diff options
Diffstat (limited to '28312-tei')
| -rw-r--r-- | 28312-tei/28312-tei.tei | 8025 |
1 files changed, 8025 insertions, 0 deletions
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 <http://www.pgdp.net/>. + </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—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 +<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>—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—from +the felling of sacred trees to the profanation of +the Eleusinian Mysteries—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—the trial of Socrates is +the only one of which we know details—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—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 +<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—atheism in our +sense—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—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 <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—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, +<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—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> +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—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—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—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—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> +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—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—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—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 <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—though not consciously its object—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—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 +<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—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> +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—to its honour be it said—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—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, +<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—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> +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—very +rare—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—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—</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>—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—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—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 +<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—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> +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—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> +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—which is of special interest +to us—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—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 +<pb n='066'/><anchor id='Pg066'/> +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 <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi> 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> +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—for on this important point I think we can +confidently rely upon Plato's <hi rend='italic'>Apology</hi>—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—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—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—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 <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—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—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 +<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—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—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—one of +many—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—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—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—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—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—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> +In order to gain a concrete starting-point we +<pb n='090'/><anchor id='Pg090'/> +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> +<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 <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—in contradistinction +to Rome—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—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 +<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—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 <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—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> +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—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—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—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 +<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—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> +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—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—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—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—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—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 +<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—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—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> +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—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—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—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> +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—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> +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—for Lucian +was really witty—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—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 +<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—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> +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> + +<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—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 +<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—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> + +<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—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—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> +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—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> +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> + +<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—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 +<pb n='147'/><anchor id='Pg147'/> +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> +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—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> +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—<hi rend='italic'>i.e.</hi> 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> +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—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> + +<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.—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).—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.—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.—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.—His criticism of Homer and Hesiod: +<hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 11, 12.—Titans and Giants: +<pb n='155'/><anchor id='Pg155'/> +<hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 1. 22.—Criticism of Anthropomorphism: +<hi rend='italic'>ibid.</hi> 14-16.—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.—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.—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.—Pericles a free-thinker: Plut. <hi rend='italic'>Pericl.</hi> 6 and 38; +comp. Decharme, p. 160.—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.—Sophocles: +<hi rend='italic'>Oed. rex.</hi> 498, 863.—Diopeithes: Plut. +<hi rend='italic'>Pericl.</hi> 32 (<hi rend='italic'>Vorsokr.</hi> 46, A +17).—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.—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.—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.—Diogenes an atheist: Aelian, <hi rend='italic'>v.h.</hi> 2, 31.—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.—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.—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).—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.—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.—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—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.—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.—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.—Moschion: <hi rend='italic'>Trag. Fragm.</hi> ed. +Nauck (2nd ed.), p. 813.—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.—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>).—Aristotle: +<hi rend='italic'>Metaph.</hi> A 8, 1074<hi rend='italic'>b</hi>; see text, p. +85.—Polybius: vi. 56; see text pp. 90 and 114.—Plato's +<hi rend='italic'>Gorgias</hi>, p. 482 and foll. +</p> + +<p> +P. <ref target="Pg049">49</ref>.—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>.—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.—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.—<hi rend='italic'>Bellerophon</hi>: fragm. 286. +</p> + +<p> +P. <ref target="Pg054">54</ref>. <q>If the gods——</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).—Aeschylus: +<hi rend='italic'>Agam.</hi> 160.—Aristophanes: <hi rend='italic'>Thesmoph.</hi> +450.—In the <hi rend='italic'>Frogs</hi>, 892, +Euripides prays to the Ether and other abstractions, not to the +gods.—<hi rend='italic'>Clouds</hi>: 1371. +</p> + +<p> +P. <ref target="Pg056">56</ref>. Plato: <hi rend='italic'>Republ.</hi> viii. p. +568a.—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.—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 <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—an ambiguity that is characteristic of Greek +religion.—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.—Cinesias: Decharme, p. 135.—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.—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>.—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.—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.—Teleological view of +nature: Xenoph. <hi rend='italic'>Memor.</hi> i. 4; iv. 3.—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.—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.—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.—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.—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.—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.—Zeller: <hi rend='italic'>Philos. d. Griechen</hi>, ii. 1, p. +925.—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>.—<hi rend='italic'>Timaeus</hi>: +p. 40<hi rend='italic'>d</hi> foll.—<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>.—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>.—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>—<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.—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.—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.—Discussion of worship precluded: +<hi rend='italic'>Top.</hi> A, xi. p. 105<hi rend='italic'>a</hi>, 5.—Aristotle's +Will: <hi rend='italic'>Diog</hi>. Laert. v. 15.—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>—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—<emph>and that they do so is generally taken for granted</emph>—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.—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.—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.—Demosthenes's +dream: <hi rend='italic'>Aeschin.</hi> iii. 77.—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.—Demetrius of Phalerum: +Polyb. xxix. 21.—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.—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 +<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.—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.—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.—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.—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.—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.—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, <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.—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.—Stoic polemic +against atheism: Epictetus, <hi rend='italic'>diss.</hi> ii. 20, 21; comp. Marcus +Aurelius, vi. 44.—Later Cynicism: Zeller, iii. 1, p. 763.—Oenomaus: only +preserved in excerpts by Euseb. <hi rend='italic'>praep. evang.</hi> 5-6 (a separate +edition is wanted).—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.—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.—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.—Euhemerism: Wisdom of Solomon 14.15; Epistle of Aristeas, +135; Sibyll. iii. 547, 554, 723.—Elements and celestial bodies: +Wisdom of Solomon 13; Philo, <hi rend='italic'>de decal.</hi> 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 <hi rend='italic'>Opera</hi>, 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: <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.—Jewish demonology: Bousset, <hi rend='italic'>Religion d. Judentums</hi>, +p. 326 (1st ed.).—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.—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.—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)—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.—Thomas Aquinas: +<hi rend='italic'>Summa theol.</hi> P. ii. 2, Q. 94, art. 4; comp. also Q. 122, art. +2.—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).—<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).—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, <hi rend='italic'>e.g.</hi>, by Veldeke, +<hi rend='italic'>Eneidt</hi>, i. 45, 169.—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.—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.—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.—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.—On the conception of the antique gods in the +earlier Middle Ages, see Gruppe, § 4.—Thomas Aquinas: <hi rend='italic'>Summa +theol.</hi> 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, <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.—On +Bacon, see Gruppe, § 22. Typhoeus-myth: introduct. to <hi rend='italic'>De +sapientia veterum.</hi>—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.—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).—Caelius Rhodiginus: <hi rend='italic'>Lectionum antiq.</hi> +(Leyden, 1516), lib. ii. cap. 12; comp. Gruppe, § 15.—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.—Machiavelli: <hi rend='italic'>Discorsi</hi>, i. 56.—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.—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>).—On the influence exercised by van +Dale and Fontenelle on the succeeding mythologists, see Gruppe, § 34.—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.—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.—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> |