{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_22213/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_22213","id":"gutenberg_22213","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22213","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Ancient","Category: History - Religious","Paganism -- Rome","Religions","Rome -- Religion"],"text":"Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Keith Edkins and\nthe Online Distributed Proofreading Team at\nhttp://www.pgdp.net\n\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's note: A few typographical errors have been corrected: they\nare listed at the end of the text.\n\nSome short Greek renderings in the main text were printed as page\nfootnotes. To avoid confusion with the links to the scholarly notes, these\nhave been moved to parentheses next to the English renderings.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\nThe Oriental Religions in\nRoman Paganism\n\nBy\n\nFranz Cumont\n\nWith an Introductory Essay by\nGrant Showerman\n\nAuthorized Translation\n\nChicago\nThe Open Court Publishing Company\n\nLondon Agents\nKegan Paul, Trench, Truebner & Co.\n\n1911\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nCOPYRIGHT BY\nTHE OPEN COURT PUBLISHING CO.\n1911\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTO MY TEACHER AND FRIEND\n\nCHARLES MICHEL\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{iii}\n\nTABLE OF CONTENTS.\n\nINTRODUCTION.--The Significance of Franz Cumont's Work, By Grant Showerman\n... v\n\nPREFACE ... xv\n\nPREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION ... xxv\n\nI. ROME AND THE ORIENT ... 1\n\nSuperiority of the Orient, 1.--Its Influence on Political Institutions,\n3.--Its Influence on Civil Law, 5.--Its Influence on Science, 6.--Its\nInfluence on Literature and Art, 7.--Its Influence on Industry,\n9.--SOURCES: Destruction of Pagan Rituals, 11.--Mythographers,\n12.--Historians, 13.--Satirists, 13.--Philosophers, 14.--Christian\nPolemicists, 15.--Archeological Documents, 16.\n\nII. WHY THE ORIENTAL RELIGIONS SPREAD ... 20\n\nDifference in the Religions of the Orient and the Occident, 20.--Spread of\nOriental Religions, 22.--Economic Influences, 23.--Theory of Degeneration,\n25.--Conversions are of Individuals, 27.--Appeal of the Oriental Religions\nto the Senses, 28.--Appeal to the Intelligence, 31.--Appeal to the\nConscience, 35.--Inadequacy of the Roman Religion, 35.--Skepticism,\n37.--Imperial Power, 38.--The Purification of Souls, 39.--Hope of\nImmortality, 42.--Conclusion, 43.\n\nIII. ASIA MINOR ... 46\n\nArrival of Cybele at Rome, 46.--Her Religion in Asia Minor, 47.--Religion\nat Rome under the Republic, 51.--Adoption of the Goddess Ma-Bellona,\n53.--Politics of Claudius, 55.--Spring Festival, 56.--Spread of the\nPhrygian Religion in the Provinces, 57.--Causes of Its Success, 58.--Its\nOfficial Recognition, 60.--ARRIVAL OF OTHER CULTS: Men, 61.--Judaism,\n63.--Sabazius, 64.--Anahita, 65.--The Taurobolium, 66.--Philosophy,\n70.--Christianity, 70.--Conclusion, 71.\n\nIV. EGYPT ... 73\n\nFoundation of Serapis Worship, 73.--The Egyptian Religion Hellenized,\n75.--Diffusion in Greece, 79.--Adoption at Rome, 80.--Persecutions,\n82.--Adoption Under Caligula, 84.--Its History, 85.--Its Transformation,\n86.--Uncertainty in Egyptian Theology, 87.--Insufficiency of Its Ethics,\n90.--Power of Its Ritual, 93.--Daily Liturgy, 95.--Festivals, 97.--Doctrine\nof Immortality, 99.--The _Refrigerium_, 101.\n\n{iv} V. SYRIA ... 103\n\nThe Syrian Goddess, 103.--Importation of New Gods by Syrian Slaves,\n105.--Syrian Merchants, 107.--Syrian Soldiers, 112.--Heliogabalus and\nAurelian, 114.--Value of Semitic Paganism, 115.--Animal Worship,\n116.--Baals, 118.--Human Sacrifice, 119.--Transformation of the Sacerdotal\nReligion, 120.--Purity, 121.--Influence of Babylon, 122.--Eschatology,\n125.--THEOLOGY: God is Supreme, 127.--God is Omnipotent, 129.--God is\nEternal and Universal, 130.--Semitic Syncretism, 131.--Solar Henotheism,\n133.\n\nVI. PERSIA ... 135\n\nPersia and Europe, 135.--Influence of the Achemenides, 136.--Influence of\nMazdaism, 138.--Conquests of Rome, 139.--Influence of the Sassanides,\n140.--Origin of the Mysteries of Mithra, 142.--Persians in Asia Minor,\n144.--The Mazdaism of Anatolia, 146.--Its Diffusion in the Occident,\n149.--Its Qualities, 150.--Dualism, 151.--The Ethics of Mithraism,\n155.--The Future Life, 158.--Conclusion, 159.\n\nVII. ASTROLOGY AND MAGIC ... 162\n\nPrestige of Astrology, 162.--Its Introduction in the Occident,\n163.--Astrology Under the Empire, 164.--Polemics Powerless Against\nAstrology, 166.--Astrology a Scientific Religion, 169.--The Primitive Idea\nof Sympathy, 171.--Divinity of the Stars, 172.--Transformation of the Idea\nof God, 174.--New Gods, 175.--Big Years, 176.--Astrological Eschatology,\n177.--Man's Relation to Heaven, 178.--Fatalism, 179.--Efficacy of Prayer,\n180.--Efficacy of Magic, 182.--Treatises on Magic, 182.--Idea of Sympathy,\n183.--Magic a Science, 184.--Magic is Religious, 185.--Ancient Italian\nSorcery, 186.--Egypt and Chaldea, 187.--Theurgy, 188.--Persian Magic,\n189.--Persecutions, 191.--Conclusion, 193.\n\nVIII. THE TRANSFORMATION OF ROMAN PAGANISM ... 196\n\nPaganism Before Constantine, 196.--Religion of Asia Minor, 197.--Religion\nof Egypt and Syria, 198.--Religion of Persia, 199.--Many Pagan Religions,\n200.--Popular Religion and Philosophy, 201.--Christian Polemics,\n202.--Roman Paganism Become Oriental, 204.--Mysteries, 205.--Nature\nWorship, 206.--Supreme God, 207.--Sidereal Worship, 208.--The Ritual Given\na Moral Significance, 209.--The End of the World, 209.--Conclusion, 210.\n\nNOTES ... 213\n\nPreface, 213.--I. Rome and the Orient, 214,--II. Why the Oriental Religions\nSpread, 218.--III. Asia Minor, 223.--IV. Egypt, 228.--V. Syria, 241.--VI.\nPersia, 260.--VII. Astrology and Magic, 270.--VIII. The Transformation of\nPaganism, 281.\n\nINDEX ... 289\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{v}\n\nINTRODUCTION.\n\nTHE SIGNIFICANCE OF FRANZ CUMONT'S WORK.\n\nFranz Cumont, born January 3, 1868, and educated at Ghent, Bonn, Berlin,\nand Paris, resides in Brussels, and has been Professor in the University of\nGhent since 1892. His monumental work, _Textes et monuments figures\nrelatifs aux mysteres de Mithra_, published in 1896 and 1899 in two\nvolumes, was followed in 1902 by the separate publication, under the title\n_Les Mysteres de Mithra_, of the second half of Vol. I, the _Conclusions_\nin which he interpreted the great mass of evidence contained in the\nremainder of the work. The year following, this book appeared in the\ntranslation of Thomas J. McCormack as _The Mysteries of Mithra_, published\nby the Open Court Publishing Company. M. Cumont's other work of prime\ninterest to students of the ancient faiths, _Les religions orientales dans\nle paganisme romain_, appeared in 1906, was revised and issued in a second\nedition in 1909, and is now presented in English in the following pages.\n\nM. Cumont is an ideal contributor to knowledge in his chosen field. As an\ninvestigator, he combines in one person Teutonic thoroughness and Gallic\nintuition. As a writer, his virtues are no less pronounced. Recognition of\nhis mastery of an enormous array of detailed learning followed immediately\non the publication {vi} of _Textes et monuments_, and the present series of\nessays, besides a numerous series of articles and monographs, makes\nmanifest the same painstaking and thorough scholarship; but he is something\nmore than the mere _savant_ who has at command a vast and difficult body of\nknowledge. He is also the literary architect who builds up his material\ninto well-ordered and graceful structure.\n\nAbove all, M. Cumont is an interpreter. In _The Mysteries of Mithra_ he put\ninto circulation, so to speak, the coin of the ideas he had minted in the\npatient and careful study of _Textes et Monuments_; and in the studies of\n_The Oriental Religions_ he is giving to the wider public the\ninterpretation of the larger and more comprehensive body of knowledge of\nwhich his acquaintance with the religion of Mithra is only a part, and\nagainst which as a background it stands. What his book _The Mysteries of\nMithra_ is to his special knowledge of Mithraism, _The Oriental Religions_\nis to his knowledge of the whole field. He is thus an example of the\nhighest type of scholar--the exhaustive searcher after evidence, and the\nsympathetic interpreter who mediates between his subject and the lay\nintellectual life of his time.\n\nAnd yet, admirable as is M. Cumont's presentation in _The Mysteries of\nMithra_ and _The Oriental Religions_, nothing is a greater mistake than to\nsuppose that his popularizations are facile reading. The few specialists in\nancient religions may indeed sail smoothly in the current of his thought;\nbut the very nature of a subject which ramifies so extensively and so\nintricately into the whole of ancient life, concerning itself with\npractically all the manifestations of ancient {vii}\ncivilization--philosophy, religion, astrology, magic, mythology,\nliterature, art, war, commerce, government--will of necessity afford some\nobstacle to readers unfamiliar with the study of religion.\n\nIt is in the hope of lessening somewhat this natural difficulty of\nassimilating M. Cumont's contribution to knowledge, and above all, to life,\nthat these brief words of introduction are undertaken. The presentation in\noutline of the main lines of thought which underlie his conception of the\nimportance of the Oriental religions in universal history may afford the\nuninitiated reader a background against which the author's depiction of the\nvarious cults of the Oriental group will be more easily and clearly seen.\n\nM. Cumont's work, then, transports us in imagination to a time when\nChristianity was still--at least in the eyes of Roman pagans--only one of a\nnumerous array of foreign Eastern religions struggling for recognition in\nthe Roman world, and especially in the city of Rome. To understand the\nconditions under which the new faith finally triumphed, we should first\nrealize the number of these religions, and the apparently chaotic condition\nof paganism when viewed as a system.\n\n\"Let us suppose,\" says M. Cumont, \"that in modern Europe the faithful had\ndeserted the Christian churches to worship Allah or Brahma, to follow the\nprecepts of Confucius or Buddha, or to adopt the maxims of the Shinto; let\nus imagine a great confusion of all the races of the world in which Arabian\nmullahs, Chinese scholars, Japanese bonzes, Tibetan lamas and Hindu pundits\nshould all be preaching fatalism and {viii} predestination,\nancestor-worship and devotion to a deified sovereign, pessimism and\ndeliverance through annihilation--a confusion in which all those priests\nshould erect temples of exotic architecture in our cities and celebrate\ntheir disparate rites therein. Such a dream, which the future may perhaps\nrealize, would offer a pretty accurate picture of the religious chaos in\nwhich the ancient world was struggling before the reign of Constantine.\"\n\nBut it is no less necessary to realize, in the second place, that, had\nthere not been an essential solidarity of all these different faiths, the\ntriumph of Christianity would have been achieved with much less difficulty\nand in much less time. We are not to suppose that religions are long-lived\nand tenacious unless they possess something vital which enables them to\nresist. In his chapter on \"The Transformation of Roman Paganism,\" M. Cumont\nthus accounts for the vitality of the old faiths: \"The mass of religions at\nRome finally became so impregnated by neo-Platonism and Orientalism that\npaganism may be called a single religion with a fairly distinct theology,\nwhose doctrines were somewhat as follows: adoration of the elements,\nespecially the cosmic bodies; the reign of one God, eternal and omnipotent,\nwith messenger attendants; spiritual interpretation of the gross rites yet\nsurviving from primitive times; assurance of eternal felicity to the\nfaithful; belief that the soul was on earth to be proved before its final\nreturn to the universal spirit, of which it was a spark; the existence of\nan abysmal abode for the evil, against whom the faithful must keep up an\nunceasing struggle; the destruction of the universe, {ix} the death of the\nwicked, and the eternal happiness of the good in a reconstructed world.\"[1]\n\nIf this formulation of pagan doctrine surprises those who have been told\nthat paganism was \"a fashion rather than a faith,\" and are accustomed to\nthink of it in terms of Jupiter and Juno, Venus and Mars, and the other\nempty, cold, and formalized deities that have so long filled literature and\nart, it will be because they have failed to take into account that between\nAugustus and Constantine three hundred years elapsed, and are unfamiliar\nwith the very natural fact that during all that long period the character\nof paganism was gradually undergoing change and growth. \"The faith of the\nfriends of Symmachus,\" M. Cumont tells us, \"was much farther removed from\nthe religious ideal of Augustus, although they would never have admitted\nit, than that of their opponents in the senate.\"\n\nTo what was due this change in the content of the pagan ideal, so great\nthat the phraseology in which the ideal is described puts us in mind of\nChristian doctrine itself? First, answers M. Cumont, to neo-Platonism,\nwhich attempted the reconciliation of the antiquated religions with the\nadvanced moral and intellectual ideas of its own time by spiritual\ninterpretation of outgrown cult stories and cult practices. A second and\nmore vital cause, however, wrought to bring about the same result. This was\nthe invasion of the Oriental religions, and the slow working, from the\nadvent of the Great Mother of the Gods in B. C. 204 to the downfall of\npaganism at the end of the fourth {x} century of the Christian era, of the\nleaven of Oriental sentiment. The cults of Asia and Egypt bridged the gap\nbetween the old religions and Christianity, and in such a way as to make\nthe triumph of Christianity an evolution, not a revolution. The Great\nMother and Attis, with self-consecration, enthusiasm, and asceticism; Isis\nand Serapis, with the ideals of communion and purification; Baal, the\nomnipotent dweller in the far-off heavens; Jehovah, the jealous God of the\nHebrews, omniscient and omnipresent; Mithra, deity of the sun, with the\nPersian dualism of good and evil, and with after-death rewards and\npunishments--all these, and more, flowed successively into the channel of\nRoman life and mingled their waters to form the late Roman paganism which\nproved so pertinacious a foe to the Christian religion. The influence that\nunderlay their pretensions was so real that there is some warrant for the\nview of Renan that at one time it was doubtful whether the current as it\nflowed away into the Dark Ages should be Mithraic or Christian.\n\nThe vitalization of the evidence regarding these cults is M. Cumont's great\ncontribution. His perseverance in the accurate collection of material is\nequalled only by his power to see the real nature and effect of the\nreligions of which he writes. Assuming that no religion can succeed merely\nbecause of externals, but must stand on some foundation of moral\nexcellence, he shows how the pagan faiths were able to hold their own, and\neven to contest the ground with Christianity. These religions, he asserts,\ngave greater satisfaction first, to the senses and passions, secondly, to\nthe intelligence, finally, and above all, to the conscience. \"The spread of\nthe Oriental religions\"--again I quote {xi} a summary from _Classical\nPhilology_--\"was due to merit. In contrast to the cold and formal religions\nof Rome, the Oriental faiths, with their hoary traditions and basis of\nscience and culture, their fine ceremonial, the excitement attendant on\ntheir mysteries, their deities with hearts of compassion, their cultivation\nof the social bond, their appeal to conscience and their promises of\npurification and reward in a future life, were personal rather than civic,\nand satisfied the individual soul.... With such a conception of latter-day\npaganism, we may more easily understand its strength and the bitter rivalry\nbetween it and the new faith, as well as the facility with which pagan\nsociety, once its cause was proved hopeless, turned to Christianity.\" The\nOriental religions had made straight the way. Christianity triumphed after\nlong conflict because its antagonists also were not without weapons from\nthe armory of God. Both parties to the struggle had their loins girt about\nwith truth, and both wielded the sword of the spirit; but the steel of the\nChristian was the more piercing, the breastplate of his righteousness was\nthe stronger, and his feet were better shod with the preparation of the\ngospel of peace.\n\nNor did Christianity stop there. It took from its opponents their own\nweapons, and used them; the better elements of paganism were transferred to\nthe new religion. \"As the religious history of the empire is studied more\nclosely,\" writes M. Cumont, \"the triumph of the church will, in our\nopinion, appear more and more as the culmination of a long evolution of\nbeliefs. We can understand the Christianity of the fifth century with its\ngreatness and weaknesses, its spiritual exaltation and its puerile\nsuperstitions, if we {xii} know the moral antecedents of the world in which\nit developed.\"\n\nM. Cumont is therefore a contributor to our appreciation of the continuity\nof history. Christianity was not a sudden and miraculous transformation,\nbut a composite of slow and laborious growth. Its four centuries of\nstruggle were not a struggle against an entirely unworthy religion, else\nwould our faith in its divine warrant be diminished; it is to its own great\ncredit, and also to the credit of the opponents that succumbed to it, that\nit finally overwhelmed them. To quote Emil Aust: \"Christianity did not wake\ninto being the religious sense, but it afforded that sense the fullest\nopportunity of being satisfied; and paganism fell because the less perfect\nmust give place to the more perfect, not because it was sunken in sin and\nvice. It had out of its own strength laid out the ways by which it advanced\nto lose itself in the arms of Christianity, and to recognize this does not\nmean to minimize the significance of Christianity. We are under no\nnecessity of artificially darkening the heathen world; the light of the\nEvangel streams into it brightly enough without this.\"[2]\n\nFinally, the work of M. Cumont and others in the field of the ancient\nOriental religions is not an isolated activity, but part of a larger\nintellectual movement. Their effort is only one manifestation of the\ninterest of recent years in the study of universal religion; other\nmanifestations of the same interest are to be seen in the histories of the\nGreek and Roman religions by {xiii} Gruppe, Farnell, and Wissowa, in the\nanthropological labors of Tylor, Lang, and Frazer, in the publication of\nReinach's _Orpheus_, in the study of comparative religion, and in such a\nphenomenon as a World's Parliament of Religions.\n\nIn a word, M. Cumont and his companion ancient Orientalists are but one\nbrigade engaged in the modern campaign for the liberation of religious\nthought. His studies are therefore not concerned alone with paganism, nor\nalone with the religions of the ancient past; in common with the labors of\nstudents of modern religion, they touch our own faith and our own times,\nand are in vital relation with our philosophy of living, and consequently\nwith our highest welfare. \"To us moderns,\" says Professor Frazer in the\npreface to his _Golden Bough_, \"a still wider vista is vouchsafed, a\ngreater panorama is unrolled by the study which aims at bringing home to us\nthe faith and the practice, the hopes and the ideals, not of two highly\ngifted races only, but of all mankind, and thus at enabling us to follow\nthe long march, the slow and toilsome ascent, of humanity from savagery to\ncivilization.... But the comparative study of the beliefs and institutions\nof mankind is fitted to be much more than a means of satisfying an\nenlightened curiosity and of furnishing materials for the researches of the\nlearned. Well handled, it may become a powerful instrument to expedite\nprogress....\"\n\nIt is possible that all this might disquiet the minds of those who have\nbeen wont to assume perfection in the primitive Christian church, and who\nassume also that present-day Christianity is the ultimate form of the\nChristian religion. Such persons--if there are {xiv} such--should rather\ntake heart from the whole-souled devotion to truth everywhere to be seen in\nthe works of scholars in ancient religion, and from their equally evident\nsympathy with all manifestations of human effort to establish the divine\nrelation; but most of all from their universal testimony that for all time\nand in all places and under all conditions the human heart has felt\npowerfully the need of the divine relation. From the knowledge that the\ndesire to get right with God--the common and essential element in all\nreligions--has been the most universal and the most potent and persistent\nfactor in past history, it is not far to the conviction that it will always\ncontinue to be so, and that the struggle toward the divine light of\nreligion pure and undefiled will never perish from the earth.\n\nGRANT SHOWERMAN.\n\nTHE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nNotes to Introduction.\n\n[1] This summary of M. Cumont's chapter is quoted from my review of the\nfirst edition of _Les religions orientales_ in _Classical Philology_, III,\n4, p. 467.\n\n[2] _Die Religion der Roemer_, p. 116. For the significance of the pagan\nfaiths, see an essay on \"The Ancient Religions in Universal History,\"\n_American Journal of Philology_, XXIX, 2. pp. 156-171.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{xv}\n\nPREFACE.\n\nIn November, 1905, the College de France honored the writer by asking him\nto succeed M. Naville in opening the series of lectures instituted by the\nMichonis foundation. A few months later the \"Hibbert Trust\" invited him to\nOxford to develop certain subjects which he had touched upon at Paris. In\nthis volume have been collected the contents of both series with the\naddition of a short bibliography and notes intended for scholars desirous\nof verifying assertions made in the text.[1] The form of the work has\nscarcely been changed, but we trust that these pages, intended though they\nwere for oral delivery, will bear reading, and that the title of these\nstudies will not seem too ambitious for what they have to offer. The\npropagation of the Oriental religions, with the development of\nneo-Platonism, is the leading fact in the moral history of the pagan\nempire. May this small volume on a great subject throw at least some light\nupon this truth, and may the reader receive these essays with the same kind\ninterest shown by the audiences at Paris and Oxford.\n\nThe reader will please remember that the different chapters were thought\nout and written as lectures. They do not claim to contain a debit and\ncredit account of what the Latin paganism borrowed from or loaned to the\nOrient. Certain well-known facts have been {xvi} deliberately passed over\nin order to make room for others that are perhaps less known. We have taken\nliberties with our subject matter that would not be tolerated in a didactic\ntreatise, but to which surely no one will object.\n\nWe are more likely to be reproached for an apparently serious omission. We\nhave investigated only the internal development of paganism in the Latin\nworld, and have considered its relation to Christianity only incidentally\nand by the way. The question is nevertheless important and has been the\nsubject of celebrated lectures as well as of learned monographs and widely\ndistributed manuals.[2] We wish to slight neither the interest nor the\nimportance of that controversy, and it is not because it seemed negligible\nthat we have not entered into it.\n\nBy reason of their intellectual bent and education the theologians were for\na long time more inclined to consider the continuity of the Jewish\ntradition than the causes that disturbed it; but a reaction has taken\nplace, and to-day they endeavor to show that the church has borrowed\nconsiderably from the conceptions and ritualistic ceremonies of the pagan\nmysteries. In spite of the prestige that surrounded Eleusis, the word\n\"mysteries\" calls up Hellenized Asia rather than Greece proper, because in\nthe first place the earliest Christian communities were founded, formed and\ndeveloped in the heart of Oriental populations, Semites, Phrygians and\nEgyptians. Moreover the religions of those people were much farther\nadvanced, much richer in ideas and sentiments, more striking and stirring\nthan the Greco-Latin anthropomorphism. Their liturgy always derives its\ninspiration from generally accepted beliefs {xvii} about purification\nembodied in certain acts regarded as sanctifying. These facts were almost\nidentical in the various sects. The new faith poured its revelation into\nthe hallowed moulds of earlier religions because in that form alone could\nthe world in which it developed receive its message.\n\nThis is approximately the point of view adopted by the latest historians.\n\nBut, however absorbing this important problem may be, we could not think of\ngoing into it, even briefly, in these studies on Roman paganism. In the\nLatin world the question assumes much more modest proportions, and its\naspect changes completely. Here Christianity spread only after it had\noutgrown the embryonic state and really became established. Moreover like\nChristianity the Oriental mysteries at Rome remained for a long time\nchiefly the religion of a foreign minority. Did any exchange take place\nbetween these rival sects? The silence of the ecclesiastical writers is not\nsufficient reason for denying it. We dislike to acknowledge a debt to our\nadversaries, because it means that we recognize some value in the cause\nthey defend, but I believe that the importance of these exchanges should\nnot be exaggerated. Without a doubt certain ceremonies and holidays of the\nchurch were based on pagan models. In the fourth century Christmas was\nplaced on the 25th of December because on that date was celebrated the\nbirth of the sun (_Natalis Invicti_) who was born to a new life each year\nafter the solstice.[3] Certain vestiges of the religions of Isis and Cybele\nbesides other polytheistic practices perpetuated themselves in the\nadoration of local saints. On the other hand as soon as Christianity became\na moral power in {xviii} the world, it imposed itself even on its enemies.\nThe Phrygian priests of the Great Mother openly opposed their celebration\nof the vernal equinox to the Christian Easter, and attributed to the blood\nshed in the taurobolium the redemptive power of the blood of the divine\nLamb.[4]\n\nAll these facts constitute a series of very delicate problems of chronology\nand interrelation, and it would be rash to attempt to solve them _en bloc_.\nProbably there is a different answer in each particular case, and I am\nafraid that some cases must always remain unsolved. We may speak of\n\"vespers of Isis\" or of a \"eucharist of Mithra and his companions,\" but\nonly in the same sense as when we say \"the vassal princes of the empire\" or\n\"Diocletian's socialism.\" These are tricks of style used to give prominence\nto a similarity and to establish a parallel strongly and closely. A word is\nnot a demonstration, and we must be careful not to infer an influence from\nan analogy. Preconceived notions are always the most serious obstacles to\nan exact knowledge of the past. Some modern writers, like the ancient\nChurch Fathers, are fain to see a sacrilegious parody inspired by the\nspirit of lies in the resemblance between the mysteries and the church\nceremonies. Other historians seem disposed to agree with the Oriental\npriests, who claimed priority for their cults at Rome, and saw a plagiarism\nof their ancient rituals in the Christian ceremonies. It would appear that\nboth are very much mistaken. Resemblance does not necessarily presuppose\nimitation, and frequently a similarity of ideas and practices must be\nexplained by common origin, exclusive of any borrowing. {xix}\n\nAn illustration will make my thought clearer. The votaries of Mithra\nlikened the practice of their religion to military service. When the\nneophyte joined he was compelled to take an oath (_sacramentum_) similar to\nthe one required of recruits in the army, and there is no doubt that an\nindelible mark was likewise branded on his body with a hot iron. The third\ndegree of the mystical hierarchy was that of \"soldier\" (_miles_).\nThenceforward the initiate belonged to the sacred militia of the invincible\ngod and fought the powers of evil under his orders. All these ideas and\ninstitutions are so much in accord with what we know of Mazdean dualism, in\nwhich the entire life was conceived as a struggle against the malevolent\nspirits; they are so inseparable from the history even of Mithraism, which\nalways was a soldiers' religion, that we cannot doubt they belonged to it\nbefore its appearance in the Occident.\n\nOn the other hand, we find similar conceptions in Christianity. The society\nof the faithful--the term is still in use--is the \"Church Militant.\" During\nthe first centuries the comparison of the church with an army was carried\nout even in details;[5] the baptism of the neophyte was the oath of\nfidelity to the flag taken by the recruits. Christ was the \"emperor,\" the\ncommander-in-chief, of his disciples, who formed cohorts triumphing under\nhis command over the demons; the apostates were deserters; the sanctuaries,\ncamps; the pious practices, drills and sentry-duty, and so on.\n\nIf we consider that the gospel preached peace, that for a long time the\nChristians felt a repugnance to military service, where their faith was\nthreatened, we are tempted to admit _a priori_ an influence of the\nbelligerent cult of Mithra upon Christian thought. {xx}\n\nBut this is not the case. The theme of the _militia Christi_ appears in the\noldest ecclesiastical authors, in the epistles of St. Clement and even in\nthose of St. Paul. It is impossible to admit an imitation of the Mithraic\nmysteries then, because at that period they had no importance whatever.\n\nBut if we extend our researches to the history of that notion, we shall\nfind that, at least under the empire, the mystics of Isis were also\nregarded as forming sacred cohorts enlisted in the service of the goddess,\nthat previously in the Stoic philosophy human existence was frequently\nlikened to a campaign, and that even the astrologers called the man who\nsubmitted to destiny and renounced all revolt a \"soldier of fate.\"[6]\n\nThis conception of life, especially of religious life, was therefore very\npopular from the beginning of our era. It was manifestly prior both to\nChristianity and to Mithraism. It developed in the military monarchies of\nthe Asiatic Diadochi. Here the soldier was no longer a citizen defending\nhis country, but in most instances a volunteer bound by a sacred vow to the\nperson of his king. In the martial states that fought for the heritage of\nthe Achemenides this personal devotion dominated or displaced all national\nfeeling. We know the oaths taken by those subjects to their deified\nkings.[7] They agreed to defend and uphold them even at the cost of their\nown lives, and always to have the same friends and the same enemies as\nthey; they dedicated to them not only their actions and words, but their\nvery thoughts. Their duty was a complete abandonment of their personality\nin favor of those monarchs who were held the equals of the gods. The sacred\n_militia_ of the mysteries was nothing but this civic {xxi} morality viewed\nfrom the religious standpoint. It confounded loyalty with piety.\n\nAs we see, the researches into the doctrines or practices common to\nChristianity and the Oriental mysteries lead almost always beyond the\nlimits of the Roman empire into the Hellenistic Orient. The religious\nconceptions which imposed themselves on Latin Europe under the Caesars[8]\nwere developed there, and it is there we must look for the key to enigmas\nstill unsolved. It is true that at present nothing is more obscure than the\nhistory of the religions that arose in Asia when Greek culture came in\ncontact with barbarian theology. It is rarely possible to formulate\nsatisfactory conclusions with any degree of certainty, and before further\ndiscoveries are made we shall frequently be compelled to weigh contrasting\nprobabilities. We must frequently throw out the sounding line into the\nshifting sea of possibility in order to find secure anchorage. But at any\nrate we perceive with sufficient distinctness the direction in which the\ninvestigations must be pursued.\n\nIt is our belief that the main point to be cleared up is the composite\nreligion of those Jewish or Jewish-pagan communities, the worshipers of\nHypsistos, the Sabbatists, the Sabaziasts and others in which the new creed\ntook root during the apostolic age. In those communities the Mosaic law had\nbecome adapted to the sacred usages of the Gentiles even before the\nbeginning of our era, and monotheism had made concessions to idolatry. Many\nbeliefs of the ancient Orient, as for instance the ideas of Persian dualism\nregarding the infernal world, arrived in Europe by two roads, the more or\nless orthodox Judaism of the communities of {xxii} the dispersion in which\nthe gospel was accepted immediately, and the pagan mysteries imported from\nSyria or Asia Minor. Certain similarities that surprised and shocked the\napologists will cease to look strange as soon as we reach the distant\nsources of the channels that reunited at Rome.\n\nBut these delicate and complicated researches into origins and\nrelationships belong especially to the history of the Alexandrian period.\nIn considering the Roman empire, the principal fact is that the Oriental\nreligions propagated doctrines, previous to and later side by side with\nChristianity, that acquired with it universal authority at the decline of\nthe ancient world. The preaching of the Asiatic priests also unwittingly\nprepared for the triumph of the church which put its stamp on the work at\nwhich they had unconsciously labored.\n\nThrough their popular propaganda they had completely disintegrated the\nancient national faith of the Romans, while at the same time the Caesars had\ngradually destroyed the political particularism. After their advent it was\nno longer necessary for religion to be connected with a state in order to\nbecome universal. Religion was no longer regarded as a public duty, but as\na personal obligation; no longer did it subordinate the individual to the\ncity-state, but pretended above all to assure his welfare in this world and\nespecially in the world to come. The Oriental mysteries offered their\nvotaries radiant perspectives of eternal happiness. Thus the focus of\nmorality was changed. The aim became to realize the sovereign good in the\nlife hereafter instead of in this world, as the Greek philosophy had done.\nNo longer did man act in view of tangible {xxiii} realities, but to attain\nideal hopes. Existence in this life was regarded as a preparation for a\nsanctified life, as a trial whose outcome was to be either everlasting\nhappiness or everlasting pain.\n\nAs we see, the entire system of ethical values was overturned.\n\nThe salvation of the soul, which had become the one great human care, was\nespecially promised in these mysteries upon the accurate performance of the\nsacred ceremonies. The rites possessed a power of purification and\nredemption. They made man better and freed him from the dominion of hostile\nspirits. Consequently, religion was a singularly important and absorbing\nmatter, and the liturgy could be performed only by a clergy devoting itself\nentirely to the task. The Asiatic gods exacted undivided service; their\npriests were no longer magistrates, scarcely citizens. They devoted\nthemselves unreservedly to their ministry, and demanded of their adherents\nsubmission to their sacred authority.\n\nAll these features that we are but sketching here, gave the Oriental\nreligions a resemblance to Christianity, and the reader of these studies\nwill find many more points in common among them. These analogies are even\nmore striking to us than they were in those times because we have become\nacquainted in India and China with religions very different from the Roman\npaganism and from Christianity as well, and because the relationships of\nthe two latter strike us more strongly on account of the contrast. These\ntheological similarities did not attract the attention of the ancients,\nbecause they scarcely conceived of the existence of other possibilities,\nwhile differences were what they {xxiv} remarked especially. I am not at\nall forgetting how considerable these were. The principal divergence was\nthat Christianity, by placing God in an ideal sphere beyond the confines of\nthis world, endeavored to rid itself of every attachment to a frequently\nabject polytheism. But even if we oppose tradition, we cannot break with\nthe past that has formed us, nor separate ourselves from the present in\nwhich we live. As the religious history of the empire is studied more\nclosely, the triumph of the church will, in our opinion, appear more and\nmore as the culmination of a long evolution of beliefs. We can understand\nthe Christianity of the fifth century with its greatness and weaknesses,\nits spiritual exaltation and its puerile superstitions, if we know the\nmoral antecedents of the world in which it developed. The faith of the\nfriends of Symmachus was much farther removed from the religious ideal of\nAugustus, although they would never have admitted it, than that of their\nopponents in the senate. I hope that these studies will succeed in showing\nhow the pagan religions from the Orient aided the long continued effort of\nRoman society, contented for many centuries with a rather insipid idolatry,\ntoward more elevated and more profound forms of worship. Possibly their\ncredulous mysticism deserves as much blame as is laid upon the theurgy of\nneo-Platonism, which drew from the same sources of inspiration, but like\nneo-Platonism it has strengthened man's feeling of eminent dignity by\nasserting the divine nature of the soul. By making inner purity the main\nobject of earthly existence, they refined and exalted the psychic life and\ngave it an almost supernatural intensity, which until then was unknown in\nthe ancient world. {xxv}\n\nPREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.\n\nIn this second edition the eight lectures forming the reading matter of\nthis book have suffered scarcely any change, and, excepting the chapter on\nSyria, the additions are insignificant. It would have been an easy matter\nto expand them, but I did not want these lectures to become erudite\ndissertations, nor the ideas which are the essential part of a sketch like\nthe present to be overwhelmed by a multiplicity of facts. In general I have\ntherefore limited myself to weeding out certain errors that were\noverlooked, or introduced, in the proofreading.\n\nThe notes, however, have been radically revised. I have endeavored to give\nexpression to the suggestions or observations communicated to me by\nobliging readers; to mention new publications and to utilize the results of\nmy own studies. The index makes it easy to find the subjects discussed.\n\nAnd here I must again thank my friend Charles Michel, who undertook the\ntedious task of rereading the proofs of this book, and whose scrupulous and\nsagacious care has saved me from many and many a blunder.\n\nF. C.\n\nPARIS, FRANCE, February, 1909.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{1}\n\nROME AND THE ORIENT.\n\nWe are fond of regarding ourselves as the heirs of Rome, and we like to\nthink that the Latin genius, after having absorbed the genius of Greece,\nheld an intellectual and moral supremacy in the ancient world similar to\nthe one Europe now maintains, and that the culture of the peoples that\nlived under the authority of the Caesars was stamped forever by their strong\ntouch. It is difficult to forget the present entirely and to renounce\naristocratic pretensions. We find it hard to believe that the Orient has\nnot always lived, to some extent, in the state of humiliation from which it\nis now slowly emerging, and we are inclined to ascribe to the ancient\ninhabitants of Smyrna, Beirut or Alexandria the faults with which the\nLevantines of to-day are being reproached. The growing influence of the\nOrientals that accompanied the decline of the empire has frequently been\nconsidered a morbid phenomenon and a symptom of the slow decomposition of\nthe ancient world. Even Renan does not seem to have been sufficiently free\nfrom an old prejudice when he wrote on this subject:[1] \"That the oldest\nand most worn out civilization should by its corruption subjugate the\nyounger was inevitable.\"\n\nBut if we calmly consider the real facts, avoiding the optical illusion\nthat makes things in our immediate {2} vicinity look larger, we shall form\na quite different opinion. It is beyond all dispute that Rome found the\npoint of support of its military power in the Occident. The legions from\nthe Danube and the Rhine were always braver, stronger and better\ndisciplined than those from the Euphrates and the Nile. But it is in the\nOrient, especially in these countries of \"old civilization,\" that we must\nlook for industry and riches, for technical ability and artistic\nproductions, as well as for intelligence and science, even before\nConstantine made it the center of political power.\n\nWhile Greece merely vegetated in a state of poverty, humiliation and\nexhaustion; while Italy suffered depopulation and became unable to provide\nfor her own support; while the other countries of Europe were hardly out of\nbarbarism; Asia Minor, Egypt and Syria gathered the rich harvests Roman\npeace made possible. Their industrial centers cultivated and renewed all\nthe traditions that had caused their former celebrity. A more intense\nintellectual life corresponded with the economic activity of these great\nmanufacturing and exporting countries. They excelled in every profession\nexcept that of arms, and even the prejudiced Romans admitted their\nsuperiority. The menace of an Oriental empire haunted the imaginations of\nthe first masters of the world. Such an empire seems to have been the main\nthought of the dictator Caesar, and the triumvir Antony almost realized it.\nEven Nero thought of making Alexandria his capital. Although Rome,\nsupported by her army and the right of might, retained the political\nauthority for a long time, she bowed to the fatal moral ascendency of more\nadvanced peoples. Viewed from this standpoint the history of the empire {3}\nduring the first three centuries may be summarized as a \"peaceful\ninfiltration\" of the Orient into the Occident.[2] This truth has become\nevident since the various aspects of Roman civilization are being studied\nin greater detail; and before broaching the special subject of these\nstudies we wish to review a few phases of the slow metamorphosis of which\nthe propagation of the Oriental religions was one phenomenon.\n\nIn the first place the imitation of the Orient showed itself plainly in\npolitical institutions.[3] To be convinced of this fact it is sufficient to\ncompare the government of the empire in the time of Augustus with what it\nhad become under Diocletian. At the beginning of the imperial regime Rome\nruled the world but did not govern it. She kept the number of her\nfunctionaries down to a minimum, her provinces were mere unorganized\naggregates of cities where she only exercised police power, protectorates\nrather than annexed countries.[4] As long as law and order were maintained\nand her citizens, functionaries and merchants could transact their\nbusiness, Rome was satisfied. She saved herself the trouble of looking\nafter the public service by leaving broad authority to the cities that had\nexisted before her domination, or had been modeled after her. The taxes\nwere levied by syndicates of bankers and the public lands rented out.\nBefore the reforms instituted by Augustus, even the army was not an organic\nand permanent force, but consisted theoretically of troops levied before a\nwar and discharged after victory.\n\nRome's institutions remained those of a city. It was difficult to apply\nthem to the vast territory she attempted to govern with their aid. They\nwere a clumsy {4} apparatus that worked only by sudden starts, a\nrudimentary system that could not and did not last.\n\nWhat do we find three centuries later? A strongly centralized state in\nwhich an absolute ruler, worshiped like a god and surrounded by a large\ncourt, commanded a whole hierarchy of functionaries; cities divested of\ntheir local liberties and ruled by an omnipotent bureaucracy, the old\ncapital herself the first to be dispossessed of her autonomy and subjected\nto prefects. Outside of the cities the monarch, whose private fortune was\nidentical with the state finances, possessed immense domains managed by\nintendants and supporting a population of serf-colonists. The army was\ncomposed largely of foreign mercenaries, professional soldiers whose pay or\nbounty consisted of lands on which they settled. All these features and\nmany others caused the Roman empire to assume the likeness of ancient\nOriental monarchies.\n\nIt would be impossible to admit that like causes produce like results, and\nthen maintain that a similarity is not sufficient proof of an influence in\nhistory. Wherever we can closely follow the successive transformations of a\nparticular institution, we notice the action of the Orient and especially\nof Egypt. When Rome had become a great cosmopolitan metropolis like\nAlexandria, Augustus reorganized it in imitation of the capital of the\nPtolemies. The fiscal reforms of the Caesars like the taxes on sales and\ninheritances, the register of land surveys and the direct collection of\ntaxes, were suggested by the very perfect financial system of the\nLagides,[5] and it can be maintained that their government was the first\nsource from which those of modern Europe were derived, through the medium\n{5} of the Romans. The imperial _saltus_, superintended by a procurator and\ncultivated by metayers reduced to the state of serfs, was an imitation of\nthe ones that the Asiatic potentates formerly cultivated through their\nagents.[6] It would be easy to increase this list of examples. The absolute\nmonarchy, theocratic and bureaucratic at the same time, that was the form\nof government of Egypt, Syria and even Asia Minor during the Alexandrine\nperiod was the ideal on which the deified Caesars gradually fashioned the\nRoman empire.\n\nOne cannot however deny Rome the glory of having elaborated a system of\nprivate law that was logically deduced from clearly formulated principles\nand was destined to become the fundamental law of all civilized\ncommunities. But even in connection with this private law, where the\noriginality of Rome is uncontested and her preeminence absolute, recent\nresearches have shown with how much tenacity the Hellenized Orient\nmaintained its old legal codes, and how much resistance local customs, the\nwoof of the life of nations, offered to unification. In truth, unification\nnever was realized except in theory.[7] More than that, these researches\nhave proved that the fertile principles of that provincial law, which was\nsometimes on a higher moral plane than the Roman law, reacted on the\nprogressive transformation of the old _ius civile_. And how could it be\notherwise? Were not a great number of famous jurists like Ulpian of Tyre\nand Papinian of Hemesa natives of Syria? And did not the law-school of\nBeirut constantly grow in importance after the third century, until during\nthe fifth century it became the most brilliant center of legal education?\nThus Levantines {6} cultivated even the patrimonial field cleared by\nScaevola and Labeo.[8]\n\nIn the austere temple of law the Orient held as yet only a minor position;\neverywhere else its authority was predominant. The practical mind of the\nRomans, which made them excellent lawyers, prevented them from becoming\ngreat scholars. They esteemed pure science but little, having small talent\nfor it, and one notices that it ceased to be earnestly cultivated wherever\ntheir direct domination was established. The great astronomers,\nmathematicians, and physicians, like the originators or defenders of the\ngreat metaphysical systems, were mostly Orientals. Ptolemy and Plotinus\nwere Egyptians, Porphyry and Iamblichus, Syrians, Dioscorides and Galen,\nAsiatics. All branches of learning were affected by the spirit of the\nOrient. The clearest minds accepted the chimeras of astrology and magic.\nPhilosophy claimed more and more to derive its inspiration from the\nfabulous wisdom of Chaldea and Egypt. Tired of seeking truth, reason\nabdicated and hoped to find it in a revelation preserved in the mysteries\nof the barbarians. Greek logic strove to coordinate into an harmonious\nwhole the confused traditions of the Asiatic religions.\n\nLetters, as well as science, were cultivated chiefly by the Orientals.\nAttention has often been called to the fact that those men of letters that\nwere considered the purest representatives of the Greek spirit under the\nempire belonged almost without exception to Asia Minor, Syria or Egypt. The\nrhetorician Dion Chrysostom came from Prusa in Bithynia, the satirist\nLucian from Samosata in Commagene on the borders of the Euphrates. A number\nof other names could be cited. {7} From Tacitus and Suetonius down to\nAmmianus, there was not one author of talent to preserve in Latin the\nmemory of the events that stirred the world of that period, but it was a\nBithynian again, Dion Cassius of Nicea, who, under the Severi, narrated the\nhistory of the Roman people.\n\nIt is a characteristic fact that, besides this literature whose language\nwas Greek, others were born, revived and developed. The Syriac, derived\nfrom the Aramaic which was the international language of earlier Asia,\nbecame again the language of a cultured race with Bardesanes of Edessa. The\nCopts remembered that they had spoken several dialects derived from the\nancient Egyptian and endeavored to revive them. North of the Taurus even\nthe Armenians began to write and polish their barbarian speech. Christian\npreaching, addressed to the people, took hold of the popular idioms and\nroused them from their long lethargy. Along the Nile as well as on the\nplains of Mesopotamia or in the valleys of Anatolia it proclaimed its new\nideas in dialects that had been despised hitherto, and wherever the old\nOrient had not been entirely denationalized by Hellenism, it successfully\nreclaimed its intellectual autonomy.\n\nA revival of native art went hand in hand with this linguistic awakening.\nIn no field of intellect has the illusion mentioned above been so complete\nand lasting as in this one. Until a few years ago the opinion prevailed\nthat an \"imperial\" art had come into existence in the Rome of Augustus and\nthat thence its predominance had slowly spread to the periphery of the\nancient world. If it had undergone some special modifications in Asia these\nwere due to exotic influences, undoubtedly {8} Assyrian or Persian. Not\neven the important discoveries of M. de Voguee in Hauran[9] were sufficient\nto prove the emptiness of a theory that was supported by our lofty\nconviction of European leadership.\n\nTo-day it is fully proven not only that Rome has given nothing or almost\nnothing to the Orientals but also that she has received quite a little from\nthem. Impregnated with Hellenism, Asia produced an astonishing number of\noriginal works of art in the kingdoms of the Diadochs. The old processes,\nthe discovery of which dates back to the Chaldeans, the Hittites or the\nsubjects of the Pharaohs, were first utilized by the conquerors of\nAlexander's empire who conceived a rich variety of new types, and created\nan original style. But if during the three centuries preceding our era,\nsovereign Greece played the part of the demiurge who creates living beings\nout of preexisting matter, during the three following centuries her\nproductive power became exhausted, her faculty of invention weakened, the\nancient local traditions revolted against her empire and with the help of\nChristianity overcame it. Transferred to Byzantium they expanded in a new\nefflorescence and spread over Europe where they paved the way for the\nformation of the Romanesque art of the early Middle Ages.[10]\n\nRome, then, far from having established her suzerainty, was tributary to\nthe Orient in this respect. The Orient was her superior in the extent and\nprecision of its technical knowledge as well as in the inventive genius and\nability of its workmen. The Caesars were great builders but frequently\nemployed foreign help. Trajan's principal architect, a magnificent builder,\nwas a Syrian, Apollodorus of Damascus.[11] {9}\n\nHer Levantine subjects not only taught Italy the artistic solution of\narchitectonic problems like the erection of a cupola on a rectangular or\noctagonal edifice, but also compelled her to accept their taste, and they\nsaturated her with their genius. They imparted to her their love of\nluxuriant decoration, and of violent polychromy, and they gave religious\nsculpture and painting the complicated symbolism that pleased their\nabstruse and subtle minds.\n\nIn those times art was closely connected with industry, which was entirely\nmanual and individual. They learned from each other, they improved and\ndeclined together, in short they were inseparable. Shall we call the\npainters that decorated the architecturally fantastic and airy walls of\nPompeii in Alexandrian or perhaps Syrian taste artisans or artists? And how\nshall we classify the goldsmiths, Alexandrians also, who carved those\ndelicate leaves, those picturesque animals, those harmoniously elegant or\ncunningly animated groups that cover the phials and goblets of Bosco Reale?\nAnd descending from the productions of the industrial arts to those of\nindustry itself, one might also trace the growing influence of the Orient;\none might show how the action of the great manufacturing centers of the\nEast gradually transformed the material civilization of Europe; one might\npoint out how the introduction into Gaul[12] of exotic patterns and\nprocesses changed the old native industry and gave its products a\nperfection and a popularity hitherto unknown. But I dislike to insist\novermuch on a point apparently so foreign to the one now before us. It was\nimportant however to mention this subject at the beginning because in\nwhatever direction scholars of {10} to-day pursue their investigations they\nalways notice Asiatic culture slowly supplanting that of Italy. The latter\ndeveloped only by absorbing elements taken from the inexhaustible reserves\nof the \"old civilizations\" of which we spoke at the beginning. The\nHellenized Orient imposed itself everywhere through its men and its works;\nit subjected its Latin conquerors to its ascendancy in the same manner as\nit dominated its Arabian conquerors later when it became the civilizer of\nIslam. But in no field of thought was its influence, under the empire, so\ndecisive as in religion, because it finally brought about the complete\ndestruction of the Greco-Latin paganism.[13]\n\nThe invasion of the barbarian religions was so open, so noisy and so\ntriumphant that it could not remain unnoticed. It attracted the anxious or\nsympathetic attention of the ancient authors, and since the Renaissance\nmodern scholars have frequently taken interest in it. Possibly however they\ndid not sufficiently understand that this religious evolution was not an\nisolated and extraordinary phenomenon, but that it accompanied and aided a\nmore general evolution, just as that aided it in turn. The transformation\nof beliefs was intimately connected with the establishment of the monarchy\nby divine right, the development of art, the prevailing philosophic\ntendencies, in fact with all the manifestations of thought, sentiment and\ntaste.\n\nWe shall attempt to sketch this religious movement with its numerous and\nfar-reaching ramifications. First we shall try to show what caused the\ndiffusion of the Oriental religions. In the second place we shall examine\nthose in particular that originated in Asia Minor, Egypt, Syria and Persia,\nand we shall endeavor to {11} distinguish their individual characteristics\nand estimate their value. We shall see, finally, how the ancient idolatry\nwas transformed and what form it assumed in its last struggle against\nChristianity, whose victory was furthered by Asiatic mysteries, although\nthey opposed its doctrine.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nBut before broaching this subject a preliminary question must be answered.\nIs the study which we have just outlined possible? What items will be of\nassistance to us in this undertaking? From what sources are we to derive\nour knowledge of the Oriental religions in the Roman empire?\n\nIt must be admitted that the sources are inadequate and have not as yet\nbeen sufficiently investigated.\n\nPerhaps no loss caused by the general wreck of ancient literature has been\nmore disastrous than that of the liturgic books of paganism. A few mystic\nformulas quoted incidentally by pagan or Christian authors and a few\nfragments of hymns in honor of the gods[14] are practically all that\nescaped destruction. In order to obtain an idea of what those lost rituals\nmay have been one must turn to their imitations contained in the chorus of\ntragedies, and to the parodies comic authors sometimes made; or look up in\nbooks of magic the plagiarisms that writers of incantations may have\ncommitted.[15] But all this gives us only a dim reflection of the religious\nceremonies. Shut out from the sanctuary like profane outsiders, we hear\nonly the indistinct echo of the sacred songs and not even in imagination\ncan we attend the celebration of the mysteries.\n\nWe do not know how the ancients prayed, we cannot penetrate into the\nintimacy of their religious life, {12} and certain depths of the soul of\nantiquity we must leave unsounded. If a fortunate windfall could give us\npossession of some sacred book of the later paganism its revelations would\nsurprise the world. We could witness the performance of those mysterious\ndramas whose symbolic acts commemorated the passion of the gods; in company\nwith the believers we could sympathize with their sufferings, lament their\ndeath and share in the joy of their return to life. In those vast\ncollections of archaic rites that hazily perpetuated the memory of\nabolished creeds we would find traditional formulas couched in obsolete\nlanguage that was scarcely understood, naive prayers conceived by the faith\nof the earliest ages, sanctified by the devotion of past centuries, and\nalmost ennobled by the joys and sufferings of past generations. We would\nalso read those hymns in which philosophic thought found expression in\nsumptuous allegories[16] or humbled itself before the omnipotence of the\ninfinite, poems of which only a few stoic effusions celebrating the\ncreative or destructive fire, or expressing a complete surrender to divine\nfate can give us some idea.[17]\n\nBut everything is gone, and thus we lose the possibility of studying from\nthe original documents the internal development of the pagan religions.\n\nWe should feel this loss less keenly if we possessed at least the works of\nGreek and Latin mythographers on the subject of foreign divinities like the\nvoluminous books published during the second century by Eusebius and Pallas\non the Mysteries of Mithra. But those works were thought devoid of interest\nor even dangerous by the devout Middle Ages, and they are not likely to\nhave survived the fall of paganism. The {13} treatises on mythology that\nhave been preserved deal almost entirely with the ancient Hellenic fables\nmade famous by the classic writers, to the neglect of the Oriental\nreligions.[18]\n\nAs a rule, all we find in literature on this subject are a few incidental\nremarks and passing allusions. History is incredibly poor in that respect.\nThis poverty of information was caused in the first place by a narrowness\nof view characteristic of the rhetoric cultivated by historians of the\nclassical period and especially of the empire. Politics and the wars of the\nrulers, the dramas, the intrigues and even the gossip of the courts and of\nthe official world were of much higher interest to them than the great\neconomic or religious transformations. Moreover, there is no period of the\nRoman empire concerning which we are so little informed as the third\ncentury, precisely the one during which the Oriental religions reached the\napogee of their power. From Herodianus and Dion Cassius to the Byzantines,\nand from Suetonius to Ammianus Marcellinus, all narratives of any\nimportance have been lost, and this deplorable blank in historic tradition\nis particularly fatal to the study of paganism.\n\nIt is a strange fact that light literature concerned itself more with these\ngrave questions. The rites of the exotic religions stimulated the\nimagination of the satirists, and the pomp of the festivities furnished the\nnovelists with brilliant descriptive matter. Juvenal laughs at the\nmortifications of the devotees of Isis; in his _Necromancy_ Lucian parodies\nthe interminable purifications of the magi, and in the _Metamorphoses_\nApuleius relates the various scenes of an initiation into the mysteries of\nIsis with the fervor of a neophyte and {14} the studied refinement of a\nrhetorician. But as a rule we find only incidental remarks and superficial\nobservations in the authors. Not even the precious treatise _On the Syrian\nGoddess_, in which Lucian tells of a visit to the temple of Hierapolis and\nrepeats his conversation with the priests, has any depth. What he relates\nis the impression of an intelligent, curious and above all an ironical\ntraveler.[19]\n\nIn order to obtain a more perfect initiation and a less fragmentary insight\ninto the doctrines taught by the Oriental religions, we are compelled to\nturn to two kinds of testimony, inspired by contrary tendencies, but\nequally suspicious: the testimony of the philosophers, and that of the\nfathers of the church. The Stoics and the Platonists frequently took an\ninterest in the religious beliefs of the barbarians, and it is to them that\nwe are indebted for the possession of highly valuable data on this subject.\nPlutarch's treatise _Isis and Osiris_ is a source whose importance is\nappreciated even by Egyptologists, whom it aids in reconstructing the\nlegends of those divinities.[20] But the philosophers very seldom expounded\nforeign doctrines objectively and for their own sake. They embodied them in\ntheir systems as a means of proof or illustration; they surrounded them\nwith personal exegesis or drowned them in transcendental commentaries; in\nshort, they claimed to discover their own ideas in them. It is always\ndifficult and sometimes impossible to distinguish the dogmas from the\nself-confident interpretations which are usually as incorrect as possible.\n\nThe writings of the ecclesiastical authors, although prejudiced, are very\nfertile sources of information, but in perusing them one must guard against\nanother kind {15} of error. By a peculiar irony of fate those\ncontroversialists are to-day in many instances our only aid in reviving the\nidolatry they attempted to destroy. Although the Oriental religions were\nthe most dangerous and most persistent adversaries of Christianity, the\nworks of the Christian writers do not supply as abundant information as one\nmight suppose. The reason for this is that the fathers of the church often\nshow a certain reserve in speaking of idolatry, and affect to recall its\nmonstrosities only in guarded terms. Moreover, as we shall see later\non,[21] the apologists of the fourth century were frequently behind the\ntimes as to the evolution of doctrines, and drawing on literary tradition,\nfrom epicureans and skeptics, they fought especially the beliefs of the\nancient Grecian and Italian religions that had been abolished or were dying\nout, while they neglected the living beliefs of the contemporary world.\n\nSome of these polemicists nevertheless directed their attacks against the\ndivinities of the Orient and their Latin votaries. Either they derived\ntheir information from converts or they had been pagans themselves during\ntheir youth. This was the case with Firmicus Maternus who has written a bad\ntreatise on astrology and finally fought the _Error of the Profane\nReligions_. However, the question always arises as to how much they can\nhave known of the esoteric doctrines and the ritual ceremonies, the secret\nof which was jealously guarded. They boast so loudly of their power to\ndisclose these abominations, that they incur the suspicion that the\ndiscretion of the initiates baffled their curiosity. In addition they were\ntoo ready to believe all the calumnies that were circulated against the\npagan mysteries, {16} calumnies directed against occult sects of all times\nand against the Christians themselves.\n\nIn short, the literary tradition is not very rich and frequently little\nworthy of belief. While it is comparatively considerable for the Egyptian\nreligions because they were received by the Greek world as early as the\nperiod of the Ptolemies, and because letters and science were always\ncultivated at Alexandria, it is even less important for Phrygia, although\nCybele was Hellenized and Latinized very early, and excepting the tract by\nLucian on the goddess of Hierapolis it is almost nothing for the Syrian,\nCappadocian and Persian religions.\n\nThe insufficiency of the data supplied by writers increases the value of\ninformation furnished by epigraphic and archeological documents, whose\nnumber is steadily growing. The inscriptions possess a certainty and\nprecision that is frequently absent in the phrases of the writers. They\nenable one to draw important conclusions as to the dates of propagation and\ndisappearance of the various religions, their extent, the quality and\nsocial rank of their votaries, the sacred hierarchy and sacerdotal\npersonnel, the constitution of the religious communities, the offerings\nmade to the gods, and the ceremonies performed in their honor; in short,\nconclusions as to the secular and profane history of these religions, and\nin a certain measure their ritual. But the conciseness of the lapidary\nstyle and the constant repetition of stereotyped formulas naturally render\nthat kind of text hardly explicit and sometimes enigmatical. There are\ndedications like the _Nama Sebesio_ engraved upon the great Mithra\nbas-relief preserved in the Louvre, that caused a number of {17}\ndissertations to be written without any one explaining it. And besides, in\na general way, epigraphy gives us but little information about the liturgy\nand almost nothing regarding the doctrines.\n\nArcheology must endeavor to fill the enormous blanks left by the written\ntradition; the monuments, especially the artistic ones, have not as yet\nbeen collected with sufficient care nor interpreted with sufficient method.\nBy studying the arrangement of the temples and the religious furniture that\nadorned them, one can at the same time determine part of the liturgic\nceremonies which took place there. On the other hand, the critical\ninterpretation of statuary relics enables us to reconstruct with sufficient\ncorrectness certain sacred legends and to recover part of the theology of\nthe mysteries. Unlike Greek art, the religious art at the close of paganism\ndid not seek, or sought only incidentally, to elevate the soul through the\ncontemplation of an ideal of divine beauty. True to the traditions of the\nancient Orient, it tried to edify and to instruct at the same time.[22] It\ntold the history of the gods and the world in cycles of pictures, or it\nexpressed through symbols the subtle conceptions of theology and even\ncertain doctrines of profane science, like the struggle of the four\nelements; just as during the Middle Ages, so the artist of the empire\ninterpreted the ideas of the clergy, teaching the believers by means of\npictures and rendering the highest religious conceptions intelligible to\nthe humblest minds. But to read this mystic book whose pages are scattered\nin our museums we must laboriously look for its key, and we cannot take for\na guide and exegetist some Vincent de Beauvais of Diocletian's period[23]\nas when looking over the marvelous {18} sculptured encyclopedias in our\nGothic cathedrals. Our position is frequently similar to that of a scholar\nof the year 4000 who would undertake to write the history of the Passion\nfrom the pictures of the fourteen stations, or to study the veneration of\nthe saints from the statues found in the ruins of our churches.\n\nBut, as far as the Oriental religions are concerned, the results of all the\nlaborious investigations now being made in the classical countries can be\nindirectly controlled, and this is a great advantage. To-day we are\ntolerably well acquainted with the old religions of Egypt, Babylonia and\nPersia. We read and translate correctly the hieroglyphics of the Nile, the\ncuneiform tablets of Mesopotamia and the sacred books, Zend or Pahlavi, of\nParseeism. Religious history has profited more by their deciphering than\nthe history of politics or of civilization. In Syria also, the discovery of\nAramaic and Phoenician inscriptions and the excavations made in temples\nhave in a certain measure covered the deficiency of information in the\nBible or in the Greek writers on Semitic paganism. Even Asia Minor, that is\nto say the uplands of Anatolia, is beginning to reveal herself to explorers\nalthough almost all the great sanctuaries, Pessinus, the two Comanas,\nCastabala, are as yet buried underground. We can, therefore, even now form\na fairly exact idea of the beliefs of some of the countries that sent the\nOriental mysteries to Rome. To tell the truth, these researches have not\nbeen pushed far enough to enable us to state precisely what form religion\nhad assumed in those regions at the time they came into contact with Italy,\nand we should be likely to commit very strange errors, if we brought\ntogether practices that may have been {19} separated by thousands of years.\nIt is a task reserved for the future to establish a rigorous chronology in\nthis matter, to determine the ultimate phase that the evolution of creeds\nin all regions of the Levant had reached at the beginning of our era, and\nto connect them without interruption of continuity to the mysteries\npracticed in the Latin world, the secrets of which archeological researches\nare slowly bringing to light.\n\nWe are still far from welding all the links of this long chain firmly\ntogether; the orientalists and the classical philologists cannot, as yet,\nshake hands across the Mediterranean. We raise only one corner of Isis's\nveil, and scarcely guess a part of the revelations that were, even\nformerly, reserved for a pious and chosen few. Nevertheless we have\nreached, on the road of certainty, a summit from which we can overlook the\nfield that our successors will clear. In the course of these lectures I\nshall attempt to give a summary of the essential results achieved by the\nerudition of the nineteenth century and to draw from them a few conclusions\nthat will, possibly, be provisional. The invasion of the Oriental religions\nthat destroyed the ancient religions and national ideals of the Romans also\nradically transformed the society and government of the empire, and in view\nof this fact it would deserve the historian's attention even if it had not\nforeshadowed and prepared the final victory of Christianity.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{20}\n\nWHY THE ORIENTAL RELIGIONS SPREAD.\n\nWhen, during the fourth century, the weakened empire split asunder like an\noverburdened scale whose beam is broken, this political divorce perpetuated\na moral separation that had existed for a long time. The opposition between\nthe Greco-Oriental and the Latin worlds manifests itself especially in\nreligion and in the attitude taken by the central power toward it.\n\nOccidental paganism was almost exclusively Latin under the empire. After\nthe annexation of Spain, Gaul and Brittany, the old Iberian, Celtic and\nother religions were unable to keep up the unequal struggle against the\nmore advanced religion of the conquerors. The marvelous rapidity with which\nthe literature of the civilizing Romans was accepted by the subject peoples\nhas frequently been pointed out. Its influence was felt in the temples as\nwell as in the forum; it transformed the prayers to the gods as well as the\nconversation between men. Besides, it was part of the political program of\nthe Caesars to make the adoption of the Roman divinities general, and the\ngovernment imposed the rules of its sacerdotal law as well as the\nprinciples of its public and civil law upon its new subjects. The municipal\nlaws prescribed the election of pontiffs and augurs in common with the\njudicial duumvirs. In Gaul druidism, with its oral traditions embodied in\n{21} long poems, perished and disappeared less on account of the police\nmeasures directed against it than in consequence of its voluntary\nrelinquishment by the Celts, as soon as they came under the ascendency of\nLatin culture. In Spain it is difficult to find any traces of the\naboriginal religions. Even in Africa, where the Punic religion was far more\ndeveloped, it maintained itself only by assuming an entirely Roman\nappearance. Baal became Saturn and Eshmoun AEsculapius. It is doubtful if\nthere was one temple in all the provinces of Italy and Gaul where, at the\ntime of the disappearance of idolatry, the ceremonies were celebrated\naccording to native rites and in the local idiom. To this exclusive\npredominance of Latin is due the fact that it remained the only liturgic\nlanguage of the Occidental church, which here as in many other cases\nperpetuated a preexisting condition and maintained a unity previously\nestablished. By imposing her speech upon the inhabitants of Ireland and\nGermany, Christian Rome simply continued the work of assimilation in the\nbarbarian provinces subject to her influence that she had begun while\npagan.[1]\n\nIn the Orient, however, the churches that are separate from the Greek\northodoxy use, even to-day, a variety of dialects calling to mind the great\ndiversity of races formerly subject to Rome. In those times twenty\nvarieties of speech translated the religious thought of the peoples joined\nunder the dominion of the Caesars. At the beginning of our era Hellenism had\nnot yet conquered the uplands of Anatolia,[2] nor central Syria, nor the\ndivisions of Egypt. Annexation to the empire might retard and in certain\nregions weaken the power of expansion of Greek civilization, {22} but it\ncould not substitute Latin culture for it[3] except around the camps of the\nlegions guarding the frontier, and in a very few colonies. It especially\nbenefitted the individuality of each region. The native religions retained\nall their prestige and independence. In their ancient sanctuaries that took\nrank with the richest and most famous of the world, a powerful clergy\ncontinued to practise ancestral devotions according to barbarian rites, and\nfrequently in a barbarian tongue. The traditional liturgy, everywhere\nperformed with scrupulous respect, remained Egyptian or Semitic, Phrygian\nor Persian, according to the locality.\n\nNeither pontifical law nor augural science ever obtained credit outside of\nthe Latin world. It is a characteristic fact that the worship of the\ndeified emperors, the only official worship required of every one by the\ngovernment as a proof of loyalty, should have originated of its own accord\nin Asia, received its inspiration from the purest monarchic traditions, and\nrevived in form and spirit the veneration accorded to the Diadochi by their\nsubjects.\n\nNot only were the gods of Egypt and Asia never supplanted like those of\nGaul or Spain, but they soon crossed the seas and gained worshipers in\nevery Latin province. Isis and Serapis, Cybele and Attis, the Syrian Baals,\nSabazius and Mithra were honored by brotherhoods of believers as far as the\nremotest limits of Germany. The Oriental reaction that we perceive from the\nbeginning of our era, in studying the history of art, literature, and\nphilosophy, manifested itself with incomparably greater power in the\nreligious sphere. First, there was a slow infiltration of despised exotic\nreligions, then, toward the end of the first {23} century, the Orontes, the\nNile and the Halys, to use the words of Juvenal, flowed into the Tiber, to\nthe great indignation of the old Romans. Finally, a hundred years later, an\ninflux of Egyptian, Semitic and Persian beliefs and conceptions took place\nthat threatened to submerge all that the Greek and Roman genius had\nlaboriously built up. What called forth and permitted this spiritual\ncommotion, of which the triumph of Christianity was the outcome? Why was\nthe influence of the Orient strongest in the religious field? These\nquestions claim our attention. Like all great phenomena of history, this\nparticular one was determined by a number of influences that concurred in\nproducing it. In the mass of half-known particulars that brought it about,\ncertain factors or leading causes, of which every one has in turn been\nconsidered the most important, may be distinguished.\n\nIf we yielded to the tendency of many excellent minds of to-day and\nregarded history as the resultant of economic and social forces, it would\nbe easy to show their influence in that great religious movement. The\nindustrial and commercial preponderance of the Orient was manifest, for\nthere were situated the principal centers of production and export. The\never increasing traffic with the Levant induced merchants to establish\nthemselves in Italy, in Gaul, in the Danubian countries, in Africa and in\nSpain; in some cities they formed real colonies. The Syrian emigrants were\nespecially numerous. Compliant, quick and diligent, they went wherever they\nexpected profit, and their colonies, scattered as far as the north of Gaul,\nwere centers for the religious propaganda of paganism just as the Jewish\ncommunities of the Diaspora were for Christian {24} preaching. Italy not\nonly bought her grain from Egypt, she imported men also; she ordered slaves\nfrom Phrygia, Cappadocia, Syria and Alexandria to cultivate her depopulated\nfields and perform the domestic duties in her palaces. Who can tell what\ninfluence chambermaids from Antioch or Memphis gained over the minds of\ntheir mistresses? At the same time the necessities of war removed officers\nand men from the Euphrates to the Rhine or to the outskirts of the Sahara,\nand everywhere they remained faithful to the gods of their far-away\ncountry. The requirements of the government transferred functionaries and\ntheir clerks, the latter frequently of servile birth, into the most distant\nprovinces. Finally, the ease of communication, due to the good roads,\nincreased the frequency and extent of travel.\n\nThus the exchange of products, men and ideas necessarily increased, and it\nmight be maintained that theocracy was a necessary consequence of the\nmingling of the races, that the gods of the Orient followed the great\ncommercial and social currents, and that their establishment in the\nOccident was a natural result of the movement that drew the excess\npopulation of the Asiatic cities and rural districts into the less thickly\ninhabited countries.\n\nThese reflections, which could be developed at some length, surely show the\nway in which the Oriental religions spread. It is certain that the\nmerchants acted as missionaries in the seaports and places of commerce, the\nsoldiers on the frontiers and in the capital, the slaves in the city\nhomes,[4] in the rural districts and in public affairs. But while this\nacquaints us with the means and the agents of the diffusion of those\nreligions, {25} it tells us nothing of the reasons for their adoption by\nthe Romans. We perceive the how, but not the why, of their sudden\nexpansion. Especially imperfect is our understanding of the reasons for the\ndifference between the Orient and the Occident pointed out above.\n\nAn example will make my meaning clear. A Celtic divinity, Epona,[5] was\nheld in particular honor as the protectress of horses, as we all know. The\nGallic horsemen worshiped her wherever they were cantoned; her monuments\nhave been found scattered from Scotland to Transylvania. And yet, although\nthis goddess enjoyed the same conditions as, for instance Jupiter\n_Dolichenus_ whom the cohorts of Commagene introduced into Europe, it does\nnot appear that she ever received the homage of many strangers; it does not\nappear, above all, that druidism ever assumed the shape of \"mysteries of\nEpona\" into which Greeks and Romans would have asked to be initiated. It\nwas too deficient in the intrinsic strength of the Oriental religions, to\nmake proselytes.\n\nOther historians and thinkers of to-day prefer to apply the laws of natural\nscience to religious phenomena; and the theories about the variation of\nspecies find an unforeseen application here. It is maintained that the\nimmigration of Orientals, of Syrians in particular, was considerable enough\nto provoke an alteration and rapid deterioration in the robust Italic and\nCeltic races. In addition, a social status contrary to nature, and a bad\npolitical regime effected the destruction of the strongest, the\nextermination of the best and the ascendancy of the worst elements of the\npopulation. This multitude, corrupted by deleterious cross-breeding and\nweakened by bad selection, became unable to {26} oppose the invasion of the\nAsiatic chimeras and aberrations. A lowering of the intellectual level and\nthe disappearance of the critical spirit accompanied the decline of morals\nand the weakening of character. In the evolution of beliefs the triumph of\nthe Orient denoted a regression toward barbarism, a return to the remote\norigins of faith and to the worship of natural forces. This is a brief\noutline of explanations recently proposed and received with some favor.[6]\n\nIt cannot be denied that souls and morals appear to have become coarser\nduring the Roman decline. Society as a whole was deplorably lacking in\nimagination, intellect and taste. It seemed afflicted with a kind of\ncerebral anemia and incurable sterility. The impaired reason accepted the\ncoarsest superstitions, the most extreme asceticism and most extravagant\ntheurgy. It resembled an organism incapable of defending itself against\ncontagion. All this is partly true; but the theories summarized proceed\nfrom an incorrect conception of things; in reality they are based on the\nillusion that Asia, under the empire, was inferior to Europe. While the\ntriumph of the Oriental religions sometimes assumed the appearance of an\nawakening of savagery, these religions in reality represented a more\nadvanced type in the evolution of religious forms than the ancient national\ndevotions. They were less primitive, less simple, and, if I may use the\nexpression, provided with more organs than the old Greco-Roman idolatry. We\nhave indicated this on previous occasions, and hope to bring it out with\nperfect clearness in the course of these studies.\n\nIt is hardly necessary to state that a great religious conquest can be\nexplained only on moral grounds. {27} Whatever part must be ascribed to the\ninstinct of imitation and the contagion of example, in the last analysis we\nare always face to face with a series of individual conversions. The\nmysterious affinity of minds is as much due to reflection as to the\ncontinued and almost unconscious influence of confused aspirations that\nproduce faith. The obscure gestation of a new ideal is accomplished with\npangs of anguish. Violent struggles must have disturbed the souls of the\nmasses when they were torn away from their old ancestral religions, or more\noften from indifference, by those exacting gods who demanded a surrender of\nthe entire person, a _devotion_ in the etymological meaning of the word.\nThe consecration to Isis of the hero of Apuleius was the result of a call,\nof an appeal, by the goddess who wanted the neophyte to enlist in her\nsacred militia.[7]\n\nIf it is true that every conversion involves a psychological crisis, a\ntransformation of the intimate personality of the individual, this is\nespecially true of the propagation of the Oriental religions. Born outside\nof the narrow limits of the Roman city, they grew up frequently in\nhostility to it, and were international, consequently individual. The bond\nthat formerly kept devotion centered upon the city or the tribe, upon the\n_gens_ or the family, was broken. In place of the ancient social groups\ncommunities of initiates came into existence, who considered themselves\nbrothers no matter where they came from.[8] A god, conceived of as being\nuniversal, received every mortal as his child. Whenever these religions had\nany relation to the state they were no longer called upon to support old\nmunicipal or social institutions, but to lend their strength to the {28}\nauthority of a sovereign regarded as the eternal lord of the whole world\njointly with God himself. In the circles of the mystics, Asiatics mingled\nwith Romans, and slaves with high functionaries. The adoption of the same\nfaith made the poor freedman the equal and sometimes the superior, of the\ndecurion and the _clarissimus_. All submitted to the same rules and\nparticipated in the same festivities, in which the distinctions of an\naristocratic society and the differences of blood and country were\nobliterated. The distinctions of race and nationality, of magistrate and\nfather of a family, of patrician and plebeian, of citizen and foreigner,\nwere abolished; all were but men, and in order to recruit members, those\nreligions worked upon man and his character.\n\nIn order to gain the masses and the cream of Roman society (as they did for\na whole century) the barbarian mysteries had to possess a powerful charm,\nthey had to satisfy the deep wants of the human soul, and their strength\nhad to be superior to that of the ancient Greco-Roman religion. To explain\nthe reasons for their victory we must try to reveal the nature of this\nsuperiority--I mean their superiority in the struggle, without assuming\ninnate superiority.\n\nI believe that we can define it by stating that those religions gave\ngreater satisfaction first, to the senses and passions, secondly, to the\nintelligence, finally, and above all, to the conscience.\n\nIn the first place, they appealed more strongly to the senses. This was\ntheir most obvious feature, and it has been pointed out more often than any\nother. Perhaps there never was a religion so cold and prosaic as the Roman.\nBeing subordinated to politics, it sought, {29} above all, to secure the\nprotection of the gods for the state and to avert the effects of their\nmalevolence by the strict execution of appropriate practices. It entered\ninto a contract with the celestial powers from which mutual obligations\narose: sacrifices on one side, favors on the other. The pontiffs, who were\nalso magistrates, regulated the religious practices with the exact\nprecision of jurists;[9] as far as we know the prayers were all couched in\nformulas as dry and verbose as notarial instruments. The liturgy reminds\none of the ancient civil law on account of the minuteness of its\nprescriptions. This religion looked suspiciously at the abandonment of the\nsoul to the ecstasies of devotion. It repressed, by force if necessary, the\nexuberant manifestations of too ardent faith and everything that was not in\nkeeping with the grave dignity befitting the relations of a _civis Romanus_\nwith a god. The Jews had the same scrupulous respect as the Romans for a\nreligious code and formulas of the past, \"but in spite of their dry and\nminute practices, the legalism of the Pharisees stirred the heart more\nstrongly than did Roman formalism.\"[10]\n\nLacking the recognized authority of official creeds, the Oriental religions\nhad to appeal to the passions of the individual in order to make\nproselytes. They attracted men first by the disturbing seductiveness of\ntheir mysteries, where terror and hope were evoked in turns, and charmed\nthem by the pomp of their festivities and the magnificence of their\nprocessions. Men were fascinated by the languishing songs and intoxicating\nmelodies. Above all these religions taught men how to reach that blissful\nstate in which the soul was freed from the tyranny of the body and of\nsuffering, {30} and lost itself in raptures. They led to ecstasy either by\nmeans of nervous tension resulting from continued maceration and fervent\ncontemplation or by more material means like the stimulation of vertiginous\ndances and dizzy music, or even by the absorption of fermented liquors\nafter a long abstinence,[11] as in the case of the priests of the Great\nMother. In mysticism it is easy to descend from the sublime to the vile.\n\nEven the gods, with whom the believers thought they were uniting themselves\nin their mystic outbursts, were more human and sometimes more sensual than\nthose of the Occident. The latter had that quietude of soul in which the\nphilosophic morality of the Greeks saw a privilege of the sage; in the\nserenity of Olympus they enjoyed perpetual youth; they were Immortals. The\ndivinities of the Orient, on the contrary, suffered and died, but only to\nrevive again.[12] Osiris, Attis and Adonis were mourned like mortals by\nwife or mistress, Isis, Cybele or Astarte. With them the mystics moaned for\ntheir deceased god and later, after he had revived, celebrated with\nexultation his birth to a new life. Or else they joined in the passion of\nMithra, condemned to create the world in suffering. This common grief and\njoy were often expressed with savage violence, by bloody mutilations, long\nwails of despair, and extravagant acclamations. The manifestations of the\nextreme fanaticism of those barbarian races that had not been touched by\nGreek skepticism and the very ardor of their faith inflamed the souls of\nthe multitudes attracted by the exotic gods.\n\nThe Oriental religions touched every chord of sensibility and satisfied the\nthirst for religious emotion that the austere Roman creed had been unable\nto quench. {31} But at the same time they satisfied the intellect more\nfully, and this is my second point.\n\nIn very early times Greece--later imitated by Rome--became resolutely\nrationalistic: her greatest originality lies here. Her philosophy was\npurely laical; thought was unrestrained by any sacred tradition; it even\npretended to pass judgment upon these traditions and condemned or approved\nof them. Being sometimes hostile, sometimes indifferent and some times\nconciliatory, it always remained independent of faith. But while Greece\nthus freed herself from the fetters of a superannuated mythology, and\nopenly and boldly constructed those systems of metaphysics by means of\nwhich she claimed to solve the enigmas of the universe, her religion lost\nits vitality and dried up because it lacked the strengthening nourishment\nof reflection. It became a thing devoid of sense, whose _raison d'etre_ was\nno longer understood; it embodied dead ideas and an obsolete conception of\nthe world. In Greece as well as at Rome it was reduced to a collection of\nunintelligible rites, scrupulously and mechanically reproduced without\naddition or omission because they had been practised by the ancestors of\nlong ago, and formulas hallowed by the _mos maiorum_, that were no longer\nunderstood or sincerely cherished. Never did a people of advanced culture\nhave a more infantile religion.\n\nThe Oriental civilizations on the contrary were sacerdotal in character. As\nin medieval Europe, the scholars of Asia and Egypt were priests. In the\ntemples the nature of the gods and of man were not the only subjects of\ndiscussion; mathematics, astronomy, medicine, philology and history were\nalso studied. The successors of Berosus, a priest from Babylonia, and {32}\nManetho, a priest from Heliopolis, were considered deeply versed in all\nintellectual disciplines as late as the time of Strabo.[13]\n\nThis state of affairs proved detrimental to the progress of science.\nResearches were conducted according to preconceived ideas and were\nperverted through strange prejudices. Astrology and magic were the\nmonstrous fruit of a hybrid union. But all this certainly gave religion a\npower it had never possessed either in Greece or Rome.\n\nAll results of observation, all conquests of thought, were used by an\nerudite clergy to attain the principal object of their activities, the\nsolution of the problem of the destiny of man and matter, and of the\nrelations of heaven and earth. An ever enlarging conception of the universe\nkept transforming the modes of belief. Faith presumed to enslave both\nphysics and metaphysics. The credit of every discovery was given to the\ngods. Thoth in Egypt and Bel in Chaldea were the revealers not only of\ntheology and the ritual, but of all human knowledge.[14] The names of the\nOriental Hipparchi and Euclids who solved the first problems of astronomy\nand geometry were unknown; but a confused and grotesque literature made use\nof the name and authority of Hermes Trismegistus. The doctrines of the\nplanetary spheres and the opposition of the four elements were made to\nsupport systems of anthropology and of morality; the theorems of astronomy\nwere used to establish an alleged method of divination; formulas of\nincantation, supposed to subject divine powers to the magician, were\ncombined with chemical experiments and medical prescriptions.\n\nThis intimate union of erudition and faith continued {33} in the Latin\nworld. Theology became more and more a process of deification of the\nprinciples or agents discovered by science and a worship of time regarded\nas the first cause, the stars whose course determined the events of this\nworld, the four elements whose innumerable combinations produced the\nnatural phenomena, and especially the sun which preserved heat, fertility\nand life. The dogmas of the mysteries of Mithra were, to a certain extent,\nthe religious expression of Roman physics and astronomy. In all forms of\npantheism the knowledge of nature appears to be inseparable from that of\nGod.[15] Art itself complied more and more with the tendency to express\nerudite ideas by subtle symbolism, and it represented in allegorical\nfigures the relations of divine powers and cosmic forces, like the sky, the\nearth, the ocean, the planets, the constellations and the winds. The\nsculptors engraved on stone everything man thought and taught. In a general\nway the belief prevailed that redemption and salvation depended on the\nrevelation of certain truths, on a knowledge of the gods, of the world and\nof our person, and piety became gnosis.[16]\n\nBut, you will say, since in the classic age philosophy also claimed to lead\nto morality through instruction and to acquaint man with the supreme good,\nwhy did it yield to Oriental religions that were in reality neither\noriginal nor innovating? Quite right, and if a powerful rationalist school,\npossessed of a good critical method, had led the minds, we may believe that\nit would have checked the invasion of the barbarian mysteries or at least\nlimited their field of action. However, as has frequently been pointed out,\neven in ancient Greece the philosophic critics had very little hold on {34}\npopular religion obstinately faithful to its inherited superstitious forms.\nBut how many second century minds shared Lucian's skepticism in regard to\nthe dogmatic systems! The various sects were fighting each other for ever\nso long without convincing one another of their alleged error. The satirist\nof Samosata enjoyed opposing their exclusive pretensions while he himself\nreclined on the \"soft pillow of doubt.\" But only intelligent minds could\ndelight in doubt or surrender to it; the masses wanted certainties. There\nwas nothing to revive confidence in the power of a decrepit and threadbare\nscience. No great discovery transformed the conception of the universe.\nNature no longer betrayed her secrets, the earth remained unexplored and\nthe past inscrutable. Every branch of knowledge was forgotten. The world\ncursed with sterility, could but repeat itself; it had the poignant\nappreciation of its own decay and impotence. Tired of fruitless researches,\nthe mind surrendered to the necessity of believing. Since the intellect was\nunable to formulate a consistent rule of life faith alone could supply it,\nand the multitudes gravitated toward the temples, where the truths taught\nto man in earlier days by the Oriental gods were revealed. The stanch\nadherence of past generations to beliefs and rites of unlimited antiquity\nseemed to guarantee their truth and efficacy. This current was so strong\nthat philosophy itself was swept toward mysticism and the neo-Platonist\nschool became a theurgy.\n\nThe Oriental mysteries, then, could stir the soul by arousing admiration\nand terror, pity and enthusiasm in turn. They gave the intellect the\nillusion of learned depth and absolute certainty and finally--our third\n{35} point--they satisfied conscience as well as passion and reason. Among\nthe complex causes that guaranteed their domination, this was without doubt\nthe most effective.\n\nIn every period of their history the Romans, unlike the Greeks in this\nrespect, judged theories and institutions especially by their practical\nresults. They always had a soldier's and business man's contempt for\nmetaphysicians. It is a matter of frequent observation that the philosophy\nof the Latin world neglected metaphysical speculations and concentrated its\nattention on morals, just as later the Roman church left to the subtle\nHellenes the interminable controversies over the essence of the divine\nlogos and the double nature of Christ. Questions that could rouse and\ndivide her were those having a direct application to life, like the\ndoctrine of grace.\n\nThe old religion of the Romans had to respond to this demand of their\ngenius. Its poverty was honest.[17] Its mythology did not possess the\npoetic charm of that of Greece, nor did its gods have the imperishable\nbeauty of the Olympians, but they were more moral, or at least pretended to\nbe. A large number were simply personified qualities, like chastity and\npiety. With the aid of the censors they imposed the practice of the\nnational virtues, that is to say of the qualities useful to society,\ntemperance, courage, chastity, obedience to parents and magistrates,\nreverence for the oath and the law, in fact, the practice of every form of\npatriotism. During the last century of the republic the pontiff Scaevola,\none of the foremost men of his time, rejected as futile the divinities of\nfable and poetry, as superfluous or obnoxious those of the philosophers and\nthe exegetists, {36} and reserved all his favors for those of the\nstatesmen, as the only ones fit for the people.[18] These were the ones\nprotecting the old customs, traditions and frequently even the old\nprivileges. But in the perpetual flux of things conservatism ever carries\nwith it a germ of death. Just as the law failed to maintain the integrity\nof ancient principles, like the absolute power of the father of the family,\nprinciples that were no longer in keeping with the social realities, so\nreligion witnessed the foundering of a system of ethics contrary to the\nmoral code that had slowly been established. The idea of collective\nresponsibility contained in a number of beliefs is one instance. If a\nvestal violated her vow of chastity the divinity sent a pest that ceased\nonly on the day the culprit was punished. Sometimes the angry heavens\ngranted victory to the army only on condition that a general or soldier\ndedicate himself to the infernal gods as an expiatory victim. However,\nthrough the influence of the philosophers and the jurists the conviction\nslowly gained ground that each one was responsible for his own misdeeds,\nand that it was not equitable to make a whole city suffer for the crime of\nan individual. People ceased to admit that the gods crushed the good as\nwell as the wicked in one punishment. Often, also, the divine anger was\nthought to be as ridiculous in its manifestations as in its cause. The\nrural superstitions of the country districts of Latium continued to live in\nthe pontifical code of the Roman people. If a lamb with two heads or a colt\nwith five legs was born, solemn supplications were prescribed to avert the\nmisfortunes foreboded by those terrifying prodigies.[19]\n\nAll these puerile and monstrous beliefs that burdened {37} the religion of\nthe Latins had thrown it into disrepute. Its morality no longer responded\nto the new conception of justice beginning to prevail. As a rule Rome\nremedied the poverty of her theology and ritual by taking what she needed\nfrom the Greeks. But here this resource failed her because the poetic,\nartistic and even intellectual religion of the Greeks was hardly moral. And\nthe fables of a mythology jeered at by the philosophers, parodied on the\nstage and put to verse by libertine poets were anything but edifying.\n\nMoreover--this was its second weakness--whatever morality it demanded of a\npious man went unrewarded. People no longer believed that the gods\ncontinually intervened in the affairs of men to reveal hidden crimes and to\npunish triumphant vice, or that Jupiter would hurl his thunderbolt to crush\nthe perjurer. At the time of the proscriptions and the civil wars under\nNero or Commodus it was more than plain that power and possessions were for\nthe strongest, the ablest or even the luckiest, and not for the wisest or\nthe most pious. The idea of reward or punishment beyond the grave found\nlittle credit. The notions of future life were hazy, uncertain, doubtful\nand contradictory. Everybody knows Juvenal's famous lines: \"That there are\nmanes, a subterranean kingdom, a ferryman with a long pole, and black frogs\nin the whirlpools of the Styx; that so many thousand men could cross the\nwaves in a single boat, to-day even children refuse to believe.\"[20]\n\nAfter the fall of the republic indifference spread, the temples were\nabandoned and threatened to tumble into ruins, the clergy found it\ndifficult to recruit members, the festivities, once so popular, fell into\ndesuetude, and {38} Varro, at the beginning of his _Antiquities_, expressed\nhis fear lest \"the gods might perish, not from the blows of foreign\nenemies, but from very neglect on the part of the citizens.\"[21] It is well\nknown that Augustus, prompted by political rather than by religious\nreasons, attempted to revive the dying religion. His religious reforms\nstood in close relation to his moral legislation and the establishment of\nthe imperial dignity. Their tendency was to bring the people back to the\npious practice of ancient virtues but also to chain them to the new\npolitical order. The alliance of throne and altar in Europe dates from that\ntime.\n\nThis attempted reform failed entirely. Making religion an auxiliary to\nmoral policing is not a means of establishing its empire over souls. Formal\nreverence for the official gods is not incompatible with absolute and\npractical skepticism. The restoration attempted by Augustus is nevertheless\nvery characteristic because it is so consistent with the Roman spirit which\nby temperament and tradition demanded that religion should support morality\nand the state.\n\nThe Asiatic religions fulfilled the requirements. The change of regime,\nalthough unwelcome, brought about a change of religion. The increasing\ntendency of Caesarism toward absolute monarchy made it lean more and more\nupon the Oriental clergy. True to the traditions of the Achemenides and the\nPharaohs, those priests preached doctrines tending to elevate the sovereign\nabove humanity, and they supplied the emperors with dogmatic justification\nfor their despotism.[22]\n\nIt is a noteworthy fact that the rulers who most loudly proclaimed their\nautocratic pretentions, like {39} Domitian and Commodus, were also those\nthat favored foreign creeds most openly.\n\nBut his selfish support merely sanctioned a power already established. The\npropaganda of the Oriental religions was originally democratic and\nsometimes even revolutionary like the Isis worship. Step by step they\nadvanced, always reaching higher social classes and appealing to popular\nconscience rather than to the zeal of functionaries.\n\nAs a matter of fact all these religions, except that of Mithra, seem at\nfirst sight to be far less austere than the Roman creed. We shall have\noccasion to note that they contained coarse and immodest fables and\natrocious or vile rites. The Egyptian gods were expelled from Rome by\nAugustus and Tiberius on the charge of being immoral, but they were called\nimmoral principally because they opposed a certain conception of the social\norder. They gave little attention to the public interest but attached\nconsiderable importance to the inner life and consequently to the value of\nthe individual. Two new things, in particular, were brought to Italy by the\nOriental priests: mysterious methods of purification, by which they claimed\nto wash away the impurities of the soul, and the assurance that a blessed\nimmortality would be the reward of piety.[23]\n\nThese religions pretended to restore lost purity[24] to the soul either\nthrough the performance of ritual ceremonies or through mortifications and\npenance. They had a series of ablutions and lustrations supposed to restore\noriginal innocence to the mystic. He had to wash himself in the sacred\nwater according to certain prescribed forms. This was really a magic rite,\nbecause bodily purity acted sympathetically upon the soul, or {40} else it\nwas a real spiritual disinfection with the water driving out the evil\nspirits that had caused pollution. The votary, again, might drink or\nbesprinkle himself with the blood of a slaughtered victim or of the priests\nthemselves, in which case the prevailing idea was that the liquid\ncirculating in the veins was a vivifying principle capable of imparting a\nnew existence.[25] These and similar rites[26] used in the mysteries were\nsupposed to regenerate the initiated person and to restore him to an\nimmaculate and incorruptible life.[27]\n\nPurgation of the soul was not effected solely by liturgic acts but also by\nself-denial and suffering.[28] The meaning of the term _expiatio_ changed.\nExpiation, or atonement, was no longer accomplished by the exact\nperformance of certain ceremonies pleasing to the gods and required by a\nsacred code like a penalty for damages, but by privation and personal\nsuffering. Abstinence, which prevented the introduction of deadly elements\ninto the system, and chastity, which preserved man from pollution and\ndebility, became means of getting rid of the domination of the evil powers\nand of regaining heavenly favor.[29] Macerations, laborious pilgrimages,\npublic confessions, sometimes flagellations and mutilations, in fact all\nforms of penance and mortifications uplifted the fallen man and brought him\nnearer to the gods. In Phrygia a sinner would write his sin and the\npunishment he suffered upon a stela for every one to see and would return\nthanks to heaven that his prayer of repentance had been heard.[30] The\nSyrian, who had offended his goddess by eating her sacred fish, dressed in\nsordid rags, covered himself with a sack and sat in the public highway\nhumbly to proclaim his misdeed in order to obtain forgiveness.[31] {41}\n\"Three times, in the depths of winter,\" says Juvenal, \"the devotee of Isis\nwill dive into the chilly waters of the Tiber, and shivering with cold,\nwill drag herself around the temple upon her bleeding knees; if the goddess\ncommands, she will go to the outskirts of Egypt to take water from the Nile\nand empty it within the sanctuary.\"[32] This shows the introduction into\nEurope of Oriental asceticism.\n\nBut there were impious acts and impure passions that contaminated and\ndefiled the soul. Since this infection could be destroyed only by\nexpiations prescribed by the gods, the extent of the sin and the character\nof the necessary penance had to be estimated. It was the priest's\nprerogative to judge the misdeeds and to impose the penalties. This\ncircumstance gave the clergy a very different character from the one it had\nat Rome. The priest was no longer simply the guardian of sacred traditions,\nthe intermediary between man or the state and the gods, but also a\nspiritual guide. He taught his flock the long series of obligations and\nrestrictions for shielding their weakness from the attacks of evil spirits.\nHe knew how to quiet remorse and scruples, and to restore the sinner to\nspiritual calm. Being versed in sacred knowledge, he had the power of\nreconciling the gods. Frequent sacred repasts maintained a spirit of\nfellowship among the mystics of Cybele, Mithra or the Baals,[33] and a\ndaily service unceasingly revived the faith of the Isis worshipers. In\nconsequence, the clergy were entirely absorbed in their holy office and\nlived only for and by their temples. Unlike the sacerdotal colleges of Rome\nin which the secular and religious functions were not yet clearly\ndifferentiated,[34] they were not an {42} administrative commission ruling\nthe sacred affairs of the state under the supervision of the senate; they\nformed what might almost be called a caste of recluses distinguished from\nordinary men by their insignia, garb, habits and food, and constituting an\nindependent body with a hierarchy, formulary and even councils of their\nown.[35] They did not return to every-day duties as private citizens or to\nthe direction of public affairs as magistrates as the ancient pontiffs had\ndone after the solemn festival service.\n\nWe can readily understand that these beliefs and institutions were bound to\nestablish the Oriental religions and their priests on a strong basis. Their\ninfluence must have been especially powerful at the time of the Caesars. The\nlaxity of morals at the beginning of our era has been exaggerated but it\nwas real. Many unhealthy symptoms told of a profound moral anarchy weighing\non a weakened and irresolute society. The farther we go toward the end of\nthe empire the more its energy seems to fail and the character of men to\nweaken. The number of strong healthy minds incapable of a lasting\naberration and without need of guidance or comfort was growing ever\nsmaller. We note the spread of that feeling of exhaustion and debility\nwhich follows the aberrations of passion, and the same weakness that led to\ncrime impelled men to seek absolution in the formal practices of\nasceticism. They applied to the Oriental priests for spiritual remedies.\n\nPeople flattered themselves that by performing the rites they would attain\na condition of felicity after death. All barbarian mysteries pretended to\nreveal to their adherents the secret of blessed immortality. Participation\nin the occult ceremonies of the sect was a {43} chief means of\nsalvation.[36] The vague and disheartening beliefs of ancient paganism in\nregard to life after death were transformed into the firm hope of a\nwell-defined form of happiness.[37]\n\nThis faith in a personal survival of the soul and even of the body was\nbased upon a strong instinct of human nature, the instinct of\nself-preservation. Social and moral conditions in the empire during its\ndecline gave it greater strength than it had ever possessed before.[38] The\nthird century saw so much suffering, anguish and violence, so much\nunnecessary ruin and so many unpunished crimes, that the Roman world took\nrefuge in the expectation of a better existence in which all the iniquity\nof this world would be retrieved. No earthly hope brightened life. The\ntyranny of a corrupt bureaucracy choked all disposition for political\nprogress. Science stagnated and revealed no more unknown truths. Growing\npoverty discouraged the spirit of enterprise. The idea gained ground that\nhumanity was afflicted with incurable decay, that nature was approaching\nher doom and that the end of world was near.[39] We must remember all these\ncauses of discouragement and despondency to understand the power of the\nidea, expressed so frequently, that the spirit animating man was forced by\nbitter necessity to imprison itself in matter and that it was delivered\nfrom its carnal captivity by death. In the heavy atmosphere of a period of\noppression and impotence the dejected soul longed with incredible ardor to\nfly to the radiant abode of heaven.\n\nTo recapitulate, the Oriental religions acted upon the senses, the\nintellect and the conscience at the same time, and therefore gained a hold\non the entire man. {44} Compared with the ancient creeds, they appear to\nhave offered greater beauty of ritual, greater truth of doctrine and a far\nsuperior morality. The imposing ceremonial of their festivities and the\nalternating pomp and sensuality, gloom and exaltation of their services\nappealed especially to the simple and the humble, while the progressive\nrevelation of ancient wisdom, inherited from the old and distant Orient,\ncaptivated the cultured mind. The emotions excited by these religions and\nthe consolations offered strongly attracted the women, who were the most\nfervent and generous followers and most passionate propagandists[40] of the\nreligions of Isis and Cybele. Mithra was worshiped almost exclusively by\nmen, whom he subjected to a rigid moral discipline. Thus souls were gained\nby the promise of spiritual purification and the prospect of eternal\nhappiness.\n\nThe worship of the Roman gods was a civic duty, the worship of the foreign\ngods the expression of a personal belief. The latter were the objects of\nthe thoughts, feelings and intimate aspirations of the individual, not\nmerely of the traditional and, one might say, functional adoration of the\ncitizen. The ancient municipal devotions were connected with a number of\nearthly interests that helped to support each other. They were one of\nvarious forms of family spirit and patriotism and guaranteed the prosperity\nof the community. The Oriental mysteries, directing the will toward an\nideal goal and exalting the inner spirit, were less mindful of economic\nutility, but they could produce that vibration of the moral being that\ncaused emotions, stronger than any rational faculty, to gush forth from the\ndepths of the soul. Through a sudden illumination {45} they furnished the\nintuition of a spiritual life whose intensity made all material happiness\nappear insipid and contemptible. This stirring appeal of supernatural life\nmade the propaganda irresistible. The same ardent enthusiasm guaranteed at\nthe same time the uncontested domination of neo-Platonism among the\nphilosophers. Antiquity expired and a new era was born.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{46}\n\nASIA MINOR.\n\nThe first Oriental religion adopted by the Romans was that of the goddess\nof Phrygia, whom the people of Pessinus and Mount Ida worshiped, and who\nreceived the name of _Magna Mater deum Idea_ in the Occident. Its history\nin Italy covers six centuries, and we can trace each phase of the\ntransformation that changed it in the course of time from a collection of\nvery primitive nature beliefs into a system of spiritualized mysteries used\nby some as a weapon against Christianity. We shall now endeavor to outline\nthe successive phases of that slow metamorphosis.\n\nThis religion is the only one whose success in the Latin world was caused\noriginally by a mere chance circumstance. In 205 B. C, when Hannibal,\nvanquished but still threatening, made his last stand in the mountains of\nBruttium, repeated torrents of stones frightened the Roman people. When the\nbooks were officially consulted in regard to this prodigy they promised\nthat the enemy would be driven from Italy if the Great Mother of Ida could\nbe brought to Rome. Nobody but the Sibyls themselves had the power of\naverting the evils prophesied by them. They had come to Italy from Asia\nMinor, and in this critical situation their sacred poem recommended the\npractice of their native religion as a remedy. In token of his {47}\nfriendship, King Attalus presented the ambassadors of the senate with the\nblack aerolite, supposed to be the abode of the goddess, that this ruler\nhad shortly before transferred from Pessinus to Pergamum. According to the\nmandate of the oracle the stone was received at Ostia by the best citizen\nof the land, an honor accorded to Scipio Nasica--and carried by the most\nesteemed matrons to the Palatine, where, hailed by the cheers of the\nmultitude and surrounded by fumes of incense, it was solemnly installed\n(Nones of April, 204). This triumphal entry was later glorified by\nmarvelous legends, and the poets told of edifying miracles that had\noccurred during Cybele's voyage. In the same year Scipio transferred the\nseat of war to Africa, and Hannibal, compelled to meet him there, was\nbeaten at Zama. The prediction of the Sybils had come true and Rome was rid\nof the long Punic terror. The foreign goddess was honored in recognition of\nthe service she had rendered. A temple was erected to her on the summit of\nthe Palatine, and every year a celebration enhanced by scenic plays, the\n_ludi Megalenses_, commemorated the date of dedication of the sanctuary and\nthe arrival of the goddess (April 4th-10th).\n\nWhat was this Asiatic religion that had suddenly been transferred into the\nheart of Rome by an extraordinary circumstance? Even then it could look\nback upon a long period of development. It combined beliefs of various\norigin. It contained primitive usages of the religion of Anatolia, some of\nwhich have survived to this day in spite of Christianity and Islam. Like\nthe Kizil-Bash peasants of to-day, the ancient inhabitants of the peninsula\nmet on the summits of mountains covered with woods no ax had desecrated,\nand {48} celebrated their festal days.[1] They believed that Cybele resided\non the high summits of Ida and Berecyntus, and the perennial pines, in\nconjunction with the prolific and early maturing almond tree, were the\nsacred trees of Attis. Besides trees, the country people worshiped stones,\nrocks or meteors that had fallen from the sky like the one taken from\nPessinus to Pergamum and thence to Rome. They also venerated certain\nanimals, especially the most powerful of them all, the lion, who may at one\ntime have been the totem of savage tribes.[2] In mythology as well as in\nart the lion remained the riding or driving animal of the Great Mother.\nTheir conception of the divinity was indistinct and impersonal. A goddess\nof the earth, called Ma or Cybele, was revered as the fecund mother of all\nthings, the \"mistress of the wild beasts\"[3] that inhabit the woods. A god\nAttis, or Papas, was regarded as her husband, but the first place in this\ndivine household belonged to the woman, a reminiscence of the period of\nmatriarchy.[4]\n\nWhen the Phrygians at a very early period came from Thrace and inserted\nthemselves like a wedge in the old Anatolian races, they adopted the vague\ndeities of their new country by identifying them with their own, after the\nhabit of pagan nations. Thus Attis became one with the Dionysus-Sabazius of\nthe conquerors, or at least assumed some of his characteristics. This\nThracian Dionysus was a god of vegetation. Foucart has thus admirably\npictured his savage nature: \"Wooded summits, deep oak and pine forests,\nivy-clad caverns were at all times his favorite haunts. Mortals who were\nanxious to know the powerful divinity ruling these solitudes had to observe\nthe life of his kingdom, {49} and to guess the god's nature from the\nphenomena through which he manifested his power. Seeing the creeks descend\nin noisy foaming cascades, or hearing the roaring of steers in the uplands\nand the strange sounds of the wind-beaten forests, the Thracians thought\nthey heard the voice and the calls of the lord of that empire, and imagined\na god who was fond of extravagant leaps and of wild roaming over the wooded\nmountains. This conception inspired their religion, for the surest way for\nmortals to ingratiate themselves with a divinity was to imitate him, and as\nfar as possible to make their lives resemble his. For this reason the\nThracians endeavored to attain the divine delirium that transported their\nDionysus, and hoped to realize their purpose by following their invisible\nyet ever-present lord in his chase over the mountains.\"[5]\n\nIn the Phrygian religion we find the same beliefs and rites, scarcely\nmodified at all, with the one difference that Attis, the god of vegetation,\nwas united to the goddess of the earth instead of living \"in sullen\nloneliness.\" When the tempest was beating the forests of the Berecyntus or\nIda, it was Cybele traveling about in her car drawn by roaring lions\nmourning her lover's death. A crowd of worshipers followed her through\nwoods and thickets, mingling their shouts with the shrill sound of flutes,\nwith the dull beat of tambourines, with the rattling of castanets and the\ndissonance of brass cymbals. Intoxicated with shouting and with uproar of\nthe instruments, excited by their impetuous advance, breathless and\npanting, they surrendered to the raptures of a sacred enthusiasm. Catullus\nhas left us a dramatic description of this divine ecstasy.[6] {50}\n\nThe religion of Phrygia was perhaps even more violent than that of Thrace.\nThe climate of the Anatolian uplands is one of extremes. Its winters are\nrough, long and cold, the spring rains suddenly develop a vigorous\nvegetation that is scorched by the hot summer sun. The abrupt contrasts of\na nature generous and sterile, radiant and bleak in turn, caused excesses\nof sadness and joy that were unknown in temperate and smiling regions,\nwhere the ground was never buried under snow nor scorched by the sun. The\nPhrygians mourned the long agony and death of the vegetation, but when the\nverdure reappeared in March they surrendered to the excitement of a\ntumultuous joy. In Asia savage rites that had been unknown in Thrace or\npracticed in milder form expressed the vehemence of those opposing\nfeelings. In the midst of their orgies, and after wild dances, some of the\nworshipers voluntarily wounded themselves and, becoming intoxicated with\nthe view of the blood, with which they besprinkled their altars, they\nbelieved they were uniting themselves with their divinity. Or else,\narriving at a paroxysm of frenzy, they sacrificed their virility to the\ngods as certain Russian dissenters still do to-day. These men became\npriests of Cybele and were called Galli. Violent ecstasis was always an\nendemic disease in Phrygia. As late as the Antonines, montanist prophets\nthat arose in that country attempted to introduce it into Christianity.\n\nAll these excessive and degrading demonstrations of an extreme worship must\nnot cause us to slight the power of the feeling that inspired it. The\nsacred ecstasy, the voluntary mutilations and the eagerly sought sufferings\nmanifested an ardent longing for {51} deliverance from subjection to carnal\ninstincts, and a fervent desire to free the soul from the bonds of matter.\nThe ascetic tendencies went so far as to create a kind of begging\nmonachism--the _metragyrtes_. They also harmonized with some of the ideas\nof renunciation taught by Greek philosophy, and at an early period Hellenic\ntheologians took an interest in this devotion that attracted and repelled\nthem at the same time. Timotheus the Eumolpid, who was one of the founders\nof the Alexandrian religion of Serapis, derived the inspiration for his\nessays on religious reform, among other sources, from the ancient Phrygian\nmyths. Those thinkers undoubtedly succeeded in making the priests of\nPessinus themselves admit many speculations quite foreign to the old\nAnatolian nature worship. The votaries of Cybele began at a very remote\nperiod to practise \"mysteries\"[7] in which the initiates were made\nacquainted, by degrees, with a wisdom that was always considered divine,\nbut underwent peculiar variations in the course of time.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nSuch is the religion which the rough Romans of the Punic wars accepted and\nadopted. Hidden under theological and cosmological doctrines it contained\nan ancient stock of very primitive and coarse religious ideas, such as the\nworship of trees, stones and animals. Besides this superstitious fetichism\nit involved ceremonies that were both sensual and ribald, including all the\nwild and mystic rites of the bacchanalia which the public authorities were\nto prohibit a few years later.\n\nWhen the senate became better acquainted with the divinity imposed upon it\nby the Sibyls, it must have been quite embarrassed by the present of King\nAttalus. {52} The enthusiastic transports and the somber fanaticism of the\nPhrygian worship contrasted violently with the calm dignity and respectable\nreserve of the official religion, and excited the minds of the people to a\ndangerous degree. The emasculated Galli were the objects of contempt and\ndisgust and what in their own eyes was a meritorious act was made a crime\npunishable by law, at least under the empire.[8] The authorities hesitated\nbetween the respect due to the powerful goddess that had delivered Rome\nfrom the Carthaginians and the reverence for the _mos maiorum_. They solved\nthe difficulty by completely isolating the new religion in order to prevent\nits contagion. All citizens were forbidden to join the priesthood of the\nforeign goddess or to participate in her sacred orgies. The barbarous rites\naccording to which the Great Mother was to be worshiped were performed by\nPhrygian priests and priestesses. The holidays celebrated in her honor by\nthe entire nation, the _Megalensia_, contained no Oriental feature and were\norganized in conformity with Roman traditions.\n\nA characteristic anecdote told by Diodorus[9] shows what the public feeling\nwas towards this Asiatic worship at the end of the republic. In Pompey's\ntime a high priest from Pessinus came to Rome, presented himself at the\nforum in his sacerdotal garb, a golden diadem and a long embroidered\nrobe--and pretending that the statue of his goddess had been profaned\ndemanded public expiation. But a tribune forbade him to wear the royal\ncrown, and the populace rose against him in a mob and compelled him to seek\nrefuge in his house. Although apologies were made later, this story shows\nhow little the people of that period felt {53} the veneration that attached\nto Cybele and her clergy after a century had passed.\n\nKept closely under control, the Phrygian worship led an obscure existence\nuntil the establishment of the empire. That closed the first period of its\nhistory at Rome. It attracted attention only on certain holidays, when its\npriests marched the streets in procession, dressed in motley costumes,\nloaded with heavy jewelry, and beating tambourines. On those days the\nsenate granted them the right to go from house to house to collect funds\nfor their temples. The remainder of the year they confined themselves to\nthe sacred enclosure of the Palatine, celebrating foreign ceremonies in a\nforeign language. They aroused so little notice during this period that\nalmost nothing is known of their practices or of their creed. It has even\nbeen maintained that Attis was not worshiped together with his companion,\nthe Great Mother, during the times of the republic, but this is undoubtedly\nwrong, because the two persons of this divine couple must have been as\ninseparable in the ritual as they were in the myths.[10]\n\nBut the Phrygian religion kept alive in spite of police surveillance, in\nspite of precautions and prejudices; a breach had been made in the cracked\nwall of the old Roman principles, through which the entire Orient finally\ngained ingress.\n\nDirectly after the fall of the republic a second divinity from Asia Minor,\nclosely related to the Great Mother, became established in the capital.\nDuring the wars against Mithridates the Roman soldiers learned to revere\nMa, the great goddess of the two Comanas, who was worshiped by a whole\npeople of hierodules in the ravines of the Taurus and along the banks of\nthe {54} Iris. Like Cybele she was an ancient Anatolian divinity and\npersonified fertile nature. Her worship, however, had not felt the\ninfluence of Thrace, but rather that of the Semites and the Persians,[11]\nlike the entire religion of Cappadocia. It is certain that she was\nidentical with the Anahita of the Mazdeans, who was of much the same\nnature.\n\nThe rites of her cult were even more sanguinary and savage than those of\nPessinus, and she had assumed or preserved a warlike character that gave\nher a resemblance to the Italian Bellona. The dictator Sulla, to whom this\ninvincible goddess of combats had appeared in a dream, was prompted by his\nsuperstition to introduce her worship into Rome. The terrible ceremonies\nconnected with it produced a deep impression. Clad in black robes, her\n\"fanatics,\" as they were called, would turn round and round to the sound of\ndrums and trumpets, with their long, loose hair streaming, and when vertigo\nseized them and a state of anesthesia was attained, they would strike their\narms and bodies great blows with swords and axes. The view of the running\nblood excited them, and they besprinkled the statue of the goddess and her\nvotaries with it, or even drank it. Finally a prophetic delirium would\novercome them, and they foretold the future.\n\nThis ferocious worship aroused curiosity at first, but it never gained\ngreat consideration. It appears that the Cappadocian Bellona joined the\nnumber of divinities that were subordinated to the _Magna Mater_ and, as\nthe texts put it, became her follower (_pedisequa_).[12] The brief\npopularity enjoyed by this exotic _Ma_ at the beginning of our era shows,\nnevertheless, the growing {55} influence of the Orient, and of the\nreligions of Asia Minor in particular.\n\nAfter the establishment of the empire the apprehensive distrust in which\nthe worship of Cybele and Attis had been held gave way to marked favor and\nthe original restrictions were withdrawn. Thereafter Roman citizens were\nchosen for _archigalli_, and the holidays of the Phrygian deities were\nsolemnly and officially celebrated in Italy with even more pomp than had\nbeen displayed at Pessinus.\n\nAccording to Johannes Lydus, the Emperor Claudius was the author of this\nchange. Doubts have been expressed as to the correctness of the statement\nmade by this second-rate compiler, and it has been claimed that the\ntransformation in question took place under the Antonines. This is\nerroneous. The testimony of inscriptions corroborates that of the Byzantine\nwriter.[13] In spite of his love of archaism, it was Claudius who permitted\nthis innovation to be made, and we believe that we can divine the motives\nof his action.\n\nUnder his predecessor, Caligula, the worship of Isis had been authorized\nafter a long resistance. Its stirring festivities and imposing processions\ngained considerable popularity. This competition must have been disastrous\nto the priests of the _Magna Mater_, who were secluded in their temple on\nthe Palatine, and Caligula's successor could not but grant to the Phrygian\ngoddess, so long established in the city, the favor accorded the Egyptian\ndivinity who had been admitted into Rome but very recently. In this way\nClaudius prevented too great an ascendency in Italy of this second stranger\nand supplied a distributary to the current of popular superstition. Isis\nmust have been held under great {56} suspicion by a ruler who clung to old\nnational institutions.[14]\n\nThe Emperor Claudius introduced a new cycle of holidays that were\ncelebrated from March 15th to March 27th, the beginning of spring at the\ntime of the revival of vegetation, personified in Attis. The various acts\nof this grand mystic drama are tolerably well known. The prelude was a\nprocession of _cannophori_ or reed-bearers on the fifteenth; undoubtedly\nthey commemorated Cybele's discovery of Attis, who, according to the\nlegends, had been exposed while a child on the banks of the Sangarius, the\nlargest river of Phrygia, or else this ceremony may have been the\ntransformation of an ancient phallephory intended to guarantee the\nfertility of the fields.[15] The ceremonies proper began with the equinox.\nA pine was felled and transferred to the temple of the Palatine by a\nbrotherhood that owed to this function its name of \"tree-bearers\"\n(_dendrophori_). Wrapped like a corpse in woolen bands and garlands of\nviolets, this pine represented Attis dead. This god was originally only the\nspirit of the plants, and the honors given to the \"March-tree\"[16] in front\nof the imperial palace perpetuated a very ancient agrarian rite of the\nPhrygian peasants. The next day was a day of sadness and abstinence on\nwhich the believers fasted and mourned the defunct god. The twenty-fourth\nbore the significant name of _Sanguis_ in the calendars. We know that it\nwas the celebration of the funeral of Attis, whose manes were appeased by\nmeans of libations of blood, as was done for any mortal. Mingling their\npiercing cries with the shrill sound of flutes, the Galli flagellated\nthemselves and cut their flesh, and neophytes performed the supreme {57}\nsacrifice with the aid of a sharp stone, being insensible to pain in their\nfrenzy.[17] Then followed a mysterious vigil during which the mystic was\nsupposed to be united as a new Attis with the great goddess.[18] On March\n25th there was a sudden transition from the shouts of despair to a\ndelirious jubilation, the _Hilaria_. With springtime Attis awoke from his\nsleep of death, and the joy created by his resurrection burst out in wild\nmerry-making, wanton masquerades, and luxurious banquets. After twenty-four\nhours of an indispensable rest (_requietio_), the festivities wound up, on\nthe twenty-seventh, with a long and gorgeous procession through the streets\nof Rome and surrounding country districts. Under a constant rain of flowers\nthe silver statue of Cybele was taken to the river Almo and bathed and\npurified according to an ancient rite (_lavatio_).\n\nThe worship of the Mother of the Gods had penetrated into the Hellenic\ncountries long before it was received at Rome, but in Greece it assumed a\npeculiar form and lost most of its barbarous character. The Greek mind felt\nan unconquerable aversion to the dubious nature of Attis. The _Magna\nMater_, who is thoroughly different from her Hellenized sister, penetrated\ninto all Latin provinces and imposed herself upon them with the Roman\nreligion. This was the case in Spain, Brittany, the Danubian countries,\nAfrica and especially in Gaul.[19] As late as the fourth century the car of\nthe goddess drawn by steers was led in great state through the fields and\nvineyards of Autun in order to stimulate their fertility.[20] In the\nprovinces the _dendrophori_, who carried the sacred pine in the spring\nfestivities, formed associations recognized by the state. These\nassociations had charge of the work of our {58} modern fire departments,\nbesides their religious mission. In case of necessity these woodcutters and\ncarpenters, who knew how to fell the divine tree of Attis, were also able\nto cut down the timbers of burning buildings. All over the empire religion\nand the brotherhoods connected with it were under the high supervision of\nthe quindecimvirs of the capital, who gave the priests their insignia. The\nsacerdotal hierarchy and the rights granted to the priesthood and believers\nwere minutely defined in a series of senate decrees. These Phrygian\ndivinities who had achieved full naturalization and had been placed on the\nofficial list of gods, were adopted by the populations of the Occident as\nRoman gods together with the rest. This propagation was clearly different\nfrom that of any other Oriental religion, for here the action of the\ngovernment aided the tendencies that attracted the devout masses to these\nAsiatic divinities.\n\nThis popular zeal was the result of various causes. Ancient authors\ndescribe the impression produced upon the masses by those magnificent\nprocessions in which Cybele passed along on her car, preceded by musicians\nplaying captivating melodies, by priests wearing gorgeous costumes covered\nwith amulets, and by the long line of votaries and members of the\nfraternities, all barefoot and wearing their insignia. All this, however,\ncreated only a fleeting and exterior impression upon the neophyte, but as\nsoon as he entered the temple a deeper sensation took hold of him. He heard\nthe pathetic story of the goddess seeking the body of her lover cut down in\nthe prime of his life like the grass of the fields. He saw the bloody\nfuneral services in which the cruel death of the young man was mourned,\n{59} and heard the joyful hymns of triumph, and the gay songs that greeted\nhis return to life. By a skilfully arranged gradation of feelings the\nonlookers were uplifted to a state of rapturous ecstasy. Feminine devotion\nin particular found encouragement and enjoyment in these ceremonies, and\nthe Great Mother, the fecund and generous goddess, was always especially\nworshiped by the women.\n\nMoreover, people founded great hopes on the pious practice of this\nreligion. Like the Thracians, the Phrygians began very early to believe in\nthe immortality of the soul. Just as Attis died and came to life again\nevery year, these believers were to be born to new life after their death.\nOne of the sacred hymns said: \"Take courage, oh mystics, because the god is\nsaved; and for you also will come salvation from your trials.\"[21] Even the\nfuneral ceremonies were affected by the strength of that belief. In some\ncities, especially at Amphipolis in Macedonia, graves have been found\nadorned with earthenware statuettes representing the shepherd Attis;[22]\nand even in Germany the gravestones are frequently decorated with the\nfigure of a young man in Oriental costume, leaning dejectedly upon a\nknotted stick (_pedum_), who represented the same Attis. We are ignorant of\nthe conception of immortality held by the Oriental disciples of the\nPhrygian priests. Maybe, like the votaries of Sabazius, they believed that\nthe blessed ones were permitted to participate with Hermes Psychopompos in\na great celestial feast, for which they were prepared by the sacred repasts\nof the mysteries.[23] {60}\n\nAnother agent in favor of this imported religion was, as we have stated\nabove, the fact of its official recognition. This placed it in a privileged\nposition among Oriental religions, at least at the beginning of the\nimperial regime. It enjoyed a toleration that was neither precarious nor\nlimited; it was not subjected to arbitrary police measures nor to coercion\non the part of magistrates; its fraternities were not continually\nthreatened with dissolution, nor its priests with expulsion. It was\npublicly authorized and endowed, its holidays were marked in the calendars\nof the pontiffs, its associations of dendrophori were organs of municipal\nlife in Italy and in the provinces, and had a corporate entity.\n\nTherefore it is not surprising that other foreign religions, after being\ntransferred to Rome, sought to avert the dangers of an illicit existence by\nan alliance with the Great Mother. The religion of the latter frequently\nconsented to agreements and compromises, from which it gained in reality as\nmuch as it gave up. In exchange for material advantages it acquired\ncomplete moral authority over the gods that accepted its protection. Thus\nCybele and Attis absorbed a majority of the divinities from Asia Minor that\nhad crossed the Ionian Sea. Their clergy undoubtedly intended to establish\na religion complex enough to enable the emigrants from every part of the\nvast peninsula, slaves, merchants, soldiers, functionaries, scholars, in\nshort, people of all classes of society, to find their national and\nfavorite devotions in it. As a matter of fact no other Anatolian god could\nmaintain his independence side by side with the deities of Pessinus.[24]\n\nWe do not know the internal development of the {61} Phrygian mysteries\nsufficiently to give details of the addition of each individual part. But\nwe can prove that in the course of time certain religions were added to the\none that had been practised in the temple of the Palatine ever since the\nrepublic.\n\nIn the inscriptions of the fourth century, Attis bears the cognomen of\n_menotyrannus_. At that time this name was undoubtedly understood to mean\n\"lord of the months,\" because Attis represented the sun who entered a new\nsign of the zodiac every month.[25] But that was not the original meaning\nof the term. \"_Men tyrannus_\" appears with quite a different meaning in\nmany inscriptions found in Asia Minor. _Tyrannos_ ([Greek: Turannos]),\n\"lord,\" is a word taken by the Greeks from the Lydian, and the honorable\ntitle of \"tyrant\" was given to Men, an old barbarian divinity worshiped by\nall Phrygia and surrounding regions.[26] The Anatolian tribes from Caria to\nthe remotest mountains of Pontus worshiped a lunar god under that name who\nwas supposed to rule not only the heavens but also the underworld, because\nthe moon was frequently brought into connection with the somber kingdom of\nthe dead. The growth of plants and the increase of cattle and poultry were\nascribed to his celestial influence, and the villagers invoked his\nprotection for their farms and their district. They also placed their rural\nburial grounds under the safeguard of this king of shadows. No god enjoyed\ngreater popularity in the country districts.\n\nThis powerful divinity penetrated into Greece at an early period. Among the\nmixed populations of the AEgean seaports, in the Piraeus, at Rhodes, Delos\nand Thasos, religious associations for his worship were {62} founded. In\nAttica the presence of the cult can be traced back to the fourth century,\nand its monuments rival those of Cybele in number and variety. In the Latin\nOccident, however, no trace of it can be found, because it had been\nabsorbed by the worship of _Magna Mater_. In Asia itself, Attis and Men\nwere sometimes considered identical, and this involved the Roman world in a\ncomplete confusion of those two persons, who in reality were very\ndifferent. A marble statue discovered at Ostia represents Attis holding the\nlunar crescent, which was the characteristic emblem of Men. His\nassimilation to the \"tyrant\" of the infernal regions transformed the\nshepherd of Ida into a master of the underworld, an office that he combined\nwith his former one as author of resurrection.\n\nA second title that was given to him reveals another influence. A certain\nRoman inscription is dedicated to Attis the Supreme ([Greek: Attei\nhupsistoi]).[27] This epithet is very significant. In Asia Minor\n\"Hypsistos\" was the appellation used to designate the god of Israel.[28] A\nnumber of pagan thiasi had arisen who, though not exactly submitting to the\npractice of the synagogue, yet worshiped none but the Most High, the\nSupreme God, the Eternal God, God the Creator, to whom every mortal owed\nservice. These must have been the attributes ascribed to Cybele's companion\nby the author of the inscription, because the verse continues: ([Greek: kai\nsunechonti to pan]) \"To thee, who containest and maintainest all\nthings.\"[29] Must we then believe that Hebraic monotheism had some\ninfluence upon the mysteries of the Great Mother? This is not at all\nimprobable. We know that numerous Jewish colonies were established in\nPhrygia by the Seleucides, and that {63} these expatriated Jews agreed to\ncertain compromises in order to conciliate their hereditary faith with that\nof the pagans in whose midst they lived. It is also possible that the\nclergy of Pessinus suffered the ascendancy of the Biblical theology. Under\nthe empire Attis and Cybele became the \"almighty gods\" (_omnipotentes_)\n_par excellence_, and it is easy to see in this new conception a leaning\nupon Semitic or Christian doctrines, more probably upon Semitic ones.[30]\n\nWe shall now take up the difficult question of the influence of Judaism\nupon the mysteries during the Alexandrian period and at the beginning of\nthe empire. Many scholars have endeavored to define the influence exercised\nby the pagan beliefs on those of the Jews; it has been shown how the\nIsraelitic monotheism became Hellenized at Alexandria and how the Jewish\npropaganda attracted proselytes who revered the one God, without, however,\nobserving all the prescriptions of the Mosaic law. But no successful\nresearches have been made to ascertain how far paganism was modified\nthrough an infiltration of Biblical ideas. Such a modification must\nnecessarily have taken place to some extent. A great number of Jewish\ncolonies were scattered everywhere on the Mediterranean, and these were\nlong animated with such an ardent spirit of proselytism that they were\nbound to impose some of their conceptions on the pagans that surrounded\nthem. The magical texts which are almost the only original literary\ndocuments of paganism we possess, clearly reveal this mixture of Israelitic\ntheology with that of other peoples. In them we frequently find names like\nIao (Yahveh), Sabaoth, or the names of angels side by side with those of\nEgyptian or Greek divinities. Especially in Asia {64} Minor, where the\nIsraelites formed a considerable and influential element of the population,\nan intermingling of the old native traditions and the religion of the\nstrangers from the other side of the Taurus must have occurred.\n\nThis mixture certainly took place in the mysteries of Sabazius, the\nPhrygian Jupiter or Dionysus.[31] They were very similar to those of Attis,\nwith whom he was frequently confounded. By means of an audacious etymology\nthat dates back to the Hellenistic period, this old Thraco-Phrygian\ndivinity has been identified with \"Yahveh Zebaoth,\" the Biblical \"Lord of\nHosts.\" The corresponding expression ([Greek: kurios Sabaoth]) in the\nSeptuagint has been regarded as the equivalent of the _kurios Sabazios_\n([Greek: kurios Sabazios]) of the barbarians. The latter was worshiped as\nthe supreme, almighty and holy Lord. In the light of a new interpretation\nthe purifications practised in the mysteries were believed to wipe out the\nhereditary impurity of a guilty ancestor who had aroused the wrath of\nheaven against his posterity, much as the original sin with which Adam's\ndisobedience had stained the human race was to be wiped out. The custom\nobserved by the votaries of Sabazius of dedicating votive hands which made\nthe liturgic sign of benediction with the first three fingers extended (the\n_benedictio latina_ of the church) was probably taken from the ritual of\nthe Semitic temples through the agency of the Jews. The initiates believed,\nagain like the Jews, that after death their good angel (_angelus bonus_)\nwould lead them to the banquet of the eternally happy, and the everlasting\njoys of these banquets were anticipated on earth by the liturgic repasts.\nThis celestial feast can {65} be seen in a fresco painting on the grave of\na priest of Sabazius called Vincentius, who was buried in the Christian\ncatacomb of Praetextatus, a strange fact for which no satisfactory\nexplanation has as yet been furnished. Undoubtedly he belonged to a\nJewish-pagan sect that admitted neophytes of every race to its mystic\nceremonies. In fact, the church itself formed a kind of secret society\nsprung from the synagogue but distinct from it, in which Gentiles and the\nChildren of Israel joined in a common adoration.\n\nIf it is a fact, then, that Judaism influenced the worship of Sabazius, it\nis very probable that it influenced the cult of Cybele also, although in\nthis case the influence cannot be discerned with the same degree of\ncertainty. The religion of the Great Mother did not receive rejuvenating\ngerms from Palestine only, but it was greatly changed after the gods of\nmore distant Persia came and joined it. In the ancient religion of the\nAchemenides, Mithra, the genius of light, was coupled with Anahita, the\ngoddess of the fertilizing waters. In Asia Minor the latter was assimilated\nwith the fecund Great Mother, worshiped all over the peninsula,[32] and\nwhen at the end of the first century of our era the mysteries of Mithra\nspread over the Latin provinces, its votaries built their sacred crypts in\nthe shadow of the temples of the _Magna Mater_.\n\nEverywhere in the empire the two religions lived in intimate communion. By\ningratiating themselves with the Phrygian priests, the priests of Mithra\nobtained the support of an official institution and shared in the\nprotection granted by the state. Moreover, men alone could participate in\nthe secret ceremonies of the Persian liturgy, at least in the Occident.\nOther {66} mysteries, to which women could be admitted, had therefore to be\nadded in order to complete them, and so the mysteries of Cybele received\nthe wives and daughters of the Mithraists.\n\nThis union had even more important consequences for the old religion of\nPessinus than the partial infusion of Judaic beliefs had had. Its theology\ngained a deeper meaning and an elevation hitherto unknown, after it had\nadopted some of the conceptions of Mazdaism.\n\nThe introduction of the taurobolium in the ritual of the _Magna Mater_,\nwhere it appeared after the middle of the first century, was probably\nconnected with this transformation. We know the nature of this sacrifice,\nof which Prudentius gives a stirring description based on personal\nrecollection of the proceeding. On an open platform a steer was killed, and\nthe blood dropped down upon the mystic, who was standing in an excavation\nbelow. \"Through the thousand crevices in the wood,\" says the poet, \"the\nbloody dew runs down into the pit. The neophyte receives the falling drops\non his head, clothes and body. He leans backward to have his cheeks, his\nears, his lips and his nostrils wetted; he pours the liquid over his eyes,\nand does not even spare his palate, for he moistens his tongue with blood\nand drinks it eagerly.\"[33] After submitting to this repulsive sprinkling\nhe offered himself to the veneration of the crowd. They believed that he\nwas purified of his faults, and had become the equal of the deity through\nhis red baptism.\n\nAlthough the origin of this sacrifice that took place in the mysteries of\nCybele at Rome is as yet shrouded in obscurity, recent discoveries enable\nus to trace back {67} very closely the various phases of its development.\nIn accordance with a custom prevalent in the entire Orient at the beginning\nof history, the Anatolian lords were fond of pursuing and lassoing wild\nbuffalos, which they afterwards sacrificed to the gods. Beasts caught\nduring a hunt were immolated, and frequently also prisoners of war.\nGradually the savagery of this primitive rite was modified until finally\nnothing but a circus play was left. During the Alexandrian period people\nwere satisfied with organizing a _corrida_ in the arena, in the course of\nwhich the victim intended for immolation was seized. This is the proper\nmeaning of the terms taurobolium and criobolium ([Greek: taurobolion,\nkriobolion.]), which had long been enigmas,[34] and which denoted the act\nof catching a steer or a ram by means of a hurled weapon, probably the\nthong of a lasso. Without doubt even this act was finally reduced to a mere\nsham under the Roman empire, but the weapon with which the animal was slain\nalways remained a hunting weapon, a sacred boar spear.[35]\n\nThe ideas on which the immolation was based were originally just as\nbarbarous as the sacrifice itself. It is a matter of general belief among\nsavage peoples that one acquires the qualities of an enemy slain in battle\nor of a beast killed in the chase by drinking or washing in the blood, or\nby eating some of the viscera of the body. The blood especially has often\nbeen considered as the seat of vital energy. By moistening his body with\nthe blood of the slaughtered steer, the neophyte believed that he was\ntransfusing the strength of the formidable beast into his own limbs.\n\nThis naive and purely material conception was soon {68} modified and\nrefined. The Thracians brought into Phrygia, and the Persian magi into\nCappadocia, the fast spreading belief in the immortality of mankind. Under\ntheir influence, especially under that of Mazdaism, which made the mythical\nsteer the author of creation and of resurrection, the old savage practice\nassumed a more spiritual and more elevated meaning. By complying with it,\npeople no longer thought they were acquiring the buffalo's strength; the\nblood, as the principle of life, was no longer supposed to renew physical\nenergy, but to cause a temporary or even an eternal rebirth of the soul.\nThe descent into the pit was regarded as burial, a melancholy dirge\naccompanied the burial of the old man who had died. When he emerged\npurified of all his crimes by the sprinkling of blood and raised to a new\nlife, he was regarded as the equal of a god, and the crowd worshiped him\nfrom a respectful distance.[36]\n\nThe vogue obtained in the Roman empire by the practice of this repugnant\nrite can only be explained by the extraordinary power ascribed to it. He\nwho submitted to it was _in aeternum renatus_,[37] according to the\ninscriptions.\n\nWe could also outline the transformation of other Phrygian ceremonies, of\nwhich the spirit and sometimes the letter slowly changed under the\ninfluence of more advanced moral ideas. This is true of the sacred feasts\nattended by the initiates. One of the few liturgic formulas antiquity has\nleft us refers to these Phrygian banquets. One hymn says: \"I have eaten\nfrom the tambourine, I have drunk from the cymbal, I have become a mystic\nof Attis.\" The banquet, which is found in several Oriental religions, was\nsometimes simply the {69} external sign indicating that the votaries of the\nsame divinity formed one large family. Admitted to the sacred table, the\nneophyte was received as the guest of the community and became a brother\namong brothers. The religious bond of the thiasus or _sodalicium_ took the\nplace of the natural relationship of the family, the gens or the clan, just\nas the foreign religion replaced the worship of the domestic hearth.\n\nSometimes other effects were expected of the food eaten in common. When the\nflesh of some animal supposed to be of a divine nature was eaten, the\nvotary believed that he became identified with the god and that he shared\nin his substance and qualities. In the beginning the Phrygian priests\nprobably attributed the first of these two meanings to their barbarous\ncommunions.[38] Towards the end of the empire, moral ideas were\nparticularly connected with the assimilation of sacred liquor and meats\ntaken from the tambourine and cymbal of Attis. They became the staff of the\nspiritual life and were to sustain the votary in his trials; at that period\nhe considered the gods as especially \"the guardians of his soul and\nthoughts.\"[39]\n\nAs we see, every modification of the conception of the world and of man in\nthe society of the empire had its reflection in the doctrine of the\nmysteries. Even the conception of the old deities of Pessinus was\nconstantly changing. When astrology and the Semitic religions caused the\nestablishment of a solar henotheism as the leading religion at Rome, Attis\nwas considered as the sun, \"the shepherd of the twinkling stars.\" He was\nidentified with Adonis, Bacchus, Pan, Osiris and Mithra; he was made a\n\"polymorphous\"[40] being in which all celestial powers manifested {70}\nthemselves in turn; a _pantheos_ who wore the crown of rays and the lunar\ncrescent at the same time, and whose various emblems expressed an infinite\nmultiplicity of functions.\n\nWhen neo-Platonism was triumphing, the Phrygian fable became the\ntraditional mould into which subtle exegetists boldly poured their\nphilosophic speculations on the creative and stimulating forces that were\nthe principles of all material forms, and on the deliverance of the divine\nsoul that was submerged in the corruption of this earthly world. In his\nhazy oration on the Mother of the Gods, Julian lost all notion of reality\non account of his excessive use of allegory and was swept away by an\nextravagant symbolism.[41]\n\nAny religion as susceptible to outside influences as this one was bound to\nyield to the ascendancy of Christianity. From the explicit testimony of\necclesiastical writers we know that attempts were made to oppose the\nPhrygian mysteries to those of the church. It was maintained that the\nsanguinary purification imparted by the taurobolium was more efficacious\nthan baptism. The food that was taken during the mystic feasts was likened\nto the bread and wine of the communion; the Mother of the Gods was\nundoubtedly placed above the Mother of God, whose son also had risen again.\nA Christian author, writing at Rome about the year 375, furnishes some\nremarkable information on this subject. As we have seen, a mournful\nceremony was celebrated on March 24th, the _dies sanguinis_ in the course\nof which the _galli_ shed their blood and sometimes mutilated themselves in\ncommemoration of the wound that had caused Attis's death, ascribing an\nexpiatory and atoning power to the blood thus shed. The pagans {71} claimed\nthat the church had copied their most sacred rites by placing her Holy Week\nat the vernal equinox in commemoration of the sacrifice of the cross on\nwhich the divine Lamb, according to the church, had redeemed the human\nrace. Indignant at these blasphemous pretensions, St. Augustine tells of\nhaving known a priest of Cybele who kept saying: _Et ipse Pileatus\nchristianus est_--\"and even the god with the Phrygian cap [i. e., Attis] is\na Christian.\"[42]\n\nBut all efforts to maintain a barbarian religion stricken with moral\ndecadence were in vain. On the very spot on which the last taurobolia took\nplace at the end of the fourth century, in the _Phrygianum_, stands to-day\nthe basilica of the Vatican.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThere is no Oriental religion whose progressive evolution we could follow\nat Rome so closely as the cult of Cybele and Attis, none that shows so\nplainly one of the reasons that caused their common decay and\ndisappearance. They all dated back to a remote period of barbarism, and\nfrom that savage past they inherited a number of myths the odium of which\ncould be masked but not eradicated by philosophical symbolism, and\npractices whose fundamental coarseness had survived from a period of rude\nnature worship, and could never be completely disguised by means of mystic\ninterpretations. Never was the lack of harmony greater between the\nmoralizing tendencies of theologians and the cruel shamelessness of\ntradition. A god held up as the august lord of the universe was the pitiful\nand abject hero of an obscene love affair; the taurobolium, performed to\nsatisfy man's most exalted aspirations for spiritual purification and\nimmortality, looked like a {72} shower bath of blood and recalled\ncannibalistic orgies. The men of letters and senators attending those\nmysteries saw them performed by painted eunuchs, ill reputed for their\ninfamous morals, who went through dizzy dances similar to those of the\ndancing dervishes and the Aissaouas. We can imagine the repugnance these\nceremonies caused in everybody whose judgment had not been destroyed by a\nfanatical devotion. Of no other pagan superstition do the Christian\npolemicists speak with such profound contempt, and there is undoubtedly a\nreason for their attitude. But they were in a more fortunate position than\ntheir pagan antagonists; their doctrine was not burdened with barbarous\ntraditions dating back to times of savagery; and all the ignominies that\nstained the old Phrygian religion must not prejudice us against it nor\ncause us to slight the long continued efforts that were made to refine it\ngradually and to mould it into a form that would fulfil the new demands of\nmorality and enable it to follow the laborious march of Roman society on\nthe road of religious progress.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{73}\n\nEGYPT.\n\nWe know more about the religion of the early Egyptians than about any other\nancient religion. Its development can be traced back three or four thousand\nyears; we can read its sacred texts, mythical narratives, hymns, rituals,\nand the Book of the Dead in the original, and we can ascertain its various\nideas as to the nature of the divine powers and of future life. A great\nnumber of monuments have preserved for our inspection the pictures of\ndivinities and representations of liturgic scenes, while numerous\ninscriptions and papyri enlighten us in regard to the sacerdotal\norganization of the principal temples. It would seem that the enormous\nquantity of documents of all kinds that have been deciphered in the course\nof nearly an entire century should have dispelled every uncertainty about\nthe creed of ancient Egypt, and should have furnished exact information\nwith regard to the sources and original character of the worship which the\nGreeks and the Romans borrowed from the subjects of the Ptolemies.\n\nAnd yet, this is not the case. While of the four great Oriental religions\nwhich were transplanted into the Occident, the religion of Isis and Serapis\nis the one whose relation to the ancient belief of the mother country we\ncan establish with greatest accuracy, we {74} know very little of its first\nform and of its nature before the imperial period, when it was held in high\nesteem.\n\nOne fact, however, appears to be certain. The Egyptian worship that spread\nover the Greco-Roman world came from the Serapeum founded at Alexandria by\nPtolemy Soter, somewhat in the manner of Judaism that emanated from the\ntemple of Jerusalem. But the earliest history of that famous sanctuary is\nsurrounded by such a thick growth of pious legends, that the most sagacious\ninvestigators have lost their way in it. Was Serapis of native origin, or\nwas he imported from Sinope or Seleucia, or even from Babylon? Each of\nthese opinions has found supporters very recently. Is his name derived from\nthat of the Egyptian god Osiris-Apis, or from that of the Chaldean deity\nSar-Apsi? _Grammatici certant_.[1]\n\nWhichever solution we may adopt, one fact remains, namely, that Serapis and\nOsiris were either immediately identified or else were identical from the\nbeginning. The divinity whose worship was started at Alexandria by Ptolemy\nwas the god that ruled the dead and shared his immortality with them. He\nwas fundamentally an Egyptian god, and the most popular of the deities of\nthe Nile. Herodotus says that Isis and Osiris were revered by every\ninhabitant of the country, and their traditional holidays involved secret\nceremonies whose sacred meaning the Greek writer dared not reveal.[2]\n\nRecognizing their Osiris in Serapis, the Egyptians readily accepted the new\ncult. There was a tradition that a new dynasty should introduce a new god\nor give a sort of preeminence to the god of its own district. From time\nimmemorial politics had changed the {75} government of heaven when changing\nthat of earth. Under the Ptolemies the Serapis of Alexandria naturally\nbecame one of the principal divinities of the country, just as the Ammon of\nThebes had been the chief of the celestial hierarchy under the Pharaohs of\nthat city, or as, under the sovereigns from Sais, the local Neith had the\nprimacy. At the time of the Antonines there were forty-two Serapeums in\nEgypt.[3]\n\nBut the purpose of the Ptolemies was not to add one more Egyptian god to\nthe countless number already worshiped by their subjects. They wanted this\ngod to unite in one common worship the two races inhabiting the kingdom,\nand thus to further a complete fusion. The Greeks were obliged to worship\nhim side by side with the natives. It was a clever political idea to\ninstitute a Hellenized Egyptian religion at Alexandria. A tradition\nmentioned by Plutarch[4] has it that Manetho, a priest from Heliopolis, a\nman of advanced ideas, together with Timotheus, a Eumolpid from Eleusis,\nthought out the character that would best suit the newcomer. The result was\nthat the composite religion founded by the Lagides became a combination of\nthe old creed of the Pharaohs and the Greek mysteries.\n\nFirst of all, the liturgic language was no longer the native idiom but\nGreek. This was a radical change. The philosopher Demetrius of Phalerum,\nwho had been cured of blindness by Serapis, composed poems in honor of the\ngod that were still sung under the Caesars several centuries later.[5] We\ncan easily imagine that the poets, who lived on the bounty of the\nPtolemies, vied with each other in their efforts to celebrate their\nbenefactors' god, and the old rituals that were translated from the\nEgyptian were also enriched with {76} edifying bits of original\ninspiration. A hymn to Isis, found on a marble monument in the island of\nAndros,[6] gives us some idea of these sacred compositions, although it is\nof more recent date.\n\nIn the second place, the artists replaced the old hieratic idols by more\nattractive images and gave them the beauty of the immortals. It is not\nknown who created the figure of Isis draped in a linen gown with a fringed\ncloak fastened over the breast, whose sweet meditative, graciously maternal\nface is a combination of the ideals imagined for Hera and Aphrodite. But we\nknow the sculptor of the first statue of Serapis that stood in the great\nsanctuary of Alexandria until the end of paganism. This statue, the\nprototype of all the copies that have been preserved, is a colossal work of\nart made of precious materials by a famous Athenian sculptor named Bryaxis,\na contemporary of Scopas. It was one of the last divine creations of\nHellenic genius. The majestic head, with its somber and yet benevolent\nexpression, with its abundance of hair, and with a crown in the shape of a\nbushel, bespoke the double character of a god ruling at the same time both\nthe fertile earth and the dismal realm of the dead.[7]\n\nAs we see, the Ptolemies had given their new religion a literary and\nartistic shape that was capable of attracting the most refined and cultured\nminds. But the adaptation to the Hellenic feeling and thinking was not\nexclusively external. Osiris, the god whose worship was thus renewed, was\nmore adapted than any other to lend his authority to the formation of a\nsyncretic faith. At a very early period, in fact before the time of\nHerodotus, Osiris had been identified with Dionysus, and Isis with Demeter.\nM. Foucart has {77} endeavored to prove in an ingenious essay that this\nassimilation was not arbitrary, that Osiris and Isis came into Crete and\nAttica during the prehistoric period, and that they were mistaken for\nDionysus and Demeter[8] by the people of those regions. Without going back\nto those remote ages, we shall merely say with him that the mysteries of\nDionysus were connected with those of Osiris by far-reaching affinities,\nnot simply by superficial and fortuitous resemblances. Each commemorated\nthe history of a god governing both vegetation and the underworld at the\nsame time, who was put to death and torn to pieces by an enemy, and whose\nscattered limbs were collected by a goddess, after which he was\nmiraculously revived. The Greeks must have been very willing to adopt a\nworship in which they found their own divinities and their own myths again\nwith something more poignant and more magnificent added. It is a very\nremarkable fact that of all the many deities worshiped by the Egyptian\ndistricts those of the immediate neighborhood, or if you like, the cycle of\nOsiris, his wife Isis, their son Harpocrates and their faithful servant\nAnubis, were the only ones that were adopted by the Hellenic populations.\nAll other heavenly or infernal spirits worshiped by the Egyptians remained\nstrangers to Greece.[9]\n\nIn the Greco-Latin literature we notice two opposing attitudes toward the\nEgyptian religion. It was regarded as the highest and the lowest of\nreligions at the same time, and as a matter of fact there was an abyss\nbetween the always ardent popular beliefs and the enlightened faith of the\nofficial priests. The Greeks and Romans gazed with admiration upon the\nsplendor of the temples and ceremonial, upon the fabulous {78} antiquity of\nthe sacred traditions and upon the erudition of a clergy possessed of a\nwisdom that had been revealed by divinity. In becoming the disciples of\nthat clergy, they imagined they were drinking from the pure fountain whence\ntheir own myths had sprung. They were overawed by the pretensions of a\nclergy that prided itself on a past in which it kept on living, and they\nstrongly felt the attraction of a marvelous country where everything was\nmysterious, from the Nile that had created it to the hieroglyphs engraved\nupon the walls of its gigantic edifices.[10] At the same time they were\nshocked by the coarseness of its fetichism and by the absurdity of its\nsuperstitions. Above all they felt an unconquerable repulsion at the\nworship of animals and plants, which had always been the most striking\nfeature of the vulgar Egyptian religion and which, like all other archaic\ndevotions, seems to have been practised with renewed fervor after the\naccession of the Saite dynasty. The comic writers and the satirists never\ntired of scoffing at the adorers of the cat, the crocodile, the leek and\nthe onion. Juvenal says ironically: \"O holy people, whose very\nkitchen-gardens produce gods.\"[11] In a general way, this strange people,\nentirely separated from the remainder of the world, were regarded with\nabout the same kind of feeling that Europeans entertained toward the\nChinese for a long time.\n\nA purely Egyptian worship would not have been acceptable to the Greco-Latin\nworld. The main merit of the mixed creation of the political genius of the\nPtolemies consisted in the rejection or modification of everything\nrepugnant or monstrous like the phallophories of Abydos, and in the\nretention of none but {79} stirring or attractive elements. It was the most\ncivilized of all barbarian religions; it retained enough of the exotic\nelement to arouse the curiosity of the Greeks, but not enough to offend\ntheir delicate sense of proportion, and its success was remarkable.\n\nIt was adopted wherever the authority or the prestige of the Lagides was\nfelt, and wherever the relations of Alexandria, the great commercial\nmetropolis, extended. The Lagides induced the rulers and the nations with\nwhom they concluded alliances to accept it. King Nicocreon introduced it\ninto Cyprus after having consulted the oracle of the Serapeum,[12] and\nAgathocles introduced it into Sicily, at the time of his marriage with the\ndaughter-in-law of Ptolemy I (298).[13] At Antioch, Seleucus Callinicus\nbuilt a sanctuary for the statue of Isis sent to him from Memphis by\nPtolemy Euergetes.[14] In token of his friendship Ptolemy Soter introduced\nhis god Serapis into Athens, where the latter had a temple at the foot of\nthe Acropolis[15] ever after, and Arsinoe, his mother or wife, founded\nanother at Halicarnassus, about the year 307.[16] In this manner the\npolitical activity of the Egyptian dynasty was directed toward having the\ndivinities, whose glory was in a certain measure connected with that of\ntheir house, recognized everywhere. Through Apuleius we know that under the\nempire the priests of Isis mentioned the ruling sovereign first of all in\ntheir prayers.[17] And this was simply an imitation of the grateful\ndevotion which their predecessors had felt toward the Ptolemies.\n\nProtected by the Egyptian squadrons, sailors and merchants propagated the\nworship of Isis, the goddess of navigators, simultaneously on the coasts of\nSyria, {80} Asia Minor and Greece, in the islands of the Archipelago,[18]\nand as far as the Hellespont and Thrace.[19] At Delos, where the\ninscriptions enable us to study this worship somewhat in detail, it was not\nmerely practised by strangers, but the very sacerdotal functions were\nperformed by members of the Athenian aristocracy. A number of funereal\nbas-reliefs, in which the deified dead wears the _calathos_ of Serapis on\nhis head, prove the popularity of the belief in future life propagated by\nthese mysteries. According to the Egyptian faith he was identified with the\ngod of the dead.[20]\n\nEven after the splendor of the court of Alexandria had faded and vanished;\neven after the wars against Mithridates and the growth of piracy had ruined\nthe traffic of the AEgean Sea, the Alexandrian worship was too deeply rooted\nin the soil of Greece to perish, although it became endangered in certain\nseaports like Delos. Of all the gods of the Orient, Isis and Serapis were\nthe only ones that retained a place among the great divinities of the\nHellenic world until the end of paganism.[21]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIt was this syncretic religion that came to Rome after having enjoyed\npopularity in the eastern Mediterranean. Sicily and the south of Italy were\nmore than half Hellenized, and the Ptolemies had diplomatic relations with\nthese countries, just as the merchants of Alexandria had commercial\nrelations with them. For this reason the worship of Isis spread as rapidly\nin those regions as on the coasts of Ionia or in the Cyclades.[22] It was\nintroduced into Syracuse and Catana during the earliest years of the third\ncentury by {81} Agathocles. The Serapeum of Pozzuoli, at that time the\nbusiest seaport of Campania, was mentioned in a city ordinance of the year\n105 B. C.[23] About the same time an Iseum was founded at Pompeii, where\nthe decorative frescos attest to this day the power of expansion possessed\nby the Alexandrian culture.\n\nAfter its adoption by the southern part of the Italian peninsula, this\nreligion was bound to penetrate rapidly to Rome. Ever since the second\ncentury before our era, it could not help but find adepts in the chequered\nmultitude of slaves and freedmen. Under the Antonines the college of the\n_pastophori_ recalled that it had been founded in the time of Sulla.[24] In\nvain did the authorities try to check the invasion of the Alexandrian gods.\nFive different times, in 59, 58, 53, and 48 B. C., the senate ordered their\naltars and statues torn down,[25] but these violent measures did not stop\nthe diffusion of the new beliefs. The Egyptian mysteries were the first\nexample at Rome of an essentially popular religious movement that was\ntriumphant over the continued resistance of the public authorities and the\nofficial clergy.\n\nWhy was this Egyptian worship the only one of all Oriental religions to\nsuffer repeated persecutions? There were two motives, one religious and one\npolitical.\n\nIn the first place, this cult was said to exercise a corrupting influence\nperversive of piety. Its morals were loose, and the mystery surrounding it\nexcited the worst suspicions. Moreover, it appealed violently to the\nemotions and senses. All these factors offended the grave decency that a\nRoman was wont to {82} maintain in the presence of the gods. The innovators\nhad every defender of the _mos maiorum_ for an adversary.\n\nIn the second place, this religion had been founded, supported and\npropagated by the Ptolemies; it came from a country that was almost hostile\nto Italy during the last period of the republic;[26] it issued from\nAlexandria, whose superiority Rome felt and feared. Its secret societies,\nmade up chiefly of people of the lower classes, might easily become clubs\nof agitators and haunts of spies. All these motives for suspicion and\nhatred were undoubtedly more potent in exciting persecution than the purely\ntheological reasons, and persecution was stopped or renewed according to\nthe vicissitudes of general politics.\n\nAs we have stated, the chapels consecrated to Isis were demolished in the\nyear 48 B. C. After Caesar's death, the triumvirs decided in 43 B. C. to\nerect a temple in her honor out of the public funds, undoubtedly to gain\nthe favor of the masses. This action would have implied official\nrecognition, but the project appears never to have been executed. If Antony\nhad succeeded at Actium, Isis and Serapis would have entered Rome in\ntriumph, but they were vanquished with Cleopatra; and when Augustus had\nbecome the master of the empire, he professed a deep aversion for the gods\nof his former enemies. Moreover, he could not have suffered the intrusion\nof the Egyptian clergy into the Roman sacerdotal class, whose guardian,\nrestorer and chief he was. In 28 B. C. an ordinance was issued forbidding\nthe erecting of altars to the Alexandrian divinities inside the sacred\nenclosure of the _pomerium_, and seven years later Agrippa extended this\nprohibitive regulation to a radius of a thousand paces around the {83}\ncity. Tiberius acted on the same principle and in 19 A. D. instituted the\nbloodiest persecution against the priests of Isis that they ever suffered,\nin consequence of a scandalous affair in which a matron, a noble and some\npriests of Isis were implicated.\n\nAll these police measures, however, were strangely ineffectual. The\nEgyptian worship was excluded from Rome and her immediate neighborhood in\ntheory if not in fact, but the rest of the world remained open to its\npropaganda.[27]\n\nWith the beginning of the empire it slowly invaded the center and the north\nof Italy and spread into the provinces. Merchants, sailors, slaves,\nartisans, Egyptian men of letters, even the discharged soldiers of the\nthree legions cantoned in the valley of the Nile contributed to its\ndiffusion. It entered Africa by way of Carthage, and the Danubian countries\nthrough the great emporium of Aquileia. The new province of Gaul was\ninvaded through the valley of the Rhone. At that period many Oriental\nemigrants went to seek their fortunes in these new countries. Intimate\nrelations existed between the cities of Arles and Alexandria, and we know\nthat a colony of Egyptian Greeks, established at Nimes by Augustus, took\nthe gods of their native country thither.[28] At the beginning of our era\nthere set in that great movement of conversion that soon established the\nworship of Isis and Serapis from the outskirts of the Sahara to the vallum\nof Britain, and from the mountains of Asturias to the mouths of the Danube.\n\nThe resistance still offered by the central power could not last much\nlonger. It was impossible to dam in this overflowing stream whose\nthundering waves struck the {84} shaking walls of the _pomerium_ from every\nside. The prestige of Alexandria seemed invincible. At that period the city\nwas more beautiful, more learned, and better policed than Rome. She was the\nmodel capital, a standard to which the Latins strove to rise. They\ntranslated the works of the scholars of Alexandria, imitated her authors,\ninvited her artists and copied her institutions. It is plain that they had\nalso to undergo the ascendancy of her religion. As a matter of fact, her\nfervent believers maintained her sanctuaries, despite the law, on the very\nCapitol. Under Caesar, Alexandrian astronomers had reformed the calendar of\nthe pontiffs, and Alexandrian priests soon marked the dates of Isis\nholidays upon it.\n\nThe decisive step was taken soon after the death of Tiberius. Caligula\nerected the great temple of Isis Campensis on the Campus Martius probably\nin the year 38.[29] In order to spare the sacerdotal susceptibilities, he\nfounded it outside of the sacred enclosure of the city of Servius. Later\nDomitian made one of Rome's most splendid monuments of that temple. From\nthat time Isis and Serapis enjoyed the favor of every imperial dynasty, the\nFlavians as well as the Antonines and the Severi. About the year 215\nCaracalla built an Isis temple, even more magnificent than that of\nDomitian, on the Quirinal, in the heart of the city, and perhaps another\none on the Coelian. As the apologist Minucius Felix states, the Egyptian\ngods had become entirely Roman.[30]\n\nThe climax of their power seems to have been reached at the beginning of\nthe third century; later on the popular vogue and official support went to\nother divinities, like the Syrian Baals and the Persian {85} Mithras. The\nprogress of Christianity also deprived them of their power, which was,\nhowever, still considerable until the end of the ancient world. The Isis\nprocessions that marched the streets of Rome were described by an eye\nwitness as late as the year 394,[31] but in 391 the patriarch Theophilus\nhad consigned the Serapeum of Alexandria to the flames, having himself\nstruck the first blow with an ax against the colossal statue of the god\nthat had so long been the object of a superstitious veneration. Thus the\nprelate destroyed the \"very head of idolatry,\" as Rufinus put it.[32]\n\nAs a matter of fact, idolatry received its death blow. The worship of the\ngods of the Ptolemies died out completely between the reigns of Theodosius\nand Justinian,[33] and in accordance with the sad prophecy of Hermes\nTrismegistus[34] Egypt, Egypt herself, lost her divinities and became a\nland of the dead. Of her religions nothing remained but fables that were no\nlonger believed, and the only thing that reminded the barbarians who came\nto inhabit the country of its former piety, were words engraved on stone.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThis rapid sketch of the history of Isis and Serapis shows that these\ndivinities were worshiped in the Latin world for more than five centuries.\nThe task of pointing out the transformations of the cult during that long\nperiod, and the local differences there may have been in the various\nprovinces, is reserved for future researches. These will undoubtedly find\nthat the Alexandrian worship did not become Latinized under the empire, but\nthat its Oriental character became more and more pronounced. When Domitian\nrestored the Iseum of the Campus Martius and that of Beneventum, he {86}\ntransferred from the valley of the Nile sphinxes, cynocephali and obelisks\nof black or pink granite bearing borders of hieroglyphics of Amasis,\nNectanebos or even Rameses II. On other obelisks that were erected in the\npropyleums even the inscriptions of the emperors were written in\nhieroglyphics.[35] Half a century later that true dilettante, Hadrian,\ncaused the luxuries of Canopus to be reproduced, along with the vale of\nTempe, in his immense villa at Tibur, to enable him to celebrate his\nvoluptuous feasts under the friendly eyes of Serapis. He extolled the\nmerits of the deified Antinous in inscriptions couched in the ancient\nlanguage of the Pharaohs, and set the fashion of statues hewn out of black\nbasalt in the Egyptian style.[36] The amateurs of that period affected to\nprefer the hieratic rigidity of the barbarian idols to the elegant freedom\nof Alexandrian art. Those esthetic manifestations probably corresponded to\nreligious prejudices, and the Latin worship always endeavored to imitate\nthe art of temples in the Nile valley more closely than did the Greek. This\nevolution was in conformity with all the tendencies of the imperial period.\n\nBy what secret virtue did the Egyptian religion exercise this irresistible\ninfluence over the Roman world? What new elements did those priests, who\nmade proselytes in every province, give the Roman world? Did the success of\ntheir preaching mean progress or retrogression from the standard of the\nancient Roman faith? These are complex and delicate questions that would\nrequire minute analysis and cautious treatment with a constant and exact\nobservation of shades. I am compelled to limit myself to a rapid sketch,\nwhich, I {87} fear, will appear rather dry and arbitrary, like every\ngeneralization.\n\nThe particular doctrines of the mysteries of Isis and Serapis in regard to\nthe nature and power of the gods were not, or were but incidentally, the\nreasons for the triumph of these mysteries. It has been said that the\nEgyptian theology always remained in a \"fluid state,\"[37] or better in a\nstate of chaos. It consisted of an amalgamation of disparate legends, of an\naggregate of particular cults, as Egypt herself was an aggregate of a\nnumber of districts. This religion never formulated a coherent system of\ngenerally accepted dogmas. It permitted the coexistence of conflicting\nconceptions and traditions, and all the subtlety of its clergy never\naccomplished, or rather never began, the task of fusing those\nirreconcilable elements into one harmonious synthesis.[38] For the\nEgyptians there was no principle of contradiction. All the heterogeneous\nbeliefs that ever obtained in the various districts during the different\nperiods of a very long history, were maintained concurrently and formed an\ninextricable confusion in the sacred books.\n\nAbout the same state of affairs prevailed in the Occidental worship of the\nAlexandrian divinities. In the Occident, just as in Egypt, there were\n\"prophets\" in the first rank of the clergy, who learnedly discussed\nreligion, but never taught a theological system that found universal\nacceptance. The sacred scribe Cheremon, who became Nero's tutor, recognized\nthe stoical theories in the sacerdotal traditions of his country.[39] When\nthe eclectic Plutarch speaks of the character of the Egyptian gods, he\nfinds it agrees surprisingly with his own philosophy,[40] and when the\nneo-Platonist {88} Iamblichus examines them, their character seems to agree\nwith his doctrines. The hazy ideas of the Oriental priests enabled every\none to see in them the phantoms he was pursuing. The individual imagination\nwas given ample scope, and the dilettantic men of letters rejoiced in\nmolding these malleable doctrines at will. They were not outlined sharply\nenough, nor were they formulated with sufficient precision to appeal to the\nmultitude. The gods were everything and nothing; they got lost in a\n_sfumato_. A disconcerting anarchy and confusion prevailed among them. By\nmeans of a scientific mixture of Greek, Egyptian and Semitic elements\n\"Hermetism\"[41] endeavored to create a theological system that would be\nacceptable to all minds, but it seems never to have imposed itself\ngenerally on the Alexandrian mysteries which were older than itself, and\nfurthermore it could not escape the contradictions of Egyptian thought. The\nreligion of Isis did not gain a hold on the soul by its dogmatism.\n\nIt must be admitted, however, that, owing to its extreme flexibility, this\nreligion was easily adapted to the various centers to which it was\ntransferred, and that it enjoyed the valuable advantage of being always in\nperfect harmony with the prevailing philosophy. Moreover, the syncretic\ntendencies of Egypt responded admirably to those that began to obtain at\nRome. At a very early period henotheistic theories had been favorably\nreceived in sacerdotal circles, and while crediting the god of their own\ntemple with supremacy, the priests admitted that he might have a number of\ndifferent personalities, under which he was worshiped simultaneously. In\nthis way the unity of the supreme being was affirmed for the thinkers, and\npolytheism with its {89} intangible traditions maintained for the masses.\nIn the same manner Isis and Osiris had absorbed several local divinities\nunder the Pharaohs, and had assumed a complex character that was capable of\nindefinite extension. The same process continued under the Ptolemies when\nthe religion of Egypt came into contact with Greece. Isis was identified\nsimultaneously with Demeter, Aphrodite, Hera, Semele, Io, Tyche, and\nothers. She was considered the queen of heaven and hell, of earth and sea.\nShe was \"the past, the present and the future,\"[42] \"nature the mother of\nthings, the mistress of the elements, born at the beginning of the\ncenturies.\"[43] She had numberless names, an infinity of different aspects\nand an inexhaustible treasure of virtues. In short, she became a\npantheistic power that was everything in one, _una quae est omnia_.[44]\n\nThe authority of Serapis was no less exalted, and his field no less\nextensive. He also was regarded as a universal god of whom men liked to say\nthat he was \"unique.\" ([Greek: Heis Zeus Sarapis]) In him all energies were\ncentered, although the functions of Zeus, of Pluto or of Helios were\nespecially ascribed to him. For many centuries Osiris had been worshiped at\nAbydos both as author of fecundity and lord of the underworld,[45] and this\ndouble character early caused him to be identified with the sun, which\nfertilizes the earth during its diurnal course and travels through the\nsubterranean realms at night. Thus the conception of this nature divinity,\nthat had already prevailed along the Nile, accorded without difficulty with\nthe solar pantheism that was the last form of Roman paganism. This\ntheological system, which did not gain the upper hand in the Occident until\nthe {90} second century of our era, was not brought in by Egypt. It did not\nhave the exclusive predominance there that it had held under the empire,\nand even in Plutarch's time it was only one creed among many.[46] The\ndeciding influence in this matter was exercised by the Syrian Baals and the\nChaldean astrology.\n\nThe theology of the Egyptian mysteries, then, followed rather than led the\ngeneral influx of ideas. The same may be said of their ethics. It did not\nforce itself upon the world by lofty moral precepts, nor by a sublime ideal\nof holiness. Many have admired the edifying list in the Book of the Dead,\nthat rightfully or otherwise sets forth the virtues which the deceased\nclaims to have practised in order to obtain a favorable judgment from\nOsiris. If one considers the period in which it appears, this ethics is\nundoubtedly very elevated, but it seems rudimentary and even childish if\none compares it with the principles formulated by the Roman jurists, to say\nnothing of the minute psychological analyses of the Stoic casuists. In this\nrange of ideas also, the maintenance of the most striking contrasts\ncharacterizes Egyptian mentality, which was never shocked by the cruelties\nand obscenities that sullied the mythology and the ritual. Like Epicurus at\nAthens, some of the sacred texts actually invited the believers to enjoy\nlife before the sadness of death.[47]\n\nIsis was not a very austere goddess at the time she entered Italy.\nIdentified with Venus, as Harpocrates was with Eros, she was honored\nespecially by the women with whom love was a profession. In Alexandria, the\ncity of pleasure, she had lost all severity, and at Rome this good goddess\nremained very indulgent to human weaknesses. Juvenal harshly refers to {91}\nher as a procuress,[48] and her temples had a more than doubtful\nreputation, for they were frequented by young men in quest of gallant\nadventures. Apuleius himself chose a lewd tale in which to display his\nfervor as an initiate.\n\nBut we have said that Egypt was full of contradictions, and when a more\nexacting morality demanded that the gods should make man virtuous, the\nAlexandrian mysteries offered to satisfy that demand.\n\nAt all times the Egyptian ritual attributed considerable importance to\npurity, or, to use a more adequate term, to cleanliness. Before every\nceremony the officiating priest had to submit to ablutions, sometimes to\nfumigations or anointing, and to abstain from certain foods and from\nincontinence for a certain time. Originally no moral idea was connected\nwith this purification. It was considered a means of exorcising malevolent\ndemons or of putting the priest into a state in which the sacrifice\nperformed by him could have the expected effect. It was similar to the\ndiet, shower-baths and massage prescribed by physicians for physical\nhealth. The internal status of the officiating person was a matter of as\nmuch indifference to the celestial spirits as the actual worth of the\ndeceased was to Osiris, the judge of the underworld. All that was necessary\nto have him open the fields of Aalu to the soul was to pronounce the\nliturgic formulas, and if the soul declared its innocence in the prescribed\nterms its word was readily accepted.\n\nBut in the Egyptian religion, as in all the religions of antiquity,[49] the\noriginal conception was gradually transformed and a new idea slowly took\nits place. The sacramental acts of purification were now {92} expected to\nwipe out moral stains, and people became convinced that they made man\nbetter. The devout female votaries of Isis, whom Juvenal[50] pictures as\nbreaking the ice to bathe in the Tiber, and crawling around the temple on\ntheir bleeding knees, hoped to atone for their sins and to make up for\ntheir shortcomings by means of these sufferings.\n\nWhen a new ideal grew up in the popular conscience during the second\ncentury, when the magicians themselves became pious and serious people,\nfree from passions and appetites, and were honored because of the dignity\nof their lives more than for their white linen robes,[51] then the virtues\nof which the Egyptian priests enjoined the practice also became less\nexternal. Purity of the heart rather than cleanliness of the body was\ndemanded. Renunciation of sensual pleasures was the indispensable condition\nfor the knowledge of divinity, which was the supreme good.[52] No longer\ndid Isis favor illicit love. In the novel by Xenophon of Ephesus (about 280\nA. D.) she protects the heroine's chastity against all pitfalls and assures\nits triumph. According to the ancient belief man's entire existence was a\npreparation for the formidable judgment held by Serapis after death, but to\nhave him decide in favor of the mystic, it was not enough to know the rites\nof the sect; the individual life had to be free from crime; and the master\nof the infernal regions assigned everybody a place according to his\ndeserts.[53] The doctrine of future retribution was beginning to develop.\n\nHowever, in this regard, as in their conception of the divinity, the\nEgyptian mysteries followed the general progress of ideas more than they\ndirected it. {93} Philosophy transformed them, but found in them little\ninspiration.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nHow could a religion, of which neither the theology nor the ethics was\nreally new, stir up at the same time so much hostility and fervor among the\nRomans? To many minds of to-day theology and ethics constitute religion,\nbut during the classical period it was different, and the priests of Isis\nand Serapis conquered souls mainly by other means. They seduced them by the\npowerful attraction of the ritual and retained them by the marvelous\npromises of their doctrine of immortality.\n\nTo the Egyptians ritual had a value far superior to that we ascribe to it\nto-day. It had an operative strength of its own that was independent of the\nintentions of the officiating priest. The efficacy of prayer depended not\non the inner disposition of the believer, but on the correctness of the\nwords, gestures and intonation. Religion was not clearly differentiated\nfrom magic. If a divinity was invoked according to the correct forms,\nespecially if one knew how to pronounce its real name, it was compelled to\nact in conformity to the will of its priest. The sacred words were an\nincantation that compelled the superior powers to obey the officiating\nperson, no matter what purpose he had in view. With the knowledge of the\nliturgy men acquired an immense power over the world of spirits. Porphyry\nwas surprised and indignant because the Egyptians sometimes dared to\nthreaten the gods in their orations.[54] In the consecrations the priest's\nsummons compelled the gods to come and animate their {94} statues, and thus\nhis voice created divinities,[55] as originally the almighty voice of Thoth\nhad created the world.[56]\n\nThe ritual that conferred such superhuman power[57] developed in Egypt into\na state of perfection, completeness and splendor unknown in the Occident.\nIt possessed a unity, a precision and a permanency that stood in striking\ncontrast to the variety of the myths, the uncertainty of the dogmas and the\narbitrariness of the interpretations. The sacred books of the Greco-Roman\nperiod are a faithful reproduction of the texts that were engraved upon the\nwalls of the pyramids at the dawn of history, notwithstanding the centuries\nthat had passed. Even under the Caesars the ancient ceremonies dating back\nto the first ages of Egypt, were scrupulously performed because the\nsmallest word and the least gesture had their importance.\n\nThis ritual and the attitude toward it found their way for the most part\ninto the Latin temples of Isis and Serapis. This fact has long been\nignored, but there can be no doubt about it. A first proof is that the\nclergy of those temples were organized just like those of Egypt during the\nperiod of the Ptolemies.[58] There was a hierarchy presided over by a high\npriest, which consisted of _prophetes_ skilled in the sacred science,\n_stolistes_, or _ornatrices_,[59] whose office it was to dress the statues\nof the gods, _pastophori_ who carried the sacred temple plates in the\nprocessions, and so on, just as in Egypt. As in their native country, the\npriests were distinguished from common mortals by a tonsure, by a linen\ntunic, and by their habits as well as by their garb. They devoted\nthemselves entirely to their ministry and had no other profession. This\n{95} sacerdotal body always remained Egyptian in character, if not in\nnationality, because the liturgy it had to perform remained so. In a\nsimilar manner the priests of the Baals were Syrians,[60] because they were\nthe only ones that knew how to honor the gods of Syria.\n\nIn the first place a daily service had to be held just as in the Nile\nvalley. The Egyptian gods enjoyed a precarious immortality, for they were\nliable to destruction and dependent on necessities. According to a very\nprimitive conception that always remained alive, they had to be fed,\nclothed and refreshed every day or else perish. From this fact arose the\nnecessity of a liturgy that was practically the same in every district. It\nwas practised for thousands of years and opposed its unaltering form to the\nmultiplicity of legends and local beliefs.[61]\n\nThis daily liturgy was translated into Greek, perhaps later into Latin\nalso; it was adapted to the new requirements by the founders of the\nSerapeum, and faithfully observed in the Roman temples of the Alexandrian\ngods. The essential ceremony always was the opening (_apertio_)[62] of the\nsanctuary. At dawn the statue of the divinity was uncovered and shown to\nthe community in the _naos_, that had been closed and sealed during the\nnight.[63] Then, again as in Egypt, the priest lit the sacred fire and\noffered libations of water supposed to be from the deified Nile,[64] while\nhe chanted the usual hymns to the sound of flutes. Finally, \"erect upon the\nthreshold\"--I translate literally from Porphyry--\"he awakens the god by\ncalling to him in the Egyptian language.\"[65] As we see, the god was\nrevived by the sacrifice and, as under the Pharaohs, awoke from his slumber\nat the calling of {96} his name. As a matter of fact the name was\nindissolubly connected with the personality; he who could pronounce the\nexact name of an individual or of a divinity was obeyed as a master by his\nslave.[66] This fact made it necessary to maintain the original form of\nthat mysterious word. There was no other motive for the introduction of a\nnumber of barbarian appellatives into the magical incantations.\n\nIt is also probable that the toilet of the statue was made every day, that\nits body and head were dressed,[67] as in the Egyptian ritual. We have seen\nthat the _ornatrices_ or _stolistes_ were especially entrusted with these\nduties. The idol was covered with sumptuous raiment and ornamented with\njewels and gems. An inscription furnishes us with an inventory of the\njewels worn by an Isis of ancient Cadiz;[68] her ornaments were more\nbrilliant than those of a Spanish madonna.\n\nDuring the entire forenoon, from the moment that a noisy acclamation had\ngreeted the rising of the sun, the images of the gods were exposed to the\nsilent adoration of the initiates.[69] Egypt is the country whence\ncontemplative devotion penetrated into Europe. Then, in the afternoon, a\nsecond service was held to close the sanctuary.[70]\n\nThe daily liturgy must have been very absorbing. This innovation in the\nRoman paganism was full of consequences. No longer were sacrifices offered\nto the god on certain occasions only, but twice a day elaborate services\nwere held. As with the Egyptians, whom Herodotus had termed the most\nreligious of all peoples,[71] devotion assumed a tendency to fill out the\nwhole existence and to dominate private and public interests. The constant\nrepetition of the same prayers {97} kept up and renewed faith, and, we\nmight say, people lived continually under the eyes of the gods.\n\nBesides the daily rites of the Abydos liturgy the holidays marking the\nbeginning of the different seasons were celebrated at the same date every\nyear.[72] It was the same in Italy. The calendars have preserved the names\nof several of them, and of one, the _Navigium Isidis_, the rhetorician\nApuleius[73] has left us a brilliant description on which, to speak with\nthe ancients, he emptied all his color tubes. On March 5th, when navigation\nreopened after the winter months, a gorgeous procession[74] marched to the\ncoast, and a ship consecrated to Isis, the protectress of sailors, was\nlaunched. A burlesque group of masked persons opened the procession, then\ncame the women in white gowns strewing flowers, the _stolistes_ waving the\ngarments of the goddess and the _dadophori_ with lighted torches. After\nthese came the _hymnodes_, whose songs mingled in turn with the sharp sound\nof the cross-flutes and the ringing of the brass timbrels; then the throngs\nof the initiates, and finally the priests, with shaven heads and clad in\nlinen robes of a dazzling white, bearing the images of animal-faced gods\nand strange symbols, as for instance a golden urn containing the sacred\nwater of the Nile. The procession stopped in front of altars[75] erected\nalong the road, and on these altars the sacred objects were uncovered for\nthe veneration of the faithful. The strange and sumptuous magnificence of\nthese celebrations made a deep impression on the common people who loved\npublic entertainments.\n\nBut of all the celebrations connected with the worship of Isis the most\nstirring and the most suggestive {98} was the commemoration of the \"Finding\nof Osiris\" (_Inventio_, [Greek: Heuresis]). Its antecedents date back to\nremote antiquity. Since the time of the twelfth dynasty, and probably much\nearlier, there had been held at Abydos and elsewhere a sacred performance\nsimilar to the mysteries of our Middle Ages, in which the events of\nOsiris's passion and resurrection were reproduced. We are in possession of\nthe ritual of those performances.[76] Issuing from the temple, the god fell\nunder Set's blows; around his body funeral lamentations were simulated, and\nhe was buried according to the rites; then Set was vanquished by Horus, and\nOsiris, restored to life, reentered his temple triumphant over death.\n\nThe same myth was represented in almost the same manner at Rome at the\nbeginning of each November.[77] While the priests and the believers moaned\nand lamented, Isis in great distress sought the divine body of Osiris,\nwhose limbs had been scattered by Typhon. Then, after the corpse had been\nfound, rehabilitated and revived, there was a long outburst of joy, an\nexuberant jubilation that rang through the temples and the streets so\nloudly that it annoyed the passers-by.\n\nThis mingled despair and enthusiasm acted as strongly upon the feelings of\nthe believers as did the spring-holiday ceremony in the Phrygian religion,\nand it acted through the same means. Moreover, there was an esoteric\nmeaning attached to it that none but the pious elect understood. Besides\nthe public ceremonies there was a secret worship to which one was admitted\nonly after a gradual initiation. The hero of Apuleius had to submit to the\nordeal three times in order to obtain the whole revelation. In Egypt the\n{99} clergy communicated certain rites and interpretations only upon a\npromise not to reveal them. In fact this was the case in the worship of\nIsis at Abydos and elsewhere.[78] When the Ptolemies regulated the Greek\nritual of their new religion, it assumed the form of the mysteries spread\nover the Hellenic world and became very like those of Eleusis. The hand of\nthe Eumolpid Timotheus is noticeable in this connection.[79]\n\nBut while the ceremonial of the initiations and even the production of the\nliturgic drama were thus adapted to the religious habits of the Greeks, the\ndoctrinal contents of the Alexandrian mysteries remained purely Egyptian.\nThe old belief that immortality could be secured by means of an\nidentification of the deceased with Osiris or Serapis never died out.\n\nPerhaps in no other people did the epigram of Fustel de Coulanges find so\ncomplete a verification as in the Egyptians: \"Death was the first mystery;\nit started man on the road to the other mysteries.\"[80] Nowhere else was\nlife so completely dominated by preoccupation with life after death;\nnowhere else was such minute and complicated care taken to secure and\nperpetuate another existence for the deceased. The funeral literature, of\nwhich we have found a very great number of documents, had acquired a\ndevelopment equaled by no other, and the architecture of no other nation\ncan exhibit tombs comparable with the pyramids or the rock-built sepulchers\nof Thebes.\n\nThis constant endeavor to secure an after-existence for one's self and\nrelatives manifested itself in various ways, but it finally assumed a\nconcrete form in the worship of Osiris. The fate of Osiris, the god who\ndied and returned to life, became the prototype of the {100} fate of every\nhuman being that observed the funeral rites. \"As truly as Osiris lives,\"\nsays an Egyptian text, \"he also shall live; as truly as Osiris is not dead,\nshall he not die; as truly as Osiris is not annihilated, shall he not be\nannihilated.\"[81]\n\nIf, then, the deceased had piously served Osiris-Serapis, he was\nassimilated to that god, and shared his immortality in the underworld,\nwhere the judge of the dead held forth. He lived not as a tenuous shade or\nas a subtle spirit, but in full possession of his body as well as of his\nsoul. That was the Egyptian doctrine, and that certainly was also the\ndoctrine of the Greco-Latin mysteries.[82]\n\nThrough the initiation the mystic was born again, but to a superhuman life,\nand became the equal of the immortals.[83] In his ecstasy he imagined that\nhe was crossing the threshold of death and contemplating the gods of heaven\nand hell face to face.[84] If he had accurately followed the prescriptions\nimposed upon him by Isis and Serapis through their priests, those gods\nprolonged his life after his decease beyond the duration assigned to it by\ndestiny, and he participated eternally in their beatitude and offered them\nhis homage in their realm.[85] The \"unspeakable pleasure\" he felt when\ncontemplating the sacred images in the temple[86] became perpetual rapture\nwhen he was in the divine presence instead of in the presence of the image,\nand drawn close to divinity his thirsting soul enjoyed the delights of that\nineffable beauty.[87]\n\nWhen the Alexandrian mysteries spread over Italy under the republic, no\nreligion had ever brought to mankind so formal a promise of blest\nimmortality as these, and this, more than anything else, lent them an {101}\nirresistible power of attraction. Instead of the vague and contradictory\nopinions of the philosophers in regard to the destiny of the soul, Serapis\noffered certainty founded on divine revelation corroborated by the faith of\nthe countless generations that had adhered to it. What the votaries of\nOrpheus had confusedly discovered through the veil of the legends, and\ntaught to Magna Grecia,[88] namely, that this earthly life was a trial, a\npreparation for a higher and purer life, that the happiness of an\nafter-life could be secured by means of rites and observances revealed by\nthe gods themselves, all this was now preached with a firmness and\nprecision hitherto unknown. These eschatological doctrines in particular,\nhelped Egypt to conquer the Latin world and especially the miserable\nmasses, on whom the weight of all the iniquities of Roman society rested\nheavily.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe power and popularity of that belief in future life has left traces even\nin the French language, and in concluding this study, from which I have\nbeen compelled to exclude every picturesque detail, I would like to point\nout how a French word of to-day dimly perpetuates the memory of the old\nEgyptian ideas.\n\nDuring the cold nights of their long winters the Scandinavians dreamed of a\nWalhalla where the deceased warriors sat in well-closed brilliantly\nilluminated halls, warming themselves and drinking the strong liquor served\nby the Valkyries; but under the burning sky of Egypt, near the arid sand\nwhere thirst kills the traveler, people wished that their dead might find a\nlimpid spring in their future wanderings to assuage the heat that devoured\nthem, and that they might be {102} refreshed by the breezes of the north\nwind.[89] Even at Rome the adherents of the Alexandrian gods frequently\ninscribed the following wish on their tombs: \"May Osiris give you fresh\nwater.\"[90] Soon this water became, in a figurative sense, the fountain of\nlife pouring out immortality to thirsting souls. The metaphor obtained such\npopularity that in Latin _refrigerium_ became synonymous with comfort and\nhappiness. The term retained this meaning in the liturgy of the church,[91]\nand for that reason people continue to pray for spiritual\n_rafraichissement_ of the dead although the Christian paradise has very\nlittle resemblance to the fields of Aalu.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{103}\n\nSYRIA.\n\nThe religions of Syria never had the same solidarity in the Occident as\nthose from Egypt or Asia Minor. From the coasts of Phoenicia and the\nvalleys of Lebanon, from the borders of the Euphrates and the oases of the\ndesert, they came at various periods, like the successive waves of the\nincoming tide, and existed side by side in the Roman world without uniting,\nin spite of their similarities. The isolation in which they remained and\nthe persistent adherence of their believers to their particular rites were\na consequence and reflection of the disunited condition of Syria herself,\nwhere the different tribes and districts remained more distinct than\nanywhere else, even after they had been brought together under the\ndomination of Rome. They doggedly preserved their local gods and Semitic\ndialects.\n\nIt would be impossible to outline each one of these religions in detail at\nthis time and to reconstruct their history, because our meager information\nwould not permit it, but we can indicate, in a general way, how they\npenetrated into the Occidental countries at various periods, and we can try\nto define their common characteristics by showing what new elements the\nSyrian paganism brought to the Romans.\n\nThe first Semitic divinity to enter Italy was {104} _Atargatis_, frequently\nmistaken for the Phoenician Astarte, who had a famous temple at Bambyce or\nHierapolis, not far from the Euphrates, and was worshiped with her husband,\nHadad, in a considerable part of Syria besides. The Greeks considered her\nas the principal Syrian goddess ([Greek: Suria thea]), and in the Latin\ncountries she was commonly known as _dea Syria_, a name corrupted into\n_Iasura_ by popular use.\n\nWe all remember the unedifying descriptions of her itinerant priests that\nLucian and Apuleius[1] have left. Led by an old eunuch of dubious habits, a\ncrowd of painted young men marched along the highways with an ass that bore\nan elaborately adorned image of the goddess. Whenever they passed through a\nvillage or by some rich villa, they went through their sacred exercises. To\nthe shrill accompaniment of their Syrian flutes they turned round and\nround, and with their heads thrown back fluttered about and gave vent to\nhoarse clamors until vertigo seized them and insensibility was complete.\nThen they flagellated themselves wildly, struck themselves with swords and\nshed their blood in front of a rustic crowd which pressed closely about\nthem, and finally they took up a profitable collection from the wondering\nspectators. They received jars of milk and wine, cheeses, flour, bronze\ncoins of small denominations and even some silver pieces, all of which\ndisappeared in the folds of their capacious robes. If opportunity presented\nthey knew how to increase their profits by means of clever thefts or by\nmaking commonplace predictions for a moderate consideration.\n\nThis picturesque description, based on a novel by {105} Lucius of Patras,\nis undoubtedly extreme. It is difficult to believe that the sacerdotal\ncorps of the goddess of Hierapolis should have consisted only of charlatans\nand thieves. But how can the presence in the Occident of that begging and\nlow nomadic clergy be explained?\n\nIt is certain that the first worshipers of the Syrian goddess in the Latin\nworld were slaves. During the wars against Antiochus the Great a number of\nprisoners were sent to Italy to be sold at public auction, as was the\ncustom, and the first appearance in Italy of the _Chaldaei_[2] has been\nconnected with that event. The _Chaldaei_ were Oriental fortune-tellers who\nasserted that their predictions were based on the Chaldean astrology. They\nfound credulous clients among the farm laborers, and Cato gravely exhorts\nthe good landlord to oust them from his estate.[3]\n\nBeginning with the second century before Christ, merchants began to import\nSyrian slaves. At that time Delos was the great trade center in this human\ncommodity, and in that island especially Atargatis was worshiped by\ncitizens of Athens and Rome.[4] Trade spread her worship in the\nOccident.[5] We know that the great slave revolution that devastated Sicily\nin 134 B. C. was started by a slave from Apamea, a votary of the Syrian\ngoddess. Simulating divine madness, he called his companions to arms,\npretending to act in accordance with orders from heaven.[6] This detail,\nwhich we know by chance, shows how considerable a proportion of Semites\nthere was in the gangs working the fields, and how much authority Atargatis\nenjoyed in the rural centers. Being too poor to build temples for their\nnational goddess, those agricultural laborers {106} waited with their\ndevotions until a band of itinerant _galli_ passed through the distant\nhamlet where the lot of the auction had sent them. The existence of those\nwandering priests depended, therefore, on the number of fellow-countrymen\nthey met in the rural districts, who supported them by sacrificing a part\nof their poor savings.\n\nTowards the end of the republic those diviners appear to have enjoyed\nrather serious consideration at Rome. It was a pythoness from Syria that\nadvised Marius on the sacrifices he was to perform.[7]\n\nUnder the empire the importation of slaves increased. Depopulated Italy\nneeded more and more foreign hands, and Syria furnished a large quota of\nthe forced immigration of cultivators. But those Syrians, quick and\nintelligent as they were strong and industrious, performed many other\nfunctions. They filled the countless domestic positions in the palaces of\nthe aristocracy and were especially appreciated as litter-bearers.[8] The\nimperial and municipal administrations, as well as the big contractors to\nwhom customs and the mines were farmed out, hired or bought them in large\nnumbers, and even in the remotest border provinces the _Syrus_ was found\nserving princes, cities or private individuals. The worship of the Syrian\ngoddess profited considerably by the economic current that continually\nbrought new worshipers. We find her mentioned in the first century of our\nera in a Roman inscription referring in precise terms to the slave market,\nand we know that Nero took a devout fancy to the stranger that did not,\nhowever, last very long.[9] In the popular Trastevere quarter she had a\ntemple until the end of paganism.[10] {107}\n\nDuring the imperial period, however, the slaves were no longer the only\nmissionaries that came from Syria, and Atargatis was no longer the only\ndivinity from that country to be worshiped in the Occident. The propagation\nof the Semitic worship progressed for the most part in a different manner\nunder the empire.\n\nAt the beginning of our era the Syrian merchants, _Syri negotiatores_,\nundertook a veritable colonization of the Latin provinces.[11] During the\nsecond century before Christ the traders of that nation had established\nsettlements along the coast of Asia Minor, on the Piraeus, and in the\nArchipelago. At Delos, a small island but a large commercial center, they\nmaintained several associations that worshiped their national gods, in\nparticular Hadad and Atargatis. But the wars that shook the Orient at the\nend of the republic, and above all the growth of piracy, ruined maritime\ncommerce and stopped emigration. This began again with renewed vigor when\nthe establishment of the empire guaranteed the safety of the seas and when\nthe Levantine traffic attained a development previously unknown. We can\ntrace the history of the Syrian establishments in the Latin provinces from\nthe first to the seventh century, and recently we have begun to appreciate\ntheir economic, social and religious importance at its true value.\n\nThe Syrians' love of lucre was proverbial. Active, compliant and able,\nfrequently little scrupulous, they knew how to conclude first small deals,\nthen larger ones, everywhere. Using the special talents of their race to\nadvantage, they succeeded in establishing themselves on all coasts of the\nMediterranean, even in {108} Spain.[12] At Malaga an inscription mentions a\ncorporation formed by them. The Italian ports where business was especially\nactive, Pozzuoli, Ostia, later Naples, attracted them in great numbers. But\nthey did not confine themselves to the seashore; they penetrated far into\nthe interior of the countries, wherever they hoped to find profitable\ntrade. They followed the commercial highways and traveled up the big\nrivers. By way of the Danube they went as far as Pannonia, by way of the\nRhone they reached Lyons. In Gaul they were especially numerous. In this\nnew country that had just been opened to commerce fortunes could be made\nrapidly. A rescript discovered on the range of the Lebanon is addressed to\nsailors from Arles, who had charge of the transportation of grain, and in\nthe department of Ain a bilingual epitaph has been found mentioning a\nmerchant of the third century, Thaim or Julian, son of Saad, decurion of\nthe city of Canatha in Syria, who owned two factories in the Rhone basin,\nwhere he handled goods from Aquitania.[13] Thus the Syrians spread over the\nentire province as far as Treves, where they had a strong colony. Not even\nthe barbarian invasions of the fifth century stopped their immigration.\nSaint Jerome describes them traversing the entire Roman world amidst the\ntroubles of the invasion, prompted by the lust of gain to defy all dangers.\nIn the barbarian society the part played by this civilized and city-bred\nelement was even more considerable. Under the Merovingians in about 591\nthey had sufficient influence at Paris to have one of their number elected\nbishop and to gain possession of all ecclesiastical offices. Gregory of\nTours tells how King Gontrand, on entering the city of Orleans {109} in\n585, was received by a crowd praising him \"in the language of the Latins,\nthe Jews and the Syrians.\"[14] The merchant colonies existed until the\nSaracen corsairs destroyed the commerce of the Mediterranean.\n\nThose establishments exercised a strong influence upon the economic and\nmaterial life of the Latin provinces, especially in Gaul. As bankers the\nSyrians concentrated a large share of the money business in their hands and\nmonopolized the importing of the valuable Levantine commodities as well as\nof the articles of luxury; they sold wines, spices, glassware, silks and\npurple fabrics, also objects wrought by goldsmiths, to be used as patterns\nby the native artisans. Their moral and religious influence was not less\nconsiderable: for instance, it has been shown that they furthered the\ndevelopment of monastic life during the Christian period, and that the\ndevotion to the crucifix[15] that grew up in opposition to the\nmonophysites, was introduced into the Occident by them. During the first\nfive centuries Christians felt an unconquerable repugnance to the\nrepresentation of the Saviour of the world nailed to an instrument of\npunishment more infamous than the guillotine of to-day. The Syrians were\nthe first to substitute reality in all its pathetic horror for a vague\nsymbolism.\n\nIn pagan times the religious ascendency of that immigrant population was no\nless remarkable. The merchants always took an interest in the affairs of\nheaven as well as in those of earth. At all times Syria was a land of\nardent devotion, and in the first century its children were as fervid in\npropagating their barbarian gods in the Occident as after their conversion\nthey were enthusiastic in spreading Christianity as far {110} as Turkestan\nand China. As soon as the merchants had established their places of\nbusiness in the islands of the Archipelago during the Alexandrian period,\nand in the Latin period under the empire, they founded chapels in which\nthey practised their exotic rites.\n\nIt was easy for the divinities of the Phoenician coast to cross the seas.\nAmong them were Adonis, whom the women of Byblos mourned; Balmarcodes, \"the\nLord of the dances,\" who came from Beirut; Marna, the master of rain,\nworshiped at Gaza; and Maiuma,[16] whose nautical holiday was celebrated\nevery spring on the coast near Ostia as well as in the Orient.\n\nBesides these half Hellenized religions, others of a more purely Semitic\nnature came from the interior of the country, because the merchants\nfrequently were natives of the cities of the _Hinterland_, as for instance\nApamea or Epiphanea in Coele-Syria, or even of villages in that flat\ncountry. As Rome incorporated the small kingdoms beyond the Lebanon and the\nOrontes that had preserved a precarious independence, the current of\nemigration increased. In 71 Commagene, which lies between the Taurus and\nthe Euphrates, was annexed by Vespasian, a little later the dynasties of\nChalcis and Emesa were also deprived of their power. Nero, it appears, took\npossession of Damascus; half a century later Trajan established the new\nprovince of Arabia in the south (106 A. D.), and the oasis of Palmyra, a\ngreat mercantile center, lost its autonomy at the same time. In this manner\nRome extended her direct authority as far as the desert, over countries\nthat were only superficially Hellenized, and where the native devotions had\npreserved all their {111} savage fervor. From that time constant\ncommunication was established between Italy and those regions which had\nheretofore been almost inaccessible. As roads were built commerce\ndeveloped, and together with the interests of trade the needs of\nadministration created an incessant exchange of men, of products and of\nbeliefs between those out-of-the-way countries and the Latin provinces.\n\nThese annexations, therefore, were followed by a renewed influx of Syrian\ndivinities into the Occident. At Pozzuoli, the last port of call of the\nLevantine vessels, there was a temple to the Baal of Damascus (_Jupiter\nDamascenus_) in which leading citizens officiated, and there were altars on\nwhich two golden camels[17] were offered to Dusares, a divinity who had\ncome from the interior of Arabia. They kept company with a divinity of more\nancient repute, the Hadad of Baabek-Heliopolis (_Jupiter Heliopolitanus_),\nwhose immense temple, considered one of the world's wonders,[18] had been\nrestored by Antoninus Pius, and may still be seen facing Lebanon in\nmajestic elegance. Heliopolis and Beirut had been the most ancient colonies\nfounded by Augustus in Syria. The god of Heliopolis participated in the\nprivileged position granted to the inhabitants of those two cities, who\nworshiped in a common devotion,[19] and he was naturalized as a Roman with\ngreater ease than the others.\n\nThe conquest of all Syria as far as Euphrates and the subjection of even a\npart of Mesopotamia aided the diffusion of the Semitic religions in still\nanother manner. From these regions, which were partly inhabited by fighting\nraces, the Caesars drew recruits for the imperial army. They levied a great\nnumber of {112} legionaries, but especially auxiliary troops, who were\ntransferred to the frontiers. Troopers and foot-soldiers from those\nprovinces furnished important contingents to the garrisons of Europe and\nAfrica. For instance, a cohort of one thousand archers from Emesa was\nestablished in Pannonia, another of archers from Damascus in upper Germany;\nMauretania received irregulars from Palmyra, and bodies of troops levied in\nIturaea, on the outskirts of the Arabian desert, were encamped in Dacia,\nGermany, Egypt and Cappadocia at the same time. Commagene alone furnished\nno less than six cohorts of five hundred men each that were sent to the\nDanube and into Numidia.[20]\n\nThe number of inscriptions consecrated by soldiers proves both the ardor of\ntheir faith and the diversity of their beliefs. Like the sailors of to-day\nwho are transferred to strange climes and exposed to incessant danger, they\nwere constantly inclined to invoke the protection of heaven, and remained\nattached to the gods who seemed to remind them in their exile of the\ndistant home country. Therefore it is not surprising that the Syrians who\nserved in the army should have practised the religion of their Baals in the\nneighborhood of their camps. In the north of England, near the wall of\nHadrian, an inscription in verse in honor of the goddess of Hierapolis has\nbeen found; its author was a prefect, probably of a cohort of Hamites\nstationed at this distant post.[21]\n\nNot all the soldiers, however, went to swell the ranks of believers\nworshiping divinities that had long been adopted by the Latin world, as did\nthat officer. They also brought along new ones that had come from a still\ngreater distance than their predecessors, in fact {113} from the outskirts\nof the barbarian world, because from those regions in particular trained\nmen could be obtained. There were, for instance, _Baltis_, an \"Our Lady\"\nfrom Osroene beyond the Euphrates;[22] _Aziz_, the \"strong god\" of Edessa,\nwho was identified with the star Lucifer;[23] _Malakbel_, the \"Lord's\nmessenger,\" patron of the soldiers from Palmyra, who appeared with several\ncompanions at Rome, in Numidia and in Dacia.[24] The most celebrated of\nthose gods then was the Jupiter of Doliche, a small city of Commagene, that\nowed its fame to him. Because of the troops coming from that region, this\nobscure Baal, whose name is mentioned by no author, found worshipers in\nevery Roman province as far as Africa, Germany and Brittany. The number of\nknown inscriptions consecrated to him exceeds a hundred, and it is still\ngrowing. Being originally nothing but a god of lightning, represented as\nbrandishing an ax, this local genius of the tempest was elevated to the\nrank of tutelary divinity of the imperial armies.[25]\n\nThe diffusion of the Semitic religions in Italy that commenced\nimperceptibly under the republic became more marked after the first century\nof our era. Their expansion and multiplication were rapid, and they\nattained the apogee of their power during the third century. Their\ninfluence became almost predominant when the accession of the Severi lent\nthem the support of a court that was half Syrian. Functionaries of all\nkinds, senators and officers, vied with each other in devotion to the\npatron gods of their sovereigns, gods which the sovereigns patronized in\nturn. Intelligent and ambitious princesses like Julia Domna, Julia Maesa,\nJulia Mammea, whose ascendency was very {114} considerable, became\npropagators of their national religion. We all know the audacious\npronunciamento of the year 218 that placed upon the throne the\nfourteen-year-old emperor Heliogabalus, a worshiper of the Baal of Emesa.\nHis intention was to give supremacy over all other gods to his barbarian\ndivinity, who had heretofore been almost unknown. The ancient authors\nnarrate with indignation how this crowned priest attempted to elevate his\nblack stone, the coarse idol brought from Emesa, to the rank of supreme\ndivinity of the empire by subordinating the whole ancient pantheon to it;\nthey never tire of giving revolting details about the dissoluteness of the\ndebaucheries for which the festivities of the new _Sol invictus Elagabal_\nfurnished a pretext.[26] However, the question arises whether the Roman\nhistorians, being very hostile to that foreigner who haughtily favored the\ncustoms of his own country, did not misrepresent or partly misunderstand\nthe facts. Heliogabalus's attempt to have his god recognized as supreme,\nand to establish a kind of monotheism in heaven as there was monarchy on\nearth, was undoubtedly too violent, awkward and premature, but it was in\nkeeping with the aspirations of the time, and it must be remembered that\nthe imperial policy could find the support of powerful Syrian colonies not\nonly at Rome but all over the empire.\n\nHalf a century later Aurelian[27] was inspired by the same idea when he\ncreated a new worship, that of the \"Invincible Sun.\" Worshiped in a\nsplendid temple, by pontiffs equal in rank to those of ancient Rome, having\nmagnificent plays held in his honor every fourth year, _Sol invictus_ was\nalso elevated to the supreme rank in the divine hierarchy, and became the\nspecial {115} protector of the emperors and the empire. The country where\nAurelian found the pattern he sought to reproduce, was again Syria. Into\nthe new sanctuary he transferred the images of Bel and Helios, taken from\nPalmyra, after it had fallen before his arms.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe sovereigns, then, twice attempted to replace the Capitoline Jupiter by\na Semitic god and to make a Semitic religion the principal and official\nreligion of the Romans. They proclaimed the fall of the old Latin idolatry\nand the accession of a new paganism taken from Syria. What was the\nsuperiority attributed to the creeds of that country? Why did even an\nIllyrian general like Aurelian look for the most perfect type of pagan\nreligion in that country? That is the problem to be solved, but it must\nremain unsolved unless an exact account is given of the fate of the Syrian\nbeliefs under the empire.\n\nThat question has not as yet been very completely elucidated. Besides the\nsuperficial opuscule of Lucian on the _dea Syria_, we find scarcely any\nreliable information in the Greek or Latin writers. The work by Philo of\nByblos is a euhemeristic interpretation of an alleged Phoenician cosmogony,\nand a composition of little merit. Neither have we the original texts of\nthe Semitic liturgies, as we have for Egypt. Whatever we have learned we\nowe especially to the inscriptions, and while these furnish highly valuable\nindications as to the date and area of expansion of these religions, they\ntell us hardly anything about their doctrines. Light on this subject may be\nexpected from the excavations that are being made in the great sanctuaries\nof Syria, and also from a more exact interpretation {116} of the sculptured\nmonuments that we now possess in great numbers, especially those of Jupiter\nDolichenus.\n\nSome characteristics of the Semitic paganism, however, are known at\npresent, and it must be admitted that it would appear at a disadvantage if\njudged by those noticeable features that first attract our attention. It\nhad retained a stock of very primitive ideas and some aboriginal nature\nworship that had lasted through many centuries and was to persist, in part,\nunder Christianity and Islam until the present day.[28] Such were the\nworship of high elevations on which a rustic enclosure sometimes marked the\nlimits of the consecrated territory; the worship of the waters that flow to\nthe sea, the streams that arise in the mountains, the springs that gush out\nof the soil, the ponds, the lakes and the wells, into all of which\nofferings were thrown with the idea either of venerating in them the\nthirst-quenching liquid or else the fecund nature of the earth; the worship\nof the trees that shaded the altars and that nobody dared to fell or\nmutilate; the worship of stones, especially of the rough stones called\nbethels that were regarded, as their name (_beth-El_) indicates, as the\nresidence of the god, or rather, as the matter in which the god was\nembodied.[29] Aphrodite Astarte was worshiped in the shape of a conical\nstone at Paphos, and a black aerolite covered with projections and\ndepressions to which a symbolic meaning was attributed represented\nElagabal, and was transferred from Emesa to Rome, as we have said.\n\nThe animals, as well as inanimate things, received their share of homage.\nRemnants of the old Semitic zoolatry perpetuated themselves until the end\nof paganism and even later. Frequently the gods were {117} represented\nstanding erect on animals. Thus the Dolichean Baal stood on a steer, and\nhis spouse on a lion. Around certain temples there were sacred parks, in\nwhich savage beasts roamed at liberty,[30] a reminder of the time when they\nwere considered divine. Two animals especially were the objects of\nuniversal veneration, the pigeon and the fish. Vagrant multitudes of\npigeons received the traveler landing at Ascalon,[31] and they played about\nthe enclosures of all the temples of Astarte[32] in flocks resembling white\nwhirlwinds. The pigeon belonged, properly speaking, to the goddess of love,\nwhose symbol it has remained above all to the people worshiping that\ngoddess.\n\n \"Quid referam ut volitet crebras intacta per urbes\n  Alba Palaestino sancta columba Syro?\"[33]\n\nThe fish was sacred to Atargatis, who undoubtedly had been represented in\nthat shape at first, as Dagon always was.[34] The fish were kept in ponds\nin the proximity of the temples.[35] A superstitious fear prevented people\nfrom touching them, because the goddess punished the sacrilegious by\ncovering their bodies with ulcers and tumors.[36] At certain mystic\nrepasts, however, the priests and initiates consumed the forbidden food in\nthe belief that they were absorbing the flesh of the divinity herself. That\nworship and its practices, which were spread over Syria, probably suggested\nthe ichthus symbolism in the Christian period.[37]\n\nHowever, over this lower and primordial stratum that still cropped out here\nand there, other less rudimentary beliefs had formed. Besides inanimate\nobjects and animals, the Syrian paganism worshiped personal divinities\nespecially. The character of the gods that were originally adored by the\nSemitic tribes has been {118} ingeniously reconstructed.[38] Each tribe had\nits Baal and Baalat who protected it and whom only its members were\npermitted to worship. The name of _Ba'al_, \"master,\" summarizes the\nconception people had of him. In the first place he was regarded as the\nsovereign of his votaries, and his position in regard to them was that of\nan Oriental potentate towards his subjects; they were his servants, or\nrather his slaves.[39] The Baal was at the same time the \"master\" or\nproprietor of the country in which he resided and which he made fertile by\ncausing springs to gush from its soil. Or his domain was the firmament and\nhe was the _dominus caeli_, whence he made the waters fall to the roar of\ntempests. He was always united with a celestial or earthly \"queen\" and, in\nthe third place, he was the \"lord\" or husband of the \"lady\" associated with\nhim. The one represented the male, the other the female principle; they\nwere the authors of all fecundity, and as a consequence the worship of the\ndivine couple often assumed a sensual and voluptuous character.\n\nAs a matter of fact, immorality was nowhere so flagrant as in the temples\nof Astarte, whose female servants honored the goddess with untiring ardor.\nIn no country was sacred prostitution so developed as in Syria, and in the\nOccident it was to be found practically only where the Phoenicians had\nimported it, as on Mount Eryx. Those aberrations, that were kept up until\nthe end of paganism,[40] probably have their explanation in the primitive\nconstitution of the Semitic tribe, and the religious custom must have been\noriginally one of the forms of exogamy, which compelled the woman to unite\nherself first with a stranger.[41] {119}\n\nAs a second blemish, the Semitic religions practised human immolations\nlonger than any other religion, sacrificing children and grown men in order\nto please sanguinary gods. In spite of Hadrian's prohibition of those\nmurderous offerings,[42] they were maintained in certain clandestine rites\nand in the lowest practices of magic, up to the fall of the idols, and even\nlater. They corresponded to the ideas of a period during which the life of\na captive or slave had no greater value than that of an animal.\n\nThese sacred practices and many others, on which Lucian complacently\nenlarges in his opuscule on the goddess of Hierapolis, daily revived the\nhabits of a barbarous past in the temples of Syria. Of all the conceptions\nthat had successively dominated the country, none had completely\ndisappeared. As in Egypt, beliefs of very different date and origin\ncoexisted, without any attempt to make them agree, or without success when\nthe task was undertaken. In these beliefs zoolatry, litholatry and all the\nother nature worships outlived the savagery that had created them. More\nthan anywhere else the gods had remained the chieftains of clans[43]\nbecause the tribal organizations of Syria were longer lived and more\ndeveloped than those of any other region. Under the empire many districts\nwere still subjected to the tribal regime and commanded by \"ethnarchs\" or\n\"phylarchs.\"[44] Religion, which sacrificed the lives of the men and the\nhonor of the women to the divinity, had in many regards remained on the\nmoral level of unsocial and sanguinary tribes. Its obscene and atrocious\nrites called forth exasperated indignation on the part of {120} the Roman\nconscience when Heliogabalus attempted to introduce them into Italy with\nhis Baal of Emesa.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nHow, then, can one explain the fact that in spite of all, the Syrian gods\nimposed themselves upon the Occident and made even the Caesars accept them?\nThe reason is that the Semitic paganism can no more be judged by certain\nrevolting practices, that perpetuated in the heart of civilization the\nbarbarity and puerilities of an uncultivated society, than the religion of\nthe Nile can be so judged. As in the case of Egypt we must distinguish\nbetween the sacerdotal religion and the infinitely varied popular religion\nthat was embodied in local customs. Syria possessed a number of great\nsanctuaries in which an educated clergy meditated and expatiated upon the\nnature of the divine beings and on the meaning of traditions inherited from\nremote ancestors. As their own interests demanded, that clergy constantly\namended the sacred traditions and modified their spirit when the letter was\nimmutable, in order to make them agree with the new aspirations of a more\nadvanced period. They had their mysteries and their initiates to whom they\nrevealed a wisdom that was above the vulgar beliefs of the masses.[45]\n\nFrequently we can draw diametrically opposite conclusions from the same\nprinciple. In that manner the old idea of _tabu_, that seems to have\ntransformed the temples of Astarte into houses of debauchery, also became\nthe source of a severe code of morals. The Semitic tribes were haunted with\nthe fear of the tabu. A multitude of things were either impure or sacred\nbecause, in the original confusion, those two notions {121} had not been\nclearly differentiated. Man's ability to use the products of nature to\nsatisfy his needs, was thus limited by a number of prohibitions,\nrestrictions and conditions. He who touched a forbidden object was soiled\nand corrupted, his fellows did not associate with him and he could no\nlonger participate in the sacrifices. In order to wipe out the blemish, he\nhad recourse to ablutions and other ceremonies known to the priests.\nPurity, that had originally been considered simply physical, soon became\nritualistic and finally spiritual. Life was surrounded by a network of\ncircumstances subject to certain conditions, every violation of which meant\na fall and demanded penance. The anxiety to remain constantly in a state of\nholiness or regain that state when it had been lost, filled one's entire\nexistence. It was not peculiar to the Semitic tribes, but they ascribed a\nprime importance to it.[46] And the gods, who necessarily possessed this\nquality in an eminent degree, were holy beings ([Greek: hagioi])[47] _par\nexcellence_.\n\nIn this way principles of conduct and dogmas of faith have frequently been\nderived from instinctive and absurd old beliefs. All theological doctrines\nthat were accepted in Syria modified the prevailing ancient conception of\nthe Baals. But in our present state of knowledge it is very difficult\nindeed to determine the shares that the various influences contributed,\nfrom the conquests of Alexander to the Roman domination, to make the Syrian\npaganism what it became under the Caesars. The civilization of the Seleucid\nempire is little known, and we cannot determine what caused the alliance of\nGreek thought with the Semitic traditions.[48] The religions of the\nneighboring nations {122} also had an undeniable influence. Phoenicia and\nLebanon remained moral tributaries of Egypt long after they had liberated\nthemselves from the suzerainty of the Pharaohs. The theogony of Philo of\nByblos took gods and myths from that country, and at Heliopolis Hadad was\nhonored \"according to Egyptian rather than Syrian rite.\"[49] The rigorous\nmonotheism of the Jews, who were dispersed over the entire country, must\nalso have acted as an active ferment of transformation.[50] But it was\nBabylon that retained the intellectual supremacy, even after its political\nruin. The powerful sacerdotal caste ruling it did not fall with the\nindependence of the country, and it survived the conquests of Alexander as\nit had previously lived through the Persian domination. The researches of\nAssyriologists have shown that its ancient worship persisted under the\nSeleucides, and at the time of Strabo the \"Chaldeans\" still discussed\ncosmology and first principles in the rival schools of Borsippa and\nOrchoe.[51] The ascendancy of that erudite clergy affected all surrounding\nregions; it was felt by Persia in the east, Cappadocia in the north, but\nmore than anywhere else by the Syrians, who were connected with the\nOriental Semites by bonds of language and blood. Even after the Parthians\nhad wrested the valley of the Euphrates from the Seleucides, relations with\nthe great temples of that region remained uninterrupted. The plains of\nMesopotamia, inhabited by races of like origin, extended on both sides of\nan artificial border line; great commercial roads followed the course of\nthe two rivers flowing into the Persian Gulf or cut across the desert, and\nthe pilgrims came to Babylon, as Lucian tells us, to perform their\ndevotions to the Lady of Bambyce.[52] {123}\n\nEver since the Captivity, constant spiritual relations had existed between\nJudaism and the great religious metropolis. At the birth of Christianity\nthey manifested themselves in the rise of gnostic sects in which the\nSemitic mythology formed strange combinations with Jewish and Greek ideas\nand furnished the foundation for extravagant superstructures.[53] Finally,\nduring the decline of the empire, it was Babylon again from which emanated\nManicheism, the last form of idolatry received in the Latin world. We can\nimagine how powerful the religious influence of that country on the Syrian\npaganism must have been.\n\nThat influence manifested itself in various ways. First, it introduced new\ngods. In this way Bel passed from the Babylonian pantheon into that of\nPalmyra and was honored throughout northern Syria.[54] It also caused\nancient divinities to be arranged in new groups. To the primitive couple of\nthe Baal and the Baalat a third member was added in order to form one of\nthose triads dears to Chaldean theology. This took place at Hierapolis as\nwell as at Heliopolis, and the three gods of the latter city, Hadad,\nAtargatis and Simios, became Jupiter, Venus and Mercury in Latin\ninscriptions.[55] Finally, and most important, astrolatry wrought radical\nchanges in the characters of the celestial powers, and, as a further\nconsequence, in the entire Roman paganism. In the first place it gave them\na second personality in addition to their own nature. The sidereal myths\nsuperimposed themselves upon the agrarian myths, and gradually obliterated\nthem. Astrology, born on the banks of the Euphrates, imposed itself in\nEgypt upon the haughty and unapproachable clergy of the most conservative\nof all nations.[56] Syria {124} received it without reserve and surrendered\nunconditionally;[57] numismatics and archeology as well as literature prove\nthis. King Antiochus of Commagene, for instance, who died 34 B. C., built\nhimself a monumental tomb on a spur of the Taurus, in which he placed his\nhoroscope, designed on a large bas-relief, beside the images of his\nancestral divinities.[58]\n\nThe importance which the introduction of the Syrian religions into the\nOccident has for us consists therefore in the fact that indirectly they\nbrought certain theological doctrines of the Chaldeans with them, just as\nIsis and Serapis carried beliefs of old Egypt from Alexandria to the\nOccident. The Roman empire received successively the religious tribute of\nthe two great nations that had formerly ruled the Oriental world. It is\ncharacteristic that the god Bel whom Aurelian brought from Asia to set up\nas the protector of his states, was in reality a Babylonian who had\nemigrated to Palmyra,[59] a cosmopolitan center apparently predestined by\nvirtue of its location to become the intermediary between the civilizations\nof the Euphrates and the Mediterranean.\n\nThe influence exercised by the speculations of the Chaldeans upon\nGreco-Roman thought can be asserted positively, but cannot as yet be\nstrictly defined. It was at once philosophic and religious, literary and\npopular. The entire neo-Platonist school used the names of those venerable\nmasters, but it cannot be determined how much it really owes to them. A\nselection of poems that has often been quoted since the third century,\nunder the title of \"Chaldaic Oracles\" ([Greek: Logia Chaldaika]) combines\nthe ancient Hellenic theories with a fantastic {125} mysticism that was\ncertainly imported from the Orient. It is to Babylonia what the literature\nof Hermes Trismegistus is to Egypt, and it is equally difficult to\ndetermine the nature of the ingredients that the author put into his sacred\ncompositions. But at an earlier date the Syrian religions had spread far\nand wide in the Occident ideas conceived on the distant banks of the\nEuphrates. I shall try to indicate briefly what their share in the pagan\nsyncretism was.\n\nWe have seen that the gods from Alexandria gained souls especially by the\npromise of blessed immortality. Those from Syria must also have satisfied\ndoubts tormenting all the minds of that time. As a matter of fact the old\nSemitic ideas on man's fate in after-life were little comforting. We know\nhow sad, dull and hopeless their conception of life after death was. The\ndead descended into a subterranean realm where they led a miserable\nexistence, a weak reflection of the one they had lost; since they were\nsubject to wants and suffering, they had to be supported by funeral\nofferings placed on their sepulchers by their descendants. Those ancient\nbeliefs and customs were found also in primitive Greece and Italy.\n\nThis rudimentary eschatology, however, gave way to quite a different\nconception, one that was closely related to the Chaldean astrology, and\nwhich spread over the Occident towards the end of the republic. According\nto this doctrine the soul returned to heaven after death, to live there\namong the divine stars. While it remained on earth it was subject to all\nthe bitter necessities of a destiny determined by the revolutions of the\nstars; but when it ascended into the upper regions, it escaped that fate\nand even the limits of time; {126} it shared equally in the immortality of\nthe sidereal gods that surrounded it.[60] In the opinion of some, the soul\nwas attracted by the rays of the sun, and after passing through the moon,\nwhere it was purified, it lost itself in the shining star of day.[61]\nAnother more purely astrological theory, that was undoubtedly a development\nof the former, taught that the soul descended to earth from the heights of\nheaven by passing through the spheres of the seven planets. During its\npassage it acquired the dispositions and qualities proper to each planet.\nAfter death it returned to its original abode by the same route. To get\nfrom one sphere to another, it had to pass a door guarded by a commandant\n([Greek: archon]).[62] Only the souls of initiates knew the password that\nmade those incorruptible guardians yield, and under the conduct of a\npsychopompus[63] they ascended safely from zone to zone. As the soul rose\nit divested itself of the passions and qualities it had acquired on its\ndescent to the earth as though they were garments, and, free from\nsensuality, it penetrated into the eighth heaven to enjoy everlasting\nhappiness as a subtle essence.\n\nPerhaps this doctrine, undoubtedly of Babylonian origin, was not generally\naccepted by the Syrian religions, as it was by the mysteries of Mithra, but\nthese religions, impregnated with astrology, certainly propagated the\nbelief that the souls of those worshipers that had led pious lives were\nelevated to the heights of heaven, where an apotheosis made them the equals\nof the luminous gods.[64] Under the empire this doctrine slowly supplanted\nall others; the Elysian fields, which the votaries of Isis and Serapis\nstill located in {127} the depths of the earth, were transferred into the\nether bathing the fixed stars,[65] and the underworld was thereafter\nreserved for the wicked who had not been allowed to pass through the\ncelestial gates.\n\nThe sublime regions occupied by the purified souls were also the abode of\nthe supreme god.[66] When it transformed the ideas on the destiny of man,\nastrology also modified those relating to the nature of the divinity. In\nthis matter the Syrian religions were especially original; for even if the\nAlexandrian mysteries offered man just as comforting prospects of\nimmortality as the eschatology of their rivals, they were backward in\nbuilding up a commensurate theology. To the Semitic races belongs the honor\nof having reformed the ancient fetichism most thoroughly. Their base and\nnarrow conceptions of early times to which we can trace their existence,\nbroaden and rise until they form a kind of monotheism.\n\nAs we have seen, the Syrian tribes worshiped a god of lightning,[67] like\nall primitive races. That god opened the reservoirs of the firmament to let\nthe rain fall and split the giant trees of the woods with the double ax\nthat always remained his emblem.[68] When the progress of astronomy removed\nthe constellations to incommensurable distances, the \"Baal of the Heavens\"\n(_Ba'al [vs]amin_) had to grow in majesty. Undoubtedly at the time of the\nAchemenides, he was connected with the Ahura-Mazda of the Persians, the\nancient god of the vault of heaven, who had become the highest physical and\nmoral power, and this connection helped to transform the old genius of\nthunder.[69] People continued to worship the material heaven in him; under\nthe Romans he was still simply called {128} _Caelus_, as well as \"Celestial\nJupiter\" (_Jupiter Caelestis_, [Greek: Zeus Ouranios]),[70] but it was a\nheaven studied by a sacred science that venerated its harmonious mechanism.\nThe Seleucides represented him on their coins with a crescent over his\nforehead and carrying a sun with seven rays, to symbolize the fact that he\npresided over the course of the stars;[71] or else he was shown with the\ntwo Dioscuri at his side, heroes who enjoyed life and suffered death in\nturn, according to the Greek myth, and who had become the symbols of the\ntwo celestial hemispheres. Religious uranography placed the residence of\nthe supreme divinity in the most elevated region of the world, fixing its\nabode in the zone most distant from the earth, above the planets and the\nfixed stars. This fact was intended to be expressed by the term Most-High\n([Greek: Hupsistos]) applied to the Syrian Baals as well as to Jehovah.[72]\nAccording to this cosmic religion, the Most High resided in the immense orb\nthat contained the spheres of all the stars and embraced the entire\nuniverse which was subject to his domination. The Latins translated the\nname of this \"Hypsistos\" by _Jupiter summus exsuperantissimus_[73] to\nindicate his preeminence over all divine beings.\n\nAs a matter of fact, his power was infinite. The primary postulate of the\nChaldean astrology was that all phenomena and events of this world were\nnecessarily determined by sidereal influence. The changes of nature, as\nwell as the dispositions of men, were controlled according to fate, by the\ndivine energies that resided in the heavens. In other words, the gods were\nalmighty; they were the masters of destiny that governed the universe\nabsolutely. The notion of their {129} omnipotence resulted from the\ndevelopment of the ancient autocracy with which the Baals were credited. As\nwe have stated, they were conceived after the image of an Asiatic monarch,\nand the religious terminology was evidently intended to display the\nhumility of their priests toward them. In Syria we find nothing analogous\nto what existed in Egypt, where the priest thought he could compel the gods\nto act, and even dared to threaten them.[74] The distance separating the\nhuman and the divine always was much greater with the Semitic tribes, and\nall that astrology did was to emphasize the distance more strongly by\ngiving it a doctrinal foundation and a scientific appearance. In the Latin\nworld the Asiatic religions propagated the conception of the absolute and\nillimitable sovereignty of God over the earth. Apuleius calls the Syrian\ngoddess _omnipotens et omniparens_, \"mistress and mother of all\nthings.\"[75]\n\nThe observation of the starry skies, moreover, had led the Chaldeans to the\nnotion of a divine eternity. The constancy of the sidereal revolutions\ninspired the conclusion as to their perpetuity. The stars follow their ever\nuncompleted courses unceasingly; as soon as the end of their journey is\nreached, they resume without stopping the road already covered, and the\ncycles of years in which their movements take place extend from the\nindefinite past into the indefinite future.[76] Thus a clergy of\nastronomers necessarily conceived Baal, \"Lord of the heavens,\" as the\n\"Master of eternity\" or \"He whose name is praised through all\neternity\"[77]--titles which constantly recur in Semitic inscriptions. The\ndivine stars did not die, like Osiris or Attis; whenever they seemed to\nweaken, they were {130} born to a new life and always remained invincible\n(_invicti_).\n\nTogether with the mysteries of the Syrian Baals, this theological notion\npenetrated into Occidental paganism.[78] Whenever an inscription to a _deus\naeternus_ is found in the Latin provinces it refers to a Syrian sidereal\ngod, and it is a remarkable fact that this epithet did not enter the ritual\nbefore the second century, at the time the worship of the god Heaven\n(_Caelus_)[79] was propagated. That the philosophers had long before placed\nthe first cause beyond the limits of time was of no consequence, for their\ntheories had not penetrated into the popular consciousness nor modified the\ntraditional formulary of the liturgies. To the people the divinities were\nbeings more beautiful, more vigorous, and more powerful than man, but born\nlike him, and exempt only from old age and death, the immortals of old\nHomer. The Syrian priests diffused the idea of a god without beginning and\nwithout end through the Roman world, and thus contributed, along lines\nparallel with the Jewish proselytism, to lend the authority of dogma to\nwhat had previously been only a metaphysical theory.\n\nThe Baals were universal as well as eternal, and their power became\nlimitless in regard to space as it had been in regard to time. These two\nprinciples were correlative. The title of \"_mar'olam_\" which the Baals bore\noccasionally may be translated by \"Lord of the universe,\" or by \"Lord of\neternity,\" and efforts certainly have been made to claim the twofold\nquality for them.[80] Peopled with divine constellations and traversed by\nplanets assimilated to the inhabitants of Olympus, the heavens determined\nthe destinies of the {131} entire human race by their movements, and the\nwhole earth was subject to the changes produced by their revolutions.[81]\nConsequently the old _Ba'al [vs]amin_ was necessarily transformed into a\nuniversal power. Of course, even under the Caesars there existed in Syria\ntraces of a period when the local god was the fetich of a clan and could be\nworshiped by the members of that clan only, a period when strangers were\nadmitted to his altars only after a ceremony of initiation, as brothers, or\nat least as guests and clients.[82] But from the period when our knowledge\nof the history of the great divinities of Heliopolis or Hierapolis begins,\nthese divinities were regarded as common to all Syrians, and crowds of\npilgrims came from distant countries to obtain grace in the holy cities. As\nprotectors of the entire human race the Baals gained proselytes in the\nOccident, and their temples witnessed gatherings of devotees of every race\nand nationality. In this respect the Baals were distinctly different from\nJehovah.\n\nThe essence of paganism implies that the nature of a divinity broadens as\nthe number of its votaries increases. Everybody credits it with some new\nquality, and its character becomes more complex. As it gains in power it\nalso has a tendency to dominate its companion gods and to concentrate their\nfunctions in itself. To escape this threatening absorption, these gods must\nbe of a very sharply defined personality and of a very original character.\nThe vague Semitic deities, however, were devoid of a well-defined\nindividuality. We fail to find among them a well organized society of\nimmortals, like that of the Greek Olympus where each divinity had its own\nfeatures and its own particular {132} life full of adventures and\nexperiences, and each followed its special calling to the exclusion of all\nthe others. One was a physician, another a poet, a third a shepherd, hunter\nor blacksmith. The Greek inscriptions found in Syria are, in this regard,\neloquently concise.[83] Usually they have the name of Zeus accompanied by\nsome simple epithet: kurios ([Greek: kurios], Lord), _aniketos_ ([Greek:\naniketos], invincible), _megistos_ ([Greek: megistos], greatest). All these\nBaals seem to have been brothers. They were personalities of indeterminate\noutline and interchangeable powers and were readily confused.\n\nAt the time the Romans came into contact with Syria, it had already passed\nthrough a period of syncretism similar to the one we can study with greater\nprecision in the Latin world. The ancient exclusiveness and the national\nparticularism had been overcome. The Baals of the great sanctuaries had\nenriched themselves with the virtues[84] of their neighbors; then, always\nfollowing the same process, they had taken certain features from foreign\ndivinities brought over by the Greek conquerors. In that manner their\ncharacters had become indefinable, they performed incompatible functions\nand possessed irreconcilable attributes. An inscription found in\nBritain[85] assimilates the Syrian goddess to Peace, Virtue, Ceres, Cybele,\nand even to the sign of the Virgin.\n\nIn conformity with the law governing the development of paganism, the\nSemitic gods tended to become pantheistic because they comprehended all\nnature and were identified with it. The various deities were nothing but\ndifferent aspects under which the supreme and infinite being manifested\nitself. Although Syria {133} remained deeply and even coarsely idolatrous\nin practice, in theory it approached monotheism or, better perhaps,\nhenotheism. By an absurd but curious etymology the name Hadad has been\nexplained as \"one, one\" (_'ad 'ad_).[86]\n\nEverywhere the narrow and divided polytheism showed a confused tendency to\nelevate itself into a superior synthesis, but in Syria astrology lent the\nfirmness of intelligent conviction to notions that were vague elsewhere.\nThe Chaldean cosmology, which deified all elements but ascribed a\npredominant influence to the stars, ruled the entire Syrian syncretism. It\nconsidered the world as a great organism which was kept intact by an\nintimate solidarity, and whose parts continually influenced each other.\n\nThe ancient Semites believed therefore that the divinity could be regarded\nas embodied in the waters, in the fire of the lightning, in stones or\nplants. But the most powerful gods were the constellations and the planets\nthat governed the course of time and of all things.\n\nThe sun was supreme because it led the starry choir, because it was the\nking and guide of all the other luminaries and therefore the master of the\nwhole world.[87] The astronomical doctrines of the \"Chaldeans\" taught that\nthis incandescent globe alternately attracted and repelled the other\nsidereal bodies, and from this principle the Oriental theologians had\nconcluded that it must determine the entire life of the universe, inasmuch\nas it regulated the movements of the heavens. As the \"intelligent light\" it\nwas especially the creator of human reason, and just as it repelled and\nattracted the planets in turn, it was believed {134} to send out souls, at\nthe time of birth, into the bodies they animated, and to cause them to\nreturn to its bosom after death by means of a series of emissions and\nabsorptions.\n\nLater on, when the seat of the Most-High was placed beyond the limits of\nthe universe, the radiant star that gives us light became the visible image\nof the supreme power, the source of all life and all intelligence, the\nintermediary between an inaccessible god and mankind, and the one object of\nspecial homage from the multitude.[88]\n\nSolar pantheism, which grew up among the Syrians of the Hellenistic period\nas a result of the influence of Chaldean astrolatry, imposed itself upon\nthe whole Roman world under the empire. Our very rapid sketch of the\nconstitution of that theological system shows incidentally the last form\nassumed by the pagan idea of God. In this matter Syria was Rome's teacher\nand predecessor. The last formula reached by the religion of the pagan\nSemites and in consequence by that of the Romans, was a divinity unique,\nalmighty, eternal, universal and ineffable, that revealed itself throughout\nnature, but whose most splendid and most energetic manifestation was the\nsun. To arrive at the Christian monotheism[89] only one final tie had to be\nbroken, that is to say, this supreme being residing in a distant heaven had\nto be removed beyond the world. So we see once more in this instance, how\nthe propagation of the Oriental cults levelled the roads for Christianity\nand heralded its triumph. Although astrology was always fought by the\nchurch, it had nevertheless prepared the minds for the dogmas the church\nwas to proclaim.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{135}\n\nPERSIA.\n\nThe dominant historical fact in western Asia in ancient times was the\nopposition between the Greco-Roman and Persian civilizations, which was\nitself only an episode in the great struggle that was constantly in\nprogress between the Orient and the Occident in those countries. In the\nfirst enthusiasm of their conquests, the Persians extended their dominion\nas far as the cities of Ionia and the islands of the AEgean Sea, but their\npower of expansion was broken at the foot of the Acropolis. One hundred and\nfifty years later, Alexander destroyed the empire of the Achemenides and\ncarried Hellenic culture to the banks of the Indus. After two and a half\ncenturies the Parthians under the Arsacid dynasty advanced to the borders\nof Syria, and Mithradates Eupator, an alleged descendant of Darius,\npenetrated to the heart of Greece at the head of his Persian nobility from\nPontus.\n\nAfter the flood came the ebb. The reconstructed Roman empire of Augustus\nsoon reduced Armenia, Cappadocia and even the kingdom of the Parthians to a\nkind of vassalage. But after the middle of the third century the Sassanid\ndynasty restored the power of Persia and revived its ancient pretensions.\nFrom that time until the triumph of Islam it was one long {136} duel\nbetween the two rival states, in which now one was victorious and now the\nother, while neither was ever decisively beaten. An ambassador of king\nNarses to Galerius called these two states \"the two eyes of the human\nrace.\"[1]\n\nThe \"invincible\" star of the Persians might wane and vanish, but only to\nreappear in greater glory. The political and military strength displayed by\nthis nation through the centuries was the result of its high intellectual\nand moral qualities. Its original culture was always hostile to such an\nassimilation as that experienced in different degrees by the Aryans of\nPhrygia, the Semites of Syria and the Hamites of Egypt. Hellenism and\nIranism--if I may use that term--were two equally noble adversaries but\ndifferently educated, and they always remained separated by instinctive\nracial hostility as much as by hereditary opposition of interests.\n\nNevertheless, when two civilizations are in contact for more than a\nthousand years, numerous exchanges are bound to occur. The influence\nexercised by Hellenism as far as the uplands of Central Asia has frequently\nbeen pointed out,[2] but the prestige retained by Persia throughout the\nages and the extent of area influenced by its energy has not perhaps been\nshown with as much accuracy. For even if Mazdaism was the highest\nexpression of Persian genius and its influence in consequence mainly\nreligious, yet it was not exclusively so.\n\nAfter the fall of the Achemenides the memory of their empire long haunted\nAlexander's successors. Not only did the dynasties which claimed to be\ndescended from Darius, and which ruled over Pontus, {137} Cappadocia and\nCommagene, cultivate political traditions that brought them nearer to their\nsupposed ancestors, but those traditions were partly adopted even by the\nSeleucides and the Ptolemies, the legitimate heirs of the ancient masters\nof Asia. People were fond of recalling the ideals of past grandeur and\nsought to realize them in the present. In that manner several institutions\nwere transmitted to the Roman emperors through the agency of the Asiatic\nmonarchies. The institution of the _amici Augusti_, for instance, the\nappointed friends and intimate counselors of the rulers, adopted in Italy\nthe forms in use at the court of the Diadochi, who had themselves imitated\nthe ancient organization of the palace of the Great Kings.[3]\n\nThe custom of carrying the sacred fire before the Caesars as an emblem of\nthe perpetuity of their power, dated back to Darius and with other Persian\ntraditions passed on to the dynasties that divided the empire of Alexander.\nThere is a striking similarity not only between the observance of the\nCaesars and the practice of the Oriental monarchs, but also between the\nbeliefs that they held. The continuity of the political and religious\ntradition cannot be doubted.[4] As the court ceremonial and the internal\nhistory of the Hellenistic kingdoms become better known we shall be able to\noutline with greater precision the manner in which the divided and\ndiminished heritage of the Achemenides, after generations of rulers, was\nfinally left to those Occidental sovereigns who called themselves the\nsacrosanct lords of the world as Artaxerxes had done.[5] It may not be\ngenerally known that the habit of welcoming friends with a kiss was a\nceremony in the {138} Oriental formulary before it became a familiar custom\nin Europe.[6]\n\nIt is very difficult to trace the hidden paths by which pure ideas travel\nfrom one people to another. But certain it is that at the beginning of our\nera certain Mazdean conceptions had already spread outside of Asia. The\nextent of the influence of Parseeism upon the beliefs of Israel under the\nAchemenides cannot be determined, but its existence is undeniable.[7] Some\nof its doctrines, as for instance those relating to angels and demons, the\nend of the world and the final resurrection, were propagated everywhere in\nthe basin of the Mediterranean as a consequence of the diffusion of Jewish\ncolonies.\n\nOn the other hand, ever since the conquests of Cyrus and Darius, the active\nattention of the Greeks had been drawn toward the doctrines and religious\npractices of the new masters of the Orient.[8] A number of legends\nrepresenting Pythagoras, Democritus and other philosophers as disciples of\nthe magi prove the prestige of that powerful sacerdotal class. The\nMacedonian conquest, which placed the Greeks in direct relations with\nnumerous votaries of Mazdaism, gave a new impetus to works treating that\nreligion, and the great scientific movement inaugurated by Aristotle caused\nmany scholars to look into the doctrines taught by the Persian subjects of\nthe Seleucides. We know from a reliable source that the works catalogued\nunder the name of Zoroaster in the library of Alexandria contained two\nmillion lines. This immense body of sacred literature was bound to attract\nthe attention of scholars and to call forth the reflections of\nphilosophers. The dim and dubious science that reached {139} even the lower\nclasses under the name of \"magic\" was to a considerable extent of Persian\norigin, as its name indicates, and along with physician's recipes and\nthaumaturgic processes it imparted some theological doctrines in a confused\nfashion.[9]\n\nThis explains why certain institutions and beliefs of the Persians had\nfound imitators and adepts in the Greco-Oriental world long before the\nRomans had gained a foothold in Asia. Their influence was indirect, secret,\nfrequently indiscernible, but it was certain. The most active agencies in\nthe diffusion of Mazdaism as of Judaism seem to have been colonies of\nbelievers who had emigrated far from the mother country. There was a\nPersian dispersion similar to that of the Israelites. Communities of magi\nwere established not only in eastern Asia Minor, but in Galatia, Phrygia,\nLydia and even in Egypt. Everywhere they remained attached to their customs\nand beliefs with persistent tenacity.[10]\n\nWhen Rome extended her conquests into Asia Minor and Mesopotamia, the\ninfluence of Persia became much more direct. Superficial contact with the\nMazdean populations began with the wars against Mithradates, but it did not\nbecome frequent and lasting until the first century of our era. During that\ncentury the empire gradually extended its limits to the upper Euphrates,\nand thereby absorbed all the uplands of Anatolia and Commagene south of the\nTaurus. The native dynasties which had fostered the secular isolation of\nthose distant countries in spite of the state of vassalage to which they\nhad been reduced disappeared one after another. The Flavians constructed\nthrough those hitherto almost inaccessible regions an immense network {140}\nof roads that were as important to Rome as the railways of Turkestan or of\nSiberia are to modern Russia. At the same time Roman legions camped on the\nbanks of the Euphrates and in the mountains of Armenia. Thus all the little\nMazdean centers scattered in Cappadocia and Pontus were forced into\nconstant relation with the Latin world, and on the other hand the\ndisappearance of the buffer states made the Roman and Parthian empires\nneighboring powers in Trajan's time (98-117 A. D.).\n\nFrom these conquests and annexations in Asia Minor and Syria dates the\nsudden propagation of the Persian mysteries of Mithra in the Occident. For\neven though a congregation of their votaries seems to have existed at Rome\nunder Pompey as early as 67 B. C., the real diffusion of the mysteries\nbegan with the Flavians toward the end of the first century of our era.\nThey became more and more prominent under the Antonines and the Severi, and\nremained the most important cult of paganism until the end of the fourth\ncentury. Through them as a medium the original doctrines of Mazdaism were\nwidely propagated in every Latin province, and in order to appreciate the\ninfluence of Persia upon the Roman creeds, we must now give them our\ncareful attention.\n\nHowever, it must be said that the growing influence of Persia did not\nmanifest itself solely in the religious sphere. After the accession of the\nSassanid dynasty (228 A. D.) the country once more became conscious of its\noriginality, again resumed the cultivation of national traditions,\nreorganized the hierarchy of its official clergy and recovered the\npolitical cohesion which had been wanting under the Parthians. It felt\n{141} and showed its superiority over the neighboring empire that was then\ntorn by factions, thrown upon the mercy of manifestoes, and ruined\neconomically and morally. The studies now being made in the history of that\nperiod show more and more that debilitated Rome had become the imitator of\nPersia.\n\nIn the opinion of contemporaries the court of Diocletian, prostrating\nitself before a master who was regarded as the equal of God, with its\ncomplicated hierarchy and crowd of eunuchs that disgraced it, was an\nimitation of the court of the Sassanides. Galerius declared in unmistakable\nterms that Persian absolutism must be introduced in his empire,[11] and the\nancient Caesarism founded on the will of the people seemed about to be\ntransformed into a sort of caliphate.\n\nRecent discoveries also throw light upon a powerful artistic school that\ndeveloped in the Parthian empire and later in that of the Sassanides and\nwhich grew up independently of the Greek centers of production. Even if it\ntook certain models from the Hellenic sculpture or architecture, it\ncombined them with Oriental motives into a decoration of exuberant\nrichness. Its field of influence extended far beyond Mesopotamia into the\nsouth of Syria where it has left monuments of unequalled splendor. The\nradiance of that brilliant center undoubtedly illuminated Byzantium, the\nbarbarians of the north, and even China.[12]\n\nThe Persian Orient, then, exerted a dominant influence on the political\ninstitutions and artistic tastes of the Romans as well as on their ideas\nand beliefs. The propagation of the religion of Mithra, which always\nproudly proclaimed its Persian origin, was accompanied by a number of\nparallel influences of the {142} people from which it had issued. Never,\nnot even during the Mohammedan invasions, had Europe a narrower escape from\nbecoming Asiatic than when Diocletian officially recognized Mithra as the\nprotector of the reconstructed empire.[13] The time when that god seemed to\nbe establishing his authority over the entire civilized world was one of\nthe critical phases in the moral history of antiquity. An irresistible\ninvasion of Semitic and Mazdean conceptions nearly succeeded in permanently\noverwhelming the Occidental spirit. Even after Mithra had been vanquished\nand expelled from Christianized Rome, Persia did not disarm. The work of\nconversion in which Mithraism had failed was taken up by Manicheism, the\nheir to its cardinal doctrines, and until the Middle Ages Persian dualism\ncontinued to cause bloody struggles in the ancient Roman provinces.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nJust as we cannot understand the character of the mysteries of Isis and\nSerapis without studying the circumstances accompanying their creation by\nthe Ptolemies, so we cannot appreciate the causes of the power attained by\nthe mysteries of Mithra, unless we go far back to their origin.\n\nHere the subject is unfortunately more obscure. The ancient authors tell us\nalmost nothing about the origin of Mithra. One point on which they all\nagree is that he was a Persian god, but this we should know from the Avesta\neven if they had not mentioned it. But how did he get to Italy from the\nPersian uplands?\n\nTwo scant lines of Plutarch are the most explicit document we have on the\nsubject. He narrates incidentally that the pirates from Asia Minor\nvanquished {143} by Pompey in 67 performed strange sacrifices on Olympus, a\nvolcano of Lycia, and practiced occult rites, among others those of Mithra\nwhich, he says, \"exist to the present day and were first taught by\nthem.\"[14] Lactantius Placidus, a commentator on Statius and a mediocre\nauthority, also tells us that the cult passed from the Persians to the\nPhrygians and from the Phrygians to the Romans.[15]\n\nThese two authors agree then in fixing in Asia Minor the origin of this\nPersian religion that later spread over the Occident, and in fact various\nindications direct us to that country. The frequency of the name\nMithradates, for instance, in the dynasties of Pontus, Cappadocia, Armenia\nand Commagene, connected with the Achemenides by fictitious genealogies,\nshows the devotion of those kings to Mithra.\n\nAs we see, the Mithraism that was revealed to the Romans at the time of\nPompey had established itself in the Anatolian monarchies during the\npreceding period, which was an epoch of intense moral and religious unrest.\nUnfortunately we have no monuments of that period of its history. The\nabsence of direct testimony on the development of Mazdean sects during the\nlast three centuries before our era prevents us from gaining exact\nknowledge of the Parseeism of Asia Minor.\n\nNone of the temples dedicated to Mithra in that religion have been\nexamined.[16] The inscriptions mentioning his name are as yet few and\ninsignificant, so that it is only by indirect means that we can arrive at\nconclusions about this primitive cult. The only way to explain its\ndistinguishing features in the Occident is to study the environment in\nwhich it originated.\n\nDuring the domination of the Achemenides eastern {144} Asia Minor was\ncolonized by the Persians. The uplands of Anatolia resembled those of\nPersia in climate and soil, and were especially adapted to the raising of\nhorses.[17] In Cappadocia and even in Pontus the aristocracy who owned the\nsoil belonged to the conquering nation. Under the various governments which\nfollowed after the death of Alexander, those landlords remained the real\nmasters of the country, chieftains of clans governing the canton where they\nhad their domains, and, on the outskirts of Armenia at least, they retained\nthe hereditary title of satraps through all political vicissitudes until\nthe time of Justinian, thus recalling their Persian origin.[18] This\nmilitary and feudal aristocracy furnished Mithradates Eupator a\nconsiderable number of the officers who helped him in his long defiance of\nRome, and later it defended the threatened independence of Armenia against\nthe enterprises of the Caesars. These warriors worshiped Mithra as the\nprotecting genius of their arms, and this is the reason why Mithra always,\neven in the Latin world, remained the \"invincible\" god, the tutelary deity\nof armies, held in special honor by warriors.\n\nBesides the Persian nobility a Persian clergy had also become established\nin the peninsula. It officiated in famous temples, at Zela in Pontus and\nHierocaesarea in Lydia. Magi, called _magousaioi_ or _pyrethes_\n(firelighters) were scattered over the Levant. Like the Jews, they retained\ntheir national customs and traditional rites with such scrupulous loyalty\nthat Bardesanes of Edessa cited them as an example in his attempt to refute\nthe doctrines of astrology and to show that a nation can retain the same\ncustoms in different climates.[19] We know their religion sufficiently to\nbe {145} certain that the Syrian author had good grounds for attributing\nthat conservative spirit to them. The sacrifices of the _pyrethes_ which\nStrabo observed in Cappadocia recall all the peculiarities of the Avestan\nliturgy. The same prayers were recited before the altar of the fire while\nthe priest held the sacred fasces (_barecman_); the same offerings were\nmade of milk, oil and honey; and the same precautions were taken to prevent\nthe priest's breath from polluting the divine flame. Their gods were\npractically those of orthodox Mazdaism. They worshiped Ahura Mazda, who had\nto them remained a divinity of the sky as Zeus and Jupiter had been\noriginally. Below him they venerated deified abstractions (such as\nVohumano, \"good mind,\" and Ameretat, \"immortality\") from which the religion\nof Zoroaster made its Amshaspends, the archangels surrounding the Most\nHigh.[20] Finally they sacrificed to the spirits of nature, the Yazatas:\nfor instance, Anahita or Anaites the goddess of the waters--that made\nfertile the fields; Atar, the personification of fire; and especially\nMithra, the pure genius of light.\n\nThus the basis of the religion of the magi of Asia Minor was Mazdaism,\nsomewhat changed from that of the Avesta, and in certain respects holding\ncloser to the primitive nature worship of the Aryans, but nevertheless a\nclearly characterized and distinctive Mazdaism, which was to remain the\nmost solid foundation for the greatness of the mysteries of Mithra in the\nOccident.\n\nRecent discoveries[21] of bilingual inscriptions have succeeded in\nestablishing the fact that the language used, or at least written, by the\nPersian colonies of Asia Minor was not their ancient Aryan idiom, but {146}\nAramaic, which was a Semitic dialect. Under the Achemenides this was the\ndiplomatic and commercial language of all countries west of the Tigris. In\nCappadocia and Armenia it remained the literary and probably also the\nliturgical language until it was slowly supplanted by Greek during the\nHellenistic period. The very name _magousaioi_ ([Greek: magousaioi]) given\nto the magi in those countries is an exact transcription of a Semitic\nplural.[22] This phenomenon, surprising at first sight, is explained by the\nhistory of the _magousaioi_ who emigrated to Asia Minor. They did not come\nthere directly from Persepolis or Susa, but from Mesopotamia. Their\nreligion had been deeply influenced by the speculations of the powerful\nclergy officiating in the temples of Babylon. The learned theology of the\nChaldeans imposed itself on the primitive Mazdaism, which was a collection\nof traditions and rites rather than a body of doctrines. The divinities of\nthe two religions became identified, their legends connected, and the\nSemitic astrology, the result of long continued scientific observations,\nsuperimposed itself on the naturalistic myths of the Persians. Ahura Mazda\nwas assimilated to Bel, Anahita to Ishtar, and Mithra to Shamash, the solar\ngod. For that reason Mithra was commonly called _Sol invictus_ in the Roman\nmysteries, and an abstruse and a complicated astronomic symbolism was\nalways part of the teachings revealed to candidates for initiation and\nmanifested itself also in the artistic embellishments of the temple.\n\nIn connection with a cult from Commagene we can observe rather closely how\nthe fusion of Parseeism with Semitic and Anatolian creeds took place,\nbecause {147} in those regions the form of religious transformations was at\nall times syncretic. On a mountain top in the vicinity of a town named\nDoliche, a deity was worshiped who after a number of transformations became\na Jupiter Protector of the Roman armies. Originally this god, who was\nbelieved to have discovered the use of iron, seems to have been brought to\nCommagene by a tribe of blacksmiths, the Chalybes, who had come from the\nnorth.[23] He was represented standing on a steer and holding in his hand a\ntwo-edged ax, an ancient symbol venerated in Crete during the Mycenean age\nand found also at Labranda in Caria and all over Asia Minor.[24] The ax\nsymbolized the god's mastery over the lightning which splits asunder the\ntrees of the forest amidst the din of storms. Once established on Syrian\nsoil, this genius of thunder became identified with some local Baal and his\ncult took up all the Semitic features. After the conquests of Cyrus and the\nfounding of the Persian domination, this \"Lord of the heavens\" was readily\nconfounded with Ahura Mazda, who was likewise \"the full circle of heaven,\"\naccording to a definition of Herodotus,[25] and whom the Persians also\nworshiped on mountain tops. When a half Persian, half Hellenic dynasty\nsucceeded Alexander in Commagene, this Baal became a _Zeus Oromasdes_\n([Greek: Zeus Oromasdes], Ahura Mazda) residing in the sublime ethereal\nregions. A Greek inscription speaks of the celestial thrones \"on which this\nsupreme divinity receives the souls of its worshipers.\"[26] In the Latin\ncountries \"Jupiter Caelus\" remained at the head of the Mazdean\npantheon,[27] and in all the provinces the temples of {148} \"Jupiter\nDolichenus\" were erected beside those of Mithra, and the two remained in\nthe closest relations.[28]\n\nThe same series of transformations took place elsewhere with a number of\nother gods.[29] The Mithra worship was thus formed, in the main, by a\ncombination of Persian beliefs with Semitic theology, incidentally\nincluding certain elements from the native cults of Asia Minor. The Greeks\nlater translated the names of the Persian divinities into their language\nand imposed certain forms of their mysteries on the Mazdean cult.[30]\nHellenic art lent to the Yazatas that idealized form in which it liked to\nrepresent the immortals, and philosophy, especially that of the Stoics,\nendeavored to discover its own physical and metaphysical theories in the\ntraditions of the magi. But in spite of all these accommodations,\nadaptations and interpretations, Mithraism always remained in substance a\nMazdaism blended with Chaldeanism, that is to say, essentially a barbarian\nreligion. It certainly was far less Hellenized than the Alexandrian cult of\nIsis and Serapis, or even that of the Great Mother of Pessinus. For that\nreason it always seemed unacceptable to the Greek world, from which it\ncontinued to be almost completely excluded. Even language furnishes a\ncurious proof of that fact. Greek contains a number of theophorous ([Greek:\ntheophoros], god-bearing) names formed from those of Egyptian or Phrygian\ngods, like Serapion, Metrodoros, Metrophilos--Isidore is in use at the\npresent day--but all known derivations of Mithra are of barbarian\nformation. The Greeks never admitted the god of their hereditary enemies,\nand the great centers of Hellenic {149} civilization escaped his influence\nand he theirs.[31] Mithraism passed directly from Asia into the Latin\nworld.\n\nThere it spread with lightning rapidity from the time it was first\nintroduced. When the progressive march of the Romans toward the Euphrates\nenabled them to investigate the sacred trust transmitted by Persia to the\nmagi of Asia Minor, and when they became acquainted with the Mazdean\nbeliefs which had matured in the seclusion of the Anatolian mountains, they\nadopted them with enthusiasm. The Persian cult was spread by the soldiers\nalong the entire length of the frontiers towards the end of the first\ncentury and left numerous traces around the camps of the Danube and the\nRhine, near the stations along the wall of Britain, and in the vicinity of\nthe army posts scattered along the borders of the Sahara or in the valleys\nof the Asturias. At the same time the Asiatic merchants introduced it in\nthe ports of the Mediterranean, along the great waterways and roads, and in\nall commercial cities. It also possessed missionaries in the Oriental\nslaves who were to be found everywhere, engaging in every pursuit, employed\nin the public service as well as in domestic work, in the cultivation of\nland as well as in financial and mining enterprises, and above all in the\nimperial service, where they filled the offices.\n\nSoon this foreign god gained the favor of high functionaries and of the\nsovereign himself. At the end of the second century Commodus was initiated\ninto the mysteries, a conversion that had a tremendous effect. A hundred\nyears later Mithra's power was such that at one time he seemed about to\neclipse both Oriental and Occidental rivals and to dominate the {150}\nentire Roman world. In the year 307 Diocletian, Galerius and Licinius met\nin a solemn interview at Carnuntum on the Danube and dedicated a sanctuary\nthere to Mithra, \"the protector of their empire\" (_fautori imperii\nsui_).[32]\n\nIn previous works on the mysteries of Mithra we have endeavored to assign\ncauses for the enthusiasm that attracted humble plebeians and great men of\nthe world to the altars of this barbarian god. We shall not repeat here\nwhat any one who has the curiosity may read either in a large or a small\nbook according to his preferences,[33] but we must consider the problem\nfrom a different point of view. Of all Oriental religions the Persian cult\nwas the last to reach the Romans. We shall inquire what new principle it\ncontained; to what inherent qualities it owed its superiority; and through\nwhat characteristics it remained distinct in the conflux of creeds of all\nkinds that were struggling for supremacy in the world at that time.\n\nThe originality and value of the Persian religion lay not in its doctrines\nregarding the nature of the celestial gods. Without doubt Parseeism is of\nall pagan religions the one that comes closest to monotheism, for it\nelevates Ahura Mazda high above all other celestial spirits. But the\ndoctrines of Mithraism are not those of Zoroaster. What it received from\nPersia was chiefly its mythology and ritual; its theology, which was\nthoroughly saturated with Chaldean erudition, probably did not differ\nnoticeably from the Syrian. At the head of the divine hierarchy it placed\nas first cause an abstraction, deified Time, the Zervan Akarana of the\nAvesta. This divinity regulated the revolutions of the stars and in\nconsequence was the absolute master of {151} all things. Ahura Mazda, whose\nthrone was in the heavens, had become the equivalent of _Ba'al Samin_, and\neven before the magi the Semites had introduced into the Occident the\nworship of the sun, the source of all energy and light. Babylonian\nastrology and astrolatry inspired the theories of the mithreums as well as\nof the Semitic temples, a fact that explains the intimate connection of the\ntwo cults. This half religious, half scientific system which was not\npeculiarly Persian nor original to Mithraism was not the reason for the\nadoption of that worship by the Roman world.\n\nNeither did the Persian mysteries win the masses by their liturgy.\nUndoubtedly their secret ceremonies performed in mountain caves, or at any\nrate in the darkness of the underground crypts, were calculated to inspire\nawe. Participation in the liturgical meals gave rise to moral comfort and\nstimulation. By submitting to a sort of baptism the votaries hoped to\nexpiate their sins and regain an untroubled conscience. But the sacred\nfeasts and purifying ablutions connected with the same spiritual hopes are\nfound in other Oriental cults, and the magnificent suggestive ritual of the\nEgyptian clergy certainly was more impressive than that of the magi. The\nmythic drama performed in the grottoes of the Persian god and culminating\nin the immolation of a steer who was considered as the creator and\nrejuvenator of the earth, must have seemed less important and affecting\nthan the suffering and joy of Isis seeking and reviving the mutilated body\nof her husband, or than the moaning and jubilation of Cybele mourning over\nand reviving her lover Attis.\n\nBut Persia introduced dualism as a fundamental principle in religion. It\nwas this that distinguished {152} Mithraism from other sects and inspired\nits dogmatic theology and ethics, giving them a rigor and firmness unknown\nto Roman paganism. It considered the universe from an entirely new point of\nview and at the same time provided a new goal in life.\n\nOf course, if we understand by dualism the antithesis of mind and matter,\nof reason and intuition, it appeared at a considerably earlier period in\nGreek philosophy,[34] where it was one of the leading ideas of\nneo-Pythagoreanism and of Philo's system. But the distinguishing feature of\nthe doctrine of the magi is the fact that it deified the evil principle,\nset it up as a rival to the supreme deity, and taught that both had to be\nworshiped. This system offered an apparently simple solution to the problem\nof evil, the stumbling block of theologies, and it attracted the cultured\nminds as well as the masses, to whom it afforded an explanation of their\nsufferings. Just as the mysteries of Mithra began to spread Plutarch wrote\nof them favorably and was inclined himself to adopt them.[35] From that\ntime dates the appearance in literature of the anti-gods ([Greek:\nantitheoi]),[36] under the command of the powers of darkness[37] and\narrayed against the celestial spirits, messengers or \"angels\"[38] of\ndivinity. They were Ahriman's _devas_ struggling with the Yazatas of\nOrmuzd.\n\nA curious passage in Porphyry[39] shows that the earliest neo-Platonists\nhad already admitted Persian demonology into their system. Below the\nincorporeal and indivisible supreme being, below the stars and the planets,\nthere were countless spirits.[40] Some of them, the gods of cities and\nnations, received special names: {153} the others comprised a nameless\nmultitude. They were divided into two groups. The first were the benevolent\nspirits that gave fecundity to plants and animals, serenity to nature, and\nknowledge to men. They acted as intermediaries between gods and men,\nbearing up to heaven the homage and prayers of the faithful, and down from\nheaven portents and warnings. The others were wicked spirits inhabiting\nregions close to the earth and there was no evil that they did not exert\nevery effort to cause.[41] At the same time both violent and cunning,\nimpetuous and crafty, they were the authors of all the calamities that\nbefell the world, such as pestilence, famine, tempests and earthquakes.\nThey kindled evil passions and illicit desires in the hearts of men and\nprovoked war and sedition. They were clever deceivers rejoicing in lies and\nimpostures. They encouraged the phantasmagoria and mystification of the\nsorcerers[42] and gloated over the bloody sacrifices which magicians\noffered to them all, but especially to their chief.\n\nDoctrines very similar to these were certainly taught in the mysteries of\nMithra; homage was paid to Ahriman (Arimanius) lord of the somber\nunderworld, and master of the infernal spirits.[43] This cult has continued\nin the Orient to the present day among the Yezidis, or devil worshipers.\n\nIn his treatise against the magi, Theodore of Mopsuestia[44] speaks of\nAhriman as Satan ([Greek: Satanas]). At first sight there really is a\nsurprising resemblance between the two. Both are heads of a numerous army\nof demons; both are spirits of error and falsehood, princes of darkness,\n{154} tempters and corrupters. An almost identical picture of the pair\ncould be drawn, and in fact they are practically the same figure under\ndifferent names. It is generally admitted that Judaism took the notion of\nan adversary of God[45] from the Mazdeans along with portions of their\ndualism. It was therefore natural that Jewish doctrine, of which\nChristianity is heir, should have been closely allied to the mysteries of\nMithra. A considerable part of the more or less orthodox beliefs and\nvisions that gave the Middle Ages their nightmare of hell and the devil\nthus came from Persia by two channels: on the one hand Judeo-Christian\nliterature, both canonical and apocryphal; and on the other, the remnants\nof the Mithra cult and the various sects of Manicheism that continued to\npreach the old Persian doctrines on the antagonism between the two world\nprinciples.\n\nBut a theoretical adherence of the mind to dogmas that satisfy it, does not\nsuffice to convert it to a new religion. There must be motives of conduct\nand a basis for hope besides grounds for belief. The Persian dualism was\nnot only a powerful metaphysical conception; it was also the foundation of\na very efficacious system of ethics, and this was the chief agent in the\nsuccess of the mysteries of Mithra during the second and third centuries in\nthe Roman world then animated by unrealized aspirations for more perfect\njustice and holiness.\n\nA sentence of the Emperor Julian,[46] unfortunately too brief, tells us\nthat Mithra subjected his worshipers to \"commandments\" ([Greek: entolai])\nand rewarded faithful observance both in this world and in the next. The\n{155} importance attached by the Persians to their peculiar ethics and the\nrigor with which they observed its precepts, are perhaps the most striking\nfeatures of their national character as manifested in history. They were a\nrace of conquerors subject to a severe discipline, like the Romans, and\nlike them they realized the necessity of discipline in the administration\nof a vast empire. Certain affinities between the two imperial nations\nconnected them directly without the mediation of the Greek world. Mazdaism\nbrought long awaited satisfaction to the old-time Roman desire for a\npractical religion that would subject the individual to a rule of conduct\nand contribute to the welfare of the state.[47] Mithra infused a new vigor\ninto the paganism of the Occident by introducing the imperative ethics of\nPersia.\n\nUnhappily the text of the Mithraic decalogue has not been preserved and its\nprincipal commandments can be restored only by implication.\n\nMithra, the ancient spirit of light, became the god of truth and justice in\nthe religion of Zoroaster and retained that character in the Occident. He\nwas the Mazdean Apollo, but while Hellenism, with a finer appreciation of\nbeauty, developed the esthetic qualities in Apollo, the Persians, caring\nmore for matters of conscience, emphasized the moral character in\nMithra.[48] The Greeks, themselves little scrupulous in that respect, were\nstruck by the abhorrence in which their Oriental neighbors held a lie. The\nPersians conceived of Ahriman as the embodiment of deceit. Mithra was\nalways the god invoked as the guarantor of faith and protector of the\ninviolability of contracts. Absolute fidelity to his oath had to be a\ncardinal virtue {156} in the religion of a soldier, whose first act upon\nenlistment was to pledge obedience and devotion to the sovereign. This\nreligion exalted loyalty and fidelity and undoubtedly tried to inspire a\nfeeling similar to our modern idea of honor.\n\nIn addition to respect for authority it preached fraternity. All the\ninitiates considered themselves as sons of the same father owing to one\nanother a brother's affection. It is a question whether they extended the\nlove of neighbor to that universal charity taught by philosophy and\nChristianity. Emperor Julian, a devoted mystic, liked to set up such an\nideal, and it is probable that the Mithraists of later paganism rose to\nthis conception of duty,[49] but they were not its authors. They seemed to\nhave attached more importance to the virile qualities than to compassion\nand gentleness. The fraternal spirit of initiates calling themselves\nsoldiers was doubtless more akin to the spirit of comradeship in a regiment\nthat has _esprit de corps_, than to the love of one's neighbor that\ninspires works of mercy towards all.\n\nAll primitive people imagine nature filled with unclean and wicked spirits\nthat corrupt and torture those who disturb their repose; but dualism\nendowed this universal belief with marvelous power as well as with a\ndogmatic basis. Mazdaism is governed throughout by ideas of purity and\nimpurity. \"No religion on earth has ever been so completely dominated by an\nideal of purification.\"[50] This kind of perfection was the goal of the\naspiration and effort of believers. They were obliged to guard with\ninfinite precaution against defiling the divine elements, for instance\nwater or fire, or their own persons, and to wipe out all pollution by {157}\nrepeated lustrations. But, as in the Syrian cults of the imperial period,\nthese Mithraic rites did remain simply formal, mechanical and of the flesh,\ninspired by the old idea of _tabu_. Mithraic baptism wiped out moral\nfaults; the purity aimed at had become spiritual.\n\nThis perfect purity distinguishes the mysteries of Mithra from those of all\nother Oriental gods. Serapis is the brother and husband of Isis, Attis the\nlover of Cybele, every Syrian Baal is coupled with a spouse; but Mithra\nlives alone. Mithra is chaste, Mithra is holy (_sanctus_),[51] and for the\nworship of fecundity he substitutes a new reverence for continence.\n\nHowever, although resistance to sensuality is laudable and although the\nideal of perfection of this Mazdean sect inclined towards the asceticism to\nwhich the Manichean conception of virtue led, yet good does not consist\nexclusively in abnegation and self-control, but also in action. It is not\nsufficient for a religion to classify moral values, but in order to be\neffective it must furnish motives for putting them into practice. Dualism\nwas peculiarly favorable for the development of individual effort and human\nenergy; here its influence was strongest. It taught that the world is the\nscene of a perpetual struggle between two powers that share the mastery;\nthe goal to be reached is the disappearance of evil and the uncontested\ndominion, the exclusive reign, of the good. Animals and plants, as well as\nman, are drawn up in two rival camps perpetually hostile, and all nature\nparticipates in the eternal combat of the two opposing principles. The\ndemons created by the infernal spirit emerge constantly from the abyss and\nroam about the earth; they penetrate everywhere carrying corruption,\ndistress, {158} sickness and death. The celestial spirits and the\nsupporters of piety are compelled constantly to baffle their ever renewed\nenterprises. The strife continues in the heart and conscience of man, the\nepitome of the universe, between the divine law of duty and the suggestions\nof the evil spirits. Life is a merciless war knowing no truce. The task of\nthe true Mazdean consisted in constantly fighting the evil in order to\nbring about the gradual triumph of Ormuzd in the world. The believer was\nthe assistant of the gods in their work of purification and improvement.\n\nThe worshipers of Mithra did not lose themselves in a contemplative\nmysticism like other sects. Their morality particularly encouraged action,\nand during a period of laxness, anarchy and confusion, they found\nstimulation, comfort and support in its precepts. Resistance to the\npromptings of degrading instincts assumed the glamor and prestige of\nwarlike exploits in their eyes and instilled an active principle of\nprogress into their character. By supplying a new conception of the world,\ndualism also gave a new meaning to life. This same dualism determined the\neschatological beliefs of the Mithraists. The antagonism between heaven and\nhell was extended into the life hereafter.[52] Mithra, the \"invincible\" god\nwho assisted the faithful in their struggle against the malignity of the\ndemons, was not only their strong companion in their human trials, but as\nan antagonist of the infernal powers he insured the welfare of his\nfollowers in the future life as well as on earth. When the genius of\ncorruption seizes the corpse after death, the spirits of darkness and the\ncelestial messengers struggle for the possession of the soul that has left\nits corporeal prison. It stands {159} trial before Mithra, and if its\nmerits outweigh its shortcomings in the divine balance it is defended from\nAhriman's agents that seek to drag it into the infernal abyss. Finally it\nis led into the ethereal regions where Jupiter-Ormuzd reigns in eternal\nlight. The believers in Mithra did not agree with the votaries of Serapis\nwho held that the souls of the just reside in the depths of the earth.[53]\nTo them that somber kingdom was the domain of wrong-doers. The souls of the\njust live in the boundless light that extends above the stars, and by\ndivesting themselves of all sensuality and all lust in passing through the\nplanetary spheres[54] they become as pure as the gods whose company they\nenter.\n\nHowever, when the world came to an end the body also was to share in that\nhappiness because it was believed as in Egypt that the whole person would\nenjoy eternal life. After time had run its course Mithra would raise all\nmen from the dead, pouring out a marvelous beverage of immortality for the\ngood, but all evil doers would be annihilated by fire together with Ahriman\nhimself.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nOf all the Oriental cults none was so severe as Mithraism, none attained an\nequal moral elevation, none could have had so strong a hold on mind and\nheart. In many respects it gave its definite religious formula to the pagan\nworld and the influence of its ideas remained long after the religion\nitself had come to a violent end. Persian dualism introduced certain\nprinciples into Europe that have never ceased to exert an influence. Its\nwhole history proves the thesis with which we began, the power of\nresistance and of {160} influence possessed by Persian culture and\nreligion. These possessed an originality so independent that after having\nresisted in the Orient the power of absorption of Hellenism, and after\nhaving checked the Christian propaganda, they even withstood the\ndestructive power of Islam. Firdusi (940-1020) glories in the ancient\nnational traditions and the mythical heroes of Mazdaism, and while the\nidolatry of Egypt, Syria and Asia Minor has long since died out or\ndegenerated, there are votaries of Zoroaster at the present day who piously\nperform the sacred ceremonies of the Avesta and practise genuine fire\nworship.\n\nAnother witness to the vitality of Mithraic Mazdaism is the fact that it\nescaped becoming a kind of state religion of the Roman empire during the\nthird century. An oft-quoted sentence of Renan's says:[55] \"If Christianity\nhad been checked in its growth by some deadly disease, the world would have\nbecome Mithraic.\" In hazarding that statement he undoubtedly conjured up a\npicture of what would have been the condition of this poor world in that\ncase. He must have imagined, one of his followers would have us\nbelieve,[56] that the morals of the human race would have been but little\nchanged, a little more virile perhaps, a little less charitable, but only a\nshade different. The erudite theology taught by the mysteries would\nobviously have shown a laudable respect for science, but as its dogmas were\nbased upon a false physics it would apparently have insured the persistence\nof an infinity of errors. Astronomy would not be lacking, but astrology\nwould have been unassailable, while the heavens would still be revolving\naround the earth to accord with its doctrines. The greatest {161} danger,\nit appears to me, would have been that the Caesars would have established a\ntheocratic absolutism supported by the Oriental ideas of the divinity of\nkings. The union of throne and altar would have been inseparable, and\nEurope would never have known the invigorating struggle between church and\nstate. But on the other hand the discipline of Mithraism, so productive of\nindividual energy, and the democratic organization of its societies in\nwhich senators and slaves rubbed elbows, contain a germ of liberty.\n\nWe might dwell at some length on these contrasting possibilities, but it is\nhard to find a mental pastime less profitable than the attempt to remake\nhistory and to conjecture on what might have been had events proved\notherwise. If the torrent of actions and reactions that carries us along\nwere turned out of its course what imagination could describe the unknown\nregions through which it would flow?\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{162}\n\nASTROLOGY AND MAGIC.\n\nWhen we consider the absolute authority that astrology exercised under the\nRoman empire, we find it hard to escape a feeling of surprise. It is\ndifficult to think that people could ever consider astrology as the most\nvaluable of all arts and the queen of sciences,[1] and it is not easy for\nus to imagine the moral conditions that made such a phenomenon possible,\nbecause our state of mind to-day is very different. Little by little the\nconviction has gained ground that all that can be known about the future,\nat least the future of man and of human society, is conjecture. The\nprogress of knowledge has taught man to acquiesce in his ignorance.\n\nIn former ages it was different: forebodings and predictions found\nuniversal credence. The ancient forms of divination, however, had fallen\nsomewhat into disrepute at the beginning of our era, like the rest of the\nGreco-Roman religion. It was no longer thought that the eagerness or\nreluctance with which the sacred hens ate their paste, or the direction of\nthe flight of the birds indicated coming success or disaster. Abandoned,\nthe Hellenic oracles were silent. Then appeared astrology, surrounded with\nall the prestige of an exact science, and based upon the experience of many\ncenturies. It promised to ascertain the {163} occurrences of any one's life\nwith as much precision as the date of an eclipse. The world was drawn\ntowards it by an irresistible attraction. Astrology did away with, and\ngradually relegated to oblivion, all the ancient methods that had been\ndevised to solve the enigmas of the future. Haruspicy and the augural art\nwere abandoned, and not even the ancient fame of the oracles could save\nthem from falling into irretrievable desuetude. This great chimera changed\nreligion as well as divination, its spirit penetrated everything. And\ntruly, if, as some scholars still hold, the main feature of science is the\nability to predict,[2] no branch of learning could compare with this one,\nnor escape its influence.\n\nThe success of astrology was connected with that of the Oriental religions,\nwhich lent it their support, as it in turn helped them. We have seen how it\nforced itself upon Semitic paganism, how it transformed Persian Mazdaism\nand even subdued the arrogance of the Egyptian sacerdotal caste.[3] Certain\nmystical treatises ascribed to the old Pharaoh Nechepso and his confidant,\nthe priest Petosiris, nebulous and abstruse works that became, one might\nsay, the Bible of the new belief in the power of the stars, were translated\ninto Greek, undoubtedly in Alexandria, about the year 150 before our\nera.[4] About the same time the Chaldean genethlialogy began to spread in\nItaly, with regard to which Berosus, a priest of the god Baal, who came to\nBabylon from the island of Cos, had previously succeeded in arousing the\ncuriosity of the Greeks. In 139 a praetor expelled the \"Chaldaei\" from Rome,\ntogether with the Jews. But all the adherents of the Syrian goddess, of\nwhom there was quite a number in the Occident, were patrons and defenders\nof these Oriental {164} prophets, and police measures were no more\nsuccessful in stopping the diffusion of their doctrines, than in the case\nof the Asiatic mysteries. In the time of Pompey, the senator Nigidius\nFigulus, who was an ardent occultist, expounded the barbarian uranography\nin Latin. But the scholar whose authority contributed most to the final\nacceptance of sidereal divination was a Syrian philosopher of encyclopedic\nknowledge, Posidonius of Apamea, the teacher of Cicero.[5] The works of\nthat erudite and religious writer influenced the development of the entire\nRoman theology more than anything else.\n\nUnder the empire, while the Semitic Baals and Mithra were triumphing,\nastrology manifested its power everywhere. During that period everybody\nbowed to it. The Caesars became its fervent devotees, frequently at the\nexpense of the ancient cults. Tiberius neglected the gods because he\nbelieved only in fatalism,[6] and Otho, blindly confiding in the Oriental\nseer, marched against Vitellius in spite of the baneful presages that\naffrighted his official clergy.[7] The most earnest scholars, Ptolemy under\nthe Antonines for instance, expounded the principles of that\npseudo-science, and the very best minds received them. In fact, scarcely\nanybody made a distinction between astronomy and its illegitimate sister.\nLiterature took up this new and difficult subject, and, as early as the\ntime of Augustus or Tiberius, Manilius, inspired by the sidereal fatalism,\nendeavored to make poetry of that dry \"mathematics,\" as Lucretius, his\nforerunner, had done with the Epicurean atomism. Even art looked there for\ninspiration and depicted the stellar deities. At Rome and in the provinces\narchitects erected sumptuous _septizonia_ in the likeness of {165} the\nseven spheres in which the planets that rule our destinies move.[8] This\nAsiatic divination was first aristocratic[9]--because the obtaining of an\nexact horoscope was a complicated matter, and consultations were\nexpensive--but it promptly became popular, especially in the urban centers\nwhere Oriental slaves gathered in large numbers. The learned\ngenethlialogers of the observatories had unlicensed colleagues, who told\nfortunes at street-crossings or in barnyards. Even common epitaphs, which\nRossi styles \"the scum of inscriptions,\" have retained traces of that\nbelief. The custom arose of stating in epitaphs the exact length of a life\nto the very hour, for the moment of birth determined that of death:\n\n  _Nascentes morimur, finisque ab origine pendet._[10]\n\nSoon neither important nor small matters were undertaken without consulting\nthe astrologer. His previsions were sought not only in regard to great\npublic events like the conduct of a war, the founding of a city, or the\naccession of a ruler, not only in case of a marriage, a journey, or a\nchange of domicile; but the most trifling acts of every-day life were\ngravely submitted to his sagacity. People would no longer take a bath, go\nto the barber, change their clothes or manicure their fingernails, without\nfirst awaiting the propitious moment.[11] The collections of \"initiatives\"\n([Greek: katarchai]) that have come to us contain questions that make us\nsmile: Will a son who is about to be born have a big nose? Will a girl just\ncoming into this world have gallant adventures?[12] And certain precepts\nsound almost like burlesques: he who gets his hair cut while {166} the moon\nis in her increase will become bald--evidently by analogy.[13]\n\nThe entire existence of states and individuals, down to the slightest\nincidents, was thought to depend on the stars. The absolute control they\nwere supposed to exercise over everybody's daily condition, even modified\nthe language in every-day use and left traces in almost all idioms derived\nfrom the Latin. If we speak of a martial, or a jovial character, or a\nlunatic, we are unconsciously admitting the existence, in these heavenly\nbodies (Mars, Jupiter, Luna) of their ancient qualities.\n\nIt must be acknowledged, however, that the Grecian spirit tried to combat\nthe folly that was taking hold of the world, and from the time of its\npropagation astrology found opponents among the philosophers. The most\nsubtle of these adversaries was the probabilist Carneades, in the second\ncentury before our era. The topical arguments which he advanced, were taken\nup, reproduced, and developed in a thousand ways by later polemicists. For\ninstance, Were all the men that perish together in a battle, born at the\nsame moment, because they had the same fate? Or, on the other hand, do we\nnot observe that twins, born at the same time, have the most unlike\ncharacters and the most different fortunes?\n\nBut dialectics are an accomplishment in which the Greeks ever excelled, and\nthe defenders of astrology found a reply to every objection. They\nendeavored especially to establish firmly the truths of observation, upon\nwhich rested the entire learned structure of their art: the influence of\nthe stars over the phenomena of nature and the characters of individuals.\nCan it be {167} denied, they said, that the sun causes vegetation to appear\nand to perish, and that it puts animals _en rut_ or plunges them into\nlethargic sleep? Does not the movement of the tide depend on the course of\nthe moon? Is not the rising of certain constellations accompanied every\nyear by storms? And are not the physical and moral qualities of the\ndifferent races manifestly determined by the climate in which they live?\nThe action of the sky on the earth is undeniable, and, the sidereal\ninfluences once admitted, all previsions based on them are legitimate. As\nsoon as the first principle is admitted, all corollaries are logically\nderived from it.\n\nThis way of reasoning was universally considered irrefutable. Before the\nadvent of Christianity, which especially opposed it because of its\nidolatrous character, astrology had scarcely any adversaries except those\nwho denied the possibility of science altogether, namely, the\nneo-Academicians, who held that man could not attain certainty, and such\nradical sceptics as Sextus Empiricus. Upheld by the Stoics, however, who\nwith very few exceptions were in favor of astrology, it can be maintained\nthat it emerged triumphant from the first assaults directed against it. The\nonly result of the objections raised to it was to modify some of its\ntheories. Later, the general weakening of the spirit of criticism assured\nastrology an almost uncontested domination. Its adversaries did not renew\ntheir polemics; they limited themselves to the repetition of arguments that\nhad been opposed, if not refuted, a hundred times, and consequently seemed\nworn out. At the court of the Severi any one who should have denied the\ninfluence of the planets upon the events of this world {168} would have\nbeen considered more preposterous than he who would admit it to-day.\n\nBut, you will say, if the theorists did not succeed in proving the\ndoctrinal falsity of astrology, experience should have shown its\nworthlessness. Errors must have occurred frequently and must have been\nfollowed by cruel disillusionment. Having lost a child at the age of four\nfor whom a brilliant future had been predicted, the parents stigmatized in\nthe epitaph the \"lying mathematician whose great renown deluded them.\"[14]\nNobody thought of denying the possibility of such errors. Manuscripts have\nbeen preserved, wherein the makers of horoscopes themselves candidly and\nlearnedly explain how they were mistaken in such and such a case, because\nthey had not taken into account some one of the data of the problem.[15]\nManilius, in spite of his unlimited confidence in the power of reason,\nhesitated at the complexity of an immense task that seemed to exceed the\ncapacity of human intelligence,[16] and in the second century, Vettius\nValens bitterly denounced the contemptible bunglers who claimed to be\nprophets, without having had the long training necessary, and who thereby\ncast odium and ridicule upon astrology, in the name of which they pretended\nto operate.[17] It must be remembered that astrology, like medicine, was\nnot only a science ([Greek: episteme]), but also an art ([Greek: techne]).\nThis comparison, which sounds irreverent to-day, was a flattering one in\nthe eyes of the ancients.[18] To observe the sky was as delicate a task as\nto observe the human body; to cast the horoscope of a newly born child,\njust as perilous as to make a diagnosis, and to interpret the cosmic\nsymptoms just as hard as to {169} interpret those of our organism. In both\ninstances the elements were complex and the chances of error infinite. All\nthe examples of patients dying in spite of the physician, or on account of\nhim, will never keep a person who is tortured by physical pain from\nappealing to him for help; and similarly those whose souls were troubled\nwith ambition or fear turned to the astrologer for some remedy for the\nmoral fever tormenting them. The calculator, who claimed to determine the\nmoment of death, and the medical practitioner who claimed to avert it\nreceived the anxious patronage of people worried by this formidable issue.\nFurthermore, just as marvelous cures were reported, striking predictions\nwere called to mind or, if need were, invented. The diviner had, as a rule,\nonly a restricted number of possibilities to deal with, and the calculus of\nprobabilities shows that he must have succeeded sometimes. Mathematics,\nwhich he invoked, was in his favor after all, and chance frequently\ncorrected mischance. Moreover, did not the man who had a well-frequented\nconsulting-office, possess a thousand means, if he was clever, of placing\nall the chances on his side, in the hazardous profession he followed, and\nof reading in the stars anything he thought expedient? He observed the\nearth rather than the sky, and took care not to fall into a well.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nHowever, what helped most to make astrology invulnerable to the blows of\nreason and of common sense, was the fact that in reality, the apparent\nrigor of its calculus and its theorems notwithstanding, it was not a\nscience but a faith. We mean not only that {170} it implied belief in\npostulates that could not be proved--the same thing might be said of almost\nall of our poor human knowledge, and even our systems of physics and\ncosmology in the last analysis are based upon hypotheses--but that\nastrology was born and reared in the temples of Chaldea and Egypt.[19] Even\nin the Occident it never forgot its sacerdotal origin and never more than\nhalf freed itself from religion, whose offspring it was. Here lies the\nconnection between astrology and the Oriental religions, and I wish to draw\nthe reader's special attention to this point.\n\nThe Greek works and treatises on astrology that have come down to us reveal\nthis essential feature only very imperfectly. The Byzantines stripped this\npseudo-science, always regarded suspiciously by the church, of everything\nthat savored of paganism. Their process of purification can, in some\ninstances, be traced from manuscript to manuscript.[20] If they retained\nthe name of some god or hero of mythology, the only way they dared to write\nit was by cryptography. They have especially preserved purely didactic\ntreatises, the most perfect type of which is Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos which\nhas been constantly quoted and commented upon; and they have reproduced\nalmost exclusively expurgated texts, in which the principles of various\ndoctrines are drily summarized. During the classic age works of a different\ncharacter were commonly read. Many \"Chaldeans\" interspersed their\ncosmological calculations and theories with moral considerations and\nmystical speculations. In the first part of a work that he names \"Vision,\"\n([Greek: Horasis]) Critodemus, in prophetic language, represents the truths\nhe reveals {171} as a secure harbor of refuge from the storms of this\nworld, and he promises his readers to raise them to the rank of\nimmortals.[21] Vettius Valens, a contemporary of Marcus Aurelius, implored\nthem in solemn terms, not to divulge to the ignorant and impious the arcana\nhe was about to acquaint them with.[22] The astrologers liked to assume the\nappearance of incorruptible and holy priests and to consider their calling\na sacerdotal one.[23] In fact, the two ministries sometimes combined: A\ndignitary of the Mithraic clergy called himself _studiosus astrologiae_[24]\nin his epitaph, and a member of a prominent family of Phrygian prelates\ncelebrated in verse the science of divination which enabled him to issue a\nnumber of infallible predictions.[25]\n\nThe sacred character of astrology revealed itself in some passages that\nescaped the orthodox censure and in the tone some of its followers assumed,\nbut we must go further and show that astrology was religious in its\nprinciples as well as in its conclusions, the debt it owed to mathematics\nand observation notwithstanding.\n\nThe fundamental dogma of astrology, as conceived by the Greeks, was that of\nuniversal solidarity. The world is a vast organism, all the parts of which\nare connected through an unceasing exchange of molecules of effluvia. The\nstars, inexhaustible generators of energy, constantly act upon the earth\nand man--upon man, the epitome of all nature, a \"microcosm\" whose every\nelement corresponds to some part of the starry sky. This was, in a few\nwords, the theory formulated by the Stoic disciples of the Chaldeans;[26]\nbut if we divest it of all the philosophic garments with which it has been\nadorned, what do we find? The idea of {172} sympathy, a belief as old as\nhuman society! The savage peoples also established mysterious relations\nbetween all bodies and all the beings that inhabit the earth and the\nheavens, and which to them were animated with a life of their own endowed\nwith latent power, but we shall speak of this later on, when taking up the\nsubject of magic. Even before the propagation of the Oriental religions,\npopular superstition in Italy and Greece attributed a number of odd actions\nto the sun, the moon, and the constellations as well.[27]\n\nThe Chaldaei, however, claimed a predominant power for the stars. In fact,\nthey were regarded as gods _par excellence_ by the religion of the ancient\nChaldeans in its beginnings. The sidereal religion of Babylon concentrated\ndeity, one might say, in the luminous moving bodies at the expense of other\nnatural objects, such as stones, plants, animals, which the primitive\nSemitic faith considered equally divine. The stars always retained this\ncharacter, even at Rome. They were not, as to us, infinitely distant bodies\nmoving in space according to the inflexible laws of mechanics, and whose\nchemical composition may be determined. To the Latins as to the Orientals,\nthey were propitious or baleful deities, whose ever-changing relations\ndetermined the events of this world.\n\nThe sky, whose unfathomable depth had not yet been perceived, was peopled\nwith heroes and monsters of contrary passions, and the struggle above had\nan immediate echo upon earth. By what principle have such a quality and so\ngreat an influence been attributed to the stars? Is it for reasons derived\nfrom their apparent motion and known through observation or experience?\nSometimes. Saturn made people {173} apathetic and irresolute, because it\nmoved most slowly of all the planets.[28] But in most instances purely\nmythological reasons inspired the precepts of astrology. The seven planets\nwere associated with certain deities, Mars, Venus, or Mercury, whose\ncharacter and history are known to all. It is sufficient simply to\npronounce their names to call to mind certain personalities that may be\nexpected to act according to their natures, in every instance. It was\nnatural for Venus to favor lovers, and for Mercury to assure the success of\nbusiness transactions and dishonest deals. The same applies to the\nconstellations, with which a number of legends are connected: \"catasterism\"\nor translation into the stars, became the natural conclusion of a great\nmany tales. The heroes of mythology, or even those of human society,\ncontinued to live in the sky in the form of brilliant stars. There Perseus\nagain met Andromeda, and the Centaur Chiron, who is none other than\nSagittarius, was on terms of good fellowship with the Dioscuri.\n\nThese constellations, then, assumed to a certain extent the good and the\nbad qualities of the mythical or historical beings that had been\ntransferred upon them. For instance, the serpent, which shines near the\nnorthern pole, was the author of medical cures, because it was the animal\nsacred to AEsculapius.[29]\n\nThe religious foundation of the rules of astrology, however, can not always\nbe recognized. Sometimes it is entirely forgotten, and in such cases the\nrules assume the appearance of axioms, or of laws based upon long\nobservation of celestial phenomena. Here we have a simple aspect of\nscience. The process of {174} assimilation with the gods and catasterism\nwere known in the Orient long before they were practiced in Greece.\n\nThe traditional outlines that we reproduce on our celestial maps are the\nfossil remains of a luxuriant mythological vegetation, and besides our\nclassic sphere the ancients knew another, the \"barbarian\" sphere, peopled\nwith a world of fantastic persons and animals. These sidereal monsters, to\nwhom powerful qualities were ascribed, were likewise the remnants of a\nmultitude of forgotten beliefs. Zoolatry was abandoned in the temples, but\npeople continued to regard as divine the lion, the bull, the bear, and the\nfishes, which the Oriental imagination had seen in the starry vault. Old\ntotems of the Semitic tribes or of the Egyptian divisions lived again,\ntransformed into constellations. Heterogeneous elements, taken from all the\nreligions of the Orient, were combined in the uranography of the ancients,\nand in the power ascribed to the phantoms that it evoked, vibrates in the\nindistinct echo of ancient devotions that are often completely unknown to\nus.[30]\n\nAstrology, then, was religious in its origin and in its principles. It was\nreligious also in its close relation to the Oriental religions, especially\nthose of the Syrian Baals and of Mithra; finally, it was religious in the\neffects that it produced. I do not mean the effects expected from a\nconstellation in any particular instance: as for example the power to evoke\nthe gods that were subject to their domination.[31] But I have in mind the\ngeneral influence those doctrines exercised upon Roman paganism.\n\nWhen the Olympian gods were incorporated among the stars, when Saturn and\nJupiter became planets and {175} the celestial virgin a sign of the zodiac,\nthey assumed a character very different from the one they had originally\npossessed. It has been shown[32] how, in Syria, the idea of an infinite\nrepetition of cycles of years according to which the celestial revolutions\ntook place, led to the conception of divine eternity, how the theory of a\nfatal domination of the stars over the earth brought about that of the\nomnipotence of the \"lord of the heavens,\" and how the introduction of a\nuniversal religion was the necessary result of the belief that the stars\nexerted an influence upon the peoples of every climate. The logic of all\nthese consequences of the principles of astrology was plain to the Latin as\nwell as to the Semitic races, and caused a rapid transformation of the\nancient idolatry. As in Syria, the sun, which the astrologers called the\nleader of the planetary choir, \"who is established as king and leader of\nthe whole world,\"[33] necessarily became the highest power of the Roman\npantheon.\n\nAstrology also modified theology, by introducing into this pantheon a great\nnumber of new gods, some of whom were singularly abstract. Thereafter man\nworshiped the constellations of the firmament, particularly the twelve\nsigns of the zodiac, every one of which had its mythologic legend; the sky\n(_Caelus_) itself, because it was considered the first cause, and was\nsometimes confused with the supreme being; the four elements, the\nantithesis and perpetual transmutations of which produced all tangible\nphenomena, and which were often symbolized by a group of animals ready to\ndevour each other;[34] finally, time and its subdivisions.[35]\n\nThe calendars were religious before they were secular; their purpose was\nnot, primarily, to record fleeting {176} time, but to observe the\nrecurrence of propitious or inauspicious dates separated by periodic\nintervals. It is a matter of experience that the return of certain moments\nis associated with the appearance of certain phenomena; they have,\ntherefore, a special efficacy, and are endowed with a sacred character. By\ndetermining periods with mathematical exactness, astrology continued to see\nin them \"a divine power,\"[36] to use Zeno's term. Time, that regulates the\ncourse of the stars and the transubstantiation of the elements, was\nconceived of as the master of the gods and the primordial principle, and\nwas likened to destiny. Each part of its infinite duration brought with it\nsome propitious or evil movement of the sky that was anxiously observed,\nand transformed the ever modified universe. The centuries, the years and\nthe seasons, placed into relation with the four winds and the four cardinal\npoints, the twelve months connected with the zodiac, the day and the night,\nthe twelve hours, all were personified and deified, as the authors of every\nchange in the universe. The allegorical figures contrived for these\nabstractions by astrological paganism did not even perish with it.[37] The\nsymbolism it had disseminated outlived it, and until the Middle Ages these\npictures of fallen gods were reproduced indefinitely in sculpture, mosaics,\nand in Christian miniatures.[38]\n\nThus astrology entered into all religious ideas, and the doctrines of the\ndestiny of the world and of man harmonized with its teachings. According to\nBerosus, who is the interpreter of ancient Chaldean theories, the existence\nof the universe consisted of a series of \"big years,\" each having its\nsummer and its winter. Their summer took place when all the planets were in\n{177} conjunction at the same point of Cancer, and brought with it a\ngeneral conflagration. On the other hand, their winter came when all the\nplanets were joined in Capricorn, and its result was a universal flood.\nEach of these cosmic cycles, the duration of which was fixed at 432,000\nyears according to the most probable estimate, was an exact reproduction of\nthose that had preceded it. In fact, when the stars resumed exactly the\nsame position, they were forced to act in identically the same manner as\nbefore. This Babylonian theory, an anticipation of that of the \"eternal\nreturn of things,\" which Nietzsche boasts of having discovered, enjoyed\nlasting popularity during antiquity, and in various forms came down to the\nRenaissance.[39] The belief that the world would be destroyed by fire, a\ntheory also spread abroad by the Stoics, found a new support in these\ncosmic speculations.\n\nAstrology, however, revealed the future not only of the universe, but also\nof man. According to a Chaldeo-Persian doctrine, accepted by the pagan\nmystics and previously pointed out by us,[40] a bitter necessity compelled\nthe souls that dwell in great numbers on the celestial heights, to descend\nupon this earth and to animate certain bodies that are to hold them in\ncaptivity. In descending to the earth they travel through the spheres of\nthe planets and receive some quality from each of these wandering stars,\naccording to its positions. Contrariwise, when death releases them from\ntheir carnal prison, they return to their first habitation, providing they\nhave led a pious life, and if as they pass through the doors of the\nsuperposed heavens they divest themselves of the passions and inclinations\nacquired during their first journey, {178} to ascend finally, as pure\nessence to the radiant abode of the gods. There they live forever among the\neternal stars, freed from the tyranny of destiny and even from the\nlimitations of time.\n\nThis alliance of the theorems of astronomy with their old beliefs supplied\nthe Chaldeans with answers to all the questions that men asked concerning\nthe relation of heaven and earth, the nature of God, the existence of the\nworld, and their own destiny. Astrology was really the first scientific\ntheology. Hellenistic logic arranged the Oriental doctrines properly,\ncombined them with the Stoic philosophy and built them up into a system of\nindisputable grandeur, an ideal reconstruction of the universe, the\npowerful assurance of which inspired Manilius to sublime language when he\nwas not exhausted by his efforts to master an ill-adapted theme.[41] The\nvague and irrational notion of \"sympathy\" is transformed into a deep sense\nof the relationship between the human soul, an igneous substance, and the\ndivine stars, and this feeling is strengthened by thought.[42] The\ncontemplation of the sky has become a communion. During the splendor of\nnight the mind of man became intoxicated with the light streaming from\nabove; born on the wings of enthusiasm, he ascended into the sacred choir\nof the stars and took part in their harmonious movements. \"He participates\nin their immortality, and, before his appointed hour, converses with the\ngods.\"[43] In spite of the subtle precision the Greeks always maintained in\ntheir speculations, the feeling that permeated astrology down to the end of\npaganism never belied its Oriental and religious origin. {179}\n\nThe most essential principle of astrology was that of fatalism. As the poet\nsays:[44]\n\n  _\"Fata regunt orbem, certa stant omnia lege.\"_\n\nThe Chaldeans were the first to conceive the idea of an inflexible\nnecessity ruling the universe, instead of gods acting in the world\naccording to their passions, like men in society. They noticed that an\nimmutable law regulated the movements of the celestial bodies, and, in the\nfirst enthusiasm of their discovery they extended its effects to all moral\nand social phenomena. The postulates of astrology imply an absolute\ndeterminism. Tyche, or deified fortune, became the irresistible mistress of\nmortals and immortals alike, and was even worshiped exclusively by some\nunder the empire. Our deliberate will never plays more than a very limited\npart in our happiness and success, but, among the pronunciamentos and in\nthe anarchy of the third century, blind chance seemed to play with the life\nof every one according to its fancy, and it can easily be understood that\nthe ephemeral rulers of that period, like the masses, saw in chance the\nsovereign disposer of their fates.[45]\n\nThe power of this fatalist conception during antiquity may be measured by\nits long persistence, at least in the Orient, where it originated. Starting\nfrom Babylonia,[46] it spread over the entire Hellenic world, as early as\nthe Alexandrian period, and towards the end of paganism a considerable part\nof the efforts of the Christian apologists was directed against it.[47] But\nit was destined to outlast all attacks, and to impose itself even on\nIslam.[48] In Latin Europe, in spite of the anathemas of the church, the\nbelief remained confusedly {180} alive all through the Middle Ages that on\nthis earth everything happens somewhat\n\n \"Per ovra delle rote magne,\n  Che drizzan ciascun seme ad alcun fine\n  Secondo che le stella son campagne.\"[49]\n\nThe weapons used by the ecclesiastic writers in contending against this\nsidereal fatalism were taken from the arsenal of the old Greek dialectics.\nIn general, they were those that all defenders of free will had used for\ncenturies: determinism destroys responsibility; rewards and punishments are\nabsurd if man acts under a necessity that compels him, if he is born a hero\nor a criminal. We shall not dwell on these metaphysical discussions,[50]\nbut there is one argument that is more closely connected with our subject,\nand therefore should be mentioned. If we live under an immutable fate, no\nsupplication can change its decisions; religion is unavailing, it is\nuseless to ask the oracles to reveal the secrets of a future which nothing\ncan change, and prayers, to use one of Seneca's expressions, are nothing\nbut \"the solace of diseased minds.\"[51]\n\nAnd, doubtless, some adepts of astrology, like the Emperor Tiberius,[52]\nneglected the practice of religion, because they were convinced that fate\ngoverned all things. Following the example set by the Stoics, they made\nabsolute submission to an almighty fate and joyful acceptance of the\ninevitable a moral duty, and were satisfied to worship the superior power\nthat ruled the universe, without demanding anything in return. They\nconsidered themselves at the mercy of even the most capricious fate, and\nwere like the intelligent slave who guesses the desires of his master to\nsatisfy them, and {181} knows how to make the hardest servitude\ntolerable.[53] The masses, however, never reached that height of\nresignation. They looked at astrology far more from a religious than from a\nlogical standpoint.[54] The planets and constellations were not only cosmic\nforces, whose favorable or inauspicious action grew weaker or stronger\naccording to the turnings of a course established for eternity; they were\ndeities who saw and heard, who were glad or sad, who had a voice and sex,\nwho were prolific or sterile, gentle or savage, obsequious or arrogant.[55]\nTheir anger could therefore be soothed and their favor obtained through\nrites and offerings; even the adverse stars were not unrelenting and could\nbe persuaded through sacrifices and supplications. The narrow and pedantic\nFirmicus Maternus strongly asserts the omnipotence of fate, but at the same\ntime he invokes the gods and asks for their aid against the influence of\nthe stars. As late as the fourth century the pagans of Rome who were about\nto marry, or to make a purchase, or to solicit a public office, went to the\ndiviner for his prognostics, at the same time praying to Fate for\nprosperity in their undertaking.[56] Thus a fundamental antinomy manifested\nitself all through the development of astrology, which pretended to be an\nexact science, but always remained a sacerdotal theology.\n\nOf course, the more the idea of fatalism imposed itself and spread, the\nmore the weight of this hopeless theory oppressed the consciousness. Man\nfelt himself dominated and crushed by blind forces that dragged him on as\nirresistibly as they kept the celestial spheres in motion. His soul tried\nto escape the oppression of this cosmic mechanism, and to leave the slavery\nof {182} Ananke. But he no longer had confidence in the ceremonies of his\nold religion. The new powers that had taken possession of heaven had to be\npropitiated by new means. The Oriental religions themselves offered a\nremedy against the evils they had created, and taught powerful and\nmysterious processes for conjuring fate.[57] And side by side with\nastrology we see magic, a more pernicious aberration, gaining ground.[58]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIf, from the reading of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, we pass on to read a magic\npapyrus, our first impression is that we have stepped from one end of the\nintellectual world to the other. Here we find no trace of the systematic\norder or severe method that distinguish the work of the scholar of\nAlexandria. Of course, the doctrines of astrology are just as chimerical as\nthose of magic, but they are deduced with an amount of logic, entirely\nwanting in works of sorcery, that compels reasoning intellects to accept\nthem. Recipes borrowed from medicine and popular superstition, primitive\npractices rejected or abandoned by the sacerdotal rituals, beliefs\nrepudiated by a progressive moral religion, plagiarisms and forgeries of\nliterary or liturgic texts, incantations in which the gods of all barbarous\nnations are invoked in unintelligible gibberish, odd and disconcerting\nceremonies--all these form a chaos in which the imagination loses itself, a\npotpourri in which an arbitrary syncretism seems to have attempted to\ncreate an inextricable confusion.\n\nHowever, if we observe more closely how magic operates, we find that it\nstarts out from the same principles and acts along the same line of\nreasoning {183} as astrology. Born during the same period in the primitive\ncivilizations of the Orient, both were based on a number of common\nideas.[59] Magic, like astrology, proceeded from the principle of universal\nsympathy, yet it did not consider the relation existing between the stars\ntraversing the heavens, and physical or moral phenomena, but the relation\nbetween whatever bodies there are. It started out from the preconceived\nidea that an obscure but constant relation exists between certain things,\ncertain words, certain persons. This connection was established without\nhesitation between dead material things and living beings, because the\nprimitive races ascribed a soul and existence similar to those of man, to\neverything surrounding them. The distinction between the three kingdoms of\nnature was unknown to them; they were \"animists.\" The life of a person\nmight, therefore, be linked to that of a thing, a tree, or an animal, in\nsuch a manner that one died if the other did, and that any damage suffered\nby one was also sustained by its inseparable associate. Sometimes the\nrelation was founded on clearly intelligible grounds, like a resemblance\nbetween the thing and the being, as where, to kill an enemy, one pierced a\nwaxen figure supposed to represent him. Or a contact, even merely passing\nby, was believed to have created indestructible affinities, for instance\nwhere the garments of an absent person were operated upon. Often, also,\nthese imaginary relations were founded on reasons that escape us: like the\nqualities attributed by astrology to the stars, they may have been derived\nfrom old beliefs the memory of which is lost.\n\nLike astrology, then, magic was a science in some respects. First, like the\npredictions of its sister, it {184} was partly based on\nobservation--observation frequently rudimentary, superficial, hasty, and\nerroneous, but nevertheless important. It was an experimental discipline.\nAmong the great number of facts noted by the curiosity of the magicians,\nthere were many that received scientific indorsement later on. The\nattraction of the magnet for iron was utilized by the thaumaturgi before it\nwas interpreted by the natural philosophers. In the vast compilations that\ncirculated under the venerable names of Zoroaster or Hostanes, many fertile\nremarks were scattered among puerile ideas and absurd teachings, just as in\nthe Greek treatises on alchemy that have come down to us. The idea that\nknowledge of the power of certain agents enables one to stimulate the\nhidden forces of the universe into action and to obtain extraordinary\nresults, inspires the researches of physics to-day, just as it inspired the\nclaims of magic. And if astrology was a perverted astronomy, magic was\nphysics gone astray.\n\nMoreover, and again like astrology, magic was a science, because it started\nfrom the fundamental conception that order and law exist in nature, and\nthat the same cause always produces the same effect. An occult ceremony,\nperformed with the same care as an experiment in the chemical laboratory,\nwill always have the expected result. To know the mysterious affinities\nthat connect all things is sufficient to set the mechanism of the universe\ninto motion. But the error of the magicians consisted in establishing a\nconnection between phenomena that do not depend on each other at all. The\nact of exposing to the light for an instant a sensitive plate in a camera,\nthen immersing it, according to given recipes, in appropriate liquids, and\nof making {185} the picture of a relative or friend appear thereon, is a\nmagical operation, but based on real actions and reactions, instead of on\narbitrarily assumed sympathies and antipathies. Magic, therefore, was a\nscience groping in the dark, and later became \"a bastard sister of\nscience,\" as Frazer puts it.\n\nBut, like astrology, magic was religious in origin, and always remained a\nbastard sister of religion. Both grew up together in the temples of the\nbarbarian Orient. Their practices were, at first, part of the dubious\nknowledge of fetichists who claimed to have control over the spirits that\npeopled nature and animated everything, and who claimed that they\ncommunicated with these spirits by means of rites known to themselves\nalone. Magic has been cleverly defined as \"the strategy of animism.\"[60]\nBut, just as the growing power ascribed by the Chaldeans to the sidereal\ndeities transformed the original astrology, so primitive sorcery assumed a\ndifferent character when the world of the gods, conceived after the image\nof man, separated itself more and more from the realm of physical forces\nand became a realm of its own. This gave the mystic element which always\nentered the ceremonies, a new precision and development. By means of his\ncharms, talismans, and exorcisms, the magician now communicated with the\ncelestial or infernal \"demons\" and compelled them to obey him. But these\nspirits no longer opposed him with the blind resistance of matter animated\nby an uncertain kind of life; they were active and subtle beings having\nintelligence and will-power. Sometimes they took revenge for the slavery\nthe magician attempted to impose on them and punished the audacious\noperator, who feared them, although {186} invoking their aid. Thus the\nincantation often assumed the shape of a prayer addressed to a power\nstronger than man, and magic became a religion. Its rites developed side by\nside with the canonical liturgies, and frequently encroached on them.[61]\nThe only barrier between them was the vague and constantly shifting\nborderline that limits the neighboring domains of religion and\nsuperstition.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThis half scientific, half religious magic, with its books and its\nprofessional adepts, is of Oriental origin. The old Grecian and Italian\nsorcery appears to have been rather mild. Conjurations to avert\nhail-storms, or formulas to draw rain, evil charms to render fields barren\nor to kill cattle, love philters and rejuvenating salves, old women's\nremedies, talismans against the evil eye,--all are based on popular\nsuperstition and kept in existence by folk-lore and charlatanism. Even the\nwitches of Thessaly, whom people credited with the power of making the moon\ndescend from the sky, were botanists more than anything else, acquainted\nwith the marvelous virtues of medicinal plants. The terror that the\nnecromancers inspired was due, to a considerable extent, to the use they\nmade of the old belief in ghosts. They exploited the superstitious belief\nin ghost-power and slipped metal tablets covered with execrations into\ngraves, to bring misfortune or death to some enemy. But neither in Greece\nnor in Italy is there any trace of a coherent system of doctrines, of an\noccult and learned discipline, nor of any sacerdotal instruction.\n\nOriginally the adepts in this dubious art were {187} despised. As late as\nthe period of Augustus they were generally equivocal beggar-women who plied\ntheir miserable trade in the lowest quarters of the slums. But with the\ninvasion of the Oriental religions the magician began to receive more\nconsideration, and his condition improved.[62] He was honored, and feared\neven more. During the second century scarcely anybody would have doubted\nhis power to call up divine apparitions, converse with the superior spirits\nand even translate himself bodily into the heavens.[63]\n\nHere the victorious progress of the Oriental religions shows itself. The\nEgyptian ritual[64] originally was nothing but a collection of magical\npractices, properly speaking. The religious community imposed its will upon\nthe gods by means of prayers or even threats. The gods were compelled to\nobey the officiating priest, if the liturgy was correctly performed, and if\nthe incantations and the magic words were pronounced with the right\nintonation. The well-informed priest had an almost unlimited power over all\nsupernatural beings on land, in the water, in the air, in heaven and in\nhell. Nowhere was the gulf between things human and things divine smaller,\nnowhere was the increasing differentiation that separated magic from\nreligion less advanced. Until the end of paganism they remained so closely\nassociated that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish the texts of one\nfrom those of the other.\n\nThe Chaldeans[65] also were past masters of sorcery, well versed in the\nknowledge of presages and experts in conjuring the evils which the presages\nforetold. In Mesopotamia, where they were confidential advisers of the\nkings, the magicians belonged to the official {188} clergy; they invoked\nthe aid of the state gods in their incantations, and their sacred science\nwas as highly esteemed as haruspicy in Etruria. The immense prestige that\ncontinued to surround it, assured its persistence after the fall of Nineveh\nand Babylon. Its tradition was still alive under the Caesars, and a number\nof enchanters rightly or wrongly claimed to possess the ancient wisdom of\nChaldea.[66]\n\nAnd the thaumaturgus, who was supposed to be the heir of the archaic\npriests, assumed a wholly sacerdotal appearance at Rome. Being an inspired\nsage who received confidential communications from heavenly spirits, he\ngave to his life and to his appearance a dignity almost equal to that of\nthe philosopher. The common people soon confused the two,[67] and the\nOrientalizing philosophy of the last period of paganism actually accepted\nand justified all the superstitions of magic. Neo-Platonism, which\nconcerned itself to a large extent with demonology, leaned more and more\ntowards theurgy, and was finally completely absorbed by it.\n\nBut the ancients expressly distinguished, \"magic,\" which was always under\nsuspicion and disapproved of, from the legitimate and honorable art for\nwhich the name \"theurgy\"[68] was invented. The term \"magician,\" ([Greek:\nmagos]) which applied to all performers of miracles, properly means the\npriests of Mazdaism, and a well attested tradition makes the Persians[69]\nthe authors of the real magic, that called \"black magic\" by the Middle\nAges. If they did not invent it--because it is as old as humanity--they\nwere at least the first to place it upon a doctrinal foundation and to\nassign to it a place {189} in a clearly formulated theological system. The\nMazdean dualism gave a new power to this pernicious knowledge by conferring\nupon it the character that will distinguish it henceforth.\n\nUnder what influences did the Persian magic come into existence? When and\nhow did it spread? These are questions that are not well elucidated yet.\nThe intimate fusion of the religious doctrines of the Iranian conquerors\nwith those of the native clergy, which took place at Babylon, occurred in\nthis era of belief,[70] and the magicians that were established in\nMesopotamia combined their secret traditions with the rites and formulas\ncodified by the Chaldean sorcerers. The universal curiosity of the Greeks\nsoon took note of this marvelous science. Naturalist philosophers like\nDemocritus,[71] the great traveler, seem to have helped themselves more\nthan once from the treasure of observations collected by the Oriental\npriests. Without a doubt they drew from these incongruous compilations, in\nwhich truth was mingled with the absurd and reality with the fantastical,\nthe knowledge of some properties of plants and minerals, or of some\nexperiments of physics. However, the limpid Hellenic genius always turned\naway from the misty speculations of magic, giving them but slight\nconsideration. But towards the end of the Alexandrine period the books\nascribed to the half-mythical masters of the Persian science, Zoroaster,\nHostanes and Hystaspes, were translated into Greek, and until the end of\npaganism those names enjoyed a prodigious authority. At the same time the\nJews, who were acquainted with the arcana of the Irano-Chaldean doctrines\nand proceedings, made some of the recipes known wherever the dispersion\nbrought {190} them.[72] Later, a more immediate influence was exercised\nupon the Roman world by the Persian colonies of Asia Minor,[73] who\nretained an obstinate faith in their ancient national beliefs.\n\nThe particular importance attributed to magic by the Mazdeans is a\nnecessary consequence of their dualist system, which has been treated by us\nbefore.[74] Ormuzd, residing in the heavens of light, is opposed by his\nirreconcilable adversary, Ahriman, ruler of the underworld. The one stands\nfor light, truth, and goodness, the other for darkness, falsehood, and\nperversity. The one commands the kind spirits which protect the pious\nbeliever, the other is master over demons whose malice causes all the evils\nthat afflict humanity. These opposite principles fight for the domination\nof the earth, and each creates favorable or noxious animals and plants.\nEverything on earth is either heavenly or infernal. Ahriman and his demons,\nwho surround man to tempt or hurt him,[75] are evil gods and entirely\ndifferent from those of which Ormuzd's host consists. The magician\nsacrifices to them, either to avert evils they threaten, or to direct their\nire against enemies of true belief, and the impure spirits rejoice in\nbloody immolations and delight in the fumes of flesh burning on the\naltars.[76] Terrible acts and words attended all immolations. Plutarch[77]\nmentions an example of the dark sacrifices of the Mazdeans. \"In a mortar,\"\nhe says, \"they pound a certain herb called wild garlic, at the same time\ninvoking Hades (Ahriman), and the powers of darkness, then stirring this\nherb in the blood of a slaughtered wolf, they take it away and drop it on a\nspot never reached by the rays of the sun.\" A necromantic performance\nindeed. {191}\n\nWe can imagine the new strength which such a conception of the universe\nmust have given to magic. It was no longer an incongruous collection of\npopular superstitions and scientific observations. It became a reversed\nreligion: its nocturnal rites were the dreadful liturgy of the infernal\npowers. There was no miracle the experienced magician might not expect to\nperform with the aid of the demons, providing he know how to master them;\nhe would invent any atrocity in his desire to gain the favor of the evil\ndivinities whom crime gratified and suffering pleased. Hence the number of\nimpious practices performed in the dark, practices the horror of which is\nequaled only by their absurdity: preparing beverages that disturbed the\nsenses and impaired the intellect; mixing subtle poisons extracted from\ndemoniac plants and corpses already in a state of putridity;[78] immolating\nchildren in order to read the future in their quivering entrails or to\nconjure up ghosts. All the satanic refinement that a perverted imagination\nin a state of insanity could conceive[79] pleased the malicious evil\nspirits; the more odious the monstrosity, the more assured was its\nefficacy. These abominable practices were sternly suppressed by the Roman\ngovernment. Whereas, in the case of an astrologer who had committed an open\ntransgression, the law was satisfied with expelling him from Rome--whither\nhe generally soon returned,--the magician was put in the same class with\nmurderers and poisoners, and was subjected to the very severest punishment.\nHe was nailed to the cross or thrown to the wild beasts. Not only the\npractice of the profession, but even the simple fact of possessing works of\nsorcery made any one subject to prosecution.[80] {192}\n\nHowever, there are ways of reaching an agreement with the police, and in\nthis case custom was stronger than law. The intermittent rigor of imperial\nedicts had no more power to destroy an inveterate superstition than the\nChristian polemics had to cure it. It was a recognition of its strength\nwhen state and church united to fight it. Neither reached the root of the\nevil, for they did not deny the reality of the power wielded by the\nsorcerers. As long as it was admitted that malicious spirits constantly\ninterfered in human affairs, and that there were secret means enabling the\noperator to dominate those spirits or to share in their power, magic was\nindestructible. It appealed to too many human passions to remain unheard.\nIf, on the one hand, the desire of penetrating the mysteries of the future,\nthe fear of unknown misfortunes, and hope, always reviving, led the anxious\nmasses to seek a chimerical certainty in astrology, on the other hand, in\nthe case of magic, the blinding charm of the marvelous, the entreaties of\nlove and ambition, the bitter desire for revenge, the fascination of crime,\nand the intoxication of bloodshed,--all the instincts that are not avowable\nand that are satisfied in the dark, took turns in practising their\nseductions. During the entire life of the Roman empire its existence\ncontinued, and the very mystery that it was compelled to hide in increased\nits prestige and almost gave it the authority of a revelation.\n\nA curious occurrence that took place towards the end of the fifth century\nat Beirut, in Syria, shows how deeply even the strongest intellects of that\nperiod believed in the most atrocious practices of magic. One night some\nstudents of the famous law-school of that {193} city attempted to kill a\nslave in the circus, to aid the master in obtaining the favor of a woman\nwho scorned him. Being reported, they had to deliver up their hidden\nvolumes, of which those of Zoroaster and of Hostanes were found, together\nwith those written by the astrologer Manetho. The whole city was agitated,\nand searches proved that many young men preferred the study of the illicit\nscience to that of Roman law. By order of the bishop a solemn auto-da-fe\nwas made of all this literature, in the presence of the city officials and\nthe clergy, and the most revolting passages were read in public, \"in order\nto acquaint everybody with the conceited and vain promises of the demons,\"\nas the pious writer of the story says.[81]\n\nThus the ancient traditions of magic continued to live in the Christian\nOrient after the fall of paganism. They even outlived the domination of the\nchurch. The rigorous principles of its monotheism notwithstanding, Islam\nbecame infected with those Persian superstitions. In the Occident the evil\nart resisted persecution and anathemas with the same obstinacy as in the\nOrient. It remained alive in Rome all through the fifth century,[82] and\nwhen scientific astrology in Europe went down with science itself, the old\nMazdean dualism continued to manifest itself, during the entire Middle Ages\nin the ceremonies of the black mass and the worshiping of Satan, until the\ndawn of the modern era.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTwin sisters, born of the superstitions of the learned Orient, magic and\nastrology always remained the hybrid daughters of sacerdotal culture. Their\nexistence {194} was governed by two contrary principles, reason and faith,\nand they never ceased to fluctuate between these two poles of thought. Both\nwere inspired by a belief in universal sympathy, according to which occult\nand powerful relations exist between human beings and dead objects, all\npossessing a mysterious life. The doctrine of sidereal influences, combined\nwith a knowledge of the immutability of the celestial revolutions, caused\nastrology to formulate the first theory of absolute fatalism, whose decrees\nmight be known beforehand. But, besides this rigorous determinism, it\nretained its childhood faith in the divine stars, whose favor could be\nsecured and malignity avoided through worship. In astrology the\nexperimental method was reduced to the completing of prognostics based on\nthe supposed character of the stellar gods.\n\nMagic also remained half empirical and half religious. Like our physics, it\nwas based on observation, it proclaimed the constancy of the laws of\nnature, and sought to conquer the latent energies of the material world in\norder to bring them under the dominion of man's will. But at the same time\nit recognized, in the powers that it claimed to conquer, spirits or demons\nwhose protection might be obtained, whose ill-will might be appeased, or\nwhose savage hostility might be unchained by means of immolations and\nincantations.\n\nAll their aberrations notwithstanding, astrology and magic were not\nentirely fruitless. Their counterfeit learning has been a genuine help to\nthe progress of human knowledge. Because they awakened chimerical hopes and\nfallacious ambitions in the minds of their adepts, researches were\nundertaken which undoubtedly {195} would never have been started or\npersisted in for the sake of a disinterested love of truth. The\nobservations, collected with untiring patience by the Oriental priests,\ncaused the first physical and astronomical discoveries, and, as in the time\nof the scholastics, the occult sciences led to the exact ones. But when\nthese understood the vanity of the astounding illusions on which astrology\nand magic had subsisted, they broke up the foundation of the arts to which\nthey owed their birth.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{196}\n\nTHE TRANSFORMATION OF ROMAN PAGANISM.\n\nAbout the time of the Severi the religion of Europe must have presented an\naspect of surprising variety. Although dethroned, the old native Italian,\nCeltic and Iberian divinities were still alive. Though eclipsed by foreign\nrivals, they lived on in the devotion of the lower classes and in the\ntraditions of the rural districts. For a long time the Roman gods had been\nestablished in every town and had received the homage of an official clergy\naccording to pontifical rites. Beside them, however, were installed the\nrepresentatives of all the Asiatic pantheons, and these received the most\nfervent adoration from the masses. New powers had arrived from Asia Minor,\nEgypt, Syria, and the dazzling Oriental sun outshone the stars of Italy's\ntemperate sky. All forms of paganism were simultaneously received and\nretained while the exclusive monotheism of the Jews kept its adherents, and\nChristianity strengthened its churches and fortified its orthodoxy, at the\nsame time giving birth to the baffling vagaries of gnosticism. A hundred\ndifferent currents carried away hesitating and undecided minds, a hundred\ncontrasting sermons made appeals to the conscience of the people.\n\nLet us suppose that in modern Europe the faithful {197} had deserted the\nChristian churches to worship Allah or Brahma, to follow the precepts of\nConfucius or Buddha, or to adopt the maxims of the Shinto; let us imagine a\ngreat confusion of all the races of the world in which Arabian mullahs,\nChinese scholars, Japanese bonzes, Tibetan lamas and Hindu pundits would be\npreaching fatalism and predestination, ancestor-worship and devotion to a\ndeified sovereign, pessimism and deliverance through annihilation--a\nconfusion in which all those priests would erect temples of exotic\narchitecture in our cities and celebrate their disparate rites therein.\nSuch a dream, which the future may perhaps realize, would offer a pretty\naccurate picture of the religious chaos in which the ancient world was\nstruggling before the reign of Constantine.\n\nThe Oriental religions that successively gained popularity exercised a\ndecisive influence on the transformation of Latin paganism. Asia Minor was\nthe first to have its gods accepted by Italy. Since the end of the Punic\nwars the black stone symbolizing the Great Mother of Pessinus had been\nestablished on the Palatine, but only since the reign of Claudius could the\nPhrygian cult freely develop in all its splendor and excesses. It\nintroduced a sensual, highly-colored and fanatical worship into the grave\nand somber religion of the Romans. Officially recognized, it attracted and\ntook under its protection other foreign divinities from Anatolia and\nassimilated them to Cybele and Attis, who thereafter bore the symbols of\nseveral deities together. Cappadocian, Jewish, Persian and even Christian\ninfluences modified the old rites of Pessinus and filled them with ideas of\nspiritual purification and {198} eternal redemption by the bloody baptism\nof the taurobolium. But the priests did not succeed in eliminating the\nbasis of coarse naturism which ancient barbaric tradition had imposed upon\nthem.\n\nBeginning with the second century before our era, the mysteries of Isis and\nSerapis spread over Italy with the Alexandrian culture whose religious\nexpression they were, and in spite of all persecution established\nthemselves at Rome where Caligula gave them the freedom of the city. They\ndid not bring with them a very advanced theological system, because Egypt\nnever produced anything but a chaotic aggregate of disparate doctrines, nor\na very elevated ethics, because the level of its morality--that of the\nAlexandrian Greeks--rose but slowly from a low stage. But they made Italy,\nand later the other Latin provinces, familiar with an ancient ritual of\nincomparable charm that aroused widely different feelings with its splendid\nprocessions and liturgic dramas. They also gave their votaries positive\nassurance of a blissful immortality after death, when they would be united\nwith Serapis and, participating body and soul in his divinity, would live\nin eternal contemplation of the gods.\n\nAt a somewhat later period arrived the numerous and varied Baals of Syria.\nThe great economic movement starting at the beginning of our era which\nproduced the colonization of the Latin world by Syrian slaves and\nmerchants, not only modified the material civilization of Europe, but also\nits conceptions and beliefs. The Semitic cults entered into successful\ncompetition with those of Asia Minor and Egypt. They may not have had so\nstirring a liturgy, nor have been so thoroughly absorbed in preoccupation\nwith a future {199} life, although they taught an original eschatology, but\nthey did have an infinitely higher idea of divinity. The Chaldean\nastrology, of which the Syrian priests were enthusiastic disciples, had\nfurnished them with the elements of a scientific theology. It had led them\nto the notion of a God residing far from the earth above the zone of the\nstars, a God almighty, universal and eternal. Everything on earth was\ndetermined by the revolutions of the heavens according to infinite cycles\nof years. It had taught them at the same time the worship of the sun, the\nradiant source of earthly life and human intelligence.\n\nThe learned doctrines of the Babylonians had also imposed themselves upon\nthe Persian mysteries of Mithra which considered time identified with\nheaven as the supreme cause, and deified the stars; but they had\nsuperimposed themselves upon the ancient Mazdean creed without destroying\nit. Thus the essential principles of the religion of Iran, the secular and\noften successful rival of Greece, penetrated into the Occident under cover\nof Chaldean wisdom. The Mithra worship, the last and highest manifestation\nof ancient paganism, had Persian dualism for its fundamental dogma. The\nworld is the scene and the stake of a contest between good and evil, Ormuzd\nand Ahriman, gods and demons, and from this primary conception of the\nuniverse flowed a strong and pure system of ethics. Life is a combat;\nsoldiers under the command of Mithra, invincible heroes of the faith, must\nceaselessly oppose the undertakings of the infernal powers which sow\ncorruption broadcast. This imperative ethics was productive of energy and\nformed the characteristic {200} feature distinguishing Mithraism from all\nother Oriental cults.\n\nThus every one of the Levantine countries--and that is what we meant to\nshow in this brief recapitulation--had enriched Roman paganism with new\nbeliefs that were frequently destined to outlive it. What was the result of\nthis confusion of heterogeneous doctrines whose multiplicity was extreme\nand whose values were very different? How did the barbaric ideas refine\nthemselves and combine with each other when thrown into the fiery crucible\nof imperial syncretism? In other words, what shape was assumed by ancient\nidolatry, so impregnated with exotic theories during the fourth century,\nwhen it was finally dethroned? It is this point that we should like to\nindicate briefly as the conclusion to these studies.\n\nHowever, can we speak of _one_ pagan religion? Did not the blending of the\nraces result in multiplying the variety of disagreements? Had not the\nconfused collision of creeds produced a division into fragments, a\ncommunication of churches? Had not a complacent syncretism engendered a\nmultiplication of sects? The \"Hellenes,\" as Themistius told the Emperor\nValens, had three hundred ways of conceiving and honoring deity, who takes\npleasure in such diversity of homage.[1] In paganism a cult does not die\nviolently, but after long decay. A new doctrine does not necessarily\ndisplace an older one. They may co-exist for a long time as contrary\npossibilities suggested by the intellect or faith, and all opinions, all\npractices, seem respectable to paganism. It never has any radical or\nrevolutionary transformations. Undoubtedly, the pagan beliefs of the fourth\ncentury or earlier did not {201} have the consistency of a metaphysical\nsystem nor the rigor of canons formulated by a council. There is always a\nconsiderable difference between the faith of the masses and that of\ncultured minds, and this difference was bound to be great in an\naristocratic empire whose social classes were sharply separated. The\ndevotion of the masses was as unchanging as the depths of the sea; it was\nnot stirred up nor heated by the upper currents.[2] The peasants practised\ntheir pious rites over anointed stones, sacred springs and blossoming\ntrees, as in the past, and continued celebrating their rustic holidays\nduring seed-time and harvest. They adhered with invincible tenacity to\ntheir traditional usages. Degraded and lowered to the rank of\nsuperstitions, these were destined to persist for centuries under the\nChristian orthodoxy without exposing it to serious peril, and while they\nwere no longer marked in the liturgic calendars they were still mentioned\noccasionally in the collections of folk-lore.\n\nAt the other extreme of society the philosophers delighted in veiling\nreligion with the frail and brilliant tissue of their speculations. Like\nthe emperor Julian they improvised bold and incongruous interpretations of\nthe myth of the Great Mother, and these interpretations were received and\nrelished by a restricted circle of scholars. But during the fourth century\nthese vagaries of the individual imagination were nothing but arbitrary\napplications of uncontested principles. During that century there was much\nless intellectual anarchy than when Lucian had exposed the sects \"for sale\nat public auction\"; a comparative harmony arose among the pagans after they\njoined the opposition. One single school, that of neo-Platonism, ruled all\n{202} minds. This school not only respected positive religion, as ancient\nstoicism had done, but venerated it, because it saw there the expression of\nan old revelation handed down by past generations. It considered the sacred\nbooks divinely inspired--the books of Hermes Trismegistus, Orpheus, the\nChaldean oracles, Homer, and especially the esoteric doctrines of the\nmysteries--and subordinated its theories to their teachings. As there must\nbe no contradiction between all the disparate traditions of different\ncountries and different periods, because all have emanated from one\ndivinity, philosophy, the _ancilla theologiae_, attempted to reconcile them\nby the aid of allegory. And thus, by means of compromises between old\nOriental ideas and Greco-Latin thought, an _ensemble_ of beliefs slowly\ntook form, the truth of which seemed to have been established by common\nconsent. So when the atrophied parts of the Roman religion had been\nremoved, foreign elements had combined to give it a new vigor and in it\nthemselves became modified. This hidden work of internal decomposition and\nreconstruction had unconsciously produced a religion very different from\nthe one Augustus had attempted to restore.\n\nHowever, we would be tempted to believe that there had been no change in\nthe Roman faith, were we to read certain authors that fought idolatry in\nthose days. Saint Augustine, for instance, in his _City of God_, pleasantly\npokes fun at the multitude of Italian gods that presided over the paltriest\nacts of life.[3] But the useless, ridiculous deities of the old pontifical\nlitanies no longer existed outside of the books of antiquaries. As a matter\nof fact, the Christian polemicist's authority in this instance was Varro.\nThe defenders of the {203} church sought weapons against idolatry even in\nXenophanes, the first philosopher to oppose Greek polytheism. It has\nfrequently been shown that apologists find it difficult to follow the\nprogress of the doctrines which they oppose, and often their blows fall\nupon dead men. Moreover, it is a fault common to all scholars, to all\nimbued with book learning, that they are better acquainted with the\nopinions of ancient authors than with the sentiments of their\ncontemporaries, and that they prefer to live in the past rather than in the\nworld surrounding them. It was easier to reproduce the objections of the\nEpicureans and the skeptics against abolished beliefs, than to study the\ndefects of an active organism with a view to criticizing it. In those times\nthe merely formal culture of the schools caused many of the best minds to\nlose their sense of reality.\n\nThe Christian polemics therefore frequently give us an inadequate idea of\npaganism in its decline. When they complacently insisted upon the\nimmorality of the sacred legends they ignored the fact that the gods and\nheroes of mythology had no longer any but a purely literary existence.[4]\nThe writers of that period, like those of the Renaissance, regarded the\nfictions of mythology as details necessary to poetical composition. They\nwere ornaments of style, rhetorical devices, but not the expression of a\nsincere faith. Those old myths had fallen to the lowest degree of disrepute\nin the theater. The actors of mimes ridiculing Jupiter's gallant adventures\ndid not believe in their reality any more than the author of Faust believed\nin the compact with Mephistopheles.\n\nSo we must not be deceived by the oratorical effects {204} of a rhetorician\nlike Arnobius or by the Ciceronian periods of a Lactantius. In order to\nascertain the real status of the beliefs we must refer to Christian authors\nwho were men of letters less than they were men of action, who lived the\nlife of the people and breathed the air of the streets, and who spoke from\nexperience rather than from the treatises of mythmongers. They were high\nfunctionaries like Prudentius;[5] like the man to whom the name\n\"Ambrosiaster\"[6] has been given since the time of Erasmus; like the\nconverted pagan Firmicus Maternus,[7] who had written a treatise on\nastrology before opposing \"The Error of the Profane Religions\"; like\ncertain priests brought into contact with the last adherents of idolatry\nthrough their pastoral duties, as for instance the author of the homilies\nascribed to St. Maximus of Turin;[8] finally like the writers of anonymous\npamphlets, works prepared for the particular occasion and breathing the\nardor of all the passions of the movement.[9] If this inquiry is based on\nthe obscure indications in regard to their religious convictions left by\nmembers of the Roman aristocracy who remained true to the faith of their\nancestors, like Macrobius or Symmachus; if it is particularly guided by the\nexceptionally numerous inscriptions that seem to be the public expression\nof the last will of expiring paganism, we shall be able to gain a\nsufficiently precise idea of the condition of the Roman religion at the\ntime of its extinction.\n\nOne fact becomes immediately clear from an examination of those documents.\nThe old national religion of Rome was dead.[10] The great dignitaries still\nadorned themselves with the titles of augur and quindecimvir, or of consul\nand tribune, but those {205} archaic prelacies were as devoid of all real\ninfluence upon religion as the republican magistracies were powerless in\nthe state. Their fall had been made complete on the day when Aurelian\nestablished the pontiffs of the Invincible Sun, the protector of his\nempire, beside and above the ancient high priests. The only cults still\nalive were those of the Orient, and against them were directed the efforts\nof the Christian polemics, who grew more and more bitter in speaking of\nthem. The barbarian gods had taken the place of the defunct immortals in\nthe devotion of the pagans. They alone still had empire over the soul.\n\nWith all the other \"profane religions,\" Firmicus Maternus fought those of\nthe four Oriental nations. He connected them with the four elements. The\nEgyptians were the worshipers of water--the water of the Nile fertilizing\ntheir country; the Phrygians of the earth, which was to them the Great\nMother of everything; the Syrians and Carthaginians of the air, which they\nadored under the name of celestial Juno;[11] the Persians of fire, to which\nthey attributed preeminence over the other three principles. This system\ncertainly was borrowed from the pagan theologians. In the common peril\nthreatening them, those cults, formerly rivals, had become reconciled and\nregarded themselves as divisions and, so to speak, congregations, of the\nsame church. Each one of them was especially consecrated to one of the\nelements which in combination form the universe. Their union constituted\nthe pantheistic religion of the deified world.\n\nAll the Oriental religions assumed the form of mysteries.[12] Their\ndignitaries were at the same time pontiffs of the Invincible Sun, fathers\nof Mithra, {206} celebrants of the taurobolium of the Great Mother,\nprophets of Isis; in short, they had all titles imaginable. In their\ninitiation they received the revelation of an esoteric doctrine\nstrengthened by their fervor.[13] What was the theology they learned? Here\nalso a certain dogmatic homogeneity has established itself.\n\nAll writers agree with Firmicus that the pagans worshiped the\n_elementa_.[14] Under this term were included not only the four simple\nsubstances which by their opposition and blending caused all phenomena of\nthe visible world,[15] but also the stars and in general the elements of\nall celestial and earthly bodies.[16]\n\nWe therefore may in a certain sense speak of the return of paganism to\nnature worship; but must this transformation be regarded as a retrogression\ntoward a barbarous past, as a relapse to the level of primitive animism? If\nso, we should be deceived by appearances. Religions do not fall back into\ninfancy as they grow old. The pagans of the fourth century no longer\nnaively considered their gods as capricious genii, as the disordered powers\nof a confused natural philosophy; they conceived them as cosmic energies\nwhose providential action was regulated in a harmonious system. Faith was\nno longer instinctive and impulsive, for erudition and reflection had\nreconstructed the entire theology. In a certain sense it might be said that\ntheology had passed from the fictitious to the metaphysical state,\naccording to the formula of Comte. It was intimately connected with the\nknowledge of the day, which was cherished by its last votaries with love\nand pride, as faithful heirs of the ancient wisdom of the Orient and\nGreece.[17] In many instances it was nothing but a religious form of the\ncosmology of the {207} period. This constituted both its strength and its\nweakness. The rigorous principles of astrology determined its conception of\nheaven and earth.\n\nThe universe was an organism animated by a God, unique, eternal and\nalmighty. Sometimes this God was identified with the destiny that ruled all\nthings, with infinite time that regulated all visible phenomena, and he was\nworshiped in each subdivision of that endless duration, especially in the\nmonths and the seasons.[18] Sometimes, however, he was compared with a\nking; he was thought of as a sovereign governing an empire, and the various\ngods then were the princes and dignitaries interceding with the rulers on\nbehalf of his subjects whom they led in some manner into his presence. This\nheavenly court had its messengers or \"angels\" conveying to men the will of\nthe master and reporting again the vows and petitions of his subjects. It\nwas an aristocratic monarchy in heaven as on earth.[19] A more philosophic\nconception made the divinity an infinite power impregnating all nature with\nits overflowing forces. \"There is only one God, sole and supreme,\" wrote\nMaximus of Madaura about 390, \"without beginning or parentage, whose\nenergies, diffused through the world, we invoke under various names,\nbecause we are ignorant of his real name. By successively addressing our\nsupplications to his different members we intend to honor him in his\nentirety. Through the mediation of the subordinate gods the common father\nboth of themselves and of all men is honored in a thousand different ways\nby mortals who are thus in accord in spite of their discord.\"[20]\n\nHowever, this ineffable God, who comprehensively embraces everything,\nmanifests himself especially in {208} the resplendent brightness of the\nethereal sky.[21] He reveals his power in water and in fire, in the earth,\nthe sea and the blowing of the winds; but his purest, most radiant and most\nactive epiphany is in the stars whose revolutions determine every event and\nall our actions. Above all he manifests himself in the sun, the motive\npower of the celestial spheres, the inexhaustible seat of light and life,\nthe creator of all intelligence on earth. Certain philosophers like the\nsenator Praetextatus, one of the _dramatis personae_ of Macrobius,\nconfounded all the ancient divinities of paganism with the sun in a\nthorough-going syncretism.[22]\n\nJust as a superficial observation might lead to the belief that the\ntheology of the last pagans had reverted to its origin, so at first sight\nthe transformation of the ritual might appear like a return to savagery.\nWith the adoption of the Oriental mysteries barbarous, cruel and obscene\npractices were undoubtedly spread, as for instance the masquerading in the\nguise of animals in the Mithraic initiations, the bloody dances of the\n_galli_ of the Great Mother and the mutilations of the Syrian priests.\nNature worship was originally as \"amoral\" as nature itself. But an ethereal\nspiritualism ideally transfigured the coarseness of those primitive\ncustoms. Just as the doctrine had become completely impregnated with\nphilosophy and erudition, so the liturgy had become saturated with ethical\nideas.\n\nThe taurobolium, a disgusting shower-bath of lukewarm blood, had become a\nmeans of obtaining a new and eternal life; the ritualistic ablutions were\nno longer external and material acts, but were supposed to cleanse the soul\nof its impurities and to restore its original innocence; the sacred repasts\n{209} imparted an intimate virtue to the soul and furnished sustenance to\nthe spiritual life. While efforts were made to maintain the continuity of\ntradition, its content had slowly been transformed. The most shocking and\nlicentious fables were metamorphosed into edifying narratives by convenient\nand subtle interpretations which were a joy to the learned mythographers.\nPaganism had become a school of morality, the priest a doctor and director\nof the conscience.[23]\n\nThe purity and holiness imparted by the practice of sacred ceremonies were\nthe indispensable condition for obtaining eternal life.[24] The mysteries\npromised a blessed immortality to their initiates, and claimed to reveal to\nthem infallible means of effecting their salvation. According to a\ngenerally accepted symbol, the spirit animating man was a spark, detached\nfrom the fires shining in the ether; it partook of their divinity and so,\nit was believed, had descended to the earth to undergo a trial. It could\nliterally be said that\n\n \"Man is a fallen god who still remembers heaven.\"\n\nAfter having left their corporeal prisons, the pious souls reascended\ntowards the celestial regions of the divine stars, to live forever in\nendless brightness beyond the starry spheres.[25]\n\nBut at the other extremity of the world, facing this luminous realm,\nextended the somber kingdom of evil spirits. They were irreconcilable\nadversaries of the gods and men of good will, and constantly left the\ninfernal regions to roam about the earth and scatter evil. With the aid of\nthe celestial spirits, the faithful had to struggle forever against their\ndesigns and seek to avert their anger by means of bloody sacrifices. {210}\nBut, with the help of occult and terrible processes, the magician could\nsubject them to his power and compel them to serve his purposes. This\ndemonology, the monstrous offspring of Persian dualism, favored the rise of\nevery superstition.[26]\n\nHowever, the reign of the evil powers was not to last forever. According to\ncommon opinion the universe would be destroyed by fire[27] after the times\nhad been fulfilled. All the wicked would perish, but the just would be\nrevived and establish the reign of universal happiness in the regenerated\nworld.[28]\n\nThe foregoing is a rapid sketch of the theology of paganism after three\ncenturies of Oriental influence. From coarse fetichism and savage\nsuperstitions the learned priests of the Asiatic cults had gradually\nproduced a complete system of metaphysics and eschatology, as the Brahmins\nbuilt up the spiritualistic monism of the Vedanta beside the monstrous\nidolatry of Hinduism, or, to confine our comparisons to the Latin world, as\nthe jurists drew from the traditional customs of primitive tribes the\nabstract principles of a legal system that governs the most cultivated\nsocieties. This religion was no longer like that of ancient Rome, a mere\ncollection of propitiatory and expiatory rites performed by the citizen for\nthe good of the state; it now pretended to offer to all men a\nworld-conception which gave rise to a rule of conduct and placed the end of\nexistence in the future life. It was more unlike the worship that Augustus\nhad attempted to restore than the Christianity that fought it. The two\nopposed creeds moved in the same intellectual and moral sphere,[29] and one\ncould actually pass from one to the other without shock or interruption.\nSometimes when {211} reading the long works of the last Latin writers, like\nAmmianus Marcellinus or Boethius, or the panegyrics of the official\norators,[30] scholars could well ask whether their authors were pagan or\nChristian. In the time of Symmachus and Praetextatus, the members of the\nRoman aristocracy who had remained faithful to the gods of their ancestors\ndid not have a mentality or morality very different from that of adherents\nof the new faith who sat with them in the senate. The religious and\nmystical spirit of the Orient had slowly overcome the whole social organism\nand had prepared all nations to unite in the bosom of a universal church.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n{213}\n\nNOTES.\n\nPREFACE.\n\n1 We are indebted for more than one useful suggestion to our colleagues\nMessrs. Charles Michel and Joseph Bidez, who were kind enough to read the\nproofs of the French edition.\n\n2 An outline of the present state of the subject will be found in a recent\nvolume by Gruppe, _Griechische Mythologie_, 1906, pp. 1606 ff., whose views\nare sharply opposed to the negative conclusions formulated, with certain\nreservations, by Harnack, _Ausbreitung des Christentums_, II, pp. 274 ff.\nAmong the latest studies intended for the general reader that have appeared\non this subject, may be mentioned in Germany those of Geffcken (_Aus der\nWerdezeit des Christentums_, Leipsic, 1904, pp. 114 ff.), and in England\nthose of Cheyne (_Bible Problems_, 1904), who expresses his opinion in\nthese terms: \"The Christian religion is a synthesis, and only those who\nhave dim eyes can assert that the intellectual empires of Babylonia and\nPersia have fallen.\"--Very useful is the new book of Clemen,\n_Religionsgeschichtliche Erklaerung des Neuen Testaments_, Giessen, 1909.\n\n3 _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 342, n. 4; see the new texts commented on by\nUsener, _Rhein. Museum_, LX, 1905, pp. 466 ff.; 489 ff., and my paper\n\"Natalis Invicti,\" _C. R. Acad. des inscr._, 1911.\n\n4 See page 70. Compare also _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 341. The imitation\nof the church is plain in the pagan reform attempted by the emperor Julian.\n\n5 See Harnack, _Militia Christi_, 1905.\n\n6 I have collected a number of texts on the religious \"militias\" in _Mon.\nmyst. Mithra_, I, p. 317, n. 1. Others could certainly be discovered:\nApuleius, _Metam._, XI, 14: _E cohorte {214} religionis unus_ (in\nconnection with a mystic of Isis);--Vettius Valens (V, 2, p. 220, 27, Kroll\ned.): [Greek: Stratiotai tes heimarmenes]; (VII, 3, p. 271, 28) [Greek:\nSustrateuesthai tois kairois gennaios]. See Minucius Felix, 36, Sec. 7: _Quod\npatimur non est poena, militia est._--We might also mention the commonplace\nterm _militia Veneris_, which was popular with the Augustan poets\n(Propertius, IV, 1, 137; see I, 6, 30; Horace, _Od._, III, 26, and\nespecially the parallel developed by Ovid, _Amor._, I, 9, 1 ff., and _Ars\namat._, III, 233 ff.)--Socrates, in Plato's _Apologia_ (p. 28 E),\nincidentally likens the philosophic mission imposed on him by the divinity\nto the campaigns he waged under the orders of the archons, but the\ncomparison of God with a \"strategus\" was developed especially by the\nStoics; see Capelle, \"Schrift von der Welt,\" _Neue Jahrb. fuer das klass.\nAltert._, XV, 1905, p. 558, n. 6, and Seneca, _Epist._, 107, 9: _Optimum\nest Deum sine murmuratione comitari, malus miles est qui imperatorem gemens\nsequitur_.--See now also Reitzenstein, _Hellenistische Mysterienreligion_,\n1910, p. 66.\n\n7 See _Rev. des etudes grecques_, XIV, 1901, pp. 43 ff.\n\n8 This has been clearly shown by Wendland in connection with the idea of\nthe [Greek: soteria], _Zeitschrift fuer neutest. Wiss._, V, 1904, pp. 355\nff. More recently he has thrown light on the general influence of\nHellenistic civilization on Christianity (_Die hellenistisch-roemische\nKultur in ihren Beziehungen zum Judentum und Christentum_, Tuebingen, 1908).\nA first attempt to determine the character of Hellenistic mysteries is to\nbe found in Reitzenstein's _Hellenistische Mysterienreligion_, 1910.\n\nI. ROME AND THE ORIENT.\n\n1 Renan, _L'Antechrist_, p. 130.\n\n2 M. Krumbacher (_Byzant. Zeitschr._, XVI, 1907, p. 710) notes, in\nconnection with the idea that I am defending here: \"In aehnlicher Weise war\ndieser Gedanke (der Ueberfluegelung des Abendlandes durch die auf allen\nKulturgebieten vordringende Regsamkeit der Orientalen) kurz vorher in\nmeiner Skizze der byzantinischen Literatur (_Kultur der Gegenwart_, I, 8\n[1907], pp. 246-253) auseinandergelegt worden; es ist ein erfreulicher und\nbei dem Wirrsal widerstreitender Doctrinen troestlicher Beweis fuer den\nFortschritt der Erkenntniss, dass {215} zwei von ganz verschiedenen\nRichtungen ausgehende Diener der Wissenschaft sich in so wichtigen\nallgemeinen Fragen so nahe kommen.\"\n\n3. Cf. Kornemann, \"Aegyptische Einfluesse im roemischen Kaiserreich\" (_Neue\nJahrb. fuer das klass. Altertum_, II, 1898, p. 118 ff.) and Otto Hirschfeld,\n_Die kaiserl. Verwaltungsbeamten_, 2d. ed., p. 469.\n\n4. See Cicero's statement regarding the ancient Roman dominion (_De off._,\nII, 8): \"Illud patrocinium orbis terrae verius quam imperium poterat\nnominari.\"\n\n5. O. Hirschfeld, _op. cit._, pp. 53, 91, 93, etc.; cf. Mitteis,\n_Reichsrecht und Volksrecht_, p. 9, n. 2, etc. Thus have various\ninstitutions been transmitted from the ancient Persians to the Romans; see\nCh. VI, n. 5.\n\n6. Rostovtzew, \"Der Ursprung des Kolonats\" (_Beitraege zur alten Gesch._, I,\n1901, p. 295); Haussoullier, _Histoire de Milet et du Didymeion_, 1902, p.\n106.\n\n7. Mitteis, _Reichsrecht und Volksrecht in den oestlichen Provinzen_, 1891,\npp. 8 ff.\n\n8. Mommsen, _Gesammelte Schriften_, II, 1905, p. 366: \"Seit Diocletian\nuebernimmt der oestliche Reichsteil, die _partes Orientis_, auf allen\nGebieten die Fuehrung. Dieser spaete Sieg des Hellenismus ueber die Lateiner\nist vielleicht nirgends auffaelliger als auf dem Gebiet der juristischen\nSchriftstellerei.\"\n\n9. De Voguee and Duthoit, _L'Architecture civile et religieuse de la Syrie\ncentrale_, Paris, 1866-1877.\n\n10. This result is especially due to the researches of M. Strzygowski, but\nwe cannot enter here into the controversies aroused by his publications:\n_Orient oder Rom_, 1911; _Hellas in des Orients Umarmung_, Munich, 1902,\nand especially _Kleinasien, ein Neuland der Kunstgeschichte_, Leipsic,\n1903; [cf. the reports of Ch. Diehl, _Journal des Savants_, 1904, pp. 236\nff. = _Etudes byzantines_, 1905, pp. 336 ff.; Gabriel Millet, _Revue\narcheolog._, 1905, I, pp. 93 ff.; Marcel Laurent, _Revue de l'Instr. publ.\nen Belgique_, 1905, pp. 145 ff.]; _Mschatta_, 1904, [cf. _infra_, Ch. VI,\nn. 12].--M. Brehier, \"Orient ou Byzance?\" (_Rev. archeol._, 1907, II, pp.\n396 ff.), gives a substantial summary of the question.--In his last volume,\n_Amida_ (1910), M. {216} Strzygowski tries to find the source of medieval\nart in Mesopotamia. For this controversy see Diehl's _Manuel d'art\nbyzantin_, 1910.\n\n11. See also Pliny, _Epist. Traian._, 40: \"Architecti tibi [in Bithynia]\ndeesse non possunt ... cum ex Graecia etiam ad nos [at Rome] venire soliti\nsint.\"--Among the names of architects mentioned in Latin inscriptions there\nare a great many revealing Greek or Oriental origin (see Ruggiero, _Dizion.\nepigr._, s. v. \"Architectus\"), in spite of the consideration which their\neminently useful profession always enjoyed at Rome.\n\n12. The question of the artistic and industrial influences exercised by the\nOrient over Gaul during the Roman period, has been broached\nfrequently--among others by Courajod (_Lecons du Louvre_, I, 1899, pp. 115,\n327 ff.)--but it has never been seriously studied in its entirety.\nMichaelis has recently devoted a suggestive article to this subject in\nconnection with a statue from the museum of Metz executed in the style of\nthe school of Pergamum (_Jahrb. der Gesellsch. fuer lothring. Geschichte_,\nXVII, 1905, pp. 203 ff.). By the influence of Marseilles in Gaul, and the\nancient connection of that city with the towns of Hellenic Asia, he\nexplains the great difference between the works of sculpture discovered\nalong the upper Rhine, which had been civilized by the Italian legions, and\nthose unearthed on the other side of the Vosges. This is a very important\ndiscovery, rich in results. We believe, however, that Michaelis ascribes\ntoo much importance to the early Marseilles traders traveling along the old\n\"tin road\" towards Brittany and the \"amber road\" towards Germany. The\nAsiatic merchants and artisans did not set out from one point only. There\nwere many emigrants all over the valley of the Rhone. Lyons was a\nhalf-Hellenized city, and the relations of Arles with Syria, of Nimes with\nEgypt, etc., are well known. We shall speak of them in connection with the\nreligions of those countries.\n\n13. Even in the bosom of the church the Latin Occident of the fourth\ncentury was still subordinate to the Greek Orient, which imposed its\ndoctrinal problems upon it (Harnack, _Mission und Ausbreitung_, II, p. 283,\nn. 1).\n\n14. The sacred formulas have been collected by Alb. Dieterich, _Eine\nMithrasliturgie_, pp. 212 ff. He adds [Greek: Doie soi Osiris to psuchron\nhudor], {217} _Archiv fuer Religionswiss_., VII, 1905, p. 504, n. 1. [Cf.\n_infra_, ch. IV, n. 90.] Among the hymns of greatest importance for the\nOriental cults we must cite those in honor of Isis, discovered in the\nisland of Andros (Kaibel, _Epigr._, 4028) and elsewhere (see ch. IV, n. 6).\nFragments of hymns in honor of Attis have been preserved by Hippolytus\n(_Philosoph._, V, 9. pp. 168 ff.) The so-called orphic hymns (Abel,\n_Orphica_, 1883), which date back to a rather remote period, do not seem to\ncontain many Oriental elements (see Maas, _Orpheus_, 1893, pp. 173 ff.),\nbut this does not apply to the gnostic hymns of which we possess very\ninstructive fragments.--Cf. _Mon. myst. de Mithra_, I, p. 313, n. 1.\n\n15. Regarding the imitations of the stage, see Adami, _De poetis scen.\nGraecis hymnorum sacrorum imitatoribus_, 1901. Wuensch has shown the\nliturgic character of a prayer to Asklepios, inserted by Herondas into his\nmimiambi (_Archiv fuer Religionswiss._, VII, 1904, pp. 95 ff.) Dieterich\nbelieves he has found an extensive extract from the Mithraic liturgy in a\nmagic papyrus of Paris (see _infra_, ch. VI, Bibliography). But all these\ndiscoveries amount to very little if we think of the enormous number of\nliturgic texts that have been lost, and even in the case of ancient Greece\nwe know little regarding this sacred literature. See Ausfeld, _De Graecorum\nprecationibus_, Leipsic, 1903; Ziegler, _De precationum apud Graecos formis\nquaestiones selectae_, Breslau, 1905; H. Schmidt, _Veteres philosophi\nquomodo iudicaverint de precibus_, Giessen, 1907.\n\n16. For instance, the hymn \"which the magi sung\" about the steeds of the\nsupreme god; its contents are given by Dion Chrysostom, Oral., XXXVI, 39\n(see _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I. p. 298; II, p. 60).\n\n17. I have in mind the hymns of Cleanthes (Von Arnim, _Stoic. fragm._, I,\nNos. 527, 537), also Demetrius's act of renunciation in Seneca, _De\nProvid._, V, 5, which bears a surprising resemblance to one of the most\nfamous Christian prayers, the _Suscipe_ of Saint Ignatius which concludes\nthe book of Spiritual Exercises (Delehaye, _Les legendes hagiographiques_,\n1905, p. 170, n. 1).--In this connection we ought to mention the prayer\ntranslated in the _Asclepius_, the Greek text {218} of which has recently\nbeen found on a papyrus (Reitzenstein, _Archiv fuer Religionswiss._, VII,\n1904, p. 395). On pagan prayers introduced into the Christian liturgy see\nReitzenstein and Wendland, _Nachrichten Ges. Wiss._, Goettingen, 1910, pp.\n325 ff.\n\n18. This point has been studied more in detail in our _Monuments relatifs\naux mysteres de Mithra_, from which we have taken parts of the following\nobservations (I, pp. 21 ff.).\n\n19. Lucian's authorship of the treatise [Greek: Peri tes Suries theou] has\nbeen questioned but wrongly; see Maurice Croiset, _Essai sur Lucien_, 1882,\npp. 63, 204. I am glad to be able to cite the high authority of Noeldeke in\nfavor of its authenticity. Noeldeke writes me on this subject: \"Ich habe\njeden Zweifel daran schon lange aufgegeben.... Ich habe lange den Plan\ngehabt, einen Commentar zu diesem immerhin recht lehrreichen Stueck zu\nschreiben and viel Material dazu gesammelt. Aus der Annahme der Echtheit\ndieser Schrift ergiebt sich mir, dass auch das [Greek: Peri astronomias]\necht ist.\"\n\n20. Cf. Frisch, _De compositione libri Plutarchei qui inscribitur_, [Greek:\nPeri Isidos], Leipsic, 1906, and the observations of Neustadt, _Berl.\nPhilol. Wochenschr._, 1907, p. 1117.--One of Plutarch's sources is the\n[Greek: Ioudaika] by Apion.--See also Scott Moncrieft, _Journ. of Hell.\nStudies_, XIX, 1909, p. 81.\n\n21. See ch. VII, pp. 202-203.\n\n22. Cf. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 75, p. 219.--For Egypt see Georges\nFoucart, \"L'art et la religion dans l'ancienne Egypte,\" _Revue des idees_,\nNov. 15, 1908.\n\n23. The narrative and symbolic sculpture of the Oriental cults was a\npreparation for that of the Middle Ages, and many remarks in Male's\nbeautiful book _L'Art du XIII^e siecle en France_, can be applied to the\nart of dying paganism.\n\nII. WHY THE ORIENTAL RELIGIONS SPREAD.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY: Boissier, _La religion romaine d'Auguste aux Antonins_,\nespecially Bk. II, ch. II.--Jean Reville, _La religion a Rome sous les\nSeveres_, Paris, 1886.--Wissowa, _Religion und Cultus der Roemer_, Munich,\n1902, pp. 71 ff., 289 ff.--Samuel Dill, _Roman Society from Nero to Marcus\nAurelius_, London, 1905.--Bigg, _The Church's Task Under the Roman Empire_,\n{219} Oxford, 1905.--Cf. also Gruppe, _Griech. Mythologie und\nReligionsgeschichte_, 1906, pp. 1519 ff.--Wendland, _Die\nhellenistisch-roemische Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zum Judentum und zum\nChristentum_, Tuebingen, 1907, pp. 54 f.--The monographs will be cited in\nconnection with the different cults which they treat.\n\n1. _Melanges Fredericq_, Brussels, 1904, pp. 63 ff. (_Pourquoi le latin fut\nla seule langue liturgique de l'Occident_); cf. the observations of Lejay,\n_Rev. d'hist. et litt. relig._, XI, 1906, p. 370.\n\n2. Holl, _Volkssprache in Kleinasien_ (_Hermes_, 1908, pp. 250 ff.).\n\n3. The volume of Hahn, _Rom und Romanismus im griechisch-roemischen Osten\nbis auf die Zeit Hadrians_ (Leipsic, 1906) discusses a period for the most\npart prior to the one that interests us. On the period following we have\nnothing but a provisional sketch by the same author, _Romanismus und\nHellenismus bis auf die Zeit Justinians_ (_Philologus_, Suppl. X), 1907.\n\n4. Cf. Tacitus, Annales, XIV, 44: \"_Nationes in familiis habemus quibus\ndiversi ritus, externa sacra aut nulla sunt._\"\n\n5. S. Reinach, _Epona_ (Extr. _Rev. archeol._). 1895.\n\n6. The theory of the degeneration of races has been set forth in particular\nby Stewart Chamberlain, _Die Grundlagen des XIX. Jahrhunderts_, 3d. ed.,\nMunich, 1901, pp. 296 ff.--The idea of selection by retrogression, of the\n_Ausrottung der Besten_, has been defended, as is well known, by Seeck in\nhis _Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt_, which outlines the\nreligious consequence (II, p. 344). His system is developed in the third\nvolume which appeared in 1909.\n\n7. Apuleius, _Metam._, XI, 14 ff. See Preface. Manilius said of the divine\nstars (IV, 910; cf. II, 125),\n\n\"_Ipse vocat nostros animos ad sidera mundus_.\"\n\n8. Hepding, _Attis_, pp. 178 ff., 187.\n\n9. The intimate connection between the juridical and religious ideas of the\nRomans has left numerous traces even in their language. One of the most\ncurious is the double meaning of the term _supplicium_, which stands at the\nsame time for a supplication addressed to the gods and a punishment {220}\ndemanded by custom, and later by law. In regard to the development of this\ntwofold meaning, see the recent note by Richard Heinze, _Archiv fuer\nlateinische Lexicographie_, XV, pp. 90 ff. Sematology is often synonymous\nwith the study of customs.\n\n10 Reville, _op. cit._, p. 144.\n\n11 On ecstasy in the mysteries in general, cf. Rohde, _Psyche_, 2d ed., pp.\n315-319; in the Oriental religions cf. De Jong, _De Apuleio Isiacorum\nmysteriorum teste_, 1900, p. 100; De Jong, _Das antike Mysterienwesen_,\nLeyden, 1909. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 323.\n\n12 Firmicus Maternus mentioned this in _De errore prof. relig._, c. 8.\n\n13 For Babylonia, cf. Strab., XVI, 1, Sec. 6, and _infra_, ch. V, n. 51; for\nEgypt, _id._, XVII, 21, Sec. 46. From the very interesting account Otto has\nwritten of the science of the Egyptian priests during the Hellenistic\nperiod (_Priester und Tempel_, II, pp. 211 ff.; 234), it appears that it\nremained quite worthy of consideration although progress had ceased.\n\n14 Strabo, _loc. cit._: [Greek: Anatitheasi de toi Hermei pasan ten\ntoiauten sophian]; Pliny, _Hist. nat._, VI, 26, Sec. 121: \"(Belus) _inventor\nfuit sideralis scientiae_\"; cf. Solinus, 56, Sec. 3; Achilles, _Isag._, 1\n(Maass, _Comm. in Arat._, p. 27): [Greek: Beloi ten heuresin anathentes].\nLet us remember that Hammurabi's code was represented as the work of\nMarduk.--In a general way, the gods are the authors of all inventions\nuseful to humanity; cf. Reitzenstein, _Poimandres_, 1904, p. 123;\nDeissmann, _Licht von Osten_, 91 ff. Likewise in the Occident: _CIL_, VII,\n759 = Buecheler, _Carm. epigr._, 24: \"(Dea Syria) ex quis muneribus nosse\ncontigit deos,\" etc., cf. Plut., _Crass._, 17.--\"Religion im Sinne des\nOrients ist die Erklaerung alles dessen was ist, also eine Weltauffassung\"\n(Winckler, _Himmelsbild der Babylonier_, 1903, p. 9).\n\n15 _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 312.--Manicheism likewise brought a complete\ncosmological system from Babylonia. Saint Augustine criticizes the book of\nthat sect for containing long dissertations and absurd stories about\nmatters that have nothing at all to do with salvation; see my _Recherches\nsur le manicheisme_, 1908, p. 53.\n\n16 Cf. Porphyry, _Epist. Aneb._, 11; Jambl., _De myst._, II, 11. {221}\n\n17 This upright character of the Roman religion has been thoroughly\nexpounded by G. Boissier (_op. cit._, I, 30 ff, 373 ff). See also the\nremarks by Bailey, _Religion of Ancient Rome_, London, 1907, pp. 103 ff.\n\n18 Varro in Augustine _De civ. Dei_, IV, 27; VI, 5; cf. Varro, _Antiq.\nrerum divin._, ed. Aghad, pp. 145 ff. The same distinction between the\nreligion of the poets, of the legislators and of the philosophers has been\nmade by Plutarch, _Amatorius_, 18, p. 763 C. The author of this division is\nPosidonius of Apamea. See Diels, _Doxographi Graeci_, p. 295, 10, and\nWendland, _Archiv fuer Gesch. der Philos._, I, pp. 200 ff.\n\n19 Luterbacher, _Der Prodigienglaube der Roemer_, Burgdorf, 1904.\n\n20 Juvenal, II, 149; cf. Diodorus, I, 93, Sec. 3. Cf. Plutarch also in\nspeaking of future punishment (_Non posse suaviter vivi_, c. 26, p. 1104\nC-E: _Quo modo poetas aud._, c. 2, p. 17 C-E; _Consol. ad Apollon._, c. 10,\np. 106 F), \"nous laisse entendre que pour la plupart de ses contemporains\nce sont la des contes de nourrice qui ne peuvent effrayer que des enfants\"\n(Decharme, _Traditions religieuses chez les Grecs_, 1904, p. 442).\n\n21 Aug., _Civ. Dei_, VI, 2; Varro, _Antiqu._, ed. Aghad, 141; \"Se timere ne\n(dii) pereant non incursu hostili sed civium neglegentia.\"\n\n22 I have developed this point in my _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 279 ff.\n\n23 In Greece the Oriental cults expanded much less than in any other\nreligion, because the Hellenic mysteries, especially those of Eleusis,\ntaught similar doctrines and satisfied the religious needs.\n\n24 The development of the \"ritual of purification\" has been broadly\nexpounded in its entirety, by Farnell in _The Evolution of Religion_, 1905,\npp. 88 ff.\n\n25 We shall mention this subject again when speaking of the taurobolium in\nch. III, pp. 67 ff.\n\n26 We cannot dwell here upon the various forms assumed by that purifying\nrite of the Oriental mysteries. Often these forms remained quite primitive,\nand the idea that inspired them is still clear, as where Juvenal (VI, 521\nf.) pictures the {222} worshiper of the _Magna Mater_ divesting himself of\nhis beautiful garments and giving them to the _archigallus_ to wipe out all\nthe misdeeds of the year (_ut totum semel expiet annum_). The idea of a\nmechanical transfer of the pollution by relinquishing the clothes is\nfrequent among savages; see Farnell, _op. cit._, p. 117; also Frazer,\n_Golden Bough_, I^2, p. 60.\n\n27 Dieterich, _Eine Mithrasliturgie_, pp. 157 ff.; Hepding, _Attis_, pp.\n194 ff.--Cf. Frazer, _Golden Bough_, III^2 pp. 424 ff.\n\n28 Cf. Augustine _Civit. Dei_, X, 28: \"Confiteris tamen (sc. Porphyrius)\netiam spiritalem animam sine theurgicis artibus et sine teletis quibus\nfrustra discendis elaborasti, posse continentiae virtute purgari,\" cf.\n_ibid._, X, 23 and _infra_, ch. VIII, n. 24.\n\n29 Here we can only touch upon a subject of very great interest. Porphyry's\ntreatise _De abstinentia_ offers a fuller treatment than is often possible\nin this kind of studies.--See Farnell, _op. cit._, pp. 154 ff.\n\n30 On [Greek: exomologesis] in the religions of Asia Minor, cf. Ramsay,\n_Cities_, I, p. 134, p. 152, and Chapot, _La province romaine d'Asie_,\n1904, pp. 509 ff. See also Crusius, \"Paroemiographica,\" _Sitzungsb. Bayr.\nAkad._, 1910, p. 111.\n\n31 Menander in Porphyry _De abstin._, II, 15; cf. Plutarch, _De\nSuperstit._, 7, p. 168 D.; Tertullian, _De Paenit._, c. 9.--Regarding the\nsacred fishes of Atargatis, see _infra_, ch. V.--In Apuleius (Met. VIII,\n28) the _gallus_ of the goddess loudly accuses himself of his crime and\npunishes himself by flagellation. See Gruppe, _Griech. Myth._, p. 1545;\nFarnell, _Evol. of Religion_, p. 55.--As a matter of fact, the confession\nof sin is an old religious tradition dating back to the Babylonians; cf.\nLagrange, _Religions semit._, p. 225 ff. Schrank, _Babylonische Suehnriten_,\n1909, p. 46.\n\n32 Juvenal, VI, 523 ff., 537 ff.; cf. Seneca, _Vit. beat._, XXVI, 8.\n\n33 On liturgic feasts in the religion of Cybele: _infra_, ch. II; in the\nmysteries of Mithra: _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I. p. 320; in the Syrian cults:\nch. V, n. 37. See in general, Hepding, _Attis_, pp. 185 ff.\n\n34 We know according to Herbert Spencer that the {223} progressive\ndifferentiation of the ecclesiastic and lay functions is one of the\ncharacteristics of religious evolution. In this regard Rome was far behind\nthe Orient.\n\n35 An essential result of the researches of Otto (_op. cit._) is the proof\nof the opposition existing in Egypt since the Ptolemies between the\nhierarchic organization of the Egyptian clergy and the almost anarchical\nautonomy of the Greek priests. See our remarks on the clergy of Isis and\nthe Galli. On the Mithraic hierarchy see our _Mysteries of Mithra_,\nChicago, 1903, p. 165.\n\n36 The development of the conceptions of \"salvation\" and \"saviour\" after\nthe Hellenistic period has been studied by Wendland, [Greek: Soter]\n(_Zeitschrift fuer neutestam. Wissensch._, V, 1904, pp. 335 ff.). See also\nLietzmann, _Der Weltheiland_, Bonn, 1909. W. Otto, \"Augustus [Greek:\nSoter],\" _Hermes_, XLV, 1910, pp. 448 ff.\n\n37 Later on we shall expound the two principal doctrines, that of the\nEgyptian religions (identification with Osiris, god of the dead), and that\nof the Syrian and Persian religions (ascension into heaven).\n\n38 At that time man's fate after death was the one great interest. An\ninteresting example of the power of this idea is furnished by Arnobius. He\nbecame converted to Christianity because, according to his peculiar\npsychology, he feared that his soul might die, and believed that Christ\nalone could protect him against final annihilation (cf. Bardenhewer,\n_Gesch. der altkirchlichen Literatur_, II, 1903, p. 470.)\n\n39 Lucretius had expressed this conviction (II, 1170 ff.). It spread to the\nend of the empire as disasters multiplied; cf. _Rev. de philologie_, 1897,\np. 152.\n\n40 Boissier, _Rel. rom._, I^3, p. 359; Friedlaender, _Sittengesch._, I^6,\npp. 500 ff.\n\nIII. ASIA MINOR.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY: Jean Reville, _La religion a Rome sous les Severes_, pp. 62\nff.--Drexler in Roscher, _Lexikon der Mythol._, s. v. \"_Meter_,\" II,\n2932.--Wissowa, _Religion und Cultus der Roemer_, pp. 263 ff., where the\nearlier bibliography will be found, {224} p. 271.--Showerman, \"The Great\nMother of the Gods\" (_Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin_, No. 43),\nMadison, 1901.--Hepding, _Attis, seine Mythen und sein Kult_, Giessen,\n1903.--Dill, _Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius_, London, 1905,\npp. 547 ff.--Gruppe, _Griech. Mythologie_, 1906, pp. 1521 ff. Eisele, \"Die\nphrygischen Kulte,\" _Neue Jahrb. fuer das klass. Altertum_, XXIII, 1909, pp.\n620 ff.\n\nFor a number of years Henri Graillot has been collecting the monuments of\nthe religion of Cybele with a view to publishing them in their\nentirety.--Numerous remarks on the Phrygian religion will be found in the\nworks and articles of Ramsay, especially in _Cities and Bishoprics of\nPhrygia_, 1895, and _Studies in the Eastern Roman Provinces_, 1906.\n\n1. Arrien, fr. 30 (_FGH_, III, p. 592). Cf. our _Studio Pontica_, 1905, pp.\n172 ff., and Statius, Achill., II, 345: \"Phrygas lucos ... vetitasque solo,\nprocumbere pinus\"; Virg., _Aen., IX_, 85.\n\n2. Lion; cf. S. Reinach, _Mythes, cultes_, I, p. 293. The lion, represented\nin Asia Minor at a very remote period as devouring a bull or other animals,\nmight possibly represent the sacred animal of Lydia or Phrygia vanquishing\nthe protecting _totem_ of the tribes of Cappadocia or the neighboring\ncountries (I am using the term _totem_ in its broadest meaning). This at\nleast is the interpretation given to similar groups in Egypt. Cf. Foucart,\n_La methode comparat. et l'histoire des religions_, 1909, p. 49, p. 70.\n\n3. [Greek: Potnia theron]. On this title, cf. Radet, _Revue des etudes\nanciennes_, X, 1908, pp. 110 ff. The most ancient type of the goddess, a\nwinged figure leading lions, is known from monuments dating back to the\nperiod of the Mermnadi (687-546 B. C.).\n\n4. Cf. Ramsay, _Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia_, I, p. 7, p. 94.\n\n5. Foucart, _Le culte de Dionysos en Attique_ (Extract from the _Mem. Acad.\nInscr._, XXXVII), 1904, pp. 22 ff.--The Thracians also seem to have spread,\nin Asia Minor, the cult of the \"riding god\" which existed until the\nbeginning of the Roman period; cf. Remy, _Le Musee belge_, XI, 1907, pp.\n136 ff.\n\n6. Catullus, LXIII. {225}\n\n7. The development of these mysteries has been well expounded by Hepding,\npp. 177 ff. (see Gruppe, _Gr. Myth._, p. 1544).--Ramsay has recently\ncommented upon inscriptions of Phrygian mystics, united by the knowledge of\ncertain secret signs ([Greek: tekmor]); cf. _Studies in the Eastern Roman\nProvinces_, 1906, pp. 346 ff.\n\n8. Dig., XLVIII, 8, 4, 2: \"Nemo liberum servumve invitum sinentemve\ncastrare debet.\" Cf. Mommsen, _Strafrecht_, p. 637.\n\n9. Diodorus, XXXVI, 6; cf. Plutarch, _Marius_, 17.\n\n10. Cf. Hepding, _op. cit._, p. 142.\n\n11. Cf. chap. VI.\n\n12. Wissowa, _op. cit._, p. 291.\n\n13. Hepding, _op. cit._, pp. 145 ff. Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, s. v.\n\"Dendrophori,\" V, col. 216 and Suppl., col, 225, s. v. \"Attis.\"\n\n14. Cf. Tacitus, _Annales_, XI, 15.\n\n15. This opinion has recently been defended by Showerman, _Classical\nJournal_, II, 1906, p. 29.\n\n16. Frazer, _The Golden Bough_, II^2, pp. 130 ff.\n\n17. Hepding, pp. 160 ff. Cf. the texts of Ambrosiaster cited in _Rev. hist.\net litt. relig._, VIII, 1903, p. 423, n. 1.\n\n18. Hepding, p. 193. Cf. Gruppe, p. 1541.\n\n19. On this diffusion, cf. Drexler in Roscher, _Lexikon_, s. v. \"Meter,\"\ncol. 918.\n\n20. Gregory of Tours, _De glor. confess._, c. 76. Cf. _Passio S.\nSymphoriani_ in Ruinart, _Acta sinc._, ed. of 1859, p. 125. The _carpentum_\nmentioned in these texts is found in Africa; cf. _CIL_, VIII, 8457, and\nGraillot, _Rev. archeol._, 1904, I, p. 353; Hepding, op. cit., p. 173, n.\n7.\n\n21. [Greek: Tharreite mustai tou theou sesosmenou | hestai gar humin ek\nponon soteria]; cf. Hepding, op. cit., p. 167.--Attis has become a god\nthrough his death (see Reitzenstein, _Poimandres_, p. 93), and in the same\nway were his votaries to become the equals of the divinity through death.\nThe Phrygian epitaphs frequently have the character of dedications, and it\nappears that the graves were grouped about the temple, see Ramsay,\n_Studies_, pp. 65 ff., 271 ff., _passim_. {226}\n\n22. Perdrizet, _Bull. corr. hell._, XIX, 1905, p. 534 ff.\n\n23. We know of those beliefs of the Sabaziasts from the frescoes in the\ncatacombs of Praetextatus; the _Mercurius nuntius_, who leads the dead, is\nfound beside Attis under the Greek name of Hermes (see Hepding, p.\n263).--Maybe the inscription _CIL_, VI, 509 = _Inscr. graec._, XIV, 1018,\nshould be completed: [Greek: Rheiei [Hermei] te genethloi]; cf. _CIL_, VI,\n499. Hermes appears beside the Mother of the gods on a bas-relief by Ouchak\npublished by Michon, _Rev. des etudes anciennes_, 1906, p. 185, pl. II. See\nalso Mendel, \"Musee de Brousse,\" _Bull. corr. hell._, 1909, p. 255.--The\nThracian Hermes is mentioned in Herodotus, see Maury, _Rel. de la Grece_,\nIII, p. 136.\n\n24. Besides Bellona-Ma, subordinate to Cybele and Sabazius, who was as much\nJewish as Phrygian, there was only one god of Asia Minor, the Zeus Bronton\n(the Thunderer) of Phrygia, prominently mentioned in Roman epigraphy. See\nPauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, s. v. and Suppl. I, col. 258.\n\n25. Cf. _CIL_, VI, 499: \"Attidi menotyranno invicto.\" \"Invictus\" is the\ncharacteristic epithet of the solar divinities.\n\n26. P. Perdrizet, \"Men\" (_Bull. corr. hell._, XX), 1896; Drexler in\nRoscher, _Lexikon_, s. v., II, col. 2687.\n\n27. _CIL_, VI, 50 = _Inscr. graec._, XIV, 1018.\n\n28. Schuerer, _Sitzungsb. Akad. Berlin_, XIII, 1897, p. 200 f. and our\n_Hypsistos_ (Suppl. _Revue instr. publ. en Belgique_), 1897.\n\n29. The term is taken from the terminology of the mysteries: the\ninscription cited dates back to 370 A. D. In 364, in connection with\nEleusis, Agorius Praetextatus spoke of [Greek: sunechonta to anthropeion\ngenos hagiotata musteria] (Zozimus, IV, 3, 2). Earlier the \"Chaldean\noracles\" applied to the intelligible god the term [Greek: metra sunechousa\nta panta] (Kroll, _De orac. Chaldeicis_, p. 19).\n\n30. Henri Graillot, _Les dieux Tout-Puissants, Cybele et Attis_ (_Revue\narcheol._, 1904, I), pp. 331 ff.--Graillot is rather inclined to admit a\nChristian influence, but _omnipotentes_ was used as a liturgic epithet in\n288 A. D., and at about the same date Arnobius (VII, 32) made use of the\nperiphrasis _omnipotentia numina_ to designate the Phrygian gods, and he\n{227} certainly was understood by all. This proves that the use of that\nperiphrasis was general, and that it must have dated back to a much earlier\nperiod. As a matter of fact a dedication has been found at Delos, reading\n[Greek: Dii toi panton kratounti kai Metri megalei tei panton kratousei]\n(_Bull. corr. hellen._, 1882, p. 502, No. 25), that reminds the reader of\nthe [Greek: pantokrator] of the Septuagint; and Graillot (loc. cit., p.\n328, n. 7) justly observes, in this connection, that on certain bas-reliefs\nCybele was united with the Theos Hypsistos, that is to say, the god of\nIsrael; see Perdrizet, _Bull. corr. hell._, XXIII, 1899, p. 598. On the\ninfluence of Judaism on the cult of Men cf. Sam. Wide, _Archiv fuer\nReligionsw._, 1909, p. 227.--On the omnipotence of the Syrian gods, see ch.\nV, pp. 128 ff.\n\n31. We are here giving the substance of a short essay on \"Les mysteres de\nSabazius et le judaisme,\" published in the _Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._,\nFebr. 9, 1906, pp. 63 ff. Cf. \"A propos de Sabazius,\" _Musee belge_, XIV,\n1910, pp. 56 ff.\n\n32. Cf. _Monuments myst. de Mithra_, I, p. 333 f. The very early\nassimilation of Cybele and Anahita justifies to a certain extent the\nunwarranted practice of calling Cybele the Persian Artemis. See Radet,\n_Revue des etudes anciennes_, X, 1908, p. 157. The pagan theologians often\nconsidered Attis as the primeval man whose death brought about the\ncreation, and so they likened him to the Mazdean Gayomart, see Bousset,\n_Hauptprobleme der Gnosis_, 1907, pp. 184 ff.\n\n33. Prudentius, _Peristeph._, X, 1011 f.\n\n34. Their meaning has been revealed through an inscription at Pergamum\npublished by Schroeder, _Athen. Mitt._, 1904, pp. 152 ff.; cf. _Revue\narcheologique_, 1905, I, pp. 29 ff.--The ideas on the development of that\nceremony, which we are summarizing here, have been expounded by us more\nfully in the _Revue archeologique_, 1888, II, pp. 132 ff.; _Mon. myst. de\nMithra_, I, pp. 334 ff.; _Revue d'histoire et de litt. relig._, VI, 1901,\np. 97.--Although the conclusions of the last article have been contested by\nHepding (op. cit., 70 f.), it cannot be doubted that the taurobolium was\nalready practised in Asia Minor, in the cult of the Ma-Bellona. Moore\n(_American Journal of Archeology_, 1905, p. 71) justly refers to the text\nof Steph. Byz., in this connection: [Greek: Mastaura; ekaleito de kai he\nRhea Ma kai tauros autei ethueto para Ludois]. {228} The relation between\nthe cult of Ma and that of Mithra is shown in the epithet of [Greek:\nAneiketos], given to the goddess as well as to the god; see _Athen. Mitt._,\nXXIX, 1904, p. 169, and Keil und von Premerstein, \"Reise in Lydien,\"\n_Denkschr. Akad. Wien_, 1908, p. 28 (inscription of the Hyrkanis plain).\n\n35. Prudentius, Peristeph., 1027: \"_Pectus sacrato dividunt venabulo._\" The\n_harpe_ shown on the taurobolic altars, is perhaps in reality a boar-spear\nhaving a kind of hilt (_mora_; cf. Grattius, _Cyneg._, 110) to prevent the\nblade from entering too far.\n\n36. Hepding, pp. 196 ff.; cf. _supra_, n. 21.\n\n37. _CIL_, VI, 510, = Dessau, _Inscr. sel._, 4152. Cf. Gruppe, _Griech.\nMyth._, p. 1541, n. 7.\n\n38. Hepding, pp. 186 ff.\n\n39. _CIL_, VI, 499: \"Dii animae mentisque custodes.\" Cf. 512: \"Diis magnis\net tutatoribus suis,\" and _CIL_, XII, 1277, where Bel is called _mentis\nmagister_.\n\n40. Hippolytus, _Refut. haeres._, V, 9.\n\n41. Julien, _Or._, V; cf. Paul Allard, _Julien l'Apostat_, II, pp. 246 ff.;\nMau, _Die Religionsphilosophie Kaiser Julians_, 1908, pp. 90 ff. Proclus\nalso devoted a philosophic commentary to the Cybele myth (Marinus, _Vita\nProcli_, 34).\n\n42. Regarding all this see _Revue d'histoire et de litterat. relig._, VIII,\n1903, pp. 423, ff.--Frazer (_Osiris, Attis, Adonis_, 1907, pp. 256 ff.) has\nrecently defended the position that the commemoration of the death of\nChrist was placed by a great many churches upon March 25th to replace the\ncelebration of Attis's death on the same date, just as Christmas has been\nsubstituted for the _Natalis Invicti_. The text of Ambrosiaster cited in\nour article (Pseudo Augustin, _Quaest. veter. Test_, LXXXIV, 3, p. 145, 13,\nSouter ed.) shows that this was asserted even in antiquity.\n\nIV. EGYPT.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY: Lafaye, _Histoire du culte des divinites d'Alexandrie hors de\nl'Egypte_, Paris, 1884, and article \"Isis\" in Daremberg and Saglio,\n_Dictionn. des antiquites_, III, 1899, {229} where may be found (p. 586) an\nindex of the earlier works.--Drexler, art. \"Isis\" in Roscher, _Lexikon der\nMythol._, II, p. 373-548.--Reville, _op. cit._, pp. 54 ff.--Wissowa, _op.\ncit._, pp. 292 ff.--Dill, _op. cit._, pp. 560 ff.--Gruppe, _Griechische\nMythologie und Religionsgesch._, pp. 1563-1581 (published after the\nrevision of this chapter).--The study of the Roman cult of the Alexandrian\ngods is inseparable from that of the Egyptian religion. It would be\nimpossible to furnish a bibliography of the latter here. We shall only\nrefer the reader to the general works of Maspero, _Etudes de Mythologie_, 4\nvols., Paris, 1893, and _Histoire ancienne des peuples de l'Orient_, 1895\n(_passim_).--Wiedemann, _Religion of the Ancient Egyptians_, London, 1897\n[cf. Hastings, _Dictionary of the Bible_, \"Religion of Egypt,\" V, pp.\n177-197].--Erman, _Die aegyptische Religion_, Berlin, 1910.--Naville, _La\nreligion des anciens Egyptiens_ (six lectures delivered at the College de\nFrance), 1906.--W. Otto, _Priester und Tempel im hellenistischen Aegypten_,\n2 vols., 1905, 1908.--The publication of a _Bulletin critique des religions\nde l'Egypte_ by Jean Capart, begun in the _Rev. de l'hist. des religions_\n(LI, 1905, pp. 192 ff.; LIII, 1906, pp. 307 ff.; 1909, pp. 162 ff.).\n\n1. Cf. on this controversy Bouche-Leclercq, _Histoire des Lagides_, I, p.\n102; S. Reinach, _Cultes, Mythes et Religions_, II, pp. 347 f.; Lehmann,\n_Beitraege zur alten Geschichte_, IV, 1904, pp. 396 ff.; Wilcken, _Archiv f.\nPapyrusforschung_, III, 1904, pp. 249 ff.; Otto, _Priester und Tempel_, I,\n1905, pp. 11 ff.; Gruppe, loc. cit., pp. 1578 ff.; Petersen, _Die\nSerapislegende_, 1910, pp. 47 ff.; Schmidt, _Kultuebertragungen_, 1910, pp.\n47 ff.\n\n2. Herodotus, II, 42, 171.--Cf. n. 4.\n\n3. AElius Aristides, VIII, 56 (I, p. 96, ed. Dindorf). Cf. Plut., _De Iside\net Osiride_, ed. Parthey, p. 216.\n\n4. Plut., _De Is. et Osir._, 28; cf. Otto, _Priester und Tempel_, II, pp.\n215 ff.--This Timotheus is undoubtedly the same one that wrote about the\nPhrygian mysteries; see _infra_, n. 79.--The question, to what extent the\nHellenistic cult had the form ascribed to it by Plutarch and Apuleius\nimmediately after its creation, is still unsettled; see Otto, _Priester und\nTempel_, II, p. 222. We do not appear to have any direct proof of the\nexistence of \"mysteries\" of Isis and Serapis {230} prior to the Empire, but\nall probabilities are in favor of a more ancient origin, and the mysteries\nwere undoubtedly connected with the ancient Egyptian esoterism.--See\n_infra_, n. 78.\n\n5. Diogenes Laertius, V, 5, Sec. 76: [Greek: Hothen kai tous paianas poiesai\ntous mechri nun haidomenous]. The [Greek: mechri nun] Diogenes took\nundoubtedly from his source, Didymus. See Artemidorus, _Onirocr._, II, 44\n(p. 143, 25 Hercher).--This information is explicitly confirmed by an\ninscription which mentions [Greek: he hiera taxis ton paianiston] (_Inscr.\nGraec._, XIV, 1034).\n\n6. Kaibel, _Epigr._ 1028 = Abel, _Orphica_, p. 295, etc.--See _supra_, ch.\nI, n. 14.--According to recent opinion, M. de Wilamowitz was good enough to\nwrite me, the date of the Andros hymn cannot have been later than the\nperiod of Cicero, and it is very probably contemporary with Sulla.--See\n_supra_, ch. I, n. 14.--On other similar texts, see Gruppe, _Griech.\nMythol._, P. 1563.\n\n7. Amelung, _Le Serapis de Bryaxis_ (_Revue archeol_, 1903, II), p. 178.\n\n8. P. Foucart, _Le culte de Dionysos en Attique_ (_Mem. Acad. des Inscr._,\nXXXVII), 1904. On the Isis cult in ancient Greece, we can now refer to\nGruppe, _Griech. Myth._, pp. 1565 ff.; Ruhl, _De Sarapide et Iside in\nGraecia cultis_ (Diss. Berlin) 1906, has made careful use of the epigraphic\ntexts dating back to the time before the Roman period.\n\n9. The only exception is the Zeus Ammon, who was only half Egyptian and\nowed his very early adoption to the Greek colonies of Cyrene; see Gruppe,\n_Griech. Myth._, p. 1558. The addition of other goddesses, like Nephtis or\nBubastis to Isis is exceptional.\n\n10. Concerning the impression which Egypt made on travelers, see\nFriedlaender, _Sittengesch._, II^6, 144 ff.; Otto, _Priester und Tempel_,\nII, p. 210.\n\n11. Juvenal, XV, 10, and the notes of Friedlaender on these passages.--The\nAthenian comic writers frequently made fun of the Egyptian zoolatry\n(Lafaye, _op. cit._, p. 32). Philo of Alexandria considered the Egyptians\nas the most idolatrous heathens and he attacked their animal worship, in\nparticular {231} (_De Decal._, 16, II, p. 193 M., and _passim_). The pagan\nwriters were no less scandalized (Cicero, _Nat. deor._, III, 15, etc.)\nexcept where they preferred to apply their ingenuity to justify it. See\nDill, _loc. cit._, p. 571.--The features of this cult in ancient Egypt have\nbeen recently studied by George Foucart, _Revue des idees_, Nov. 15, 1908,\nand _La methode comparative et l'histoire des religions_, 1909, pp. 43 ff.\n\n12. Macrobius, _Sat._, I, 20, Sec. 16.\n\n13. Holm, _Gesch. Siziliens_, I, p. 81.\n\n14. Libanius, Or., XI, 114 (I, p. 473 Foerster). Cf. Drexler in Roscher,\n_op. cit._, col. 378.\n\n15. Pausan., I, 18, 4: [Greek: Sarapidos hon para Ptolemaiou theon\neisegagonto]. Ruhl (op. cit., p. 4) attaches no historic value to this\ntext, but, as he points out himself, we have proof that an official Isis\ncult existed at Athens under Ptolemy Soter, and that Serapis was worshiped\nin that city at the beginning of the third century.\n\n16. Dittenberger, _Or. gr. inscr. sel._, No. 16.\n\n17. Apul., _Metam._, XI, 17.\n\n18. Thus it is found to be the case from the first half of the third\ncentury at Thera, a naval station of the Ptolemies (Hiller von Gaertringen,\n_Thera_, III, pp. 85 ff.; cf. Ruhl, _op. cit._, p. 59), and also at Rhodes\n(_Rev. archeol._, 1905, I, p. 341). Cult of Serapis at Delos, cf. _Comptes\nrendus Acad. inscr._, 1910, pp. 294 ff.\n\n19. A number of proofs of its diffusion have been collected by Drexler,\n_loc. cit._, p. 379. See Lafaye, \"Isis\" (cf. _supra_), p. 577; and Ruhl,\n_De Sarapide et Iside in Graecia cultis_, 1906.\n\n20. This interpretation has already been proposed by Ravaisson (_Gazette\narcheologique_, I, pp. 55 ff.), and I believe it to be correct, see\n_Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._, 1906, p. 75, n. 1.\n\n21. The power of the Egyptian cult in the Oriental half of the empire has\nbeen clearly shown by von Domaszewski (_Roem. Mitt._, XVII, 1902, pp. 333\nff.), but perhaps with some exaggeration. All will endorse the restrictions\nformulated by Harnack, _Ausbreitung des Christentums_, II, p. 274.\n\n22. The very early spread of Orphic doctrines in Magna Graecia, evidenced\nby the tablets of Sybaris and Petilia (Diels, {232} _Vorsokratiker_, II^2,\np. 480) must have prepared the way for it. These tablets possess many\npoints in common with the eschatological beliefs of Egypt, but, as their\nlatest commentator justly remarks (Harrison, _Prolegomena to the Study of\nGreek Religion_, p. 624), these new ideas are fairly overwhelmed in the old\nmythology. The mysteries of Isis and Serapis seemed to offer a revelation\nthat had been a presentiment for a long time, and the affirmation of a\ntruth foreshadowed by early symbols.\n\n23. _CIL_, X, 1781, I, 15-6.\n\n24. Apul., _Metam._, XI, 30.\n\n25. Wissowa, _op. cit._, p. 292-3; cf. Seeck, _Hermes_, XLIII, 1908, p.\n642.\n\n26. Manicheism was later persecuted on a similar pretext, see _Collat. Mos.\net Rom. leg._, 15, 3, Sec. 4: \"De Persica adversaria nobis gente progressa.\"\n\n27. A full list of the inscriptions and monuments discovered in the various\ncities is given by Drexler in Roscher, _Lexikon_, s. v. \"Isis,\" II, col.\n409 ff.\n\n28. Hirschfeld, _CIL_, XII, p. 382, and _Wiener Studien_, V, 1883, pp.\n319-322.\n\n29. Cf. Wissowa, _op. cit._, pp. 294 ff.\n\n30. Minuc. Fel., _Octav._ 22, 2: \"Haec AEgyptia quondam nunc et sacra Romana\nsunt.\"\n\n31. _Carmen contra paganos_ (_Anthol. lat._, ed. Riese, I, 20 ff.) v. 91,\n95 ff.; cf. Ps. Aug., _Quaest. Vet. Test._, CXIV, 11 (p. 308, 10 Souter),\nand _Rev. hist. litt. relig._, VIII, 1903, p. 422, n. 1.\n\n32. Rufin, II, 24: \"_Caput ipsum idolatriae._\" A miniature from an\nAlexandrian chronicle shows the patriarch Theophilus, crowned with a halo,\nstamping the Serapeum under foot, see Bauer and Strzygowski, _Eine\nalexandrinische Weltchronik_ (_Denkschr. Akad. Wien_, LI), 1905, to the\nyear 391, pp. 70 ff., 122, and pl. VI.\n\n33. Cf. Drexler in Roscher, s. v. \"Isis,\" II, p. 425; Harnack, _Ausbreitung\ndes Christentums_, II, pp. 147 ff.--Some curious details showing the\npersistence of the Isis cult among the professors and students of\nAlexandria during the last years of the {233} fifth century are given in\nthe life of Severus of Antioch by Zachariah the Scholastic (_Patrol.\norient._, I, ed. Kugener), pp. 17 ff., 27 ff.\n\n34. Ps.-Apul., 34. Compare with a similar prophecy in the Sibylline\noracles, V, 184 f. (p. 127, Geffcken ed.).\n\n35. Iseum of Beneventum; cf. _Notizie debgli scavi di ant._, 1904, pp. 107\nff. Iseum of the Campus Martius: see Lanciani, _Bollet. communale di Roma_,\n1883, pp. 33 ff.; Marucchi, _ibid._, 1890, pp. 307 f.--The _signa\nMemphitica_ (made of Memphian marble), are mentioned in an inscription\n(Dessau, _Inscr. sel._, 4367-8).--The term used in connection with\nCaracalla: \"Sacra Isidis Romam deportavit,\" which Spartianus (_Carac._, 9;\ncf. Aur. Vict., _Caes._, 21, 4) no longer understood, also seems to refer to\na transfer of sacred Egyptian monuments. At Delos a statue of a singer\ntaken from some grave of the Sais period had been placed in the temple.\nEverything Egyptian was looked upon as sacred. (Ruhl, _op. cit._, p. 53).\n\n36. Gregorovius, _Gesch. des Kaisers Hadrian_, pp. 222 ff.; cf. Drexler,\n_loc. cit._, p. 410.\n\n37. The term is Wiedemann's.\n\n38. Naville, _op. cit._, pp. 89 ff.\n\n39. On the [Greek: hierogammateus] Cheremon, see Otto, _Priester und\nTempel_ II, p. 216; Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, III, col. 2025\nff.\n\n40. Doctrines of Plutarch: cf. Decharme, _Traditions religieuses chez les\nGrecs_, pp. 486 ff. and _supra_, ch. I, n. 20.\n\n41. I did not mention Hermetism, made prominent by the researches of\nReitzenstein, because I believe its influence in the Occident to have been\npurely literary. To my knowledge there is no trace in the Latin world of an\nHermetic sect with a clergy and following. The _Heliognostae_ or\n_Deinvictiaci_ who, in Gaul, attempted to assimilate the native Mercury\nwith the Egyptian Thoth, (_Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 49, n. 2; cf. 359),\nwere Christian gnostics. I believe that Reitzenstein misunderstood the\nfacts when he stated (_Wundererzaehlungen_, 1906, p. 128): \"Die hermetische\nLiteratur ist im zweiten und dritten Jahrhundert fuer alle\nreligioes-interessierten der allgemeine Ausdruck der Froemmigkeit geworden.\"\nI believe that {234} Hermetism, which is used as a label for doctrines of\nvery different origin, was influenced by \"the universal spirit of\ndevotion,\" and was not its creator. It was the result of a long continued\neffort to reconcile the Egyptian traditions first with Chaldean astrology,\nthen with Greek philosophy, and it became transformed simultaneously with\nthe philosophy. But this subject would demand extended development. It is\nadmitted by Otto, the second volume of whose book has been published since\nthe writing of these lines, that not even during the Hellenistic period was\nthere enough theological activity of the Egyptian clergy to influence the\nreligion of the times. (_Priester und Tempel_, II, pp. 218-220).\n\n42. Plut, _De Isid._, 9.\n\n43. Apul., _Metam._, XI, 5.\n\n44. _CIL_ X, 3800 = Dessau, _Inscr. sel._, 4362.\n\n45. See the opening pages of this chapter.\n\n46. Plut,. _De Iside et Osir._, 52; cf. Hermes Trismegistus, [Greek: Horoi\nAsklepiou], c. 16; and Reitzenstein, _Poimandres_, p. 197.\n\n47. Cf. Naville, _op. cit._, pp. 170 ff.\n\n48. Juv., VI, 489: \"Isiacae sacraria lenae\"; cf. Friedlaender,\n_Sittengeschichte_, I^6, p. 502.\n\n49. In a recent book Farnell has brilliantly outlined the history of the\nritual of purification and that of the conception of purity throughout\nantiquity (_Evolution of Religion_, London, 1905, pp. 88-192), but\nunfortunately he has not taken Egypt into account where the primitive forms\nhave been maintained with perhaps the fewest alterations.\n\n50. Juv., VI, 522 ff.\n\n51. Friedlaender, _Sittengeschichte_, I^6, p. 510.--On this transformation\nof the Isis cult, cf. Reville, _op. cit._, p. 56.\n\n52. Plut., _De Iside_, c. 2; cf. Apul., _Met._, XI, 6, end.\n\n53. AElius Arist., _In Sarap._, 25 (II, p. 359, Keil ed.); see Diodorus, I,\n93, and Apuleius, XI, 6, end.--On future rewards and punishments in\nHermetism, see Ps.-Apul., _Asclepius_, c. 28; Lydus, _De mensib._, IV, 32\nand 149, Wuensch ed.\n\n54. Porph., _Epist. ad Aneb._, 29. The answer of the Ps.-Iamblichus (_de\nMyst._, VI, 5-7) is characteristic. He {235} maintained that these threats\nwere addressed to demons; however, he was well aware that the Egyptians did\nnot distinguish clearly between incantations and prayers (VI, 7, 5).\n\n55. Cf. G. Hock, _Griechische Weihegebraeuche_, 1905, pp. 65 ff. Ps.-Apul.,\n_Asclep._, 23: \"Homo fictor est deorum qui in templis sunt et non solum\ninluminatur, verum etiam inluminat\"; c. 37: \"Proavi invenerunt artem qua\nefficerent deos.\" Cf. George Foucart, _loc. cit._ [n. 61]: \"La statuaire\negyptienne a, avant tout autre, le caractere de creer des etres vivants.\"\n\n56. Maspero, _Sur la toute-puissance de la parole_ (_Recueil de travaux_,\nXXIV), 1902, pp. 163-175; cf. my _Recherches sur le manicheisme_, p. 24, n.\n2.--The parallelism between the divine and the sacerdotal influence is\nestablished in Ps.-Apul., _Asclepius_, 23.\n\n57. Iamblichus, _Myst._, VI, 6; cf. G. Foucart, _La methode comparative et\nl'histoire des religions_, 1909, p. 131, 141, 149 ff. and infra, n. 66. The\nEgyptians prided themselves on having been the first \"to know the sacred\nnames and to use the sacred speech\" (Luc., _De Dea Syr._, 1).\n\n58. This has been proven by Otto, _Priester und Tempel_, I, pp. 114 ff. Cf.\n_supra_, chap. II, n. 35. Certain busts have recently inspired Mr. Dennison\nto give his attention to the tonsure of the votaries of Isis (_American\nJourn. of Archeology_, V, 1905, p. 341). The Pompeian frescoes representing\npriests and ceremonies of the Isis cult are particularly important for our\nknowledge of the liturgy (Guimet, _C. R. Acad. des Inscr._, 1896, pls.\nVII-IX. Cf. von Bissing, _Transact. congr. relig. Oxford_, 1908, I, pp. 225\nff.).\n\n59. _CIL_, XII, 3061: \"Ornatrix fani.\"\n\n60. Cf. Kan, _De Iove Dolicheno_, 1901, p. 33.\n\n61. Cf. Moret, _Le rituel du culte divin journalier en Egypte_, Paris,\n1902. Just as the ritual of consecration brought the statue to life\n(_supra_, n. 55), the repeated sacrifices sustained life, and made it\n_longa durare per tempora_ (Ps.-Apul., _Asclep._, 38). The epithet of\n[Greek: aeizoos], given to several divinities (_CIG_, 4598; _Griech.\nUrkunden_ of Berlin, I, No. 124), expresses it exactly. All this is in\nconformity with the old ideas prevailing in the valley of the Nile (see\nGeorge Foucart, _Revue des {236} idees_, Nov. 15, 1908).--When compared\nwith the Egyptian ceremonial, the brief data scattered through the Greek\nand Latin authors become wonderfully clear and coherent.\n\n62. Apul., XI, 22: \"Rituque sollemni apertionis celebrato ministerio.\" Cf.\nXI, 20: \"Matutinas apertiones templi.\"\n\n63. Jusephus, _Ant. Jud._, XVIII, 3, 5, Sec. 174.\n\n64. Servius ad Verg., _Aen._, IV, 512: \"In templo Isidis aqua sparsa de\nNilo esse dicebatur\"; cf. II, 116. When, by pouring water taken from the\nriver, reality took the place of this fiction, the act was much more\neffective; see Juv. VII, 527.\n\n65. This passage, together with a chapter from Apuleius (XI, 20), is the\nprincipal text we have in connection with the ritual of those Isis matins.\n(_De Abstin._, IV, 9):\n\n[Greek: Hos pou eti kai nun en tei anoixei tou hagiou Sarapidos he\ntherapeia dia puros kai hudatos ginetai, leibontos tou humnodou to hudor\nkai to pur phainontos, hopenika hestos epi tou oudou tei patrioi ton\nAiguption phonei egeirei ton theon].\n\nArnobius (VII, 32) alludes to the same belief of the votaries of Isis:\n\"Quid sibi volunt excitationes illae quas canitis matutini conlatis ad\ntibiam vocibus? Obdormiscunt enim superi remeare ut ad vigilias debeant?\nQuid dormitiones illae quibus ut bene valeant auspicabili salutatione\nmandatis?\"\n\n66. On the power of \"barbarian names\" see my _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p.\n313, n. 4; Dieterich, _Mithrasliturgie_, pp. III ff. Cf. Charles Michel,\n_Note sur un passage de Jamblique_ (Melanges, Louis Havet), 1909, p.\n279.--On the persistence of the same idea among the Christians, cf.\nHarnack, _Ausbreitung des Christ._, I, pp. 124 ff.; Heitmueller, _Im Namen\nJesu_, Goettingen, 1903 (rich material).\n\n67. Apul., _Met._, XI, 9.\n\n68. _CIL_, II, 3386 = Dessau, _Inscr. sel._, 442; cf. 4423.\n\n69. Apul., XI, 24; cf. Lafaye, pp. 118 ff. Porphyry (_De Abstin._, IV, 6)\ndwells at length on this contemplative character of the Egyptian devotion:\nThe priests [Greek: apedosan holon ton bion tei ton theon theoriai kai\ntheasei].\n\n70. In the Pharaonic ritual the closing ceremony seems to have taken place\nduring the morning, but in the Occident the sacred images were exposed for\ncontemplation, and the {237} ancient Egyptian service must, therefore, have\nbeen divided into two ceremonies.\n\n71. Herodotus, II, 37.\n\n72. Cf. Maspero, _Rev. critique_, 1905, II, p. 361 ff.\n\n73. Apul., _Metam._, XI, 7 ff.--This festival seems to have persisted at\nCatana in the worship of Saint Agatha; cf. _Analecta Bollandiana_, XXV,\n1906, p. 509.\n\n74. Similar masquerades are found in a number of pagan cults (_Mon. myst.\nMithra_, I, p. 315), and from very early times they were seen in Egypt; see\nvon Bissing, _loc. cit._, n. 58, p. 228.\n\n75. The _pausarii_ are mentioned in the inscriptions; cf. Dessau, _Inscr.\nsel._, 4353, 4445.\n\n76. Schaefer, _Die Mysterien des Osiris in Abydos unter Sesostris III_,\nLeipsic, 1904; cf. Capart, _Rev. hist, relig._, LI, 1905, p. 229, and\nWiedemann, _Melanges Nicole_, pp. 574 ff. Junker, \"Die Stundenwachen in den\nOsirismysterien\" (_Denkschrift Akad. Wien_, LIV) 1910.\n\n77. In the Abydos mysteries, the god Thoth set out in a boat to seek the\nbody of Osiris. Elsewhere it was Isis who sailed out in quest of it. We do\nnot know whether this scene was played at Rome; but it certainly was played\nat Gallipoli where make-believe fishermen handled the nets in a\nmake-believe Nile; cf. P. Foucart, _Rech. sur les myst. d'Eleusis_ (_Mem.\nAcad. Inscr._, XXXV), p. 37.\n\n78. Cheremon in Porphyry, _Epist. ad Aneb._, 31:\n\n[Greek: Kai ta krupta tes Isidos epainei kai to en Abudoi aporreton\ndeixei].\n\nCf. Iamblichus, _De myster._, VI, 5-7.--On the \"mysteries\" of Isis in\nEgypt, cf. Foucart, _loc. cit._, p. 19 f.; De Jong, _De Apuleio Isiacorum\nmysteriorum teste_, Leyden, 1900, pp. 79 f., and _Das antike\nMysterienwesen_, Leyden, 1909.\n\n79. Cf. _supra_.--De Jong, op. cit., pp. 40 ff.; Gruppe, _Griech. Mythol._,\np. 1574.\n\n80. _La Cite antique_, I, ch. II, end.\n\n81. Cf. Erman, _op. cit._, pp. 96-97.\n\n82. Sufficient proof is contained in the bas-reliefs cited above (n. 20),\nwhere apotheosized death assumes the shape of {238} Serapis. Compare\nKaibel, _Inscr. gr._, XIV, 2098: [Greek: Eupsuchi meta tou Oseiridos]. This\nmaterial conception of immortality could be easily reconciled with the old\nItalian ideas, which had persisted in a dormant state in the minds of the\npeople, see Friedlaender, _Sittengeschichte_, III^6, p. 758.\n\n83. Reitzenstein, _Archiv fuer Religionswiss._, VII, 1904, 406 ff. These are\nperhaps the most striking pages written on the meaning of the ceremony; it\nis an [Greek: apathanatismos]. Cf. also Reitzenstein, _Hellenistische\nWundererzaehlungen_, p. 116.\n\n84. Apul., _Metam._, 23.--De Jong, the latest commentator on this passage,\nseems inclined to take it as a mere ecstatic vision, but the vision was\ncertainly caused by a dramatic scene in the course of which hell and heaven\nwere shown in the dark.--The Egyptians represented them even on the stage;\nsee Suetonius, _Calig._, 8: \"Parabatur et in mortem spectaculum quo\nargumenta inferorum per Aegyptios et Aethiopas explicarentur.\"\n\n85. Apul., _Met._, XI, 6 end.\n\n86. _Ibid._, c. 24: \"Inexplicabili voluptate < aspectu > divini simulacri\nperfruebar.\"\n\n87. Plut., _De Isid._, 78, p. 383 A:\n\n[Greek: Hos an exertemenais (tais psuchais ap' autou (tou Osiridos kai\ntheomenais aplestos kai pothousais to me phaton mede rheton anthropois\nkallos].\n\n88. Cf., _supra_, n. 22.\n\n89. We find similar wishes on the Egyptian monuments, frequently at least\nsince the Middle Empire. \"Donnez-moi de l'eau courante a boire....\nMettez-moi la face au vent du nord sur le bord de l'eau et que sa fraicheur\ncalme mon coeur\" (Maspero, _Etudes egyptiennes_, I, 1881, p. 189). \"Oh, si\nj'avais de l'eau courante a boire et si mon visage etait tourne vers le\nvent du nord\" (Naville,_op. cit._, p. 174). On a funerary stele in the\nBrussels museum (Capart, _Guide_, 1905, p. 71) is inscribed, \"Que les dieux\naccordent de boire l'eau des sources, de respirer les doux vents du\nnord.\"--The very material origin of this wish appears in the funeral texts,\nwhere the soul is shown crossing the desert, threatened with hunger and\nthirst, and obtaining refreshment by the aid of the gods (Maspero, _Etudes\nde mythol. et d'archeol. egypt._, 1883, I, pp. {239} 366 ff.).--On a tablet\nat Petilia (see _supra_, n. 22), the soul of the deceased is required to\ndrink the fresh water ([Greek: psuchron hudor]) flowing from the lake of\nMemory in order to reign with the heroes. There is nothing to prevent our\nadmitting with Foucart (\"Myst. d'Eleusis,\" _Mem. Acad. des Inscr._, XXXV,\n2, p. 67), that the Egyptian ideas may have permeated the Orphic worship of\nsouthern Italy after the fourth or third century, since they are found\nexpressed a hundred years earlier at Carpentras (_infra_, n. 90).\n\n90. [Greek: Doie soi ho Osiris to psuchron hudor], at Rome: Kaibel, _Inscr.\ngr._ XIV. 1488, 1705, 1782, 1842; cf. 658 and _CIL_, VI, 3, 20616.--[Greek:\nSoi de Oseiridos hagnon hudor Eisis charisaito], _Rev. archeol._, 1887, p.\n199, cf. 201.--[Greek: Psuchei dipsosei psuchron hudor metados], _CIG_,\n6267 = Kaibel, 1890. It is particularly interesting to note that almost the\nsame wish appears on the Aramaic stele of Carpentras (_C. I. Sem._, II,\n141), which dates back to the fourth or fifth century B. C.: \"Blessed be\nthou, take water from in front of Osiris.\"--A passage in the book of Enoch\nmanifestly inspired by Egyptian conceptions, mentions the \"spring of\nwater,\" the \"spring of life,\" in the realm of the dead (Enoch, xxii. 2, 9.\nCf. Martin, _Le livre d'Henoch_, 1906, p. 58, n. 1, and Bousset, _Relig.\ndes Judentums_, 1903, p 271). From Judaism the expression has passed into\nChristianity. Cf. Rev. vii. 17; xxi. 6.\n\n91. The Egyptian origin of the Christian expression has frequently been\npointed out and cannot be doubted; see Lafaye, _op. cit._, p. 96, n. 1;\nRohde, _Psyche_, II, p. 391; Kraus, _Realencycl. der christl. Alt._, s. v.\n\"Refrigerium\"; and especially Dieterich, _Nekyia_, pp. 95 ff. Cf.\nPerdrizet, _Rev. des etudes anc._, 1905, p. 32; Audollent, _Melanges Louis\nHavet_, 1909, p. 575.--The _refrigerii sedes_, which the Catholic Church\npetitions for the deceased in the anniversary masses, appears in the oldest\nLatin liturgies, and the Greeks, who do not believe in purgatory, have\nalways expressed themselves along the same lines. For instance, Nubian\ninscriptions which are in perfect agreement with the euchology of\nConstantinople hope the soul will rest [Greek: en topoi chloeroi, en topoi\nanapsuxeos] (G. Lefebvre, _Inscr. gr. chret. d'Eg._, No. 636, 664 ff., and\nintrod., p. xxx; cf. Dumont, _Melanges_, Homolle ed., pp. 585 ff.). The\ndetail is not without significance because it furnishes a {240} valuable\nindication as to the Egyptian origin of prayer for the dead; this is\nunknown to Graeco-Roman paganism which prayed to the deified dead but never\n_for_ the dead as such. The Church took this custom from the Synagogue, but\nthe Jews themselves seem to have taken it from the Egyptians during the\nHellenistic period, undoubtedly in the course of the second century (S.\nReinach, _Cultes, mythes_, I, p. 325), just as they were indebted to the\nEgyptians for the idea of the \"spring of life\" (_supra_, n. 90). The\nformula in the Christian inscriptions cited,\n\n[Greek: anapauson ten psuchen en kolpois Abraam kai Isaak kai Iakob],\n\nappears to indicate a transposition of the doctrine of identification with\nOsiris. In this way we can explain the persistence in the Christian\nformulary of expressions, like _requies aeterna_, corresponding to the most\nprimitive pagan conceptions of the life of the dead, who were not to be\ndisturbed in their graves.--A name for the grave, which appears frequently\nin Latin epitaphs, viz., _domus aeterna_ (or _aeternalis_) is undoubtedly\nalso of Egyptian importation. In Egypt, \"la tombe est la maison du mort, sa\nmaison d'eternite, comme disent les textes\" (Capart, _Guide du musee de\nBruxelles_, 1905, p. 32). The Greeks were struck by this expression which\nappears in innumerable instances. Diodorus of Sicily (I, 51, Sec. 2) was aware\nthat the Egyptians\n\n[Greek: tous ton teteleutekoton taphous aidious oikous prosagoreuousin, hos\nen Haidou diatelounton ton apeiron aiona] (cf. I, 93, Sec. 1, [Greek: eis ten\naionion oikesin]).--\n\nIt is probable that this appellation of the tomb passed from Egypt into\nPalestine and Syria. It appears already in Ecclesiastes, xii. 7 (_beth\n'olam_ = \"house of eternity\"), and it is found in Syrian epigraphy (for\ninstance in inscriptions of the third century (_Comptes Rendus Acad.\nInscr._, 1906, p. 123), also in the epigraphy of Palmyra. (Chabot, _Journal\nasiatique_, 1900, p. 266, No. 47)).--Possibly the hope for consolation,\n[Greek: Eupsuchei, oudeis athanatos], frequently found engraved upon tombs\neven in Latin countries was also derived from the Egyptian religion, but\nthis is more doubtful. [Greek: Eupsuchei] is found in the epitaphs of\ninitiates in the Alexandrian mysteries. Kaibel, _Inscr. gr._, XIV, 1488,\n1782 ([Greek: Eupsuchei kuria kai doie soi ho Osiris to psuchron hudor]),\n2098 (cf. _supra_, n. 90). Possibly the twofold meaning of {241} [Greek:\neupsuchos] which stands both for _animosus_ and _frigidus_ (see Dieterich,\n_Nekyia_, _loc. cit._) has been played upon. But on the other hand, the\nidea contained in the formula \"Be cheerful, nobody is immortal,\" also\ninspired the \"Song of the Harpist,\" a canonical hymn that was sung in Egypt\non the day of the funeral. It invited the listener to \"make his heart glad\"\nbefore the sadness of inevitable death (Maspero, _Etudes egyptiennes_, I,\n1881, pp. 171 ff.; cf. Naville, _op. cit._, p. 171).\n\nV. SYRIA.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY: The Syrian religions have been studied with especial\nattention to their relation with Judaism: Baudissin, _Studien zur\nsemitischen Religionsgeschichte_, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1876. The same author\nhas published veritable monographs on certain divinities (Astarte, Baal,\nSonne, etc.) in the _Realencyclopaedie fuer prot. Theol._, of Herzog-Hauck,\n3d ed.--Baethgen, _Beitraege zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte_, Berlin,\n1888.--W. Robertson Smith, _The Religion of the Semites_, 2d. ed., London,\n1894.--Lagrange, _Etudes sur les religions semitiques_, 2d ed., Paris,\n1905. The results of the excavations in Palestine, which are important in\nregard to the funeral customs and the oldest idolatry, have been summarized\nby Father Hugues Vincent, _Canaan d'apres l'exploration recente_, 1907.--On\nthe propagation of the Syrian religions in the Occident, see Reville, _op.\ncit._, pp. 70 _et passim_; Wissowa, _Religion der Roemer_, pp. 299 ff.;\nGruppe, _Griech. Mythol._, pp. 1582 f.--Important observations will be\nfound in Clermont-Ganneau, _Recueil d'archeologie orientale_, 8 vols.,\n1888, and in Dussaud, _Notes de mythologie syrienne_, Paris, 1903. We have\npublished a series of articles on particular divinities in the\n_Realencyclopaedie_ of Pauly-Wissowa (Baal, Balsamem, Dea Syria, Dolichenus,\nGad, etc.). Other monographs are cited below.\n\n1. Lucian, _Lucius_, 53 ff.; Apul., _Metam._, VIII, 24 ff. The description\nby these authors has recently been confirmed by the discovery of an\ninscription at Kefr-Hauar in Syria: a slave of the Syrian goddess \"sent by\nher mistress ([Greek: kuria]),\" boasts of having brought back \"seventy\nsacks\" from each of her trips (Fossey, _Bull. corr. hell._, XXI, 1897, p.\n60; on the {242} meaning of [Greek: pera], \"sack,\" see Deissmann, _Licht\nvon Osten_, 1908, p. 73).\n\n2. Cf. Riess in Pauly-Wissowa, s. v. _Astrologie_, col. 1816.\n\n3. Cato, _De agric._, V, 4.\n\n4. On dedication of Romans to Atargatis, see _Bull. corr. hell._, VI, 1882,\np. 497, No. 15; p. 498, No. 17.\n\n5. Since the year 187 we find the Syrian musicians (_sambucistriae_)\nmentioned also at Rome. Their number grew steadily (Livy, XXXIX, 6; see\nFriedlaender, _Sittengesch._, III^6, p. 346.)\n\n6. Florus, II, 7 (III, 9); cf. Diodorus Sic., fr. 34, 2, 5.\n\n7. Plut., _Vit. Marii_, 17.\n\n8. Juvenal, VI, 351; Martial, IV, 53, 10; IX, 2, 11, IX, 22, 9.\n\n9. _CIL_, VI, 399; cf. Wissowa, _op. cit._, p. 201.--Suetonius, _Nero_, 56.\n\n10. A temple of the Syrian gods at Rome, located at the foot of the\nJaniculum, has been excavated very recently. Cf. Gauckler, _Bolletino\ncommunale di Roma_, 1907, pp. 5 ff. (Cf. Huelsen, _Mitt. Inst. Rom_, XXII,\n1907, pp. 225 ff.); _Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._, 1907, pp. 135 ff.; 1908,\npp. 510 ff.; 1909, pp. 424 ff., pp. 617 ff.; Nicole and Darier, _Le\nsanctuaire des dieux orientaux au Janicule_, Rome, 1909 (Extr. des \"Mel.\nEcole franc. de Rome,\" XXIX). In it have been found dedications to Hadad of\nthe Lebanon, to the Hadad [Greek: akroreites], and to Maleciabrudus (in\nregard to the latter see Clermont-Ganneau, _Rec. d'archeol. or._, VIII,\n1907, p. 52). Cf. my article \"Syria Dea\" in Daremberg-Saglio-Pottier,\n_Diction. des antiquites gr. et rom._, 1911.\n\n11. I have said a few words on this colonization in my _Mon. rel. aux myst.\nde Mithra_, I, p. 262. Courajod has considered it in regard to artistic\ninfluences, _Lecons du Louvre_, I, 1899, pp. 115, 327 ff. For the\nMerovingian period see Brehier, _Les colonies d'orientaux en Occident au\ncommencement du moyen age_ (_Byzant. Zeitschr._, XII), 1903, pp. 1 ff.\n\n12. Kaibel, _Inscr. gr._, XIV, 2540.\n\n13. _Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._, 1899, p. 353 = Waltzing, _Corporations\nprofessionelles_, II, No. 1961 = _CIL_, III S., {243} 14165^8.--Inscription\nof Thaim of Canatha: Kaibel, _Inscr. gr._, XIV, 2532.\n\n14. Gregory of Tours, _Hist. Fr._, VIII, 1.--On the diffusion of the\nSyrians in Gaul, see Brehier, _loc. cit._, p. 16 ff.\n\n15. Cf. Brehier, _Les origines du crucifix dans l'art religieux_, Paris,\n1904.\n\n16. Adonis: Wissowa, p. 300, n. 1.--Balmarcodes: Pauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._,\ns. v.; Jalabert, _Mel. fac. orient. Beyrouth_, I, p. 182.--Marnas: The\nexistence at Ostia of a \"Marneum\" can be deduced from the dedication _CIG_,\n5892 (cf. Drexler in Roscher, _Lexikon_, s. v., col. 2382).--On\nMaleciabrudus, cf. _supra_, n. 10.--The Maiuma festival was probably\nintroduced with the cult of the god of Gaza, Lydus, _De Mensib._, IV, 80\n(p. 133, Wuensch ed.) = Suidas s. v. [Greek: Maioumas] and Drexler, _loc.\ncit._, col. 2287. Cf. Clermont-Ganneau, _Rec. d'archeol. orient._, IV, p.\n339.\n\n17. Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, s. v. \"Damascenus, Dusares.\"\n\n18. Malalas, XI, p. 280, 12 (Bonn).--The temple has recently been excavated\nby a German mission; cf. Puchstein, _Fuehrer in Baalbek_, Berlin, 1905.--On\nthe Hadad at Rome, cf. _supra_, n. 10.\n\n19. _CIL_, X, 1634: \"Cultores Iovis Heliopolitani Berytenses qui Puteolis\nconsistunt\"; cf. Wissowa, _loc. cit._, p. 504, n. 3; Ch. Dubois, _Pouzzoles\nantique_, Paris, 1906, p. 156.\n\n20. A list of the known military societies has been made by Cichorius in\nPauly-Wissowa, _Realencycl._, s. v. \"Ala\" and \"Cohors.\"\n\n21. _CIL_, VII, 759 = Buecheler, _Carmina epigr._, 24. Two inscriptions\ndedicated to the Syrian Hercules (Melkarth) and to Astarte have been\ndiscovered at Corbridge, near Newcastle (_Inscr. gr._, XIV, 2553). It is\npossible that Tyrian archers were cantoned there.\n\n22. Baltis: Pauly-Wissowa, _Realencyclop._, s. v.\n\n23. Pauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, s. v. \"Aziz\"; cf. Wissowa, _op. cit._, p.\n303, n. 7.\n\n24. On the etymology of Malakbel, see Dussaud, _Notes_, 24 ff. On the\nreligion in the Occident see Edu. Meyer in Roscher, _Lexikon_, s. v. {244}\n\n25. Kan, _De Iovis Dolicheni cultu_, Groningen, 1901; cf. Pauly-Wissowa,\n_Realencycl._, s. v. \"Dolichenus.\"\n\n26. Reville, _Relig. sous les Severes_, pp. 237 ff.; Wissowa, _op. cit._,\np. 305; cf. Pauly-Wissowa, s. v. \"Elagabal.\"--In a recent article (_Die\npolitische Bedeutung der Religion von Emesa_ [_Archiv fuer Religionsw._,\nXI], 1908, pp. 223 ff.) M. von Domaszewski justly lays stress on the\nreligious value of the solar monotheism that arose in the temples of Syria,\nbut he attributes too important a part in its formation to the clergy of\nEmesa (see _infra_, n. 88). The preponderant influence seems to have been\nexercised by Palmyra (see _infra_, n. 59).\n\n27. Cf. _infra_, n. 59.\n\n28. Cf. Curtiss, _Primitive Semitic Religion To-day_, Chicago, 1902;\nJaussen, _Coutumes des Arabes du pays de Moab_, Paris, 1908, pp. 297 ff.\n\n29. Cf. Robertson Smith, _passim_; Lagrange, pp. 158-216; Vincent, _op.\ncit._, pp. 102-123; 144 f.--The power of this Semitic litholatry equaled\nits persistence. Philo of Byblus defined the bethels as [Greek: lithoi\nempsuchoi] (2, Sec. 20, FHG, III, p. 563): Hippolytus also tells us (V, 1, p.\n145, Cruice), that in the Syrian mysteries ([Greek: Assurion teletai]) it\nwas taught that the stones were animated ([Greek: hoi lithoi eisin\nempsuchoi; echousi gar to auxetikon]), and the same doctrine perpetuated\nitself in Manicheism. (Titus of Bostra, II, 60, p. 60, 25, de Lagarde ed.:\n\n[Greek: Ouk aischunetai de kai tous lithous epsuchosthai legon kai ta panta\nempsucha eisegoumenos]).\n\nDuring the last years of paganism the neo-Platonists developed a\nsuperstitious worship of the bethels; see Conybeare, _Transactions of the\nCongress of Hist. of Rel._, Oxford, 1908, p. 177.\n\n30. Luc., _De dea Syria_, c. 41. Cf. the inscription of Narnaka with the\nnote of Clermont-Ganneau, _Etudes d'arch. orient._, II, p. 163.--For bull\nworship in Syria cf. Ronzevalle, _Melanges fac. orient. Beyrouth_, I, 1906,\npp. 225, 238; Vincent, _op. cit._, p. 169.\n\n31. Philo Alex., _De provid._, II, c. 107 (II, 646 M.); cf. Lucian, _De dea\nSyria_, 54.\n\n32. For instance on Mount Eryx in Sicily (Ael., _Nat. Anim._, {245} IV,\n2).--Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, s. v. \"Dea Syria,\" col. 2242.\n\n33. Tibullus, I, 7, 17.\n\n34. Lucian, _De dea Syria_, 14; 54. Cf. Diodorus, II, 4, 2; Ovid, _Met._,\nIV, 46; V, 331.\n\n35. Pauly-Wissowa, _loc. cit._, col. 2241; W. Robertson Smith, p. 175.\n\n36. The ancient authors frequently alluded to this superstition of the\nSyrians (the texts have been collected by Selden, _De dis Syris_, II, C. 3,\npp. 268 ff., ed. of 1672). W. Robertson Smith (_loc. cit._, p. 449), is\nright in connecting it with certain ideas of savages. Like many primitive\nbeliefs, this one has continued to the present day. It has been pointed out\nto me that at Sam-Keui, a little west of Doliche, there is a pond fed by a\nspring and well stocked with fish, which one is forbidden to take. Near the\nmosque of Edessa is a large pond where catching fish is prohibited. They\nare considered sacred, and the people believe that any one who would eat\nthem would die instantly. (Sachau, _Reise in Syrien_, 1883, pp. 196 ff. Cf.\nLord Warkworth, _Diary in Asiatic Turkey_, London, 1898, p. 242). The same\nis the case at the mosque of Tripoli and elsewhere (Lammens, _Au pays des\nNosairis_ [_Revue de l'Orient chretien_], 1908, p. 2). Even in Asia Minor\nthis superstition is found. At Tavshanli, north of Aezani on the upper\nRhyndacus, there is to-day a square cistern filled with sacred fish which\nno one is allowed to take (on the authority of Munro). Travelers in Turkey\nhave frequently observed that the people do not eat fish, even when there\nis a scarcity of food (Sachau, _loc. cit._, p. 196) and the general belief\nthat their flesh is unhealthful and can cause sickness is not entirely\nunfounded. Here is what Ramsay has to say on the subject (_Impressions of\nTurkey_, London, 1897, p. 288): \"Fish are rarely found and when found are\nusually bad: the natives have a prejudice against fish, and my own\nexperience has been unfavorable.... In the clear sparkling mountain stream\nthat flows through the Taurus by Bozanti-Khan, a small kind of fish is\ncaught; I had a most violent attack of sickness in 1891 after eating some\nof them, and so had all who partook.\" Captain Wilson, who spent a number of\nyears in {246} Asia Minor, asserts (_Handbook of Asia-Minor_, p. 19), that\n\"the natives do not eat fish to any extent.\" The \"totemic\" prohibition in\nthis instance really seems to have a hygienic origin. People abstained from\nall kinds of fish because some species were dangerous, that is to say,\ninhabited by evil spirits, and the tumors sent by the Syrian goddess were\nmerely the edemas caused by the poisoning.\n\n37. On the [Greek: Ichthus] symbolism I will merely refer to Usener,\n_Sintflutsagen_, 1899, pp. 223 ff. Cf. S. Reinach, _Cultes, mythes_, III,\n1908, pp. 43 ff. An exhaustive book on this subject has recently appeared:\nDoelger, [Greek: ICHTHYS], _das Fischsymbol in fruehchristlicher Zeit_, I,\nRome, 1910.\n\nOn sacred repasts where fish was eaten see Mnaseas, fragment 32 (_Fragm.\nhistor. graec._, III, 115); cf. Dittenberger, _Sylloge_, 584: [Greek: Ean\nde tis ton ichthuon apothanei, karpoustho authemeron epi tou bomou], and\nDiog. Laert., VIII, 34. There were also sacred repasts in the Occident in\nthe various Syrian cults: _Cenatorium et triclinium_ in the temples of\nJupiter Dolichenus (_CIL_, III, 4789; VI, 30931; XI, 696, cf. _Mon. myst.\nMithra_, II, p. 501); _promulsidaria et mantelium_ offered to the Venus\nCaelestis (_CIL_, X, 1590); construction of a temple to Malachbel with a\n_culina_ (_CIL_, III, 7954). Mention is made of a [Greek: deipnokrites,\ndeipnois kreinas polla met' euphrosunes], in the temple of the Janiculum\n(Gauckler, _C.R. Acad. Inscr._, 1907, p. 142; _Bolletino communale_, 1907,\npp. 15 ff.). Cf. Lagrange, _Religions semitiques_, II, p. 609, and\nPauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, s. v. \"Gad.\"\n\n38. W. Robertson Smith, pp. 292 ff.\n\n39. An inscription discovered at Kefr-Hauar (Fossey, _Bull. corr. hell._,\n1897, p. 60) is very characteristic in this respect. A \"slave\" of the\nSyrian goddess in that inscription offers his homage to his \"mistress\"\n([Greek: kuria]).\n\n40. Notably at Aphaca where they were not suppressed until the time of\nConstantine (Eusebius, _Vit. Const._, III, 55; cf. Sozom., II, 5).\n\n41. Much has been written about the sacred prostitutions in paganism, and\nit is well known that Voltaire ridiculed the scholars who were credulous\nenough to believe in the tales of Herodotus. But this practice has been\nproven by {247} irrefutable testimony. Strabo, for instance, whose\ngreat-uncle was arch-priest of Comana, mentions it in connection with that\ncity, (XII, 3, 36, p. 559 C), and he manifests no surprise. The history of\nreligion teaches many stranger facts; this one, however, is disconcerting.\nThe attempt has been made to see in it a relic of the primitive promiscuity\nor polyandry, or a persistence of \"sexual hospitality,\" (\"No custom is more\nwidely spread than the providing for a guest a female companion, who is\nusually a wife or daughter of the host,\" says Wake, _Serpent Worship_,\n1888, p. 158); or the substitution of union with a man for union with the\ngod (Gruppe, _Griech. Mythol._, p. 915). But these hypotheses do not\nexplain the peculiarities of the religious custom as it is described by\nmore reliable authors. They insist upon the fact that the girls were\ndedicated to the temple service while _virgins_, and that after having had\n_strangers_ for lovers, they married in their own country. Thus Strabo (XI,\n14, Sec. 16, p. 532 C.) narrates in connection with the temple of Anaitis in\nAcilisena, that [Greek: thugateras hoi epiphanestatoi tou ethnous anierousi\nparthenous, ais nomos esti kataporneutheisais polun chronon para tei theoi\nmeta tauta didosthai pros gamon, ouk apaxiountos tei toiautei sunoikein\noudenos]. Herodotus (I, 93), who relates about the same thing of the Lydian\nwomen, adds that they acquired a dowry in that manner; an inscription at\nTralles (_Bull. corr. hell._, VII, 1885, p. 276) actually mentions a\ndescendant of a sacred prostitute ([Greek: ek progonon pallakidon]) who had\ntemporarily filled the same office ([Greek: pallakeusasa kata chresmon\nDii]). Even at Thebes in Egypt there existed a similar custom with striking\nlocal peculiarities in the time of Strabo (XVII, 1, Sec. 46), and traces of it\nseem to have been found in Greece among the Locrians (Vurtheim, _De Aiacis\norigine_, Leyden, 1907). Every Algerian traveler knows how the girls of the\nOuled-Nail earn their dowry in the _ksours_ and the cities, before they go\nback to their tribes to marry, and Doutte (_Notes sur l'Islam maghrebien,\nles Marabouts_, Extr. _Rev. hist. des relig._, XL-XLI, Paris, 1900), has\nconnected these usages with the old Semitic prostitution, but his thesis\nhas been attacked and the historical circumstances of the arrival of the\nOuled-Nail in Algeria in the eleventh century render it very doubtful (Note\nby Basset).--It seems certain (I do not know whether this explanation has\never been offered) {248} that this strange practice is a modified\nutilitarian form of an ancient exogamy. Besides it had certain favorable\nresults, since it protected the girl against the brutality of her kindred\nuntil she was of marriageable age, and this fact must have insured its\npersistence; but the idea that inspired it at first was different. \"La\npremiere union sexuelle impliquant une effusion de sang, a ete interdite,\nlorsque ce sang etait celui d'une fille du clan verse par le fait d'un\nhomme du clan\" (Salomon Reinach, _Mythes, cultes_, I, 1905, p. 79. Cf.\nLang, _The Secret of the Totem_, London, 1905.) Thence rose the obligation\non virgins to yield to a stranger first. Only then were they permitted to\nmarry a man of their own race. Furthermore, various means were resorted to\nin order to save the husband from the defilement which might result from\nthat act (see for inst., Reinach, _Mythes, cultes_, I, p. 118).--The\nopinion expressed in this note was attacked, almost immediately after its\npublication, by Frazer (_Adonis, Attis, Osiris_, 1907, pp. 50 ff.) who\npreferred to see in the sacred prostitutions a relic of primitive\ncommunism. But at least one of the arguments which he uses against our\nviews is incorrect. Not the women, but the men, received presents in\nAcilisena (Strabo, _loc. cit._) and the communistic theory does not seem to\naccount for the details of the custom prevailing in the temple of Thebes.\nThere the horror of blood clearly appears. On the discovery of a skull\n(having served at a rite of consecration) in the temple of the Janiculum,\nsee the article cited above, \"Dea Syria,\" in _Dict. des antiquites_.\n\n42. Porphyry, _De Abstin._, II, 56; Tertull., _Apol._, 9. Cf. Lagrange,\n_op. cit._, p. 445.\n\n43. Even in the regions where the cities developed, the Baal and the Baalat\nalways remained the divinities [Greek: poliouchoi], the protectors of the\ncity which they were supposed to have founded.\n\n44. Le Bas-Waddington, 2196.--Suidas, s. v. [Greek: Phularches] (II, 2,\ncol. 1568, Bernhardy). Cf. Marquardt, _Staatsverwaltung_, I, p. 405, 409.\n\n45. Hippolytus, Adv. Haeres., V, II, Sec. 7: [Greek: Assurion teletai]; Sec. 18:\n[Greek: Assurion musteria] (pp. 145, 148, ed. by Cruice). Cf. Origen,\n_Contra Celsum_, I, 12. Pognon (_Inscrip. semitiques_, {249} 1907, No. 48)\nhas recently published a Syrian epitaph that is unfortunately mutilated,\nbut which seems to be that of an adept of the pagan mysteries; see Noeldeke,\n_Zeitschrift fuer Assyr._, XXI, 1907, p. 155.\n\n46. On the Semitic notion of purity, W. Robertson Smith has written\nadmirably and convincingly (pp. 446 ff. and _passim_). The question has\nbeen taken up from a different point of view by Lagrange, pp. 141 ff.--The\ndevelopment of the notion of purity in the ancient religions has been\nrecently expounded by Farnell, _The Evolution of Religion_, 1905, pp. 88\nff., especially pp. 124 ff. Cf. also _supra_, p. 91 f. An example of the\nprohibitions and purifications is found in the Occident in an inscription,\nunfortunately mutilated, discovered at Rome and dedicated to Beellefarus\n(_CIL_, VI, 30934, 31168; cf. Lafaye, _Rev. hist. relig._, XVII, 1888, pp.\n218 ff.; Dessau, _Inscr. sel._, 4343). If I have understood the text\ncorrectly it commands those who have eaten pork to purify themselves by\nmeans of honey.--On penances in the Syrian religions see ch. II, n. 31.\n\n47. M. Clermont-Ganneau (_Etudes d'archeologie orientale_, II, 1896, p.\n104) states that the epithet [Greek: hagios] is extremely rare in pagan\nHellenism, and almost always betrays a Semitic influence. In such cases it\ncorresponds to [Hebrew: QRSH], which to the Semites is the epithet _par\nexcellence_ of the divinity. Thus Eshmon is [Hebrew: QRSH]; cf. Lidzbarski,\n_Ephemer. fuer semit. Epigraph._, II, p. 155; Clermont-Ganneau, _Recueil\nd'archeol. orient._, III, p. 330; V, p. 322.--In Greek Le Bas-Waddington,\n2720, has: [Greek: Oi katochoi hagiou ouraniou Dios]. Dittenberger,\n_Orientis inscript._, 620, [Greek: Zeus hagios Beel bosoros]. Some time ago\nI copied at a dealer's, a dedication engraved upon a lamp: [Greek: Theoi\nhagioi Arelseloi], in Latin: J. Dolichenus _sanctus_, _CIL_, VI, 413, X,\n7949.--J. Heliopolitanus _sanctissimus_, _CIL_, VIII, 2627.--\"Caelestis\n_sancta_,\" VIII, 8433, etc.--The African Saturn (= Baal) is often called\n_sanctus_.--_Hera sancta_ beside Jupiter Dolichenus, VI, 413.--Malakbel is\ntranslated by _Sol sanctissimus_, in the bilingual inscription of the\nCapitol, VI, 710 = Dessau, 4337. Cf. _deus sanctus aeternus_, V, 1058,\n3761, and _Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._, 1906, p. 69.--See in general\nDelehaye, _Analecta Bollandiana_, 1909, pp. 157 ff. {250}\n\n48. As curious examples of Greco-Syrian syncretism we may mention the\nbas-relief of Ed-Douwair in the Louvre, which has been analyzed in detail\nby Dussaud (_Notes_, pp. 89 ff.), and especially that of Homs in the\nBrussels museum (_ibid._, 104 ff.).\n\n49. Macrobius, I, 23, Sec. 11: \"Ritu Assyrio magis quam Aegyptio colitur\"; cf.\nLucian, _De dea Syria_, 5.--\"Hermetic\" theories penetrated even to the\nSabians of Osrhoene (Reitzenstein, _Poimandres_, 166 ff.), although their\ninfluence seems to have been merely superficial (Bousset, _Goettingische\ngelehrt. Anzeigen_, 1905, 704 ff.)--The existence of [Greek: katochoi] at\nBaetocece and elsewhere appears to be due to Egyptian influence (Jalabert,\n_Melanges de la fac. orient. de Beyrouth_, II, 1907, pp. 308 ff.). The\nmeaning of [Greek: katochos] which has been interpreted in different ways,\nis established, I think, by the passages collected by Kroll, _Cat. codd.\nastrol. graec._, V, pars 2, p. 146; cf. Otto, _Priester und Tempel_, I, p.\n119; Bouche-Leclercq, _Hist. des Lagides_, IV, p. 335. It refers to the\npoor, the sick and even the \"illumined\" living within the temple enclosures\nand undoubtedly supported by the clergy, as were the refugees of the\nChristian period who availed themselves of the right of sanctuary in the\nchurches (cf. _Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._, 1907, p. 454).\n\n50. Cf. _infra_, n. 59.\n\n51. Strabo, XVI, 1, 6. Cf. Pliny, _H. N._, VI, 6: \"Durat adhuc ibi Iovis\nBeli templum.\" Cf. my _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 35 ff.; Chapot, _Mem.\nsoc. antiq. de France_, 1902, pp. 239 ff.; Gruppe, _Griech. Mythol._, p.\n1608, n. 1.\n\n52. Lucian, _De dea Syria_, c. 10.\n\n53. Harnack, _Dogmengeschichte_, I, pp. 233 ff. and _passim_.\n\n54. On the worship of Bel in Syria cf. _Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._, 1907,\npp. 447 ff.--Cf. _infra_, n. 59.\n\n55. On the Heliopolitan triad and the addition of Mercury to the original\ncouple see Perdrizet, _Rev. etudes anc._, III, 1901, p. 258; Dussaud,\n_Notes_, p. 24; Jalabert, _Melanges fac. orient. de Bayrouth_, I, 1906, pp.\n175 ff.--Triad of Hierapolis: Lucian, _De dea Syria_, c. 33. According to\nDussaud, the three divinities came from Babylon together, _Notes_, p.\n115.--The existence of a Phoenician triad (Baal, Astarte, Eshmoun or {251}\nMelkarth), and of a Palmyrian triad has been conjectured but without\nsufficient reason (_ibid._, 170, 172 ff.); the existence of Carthaginian\ntriads is more probable (cf. Polybius, VII, 9, 11, and von Baudissin,\n_Iolaos_ [_Philothesia fuer Paul Kleinert_], 1907, pp. 5 ff.)--See in\ngeneral Usener, _Dreiheit_ (Extr. _Rhein. Museum_, LVIII), 1903, p. 32. The\ntriads continued in the theology of the \"Chaldaic Oracles\" (Kroll, _De\norac. Chald._, 13 ff.) and a threefold division of the world and the soul\nwas taught in the \"Assyrian mysteries\" (_Archiv fuer Religionswiss._, IX,\n1906, p. 331, n. 1).\n\n56. Boll, _Sphaera_, p. 372.--The introduction of astrology into Egypt\nseems to date back no further than the time of the Ptolemies.\n\n57. The Seleucides, like the Roman emperors later, believed in Chaldean\nastrology (Appian., _Syr._, 28; Diodorus, II, 31, 2; cf. Riess in\nPauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, s. v. \"Astrologie,\" col. 1814), and the kings of\nCommagene, as well as of a great number of Syrian cities, had the signs of\nthe zodiac as emblems on their coins. It is even certain that this\npseudo-science penetrated into those regions long before the Hellenistic\nperiod. Traces of it are found in the Old Testament (Schiaparelli;\ntranslation by Luedke, _Die Astron. im Alten Testament_, 1904, p. 46). It\nmodified the entire Semitic paganism. The only cult which we know in any\ndetail, that of the Sabians, assigned the highest importance to it; but in\nthe myths and doctrines of the others its influence is no less apparent\n(Pauly-Wissowa, _Realencycl._, s. v. \"Dea Syria,\" IV, col. 2241, and s. v.\n\"Gad\"; cf. Baudissin, _Realencycl. fuer prot. Theol._, s. v., \"Sonne,\" pp.\n510-520). To what extent, for instance, the clergy of Emesa had been\nsubjected to its ascendency is shown by the novel of Heliodorus, written by\na priest of that city (Rohde, _Griech. Roman_^2, p. 464 [436]), and by the\nhoroscope that put Julia Domna upon the throne (_Vita Severi_, 3, 8; cf. A.\nvon Domaszewski, _Archiv fuer Religionsw._, XI, 1908, p. 223). The\nirresistible influence extended even to the Arabian paganism (Noeldeke in\nHastings, _Encyclop. of Religion_, s. v. \"Arabs,\" I, p. 661; compare,\n_Orac. Sibyll._, XIII, 64 ff., on Bostra). The sidereal character which has\nbeen attributed to the Syrian gods, was borrowed, but none the less real.\nFrom very early times the Semites worshiped the sun, {252} the moon, and\nthe stars (see Deut. iv. 19; Job xxxi. 25), especially the planet Venus,\nbut this cult was of secondary importance only (see W. Robertson Smith,\n_op. cit._, p. 135, n. 1), although it grew in proportion as the Babylonian\ninfluence became stronger. The polemics of the Fathers of the Syrian Church\nshow how considerable its prestige was in the Christian era (cf. Ephrem,\n_Opera Syriaca_, Rome, 1740, II, pp. 447 ff.; the \"Assyrian\" Tatian, c. 9\nff., etc.).\n\n58. Humann and Puchstein, _Reise in Klein-Asien und Nord-Syrien_, 1890, pl.\nXL; _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 188, fig. 8; Bouche-Leclercq, _Astrol. gr._,\np. 439.\n\n59. Cf. Wissowa, _op. cit._, p. 306-7.--On the temple of Bel at Palmyra,\ncf. Sobernheim, _Palmyrenische Inschriften_ (_Mitt. der vorderasiat.\nGesellsch._, X), 1905, pp. 319 ff.; Lidzbarski, _Ephemeris_, I, pp. 255\nff., II, p. 280.--Priests of Bel: Clermont-Ganneau, _Recueil d'arch.\norient._, VII, p. 12, 24, 364. Cf. _supra_, n. 54. The power of Palmyra\nunder Zenobia, who ruled from the Tigris to the Nile, must have had as a\ncorollary the establishment of an official worship that was necessarily\nsyncretic. Hence its special importance for the history of paganism.\nAlthough the Babylonian astrology was a powerful factor in this worship,\nJudaism seems to have had just as great an influence in its formation.\nThere was at Palmyra a large Jewish colony, which the writers of the Talmud\nconsidered only tolerably orthodox (Chaps, _Gli Ebrei di Palmira_ [_Rivista\nIsraelitica_, I], Florence, 1904, pp. 171 ff., 238 f. Cf. \"Palmyra\" in the\n_Jewish Encycl._; Jewish insc. of Palmyra; Euting, _Sitzb. Berl. Acad._,\n1885, p. 669; Landauer, _ibid._, 1884, pp. 933 ff.). This colony seems to\nhave made compromises with the idolaters. On the other hand we see Zenobia\nherself rebuilding a synagogue in Egypt (_Revue archeologique_, XXX, 1875,\np. III; _Zeitschrift fuer Numismatik_, V, p. 229; Dittenberger, _Orientis\ninscript._, 729). This influence of Judaism seems to explain the\ndevelopment at Palmyra of the cult of [Greek: Zeus hupsitos kai epekoos],\n\"he whose name is blessed in eternity.\" The name of Hypsistos has been\napplied everywhere to Jehovah and to the pagan Zeus (_supra_, p. 62, 128)\nat the same time. The text of Zosimus (I, 61), according to which Aurelian\nbrought from Palmyra to Rome the statues of [Greek: Heliou te kai Belou]\n(this has been wrongly changed to read [Greek: tou kai Belou]), proves that\nthe {253} astrological religion of the great desert city recognized a\nsupreme god residing in the highest heavens, and a solar god, his visible\nimage and agent, according to the Semitic theology of the last period of\npaganism (_supra_, p. 134).\n\n60. I have spoken of this solar eschatology in the memorial cited _infra_,\nn. 88.\n\n61. This opinion is that of Posidonius (see Wendland, _Philos Schrift ueber\ndie Vorsehung_, Berlin, 1892, p. 68, n. 1; 70, n. 2). It is shared by the\nancient astrologers.\n\n62. This old pagan and gnostic idea has continued to the present day in\nSyria among the Nosairis; cf. Dussaud, _Histoire et religion des Nosairis_,\n1900, p. 125.\n\n63. The belief that pious souls are guided to heaven by a psychopompus, is\nfound not only in the mysteries of Mithra (_Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 310),\nbut also in the Syrian cults where that role was often assigned to the\nsolar god, see Isid. Levy, _Cultes syriens dans le Talmud_ (_Revue des\netudes juives_, XLIII), 1901, p. 5, and Dussaud, _Notes_, p. 27; cf. the Le\nBas-Waddington inscription, 2442:\n\n\"[Greek: Basileu despota] (= the sun), [Greek: hilathi kai didou pasin\nhemin hugien katharan, prexis agathas kai biou telos esthlon].\"--\n\nThe same idea is found in inscriptions in the Occident; as for instance in\nthe peculiar epitaph of a sailor who died at Marseilles (Kaibel, _Inscr.\ngr._, XIV, 2462 = _Epigr._, 650):\n\n \"[Greek: En de [te] tethneioisin homeguri [es] ge pelousin]\n  [Greek: doiai; ton hetere men epichthonie pephoretai,]\n  [Greek: he d' hetere teiressi sun aitherioisi choreuei,]\n  [Greek: es straties eis eimi, lachon theon hegemonea].\"\n\nIt is the same term that Julian used (_Cesars_, p. 336 C) in speaking of\nMithra, the guide of souls: [Greek: hegemona theon]. Cf. also _infra_, n.\n66 and ch. VIII, n. 24.\n\n64. The Babylonian origin of the doctrine that the souls returned to heaven\nby crossing the seven planetary spheres, has been maintained by Anz (_Zur\nFrage nach dem Ursprung des Gnostizismus_, 1897; cf. _Mon. myst. Mithra_,\nI. pp. 38 ff., p. 309; Bousset, _Die Himmelsreise der Seele_ [_Archiv fuer\nReligionsw._, IV], 1901, pp. 160 ff.) and \"Gnosis\" in Pauly-Wissowa,\n_Realencyclopaedie_, col. 1520. It has since been denied by Reitzenstein\n(_Poimandres_, p. 79; cf. Kroll, _Berl. philol. Wochensch._, {254} 1906, p.\n486). But although it may have been given its precise shape and been\ntransformed by the Greeks and even by the Egyptians, I persist in believing\nthat it is of Chaldean and religious origin. I heartily agree with the\nconclusions recently formulated by Bousset, (_Goettingische gelehrte\nAnzeigen_, 1905, pp. 707 ff.). We can go farther: Whatever roots it may\nhave had in the speculations of ancient Greece (Aristoph., _Pax_, 832,\nPlato, _Tim._, 42B, cf. Haussoullier, _Rev. de philol._, 1909, pp. 1 ff.),\nwhatever traces of it may be found in other nations (Dieterich,\n_Mithrasliturgie_, pp. 182 ff.; _Nekyia_, p. 24, note; Rohde, _Psyche_, II,\np. 131, n. 3), the idea itself of the soul rising to the divine stars after\ndeath certainly developed under the influence of the sidereal worship of\nthe Semites to a point where it dominated all other eschatological\ntheories. The belief in the eternity of souls is the corollary to the\nbelief in the eternity of the celestial gods (p. 129). We cannot give the\nhistory of this conception here, and we shall limit ourselves to brief\nobservations. The first account of this system ever given at Rome is found\nin \"Scipio's Dream\" (c. 3); it probably dates back to Posidonius of Apamea\n(cf. Wendland, _Die hellenistisch-roemische Kultur_, p. 85, 166, n. 3, 168,\nn. 1), and is completely impregnated with mysticism and astrolatry. The\nsame idea is found a little later in the astrologer Manilius (I, 758; IV,\n404, etc.). The shape which it assumed in Josephus (_Bell. Judaic._, V, 1,\n5, Sec. 47) is also much more religious than philosophical and is strikingly\nsimilar to a dogma of Islam (happiness in store for those dying in battle;\na Syrian [_ibid._, Sec. 54] risks his life that his soul may go to heaven).\nThis recalls the inscription of Antiochus of Commagene (Michel, _Recueil_,\nNo. 735, l. 40):\n\n[Greek: Soma pros ouranious Dios Oromasdou thronous theophile psuchen\npropempsan eis ton apeiron aiona koimesetai].\n\nIt must be said that this sidereal immortality was not originally common to\nall men; it was reserved \"omnibus qui patriam conservaverint adiuverint,\nauxerint\" (_Somn. Scip._ c. 3, c. 8; cf. _Manil._, I, 758; Lucan, _Phars._,\nIX, 1 ff.; Wendland, _op. cit._, p. 85 n. 2), and this also is in\nconformity with the oldest Oriental traditions. The rites first used to\nassure immortality to kings and to make them the equals of the gods were\nextended little by little as a kind of privilege, to the important {255}\npersons of the state, and only very much later were they applied to all who\ndied.\n\nRegarding the diffusion of this belief from the beginning of the first\ncentury of our era, see Diels, _Elementum_, 1899, p. 73, cf. 78;\nBadstuebner, _Beitraege zur Erklaerung Senecas_, Hamburg, pp. 2 ff.--It is\nexpressed in many inscriptions (Friedlaender, _Sitteng._, III, pp. 749 ff.;\nRohde, _Psyche_, p. 673, cf. 610; epitaph of Vezir-Keupru, _Studia\nPontica_, No. 85; _CIL_. III (Salone), 6384; _supra_, n. 63, etc.) It\ngained access into Judaism and paganism simultaneously (cf. Bousset, _Die\nReligion des Judentums im neutest. Zeitalter_, 1903, p. 271, and, for Philo\nof Alexandria, Zeller, _Philos. der Griechen_, V, p. 397 and p.\n297).--During the third century it was expounded by Cornelius Labeo, the\nsource of Arnobius and Servius (Nieggetiet, _De Cornelio Labeone_ [Diss.\nMunster], 1908, pp. 77-86). It was generally accepted towards the end of\nthe empire; see _infra_, n. 25.--I hope soon to have the opportunity of\nsetting forth the development of this sidereal eschatology with greater\nprecision in my lectures on \"Astrology and Religion in Antiquity\" which\nwill appear in 1912 (chap. VI).\n\n65. According to the doctrine of the Egyptian mysteries the Elysian Fields\nwere in the under-world (Apul., _Metam._, XI, 6).--According to the\nastrological theory, the Elysian Fields were in the sphere of the fixed\nstars (Macrobius, _Comm. somn. Scip._, I, 11, Sec. 8; cf. _infra_, chap. VIII,\nn. 25). Others placed them in the moon (Servius, _Ad Aen._, VI, 887; cf.\nNorden, _Vergils Buch_, VI, p. 23; Rohde, _Psyche_, pp. 609 ff.).\nIamblichus placed them between the moon and the sun (Lydus, _De mens._, IV,\n149, p. 167, 23, Wuensch).\n\n66. The relation between the two ideas is apparent in the alleged account\nof the Pythagorean doctrine which Diogenes Laertius took from Alexander\nPolyhistor, and which is in reality an apocryphal composition of the first\ncentury of our era. It was said that Hermes guided the pure souls, after\ntheir separation from the body, [Greek: eis ton Hupsiston] (Diog. Laert.,\nVIII, Sec. 31; cf. Zeller, _Philos. der Griechen_, V, p. 106, n. 2).--On the\nmeaning of Hypsistos, cf. _supra_, p. 128. It appears very plainly in the\npassage of Isaiah, xiv, 13, as rendered by the Septuagint: {256}\n\n[Greek: Eis ton ouranon anabesomai, epano ton asteron theso ton thronon mou\n... esomai homoios toi Hupsistoi.]\n\n67. Originally he was the thunder-god, in Greek [Greek: Keraunos]. Under\nthis name he appeared for instance on the bas-relief preserved in the\nmuseum of Brussels (Dussaud, _Notes_, p. 105). Later, by a familiar\nprocess, the influence of a particular god becomes the attribute of a\ngreater divinity, and we speak of a [Greek: Zeus Keraunios] (cf. Usener,\n_Keraunos_, Rhein. Museum, N. F., LX, 1901).--This Zeus Keraunios appears\nin many inscriptions of Syria (_CIG_, 4501, 4520; Le Bas-Waddington, 2195,\n2557 _a_, 2631, 2739; cf. Roscher, _Lexikon Myth._, s. v. \"Keraunos\").\n\nHe is the god to whom Seleucus sacrificed when founding Seleucia (Malalas,\np. 199), and a dedication to the same god has been found recently in the\ntemple of the Syrian divinities at Rome (_supra_, n. 10).--An equivalent of\nthe Zeus Keraunios is the Zeus [Greek: Kataibates]--\"he who descends in the\nlightning\"--worshiped at Cyrrhus (Wroth, _Greek Coins in the British\nMuseum_: \"Galatia, Syria,\" p. 52 and LII; Roscher, _Lexikon_, s. v.)\n\n68. For instance the double ax was carried by Jupiter Dolichenus (cf.\n_supra_, p. 147). On its significance, cf. Usener, _loc. cit._, p. 20.\n\n69. Cf. Lidzbarski, _Balsamem, Ephem. semit. Epigr._, I, p. 251.--Ba'al\nSamain is mentioned as early as the ninth century B. C. in the inscription\nof Ben Hadad (Pognon, _Inscr. semit._, 1907, pp. 165 ff.; cf. Dussaud,\n_Rev. archeol._, 1908, I, p. 235). In Aramaic papyri preserved at Berlin,\nthe Jews of Elephantine call Jehovah \"the god of heaven\" in an address to a\nPersian governor, and the same name was used in the alleged edicts of Cyrus\nand his successors, which were inserted in the book of Esdras (i. 1; vi. 9,\netc.)--If there were the slightest doubt as to the identity of the god of\nthunder with Baalsamin, it would be dispelled by the inscription of\nEt-Tayibe, where this Semitic name is translated into Greek as [Greek: Zeus\nmegistos keraunios]; cf. Lidzbarski, _Handbuch_, p. 477, and Lagrange, _op.\ncit._, p. 508.\n\n70. On the worship of Baalsamin, confused with Ahura-Mazda and transformed\ninto _Caelus_, see _Mon. myst. Mithra_, p. 87.--The texts attesting the\nexistence of a real cult of {257} heaven among the Semites are very\nnumerous. Besides the ones I have gathered (_loc. cit._, n. 5); see\nConybeare, _Philo about the Contemplative Life_, p. 33, n. 16; Kayser, _Das\nBuch der Erkenntniss der Wahrheit_, 1893, p. 337, and _infra_, n. 75. Zeus\n[Greek: Ouranios]: Le Bas-Waddington, 2720 _a_ (Baal of Betocece); Renan,\n_Mission de Phenicie_, p. 103.--Cf. _Archiv fuer Religionswissenschaft_, IX,\n1906, p. 333.\n\n71. Coins of Antiochus VIII Grypus (125-96 B. C.); Babelon, _Rois de Syrie,\nd'Armenie_, 1890, p. CLIV, pp. 178 ff.\n\n72. All these qualities ascribed to the Baals by astrological paganism\n([Greek: hupsistos, pantokrator], etc.), are also the attributes which,\naccording to the doctrine of Alexandrian Judaism, characterized Jehovah\n(see _supra_, n. 66). If he was originally a god of thunder, as has been\nmaintained, the evolution of the Jewish theology was parallel to that of\nthe pagan conceptions (see _supra_, n. 69).\n\n73. On this subject cf. _Jupiter summus exsuperantissimus_ (_Archiv f.\nReligionsw._, IX), 1906, pp. 326 ff.\n\n74. Ps.-Iamblichus, _De mysteriis_, VI, 7 (cf. Porph., _Epist. Aneb._, c.\n29), notes this difference between the two religions.\n\n75. Apul., _Met._, VIII, 25. Cf. _CIL_, III, 1090; XII, 1227 (= Dessau,\n2998, 4333); Macrobius, _Comm. somn. Scipionis_, I, 14, Sec. 2: \"Nihil aliud\nesse deum nisi caelum ipsum et caelestia ipsa quae cernimus, ideo ut summi\nomnipotentiam dei ostenderet posse vix intellegi.\"--[Greek: Helios\npantokratos]: Macrob., I, 23, 21.\n\n76. Diodorus, II, 30: [Greek: Chaldaioi ten tou kosmou phusin aidion phasin\neinai k. t. l.]; cf. Cicero, _Nat. deor._, II, 20, Sec. 52 ff.; Pliny, _H.\nN._, II, 8, Sec. 30. The notion of eternity was correlative with that of\n[Greek: heimarmene]; cf. Ps.-Apul., _Asclep._, 40; Apul., _De deo\nSocratis_, c. 2: \"(The planets) quae in deflexo cursu ... meatus aeternos\ndivinis vicibus efficiunt.\"--This subject will be more fully treated in my\nlectures on \"Astrology and Religion\" (chaps. IV-V).\n\n77. At Palmyra: De Voguee, _Inscr. sem._, pp. 53 ff., etc.--On the first\ntitle, see _infra_, n. 80.\n\n78. Note especially _CIL_, VI, 406 = 30758, where Jupiter Dolichenus is\ncalled _Aeternus conservator totius poli_. The {258} relation to heaven\nhere remained apparent. See _Somn. Scip._, III, 4; IV, 3.\n\n79. Cf. _Rev. archeol._, 1888, I, pp. 184 ff.; Pauly-Wissowa, s. v.\n\"Aeternus,\" and _Festschrift fuer Otto Benndorf_, 1898, p. 291.--The idea of\nthe eternity of the gods also appeared very early in Egypt, but it does not\nseem that the mysteries of Isis--in which the death of Osiris was\ncommemorated--made it prominent, and it certainly was spread in the\nOccident only by the sidereal cults.\n\n80. The question has been raised whether the epithet [Hebrew: MR' `LM']\nmeans \"lord of the world\" or \"lord of eternity\" (cf. Lidzbarski,\n_Ephemeris_, I, 258; II, 297; Lagrange, p. 508), but in our opinion the\ncontroversy is to no purpose, since in the spirit of the Syrian priests the\ntwo ideas are inseparable and one expression in itself embraces both, the\nworld being conceived as eternal (_supra_, n. 76). See for Egypt,\nHorapoll., _Hieroglyph._, I (serpent as symbol of the [Greek: aion] and\n[Greek: kosmos]). At Palmyra, too, the title \"lord of all\" is found,\n[Hebrew: MR' KL] (Lidzbarski, _loc. cit._); cf. Julian, Or., IV, p. 203, 5\n(Hertlein): [Greek: Ho basileus ton holon Helios], and infra, n. 81; n. 87.\nAlready at Babylon the title \"lord of the universe\" was given to Shamash\nand Hadad; see Jastrow, _Religion Babyloniens_, I, p. 254, n. 10. Noeldeke\nhas been good enough to write me as follows on this subject: \"Daran kan\nkein Zweifel sein, dass [Hebrew: `LM] zunaechst (lange Zeit) Ewigkeit\nheisst, und dass die Bedeutung 'Welt' secundaer ist. Ich halte es daher fuer\nso gut wie gewiss dass das palmyrenische [Hebrew: MR' `LM'], wenn es ein\nalter Name ist, den 'ewigen' Herrn bedeutet, wie ohne Zweifel [Hebrew: 'L\n`WLM], Gen., xxi. 33. Das biblische Hebraeisch kennt die Bedeutung 'Welt'\nnoch nicht, abgesehen wohl von der spaeten Stelle, Eccl. iii. 11. Und, so\nviel ich sehe, ist im Palmyrenischen sonst [Hebrew: `LM'] immer 'Ewigkeit,'\nz.B. in der haeufigen Redensart [Hebrew: LBRYK SHMCH L`LM']. Aber das\ndaneben vorkommende palmyr. [Hebrew: MR' KL] fuehrt allerdings darauf, dass\ndie palmyrenische Inschrift auch in [Hebrew: MR' `LM'] den 'Herrn der Welt'\nsah. Ja der syrische Uebersetzer sieht auch in jenem hebraeischen [Hebrew:\n'L `WLM] 'den Gott der Welt.' Das Syrische hat naemlich einen formalen\nUnterschied festgestellt zwischen _'[=a]l[)a]m_, dem Status absolutus,\n'Ewigkeit,' und _'[=a]lm[=a]_ [_[=a]l^em[=a]_] dem Status emphaticus\n'Welt.'--Sollte uebrigens die {259} Bedeutung Welt diesem Worte erst durch\nEinfluss griechischer Speculation zu Teil geworden sein? In der\nZingirli-Inschrift bedeuted [Hebrew: BTSLM] noch bloss 'in seiner Zeit.'\"\n\n81. Cf. _CIL_, III, 1090 = Dessau, _Inscr._, 2998: \"Divinarum humanarumque\nrerum rectori.\" Compare _ibid._, 2999 and Cagnet, _Annee epigr._, 1905, No.\n235: \"I. O. M., id est universitatis principi.\" Cf. the article of the\n_Archiv_ cited, n. 73. The _Asclepius_ says (c. 39), using an astrological\nterm: \"Caelestes dii catholicorum dominantur, terreni incolunt singula.\"\n\n82. Cf. W. Robertson Smith, 75 ff., _passim_. In the Syrian religions as in\nthat of Mithra, the initiates regarded each other as members of the same\nfamily, and the phrase \"dear brethren\" as used by our preachers, was\nalready in use among the votaries of Jupiter Dolichenus (_fratres\ncarissimos_, _CIL_, VI, 406 = 30758).\n\n83. Renan mentioned this fact in his _Apotres_, p. 297 = _Journal\nAsiatique_, 1859, p. 259. Cf. Jalabert, _Mel. faculte orient. Beyrout_, I,\n1906, p. 146.\n\n84. This is the term (_virtutes_) used by the pagans. See the inscription\n_Numini et virtutibus dei aeterni_ as reconstructed in _Revue de\nPhilologie_, 1902, p. 9; _Archiv fuer Religionsw._, _loc. cit._, p. 335, n.\n1 and _infra_, ch. VIII, n. 20.\n\n85. _CIL_, VII, 759 = Buecheler, _Carm. epig._, 24.--Cf. Lucian, _De dea\nSyria_, 32.\n\n86. Macrobius, _Sat._, I, 23, Sec. 17: \"Nominis (Adad) interpretatio\nsignificat unus unus.\"\n\n87. Cicero, _Somnium Scip._, c. 4: \"Sol dux et princeps et moderator\nluminum reliquorum, mens mundi et temperatio.\" Pliny, _H. N._, II, 6, Sec. 12:\n\"Sol ... siderum ipsorum caelique rector. Hunc esse mundi totius animam ac\nplanius mentem, hunc principale naturae regimen ac numen credere decet,\"\netc. Julian of Laodicea, _Cat. codd. astr._, I, p. 136, l. 1:\n\n[Greek: Helios basileus kai hegemon tou sumpantos kosmou kathestos, panton\nkathegoumenos kai panton on genesiarches.]\n\n88. We are here recapitulating some conclusions of a study on _La theologie\nsolaire du paganisme romain_ published in _Memoires des savants etrangers\npresentes a l'Acad. des Inscr._, XII, 2d part, pp. 447 ff., Paris, 1910.\n{260}\n\n89. The hymns of Synesius (II, 10 ff., IV, 120 ff., etc.) contain peculiar\nexamples of the combination of the old astrological ideas with Christian\ntheology.\n\nVI. PERSIA.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY: We shall not attempt here to give a bibliography of the works\ndevoted to Mazdaism. We shall merely refer the reader to that of Lehmann in\nChantepie de la Saussaye, _Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte_, II, p. 150.\nWe should mention, in the first place, Darmesteter, _Le Zend Avesta_, 1892\nff., with introductions and commentary.--In my _Textes et monuments\nrelatifs aux mysteres de Mithra_ (2 vols., 1894-1900), I, pp. xx ff., I\nhave furnished a list of the earlier works on this subject; the conclusions\nof the book have been published separately without the notes, under the\ntitle: _Les Mysteres de Mithra_, (2d ed., Paris and Brussels, 1902; English\ntranslation, Chicago, 1903). See also the article \"Mithra\" in the\n_Dictionnaire des antiquites_ of Daremberg and Saglio, 1904.--General\noutlines of certain phases of this religion have been since given by Grill,\n_Die persische Mysterienreligion und das Christentum_, 1903; Roeses, _Ueber\nMithrasdienst_, Stralsund, 1905; G. Wolff, _Ueber Mithrasdienst und\nMithreen_, Frankfort, 1909; Reinach, _La morale du mithraisme_ in _Cultes,\nmythes_, II, 1906, pp. 220 ff.; Dill, _op. cit._, pp. 594-626; cf. also\nBigg, _op. cit._ [p. 321], 1905, p. 46 ff.; Harnack, _Ausbreitung des\nChristent._, II, p. 270. Among the learned researches which we cannot\nenumerate here, the most important is that of Albrecht Dieterich, _Eine\nMithrasliturgie_, 1903. He has endeavored with some ingenuity to show that\na mystical passage inserted in a magic papyrus preserved at Paris is in\nreality a fragment of a Mithraic liturgy, but here I share the skepticism\nof Reitzenstein (_Neue Jahrb. f. das class. Altertum_, 1904, p. 192) and I\nhave given my reasons in _Rev. de l'Instr. publ. en Belg._, XLVII, 1904,\npp. 1 ff. Dieterich answered briefly in _Archiv f. Religionswis._, VIII,\n1905, p. 502, but without convincing me. The author of the passage in\nquestion may have been more or less accurate in giving his god the external\nappearance of Mithra, but he certainly did not know the eschatology of the\nPersian mysteries. We know, for {261} instance, through positive testimony\nthat they taught the dogma of the passage of the soul through the seven\nplanetary spheres, and that Mithra acted as a guide to his votaries in\ntheir ascension to the realm of the blessed. Neither the former nor the\nlatter doctrine, however, is found in the fantastic uranography of the\nmagician. The name of Mithra, as elsewhere that of the magi Zoroaster and\nHostanes, helped to circulate an Egyptian forgery., cf. Wendland, _Die\nhellenistisch-roemische Kultur_, 1907, p. 168, n. 1. See on this controversy\nWuensch's notes in the 2d ed. of the _Mithrasliturgie_, 1910, pp. 225 ff.--A\nconsiderable number of new monuments have been published of late years (the\nmithreum of Saalburg by Jacobi, etc.). The most important ones are those of\nthe temple of Sidon preserved in the collection of Clercq (De Ridder,\n_Marbres de la collection de C._, 1906, pp. 52 ff.) and those of Stockstadt\npublished by Drexel (_Der obergerm. Limes_, XXXIII, Heidelberg, 1910). In\nthe following notes I shall only mention the works or texts which could not\nbe utilized in my earlier researches.\n\n1. Cf. Petr. Patricius, _Excerpta de leg._, 12 (II, p. 393, de Boor ed.).\n\n2. Cf. Chapot, _Les destinees de l'hellenisme au dela l'Euphrate_ (_Mem.\nsoc. antiq. de France_), 1902, pp. 207 ff.\n\n3. Humbert in Daremberg and Saglio, _Dictionnaire_, s. v. \"Amici,\" I, p.\n228 (cf. 160). Cf. Friedlaender, _Sittengesch._, I, pp. 202 ff.\n\n4. Cf. _L'Eternite des empereurs romains_ (_Rev. d'hist. et de litt.\nrelig._, I), 1896, p. 442.\n\n5. Friedlaender (_loc. cit._, p. 204) has pointed out several instances\nwhere Augustus borrowed from his distant predecessors the custom of keeping\na journal of the palace, of educating the children of noble families at\ncourt, etc. Certain public institutions were undoubtedly modeled on them;\nfor instance, the organization of the mails (Otto Hirschfeld,\n_Verwaltungsbeamten_, p. 190, n. 2; Rostovtzev, _Klio_, VI, p. 249 (on\nangariae)); cf. Preisigke, _Die Ptolemaeische Staatspost_ (_Klio_, VII, p.\n241), that of the secret police (Friedlaender, I, p. 427).--On the Mazdean\n_Hvareno_ who became [Greek: Tuche basileos], then _Fortuna Augusti_, cf.\n_Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 284 ff.--Even Mommsen (_Roem. Gesch._, V, p.\n343), although {262} predisposed to look for the continuity of the Roman\ntradition, adds, after setting forth the rules that obtained at the court\nof the Parthians: \"Alle Ordnungen die mit wenigen Abminderungen bei den\nroemischen Caesaren wiederkehren und vielleicht zum Teil von diesen der\naelteren Grossherrschaft entlehnt sind.\"--Cf. also _infra_, ch. VIII, n. 19.\n\n6. Friedlaender, _loc. cit._, p. 204; cf. p. 160.\n\n7. Bousset, _Die Religion des Judentums im neutestam. Zeitalter_, 1903 (2d\ned. 1906), pp. 453 ff., _passim_.\n\n8. Cf. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 21 ff.\n\n9. Cf. _infra_, ch. VII, pp. 188 ff.\n\n10. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 9 ff., pp. 231 ff.\n\n11. Lactantius, _De mort. persec._, 21, 2; cf. Seeck, _Gesch. des\nUntergangs der antiken Welt_, II, pp. 7 ff.\n\n12. Cf. Strzygowski, _Mschatta_ (_Jahrb. preuss. Kunstsammlungen_, XXV),\nBerlin, 1904, pp. 324 ff., 371 ff.--From a communication made to the\nCongress of Orientalists at Copenhagen (1908) by Father Lammens, it would\nappear that the facade of Mschatta is the work of an Omaiyad kalif of\nDamascus, and Strzygowski's conclusions would, therefore, have to be\nmodified considerably; but the influence of Sassanid art in Syria is\nnevertheless certain; see Dussaud, _Les Arabes en Syrie avant l'Islam_,\n1907, pp. 33, 51 ff.\n\n13. Cf. _infra_, n. 32.\n\n14. Plutarch, _V. Pompei_, 24:\n\n[Greek: Xenas de thusias ethuon autoi tas en Olumpoi kai teletas tinas\naporretous eteloun, on he tou Mithrou kai mechri deuro diasozetai\nkatadeichtheisa proton hup' ekeinon].\n\n15. Lactantius Placidus ad Stat., _Theb._ IV, 717: \"Quae sacra primum\nPersae habuerunt, a Persis Phryges, a Phrygibus Romani.\"\n\n16. In the _Studio Pontica_, p. 368, I have described a grotto located near\nTrapezus and formerly dedicated to Mithra, but now transformed into a\nchurch. We know of no other Mithreum. A bilingual dedication to Mithra, in\nGreek and Aramaic, is engraved upon a rock in a wild pass near Farasha\n(Rhodandos) in Cappadocia. Recently it has been republished {263} with\nexcellent notes by Henri Gregoire (_Comptes Rendus Acad. des Inscr._, 1908,\npp. 434 ff.), but the commentator has mentioned no trace of a temple. The\ntext says that a strategus from Ariaramneia [Greek: emageuse Mithrei].\nPerhaps these words must be translated according to a frequent meaning of\nthe aorist, by \"became a magus of Mithra\" or \"began to serve Mithra as a\nmagus.\" This would lead to the conclusion that the inscription was made on\nthe occasion of an initiation. The magus dignity was originally hereditary\nin the sacred caste; strangers could acquire it after the cult had assumed\nthe form of mysteries. If the interpretation offered by us is correct the\nCappadocian inscription would furnish interesting evidence of that\ntransformation in the Orient. Moreover, we know that Tiridates of Armenia\ninitiated Nero; see _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 239.\n\n17. Strabo, XI, 14, Sec. 9. On the studs of Cappadocia, cf. Gregoire, _Saints\njumeaux et dieux cavaliers_, 1905, pp. 56 ff.\n\n18. Cf. _C. R. Acad. des Inscr._, 1905, pp. 99 ff. (note on the bilingual\ninscription of Aghatcha-Kale); cf. Daremberg-Saglio-Pottier, _Dict.\nAntiqu._, s. v. \"Satrapa.\"\n\n19. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 10, n. 1. The argument undoubtedly dates\nback to Carneades, see Boll, _Studien ueber Claudius Ptolemaeus_, 1894, pp.\n181 ff.\n\n20. Louis H. Gray (_Archiv fuer Religionswiss._, VII, 1904, p. 345) has\nshown how these six Amshaspands passed from being divinities of the\nmaterial world to the rank of moral abstractions. From an important text of\nPlutarch it appears that they already had this quality in Cappadocia; cf.\n_Mon. myst. Mithra_, II, p. 33, and Philo, _Quod omn. prob. lib._, 11 (II,\n456 M).--On Persian gods worshiped in Cappadocia, see _Mon. myst. Mithra_,\nI, p. 132.\n\n21. See _supra_, n. 16 and 18.--According to Gregoire, the bilingual\ninscription of Farasha dates back to the first century, before or after\nChrist (_loc. cit._, p. 445).\n\n22. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 9, n. 5.\n\n23. Comparison of the type of Jupiter Dolichenus with the bas-reliefs of\nBoghaz-Keui led Kan (_De Iovis Dolicheni cultu_, Groningen, 1901, pp. 3\nff.) to see an Anatolian god in him. {264} The comparison of the formula\n_ubi ferrum nascitur_ with the expression [Greek: hopou ho sideros\ntiktetai], used in connection with the Chalybians, leads to the same\nconclusion, see _Revue de philologie_, XXVI, 1902, p. 281.--Still, the\nrepresentations of Jupiter Dolichnus also possess a remarkable resemblance\nto those of the Babylonian god Ramman; cf. Jeremias in Roscher, _Lexikon\nder Myth._, s. v. \"Ramman,\" IV, col. 50 ff.\n\n24. _Rev. archeol._ 1905, I, p. 189. Cf. _supra_, p. 127, n. 68.\n\n25. Herod., I, 131.--On the assimilation of Baalsamin to Ahura-Mazda, cf.\n_supra_, p. 127, and _infra_, n. 29. At Rome, Jupiter Dolichenus was\n_conservator totius poli et numen praestantissimum_ (_CIL_, VI, 406 =\n30758).\n\n26. Inscription of King Antiochus of Commagene (Michel, _Recueil_, No.\n735), l. 43:\n\n[Greek: Pros ouranious Dios Oromasdou thronous theophile psuchen\npropempsan]; cf. l. 33: [Greek: Ouranion anchista thronon].\n\n27. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 87.\n\n28. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 333.--An inscription discovered in a\nmithreum at Dorstadt (Sacidava in Dacia, _CIL_, III, 7728, cf. 7729),\nfurnishes, if I rightly understand, another proof of the relation existing\nbetween the Semitic cults and that of the Persian gods. It speaks of a\n\"de[orum?] sacerdos creatus a Pal[myr]enis, do[mo] Macedonia, et adven[tor]\nhuius templi.\" This rather obscure text becomes clear when compared with\nApul., _Metam._, XI, 26. After the hero had been initiated into the\nmysteries of Isis in Greece, he was received at Rome in the great temple of\nthe Campus Martius, \"fani quidem advena, religionis autem indigena.\" It\nappears also that this Macedonian, who was made a priest of their national\ngods (Bel, Malakbel, etc.) by a colony of Palmyrenians, was received in\nDacia by the mystics of Mithra as a member of their religion.\n\n29. At Venasa in Cappadocia, for instance, the people, even during the\nChristian period, celebrated a panegyric on a mountain, where the celestial\nZeus, representing Baalsamin and Ahura-Mazda, was formerly worshiped\n(Ramsay, _Church in the Roman Empire_, 1894, pp. 142, 457). The\nidentification of Bel with Ahura-Mazda in Cappadocia results from the\nAramaic inscription of Jarpuz (Clermont-Ganneau, _Recueil_, III, {265} p.\n59; Lidzbarski, _Ephemeris fuer semit. Epigraphik_, I, pp. 59 ff.). The Zeus\nStratios worshiped upon a high summit near Amasia was in reality\nAhura-Mazda, who in turn probably supplanted some local god (_Studia\nPontica_, pp. 173 ff.).--Similarly the equation Anahita = Ishtar = Ma or\nCybele for the great female divinity is accepted everywhere (_Mon. myst.\nMithra_, I, p. 333), and Ma takes the epithet [Greek: aniketos] like Mithra\n(_Athen. Mitt._, XVIII, 1893, p. 415, and XXIX, 1904, p. 169). A temple of\nthis goddess was called [Greek: hieron Astartes] in a decree of Anisa\n(Michel, _Recueil_, No. 536, l. 32).\n\n30. The Mithra \"mysteries\" are not of Hellenic origin (_Mon. myst. Mithra_,\nI, p. 239), but their resemblance to those of Greece, which Gruppe insists\nupon (_Griech. Mythologie_, pp. 1596 ff.) was such that the two were bound\nto become confused in the Alexandrian period.\n\n31. Harnack (_Ausbreitung des Christentums_, II, p. 271) sees in this\nexclusion of the Hellenic world a prime cause of the weakness of the Mithra\nworship in its struggle against Christianity. The mysteries of Mithra met\nthe Greek culture with the culture of Persia, superior in some respects.\nBut if it was capable of attracting the Roman mind by its moral qualities,\nit was too Asiatic, on the whole, to be accepted without repugnance by the\nOccidentals. The same was true of Manicheism.\n\n32. _CIL_, III, 4413; cf. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 281.\n\n33. Cf. the bibliography at the head of the notes for this chapter.\n\n34. As Plato grew older he believed that he could not explain the evils of\nthis world without admitting the existence of an \"evil soul of the world\"\n(Zeller, _Philos. der Griechen_, II, p. 973, p. 981, n. 1). But this late\nconception, opposed as it is to his entire system, is probably due to the\ninfluence of Oriental dualism. It is found in the Epinomis (Zeller,\n_ibid._, p. 1042, n. 4), where the influence of \"Chaldean\" theories is\nundeniable; cf. Bidez, _Revue de Philologie_, XXIX, 1905, p. 319.\n\n35. Plutarch, _De Iside_, 46 ff.; cf. Zeller, _Philos. der Griechen_, V, p.\n188; Eisele, _Zur Demonologie des Plutarch_ (_Archiv fuer Gesch. der\nPhilos._, XVII), 1903, p. 283 f.--Cf. _infra_, n. 40. {266}\n\n36. Arnobius, who was indebted to Cornelius Labeo for some exact\ninformation on the doctrines of the magi, says (IV, 12, p. 150, 12,\nReifferscheid): \"Magi suis in accitionibus memorant antitheos saepius\nobrepere pro accitis, esse autem hos quosdam materiis ex crassioribus\nspiritus qui deos se fingant, nesciosque mendaciis et simulationibus\nludant.\" Lactantius, the pupil of Arnobius, used the same word in speaking\nof Satan that a Mazdean would have used in referring to Ahriman (_Inst.\ndivin._, II, 9, 13, p. 144, 13, Brandt): \"Nox quam pravo illi antitheo\ndicimus attributam\"; he is the _aemulus Dei_.--Heliodorus who has made use\nin his _Aethiopica_ of data taken from the Mazdean beliefs (see _Monuments\nrelatifs aux mysteres de Mithra_, volume I, p. 336, n. 2) uses the Greek\nword in the same sense, (IV, 7, p. 105, 27, Bekker ed.): [Greek: Antitheos\ntis eoiken empodizein ten praxin].--The Ps.-Iamblichus, _De myster._, III,\n31, Sec. 15, likewise speaks of [Greek: daimones ponerous hous de kai kalousin\nantitheous]. Finally the magical papyri also knew of the existence of these\ndeceiving spirits (Wessely, _Denksch. Akad. Wien_, XLII, p. 42, v. 702:\n[Greek: Pempson moi ton alethinon Asklepion dicha tinos antitheou\nplanodaimonos]).\n\n37. In a passage to which we shall return in note 39, Porphyry (_De\nAbstin._, II, 42), speaks of the demons in almost the same terms as\nArnobius: [Greek: To gar pseudos toutois hoikeion; Boulontai gar einai\ntheoi kai he proestosa auton dunamis dokein theos einai ho megistos] (cf.\nc. 41: [Greek: Toutous kai ton proestota auton]); likewise Ps.-Iamblichus,\n_De myst._, III, 30, 6: [Greek: Ton megan hegemona ton daimonon].--In the\n_De philos. ex orac. haur._ (pp. 147 ff. Wolff), an early work in which he\nfollowed other sources than those in _De Abstinentia_, Porphyry made\nSerapis (= Pluto) the chief of the malevolent demons. There was bound to be\na connection between the Egyptian god of the underworld and the Ahriman of\nthe Persians at an early date.--A veiled allusion to this chief of demons\nmay be contained in Lucan, VI, 742 ff., and Plutarch who, in _De Iside_,\n46, called Ahriman Hades (_supra_, p. 190; cf. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, II, p.\n131, No. 3), says elsewhere (_De latenter viv._, 6, p. 1130): [Greek: Ton\nde tes enantias kurion moiras, eite theos eite daimon estin, Aiden\nonomazousin]. Cf. Decharme, _Traditions religieuses chez les Grecs_, 1904,\np. 431, n. 1.\n\n38. The dedication _Diis angelis_ recently found at {267} Viminacium\n(_Jahresh. Instituts in Wien_, 1905, Beiblatt, p. 6), in a country where\nthe Mithra worship had spread considerably seems to me to refer to this.\nSee Minuc. Felix, _Octav._, 26: \"Magorum et eloquio et negotio primus\nHostanes angelos, id est ministros et nuntios Dei, eius venerationi novit\nassistere.\" St. Cypr., \"Quod idola dii n. s.,\" c. 6 (p. 24, 2, Hartel):\n\"Ostanes et formam Dei veri negat conspici posse et angelos veros sedi eius\ndicit adsistere.\" Cf. Tertullian, _Apol._, XXIII: \"Magi habentes\ninvitatorum angelorum et daemonum adsistentem sibi potestatem;\" Arnobius,\nII, 35 (p. 76, 15, Reifferscheid); Aug., _Civ. Dei_, X, 9, and the texts\ncollected by Wolff, _Porphyrii de philos. ex orac. haurienda_, 1856, pp.\n223 ff.; Kroll, _De orac. Chaldaicis_, 1894, pp. 53; Roscher, _Die\nHebdomadenlehre der griech. Philosophen_, Leipsic, 1906, p. 145; Abt,\n_Apuleius und die Zauberei_, Giessen, 1909, p. 256.\n\n39. Porphyry, _De Abstin._, II, 37-43, expounds a theory about the demons,\nwhich, he says, he took from \"certain Platonists\" ([Greek: Platonikoi\ntines], Numenius and Cronius?). That these authors, whoever they were,\nhelped themselves freely to the doctrines of the magi, seems to appear\nimmediately from the whole of Porphyry's exposition (one could almost give\nan endless commentary on it with the help of the Mazdean books) and in\nparticular from the mention that is made of a power commanding the spirits\nof evil (see _supra_, n. 37). This conclusion is confirmed by a comparison\nwith the passage of Arnobius cited above (n. 36), who attributes similar\ntheories to the \"magi,\" and with a chapter of the Ps.-Iamblichus (_De\nmysteriis_, III, 31) which develops analogous beliefs as being those of\n\"Chaldean prophets.\"--Porphyry also cites a \"Chaldean\" theologian in\nconnection with the influence of the demons, _De regressu animae_ (Aug.,\n_Civ. Dei_, X, 9).\n\nI conjecture that the source of all this demonology is the book attributed\nto Hostanes which we find mentioned in the second century of our era by\nMinucius Felix, St. Cyprian (_supra_, n. 38), etc.; cf. Wolff, op. cit., p.\n138; _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 33. As a matter of fact it would be false\nlogic to try to explain the evolution of demonology, which is above\neverything else religious, by the development of the philosophic theories\nof the Greeks (see for instance the communications of Messrs. Stock and\nGlover: _Transactions of the Congress of {268} History of Rel._, Oxford,\n1908, II, pp. 164 ff.). The influence of the popular Hellenic or foreign\nideas has always been preponderant here; and the Epinomis, which contains\none of the oldest accounts of the theory of demons, as proved _supra_, n.\n34, was influenced by the Semitic notions about genii, the ancestors of the\n_djinns_ and the _welys_ of Islam.\n\nIf, as we believe, the text of Porphyry really sets forth the theology of\nthe magi, slightly modified by Platonic ideas based on popular beliefs of\nthe Greeks and perhaps of the barbarians, we shall be able to draw\ninteresting conclusions in regard to the mysteries of Mithra. For instance,\none of the principles developed is that the gods must not be honored by the\nsacrifice of animated beings ([Greek: empsucha]), and that immolation of\nvictims should be reserved for the demons. The same idea is found in\nCornelius Labeo, (Aug., _Civ. Dei_, VIII, 13; see Arnobius, VII, 24), and\npossibly it was the practice of the Mithra cult. Porphyry (II, 36) speaks\nin this connection of rites and mysteries, but without divulging them, and\nit is known that in the course of its history Mazdaism passed from the\nbloody to the bloodless sacrifice (_Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 6).\n\n40. Cf. Plutarch, _De defectu orac._, 10, p. 415 A:\n\n[Greek: Emoi de dokousi pleionas lusai aporias hoi to ton daimonon genos en\nmesoi thentes theon kai anthropon kai tropon tina ten koinonian hemon\nsunagon eis tauto kai sunapton exeurontes; eite magon ton peri Zoroastren\nho logos outos esti, eite Thraikios]....\n\n41. Cf. Minucius Felix, 26, Sec. 11: \"Hostanes daemonas prodidit terrenos\nvagos humanitatis inimicos.\" The pagan idea, that the air was peopled with\nevil spirits against whom man had to struggle perpetually, persisted among\nthe Christians; cf. Ephes., ii. 2, vi. 12, see also Prudentius,\n_Hamartigenia_, 514 ff.\n\n42. Cf. Minucius Felix, _loc. cit._: \"Magi non solum sciunt daemonas, sed\nquidquid miraculi ludunt, per daemonas faciunt,\" etc. Cf. Aug., _Civ. Dei_,\nX, 9 and _infra_, ch. VII, n. 76.\n\n43. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 139 ff.\n\n44. Theod. Mopsuest. ap. Photius, _Bibl._ 81. Cf. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I,\np. 8. {269}\n\n45. Cf. Bousset, _Die Religion des Judentums im neutest. Zeitalter_, 1903,\npp. 483 ff.\n\n46. Julian, _Caesares_, p. 336 C. The term [Greek: entolai] is the one also\nused in the Greek Church for the commandments of the Lord.\n\n47. Cf. _supra_, p. 36.\n\n48. The remark is from Darmesteter, _Zend-Avesta_, II, p. 441.\n\n49. Cf. Reinach, _op. cit._, [260], pp. 230 ff.\n\n50. Farnell, _Evolution of Religion_, p. 127.\n\n51. Mithra is _sanctus_ (_Mon. myst. Mithra_, II, p. 533), like the Syrian\ngods; cf. _supra_, ch. V, n. 47.\n\n52. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 309 ff. The eschatology of orthodox\nMazdaism has been expounded recently by Soederblom, _La vie future d'apres\nle mazdeisme_, Paris, 1901.\n\n53. Cf. _supra_, ch. IV, p. 100, ch. V, p. 126.\n\n54. We have explained this theory above, p. 125. It was foreign to the\nreligion of Zoroaster and was introduced into the mysteries of Mithra with\nthe Chaldean astrology. Moreover, ancient mythological ideas were always\nmixed with this learned theology. For instance, it was an old Oriental\nbelief that souls, being regarded as material, wore clothing (_Mon. myst.\nMithra_, I, p. 15, n. 5; Bousset, _Archiv fuer Religionswiss._, IV, 1901, p.\n233, n. 2; _Rev. hist. des relig._, 1899, p. 243, and especially Boeklen,\n_Die Verwandtschaft der juedisch-christlichen und der parsischen\nEschatologie_, Goettingen, 1902, pp. 61 ff.) Thence arose the notion\nprevalent to the end of paganism, that the soul in passing through the\nplanetary spheres, took on the qualities of the stars \"like successive\ntunics.\" Porphyry, _De abstin._, I, 31: [Greek: Apoduteon ara tous pollous\nhemin chitonas k. t. l.]; Macrobius, _Somnium Sc._, I, 11, Sec. 12: \"In\nsingulis sphaeris aetherea obvolutione vestitur\"; I, 12, Sec. 13: \"Luminosi\ncorporis amicitur accessu\"; Proclus, _In Tim._, I, 113, 8, Diehl ed.:\n[Greek: Periballesthai chitonas], Procl., _Opera_, Cousin ed., p. 222:\n\"Exuendum autem nobis et tunicas quas descendentes induti sumus\"; Kroll,\n_De orac. Chaldaicis_, p. 51, n. 2: [Greek: Psuche hessamene noun]; Julian,\nOr., II, p. 123, 22, (Hertlein). Cf. Wendland, _Die hellenistisch-roemische\nKultur_, p. 168 n. 1. Compare what {270} Hippolytus, _Philos._, V, I, says\nof Isis (Ishtar?) in connection with the Naasenians. She is [Greek:\nheptastolos], because nature also is covered with seven ethereal garments,\nthe seven heavens of the planets; see Ps.-Apul., _Asclepius_, 34 (p. 75, 2\nThomas): \"Mundum sensibilem et, quae in eo sunt, omnia a superiore illo\nmundo quasi ex vestimento esse contecta.\" I have insisted upon the\npersistence of this idea, because it may help us to grasp the significance\nattributed to a detail of the Mithra ritual in connection with which\nPorphyry relates nothing but contradictory interpretations. The persons\ninitiated into the seven degrees were obliged to put on different costumes.\nThe seven degrees of initiation successively conferred upon the mystic were\nsymbols of the seven planetary spheres, through which the soul ascended\nafter death (_Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 316), the garments assumed by the\ninitiates were probably considered as emblems of those \"tunics\" which the\nsoul put on when descending into the lower realms and discarded on\nreturning to heaven.\n\n55. Renan, _Marc-Aurele_, p. 579.\n\n56. Anatole France, _Le mannequin d'osier_, p. 318. Cf. Reinach, _op. cit._\n[p. 260], p. 232.\n\nVII. ASTROLOGY AND MAGIC.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY: Bouche-Leclercq's book _L'astrologie grecque_ (Paris, 1899)\nmakes it unnecessary to refer to the earlier works of Saumaise (_De annis\nclimactericis_, 1648), of Seiffarth (_Beitraege sur Lit. des alten\nAegypten_, II, 1883), etc. Most of the facts cited by us are taken from\nthat monumental treatise, unless otherwise stated.--A large number of new\ntexts has been published in the _Catalogus codicum astrologorum Graecorum_\n(9 vols. ready, Brussels, 1898).--Franz Boll, _Sphaera_ (Leipsic, 1903) is\nimportant for the history of the Greek and barbarian constellations (see\n_Rev. archeol._, 1903, I, p. 437).--De la Ville de Mirmont has furnished\nnotes on _L'astrologie en Gaule au V^e siecle_ (_Rev. des Etudes\nanciennes_, 1902, pp. 115 ff.; 1903, pp. 255 ff.; 1906, p. 128). Also in\nbook form, Bordeaux, 1904. The principal results of the latest researches\nhave been outlined to perfection by Boll, _Die Erforschung der {271}\nantiken Astrologie_ (_Neue Jahrb. fuer das klass. Altert._, XI), 1908, pp.\n104 ff.--For the bibliography of magic, cf. _infra_, notes, 58 ff.\n\n1. Stephan. Byzant. (_Cat. codd. astr._, II, p. 235), I, 12: [Greek:\nExochotate kai pases epistemes despoina]. Theophil. Edess., _ibid._, V, 1,\np. 184: [Greek: Hoti pason timiotera technon]. Vettius Valens, VI, proem.\n(_ibid._, V, 2, p. 34, 7 = p. 241, 19, Kroll ed.): [Greek: Tis gar ouk an\nkrinai tauten ten theorian pason prouchein kai makariotaten tunchanein].\n\n2. Cf. Louis Havet, _Revue bleue_, Nov., 1905, p. 644.\n\n3. Cf. _supra_, p. 146, p. 123.\n\n4. Kroll, _Aus der Gesch. der Astrol._ (_Neue Jahrb. fuer das klass.\nAltertum_, VII), 1901, pp. 598 ff. Cf. Boll, _Cat. codd. astr._, VII, p.\n130.\n\n5. The argumentation of Posidonius, placed at the beginning of the\nTetrabiblos, inspired the defense of astrology, and it has been drawn upon\nconsiderably by authors of widely different spirit and tendencies, see\nBoll, _Studien ueber Claudius Ptolemaeus_, 1894, pp. 133 ff.\n\n6. Suetonius, Tib., 69.\n\n7. Suetonius, _Othon_, 8; cf. _Bouche-Leclercq_, p. 556, n. 4.\n\n8. On these edifices, cf. Maass, _Tagesgoetter_, 1902. The form \"Septizonia\"\nis preferable to \"Septizodia\"; cf. Schuerer, _Siebentaegige Woche_ (Extr.\n_Zeitschr. neutestam. Wissensch._, VI), 1904, pp. 31, 63.\n\n9. Friedlaender, _Sittengesch._, I, p. 364. It appears that astrology never\nobtained a hold on the lower classes of the rural population. It has a very\ninsignificant place in the folklore and healing arts of the peasantry.\n\n10. Manilius, IV, 16.--For instance _CIL_, VI, 13782, the epitaph of a\nSyrian freedman: \"L. Caecilius L. l(ibertus) Syrus, natus mense Maio hora\nnoctis VI, die Mercuri, vixit ann. VI dies XXXIII, mortuus est IIII Kal.\nIulias hora X, elatus est h(ora) III frequentia maxima.\" Cf. Bucheler,\n_Carm. epigr._, 1536: \"Voluit hoc astrum meum.\"\n\n11. Chapter [Greek: Peri deipnou]: _Cat. codd. astr._, IV, p. 94. The\nprecept: \"Ungues Mercurio, barbam Iove, Cypride crinem,\" {272} ridiculed by\nAusonius, (VII, 29, p. 108, Piper) is well known. There are many chapters\n[Greek: Peri onuchon, Peri himation], etc.\n\n12. _Cat. codd. astr._, V, 1 (Rom.) p. 11, cod. 2, f. 34: [Greek: Peri tou\nei echei megan rhina ho gennetheis. Poteron porne genetai he gennetheisa.]\n\n13. Varro, _De re rustica_, I, 37, 2; cf. Pliny, _Hist. nat._, XVI, 75,\nSec. 194. Olympiod, _Comm. in Alcibiad Plat._, p. 18 (ed. Creuzer, 1821):\n[Greek: Tous hieratikos zontas estin idein me apokeiromenous auxouses tes\nselenes]. This applies to popular superstition rather than to astrology.\n\n14. _CIL_, VI, 27140 = Buecheler, _Carmina epigraph._, 1163: \"Decepit\nutrosque | Maxima mendacis fama mathematici.\"\n\n15. Palchos in the _Cat. codd. astr._, I, pp. 106-107.\n\n16. Manilius, IV, 386 ff., 866 ff. _passim_.\n\n17. Vettius Valens, V, 12 (_Cat. codd. astr._, V, 2, p. 32 = p. 239, 8,\nKroll ed.); cf. V, 9 (_Cat._, V, 2, p. 31, 20 = p. 222, 11 Kroll ed.).\n\n18. Cf. Steph. Byz., _Cat. codd. astr._, II, p. 186. He calls both [Greek:\nstochasmos entechnos]. The expression is taken up again by Manuel Comnenus\n(_Cat._, V, 1, p. 123, 4), and by the Arab Abou-Mashar [Apomasar] (_Cat._,\nV, 2, p. 153).\n\n19. The sacerdotal origin of astrology was well known to the ancients; see\nManilius, I, 40 ff.\n\n20. Thus in the chapter on the fixed stars which passed down to Theophilus\nof Edessa and a Byzantine of the ninth century, from a pagan author who\nwrote at Rome in 379; cf. _Cat. codd. astrol._, V, 1, pp. 212, 218.--The\nsame observation has been made in the manuscripts of the Cyranides, cf. F.\nde Mely and Ruelle, _Lapidaires grecs_, II, p. xi. n. 3.--See also _Mon.\nmyst. Mithra_, I, pp. 31 ff.; Boll, _Die Erforsch. der antiken Astrologie_,\npp. 110 ff.\n\n21. In Vettius Valens, III, 12 (p. 150, 12 Kroll ed.) and IX, prooem. (p.\n329, 20); cf. VI, prooem. (p. 241, 16); Riess, _Petosiridis et Necheps.\nfragm._, fr. 1.\n\n22. Vettius Valens, IV, 11 (_Cat. codd, astr._, V, 2, p. 86 = p. 172, 31\nff., Kroll ed.), cf. V, 12, (_Cat._, _ibid._, p. 32 = p. 238, 18 ff.), VII\nprooem. (_Cat._, p. 41 = p. 263, l. 4, Kroll ed. and the note). {273}\n\n23. Firmicus Maternus, II, 30, VIII, prooem. and 5. Cf. Theophilus of\nEdessa, _Cat._, V, 1, p. 238, 25; Julian of Laod., _Cat._, IV, p. 104, 4.\n\n24. _CIL_, V, 5893.--Chaeremon, an Egyptian priest, was also an astrologer.\n\n25. Souter, _Classical Review_, 1897, p. 136; Ramsay, _Cities and\nBishoprics of Phrygia_, II, p. 566, 790.\n\n26. On the Stoic theory of sympathy see Bouche-Leclercq, pp. 28 ff.,\n_passim_. A brilliant account will be found in Proclus, _In remp. Plat._,\nII, 258 f., Kroll ed. Cf. also Clem. Alex., _Strom._, VI, 16, p. 143 (p.\n504, 21, Staehelin ed.)--Philo attributed it to the Chaldeans (_De migrat.\nAbrahami_, 32, II, p. 303, 5, Wendland):\n\n[Greek: Chaldaioi ton allon anthropon ekpeponekenai kai diapherontos\ndokousin astronomian kai genethlialogiken, ta epigeia tois meteorois kai ta\nourania tois epi ges harmozomenoi kai hosper dia mousikes logon ten\nemmelestaten sumphonian tou pantos epideiknumenoi tei ton meron pros allela\nkoinoniai kai sumpatheiai, topois men diezeugmenon, sungeneiai de ou\ndioikismenon.]\n\n27. Riess in Pauly-Wissowa, _Realenc._, s. v. \"Aberglaube,\" I, col. 38 f.\n\n28. (_No note with this number in original book--Transcriber._).\n\n29. _Cat._, V, 1, p. 210, where a number of other examples will be found.\n\n30. See Boll, _Sphaera_ (_passim_), and his note on the lists of animals\nassigned to the planets, in Roscher, _Lexikon Myth._, s. v. \"Planeten,\"\nIII, col. 2534; cf. _Die Erforsch. der Astrologie_, p. 110, n. 3.\n\n31. _Cat._, V, 1, pp. 210 ff.\n\n32. Cf. _supra_, ch. V. pp. 128 ff.\n\n33. Cf. _supra_, ch. V, n. 87.\n\n34. On worship of the sky, of the signs of the zodiac, and of the elements,\ncf. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 85 ff., 98 ff., 108 ff.\n\n35. The magico-religious notion of sanctity, of _mana_, appeared in the\nidea and notation of time. This has been shown by Hubert in his profound\nanalysis of _La representation du temps dans la religion et la magie_\n(_Progr. ec. des Hautes-Etudes_), 1905 = _Melanges hist. des rel._, Paris,\n1909, p. 190.\n\n36. On the worship of Time see _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 20, {274} 74\nff.; of the seasons: _ibid._, pp. 92 ff. There is no doubt that the\nveneration of time and its subdivisions (seasons, months, days, etc.)\nspread through the influence of astrology. Zeno had deified them; see\nCicero, _Nat. D._, II, 63 (= von Arnim, fr. 165): \"Astris hod idem (i. e.\nvim divinam) tribuit, tum annis, mensibus, annorumque mutationibus.\" In\nconformity with the materialism of the Stoics these subdivisions of time\nwere conceived by him as bodies (von Arnim, _loc. cit._, II, fr. 665; cf.\nZeller, _Ph. Gr._, IV, p. 316, p. 221). The later texts have been collected\nby Drexler in Roscher, _Lexikon_, s. v. \"Men,\" II, col. 2689. See also\nAmbrosiaster, _Comm. in epist. Galat._, IV, 10 (Migne, col. 381 B). Egypt\nhad worshiped the hours, the months, and the propitious and adverse years\nas gods long before the Occident; see Wiedemann, _loc. cit._ (_infra_, n.\n64) pp. 7 ff.\n\n37. They adorn many astronomical manuscripts, particularly the _Vaticanus\ngr._ 1291, the archetype of which dates back to the third century of our\nera; cf. Boll, _Sitzungsb. Akad. Muenchen_, 1899, pp. 125 ff., 136 ff.\n\n38. Piper, _Mythologie der christl. Kunst_, 1851, II, pp. 313 f. Cf. _Mon.\nmyst. Mithra_, I, p. 220.\n\n39. Bidez, _Berose et la grande annee_ in the _Melanges Paul Fredericq_,\nBrussels, 1904, pp. 9 ff.\n\n40. Cf. _supra_, pp. 126, 158 f.\n\n41. When Goethe had made the ascent of the Brocken, in 1784, during\nsplendid weather, he expressed his admiration by writing the following\nverses from memory, (II, 115): \"Quis caelum possit, nisi caeli munere,\nnosse | Et reperire deum, nisi qui pars ipse deorum est?\"; cf. _Brief an\nFrau von Stein_, No. 518, (Schoell) 1885, quoted by Ellis in _Noctes\nManilianae_, p. viii.\n\n42. This idea in the verse of Manilius (n. 41, cf. IV, 910), and which may\nbe found earlier in _Somnium Scipionis_ (III, 4; see Macrobius, _Comment._\nI, 14, Sec. 16; \"Animi societatem cum caelo et sideribus habere communem\";\nPseudo-Apul., _Asclepius_, c. 6, c. 9. Firmicus Maternus, _Astrol._, I, 5,\nSec. 10). dates back to Posidonius who made the contemplation of the sky one\nof the sources of the belief in God (Capelle, _Jahrb._ {275} _fuer das\nklass. Altertum_, VIII, 1905, p. 534, n. 4), and it is even older than\nthat, for Hipparchus had already admitted a \"cognationem cum homine\nsiderum, animasque, nostras partem esse caeli\" (Pliny, _Hist. nat._, II,\n26, Sec. 95).\n\n43. Vettius Valens, IX, 8 (_Cat. codd. astr._, V, 2, p. 123 = p. 346, 20,\nKroll ed.), VI, prooem. (_Cat._, ibid. p. 34, p. 35, 14 = p. 242, 16, 29,\nKroll ed.); cf. the passages of Philo collected by Cohn, _De opificio\nmundi_, c. 23, p. 24, and Capelle, _loc. cit._\n\n44. Manilius, IV, 14.\n\n45. Cf. my article on _L'eternite des empereurs_ (_Rev. hist. litt.\nrelig._, I), 1898, pp. 445 ff.\n\n46. Reitzenstein, to whom belongs the credit of having shown the strength\nof this astrological fatalism (see _infra_, n. 57), believes that it\ndeveloped in Egypt, but surely he is wrong. In this connection see the\nobservations of Bousset, _Goetting. gel. Anzeigen_, 1905, p. 704.\n\n47. The most important work is unfortunately lost: it was the [Greek: Peri\nheimarmenes] by Diodorus of Tarsus. Photius has left us a summary (_cod._\n223). We possess a treatise on the same subject by Gregory of Nyssa (_P.\nG._, XLV, p. 145). They were supported by the Platonist Hierocles (Photius,\n_cod._ 214, p. 172 b.).--Many attacks on astrology are found in St.\nEphraim, _Opera syriaca_, II, pp. 437 ff.; St. Basil (_Hexaem._, VI, 5),\nSt. Gregory of Nazianzen, St. Methodus (_Symp., P. G._, XVII, p. 1173);\nlater in St. John Chrysostom, Procopus of Gaza, etc. A curious extract from\nJulian of Halicarnassus has been published by Usener, _Rheinisches Mus._,\nLV, 1900, p. 321.--We have spoken briefly of the Latin polemics in the\n_Revue d'hist. et de litt. relig._, VIII, 1903, pp. 423 f. A work entitled\nDe Fato (Bardenhewer, _Gesch. altchr. Lit._, I, p. 315) has been attributed\nto Minucius Felix; Nicetas of Remesiana (about 400) wrote a book _Adversus\ngenethlialogiam_ (Gennadius, _Vir. inl._, c. 22), but the principal\nadversary of the _mathematici_ was St. Augustine (_Civ. Dei_, c. 1 ff.;\n_Epist._, 246, ad Lampadium, etc.). See also Wendland, _Die\nhellenistisch-roemische Kultur_, p. 172, n. 2.\n\n48. The influence of the astrological ideas was felt by the Arabian\npaganism before Mohammed; see _supra_, ch. V, n. 57. {276}\n\n49. Dante, _Purg._, XXX, 109 ff.--In the _Convivio_, II, ch. XIV, Dante\nexpressly professes the doctrine of the influence of the stars over human\naffairs.--The church succeeded in extirpating the learned astrology of the\nLatin world almost completely at the beginning of the Middle Ages. We do\nnot know of one astrological treatise, or of one manuscript of the\nCarlovingian period, but the ancient faith in the power of the stars\ncontinued in secret and gained new strength when Europe came in contact\nwith Arabian science.\n\n50. Bouche-Leclercq devotes a chapter to them (pp. 609 ff.).\n\n51. Seneca, _Quaest. Nat._, II, 35: \"Expiationes et procurationes nihil\naliud esse quam aegrae mentis solatia. Fata inrevocabiliter ius suum\nperagunt nec ulla commoventur prece.\" Cf. Schmidt, _Veteres philosophi\nquomodo iudicaverint de precibus_, Giessen, 1907, p. 34.--Vettius Valens,\nV, 9, (_Catal. codd. astr._, V, 2 p. 30, 11 = p. 220, 28, Kroll ed.),\nprofesses that [Greek: Adunaton tina euchais e thusiais epinikesai ten ex\narches katabolen k. t. l.], but he seems to contradict himself, IX, 8 (p.\n347, 1 ff.).\n\n52. Suetonius, _Tib._, 69: \"Circa deos ac religiones neglegentior, quippe\naddictus mathematicae, plenusque persuasionis cuncta fato agi.\" Cf.\nManilius, IV.\n\n53. Vettius Valens, IX, 11 (_Cat. codd. astr._, V, 2, p. 51, 8 ff. = p.\n355, 15. Kroll ed.), cf. VI, prooem. (_Cat._, p. 33 = p. 240, Kroll).\n\n54. \"Si tribuunt fata genesis, cur deos oratis?\" reads a verse of\nCommodianus (I, 16, 5). The antinomy between the belief in fatalism and\nthis practice did not prevent the two from existing side by side, cf. _Mon.\nmyst. Mithra_, I, pp. 120, 311; _Revue d'hist. et de litt. relig._, VIII,\n1903, p. 431.--The peripatetic Alexander of Aphrodisias who fought fatalism\nin his [Greek: Peri heimarmenes], at the beginning of the third century,\nand who violently attacked the charlatanism and cupidity of the astrologers\nin another book (_De anima mantissa_, p. 180, 14, Bruns), formulated the\ncontradiction in the popular beliefs of his time (_ibid._, p. 182, 18):\n\n[Greek: Pote men anthropoi to tes heimarmenes humnousin hos anankaion, pote\nde ou pantei ten sunecheian autes pisteuousi sozein; kai gar hoi dia ton\nlogon huper autes hos ouses anankaias diateinomenoi sphodra kai panta\nanatithentes autei, en tais kata ton bion praxesin ouk eoikasin autei\npepisteukenai;] {277} [Greek: Tuchen goun pollakis epiboontai, allen\nhomologountes einai tauten aitian tes heimarmenes; alla kai tois theois ou\ndialeipousin euchomenoi, hos dunamenon tinos hup' auton dia tas euchas\ngenesthai kai para ten heimarmenen; ... kai manteiais ouk oknousi\nchresthai, hos enon autois, ei promathoien, phulaxasthai ti ton heimarmenon\n... apithanotatai goun eisin auton hai pros ten touton sumphonian\nheuresilogiai.] Cf. also _De Fato_, c. 2 (p. 165, 26 ff. Bruns).\n\n55. Manilius, II, 466: \"Quin etiam propriis inter se legibus astra |\nConveniunt, ut certa gerant commercia rerum, | Inque vicem praestant visus\natque auribus haerent, | Aut odium, foedusque gerunt,\" etc.--Signs [Greek:\nbleponta] and [Greek: akouonta]: cf. Bouche-Leclercq, pp. 139 ff.--The\nplanets rejoice ([Greek: chairein]) in their mansions, etc.--Signs [Greek:\nphoneenta], etc.: cf. _Cat._, I, pp. 164 ff.; Bouche-Leclercq, pp. 77 ff.\nThe terminology of the driest didactic texts is saturated with mythology.\n\n56. Saint Leo, _In Nativ._, VII, 3 (Migne, _P. L._, LIV, col. 218);\nFirmicus, I, 6, 7; Ambrosiaster, in the _Revue d'hist. et litt. relig._,\nVIII, 1903, p. 16.\n\n57. Cf. Reitzenstein, _Poimandres_, pp. 77 ff., cf. p. 103, where a text of\nZosimus attributes this theory to Zoroaster. Wendland, _Die\nhellenistisch-roem. Kultur_, 1907, p. 81. This is the meaning of the verse\nof the _Orac. Chaldaica_: [Greek: Ou gar huph' heimarten agelen piptousi\ntheourgoi] (p. 59 Kroll). According to Arnobius (II, 62, Cornelius Labeo)\nthe magi claimed \"deo esse se gnatos nec fati obnoxios legibus.\"\n\n58. _Bibliography._ We have no complete book on Greek and Roman magic.\nMaury, _La magie et l'astrologie dans l'antiquite et au moyen age_, 1864,\nis a mere sketch. The most complete account is Hubert's art. \"Magia\" in the\n_Dict. des antiquites_ of Daremberg, Saglio, Pottier. It contains an index\nof the sources and the earlier bibliography. More recent studies are: Fahz,\n_De poet. Roman. doctrina magica_, Giessen, 1903; Audollent, _Defixionum\ntabulae_, Paris, 1904; Wuensch, _Antikes Zaubergeraet aus Pergamon_, Berlin,\n1905 (important objects found dating back to the third century, A. D.);\nAbt, _Die Apologie des Apuleius und die Zauberei_, Giessen, 1908.--The\nsuperstition that is not magic, but borders upon it, is the subject of a\nvery important article by Riess, \"Aberglaube,\" in the _Realenc._ of\nPauly-Wissowa. An essay by Kroll, _Antiker Aberglaube_, Hamburg, 1897,\ndeserves mention.--Cf. Ch. Michel {278} in the _Revue d'hist. et litt.\nrel._, VII, 1902, p. 184. See also _infra_, nn. 64, 65, 72.\n\n59. The question of the principles of magic has recently been the subject\nof discussions started by the theories of Frazer, _The Golden Bough_, 2d\ned., 1900 (cf. Goblet d'Alviella, _Revue de l'univ. de Bruxelles_, Oct.\n1903). See Andrew Lang, _Magic and Religion_, London, 1901; Hubert and\nMauss, _Esquisse d'une theorie generale de la magie_ (_Annee sociologique_,\nVII), 1904, p. 56; cf. _Melanges hist. des relig._, Paris, 1909, pp. xvii\nff.; Jevons, _Magic_, in the _Transactions of the Congress for the History\nof Religions_, Oxford, 1908, I, p. 71. Loisy, \"Magie science et religion,\"\nin _A propos d'hist. des religions_, 1911, p. 166.\n\n60. S. Reinach, _Mythes, cultes et relig._, II, Intr., p. xv.\n\n61. The infiltration of magic into the liturgy under the Roman empire is\nshown especially in connection with the ritual of consecration of the\nidols, by Hock, _Griechische Weihegebraeuche_, Wuerzburg, 1905, p. 66.--Cf.\nalso Kroll, _Archiv fuer Religionsw._, VIII, 1905, Beiheft, pp. 27 ff.\n\n62. Friedlaender, _Sittengeschichte_, I, pp. 509 f.\n\n63. Arnobius, II, 62, cf. II, 13; Ps.-Iamblichus, _De Myst._, VIII, 4.\n\n64. Magic in Egypt: Budge, _Egyptian Magic_, London, 1901; Wiedemann,\n_Magie und Zauberei im alten Aegypten_, Leipsic, 1905 [cf. Maspero, _Rev.\ncritique_, 1905, II, p. 166]; Otto, _Priester und Tempel_, II, p. 224;\nGriffith, _The Demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden_, 1904 (a\nremarkable collection dating back to the third century of our era), and the\nwritings analyzed by Capart, _Rev. hist. des relig._, 1905 (Bulletin of\n1904, p. 17), 1906 (Bull. of 1905, p. 92).\n\n65. Fossey, _La magie assyrienne_, Paris, 1902. The earlier bibliography\nwill be found p. 7. See also Hubert in Daremberg, Saglio, Pottier, _Dict.\ndes antiq._, s. v. \"Magia,\" p. 1505, n. 5. Campbell Thomson, _Semitic\nMagic, Its Origin and Development_, London, 1908.\n\nTraces of magical conceptions have survived even in the prayers of the\northodox Mohammedans; see the curious {279} observations of Goldziher,\n_Studien, Theodor Noeldeke gewidmet_, 1906, I, pp. 302 ff. The\nAssyrio-Chaldean magic may be compared profitably with Hindu magic (Victor\nHenry, _La Magie dans l'Inde antique_, Paris, 1904).\n\n66. There are many indications that the Chaldean magic spread over the\nRoman empire, probably as a consequence of the conquests of Trajan and\nVerus (Apul., _De Magia_, c. 38; Lucian, _Philopseudes_, c. 11; _Necyom._,\nc. 6, etc. Cf. Hubert, loc. cit.) Those most influential in reviving these\nstudies seem to have been two rather enigmatical personages, Julian the\nChaldean, and his son Julian the Theurge, who lived under Marcus Aurelius.\nThe latter was Considered the author of the [Greek: Logia Chaldaika], which\nin a measure became the Bible of the last neo-Platonists.\n\n67. Apul., _De Magia_, c. 27. The name [Greek: philosophos], _philosophus_,\nwas finally applied to all adepts in the occult sciences.\n\n68. The term seems to have been first used by Julian, called the Theurge,\nand thence to have passed to Porphyry (_Epist. Aneb._, c. 46; Augustine,\n_Civ. Dei_, X, 9-10) and to the neo-Platonists.\n\n69. Hubert, article cited, pp. 1494, n. 1; 1499 f.; 1504. Ever since\nmagical papyri were discovered in Egypt, there has been a tendency to\nexaggerate the influence exercised by that country on the development of\nmagic. It made magic prominent as we have said, but a study of these same\npapyri proves that elements of very different origin had combined with the\nnative sorcery, which seems to have laid special stress upon the importance\nof the \"barbarian names,\" because to the Egyptians the name had a reality\nquite independent of the object denoted by it, and possessed an effective\nforce of its own (_supra_, pp. 93, 95). But that is, after all, only an\nincidental theory, and it is significant that in speaking of the origin of\nmagic, Pliny (XXX, 7) names the Persians in the first place, and does not\neven mention the Egyptians.\n\n70. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, pp. 230 ff.--Consequently Zoroaster, the\nundisputed master of the magi, is frequently considered a disciple of the\nChaldeans or as himself coming from Babylon. The blending of Persian and\nChaldean beliefs appears clearly in Lucian, _Necyom._, 6 ff. {280}\n\n71. The majority of the magical formulas attributed to Democritus are the\nwork of forgers like Bolos of Mendes (cf. Diels, _Fragmente der\nVorsokratiker_, I^2, pp. 440 f.), but the authorship of this literature\ncould not have been attributed to him, had not these tendencies been so\nfavorable.\n\n72. On Jewish magic see: Blau, _Das altjuedische Zauberwesen_, 1898; cf.\nHubert, _loc. cit._, p. 1505.\n\n73. Pliny, _H. N._, XXX, 1, Sec. 6; Juvenal, VI, 548 ff. In Pliny's opinion\nthese magicians were especially acquainted with _veneficas artes_. The\ntoxicology of Mithridates goes back to that source (Pliny, XXV, 2, 7). Cf.\nHorace, _Epod._, V, 21; Virgil, _Buc._ VIII, 95, etc.\n\n74. Cf. _supra_, pp. 151 ff.\n\n75. Minucius Felix, _Octavius_, 26; cf. _supra_, ch. VI, p. 152.\n\n76. In a passage outlining the Persian demonology (see _supra_, n. 39),\nPorphyry tells us (_De Abst._, II, 41):\n\n[Greek: Toutous] (sc. [Greek: tous daimonas]) [Greek: malista kai ton\nproestota auton] (c. 42, [Greek: he proestosa auton dunamis] = Ahriman)\n[Greek: ektimosin hoi ta kaka dia ton goeteion prattomenoi k. t. l.] Cf.\nLactantius, _Divin. Inst._, II, 14 (I, p. 164, 10, Brandt ed.); Clem. of\nAlexandria, _Stromat._, III, p. 46 C, and _supra_, n. 37. The idea that the\ndemons subsisted on the offerings and particularly on the smoke of the\nsacrifices agrees entirely with the old Persian and Babylonian ideas. See\nYasht V, XXI, 94: What \"becomes of the libations which the wicked bring to\nyou after sunset?\" \"The devas receive them,\" etc.--In the cuneiform tablet\nof the deluge (see 160 ff.), the gods \"smell the good odor and gather above\nthe officiating priest like flies.\" (Dhorme, _Textes religieux\nassyro-babyloniens_, 1907, p. 115; cf. Maspero, _Hist. anc. des peuples de\nl'Orient_, I, p. 681.).\n\n77. Plut., _De Iside_, c. 46.\n\n78. The _druj Nasu_ of the Mazdeans; cf. Darmesteter, _Zend-Avesta_, II, p.\nxi and 146 ff.\n\n79. Cf. Lucan, _Phars._, VI, 520 ff.\n\n80. Mommsen, _Strafrecht_, pp. 639 ff. There is no doubt that the\nlegislation of Augustus was directed against magic, cf. Dion, LII, 34,\n3.--Manilius (II, 108) opposes to astrology the {281} _artes quorum haud\npermissa facultas_. Cf. also Suet., _Aug._, 31.\n\n81. Zachariah the Scholastic, _Vie de Severe d'Antioche_, Kugener ed.\n(_Patrol. orientalis_, II), 1903, pp. 57 ff.\n\n82. Magic at Rome in the fifth century: Wuensch, _Sethianische\nVerfluchungstafeln aus Rom_, Leipsic, 1898 (magical leads dated from 390 to\n420); _Revue hist. litt. relig._, VIII, 1903, p. 435, and Burchardt, _Die\nZeit Constantin's_, 2d ed., 1880, pp. 236 ff.\n\nVIII. THE TRANSFORMATION OF PAGANISM.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY: The history of the destruction of paganism is a subject that\nhas tempted many historians. Beugnot (1835), Lasaulx (1854), Schulze (Jena,\n1887-1892) have tried it with varying success (see Wissowa, _Religion der\nRoemer_, pp. 84 ff.). But hardly any one has been interested in the\nreconstruction of the theology of the last pagans, although material is not\nlacking. The meritorious studies of Gaston Boissier (_La fin du Paganisme_,\nParis, 1891) treat especially the literary and moral aspects of that great\ntransformation. Allard (_Julien l'Apostat_, I, 1900, p. 39 ff.) has\nfurnished a summary of the religious evolution during the fourth century.\n\n1. Socrates, _Hist. Eccl._, IV, 32.\n\n2. It is a notable fact that astrology scarcely penetrated at all into the\nrural districts (_supra_, ch. VII, n. 9), where the ancient devotions\nmaintained themselves; see the _Vita S. Eligii_, Migne, _P. L._, XL, col.\n1172 f.--In the same way the cult of the menhirs in Gaul persisted in the\nMiddle Ages; see d'Arbois de Jubainville, _Comptes Rendus Acad. Inscr._,\n1906, pp. 146 ff.; S. Reinach, _Mythes, cultes_, III, 1908, pp. 365 ff.\n\n3. Aug., _Civ. Dei_, IV, 21 _et passim_. Arnobius and Lactantius had\npreviously developed this theme.\n\n4. On the use made of mythology during the fourth century, cf. Burckhardt,\n_Zeit Contantins_, 2d ed., 1880, pp. 145-147; Boissier, _La fin du\npaganisme_, II, pp. 276 ff. and _passim_. {282}\n\n5. It is well known that the poems of Prudentius (348-410), especially the\nPeristephanon, contain numerous attacks on paganism and the pagans.\n\n6. Cf. _La polemique de l'Ambrosiaster contre les paiens_ (_Rev. hist. et\nlitt. relig._, VIII, 1903, pp. 418 ff.). On the personality of the author\n(probably the converted Jew Isaac), cf. Souter, _A Study of Ambrosiaster_,\nCambridge, 1905 (_Texts and Studies_, VII) and his edition of the\n_Quaestiones_, (Vienna, 1908), intr. p. xxiv.\n\n7. The identity of Firmicus Maternus, the author of _De errore profanarum\nreligionum_, and that of the writer of the eight books _Matheseos_ appears\nto have been definitely established.\n\n8. Maximus was Bishop of Turin about 458-465 A. D. We possess as yet only a\nvery defective edition of the treatises _Contra Paganos_ and _Contra\nJudaeos_ (Migne, _Patr. lat._, LVII, col. 781 ff.).\n\n9. Particularly the _Carmen adversus paganos_ written after Eugene's\nattempt at restoration in 394 A. D. (Riese, _Anthol. lat._, I, 20) and the\n_Carmen ad senatorem ad idolorum servitutem conversum_, attributed to St.\nCyprian (Hartel. ed., III, p. 302), which is probably contemporaneous with\nthe former.\n\n10. On this point see the judicious reflections of Paul Allard, _Julien\nl'Apostat_, I, 1900, p. 35.\n\n11. Hera was the goddess of the air after the time of the Stoics ([Greek:\nHera] = [Greek: aer]).\n\n12. Cf. _supra_, pp. 51, 75, 99, 120, 148. Besides the Oriental gods the\nonly ones to retain their authority were those of the Grecian mysteries,\nBacchus and Hecate, and even these were transformed by their neighbors.\n\n13. The wife of Praetextatus, after praising his career and talents in his\nepitaph, adds: \"Sed ista parva: tu pius mystes sacris | teletis reperta\nmentis arcano premis, | divumque numen multiplex doctus colis\" (_CIL_, 1779\n= Dessau, _Inscr. sel._, 1259).\n\n14. Pseudo-August. [Ambrosiaster], _Quaest. Vet. et Nov. Test._, (p. 139,\n9-11, Souter ed.): \"Paganos elementis esse {283} subiectos nulli dubium\nest.... Paganos elementa colere omnibus cognitum est\"; cf. 103 (p. 304, 4\nSouter ed.): \"Solent (pagani) ad elementa confugere dicentes haec se colere\nquibus gubernaculis regitur vita humana\" (cf. _Rev. hist. lit. rel._, VIII,\n1903, p. 426, n. 3).--Maximus of Turin (Migne, _P. L._, LVII, 783): \"Dicunt\npagani: nos solem, lunam et stellas et universa elementa colimus et\nveneramur.\" Cf. _Mon myst. Mithra_, I, p. 103, n. 4, p. 108.\n\n15. Firmicus Maternus, _Mathes._, VII prooem: \"(Deus) qui ad fabricationem\nomnium elementorum diversitate composita ex contrariis et repugnantibus\ncuncta perfecit.\"\n\n16. _Elementum_ is the translation of [Greek: stoicheion], which has had\nthe same meaning in Greek at least ever since the first century (see Diels,\n_Elementum_, 1899, pp. 44 ff., and the Septuagint, Sap. Sal., 7, 18; 19,\n17.) Pfister, \"_Die [Greek: stoicheia tou kosmou] in den Briefen des\nPaulus_,\" _Philologus_, LXIX, 1910, p. 410.--In the fourth century this\nmeaning was generally accepted: Macrobius, _Somn. Scipionis_, I, 12, Sec. 16:\n\"Caeli dico et siderum, aliorumque elementorum\"; cf. I, 11, Sec. 7 ff.\nMartianus Capella, II, 209; Ambrosiaster, _loc. cit._; Maximus of Turin,\n_loc. cit._; Lactantius, II, 13, 2: \"Elementa mundi, caelum, solem, terram,\nmare.\"--Cf. Diels, _op. cit._, pp. 78 ff.\n\n17. Cf. _Rev. hist. litt. rel._, VIII, 1903, pp. 429 ff.--Until the end of\nthe fifth century higher education in the Orient remained in the hands of\nthe pagans. The life of Severus of Antioch, by Zachariah the Scholastic,\npreserved in a Syrian translation [_supra_, ch. VII, n. 81], is\nparticularly instructive in this regard. The Christians, who were opposed\nto paganism and astrology, consequently manifested an aversion to the\nprofane sciences in general, and in that way they became responsible to a\nserious extent for the gradual extinction of the knowledge of the past (cf.\n_Rev. hist. litt. rel._, _ibid._, p. 431; Royer, _L'enseignement d'Ausone a\nAlcuin_, 1906, p. 130 ff.). But it must be said in their behalf that before\nthem Greek philosophy had taught the vanity of every science that did not\nhave the moral culture of the ego for its purpose, see Geffcken, _Aus der\nWerdezeit des Christentums_, p. 7, p. 111.\n\n18. _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 294. Cf. _supra_, pp. 175 f. {284}\n\n19. Ambrosiaster, _Comm. in Epist. Pauli_, p. 58 B: \"Dicentes per istos\nposse ire ad Deum sicut per comites pervenire ad regem\" (cf. _Rev. his.\nlit. rel._, VIII, 1903, p. 427).--The same idea was set forth by Maximus of\nTurin (_Adv. pag._, col. 791) and by Lactantius (_Inst. div._, II, 16, Sec. 5\nff., p. 168 Brandt); on the celestial court, see also Arnobius, II, 36;\nTertullian, _Apol._, 24.--Zeus bore the name of king, but the Hellenic\nOlympus was in reality a turbulent republic. The conception of a supreme\ngod, the sovereign of a hierarchical court, seems to have been of Persian\norigin, and to have been propagated by the magi and the mysteries of\nMithra. The inscription of the Nemroud Dagh speaks of [Greek: Dios\nOromasdou thronous] (_supra_, ch. VI, n. 26), and, in fact, a bas-relief\nshows Zeus-Oramasdes sitting on a throne, scepter in hand. The Mithra\nbas-reliefs likewise represent Jupiter Ormuzd on a throne, with the other\ngods standing around him (_Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 129; II, p. 188, fig.\n11); and Hostanes pictured the angels sitting around the throne of God\n(_supra_, ch. VI, n. 38; see Rev. iv). Moreover, the celestial god was\nfrequently compared, not to a king in general, but to the Great King, and\npeople spoke of his satraps; cf. Pseudo-Arist., [Greek: Peri kosmou], c. 6,\np. 398 _a_, 10 ff. = Apul., _De mundo_, c. 26; Philo, _De opif. mundi_, c.\n23, 27 (p. 24, 17; 32, 24, Cohn); Maximus of Turin, X, 9; and Capelle, _Die\nSchrift von der Welt_ (_Neue Jahrb. fuer das klass. Altert._, VIII), 1905,\np. 556, n. 6. Particularly important is a passage of Celsus (Origen,\n_Contra Cels._, VIII, 35) where the relation of this doctrine to the\nPersian demonology is shown. But the Mazdean conception must have combined,\nat an early date, with the old Semitic idea that Baal was the lord and\nmaster of his votaries (_supra_, p. 94 ff.). In his _Neutestamentliche\nZeitgeschichte_, (2d. ed., 1906, p. 364 ff.), Holtzmann insists on the fact\nthat the people derived their conception of the kingdom of God from the\npattern of the Persian monarchy. See also _supra_, p. 111.\n\nA comparison similar to this one, which is also found among the pagans of\nthe fourth century, is the comparison of heaven with a city (Nectarius in\nSt. Aug., _Epist._, 103 [Migne, _P. L._, XXXIII, col. 386]): \"Civitatem\nquam magnus Deus et bene meritae de eo animae habitant,\" etc. Compare the\nCity of God of St. Augustine and the celestial Jerusalem of the Jews {285}\n(Bousset, _Religion des Judentums_, 1903, p. 272).--Cf. also Manilius, V,\n735 ff.\n\n20. August., _Epist._ 16 [48] (Migne, _Pat. Lat._, XXXIII, col. 82):\n\"Equidem unum esse Deum summum sine initio, sine prole naturae, seu patrem\nmagnum atque magnificum, quis tam demens, tam mente captus neget esse\ncertissimum? Huius nos virtutes per mundanum opus diffusas multis vocabulis\ninvocamus, quoniam nomen eius cuncti proprium videlicet ignoramus. Nam Deus\nomnibus religionibus commune nomen est. Ita fit ut, dum eius quasi quaedam\nmembra carptim variis supplicationibus prosequimur, totum colere profecto\nvideamur.\" And at the end: \"Dii te servent, per quos et eorum atque\ncunctorum mortalium communem patrem, universi mortales, quos terra\nsustinet, mille modis concordi discordia, veneramur et colimus.\" Cf.\nLactantius Placidus, _Comm. in Stat. Theb._, IV, 516.--Another pagan\n(_Epist._, 234 [21], Migne, _P. L._, XXXIII, col. 1031) speaks \"deorum\ncomitatu vallatus, Dei utique potestatibus emeritus, id est eius unius et\nuniversi et incomprehensibilis et ineffabilis infatigabilisque Creatoris\nimpletus virtutibus, quos (_read_ quas) ut verum est angelos dicitis vel\nquid alterum post Deum vel cum Deo aut a Deo aut in Deum.\"\n\n21. The two ideas are contrasted in the _Paneg. ad Constantin. Aug._, 313\nA. D., c. 26 (p. 212, Baehrens ed.): \"Summe rerum sator, cuius tot nomina\nsunt quot gentium linguas esse voluisti (quem enim te ipse dici velis,\nscire non possumus), sive tute quaedam vis mensque divina es, quae toto\ninfusa mundo omnibus miscearis elementis et sine ullo extrinsecus accedente\nvigoris impulsu per te ipsa movearis, sive alique supra omne caelum\npotestas es quae hoc opus tuum ex altiore naturae arce despicias.\"--Compare\nwith what we have said of _Jupiter exsuperantissimus_ (p. 128).\n\n22. Macrobius, _Sat._, I, 17 ff.; cf. Firm. Mat., _Err. prof. rel._, c. 8;\n_Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, 338 ff. Some have supposed that the source of\nMacrobius's exposition was Iamblichus.\n\n23. Julian had intended to make all the temples centers of moral\ninstruction (Allard, _Julien l'Apostat_, II, 186 ff.), and this great idea\nof his reign was partially realized after his death. His homilies were\nlittle appreciated by the bantering {286} and frivolous Greeks of Antioch\nor Alexandria, but they appealed much more to Roman gravity. At Rome the\nrigorous mysteries of Mithra had paved the way for reform. St. Augustine,\n_Epist._, 91 [202] (Migne, _P. L._, XXXIII, col. 315), c. 408 A. D.,\nrelates that moral interpretations of the old myths were told among the\npagans during his time: \"Illa omnia quae antiquitus de vita deorum\nmoribusque conscripta sunt, longe aliter sunt intelligenda atque\ninterpretanda sapientibus. Ita vero in templis populis congregatis recitari\nhuiuscemodi salubres interpretationes heri et nudiustertius audivimus.\" See\nalso _Civ. Dei_, II, 6: \"Nec nobis nescio quos susurros paucissimorum\nauribus anhelatos et arcana velut religione traditos iactent (pagani),\nquibus vitae probitas sanctitasque discatur.\" Compare the epitaph of\nPraetextatus (_CIL_, VI, 1779 = Dessau, _Inscr. sel._, 1259): \"Paulina veri\net castitatis conscia | dicata templis,\" etc.--Firmicus Maternus (_Mathes_,\nII, 30) demands of the astrologer the practice of all virtues, \"antistes\nenim deorum separatus et alienus esse debet a pravis illecebris\nvoluptatum.... Itaque purus, castus esto, etc.\"\n\n24. This is clearly asserted by the verses of the epitaph cited (v. 22 ff):\n\"Tu me, marite, disciplinarum bono | puram ac pudicam SORTE MORTIS EXIMENS,\n| in templa ducis ac famulam divis dicas: | Te teste cunctis imbuor\nmysteriis.\" Cf. Aug., _Epist._, 234 (Migne, _P. L._, XXXIII, col. 1031,\nletter of a pagan to the bishop,): \"Via est in Deum melior, qua vir bonus,\npiis, puris iustis, castis, veris dictisque factisque probatus et deorum\ncomitatu vallatus ... ire festinat; via est, inquam, qua purgati antiquorum\nsacrorum piis praeceptis expiationibusque purissimis et abstemiis\nobservationibus decocti anima et corpore constantes deproperant.\"--St.\nAugustine (_Civ. Dei_, VI, 1 and VI, 12) opposes the pagans who assert\n\"deos non propter praesentem vitam coli sed propter aeternam.\"\n\n25. The variations of this doctrine are set forth in detail by Macrobius,\n_In Somn. Scip._, I, 11, Sec. 5 ff. According to some, the soul lived above\nthe sphere of the moon, where the immutable realm of eternity began;\naccording to others, in the spheres of the fixed stars where they placed\nthe Elysian Fields (_supra_, ch. V, n. 65; see Martian, _Capella_, II,\n209). The Milky Way in particular was assigned to them as their residence\n{287} (Macr., _ib._, c. 12; cf. Favon. Eulog., _Disput. de somn.\nScipionis_, p. 1, 20 [Holder ed.]: \"Bene meritis ... lactei circuli lucida\nac candens habitatio deberetur\"; St. Jerome, _Ep._, 23, Sec. 3 [Migne, _P.\nL._, XXII, col. 426), in conformity with an old Pythagorean doctrine\n(Gundel, _De stellarum appellatione et relig. Romana_, 1907, p. 153 [245]),\nas well as an Egyptian doctrine (Maspero, _Hist. des peuples de l'Orient_,\nI, p. 181).--According to others, finally, the soul was freed from all\nconnection with the body and lived in the highest region of heaven,\ndescending first through the gates of Cancer and Capricorn, at the\nintersection of the zodiac and the Milky Way, then through the spheres of\nthe planets. This theory, which was that of the mysteries (_supra_, pp.\n126, 152) obtained the approbation of Macrobius (\"quorum sectae amicior est\nratio\") who explains it in detail (I, 12, Sec. 13 ff.). Arnobius, who got his\ninspiration from Cornelius Labeo (_supra_, ch. V, n. 64), opposed it, as a\nwidespread error (II, 16): \"Dum ad corpora labimur et properamus humana ex\nmundanis circulis, sequuntur causae quibus mali simus et pessimi.\" Cf.\nalso, II, 33: \"Vos, cum primum soluti membrorum abieretis e nodis, alas\nvobis adfuturas putatis quibus ad caelum pergere atque ad sidera volare\npossitis,\" etc.). It had become so popular that the comedy by Querolus,\nwritten in Gaul during the first years of the fifth century, alluded to it\nin a mocking way, in connection with the planets (V, 38): \"Mortales vero\naddere animas sive inferis nullus labor sive superis.\" It was still taught,\nat least in part, by the Priscillianists (Aug., _De haeres._, 70;\nPriscillianus, ed. Schepss., p. 153, 15; cf. Herzog-Hauck, _Realencycl._,\n3d ed., s. v. \"Priscillian,\" p. 63.--We have mentioned (_supra_, ch. VI, n.\n54) the origin of the belief and of its diffusion under the empire.\n\n26. Cf. _supra_, p. 152, and pp. 189 ff.; _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 296.\n\n27. This idea was spread by the Stoics ([Greek: ekpurosis]) and by\nastrology (_supra_, p. 177); also by the Oriental religions, see\nLactantius, _Inst._, VII, 18, and _Mon. myst. Mithra_, I, p. 310.\n\n28. Gruppe (_Griech. Mythol._, pp. 1488 ff.) has tried to indicate the\ndifferent elements that entered into this doctrine.\n\n29. Cf. supra, pp. 134 f., p. 160 and _passim_. The similarity {288} of the\npagan theology to Christianity was strongly brought out by Arnobius, II,\n13-14.--Likewise in regard to the Orient, de Wilamowitz has recently\npointed out the close affinity uniting the theology of Synesius with that\nof Proclus (_Sitzungsb. Akad. Berlin_, XIV, 1907, pp. 280 ff.) he has also\nindicated how philosophy then led to Christianity.\n\n30. M. Pichon (_Les derniers ecrivains profanes_, Paris, 1906) has recently\nshown how the eloquence of the panegyrists unconsciously changed from\npaganism to monotheism. See also Maurice, _Comptes Rendus Acad.\nInscriptions_, 1909, p. 165.--The vague deism of Constantine strove to\nreconcile the opposition of heliolatry and Christianity (Burckhardt, _Die\nZeit Constantins_, pp. 353 ff.) and the emperor's letters addressed to\nArius and the community of Nicomedia (Migne, _P. G._, LXXXV, col. 1343 ff.)\nare, as shown by Loeschke (_Das Syntagma des Gelasius_ [Rhein. Mus., LXI],\n1906, p. 44), \"ein merkwuerdiges Produkt theologischen Dilettantismus,\naufgebaut auf im wesentlichen pantheistischer Grundlage mit Hilfe weniger\nchristlicher Termini und fast noch weniger christlicher Gedanken.\" I shall\ncite a passage in which the influence of the astrological religion is\nparticularly noticeable (col. 1552 D): [Greek: Idou gar ho kosmos morphe\neitoun schema tunchanei hon; kai hoi asteres ge charakteras probeblentai;\nkai holos to pneuma tou sphairoeidous toutou kuklou, eidos ton onton\ntunchanei hon, kai hosper morphoma; kai homos ho Theos pantachou paresti.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       * {289}\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n  Ablutions, Ritualistic, 208.\n  Absolutism, 38, 141, 161.\n  Abstinence, 40.\n  Abydos, 89, 98, 99, 237 n. 78;\n    Isis in, 99;\n    Liturgy of, 97;\n    Mysteries of, 237 n. 77;\n    Phallophories of, 78.\n  Achemenides, 127, 135, 143.\n  Adonis, 110;\n    and Attis, 69.\n  AEsculapius and Eshmoun, 21;\n    Serpent sacred to, 173.\n  _Aeterna domus_, 240 n. 91.\n  _Aeternus, Deus_, 130.\n  Africa, Isis in, 83.\n  Agatha, St., 237 n. 73.\n  Agathocles, 79, 80.\n  Agrippa forbids worship of Isis, 82.\n  Ahriman, 152, 190, 199;\n    and Satan, 153, 266 n. 36.\n  Ahura-Mazda, 127, 145;\n    and Bel, 146.\n  Alexander, 135;\n    of Aphrodisias, 276 n. 54;\n    Polyhistor, 255 n. 66.\n  Alexandria, 84;\n    Greek influence in, 75f.;\n    Isis in, 90, 232 n. 33.\n  Alexandrian calendar, 84;\n    mysteries, 99, 240 n. 91.\n  Amasis, 86.\n  Amber road, 216 n. 12.\n  Ambrosiaster, 204.\n  Ameretat, 145.\n  _Amici Augusti_, 137.\n  Ammianus Marcellinus, 211.\n  Ammon, 230 n. 9.\n  Amshaspends, 145, 263 n. 20.\n  Anahita, 54, 65, 145;\n    and Ishtar, 146;\n    Cybele and, 227 n. 32.\n  Ananke, 182.\n  Anatolia, 47, 139, 143.\n  Andros, 76.\n  Angels, 138, 152, 207, 267 n. 38.\n  Animals, 116;\n    sacred in Egypt, 78, 230f. n. 11;\n    sacred in Phrygia, 48;\n    sacred in Syria, 115f.\n  Animism, 183.\n  Anti-gods, 152.\n  Antinous, 86.\n  Antiochus, the Great, 105;\n    of Commagene, 124, 264 n. 26.\n  Antonines, 140.\n  Antoninus Pius, 111.\n  Antony, 82.\n  Anubis, 77.\n  _Apertio_, 95.\n  Aphaca, 246 n. 40.\n  Aphrodite and Isis, 89.\n  Apion, 218 n. 20.\n  Apollo and Mithra, 155.\n  Apollodorus of Damascus, 8.\n  Apuleius, 20, 79, 97, 104, 129.\n  Aquileia, Isis in, 83.\n  Aquitania, 108.\n  Arabia, Astrology in, 275 n. 48.\n  Aramaic, 146.\n  Archeology as source, 16.\n  Architecture, 8, 216 n. 11.\n  Archon, 126.\n  Aristotle, 138.\n  Arius, 288 n. 30.\n  Arles, 216 n. 12.\n  Armenia, 144.\n  Army. See \"Soldiers\" and \"Militia.\"\n  Arnobius, 204, 223 n. 38, 226 n. 30, 236 n. 65, 277 n. 57, 287 n. 25.\n  Arsacides, 135.\n  {290}\n  Arsinoe, Serapeum in, 79.\n  Art, Astrology in, 164, 168;\n    Egyptian, 86;\n    in Persia, 141;\n    Influence of Oriental, 7;\n    of Oriental religions, 33;\n    of paganism, 17, 218 n. 23.\n  Artaxerxes, 137.\n  Artemis and Cybele, 227 n. 32.\n  Aryans, Nature worship of, 145.\n  Ascalon, 117.\n  Asceticism, 40f., 51, 157.\n  Asia Minor, 46ff., 197;\n    Isis in, 80;\n    Mazdaism in, 145;\n    Mithraism in, 143.\n  Astarte, 120, 243 n. 21;\n    Immorality of, 118.\n  Astrology, 207;\n    and magic, 32, 162ff.;\n    Babylonian, 151;\n    Chaldean, 199;\n    Christian theology and, 260 n. 89;\n    in Syria, 123, 133;\n    Origin of, 170, 272 n. 19;\n    religious, 169.\n  Atar, 145.\n  Atargatis, 103ff.;\n    and Venus, 123;\n    Fish sacred to, 117.\n  Athens, Serapis in, 79.\n  Atonement, 40.\n  Attalus, 47, 51.\n  Attica, Attis and Cybele in, 62.\n  Attis, x, 22, 48, 53, 69, 197, 225 n. 21;\n    and Cybele, 62f.;\n    Death of, 59;\n    Hymns to, 217 n. 14;\n    in Greece, 57;\n    _Menotyrannus_, 61.\n  Augustine, St., 71, 202, 220 n. 15, 275 n. 47.\n  Augustus, 39, 111, 135, 187, 261 n. 5, 280 n. 80;\n    and Diocletian, 3;\n    and the Egyptian religion, 82;\n    Reforms of, 38.\n  Aurelian, 114f., 124, 205, 252 n. 59.\n  Aust, Emil, xii.\n  Autun, 57.\n  Avesta, 142.\n  Aziz, 113.\n\n  Baal, x, 22, 84, 114, 118, 123, 130, 248 n. 43;\n    and Saturn, 21;\n    different from Jehovah, 131;\n    Mystics of, 41.\n  _Ba'al samin_, 127, 131, 151, 256 nn. 69, 70; 264 nn. 25, 29.\n  Baalat, 118, 123, 248 n. 43.\n  Babylon, Astrology of, 151;\n    Confession of sin in, 222 n. 31;\n    Cosmology of, 220 n. 15;\n    Influence of in Persia, 146;\n    Influence of in Syria, 122;\n    Judaism and, 123.\n    See also \"Chaldeans.\"\n  Bacchus, 282 n. 12;\n    and Attis, 69.\n  Balmarcodes, 110.\n  Baltis, 113.\n  Bambyce, Lady of, 122.\n  Baptism, Mithraic, 157;\n    Taurobolium compared to, 70.\n  Bardesanes of Edessa, 144.\n  Beirut, 110f., 192.\n  Bel, 32, 115, 123f.;\n    Ahura Mazda and, 146.\n  Bellona, 54.\n  Beneventum, Iseum of, 233 n. 35.\n  Berosus, 31, 163, 176.\n  Bethels, 116. See also \"Litholatry.\"\n  Bidez, Joseph, 213 n. 1.\n  Boethius, 211.\n  Book of the Dead, 90.\n  Borsippa, 122.\n  _Bronton, Zeus_, 226 n. 24.\n  Brotherhoods, 58. See also \"Fraternity.\"\n  Bryaxis, 76.\n  Bubastis, 230 n. 9.\n  Byzantium, 141;\n    Astrology in, 170.\n\n  Cadiz, Isis of, 96.\n  _Caelestis, Jupiter_, 128.\n  _Caelus_, 128, 130, 175;\n    Jupiter, 147.\n    See also \"Sky\" and \"Zeus Ouranios.\"\n  Calendars, 173;\n    Alexandrian, 84.\n  Caligula, 55, 84, 198.\n  Campus Martius, Iseum of, 233 n. 35.\n  _Cannophori_, 56.\n  Cappadocia, 112f.\n  Caracalla, 84.\n  Carneades, 166.\n  Carnuntum, 150.\n  {291}\n  _Carpentum_ of Cybele, 225 n. 20.\n  Catacombs, 65, 226 n. 23.\n  Catasterism, 173.\n  Cato, 105.\n  Catullus, 49.\n  Chaeremon, 273 n. 24.\n  Chaldean astrology, 199;\n    cosmology, 133;\n    oracles, 124, 202, 226 n. 29, 251 n. 55.\n  Chaldeans, 105, 122, 124, 170, 187, 267 n. 39.\n  Chalybes, 147.\n  Chastity, 40.\n  Cheremon, 87.\n  China, 141.\n  Chiron, 173.\n  _Christi, Militia_, xxff.\n  Christian liturgy, Pagan prayer in, 218 n. 17;\n    monotheism, 134;\n    theology and astrology, 260 n. 89.\n  Christianity, and heliolatry, 288 n. 30;\n    and paganism, xviff., 202ff., 288 n. 29;\n    Hellenistic influence on, 214 n. 8;\n    opposed to astrology, 167;\n    opposed to science, 283 n. 17;\n    Resemblance to, xxiii;\n    Triumph of, xi, 19, 85.\n    See also \"Church.\"\n  Christmas, xvii.\n  Church, Fathers of the, xviii, 14;\n    militant, xix.\n  Cicero, 164.\n  Claudius, 55.\n  Cleanthes, Hymns of, 217 n. 17.\n  Clothing of souls, 269 n. 54.\n  Commagene, 112f., 139, 146f.\n  Commodus, 39, 149.\n  Common origin of ideas, xviii.\n  Communions in Phrygia, 69.\n  Communities of initiates, Rise of, 27.\n  Community and family, 69.\n  Comte, 206.\n  Confession of sin, 40;\n    in Babylonia, 222 n. 31.\n  Conscience, Influence of Oriental religions on, 28, 35ff., 43.\n  Constantine, 246 n. 40, 288 n. 30.\n  Continence, 157.\n  Cosmology, Babylonian, 220 n. 15;\n    Chaldean, 133.\n  Coulanges, Fustel de, 99.\n  Crete, 147.\n  Critodemus, 170.\n  Crucifix, Devotion to, 109.\n  Cybele, 22, 47ff., 197;\n    and Anahita, 227 n. 32;\n    and Mithra cults combined, 65;\n    Mystics of, 41.\n  Cyprian, St., 282 n. 9.\n\n  Dacia, 112, 113.\n  _Dadophori_, 97.\n  Dagon, 117.\n  _Damascenus, Jupiter_, 111.\n  Dante, 180, 276 n. 49.\n  _Dea Syria_, 14, 104.\n  Death, Life after, 99, 223 n. 38;\n    Spirit released by, 43.\n    See also \"Immortality.\"\n  Decalogue, Mithraic, 155.\n  _Deinvictiaci_, 233 n. 41.\n  Delos, Atargatis in, 105, 107;\n    Attis in, 61;\n    Isis in, 80.\n  Demeter and Isis, 76, 89.\n  Demetrius of Phalerum, 75.\n  Democritus, 189.\n  Demonology, 210, 267 n. 39;\n    Persian, 152ff., 284 n. 19.\n  Demons, 138, 266 n. 37, 280 n. 76.\n  _Dendrophori_, 56f.\n  Deterioration of races, 25, 219 n. 6.\n  _Devotio_, 27.\n  _Dies sanguinis_, 56, 70.\n  Diffusion, Agents of, 24.\n  _Diis angelis_, 266 n. 38.\n  Diocletian, 142, 150;\n    and Augustus, 3;\n    Court of, 141.\n  Diodochi, 137.\n  Diodorus of Sicily, 52, 240 n. 91;\n    of Tarsus, 275 n. 47.\n  Diogenes Laertius, 255 n. 66.\n  Dionysus and Osiris, 76;\n    and Sabazius, 48.\n    See also \"Sabazius.\"\n  Dioscuri, 128, 173.\n  Discipline, Persian, 155.\n  Dispersion of the Jews, 138, 189.\n  Distinctions abolished, 28.\n  {292}\n  Doliche, 113, 147.\n  Dolichenus, Jupiter, 25, 113, 116, 148, 249 n. 47.\n  Domitian, 38, 84, 85.\n  _Domus aeterna_, 240 n. 91.\n    See also \"Heaven\" and \"Souls.\"\n  Druidism, 20.\n  Dualism, Persian, xxi, 142, 151, 159, 199, 210.\n  Dusares, 111.\n\n  Easter, xviii, 70.\n  Egypt, 73ff., 112f.;\n    Astrology in, 251 n. 56;\n    Magi in, 139;\n    Magic in, 279 n. 69.\n  Egyptian mysteries, Ethics of, 90.\n  Elagabal, 114, 116.\n  _Elementa_, 206.\n  Elephantine, 256 n. 69.\n  Elysian Fields, 126.\n    See also \"Souls.\"\n  Emesa, 112;\n    Baal of, 114.\n  Emotion in Oriental religions, 30, 34.\n  Emperors, Worship of, 22.\n  End of the world, 138, 209.\n    See also \"Eschatology.\"\n  England, Inscription in, 112, 132.\n  Epicureans, 203.\n  Epicurus, 90.\n  Epona, 25.\n  Erasmus, 204.\n  Eros, Harpocrates and, 90.\n  Eryx, Mount, 118.\n  Eschatology, 199.\n    See also \"Immortality.\"\n  Eshmoun, AEsculapius and, 21.\n  Ethics of Egyptian mysteries, 90;\n    of Mithraism, 199;\n    Persian, 154.\n    See also \"Morality.\"\n  Eugene, 282 n. 9.\n  Evil principle deified, 152.\n  _Expiatio_, 40.\n\n  Faith, Reason and, 169, 194;\n    Union of science and, 32, 34.\n  Farnell, xiii.\n  Fatalism, 179ff., 276 n. 54;\n    of Tiberius, 164.\n  _Fautori imperii sui_, 150.\n  Feasts, 44, 48;\n    Liturgic, 64;\n    Sacred, 59, 68, 151, 208;\n    Fish at sacred, 246 n. 37.\n  Fetichism, 51, 127, 131, 210.\n  Firdusi, 160.\n  Fire, Sacred, 137;\n    Universe to be destroyed by, 177, 210.\n  Firmicus Maternus, 15, 181, 204, 205, 282 n. 7, 286 n. 23.\n  Fish, 117, 245 n. 36, 246 n. 37;\n    Sacred, 40.\n  Flagellations, 40, 56, 104, 222 n. 31.\n  Flavians, 140.\n  Formulas as sources, 11, 216 n. 14.\n  Foucart, 48, 76.\n  Fraternity, 156.\n    See \"Brotherhoods.\"\n  Frazer, xiii.\n  Future life, Notions of, 37, 39, 43;\n    retribution in Egypt, 92.\n    See also \"Death\" and \"Immortality.\"\n\n  Galatia, Magi in, 139.\n  Galerius, 136, 141, 150.\n  Galli, 50, 52, 70, 106, 208, 222 n. 31.\n  Gallipoli, 237 n. 77.\n  Gaul, Cybele in, 57;\n    Influence of Orient in, 9, 216 n. 12;\n    Syrians in, 108f.\n  Gayomart, 227 n. 32.\n  Germany, 112.\n  Gnosis, 33.\n  Gnostic hymns, 217 n. 14;\n    sects, 233 n. 41.\n  Gnosticism, 196.\n  God, Pagan conceptions of, 207, 284 n. 19.\n  Goethe on the Brocken, 274 n. 41.\n  Gontrand, 108.\n  Good Friday, 71, 228 n. 42.\n  Great Mother, ix, x, xviii, 30, 46ff., 148, 197, 201, 205f.\n  Greece, Cybele in, 57;\n    Isis in, 77, 80, 230 n. 8.\n  Greek influence in Alexandria, 75f.;\n    philosophy, Dualism in, 152;\n    religion, 30, 31, 33.\n  {293}\n  Gregory of Tours, 108.\n  Gruppe, xiii.\n\n  Hadad, 107, 111, 121, 242 n. 10;\n    and Jupiter, 123;\n    Etymology of, 133.\n  Hadrian, 86, 119.\n  Hammurabi and Marduk, 220 n. 14.\n  Hannibal, 46.\n  _Hagioi_, 121, 249 n. 47.\n  Harpist, Song of the, 241 n. 91.\n  Harpocrates, 77;\n    and Eros, 90.\n  Hauran, 8.\n  Heaven a city, 284 n. 19;\n    a court, 207.\n    See also \"Elysian Fields.\"\n  Hecate, 282 n. 12.\n  Heliogabalus, 114, 120.\n  Heliognostae, 233 n. 41.\n  Heliolatry and Christianity, 288 n. 30.\n  Heliopolis, 123.\n  _Heliopolitanus, Jupiter_, 111, 249 n. 47.\n  Hellenistic influence on Christianity, 214 n. 8.\n  Henotheism in Syria, 133.\n  Hera, 282 n. 11;\n    and Isis, 89;\n    _sancta_, 249 n. 47.\n  Hermes, 226 n. 23;\n    Psychopompos, 59.\n  Hermes Trismegistus, 32, 85, 202, 234 n. 46.\n  Hermetism, 88, 234 n. 53, 250 n. 49;\n    Influence of, 233 n. 41.\n  Herodotus, 96, 147.\n  Hierapolis, 123.\n  High places, Worship of, 116.\n  _Hilaria_, 57.\n  Hinduism, 210.\n  Hipparchus, 275 n. 42.\n  Homer, 202.\n  Honor, 156.\n  Horus, 98.\n  Hostanes, 184, 189, 193, 267 n. 39, 284 n. 19.\n  Hymn to Isis, 76, 230 n. 6;\n    as sources, 11, 217 n. 14;\n    of Synesius, 260 n. 89.\n  _Hymnodes_, 97.\n  Hypsistos, xxi, 62, 128, 227 n. 30, 252 n. 59, 255 n. 66.\n    See also \"Most High.\"\n  Hystaspes, 189.\n\n  Iamblichus, 87.\n  Iao, 63.\n  _Iasura_, 104.\n  _Ichthus_ symbolism, 117.\n  Idolatry, Death of, 85;\n    in Syria, 133;\n    of Hinduism, 210.\n  Idols, Consecration of, 278 n. 61,\n    Toilet of, 96.\n  Ignatius, St., 217 n. 17.\n  Immorality of Astarte, 118;\n    of legends, 203.\n  Immortality, 39, 42f., 59, 68, 145, 209, 238 n. 82;\n    in Egypt, 99;\n    in Persia, 159;\n    Semitic ideas on, 125.\n  Industry, Influence of Oriental, 9.\n  Initiates, Rise of communities of, 27;\n    Syrian, 120.\n  Initiation, 100.\n  Intelligence, Influence of Oriental religions on, 28, 31ff., 43.\n  Intelligent light (sun), 133.\n  _Inventio_ of Osiris, 98.\n  _Invicti_, 130.\n  Io and Isis, 89.\n  Ishtar and Anahita, 146.\n  Isis, x, xvii, 22, 55, 73ff., 206;\n    and Io, 89;\n    and Venus, 90;\n    Hymns to, 217 n. 14;\n    Influence of, 86;\n    Mysteries of, 87, 198;\n    Mystics of, xx;\n    Worshipers of, 41.\n  Italy, Syrians in, 106f.\n  Ituraea, 112.\n\n  Jehovah, x, 257 n. 72;\n    Baal different from, 131.\n  Jerome, 108.\n  Jewish colonies in Phrygia, 62.\n  Jews, 189, 196;\n    in Asia Minor, 64;\n    Monotheism of, 122.\n  Judaism, 252 n. 59;\n    and Babylon, 123;\n    Influence of, 63;\n    Influence of Parseeism on, 138.\n  {294}\n  Julia Domna, 113, 251 n. 57;\n    Maesa, 113;\n    Mammea, 113.\n  Julian, 70, 154, 156, 201, 213 n. 4, 285 n. 23;\n    the Chaldean, 279 n. 66;\n    the Theurge, 279 n. 66, n. 68.\n  Juno, 205.\n  Jupiter _Caelestis_, 128;\n    _Caelus_, 147;\n    _Damascenus_, 111;\n    _Dolichenus_, 25, 113, 116, 148;\n    Hadad and, 123;\n    _Heliopolitanus_, 111;\n    Protector, 147.\n    See also \"Zeus.\"\n  Juvenal, 13, 23, 37, 41, 78, 90, 92.\n\n  Kiss of welcome, 137.\n  Kizil-Bash peasants, 47.\n\n  Labeo, Cornelius, 6, 255 n. 64.\n  Labranda, 147.\n  Lactantius Placidus, 143, 204.\n  Lagides, 75, 79;\n    Financial system of the, 4.\n  Lammens, 262 n. 12.\n  Lang, xiii.\n  Law in Rome and the Orient, 5.\n  Lebanon, 122.\n  Licinius, 150.\n  Life after death, 99, 223 n. 38.\n    See also \"Immortality.\"\n  Lightning, God of, 127.\n  Lion, 224 n. 2.\n  Literature as source, 13;\n    Astrology in, 164;\n    in Persia, 138;\n    Influence of Roman, 20;\n    Influence of Oriental, 7.\n  Litholatry, 116, 119, 244 n. 29.\n  Liturgic repasts, 64.\n  Liturgy, 130, 198;\n    Magic in, 278 n. 61;\n    Mithraic, 217 n. 15;\n    of Abydos, 97;\n    Pagan prayer in Christian, 218 n. 17;\n    Persian, 151;\n    Roman, 29.\n  Lucian, 13, 14, 34, 104, 115, 119, 122, 201.\n  Lucian's _De dea Syria_, Authenticity of, 218 n. 19.\n  Lucius of Patras, 105.\n  Lucretius, 223 n. 39.\n  Lustrations, 39.\n  Lydia, Magi in, 139.\n  Lydus, Johannes, 55.\n  Lyons, 216 n. 12.\n\n  Ma, 48, 53, 228 n. 34.\n  McCormack, Thomas J., v.\n  Macrobius, 204, 208, 287 n. 25.\n  Magi, 138;\n    Theology of the, 268 n. 39.\n  Magic, Astrology and, 32, 182ff.;\n    Bibliography of, 277 n. 58;\n    in Persia, 139;\n    Religion and, 93;\n    religious, 185.\n  _Magna Mater_, 46ff.\n    See also \"Great Mother.\"\n  _Magousaioi_, 144, 146.\n  Maiuma, 110.\n  Malaga, Syrians in, 108.\n  Malakbel, 113, 249 n. 47.\n  Maleciabrudus, 242 n. 10.\n  Manetho, 32, 75, 193.\n  Manicheism, 123, 142, 220 n. 15, 232 n. 26, 244 n. 29.\n  Manilius, 168, 178.\n  Marduk, Hammurabi and, 220 n. 14.\n  Marius, 106.\n  Marna, 110.\n  _Mar'olam_, 130.\n  Mars, 173.\n  Matter, Spirit imprisoned in, 43.\n  Mauretania, 112.\n  Maximus of Madaura, 207.\n  Maximus of Turin, 204, 282 n. 8, 283 n. 14, 284 n. 19.\n  Mazdaism, 136;\n    in Asia Minor, 145.\n  _Megalenses, Ludi_, 47, 52.\n  Melkarth, 243 n. 21.\n  Memory, Lake of, 239 n. 89.\n  Men, 62.\n  _Menotyrannus_, Attis, 61.\n  Merchants, Influence of, on diffusion, 24, 79, 105.\n  Mercury, 173;\n    Simios and, 123.\n  Merovingians, 108.\n  _Metragyrtes_, 51.\n  Michel, Charles, xxv, 213 n. 1.\n  _Militia Christi_, xxff.\n  Militia, Sacred, xx, 27.\n  Militias, Religious, 213 n. 6.\n  {295}\n  Minucius Felix, 84.\n  Mithra, x, 22, 84, 142ff.;\n    and Apollo, 155;\n    and Attis, 69;\n    and Cybele cults combined, 65;\n    and Shamash, 146;\n    Mysteries of, 33, 126, 140, 269 n. 54;\n    Mystics of, 41;\n    Purity of, 157.\n  Mithradates Eupator, 135, 144;\n    Toxicology of, 280 n. 73.\n  Mithraism, Advantages of, 159;\n    Ethics of, 199;\n    not Zoroastrianism, 150.\n  Mithreum near Trapezus, 262 n. 16.\n  Mohammedans, Magic of the, 278 n. 65.\n  Monotheism, 288 n. 30;\n    Christian, 134;\n    in Syria, 133;\n    Parseeism closest to, 150.\n  Morality, in the Oriental mysteries, xxii, 44;\n    in Egyptian religion, 81;\n    in Roman religion, 35;\n    Laxity of, 42;\n    of paganism, 209;\n    unrewarded, 37.\n    See also \"Ethics.\"\n  Mosaic Law, xxi.\n  Most-High, 134, 145.\n    See also \"Hypsistos.\"\n  Mutilations, 40.\n  Mysteries, Alexandrian, 88, 99, 240 n. 91;\n    Charm of, 29;\n    Egyptian, 237 n. 77;\n    Egyptian, Theology of, 90;\n    Hellenic, 214 n. 8, 221 n. 23;\n    in Syria, 120;\n    of all the Oriental religions, 205;\n    of Isis, 87, 142, 258 n. 79,\n    of Mithra, 33, 126, 140, 142, 199, 269 n. 54, 286 n. 23;\n    Oriental, xxii, 44;\n    Phrygian, 51.\n  Mystic rites, 39f., 51.\n  Mythology, Roman, 35.\n\n  _Nama Sebesio_, 16.\n  Names, Barbarian, 279 n. 69;\n    Theophorous, 148.\n  Naples, Syrians in, 108.\n  Narses, 136.\n  _Natalis Invicti_, xvii, 228 n. 42.\n  Nature worship, 206.\n  _Navigium Isidis_, 97.\n  Nechepso, 163.\n  Nectanebos, 86.\n  Neo-Platonism, ix, xxiv, 34, 45, 70, 124, 152, 188, 201, 244 n. 29, 279\n      n. 66.\n  Neo-Pythagoreanism, 152.\n  Nephtis, 230 n. 9.\n  Nero, 87, 106;\n    initiated by Tiridates, 263 n. 16.\n  Nicocreon, 79.\n  Nietzsche, 177.\n  Nigidius Figulus, 164.\n  Nile, 205.\n  Nimes, 216 n. 12;\n    Isis in, 83.\n  Noeldeke, 258 n. 80;\n    on authenticity of _De dea Syria_, 218 n. 19.\n  Numidia, 113.\n\n  Olympus a republic, 284 n. 19;\n    Sacrifices on, 143.\n  _Omnipotens et omniparens_, 129.\n  _Omnipotentes_, 63, 226 n. 30.\n  Orchoe, 122.\n  Organism, Universe an, 207.\n  Orient, Law in the, 5f.\n    Menace of, 2ff.;\n    Triumph of, 26.\n  Ormuzd, 152, 190, 199.\n  _Ornatrices_, 94, 96.\n  Orpheus, 101, 202.\n  Orphic hymns, 217 n. 14.\n  Osiris, 237 n. 77;\n    and Attis, 69;\n    Deceased identified with, 99;\n    the judge, 90f.;\n    _Inventio_ of, 98;\n    Serapis and, 74ff.\n  Ostia, Syrians in, 108.\n  Otho and Vitellius, 164.\n\n  Pagan theology and Christianity, 288 n. 29.\n  Paganism, Chaotic condition of, vii;\n    Education in, 283 n. 17;\n    Essence of, 131;\n    Latin, 197;\n    Morality of, 209;\n    Semitic, 116;\n    Syrian, 121.\n  Palmyra, 112f., 115, 123f., 252 n. 59.\n  Pan and Attis, 69.\n  Pannonia, 112;\n    Syrians in, 108.\n  Pantheism, 33;\n    Solar, 134.\n  {296}\n  _Pantheos_, 70.\n  Papas. See \"Attis.\"\n  Paphos, Conical stone at, 116.\n  Parseeism closest to monotheism, 150;\n    Influence of, on Judaism, 138.\n  _Pastophori_, 94.\n  Penance, 40f.;\n    in Syria, 249 n. 46.\n  Pergamum, 47ff.\n  Perseus and Andromeda, 173.\n  Persia, 135ff.;\n    Magic of, 189.\n  Pessinus, 47ff.; 148, 197.\n  Petilia, 239 n. 89.\n  Petosiris the priest, 163.\n  Phallophories of Abydos, 78.\n  Philo of Alexandria, 230 n. 11.\n  Philo of Biblos, 115, 122.\n  Philosophers, 201.\n  Philosophy, 33.\n  Phoenicia, 122.\n  Phrygia, 46ff.;\n    Magi in, 139;\n    Penance in, 40.\n  Pigeon, 117.\n  Pilgrimages, 46.\n  Pine, Sacred, 56f.\n  Piraeus, Attis in, 61.\n  Plagiarism, 11.\n  Plants, Sacred, in Egypt, 78.\n  Plato, 265 n. 34.\n  Platonists, 14.\n  Pliny, 279 n. 69.\n  Plutarch, 14, 75, 87, 90, 142, 152, 190.\n  Pluto, chief of demons, 266 n. 37.\n  Polemicists as source, 15.\n  Pompeii, Frescoes of, 235 n. 58;\n    Iseum at, 81.\n  Pompey, 143.\n  Porphyry, 93, 95, 152.\n  Posidonius of Apamea, 164.\n  Pozzuoli, 111;\n    Serapeum of, 81;\n    Syrians in, 108.\n  Praetextatus, 208, 211;\n    Catacombs of, 65, 226 n. 23;\n    Epitaph of, 286 n. 23;\n    Wife of, 282 n. 13.\n  Priesthood, 41;\n    in Egypt, 94;\n    Oriental 32.\n  Proclus, 228 n. 41.\n  _Prophetes_, 94.\n  Prudentius, 66, 204, 282 n. 5.\n  Psychological crisis, 27.\n  Ptolemy, 164, 170, 182.\n  Ptolemy Euergetes, 79.\n  Ptolemy Soter, 74, 79.\n  Purification, 64; in Mazdaism, 156.\n  Purity, 209;\n    Conception of, 234 n. 49, 249 n. 46;\n    in Egyptian ritual, 91;\n    in Syria, 121;\n    of Mithra, 157.\n  _Pyrethes_, 144.\n  Pythoness, 106.\n\n  Querolus, 287 n. 25.\n\n  Rameses II, 86.\n  Ramsay, 225 n. 7.\n  Rationalism of Greece, 31.\n  Reason and faith, 169, 194.\n  _Refrigerium_, 102.\n  Reinach, xiii.\n  Religion, and magic, 93;\n    Roman, 28.\n  Religions, Invasion of the barbarian, 10, 19, 22;\n    Parliament of, xiii.\n  Renan, x, 1, 160.\n  Repasts. See \"Feasts.\"\n  Responsibility, Collective, 36.\n  Resurrection, 138.\n  Reward and punishment, 37, 92, 154.\n  Rhodes, Attis in, 61.\n  Rites, Mystic, 39f., 51.\n  Ritual, Egyptian, 93;\n    Pharaonic, 236 n. 70.\n  Ritualistic ablutions, 208.\n  Roman liturgy, 29;\n    mythology, 35;\n    religion, 28.\n  Rome, Isis in, 83;\n    Private law of, 5.\n  Rufinus, 85.\n\n  Sabaoth, 63.\n  Sabaziasts, xxi, 226 n. 23.\n  Sabazius, 22, 59, 64f.\n    Dionysus and, 48.\n    See also \"Dionysus.\"\n  Sabbatists, xxi.\n  Sabians, 250 n. 49.\n  Sacerdotal character of Oriental civilizations, 31.\n  {297}\n  Sacrifice, Human, 119.\n  Sagittarius, 173.\n  Salvation, xxiii, 33, 40, 43.\n  Sanctuary, Right of, 250 n. 49.\n  _Sanctus_, (Mithra), 157.\n  Sassanides, 135, 140;\n    Court of the, 141.\n  Satan, Ahriman and, 153, 266 n. 36.\n  Saturn, 172;\n    Baal and, 21.\n  Saviour, 223 n. 36.\n  Scaevola, 6, 35.\n  Science, 43;\n    and faith, 32, 34;\n    and the priesthood, 32;\n    Christians opposed to, 283 n. 17;\n    Magic a, 183f.\n  Sciences, Astrology queen of, 162.\n  Scipio Nasica, 47.\n  Scopas, 76.\n  Seleucides, 62, 121, 128, 138.\n  Seleucus, 256 n. 67;\n    Callinicus, 79.\n  Semele and Isis, 89.\n  Semitic paganism, 116;\n    religions, Diffusion of the, 111ff.\n  Seneca, 217 n. 17.\n  Senses, Influence of Oriental religions on, 28ff., 43.\n  _Septizonia_, 164.\n  Serapis, x, 22, 73ff., 126;\n    chief of demons, 266 n. 37.\n  Serpent sacred to AEsculapius, 173.\n  Set, 98.\n  Severi, 140, 167, 196.\n  Severus of Antioch, 233 n. 33.\n  Sextus Empiricus, 167.\n  Shamash and Mithra, 146.\n  Showerman, xiv, 225 n. 15.\n  Sibylline oracles, 233 n. 34.\n  Sibyls, 46.\n  Sicily, Slave revolution in, 105.\n  Sidereal immortality, 254 n. 64,\n    worship, 133, 251 n. 57, 254 n. 64.\n    See also \"Stars.\"\n  _Signa Memphitica_, 233 n. 35.\n  Simios and Mercury, 123.\n  Sky, 208. See \"Caelus.\"\n  Slave revolution in Sicily, 105.\n  _Sol invictus_, 114, 146, 205;\n    _sanctissimus_, 249 n. 47.\n  Soldiers of fate, xx;\n    Faith of Syrian, 112;\n    Persian cult spread by, 149.\n  Souls, Abode of, in the stars, 125, 159, 269 n. 54, 287 n. 25;\n    Abode of, in the earth, 159;\n    Clothing of, 269 n. 54.\n  Sources, 11ff.\n  Spear, Sacred, 67.\n  Species, Variation of, 25.\n  Spencer, Herbert, 222 n. 34.\n  Spirit imprisoned in matter, 43.\n  Spring of water, 239 n. 90.\n  Stars, 129;\n    Deified, 199;\n    Soul in the, 125, 159, 269 n. 54, 287 n. 25.\n  Steer, the author of creation, 68.\n  Stoics, 14, 148, 167, 171, 177, 180, 214 n. 6;\n    Philosophy of, xx.\n  _Stolistes_, 94, 96, 97.\n  Stones, Worship of, 116.\n    See also \"Litholatry.\"\n  Strabo, 32, 122, 145, 247 n. 41.\n  Strategus, God a, 214 n. 6.\n  Sulla, 54, 81.\n  Sun, Supreme, 133. See also \"_Sol invictus_.\"\n  Superstition, 36, 277 n. 58.\n  _Supplicium_, The term, 219 n. 9.\n  Symmachus, xxiv, 204, 211.\n  Sympathy, 171, 194.\n  Synesius, Hymns of, 260 n. 89.\n  Syria, Isis in, 79.\n  Syrian goddess, 14, 104.\n  Syrians in Italy, 106f.\n\n  Tabu, 120, 157.\n  Taurobolium, xviii, 66, 198, 206, 208;\n    compared to baptism, 70.\n  Tetrabiblos, 170, 182, 271 n. 5.\n  Thasos, Attis in, 61.\n  Thaumaturgus, 188.\n  Thebes, Sepulchers of, 99.\n  Themistius, 200.\n  Theodore of Mopsuestia, 153.\n  Theology, 33;\n    and astrology, 175, 260 n. 89;\n    of the Egyptian mysteries, 90;\n    of the magi, 268 n. 39.\n  {298}\n  Theophilus, 85;\n    Miniature of, 232 n. 32.\n  Theophorous names, 148.\n  Thessaly, Witches of, 186.\n  Thoth, 32, 94, 237 n. 77.\n  Thunder-god, 256 n. 67.\n  Tiberius, 39, 180;\n    Fatalism of, 164;\n    persecutes priests of Isis, 83.\n  Time, 35;\n    Deified, 150, 273 n. 36.\n  Timotheus the Eumolpid, 51, 75, 99, 229 n. 4.\n  Tin road, 216 n. 12.\n  Tiridates, Nero initiated by, 263 n. 16.\n  Toilet of the idol, 96.\n  Tonsure, 235 n. 58.\n  Totem, 48.\n  Trapezus, Mithreum near, 262 n. 16.\n  Trees, Sacred, 48, 56, 78, 116.\n  Triads, 250 n. 55.\n  Trinity, Egyptian, 77;\n    Syrian, 123.\n  Tyche, 179;\n    and Isis, 89.\n  Tylor, xiii.\n  _Tyrannos_, 61.\n\n  Universal church, 211.\n  Universe, 207.\n\n  Valens, 200;\n    Vettius, 168, 171.\n  Varro, 38, 202.\n  Vedanta, 210.\n  Venus, 173;\n    Atargatis and, 123;\n    Isis and, 90.\n  Viminacium, 267 n. 38.\n  Vincentius, Grave of, 65.\n  Vitellius, Otho and, 164.\n  Voguee, de, 8.\n  Vohumano, 145.\n\n  Water, Spring of, 239 n. 90;\n    Worship of, 116.\n  Wissowa, xiii.\n\n  Xenophanes, 203.\n\n  Yahveh Zebaoth, 64.\n    See also \"Jehovah.\"\n  Yazatas, 145, 148, 152.\n\n  Zachariah the Scholastic, 283 n. 17, 233 n. 33, 281 n. 81.\n  Zeno, 176.\n  Zenobia, 252 n. 59.\n  Zervan Akarana, 150.\n  Zeus Ammon, 230 n. 9;\n    Bronton, 226 n. 24;\n    Keraunios, 256 n. 67;\n    Oromasdes, 147;\n    Ouranios, 128;\n    Stratios, 265 n. 29.\n    See also \"Jupiter.\"\n  Zoolatry, 119.\n    See also \"Animals.\"\n  Zoroaster, 138, 145, 184, 189, 193, 269 n. 54, 277 n. 57, 279 n. 70;\n    Votaries of, 160.\n  Zoroastrianism, Mithraism not, 150.\n  Zosimus, 277 n. 57.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\nCorrections made to printed original.\n\np. 40. \"regenerate the initiated person\": 'initated' in original.\n\np. 138. \"and the Hamites of Egypt\": 'Hanites' in original.\n\np. 148. \"But in spite of all these accommodations\": 'accomodations' in\noriginal.\n\np. 175. \"particularly the twelve signs of the zodiac\": 'particutarly' in\noriginal.\n\np. 176. \"twelve months connected with the zodiac\": 'tweleve' in original.\n\np. 178. \"a system of indisputable grandeur\": 'indiputable' in original.\n\np. 182. \"a more pernicious aberration, gaining ground\": 'gronud' in\noriginal.\n\np. 227. n. 30. \"the [Greek: pantokrator] of the Septuagint\": 'Septugint' in\noriginal.\n\np. 236. n. 65. \"the principal text we have\": 'mave' in original.\n\np. 251. n. 34. \"differentiation of the ecclesiastic and lay functions\":\n'ecclestiastic' in original.\n\np. 253. n. 62. \"among the Nosairis\": 'Hosairis' in original.\n\np. 264. n. 24. \"Cf. supra, p. 127, n. 68.\": 'p. 373' in original (which\ndoes not exist).\n\np. 268. n. 41. \"man had to struggle perpetually\": 'strugle' in original.\n\np. 273. n. 26. \"[Greek: astronomian]\": '[Greek: astrouomian]' in original.\n\np. 275. n. 48. \"see supra, ch. V, n. 57.\": 'ch. VIII' in original; there is\nno such note, ch. V appears to be meant.\n\np. 285. n. 21. \"Jupiter exsuperantissimus (p. 128).\": 'p. 190' in original;\np. 128 appears to be the only relevant passage.\n\np. 287. n. 25. \"We have mentioned (supra, ch. VI, n. 54)\": 'ch. V' in\noriginal, but ch. VI appears to be the relevant note.\n\np. 287. n. 27. \"by astrology (supra, p. 177)\": 'p. 262' in original; p. 262\nis in the notes, p. 177 appears to be the relevant passage.\n\nIndex:\n\nArnobius \"277 n. 57\": 'n. 58' wrongly in original.\n\nCarneades. 'Carbeades' wrongly in original.\n\nJulian the Theurge, \"n. 68\": 'n. 67' wrongly in original.\n\nSidereal. 'Siderial' wrongly in original.\n\nSupplicium, \"219 n. 9.\": 'n. 6' wrongly in original.\n\nTriads, \"250 n. 55.\": 'n. 50' wrongly in original.","title":"The Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":94264}