Pagan free-thinking survives in the
+first centuries of our era, and also the epithet _atheoi_ was bestowed
+generally on the Christians and sometimes on the Jews, and if only for
+this reason they cannot be altogether passed by in this survey.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+
+The paganism of antiquity is based on a primitive religion, _i.e._ it is
+originally in the main homogeneous with the religions nowadays met with in
+the so-called primitive peoples. It underwent, however, a long process of
+evolution parallel with and conditioned by the development of Greek and
+later Roman civilisation. This evolution carried ancient religion far away
+from its primitive starting-point; it produced numerous new formations,
+above all a huge system of anthropomorphic gods, each with a definite
+character and personality of his own. This development is the result of an
+interplay of numerous factors: changing social and economical conditions
+evoked the desire for new religious ideas; the influence of other peoples
+made itself felt; poetry and the fine arts contributed largely to the
+moulding of these ideas; conscious reflection, too, arose early and
+modified original simplicity. But what is characteristic of the whole
+process is the fact that it went on continuously without breaks or sudden
+bounds. Nowhere in ancient religion, as far as we can trace it, did a
+powerful religious personality strike in with a radical transformation,
+with a direct rejection of old ideas and dogmatic accentuation of new
+ones. The result of this quiet growth was an exceedingly heterogeneous
+organism, in which remains of ancient, highly primitive customs and ideas
+were retained along with other elements of a far more advanced character.
+
+Such a state of things need not in itself trouble the general
+consciousness; it is a well-established fact that in religion the most
+divergent elements are not incompatible. Nevertheless, among the Greeks,
+with their strong proclivity to reflective thought, criticism early arose
+against the traditional conceptions of the gods. The typical method of
+this criticism is that the higher conceptions of the gods are used against
+the lower. From the earliest times the Greek religious sense favoured
+absoluteness of definition where the gods are concerned; even in Homer
+they are not only eternal and happy, but also all-powerful and
+all-knowing. Corresponding expressions of a moral character are hardly to
+be found in Homer; but as early as Hesiod and Solon we find, at any rate,
+Zeus as the representative of heavenly justice. With such definitions a
+large number of customs of public worship and, above all, a number of
+stories about the gods, were in violent contradiction; thus we find even
+so old and so pious a poet as Pindar occasionally rejecting mythical
+stories which he thinks at variance with the sublime nature of the gods.
+This form of criticism of popular beliefs is continued through the whole
+of antiquity; it is found not only in philosophers and philosophically
+educated laymen, but appears spontaneously in everybody of a reflective
+mind; its best known representative in earlier times is Euripides. Typical
+of its popular form is in the first place its casualness; it is directed
+against details which at the moment attract attention, while it leaves
+other things alone which in principle are quite as offensive, but either
+not very obviously so, or else not relevant to the matter in hand.
+Secondly, it is naive: it takes the gods of the popular belief for granted
+essentially as they are; it does not raise the crucial question whether
+the popular belief is not quite justified in attributing to these higher
+beings all kinds of imperfection, and wrong in attributing perfection to
+them, and still less if such beings, whether they are defined as perfect
+or imperfect, exist at all. It follows that as a whole this form of
+criticism is outside the scope of our inquiry.
+
+Still, there is one single personality in early Greek thought who seems to
+have proceeded still further on the lines of this naive criticism, namely,
+Xenophanes of Colophon. He is generally included amongst the philosophers,
+and rightly in so far as he initiated a philosophical speculation which
+was of the highest importance in the development of Greek scientific
+thought. But in the present connexion it would, nevertheless, be
+misleading to place Xenophanes among those philosophers who came into
+conflict with the popular belief because their conception of Existence was
+based on science. The starting-point for his criticism of the popular
+belief is in fact not philosophical, but religious; he ranks with
+personalities like Pindar and Euripides--he was also a verse-writer
+himself, with considerable poetic gift--and is only distinguished from them
+by the greater consistency of his thought. Hence, the correct course is to
+deal with him in this place as the only eminent thinker in antiquity about
+whom it is known that--starting from popular belief and religious
+motives--he reached a standpoint which at any rate with some truth may be
+designated as atheism.
+
+Xenophanes lived in the latter part of the sixth and the beginning of the
+fifth centuries B.C. (according to his own statement he reached an age of
+more than ninety years). He was an itinerant singer who travelled about
+and recited poetry, presumably not merely his own but also that of others.
+In his own poems he severely attacked the manner in which Homer and
+Hesiod, the most famous poets of Greece, had represented the gods: they
+had attributed to them everything which in man's eyes is outrageous and
+reprehensible--theft, adultery and deception of one another. Their accounts
+of the fights of the gods against Titans and Giants he denounced as
+"inventions of the ancients." But he did not stop at that: "Men believe
+that the gods are born, are clothed and shaped and speak like themselves";
+"if oxen and horses and lions could draw and paint, they would delineate
+their gods in their own image"; "the Negroes believe that their gods are
+flat-nosed and black, the Thracians that theirs have blue eyes and red
+hair." Thus he attacked directly the popular belief that the gods are
+anthropomorphic, and his arguments testify that he clearly realised that
+men create their gods in their own image. On another main point, too, he
+was in direct opposition to the religious ideas of his time: he rejected
+Divination, the belief that the gods imparted the secrets of the future to
+men--which was deemed a mainstay of the belief in the existence of the
+gods. As a positive counterpart to the anthropomorphic gods, Xenophanes
+set up a philosophical conception of God: God must be One, Eternal,
+Unchangeable and identical with himself in every way (all sight, all
+hearing and all mind). This deity, according to the explicit statements of
+our earliest sources, he identified with the universe.
+
+If we examine more closely the arguments put forth by Xenophanes in
+support of his remarkable conception of the deity, we realise that he
+everywhere starts from the definitions of the nature of the gods as given
+by popular religion; but, be it understood, solely from the absolute
+definitions. He takes the existence of the divine, with its absolute
+attributes, for granted; it is in fact the basis of all his speculation.
+His criticism of the popular ideas of the gods is therefore closely
+connected with his philosophical conception of God; the two are the
+positive and negative sides of the same thing. Altogether his connexion
+with what I call the naive criticism of the popular religion is
+unmistakable.
+
+It is undoubtedly a remarkable fact that we meet at this early date with
+such a consistent representative of this criticism. If we take Xenophanes
+at his word we must describe him as an atheist, and atheism in the sixth
+century B.C. is a very curious phenomenon indeed. Neither was it
+acknowledged in antiquity; no one placed Xenophanes amongst _atheoi_; and
+Cicero even says somewhere (according to Greek authority) that Xenophanes
+was the only one of those who believed in gods who rejected divination. In
+more recent times, too, serious doubt has been expressed whether
+Xenophanes actually denied the existence of the gods. Reference has
+amongst other things been made to the fact that he speaks in several
+places about "gods" where he, according to his view, ought to say "God";
+nay, he has even formulated his fundamental idea in the words: "One God,
+the greatest amongst gods and men, neither in shape nor mind like unto any
+mortal." To be sure, Xenophanes is not always consistent in his language;
+but no weight whatever ought to be attached to this, least of all in the
+case of a man who exclusively expressed himself in verse. Another theory
+rests on the tradition that Xenophanes regarded his deity and the universe
+as identical, consequently was a pantheist. In that case, it is said, he
+may very well have considered, for instance, the heavenly bodies as
+deities. Sound as this argument is in general, it does not apply to this
+case. When a thinker arrives at pantheism, starting from a criticism of
+polytheism which is expressly based on the antithesis between the unity
+and plurality of the deity--then very valid proofs, indeed, are needed in
+order to justify the assumption that he after all believed in a plurality
+of gods; and such proofs are wanting in the case of Xenophanes.
+
+Judging from the material in hand one can hardly arrive at any other
+conclusion than that the standpoint of Xenophanes comes under our
+definition of atheism. But we must not forget that only fragments of his
+writings have been preserved, and that the more extensive of them do not
+assist us greatly to the understanding of his religious standpoint. It is
+possible that we might have arrived at a different conclusion had we but
+possessed his chief philosophical work in its entirety, or at least larger
+portions of it. And I must candidly confess that if I were asked whether,
+in my heart of hearts, I believed that a Greek of the sixth century B.C.
+denied point-blank the existence of his gods, my answer would be in the
+negative.
+
+That Xenophanes was not considered an atheist by the ancients may possibly
+be explained by the fact that they objected to fasten this designation on
+a man whose reasoning took the deity as a starting-point and whose sole
+aim was to define its nature. Perhaps they also had an inkling that he in
+reality stood on the ground of popular belief, even if he went beyond it.
+Still more curious is the fact that his religious view does not seem to
+have influenced the immediately succeeding philosophy at all. His
+successors, Parmenides and Zeno, developed his doctrine of unity, but in a
+pantheistic direction, and on a logical, not religious line of argument;
+about their attitude to popular belief we are told practically nothing.
+And Ionic speculation took a quite different direction. Not till a century
+later, in Euripides, do we observe a distinct influence of his criticism
+of popular belief; but at that time other currents of opinion had
+intervened which are not dependent on Xenophanes, but might direct
+attention to him.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+
+Ancient Greek naturalism is essentially calculated to collide with the
+popular belief. It seeks a natural explanation of the world, first and
+foremost of its origin, but in the next place of individual natural
+phenomena. As to the genesis of the world, speculations of a mythical kind
+had already developed on the basis of the popular belief. They were not,
+however, binding on anybody, and, above all, the idea of the gods having
+created the world was altogether alien to Greek religion. Thus, without
+offence to them it might be maintained that everything originated from a
+primary substance or from a mixture of several primary substances, as was
+generally maintained by the ancient naturalists. On the other hand, a
+conflict arose as soon as the heavenly phenomena, such as lightning and
+thunder, were ascribed to natural causes, or when the heavenly bodies were
+made out to be natural objects; for to the Greeks it was an established
+fact that Zeus sent lightning and thunder, and that the sun and the moon
+were gods. A refusal to believe in the latter was especially dangerous
+because they were _visible_ gods, and as to the person who did not believe
+in their divinity the obvious conclusion would be that he believed still
+less in the invisible gods.
+
+That this inference was drawn will appear before long. But the epithet
+"atheist" was very rarely attached to the ancient naturalists; only a few
+of the later (and those the least important) were given the nickname
+_atheos_. Altogether we hear very little of the relation of these
+philosophers to the popular belief, and this very silence is surely
+significant. No doubt, most of them bestowed but a scant attention on this
+aspect of the matter; they were engrossed in speculations which did not
+bring them into conflict with the popular belief, and even their
+scientific treatment of the "divine" natural phenomena did not make them
+doubt the _existence_ of the gods. This is connected with a peculiarity in
+their conception of existence. Tradition tells us of several of them, and
+it applies presumably also to those of whom it is not recorded, that they
+designated their primary substance or substances as gods; sometimes they
+also applied this designation to the world or worlds originating in the
+primary substance. This view is deeply rooted in the Greek popular belief
+and harmonises with its fundamental view of existence. To these ancient
+thinkers the primary substance is at once a living and a superhuman power;
+and any living power which transcended that of man was divine to the
+Greeks. Hylozoism (the theory that matter is alive) consequently, when it
+allies itself with popular belief, leads straight to pantheism, whereas it
+excludes monotheism, which presupposes a distinction between god and
+matter. Now it is a matter of experience that, while monotheism is the
+hereditary foe of polytheism, polytheism and pantheism go very well
+together. The universe being divine, there is no reason to doubt that
+beings of a higher order than man exist, nor any reason to refuse to
+bestow on them the predicate "divine"; and with this we find ourselves in
+principle on the standpoint of polytheistic popular belief. There is
+nothing surprising, then, in the tradition that Thales identified God with
+the mind of the universe and believed the universe to be animated, and
+filled with "demons." The first statement is in this form probably
+influenced by later ideas and hardly a correct expression of the view of
+Thales; the rest bears the very stamp of genuineness, and similar ideas
+recur, more or less completely and variously refracted, in the succeeding
+philosophers.
+
+To follow these variations in detail is outside the scope of this
+investigation; but it may be of interest to see the form they take in one
+of the latest and most advanced representatives of Ionian naturalism. In
+Democritus's conception of the universe, personal gods would seem excluded
+_a priori_. He works with but three premises: the atoms, their movements,
+and empty space. From this everything is derived according to strict
+causality. Such phenomena also as thunder and lightning, comets and
+eclipses, which were generally ascribed to the gods, are according to his
+opinion due to natural causes, whereas people in the olden days were
+afraid of them because they believed they were due to the gods.
+Nevertheless, he seems, in the first place, to have designated Fire, which
+he at the same time recognised as a "soul-substance," as divine, the
+cosmic fire being the soul of the world; and secondly, he thought that
+there was something real underlying the popular conception of the gods. He
+was led to this from a consideration of dreams, which he thought were
+images of real objects which entered into the sleeper through the pores of
+the body. Now, since gods might be seen in dreams, they must be real
+beings. He did actually say that the gods had more senses than the
+ordinary five. When he who of all the Greek philosophers went furthest in
+a purely mechanical conception of nature took up such an attitude to the
+religion of his people, one cannot expect the others, who were less
+advanced, to discard it.
+
+Nevertheless, there is a certain probability that some of the later Ionian
+naturalists went further in their criticism of the gods of popular belief.
+One of them actually came into conflict with popular religion; it will be
+natural to begin with him.
+
+Shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, Anaxagoras of
+Clazomenae was accused of impiety and had to leave Athens, where he had
+taken up his abode. The object of the accusation was in reality political;
+the idea being to hit Pericles through his friend the naturalist. What
+Anaxagoras was charged with was that he had assumed that the heavenly
+bodies were natural objects; he had taught that the sun was a red-hot
+mass, and that the moon was earth and larger than Peloponnese. To base an
+accusation of impiety on this, it was necessary first to carry a public
+resolution, giving power to prosecute those who gave natural explanations
+of heavenly phenomena.
+
+As to Anaxagoras's attitude to popular belief, we hear next to nothing
+apart from this. There is a story of a ram's head being found with one
+horn in the middle of the forehead; it was brought to Pericles, and the
+soothsayer Lampon explained the portent to the effect that, of the two
+men, Pericles and Thucydides, who contended for the leadership of Athens,
+one should prove victorious. Anaxagoras, on the other hand, had the ram's
+head cut open and showed that the brain did not fill up the cranium, but
+was egg-shaped and lay gathered together at the point where the horn grew
+out. He evidently thought that abortions also, which otherwise were
+generally considered as signs from the gods, were due to natural causes.
+Beyond this, nothing is said of any attack on the popular belief on the
+part of Anaxagoras, and in his philosophy nothing occurred which logically
+entailed a denial of the existence of the gods. Add to this that it was
+necessary to create a new judicial basis for the accusation against
+Anaxagoras, and it can be taken as certain that neither in his writings
+nor in any other way did he come forward in public as a denier of the
+gods.
+
+It is somewhat different when we consider the purely personal point of
+view of Anaxagoras. The very fact that no expression of his opinion
+concerning the gods has been transmitted affords food for thought.
+Presumably there was none; but this very fact is notable when we bear in
+mind that the earlier naturalists show no such reticence. Add to this
+that, if there is any place and any time in which we might expect a
+complete emancipation from popular belief, combined with a decided
+disinclination to give expression to it, it is Athens under Pericles. Men
+like Pericles and his friends represent a high level, perhaps the zenith,
+in Hellenic culture. That they were critical of many of the religious
+conceptions of their time we may take for granted; as to Pericles himself,
+this is actually stated as a fact, and the accusations of impiety directed
+against Aspasia and Pheidias prove that orthodox circles were very well
+aware of it. But the accusations prove, moreover, that Pericles and those
+who shared his views were so much in advance of their time that they could
+not afford to let their free-thinking attitude become a matter of public
+knowledge without endangering their political position certainly, and
+possibly even more than that. To be sure, considerations of that kind did
+not weigh with Anaxagoras; but he was--and that we know on good authority--a
+quiet scholar whose ideal of life was to devote himself to problems of
+natural science, and he can hardly have wished to be disturbed in this
+occupation by affairs in which he took no sort of interest. The question
+is then only how far men like Pericles and himself may have ventured in
+their criticism. Though all direct tradition is wanting, we have at any
+rate circumstantial evidence possessing a certain degree of probability.
+
+To begin with, the attempt to give a natural explanation of prodigies is
+not in itself without interest. The mantic art, _i.e._ the ability to
+predict the future by signs from the gods or direct divine inspiration,
+was throughout antiquity considered one of the surest proofs of the
+existence of the gods. Now, it by no means follows that a person who was
+not impressed by a deformed ram's head would deny, _e.g._, the ability of
+the Delphic Oracle to predict the future, especially not so when the
+person in question was a naturalist. But that there was at this time a
+general tendency to reject the art of divination is evident from the fact
+that Herodotus as well as Sophocles, both of them contemporaries of
+Pericles and Anaxagoras, expressly contend against attempts in that
+direction, and, be it remarked, as if the theory they attack was commonly
+held. Sophocles is in this connexion so far the more interesting of the
+two, as, on one hand, he criticises private divination but defends the
+Delphic oracle vigorously, while he, on the other hand, identifies denial
+of the oracle with denial of the gods. And he does this in such a way as
+to make it evident that he has a definite object in mind. That in this
+polemic he may have been aiming precisely at Anaxagoras is indicated by
+the fact that Diopeithes, who carried the resolution concerning the
+accusation of the philosopher, was a soothsayer by profession.
+
+The strongest evidence as to the free-thinking of the Periclean age is,
+however, to be met with in the historical writing of Thucydides. In his
+work on the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides completely eliminated the
+supernatural element; not only did he throughout ignore omens and
+divinations, except in so far as they played a part as a psychological
+factor, but he also completely omitted any reference to the gods in his
+narrative. Such a procedure was at this time unprecedented, and contrasts
+sharply with that of his immediate forerunner Herodotus, who constantly
+lays stress on the intervention of the gods. That is hardly conceivable
+except in a man who had altogether emancipated himself from the religious
+views of his time. Now, Thucydides is not only a fellow-countryman and
+younger contemporary of Pericles, but he also sees in Pericles his ideal
+not only as a politician but evidently also as a man. Hence, when
+everything is considered, it is not improbable that Pericles and his
+friends went to all lengths in their criticism of popular belief,
+although, of course, it remains impossible to state anything definite as
+to particular persons' individual views. Curiously enough, even in
+antiquity this connexion was observed; in a biography of Thucydides it is
+said that he was a disciple of Anaxagoras and _accordingly_ was also
+considered something of an atheist.
+
+While Anaxagoras, his trial notwithstanding, is not generally designated
+an atheist, probably because there was nothing in his writings to which he
+might be pinned down, that fate befell two of his contemporaries, Hippo of
+Rhegium and Diogenes of Apollonia. Very little, however, is known of them.
+Hippo, who is said to have been a Pythagorean, taught that water and fire
+were the origin of everything; as to the reason why he earned the nickname
+_atheos_, it is said that he taught that Water was the primal cause of
+all, as well as that he maintained that nothing existed but what could be
+perceived by the senses. There is also quoted a (fictitious) inscription,
+which he is said to have caused to be put on his tomb, to the effect that
+Death has made him the equal of the immortal gods (in that he now exists
+no more than they). Otherwise we know nothing special of Hippo; Aristotle
+refers to him as shallow. As to Diogenes, we learn that he was influenced
+by Anaximenes and Anaxagoras; in agreement with the former he regarded Air
+as the primary substance, and like Anaxagoras he attributed reason to his
+primary substance. Of his doctrine we have extensive accounts, and also
+some not inconsiderable fragments of his treatise _On Nature_; but they
+are almost all of them of purely scientific, mostly of an anatomical and
+physiological character. In especial, as to his relation to popular
+belief, it is recorded that he identified Zeus with the air. Indirectly,
+however, we are able to demonstrate, by the aid of an almost contemporary
+witness, that there must have been some foundation for the accusation of
+"atheism." For in _The Clouds_, where Aristophanes wants to represent
+Socrates as an atheist, he puts in his mouth scraps of the naturalism of
+Diogenes; that he would hardly have done, if Diogenes had not already been
+decried as an atheist.
+
+It is of course impossible to base any statement of the relation of the
+two philosophers to popular belief on such a foundation. But it is,
+nevertheless, worth noticing that while not a single one of the earlier
+naturalists acquired the designation atheist, it was applied to two of the
+latest and otherwise little-known representatives of the school. Take this
+in combination with what has been said above of Anaxagoras, and we get at
+any rate a suspicion that Greek naturalism gradually led its adherents
+beyond the naive stage where many individual phenomena were indeed
+ascribed to natural causes, even if they had formerly been regarded as
+caused by divine intervention, but where the foundations of the popular
+belief were left untouched. Once this path has been entered on, a point
+will be arrived at where the final conclusion is drawn and the existence
+of the supernatural completely denied. It is probable that this happened
+towards the close of the naturalistic period. If so early a philosopher as
+Anaxagoras took this point of view, his personal contribution as a member
+of the Periclean circle may have been more significant in the religious
+field than one would conjecture from the character of his work.
+
+Before we proceed to mention the sophists, there is one person on our list
+who must be examined though the result will be negative, namely, Diagoras
+of Melos. As he appears in our records, he falls outside the
+classification adopted here; but as he must have lived, at any rate, about
+the middle of the fifth century (he is said to have "flourished" in 464)
+he may most fitly be placed on the boundary line between the Ionian
+philosophy and Sophistic.
+
+For later antiquity Diagoras is the typical atheist; he heads our lists of
+atheists, and round his person a whole series of myths have been formed.
+He is said to have been a poet and a pious man like others; but then a
+colleague once stole an ode from him, escaped by taking an oath that he
+was innocent, and afterwards made a hit with the stolen work. So Diagoras
+lost his faith in the gods and wrote a treatise under the title of
+_apopyrgizontes logoi_ (literally, destructive considerations) in which he
+attacked the belief in the gods.
+
+This looks very plausible, and is interesting in so far as it, if correct,
+affords an instance of atheism arising in a layman from actual experience,
+not in a philosopher from speculation. If we ask, however, what is known
+historically about Diagoras, we are told a different tale. There existed
+in Athens, engraved on a bronze tablet and set up on the Acropolis, a
+decree of the people offering a reward of one talent to him who should
+kill Diagoras of Melos, and of two talents to him who should bring him
+alive to Athens. The reason given was that he had scoffed at the
+Eleusinian Mysteries and divulged what took place at them. The date of
+this decree is given by a historian as 415 B.C.; that this is correct is
+seen from a passage in Aristophanes's contemporary drama, _The Birds_.
+Furthermore, one of the disciples of Aristotle, the literary historian
+Aristoxenus, states that no trace of impiety was to be found in the works
+of the dithyrambic poet Diagoras, and that, in fact, they contained
+definite opinions to the contrary. A remark to the effect that Diagoras
+was instrumental in drawing up the laws of Mantinea is probably due to the
+same source. The context shows that the reference is to the earlier
+constitution of Mantinea, which was a mixture of aristocracy and
+democracy, and is praised for its excellence. It is inconceivable that, in
+a Peloponnesian city during the course of, nay, presumably even before the
+middle of the fifth century, a notorious atheist should have been invited
+to advise on the revision of its constitution. It is more probable that
+Aristoxenus adduced this fact as an additional disproof of Diagoras's
+atheism, in which he evidently did not believe.
+
+The above information explains the origin of the legend. Two fixed points
+were in existence: the pious poet of _c._ 460 and the atheist who was
+outlawed in 415; a bridge was constructed between them by the story of the
+stolen ode. This disposes of the whole supposition of atheism growing out
+of a basis of experience. But, furthermore, it must be admitted that it is
+doubtful whether the poet and the atheist are one and the same person. The
+interval of time between them is itself suspicious, for the poet,
+according to the ancient system of calculation, must have been about forty
+years old in 464, consequently between eighty and ninety in 415. (There is
+general agreement that the treatise, the title of which has been quoted,
+must have been a later forgery.) If, in spite of all, I dare not
+absolutely deny the identity of the two Diagorases of tradition, the
+reason is that Aristophanes, where he mentions the decree concerning
+Diagoras, seems to suggest that his attack on the Mysteries was an old
+story which was raked up again in 415. But for our purpose, at any rate,
+nothing remains of the copious mass of legend but the fact that one
+Diagoras of Melos in 415 was outlawed in Athens on the ground of his
+attack on the Mysteries. Such an attack may have been the outcome of
+atheism; there was no lack of impiety in Athens at the end of the fifth
+century. But whether this was the case or not we cannot possibly tell; and
+to throw light on free-thinking tendencies in Athens at this time, we have
+other and richer sources than the historical notice of Diagoras.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+
+With the movement in Greek thought which is generally known as sophistic,
+a new view of popular belief appears. The criticism of the sophists was
+directed against the entire tradition on which Greek society was based,
+and principally against the moral conceptions which hitherto had been
+unquestioned: good and evil, right and wrong. The criticism was
+essentially negative; that which hitherto had been imagined as absolute
+was demonstrated to be relative, and the relative was identified with the
+invalid. Thus they could not help running up against the popular ideas of
+the gods, and treating them in the same way. A leading part was here
+played by the sophistic distinction between _nomos_ and _physis_, Law and
+Nature, _i.e._ that which is based on human convention, and that which is
+founded on the nature of things. The sophists could not help seeing that
+the whole public worship and the ideas associated with it belonged to the
+former--to the domain of "the law." Not only did the worship and the
+conceptions of the gods vary from place to place in the hundreds of small
+independent communities into which Hellas was divided--a fact which the
+sophists had special opportunity of observing when travelling from town to
+town to teach; but it was even officially admitted that the whole
+ritual--which, popularly speaking, was almost identical with religion--was
+based on convention. If a Greek was asked why a god was to be worshipped
+in such and such a way, generally the only answer was: because it is the
+law of the State (or the convention; the word _nomos_ expresses both
+things). Hence it followed in principle that religion came under the
+domain of "the law," being consequently the work of man; and hence again
+the obvious conclusion, according to sophistic reasoning, was that it was
+nothing but human imagination, and that there was no _physis_, no reality,
+behind it at all. In the case of the naturalists, it was the positive
+foundation of their system, their conception of nature as a whole, that
+led them to criticise the popular belief. Hence their criticism was in the
+main only directed against those particular ideas in the popular belief
+which were at variance with the results of their investigations. To be
+sure, the sophists were not above making use of the results of natural
+science in their criticism of the popular belief; it was their general aim
+to impart the highest education of their time, and of a liberal education
+natural science formed a rather important part. But their starting-point
+was quite different from that of the naturalists. Their whole interest was
+concentrated on man as a member of the community, and it was from
+consideration of this relation that they were brought into collision with
+the established religion. Hence their attack was far more dangerous than
+that of the naturalists; no longer was it directed against details, it
+laid bare the psychological basis itself of popular belief and clearly
+revealed its unstable character. Their criticism was fundamental and
+central, not casual and circumstantial.
+
+From a purely practical point of view also, the criticism of the sophists
+was far more dangerous than that of the old philosophers. They were not
+theorists themselves, but practitioners; their business was to impart the
+higher education to the more mature youth. It was therefore part of their
+profession to disseminate their views not by means of learned professional
+writings, but by the persuasive eloquence of oral discourse. And in their
+criticism of the existing state of things they did not start with special
+results which only science could prove, and the correctness of which the
+layman need not recognise; they operated with facts and principles known
+and acknowledged by everybody. It is not to be wondered at that such
+efforts evoked a vigorous reaction on the part of established society, the
+more so as in any case the result of sophistic criticism--though not
+consciously its object--was to liquefy the moral principles on which the
+social order was based.
+
+Such, in principle, appeared to be the state of things. In practice, here
+as elsewhere, the devil proved not so black as he was painted. First, not
+all the sophists--hardly even the majority of them--drew the logical
+conclusions from their views in respect of either morals or religion. They
+were teachers of rhetoric, and as such they taught, for instance, all the
+tricks by which a bad cause might be defended; that was part of the trade.
+But it must be supposed that Gorgias, the most distinguished of them,
+expressly insisted that rhetoric, just like any other art the aim of which
+was to defeat an opponent, should only be used for good ends. Similarly
+many of them may have stopped short in their criticism of popular belief
+at some arbitrary point, so that it was possible for them to respect at
+any rate something of the established religion, and so, of course, first
+and foremost the very belief in the existence of the gods. That they did
+not as a rule interfere with public worship, we may be sure; that was
+based firmly on "the Law." But, in addition, even sophists who personally
+took an attitude radically contradictory to popular belief had the most
+important reasons for being careful in advancing such a view. They had to
+live by being the teachers of youth; they had no fixed appointment, they
+travelled about as lecturers and enlisted disciples by means of their
+lectures. For such men it would have been a very serious thing to attack
+the established order in its tenderest place, religion, and above all they
+had to beware of coming into conflict with the penal laws. This risk they
+did not incur while confining themselves to theoretical discussions about
+right and wrong, nor by the practical application of them in their
+teaching of rhetoric; but they might very easily incur it if attacking
+religion. This being the case, it is not to be wondered at that we do not
+find many direct statements of undoubtedly atheistical character handed
+down from the more eminent sophists, and that trials for impiety are rare
+in their case. But, nevertheless, a few such cases are met with, and from
+these as our starting-point we will now proceed.
+
+As to Protagoras of Abdera, one of the earliest and most famous of all the
+sophists, it is stated that he began a pamphlet treating of the gods with
+the words: "Concerning the gods I can say nothing, neither that they exist
+nor that they do not exist, nor of what form they are; because there are
+many things which prevent one from knowing that, namely, both the
+uncertainty of the matter and the shortness of man's life." On this
+account, it is said, he was charged with impiety at Athens and was
+outlawed, and his works were publicly burned. The date of this trial is
+not known for certain; but it is reasonably supposed to have coincided
+with that of Diagoras, namely, in 415. At any rate it must have taken
+place after 423-421, as we know that Protagoras was at that time staying
+in Athens. As he must have been born about 485, the charge overtook him
+when old and famous; according to one account, his work on the gods seems
+to belong to his earlier writings.
+
+To doubt the correctness of this tradition would require stronger reasons
+than we possess, although it is rather strange that the condemnation of
+Protagoras is mentioned neither in our historical sources nor in
+Aristophanes, and that Plato, who mentions Protagoras rather frequently as
+dead, never alludes to it. At any rate, the quotation from the work on the
+gods is certainly authentic, for Plato himself referred to it. Hence it is
+certain that Protagoras directly stated the problem as to the existence of
+the gods and regarded it as an open question. But beyond that nothing much
+can be deduced from the short quotation; and as to the rest of the book on
+the gods we know nothing. The meagre reasons for scepticism adduced
+probably do not imply any more than that the difficulties are objective as
+well as subjective. If, in the latter respect, the brevity of life is
+specially mentioned it may be supposed that Protagoras had in mind a
+definite proof of the existence of the gods which was rendered difficult
+by the fact that life is so brief; prediction of the future may be guessed
+at, but nothing certain can be stated.
+
+Protagoras is the only one of the sophists of whom tradition says that he
+was the object of persecution owing to his religious views. The trial of
+Socrates, however, really belongs to the same category when looked at from
+the accusers' point of view; Socrates was accused as a sophist. But as his
+own attitude towards popular religion differed essentially from that of
+the sophists, we cannot consider him in this connexion. Protagoras's trial
+itself is partly determined by special circumstances. In all probability
+it took place at a moment when a violent religious reaction had set in at
+Athens owing to some grave offences against the public worship and
+sanctuaries of the State (violation of the Mysteries and mutilation of the
+Hermae). The work on the gods had presumably been in existence and known
+long before this without causing scandal to anybody. But, nevertheless,
+the trial, like those of Anaxagoras and Socrates, plainly bears witness to
+the animosity with which the modern free-thought was regarded in Athens.
+This animosity did not easily manifest itself publicly without special
+reasons; but it was always there and might always be used in case of
+provocation.
+
+As to Protagoras's personal attitude to the question of the existence of
+the gods, much may be guessed and much has been guessed; but nothing can
+be stated for certain. However, judging from the man's profession and his
+general habit of life as it appears in tradition, we may take for granted
+that he did not give offence in his outward behaviour by taking a hostile
+attitude to public worship or attacking its foundations; had that been so,
+he would not for forty years have been the most distinguished teacher of
+Hellas, but would simply not have been tolerated. An eminent modern
+scholar has therefore advanced the conjecture that Protagoras
+distinguished between belief and knowledge, and that his work on the gods
+only aimed at showing that the existence of the gods could not be
+scientifically demonstrated.  Now such a distinction probably, if
+conceived as a conscious principle, is alien to ancient thought, at any
+rate at the time of Protagoras; and yet it may contain a grain of truth.
+When it is borne in mind that the incriminated passage represents the very
+exordium of the work of Protagoras, the impression cannot be avoided that
+he himself did not intend his work to disturb the established religion,
+but that he quite naively took up the existence of the gods as a subject,
+as good as any other, for dialectic discussion. All that he was concerned
+with was theory and theorising; religion was practice and ritual; and he
+had no more intention of interfering with that than the other earlier
+sophists of assailing the legal system of the community in their
+speculation as to relativity of right and wrong.
+
+All this, however, does not alter the fact that the work of Protagoras
+posed the very question of the existence of the gods as a problem which
+might possibly be solved in the negative. He seems to have been the first
+to do this. That it could be done is significant of the age to which
+Protagoras belongs; that it was done was undoubtedly of great importance
+for the development of thought in wide circles.
+
+Prodicus of Ceos, also one of the most famous sophists, advanced the idea
+that the conceptions of the gods were originally associated with those
+things which were of use to humanity: sun and moon, rivers and springs,
+the products of the earth and the elements; therefore bread was identified
+with Demeter, wine with Dionysus, water with Poseidon, fire with
+Hephaestus. As a special instance he mentioned the worship of the Nile by
+the Egyptians.
+
+In Democritus, who was a slightly elder contemporary of Prodicus, we have
+already met with investigation into the origin of the conceptions of the
+gods. There is a close parallel between his handling of the subject and
+that of Prodicus, but at the same time a characteristic difference.
+Democritus was a naturalist, hence he took as his starting-point the
+natural phenomena commonly ascribed to the influence of the gods.
+Prodicus, on the other hand, started from the intellectual life of man. We
+learn that he had commenced to study synonyms, and that he was interested
+in the interpretation of the poets. Now he found that Homer occasionally
+simply substituted the name of Hephaestus for fire, and that other poets
+went even further on the same lines. Furthermore, while it was common
+knowledge to every Greek that certain natural objects, such as the
+heavenly bodies and the rivers, were regarded as divine and had names in
+common with their gods, this to Prodicus would be a specially attractive
+subject for speculation. It is plainly shown by his instances that it is
+linguistic observations of this kind which were the starting-point of his
+theory concerning the origin of the conceptions of the gods.
+
+In the accounts of Prodicus it is taken for granted that he denied the
+existence of the gods, and in later times he is classed as _atheos_.
+Nevertheless we have every reason to doubt the correctness of this
+opinion. The case of Democritus already shows that a philosopher might
+very well derive the conceptions of the gods from an incorrect
+interpretation of certain phenomena without throwing doubt on their
+existence. As far as Prodicus is concerned it may be assumed that he did
+not believe that Bread, Wine or Fire were gods, any more than Democritus
+imagined that Zeus sent thunder and lightning; nor, presumably, did he
+ever believe that rivers were gods. But he need not therefore have denied
+the existence of Demeter, Dionysus and Hephaestus, much less the divinity
+of the sun and the moon. And if we consider his theory more closely it
+points in quite a different direction from that of atheism. To Prodicus it
+was evidently the conception of utility that mattered: if these objects
+came to be regarded as gods it was because they "benefited humanity." This
+too is a genuinely sophistic view, characteristically deviating from that
+of the naturalist Democritus in its limitation to the human and social
+aspect of the question. Such a point of view, if confronted with the
+question of the existence of the gods, may very well, according to
+sophistic methods of reasoning, lead to the conclusion that primitive man
+was right in so far as the useful, _i.e._ that which "benefits humanity,"
+really is an essential feature of the gods, and wrong only in so far as he
+identified the individual useful objects with the gods. Whether Prodicus
+adopted this point of view, we cannot possibly tell; but the general body
+of tradition concerning the man, which does not in any way suggest
+religious radicalism, indicates as most probable that he did not connect
+the question of the origin of the conceptions of the gods with that of the
+existence of the gods, which to him was taken for granted, and that it was
+only later philosophers who, in their researches into the ideas of earlier
+philosophers about the gods, inferred his atheism from his speculations on
+the history of religion.
+
+Critias, the well-known reactionary politician, the chief of the Thirty
+Tyrants, is placed amongst the atheists on the strength of a passage in a
+satyric drama, _Sisyphus_. The drama is lost, but our authority quotes the
+objectionable passage _in extenso_; it is a piece of no less than forty
+lines. The passage argues that human life in its origins knew no social
+order, that might ruled supreme. Then men conceived the idea of making
+laws in order that right might rule instead of might. The result of this
+was, it is true, that wrong was not done openly; but it was done secretly
+instead. Then a wise man bethought himself of making men believe that
+there existed gods who saw and heard everything which men did, nay even
+knew their innermost thoughts. And, in order that men might stand in
+proper awe of the gods, he said that they lived in the sky, out of which
+comes that which makes men afraid, such as lightning and thunder, but also
+that which benefits them, sunshine and rain, and the stars, those fair
+ornaments by whose course men measure time. Thus he succeeded in bringing
+lawlessness to an end. It is expressly stated that it was all a cunning
+fraud: "by such talk he made his teaching most acceptable, veiling truth
+with false words."
+
+In antiquity it was disputed whether the drama _Sisyphus_ was by Critias
+or Euripides; nowadays all agree in attributing it to Critias; nor does
+the style of the long fragment resemble that of Euripides. The question
+is, however, of no consequence in this connexion: whether the drama is by
+Critias or Euripides it is wrong to attribute to an author opinions which
+he has put into the mouth of a character in a drama. Moreover, _Sisyphus_
+was a satyric play, _i.e._ it belonged to a class of poetry the liberty of
+which was nearly as great as in comedy, and the speech was delivered by
+Sisyphus himself, who, according to the legend, is a type of the crafty
+criminal whose forte is to do evil and elude punishment. There is, in
+fact, nothing in that which we otherwise hear of Critias to suggest that
+he cherished free-thinking views. He was--or in his later years became--a
+fanatical adversary of the Attic democracy, and he was, when he held
+power, unscrupulous in his choice of the means with which he opposed it
+and the men who stood in the path of his reactionary policy; but in our
+earlier sources he is never accused of impiety in the theoretical sense.
+And yet there had been an excellent opportunity of bringing forward such
+an accusation; for in his youth Critias had been a companion of Socrates,
+and his later conduct was used as a proof that Socrates corrupted his
+surroundings. But it is always Critias's political crimes which are
+adduced in this connexion, not his irreligion. On the other hand,
+posterity looked upon him as the pure type of tyrant, and the label
+atheist therefore suggested itself on the slightest provocation.
+
+But, even if the _Sisyphus_ fragment cannot be used to characterise its
+author as an atheist, it is, nevertheless, of the greatest interest in
+this connexion, and therefore demands closer analysis.
+
+The introductory idea, that mankind has evolved from an animal state into
+higher stages, is at variance with the earlier Greek conception, namely,
+that history begins with a golden age from which there is a continual
+decline. The theory of the fragment is expressed by a series of authors
+from the same and the immediately succeeding period. It occurs in
+Euripides; a later and otherwise little-known tragedian, Moschion,
+developed it in detail in a still extant fragment; Plato accepted it and
+made it the basis of his presentation of the origin of the State;
+Aristotle takes it for granted. Its source, too, has been demonstrated: it
+was presumably Democritus who first advanced it. Nevertheless the author
+of the fragment has hardly got it direct from Democritus, who at this time
+was little known at Athens, but from an intermediary. This intermediary is
+probably Protagoras, of whom it is said that he composed a treatise, _The
+Original State, i.e._ the primary state of mankind. Protagoras was a
+fellow-townsman of Democritus, and recorded by tradition as one of his
+direct disciples.
+
+In another point also the fragment seems to betray the influence of
+Democritus. When it is said that the wise inventors of the gods made them
+dwell in the skies, because from the skies come those natural phenomena
+which frighten men, it is highly suggestive of Democritus's criticism of
+the divine explanation of thunder and lightning and the like. In this case
+also Protagoras may have been the intermediary. In his work on the gods he
+had every opportunity of discussing the question in detail. But here we
+have the theory of Democritus combined with that of Prodicus in that it is
+maintained that from the skies come also those things that benefit men,
+and that they are on this account also a suitable dwelling-place for the
+gods. It is obvious that the author of the fragment (or his source) was
+versed in the most modern wisdom.
+
+All this erudition, however, is made to serve a certain tendency: the
+well-known tendency to represent religion as a political invention having
+as its object the policing of society. It is a theory which in
+antiquity--to its honour be it said--is but of rare occurrence. There is a
+vague indication of it in Euripides, a more definite one in Aristotle, and
+an elaborate application of it in Polybius; and that is in reality all.
+(That many people in more enlightened ages upheld religion as a means of
+keeping the masses in check, is a different matter.) However, it is an
+interesting fact that the Critias fragment is not only the first evidence
+of the existence of the theory known to us, but also presumably the
+earliest and probably the best known to later antiquity. Otherwise we
+should not find reference for the theory made to a fragment of a farce,
+but to a quotation from a philosopher.
+
+This might lead us to conclude that the theory was Critias's own
+invention, though, of course, it would not follow that he himself adhered
+to it. But it is more probable that it was a ready-made modern theory
+which Critias put into the mouth of Sisyphus. Not only does the whole
+character of the fragment and its scene of action favour this supposition,
+but there is also another factor which corroborates it.
+
+In the _Gorgias_ Plato makes one of the characters, Callicles--a man of
+whom we otherwise know nothing--profess a doctrine which up to a certain
+point is almost identical with that of the fragment. According to
+Callicles, the natural state (and the right state; on this point he is at
+variance with the fragment) is that right belongs to the strong. This
+state has been corrupted by legislation; the laws are inventions of the
+weak, who are also the majority, and their aim is to hinder the
+encroachment of the strong. If this theory is carried to its conclusion,
+it is obvious that religion must be added to the laws; if the former is
+not also regarded as an invention for the policing of society, the whole
+theory is upset. Now in the _Gorgias_ the question as to the attitude of
+the gods towards the problem of what is right and what is wrong is
+carefully avoided in the discussion. Not till the close of the dialogue,
+where Plato substitutes myth for scientific research, does he draw the
+conclusion in respect of religion. He does this in a positive form, as a
+consequence of _his_ point of view: after death the gods reward the just
+and punish the unjust; but he expressly assumes that Callicles will regard
+it all as an old wives' tale.
+
+In Callicles an attempt has been made to see a pseudonym for Critias. That
+is certainly wrong. Critias was a kinsman of Plato, is introduced by name
+in several dialogues, nay, one dialogue even bears his name, and he is
+everywhere treated with respect and sympathy. Nowadays, therefore, it is
+generally acknowledged that Callicles is a real person, merely unknown to
+us as such. However that may be, Plato would never have let a leading
+character in one of his longer dialogues advance (and Socrates refute) a
+view which had no better authority than a passage in a satyric drama. On
+the other hand, there is, as shown above, difficulty in supposing that the
+doctrine of the fragment was stated in the writings of an eminent sophist;
+so we come to the conclusion that it was developed and diffused in
+sophistic circles by oral teaching, and that it became known to Critias
+and Plato in this way. Its originator we do not know. We might think of
+the sophist Thrasymachus, who in the first book of Plato's _Republic_
+maintains a point of view corresponding to that of Callicles in _Gorgias_.
+But what we otherwise learn of Thrasymachus is not suggestive of interest
+in religion, and the only statement of his as to that kind of thing which
+has come down to us tends to the denial of a providence, not denial of the
+gods. Quite recently Diagoras of Melos has been guessed at; this is empty
+talk, resulting at best in substituting _x_ (or _NN_) for _y_.
+
+If I have dwelt in such detail on the _Sisyphus_ fragment, it is because
+it is our first direct and unmistakable evidence of ancient atheism. Here
+for the first time we meet with the direct statement which we have
+searched for in vain among all the preceding authors: that the gods of
+popular belief are fabrication pure and simple and without any
+corresponding reality, however remote. The nature of our tradition
+precludes our ascertaining whether such a statement might have been made
+earlier; but the probability is _a priori_ that it was not. The whole
+development of ancient reasoning on religious questions, as far as we are
+able to survey it, leads in reality to the conclusion that atheism as an
+expressed (though perhaps not publicly expressed) confession of faith did
+not appear till the age of the sophists.
+
+With the Critias fragment we have also brought to an end the inquiry into
+the direct statements of atheistic tendency which have come down to us
+from the age of the sophists. The result is, as we see, rather meagre. But
+it may be supplemented with indirect testimonies which prove that there
+was more of the thing than the direct tradition would lead us to
+conjecture, and that the denial of the existence of the gods must have
+penetrated very wide circles.
+
+The fullest expression of Attic free-thought at the end of the fifth
+century is to be found in the tragedies of Euripides. They are leavened
+with reflections on all possible moral and religious problems, and
+criticism of the traditional conceptions of the gods plays a leading part
+in them. We shall, however, have some difficulty in using Euripides as a
+source of what people really thought at this period, partly because he is
+a very pronounced personality and by no means a mere mouthpiece for the
+ideas of his contemporaries--during his lifetime he was an object of the
+most violent animosity owing, among other things, to his free-thinking
+views--partly because he, as a dramatist, was obliged to put his ideas into
+the mouths of his characters, so that in many cases it is difficult to
+decide how much is due to dramatic considerations and how much to the
+personal opinion of the poet. Even to this day the religious standpoint of
+Euripides is matter of dispute. In the most recent detailed treatment of
+the question he is characterised as an atheist, whereas others regard him
+merely as a dialectician who debates problems without having any real
+standpoint of his own.
+
+I do not believe that Euripides personally denied the existence of the
+gods; there is too much that tells against that theory, and, in fact,
+nothing that tells directly in favour of it, though he did not quite
+escape the charge of atheism even in his own day. To prove the correctness
+of this view would, however, lead too far afield in this connexion. On the
+other hand, a short characterisation of Euripides's manner of reasoning
+about religious problems is unavoidable as a background for the treatment
+of those--very rare--passages where he has put actually atheistic
+reflections into the mouths of his characters.
+
+As a Greek dramatist Euripides had to derive his subjects from the heroic
+legends, which at the same time were legends of the gods in so far as they
+were interwoven with tales of the gods' direct intervention in affairs. It
+is precisely against this intervention that the criticism of Euripides is
+primarily directed. Again and again he makes his characters protest
+against the manner in which they are treated by the gods or in which the
+gods generally behave. It is characteristic of Euripides that his
+starting-point in this connexion is always the moral one. So far he is a
+typical representative of that tendency which, in earlier times, was
+represented by Xenophanes and a little later by Pindar; in no other Greek
+poet has the method of using the higher conceptions of the gods against
+the lower found more complete expression than in Euripides. And in so far,
+too, he is still entirely on the ground of popular belief. But at the same
+time it is characteristic of him that he is familiar with and highly
+influenced by Greek science. He knows the most eminent representatives of
+Ionian naturalism (with the exception of Democritus), and he is fond of
+displaying his knowledge. Nevertheless, it cannot be said that he uses it
+in a contentious spirit against popular belief; on the contrary, he is
+inclined in agreement with the old philosophers to identify the gods of
+popular belief with the elements. Towards sophistic he takes a similar,
+but less sympathetic attitude. Sophistic was not in vogue till he was a
+man of mature age; he made acquaintance with it, and he made use of
+it--there are reflections in his dramas which carry distinct evidence of
+sophistic influence; but in his treatment of religious problems he is not
+a disciple of the sophists, and on this subject, as on others, he
+occasionally attacked them.
+
+It is against this background that we must set the reflections with an
+atheistic tone that we find in Euripides. They are, as already mentioned,
+rare; indeed, strictly speaking there is only one case in which a
+character openly denies the existence of the gods. The passage is a
+fragment of the drama _Bellerophon_; it is, despite its isolation, so
+typical of the manner of Euripides that it deserves to be quoted in full.
+
+"And then to say that there are gods in the heavens! Nay, there are none
+there; if you are not foolish enough to be seduced by the old talk. Think
+for yourselves about the matter, and do not be influenced by my words. I
+contend that the tyrants kill the people wholesale, take their money and
+destroy cities in spite of their oaths; and although they do all this they
+are happier than people who, in peace and quietness, lead god-fearing
+lives. And I know small states which honour the gods, but must obey
+greater states, which are less pious, because their spearmen are fewer in
+number. And I believe that you, if a slothful man just prayed to the gods
+and did not earn his bread by the work of his hands--" Here the sense is
+interrupted; but there remains one more line: "That which builds the
+castle of the gods is in part the unfortunate happenings ..." The
+continuation is missing.
+
+The argumentation here is characteristic of Euripides. From the injustice
+of life he infers the non-existence of the gods. The conclusion evidently
+only holds good on the assumption that the gods must be just; and this is
+precisely one of the postulates of popular belief. The reasoning is not
+sophistic; on the contrary, in their attacks the sophists took up a
+position outside the foundation of popular belief and attacked the
+foundation itself. This reasoning, on the other hand, is closely allied to
+the earlier religious thinking of the Greeks; it only proceeds further
+than the latter, where it results in rank denial.
+
+The drama of _Bellerophon_ is lost, and reconstruction is out of the
+question; if only for that reason it is unwarrantable to draw any
+conclusions from the detached fragment as to the poet's personal attitude
+towards the existence of the gods. But, nevertheless, the fragment is of
+interest in this connexion. It would never have occurred to Sophocles or
+Aeschylus to put such a speech in the mouth of one of his characters. When
+Euripides does that it is a proof that the question of the existence of
+the gods has begun to present itself to the popular consciousness at this
+time. Viewed in this light other statements of his which are not in
+themselves atheistic become significant. When it is said: "If the gods act
+in a shameful way, they are not gods"--that indeed is not atheism in our
+sense, but it is very near to it. Interesting is also the introduction to
+the drama _Melanippe_: "Zeus, whoever Zeus may be; for of that I only know
+what is told." Aeschylus begins a strophe in one of his most famous choral
+odes with almost the same words: "Zeus, whoe'er he be; for if he desire so
+to be called, I will address him by this name." In him it is an expression
+of genuine antique piety, which excludes all human impertinence towards
+the gods to such a degree that it even forgoes knowing their real names.
+In Euripides the same idea becomes an expression of doubt; but in this
+case also the doubt is raised on the foundation of popular belief.
+
+It is not surprising that so prominent and sustained a criticism of
+popular belief as that of Euripides, produced, moreover, on the stage,
+called forth a reaction from the defenders of the established faith, and
+that charges of impiety were not wanting. It is more to be wondered at
+that these charges on the whole are so few and slight, and that Euripides
+did not become the object of any actual prosecution. We know of a private
+trial in which the accuser incidentally charged Euripides with impiety on
+the strength of a quotation from one of his tragedies, Euripides's answer
+being a protest against dragging his poetry into the affair; the verdict
+on that belonged to another court. Aristophanes, who is always severe on
+Euripides, has only one passage directly charging him with being a
+propagator of atheism; but the accusation is hardly meant to be taken
+seriously. In _The Frogs_, where he had every opportunity of emphasising
+this view, there is hardly an indication of it. In _The Clouds_, where the
+main attack is directed against modern free-thought, Euripides, to be
+sure, is sneered at as being the fashionable poet of the corrupted youth,
+but he is not drawn into the charge of impiety. Even when Plato wrote his
+_Republic_, Euripides was generally considered the "wisest of all
+tragedians." This would have been impossible if he had been considered an
+atheist. In spite of all, the general feeling must undoubtedly have been
+that Euripides ultimately took his stand on the ground of popular belief.
+It was a similar instinctive judgment in regard to religion which
+prevented antiquity from placing Xenophanes amongst the atheists. Later
+times no doubt judged differently; the quotation from _Melanippe_ is in
+fact cited as a proof that Euripides was an atheist in his heart of
+hearts.
+
+In Aristophanes we meet with the first observations concerning the change
+in the religious conditions of Athens during the Peloponnesian War. In one
+of his plays, _The Clouds_, he actually set himself the task of taking up
+arms against modern unbelief, and he characterises it directly as atheism.
+If only for that reason the play deserves somewhat fuller consideration.
+
+It is well known that Aristophanes chose Socrates as a representative of
+the modern movement. In him he embodies all the faults with which he
+wished to pick a quarrel in the fashionable philosophy of the day. On the
+other hand, the essence of Socratic teaching is entirely absent from
+Aristophanes's representation; of that he had hardly any understanding,
+and even if he had he would at any rate not have been able to make use of
+it in his drama. We need not then in this connexion consider Socrates
+himself at all; on the other hand, the play gives a good idea of the
+popular idea of sophistic. Here we find all the features of the school,
+grotesquely mixed up and distorted by the farce, it is true, but
+nevertheless easily recognisable: rhetoric as an end in itself, of course,
+with emphasis on its immoral aspect; empty and hair-splitting dialectics;
+linguistic researches; Ionic naturalism; and first and last, as the focus
+of all, denial of the gods. That Aristophanes was well informed on certain
+points, at any rate, is clear from the fact that the majority of the
+scientific explanations which he puts into the mouth of Socrates actually
+represent the latest results of science at that time--which in all
+probability did not prevent his Athenians from considering them as
+exceedingly absurd and ridiculous.
+
+What matters here, however, is only the accusation of atheism which he
+made against Socrates. It is a little difficult to handle, in so far as
+Aristophanes, for dramatic reasons, has equipped Socrates with a whole set
+of deities. There are the clouds themselves, which are of Aristophanes's
+own invention; there is also the air, which he has got from Diogenes of
+Apollonia, and finally a "vortex" which is supposed to be derived from the
+same source, and which at any rate has cast Zeus down from his throne. All
+this we must ignore, as it is only conditioned partly by technical
+reasons--Aristophanes had to have a chorus and chose the clouds for the
+purpose--and partially by the desire to ridicule Ionic naturalism. But
+enough is left over. In the beginning of the play Socrates expressly
+declares that no gods exist. Similar statements are repeated in several
+places. Zeus is sometimes substituted for the gods, but it comes to the
+same thing. And at the end of the play, where the honest Athenian, who has
+ventured on the ticklish ground of sophistic, admits his delusion, it is
+expressly said:
+
+"Oh, what a fool I am! Nay, I must have been mad indeed when I thought of
+throwing the gods away for Socrates's sake!"
+
+Even in the verses with which the chorus conclude the play it is insisted
+that the worst crime of the sophists is their insult to the gods.
+
+The inference to be drawn from all this is simply that the popular
+Athenian opinion--for we may rest assured that this and the view of
+Aristophanes are identical--was that the sophists were atheists. That says
+but little. For popular opinion always works with broad categories, and
+the probability is that in this case, as demonstrated above, it was in the
+wrong, for, as a rule, the sophists were hardly conscious deniers of the
+gods. But, at the same time, at the back of the onslaught of Aristophanes
+there lies the idea that the teaching of the sophists led to denial of the
+gods; that atheism was the natural outcome of their doctrine and way of
+reasoning. And that there was some truth therein is proved by other
+evidence which can hardly be rejected.
+
+In the indictment of Socrates it is said that he "offended by not
+believing in the gods in which the State believed." In the two apologies
+for Socrates which have come down to us under Xenophon's name, the author
+treats this accusation entirely under the aspect of atheism, and tries to
+refute it by positive proofs of the piety of Socrates. But not one word is
+said about there being, in and for itself, anything remarkable or
+improbable in the charge. In Plato's _Apology_, Plato makes Socrates ask
+the accuser point-blank whether he is of the opinion that he, Socrates,
+does not believe in the gods at all and accordingly is a downright denier
+of the gods, or whether he merely means to say that he believes in other
+gods than those of the State. He makes the accuser answer that the
+assertion is that Socrates does not believe in any gods at all. In Plato
+Socrates refutes the accusation indirectly, using a line of argument
+entirely differing from that of Xenophon. But in Plato, too, the
+accusation is treated as being in no way extraordinary. In my opinion,
+Plato's _Apology_ cannot be used as historical evidence for details unless
+special reasons can be given proving their historical value beyond the
+fact that they occur in the _Apology_. But in this connexion the question
+is not what was said or not said at Socrates's trial. The decisive point
+is that we possess two quite independent and unambiguous depositions by
+two fully competent witnesses of the beginning of the fourth century which
+both treat of the charge of atheism as something which is neither strange
+nor surprising at their time. It is therefore permissible to conclude that
+in Athens at this time there really existed circles or at any rate not a
+few individuals who had given up the belief in the popular gods.
+
+A dialogue between Socrates and a young man by name Aristodemus, given in
+Xenophon's _Memorabilia_, makes the same impression. Of Aristodemus it is
+said that he does not sacrifice to the gods, does not consult the Oracle
+and ridicules those who do so. When he is called to account for this
+behaviour he maintains that he does not despise "the divine," but is of
+the opinion that it is too exalted to need his worship. Moreover, he
+contends that the gods do not trouble themselves about mankind. This is,
+of course, not atheism in our sense; but Aristodemus's attitude is,
+nevertheless, extremely eccentric in a community like that of Athens in
+the fifth century. And yet it is not mentioned as anything isolated and
+extraordinary, but as if it were something which, to be sure, was out of
+the common, but not unheard of.
+
+It is further to be observed that at the end of the fifth century we often
+hear of active sacrilegious outrages. An example is the historic trial of
+Alcibiades for profanation of the Mysteries. But this was not an isolated
+occurrence; there were more of the same kind at the time. Of the
+dithyrambic poet Cinesias it is said that he profaned holy things in an
+obscene manner. But the greatest stress of all must be laid on the
+well-known mutilation of the Hermae at Athens in 415, just before the
+expedition to Sicily. All the tales about the outrages of the Mysteries
+_may_ have been fictitious, but it is a fact that the Hermae were
+mutilated. The motive was probably political: the members of a secret
+society intended to pledge themselves to each other by all committing a
+capital crime. But that they chose just this form of crime shows quite
+clearly that respect for the State religion had greatly declined in these
+circles.
+
+What has so far been adduced as proof that the belief in the gods had
+begun to waver in Athens at the end of the fifth century is, in my
+opinion, conclusive in itself to anybody who is familiar with the more
+ancient Greek modes of thought and expression on this point, and can not
+only hear what is said, but also understand how it is said and what is
+passed over in silence. Of course it can always be objected that the
+proofs are partly the assertions of a comic poet who certainly was not
+particular about accusations of impiety, partly deductions _ex silentio_,
+partly actions the motives for which are uncertain. Fortunately, however,
+we have--from a slightly later period, it is true--a positive utterance
+which confirms our conclusion and which comes from a man who was not in
+the habit of talking idly and who had the best opportunities of knowing
+the circumstances.
+
+In the tenth book of his _Laws_, written shortly before his death, _i.e._
+about the middle of the fourth century, Plato gives a detailed account of
+the question of irreligion seen from the point of view of penal
+legislation. He distinguishes here between three forms, namely, denial of
+the existence of the gods, denial of the divine providence (whereas the
+existence of the gods is admitted), and finally the assumption that the
+gods exist and exercise providence, but that they allow themselves to be
+influenced by sacrifices and prayers. Of these three categories the last
+is evidently directed against ancient popular belief itself; it does not
+therefore interest us in this connexion. The second view, the denial of a
+providence, we have already met with in Xenophon in the character of
+Aristodemus, and in the sophist Thrasymachus; Euripides, too, sometimes
+alludes to it, though it was far from being his own opinion. Whether it
+amounted to denial of the gods or not was, in ancient times, the cause of
+much dispute; it is, of course, not atheism in our sense, but it is
+certainly evidence that belief in the gods is shaken. The first view, on
+the other hand, is sheer atheism. Plato consequently reckons with this as
+a serious danger to the community; he mentions it as a widespread view
+among the youth of his time, and in his legislation he sentences to death
+those who fail to be converted. It would seem certain, therefore, that
+there was, in reality, something in it after all.
+
+Plato does not confine himself to defining atheism and laying down the
+penalty for it; he at the same time, in accordance with a principle which
+he generally follows in the _Laws_, discusses it and tries to disprove it.
+In this way he happens to give us information--which is of special interest
+to us--of the proofs which were adduced by its followers.
+
+The argument is a twofold one. First comes the naturalistic proof; the
+heavenly bodies, according to the general (and Plato's own) view the most
+certain deities, are inanimate natural objects. It is interesting to note
+that in speaking of this doctrine in detail reference is clearly made to
+Anaxagoras; this confirms our afore-mentioned conjectures as to the
+character of his work. Plato was quite in a position to deal with
+Anaxagoras on the strength not only of what he said, but of what he passed
+over in silence. The second argument is the well-known sophistic one, that
+the gods are _nomoi_, not _physei_, they depend upon convention, which has
+nothing to do with reality. In this connexion the argument adds that what
+applies to the gods, applies also to right and wrong; _i.e._ we find here
+in the _Laws_ the view with which we are familiar from Callicles in the
+_Gorgias_, but with the missing link supplied. And Plato's development of
+this theme shows clearly just what a general historical consideration
+might lead us to expect, namely, that it was naturalism and sophistic that
+jointly undermined the belief in the old gods.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+
+With Socrates and his successors the whole question of the relation of
+Greek thought to popular belief enters upon a new phase. The Socratic
+philosophy is in many ways a continuation of sophistic. This is involved
+already in the fact that the same questions form the central interest in
+the two schools of thought, so that the problems stated by the sophists
+became the decisive factor in the content of Socratic and Platonic
+thought. The Socratic schools at the same time took over the actual
+programme of the sophists, namely, the education of adolescence in the
+highest culture. But, on the other hand, the Socratic philosophy was in
+the opposite camp to sophistic; on many points it represents a reaction
+against it, a recollection of the valuable elements contained in earlier
+Greek thought on life, especially human life, values which sophistic
+regarded with indifference or even hostility, and which were threatened
+with destruction if it should carry the day. This reactionary tendency in
+Socratic philosophy appears nowhere more plainly than in the field of
+religion.
+
+Under these circumstances it is a peculiar irony of fate that the very
+originator of the new trend in Greek thought was charged with and
+sentenced for impiety. We have already mentioned the singular prelude to
+the indictment afforded by the comedy of Aristophanes. We have also
+remarked upon the futility of looking therein for any actual enlightenment
+on the Socratic point of view. And Plato makes Socrates state this with
+all necessary sharpness in the _Apology_. Hence what we may infer from the
+attack of Aristophanes is merely this, that the general public lumped
+Socrates together with the sophists and more especially regarded him as a
+godless fellow. Unless this had been so, Aristophanes could not have
+introduced him as the chief character in his travesty. And without doubt
+it was this popular point of view which his accusers relied on when they
+actually included atheism as a count in their bill of indictment. It will,
+nevertheless, be necessary to dwell for a moment on this bill of
+indictment and the defence.
+
+The charge of impiety was a twofold one, partly for not believing in the
+gods the State believed in, partly for introducing new "demonic things."
+This latter act was directly punishable according to Attic law. What his
+accusers alluded to was the _daimonion_ of Socrates. That they should have
+had any idea of what that was must be regarded as utterly out of the
+question, and whatever it may have been--and of this we shall have a word
+to say later--it had at any rate nothing whatever to do with atheism. As to
+the charge of not believing in the gods of the State, Plato makes the
+accuser prefer it in the form that Socrates did not believe in any gods at
+all, after which it becomes an easy matter for Socrates to show that it is
+directly incompatible with the charge of introducing new deities. As
+ground for his accusation the accuser states--in Plato, as before--that
+Socrates taught the same doctrine about the sun and moon as Anaxagoras.
+The whole of the passage in the _Apology_ in which the question of the
+denial of gods is dealt with--a short dialogue between Socrates and the
+accuser, quite in the Socratic manner--historically speaking, carries
+little conviction, and we therefore dare not take it for granted that the
+charge either of atheism or of false doctrine about the sun and moon was
+put forward in that form. But that something about this latter point was
+mentioned during the trial must be regarded as probable, when we consider
+that Xenophon, too, defends Socrates at some length against the charge of
+concerning himself with speculations on Nature. That he did not do so must
+be taken for certain, not only from the express evidence of Xenophon and
+Plato, but from the whole nature of the case. The accusation on this point
+was assuredly pure fabrication. There remains only what was no doubt also
+the main point, namely, the assertion of the pernicious influence of
+Socrates on the young, and the inference of irreligion to be drawn from
+it--an argument which it would be absurd to waste any words upon.
+
+The attack, then, affords no information about Socrates's personal point
+of view as regards belief in the gods, and the defence only very little.
+Both Xenophon and Plato give an account of Socrates's _daimonion_, but
+this point has so little relation to the charge of atheism that it is not
+worth examination. For the rest Plato's defence is indirect. He makes
+Socrates refute his opponent, but does not let him say a word about his
+own point of view. Xenophon is more positive, in so far as in the first
+place he asserts that Socrates worshipped the gods like any other good
+citizen, and more especially that he advised his friends to use the
+Oracle; in the second place, that, though he lived in full publicity, no
+one ever saw him do or heard him say anything of an impious nature. All
+these assertions are assuredly correct, and they render it highly
+improbable that Socrates should have secretly abandoned the popular faith,
+but they tell us little that is positive about his views. Fortunately we
+possess other means of getting to closer grips with the question; the way
+must be through a consideration of Socrates's whole conduct and his mode
+of thought.
+
+Here we at once come to the interesting negative fact that there is
+nothing in tradition to indicate that Socrates ever occupied himself with
+theological questions. To be sure, Xenophon has twice put into his mouth a
+whole theodicy expressing an elaborate teleological view of nature. But
+that we dare not base anything upon this is now, I think, universally
+acknowledged. Plato, in the dialogue _Euthyphron_, makes him subject the
+popular notion of piety to a devastating criticism; but this, again, will
+not nowadays be regarded as historical by anybody. Everything we are told
+about Socrates which bears the stamp of historical truth indicates that he
+restricted himself to ethics and left theology alone. But this very fact
+is not without significance. It indicates that Socrates's aim was not to
+alter the religious views of his contemporaries. Since he did not do so we
+may reasonably believe it was because they did not inconvenience him in
+what was most important to him, _i.e._ ethics.
+
+We may, however, perhaps go even a step farther. We may venture, I think,
+to maintain that so far from contemporary religion being a hindrance to
+Socrates in his occupation as a teacher of ethics, it was, on the
+contrary, an indispensable support to him, nay, an integral component of
+his fundamental ethical view. The object of Socrates in his relations with
+his fellow-men was, on his own showing--for on this important point I think
+we can confidently rely upon Plato's _Apology_--to make clear to them that
+they knew nothing. And when he was asked to say in what he himself
+differed from other people, he could mention only one thing, namely, that
+he was aware of his own ignorance. But his ignorance is not an ignorance
+of this thing or that, it is a radical ignorance, something involved in
+the essence of man as man. That is, in other words, it is determined by
+religion. In order to be at all intelligible and ethically applicable, it
+presupposes the conception of beings of whom the essence is knowledge. For
+Socrates and his contemporaries the popular belief supplied such beings in
+the gods. The institution of the Oracle itself is an expression of the
+recognition of the superiority of the gods to man in knowledge. But the
+dogma had long been stated even in its absolute form when Homer said: "The
+gods know everything." To Socrates, who always took his starting-point
+quite popularly from notions that were universally accepted, this basis
+was simply indispensable. And so far from inconveniencing Socrates, the
+multiplicity and anthropomorphism of the gods seemed an advantage to
+him--the more they were like man in all but the essential qualification,
+the better.
+
+The Socratic ignorance has an ethical bearing. Its complement is his
+assertion that virtue is knowledge. Here again the gods are the necessary
+presupposition and determination. That the gods were good, or, as it was
+preferred to express it, "just" (the Greek word comprises more than the
+English word), was no less a popular dogma than the notion that they
+possessed knowledge. Now all Socrates's efforts were directed towards
+goodness as an end in view, towards the ethical development of mankind.
+Here again popular belief was his best ally. To the people to whom he
+talked, virtue (the Greek word is at once both wider and narrower in sense
+than the English term) was no mere abstract notion; it was a living
+reality to them, embodied in beings that were like themselves, human
+beings, but perfect human beings.
+
+If we correlate this with the negative circumstance that Socrates was no
+theologian but a teacher of ethics, we can easily understand a point of
+view which accepted popular belief as it was and employed it for working
+purposes in the service of moral teaching. Such a point of view, moreover,
+gained extraordinary strength by the fact that it preserved continuity
+with earlier Greek religious thought. This latter, too, had been ethical
+in its bearing; it, too, had employed the gods in the service of its
+ethical aim. But its central idea was felicity, not virtue; its
+starting-point was the popular dogma of the felicity of the gods, not
+their justice. In this way it had come to lay stress on a virtue which
+might be termed modesty, but in a religious sense, _i.e._ man must
+recognise his difference from the gods as a limited being, subject to the
+vicissitudes of an existence above which the gods are raised. Socrates
+says just the same, only that he puts knowledge or virtue, which to him
+was the same thing, in the place of felicity. From a religious point of
+view the result is exactly the same, namely, the doctrine of the gods as
+the terminus and ideal, and the insistence on the gulf separating man from
+them. We are tempted to say that, had Socrates turned with hostile intent
+against a religion which thus played into his hands, the more fool he. But
+this is putting the problem the wrong way up--Socrates never stood
+critically outside popular belief and traditional religious thought
+speculating as to whether he should use it or reject it. No, his thought
+grew out of it as from the bosom of the earth. Hence its mighty religious
+power, its inevitable victory over a school of thought which had severed
+all connexion with tradition.
+
+That such a point of view should be so badly misunderstood as it was in
+Athens seems incomprehensible. The explanation is no doubt that the whole
+story of Socrates's denial of the gods was only included by his accusers
+for the sake of completeness, and did not play any great part in the final
+issue. This seems confirmed by the fact that they found it convenient to
+support their charge of atheism by one of introducing foreign gods, this
+being punishable by Attic law. They thus obtained some slight hold for
+their accusation. But both charges must be presumed to have been so
+signally refuted during the trial that it is hardly possible that any
+great number of the judges were influenced by them. It was quite different
+and far weightier matters which brought about the conviction of Socrates,
+questions on which there was really a deep and vital difference of opinion
+between him and his contemporaries. That Socrates's attitude towards
+popular belief was at any rate fully understood elsewhere is testified by
+the answer of the Delphic Oracle, that declared Socrates to be the wisest
+of all men. However remarkable such a pronouncement from such a place may
+appear, it seems impossible to reject the accounts of it as unhistorical;
+on the other hand, it does not seem impossible to explain how the Oracle
+came to declare itself as reported. Earlier Greek thought, which insisted
+upon the gulf separating gods and men, was from olden times intimately
+connected with the Delphic Oracle. It hardly sprang from there; more
+probably it arose spontaneously in various parts of Hellas. But it would
+naturally feel attracted toward the Oracle, which was one of the religious
+centres of Hellas, and it was recognised as legitimate by the Oracle.
+Above all, the honour shown by the Oracle to Pindar, one of the chief
+representatives of the earlier thought, testifies to this. Hence there is
+nothing incredible in the assumption that Socrates attracted notice at
+Delphi as a defender of the old-fashioned religious views approved by the
+Oracle, precisely in virtue of his opposition to the ideas then in vogue.
+
+If we accept this explanation we are, however, excluded from taking
+literally Plato's account of the answer of the Delphic Oracle and
+Socrates's attitude towards it. Plato presents the case as if the Oracle
+were the starting-point of Socrates's philosophy and of the peculiar mode
+of life which was indissolubly bound up with it. This presentation cannot
+be correct if we are to regard the Oracle as historical and understand it
+as we have understood it. The Oracle presupposes the Socrates we know: a
+man with a religious message and a mode of life which was bound to attract
+notice to him as an exception from the general rule. It cannot, therefore,
+have been the cause of Socrates's finding himself. On the other hand, it
+is difficult to imagine a man choosing a mode of life like that of
+Socrates without a definite inducement, without some fact or other that
+would lead him to conceive himself as an exception from the rule. If we
+look for such a fact in the life of Socrates, we shall look in vain as
+regards externals. Apart from his activities as a religious and ethical
+personality, his life was that of any other Attic citizen. But in his
+spiritual life there was certainly one point, but only one, on which he
+deviated from the normal, namely, his _daimonion_. If we examine the
+accounts of this more closely the only thing we can make of them is--or so
+at least it seems to me--that we are here in the presence of a
+form--peculiar, no doubt, and highly developed--of the phenomena which are
+nowadays classed under the concept of clairvoyance. Now Plato makes
+Socrates himself say that the power of avoiding what would harm him, in
+great things and little, by virtue of a direct perception (a "voice"),
+which is what constituted his _daimonion_, was given him from childhood.
+That it was regarded as something singular both by himself and others is
+evident, and likewise that he himself regarded it as something
+supernatural; the designation _daimonion_ itself seems to be his own. I
+think that we must seek for the origin of Socrates's peculiar mode of life
+in this direction, strange as it may be that a purely mystic element
+should have given the impulse to the most rationalistic philosophy the
+world has ever produced. It is impossible to enter more deeply into this
+problem here; but, if my conjecture is correct, we have an additional
+explanation of the fact that Socrates was disposed to anything rather than
+an attack on the established religion.
+
+A view of popular religion such as I have here sketched bore in itself the
+germ of a further development which must lead in other directions. A
+personality like Socrates might perhaps manage throughout a lifetime to
+keep that balance on a razor's edge which is involved in utilising to the
+utmost in the service of ethics the popular dogmas of the perfection of
+the gods, while disregarding all irrelevant tales, all myths and all
+notions of too human a tenor about them. This demanded concentration on
+the one thing needful, in conjunction with deep piety of the most genuine
+antique kind, with the most profound religious modesty, a combination
+which it was assuredly given to but one man to attain. Socrates's
+successors had it not. Starting precisely from a Socratic foundation they
+entered upon theological speculations which carried them away from the
+Socratic point of view.
+
+For the Cynics, who set up virtue as the only good, the popular notions of
+the gods would seem to have been just as convenient as for Socrates. And
+we know that Antisthenes, the founder of the school, made ample use of
+them in his ethical teaching. He represented Heracles as the Cynical ideal
+and occupied himself largely with allegorical interpretation of the myths.
+On the other hand, there is a tradition that he maintained that "according
+to nature" there was only one god, but "according to the law" several--a
+purely sophistic view. He inveighed against the worship of images, too,
+and maintained that god "did not resemble any thing," and we know that his
+school rejected all worship of the gods because the gods "were in need of
+nothing." This conception, too, is presumably traceable to Antisthenes. In
+all this the theological interest is evident. As soon as this interest
+sets in, the harmonious relation to the popular faith is upset, the
+discord between its higher and lower ideas becomes manifest, and criticism
+begins to assert itself. In the case of Antisthenes, if we may believe
+tradition, it seems to have led to monotheism, in itself a most remarkable
+phenomenon in the history of Greek religion, but the material is too
+slight for us to make anything of it. The later Cynics afford interesting
+features in illustration of atheism in antiquity, but this is best left to
+a later chapter.
+
+About the relations of the Megarians to the popular faith we know next to
+nothing. One of them, Stilpo, was charged with impiety on account of a bad
+joke about Athene, and convicted, although he tried to save himself by
+another bad joke. As his point of view was that of a downright sceptic, he
+was no doubt an atheist according to the notions of antiquity; in our day
+he would be called an agnostic, but the information that we have about his
+religious standpoint is too slight to repay dwelling on him.
+
+As to the relation of the Cyrenaic school to the popular faith, the
+general proposition has been handed down to us that the wise man could not
+be "deisidaimon," _i.e._ superstitious or god-fearing; the Greek word can
+have both senses. This does not speak for piety at any rate, but then the
+relationship of the Cyrenaics to the gods of popular belief was different
+from that of the other followers of Socrates. As they set up pleasure--the
+momentary, isolated feeling of pleasure--as the supreme good, they had no
+use for the popular conceptions of the gods in their ethics, nay, these
+conceptions were even a hindrance to them in so far as the fear of the
+gods might prove a restriction where it ought not to. In these
+circumstances we cannot wonder at finding a member of the school in the
+list of _atheoi_. This is Theodorus of Cyrene, who lived about the year
+300. He really seems to have been a downright denier of the gods; he wrote
+a work _On the Gods_ containing a searching criticism of theology, which
+is said to have exposed him to unpleasantness during a stay at Athens, but
+the then ruler of the city, Demetrius of Phalerum, protected him. There is
+nothing strange in a manifestation of downright atheism at this time and
+from this quarter. More remarkable is that interest in theology which we
+must assume Theodorus to have had, since he wrote at length upon the
+subject. Unfortunately it is not evident from the account whether his
+criticism was directed mostly against popular religion or against the
+theology of the philosophers. As it was asserted in antiquity that
+Epicurus used his book largely, the latter is more probable.
+
+Whereas in the case of the "imperfect Socratics" as well as of all the
+earlier philosophers we must content ourselves with more or less casual
+notes, and at the best with fragments, and for Socrates with second-hand
+information, when we come to Plato we find ourselves for the first time in
+the presence of full and authentic information. Plato belongs to those few
+among the ancient authors of whom everything that their contemporaries
+possessed has been preserved to our own day. There would, however, be no
+cause to speak about Plato in an investigation of atheism in antiquity,
+had not so eminent a scholar as Zeller roundly asserted that Plato did not
+believe in the Greek gods--with the exception of the heavenly bodies, in
+the case of which the facts are obvious. On the other hand, it is
+impossible here to enter upon a close discussion of so large a question; I
+must content myself with giving my views in their main lines, with a brief
+statement of my reasons for holding them.
+
+In the mythical portions of his dialogues Plato uses the gods as a given
+poetic motive and treats them with poetic licence. Otherwise they play a
+very inferior part in the greater portion of his works. In the
+_Euthyphron_ he gives a sharp criticism of the popular conception of
+piety, and in reality at the same time very seriously questions the
+importance and value of the existing form of worship. In his chief ethical
+work, the _Gorgias_, he subjects the fundamental problems of individual
+ethics to a close discussion without saying one word of their relation to
+religion; if we except the mythic part at the end the gods scarcely appear
+in the dialogue. Finally, in his _Republic_ he no doubt gives a detailed
+criticism of popular mythology as an element of education, and in the
+course of this also some positive definitions of the idea of God, but
+throughout the construction of his ideal community he entirely disregards
+religion and worship, even if he occasionally takes it for granted that a
+cult of some sort exists, and in one place quite casually refers to the
+Oracle at Delphi as authority for its organisation in details. To this may
+further be added the negative point that he never in any of his works made
+Socrates define his position in regard to the sophistic treatment of the
+popular religion.
+
+In Plato's later works the case is different. In the construction of the
+universe described in the _Timaeus_ the gods have a definite and
+significant place, and in the _Laws_, Plato's last work, they play a
+leading part. Here he not only gives elaborate rules for the organisation
+of the worship which permeate the whole life of the community, but even in
+the argument of the dialogue the gods are everywhere in evidence in a way
+which strongly suggests bigotry. Finally, Plato gives the above-mentioned
+definitions of impiety and fixes the severest punishment for it--for
+downright denial of the gods, when all attempts at conversion have failed,
+the penalty of death.
+
+On this evidence we are tempted to take the view that Plato in his earlier
+years took up a critical attitude in regard to the gods of popular belief,
+perhaps even denied them altogether, that he gradually grew more
+conservative, and ended by being a confirmed bigot. And we might look for
+a corroboration of this in a peculiar observation in the _Laws_. Plato
+opens his admonition to the young against atheism by reminding them that
+they are young, and that false opinion concerning the gods is a common
+disease among the young, but that utter denial of their existence is not
+wont to endure to old age. In this we might see an expression of personal
+religious experience.
+
+Nevertheless I do not think such a construction of Plato's religious
+development feasible. A decisive objection is his exposition of the
+Socratic point of view in so early a work as the _Apology_. I at any rate
+regard it as psychologically impossible that a downright atheist, be he
+ever so great a poet, should be able to draw such a picture of a deeply
+religious personality, and draw it with so much sympathy and such
+convincing force. Add to this other facts of secondary moment. Even the
+close criticism to which Plato subjects the popular notions of the gods in
+his _Republic_ does not indicate denial of the gods as such; moreover, it
+is built on a positive foundation, on the idea of the goodness of the gods
+and their truth (which for Plato manifests itself in immutability).
+Finally, Plato at all times vigorously advocated the belief in providence.
+In the _Laws_ he stamps unbelief in divine providence as impiety; in the
+_Republic_ he insists in a prominent passage that the gods love the just
+man and order everything for him in the best way. And he puts the same
+thought into Socrates's mouth in the _Apology_, though it is hardly
+Socratic in the strict sense of the word, _i.e._ as a main point in
+Socrates's conception of existence. All this should warn us not to
+exaggerate the significance of the difference which may be pointed out
+between the religious standpoints of the younger and the older Plato. But
+the difference itself cannot, I think, be denied; there can hardly be any
+doubt that Plato was much more critical of popular belief in his youth and
+prime than towards the close of his life.
+
+Even in Plato's later works there is, in spite of their conservative
+attitude, a very peculiar reservation in regard to the anthropomorphic
+gods of popular belief. It shows itself in the _Laws_ in the fact that
+where he sets out to _prove_ the existence of the gods he contents himself
+with proving the divinity of the heavenly bodies and quite disregards the
+other gods. It appears still more plainly in the _Timaeus_, where he gives
+a philosophical explanation of how the divine heavenly bodies came into
+existence, but says expressly of the other gods that such an explanation
+is impossible, and that we must abide by what the old theologians said on
+this subject; they being partly the children of gods would know best where
+their parents came from. It is observations of this kind that induced
+Zeller to believe that Plato altogether denied the gods of popular belief;
+he also contends that the gods have no place in Plato's system. This
+latter contention is perfectly correct; Plato never identified the gods
+with the ideas (although he comes very near to it in the _Republic_, where
+he attributes to them immutability, the quality which determines the
+essence of the ideas), and in the _Timaeus_ he distinguishes sharply
+between them. No doubt his doctrine of ideas led up to a kind of divinity,
+the idea of the good, as the crown of the system, but the direct inference
+from this conception would be pure monotheism and so exclude polytheism.
+This inference Plato did not draw, though his treatment of the gods in the
+_Laws_ and _Timaeus_ certainly shows that he was quite clear that the gods
+of the popular faith were an irrational element in his conception of the
+universe. The two passages do not entitle us to go further and conclude
+that he utterly rejected them, and in the _Timaeus_, where Plato makes
+both classes of gods, both the heavenly bodies and the others, take part
+in the creation of man, this is plainly precluded. The playful turn with
+which he evades inquiry into the origin of the gods thus receives its
+proper limitation; it is entirely confined to their origin.
+
+Such, according to my view, is the state of the case. It is of fundamental
+importance to emphasise the fact that we cannot conclude, because the gods
+of popular belief do not fit into the system of a philosopher, that he
+denies their existence. In what follows we shall have occasion to point
+out a case in which, as all are now agreed, a philosophical school has
+adopted and stubbornly held to the belief in the existence of gods though
+this assumption was directly opposed to a fundamental proposition in its
+system of doctrine. The case of Plato is particularly interesting because
+he himself was aware and has pointed out that here was a point on which
+the consistent scientific application of his conception of the universe
+must fail. It is the outcome--one of many--of what is perhaps his finest
+quality as a philosopher, namely, his intellectual honesty.
+
+An indirect testimony to the correctness of the view here stated will be
+found in the way in which Plato's faithful disciple Xenocrates developed
+his theology, for it shows that Xenocrates presupposed the existence of
+the gods of popular belief as given by Plato. Xenocrates made it his
+general task to systematise Plato's philosophy (which had never been set
+forth publicly by himself as a whole), and to secure it against attack. In
+the course of this work he was bound to discover that the conception of
+the gods of popular belief was a particularly weak point in Plato's
+system, and he attempted to mend matters by a peculiar theory which became
+of the greatest importance for later times. Xenocrates set up as gods, in
+the first place, the heavenly bodies. Next he gave his highest principles
+(pure abstracts such as oneness and twoness) and the elements of his
+universe (air, water and earth) the names of some of the highest
+divinities in popular belief (Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Demeter). These gods,
+however, did not enter into direct communication with men, but only
+through some intermediate agent. The intermediate agents were the
+"demons," a class of beings who were higher than man yet not perfect like
+the gods. They were, it seems, immortal; they were invisible and far more
+powerful than human beings; but they were subject to human passions and
+were of highly differing grades of moral perfection. These are the beings
+that are the objects of the greater part of the existing cult, especially
+such usages as rest on the assumption that the gods can do harm and are
+directed towards averting it, or which are in other ways objectionable;
+and with them are connected the myths which Plato subjected to so severe a
+criticism. Xenocrates found a basis for this system in Plato, who in the
+_Symposium_ sets up the demons as a class of beings between gods and men,
+and makes them carriers of the prayers and wishes of men to the gods. But
+what was a passing thought with Plato serving only a poetical purpose was
+taken seriously and systematised by Xenocrates.
+
+It can hardly be said that Xenocrates has gained much recognition among
+modern writers on the history of philosophy for his theory of demons. And
+yet I cannot see that there was any other possible solution of the problem
+which ancient popular belief set ancient philosophy, if, be it understood,
+we hold fast by two hypotheses: the first, that the popular belief and
+worship of the ancients was based throughout on a foundation of reality;
+and second, that moral perfection is an essential factor in the conception
+of God. The only inconsistency which we may perhaps bring home to
+Xenocrates is that he retained certain of the popular names of the gods as
+designations for gods in his sense; but this inconsistency was, as we
+shall see, subsequently removed. In favour of this estimate of
+Xenocrates's doctrine of demons may further be adduced that it actually
+was the last word of ancient philosophy on the matter. The doctrine was
+adopted by the Stoics, the Neo-Pythagoreans, and the Neo-Platonists. Only
+the Epicureans went another way, but their doctrine died out before the
+close of antiquity. And so the doctrine of demons became the ground on
+which Jewish-Christian monotheism managed to come to terms with ancient
+paganism, to conquer it in theory, as it were.
+
+This implies, however, that the doctrine of demons, though it arose out of
+an honest attempt to save popular belief philosophically, in reality
+brings out its incompatibility with philosophy. The religion and worship
+of the ancients could dispense with neither the higher nor the lower
+conceptions of its gods. If the former were done away with, recognition,
+however full, of the existence of the gods was no good; in the long run
+the inference could not be avoided that they were immoral powers and so
+ought not to be worshipped. This was the inference drawn by Christianity
+in theory and enforced in practice, ultimately by main force.
+
+Aristotle is among the philosophers who were prosecuted for impiety. When
+the anti-Macedonian party came into power in Athens after the death of
+Alexander, there broke out a persecution against his adherents, and this
+was also directed against Aristotle. The basis of the charge against him
+was that he had shown divine honour after his death to the tyrant Hermias,
+whose guest he had been during a prolonged stay in Asia Minor. This seems
+to have been a fabrication, and at any rate has nothing to do with
+atheism. In the writings of Aristotle, as they were then generally known,
+it would assuredly have been impossible to find any ground for a charge of
+atheism.
+
+Nevertheless, Aristotle is one of the philosophers about whose faith in
+the gods of popular religion well-founded doubts may be raised. Like
+Plato, he acknowledged the divinity of the heavenly bodies on the ground
+that they must have a soul since they had independent motion. Further, he
+has a kind of supreme god who, himself unmoved, is the cause of all
+movement, and whose constituent quality is reason. As regards the gods of
+popular belief, in his _Ethics_ and his _Politics_ he assumes public
+worship to be a necessary constituent of the life of the individual and
+the community. He gave no grounds for this assumption--on the contrary, he
+expressly declared that it was a question which ought not to be discussed
+at all: he who stirs up doubts whether honour should be paid to the gods
+is in need not of teaching but of punishment. (That he himself took part
+in worship is evident from his will.) Further, in his ethical works he
+used the conceptions of the gods almost in the same way as we have assumed
+that Socrates did, _i.e._ as the ethical ideal and determining the limits
+of the human. He never entered upon any elaborate criticism of the lower
+elements of popular religion such as Plato gave. So far everything is in
+admirable order. But if we look more closely at things there is
+nevertheless nearly always a little "but" in Aristotle's utterances about
+the gods. Where he operates with popular notions he prefers to speak
+hypothetically or to refer to what is generally assumed; or he is content
+to use only definitions which will also agree with his own philosophical
+conception of God. But he goes further; in a few places in his writings
+there are utterances which it seems can only be interpreted as a radical
+denial of the popular religion. The most important of them deserves to be
+quoted _in extenso_:
+
+
+    "A tradition has been handed down from the ancients and from the
+    most primitive times, and left to later ages in the form of myth,
+    that these substances (_i.e._ sky and heavenly bodies) are gods
+    and that the divine embraces all nature. The rest consists in
+    legendary additions intended to impress the multitude and serve
+    the purposes of legislation and the common weal; for these gods
+    are said to have human shape or resemble certain other beings
+    (animals), and they say other things which follow from this and
+    are of a similar kind to those already mentioned. But if we
+    disregard all this and restrict ourselves to the first point, that
+    they thought that the first substances were gods, we must
+    acknowledge that it is a divinely inspired saying. And as, in all
+    probability, every art and science has been discovered many times,
+    as far as it is possible, and has perished again, so these
+    notions, too, may have been preserved till now as relics of those
+    times. To this extent only can we have any idea of the opinion
+    which was held by our fathers and has come down from the beginning
+    of things."
+
+
+The last sentences, expressing Aristotle's idea of a life-cycle and
+periods of civilisation which repeat themselves, have only been included
+in the quotation for the sake of completeness. If we disregard them, the
+passage plainly enough states the view that the only element of truth in
+the traditional notions about the gods was the divinity of the sky and the
+heavenly bodies; the rest is myth. Aristotle has nowhere else expressed
+himself with such distinctness and in such length, but then the passage in
+question has a place of its own. It comes in his _Metaphysics_ directly
+after the exposition of his philosophical conception of God--a position
+marked by profound earnestness and as it were irradiated by a quiet inner
+fervour. We feel that we are here approaching the _sanctum sanctorum_ of
+the thinker. In this connexion, and only here, he wished for once to state
+his opinion about the religion of his time without reserve. What he says
+here is a precise formulation of the result arrived at by the best Greek
+thinkers as regards the religion of the Greek people. It was not, they
+thought, pure fabrication. It contained an element of truth of the
+greatest value. But most of it consisted of human inventions without any
+reality behind them.
+
+A point of view like that of Aristotle would, I suppose, hardly have been
+called atheism among the ancients, if only because the heavenly bodies
+were acknowledged as divine. But according to our definition it is
+atheism. The "sky"-gods of Aristotle have nothing in common with the gods
+of popular belief, not even their names, for Aristotle never names them.
+And the rest, the whole crowd of Greek anthropomorphic gods, exist only in
+the human imagination.
+
+Aristotle's successors offer little of interest to our inquiry.
+Theophrastus was charged with impiety, but the charge broke down
+completely. His theological standpoint was certainly the same as
+Aristotle's. Of Strato, the most independent of the Peripatetics, we know
+that in his view of nature he laid greater stress on the material causes
+than Aristotle did, and so arrived at a different conception of the
+supreme deity. Aristotle had severed the deity from Nature and placed it
+outside the latter as an incorporeal being whose chief determining factor
+was reason. In Strato's view the deity was identical with Nature and, like
+the latter, was without consciousness; consciousness was only found in
+organic nature. Consequently we cannot suppose him to have believed in the
+divinity of the heavenly bodies in Aristotle's sense, though no direct
+statement on this subject has come down to us. About his attitude towards
+popular belief we hear nothing. A denial of the popular gods is not
+necessarily implied in Strato's theory, but seems reasonable in itself and
+is further rendered probable by the fact that all writers seem to take it
+for granted that Strato knew no god other than the whole of Nature.
+
+We designated Socratic philosophy, in its relation to popular belief, as a
+reaction against the radical free-thought of the sophistic movement. It
+may seem peculiar that with Aristotle it develops into a view which we can
+only describe as atheism. There is, however, an important difference
+between the standpoints of the sophists and of Aristotle. Radical as the
+latter is at bottom, it is not, however, openly opposed to popular
+belief--on the contrary, to any one who did not examine it more closely it
+must have had the appearance of accepting popular belief. The very
+assumption that the heavenly bodies were divine would contribute to that
+effect; this, as we have seen, was a point on which the popular view laid
+great stress. If we add to this that Aristotle never made the existence of
+the popular gods matter of debate; that he expressly acknowledged the
+established worship; and that he consistently made use of certain
+fundamental notions of popular belief in his philosophy--we can hardly
+avoid the conclusion that, notwithstanding his personal emancipation from
+the existing religion, he is a true representative of the Socratic
+reaction against sophistic. But we see, too, that there is a reservation
+in this reaction. In continuity with earlier Greek thought on religion, it
+proceeded from the absolute definitions of the divine offered by popular
+belief, but when criticising anthropomorphism on this basis it did not
+after all avoid falling out with popular belief. How far each philosopher
+went in his antagonism was a matter of discretion, as also was the means
+chosen to reconcile the philosophical with the popular view. The theology
+of the Socratic schools thus suffered from a certain half-heartedness; in
+the main it has the character of a compromise. It would not give up the
+popular notions of the gods, and yet they were continually getting in the
+way. This dualism governs the whole of the succeeding Greek philosophy.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+
+During the three or four centuries which passed between the downfall of
+free Hellas and the beginning of the Roman Empire, great social and
+political changes took place in the ancient world, involving also vital
+changes in religion. The chief phenomenon in this field, the invasion of
+foreign, especially oriental, religions into Hellas, does not come within
+the scope of this investigation. On the one hand, it is an expression of
+dissatisfaction with the old gods; on the other, the intrusion of new gods
+would contribute to the ousting of the old ones. There is no question of
+atheism here; it is only a change within polytheism. But apart from this
+change there is evidence that the old faith had lost its hold on men's
+minds to no inconsiderable extent. Here, too, there is hardly any question
+of atheism properly speaking, but as a background to the--not very
+numerous--evidences of such atheism in our period, we cannot well ignore
+the decline of the popular faith. Our investigation is rendered difficult
+on this point, and generally within this period, by the lack of direct
+evidence. Of the rich Hellenistic literature almost everything has been
+lost, and we are restricted to reports and fragments.
+
+In order to gain a concrete starting-point we will begin with a quotation
+from the historian Polybius--so to speak the only Greek prose author of the
+earlier Hellenistic period of whose works considerable and connected
+portions are preserved. Polybius wrote in the latter half of the second
+century a history of the world in which Rome took the dominant place. Here
+he gave, among other things, a detailed description of the Roman
+constitution and thus came to touch upon the state of religion in Rome as
+compared with that in Greece. He says on this subject:
+
+"The greatest advantage of the Roman constitution seems to me to lie in
+its conception of the gods, and I believe that what among other peoples is
+despised is what holds together the Roman power--I mean superstition. For
+this feature has by them been developed so far in the direction of the
+'horrible,' and has so permeated both private and public life, that it is
+quite unique. Many will perhaps find this strange, but I think they have
+acted so with an eye to the mass of the people. For if it were possible to
+compose a state of reasonable people such a procedure would no doubt be
+unnecessary, but as every people regarded as a mass is easily impressed
+and full of criminal instincts, unreasonable violence, and fierce passion,
+there is nothing to be done but to keep the masses under by vague fears
+and such-like hocus-pocus. Therefore it is my opinion that it was not
+without good reason or by mere chance that the ancients imparted to the
+masses the notions of the gods and the underworld, but rather is it
+thoughtless and irrational when nowadays we seek to destroy them."
+
+As a proof of this last statement follows a comparison between the state
+of public morals in Greece and in Rome. In Greece you cannot trust a man
+with a few hundred pounds without ten notaries and as many seals and
+double the number of witnesses; in Rome great public treasure is
+administered with honesty merely under the safeguard of an oath.
+
+As we see, this passage contains direct evidence that in the second
+century in Hellas--in contradistinction to Rome--there was an attempt to
+break down the belief in the gods. By his "we" Polybius evidently referred
+especially to the leading political circles. He knew these circles from
+personal experience, and his testimony has all the more weight because he
+does not come forward in the role of the orthodox man complaining in the
+usual way of the impiety of his contemporaries; on the contrary, he speaks
+as the educated and enlightened man to whom it is a matter of course that
+all this talk about the gods and the underworld is a myth which nobody
+among the better classes takes seriously. This is a tone we have not heard
+before, and it is a strong indirect testimony to the fact that Polybius is
+not wrong when he speaks of disbelief among the upper classes of Greece.
+
+In this connexion the work of Polybius has a certain interest on another
+point. Where earlier--and later--authors would speak of the intervention of
+the gods in the march of history, he operates as a rule with an idea which
+he calls Tyche. The word is untranslatable when used in this way. It is
+something between chance, fortune and fate. It is more comprehensive and
+more personal than chance; it has not the immutable, the "lawbound"
+character of fate; rather it denotes the incalculability, the
+capriciousness associated, especially in earlier usage, with the word
+fortune, but without the tendency of this word to be used in a good sense.
+
+This Tyche-religion--if we may use this expression--was not new in Hellas.
+Quite early we find Tyche worshipped as a goddess among the other deities,
+and it is an old notion that the gods send good fortune, a notion which
+set its mark on a series of established phrases in private and public
+life. But what is of interest here is that shifting of religious ideas in
+the course of which Tyche drives the gods into the background. We find
+indications of it as early as Thucydides. In his view of history he lays
+the main stress, certainly, on human initiative, and not least on rational
+calculation, as the cause of events. But where he is obliged to reckon
+with an element independent of human efforts, he calls it Tyche and not
+"the immortal gods." A somewhat similar view we find in another great
+political author of the stage of transition to our period, namely,
+Demosthenes. Demosthenes of course employs the official apparatus of gods:
+he invokes them on solemn occasions; he quotes their authority in support
+of his assertions (once he even reported a revelation which he had in a
+dream); he calls his opponents enemies of the gods, etc. But in his
+political considerations the gods play a negligible part. The factors with
+which he reckons as a rule are merely political forces. Where he is
+compelled to bring forward elements which man cannot control, he shows a
+preference for Tyche. He certainly occasionally identifies her with the
+favour of the gods, but in such a way as to give the impression that it is
+only a _facon de parler_. Direct pronouncements of a free-thinking kind
+one would not expect from an orator and statesman, and yet Demosthenes was
+once bold enough to say that Pythia, the mouthpiece of the Delphic Oracle,
+was a partisan of Macedonia, an utterance which his opponent Aeschines,
+who liked to parade his orthodoxy, did not omit to cast in his teeth. On
+the whole, Aeschines liked to represent Demosthenes as a godless fellow,
+and it is not perhaps without significance that the latter never directly
+replied to such attacks, or indirectly did anything to impair their force.
+
+During the violent revolutions that took place in Hellas under Alexander
+the Great and his successors, and the instability of social and political
+conditions consequent thereon, the Tyche-religion received a fresh
+impetus. With one stroke Hellas was flung into world politics. Everything
+grew to colossal proportions in comparison with earlier conditions. The
+small Hellenic city-states that had hitherto been each for itself a world
+shrank into nothing. It is as if the old gods could not keep pace with
+this violent process of expansion. Men felt a craving for a wider and more
+comprehensive religious concept to answer to the changed conditions, and
+such an idea was found in the idea of Tyche. Thoughtful men, such as
+Demetrius of Phalerum, wrote whole books about it; states built temples to
+Tyche; in private religion also it played a great part. No one reflected
+much on the relation of Tyche to the old gods. It must be remembered that
+Tyche is a real layman's notion, and that Hellenistic philosophy regarded
+it as its task precisely to render man independent of the whims of fate.
+Sometimes, however, we find a positive statement of the view that Tyche
+ruled over the gods also. It is characteristic of the state of affairs;
+men did not want to relinquish the old gods, but could not any longer
+allow them the leading place.
+
+If we return for a moment to Polybius, we shall find that his conception
+of Tyche strikingly illustrates the distance between him and Thucydides.
+In the introduction to his work, on its first page, he points out that the
+universally acknowledged task of historical writing is partly to educate
+people for political activities, partly to teach them to bear the
+vicissitudes of fortune with fortitude by reminding them of the lot of
+others. And subsequently, when he passes on to his main theme, the
+foundation of the Roman world-empire, after having explained the plan of
+his work, he says: "So far then our plan. But the _co-operation of
+fortune_ is still needed if my life is to be long enough for me to
+accomplish my purpose." An earlier--or a later--author would here either
+have left the higher powers out of the game altogether or would have used
+an expression showing more submission to the gods of the popular faith.
+
+In a later author, Pliny the Elder, we again find a characteristic
+utterance throwing light upon the significance of the Tyche-religion.
+After a very free-thinking survey of the popular notions regarding the
+gods, Pliny says: "As an intermediate position between these two views
+(that there is a divine providence and that there is none) men have
+themselves invented another divine power, in order that speculation about
+the deity might become still more uncertain. Throughout the world, in
+every place, at every hour of the day, Fortune alone is invoked and named
+by every mouth; she alone is accused, she bears the guilt of everything;
+of her only do we think, to her is all praise, to her all blame. And she
+is worshipped with railing words--she is deemed inconstant, by many even
+blind; she is fickle, unstable, uncertain, changeable; giving her favours
+to the unworthy. To her is imputed every loss, every gain; in all the
+accounts of life she alone fills up both the debit and the credit side,
+and we are so subject to chance that Chance itself becomes our god, and
+again proves the incertitude of the deity." Even if a great deal of this
+may be put down to rhetoric, by which Pliny was easily carried away, the
+solid fact itself remains that he felt justified in speaking as if Dame
+Fortune had dethroned all the old gods.
+
+That this view of life must have persisted very tenaciously even down to a
+time when a strong reaction in the direction of positive religious feeling
+had set in, is proved by the romances of the time. The novels of the
+ancients were in general poor productions. Most of them are made after the
+recipe of a little misfortune in each chapter and great happiness in the
+last. The two lovers meet, fall in love, part, and suffer a series of
+troubles individually until they are finally united. The power that
+governs their fates and shapes everything according to this pattern is
+regularly Tyche, never the gods. The testimony of the novels is of special
+significance because they were read by the general mass of the educated
+classes, not by the select who had philosophy to guide them.
+
+Another testimony to the weakening of popular faith in the Hellenistic age
+is the decay of the institution of the Oracle. This, also, is of early
+date; as early as the fifth and fourth century we hear much less of the
+interference of the oracles in political matters than in earlier times.
+The most important of them all, the Delphic Oracle, was dealt a terrible
+blow in the Holy War (356-346 B.C.), when the Phocians seized it and used
+the treasures which had been accumulated in it during centuries to hire
+mercenaries and carry on war. Such proceedings would assuredly have been
+impossible a century earlier; no soldiers could have been hired with money
+acquired in such a way, or, if they could have been procured, all Hellas
+would have risen in arms against the robbers of the Temple, whereas in the
+Holy War most of the states were indifferent, and several even sided with
+the Phocians. In the succeeding years, after Philip of Macedonia had put
+an end to the Phocian scandal, the Oracle was in reality in his hands--it
+was during this period that Demosthenes stigmatised it as the mouthpiece
+of Philip. In the succeeding centuries, too, it was dependent on the
+various rulers of Hellas and undoubtedly lost all public authority. During
+this period we hear very little of the oracles of Hellas until the time
+before and after the birth of Christ provides us with definite evidence of
+their complete decay.
+
+Thus Strabo, who wrote during the reign of Augustus, says that the
+ancients attached more importance to divination generally and oracles more
+particularly, whereas people in his day were quite indifferent to these
+things. He gives as the reason that the Romans were content to use the
+Sibylline books and their own system of divination. His remark is made _a
+propos_ of the Oracle in Libya, which was formerly in great repute, but
+was almost extinct in his time. He is undoubtedly correct as to the fact,
+but the decline of the oracular system cannot be explained by the
+indifference of the Romans. Plutarch, in a monograph on the discontinuance
+of the oracles, furnishes us with more detailed information. From this it
+appears that not only the Oracle of Ammon but also the numerous oracles of
+Boeotia had ceased to exist, with one exception, while even for the Oracle
+at Delphi, which had formerly employed three priestesses, a single one
+amply sufficed. We also note the remark that the questions submitted to
+the Oracle were mostly unworthy or of no importance.
+
+The want of consideration sometimes shown to sacred places and things
+during the wars of the Hellenistic period may no doubt also be regarded as
+the result of a weakening of interest in the old gods. We have detailed
+information on this point from the war between Philip of Macedonia and the
+Aetolians in 220-217 B.C. The Aetolians began by destroying the temples at
+Dium and Dodona, whereupon Philip retaliated by totally wrecking the
+federal sanctuary of the Aetolians at Thermon. Of Philip's admiral
+Dicaearchus we are told by Polybius that wherever he landed he erected
+altars to "godlessness and lawlessness" and offered up sacrifice on them.
+Judging by the way he was hated, his practice must have answered to his
+theory.
+
+One more phenomenon must be mentioned in this context, though it falls
+outside the limits within which we have hitherto moved, and though its
+connexion with free-thought and religious enlightenment will no doubt, on
+closer examination, prove disputable. This is the decay of the established
+worship of the Roman State in the later years of the Republic.
+
+In the preceding pages there has been no occasion to include conditions in
+Rome in our investigation, simply because nothing has come down to us
+about atheism in the earlier days of Rome, and we may presume that it did
+not exist. Of any religious thought at Rome corresponding to that of the
+Greeks we hear nothing, nor did the Romans produce any philosophy.
+Whatever knowledge of philosophy there was at Rome was simply borrowed
+from the Greeks. The Greek influence was not seriously felt until the
+second century B.C., even though as early as about the middle of the third
+century the Romans, through the performance of plays translated from the
+Greek, made acquaintance with Greek dramatic poetry and the religious
+thought contained therein. Neither the latter, nor the heresies of the
+philosophers, seem to have made any deep impression upon them. Ennius,
+their most important poet of the second century, was no doubt strongly
+influenced by Greek free-thinking, but this was evidently an isolated
+phenomenon. Also, by birth Ennius was not a native of Rome but half a
+Greek. The testimony of Polybius (from the close of the second century) to
+Roman religious conservatism is emphatic enough. Its causes are doubtless
+of a complex nature, but as one of them the peculiar character of the
+Roman religion itself stands out prominently. However much it resembled
+Greek religion in externals--a resemblance which was strengthened by
+numerous loans both of religious rites and of deities--it is decidedly
+distinct from it in being restricted still more to cultus and, above all,
+in being entirely devoid of mythology. The Roman gods were powers about
+the rites of whose worship the most accurate details were known or could
+be ascertained if need were, but they had little personality, and about
+their personal relations people knew little and cared less. This was,
+aesthetically, a great defect. The Roman gods afforded no good theme for
+poetry and art, and when they were to be used as such they were invariably
+replaced by loans from the Greeks. But, as in the face of Greek
+free-thought and Greek criticism of religion, they had the advantage that
+the vital point for attack was lacking. All the objectionable tales of the
+exploits of the gods and the associated ideas about their nature which had
+prompted the Greek attack on the popular faith simply did not exist in
+Roman religion. On the other hand, its rites were in many points more
+primitive than the Greek ones, but Greek philosophy had been very reserved
+in its criticism of ritual. We may thus no doubt take it for granted,
+though we have no direct evidence to that effect, that even Romans with a
+Greek education long regarded the Greek criticism of religion as something
+foreign which was none of their concern.
+
+That a time came when all this was changed; that towards the end of the
+Republic great scepticism concerning the established religion of Rome was
+found among the upper classes, is beyond doubt, and we shall subsequently
+find occasion to consider this more closely. In this connexion another
+circumstance demands attention, one which, moreover, has by some been
+associated with Greek influence among the upper classes, namely, the decay
+of the established worship of the Roman State during the last years of the
+Republic. Of the actual facts there can hardly be any doubt, though we
+know very little about them. The decisive symptoms are: that Augustus,
+after having taken over the government, had to repair some eighty
+dilapidated temples in Rome and reinstitute a series of religious rites
+and priesthoods which had ceased to function. Among them was one of the
+most important, that of the priest of Jupiter, an office which had been
+vacant for more than seventy-five years (87-11 B.C.), because it excluded
+the holder from a political career. Further, that complaints were made of
+private persons encroaching on places that were reserved for religious
+worship; and that Varro, when writing his great work on the Roman
+religion, in many cases was unable to discover what god was the object of
+an existing cult; and generally, according to his own statement he wrote
+his work, among other things, in order to save great portions of the old
+Roman religion from falling into utter oblivion on account of the
+indifference of the Romans themselves. It is obvious that such a state of
+affairs would have been impossible in a community where the traditional
+religion was a living power, not only formally acknowledged by everybody,
+but felt to be a necessary of life, the spiritual daily bread, as it were,
+of the nation.
+
+To hold, however, that the main cause of the decay of the established
+religion of Rome was the invasion of Greek culture, together with the fact
+that the members of the Roman aristocracy, from whom the priests were
+recruited and who superintended the cult, had become indifferent to the
+traditional religion through this influence, this, I think, is to go
+altogether astray. We may take it for granted that the governing classes
+in Rome would not have ventured to let the cult decay if there had been
+any serious interest in it among the masses of the population; and it is
+equally certain that Greek philosophy and religious criticism did not
+penetrate to these masses. When they became indifferent to the national
+religion, this was due to causes that had nothing to do with free-thought.
+The old Roman religion was adapted for a small, narrow and homogeneous
+community whose main constituent and real core consisted of the farmers,
+large and small, and minor artisans. In the last centuries of the Republic
+the social development had occasioned the complete decay of the Roman
+peasantry, and the free artisans had fared little better. In the place of
+the old Rome had arisen the capital of an empire, inhabited by a
+population of a million and of extraordinarily mixed composition. Not only
+did this population comprise a number of immigrant foreigners, but, in
+consequence of the peculiar Roman rule that every slave on being set free
+attained citizenship, a large percentage of the citizens must of necessity
+have been of foreign origin. Only certain portions of the Roman religion,
+more especially the cult of the great central deities of the State
+religion, can have kept pace with these changed conditions; the remainder
+had in reality lost all hold on Roman society as it had developed in
+process of time, and was only kept alive by force of habit. To this must
+be added the peculiar Roman mixture of mobility and conservatism in
+religious matters. The Roman superstition and uncertainty in regard to the
+gods led on the one hand to a continual setting up of new cults and new
+sanctuaries, and on the other hand to a fear of letting any of the old
+cults die out. In consequence thereof a great deal of dead and worthless
+ritual material must have accumulated in Rome in the course of centuries,
+and was of course in the way during the rapid development of the city in
+the last century of the Republic. Things must gradually have come to such
+a pass that a thorough reform, above all a reduction, of the whole cult
+had become a necessity. To introduce such a reform the republican
+government was just as unsuited as it was to carry out all the other tasks
+imposed by the development of the empire and the capital at that time. On
+this point, however, it must not be forgotten that the governing class not
+only lacked ability, for political reasons, to carry out serious reforms,
+but also the will to do so, on account of religious indifference, and so
+let things go altogether to the bad. The consequence was anarchy, in this
+as in all other spheres at that time; but at the same time the tendency
+towards the only sensible issue, a restriction of the old Roman
+State-cult, is plainly evident. The simultaneous strong infusion of
+foreign religions was unavoidable in the mixed population of the capital.
+That these influences also affected the lower classes of the citizens is
+at any rate a proof that they were not indifferent to religion.
+
+In its main outlines this is all the information that I have been able to
+glean about the general decline of the belief in the gods during the
+Hellenistic period. Judging from such information we should expect to find
+strong tendencies to atheism in the philosophy of the period. These
+anticipations are, however, doomed to disappointment. The ruling
+philosophical schools on the whole preserved a friendly attitude towards
+the gods of the popular faith and especially towards their worship,
+although they only accepted the existing religion with strict reservation.
+
+Most characteristic but least consistent and original was the attitude of
+the Stoic school. The Stoics were pantheists. Their deity was a substance
+which they designated as fire, but which, it must be admitted, differed
+greatly from fire as an element. It permeated the entire world. It had
+produced the world out of itself, and it absorbed it again, and this
+process was repeated to eternity. The divine fire was also reason, and as
+such the cause of the harmony of the world-order. What of conscious reason
+was found in the world was part of the divine reason.
+
+Though in this scheme of things there was in the abstract plenty of room
+for the gods of popular belief, nevertheless the Stoics did not in reality
+acknowledge them. In principle their standpoint was the same as
+Aristotle's. They supposed the heavenly bodies to be divine, but all the
+rest, namely, the anthropomorphic gods, were nothing to them.
+
+In their explanation of the origin of the gods they went beyond Aristotle,
+but their doctrine was not always the same on this point. The earlier
+Stoics regarded mythology and all theology as human inventions, but not
+arbitrary inventions. Mythology, they thought, should be understood
+allegorically; it was the naive expression partly of a correct conception
+of Nature, partly of ethical and metaphysical truths. Strictly speaking,
+men had always been Stoics, though in an imperfect way. This point of view
+was elaborated in detail by the first Stoics, who took their stand partly
+on the earlier naturalism which had already broken the ground in this
+direction, and partly on sophistic, so that they even brought into vogue
+again the theory of Prodicus, that the gods were a hypostasis of the
+benefits of civilisation. Such a standpoint could not of course be
+maintained without arbitrariness and absurdities which exposed it to
+embarrassing criticism. This seems to have been the reason why the later
+Stoics, and especially Poseidonius, took another road. They adopted the
+doctrine of Xenocrates with regard to demons and developed it in fantastic
+forms. The earlier method was not, however, given up, and at the time of
+Cicero we find both views represented in the doctrine of the school.
+
+Such is the appearance of the theory. In both its forms it is evidently an
+attempt to meet popular belief half-way from a standpoint which is really
+beyond it. This tendency is seen even more plainly in the practice of the
+Stoics. They recognised public worship and insisted on its advantages; in
+their moral reflections they employed the gods as ideals in the Socratic
+manner, regardless of the fact that in their theory they did not really
+allow for gods who were ideal men; nay, they even went the length of
+giving to their philosophical deity, the "universal reason," the name of
+Zeus by preference, though it had nothing but the name in common with the
+Olympian ruler of gods and men. This pervading ambiguity brought much
+well-deserved reproof on the Stoics even in ancient times; but, however
+unattractive it may seem to us, it is of significance as a manifestation
+of the great hold popular belief continued to have even on the minds of
+the upper classes, for it was to these that the Stoics appealed.
+
+Far more original and consistent is the Epicurean attitude towards the
+popular faith. Epicurus unreservedly acknowledged its foundation, _i.e._
+the existence of anthropomorphic beings of a higher order than man. His
+gods had human shape but they were eternal and blessed. In the latter
+definition was included, according to the ethical ideal of Epicurus, the
+idea that the gods were free from every care, including taking an interest
+in nature or in human affairs. They were entirely outside the world, a
+fact to which Epicurus gave expression by placing them in the empty spaces
+between the infinite number of spherical worlds which he assumed. There
+his gods lived in bliss like ideal Epicureans. Lucretius, the only poet of
+this school, extolled them in splendid verse whose motif he borrowed from
+Homer's description of Olympus. In this way Epicurus also managed to
+uphold public worship itself. It could not, of course, have any practical
+aim, but it was justified as an expression of the respect man owed to
+beings whose existence expressed the human ideal.
+
+The reasons why Epicurus assumed this attitude towards popular belief are
+simple enough. He maintained that the evidence of sensual perception was
+the basis of all knowledge, and he thought that the senses (through
+dreams) gave evidence of the existence of the gods. And in the popular
+ideas of the bliss of the gods he found his ethical ideal directly
+confirmed. As regards their eternity the case was more difficult. The
+basis of his system was the theory that everything was made of atoms and
+that only the atoms as such, not the bodies composed of the atoms, were
+eternal. He conceived the gods, too, as made of atoms, nevertheless he
+held that they were eternal. Any rational explanation of this postulate is
+not possible on Epicurus's hypotheses, and the criticism of his theology
+was therefore especially directed against this point.
+
+Epicurus was the Greek philosopher who most consistently took the course
+of emphasising the popular dogma of the perfection of the gods in order to
+preserve the popular notions about them. And he was the philosopher to
+whom this would seem the most obvious course, because his ethical
+ideal--quietism--agreed with the oldest popular ideal of divine existence.
+In this way Epicureanism became the most orthodox of all Greek
+philosophical schools. If nevertheless Epicurus did not escape the charge
+of atheism the sole reason is that his whole theology was denounced
+off-hand as hypocrisy. It was assumed to be set up by him only to shield
+himself against a charge of impiety, not to be his actual belief. This
+accusation is now universally acknowledged to be unjustified, and the
+Epicureans had no difficulty in rebutting it with interest. They took
+special delight in pointing out that the theology of the other schools was
+much more remote from popular belief than theirs, nay, in spite of
+recognition of the existing religion, was in truth fundamentally at
+variance with it. But in reality their own was in no better case: gods who
+did not trouble in the least about human affairs were beings for whom
+popular belief had no use. It made no difference that Epicurus's
+definition of the nature of the gods was the direct outcome of a
+fundamental doctrine of popular belief. Popular religion will not tolerate
+pedantry.
+
+In this connexion we cannot well pass over a third philosophical school
+which played no inconspicuous role in the latter half of our period,
+namely, Scepticism. The Sceptic philosophy as such dates from Socrates,
+from whom the so-called Megarian school took its origin, but it did not
+reach its greatest importance until the second century, when the Academic
+school became Sceptic. It was especially the famous philosopher Carneades,
+a brilliant master of logic and dialectic, who made a success by his
+searching negative criticism of the doctrines of the other philosophical
+schools (the Dogmatics). For such criticism the theology of the
+philosophers was a grateful subject, and Carneades did not spare it. Here
+as in all the investigations of the Sceptics the theoretical result was
+that no scientific certainty could be attained: it was equally wrong to
+assert or to deny the existence of the gods. But in practice the attitude
+of the Sceptics was quite different. Just as they behaved like other
+people, acting upon their immediate impressions and experience, though
+they did not believe that anything could be scientifically proved, _e.g._
+not even the reality of the world of the senses, so also did they
+acknowledge the existing cult and lived generally like good heathens.
+Characteristic though Scepticism be of a period of Greek spiritual life in
+which Greek thought lost its belief in itself, it was, however, very far
+from supporting atheism. On the contrary, according to the correct Sceptic
+doctrine atheism was a dogmatic contention which theoretically was as
+objectionable as its antithesis, and in practice was to be utterly
+discountenanced.
+
+A more radical standpoint than this as regards the gods of the popular
+faith is not found during the Hellenistic period except among the less
+noted schools, and in the beginning of the period. We have already
+mentioned such thinkers as Strato, Theodorus, and Stilpo; chronologically
+they belong to the Hellenistic Age, but in virtue of their connexion with
+the Socratic philosophy they were dealt with in the last chapter. A
+definite polemical attitude towards the popular faith is also a
+characteristic of the Cynic school, hence, though our information is very
+meagre, we must speak of it a little more fully.
+
+The Cynics continued the tendency of Antisthenes, but the school
+comparatively soon lost its importance. After the third century we hear no
+more about the Cynics until they crop up again about the year A.D. 100.
+But in the fourth and third centuries the school had important
+representatives. The most famous is Diogenes; his life, to be sure, is
+entangled in such a web of legend that it is difficult to arrive at a true
+picture of his personality. Of his attitude towards popular belief we know
+one thing, that he did not take part in the worship of the gods. This was
+a general principle of the Cynics; their argument was that the gods were
+"in need of nothing" (cf. above, pp. 60 and 41). If we find him accused of
+atheism, in an anecdote of very doubtful value, it may, if there is
+anything in it, be due to his rejection of worship. Of one of his
+successors, however, Bion of Borysthenes, we have authentic information
+that he denied the existence of the gods, with the edifying legend
+attached that he was converted before his death. But we also hear of Bion
+that he was a disciple of the atheist Theodorus, and other facts go to
+suggest that Bion united Cynic and Hedonistic principles in his mode of
+life--a compromise that was not so unlikely as might be supposed. Bion's
+attitude cannot therefore be taken as typical of Cynicism. Another Cynic
+of about the same period (the beginning of the third century) was Menippus
+of Gadara (in northern Palestine). He wrote tales and dialogues in a
+mixture of prose and verse. The contents were satirical, the satire being
+directed against the contemporary philosophers and their doctrines, and
+against the popular notions of the gods. Menippus availed himself partly
+of the old criticism of mythology and partly of the philosophical attacks
+on the popular conception of the gods. The only novelty was the facetious
+form in which he concealed the sting of serious criticism. It is
+impossible to decide whether he positively denied the existence of the
+gods, but his satire on the popular notions and its success among his
+contemporaries at least testifies to the weakening of the popular faith
+among the educated classes. In Hellas itself he seems to have gone out of
+fashion very early; but the Romans took him up again; Varro and Seneca
+imitated him, and Lucian made his name famous again in the Greek world in
+the second century after Christ. It is chiefly due to Lucian that we can
+form an idea of Menippus's literary work, hence we shall return to Cynic
+satire in our chapter on the age of the Roman Empire.
+
+During our survey of Greek philosophical thought in the Hellenistic period
+we have only met with a few cases of atheism in the strict sense, and they
+all occur about and immediately after 300, though there does not seem to
+be any internal connexion between them. About the same time there appeared
+a writer, outside the circle of philosophers, who is regularly listed
+among the _atheoi_, and who has given a name to a peculiar theory about
+the origin of the idea of the gods, namely, Euhemerus. He is said to have
+travelled extensively in the service of King Cassander of Macedonia. At
+any rate he published his theological views in the shape of a book of
+travel which was, however, wholly fiction. He relates how he came to an
+island, Panchaia, in the Indian Ocean, and in a temple there found a
+lengthy inscription in which Uranos, Kronos, Zeus and other gods recorded
+their exploits. The substance of the tale was that these gods had once
+been men, great kings and rulers, who had bestowed on their peoples all
+sorts of improvements in civilisation and had thus got themselves
+worshipped as gods. It appears from the accounts that Euhemerus supposed
+the heavenly bodies to be real and eternal gods--he thought that Uranos had
+first taught men to worship them; further, as his theory is generally
+understood, it must be assumed that in his opinion the other gods had
+ceased to exist as such after their death. This accords with the fact that
+Euhemerus was generally characterised as an atheist.
+
+The theory that the gods were at first men was not originated by
+Euhemerus, though it takes its name (Euhemerism) from him. The theory had
+some support in the popular faith which recognised gods (Heracles,
+Asclepius) who had lived as men on earth; and the opinion which was
+fundamental to Greek religion, that the gods had _come into existence_,
+and had not existed from eternity, would favour this theory. Moreover,
+Euhemerus had had an immediate precursor in the slightly earlier Hecataeus
+of Abdera, who had set forth a similar theory, with the difference,
+however, that he took the view that all excellent men became real gods.
+But Euhemerus's theory appeared just at the right moment and fell on
+fertile soil. Alexander the Great and his successors had adopted the
+Oriental policy by which the ruler was worshipped as a god, and were
+supported in this by a tendency which had already made itself felt
+occasionally among the Greeks in the East. Euhemerus only inverted
+matters--if the rulers were gods, it was an obvious inference that the gods
+were rulers. No wonder that his theory gained a large following. Its great
+influence is seen from numerous similar attempts in the Hellenistic world.
+At Rome, in the second century, Ennius translated his works into Latin,
+and as late as the time of Augustus an author such as Diodorus, in his
+popular history of the world, served up Euhemerism as the best scientific
+explanation of the origin of religion. It is characteristic, too, that
+both Jews and Christians, in their attacks on Paganism, reckoned with
+Euhemerism as a well-established theory. As every one knows, it has
+survived to our day; Carlyle, I suppose, being its last prominent
+exponent.
+
+It is characteristic of Euhemerism in its most radical form that it
+assumed that the gods of polytheism did not exist; so far it is atheism.
+But it is no less characteristic that it made the concession to popular
+belief that its gods had once existed. Hereby it takes its place, in spite
+of its greater radicalism, on the same plane with most other ancient
+theories about the origin of men's notions about the gods. The gods of
+popular belief could not survive in the light of ancient thought, which in
+its essence was free-thought, not tied down by dogmas. But the
+philosophers of old could not but believe that a psychological fact of
+such enormous dimensions as ancient polytheism must have something
+answering to it in the objective world. Ancient philosophy never got clear
+of this dilemma; hence Plato's open recognition of the absurdity; hence
+Aristotle's delight at being able to meet the popular faith half-way in
+his assumption of the divinity of the heavenly bodies; hence Xenocrates's
+demons, the allegories of the Stoics, the ideal Epicureans of Epicurus,
+Euhemerus's early benefactors of mankind. And we may say that the more the
+Greeks got to know of the world about them the more they were confirmed in
+their view, for in the varied multiplicity of polytheism they found the
+same principle everywhere, the same belief in a multitude of beings of a
+higher order than man.
+
+Euhemerus's theory is no doubt the last serious attempt in the old pagan
+world to give an explanation of the popular faith which may be called
+genuine atheism. We will not, however, leave the Hellenistic period
+without casting a glance at some personalities about whom we have
+information enough to form an idea at first hand of their religious
+standpoint, and whose attitude towards popular belief at any rate comes
+very near to atheism pure and simple.
+
+One of them is Polybius. In the above-cited passage referring to the
+decline of the popular faith in the Hellenistic period, Polybius also
+gives his own theory of the origin of men's notions regarding the gods. It
+is not new. It is the theory known from the Critias fragment, what may be
+called the political theory. In the fragment it appears as atheism pure
+and simple, and it seems obvious to understand it in the same way in
+Polybius. That he shows a leaning towards Euhemerism in another passage
+where he speaks about the origin of religious ideas, is in itself not
+against this--the two theories are closely related and might very well be
+combined. But we have a series of passages in which Polybius expressed
+himself in a way that seems quite irreconcilable with a purely atheistic
+standpoint. He expressly acknowledged divination and worship as justified;
+in several places he refers to disasters that have befallen individuals or
+a whole people as being sent by the gods, or even as a punishment for
+impiety; and towards the close of his work he actually, in marked contrast
+to the tone of its beginning, offers up a prayer to the gods to grant him
+a happy ending to his long life. It would seem as if Polybius at a certain
+period of his life came under the influence of Stoicism and in consequence
+greatly modified his earlier views. That these were of an atheistic
+character seems, however, beyond doubt, and that is the decisive point in
+this connexion.
+
+Cicero's philosophical standpoint was that of an Academic, _i.e._ a
+Sceptic. But--in accord, for the rest, with the doctrines of the school
+just at this period--he employed his liberty as a Sceptic to favour such
+philosophical doctrines as seemed to him more reasonable than others,
+regardless of the school from which they were derived. In his philosophy
+of religion he was more especially a Stoic. He himself expressly insisted
+on this point of view in the closing words of his work on the _Nature of
+the Gods_. As he was not, and made no pretence of being, a philosopher,
+his philosophical expositions have no importance for us; they are
+throughout second-hand, mostly mere translations from Greek sources. That
+we have employed them in the foregoing pages to throw light on the
+theology of the earlier, more especially the Hellenistic, philosophy, goes
+without saying. But his personal religious standpoint is not without
+interest.
+
+As orator and statesman Cicero took his stand wholly on the side of the
+established Roman religion, operating with the "immortal gods," with
+Jupiter Optimus Maximus, etc., at his convenience. In his works on the
+_State_ and the _Laws_ he adheres decidedly to the established religion.
+But all this is mere politics. Personally Cicero had no religion other
+than philosophy. Philosophy was his consolation in adversity, or he
+attempted to make it so, for the result was often indifferent; and he
+looked to philosophy to guide him in ethical questions. We never find any
+indication in his writings that the gods of popular belief meant anything
+to him in these respects. And what is more--he assumed this off-hand to be
+the standpoint of everybody else, and evidently he was justified. A great
+number of letters from him to his circle, and not a few from his friends
+and acquaintances to him, have been preserved; and in his philosophical
+writings he often introduces contemporary Romans as characters in the
+dialogue. But in all this literature there is never the faintest
+indication that a Roman of the better class entertained, or could even be
+supposed to entertain, an orthodox view with regard to the State religion.
+To Cicero and his circle the popular faith did not exist as an element of
+their personal religion.
+
+Such a standpoint is of course, practically speaking, atheism, and in this
+sense atheism was widely spread among the higher classes of the
+Graeco-Roman society about the time of the birth of Christ. But from this
+to theoretical atheism there is still a good step. Cicero himself affords
+an amusing example of how easily people, who have apparently quite
+emancipated themselves from the official religion of their community, may
+backslide. When his beloved daughter Tullia died in the year 45 B.C., it
+became evident that Cicero, in the first violence of his grief, which was
+the more overwhelming because he was excluded from political activity
+during Caesar's dictatorship, could not console himself with philosophy
+alone. He wanted something more tangible to take hold on, and so he hit
+upon the idea of having Tullia exalted among the gods. He thought of
+building a temple and instituting a cult in her honour. He moved heaven
+and earth to arrange the matter, sought to buy ground in a prominent place
+in Rome, and was willing to make the greatest pecuniary sacrifices to get
+a conspicuous result. Nothing came of it all, however; Cicero's friends,
+who were to help him to put the matter through, were perhaps hardly so
+eager as he; time assuaged his own grief, and finally he contented himself
+with publishing a consolatory epistle written by himself, or, correctly
+speaking, translated from a famous Greek work and adapted to the occasion.
+So far he ended where he should, _i.e._ in philosophy; but the little
+incident is significant, not least because it shows what practical ends
+Euhemerism could be brought to serve and how doubtful was its atheistic
+character after all. For not only was the contemplated apotheosis of
+Tullia in itself a Euhemeristic idea, but Cicero also expressly defended
+it with Euhemeristic arguments, though speaking as if the departed who
+were worshipped as gods really had become gods.
+
+The attitude of Cicero and his contemporaries towards popular belief was
+still the general attitude in the first days of the Empire. It was of no
+avail that Augustus re-established the decayed State cult in all its
+splendour and variety, or that the poets during his reign, when they
+wished to express themselves in harmony with the spirit of the new regime,
+directly or indirectly extolled the revived orthodoxy. Wherever we find
+personal religious feeling expressed by men of that time, in the Epistles
+of Horace, in Virgil's posthumous minor poems or in such passages in his
+greater works where he expresses his own ideals, it is philosophy that is
+predominant and the official religion ignored. Virgil was an Epicurean;
+Horace an Eclectic, now an Epicurean, then a Stoic; Augustus had a
+domestic philosopher. Ovid employed his genius in writing travesties of
+the old mythology while at the same time he composed a poem, serious for
+him, on the Roman cult; and when disaster befell him and he was cast out
+from the society of the capital, which was the breath of life to him, he
+was abandoned not only by men, but also by the gods--he had not even a
+philosophy with which to console himself. It is only in inferior writers
+such as Valerius Maximus, who wrote a work on great deeds--good and
+evil--under Tiberius, that we find a different spirit.
+
+Direct utterances about men's relationship to the gods, from which
+conclusions can be drawn, are seldom met with during this period. The
+whole question was so remote from the thoughts of these people that they
+never mentioned it except when they assumed an orthodox air for political
+or aesthetic reasons. Still, here and there we come across something. One
+of the most significant pronouncements is that of Pliny the Elder, from
+whom we quoted the passage about the worship of Fortune. Pliny opens his
+scientific encyclopedia by explaining the structure of the universe in its
+broad features; this he does on the lines of the physics of the Stoics,
+hence he designates the universe as God. Next comes a survey of special
+theology. It is introduced as follows: "I therefore deem it a sign of
+human weakness to ask about the shape and form of God. Whoever God is, if
+any other god (than the universe) exists at all, and in whatever part of
+the world he is, he is all perception, all sight, all hearing, all soul,
+all reason, all self." The popular notions of the gods are then reviewed,
+in the most supercilious tone, and their absurdities pointed out. A polite
+bow is made to the worship of the Emperors and its motives, the rest is
+little but persiflage. Not even Providence, which was recognised by the
+Stoics, is acknowledged by Pliny. The conclusion is like the beginning:
+"To imperfect human nature it is a special consolation that God also is
+not omnipotent (he can neither put himself to death, even if he would,
+though he has given man that power and it is his choicest gift in this
+punishment which is life; nor can he give immortality to mortals or call
+the dead to life; nor can he bring it to pass that those who have lived
+have not lived, or that he who has held honourable offices did not hold
+them); and that he has no other power over the past than that of oblivion;
+and that (in order that we may also give a jesting proof of our
+partnership with God) he cannot bring it about that twice ten is not
+twenty, and more of the same sort--by all which the power of Nature is
+clearly revealed, and that it is this we call God."
+
+An opinion like that expressed here must without doubt be designated as
+atheism, even though it is nothing but the Stoic pantheism logically
+carried out. As we have said before, we rarely meet it so directly
+expressed, but there can hardly be any doubt that even in the time of
+Pliny it was quite common in Rome. At this point, then, had the educated
+classes of the ancient world arrived under the influence of Hellenistic
+philosophy.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+
+Though the foundation of the Empire in many ways inaugurated a new era for
+the antique world, it is, of course, impossible, in an inquiry which is
+not confined to political history in the narrowest sense of the word, to
+operate with anything but the loosest chronological divisions. Accordingly
+in the last chapter we had to include phenomena from the early days of the
+Empire in order not to separate things which naturally belonged together.
+From the point of view of religious history the dividing line cannot
+possibly be drawn at the Emperor Augustus, in spite of his restoration of
+worship and the orthodox reaction in the official Augustan poetry, but
+rather at about the beginning of the second century. The enthusiasm of the
+Augustan Age for the good old times was never much more than affectation.
+It quickly evaporated when the promised millennium was not forthcoming,
+and was replaced by a reserve which developed into cynicism--but, be it
+understood, in the upper circles of the capital only. In the empire at
+large the development took its natural tranquil course, unaffected by the
+manner in which the old Roman nobility was effacing itself; and this
+development did not tend towards atheism.
+
+The reaction towards positive religious feeling, which becomes clearly
+manifest in the second century after Christ, though the preparation for it
+is undoubtedly of earlier date, is perhaps the most remarkable phenomenon
+in the religious history of antiquity. This is not the place to inquire
+into its causes, which still remain largely unexplained; there is even no
+reason to enter more closely into its outer manifestations, as the thing
+itself is doubted by nobody. It is sufficient to mention as instances
+authors like Suetonius, with his naive belief in miracles, and the
+rhetorician Aristides, with his Asclepius-cult and general
+sanctimoniousness; or a minor figure such as Aelian, who wrote whole books
+of a pronounced, nay even fanatical, devotionalism; or within the sphere
+of philosophy movements like Neo-Pythagoreanism and Neo-Platonism, both of
+which are as much in the nature of mystic theology as attempts at a
+scientific explanation of the universe. It is characteristic, too, that an
+essentially anti-religious school like that of the Epicureans actually
+dies out at this time. Under these conditions our task in this chapter
+must be to bring out the comparatively few and weak traces of other
+currents which still made themselves felt.
+
+Of the earlier philosophical schools Stoicism flowered afresh in the
+second century; the Emperor Marcus Aurelius himself was a prominent
+adherent of the creed. This later Stoicism differs, however, somewhat from
+the earlier. It limits the scientific apparatus which the early Stoics had
+operated with to a minimum, and is almost exclusively concerned with
+practical ethics on a religious basis. Its religion is that of ordinary
+Stoicism: Pantheism and belief in Providence. But, on the whole, it takes
+up a more sympathetic attitude towards popular religion than early
+Stoicism had done. Of the bitter criticism of the absurdities of the
+worship of the gods and of mythology which is still to be met with as late
+as Seneca, nothing remains. On the contrary, participation in public
+worship is still enjoined as being a duty; nay, more: attacks on belief in
+the gods--in the plain popular sense of the word--are denounced as
+pernicious and reprehensible. Perhaps no clearer proof could be adduced of
+the revolution which had taken place in the attitude of the educated
+classes towards popular religion than this change of front on the part of
+Stoicism.
+
+Contrary to this was the attitude of another school which was in vogue at
+the same time as the Stoic, namely, the Cynic. Between Cynicism and
+popular belief strained relations had existed since early times. It is
+true, the Cynics did not altogether deny the existence of the gods; but
+they rejected worship on the ground that the gods were not in need of
+anything, and they denied categorically the majority of the popular ideas
+about the gods. For the latter were, in fact, popular and traditional, and
+the whole aim of the Cynics was to antagonise the current estimate of
+values. A characteristic instance of their manner is provided by this very
+period in the fragments of the work of Oenomaus. The work was entitled
+_The Swindlers Unmasked_, and it contained a violent attack on oracles.
+Its tone is exceedingly pungent. In the extant fragments Oenomaus
+addresses the god in Delphi and overwhelms him with insults. But we are
+expressly told--and one utterance of Oenomaus himself verifies it--that the
+attack was not really directed against the god, but against the men who
+gave oracles in his name. In his opinion the whole thing was a priestly
+fraud--a view which otherwise was rather unfamiliar to the ancients, but
+played an important part later. Incidentally there is a violent attack on
+idolatry. The work is not without acuteness of thought and a certain
+coarse wit of the true Cynical kind; but it is entirely uncritical
+(oracles are used which are evidently inventions of later times) and of no
+great significance. It is even difficult to avoid the impression that the
+author's aim is in some degree to create a sensation. Cynics of that day
+were not strangers to that kind of thing. But it is at any rate a proof of
+the fact that there were at the time tendencies opposed to the religious
+reaction.
+
+A more significant phenomenon of the same kind is to be found in the
+writings of Lucian. Lucian was by education a rhetorician, by profession
+an itinerant lecturer and essayist. At a certain stage of his life he
+became acquainted with the Cynic philosophy and for some time felt much
+attracted to it. From that he evidently acquired a sincere contempt of the
+vulgar superstition which flourished in his time, even in circles of which
+one might have expected something better. In writings which for the
+greater part belong to his later period, he pilloried individuals who
+traded (or seemed to trade) in the religious ferment of the time, as well
+as satirised superstition as such.  In this way he made an important
+contribution to the spiritual history of the age. But simultaneously he
+produced, for the entertainment of his public, a series of writings the
+aim of which is to make fun of the Olympian gods. In this work also he
+leant on the literature of the Cynics, but substituted for their grave and
+biting satire light causeries or slight dramatic sketches, in which his
+wit--for Lucian was really witty--had full scope. As an instance of his
+manner I shall quote a short passage from the dialogue _Timon_. It is Zeus
+who speaks; he has given Hermes orders to send the god of wealth to Timon,
+who has wasted his fortune by his liberality and is now abandoned by his
+false friends. Then he goes on: "As to the flatterers you speak of and
+their ingratitude, I shall deal with them another time, and they will meet
+with their due punishment as soon as I have had my thunderbolt repaired.
+The two largest darts of it were broken and blunted the other day when I
+got in a rage and flung it at the sophist Anaxagoras, who was trying to
+make his disciples believe that we gods do not exist at all. However, I
+missed him, for Pericles held his hand over him, but the bolt struck the
+temple of the Dioscuri and set fire to it, and the bolt itself was nearly
+destroyed when it struck the rock." This sort of thing abounds in Lucian,
+even if it is not always equally amusing and to the point. Now there is
+nothing strange in the fact that a witty man for once should feel inclined
+to make game of the old mythology; this might have happened almost at any
+time, once the critical spirit had been awakened. But that a man, and
+moreover an essayist, who had to live by the approval of his public,
+should make it his trade, as it were, and that at a time of vigorous
+religious reaction, seems more difficult to account for. Lucian's
+controversial pamphlets against superstition cannot be classed off-hand
+with his _Dialogues of the Gods_; the latter are of a quite different and
+far more harmless character. The fact is rather that mythology at this
+time was fair game. It was cut off from its connexion with religion--a
+connexion which in historical times was never very intimate and was now
+entirely severed. This had been brought about in part by centuries of
+criticism of the most varied kind, in part precisely as a result of the
+religious reaction which had now set in. If people turned during this time
+to the old gods--who, however, had been considerably contaminated with new
+elements--it was because they had nothing else to turn to; but what they
+now looked for was something quite different from the old religion. The
+powerful tradition which had bound members of each small community--we
+should say, of each township--to its familiar gods, with all that belonged
+to them, was now in process of dissolution; in the larger cities of the
+world-empire with their mixed populations it had entirely disappeared.
+Religion was no longer primarily a concern of society; it was a personal
+matter. In the face of the enormous selection of gods which ancient
+paganism came gradually to proffer, the individual was free to choose, as
+individual or as a member of a communion based upon religious, not
+political, sympathy. Under these circumstances the existence of the gods
+and their power and will to help their worshippers was the only thing of
+interest; all the old tales about them were more than ever myths of no
+religious value. On closer inspection Lucian indeed proves to have
+exercised a certain selection in his satire. Gods like Asclepius and
+Serapis, who were popular in his day, he prefers to say nothing about; and
+even with a phenomenon like Christianity he deals cautiously; he sticks to
+the old Olympian gods. Thus his derision of these constitutes an indirect
+proof that they had gone out of vogue, and his forbearance on other points
+is a proof of the power of the current religion over contemporary minds.
+As to ascribing any deeper religious conviction to Lucian--were it even of
+a purely negative kind--that is, in view of the whole character of his
+work, out of the question. To be sure, his polemical pamphlets against
+superstition show clearly, like those of Oenomaus, that the religious
+reaction did not run its course without criticism from certain sides; but
+even here it is significant that the criticism comes from a professional
+jester and not from a serious religious thinker.
+
+A few words remain to be said about the two monotheistic religions which
+in the days of the Roman Empire came to play a great, one of them indeed a
+decisive, part. I have already referred to pagan society's attitude
+towards Judaism and Christianity, and pointed out that the adherents of
+both were designated and treated as atheists--the Jews only occasionally
+and with certain reservations, the Christians nearly always and
+unconditionally. The question here is, how far this designation was
+justified according to the definition of atheism which is the basis of our
+inquiry.
+
+In the preceding pages we have several times referred to the fact that the
+real enemy of Polytheism is not the philosophical theology, which
+generally tends more or less towards Pantheism, but Monotheism. It is in
+keeping with this that the Jews and the Christians in practice are
+downright deniers of the pagan gods: they would not worship them; whereas
+the Greek philosophers as a rule respected worship, however far they went
+in their criticism of men's ideas of the gods. We shall not dwell here on
+this aspect of the matter; we are concerned with the theory only. Detailed
+expositions of it occur in numerous writings, from the passages in the Old
+Testament where heathenism is attacked, to the defences of Christianity by
+the latest Fathers of the Church.
+
+The original Jewish view, according to which the heathen gods are real
+beings just as much as the God of the Jews themselves--only Jews must not
+worship them--is in the later portions of the Old Testament superseded by
+the view that the gods are only images made of wood, stone or metal, and
+incapable of doing either good or evil. This point of view is taken over
+by later Jewish authors and completely dominates them. In those acquainted
+with Greek thought it is combined with Euhemeristic ideas: the images
+represent dead men. The theory that the gods are really natural
+objects--elements or heavenly bodies--is occasionally taken into account
+too. Alongside of these opinions there appears also the view that the
+pagan gods are evil spirits (demons). It is already found in a few places
+in the Old Testament, and after that sporadically and quite incidentally
+in later Jewish writings; in one place it is combined with the Old
+Testament's account of the fallen angels. The demon-theory is not an
+instrument of Jewish apologetics proper, not even of Philo, though he has
+a complete demonology and can hardly have been ignorant of the
+Platonic-Stoic doctrine of demons.
+
+Apart from the few and, as it were, incidental utterances concerning
+demons, the Jewish view of the pagan gods impresses one as decidedly
+atheistic. The god is identical with the idol, and the idol is a dead
+object, the work of men's hands, or the god is identical with a natural
+object, made by God to be sure, but without soul or, at any rate, without
+divinity. It is remarkable that no Jewish controversialist seriously
+envisaged the problem of the real view of the gods embodied in the popular
+belief of the ancients, namely, that they are personal beings of a higher
+order than man. It is inconceivable that men like Philo, Josephus and the
+author of the Wisdom of Solomon should have been ignorant of it. I know
+nothing to account for this curious phenomenon; and till some light has
+been thrown upon the matter, I should hesitate to assert that the Jewish
+conception of Polytheism was purely atheistic, however much appearance it
+may have of being so.
+
+It was otherwise with Christian polemical writing. As early as St. Paul
+the demon-theory appears distinctly, though side by side with utterances
+of seemingly atheistic character. Other New Testament authors, too,
+designate the gods as demons. The subsequent apologists, excepting the
+earliest, Aristides, lay the main stress on demonology, but include for
+the sake of completeness idolatry and the like, sometimes without caring
+about or trying to conciliate the contradictions. In the long run
+demonology is victorious; in St. Augustine, the foremost among Christian
+apologists, there is hardly any other point of view that counts.
+
+To trace the Christian demonology in detail and give an account of its
+various aspects is outside the scope of this essay. Its origin is a
+twofold one, partly the Jewish demonology, which just at the commencement
+of our era had received a great impetus, partly the theory of the Greek
+philosophers, which we have characterised above when speaking of
+Xenocrates. The Christian doctrine regarding demons differs from the
+latter, especially by the fact that it does not acknowledge good demons;
+they were all evil. This was the indispensable basis for the interdict
+against the worship of demons; in its further development the Christians,
+following Jewish tradition, pointed to an origin in the fallen angels, and
+thus effected a connexion with the Old Testament. While they at the same
+time retained its angelology they had to distinguish good and evil beings
+intermediate between god and man; but they carefully avoided designating
+the angels as demons, and kept them distinct from the pagan gods, who were
+all demons and evil.
+
+The application of demonology to the pagan worship caused certain
+difficulties in detail. To be sure, it was possible to identify a given
+pagan god with a certain demon, and this was often done; but it was
+impossible to identify the Pagans' conceptions of their gods with the
+Christians' conceptions of demons. The Pagans, in fact, ascribed to their
+gods not only demoniac (diabolical) but also divine qualities, which the
+Christians absolutely denied them. Consequently they had to recognise that
+pagan worship to a great extent rested on a delusion, on a misconception
+of the essential character of the gods which were worshipped. This view
+was corroborated by the dogma of the fallen angels, which was altogether
+alien to paganism. By identifying them with the evil spirits of the Bible,
+demon-names were even obtained which differed from those of the pagan gods
+and, of course, were the correct ones; were they not given in Holy Writ?
+In general, the Christians, who possessed an authentic revelation of the
+matter, were of course much better informed about the nature of the pagan
+gods than the Pagans themselves, who were groping in the dark. Euhemerism,
+which plays a great part in the apologists, helped in the same direction:
+the supposition that the idols were originally men existed among the
+Pagans themselves, and it was too much in harmony with the tendency of the
+apologists to be left unemployed. It was reconciled with demonology by the
+supposition that the demons had assumed the masks of dead heroes; they had
+beguiled mankind to worship them in order to possess themselves of the
+sacrifices, which they always coveted, and by this deception to be able to
+rule and corrupt men. The Christians also could not avoid recognising that
+part of the pagan worship was worship of natural objects, in particular of
+the heavenly bodies; and this error of worshipping the "creation instead
+of the creator" was so obvious that the Christians were not inclined to
+resort to demonology for an explanation of this phenomenon, the less so as
+they could not identify the sun or the moon with a demon. The conflict of
+these different points of view accounts for the peculiar vacillation in
+the Christian conception of paganism. On one hand, we meet with crude
+conceptions, according to which the pagan gods are just like so many
+demons; they are specially prominent when pagan miracles and prophecies
+are to be explained. On the other hand, there is a train of thought which
+carried to its logical conclusion would lead to conceiving paganism as a
+whole as a huge delusion of humanity, but a delusion caused indeed by
+supernatural agencies. This conclusion hardly presented itself to the
+early Church; later, however, it was drawn and caused a not inconsiderable
+shifting in men's views and explanations of paganism.
+
+Demonology is to such a degree the ruling point of view in Christian
+apologetics that it would be absurd to make a collection from these
+writings of utterances with an atheistic ring. Such utterances are to be
+found in most of them; they appear spontaneously, for instance, wherever
+idolatry is attacked. But one cannot attach any importance to them when
+they appear in this connexion, not even in apologists in whose works the
+demon theory is lacking. No Christian theologian in antiquity advanced,
+much less sustained, the view that the pagan gods were mere phantoms of
+human imagination without any corresponding reality.
+
+Remarkable as this state of things may appear to us moderns, it is really
+quite simple, nay even a matter of course, when regarded historically.
+Christianity had from its very beginning a decidedly dualistic character.
+The contrast between this world and the world to come was identical with
+the contrast between the kingdom of the Devil and the kingdom of God. As
+soon as the new religion came into contact with paganism, the latter was
+necessarily regarded as belonging to the kingdom of the Devil; thus the
+conception of the gods as demons was a foregone conclusion. In the minds
+of the later apologists, who became acquainted with Greek philosophy, this
+conception received additional confirmation; did it not indeed agree in
+the main with Platonic and Stoic theory? Details were added: the
+Christians could not deny the pagan miracles without throwing a doubt on
+their own, for miracles cannot be done away with at all except by a denial
+on principle; neither could they explain paganism--that gigantic,
+millennial aberration of humanity--by merely human causes, much less lay
+the blame on God alone. But ultimately all this rests on one and the same
+thing--the supernatural and dualistic hypothesis. Consequently demonology
+is the kernel of the Christian conception of paganism: it is not merely a
+natural result of the hypotheses, it is the one and only correct
+expression of the way in which the new religion understood the old.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+
+In the preceding inquiry we took as our starting-point not the ancient
+conception of atheism but the modern view of the nature of the pagan gods.
+It proved that this view was, upon the whole, feebly represented during
+antiquity, and that it was another view (demonology) which was transmitted
+to later ages from the closing years of antiquity. The inquiry will
+therefore find its natural conclusion in a demonstration of the time and
+manner in which the conception handed down from antiquity of the nature of
+paganism was superseded and displaced by the modern view.
+
+This question is, however, more difficult to answer than one would perhaps
+think. After ancient paganism had ceased to exist as a living religion, it
+had lost its practical interest, and theoretically the Middle Ages were
+occupied with quite other problems than the nature of paganism. At the
+revival of the study of ancient literature, during the Renaissance, people
+certainly again came into the most intimate contact with ancient religion
+itself, but systematic investigations of its nature do not seem to have
+been taken up in real earnest until after the middle of the sixteenth
+century. It is therefore difficult to ascertain in what light paganism was
+regarded during the thousand years which had then passed since its final
+extinction. From the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, on the other
+hand, the material is extraordinarily plentiful, though but slightly
+investigated. Previous works in this field seem to be entirely wanting; at
+any rate it has not been possible for me to find any collective treatment
+of the subject, nor even any contributions worth mentioning towards the
+solution of the numerous individual problems which arise when we enter
+upon what might be called "the history of the history of religion."(1) In
+this essay I must therefore restrict myself to a few aphoristic remarks
+which may perhaps give occasion for this subject, in itself not devoid of
+interest, to receive more detailed treatment at some future time.
+
+Milton, in the beginning of _Paradise Lost_, which appeared in 1667, makes
+Satan assemble all his angels for continued battle against God. Among the
+demons there enumerated, ancient gods also appear; they are, then, plainly
+regarded as devils. Now Milton was not only a poet, but also a sound
+scholar and an orthodox theologian; we may therefore rest assured that his
+conception of the pagan gods was dogmatically correct and in accord with
+the prevailing views of his time. In him, therefore, we have found a fixed
+point from which we can look forwards and backwards; as late as after the
+middle of the seventeenth century the early Christian view of the nature
+of paganism evidently persisted in leading circles.
+
+We seldom find definite heathen gods so precisely designated as demons as
+in Milton, but no doubt seems possible that the general principle was
+accepted by contemporary and earlier authors. The chief work of the
+seventeenth century on ancient religion is the _De Theologia Gentili_ of
+G. I. Voss; he operates entirely with the traditional view. It may be
+traced back through a succession of writings of the seventeenth and
+sixteenth centuries. They are all, or almost all, agreed that antique
+paganism was the work of the devil, and that idolatry was, at any rate in
+part, a worship of demons. From the Middle Ages I can adduce a pregnant
+expression of the same view from Thomas Aquinas; in his treatment of
+idolatry and also of false prophecy he definitely accepts the demonology
+of the early Church. On this point he appeals to Augustine, and with
+perfect right; from this it may presumably be assumed that the Schoolmen
+in general had the same view, Augustine being, as we know, an authority
+for Catholic theologians.
+
+In mediaeval poets also we occasionally find the same view expressed. As
+far as I have been able to ascertain, Dante has no ancient gods among his
+devils, and the degree to which he had dissociated himself from ancient
+paganism may be gauged by the fact that in one of the most impassioned
+passages of his poem he addresses the Christian God as "Great Jupiter."
+But he allows figures of ancient mythology such as Charon, Minos and
+Geryon to appear in his infernal world, and when he designates the pagan
+gods as "false and _untruthful_," demonology is evidently at the back of
+his mind. The mediaeval epic poets who dealt with antique subjects took
+over the pagan gods more or less. Sometimes, as in the Romance of Troy,
+the Christian veneer is so thick that the pagan groundwork is but slightly
+apparent; in other poems, such as the adaptation of the _Aeneid_, it is
+more in evidence. In so far as the gods are not eliminated they seem as a
+rule to be taken over quite naively from the source without further
+comment; but occasionally the poet expresses his view of their nature.
+Thus the French adapter of Statius's _Thebais_, in whose work the
+Christian element is otherwise not prominent, cautiously remarks that
+Jupiter and Tisiphone, by whom his heroes swear, are in reality only
+devils. Generally speaking, the gods of antiquity are often designated as
+devils in mediaeval poetry, but at times the opinion that they are
+departed human beings crops up. Thus, as we might expect, the theories of
+ancient times still survive and retain their sway.
+
+There is a domain in which we might expect to find distinct traces of the
+survival of the ancient gods in the mediaeval popular consciousness,
+namely, that of magic. There does not, however, seem to be much in it; the
+forms of mediaeval magic often go back to antiquity, but the beings it
+operates with are pre-eminently the Christian devils, if we may venture to
+employ the term, and the evil spirits of popular belief. There is,
+however, extant a collection of magic formulae against various ailments in
+which pagan gods appear: Hercules and Juno Regina, Juno and Jupiter, the
+nymphs, Luna Jovis filia, Sol invictus. The collection is transmitted in a
+manuscript of the ninth century; the formulae mostly convey the impression
+of dating from a much earlier period, but the fact that they were copied
+in the Middle Ages suggests that they were intended for practical
+application.
+
+A problem, the closer investigation of which would no doubt yield an
+interesting result, but which does not seem to have been much noticed, is
+the European conception of the heathen religions with which the explorers
+came into contact on their great voyages of discovery. Primitive
+heathenism as a living reality had lain rather beyond the horizon of the
+Middle Ages; when it was met with in America, it evidently awakened
+considerable interest. There is a description of the religion of Peru and
+Mexico, written by the Jesuit Acosta at the close of the sixteenth
+century, which gives us a clear insight into the orthodox view of
+heathenism during the Renaissance. According to Acosta, heathenism is as a
+whole the work of the Devil; he has seduced men to idolatry in order that
+he himself may be worshipped instead of the true God. All worship of idols
+is in reality worship of Satan. The individual idols, however, are not
+identified with individual devils; Acosta distinguishes between the
+worship of nature (heavenly bodies, natural objects of the earth, right
+down to trees, etc.), the worship of the dead, and the worship of images,
+but says nothing about the worship of demons. At one point only is there a
+direct intervention of the evil powers, namely, in magic, and particularly
+in oracles; and here then we find, as an exception, mention of individual
+devils which must be imagined to inhabit the idols. The same conception is
+found again as late as the seventeenth century in a story told by G. I.
+Voss of the time of the Dutch wars in Brazil. Arcissewski, a Polish
+officer serving in the Dutch army, had witnessed the conjuring of a devil
+among the Tapuis. The demon made his appearance all right, but proved to
+be a native well known to Arcissewski. As he, however, made some true
+prognostications, Voss, as it seems at variance with Arcissewski, thinks
+that there must have been some supernatural powers concerned in the game.
+
+An exceptional place is occupied by the attempt made during the
+Renaissance at an actual revival of ancient paganism and the worship of
+its gods. It proceeded from Plethon, the head of the Florentine Academy,
+and seems to have spread thence to the Roman Academy. The whole movement
+must be viewed more particularly as an outcome of the enthusiasm during
+the Renaissance for the culture of antiquity and more especially for its
+philosophy rather than its religion; the gods worshipped were given a new
+and strongly philosophical interpretation. But it is not improbable that
+the traditional theory of the reality of the ancient deities may have had
+something to do with it.
+
+Simultaneously with demonology, and while it was still acknowledged in
+principle, there flourished more naturalistic conceptions of paganism,
+both in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. As remarked above, the
+way was already prepared for them during antiquity. In Thomas Aquinas we
+find a lucid explanation of the origin of idolatry with a reference to the
+ancient theory. Here we meet with the familiar elements: the worship of
+the stars and the cult of the dead. According to Thomas, man has a natural
+disposition towards this error, but it only comes into play when he is led
+astray by demons. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Devil is
+mentioned oftener than the demons (compare Acosta's view of the heathenism
+of the American Indians); evidently the conception of the nature of evil
+had undergone a change in the direction of monotheism. In this way more
+scope was given for the adoption of naturalistic views in regard to the
+individual forms in which paganism manifested itself than when dealing
+with a multiplicity of demons that answered individually to the pagan
+gods, and we meet with systematic attempts to explain the origin of
+idolatry by natural means, though still with the Devil in the background.
+
+One of these systems, which played a prominent part, especially in the
+seventeenth century, is the so-called Hebraism, _i.e._ the attempt to
+derive the whole of paganism from Judaism. This fashion, for which the way
+had already been prepared by Jewish and Christian apologists, reaches its
+climax, I think, with Abbot Huet, who derived all the gods of antiquity
+(and not only Greek and Roman antiquity) from Moses, and all the goddesses
+from his sister; according to him the knowledge of these two persons had
+spread from the Jews to other peoples, who had woven about them a web of
+"fables." Alongside of Hebraism, which is Euhemeristic in principle,
+allegorical methods of interpretation were put forward. The chief
+representative of this tendency in earlier times is Natalis Comes (Noel du
+Comte), the author of the first handbook of mythology; he directly set
+himself the task of allegorising all the myths. The allegories are mostly
+moral, but also physical; Euhemeristic interpretations are not rejected
+either, and in several places the author gives all three explanations side
+by side without choosing between them.  In the footsteps of du Comte
+follows Bacon, in his _De Sapientia Veterum_; to the moral and physical
+allegories he adds political ones, as when Jove's struggle with Typhoeus
+is made to symbolise a wise ruler's treatment of a rebellion. While these
+attempts at interpretation, both the Euhemeristic and the allegorical, are
+in principle a direct continuation of those of antiquity, another method
+points plainly in the direction of the fantastic notions of the Middle
+Ages. As early as the sixteenth century the idea arose of connecting the
+theology of the ancients with alchemy. The idea seemed obvious because the
+metals were designated by the names of the planets, which are also the
+names of the gods. It found acceptance, and in the seventeenth century we
+have a series of writings in which ancient mythology is explained as the
+symbolical language of chemical processes.
+
+Within the limits of the supernatural explanation the interest centred
+more and more in a single point: the oracles. As far back as in Aquinas,
+"false prophecy" is a main section in the chapter on demons, whose power
+to foretell the future he expressly acknowledges. In the sixteenth and
+seventeenth centuries, when the interest in the prediction of the future
+was so strong, the ancient accounts of true prognostications were the real
+prop of demonology. Hence demons generally play a great part in these
+explanations, even though in other cases the Devil fills the bill. Thus
+Acosta in his account of the American religions; thus Voss and numerous
+other writers of the seventeenth century; and it is hardly a mere
+accident, one would think, when Milton specially mentions Dodona and
+Delphi as the seats of worship of the Greek demons. Among a few of the
+humanists we certainly find an attempt to apply the natural explanation
+even here; thus Caelius Rhodiginus asserted that a great part (but not
+all!) of the oracular system might be explained as priestly imposture, and
+his slightly younger contemporary Caelius Calcagninus, in his dialogue on
+oracles, seems to go still further and to deny the power of predicting the
+future to any other being than the true God. An exceptional position is
+occupied by Pomponazzi, who in his little pamphlet _De Incantationibus_
+seems to wish to derive all magic, including the oracles, from natural
+causes, though ultimately he formally acknowledges demonology as the
+authoritative explanation. But these advances did not find acceptance; we
+find even Voss combating the view on which they were founded. It is
+characteristic of the power of demonology in this domain that in support
+of his point of view he can quote no less a writer than Machiavelli.
+
+The author who opened battle in real earnest against demonology was a
+Dutch scholar, one van Dale, otherwise little known. In a couple of
+treatises written about the close of the seventeenth century he tried to
+show that the whole of idolatry (as well as the oracles in particular) was
+not dependent on the intervention of supernatural beings, but was solely
+due to imposture on the part of the priests. Van Dale was a Protestant, so
+he easily got over the unanimous recognition of demonology by the Fathers
+of the Church. The accounts of demons in the Old and New Testaments proved
+more difficult to deal with; it is interesting to see how he wriggles
+about to get round them--and it illustrates most instructively the degree
+to which demonology affords the only reasonable and natural explanation of
+paganism on the basis of early Christian belief.
+
+Van Dale's books are learned works written in Latin, full of quotations in
+Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and moreover confused and obscure in exposition,
+as is often the case with Dutch writings of that time. But a clever
+Frenchman, Fontenelle, took upon himself the task of rendering his work on
+the oracles into French in a popular and attractive form. His book called
+forth an answering pamphlet from a Jesuit advocating the traditional view;
+the little controversy seems to have made some stir in France about the
+year 1700. At any rate Banier, who, in the beginning of the eighteenth
+century, treated ancient mythology from a Euhemeristic point of view, gave
+some consideration to it. His own conclusion is--in 1738!--that demonology
+cannot be dispensed with for the explanation of the oracles. He gives his
+grounds for this in a very sensible criticism of van Dale's priestly fraud
+theory, the absurdity of which he exposes with sound arguments.
+
+Banier is the last author to whom I can point for the demon-theory applied
+as an explanation of a phenomenon in ancient religion; I have not found it
+in any other mythologist of the eighteenth century, and even in Banier,
+with the exception of this single point, everything is explained quite
+naturally according to the best Euhemeristic models. But in the positive
+understanding of the nature of ancient paganism no very considerable
+advance had actually been made withal. A characteristic example of this is
+the treatment of ancient religion by such an eminent intellect as
+Giambattista Vico. In his _Scienza Nuova_, which appeared in 1725, as the
+foundation of his exposition of the religion of antiquity he gives a
+characterisation of the mode of thought of primitive mankind, which is so
+pertinent and psychologically so correct that it anticipates the results
+of more than a hundred years of research. Of any supernatural explanation
+no trace is found in him, though otherwise he speaks as a good Catholic.
+But when he proceeds to explain the nature of the ancient ideas of the
+gods in detail, all that it comes to is a series of allegories, among
+which the politico-social play a main part. Vico sees the earliest history
+of mankind in the light of the traditions about Rome; the Graeco-Roman
+gods, then, and the myths about them, become to him largely an expression
+of struggles between the "patricians and plebeians" of remote antiquity.
+
+Most of the mythology of the eighteenth century is like this. The
+Euhemeristic school gradually gave up the hypothesis of the Jewish
+religion as the origin of paganism; Banier, the chief representative of
+the school, still argues at length against Hebraism. In its place,
+Phoenicians, Assyrians, Persians and, above all, Egyptians, are brought
+into play, or, as in the case of the Englishman Bryant, the whole of
+mythology is explained as reminiscences of the exploits of an aboriginal
+race, the Cuthites, which never existed. The allegorist school gradually
+rallied round the idea of the cult of the heavenly bodies as the origin of
+the pagan religions; as late as the days of the French Revolution, Dupuis,
+in a voluminous work, tried to trace the whole of ancient religion and
+mythology back to astronomy. On the whole the movement diverged more and
+more from Euhemerism towards the conception of Greek religion as a kind of
+cult of nature; when the sudden awakening to a more correct understanding
+came towards the close of the century, Euhemerism was evidently already an
+antiquated view. Thus, since the Renaissance, by a slow and very devious
+process of development, a gradual approach had been made to a more correct
+view of the nature of ancient religion. After the Devil had more or less
+taken the place of the demons, the rest of demonology, the moral allegory,
+Hebraism and Euhemerism were eliminated by successive stages, and
+nature-symbolism was reached as the final stage.
+
+We know now that even this is not the correct explanation of the nature
+and origin of the conception of the gods prevailing among the ancients.
+Recent investigations have shown that the Greek gods, in spite of their
+apparent simplicity and clarity, are highly complex organisms, the
+products of a long process of development to which the most diverse
+factors have contributed. In order to arrive at this result another
+century of work, with many attempts in the wrong direction, has been
+required. The idea that the Greek gods were nature-gods really dominated
+research through almost the whole of the nineteenth century. If it has now
+been dethroned or reduced to the measure of truth it contains--for
+undoubtedly a natural object enters as a component into the essence of
+some Greek deities--this is in the first place due to the intensive study
+of the religions of primitive peoples, living or obsolete; and the results
+of this study were only applied to Greek religion during the last decade
+of the century. But the starting-point of modern history of religion lies
+much farther back: its beginnings date from the great revival of
+historical research which was inaugurated by Rousseau and continued by
+Herder. Henceforward the unhistorical methods of the age of enlightenment
+were abolished, and attention directed in real earnest towards the earlier
+stages of human civilisation.
+
+This, however, carries us a step beyond the point of time at which this
+sketch should, strictly speaking, stop. For by the beginning of the
+eighteenth century--but not before--the negative fact which is all important
+in this connexion had won recognition: namely, that there existed no
+supernatural beings latent behind the Greek ideas of their gods, and
+corresponding at any rate in some degree to them; but that these ideas
+must be regarded and explained as entirely inventions of the human
+imagination.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+
+At the very beginning of this inquiry it was emphasised that its theme
+would in the main be the religious views of the upper class, and within
+this sphere again especially the views of those circles which were in
+close touch with philosophy. The reason for this is of course in the first
+place that only in such circles can we expect to find expressed a point of
+view approaching to positive atheism. But we may assuredly go further than
+this. We shall hardly be too bold in asserting that the free-thinking of
+philosophically educated men in reality had very slight influence on the
+great mass of the population. Philosophy did not penetrate so far, and
+whatever degree of perception we estimate the masses to have had of the
+fact that the upper layer of society regarded the popular faith with
+critical eyes--and in the long run it could not be concealed--we cannot fail
+to recognise that religious development among the ancients did not tend
+towards atheism. Important changes took place in ancient religion during
+the Hellenistic Age and the time of the Roman Empire, but their causes
+were of a social and national kind, and, if we confine ourselves to
+paganism, they only led to certain gods going out of fashion and others
+coming in. The utmost we can assert is that a certain weakening of the
+religious life may have been widely prevalent during the time of
+transition between the two ages--the transition falls at somewhat different
+dates in the eastern and western part of the Empire--but that weakening was
+soon overcome.
+
+Now the peculiar result of this investigation of the state of religion
+among the upper classes seems to me to be this: the curve of intensity of
+religious feeling which conjecture leads us to draw through the spiritual
+life of the ancients as a whole, that same curve, but more distinct and
+sharply accentuated, is found again in the relations of the upper classes
+to the popular faith. Towards the close of the fifth century it looks as
+if the cultured classes that formed the centre of Greek intellectual life
+were outgrowing the ancient religion. The reaction which set in with
+Socrates and Plato certainly checked this movement, but it did not stop
+it. Cynics, Peripatetics, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, in spite of
+their widely differing points of view, were all entirely unable to share
+the religious ideas of their countrymen in the form in which they were
+cast in the national religion. However many allowances they made, their
+attitude towards the popular faith was critical, and on important points
+they denied it. It is against the background thus resulting from ancient
+philosophy's treatment of ancient religion that we must view such
+phenomena as Polybius, Cicero, and Pliny the Elder, if we wish to
+understand their full significance.
+
+On the other hand, it is certain that this was not the view that conquered
+in the end among the educated classes in antiquity. The lower we come down
+in the Empire the more evident does the positive relation of the upper
+class to the gods of the popular faith become. Some few examples have
+already been mentioned in the preceding pages. In philosophy the whole
+movement finds its typical expression in demonology, which during the
+later Empire reigned undisputed in the one or two schools that still
+retained any vitality. It is significant that its source was the earlier
+Platonism, with its very conservative attitude towards popular belief, and
+that it was taken over by the later Stoic school, which inaugurated the
+general religious reaction in philosophy. And it is no less significant
+that demonology was swallowed whole by the monotheistic religion which
+superseded ancient paganism, and for more than a thousand years was the
+recognised explanation of the nature thereof.
+
+In accordance with the line of development here sketched, the inquiry has
+of necessity been focused on two main points: Sophistic and the
+Hellenistic Age. Now it is of peculiar interest to note what small traces
+of pure atheism can after all be found here, in spite of all criticism of
+the popular faith. We have surmised its presence among a few prominent
+personalities in fifth-century Athens; we have found evidence of its
+extension in the same place in the period immediately following; and in
+the time of transition between the fourth and third centuries we have
+thought it likely that it existed among a very few philosophers, of whom
+none are in the first rank. Everywhere else we find adjustments, in part
+very serious and real concessions, to popular belief. Not to mention the
+attitude towards worship, which was only hostile in one sect of slight
+importance: the assumption of the divinity of the heavenly bodies which
+was common to the Academics, Peripatetics, and Stoics is really in
+principle an acknowledgement of the popular faith, whose conception of the
+gods was actually borrowed and applied, not to some philosophical
+abstraction, but to individual and concrete natural objects. The
+anthropomorphic gods of the Epicureans point in the same direction. In
+spite of their profound difference from the beings that were worshipped
+and believed in by the ordinary Greek, they are in complete harmony with
+the opinion on which all polytheism is based: that there are individual
+beings of a higher order than man. And though the Stoics in theory
+confined their acknowledgment of this doctrine to the heavenly bodies, in
+practice--even if we disregard demonology--they consistently brought it to
+bear upon the anthropomorphic gods, in direct continuation of the Socratic
+reaction against the atheistic tendencies of Sophistic.
+
+If now we ask ourselves what may be the cause of this peculiar dualism in
+the relationship of ancient thought to religion, though admitting the
+highly complex nature of the problem, we can scarcely avoid recognising a
+certain principle. Ancient thought outgrew the ancient popular faith; that
+is beyond doubt. Hence its critical attitude. But it never outgrew that
+supernaturalist view which was the foundation of the popular faith. Hence
+its concessions to the popular faith, even when it was most critical, and
+its final surrender thereunto. And that it never outgrew the foundation of
+the popular faith is connected with its whole conception of nature and
+especially with its conception of the universe. We cannot indeed deny that
+the ancients had a certain feeling that nature was regulated by laws, but
+they only made imperfect attempts at a mechanical theory of nature in
+which this regulation of the world by law was carried through in
+principle, and with one brilliant exception they adhered implicitly to the
+geocentric conception of the universe. We may, I think, venture to assert
+with good reason that on such assumptions the philosophers of antiquity
+could not advance further than they did. In other words, on the given
+hypotheses the supernaturalist view was the correct one, the one that was
+most probable, and therefore that on which people finally agreed. A few
+chosen spirits may at any time by intuition, without any strictly
+scientific foundation, emancipate themselves entirely from religious
+errors; this also happened among the ancients, and on the first occasion
+was not unconnected with an enormous advance in the conception of nature.
+But it is certain that the views of an entire age are always decisively
+conditioned by its knowledge and interpretation of the universe
+surrounding it, and cannot in principle be emancipated therefrom.
+
+Seen from this point of view, our brief sketch of the attitude of
+posterity towards the religion of the pagan world will also not be without
+interest. If, after isolated advances during the mighty awakening of the
+Renaissance, it is not until the transition from the seventeenth to the
+eighteenth century that we find the modern atheistic conception of the
+nature of the gods of the ancients established in principle and
+consistently applied, we can scarcely avoid connecting this fact with the
+advance of natural science in the seventeenth century, and not least with
+the victory of the heliocentric system. After the close of antiquity the
+pagan gods had receded to a distance, practically speaking, because they
+were not worshipped any more. No one troubled himself about them. But in
+theory one had got no further, _i.e._ no advance had been made on the
+ancients, and no advance could be made as long as supernaturalism was
+adhered to in connexion with the ancient view of the universe. Through
+monotheism the notions of the divinity of the sun, moon and planets had
+certainly been got rid of, but not so the notion of the world--_i.e._ the
+globe enclosed within the firmament--as filled with personal beings of a
+higher order than man; and even the duty of turning the spheres to which
+the heavenly bodies were believed to be fastened was--quite
+consistently--assigned to some of these beings. As long as such notions
+were in operation, not only were there no grounds for denying the reality
+of the pagan gods, but there was every reason to assume it. So far we may
+rightly say that it was Copernicus, Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Kepler and
+Newton that did away with the traditional conception of ancient paganism.
+
+Natural science, however, furnishes only the negative result that the gods
+of polytheism are not what they are said to be: real beings of a higher
+order than man. To reveal what they are, other knowledge is required. This
+was not attained until long after the revival of natural science in the
+sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The vacillation in the eighteenth
+century between various theories of the explanation of the nature of
+ancient polytheism--theories which were all false, though not equally
+false--is in this respect significant enough; likewise the gradual progress
+which characterises research in the nineteenth century, and which may be
+indicated by such names as Heyne, Buttmann, K. O. Mueller, Lobeck,
+Mannhardt, Rohde, and Usener, to mention only some of the most important
+and omitting those still alive. Viewed in this light the development
+sketched here within a narrowly restricted field is typical of the course
+of European intellectual history from antiquity down to our day.
+
+
+
+
+
+NOTES
+
+
+Of Atheism in Antiquity as defined here no treatment is known to me; but
+there exist an older and a newer book that deal with the question within a
+wider compass. The first of these is Krische, _Die theologischen Lehren
+der griechischen Denker_ (Goettingen, 1840); it is chiefly concerned with
+the philosophical conceptions of deity, but it touches also on the
+relations of philosophers to popular religion. The second is Decharme, _La
+critique des traditions religieuses chez les Grecs_ (Paris, 1904); it is
+not fertile in new points of view, but it has suggested several details
+which I might else have overlooked. Such books as Caird, _The Evolution of
+Theology in the Greek Philosophers_ (Glasgow, 1904), or Moon, _Religious
+Thought of the Greeks_ (Cambridge, Mass., 1919), barely touch on the
+relation to popular belief; of Louis, _Les doctrines religieuses des
+philosophes grecs_, I have not been able to make use. I regret that Poul
+Helms, _The Conception of God in Greek Philosophy_ (Danish, in _Studier
+for Sprog-og Oldtidsforskning_, No. 115), was not published until my essay
+was already in the press. General works on Atheism are indicated in
+Aveling's article, "Atheism," in the _Catholic Encyclopaedia_, vol. ii.,
+but none of them seem to be found at Copenhagen. In the _Dictionary of
+Religion and Ethics_, ii., there is a detailed article on Atheism in its
+relation to different religions; the section treating of Antiquity is
+written by Pearson, but is meagre. Works like Zeller, _Philosophie der
+Griechen_, and Gomperz, _Griechische Denker_, contain accounts of the
+attitude of philosophers (Gomperz also includes others) towards popular
+belief; of these books I have of course made use throughout, but they are
+not referred to in the following notes except on special occasion.
+Scattered remarks and small monographs on details are naturally to be
+found in plenty. Where I have met with such and found something useful in
+them, or where I express dissent from them, I have noticed it; but I have
+not aimed at exhausting the literature on my subject. On the other hand I
+have tried to make myself completely acquainted with the first-hand
+material, wherever it gave a direct support for assuming Atheism, and to
+take my own view of it. In many cases, however, the argumentation has had
+to be indirect: it has been necessary to draw inferences from what an
+author does not say in a certain connexion when he might be expected to
+say it, or what he generally and throughout avoids mentioning, or from his
+general manner and peculiarities in his way of speaking of the gods. In
+such cases I have often had to be content with my previous knowledge and
+my general impression of the facts; but then I have as a rule made use of
+the important modern literature on the subject. In working out the sketch
+of the ideas after the end of Antiquity, I have been almost without any
+guidance in modern literature. I have accordingly had to try, on the basis
+of a superficial acquaintance with some of the chief types, to form for
+myself, as best I might, some idea of the course of the evolution; but I
+have not been able to go systematically through the immense material,
+however fruitful such a research appeared to be. In the meantime, between
+the publication of my Danish essay and this translation, there has
+appeared a work by Mr. Gruppe, _Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und
+Religionsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1921). My task in writing my last chapters
+would have been much easier if I could have made use of Mr. Gruppe's
+learned and comprehensive treatment of the subject; but it would not have
+been superfluous, for Mr. Gruppe deals principally with the history of
+classical mythology, not with the history of the belief in the gods of
+antiquity. So I have ventured to let my sketch stand as it is, only
+reducing some of the notes (which I had on purpose made rather full, to
+aid others who might pursue the subject) by referring to Mr. Gruppe
+instead of to the sources themselves.
+
+For kindly helping me to find my bearings in out-of-the-way parts of my
+subject, I am indebted to my colleagues F. Buhl, I.L. Heiberg, I.C.
+Jacobsen and Kr. Nyrop, as well as to Prof. Martin P. Nilsson in Lund.
+
+P. 1. Definition of Atheism: see the article in the _Catholic Encycl._
+vol. ii.
+
+P. 5. Atheism: see Murray, _New Engl. Dict._, under Atheism and -ism. The
+word seems to have come up in the Renaissance.
+
+P. 6. Criminal Law at Athens: see Lipsius, _Das attische Recht und
+Rechtsverfahren_, i. p. 358.--The definition in Aristotle, _de virt. et
+vit._ 7, p. 1251_a_, has, I think, no legal foundation.
+
+P. 9. On the legal foundation for the trials of Christians, see Mommsen,
+_Der Religionsfreuel nach roemischem Recht_ (_Ges. Schr._ iii. p.
+389).--Mommsen goes too far, I think, in supposing a legal foundation for
+the trials of Christians; above all, I do not believe that the defection
+from the Roman religion was ever considered as maiestas in the technical
+sense of the word, the more so as it is certain that, after the earliest
+period, no difference was made in the treatment of citizens and aliens.
+
+P. 13. Lists of atheists: Cicero, _de nat. deor._ 1. 1, 2 (comp. 1. 23,
+26). Sext. Emp. _hypotyp._ 3. 213; _adv. math._ 9. 50. Aelian, _v.h._ 2.
+31; _de nat. an._ 6. 40.--The predicate _atheos_ is once applied to
+Anaxagoras by a Christian author (Irenaeus: see Diels, _Vorsokr._ 46, A
+113; compare also Marcellinus, _vit. Thuc._, see below, note on p. 29). Of
+such isolated cases I have taken no account.
+
+P. 16. On the dualism in the Greek conception of the nature of gods see
+Naegelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p. 11.--Pindar: _Ol._ 1. 28, 9. 35; _Pyth._ 3.
+27.
+
+P. 17. Xenophanes: Einhorn, _Zeit- und Streitfragen der modernen
+Xenophanesforschung_ (_Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos._ xxxi.).
+
+P. 18. Xenophanes's age: Diels, _Vorsokr._ 11, B 8.--His criticism of Homer
+and Hesiod: _ibid._ 11, 12.--Titans and Giants: _ibid._ 1. 22.--Criticism of
+Anthropomorphism: _ibid._ 14-16.--Divination: Cic. _de div._ 1. 3, 5.
+
+P. 19. On Xenophanes's conception of God, comp. _Vorsokr._ 11, B 23-26; on
+the identification of God with the universe: _Vorsokr._ 11, A 30, 31,
+33-36.--Cicero: _de div._ 1. 3, 5.
+
+P. 21. For Xenophanes's theology, comp. Freudenthal, _Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos._ i. p. 322, and Zeller's criticism, _ibid._ p. 524. Agreeing with
+Freudenthal: Decharme, p. 46; Campbell, _Religion in Greek Literature_, p.
+293.
+
+P. 21. Parmenides does not even appear to have designated his "Being" as
+God (Zeller, i. p. 563).
+
+P. 23. In the eighteenth century people discussed diffusely the question
+whether Thales was an atheist (of course in the sense in which the word
+was taken at that time); comp. Tennemann, _Gesch. d. Philos._ i. pp. 62
+and 422. Tennemann remarks quite truly that the question is put wrongly.
+
+P. 24. Thales: Diels, _Vorsokr._ 1, A 22-23.--Attitude of Democritus
+towards popular belief: _Vorsokr._ 55, A 74-79; comp. 116, 117; B 166, and
+also B 30. Diels, _Ueber den Daemonenglauben des D._ (_Arch. f. Gesch. d.
+Philos._ 1894, p. 154).
+
+P. 25. Trial of Anaxagoras: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 1, 17, 18, 19.
+
+P. 26. Ram's head: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 16.
+
+P. 27. Geffcken (in _Hermes_, 42, p. 127) has tried to make out something
+about a criticism of popular belief by Anaxagoras from some passages in
+Aristophanes (_Nub._ 398) and Lucian (_Tim._ 10, etc.), but I do not think
+he has succeeded.--Pericles a free-thinker: Plut. _Pericl._ 6 and 38; comp.
+Decharme, p. 160.--Personality of Anaxagoras: _Vorsokr._ 46, A 30
+(Aristotle, _Eud. Ethics_, A 4, p. 1215_b_, 6).
+
+P. 28. Herodotus: 8, 77.--Sophocles: _Oed. rex._ 498, 863.--Diopeithes:
+Plut. _Pericl._ 32 (_Vorsokr._ 46, A 17).--Thucydides: Classen in the
+preface to his 3rd ed., p. lvii.
+
+P. 29. Thucydides, a disciple of Anaxagoras: Marcellinus, _vit. Thuc._
+22.--Generally Thucydides is thought to have been more conservative in his
+religious opinions than I consider probable; see Classen, _loc. cit._;
+Decharme, p. 83; Gertz in his preface to the Danish translation of
+Thucydides, p. xxvii.--Hippo: _Vorsokr._ 26, A 4, 6, 8, 9; B 2, 3.
+
+P. 30. Aristotle: _Vorsokr._ 26, A 7.--Diogenes an atheist: Aelian, _v.h._
+2, 31.--The air his god: _Vorsokr._ 51, A 8 (he thought that Homer
+identified Zeus with the air, and approved of this as {~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON WITH PSILI~} {~GREEK SMALL LETTER MU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER UPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER THETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER KAPPA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMEGA WITH PERISPOMENI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~}, {~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK KORONIS~}
+{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER LAMDA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER THETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMEGA WITH PERISPOMENI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA~} {~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH PSILI~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER RHO~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER MU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}); B 5, 7, 8.--Allusions to his doctrines by Aristophanes:
+_Nub._ 225, 828 (_Vorsokr._ 51, C 1, 2).
+
+P. 31. A chief representative of the naively critical view of natural
+phenomena is for us Herodotus. The _locus classicus_ is vii. 129; comp.
+Gomperz, _Griech. Denker_, i. p. 208; Heiberg, _Festskrift til Ussing_
+(Copenhagen, 1900), p. 91; Decharme, p. 69.--Principal passages about
+Diagoras: Sext. Emp. _adv. math._ 9, 53; Suidas, art. _Diagoras II._;
+schol. Aristoph. _Nub._ 830 (the legend); Suidas, art. _Diagoras I._;
+Aristoph. _Av._ 1071 with schol.; schol. Aristoph. _Ran._ 320; [Lysias]
+vi. 17; Diod. xiii. 16 (the decree); Philodem. _de piet._ p. 89 Gomp.
+(comments of Aristoxenus); Aelian, _v.h._ ii. 22 (legislation at
+Mantinea).--Wilamowitz (_Textgesch. d. Lyr._ p. 80) has tried to save the
+tradition by supposing that the _acme_ of Diagoras has been put too early.
+Comp. also his remarks, _Griech. Verskunst._ p. 426, where he has taken up
+the question again with reference to my treatment of it. As he has now
+conceded the possibility of referring the legislation to the earlier date,
+the difference between us is really very slight, and it is of course
+possible, perhaps even probable, that the acme of the poet has been
+antedated.--Aristoph. _Av._ 1071: "On this very day it is made public, that
+if one of you kills Diagoras from Melos, he shall have a talent, and if
+one kills one of the dead tyrants, he shall have a talent." The parallel
+between the two decrees, of which the latter is of course an invention of
+Aristophanes, would be without point if the decree against Diagoras was
+not as futile as the decree against the tyrants (_i.e._ the sons of
+Peisistratus, who had been dead some three-quarters of a century), that
+is, if it did not come many years too late.--Wilamowitz (_Griech.
+Verskunst, loc. cit._) takes the sense to be: "You will not get hold of
+Diagoras any more than you did of the tyrants." But this, besides being
+somewhat pointless, does not agree so well as my explanation with the
+introductory words: "On this very day." On the other hand, I never meant
+to imply that Diagoras was dead in 415, but only that his offence was an
+old one--just as that of Protagoras probably was (see p. 39).
+
+P. 39. Trial of Protagoras: _Vorsokr._ 74, A 1-4, 23; the passage
+referring to the gods: _ibid._ B 4.--Plato: _Theaet._ p. 162_d_ (_Vorsokr._
+74, A 23).
+
+P. 41. Distinction between belief and knowledge by Protagoras: Gomperz,
+_Griech. Denker_, i. p. 359.
+
+P. 42. Prodicus: _Vorsokr._ 77, B 5. Comp. Norvin, _Allegorien i den
+graeske Philosophi_ (_Edda_, 1919), p. 82. I cannot, however, quite adopt
+Norvin's view of the theory of Protagoras.
+
+P. 44. Critias: _Vorsokr._ 81, B 25.--W. Nestle, _Jahrbb. f. Philol._ xi.
+(1903), pp. 81 and 178, gives an exhaustive treatment of the subject, but
+I cannot share his view of it.
+
+P. 46. Euripides: _Suppl._ 201.--Moschion: _Trag. Fragm._ ed. Nauck (2nd
+ed.), p. 813.--Plato: _Rep._ ii. 369b.
+
+P. 47. Democritus: Reinhardt in _Hermes_, xlvii (1912), p. 503 In spite of
+Wilamowitz's objections (in his _Platon_, ii. p. 214), I still consider it
+probable that Plato alludes to a philosophical theory.--Protagoras on the
+original state: _Vorsokr._ 74, B 8_b_.
+
+P. 48. Euripides: _Electra, 737_ (Euripides does not believe in the tale
+that the sun reversed its course on account of Thyestes's fraud against
+Atreus, and then adds: "Fables that terrify men are a profit to the
+worship of the gods").--Aristotle: _Metaph._ A 8, 1074_b_; see text, p.
+85.--Polybius: vi. 56; see text pp. 90 and 114.--Plato's _Gorgias_, p. 482
+and foll.
+
+P. 49.--Callicles: see _e.g._ Wilamowitz, _Platon_, i. p. 208.
+
+P. 50.--Thrasymachus: Plato, _Rep._ i. pp. 338_c_, 343_a_; comp. also ii.
+p. 358_b_. His remark on Providence (_Vorsokr._ 78, B 8) runs thus: "The
+gods do not see the things that are done among men; if they did, they
+would not overlook the greatest human good, justice. For we find that men
+do not follow it." Comp. text, p. 61.--Diagoras as Critias's source:
+Nestle, _Jahrbb._, 1903, p. 101.
+
+P. 51. Euripides: see W. Nestle, _Euripides_ (Stuttgart, 1901) pp. 51-152.
+Here, too, the material is set forth exhaustively; the results seem to me
+inadmissible. Browning's theory (_The Ring and the Book_, x. 1661 foll.)
+that Euripides did believe in the existence of the gods, but did not
+believe them to be perfect, is a possible, perhaps even a probable,
+explanation of many of his utterances; but it will hardly fit all of them.
+I have examined the question in an essay, "Browning om Euripides" in my
+_Udvalgte Afhandlinger_, p. 55.
+
+P. 52. Gods identified with the Elements: _Bacch._ 274; fragm. 839. 877,
+941 (Nestle, p. 153).
+
+P. 53. Polemic against sophists: Nestle, p. 206.--_Bellerophon_: fragm.
+286.
+
+P. 54. "If the gods----": fragm. 292, 7.
+
+P. 55. _Melanippe_: fragm. 480. The words are said to have given offence
+at the rehearsal, so that Euripides altered them at the production of the
+play (Plut. _Amat._ ch. 13).--Aeschylus: _Agam._ 160.--Aristophanes:
+_Thesmoph._ 450.--In the _Frogs_, 892, Euripides prays to the Ether and
+other abstractions, not to the gods.--_Clouds_: 1371.
+
+P. 56. Plato: _Republ._ viii. p. 568a.--Quotation from _Melanippe_: Plut.
+_Amat._ 13.
+
+P. 57. Aristophanes and Naturalism: see note to p. 30.
+
+P. 58. Denial of the gods in the _Clouds_, 247, 367, 380, 423, 627, 817,
+825, 1232.--Moral of the piece: 1452-1510.--In Aristophanes's own travesties
+of the gods, scholars have found evidence for a weakening of popular
+belief, but this is certainly wrong; comp. Decharme, p. 109.--Words like
+"believe" and "belief" do not cover the Greek word {~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER OMICRON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER MU~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA WITH OXIA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER ZETA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER EPSILON~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER IOTA~}{~GREEK SMALL LETTER NU~}, which
+signifies at once "believe" and "be in the habit," "use habitually," so
+that it covers both belief and worship--an ambiguity that is characteristic
+of Greek religion.--Xenophon: _Memorab._ i. 1; _Apol. Socr._ 10 and foll.
+
+P. 59. Plato: _Apol._ p. 24_b_ (the indictment); 26_b_ (the refutation).
+
+P. 60. Aristodemus: Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 4.--Cinesias: Decharme, p. 135.--The
+Hermocopidae: Decharme, p. 152. Beloch, _Hist. of Greece_, ii. 1, p. 360,
+has another explanation. To my argument it is of no consequence what
+special motive is assigned for the crime, as long as it is a political
+one.
+
+P. 61. Plato on impiety: _Laws_, x. p. 886b; comp. xii. p. 967_a_.
+Curiously enough, the same tripartition of the wrong attitude towards the
+gods occurs already in the _Republic_, ii. p. 365_d_, where it is
+introduced incidentally as well known and a matter of course.
+
+P. 62. Euripides: _e.g._ _Hecuba_, 488; _Suppl._ 608.--Reference to
+Anaxagoras: _Laws_, x. p. 886_d_; to Sophistic, 889_b_.
+
+P. 65. Plato in the _Apology_: p. 19_c_.--Socrates's _daimonion_ a proof of
+_asebeia_: Xenoph. _Memorab._ i. 1, 2; _Apol_. _Socr._ 12; Plato, _Apol._
+p. 31_d_.
+
+P. 66. Accusation of teaching the doctrine of Anaxagoras: Plato, _Apol._
+p. 26_d_; comp. Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 1, 10.--Plato's defence of Socrates:
+_Apol._ p. 27_a_.
+
+P. 67. Xenophon's defence of Socrates: _Memor._ i. 1, 2; 6 foll., 10
+foll.--Teleological view of nature: Xenoph. _Memor._ i. 4; iv. 3.--On the
+religious standpoint of Socrates, comp. my _Udvalgte Afhandlinger_, p. 38.
+
+P. 68. Plato's _Apology_, p. 21_d_, 23_a_ and _f_, etc.--The gods
+all-knowing: _Odyss._ iv. 379 and 468; comp. Naegelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p.
+18; _Nachhom. Theol._ p. 23.
+
+P. 69. The gods just: Naegelsbach, _Hom. Theol._ p. 297; _Nachhom. Theol._
+p. 27.
+
+P. 71. The relation between early religious thought and Delphi has been
+explained correctly by Sam Wide, _Einleit. in die Altertumswissensch._,
+ii. p. 221; comp. also I. L. Heiberg in _Tilskueren_, 1919, ii. p.
+44.--Honours shown to Pindar at Delphi: schol. Pind. ed. Drachm. i. p. 2,
+14; 5, 6. Pausan, x. 24. 5.
+
+P. 72. Plato on the Delphic Oracle: _Apol._ p. 20_e_. On the following
+comp. I. L. Heiberg, _loc. cit._ p. 45.--Socrates on his _daimonion_:
+Plato, _Apol._ p. 31_c_.
+
+P. 74. Antisthenes: Ritter, _Hist. philos. Gr.__9_ 285.--On the later
+Cynics, especially Diogenes, see Diog. Laert. vi. 105 (the gods are in
+need of nothing); Julian, _Or._ vi. p. 199_b_ (Diogenes did not worship
+the gods).
+
+P. 75. Cyrenaics: Diog. Laert. ii. 91.--Date of Theodorus: Diog. Laert. ii.
+101, 103; his book on the gods: Diog. Laert. ii. 97, Sext. Emp. _adv.
+math._ ix. 55; his trial: Diog. Laert. ii. 101.
+
+P. 76. Theodorus's book used by Epicurus: Diog. Laert. ii. 97.--Zeller:
+_Philos. d. Griechen_, ii. 1, p. 925.--Euthyphron: see especially p. 14_b_
+foll.
+
+P. 77. Criticism of Mythology in the _Republic_: ii. p. 377_b_ foll.;
+worship presupposed: _e.g._ iii. p. 415_e_; v. p. 459_e_, 461_a_, 468_d_,
+469_a_, 470_a_; vii. p. 540_b_; reference to the Oracle: iv. p.
+427_b_.--_Timaeus_: p. 40_d_ foll.--_Laws_, rules of worship: vi. p. 759_a_,
+vii. p. 967_a_ and elsewhere, x. p. 909_d_; capital punishment for
+atheists: x. p. 909_a_. Comp. above, on p. 61.
+
+P. 78. Atheism a sin of youth: _Laws_, x. p. 888_a_.--Goodness and truth of
+the gods: _Republ._ ii. p. 379_a_, 380_d_, 382_a_.--Belief in Providence:
+_Laws_, x. p. 885_c_, etc.; _Republ._ x. p. 612_e_; _Apol._ p. 41_d_.
+
+P. 79. _Laws_, x. p. 888_d_, 893_b_ foll., especially 899_c-d_; comp. also
+xii. p. 967_a-c._--_Timaeus_: p. 40_d-f_. Comp. _Laws_, xii. p. 948_b_.
+
+P. 80. The gods in the _Republic_, ii. p. 380_d_. This passage, taken
+together with Plato's general treatment of popular belief, might lead to
+the hypothesis that it was Plato's doctrine of ideas rather than the
+rationalism of his youth that brought about strained relations between his
+thought and popular belief. I incline to think that such is the case; but
+there is a long step even from such a state of things to downright
+atheism, and the stress Plato always laid on the belief in Providence is a
+strong argument in favour of his belief in the gods, for he could never
+make his ideas act in the capacity of Providence.--The gods as creators of
+mankind: _Timaeus_, p. 41_a_ foll.
+
+P. 81. Xenocrates: the exposition of his doctrine given in the text is
+based upon Heinze's _Xenokrates_ (Leipzig, 1892).
+
+P. 83. Trial of Aristotle: Diog. Laert. v. 5; Athen. xv. p. 696.--The
+writings of Aristotle that have come down to us are almost all of them
+compositions for the use of his disciples, and were not accessible to the
+general public during his lifetime.
+
+P. 84. On the religious views of Aristotle see in general Zeller, ii. 2,
+p. 787 (Engl. transl. ii. p. 325); where the references to his writings
+are given in full. In the following I indicate only a few passages of
+special interest.--Discussion of worship precluded: _Top._ A, xi. p.
+105_a_, 5.--Aristotle's Will: _Diog_. Laert. v. 15.--The gods as determining
+the limits of the human: _e.g._ _Nic. Eth._ K, viii. p. 1178b, 33: "(the
+wise) will also be in need of outward prosperity, as he is (only) a
+man."--Reservations in speaking of the gods, _e.g._ _Nic. Eth._ K, ix. p.
+1179_a_, 13: "he who is active in accordance with reason ... must also be
+supposed to be the most beloved of the gods; for if the gods trouble
+themselves about human affairs--_and that they do so is generally taken for
+granted_--it must be probable that they take pleasure in what is best and
+most nearly related to themselves (_and that must be the reason_), and
+that they reward those who love and honour this most highly," etc. The
+passage is typical both of the hypothetical way of speaking, and of the
+twist in the direction of Aristotle's own conception of the deity (whose
+essence is reason); also of the Socratic manner of dealing with the gods.
+
+P. 85. The passage quoted is from the _Metaphysics_, A viii. p. 1074_a_,
+38. Comp. _Metaph._ B, ii. p. 997_b_, 8; iv. p. 1000_a_, 9.
+
+P. 86. Theophrastus: Diog. Laert. v. 37.
+
+P. 87. Strato: Diels, _Ueber das physikal. System des S., Sitzungsber. d.
+Berl. Akad._, 1893, p. 101.--His god the same as nature: _Cic. de nat.
+deor._ i. 35.
+
+P. 89. On the history of Hellenistic religion, see Wendland, _Die
+hellenistisch-roemische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen z. Judentum u.
+Christentum_ (Tuebingen, 1907).
+
+P. 90. The passage quoted is Polyb. vi. 56, 6.
+
+P. 92. On the Tyche-Religion, see Naegelsbach, _Nachhom. Theologie_, p.
+153; Lehrs, _Populaere Aufsaetze_, p. 153; Rohde, _Griech. Roman_, p. 267
+(1st ed.); Wendland, p. 59.--Thucydides: see Classen in the introduction to
+his (3rd) edition, pp. lvii-lix, where all the material is collected. A
+conclusive passage is vii. 36, 6, where Thuc. makes the bigoted Nicias
+before a decisive battle express the hope that "Fortune" will favour the
+Athenians.--Demosthenes's dream: _Aeschin._ iii. 77.--Demosthenes on Tyche:
+_Olynth._ ii. 22; _de cor._ 252.
+
+P. 93. Demosthenes and the Pythia: _Aesch._ iii. 130. Comp. _ibid._ 68,
+131, 152; Plutarch, _Dem._ 20.--Demetrius of Phalerum: Polyb. xxix.
+21.--Temples of Tyche: Roscher, _Mythol. Lex._, art. _Fortuna_.
+
+P. 94. Tyche mistress of the gods: _Trag. adesp. fragm._ 506, Nauck; [Dio
+Chrys.] lxiv. p. 331 R.--Polybius: i. 1; iii. 5, 7.--The reservations
+against Tyche as a principle for the explaining of historical facts, and
+the twisting of the notion in the direction of Providence found in certain
+passages in Polybius, do not concern us here; they are probably due to the
+Stoic influence he underwent during his stay at Rome. Comp. below, on p.
+114, and see Cuntz, _Polybios_ (Leipzig, 1902), p. 43.--Pliny: ii. 22 foll.
+
+P. 95. Tyche in the novels: Rohde, _Griech. Rom._ p. 280.
+
+P. 97. Strabo: xvii. p. 813.--Plutarch: _de def. or._ 5 and 7.
+
+P. 98. The Aetolians at Dium: Polyb. iv. 62; at Dodona, iv. 67; Philip at
+Thermon, v. 9; Dicaearchus, xviii. 54.--Decay of Roman worship: Wissowa,
+_Religion u. Kultus d. Roemer_, p. 70 (2nd ed.). To this work I must refer
+for indications of the sources; but the polemic in the text is chiefly
+directed against Wissowa.
+
+P. 99. Ennius: comp. below, p. 112.
+
+P. 100. Varro: in Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, vi. 2.
+
+P. 103. Theology of the Stoics: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 309-45.
+
+P. 104. Demonology of the Stoics: Heinze, _Xenokrates_, p. 96.
+
+P. 105. Epicurus's theology: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 427-38. Comp. Schwartz,
+_Charakterkoepfe_, ii. p. 43.
+
+P. 106. Epicurus's doctrine of the eternity of the gods criticised: Cic.
+_de nat. deor._ i. 68 foll.
+
+P. 107. The Sceptics: Zeller, iii. 1, pp. 507 and 521.
+
+P. 109. Diogenes: see note on p. 74.--Bion: Diog. Laert. iv. 52 and 54.
+
+P. 110. Menippos: R. Helm, _Lukian u. Menipp_ (Leipzig and Berlin, 1906).
+
+P. 111. Euhemerus: Jacoby in Pauly-Wissowa's _Realencyclop._, art.
+"Euemeros"; Wendland, _Hellenist. Kultur_, p. 70.--Euhemerism before
+Euhemerus: Lobeck, _Aglaophamus_, p. 9; Wendland, p. 67.
+
+P. 112. A Danish scholar, Dr. J. P. Jacobsen (_Afhandlinger og Artikler_,
+p. 490), seems to think that Euhemerus's theory was influenced by the
+worship of heroes. But there is nothing to show that Euhemerus supposed
+his gods to have continued their existence after their death, though this
+would have been in accordance with Greek belief even in the Hellenistic
+period; he seems rather to have insisted that they were worshipped as gods
+during their lifetime (comp. Jacoby, _loc. cit._).
+
+P. 114. Euhemerism in Polybius: xxxiv. 2; comp. x. 10, 11.--Relapse into
+orthodoxy: xxxvii. 9 (the decisive passage); xxxix. 19, 2 (concluding
+prayer to the gods); xviii. 54, 7-10; xxiii. 10, 14 (the gods punish
+impiety; comp. xxxvii. 9, 16). There is a marked contrast between such
+passages and the way Polybius speaks of Philip's destruction of the
+sanctuary at Thermon; he blames it severely, but merely on political, not
+on religious grounds (v. 9-12). Orthodox utterances in the older portions
+of the work (i. 84, 10; x. 2, 7) may be due to that accommodation to
+popular belief which Polybius himself acknowledges as justifiable (xvi.
+12, 9), but also to later revision.--Influence of Stoicism: Hirzel,
+_Untersuchungen zu Ciceros philos. Schriften_, ii. p. 841.
+
+P. 115. Cicero's Stoicism in his philosophy of religion: _de nat. deor._
+iii. 40, 95.
+
+P. 116. Sanctuary to Tullia: Cic. _ad Att._ xii. 18 foll.; several of the
+letters (23, 25, 35, 36) show that Atticus disapproved of the idea, and
+that Cicero himself was conscious that it was unworthy of him.
+
+P. 117. Euhemeristic defence: _fragm. consol._ 14, 15.--Augustus's
+reorganisation of the cults: Wissowa, _Religion u. Kultus d. Roemer_, p.
+73. Recent scholars, especially when treating of Virgil (Heinze, _Vergils
+ep. Technik_, 3rd ed. p. 291; Norden, _Aeneis_, vi. 2nd ed. pp. 314, 318,
+362), speak of the reform of Augustus as if it involved a real revulsion
+of feeling in his contemporaries. This is in my opinion a complete
+misunderstanding of the facts. Virgil's religious views: _Catal. v.,
+Georgics_, ii. 458.
+
+P. 118. Pliny: _hist. nat._ ii. 1-27. The passages translated are �� 14
+and 27.
+
+P. 122. Seneca: fragm. 31-39, Haase.--Stoic polemic against atheism:
+Epictetus, _diss._ ii. 20, 21; comp. Marcus Aurelius, vi. 44.--Later
+Cynicism: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 763.--Oenomaus: only preserved in excerpts by
+Euseb. _praep. evang._ 5-6 (a separate edition is wanted).--His polemic
+directed against the priests: Euseb. 5, p. 213_c_; comp. Oenomaus himself,
+_ibid._ 6, p. 256_d_.
+
+P. 123. Lucian: see Christ, _Gesch. d. griech. Litt._ ii. 2, p. 550 (5th
+ed.), and R. Helm, _Lukian u. Menipp_ (see note to p. 110).
+
+P. 124. Timon: ch. x.
+
+P. 126. On Lucian's caution in attacking the really popular gods, see
+Wilamowitz, in _Kultur d. Gegenwart_, i. 8, p. 248.--The Jews atheists:
+Harnack, _Der Vorwurf d. Atheismus in den 3 ersten Jahrh_. (_Texte u.
+Unters._, N.F., xiii. 4), p. 3.
+
+P. 127. I have met with no comprehensive treatment of Jewish and Christian
+polemic against Paganism; Geffcken, _Zwei griech. Apologeten_ (Leipzig,
+1907), is chiefly concerned with investigations into the sources. I shall
+therefore indicate the principal passages on which my treatment is
+based.--Polemic against images in the Old Testament: Isaiah 44.10 etc.; in
+later literature: Epistle of Jeremiah; Wisdom of Solomon 13 foll.; Philo,
+_de decal._ 65 foll., etc.--Euhemerism: Wisdom of Solomon 14.15; Epistle of
+Aristeas, 135; Sibyll. iii. 547, 554, 723.--Elements and celestial bodies:
+Wisdom of Solomon 13; Philo, _de decal._ 52 foll.--The tenacity of
+tradition is apparent from the fact that even Maimonides in his treatise
+of idolatry deals only with star-worship and image-worship. I know the
+treatise only from the Latin translation by D. Voss (in G. I. Voss's
+_Opera_, vol. v.).--Demons: Deuteron. 32.17; Psalms 106.37; add (according
+to LXX.) Isaiah 65.11; Psalms 96.5. Later writers: Enoch 19.99, 7; Baruch
+4.7. Such passages as Jub. 22, 17 or Sibyll. prooem. 22 are possibly
+Euhemeristic.--Fallen angels: Enoch, 19.--Philo's demonology: _de gig._
+6-18, etc.
+
+P. 128. St. Paul: 1 Cor. 10.20; comp. 8.4 and Rom. 1.23.
+
+P. 129. Image-worship and demon-worship not conciliated: _e.g._ Tertull.
+_Apologet._ 10-15 and 22-23, comp. 27.--Jewish demonology: Bousset,
+_Religion d. Judentums_, p. 326 (1st ed.).--Fallen angels: _e.g._ Athenag.
+24 foll.; Augustine, _Enchir._ 9, 28 foll.; _de civ. Dei_, viii. 22.
+
+P. 130. Euhemerism in the Apologists: _e.g._ Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, ii.
+10; vi. 7; vii. 18 and 33; viii. 26.--Euhemerism and demonology combined:
+_e.g._ Augustine, _de civ. Dei_, ii. 10; vii. 35; comp. vii. 28
+fin.--Worship of the heavenly bodies: _e.g._ Aristid. 3 foll.; Augustine,
+_de civ. Dei_, vii. 29 foll.
+
+P. 131. Paganism a delusion caused by demons: Thomas Aq. _Summa theol._ P.
+ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. below, note on p. 135.
+
+P. 133. For the following sketch I have found valuable material in
+Gedike's essay, _Ueber die mannigfaltigen Hypothesen z. Erklaerung d.
+Mythologie_ (_Verm. Schriften_, Berlin, 1801, p. 61).
+
+P. 134. Milton: _Paradise Lost_, i. 506. The theory that the pagan oracles
+fell mute at the rise of Christianity is also found in Milton, _Hymn on
+the Morning of Christ's Nativity_, st. xviii. foll.
+
+P. 135. G. I. Voss; _De Theologia Gentili_, lib. i. (published,
+1642)--Voss's view is in the main that idolatry as a whole is the work of
+the Devil. What is worshipped is partly the heavenly bodies, partly
+demons, partly (and principally) dead men; most of the ancient gods are
+identified with persons from the Old Testament. Demon-worship is dealt
+with in ch. 6; it is proved among other things by the true predictions of
+the oracles. Individual Greek deities are identified with demons in ch. 7,
+in a context where oracles are dealt with. On older works of the same
+tendency, see below, note on p. 140; on Natalis Comes, _ibid._ A fuller
+treatment of Voss's theories is found in Gruppe's work, � 25.--Thomas
+Aquinas: _Summa theol._ P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. also Q. 122, art.
+2.--Dante: Sommo Giove for God, _Purg._ vi. 118; his devils: Charon, _Inf._
+iii. 82 (109 expressly designated as "dimonio"); Minos, _Inf._ v. 4;
+Geryon, _Inf._ xviii. (there are more of the same kind).--"Dei falsi e
+bugiardi": _Inf._ i. 72. (Plutus, who appears as a devil in _Inf._ vii.
+was probably taken by Dante for an antique god; but the name may also be a
+classicising translation of Mammon.)
+
+P. 136. Mediaeval epic poets: Nyrop, _Den oldfranske Heltedigtning_, p.
+255 and 260; Dernedde, _Ueber die den altfranzoes. Dichtern bekannten
+Stoffe aus dem Altertum_ (Diss. Goetting. 1887).--Confusion of ancient and
+Christian elements: Dernedde, p. 10; the gods are devils: Dernedde, pp.
+85, 88.--Euhemerism: Dernedde, p. 4.--I have tried to get a first-hand
+impression of the way the gods are treated by the old French epic poets,
+but the material is too large, and indexes suited to the purpose are
+wanting. The paganism of the original is taken over naively, _e.g._, by
+Veldeke, _Eneidt_, i. 45, 169.--On magic I have consulted Horst's
+_Daemonomagie_ (Frankf. 1818); and his _Zauber-Bibliothek_ (Mainz,
+1821-26); Schindler, _Der Aberglaube des Mittelalters_ (Breslau, 1858);
+Maury, _La magie et l'astrologie dans l'antiquite et au moyen age_ (Paris,
+1860). These authors all agree that mediaeval magic is dependent on
+antiquity, but that the pagan gods are superseded by devils (or the
+Devil). The connexion in substance with antiquity, on which Maury
+specially insists, is certain enough, but does not concern us here, where
+the question is about the theory. In the _Zauber-Bibl._ i. p. 137 (in the
+treatise _Pneumatologia vera et occulta_), the snake Python is put down
+among the demons, with the remark that Apollo was called after it.--Magic
+formulae with antique gods: Heim, _Incantamenta magica_ (in the _Neue
+Jahrbb. f. Philologie_, Suppl. xix. 1893, p. 557; I owe this reference to
+the kindness of my colleague, Prof. Groenbeck). Pradel, _Religionsgesch.
+Vers. u. __ Vorarb._ iii., has collected prayers and magic formulae from
+Italy and Greece; they do not contain names of antique gods.
+
+P. 137. Acosta: Joseph de Acosta, _Historia naturale e morale delle
+Indie_, Venice, 1596. I have used this Italian translation; the original
+work appeared in 1590.--Demons at work in oracles: bk. v. ch. 9; in magic:
+ch. 25.
+
+P. 138. Demon in Brazil: Voss, _Theol. Gent._ i. ch. 8.--Pagan worship in
+the Florentine and Roman Academies: Voigt, _Wiederbelebung d. klass.
+Altertums_, ii. p. 239 (2nd ed.); Hettner, _Ital. Studien_, p. 174.--On the
+conception of the antique gods in the earlier Middle Ages, see Gruppe, �
+4.--Thomas Aquinas: _Summa theol._ P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4.--Curious and
+typical of the mediaeval way of reasoning is the idea of seeking
+prototypes of the Christian history of salvation in pagan mythology. See
+v. Eicken, _Gesch. u. System d. mittelalt. Weltanschauung_ (Stuttg. 1887),
+p. 648, and (with more detail) F. Piper, _Mythologie u. Symbolik d.
+christl. Kunst_ (Weimar, 1847-51), i. p. 143; comp. also Gruppe, � 8 foll.
+Good instances are the myths in the _Speculum humanae salvationis_, chs. 3
+and 24.
+
+P. 139. On Hebraism in general, see Gruppe, � 19 and � 24 foll.; on Huet,
+� 28. Nevertheless, Huet operates with demonology in connexion with the
+oracles (_Dem. evang._ ii. 9, 34, 4).
+
+P. 140. On Natalis Comes, see Gruppe, � 19. In bk. i. ch. 7, Natalis Comes
+gives an account of the origin of antiquity's conceptions of the gods; it
+has quite a naturalistic turn. Nevertheless, we find in ch. 16 a remark
+which shows that he embraced demonology in its crudest form; compare also
+the theory set forth in ch. 10. His interpretations of myths are collected
+in bk. x.--On Bacon, see Gruppe, � 22. Typhoeus-myth: introduct. to _De
+sapientia veterum._--Alchemistic interpretations: Gedike, _Verm.
+Schriften_, p. 78; Gruppe, � 30. Of the works quoted by Gedike, I have
+consulted Faber's _Panchymicum_ (Frankf. 1651) and Toll's Fortuita
+(Amsterd. 1687). Faber has only some remarks on the matter in bk. i. ch.
+5; by Toll the alchemistic interpretation is carried through. Gedike
+quotes, moreover, a work by Suarez de Salazar, which must date from the
+sixteenth century; according to Joecher (iv. 1913) it only exists in MS.,
+and I do not know where Gedike got his reference.--Thomas: _Summa_, P. ii.
+2, Q. 172, arts. 5 and 6.
+
+P. 141. Demonology as explanation of the oracles: see van Dale, _De
+oraculis_, p. 430 (Amsterd. 1700); he quotes numerous treatises from the
+sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I have glanced at Moebius, _De
+oraculorum ethnicorum origine_, etc. (Leipzig, 1656).--Caelius Rhodiginus:
+_Lectionum antiq._ (Leyden, 1516), lib. ii. cap. 12; comp. Gruppe, �
+15.--Caelius Calcagninus: _Oraculorum liber_ (in his _Opera_, Basle, 1544,
+p. 640). The little dialogue is not very easy to understand; it is
+evidently a satire on contemporary credulity; but that Caelius completely
+rejected divination seems to be assumed also by G. I. Voss, _Theol. Gent._
+i. 6.--Machiavelli: _Discorsi_, i. 56.--Van Dale: _De oraculis gentilium_
+(1st ed. Amsterd. 1683); _De idololatria_ (Amsterd. 1696). Difficulties
+with the biblical accounts of demons: _De idol._, dedication.--Fontenelle:
+_Histoire des oracles_ (Paris, 1687). The little book has an amusing
+preface, in which Fontenelle with naive complacency (and with a sharp eye
+for van Dale's deficiencies of style) gives an account of his
+popularisation of the learned work. On Fontenelle and the answer by the
+Jesuit, Balthus, see for further details Banier, _La mythologie et les
+fables expliquees par l'histoire_ (Paris, 1738), bk. iii. ch. 1. Van
+Dale's book itself had called forth an answer by Moebius (included in the
+edition of 1690 of his work, _de orac. ethn. orig._).--On the influence
+exercised by van Dale and Fontenelle on the succeeding mythologists, see
+Gruppe, � 34.--Banier: see Gruppe, � 35.
+
+P. 143. Vico: _Scienza nuova_ (Milan, 1853), p. 168 (bk. ii. in the
+section, Della metafisica poetica); political allegories, _e.g._ p. 309
+(in the Canone mitologico). Comp. Gruppe, � 44.--Banier: in the work
+indicated above, bk. i. ch. 5.
+
+P. 144. On the mythological theories of the eighteenth century, comp.
+Gruppe, � 36 foll.; on Bryant, � 40; on Dupuis, � 41.--Polemic against
+Euhemerism from the standpoint of nature-symbolism: de la Barre, _Memoires
+pour servir a l'histoire de la religion en Grece_, in _Mem. de l'Acad. des
+Inscr._ xxiv. (1749; the treatise had already been communicated in 1737
+and 1738); a posthumous continuation in _Mem._ xxix. (1770) gives an idea
+of de la Barre's own point of view, which was not a little in advance of
+his time. Comp. Gruppe, � 37.
+
+P. 145. A good survey of modern investigations in the field of the history
+of ancient religion is given by Sam Wide in the _Einleit. in die
+Altertumswissensch._ ii.; here also remarks on the mythology of older
+times. The later part of Gruppe's work contains a very full treatment of
+the subject.
+
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+Absolute definitions of the divine, 16, 19, 68, 69, 82, 88.
+
+Academics, 149.
+
+Academy, later, 108, 114.
+
+Acosta, 137, 139, 141.
+
+Aelian, 121.
+
+Aeneid (mediaeval), 136.
+
+Aeschines, 93.
+
+Aeschylus, 54, 55.
+
+Aetolians, 97, 98.
+
+Alchemistic explanation of Paganism, 140.
+
+Alcibiades, 60.
+
+Alexander the Great, 93, 112.
+
+Allegorical interpretation, 104, 113, 139, 140, 143, 144.
+
+American Paganism, 137, 139, 141.
+
+Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, 7, 13, 25-29, 30, 31, 40, 62, 63, 66, 124.
+
+Anaximenes, 30.
+
+Angelology, 129.
+
+Anthropomorphism, 14, 18, 19, 69.
+
+Antisthenes, 13, 74, 109.
+
+Apologists, 128, 130, 132, 139.
+
+Arcissewsky, 138.
+
+Aristides the Apologist, 129.
+
+Aristides Rhetor, 121.
+
+Aristodemus, 60, 62.
+
+Aristophanes, 30, 32, 33, 39, 55, 56-58, 65.
+  _Birds_, 32.
+  _Clouds_, 30, 55, 56-58
+  _Frogs_, 55.
+
+Aristotle, 13, 30, 32, 46, 83-87, 104, 113.
+  _Ethics_, 84.
+  _Metaphysics_, 85-86.
+  _Politics_, 84.
+
+Aristoxenus, 32, 33.
+
+Asclepius, 111, 121, 126.
+
+_Asebeia_, 6, 7, 8.
+
+Aspasia, 27.
+
+Atheism (and Atheist) defined, 1;
+  rare in antiquity, 2, 133;
+  of recent origin, 2, 143;
+  origin of the words, 5;
+  lists of atheists, 13;
+  punishable by death in Plato's _Laws_, 77;
+  sin of youth, 78.
+
+Athene, 74.
+
+Athens, its treatment of atheism, 6-8, 9, 12, 25, 39, 65 foll., 74, 75,
+            83, 86;
+  its view of sophistic, 58-59.
+
+_Atheos_ (_atheoi_), 2, 10, 13, 14, 19, 23, 29, 43, 75, 110.
+
+_Atheotes_, 2.
+
+Augustine, St., 129, 135.
+
+Augustus, 117;
+  religious reaction of, 100, 113, 117, 120.
+
+Aurelius, Marcus, 11, 121.
+
+Bacon, Francis (_De Sap. Vet._) 140.
+
+Banier, 142, 143.
+
+Bible, 130, 142.
+
+Bion, 13, 109.
+
+Brazil, 138.
+
+Bruno, Giordano, 151.
+
+Bryant, 144.
+
+Buttmann, 152.
+
+Caelius Calcagninus, 141.
+
+Caelius Rhodiginus, 141.
+
+Callicles, 48 foll., 63.
+
+Carlyle, 112.
+
+Carneades, 8, 108.
+
+Cassander of Macedonia, 111.
+
+Charon, 135.
+
+Christianity, 126, 128-32.
+
+Christians, their atheism, 9;
+  prosecutions of, 10;
+  demonology, 83.
+
+Cicero, 19, 105, 114-17, 147.
+  _Nature of the Gods_, 115.
+  _On the State_, 115.
+  _On the Laws_, 115.
+  _De consolatione_, 116.
+
+Cinesias, 60.
+
+Copernicus, 151.
+
+Critias, 13, 44-50.
+  _Sisyphus_, 44 f., 114.
+
+Criticism of popular religion, 16, 17, 19, 35 foll., 74, 78, 82, 84, 88,
+            90, 99, 104, 109, 110, 122, 124-26.
+
+Cuthites, 144.
+
+Cynics, 74, 109-10, 122, 124, 147.
+
+Cyrenaics, 75.
+
+_Daimonion_ of Socrates, 65, 66, 72-73.
+
+van Dale, 141-42.
+
+Dante, 135.
+
+Deisidaimon, 75.
+
+Demeter, 42, 43, 81.
+
+Demetrius of Phalerum, 75, 93.
+  _On Tyche_, 93.
+
+Democritus, 24, 42, 43, 44, 47, 52.
+
+Demonology, 81-83, 105, 113, 127-32, 134-42, 148, 149.
+
+Demosthenes, 92-93, 96.
+
+Devil, 132, 137, 139, 141, 144.
+
+Diagoras of Melos, 13, 31-34, 39, 50.
+  _Apopyrgizontes logoi_, 32, 33.
+
+Dicaearchus, 98.
+
+Diodorus Siculus, 112.
+
+Diogenes of Apollonia, 13, 29-30, 57.
+
+Diogenes the Cynic, 109.
+
+Dionysus, 42, 43.
+
+Diopeithes, 28.
+
+Dioscuri, 124.
+
+Dium, 98.
+
+Divination, 18, 20, 26, 27, 28, 40, 97, 114, 131, 135, 137, 140-42.
+  Comp. Oracle.
+
+Dodona, 98, 141.
+
+Dogmatics, 108.
+
+Domitian, 11.
+
+Dupuis, 144.
+
+Elements, divine, 23, 24, 30, 52 foll., 57, 81, 103, 127.
+
+Eleusinian Mysteries, 32, 33, 40, 60.
+
+Ennius, 99, 112.
+
+Epicureans, Epicurus, 13, 76, 80, 83, 105-7, 113, 147, 149.
+
+Euhemerus, Euhemerism, 13, 110-12, 113, 114, 117, 127, 130, 136, 137, 139,
+            140, 142, 143, 144.
+
+Euripides, 16, 17, 21, 45, 46, 48, 51-56, 62.
+  _Bellerophon_, 53.
+  _Melanippe_, 55, 56.
+
+Fallen angels, 128, 129, 130.
+
+Florentine Academy, 138.
+
+Foreign gods, 70, 89, 103.
+
+Fontenelle, 142.
+
+Geocentric view, 150.
+
+Geryon, 135.
+
+Giants, 18.
+
+Gorgias, 37.
+
+Hades, 81.
+
+Heavenly bodies, 2, 20, 22, 25, 43, 62, 66, 79, 80, 81, 84, 87, 104, 127,
+            128, 130, 137, 139, 144, 149, 151.
+
+Heavenly phenomena, 22.
+
+Hebraism, 139, 143, 144.
+
+Hecataeus of Abdera, 112.
+
+Heliocentric view, 151.
+
+Hellenistic philosophy, 94, 103-10, 119.
+
+Hephaestus, 42, 43.
+
+Heracles, 74, 111.
+
+Hercules, 136.
+
+Herder, 145.
+
+Hermae, 40, 60.
+
+Hermes, 124.
+
+Hermias, 83.
+
+Herodotus, 28, 29.
+
+Hesiod, 16, 18.
+
+Heyne, 152.
+
+Hippo of Rhegium, 13, 29-30.
+
+Holy War, 96.
+
+Homer, 16, 18, 43, 68, 106.
+
+Horace, 117.
+
+Huet, 139.
+
+Hylozoism, 23.
+
+Ideas, Platonic, 80.
+
+Idolatry attacked, 123.
+  See also Image Worship.
+
+Ignorance, Socratic, 68.
+
+Image Worship, 127, 128, 131-37.
+
+Jews, their atheism, 9, 126.
+
+Josephus, 128.
+
+Judaism, 126, 127-28, 129.
+
+Juno Regina, 136.
+
+Jupiter (in Dante), 135;
+  (in the Thebais,) 136.
+
+Jupiter-priest, 100.
+
+Kepler, 151.
+
+Kronos, 111.
+
+Lampon, 26.
+
+Lobeck, 152.
+
+Lucian, 110, 123-26.
+  _Timon_, 124.
+  _Dialogues of the Gods_, 125.
+
+Lucretius, 106.
+
+Luna Jovis filia, 136.
+
+Macedonia, 93.
+
+Machiavelli, 141.
+
+Magic, 136-37.
+
+Mannhardt, 152.
+
+Mantinea, constitution of, 32.
+
+Marcus Aurelius, 11, 121.
+
+Mediaeval epic poets, 136.
+
+Megarians, 74, 107.
+
+Menippus of Gadara, 110.
+
+Mexico, 137.
+
+Middle Ages, 133, 135-39.
+
+Milton (_Paradise Lost_), 134, 135, 141.
+
+Minos, 135.
+
+Miracles, pagan, 131, 132.
+
+Modesty, religions, 55, 70, 73.
+
+Moschion, 46.
+
+Moses and his sister, 139.
+
+Monotheism, 9, 12, 23, 74, 80, 83, 127 foll., 139, 148, 151.
+
+Mueller, K. O., 152.
+
+Natalis Comes, 139 foll.
+
+Naturalism, Ionian, 21, 22-25, 30-31, 52, 57.
+
+Negroes, 18.
+
+Neo-Platonists, 83, 121.
+
+Neo-Pythagoreans, 83, 121.
+
+Nero, 11.
+
+Newton, 151.
+
+Nile, 42.
+
+_Nomos_ (and _Physis_), 35, 36, 38, 63, 74.
+
+Nymphs, 136.
+
+Oenomaus (_The Swindlers Unmasked_), 122-23, 126.
+
+Old Testament, 127, 129.
+
+Oracle of Ammon, 97; oracles of Boeotia, 97;
+  Delphic Oracle, 28, 60, 67, 68, 71, 72, 77, 93, 96, 97, 123, 141;
+  decay of oracles, 96-97;
+  oracles explained by priestly fraud, 123, 141-42.
+  Ovid, 117.
+
+Paganism of Antiquity, its character, 15.
+
+Panchaia, 111.
+
+Parmenides, 21.
+
+Pantheism, 20, 23, 103, 119, 122, 127.
+
+Paul, St., 128.
+
+Pericles, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 124.
+
+Peripatetics, 147, 149.
+
+Peru, 137.
+
+Pheidias, 27.
+
+Philip III. of Macedonia, 96.
+
+Philip V. of Macedonia, 97-98.
+
+Philo, 128.
+
+Phocians, 96.
+
+_Physis_ (and _Nomos_), 35, 36, 63, 74.
+
+Pindar, 16, 17, 52, 71.
+
+Plato, 13, 39, 48, 49, 50, 56, 59, 61-63, 65, 66, 72, 76-81, 82, 84, 113,
+            147.
+  _Apology_, 59, 65, 66, 68, 72, 78, 79.
+  _Euthyphron_, 67, 76.
+  _Gorgias_, 48 foll., 63, 77.
+  _Laws_, 61 foll., 77, 78, 79, 80.
+  _Republic_, 50, 56, 77, 78.
+  _Symposium_, 82.
+  _Timaeus_, 77, 79, 80.
+
+Platonism, 148.
+
+Plethon, 138.
+
+Pliny the Elder, 94, 95, 118, 147.
+
+Plutarch (_de def. orac._), 97.
+
+Polybius, 48, 90-91, 94, 99, 113-14, 147;
+  Stoicism in P., 114.
+
+Pomponazzi (_De Incantat._), 141.
+
+Poseidon, 42, 81.
+
+Poseidonius, 104.
+
+Prodicus of Ceos, 13, 42-44, 104.
+
+Protagoras of Abdera, 13, 39-42, 47.
+  _On the Gods_, 39 foll.
+  _Original State_, 47.
+
+Providence, 60, 61, 78, 105, 118, 122.
+
+Pythia, 93.
+
+Reaction, religious, of second century, 120-21, 125;
+  of Augustus, see Augustus.
+
+Reinterpretation of the conceptions of the gods, 2.
+  See also Allegorical interpretation.
+
+Religion a political invention, 47, 114.
+
+Religious thought, early, of Greece, 16-17, 52, 54, 55, 69-70, 71, 84, 88,
+            98, 107.
+
+Renaissance, 133, 138, 139 foll., 141.
+
+Rohde, 152.
+
+Roman Academy, 138.
+
+Roman religion, 90, 99-100, 101-2.
+
+Roman State-worship, decay of, 98-103.
+
+Romance of Troy, 136.
+
+Romances, 95-96.
+
+Rome's treatment of atheism, 8-11.
+
+Rousseau, 145.
+
+Scepticism, 107-8, 114, 147.
+
+Schoolmen, 135.
+
+Seneca, 110, 122.
+
+Sibylline books, 97.
+
+Sisyphus, 45, 48.
+
+Socrates, 7, 13, 40, 46, 49, 56, 58, 64-73, 84, 107, 147. See also
+            _Daimonion_ of S.
+
+Socratic philosophy, 64, 87, 149.
+
+Socratic Schools, 73, 87-88.
+
+Sol invictus, 136.
+
+Solon, 16.
+
+Sophistic, 35-38, 57, 64, 87, 104, 148, 149.
+
+Sophocles, 28, 54.
+
+Stilpo, 13, 74, 108.
+
+Stoics, 83, 103-5, 113, 118, 119, 121-22, 147, 148, 149.
+
+Strabo, 97.
+
+Strato, 87, 108.
+
+Suetonius, 121.
+
+Supernaturalism, 149-51.
+
+Superstition, 75, 90, 102, 123, 126.
+
+Tapuis, 138.
+
+Thales, 24.
+
+Thebais (mediaeval), 136.
+
+Theodicy (Socratic), 67.
+
+Theodoras, 13, 75-76, 108, 109.
+  _On the Gods_, 75.
+
+Theophrastus, 13, 86.
+
+Thermon, 98.
+
+Thomas Aquinas, 131, 135, 138, 139, 140.
+
+Thracians, 18.
+
+Thrasymachus, 50, 62.
+
+Thucydides (the historian), 28-29, 92, 94.
+
+Thucydides (the statesman), 26.
+
+Tiberius, 118.
+
+Tisiphone, 136.
+
+Titans, 18.
+
+Tolerance in antiquity, 9, 11.
+
+Trajan, 11.
+
+Tullia, 116.
+
+Tyche, 91-96, 118.
+
+Typhoeus, 140.
+
+Uranos, 111.
+
+Usener, 152.
+
+Valerius Maximus, 118.
+
+Varro, 100, 110.
+
+Vico (_Scienza Nuova_), 143.
+
+Violation of sanctuaries, 40, 60, 97, 100.
+
+Virgil, 117.
+
+Voss, G. I., 135, 138, 141.
+
+Wisdom of Solomon, 128.
+
+Worship rejected, 9-13, 60, 74, 77, 84, 109, 123, 125.
+
+Xenocrates, 81-82, 105, 113, 129.
+
+Xenophanes of Colophon, 13, 17-21,
+52, 56.
+
+Xenophon, 58, 59, 62, 66, 67.
+  _Memorab._ 58, 60.
+  _Apology_, 58.
+
+Zeller, 76, 79.
+
+Zeno of Elea, 21.
+
+Zeus, 16, 22, 30, 43, 55, 57, 58, 81, 105, 111, 124.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FOOTNOTES
+
+
+    1 This was written before the appearance of Mr. Gruppe's work,
+      _Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte_.
+      Compare _infra_, p. 154.
+
+
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ATHEISM IN PAGAN ANTIQUITY***
+
+
+
+CREDITS
+
+
+March 11, 2009
+
+            Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1
+            Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, J.P.W. Fraser, David
+            King, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+            <http://www.pgdp.net/>.
+
+
+
+A WORD FROM PROJECT GUTENBERG
+
+
+This file should be named 28312.txt or 28312.zip.
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/8/3/1/28312/
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one -- the old editions will be
+renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no one
+owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and
+you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission
+and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the
+General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
+distributing Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works to protect the Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered
+trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you
+receive specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of
+this eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
+for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
+performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given away
+-- you may do practically _anything_ with public domain eBooks.
+Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+
+
+_Please read this before you distribute or use this work._
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
+any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project Gutenberg"),
+you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.
+
+
+General Terms of Use & Redistributing Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works
+
+
+1.A.
+
+
+By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work,
+you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
+terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
+agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this
+agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee
+for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work
+and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may
+obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set
+forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+
+1.B.
+
+
+"Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or
+associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
+bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
+do with most Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works even without complying
+with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are
+a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works if you
+follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+
+1.C.
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" or
+PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
+work is in the public domain in the United States and you are located in
+the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
+distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on
+the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
+course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} mission of
+promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
+keeping the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} name associated with the work. You can
+easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
+same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License when you
+share it without charge with others.
+
+
+1.D.
+
+
+The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you
+can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant
+state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of
+your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
+downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
+derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work.
+The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of
+any work in any country outside the United States.
+
+
+1.E.
+
+
+Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+
+1.E.1.
+
+
+The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access
+to, the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License must appear prominently whenever
+any copy of a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work (any work on which the phrase
+"Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project Gutenberg"
+is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or
+distributed:
+
+
+    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+    almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
+    or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
+    included with this eBook or online at http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+1.E.2.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work is derived from the
+public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with
+permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and
+distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or
+charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you
+must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7
+or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.3.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic work is posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
+with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
+by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
+Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License for all works posted with the permission of the
+copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+
+1.E.4.
+
+
+Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License
+terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
+other work associated with Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}.
+
+
+1.E.5.
+
+
+Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic
+work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying
+the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate
+access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License.
+
+
+1.E.6.
+
+
+You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed,
+marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word
+processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version posted
+on the official Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} web site (http://www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other form.
+Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License as
+specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+
+1.E.7.
+
+
+Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
+copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works unless you comply
+with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.8.
+
+
+You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or
+distributing Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works provided that
+
+    - You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+      the use of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works calculated using the method you
+      already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to
+      the owner of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} trademark, but he has agreed to
+      donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60
+      days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally
+      required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments
+      should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4,
+      "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+      Archive Foundation."
+
+      You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+      you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+      does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} License.
+      You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the
+      works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and
+      all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works.
+
+      You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
+      any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+      electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
+      receipt of the work.
+
+      You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+      distribution of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} works.
+
+
+1.E.9.
+
+
+If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic
+work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this
+agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael Hart, the owner of the
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
+Section 3 below.
+
+
+1.F.
+
+
+1.F.1.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to
+identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works in creating the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} collection. Despite these
+efforts, Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works, and the medium on which they
+may be stored, may contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to,
+incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright
+or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk
+or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot
+be read by your equipment.
+
+
+1.F.2.
+
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -- Except for the "Right of
+Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
+damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE
+NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
+OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
+FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
+WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
+PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY
+OF SUCH DAMAGE.
+
+
+1.F.3.
+
+
+LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND -- If you discover a defect in this
+electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund
+of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to
+the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a
+physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation.
+The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect
+to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the
+work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose
+to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
+lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
+refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+
+1.F.4.
+
+
+Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
+paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+
+1.F.5.
+
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the
+exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
+limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state
+applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make
+the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state
+law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement
+shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+
+1.F.6.
+
+
+INDEMNITY -- You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark
+owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and
+any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
+of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs
+and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from
+any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of
+this or any Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work, (b) alteration, modification, or
+additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} work, and (c) any Defect
+you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.
+
+
+           Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+
+
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
+works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
+obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the
+efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks
+of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
+they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}'s goals and ensuring
+that the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} collection will remain freely available for
+generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} and future generations. To learn more about the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
+can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation web page at
+http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.
+
+
+   Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
+Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
+The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
+Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. Contributions to the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full
+extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr.
+S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North
+1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact information
+can be found at the Foundation's web site and official page at
+http://www.pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+
+
+    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+    Chief Executive and Director
+    gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.
+
+
+  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+                                Foundation
+
+
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread
+public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
+number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
+in machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment
+including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
+particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
+Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
+effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
+requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
+received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
+determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
+not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
+accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
+with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
+statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
+United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods
+and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
+checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please
+visit: http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.
+
+
+      General Information About Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} electronic works.
+
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
+anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}
+eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~} eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
+all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. unless a copyright
+notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance
+with any particular paper edition.
+
+Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook's eBook
+number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII, compressed
+(zipped), HTML and others.
+
+Corrected _editions_ of our eBooks replace the old file and take over the
+old filename and etext number. The replaced older file is renamed.
+_Versions_ based on separate sources are treated as new eBooks receiving
+new filenames and etext numbers.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg{~TRADE MARK SIGN~}, including how
+to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
+how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
+newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+***FINIS***
+
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/28312.zip b/28312.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f97801f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28312.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..04e1274
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #28312 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28312)