Part 11

XLI. The last argument we have urged against Monsieur Huet, militates with equal force against all other authors, who have in different ways engaged in the same undertaking, as against him; it being certain, that in none of the fables of paganism, can there be found any of the scripture proper names; and although some have pretended to meet here and there one, besides the visible distinction there is between the words, we may with very little reflection, perceive the signification of them is quite different: for example, the word Evoe, repeated in the Festivals of Bacchus, is pretended by Mr. Butler, to have been used in remembrance of our first mother Eve: but the commentators upon Plautus, Virgil, and Ovid, consider this word when it occurs in the works of those poets, as an interjection, which is expressive of nothing more, than the affection or esteem of him who pronounces it. The Latin and Greek dictionaries agree in this definition, and give it the following signification: _Bene sit illi_.

XLII. I confess, that in here and there a fable, we may meet with an opportune application or allusion to historical truth; but this in no wise proves, that the history gave rise to the fable. Accident of itself, is capable of producing these coinciding circumstances. Because something happens to a man to-day, which he dreamed of the night before, no prudent person would infer from thence that there was any connection between the dream and the event. Among the variety of images which the fancy forms in dreams, it is next to impossible, that a part of them should not coincide with some realities; and we may say the same of voluntary fictions. It would be a striking wonder, if among the multitude of extravagances and errors common to the Gentiles, some one or other of them should not bear a lively analogy to here and there a revealed truth.

XLIII. It is true, that although this coincidence may be purely casual, it is possible, that it may also be relative, or have some connexion. I mean that it is possible, here and there a portion of sacred history, either as the malice or ignorance of men took away from, or added circumstances to it, might have degenerated by little and little from its purity, and might ultimately have been involved or obscured in some of the heathen fables. It is probable, that in the first book of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, is contained disguised or disfigured, part of what Moses wrote in the first chapters of Genesis respecting the creation, the criminal outrages committed by those the scripture calls Giants, the universal corruption of mankind, and the deluge. But the supposing, that here and there a fable may have been derived from holy writ, is not the same, as deducing from thence the derivation of a general system, which applies to all the errors of paganism; and even with respect to those few fables which bear a similitude to the scripture, we should suppose the derivation as probable, and not as certain, for the reason we have already hinted, which is, that the likeness of the error to truth may have been casual.

XLIV. By adopting this conduct, and pursuing this prudent middle way, we should avoid deriving all the fables from sacred history, and not incline to the particular system of Senior Branchini, a learned modern Italian, who attempted deducing them all from profane story. This author is of opinion, that all the relations of heroes and deities contained in the antient monuments, which were calculated to transmit to posterity the memories of such men, as in the early times had particularly distinguished themselves, and had become eminent by various ways; I say Senior Branchini conjectures, that these testimonies of the actions of those men, having fallen into the hands of poets, flatterers, their passionate admirers, or their own immediate descendants; the first in consequence of their profession, the second excited by their interest, the third by their affection, and the last by their vanity, ornamented them with many fabulous circumstances; and from this complication of lies and truth, was derived all the theology of paganism.

XLV. There is no doubt, but it has been very common for men to deify one another, from all, or each of those four motives. The poets did it above two thousand five hundred years ago, and have not yet got the better of the bad habit; for there is not a fine woman at this day, whom their pens don’t elevate to the rank of a goddess. The flatterers made deities of those, who, on account of their vices, were unworthy to be called men, as is evident from the apotheosis of the Roman emperors; and the vanity of descendants, deified their illustrious ancestors, by attributing a divine origin to the founders of many empires and republics. The Romans, not content with feigning the god Mars to have been the father of their first prince Romulus, raised Romulus himself to the rank of a divinity, and made him their tutelar deity.

XLVI. From the passion of love, was derived the most ancient propensity to deify mortals; for the book of Ecclesiastes, chap. 14, points this out as the first principle or source, from whence this species of idolatry sprang. A father extremely afflicted for the loss of his son, snatched away in the flower of his youth, to express his great tenderness and affection for him, causes his statue to be carved; and this tenderness and affection, being afterwards extended to the utmost limits of human feeling, disturbs his understanding, and causes him so far to forget himself, as to make the image the object of his adoration. His authority and example, extends the superstition to his domestics; from them it is communicated to all the inhabitants of a town, and from the inhabitants of that town to those of a whole region. There was seen many ages after this delirium commenced, an intention of repeating it, from the influence of the same passion, by one of the greatest men of antiquity. Cicero, that very Cicero, who at one time was the oracle of the Romans, and afterwards the admiration of succeeding ages, so far lost himself upon the death of his most beloved daughter Tullia, as to persist for a long while, in a determination of erecting altars to her as a deity. He also transmitted to posterity in his writings, testimonies, of his having once entertained so extravagant and mad a resolution.

XLVII. This impious and ridiculous folly was carried to the most shameless length by the emperor Adrian; who built temples, raised altars, constituted priests, festivals, and sacrifices, to whom? Why, to a boy of Bythinia named Antonio, the accomplice of his abominable turpitudes, who as some say was drowned by accident in the Nile, and as others tell the story, he of his own free will offered up his life in a magic sacrifice, which was made to prolong that of the emperor, and which according to the rites and ceremonies appertaining to it, required a voluntary victim.

XLVIII. But although it may be true, that the human affections of love, vanity, and interest, assisted by the fictions of the poets, have been the cause of deifying many men, still the system of Senior Branchini cannot subsist in its general and extended sense, for the following reasons. In the first place, because of the total exclusion it makes of all sacred history, which, as we have already said, some poets might have adulterated, in the same manner, and by the same means, they adulterated profane ones. Secondly, because some of the fictions might have been pure fictions, or mere fables, unmixed or unconnected with any history whatever. Who can prevent a cunning artful man, that travels into a remote region, from relating prodigies of some hero of his own country, who never existed? and who afterwards could be answerable, that the people of the country where he had spread the lie, should not adopt this imaginary hero as a divinity? Thirdly, as a great portion of the gentiles worshiped stars or planets, which they believed were animated, it is probable, that many of their fictions alluded to no other object but them. For example, when the adoration of the sun became an established worship, they might, and it is natural that they should feign, that the deity who animated it, had done such and such things, which bore no relation to any man or circumstance whatever, but only to the imaginary spirit.

XLIX. Lastly, the greatest part of the fables of the Gentiles, may have had no other origin, than some mystical, moral, political, or philosophical figure or representation, which their authors calculated them to illustrate or inculcate. I mean that those who contrived and fabricated them, had no other intention, than to represent obscurely, and under the veil of fables, some theological mysteries, or some philosophical, political, or moral maxims; but that afterwards, the ignorance of the vulgar, by mistaking their intent and meaning, and by construing and understanding them in a literal sense, came to form out of them, a ridiculous theology and religion, which never entered the heads of those who were the original authors of them. It is well known, the Egyptians under hieroglyphicks, concealed not only their religion, but even their history, policy, and philosophy, which were only laid open or explained to their kings, and priests of the Sun. It is probable that in imitation of the Egyptians, who in those days were venerated as the most learned people in the world, many other nations adopted the same practice; and it is also possible that the Egyptians themselves, might have derived this custom from some other nation, who at one time might have been superior to them in wisdom and learning; and it is likewise possible, that this might have been a common practice in early antiquity. It is certain, that there are vast numbers of the pagan fables, which are capable of bearing a much more apt and commodious application to their physics, their morals, and their policy, than to their history. Read the treatise of the famous Bacon _de sapientia veterum_, who, by pursuing this idea, has been very happy in his explanation of not a few of those fables.

L. Thus we perceive, this is a matter capable of affording innumerable conjectures; but not a basis, solid enough to build any general system upon; which is the point we have chiefly endeavoured to demonstrate in this discourse; and particularly, with respect to the union or connexion of fable with history; and more especially with sacred history; which differs as much, and is as widely distant from the errors of paganism, as the greatest truth is from the greatest lie.

THE ORIGIN OF FABLE IN HISTORY.

In a Letter from FEYJOE, to a Correspondent, in Answer to one censuring the foregoing Discourse.

DEAR SIR,

I. My esteem for your person, induces me to respect your letter; but if I was not restrained by the first of these considerations, I don’t know how I might be disposed to treat the epistle; because the charge you alledge against me in it, is destitute of all foundation. You first of all point-blank accuse me, with having in my essay on the _Divorce of History from Fable_, advanced, there is no fiction whatever of paganism, which is derived from sacred history; and then treat the maxim as savouring of impiety. But if broaching this maxim was criminal and a sin, alas! what must become of the honour and piety, of the most learned, and most religious abbot Branchini? for he was the man who first advanced, and afterwards with all his might, endeavoured to enforce and establish this system, and asserted, that all the fables of the pagans, were founded on, and derived from profane history. But why does this sentiment savour of impiety? You answer this, and say, because it takes away a species of support from the truth of holy writ. This can hardly be esteemed a very substantial species of support. Whoever would be inclined to doubt or disbelieve the scripture truths, notwithstanding the firm foundation on which they rest, would not be disposed to credit them, on account of the weak auxiliary confirmation they derive from such a support? That the origin of the fables of the Gentiles, were derived from those truths, is at best but a doubtful, and a speculative opinion; and how can a doubtful proof confirm any man in the belief of a matter, which rests, or is founded in that sort of proof? But if a fair proof of this could be adduced, it would answer no purpose, for it would be very easy for him who was guilty of the impiety, in order to elude any consequences from the detection, to pretend he derived the hint from another fable, and that these tales are the children of one another, and that those of the latest date, are introduced to ornament and give lustre to those which preceded them.

II. But admitting that the maxim did border upon impiety, I am by no means interested in defending or justifying it, as I was in no wise concerned in preferring it, and therefore it is very unjust in you to impute it to me. My object in the discourse you mention, was that of combating the system, which derives all the fictions of gentilism in general, from sacred history; although as is evident from my words in the 43d article of that Discourse, I admit that some of them might possibly have sprung from that source, how then can you when these were my words, fix a charge upon me of affirming, that no fiction whatever of paganism, took its rise from sacred history?

III. I also combat, although it is only by the way, or _en passant_, the system of Senior Branchini, who asserts, that all the fables were the offspring of profane history; or, to speak more properly, he endeavours to inculcate, that the first are mysterious or enigmatical representations of the last, which attempt, necessarily betrays him into some violent and absurd allusions; and perhaps into such as are more glaring, than those I have pointed out, by which, he derives all the fables from holy writ. For example; he pretends that all the Iliad is a true history, but converted into allegory, agreeable to the practice of the East. That Jupiter was the successor of the great conqueror Sesostris, whose dominion extended over a vast tract of country in the time of the Trojan war; that the inferior deities, represented either eminent men, or particular nations; and that a part of those deities, were tributary princes to the said Sesostris, or some one of his successors, whose dependence upon him, did not deprive them of the option, of taking part either with the Trojans or the Greeks, just as their passions or interests dictated to them. That the goddess Juno was Syria, called _Blanca_, and was characterized by the white arms of Juno, so much extolled by Homer. Minerva was the wise Egypt, Mars the union or combination of Armenia, Colquida, Thrace and Thessaly; and in this manner, he reasons upon the other fables. Into such strange paradoxes as these, are men drawn by their passion for systems of great extent.

IV. But although I don’t assent to the system of Senior Branchini, the whole of which it is impossible to adjust, without falling into great absurdities, I agree, after the example of many men eminent for their literature, that a large portion of the fables, is a compound of parcels of profane history, disguised and deformed; but still the alteration they have undergone, has not so thoroughly disfigured them, but that we may discern in the copies, sufficient marks of their origin and derivation; and I propose pointing out to you in this letter, the instances of this sort that occur to me.

V. It is highly probable, that some of the subaltern deities, were formed upon the idea that was entertained by the populace, of some particular persons, eminent either for their heroic virtues, or for having been the inventors of some arts, that were found to be exceedingly useful to the public. This is the account Pliny gives of the matter in chap. 1. of his twenty-fifth book. _At herculè, singula quosdam inventa deorum numero addidere._

VI. Saturn devouring his children, according to Mr. Rollin, is derived from a part of the Carthaginian history, which speaks of a king of Carthage, who buried his sons alive as a sacrifice to the gods; and this agrees in substance, with the account given of the thing by Mons. Bonamy, in his History of the Royal Academy of Inscriptions, _tom._ 7. p. 29. But, as we shall see in the sequel, it is much more probable, that the fabulous Saturn of paganism was derived from the true Abraham of scripture.

VII. The Cretans considered Jupiter as their countryman; and even in the time of Lucian, as appears by this author in his Dialogue of _Jupiter Tragicus_, shewed his tomb in that island; and although they allowed he was dead, it without doubt had been handed down to them by tradition, that he was some eminent man, and had peradventure been king of the country.

VIII. In the fiction of the Stygian Lake, and of the boatman Charon, is contained a mixture of natural and civil history. There is in Arcadia a lake, which not only was called Stygia at the time when the poets first began to make it famous by their inventions, but many ages after that æra, preserved this name; for even in the days of Pliny it retained it; and I don’t know whether it does not retain it with very little alteration, at this period. The deadly quality of its waters, gave occasion to the poets, to feign that it was of infernal derivation, and to place the source, both of the lake, and the river which runs into it, in the region of the dead. Pliny says, that the waters of it, by being drunk, kill in an instant; and adds upon the authority of Theophrastus, that there are little fish bred in it, which poison whoever eats them. Some antient authors, attribute a faculty to its waters so intensely corrosive, that it can’t be contained in any vessel, but one made of a wild ass’s hoof, as it gnaws and tears to pieces, those made of any other materials; and the disciples of Aristotle formerly pretended, that this secret was revealed by their master to Antipater, to instruct him how he might send some of this poisonous water to Babylon, for the destruction of Alexander.

IX. The learned Abbé Fourmont, who in the years 1729 and 30, by order of the most Christian king, made a voyage of critical enquiry to the Levant, where he scrutinized with the greatest exactness all Greece, and after passing the brook which supplied it with water, examined with much attention the Stygian Lake; which he gives the following horrible description of. He says, the water of the brook which runs into it, before it enters the lake, is clear, but after that, becomes thick and tainted; an alteration, which can only be imputed to the bad qualities and pernicious nature of its bottom. He says further, the surface presents to the view, a confused mixture of the most disgustful tints; and that a thick scum, of the colour of the rust of copper tinged with black, swims on its top, which being agitated by the wind, looks like the bubbles of boiling tar or bitumen. The obnoxious active quality of its waters, is not less pernicious than its aspect is displeasing; and the vapours which arise from them, blight all the plants that grow near the lake; and that it’s banks are avoided and fled from, by all sorts of beasts. The Abbé Fourmont mentions a circumstance, that contradicts what has been related by Theophrastus, which is, that its fish poison whoever eats them; for he asserts, that no fish can live in the waters of the lake; and saying they are deadly to the very fish, is certainly an aggravation of their pernicious qualities.

X. The lake then, being in so many respects horrible and affrighting, it is no wonder that from these circumstances, poetic fancy should place it in the region of horror, or at the entrance of it.

XI. The fable of the boatman Charon, who for an obolo, an Athenian piece of money worth a little more than our halfpenny, carried the souls of the dead over the lake, was derived from an Egyptian story, related by Diodorus Siculus. There was in Egypt a lake, over which dead bodies after they were embalmed, were carried to the opposite shore to be buried; and there were judges appointed to attend at the place of embarkation, to examine into the course of life which had been led by the dead persons; and after this inquiry, to pronounce whether they were or were not, worthy to be interred; which office was exercised with such severity, that this common honour has been denied to some of the royal family. To this story there is annexed a tradition, which the Abbé Fourmont says, subsists in that part of Egypt at this day. The tradition is as follows; that there was once a farmer of the revenues of one of the Pharaohs, who laid a tax upon this transportation of the dead, which brought in vast sums. Thus you see, that both in Greece and Egypt, there were found true materials, wherewith to fabricate the fable of the Stygian Lake, to build the boat which conveyed the dead bodies to the abyss, and to erect a monument, to eternize the avarice of the boatman Charon.

XII. The fable of the river Lethe, whose waters the dead are obliged to drink, to make them forget all they ever saw or knew in the region of the living, and also that of the boatman Charon, are both of African origin. This river rises near the great bog or quicksand, and after running under ground, and being hid for some miles, shews itself again near to the city of Berenica, now Bernick or Bernisho, greatly increased in size, by the addition made to it, by subterraneous waters; and this made it thought, that it was not the same river which they had before seen bury itself under ground, and was also the circumstance, that gave rise to its deriving its source from Hell.

XIII. The river likewise which was antiently called Lethe, but now goes by the name of Limia, and runs through my native country; and concerning which, there was once a prevailing opinion among the Romans, that it had the same properties which the poets attributed to the infernal river, causing forgetfulness, not only in those who drank of its waters, but also in those who waded through it, and it not being then certain whether this error or preoccupation with respect to the river Lethe, and the fiction of its source originating in Hell, took its rise from the river Lethe of my country; or whether the fable of the river Lethe coming from Hell, and the property of its waters being then established, might have occasioned the confounding the river Lethe of Galicia with the other.

XIV. I say, however this was, the opinion of the qualities of the river Lethe, was so rooted and fixed among the vulgar of the Romans, that when the consul Decimus Brutus, as Florus calls him, or Aulus Brutus, as he is called by Paterculus, was engaged in the conquest of Galicia, and who on account of his having conquered it, obtained the surname of Gallego; I say, when this consul came to the river Lethe, which is fordable, none of his soldiers, for fear of incurring that general forgetfulness, would venture to wade through it, till the consul who was not preoccupied with the vulgar error, passed thro’ it to the opposite shore; and when he was arrived there, turned about and called some of his countrymen by their names, by which he gave them to understand, that he had not incurred the forgetfulness they so much dreaded; and said further to them, as Florus informs us, _Formidatum Romanis fluvium oblivionis_.