This is a modern-English version of The Ruins; Or, Meditation on the Revolutions of Empires and the Law of Nature, originally written by Volney, C.-F. (Constantin-François).
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
THE RUINS,
OR, MEDITATION ON THE REVOLUTIONS OF EMPIRES:
AND
THE LAW OF
NATURE,
by C. F. VOLNEY,
COMTE ET PAIR DE FRANCE. COMMANDEUR DE LA LEGION D'HONNEUR, MEMBRE DE
L'ACADEMIE FRANCAISE, ET DE PLUSIEURS AUTRES SOCIETES SAVANTES.
DEPUTY TO THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF 1789, AND AUTHOR OF "TRAVELS IN EGYPT
AND SYRIA," "NEW RESEARCHES ON ANCIENT HISTORY," ETC.
TO
WHICH IS ADDED
VOLNEY'S ANSWER TO DR. PRIESTLY, A BIOGRAPHICAL
NOTICE BY COUNT DARU, AND THE ZODIACAL SIGNS AND CONSTELLATIONS BY THE
EDITOR.
I will cherish in remembrance the love of man, I will employ myself on the means of effecting good for him, and build my own happiness on the promotion of his.—Volney.
I will cherish the memory of human love, I will concentrate on ways to help others, and I will find my own happiness in supporting them. —Volney.
NEW YORK, TWENTIETH CENTURY PUB. CO., 4 WARREN ST. 1890.
PUBLISHER'S PREFACE.
Having recently purchased a set of stereotyped plates of Volney's Ruins, with a view of reprinting the same, I found, on examination, that they were considerably worn by the many editions that had been printed from them and that they greatly needed both repairs and corrections. A careful estimate showed that the amount necessary for this purpose would go far towards reproducing this standard work in modern type and in an improved form. After due reflection this course was at length decided upon, and all the more readily, as by discarding the old plates and resetting the entire work, the publisher was enabled to greatly enhance its value, by inserting the translator's preface as it appeared in the original edition, and also to restore many notes and other valuable material which had been carelessly omitted in the American reprint.
Having recently bought a set of worn plates of Volney's Ruins, with the intention of reprinting them, I discovered upon inspection that they were quite damaged from the numerous editions that had been produced from them and that they needed significant repairs and corrections. A careful assessment revealed that the funds required for this would largely cover the cost of reproducing this important work in modern type and a better format. After careful consideration, we ultimately decided to go this route, especially since by replacing the old plates and resetting the entire work, the publisher could greatly increase its value by including the translator's preface as it appeared in the original edition and by restoring many notes and other valuable material that had been carelessly left out of the American reprint.
An example of an important omission of this kind may be found on the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth pages of this volume, which may be appropriately referred to, in this connection. It is there stated, in describing the ancient kingdom of Ethiopia, and the ruins of Thebes, her opulent metropolis, that "There a people, now forgotten, discovered, while others were yet barbarians, the elements of the arts and sciences. A race of men, now rejected from society for their sable skin and frizzled hair, founded on the study of the laws of nature, those civil and religious systems which still govern the universe."
An example of a significant omission can be found on the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth pages of this book, which is relevant to this discussion. It states that while describing the ancient kingdom of Ethiopia and the ruins of Thebes, its wealthy capital, "There, a people now forgotten, discovered the foundations of the arts and sciences while others were still barbaric. A group of people, now excluded from society for their dark skin and curly hair, established those civil and religious systems based on the study of the laws of nature that still govern the universe."
A voluminous note, in which standard authorities are cited, seems to prove that this statement is substantially correct, and that we are in reality indebted to the ancient Ethiopians, to the fervid imagination of the persecuted and despised negro, for the various religious systems now so highly revered by the different branches of both the Semitic and Aryan races. This fact, which is so frequently referred to in Mr. Volney's writings, may perhaps solve the question as to the origin of all religions, and may even suggest a solution to the secret so long concealed beneath the flat nose, thick lips, and negro features of the Egyptian Sphinx. It may also confirm the statement of Dioderus, that "the Ethiopians conceive themselves as the inventors of divine worship, of festivals, of solemn assemblies, of sacrifices, and of every other religious practice."
A detailed note, which references standard authorities, seems to show that this statement is largely correct, and that we actually owe our various religious systems—now highly respected by the different branches of both Semitic and Aryan races—to the ancient Ethiopians and the passionate imagination of the marginalized and misunderstood Black community. This point, often mentioned in Mr. Volney's writings, might help answer the question about the origin of all religions and could also provide some insight into the mystery that has long been hidden beneath the flat nose, thick lips, and African features of the Egyptian Sphinx. It may also support Diodorus's claim that "the Ethiopians consider themselves the creators of divine worship, festivals, solemn assemblies, sacrifices, and every other religious practice."
That an imaginative and superstitious race of black men should have invented and founded, in the dim obscurity of past ages, a system of religious belief that still enthralls the minds and clouds the intellects of the leading representatives of modern theology,—that still clings to the thoughts, and tinges with its potential influence the literature and faith of the civilized and cultured nations of Europe and America, is indeed a strange illustration of the mad caprice of destiny, of the insignificant and apparently trivial causes that oft produce the most grave and momentous results.
That an imaginative and superstitious group of black people created and established, in the distant past, a system of religious belief that still captivates the minds and clouds the understanding of the leading figures in modern theology—one that still influences the thoughts and colors the literature and beliefs of the civilized and cultured nations of Europe and America—is truly a strange example of the unpredictable twists of fate, highlighting the insignificant and seemingly trivial causes that often lead to the most serious and significant outcomes.
The translation here given closely follows that published in Paris by Levrault, Quai Malaquais, in 1802, which was under the direction and careful supervision of the talented author; and whatever notes Count Volney then thought necessary to insert in his work, are here carefully reproduced without abridgment or modification.
The translation provided here closely follows the version published in Paris by Levrault, Quai Malaquais, in 1802, which was overseen and carefully managed by the skilled author. Any notes that Count Volney deemed necessary to include in his work are reproduced here in full, without any edits or changes.
The portrait, maps and illustrations are from a French edition of Volney's complete works, published by Bossange Freres at No. 12 Rue de Seine, Paris, in 1821,—one year after the death of Mr. Volney. It is a presentation copy "on the part of Madame, the Countess de Volney, and of the nephew of the author," and it may therefore be taken for granted that Mr. Volney's portrait, as here given, is correct, and was satisfactory to his family.
The portrait, maps, and illustrations come from a French edition of Volney's complete works, published by Bossange Freres at No. 12 Rue de Seine, Paris, in 1821—just a year after Mr. Volney passed away. It is a presentation copy "from Madame, the Countess de Volney, and the author's nephew," so it can be assumed that Mr. Volney's portrait, as presented here, is accurate and was accepted by his family.
An explanation of the figures and diagrams shown on the map of the Astrological Heaven of the Ancients has been added in the appendix by the publisher.
An explanation of the figures and diagrams displayed on the map of the Ancient Astrological Heaven has been added in the appendix by the publisher.
PETER ECKLER.
PETER ECKLER.
New York, January 3, 1890.
New York, January 3, 1890.
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE
OF THE ENGLISH EDITION PUBLISHED IN PARIS.
To offer the public a new translation of Volney's Ruins may require some apology in the view of those who are acquainted with the work only in the English version which already exists, and which has had a general circulation. But those who are conversant with the book in the author's own language, and have taken pains to compare it with that version, must have been struck with the errors with which the English performance abounds. They must have regretted the loss of many original beauties, some of which go far in composing the essential merits of the work.
To present a new translation of Volney's Ruins might need some explanation for those who only know the existing English version, which is widely circulated. However, those familiar with the book in the author's original language, who have carefully compared it to that version, must have noticed the numerous mistakes in the English translation. They would likely lament the loss of many original elements, some of which are key to the book’s true value.
The energy and dignity of the author's manner, the unaffected elevation of his style, the conciseness, perspicuity and simplicity of his diction, are everywhere suited to his subject, which is solemn, novel, luminous, affecting,—a subject perhaps the most universally interesting to the human race that has ever been presented to their contemplation. It takes the most liberal and comprehensive view of the social state of man, develops the sources of his errors in the most perspicuous and convincing manner, overturns his prejudices with the greatest delicacy and moderation, sets the wrongs he has suffered, and the rights he ought to cherish, in the clearest point of view, and lays before him the true foundation of morals—his only means of happiness.
The energy and dignity of the author's style, the natural elevation of his writing, and the clarity, straightforwardness, and simplicity of his words are perfectly suited to his subject, which is serious, new, enlightening, and moving—possibly the most universally interesting topic ever presented to humanity. It offers a broad and inclusive perspective on the social condition of people, clearly and convincingly explores the sources of their mistakes, gently and thoughtfully challenges their biases, highlights the injustices they have faced, and clarifies the rights they should uphold, while also presenting the true foundation of morality—his only path to happiness.
As the work has already become a classical one, even in English, and as it must become and continue to be so regarded in all languages in which it shall be faithfully rendered, we wish it to suffer as little as possible from a change of country;—that as much of the spirit of the original be transfused and preserved as is consistent with the nature of translation.
As this work has already become a classic, even in English, and it must continue to be viewed as such in all languages where it is accurately translated, we hope it can undergo as few changes as possible due to cultural differences; that as much of the original spirit is captured and maintained as is appropriate for the nature of translation.
How far we have succeeded in performing this service for the English reader we must not pretend to determine. We believe, however, that we have made an improved translation, and this without claiming any particular merit on our part, since we have had advantages which our predecessor had not. We have been aided by his labors; and, what is of still more importance, our work has been done under the inspection of the author, whose critical knowledge of both languages has given us a great facility in avoiding such errors as might arise from hurry or mistake.
How much we’ve succeeded in providing this service for the English reader is something we shouldn't claim to know. However, we believe we’ve created a better translation, without insisting that we deserve special credit since we had advantages that our predecessor didn’t. We’ve benefited from his work, and even more importantly, our effort has been overseen by the author, whose deep understanding of both languages has helped us avoid mistakes that could come from rushing or errors.
Paris, November 1, 1802.
Paris, Nov 1, 1802.
PREFACE OF THE LONDON EDITION.*
* Published by T. Allman, 42 Holborn Hill, London, 1851.
* Published by T. Allman, 42 Holborn Hill, London, 1851.
The plan of this publication was formed nearly ten years ago; and allusions to it may be seen in the preface to Travels in Syria and Egypt, as well as at the end of that work, (published in 1787). The performance was in some forwardness when the events of 1788 in France interrupted it. Persuaded that a development of the theory of political truth could not sufficiently acquit a citizen of his debt to society, the author wished to add practice; and that particularly at a time when a single arm was of consequence in the defence of the general cause.
The plan for this publication was developed nearly ten years ago, and references to it can be found in the preface of Travels in Syria and Egypt, as well as at the end of that book (published in 1787). The work was already in progress when the events of 1788 in France interrupted it. Convinced that explaining the theory of political truth alone wouldn’t fully fulfill a citizen's responsibility to society, the author wanted to add practical examples, especially at a time when individual contributions were crucial to defending the common cause.
The same desire of public benefit which induced him to suspend his work, has since engaged him to resume it, and though it may not possess the same merit as if it had appeared under the circumstances that gave rise to it, yet he imagines that at a time when new passions are bursting forth,—passions that must communicate their activity to the religious opinions of men,—it is of importance to disseminate such moral truths as are calculated to operate as a curb and restraint. It is with this view he has endeavored to give to these truths, hitherto treated as abstract, a form likely to gain them a reception.
The same desire to benefit the public that led him to pause his work has now prompted him to continue it. Although it might not be as valuable as if it had been released under the original circumstances, he believes that, at a time when new passions are emerging—passions that will inevitably influence people's religious beliefs—it’s crucial to spread moral truths that can serve as a check and balance. With this in mind, he has tried to present these truths, which have previously been seen as abstract, in a way that is likely to be accepted.
It was found impossible not to shock the violent prejudices of some readers; but the work, so far from being the fruit of a disorderly and perturbed spirit, has been dictated by a sincere love of order and humanity.
It was found impossible not to challenge the strong biases of some readers; however, this work, far from being the result of a chaotic and troubled mind, has been inspired by a genuine love for order and humanity.
After reading this performance it will be asked, how it was possible in 1784 to have had an idea of what did not take place till the year 1790? The solution is simple. In the original plan the legislator was a fictitious and hypothetical being: in the present, the author has substituted an existing legislator; and the reality has only made the subject additionally interesting.
After reading this performance, one might wonder how it was possible in 1784 to have an idea of something that didn’t happen until 1790. The answer is straightforward. In the original plan, the legislator was a made-up and theoretical figure; in the current version, the author has replaced them with a real legislator, and the actual situation has only made the topic more engaging.
PREFACE OF THE AMERICAN EDITION.*
* The copy from which this preface is reprinted was published in Boston by Charles Gaylord, in 1833. It was given to the writer, when a mere lad, by a lady—almost a stranger—who was traveling through the little hamlet on the banks of the Hudson where he then resided. This lady assured me that the book was of great value, containing noble and sublime truths; and the only condition she attached to the gift was, that I should read it carefully and endeavor to understand its meaning. This I willingly promised and faithfully performed; and all who have "climbed the heights," and escaped from the thraldom of superstitious faith, will concede the inestimable value of such a gift— rich with the peace and consolation that the truth imparts. —Pub.
* The copy from which this preface is reprinted was published in Boston by Charles Gaylord, in 1833. It was given to the writer, when he was still a young boy, by a lady—almost a stranger—who was passing through the small village by the Hudson River where he lived at the time. This lady told me that the book was very valuable, containing noble and profound truths; and the only condition she put on the gift was that I should read it carefully and try to understand its meaning. I gladly agreed and fulfilled that promise; and everyone who has "climbed the heights" and escaped the shackles of blind faith will recognize the immeasurable worth of such a gift—filled with the peace and comfort that truth brings. —Pub.
If books were to be judged of by their volume, the following would have but little value; if appraised by their contents, it will perhaps be reckoned among the most instructive.
If we judged books by their size, the following would seem worthless; but if we evaluated them by their content, it might be considered one of the most informative.
In general, nothing is more important than a good elementary book; but, also, nothing is more difficult to compose and even to read: and why? Because, as every thing in it should be analysis and definition, all should be expressed with truth and precision. If truth and precision are wanting, the object has not been attained; if they exist, its very force renders it abstract.
In general, nothing is more important than a good basic book; however, nothing is more challenging to create and even to read. Why is that? Because everything in it needs to be analytical and defined, and everything should be expressed clearly and accurately. If clarity and accuracy are lacking, the goal hasn't been achieved; if they are present, their very strength makes it abstract.
The first of these defects has been hitherto evident in all books of morality. We find in them only a chaos of incoherent maxims, precepts without causes, and actions without a motive. The pedants of the human race have treated it like a little child: they have prescribed to it good behavior by frightening it with spirits and hobgoblins. Now that the growth of the human race is rapid, it is time to speak reason to it; it is time to prove to men that the springs of their improvement are to be found in their very organization, in the interest of their passions, and in all that composes their existence. It is time to demonstrate that morality is a physical and geometrical science, subject to the rules and calculations of the other mathematical sciences: and such is the advantage of the system expounded in this book, that the basis of morality being laid in it on the very nature of things, it is both constant and immutable; whereas, in all other theological systems, morality being built upon arbritary opinions, not demonstrable and often absurd, it changes, decays, expires with them, and leaves men in an absolute depravation. It is true that because our system is founded on facts and not on reveries, it will with much greater difficulty be extended and adopted: but it will derive strength from this very struggle, and sooner or later the eternal religion of Nature must overturn the transient religions of the human mind.
The first of these flaws has been obvious in all morality books. They only present a jumble of contradictory maxims, rules without reasons, and actions without motives. The intellectuals of humanity have treated it like a child: they’ve dictated good behavior by scaring it with ghosts and monsters. Now that humanity is growing rapidly, it’s time to speak sensibly; it’s time to show people that the keys to their improvement lie in their own nature, in the interests of their passions, and in everything that makes up their lives. It’s time to prove that morality is a physical and mathematical science, governed by the same rules and calculations as other math disciplines: and the advantage of the system laid out in this book is that its foundation of morality is rooted in the nature of things, making it constant and unchanging; whereas in all other theological systems, morality is based on arbitrary beliefs that are often unprovable and absurd, changing, decaying, and dying along with them, leaving people in complete moral decline. It’s true that our system, based on facts rather than fantasies, will be much harder to spread and accept: but it will gain strength from this very challenge, and sooner or later, the eternal religion of Nature will replace the fleeting religions of the human mind.
This book was published for the first time in 1793, under the title of The French Citizen's Catechism. It was at first intended for a national work, but as it may be equally well entitled the Catechism of men of sense and honor, it is to be hoped that it will become a book common to all Europe. It is possible that its brevity may prevent it from attaining the object of a popular classical work, but the author will be satisfied if he has at least the merit of pointing out the way to make a better.
This book was first published in 1793, under the title The French Citizen's Catechism. It was originally meant to be a national work, but since it could just as easily be called the Catechism of sensible and honorable people, it is hoped that it will become a common book across Europe. Its brevity might keep it from becoming a widely recognized classic, but the author will be content if he has at least succeeded in showing the way to create something better.
ADVERTISEMENT OF THE AMERICAN EDITION.
VOLNEY'S RUINS;
OR MEDITATION ON THE REVOLUTIONS OF EMPIRES.
OR MEDITATION ON THE REVOLUTIONS OF EMPIRES.
The superior merits of this work are too well known to require commendation; but as it is not generally known that there are in circulation three English translations of it, varying materially in regard to faithfulness and elegance of diction, the publisher of the present edition inserts the following extracts for the information of purchasers and readers:
The great qualities of this work are so well recognized that it doesn’t need praise; however, it’s not widely known that there are three English translations available, which differ significantly in terms of accuracy and style. The publisher of this edition includes the following excerpts to inform buyers and readers:
PARIS TRANSLATION,
First published in this Country by Dixon and Sickels.
INVOCATION.
Call to action.
Hail, solitary ruins! holy sepulchres, and silent walls! you I invoke; to you I address my prayer. While your aspect averts, with secret terror, the vulgar regard, it excites in my heart the charm of delicious sentiments—sublime contemplations. What useful lessons! what affecting and profound reflections you suggest to him who knows how to consult you. When the whole earth, in chains and silence, bowed the neck before its tyrants, you had already proclaimed the truths which they abhor, and confounding the dust of the king with that of the meanest slave, had announced to man the sacred dogma of Equality! Within your pale, in solitary adoration of Liberty, I saw her Genius arise from the mansions of the dead; not such as she is painted by the impassioned multitude, armed with fire and sword, but under the august aspect of justice, poising in her hand the sacred balance, wherein are weighed the actions of men at the gates of eternity.
Hail, lonely ruins! Holy burial sites and silent walls! I call on you; I direct my prayer to you. While your appearance turns away the common gaze with secret dread, it stirs in my heart the charm of wonderful feelings—lofty thoughts. What valuable lessons! What touching and deep reflections you offer to those who know how to seek your wisdom. When the whole world, in chains and silence, bowed to its oppressors, you had already proclaimed the truths they despised, merging the dust of kings with that of the lowest slave and declaring to humanity the sacred principle of Equality! Within your confines, in solitary worship of Liberty, I saw her spirit rise from the realms of the dead; not as the passionate crowd paints her, armed with fire and sword, but with the noble presence of justice, holding in her hand the sacred scale, where the deeds of men are weighed at the gates of eternity.
O Tombs! what virtues are yours! you appal the tyrant's heart, and poison with secret alarm his impious joys; he flies, with coward step, your incorruptible aspect, and erects afar his throne of insolence.
O Tombs! what virtues are yours! you terrify the tyrant’s heart and secretly spoil his wicked pleasures; he retreats, with a cowardly step, from your unyielding presence and sets up his throne of arrogance far away.
LONDON TRANSLATION.
INVOCATION.
Invocation.
Solitary ruins, sacred tombs, ye mouldering and silent walls, all hail! To you I address my invocation. While the vulgar shrink from your aspect with secret terror, my heart finds in the contemplation a thousand delicious sentiments, a thousand admirable recollections. Pregnant, I may truly call you, with useful lessons, with pathetic and irresistible advice to the man who knows how to consult you. A while ago the whole world bowed the neck in silence before the tyrants that oppressed it; and yet in that hopeless moment you already proclaimed the truths that tyrants hold in abhorrence: mixing the dust of the proudest kings with that of the meanest slaves, you called upon us to contemplate this example of Equality. From your caverns, whither the musing and anxious love of Liberty led me, I saw escape its venerable shade, and with unexpected felicity, direct its flight and marshal my steps the way to renovated France.
Lonely ruins, sacred tombs, you crumbling and quiet walls, all greetings to you! I direct my invocation to you. While the ordinary people recoil from your presence in fear, my heart discovers in your contemplation a thousand delightful feelings, a thousand wonderful memories. I can truly call you full of valuable lessons and moving, irresistible advice for those who know how to seek you out. Not long ago, the entire world silently bowed to the tyrants who oppressed it; yet in that desperate moment, you were already proclaiming the truths that tyrants detest: by mixing the dust of the proudest kings with that of the humblest slaves, you urged us to reflect on this example of Equality. From your depths, where the reflective and eager love of Liberty guided me, I saw the venerable spirit of Liberty emerge and, to my surprise, direct its course and lead my steps toward a renewed France.
Tombs! what virtues and potency do you exhibit! Tyrants tremble at your aspect—you poison with secret alarm their impious pleasures—they turn from you with impatience, and, coward like, endeavor to forget you amid the sumptuousness of their palaces.
Tombs! What virtues and power you showcase! Tyrants shudder at your presence—you secretly disturb their wicked pleasures—they avoid you with impatience, and like cowards, try to forget you in the luxury of their palaces.
PHILADELPHIA TRANSLATION.
INVOCATION.
Invocation.
Hail, ye solitary ruins, ye sacred tombs, and silent walls! 'Tis your auspicious aid that I invoke; 'tis to you my soul, wrapt in meditation, pours forth its prayers! What though the profane and vulgar mind shrinks with dismay from your august and awe-inspiring aspect; to me you unfold the sublimest charms of contemplation and sentiment, and offer to my senses the luxury of a thousand delicious and enchanting thoughts! How sumptuous the feast to a being that has a taste to relish, and an understanding to consult you! What rich and noble admonitions; what exquisite and pathetic lessons do you read to a heart that is susceptible of exalted feelings! When oppressed humanity bent in timid silence throughout the globe beneath the galling yoke of slavery, it was you that proclaimed aloud the birthright of those truths which tyrants tremble at while they detect, and which, by sinking the loftiest head of the proudest potentate, with all his boasted pageantry, to the level of mortality with his meanest slave, confirmed and ratified by your unerring testimony the sacred and immortal doctrine of Equality.
Hail, you lonely ruins, you sacred tombs, and quiet walls! I call upon your gracious help; it's to you my soul, deep in thought, sends forth its prayers! Even though the shallow and ordinary mind recoils in fear from your grand and awe-inspiring presence, you reveal to me the highest joys of reflection and feeling, and offer my senses the luxury of a thousand delightful and captivating thoughts! What a lavish feast for someone who has a taste to appreciate and an understanding to seek you out! What rich and noble guidance; what beautiful and moving lessons do you share with a heart that is open to deep emotions! When oppressed humanity bows in quiet fear under the cruel chains of slavery, it was you who loudly declared the birthright of those truths that tyrants dread when they recognize them, and which, by lowering the mightiest ruler, with all his flaunted glory, to the level of his lowest slave, confirmed and validated through your unwavering testimony the sacred and timeless principle of Equality.
Musing within the precincts of your inviting scenes of philosophic solitude, whither the insatiate love of true-born Liberty had led me, I beheld her Genius ascending, not in the spurious character and habit of a blood-thirsty Fury, armed with daggers and instruments of murder, and followed by a frantic and intoxicated multitude, but under the placid and chaste aspect of Justice, holding with a pure and unsullied hand the sacred scales in which the actions of mortals are weighed on the brink of eternity.
Thinking in the calm spaces of your welcoming scenes of thoughtful solitude, where my never-ending love for genuine Liberty brought me, I saw her spirit rising, not in the false form of a savage Fury, armed with daggers and tools of violence, and followed by a wild and drunken crowd, but as the serene and pure figure of Justice, holding with a clean and untarnished hand the sacred scales in which the deeds of humans are measured on the edge of eternity.
The first translation was made and published in London soon after the appearance of the work in French, and, by a late edition, is still adopted without alteration. Mr. Volney, when in this country in 1797, expressed his disapprobation of this translation, alleging that the translator must have been overawed by the government or clergy from rendering his ideas faithfully; and, accordingly, an English gentleman, then in Philadelphia, volunteered to correct this edition. But by his endeavors to give the true and full meaning of the author with great precision, he has so overloaded his composition with an exuberance of words, as in a great measure to dissipate the simple elegance and sublimity of the original. Mr. Volney, when he became better acquainted with the English language, perceived this defect; and with the aid of our countryman, Joel Barlow, made and published in Paris a new, correct, and elegant translation, of which the present edition is a faithful and correct copy.
The first translation was done and published in London shortly after the work came out in French, and a later edition is still used without any changes. Mr. Volney, when he was in this country in 1797, criticized this translation, claiming that the translator must have been intimidated by the government or clergy and couldn’t convey his ideas accurately. As a result, an English gentleman in Philadelphia offered to revise this edition. However, in his attempt to capture the true and full meaning of the author with great accuracy, he ended up overloading his writing with too many words, which largely took away from the simple elegance and greatness of the original. Once Mr. Volney became more familiar with the English language, he noticed this issue and, with the help of our fellow countryman, Joel Barlow, created and published a new, accurate, and elegant translation in Paris, of which this current edition is a faithful and correct copy.
CONTENTS
PREFACE OF THE LONDON EDITION.*
PREFACE OF THE AMERICAN EDITION.*
ADVERTISEMENT OF THE AMERICAN EDITION.
CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER II.
CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER V.
CHAPTER VI.
CHAPTER VII.
CHAPTER VIII.
CHAPTER IX.
CHAPTER X.
CHAPTER XI.
CHAPTER XII.
CHAPTER XIII.
CHAPTER XIV.
CHAPTER XV.
CHAPTER XVI.
CHAPTER XVII.
CHAPTER XVIII.
CHAPTER XIX.
CHAPTER XX.
CHAPTER XXI.
CHAPTER XXII.
CHAPTER XXIII.
CHAPTER XXIV.CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER II.
CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER V.
CHAPTER VI.
CHAPTER VII.
CHAPTER VIII.
CHAPTER IX.
CHAPTER X.
CHAPTER XI.
CHAPTER XII.
CONTENTS
PREFACE OF THE LONDON EDITION.*
PREFACE OF THE AMERICAN EDITION.*
ADVERTISEMENT OF THE AMERICAN EDITION.
CHAPTER I.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_10__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_11__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_12__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_13__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_14__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_15__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_16__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_17__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_18__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_19__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_20__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_21__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_22__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_23__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_24__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_25__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_26__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_27__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_28__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_29__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_30__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_31__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_32__CHAPTER I.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_35__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_36__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_37__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_38__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_39__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_40__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_41__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_42__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_43__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_44__
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_45__
LIFE OF VOLNEY
By Count Daru.
Constantine Francis Chassebeuf De Volney was born in 1757 at Craon, in that intermediate condition of life, which is of all the happiest, since it is deprived only of fortune's too dangerous favors, and can aspire to the social and intellectual advantages reserved for a laudable ambition.
Constantine Francis Chassebeuf De Volney was born in 1757 in Craon, in that middle-class situation, which is the happiest of all, since it lacks the risky favors of wealth and can aim for the social and intellectual benefits reserved for those with noble ambitions.
From his earliest youth, he devoted himself to the search after truth, without being disheartened by the serious studies which alone can initiate us into her secrets. After having become acquainted with the ancient languages, the natural sciences and history, and being admitted into the society of the most eminent literary characters, he submitted, at the age of twenty, to an illustrious academy, the solution of one of the most difficult problems that the history of antiquity has left open for discussion. This attempt received no encouragement from the learned men who were appointed his judges; and the author's only appeal from their sentence was to his courage and his efforts.
From a young age, he dedicated himself to the pursuit of truth, undeterred by the rigorous studies that are essential for uncovering its secrets. After studying ancient languages, natural sciences, and history, and joining the company of some of the most prominent literary figures, he presented, at just twenty years old, a solution to one of the toughest problems left unresolved in ancient history to a prestigious academy. However, this endeavor received no support from the scholars who judged him; the only recourse for the author against their verdict was his own determination and hard work.
Soon after, a small inheritance having fallen to his lot, the difficulty was how to spend it (these are his own words.) He resolved to employ it in acquiring, by a long voyage, a new fund of information, and determined to visit Egypt and Syria. But these countries could not be explored to advantage without a knowledge of the language. Our young traveller was not to be discouraged by this difficulty. Instead of learning Arabic in Europe, he withdrew to a convent of Copts, until he had made himself master of an idiom that is spoken by so many nations of the East. This resolution showed one of those undaunted spirits that remain unshaken amid the trials of life.
Soon after, a small inheritance came his way, and the challenge was how to spend it (these are his own words). He decided to use it to gain new knowledge through a long voyage and was determined to visit Egypt and Syria. However, exploring these countries effectively required knowledge of the language. Our young traveler refused to be discouraged by this obstacle. Rather than learning Arabic in Europe, he went to a convent of Copts until he mastered a language spoken by many nations in the East. This choice demonstrated one of those fearless spirits that remain steadfast amid life's challenges.
Although, like other travellers, he might have amused us with an account of his hardships and the perils surmounted by his courage, he overcame the temptation of interrupting his narrative by personal adventures. He disdained the beaten track. He does not tell us the road he took, the accidents he met with, or the impressions he received. He carefully avoids appearing upon the stage; he is an inhabitant of the country, who has long and well observed it, and who describes its physical, political, and moral state. The allusion would be entire if an old Arab could be supposed to possess all the erudition, all the European philosophy, which are found united and in their maturity in a traveller of twenty-five.
Although, like other travelers, he could have entertained us with stories about his struggles and the dangers he faced with bravery, he resisted the temptation to interrupt his narrative with personal adventures. He rejected the usual route. He doesn’t tell us the path he took, the accidents he encountered, or the impressions he gained. He deliberately avoids being the center of attention; instead, he’s a local who has observed his surroundings for a long time and offers a description of its physical, political, and moral state. The reference would be complete if one could imagine an old Arab possessing all the knowledge and European philosophy that are typically found together and fully developed in a traveler of twenty-five.
But though a master in all those artifices by which a narration is rendered interesting, the young man is not to be discerned in the pomp of labored descriptions. Although possessed of a lively and brilliant imagination, he is never found unwarily explaining by conjectural systems the physical or moral phenomena he describes. In his observations he unites prudence with science. With these two guides he judges with circumspection, and sometimes confesses himself unable to account for the effects he has made known to us.
But even though he's skilled in all those techniques that make a story interesting, the young man doesn't get lost in over-the-top descriptions. Despite having a vivid and impressive imagination, he never carelessly tries to explain the physical or moral events he talks about with unfounded theories. In his observations, he combines wisdom with knowledge. With these two guides, he makes careful judgments and sometimes admits that he can't fully explain the effects he's shared with us.
Thus his account has all the qualities that persuade—accuracy and candor. And when, ten years later, a vast military enterprise transported forty thousand travellers to the classic ground, which he had trod unattended, unarmed and unprotected, they all recognized a sure guide and an enlightened observer in the writer who had, as it seemed, only preceded them to remove or point out a part of the difficulties of the way.
Thus his account has all the qualities that convince—accuracy and honesty. And when, ten years later, a massive military operation transported forty thousand travelers to the historic ground he had walked alone, unarmed and unprotected, they all recognized a reliable guide and a keen observer in the writer who had, it seemed, only gone ahead to clear or highlight some of the obstacles in their path.
The unanimous testimony of all parties proved the accuracy of his account and the justness of his observations; and his Travels in Egypt and Syria were, by universal suffrage, recommended to the gratitude and the confidence of the public.
The unanimous testimony of everyone involved confirmed the accuracy of his account and the validity of his observations; and his Travels in Egypt and Syria were, by universal agreement, recommended to the gratitude and trust of the public.
Before the work had undergone this trial it had obtained in the learned world such a rapid and general success, that it found its way into Russia. The empress, then (in 1787) upon the throne, sent the author a medal, which he received with respect, as a mark of esteem for his talents, and with gratitude, as a proof of the approbation given to his principles. But when the empress declared against France, Volney sent back the honorable present, saying: "If I obtained it from her esteem, I can only preserve her esteem by returning it."
Before the work was put to this test, it had gained such quick and widespread success in the academic community that it made its way to Russia. The empress, who was on the throne in 1787, sent the author a medal, which he received respectfully as a recognition of his talents, and with gratitude as a sign of approval for his principles. However, when the empress took a stance against France, Volney returned the prestigious gift, stating: "If I earned it through her esteem, I can only maintain that esteem by giving it back."
The revolution of 1789, which had drawn upon France the menaces of Catharine, had opened to Volney a political career. As deputy in the assembly of the states-general, the first words he uttered there were in favor of the publicity of their deliberations. He also supported the organization of the national guards, and that of the communes and departments.
The revolution of 1789, which had brought threats from Catharine upon France, had launched Volney into a political career. As a deputy in the assembly of the states-general, his first words were in support of making their discussions public. He also endorsed the formation of the national guards, as well as that of the communes and departments.
At the period when the question of the sale of the domain lands was agitated (in 1790), he published an essay in which he lays down the following principles: "The force of a State is in proportion to its population; population is in proportion to plenty; plenty is in proportion to tillage; and tillage, to personal and immediate interest, that is to the spirit of property. Whence it follows, that the nearer the cultivator approaches the passive condition of a mercenary, the less industry and activity are to be expected from him; and, on the other hand, the nearer he is to the condition of a free and entire proprietor, the more extension he gives to his own forces, to the produce of his lands, and the general prosperity of the State."
At the time when the question of selling the public lands was being discussed (in 1790), he published an essay in which he states the following principles: "The strength of a State is linked to its population; population is linked to abundance; abundance is linked to farming; and farming is linked to personal and direct interest, which is the essence of property. Therefore, it follows that the closer the farmer is to the passive role of a hired worker, the less effort and activity we can expect from him; on the other hand, the closer he is to being a free and complete owner, the more he will expand his own capabilities, the productivity of his land, and the overall prosperity of the State."
The author draws this conclusion, that a State is so much the more powerful as it includes a greater number of proprietors,—that is, a greater division of property.
The author concludes that a state is more powerful when it has a larger number of owners—that is, a greater distribution of property.
Conducted into Corsica by that spirit of observation which belongs only to men whose information is varied and extensive, he perceived at the first glance all that could be done for the improvement of agriculture in that country: but he knew that, for a people firmly attached to ancient customs, there can exist no other demonstration or means of persuasion than example. He purchased a considerable estate, and made experiments on those kinds of tillage that he hoped to naturalize in that climate. The sugar-cane, cotton, indigo and coffee soon demonstrated the success of his efforts. This success drew upon him the notice of the government. He was appointed director of agriculture and commerce in that island, where, through ignorance, all new methods are introduced with such difficulty.
Brought to Corsica by his keen sense of observation, which only comes from having a wide range of knowledge, he quickly saw all the ways agriculture could be improved in that region. However, he understood that for a people deeply rooted in their traditional ways, the only effective demonstration or persuasion is through example. He bought a large estate and conducted experiments on the types of farming he hoped to adapt to that climate. Sugarcane, cotton, indigo, and coffee soon showed the success of his efforts. This success caught the attention of the government. He was appointed as the director of agriculture and commerce on the island, where ignorance makes it challenging to introduce any new methods.
It is impossible to calculate all the good that might have resulted from this peaceable magistracy; and we know that neither instruction, zeal, nor a persevering courage was wanting to him who had undertaken it. Of this he had given convincing proofs. It was in obedience to another sentiment, no less respectable, that he voluntarily interrupted the course of his labors. When his fellow citizens of Angers appointed him their deputy in the constituent assembly, he resigned the employment he held under government, upon the principle that no man can represent the nation and be dependent for a salary upon those by whom it is administered.
It’s impossible to quantify all the good that might have come from this peaceful magistracy; and we know that he lacked neither instruction, enthusiasm, nor persistent courage in taking it on. He showed convincing evidence of this. He voluntarily paused his work out of respect for another important sentiment. When his fellow citizens in Angers chose him as their deputy in the constituent assembly, he stepped down from his government position, believing that no one can truly represent the nation while being financially dependent on those who run it.
Through respect for the independence of his legislative functions, he had ceased to occupy the place he possessed in Corsica before his election, but he had not ceased to be a benefactor of that country. He returned thither after the session of the constituent assembly. Invited into that island by the principal inhabitants, who were anxious to put into practice his lessons, he spent there a part of the years 1792 and 1793.
Through respect for the independence of his legislative duties, he stopped holding the position he had in Corsica before his election, but he hadn’t stopped being a benefactor to that country. He went back there after the session of the constituent assembly. Invited to the island by the leading residents, who were eager to apply his teachings, he spent part of the years 1792 and 1793 there.
On his return he published a work entitled: An Account of the Present State of Corsica. This was an act of courage; for it was not a physical description, but a political review of the condition of a population divided into several factions and distracted by violent animosities. Volney unreservedly revealed the abuses, solicited the interest of France in favor of the Corsicans, without flattering them, and boldly denounced their defects and vices; so that the philosopher obtained the only recompense he could expect from his sincerity—he was accused by the Corsicans of heresy.
On his return, he published a work titled: An Account of the Present State of Corsica. This was a brave move; it wasn't just a physical description, but a political analysis of a population split into various factions and torn apart by intense rivalries. Volney openly exposed the abuses, sought France's interest in supporting the Corsicans without flattering them, and boldly called out their flaws and vices; as a result, the philosopher received the only reward he could expect for his honesty—he was accused by the Corsicans of heresy.
To prove that he had not merited this reproach, he published soon after a short treatise entitled: The Law of Nature, or Physical Principles of Morality.
To show that he didn't deserve this criticism, he soon published a short essay called: The Law of Nature, or Physical Principles of Morality.
He was soon exposed to a much more dangerous charge, and this, it must be confessed, he did merit. This philosopher, this worthy citizen, who in our first National assembly had seconded with his wishes and his talents the establishment of an order of things which he considered favorable to the happiness of his country, was accused of not being sincerely attached to that liberty for which he had contended; that is to say, of being averse to anarchy. An imprisonment of ten months, which only ended after the 9th of Thermidor, was a new trial reserved for his courage.
He was soon faced with a much more serious accusation, and it must be admitted, he actually deserved it. This philosopher, this upstanding citizen, who had supported the creation of a system he believed would benefit his country's happiness during our first National Assembly with his efforts and skills, was accused of not being truly committed to the liberty he had fought for; in other words, of being against anarchy. A ten-month imprisonment, which only ended after the 9th of Thermidor, was a new test of his courage.
The moment at which he recovered his liberty, was when the horror inspired by criminal excesses had recalled men to those noble sentiments which fortunately are one of the first necessaries of civilized life. They sought for consolations in study and literature after so many misfortunes, and organized a plan of public instruction.
The moment he regained his freedom was when the fear caused by criminal actions reminded people of those noble feelings that are essential for civilized life. They looked for comfort in study and literature after so many hardships and set up a plan for public education.
It was in the first place necessary to insure the aptitude of those to whom education should be confided; but as the systems were various, the best methods and a unity of doctrine were to be determined. It was not enough to interrogate the masters, they were to be formed, new ones were to be created, and for that purpose a school was opened in 1794, wherein the celebrity of the professors promised new instruction even to the best informed. This was not, as was objected, beginning the edifice at the roof, but creating architects, who were to superintend all the arts requisite for constructing the building.
It was crucial to ensure that those entrusted with education were qualified; however, since there were different systems in place, the best methods and a unified approach needed to be established. It wasn't enough to just question the teachers; they needed to be trained, and new ones had to be developed. To achieve this, a school was opened in 1794, where the reputation of the professors promised to offer new insights even to those who were already well-informed. This was not, as some claimed, starting from the top down, but rather creating the architects who would oversee all the necessary skills for building the foundation.
The more difficult their functions were, the greater care was to be taken in the choice of the professors; but France, though then accused of being plunged in barbarism, possessed men of transcendent talents, already enjoying the esteem of all Europe, and we may be bold to say, that by their labors, our literary glory had likewise extended its conquests. Their names were proclaimed by the public voice, and Volney's was associated with those of the men most illustrious in science and in literature.*
The more challenging their roles were, the more careful they had to be in choosing the professors; but France, although then criticized for being in a state of barbarism, had individuals of exceptional talent, already respected across Europe. We can confidently say that through their work, our literary achievements also expanded. Their names were recognized by the public, and Volney's was mentioned alongside those of the most distinguished figures in science and literature.*
* Lagrange, Laplace, Berthollet, Garat, Bernardin de Saint- Pierre, Daubenton, Hauy, Volney, Sicard, Monge, Thouin, La Harpe, Buache Mentelle.
* Lagrange, Laplace, Berthollet, Garat, Bernardin de Saint-Pierre, Daubenton, Hauy, Volney, Sicard, Monge, Thouin, La Harpe, Buache Mentelle.
This institution, however, did not answer the expectations that had been formed of it, because the two thousand students that assembled from all parts of France were not equally prepared to receive these transcendent lessons, and because it had not been sufficiently ascertained how far the theory of education should be kept distinct from education itself.
This institution, however, did not meet the expectations placed on it, because the two thousand students gathered from all over France were not equally prepared to absorb these exceptional lessons, and because it had not been clearly established how much the theory of education should be kept separate from actual education.
Volney's Lectures on History, which were attended by an immense concourse of auditors, became one of his chief claims to literary glory. When forced to interrupt them, by the suppression of the Normal school, he might have reasonably expected to enjoy in his retirement that consideration which his recent functions had added to his name. But, disgusted with the scenes he had witnessed in his native land, he felt that passion revive within him which, in his youth, had led him to visit Africa and Asia. America, civilized within a century, and free only within a few years, fixed his attention. There every thing was new,—the inhabitants, the constitution, the earth itself. These were objects worthy of his observation. When embarking for this voyage, however, he felt emotions very different from those which formerly accompanied him into Turkey. Then in the prime of life, he joyfully bid adieu to a land where peace and plenty reigned, to travel amongst barbarians; now, mature in years, but dismayed at the spectacle and experience of injustice and persecution, it was with diffidence, as we learn from himself, that he went to implore from a free people an asylum for a sincere friend of that liberty that had been so profaned.
Volney's Lectures on History, which drew a huge audience, became one of his main accomplishments in the literary world. When he had to stop them due to the closure of the Normal school, he might have reasonably expected to enjoy the respect that his recent contributions had brought to his name during his retirement. However, frustrated by the scenes he had witnessed in his homeland, he felt the old passion stir within him that had once driven him to explore Africa and Asia. America, developed in just a century and newly free, captured his attention. Everything there was new—the people, the Constitution, the very land itself. These were all worthy subjects for his study. Yet, as he set out on this journey, he felt emotions very different from those that had accompanied him on his previous trip to Turkey. Back then, in the prime of life, he had happily said goodbye to a land of peace and prosperity to travel among what he saw as savages; now, older and disheartened by the injustice and persecution he had witnessed, he approached a free people with hesitation, as he noted himself, seeking refuge for a true advocate of the freedom that had been so trampled.
Our traveller had gone to seek for repose beyond the seas. He there found himself exposed to aggression from a celebrated philosopher, Dr. Priestley. Although the subject of this discussion was confined to the investigation of some speculative opinions, published by the French writer in his work entitled The Ruins, the naturalist in this attack employed a degree of violence which added nothing to the force of his arguments, and an acrimony of expression not to be expected from a philosopher. M. Volney, though accused of Hottentotism and ignorance, preserved in his defence, all the advantages that the scurrility of his adversary gave over him. He replied in English, and Priestley's countrymen could only recognize the Frenchman in the refinement and politeness of his answer.
Our traveler went abroad to find some peace. There, he faced criticism from a well-known philosopher, Dr. Priestley. Even though their discussion was just about some speculative ideas published by the French writer in his book, The Ruins, the naturalist attacked with a level of aggression that didn’t add to his arguments, and a harsh tone that was unexpected from a philosopher. M. Volney, despite being accused of ignorance and lack of understanding, managed to maintain all the advantages that his opponent's insults provided him. He responded in English, and Priestley’s fellow countrymen could only see the Frenchman in the elegance and politeness of his reply.
Whilst M. Volney was travelling in America, there had been formed in France a literary body which, under the name of Institute, had attained in a very few years a distinguished rank amongst the learned societies of Europe. The name of the illustrious traveller was inscribed in it at its formation, and he acquired new rights to the academical honors conferred on him during his absence, by the publication of his observations On the Climate and Soil of the United States.
While M. Volney was traveling in America, a literary group called the Institute was established in France and quickly gained a prominent position among the learned societies in Europe. The name of the renowned traveler was added at its inception, and he earned further rights to the academic honors awarded to him during his time away through the publication of his observations On the Climate and Soil of the United States.
These rights were further augmented by the historical and physiological labors of the Academician. An examination and justification of The Chronology of Herodotus, with numerous and profound researches on The History of the most Ancient Nations, occupied for a long time him who had observed their monuments and traces in the countries they inhabited. The trial he had made of the utility of the Oriental languages inspired him with an ardent desire to propagate the knowledge of them; and to be propagated, he felt how necessary it was to render it less difficult. In this view he conceived the project of applying to the study of the idioms of Asia, a part of the grammatical notions we possess concerning the languages of Europe. It only appertains to those conversant with their relations of dissimilitude or conformity to appreciate the possibility of realizing this system. The author has, however, already received the most flattering encouragement and the most unequivocal appreciation, by the inscription of his name amongst the members of the learned and illustrious society founded by English commerce in the Indian peninsula.
These rights were further enhanced by the historical and scientific work of the Academician. An examination and justification of The Chronology of Herodotus, along with extensive research on The History of the most Ancient Nations, occupied the one who had studied their monuments and remnants in the regions they lived in for a long time. His exploration of the usefulness of the Oriental languages sparked a strong desire in him to spread this knowledge; he recognized that for it to spread, it was essential to make it less challenging. With this in mind, he came up with the idea of applying part of the grammatical concepts we have about European languages to the study of Asian languages. Only those familiar with their differences or similarities can truly appreciate the feasibility of implementing this system. However, the author has already received significant praise and clear recognition through the inclusion of his name among the members of the esteemed learned society established by English trade in the Indian subcontinent.
M. Volney developed his system in three works,* which prove that this idea of uniting nations separated by immense distances and such various idioms, had never ceased to occupy him for twenty-five years. Lest those essays, of the utility of which he was persuaded, should be interrupted by his death, with the clay-cold hand that corrected his last work, he drew up a will which institutes a premium for the prosecution of his labors. Thus he prolonged, beyond the term of a life entirely devoted to letters, the glorious services he had rendered to them.
M. Volney developed his system in three works,* which show that the idea of bringing together nations separated by vast distances and different languages had been on his mind for twenty-five years. To ensure that his essays, which he believed were valuable, wouldn't be cut short by his death, he prepared a will with the cold hand that had just finished his last work, establishing a reward for continuing his efforts. In this way, he extended the remarkable contributions he made to literature beyond his life dedicated to it.
* On the Simplification of Oriental Languages, 1795. The European Alphabet Applied to the Languages of Asia, 1819. Hebrew Simplified, 1820.
* On the Simplification of Oriental Languages, 1795. The European Alphabet Applied to the Languages of Asia, 1819. Hebrew Simplified, 1820.
This is not the place, nor does it belong to me to appreciate the merit of the writings which render Volney's name illustrious. His name had been inscribed in the list of the Senate, and afterwards of the House of Peers. The philosopher who had travelled in the four quarters of the world, and observed their social state, had other titles to his admission into this body, than his literary glory. His public life, his conduct in the constituent assembly, his independent principles, the nobleness of his sentiments, the wisdom and fixity of his opinions, had gained him the esteem of those who can be depended upon, and with whom it is so agreeable to discuss political interests.
This is neither the right place nor my role to evaluate the value of the works that have made Volney's name famous. He had been listed in the Senate and later in the House of Peers. The philosopher who traveled around the world and observed various societies had more qualifications for joining this body than just his literary fame. His public service, his actions in the constituent assembly, his independent beliefs, the nobility of his ideas, and the wisdom and consistency of his views earned him the respect of reliable individuals with whom it's pleasant to discuss political matters.
Although no man had a better right to have an opinion, no one was more tolerant for the opinions of others. In State assemblies as well as in Academical meetings, the man whose counsels were so wise, voted according to his conscience, which nothing could bias; but the philosopher forgot his superiority to hear, to oppose with moderation, and sometimes to doubt. The extent and variety of his information, the force of his reason, the austerity of his manners, and the noble simplicity of his character, had procured him illustrious friends in both hemispheres; and now that this erudition is extinct in the tomb,* we may be allowed at least to predict that he was one of the very few whose memory shall never die.
Although no one had a better right to have an opinion, no one was more tolerant of the opinions of others. In state assemblies and academic meetings, the man whose advice was so wise voted according to his conscience, which nothing could sway; but the philosopher overlooked his superiority to listen, to oppose with moderation, and sometimes to even doubt. The breadth and variety of his knowledge, the strength of his reasoning, the seriousness of his demeanor, and the noble simplicity of his character earned him esteemed friends across both hemispheres; and now that this knowledge is buried in the grave,* we can at least predict that he was one of the very few whose memory will never fade.
* He died in Paris on the 20th of April, 1820.
* He passed away in Paris on April 20, 1820.
A list of the Works Published by Count Volney.
A list of the works published by Count Volney.
TRAVELS IN EGYPT AND SYRIA during the years 1783, 1784, and 1785: 2 vols. 8vo.—1787.
TRAVELS IN EGYPT AND SYRIA from the years 1783, 1784, and 1785: 2 volumes. 8vo.—1787.
CHRONOLOGY OF THE TWELVE CENTURIES that preceded the entrance of Xerxes into Greece.
CHRONOLOGY OF THE TWELVE CENTURIES that came before Xerxes' entry into Greece.
CONSIDERATIONS ON THE TURKISH WAR, in 1788.
CONSIDERATIONS ON THE TURKISH WAR, in 1788.
THE RUINS, or Meditations on the Revolutions of Empires—1791.
THE RUINS, or Meditations on the Revolutions of Empires—1791.
ACCOUNT OF THE PRESENT STATE OF CORSICA—1793.
ACCOUNT OF THE PRESENT STATE OF CORSICA—1793.
THE LAW OF NATURE, or Physical Principles of Morality—1793.
THE LAW OF NATURE, or Physical Principles of Morality—1793.
ON THE SIMPLIFICATION OF ORIENTAL LANGUAGES—1795. A LETTER TO DR. PRIESTLEY—1797.
ON THE SIMPLIFICATION OF ORIENTAL LANGUAGES—1795. A LETTER TO DR. PRIESTLEY—1797.
LECTURES ON HISTORY, delivered at the Normal School in the year 3—1800.
LECTURES ON HISTORY, delivered at the Normal School in the year 3—1800.
ON THE CLIMATE AND SOIL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, to which is added an account of Florida, of the French colony of Scioto, of some Canadian Colonies, and of the Savages—1803.
ON THE CLIMATE AND SOIL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, to which is added a description of Florida, the French colony of Scioto, some Canadian colonies, and the Indigenous peoples—1803.
REPORT MADE TO THE CELTIC ACADEMY ON THE RUSSIAN WORK OF PROFESSOR PALLAS, entitled "A Comparative Vocabulary of all the Languages in the World."
REPORT MADE TO THE CELTIC ACADEMY ON THE RUSSIAN WORK OF PROFESSOR PALLAS, titled "A Comparative Vocabulary of all the Languages in the World."
THE CHRONOLOGY OF HERODOTUS conformable with his Text—1808 and 1809.
THE CHRONOLOGY OF HERODOTUS in line with his Text—1808 and 1809.
NEW RESEARCHES ON ANCIENT HISTORY, 3 vols. 8vo.—1814
NEW RESEARCHES ON ANCIENT HISTORY, 3 volumes. 8vo.—1814
THE EUROPEAN ALPHABET Applied to the Languages of Asia—1819.
THE EUROPEAN ALPHABET Applied to the Languages of Asia—1819.
A HISTORY OF SAMUEL—1819. HEBREW SIMPLIFIED—1820. INVOCATION.
A HISTORY OF SAMUEL—1819. HEBREW SIMPLIFIED—1820. INVOCATION.
Hail solitary ruins, holy sepulchres and silent walls! you I invoke; to you I address my prayer. While your aspect averts, with secret terror, the vulgar regard, it excites in my heart the charm of delicious sentiments—sublime contemplations. What useful lessons, what affecting and profound reflections you suggest to him who knows how to consult you! When the whole earth, in chains and silence bowed the neck before its tyrants, you had already proclaimed the truths which they abhor; and confounding the dust of the king with that of the meanest slave, had announced to man the sacred dogma of Equality. Within your pale, in solitary adoration of Liberty, I saw her Genius arise from the mansions of the dead; not such as she is painted by the impassioned multitude, armed with fire and sword, but under the august aspect of Justice, poising in her hand the sacred balance wherein are weighed the actions of men at the gates of eternity!
Hail, lonely ruins, sacred tombs, and silent walls! I call upon you; I direct my prayer to you. While your appearance deters the ordinary gaze with its hidden dread, it stirs within me the pleasure of beautiful feelings—lofty reflections. What valuable lessons, what moving and deep thoughts you offer to those who know how to seek your wisdom! When the entire world bowed in chains and silence before its oppressors, you had already revealed the truths they despise; and by mixing the dust of kings with that of the poorest slave, you declared the sacred principle of Equality. Within your presence, in solitary worship of Liberty, I saw her Spirit rise from the dwellings of the dead; not as she is depicted by the passionate crowd, armed with fire and sword, but in the noble guise of Justice, holding in her hand the sacred scales where the actions of men are measured at the gates of eternity!
O Tombs! what virtues are yours! You appal the tyrant's heart, and poison with secret alarm his impious joys. He flies, with coward step, your incorruptible aspect, and erects afar his throne of insolence.* You punish the powerful oppressor; you wrest from avarice and extortion their ill-gotten gold, and you avenge the feeble whom they have despoiled; you compensate the miseries of the poor by the anxieties of the rich; you console the wretched, by opening to him a last asylum from distress; and you give to the soul that just equipoise of strength and sensibility which constitutes wisdom—the true science of life. Aware that all must return to you, the wise man loadeth not himself with the burdens of grandeur and of useless wealth: he restrains his desires within the limits of justice; yet, knowing that he must run his destined course of life, he fills with employment all its hours, and enjoys the comforts that fortune has allotted him. You thus impose on the impetuous sallies of cupidity a salutary rein! you calm the feverish ardor of enjoyments which disturb the senses; you free the soul from the fatiguing conflict of the passions; elevate it above the paltry interests which torment the crowd; and surveying, from your commanding position, the expanse of ages and nations, the mind is only accessible to the great affections—to the solid ideas of virtue and of glory.
O tombs! What virtues you have! You frighten the tyrant’s heart and secretly poison his wicked joys. He flees, with a cowardly step, from your unyielding presence and builds his throne of arrogance far away. You punish the powerful oppressors; you take back the stolen gold from greed and exploitation, and you avenge the weak whom they have robbed; you offset the suffering of the poor with the anxieties of the rich; you comfort the miserable by giving them a final refuge from distress; and you provide the soul with the perfect balance of strength and sensitivity that defines wisdom—the real understanding of life. Knowing that everyone must return to you, the wise person doesn’t burden themselves with ambitions for power or useless wealth: they keep their desires within the boundaries of fairness; yet, understanding that they must follow their predetermined path in life, they fill every hour with meaningful activity and appreciate the comforts that fate has given them. You therefore impose a healthy restraint on the reckless impulses of greed! You soothe the restless desire for pleasures that disturb the senses; you liberate the soul from the exhausting struggle of the passions; you lift it above the petty concerns that torment the masses; and by viewing, from your elevated position, the broad sweep of ages and nations, the mind is only open to deep connections—to the enduring principles of virtue and glory.
* The cathedral of St. Denis is the tomb of the kings of France; and it was because the towers of that edifice are seen from the Castle of St. Germain, that Louis XIV. quitted that admirable residence, and established a new one in the savage forests of Versailles. (This note, like many others, has been omitted from the American editions. It seems pertinent to the subject, and is explanatory of the text.—Pub.)
* The cathedral of St. Denis is the burial place of the kings of France, and it was because the towers of this building can be seen from the Castle of St. Germain that Louis XIV left that wonderful residence and set up a new one in the dense forests of Versailles. (This note, like many others, has been omitted from the American editions. It seems relevant to the subject and helps explain the text.—Pub.)
Ah! when the dream of life is over, what will then avail all its agitations, if not one trace of utility remains behind?
Ah! When the dream of life is over, what will all its struggles mean if there’s not even a trace of usefulness left behind?
O Ruins! to your school I will return! I will seek again the calm of your solitudes; and there, far from the afflicting spectacle of the passions, I will cherish in remembrance the love of man, I will employ myself on the means of effecting good for him, and build my own happiness on the promotion of his.
O Ruins! I will come back to your sanctuary! I will look for the peace of your quietness again; and there, away from the painful display of emotions, I will hold onto the memory of love for humanity. I will focus on ways to do good for others and build my own happiness by promoting theirs.
CHAPTER I.
THE JOURNEY.
In the eleventh year of the reign of Abd-ul-Hamid, son of Ahmid, emperor of the Turks; when the Nogais-Tartars were driven from the Crimea, and a Mussulman prince of the blood of Gengis-Kahn became the vassal and guard of a Christian woman and queen,* I was travelling in the Ottoman dominions, and through those provinces which were anciently the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria.
In the eleventh year of Abd-ul-Hamid's reign, son of Ahmid, emperor of the Turks, when the Nogai Tartars were pushed out of Crimea, and a Muslim prince from the lineage of Gengis Khan became the vassal and protector of a Christian queen,* I was traveling through the Ottoman Empire and the regions that were once the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria.
* In the eleventh year of Abd-ul-Hamid, that is 1784 of the Christian era, and 1198 of the Hegira. The emigration of the Tartars took place in March, immediately on the manifesto of the empress, declaring the Crimea to be incorporated with Russia. The Mussulman prince of the blood of Gengis-khan was Chahin-Guerai. Gengis-Khan was borne and served by the kings whom he conquered: Chahin, on the contrary, after selling his country for a pension of eighty thousand roubles, accepted the commission of captain of guards to Catherine II. He afterwards returned home, and according to custom was strangled by the Turks.
* In the eleventh year of Abd-ul-Hamid, which is 1784 in the Gregorian calendar and 1198 in the Hegira calendar. The migration of the Tartars occurred in March, right after the empress announced that Crimea was now part of Russia. The Muslim prince from the Genghis Khan lineage was Chahin-Guerai. While Genghis Khan was prestigious and served by the kings he defeated, Chahin, on the other hand, sold his homeland for a pension of eighty thousand roubles and took on the role of captain of the guards for Catherine II. He later returned home and, as was customary, was executed by strangulation by the Turks.
My whole attention bent on whatever concerns the happiness of man in a social state, I visited cities, and studied the manners of their inhabitants; entered palaces, and observed the conduct of those who govern; wandered over fields, and examined the condition of those who cultivated them: and nowhere perceiving aught but robbery and devastation, tyranny and wretchedness, my heart was oppressed with sorrow and indignation.
My full attention focused on anything related to human happiness in society, I visited cities and studied the behaviors of their residents; entered palaces and observed how those in power acted; roamed through fields and looked into the lives of the people who worked them. And seeing nothing but theft and destruction, oppression and misery, my heart was weighed down with sadness and anger.
I saw daily on my road fields abandoned, villages deserted, and cities in ruin. Often I met with ancient monuments, wrecks of temples, palaces and fortresses, columns, aqueducts and tombs. This spectacle led me to meditate on times past, and filled my mind with contemplations the most serious and profound.
I saw every day on my way abandoned fields, deserted villages, and ruined cities. Often, I came across ancient monuments, the remains of temples, palaces, and fortresses, along with columns, aqueducts, and tombs. This sight made me reflect on the past and filled my mind with the most serious and profound thoughts.
Arrived at the city of Hems, on the border of the Orontes, and being in the neighborhood of Palmyra of the desert, I resolved to visit its celebrated ruins. After three days journeying through arid deserts, having traversed the Valley of Caves and Sepulchres, on issuing into the plain, I was suddenly struck with a scene of the most stupendous ruins—a countless multitude of superb columns, stretching in avenues beyond the reach of sight. Among them were magnificent edifices, some entire, others in ruins; the earth every where strewed with fragments of cornices, capitals, shafts, entablatures, pilasters, all of white marble, and of the most exquisite workmanship. After a walk of three-quarters of an hour along these ruins, I entered the enclosure of a vast edifice, formerly a temple dedicated to the Sun; and accepting the hospitality of some poor Arabian peasants, who had built their hovels on the area of the temple, I determined to devote some days to contemplate at leisure the beauty of these stupendous ruins.
I arrived in the city of Hems, on the border of the Orontes, and since I was near the desert's Palmyra, I decided to check out its famous ruins. After three days of traveling through dry deserts and crossing the Valley of Caves and Tombs, I emerged into the plain and was immediately struck by the incredible scene of vast ruins—an endless array of magnificent columns stretching in avenues as far as I could see. Among them stood grand buildings, some intact and others in ruins; the ground was covered with pieces of cornices, capitals, shafts, entablatures, pilasters, all made of white marble and crafted with exquisite skill. After walking for about three-quarters of an hour through these ruins, I entered the area of a large structure that used to be a temple dedicated to the Sun. Accepting the hospitality of some poor Arabian farmers who had built their homes on the temple grounds, I decided to spend a few days enjoying the beauty of these remarkable ruins at my leisure.
Daily I visited the monuments which covered the plain; and one evening, absorbed in reflection, I had advanced to the Valley of Sepulchres. I ascended the heights which surround it from whence the eye commands the whole group of ruins and the immensity of the desert. The sun had sunk below the horizon: a red border of light still marked his track behind the distant mountains of Syria; the full-orbed moon was rising in the east, on a blue ground, over the plains of the Euphrates; the sky was clear, the air calm and serene; the dying lamp of day still softened the horrors of approaching darkness; the refreshing night breezes attempered the sultry emanations from the heated earth; the herdsmen had given their camels to repose, the eye perceived no motion on the dusky and uniform plain; profound silence rested on the desert; the howlings only of the jackal,* and the solemn notes of the bird of night, were heard at distant intervals. Darkness now increased, and through the dusk could only be discerned the pale phantasms of columns and walls. The solitude of the place, the tranquillity of the hour, the majesty of the scene, impressed on my mind a religious pensiveness. The aspect of a great city deserted, the memory of times past, compared with its present state, all elevated my mind to high contemplations. I sat on the shaft of a column, my elbow reposing on my knee, and head reclining on my hand, my eyes fixed, sometimes on the desert, sometimes on the ruins, and fell into a profound reverie.
Every day, I visited the monuments scattered across the plain; and one evening, lost in thought, I made my way to the Valley of Sepulchres. I climbed the heights surrounding it, from where I could see the entire collection of ruins and the vastness of the desert. The sun had set below the horizon: a red edge of light still traced its path behind the distant mountains of Syria; the full moon was rising in the east, against a blue backdrop, over the plains of the Euphrates; the sky was clear, and the air was calm and peaceful; the fading light of day still softened the terrors of the looming darkness; the refreshing night breezes tempered the heat rising from the sun-baked ground; the herdsmen had let their camels rest, and there was no movement visible on the dim, uniform plain; deep silence enveloped the desert; only the distant howls of jackals and the solemn calls of the night bird broke the quiet at intervals. As darkness deepened, only the pale outlines of columns and walls could be seen through the gloom. The solitude of the place, the tranquility of the hour, the grandeur of the scene, imbued my mind with a spiritual contemplation. The image of a once-great, now-abandoned city, combined with memories of the past and its current state, lifted my thoughts to lofty reflections. I sat on a column's shaft, resting my elbow on my knee and my head on my hand, my eyes fixed alternately on the desert and on the ruins, and slipped into a deep reverie.
* An animal resembling a dog and a fox. It preys on other small animals, and upon the bodies of the dead on the field of battle. It is the Canis aureus of Linnaeus.
* An animal that looks like a dog and a fox. It hunts other small animals and feeds on the bodies of the dead on the battlefield. It is the Canis aureus of Linnaeus.
CHAPTER II.
THE REVERIE.
Here, said I, once flourished an opulent city; here was the seat of a powerful empire. Yes! these places now so wild and desolate, were once animated by a living multitude; a busy crowd thronged in these streets, now so solitary. Within these walls, where now reigns the silence of death, the noise of the arts, and the shouts of joy and festivity incessantly resounded; these piles of marble were regular palaces; these fallen columns adorned the majesty of temples; these ruined galleries surrounded public places. Here assembled a numerous people for the sacred duties of their religion, and the anxious cares of their subsistence; here industry, parent of enjoyments, collected the riches of all climes, and the purple of Tyre was exchanged for the precious thread of Serica;* the soft tissues of Cassimere for the sumptuous tapestry of Lydia; the amber of the Baltic for the pearls and perfumes of Arabia; the gold of Ophir for the tin of Thule.
Here, I said, once stood a wealthy city; here was the center of a powerful empire. Yes! these places that are now so wild and desolate were once alive with a bustling crowd; a busy throng filled these now lonely streets. Within these walls, where silence now reigns like death, the sounds of art and the cheers of joy and celebration constantly echoed; these marble structures were grand palaces; these fallen columns adorned the elegance of temples; these ruined galleries surrounded public spaces. Here, a large population gathered for their sacred religious duties and the daily struggles for survival; here, industry, the mother of enjoyment, brought together the riches of every corner of the world, and the purple dye from Tyre was traded for the precious silk from Serica; the soft fabrics from Cashmere for the luxurious tapestries of Lydia; the amber from the Baltic for the pearls and fragrances of Arabia; the gold from Ophir for the tin from Thule.
* The precious thread of Serica.—That is, the silk originally derived from the mountainous country where the great wall terminates, and which appears to have been the cradle of the Chinese empire. The tissues of Cassimere.— The shawls which Ezekiel seems to have described under the appellation of Choud-choud. The gold of Ophir.—This country, which was one of the twelve Arab cantons, and which has so much and so unsuccessfully been sought for by the antiquarians, has left, however, some trace of itself in Ofor, in the province of Oman, upon the Persian Gulf, neighboring on one side to the Sabeans, who are celebrated by Strabo for their abundance of gold, and on the other to Aula or Hevila, where the pearl fishery was carried on. See the 27th chapter of Ezekiel, which gives a very curious and extensive picture of the commerce of Asia at that period.
* The precious thread of Serica.—That is, the silk originally from the mountainous region where the Great Wall ends, and which seems to have been the birthplace of the Chinese empire. The fabrics of Cassimere.—The shawls that Ezekiel seems to describe using the name Choud-choud. The gold of Ophir.—This region, which was one of the twelve Arab cantons and has been extensively and unsuccessfully searched for by historians, still has some remnants in Ofor, in the province of Oman, near the Persian Gulf, next to the Sabeans, who Strabo noted for their wealth of gold, and on the other side to Aula or Hevila, where pearl fishing took place. See the 27th chapter of Ezekiel, which provides a fascinating and detailed view of trade in Asia during that time.
And now behold what remains of this powerful city: a miserable skeleton! What of its vast domination: a doubtful and obscure remembrance! To the noisy concourse which thronged under these porticoes, succeeds the solitude of death. The silence of the grave is substituted for the busy hum of public places; the affluence of a commercial city is changed into wretched poverty; the palaces of kings have become a den of wild beasts; flocks repose in the area of temples, and savage reptiles inhabit the sanctuary of the gods. Ah! how has so much glory been eclipsed? how have so many labors been annihilated? Do thus perish then the works of men—thus vanish empires and nations?
And now look at what’s left of this powerful city: a sad shell! What happened to its vast power: just a doubtful and obscure memory! The noisy crowds that once filled these porticoes are replaced by the silence of death. The quiet of the grave has taken the place of the lively buzz of public spaces; the wealth of a thriving city has turned into miserable poverty; the palaces of kings have become a lair for wild beasts; flocks rest in the area of temples, and wild reptiles live in the sanctuaries of the gods. Ah! How has so much glory faded? How have so many efforts been destroyed? Do the works of men really perish like this—do empires and nations just vanish away?
And the history of former times revived in my mind; I remembered those ancient ages when many illustrious nations inhabited these countries; I figured to myself the Assyrian on the banks of the Tygris, the Chaldean on the banks of the Euphrates, the Persian reigning from the Indus to the Mediterranean. I enumerated the kingdoms of Damascus and Idumea, of Jerusalem and Samaria, the warlike states of the Philistines, and the commercial republics of Phoenicia. This Syria, said I, now so depopulated, then contained a hundred flourishing cities, and abounded with towns, villages, and hamlets.* In all parts were seen cultivated fields, frequented roads, and crowded habitations. Ah! whither have flown those ages of life and abundance?—whither vanished those brilliant creations of human industry? Where are those ramparts of Nineveh, those walls of Babylon, those palaces of Persepolis, those temples of Balbec and of Jerusalem? Where are those fleets of Tyre, those dock-yards of Arad, those work-shops of Sidon, and that multitude of sailors, of pilots, of merchants, and of soldiers? Where those husbandmen, harvests, flocks, and all the creation of living beings in which the face of the earth rejoiced? Alas! I have passed over this desolate land! I have visited the palaces, once the scene of so much splendor, and I beheld nothing but solitude and desolation. I sought the ancient inhabitants and their works, and found nothing but a trace, like the foot-prints of a traveller over the sand. The temples are fallen, the palaces overthrown, the ports filled up, the cities destroyed; and the earth, stripped of inhabitants, has become a place of sepulchres. Great God! whence proceed such fatal revolutions? What causes have so changed the fortunes of these countries? Wherefore are so many cities destroyed? Why has not this ancient population been reproduced and perpetuated?
And the history of the past came back to me; I remembered those ancient times when many prominent nations lived in these regions; I imagined the Assyrian by the banks of the Tigris, the Chaldean along the Euphrates, and the Persian ruling from the Indus to the Mediterranean. I listed the kingdoms of Damascus and Idumea, Jerusalem and Samaria, the warrior states of the Philistines, and the trading republics of Phoenicia. This Syria, I thought, now so empty, once had a hundred thriving cities and was full of towns, villages, and small communities. Everywhere there were cultivated fields, busy roads, and crowded homes. Ah! Where have those vibrant times of plenty gone? — Where did those brilliant achievements of human effort disappear to? Where are the walls of Nineveh, the fortifications of Babylon, the palaces of Persepolis, and the temples of Baalbek and Jerusalem? Where are the fleets of Tyre, the shipyards of Arad, the workshops of Sidon, and all those sailors, pilots, merchants, and soldiers? Where are the farmers, the harvests, the flocks, and all the living creatures that once made the earth joyful? Alas! I have crossed this barren land! I have explored the palaces that were once so grand, and all I found was loneliness and ruin. I searched for the ancient people and their creations and discovered nothing but a trace, like footprints left by a traveler on the sand. The temples have crumbled, the palaces have fallen, the ports have been filled in, the cities have been destroyed; and the earth, stripped of its people, has turned into a graveyard. Great God! What brings about such devastating changes? What causes have so altered the fate of these lands? Why have so many cities been wiped out? Why hasn’t this ancient population been restored and carried on?
* According to Josephus and Strabo, there were in Syria twelve millions of souls, and the traces that remain of culture and habitation confirm the calculation.
* According to Josephus and Strabo, there were in Syria twelve million people, and the remnants of culture and settlement support this estimate.
Thus absorbed in meditation, a crowd of new reflections continually poured in upon my mind. Every thing, continued I, bewilders my judgment, and fills my heart with trouble and uncertainty. When these countries enjoyed what constitutes the glory and happiness of man, they were inhabited by infidel nations: It was the Phoenician, offering human sacrifices to Moloch, who gathered into his stores the riches of all climates; it was the Chaldean, prostrate before his serpent-god,* who subjugated opulent cities, laid waste the palaces of kings, and despoiled the temples of the gods; it was the Persian, worshipper of fire, who received the tribute of a hundred nations; they were the inhabitants of this very city, adorers of the sun and stars, who erected so many monuments of prosperity and luxury. Numerous herds, fertile fields, abundant harvests—whatsoever should be the reward of piety—was in the hands of these idolaters. And now, when a people of saints and believers occupy these fields, all is become sterility and solitude. The earth, under these holy hands, produces only thorns and briers. Man soweth in anguish, and reapeth tears and cares. War, famine, pestilence, assail him by turns. And yet, are not these the children of the prophets? The Mussulman, Christian, Jew, are they not the elect children of God, loaded with favors and miracles? Why, then, do these privileged races no longer enjoy the same advantages? Why are these fields, sanctified by the blood of martyrs, deprived of their ancient fertility? Why have those blessings been banished hence, and transferred for so many ages to other nations and different climes?
Thus absorbed in meditation, a flood of new thoughts kept rushing into my mind. Everything, I continued, confuses my judgment and fills my heart with worry and doubt. When these lands experienced what gives life glory and happiness, they were inhabited by non-believing nations: It was the Phoenician, offering human sacrifices to Moloch, who collected the wealth of all climates; it was the Chaldean, bowing before his serpent god,* who conquered rich cities, destroyed the palaces of kings, and looted the temples of the gods; it was the Persian, fire-worshipper, who received tribute from a hundred nations; it was the people of this very city, sun and star worshippers, who built so many monuments of prosperity and luxury. Large herds, fertile fields, bountiful harvests—whatever should be the reward of devoutness—were in the hands of these idol worshippers. And now, with a community of saints and believers occupying these fields, everything has turned to barrenness and isolation. The land, under these holy hands, produces only thorns and thistles. Man sows in pain and reaps tears and worries. War, famine, and disease attack him in turns. And yet, are not these the children of the prophets? The Muslim, Christian, Jew, are they not the chosen children of God, blessed with favors and miracles? Then why do these favored groups no longer enjoy the same benefits? Why are these fields, sanctified by the blood of martyrs, stripped of their former fertility? Why have those blessings been driven away and shifted to other nations and different lands for so many ages?
* The dragon Bell.
The Bell dragon.
At these words, revolving in my mind the vicissitudes which have transmitted the sceptre of the world to people so different in religion and manners from those in ancient Asia to the most recent of Europe, this name of a natal land revived in me the sentiment of my country; and turning my eyes towards France, I began to reflect on the situation in which I had left her.*
At these words, as I thought about the events that had passed down the power of the world to people so different in religion and customs—from ancient Asia to modern Europe—this mention of my homeland reignited my feelings for my country; and turning my gaze toward France, I started to reflect on the circumstances in which I had left her.*
* In the year 1782, at the close of the American war.
* In the year 1782, at the end of the American war.
I recalled her fields so richly cultivated, her roads so admirably constructed, her cities inhabited by a countless people, her fleets spread over every sea, her ports filled with the produce of both the Indies: and then comparing the activity of her commerce, the extent of her navigation, the magnificence of her buildings, the arts and industry of her inhabitants, with what Egypt and Syria had once possessed, I was gratified to find in modern Europe the departed splendor of Asia; but the charm of my reverie was soon dissolved by a last term of comparison. Reflecting that such had once been the activity of the places I was then contemplating, who knows, said I, but such may one day be the abandonment of our countries? Who knows if on the banks of the Seine, the Thames, the Zuyder-Zee, where now, in the tumult of so many enjoyments, the heart and the eye suffice not for the multitude of sensations,—who knows if some traveller, like myself, shall not one day sit on their silent ruins, and weep in solitude over the ashes of their inhabitants, and the memory of their former greatness.
I remembered her fields so lush, her roads so well-built, her cities filled with countless people, her fleets covering every ocean, her ports bustling with goods from both Indies. When I compared the vibrancy of her commerce, the reach of her navigation, the grandeur of her buildings, and the skills and crafts of her people with what Egypt and Syria once had, I was pleased to see the lost glory of Asia reflected in modern Europe. But the charm of my daydream quickly faded with one final thought. Considering that such was once the vibrancy of the places I was looking at, who knows, I thought, if one day our countries will face abandonment? Who knows if along the banks of the Seine, the Thames, or the Zuyder-Zee, where now, amidst so many pleasures, the heart and the eye can't keep up with all the sensations—who knows if some traveler like me will one day sit on their quiet ruins and weep alone over the remains of their people and the memory of their past greatness?
At these words, my eyes filled with tears: and covering my head with the fold of my mantle, I sank into gloomy meditations on all human affairs. Ah! hapless man, said I in my grief, a blind fatality sports with thy destiny!* A fatal necessity rules with the hand of chance the lot of mortals! But no: it is the justice of heaven fulfilling its decrees!—a God of mystery exercising his incomprehensible judgments! Doubtless he has pronounced a secret anathema against this land: blasting with maledictions the present, for the sins of past generations. Oh! who shall dare to fathom the depths of the Omnipotent?
At these words, my eyes filled with tears; and covering my head with the fold of my cloak, I sank into dark thoughts about all human affairs. Ah! unfortunate human, I said in my sorrow, a blind fate plays with your destiny! A cruel necessity rules with the hand of chance over the fate of humans! But no: it’s the justice of heaven carrying out its decrees!—a mysterious God exercising his unfathomable judgments! Surely, he has declared a hidden curse against this land: cursing the present for the sins of past generations. Oh! who will dare to understand the depths of the Omnipotent?
* Fatality is the universal and rooted prejudice of the East. "It was written," is there the answer to every thing. Hence result an unconcern and apathy, the most powerful impediments to instruction and civilization.
* Fatalism is the deep-seated and widespread belief of the East. "It was meant to be," is the response to everything there. This leads to a sense of indifference and apathy, which are the biggest barriers to education and progress.
And sunk in profound melancholy, I remained motionless.
And lost in deep sadness, I stayed still.
CHAPTER III.
THE APPARITION.
While thus absorbed, a sound struck my ear, like the agitation of a flowing robe, or that of slow footsteps on dry and rustling grass. Startled, I opened my mantle, and looking about with fear and trembling, suddenly, on my left, by the glimmering light of the moon, through the columns and ruins of a neighboring temple, I thought I saw an apparition, pale, clothed in large and flowing robes, such as spectres are painted rising from their tombs. I shuddered: and while agitated and hesitating whether to fly or to advance toward the object, a distinct voice, in solemn tones, pronounced these words:
While I was lost in thought, I heard a sound, like the rustle of a flowing robe or slow footsteps on dry, crunchy grass. Startled, I opened my cloak and, filled with fear, looked around. Suddenly, to my left, illuminated by the moonlight filtering through the columns and ruins of a nearby temple, I thought I saw a ghost, pale and dressed in large, flowing robes like the ones typically depicted rising from their tombs. I shuddered, caught between the urge to run away and the impulse to move closer to the figure, when a clear, solemn voice spoke these words:
How long will man importune heaven with unjust complaint? How long, with vain clamors, will he accuse Fate as the author of his calamities? Will he forever shut his eyes to the light, and his heart to the admonitions of truth and reason? The light of truth meets him everywhere; yet he sees it not! The voice of reason strikes his ear; and he hears it not! Unjust man! if for a moment thou canst suspend the delusion which fascinates thy senses, if thy heart can comprehend the language of reason, interrogate these ruins! Read the lessons which they present to thee! And you, evidences of twenty centuries, holy temples! venerable tombs! walls once so glorious, appear in the cause of nature herself! Approach the tribunal of sound reason, and bear testimony against unjust accusations! Come and confound the declamations of a false wisdom or hypocritical piety, and avenge the heavens and the earth of man who calumniates them both!
How long will people bother heaven with unfair complaints? How long will they blame fate for their misfortunes with empty cries? Will they always ignore the truth and the warnings of reason? The light of truth is everywhere, yet they don't see it! The voice of reason reaches their ears, but they don't listen! Unjust person! If for a moment you can shake off the illusion that captivates your senses, if your heart can understand the language of reason, question these ruins! Read the lessons they offer you! And you, evidence of twenty centuries, sacred temples! Respected tombs! Walls that were once so magnificent, stand for the cause of nature itself! Approach the court of sound reason, and testify against unfair accusations! Come and challenge the rhetoric of false wisdom or hypocritical piety, and defend heaven and earth from the person who slanders them both!
What is that blind fatality, which without order and without law, sports with the destiny of mortals? What is that unjust necessity, which confounds the effect of actions, whether of wisdom or of folly? In what consist the anathemas of heaven over this land? Where is that divine malediction which perpetuates the abandonment of these fields? Say, monuments of past ages! have the heavens changed their laws and the earth its motion? Are the fires of the sun extinct in the regions of space? Do the seas no longer emit their vapors? Are the rains and the dews suspended in the air? Do the mountains withhold their springs? Are the streams dried up? And do the plants no longer bear fruit and seed? Answer, generation of falsehood and iniquity, hath God deranged the primitive and settled order of things which he himself assigned to nature? Hath heaven denied to earth, and earth to its inhabitants, the blessings they formerly dispensed? If nothing hath changed in the creation, if the same means now exist which before existed, why then are not the present what former generations were? Ah! it is falsely that you accuse fate and heaven! it is unjustly that you accuse God as the cause of your evils! Say, perverse and hypocritical race! if these places are desolate, if these powerful cities are reduced to solitude, is it God who has caused their ruin? Is it his hand which has overthrown these walls, destroyed these temples, mutilated these columns, or is it the hand of man? Is it the arm of God which has carried the sword into your cities, and fire into your fields, which has slaughtered the people, burned the harvests, rooted up trees, and ravaged the pastures, or is it the hand of man? And when, after the destruction of crops, famine has ensued, is it the vengeance of God which has produced it, or the mad fury of mortals? When, sinking under famine, the people have fed on impure aliments, if pestilence ensues, is it the wrath of God which sends it, or the folly of man? When war, famine and pestilence, have swept away the inhabitants, if the earth remains a desert, is it God who has depopulated it? Is it his rapacity which robs the husbandman, ravages the fruitful fields, and wastes the earth, or is it the rapacity of those who govern? Is it his pride which excites murderous wars, or the pride of kings and their ministers? Is it the venality of his decisions which overthrows the fortunes of families, or the corruption of the organs of the law? Are they his passions which, under a thousand forms, torment individuals and nations, or are they the passions of man? And if, in the anguish of their miseries, they see not the remedies, is it the ignorance of God which is to blame, or their ignorance? Cease then, mortals, to accuse the decrees of Fate, or the judgments of the Divinity! If God is good, will he be the author of your misery? If he is just, will he be the accomplice of your crimes? No, the caprice of which man complains is not the caprice of fate; the darkness that misleads his reason is not the darkness of God; the source of his calamities is not in the distant heavens, it is beside him on the earth; it is not concealed in the bosom of the divinity; it dwells within himself, he bears it in his own heart.
What is that blind fate that plays with the destinies of humans without order or law? What is that unfair necessity that muddles the outcomes of actions, whether wise or foolish? What are the curses from above that hang over this land? Where is that divine punishment that keeps these fields abandoned? Speak, monuments of the past! Have the heavens changed their laws and the earth its movement? Are the sun's fires extinguished in the cosmos? Do the seas no longer release their vapors? Are the rains and dews suspended in the air? Do the mountains hold back their springs? Are the rivers dried up? And do plants no longer bear fruit and seeds? Answer, generation of lies and wrongdoing, has God disrupted the original and established order of nature he himself set? Has heaven denied earth, and earth denied its people, the blessings they used to provide? If nothing has changed in creation, if the same resources now exist that existed before, then why aren’t the present like previous generations? Ah! You wrongly accuse fate and heaven! You unjustly blame God for your misfortunes! Speak, wicked and hypocritical race! If these places are desolate, if these powerful cities have become lonely, is it God who caused their downfall? Is it His hand that toppled these walls, destroyed these temples, shattered these columns, or is it the hand of man? Is it God's arm that brought violence to your cities, and fire to your fields, slaughtered the people, burned the harvests, uprooted trees, and devastated the pastures, or is it the hand of man? And when, after crop destruction, famine follows, is it God's revenge that causes it, or the crazy fury of humans? When, suffering from famine, the people consume impure food, if disease follows, is it God's wrath that sends it, or man's foolishness? When war, famine, and disease have wiped out the population, if the earth remains a wasteland, is it God who has depopulated it? Is it His greed that robs the farmer, devastates the fertile fields, and exhausts the earth, or is it the greed of those in power? Is it His pride that stirs up bloody wars, or the pride of kings and their advisers? Is it the corruption of His decisions that disrupts family fortunes, or the corruption of the legal system? Are His passions which, in various forms, torment individuals and nations, or are they human passions? And if, in their suffering, they don't see the solutions, is it God’s ignorance to blame, or their own? So stop, humans, blaming the decrees of Fate, or the judgments of the Divine! If God is good, will He be the cause of your suffering? If He is just, will He be an accomplice to your crimes? No, the whims that people complain about are not fate's whims; the darkness that clouds their judgment isn't God's darkness; the source of their troubles isn't in the distant heavens, it lies beside them on the earth; it isn't hidden in divinity; it lives within themselves, carried in their own hearts.
Thou murmurest and sayest: What! have an infidel people then enjoyed the blessings of heaven and earth? Are the holy people of God less fortunate than the races of impiety? Deluded man! where then is the contradiction which offends thee? Where is the inconsistency which thou imputest to the justice of heaven? Take into thine own hands the balance of rewards and punishments, of causes and effects. Say: when these infidels observed the laws of the heavens and the earth, when they regulated well-planned labors by the order of the seasons and the course of the stars, should the Almighty have disturbed the equilibrium of the universe to defeat their prudence? When their hands cultivated these fields with toil and care, should he have diverted the course of the rains, suspended the refreshing dews, and planted crops of thorns? When, to render these arid fields productive, their industry constructed aqueducts, dug canals, and led the distant waters across the desert, should he have dried up their sources in the mountains? Should he have blasted the harvests which art had nourished, wasted the plains which peace had peopled, overthrown cities which labor had created, or disturbed the order established by the wisdom of man? And what is that infidelity which founded empires by its prudence, defended them by its valor, and strengthened them by its justice—which built powerful cities, formed capacious ports, drained pestilential marshes, covered the ocean with ships, the earth with inhabitants; and, like the creative spirit, spread life and motion throughout the world? If such be infidelity, what then is the true faith? Doth sanctity consist in destruction? The God who peoples the air with birds, the earth with animals, the waters with fishes—the God who animates all nature—is he then a God of ruins and tombs? Demands he devastation for homage, and conflagration for sacrifice? Requires he groans for hymns, murderers for votaries, a ravaged and desolate earth for his temple? Behold then, holy and believing people, what are your works! behold the fruits of your piety! You have massacred the people, burned their cities, destroyed cultivation, reduced the earth to a solitude; and you ask the reward of your works! Miracles then must be performed! The people whom you extirpated must be recalled to life, the walls rebuilt which you have overthrown, the harvests reproduced which you have destroyed, the waters regathered which you have dispersed; the laws, in fine, of heaven and earth reversed; those laws, established by God himself, in demonstration of his magnificence and wisdom; those eternal laws, anterior to all codes, to all the prophets those immutable laws, which neither the passions nor the ignorance of man can pervert. But that passion which mistaketh, that ignorance which observeth neither causes nor effects, hath said in its folly: "All things flow from chance; a blind fatality poureth out good and evil upon the earth; success is not to the prudent, nor felicity to the wise;" or, assuming the language of hypocrisy, she hath said, "all things are from God; he taketh pleasure in deceiving wisdom and confounding reason." And Ignorance, applauding herself in her malice, hath said, "thus will I place myself on a par with that science which confounds me—thus will I excel that prudence which fatigues and torments me." And Avarice hath added: "I will oppress the weak, and devour the fruits of his labors; and I will say, it is fate which hath so ordained." But I! I swear by the laws of heaven and earth, and by the law which is written in the heart of man, that the hypocrite shall be deceived in his cunning—the oppressor in his rapacity! The sun shall change his course, before folly shall prevail over wisdom and knowledge, or ignorance surpass prudence, in the noble and sublime art of procuring to man his true enjoyments, and of building his happiness on an enduring foundation.
You murmur and ask: What! Have a godless people then enjoyed the blessings of heaven and earth? Are the holy people of God less fortunate than those who are without faith? Deluded person! Where is the contradiction that bothers you? Where is the inconsistency that you attribute to the justice of heaven? Take the balance of rewards and punishments, of causes and effects into your own hands. Say this: When those unbelievers followed the laws of nature and properly planned their work according to the seasons and the stars' courses, should the Almighty have disturbed the balance of the universe to undermine their wisdom? When they cultivated these fields with hard work and care, should He have altered the rain's course, held back the refreshing dew, and grown thorns instead of crops? When they built aqueducts, dug canals, and brought distant waters across the desert to make these dry lands productive, should He have dried up their sources in the mountains? Should He have destroyed the harvests that human effort nurtured, wasted the lands that peace filled, toppled cities that labor created, or disturbed the order established by human wisdom? And what is that infidelity that built empires through its wisdom, defended them through its courage, and strengthened them through its justice—building powerful cities, creating large ports, draining deadly marshes, covering the ocean with ships and the land with people; and, like a creative spirit, spreading life and motion throughout the world? If that is infidelity, then what is true faith? Does holiness involve destruction? The God who fills the air with birds, the earth with animals, and the waters with fish—this God who gives life to all nature—is He then a God of ruins and tombs? Does He demand devastation for worship and fire for sacrifice? Does He require cries instead of songs, murderers instead of devotees, and a ravaged and desolate earth for His temple? Look then, holy and faithful people, at your works! Look at the fruits of your piety! You have massacred the people, burned their cities, destroyed cultivation, and turned the earth into a wasteland; and you ask for the reward of your deeds! Miracles must then be performed! The people you wiped out must be brought back to life, the walls you tore down must be rebuilt, the harvests you destroyed must be restored, the waters you scattered must be collected again; in short, the laws of heaven and earth must be reversed—those laws established by God Himself, showcasing His greatness and wisdom; those eternal laws, existing before any codes or prophets, those unchanging laws that neither human passions nor ignorance can twist. But that passion which is mistaken, that ignorance which sees neither causes nor effects, has foolishly said: "Everything happens by chance; blind fate pours good and evil upon the earth; success does not come to the wise, nor happiness to the prudent;" or, pretending to be virtuous, it has said, "Everything comes from God; He enjoys deceiving wisdom and confusing reason." And Ignorance, reveling in its malice, has said, "I will elevate myself to the level of that knowledge which confounds me—thus I will outshine that prudence which tires and torments me." And Greed has added: "I will take advantage of the weak and consume the fruits of their labor; and I will state that it is fate that has ordained it." But I! I swear by the laws of heaven and earth, and by the law written in the heart of man, that the hypocrite will be deceived by his cunning—the oppressor by his greed! The sun will change its path before folly triumphs over wisdom and knowledge, or ignorance exceeds prudence, in the noble and elevated art of providing true enjoyment for humanity and building lasting happiness.
CHAPTER IV.
THE EXPOSITION
Thus spoke the Phantom. Confused with this discourse, and my heart agitated with different reflections, I remained long in silence. At length, taking courage, I thus addressed him: Oh, Genius of tombs and ruins! Thy presence, thy severity, hath disordered my senses; but the justice of thy discourse restoreth confidence to my soul. Pardon my ignorance. Alas, if man is blind, shall his misfortune be also his crime? I may have mistaken the voice of reason; but never, knowingly, have I rejected its authority. Ah! if thou readest my heart, thou knowest with what enthusiasm it seeketh truth. Is it not in its pursuit that thou seest me in this sequestered spot? Alas! I have wandered over the earth, I have visited cities and countries; and seeing everywhere misery and desolation, a sense of the evils which afflict my fellow men hath deeply oppressed my soul. I have said, with a sigh: is man then born but for sorrow and anguish? And I have meditated upon human misery that I might discover a remedy. I have said, I will separate myself from the corruption of society; I will retire far from palaces where the mind is depraved by satiety and from the hovel where it is debased by misery. I will go into the desert and dwell among ruins; I will interrogate ancient monuments on the wisdom of past ages; I will invoke from the bosom of the tombs the spirit which once in Asia gave splendor to states, and glory to nations; I will ask of the ashes of legislators, by what secret causes do empires rise and fall; from what sources spring the Prosperity and misfortunes of nations, on what principles can the Peace of Society, and the happiness of man be established?
Thus spoke the Phantom. Confused by this conversation and my heart troubled with different thoughts, I stayed silent for a long time. Finally, finding my courage, I addressed him: Oh, Spirit of tombs and ruins! Your presence, your severity, has unsettled my senses; but the truth in your words restores confidence to my soul. Forgive my ignorance. Alas, if humanity is blind, does that mean its misfortune is also its crime? I may have misunderstood reason's voice; yet I have never knowingly rejected its authority. Ah! If you see into my heart, you know how passionately I seek the truth. Isn’t it in that quest that you find me in this secluded place? Alas! I have traveled across the earth, visited cities and countries; and seeing misery and despair everywhere, the weight of the suffering endured by my fellow humans has deeply burdened my soul. I have sighed and asked: is humanity destined only for sorrow and anguish? I have contemplated human suffering, searching for a remedy. I said I would separate myself from society's corruption; I would retreat far from palaces where the mind is dulled by excess and from the slums where it is degraded by poverty. I would go into the desert and dwell among ruins; I would question ancient monuments about the wisdom of past ages; I would summon from the depths of the tombs the spirit that once brought glory to states and nations in Asia; I would inquire of the ashes of lawmakers, by what hidden forces do empires rise and fall; from where do the prosperity and misfortunes of nations come, and on what foundations can the peace of society and the happiness of humanity be built?
I ceased, and with submissive look awaited the answer of the Genius.
I stopped and, looking submissive, waited for the Genius's response.
Peace and happiness, said he, attend those who practice justice! Since thy heart, O mortal, with sincerity seeketh truth; since thine eyes can still recognize her through the mist of prejudice, thy prayer shall not be in vain. I will unfold to thy view that truth thou invokest; I will teach thy reason that knowledge thou seekest; I will reveal to thee the science of ages and the wisdom of the tombs.
Peace and happiness, he said, come to those who practice justice! Since your heart, O human, sincerely seeks the truth; since your eyes can still see it through the fog of prejudice, your prayer will not be in vain. I will show you the truth you call for; I will teach your mind the knowledge you seek; I will reveal to you the science of the ages and the wisdom of the past.
Then approaching and laying his hand on my head, he said:
Then he came closer and placed his hand on my head, saying:
Rise, mortal, and extricate thy senses from the dust in which thou movest.
Rise, mortal, and free your senses from the dust where you wander.
Suddenly a celestial flame seemed to dissolve the bands which held us to the earth; and, like a light vapor, borne on the wings of the Genius, I felt myself wafted to the regions above. Thence, from the aerial heights, looking down upon the earth, I perceived a scene altogether new. Under my feet, floating in the void, a globe like that of the moon, but smaller and less luminous, presented to me one of its phases; and that phase* had the aspect of a disk varigated with large spots, some white and nebulous, others brown, green or gray, and while I strained my sight to distinguish what they were, the Genius exclaimed:
Suddenly, a celestial flame seemed to dissolve the bonds that tied us to the earth; and, like a light vapor, carried on the wings of the Genius, I felt myself lifted to the heights above. From there, looking down upon the earth from the sky, I saw a completely new scene. Below me, floating in the void, was a globe similar to the moon but smaller and less bright, revealing one of its phases; and that phase had the appearance of a disk marked with large spots, some white and hazy, others brown, green, or gray. As I strained my eyes to make out what they were, the Genius exclaimed:
* See Plate representing half the terrestrial globe, opposite page 10.
* See the plate showing half of the Earth, on the opposite page 10.
Disciple of Truth, knowest thou that object?
Disciple of Truth, do you know that object?
O Genius, answered I, if I did not see the moon in another quarter of the heavens, I should have supposed that to be her globe. It has the appearance of that planet seen through the telescope during the obscuration of an eclipse. These varigated spots might be mistaken for seas and continents.
O Genius, I replied, if I didn't see the moon in another part of the sky, I would have thought that was her globe. It looks like that planet viewed through a telescope during an eclipse. These colorful spots could be mistaken for oceans and landmasses.
They are seas and continents, said he, and those of the very hemisphere which you inhabit.
They are seas and continents, he said, and they belong to the same hemisphere you live in.
What! said I, is that the earth—the habitation of man?
What! I said, is that the Earth—the home of humanity?
Yes, replied he, that brown space which occupies irregularly a great portion of the disk, and envelops it almost on every side, is what you call the great ocean, which advancing from the south pole towards the equator, forms first the great gulf of India and Africa, then extends eastward across the Malay islands to the confines of Tartary, while towards the west it encircles the continents of Africa and of Europe, even to the north of Asia.
Yes, he replied, that brown area that takes up an unevenly large part of the disk and surrounds it almost completely is what you call the great ocean. It stretches from the South Pole towards the equator, first forming the large gulf between India and Africa, then extending eastward across the Malay islands to the borders of Tartary, while to the west it wraps around the continents of Africa and Europe, even reaching north of Asia.
That square peninsula under our feet is the arid country of the Arabs; the great continent on its left, almost as naked in its interior, with a little verdure only towards its borders, is the parched soil inhabited by black-men.* To the north, beyond a long, narrow and irregular sea,** are the countries of Europe, rich in meadows and cultivated fields. On its right, from the Caspian Sea, extend the snowy and naked plains of Tartary. Returning in this direction that white space is the vast and barren desert of Cobi, which separates China from the rest of the world. You see that empire in the furrowed plain which obliquely rounds itself off from our sight. On yonder coasts, those ragged tongues of land and scattered points are the peninsulas and islands of the Malays, the wretched possessors of the spices and perfumes. That triangle which advances so far into the sea, is the too famous peninsula of India.*** You see the winding course of the Ganges, the rough mountains of Thibet, the lovely valley of Cachemere, the briny deserts of Persia, the banks of the Euphrates and Tygris, the deep bed of the Jordan and the canals of the solitary Nile.
That square peninsula beneath our feet is the dry land of the Arabs; the vast continent to its left, almost barren in its interior with only a bit of greenery at the edges, is the arid territory inhabited by black people.* To the north, across a long, narrow, and irregular sea,** are the countries of Europe, filled with meadows and cultivated fields. To its right, from the Caspian Sea, stretch the snowy and bare plains of Tartary. Looking back in this direction, that blank area is the huge and desolate Cobi desert, which separates China from the rest of the world. You can see that empire in the undulating plain that curves out of our view. On those distant coasts, the jagged pieces of land and scattered spots are the peninsulas and islands of the Malays, the unfortunate holders of spices and perfumes. That triangle extending far into the sea is the infamous peninsula of India.*** You can see the winding path of the Ganges, the rugged mountains of Tibet, the beautiful valley of Kashmir, the salty deserts of Persia, the banks of the Euphrates and Tigris, the deep course of the Jordan, and the channels of the lonely Nile.
* Africa. ** The Mediterranean. *** Of what real good has been the commerce of India to the mass of the people? On the contrary, how great the evil occasioned by the superstition of this country having been added the general superstition!
* Africa. ** The Mediterranean. *** What real benefit has the trade with India brought to most people? On the contrary, how significant has the harm been caused by the superstitions of this region compounded with the widespread superstitions?
O Genius, said I, interrupting him, the sight of a mortal reaches not to objects at such a distance. He touched my eyes, and immediately they became piercing as those of an eagle; nevertheless the rivers still appeared like waving lines, the mountains winding furrows, and the cities little compartments like the squares of a chess-board.
O Genius, I said, interrupting him, a human's sight can't reach objects that far away. He touched my eyes, and immediately they became as sharp as an eagle's; still, the rivers looked like wavy lines, the mountains like winding furrows, and the cities like little squares on a chessboard.
And the Genius proceeded to enumerate and point out the objects to me: Those piles of ruins, said he, which you see in that narrow valley watered by the Nile, are the remains of opulent cities, the pride of the ancient kingdom of Ethiopia.* Behold the wrecks of her metropolis, of Thebes with her hundred palaces,** the parent of cities, and monument of the caprice of destiny. There a people, now forgotten, discovered, while others were yet barbarians, the elements of the arts and sciences. A race of men now rejected from society for their sable skin and frizzled hair, founded on the study of the laws of nature, those civil and religious systems which still govern the universe. Lower down, those dusky points are the pyramids whose masses have astonished you. Beyond that, the coast, hemmed in between the sea and a narrow ridge of mountains, was the habitation of the Phoenicians. These were the famous cities of Tyre, of Sidon, of Ascalon, of Gaza, and of Berytus. That thread of water with no outlet, is the river Jordan; and those naked rocks were once the theatre of events that have resounded throughout the world. Behold that desert of Horeb, and that Mount Sinai; where, by means beyond vulgar reach, a genius, profound and bold, established institutions which have weighed on the whole human race. On that dry shore which borders it, you perceive no longer any trace of splendor; yet there was an emporium of riches. There were those famous Ports of Idumea, whence the fleets of Phoenicia and Judea, coasting the Arabian peninsula, went into the Persian gulf, to seek there the pearls of Hevila, the gold of Saba and of Ophir. Yes, there on that coast of Oman and of Barhain was the seat of that commerce of luxuries, which, by its movements and revolutions, fixed the destinies of ancient nations.*** Thither came the spices and precious stones of Ceylon, the shawls of Cassimere, the diamonds of Golconda, the amber of Maldivia, the musk of Thibet, the aloes of Cochin, the apes and peacocks of the continent of India, the incense of Hadramaut, the myrrh, the silver, the gold dust and ivory of Africa; thence passing, sometimes by the Red Sea on the vessels of Egypt and Syria, these luxuries nourished successively the wealth of Thebes, of Sidon, of Memphis and of Jerusalem; sometimes, ascending the Tygris and Euphrates, they awakened the activity of the Assyrians, Medes, Chaldeans, and Persians; and that wealth, according to the use or abuse of it, raised or reversed by turns their domination. Hence sprung the magnificence of Persepolis, whose columns you still perceive; of Ecbatana, whose sevenfold wall is destroyed; of Babylon,**** now leveled with the earth; of Nineveh, of which scarce the name remains; of Thapsacus, of Anatho, of Gerra, and of desolated Palmyra. O names for ever glorious! fields of renown! countries of never-dying memory! what sublime lessons doth your aspect offer! what profound truths are written on the surface of your soil! remembrances of times past, return into my mind! places, witnesses of the life of man in so many different ages, retrace for me the revolutions of his fortune! say, what were their springs and secret causes! say, from what sources he derived success and disgrace! unveil to himself the causes of his evils! correct him by the spectacle of his errors! teach him the wisdom which belongeth to him, and let the experience of past ages become a means of instruction, and a germ of happiness to present and future generations.
And the Genius went on to point out the objects to me: Those piles of ruins you see in that narrow valley by the Nile are the remains of wealthy cities, the pride of ancient Ethiopia.* Look at the wrecks of its capital, Thebes, with her hundred palaces,** the mother of cities, and a monument to the whims of fate. Here, a people now forgotten discovered, while others were still primitive, the foundations of the arts and sciences. A race of people now marginalized because of their dark skin and curly hair created the civil and religious systems based on the study of nature’s laws that still govern the universe. Further down, those dark shapes are the pyramids that have amazed you. Beyond that, the coast, squeezed between the sea and a narrow mountain range, was home to the Phoenicians. These were the famous cities of Tyre, Sidon, Ascalon, Gaza, and Berytus. That narrow body of water with no outlet is the Jordan River; and those bare rocks once witnessed events that have echoed throughout history. Look at that desert of Horeb and that Mount Sinai; where, through extraordinary means, a profound and daring genius established institutions that have impacted all of humanity. On that dry shore next to it, you can no longer see any signs of grandeur; yet there was a hub of wealth. Those were the renowned Ports of Idumea, from where the fleets of Phoenicia and Judea sailed along the Arabian peninsula into the Persian Gulf to seek the pearls of Hevila, the gold of Saba, and the treasures of Ophir. Yes, there on that coast of Oman and Bahrain was the center of that luxury trade, which, through its movements and changes, determined the fates of ancient nations.*** Spices and precious stones from Ceylon, shawls from Kashmir, diamonds from Golconda, amber from the Maldives, musk from Tibet, aloes from Cochin, monkeys and peacocks from India, incense from Hadramaut, myrrh, silver, gold dust, and ivory from Africa all flowed through here; sometimes crossing by the Red Sea on the vessels of Egypt and Syria, these luxuries successively fueled the wealth of Thebes, Sidon, Memphis, and Jerusalem; at other times, traveling up the Tigris and Euphrates, they fueled the ambitions of the Assyrians, Medes, Chaldeans, and Persians; and that wealth, depending on how it was used, either elevated or toppled their power. Thus arose the magnificence of Persepolis, whose columns you can still see; of Ecbatana, whose seven-fold wall is gone; of Babylon,**** now flattened; of Nineveh, of which scarcely a name remains; of Thapsacus, of Anatho, of Gerra, and of the ruined Palmyra. O names forever glorious! fields of glory! lands of everlasting memory! what sublime lessons do your sights offer! what profound truths are written on the very ground! memories of the past flood my mind! places, witnesses of humanity's life through different ages, recount to me the twists of their fortunes! tell me, what were their sources and hidden reasons! tell me, from what origins did they gain success and misfortune! reveal to them the reasons for their sufferings! correct them with the view of their mistakes! teach them the wisdom that belongs to them, and let the lessons of the past be a way of learning, and a seed of happiness for present and future generations.
* In the new Encyclopedia 3rd vol. Antiquities is published a memoir, respecting the chronology of the twelve ages anterior to the passing of Xerxes into Greece, in which I conceive myself to have proved that upper Egypt formerly composed a distinct kingdom known to the Hebrews by the name of Kous and to which the appellation of Ethiopia was specially given. This kingdom preserved its independence to the time of Psammeticus; at which period, being united to the Lower Egypt, it lost its name of Ethiopia, which thenceforth was bestowed upon the nations of Nubia and upon the different tribes of blacks, including Thebes, their metropolis. ** The idea of a city with a hundred gates, in the common acceptation of the word, is so absurd, that I am astonished the equivoque has not before been felt. It has ever been the custom of the East to call palaces and houses of the great by the name of gates, because the principal luxury of these buildings consists in the singular gate leading from the street into the court, at the farthest extremity of which the palace is situated. It is under the vestibule of this gate that conversation is held with passengers, and a sort of audience and hospitality given. All this was doubtless known to Homer; but poets make no commentaries, and readers love the marvellous. This city of Thebes, now Lougsor, reduced to the condition of a miserable village, has left astonishing monuments of its magnificence. Particulars of this may be seen in the plates of Norden, in Pocock, and in the recent travels of Bruce. These monuments give credibility to all that Homer has related of its splendor, and lead us to infer its political power and external commerce. Its geographical position was favorable to this twofold object. For, on one side, the valley of the Nile, singularly fertile, must have early occasioned a numerous population; and, on the other, the Red Sea, giving communication with Arabia and India, and the Nile with Abyssinia and the Mediterranean, Thebes was thus naturally allied to the richest countries on the globe; an alliance that procured it an activity so much the greater, as Lower Egypt, at first a swamp, was nearly, if not totally, uninhabited. But when at length this country had been drained by the canals and dikes which Sesostris constructed, population was introduced there, and wars arose which proved fatal to the power of Thebes. Commerce then took another route, and descended to the point of the Red Sea, to the canals of Sesostris (see Strabo), and wealth and activity were transferred to Memphis. This is manifestly what Diodorus means when he tells us (lib. i. sect. 2), that as soon as Memphis was established and made a wholesome and delicious abode, kings abandoned Thebes to fix themselves there. Thus Thebes continued to decline, and Memphis to flourish, till the time of Alexander, who, building Alexandria on the border of the sea, caused Memphis to fall in its turn; so that prosperity and power seem to have descended historically step by step along the Nile; whence it results, both physically and historically, that the existence of Thebes was prior to that of the other cities. The testimony of writers is very positive in this respect. "The Thebans," says Diodorus, "consider themselves as the most ancient people of the earth, and assert, that with them originated philosophy and the science of the stars. Their situation, it is true, is infinitely favorable to astronomical observation, and they have a more accurate division of time into mouths and years than other nations" etc. What Diodorus says of the Thebans, every author, and himself elsewhere, repeat of the Ethiopians, which tends more firmly to establish the identity of this place of which I have spoken. "The Ethiopians conceive themselves," says he, lib. iii., "to be of greater antiquity than any other nation: and it is probable that, born under the sun's path, its warmth may have ripened them earlier than other men. They suppose themselves also to be the inventors of divine worship, of festivals, of solemn assemblies, of sacrifices, and every other religious practice. They affirm that the Egyptians are one of their colonies, and that the Delta, which was formerly sea, became land by the conglomeration of the earth of the higher country which was washed down by the Nile. They have, like the Egyptians, two species of letters, hieroglyphics, and the alphabet; but among the Egyptians the first was known only to the priests, and by them transmitted from father to son, whereas both species were common among the Ethiopians." "The Ethiopians," says Lucian, page 985, "were the first who invented the science of the stars, and gave names to the planets, not at random and without meaning, but descriptive of the qualities which they conceived them to possess; and it was from them that this art passed, still in an imperfect state, to the Egyptians." It would be easy to multiply citations upon this subject; from all which it follows, that we have the strongest reasons to believe that the country neighboring to the tropic was the cradle of the sciences, and of consequence that the first learned nation was a nation of Blacks; for it is incontrovertible, that, by the term Ethiopians, the ancients meant to represent a people of black complexion, thick lips, and woolly hair. I am therefore inclined to believe, that the inhabitants of Lower Egypt were originally a foreign colony imported from Syria and Arabia, a medley of different tribes of savages, originally shepherds and fishermen, who, by degrees formed themselves into a nation, and who, by nature and descent, were enemies of the Thebans, by whom they were no doubt despised and treated as barbarians. I have suggested the same ideas in my Travels into Syria, founded upon the black complexion of the Sphinx. I have since ascertained that the antique images of Thebias have the same characteristic; and Mr. Bruce has offered a multitude of analogous facts; but this traveller, of whom I heard some mention at Cairo, has so interwoven these facts with certain systematic opinions, that we should have recourse to his narratives with caution. It is singular that Africa, situated so near us, should be the least known country on the earth. The English are at this moment making explorations, the success of which ought to excite our emulation. *** Ailah (Eloth), and Atsiom-Gaber (Hesien-Geber.) The name of the first of these towns still subsists in its ruins, at the point of the gulf of the Red Sea, and in the route which the pilgrims take to Mecca. Hesion has at present no trace, any more than Quolzoum and Faran: it was, however, the harbor for the fleets of Solomon. The vessels of this prince conducted by the Tyrians, sailed along the coast of Arabia to Ophir, in the Persian Gulf, thus opening a communication with the merchants of India and Ceylon. That this navigation was entirely of Tyrian invention, appears both from the pilots and shipbuilders employed by the Jews, and the names that were given to the trading islands, viz. Tyrus and Aradus, now Barhain. The voyage was performed in two different modes, either in canoes of osier and rushes, covered on the outside with skins done over with pitch: (these vessels were unable to quit the Red Sea, or so much as to leave the shore.) The second mode of carrying on the trade was by means of vessels with decks of the size of our river boats, which were able to pass the strait and to weather the dangers of time ocean; but for this purpose it was necessary to bring the wood from Mount Libanus and Cilicia, where it is very fine and in great abundance. This wood was first conveyed in floats from Tarsus to Phoenicia, for which reason the vessels were called ships of Tarsus; from whence it has been ridiculously inferred, that they went round the promontory of Africa as far as Tortosa in Spain. From Phoenicia it was transported on the backs of camels to the Red Sea, which practice still continues, because the shores of this sea are absolutely unprovided with wood even for fuel. These vessels spent a complete year in their voyage, that is, sailed one year, sojourned another, and did not return till the third. This tediousness was owing first to their cruising from port to port, as they do at present; secondly, to their being detained by the Monsoon currents; and thirdly, because, according to the calculations of Pliny and Strabo, it was the ordinary practice among the ancients to spend three years in a voyage of twelve hundred leagues. Such a commerce must have been very expensive, particularly as they were obliged to carry with them their provisions, and even fresh water. For this reason Solomon made himself master of Palmyra, which was at that time inhabited, and was already the magazine and high road of merchants by the way of the Euphrates. This conquest brought Solomon much nearer to the country of gold and pearls. This alternative of a route either by the Red Sea or by the river Euphrates was to the ancients, what in later times has been the alternative in a voyage to the Indies, either by crossing the isthmus of Suez or doubling the cape of Good Hope. It appears that till the time of Moses, this trade was carried on across the desert of Syria and Thebais; that afterwards it fell into the hands of the Phoenicians, who fixed its site upon the Red Sea; and that it was mutual jealousy that induced the kings of Nineveh and Babylon to undertake the destruction of Tyre and Jerusalem. I insist the more upon these facts, because I have never seen any thing reasonable upon the subject. **** It appears that Babylon occupied on the eastern banks of the Euphrates a space of ground six leagues in length. Throughout this space bricks are found by means of which daily additions are made to the town of Helle. Upon many of these are characters written with a nail similar to those of Persepolis. I am indebted for these facts to M. de Beauchamp, grand vicar of Babylon, a traveller equally distinguished for his knowledge of astronomy and for his veracity.
* In the new Encyclopedia 3rd vol., Antiquities publishes a memoir discussing the timeline of the twelve ages before Xerxes crossed into Greece. In this, I believe I have demonstrated that Upper Egypt used to be a separate kingdom known to the Hebrews as Kous, and this kingdom was specifically referred to as Ethiopia. This kingdom maintained its independence until the time of Psammeticus; at that point, when it joined with Lower Egypt, it lost the name Ethiopia, which was then given to the nations of Nubia and the various tribes of black people, including Thebes, their capital. ** The notion of a city with a hundred gates, in the usual sense of the word, seems so ridiculous that I'm surprised this pun hasn’t been noticed before. It has always been customary in the East to refer to the palaces and homes of the wealthy as gates, because the main luxury of these buildings lies in the unique gate leading from the street into the courtyard, where the palace is located at the far end. Conversations with passersby typically happen under this gate's vestibule, serving as a place for receiving guests and offering hospitality. Homer must have been aware of all this; however, poets don’t provide commentaries, and readers are drawn to the marvelous. This city of Thebes, now known as Luxor, has diminished to the status of a poor village but has left behind incredible monuments reflecting its grandeur. Further details can be found in the plates of Norden, Pocock, and the recent travels of Bruce. These monuments support everything Homer mentioned about its splendor and suggest its political strength and external trade. Its geographic location was advantageous for both purposes. On one side, the remarkably fertile Nile valley likely led to a large population early on; on the other, the Red Sea provided connections to Arabia and India, and the Nile linked to Abyssinia and the Mediterranean. Thus, Thebes was naturally connected to the richest regions on Earth, a connection that intensified since Lower Egypt, initially a marsh, was nearly uninhabited. However, once this area was drained by the canals and dikes built by Sesostris, people began to inhabit it, leading to conflicts that ultimately weakened Thebes' power. Trade then shifted to the Red Sea via the canals of Sesostris (see Strabo), transferring wealth and activity to Memphis. This is evidently what Diodorus refers to when he states (lib. i. sect. 2) that once Memphis was established as a healthy and pleasant place to live, kings chose to leave Thebes and settle there. Thus, Thebes continued to decline while Memphis thrived until the time of Alexander, who, by founding Alexandria by the sea, caused Memphis to decline in turn. Prosperity and power seemed to have historically transferred step by step along the Nile, leading to the conclusion that Thebes existed before the other cities. The writings clearly affirm this. "The Thebans," Diodorus states, "consider themselves the most ancient people on earth and claim that philosophy and the study of the stars began with them. Their location is indeed very favorable for astronomical observation, and they have a more precise division of time into months and years than other nations," etc. What Diodorus says about the Thebans is echoed by every author and himself elsewhere regarding the Ethiopians, reinforcing the identity of the place I have mentioned. "The Ethiopians believe," he says in lib. iii., "that they are older than any other nation, and it's likely that being born in the sun's path, its warmth may have accelerated their maturity compared to other men. They also think they were the ones who invented divine worship, festivals, solemn assemblies, sacrifices, and every other religious practice. They assert that the Egyptians are one of their colonies and that the Delta, which was once sea, became land through sediment brought down from the highlands by the Nile. Like the Egyptians, they have two types of writing, hieroglyphics and an alphabet; but in Egypt, the former was known only to the priests and passed down through generations, while both types were common among the Ethiopians." "The Ethiopians," Lucian states, page 985, "were the first to invent the study of the stars and name the planets, not randomly and without meaning, but in ways that described the qualities they believed each possessed; and it was from them that this art passed, albeit in an incomplete state, to the Egyptians." It would be easy to provide many quotes on this matter; from all of them, it follows that we have strong reasons to believe that the region near the tropic was the birthplace of the sciences, which leads us to conclude that the first learned nation was a nation of Blacks. Indeed, it's indisputable that when the ancients referred to Ethiopians, they meant a people with black skin, full lips, and woolly hair. Therefore, I’m inclined to believe that the inhabitants of Lower Egypt were originally a foreign colony brought from Syria and Arabia, a mix of various tribes of nomads, initially shepherds and fishermen, who gradually formed a nation and were, by nature and ancestry, enemies of the Thebans, who surely regarded them as despised barbarians. I expressed the same thoughts in my Travels into Syria, based on the black skin of the Sphinx. I've since confirmed that the ancient images of Thebes share the same characteristic, and Mr. Bruce has provided numerous similar facts. However, this traveler, of whom I heard some mention in Cairo, has woven these facts together with certain systematic opinions, so we should approach his narratives with caution. It’s strange that Africa, located so close to us, remains the least explored country on Earth. The English are currently undertaking explorations whose success should inspire us. *** Ailah (Eloth) and Atsiom-Gaber (Hesien-Geber). The name of the first of these towns still survives in its ruins at the tip of the Gulf of the Red Sea, as well as in the route pilgrims take to Mecca. Hesion, however, has completely vanished, much like Quolzoum and Faran; it was, nonetheless, the harbor for Solomon’s fleets. The ships of this king, led by the Tyrians, sailed along the coast of Arabia to Ophir in the Persian Gulf, establishing trade connections with merchants from India and Ceylon. This navigation was entirely invented by the Tyrians, which is evident from the experts and shipbuilders employed by the Jews and the names given to the trading islands, namely Tyrus and Aradus, present-day Bahrain. The journey was made in two different ways: either in canoes made from reeds and rushes, covered on the outside with skins treated with pitch (these vessels could not venture out of the Red Sea or leave the shoreline), or using decked ships similar in size to our riverboats, capable of navigating the strait and enduring the dangers of the open ocean. For this purpose, wood had to be transported from Mount Lebanon and Cilicia, where high-quality timber was abundant. This timber was initially rafted from Tarsus to Phoenicia, which is why the vessels were called ships of Tarsus; this has led to the absurd conclusion that they circumnavigated the African coast as far as Tortosa in Spain. From Phoenicia, it was carried by camels to the Red Sea, a practice that continues today, as the shores of this sea lack wood even for fuel. These vessels spent a full year on their voyage, sailing for one year, staying for another, and returning in the third. This lengthy journey was primarily due to their coastal hopping, as they do now; secondly, delays caused by the Monsoon currents; and thirdly, as noted by Pliny and Strabo, the ancients usually took three years for a journey of twelve hundred leagues. Such trade was likely very costly, especially since they had to carry their provisions and even freshwater. This is why Solomon seized Palmyra, which at that time was inhabited and already served as a storehouse for merchants along the Euphrates. This conquest brought Solomon much closer to the land of gold and pearls. The alternative routes—either through the Red Sea or along the Euphrates—were for the ancients what the later options of traveling to the Indies were: either crossing the Isthmus of Suez or rounding the Cape of Good Hope. It seems that until the time of Moses, this trade occurred across the desert of Syria and Thebais; afterwards, it fell into the hands of the Phoenicians, who established it on the Red Sea. Mutual rivalry between the kings of Nineveh and Babylon ignited their desire to destroy Tyre and Jerusalem. I emphasize these facts since I've never encountered a reasonable account on the topic. **** It appears that Babylon occupied a stretch of land six leagues long on the eastern banks of the Euphrates. Throughout this area, bricks are found that are used for daily additions to the town of Helle. Many of these have characters inscribed with a nail, similar to those found at Persepolis. I owe these details to M. de Beauchamp, the grand vicar of Babylon, a traveler celebrated for his expertise in astronomy and his honesty.
CHAPTER V.
CONDITION OF MAN IN THE UNIVERSE.
The Genius, after some moments of silence, resumed in these words:
The Genius, after a few moments of silence, spoke again with these words:
I have told thee already, O friend of truth! that man vainly ascribes his misfortunes to obscure and imaginary agents; in vain he seeks as the source of his evils mysterious and remote causes. In the general order of the universe his condition is, doubtless, subject to inconveniences, and his existence governed by superior powers; but those powers are neither the decrees of a blind fatality, nor the caprices of whimsical and fantastic beings. Like the world of which he forms a part, man is governed by natural laws, regular in their course, uniform in their effects, immutable in their essence; and those laws,—the common source of good and evil,—are not written among the distant stars, nor hidden in codes of mystery; inherent in the nature of terrestrial beings, interwoven with their existence, at all times and in all places, they are present to man; they act upon his senses, they warn his understanding, and give to every action its reward or punishment. Let man then know these laws! let him comprehend the nature of the elements which surround him, and also his own nature, and he will know the regulators of his destiny; he will know the causes of his evils and the remedies he should apply.
I have already told you, O friend of truth! that people foolishly blame their misfortunes on obscure and imaginary forces; in vain do they search for mysterious and distant causes of their troubles. In the grand scheme of the universe, their situation is certainly affected by difficulties, and their existence is influenced by higher powers; but these powers are neither the whims of blind fate nor the caprices of strange and fantastical beings. Like the world he is part of, humanity is governed by natural laws that are consistent in their processes, uniform in their impacts, and unchanging in their essence; and these laws—the common source of good and evil—are not written in the distant stars or hidden in mysterious codes; they are inherent in the nature of earthly beings, intertwined with their existence, always and everywhere present to people; they affect their senses, guide their understanding, and provide rewards or punishments for every action. Let people then understand these laws! Let them grasp the nature of the elements around them, as well as their own nature, and they will understand the regulators of their destiny; they will recognize the causes of their troubles and the remedies they should use.
When the hidden power which animates the universe, formed the globe which man inhabits, he implanted in the beings composing it, essential properties which became the law of their individual motion, the bond of their reciprocal relations, the cause of the harmony of the whole; he thereby established a regular order of causes and effects, of principles and consequences, which, under an appearance of chance, governs the universe, and maintains the equilibrium of the world. Thus, he gave to fire, motion and activity; to air, elasticity; weight and density to matter; he made air lighter than water, metal heavier than earth, wood less cohesive than steel; he decreed flame to ascend, stones to fall, plants to vegetate; to man, who was to be exposed to the action of so many different beings, and still to preserve his frail life, he gave the faculty of sensation. By this faculty all action hurtful to his existence gives him a feeling of pain and evil, and all which is salutary, of pleasure and happiness. By these sensations, man, sometimes averted from that which wounds his senses, sometimes allured towards that which soothes them, has been obliged to cherish and preserve his own life; thus, self-love, the desire of happiness, aversion to pain, become the essential and primary laws imposed on man by nature herself—the laws which the directing power, whatever it be, has established for his government—and which laws, like those of motion in the physical world, are the simple and fruitful principle of whatever happens in the moral world.
When the hidden force that drives the universe formed the planet where humanity lives, it instilled essential properties in the beings that inhabit it. These properties became the basis for their individual movements, the connection of their interactions, and the reason for the harmony of the whole; it established a consistent order of causes and effects, principles and outcomes, which, under the guise of randomness, governs the universe and maintains the balance of the world. In this way, it gave fire motion and activity; air, elasticity; weight and density to matter; it made air lighter than water, metals heavier than earth, and wood less dense than steel; it determined that flames rise, stones fall, and plants grow; to humans, who are exposed to the actions of so many different things while still having to preserve their fragile lives, it granted the ability to feel. Through this ability, all actions harmful to their existence cause them to experience pain and suffering, while those that are beneficial bring pleasure and happiness. Through these sensations, humans are occasionally deterred from things that harm their senses and drawn to things that soothe them, which compels them to care for and protect their own lives. Thus, self-love, the pursuit of happiness, and the aversion to pain become the fundamental and primary laws instilled in humans by nature itself—the laws that the guiding force, whatever it may be, has set for their governance—and these laws, much like the laws of motion in the physical world, serve as the simple and productive principle of everything that occurs in the moral world.
Such, then, is the condition of man: on one side, exposed to the action of the elements which surround him, he is subject to many inevitable evils; and if, in this decree, nature has been severe, on the other hand, just and even indulgent she has not only tempered the evils with equivalent good, she has also enabled him to increase the good and alleviate the evil. She seems to say:
Such is the condition of man: on one hand, exposed to the forces of nature around him, he faces many unavoidable hardships; and while nature may be harsh in this regard, on the other hand, she has balanced the hardships with corresponding benefits. She has also given him the ability to enhance the good and lessen the bad. It seems she is saying:
"Feeble work of my hands, I owe thee nothing, and I give thee life; the world wherein I placed thee was not made for thee, yet I give thee the use of it; thou wilt find in it a mixture of good and evil; it is for thee to distinguish them; for thee to guide thy footsteps in a path containing thorns as well as roses. Be the arbiter of thine own fate; I put thy destiny into thine own hands!"
"Fragile creation of my hands, I owe you nothing, yet I give you life; the world where I placed you wasn't made for you, but I give you the chance to use it; you'll find a mix of good and bad in it; it's up to you to tell them apart; it's for you to navigate a path that has both thorns and roses. Be the master of your own fate; I put your destiny in your own hands!"
Yes, man is made the architect of his own destiny; he, himself, hath been the cause of the successes or reverses of his own fortune; and if, on a review of all the pains with which he has tormented his own life, he finds reason to weep over his own weakness or imprudence yet, considering the beginnings from which he sat out, and the height attained, he has, perhaps, still reason to presume on his strength, and to pride himself on his genius.
Yes, a person is the architect of their own destiny; they have been the reason for the successes or failures in their life. If they look back at all the struggles they’ve caused themselves and feel sad about their own weaknesses or poor choices, they can also consider the starting point they came from and the heights they've reached. In that case, they still have reason to believe in their strength and to take pride in their abilities.
CHAPTER VI.
THE PRIMITIVE STATE OF MAN.
Formed naked in body and in mind, man at first found himself thrown, as it were by chance, on a rough and savage land: an orphan, abandoned by the unknown power which had produced him, he saw not by his side beings descended from heaven to warn him of those wants which arise only from his senses, nor to instruct him in those duties which spring only from his wants. Like to other animals, without experience of the past, without foresight of the future, he wandered in the bosom of the forest, guided only and governed by the affections of his nature. By the pain of hunger, he was led to seek food and provide for his subsistence; by the inclemency of the air, he was urged to cover his body, and he made him clothes; by the attraction of a powerful pleasure, he approached a being like himself, and he perpetuated his kind.
Naked in body and in mind, man initially found himself thrown, as if by chance, into a harsh and wild land: an orphan, abandoned by the unknown force that had created him. He saw no beings beside him descended from heaven to guide him on the needs that arose only from his senses or to teach him the responsibilities that came from those needs. Like other animals, without knowledge of the past and no foresight of the future, he wandered in the depths of the forest, guided solely by the instincts of his nature. Driven by the pain of hunger, he sought out food to sustain himself; because of harsh weather, he felt the need to cover his body and made himself clothes; drawn by strong desire, he approached another being like himself and ensured the continuation of his species.
Thus the impressions which he received from every object, awakening his faculties, developed by degrees his understanding, and began to instruct his profound ignorance: his wants excited industry, dangers formed his courage; he learned to distinguish useful from noxious plants, to combat the elements, to seize his prey, to defend his life; and thus he alleviated its miseries.
Thus the experiences he gained from everything around him stimulated his abilities, gradually enhancing his understanding and starting to educate his deep ignorance: his needs sparked his work ethic, and challenges built his bravery; he learned to tell the difference between helpful and harmful plants, to face the elements, to catch his food, to protect his life; and in this way, he eased its hardships.
Thus self-love, aversion to pain, the desire of happiness, were the simple and powerful excitements which drew man from the savage and barbarous condition in which nature had placed him. And now, when his life is replete with enjoyments, when he may count each day by the comforts it brings, he may applaud himself and say:
Thus, self-love, the aversion to pain, and the desire for happiness were the basic yet strong motivations that pulled humans away from the savage and barbaric state that nature had put them in. And now, when their lives are full of pleasures, when they can measure each day by the comforts it brings, they can praise themselves and say:
"It is I who have produced the comforts which surround me; it is I who am the author of my own happiness; a safe dwelling, convenient clothing, abundant and wholesome nourishment, smiling fields, fertile hills, populous empires, all is my work; without me this earth, given up to disorder, would have been but a filthy fen, a wild wood, a dreary desert."
"I am the one who has created the comforts around me; I am the author of my own happiness. A safe home, comfortable clothing, plentiful and healthy food, flourishing fields, fertile hills, and thriving societies – all of it is my doing. Without me, this world, left to chaos, would be nothing but a muddy swamp, a wild forest, or a bleak desert."
Yes, creative man, receive my homage! Thou hast measured the span of the heavens, calculated the volume of the stars, arrested the lightning in its clouds, subdued seas and storms, subjected all the elements. Ah! how are so many sublime energies allied to so many errors?
Yes, creative person, accept my respect! You have measured the expanse of the sky, calculated the volume of the stars, captured lightning in its clouds, tamed seas and storms, and controlled all the elements. Ah! how are so many great powers connected to so many mistakes?
CHAPTER VII.
PRINCIPLES OF SOCIETY.
Wandering in the woods and on the banks of rivers in pursuit of game and fish, the first men, beset with dangers, assailed by enemies, tormented by hunger, by reptiles, by ravenous beasts, felt their own individual weakness; and, urged by a common need of safety, and a reciprocal sentiment of like evils, they united their resources and their strength; and when one incurred a danger, many aided and succored him; when one wanted subsistence, another shared his food with him. Thus men associated to secure their existence, to augment their powers, to protect their enjoyments; and self-love thus became the principle of society.
Wandering through the woods and along riverbanks in search of animals and fish, early humans faced dangers, enemies, hunger, snakes, and wild beasts, which made them acutely aware of their own vulnerabilities. Driven by a shared need for safety and mutual recognition of common struggles, they pooled their resources and strengths. When one person faced danger, many would lend a helping hand, and when one lacked food, another would share what they had. In this way, people came together to ensure their survival, enhance their abilities, and safeguard their pleasures; consequently, self-interest became the foundation of society.
Instructed afterwards by the experience of various and repeated accidents, by the fatigues of a wandering life, by the distress of frequent scarcity, men reasoned with themselves and said:
Informed later by the experiences of various and repeated events, by the struggles of a nomadic life, by the hardships of regular shortages, people reflected and said:
"Why consume our days in seeking scattered fruits from a parsimonious soil? why exhaust ourselves in pursuing prey which eludes us in the woods or waters? why not collect under our hands the animals that nourish us? why not apply our cares in multiplying and preserving them? We will feed on their increase, be clothed in their skins, and live exempt from the fatigues of the day and solicitude for the morrow."
"Why spend our days searching for scarce food from a stingy land? Why wear ourselves out chasing after animals that escape us in the woods or rivers? Why not gather the animals that provide for us? Why not focus on growing and protecting them? We can thrive on their growth, wear their skins, and live free from the exhaustion of today and worry for tomorrow."
And men, aiding one another, seized the nimble goat, the timid sheep; they tamed the patient camel, the fierce bull, the impetuous horse; and, applauding their own industry, they sat down in the joy of their souls, and began to taste repose and comfort: and self-love, the principle of all reasoning, became the incitement to every art, and every enjoyment.
And men, helping each other, caught the quick goat and the shy sheep; they trained the steady camel, the strong bull, and the eager horse; and, proud of their hard work, they sat down filled with happiness, starting to experience rest and ease: and self-love, the foundation of all thinking, drove them towards every skill and every pleasure.
When, therefore, men could pass long days in leisure, and in communication of their thoughts, they began to contemplate the earth, the heavens, and their own existence as objects of curiosity and reflection; they remarked the course of the seasons, the action of the elements, the properties of fruits and plants; and applied their thoughts to the multiplication of their enjoyments. And in some countries, having observed that certain seeds contained a wholesome nourishment in a small volume, convenient for transportation and preservation, they imitated the process of nature; they confided to the earth rice, barley, and corn, which multiplied to the full measure of their hope; and having found the means of obtaining within a small compass and without removal, plentiful subsistence and durable stores, they established themselves in fixed habitations; they built houses, villages, and towns; formed societies and nations; and self-love produced all the developments of genius and of power.
When people started to have long, leisurely days to share their thoughts, they began to think about the earth, the sky, and their own existence as things worth exploring. They noticed the changing seasons, the forces of nature, and the characteristics of fruits and plants; they focused on ways to enhance their pleasures. In some places, they realized that certain seeds had nutritious food packed in a small size, which was easy to transport and store, so they mimicked nature's process. They planted rice, barley, and corn in the ground, which grew beyond their expectations. Once they found a way to secure abundant food and long-lasting supplies without having to move around, they settled down and built homes, villages, and towns; formed communities and nations; and their self-interest led to all the advancements in creativity and power.
Thus by the aid of his own faculties, man has raised himself to the astonishing height of his present fortune. Too happy if, observing scrupulously the law of his being, he had faithfully fulfilled its only and true object! But, by a fatal imprudence, sometimes mistaking, sometimes transgressing its limits, he has launched forth into a labyrinth of errors and misfortunes; and self-love, sometimes unruly, sometimes blind, became a principle fruitful in calamities.
Thus, with the help of his own abilities, man has elevated himself to the incredible height of his current situation. He would be lucky if, by carefully following the laws of his nature, he had genuinely achieved its true purpose! But, due to a harmful mistake, sometimes misunderstanding and sometimes overstepping its boundaries, he has ventured into a maze of errors and misfortunes; and self-love, at times uncontrollable and at times blind, has become a source of many disasters.
CHAPTER VIII.
SOURCES OF THE EVILS OF SOCIETY.
In truth, scarcely were the faculties of men developed, when, inveigled by objects which gratify the senses, they gave themselves up to unbridled desires. The sweet sensations which nature had attached to their real wants, to endear to them their existence, no longer satisfied them. Not content with the abundance offered by the earth or produced by industry, they wished to accumulate enjoyments and coveted those possessed by their fellow men. The strong man rose up against the feeble, to take from him the fruit of his labor; the feeble invoked another feeble one to repel the violence. Two strong ones then said:
In reality, as soon as people's abilities developed, they were tempted by things that pleased their senses and gave in to their unchecked desires. The pleasurable experiences that nature had attached to their genuine needs, meant to make life enjoyable, were no longer enough for them. Unsatisfied with the wealth provided by the earth or created through hard work, they wanted to gather more pleasures and envied those that others had. The strong man stood up against the weak to seize the fruits of his labor; the weak called upon another weak person to push back against the aggression. Two strong ones then said:
"Why fatigue ourselves to produce enjoyments which we may find in the hands of the weak? Let us join and despoil them; they shall labor for us, and we will enjoy without labor."
"Why exhaust ourselves to create pleasures that we can easily take from those who are weak? Let's team up and take what they have; they'll work for us, and we'll enjoy the rewards without putting in any effort."
And the strong associating for oppression and the weak for resistance, men mutually afflicted each other; and a general and fatal discord spread over the earth, in which the passions, assuming a thousand new forms, have generated a continued chain of misfortunes.
And the powerful teamed up for oppression while the vulnerable stood together for resistance, causing mutual suffering; a widespread and devastating conflict spread across the earth, where passions, taking on countless new forms, created an ongoing series of misfortunes.
Thus the same self-love which, moderate and prudent, was a principle of happiness and perfection, becoming blind and disordered, was transformed into a corrupting poison; and cupidity, offspring and companion of ignorance, became the cause of all the evils that have desolated the earth.
Thus, the same self-love that, when moderate and prudent, served as a foundation for happiness and growth, became blind and chaotic, turning into a corrupting poison; and greed, the child and companion of ignorance, became the root of all the evils that have devastated the earth.
Yes, ignorance and cupidity! these are the twin sources of all the torments of man! Biased by these into false ideas of happiness, he has mistaken or broken the laws of nature in his own relation with external objects; and injuring his own existence, has violated individual morality; shutting through these his heart to compassion, and his mind to justice, he has injured and afflicted his equal, and violated social morality. From ignorance and cupidity, man has armed against man, family against family, tribe against tribe; and the earth is become a theatre of blood, of discord, and of rapine. By ignorance and cupidity, a secret war, fermenting in the bosom of every state, has separated citizen from citizen; and the same society has divided itself into oppressors and oppressed, into masters and slaves; by these, the heads of a nation, sometimes insolent and audacious, have forged its chains within its own bowels; and mercenary avarice has founded political despotism. Sometimes, hypocritical and cunning, they have called from heaven a lying power, and a sacrilegious yoke; and credulous cupidity has founded religious despotism. By these have been perverted the ideas of good and evil, just and unjust, vice and virtue; and nations have wandered in a labyrinth of errors and calamities.
Yes, ignorance and greed! These are the twin sources of all human suffering! Misled by these into false ideas of happiness, people have misunderstood or violated the laws of nature in their relationships with the world; by harming their own existence, they have broken individual morality. Closing their hearts to compassion and their minds to justice, they have harmed and oppressed others, violating social morality. Fueled by ignorance and greed, people have turned against each other—families against families, tribes against tribes; the earth has become a stage for bloodshed, conflict, and looting. Due to ignorance and greed, a hidden war has brewed within every society, separating citizens from one another; the same communities have split into oppressors and the oppressed, into masters and slaves. Sometimes, the leaders of a nation, arrogant and bold, have forged chains from within their own ranks; and greedy self-interest has given rise to political tyranny. At times, deceitful and cunning, they have invoked a false power from above and imposed a sacrilegious burden; gullible greed has established religious tyranny. Because of these forces, the concepts of good and evil, justice and injustice, vice and virtue have been twisted, leading nations into a maze of mistakes and tragedies.
The cupidity of man and his ignorance,—these are the evil genii which have wasted the earth! These are the decrees of fate which have overthrown empires! These are the celestial anathemas which have smitten these walls once so glorious, and converted the splendor of a populous city into a solitude of mourning and of ruins! But as in the bosom of man have sprung all the evils which have afflicted his life, there he also is to seek and to find their remedies.
The greed of humans and their ignorance—these are the harmful forces that have destroyed the world! These are the fateful decisions that have toppled empires! These are the divine curses that have struck down these once-glorious walls, turning the magnificence of a bustling city into a place of sorrow and ruins! But just as all the troubles that have plagued humanity come from within, so too must one look to themselves to find the solutions.
CHAPTER IX.
ORIGIN OF GOVERNMENT AND LAWS.
In fact, it soon happened that men, fatigued with the evils they reciprocally inflicted, began to sigh for peace; and reflecting on their misfortunes and the causes of them, they said:
In fact, it didn't take long for people, tired of the harm they were causing each other, to start longing for peace; and while reflecting on their misfortunes and what caused them, they said:
"We are mutually injuring each other by our passions; and, aiming to grasp every thing, we hold nothing. What one seizes to-day, another takes to-morrow, and our cupidity reacts upon ourselves. Let us establish judges, who shall arbitrate our rights, and settle our differences! When the strong shall rise against the weak, the judge shall restrain him, and dispose of our force to suppress violence; and the life and property of each shall be under the guarantee and protection of all; and all shall enjoy the good things of nature."
"We're hurting each other with our desires, and while we try to grab everything, we end up with nothing. What one person takes today, another grabs tomorrow, and our greed comes back to hurt us. Let's appoint judges to settle our disputes and arbitrate our rights! When the strong attack the weak, the judge will hold them back and use our strength to stop violence; everyone's life and property will be protected by all, and everyone will benefit from the good things nature has to offer."
Conventions were thus formed in society, sometimes express, sometimes tacit, which became the rule for the action of individuals, the measure of their rights, the law of their reciprocal relations; and persons were appointed to superintend their observance, to whom the people confided the balance to weigh rights, and the sword to punish transgressions.
Conventions were established in society, sometimes openly, sometimes quietly, which became the standard for individual actions, the measure of their rights, and the guidelines for their relationships with each other; individuals were chosen to oversee their adherence, to whom the community entrusted the scales to measure rights and the power to punish violations.
Thus was established among individuals a happy equilibrium of force and action, which constituted the common security. The name of equity and of justice was recognized and revered over the earth; every one, assured of enjoying in peace, the fruits of his toil, pursued with energy the objects of his attention; and industry, excited and maintained by the reality or the hope of enjoyment, developed, all the riches of art and of nature. The fields were covered with harvests, the valleys with flocks, the hills with fruits, the sea with vessels, and man became happy and powerful on the earth. Thus did his own wisdom repair the disorder which his imprudence had occasioned; and that wisdom was only the effect of his own organization. He respected the enjoyments of others in order to secure his own; and cupidity found its corrective in the enlightened love of self.
Thus was established among individuals a happy balance of power and action, which made up the common security. The concepts of fairness and justice were recognized and respected around the world; everyone, confident they could enjoy the rewards of their hard work in peace, actively pursued their interests. Industry, fueled and sustained by either the reality or the hope of enjoyment, blossomed, producing all the riches of art and nature. The fields were filled with harvests, the valleys with livestock, the hills with fruits, the sea with ships, and people became happy and prosperous on the earth. Thus did his own wisdom fix the chaos that his carelessness had caused; and that wisdom was simply the result of his own organization. He respected the joys of others to safeguard his own; and greed found its balance in a thoughtful love of oneself.
Thus the love of self, the moving principle of every individual, becomes the necessary foundation of every association; and on the observance of that law of our nature has depended the fate of nations. Have the factitious and conventional laws tended to that object and accomplished that aim? Every one, urged by a powerful instinct, has displayed all the faculties of his being; and the sum of individual felicities has constituted the general felicity. Have these laws, on the contrary, restrained the effort of man toward his own happiness? His heart, deprived of its exciting principle, has languished in inactivity, and from the oppression of individuals has resulted the weakness of the state.
Thus, self-love, the driving force behind each person, becomes the essential foundation of every group, and the fate of nations has depended on following that law of our nature. Have artificial and conventional laws worked towards that goal and achieved that purpose? Everyone, driven by a strong instinct, has shown all their abilities; and the total of individual happiness has made up the general happiness. On the other hand, have these laws held back people's efforts for their own happiness? Without its motivating force, the heart has withered in inactivity, and the oppression of individuals has led to the weakness of the state.
As self-love, impetuous and improvident, is ever urging man against his equal, and consequently tends to dissolve society, the art of legislation and the merit of administrators consists in attempering the conflict of individual cupidities, in maintaining an equilibrium of powers, and securing to every one his happiness, in order that, in the shock of society against society, all the members may have a common interest in the preservation and defence of the public welfare.
As self-love, impulsive and thoughtless, constantly pushes people against each other, which can tear society apart, the skill of lawmakers and the value of leaders lies in balancing individual desires, maintaining a balance of power, and ensuring that everyone can pursue their happiness. This way, when one part of society comes into conflict with another, all members have a shared interest in protecting and promoting the common good.
The internal splendor and prosperity of empires then, have had for their efficient cause the equity of their laws and government; and their respective external powers have been in proportion to the number of persons interested, and their degree of interest in the public welfare.
The internal wealth and success of empires have been driven by the fairness of their laws and governance, while their external power has depended on the number of people involved and how much they care about the public good.
On the other hand, the multiplication of men, by complicating their relations, having rendered the precise limitation of their rights difficult, the perpetual play of the passions having produced incidents not foreseen—their conventions having been vicious, inadequate, or nugatory—in fine, the authors of the laws having sometimes mistaken, sometimes disguised their objects; and their ministers, instead of restraining the cupidity of others, having given themselves up to their own; all these causes have introduced disorder and trouble into societies; and the viciousness of laws and the injustice of governments, flowing from cupidity and ignorance, have become the causes of the misfortunes of nations, and the subversion of states.
On the other hand, as the population grows, the complexity of relationships has made it hard to clearly define everyone's rights. The ongoing conflicts driven by people's emotions have led to unexpected situations. Their agreements have often been flawed, insufficient, or ineffective. In short, lawmakers have sometimes misidentified or concealed their true intentions, and instead of controlling the greed of others, those in power have given in to their own. All these factors have led to disorder and strife in societies, and the flaws in laws and the unfairness of governments, stemming from greed and ignorance, have caused the suffering of nations and the downfall of states.
CHAPTER X.
GENERAL CAUSES OF THE PROSPERITY OF ANCIENT STATES.
Such, O man who seekest wisdom, such have been the causes of revolution in the ancient states of which thou contemplatest the ruins! To whatever spot I direct my view, to whatever period my thoughts recur, the same principles of growth or destruction, of rise or fall, present themselves to my mind. Wherever a people is powerful, or an empire prosperous, there the conventional laws are conformable with the laws of nature—the government there procures for its citizens a free use of their faculties, equal security for their persons and property. If, on the contrary, an empire goes to ruin, or dissolves, it is because its laws have been vicious, or imperfect, or trodden under foot by a corrupt government. If the laws and government, at first wise and just, become afterwards depraved, it is because the alternation of good and evil is inherent to the heart of man, to a change in his propensities, to his progress in knowledge, to a combination of circumstances and events; as is proved by the history of the species.
Such, O man seeking wisdom, have been the reasons for revolutions in the ancient states whose ruins you contemplate! No matter where I look or what period I think of, the same principles of growth or destruction, of rise or fall, come to mind. Wherever a people is strong, or an empire is thriving, the conventional laws align with the laws of nature—there, the government provides its citizens with the freedom to use their abilities and equal protection for their persons and property. Conversely, if an empire falls apart or collapses, it’s because its laws have been flawed or corrupted, or are being disregarded by a corrupt government. If the laws and government, once wise and just, later become corrupt, it’s due to the constant shift between good and evil that is inherent in the human heart, changes in his tendencies, progress in knowledge, and a mix of circumstances and events; as demonstrated by the history of mankind.
In the infancy of nations, when men yet lived in the forest, subject to the same wants, endowed with the same faculties, all were nearly equal in strength; and that equality was a circumstance highly advantageous in the composition of society: as every individual, thus feeling himself sufficiently independent of every other, no one was the slave, none thought of being the master of another. Man, then a novice, knew neither servitude nor tyranny; furnished with resources sufficient for his existence, he thought not of borrowing from others; owning nothing, requiring nothing, he judged the rights of others by his own, and formed ideas of justice sufficiently exact. Ignorant, moreover, in the art of enjoyments, unable to produce more than his necessaries, possessing nothing superfluous, cupidity remained dormant; or if excited, man, attacked in his real wants, resisted it with energy, and the foresight of such resistance ensured a happy balance.
In the early days of nations, when people lived in the forest, facing the same needs and sharing similar abilities, they were almost equal in strength. This equality was a significant advantage for forming society: every individual felt sufficiently independent from others, so no one was a slave, and no one aspired to be a master over another. At that time, humans, inexperienced, knew nothing of servitude or tyranny; equipped with enough resources to survive, they didn't think about relying on others. Having nothing and needing nothing, they judged others' rights by their own and had a clear sense of justice. Also, because they were unaware of how to enjoy excess and could only produce what they needed, greed stayed dormant; and if it sparked, when faced with real needs, people energetically resisted it, ensuring a happy balance through this foresight.
Thus original equality, in default of compact, maintained freedom of person, security of property, good manners, and order. Every one labored by himself and for himself; and the mind of man, being occupied, wandered not to culpable desires. He had few enjoyments, but his wants were satisfied; and as indulgent nature had made them less than his resources, the labor of his hands soon produced abundance—abundance, population; the arts unfolded, culture extended, and the earth, covered with numerous inhabitants, was divided into different dominions.
So, original equality, in the absence of agreements, ensured personal freedom, property security, good behavior, and order. Everyone worked independently and for their own benefit; and since people's minds were engaged, they didn't fall into wrongful desires. They had few pleasures, but their needs were met; and because nature had made those needs smaller than their resources, the work of their hands quickly created plenty—plenty for a growing population; the arts blossomed, culture spread, and the earth, filled with many people, was divided into different territories.
The relations of man becoming complicated, the internal order of societies became more difficult to maintain. Time and industry having generated riches, cupidity became more active; and because equality, practicable among individuals, could not subsist among families, the natural equilibrium was broken; it became necessary to supply it by a factitious equilibrium; to set up chiefs, to establish laws; and in the primitive inexperience, it necessarily happened that these laws, occasioned by cupidity, assumed its character. But different circumstances concurred to correct the disorder, and oblige governments to be just.
As people's relationships grew more complicated, it became harder to maintain order within societies. Time and industry generated wealth, increasing greed; and since equality that works among individuals can't exist among families, the natural balance was disrupted. It became necessary to create an artificial balance—putting leaders in place and establishing laws. In the early days, given their lack of experience, the laws that emerged from greed reflected that same greed. However, various factors worked together to address the chaos and push governments to be fair.
States, in fact, being weak at first, and having foreign enemies to fear, the chiefs found it their interest not to oppress their subjects; for, by lessening the confidence of the citizens in their government, they would diminish their means of resistance—they would facilitate foreign invasion, and by exercising arbitrary power, have endangered their very existence.
States were initially weak and had foreign enemies to worry about, so the leaders realized it was in their best interest not to oppress their people. If they eroded the citizens' trust in their government, they would weaken their ability to resist, make foreign invasion easier, and by acting with unchecked power, put their own existence at risk.
In the interior, the firmness of the people repelled tyranny; men had contracted too long habits of independence; they had too few wants, and too much consciousness of their own strength.
In the interior, the resilience of the people pushed back against tyranny; they had developed long-standing habits of independence; they had few needs and a strong awareness of their own power.
States being of a moderate size, it was difficult to divide their citizens so as to make use of some for the oppression of others. Their communications were too easy, their interest too clear and simple: besides, every one being a proprietor and cultivator, no one needed to sell himself, and the despot could find no mercenaries.
States being of a moderate size, it was difficult to divide their citizens so as to make use of some for the oppression of others. Their communication was too easy, their interests too clear and simple: besides, everyone being a property owner and farmer, no one needed to sell themselves, and the despot could find no mercenaries.
If, then, dissensions arose, they were between family and family, faction and faction, and they interested a great number. The troubles, indeed, were warmer; but fears from abroad pacified discord at home. If the oppression of a party prevailed, the earth being still unoccupied, and man, still in a state of simplicity, finding every where the same advantages, the oppressed party emigrated, and carried elsewhere their independence.
If disagreements occurred, they were between families and factions, and they involved many people. The conflicts were intense; however, concerns from outside kept the peace at home. If one group was oppressed, with land still open and people living simply, finding the same opportunities everywhere, the oppressed group would leave and take their independence somewhere else.
The ancient states then enjoyed within themselves numerous means of prosperity and power. Every one finding his own well-being in the constitution of his country, took a lively interest in its preservation. If a stranger attacked it, having to defend his own field, his own house, he carried into combat all the passions of a personal quarrel; and, devoted to his own interests, he was devoted to his country.
The ancient states then had many ways to achieve prosperity and power. Everyone, finding their own well-being in their country's structure, took a genuine interest in its preservation. If a stranger attacked, defending his own land and home, he brought all the emotions of a personal conflict into the fight; committed to his own interests, he was also committed to his country.
As every action useful to the public attracted its esteem and gratitude, every one became eager to be useful; and self-love multiplied talents and civic virtues.
As every action that benefited the public earned respect and gratitude, everyone became eager to be helpful; and self-interest increased talents and civic virtues.
Every citizen contributing equally by his talents and person, armies and funds were inexhaustible, and nations displayed formidable masses of power.
Every citizen contributing equally with their skills and efforts, armies and resources were endless, and nations showed impressive amounts of strength.
The earth being free, and its possession secure and easy, every one was a proprietor; and the division of property preserved morals, and rendered luxury impossible.
The earth was free, and owning land was secure and simple, so everyone was a landowner; this division of property maintained ethical standards and made luxury unattainable.
Every one cultivating for himself, culture was more active, produce more abundant; and individual riches became public wealth.
Everyone cultivating for themselves, agriculture was more active, production more abundant; and individual wealth became public wealth.
The abundance of produce rendering subsistence easy, population was rapid and numerous, and states attained quickly the term of their plenitude.
The abundance of food made it easy to survive, leading to rapid population growth, and states quickly reached their peak.
Productions increasing beyond consumption, the necessity of commerce arose; and exchanges took place between people and people; which augmented their activity and reciprocal advantages.
Productions grew faster than consumption, creating a need for trade; and exchanges happened between people, which boosted their activity and mutual benefits.
In fine, certain countries, at certain times, uniting the advantages of good government with a position on the route of the most active circulation, they became emporiums of flourishing commerce and seats of powerful domination. And on the shores of the Nile and Mediterranean, of the Tygris and Euphrates, the accumulated riches of India and of Europe raised in successive splendor a hundred different cities.
In summary, some countries, at certain times, combined the benefits of good governance with a location along the busiest trade routes, becoming hubs of thriving commerce and centers of strong power. Along the shores of the Nile and Mediterranean, and the Tigris and Euphrates, the wealth from India and Europe built up the impressive splendor of a hundred different cities over time.
The people, growing rich, applied their superfluity to works of common and public use; and this was in every state, the epoch of those works whose grandeur astonishes the mind; of those wells of Tyre, of those dykes of the Euphrates, of those subterranean conduits of Media,* of those fortresses of the desert, of those aqueducts of Palmyra, of those temples, of those porticoes. And such labors might be immense, without oppressing the nations; because they were the effect of an equal and common contribution of the force of individuals animated and free.
The people, growing wealthy, invested their surplus into projects for the common good; and in every state, this was the time for those impressive works that amaze the mind: the wells of Tyre, the dikes of the Euphrates, the underground channels of Media, the fortresses of the desert, the aqueducts of Palmyra, the temples, the porticoes. These efforts could be monumental without burdening the nations, as they resulted from a fair and collective contribution of motivated and free individuals.
* See respecting these monuments my Travels into Syria, vol. ii. p. 214.
* For information about these monuments, check my Travels into Syria, vol. ii. p. 214.
From the town or village of Samouat the course of the Euphrates is accompanied with a double bank, which descends as far as its junction with the Tygris, and from thence to the sea, being a length of about a hundred leagues, French measure. The height of these artificial banks is not uniform, but increases as you advance from the sea; it may be estimated at from twelve to fifteen feet. But for them, the inundation of the river would bury the country around, which is flat, to an extent of twenty or twenty-five leagues and even notwithstanding these banks, there has been in modern times an overflow, which has covered the whole triangle formed by the junction of this river to the Tygris, being a space of country of one hundred and thirty square leagues. By the stagnation of these waters an epidemical disease of the most fatal nature was occasioned. It follows from hence, 1. That all the flat country bordering upon these rivers, was originally a marsh; 2. That this marsh could not have been inhabited previously to the construction of the banks in question; 3. That these banks could not have been the work but of a population prior as to date; and the elevation of Babylon, therefore, must have been posterior to that of Nineveh, as I think I have chronologically demonstrated in the memoir above cited. See Encyclopedia, vol. xiii, of Antiquities.
From the town or village of Samouat, the Euphrates River flows alongside a double bank that extends all the way to its confluence with the Tigris and then down to the sea, covering about a hundred leagues in French measure. The height of these artificial banks isn't consistent; it gets higher as you move away from the sea, estimated to be between twelve and fifteen feet. Without them, the river's flooding would submerge the surrounding flat land for around twenty to twenty-five leagues. Even with these banks, there have been recent floods that inundated the entire area formed by the merging of the Euphrates and Tigris, covering about one hundred thirty square leagues of land. This stagnant water led to a deadly epidemic. From this, we can conclude: 1. That all the flat land near these rivers was originally a marsh; 2. That this marsh couldn’t have been inhabited before the banks were built; 3. That those banks must have been created by a population that existed before; thus, the rise of Babylon must have come after the rise of Nineveh, as I've demonstrated chronologically in the previously referenced paper. See Encyclopedia, vol. xiii, of Antiquities.
The modern Aderbidjan, which was a part of Medea, the mountains of Koulderstan, and those of Diarbekr, abound with subterranean canals, by means of which the ancient inhabitants conveyed water to their parched soil in order to fertilize it. It was regarded as a meritorious act and a religious duty prescribed by Zoroaster, who, instead of preaching celibacy, mortifications, and other pretended virtues of the monkish sort, repeats continually in the passages that are preserved respecting him in the Sad-der and the Zend-avesta:
The modern Azerbaijan, which was part of Media, along with the mountains of Kordestan and those of Diyarbakr, is filled with underground canals that ancient inhabitants used to bring water to their dry land to make it fertile. This was seen as a good deed and a religious obligation set by Zoroaster, who, instead of promoting celibacy, self-denial, and other false virtues typically associated with monks, constantly emphasizes in the texts that are preserved about him in the Sad-der and the Zend-avesta:
"That the action most pleasing to God is to plough and cultivate the earth, to water it with running streams, to multiply vegetation and living beings, to have numerous flocks, young and fruitful virgins, a multitude of children," etc., etc.
"That the action most pleasing to God is to farm and tend the land, to irrigate it with flowing streams, to increase plants and living creatures, to have many herds, young and fruitful women, a large number of children," etc., etc.
Among the aqueducts of Palmyra it appears certain, that, besides those which conducted water from the neighboring hills, there was one which brought it even from the mountains of Syria. It is to be traced a long way into the Desert where it escapes our search by going under ground.
Among the aqueducts of Palmyra, it seems clear that, in addition to those that brought water from the nearby hills, there was one that sourced it all the way from the mountains of Syria. This aqueduct can be followed for quite a distance into the Desert, where it slips from our view by going underground.
Thus ancient states prospered, because their social institutions conformed to the true laws of nature; and because men, enjoying liberty and security for their persons and their property, might display all the extent of their faculties,—all the energies of their self-love.
Thus ancient states thrived because their social institutions aligned with the true laws of nature, and because people, experiencing freedom and security for themselves and their property, could showcase the full range of their abilities—especially the drive of their self-interest.
CHAPTER XI.
GENERAL CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTIONS AND RUIN OF ANCIENT STATES.
Cupidity had nevertheless excited among men a constant and universal conflict, which incessantly prompting individuals and societies to reciprocal invasions, occasioned successive revolutions, and returning agitations.
Greed had nonetheless triggered a constant and widespread conflict among people, which continually urged individuals and societies to invade one another, leading to successive revolutions and ongoing unrest.
And first, in the savage and barbarous state of the first men, this audacious and fierce cupidity produced rapine, violence, and murder, and retarded for a long time the progress of civilization.
And first, in the brutal and wild state of early humans, this bold and aggressive greed led to theft, violence, and killing, hindering the advancement of civilization for a long time.
When afterwards societies began to be formed, the effect of bad habits, communicated to laws and governments, corrupted their institutions and objects, and established arbitrary and factitious rights, which depraved the ideas of justice, and the morality of the people.
When societies started to form later on, the impact of bad habits, passed onto laws and governments, corrupted their institutions and goals, and created arbitrary and artificial rights, which distorted the concepts of justice and the morality of the people.
Thus one man being stronger than another, their inequality—an accident of nature—was taken for her law;* and the strong being able to take the life of the weak, and yet sparing him, arrogated over his person an abusive right of property; and the slavery of individuals prepared the way for the slavery of nations.
Thus, one man being stronger than another, their inequality—an accident of nature—was seen as the law; and the strong, having the ability to take the life of the weak but choosing to spare him, claimed an abusive right of ownership over his person; and the enslavement of individuals set the stage for the enslavement of nations.
*Almost all the ancient philosophers and politicians have laid it down as a principle that men are born unequal, that nature his created some to be free, and others to be slaves. Expressions of this kind are to be found in Aristotle, and even in Plato, called the divine, doubtless in the same sense as the mythological reveries which he promulgated. With all the people of antiquity, the Gauls, the Romans, the Athenians, the right of the strongest was the right of nations; and from the same principle are derived all the political disorders and public national crimes that at present exist.
*Almost all ancient philosophers and politicians have established the idea that people are born unequal, with nature having created some to be free and others to be slaves. This notion can be found in Aristotle, and even in Plato, who is often referred to as divine, likely in the same way as the mythological fantasies he shared. Among all ancient cultures, including the Gauls, Romans, and Athenians, the principle of the strongest was the principle of nations; and all current political issues and public national crimes stem from this same principle.*
Because the head of a family could be absolute in his house, he made his own affections and desires the rule of his conduct; he gave or resumed his goods without equality, without justice; and paternal despotism laid the foundation of despotism in government.*
Because the head of a family could have complete control in his home, he made his own feelings and desires the standard for his behavior; he gave or took back his possessions without fairness or justice; and parental tyranny established the basis for tyranny in government.*
* Upon this single expression it would be easy to write a long and important chapter. We might prove in it, beyond contradiction, that all the abuses of national governments, have sprung from those of domestic government, from that government called patriarchal, which superficial minds have extolled without having analyzed it. Numberless facts demonstrate, that with every infant people, in every savage and barbarous state, the father, the chief of the family, is a despot, and a cruel and insolent despot. The wife is his slave, the children his servants. This king sleeps or smokes his pipe, while his wife and daughters perform all the drudgery of the house, and even that of tillage and cultivation, as far as occupations of this nature are practised in such societies; and no sooner have the boys acquired strength then they are allowed to beat the females and make them serve and wait upon them as they do upon their fathers. Similar to this is the state of our own uncivilized peasants. In proportion as civilization spreads, the manners become milder, and the condition of the women improves, till, by a contrary excess, they arrive at dominion, and then a nation becomes effeminate and corrupt. It is remarkable that parental authority is great in proportion as the government is despotic. China, India, and Turkey are striking examples of this. One would suppose that tyrants gave themselves accomplices and interested subaltern despots to maintain their authority. In opposition to this the Romans will be cited, but it remains to be proved that the Romans were men truly free and their quick passage from their republican despotism to their abject servility under the emperors, gives room at least for considerable doubt as to that freedom.
* Based on this one statement, it would be easy to write a long and significant chapter. We could demonstrate, without a doubt, that all the issues with national governments have originated from those of family governance—specifically the patriarchal system that superficial thinkers have praised without really analyzing it. Numerous facts show that in every new society, in every primitive and barbaric state, the father, the head of the family, acts as a tyrant, a brutal and arrogant tyrant. The wife is his servant, and the children are his laborers. This ruler relaxes or smokes his pipe while his wife and daughters handle all the household chores and, even, as far as it happens in such societies, agriculture. As soon as boys gain strength, they are allowed to hit the females and make them serve them, just as they do with their fathers. Our own uncivilized peasants are in a similar situation. As civilization progresses, behavior becomes gentler, and the status of women improves until, in an opposite extreme, they gain power, and then a nation becomes weak and corrupt. It’s notable that parental authority is greater when the government is tyrannical. China, India, and Turkey are clear examples of this. One might think that tyrants install accomplices and subordinate tyrants to maintain their control. In contrast, the Romans could be mentioned, but it still needs to be demonstrated that the Romans were truly free men, and their quick transition from republican tyranny to abject servitude under the emperors leaves significant doubt about that freedom.
In societies formed on such foundations, when time and labor had developed riches, cupidity restrained by the laws, became more artful, but not less active. Under the mask of union and civil peace, it fomented in the bosom of every state an intestine war, in which the citizens, divided into contending corps of orders, classes, families, unremittingly struggled to appropriate to themselves, under the name of supreme power, the ability to plunder every thing, and render every thing subservient to the dictates of their passions; and this spirit of encroachment, disguised under all possible forms, but always the same in its object and motives, has never ceased to torment the nations.
In societies built on these foundations, as time and labor created wealth, greed, kept in check by laws, became more clever but no less active. Behind the facade of unity and civil peace, it stirred up internal conflict within each state, where citizens, split into rival groups of orders, classes, and families, continually fought to claim for themselves, under the guise of supreme power, the right to exploit everything and make everything serve their desires. This spirit of overreach, masked in various forms but always consistent in its goals and motivations, has never stopped troubling nations.
Sometimes, opposing itself to all social compact, or breaking that which already existed, it committed the inhabitants of a country to the tumultuous shock of all their discords; and states thus dissolved, and reduced to the condition of anarchy, were tormented by the passions of all their members.
Sometimes, by going against all social agreements or breaking existing ones, it forced the people of a country into the chaotic clash of all their disagreements; and states that fell apart and were reduced to anarchy were plagued by the feelings of all their citizens.
Sometimes a nation, jealous of its liberty, having appointed agents to administer its government, these agents appropriated the powers of which they had only the guardianship: they employed the public treasures in corrupting elections, gaining partisans, in dividing the people among themselves. By these means, from being temporary they became perpetual; from elective, hereditary; and the state, agitated by the intrigues of the ambitious, by largesses from the rich and factious, by the venality of the poor and idle, by the influence of orators, by the boldness of the wicked, and the weakness of the virtuous, was convulsed with all the inconveniences of democracy.
Sometimes a nation, protective of its freedom, appoints representatives to run its government, but these representatives take on powers they were only supposed to oversee. They misuse public funds to manipulate elections, recruit supporters, and create divisions among the citizens. As a result, what started as a temporary arrangement turned into a permanent one; what was meant to be elected became hereditary. The state, stirred by the schemes of the ambitious, the bribes from the wealthy and influential, the corruption of the poor and idle, the persuasion of speakers, the audacity of the unethical, and the frailty of the honest, was thrown into chaos with all the problems of democracy.
The chiefs of some countries, equal in strength and mutually fearing each other, formed impious pacts, nefarious associations; and, apportioning among themselves all power, rank, and honor, unjustly arrogated privileges and immunities; erected themselves into separate orders and distinct classes; reduced the people to their control; and, under the name of aristocracy, the state was tormented by the passions of the wealthy and the great.
The leaders of some countries, equal in power and afraid of one another, made wicked agreements and harmful alliances; they divided all power, status, and honor among themselves, unfairly claiming privileges and immunities; they set themselves up as separate groups and distinct classes; they brought the people under their control; and, under the guise of aristocracy, the state was plagued by the desires of the rich and powerful.
Sacred impostors, in other countries, tending by other means to the same object, abused the credulity of the ignorant. In the gloom of their temples, behind the curtain of the altar, they made their gods act and speak; gave forth oracles, worked miracles, ordered sacrifices, levied offerings, prescribed endowments; and, under the names of theocracy and of religion, the state became tormented by the passions of the priests.
Sacred impostors in other countries, using different methods to achieve the same goal, took advantage of the ignorance of the people. In the shadows of their temples, behind the altar curtain, they made their gods act and speak; delivered oracles, performed miracles, commanded sacrifices, collected offerings, and set up endowments. Under the guise of theocracy and religion, the state became overwhelmed by the power of the priests.
Sometimes a nation, weary of its dissensions or of its tyrants, to lessen the sources of evil, submitted to a single master; but if it limited his powers, his sole aim was to enlarge them; if it left them indefinite, he abused the trust confided to him; and, under the name of monarchy, the state was tormented by the passions of kings and princes.
Sometimes a nation, tired of its internal conflicts or oppressive leaders, would put its trust in a single ruler to reduce the sources of trouble; however, if it restricted his powers, his main goal was to expand them. If his powers were left vague, he misused the trust placed in him; and under the guise of monarchy, the state experienced the turmoil brought on by the desires of kings and princes.
Then the factions, availing themselves of the general discontent, flattered the people with the hope of a better master; dealt out gifts and promises, deposed the despot to take his place; and their contests for the succession, or its partition, tormented the state with the disorders and devastations of civil war.
Then the factions, taking advantage of the widespread unhappiness, flattered the people with the hope of a better leader; handed out gifts and promises, overthrew the tyrant to take his position; and their battles for the succession, or its division, plagued the state with the chaos and destruction of civil war.
In fine, among these rivals, one more adroit, or more fortunate, gained the ascendency, and concentrated all power within himself. By a strange phenomenon, a single individual mastered millions of his equals, against their will and without their consent; and the art of tyranny sprung also from cupidity.
In short, among these rivals, one who was either more skilled or luckier rose to power and took control of everything. In a strange twist, one person dominated millions of others, despite their resistance and without their agreement; and the skill of tyranny also emerged from greed.
In fact, observing the spirit of egotism which incessantly divides mankind, the ambitious man fomented it with dexterity, flattered the vanity of one, excited the jealousy of another, favored the avarice of this, inflamed the resentment of that, and irritated the passions of all; then, placing in opposition their interests and prejudices, he sowed divisions and hatreds, promised to the poor the spoils of the rich, to the rich the subjection of the poor; threatened one man by another, this class by that; and insulating all by distrust, created his strength out of their weakness, and imposed the yoke of opinion, which they mutually riveted on each other. With the army he levied contributions, and with contributions he disposed of the army: dealing out wealth and office on these principles, he enchained a whole people in indissoluble bonds, and they languished under the slow consumption of despotism.
Actually, seeing how the spirit of selfishness constantly divides people, the ambitious individual skillfully stirred it up, flattering one person's vanity, provoking another's jealousy, catering to someone else's greed, stoking the resentment of yet another, and riling up everyone's emotions; then, by pitting their interests and biases against each other, he sowed discord and hatred, promising the poor the riches of the wealthy and the wealthy the submission of the poor; threatening one person by another, one class by another; and by fostering distrust among all, he built his power from their weaknesses and enforced a system of opinion that they collectively enforced on each other. With the army, he collected taxes, and with those taxes, he controlled the army: distributing wealth and positions based on these principles, he shackled an entire population in unbreakable chains, and they suffered under the gradual decay of tyranny.
Thus the same principle, varying its action under every possible form, was forever attenuating the consistence of states, and an eternal circle of vicissitudes flowed from an eternal circle of passions.
Thus the same principle, changing its effect in every possible way, was constantly weakening the stability of states, and a never-ending cycle of changes emerged from a never-ending cycle of emotions.
And this spirit of egotism and usurpation produced two effects equally operative and fatal: the one a division and subdivision of societies into their smallest fractions, inducing a debility which facilitated their dissolution; the other, a preserving tendency to concentrate power in a single hand,* which, engulfing successively societies and states, was fatal to their peace and social existence.
And this attitude of self-importance and taking control had two equally powerful and destructive effects: one was a division of societies into their smallest parts, leading to a weakness that made them fall apart; the other was a tendency to concentrate power in a single authority, which swallowed up societies and states one by one, ultimately threatening their peace and social stability.
* It is remarkable that this has in all instances been the constant progress of societies; beginning with a state of anarchy or democracy, that is, with a great division of power they have passed to aristocracy, and from aristocracy to monarchy. Does it not hence follow that those who constitute states under the democratic form, destine them to undergo all the intervening troubles between that and monarchy; but it should at the same time be proved that social experience is already exhausted for the human race, and that this spontaneous movement is not solely the effect of ignorance.
* It’s notable that this has consistently been the trend in societies; starting from a state of chaos or democracy, where power is widely divided, they've transitioned to aristocracy, and then from aristocracy to monarchy. Doesn't it follow that those who build states in a democratic way are setting them up to go through all the challenges that come between that and monarchy? But it also needs to be shown that social experience has already been fully explored by humanity, and that this natural progression isn’t just a result of ignorance.
Thus, as in a state, a party absorbed the nation, a family the party, and an individual the family; so a movement of absorption took place between state and state, and exhibited on a larger scale in the political order, all the particular evils of the civil order. Thus a state having subdued a state, held it in subjection in the form of a province; and two provinces being joined together formed a kingdom; two kingdoms being united by conquest, gave birth to empires of gigantic size; and in this conglomeration, the internal strength of states, instead of increasing, diminished; and the condition of the people, instead of ameliorating, became daily more abject and wretched, for causes derived from the nature of things.
Thus, just like a state can absorb a nation, a party can absorb a state, and a family can absorb a party, a similar type of absorption happens between states. This is seen on a larger scale in the political system, showcasing all the specific issues of civil society. So, when one state conquered another, it kept it under control as a province; when two provinces came together, they formed a kingdom; and when two kingdoms were united through conquest, they created massive empires. In this mix, the internal strength of states didn’t grow, but rather weakened; and the situation of the people, instead of improving, became increasingly miserable and terrible, due to inherent factors.
Because, in proportion as states increased in extent, their administration becoming more difficult and complicated, greater energies of power were necessary to move such masses; and there was no longer any proportion between the duties of sovereigns and their ability to perform their duties:
Because as states grew larger, their administration became more difficult and complicated, greater amounts of power were needed to manage such large populations; and there was no longer a balance between the responsibilities of rulers and their capacity to fulfill those responsibilities.
Because despots, feeling their weakness, feared whatever might develop the strength of nations, and studied only how to enfeeble them:
Because tyrants, aware of their fragility, feared anything that could strengthen nations and focused solely on how to weaken them:
Because nations, divided by the prejudices of ignorance and hatred, seconded the wickedness of their governments; and availing themselves reciprocally of subordinate agents, aggravated their mutual slavery:
Because countries, split by the biases of ignorance and hatred, supported the wrongdoing of their governments; and by using subordinate agents against each other, they worsened their shared oppression:
Because, the balance between states being destroyed, the strong more easily oppressed the weak.
Because the balance between states was destroyed, the strong could more easily oppress the weak.
Finally, because in proportion as states were concentrated, the people, despoiled of their laws, of their usages, and of the government of their choice, lost that spirit of personal identification with their government, which had caused their energy.
Finally, as states became more centralized, the people, stripped of their laws, traditions, and the government they chose, lost the sense of personal connection to their government that had fueled their determination.
And despots, considering empires as their private domains and the people as their property, gave themselves up to depredations, and to all the licentiousness of the most arbitrary authority.
And dictators, seeing empires as their personal territories and the people as their belongings, indulged in plunder and all the excesses of unchecked power.
And all the strength and wealth of nations were diverted to private expense and personal caprice; and kings, fatigued with gratification, abandoned themselves to all the extravagancies of factitious and depraved taste.* They must have gardens mounted on arcades, rivers raised over mountains, fertile fields converted into haunts for wild beasts; lakes scooped in dry lands, rocks erected in lakes, palaces built of marble and porphyry, furniture of gold and diamonds. Under the cloak of religion, their pride founded temples, endowed indolent priests, built, for vain skeletons, extravagant tombs, mausoleums and pyramids;** millions of hands were employed in sterile labors; and the luxury of princes, imitated by their parasites, and transmitted from grade to grade to the lowest ranks, became a general source of corruption and impoverishment.
And all the power and wealth of nations were redirected to private gain and personal whims; kings, tired of constant pleasure, indulged in all kinds of extravagant and twisted tastes. They demanded gardens set on arches, rivers raised over hills, fertile lands turned into wilderness for wild animals; lakes carved out in dry areas, rocks placed in lakes, palaces made of marble and porphyry, and furniture made of gold and diamonds. Under the guise of religion, their arrogance built temples, supported lazy priests, and constructed, for empty idols, lavish tombs, mausoleums, and pyramids; millions of people were employed in useless work; and the luxury of princes, copied by their courtiers and passed down to lower classes, became a widespread source of corruption and poverty.
* It is equally worthy of remark, that the conduct and manners of princes and kings of every country and every age, are found to be precisely the same at similar periods, whether of the formation or dissolution of empires. History every where presents the same pictures of luxury and folly; of parks, gardens, lakes, rocks, palaces, furniture, excess of the table, wine, women, concluding with brutality. The absurd rock in the garden of Versailles has alone cost three millions. I have sometimes calculated what might have been done with the expense of the three pyramids of Gizah, and I have found that it would easily have constructed from the Red Sea to Alexandria, a canal one hundred and fifty feet wide and thirty deep, completely covered in with cut stones and a parapet, together with a fortified and commercial town, consisting of four hundred houses, furnished with cisterns. What a difference in point of utility between such a canal and these pyramids! ** The learned Dupuis could not be persuaded that the pyramids were tombs; but besides the positive testimony of historians, read what Diodorus says of the religious and superstitious importance every Egyptian attached to building his dwelling eternal, b. 1. During twenty years, says Herodotus, a hundred thousand men labored every day to build the pyramid of the Egyptian Cheops. Supposing only three hundred days a year, on account of the sabbath, there will be 30 millions of days' work in a year, and 600 millions in twenty years; at 15 sous a day, this makes 450 millions of francs lost, without any further benefit. With this sum, if the king had shut the isthmus of Suez by a strong wall, like that of China, the destinies of Egypt might have been entirely changed. Foreign invasions would have been prevented, and the Arabs of the desert would neither have conquered nor harassed that country. Sterile labors! how many millions lost in putting one stone upon another, under the forms of temples and churches! Alchymists convert stones into gold; but architects change gold into stone. Woe to the kings (as well as subjects) who trust their purse to these two classes of empirics!
* It's also worth noting that the behavior and manners of princes and kings from every country and era are exactly the same during similar times, whether they are building or breaking down empires. History consistently shows us similar scenes of luxury and foolishness; of parks, gardens, lakes, rocks, palaces, furniture, lavish meals, wine, women, and ending with brutality. The ridiculous rock in the garden of Versailles alone cost three million. I’ve sometimes thought about what could have been achieved with the money spent on the three pyramids of Giza, and I found that it could have easily built a canal one hundred and fifty feet wide and thirty feet deep, running from the Red Sea to Alexandria, completely lined with cut stones and a parapet, along with a fortified trading town with four hundred houses equipped with cisterns. What a difference in utility between such a canal and these pyramids! ** The learned Dupuis couldn’t be convinced that the pyramids were tombs; however, aside from the positive accounts from historians, read what Diodorus says about the religious and superstitious importance every Egyptian attached to building his eternal dwelling, b. 1. For twenty years, Herodotus states, a hundred thousand men worked every day to build the pyramid of the Egyptian Cheops. Assuming only three hundred days of work a year due to the Sabbath, that’s 30 million days of labor each year, totaling 600 million over twenty years; at 15 sous a day, that amounts to 450 million francs wasted without any other benefits. With that amount, if the king had blocked the isthmus of Suez with a strong wall like the Great Wall of China, the fate of Egypt could have been completely different. Foreign invasions could have been prevented, and the desert Arabs wouldn’t have conquered or troubled that land. What pointless efforts! How many millions wasted building one stone on top of another in the form of temples and churches! Alchemists turn stones into gold; but architects turn gold into stone. Woe to the kings (and their subjects) who trust their money to these two groups of charlatans!
And in the insatiable thirst of enjoyment, the ordinary revenues no longer sufficing, they were augmented; the cultivator, seeing his labors increase without compensation, lost all courage; the merchant, despoiled, was disgusted with industry; the multitude, condemned to perpetual poverty, restrained their labor to simple necessaries; and all productive industry vanished.
And in the never-ending desire for pleasure, the usual sources of income weren't enough anymore, so they increased; the farmer, watching his efforts grow without reward, lost all motivation; the merchant, stripped of his resources, became fed up with working; the masses, stuck in constant poverty, limited their work to just the essentials; and all productive industry disappeared.
The surcharge of taxes rendering lands a burdensome possession, the poor proprietor abandoned his field, or sold it to the powerful; and fortune became concentrated in a few hands. All the laws and institutions favoring this accumulation, the nation became divided into a group of wealthy drones, and a multitude of mercenary poor; the people were degraded with indigence, the great with satiety, and the number of those interested in the preservation of the state decreasing, its strength and existence became proportionally precarious.
The added tax burdens made land ownership a heavy liability, causing struggling landowners to either abandon their fields or sell them to the powerful. Wealth became concentrated in the hands of a few. With laws and systems supporting this accumulation, the nation split into a group of wealthy elite and a vast number of struggling poor. The people faced degradation from poverty while the wealthy were overly satisfied, which led to a decrease in those invested in the stability of the state, making its strength and existence increasingly fragile.
On the other hand, emulation finding no object, science no encouragement, the mind sunk into profound ignorance.
On the other hand, without something to imitate and lacking support from science, the mind fell into deep ignorance.
The administration being secret and mysterious, there existed no means of reform or amelioration. The chiefs governing by force or fraud, the people viewed them as a faction of public enemies; and all harmony ceased between the governors and governed.
The administration was secretive and mysterious, leaving no way for reform or improvement. The leaders ruled through force or deceit, and the people saw them as a group of public enemies; all harmony between the rulers and the ruled disappeared.
And these vices having enervated the states of the wealthy part of Asia, the vagrant and indigent people of the adjacent deserts and mountains coveted the enjoyments of the fertile plains; and, urged by a cupidity common to all, attacked the polished empires, and overturned the thrones of their despots. These revolutions were rapid and easy; because the policy of tyrants had enfeebled the subjects, razed the fortresses, destroyed the warriors; and because the oppressed subjects remained without personal interest, and the mercenary soldiers without courage.
And these weaknesses weakened the wealthy regions of Asia. The homeless and poor people from the nearby deserts and mountains desired the comforts of the fertile plains. Driven by a common greed, they attacked the refined empires and toppled the thrones of their rulers. These revolutions happened quickly and easily because the tyrants' policies had weakened the people, destroyed the fortresses, and eliminated the warriors, leaving the oppressed subjects with no personal stakes and the hired soldiers without any bravery.
And hordes of barbarians having reduced entire nations to slavery, the empires, formed of conquerors and conquered, united in their bosom two classes essentially opposite and hostile. All the principles of society were dissolved: there was no longer any common interest, no longer any public spirit; and there arose a distinction of casts and races, which reduced to a regular system the maintenance of disorder; and he who was born of this or that blood, was born a slave or a tyrant—property or proprietor.
And groups of barbarians had enslaved entire nations, causing the empires, made up of conquerors and the conquered, to harbor two classes that were fundamentally opposed and hostile to each other. All the principles of society had broken down: there was no longer any common interest or sense of community; and a division of casts and races emerged, creating a structured system to maintain chaos. Those born of certain bloodlines were destined to be either slaves or tyrants—property or property owners.
The oppressors being less numerous than the oppressed it was necessary to perfect the science of oppression, in order to support this false equilibrium. The art of governing became the art of subjecting the many to the few. To enforce an obedience so contrary to instinct, the severest punishments were established, and the cruelty of the laws rendered manners atrocious. The distinction of persons establishing in the state two codes, two orders of criminal justice, two sets of laws, the people, placed between the propensities of the heart and the oath uttered from the mouth, had two consciences in contradiction with each other; and the ideas of justice and injustice had no longer any foundation in the understanding.
The oppressors were fewer in number than the oppressed, so it was essential to refine the practice of oppression to maintain this false balance. Governing became the art of controlling the majority for the benefit of the few. To enforce obedience that went against instinct, harsh punishments were implemented, and the cruelty of the laws made society brutal. The classification of individuals created two separate legal systems, two types of criminal justice, two sets of laws. The people, caught between their true feelings and the promises they made, ended up with two conflicting consciences, and the concepts of justice and injustice lost all grounding in understanding.
Under such a system, the people fell into dejection and despair; and the accidents of nature were added to the other evils which assailed them. Prostrated by so many calamities, they attributed their causes to superior and hidden powers; and, because they had tyrants on earth, they fancied others in heaven; and superstition aggravated the misfortunes of nations.
Under such a system, the people sank into sadness and hopelessness; and natural disasters were piled on top of the other problems they faced. Overwhelmed by so many hardships, they blamed their causes on higher and unseen forces; and since they suffered under tyrants on earth, they imagined there were others in the sky; and superstition made the nations' troubles even worse.
Fatal doctrines and gloomy and misanthropic systems of religion arose, which painted their gods, like their despots, wicked and envious. To appease them, man offered up the sacrifice of all his enjoyments. He environed himself in privations, and reversed the order of nature. Conceiving his pleasures to be crimes, his sufferings expiations, he endeavored to love pain, and to abjure the love of self. He persecuted his senses, hated his life; and a self-denying and anti-social morality plunged nations into the apathy of death.
Fatal beliefs and dark, misanthropic religious systems emerged, portraying their gods, much like their tyrants, as evil and envious. To satisfy them, people sacrificed all their joys. They surrounded themselves with deprivation and turned the natural order upside down. Believing their pleasures were sins and their sufferings atonements, they tried to embrace pain and reject self-love. They punished their senses, despised their lives; and a self-denying, anti-social morality dragged nations into a lifeless apathy.
But provident nature having endowed the heart of man with hope inexhaustible, when his desires of happiness were baffled on this earth, he pursued it into another world. By a sweet illusion he created for himself another country—an asylum where, far from tyrants, he should recover the rights of nature, and thence resulted new disorders. Smitten with an imaginary world, man despised that of nature. For chimerical hopes, he neglected realities. His life began to appear a troublesome journey—a painful dream; his body a prison, the obstacle to his felicity; and the earth, a place of exile and of pilgrimage, not worthy of culture. Then a holy indolence spread over the political world; the fields were deserted, empires depopulated, monuments neglected and deserts multiplied; ignorance, superstition and fanaticism, combining their operations, overwhelmed the earth with devastation and ruin.
But nature, being kind, gave humans an endless supply of hope, so when their desires for happiness were thwarted here on earth, they chased it into another world. Through a comforting illusion, they created a different place for themselves—an escape where, far from oppressors, they could reclaim their natural rights, leading to new troubles. Enchanted by a made-up world, people turned their backs on the natural one. For the sake of unrealistic hopes, they ignored the truths around them. Life started to feel like a burdensome journey—a painful dream; their bodies became prisons, hindering their happiness; and the earth turned into a place of exile and wandering, unworthy of cultivation. Then a sense of lazy holiness spread through the political landscape; fields were left untended, empires were depopulated, monuments were ignored, and deserts expanded; ignorance, superstition, and fanaticism joined forces, bringing destruction and ruin to the earth.
Thus agitated by their own passions, men, whether collectively or individually taken, always greedy and improvident, passing from slavery to tyranny, from pride to baseness, from presumption to despondency, have made themselves the perpetual instruments of their own misfortunes.
Thus stirred by their own emotions, people, whether as a group or as individuals, always eager and shortsighted, moving from servitude to oppression, from arrogance to shame, from overconfidence to despair, have continuously made themselves the tools of their own misfortunes.
These, then, are the principles, simple and natural, which regulated the destiny of ancient states. By this regular and connected series of causes and effects, they rose or fell, in proportion as the physical laws of the human heart were respected or violated; and in the course of their successive changes, a hundred different nations, a hundred different empires, by turns humbled, elevated, conquered, overthrown, have repeated for the earth their instructive lessons. Yet these lessons were lost for the generations which have followed! The disorders in times past have reappeared in the present age! The chiefs of the nations have continued to walk in the paths of falsehood and tyranny!—the people to wander in the darkness of superstition and ignorance!
These are the principles, simple and natural, that shaped the fate of ancient states. Through this consistent and connected chain of causes and effects, they rose or fell based on whether the basic laws of the human heart were honored or ignored. Throughout their different changes, countless nations and empires have risen and fallen, teaching valuable lessons to the world. Yet these lessons have been forgotten by the generations that came after! The problems of the past have resurfaced in today's world! The leaders of nations continue to follow the paths of deception and oppression, while the people remain lost in the darkness of superstition and ignorance!
Since then, continued the Genius, with renewed energy, since the experience of past ages is lost for the living—since the errors of progenitors have not instructed their descendants, the ancient examples are about to reappear; the earth will see renewed the tremendous scenes it has forgotten. New revolutions will agitate nations and empires; powerful thrones will again be overturned, and terrible catastrophes will again teach mankind that the laws of nature and the precepts of wisdom and truth cannot be infringed with impunity.
Since then, the Genius continued with renewed energy, because the lessons of the past are forgotten by the living—because the mistakes of ancestors haven't taught their descendants, the old examples are about to come back; the earth will witness the dramatic events it has forgotten. New revolutions will shake nations and empires; powerful thrones will be toppled again, and devastating disasters will remind humanity that the laws of nature and the principles of wisdom and truth cannot be broken without consequences.
CHAPTER XII.
LESSONS OF TIMES PAST REPEATED ON THE PRESENT.
Thus spoke the Genius. Struck with the justice and coherence of his discourse, assailed with a crowd of ideas, repugnant to my habits yet convincing to my reason, I remained absorbed in profound silence. At length, while with serious and pensive mien, I kept my eyes fixed on Asia, suddenly in the north, on the shores of the Black sea, and in the fields of the Crimea, clouds of smoke and flame attracted my attention. They appeared to rise at the same time from all parts of the peninsula; and passing by the isthmus into the continent, they ran, as if driven by a westerly wind, along the oozy lake of Azof, and disappeared in the grassy plains of Couban; and following more attentively the course of these clouds, I observed that they were preceded or followed by swarms of moving creatures, which, like ants or grasshoppers disturbed by the foot of a passenger, agitated themselves with vivacity. Sometimes these swarms appeared to advance and rush against each other; and numbers, after the concussion, remained motionless. While disquieted at this spectacle, I strained my sight to distinguish the objects.
Thus spoke the Genius. Amazed by the logic and clarity of his words, overwhelmed by a flood of thoughts that clashed with my usual beliefs yet made sense to my mind, I stayed lost in deep silence. Eventually, while I had a serious and thoughtful expression and kept my gaze on Asia, I suddenly noticed clouds of smoke and flames rising in the north, on the shores of the Black Sea and in the fields of Crimea. They seemed to erupt simultaneously from all parts of the peninsula; moving across the isthmus into the mainland, they traveled, as if pushed by a westerly wind, along the muddy Lake of Azov and vanished into the grassy plains of Kuban. As I followed these clouds more closely, I noticed they were accompanied by swarms of moving creatures, which stirred with energy like ants or grasshoppers disturbed by someone's foot. At times, these swarms seemed to charge at each other, and many, after the collision, lay still. While troubled by this sight, I strained to see the details.
Do you see, said the Genius, those flames which spread over the earth, and do you comprehend their causes and effects?
Do you see those flames spreading across the earth? Do you understand their causes and effects?
Oh! Genius, I answered, I see those columns of flame and smoke, and something like insects, accompanying them; but, when I can scarcely discern the great masses of cities and monuments, how should I discover, such little creatures? I can just perceive that these insects mimic battle, for they advance, retreat, attack and pursue.
Oh! Genius, I replied, I see those columns of fire and smoke, along with what looks like insects moving beside them; but, when I can barely make out the huge shapes of cities and monuments, how am I supposed to notice such tiny creatures? I can only just tell that these insects are acting out a battle, as they move forward, pull back, attack, and chase each other.
It is no mimicry, said the Genius, these are real battles.
It’s not imitation, the Genius said; these are actual battles.
And what, said I, are those mad animalculae, which destroy each other? Beings of a day! will they not perish soon enough?
And what are those crazy little creatures that kill each other? Beings that last just a day! Won't they die off soon enough?
Then the Genius, touching my sight and hearing, again directed my eyes towards the same object. Look, said he, and listen!
Then the Genius, touching my sight and hearing, again directed my eyes towards the same object. "Look," he said, "and listen!"
Ah! wretches, cried I, oppressed with grief, these columns of flame! these insects! oh! Genius, they are men. These are the ravages of war! These torrents of flame rise from towns and villages! I see the squadrons who kindle them, and who, sword in hand overrun the country: they drive before them crowds of old men, women, and children, fugitive and desolate: I perceive other horsemen, who with shouldered lances, accompany and guide them. I even recognize them to be Tartars by their led horses,* their kalpacks, and tufts of hair: and, doubtless, they who pursue, in triangular hats and green uniforms, are Muscovites. Ah! I now comprehend, a war is kindled between the empire of the Czars and that of the Sultans.
Ah! Wretches, I cried, overwhelmed with grief, these columns of flame! These insects! Oh! Genius, they are men. This is the destruction of war! These torrents of flame rise from towns and villages! I see the troops setting them ablaze, sword in hand, sweeping across the land: they drive before them crowds of old men, women, and children, fleeing and broken-hearted: I notice other riders, armed with lances, who accompany and direct them. I even recognize them as Tartars by their led horses, their kalpacks, and tufts of hair: and, without a doubt, those pursuing them, wearing triangular hats and green uniforms, are Muscovites. Ah! Now I understand, a war has erupted between the empire of the Czars and that of the Sultans.
* A Tartar horseman has always two horses, of which he leads one in hand. The Kalpeck is a bonnet made of the skin of a sheep or other animal. The part of the head covered by this bonnet is shaved, with the exception of a tuft, about the size of a crown piece, and which is suffered to grow to the length of seven or eight inches, precisely where our priests place their tonsure. It is by this tuft of hair, worn by the majority of Mussulmen, that the angel of the tomb is to take the elect and carry them into paradise.
* A Tartar horseman always has two horses, leading one by the reins. The Kalpeck is a cap made from the skin of a sheep or another animal. The part of the head covered by this cap is shaved, except for a tuft about the size of a coin, which is allowed to grow to seven or eight inches long, right where our priests have their tonsure. It is by this tuft of hair, worn by most Muslims, that the angel of the tomb is believed to take the chosen ones and carry them into paradise.
Not yet, replied the Genius; this is only a preliminary. These Tartars have been, and might still he troublesome neighbors. The Muscovites are driving them off, finding their country would be a convenient extension of their own limits; and as a prelude to another revolution, the throne of the Guerais is destroyed.
Not yet, replied the Genius; this is just a start. These Tartars have been, and could still be, annoying neighbors. The Muscovites are pushing them out, realizing their land would be a useful addition to their territory; and as a lead-up to another revolution, the throne of the Guerais is taken down.
And in fact, I saw the Russian standards floating over the Crimea: and soon after their flag waving on the Euxine.
And actually, I saw the Russian flags flying over Crimea: and shortly after, their flag waving on the Black Sea.
Meanwhile, at the cry of the flying Tartars, the Mussulman empire was in commotion. They are driving off our brethren, cried the children of Mahomet: the people of the prophet are outraged! infidels occupy a consecrated land and profane the temples of Islamism.* Let us arm; let us rush to combat, to avenge the glory of God and our own cause.
Meanwhile, at the shout of the flying Tartars, the Muslim empire was in turmoil. They are taking our brothers, shouted the followers of Muhammad: the people of the prophet are outraged! Non-believers are occupying sacred land and desecrating the temples of Islam. Let us arm ourselves; let us rush into battle, to defend the glory of God and our own cause.
* It is not in the power of the Sultan to cede to a foreign power a province inhabited by true believers. The people, instigated by the lawyers, would not fail to revolt. This is one reason which has led those who know the Turks, to regard as chimerical the ceding of Candia, Cyprus, and Egypt, projected by certain European potentates.
* The Sultan cannot hand over a province populated by true believers to a foreign power. The people, incited by the lawyers, would certainly rebel. This is one reason why those familiar with the Turks consider the idea of ceding Candia, Cyprus, and Egypt, as proposed by some European leaders, to be unrealistic.
And a general movement of war took place in both empires. In every part armed men assembled. Provisions, stores, and all the murderous apparatus of battle were displayed. The temples of both nations, besieged by an immense multitude, presented a spectacle which fixed all my attention.
And a general movement of war happened in both empires. In every part, armed men gathered. Supplies, resources, and all the deadly tools of battle were on display. The temples of both nations, surrounded by a huge crowd, created a scene that captured all my attention.
On one side, the Mussulmen gathered before their mosques, washed their hands and feet, pared their nails, and combed their beards; then spreading carpets upon the ground, and turning towards the south, with their arms sometimes crossed and sometimes extended, they made genuflexions and prostrations, and recollecting the disasters of the late war, they exclaimed:
On one side, the Muslims gathered in front of their mosques, washed their hands and feet, trimmed their nails, and combed their beards; then laying carpets on the ground and facing south, with their arms sometimes crossed and sometimes raised, they knelt and bowed down. Remembering the tragedies of the recent war, they shouted:
God of mercy and clemency! hast thou then abandoned thy faithful people? Thou who hast promised to thy Prophet dominion over nations, and stamped his religion by so many triumphs, dost thou deliver thy true believers to the swords of infidels?
God of mercy and compassion! Have you then abandoned your faithful people? You who promised your Prophet power over nations and confirmed his religion with so many victories, do you hand over your true believers to the swords of non-believers?
And the Imans and the Santons said to the people:
And the Imams and the Saints said to the people:
It is in chastisement of your sins. You eat pork; you drink wine; you touch unclean things. God hath punished you. Do penance therefore; purify; repeat the profession of faith;* fast from the rising to the setting sun; give the tenth of your goods to the mosques; go to Mecca; and God will render you victorious.
It is a punishment for your sins. You eat pork, you drink wine, and you touch things that are unclean. God has punished you. So, do penance; purify yourself; reaffirm your faith; fast from sunrise to sunset; give a tenth of your belongings to the mosques; go to Mecca; and God will grant you victory.
* There is but one God, and Mahomet is his prophet.
* There is only one God, and Muhammad is his prophet.
And the people, recovering courage, uttered loud cries:
And the people, regaining their courage, shouted loudly:
There is but one God, said they transported with fury, and Mahomet is his prophet! Accursed be he who believeth not!
There is only one God, they shouted in anger, and Muhammad is his prophet! Cursed is anyone who does not believe!
God of goodness, grant us to exterminate these Christians; it is for thy glory we fight, and our death is a martyrdom for thy name. And then, offering victims, they prepared for battle.
God of goodness, help us to wipe out these Christians; we fight for your glory, and our death will be a martyrdom in your name. And then, offering sacrifices, they got ready for battle.
On the other side, the Russians, kneeling, said:
On the other side, the Russians, kneeling, said:
We render thanks to God, and celebrate his power. He hath strengthened our arm to humble his enemies. Hear our prayers, thou God of mercy! To please thee, we will pass three days without eating either meat or eggs. Grant us to extirpate these impious Mahometans, and to overturn their empire. To thee we will consecrate the tenth of our spoil; to thee we will raise new temples.
We give thanks to God and celebrate His power. He has strengthened us to defeat His enemies. Hear our prayers, merciful God! To please You, we will spend three days fasting from meat and eggs. Help us to eliminate these impious Muslims and bring down their empire. We will dedicate a tenth of our spoils to You; we will build new temples in Your honor.
And the priests filled the churches with clouds of smoke, and said to the people:
And the priests filled the churches with clouds of smoke and said to the people:
We pray for you, God accepteth our incense, and blesseth your arms. Continue to fast and to fight; confess to us your secret sins; give your wealth to the church; we will absolve you from your crimes, and you shall die in a state of grace.
We pray for you, God accepts our offerings, and blesses your strength. Keep fasting and fighting; confess your hidden sins to us; donate your wealth to the church; we will forgive your wrongdoings, and you will die in a state of grace.
And they sprinkled water upon the people, dealt out to them, as amulets and charms, small relics of the dead, and the people breathed war and combat.
And they sprinkled water on the people, handing out small relics of the dead as amulets and charms, and the people were filled with thoughts of war and battle.
Struck with this contrast of the same passions, and grieving for their fatal consequences, I was considering the difficulty with which the common judge could yield to prayers so contradictory; when the Genius, glowing with anger, spoke with vehemence:
Struck by this contrast of the same emotions, and mourning their disastrous outcomes, I was thinking about how hard it would be for a fair judge to respond to such opposing pleas; when the Genius, filled with rage, spoke passionately:
What accents of madness strike my ear? What blind and perverse delirium disorders the spirits of the nations? Sacrilegious prayers rise not from the earth! and you, oh Heavens, reject their homicidal vows and impious thanksgivings! Deluded mortals! is it thus you revere the Divinity? Say then; how should he, whom you style your common father, receive the homage of his children murdering one another? Ye victors! with what eye should he view your hands reeking in the blood he hath created? And, what do you expect, oh vanquished, from useless groans? Hath God the heart of a mortal, with passions ever changing? Is he, like you, agitated with vengeance or compassion, with wrath or repentance? What base conception of the most sublime of beings! According to them, it would seem, that God whimsical and capricious, is angered or appeased as a man: that he loves and hates alternately; that he punishes or favors; that, weak or wicked, he broods over his hatred; that, contradictory or perfidious, he lays snares to entrap; that he punishes the evils he permits; that he foresees but hinders not crimes; that, like a corrupt judge, he is bribed by offerings; like an ignorant despot, he makes laws and revokes them; that, like a savage tyrant, he grants or resumes favors without reason, and can only be appeased by servility. Ah! now I know the lying spirit of man! Contemplating the picture which he hath drawn of the Divinity: No, said I, it is not God who hath made man after the image of God; but man hath made God after the image of man; he hath given him his own mind, clothed him with his own propensities; ascribed to him his own judgments. And when in this medley he finds the contradiction of his own principles, with hypocritical humility, he imputes weakness to his reason, and names the absurdities of his own mind the mysteries of God.
What kinds of madness are ringing in my ears? What blind and twisted delirium is disrupting the spirits of nations? Sacrilegious prayers don't rise from the earth! And you, oh Heavens, reject their murderous vows and disrespectful thanks! Deluded humans! Is this how you honor the Divine? Tell me, how should He, whom you call your common father, accept the tribute of his children killing one another? You victors! How should he look at your hands dripping with the blood He made? And what do you, oh defeated ones, expect from your useless moans? Does God have the heart of a mortal, with ever-changing emotions? Is He, like you, stirred by vengeance or compassion, anger or regret? What a low view of the most sublime being! According to them, it seems that God, unpredictable and capricious, gets angry or calmed down like a person: that He loves and hates in turns; that He punishes or rewards; that, weak or wicked, He broods over His hatred; that, contradictory or deceitful, He sets traps to ensnare; that He punishes the evils He allows; that He sees crimes but does nothing to stop them; that, like a corrupt judge, He can be bribed by offerings; like an ignorant tyrant, He makes and cancels laws; that, like a savage dictator, He gives or takes away favors for no reason, and can only be pleased by servility. Ah! Now I see the deceptive nature of humanity! Looking at the image we've created of the Divine: No, I said, it is not God who made man in the image of God; rather, man has made God in his own image; he has given Him his own thoughts, dressed Him in his own tendencies; attributed to Him his own judgments. And when in this jumble he sees the contradictions of his own beliefs, with fake humility, he blames his reason for being weak, and calls the absurdities of his own mind the mysteries of God.
He hath said, God is immutable, yet he offers prayers to change him; he hath pronounced him incomprehensible, yet he interprets him without ceasing.
He has said, God is unchanging, yet he prays to change him; he has declared him beyond understanding, yet he keeps interpreting him.
Imposters have arisen on the earth who have called themselves the confidants of God; and, erecting themselves into teachers of the people, have opened the ways of falsehood and iniquity; they have ascribed merit to practices indifferent or ridiculous; they have supposed a virtue, in certain postures, in pronouncing certain words, articulating certain names; they have transformed into a crime the eating of certain meats, the drinking of certain liquors, on one day rather than another. The Jew would rather die than labor on the sabbath; the Persian would endure suffocation, before he would blow the fire with his breath; the Indian places supreme perfection in besmearing himself with cow-dung, and pronouncing mysteriously the word Aum;* the Mussulman believes he has expiated everything in washing his head and arms; and disputes, sword in hand, whether the ablution should commence at the elbow, or finger ends;** the Christian would think himself damned, if he ate flesh instead of milk or butter. Oh sublime doctrines! Doctrines truly from heaven! Oh perfect morals, and worthy of martyrdom or the apostolate! I will cross the seas to teach these admirable laws to the savage people—to distant nations; I will say unto them:
Imposters have emerged on earth, claiming to be the confidants of God. They have positioned themselves as teachers of the people and opened the doors to falsehood and wrongdoing. They have attributed value to practices that are trivial or absurd. They believe there is virtue in certain postures, saying specific words, or pronouncing particular names. They have turned into a crime the act of eating certain meats or drinking specific beverages on one day over another. The Jew would rather die than work on the Sabbath; the Persian would rather suffocate than blow on the fire; the Indian considers supreme perfection in smearing himself with cow dung and mysteriously saying the word Aum; the Muslim thinks he has atoned for everything by washing his head and arms, and debates, sword in hand, whether the washing should start at the elbow or the fingertips; the Christian thinks he would be damned if he eats meat instead of milk or butter. Oh, what sublime doctrines! Doctrines that truly come from heaven! Oh, perfect morals, worthy of martyrdom or the apostleship! I will cross the seas to teach these admirable laws to the savage people—to distant nations; I will say to them:
* This word is, in the religion of the Hindoos, a sacred emblem of the Divinity. It is only to be pronounced in secret, without being heard by any one. It is formed of three letters, of which the first, a, signifies the principal of all, the creator, Brama; the second, u, the conservator, Vichenou; and the last, m, the destroyer, who puts an end to all, Chiven. It is pronounced like the monosyllable om, and expresses the unity of those three Gods. The idea is precisely that of the Alpha and Omega mentioned in the New Testament. ** This is one of the grand points of schism between the partisans of Omar and those of Ali. Suppose two Mahometans to meet on a journey, and to accost each other with brotherly affection: the hour of prayer arrives; one begins his ablution at his fingers, the other at the elbow, and instantly they are mortal enemies. O sublime importance of religious opinions! O profound philosophy of the authors of them!
* In Hinduism, this word is a sacred symbol of the Divine. It's only meant to be spoken in private, where no one can hear it. It's made up of three letters: the first, a, represents the primary creator, Brahma; the second, u, stands for the preserver, Vishnu; and the last, m, symbolizes the destroyer, Shiva, who brings everything to an end. It's pronounced like the monosyllable "om" and reflects the unity of these three Gods. This concept is similar to the Alpha and Omega mentioned in the New Testament. ** This is a major point of conflict between the followers of Omar and those of Ali. Imagine two Muslims meeting on a journey and greeting each other warmly as brothers: when it's time to pray, one starts his ablutions at his fingers, while the other begins at the elbow, and just like that, they become bitter enemies. Oh, the profound significance of religious beliefs! Oh, the deep philosophy behind their origins!
Children of nature, how long will you walk in the paths of ignorance? how long will you mistake the true principles of morality and religion? Come and learn its lessons from nations truly pious and learned, in civilized countries. They will inform you how, to gratify God, you must in certain months of the year, languish the whole day with hunger and thirst; how you may shed your neighbor's blood, and purify yourself from it by professions of faith and methodical ablutions; how you may steal his property and be absolved on sharing it with certain persons, who devote themselves to its consumption.
Children of nature, how long will you wander in ignorance? How long will you confuse the real principles of morality and religion? Come and learn from truly pious and knowledgeable nations in civilized countries. They will teach you how, to please God, you must spend certain months of the year suffering all day from hunger and thirst; how you can spill your neighbor's blood and cleanse yourself through declarations of faith and careful rituals; how you can take someone’s property and be forgiven by sharing it with certain people who dedicate themselves to consuming it.
Sovereign and invisible power of the universe! mysterious mover of nature! universal soul of beings! thou who art unknown, yet revered by mortals under so many names! being incomprehensible and infinite! God, who in the immensity of the heavens directest the movement of worlds, and peoplest the abyss of space with millions of suns! say what do these human insects, which my sight no longer discerns on the earth, appear in thy eyes? To thee, who art guiding stars in their orbits, what are those wormlings writhing themselves in the dust? Of what import to thy immensity, their distinctions of parties and sects? And of what concern the subtleties with which their folly torments itself?
Sovereign and unseen power of the universe! Mysterious force of nature! Universal spirit of all beings! You who are unknown, yet respected by humans under so many names! Being who is beyond comprehension and infinite! God, who in the vastness of the heavens directs the movement of worlds and fills the depths of space with millions of suns! Tell me, what do these tiny humans, of whom I can no longer see on Earth, look like in your eyes? To you, who guide the stars in their paths, what are those little creatures squirming in the dust? What do their differences of opinions and beliefs mean to your vastness? And how do the trivial worries that plague their minds matter to you?
And you, credulous men, show me the effect of your practices! In so many centuries, during which you have been following or altering them, what changes have your prescriptions wrought in the laws of nature? Is the sun brighter? Is the course of the seasons varied? Is the earth more fruitful, or its inhabitants more happy? If God be good, can your penances please him? If infinite, can your homage add to his glory? If his decrees have been formed on foresight of every circumstance, can your prayers change them? Answer, O inconsistent mortals!
And you, gullible people, show me the results of your practices! In all these centuries of following or changing them, what changes have your rules made in the laws of nature? Is the sun any brighter? Has the order of the seasons changed? Is the earth more productive or its people happier? If God is good, can your sacrifices please him? If he's infinite, can your worship add to his glory? If his plans were made with knowledge of every situation, can your prayers change them? Respond, O inconsistent humans!
Ye conquerors of the earth, who pretend you serve God! doth he need your aid? If he wishes to punish, hath he not earthquakes, volcanoes, and thunder? And cannot a merciful God correct without extermination?
You conquerors of the earth, who pretend to serve God! Does He really need your help? If He wants to punish, doesn’t He have earthquakes, volcanoes, and thunder? And can't a merciful God correct without complete destruction?
Ye Mussulmans, if God chastiseth you for violating the five precepts, how hath he raised up the Franks who ridicule them? If he governeth the earth by the Koran, by what did he govern it before the days of the prophet, when it was covered with so many nations who drank wine, ate pork, and went not to Mecca, whom he nevertheless permitted to raise powerful empires? How did he judge the Sabeans of Nineveh and of Babylon; the Persian, worshipper of fire; the Greek and Roman idolators; the ancient kingdoms of the Nile; and your own ancestors, the Arabians and Tartars? How doth he yet judge so many nations who deny, or know not your worship—the numerous castes of Indians, the vast empire of the Chinese, the sable race of Africa, the islanders of the ocean, the tribes of America?
You Muslims, if God punishes you for breaking the five precepts, how has He allowed the Franks to mock them? If He rules the earth through the Koran, how did He govern it before the days of the prophet, when it was filled with so many nations that drank wine, ate pork, and didn’t go to Mecca, yet He still allowed them to build powerful empires? How did He judge the Sabeans of Nineveh and Babylon, the Persians who worshiped fire, the pagan Greeks and Romans, the ancient kingdoms of the Nile, and your own ancestors, the Arabs and Tartars? How does He still judge so many nations that deny or don’t know your worship—the many castes of Indians, the vast Chinese empire, the Black races of Africa, the islanders of the ocean, and the tribes of America?
Presumptuous and ignorant men, who arrogate the earth to yourselves! if God were to gather all the generations past and present, what would be, in their ocean, the sects calling themselves universal, of Christians and Mussulmans? What would be the judgments of his equal and common justice over the real universality of mankind? Therein it is that your knowledge loseth itself in incoherent systems; it is there that truth shines with evidence; and there are manifested the powerful and simple laws of nature and reason—laws of a common and general mover—of a God impartial and just, who sheds rain on a country without asking who is its prophet; who causeth his sun to shine alike on all the races of men, on the white as on the black, on the Jew, on the Mussulman, the Christian, and the Idolater; who reareth the harvest wherever cultivated with diligence; who multiplieth every nation where industry and order prevaileth; who prospereth every empire where justice is practised, where the powerful are restrained, and the poor protected by the laws; where the weak live in safety, and all enjoy the rights given by nature and a compact formed in justice.
Presumptuous and ignorant people, who take the earth for yourselves! If God were to gather all the generations past and present, what would the groups calling themselves universal, like Christians and Muslims, mean in that context? What would be the judgments of his fair and common justice over the true universality of humanity? This is where your knowledge gets lost in disorganized systems; this is where truth shines clearly, and where the powerful and simple laws of nature and reason are revealed—laws governing a common and general mover—a God who is impartial and just, who sends rain to a land without asking who its prophet is; who makes his sun shine equally on all races of people, on the white as well as the black, on the Jew, the Muslim, the Christian, and the idolater; who brings forth harvests wherever there is diligent cultivation; who increases the prosperity of every nation where industry and order prevail; who ensures the success of every empire where justice is practiced, where the powerful are held back, and the poor are protected by the laws; where the weak can live safely, and everyone enjoys the rights granted by nature and a fair agreement formed in justice.
These are the principles by which people are judged! this the true religion which regulates the destiny of empires, and which, O Ottomans, hath governed yours! Interrogate your ancestors, ask of them by what means they rose to greatness; when few, poor and idolaters, they came from the deserts of Tartary and encamped in these fertile countries; ask if it was by Islamism, till then unknown to them, that they conquered the Greeks and the Arabs, or was it by their courage, their prudence, moderation, spirit of union—the true powers of the social state? Then the Sultan himself dispensed justice, and maintained discipline. The prevaricating judge, the extortionate governor, were punished, and the multitude lived at ease. The cultivator was protected from the rapine of the janissary, and the fields prospered; the highways were safe, and commerce caused abundance. You were a band of plunderers, but just among yourselves. You subdued nations, but did not oppress them. Harassed by their own princes, they preferred being your tributaries. What matters it, said the Christian, whether my ruler breaks or adores images, if he renders justice to me? God will judge his doctrines in the heavens above.
These are the principles by which people are judged! This is the true religion that shapes the fate of empires, and which, O Ottomans, has governed yours! Question your ancestors, and find out how they achieved greatness; when they were few, poor, and idolaters, they came from the deserts of Tartary and settled in these fertile lands. Ask whether it was through Islam, which was unknown to them then, that they conquered the Greeks and the Arabs, or was it because of their courage, wisdom, moderation, and spirit of unity—the real strengths of society? Back then, the Sultan himself administered justice and maintained order. Corrupt judges and greedy governors were punished, allowing the people to live peacefully. Farmers were safeguarded from the plunder of the janissaries, and the fields thrived; the roads were safe, and trade flourished. You were a group of raiders, but just among yourselves. You conquered nations, but did not oppress them. Harassed by their own rulers, they preferred to be your vassals. What does it matter, said the Christian, if my leader breaks or worships images, as long as he delivers justice to me? God will judge his beliefs in the heavens above.
You were sober and hardy; your enemies timid and enervated; you were expert in battle, your enemies unskillful; your leaders were experienced, your soldiers warlike and disciplined. Booty excited ardor, bravery was rewarded, cowardice and insubordination punished, and all the springs of the human heart were in action. Thus you vanquished a hundred nations, and of a mass of conquered kingdoms compounded an immense empire.
You were strong and tough; your enemies were scared and weak; you were skilled in battle, while your enemies were untrained; your leaders were experienced, and your soldiers were fierce and disciplined. The promise of loot fueled your passion, courage was rewarded, while cowardice and disobedience were punished, and all the motivations of the human heart were in play. In this way, you defeated a hundred nations and built a vast empire from a multitude of conquered kingdoms.
But other customs have succeeded; and in the reverses attending them, the laws of nature have still exerted their force. After devouring your enemies, your cupidity, still insatiable, has reacted on itself, and, concentrated in your own bowels, has consumed you.
But other customs have taken hold; and in the setbacks that came with them, the laws of nature still held strong. After overpowering your enemies, your greed, never satisfied, has turned against you and, focused within yourself, has devoured you.
Having become rich, you have quarrelled for partition and enjoyment, and disorder hath arisen in every class of society.
Having gotten rich, you've fought over dividing and enjoying your wealth, and chaos has emerged in every level of society.
The Sultan, intoxicated with grandeur, has mistaken the object of his functions; and all the vices of arbitrary power have been developed. Meeting no obstacle to his appetites, he has become a depraved being; weak and arrogant, he has kept the people at a distance; and their voice has no longer instructed and guided him. Ignorant, yet flattered, neglecting all instruction, all study, he has fallen into imbecility; unfit for business, he has thrown its burdens on hirelings, and they have deceived him. To satisfy their own passions, they have stimulated and nourished his; they have multiplied his wants, and his enormous luxury has consumed everything. The frugal table, plain clothing, simple dwelling of his ancestors no longer sufficed. To supply his pomp, earth and sea have been exhausted. The rarest furs have been brought from the poles; the most costly tissues from the equator. He has devoured at a meal the tribute of a city, and in a day that of a province. He has surrounded himself with an army of women, eunuchs, and satellites. They have instilled into him that the virtue of kings is to be liberal, and the munificence and treasures of the people have been delivered into the hands of flatterers. In imitation of their master, his servants must also have splendid houses, the most exquisite furniture; carpets embroidered at great cost, vases of gold and silver for the lowest uses, and all the riches of the empire have been swallowed up in the Serai.
The Sultan, drunk on power, has lost sight of his responsibilities; all the flaws of absolute authority have surfaced. With no boundaries to his desires, he has turned into a corrupt individual; weak and arrogant, he has pushed the people away, and their voices no longer guide him. Ignorant yet pampered, ignoring all advice and education, he has slipped into foolishness; unfit for duty, he has passed its burdens onto underlings, who have deceived him. To fulfill their own desires, they have stirred and fed his; they have increased his needs, and his excessive luxury has consumed everything. The simple meals, plain clothes, and modest homes of his ancestors are no longer enough. To sustain his extravagance, both land and sea have been drained. The rarest furs have been obtained from the poles; the most expensive fabrics have come from the equator. He has consumed the tribute of a city in one meal and that of a province in a day. He surrounds himself with an entourage of women, eunuchs, and attendants. They have taught him that a king's virtue lies in being generous, and the wealth of the people has been handed over to sycophants. Following their leader's example, his servants must also have opulent homes, the finest furnishings; carpets made with great expense, gold and silver vases for the simplest uses, and all the riches of the empire have been consumed in the palace.
To supply this inordinate luxury, the slaves and women have sold their influence, and venality has introduced a general depravation. The favor of the sovereign has been sold to his vizier, and the vizier has sold the empire. The law has been sold to the cadi, and the cadi has made sale of justice. The altar has been sold to the priest, and the priest has sold the kingdom of heaven. And gold obtaining everything, they have sacrificed everything to obtain gold. For gold, friend has betrayed friend, the child his parent, the servant his master, the wife her honor, the merchant his conscience; and good faith, morals, concord, and strength were banished from the state.
To provide this excessive luxury, slaves and women have leveraged their influence, and corruption has led to widespread moral decay. The ruler's favor has been traded to his advisor, and the advisor has sold off the empire. The law has been bought by the judge, and the judge has sold justice. The altar has been compromised by the priest, and the priest has sold the promise of heaven. With gold enabling everything, they have sacrificed everything to acquire wealth. For the sake of gold, friends have betrayed friends, children their parents, servants their masters, wives their honor, and merchants their integrity; as a result, trust, morality, harmony, and strength were expelled from the state.
The pacha, who had purchased the government of his province, farmed it out to others, who exercised every extortion. He sold in turn the collection of the taxes, the command of the troops, the administration of the villages; and as every employ has been transient, rapine, spread from rank to rank, has been greedy and implacable. The revenue officer has fleeced the merchant, and commerce was annihilated; the aga has plundered the husbandman, and culture has degenerated. The laborer, deprived of his stock, has been unable to sow; the tax was augmented, and he could not pay it; the bastinado has been threatened, and he has borrowed. Money, from want of security, being locked up from circulation, interest was therefore enormous, and the usury of the rich has aggravated the misery of the laborer.
The governor, who had bought control of his province, handed it over to others who took advantage at every turn. He sold off the tax collection, the leadership of the troops, and the management of the villages; and since every role was temporary, corruption spread through every level, becoming ruthless and insatiable. The tax collector drained the merchants dry, effectively destroying commerce; the commander exploited the farmers, leading to a decline in agriculture. The laborer, stripped of his resources, couldn't plant his crops; taxes were raised, and he couldn't afford them; he was threatened with corporal punishment and resorted to borrowing. With money being too risky to circulate, interest rates skyrocketed, and the lending practices of the wealthy worsened the suffering of the laborers.
When excessive droughts and accidents of seasons have blasted the harvest, the government has admitted no delay, no indulgence for the tax; and distress bearing hard on the village, a part of its inhabitants have taken refuge in the cities; and their burdens falling on those who remained, has completed their ruin, and depopulated the country.
When severe droughts and unpredictable weather have destroyed the harvest, the government has shown no leniency or delays for taxes. As hardship weighs heavily on the village, some residents have moved to the cities, and the burden on those who stayed has led to their ruin and emptied the countryside.
If driven to extremity by tyranny and outrage, the villages have revolted, the pacha rejoices. He wages war on them, assails their homes, pillages their property, carries off their stock; and when the fields have become a desert, he exclaims:
If pushed to their limits by oppression and abuse, the villages have rebelled, and the pacha is pleased. He attacks them, destroys their homes, steals their belongings, takes their livestock; and when the fields have turned into a wasteland, he shouts:
"What care I? I leave these fields to-morrow."
"What do I care? I'm leaving these fields tomorrow."
The earth wanting laborers, the rain of heaven and overflowing of torrents have stagnated in marshes; and their putrid exhalations in a warm climate, have caused epidemics, plagues, and maladies of all sorts, whence have flowed additional suffering, penury, and ruin.
The earth needs workers; the rain from above and the overflowing streams have pooled in marshes, and their foul smells in a warm climate have led to epidemics, plagues, and all kinds of illnesses, resulting in even more suffering, poverty, and destruction.
Oh! who can enumerate all the calamities of tyrannical government?
Oh! who can list all the disasters of a cruel government?
Sometimes the pachas declare war against each other, and for their personal quarrels the provinces of the same state are laid waste. Sometimes, fearing their masters, they attempt independence, and draw on their subjects the chastisement of their revolt. Sometimes dreading their subjects, they invite and subsidize strangers, and to insure their fidelity set no bounds to their depredations. Here they persecute the rich and despoil them under false pretences; there they suborn false witnesses, and impose penalties for suppositious offences; everywhere they excite the hatred of parties, encourage informations to obtain amercements, extort property, seize persons; and when their short-sighted avarice has accumulated into one mass all the riches of a country, the government, by an execrable perfidy, under pretence of avenging its oppressed people, takes to itself all their spoils, as if they were the culprits, and uselessly sheds the blood of its agents for a crime of which it is the accomplice.
Sometimes, the pachas go to war with each other, and their personal disputes destroy entire provinces of the same state. Other times, fearing their superiors, they seek independence, bringing harsh punishment upon their subjects for their rebellion. Sometimes, afraid of their subjects, they invite and pay outsiders, and to ensure their loyalty, they allow endless plundering. Here, they target the wealthy and rob them under false pretenses; there, they bribe false witnesses and impose fines for made-up offenses; everywhere they stir up party tensions, promote accusations to extract fines, steal property, and capture people. When their shortsighted greed has amassed all of a country’s wealth, the government, in a terrible betrayal, under the guise of protecting its oppressed people, takes all the spoils for itself, as if it were the offenders, and unnecessarily spills the blood of its agents for a crime in which it is complicit.
Oh wretches, monarchs or ministers, who sport with the lives and fortunes of the people! Is it you who gave breath to man, that you dare take it from him? Do you give growth to the plants of the earth, that you may waste them? Do you toil to furrow the field? Do you endure the ardor of the sun, and the torment of thirst, to reap the harvest or thrash the grain? Do you, like the shepherd, watch through the dews of the night? Do you traverse deserts, like the merchant? Ah! on beholding the pride and cruelty of the powerful, I have been transported with indignation, and have said in my wrath, will there never then arise on the earth men who will avenge the people and punish tyrants? A handful of brigands devour the multitude, and the multitude submits to be devoured! Oh! degenerate people! Know you not your rights? All authority is from you, all power is yours. Unlawfully do kings command you on the authority of God and of their lance—Soldiers be still; if God supports the Sultan he needs not your aid; if his sword suffices, he needs not yours; let us see what he can do alone. The soldiers grounded their arms; and behold these masters of the world, feeble as the meanest of their subjects! People! know that those who govern are your chiefs, not your masters; your agents, not your owners; that they have no authority over you, but by you, and for you; that your wealth is yours and they accountable for it; that, kings or subjects, God has made all men equal, and no mortal has the right to oppress his fellow-creatures.
Oh wretches, kings or ministers, who toy with the lives and fortunes of the people! Is it you who gave life to man, that you dare take it away? Do you make the plants grow, just to waste them? Do you labor to plow the fields? Do you endure the heat of the sun, and the agony of thirst, just to harvest or thresh the grain? Do you, like the shepherd, stay awake through the dewy nights? Do you cross deserts, like the merchant? Ah! Seeing the pride and cruelty of the powerful, I have been filled with rage, and have shouted in my anger, will there ever be people on this earth who will stand up for the oppressed and punish the tyrants? A handful of robbers devour the masses, and the masses submit to being devoured! Oh! degenerate people! Don't you know your rights? All authority comes from you, all power is yours. Kings unlawfully command you with the authority of God and their swords—Soldiers, stand down; if God supports the Sultan, he doesn’t need your help; if his sword is enough, he doesn’t need yours; let’s see what he can do by himself. The soldiers laid down their weapons; and look at these rulers of the world, weak as the lowest of their subjects! People! know that those who lead are your chiefs, not your masters; your representatives, not your owners; they have no power over you, except by you, and for you; that your wealth is yours and they are accountable for it; that, whether kings or subjects, God has made all men equal, and no one has the right to oppress their fellow human beings.
But this nation and its chiefs have mistaken these holy truths. They must abide then the consequences of their blindness. The decree is past; the day approaches when this colossus of power shall be crushed and crumbled under its own mass. Yes, I swear it, by the ruins of so many empires destroyed. The empire of the Crescent shall follow the fate of the despotism it has copied. A nation of strangers shall drive the Sultan from his metropolis. The throne of Orkhan shall be overturned. The last shoot of his trunk shall be broken off; and the horde of Oguzians,* deprived of their chief, shall disperse like that of the Nagois. In this dissolution, the people of the empire, loosened from the yoke which united them, shall resume their ancient distinctions, and a general anarchy shall follow, as happened in the empire of the Sophis;** until there shall arise among the Arabians, Armenians, or Greeks, legislators who may compose new states.
But this nation and its leaders have misunderstood these sacred truths. They will have to face the consequences of their ignorance. The decision has been made; the day is coming when this giant of power will be crushed and broken under its own weight. Yes, I swear it, by the ruins of so many destroyed empires. The empire of the Crescent will meet the same fate as the despotism it has imitated. A nation of outsiders will force the Sultan out of his capital. The throne of Orkhan will be overthrown. The last branch of his lineage will be severed; and the group of Oguzians, stripped of their leader, will scatter like the Nagois. In this collapse, the people of the empire, freed from the bonds that held them together, will revert to their ancient identities, and chaos will ensue, just as it did in the empire of the Sophis, until new lawmakers emerge among the Arabians, Armenians, or Greeks to form new states.
* Before the Turks took the name of their chief, Othman I., they bore that of Oguzians; and it was under this appellation that they were driven out of Tartary by Gengis, and came from the borders of Giboun to settle themselves in Anatolia. ** In Persia, after the death of Thamas-Koulikan, each province had its chief, and for forty years these chiefs were in a constant state of war. In this view the Turks do not say without reason: "Ten years of a tyrant are less destructive than a single night of anarchy."
* Before the Turks adopted the name of their leader, Othman I., they were known as Oguzians. It was under this name that they were expelled from Tartary by Genghis and migrated from the borders of Giboun to settle in Anatolia. ** In Persia, following the death of Thamas-Koulikan, each province had its own leader, and for forty years these leaders were constantly at war. In this regard, the Turks rightly say: "Ten years of a tyrant are less destructive than a single night of chaos."
Oh! if there were on earth men profound and bold! what elements for grandeur and glory! But the hour of destiny has already come; the cry of war strikes my ear; and the catastrophe begins. In vain the Sultan leads forth his armies; his ignorant warriors are beaten and dispersed. In vain he calls his subjects; their hearts are ice. Is it not written? say they, what matters who is our master? We cannot lose by the change.
Oh! If only there were strong and daring men on earth! What a recipe for greatness and honor! But the time of fate has already arrived; the sound of war reaches my ears, and the disaster starts. The Sultan leads his armies out in vain; his clueless soldiers are defeated and scattered. He calls out to his people, but their hearts are cold. Isn't it written? they say, what difference does it make who our leader is? We can’t lose anything by switching.
In vain the true believers invoke heaven and the prophet. The prophet is dead; and heaven without pity answers:
In vain, the true believers call out to heaven and the prophet. The prophet is gone; and heaven, without compassion, responds:
Cease to invoke me. You have caused your own misfortunes; cure them yourselves. Nature has established laws; your part is to obey them. Observe, reason, and profit by experience. It is the folly of man which ruins him; let his wisdom save him. The people are ignorant; let them gain instruction. Their chiefs are wicked; let them correct and amend; for such is Nature's decree. Since the evils of society spring from cupidity and ignorance, men will never cease to be persecuted, till they become enlightened and wise; till they practise justice, founded on a knowledge of their relations and of the laws of their organization.*
Stop calling on me. You've created your own problems; fix them yourself. Nature has set the rules; your job is to follow them. Observe, think, and learn from experience. It's human foolishness that leads to ruin; let wisdom be the way out. The people are clueless; they need to learn. Their leaders are corrupt; they should change for the better, because that's how it works according to Nature. Since the issues in society come from greed and ignorance, people will continue to suffer until they become knowledgeable and wise; until they practice justice based on understanding their connections and the rules of their existence.*
* A singular moral phenomenon made its appearance in Europe in the year 1788. A great nation, jealous of its liberty, contracted a fondness for a nation the enemy of liberty; a nation friendly to the arts, for a nation that detests them; a mild and tolerant nation, for a persecuting and fanatic one; a social and gay nation, for a nation whose characteristics are gloom and misanthropy; in a word, the French were smitten with a passion for the Turks: they were desirous of engaging in a war for them, and that at a time when revolution in their own country was just at its commencement. A man, who perceived the true nature of the situation, wrote a book to dissuade them from the war: it was immediately pretended that he was paid by the government, which in reality wished the war, and which was upon the point of shutting him up in a state prison. Another man wrote to recommend the war: he was applauded, and his word taken for the science, the politeness, and importance of the Turks. It is true that he believed in his own thesis, for he has found among them people who cast a nativity, and alchymists who ruined his fortune; as he found Martinists at Paris, who enabled him to sup with Sesostris, and Magnetizers who concluded with destroying his existence. Notwithstanding this, the Turks were beaten by the Russians, and the man who then predicted the fall of their empire, persists in the prediction. The result of this fall will be a complete change of the political system, as far as it relates to the coast of the Mediterranean. If, however, the French become important in proportion as they become free, and if they make use of the advantage they will obtain, their progress may easily prove of the most honorable sort; inasmuch as, by the wise decrees of fate, the true interest of mankind evermore accords with their true morality.
* A unique moral event happened in Europe in 1788. A great nation, protective of its freedom, developed an affection for a nation that opposed liberty; a nation supportive of the arts, for a nation that despises them; a gentle and tolerant nation, for a persecuting and fanatical one; a sociable and cheerful nation, for a nation characterized by gloom and misanthropy; in short, the French fell passionately in love with the Turks: they wanted to go to war for them, at a time when revolution was just starting in their own country. A man, who understood the reality of the situation, wrote a book to convince them against the war: it was quickly claimed that he was being funded by the government, which actually wanted the war and was about to imprison him. Another man wrote in favor of the war: he was praised, and his opinions were taken as the truth regarding the culture, courtesy, and significance of the Turks. It’s true that he believed in his own argument, having encountered people among them who practiced astrology and alchemy which ruined him financially; just as he found Martinists in Paris who allowed him to dine with Sesostris, along with Magnetizers who ultimately harmed his life. Despite this, the Turks were defeated by the Russians, and the man who then predicted the decline of their empire continues to stand by that prediction. The outcome of this decline will lead to a complete shift in the political landscape, especially concerning the Mediterranean coast. However, if the French become significant as they become free, and if they take advantage of the opportunities they gain, their progress could be truly honorable; because, by the wise design of fate, the true interests of humanity consistently align with true morality.
CHAPTER XIII.
WILL THE HUMAN RACE IMPROVE?
At these words, oppressed with the painful sentiment with which their severity overwhelmed me: Woe to the nations! cried I, melting in tears; woe to myself! Ah! now it is that I despair of the happiness of man! Since his miseries proceed from his heart; since the remedy is in his own power, woe for ever to his existence! Who, indeed will ever be able to restrain the lust of wealth in the strong and powerful? Who can enlighten the ignorance of the weak? Who can teach the multitude to know their rights, and force their chiefs to perform their duties? Thus the race of man is always doomed to suffer! Thus the individual will not cease to oppress the individual, a nation to attack a nation; and days of prosperity, of glory, for these regions, shall never return. Alas! conquerors will come; they will drive out the oppressors, and fix themselves in their place; but, inheriting their power, they will inherit their rapacity; and the earth will have changed tyrants, without changing the tyranny.
At these words, overwhelmed by the painful feelings their severity brought me, I cried out, "Woe to the nations!" as I melted into tears; "woe to myself! Ah, now I despair of humanity's happiness! Since our miseries come from within us, and the solution is in our own hands, woe forever to our existence! Who will ever be able to control the greed of the strong and powerful? Who can enlighten the ignorance of the weak? Who can teach the masses to understand their rights and compel their leaders to fulfill their responsibilities? Thus, humankind is always doomed to suffer! Thus, individuals will continue to oppress one another, nations will keep attacking nations; and days of prosperity and glory for these lands will never return. Alas! conquerors will come; they will oust the oppressors and take their place; but, inheriting their power, they will also inherit their greed; and the earth will have changed its tyrants without changing the tyranny.
Then, turning to the Genius, I exclaimed:
Then, turning to the Genius, I said:
O Genius, despair hath settled on my soul. Knowing the nature of man, the perversity of those who govern, and the debasement of the governed—this knowledge hath disgusted me with life; and since there is no choice but to be the accomplice or the victim of oppression, what remains to the man of virtue but to mingle his ashes with those of the tomb?
O Genius, despair has settled on my soul. Understanding human nature, the corruption of those in power, and the degradation of the oppressed—this knowledge has made me sick of life; and since there’s no way to escape being either an accomplice or a victim of oppression, what is left for a good man but to join his ashes with those of the grave?
The Genius then gave me a look of severity, mingled with compassion; and after a few moments of silence, he replied:
The Genius then looked at me with a serious yet compassionate expression, and after a brief pause, he responded:
Virtue, then, consists in dying! The wicked man is indefatigable in consummating his crime, and the just is discouraged from doing good at the first obstacle he encounters! But such is the human heart. A little success intoxicates man with confidence; a reverse overturns and confounds him. Always given up to the sensation of the moment, he seldom judges things from their nature, but from the impulse of his passion.
Virtue, then, is about dying! The wicked person relentlessly pursues their crime, while the good person is discouraged from doing good at the first challenge they face! But that’s just how the human heart works. A little success gets people drunk on confidence; a setback throws them off and confuses them. Always caught up in the feelings of the moment, people rarely judge things by their true nature but instead follow the impulse of their emotions.
Mortal, who despairest of the human race, on what profound combination of facts hast thou established thy conclusion? Hast thou scrutinized the organization of sentient beings, to determine with precision whether the instinctive force which moves them on to happiness is essentially weaker than that which repels them from it? or, embracing in one glance the history of the species, and judging the future by the past, hast thou shown that all improvement is impossible? Say! hath human society, since its origin, made no progress toward knowledge and a better state? Are men still in their forests, destitute of everything, ignorant, stupid and ferocious? Are all the nations still in that age when nothing was seen upon the globe but brutal robbers and brutal slaves? If at any time, in any place, individuals have ameliorated, why shall not the whole mass ameliorate? If partial societies have made improvements, what shall hinder the improvement of society in general? And if the first obstacles are overcome, why should the others be insurmountable?
Mortal, who despairs of the human race, on what deep combination of facts have you built your conclusion? Have you examined the organization of sentient beings to determine if the instinctive drive that pushes them toward happiness is fundamentally weaker than what pulls them away from it? Or, looking at the entire history of the species and judging the future by the past, have you demonstrated that all progress is impossible? Tell me! Has human society, since its beginning, made no strides toward knowledge and a better state? Are people still living in their forests, lacking everything, ignorant, foolish, and savage? Are all nations still stuck in an era where only brutal robbers and brutal slaves roamed the earth? If individuals have improved at any time and in any place, why can't the whole population improve? If smaller societies have made advancements, what would stop society as a whole from improving? And if the initial obstacles are overcome, why should the others be impossible to conquer?
Art thou disposed to think that the human race degenerates? Guard against the illusion and paradoxes of the misanthrope. Man, discontented with the present, imagines for the past a perfection which never existed, and which only serves to cover his chagrin. He praises the dead out of hatred to the living, and beats the children with the bones of their ancestors.
Are you inclined to believe that humanity is declining? Be wary of the misconceptions and contradictions of the misanthrope. People, unhappy with the present, envision an ideal past that never existed, which only masks their frustration. They praise the dead out of disdain for the living and punish the young with the mistakes of their predecessors.
To prove this pretended retrograde progress from perfection we must contradict the testimony of reason and of fact; and if the facts of history are in any measure uncertain, we must contradict the living fact of the organization of man; we must prove that he is born with the enlightened use of his senses; that, without experience, he can distinguish aliment from poison; that the child is wiser than the old man; that the blind walks with more safety than the clear-sighted; that the civilized man is more miserable than the savage; and, indeed, that there is no ascending scale in experience and instruction.
To prove this supposed backward movement from perfection, we have to go against what reason and facts tell us; and if the historical facts are somewhat unclear, we have to contradict the undeniable reality of human organization. We must show that people are born with the ability to use their senses wisely; that, without any experience, they can tell food from poison; that a child is smarter than an old man; that a blind person navigates with more safety than someone who can see; that a civilized person is more unhappy than a savage; and, in fact, that there's no upward progression in experience and knowledge.
Believe, young man, the testimony of monuments, and the voice of the tombs. Some countries have doubtless fallen from what they were at certain epochs; but if we weigh the wisdom and happiness of their inhabitants, even in those times, we shall find more of splendor than of reality in their glory; we shall find, in the most celebrated of ancient states, enormous vices and cruel abuses, the true causes of their decay; we shall find in general that the principles of government were atrocious; that insolent robberies, barbarous wars and implacable hatreds were raging from nation to nation;* that natural right was unknown; that morality was perverted by senseless fanaticism and deplorable superstition; that a dream, a vision, an oracle, were constantly the causes of vast commotions. Perhaps the nations are not yet entirely cured of all these evils; but their intensity at least is diminished, and the experience of the past has not been wholly lost. For the last three centuries, especially, knowledge has increased and been extended; civilization, favored by happy circumstances, has made a sensible progress; inconveniences and abuses have even turned to its advantage; for if states have been too much extended by conquest, the people, by uniting under the same yoke, have lost the spirit of estrangement and division which made them all enemies one to the other. If the powers of government have been more concentrated, there has been more system and harmony in their exercise. If wars have become more extensive in the mass, they are less bloody in detail. If men have gone to battle with less personality, less energy, their struggles have been less sanguinary and less ferocious; they have been less free, but less turbulent; more effeminate, but more pacific. Despotism itself has rendered them some service; for if governments have been more absolute, they have been more quiet and less tempestuous. If thrones have become a property and hereditary, they have excited less dissensions, and the people have suffered fewer convulsions; finally, if the despots, jealous and mysterious, have interdicted all knowledge of their administration, all concurrence in the management of public affairs, the passions of men, drawn aside from politics, have fixed upon the arts, and the sciences of nature; and the sphere of ideas in every direction has been enlarged; man, devoted to abstract studies, has better understood his place in the system of nature, and his relations in society; principles have been better discussed, final causes better explained, knowledge more extended, individuals better instructed, manners more social, and life more happy. The species at large, especially in certain countries, has gained considerably; and this amelioration cannot but increase in future, because its two principal obstacles, those even which, till then, had rendered it slow and sometimes retrograde,—the difficulty of transmitting ideas and of communicating them rapidly,—have been at last removed.
Believe me, young man, the evidence of monuments and the voices of the tombs speak the truth. Some countries have certainly declined from their past glory; however, if we consider the wisdom and happiness of their people even during those times, we'll see that their grandeur often had more shine than substance. In the most renowned ancient states, we uncover great vices and brutal abuses as the true reasons for their decline. Generally, we find that government principles were terrible, with rampant theft, brutal wars, and unyielding hatred spreading from nation to nation; that natural rights were ignored; that morality was distorted by senseless fanaticism and unfortunate superstition; and that dreams, visions, and oracles frequently caused large-scale upheavals. Perhaps nations are not entirely free from these issues yet, but their severity has at least diminished, and the lessons of the past haven't been completely forgotten. In the last three centuries, especially, knowledge has expanded and spread; civilization, benefiting from fortunate circumstances, has made noticeable progress. Problems and abuses have even turned to its advantage; for while states have been overly expanded through conquest, people, by coming together under the same authority, have lost the spirit of division and hostility that made them enemies. If governmental powers have become more centralized, there's been more order and consistency in their administration. Although wars have become greater in scale, they are less bloody in practice. While people may fight with less individuality and less intensity, their conflicts have been less deadly and less vicious; they may be less free, but also less chaotic; more subdued, but more peaceful. Even despotism has provided some benefits; as governments have become more absolute, they have been quieter and less turbulent. If thrones have become property and hereditary, this has led to fewer disputes, and the people have experienced fewer upheavals. Finally, if despots, out of jealousy and secrecy, have banned all knowledge of their administration and excluded the public from decision-making, the passions of men, redirected away from politics, have focused on the arts and the sciences of nature; as a result, the realm of ideas has expanded in all directions. People, engaged in abstract studies, have gained a better understanding of their place in nature and their social relationships; principles have been discussed more thoroughly, ultimate causes have been explained more clearly, knowledge has spread further, individuals have been better educated, social interactions have improved, and life has become happier. Overall, humanity, especially in certain countries, has made significant gains; and this improvement is bound to continue in the future, as the two main obstacles that had previously slowed it down and sometimes caused setbacks—the difficulty of sharing ideas and communicating quickly—have finally been removed.
* Read the history of the wars of Rome and Carthage, of Sparta and Messina, of Athens and Syracuse, of the Hebrews and the Phoenicians: yet these are the nations of which antiquity boasts as being most polished!
* Read about the history of the wars between Rome and Carthage, Sparta and Messina, Athens and Syracuse, and the Hebrews and the Phoenicians: yet these are the nations that ancient times claim as being the most refined!
Indeed, among the ancients, each canton, each city, being isolated from all others by the difference of its language, the consequence was favorable to ignorance and anarchy. There was no communication of ideas, no participation of discoveries, no harmony of interests or of wills, no unity of action or design; besides, the only means of transmitting and of propagating ideas being that of speech, fugitive and limited, and that of writing, tedious of execution, expensive and scarce, the consequence was a hindrance of present instruction, loss of experience from one generation to another, instability, retrogression of knowledge, and a perpetuity of confusion and childhood.
Indeed, in ancient times, each region and city was cut off from all the others by language differences, which led to ignorance and chaos. There was no exchange of ideas, no sharing of discoveries, no alignment of interests or intentions, and no coordinated action or plans. Furthermore, the only ways to share and spread ideas were through speech, which was fleeting and limited, and writing, which was slow to produce, costly, and rare. As a result, this created obstacles to learning, a loss of knowledge from one generation to the next, instability, regression in understanding, and a constant state of confusion and immaturity.
But in the modern world, especially in Europe, great nations having allied themselves in language, and established vast communities of opinions, the minds of men are assimilated, and their affections extended; there is a sympathy of opinion and a unity of action; then that gift of heavenly Genius, the holy art of printing, having furnished the means of communicating in an instant the same idea to millions of men, and of fixing it in a durable manner, beyond the power of tyrants to arrest or annihilate, there arose a mass of progressive instruction, an expanding atmosphere of science, which assures to future ages a solid amelioration. This amelioration is a necessary effect of the laws of nature; for, by the law of sensibility, man as invincibly tends to render himself happy as the flame to mount, the stone to descend, or the water to find its level. His obstacle is his ignorance, which misleads him in the means, and deceives him in causes and effects. He will enlighten himself by experience; he will become right by dint of errors; he will grow wise and good because it is his interest so to be. Ideas being communicated through the nation, whole classes will gain instruction; science will become a vulgar possession, and all men will know what are the principles of individual happiness and of public prosperity. They will know the relations they bear to society, their duties and their rights; they will learn to guard against the illusions of the lust of gain; they will perceive that the science of morals is a physical science, composed, indeed, of elements complicated in their operation, but simple and invariable in their nature, since they are only the elements of the organization of man. They will see the propriety of being moderate and just, because in that is found the advantage and security of each; they will perceive that the wish to enjoy at the expense of another is a false calculation of ignorance, because it gives rise to reprisal, hatred, and vengeance, and that dishonesty is the never-failing offspring of folly.
But in today’s world, especially in Europe, great nations have come together through language and created vast communities of opinions. People’s minds are becoming more alike, and their feelings are expanding; there’s a shared viewpoint and a unified action. With the incredible gift of the heavenly Genius, the art of printing, the ability to instantly share the same idea with millions and have it preserved in a lasting way, free from being stopped or destroyed by tyrants, a wave of progressive education has emerged, creating an expanding atmosphere of science that guarantees future generations a significant improvement. This improvement is a necessary outcome of natural laws; because, following the law of sensitivity, people inherently strive for happiness just like fire rises, stones fall, or water finds its level. The only obstacle is ignorance, which misguides people about the means and misleads them regarding causes and effects. They will learn from experience; they will get it right through their mistakes; they will become wise and good because it serves their interests. As ideas spread throughout the nation, entire classes will gain knowledge; science will become common knowledge, and everyone will understand the principles of individual happiness and public prosperity. They will grasp their relationship with society, their duties, and their rights; they will learn to guard against the deceptions of greed; they will understand that moral science is a physical science, made up of elements that are complicated in how they operate but simple and consistent in their nature since they are just the building blocks of human organization. They will recognize the importance of being moderate and fair because that brings advantages and security to everyone; they will see that wanting to benefit at the expense of others is a misguided thought born from ignorance, as it leads to retaliation, hatred, and revenge, and that dishonesty is a consistent result of folly.
Individuals will feel that private happiness is allied to public good:
Individuals will feel that personal happiness is connected to the greater good:
The weak, that instead of dividing their interests, they ought to unite them, because equality constitutes their force:
The weak, instead of separating their interests, should come together, because their equality is their strength:
The rich, that the measure of enjoyment is bounded by the constitution of the organs, and that lassitude follows satiety:
The wealthy, who find that their enjoyment is limited by the nature of their bodies, and that tiredness comes after too much satisfaction:
The poor, that the employment of time, and the peace of the heart, compose the highest happiness of man. And public opinion, reaching kings on their thrones, will force them to confine themselves to the limits of regular authority.
The poor show that how we spend our time and the peace of our hearts make up the greatest happiness for people. And public opinion, reaching kings on their thrones, will compel them to stick to the boundaries of rightful authority.
Even chance itself, serving the cause of nations, will sometimes give them feeble chiefs, who, through weakness, will suffer them to become free; and sometimes enlightened chiefs, who, from a principle of virtue, will free them.
Even fate, working for the interests of nations, will occasionally hand them weak leaders, who, out of their weakness, will allow their people to become free; and sometimes wise leaders, who, out of a sense of virtue, will grant them freedom.
And when nations, free and enlightened, shall become like great individuals, the whole species will have the same facilities as particular portions now have; the communication of knowledge will extend from one to another, and thus reach the whole. By the law of imitation, the example of one people will be followed by others, who will adopt its spirit and its laws. Even despots, perceiving that they can no longer maintain their authority without justice and beneficence, will soften their sway from necessity, from rivalship; and civilization will become universal.
And when nations that are free and enlightened become like great individuals, everyone will have the same opportunities as certain groups do now. Knowledge will be shared from one person to another, reaching everyone. Following the principle of imitation, one nation's example will inspire others to adopt its ideals and laws. Even tyrants, seeing that they can’t hold onto their power without fairness and kindness, will ease their control out of necessity and competition; and civilization will become universal.
There will be established among the several nations an equilibrium of force, which, restraining them all within the bounds of the respect due to their reciprocal rights, shall put an end to the barbarous practice of war, and submit their disputes to civil arbitration.* The human race will become one great society, one individual family, governed by the same spirit, by common laws, and enjoying all the happiness of which their nature is susceptible.
There will be a balance of power established among various nations, which will keep everyone within the limits of respect for each other's rights, ending the brutal practice of war and settling disputes through civil arbitration.* Humanity will become one large community, like one family, governed by the same principles, following common laws, and experiencing all the happiness that comes naturally to them.
* What is a people? An individual of the society at large. What a war? A duel between two individual people. In what manner ought a society to act when two of its members fight? Interfere and reconcile, or repress them. In the days of the Abbe de Saint Pierre this was treated as a dream, but happily for the human race it begins to be realized.
* What is a community? An individual within society at large. What is a war? A fight between two individuals. How should a society respond when two of its members clash? Step in and mediate, or suppress them? Back in the time of the Abbe de Saint Pierre, this was seen as a fantasy, but fortunately for humanity, it's starting to come true.
Doubtless this great work will be long accomplishing; because the same movement must be given to an immense body; the same leaven must assimilate an enormous mass of heterogeneous parts. But this movement shall be effected; its presages are already to be seen. Already the great society, assuming in its course the same characters as partial societies have done, is evidently tending to a like result. At first disconnected in all its parts, it saw its members for a long time without cohesion; and this general solitude of nations formed its first age of anarchy and childhood; divided afterwards by chance into irregular sections, called states and kingdoms, it has experienced the fatal effects of an extreme inequality of wealth and rank; and the aristocracy of great empires has formed its second age; then, these lordly states disputing for preeminence, have exhibited the period of the shock of factions.
Surely, this major task will take a long time to complete because the same force must move a vast entity; the same influence must unify a huge array of diverse elements. But this momentum will happen; its signs are already visible. The large society, taking on similar traits to smaller societies as it develops, is clearly moving toward a similar outcome. Initially scattered and disconnected, its members experienced a long period without unity; this overall isolation of nations marked its first phase of chaos and infancy. Later, divided randomly into uneven sections called states and kingdoms, it faced the disastrous consequences of extreme disparities in wealth and status; the elite of large empires marked its second phase. Then, these powerful states, vying for dominance, entered a period of factional conflict.
At present the contending parties, wearied with discord, feel the want of laws, and sigh for the age of order and of peace. Let but a virtuous chief arise! a just, a powerful people appear! and the earth will raise them to supreme power. The world is waiting for a legislative people; it wishes and demands it; and my heart attends the cry.
Right now, the fighting sides, tired of conflict, realize they need laws and long for a time of order and peace. If a virtuous leader would just emerge! A fair and strong community shows up! Then the world will elevate them to the highest power. Everyone is waiting for a community with the ability to make laws; it's what they want and require, and my heart responds to that call.
Then turning towards the west: Yes, continued he, a hollow sound already strikes my ear; a cry of liberty, proceeding from far distant shores, resounds on the ancient continent. At this cry, a secret murmur against oppression is raised in a powerful nation; a salutary inquietude alarms her respecting her situation; she enquires what she is, and what she ought to be; while, surprised at her own weakness, she interrogates her rights, her resources, and what has been the conduct of her chiefs.
Then turning toward the west: Yes, he continued, a hollow sound is already reaching my ears; a call for freedom, coming from faraway shores, echoes on the old continent. At this call, a hidden murmur against oppression arises in a strong nation; a healthy unease stirs her about her condition; she asks what she is, and what she should be; while, shocked by her own weakness, she questions her rights, her resources, and the actions of her leaders.
Yet another day—a little more reflection—and an immense agitation will begin; a new-born age will open! an age of astonishment to vulgar minds, of terror to tyrants, of freedom to a great nation, and of hope to the human race!
Yet another day—a bit more reflection—and a huge agitation will start; a new era will begin! An era of wonder for ordinary minds, of fear for tyrants, of freedom for a great nation, and of hope for humanity!
CHAPTER XIV.
THE GREAT OBSTACLE TO IMPROVEMENT.
The Genius ceased. But preoccupied with melancholy thoughts, my mind resisted persuasion; fearing, however, to shock him by my resistance, I remained silent. After a while, turning to me with a look which pierced my soul, he said:
The Genius stopped. But lost in sad thoughts, my mind fought against persuasion; afraid to upset him with my resistance, I stayed quiet. After a moment, he looked at me with a gaze that went right through me and said:
Thou art silent, and thy heart is agitated with thoughts which it dares not utter.
You are silent, and your heart is troubled with thoughts that you’re afraid to speak.
At last, troubled and terrified, I replied:
At last, feeling anxious and scared, I replied:
O Genius, pardon my weakness. Doubtless thy mouth can utter nothing but truth; but thy celestial intelligence can seize its rays, where my gross faculties can discern nothing but clouds. I confess it; conviction has not penetrated my soul, and I feared that my doubts might offend thee.
O Genius, please forgive my weakness. Surely your words can only express the truth, but your heavenly wisdom can grasp its brilliance, while my limited understanding can only see confusion. I admit it; certainty hasn't reached my heart, and I worried that my doubts might upset you.
And what is doubt, replied he, that it should be a crime? Can man feel otherwise than as he is affected? If a truth be palpable, and of importance in practice, let us pity him that misconceives it. His punishment will arise from his blindness. If it be uncertain or equivocal, how is he to find in it what it has not? To believe without evidence or proof, is an act of ignorance and folly. The credulous man loses himself in a labyrinth of contradictions; the man of sense examines and discusses, that he may be consistent in his opinions. The honest man will bear contradiction; because it gives rise to evidence. Violence is the argument of falsehood; and to impose a creed by authority is the act and indication of a tyrant.
And what is doubt, he replied, that it should be considered a crime? Can a person feel any other way than how they are affected? If a truth is obvious and important in practice, let’s have compassion for those who misunderstand it. Their punishment will come from their ignorance. If it’s uncertain or ambiguous, how can they find what isn’t there? Believing without evidence or proof is an act of ignorance and foolishness. The gullible person gets lost in a maze of contradictions; the sensible person examines and discusses to remain consistent in their beliefs. A truly honest person can handle contradiction because it leads to clarity. Using violence as an argument is a sign of falsehood, and imposing a belief system through authority is the act and mark of a tyrant.
O Genius, said I, encouraged by these words, since my reason is free, I strive in vain to entertain the flattering hope with which you endeavor to console me. The sensible and virtuous soul is easily caught with dreams of happiness; but a cruel reality constantly awakens it to suffering and wretchedness. The more I meditate on the nature of man, the more I examine the present state of societies, the less possible it appears to realize a world of wisdom and felicity. I cast my eye over the whole of our hemisphere; I perceive in no place the germ, nor do I foresee the instinctive energy of a happy revolution. All Asia lies buried in profound darkness. The Chinese, governed by an insolent despotism,* by strokes of the bamboo and the cast of lots, restrained by an immutable code of gestures, and by the radical vices of an ill-constructed language,** appear to be in their abortive civilization nothing but a race of automatons. The Indian, borne down by prejudices, and enchained in the sacred fetters of his castes, vegetates in an incurable apathy. The Tartar, wandering or fixed, always ignorant and ferocious, lives in the savageness of his ancestors. The Arab, endowed with a happy genius, loses its force and the fruits of his virtue in the anarchy of his tribes and the jealousy of his families. The African, degraded from the rank of man, seems irrevocably doomed to servitude. In the North I see nothing but vilified serfs, herds of men with which landlords stock their estates. Ignorance, tyranny, and wretchedness have everywhere stupified the nations; and vicious habits, depraving the natural senses, have destroyed the very instinct of happiness and of truth.
O Genius, I said, encouraged by these words, since my mind is free, I struggle in vain to hold on to the flattering hope you’re trying to comfort me with. The sensible and virtuous soul easily gets caught up in dreams of happiness; but a harsh reality constantly pulls it back to suffering and misery. The more I think about the nature of humanity and examine the current state of societies, the less likely it seems to create a world of wisdom and happiness. I look across our hemisphere; I see no sign, nor do I anticipate the instinctive drive for a joyful revolution. All of Asia is buried in deep darkness. The Chinese, ruled by a ruthless despotism,* through punishment and random chance, constrained by an unchanging code of gestures and the fundamental flaws of a poorly constructed language,** seem in their flawed civilization to be nothing more than a race of automatons. The Indian, weighed down by prejudices and bound by the sacred chains of his castes, languishes in an unhealable apathy. The Tartar, whether wandering or settled, remains perpetually ignorant and fierce, living in the brutality of his ancestors. The Arab, gifted with a bright intellect, loses its strength and the benefits of his virtue in the chaos of his tribes and the rivalries of his families. The African, stripped of his humanity, appears hopelessly condemned to servitude. In the North, I see nothing but degraded serfs, masses of people with which landlords populate their estates. Ignorance, tyranny, and misery have numbed the nations everywhere; and corrupt habits, distorting the natural senses, have obliterated even the instinct for happiness and truth.
* The emperor of China calls himself the son of heaven; that is, of God: for in the opinion of the Chinese, the material of heaven, the arbiter of fatality, is the Deity himself. "The emperor only shows himself once in ten months, lest the people, accustomed to see him, might lose their respect; for he holds it as a maxim that power can only be supported by force, that the people have no idea of justice, and are not to be governed but by coercion." Narrative of two Mahometan travellers in 851 and 877, translated by the Abbe Renaudot in 1718. Notwithstanding what is asserted by the missionaries, this situation has undergone no change. The bamboo still reigns in China, and the son of heaven bastinades, for the most trivial fault, the Mandarin, who in his turn bastinades the people. The Jesuits may tell us that this is the best governed country in the world, and its inhabitants the happiest of men: but a single letter from Amyot has convinced me that China is a truly Turkish government, and the account of Sonnerat confirms it. See Vol. II. of Voyage aux Indes, in 4to. ** As long as the Chinese shall in writing make use of their present characters, they can be expected to make no progress in civilization. The necessary introductory step must be the giving them an alphabet like our own, or of substituting in the room of their language that of the Tartars. The improvement made in the latter by M. de Lengles, is calculated to introduce this change. See the Mantchou alphabet, the production of a mind truly learned in the formation of language.
* The emperor of China calls himself the son of heaven, meaning God: because the Chinese believe that the power of heaven, the ruler of fate, is God himself. "The emperor only shows up once every ten months to avoid the people getting too familiar with him and losing their respect; he believes that power can only be maintained through force, that the people don’t understand justice, and that they can only be ruled through coercion." Narrative of two Muslim travelers in 851 and 877, translated by the Abbe Renaudot in 1718. Despite what missionaries claim, this situation hasn’t changed. The bamboo still dominates in China, and the son of heaven punishes the Mandarin with a beating for even the smallest mistake, who in turn punishes the people. The Jesuits may tell us it’s the best-governed country in the world, and its people are the happiest, but one letter from Amyot convinced me that China is governed like Turkey, and Sonnerat’s account confirms it. See Vol. II of Voyage aux Indes, in 4to. ** As long as the Chinese continue to use their current writing system, they won’t make progress in civilization. The necessary first step is to give them an alphabet like ours or to replace their language with that of the Tartars. The advancements made in the latter by M. de Lengles are meant to encourage this change. See the Manchu alphabet, a product of a truly knowledgeable mind in language formation.
In some parts of Europe, indeed, reason has begun to dawn, but even there, do nations partake of the knowledge of individuals? Are the talents and genius of governors turned to the benefit of the people? And those nations which call themselves polished, are they not the same that for the last three centuries have filled the earth with their injustice? Are they not those who, under the pretext of commerce, have desolated India, depopulated a new continent, and, at present, subject Africa to the most barbarous slavery? Can liberty be born from the bosom of despots? and shall justice be rendered by the hands of piracy and avarice? O Genius, I have seen the civilized countries; and the mockery of their wisdom has vanished before my sight. I saw wealth accumulated in the hands of a few, and the multitude poor and destitute. I have seen all rights, all powers concentered in certain classes, and the mass of the people passive and dependent. I have seen families of princes, but no families of the nation. I have seen government interests, but no public interests or spirit. I have seen that all the science of government was to oppress prudently; and the refined servitude of polished nations appeared to me only the more irremediable.
In some parts of Europe, reason has started to emerge, but even there, do nations benefit from the knowledge of individuals? Are the skills and talents of leaders used for the good of the people? And those nations that consider themselves sophisticated, are they not the same ones that have spread injustice across the earth for the last three centuries? Aren't they the ones who, under the guise of trade, have devastated India, depopulated a new continent, and currently, subject Africa to the most brutal slavery? Can freedom emerge from the reign of tyrants? And will justice be delivered by those engaged in piracy and greed? Oh Genius, I have witnessed the so-called civilized countries; and the irony of their wisdom has faded before my eyes. I saw wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, while the majority remained poor and destitute. I have observed all rights and powers focused in certain classes, with the masses passive and dependent. I have seen royal families, but no representatives of the nation. I have seen interests of the government, but no interests or spirit of the public. I have realized that all the knowledge of governance was merely a way to oppress cautiously; and the sophisticated oppression of polished nations seemed only more inescapable to me.
One obstacle above all has profoundly struck my mind. On looking over the world, I have seen it divided into twenty different systems of religion. Every nation has received, or formed, opposite opinions; and every one ascribing to itself the exclusive possession of the truth, must believe the other to be wrong. Now if, as must be the fact in this discordance of opinion, the greater part are in error, and are honest in it, then it follows that our mind embraces falsehood as it does truth; and if so, how is it to be enlightened? When prejudice has once seized the mind, how is it to be dissipated? How shall we remove the bandage from our eyes, when the first article in every creed, the first dogma in all religion, is the absolute proscription of doubt, the interdiction of examination, and the rejection of our own judgment? How is truth to make herself known?—If she resorts to arguments and proofs, the timid man stifles the voice of his own conscience; if she invokes the authority of celestial powers, he opposes it with another authority of the same origin, with which he is preoccupied; and he treats all innovation as blasphemy. Thus man in his blindness, has riveted his own chains, and surrendered himself forever, without defence, to the sport of his ignorance and his passions.
One major obstacle has really caught my attention. As I look at the world, I see it divided into twenty different religions. Every nation has its own beliefs, often in opposition to each other, and each one claims to have the sole truth, which means they must see others as wrong. If, as seems likely in this clash of views, most people are mistaken and genuinely believe in their errors, then it follows that our minds can accept falsehood just as easily as truth; and if that’s the case, how can we ever find enlightenment? Once prejudice takes hold of the mind, how can it be removed? How do we lift the blindfold from our eyes when the first rule in every belief system, the first principle in all religion, is the complete rejection of doubt, the ban on questioning, and the dismissal of our own judgment? How can truth reveal itself? If she uses arguments and evidence, the fearful individual silences their own conscience; if she calls upon divine authority, he counters with another authority from the same source that he’s already focused on; and he dismisses any new ideas as blasphemy. In this way, mankind, in its ignorance, has locked itself in chains and surrendered, defenseless, to the whims of ignorance and passion.
To dissolve such fatal chains, a miraculous concurrence of happy events would be necessary. A whole nation, cured of the delirium of superstition, must be inaccessible to the impulse of fanaticism. Freed from the yoke of false doctrine, a whole people must impose upon itself that of true morality and reason. This people should be courageous and prudent, wise and docile. Each individual, knowing his rights, should not transgress them. The poor should know how to resist seduction, and the rich the allurements of avarice. There should be found leaders disinterested and just, and their tyrants should be seized with a spirit of madness and folly. This people, recovering its rights, should feel its inability to exercise them in person, and should name its representatives. Creator of its magistrates, it should know at once to respect them and to judge them. In the sudden reform of a whole nation, accustomed to live by abuses, each individual displaced should bear with patience his privations, and submit to a change of habits. This nation should have the courage to conquer its liberty; the power to defend it, the wisdom to establish it, and the generosity to extend it to others. And can we ever expect the union of so many circumstances? But suppose that chance in its infinite combinations should produce them, shall I see those fortunate days. Will not my ashes long ere then be mouldering in the tomb?
To break free from these deadly chains, a miraculous combination of fortunate events would be needed. A whole nation, freed from the madness of superstition, must no longer be swayed by fanaticism. Liberated from the grip of false beliefs, people must commit themselves to true morality and reason. This society should be brave and careful, wise and willing to learn. Each person, aware of their rights, should not overstep them. The poor should resist temptation, and the rich should avoid the trappings of greed. There should be leaders who are selfless and fair, and their oppressive rulers should be overtaken by madness and foolishness. This populace, reclaiming its rights, should recognize its inability to exercise them directly and should elect its representatives. As the creator of its officials, it should know both to respect and to hold them accountable. In the sudden transformation of a nation used to living through corruption, every individual affected should patiently endure their losses and adapt to new habits. This nation should be brave enough to win its freedom, strong enough to protect it, wise enough to establish it, and generous enough to share it with others. Can we really expect so many circumstances to align? But if fate, in its endless possibilities, were to bring them together, will I live to see those fortunate days? Won't my remains have long since turned to dust in the grave?
Here, sunk in sorrow, my oppressed heart no longer found utterance. The Genius answered not, but I heard him whisper to himself:
Here, deep in sadness, my heavy heart couldn't express itself anymore. The Genius didn't respond, but I heard him mumble to himself:
Let us revive the hope of this man; for if he who loves his fellow creatures be suffered to despair, what will become of nations? The past is perhaps too discouraging; I must anticipate futurity, and disclose to the eye of virtue the astonishing age that is ready to begin; that, on viewing the object she desires, she may be animated with new ardor, and redouble her efforts to attain it.
Let’s bring back this man’s hope; because if someone who cares about others is allowed to give up, what will happen to our nations? The past might be too disheartening; I need to look ahead and reveal to virtuous people the amazing era that’s about to start; so that when they see what they want, they’ll be inspired with fresh enthusiasm and work even harder to achieve it.
CHAPTER XV.
THE NEW AGE.
Scarcely had he finished these words, when a great tumult arose in the west; and turning to that quarter, I perceived, at the extremity of the Mediterranean, in one of the nations of Europe, a prodigious movement—such as when a violent sedition arises in a vast city—a numberless people, rushing in all directions, pour through the streets and fluctuate like waves in the public places. My ear, struck with the cries which resounded to the heavens, distinguished these words:
Scarcely had he finished speaking when a huge uproar erupted in the west; and turning in that direction, I noticed, at the far end of the Mediterranean, in one of the European nations, an incredible chaos—similar to when a violent riot breaks out in a large city—countless people rushing in all directions, flooding the streets and moving like waves in the public squares. My ears, filled with the cries that echoed to the sky, caught these words:
What is this new prodigy? What cruel and mysterious scourge is this? We are a numerous people and we want hands! We have an excellent soil, and we are in want of subsistence? We are active and laborious, and we live in indigence! We pay enormous tributes, and we are told they are not sufficient! We are at peace without, and our persons and property are not safe within. Who, then, is the secret enemy that devours us?
What is this new wonder? What cruel and mysterious plague is this? We are many, and we need more workers! We have great land, yet we struggle to survive! We are hardworking, but we live in poverty! We pay hefty taxes, and we’re told it’s not enough! We’re at peace outside, but our safety and property aren’t secure inside. So who is the hidden enemy that is destroying us?
Some voices from the midst of the multitude replied:
Some voices from the crowd responded:
Raise a discriminating standard; and let all those who maintain and nourish mankind by useful labors gather round it; and you will discover the enemy that preys upon you.
Raise a critical standard, and let everyone who supports and sustains humanity through meaningful work come together around it; and you will uncover the enemy that is feeding on you.
The standard being raised, this nation divided itself at once into two bodies of unequal magnitude and contrasted appearance. The one, innumerable, and almost total, exhibited in the poverty of its clothing, in its emaciated appearance and sun-burnt faces, the marks of misery and labor; the other, a little group, an insignificant faction, presented in its rich attire embroidered with gold and silver, and in its sleek and ruddy faces, the signs of leisure and abundance.
The standard being raised, this nation quickly split into two groups of different sizes and looks. One group, countless and nearly everyone, showed through their tattered clothes, thin bodies, and sunburned faces the signs of hardship and hard work; the other, a small group, an insignificant faction, displayed in their lavish outfits adorned with gold and silver, and in their smooth, rosy faces, the indicators of comfort and plenty.
Considering these men more attentively, I found that the great body was composed of farmers, artificers, merchants, all professions useful to society; and that the little group was made up of priests of every order, of financiers, of nobles, of men in livery, of commanders of armies; in a word, of the civil, military, and religious agents of government.
Considering these men more closely, I realized that the majority was made up of farmers, craftsmen, and merchants—all professions that are valuable to society; and that the smaller group consisted of priests from various orders, financiers, nobles, people in uniforms, and army commanders; in short, the civil, military, and religious representatives of the government.
These two bodies being assembled face to face, and regarding each other with astonishment, I saw indignation and rage arising in one side, and a sort of panic in the other. And the large body said to the little one: Why are you separated from us? Are you not of our number?
These two figures were brought together, staring at each other in shock. I saw anger and fury on one side, while the other side seemed somewhat panicked. Then the larger figure asked the smaller one: Why are you apart from us? Aren't you one of us?
No, replied the group; you are the people; we are a privileged class, who have our laws, customs, and rights, peculiar to ourselves.
"No," the group replied; "you are the people; we are a privileged class, with our own laws, customs, and rights that are unique to us."
PEOPLE.—And what labor do you perform in our society?
PEOPLE.—So what work do you do in our society?
PRIVILEGED CLASS.—None; we are not made to work.
PRIVILEGED CLASS.—None; we aren’t meant to work.
PEOPLE.—How, then, have you acquired these riches?
PEOPLE.—So, how did you get all this wealth?
PRIVILEGED CLASS.—By taking the pains to govern you.
PRIVILEGED CLASS.—By making the effort to govern you.
PEOPLE.—What! is this what you call governing? We toil and you enjoy! we produce and you dissipate! Wealth proceeds from us, and you absorb it. Privileged men! class who are not the people; form a nation apart, and govern yourselves.*
PEOPLE.—What! Is this what you call governing? We work hard while you relax! We create wealth, and you waste it! The resources come from us, and you take them for yourselves. Privileged ones! A class that isn't the people; separate yourselves and govern your own kind.*
* This dialogue between the people and the indolent classes, is applicable to every society; it contains the seeds of all the political vices and disorders that prevail, and which may thus be defined: Men who do nothing, and who devour the substance of others; and men who arrogate to themselves particular rights and exclusive privileges of wealth and indolence. Compare the Mamlouks of Egypt, the nobility of Europe, the Nairs of India, the Emirs of Arabia, the patricians of Rome, the Christian clergy, the Imans, the Bramins, the Bonzes, the Lamas, etc., etc., and you will find in all the same characteristic feature:—Men living in idleness at the expense of those who labor.
* This conversation between the general public and the lazy classes applies to every society; it contains the roots of all the political flaws and issues that exist, which can be defined as follows: People who do nothing and consume the resources of others; and people who claim specific rights and exclusive privileges due to their wealth and laziness. Look at the Mamluks of Egypt, the nobility of Europe, the Nairs of India, the Emirs of Arabia, the patricians of Rome, the Christian clergy, the Imans, the Brahmins, the Bonzes, the Lamas, and so on, and you will see the same characteristic:—People living in idleness at the expense of those who work.
Then the little group, deliberating on this new state of things, some of the most honorable among them said: We must join the people and partake of their labors and burdens, for they are men like us, and our riches come from them; but others arrogantly exclaimed: It would be a shame, an infamy, for us to mingle with the crowd; they are born to serve us. Are we not men of another race—the noble and pure descendants of the conquerors of this empire? This multitude must be reminded of our rights and its own origin.
Then the small group, reflecting on this new situation, had some of the most honorable among them say: We need to join the people and share in their work and struggles, because they are just like us, and our wealth comes from them; but others arrogantly argued: It would be disgraceful, a shameful act, for us to mix with the crowd; they are meant to serve us. Aren't we of a different class—the noble and pure descendants of the conquerors of this empire? This crowd needs to be reminded of our rights and their own origins.
THE NOBLES.—People! know you not that our ancestors conquered this land, and that your race was spared only on condition of serving us? This is our social compact! this the government constituted by custom and prescribed by time.
THE NOBLES.—People! Don't you realize that our ancestors conquered this land, and that your people were spared only on the condition of serving us? This is our social agreement! This is the government established by tradition and defined by time.
PEOPLE.—O conquerors, pure of blood! show us your genealogies! we shall then see if what in an individual is robbery and plunder, can be virtuous in a nation.
PEOPLE.—O conquerors, pure of blood! Show us your family trees! Then we will see if what is considered theft and looting in an individual can be virtuous in a nation.
And forthwith, voices were heard in every quarter calling out the nobles by their names; and relating their origin and parentage, they told how the grandfather, great-grandfather, or even father, born traders and mechanics, after acquiring wealth in every way, had purchased their nobility for money: so that but very few families were really of the original stock. See, said these voices, see these purse-proud commoners who deny their parents! see these plebian recruits who look upon themselves as illustrious veterans! and peals of laughter were heard.
And right away, voices were heard everywhere calling out the nobles by name; they talked about their origins and backgrounds, explaining how their grandfathers, great-grandfathers, or even fathers, who were once traders and workers, acquired wealth in various ways and bought their titles with money. As a result, very few families were genuinely of noble descent. "Look," these voices said, "look at these arrogant commoners who deny their roots! Look at these average people who see themselves as distinguished veterans!" And laughter erupted.
And the civil governors said: these people are mild, and naturally servile; speak to them of the king and of the law, and they will return to their duty. People! the king wills, the sovereign ordains!
And the civil governors said: these people are gentle and naturally submissive; talk to them about the king and the law, and they will go back to their duties. People! the king commands, the sovereign decrees!
PEOPLE.—The king can will nothing but the good of the people; the sovereign can only ordain according to law.
PEOPLE.—The king can only will the good of the people; the sovereign can only make decisions based on the law.
CIVIL GOVERNORS.—The law commands you to be submissive.
CIVIL GOVERNORS.—The law requires you to obey.
PEOPLE.—The law is the general will; and we will a new order of things.
PEOPLE.—The law reflects the collective will; and we desire a new way of doing things.
CIVIL GOVERNORS.—You are then a rebel people.
CIVIL GOVERNORS.—So, you’re a rebellious group.
PEOPLE.—A nation cannot revolt; tyrants only are rebels.
PEOPLE.—A nation can’t revolt; only tyrants are rebels.
CIVIL GOVERNORS.—The king is on our side; he commands you to submit.
CIVIL GOVERNORS.—The king is on our side; he orders you to comply.
PEOPLE.—Kings are inseparable from their nations. Our king cannot be with you; you possess only his phantom.
PEOPLE.—Kings are tied to their nations. Our king can't be with you; you only have his ghost.
And the military governors came forward. The people are timorous, said they; we must threaten them; they will submit only to force. Soldiers, chastise this insolent multitude.
And the military governors stepped up. The people are scared, they said; we need to threaten them; they will only obey with force. Soldiers, punish this disrespectful crowd.
PEOPLE.—Soldiers, you are of our blood! Will you strike your brothers, your relatives? If the people perish who will nourish the army?
PEOPLE.—Soldiers, you're one of us! Will you turn against your brothers, your family? If the people are gone, who will support the army?
And the soldiers, grounding their arms, said to the chiefs:
And the soldiers, putting down their weapons, said to the leaders:
We are likewise the people; show us the enemy!
We are also the people; show us the enemy!
Then the ecclesiastical governors said: There is but one resource left. The people are superstitious; we must frighten them with the names of God and religion.
Then the church leaders said: There’s only one option left. The people are superstitious; we need to scare them with the names of God and religion.
Our dear brethren! our children! God has ordained us to govern you.
Our dear brothers and sisters! Our children! God has chosen us to lead you.
PEOPLE.—Show us your credentials from God!
PEOPLE.—Show us your proof from God!
PRIESTS.—You must have faith; reason leads astray.
PRIESTS.—You need to have faith; logic can mislead you.
PEOPLE.—Do you govern without reason?
PEOPLE.—Do you lead without reason?
PRIESTS.—God commands peace! Religion prescribes obedience.
PRIESTS.—God wants peace! Religion demands obedience.
PEOPLE.—Peace supposes justice. Obedience implies conviction of a duty.
PEOPLE.—Peace requires justice. Obedience means having a strong belief in a duty.
PRIESTS.—Suffering is the business of this world.
PRIESTS.—Suffering is the reality of this world.
PEOPLE.—Show us the example.
PEOPLE.—Set the example.
PRIESTS.—Would you live without gods or kings?
PRIESTS.—Would you live without gods or rulers?
PEOPLE.—We would live without oppressors.
PEOPLE.—We would live free.
PRIESTS.—You must have mediators, intercessors.
PRIESTS.—You need mediators, intercessors.
PEOPLE.—Mediators with God and with the king! courtiers and priests, your services are too expensive: we will henceforth manage our own affairs.
PEOPLE.—Mediators with God and with the king! Courtiers and priests, your services are too pricey: from now on, we'll handle our own affairs.
And the little group said: We are lost! the multitude are enlightened.
And the small group said: We are lost! The crowd is enlightened.
And the people answered: You are safe; since we are enlightened we will commit no violence; we only claim our rights. We feel resentments, but we will forget them. We were slaves, we might command; but we only wish to be free, and liberty is but justice.
And the people answered: You are safe; now that we are enlightened, we will commit no violence; we only claim our rights. We feel resentments, but we will let them go. We were once slaves, we could take control; but all we want is to be free, and freedom is just justice.
CHAPTER XVI.
A FREE AND LEGISLATIVE PEOPLE.
Considering that all public power was now suspended, and that the habitual restraint of the people had suddenly ceased, I shuddered with the apprehension that they would fall into the dissolution of anarchy. But, taking their affairs into immediate deliberation, they said:
Considering that all public authority was now on hold, and that the usual control over the people had suddenly vanished, I felt a chill of dread that they would descend into chaos. But, as they quickly discussed their situation, they said:
It is not enough that we have freed ourselves from tyrants and parasites; we must prevent their return. We are men, and experience has abundantly taught us that every man is fond of power, and wishes to enjoy it at the expense of others. It is necessary, then, to guard against a propensity which is the source of discord; we must establish certain rules of duty and of right. But the knowledge of our rights, and the estimation of our duties, are so abstract and difficult as to require all the time and all the faculties of a man. Occupied in our own affairs, we have not leisure for these studies; nor can we exercise these functions in our own persons. Let us choose, then, among ourselves, such persons as are capable of this employment. To them we will delegate our powers to institute our government and laws. They shall be the representatives of our wills and of our interests. And in order to attain the fairest representation possible of our wills and our interests, let it be numerous, and composed of men resembling ourselves.
It's not enough that we've freed ourselves from tyrants and leeches; we need to make sure they don't come back. We are human, and experience has shown us that everyone likes power and wants to have it at others' expense. Therefore, we need to guard against this tendency, which leads to conflict; we must establish clear rules for duty and rights. However, understanding our rights and figuring out our duties is complex and requires all our time and energy. Busy with our own lives, we don't have the time for these studies, nor can we manage these roles ourselves. So, let's choose individuals among us who are capable of taking on this task. We'll give them the authority to create our government and laws. They will represent our will and our interests. To achieve the best possible representation of our wills and interests, let this group be large and made up of people like us.
Having made the election of a numerous body of delegates, the people thus addressed them:
Having chosen a large group of delegates, the people then addressed them:
We have hitherto lived in a society formed by chance, without fixed agreements, without free conventions, without a stipulation of rights, without reciprocal engagements,—and a multitude of disorders and evils have arisen from this precarious state. We are now determined on forming a regular compact; and we have chosen you to adjust the articles. Examine, then, with care what ought to be its basis and its conditions; consider what is the end and the principles of every association; recognize the rights which every member brings, the powers which he delegates, and those which he reserves to himself. Point out to us the rules of conduct—the basis of just and equitable laws. Prepare for us a new system of government; for we realize that the one which has hitherto guided us is corrupt. Our fathers have wandered in the paths of ignorance, and habit has taught us to follow in their footsteps. Everything has been done by fraud, violence, and delusion; and the true laws of morality and reason are still obscure. Clear up, then, their chaos; trace out their connection; publish their code, and we will adopt it.
We have until now lived in a society built by chance, without fixed agreements, without free conventions, without a clear definition of rights, and without mutual commitments—resulting in many problems and issues from this unstable situation. We are now committed to creating a proper agreement; and we have chosen you to set the terms. So, please examine carefully what its foundation and conditions should be; think about the purpose and principles of any organization; acknowledge the rights each member brings, the powers they delegate, and those they keep for themselves. Outline for us the rules of conduct—the foundation of fair and just laws. Prepare a new system of governance for us, because we recognize that the one we’ve followed so far is corrupt. Our ancestors have strayed along paths of ignorance, and we have learned to follow in their footsteps. Everything has been done through deception, force, and trickery; and the true laws of morality and reason remain unclear. Please clarify their confusion; draw out their connections; publish their code, and we will accept it.
And the people raised a large throne, in the form of a pyramid, and seating on it the men they had chosen, said to them:
And the people built a large throne shaped like a pyramid, and after seating the men they had chosen on it, they said to them:
We raise you to-day above us, that you may better discover the whole of our relations, and be above the reach of our passions. But remember that you are our fellow-citizens; that the power we confer on you is our own; that we deposit it with you, but not as a property or a heritage; that you must be the first to obey the laws you make; that to-morrow you redescend among us, and that you will have acquired no other right but that of our esteem and gratitude. And consider what a tribute of glory the world, which reveres so many apostles of error, will bestow on the first assembly of rational men, who shall have declared the unchangeable principles of justice, and consecrated, in the face of tyrants, the rights of nations.
We lift you up today so you can see our entire situation more clearly and be beyond our emotional influence. But keep in mind that you are our fellow citizens; the power we give you is really ours; we are entrusting it to you, but not as if it were your personal property or legacy; you must be the first to follow the laws you create; tomorrow you will come back down among us, and the only rights you’ll gain are our respect and gratitude. Think about the incredible honor the world will give to the first gathering of rational individuals who declare the timeless principles of justice and, in front of tyrants, affirm the rights of nations.
CHAPTER XVII.
UNIVERSAL BASIS OF ALL RIGHT AND ALL LAW.
The men chosen by the people to investigate the true principles of morals and of reason then proceeded in the sacred object of their mission; and, after a long examination, having discovered a fundamental and universal principle, a legislator arose and said to the people:
The men selected by the people to explore the true principles of morality and reason then moved forward with their important mission; and, after a thorough investigation, having found a fundamental and universal principle, a legislator stood up and addressed the people:
Here is the primordial basis, the physical origin of all justice and of all right.
Here is the fundamental basis, the physical source of all justice and of all rights.
Whatever be the active power, the moving cause, that governs the universe, since it has given to all men the same organs, the same sensations, and the same wants, it has thereby declared that it has given to all the same right to the use of its treasures, and that all men are equal in the order of nature.
Whatever the driving force is that governs the universe, since it has provided all people with the same organs, the same feelings, and the same needs, it has consequently declared that it has granted everyone the same right to use its resources, and that all people are equal in the natural order.
And, since this power has given to each man the necessary means of preserving his own existence, it is evident that it has constituted them all independent one of another; that it has created them free; that no one is subject to another; that each one is absolute proprietor of his own person.
And, since this power has given each person the essential means to preserve their own existence, it's clear that it has made them all independent from one another; that it has created them free; that no one is subject to another; that each person is the absolute owner of their own self.
Equality and liberty are, therefore, two essential attributes of man, two laws of the Divinity, constitutional and unchangeable, like the physical properties of matter.
Equality and freedom are, therefore, two fundamental qualities of humanity, two laws of the Divine, constitutional and unchanging, like the physical properties of matter.
Now, every individual being absolute master of his own person, it follows that a full and free consent is a condition indispensable to all contracts and all engagements.
Now, since everyone is the complete master of their own person, it follows that full and free consent is an essential condition for all contracts and commitments.
Again, since each individual is equal to another, it follows that the balance of what is received and of what is given, should be strictly in equilibrium; so that the idea of justice, of equity, necessarily imports that of equality.*
Again, since each person is equal to another, it follows that the balance of what is received and what is given should be strictly in equilibrium; so the concept of justice and fairness inherently includes the notion of equality.*
* The etymology of the words themselves trace out to us this connection: equilibrium, equalitas, equitas, are all of one family, and the physical idea of equality, in the scales of a balance, is the source and type of all the rest.
* The origins of the words themselves show us this connection: equilibrium, equalitas, equitas, all belong to the same family, and the physical concept of equality, represented by the scales of a balance, is the source and model for everything else.
Equality and liberty are therefore the physical and unalterable basis of every union of men in society, and of course the necessary and generating principle of every law and of every system of regular government.*
Equality and freedom are the fundamental and unchangeable foundation of every group of people in society, and they are obviously the essential and driving force behind every law and every system of organized government.*
* In the Declaration of Rights, there is an inversion of ideas in the first article, liberty being placed before equality, from which it in reality springs. This defect is not to be wondered at; the science of the rights of man is a new science: it was invented yesterday by the Americans, to-day the French are perfecting it, but there yet remains a great deal to be done. In the ideas that constitute it there is a genealogical order which, from us basis, physical equality, to the minutest and most remote branches of government, ought to proceed in an uninterrupted series of inferences.
* In the Declaration of Rights, the first article flips the order of concepts by placing liberty before equality, even though equality actually stems from it. This flaw isn’t surprising; the study of human rights is a relatively new field: it was created just yesterday by the Americans, and today the French are refining it, but a lot of work is still needed. The ideas that shape it have a hierarchical order that should start from our foundation of physical equality and flow logically through to the various branches of government in a continuous chain of reasoning.
A disregard of this basis has introduced in your nation, and in every other, those disorders which have finally roused you. It is by returning to this rule that you may reform them, and reorganize a happy order of society.
A neglect of this foundation has caused disturbances in your nation, and in every other one, that have finally awakened you. It is by going back to this principle that you can fix these issues and create a well-functioning society.
But observe, this reorganization will occasion a violent shock in your habits, your fortunes, and your prejudices. Vicious contracts and abusive claims must be dissolved, unjust distinctions and ill founded property renounced; you must indeed recur for a moment to a state of nature. Consider whether you can consent to so many sacrifices.
But notice, this reorganization will create a major upheaval in your habits, finances, and beliefs. Unfair contracts and wrongful claims need to be ended, unjust distinctions and unfounded property must be given up; you will indeed have to go back for a moment to a state of nature. Think about whether you can agree to make so many sacrifices.
Then, reflecting on the cupidity inherent in the heart of man, I thought that this people would renounce all ideas of amelioration.
Then, thinking about the greed that exists in people's hearts, I realized that this community would give up any hope for improvement.
But, in a moment, a great number of men, advancing toward the pyramid, made a solemn abjuration of all their distinctions and all their riches.
But then, in an instant, a large group of men, moving toward the pyramid, made a serious renouncement of all their titles and all their wealth.
Establish for us, said they, the laws of equality and liberty; we will possess nothing in future but on the title of justice.
"Set up the laws of equality and freedom for us," they said. "From now on, we will only have what we deserve through justice."
Equality, liberty, justice,—these shall be our code, and shall be written on our standards.
Equality, freedom, justice—these will be our guiding principles, and they will be displayed on our banners.
And the people immediately raised a great standard, inscribed with these three words, in three different colors. They displayed it over the pyramid of the legislators, and for the first time the flag of universal justice floated on the face of the earth.
And the people quickly raised a huge banner, marked with these three words in three different colors. They displayed it over the pyramid of the lawmakers, and for the first time, the flag of universal justice flew across the earth.
And the people raised before the pyramid a new altar, on which they placed a golden balance, a sword, and a book with this inscription:
And the people built a new altar in front of the pyramid, where they placed a golden balance, a sword, and a book with this inscription:
TO EQUAL LAW, WHICH JUDGES AND PROTECTS.
TO EQUAL LAW, THAT JUDGES AND PROTECTS.
And having surrounded the pyramid and the altar with a vast amphitheatre, all the people took their seats to hear the publication of the law. And millions of men, raising at once their hands to heaven, took the solemn oath to live equal, free, and just; to respect their reciprocal properties and rights; to obey the law and its regularly chosen representatives.
And after surrounding the pyramid and the altar with a huge amphitheater, everyone took their seats to hear the announcement of the law. Millions of people raised their hands to the sky and took a solemn oath to live equally, freely, and fairly; to respect each other's properties and rights; and to obey the law and its elected officials.
A spectacle so impressive and sublime, so replete with generous emotions, moved me to tears; and addressing myself to the Genius, I exclaimed: Let me now live, for in future I have everything to hope.
A spectacle that was so amazing and beautiful, filled with deep emotions, brought me to tears; and speaking to the Genius, I said: Let me live now, because I have everything to look forward to in the future.
CHAPTER XVIII.
CONSTERNATION AND CONSPIRACY OF TYRANTS.
But scarcely had the solemn voice of liberty and equality resounded through the earth, when a movement of confusion, of astonishment, arose in different nations. On the one hand, the people, warmed with desire, but wavering between hope and fear, between the sentiment of right and the habit of obedience, began to be in motion. The kings, on the other hand, suddenly awakened from the sleep of indolence and despotism, were alarmed for the safety of their thrones; while, on all sides, those clans of civil and religious tyrants, who deceive kings and oppress the people, were seized with rage and consternation; and, concerting their perfidious plans, they said: Woe to us, if this fatal cry of liberty comes to the ears of the multitude! Woe to us, if this pernicious spirit of justice be propagated!
But hardly had the serious message of freedom and equality spread across the world when a wave of confusion and amazement broke out in various countries. On one side, the people, filled with desire yet torn between hope and fear, and between their sense of what was right and their usual obedience, began to stir. On the other side, the kings, suddenly jolted awake from their lazy and tyrannical slumber, were worried about the security of their thrones; meanwhile, all around them, those groups of civil and religious oppressors, who fool kings and suppress the people, were filled with anger and dread; and, plotting their deceitful schemes, they exclaimed: Woe to us if this dangerous call for freedom reaches the ears of the masses! Woe to us if this harmful spirit of justice spreads!
And, pointing to the floating banner, they continued:
And, pointing to the floating banner, they kept going:
Consider what a swarm of evils are included in these three words! If all men are equal, where is our exclusive right to honors and to power? If all men are to be free, what becomes of our slaves, our vassals, our property? If all are equal in the civil state, where is our prerogative of birth, of inheritance? and what becomes of nobility? If they are all equal in the sight of God, what need of mediators?—where is the priesthood? Let us hasten, then, to destroy a germ so prolific, and so contagious. We must employ all our cunning against this innovation. We must frighten the kings, that they may join us in the cause. We must divide the people by national jealousies, and occupy them with commotions, wars, and conquests. They must be alarmed at the power of this free nation. Let us form a league against the common enemy, demolish that sacrilegious standard, overturn that throne of rebellion, and stifle in its birth the flame of revolution.
Consider the massive problems that come with these three words! If everyone is equal, where is our exclusive right to honors and power? If everyone is supposed to be free, what happens to our slaves, our vassals, our property? If everyone is equal in society, where is our advantage of birth and inheritance? And what happens to nobility? If everyone is equal in the eyes of God, what’s the point of mediators?—where does the priesthood fit in? Let’s quickly work to eliminate such a widespread and contagious idea. We have to use all our cleverness against this change. We need to scare the kings so they’ll side with us. We must divide the people through national rivalries and keep them busy with unrest, wars, and conquests. They need to be afraid of the power of this free nation. Let’s form an alliance against our common enemy, destroy that blasphemous symbol, topple that throne of rebellion, and snuff out the flame of revolution before it even starts.
And, indeed, the civil and religious tyrants of nations formed a general combination; and, multiplying their followers by force and seduction, they marched in hostile array against the free nation; and, surrounding the altar and the pyramid of natural law, they demanded with loud cries:
And, in fact, the political and religious oppressors of nations united together; and, increasing their supporters through coercion and persuasion, they marched in aggression against the free nation; and, encircling the altar and the foundation of natural law, they shouted loudly:
What is this new and heretical doctrine? what this impious altar, this sacrilegious worship? True believers and loyal subjects! can you suppose that truth has been first discovered to-day, and that hitherto you have been walking in error? that those men, more fortunate than you, have the sole privilege of wisdom? And you, rebel and misguided nation, perceive you not that your new leaders are misleading you? that they destroy the principles of your faith, and overturn the religion of your ancestors? Ah, tremble! lest the wrath of heaven should kindle against you; and hasten by speedy repentance to retrieve your error.
What is this new and outrageous belief? What is this disrespectful altar, this shameful worship? True believers and loyal subjects! Can you really think that the truth has only been discovered today and that until now you have been in the wrong? That those people, luckier than you, hold the exclusive right to wisdom? And you, misguided and rebellious nation, can’t you see that your new leaders are leading you astray? That they are destroying the principles of your faith and overturning the religion of your ancestors? Ah, be afraid! Lest the anger of heaven be set against you; and hurry to make amends through quick repentance to correct your mistake.
But, inaccessible to seduction as well as to fear, the free nation kept silence, and rising universally in arms, assumed an imposing attitude.
But, unaffected by seduction or fear, the free nation stayed quiet and rose up unitedly in arms, taking on a strong stance.
And the legislator said to the chiefs of nations:
And the lawmaker said to the leaders of the nations:
If while we walked with a bandage on our eyes the light guided our steps, why, since we are no longer blindfold, should it fly from our search? If guides, who teach mankind to see for themselves, mislead and deceive them, what can be expected from those who profess to keep them in darkness?
If, while we walked with our eyes covered, light guided our steps, then why, now that we can see, does it escape our pursuit? If guides, who teach people to see for themselves, mislead and fool them, what can we expect from those who claim to keep them in the dark?
But hark, ye leaders of nations! If you possess the truth, show it to us, and we will receive it with gratitude, for we seek it with ardor, and have a great interest in finding it. We are men, and liable to be deceived; but you are also men, and equally fallible. Aid us then in this labyrinth, where the human race has wandered for so many ages; help us to dissipate the illusion of so many prejudices and vicious habits. Amid the shock of so many opinions which dispute for our acceptance, assist us in discovering the proper and distinctive character of truth. Let us this day terminate the long combat with error. Let us establish between it and truth a solemn contest, to which we will invite the opinions of men of all nations. Let us convoke a general assembly of the nations. Let them be judges in their own cause; and in the debate of all systems, let no champion, no argument, be wanting, either on the side of prejudice or of reason; and let the sentiment of a general and common mass of evidence give birth to a universal concord of opinions and of hearts.
But listen up, leaders of nations! If you have the truth, show it to us, and we’ll be grateful because we’re eager to find it. We’re human and can be misled, but you’re human too and just as fallible. So help us in this maze where humanity has been lost for ages; help us break free from the many illusions created by prejudice and bad habits. With all these conflicting opinions vying for our approval, assist us in identifying the true and unique nature of truth. Let’s end this long struggle with error today. Let’s create a serious contest between it and truth, inviting the views of people from all nations. Let’s gather a general assembly of the nations and let them judge their own case; in the debate of all systems, let there be no shortage of champions or arguments, whether for prejudice or reason; and may the consensus of a broad and shared understanding give rise to universal agreement in opinions and hearts.
CHAPTER XIX.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE NATIONS.
Thus spoke the legislator; and the multitude, seized with those emotions which a reasonable proposition always inspires, expressed its applause; while the tyrants, left without support, were overwhelmed with confusion.
Thus spoke the legislator; and the crowd, filled with the feelings that a sensible proposal always brings, showed their approval; while the tyrants, abandoned and without backing, were filled with confusion.
A scene of a new and astonishing nature then opened to my view. All that the earth contains of people and of nations; men of every race and of every region, converging from their various climates, seemed to assemble in one allotted place; where, forming an immense congress, distinguished in groups by the vast variety of their dresses, features, and complexion, the numberless multitude presented a most unusual and affecting sight.
A scene of new and incredible nature unfolded before me. All the people and nations of the earth—men from every race and place—seemed to gather in one designated spot. They formed a massive assembly, grouped together by the wide range of their clothing, features, and skin tones, creating a striking and unforgettable sight.
On one side I saw the European, with his short close coat, pointed triangular hat, smooth chin, and powdered hair; on the other side the Asiatic, with a flowing robe, long beard, shaved head, and round turban. Here stood the nations of Africa, with their ebony skins, their woolly hair, their body girt with white and blue tissues of bark, adorned with bracelets and necklaces of coral, shells, and glass; there the tribes of the north, enveloped in their leathern bags; the Laplander, with his pointed bonnet and his snow-shoes; the Samoyede, with his feverish body and strong odor; the Tongouse, with his horned cap, and carrying his idols pendant from his neck; the Yakoute, with his freckled face; the Kalmuc, with his flat nose and little retorted eyes. Farther distant were the Chinese, attired in silk, with their hair hanging in tresses; the Japanese, of mingled race; the Malays, with wide-spreading ears, rings in their noses, and palm-leaf hats of vast circumference;* and the tattooed races of the isles of the southern ocean and of the continent of the antipodes.** The view of so many varieties of the same species, of so many extravagant inventions of the same understanding, and of so many modifications of the same organization, affected me with a thousand feelings and a thousand thoughts.*** I contemplated with astonishment this gradation of color, which, passing from a bright carnation to a light brown, a deeper brown, dusky, bronze, olive, leaden, copper, ends in the black of ebony and of jet. And finding the Cassimerian, with his rosy cheek, next to the sun-burnt Hindoo, and the Georgian by the side of the Tartar, I reflected on the effects of climate hot or cold, of soil high or low, marshy or dry, open or shaded. I compared the dwarf of the pole with the giant of the temperate zones, the slender body of the Arab with the ample chest of the Hollander; the squat figure of the Samoyede with the elegant form of the Greek and the Sclavonian; the greasy black wool of the Negro with the bright silken locks of the Dane; the broad face of the Kalmuc, his little angular eyes and flattened nose, with the oval prominent visage, large blue eyes, and aquiline nose of the Circassian and Abazan. I contrasted the brilliant calicoes of the Indian, the well-wrought stuffs of the European, the rich furs of the Siberian, with the tissues of bark, of osiers, leaves and feathers of savage nations; and the blue figures of serpents, flowers, and stars, with which they painted their bodies. Sometimes the variegated appearance of this multitude reminded me of the enamelled meadows of the Nile and the Euphrates, when, after rains or inundations, millions of flowers are rising on every side. Sometimes their murmurs and their motions called to mind the numberless swarms of locusts which, issuing from the desert, cover in the spring the plains of Hauran.
On one side, I saw the European, with his short coat, pointed triangular hat, smooth chin, and powdered hair; on the other side, the Asian, dressed in a flowing robe, with a long beard, shaved head, and round turban. Here stood the nations of Africa, with their dark skin, woolly hair, their bodies wrapped in white and blue bark cloth, adorned with bracelets and necklaces made of coral, shells, and glass; there were the northern tribes, wrapped in their leather bags; the Laplander, wearing his pointed hat and snowshoes; the Samoyed, with his sweaty body and strong odor; the Tunguese, sporting a horned cap and carrying idols hanging from his neck; the Yakut, with his freckled face; and the Kalmyk, with his flat nose and small, slanted eyes. Farther away were the Chinese, dressed in silk, with their hair in long strands; the Japanese, of mixed descent; the Malays, with large ears, nose rings, and wide palm-leaf hats; and the tattooed peoples from the southern islands and the antipodes. The sight of so many variations of the same species, so many remarkable creations of the same intelligence, and so many adaptations of the same form stirred a thousand emotions and thoughts in me. I stared in wonder at this gradient of color, ranging from bright pink to light brown, then deeper brown, dusky, bronze, olive, leaden, copper, and finally leading to the black of ebony and jet. Noticing the Cassimerian, with his rosy cheeks, next to the sun-kissed Hindu, and the Georgian beside the Tartar, I pondered the effects of different climates, whether hot or cold, of various terrains, whether high or low, marshy or dry, open or shaded. I compared the dwarf of the pole with the giant from temperate zones, the slender Arab with the broad-chested Hollander; the squat Samoyed with the graceful Greek and Slav; the coarse black wool of the African with the shiny silken hair of the Dane; the round face of the Kalmyk, with his small, sharp eyes and flat nose, to the oval, prominent features, large blue eyes, and hooked nose of the Circassian and Abaza. I contrasted the vibrant calicoes of the Indian with the finely made fabrics of the European, the luxurious furs of the Siberian, against the bark cloth, willow, leaves, and feathers of the native tribes; and the blue patterns of snakes, flowers, and stars that they painted on their bodies. Sometimes the colorful appearance of this crowd reminded me of the blooming meadows of the Nile and the Euphrates, when, after rains or floods, millions of flowers spring up everywhere. Other times, their chatter and movements reminded me of the countless swarms of locusts that burst forth from the desert, covering the plains of Hauran in the spring.
* This species of the palm-tree is called Latanier. Its leaf, similar to a fan-mount, grows upon a stalk issuing directly from the earth. A specimen may be seen in the botanic garden. ** The country of the Papons of New Guinea. *** A hall of costumes in one of the galleries of the Louvre would, in every point of view, be an interesting establishment. It would furnish an admirable treat to the curiosity of a great number of persons, excellent models to the artist, and useful subjects of meditation to the physician, the philosopher and the legislator. Picture to yourself a collection of the various faces and figures of every country and nation, exhibiting accurately, color, features and form; what a field for investigation and enquiry as to the influence of climate, customs, food, etc. It might truly be called the science of man! Buffon has attempted a chapter of this nature, but it only serves to exhibit more strikingly our actual ignorance. Such a collection is said to have been begun at St. Petersburg, but it is also said at the same time to be as imperfect as the vocabulary of the three hundred languages. The enterprise would be worthy of the French nation.
* This type of palm tree is called Latanier. Its leaf, resembling a fan, grows on a stalk that comes directly from the ground. You can see a specimen in the botanic garden. ** The land of the Papons in New Guinea. *** A costume hall in one of the galleries of the Louvre would be an intriguing place in every way. It would provide a fascinating experience for many people, excellent models for artists, and valuable subjects for reflection for physicians, philosophers, and legislators. Imagine a collection showcasing the diverse faces and figures from every country and nation, accurately displaying color, features, and form; what a great opportunity for investigation into the effects of climate, customs, diet, etc. It could truly be called the science of humanity! Buffon attempted a chapter on this topic, but it only highlights our current ignorance. It’s said that a collection like this was started in St. Petersburg, but at the same time, it’s also claimed to be as incomplete as the vocabulary of three hundred languages. This project would be a worthy endeavor for the French nation.
At the sight of so many rational beings, considering on the one hand the immensity of thoughts and sensations assembled in this place, and on the other hand, reflecting on the opposition of so many opinions, and the shock of so many passions of men so capricious, I struggled between astonishment, admiration, and secret dread—when the legislator commanded silence, and attracted all my attention.
At the sight of so many thinking individuals, considering the vast array of thoughts and feelings gathered here on one hand, and on the other, reflecting on the clash of so many viewpoints and the intensity of the unpredictable emotions among these people, I felt a mix of amazement, admiration, and hidden fear—when the legislator called for silence and drew all my attention.
Inhabitants of earth! a free and powerful nation addresses you with words of justice and peace, and she offers you the sure pledges of her intentions in her own conviction and experience. Long afflicted with the same evils as yourselves, we sought for their source, and found them all derived from violence and injustice, erected into law by the inexperience of past ages, and maintained by the prejudices of the present. Then abolishing our artificial and arbitrary institutions, and recurring to the origin of all right and reason, we have found that there existed in the very order of nature and in the physical constitution of man, eternal and immutable laws, which only waited his observance to render him happy.
Inhabitants of Earth! A free and powerful nation speaks to you with messages of justice and peace, offering you clear assurances of our intentions based on our own beliefs and experiences. Having long suffered from the same problems as you, we searched for their origins and discovered that all these issues stem from violence and injustice, upheld by the ignorance of past generations and supported by the biases of today. By dismantling our artificial and unjust institutions and returning to the foundation of all rights and reason, we've recognized that there are eternal and unchanging laws within the very order of nature and the physical makeup of humanity, which only need to be acknowledged for us to find true happiness.
O men! cast your eyes on the heavens that give you light, and on the earth that gives you bread! Since they offer the same bounties to you all—since from the power that gives them motion you have all received the same life, the same organs, have you not likewise all received the same right to enjoy its benefits? Has it not hereby declared you all equal and free? What mortal shall dare refuse to his fellow that which nature gives him?
O people! Look up at the skies that provide you light, and at the earth that provides you sustenance! Since they offer the same abundance to everyone—since from the force that sets them in motion you have all received the same life and the same abilities, don’t you all also have the same right to enjoy their benefits? Has this not declared you all equal and free? What person would dare deny their fellow the things that nature provides?
O nations! let us banish all tyranny and all discord; let us form but one society, one great family; and, since human nature has but one constitution, let there exist in future but one law, that of nature—but one code, that of reason—but one throne, that of justice—but one altar, that of union.
O nations! Let’s get rid of all tyranny and all conflict; let’s create just one society, one big family; and, since human nature has only one constitution, let there be in the future just one law, that of nature—just one code, that of reason—just one throne, that of justice—just one altar, that of unity.
He ceased; and an immense acclamation resounded to the skies. Ten thousand benedictions announced the transports of the multitude; and they made the earth re-echo JUSTICE, EQUALITY and UNION.
He stopped speaking, and a huge cheer rose to the skies. Ten thousand blessings celebrated the excitement of the crowd, and they made the earth echo with JUSTICE, EQUALITY, and UNION.
But different emotions soon succeeded; soon the doctors and the chiefs of nations exciting a spirit of dispute, there was heard a sullen murmur, which growing louder, and spreading from group to group, became a vast disorder; and each nation setting up exclusive pretensions, claimed a preference for its own code and opinion.
But different emotions quickly took over; soon the doctors and the leaders of nations stirred up a spirit of conflict, and a low murmur was heard, which grew louder and spread from group to group, turning into a huge chaos; and each nation, claiming exclusive rights, favored its own rules and beliefs.
You are in error, said the parties, pointing one to the other. We alone are in possession of reason and truth. We alone have the true law, the real rule of right and justice, the only means of happiness and perfection. All other men are either blind or rebellious.
You’re mistaken, the parties said, pointing at each other. We alone have reason and truth. We alone possess the true law, the real standard of right and justice, the only path to happiness and fulfillment. Everyone else is either clueless or defiant.
And great agitation prevailed.
And there was great unrest.
Then the legislator, after enforcing silence, loudly exclaimed:
Then the legislator, after enforcing silence, shouted:
What, O people! is this passionate emotion? Whither will this quarrel conduct you? What can you expect from this dissension? The earth has been for ages a field of disputation, and you have shed torrents of blood in your controversies. What have you gained by so many battles and tears? When the strong has subjected the weak to his opinion, has he thereby aided the cause of truth?
What is this intense emotion, people? Where will this argument lead you? What do you hope to achieve from this disagreement? For ages, the world has been a battleground, and you've spilled rivers of blood over your conflicts. What have you gained from all those fights and tears? When the powerful impose their views on the weak, does that really help the truth?
O nations! take counsel of your own wisdom. When among yourselves disputes arise between families and individuals, how do you reconcile them? Do you not give them arbitrators?
O nations! Seek advice from your own wisdom. When disputes come up between families and individuals, how do you resolve them? Don't you appoint arbitrators?
Yes, cried the whole multitude.
Yes, shouted the whole crowd.
Do so then to the authors of your present dissensions. Order those who call themselves your instructors, and who force their creeds upon you, to discuss before you their reasons. Since they appeal to your interests, inform yourselves how they support them.
Do that then to the authors of your current disagreements. Tell those who call themselves your teachers, and who impose their beliefs on you, to explain their reasons in front of you. Since they claim to act in your best interests, find out how they back that up.
And you, chiefs and governors of the people! before dragging the masses into the quarrels resulting from your diverse opinions, let the reasons for and against your views be given. Let us establish one solemn controversy, one public scrutiny of truth—not before the tribunal of a corruptible individual, or of a prejudiced party, but in the grand forum of mankind—guarded by all their information and all their interests. Let the natural sense of the whole human race be our arbiter and judge.
And you, leaders and officials of the people! Before pulling everyone into the disputes that come from your differing opinions, let’s present the arguments for and against your views. Let’s create one serious debate, one public examination of the truth—not in front of a corrupt individual or a biased group, but in the broad forum of humanity—protected by all their knowledge and interests. Let the collective sense of all humanity be our judge.
CHAPTER XX.
THE SEARCH OF TRUTH.
The people expressed their applause, and the legislator continued: To proceed with order, and avoid all confusion, let a spacious semicircle be left vacant in front of the altar of peace and union; let each system of religion, and each particular sect, erect its proper distinctive standard on the line of this semicircle; let its chiefs and doctors place themselves around the standard, and their followers form a column behind them.
The crowd showed their appreciation, and the legislator went on: To keep things orderly and prevent any confusion, let's leave a large semicircle empty in front of the altar of peace and unity; each religion and each specific sect should set up its own unique banner along that semicircle; their leaders and scholars should position themselves around the banner, while their followers stand in a line behind them.
The semicircle being traced, and the order published, there instantly rose an innumerable multitude of standards, of all colors and of every form, like what we see in a great commercial port, when, on a day of rejoicing, a thousand different flags and streamers are floating from a forest of masts.
The semicircle was drawn, and the announcement was made; immediately, an endless crowd of flags of every color and shape appeared, like what you see in a big commercial port when, on a festive day, a thousand different flags and banners are waving from a sea of masts.
At the sight of this prodigious diversity, I turned towards the Genius and said:
At the sight of this amazing diversity, I turned to the Genius and said:
I thought that the earth was divided only into eight or ten systems of faith, and I then despaired of a reconciliation; I now behold thousands of different sects, and how can I hope for concord?
I used to think the world was just split into eight or ten belief systems, and I felt hopeless about finding common ground; now I see thousands of different groups, so how can I expect harmony?
But these, replied the Genius, are not all; and yet they will be intolerant!
But that’s not all, the Genius replied, and still they will be intolerant!
Then, as the groups advanced to take their stations, he pointed out to me their distinctive marks, and thus began to explain their characters:
Then, as the groups moved forward to take their positions, he pointed out their unique features to me and started to explain their characteristics:
That first group, said he, with a green banner bearing a crescent, a bandage, and a sabre, are the followers of the Arabian prophet. To say there is a God, without knowing what he is; to believe the words of a man, without understanding his language; to go into the desert to pray to God, who is everywhere; to wash the hands with water, and not abstain from blood; to fast all day, and eat all night; to give alms of their own goods, and to plunder those of others; such are the means of perfection instituted by Mahomet—such are the symbols of his followers; and whoever does not bear them is a reprobate, stricken with anathema, and devoted to the sword.
That first group, he said, has a green banner with a crescent, a bandage, and a sword; they are the followers of the Arabian prophet. To claim there is a God without knowing who He is; to believe a man's words without getting his language; to go into the desert to pray to God, who is everywhere; to wash their hands with water while not avoiding blood; to fast all day and eat all night; to give away their own possessions while stealing from others—these are the ways of perfection established by Mohammed—these are the symbols of his followers; and anyone who doesn't embrace them is an outcast, marked for destruction, and doomed to violence.
A God of clemency, the author of life, has instituted these laws of oppression and murder: he made them for all the world, but has revealed them only to one man; he established them from all eternity, though he made them known but yesterday. These laws are abundantly sufficient for all purposes, and yet a volume is added to them. This volume was to diffuse light, to exhibit evidence, to lead men to perfection and happiness; and yet every page was so full of obscurities, ambiguities, and contradictions, that commentaries and explanations became necessary, even in the life-time of its apostle. Its interpreters, differing in opinion, divided into opposite and hostile sects. One maintains that Ali is the true successor; the other contends for Omar and Aboubekre. This denies the eternity of the Koran; that the necessity of ablutions and prayers. The Carmite forbids pilgrimages, and allows the use of wine; the Hakemite preaches the transmigration of souls. Thus they make up the number of seventy-two sects, whose banners are before you.* In this contestation, every one attributing the evidence of truth exclusively to himself, and taxing all others with heresy and rebellion, turns against them its sanguinary zeal. And their religion, which celebrates a mild and merciful God, the common father of all men,—changed to a torch of discord, a signal for war and murder, has not ceased for twelve hundred years to deluge the earth in blood, and to ravage and desolate the ancient hemisphere from centre to circumference.**
A God of mercy, the creator of life, has established these laws of oppression and murder: He created them for everyone, but only revealed them to one person; He set them in place from eternity, even though He only made them known yesterday. These laws are more than enough for all purposes, yet a whole volume has been added to them. This volume was meant to provide clarity, show evidence, and guide people toward perfection and happiness; however, every page is so filled with confusion, ambiguity, and contradictions that commentaries and explanations became necessary, even during the life of its apostle. Its interpreters, with differing opinions, split into opposing and hostile sects. One claims that Ali is the true successor; another argues for Omar and Aboubekre. Some deny the eternity of the Koran; others reject the necessity of ablutions and prayers. The Carmite prohibits pilgrimages but allows the use of wine; the Hakemite teaches the reincarnation of souls. Thus, they total seventy-two sects, their flags waving before you.* In this conflict, each one believes they hold the exclusive evidence of truth and accuses all others of heresy and rebellion, directing their violent fervor against them. Their religion, which celebrates a gentle and merciful God, the common father of all humanity, has transformed into a cause of discord, a call to war and murder, that has drenched the earth in blood and ravaged the ancient world from center to edge for twelve hundred years.**
* The Mussulmen enumerate in common seventy-two sects, but I read, while I resided among them, a work which gave an account of more than eighty,—all equally wise and important. ** Read the history of Islamism by its own writers, and you will be convinced that one of the principal causes of the wars which have desolated Asia and Africa, since the days of Mahomet, has been the apostolical fanaticism of its doctrine. Caesar has been supposed to have destroyed three millions of men: it would be interesting to make a similar calculation respecting every founder of a religious system.
* The Muslims count a common seventy-two sects, but during my time with them, I read a work that described over eighty—each being equally wise and significant. ** If you read the history of Islam written by its own authors, you'll see that one of the main reasons for the wars that have ravaged Asia and Africa since the time of Muhammad has been the fervent zeal of its teachings. Caesar is believed to have caused the deaths of three million people; it would be fascinating to make a similar estimate for every founder of a religious system.
Those men, distinguished by their enormous white turbans, their broad sleeves, and their long rosaries, are the Imans, the Mollas, and the Muftis; and near them are the Dervishes with pointed bonnets, and the Santons with dishevelled hair. Behold with what vehemence they recite their professions of faith! They are now beginning a dispute about the greater and lesser impurities—about the matter and the manner of ablutions,—about the attributes of God and his perfections—about the Chaitan, and the good and wicked angels,—about death, the resurrection, the interrogatory in the tomb, the judgment, the passage of the narrow bridge not broader than a hair, the balance of works, the pains of hell, and the joys of paradise.
Those men, marked by their large white turbans, wide sleeves, and long rosaries, are the Imams, the Mullahs, and the Muftis; and nearby are the Dervishes wearing pointed hats and the Santons with messy hair. Look at how passionately they recite their declarations of faith! They are now starting a debate about major and minor impurities—about the details and methods of purification—about the qualities of God and His perfection—about the Shaytan, as well as the good and bad angels—about death, resurrection, the questioning in the grave, judgment, crossing the narrow bridge that's no wider than a hair, the weighing of deeds, the torments of hell, and the delights of paradise.
Next to these, that second more numerous group, with white banners intersected with crosses, are the followers of Jesus. Acknowledging the same God with the Mussulmans, founding their belief on the same books, admitting, like them, a first man who lost the human race by eating an apple, they hold them, however, in a holy abhorrence; and, out of pure piety, they call each other impious blasphemers.
Next to these, the larger second group, with white banners crossed with red, are the followers of Jesus. They recognize the same God as Muslims, base their faith on the same scriptures, and accept, like them, that the first human lost the human race by eating an apple. However, they hold them in a sacred disgust; and out of sheer piety, they call each other wicked blasphemers.
The great point of their dissension consists in this, that after admitting a God one and indivisible the Christian divides him into three persons, each of which he believes to be a complete and entire God, without ceasing to constitute an identical whole, by the indivisibility of the three. And he adds, that this being, who fills the universe, has reduced himself to the body of a man; and has assumed material, perishable, and limited organs, without ceasing to be immaterial, infinite, and eternal. The Mussulman who does not comprehend these mysteries, rejects them as follies, and the visions of a distempered brain; though he conceives perfectly well the eternity of the Koran, and the mission of the prophet: hence their implacable hatreds.
The main point of their disagreement is that while Christians acknowledge a single, indivisible God, they believe He is divided into three persons, each one considered a full and complete God, yet still making up one unified whole through the indivisibility of the three. They also claim that this being, who encompasses the universe, has taken on the form of a man and adopted physical, perishable, and limited attributes, while still remaining immaterial, infinite, and eternal. Muslims, who don’t understand these mysteries, dismiss them as nonsense and the delusions of a disturbed mind, even though they fully grasp the eternity of the Quran and the mission of the prophet. This leads to their deep-seated animosity.
Again, the Christians, divided among themselves on many points, have formed parties not less violent than the Mussulmans; and their quarrels are so much the more obstinate, as the objects of them are inaccessible to the senses and incapable of demonstration: their opinions, therefore, have no other basis but the will and caprice of the parties. Thus, while they agree that God is a being incomprehensible and unknown, they dispute, nevertheless, about his essence, his mode of acting, and his attributes. While they agree that his pretended transformation into man is an enigma above the human understanding, they dispute on the junction or distinction of his two wills and his two natures, on his change of substance, on the real or fictitious presence, on the mode of incarnation, etc.
Once again, Christians, divided on many issues, have formed factions that are just as intense as those of the Muslims. Their disputes are even more stubborn because the topics they argue about are beyond human senses and can't be proven. Therefore, their beliefs rest solely on the will and whims of the groups involved. So, while they agree that God is an incomprehensible and unknown being, they still argue about his essence, how he acts, and his attributes. Even though they all acknowledge that his supposed transformation into man is a mystery beyond human understanding, they debate the connection or distinction between his two wills and two natures, his change of substance, the real or imagined presence, the way of incarnation, and so on.
Hence those innumerable sects, of which two or three hundred have already perished, and three or four hundred others, which still subsist, display those numberless banners which here distract your sight.
Hence those countless sects, of which two or three hundred have already disappeared, and three or four hundred others, which still exist, show those innumerable banners that here distract your view.
The first in order, surrounded by a group in varied and fantastic dress, that confused mixture of violet, red, white, black and speckled garments—with heads shaved, or with tonsures, or with short hair—with red hats, square bonnets, pointed mitres, or long beards, is the standard of the Roman pontiff, who, uniting the civil government to the priesthood, has erected the supremacy of his city into a point of religion, and made of his pride an article of faith.
The first in line, surrounded by a group in a mix of colorful and amazing outfits—an odd blend of purple, red, white, black, and patterned clothes—some with shaved heads, some with tonsures, and others with short hair—wearing red hats, square bonnets, pointed miters, or long beards, represents the standard of the Roman pontiff. He has combined civil authority with religious leadership, establishing the supremacy of his city as a matter of faith, turning his pride into a belief.
On his right you see the Greek pontiff, who, proud of the rivalship of his metropolis, sets up equal pretensions, and supports them against the Western church by the priority of that of the East. On the left are the standards of two recent chiefs,* who, shaking off a yoke that had become tyrannical, have raised altar against altar in their reform, and wrested half of Europe from the pope. Behind these are the subaltern sects, subdivided from the principal divisions, the Nestorians, the Eutycheans, the Jacobites, the Iconoclasts, the Anabaptists, the Presbyterians, the Wicliffites, the Osiandrians, the Manicheans, the Pietists, the Adamites, the Contemplatives, the Quakers, the Weepers, and a hundred others,** all of distinct parties, persecuting when strong, tolerant when weak, hating each other in the name of a God of peace, forming each an exclusive heaven in a religion of universal charity, dooming each other to pains without end in a future state, and realizing in this world the imaginary hell of the other.
On his right is the Greek pope, who, proud of his city's status, claims equal recognition and defends it against the Western church by emphasizing the primacy of the Eastern church. On the left are the flags of two recent leaders,* who, having broken free from a tyrannical rule, have set up altars against each other in their reform and taken half of Europe away from the pope. Behind them are the various smaller sects, stemming from the main branches: the Nestorians, the Eutycheans, the Jacobites, the Iconoclasts, the Anabaptists, the Presbyterians, the Wicliffites, the Osiandrians, the Manicheans, the Pietists, the Adamites, the Contemplatives, the Quakers, the Weepers, and many more,** each with their distinct beliefs, aggressive when in power, tolerant when weak, all battling each other in the name of a God of peace, each creating their own exclusive version of heaven in what they claim is a universal religion of love, condemning one another to endless suffering in the afterlife, and manifesting in this world the imagined hell of the other.
* Luther and Calvin. ** Consult upon this subject Dictionnaire des Herseies par l'Abbe Pluquet, in two volumes 8vo.: a work admirably calculated to inspire the mind with philosophy, in the sense that the Lacedemonians taught the children temperance by showing to them the drunken Helots.
* Luther and Calvin. ** For more on this topic, see Dictionnaire des Herseies by l'Abbe Pluquet, in two volumes 8vo.: a work that effectively stimulates philosophical thought, similar to how the Lacedemonians taught their children temperance by exposing them to the drunken Helots.
After this group, observing a lonely standard of the color of hyacinth, round which were assembled men clad in all the different dresses of Europe and Asia:
After this group, noticing a lonely standard in hyacinth color, around which men dressed in various styles from Europe and Asia were gathered:
At least, said I, to the Genius, we shall find unanimity here.
At least, I said to the Genius, we'll find agreement here.
Yes, said he, at first sight and by a momentary accident. Dost thou not know that system of worship?
Yes, he said, at first glance and by a brief accident. Don't you know that way of worship?
Then, perceiving in Hebrew letters the monogram of the name of God, and the palms which the Rabbins held in their hands:
Then, noticing the Hebrew letters that formed the monogram of God's name, and the palms that the Rabbis were holding:
True, said I, these are the children of Moses, dispersed even to this day, abhorring every nation, and abhorred and persecuted by all.
True, I said, these are the descendants of Moses, scattered even to this day, hating every nation, and hated and persecuted by all.
Yes, he replied, and for this reason, that, having neither the time nor liberty to dispute, they have the appearance of unanimity. But no sooner will they come together, compare their principles, and reason on their opinions, than they will separate as formerly, at least into two principal sects;* one of which, taking advantage of the silence of their legislator, and adhering to the literal sense of his books, will deny everything that is not clearly expressed therein; and on this principle will reject as profane inventions, the immortality of the soul, its transmigration to places of pain or pleasure, its resurrection, the final judgment, the good and bad angels, the revolt of the evil Genius, and all the poetical belief of a world to come. And this highly-favored people, whose perfection consists in a slight mutilation of their persons,—this atom of a people, which forms but a small wave in the ocean of mankind, and which insists that God has made nothing but for them, will by its schism reduce to one-half, its present trifling weight in the scale of the universe.
Yes, he replied, and for this reason: since they lack both the time and freedom to argue, they seem to agree. But as soon as they gather, compare their beliefs, and discuss their opinions, they will split apart as before, at least into two main groups; one of which, taking advantage of their legislator's silence and sticking to the literal meaning of his texts, will deny everything that isn't clearly stated there. On this basis, they will reject as false ideas like the immortality of the soul, its reincarnation to places of suffering or joy, its resurrection, the final judgment, good and evil angels, the rebellion of the devil, and all the imaginative beliefs about an afterlife. And this privileged group, whose perfection involves a minor alteration of their bodies—this tiny group that creates just a small ripple in the ocean of humanity, and claims that God created everything solely for them, will, through their division, reduce their already insignificant impact in the grand scheme of things.
* The Sadducees and Pharisees.
The Sadducees and Pharisees.
He then showed me a neighboring group, composed of men dressed in white robes, wearing a veil over their mouths, and ranged around a banner of the color of the morning sky, on which was painted a globe cleft in two hemispheres, black and white: The same thing will happen, said he, to these children of Zoroaster,* the obscure remnant of a people once so powerful. At present, persecuted like the Jews, and dispersed among all nations, they receive without discussion the precepts of the representative of their prophet. But as soon as the Mobed and the Destours** shall assemble, they will renew the controversy about the good and the bad principle; on the combats of Ormuzd, God of light, and Ahrimanes, God of darkness; on the direct and allegorical sense; on the good and evil Genii; on the worship of fire and the elements; on impurities and ablutions; on the resurrection of the soul and body, or only of the soul;*** on the renovation of the present world, and on that which is to take its place. And the Parses will divide into sects, so much the more numerous, as their families will have contracted, during their dispersion, the manners and opinions of different nations.
He then pointed out a nearby group made up of men dressed in white robes, with veils over their mouths, gathered around a banner that looked like the morning sky, featuring a globe split into two halves, black and white. "The same thing will happen to these children of Zoroaster," he said, "the forgotten remnant of a once-powerful people. Right now, they are persecuted like the Jews and scattered among all nations, accepting without question the teachings of their prophet's representative. But once the Mobed and the Destours gather, they'll reignite the debate about good and evil, the battles between Ormuzd, the God of light, and Ahrimanes, the God of darkness; the literal and figurative meanings; the good and evil spirits; the reverence for fire and the elements; cleanliness and rituals; the resurrection of the soul and body, or just the soul; the renewal of the current world, and the one that will replace it. The Parsis will split into even more sects, as their families adopt the customs and beliefs of the different nations they've mingled with during their dispersion."
* They are the Parses, better known by the opprobrious name of Gaures or Guebres, another word for infidels. They are in Asia what the Jews are in Europe. The name of their pope or high priest is Mobed. ** That is to say, their priests. See, respecting the rites of this religion, Henry Lord Hyde, and the Zendavesta. Their costume is a robe with a belt of four knots, and a veil over their mouth for fear of polluting the fire with their breath. *** The Zoroastrians are divided between two opinions; one party believing that both soul and body will rise, the other that it will be the soul only. The Christians and Mahometans have embraced the most solid of the two.
* They are the Parses, commonly known by the derogatory terms Gaures or Guebres, which mean infidels. They are to Asia what the Jews are to Europe. Their pope or high priest is called Mobed. ** That refers to their priests. See, regarding the rituals of this religion, Henry Lord Hyde, and the Zendavesta. Their outfit consists of a robe with a belt tied in four knots, and they wear a veil over their mouth to avoid contaminating the fire with their breath. *** The Zoroastrians are split into two beliefs; one group thinks that both the soul and body will rise, while the other believes it will only be the soul. The Christians and Muslims have opted for the more solid of the two beliefs.
Next to these, remark those banners of an azure ground, painted with monstrous figures of human bodies, double, triple, and quadruple, with heads of lions, boars, and elephants, and tails of fishes and tortoises; these are the ensigns of the sects of India, who find their gods in various animals, and the souls of their fathers in reptiles and insects. These men support hospitals for hawks, serpents, and rats, and they abhor their fellow creatures! They purify themselves with the dung and urine of cows, and think themselves defiled by the touch of a man! They wear a net over the mouth, lest, in a fly, they should swallow a soul in a state of penance,* and they can see a Pariah** perish with hunger! They acknowledge the same gods, but they separate into hostile bands.
Next to these, notice those banners on a blue background, decorated with bizarre images of human bodies, double, triple, and quadruple, with heads of lions, boars, and elephants, and tails of fish and turtles; these represent the sects of India, who see their gods in various animals, and the souls of their ancestors in reptiles and insects. These people maintain hospitals for hawks, snakes, and rats, yet they look down on their fellow humans! They purify themselves with cow dung and urine, believing they become impure by simply touching another person! They wear a net over their mouths to avoid accidentally swallowing a fly that might contain a soul in a state of penance,* and they can watch a Pariah** starve without a second thought! They worship the same gods, but they divide into hostile groups.
* According to the system of the Metempsychosis, a soul, to undergo purification, passes into the body of some insect or animal. It is of importance not to disturb this penance, as the work must in that case begin afresh. ** This is the name of a cast or tribe reputed unclean, because they eat of what has enjoyed life.
* According to the belief in Metempsychosis, a soul, in order to purify itself, moves into the body of an insect or animal. It’s crucial not to interrupt this process, as that would mean starting all over again. ** This refers to a group or tribe considered unclean because they eat things that have lived.
The first standard, retired from the rest, bearing a figure with four heads, is that of Brama, who, though the creator of the universe, is without temples or followers; but, reduced to serve as a pedestal to the Lingam,* he contents himself with a little water which the Bramin throws every morning on his shoulder, reciting meanwhile an idle canticle in his praise.
The first standard, set apart from the others, shows a figure with four heads—this is Brama, the creator of the universe. Despite his status, he has no temples or followers. Instead, he has been reduced to serving as a pedestal for the Lingam,* and he is satisfied with a little water that the Bramin pours on his shoulder every morning while reciting a meaningless song in his honor.
* See Sonnerat, Voyage aux Indes, vol. 1.
* See Sonnerat, Voyage aux Indes, vol. 1.
The second, bearing a kite with a scarlet body and a white head, is that of Vichenou, who, though preserver of the world, has passed part of his life in wicked actions. You sometimes see him under the hideous form of a boar or a lion, tearing human entrails, or under that of a horse,* shortly to come armed with a sword to destroy the human race, blot out the stars, annihilate the planets, shake the earth, and force the great serpent to vomit a fire which shall consume the spheres.
The second one, carrying a kite with a red body and a white head, represents Vichenou, who, despite being the protector of the world, has spent part of his life engaging in evil deeds. You might see him in the grotesque form of a boar or a lion, ripping apart human innards, or as a horse, soon to come wielding a sword to wipe out humanity, erase the stars, destroy the planets, shake the earth, and make the great serpent spew out fire that will consume the heavens.
* These are the incarnations of Vichenou, or metamorphoses of the sun. He is to come at the end of the world, that is, at the expiration of the great period, in the form of a horse, like the four horses of the Apocalypse.
* These are the incarnations of Vichenou, or transformations of the sun. He is expected to appear at the end of the world, meaning at the end of the great period, in the form of a horse, like the four horses of the Apocalypse.
The third is that of Chiven, God of destruction and desolation, who has, however, for his emblem the symbol of generation. He is the most wicked of the three, and he has the most followers. These men, proud of his character, express in their devotions to him their contempt for the other gods,* his equals and brothers; and, in imitation of his inconsistencies, while they profess great modesty and chastity, they publicly crown with flowers, and sprinkle with milk and honey, the obscene image of the Lingam.
The third is Chiven, the God of destruction and desolation, who ironically has the symbol of creation as his emblem. He’s the most malevolent of the three and has the largest following. His followers, proud of his nature, showcase their disdain for the other gods—his equals and brothers—through their devotion to him. Imitating his contradictions, while claiming to be very modest and pure, they publicly adorn the obscene image of the Lingam with flowers and drench it in milk and honey.
* When a sectary of Chiven hears the name of Vichenou pronounced, he stops his ears, runs, and purifies himself.
* When a follower of Chiven hears the name of Vichenou said, he covers his ears, runs away, and cleanses himself.
In the rear of these, approach the smaller standards of a multitude of gods—male, female, and hermaphrodite. These are friends and relations of the principal gods, who have passed their lives in wars among themselves, and their followers imitate them. These gods have need of nothing, and they are constantly receiving presents; they are omnipotent and omnipresent, and a priest, by muttering a few words, shuts them up in an idol or a pitcher, to sell their favors for his own benefit.
In the back of these, you'll find the smaller icons of many gods—male, female, and hermaphrodite. These are friends and family of the main gods, who have spent their lives fighting among themselves, and their followers copy them. These gods don’t need anything, and they are always receiving gifts; they are all-powerful and everywhere at once, and a priest, by muttering a few words, can trap them in a statue or a jar to sell their blessings for his own gain.
Beyond these, that cloud of standards, which, on a yellow ground, common to them all, bear various emblems, are those of the same god, who reins under different names in the nations of the East. The Chinese adores him in Fot,* the Japanese in Budso, the Ceylonese in Bedhou, the people of Laos in Chekia, of Pegu in Phta, of Siam in Sommona-Kodom, of Thibet in Budd and in La. Agreeing in some points of his history, they all celebrate his life of penitence, his mortifications, his fastings, his functions of mediator and expiator, the enmity between him and another god, his adversary, their battles, and his ascendency. But as they disagree on the means of pleasing him, they dispute about rites and ceremonies, and about the dogmas of interior doctrine and of public doctrine. That Japanese Bonze, with a yellow robe and naked head, preaches the eternity of souls, and their successive transmigrations into various bodies; near him, the Sintoist denies that souls can exist separate from the senses,** and maintains that they are only the effect of the organs to which they belong, and with which they must perish, as the sound of the flute perishes with the flute. Near him, the Siamese, with his eyebrows shaved, and a talipat screen*** in his hand, recommends alms, offerings, and expiations, at the same time that he preaches blind necessity and inexorable fate. The Chinese vo-chung sacrifices to the souls of his ancestors; and next him, the follower of Confucius interrogates his destiny in the cast of dice and the movement of the stars.**** That child, surrounded by a swarm of priests in yellow robes and hats, is the Grand Lama, in whom the god of Thibet has just become incarnate.*5 But a rival has arisen who partakes this benefit with him; and the Kalmouc on the banks of the Baikal, has a God similar to the inhabitant of Lasa. And they agree, also, in one important point—that god can inhabit only a human body. They both laugh at the stupidity of the Indian who pays homage to cow-dung, though they themselves consecrate the excrements of their high-priest.*6
Beyond these, that cloud of standards, which, on a yellow background, common to them all, bear various emblems, represent the same god, worshipped under different names in Eastern nations. The Chinese worship him as Fot,* the Japanese as Budso, the Ceylonese as Bedhou, the people of Laos as Chekia, the people of Pegu as Phta, the people of Siam as Sommona-Kodom, the people of Tibet as Budd and La. While they share some aspects of his story, they all celebrate his life of penance, his self-denials, his fasting, his role as mediator and atoner, the conflict between him and another god, his adversary, their battles, and his dominion. However, since they disagree on how to please him, they argue about rituals and ceremonies, as well as the principles of personal belief and public doctrine. That Japanese Bonze, wearing a yellow robe and with a bare head, preaches the eternity of souls and their continuous rebirths into different bodies; nearby, the Sintoist denies that souls can exist apart from the senses,** asserting that they are merely a product of the organs to which they belong and must perish with them, just like the sound of a flute disappears when the flute does. Close by, the Siamese, with shaved eyebrows and a talipat screen*** in his hand, advocates for alms, offerings, and atonements while preaching blind necessity and fatalism. The Chinese vo-chung sacrifices to the spirits of his ancestors; beside him, the follower of Confucius looks to his fate in the casting of dice and the movement of the stars.**** That child, surrounded by numerous priests in yellow robes and hats, is the Grand Lama, in whom the god of Tibet has just become incarnate.*5 However, a rival has emerged who shares this honor with him, and the Kalmouk along the banks of Baikal has a God similar to the inhabitant of Lhasa. They also agree on one significant point—that god can only inhabit a human body. They both mock the foolishness of the Indian who venerates cow dung, while they themselves consecrate the excrement of their high priest.*6
* The original name of this god is Baits, which in Hebrew signifies an egg. The Arabs pronounce it Baidh, giving to the dh an emphatic sound which makes it approach to dz. Kempfer, an acurate traveler, writes it Budso, which must be pronounced Boudso, whence is derived the name of Budsoist and of Bonze, applied to the priests. Clement of Alexandria, in his Stromata, writes it Bedou, as it is pronounced also by the Chingulais; and Saint Jerome, Boudda and Boutta. At Thibet they call it Budd; and hence the name of the country called Boud-tan and Ti-budd: it was in this province that this system of religion was first inculcated in Upper Asia; La is a corruption of Allah, the name of God in the Syriac language, from which many of the eastern dialects appear to be derived. The Chinese having neither b nor d, have supplied their place by f and t, and have therefore said Fout. ** See in Kempfer the doctrine of the Sintoists, which is a mixture of that of Epicurus and of the Stoics. *** It is a leaf of the Latanier species of the palm-tree. Hence the bonzes of Siam take the appellation of Talapoin. The use of this screen is an exclusive privilege. **** The sectaries of Confucius are no less addicted to astrology than the bonzes. It is indeed the malady of every eastern nation. *5 The Delai-La-Ma, or immense high priest of La, is the same person whom we find mentioned in our old books of travels, by the name of Prester John, from a corruption of the Persian word Djehan, which signifies the world, to which has been prefixed the French word prestre or pretre, priest. Thus the priest world, and the god world are in the Persian idiom the same. *6 In a recent expedition the English have found certain idols of the Lamas filled in the inside with sacred pastils from the close stool of the high priest. Mr. Hastings, and Colonel Pollier, who is now at Lausanne, are living witnesses of this fact, and undoubtedly worthy of credit. It will be very extraordinary to observe, that this disgusting ceremony is connected with a profound philosophical system, to wit, that of the metempsychosis, admitted by the Lamas. When the Tartars swallow, the sacred relics, which they are accustomed to do, they imitate the laws of the universe, the parts of which are incessantly absorbed and pass into the substance of each other. It is upon the model of the serpent who devours his tail, and this serpent is Budd and the world.
* The original name of this god is Baits, which in Hebrew means an egg. The Arabs pronounce it Baidh, giving the dh an emphatic sound that makes it close to dz. Kempfer, an accurate traveler, writes it Budso, which must be pronounced Boudso, from which the terms Budsoist and Bonze, referring to the priests, are derived. Clement of Alexandria refers to it as Bedou, as it is also pronounced by the Chingulais, and Saint Jerome as Boudda and Boutta. In Tibet, they call it Budd; hence the names of the regions called Boud-tan and Ti-budd: it was in this province that this religion was first taught in Upper Asia; La is a variation of Allah, the name for God in Syriac, from which many Eastern dialects seem to be derived. The Chinese, lacking b and d, have replaced them with f and t, hence calling it Fout. ** See in Kempfer the doctrine of the Sintoists, which is a blend of Epicureanism and Stoicism. *** It is a leaf of the Latanier palm tree. Thus, the bonzes of Siam are called Talapoin. The use of this screen is a special privilege. **** The followers of Confucius are just as into astrology as the bonzes. It seems to be a common fascination in every Eastern nation. *5 The Delai-La-Ma, or the great high priest of La, is the same figure mentioned in our old travel books as Prester John, a distortion of the Persian word Djehan, meaning the world, with the French word prestre or pretre, meaning priest, prefixed. Thus, the terms priest world and god world are the same in Persian. *6 In a recent expedition, the English discovered certain idols of the Lamas that were filled inside with sacred pastils from the high priest's latrine. Mr. Hastings and Colonel Pollier, who is currently in Lausanne, are living proof of this fact and are undoubtedly credible witnesses. It is quite remarkable to note that this off-putting ceremony is linked to a profound philosophical system, namely the idea of metempsychosis, which the Lamas accept. When the Tartars consume sacred relics, which they are accustomed to doing, they mimic the laws of the universe, where parts are continually absorbed and transform into each other. This is modeled after the serpent that devours its own tail, with this serpent representing Budd and the world.
After these, a crowd of other banners, which no man could number, came forward into sight; and the genius exclaimed:
After these, a crowd of countless other banners appeared; and the genius exclaimed:
I should never finish the detail of all the systems of faith which divide these nations. Here the hordes of Tartars adore, in the forms of beasts, birds, and insects, the good and evil Genii; who, under a principal, but indolent god, govern the universe. In their idolatry they call to mind the ancient paganism of the West. You observe the fantastical dress of the Chamans; who, under a robe of leather, hung round with bells and rattles, idols of iron, claws of birds, skins of snakes and heads of owls, invoke, with frantic cries and factitious convulsions, the dead to deceive the living. There, the black tribes of Africa exhibit the same opinions in the worship of their fetiches. See the inhabitant of Juida worship god in a great snake, which, unluckily, the swine delight to eat.* The Teleutean attires his god in a coat of several colors, like a Russian soldier.** The Kamchadale, observing that everything goes wrong in his frozen country, considers god as an old ill-natured man, smoking his pipe and hunting foxes and martins in his sledge.***
I could never fully explain all the belief systems that divide these nations. Here, the Tartar hordes worship, in the forms of animals, birds, and insects, the good and evil spirits, who, under a major but lazy god, control the universe. Their idolatry recalls the ancient paganism of the West. You can see the wild outfits of the shamans, who, wearing leather robes adorned with bells and rattles, iron idols, bird claws, snake skins, and owl heads, summon the dead with frantic cries and feigned convulsions to trick the living. There, the black tribes of Africa express the same beliefs in the worship of their fetishes. Look at the people of Juida who worship a great snake, which, unfortunately, the pigs love to eat.* The Teleutean dresses his god in a colorful coat, like a Russian soldier.** The Kamchadale, noticing that everything goes wrong in his frozen land, sees god as an old grumpy man, smoking his pipe and hunting foxes and martens in his sled.***
* It frequently happens that the swine devour the very species of serpents the negroes adore, which is a source of great desolation in the country. President de Brosses has given us, in his History of the Fetiche, a curious collection of absurdities of this nature. ** The Teleuteans, a Tartar nation, paint God as wearing a vesture of all colors, particularly red and green; and as these constitute the uniform of the Russian dragoons, they compare him to this description of soldiers. The Egyptians also dress the God World in a garment of every color. Eusebius Proep. Evang. p 115. The Teleuteans call God Bou, which is only an alteration of Boudd, the God Egg and World. *** Consult upon this subject a work entitled, Description des Peuples, soumis a la Russie, and it will be found that the picture is not overcharged.
* It often happens that pigs eat the exact kinds of snakes that the Black people worship, which causes a lot of distress in the area. President de Brosses has presented us with a fascinating collection of such absurdities in his History of the Fetiche. ** The Teleuteans, a Tartar nation, depict God as wearing a robe of all colors, especially red and green; since these colors are the uniform of Russian dragoons, they liken Him to these soldiers. The Egyptians also dress the God World in a multicolored garment. Eusebius Proep. Evang. p 115. The Teleuteans refer to God as Bou, which is simply a variation of Boudd, the God Egg and World. *** For more on this topic, refer to a work titled, Description des Peuples, soumis a la Russie, and you'll see that the portrayal is not exaggerated.
But you may still behold a hundred savage nations who have none of the ideas of civilized people respecting God, the soul, another world, and a future life; who have formed no system of worship; and who nevertheless enjoy the rich gifts of nature in the irreligion in which she has created them.
But you can still see a hundred wild nations who have none of the ideas that civilized people have about God, the soul, the afterlife, and a future existence; who have created no system of worship; and who still enjoy the abundant gifts of nature in the lack of religion in which they have been formed.
CHAPTER XXI.
PROBLEM OF RELIGIOUS CONTRADICTIONS.
The various groups having taken their places, an unbounded silence succeeded to the murmurs of the multitude; and the legislator said:
The different groups settled into their spots, and a deep silence replaced the chatter of the crowd; then the legislator spoke:
Chiefs and doctors of mankind! You remark how the nations, living apart, have hitherto followed different paths, each believing its own to be that of truth. If, however, truth is one, and opinions are various, it is evident that some are in error. If, then, such vast numbers of us are in the wrong, who shall dare to say, "I am in the right?" Begin, therefore, by being indulgent in your dissensions. Let us all seek truth as if no one possessed it. The opinions which to this day have governed the world, originating from chance, propagated in obscurity, admitted without discussion, accredited by a love of novelty and imitation, have usurped their empire in a clandestine manner. It is time, if they are well founded, to give a solemn stamp to their certainty, and legitimize their existence. Let us summon them this day to a general scrutiny, let each propound his creed, let the whole assembly be the judge, and let that alone be acknowledged as true which is so for the whole human race.
Leaders and doctors of humanity! You notice how nations, living separately, have so far taken different paths, each believing its own to be the true one. However, if truth is singular and opinions are multiple, it’s clear that some are mistaken. Given that so many of us could be wrong, who among us dares to claim, "I am right?" Therefore, let’s start by being tolerant of our disagreements. Let’s all search for truth as if no one already has it. The beliefs that have influenced the world until now, arising from chance, spread in the shadows, taken for granted without debate, and accepted due to a fascination with novelty and imitation, have taken hold in a secretive way. It’s time, if they are well-founded, to formally establish their certainty and legitimize their existence. Let’s call for an open examination today, allow everyone to present their beliefs, let the entire assembly be the judge, and recognize as true only that which is valid for all of humanity.
Then, by order of position, the representative of the first standard on the left was allowed to speak:
Then, following the order of arrangement, the representative of the first standard on the left was given the opportunity to speak:
"You are not permitted to doubt," said their chief, "that our doctrine is the only true and infallible one. FIRST, it is revealed by God himself—"
"You can't question," said their leader, "that our beliefs are the only true and flawless ones. FIRST, they are revealed by God himself—"
"So is ours," cried all the other standards, "and you are not permitted to doubt it."
"So is ours," shouted all the other standards, "and you're not allowed to doubt it."
"But at least," said the legislator, "you must prove it, for we cannot believe what we do not know."
"But at least," said the legislator, "you need to show us proof because we can't believe what we don't understand."
"Our doctrine is proved," replied the first standard, "by numerous facts, by a multitude of miracles, by resurrections of the dead, by rivers dried up, by mountains removed—"
"Our doctrine is proven," replied the first standard, "by many facts, by countless miracles, by people coming back to life, by rivers that have dried up, by mountains that have been moved—"
"And we also have numberless miracles," cried all the others, and each began to recount the most incredible things.
"And we also have countless miracles," shouted everyone else, and each started to share the most unbelievable stories.
"THEIR miracles," said the first standard, "are imaginary, or the fictions of the evil spirit, who has deluded them."
"THEIR miracles," said the first standard, "are made up, or the fabrications of an evil spirit that has tricked them."
"They are yours," said the others, "that are imaginary;" and each group, speaking of itself, cried out:
"They're yours," said the others, "those are just imaginary;" and each group, talking about itself, shouted:
"None but ours are true, all the others are false."
"Only ours are true; all the others are false."
The legislator then asked: "Have you living witnesses of the facts?"
The legislator then asked, "Do you have any living witnesses to the events?"
"No," replied they all; "the facts are ancient, the witnesses are dead, but their writings remain."
"No," they all replied; "the facts are old, the witnesses are gone, but their writings are still here."
"Be it so," replied the legislator; "but if they contradict each other, who shall reconcile them?"
"That's true," replied the legislator, "but if they contradict each other, who will resolve the conflict?"
"Just judge!" cried one of the standards, "the proof that our witnesses have seen the truth is, that they died to confirm it; and our faith is sealed by the blood of martyrs."
"Just judge!" shouted one of the standards, "the evidence that our witnesses have seen the truth is that they died to affirm it; and our belief is solidified by the blood of martyrs."
"And ours too," said the other standards; "we have thousands of martyrs who have died in the most excruciating torments, without ever denying the truth."
"And ours too," said the other standards; "we have thousands of martyrs who have died in the most unbearable pain, without ever denying the truth."
Then the Christians of every sect, the Mussulmans, the Indians, the Japanese, recited endless legends of confessors, martyrs, penitents, etc.
Then Christians from every denomination, Muslims, Indians, and Japanese shared countless stories of confessors, martyrs, penitents, and so on.
And one of these parties, having denied the martyrology of the others: "Well," said they, "we will then die ourselves to prove the truth of our belief."
And one of these groups, having rejected the martyr stories of the others, said, "Alright, then we’ll die ourselves to prove the truth of our beliefs."
And instantly a crowd of men, of every religion and of every sect, presented themselves to suffer the torments of death. Many even began to tear their arms, and to beat their heads and breasts, without discovering any symptom of pain.
And right away, a crowd of men from every religion and sect came forward to endure the pains of death. Many even started to tear at their arms and hit their heads and chests, showing no signs of pain.
But the legislator, preventing them—"O men!" said he, "hear my words with patience. If you die to prove that two and two make four, will your death add any thing to this truth?"
But the legislator, stopping them—"Oh men!" he said, "listen to my words with patience. If you die to prove that two plus two equals four, will your death add anything to this truth?"
"No!" answered all.
"Everyone answered, 'No!'"
"And if you die to prove that they make five, will that make them five?"
"And if you die to prove that they total five, will that actually make them five?"
Again they all answered, "No."
Once more, they all replied, "No."
"What, then, is your persuasion to prove, if it changes not the existence of things? Truth is one—your persuasions are various; many of you, therefore, are in error. Now, if man, as is evident, can persuade himself of error, what is the persuasion of man to prove?
"What, then, is your argument to prove if it doesn’t change the existence of things? Truth is singular—your arguments are diverse; many of you, therefore, are mistaken. Now, if a person, as is clear, can convince themselves of a mistake, what can a person’s argument truly prove?"
"If error has its martyrs, what is the sure criterion of truth?
"If error has its martyrs, what is the definite standard for truth?"
"If the evil spirit works miracles, what is the distinctive character of God?
"If the evil spirit performs miracles, what sets God apart?"
"Besides, why resort forever to incomplete and insufficient miracles? Instead of changing the course of nature, why not rather change opinions? Why murder and terrify men, instead of instructing and correcting them?
"Besides, why stick with incomplete and inadequate miracles forever? Instead of altering the course of nature, why not change people's minds? Why resort to killing and frightening people instead of teaching and guiding them?"
"O credulous, but opinionated mortals! none of us know what was done yesterday, what is doing to-day even under our eyes; and we swear to what was done two thousand years ago!
"O gullible, yet stubborn humans! None of us know what happened yesterday, what is happening today right in front of us; and we swear to what happened two thousand years ago!"
"Oh, the weakness and yet the pride of men! The laws of nature are unchangeable and profound—our minds are full of illusion and frivolity—and yet we would comprehend every thing—determine every thing! Forgetting that it is easier for the whole human race to be in error, than to change the nature of the smallest atom."
"Oh, the fragility and yet the arrogance of humanity! The laws of nature are unchangeable and deep—our minds are filled with delusions and triviality—yet we strive to understand everything and control everything! We forget that it’s easier for all of humanity to be wrong than to alter the nature of even the tiniest atom."
"Well, then," said one of the doctors, "let us lay aside the evidence of fact, since it is uncertain; let us come to argument—to the proofs inherent in the doctrine."
"Alright then," said one of the doctors, "let's set aside the evidence of fact since it's uncertain; let's get to the argument—the proofs that are part of the doctrine."
Then came forward, with a look of confidence, an Iman of the law of Mahomet; and, having advanced into the circle, turned towards Mecca, and recited with great fervor his confession of faith. "Praise be to God," said he, with a solemn and imposing voice, "the light shines with full evidence, and the truth has no need of examination." Then, showing the Koran, he exclaimed: "Here is the light of truth in its proper essence. There is no doubt in this book. It conducts with safety him who walks in darkness, and who receives without discussion the divine word which descended on the prophet, to save the simple and confound the wise. God has established Mahomet his minister on earth; he has given him the world, that he may subdue with the sword whoever shall refuse to receive his law. Infidels dispute, and will not believe; their obduracy comes from God, who has hardened their hearts to deliver them to dreadful punishments."*
Then stepped forward, confidently, a follower of the teachings of Muhammad. He moved into the center, faced Mecca, and passionately recited his declaration of faith. "Praise be to God," he said in a serious and powerful voice, "the light is clear, and the truth doesn't need any scrutiny." Then, holding up the Quran, he declared, "Here is the light of truth in its purest form. There is no doubt in this book. It safely guides those who stumble in darkness and who accept without question the divine message revealed to the prophet, to save the humble and challenge the learned. God has appointed Muhammad as His messenger on earth; He has granted him the world to conquer with the sword anyone who refuses to accept His law. Unbelievers argue and remain unfaithful; their stubbornness is from God, who has hardened their hearts to condemn them to severe punishments."
* This passage contains the sense and nearly the very words of the first chapter of the Koran; and the reader will observe in general, that, in the pictures that follow, the writer has endeavored to give as accurately as possible the letter and spirit of the opinions of each party.
* This passage captures the essence and almost the exact wording of the first chapter of the Quran; and the reader will generally notice that, in the following descriptions, the writer has tried to represent as closely as possible both the letter and spirit of each party's viewpoints.
At these words a violent murmur arose on all sides, and silenced the speaker. "Who is this man," cried all the groups, "who thus insults us without a cause? What right has he to impose his creed on us as conqueror and tyrant? Has not God endowed us, as well as him, with eyes, understanding, and reason? And have we not an equal right to use them, in choosing what to believe and what to reject? If he attacks us, shall we not defend ourselves? If he likes to believe without examination, must we therefore not examine before we believe?
At these words, a loud uproar broke out from all sides, drowning out the speaker. "Who is this guy," everyone shouted, "who insults us for no reason? What right does he have to force his beliefs on us like a conqueror and tyrant? Hasn't God given us, just like him, eyes, understanding, and reason? And don't we have the same right to use them to decide what to believe and what to dismiss? If he attacks us, shouldn't we defend ourselves? If he prefers to believe without questioning, do we have to do the same before we believe?"
"And what is this luminous doctrine that fears the light? What is this apostle of a God of clemency, who preaches nothing but murder and carnage? What is this God of justice, who punishes blindness which he himself has made? If violence and persecution are the arguments of truth, are gentleness and charity the signs of falsehood?"
"And what is this shining doctrine that fears the light? What is this messenger of a merciful God, who only talks about murder and violence? What is this God of justice, who punishes the blindness that he himself has created? If violence and persecution are the proof of truth, are kindness and compassion the signs of falsehood?"
A man then advancing from a neighboring group, said to the Iman:
A man then stepped forward from a nearby group and said to the Imam:
"Admitting that Mahomet is the apostle of the best doctrine,—the prophet of the true religion,—have the goodness at least to tell us whether, in the practice of his doctrine, we are to follow his son-in-law Ali, or his vicars Omar and Aboubekre?"*
"Admitting that Muhammad is the apostle of the best doctrine—the prophet of the true religion—could you at least tell us whether, in practicing his teachings, we should follow his son-in-law Ali, or his successors Omar and Abu Bakr?"*
* These are the two grand parties into which the Mussulmans are divided. The Turks have embraced the second, the Persians the first.
* These are the two main groups that the Muslims are split into. The Turks have joined the second group, while the Persians have joined the first.
At the sound of these names a terrible schism arose among the Mussulmans themselves. The partisans of Ali and those of Omar, calling out heretics and blasphemers, loaded each other with execrations. The quarrel became so violent that neighboring groups were obliged to interfere, to prevent their coming to blows. At length, tranquillity being somewhat restored, the legislator said to the Imans:
At the mention of these names, a major divide emerged among the Muslims themselves. Supporters of Ali and those of Omar, shouting accusations of heresy and blasphemy, hurled insults at each other. The conflict escalated so much that nearby groups had to step in to stop them from fighting. Eventually, once some calm was restored, the legislator addressed the Imans:
"See the consequences of your principles! If you yourselves were to carry them into practice, you would destroy each other to the last man. Is it not the first law of God that man should live?"
"Look at the outcomes of your beliefs! If you actually put them into action, you'd wipe each other out completely. Isn't it God's first rule that people should live?"
Then, addressing himself to the other groups, he continued:
Then, turning to the other groups, he continued:
"Doubtless this intolerant and exclusive spirit shocks every idea of justice, and overturns the whole foundation of morals and society; but before we totally reject this code of doctrine, is it not proper to hear some of its dogmas? Let us not pronounce on the forms, without having some knowledge of the substance."
"Doubtless, this intolerant and exclusive attitude contradicts every notion of justice and undermines the entire foundation of morals and society. But before we completely dismiss this set of beliefs, shouldn't we take a moment to consider some of its principles? Let's not judge the forms without first understanding the substance."
The groups having consented, the Iman began to expound how God, having sent to the nations lost in idolatry twenty-four thousand prophets, had finally sent the last, the seal and perfection of all, Mahomet; on whom be the salvation of peace: how, to prevent the divine word from being any longer perverted by infidels, the supreme goodness had itself written the pages of the Koran. Then, explaining the particular dogmas of Islamism, the Iman unfolded how the Koran, partaking of the divine nature, was uncreated and eternal, like its author: how it had been sent leaf by leaf, in twenty-four thousand nocturnal apparitions of the angel Gabriel: how the angel announced himself by a gentle knocking, which threw the prophet into a cold sweat: how in the vision of one night he had travelled over ninety heavens, riding on the beast Borack, half horse and half woman: how, endowed with the gift of miracles, he walked in the sunshine without a shadow, turned dry trees to green, filled wells and cisterns with water, and split in two the body of the moon: how, by divine command, Mahomet had propagated, sword in hand, the religion the most worthy of God by its sublimity, and the most proper for men by the simplicity of its practice; since it consisted in only eight or ten points:—To profess the unity of God; to acknowledge Mahomet as his only prophet; to pray five times a day; to fast one month in the year; to go to Mecca once in our life; to pay the tenth of all we possess; to drink no wine; to eat no pork; and to make war upon the infidels.* He taught that by these means every Mussulman becoming himself an apostle and martyr, should enjoy in this world many blessings; and at his death, his soul, weighed in the balance of works, and absolved by the two black angels, should pass the infernal pit on the bridge as narrow as a hair and as sharp as the edge of a sword, and should finally be received to a region of delight, which is watered with rivers of milk and honey, and embalmed in all the perfumes of India and Arabia; and where the celestial Houris—virgins always chaste—are eternally crowning with repeated favors the elect of God, who preserve an eternal youth.
The groups agreed, and the Imam began to explain how God, after sending twenty-four thousand prophets to the nations lost in idolatry, finally sent the last and final prophet, Muhammad—may peace be upon him. He spoke about how, to ensure the divine word wasn't distorted any longer by non-believers, God's supreme goodness had written the pages of the Quran itself. Then, while detailing the key beliefs of Islam, the Imam explained how the Quran, sharing in the divine nature, was uncreated and eternal, just like its author. He described how it was revealed leaf by leaf, through twenty-four thousand night-time appearances of the angel Gabriel. The angel would announce himself with a gentle knock, which caused the prophet to break into a cold sweat. He recounted how, during a vision one night, Muhammad traveled through ninety heavens, riding the creature Burak, which was half horse and half woman. With miraculous powers, he walked in the sunlight without casting a shadow, transformed dry trees into lush greens, filled wells and cisterns with water, and split the moon in two. By divine command, Muhammad spread the most worthy religion of God, which was both sublime and simple for people to practice; it contained only eight or ten principles: to profess the oneness of God; to accept Muhammad as his sole prophet; to pray five times a day; to fast for one month each year; to make a pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in a lifetime; to give ten percent of one’s possessions; to avoid drinking wine; to refrain from eating pork; and to wage war against non-believers. He taught that through these means, every Muslim could become an apostle and martyr, enjoying many blessings in this life. Upon death, their soul, weighed by deeds and absolved by the two black angels, would cross the narrow, sharp bridge over the infernal pit and be welcomed into a realm of delight, flowing with rivers of milk and honey, and filled with the perfumes of India and Arabia; where the celestial Houris—virgins always pure—would eternally bless the chosen ones of God, who would remain in eternal youth.
* Whatever the advocates for the philosophy and civilization of the Turks may assert, to make war upon infidels is considered by them as an obligatory precept and an act of religion. See Reland de Relig. Mahom.
* No matter what the supporters of Turkish philosophy and culture might say, they view waging war against non-believers as a mandatory rule and a religious duty. See Reland de Relig. Mahom.
At these words an involuntary smile was seen on all their lips; and the various groups, reasoning on these articles of faith, exclaimed with one voice:
At these words, an involuntary smile appeared on all their lips, and the different groups, reflecting on these beliefs, exclaimed in unison:
"Is it possible that reasonable beings can admit such reveries? Would you not think it a chapter from The Thousand and One Nights?"
"Is it possible for rational beings to entertain such fantasies? Wouldn’t you think it’s a chapter from The Thousand and One Nights?"
A Samoyede advanced into the circle: "The paradise of Mahomet," said he, "appears to me very good; but one of the means of gaining it is embarrassing: for if we must neither eat nor drink between the rising and setting sun, as he has ordered, how are we to practise that fast in my country, where the sun continues above the horizon six months without setting?"
A Samoyede stepped into the circle and said, "The paradise of Mahomet sounds great to me, but one of the ways to reach it is complicated. If we can’t eat or drink between sunrise and sunset like he commanded, how are we supposed to fast in my country where the sun stays up for six months without setting?"
"That is impossible," cried all the Mussulman doctors, to support the teaching of the prophet; but a hundred nations having attested the fact, the infallibility of Mahomet could not but receive a severe shock.
"That's impossible," shouted all the Muslim scholars, to uphold the teachings of the prophet; but with a hundred nations confirming the truth, the infallibility of Muhammad took a serious hit.
"It is singular," said an European, "that God should be constantly revealing what takes place in heaven, without ever instructing us what is doing on the earth."
"It’s odd," said a European, "that God keeps showing us what’s happening in heaven, but never tells us what’s going on down here on earth."
"For my part," said an American, "I find a great difficulty in the pilgrimage. For suppose twenty-five years to a generation, and only a hundred millions of males on the globe,—each being obliged to go to Mecca once in his life,—there must be four millions a year on the journey; and as it would be impracticable for them to return the same year, the numbers would be doubled—that is, eight millions: where would you find provisions, lodgings, water, vessels, for this universal procession? Here must be miracles indeed!"
"For my part," said an American, "I find it really difficult to manage this pilgrimage. Let’s say a generation lasts about twenty-five years, and there are only a hundred million males on the planet—each one is required to go to Mecca at least once in his lifetime—there would need to be four million making the journey every year; and since it wouldn’t be possible for them to return within the same year, the numbers would be doubled—that’s eight million. Where would all these people find food, places to stay, water, and transportation for such a massive gathering? There must be some serious miracles involved!"
"The proof," said a catholic doctor, "that the religion of Mahomet is not revealed, is that the greater part of the ideas which serve for its basis existed a long time before, and that it is only a confused mixture of truths disfigured and taken from our holy religion and from that of the Jews; which an ambitious man has made to serve his projects of domination, and his worldly views. Look through his book; you will see nothing there but the histories of the Bible and the Gospel travestied into absurd fables—into a tissue of vague and contradictory declamations, and ridiculous or dangerous precepts.
"The proof," said a Catholic doctor, "that the religion of Muhammad is not divinely revealed, is that most of the ideas that form its foundation existed long before, and it’s just a muddled mix of truths distorted and taken from our holy religion and that of the Jews; which an ambitious person has used to further his agenda for power and his worldly ambitions. Look through his book; you will find nothing there but the stories of the Bible and the Gospel twisted into absurd fables—into a collection of vague and contradictory statements, and ridiculous or harmful teachings."
"Analyze the spirit of these precepts, and the conduct of their apostle; you will find there an artful and audacious character, which, to obtain its end, works ably it is true, on the passions of the people it had to govern. It is speaking to simple men, and it entertains them with miracles; they are ignorant and jealous, and it flatters their vanity by despising science; they are poor and rapacious, and it excites their cupidity by the hope of pillage; having nothing at first to give them on earth, it tells them of treasures in heaven; it teaches them to desire death as a supreme good; it threatens cowards with hell; it rewards the brave with paradise; it sustains the weak with the opinion of fatality; in short, it produces the attachment it wants by all the allurements of sense, and all the power of the passions.
"Analyze the essence of these principles and the actions of their leader; you’ll see a clever and bold character that, to achieve its goals, skillfully plays on the emotions of the people it needs to control. It speaks to simple folks and entertains them with miracles; they are unaware and envious, and it boosts their ego by belittling knowledge; they are poor and greedy, and it stirs their desire for greed with promises of loot; having nothing to offer them in this life, it tells them about riches in the afterlife; it teaches them to see death as the ultimate blessing; it threatens the timid with hell; it rewards the valiant with heaven; it supports the vulnerable with the idea of fate; in short, it creates the attachment it desires through all the temptations of the senses and the full force of human emotions."
"How different is the character of our religion! and how completely does its empire, founded on the counteraction of the natural temper, and the mortification of all our passions, prove its divine origin! How forcibly does its mild and compassionate morality, its affections altogether spiritual, attest its emanation from God! Many of its doctrines, it is true, soar above the reach of the understanding, and impose on reason a respectful silence; but this more fully demonstrates its revelation, since the human mind could never have imagined such mysteries."
"How different is the nature of our religion! And how completely does its foundation, built on overcoming our natural tendencies and restraining all our passions, show its divine origin! How powerfully its gentle and compassionate morals, focused entirely on spiritual feelings, confirm that it comes from God! Many of its teachings, it's true, go beyond what we can understand and demand a respectful silence from reason; but this only reinforces its revelation, since the human mind could never have conceived of such mysteries."
Then, holding the Bible in one hand and the four Gospels in the other, the doctor began to relate that, in the beginning, God, after passing an eternity in idleness, took the resolution, without any known cause, of making the world out of nothing; that having created the whole universe in six days, he found himself fatigued on the seventh; that having placed the first human pair in a garden of delights, to make them completely happy, he forbade their tasting a particular fruit which he placed within their reach; that these first parents, having yielded to the temptation, all their race (which were not yet born) had been condemned to bear the penalty of a fault which they had not committed; that, after having left the human race to damn themselves for four or five thousand years, this God of mercy ordered a well beloved son, whom he had engendered without a mother, and who was as old as himself, to go and be put to death on the earth; and this for the salvation of mankind; of whom much the greater portion, nevertheless, have ever since continued in the way of perdition; that to remedy this new difficulty, this same God, born of a virgin, having died and risen from the dead, assumes a new existence every day, and in the form of a piece of bread, multiplies himself by millions at the voice of one of the basest of men. Then, passing on to the doctrine of the sacraments, he was going to treat at large on the power of absolution and reprobation, of the means of purging all sins by a little water and a few words, when, uttering the words indulgence, power of the pope, sufficient grace, and efficacious grace, he was interrupted by a thousand cries.
Then, holding the Bible in one hand and the four Gospels in the other, the doctor began to explain that, in the beginning, God, after spending an eternity doing nothing, decided, without any reason, to create the world out of nothing. After creating the entire universe in six days, He felt tired on the seventh. He placed the first human couple in a paradise to make them completely happy but forbade them from eating a specific fruit that was within their reach. When these first parents gave in to temptation, all their descendants (who weren’t even born yet) were condemned to suffer the consequences of a sin they didn’t commit. After letting humanity condemn itself for four or five thousand years, this merciful God commanded a beloved son, who was conceived without a mother and was as old as He was, to go be killed on earth for the salvation of mankind; yet, a large part of humanity has since continued down a path of destruction. To address this new issue, the same God, born of a virgin, who died and rose from the dead, takes on a new existence every day and, in the form of a piece of bread, multiplies Himself by millions at the command of one of the lowliest of men. Then, moving on to the teaching of the sacraments, he was about to discuss in detail the power of absolution and condemnation, and how all sins can be cleansed with a little water and a few words, when he mentioned the terms indulgence, the power of the pope, sufficient grace, and efficacious grace, and was interrupted by a chorus of shouts.
"It is a horrible abuse," cried the Lutherans, "to pretend to remit sins for money."
"It’s a terrible abuse," shouted the Lutherans, "to act like you can forgive sins for money."
"The notion of the real presence," cried the Calvinists, "is contrary to the text of the Gospel."
"The idea of real presence," shouted the Calvinists, "goes against the Gospel text."
"The pope has no right to decide anything of himself," cried the Jansenists; and thirty other sects rising up, and accusing each other of heresies and errors, it was no longer possible to hear anything distinctly.
"The pope has no right to make any decisions on his own," shouted the Jansenists; and with thirty other groups emerging, accusing one another of heresies and mistakes, it became impossible to hear anything clearly.
Silence being at last restored, the Mussulmans observed to the legislator:
Silence finally returned, the Muslims said to the lawmaker:
"Since you have rejected our doctrine as containing things incredible, can you admit that of the Christians? Is not theirs still more contrary to common sense and justice? A God, immaterial and infinite, to become a man! to have a son as old as himself! This god-man to become bread, to be eaten and digested! Have we any thing equal to that? Have the Christians an exclusive right of setting up a blind faith? And will you grant them privileges of belief to our detriment?"
"Since you’ve dismissed our beliefs as unbelievable, can you accept the ones from the Christians? Aren’t theirs even more against common sense and fairness? A God, who is invisible and infinite, becoming a man! To have a son who is the same age as himself! This god-man turning into bread, to be eaten and digested! Is there anything that compares to that? Do Christians have the exclusive right to impose blind faith? And will you allow them special privileges of belief at our expense?"
Some savage tribes then advanced: "What!" said they, "because a man and woman ate an apple six thousand years ago, all the human race are damned? And you call God just? What tyrant ever rendered children responsible for the faults of their fathers? What man can answer for the actions of another? Does not this overturn every idea of justice and of reason?"
Some savage tribes then advanced: "What!" they said, "because a man and woman ate an apple six thousand years ago, the entire human race is damned? And you call God just? What tyrant ever made children responsible for the mistakes of their parents? What man can be held accountable for the actions of someone else? Doesn't this destroy every concept of justice and reason?"
Others exclaimed: "Where are the proofs, the witnesses of these pretended facts? Can we receive them without examining the evidence? The least action in a court of justice requires two witnesses; and we are ordered to believe all this on mere tradition and hearsay!"
Others exclaimed: "Where's the evidence, the witnesses for these supposed facts? Can we accept them without looking at the proof? Even the smallest action in a court of law needs two witnesses; and we're expected to believe all this just based on rumors and hearsay!"
A Jewish Rabbin then addressing the assembly, said: "As to the fundamental facts, we are sureties; but with regard to their form and their application, the case is different, and the Christians are here condemned by their own arguments. For they cannot deny that we are the original source from which they are derived—the primitive stock on which they are grafted; and hence the reasoning is very short: Either our law is from God, and then theirs is a heresy, since it differs from ours, or our law is not from God, and then theirs falls at the same time."
A Jewish rabbi then addressed the assembly, saying: "Regarding the fundamental facts, we stand as guarantors; however, when it comes to their form and application, the situation changes, and the Christians are here condemned by their own arguments. They can't deny that we are the original source from which they have come—the foundational stock onto which they are grafted. Therefore, the reasoning is quite simple: Either our law is from God, in which case theirs is a heresy since it differs from ours, or our law isn’t from God, and then theirs collapses at the same time."
"But you must make this distinction," replied the Christian: "Your law is from God as typical and preparative, but not as final and absolute: you are the image of which we are the substance."
"But you have to make this distinction," replied the Christian: "Your law is from God as a model and preparation, but not as final and absolute: you are the image of which we are the substance."
"We know," replied the Rabbin, "that such are your pretensions; but they are absolutely gratuitous and false. Your system turns altogether on mystical meanings, visionary and allegorical interpretations.* With violent distortions on the letter of our books, you substitute the most chimerical ideas for the true ones, and find in them whatever pleases you; as a roving imagination will find figures in the clouds. Thus you have made a spiritual Messiah of that which, in the spirit of our prophets, is only a temporal king. You have made a redemption of the human race out of the simple re-establishment of our nation. Your conception of the Virgin is founded on a single phrase, of which you have changed the meaning. Thus you make from our Scriptures whatever your fancy dictates; you even find there your trinity; though there is not a word that has the most distant allusion to such a thing; and it is an invention of profane writers, admitted into your system with a host of other opinions, of every religion and of every sect, during the anarchy of the first three centuries of your era."
"We know," replied the Rabbi, "that you have these claims; but they are completely unfounded and false. Your system relies entirely on mystical meanings, visionary and symbolic interpretations. By forcefully twisting the literal meanings of our texts, you replace true ideas with the most fanciful concepts and find whatever suits your interests; just as a wandering mind sees shapes in the clouds. In doing so, you've turned a temporal king, as understood by our prophets, into a spiritual Messiah. You've transformed the simple restoration of our nation into a redemption of humanity. Your view of the Virgin is based on a single phrase, which you have reinterpreted. This way, you create from our Scriptures whatever you wish; you even derive your concept of the trinity from them, despite there being no mention of it at all; it's a notion invented by secular writers, integrated into your belief system along with many other ideas from every religion and sect during the chaos of the first three centuries of your era."
* When we read the Fathers of the church, and see upon what arguments they have built the edifice of religion, we are inexpressibly astonished with their credulity or their knavery: but allegory was the rage of that period; the Pagans employed it to explain the actions of their gods, and the Christians acted in the same spirit when they employed it after their fashion.
* When we read the early church leaders and see what arguments they used to construct the foundation of religion, we are incredibly amazed by their gullibility or their deceit: allegory was the trend of that time; the Pagans used it to explain the actions of their gods, and the Christians did the same in their own way.
At these words, the Christian doctors, crying sacrilege and blasphemy, sprang forward in a transport of fury to fall upon the Jew; and a troop of monks, in motley dresses of black and white, advanced with a standard on which were painted pincers, gridirons, lighted fagots, and the words Justice, Charity, Mercy.* "It is necessary," said they, "to make an example of these impious wretches, and burn them for the glory of God." They began even to prepare the pile, when a Mussulman answered in a strain of irony:
At these words, the Christian leaders, shouting sacrilege and blasphemy, rushed forward in a fit of rage to attack the Jew; and a group of monks, dressed in a mix of black and white, approached with a banner featuring images of pincers, gridirons, burning torches, and the words Justice, Charity, Mercy.* "It's necessary," they said, "to set an example of these godless wretches and burn them for the glory of God." They even started to gather materials for the pyre when a Muslim replied sarcastically:
"This, then, is that religion of peace, that meek and beneficent system which you so much extol! This is that evangelical charity which combats infidelity with persuasive mildness, and repays injuries with patience! Ye hypocrites! It is thus that you deceive mankind—thus that you propagate your accursed errors! When you were weak, you preached liberty, toleration, peace; when you are strong, you practise persecution and violence—"
"This is that religion of peace, that gentle and kind system you praise so much! This is the charitable spirit that fights against disbelief with gentle persuasion and responds to wrongs with patience! You hypocrites! This is how you mislead people—this is how you spread your horrible falsehoods! When you were weak, you preached liberty, tolerance, and peace; now that you’re strong, you practice persecution and violence—"
* This description answers exactly to the banner of the Inquisition of Spanish Jacobins.
* This description perfectly matches the banner of the Inquisition of Spanish Jacobins.
And he was going to begin the history of the wars and slaughters of Christianity, when the legislator, demanding silence, suspended this scene of discord.
And he was about to start telling the story of the wars and bloodshed of Christianity, when the legislator, asking for silence, interrupted this scene of conflict.
The monks, affecting a tone of meekness and humility, exclaimed: "It is not ourselves that we would avenge; it is the cause of God; it is the glory of God that we defend."
The monks, trying to sound humble and modest, exclaimed: "We’re not seeking revenge for ourselves; we’re standing up for God’s cause; it’s God’s glory that we defend."
"And what right have you, more than we," said the Imans, "to constitute yourselves the representatives of God? Have you privileges that we have not? Are you not men like us?"
"And what right do you have, more than us," said the Imans, "to consider yourselves the representatives of God? Do you have privileges that we don’t? Aren’t you just people like us?"
"To defend God," said another group, "to pretend to avenge him, is to insult his wisdom and his power. Does he not know, better than men, what befits his dignity?"
"To defend God," said another group, "to act like we’re avenging Him, is to disrespect His wisdom and power. Doesn’t He know better than us what suits His dignity?"
"Yes," replied the monks, "but his ways are secret."
"Yeah," replied the monks, "but his methods are hidden."
"And it remains for you to prove," said the Rabbins, "that you have the exclusive privilege of understanding them."
"And now it's up to you to show," said the Rabbins, "that you have the exclusive right to understand them."
Then, proud of finding supporters to their cause, the Jews thought that the books of Moses were going to be triumphant, when the Mobed (high priest) of the Parses obtained leave to speak.
Then, proud of having found supporters for their cause, the Jews believed that the books of Moses were about to be celebrated when the Mobed (high priest) of the Parses was granted permission to speak.
"We have heard," said he, "the account of the Jews and Christians of the origin of the world; and, though greatly mutilated, we find in it some facts which we admit. But we deny that they are to be attributed to the legislator of the Hebrews. It was not he who made known to men these sublime truths, these celestial events. It was not to him that God revealed them, but to our holy prophet Zoroaster: and the proof of this is in the very books that they refer to. Examine with attention the laws, the ceremonies, the precepts established by Moses in those books; you will not find the slightest indication, either expressed or understood, of what constitutes the basis of the Jewish and Christian theology. You nowhere find the least trace of the immortality of the soul, or of a future life, or of heaven, or of hell, or of the revolt of the principal angel, author of the evils of the human race. These ideas were not known to Moses, and the reason is very obvious: it was not till four centuries afterwards that Zoroaster first evangelized them in Asia.*
"We've heard," he said, "the stories from the Jews and Christians about the origin of the world; and while they're significantly altered, we acknowledge that some of it contains facts. However, we reject the idea that these truths can be credited to the Hebrew legislator. It wasn't he who revealed these profound truths and celestial events to humanity. It was our holy prophet Zoroaster who received this revelation from God. The evidence is found in the very texts they reference. Look closely at the laws, ceremonies, and teachings laid down by Moses in those texts; you won't find any mention, explicit or implied, of what forms the foundation of Jewish and Christian theology. There's no trace of the immortality of the soul, a future life, heaven, hell, or the uprising of the chief angel, who is responsible for the miseries of humanity. Moses was unaware of these concepts, and it's quite clear why: it wasn't until four centuries later that Zoroaster first preached them in Asia.*
* See the Chronology of the Twelve Ages, in which I conceive myself to have clearly proved that Moses lived about 1,400 years before Jesus Christ, and Zoroaster about a thousand.
* See the Chronology of the Twelve Ages, in which I believe I have clearly shown that Moses lived around 1,400 years before Jesus Christ, and Zoroaster about a thousand.
"Thus," continued the Mobed, turning to the Rabbins, "it was not till after that epoch, that is to say, in the time of your first kings, that these ideas began to appear in your writers; and then their appearance was obscure and gradual, according to the progress of the political relations between your ancestors and ours. It was especially when, having been conquered by the kings of Nineveh and Babylon and transported to the banks of the Tygris and the Euphrates, where they resided for three successive generations, that they imbibed manners and opinions which had been rejected as contrary to their law. When our king Cyrus had delivered them from slavery, their heart was won to us by gratitude; they became our disciples and imitators; and they admitted our dogmas in the revision of their books;* for your Genesis, in particular, was never the work of Moses, but a compilation drawn up after the return from the Babylonian captivity, in which are inserted the Chaldean opinions of the origin of the world.
"Thus," continued the Mobed, turning to the Rabbins, "it was only after that era, specifically during the time of your first kings, that these ideas started to show up in your writers; and even then, their emergence was unclear and gradual, reflecting the evolving political relationships between your ancestors and ours. It was particularly when they were conquered by the kings of Nineveh and Babylon and taken to the banks of the Tigris and the Euphrates, where they lived for three successive generations, that they absorbed customs and beliefs that had been rejected as contradictory to their law. When our king Cyrus freed them from slavery, their hearts turned to us with gratitude; they became our followers and took inspiration from us; and they incorporated our doctrines in the revision of their texts;* for your Genesis, in particular, was never authored by Moses, but is a compilation created after the return from the Babylonian exile, which includes the Chaldean views on the origin of the world."
* In the first periods of the Christian church, not only the most learned of those who have since been denominated heretics, but many of the orthodox conceived Moses to have written neither the law nor the Pentateuch, but that the work was a compilation made by the elders of the people and the Seventy, who, after the death of Moses, collected his scattered ordinances, and mixed with them things that were extraneous; similar to what happened as to the Koran of Mahomet. See Les Clementines, Homel. 2. sect. 51. and Homel. 3. sect. 42. Modern critics, more enlightened or more attentive than the ancients, have found in Genesis in particular, marks of its having been composed on the return from the captivity; but the principal proofs have escaped them. These I mean to exhibit in an analysis of the book of Genesis, in which I shall demonstrate that the tenth chapter, among others, which treats of the pretended generations of the man called Noah, is a real geographical picture of the world, as it was known to the Hebrews at the epoch of the captivity, which was bounded by Greece or Hellas at the West, mount Caucasus at the North, Persia at the East, and Arabia and Upper Egypt at the South. All the pretended personages from Adam to Abraham, or his father Terah, are mythological beings, stars, constellations, countries. Adam is Bootes: Noah is Osiris: Xisuthrus Janus, Saturn; that is to say Capricorn, or the celestial Genius that opened the year. The Alexandrian Chronicle says expressly, page 85, that Nimrod was supposed by the Persians to be their first king, as having invented the art of hunting, and that he was translated into heaven, where he appears under the name of Orion.
* In the early days of the Christian church, not only the most educated among those later labeled as heretics but also many orthodox believers thought that Moses didn't actually write the law or the Pentateuch. Instead, they believed this work was a compilation created by the people's elders and the Seventy, who collected his scattered ordinances after Moses' death and mixed in unrelated material; similar to what happened with the Koran of Muhammad. See Les Clementines, Homel. 2. sect. 51. and Homel. 3. sect. 42. Modern critics, who are either more knowledgeable or more observant than ancient scholars, have found indications in Genesis, in particular, that it was written after the captivity. However, they have missed the main evidence. I intend to present this in an analysis of the book of Genesis, where I will show that the tenth chapter, among others, which discusses the so-called generations of the man named Noah, is actually a true geographical representation of the world as it was known to the Hebrews at the time of the captivity. This world was bordered by Greece or Hellas to the West, Mount Caucasus to the North, Persia to the East, and Arabia and Upper Egypt to the South. All the supposed figures from Adam to Abraham, or his father Terah, are mythological beings, stars, constellations, or countries. Adam is Bootes; Noah is Osiris; Xisuthrus is Janus, Saturn; that is, Capricorn, or the celestial Genius that began the year. The Alexandrian Chronicle explicitly states, page 85, that Nimrod was thought by the Persians to be their first king for inventing the art of hunting and that he was taken up into heaven, where he appears under the name of Orion.
"At first the pure followers of the law, opposing to the emigrants the letter of the text and the absolute silence of the prophet, endeavored to repel these innovations; but they ultimately prevailed, and our doctrine, modified by your ideas, gave rise to a new sect.
"Initially, the strict followers of the law, opposing the emigrants with the exact wording of the text and the complete silence of the prophet, tried to push back against these changes; but in the end, they lost ground, and our doctrine, altered by your views, led to the formation of a new sect."
"You expected a king to restore your political independence; we announced a God to regenerate and save mankind. From this combination of ideas, your Essenians laid the foundation of Christianity: and whatever your pretensions may be, Jews, Christians, Mussulmans, you are, in your system of spiritual beings, only the blundering followers of Zoroaster."
"You expected a king to restore your political independence; we announced a God to regenerate and save humanity. From this combination of ideas, your Essenians laid the groundwork for Christianity: and regardless of your claims, Jews, Christians, Muslims, you are, in your belief system, merely the confused followers of Zoroaster."
The Mobed, then passing on to the details of his religion, quoting from the Zadder and the Zendavesta, recounted, in the same order as they are found in the book of Genesis, the creation of the world in six gahans,* the formation of a first man and a first woman, in a divine place, under the reign of perfect good; the introduction of evil into the world by the great snake, emblem of Ahrimanes; the revolt and battles of the Genius of evil and darkness against Ormuzd, God of good and of light; the division of the angels into white and black, or good and bad; their hierarchal orders, cherubim, seraphim, thrones, dominions, etc.; the end of the world at the close of six thousand years; the coming of the lamb, the regenerator of nature; the new world; the future life, and the regions of happiness and misery; the passage of souls over the bridge of the bottomless pit; the celebration of the mysteries of Mithras; the unleavened bread which the initiated eat; the baptism of new-born children; the unction of the dead; the confession of sins; and, in a word, he recited so many things analagous to those of the three preceding religions, that his discourse seemed like a commentary or a continuation of the Koran or the Apocalypse.**
The Mobed, moving on to the specifics of his religion, quoting from the Zadder and the Zendavesta, detailed, in the same order as found in the book of Genesis, the creation of the world in six gahans,* the formation of the first man and woman in a divine place, under the reign of perfect good; the introduction of evil into the world by the great snake, symbolizing Ahrimanes; the revolt and battles of the Genius of evil and darkness against Ormuzd, God of good and light; the division of the angels into white and black, or good and bad; their hierarchical orders—cherubim, seraphim, thrones, dominions, etc.; the end of the world after six thousand years; the coming of the lamb, the regenerator of nature; the new world; the afterlife, and the realms of happiness and misery; the crossing of souls over the bridge of the bottomless pit; the celebration of the mysteries of Mithras; the unleavened bread consumed by the initiated; the baptism of newborn children; anointing the dead; confession of sins; and, in short, he recounted so many points similar to those of the three preceding religions that his discourse sounded like a commentary or a continuation of the Koran or the Apocalypse.**
* Or periods, or in six gahan-bars, that is six periods of time. These periods are what Zoroaster calls the thousands of God or of light, meaning the six summer months. In the first, say the Persians, God created (arranged in order) the heavens; in the second the waters; in the third the earth; in the fourth trees; in the fifth animals; and in the sixth man; corresponding with the account in Genesis. For particulars see Hyde, ch. 9, and Henry Lord, ch. 2, on the religion of the ancient Persians. It is remarkable that the same tradition is found in the sacred books of the Etrurians, which relate that the fabricator of all things had comprised the duration of his work in a period of twelve thousand years, which period was distributed to the twelve houses of the sun. In the first thousand, God made heaven and earth; in the second the firmament; in the third the sea and the waters; in the fourth the sun, moon and stars; in the fifth the souls of animals, birds, and reptiles; in the sixth man. See Suidas, at the word Tyrrhena; which shows first the identity of their theological and astrological opinions; and, secondly, the identity, or rather confusion of ideas, between absolute and systematical creation; that is, the periods assigned for renewing the face of nature, which were at first the period of the year, and afterwards periods of 60, of 600, of 25,000, of 36,000 and of 432,000 years. ** The modern Parses and the ancient Mithriacs, who are the same sect, observe all the Christian sacraments, even the laying on of hands in confirmation. The priest of Mithra, says Tertullian, (de Proescriptione, ch. 40) promises absolution from sin on confession and baptism; and, if I rightly remember, Mithra marks his soldiers in the forehead, with the chrism called in the Egyptian Kouphi; he celebrates the sacrifice of bread, which is the resurrection, and presents the crown to his followers, menacing them at the same time with the sword, etc. In these mysteries they tried the courage of the initiated with a thousand terrors, presenting fire to his face, a sword to his breast, etc.; they also offered him a crown, which he refused, saying, God is my crown: and this crown is to be seen in the celestial sphere by the side of Bootes. The personages in these mysteries were distinguished by the names of the animal constellations. The ceremony of mass is nothing more than an imitation of these mysteries and those of Eleusis. The benediction, the Lord be with you, is a literal translation of the formula of admission chou-k, am, p-ka. See Beausob. Hist. Du Manicheisme, vol. ii.
* Or periods, or in six gahan-bars, which means six periods of time. These periods are what Zoroaster calls the thousands of God or of light, referring to the six summer months. In the first, the Persians say, God created (arranged in order) the heavens; in the second the waters; in the third the earth; in the fourth trees; in the fifth animals; and in the sixth man; corresponding with the account in Genesis. For details see Hyde, ch. 9, and Henry Lord, ch. 2, on the religion of the ancient Persians. It's noteworthy that the same tradition appears in the sacred books of the Etrurians, which state that the creator of all things divided the duration of his work into a period of twelve thousand years, which was allocated to the twelve houses of the sun. In the first thousand, God made heaven and earth; in the second the firmament; in the third the sea and the waters; in the fourth the sun, moon, and stars; in the fifth the souls of animals, birds, and reptiles; and in the sixth man. See Suidas, at the word Tyrrhena; this illustrates both the similarity of their theological and astrological views and the overlap, or rather confusion, of concepts between absolute and systematic creation; that is, the periods assigned for renewing the face of nature, which initially were the period of the year, and later periods of 60, 600, 25,000, 36,000, and 432,000 years. ** The modern Parses and the ancient Mithriacs, who are the same group, observe all the Christian sacraments, including the laying on of hands in confirmation. The priest of Mithra, Tertullian states (de Proescriptione, ch. 40), promises forgiveness from sin upon confession and baptism; and, if I remember correctly, Mithra marks his soldiers on the forehead with the chrism known in Egyptian as Kouphi; he commemorates the sacrifice of bread, which signifies resurrection, and presents a crown to his followers while threatening them at the same time with a sword, etc. In these mysteries, they tested the bravery of the initiates with a thousand terrors, presenting fire to their faces, a sword to their chests, etc.; they also offered him a crown, which he declined, declaring, God is my crown: and this crown can be seen in the celestial sphere next to Bootes. The figures in these mysteries were recognized by the names of the animal constellations. The ceremony of mass is nothing more than a reenactment of these mysteries and those of Eleusis. The blessing, "The Lord be with you," is a direct translation of the admission formula chou-k, am, p-ka. See Beausob. Hist. Du Manicheisme, vol. ii.
But the Jewish, Christian, and Mahometan doctors, crying out against this recital, and treating the Parses as idolaters and worshippers of fire, charged them with falsehood, interpolations, falsification of facts; and there arose a violent dispute as to the dates of the events, their order and succession, the origin of the doctrines, their transmission from nation to nation, the authenticity of the books on which they are founded, the epoch of their composition, the character of their compilers, and the validity of their testimony. And the various parties, pointing out reciprocally to each other, the contradictions, improbabilities, and forgeries, accused one another of having established their belief on popular rumors, vague traditions, and absurd fables, invented without discernment, and admitted without examination by unknown, partial, or ignorant writers, at uncertain or unknown epochs.
But the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim scholars, protesting against this account and labeling the Zoroastrians as idol worshippers and fire worshippers, accused them of dishonesty, distortions, and altering facts. This sparked a heated argument about the timing of events, their sequence and succession, the origins of the beliefs, their spread from one culture to another, the credibility of the texts they were based on, the time they were written, the nature of their authors, and the validity of their claims. Each group pointed out the contradictions, implausibilities, and forgeries in each other's beliefs, accusing one another of relying on popular rumors, vague traditions, and ridiculous tales created without insight and accepted without scrutiny by unknown, biased, or uninformed writers from uncertain or unknown times.
A great murmur now arose from under the standards of the various Indian sects; and the Bramins, protesting against the pretensions of the Jews and the Parses, said:
A loud chatter now emerged from beneath the banners of the different Indian sects; and the Bramins, opposing the claims of the Jews and the Parses, said:
"What are these new and almost unheard of nations, who arrogantly set themselves up as the sources of the human race, and the depositaries of its archives? To hear their calculations of five or six thousand years, it would seem that the world was of yesterday; whereas our monuments prove a duration of many thousands of centuries. And for what reason are their books to be preferred to ours? Are then the Vedes, the Chastres, and the Pourans inferior to the Bibles, the Zendavestas, and the Zadders?* And is not the testimony of our fathers and our gods as valid as that of the fathers and the gods of the West? Ah! if it were permitted to reveal our mysteries to profane men! if a sacred veil did not justly conceal them from every eye!"
"What are these new and almost unknown nations that arrogantly position themselves as the origins of humanity and the keepers of its history? When they talk about five or six thousand years, it makes it seem like the world just began; meanwhile, our monuments show a history spanning many thousands of centuries. Why should their texts be considered better than ours? Are the Vedas, the Shastras, and the Puranas really inferior to the Bibles, the Zendavestas, and the Zadders? And isn’t the testimony of our ancestors and our gods just as valid as that of the ancestors and gods of the West? Ah! If only we could share our mysteries with ordinary people! If only a sacred veil didn’t justly keep them hidden from every eye!"
These are the sacred volumes of the Hindoos; they are sometimes written Vedams, Pouranams, Chastrans, because the Hindoos, like the Persians, are accustomed to give a nasal sound to the terminations of their words, which we represent by the affixes on and an, and the Portuguese by the affixes om and am. Many of these books have been translated, thanks to the liberal spirit of Mr. Hastings, who has founded at Calcutta a literary society, and a printing press. At the same time, however, that we express our gratitude to this society, we must be permitted to complain of its exclusive spirit; the number of copies printed of each book being such as it is impossible to purchase them even in England; they are wholly in the hands of the East India proprietors. Scarcely even is the Asiatic Miscellany known in Europe; and a man must be very learned in oriental antiquity before he so much as hears of the Jones's, the Wilkins's, and the Halhed's, etc. As to the sacred books of the Hindoos, all that are yet in our hands are the Bhagvat Geeta, the Ezour-Vedam, the Bagavadam, and certain fragments of the Chastres printed at the end of the Bhagvat Geeta. These books are in Indostan what the Old and New Testament are in Christendom, the Koran in Turkey, the Zadder and the Zendavesta among the Parses, etc. When I have taken an extensive survey of their contents, I have sometimes asked myself, what would be the loss to the human race if a new Omar condemned them to the flames; and, unable to discover any mischief that would ensue, I call the imaginary chest that contains them, the box of Pandora.
These are the sacred texts of the Hindus; they are sometimes referred to as Vedams, Pouranams, or Chastrans because, like the Persians, the Hindus tend to give a nasal sound to the endings of their words, which we represent with the affixes on and an, while the Portuguese use om and am. Many of these books have been translated, thanks to the generous efforts of Mr. Hastings, who established a literary society and a printing press in Calcutta. However, while we express our gratitude to this society, we must also voice our concern about its exclusivity; the number of copies printed of each book is so limited that it is impossible to buy them even in England; they are entirely in the hands of the East India proprietors. The Asiatic Miscellany is hardly known in Europe, and one must be quite knowledgeable in Oriental studies to even hear of figures like Jones, Wilkins, and Halhed. As for the sacred texts of the Hindus, the ones we currently have are the Bhagvat Geeta, the Ezour-Vedam, the Bagavadam, and certain fragments of the Chastres printed at the end of the Bhagvat Geeta. These texts hold the same significance in India as the Old and New Testaments do in Christianity, the Koran in Turkey, and the Zadder and the Zendavesta among the Parses. After thoroughly examining their contents, I've occasionally wondered what harm would come to humanity if a new Omar were to condemn them to the fire; unable to find any negative consequences, I refer to the imagined chest containing them as Pandora's box.
The Bramins stopping short at these words: "How can we admit your doctrine," said the legislator, "if you will not make it known? And how did its first authors propagate it, when, being alone possessed of it, their own people were to them profane? Did heaven reveal it to be kept a secret?"*
The Bramins paused at these words: "How can we accept your teaching," said the legislator, "if you're not willing to share it? And how did its original authors spread it, when they alone had it, and their own people viewed it as unholy? Did heaven reveal it just to keep it a secret?"*
* The Vedas or Vedams are the sacred volumes of the Hindoos, as the Bibles with us. They are three in number; the Rick Veda, the Yadjour Veda, and the Sama Veda; they are so scarce in India, that the English could with great difficulty find an original one, of which a copy is deposited in the British Museum; they who reckon four Vedas, include among them the Attar Veda, concerning ceremonies, but which is lost. There are besides commentaries named Upanishada, one of which was published by Anquetil du Peron, and entitled Oupnekhat, a curious work. The date of these books is more than twenty-five centuries prior to our era; their contents prove that all the reveries of the Greek metaphysicians come from India and Egypt. Since the year 1788, the learned men of England are working in India a mine of literature totally unknown in Europe, and which proves that the civilization of India ascends to a very remote antiquity. After the Vedas come the Chastras amounting to six. They treat of theology and the Sciences. Afterwards eighteen Pouranas, treating of Mythology and History. See the Bahgouet-guita, the Baga Vadam, and the Ezour-Vedam, etc.
* The Vedas, or Vedams, are the sacred texts of the Hindus, similar to the Bibles for us. There are three of them: the Rig Veda, the Yajur Veda, and the Sama Veda. They are so rare in India that it is quite difficult for the English to find an original copy, although one is held in the British Museum. Those who count four Vedas include the Atharva Veda, which is about rituals but is now lost. Besides these, there are commentaries called Upanishads, one of which was published by Anquetil du Peron and is titled Oupnekhat, a fascinating work. These texts date back more than twenty-five centuries before our era; their content shows that the musings of Greek philosophers originated from India and Egypt. Since 1788, scholars in England have been exploring a wealth of literature in India that is completely unknown in Europe, revealing that Indian civilization has origins in very ancient times. Following the Vedas are the six Shastras, which cover theology and sciences. Then there are eighteen Puranas that deal with mythology and history. See the Bhagavad Gita, the Bhagavata Purana, and the Ezour-Vedam, etc.
But the Bramins persisting in their silence: "Let them have the honor of the secret," said a European: "Their doctrine is now divulged; we have their books, and I can give you the substance of them."
But the Brahmins continued to stay quiet: "Let them have the honor of the secret," said a European. "Their teachings are now revealed; we have their books, and I can summarize their content for you."
Then beginning with an abstract of the four Vedes, the eighteen Pourans, and the five or six Chastres, he recounted how a being, infinite, eternal, immaterial and round, after having passed an eternity in self-contemplation, and determining at last to manifest himself, separated the male and female faculties which were in him, and performed an act of generation, of which the Lingam remains an emblem; how that first act gave birth to three divine powers, Brama, Bichen or Vichenou, and Chib or Chiven;* whose functions were—the first to create, the second to preserve, and the third to destroy, or change the form of the universe. Then, detailing the history of their operations and adventures, he explained how Brama, proud of having created the world and the eight bobouns, or spheres of probation, thought himself superior to Chib, his equal; how his pride brought on a battle between them, in which these celestial globes were crushed like a basket of eggs; how Brama, vanquished in this conflict, was reduced to serve as a pedestal to Chib, metamorphosed into a Lingam; how Vichenou, the god mediator, has taken at different times to preserve the world, nine mortal forms of animals; how first, in shape of a fish, he saved from the universal deluge a family who repeopled the earth; how afterwards, in the form of a tortoise,** he drew from the sea of milk the mountain Mandreguiri (the pole); then, becoming a boar, he tore the belly of the giant Ereuniachessen, who was drowning the earth in the abyss of Djole, from whence he drew it out with his tusks; how, becoming incarnate in a black shepherd, and under the name of Christ-en, he delivered the world of the enormous serpent Calengem, and then crushed his head, after having been wounded by him in the heel.
Then starting with an overview of the four Vedas, the eighteen Puranas, and the five or six Shastras, he explained how a being, infinite, eternal, immaterial, and circular, after spending an eternity in self-reflection, finally decided to reveal himself. He separated the male and female aspects within him and performed an act of creation, of which the Lingam is a symbol; this first act produced three divine powers: Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva; whose roles were – the first to create, the second to preserve, and the third to destroy or transform the universe. Then, detailing the story of their actions and experiences, he described how Brahma, proud of having created the world and the eight realms of testing, believed himself superior to Shiva, his counterpart; how his arrogance led to a battle between them, in which these celestial spheres were shattered like a basket of eggs; how Brahma, defeated in this conflict, was made to serve as a support for Shiva, transformed into a Lingam; how Vishnu, the mediating god, at different times took nine earthly forms to protect the world; how first, as a fish, he saved a family from the universal flood who repopulated the earth; how later, in the form of a tortoise, he retrieved the mountain Mandragiri (the pole) from the ocean of milk; then, becoming a boar, he ripped apart the giant Hiranyaksha, who was drowning the earth in the abyss of the great ocean, pulling it out with his tusks; how, incarnating as a black shepherd, and using the name Christ, he freed the world from the enormous serpent Kaliya, and then crushed its head after being wounded in the heel.
* These names are differently pronounced according to the different dialects; thus they say Birmah, Bremma, Brouma. Bichen has been turned into Vichen by the easy exchange of a B for a V, and into Vichenou by means of a grammatical affix. In the same manner Chib, which is synonymous with Satan, and signifies adversary, is frequently written Chiba and Chiv-en; he is called also Rouder and Routr-en, that is, the destroyer. ** This is the constellation testudo, or the lyre, which was at first a tortoise, on account of its slow motion round the Pole; then a lyre, because it is the shell of this reptile on which the strings of the lyre are mounted. See an excellent memoir of M. Dupuis sur l'Origine des Constellations.
* These names are pronounced differently based on the various dialects; for example, they say Birmah, Bremma, Brouma. Bichen has been changed to Vichen by simply swapping a B for a V, and to Vichenou by adding a grammatical suffix. Similarly, Chib, which means Satan and refers to an adversary, is often written as Chiba and Chiv-en; he is also known as Rouder and Routr-en, meaning the destroyer. ** This is the constellation testudo, or the lyre, which was originally a tortoise due to its slow movement around the Pole; then it became a lyre because it represents the shell of this reptile on which the strings of the lyre are attached. See an excellent paper by M. Dupuis on the Origin of the Constellations.
Then, passing on to the history of the secondary Genii, he related how the Eternal, to display his own glory, created various orders of angels, whose business it was to sing his praises and to direct the universe; how a part of these angels revolted under the guidance of an ambitious chief, who strove to usurp the power of God, and to govern all; how God plunged them into a world of darkness, there to undergo the punishment for their crimes; how at last, touched with compassion, he consented to release them, to receive them into favor, after they should undergo a long series of probations; how, after creating for this purpose fifteen orbits or regions of planets, and peopling them with bodies, he ordered these rebel angels to undergo in them eighty-seven transmigrations; he then explained how souls, thus purified, returned to the first source, to the ocean of life and animation from which they had proceeded; and since all living creatures contain portions of this universal soul, he taught how criminal it was to deprive them of it. He was finally proceeding to explain the rites and ceremonies, when, speaking of offerings and libations of milk and butter made to gods of copper and wood, and then of purifications by the dung and urine of cows, there arose a universal murmur, mixed with peals of laughter, which interrupted the orator.
Then, moving on to the story of the secondary Genii, he talked about how the Eternal, to showcase his own glory, created different types of angels tasked with singing his praises and managing the universe; how some of these angels rebelled under the leadership of an ambitious chief who tried to seize God's power and rule everything; how God cast them into a dark world to face punishment for their wrongs; how, at last, feeling compassion, he agreed to free them and welcome them back into his favor after they went through a long series of tests; how, to make this happen, he created fifteen orbits or regions of planets, filling them with beings, and instructed these rebellious angels to go through eighty-seven reincarnations; he then explained how souls, once purified, return to the original source, to the ocean of life and energy from which they came; and since all living beings carry pieces of this universal soul, he taught how wrong it was to deprive them of it. He was just about to explain the rituals and ceremonies when, while talking about offerings and libations of milk and butter made to gods made of copper and wood, and then about purifications using cow dung and urine, a wave of murmurs and bursts of laughter interrupted the speaker.
Each of the different groups began to reason on that religion: "They are idolators," said the Mussulmans; "and should be exterminated." "They are deranged in their intellect," said the followers of Confucius; "we must try to cure them." "What ridiculous gods," said others, "are these puppets, besmeared with grease and smoke! Are gods to be washed like dirty children, from whom you must brush away the flies, which, attracted by honey, are fouling them with their excrements!"
Each of the different groups started to think about that religion: "They are idolators," said the Muslims; "and should be wiped out." "They are insane," said the followers of Confucius; "we need to try to help them." "What ridiculous gods," said others, "are these puppets covered in grease and smoke! Are gods supposed to be washed like dirty kids, from whom you have to swat away the flies that, attracted by honey, are dirtying them with their droppings!"
But a Bramin exclaimed with indignation: "These are profound mysteries,—emblems of truth, which you are not worthy to hear."
But a Brahmin shouted in anger, "These are deep mysteries—symbols of truth that you aren't worthy to know."
"And in what respect are you more worthy than we?" exclaimed a Lama of Tibet. "Is it because you pretend to have issued from the head of Brama, and the rest of the human race from the less noble parts of his body? But to support the pride of your distinctions of origin and castes, prove to us in the first place that you are different from other men; establish, in the next place, as historical facts, the allegories which you relate; show us, indeed, that you are the authors of all this doctrine; for we will demonstrate, if necessary, that you have only stolen and disfigured it; that you are only the imitators of the ancient paganism of the West; to which, by an ill assorted mixture, you have allied the pure and spiritual doctrine of our gods—a doctrine totally detached from the senses, and entirely unknown on earth till Beddou taught it to the nations."*
"And in what way are you more deserving than we?" exclaimed a Lama from Tibet. "Is it because you claim to have come from the head of Brahma, while the rest of humanity comes from the less noble parts of his body? But to back up your pride in your supposed origins and social classes, first prove to us that you are different from other people; next, establish the stories you tell as historical facts; show us that you are indeed the creators of this doctrine; for we can prove, if necessary, that you have merely copied and distorted it; that you are simply imitating the ancient paganism of the West, to which you’ve awkwardly mixed in the pure and spiritual teachings of our gods—a doctrine completely separate from the senses and entirely unknown on earth until Beddou taught it to the nations."
* All the ancient opinions of the Egyptian and Grecian theologians are to be found in India, and they appear to have been introduced, by means of the commerce of Arabia and the vicinity of Persia, time immemorial.
* All the old beliefs of Egyptian and Greek theologians can be found in India, and they seem to have been brought there through trade with Arabia and the nearby regions of Persia, a long time ago.
A number of groups having asked what was this doctrine, and who was this god, of whom the greater part had never heard the name, the Lama resumed and said:
A number of groups had asked what this doctrine was and who this god was, of whom most had never even heard the name. The Lama continued and said:
"In the beginning, a sole-existent and self-existent God, having passed an eternity in the contemplation of his own being, resolved to manifest his perfections out of himself, and created the matter of the world. The four elements being produced, but still in a state of confusion, he breathed on the face of the waters, which swelled like an immense bubble in form of an egg, which unfolding, became the vault or orb of heaven, enclosing the world.* Having made the earth, and the bodies of animals, this God, essence of motion, imparted to them a part of his own being to animate them; for this reason, the soul of everything that breathes being a portion of the universal soul, no one of them can perish; they only change their form and mould in passing successively into different bodies. Of all these forms, the one most pleasing to God is that of man, as most resembling his own perfections. When a man, by an absolute disengagement from his senses, is wholly absorbed in self-contemplation, he then discovers the divinity, and becomes himself God. Of all the incarnations of this kind that God has hitherto taken, the greatest and most solemn was that in which he appeared thirty centuries ago in Kachemire, under the name of Fot or Beddou, to preach the doctrines of self-denial and self-annihilation."
"In the beginning, there was a single, self-existent God who spent an eternity reflecting on His own existence. He decided to reveal His perfection outside of Himself and created the matter of the world. The four elements came into being, but were still in a chaotic state. He then breathed over the waters, which swelled like a giant bubble in the shape of an egg, and as it unfolded, it became the vault or sphere of heaven that enclosed the world.* After creating the earth and the bodies of animals, this God, the essence of motion, gave them a part of His own being to bring them to life. This is why the soul of every living creature is a fragment of the universal soul; none of them can truly perish; they simply change their form and transition into different bodies. Out of all these forms, the one most pleasing to God is that of man, as it most closely resembles His own perfections. When a man completely detaches from his senses and becomes fully absorbed in self-reflection, he then discovers divinity and becomes God himself. Among all the divine incarnations that God has taken throughout history, the most significant and solemn was when He appeared thirty centuries ago in Kachemire, under the name of Fot or Beddou, to teach the principles of self-denial and self-annihilation."
* This cosmogony of the Lamas, the Bonzes, and even the Bramins, as Henry Lord asserts, is literally that of the ancient Egyptians. The Egyptians, says Porphyry, call Kneph, intelligence, or efficient cause of the universe. They relate that this God vomited an egg, from which was produced another God named Phtha or Vulcan, (igneous principle or the sun) and they add, that this egg is the world. Euseb. Proep. Evang. p. 115. They represent, says the same author in another place, the God Kneph, or efficient cause, under the form of a man in deep blue (the color of the sky) having in his hand a sceptre, a belt round his body, and a small bonnet royal of light feathers on his head, to denote how very subtile and fugacious the idea of that being is. Upon which I shall observe that Kneph in Hebrew signifies a wing, a feather, and that this color of sky-blue is to be found in the majority of the Indian Gods, and is, under the name of Narayan, one of their most distinguishing epithets.
* The creation story of the Lamas, the Bonzes, and even the Bramins, as Henry Lord claims, is essentially the same as that of the ancient Egyptians. According to Porphyry, the Egyptians refer to Kneph as the intelligence, or the efficient cause of the universe. They say that this God brought forth an egg, from which another God named Phtha or Vulcan (the fiery principle or the sun) was born, and they add that this egg represents the world. Euseb. Proep. Evang. p. 115. They depict, the same author notes elsewhere, the God Kneph, or efficient cause, as a man in deep blue (the color of the sky) holding a scepter, with a belt around his waist and a small crown of light feathers on his head, to symbolize how subtle and fleeting the idea of that being is. It’s worth noting that Kneph in Hebrew means a wing or a feather, and that this sky-blue color appears in most Indian Gods, where it is a key feature under the name Narayan.
Then, pursuing the history of Fot, the Lama continued:
Then, continuing the story of Fot, the Lama went on:
"He was born from the right flank of a virgin of royal blood, who did not cease to be a virgin for having become a mother; that the king of the country, uneasy at his birth, wished to destroy him, and for this purpose ordered a massacre of all the males born at that period, that being saved by shepherds, Beddou lived in the desert till the age of thirty years, at which time he began his mission to enlighten men and cast out devils; that he performed a multitude of the most astonishing miracles; that he spent his life in fasting and severe penitence, and at his death, bequeathed to his disciples a book containing his doctrines."
"He was born from the side of a virgin of royal blood, who remained a virgin even after becoming a mother; the king of the land, anxious about his birth, wanted to kill him and ordered a massacre of all the boys born around that time. Saved by shepherds, Beddou lived in the desert until he was thirty, when he began his mission to enlighten people and cast out demons. He performed many incredible miracles, spent his life fasting and in deep penance, and at his death, left his disciples a book containing his teachings."
And the Lama began to read:
And the Lama started to read:
"He that leaveth his father and mother to follow me," says Fot, "becomes a perfect Samanean (a heavenly man).
"He who leaves his father and mother to follow me," says Fot, "becomes a perfect Samanean (a heavenly person)."
"He that practices my precepts to the fourth degree of perfection, acquires the faculty of flying in the air, of moving heaven and earth, of prolonging or shortening his life (rising from the dead).
"Whoever follows my teachings to the highest level will gain the ability to fly, control the elements, and extend or shorten their lifespan (even coming back from the dead)."
"The Samanean despises riches, and uses only what is strictly necessary; he mortifies his body, silences his passions, desires nothing, forms no attachments, meditates my doctrines without ceasing, endures injuries with patience, and bears no malice to his neighbor.
"The Samanean despises wealth and only uses what is absolutely necessary; he disciplines his body, controls his emotions, desires nothing, forms no attachments, continuously reflects on my teachings, takes injuries with patience, and holds no grudges against his neighbor."
"Heaven and earth shall perish," says Fot: "despise therefore your bodies, which are composed of the four perishable elements, and think only of your immortal soul.
"Heaven and earth will come to an end," says Fot: "so disregard your bodies, which are made up of the four temporary elements, and focus only on your immortal soul."
"Listen not to the flesh: fear and sorrow spring from the passions: stifle the passions and you destroy fear and sorrow.
"Don't listen to the flesh: fear and sadness come from your desires: suppress the desires and you eliminate fear and sadness."
"Whoever dies without having embraced my religion," says Fot, "returns among men, until he embraces it."
"Anyone who dies without accepting my religion," says Fot, "comes back among people until they do."
The Lama was going on with his reading, when the Christians interrupted him, crying out that this was their own religion adulterated—that Fot was no other than Jesus himself disfigured, and that the Lamas were the Nestorians and the Manicheans disguised and bastardized.*
The Lama was continuing his reading when the Christians interrupted him, shouting that this was their own religion distorted—that Fot was none other than Jesus himself altered, and that the Lamas were the Nestorians and the Manicheans disguised and corrupted.*
* This is asserted by our missionaries, and among others by Georgi in his unfinished work of the Thibetan alphabet: but if it can be proved that the Manicheans were but plagiarists, and the ignorant echo of a doctrine that existed fifteen hundred years before them, what becomes of the declarations of Georgi? See upon this subject, Beausob. Hist. du Manicheisme.
* Our missionaries, including Georgi in his unfinished work on the Tibetan alphabet, claim this. But if we can show that the Manicheans were just copying and mindlessly repeating a doctrine that existed fifteen hundred years before them, what happens to Georgi's statements? For more on this topic, see Beausob. Hist. du Manicheisme.
But the Lama, supported by the Chamans, Bonzes, Gonnis, Talapoins of Siam, of Ceylon, of Japan, and of China, proved to the Christians, even from their own authors, that the doctrine of the Samaneans was known through the East more than a thousand years before the Christian era; that their name was cited before the time of Alexander, and that Boutta, or Beddou, was known before Jesus.*
But the Lama, backed by the Chamans, Bonzes, Gonnis, and Talapoins from Siam, Ceylon, Japan, and China, showed the Christians, even using their own sources, that the teachings of the Samaneans were recognized throughout the East more than a thousand years before the Christian era; that their name was mentioned before Alexander's time, and that Boutta, or Beddou, was known before Jesus.*
* The eastern writers in general agree in placing the birth of Beddou 1027 years before Jesus Christ, which makes him the contemporary of Zoroaster, with whom, in my opinion, they confound him. It is certain that his doctrine notoriously existed at that epoch; it is found entire in that of Orpheus, Pythagoras, and the Indian gymnosophists. But the gymnosophists are cited at the time of Alexander as an ancient sect already divided into Brachmans and Samaneans. See Bardesanes en Saint Jerome, Epitre a Jovien. Pythagoras lived in the ninth century before Jesus Christ; See chronology of the twelve ages; and Orpheus is of still greater antiquity. If, as is the case, the doctrine of Pythagoras and that of Orpheus are of Egyptian origin, that of Beddou goes back to the common source; and in reality the Egyptian priests recite, that Hermes as he was dying said: "I have hitherto lived an exile from my country, to which I now return. Weep not for me, I ascend to the celestial abode where each of you will follow in his turn: there God is: this life is only death."—Chalcidius in Thinaeum. Such was the profession of faith of the Samaneans, the sectaries of Orpheus, and the Pythagoreans. Farther, Hermes is no other than Beddou himself; for among the Indians, Chinese, Lamas, etc., the planet Mercury and the corresponding day of the week (Wednesday) bear the name of Beddou, and this accounts for his being placed in the rank of mythological beings, and discovers the illusion of his pretended existence as a man; since it is evident that Mercury was not a human being, but the Genius or Decan, who, placed at the summer solstice, opened the Egyptian year; hence his attributes taken from the constellation Syrius, and his name of Anubis, as well as that of Esculapius, having the figure of a man and the head of a dog: hence his serpent, which is the Hydra, emblem of the Nile (Hydor, humidity); and from this serpent he seems to have derived his name of Hermes, as Remes (with a schin) in the oriental languages, signifies serpent. Now Beddou and Hermes being the same names, it is manifest of what antiquity is the system ascribed to the former. As to the name of Samanean, it is precisely that of Chaman, still preserved in Tartary, China, and India. The interpretation given to it is, man of the woods, a hermit mortifying the flesh, such being the characteristic of this sect; but its literal meaning is, celestial (Samaoui) and explains the system of those who are called by it.—The system is the same as that of the sectaries of Orpheus, of the Essenians, of the ancient Anchorets of Persia, and the whole eastern country. See Porphyry, de Abstin. Animal. These celestial and penitent men carried in India their insanity to such an extreme as to wish not to touch the earth, and they accordingly lived in cages suspended from the trees, where the people, whose admiration was not less absurd, brought them provisions. During the night there were frequent robberies, rapes and murders, and it was at length discovered that they were committed by those men, who, descending from their cages, thus indemnified themselves for their restraint during the day. The Bramins, their rivals, embraced the opportunity of exterminating them; and from that time their name in India has been synonymous with hypocrite. See Hist. de la Chine, in 5 vols. quarto, at the note page 30; Hist. de Huns, 2 vols. and preface to the Ezour-Vedam.
* Eastern writers generally agree that Beddou was born 1027 years before Jesus Christ, which places him as a contemporary of Zoroaster, with whom I believe they confuse him. It’s clear that his teachings were known at that time; they are fully reflected in those of Orpheus, Pythagoras, and the Indian gymnosophists. The gymnosophists are mentioned during Alexander's time as an ancient sect already divided into Brachmans and Samaneans. See Bardesanes in Saint Jerome, Letter to Jovian. Pythagoras lived in the ninth century before Jesus Christ; see the chronology of the twelve ages; and Orpheus dates back even further. If, as is the case, the teachings of Pythagoras and Orpheus have Egyptian roots, then Beddou's doctrine also traces back to that common origin; indeed, the Egyptian priests recount that Hermes, as he was dying, said: "I have lived as an exile from my homeland, to which I now return. Don’t weep for me; I ascend to the heavenly realm where each of you will follow in your turn: there is God; this life is merely death."—Chalcidius in Thinaeum. This was the belief of the Samaneans, followers of Orpheus, and Pythagoreans. Furthermore, Hermes is none other than Beddou himself; among the Indians, Chinese, Lamas, etc., the planet Mercury and its corresponding day of the week (Wednesday) are called Beddou, which explains why he is regarded as a mythological figure and reveals the illusion surrounding his supposed existence as a human; since it is clear that Mercury was not a human being, but rather the Genius or Decan, who, placed at the summer solstice, initiated the Egyptian year; hence his traits linked to the constellation Sirius, and his names Anubis and Esculapius, depicted as a man with a dog's head: thus his serpent, which is the Hydra, symbol of the Nile (Hydor, moisture); and from this serpent, he seems to have gotten the name Hermes, as Remes (with a schin) means serpent in eastern languages. Now that Beddou and Hermes are equivalent names, it’s evident how ancient the system attributed to the former is. Regarding the name Samanean, it is directly related to Chaman, still used in Tartary, China, and India. The interpretation is "man of the woods," a hermit practicing self-denial, which is characteristic of this sect; but its literal meaning is "celestial" (Samaoui), explaining the beliefs of those who bear the name.—The system is the same as that of the followers of Orpheus, the Essenes, the ancient Anchorets of Persia, and the entire eastern region. See Porphyry, on Abstaining from Animal Food. These celestial and penitent individuals took their extremism in India so far that they refused to touch the ground, living instead in cages suspended from trees, where admirers, whose admiration was no less absurd, would bring them food. At night, there were frequent robberies, assaults, and murders, and it was eventually revealed that these were committed by those same men, who would descend from their cages to compensate for their restraint during the day. The Bramins, their rivals, seized the opportunity to eradicate them; since then, in India, their name has become synonymous with hypocrite. See History of China, in 5 volumes, quarto, at note page 30; History of the Huns, 2 volumes and the preface to the Ezour-Vedam.
Then, retorting the pretensions of the Christians against themselves: "Prove to us," said the Lama, "that you are not Samaneans degenerated, and that the man you make the author of your sect is not Fot himself disguised. Prove to us by historical facts that he even existed at the epoch you pretend; for, it being destitute of authentic testimony,* we absolutely deny it; and we maintain that your very gospels are only the books of some Mithriacs of Persia, and the Essenians of Syria, who were a branch of reformed Samaneans."**
Then, turning the tables on the Christians and their claims: "Prove to us," said the Lama, "that you aren't just corrupted Samaneans and that the person you claim as the founder of your faith isn't actually Fot in disguise. Provide us with historical evidence that he even existed during the time you say; since there's no reliable testimony,* we completely deny it. We assert that your gospels are merely the writings of some Mithraists from Persia and the Essenes from Syria, who were a reformed offshoot of the Samaneans."**
* There are absolutely no other monuments of the existence of Jesus Christ as a human being, than a passage in Josephus (Antiq. Jud. lib. 18, c.3,) a single phrase in Tacitus (Annal. lib. 15, c. 44), and the Gospels. But the passage in Josephus is unanimously acknowledged to be apocryphal, and to have been interpolated towards the close of the third century, (See Trad. de joseph, par M. Gillet); and that of Tacitus in so vague and so evidently taken from the deposition of the Christians before the tribunals, that it may be ranked in the class of evangelical records. It remains to enquire of what authority are these records. "All the world knows," says Faustus, who, though a Manichean, was one of the most learned men of the third century, "All the world knows that the gospels were neither written by Jesus Christ, nor his apostles, but by certain unknown persons, who rightly judging that they should not obtain belief respecting things which they had not seen, placed at the head of their recitals the names of contemporary apostles." See Beausob. vol. i. and Hist. des Apologistes de la Relig. Chret. par Burigni, a sagacious writer, who has demonstrated the absolute uncertainty of those foundations of the Christian religion; so that the existence of Jesus is no better proved than that of Osiris and Hercules, or that of Fot or Beddou, with whom, says M. de Guignes, the Chinese continually confound him, for they never call Jesus by any other name than Fot. Hist. de Huns. ** That is to say, from the pious romances formed out of the sacred legends of the mysteries of Mithra, Ceres, Isis, etc., from whence are equally derived the books of the Hindoos and the Bonzes. Our missionaries have long remarked a striking resemblance between those books and the gospels. M. Wilkins expressly mentions it in a note in the Bhagvat Geeta. All agree that Krisna, Fot, and Jesus have the same characteristic features: but religious prejudice has stood in the way of drawing from this circumstance the proper and natural inference. To time and reason must it be left to display the truth.
* There are absolutely no other monuments confirming the existence of Jesus Christ as a human being, apart from a passage in Josephus (Antiq. Jud. lib. 18, c.3), a single phrase in Tacitus (Annal. lib. 15, c. 44), and the Gospels. However, the passage in Josephus is widely acknowledged to be apocryphal and was likely added towards the end of the third century (See Trad. de joseph, par M. Gillet); and Tacitus's reference is so vague and evidently based on the testimony of Christians before the courts that it can be classified among evangelical records. It remains to question the authority of these records. "Everyone knows," says Faustus, who, despite being a Manichean, was one of the most knowledgeable men of the third century, "Everyone knows that the gospels were neither written by Jesus Christ nor his apostles, but by certain unknown individuals who, realizing they wouldn't gain credibility for things they hadn’t witnessed, attributed their writings to named contemporary apostles." See Beausob. vol. i. and Hist. des Apologistes de la Relig. Chret. par Burigni, a sharp-witted writer who has shown the absolute uncertainty of those foundations of the Christian religion; thus, the existence of Jesus is no more substantiated than that of Osiris and Hercules, or that of Fot or Beddou, with whom, says M. de Guignes, the Chinese often confuse him, as they never refer to Jesus by any other name than Fot. Hist. de Huns. ** In other words, from the pious tales formed out of the sacred legends of the mysteries of Mithra, Ceres, Isis, etc., from which the texts of the Hindoos and the Bonzes are also derived. Our missionaries have long noted a striking similarity between those texts and the gospels. M. Wilkins specifically mentions this in a note in the Bhagvat Geeta. Everyone agrees that Krisna, Fot, and Jesus share the same key features: but religious bias has prevented the drawing of the appropriate and natural conclusion from this fact. It must be left to time and reason to reveal the truth.
At these words, the Christians set up a general cry, and a new dispute was about to begin; when a number of Chinese Chamans, and Talapoins of Siam, came forward and said that they would settle the whole controversy. And one of them speaking for the whole exclaimed: "It is time to put an end to these frivolous contests by drawing aside the veil from the interior doctrine that Fot himself revealed to his disciples on his death bed.*
At these words, the Christians raised a loud protest, and a new argument was about to start; when a group of Chinese shamans and Talapoins from Siam stepped forward and said they would resolve the entire debate. One of them, speaking on behalf of everyone, exclaimed: "It’s time to end these pointless arguments by revealing the core teachings that Fot himself shared with his disciples on his deathbed."
* The Budsoists have two doctrines, the one public and ostensible, the other interior and secret, precisely like the Egyptian priests. It may be asked, why this distinction? It is, that as the public doctrine recommends offerings, expiations, endowments, etc., the priests find their profit in preaching it to the people; whereas the other, teaching the vanity of worldly things, and attended with no lucre, it is thought proper to make it known only to adepts. Can the teachers and followers of this religion be better classed than under the heads of knavery and credulity?
* The Budsoists have two sets of beliefs: one that's public and obvious, and the other that's private and secret, much like the Egyptian priests. One might wonder why this difference exists. It's because the public belief encourages offerings, atonements, donations, and so on; the priests benefit from preaching this to the masses. On the other hand, the private belief, which teaches the emptiness of worldly pursuits and doesn't offer any profit, is only shared with those who are truly initiated. Can the leaders and followers of this religion really be categorized any better than as being dishonest and gullible?
"All these theological opinions," continued he, "are but chimeras. All the stories of the nature of the gods, of their actions and their lives, are but allegories and mythological emblems, under which are enveloped ingenious ideas of morals, and the knowledge of the operations of nature in the action of the elements and the movement of the planets.
"All these theological views," he continued, "are just fantasies. All the tales about the nature of the gods, their actions and lives, are merely allegories and mythological symbols, under which clever ideas about morality and the understanding of natural processes through the movement of the elements and the planets are hidden."
"The truth is, that all is reduced to nothing—that all is illusion, appearance, dream; that the moral metempsychosis is only the figurative sense of the physical metempsychosis, or the successive movement of the elements of bodies which perish not, but which, having composed one body, pass when that is dissolved, into other mediums and form other combinations. The soul is but the vital principle which results from the properties of matter, and from the action of the elements in those bodies where they create a spontaneous movement. To suppose that this product of the play of the organs, born with them, matured with them, and which sleeps with them, can subsist when they cease, is the romance of a wandering imagination, perhaps agreeable enough, but really chimerical.
"The truth is, everything boils down to nothing—everything is an illusion, an appearance, a dream; the moral rebirth is just a symbolic interpretation of the physical rebirth, or the continuous movement of the elements of bodies that don’t truly perish. Instead, they break down into different mediums and create new combinations when one body dissolves. The soul is simply the life force that comes from the properties of matter and the interactions of the elements in those bodies where they generate spontaneous movement. To think that this outcome of the functioning organs, which exists with them, develops with them, and rests with them, can continue to exist after they stop is just a fanciful idea, maybe pleasant enough, but ultimately unrealistic."
"God itself is nothing more than the moving principle, the occult force inherent in all beings—the sum of their laws and properties—the animating principle; in a word, the soul of the universe; which on account of the infinite variety of its connections and its operations, sometimes simple, sometimes multiple, sometimes active, sometimes passive, has always presented to the human mind an unsolvable enigma. All that man can comprehend with certainty is, that matter does not perish; that it possesses essentially those properties by which the world is held together like a living and organized being; that the knowledge of these laws with respect to man is what constitutes wisdom; that virtue and merit consist in their observance; and evil, sin, and vice, in the ignorance and violation of them; that happiness and misery result from these by the same necessity which makes heavy bodies descend and light ones rise, and by a fatality of causes and effects, whose chain extends from the smallest atom to the greatest of the heavenly bodies."*
"God is just the driving force, the hidden energy present in all beings—the totality of their laws and properties—the life force; in short, the soul of the universe. Because of the endless variety of its connections and actions, sometimes simple, sometimes complex, sometimes active, sometimes passive, it has always posed an unsolvable puzzle to the human mind. All that we can understand for sure is that matter does not disappear; it inherently has the properties that hold the world together like a living, organized entity; that understanding these laws is what defines wisdom; that virtue and merit come from following them; and that evil, sin, and vice stem from ignorance and breaking them; that happiness and misery arise from these in the same way that heavy objects fall and light ones rise, and through an unbroken chain of causes and effects that stretches from the tiniest atom to the largest celestial bodies."*
* These are the very expressions of La Loubre, in his description of the kingdom of Siam and the theology of the Bronzes. Their dogmas, compared with those of the ancient philosophers of Greece and Italy, give a complete representation of the whole system of the Stoics and Epicureans, mixed with astrological superstitious, and some traits of Pythagorism.
* These are exactly the expressions of La Loubre in his description of the kingdom of Siam and the theology of the Bronzes. Their beliefs, when compared to those of the ancient philosophers from Greece and Italy, provide a full picture of the entire system of the Stoics and Epicureans, blended with astrological superstitions and some aspects of Pythagorean philosophy.
At these words, a crowd of theologians of every sect cried out that this doctrine was materialism, and that those who profess it were impious atheists, enemies to God and man, who must be exterminated. "Very well," replied the Chamans, "suppose we are in error, which is not impossible, since the first attribute of the human mind is to be subject to illusion; but what right have you to take away from men like yourselves, the life which Heaven has given them? If Heaven holds us guilty and in abhorrence, why does it impart to us the same blessings as to you? And if it treats us with forbearance, what authority have you to be less indulgent? Pious men! who speak of God with so much certainty and confidence, be so good as to tell us what it is; give us to comprehend what those abstract and metaphysical beings are, which you call God and soul, substance without matter, existence without body, life without organs or sensation. If you know those beings by your senses or their reflections, render them in like manner perceptible to us; or if you speak of them on testimony and tradition, show us a uniform account, and give a determinate basis to our creed."
At these words, a group of theologians from every faith shouted that this belief was materialism, and that anyone who held it were godless atheists, enemies of God and humanity, who needed to be eliminated. "Alright," replied the Chamans, "let's say we’re wrong, which isn’t impossible since the human mind is often deceived; but what right do you have to take away the lives of people like you, lives that Heaven has given them? If Heaven sees us as guilty and loathsome, why does it grant us the same blessings as it does to you? And if it shows us mercy, what gives you the right to be less forgiving? Pious people! Who speak of God with such certainty and confidence, please tell us what it is; help us understand what those abstract and metaphysical entities are, which you call God and soul, substance without matter, existence without a body, life without organs or sensation. If you perceive these entities through your senses or their reflections, make them equally clear to us; or if you talk about them based on testimony and tradition, show us a consistent narrative, and provide a solid foundation for our beliefs."
There now arose among the theologians a great controversy respecting God and his nature, his manner of acting, and of manifesting himself; on the nature of the soul and its union with the body; whether it exists before the organs, or only after they are formed; on the future life, and the other world. And every sect, every school, every individual, differing on all these points, and each assigning plausible reasons, and respectable though opposite authorities for his opinion, they fell into an inextricable labyrinth of contradictions.
There came a big debate among theologians about God and his nature, how he acts, and how he reveals himself; about the soul and its connection to the body; whether it exists before the body is formed or only after; about the afterlife and the next world. Each sect, school, and individual disagreed on all these issues, providing convincing reasons and respected, yet conflicting, authorities to support their views, leading them into a complicated maze of contradictions.
Then the legislator, having commanded silence and recalled the dispute to its true object, said: "Chiefs and instructors of nations; you came together in search of truth. At first, every one of you, thinking he possessed it, demanded of the others an implicit faith; but perceiving the contrariety of your opinions, you found it necessary to submit them to a common rule of evidence, and to bring them to one general term of comparison; and you agreed that each should exhibit the proofs of his doctrine. You began by alleging facts; but each religion and every sect, being equally furnished with miracles and martyrs, each producing an equal number of witnesses, and offering to support them by a voluntary death, the balance on this first point, by right of parity, remained equal.
Then the legislator, having called for silence and refocused the discussion on its true purpose, said: "Leaders and teachers of nations; you gathered here in search of truth. At first, each of you believed you had it and demanded that the others accept it without question; but realizing the differences in your views, you saw the need to submit them to a common standard of evidence and to find a single term for comparison. You agreed that everyone should present their proof for their beliefs. You started by citing facts; however, each religion and sect had its own miracles and martyrs, each providing an equal number of witnesses and offering to back them up with voluntary sacrifice, so the balance on this initial point, by right of equality, remained even.
"You then passed to the trial of reasoning; but the same arguments applying equally to contrary positions—the same assertions, equally gratuitous, being advanced and repelled with equal force, and all having an equal right to refuse his assent, nothing was demonstrated. What is more, the confrontation of your systems has brought up more and extraordinary difficulties; for amid the apparent or adventitious diversities, you have discovered a fundamental resemblance, a common groundwork; and each of you pretending to be the inventor, and first depositary, have taxed each other with adulterations and plagiarisms; and thence arises a difficult question concerning the transmission of religious ideas from people to people.
You then moved on to the trial of reasoning; however, the same arguments applied equally to opposing positions—the same claims, equally unfounded, were put forward and rejected with equal intensity, and all had an equal right to withdraw their agreement, so nothing was proven. Furthermore, your systems’ confrontation has revealed even more extraordinary challenges; for amidst the apparent or incidental differences, you found a fundamental similarity, a shared foundation; and each of you claiming to be the original creator and primary holder have accused each other of distortions and theft; and this leads to a tough question about how religious ideas are passed from one group to another.
"Finally, to complete your embarrassment: when you endeavored to explain your doctrines to each other, they appeared confused and foreign, even to their adherents; they were founded on ideas inaccessible to your senses; you consequently had no means of judging of them, and you confessed yourselves in this respect to be only the echoes of your fathers. Hence follows this other question: how came they to the knowledge of your fathers, who themselves had no other means than you to conceive them? So that, on the one hand, the succession of these ideas being unknown, and on the other, their origin and existence being a mystery, all the edifice of your religious opinions becomes a complicated problem of metaphysics and history.
"Finally, to add to your embarrassment: when you tried to explain your beliefs to each other, they seemed confusing and strange, even to those who followed them; they were based on ideas that were beyond your senses; as a result, you had no way to judge them, and you admitted that, in this regard, you were merely repeating what your ancestors said. This leads to another question: how did your ancestors come to know these ideas when they had no better means to understand them than you do? Thus, with the source of these ideas being unknown on one hand, and their origin and existence being a mystery on the other, the entire structure of your religious beliefs turns into a complicated problem of metaphysics and history."
"Since, however, these opinions, extraordinary as they may be, must have had some origin; since even the most abstract and fantastical ideas have some physical model, it may be useful to recur to this origin, and discover this model—in a word, to find out from what source the human understanding has drawn these ideas, at present so obscure, of God, of the soul, of all immaterial beings, which make the basis of so many systems; to unfold the filiation which they have followed, and the alterations which they have undergone in their transmissions and ramifications. If, then, there are any persons present who have made a study of these objects, let them come forward, and endeavor, in the face of nations, to dissipate the obscurity in which their opinions have so long remained."
"However, since these opinions, as unusual as they might be, must have come from somewhere; since even the most abstract and fanciful ideas have some physical counterpart, it might be helpful to trace this origin and identify this model—in short, to find out where human understanding has drawn these currently obscure ideas about God, the soul, and all immaterial beings, which form the foundation of so many theories; to reveal the lineage they have followed and the changes they have gone through in their transmission and branching out. So, if there are any individuals here who have studied these topics, let them step forward and try, in front of everyone, to clarify the confusion that has surrounded their opinions for so long."
CHAPTER XXII.
ORIGIN AND FILIATION OF RELIGIOUS IDEAS.
At these words, a new group, formed in an instant by men from various standards, but not distinguished by any, came forward into the circle; and one of them spoke in the name of the whole:
At these words, a new group, quickly formed by men from different backgrounds, but not identified by any specific labels, stepped forward into the circle; and one of them spoke for everyone:
"Delegates, friends of evidence and virtue! It is not surprising that the subject in question should be enveloped in so many clouds, since, besides its inherent difficulties, thought itself has always been encumbered with superadded obstacles peculiar to this study, where all free enquiry and discussion have been interdicted by the intolerance of every system. But now that our views are permitted to expand, we will expose to open day, and submit to the judgment of nations, that which unprejudiced minds, after long researches, have found to be the most reasonable; and we do this, not with the pretension of imposing a new creed, but with the hope of provoking new lights, and obtaining better information.
"Delegates, friends of evidence and virtue! It's no surprise that this topic is surrounded by so much confusion, because along with its inherent challenges, independent thought has always faced additional hurdles unique to this field, where free inquiry and discussion have been stifled by the intolerance of various systems. But now that we are allowed to broaden our perspectives, we will bring to light and present to the judgment of nations what open-minded individuals, after extensive research, have discovered to be the most reasonable. We do this not with the intention of imposing a new belief system, but with the hope of inspiring new ideas and gaining better information."
"Doctors and instructors of nations! You know what thick darkness covers the nature, the origin, the history of the dogmas which you teach. Imposed by authority, inculcated by education, and maintained by example, they pass from age to age, and strengthen their empire from habit and inattention. But if man, enlightened by reflection and experience, brings to mature examination the prejudices of his childhood, he soon discovers a multitude of incongruities and contradictions which awaken his sagacity and excite his reasoning powers.
"Doctors and teachers of nations! You know how thick darkness surrounds the nature, origin, and history of the beliefs you teach. Imposed by authority, reinforced through education, and upheld by example, they pass from generation to generation, and their hold is strengthened by habit and lack of attention. However, when a person, enlightened by thought and experience, takes a serious look at the prejudices of their childhood, they quickly uncover a host of inconsistencies and contradictions that stimulate their insight and spark their reasoning abilities."
"At first, remarking the diversity and opposition of the creeds which divide the nations, he takes courage to question the infallibility which each of them claims, and arming himself with their reciprocal pretensions, he conceives that his senses and his reason, derived immediately from God, are a law not less holy, a guide not less sure, than the mediate and contradictory codes of the prophets.
"At first, noticing the variety and conflict of the beliefs that separate the nations, he bravely decides to challenge the infallibility that each one claims. Equipping himself with their conflicting assertions, he believes that his senses and his reasoning, which come directly from God, are just as sacred and just as reliable as the indirect and contradictory teachings of the prophets."
"If he then examines the texture of these codes themselves, he observes that their laws, pretended to be divine, that is, immutable and eternal, have arisen from circumstances of times, places, and persons; that they have issued one from the other, in a kind of genealogical order, borrowing from each other reciprocally a common and similar fund of ideas, which every lawgiver modifies according to his fancy.
"If he then looks at the nature of these codes themselves, he sees that the laws, claimed to be divine, meaning unchanging and everlasting, actually come from specific times, places, and people; that they have developed from one another in a sort of family tree, each borrowing from the others a common and similar set of ideas, which every lawmaker adjusts according to his own preferences."
"If he ascends to the source of these ideas, he finds it involved in the night of time, in the infancy of nations, even to the origin of the world, to which they claim alliance; and there, placed in the darkness of chaos, in the empire of fables and traditions, they present themselves, accompanied with a state of things so full of prodigies, that it seems to forbid all access to the judgment: but this state itself excites a first effort of reason, which resolves the difficulty; for if the prodigies, found in the theological systems, have really existed—if, for instance, the metamorphoses, the apparitions, the conversations with one or many gods, recorded in the books of the Indians, the Hebrews, the Parses, are historical events, he must agree that nature in those times was totally different from what it is at present; that the present race of men are quite another species from those who then existed; and, therefore, he ought not to trouble his head about them.
"If he looks back to the origin of these ideas, he finds them tangled in the darkness of time, at the early stages of nations, even to the beginning of the world, which they claim connection to; and there, immersed in the chaos, in the realm of myths and traditions, they emerge, accompanied by a state of affairs so full of wonders that it seems to block any judgment. But this very state sparks an initial effort of reason that resolves the issue; for if the wonders found in religious systems actually occurred—if, for example, the transformations, appearances, and conversations with one or multiple gods recorded in the texts of the Indians, the Hebrews, the Parsis, are historical events, he has to accept that nature at that time was completely different from what it is now; that the current generation of humans is a totally different species from those who existed then; and therefore, he shouldn't worry about them."
"If, on the contrary, these miraculous events have really not existed in the physical order of things, then he readily conceives that they are creatures of the human intellect; and this faculty being still capable of the most fantastical combinations, explains at once the phenomenon of these monsters in history. It only remains, then, to find how and wherefore they have been formed in the imagination. Now, if we examine with care the subjects of these intellectual creations, analyze the ideas which they combine and associate, and carefully weigh all the circumstances which they allege, we shall find that this first obscure and incredible state of things is explained by the laws of nature. We find that these stories of a fabulous kind have a figurative sense different from the apparent one; that these events, pretended to be marvellous, are simple and physical facts, which, being misconceived or misrepresented, have been disfigured by accidental causes dependent on the human mind, by the confusion of signs employed to represent the ideas, the want of precision in words, permanence in language, and perfection in writing; we find that these gods, for instance, who display such singular characters in every system, are only the physical agents of nature, the elements, the winds, the stars, and the meteors, which have been personified by the necessary mechanism of language and of the human understanding; that their lives, their manners, their actions, are only their mechanical operations and connections; and that all their pretended history is only the description of these phenomena, formed by the first naturalists who observed them, and misconceived by the vulgar who did not understand them, or by succeeding generations who forgot them. In a word, all the theological dogmas on the origin of the world, the nature of God, the revelation of his laws, the manifestation of his person, are known to be only the recital of astronomical facts, only figurative and emblematical accounts of the motion of the heavenly bodies. We are convinced that the very idea of a God, that idea at present so obscure, is, in its first origin, nothing but that of the physical powers of the universe, considered sometimes as a plurality by reason of their agencies and phenomena, sometimes as one simple and only being by reason of the universality of the machine and the connection of its parts; so that the being called God has been sometimes the wind, the fire, the water, all the elements; sometimes the sun, the stars, the planets, and their influence; sometimes the matter of the visible world, the totality of the universe; sometimes abstract and metaphysical qualities, such as space, duration, motion, intelligence; and we everywhere see this conclusion, that the idea of God has not been a miraculous revelation of invisible beings, but a natural offspring of the human intellect—an operation of the mind, whose progress it has followed and whose revolutions it has undergone, in all the progress that has been made in the knowledge of the physical world and its agents.
"If, on the other hand, these miraculous events really didn’t happen in the physical world, he easily understands that they are products of human thought; and since this ability can still create the most fantastical combinations, it explains the phenomenon of these historical monsters. It only remains to figure out how and why they were formed in the imagination. Now, if we carefully examine the subjects of these intellectual creations, analyze the ideas they combine and associate, and weigh all the circumstances they claim, we will find that this initially unclear and unbelievable state of things can be explained by the laws of nature. We discover that these legendary stories have a figurative meaning different from their surface interpretation; that these supposedly marvelous events are actually simple physical facts, which, being misunderstood or misrepresented, have been distorted by random causes related to the human mind, such as the confusion of symbols used to express ideas, the lack of precision in language, the consistency of words, and the imperfections in writing. We find that these gods, for instance, who exhibit such unique characteristics in every system, are merely the physical forces of nature, like the elements, the winds, the stars, and meteors, which have been personified through the necessary mechanisms of language and human understanding; that their lives, behaviors, and actions are simply their mechanical processes and connections; and that their so-called histories are just descriptions of these phenomena, created by the early naturalists who observed them, and misinterpreted by the general public who didn’t understand them, or by later generations who forgot them. In short, all the theological beliefs about the origin of the world, the nature of God, the revelation of his laws, and the manifestation of his presence are known to be just recitals of astronomical facts, merely figurative and emblematic accounts of the movements of heavenly bodies. We are convinced that the very concept of a God, a notion that currently seems so obscure, is, at its core, nothing more than the physical forces of the universe, viewed sometimes as a plurality due to their actions and phenomena, and sometimes as a single, simple entity due to the universality of the system and how its parts connect; so that the being referred to as God has, at times, represented the wind, fire, water, all the elements; sometimes the sun, stars, planets, and their influence; sometimes the matter of the visible world, the entirety of the universe; and sometimes abstract and metaphysical qualities like space, time, motion, and intellect. Throughout, we see this conclusion: the idea of God has not been a miraculous revelation of invisible beings, but rather a natural product of human thought—an operation of the mind that has evolved alongside the advancements made in understanding the physical world and its forces."
"It is then in vain that nations attribute their religion to heavenly inspirations; it is in vain that their dogmas pretend to a primeval state of supernatural events: the original barbarity of the human race, attested by their own monuments,* belies these assertions at once. But there is one constant and indubitable fact which refutes beyond contradiction all these doubtful accounts of past ages. From this position, that man acquires and receives no ideas but through the medium of his senses,** it follows with certainty that every notion which claims to itself any other origin than that of sensation and experience, is the erroneous supposition of a posterior reasoning: now, it is sufficient to cast an eye upon the sacred systems of the origin of the world, and of the actions of the gods, to discover in every idea, in every word, the anticipation of an order of things which could not exist till a long time after. Reason, strengthened by these contradictions, rejecting everything that is not in the order of nature, and admitting no historical facts but those founded on probabilities, lays open its own system, and pronounces itself with assurance.
"It is pointless for nations to claim that their religion comes from divine inspiration; it’s pointless for their beliefs to suggest a fundamental state of supernatural occurrences. The primitive nature of humanity, confirmed by their own monuments,* contradicts these claims immediately. However, there is one undeniable fact that disproves all these questionable accounts of past times. From the understanding that humans gain and receive ideas only through their senses,** it follows that any notion that suggests it has another source besides sensation and experience is merely a mistaken conclusion drawn later. Now, just looking at the sacred narratives about the world's origin and the actions of the gods reveals that every idea and word reflects an expectation of a reality that couldn’t have existed until much later. Reason, supported by these contradictions, dismisses anything that doesn’t align with the natural order and accepts only historical facts based on probabilities, clearly presenting its own framework and asserting itself with confidence."
* It is the unanimous testimony of history, and even of legends, that the first human beings were every where savages, and that it was to civilize them, and teach them to make bread, that the Gods manifested themselves. ** The rock on which all the ancients have split, and which has occasioned all their errors, has been their supposing the idea of God to be innate and co-eternal with the soul; and hence all the reveries developed in Plato and Jamblicus. See the Timoeus, the Phedon, and De Mysteriis Egyptiorum, sect. I, c. 3.
* It’s the shared belief of history, and even of legends, that the very first humans were all savages, and that the Gods appeared to civilize them and teach them how to make bread. ** The mistake that all the ancients made, which led to many of their errors, was thinking that the idea of God is something innate and has always existed alongside the soul; this is the basis for all the theories put forth by Plato and Jamblicus. See the Timoeus, the Phedon, and De Mysteriis Egyptiorum, sect. I, c. 3.
"Before one nation had received from another nation dogmas already invented; before one generation had inherited ideas acquired by a preceding generation, none of these complicated systems could have existed in the world. The first men, being children of nature, anterior to all events, ignorant of all science, were born without any idea of the dogmas arising from scholastic disputes; of rites founded on the practice of arts not then known; of precepts framed after the development of passions; or of laws which suppose a language, a state of society not then in being; or of God, whose attributes all refer to physical objects, and his actions to a despotic state of government; or of the soul, or of any of those metaphysical beings, which we are told are not the objects of sense, and for which, however, there can be no other means of access to the understanding. To arrive at so many results, the necessary circle of preceding facts must have been observed; slow experience and repeated trials must have taught the rude man the use of his organs; the accumulated knowledge of successive generations must have invented and improved the means of living; and the mind, freed from the cares of the first wants of nature, must have raised itself to the complicated art of comparing ideas, of digesting arguments, and seizing abstract similitudes."
"Before one nation received pre-existing beliefs from another, and before one generation inherited ideas from the previous one, none of these complex systems could have existed in the world. The earliest humans, being natural beings, were unaware of past events and lacked any scientific knowledge. They were born without understanding the doctrines stemming from academic debates, rituals based on skills that had not yet been developed, principles formed after passions had evolved, or laws that required a language and a society that did not yet exist. They had no concept of God, whose attributes relate to physical objects, and whose actions connect to a tyrannical government; nor did they comprehend the soul or any of those metaphysical entities that we are told cannot be perceived through the senses, yet for which there is no alternative way to grasp. For such conclusions to be reached, a necessary series of prior events must have been experienced; gradual learning and repeated attempts must have taught early humans how to utilize their faculties; the collective knowledge of successive generations must have created and enhanced the ways of living; and the mind, liberated from the basic needs of survival, must have evolved to the intricate skill of comparing ideas, analyzing arguments, and understanding abstract similarities."
I. Origin of the idea of God: Worship of the elements and of the physical powers of nature.
I. Origin of the idea of God: Worship of the elements and the natural forces.
"It was not till after having overcome these obstacles, and gone through a long career in the night of history, that man, reflecting on his condition, began to perceive that he was subjected to forces superior to his own, and independent of his will. The sun enlightened and warmed him, the fire burned him, the thunder terrified him, the wind beat upon him, the water overwhelmed him. All beings acted upon him powerfully and irresistibly. He sustained this action for a long time, like a machine, without enquiring the cause; but the moment he began his enquiries, he fell into astonishment; and, passing from the surprise of his first reflections to the reverie of curiosity, he began a chain of reasoning.
"It wasn't until after overcoming these challenges and going through a long journey in the darkness of history that humanity, reflecting on its condition, started to realize that it was subjected to forces greater than itself and beyond its control. The sun provided light and warmth, fire inflicted pain, thunder instilled fear, the wind battered, and water overwhelmed. All beings exerted powerful and irresistible influence over him. He endured this for a long time, like a machine, without questioning the reason; but the moment he started to ask questions, he was filled with wonder. Transitioning from the shock of his initial thoughts to a daydream of curiosity, he began a process of reasoning."
"First, considering the action of the elements on him, he conceived an idea of weakness and subjection on his part, and of power and domination on theirs; and this idea of power was the primitive and fundamental type of every idea of God.
"First, thinking about how the elements affected him, he developed a sense of weakness and submission on his side, and power and control on theirs; and this notion of power became the original and basic model for every idea of God."
"Secondly, the action of these natural existences excited in him sensations of pleasure or pain, of good or evil; and by a natural effect of his organization, he conceived for them love or aversion; he desired or dreaded their presence; and fear or hope gave rise to the first idea of religion.
"Secondly, the actions of these natural beings stirred in him feelings of pleasure or pain, good or evil; and naturally, because of how he was made, he felt love or dislike for them; he wanted or feared their presence; and fear or hope led to the initial concept of religion."
"Then, judging everything by comparison, and remarking in these beings a spontaneous movement like his own, he supposed this movement directed by a will,—an intelligence of the nature of his own; and hence, by induction, he formed a new reasoning. Having experienced that certain practices towards his fellow creatures had the effect to modify their affections and direct their conduct to his advantage, he resorted to the same practices towards these powerful beings of the universe. He reasoned thus with himself: When my fellow creature, stronger than I, is disposed to do me injury, I abase myself before him, and my prayer has the art to calm him. I will pray to these powerful beings who strike me. I will supplicate the intelligences of the winds, of the stars, of the waters, and they will hear me. I will conjure them to avert the evil and give me the good that is at their disposal; I will move them by my tears, I will soften them by offerings, and I shall be happy.
"Then, comparing everything, and noticing that these beings had a spontaneous movement like his own, he thought this movement was guided by a will—an intelligence similar to his. From this, he formed a new line of reasoning. Having realized that certain actions toward his fellow beings influenced their feelings and led them to act in his favor, he decided to apply the same approach to these powerful beings of the universe. He reasoned like this: When a fellow creature, stronger than me, intends to harm me, I lower myself before them, and my plea has the ability to calm them. I will pray to these powerful beings that strike me. I will ask the intelligences of the winds, the stars, and the waters, and they will listen to me. I will appeal to them to shield me from harm and grant me the good that they can provide; I will move them with my tears, I will soften them with offerings, and I will be happy."
"Thus simple man, in the infancy of his reason, spoke to the sun and to the moon; he animated with his own understanding and passions the great agents of nature; he thought by vain sounds, and vain actions, to change their inflexible laws. Fatal error! He prayed the stone to ascend, the water to mount above its level, the mountains to remove, and substituting a fantastical world for the real one, he peopled it with imaginary beings, to the terror of his mind and the torment of his race.
"Thus, a simple man, in the early stages of his reasoning, talked to the sun and the moon; he filled the powerful forces of nature with his own understanding and emotions. He believed that by making pointless noises and performing meaningless actions, he could change their unyielding laws. What a grave mistake! He begged the stone to rise, the water to flow above its level, and the mountains to move, creating an imaginary world instead of accepting the real one, filling it with made-up beings, leading to the fear in his mind and the suffering of his people."
"In this manner the ideas of God and religion have sprung, like all others, from physical objects; they were produced in the mind of man from his sensations, from his wants, from the circumstances of his life, and the progressive state of his knowledge.
"In this way, the concepts of God and religion have emerged, like all other ideas, from physical objects; they were formed in the human mind through sensations, needs, life circumstances, and the gradual development of knowledge."
"Now, as the ideas of God had their first models in physical agents, it followed that God was at first varied and manifold, like the form under which he appeared to act. Every being was a Power, a Genius; and the first men conceived the universe filled with innumerable gods.
"Now, since people's ideas of God originated from physical elements, it made sense that God was initially seen as diverse and complex, just like the forms through which He seemed to operate. Every being was seen as a Force, a Genius; and the earliest humans imagined the universe brimming with countless gods."
"Again the ideas of God have been created by the affections of the human heart; they became necessarily divided into two classes, according to the sensations of pleasure or pain, love or hatred, which they inspired.
"Once more, the concept of God has been shaped by the emotions of the human heart; it has inevitably been categorized into two groups based on the feelings of pleasure or pain, love or hatred, that they evoke."
"The forces of nature, the gods and genii, were divided into beneficent and malignant, good and evil powers; and hence the universality of these two characters in all the systems of religion.
"The forces of nature, the gods and spirits, were categorized into good and bad, helpful and harmful powers; and that’s why these two themes are found in all religious systems."
"These ideas, analogous to the condition of their inventors, were for a long time confused and ill-digested. Savage men, wandering in the woods, beset with wants and destitute of resources, had not the leisure to combine principles and draw conclusions; affected with more evils than they found pleasures, their most habitual sentiment was that of fear, their theology terror; their worship was confined to a few salutations and offerings to beings whom they conceived as greedy and ferocious as themselves. In their state of equality and independence, no man offered himself as mediator between men and gods as insubordinate and poor as himself. No one having superfluities to give, there existed no parasite by the name of priest, no tribute by the name of victim, no empire by the name of altar. Their dogmas and their morals were the same thing, it was only self-preservation; and religion, that arbitrary idea, without influence on the mutual relations of men, was a vain homage rendered to the visible powers of nature.
"These ideas, similar to the state of their creators, were for a long time mixed up and poorly formed. Primitive people, wandering through the woods, struggling with needs and lacking resources, didn’t have the time to organize principles and reach conclusions; burdened by more troubles than pleasures, their most common feeling was fear, their beliefs rooted in terror. Their worship consisted of a few greetings and offerings to beings they thought were as greedy and fierce as they were. In their state of equality and freedom, no one took on the role of mediator between people and gods, as they were just as lowly and poor. With no one having excess to give, there were no parasites known as priests, no sacrifices called victims, and no authority known as altars. Their beliefs and morals were the same, focused solely on self-preservation; and religion, that arbitrary concept, had no real impact on how people related to each other, serving only as a shallow tribute to the visible forces of nature."
"Such was the necessary and original idea of God."
"That was the essential and original concept of God."
And the orator, addressing himself to the savage nations, continued:
And the speaker, turning to the wild nations, continued:
"We appeal to you, men who have received no foreign and factitious ideas; tell us, have you ever gone beyond what I have described? And you, learned doctors, we call you to witness; is not this the unanimous testimony of all ancient monuments?*
"We urge you, men who have not been influenced by outside and artificial ideas; tell us, have you ever experienced anything beyond what I have described? And you, knowledgeable doctors, we ask you to bear witness; is this not the consensus of all ancient monuments?*"
* It clearly results, says Plutarch, from the verses of Orpheus and the sacred books of the Egyptians and Phrygians, that the ancient theology, not only of the Greeks, but of all nations, was nothing more than a system of physics, a picture of the operations of nature, wrapped up in mysterious allegories and enigmatical symbols, in a manner that the ignorant multitude attended rather to their apparent than to their hidden meaning, and even in what they understood of the latter, supposed there to be something more deep than what they perceived. Fragment of a work of Plutarch now lost, quoted by Eusebius, Proepar. Evang. lib. 3, ch. 1, p. 83. The majority of philosophers, says Porphyry, and among others Haeremon (who lived in Egypt in the first age of Christianity), imagine there never to have been any other world than the one we see, and acknowledged no other Gods of all those recognized by the Egyptians, than such as are commonly called planets, signs of the Zodiac, and constellations; whose aspects, that is, rising and setting, are supposed to influence the fortunes of men; to which they add their divisions of the signs into decans and dispensers of time, whom they style lords of the ascendant, whose names, virtues in relieving distempers, rising, setting, and presages of future events, are the subjects of almanacs (for be it observed, that the Egyptian priests had almanacs the exact counterpart of Matthew Lansberg's); for when the priests affirmed that the sun was the architect of the universe, Chaeremon presently concludes that all their narratives respecting Isis and Osiris, together with their other sacred fables, referred in part to the planets, the phases of the moon, and the revolution of the sun, and in part to the stars of the daily and nightly hemispheres and the river Nile; in a word, in all cases to physical and natural existences and never to such as might be immaterial and incorporeal. . . . All these philosophers believe that the acts of our will and the motion of our bodies depend on those of the stars to which they are subjected, and they refer every thing to the laws of physical necessity, which they call destiny or Fatum, supposing a chain of causes and effects which binds, by I know not what connection, all beings together, from the meanest atom to the supremest power and primary influence of the Gods; so that, whether in their temples or in their idols, the only subject of worship is the power of destiny. Porphyr. Epist. ad Janebonem.
* Plutarch states that, according to the verses of Orpheus and the sacred texts of the Egyptians and Phrygians, the ancient theology—not only of the Greeks but of all civilizations—was essentially a system of physics, illustrating the workings of nature, presented in mysterious allegories and enigmatic symbols. The uneducated masses focused more on the apparent meaning than on the hidden ones, and even in their understanding of the latter, they thought there was something deeper than what they grasped. This is a fragment from a now-lost work of Plutarch, quoted by Eusebius, Proepar. Evang. lib. 3, ch. 1, p. 83. Most philosophers, Porphyry says, including Haeremon (who lived in Egypt during the early years of Christianity), believe that there has never been another world beyond the one we see. They only recognize the gods that the Egyptians did, which are generally the planets, the signs of the Zodiac, and constellations; their positions, such as when they rise and set, are thought to influence human fortunes. They also categorize these signs into decans and timekeepers, whom they call lords of the ascendant. The names and qualities related to easing ailments, their rising and setting, and omens of future events are the subjects of almanacs (it should be noted that the Egyptian priests had almanacs that precisely mirrored Matthew Lansberg's). When the priests claimed the sun was the architect of the universe, Chaeremon quickly concluded that all their stories about Isis and Osiris, along with their other sacred myths, partly referred to the planets, the moon's phases, the sun's motion, and also to the stars of the day and night skies and the Nile River; essentially, in every case, they pertained to physical and natural entities and never to anything immaterial or incorporeal. All these philosophers believe that our will and bodily movements are influenced by the stars to which they are subjected, and they attribute everything to the laws of physical necessity, which they call destiny or Fatum. They presume a chain of causes and effects that connects all beings—from the smallest atom to the highest power and primary influence of the gods—binding them together in an unknown way, so that, whether in their temples or in their idols, the only thing worshipped is the power of destiny. Porphyr. Epist. ad Janebonem.
II. Second system: Worship of the Stars, or Sabeism.
II. Second system: Worship of the Stars, or Sabeism.
"But those same monuments present us likewise a system more methodical and more complicated—that of the worship of all the stars; adored sometimes in their proper forms, sometimes under figurative emblems and symbols; and this worship was the effect of the knowledge men had acquired in physics, and was derived immediately from the first causes of the social state; that is, from the necessities and arts of the first degree, which are among the elements of society.
"But those same monuments also show us a more organized and complex system—the worship of all the stars; adored sometimes in their actual forms, sometimes through figurative emblems and symbols. This worship resulted from the knowledge people had gained in physics and came directly from the fundamental causes of the social order; that is, from the basic needs and skills that are among the elements of society."
"Indeed, as soon as men began to unite in society, it became necessary for them to multiply the means of subsistence, and consequently to attend to agriculture: agriculture, to be carried on with success, requires the observation and knowledge of the heavens. It was necessary to know the periodical return of the same operations of nature, and the same phenomena in the skies; indeed to go so far as to ascertain the duration and succession of the seasons and the months of the year. It was indispensable to know, in the first place, the course of the sun, who, in his zodiacal revolution, shows himself the supreme agent of the whole creation; then, of the moon, who, by her phases and periods, regulates and distributes time; then, of the stars, and even of the planets, which by their appearance and disappearance on the horizon and nocturnal hemisphere, marked the minutest divisions. Finally, it was necessary to form a whole system of astronomy,* or a calendar; and from these works there naturally followed a new manner of considering these predominant and governing powers. Having observed that the productions of the earth had a regular and constant relation with the heavenly bodies; that the rise, growth, and decline of each plant kept pace with the appearance, elevation, and declination of the same star or the same group of stars; in short, that the languor or activity of vegetation seemed to depend on celestial influences, men drew from thence an idea of action, of power, in those beings, superior to earthly bodies; and the stars, dispensing plenty or scarcity, became powers, genii,** gods, authors of good and evil.
"Indeed, as soon as people started to come together in society, it became necessary for them to increase their means of survival, and therefore to focus on farming. Successful farming requires an understanding of the skies. It was important to know the regular cycles of natural events and the phenomena in the sky; in fact, to determine the length and sequence of the seasons and months of the year. First, it was essential to track the sun, who, in his path through the zodiac, is the main force in all creation; next, to understand the moon, whose phases and cycles manage and measure time; then, to observe the stars, and even the planets, which, by their rising and setting in the sky, marked the smallest divisions of time. Ultimately, it was necessary to create an entire system of astronomy,* or a calendar; and from these observations emerged a new way of thinking about these powerful governing forces. Noticing that the products of the earth had a consistent relationship with the celestial bodies—that the rise, growth, and decline of each plant coincided with the appearance, rise, and fall of the same star or set of stars—and that the vigor or weakness of plants seemed linked to celestial influences, people developed a notion of action and power in these beings, which were superior to earthly entities; the stars, granting abundance or scarcity, became forces, spirits,** gods, creators of good and evil."
* It continues to be repeated every day, on the indirect authority of the book of Genesis, that astronomy was the invention of the children of Noah. It has been gravely said, that while wandering shepherds in the plains of Shinar, they employed their leisure in composing a planetary system: as if shepherds had occasion to know more than the polar star; and if necessity was not the sole motive of every invention! If the ancient shepherds were so studious and sagacious, how does it happen that the modern ones are so stupid, ignorant, and inattentive? And it is a fact that the Arabs of the desert know not so many as six constellations, and understand not a word of astronomy. ** It appears that by the word genius, the ancients denoted a quality, a generative power; for the following words, which are all of one family, convey this meaning: generare, genos, genesis, genus, gens.
* It's still often said nowadays, based on the book of Genesis, that astronomy was created by the descendants of Noah. People have seriously claimed that while they were wandering as herders in the plains of Shinar, they spent their free time developing a planetary system: as if shepherds needed to know more than the North Star, and as if necessity wasn’t the only reason behind every invention! If the ancient shepherds were so thoughtful and wise, then why are modern ones often seen as ignorant, clueless, and inattentive? In fact, the Arabs of the desert know less than six constellations and don't understand a thing about astronomy. ** It seems that the ancients used the word genius to mean a quality or generative power; the following words, all related, express this idea: generare, genos, genesis, genus, gens.
"As the state of society had already introduced a regular hierarchy of ranks, employments and conditions, men, continuing to reason by comparison, carried their new notions into their theology, and formed a complicated system of divinities by gradation of rank, in which the sun, as first god,* was a military chief or a political king: the moon was his wife and queen; the planets were servants, bearers of commands, messengers; and the multitude of stars were a nation, an army of heroes, genii, whose office was to govern the world under the orders of their chiefs. All the individuals had names, functions, attributes, drawn from their relations and influences; and even sexes, from the gender of their appellations.**
"As society established a clear hierarchy of ranks, jobs, and conditions, people began to apply their new ideas to their beliefs about the divine. They created a complicated system of gods ranked by status, with the sun as the top god, resembling a military leader or a political ruler. The moon was portrayed as his wife and queen; the planets acted as servants, messengers, and bearers of commands; and the countless stars represented a nation, an army of heroes and spirits tasked with governing the world under the direction of their leaders. Each figure was assigned names, roles, and traits based on their relationships and influences, and even genders, based on their titles."
* The Sabeans, ancient and modern, says Maimonides, acknowledge a principal God, the maker and inhabitant of heaven; but on account of his great distance they conceive him to be inaccessible; and in imitation of the conduct of people towards their kings, they employ as mediators with him, the planets and their angels, whom they call princes and potentates, and whom they suppose to reside in those luminous bodies as in palaces or tabernacles, etc. More- Nebuchim. ** According as the gender of the object was in the language of the nation masculine or feminine, the Divinity who bore its name was male or female. Thus the Cappadocians called the moon God, and the sun Goddess: a circumstance which gives to the same beings a perpetual variety in ancient mythology.
* The Sabeans, both ancient and modern, as Maimonides says, recognize a main God, the creator and dweller of heaven; however, due to his great distance, they think of him as unreachable. To imitate how people interact with their kings, they use the planets and their angels as intermediaries with him, referring to them as princes and powerful beings, and they believe these entities live in those bright bodies like in palaces or tents, etc. More-Nebuchim. ** Depending on whether the object was masculine or feminine in the language of the people, the Deity associated with its name was either male or female. For instance, the Cappadocians referred to the moon as God and the sun as Goddess: a fact that provides the same beings with constant diversity in ancient mythology.
"And as the social state had introduced certain usages and ceremonies, religion, keeping pace with the social state, adopted similar ones; these ceremonies, at first simple and private, became public and solemn; the offerings became rich and more numerous, and the rites more methodical; they assigned certain places for the assemblies, and began to have chapels and temples; they instituted officers to administer them, and these became priests and pontiffs: they established liturgies, and sanctified certain days, and religion became a civil act, a political tie.
"And as society developed certain customs and rituals, religion, evolving alongside it, embraced similar practices; these rituals, initially simple and personal, grew into public and formal events; offerings became more elaborate and frequent, and the ceremonies more organized; specific locations were designated for gatherings, leading to the creation of chapels and temples; they appointed officials to oversee these places, who then became priests and bishops: they established liturgies, sanctified certain days, and religion transformed into a civic duty, a political bond."
"But in this arrangement, religion did not change its first principles; the idea of God was always that of physical beings, operating good or evil, that is, impressing sensations of pleasure or pain: the dogma was the knowledge of their laws, or their manner of acting; virtue and sin, the observance or infraction of these laws; and morality, in its native simplicity, was the judicious practice of whatever contributes to the preservation of existence, the well-being of one's self and his fellow creatures.*
"But in this setup, religion didn't alter its fundamental beliefs; the concept of God was always that of physical beings influencing good or evil, meaning creating feelings of pleasure or pain: the doctrine was understanding their laws or how they acted; virtue and sin were about following or breaking these laws; and morality, in its straightforward essence, was the wise application of anything that helps maintain existence and promotes the wellbeing of oneself and others."
* We may add, says Plutarch, that these Egyptian priests always regarded the preservation of health as a point of the first importance, and as indispensably necessary to the practice of piety and the service of the gods. See his account of Isis and Osiris, towards the end.
* Plutarch notes that these Egyptian priests always considered maintaining good health to be extremely important and essential for practicing piety and serving the gods. See his account of Isis and Osiris towards the end.
"Should it be asked at what epoch this system took its birth, we shall answer on the testimony of the monuments of astronomy itself; that its principles appear with certainty to have been established about seventeen thousand years ago,* and if it be asked to what people it is to be attributed, we shall answer that the same monuments, supported by unanimous traditions, attribute it to the first tribes of Egypt; and when reason finds in that country all the circumstances which could lead to such a system; when it finds there a zone of sky, bordering on the tropic, equally free from the rains of the equator and the fogs of the North;** when it finds there a central point of the sphere of the ancients, a salubrious climate, a great, but manageable river, a soil fertile without art or labor, inundated without morbid exhalations, and placed between two seas which communicate with the richest countries, it conceives that the inhabitant of the Nile, addicted to agriculture from the nature of his soil, to geometry from the annual necessity of measuring his lands, to commerce from the facility of communications, to astronomy from the state of his sky, always open to observation, must have been the first to pass from the savage to the social state; and consequently to attain the physical and moral sciences necessary to civilized life.
"If someone asks when this system originated, we can confidently say based on astronomical records that its principles were established around seventeen thousand years ago.* If the question is about which people can be credited with it, we can state that the same records, backed by unanimous traditions, attribute it to the early tribes of Egypt. When we consider the factors present in that region that could lead to such a system, including a sky zone near the tropic that is free from equatorial rain and northern fog; a central point in the ancient world; a healthy climate; a large but manageable river; soil that's fertile without much effort; annual flooding without harmful emissions; and its location between two seas connected to the wealthiest regions, it becomes clear that the inhabitants of the Nile, driven by the agricultural nature of their land, the need for geometry to measure their fields, commerce facilitated by transport, and astronomy due to the clear skies, must have been the first to transition from a primitive to a more organized society. This progression likely led them to develop the physical and moral sciences essential for civilized existence."
* The historical orator follows here the opinion of M. Dupuis, who, in his learned memoirs concerning the Origin of the Constellations and Origin of all Worship, has assigned many plausible reasons to prove that Libra was formerly the sign of the vernal, and Aries of the autumnal equinox; that is, that since the origin of the actual astronomical system, the precession of the equinoxes has carried forward by seven signs the primitive order of the zodiac. Now estimating the precession at about seventy years and a half to a degree, that is, 2,115 years to each sign; and observing that Aries was in its fifteenth degree, 1,447 years before Christ, it follows that the first degree of Libra could not have coincided with the vernal equinox more lately than 15,194 years before Christ; now, if you add 1790 years since Christ, it appears that 16,984 years have elapsed since the origin of the Zodiac. The vernal equinox coincided with the first degree of Aries, 2,504 years before Christ, and with the first degree of Taurus 4,619 years before Christ. Now it is to be observed, that the worship of the Bull is the principal article in the theological creed of the Egyptians, Persians, Japanese, etc.; from whence it clearly follows, that some general revolution took place among these nations at that time. The chronology of five or six thousand years in Genesis is little agreeable to this hypothesis; but as the book of Genesis cannot claim to be considered as a history farther back than Abraham, we are at liberty to make what arrangements we please in the eternity that preceded. See on this subject the analysis of Genesis, in the first volume of New Researches on Ancient History; see also Origin of Constellatians, by Dupuis, 1781; the Origin of Worship, in 3 vols. 1794, and the Chronological Zodiac, 1806. ** M. Balli, in placing the first astronomers at Selingenakoy, near the Bailkal paid no attention to this twofold circumstance: it equally argues against their being placed at Axoum on account of the rains, and the Zimb fly of which Mr. Bruce speaks.
* The historical speaker here follows the views of M. Dupuis, who, in his well-researched writings on the Origin of the Constellations and the Origin of all Worship, offers several convincing reasons to show that Libra was once the sign of the spring equinox, and Aries of the autumn equinox; in other words, since the beginning of the current astronomical system, the precession of the equinoxes has shifted the original order of the zodiac forward by seven signs. If we estimate the precession at about seventy and a half years per degree, that is, 2,115 years for each sign, and note that Aries was in its fifteenth degree, 1,447 years before Christ, it follows that the first degree of Libra could not have matched the spring equinox any later than 15,194 years before Christ. If we add 1,790 years since Christ, it shows that 16,984 years have passed since the start of the Zodiac. The spring equinox aligned with the first degree of Aries 2,504 years before Christ and with the first degree of Taurus 4,619 years before Christ. It should be noted that the worship of the Bull is a central aspect of the theological beliefs of the Egyptians, Persians, Japanese, etc.; this clearly indicates that a significant upheaval occurred among these nations at that time. The timeline of five or six thousand years in Genesis doesn’t quite fit this theory; however, since the book of Genesis can only be considered as history from the time of Abraham onward, we can arrange the periods before that as we wish. For more on this subject, see the analysis of Genesis in the first volume of New Researches on Ancient History; also refer to the Origin of the Constellations by Dupuis, 1781; the Origin of Worship in 3 volumes, 1794, and the Chronological Zodiac, 1806. ** M. Balli, by placing the first astronomers at Selingenakoy, near Baikal, overlooked this dual circumstance: it also argues against their being located in Axoum due to the rains and the Zimb fly that Mr. Bruce mentions.
"It was, then, on the borders of the upper Nile, among a black race of men, that was organized the complicated system of the worship of the stars, considered in relation to the productions of the earth and the labors of agriculture; and this first worship, characterized by their adoration under their own forms and natural attributes, was a simple proceeding of the human mind. But in a short time, the multiplicity of the objects of their relations, and their reciprocal influence, having complicated the ideas, and the signs that represented them, there followed a confusion as singular in its cause as pernicious in its effects."
"It was, then, on the banks of the upper Nile, among a community of Black people, that the intricate system of star worship was developed, linked to the earth's produce and agricultural work. This initial worship, marked by their reverence for natural forms and attributes, was a straightforward expression of human thought. However, before long, the variety of their relationships and mutual influences complicated their ideas and the symbols that represented them, leading to a confusion that was as unique in its origin as it was harmful in its consequences."
III. Third system. Worship of Symbols, or Idolatry.
III. Third system. Worship of Symbols, or Idolatry.
"As soon as this agricultural people began to observe the stars with attention, they found it necessary to individualize or group them; and to assign to each a proper name, in order to understand each other in their designation. A great difficulty must have presented itself in this business: First, the heavenly bodies, similar in form, offered no distinguishing characteristics by which to denominate them; and, secondly, the language in its infancy and poverty, had no expressions for so many new and metaphysical ideas. Necessity, the usual stimulus of genius, surmounted everything. Having remarked that in the annual revolution, the renewal and periodical appearance of terrestrial productions were constantly associated with the rising and setting of certain stars, and to their position as relative to the sun, the fundamental term of all comparison, the mind by a natural operation connected in thought these terrestrial and celestial objects, which were connected in fact; and applying to them a common sign, it gave to the stars, and their groups, the names of the terrestrial objects to which they answered.*
"As soon as this farming community started paying attention to the stars, they realized they needed to name or group them, so they could communicate more easily. They faced a big challenge: first, the celestial bodies looked very similar and didn’t have any distinguishing features to help them name them; and second, since their language was still developing, they didn’t have words for so many new and abstract concepts. Necessity, which often inspires creativity, overcame these challenges. They observed that the annual cycles, the renewal, and the seasonal appearance of earthly plants were consistently linked with the rising and setting of certain stars, as well as their position relative to the sun—the key point of all comparisons. Their minds naturally connected these earthly and heavenly entities, which were indeed related; and by applying a common symbol, they named the stars and their constellations after the earthly objects they corresponded to.*"
* "The ancients," says Maimonides, "directing all their attention to agriculture, gave names to the stars derived from their occupation during the year." More Neb. pars 3.
* "The ancients," Maimonides says, "focused all their attention on agriculture and named the stars based on their year-round activities." More Neb. pars 3.
"Thus the Ethopian of Thebes named stars of inundation, or Aquarius, those stars under which the Nile began to overflow;* stars of the ox or the bull, those under which they began to plow; stars of the lion, those under which that animal, driven from the desert by thirst, appeared on the banks of the Nile; stars of the sheaf, or of the harvest virgin, those of the reaping season; stars of the lamb, stars of the two kids, those under which these precious animals were brought forth: and thus was resolved the first part of the difficulty.
"Thus, the Ethiopian from Thebes identified the stars of inundation, or Aquarius, with the period when the Nile started to overflow; the stars of the ox or bull, marking the time they began to plow; the stars of the lion, which appeared when that animal, driven by thirst from the desert, came to the banks of the Nile; the stars of the sheaf, or the harvest virgin, corresponding to the reaping season; and the stars of the lamb, along with the stars of the two kids, which indicated when these valuable animals were born. This resolved the first part of the difficulty."
* This must have been June.
* This had to be June.
"Moreover, man having remarked in the beings which surrounded him certain qualities distinctive and proper to each species, and having thence derived a name by which to designate them, he found in the same source an ingenious mode of generalizing his ideas; and transferring the name already invented to every thing which bore any resemblance or analogy, he enriched his language with a perpetual round of metaphors.
"Additionally, as humans noticed specific traits unique to each species around them and created names to identify them, they discovered a clever way to generalize their thoughts. By applying these names to anything that had some resemblance or similarity, they continuously enhanced their language with a flow of metaphors."
"Thus the same Ethiopian having observed that the return of the inundation always corresponded with the rising of a beautiful star which appeared towards the source of the Nile, and seemed to warn the husbandman against the coming waters, he compared this action to that of the animal who, by his barking, gives notice of danger, and he called this star the dog, the barker (Sirius). In the same manner he named the stars of the crab, those where the sun, having arrived at the tropic, retreated by a slow retrograde motion like the crab or cancer. He named stars of the wild goat, or Capricorn, those where the sun, having reached the highest point in his annuary tract, rests at the summit of the horary gnomon, and imitates the goat, who delights to climb the summit of the rocks. He named stars of the balance, or libra, those where the days and nights, being equal, seemed in equilibrium, like that instrument; and stars of the scorpion, those where certain periodical winds bring vapors, burning like the venom of the scorpion. In the same manner he called by the name of rings and serpents the figured traces of the orbits of the stars and the planets, and such was the general mode of naming all the stars and even the planets, taken by groups or as individuals, according to their relations with husbandry and terrestrial objects, and according to the analogies which each nation found between them and the objects of its particular soil and climate.*
"Thus, the same Ethiopian noticed that the arrival of the flood always coincided with the rise of a beautiful star that appeared near the source of the Nile, seemingly signaling farmers about the upcoming waters. He compared this to a dog barking to warn of danger, calling this star the dog, the barker (Sirius). Similarly, he named the stars of the crab after those where the sun, upon reaching the tropic, slowly moved back like the crab or cancer. He referred to the stars of the wild goat, or Capricorn, as those where the sun, having reached its highest point in its yearly path, rests at the peak of the shadow cast by a sundial, much like a goat that loves to climb rocky heights. He called the stars of the balance, or Libra, those where day and night are equal, appearing in balance like that instrument; and the stars of the scorpion, where certain seasonal winds bring burning vapors resembling the scorpion's venom. In the same way, he named the traced paths of the orbits of the stars and planets as rings and serpents. This was the general method used to name all the stars and even the planets, grouped or individually, based on their connections to agriculture and earthly things, as well as the similarities each culture saw between them and the elements of their specific land and climate."
* The ancients had verbs from the substantives crab, goat, tortoise, as the French have at present the verbs serpenter, coquetter. The history of all languages is nearly the same.
* The ancients had verbs based on the nouns crab, goat, and tortoise, just like the French today have the verbs serpenter and coquetter. The history of all languages is pretty much the same.
"From this it appeared that abject and terrestrial beings became associated with the superior and powerful inhabitants of heaven; and this association became stronger every day by the mechanism of language and the constitution of the human mind. Men would say by a natural metaphor: The bull spreads over the earth the germs of fecundity (in spring) he restores vegetation and plenty: the lamb (or ram) delivers the skies from the maleficent powers of winter; he saves the world from the serpent (emblem of the humid season) and restores the empire of goodness (summer, joyful season): the scorpion pours out his poison on the earth, and scatters diseases and death. The same of all similar effects.
"From this, it seemed that lowly, earthly beings became linked with the higher, powerful inhabitants of heaven; and this connection grew stronger every day through language and the workings of the human mind. People would naturally express: The bull spreads fertility across the earth (in spring); he brings back growth and abundance. The lamb (or ram) frees the skies from the harmful forces of winter; he protects the world from the serpent (symbol of the rainy season) and restores the reign of goodness (summer, the happy season); the scorpion unleashes its venom on the ground, spreading sickness and death. The same goes for all similar effects."
"This language, understood by every one, was attended at first with no inconvenience; but in the course of time, when the calendar had been regulated, the people, who had no longer any need of observing the heavens, lost sight of the original meaning of these expressions; and the allegories remaining in common use became a fatal stumbling block to the understanding and to reason. Habituated to associate to the symbols the ideas of their archetypes, the mind at last confounded them: then the same animals, whom fancy had transported to the skies, returned again to the earth; but being thus returned, clothed in the livery of the stars, they claimed the stellary attributes, and imposed on their own authors. Then it was that the people, believing that they saw their gods among them, could pray to them with more convenience: they demanded from the ram of their flock the influences which might be expected from the heavenly ram; they prayed the scorpion not to pour out his venom upon nature; they revered the crab of the sea, the scarabeus of the mud, the fish of the river; and by a series of corrupt but inseparable analogies, they lost themselves in a labyrinth of well connected absurdities.
"This language, understood by everyone, initially caused no problems; however, over time, as the calendar was standardized, people who no longer needed to observe the heavens lost track of the original meanings of these expressions. The allegories that remained in common use became a major obstacle to understanding and reason. As they became accustomed to linking the symbols with the ideas of their originals, their minds eventually confused them. Then, the same animals, which imagination had lifted to the skies, returned to earth; but upon returning, dressed in the attire of the stars, they claimed celestial attributes and misled their creators. It was then that the people, believing they saw their gods among them, could pray to them more easily: they expected the ram of their flock to provide the influences associated with the heavenly ram; they prayed to the scorpion to hold back its venom from nature; they honored the crab of the sea, the scarab of the mud, the fish of the river; and through a series of corrupted but intertwined analogies, they became lost in a maze of coherent absurdities."
"Such was the origin of that ancient whimsical worship of the animals; such is the train of ideas by which the character of the divinity became common to the vilest of brutes, and by which was formed that theological system, extremely comprehensive, complicated, and learned, which, rising on the borders of the Nile, propagated from country to country by commerce, war, and conquest, overspread the whole of the ancient world; and which, modified by time, circumstances and prejudices, is still seen entire among a hundred nations, and remains as the essential and secret basis of the theology of those even who despise and reject it."
"That was the beginning of the ancient, quirky worship of animals; this is the line of thought that caused the portrayal of the divine to be shared with the lowest of creatures, which led to the creation of a theological system that is incredibly broad, complex, and sophisticated. This system emerged along the Nile and spread from place to place through trade, war, and conquest, covering the entire ancient world. Even now, altered by time, circumstances, and biases, it can still be seen in its entirety among many nations and serves as the fundamental and hidden foundation of the beliefs of those who dismiss and reject it."
Some murmurs at these words being heard from various groups: "Yes!" continued the orator, "hence arose, for instance, among you, nations of Africa, the adoration of your fetiches, plants, animals, pebbles, pieces of wood, before which your ancestors would not have had the folly to bow, if they had not seen in them talismans endowed with the virtue of the stars.*
Some whispers were heard from different groups in response: "Yes!" The speaker continued, "this is how, for example, among you, nations of Africa, the worship of your fetishes, plants, animals, stones, and pieces of wood came about—before which your ancestors would never have stooped to bow if they hadn’t seen them as talismans with the power of the stars.*
* The ancient astrologers, says the most learned of the Jews (Maimonides), having sacredly assigned to each planet a color, an animal, a tree, a metal, a fruit, a plant, formed from them all a figure or representation of the star, taking care to select for the purpose a proper moment, a fortunate day, such as the conjunction of the star, or some other favorable aspect. They conceived that by their magic ceremonies they could introduce into those figures or idols the influences of the superior beings after which they were modeled. These were the idols that the Chaldean-Sabeans adored; and in the performance of their worship they were obliged to be dressed in the proper color. The astrologers, by their practices, thus introduced idolatry, desirous of being regarded as the dispensers of the favors of heaven; and as agriculture was the sole employment of the ancients, they succeeded in persuading them that the rain and other blessings of the seasons were at their disposal. Thus the whole art of agriculture was exercised by rules of astrology, and the priests made talismans or charms which were to drive away locusts, flies, etc. See Maimonides, More Nebuchim, pars 3, c. 29. The priests of Egypt, Persia, India, etc., pretended to bind the Gods to their idols, and to make them come from heaven at their pleasure. They threatened the sun and moon, if they were disobedient, to reveal the secret mysteries, to shake the skies, etc., etc. Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 198, and Jamblicus de Mysteriis Aegypt.
* The ancient astrologers, as noted by the most knowledgeable of the Jews (Maimonides), carefully assigned a color, animal, tree, metal, fruit, and plant to each planet. They created a representation of the star from these elements, ensuring they chose the right moment, like a star's conjunction or another favorable aspect, for the purpose. They believed that through their magical ceremonies, they could infuse these figures or idols with the influences of the higher beings they were modeled after. These were the idols worshipped by the Chaldean-Sabeans, and during their rituals, they had to wear the appropriate color. The astrologers, through their methods, introduced idolatry, eager to be seen as the distributors of celestial favors. Since agriculture was the main focus of the ancients, they convinced people that they could control rain and other seasonal blessings. Therefore, all agricultural practices were guided by astrological rules, and the priests created talismans or charms meant to ward off locusts, flies, and so on. See Maimonides, More Nebuchim, pars 3, c. 29. The priests of Egypt, Persia, India, and others claimed they could bind the gods to their idols and summon them from heaven at will. They threatened the sun and moon with the exposure of hidden mysteries and to rattle the skies, among other things. Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 198, and Jamblicus de Mysteriis Aegypt.
"Here, ye nations of Tartary, is the origin of your marmosets, and of all that train of animals with which your chamans ornament their magical robes. This is the origin of those figures of birds and of snakes which savage nations imprint upon their skins with sacred and mysterious ceremonies.
"Listen up, nations of Tartary, this is where your marmosets come from, and all the animals that your shamans decorate their magical robes with. This is where those images of birds and snakes that wild nations tattoo on their skin during sacred and mysterious ceremonies originated."
"Ye inhabitants of India! in vain you cover yourselves with the veil of mystery: the hawk of your god Vichenou is but one of the thousand emblems of the sun in Egypt; and your incarnations of a god in the fish, the boar, the lion, the tortoise, and all his monstrous adventures, are only the metamorphoses of the sun, who, passing through the signs of the twelve animals (or the zodiac), was supposed to assume their figures, and perform their astronomical functions.*
"Hey, people of India! It's pointless to hide behind a veil of mystery: the hawk of your god Vichenou is just one of the many symbols of the sun in Egypt; and your representations of a god as a fish, a boar, a lion, a tortoise, and all his bizarre adventures are simply transformations of the sun, which, as it moves through the twelve signs (or zodiac), is thought to take on their shapes and carry out their astronomical roles."
* These are the very words of Jamblicus de Symbolis Aegyptiorum, c. 2, sect. 7. The sun was the grand Proteus, the universal metamorphist.
* These are the exact words of Jamblicus de Symbolis Aegyptiorum, c. 2, sect. 7. The sun was the great Proteus, the universal shapeshifter.
"People of Japan, your bull, which breaks the mundane egg, is only the bull of the zodiac, which in former times opened the seasons, the age of creation, the vernal equinox. It is the same bull Apis which Egypt adored, and which your ancestors, Jewish Rabbins, worshipped in the golden calf. This is still your bull, followers of Zoroaster, which, sacrificed in the symbolic mysteries of Mithra, poured out his blood which fertilized the earth. And ye Christians, your bull of the Apocalypse, with his wings, symbol of the air, has no other origin; and your lamb of God, sacrificed, like the bull of Mithra, for the salvation of the world, is only the same sun, in the sign of the celestial ram, which, in a later age, opening the equinox in his turn, was supposed to deliver the world from evil, that is to say, from the constellation of the serpent, from that great snake, the parent of winter, the emblem of the Ahrimanes, or Satan of the Persians, your school masters. Yes, in vain does your imprudent zeal consign idolaters to the torments of the Tartarus which they invented; the whole basis of your system is only the worship of the sun, with whose attributes you have decorated your principal personage. It is the sun which, under the name of Horus, was born, like your God, at the winter solstice, in the arms of the celestial virgin, and who passed a childhood of obscurity, indigence, and want, answering to the season of cold and frost. It is he that, under the name of Osiris, persecuted by Typhon and by the tyrants of the air, was put to death, shut up in a dark tomb, emblem of the hemisphere of winter, and afterwards, ascending from the inferior zone towards the zenith of heaven, arose again from the dead triumphant over the giants and the angels of destruction.
"People of Japan, your bull that breaks the ordinary egg is just the bull of the zodiac, which once marked the seasons, the age of creation, and the spring equinox. It's the same bull Apis that Egypt worshipped, and that your ancestors, Jewish Rabbis, honored in the form of the golden calf. This is still your bull, followers of Zoroaster, which, sacrificed in the symbolic rituals of Mithra, spilled its blood to nourish the earth. And you Christians, your bull of the Apocalypse with its wings, a symbol of the air, has no different origin; and your lamb of God, sacrificed like Mithra's bull for the salvation of the world, is merely the same sun, represented by the celestial ram, which, in a later age, was believed to bring freedom from evil as it marked the equinox, freeing the world from the constellation of the serpent, that great snake, the source of winter, the emblem of Ahrimanes, or Satan of the Persians, your educators. Yes, in vain does your reckless enthusiasm condemn idolaters to the torments of Tartarus that you invented; the core of your system is merely the worship of the sun, whose attributes you've adorned your main figure with. It is the sun, known as Horus, born like your God at the winter solstice in the arms of the celestial virgin, who spent a childhood filled with obscurity, poverty, and need, mirroring the cold and frost of the season. It is he who, under the name of Osiris, was persecuted by Typhon and the tyrants of the air, was killed, and entombed in a dark grave, symbolizing the winter hemisphere, and later, rising from the lower realm towards the peak of heaven, triumphed over the giants and the angels of destruction."
"Ye priests! who murmur at this relation, you wear his emblems all over your bodies; your tonsure is the disk of the sun; your stole is his zodiac;* your rosaries are symbols of the stars and planets. Ye pontiffs and prelates! your mitre, your crozier, your mantle are those of Osiris; and that cross whose mystery you extol without comprehending it, is the cross of Serapis, traced by the hands of Egyptian priests on the plan of the figurative world; which, passing through the equinoxes and the tropics, became the emblem of the future life and of the resurrection, because it touched the gates of ivory and of horn, through which the soul passed to heaven."
"Hey priests! You who complain about this story, you wear his symbols all over your bodies; your shaved heads represent the sun; your stoles are his zodiac; your rosaries symbolize the stars and planets. You bishops and leaders! Your mitre, your staff, your robe are those of Osiris; and that cross you celebrate without understanding its significance is the cross of Serapis, drawn by the hands of Egyptian priests based on the figurative world; which, crossing through the equinoxes and the tropics, became the symbol of the afterlife and resurrection because it touched the gates of ivory and horn, through which the soul passes to heaven."
* "The Arabs," says Herodotus, "shave their heads in a circle and about the temples, in imitation of Bacchus (that is the sun), who shaves himself is this manner." Jeremiah speaks also of this custom. The tuft of hair which the Mahometans preserve, is taken also from the sun, who was painted by the Egyptians at the winter solstice, as having but a single hair upon his head. . . . The robes of the goddess of Syria and of Diana of Ephesus, from whence are borrowed the dress of the priests; have the twelve animals of the zodiac painted on them. . . . Rosaries are found upon all the Indian idols, constructed more than four thousand years ago, and their use in the East has been universal from time immemorial. . . . The crozier is precisely the staff of Bootes or Osiris. (See plate.) All the Lamas wear the mitre or cap in the shape of a cone, which was an emblem of the sun.
* "The Arabs," Herodotus says, "shave their heads in a circle around the temples, mimicking Bacchus (the sun), who styles himself this way." Jeremiah also mentions this practice. The tuft of hair that Muslims keep is also inspired by the sun, which the Egyptians depicted during the winter solstice as having just one hair on its head. . . . The robes of the goddess of Syria and Diana of Ephesus, from which the priests' attire is derived, feature the twelve zodiac animals painted on them. . . . Rosaries are found on all Indian idols, created over four thousand years ago, and their use in the East has been consistent throughout history. . . . The crozier is exactly the staff of Bootes or Osiris. (See plate.) All the Lamas wear a peaked mitre or cap, which symbolizes the sun.
At these words, the doctors of all the groups began to look at each other with astonishment; but no one breaking silence, the orator proceeded:
At these words, the doctors from all the groups started looking at each other in shock; but since no one spoke up, the speaker continued:
"Three principal causes concur to produce this confusion of ideas: First, the figurative expressions under which an infant language was obliged to describe the relations of objects; expressions which, passing afterwards from a limited to a general sense, and from a physical to a moral one, caused, by their ambiguities and synonymes, a great number of mistakes.
"Three main causes contribute to this confusion of ideas: First, the figurative language that an early language was forced to use to describe the relationships between objects; expressions that, transitioning from a specific to a general meaning, and from a physical to a moral context, led to many mistakes due to their ambiguities and synonyms."
"Thus, it being first said that the sun had surmounted, or finished, twelve animals, it was thought afterwards that he had killed them, fought them, conquered them; and of this was composed the historical life of Hercules.*
"Therefore, since it was first mentioned that the sun had passed over or completed twelve animals, it was later believed that he had defeated, battled, or conquered them; and from this, the legendary life of Hercules was created.*"
* See the memoir of Dupuis on the Origin of the Constellations, before cited.
* See Dupuis' memoir on the Origin of the Constellations, previously mentioned.
"It being said that he regulated the periods of rural labor, the seed time and the harvest, that he distributed the seasons and occupations, ran through the climates and ruled the earth, etc., he was taken for a legislative king, a conquering warrior; and they framed from this the history of Osiris, of Bacchus, and others of that description.
"It was said that he controlled the times for farming, the planting and harvesting, that he organized the seasons and work, traveled through different climates and governed the earth, etc. Because of this, people viewed him as a legislative king and a conquering warrior; and they created the stories of Osiris, Bacchus, and others like them."
"Having said that a planet entered into a sign, they made of this conjunction a marriage, an adultery, an incest.* Having said that the planet was hid or buried, when it came back to light, and ascended to its exaltation, they said that it had died, risen again, was carried into heaven, etc.
"Once they said a planet entered a sign, they compared this alignment to a marriage, an affair, or incest.* When they said that the planet was hidden or buried, when it returned to the surface and rose to its highest point, they claimed it had died, come back to life, been taken up to heaven, and so on."
* These are the very words of Plutarch in his account of Isis and Osiris. The Hebrews say, in speaking of the generations of the Patriarchs, et ingressus est in eam. From this continual equivoke of ancient language, proceeds every mistake.
* These are the exact words of Plutarch in his story about Isis and Osiris. The Hebrews express in their discussion of the generations of the Patriarchs, et ingressus est in eam. This ongoing confusion of ancient language leads to every misunderstanding.
"A second cause of confusion was the material figures themselves, by which men first painted thoughts; and which, under the name of hieroglyphics, or sacred characters, were the first invention of the mind. Thus, to give warning of the inundation, and of the necessity of guarding against it, they painted a boat, the ship Argo; to express the wind, they painted the wing of a bird; to designate the season, or the month, they painted the bird of passage, the insect, or the animal which made its appearance at that period; to describe the winter, they painted a hog or a serpent, which delight in humid places, and the combination of these figures carried the known sense of words and phrases.* But as this sense could not be fixed with precision, as the number of these figures and their combinations became excessive, and overburdened the memory, the immediate consequence was confusion and false interpretations. Genius afterwards having invented the more simple art of applying signs to sounds, of which the number is limited, and painting words, instead of thoughts, alphabetical writing thus threw into disuetude hieroglyphical painting; and its signification, falling daily into oblivion, gave rise to a multitude of illusions, ambiguities, and errors.
A second source of confusion was the actual symbols used, which initially represented thoughts; these were known as hieroglyphics or sacred characters, and they were the mind's first invention. For example, to signal a flood and the need to prepare for it, they drew a boat, like the ship Argo; to represent the wind, they illustrated a bird's wing; to indicate the season or month, they depicted the migratory bird, the insect, or the animal that appeared during that time; to portray winter, they showed a pig or a snake, which thrive in wet environments. The combination of these symbols conveyed the recognized meaning of words and phrases.* However, since this meaning couldn't be precisely fixed and the number of symbols and their combinations became overwhelming, it led to confusion and misinterpretations. Later, genius introduced the simpler method of using signs to represent sounds, with a limited number, replacing the painting of thoughts with writing words. As a result, alphabetical writing rendered hieroglyphics obsolete, and its meanings gradually faded into obscurity, resulting in many illusions, ambiguities, and mistakes.
* The reader will doubtless see with pleasure some examples of ancient hieroglyphics. "The Egyptians (says Hor-appolo) represent eternity by the figures of the sun and moon. They designate the world by the blue serpent with yellow scales (stars, it is the Chinese Dragon). If they were desirous of expressing the year, they drew a picture of Isis, who is also in their language called Sothis, or dog-star, one of the first constellations, by the rising of which the year commences; its inscription at Sais was, It is I that rise in the constellation of the Dog. "They also represent the year by a palm tree, and the month by one of its branches, because it is the nature of this tree to produce a branch every month. They farther represent it by the fourth part of an acre of land." The whole acre divided into four denotes the bissextile period of four years. The abbreviation of this figure of a field in four divisions, is manifestly the letter ha or het, the seventh in the Samaritan alphabet; and in general all the letters of the alphabet are merely astronomical hieroglyphics; and it is for this reason that the mode of writing is from right to left, like the march of the stars. —"They denote a prophet by the image of a dog, because the dog star (Anoubis) by its rising gives notice of the inundation. Noubi, in Hebrew signifies prophet—They represent inundation by a lion, because it takes place under that sign: and hence, says Plutarch, the custom of placing at the gates of temples figures of lions with water issuing from their mouths.—They express the idea of God and destiny by a star. They also represent God, says Porphyry, by a black stone, because his nature is dark and obscure. All white things express the celestial and luminous Gods: all circular ones the world, the moon, the sun, the orbits; all semicircular ones, as bows and crescents are descriptive of the moon. Fire and the Gods of Olympus they represent by pyramids and obelisks (the name of the sun, Baal, is found in this latter word): the sun by a cone (the mitre of Osiris): the earth, by a cylinder (which revolves): the generative power of the air by the phalus, and that of the earth by a triangle, emblem of the female organ. Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 98. "Clay, says Jamblicus de Symbolis, sect. 7, c. 2. denotes matter, the generative and nutrimental power, every thing which receives the warmth and fermentation of life." "A man sitting upon the Lotos or Nenuphar, represents the moving spirit (the sun) which, in like manner as that plant lives in the water without any communication with clay, exists equally distinct from matter, swimming in empty space, resting on itself: it is round also in all its parts, like the leaves, the flowers, and the fruit of the Lotos. (Brama has the eyes of the Lotos, says Chasler Nesdirsen, to denote his intelligence: his eye swims over every thing, like the flower of the Lotos on the waters.) A man at the helm of a ship, adds Jamblicus, is descriptive of the sun which governs all. And Porphyry tells us that the sun is also represented by a man in a ship resting upon an amphibious crocodile (emblem of air and water). "At Elephantine they worshipped the figure of a man in a sitting posture, painted blue, having the head of a ram, and the horns of a goat which encompassed a disk; all which represented the sun and moon's conjunction at the sign of the ram; the blue color denoting the power of the moon, at the period of junction, to raise water into the clouds. Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 116. "The hawk is an emblem of the sun and of light, on account of his rapid flight and his soaring into the highest regions of the air where light abounds. A fish is the emblem of aversion, and the Hippopotamus of violence, because it is said to kill its father and to ravish its mother. Hence, says Plutarch, the emblematical inscription of the temple of Sais, where we see painted on the vestibule, 1. A child, 2. An old man, 3. A hawk, 4. A fish, 5. A hippopotamus: which signify, 1. Entrance, into life, 2. Departure, 3. God, 4. Hates, 5. Injustice. See Isis and Osiris. "The Egyptians, adds he, represent the world by a Scarabeus, because this insect pushes, in a direction contrary to that in which it proceeds, a ball containing its eggs, just as the heaven of the fixed stars causes the revolution of the sun, (the yolk of an egg) in an opposite direction to its own. "They represent the world also by the number five, being that of the elements, which, says Diodorus, are earth, water, air, fire, and ether, or spiritus. The Indians have the same number of elements, and according to Macrobius's mystics, they are the supreme God, or primum mobile, the intelligence, or mens, born of him, the soul of the world which proceeds from him, the celestial spheres, and all things terrestrial. Hence, adds Plutarch, the analogy between the Greek pente, five, and pan all. "The ass," says he again, "is the emblem of Typhon, because like that animal he is of a reddish color. Now Typhon signifies whatever is of a mirey or clayey nature; (and in Hebrew I find the three words clay, red, and ass to be formed from the same root hamr). Jamblicus has farther told us that clay was the emblem of matter and he elsewhere adds, that all evil and corruption proceeded from matter; which compared with the phrase of Macrobius, all is perishable, liable to change in the celestial sphere, gives us the theory, first physical, then moral, of the system of good and evil of the ancients."
* The reader will surely enjoy some examples of ancient hieroglyphics. "The Egyptians (says Hor-appolo) symbolize eternity with the images of the sun and moon. They represent the world with a blue serpent with yellow scales (stars; it’s the Chinese Dragon). To express the year, they would depict Isis, who is also called Sothis or the dog star in their language, one of the first constellations. The rising of Sothis marks the beginning of the year; its inscription at Sais said, 'It is I that rise in the constellation of the Dog.' "They also symbolize the year with a palm tree and the month with one of its branches, since this tree produces a branch every month. They further represent it by one-fourth of an acre of land." The whole acre divided into four signifies the leap year cycle of four years. The abbreviation of this image of a field in four sections is clearly the letter ha or het, the seventh in the Samaritan alphabet; and generally, all the letters of the alphabet are merely astronomical hieroglyphics; this is why writing goes from right to left, reflecting the movement of the stars. —"They indicate a prophet with the image of a dog because the dog star (Anoubis), when it rises, signals the flooding. Noubi, in Hebrew, means prophet — They represent the inundation with a lion, as it occurs under that sign: hence, says Plutarch, the custom of placing figures of lions with water flowing from their mouths at temple gates. —They express the concept of God and destiny with a star. They also depict God, according to Porphyry, with a black stone, symbolizing his dark and obscure nature. All white objects represent the bright and heavenly Gods: all circular forms symbolize the world, the moon, the sun, and orbits; all semicircular forms, like bows and crescents, illustrate the moon. They depict fire and the Gods of Olympus with pyramids and obelisks (the name of the sun, Baal, is included in this latter term): the sun is represented by a cone (the mitre of Osiris); the earth by a cylinder (which revolves); the generative power of air is symbolized by the phallus, and that of the earth by a triangle, emblematic of the female organ. Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 98. "Clay, says Jamblicus de Symbolis, sect. 7, c. 2, symbolizes matter, production, and everything that receives the warmth and fermentation of life." "A man sitting on the Lotos or Nenuphar represents the moving spirit (the sun) which, just like that plant, lives in water without any contact with clay, existing distinct from matter, floating in empty space, resting on itself: it is round in all its parts, just like the leaves, flowers, and fruit of the Lotos. (Brama has the eyes of the Lotos, says Chasler Nesdirsen, to signify his intelligence: his eye overlooks everything, like the flower of the Lotos on the water.) A man at the helm of a ship, adds Jamblicus, illustrates the sun which governs all. And Porphyry tells us that the sun is also portrayed as a man in a ship resting upon an amphibious crocodile (symbolizing air and water). "At Elephantine, they worshiped the figure of a man seated, painted blue, with the head of a ram and the horns of a goat surrounding a disk; all this represented the conjunction of the sun and moon in the sign of the ram; the blue color signifying the moon’s power to lift water into the clouds during the junction. Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 116. "The hawk is a symbol of the sun and of light because of its swift flight and its rise into the highest parts of the air where light is abundant. A fish symbolizes aversion, and the Hippopotamus represents violence, as it is said to kill its father and to ravage its mother. Thus, says Plutarch, the emblematic inscription of the temple of Sais shows, 1. A child, 2. An old man, 3. A hawk, 4. A fish, 5. A hippopotamus: which signify, 1. Entrance into life, 2. Departure, 3. God, 4. Hatred, 5. Injustice. See Isis and Osiris. "The Egyptians, he adds, represent the world with a scarab because this insect rolls a ball containing its eggs in a direction contrary to that in which it moves, just as the heavens of the fixed stars cause the sun’s revolution (the yolk of an egg) to move in the opposite direction. "They also symbolize the world with the number five, representing the elements, which, according to Diodorus, are earth, water, air, fire, and ether or spirit. The Indians have the same number of elements, and according to Macrobius’s mystics, these are the supreme God, or primum mobile, the intelligence, or mens, born from Him, the soul of the world that proceeds from Him, the celestial spheres, and all terrestrial things. Hence, says Plutarch, the analogy between the Greek pente, five, and pan, all. "The ass," he says again, "is the symbol of Typhon, because just like that animal, it has a reddish color. Now Typhon signifies whatever is muddy or clay-like in nature; (in Hebrew, I find that clay, red, and ass are derived from the same root hamr). Jamblicus further tells us that clay was the symbol of matter, and he also adds that all evil and corruption stem from matter; which, when compared with Macrobius's phrase, all is perishable, susceptible of change in the celestial realm, presents us with the theory, first physical, then moral, of the ancient system of good and evil."
"Finally, a third cause of confusion was the civil organization of ancient states. When the people began to apply themselves to agriculture, the formation of a rural calendar, requiring a continued series of astronomical observations, it became necessary to appoint certain individuals charged with the functions of watching the appearance and disappearance of certain stars, to foretell the return of the inundation, of certain winds, of the rainy season, the proper time to sow every kind of grain. These men, on account of their service, were exempt from common labor, and the society provided for their maintenance. With this provision, and wholly employed in their observations, they soon became acquainted with the great phenomena of nature, and even learned to penetrate the secret of many of her operations. They discovered the movement of the stars and planets, the coincidence of their phases and returns with the productions of the earth and the action of vegetation; the medicinal and nutritive properties of plants and fruits; the action of the elements, and their reciprocal affinities. Now, as there was no other method of communicating the knowledge of these discoveries but the laborious one of oral instruction, they transmitted it only to their relations and friends, it followed therefore that all science and instruction were confined to a few families, who, arrogating it to themselves as an exclusive privilege, assumed a professional distinction, a corporation spirit, fatal to the public welfare. This continued succession of the same researches and the same labors, hastened, it is true, the progress of knowledge; but by the mystery which accompanied it, the people were daily plunged in deeper shades, and became more superstitious and more enslaved. Seeing their fellow mortals produce certain phenomena, announce, as at pleasure, eclipses and comets, heal diseases, and handle venomous serpents, they thought them in alliance with celestial powers; and, to obtain the blessings and avert the evils which they expected from above, they took them for mediators and interpreters; and thus became established in the bosom of every state sacrilegious corporations of hypocritical and deceitful men, who centered all powers in themselves; and the priests, being at once astronomers, theologians, naturalists, physicians, magicians, interpreters of the gods, oracles of men, and rivals of kings, or their accomplices, established, under the name of religion, an empire of mystery and a monopoly of instruction, which to this day have ruined every nation. . . ."
"Finally, a third source of confusion was the civil organization of ancient states. As people started to focus on agriculture and develop a rural calendar that required ongoing astronomical observations, it became necessary to appoint individuals responsible for monitoring the appearance and disappearance of certain stars to predict the inundation, specific winds, the rainy season, and the best times to plant all types of grain. These individuals, because of their service, were exempt from regular labor, and society took care of their needs. With this arrangement, fully engaged in their observations, they soon gained a deep understanding of significant natural phenomena and even uncovered the secrets of many of nature's processes. They discovered the movements of stars and planets, the timing of their phases and returns in relation to the Earth's productivity and the growth of vegetation; the medicinal and nutritional properties of plants and fruits; the effects of the elements and their mutual affinities. Since there was no other way to share the knowledge from these discoveries except through the laborious process of oral teaching, they only passed it on to their relatives and friends. As a result, all knowledge and instruction were limited to a few families, who took it as their exclusive privilege, developing a professional class mentality that was detrimental to public welfare. This ongoing cycle of the same research and work did indeed accelerate the advancement of knowledge; however, the mystery surrounding it caused the people to become increasingly lost in ignorance, leading to greater superstition and oppression. Observing their fellow humans produce certain phenomena, predict eclipses and comets, heal illnesses, and handle venomous snakes, they believed these individuals had a connection to celestial forces. In seeking blessings and trying to avoid the misfortunes they expected from above, they regarded them as mediators and interpreters. Thus, sacrilegious groups of hypocritical and deceitful individuals became entrenched in every state, consolidating all power in themselves; the priests, being astronomers, theologians, naturalists, physicians, magicians, interpreters of the gods, oracles for the people, and rivals or accomplices of kings, established, under the banner of religion, an empire of mystery and a monopoly on knowledge, which has since devastated every nation..."
Here the priests of all the groups interrupted the orator, and with loud cries accused him of impiety, irreligion, blasphemy; and endeavored to cut short his discourse; but the legislator observing that this was only an exposition of historical facts, which, if false or forged, would be easily refuted; that hitherto the declaration of every opinion had been free, and without this it would be impossible to discover the truth, the orator proceeded:
Here the priests from all the groups interrupted the speaker, yelling accusations of impiety, irreligion, and blasphemy; they tried to cut his speech short. However, the legislator noticed that this was just a presentation of historical facts, which could be easily disproven if they were false or made-up. He pointed out that until now, everyone had been free to express their opinions, and without that freedom, it would be impossible to uncover the truth. So, the speaker continued:
"Now, from all these causes, and from the continual associations of ill-assorted ideas, arose a mass of disorders in theology, in morals, and in traditions; first, because the animals represented the stars, the characters of the animals, their appetites, their sympathies, their aversions, passed over to the gods, and were supposed to be their actions; thus, the god Ichneumon made war against the god Crocodile; the god Wolf liked to eat the god Sheep; the god Ibis devoured the god Serpent; and the deity became a strange, capricious, and ferocious being, whose idea deranged the judgment of man, and corrupted his morals and his reason.
"Now, from all these reasons, and from the constant mix of poorly matched ideas, a bunch of issues emerged in theology, morals, and traditions. First, because the animals represented the stars, their traits, desires, likes, and dislikes were transferred to the gods and were thought to reflect their actions. So, the god Ichneumon fought against the god Crocodile; the god Wolf liked to eat the god Sheep; the god Ibis consumed the god Serpent; and the deity turned into a strange, unpredictable, and fierce being, distorting human judgment and corrupting morals and reasoning."
"Again, because in the spirit of their worship every family, every nation, took for its special patron a star or a constellation, the affections or antipathies of the symbolic animal were transferred to its sectaries; and the partisans of the god Dog were enemies to those of the god Wolf;* those who adored the god Ox had an abhorrence to those who ate him; and religion became the source of hatred and hostility,—the senseless cause of frenzy and superstition.
"Once again, because in the spirit of their worship every family and nation chose a specific star or constellation as their special patron, the feelings, whether positive or negative, associated with the symbolic animal were directed towards its followers; those who supported the god Dog viewed the followers of the god Wolf as enemies; those who worshiped the god Ox had a strong dislike for those who consumed him; and religion became a source of hatred and hostility—an irrational cause of madness and superstition."
* These are properly the words of Plutarch, who relates that those various worships were given by a king of Egypt to the different towns to disunite and enslave them, and these kings had been taken from the cast of priests. See Isis and Osiris.
* These are actually the words of Plutarch, who explains that the different forms of worship were established by an Egyptian king to divide and control the towns, and these kings were chosen from the group of priests. See Isis and Osiris.
"Besides, the names of those animal-stars having, for this same reason of patronage, been conferred on countries, nations, mountains, and rivers, these objects were taken for gods, and hence followed a mixture of geographical, historical, and mythological beings, which confounded all traditions.
"Moreover, the names of those animal constellations, given to countries, nations, mountains, and rivers for the same reason of patronage, were regarded as deities. This resulted in a blend of geographical, historical, and mythological figures that tangled all traditions."
"Finally, by the analogy of actions which were ascribed to them, the god-stars, having been taken for men, for heroes, for kings, kings and heroes took in their turn the actions of gods for models, and by imitation became warriors, conquerors, proud, lascivious, indolent, sanguinary; and religion consecrated the crimes of despots, and perverted the principles of government."
"Finally, based on the actions attributed to them, the god-stars, once thought to be men, heroes, and kings, in turn adopted the actions of the gods as their examples. By imitating them, they became warriors, conquerors, arrogant, indulgent, lazy, and bloodthirsty. Religion then sanctified the crimes of tyrants and twisted the principles of governance."
IV. Fourth system. Worship of two Principles, or Dualism.
IV. Fourth system. Worship of two Principles, or Dualism.
"In the mean time, the astronomical priests, enjoying peace and abundance in their temples, made every day new progress in the sciences, and the system of the world unfolding gradually to their view, they raised successively various hypotheses as to its agents and effects, which became so many theological systems.
"In the meantime, the astronomical priests, living in peace and plenty in their temples, made daily advancements in the sciences. As the system of the world gradually revealed itself to them, they proposed various hypotheses about its agents and effects, which developed into several theological systems."
"The voyages of the maritime nations and the caravans of the nomads of Asia and Africa, having given them a knowledge of the earth from the Fortunate Islands to Serica, and from the Baltic to the sources of the Nile, the comparison of the phenomena of the various zones taught them the rotundity of the earth, and gave birth to a new theory. Having remarked that all the operations of nature during the annual period were reducible to two principal ones, that of producing and that of destroying; that on the greater part of the globe these two operations were performed in the intervals of the two equinoxes; that is to say, during the six months of summer every thing was procreating and multiplying, and that during winter everything languished and almost died; they supposed in Nature two contrary powers, which were in a continual state of contention and exertion; and considering the celestial sphere in this view, they divided the images which they figured upon it into two halves or hemispheres; so that the constellations which were on the summer heaven formed a direct and superior empire; and those which were on the winter heaven composed an antipode and inferior empire. Therefore, as the constellations of summer accompanied the season of long, warm, and unclouded days, and that of fruits and harvests, they were considered as the powers of light, fecundity, and creation; and, by a transition from a physical to a moral sense, they became genii, angels of science, of beneficence, of purity and virtue. And as the constellations of winter were connected with long nights and polar fogs, they were the genii of darkness, of destruction, of death; and by transition, angels of ignorance, of wickedness, of sin and vice. By this arrangement the heaven was divided into two domains, two factions; and the analogy of human ideas already opened a vast field to the errors of imagination; but the mistake and the illusion were determined, if not occasioned by a particular circumstance. (Observe plate Astrological Heaven of the Ancients.)
"The journeys of sea-faring nations and the caravans of nomads in Asia and Africa gave them a knowledge of the world from the Fortunate Islands to Serica, and from the Baltic to the sources of the Nile. By comparing the different phenomena of various regions, they learned about the roundness of the earth, which led to a new theory. They noticed that all natural processes over the year could be reduced to two main actions: creating and destroying. They saw that across most of the globe, these two actions took place between the two equinoxes; in other words, during the six months of summer, everything thrived and multiplied, while in winter, life waned and nearly died. They imagined two opposing forces in nature that were constantly in conflict and effort. Viewing the celestial sphere this way, they split the images they saw into two halves or hemispheres. The constellations in the summer sky represented a direct and superior power, while those in the winter sky formed an inferior and opposing power. So, as the summer constellations brought long, warm, and clear days, along with fruits and harvests, they were seen as symbols of light, fertility, and creation. Consequently, they were regarded as spirits, angels of knowledge, kindness, purity, and virtue. Meanwhile, the winter constellations, associated with long nights and polar fogs, were the spirits of darkness, destruction, and death; thus, they became symbols of ignorance, evil, sin, and vice. This way, the sky was divided into two realms, two factions; and the parallels with human thoughts laid the groundwork for numerous imaginative errors. However, these mistakes and illusions were often shaped, if not caused, by specific circumstances. (Observe plate Astrological Heaven of the Ancients.)"
"In the projection of the celestial sphere, as traced by the astronomical priests,* the zodiac and the constellations, disposed in circular order, presented their halves in diametrical opposition; the hemisphere of winter, antipode of that of summer, was adverse, contrary, opposed to it. By a continual metaphor, these words acquired a moral sense; and the adverse genii, or angels, became revolted enemies.** From that moment all the astronomical history of the constellations was changed into a political history; the heavens became a human state, where things happened as on the earth. Now, as the earthly states, the greater part despotic, had already their monarchs, and as the sun was apparently the monarch of the skies, the summer hemisphere (empire of light) and its constellations (a nation of white angels) had for king an enlightened God, a creator intelligent and good. And as every rebel faction must have its chief, the heaven of winter, the subterranean empire of darkness and woe, and its stars, a nation of black angels, giants and demons, had for their chief a malignant genius, whose character was applied by different people to the constellation which to them was the most remarkable. In Egypt it was at first the Scorpion, first zodiacal sign after Libra, and for a long time chief of the winter signs ; then it was the Bear, or the polar Ass, called Typhon, that is to say, deluge,** on account of the rains which deluge the earth during the dominion of that star. At a later period,*** in Persia,**** it was the Serpent, who, under the name of Abrimanes, formed the basis of the system of Zoroaster; and it is the same, O Christians and Jews! that has become your serpent of Eve (the celestial virgin,) and that of the cross; in both cases it is the emblem of Satan, the enemy and great adversary of the Ancient of Days, sung by Daniel.
"In the depiction of the celestial sphere, as mapped out by the astronomical priests,* the zodiac and the constellations, arranged in circular order, showed their halves in direct opposition; the winter hemisphere, opposite to that of summer, was contrary and in conflict with it. Through a continual metaphor, these words took on a moral meaning; the opposing spirits, or angels, turned into rebellious enemies.** From that point, the entire astronomical narrative of the constellations transformed into a political story; the heavens became like a human state, where events unfolded as they did on Earth. Just as earthly states, most of which were despotic, already had their rulers, and since the sun was clearly the ruler of the skies, the summer hemisphere (realm of light) and its constellations (a nation of white angels) had an enlightened God, an intelligent and good creator, as their king. And since every rebellious faction needs a leader, the winter heaven, the underground empire of darkness and misery, and its stars, a nation of black angels, giants, and demons, had a malicious spirit as their leader, whose identity was associated by different cultures with the constellation they deemed most notable. In Egypt, it was initially the Scorpion, the first zodiac sign after Libra, and for a long time the leader of the winter signs; then it was the Bear, or the polar Ass, called Typhon, meaning deluge,** due to the rains that flood the earth during that star's reign. Later,*** in Persia,**** it became the Serpent, known as Abrimanes, which formed the foundation of Zoroaster's system; and it is the same one, O Christians and Jews! that has evolved into your serpent of Eve (the celestial virgin) and that of the cross; in both instances, it is the symbol of Satan, the adversary and great opponent of the Ancient of Days, as celebrated by Daniel."
* The ancient priests had three kinds of spheres, which it may be useful to make known to the reader. "We read in Eusebius," says Porphyry, "that Zoroaster was the first who, having fixed upon a cavern pleasantly situated in the mountains adjacent to Persia, formed the idea of consecrating it to Mithra (the sun) creator and father of all things: that is to say, having made in this cavern several geometrical divisions, representing the seasons and the elements, he imitated on a small scale the order and disposition of the universe by Mithra. After Zoroaster, it became a custom to consecrate caverns for the celebration of mysteries: so that in like manner as temples were dedicated to the Gods, rural altars to heroes and terrestrial deities, etc., subterranean abodes to infernal deities, so caverns and grottoes were consecrated to the world, to the universe, and to the nymphs: and from hence Pythagoras and Plato borrowed the idea of calling the earth a cavern, a cave, de Antro Nympharum. Such was the first projection of the sphere in relief; though the Persians give the honor of the invention to Zoroaster, it is doubtless due to the Egyptians; for we may suppose from this projection being the most simple that it was the most ancient; the caverns of Thebes, full of similar pictures, tend to strengthen this opinion. The following was the second projection: "The prophets or hierophants," says Bishop Synnesius, "who had been initiated in the mysteries, do not permit the common workmen to form idols or images of the Gods; but they descend themselves into the sacred caves, where they have concealed coffers containing certain spheres upon which they construct those images secretly and without the knowledge of the people, who despise simple and natural things and wish for prodigies and fables." (Syn. in Calvit.) That is, the ancient priests had armillary spheres like ours; and this passage, which so well agrees with that of Chaeremon, gives us the key to all their theological astrology. Lastly, they had flat models of the nature of Plate V. with the difference that they were of a very complicated nature, having every fictitious division of decan and subdecan, with the hieroglyphic signs of their influence. Kircher has given us a copy of one of them in his Egyptian Oedipus, and Gybelin a figured fragment in his book of the calendar (under the name of the Egyptian Zodiac). The ancient Egyptians, says the astrologer Julius Firmicus, (Astron. lib. ii. and lib. iv., c. 16), divide each sign of the Zodiac into three sections; and each section was under the direction of an imaginary being whom they called decan or chief of ten; so that there were three decans a month, and thirty-six a year. Now these decans, who were also called Gods (Theoi), regulated the destinies of mankind—and they were placed particularly in certain stars. They afterwards imagined in every ten three other Gods, whom they called arbiters; so that there were nine for every month, and these were farther divided into an infinite number of powers. The Persians and Indians made their spheres on similar plans; and if a picture thereof were to be drawn from the description given by Scaliger at the end of Manilius, we should find in it a complete explanation of their hieroglyphics, for every article forms one. ** If it was for this reason the Persians always wrote the name of Ahrimanes inverted thus: ['Ahrimanes' upside down and backwards]. *** Typhon, pronounced Touphon by the Greeks, is precisely the touphan of the Arabs, which signifies deluge; and these deluges in mythology are nothing more than winter and the rains, or the overflowing of the Nile: as their pretended fires which are to destroy the world, are simply the summer season. And it is for this reason that Aristotle (De Meteor, lib. I. c. xiv), says, that the winter of the great cyclic year is a deluge; and its summer a conflagration. "The Egyptians," says Porphyry, "employ every year a talisman in remembrance of the world: at the summer solstice they mark their houses, flocks and trees with red, supposing that on that day the whole world had been set on fire. It was also at the same period that they celebrated the pyrric or fire dance." And this illustrates the origin of purification by fire and by water; for having denominated the tropic of Cancer the gate of heaven, and the genial heat of celestial fire, and that of Capricorn the gate of deluge or of water, it was imagined that the spirit or souls who passed through these gates in their way to and from heaven, were roasted or bathed: hence the baptism of Mithra; and the passage through flames, observed throughout the East long before Moses. **** That is when the ram became the equinoctial sign, or rather when the alteration of the skies showed that it was no longer the bull.
* The ancient priests had three types of spheres, which it may be useful to share with the reader. "We read in Eusebius," says Porphyry, "that Zoroaster was the first who, having chosen a cave beautifully located in the mountains near Persia, decided to dedicate it to Mithra (the sun), the creator and father of all things: in other words, he created various geometric divisions in this cave, representing the seasons and elements, mimicking on a small scale the order and structure of the universe as attributed to Mithra. After Zoroaster, it became customary to dedicate caves for the celebration of mysteries: just as temples were built for the Gods, rural altars for heroes and earthly deities, and subterranean homes for underworld deities, so too were caves and grottos consecrated to the world, the universe, and the nymphs. From this, Pythagoras and Plato were inspired to refer to the earth as a cavern, a cave, de Antro Nympharum. This was the first creation of the sphere in relief; although the Persians credit Zoroaster with the invention, it more likely originated with the Egyptians; we can assume that this simpler design is the most ancient, as evidenced by the caves of Thebes filled with similar imagery. The second type was as follows: "The prophets or hierophants," says Bishop Synnesius, "who were initiated in the mysteries, do not allow ordinary workers to make idols or images of the Gods; instead, they descend into the sacred caves, where they have hidden chests containing certain spheres on which they secretly create these images, away from the knowledge of the people, who underestimate simple and natural things and crave wonders and mythology." (Syn. in Calvit.) In essence, the ancient priests had armillary spheres like ours, and this passage aligns perfectly with that of Chaeremon, giving us the key to all their theological astrology. Lastly, they possessed flat models similar to Plate V, but far more complex, featuring every fictitious division of decan and subdecan, along with the hieroglyphic signs of their influence. Kircher has included a copy of one such model in his Egyptian Oedipus, and Gybelin presented a pictorial fragment in his book of the calendar (under the name of the Egyptian Zodiac). The ancient Egyptians, according to the astrologer Julius Firmicus, (Astron. lib. ii. and lib. iv., c. 16), divided each sign of the Zodiac into three parts; each section fell under the watch of an imaginary entity they called a decan or chief of ten, resulting in three decans per month, and thirty-six in a year. These decans, also referred to as Gods (Theoi), influenced human destinies and were particularly linked to certain stars. They later imagined three additional Gods, referred to as arbiters, for every ten, meaning nine for each month, further broken down into countless powers. The Persians and Indians crafted their spheres based on similar principles; if a depiction were to be drawn from Scaliger’s description at the end of Manilius, it would provide a complete explanation of their hieroglyphics, with each element forming part of the whole. ** This is why the Persians always wrote the name of Ahrimanes inverted this way: ['Ahrimanes' upside down and backwards]. *** Typhon, pronounced Touphon by the Greeks, is exactly the touphan of the Arabs, meaning deluge; and these mythological deluges simply represent winter and rain, or the overflowing of the Nile: likewise, their supposed fires meant to end the world are actually the season of summer. For this reason, Aristotle (De Meteor, lib. I. c. xiv) states that the winter of the great cyclic year is a deluge; and its summer a conflagration. "The Egyptians," says Porphyry, "each year use a talisman to remember the world: at the summer solstice, they mark their homes, flocks, and trees with red, believing that on that day the entire world was set ablaze. It was also during this time that they celebrated the pyrric or fire dance." This illustrates the origins of purification by fire and water; by designating the tropic of Cancer as the gate of heaven and the pleasant warmth of celestial fire, and Capricorn as the gate of the deluge or water, it was imagined that spirits or souls passing through these gates on their way to and from heaven were either roasted or bathed: hence the baptism of Mithra; and the crossing through flames, seen throughout the East long before Moses. **** This is when the ram became the equinoctial sign, or more precisely when the shift in the skies indicated that the bull was no longer the sign.
"In Syria, it was the hog or wild boar, enemy of Adonis; because in that country the functions of the Northern Bear were performed by the animal whose inclination for mire and dirt was emblematic of winter. And this is the reason, followers of Moses and Mahomet! that you hold him in horror, in imitation of the priests of Memphis and Balbec, who detested him as the murderer of their God, the sun. This likewise, O Indians! is the type of your Chib-en; and it has been likewise the Pluto of your brethren, the Romans and Greeks; in like manner, your Brama, God the creator, is only the Persian Ormuzd, and the Egyptian Osiris, whose very name expresses creative power, producer of forms. And these gods received a worship analogous to their attributes, real or imaginary; which worship was divided into two branches, according to their characters. The good god receives a worship of love and joy, from which are derived all religious acts of gaiety, such as festivals, dances, banquets, offerings of flowers, milk, honey, perfumes; in a word, everything grateful to the senses and to the soul.* The evil god, on the contrary, received a worship of fear and pain; whence originated all religious acts of the gloomy sort,** tears, desolations, mournings, self-denials, bloody offerings, and cruel sacrifices.
"In Syria, it was the pig or wild boar, the enemy of Adonis; because in that country, the roles of the Northern Bear were taken on by the animal whose love for mud and dirt symbolized winter. And this is why, followers of Moses and Muhammad, you view him with horror, mimicking the priests of Memphis and Baalbek, who hated him as the killer of their God, the sun. This, too, O Indians, is the form of your Chib-en; and it has also been the Pluto for your brothers, the Romans and Greeks; similarly, your Brama, the God the creator, is just the Persian Ormuzd and the Egyptian Osiris, whose very name signifies creative power, the producer of forms. These gods received worship that matched their attributes, whether real or imaginary; this worship was divided into two categories, depending on their natures. The good god receives worship filled with love and joy, from which arise all joyful religious acts, like festivals, dances, feasts, offerings of flowers, milk, honey, perfumes; in short, everything pleasant to the senses and to the soul. The evil god, on the other hand, received worship based on fear and suffering; hence came all gloomy religious practices, such as tears, despair, mourning, self-denial, bloody offerings, and cruel sacrifices."
* All the ancient festivals respecting the return and exaltation of the sun were of this description: hence the hilaria of the Roman calendar at the period of the passage, Pascha, of the vernal equinox. The dances were imitations of the march of the planets. Those of the Dervises still represent it to this day. ** "Sacrifices of blood," says Porphyry, "were only offered to Demons and evil Genii to avert their wrath. Demons are fond of blood, humidity, stench." Apud. Euseb. Proep. Ev., p. 173. "The Egyptians," says Plutarch, "only offer bloody victims to Typhon. They sacrifice to him a red ox, and the animal immolated is held in execration and loaded with all the sins of the people." The goat of Moses. See Isis and Osiris. Strabo says, speaking of Moses, and the Jews, "Circumcision and the prohibition of certain kinds of meat sprung from superstition." And I observe, respecting the ceremony of circumcision, that its object was to take from the symbol of Osiris, (Phallus) the pretended obstacle to fecundity: an obstacle which bore the seal of Typhon, "whose nature," says Plutarch, "is made up of all that hinders, opposes, causes obstruction."
* All the ancient festivals celebrating the return and elevation of the sun were like this: thus the hilaria in the Roman calendar during the time of Pascha, at the spring equinox. The dances were imitations of the movement of the planets. The Dervishes continue to represent this today. ** "Blood sacrifices," Porphyry states, "were only made to Demons and evil Spirits to ward off their anger. Demons are drawn to blood, moisture, and foul smells." Apud. Euseb. Proep. Ev., p. 173. "The Egyptians," Plutarch explains, "only offer bloody sacrifices to Typhon. They sacrifice a red ox to him, and the animal that is killed is cursed and burdened with all the sins of the people." The goat of Moses. See Isis and Osiris. Strabo mentions, talking about Moses and the Jews, "Circumcision and the ban on certain types of meat originate from superstition." And I note, regarding the circumcision ritual, that its purpose was to remove from the symbol of Osiris (the Phallus) the supposed barrier to fertility: a barrier that bore the mark of Typhon, "whose essence," Plutarch says, "consists of everything that hinders, opposes, and obstructs."
"Hence arose that distinction of terrestrial beings into pure and impure, sacred and abominable, according as their species were of the number of the constellations of one of these two gods, and made part of his domain; and this produced, on the one hand, the superstitions concerning pollutions and purifications; and, on the other, the pretended efficacious virtues of amulets and talismans.
"Hence came the distinction of earthly beings into pure and impure, sacred and abominable, depending on whether their species belonged to the constellations of one of these two gods and were part of his realm. This led to superstitions about pollution and purification on one hand, and false claims about the powerful properties of amulets and talismans on the other."
"You conceive now," continued the orator, addressing himself to the Persians, the Indians, the Jews, the Christians, the Mussulmans, "you conceive the origin of those ideas of battles and rebellions, which equally abound in all your mythologies. You see what is meant by white and black angels, your cherubim and seraphim, with heads of eagles, of lions, or of bulls; your deus, devils, demons, with horns of goats and tails of serpents; your thrones and dominions, ranged in seven orders or gradations, like the seven spheres of the planets; all beings acting the same parts, and endowed with the same attributes in your Vedas, Bibles, and Zend-avestas, whether they have for chiefs Ormuzd or Brama, Typhon or Chiven, Michael or Satan;—whether they appear under the form of giants with a hundred arms and feet of serpents, or that of gods metamorphosed into lions, storks, bulls or cats, as they are in the sacred fables of the Greeks and Egyptians. You perceive the successive filiation of these ideas, and how, in proportion to their remoteness from their source, and as the minds of men became refined, their gross forms have been polished, and rendered less disgusting.
"You understand now," continued the speaker, addressing the Persians, Indians, Jews, Christians, and Muslims, "you understand the origin of those ideas about battles and rebellions that are found in all your mythologies. You see what is meant by white and black angels, your cherubs and seraphs, with heads of eagles, lions, or bulls; your gods, devils, and demons, with goat horns and serpent tails; your thrones and dominions, arranged in seven ranks or levels, like the seven spheres of planets; all beings playing the same roles and having the same characteristics in your Vedas, Bibles, and Zend-Avestas, whether they are led by Ormuzd or Brama, Typhon or Chiven, Michael or Satan;—whether they appear as giants with a hundred arms and serpent feet, or as gods transformed into lions, storks, bulls, or cats, as seen in the sacred stories of the Greeks and Egyptians. You recognize the gradual development of these ideas, and how, as they moved away from their original source and as people's minds became more refined, their crude forms have been polished and made less repulsive."
"But in the same manner as you have seen the system of two opposite principles or gods arise from that of symbols, interwoven into its texture, your attention shall now be called to a new system which has grown out of this, and to which this has served in its turn as the basis and support.
"But just as you have seen the system of two opposing principles or gods emerge from that of symbols, woven into its fabric, your attention will now be directed to a new system that has developed from this, with this serving as its foundation and support."
V. Moral and Mystical Worship, or System of a Future State.
V. Moral and Mystical Worship, or System of a Future State.
"Indeed, when the vulgar heard speak of a new heaven and another world, they soon gave a body to these fictions; they erected therein a real theatre of action, and their notions of astronomy and geography served to strengthen, if not to originate, this illusion.
"Indeed, when the common people heard talk about a new heaven and another world, they quickly turned these fictions into something tangible; they created a real stage for this idea, and their understanding of astronomy and geography helped to reinforce, if not create, this illusion."
"On the one hand, the Phoenician navigators who passed the pillars of Hercules, to fetch the tin of Thule and the amber of the Baltic, related that at the extremity of the world, the end of the ocean (the Mediterranean), where the sun sets for the countries of Asia, were the Fortunate Islands, the abode of eternal spring; and beyond were the hyperborean regions, placed under the earth (relatively to the tropics) where reigned an eternal night.* From these stories, misunderstood, and no doubt confusedly related, the imagination of the people composed the Elysian fields,** regions of delight, placed in a world below, having their heaven, their sun, and their stars; and Tartarus, a place of darkness, humidity, mire, and frost. Now, as man, inquisitive of that which he knows not, and desirous of protracting his existence, had already interrogated himself concerning what was to become of him after his death, as he had early reasoned on the principle of life which animates his body, and which leaves it without deforming it, and as he had imagined airy substances, phantoms, and shades, he fondly believed that he should continue, in the subterranean world, that life which it was too painful for him to lose; and these lower regions seemed commodious for the reception of the beloved objects which he could not willingly resign.
"On the one hand, the Phoenician navigators who passed the pillars of Hercules to get the tin from Thule and the amber from the Baltic told stories that at the edge of the world, at the end of the ocean (the Mediterranean), where the sun sets for the countries of Asia, were the Fortunate Islands, a place of eternal spring; and beyond that were the hyperborean regions, located under the earth (relative to the tropics) where eternal night reigned.* From these tales, misunderstood and likely confused, people’s imaginations created the Elysian fields,** realms of delight placed in an underworld, complete with their own heaven, sun, and stars; and Tartarus, a place of darkness, dampness, muck, and frost. Now, since humans, curious about the unknown and eager to extend their existence, had already wondered about what would happen to them after death, had early contemplated the life force that animates their bodies and departs without deforming them, and had envisioned airy substances, ghosts, and shadows, they eagerly believed that they would continue in the underground world a life that was too painful for them to lose; and these lower regions seemed perfect for hosting the loved ones they could not bear to let go."
* Nights of six months duration. ** Aliz, in the Phoenician or Hebrew language signifies dancing and joyous.
* Nights lasting six months. ** Aliz, in Phoenician or Hebrew, means dancing and joyful.
"On the other hand, the astrological and geological priests told such stories and made such descriptions of their heavens, as accorded perfectly well with these fictions. Having, in their metaphorical language, called the equinoxes and solstices the gates of heaven, the entrance of the seasons, they explained these terrestrial phenomena by saying, that through the gate of horn (first the bull, afterwards the ram) and through the gate of Cancer, descended the vivifying fires which give life to vegetation in the spring, and the aqueous spirits which bring, at the solstice, the inundation of the Nile; that through the gate of ivory (Libra, formerly Sagittarius, or the bowman) and that of Capricorn, or the urn, the emanations or influences of the heavens returned to their source, and reascended to their origin; and the Milky Way, which passed through the gates of the solstices, seemed to be placed there to serve them as a road or vehicle.* Besides, in their atlas, the celestial scene presented a river (the Nile, designated by the windings of the hydra), a boat, (the ship Argo) and the dog Sirius, both relative to this river, whose inundation they foretold. These circumstances, added to the preceding, and still further explaining them, increased their probability, and to arrive at Tartarus or Elysium, souls were obliged to cross the rivers Styx and Acheron in the boat of the ferryman Charon, and to pass through the gates of horn or ivory, guarded by the dog Cerberus. Finally, these inventions were applied to a civil use, and thence received a further consistency.
"On the other hand, the astrological and geological priests told stories and described their heavens in ways that matched these myths perfectly. Using their metaphorical language, they referred to the equinoxes and solstices as the gates of heaven, marking the entrance of the seasons. They explained these earthly events by saying that through the gate of horn (first the bull, then the ram) and the gate of Cancer, the life-giving fires that bring life to vegetation in spring and the watery spirits that cause the Nile to flood at the solstice descended. They said that through the gate of ivory (Libra, formerly Sagittarius, or the archer) and through Capricorn, or the urn, the emissions or influences from the heavens returned to their source and ascended back to their origin. The Milky Way, which flowed through the gates of the solstices, seemed to serve as a road or vehicle for them. Additionally, in their atlas, the celestial scene depicted a river (the Nile, represented by the twists of the hydra), a boat (the ship Argo), and the dog Sirius, all connected to this river whose flooding they predicted. These factors, along with the explanations provided earlier, made their claims seem more believable. To reach Tartarus or Elysium, souls had to cross the rivers Styx and Acheron in the boat of the ferryman Charon and pass through the gates of horn or ivory, which were guarded by the dog Cerberus. Ultimately, these inventions were given practical application, which added to their reliability."
*See Macrob. Som. Scrip. c. 12.
*See Macrob. Som. Scrip. c. 12.
"Having remarked that in their burning climate the putrefaction of dead bodies was a cause of pestilential diseases, the Egyptians, in many of their towns, had adopted the practice of burying their dead beyond the limits of the inhabited country, in the desert of the West. To go there, it was necessary to pass the channels of the river, and consequently to be received into a boat, and pay something to the ferryman, without which the body, deprived of sepulture, must have been the prey of wild beasts. This custom suggested to the civil and religious legislators the means of a powerful influence on manners; and, addressing uncultivated and ferocious men with the motives of filial piety and a reverence for the dead, they established, as a necessary condition, their undergoing a previous trial, which should decide whether the deceased merited to be admitted to the rank of the family in the black city. Such an idea accorded too well with all the others, not to be incorporated with them: the people soon adopted it; and hell had its Minos and its Rhadamanthus, with the wand, the bench, the ushers, and the urn, as in the earthly and civil state. It was then that God became a moral and political being, a lawgiver to men, and so much the more to be dreaded, as this supreme legislator, this final judge, was inaccessible and invisible. Then it was that this fabulous and mythological world, composed of such odd materials and disjointed parts, became a place of punishments and of rewards, where divine justice was supposed to correct what was vicious and erroneous in the judgment of men. This spiritual and mystical system acquired the more credit, as it took possession of man by all his natural inclinations. The oppressed found in it the hope of indemnity, and the consolation of future vengeance; the oppressor, expecting by rich offerings to purchase his impunity, formed out of the errors of the vulgar an additional weapon of oppression; the chiefs of nations, the kings and priests, found in this a new instrument of domination by the privilege which they reserved to themselves of distributing the favors and punishments of the great judge, according to the merit or demerit of actions, which they took care to characterize as best suited their system.
"Noticing that in their hot climate the decay of dead bodies caused deadly diseases, the Egyptians in many of their cities began the practice of burying their dead outside the inhabited areas, in the Western desert. To reach these burial sites, people had to cross the river’s channels, which meant they needed to board a boat and pay the ferryman. Without this payment, the body would be left unburied and vulnerable to wild animals. This practice led civil and religious leaders to see an opportunity to influence behavior; they appealed to the uncultivated and brutal by invoking themes of filial devotion and respect for the dead. They established a necessary condition that required a prior trial to determine whether the deceased deserved to join the ranks of their family in the afterlife. This idea fit well with other beliefs and was quickly embraced by the people; the concept of a judge in the afterlife emerged, complete with Minos and Rhadamanthus, holding a wand, presiding over judgment alongside ushers and an urn, just like in earthly governance. At that moment, God transformed into a moral and political entity, a lawgiver for humanity, feared even more because this supreme legislator, this ultimate judge, was unreachable and unseen. That was when this fantastical and mythological realm, built from strange materials and fragmented pieces, became a realm of punishments and rewards, where divine justice was believed to correct what was wrong and flawed in human judgment. This spiritual and mystical framework gained credibility as it resonated with all of humanity’s natural instincts. The oppressed found hope for restitution and comfort in future revenge; the oppressors believed they could buy their way to safety through generous offerings, turning the misunderstandings of ordinary people into another tool of oppression. Nation leaders, kings, and priests discovered a new means of control, claiming the right to distribute favors and punishments from the great judge based on the perceived merit or blame of actions, which they defined to best fit their agenda."
"This, then, is the manner in which an invisible and imaginary world has been introduced into the real and visible one; this is the origin of those regions of pleasure and pain, of which you Persians have made your regenerated earth, your city of resurrection, placed under the equator, with this singular attribute, that in it the blessed cast no shade.* Of these materials, Jews and Christians, disciples of the Persians, have you formed your New Jerusalem of the Apocalypse, your paradise, your heaven, copied in all its parts from the astrological heaven of Hermes: and your hell, ye Mussulmans, your bottomless pit, surmounted by a bridge, your balance for weighing souls and good works, your last judgment by the angels Monkir and Nekir, are likewise modeled from the mysterious ceremonies of the cave of Mithras** and your heaven differs not in the least from that of Osiris, of Ormuzd, and of Brama.
"This is how an invisible and imagined world has been brought into our real and visible one; this is the source of the areas of pleasure and pain that you Persians have created in your renewed earth, your city of resurrection, positioned under the equator, with the unique feature that in it the blessed cast no shadow.* From these ideas, Jews and Christians, followers of the Persians, have crafted your New Jerusalem from the Apocalypse, your paradise, your heaven, modeled entirely after the astrological heaven of Hermes; and your hell, O Muslims, your endless abyss, topped with a bridge, your scale for measuring souls and good deeds, your final judgment by the angels Monkir and Nekir, is also based on the mysterious rituals of the cave of Mithras** and your heaven is no different from that of Osiris, Ormuzd, and Brahma."
* There is on this subject a passage in Plutarch, so interesting and explanatory of the whole of this system, that we shall cite it entire. Having observed that the theory of good and evil had at all times occupied the attention of philosophers and theologians, he adds: "Many suppose there to be two gods of opposite inclinations, one delighting in good, the other in evil; the first of these is called particularly by the name of God, the second by that of Genius or Demon. Zoroaster has denominated them Oromaze and Ahrimanes, and has said that of whatever falls under the cognizance of our senses, light is the best representation of the one, and darkness and ignorance of the other. He adds, that Mithra is an intermediate being, and it is for this reason the Persians call Mithra the mediator or intermediator. Each of these Gods has distinct plants and animals consecrated to him: for example, dogs, birds and hedge-hogs belong to the good Genius, and all aquatic animals to the evil one. "The Persians also say, that Oromaze was born or formed out of the purest light; Ahrimanes, on the contrary, out of the thickest darkness: that Oromaze made six gods as good as himself, and Ahrimanes opposed to them six wicked ones: that Oromaze afterwards multiplied himself threefold (Hermes trismegistus) and removed to a distance as remote from the sun as the sun is remote from the earth that he there formed stars, and, among others, Sirius, which he placed in the heavens as a guard and sentinel. He made also twenty-four other Gods, which he inclosed in an egg; but Ahrimanes created an equal number on his part, who broke the egg, and from that moment good and evil were mixed (in the universe). But Ahrimanes is one day to be conquered, and the earth to be made equal and smooth, that all men may live happy. "Theopompus adds, from the books of the Magi, that one of these Gods reigns in turn every three thousand years during which the other is kept in subjection; that they afterwards contend with equal weapons during a similar portion of time, but that in the end the evil Genius will fall (never to rise again). Then men will become happy, and their bodies cast no shade. The God who mediates all these things reclines at present in repose, waiting till he shall be pleased to execute them." See Isis and Osiris. There is an apparent allegory through the whole of this passage. The egg is the fixed sphere, the world: the six Gods of Oromaze are the six signs of summer, those of Ahrimanes the six signs of winter. The forty-eight other Gods are the forty-eight constellations of the ancient sphere, divided equally between Ahrimanes and Oronmze. The office of Sirius, as guard and sentinel, tells us that the origin of these ideas was Egyptian: finally, the expression that the earth is to become equal and smooth, and that the bodies of happy beings are to cast no shade, proves that the equator was considered as their true paradise. ** In the caves which priests every where constructed, they celebrated mysteries which consisted (says Origen against Celsus) in imitating the motion of the stars, the planets and the heavens. The initiated took the name of constellations, and assumed the figures of animals. One was a lion, another a raven, and a third a ram. Hence the use of masks in the first representation of the drama. See Ant. Devoile, vol. iii., p. 244. "In the mysteries of Ceres the chief in the procession called himself the creator; the bearer of the torch was denominated the sun; the person nearest to the altar, the moon; the herald or deacon, Mercury. In Egypt there was a festival in which the men and women represented the year, the age, the seasons, the different parts of the day, and they walked in precession after Bacchus. Athen. lib. v., ch. 7. In the cave of Mithra was a ladder with seven steps, representing the seven spheres of the planets, by means of which souls ascended and descended. This is precisely the ladder in Jacob's vision, which shows that at that epoch a the whole system was formed. There is in the French king's library a superb volume of pictures of the Indian Gods, in which the ladder is represented with the souls of men mounting it."
* There’s a passage on this topic in Plutarch that’s so interesting and explains the entire system that we will quote it in full. He noted that the idea of good and evil has always captured the attention of philosophers and theologians, adding: “Many believe there are two gods with opposing inclinations, one enjoying good and the other evil; the first is specifically referred to as God, while the second is known as Genius or Demon. Zoroaster named them Oromaze and Ahrimanes, explaining that anything we can perceive through our senses represents light for the first and darkness and ignorance for the second. He further states that Mithra is a mediator, which is why the Persians call Mithra the mediator or intermediator. Each of these gods has unique plants and animals dedicated to them: for instance, dogs, birds, and hedgehogs belong to the good Genius, while all aquatic creatures are associated with the evil one. “The Persians also say that Oromaze was born or formed from purest light; on the other hand, Ahrimanes came from the thickest darkness: Oromaze created six gods as good as himself, and Ahrimanes created six wicked ones to oppose them. Oromaze then multiplied himself threefold (Hermes trismegistus) and moved to a distance equal to that between the sun and the earth, where he formed stars, including Sirius, which he placed in the heavens as a guard and sentinel. He also made twenty-four other gods, enclosing them in an egg; however, Ahrimanes created an equal number who broke the egg, mixing good and evil in the universe from that moment. But Ahrimanes will one day be defeated, and the earth will be made equal and smooth, so all humanity can live happily. “Theopompus adds, from the books of the Magi, that one of these gods rules in turn every three thousand years while the other is subdued; they then contend equally for another similar period, but ultimately, the evil Genius will fall (never to rise again). After that, humanity will find happiness, and their bodies will cast no shadow. The god who mediates all these events currently rests, waiting until he chooses to enact them.” See Isis and Osiris. There is a clear allegory throughout this passage. The egg symbolizes the fixed sphere, the world; the six gods of Oromaze represent the six signs of summer, while those of Ahrimanes represent the six signs of winter. The forty-eight other gods symbolize the forty-eight constellations of the ancient sphere, divided equally between Ahrimanes and Oromaze. Sirius's role as a guard and sentinel indicates that these ideas originated in Egypt; lastly, the notion that the earth is to become equal and smooth, and that the bodies of happy beings will cast no shadow, suggests that the equator was viewed as their true paradise. ** In the caves that priests constructed everywhere, they celebrated mysteries consisting (as Origen noted in his work against Celsus) of imitating the movements of the stars, planets, and heavens. The initiated adopted the names of constellations and took on the figures of animals. One was a lion, another a raven, and a third a ram. This is where the use of masks in the earliest representations of drama originated. See Ant. Devoile, vol. iii., p. 244. “In the mysteries of Ceres, the leader in the procession referred to himself as the creator; the torchbearer was called the sun; the person closest to the altar was the moon; the herald or deacon was Mercury. In Egypt, there was a festival where men and women represented the year, age, seasons, and different parts of the day, and they walked in procession after Bacchus. Athen. lib. v., ch. 7. In the cave of Mithra, there was a ladder with seven steps, representing the seven spheres of the planets, allowing souls to ascend and descend. This is exactly like the ladder in Jacob's vision, indicating that by that time, the whole system was established. In the French king's library, there's a superb volume of pictures of the Indian gods, where the ladder is depicted with the souls of men ascending it.”
VI. Sixth System. The Animated World, or Worship of the Universe under diverse Emblems.
VI. Sixth System. The Animated World, or Worship of the Universe through various Symbols.
"While the nations were wandering in the dark labyrinth of mythology and fables, the physical priests, pursuing their studies and enquiries into the order and disposition of the universe, came to new conclusions, and formed new systems concerning powers and first causes.
"While the nations were lost in the tangled maze of myths and stories, the scientific scholars, pursuing their studies and investigations into the structure and arrangement of the universe, reached new conclusions and established new theories about the forces and original causes."
"Long confined to simple appearances, they saw nothing in the movement of the stars but an unknown play of luminous bodies rolling round the earth, which they believed the central point of all the spheres; but as soon as they discovered the rotundity of our planet, the consequences of this first fact led them to new considerations; and from induction to induction they rose to the highest conceptions in astronomy and physics.
"Long limited to basic observations, they saw nothing in the movement of the stars except an unfamiliar show of bright objects rotating around the Earth, which they thought was the center of all spheres. But once they learned that our planet is round, the implications of this discovery led them to rethink their ideas. Through a series of deductions, they advanced to the most profound concepts in astronomy and physics."
"Indeed, after having conceived this luminous idea, that the terrestrial globe is a little circle inscribed in the greater circle of the heavens, the theory of concentric circles came naturally into their hypothesis, to determine the unknown circle of the terrestrial globe by certain known portions of the celestial circle; and the measurement of one or more degrees of the meridian gave with precision the whole circumference. Then, taking for a compass the known diameter of the earth, some fortunate genius applied it with a bold hand to the boundless orbits of the heavens; and man, the inhabitant of a grain of sand, embracing the infinite distances of the stars, launches into the immensity of space and the eternity of time: there he is presented with a new order of the universe of which the atom-globe which he inhabited appeared no longer to be the centre; this important post was reserved to the enormous mass of the sun; and that body became the flaming pivot of eight surrounding spheres, whose movements were henceforth subjected to precise calculations.
"After coming up with the brilliant idea that Earth is a small circle within the larger circle of the heavens, they naturally introduced the theory of concentric circles to figure out the unknown circle of the Earth using certain known parts of the celestial circle. By measuring one or more degrees of the meridian, they could accurately calculate the entire circumference. Then, using the known diameter of the Earth as a guide, a brilliant thinker boldly applied this knowledge to the vast orbits of the heavens. Man, who lives on a tiny speck of dust, reaches out to the endless distances of the stars, venturing into the vastness of space and the endlessness of time. This revelation presented a new order of the universe where the tiny globe he inhabited was no longer at the center; that significant spot was instead occupied by the massive sun, which became the blazing center of eight surrounding spheres, whose movements could now be precisely calculated."
"It was indeed a great effort for the human mind to have undertaken to determine the disposition and order of the great engines of nature; but not content with this first effort, it still endeavored to develop the mechanism, and discover the origin and the instinctive principle. Hence, engaged in the abstract and metaphysical nature of motion and its first cause, of the inherent or incidental properties of matter, its successive forms and its extension, that is to say, of time and space unbounded, the physical theologians lost themselves in a chaos of subtile reasoning and scholastic controversy.*
"It was indeed a huge challenge for the human mind to figure out the arrangement and order of the vast forces of nature; but not satisfied with this initial attempt, it continued to work on understanding the mechanics and uncovering the source and instinctual principles. Therefore, immersed in the abstract and philosophical aspects of motion and its root cause, the essential or additional properties of matter, its changing forms, and its reach—basically, the limitless concepts of time and space—the physical theologians became lost in a maze of intricate reasoning and academic debates."
* Consult the Ancient Astronomy of M. Bailly, and you will find our assertions respecting the knowledge of the priests amply proved.
* Check out the Ancient Astronomy of M. Bailly, and you will find that our claims about the priests' knowledge are well supported.
"In the first place, the action of the sun on terrestrial bodies, teaching them to regard his substance as a pure and elementary fire, they made it the focus and reservoir of an ocean of igneous and luminous fluid, which, under the name of ether, filled the universe and nourished all beings. Afterwards, having discovered, by a physical and attentive analysis, this same fire, or another perfectly resembling it, in the composition of all bodies, and having perceived it to be the essential agent of that spontaneous movement which is called life in animals and vegetation in plants, they conceived the mechanism and harmony of the universe, as of a homogeneous whole, of one identical body, whose parts, though distant, had nevertheless an intimate relation;* and the world was a living being, animated by the organic circulation of an igneous and even electrical fluid,** which, by a term of comparison borrowed first from men and animals, had the sun for a heart and a focus.***
"In the beginning, the way the sun interacts with earthly bodies taught them to see its essence as a pure and fundamental fire. They made it the center and source of an ocean of fiery and luminous energy, which, called ether, filled the universe and sustained all living things. Later, through careful analysis, they recognized this same fire, or one very similar to it, in the makeup of all bodies and identified it as the key force behind the spontaneous movement known as life in animals and growth in plants. They envisioned the universe's mechanism and harmony as a unified whole, one single entity whose parts, although far apart, were still closely connected; the world was seen as a living organism, driven by the organic flow of a fiery and even electrical energy, which, using a comparison originally from humans and animals, regarded the sun as its heart and center."
* These are the very words of Jamblicus. De Myst. Egypt. ** The more I consider what the ancients understood by ether and spirit, and what the Indians call akache, the stronger do I find the analogy between it and the electrial fluid. A luminous fluid, principle of warmth and motion, pervading the universe, forming the matter of the stars, having small round particles, which insinuate themselves into bodies, and fill them by dilating itself, be their extent what it will. What can more strongly resemble electricity? *** Natural philosophers, says Macrobius, call the sun the heart of the world. Som. Scrip. c. 20. The Egyptians, says Plutarch, call the East the face, the North the right side, and the South the left side of the world, because there the heart is placed. They continually compare the universe to a man; and hence the celebrated microcosm of the Alchymists. We observe, by the bye, that the Alchymists, Cabalists, Free-masons, Magnetisers, Martinists, and every other such sort of visionaries, are but the mistaken disciples of this ancient school: we say mistaken, because, in spite of their pretensions, the thread of the occult science is broken.
* These are the very words of Jamblicus. De Myst. Egypt. ** The more I think about what the ancients meant by ether and spirit, which the Indians refer to as akache, the clearer the similarity to the electrical fluid becomes. It’s a luminous fluid, a source of warmth and motion, that fills the universe, creating the matter of the stars, consisting of small round particles that seep into bodies and expand within them, no matter their size. What could resemble electricity more closely? *** Natural philosophers, according to Macrobius, call the sun the heart of the world. Som. Scrip. c. 20. The Egyptians, as Plutarch mentions, describe the East as the face, the North as the right side, and the South as the left side of the world because that’s where the heart is located. They constantly compare the universe to a man, which is the basis for the famous microcosm of the Alchemists. It's worth noting that the Alchemists, Cabalists, Freemasons, Magnetizers, Martinists, and all other similar visionaries are merely misguided followers of this ancient tradition: we call them misguided because, despite their claims, the thread of the occult knowledge has been lost.
"From this time the physical theologians seem to have divided into several classes; one class, grounding itself on these principles resulting from observation; that nothing can be annihilated in the world; that the elements are indestructible; that they change their combinations but not their nature; that the life and death of beings are but the different modifications of the same atoms; that matter itself possesses properties which give rise to all its modes of existence; that the world is eternal,* or unlimited in space and duration; said that the whole universe was God; and, according to them, God was a being, effect and cause, agent and patient, moving principle and thing moved, having for laws the invariable properties that constitute fatality; and this class conveyed their idea by the emblem of Pan (the great whole); or of Jupiter, with a forehead of stars, body of planets, and feet of animals; or of the Orphic Egg,** whose yolk, suspended in the center of a liquid, surrounded by a vault, represented the globe of the sun, swimming in ether in the midst of the vault of heaven;*** sometimes by a great round serpent, representing the heavens where they placed the moving principle, and for that reason of an azure color, studded with spots of gold, (the stars) devouring his tail—that is, folding and unfolding himself eternally, like the revolutions of the spheres; sometimes by that of a man, having his feet joined together and tied, to signify immutable existence, wrapped in a cloak of all colors, like the face of nature, and bearing on his head a sphere of gold,**** emblem of the sphere of the stars; or by that of another man, sometimes seated on the flower of the lotos borne on the abyss of waters, sometimes lying on a pile of twelve cushions, denoting the twelve celestial signs. And here, Indians, Japanese, Siamese, Tibetans, and Chinese, is the theology, which, founded by the Egyptians and transmitted to you, is preserved in the pictures which you compose of Brama, of Beddou, of Somona-Kodom of Omito. This, ye Jews and Christians, is likewise the opinion of which you have preserved a part in your God moving on the face of the waters, by an allusion to the wind*5 which, at the beginning of the world, that is, the departure of the sun from the sign of Cancer, announced the inundation of the Nile, and seemed to prepare the creation."
"From this point on, physical theologians appear to have split into several groups; one group based its beliefs on the observations that nothing can be completely destroyed in the world, that the elements are indestructible, that they change their arrangements but not their essence, that life and death are just different forms of the same atoms, that matter itself has properties that create all its different forms of existence, and that the world is eternal or limitless in space and time. They asserted that the entire universe was God, viewing God as a being who is both effect and cause, agent and recipient, the moving force and the thing moved, governed by the unchanging properties that constitute fate. This group expressed their idea using symbols like Pan (the great whole), or Jupiter, depicted with a starry forehead, a body of planets, and animal feet; or the Orphic Egg, whose yolk, suspended in a liquid center, surrounded by a dome, represented the sun floating in ether amidst the heaven's vault; sometimes through a large round serpent, symbolizing the heavens where they placed the moving principle, colored azure and dotted with gold spots (the stars), devouring its own tail—that is, eternally folding and unfolding itself like the movements of the spheres; sometimes as a man with his feet tied together, symbolizing unchanging existence, wrapped in a cloak of many colors, like the face of nature, and wearing a golden sphere on his head, a symbol of the stars; or as another man, sometimes seated on a lotus flower borne on the depths of water, and sometimes lying on a pile of twelve cushions, representing the twelve zodiac signs. And here, Indians, Japanese, Siamese, Tibetans, and Chinese, is the theology that, founded by the Egyptians and passed down to you, is reflected in the images you create of Brama, Beddou, Somona-Kodom, and Omito. This, you Jews and Christians, is also the idea that you have preserved in part with your God moving over the waters, alluding to the wind that, at the beginning of the world, marked the departure of the sun from the sign of Cancer, announcing the Nile's flooding and seeming to prepare for creation."
* See the Pythagorean, Ocellus Lacunus. ** Vide Oedip. Aegypt. Tome II., page 205. *** This comparison of the sun with the yolk of an egg refers: 1. To its round and yellow figure; 2. To its central situation; 3. To the germ or principle of life contained in the yolk. May not the oval form of the egg allude to the elipsis of the orbs? I am inclined to this opinion. The word Orphic offers a farther observation. Macrobius says (Som. Scrip. c. 14. and c. 20), that the sun is the brain of the universe, and that it is from analogy that the skull of a human being is round, like the planet, the seat of intelligence. Now the word Oerph signifies in Hebrew the brain and its seat (cervix): Orpheus, then, is the same as Bedou or Baits; and the Bonzes are those very Orphics which Plutarch represents as quacks, who ate no meat, vended talismans and little stones, and deceived individuals, and even governments themselves. See a learned memoir of Freret sur les Orphiques, Acad. des Inscrp. vol. 25, in quarto. **** See Porphyry in Eusebus. Proep. Evang., lib. 3, p. 115. *5 The Northern or Etesian wind, which commences regularly at the solstice, with the inundation.
* See the Pythagorean, Ocellus Lacunus. ** Refer to Oedip. Aegypt. Volume II, page 205. *** This comparison of the sun to the yolk of an egg refers to: 1. its round and yellow shape; 2. its central position; 3. the germ or principle of life found in the yolk. Could the oval shape of the egg also refer to the orbit of celestial bodies? I tend to think so. The term Orphic provides another observation. Macrobius states (Som. Scrip. ch. 14 and ch. 20) that the sun is the brain of the universe, and that this is analogous to the round skull of a human, which houses intelligence. The word Oerph means in Hebrew the brain and its seat (cervix): thus, Orpheus is equivalent to Bedou or Baits; and the Bonzes are those very Orphics that Plutarch describes as charlatans, who abstained from meat, sold talismans and small stones, and deceived individuals and even governments. See a scholarly paper by Freret on the Orphics, Acad. des Inscrp. vol. 25, in quarto. **** See Porphyry in Eusebus. Proep. Evang., book 3, p. 115. *5 The Northern or Etesian wind, which starts regularly at the solstice, along with the flooding.
VII. Seventh System. Worship of the SOUL of the WORLD, that is to say, the Element of Fire, vital Principle of the Universe.
VII. Seventh System. Worship of the SOUL of the WORLD, which is the Element of Fire, the vital Principle of the Universe.
"But others, disgusted at the idea of a being at once effect and cause, agent and patient, and uniting contrary natures in the same nature, distinguished the moving principle from the thing moved; and premising that matter in itself was inert they pretended that its properties were communicated to it by a distinct agent, of which itself was only the cover or the case. This agent was called by some the igneous principle, known to be the author of all motion; by others it was supposed to be the fluid called ether, which was thought more active and subtile; and, as in animals the vital and moving principle was called a soul, a spirit, and as they reasoned constantly by comparisons, especially those drawn from human beings, they gave to the moving principle of the universe the name of soul, intelligence, spirit; and God was the vital spirit, which extended through all beings and animated the vast body of the world. And this class conveyed their idea sometimes by Youpiter,* essence of motion and animation, principle of existence, or rather existence itself; sometimes by Vulcan or Phtha, elementary principle of fire; or by the altar of Vesta, placed in the center of her temple like the sun in the heavens; sometimes by Kneph, a human figure, dressed in dark blue, having in one hand a sceptre and a girdle (the zodiac), with a cap of feathers to express the fugacity of thought, and producing from his mouth the great egg.
"But others, disgusted by the idea of something being both an effect and a cause, an agent and a patient, and uniting opposing qualities within the same being, distinguished the mover from the thing being moved. They assumed that matter itself was inert and claimed its properties were given to it by a separate agent, of which matter was merely the outer shell or casing. This agent was referred to by some as the fiery principle, known to be the source of all motion; by others, it was thought to be the fluid called ether, which was believed to be more active and refined. Just as in animals the vital and motion-giving principle was called a soul or spirit, and they often reasoned through comparisons, especially drawn from humans, they labeled the universe's moving principle as soul, intelligence, or spirit; and God was the vital spirit that permeated all beings and animated the vast body of the world. This group sometimes conveyed their idea by mentioning Jupiter, the essence of motion and life, the principle of existence, or rather existence itself; other times by Vulcan or Phtha, the elemental principle of fire; or by the altar of Vesta, positioned at the center of her temple like the sun in the sky; sometimes by Kneph, a human figure dressed in dark blue, holding a scepter and a girdle (the zodiac), with a feathered cap to represent the fleeting nature of thought, and producing the great egg from his mouth."
* This is the true pronunciation of the Jupiter of the Latins. . . . Existence itself. This is the signification of the word You.
* This is the actual way to say Jupiter in Latin. . . . Existence itself. This is what the word You means.
"Now, as a consequence of this system, every being containing in itself a portion of the igneous and etherial fluid, common and universal mover, and this fluid soul of the world being God, it followed that the souls of all beings were portions of God himself partaking of all his attributes, that is, being a substance indivisible, simple, and immortal; and hence the whole system of the immortality of the soul, which at first was eternity.*
"Now, because of this system, every being contains a part of the fiery and ethereal essence, which is the universal force, and since this essence, the soul of the world, is God, it follows that the souls of all beings are parts of God himself, sharing all his qualities. This means they are indivisible, simple, and immortal substances. Thus, this establishes the whole idea of the immortality of the soul, which was initially considered as eternity.*"
* In the system of the first spiritualists, the soul was not created with, or at the same time as the body, in order to be inserted in it: its existence was supposed to be anterior and from all eternity. Such, in a few words, is the doctrine of Macrobius on this head. Som. Seip. passim. "There exists a luminous, igneous, subtile fluid, which under the name of ether and spiritus, fills the universe. It is the essential principle and agent of motion and life, it is the Deity. When an earthly body is to be animated, a small round particle of this fluid gravitates through the milky way towards the lunar sphere; where, when it arrives, it unites with a grosser air, and becomes fit to associate with matter: it then enters and entirely fills the body, animates it, suffers, grows, increases, and diminishes with it; lastly, when the body dies, and its gross elements dissolve, this incorruptible particle takes its leave of it, and returns to the grand ocean of ether, if not retained by its union with the lunar air: it is this air or gas, which, retaining the shape of the body, becomes a phantom or ghost, the perfect representation of the deceased. The Greeks called this phantom the image or idol of the soul; the Pythagoreans, its chariot, its frame; and the Rabbinical school, its vessel, or boat. When a man had conducted himself well in this world, his whole soul, that is its chariot and ether, ascended to the moon, where a separation took place: the chariot lived in the lunar Elysium, and the ether returned to the fixed sphere, that is, to God: for the fixed heaven, says Macrobius, was by many called by the name of God (c. 14). If a man had not lived virtuously, the soul remained on earth to undergo purification, and was to wander to and fro, like the ghosts of Homer, to whom this doctrine must have been known, since he wrote after the time of Pherecydes and Pythagoras, who were its promulgators in Greece. Herodotus upon this occasion says, that the whole romance of the soul and its transmigrations was invented by the Egyptians, and propagated in Greece by men, who pretended to be its authors. I know their names, adds he, but shall not mention them (lib. 2). Cicero, however, has positively informed us, that it was Pherecydes, master of Pythagoras. Tuscul. lib. 1, sect. 16. Now admitting that this system was at that period a novelty, it accounts for Solomon's treating it as a fable, who lived 130 years before Pherecydes. 'Who knoweth,' said he, 'the spirit of a man that it goeth upwards? I said in my heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them and that they might see that they themselves are beasts. For that which befalleth the sons of men, befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea they have all one breath, so that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast: for all is vanity.'" Eccles. c. iii: v. 18. And such had been the opinion of Moses, as a translator of Herodotus (M. Archer of the Academy of Inscriptions) justly observes in note 389 of the second book; where he says also that the immortality of the soul was not introduced among the Hebrews till their intercourse with the Assyrians. In other respects, the whole Pythagorean system, properly analysed, appears to be merely a system of physics badly understood.
* In the belief of the early spiritualists, the soul was not created with or at the same time as the body to be placed into it; rather, it was believed to have existed beforehand and for all eternity. This is, in brief, what Macrobius taught on this matter. Som. Seip. passim. "There is a bright, fiery, subtle substance, known as ether and spiritus, that fills the universe. It is the core principle and driving force of movement and life; it is the Deity. When a physical body is about to be brought to life, a small round piece of this substance travels through the Milky Way toward the moon; when it arrives, it combines with denser air and becomes capable of interacting with matter. It then enters and completely fills the body, animating it, experiencing, growing, increasing, and decreasing with it. Finally, when the body dies and its physical elements break down, this incorruptible particle departs and returns to the vast ocean of ether, unless it is held back by its connection to the lunar air. This air or gas, retaining the shape of the body, becomes a phantom or ghost, the perfect likeness of the deceased. The Greeks referred to this phantom as the image or idol of the soul; the Pythagoreans called it its chariot, its structure; and the Rabbinical school referred to it as its vessel or boat. If a person lived well in this world, their entire soul, meaning its chariot and ether, ascended to the moon, where a separation occurred: the chariot stayed in the lunar Elysium, and the ether returned to the fixed realm, which is, essentially, to God; for the fixed heavens, according to Macrobius, were often called by the name of God (c. 14). If someone did not lead a virtuous life, the soul remained on earth to be purified and would wander about like the ghosts of Homer, who likely was aware of this belief since he wrote after the time of Pherecydes and Pythagoras, who spread these ideas in Greece. Herodotus mentions that the whole tale of the soul and its reincarnations was created by the Egyptians and later shared in Greece by those who claimed to be its originators. I know their names, he adds, but won't mention them (lib. 2). Cicero, however, has clearly informed us that it was Pherecydes, the mentor of Pythagoras. Tuscul. lib. 1, sect. 16. Now, if we accept that this belief was new at that time, it explains why Solomon dismissed it as a myth, having lived 130 years before Pherecydes. 'Who knows,' he said, 'if the spirit of a man rises up? I thought in my heart about the condition of the sons of men, that God might reveal them and that they might see that they themselves are beasts. For what happens to the sons of men happens to beasts; the same fate befalls them: as one dies, so the other dies; they all share the same breath, so that a man has no advantage over a beast: everything is meaningless.'” Eccles. c. iii: v. 18. This view was also held by Moses, as noted by M. Archer of the Academy of Inscriptions in note 389 of the second book, where he similarly states that the idea of the immortality of the soul was not introduced among the Hebrews until they had interactions with the Assyrians. In other aspects, the entire Pythagorean system, when properly analyzed, seems to be just a misunderstood system of physics.
"Hence, also its transmigrations, known by the name of metempsychosis, that is, the passage of the vital principle from one body to another; an idea which arose from the real transmigration of the material elements. And behold, ye Indians, ye Boudhists, ye Christians, ye Mussulmans! whence are derived all your opinions on the spirituality of the soul; behold what was the source of the dreams of Pythagoras and Plato, your masters, who were themselves but the echoes of another, the last sect of visionary philosophers, which we will proceed to examine.
"Hence, also its reincarnations, referred to as metempsychosis, which is the transfer of the vital principle from one body to another; an idea that originated from the actual movement of material elements. And look, you Indians, you Buddhists, you Christians, you Muslims! Where do all your beliefs about the spirituality of the soul come from? See where the ideas of Pythagoras and Plato, your teachers, originated; they were merely reflections of another group, the final sect of visionary philosophers, which we will now explore."
VIII. Eighth system. The WORLD-MACHINE: Worship of the Demi-Ourgos, or Grand Artificer.
VIII. Eighth system. The WORLD-MACHINE: Worship of the Demiurge, or Grand Creator.
"Hitherto the theologians, employing themselves in examining the fine and subtile substances of ether or the generating fire, had not, however, ceased to treat of beings palpable and perceptible to the senses; and theology continued to be the theory of physical powers, placed sometimes exclusively in the stars, and sometimes disseminated through the universe; but at this period, certain superficial minds, losing the chain of ideas which had directed them in their profound studies, or ignorant of the facts on which they were founded, distorted all the conclusions that flowed from them by the introduction of a strange and novel chimera. They pretended that this universe, these heavens, these stars, this sun, differed in no respect from an ordinary machine; and applying to this first hypothesis a comparison drawn from the works of art, they raised an edifice of the most whimsical sophisms. A machine, said they, does not make itself; it has had an anterior workman; its very existence proves it. The world is a machine; therefore it had an artificer.*
So far, theologians, who have been examining the fine and subtle elements of ether or the generating fire, have not stopped discussing tangible and sensory beings; theology continued to be the study of physical powers, sometimes found only in the stars and sometimes spread throughout the universe. However, during this time, some shallow thinkers, losing the chain of ideas that had guided their deep studies or ignorant of the facts on which they were based, twisted all the conclusions drawn from them by introducing a strange and novel concept. They claimed that this universe, these heavens, these stars, this sun, were no different from an ordinary machine; and by comparing this initial hypothesis to works of art, they constructed an elaborate set of the most absurd arguments. They said a machine does not create itself; it has a previous creator; its very existence proves this. The world is a machine; therefore, it must have a creator.
* All the arguments of the spiritualists are founded on this. See Macrobius, at the end of the second book, and Plato, with the comments of Marcilius Ficinus.
* All the arguments of the spiritualists are based on this. See Macrobius, at the end of the second book, and Plato, along with the comments of Marcilius Ficinus.
"Here, then, is the Demi-Ourgos or grand artificer, constituted God autocratical and supreme. In vain the ancient philosophy objected to this by saying that the artificer himself must have had parents and progenitors; and that they only added another step to the ladder by taking eternity from the world, and giving it to its supposed author. The innovators, not content with this first paradox, passed on to a second; and, applying to their artificer the theory of the human understanding, they pretended that the Demi-Ourgos had framed his machine on a plan already existing in his understanding. Now, as their masters, the naturalists, had placed in the regions of the fixed stars the great primum mobile, under the name of intelligence and reason, so their mimics, the spiritualists, seizing this idea, applied it to their Demi-Ourgos, and making it a substance distinct and self-existent, they called it mens or logos (reason or word). And, as they likewise admitted the existence of the soul of the world, or solar principle, they found themselves obliged to compose three grades of divine beings, which were: first, the Demi-Ourgos, or working god; secondly, the logos, word or reason; thirdly, the spirit or soul (of the world).* And here, Christians! is the romance on which you have founded your trinity; here is the system which, born a heretic in the temples of Egypt, transported a pagan into the schools of Greece and Italy, is now found to be good, catholic, and orthodox, by the conversion of its partisans, the disciples of Pythagoras and Plato, to Christianity.
"Here, then, is the Demiurge or grand creator, identified as God, who is autocratic and supreme. The ancient philosophers argued against this, claiming that the creator must have had parents and ancestors; they merely added another step to the ladder by removing eternity from the world and giving it to its supposed creator. The innovators, not satisfied with this initial paradox, moved on to a second; and, applying the theory of human understanding to their creator, they suggested that the Demiurge designed his creation based on a plan that already existed in his mind. Just as their masters, the naturalists, had placed the great prime mover in the realm of the fixed stars, calling it intelligence and reason, so their followers, the spiritualists, took this idea and applied it to their Demiurge, creating a distinct and self-existent substance they called mens or logos (reason or word). Additionally, since they acknowledged the existence of the soul of the world, or solar principle, they found it necessary to define three levels of divine beings: first, the Demiurge, or working god; second, the logos, word or reason; third, the spirit or soul (of the world). And here, Christians! is the story upon which you have based your trinity; here is the system that, originating as a heretic belief in the temples of Egypt, made its way into the schools of Greece and Italy, and is now deemed good, catholic, and orthodox, thanks to the conversion of its supporters, the followers of Pythagoras and Plato, to Christianity."
* These are the real types of the Christian Trinity.
* These are the true forms of the Christian Trinity.
"It is thus that God, after having been, First, The visible and various action of the meteors and the elements;
"It is then that God, after being, first, the visible and various actions of the meteors and the elements;
"Secondly, The combined powers of the stars, considered in their relations to terrestrial beings;
"Secondly, The combined powers of the stars, considered in their relations to earthly beings;
Thirdly, These terrestrial beings themselves, by confounding the symbols with their archetypes;
Thirdly, these earthly beings themselves, by mixing up the symbols with their original forms;
Fourthly, The double power of nature in its two principal operations of producing and destroying;
Fourthly, the dual power of nature in its two main functions of creating and destroying;
"Fifthly, The animated world, with distinction of agent and patient, of effect and cause;
"Fifthly, the lively world, with a distinction between the doer and the receiver, of result and origin;
"Sixthly, The solar principle, or the element of fire considered as the only mover;
"Sixthly, the solar principle, or the element of fire viewed as the sole mover;"
"Has thus become, finally, in the last resort, a chimerical and abstract being, a scholastic subtilty, of substance without form, a body without a figure, a very delirium of the mind, beyond the power of reason to comprehend. But vainly does it seek in this last transformation to elude the senses; the seal of its origin is imprinted upon it too deep to be effaced; and its attributes, all borrowed from the physical attributes of the universe, such as immensity, eternity, indivisibility, incomprehensibility; or on the moral affections of man, such as goodness, justice, majesty; its names* even, all derived from the physical beings which were its types, and especially from the sun, from the planets, and from the world, constantly bring to mind, in spite of its corrupters, indelible marks of its real nature.
"Has therefore become, ultimately, a fanciful and abstract being, a complex idea, a substance without form, a body without shape, a true delusion of the mind, beyond what reason can grasp. But it futilely tries to escape the senses in this final transformation; the mark of its origins is too deep to erase; and its qualities, all taken from the physical features of the universe, like vastness, eternity, indivisibility, incomprehensibility; or from human moral qualities, like goodness, justice, majesty; its names, even, all come from the physical beings that served as its models, especially from the sun, the planets, and the world, continuously reminding us, despite its distorters, of the undeniable aspects of its true nature."
* In our last analysis we found all the names of the Deity to be derived from some material object in which it was supposed to reside. We have given a considerable number of instances; let us add one more relative to our word God. This is known to be the Deus of the Latins, and the Theos of the Greeks. Now by the confession of Plato (in Cratylo), of Macrobius (Saturn, lib. 1, c. 24,) and of Plutarch (Isis and Osiris) its root is thein, which signifies to wander, like planein, that is to say, it is synonymous with planets; because, add our authors, both the ancient Greeks and Barbarians particularly worshipped the planets. I know that such enquiries into etymologies have been much decried: but if, as is the case, words are the representative signs of ideas, the genealogy of the one becomes that of the other, and a good etymological dictionary would be the most perfect history of the human understanding. It would only be necessary in this enquiry to observe certain precautions, which have hitherto been neglected, and particularly to make an exact comparison of the value of the letters of the different alphabets. But, to continue our subject, we shall add, that in the Phoenician language, the word thah (with ain) signifies also to wander, and appears to be the derivation of thein. If we suppose Deus to be derived from the Greek Zeus, a proper name of You-piter, having zaw, I live, for its root, its sense will be precisely that of you, and will mean soul of the world, igneous principle. (See note p. 143). Div-us, which only signifies Genius, God of the second order, appears to me to come from the oriental word div substituted for dib, wolf and chacal, one of the emblems of the sun. At Thebes, says Macrobius, the sun was painted under the form of a wolf or chacal, for there are no wolves in Egypt. The reason of this emblem, doubtless, is that the chacal, like the cock announces by its cries the sun's rising; and this reason is confirmed by the analogy of the words lykos, wolf, and lyke, light of the morning, whence comes lux. Dius, which is to be understood also of the sun, must be derived from dih, a hawk. "The Egyptians," says Porphyry (Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 92,) "represent the sun under the emblem of a hawk, because this bird soars to the highest regions of air where light abounds." And in reality we continually see at Cairo large flights of these birds, hovering in the air, from whence they descend not but to stun us with their shrieks, which are like the monosyllable dih: and here, as in the preceding example, we find an analogy between the word dies, day, light, and dius, god, sun.
* In our last analysis, we found that all the names for the Deity come from some material object where it was believed to reside. We provided several examples; let’s add one more regarding our word God. This is recognized as Deus in Latin and Theos in Greek. Now, according to Plato (in Cratylo), Macrobius (Saturn, lib. 1, c. 24), and Plutarch (Isis and Osiris), its root is thein, which means to wander, similar to planein, indicating it is related to planets; because, our authors note, both the ancient Greeks and Barbarians especially worshipped the planets. I know that such inquiries into etymologies have often been criticized: but if words represent ideas, the lineage of one reflects that of the other, and a thorough etymological dictionary would be the most complete history of human understanding. It would only require observing certain precautions, which have been overlooked so far, particularly comparing the values of letters in different alphabets. But, to continue with our topic, we should add that in the Phoenician language, the word thah (with ain) also means to wander and seems to be derived from thein. If we assume Deus comes from the Greek Zeus, a proper name for Jupiter, with the root being zaw, I live, its meaning aligns with you, signifying the soul of the world, an ignited principle. (See note p. 143). Div-us, which means Genius, God of the second order, appears to derive from the Eastern word div, replacing dib, wolf and jackal, one of the sun's symbols. In Thebes, Macrobius notes, the sun was depicted in the form of a wolf or jackal, as there are no wolves in Egypt. The reason for this symbol is likely because the jackal, like the rooster, announces the sun’s rising with its cries; this reasoning is supported by the connection between the words lykos (wolf) and lyke (morning light), from which we get lux. Dius, which also refers to the sun, must come from dih, meaning hawk. "The Egyptians," says Porphyry (Euseb. Proecep. Evang. p. 92), "depict the sun as a hawk because this bird flies to the highest regions of the sky where light is abundant." And indeed, we often see large flocks of these birds at Cairo, soaring in the air, coming down only to daze us with their cries, which sound like the monosyllable dih: and here, as in the previous example, we observe a connection between the word dies (day, light) and dius (god, sun).
"Such is the chain of ideas which the human mind had already run through at an epoch previous to the records of history; and since their continuity proves that they were the produce of the same series of studies and labors, we have every reason to place their origin in Egypt, the cradle of their first elements. This progress there may have been rapid; because the physical priests had no other food, in the retirement of the temples, but the enigma of the universe, always present to their minds; and because in the political districts into which that country was for a long time divided, every state had its college of priests, who, being by turns auxiliaries or rivals, hastened by their disputes the progress of science and discovery.*
"Such is the chain of ideas that the human mind had already explored long before recorded history; and since their continuity shows that they came from the same series of studies and efforts, we have every reason to trace their origin back to Egypt, the birthplace of their foundational elements. The progress there may have been swift because the physical priests had nothing else to ponder in the solitude of the temples but the mystery of the universe, always on their minds; and in the political regions that country was divided into for a long time, each state had its own college of priests, who, alternating between allies and rivals, accelerated the advancement of science and discovery through their disputes.*
* One of the proofs that all these systems were invented in Egypt, is that this is the only country where we see a complete body of doctrine formed from the remotest antiquity. Clemens Alexandrinus has transmitted to us (Stromat. lib. 6,) a curious detail of the forty-two volumes which were borne in the procession of Isis. "The priest," says he, "or chanter, carries one of the symbolic instruments of music, and two of the books of Mercury; one containing hymns of the gods, the other the list of kings. Next to him the horoscope (the regulator of time,) carries a palm and a dial, symbols of astrology; he must know by heart the four books of Mercury which treat of astrology: the first on the order of the planets, the second on the risings of the sun and moon, and the two last on the rising and aspect of the stars. Then comes the sacred author, with feathers on his head (like Kneph) and a book in his hand, together with ink, and a reed to write with, (as is still the practice among the Arabs). He must be versed in hieroglyphics, must understand the description of the universe, the course of the sun, moon, stars, and planets, be acquainted with the division of Egypt into thirty-six nomes, with the course of the Nile, with instruments, measures, sacred ornaments, and sacred places. Next comes the stole bearer, who carries the cubit of justice, or measure of the Nile, and a cup for the libations; he bears also in the procession ten volumes on the subject of sacrifices, hymns, prayers, offerings, ceremonies, festivals. Lastly arrives the prophet, bearing in his bosom a pitcher, so as to be exposed to view; he is followed by persons carrying bread (as at the marriage of Cana.) This prophet, as president of the mysteries, learns ten other sacred volumes, which treat of the laws, the gods, and the discipline of the priests. Now there are in all forty-two volumes, thirty-six of which are studied and got by heart by these personages, and the remaining six are set apart to be consulted by the pastophores; they treat of medicine, the construction of the human body (anatomy), diseases, remedies, instruments, etc., etc." We leave the reader to deduce all the consequences of an Encyclopedia. It is ascribed to Mercury; but Jamblicus tells us that each book, composed by priests, was dedicated to that god, who, on account of his title of genius or decan opening the zodiac, presided over every enterprise. He is the Janus of the Romans, and the Guianesa of the Indians, and it is remarkable that Yanus and Guianes are homonymous. In short it appears that these books are the source of all that has been transmitted to us by the Greeks and Latins in every science, even in alchymy, necromancy, etc. What is most to be regretted in their loss is that part which related to the principles of medicine and diet, in which the Egyptians appear to have made a considerable progress, and to have delivered many useful observations.
* One of the pieces of evidence that all these systems were developed in Egypt is that this is the only country where we find a complete body of doctrine that has been established from ancient times. Clemens Alexandrinus has provided us (Stromat. lib. 6) with an interesting detail about the forty-two volumes that were carried in the procession of Isis. "The priest," he says, "or chanter, carries one of the symbolic musical instruments and two of the books of Mercury; one containing hymns to the gods, and the other a list of kings. Next to him, the astrologer, who regulates time, carries a palm branch and a sundial, symbols of astrology; he must memorize the four books of Mercury that discuss astrology: the first on the order of the planets, the second on the rising of the sun and moon, and the last two on the rising and aspects of the stars. Then comes the sacred author, with feathers on his head (like Kneph) and a book in hand, along with ink and a reed to write with (as is still customary among the Arabs). He must be knowledgeable in hieroglyphics, understand the description of the universe, the paths of the sun, moon, stars, and planets, be familiar with Egypt's division into thirty-six districts, the flow of the Nile, tools, measurements, sacred ornaments, and holy places. Next comes the steward, who carries the cubit of justice, or measure of the Nile, and a cup for libations; he also brings along ten volumes on the subjects of sacrifices, hymns, prayers, offerings, ceremonies, and festivals. Finally, the prophet arrives, carrying a pitcher prominently displayed; he is followed by people carrying bread (like at the wedding of Cana). This prophet, as the leader of the mysteries, studies ten other sacred volumes that cover laws, gods, and priestly discipline. In total, there are forty-two volumes, thirty-six of which these individuals study and memorize, while the remaining six are reserved for consultation by the pastophores; they focus on medicine, human anatomy, diseases, remedies, instruments, etc." We leave it to the reader to infer all the implications of this Encyclopedia. It is attributed to Mercury, but Jamblicus tells us that each book, created by priests, was dedicated to that god, who, due to his title of genius or decan opening the zodiac, oversaw every undertaking. He is the Janus of the Romans and the Guianesa of the Indians, and it's noteworthy that Yanus and Guianes sound the same. In short, it seems that these books are the source of all knowledge passed down to us by the Greeks and Latins in every field, even in alchemy, necromancy, etc. What is most regrettable about their loss is the knowledge about the principles of medicine and diet, where the Egyptians seem to have made significant advancements and provided many valuable observations.
"There happened early on the borders of the Nile, what has since been repeated in every country; as soon as a new system was formed its novelty excited quarrels and schisms; then, gaining credit by persecution itself, sometimes it effaced antecedent ideas, sometimes it modified and incorporated them; then, by the intervention of political revolutions, the aggregation of states and the mixture of nations confused all opinions; and the filiation of ideas being lost, theology fell into a chaos, and became a mere logogriph of old traditions no longer understood. Religion, having strayed from its object was now nothing more than a political engine to conduct the credulous vulgar; and it was used for this purpose, sometimes by men credulous themselves and dupes of their own visions, and sometimes by bold and energetic spirits in pursuit of great objects of ambition.
Early on along the banks of the Nile, what has since occurred in every country took place; as soon as a new system was established, its novelty sparked conflicts and divisions. Then, by gaining credibility through persecution itself, it sometimes erased earlier ideas and sometimes modified and integrated them. Then, through political revolutions, the merging of states, and the blending of nations, all opinions became confused. With the lineage of ideas lost, theology descended into chaos and became a tangled mess of old traditions that were no longer understood. Religion, having lost its true purpose, was reduced to a political tool to manipulate the gullible masses; and it was employed for this purpose, at times by those who were themselves credulous and victims of their own illusions, and at other times by bold and ambitious individuals chasing significant goals.
IX. Religion of Moses, or Worship of the Soul of the World (You-piter).
IX. Religion of Moses, or Worship of the Soul of the World (You-piter).
"Such was the legislator of the Hebrews; who, wishing to separate his nation from all others, and to form a distinct and solitary empire, conceived the design of establishing its basis on religious prejudices, and of raising around it a sacred rampart of opinions and of rites. But in vain did he prescribe the worship of the symbols which prevailed in lower Egypt and in Phoenicia;* for his god was nevertheless an Egyptian god, invented by those priests of whom Moses had been the disciple; and Yahouh,** betrayed by its very name, essence (of beings), and by its symbol, the burning bush, is only the soul of the world, the moving principle which the Greeks soon after adopted under the same denomination in their you-piter, regenerating being, and under that of Ei, existence,*** which the Thebans consecrated by the name of Kneph, which Sais worshipped under the emblem of Isis veiled, with this inscription: I am al that has been, all that is, and all that is to come, and no mortal has raised my veil; which Pythagoras honored under the name of Vesta, and which the stoic philosophy defined precisely by calling it the principle of fire. In vain did Moses wish to blot from his religion every thing which had relation to the stars; many traits call them to mind in spite of all he has done. The seven planetary luminaries of the great candlestick; the twelve stones, or signs in the Urim of the high priests; the feast of the two equinoxes, (entrances and gates of the two hemispheres); the ceremony of the lamb, (the celestial ram then in his fifteenth degree); lastly, the name even of Osiris preserved in his song,**** and the ark, or coffer, an imitation of the tomb in which that God was laid, all remain as so many witnesses of the filiation of his ideas, and of their extraction from the common source.
"Such was the lawmaker of the Hebrews, who, wanting to set his nation apart from all others and create a unique and independent empire, planned to base it on religious beliefs and build a sacred barrier of opinions and rituals around it. However, it was in vain that he mandated the worship of the symbols common in lower Egypt and Phoenicia; for his god was nonetheless an Egyptian deity, invented by those priests from whom Moses had learned. Yahouh, betrayed by its very name meaning essence (of beings), and by its symbol, the burning bush, is merely the soul of the world, the driving force that the Greeks later adopted under the same name in their Jupiter, the regenerating being, and as Ei, existence, which the Thebans revered as Kneph and which Sais honored under the image of Isis veiled, with the inscription: I am all that has been, all that is, and all that is to come, and no mortal has lifted my veil; which Pythagoras respected by calling it Vesta, and which Stoic philosophy precisely defined as the principle of fire. It was futile for Moses to eliminate all ties to the stars from his religion; many elements still evoke them despite his efforts. The seven planetary lights of the great candlestick, the twelve stones or signs in the Urim of the high priests, the festival of the two equinoxes (the entrances and gates of the two hemispheres), the lamb ceremony (the celestial ram then in its fifteenth degree); finally, even the name of Osiris remains in his song, and the ark or chest, a replica of the tomb where that God was laid, all stand as numerous testimonies to the origins of his ideas and their derivation from a common source."
* "At a certain period," says Plutarch (de Iside) "all the Egyptians have their animal gods painted. The Thebans are the only people who do not employ painters, because they worship a god whose form comes not under the senses, and cannot be represented." And this is the god whom Moses, educated at Heliopolis, adopted; but the idea was not of his invention. ** Such is the true pronunciation of the Jehovah of the moderns, who violate, in this respect, every rule of criticism; since it is evident that the ancients, particularly the eastern Syrians and Phoenicians, were acquainted neither with the J nor the P which are of Tartar origin. The subsisting usage of the Arabs, which we have re-established here, is confirmed by Diodorus, who calls the god of Moses Iaw, (lib. 1), and Iaw and Yahouh are manifestly the same word: the identity continues in that of You-piter; but in order to render it more complete, we shall demonstrate the signification to be the same. In Hebrew, that is to say, in one of the dialects of the common language of lower Asia, Yahouh is the participle of the verb hih, to exist, to be, and signifies existing: in other words, the principle of life, the mover or even motion (the universal soul of beings). Now what is Jupiter? Let us hear the Greeks and Latins explain their theology. "The Egyptians," says Diodorus, after Manatho, priest of Memphis, "in giving names to the five elements, called spirit, or ether, You-piter, on account of the true meaning of that word: for spirit is the source of life, author of the vital principle in animals; and for this reason they considered him as the father, the generator of beings." For the same reason Homer says, father, and king of men and gods. (Diod. lib. 1, sect 1). "Theologians," says Macrobius, "consider You-piter as the soul of the world." Hence the words of Virgil: " Muses let us begin with You-piter; the world is full of You-piter." (Somn. Scrip., ch. 17). And in the Saturnalia, he says, "Jupiter is the sun himself." It was this also which made Virgil say, "The spirit nourishes the life (of beings), and the soul diffused through the vast members (of the universe), agitates the whole mass, and forms but one immense body." "Ioupiter," says the ancient verses of the Orphic sect, which originated in Egypt; verses collected by Onomacritus in the days of Pisistratus, "Ioupiter, represented with the thunder in his hand, is the beginning, origin, end, and middle of all things: a single and universal power, he governs every thing; heaven, earth, fire, water, the elements, day, and night. These are what constitute his immense body: his eyes are the sun and moon: he is space and eternity: in fine," adds Porphyry. "Jupiter is the world, the universe, that which constitutes the essence and life of all beings. Now," continues the same author, "as philosophers differed in opinion respecting the nature and constituent parts of this god, and as they could invent no figure that should represent all his attributes, they painted him in the form of a man. He is in a sitting posture, in allusion to his immutable essence; the upper part of his body is uncovered, because it is in the upper regions of the universe (the stars) that he most conspicuously displays himself. He is covered from the waist downwards, because respecting terrestrial things he is more secret and concealed. He holds a scepter in his left hand, because on the left side is the heart, and the heart is the seat of the understanding, which, (in human beings) regulates every action." Euseb. Proeper. Evang., p 100. The following passage of the geographer and philosopher, Strabo, removes every doubt as to the identity of the ideas of Moses and those of the heathen theologians. "Moses, who was one of the Egyptian priests, taught his followers that it was an egregious error to represent the Deity under the form of animals, as the Egyptians did, or in the shape of man, as was the practice of the Greeks and Africans. That alone is the Deity, said he, which constitutes heaven, earth, and every living thing; that which we call the world, the sum of all things, nature; and no reasonable person will think of representing such a being by the image of any one of the objects around us. It is for this reason, that, rejecting every species of images or idols, Moses wished the Deity to be worshipped without emblems, and according to his proper nature; and he accordingly ordered a temple worthy of him to be erected, etc. Geograph. lib. 16, p. 1104, edition of 1707. The theology of Moses has, then, differed in no respect from that of his followers, that is to say, from that of the Stoics and Epicureans, who consider the Deity as the soul of the world. This philosophy appears to have taken birth, or to have been disseminated when Abraham came into Egypt (200 years before Moses), since he quitted his system of idols for that of the god Yahouh; so that we may place its promulgation about the seventeenth or eighteenth century before Christ; which corresponds with what we have said before. As to the history of Moses, Diodorus properly represents it when he says, lib. 34 and 40, "That the Jews were driven out of Egypt at a time of dearth, when the country was full of foreigners, and that Moses, a man of extraordinary prudence seized this opportunity of establishing his religion in the mountains of Judea." It will seem paradoxical to assert, that the 600,000 armed men whom he conducted thither ought to be reduced to 6,000; but I can confirm the assertion by so many proofs drawn from the books themselves, that it will be necessary to correct an error which appears to have arisen from the mistake of the transcribers. *** This was the monosyllable written on the gates of the temple of Delphos. Plutarch has made it the subject of a dissertation. **** These are the literal expressions of the book of Deuteronomy, chap. XXXII. "The works of Tsour are perfect." Now Tsour has been translated by the word creator; its proper signification is to give forms, and this is one of the definitions of Osiris in Plutarch.
* "At one point," Plutarch says (de Iside), "all the Egyptians have their animal gods painted. The Thebans are the only ones who don’t use painters, because they worship a god whose form cannot be perceived and can't be depicted." This is the god that Moses, educated at Heliopolis, embraced; however, this idea wasn’t his own. ** This is the actual pronunciation of the Jehovah of modern times, which violates every rule of criticism; it’s clear that the ancients, especially the Eastern Syrians and Phoenicians, were unfamiliar with the letters J or P, both of which have Tartar origins. The existing practice of the Arabs, which we have reaffirmed here, is supported by Diodorus, who refers to the god of Moses as Iaw (lib. 1), and Iaw and Yahouh are clearly the same word: the identity continues in that of You-piter; to make this even clearer, we will show that their meanings are also the same. In Hebrew, which is one of the dialects of the common language of lower Asia, Yahouh is the participle of the verb hih, meaning to exist or to be, and signifies existence: in other words, the principle of life, the mover, or even motion (the universal soul of beings). Now, what is Jupiter? Let's listen to the Greeks and Latins explain their theology. "The Egyptians," says Diodorus, after Manatho, priest of Memphis, "in naming the five elements, called spirit, or ether, You-piter, due to the true meaning of that word: for spirit is the source of life, the creator of the vital principle in living things; and for this reason, they viewed him as the father, the progenitor of beings." For the same reason, Homer states that he is the father and king of men and gods. (Diod. lib. 1, sect 1). "Theologians," Macrobius says, "consider You-piter to be the soul of the world." Hence Virgil's words: "Muses, let us begin with You-piter; the world is full of You-piter." (Somn. Scrip., ch. 17). And in the Saturnalia, he states, "Jupiter is the sun itself." This is also what led Virgil to say, "The spirit nourishes the life (of beings), and the soul, spread throughout the vast parts (of the universe), stirs the whole mass, forming one immense body." "Ioupiter," say the ancient verses of the Orphic sect, which originated in Egypt; verses collected by Onomacritus during the time of Pisistratus, "Ioupiter, depicted with thunder in his hand, is the beginning, origin, end, and middle of all things: a singular and universal power, he rules everything; heaven, earth, fire, water, the elements, day, and night. These constitute his immense body: his eyes are the sun and moon: he embodies space and eternity: finally," adds Porphyry, "Jupiter is the world, the universe, that which constitutes the essence and life of all beings. Now," the same author continues, "as philosophers had differing opinions on the nature and parts of this god, and they could invent no figure to represent all his attributes, they depicted him as a man. He is seated, symbolizing his unchanging essence; the upper part of his body is uncovered, because it is in the upper regions of the universe (the stars) that he most clearly reveals himself. He is covered from the waist down because regarding earthly matters, he is more hidden and concealed. He holds a scepter in his left hand, as the left side is associated with the heart, the seat of understanding, which (in humans) governs every action." Euseb. Proeper. Evang., p 100. The following statement from the geographer and philosopher Strabo clears any doubt about the similarity of the ideas of Moses and those of the pagan theologians. "Moses, who was one of the Egyptian priests, taught his followers that it was a serious mistake to depict the Deity in the form of animals, as the Egyptians did, or in the likeness of a man, as the Greeks and Africans practiced. That alone is the Deity, he said, which constitutes heaven, earth, and all living things; that which we call the world, the sum of all things, nature; and no reasonable person would think of representing such a being through the image of any object around us. It is for this reason that Moses, rejecting all forms of images or idols, wanted the Deity to be worshipped without emblems and according to his true nature; he thus commanded a worthy temple to be built for him, etc. Geograph. lib. 16, p. 1104, edition of 1707. The theology of Moses has, therefore, not differed in any way from that of his followers, that is to say, from that of the Stoics and Epicureans, who view the Deity as the soul of the world. This philosophy seems to have emerged, or been spread around the time when Abraham arrived in Egypt (200 years before Moses), as he abandoned his system of idols for the worship of the god Yahouh; we can place its introduction around the seventeenth or eighteenth century before Christ; which aligns with what we have previously stated. Regarding the history of Moses, Diodorus accurately portrays it when he states, lib. 34 and 40, "that the Jews were expelled from Egypt during a famine, when the land was full of foreigners, and that Moses, a man of remarkable wisdom, took advantage of this situation to establish his religion in the Judean mountains." It might seem outrageous to claim that the 600,000 armed men he led there should actually be reduced to 6,000; however, I can support this claim with so many proofs drawn from the texts themselves that it will be necessary to correct an error that seems to have stemmed from transcription mistakes. *** This was the monosyllable inscribed on the gates of the temple at Delphos. Plutarch has made it the focus of a dissertation. **** These are the exact words from the book of Deuteronomy, chap. XXXII. "The works of Tsour are perfect." Now, Tsour has been translated as creator; its proper meaning is to give forms, and this is one of the definitions of Osiris in Plutarch.
X. Religion of Zoroaster.
X. Zoroastrianism.
"Such also was Zoroaster; who, five centuries after Moses, and in the time of David, revived and moralized among the Medes and Bactrians, the whole Egyptian system of Osiris and Typhon, under the names Ormuzd and Ahrimanes; who called the reign of summer, virtue and good; the reign of winter, sin and evil; the renewal of nature in spring, creation of the world; the conjunction of the spheres at secular periods, resurrection; and the Tartarus and Elysium of the astrologers and geographers were named future life, hell and paradise. In a word, he did nothing but consecrate the existing dreams of the mystical system.
"Zoroaster was similar; five centuries after Moses and during David's time, he revived and moralized the entire Egyptian system of Osiris and Typhon among the Medes and Bactrians, under the names Ormuzd and Ahrimanes. He referred to the summer as virtue and goodness, and the winter as sin and evil. The renewal of nature in spring represented the creation of the world; the conjunction of the spheres at significant periods symbolized resurrection; and the Tartarus and Elysium of astrologers and geographers were referred to as the afterlife, hell, and paradise. In short, he simply sanctified the existing dreams of the mystical system."
XI. Budsoism, or Religion of the Samaneans.
XI. Buddhism, or Religion of the Samanas.
"Such again are the propagators of the dismal doctrine of the Samaneans; who, on the basis of the Metempsychosis, have erected the misanthropic system of self-denial, and of privations; who, laying it down as a principle that the body is only a prison where the soul lives in an impure confinement, that life is only a dream, an illusion, and the world only a passage to another country, to a life without end, placed virtue and perfection in absolute immobility, in the destruction of all sentiment, in the abnegation of physical organs, in the annihilation of all our being; whence resulted fasts, penances, macerations, solitude, contemplations, and all the practices of the deplorable delirium of the Anchorites.
"These are the promoters of the bleak beliefs of the Samaneans; who, based on the idea of Metempsychosis, have built a grim system of self-denial and deprivation. They assert that the body is merely a prison where the soul is trapped in an impure state, that life is just a dream, an illusion, and that the world is only a pathway to another realm, to an eternal existence. They place virtue and perfection in complete stillness, in the elimination of all feeling, in the denial of the physical body, in the total eradication of our essence; which leads to fasting, penance, self-denial, isolation, contemplation, and all the practices stemming from the tragic madness of the Anchorites."
XII. Brahmism, or Indian System.
XII. Brahmism, or Indian Tradition.
"And such, too, were the founders of the Indian System; who, refining after Zoroaster on the two principles of creation and destruction, introduced an intermediary principle, that of preservation, and on their trinity in unity, of Brama, Chiven, and Vichenou, accumulated the allegories of their ancient traditions, and the alembicated subtilities of their metaphysics.
"And so were the founders of the Indian System; who, building on Zoroaster's ideas of creation and destruction, added a third principle of preservation. They unified these concepts in the trinity of Brahma, Shiva, and Vishnu, compiling the stories from their ancient traditions and the intricate details of their philosophy."
"These are the materials which existed in a scattered state for many centuries in Asia; when a fortuitous concourse of events and circumstances, on the borders of the Euphrates and the Mediterranean, served to form them into new combinations.
"These are the materials that existed in a scattered state for many centuries in Asia, until a lucky combination of events and circumstances, at the borders of the Euphrates and the Mediterranean, brought them together in new ways."
XIII. Christianity, or the Allegorical Worship of the Sun, under the cabalistical names of Chrish-en, or Christ, and Ye-sus or Jesus.
XIII. Christianity, or the Symbolic Worship of the Sun, under the mystical names of Chrish-en, or Christ, and Ye-sus or Jesus.
"In constituting a separate nation, Moses strove in vain to defend it against the invasion of foreign ideas. An invisible inclination, founded on the affinity of their origin, had constantly brought back the Hebrews towards the worship of the neighboring nations; and the commercial and political relations which necessarily existed between them, strengthened this propensity from day to day. As long as the constitution of the state remained entire, the coercive force of the government and the laws opposed these innovations, and retarded their progress; nevertheless the high places were full of idols; and the god Sun had his chariot and horses painted in the palaces of the kings, and even in the temples of Yahouh; but when the conquests of the sultans of Nineveh and Babylon had dissolved the bands of civil power, the people, left to themselves and solicited by their conquerors, restrained no longer their inclination for profane opinions, and they were publicly established in Judea. First, the Assyrian colonies, which came and occupied the lands of the tribes, filled the kingdom of Samaria with dogmas of the Magi, which very soon penetrated into the kingdom of Judea. Afterwards, Jerusalem being subjugated, the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Arabs, entering this defenceless country, introduced their opinions; and the religion of Moses was doubly mutilated. Besides the priests and great men, being transported to Babylon and educated in the sciences of the Chaldeans, imbibed, during a residence of seventy years, the whole of their theology; and from that moment the dogmas of the hostile Genius (Satan), the archangel Michael,* the ancient of days (Ormuzd), the rebel angels, the battles in heaven, the immortality of the soul, and the resurrection, all unknown to Moses, or rejected by his total silence respecting them, were introduced and naturalized among the Jews.
"In forming a separate nation, Moses tried in vain to protect it from the influx of foreign ideas. An invisible pull, rooted in their shared origins, constantly drew the Hebrews toward the worship of neighboring nations; and the commercial and political ties that necessarily existed between them only strengthened this tendency over time. As long as the state’s constitution remained intact, the government's power and laws countered these changes and slowed their advancement; however, high places were filled with idols, and the god Sun had his chariot and horses painted in the palaces of the kings and even in the temples of Yahouh. But when the conquests of the sultans of Nineveh and Babylon shattered the civil power, the people, left to their own devices and encouraged by their conquerors, could no longer contain their attraction to secular beliefs, which were openly established in Judea. First, the Assyrian colonies that occupied the lands of the tribes filled the kingdom of Samaria with the teachings of the Magi, which soon spread into the kingdom of Judea. Later, after Jerusalem was conquered, Egyptians, Syrians, and Arabs came into this defenseless land and introduced their beliefs, further corrupting the religion of Moses. Additionally, the priests and prominent figures, taken to Babylon and educated in Chaldean sciences, absorbed the entirety of their theology over seventy years; from that point on, the doctrines of the opposing Spirit (Satan), the archangel Michael, the Ancient of Days (Ormuzd), the fallen angels, heavenly battles, the immortality of the soul, and resurrection—none of which were known to Moses or were entirely ignored by him—were introduced and became part of Jewish belief."
* "The names of the angels and of the months, such as Gabriel, Michael, Yar, Nisan, etc., came from Babylon with the Jews:" says expressly the Talmud of Jerusalem. See Beousob. Hist. du Manich. Vol. II, p. 624, where he proves that the saints of the Almanac are an imitation of the 365 angels of the Persians; and Jamblicus in his Egyptian Mysteries, sect. 2, c. 3, speaks of angels, archangels, seraphims, etc., like a true Christian.
* "The names of the angels and the months, like Gabriel, Michael, Yar, Nisan, etc., came from Babylon with the Jews," states the Talmud of Jerusalem. See Beousob. Hist. du Manich. Vol. II, p. 624, where he shows that the saints of the Almanac are modeled after the 365 angels of the Persians; and Jamblicus in his Egyptian Mysteries, sect. 2, c. 3, talks about angels, archangels, seraphims, etc., just like a true Christian.
"The emigrants returned to their country with these ideas; and their innovation at first excited disputes between their partisans the Pharisees, and their opponents the Saducees, who maintained the ancient national worship; but the former, aided by the propensities of the people and their habits already contracted, and supported by the Persians, their deliverers and masters, gained the ascendant over the latter; and the Sons of Moses consecrated the theology of Zoroaster.*
"The emigrants returned to their country with these ideas, and their innovation initially sparked debates between their supporters, the Pharisees, and their opponents, the Sadducees, who upheld the traditional national worship. However, the Pharisees, supported by the people's tendencies and established habits, along with the Persians, their liberators and rulers, gained the upper hand over the Sadducees. Consequently, the Sons of Moses affirmed the theology of Zoroaster.*"
* "The whole philosophy of the gymnosophists," says Diogenes Laertius on the authority of an ancient writer, "is derived from that of the Magi, and many assert that of the Jews to have the same origin." Lib. 1. c. 9. Megasthenes, an historian of repute in the days of Seleucus Nicanor, and who wrote particularly upon India, speaking of the philosophy of the ancients respecting natural things, puts the Brachmans and the Jews precisely on the same footing.
* "The entire philosophy of the gymnosophists," says Diogenes Laertius, referencing an ancient writer, "comes from that of the Magi, and many claim that the beliefs of the Jews have the same roots." Lib. 1. c. 9. Megasthenes, a well-known historian during the time of Seleucus Nicanor, who wrote specifically about India, places the Brachmans and the Jews on the same level regarding the ancient philosophy concerning nature.
"A fortuitous analogy between two leading ideas was highly favorable to this coalition, and became the basis of a last system, not less surprising in the fortune it has had in the world, than in the causes of its formation.
A lucky comparison between two main ideas greatly benefited this coalition and became the foundation of a new system, which is just as surprising in its success around the world as it is in the reasons for its creation.
"After the Assyrians had destroyed the kingdom of Samaria, some judicious men foresaw the same destiny for Jerusalem, which they did not fail to predict and publish; and their predictions had the particular turn of being terminated by prayers for a re-establishment and regeneration, uttered in the form of prophecies. The Hierophants, in their enthusiasm, had painted a king as a deliverer, who was to re-establish the nation in its ancient glory; the Hebrews were to become once more a powerful, a conquering nation, and Jerusalem the capital of an empire extended over the whole earth.
"After the Assyrians destroyed the kingdom of Samaria, some wise men anticipated the same fate for Jerusalem, which they boldly predicted and communicated; their predictions ended with prayers for restoration and renewal, expressed as prophecies. The Hierophants, in their excitement, depicted a king as a savior who would restore the nation to its former glory; the Hebrews would once again become a powerful, conquering nation, and Jerusalem would be the capital of an empire that spanned the entire earth."
"Events having realized the first part of these predictions, the ruin of Jerusalem, the people adhered to the second with a firmness of belief in proportion to their misfortunes; and the afflicted Jews expected, with the impatience of want and desire, this victorious king and deliverer, who was to come and save the nation of Moses, and restore the empire of David.
"After seeing the first part of these predictions come true, specifically the destruction of Jerusalem, the people clung to the second part with an unwavering faith that matched their suffering. The distressed Jews eagerly anticipated, driven by their needs and hopes, this triumphant king and savior who would come to rescue the nation of Moses and restore the kingdom of David."
"On the other hand, the sacred and mythological traditions of preceding times had spread through all Asia a dogma perfectly analogous. The cry there was a great mediator, a final judge, a future saviour, a king, god, conqueror and legislator, who was to restore the golden age upon earth,* to deliver it from the dominion of evil, and restore men to the empire of good, peace, and happiness. The people seized and cherished these ideas with so much the more avidity, as they found in them a consolation under that deplorable state of suffering into which they had been plunged by the devastations of successive conquests, and the barbarous despotism of their governments. This conformity between the oracles of different nations, and those of the prophets, excited the attention of the Jews; and doubtless the prophets had the art to compose their descriptions after the style and genius of the sacred books employed in the Pagan mysteries. There was therefore a general expectation in Judea of a great ambassador, a final Saviour; when a singular circumstance determined the epoch of his coming.
"On the other hand, the sacred and mythological traditions of earlier times had spread throughout all of Asia a belief that was very similar. The message was about a great mediator, a final judge, a future savior, a king, god, conqueror, and legislator who would restore the golden age on earth, free it from the control of evil, and bring humanity back to a realm of good, peace, and happiness. People eagerly embraced these ideas because they found comfort in them amid the terrible suffering inflicted by the repeated invasions and the brutal oppression of their governments. This similarity between the prophecies of different nations and those of the prophets caught the attention of the Jews; and undoubtedly, the prophets had a knack for crafting their descriptions in the style and essence of the sacred texts used in the Pagan mysteries. Thus, there was widespread anticipation in Judea for a great ambassador, a final Savior; when a unique event marked the time of his arrival."
* This is the reason of the application of the many Pagan oracles to Jesus, and particularly the fourth eclogue of Virgil, and the Sybilline verses so celebrated among the ancients.
* This is why many Pagan oracles were applied to Jesus, especially the fourth eclogue of Virgil and the famous Sibylline verses from ancient times.
"It is found in the sacred books of the Persians and Chaldeans, that the world, composed of a total revolution of twelve thousand, was divided into two partial revolutions; one of which, the age and reign of good, terminated in six thousand; the other, the age and reign of evil, was to terminate in six thousand more.
"It is found in the holy texts of the Persians and Chaldeans that the world, made up of a complete cycle of twelve thousand, was divided into two partial cycles; one of which, the era and reign of good, ended in six thousand; the other, the era and reign of evil, is set to end in six thousand more."
"By these records, the first authors had understood the annual revolution of the great celestial orb called the world, (a revolution composed of twelve months or signs, divided each into a thousand parts), and the two systematic periods, of winter and summer, composed each of six thousand. These expressions, wholly equivocal and badly explained, having received an absolute and moral, instead of a physical and astrological sense, it happened that the annual world was taken for the secular world, the thousand of the zodiacal divisions, for a thousand of years; and supposing, from the state of things, that they lived in the age of evil, they inferred that it would end with the six thousand pretended years.*
"From these records, the early writers had figured out the yearly cycle of the massive celestial body known as the world, which completes its journey in twelve months or signs, each divided into a thousand parts. They also recognized two regular periods, winter and summer, each lasting six thousand units. However, these terms, which were entirely ambiguous and poorly explained, ended up being interpreted with an absolute and moral meaning rather than a physical and astrological one. This led to the annual world being confused with the secular world, the thousand divisions of the zodiac mistaken for a thousand years; and given the state of affairs, they concluded that they were living in an age of evil and predicted that it would end after their supposed six thousand years.*"
* We have already seen this tradition current among the Tuscans; it was disseminated through most nations, and shows us what we ought to think of all the pretended creations and terminations of the world, which are merely the beginnings and endings of astronomical periods invented by astrologers. That of the year or solar revolution, being the most simple and perceptible, served as a model to the rest, and its comparison gave rise to the most whimsical ideas. Of this description is the idea of the four ages of the world among the Indians. Originally these four ages were merely the four seasons; and as each season was under the supposed influence of a planet, it bore the name of the metal appropriated to that planet; thus spring was the age of the sun, or of gold; summer the age of the moon, or of silver; autumn the age of Venus, or of brass; and winter the age of Mars, or of iron. Afterwards when astronomers invented the great year of 25 and 36 thousand common years, which had for its object the bringing back all the stars to one point of departure and a general conjunction, the ambiguity of the terms introduced a similar ambiguity of ideas; and the myriads of celestial signs and periods of duration which were thus measured were easily converted into so many revolutions of the sun. Thus the different periods of creation which have been so great a source of difficulty and misapprehension to curious enquirers, were in reality nothing more than hypothetical calculations of astronomical periods. In the same manner the creation of the world has been attributed to different seasons of the year, just as these different seasons have served for the fictitious period of these conjunctions; and of consequence has been adopted by different nations for the commencement of an ordinary year. Among the Egyptians this period fell upon the summer solstice, which was the commencement of their year; and the departure of the spheres, according to their conjectures, fell in like manner upon the period when the sun enters cancer. Among the Persians the year commenced at first in the spring, or when the sun enters Aries; and from thence the first Christians were led to suppose that God created the world in the spring: this opinion is also favored by the book of Genesis; and it is farther remarkable, that the world is not there said to be created by the God of Moses (Yahouh), but by the Elohim or gods in the plural, that is by the angels or genii, for so the word constantly means in the Hebrew books. If we farther observe that the root of the word Elohim signifies strong or powerful, and that the Egyptians called their decans strong and powerful leaders, attributing to them the creation of the world, we shall presently perceive that the book of Genesis affirms neither more nor less than that the world was created by the decans, by those very genii whom, according to Sanchoniathon, Mercury excited against Saturn, and who were called Elohim. It may be farther asked why the plural substantive Elohim is made to agree with the singular verb bara (the Elohim creates). The reason is that after the Babylonish captivity the unity of the Supreme Being was the prevailing opinion of the Jews; it was therefore thought proper to introduce a pious solecism in language, which it is evident had no existence before Moses; thus in the names of the children of Jacob many of them are compounded of a plural verb, to which Elohim is the nominative case understood, as Raouben (Reuben), they have looked upon me, and Samaonni (Simeon), they have granted me my prayer; to wit, the Elohim. The reason of this etymology is to be found in the religious creeds of the wives of Jacob, whose gods were the taraphim of Laban, that is, the angels of the Persians, and Egyptian decans.
* We've already seen this tradition among the Tuscans; it was spread across many nations and shows us what we should think about all the supposed creations and endings of the world, which are just the beginnings and endings of astronomical cycles invented by astrologers. The year or solar cycle, being the simplest and most noticeable, served as a model for the others, and its comparison led to some whimsical ideas. An example of this is the concept of the four ages of the world among the Indians. Originally, these four ages were just the four seasons; and because each season was thought to be influenced by a planet, it took on the name of the metal associated with that planet. So spring was the age of the sun, or gold; summer was the age of the moon, or silver; autumn was the age of Venus, or brass; and winter was the age of Mars, or iron. Later, when astronomers came up with the great year of 25 or 36 thousand common years—aimed at bringing all the stars back to one starting point for a general conjunction—the unclear terminology introduced a similar vagueness of ideas. The myriad celestial signs and cycles that were measured this way could easily be viewed as so many revolutions of the sun. Thus, the different periods of creation that have caused so much confusion and misunderstanding for eager inquirers were really just hypothetical calculations of astronomical cycles. Similarly, the creation of the world has been linked to different seasons of the year, just as those seasons provided a fictional framework for these conjunctions, which in turn has been adopted by various cultures as the start of the New Year. For the Egyptians, this period began at the summer solstice, marking the start of their year; and according to their beliefs, the departure of the spheres coincided with when the sun enters Cancer. The Persians initially marked the year starting in spring, or when the sun enters Aries; and from this, early Christians believed that God created the world in spring. This viewpoint is also supported by the book of Genesis; notably, the world isn't said to be created by the God of Moses (Yahweh), but by Elohim or gods in the plural, meaning by angels or spirits, as that term consistently means in Hebrew texts. If we further note that the root of the word Elohim signifies strong or powerful, and that the Egyptians referred to their decans as strong leaders, attributing the creation of the world to them, we'll see that the book of Genesis states no more and no less than that the world was created by the decans, those same spirits who, according to Sanchoniathon, were stirred to action against Saturn by Mercury and were called Elohim. One might also ask why the plural noun Elohim is used with the singular verb bara (the Elohim creates). The reason is that after the Babylonian captivity, the oneness of the Supreme Being became the mainstream belief among the Jews; it seemed appropriate to introduce a grammatical oddity in language that evidently didn't exist before Moses. Thus, in the names of Jacob's children, many are formed from a plural verb, where Elohim is the implied subject, such as Raouben (Reuben), meaning they have looked upon me, and Samaonni (Simeon), meaning they have granted me my prayer; namely, the Elohim. The foundation of this etymology lies within the religious beliefs of Jacob's wives, whose gods were the taraphim of Laban, that is, the angels of the Persians and Egyptian decans.
"Now, according to calculations admitted by the Jews, they began to reckon near six thousand years since the supposed creation of the world.* This coincidence caused a fermentation in the public mind. Nothing was thought of but the approaching end. They consulted the hierophants and the mystical books, which differed as to the term; the great mediator, the final judge, was expected and desired, to put an end to so many calamities. This being was so much spoken of, that some person finally was said to have seen him; and a first rumor of this sort was sufficient to establish a general certainty. Popular report became an established fact: the imaginary being was realized; and all the circumstances of mythological tradition, being assembled around this phantom, produced a regular history, of which it was no longer permitted to doubt.
"Now, according to calculations accepted by the Jews, they began to count nearly six thousand years since the supposed creation of the world.* This coincidence stirred up public anxiety. All anyone could think about was the impending end. They consulted the wise teachers and the mystical texts, which varied regarding the timing; the great mediator, the final judge, was anticipated and desired to put an end to so many disasters. This figure was talked about so much that someone eventually claimed to have seen him; and the first rumor of this kind was enough to create a widespread belief. Public opinion became an accepted fact: the imagined being was brought to life; and all the elements of mythological tradition collected around this phantom, creating a coherent history that was no longer allowed to be questioned."
* According to the computation of the Seventy, the period elapsed consisted of about 5,600 years, and this computation was principally followed. It is well known how much, in the first ages of the church, this opinion of the end of the world agitated the minds of men. In the sequel, the general councils encouraged by finding that the general conflagration did not come, pronounced the expectation that prevailed heretical, and its believers were called Millenarians; a circumstance curious enough, since it is evident from the history of the gospels that Jesus Christ was a Millenarian, and of consequence a heretic.
* According to the calculation of the Seventy, the time that has passed is around 5,600 years, and this calculation was mainly accepted. It’s well-known how much this belief in the end of the world stirred people’s minds in the early church ages. Later on, general councils, realizing that the anticipated apocalypse didn’t happen, deemed the prevailing expectation heretical, and those who believed it were labeled as Millenarians; it’s quite interesting, since it’s clear from the history of the gospels that Jesus Christ was a Millenarian, and therefore a heretic.
"These mythological traditions recounted that, in the beginning, a woman and a man had by their fall introduced sin and misery into the world. (Consult plate of the Astrological Heaven of the Ancients.)
"These mythological traditions told that, in the beginning, a woman and a man brought sin and suffering into the world with their fall. (Consult plate of the Astrological Heaven of the Ancients.)"
"By this was denoted the astronomical fact, that the celestial virgin and the herdsman (Bootes), by setting heliacally at the autumnal equinox, delivered the world to the wintry constellations, and seemed, on falling below the horizon, to introduce into the world the genius of evil, Ahrimanes, represented by the constellation of the Serpent.*
"By this, it was indicated that the celestial virgin and the herdsman (Bootes), by rising heliacally at the autumn equinox, turned over the world to the winter constellations, and appeared, as they sank below the horizon, to bring forth into the world the spirit of evil, Ahrimanes, represented by the constellation of the Serpent.*"
* "The Persians," says Chardin, "call the constellation of the serpent Ophiucus, serpent of Eve: and this serpent Ophiucas or Ophioneus plays a similar part in the theology of the Phoenicians," for Pherecydes, their disciple and the master of Pythagoras, said "that Ophioneus Serpentinus had been chief of the rebels against Jupiter." See Mars. Ficin. Apol. Socrat. p. m. 797, col. 2. I shall add that ephah (with ain) signifies in Hebrew, serpent.
* "The Persians," says Chardin, "refer to the constellation of the serpent as Ophiuchus, the serpent of Eve; and this serpent Ophiucus or Ophioneus has a similar role in the theology of the Phoenicians," since Pherecydes, their student and the teacher of Pythagoras, claimed "that Ophioneus Serpentinus was the leader of the rebels against Jupiter." See Mars. Ficin. Apol. Socrat. p. m. 797, col. 2. I should also mention that ephah (with ain) means serpent in Hebrew.
These traditions related that the woman had decoyed and seduced the man.*
These traditions mentioned that the woman had lured and seduced the man.*
* In a physical sense to seduce, seducere, means only to attract, to draw after us.
* In a physical sense, to seduce, seducere, means only to attract, to draw someone toward us.
"And in fact, the virgin, setting first, seems to draw the herdsman after her.
"And in fact, the virgin, going first, seems to lead the herdsman behind her."
"That the woman tempted him by offering him fruit fair to the sight and good to eat, which gave the knowledge of good and evil.
"That the woman tempted him by offering him fruit that looked appealing and was good to eat, which gave the knowledge of good and evil."
"And in fact, the Virgin holds in her hand a branch of fruit, which she seems to offer to the Herdsman; and the branch, emblem of autumn, placed in the picture of Mithra* between winter and summer, seems to open the door and give knowledge, the key of good and evil.
"And in fact, the Virgin holds a branch of fruit in her hand, which she seems to offer to the Herdsman; and the branch, a symbol of autumn, positioned in the image of Mithra* between winter and summer, appears to open the door and provide knowledge, the key to good and evil."
* See this picture in Hyde, page 111, edition of 1760.
* See this picture in Hyde, page 111, edition of 1760.
That this couple had been driven from the celestial garden, and that a cherub with a flaming sword had been placed at the gate to guard it.
That this couple had been driven from the heavenly garden, and that an angel with a flaming sword had been positioned at the gate to guard it.
"And in fact, when the virgin and the herdsman fall beneath the horizon, Perseus rises on the other side;* and this Genius, with a sword in his hand, seems to drive them from the summer heaven, the garden and dominion of fruits and flowers.
"And in fact, when the virgin and the herdsman disappear below the horizon, Perseus rises on the other side; and this figure, with a sword in his hand, appears to chase them away from the summer sky, the garden, and the land of fruits and flowers."
* Rather the head of Medusa; that head of a woman once so beautiful, which Perseus cut off and which beholds in his hand, is only that of the virgin, whose head sinks below the horizon at the very moment that Perseus rises; and the serpents which surround it are Orphiucus and the Polar Dragon, who then occupy the zenith. This shows us in what manner the ancients composed all their figures and fables. They took such constellations as they found at the same time on the circle of the horizon, and collecting the different parts, they formed groups which served them as an almanac in hieroglyphic characters. Such is the secret of all their pictures, and the solution of all their mythological monsters. The virgin is also Andromeda, delivered by Perseus from the whale that pursues her (pro-sequitor).
* Rather the head of Medusa; that head of a woman who was once so beautiful, which Perseus cut off and now holds in his hand, is only that of the virgin, whose head dips below the horizon at the exact moment that Perseus rises; and the serpents that surround it are Ophiuchus and the Polar Dragon, which then occupy the zenith. This illustrates how the ancients created all their figures and stories. They took constellations they observed at the same time on the horizon, and by combining various elements, they formed groups that served as a kind of almanac in hieroglyphic symbols. This is the key to all their imagery and the explanation for all their mythological creatures. The virgin is also Andromeda, rescued by Perseus from the whale that hunts her (pro-sequitor).
That of this virgin should be born, spring up, an offspring, a child, who should bruise the head of the serpent, and deliver the world from sin.
That this virgin would give birth to a child, who would crush the serpent's head and free the world from sin.
"This denotes the son, which, at the moment of the winter solstice, precisely when the Persian Magi drew the horoscope of the new year, was placed on the bosom of the Virgin, rising heliacally in the eastern horizon; on this account he was figured in their astrological pictures under the form of a child suckled by a chaste virgin,* and became afterwards, at the vernal equinox, the ram, or the lamb, triumphant over the constellation of the Serpent, which disappeared from the skies.
"This represents the son, who, at the time of the winter solstice, exactly when the Persian Magi cast the horoscope for the new year, was positioned on the chest of the Virgin, rising in the morning sky on the eastern horizon; for this reason, he was depicted in their astrological images as a child being nursed by a pure virgin,* and later, at the spring equinox, he became the ram or the lamb, victorious over the constellation of the Serpent, which vanished from the sky."
* Such was the picture of the Persian sphere, cited by Aben Ezra in the Coelam Poeticum of Blaeu, p. 71. "The picture of the first decan of the Virgin," says that writer. "represents a beautiful virgin with flowing hair; sitting in a chair, with two ears of corn in her hand, and suckling an infant, called Jesus by some nations, and Christ in Greek." In the library of the king of France is a manuscript in Arabic, marked 1165, in which is a picture of the twelve signs; and that of the Virgin represents a young woman with an infant by her side: the whole scene indeed of the birth of Jesus is to be found in the adjacent part of the heavens. The stable is the constellation of the charioteer and the goat, formerly Capricorn: a constellation called proesepe Jovis Heniochi, stable of Iou; and the word Iou is found in the name Iou-seph (Joseph). At no great distance is the ass of Typhon (the great she-bear), and the ox or bull, the ancient attendants of the manger. Peter the porter, is Janus with his keys and bald forehead: the twelve apostles are the genii of the twelve months, etc. This Virgin has acted very different parts in the various systems of mythology: she has been the Isis of the Egyptians, who said of her in one of their inscriptions cited by Julian, the fruit I have brought forth is the sun. The majority of traits drawn by Plutarch apply to her, in the same manner as those of Osiris apply to Bootes: also the seven principal stars of the she-bear, called David's chariot, were called the chariot of Osiris (See Kirker); and the crown that is situated behind, formed of ivy, was called Chen-Osiris, the tree of Osiris. The Virgin has likewise been Ceres, whose mysteries were the same with those of Isis and Mithra; she has been the Diana of the Ephesians; the great goddess of Syria, Cybele, drawn by lions; Minerva, the mother of Bacchus; Astraea, a chaste virgin taken up into heaven at the end of a golden age; Themis at whose feet is the balance that was put in her hands; the Sybil of Virgil, who descends into hell, or sinks below the hemisphere with a branch in her hand, etc.
* This was the depiction of the Persian sphere, referenced by Aben Ezra in the Coelam Poeticum of Blaeu, p. 71. "The image of the first decan of the Virgin," that author states, "shows a beautiful maiden with flowing hair; sitting in a chair, holding two ears of corn in her hand, and nursing an infant, referred to as Jesus by some cultures, and Christ in Greek." In the library of the king of France, there's a manuscript in Arabic, marked 1165, which includes an illustration of the twelve zodiac signs; the one for the Virgin depicts a young woman beside an infant: indeed, the entire scene of the birth of Jesus can be found in the nearby part of the sky. The stable corresponds to the constellation of the charioteer and the goat, previously known as Capricorn: a constellation referred to as proesepe Jovis Heniochi, the stable of Iou; and the name Iou is present in the name Iou-seph (Joseph). Not far away is the ass of Typhon (the great she-bear), and the ox or bull, the traditional companions of the manger. Peter the porter is Janus with his keys and bald head: the twelve apostles represent the spirits of the twelve months, etc. This Virgin has played many different roles in various mythologies: she has been the Isis of the Egyptians, who stated in one of their inscriptions cited by Julian, that the fruit I have produced is the sun. Most of the characteristics noted by Plutarch apply to her, just as those of Osiris apply to Bootes; also, the seven major stars of the she-bear, referred to as David's chariot, were known as the chariot of Osiris (See Kirker); and the crown located behind her, made of ivy, was called Chen-Osiris, the tree of Osiris. The Virgin has also been Ceres, whose mysteries were similar to those of Isis and Mithra; she was the Diana of the Ephesians; the great goddess of Syria, Cybele, depicted with lions; Minerva, the mother of Bacchus; Astraea, a virtuous maiden who was taken up into heaven at the end of a golden age; Themis, whose feet rest on the balance that was placed in her hands; the Sibyl of Virgil, who descends into hell, or sinks below the horizon with a branch in her hand, etc.
That, in his infancy, this restorer of divine and celestial nature would live abased, humble, obscure and indigent.
That, in his early years, this restorer of divine and heavenly nature would live in a lowly, humble, unknown, and impoverished state.
"And this, because the winter sun is abased below the horizon; and that this first period of his four ages or seasons, is a time of obscurity, scarcity, fasting, and want.
"And this is because the winter sun is below the horizon; and this first period of his four ages or seasons is a time of darkness, scarcity, fasting, and need."
"That, being put to death by the wicked, he had risen gloriously; that he had reascended from hell to heaven, where he would reign forever
"That, after being killed by the wicked, he had risen gloriously; that he had ascended from hell to heaven, where he would reign forever."
"This is a sketch of the life of the sun; who, finishing his career at the winter solstice, when Typhon and the rebel angels gain the dominion, seems to be put to death by them; but who soon after is born again, and rises* into the vault of heaven, where he reigns.
"This is an outline of the sun's life; who, wrapping up his journey at the winter solstice, when Typhon and the rebel angels take over, appears to be killed by them; but shortly after is reborn and ascends* into the sky, where he rules."
* Resurgere, to rise a second time, cannot signify to return to life, but in a metaphorical sense; but we see continually mistakes of this kind result from the ambiguous meaning of the words made use of in ancient tradition.
* Resurgere, meaning to rise again, doesn't literally mean to come back to life, but rather in a metaphorical sense; however, we often see misunderstandings of this kind arise from the ambiguous meanings of the words used in ancient traditions.
"Finally, these traditions went so far as to mention even his astrological and mythological names, and inform us that he was called sometimes Chris, that is to say, preserver,* and from that, ye Indians, you have made your god Chrish-en or Chrish-na; and, ye Greek and Western Christians, your Chris-tos, son of Mary, is the same; sometimes he is called Yes, by the union of three letters, which by their numerical value form the number 608, one of the solar periods.** And this, Europeans, is the name which, with the Latin termination, is become your Yes-us or Jesus, the ancient and cabalistic name attributed to young Bacchus, the clandestine son (nocturnal) of the Virgin Minerva, who, in the history of his whole life, and even of his death, brings to mind the history of the god of the Christians, that is, of the star of day, of which they are each of them the emblems."
"Finally, these traditions even mentioned his astrological and mythological names, telling us that he was sometimes called Chris, which means preserver,* and from that, you Indians created your god Chrish-en or Chrish-na; and, you Greek and Western Christians, your Chris-tos, son of Mary, is the same. Sometimes he is called Yes, made up of three letters that add up to the number 608, one of the solar periods.** And this, Europeans, is the name that, with a Latin ending, became your Yes-us or Jesus, the ancient and mystical name linked to young Bacchus, the secret son (night-born) of the Virgin Minerva, whose entire life story, including his death, mirrors the story of the god of Christians, that is, of the morning star, of which each of them are symbols."
* The Greeks used to express by X, or Spanish iota, the aspirated ha of the Orientals, who said haris. In Hebrew heres signifies the sun, but in Arabic the meaning of the radical word is, to guard, to preserve, and of haris, guardian, preserver. It is the proper epithet of Vichenou, which demonstrates at once the identity of the Indian and Christian Trinities, and their common origin. It is manifestly but one system, which divided into two branches, one extending to the east, and the other to the west, assumed two different forms: Its principal trunk is the Pythagorean system of the soul of the world, or Iou-piter. The epithet piter, or father, having been applied to the demi-ourgos of Plato, gave rise to an ambiguity which caused an enquiry to be made respecting the son of this father. In the opinion of the philosophers the son was understanding, Nous and Logos, from which the Latins made their Verbum. And thus we clearly perceive the origin of the eternal father and of the Verbum his son, proceeding from him (Mens Ex Deo nata, says Macrobius): the oenima or spiritus mundi, was the Holy Ghost; and it is for this reason that Manes, Pasilides, Valentinius, and other pretended heretics of the first ages, who traced things to their source, said, that God the Father was the supreme inaccessible light (that of the heaven, the primum mobile, or the aplanes); the Son the secondary light resident in the sun, and the Holy Ghost the atmosphere of the earth (See Beausob. vol. II, p. 586): hence, among the Syrians, the representation of the Holy Ghost by a dove, the bird of Venus Urania, that is of the air. The Syrians (says Nigidius de Germaico) assert that a dove sat for a certain number of days on the egg of a fish, and that from this incubation Venus was born: Sextus Empiricus also observes (Inst. Pyrrh. lib. 3, c. 23) that the Syrians abstain from eating doves; which intimates to us a period commencing in the sign Pisces, in the winter solstice. We may farther observe, that if Chris comes from Harisch by a chin, it will signify artificer, an epithet belonging to the sun. These variations, which must have embarrassed the ancients, prove it to be the real type of Jesus, as had been already remarked in the time of Tertullian. "Many, says this writer, suppose with greater probability that the sun is our God, and they refer us to the religion of the Persians." Apologet. c. 16. ** See a curious ode to the sun, by Martianus Capella, translated by Gebelin.
* The Greeks used the letter X, or the Spanish iota, to represent the aspirated "ha" of the Easterners, who said "haris." In Hebrew, "heres" means the sun, but in Arabic, the root word means to guard or preserve, and "haris" means guardian or preserver. This is the proper title for Vichenou, which shows the connection between the Indian and Christian Trinities and their shared origins. It is clearly one system that split into two branches, one going east and the other west, taking on two different forms. Its main foundation is the Pythagorean system of the soul of the world, or Iou-piter. The term "piter," or father, was used for the demiurge of Plato, which led to confusion about the son of this father. Philosophers believed the son was understanding, "Nous," and "Logos," from which the Latins derived their "Verbum." Thus, we can clearly see the origin of the eternal father and his son, the Verbum, coming from him (Mens Ex Deo nata, says Macrobius): the "oenima" or spirit of the world was the Holy Ghost; that's why Manes, Pasilides, Valentinius, and other so-called heretics of the early ages, who traced everything back to their sources, claimed that God the Father was the supreme inaccessible light (that of heaven, the primum mobile, or the aplanes); the Son was the secondary light residing in the sun, and the Holy Ghost was the atmosphere of the earth (See Beausob. vol. II, p. 586): hence, among the Syrians, the Holy Ghost is represented by a dove, the bird of Venus Urania, which signifies the air. According to Nigidius de Germaico, the Syrians believe that a dove sat for a certain number of days on the egg of a fish, and from this incubation, Venus was born. Sextus Empiricus also notes (Inst. Pyrrh. lib. 3, c. 23) that the Syrians avoid eating doves; this hints at a period starting in the sign Pisces during the winter solstice. Furthermore, if Chris comes from Harisch by a chin, it would mean artificer, a title that belongs to the sun. These variations, which must have confused the ancients, show it to be the true type of Jesus, as was already noted in Tertullian's time. "Many," this writer says, "believe more convincingly that the sun is our God, and they direct us to the religion of the Persians." Apologet. c. 16. ** See a curious ode to the sun, by Martianus Capella, translated by Gebelin.
Here a great murmur having arisen among all the Christian groups, the Lamas, the Mussulmans and the Indians called them to order, and the orator went on to finish his discourse:
Here, a great murmur arose among all the Christian groups, and the Lamas, the Muslims, and the Indians called them to order, and the speaker continued to finish his speech:
"You know at present," said he, "how the rest of this system was composed in the chaos and anarchy of the three first centuries; what a multitude of singular opinions divided the minds of men, and armed them with an enthusiasm and a reciprocal obstinacy; because, being equally founded on ancient tradition, they were equally sacred. You know how the government, after three centuries, having embraced one of these sects, made it the orthodox, that is to say, the pre-dominant religion, to the exclusion of the rest; which, being less in number, became heretics; you know how and by what means of violence and seduction this religion was propagated, extended, divided, and enfeebled; how, six hundred years after the Christian innovation, another system was formed from it and from that of the Jews; and how Mahomet found the means of composing a political and theological empire at the expense of those of Moses and the vicars of Jesus.
"You know now," he said, "how the rest of this system was created in the chaos and disorder of the first three centuries; what a multitude of unique opinions divided people's minds and fueled their passion and stubbornness; because, being equally based on ancient tradition, they were equally sacred. You know how the government, after three centuries, adopted one of these sects and made it the official, or dominant, religion, excluding the others; which, being fewer in number, became heretics; you know how and through what means of violence and persuasion this religion was spread, expanded, fractured, and weakened; how, six hundred years after the rise of Christianity, another system was formed from it and from that of the Jews; and how Muhammad managed to build a political and theological empire at the expense of those of Moses and the followers of Jesus."
"Now, if you take a review of the whole history of the spirit of all religion, you will see that in its origin it has had no other author than the sensations and wants of man; that the idea of God has had no other type and model than those of physical powers, material beings, producing either good or evil, by impressions of pleasure or pain on sensitive beings; that in the formation of all these systems the spirit of religion has always followed the same course, and been uniform in its proceedings; that in all of them the dogma has never failed to represent, under the name of gods, the operations of nature, and passions and prejudices of men; that the moral of them all has had for its object the desire of happiness and the aversion to pain; but that the people, and the greater part of legislators, not knowing the route to be pursued, have formed false, and therefore discordant, ideas of virtue and vice of good and evil, that is to say, of what renders man happy or miserable; that in every instance, the means and the causes of propagating and establishing systems have exhibited the same scenes of passion and the same events; everywhere disputes about words, pretexts for zeal, revolutions and wars excited by the ambition of princes, the knavery of apostles, the credulity of proselytes, the ignorance of the vulgar, the exclusive cupidity and intolerant arrogance of all. Indeed, you will see that the whole history of the spirit of religion is only the history of the errors of the human mind, which, placed in a world that it does not comprehend, endeavors nevertheless to solve the enigma; and which, beholding with astonishment this mysterious and visible prodigy, imagines causes, supposes reasons, builds systems; then, finding one defective, destroys it for another not less so; hates the error that it abandons, misconceives the one that it embraces, rejects the truth that it is seeking, composes chimeras of discordant beings; and thus, while always dreaming of wisdom and happiness, wanders blindly in a labyrinth of illusion and doubt."
"Now, if you look at the entire history of religious belief, you'll see that its origins are rooted solely in human feelings and needs; that the idea of God has been shaped by physical forces and material entities, which bring about either good or bad outcomes through sensations of pleasure or pain for sensitive beings. Throughout the development of all these belief systems, the essence of religion has consistently followed a similar path, maintaining uniformity in its actions. In all these systems, the doctrines have continuously represented, under the term gods, the workings of nature, as well as the emotions and biases of people. The moral core of them all has aimed at the pursuit of happiness and the avoidance of pain; however, since people—especially most lawmakers—are unaware of the right path to take, they’ve created misguided and conflicting notions of virtue and vice, of good and evil, that is, what makes people happy or miserable. In every case, the methods and reasons for promoting and solidifying these belief systems have shown the same patterns of passion and similar events; everywhere you find arguments over terminology, excuses for fervor, revolutions and wars sparked by the ambitions of rulers, the manipulation of advocates, the gullibility of converts, the ignorance of the masses, and the selfish greed and intolerant arrogance of everyone involved. Truly, the entire history of religious belief is just a chronicle of human errors—a mind trying to understand a world it doesn't fully grasp, yet making attempts to resolve the puzzle; and as it gazes in awe at this mysterious and evident wonder, it conjures up causes, speculates on reasons, and constructs systems. When it identifies a flaw in one, it destroys it only to create another that is no better; it despises the error it leaves behind, misinterprets the one it adopts, dismisses the truth it seeks, and constructs fantastical ideas of conflicting entities; and thus, while always longing for wisdom and happiness, it wanders aimlessly in a maze of deception and uncertainty."
CHAPTER XXIII.
ALL RELIGIONS HAVE THE SAME OBJECT.
Thus spoke the orator in the name of those men who had studied the origin and succession of religious ideas.
Thus spoke the speaker on behalf of those who had examined the origins and development of religious ideas.
The theologians of various systems, reasoning on this discourse: "It is an impious representation," said some, "whose tendency is nothing less than to overturn all belief, to destroy subordination in the minds of men, and annihilate our ministry and power." "It is a romance," said others, "a tissue of conjectures, composed with art, but without foundation." The moderate and prudent men added: "Supposing all this to be true, why reveal these mysteries? Doubtless our opinions are full of errors; but these errors are a necessary restraint on the multitude. The world has gone thus for two thousand years; why change it now?"
The theologians from different beliefs debated this issue: "It's a wicked portrayal," some claimed, "one that aims to completely undermine all faith, disrupt people's sense of order, and erase our authority and role." "It's just a story," others argued, "a crafted mix of guesses, made with skill but lacking any real basis." The more moderate and sensible voices added, "Even if all this is true, why uncover these secrets? Surely our views are filled with mistakes; but those mistakes are crucial for keeping the masses in check. The world has functioned this way for two thousand years; why change that now?"
A murmur of disapprobation, which never fails to rise at every innovation, now began to increase; when a numerous group of the common classes of people, and of untaught men of all countries and of every nation, without prophets, without doctors, and without doctrine, advancing in the circle, drew the attention of the whole assembly; and one of them, in the name of all, thus addressed the multitude:
A murmur of disapproval, which always comes up with every new idea, started to grow; when a large group of regular people and uneducated individuals from all over the world, without any leaders, experts, or beliefs, moved into the circle, capturing the attention of the entire crowd; and one of them, speaking for everyone, addressed the masses in this way:
"Mediators and arbiters of nations! the strange relations which have occupied the present debate were unknown to us until this day. Our understanding, confounded and amazed at so many statements, some of them learned, others absurd and all incomprehensible, remains in uncertainty and doubt. One only reflection has struck us: on reviewing so many prodigious facts, so many contradictory assertions, we ask ourselves: What are all these discussions to us? What need have we of knowing what passed five or six thousand years ago, in countries we never heard of, and among men who will ever be unknown to us? True or false, what interest have we in knowing whether the world has existed six thousand, or twenty-five thousand years? Whether it was made of nothing, or of something; by itself, or by a maker, who in his turn would require another maker? What! we are not sure of what happens near us, and shall we answer for what happens in the sun, in the moon, or in imaginary regions of space? We have forgotten our own infancy, and shall we know the infancy of the world? And who will attest what no one has seen? who will certify what no man comprehends?
"Mediators and arbiters of nations! The strange relationships that have been discussed here were unknown to us until today. Our understanding, confused and astonished by so many statements, some learned and others absurd, all incomprehensible, remains filled with uncertainty and doubt. One thought stands out: after reviewing so many incredible facts and contradictory claims, we ask ourselves: What do all these discussions mean to us? Why do we need to know what happened five or six thousand years ago in places we've never heard of and among people we'll never know? True or false, what interest do we have in knowing whether the world has existed for six thousand or twenty-five thousand years? Whether it came from nothing or something; by itself or by a creator, who in turn would need another creator? What! We aren’t even sure of what happens around us, and should we be responsible for what happens with the sun, the moon, or in imaginary areas of space? We've forgotten our own childhood, and are we supposed to know the childhood of the world? And who can verify what no one has seen? Who can certify what no one can understand?"
"Besides, what addition or diminution will it make to our existence, to answer yes or no to all these chimeras? Hitherto neither our fathers nor ourselves have had the least knowledge or notion of them, and we do not perceive that we have had on this account either more or less of the sun, more or less of subsistence, more or less of good or of evil.
"Besides, what difference does it make to our lives if we say yes or no to all these illusions? Up to now, neither our parents nor we have had any understanding or idea about them, and we don't notice that we've had more or less sunlight, more or less food, or more or less good or bad because of it."
"If the knowledge of these things is so necessary, why have we lived as well without it as those who have taken so much trouble concerning it? If this knowledge is superfluous, why should we burden ourselves with it to-day?"
"If knowing these things is so important, why have we managed just fine without it like those who have put in so much effort to learn it? If this knowledge is unnecessary, why should we weigh ourselves down with it today?"
Then addressing himself to the doctors and theologians:
Then speaking to the doctors and theologians:
"What!" said he, "is it necessary that we, poor and ignorant men, whose every moment is scarcely sufficient for the cares of life, and the labors of which you take the profit,—is it necessary for us to learn the numberless histories that you have recounted, to read the quantity of books that you have cited, and to study the various languages in which they are composed! A thousand years of life would not suffice—"
"What!" he exclaimed, "is it really necessary for us, poor and ignorant folks, whose every moment barely covers the struggles of daily life and the work from which you benefit,—is it necessary for us to learn the countless stories you've shared, to read all the books you've mentioned, and to study the different languages they’re written in? A thousand years wouldn’t be enough—"
"It is not necessary," replied the doctors, "that you should acquire all this science; we have it for you—"
"It’s not necessary," replied the doctors, "for you to learn all this science; we have it for you—"
"But even you," replied the simple men, "with all your science, you are not agreed; of what advantage, then, is your science? Besides, how can you answer for us? If the faith of one man is applicable to many, what need have even you to believe? your fathers may have believed for you; and this would be reasonable, since they have seen for you.
"But even you," replied the simple men, "with all your knowledge, you don’t even agree among yourselves; so what good is your knowledge? Also, how can you speak for us? If one person’s faith works for many, then why do you need to believe? Your fathers might have believed for you, and that would make sense since they’ve experienced things for you."
"Farther, what is believing, if believing influences no action? And what action is influenced by believing, for instance, that the world is or is not eternal?"
"Furthermore, what is belief if it doesn't lead to any action? And what action is affected by believing, for example, that the world is or isn't eternal?"
"The latter would be offensive to God," said the doctors.
"The latter would offend God," said the doctors.
"How prove you that?" replied the simple men.
"How do you prove that?" replied the simple men.
"In our books," answered the doctors.
"In our books," the doctors replied.
"We do not understand them," returned the simple men.
"We don't understand them," replied the simple men.
"We understand them for you," said the doctors.
"We'll take care of it for you," said the doctors.
"That is the difficulty," replied the simple men. "By what right do you constitute yourselves mediators between God and us?"
"That's the issue," replied the simple men. "On what basis do you consider yourselves mediators between God and us?"
"By his orders," said the doctors.
"By his orders," said the doctors.
"Where is the proof of these orders?" said the simple men.
"Where's the proof of these orders?" said the simple men.
"In our books," said the doctors.
"In our books," said the doctors.
"We understand them not," said the simple men; "and how came this just God to give you this privilege over us? Why did this common father oblige us to believe on a less degree of evidence than you? He has spoken to you; be it so; he is infallible, and deceives you not. But it is you who speak to us! And who shall assure us that you are not in error yourselves, or that you will not lead us into error? And if we should be deceived, how will that just God save us contrary to law, or condemn us on a law which we have not known?"
"We don’t get it," said the simple men; "how did this fair God give you this privilege over us? Why did this common father require us to believe on less evidence than you? He has spoken to you; that may be true; He is infallible and doesn’t deceive you. But you are the ones speaking to us! Who can guarantee that you're not mistaken yourselves or that you won't lead us astray? And if we end up being deceived, how will that fair God save us in violation of the law, or condemn us based on a law we didn’t know?"
"He has given you the natural law," said the doctors.
"He has given you the natural law," the doctors said.
"And what is the natural law?" replied the simple men. "If that law is sufficient, why has he given any other? If it is not sufficient, why did he make it imperfect?"
"And what is natural law?" replied the simple men. "If that law is good enough, why has he given us any others? If it isn't enough, why did he make it imperfect?"
"His judgments are mysteries," said the doctors, "and his justice is not like that of men."
"His judgments are a mystery," said the doctors, "and his sense of justice isn't like ours."
"If his justice," replied the simple men, "is not like ours, by what rule are we to judge of it? And, moreover, why all these laws, and what is the object proposed by them?"
"If his justice," replied the simple men, "is not like ours, by what standard are we supposed to judge it? And also, why all these laws, and what purpose do they serve?"
"To render you more happy," replied a doctor, "by rendering you better and more virtuous. It is to teach man to enjoy his benefits, and not injure his fellows, that God has manifested himself by so many oracles and prodigies."
"To make you happier," replied a doctor, "by making you healthier and more virtuous. It's to teach people to appreciate their blessings and not harm others that God has revealed Himself through so many signs and wonders."
"In that case," said the simple men, "there is no necessity for so many studies, nor of such a variety of arguments; only tell us which is the religion that best answers the end which they all propose."
"In that case," said the simple men, "there's no need for so many studies or such a variety of arguments; just tell us which religion best fulfills the purpose that all of them claim to aim for."
Immediately, on this, every group, extolling its own morality above that of all others, there arose among the different sects a new and most violent dispute.
Immediately, on this, every group, bragging about its own morality over that of all others, a new and intense dispute broke out among the different sects.
"It is we," said the Mussulmans, "who possess the most excellent morals, who teach all the virtues useful to men and agreeable to God. We profess justice, disinterestedness, resignation to providence, charity to our brethren, alms-giving, and devotion; we torment not the soul with superstitious fears; we live without alarm, and die without remorse."
"It’s us," said the Muslims, "who have the best morals, who teach all the virtues that are good for people and pleasing to God. We believe in justice, selflessness, acceptance of fate, kindness to our fellow humans, giving to those in need, and devotion; we don’t torture the soul with superstitious fears; we live without fear and die without regret."
"How dare you speak of morals," answered the Christian priests, "you, whose chief lived in licentiousness and preached impurity? You, whose first precept is homicide and war? For this we appeal to experience: for these twelve hundred years your fanatical zeal has not ceased to spread commotion and carnage among the nations. If Asia, so flourishing in former times, is now languishing in barbarity and depopulation, it is in your doctrine that we find the cause; in that doctrine, the enemy of all instruction, which sanctifies ignorance, which consecrates the most absolute despotism in the governors, imposes the most blind and passive obedience in the people, that has stupefied the faculties of man, and brutalized the nations.
"How can you talk about morals?" replied the Christian priests. "You, whose leader lived a life of excess and preached impurity? You, whose first principle is violence and war? We point to history: for the last twelve hundred years, your extreme zeal has only brought chaos and bloodshed to the nations. If Asia, once so prosperous, is now suffering from ignorance and population decline, we find the root of the problem in your teachings; in that doctrine, which opposes all forms of education, sanctifies ignorance, enshrines absolute tyranny in rulers, enforces blind and submissive obedience among the people, has dulled human faculties, and brutalized societies."
"It is not so with our sublime and celestial morals; it was they which raised the world from its primitive barbarity, from the senseless and cruel superstitions of idolatry, from human sacrifices,* from the shameful orgies of pagan mysteries; they it was that purified manners, proscribed incest and adultery, polished savage nations, banished slavery, and introduced new and unknown virtues, charity for men, their equality in the sight of God, forgiveness and forgetfulness of injuries, the restraint of all the passions, the contempt of worldly greatness, a life completely spiritual and completely holy!"
"It’s not the same with our high and heavenly morals; they were the ones that lifted the world from its primitive savagery, from the mindless and brutal superstitions of idolatry, from human sacrifices,* from the disgraceful orgies of pagan rituals; they were what refined behavior, banned incest and adultery, civilized savage nations, eliminated slavery, and introduced new and unknown virtues like compassion for others, equality in the eyes of God, forgiveness and letting go of past wrongs, controlling all desires, disregarding worldly power, and living a life that is fully spiritual and completely holy!"
* Read the cold declaration of Eusebius (Proep. Evang. lib. I, p. 11,), who pretends that, since the coming of Christ, there have been neither wars, nor tyrants, nor cannibals, nor sodomites, nor persons committing incest, nor savages destroying their parents, etc. When we read these fathers of the church we are astonished at their insincerity or infatuation.
* Read the cold statement from Eusebius (Proep. Evang. lib. I, p. 11), who claims that since Christ's arrival, there have been no wars, tyrants, cannibals, sodomites, incest, or savages destroying their parents, etc. When we read these church fathers, we are amazed at their insincerity or delusion.
"We admire," said the Mussulmans, "the ease with which you reconcile that evangelical meekness, of which you are so ostentatious, with the injuries and outrages with which you are constantly galling your neighbors. When you criminate so severely the great man whom we revere, we might fairly retort on the conduct of him whom you adore; but we scorn such advantages, and confining ourselves to the real object in question, we maintain that the morals of your gospel have by no means that perfection which you ascribe to them; it is not true that they have introduced into the world new and unknown virtues: for example, the equality of men in the sight of God,—that fraternity and that benevolence which follow from it, were formal doctrines of the sect of the Hermatics or Samaneans,* from whom you descend. As to the forgiveness of injuries, the Pagans themselves had taught it; but in the extent that you give it, far from being a virtue, it becomes an immorality, a vice. Your so much boasted precept of turning one cheek after the other, is not only contrary to every sentiment of man, but is opposed to all ideas of justice. It emboldens the wicked by impunity, debases the virtuous by servility, delivers up the world to despotism and tyranny, and dissolves all society. Such is the true spirit of your doctrines. Your gospels in their precepts and their parables, never represent God but as a despot without any rules of equity; a partial father treating a debauched and prodigal son with more favor than his respectful and virtuous children; a capricious master, who gives the same wages to workmen who had wrought but one hour, as to those who had labored through the whole day; one who prefers the last comers to the first. The moral is everywhere misanthropic and antisocial; it disgusts men with life and with society; and tends only to encourage hermitism and celibacy.
"We admire," said the Muslims, "the way you effortlessly blend that evangelical meekness you flaunt so much with the offenses and insults you constantly inflict on your neighbors. When you harshly criticize the great man we respect, we could easily respond by examining the conduct of the one you idolize; but we reject such tactics and, sticking to the real topic at hand, we assert that the morals of your gospel are far from the perfection you claim they possess; it's not true that they have introduced any new or unknown virtues into the world: for instance, the equality of all people in the eyes of God—along with the brotherhood and kindness that follow from it—were already established beliefs of the Hermatics or Samaneans,* from whom you descend. Regarding the forgiveness of injuries, the Pagans also promoted it; however, the way you expand on it turns it into a vice rather than a virtue. Your much-lauded principle of turning the other cheek is not only against human sentiment but also contradicts all ideas of justice. It emboldens the wicked by allowing them to act without consequences, undermines the virtuous by reducing them to servility, and paves the way for despotism and tyranny, ultimately breaking down society. Such is the true essence of your teachings. Your gospels, in their principles and stories, depict God only as a tyrant without any sense of fairness; a biased father showing more favor to a wayward, extravagant son than to his respectful and virtuous children; a whimsical master who pays the same rate to workers who labored for just one hour as to those who toiled all day; one who favors the latecomers over those who arrived first. The moral is constantly misanthropic and antisocial; it turns people away from life and society, only encouraging solitude and celibacy."
* The equality of mankind in a state of nature and in the eyes of God was one of the principal tenets of the Samaneans, and they appear to be the only ancients that entertained this opinion.
* The idea that all people are equal in a natural state and in the eyes of God was one of the main beliefs of the Samaneans, and they seem to be the only ancient society that held this view.
"As to the manner in which you have practised these morals, we appeal in our turn to the testimony of facts. We ask whether it is this evangelical meekness which has excited your interminable wars between your sects, your atrocious persecutions of pretended heretics, your crusades against Arianism, Manicheism, Protestantism, without speaking of your crusades against us, and of those sacrilegious associations, still subsisting, of men who take an oath to continue them?* We ask you whether it be gospel charity which has made you exterminate whole nations in America, to annihilate the empires of Mexico and Peru; which makes you continue to dispeople Africa and sell its inhabitants like cattle, notwithstanding your abolition of slavery; which makes you ravage India and usurp its dominions; and whether it be the same charity which, for three centuries past, has led you to harrass the habitations of the people of three continents, of whom the most prudent, the Chinese and Japanese, were constrained to drive you off, that they might escape your chains and recover their internal peace?"
"As for how you have lived out these morals, we turn to the evidence of facts. We ask if it’s this evangelical humility that has caused your endless wars between your groups, your terrible persecution of supposed heretics, your crusades against Arianism, Manicheism, and Protestantism, not to mention your crusades against us, and the ongoing sacrilegious alliances of those who pledge to continue such actions?* We question whether it is gospel charity that has led you to wipe out entire nations in America, to destroy the empires of Mexico and Peru; that makes you continue to depopulate Africa and sell its people like cattle, despite your abolition of slavery; that allows you to ravage India and seize its territories; and whether it’s the same charity that, for the past three centuries, has driven you to torment the homes of people on three continents, forcing even the most cautious, the Chinese and Japanese, to expel you in order to escape your oppression and regain their peace?"
* The oath taken by the knights of the Order of Malta, is to kill, or make the Mahometans prisoners, for the glory of God.
* The oath taken by the knights of the Order of Malta is to kill or capture the Muslims for the glory of God.
Here the Bramins, the Rabbins, the Bonzes, the Chamans, the Priests of the Molucca islands, and the coasts of Guinea, loading the Christian doctors with reproaches: "Yes!" cried they, "these men are robbers and hypocrites, who preach simplicity, to surprise confidence; humility, to enslave with more ease; poverty, to appropriate all riches to themselves. They promise another world, the better to usurp the present; and while they speak to you of tolerance and charity, they burn, in the name of God, the men who do not worship him in their manner."
Here the Brahmins, the Rabbis, the Monks, the Shamans, the Priests of the Molucca Islands, and those from the coasts of Guinea confronted the Christian leaders with accusations: "Yes!" they shouted, "these men are thieves and frauds, who preach simplicity to gain your trust; humility to control you more easily; and poverty to hoard all wealth for themselves. They promise a better afterlife to take advantage of this one; and while they talk to you about tolerance and charity, they burn, in the name of God, those who don’t worship Him in their way."
"Lying priests," retorted the missionaries, "it is you who abuse the credulity of ignorant nations to subjugate them. It is you who have made of your ministry an art of cheating and imposture; you have converted religion into a traffic of cupidity and avarice. You pretend to hold communications with spirits, and they give for oracles nothing but your wills. You feign to read the stars, and destiny decrees only your desires. You cause idols to speak, and the gods are but the instruments of your passions. You have invented sacrifices and libations, to collect for your own profit the milk of flocks, and the flesh and fat of victims; and under the cloak of piety you devour the offerings of the gods, who cannot eat, and the substance of the people who are forced to labor."
"Lying priests," the missionaries shot back, "it's you who take advantage of the gullibility of uninformed nations to oppress them. You've turned your ministry into a scheme of deceit and fraud; you've made religion a business driven by greed and selfishness. You act like you can communicate with spirits, but they only echo your own wishes. You pretend to read the stars, and fate only delivers what you want. You make idols talk, and the gods just serve your passions. You've created sacrifices and offerings to profit from the milk of herds and the meat and fat of animals; and disguised as piety, you consume the offerings meant for the gods, who can't eat, and the resources of the people who are forced to work."
"And you," replied the Bramins, the Bonzes, the Chamans, "you sell to the credulous living, your vain prayers for the souls of the dead. With your indulgences and your absolutions you have usurped the power of God himself; and making a traffic of his favors and pardons, you have put heaven at auction; and by your system of expiations you have formed a tariff of crimes, which has perverted all consciences."*
"And you," replied the Brahmins, the Monks, the Shamans, "you sell to the gullible living your empty prayers for the souls of the dead. With your indulgences and your absolutions, you’ve taken over the power of God himself; and by turning his favors and pardons into a business, you’ve put heaven on the auction block; and through your system of penances, you’ve created a list of sins that has warped all consciences."*
* As long as it shall be possible to obtain purification from crimes and exemption from punishment by means of money or other frivolous practices; as long as kings and great men shall suppose that building temples or instituting foundations, will absolve them from the guilt of oppression and homicide; as long as individuals shall imagine that they may rob and cheat, provided they observe fast during Lent, go to confession, and receive extreme unction, it is impossible there should exist in society any morality or virtue; and it is from a deep conviction of truth, that a modern philosopher has called the doctrine of expiations la verola des societes.
* As long as people can buy their way out of crimes and avoid punishment through money or other silly practices; as long as kings and powerful figures believe that building temples or setting up charitable foundations will free them from the guilt of oppressing others and committing murder; as long as individuals think they can steal and deceive as long as they fast during Lent, go to confession, and receive last rites, it’s impossible for any true morality or virtue to exist in society; and it’s with a deep understanding of this truth that a modern philosopher has referred to the idea of atonement as la verola des societes.
"Add to this," said the Imans, "that these men have invented the most insidious of all systems of wickedness,—the absurd and impious obligation of recounting to them the most intimate secrets of actions and of thoughts (confessions); so their insolent curiosity has carried their inquisition even into the sanctuary of the marriage bed,* and the inviolable recesses of the heart."
"Add to this," said the Imans, "that these men have created the most deceitful system of wrongdoing—the ridiculous and blasphemous expectation of sharing the most personal secrets of our actions and thoughts (confessions); their arrogant curiosity has even invaded the privacy of the marriage bed,* and the sacred spaces of the heart."
* Confession is a very ancient invention of the priests, who did not fail to avail themselves of that means of governing. It was practised in the Egyptian, Greek, Phrygian, Persian mysteries, etc. Plutarch has transmitted us the remarkable answer of a Spartan whom a priest wanted to confess. "Is it to you or to God I am to confess?" "To God," answered the priest: "In that case," replied the Spartan, "man, begone!" (Remarkable Savings of the Lacedemonians.) The first Christians confessed their faults publicly, like the Essenians. Afterwards, priests began to be established, with power of absolution from the sin of idolatry. In the time of Theodosius, a woman having publicly confessed an intrigue with a deacon, bishop Necterius, and his successor Chrysostom, granted communion without confession. It was not until the seventh century that the abbots of convents exacted from monks and nuns confession twice a year; and it was at a still later period that bishops of Rome generalized it. The Mussulmen, who suppose women to have no souls, are shocked at the idea of confession; and say; How can an honest man think of listening to the recital of the actions or the secret thoughts of a woman? May we not also ask, on the other hand, how can an honest woman consent to reveal them?
* Confession is an ancient practice invented by priests, who used it as a way to maintain control. It was common in the Egyptian, Greek, Phrygian, and Persian mysteries, among others. Plutarch recounts an interesting exchange between a Spartan and a priest who wanted him to confess. The Spartan asked, "Should I confess to you or to God?" The priest replied, "To God." The Spartan then said, "In that case, man, get lost!" (Remarkable Savings of the Lacedemonians.) The early Christians confessed their sins publicly, similar to the Essenians. Later, priests were given the authority to absolve people from the sin of idolatry. During Theodosius's time, a woman publicly confessed to having an affair with a deacon, and both Bishop Necterius and his successor Chrysostom allowed her to receive communion without confession. It wasn't until the seventh century that abbots of convents required monks and nuns to confess twice a year, and it took even longer for the bishops of Rome to make it a general practice. Muslims, who believe that women have no souls, are appalled by the idea of confession. They ask, how can a decent man listen to the recounting of a woman's actions or secret thoughts? We might also wonder, on the other hand, how can an honest woman agree to disclose them?
Thus by mutual reproaches the doctors of the different sects began to reveal all the crimes of their ministry—all the vices of their craft; and it was found that among all nations the spirit of the priesthood, their system of conduct, their actions their morals, were absolutely the same:
Thus, through mutual blame, the doctors from various sects started to expose all the wrongs in their ministry—all the flaws in their profession; and it was discovered that among all nations, the nature of the priesthood, their way of behaving, their actions, and their morals were exactly the same:
That they had everywhere formed secret associations and corporations at enmity with the rest of society:*
That they had formed secret groups and organizations everywhere, against the rest of society:*
* That we may understand the general feelings of priests respecting the rest of mankind, whom they always call by the name of the people, let us hear one of the doctors of the church. "The people," says Bishop Synnesius, in Calvit. page 315, "are desirous of being deceived, we cannot act otherwise respecting them. The case was similar with the ancient priests of Egypt, and for this reason they shut themselves up in their temples, and there composed their mysteries, out of the reach of the eye of the people." And forgetting what he has before just said, he adds: "for had the people been in the secret they might have been offended at the deception played upon them. In the mean time how is it possible to conduct one's self otherwise with the people so long as they are people? For my own part, to myself I shall always be a philosopher, but in dealing with the mass of mankind, I shall be a priest." "A little jargon," says Geogory Nazianzen to St. Jerome (Hieron. ad. Nep.) "is all that is necessary to impose on the people. The less they comprehend, the more they admire. Our forefathers and doctors of the church have often said, not what they thought, but what circumstances and necessity dictated to them." "We endeavor," says Sanchoniaton, "to excite admiration by means of the marvellous." (Proep. Evang. lib. 3.) Such was the conduct of all the priests of antiquity, and is still that of the Bramins and Lamas who are the exact counterpart of the Egyptian priests. Such was the practice of the Jesuits, who marched with hasty strides in the same career. It is useless to point out the whole depravity of such a doctrine. In general every association which has mystery for its basis, or an oath of secrecy, is a league of robbers against society, a league divided in its very bosom into knaves and dupes, or in other words agents and instruments. It is thus we ought to judge of those modern clubs, which, under the name of Illuminatists, Martinists, Cagliostronists, and Mesmerites, infest Europe. These societies are the follies and deceptions of the ancient Cabalists, Magicians, Orphies, etc., "who," says Plutarch, "led into errors of considerable magnitude, not only individuals, but kings and nations."
* To understand how priests generally feel about the rest of humanity, whom they refer to as "the people," let's listen to one of the church's scholars. "The people," says Bishop Synnesius in Calvit, page 315, "want to be deceived; we can't interact with them any other way. It was the same with the ancient priests of Egypt, which is why they isolated themselves in their temples and crafted their mysteries away from the people's gaze." And forgetting what he just previously stated, he adds, "If the people were in on the secret, they might have been upset by the deception imposed on them. In the meantime, how can one act differently towards the people as long as they remain just that? For my part, I will always consider myself a philosopher, but in dealing with the masses, I will act as a priest." "A little bit of jargon," says Gregory Nazianzen to St. Jerome (Hieron. ad. Nep.), "is all that's needed to impress the people. The less they understand, the more they admire. Our ancestors and church scholars have often said what circumstances and necessity forced them to say, rather than what they truly believed." "We strive," says Sanchoniaton, "to invoke admiration through the extraordinary." (Proep. Evang. lib. 3.) Such was the behavior of all the priests in ancient times, and it continues today with the Bramins and Lamas, who are the exact equivalents of the Egyptian priests. This was also the method of the Jesuits, who quickly followed the same path. It's pointless to highlight the full corruption of such a doctrine. In general, any group based on mystery or secrecy is a conspiracy against society, split within itself into tricksters and victims—agents and their tools. This is how we should view those modern organizations that go by names like Illuminatists, Martinists, Cagliostronists, and Mesmerites, which plague Europe. These societies are the foolishness and deceptions of ancient Cabalists, Magicians, Orphics, etc., "who," as Plutarch says, "misled not just individuals, but also kings and nations into significant errors."
That they had everywhere attributed to themselves prerogatives and immunities, by means of which they lived exempt from the burdens of other classes:
That they had claimed privileges and protections everywhere, allowing them to live free from the burdens faced by other classes:
That they everywhere avoided the toils of the laborer, the dangers of the soldier, and the disappointments of the merchant:
That they consistently steered clear of the hard work of laborers, the risks faced by soldiers, and the letdowns experienced by merchants:
That they lived everywhere in celibacy, to shun even the cares of a family:
That they lived everywhere without getting married, to avoid even the worries of a family:
That, under the cloak of poverty, they found everywhere the secret of procuring wealth and all sorts of enjoyments:
That, hidden beneath the guise of poverty, they discovered everywhere the secret to acquiring wealth and all kinds of pleasures:
That under the name of mendicity they raised taxes to a greater amount than princes:
That under the term "begging," they increased taxes to a larger extent than the rulers did:
That in the form of gifts and offerings they had established fixed and certain revenues exempt from charges:
That through gifts and offerings, they had set up fixed and certain income that was free from charges:
That under pretence of retirement and devotion they lived in idleness and licentiousness:
That under the guise of retirement and devotion, they lived in laziness and excess:
That they had made a virtue of alms-giving, to live quietly on the labors of others:
That they turned almsgiving into a way to live comfortably off the work of others:
That they had invented the ceremonies of worship, as a means of attracting the reverence of the people, while they were playing the parts of gods, of whom they styled themselves the interpreters and mediators, to assume all their powers; that, with this design, they had (according to the degree of ignorance or information of their people) assumed by turns the character of astrologers, drawers of horoscopes, fortune-tellers, magicians,* necromancers, quacks, physicians, courtiers, confessors of princes, always aiming at the great object to govern for their own advantage:
They created worship ceremonies to gain the people's respect while pretending to be gods, claiming to be their interpreters and mediators to take on all their powers. With this goal in mind, depending on how much their people knew or didn't know, they alternated between being astrologers, horoscope readers, fortune-tellers, magicians, necromancers, frauds, doctors, courtiers, and royal confessors, always aiming to control things for their own benefit.
* What is a magician, in the sense in which people understand the word? A man who by words and gestures pretends to act on supernatural beings, and compel them to descend at his call and obey his orders. Such was the conduct of the ancient priests, and such is still that of all priests in idolatrous nations; for which reason we have given them the denomination of Magicians. And when a Christian priest pretends to make God descend from heaven, to fix him to a morsel of leaven, and render, by means of this talisman, souls pure and in a state of grace, what is this but a trick of magic? And where is the difference between a Chaman of Tartary who invokes the Genii, or an Indian Bramin, who makes Vichenou descend in a vessel of water to drive away evil spirits? Yes, the identity of the spirit of priests in every age and country is fully established! Every where it is the assumption of an exclusive privilege, the pretended faculty of moving at will the powers of nature; and this assumption is so direct a violation of the right of equality, that whenever the people shall regain their importance, they will forever abolish this sacrilegious kind of nobility, which has been the type and parent stock of the other species of nobility.
* What is a magician, in the way that people understand the term? A person who, through words and gestures, pretends to influence supernatural beings, summoning them to respond to their call and follow their commands. This was the behavior of ancient priests, and it’s still the practice of all priests in idolatrous cultures; for this reason, we refer to them as Magicians. And when a Christian priest claims to bring God down from heaven, to fix him to a piece of bread, and to purify souls and grant them grace through this ritual, what is that but a kind of magic? And what’s the difference between a shaman from Tartary who calls on the spirits, or an Indian Brahmin who brings Vishnu into a pool of water to drive away evil spirits? Yes, the similarity of the role of priests across all times and places is clear! Everywhere it’s about assuming an exclusive privilege, claiming the ability to control the forces of nature at will; and this claim is such a blatant violation of the right to equality that whenever people reclaim their significance, they will permanently abolish this sacrilegious form of nobility, which has served as a model and source for other types of nobility.
That sometimes they had exalted the power of kings and consecrated their persons, to monopolize their favors, or participate their sway:
That sometimes they had praised the power of kings and given special status to their people, to secure their favors or share in their influence:
That sometimes they had preached up the murder of tyrants (reserving it to themselves to define tyranny), to avenge themselves of their contempt or their disobedience:
That they occasionally promoted the killing of tyrants (while claiming the authority to define tyranny), to get back at those who showed them disrespect or disobeyed them:
And that they always stigmatised with impiety whatever crossed their interests; that they hindered all public instruction, to exercise the monopoly of science; that finally, at all times and in all places, they had found the secret of living in peace in the midst of the anarchy they created, in safety under the despotism that they favored, in idleness amidst the industry they preached, and in abundance while surrounded with scarcity; and all this by carrying on the singular trade of selling words and gestures to credulous people, who purchase them as commodities of the greatest value.*
And they always labeled anything that threatened their interests as impious; they obstructed all public education to maintain their control over knowledge; and ultimately, they consistently managed to live peacefully amidst the chaos they created, safely under the tyranny they supported, lazily while promoting hard work, and in plenty while surrounded by scarcity. They achieved this by engaging in the unusual business of selling words and gestures to gullible people, who bought them as if they were the most valuable commodities.
* A curious work would be the comparative history of the agnuses of the pope and the pastils of the grand Lama. It would be worth while to extend this idea to religions ceremonies in general, and to confront column by column, the analogous or contrasting points of faith and superstitious practices in all nations. There is one more species of superstition which it would be equally salutary to cure, blind veneration for the great; and for this purpose it would be alone sufficient to write a minute detail of the private life of kings and princes. No work could be so philosophical as this; and accordingly we have seen what a general outcry was excited among kings and the panders of kings, when the Anecdotes of the Court of Berlin first appeared. What would be the alarm were the public put in possession of the sequel of this work? Were the people fairly acquainted with all the absurdities of this species of idol, they would no longer be exposed to covet their specious pleasures of which the plausible and hollow appearance disturbs their peace, and hinders them from enjoying the much more solid happiness of their own condition.
* A fascinating project would be a comparative history of the pope's veneration and the grand Lama's reverence. It would be worthwhile to expand this idea to religious ceremonies overall and to compare, side by side, the similar or contrasting aspects of beliefs and superstitious practices across all nations. There is another type of superstition that would also be beneficial to address: blind admiration for the influential. To tackle this, it would be enough to write a detailed account of the private lives of kings and princes. No work could be as insightful as this; indeed, we've seen the uproar that erupted among monarchs and their sycophants when the Anecdotes of the Court of Berlin was first published. Just imagine the panic if the public were to read the follow-up to this work! If people were fully aware of all the absurdities surrounding this type of idol, they wouldn’t fall prey to longing for the misleading pleasures that disturb their peace and prevent them from truly enjoying the more substantial happiness of their own lives.
Then the different nations, in a transport of fury, were going to tear in pieces the men who had thus abused them; but the legislator, arresting this movement of violence, addressed the chiefs and doctors:
Then the different nations, in a fit of rage, were ready to tear apart the men who had wronged them; but the legislator, stopping this wave of violence, spoke to the chiefs and doctors:
"What!" said he, "instructors of nations, is it thus that you have deceived them?"
"What!" he exclaimed, "leaders of nations, is this how you've misled them?"
And the terrified priests replied.
And the scared priests answered.
"O legislator! we are men. The people are so superstitious! they have themselves encouraged these errors."*
"O legislator! We are human beings. The people are so superstitious! They have actively supported these mistakes."*
* Consider in this view the Brabanters.
* Consider the Brabanters in this context.
And the kings said:
And the kings said:
"O legislator! the people are so servile and so ignorant! they prostrated themselves before the yoke, which we scarcely dared to show them."*
"O legislator! the people are so submissive and so uninformed! they bowed down before the burden, which we barely dared to reveal to them."
* The inhabitants of Vienna, for example, who harnessed themselves like cattle and drew the chariot of Leopold.
* The people of Vienna, for instance, who strapped themselves like cattle and pulled Leopold's chariot.
Then the legislator, turning to the people—"People!" said he, "remember what you have just heard; they are two indelible truths. Yes, you yourselves cause the evils of which you complain; yourselves encourage the tyrants, by a base adulation of their power, by an imprudent admiration of their false beneficence, by servility in obedience, by licentiousness in liberty, and by a credulous reception of every imposition. On whom shall you wreak vengeance for the faults committed by your own ignorance and cupidity?"
Then the legislator turned to the people. "People!" he said, "remember what you've just heard; these are two undeniable truths. Yes, you are the ones who create the problems you complain about; you encourage the tyrants through your blind praise of their power, your reckless admiration of their fake kindness, your submissiveness in obeying them, your excess in freedom, and your gullible acceptance of every deception. Who will you take your anger out on for the mistakes caused by your own ignorance and greed?"
And the people, struck with confusion, remained in mournful silence.
And the people, filled with confusion, stayed silent in sorrow.
CHAPTER XXIV.
SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM OF CONTRADICTIONS.
The legislator then resumed his discourse: "O nations!" said he, "we have heard the discussion of your opinions. The different sentiments which divide you have given rise to many reflections, and furnished several questions which we shall propose to you to solve.
The legislator then continued speaking: "O nations!" he said, "we have heard your opinions. The various views that divide you have led to much reflection and raised several questions that we will ask you to resolve.
"First, considering the diversity and opposition of the creeds to which you are attached, we ask on what motives you found your persuasion? Is it from a deliberate choice that you follow the standard of one prophet rather than another? Before adopting this doctrine, rather than that, did you first compare? did you carefully examine them? Or have you received them only from the chance of birth, from the empire of education and habit? Are you not born Christians on the borders of the Tiber, Mussulmans on those of the Euphrates, Idolaters on the Indus, just as you are born fair in cold climates, and sable under the scorching sun of Africa? And if your opinions are the effect of your fortuitous position on the earth, of consanguinity, of imitation, how is it that such a hazard should be a ground of conviction, an argument of truth?
"First, considering the variety and disagreement of the beliefs you hold, we ask what reasons support your belief? Do you follow the teachings of one prophet over another because you chose to? Before you embraced this belief instead of that one, did you compare the different options? Did you examine them thoroughly? Or did you simply take them on due to chance, from the influence of your upbringing and habits? Are you not born Christians near the Tiber, Muslims by the Euphrates, and idolaters by the Indus, just as you are born with fair skin in cold climates or dark skin under Africa's intense sun? And if your beliefs are simply a result of your random location on the planet, family ties, or imitation, how can such randomness serve as a valid basis for your convictions or a proof of truth?"
"Secondly, when we reflect on the mutual proscriptions and arbitrary intolerance of your pretensions, we are frightened at the consequences that flow from your own principles. Nations! who reciprocally devote each other to the bolts of heavenly wrath, suppose that the universal Being, whom you revere, should this moment descend from heaven on this multitude; and, clothed with all his power, should sit on this throne to judge you; suppose that he should say to you: Mortals! it is your own justice that I am going to exercise upon you. Yes, of all the religious systems that divide you, one alone shall this day be preferred; all the others, all this multitude of standards, of nations, of prophets, shall be condemned to eternal destruction. This is not enough: among the particular sects of the chosen system, one only can be favored; all the others must be condemned: neither is this enough;—from this little remnant of a group I must exclude all those who have not fulfilled the conditions enjoined by its precepts. O men! to what a small number of elect have you limited your race! to what a penury of beneficence do you reduce the immensity of my goodness! to what a solitude of beholders do you condemn my greatness and my glory!
"Secondly, when we think about the mutual restrictions and unreasonable intolerance of your claims, we are alarmed by the outcomes that result from your own beliefs. Nations! who mutually condemn each other to the wrath of heaven, imagine that the universal Being you honor should suddenly come down from the sky before this crowd; and, wielding all his power, sit on this throne to judge you; imagine that he says to you: Mortals! it’s your own justice that I’m going to enforce upon you. Yes, of all the religious systems that divide you, only one shall be favored today; all the others, that vast array of standards, nations, and prophets, will face eternal destruction. But that’s not all: among the particular sects of the chosen system, only one can be favored; all the others must be condemned: and that’s still not enough;—from this small remnant of a group, I must exclude everyone who hasn’t met the requirements set by its teachings. O humans! to how few have you limited your race! to how little kindness do you reduce the vastness of my goodness! to how sparse a number of observers do you condemn my greatness and my glory!"
"But," said the legislator rising, "no matter you have willed it so. Nations! here is an urn in which all your names are placed: one only is a prize: approach, and draw this tremendous lottery!" And the nations, seized with terror cried: "No, no; we are all brothers, all equal; we cannot condemn each other."
"But," said the legislator, standing up, "it doesn’t matter that you wanted it this way. Nations! Here’s an urn containing all your names: only one will win the prize; come forward and participate in this intense lottery!" And the nations, filled with fear, shouted: "No, no; we are all brothers, all equal; we can’t condemn each other."
"Then," said the legislator, resuming his seat: "O men! who dispute on so many subjects, lend an attentive ear to one problem which you exhibit, and which you ought to decide yourselves."
"Then," said the legislator, sitting down again, "O men! who argue about so many topics, pay close attention to one issue that you present, and which you should resolve yourselves."
And the people, giving great attention, he lifted an arm towards heaven, and, pointing to the sun, said:
And the people, paying close attention, he raised an arm toward the sky, and, pointing at the sun, said:
"Nations, does that sun, which enlightens you, appear square or triangular?"
"Nations, does that sun that shines on you look square or triangular?"
"No," answered they with one voice, "it is round."
"No," they answered in unison, "it's round."
Then, taking the golden balance that was on the altar:
Then, taking the gold scale that was on the altar:
"This gold," said the legislator, "that you handle every day, is it heavier than the same volume of copper?"
"This gold," the legislator said, "that you deal with every day, is it heavier than the same amount of copper?"
"Yes," answered all the people, "gold is heavier than Copper."
"Yeah," everyone replied, "gold is heavier than copper."
Then, taking the sword:
Then, taking the sword:
"Is this iron," said the legislator, "softer than lead?"
"Is this iron," asked the lawmaker, "softer than lead?"
"No," said the people.
"No," said the crowd.
"Is sugar sweet, and gall bitter?"
"Is sugar sweet and is gall bitter?"
"Yes."
"Yep."
"Do you love pleasure and hate pain?"
"Do you love pleasure and dislike pain?"
"Yes."
Yes.
"Thus, then, you are agreed in these points, and many others of the same nature.
"So, you all agree on these points, and many others like them."
"Now, tell us, is there a cavern in the centre of the earth, or inhabitants in the moon?"
"Now, tell us, is there a cave in the center of the Earth, or people on the moon?"
This question caused a universal murmur. Every one answered differently—some yes, others no; one said it was probable, another said it was an idle and ridiculous question; some, that it was worth knowing. And the discord was universal.
This question sparked a worldwide buzz. Everyone answered differently—some said yes, others no; one thought it was likely, another called it a pointless and silly question; some felt it was worth knowing. And the disagreement was widespread.
After some time the legislator, having obtained silence, said:
After a while, the legislator, having gained everyone's attention, said:
"Explain to us, O Nations! this problem: we have put to you several questions which you have answered with one voice, without distinction of race or of sect: white men, black men, followers of Mahomet and of Moses, worshippers of Boudha and of Jesus, all have returned the same answer. We then proposed another question, and you have all disagreed! Why this unanimity in one case, and this discordance in the other?"
"Explain to us, O Nations! this issue: we've asked you several questions, and you've answered unanimously, regardless of race or religion: white people, black people, followers of Muhammad and Moses, believers in Buddha and Jesus, all gave the same response. Then we asked another question, and you all disagreed! Why is there unity in one situation and disagreement in the other?"
And the group of simple men and savages answered and said: "The reason of this is plain. In the first case we see and feel the objects, and we speak from sensation; in the second, they are beyond the reach of our senses—we speak of them only from conjecture."
And the group of simple men and savages replied, "The reason is obvious. In the first case, we see and feel the objects, and we speak from our experiences; in the second, they are beyond our senses—we can only talk about them based on assumptions."
"You have resolved the problem," said the legislator; "and your own consent has established this first truth:
"You've solved the problem," said the legislator; "and your agreement has established this first truth:
"That whenever objects can be examined and judged of by your senses, you are agreed in opinion; and that you only differ when the objects are absent and beyond your reach.
"Whenever you can examine and judge objects with your senses, you all agree; you only disagree when the objects are absent and out of reach."
"From this first truth flows another equally clear and worthy of notice. Since you agree on things which you know with certainty, it follows that you disagree only on those which you know not with certainty, and about which you are not sure; that is to say, you dispute, you quarrel, you fight, for that which is uncertain, that of which you doubt. O men! is this wisdom?
"From this first truth comes another that is just as clear and worth noting. Since you agree on things that you know for sure, it means that you only disagree on things you don’t know for certain and about which you aren’t sure; in other words, you argue, you fight, over what is uncertain, what you doubt. Oh, people! Is this wisdom?"
"Is it not, then, demonstrated that truth is not the object of your contests? that it is not her cause which you defend, but that of your affections, and your prejudices? that it is not the object, as it really is in itself, that you would verify, but the object as you would have it; that is to say, it is not the evidence of the thing that you would enforce, but your own personal opinion, your particular manner of seeing and judging? It is a power that you wish to exercise, an interest that you wish to satisfy, a prerogative that you arrogate to yourself; it is a contest of vanity. Now, as each of you, on comparing himself to every other, finds himself his equal and his fellow, he resists by a feeling of the same right. And your disputes, your combats, your intolerance, are the effect of this right which you deny each other, and of the intimate conviction of your equality.
"Isn’t it clear that truth isn’t what you’re really competing for? You’re not defending her cause, but rather your own feelings and biases. It’s not the reality of the object that you want to prove, but how you want it to be; in other words, you’re not trying to uphold the evidence of the thing but your own opinion, your personal perspective on things. It’s about power that you want to wield, interests you want to fulfill, and a privilege you claim for yourself; it’s a battle of vanity. Now, since each of you sees yourselves as equal to one another, you push back out of a sense of shared rights. Your arguments, your fights, your intolerance, are the result of this right you deny each other and the deep-seated belief in your equality."
"Now, the only means of establishing harmony is to return to nature, and to take for a guide and regulator the order of things which she has founded; and then your accord will prove this other truth:
"Now, the only way to create harmony is to go back to nature and use the order of things that she has established as your guide and regulator; then your agreement will demonstrate this other truth:"
"That real beings have in themselves an identical, constant and uniform mode of existence; and that there is in your organs a like mode of being affected by them.
"That real beings have a consistent, constant, and uniform way of existing within themselves; and that your organs experience a similar way of being influenced by them."
"But at the same time, by reason of the mobility of these organs as subject to your will, you may conceive different affections, and find yourselves in different relations with the same objects; so that you are to them like a mirror, capable of reflecting them truly as they are, or of distorting and disfiguring them.
"But at the same time, because these organs can move according to your will, you can feel different emotions and have different relationships with the same things; so you are like a mirror to them, able to reflect them accurately as they are or to distort and misrepresent them."
"Hence it follows, that whenever you perceive objects as they are, you agree among yourselves, and with the objects; and this similitude between your sensations and their manner of existence, is what constitutes their truth with respect to you; and, on the contrary, whenever you differ in opinion, your disagreement is a proof that you do not represent them such as they are,—that you change them.
"Hence, whenever you see objects for what they really are, you all agree with each other and with the objects themselves; this similarity between your feelings and their actual existence is what makes them true for you. On the other hand, whenever you have different opinions, your disagreement shows that you don't perceive them as they are—you change them."
"Hence, also, it follows, that the causes of your disagreement exist not in the objects themselves, but in your minds, in your manner of perceiving or judging.
"Hence, it also follows that the causes of your disagreement are not found in the objects themselves, but in your minds, in how you perceive or judge."
"To establish, therefore, a uniformity of opinion, it is necessary first to establish the certainty, completely verified, that the portraits which the mind forms are perfectly like the originals; that it reflects the objects correctly as they exist. Now, this result cannot be obtained but in those cases where the objects can be brought to the test, and submitted to the examination of the senses. Everything which cannot be brought to this trial is, for that reason alone, impossible to be determined; there exists no rule, no term of comparison, no means of certainty, respecting it.
"To create a consistent opinion, it’s essential first to establish the certainty, fully verified, that the images our minds create are exactly like the originals; that they accurately reflect the objects as they truly are. Now, this outcome can only be achieved when the objects can be tested and examined by our senses. Anything that cannot undergo this testing is, for that reason, impossible to determine; there is no rule, no point of comparison, and no way to establish certainty about it."
"From this we conclude, that, to live in harmony and peace, we must agree never to decide on such subjects, and to attach to them no importance; in a word, we must trace a line of distinction between those that are capable of verification, and those that are not; and separate by an inviolable barrier the world of fantastical beings from the world of realities; that is to say, all civil effect must be taken away from theological and religious opinions.
"From this, we conclude that in order to live in harmony and peace, we need to agree never to make decisions on these topics and not to give them any importance; in other words, we should draw a line between things that can be verified and those that cannot; and we must keep the world of imaginary beings separate from the world of reality by a strict barrier; this means that all legal effect should be removed from theological and religious beliefs."
"This, O ye people of the earth! is the object proposed by a great nation freed from her fetters and her prejudices; this is the work which, under her eye and by her orders, we had undertaken, when your kings and your priests came to interrupt it. O kings and priests! you may suspend, yet for a while, the solemn publication of the laws of nature; but it is no longer in your power to annihilate or to subvert them."
"This, O people of the earth, is the goal set forth by a great nation that has been liberated from its chains and biases; this is the task that, under her guidance and by her instruction, we took on when your kings and priests tried to interrupt it. O kings and priests! You can delay the official announcement of the laws of nature for a while, but you can no longer destroy or overturn them."
A general shout then arose from every part of the assembly; and the nations universally, and with one voice, testified their assent to the proposals of the delegates: "Resume," said they, "your holy and sublime labors, and bring them to perfection. Investigate the laws which nature, for our guidance, has implanted in our breasts, and collect from them an authentic and immutable code; nor let this code be any longer for one family only, but for us all without exception. Be the legislators of the whole human race, as you are the interpreters of nature herself. Show us the line of partition between the world of chimeras and that of realities; and teach us, after so many religions of error and delusion, the religion of evidence and truth!"
A loud cheer then arose from every part of the assembly; and the nations, united and in agreement, expressed their support for the delegates' proposals: "Resume," they said, "your noble and important work, and see it through to completion. Explore the laws that nature has instilled in us for guidance, and compile them into a true and unchanging code; let this code apply not just to one family, but to all of us without exception. Be the lawmakers for all humanity, just as you are the interpreters of nature itself. Show us the line that separates the world of illusions from the world of reality; and teach us, after so many misguided religions, the religion of evidence and truth!"
Then the delegates, having resumed their enquiries into the physical and constituent attributes of man, and examined the motives and affections which govern him in his individual and social state, unfolded in these words the laws on which nature herself has founded his happiness.
Then the delegates, having continued their investigation into the physical and fundamental qualities of humans, and looked into the motivations and feelings that drive them in their personal and social lives, expressed in these words the principles on which nature herself has based human happiness.
THE LAW OF NATURE.
CHAPTER 1.
OF THE LAW OF NATURE.
Q. What is the law of nature?
Q. What is the law of nature?
A. It is the constant and regular order of events, by which God governs the universe; an order which his wisdom presents to the senses and reason of men, as an equal and common rule for their actions, to guide them, without distinction of country or sect, towards perfection and happiness.
A. It is the ongoing and consistent arrangement of events through which God controls the universe; an order that His wisdom reveals to the senses and reasoning of people, as a fair and shared standard for their actions, to lead them, regardless of their country or beliefs, towards perfection and happiness.
Q. Give a clear definition of the word law.
Q. Provide a clear definition of the word law.
A. The word law, taken literary, signifies lecture,* because originally, ordinances and regulations were the lectures, preferably to all others, made to the people, in order that they might observe them, and not incur the penalties attached to their infraction: whence follows the original custom explaining the true idea.
A. The word law, taken literally, means lecture,* because originally, rules and regulations were the lectures, preferred over all others, given to the people so they would follow them and not face the penalties for breaking them: this is where the original custom comes from, explaining the true idea.
The definition of law is, "An order or prohibition to act with the express clause of a penalty attached to the infraction, or of a recompense attached to the observance of that order."
The definition of law is, "A command or ban on actions that comes with a specific penalty for breaking it, or a reward for following that command."
* From the Latin word lex, lectio. Alcoran likewise signifies lecture and is only a literal translation of the word law.
* From the Latin word lex, lectio. Alcoran also means lecture and is just a direct translation of the word law.
Q. Do such orders exist in nature?
Q. Do these kinds of orders exist in nature?
A. Yes.
A. Yes.
Q. What does the word nature signify?
Q. What does the word nature mean?
A. The word nature bears three different significations.
A. The word nature has three different meanings.
1. It signifies the universe, the material world: in this first sense we say the beauties of nature, the riches of nature, that is to say, the objects in the heavens and on the earth exposed to our sight;
1. It signifies the universe, the material world: in this first sense we say the beauties of nature, the riches of nature, meaning the objects in the heavens and on the earth that are visible to us;
2. It signifies the power that animates, that moves the universe, considering it as a distinct being, such as the soul is to the body; in this second sense we say, "The intentions of nature, the incomprehensible secrets of nature."
2. It signifies the force that drives and moves the universe, treating it as a separate entity, like the soul is to the body; in this second sense, we say, "The purposes of nature, the unfathomable mysteries of nature."
3. It signifies the partial operations of that power on each being, or on each class of beings; and in this third sense we say, "The nature of man is an enigma; every being acts according to its nature."
3. It represents the limited workings of that power on every being, or on each category of beings; and in this third sense, we say, "The nature of man is a mystery; every being acts according to its nature."
Wherefore, as the actions of each being, or of each species of beings, are subjected to constant and general rules, which cannot be infringed without interrupting and troubling the general or particular order, those rules of action and of motion are called natural laws, or laws of nature.
Whereas the actions of every individual or each species are governed by consistent and universal rules that must not be violated, as doing so would disrupt the overall or specific order, those rules of action and movement are referred to as natural laws or laws of nature.
Q. Give me examples of those laws.
Q. Can you give me some examples of those laws?
A. It is a law of nature, that the sun illuminates successively the surface of the terrestrial globe;—that its presence causes both light and heat;—that heat acting upon water, produces vapors;—that those vapors rising in clouds into the regions of the air, dissolve into rain or snow, and renew incessantly the waters of fountains and rivers.
A. It's a natural law that the sun lights up the Earth's surface in turn; its presence creates both light and warmth; warmth acting on water produces vapor; those vapors rise into the air as clouds, break down into rain or snow, and constantly replenish the waters of fountains and rivers.
It is a law of nature, that water flows downwards; that it endeavors to find its level; that it is heavier than air; that all bodies tend towards the earth; that flame ascends towards the heavens;—that it disorganizes vegetables and animals; that air is essential to the life of certain animals; that, in certain circumstances, water suffocates and kills them; that certain juices of plants, certain minerals attack their organs, and destroy their life, and so on in a multitude of other instances.
It’s a natural law that water flows downward; that it seeks to find its level; that it's heavier than air; that all objects are drawn toward the earth; that flames rise toward the sky; that it breaks down plants and animals; that air is essential for the survival of some animals; that in certain situations, water can suffocate and kill them; that certain plant juices and minerals can harm their organs and end their lives, and so on in countless other examples.
Wherefore, as all those and similar facts are immutable, constant, and regular, so many real orders result from them for man to conform himself to, with the express clause of punishment attending the infraction of them, or of welfare attending their observance. So that if man pretends to see clear in darkness, if he goes in contradiction to the course of the seasons, or the action of the elements; if he pretends to remain under water without being drowned, to touch fire without burning himself, to deprive himself of air without being suffocated, to swallow poison without destroying himself, he receives from each of those infractions of the laws of nature a corporeal punishment proportionate to his fault; but if on the contrary, he observes and practises each of those laws according to the regular and exact relations they have to him he preserves his existence, and renders it as happy as it can be: and as the only and common end of all those laws, considered relatively to mankind, is to preserve, and render them happy, it has been agreed upon to reduce the idea to one simple expression, and to call them collectively the law of nature.
Therefore, since all those facts and similar ones are unchanging, constant, and regular, many real guidelines emerge for people to follow, with clear consequences for breaking them and benefits for adhering to them. So, if someone thinks they can see clearly in the dark, act against the natural flow of the seasons, or the forces of nature; if they believe they can stay underwater without drowning, touch fire without getting burned, deprive themselves of air without suffocating, or swallow poison without harm, they will face physical punishment proportional to their mistake for each violation of the natural laws. However, if they follow and practice these laws according to how they relate to them, they will maintain their existence and make it as happy as possible. Since the main purpose of all these laws, when considered in relation to humanity, is to preserve life and promote happiness, it has been agreed to sum this idea up in a simple phrase and refer to them collectively as the law of nature.
CHAPTER II.
CHARACTERS OF THE LAW OF NATURE.
Q. What are the characters of the law of nature?
Q. What are the characteristics of the law of nature?
A. There can be assigned ten principal ones.
A. There can be assigned ten main ones.
Q. Which is the first?
Which one is first?
A. To be inherent to the existence of things, and, consequently, primitive and anterior to every other law: so that all those which man has received, are only imitations of it, and their perfection is ascertained by the resemblance they bear to this primordial model.
A. To be fundamental to the existence of things, and therefore, basic and prior to any other law: so that all the laws that humanity has adopted are just copies of it, and their effectiveness is determined by how closely they resemble this original model.
Q. Which is the second?
Which one is second?
A. To be derived immediately from God, and presented by him to each man, whereas all other laws are presented to us by men, who may be either deceived or deceivers.
A. To be directly given by God and offered to each person, while all other laws are handed down by humans, who might be either misled or misleading.
Q. Which is the third?
What's the third one?
A. To be common to all times, and to all countries, that is to say, one and universal.
A. To be relevant across all eras and in every country, that is to say, one and universal.
Q. Is no other law universal?
Q. Is there no other law that is universal?
A. No: for no other is agreeable or applicable to all the people of the earth; they are all local and accidental, originating from circumstances of places and of persons; so that if such a man had not existed, or such an event happened, such a law would never have been enacted.
A. No: for no other is agreeable or suitable for everyone on earth; they are all specific and random, arising from the situations of places and people; so that if such a person had not existed, or such an event had not occurred, such a law would never have been created.
Q. Which is the fourth character?
Q. Who is the fourth character?
A. To be uniform and invariable.
A. To be consistent and unchanging.
Q. Is no other law uniform and invariable?
Q. Is there any other law that is consistent and unchanging?
A. No: for what is good and virtue according to one, is evil and vice according to another; and what one and the same law approves of at one time, it often condemns at another.
A. No: because what is considered good and virtuous by one person can be viewed as evil and sinful by someone else; and what a single law may endorse at one moment, it frequently disapproves of at another.
Q. Which is the fifth character?
Q. What is the fifth character?
A. To be evident and palpable, because it consists entirely of facts incessantly present to the senses, and to demonstration.
A. To be clear and obvious, because it is made up entirely of facts that are constantly available to the senses and to evidence.
Q. Are not other laws evident?
Q. Aren't there other obvious laws?
A. No: for they are founded on past and doubtful facts, on equivocal and suspicious testimonies, and on proofs inaccessible to the senses.
A. No: because they are based on questionable and uncertain facts, ambiguous and dubious testimonies, and on evidence that cannot be perceived by the senses.
Q. Which is the sixth character?
Q. What is the sixth character?
A. To be reasonable, because its precepts and entire doctrine are conformable to reason, and to the human understanding.
A. To be fair, because its principles and entire teachings align with reason and human understanding.
Q. Is no other law reasonable?
Q. Is there no other reasonable law?
A. No: for all are in contradiction to the reason and the understanding of men, and tyrannically impose on him a blind and impracticable belief.
A. No: for all contradict reason and human understanding, and cruelly force upon him a blind and unrealistic belief.
Q. Which is the seventh character?
Q. What is the seventh character?
A. To be just, because in that law, the penalties are proportionate to the infractions.
A. To be fair, because in that law, the penalties fit the violations.
Q. Are not other laws just?
Aren't other laws equitable?
A. No: for they often exceed bounds, either in rewarding deserts, or in punishing delinquencies, and consider as meritorious or criminal, null or indifferent actions.
A. No: because they often go too far, either by giving out rewards for good deeds or by punishing wrongdoings, and they view actions that are neutral or insignificant as either commendable or guilty.
Q. Which is the eighth character?
Q. What is the eighth character?
A. To be pacific and tolerant, because in the law of nature, all men being brothers and equal in rights, it recommends to them only peace and toleration, even for errors.
A. To be peaceful and tolerant, because in the law of nature, all people are brothers and equal in rights, it encourages them to embrace only peace and tolerance, even towards mistakes.
Q. Are not other laws pacific?
Aren't other laws nonviolent?
A. No: for all preach dissension, discord, and war, and divide mankind by exclusive pretensions of truth and domination.
A. No: for all promote division, conflict, and war, and split humanity through exclusive claims of truth and control.
Q. Which is the ninth character?
Q. What is the ninth character?
A. To be equally beneficent to all men, in teaching them the true means of becoming better and happier.
A. To be equally helpful to everyone by teaching them the best ways to become better and happier.
Q. Are not other laws beneficent likewise?
Q. Aren't other laws also beneficial?
A. No: for none of them teach the real means of attaining happiness; all are confined to pernicious or futile practices; and this is evident from facts, since after so many laws, so many religions, so many legislators and prophets, men are still as unhappy and ignorant, as they were six thousand years ago.
A. No: none of them teach the true way to achieve happiness; all are limited to harmful or pointless practices; and this is clear from the evidence, since after so many laws, so many religions, so many lawmakers and prophets, people are still as unhappy and uneducated as they were six thousand years ago.
Q. Which is the last character of the law of nature?
Q. What is the final aspect of the law of nature?
A. That it is alone sufficient to render men happier and better, because it comprises all that is good and useful in other laws, either civil or religious, that is to say, it constitutes essentially the moral part of them; so that if other laws were divested of it, they would be reduced to chimerical and imaginary opinions devoid of any practical utility.
A. That it is enough on its own to make people happier and better, because it includes everything good and useful in other laws, whether civil or religious. In other words, it forms the essential moral component of those laws; if other laws were stripped of it, they would be nothing more than fanciful and unrealistic ideas without any practical usefulness.
Q. Recapitulate all those characters.
Summarize all those characters.
A. We have said that the law of nature is,
A. We have said that the law of nature is,
1. Primitive; 6. Reasonable; 2. Immediate; 7. Just; 3. Universal; 8. Pacific; 4. Invariable; 9. Beneficent: and 5. Evident; 10. Alone sufficient.
1. Basic; 6. Fair; 2. Instant; 7. Right; 3. Common; 8. Peaceful; 4. Constant; 9. Helpful: and 5. Clear; 10. Sufficient on its own.
And such is the power of all these attributes of perfection and truth, that when in their disputes the theologians can agree upon no article of belief, they recur to the law of nature, the neglect of which, say they, forced God to send from time to time prophets to proclaim new laws; as if God enacted laws for particular circumstances, as men do; especially when the first subsists in such force, that we may assert it to have been at all times and in all countries the rule of conscience for every man of sense or understanding.
And that's how powerful these qualities of perfection and truth are. When the theologians can’t agree on any belief, they turn back to the law of nature, claiming that ignoring it made God send prophets to announce new laws from time to time. It's as if God made laws for specific situations like people do, especially when the original law is so strong that we can say it's always been the guiding principle for every reasonable and understanding person everywhere.
Q. If, as you say, it emanates immediately from God, does it teach his existence?
Q. If, as you say, it comes directly from God, does it prove his existence?
A. Yes, most positively: for, to any man whatever, who observes with reflection the astonishing spectacle of the universe, the more he meditates on the properties and attributes of each being, on the admirable order and harmony of their motions, the more it is demonstrated that there exists a supreme agent, a universal and identic mover, designated by the appellation of God; and so true it is that the law of nature suffices to elevate him to the knowledge of God, that all which men have pretended to know by supernatural means, has constantly turned out ridiculous and absurd, and that they have ever been obliged to recur to the immutable conceptions of natural reason.
A. Yes, definitely: for any person who thoughtfully observes the amazing spectacle of the universe, the more they reflect on the properties and characteristics of each being, and the remarkable order and harmony of their movements, the more it becomes clear that there is a supreme agent, a universal and consistent mover, referred to as God; and it’s so true that the law of nature is enough to lead them to the knowledge of God, that everything people have claimed to understand through supernatural means has always ended up being ridiculous and absurd, and they have always had to rely on the unchanging concepts of natural reason.
Q. Then it is not true that the followers of the law of nature are atheists?
Q. So it's not true that people who follow the law of nature are atheists?
A. No; it is not true; on the contrary, they entertain stronger and nobler ideas of the Divinity than most other men; for they do not sully him with the foul ingredients of all the weaknesses and passions entailed on humanity.
A. No; that’s not true; actually, they have a stronger and more noble understanding of the Divine than most people; they don’t taint it with the dirty aspects of all the weaknesses and passions that come with being human.
Q. What worship do they pay to him?
Q. What kind of worship do they show to him?
A. A worship wholly of action; the practice and observance of all the rules which the supreme wisdom has imposed on the motion of each being; eternal and unalterable rules, by which it maintains the order and harmony of the universe, and which, in their relations to man, constitute the law of nature.
A. A form of worship focused entirely on action; the practice and adherence to all the rules that supreme wisdom has set for the behavior of every being; timeless and unchanging rules, through which it upholds the order and harmony of the universe, and which, in relation to humanity, form the law of nature.
Q. Was the law of nature known before this period:
Q. Was the law of nature known before this time:
A. It has been at all times spoken of: most legislators pretend to adopt it as the basis of their laws; but they only quote some of its precepts, and have only vague ideas of its totality.
A. It has always been talked about: most lawmakers claim to use it as the foundation of their laws; however, they only reference a few of its principles and have only a vague understanding of the whole concept.
Q. Why.
Why?
A. Because, though simple in its basis, it forms in its developements and consequences, a complicated whole which requires an extensive knowledge of facts, joined to all the sagacity of reasoning.
A. Because, while it’s simple at its core, its developments and consequences create a complex whole that needs a broad understanding of facts, along with keen reasoning skills.
Q. Does not instinct alone teach the law of nature?
Q. Doesn't instinct alone teach us the law of nature?
A. No; for by instinct is meant nothing more than that blind sentiment by which we are actuated indiscriminately towards everything that flatters the senses.
A. No; by instinct, we mean nothing more than that blind feeling that drives us indiscriminately toward everything that pleases our senses.
Q. Why, then, is it said that the law of nature is engraved in the hearts of all men.
Q. Why is it said that the law of nature is written in the hearts of everyone?
A. It is said for two reasons: first, because it has been remarked, that there are acts and sentiments common to all men, and this proceeds from their common organization; secondly, because the first philosophers believed that men were born with ideas already formed, which is now demonstrated to be erroneous.
A. It is said for two reasons: first, because it has been noted that there are actions and feelings shared by all humans, which comes from their common structure; secondly, because early philosophers thought that people were born with preexisting ideas, which is now proven to be incorrect.
Q. Philosophers, then, are fallible?
Are philosophers, then, fallible?
A. Yes, sometimes.
A. Yeah, sometimes.
Q. Why so?
Why is that?
A. First, because they are men; secondly, because the ignorant call all those who reason, right or wrong, philosophers; thirdly, because those who reason on many subjects, and who are the first to reason on them, are liable to be deceived.
A. First, because they are men; secondly, because the uninformed label anyone who thinks, whether their reasoning is correct or not, as a philosopher; thirdly, because those who think deeply about various topics, especially those who are the first to do so, are prone to being misled.
Q. If the law of nature be not written, must it not become arbitrary and ideal?
Q. If the law of nature isn't written down, does that mean it becomes random and just an idea?
A. No: because it consists entirely in facts, the demonstration of which can be incessantly renewed to the senses, and constitutes a science as accurate and precise as geometry and mathematics; and it is because the law of nature forms an exact science, that men, born ignorant and living inattentive and heedless, have had hitherto only a superficial knowledge of it.
A. No: because it is based entirely on facts, which can be continuously validated through observation, and it represents a science as exact and precise as geometry and mathematics; and it’s because the law of nature is an exact science that people, who are born ignorant and live inattentively and carelessly, have only had a superficial understanding of it until now.
CHAPTER III.
PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF NATURE RELATING TO MAN.
Q. Explain the principles of the law of nature with relation to man.
Q. Explain the principles of natural law in relation to humans.
A. They are simple; all of them are comprised in one fundamental and single precept.
A. They are straightforward; they all fall under one basic and single rule.
Q. What is that precept?
What is that principle?
A. It is self-preservation.
It's self-preservation.
Q. Is not happiness also a precept of the law of nature?
Q. Isn't happiness also a principle of the law of nature?
A. Yes: but as happiness is an accidental state, resulting only from the development of man's faculties and his social system, it is not the immediate and direct object of nature; it is in some measure, a superfluity annexed to the necessary and fundamental object of preservation.
A. Yes: but since happiness is a temporary state, stemming only from the growth of human abilities and social structures, it is not the immediate and primary goal of nature; it is somewhat of an extra that comes along with the essential and core goal of survival.
Q. How does nature order man to preserve himself?
Q. How does nature instruct man to take care of himself?
A. By two powerful and involuntary sensations, which it has attached, as two guides, two guardian Geniuses to all his actions: the one a sensation of pain, by which it admonishes him of, and deters him from, everything that tends to destroy him; the other, a sensation of pleasure, by which it attracts and carries him towards everything that tends to his preservation and the development of his existence.
A. By two strong and involuntary feelings, which it has linked as two guides, two protective spirits to all his actions: one is a feeling of pain, which warns him of and prevents him from anything that could harm him; the other is a feeling of pleasure, which draws him in and leads him toward everything that helps him survive and grow in his existence.
Q. Pleasure, then, is not an evil, a sin, as casuists pretend?
Q. So, pleasure isn't bad or a sin, like some moralists claim?
A. No, only inasmuch as it tends to destroy life and health which, by the avowal of those same casuists, we derive from God himself.
A. No, only to the extent that it threatens life and health, which, according to those same moralists, we receive from God himself.
Q. Is pleasure the principal object of our existence, as some philosophers have asserted?
Q. Is pleasure the main goal of our existence, as some philosophers have claimed?
A. No; not more than pain; pleasure is an incitement to live as pain is a repulsion from death.
A. No; just like pain, pleasure is a motivation to live.
Q. How do you prove this assertion?
Q. How do you prove this claim?
A. By two palpable facts: One, that pleasure, when taken immoderately, leads to destruction; for instance, a man who abuses the pleasure of eating or drinking, attacks his health, and injures his life. The other, that pain sometimes leads to self-preservation; for instance, a man who permits a mortified member to be cut off, suffers pain in order not to perish totally.
A. By two clear facts: One, that excessive pleasure leads to destruction; for example, someone who overindulges in eating or drinking harms their health and jeopardizes their life. The other, that pain can sometimes promote self-preservation; for instance, a person who allows a gangrenous limb to be amputated experiences pain to avoid complete ruin.
Q. But does not even this prove that our sensations can deceive us respecting the end of our preservation?
Q. But doesn’t this even show that our senses can mislead us about what keeps us safe?
A. Yes; they can momentarily.
A. Yes; they can do that.
Q. How do our sensations deceive us?
Q. How do our senses trick us?
A. In two ways: by ignorance, and by passion.
A. In two ways: through ignorance and through passion.
Q. When do they deceive us by ignorance?
Q. When do they mislead us by being uninformed?
A. When we act without knowing the action and effect of objects on our senses: for example, when a man touches nettles without knowing their stinging quality, or when he swallows opium without knowing its soporiferous effects.
A. When we act without being aware of how objects affect our senses: for example, when someone touches nettles without realizing they sting, or when they swallow opium without understanding its sleep-inducing effects.
Q. When do they deceive us by passion?
Q. When do they trick us through emotion?
A. When, conscious of the pernicious action of objects, we abandon ourselves, nevertheless, to the impetuosity of our desires and appetites: for example, when a man who knows that wine intoxicates, does nevertheless drink it to excess.
A. When we realize how harmful things can be, we still give in to our strong desires and cravings: for instance, when a man knows that wine makes him drunk but still drinks too much.
Q. What is the result?
What’s the outcome?
A. That the ignorance in which we are born, and the unbridled appetites to which we abandon ourselves, are contrary to our preservation; that, therefore, the instruction of our minds and the moderation of our passions are two obligations, two laws, which spring directly from the first law of preservation.
A. That the ignorance we are born into and the unchecked desires we give in to are harmful to our well-being; that, therefore, educating our minds and controlling our passions are two responsibilities, two principles that arise directly from the fundamental principle of self-preservation.
Q. But being born ignorant, is not ignorance a law of nature?
Q. But being born unaware, isn't ignorance just a natural law?
A. No more than to remain in the naked and feeble state of infancy. Far from being a law of nature, ignorance is an obstacle to the practice of all its laws. It is the real original sin.
A. No more than to stay in the vulnerable and helpless state of infancy. Far from being a natural law, ignorance is an obstacle to obeying all its laws. It is the true original sin.
Q. Why, then, have there been moralists who have looked upon it as a virtue and perfection?
Q. Then why have some moralists viewed it as a virtue and a mark of perfection?
A. Because, from a strange or perverted disposition, they confounded the abuse of knowledge with knowledge itself; as if, because men abuse the power of speech, their tongues should be cut out; as if perfection and virtue consisted in the nullity, and not in the proper development of our faculties.
A. Because, due to a strange or twisted mindset, they mixed up the misuse of knowledge with knowledge itself; as if, because people misuse the ability to speak, their tongues should be cut out; as if perfection and virtue are about eliminating our abilities instead of properly developing them.
Q. Instruction, then, is indispensable to man's existence?
Q. So, instruction is essential for human existence?
A. Yes, so indispensable, that without it he is every instant assailed and wounded by all that surrounds him; for if he does not know the effects of fire, he burns himself; those of water he drowns himself; those of opium, he poisons himself; if, in the savage state, he does not know the wiles of animals, and the art of seizing game, he perishes through hunger; if in the social state, he does not know the course of the seasons, he can neither cultivate the ground, nor procure nourishment; and so on, of all his actions, respecting all his wants.
A. Yes, it's so essential that without it, he's constantly under attack and hurt by everything around him; because if he doesn't understand how fire works, he'll burn himself; if he doesn't know about water, he'll drown; if he doesn't understand opium, he'll poison himself; if, in a wild state, he isn't aware of animal tricks and how to catch prey, he'll starve; and if, in a social state, he doesn't know the seasons, he won't be able to farm or get food; and this applies to all his actions regarding all his needs.
Q. But can man individually acquire this knowledge necessary to his existence, and to the development of his faculties?
Q. But can a person individually gain the knowledge necessary for their existence and for the growth of their abilities?
A. No; not without the assistance of his fellow men, and by living in society.
A. No; not without the help of his fellow humans and by living in a community.
Q. But is not society to man a state against nature?
Q. But isn't society a state against nature for man?
A. No: it is on the contrary a necessity, a law that nature imposed on him by the very act of his organization; for, first, nature has so constituted man, that he cannot see his species of another sex without feeling emotions and an attraction which induce him to live in a family, which is already a state of society; secondly, by endowing him with sensibility, she organized him so that the sensations of others reflect within him, and excite reciprocal sentiments of pleasure and of grief, which are attractions, and indissoluble ties of society; thirdly, and finally, the state of society, founded on the wants of man, is only a further means of fulfilling the law of preservation: and to pretend that this state is out of nature, because it is more perfect, is the same as to say, that a bitter and wild fruit of the forest, is no longer the production of nature, when rendered sweet and delicious by cultivation in our gardens.
A. No: it is, in fact, a necessity, a law imposed by nature through the very way he is made; first, nature has designed man so that he cannot see individuals of the opposite sex without feeling emotions and an attraction that encourage him to live in a family, which is already a form of society; second, by giving him sensitivity, she has arranged him so that the feelings of others resonate within him, sparking mutual feelings of pleasure and grief, which are attractions and unbreakable bonds of society; third, and finally, the state of society, based on human needs, is just another way of fulfilling the law of preservation: to claim that this state is unnatural because it is more advanced is like saying that a bitter wild fruit from the forest is no longer a product of nature when it has been turned sweet and delicious by cultivation in our gardens.
Q. Why, then, have philosophers called the savage state the state of perfection?
Q. Why have philosophers referred to the savage state as the state of perfection?
A. Because, as I have told you, the vulgar have often given the name of philosophers to whimsical geniuses, who, from moroseness, from wounded vanity, or from a disgust to the vices of society, have conceived chimerical ideas of the savage state, in contradiction with their own system of a perfect man.
A. Because, as I’ve mentioned before, common folks have often labeled quirky geniuses as philosophers, who, out of sadness, hurt pride, or a dislike for society's flaws, have come up with unrealistic notions about a primitive state, which contradicts their own idea of a perfect human.
Q. What is the true meaning of the word philosopher?
Q. What does the word philosopher really mean?
A. The word philosopher signifies a lover of wisdom; and as wisdom consists in the practice of the laws of nature, the true philosopher is he who knows those laws, and conforms the whole tenor of his conduct to them.
A. The term philosopher means someone who loves wisdom; and since wisdom is about following the laws of nature, a true philosopher is someone who understands those laws and aligns their entire way of life with them.
Q. What is man in the savage state?
Q. What is a person like in their natural state?
A. A brutal, ignorant animal, a wicked and ferocious beast.
A. A cruel, uneducated animal, a vicious and fierce beast.
Q. Is he happy in that state?
Q. Is he happy in that situation?
A. No; for he only feels momentary sensations, which are habitually of violent wants which he cannot satisfy, since he is ignorant by nature, and weak by being isolated from his race.
A. No; because he only experiences brief feelings, which are usually intense desires that he can't fulfill, since he's naturally clueless and weakened by being cut off from his community.
Q. Is he free?
Is he available?
A. No; he is the most abject slave that exists; for his life depends on everything that surrounds him: he is not free to eat when hungry, to rest when tired, to warm himself when cold; he is every instant in danger of perishing; wherefore nature offers but fortuitous examples of such beings; and we see that all the efforts of the human species, since its origin, sorely tends to emerge from that violent state by the pressing necessity of self-preservation.
A. No; he is the most miserable slave that exists; his life depends on everything around him: he can’t eat when he’s hungry, rest when he’s tired, or warm himself when he’s cold; he is constantly at risk of dying; that’s why nature only provides rare examples of such beings; and we see that all human efforts, since the beginning, are focused on escaping that harsh condition out of the urgent need for self-preservation.
Q. But does not this necessity of preservation engender in individuals egotism, that is to say self-love? and is not egotism contrary to the social state?
Q. But doesn’t this need for self-preservation create egotism, or self-love? And isn’t egotism opposed to the social order?
A. No; for if by egotism you mean a propensity to hurt our neighbor, it is no longer self-love, but the hatred of others. Self-love, taken in its true sense, not only is not contrary to society, but is its firmest support, by the necessity we lie under of not injuring others, lest in return they should injure us.
A. No; because if by egotism you mean the tendency to harm others, it’s not self-love anymore, but rather hatred for others. True self-love isn’t against society; in fact, it’s one of its strongest foundations, as we have the need to avoid harming others to prevent them from harming us in return.
Thus mans preservation, and the unfolding of his faculties, directed towards this end, teach the true law of nature in the production of the human being; and it is from this essential principle that are derived, are referred, and in its scale are weighed, all ideas of good and evil, of vice and virtue, of just and unjust, of truth or error, of lawful or forbidden, on which is founded the morality of individual, or of social man.
Thus, the preservation of humanity and the development of its abilities, aimed at this purpose, reveal the true law of nature in the emergence of human beings. It is from this fundamental principle that all concepts of good and evil, vice and virtue, justice and injustice, truth or falsehood, lawful or forbidden are derived, referenced, and measured, forming the basis of morality for individuals and society as a whole.
CHAPTER IV.
BASIS OF MORALITY; OF GOOD, OF EVIL, OF SIN, OF CRIME, OF VICE AND OF VIRTUE.
BASIS OF MORALITY; OF GOOD, OF EVIL, OF SIN, OF CRIME, OF VICE AND OF VIRTUE.
Q. What is good, according to the law of nature?
Q. What is considered good, according to natural law?
A. It is everything that tends to preserve and perfect man.
A. It is everything that helps to preserve and improve humanity.
Q. What is evil?
What is evil?
A. That which tends to man's destruction or deterioration.
A. That which leads to a person's ruin or decline.
Q. What is meant by physical good and evil, and by moral good and evil?
Q. What do we mean by physical good and evil, and by moral good and evil?
A. By the word physical is understood, whatever acts immediately on the body. Health is a physical good; and sickness a physical evil. By moral, is meant what acts by consequences more or less remote. Calumny is a moral evil; a fair reputation is a moral good, because both one and the other occasion towards us, on the part of other men, dispositions and habitudes,* which are useful or hurtful to our preservation, and which attack or favor our means of existence.
A. The term physical refers to anything that directly affects the body. Health is a physical benefit, while illness is a physical harm. The term moral refers to what has consequences that may be more or less distant. Slander is a moral harm; a good reputation is a moral benefit because both influence how others treat us, leading to behaviors and habits that can either help or hurt our well-being and impact our survival.
* It is from this word habitudes, (reiterated actions,) in Latin mores, that the word moral, and all its family, are derived.
* The word habitudes, meaning repeated actions, comes from the Latin mores, which is the root of the word moral and all its related terms.
Q. Everything that tends to preserve, or to produce is therefore a good?
Q. So, is everything that helps preserve or produce considered good?
A. Yes; and it is for that reason that certain legislators have classed among the works agreeable to the divinity, the cultivation of a field and the fecundity of a woman.
A. Yes; and that's why some lawmakers have included things that please the divine, like farming and a woman's ability to bear children.
Q. Whatever tends to cause death is, therefore, an evil?
Q. So, anything that leads to death is considered an evil?
A. Yes; and it is for that reason some legislators have extended the idea of evil and of sin even to the killing of animals.
A. Yes; and that's why some lawmakers have broadened the concept of evil and sin to include killing animals.
Q. The murdering of a man is, therefore, a crime in the law of nature?
Q. Is killing a man considered a crime in natural law?
A. Yes, and the greatest that can be committed; for every other evil can be repaired, but murder alone is irreparable.
A. Yes, and it's the worst thing that can be done; because every other wrong can be fixed, but murder is the one thing that can’t be undone.
Q. What is a sin in the law of nature?
Q. What is a sin in natural law?
A. Whatever tends to disturb the order established by nature for the preservation and perfection of man and of society.
A. Anything that disrupts the natural order set for the preservation and improvement of humanity and society.
Q. Can intention be a merit or a crime?
Q. Can intention be a good thing or a bad thing?
A. No, for it is only an idea void of reality: but it is a commencement of sin and evil, by the impulse it gives to action.
A. No, because it's just an idea without any real substance: yet it initiates sin and evil through the motivation it provides for action.
Q. What is virtue according to the law of nature?
Q. What is virtue according to the natural law?
A. It is the practice of actions useful to the individual and to society.
A. It is the practice of actions that benefit both the individual and society.
Q. What is meant by the word individual?
Q. What does the word individual mean?
A. It means a man considered separately from every other.
A. It means a man seen apart from everyone else.
Q. What is vice according to the law of nature?
Q. What is vice according to natural law?
A. It is the practice of actions prejudicial to the individual and to society.
A. It involves actions that are harmful to both the individual and society.
Q. Have not virtue and vice an object purely spiritual and abstracted from the senses?
Q. Do virtue and vice not have a purely spiritual aspect that is separate from the senses?
A. No; it is always to a physical end that they finally relate, and that end is always to destroy or preserve the body.
A. No; it ultimately always connects to a physical goal, and that goal is always to either destroy or preserve the body.
Q. Have vice and virtue degrees of strength and intensity?
Q. Do vice and virtue have different levels of strength and intensity?
A. Yes: according to the importance of the faculties, which they attack or which they favor; and according to the number of persons in whom those faculties are favored or injured.
A. Yes: based on the significance of the abilities they either undermine or support; and according to how many people those abilities benefit or harm.
Q. Give me some examples?
Got any examples?
A. The action of saving a man's life is more virtuous than that of saving his property; the action of saving the lives of ten men, than that of saving only the life of one, and an action useful to the whole human race is more virtuous than an action that is only useful to one single nation.
A. Saving a man's life is more noble than saving his belongings; saving the lives of ten men is more commendable than saving just one, and an action that benefits all of humanity is more virtuous than one that only benefits a single nation.
Q. How does the law of nature prescribe the practice of good and virtue, and forbid that of evil and vice?
Q. How does the law of nature dictate the practice of good and virtue, and prohibit that of evil and vice?
A. By the advantages resulting from the practice of good and virtue for the preservation of our body, and by the losses which result to our existence from the practice of evil and vice.
A. By the benefits that come from practicing good and virtue for the care of our body, and by the drawbacks that come to our life from engaging in evil and vice.
Q. Its precepts are then in action?
Q. So, its principles are currently being applied?
A. Yes: they are action itself, considered in its present effect and in its future consequences.
A. Yes: they are action itself, viewed in its current impact and in its future outcomes.
Q. How do you divide the virtues?
Q. How do you categorize the virtues?
A. We divide them in three classes, first, individual virtues, as relative to man alone; secondly, domestic virtues, as relative to a family; thirdly, social virtues, as relative to society.
A. We categorize them into three classes: first, individual virtues, which relate to a person alone; second, domestic virtues, which pertain to a family; and third, social virtues, which relate to society.
CHAPTER V.
OF INDIVIDUAL VIRTUES.
Q. Which are the individual virtues?
Q. What are the individual virtues?
A. There are five principal ones, to wit: first, science, which comprises prudence and wisdom; secondly, temperance, comprising sobriety and chastity; thirdly, courage, or strength of body and mind; fourthly, activity, that is to say, love of labor and employment of time; fifthly, and finally, cleanliness, or purity of body, as well in dress as in habitation.
A. There are five main ones: first, science, which includes judgment and knowledge; second, temperance, which covers moderation and self-control; third, courage, or strength of both body and mind; fourth, diligence, meaning a love for work and making good use of time; fifth, and finally, cleanliness, or purity of body, both in clothing and living space.
Q. How does the law of nature prescribe science?
Q. How does natural law dictate science?
A. Because the man acquainted with the causes and effects of things attends in a careful and sure manner to his preservation, and to the development of his faculties. Science is to him the eye and the light, which enable him to discern clearly and accurately all the objects with which he is conversant, and hence by an enlightened man is meant a learned and well-informed man. With science and instruction a man never wants for resources and means of subsistence; and upon this principle a philosopher, who had been shipwrecked, said to his companions, that were inconsolable for the loss of their wealth: "For my part, I carry all my wealth within me."
A. Because a man who understands the causes and effects of things carefully looks after his well-being and the growth of his abilities. Science is like the eye and the light for him, allowing him to see clearly and accurately all the things he deals with, and so an enlightened person is one who is educated and informed. With knowledge and learning, a person always has resources and ways to support themselves; based on this idea, a philosopher who had been shipwrecked told his grieving companions, who were heartbroken over their lost wealth, "For me, I carry all my wealth within me."
Q. Which is the vice contrary to science?
Q. What is the vice that goes against science?
A. It is ignorance.
It's ignorance.
Q. How does the law of nature forbid ignorance?
Q. How does natural law prohibit ignorance?
A. By the grievous detriments resulting from it to our existence; for the ignorant man who knows neither causes nor effects, commits every instant errors most pernicious to himself and to others; he resembles a blind man groping his way at random, and who, at every step, jostles or is jostled by every one he meets.
A. By the serious harm it causes to our lives; because the ignorant person who knows neither causes nor effects makes harmful mistakes every moment, both for themselves and for others; they are like a blind person stumbling around randomly, who, with every step, bumps into or is bumped into by everyone they encounter.
Q. What difference is there between an ignorant and a silly man?
Q. What’s the difference between an ignorant person and a foolish person?
A. The same difference as between him who frankly avows his blindness and the blind man who pretends to sight; silliness is the reality of ignorance, to which is superadded the vanity of knowledge.
A. It's the same difference as between someone who openly admits they're blind and the blind person who pretends they can see; foolishness is the true nature of ignorance, along with the added arrogance of pretending to know.
Q. Are ignorance and silliness common?
Q. Are ignorance and foolishness common?
A. Yes, very common; they are the usual and general distempers of mankind: more than three thousand years ago the wisest of men said: "The number of fools is infinite;" and the world has not changed.
A. Yes, very common; they are the typical and general issues that people face: more than three thousand years ago, the wisest of men said: "The number of fools is infinite;" and the world has not changed.
Q. What is the reason of it?
Q. What is the reason for it?
A. Because much labor and time are necessary to acquire instruction, and because men, born ignorant and indolent, find it more convenient to remain blind, and pretend to see clear.
A. Because acquiring knowledge requires a lot of effort and time, and because people, who are born ignorant and lazy, find it easier to stay in the dark and act like they understand everything.
Q. What difference is there between a learned and a wise man?
Q. What’s the difference between a knowledgeable person and a wise person?
A. The learned knows, and the wise man practices.
A. The knowledgeable know, and the wise person puts it into practice.
Q. What is prudence?
What is wisdom?
A. It is the anticipated perception, the foresight of the effects and consequences of every action; by means of which foresight, man avoids the dangers which threaten him, while he seizes on and creates opportunities favorable to him: he thereby provides for his present and future safety in a certain and secure manner, whereas the imprudent man, who calculates neither his steps nor his conduct, nor efforts, nor resistance, falls every instant into difficulties and dangers, which sooner or later impair his faculties and destroy his existence.
A. It’s the expected understanding, the ability to foresee the effects and consequences of every action; with this foresight, a person avoids the dangers that threaten them while seizing and creating opportunities that benefit them: this way, they ensure their current and future safety in a certain and secure manner. In contrast, the reckless person, who doesn’t consider their actions, efforts, or resistance, constantly falls into difficulties and dangers that eventually weaken their abilities and ruin their life.
Q. When the Gospel says, "Happy are the poor of spirit," does it mean the ignorant and imprudent?
Q. When the Gospel says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit," does it mean those who are ignorant and reckless?
A. No; for, at the same time that it recommends the simplicity of doves, it adds the prudent cunning of serpents. By simplicity of mind is meant uprightness, and the precept of the Gospel is that of nature.
A. No; because, while it advises the simplicity of doves, it also includes the wise shrewdness of serpents. By simplicity of mind, it refers to integrity, and the principle of the Gospel aligns with that of nature.
CHAPTER VI.
ON TEMPERANCE.
Q. What is temperance?
What is moderation?
A. It is a regular use of our faculties, which makes us never exceed in our sensations the end of nature to preserve us; it is the moderation of the passions.
A. It’s the normal use of our abilities that keeps us from going beyond what nature intended to keep us safe; it’s about having control over our emotions.
Q. Which is the vice contrary to temperance?
Q. What is the vice that goes against temperance?
A. The disorder of the passions, the avidity of all kind of enjoyments, in a word, cupidity.
A. The chaotic emotions, the desire for all kinds of pleasures, in short, greed.
Q. Which are the principal branches of temperance?
Q. What are the main areas of temperance?
A. Sobriety, and continence or chastity.
A. Sobriety, and self-control or purity.
Q. How does the law of nature prescribe sobriety?
Q. How does the law of nature recommend sobriety?
A. By its powerful influence over our health. The sober man digests with comfort; he is not overpowered by the weight of aliments; his ideas are clear and easy; he fulfills all his functions properly; he conducts his business with intelligence; his old age is exempt from infirmity; he does not spend his money in remedies, and he enjoys, in mirth and gladness, the wealth which chance and his own prudence have procured him. Thus, from one virtue alone, generous nature derives innumerable recompenses.
A. By its powerful influence over our health. A sober person digests food comfortably; they are not overwhelmed by heavy meals; their thoughts are clear and straightforward; they perform all their tasks efficiently; they handle their business intelligently; their old age is free from illness; they don’t waste their money on remedies, and they enjoy, with joy and happiness, the wealth that luck and their own wise choices have brought them. Thus, from just one virtue, generous nature offers countless rewards.
Q. How does it prohibit gluttony?
Q. How does it prevent overeating?
A. By the numerous evils that are attached to it. The glutton, oppressed with aliments, digests with anxiety; his head, troubled by the fumes of indigestion, is incapable of conceiving clear and distinct ideas; he abandons himself with violence to the disorderly impulse of lust and anger, which impair his health; his body becomes bloated, heavy, and unfit for labor; he endures painful and expensive distempers; he seldom lives to be old; and his age is replete with infirmities and sorrow.
A. By the many problems that come with it. The glutton, weighed down by food, digests with stress; his head, troubled by the effects of overindulgence, finds it hard to think clearly and distinctly; he gives in violently to the chaotic urges of desire and rage, which harm his health; his body becomes swollen, heavy, and unfit for work; he suffers from painful and costly ailments; he rarely lives to old age; and his later years are filled with weaknesses and sadness.
Q. Should abstinence and fasting be considered as virtuous actions?
Q. Should abstaining and fasting be viewed as virtuous actions?
A. Yes, when one has eaten too much; for then abstinence and fasting are simple and efficacious remedies; but when the body is in want of aliment, to refuse it any, and let it suffer from hunger or thirst, is delirium and a real sin against the law of nature.
A. Yes, when someone has overeaten; because then avoiding food and fasting are straightforward and effective solutions; but when the body needs nourishment, refusing it any, and allowing it to suffer from hunger or thirst, is madness and a true violation of the laws of nature.
Q. How is drunkenness considered in the law of nature?
Q. How is drunkenness viewed in natural law?
A. As a most vile and pernicious vice. The drunkard, deprived of the sense and reason given us by God, profanes the donations of the divinity: he debases himself to the condition of brutes; unable even to guide his steps, he staggers and falls as if he were epileptic; he hurts and even risks killing himself; his debility in this state exposes him to the ridicule and contempt of every person that sees him; he makes in his drunkenness, prejudicial and ruinous bargains, and injures his fortune; he makes use of opprobrious language, which creates him enemies and repentance; he fills his house with trouble and sorrow, and ends by a premature death or by a cacochymical old age.
A. As a truly disgusting and harmful vice. The drunkard, lacking the sense and reason given to us by God, disrespects the gifts of the divine: he reduces himself to the level of beasts; unable even to walk straight, he staggers and falls as if he has a seizure; he injures himself and even risks killing himself; his weakness in this state exposes him to the ridicule and contempt of everyone who sees him; he makes harmful and disastrous deals while drunk, ruining his finances; he uses offensive language, which creates enemies and leads to regrets; he fills his home with trouble and sorrow, ultimately leading to a premature death or a miserable old age.
Q. Does the law of nature interdict absolutely the use of wine?
Q. Does the law of nature completely forbid the use of wine?
A. No; it only forbids the abuse; but as the transition from the use to the abuse is easy and prompt among the generality of men, perhaps the legislators, who have proscribed the use of wine, have rendered a service to humanity.
A. No; it only prohibits the abuse; but since the shift from use to abuse is quick and easy for most people, perhaps the lawmakers who have banned the use of wine have done a favor for humanity.
Q. Does the law of nature forbid the use of certain kinds of meat, or of certain vegetables, on particular days, during certain seasons?
Q. Does natural law prohibit the consumption of certain types of meat or specific vegetables on certain days or during specific seasons?
A. No; it absolutely forbids only whatever is injurious to health; its precepts, in this respect, vary according to persons, and even constitute a very delicate and important science for the quality, the quantity, and the combination of aliments have the greatest influence, not only over the momentary affections of the soul, but even over its habitual disposition. A man is not the same when fasting as after a meal, even if he were sober. A glass of spirituous liquor, or a dish of coffee, gives degrees of vivacity, of mobility, of disposition to anger, sadness, or gaiety; such a meat, because it lies heavy on the stomach, engenders moroseness and melancholy; such another, because it facilitates digestion, creates sprightliness, and an inclination to oblige and to love. The use of vegetables, because they have little nourishment, enfeebles the body, and gives a disposition to repose, indolence, and ease; the use of meat, because it is full of nourishment, and of spirituous liquors, because they stimulate the nerves, creates vivacity, uneasiness, and audacity. Now from those habitudes of aliment result habits of constitution and of the organs, which form afterwards different kinds of temperaments, each of which is distinguished by a peculiar characteristic. And it is for this reason that, in hot countries especially, legislators have made laws respecting regimen or food. The ancients were taught by long experience that the dietetic science constituted a considerable part of morality; among the Egyptians, the ancient Persians, and even among the Greeks, at the Areopagus, important affairs were examined fasting; and it has been remarked that, among those people, where public affairs were discussed during the heat of meals, and the fumes of digestion, deliberations were hasty and violent, and the results of them frequently unreasonable, and productive of turbulence and confusion.
A. No; it strictly prohibits only what is harmful to health; its guidelines, in this regard, vary based on individuals and even represent a very nuanced and important science, as the quality, quantity, and combination of foods greatly affect not just momentary feelings but also one's overall state of mind. A person is not the same while fasting as they are after eating, even if they haven't been drinking. A glass of liquor or a cup of coffee influences levels of energy, mood, and inclinations toward anger, sadness, or happiness; certain foods, because they are heavy on the stomach, can lead to gloominess and depression; others, because they aid digestion, promote liveliness and a tendency to be helpful and affectionate. Consuming vegetables, which are low in nutrients, weakens the body and fosters a desire for rest, laziness, and comfort; while eating meat, which is nutrient-dense, and drinking spirits, which stimulate the nerves, create energy, restlessness, and boldness. These dietary habits lead to changes in constitution and organ functions, which then develop into different temperaments, each characterized by a unique trait. This is why, especially in hot climates, lawmakers have enacted regulations regarding diet and food. The ancients learned through extensive experience that dietary science is a significant part of morality; among the Egyptians, ancient Persians, and even the Greeks, important matters were discussed while fasting at the Areopagus; it has been noted that where public discussions took place amid the heat of meals and the effects of digestion, decisions were rushed and heated, often resulting in unreasonable conclusions and fostering chaos and disorder.
CHAPTER VII.
ON CONTINENCE.
Q. Does the law of nature prescribe continence?
Q. Does the law of nature require self-control?
A. Yes: because a moderate use of the most lively of pleasures is not only useful, but indispensable, to the support of strength and health: and because a simple calculation proves that, for some minutes of privation, you increase the number of your days, both in vigor of body and of mind.
A. Yes: because using the most vibrant pleasures in moderation is not only helpful but essential for maintaining strength and health. Also, a quick calculation shows that by enduring a few minutes of deprivation, you actually extend your days, both in physical and mental energy.
Q. How does it forbid libertinism?
Q. How does it prevent libertinism?
A. By the numerous evils which result from it to the physical and the moral existence. He who carries it to an excess enervates and pines away; he can no longer attend to study or labor; he contracts idle and expensive habits, which destroy his means of existence, his public consideration, and his credit; his intrigues occasion continual embarrassment, cares, quarrels and lawsuits, without mentioning the grievous deep-rooted distempers, and the loss of his strength by an inward and slow poison; the stupid dullness of his mind, by the exhaustion of the nervous system; and, in fine, a premature and infirm old age.
A. By the many negative consequences that come from it for both physical and moral well-being. Someone who takes it to extremes becomes weak and wastes away; they can no longer focus on studying or working; they develop lazy and costly habits that ruin their means of living, their reputation, and their credibility; their schemes lead to constant stress, worries, conflicts, and lawsuits, not to mention serious, long-lasting health issues, and the loss of strength from a slow, internal poison; the dullness of their mind due to the exhaustion of their nervous system; and ultimately, an early and frail old age.
Q. Does the law of nature look on that absolute chastity so recommended in monastical institutions, as a virtue?
Q. Does the law of nature view the complete purity that is often praised in monastic life as a virtue?
A. No: for that chastity is of no use either to the society that witnesses, or the individual who practises it; it is even prejudicial to both. First, it injures society by depriving it of population, which is one of its principal sources of wealth and power; and as bachelors confine all their views and affections to the term of their lives, they have in general an egotism unfavorable to the interests of society.
A. No: because chastity doesn't benefit either the society that observes it or the individual who practices it; it can even be harmful to both. First, it harms society by reducing its population, which is one of its main sources of wealth and power; and since bachelors focus all their thoughts and feelings solely on their own lives, they generally tend to be self-centered, which is detrimental to the interests of society.
In the second place, it injures the individuals who practise it, because it deprives them of a number of affections and relations which are the springs of most domestic and social virtues; and besides, it often happens, from circumstances of age, regimen, or temperament, that absolute continence injures the constitution and causes severe diseases, because it is contrary to the physical laws on which nature has founded the system of the reproduction of beings; and they who recommend so strongly chastity, even supposing them to be sincere, are in contradiction with their own doctrine, which consecrates the law of nature by the well known commandment: increase and multiply.
Secondly, it harms the individuals who practice it because it robs them of many affections and relationships that are the foundations of most domestic and social virtues. Additionally, it often happens that due to factors like age, lifestyle, or temperament, total abstinence can damage the body and lead to serious health issues, as it goes against the physical laws that nature has established for reproduction. Those who advocate for chastity so strongly, even if they are sincere, contradict their own beliefs, which uphold the natural law encapsulated in the well-known commandment: be fruitful and multiply.
Q. Why is chastity considered a greater virtue in women than in men?
Q. Why is chastity seen as a more important virtue in women than in men?
A. Because a want of chastity in women is attended with inconveniences much more serious and dangerous for them and for society; for, without taking into account the pains and diseases they have in common with men, they are further exposed to all the disadvantages and perils that precede, attend, and follow child-birth. When pregnant contrary to law, they become an object of public scandal and contempt, and spend the remainder of their lives in bitterness and misery. Moreover, all the expense of maintaining and educating their fatherless children falls on them: which expense impoverishes them, and is every way prejudicial to their physical and moral existence. In this situation, deprived of the freshness and health that constitute their charm, carrying with them an extraneous and expensive burden, they are less prized by men, they find no solid establishment, they fall into poverty, misery, and wretchedness, and thus drag on in sorrow their unhappy existence.
A. Because a lack of chastity in women comes with much more serious and dangerous consequences for them and for society; aside from the pain and illnesses they share with men, they are also exposed to all the disadvantages and risks that come with pregnancy and childbirth. When they get pregnant outside of marriage, they become a source of public scandal and shame, and they often spend the rest of their lives in bitterness and misery. Additionally, all the costs of raising and educating their fatherless children fall on them: this financial burden impoverishes them and harms both their physical and moral well-being. In this situation, stripped of the freshness and health that make them appealing, burdened with an additional and costly responsibility, they are less valued by men, struggle to find stability, and slip into poverty and despair, dragging on in sorrow throughout their unhappy lives.
Q. Does the law of nature extend so far as the scruples of desires and thoughts.
Q. Does the law of nature apply to the concerns of desires and thoughts?
A. Yes; because, in the physical laws of the human body, thoughts and desires inflame the senses, and soon provoke to action: now, by another law of nature in the organization of our body, those actions become mechanical wants which recur at certain periods of days or of weeks, so that, at such a time, the want is renewed of such an action and such a secretion; if this action and this secretion be injurious to health, the habitude of them becomes destructive of life itself. Thus thoughts and desires have a true and natural importance.
A. Yes; because in the physical laws of the human body, thoughts and desires stimulate the senses and quickly lead to action. Now, according to another natural law in the way our bodies are organized, those actions turn into mechanical needs that happen at certain times of the day or week. So, at those times, the need for that action and that secretion comes back; if this action and secretion are harmful to health, the habit of doing them can actually be destructive to life itself. Therefore, thoughts and desires hold genuine and natural significance.
Q. Should modesty be considered as a virtue?
Q. Should modesty be seen as a virtue?
A. Yes; because modesty, inasmuch as it is a shame of certain actions, maintains the soul and body in all those habits useful to good order, and to self-preservation. The modest woman is esteemed, courted, and established, with advantages of fortune which ensure her existence, and render it agreeable to her, while the immodest and prostitute are despised, repulsed, and abandoned to misery and infamy.
A. Yes; because modesty, which is a sense of shame regarding certain actions, helps keep the mind and body aligned with behaviors that support good order and self-preservation. A modest woman is respected, sought after, and provided for, enjoying advantages that secure her well-being and make her life pleasant. In contrast, the immodest and those who sell themselves are looked down upon, rejected, and left to suffer in shame and misery.
CHAPTER VIII.
ON COURAGE AND ACTIVITY.
Q. Are courage and strength of body and mind virtues in the law of nature?
Q. Are courage and strength of body and mind considered virtues in the law of nature?
A. Yes, and most important virtues; for they are the efficacious and indispensable means of attending to our preservation and welfare. The courageous and strong man repulses oppression, defends his life, his liberty, and his property; by his labor he procures himself an abundant subsistence, which he enjoys in tranquillity and peace of mind. If he falls into misfortunes, from which his prudence could not protect him, he supports them with fortitude and resignation; and it is for this reason that the ancient moralists have reckoned strength and courage among the four principal virtues.
A. Yes, and the most important virtues; because they are the effective and essential means of ensuring our safety and well-being. The brave and strong person pushes back against oppression, defends their life, freedom, and belongings; through their work, they secure a plentiful living, which they enjoy in peace and tranquility. If they encounter hardships that their wisdom couldn't prevent, they face them with strength and acceptance; and this is why ancient philosophers listed strength and courage among the four key virtues.
Q. Should weakness and cowardice be considered as vices?
Q. Should weakness and cowardice be seen as flaws?
A. Yes, since it is certain that they produce innumerable calamities. The weak or cowardly man lives in perpetual cares and agonies; he undermines his health by the dread, oftentimes ill founded, of attacks and dangers: and this dread which is an evil, is not a remedy; it renders him, on the contrary, the slave of him who wishes to oppress him; and by the servitude and debasement of all his faculties, it degrades and diminishes his means of existence, so far as the seeing his life depend on the will and caprice of another man.
A. Yes, because it’s clear that they cause countless problems. The weak or cowardly person lives in constant worry and suffering; they harm their health by fearing, often without reason, attacks and dangers. This fear, which is harmful, doesn't help; instead, it makes them a slave to those who want to dominate them. As a result of this servitude and the weakening of all their abilities, it reduces their means of living, as they end up depending on the will and whims of another person.
Q. But, after what you have said on the influence of aliments, are not courage and force, as well as many other virtues, in a great measure the effect of our physical constitution and temperament?
Q. But, considering what you’ve said about the impact of food, aren’t courage and strength, along with many other virtues, largely shaped by our physical makeup and temperament?
A. Yes, it is true; and so far, that those qualities are transmitted by generation and blood, with the elements on which they depend: the most reiterated and constant facts prove that in the breed of animals of every kind, we see certain physical and moral qualities, attached to the individuals of those species, increase or decay according to the combinations and mixtures they make with other breeds.
A. Yes, it's true; and so far, those qualities are passed down through genetics and lineage, along with the elements they rely on: the most repeated and consistent observations show that in the breeding of animals of all types, we see certain physical and moral traits inherent in those species, increase or decrease based on the combinations and mixes they have with other breeds.
Q. But, then, as our will is not sufficient to procure us those qualities, is it a crime to be destitute of them?
Q. But if our will isn't enough to give us those qualities, is it wrong to be without them?
A. No, it is not a crime, but a misfortune; it is what the ancients call an unlucky fatality; but even then we have it yet in our power to acquire them; for, as soon as we know on what physical elements such or such a quality is founded, we can promote its growth, and hasten its developments, by a skillful management of those elements; and in this consists the science of education, which, according as it is directed, meliorates or degrades individuals, or the whole race, to such a pitch as totally to change their nature and inclinations; for which reason it is of the greatest importance to be acquainted with the laws of nature by which those operations and changes are certainly and necessarily effected.
A. No, it’s not a crime, but a misfortune; it’s what the ancients called an unlucky fate. However, we still have the ability to change it; because, as soon as we understand the physical elements that lead to certain qualities, we can encourage their growth and speed up their development through skillful management of those elements. This is the essence of the science of education, which, depending on how it is applied, can improve or degrade individuals or even entire generations to the point of completely changing their nature and tendencies. For this reason, it’s extremely important to understand the natural laws that govern these processes and changes.
Q. Why do you say that activity is a virtue according to the law of nature?
Q. Why do you claim that being active is a virtue based on the law of nature?
A. Because the man who works and employs his time usefully, derives from it a thousand precious advantages to his existence. If he is born poor, his labor furnishes him with subsistence; and still more so, if he is sober, continent, and prudent, for he soon acquires a competency, and enjoys the sweets of life; his very labor gives him virtues; for, while he occupies his body and mind, he is not affected with unruly desires, time does not lie heavy on him, he contracts mild habits, he augments his strength and health, and attains a peaceful and happy old age.
A. Because the man who works and uses his time wisely benefits from a thousand valuable advantages in his life. If he is born into poverty, his hard work provides for his needs; and even more so, if he is disciplined, self-controlled, and sensible, he quickly builds up a solid financial foundation and enjoys the pleasures of life. His very work instills virtues in him; because, while he keeps himself engaged physically and mentally, he is not burdened by reckless desires, time doesn’t weigh him down, he develops gentle habits, boosts his strength and health, and achieves a peaceful and happy old age.
Q. Are idleness and sloth vices in the law of nature?
Q. Are laziness and inactivity considered vices in the law of nature?
A. Yes, and the most pernicious of all vices, for they lead to all the others. By idleness and sloth man remains ignorant, he forgets even the science he had acquired, and falls into all the misfortunes which accompany ignorance and folly; by idleness and sloth man, devoured with disquietude, in order to dissipate it, abandons himself to all the desires of his senses, which, becoming every day more inordinate, render him intemperate, gluttonous, lascivious, enervated, cowardly, vile, and contemptible. By the certain effect of all those vices, he ruins his fortune, consumes his health, and terminates his life in all the agonies of sickness and of poverty.
A. Yes, and the worst of all vices because they lead to all the others. Through laziness and idleness, a person remains ignorant, forgetting even the knowledge they once had, and they fall into all the troubles that come with ignorance and foolishness. By being idle and lazy, a person, consumed with restlessness, tries to escape it by giving in to every urge of their senses. These desires become increasingly excessive, making them intemperate, gluttonous, lustful, weak, cowardly, despicable, and contemptible. As a result of all these vices, they destroy their wealth, ruin their health, and end their life in pain and poverty.
Q. From what you say, one would think that poverty was a vice?
Q. It sounds like you’re suggesting that poverty is a bad thing?
A. No, it is not a vice; but it is still less a virtue, for it is by far more ready to injure than to be useful; it is even commonly the result, or the beginning of vice, for the effect of all individual vices is to lead to indigence, and to the privation of the necessaries of life; and when a man is in want of necessaries, he is tempted to procure them by vicious means, that is to say, by means injurious to society. All the individual virtues tend, on the contrary, to procure to a man an abundant subsistence; and when he has more than he can consume, it is much easier for him to give to others, and to practice the actions useful to society.
A. No, it’s not a flaw; but it’s even less a quality, as it’s much more likely to cause harm than to be helpful. It’s often the result, or the start, of wrongdoing because the effect of all individual wrongs is to lead to poverty and lack of basic needs. When a person is lacking necessities, they’re tempted to get them through harmful means, which are damaging to society. In contrast, all individual virtues aim to provide a person with enough resources; and when he has more than he can use, it’s much easier for him to give to others and perform actions beneficial to society.
Q. Do you look upon opulence as a virtue?
Q. Do you consider wealth to be a good thing?
A. No; but still less as a vice: it is the use alone of wealth that can be called virtuous or vicious, according as it is serviceable or prejudicial to man and to society. Wealth is an instrument, the use and employment alone of which determine its virtue or vice.
A. No; but it's even less of a vice: it's really the way we use wealth that can be seen as virtuous or vicious, depending on whether it benefits or harms people and society. Wealth is a tool, and it's the way we use it that decides its goodness or badness.
CHAPTER IX.
ON CLEANLINESS.
Q. Why is cleanliness included among the virtues?
Q. Why is cleanliness considered a virtue?
A. Because it is, in reality, one of the most important among them, on account of its powerful influence over the health and preservation of the body. Cleanliness, as well in dress as in residence, obviates the pernicious effects of the humidity, baneful odors, and contagious exhalations, proceeding from all things abandoned to putrefaction. Cleanliness, maintains free transpiration; it renews the air, refreshes the blood, and disposes even the mind to cheerfulness.
A. Because it is actually one of the most important factors, due to its strong influence on the health and well-being of the body. Cleanliness, whether in clothing or living spaces, prevents the harmful effects of humidity, unpleasant odors, and contagious fumes that come from things left to rot. Cleanliness allows for proper breathing; it refreshes the air, revitalizes the blood, and even encourages a cheerful mindset.
From this it appears that persons attentive to the cleanliness of their bodies and habitations are, in general, more healthy, and less subject to disease, than those who live in filth and nastiness; and it is further remarked, that cleanliness carries with it, throughout all the branches of domestic administration, habits of order and arrangement, which are the chief means and first elements of happiness.
From this, it seems that people who pay attention to the cleanliness of their bodies and living spaces are generally healthier and less prone to illness than those who live in dirt and mess. Additionally, it's noted that cleanliness promotes habits of order and organization in all aspects of home life, which are key factors and fundamental elements of happiness.
Q. Uncleanliness or filthiness is, then, a real vice?
Q. Is uncleanliness or filthiness really a vice?
A. Yes, as real a one as drunkenness, or as idleness, from which in a great measure it is derived. Uncleanliness is the second, and often the first, cause of many inconveniences, and even of grievous disorders; it is a fact in medicine, that it brings on the itch, the scurf, tetters, leprosies, as much as the use of tainted or sour aliments; that it favors the contagious influence of the plague and malignant fevers, that it even produces them in hospitals and prisons; that it occasions rheumatisms, by incrusting the skin with dirt, and thereby preventing transpiration; without reckoning the shameful inconvenience of being devoured by vermin—the foul appendage of misery and depravity.
A. Yes, as real as drunkenness or laziness, which it largely stems from. Uncleanliness is the second, and often the first, cause of many problems, and even serious disorders; it's a medical fact that it leads to itching, skin flakes, rashes, and leprosy, just like consuming spoiled or sour food does; it also promotes the spread of plague and severe fevers, and can even cause them in hospitals and prisons; it leads to rheumatism by covering the skin with dirt, which prevents sweating; not to mention the embarrassing issue of being infested with pests—the disgusting companions of misery and corruption.
Most ancient legislators, therefore, considered cleanliness, which they called purity, as one of the essential dogmas of their religions. It was for this reason that they expelled from society, and even punished corporeally those who were infected with distempers produced by uncleanliness; that they instituted and consecrated ceremonies of ablutions baths, baptisms, and of purifications, even by fire and the aromatic fumes of incense, myrrh, benjamin, etc., so that the entire system of pollutions, all those rites of clean and unclean things, degenerated since into abuses and prejudices, were only founded originally on the judicious observation, which wise and learned men had made, of the extreme influence that cleanliness in dress and abode exercises over the health of the body, and by an immediate consequence over that of the mind and moral faculties.
Most ancient lawmakers viewed cleanliness, which they referred to as purity, as one of the core principles of their religions. This is why they banished from society, and even physically punished, those who suffered from ailments caused by uncleanliness. They established and dedicated rituals for washing, bathing, baptizing, and purifying, even through fire and the fragrant smoke of incense, myrrh, benzoin, and so on. Although the entire framework of pollution and the rituals distinguishing clean and unclean things has since devolved into misunderstandings and biases, it was originally based on the wise observations made by knowledgeable individuals about how significantly cleanliness in clothing and living conditions affects both physical health and, consequently, mental and moral well-being.
Thus all the individual virtues have for their object, more or less direct, more or less near, the preservation of the man who practises them and by the preservation of each man, they lead to that of families and society, which are composed of the united sum of individuals.
Thus, all the individual virtues aim, more or less directly and more or less closely, at preserving the person who practices them, and through the preservation of each individual, they contribute to the preservation of families and society, which are made up of the collective sum of individuals.
CHAPTER X.
ON DOMESTIC VIRTUES.
Q. What do you mean be domestic virtues?
Q. What do you mean by domestic virtues?
A. I mean the practice of actions useful to a family, supposed to live in the same house.*
A. I’m talking about the practice of actions that benefit a family assumed to live in the same house.*
* Domestic is derived from the Latin word domus, a house.
* Domestic comes from the Latin word domus, meaning a house.
Q. What are those virtues?
What are those values?
A. They are economy, paternal love, filial love, conjugal love, fraternal love, and the accomplishment of the duties of master and servant.
A. They are economics, parental love, sibling love, romantic love, brotherly love, and fulfilling the responsibilities of employer and employee.
Q. What is economy?
What is the economy?
A. It is, according to the most extensive meaning of the word, the proper administration of every thing that concerns the existence of the family or house; and as subsistence holds the first rank, the word economy in confined to the employment of money for the wants of life.
A. It is, in the broadest sense of the word, the correct management of everything that relates to the existence of the family or household; and since providing for basic needs is the top priority, the term economy is limited to the use of money for life's necessities.
Q. Why is economy a virtue?
Q. Why is being economical a virtue?
A. Because a man who makes no useless expenses acquires a superabundancy, which is true wealth, and by means of which he procures for himself and his family everything that is really convenient and useful; without mentioning his securing thereby resources against accidental and unforeseen losses, so that he and his family enjoy an agreeable and undisturbed competency, which is the basis of human felicity.
A. Because a man who avoids unnecessary spending accumulates wealth, which is true prosperity, and through this, he provides for himself and his family all that is genuinely helpful and practical; not to mention that he also secures resources against unexpected losses, allowing him and his family to enjoy a comfortable and stable life, which is the foundation of human happiness.
Q. Dissipation and prodigality, therefore, are vices?
Q. So, is wastefulness and extravagance considered vices?
A. Yes, for by them man, in the end, is deprived of the necessaries of life; he falls into poverty and wretchedness; and his very friends, fearing to be obliged to restore to him what he has spent with or for them, avoid him as a debtor does his creditor, and he remains abandoned by the whole world.
A. Yes, because of this, a person ultimately loses the essentials for living; they end up in poverty and misery. Even their friends, fearing they might have to repay what he has spent on them, avoid him like a debtor avoids a creditor, leaving him completely alone in the world.
Q. What is paternal love?
What is fatherly love?
A. It is the assiduous care taken by parents to make their children contract the habit of every action useful to themselves and to society.
A. It is the diligent effort made by parents to instill in their children the habit of taking actions that are beneficial both to themselves and to society.
Q. Why is paternal tenderness a virtue in parents?
Q. Why is being a caring father a virtue in parents?
A. Because parents, who rear their children in those habits, procure for themselves, during the course of their lives, enjoyments and helps that give a sensible satisfaction at every instant, and which assure to them, when advanced in years, supports and consolations against the wants and calamities of all kinds with which old age is beset.
A. Because parents who raise their children with those habits provide themselves, throughout their lives, with pleasures and assistance that offer real satisfaction at every moment, and that ensure, when they get older, support and comfort against the needs and difficulties of all kinds that come with old age.
Q. Is paternal love a common virtue?
Q. Is fatherly love a common virtue?
A. No; notwithstanding the ostentation made of it by parents, it is a rare virtue. They do not love their children, they caress and spoil them. In them they love only the agents of their will, the instruments of their power, the trophies of their vanity, the pastime of their idleness. It is not so much the welfare of their children that they propose to themselves, as their submission and obedience; and if among children so many are seen ungrateful for benefits received, it is because there are among parents as many despotic and ignorant benefactors.
A. No; despite how much parents show off about it, true love for their children is a rare quality. They don't genuinely love their children; they pamper and spoil them. What they love is that their children serve their will, act as tools for their power, serve as trophies for their vanity, and provide entertainment for their boredom. It's not really about wanting what's best for their kids, but rather about wanting their submission and obedience. And if we see so many children ungrateful for what they've received, it's because there are just as many overbearing and clueless parents.
Q. Why do you say that conjugal love is a virtue?
Q. Why do you say that marital love is a virtue?
A. Because the concord and union resulting from the love of the married, establish in the heart of the family a multitude of habits useful to its prosperity and preservation. The united pair are attached to, and seldom quit their home; they superintend each particular direction of it; they attend to the education of their children; they maintain the respect and fidelity of domestics; they prevent all disorder and dissipation; and from the whole of their good conduct, they live in ease and consideration; while married persons who do not love one another, fill their house with quarrels and troubles, create dissension between their children and the servants, leaving both indiscriminately to all kinds of vicious habits; every one in turn spoils, robs, and plunders the house; the revenues are absorbed without profit; debts accumulate; the married pair avoid each other, or contend in lawsuits; and the whole family falls into disorder, ruin, disgrace and want.
A. Because the harmony and bond created by the love of married couples establish many habits that are beneficial for the family’s success and well-being. The united couple stays connected to their home and rarely leaves; they manage every aspect of it; they focus on their children's education; they ensure respect and loyalty from their staff; they prevent chaos and waste; and through their positive behavior, they enjoy comfort and respect. In contrast, married people who don’t love each other fill their home with arguments and problems, creating conflict between their children and staff, allowing everyone to fall into various bad habits; each person takes advantage of and exploits the household; income is wasted without any benefits; debts pile up; the married couple avoids each other, or ends up in legal battles; and the entire family descends into disorder, ruin, disgrace, and poverty.
Q. Is adultery an offence in the law of nature?
Q. Is adultery a crime according to natural law?
A. Yes; for it is attended with a number of habits injurious to the married and to their families. The wife or husband, whose affections are estranged, neglect their house, avoid it, and deprive it, as much as they can, of its revenues or income, to expend them with the object of their affections; hence arise quarrels, scandal, lawsuits, the neglect of their children and servants, and at last the plundering and ruin of the whole family; without reckoning that the adulterous woman commits a most grievous theft, in giving to her husband heirs of foreign blood, who deprive his real children of their legitimate portion.
A. Yes; because it comes with a lot of harmful habits that hurt the married couple and their families. When a wife or husband becomes emotionally distant, they tend to ignore their home, avoid being there, and lessen its financial support as much as possible to spend it on the person they are infatuated with. This leads to arguments, gossip, legal battles, neglecting their children and employees, and eventually the destruction and downfall of the entire family. Not to mention that the unfaithful woman commits a serious betrayal by giving her husband children that aren’t his own, which takes away the rightful share of his real children.
Q. What is filial love?
What is parental love?
A. It is, on the side of children, the practice of those actions useful to themselves and to their parents.
A. For children, it’s the practice of actions that benefit both themselves and their parents.
Q. How does the law of nature prescribe filial love?
Q. How does natural law dictate love for one's family?
A. By three principal motives:
A. Three main motives:
1. By sentiment; for the affectionate care of parents inspires, from the most tender age, mild habits of attachment.
1. Through feelings; the loving care of parents encourages, from the earliest age, gentle habits of attachment.
2. By justice; for children owe to their parents a return and indemnity for the cares, and even for the expenses, they have caused them.
2. By justice; because children owe their parents a repayment and compensation for the care and even the expenses they have caused them.
3. By personal interest; for, if they use them ill, they give to their own children examples of revolt and ingratitude, which authorize them, at a future day, to behave to themselves in a similar manner.
3. By personal interest; because if they misuse them, they set an example of rebellion and ingratitude for their own children, which gives those children the right, at some point in the future, to treat them the same way.
Q. Are we to understand by filial love a passive and blind submission?
Q. Should we interpret filial love as a passive and blind submission?
A. No; but a reasonable submission, founded on the knowledge of the mutual rights and duties of parents and children; rights and duties, without the observance of which their mutual conduct is nothing but disorder.
A. No; but a reasonable acceptance based on understanding the shared rights and responsibilities of parents and children; rights and responsibilities, without which their interactions amount to nothing but chaos.
Q. Why is fraternal love a virtue?
Q. Why is brotherly love a virtue?
A. Because the concord and union, which result from the love of brothers, establish the strength, security, and conservation of the family: brothers united defend themselves against all oppression, they aid one another in their wants, they help one another in their misfortunes, and thus secure their common existence; while brothers disunited, abandoned each to his own personal strength, fall into all the inconveniences attendant on an insulated state and individual weakness. This is what a certain Scythian king ingeniously expressed when, on his death-bed, calling his children to him, he ordered them to break a bundle of arrows. The young men, though strong, being unable to effect it, he took them in his turn, and untieing them, broke each of the arrows separately with his fingers. "Behold," said he, "the effects of union; united together, you will be invincible; taken separately, you will be broken like reeds."
A. Because the harmony and bond that come from brotherly love create the strength, safety, and preservation of the family: united brothers defend themselves against all oppression, support each other in times of need, and help each other through difficulties, thereby ensuring their shared existence; while brothers who are divided, each relying on his own strength, face all the troubles that come from being isolated and individually weak. This is illustrated by a clever Scythian king who, on his deathbed, called his children to him and instructed them to break a bundle of arrows. The young men, despite being strong, could not do it. He then took the bundle, untied it, and broke each arrow individually with his fingers. "Look," he said, "the power of unity; together, you will be unstoppable; apart, you will break easily like reeds."
Q. What are the reciprocal duties of masters and of servants?
Q. What are the mutual responsibilities of employers and employees?
A. They consist in the practice of the actions which are respectively and justly useful to them; and here begin the relations of society; for the rule and measure of those respective actions is the equilibrium or equality between the service and the recompense, between what the one returns and the other gives; which is the fundamental basis of all society.
A. They involve the practice of actions that are appropriately and fairly beneficial to them; this is where social relationships begin. The standard and measure of those actions is the balance or equality between the service provided and the reward received, between what one gives and what the other returns; this is the essential foundation of all society.
Thus all the domestic and individual virtues refer, more or less mediately, but always with certitude, to the physical object of the amelioration and preservation of man, and are thereby precepts resulting from the fundamental law of nature in his formation.
Thus, all the personal and domestic virtues relate, directly or indirectly, but always with certainty, to the physical aspects of improving and preserving humanity, and are therefore principles derived from the fundamental law of nature in his development.
CHAPTER XI.
THE SOCIAL VIRTUES; JUSTICE.
Q. What is society?
What is society?
A. It is every reunion of men living together under the clauses of an expressed or tacit contract, which has for its end their common preservation.
A. It is every gathering of people living together under the terms of a stated or implied agreement, aimed at their mutual survival.
Q. Are the social virtues numerous?
Q. Are there many social virtues?
A. Yes; they are in as great number as the kinds of actions useful to society; but all may be reduced to one principle.
A. Yes; there are as many of them as there are types of actions that benefit society, but they can all be simplified to one principle.
Q. What is that fundamental principle?
Q. What is that basic principle?
A. It is justice, which alone comprises all the virtues of society.
A. Justice is the one thing that includes all the virtues of society.
Q. Why do you say that justice is the fundamental and almost only virtue of society?
Q. Why do you say that justice is the basic and almost sole virtue of society?
A. Because it alone embraces the practice of all the actions useful to it; and because all the other virtues, under the denominations of charity, humanity, probity, love of one's country, sincerity, generosity, simplicity of manners, and modesty, are only varied forms and diversified applications of the axiom, "Do not to another what you do not wish to be done to yourself," which is the definition of justice.
A. Because it alone includes the practice of all actions that benefit it; and because all the other virtues, known as charity, humanity, honesty, patriotism, sincerity, generosity, straightforwardness, and modesty, are just different expressions and applications of the principle, "Don’t do to others what you don’t want done to yourself," which defines justice.
Q. How does the law of nature prescribe justice?
Q. How does natural law dictate justice?
A. By three physical attributes, inherent in the organization of man.
A. Through three physical traits, inherent in the structure of humans.
Q. What are those attributes?
What are those features?
A. They are equality, liberty, and property.
A. They are equality, freedom, and property.
Q. How is equality a physical attribute of man?
Q. How is equality a physical characteristic of humans?
A. Because all men, having equally eyes, hands, mouths, ears, and the necessity of making use of them, in order to live, have, by this reason alone, an equal right to life, and to the use of the aliments which maintain it; they are all equal before God.
A. Because all people have equal eyes, hands, mouths, ears, and need to use them to live, they inherently have an equal right to life and access to the resources that sustain it; they are all equal before God.
Q. Do you suppose that all men hear equally, see equally, feel equally, have equal wants, and equal passions?
Q. Do you think that all people hear the same, see the same, feel the same, have the same wants, and the same passions?
A. No; for it is evident, and daily demonstrated, that one is short, and another long-sighted; that one eats much, another little; that one has mild, another violent passions; in a word, that one is weak in body and mind, while another is strong in both.
A. No; because it's clear and proven every day that some people are short-sighted while others are long-sighted, that some eat a lot and others eat very little, that some have calm passions while others have intense ones; in short, that some are weak in both body and mind, while others are strong in both.
Q. They are, therefore, really unequal?
Q. So, they are actually unequal?
A. Yes, in the development of their means, but not in the nature and essence of those means. They are made of the same stuff, but not in the same dimensions; nor are the weight and value equal. Our language possesses no one word capable of expressing the identity of nature, and the diversity of its form and employment. It is a proportional equality; and it is for this reason I have said, equal before God, and in the order of nature.
A. Yes, in how they develop their methods, but not in the fundamental nature and essence of those methods. They are made of the same material, but not in the same size; nor are the weight and value the same. Our language lacks a single word that can capture the sameness of nature while also reflecting the variety of its forms and uses. It represents a proportional equality; and that’s why I have stated, equal before God and in the order of nature.
Q. How is liberty a physical attribute of man?
Q. How is liberty a physical characteristic of a person?
A. Because all men having senses sufficient for their preservation—no one wanting the eye of another to see, his ear to hear, his mouth to eat, his feet to walk—they are all, by this very reason, constituted naturally independent and free; no man is necessarily subjected to another, nor has he a right to dominate over him.
A. Because all people have the senses necessary for their survival—no one needing another's eyes to see, ears to hear, mouth to eat, or feet to walk—they are all, for this very reason, naturally independent and free; no person is necessarily subjected to another, nor does anyone have the right to dominate over someone else.
Q. But if a man is born strong, has he a natural right to master the weak man?
Q. But if a man is born strong, does he have the right to dominate a weaker man?
A. No; for it is neither a necessity for him, nor a convention between them; it is an abusive extension of his strength; and here an abuse is made of the word right, which in its true meaning implies, justice or reciprocal faculty.
A. No; because it's neither something he needs nor an agreement between them; it's an abuse of his power; and here, the word right is misused, as its true meaning involves justice or mutual ability.
Q. How is property a physical attribute of man?
Q. How is property a physical feature of a person?
A. Inasmuch as all men being constituted equal or similar to one another, and consequently independent and free, each is the absolute master, the full proprietor of his body and of the produce of his labor.
A. Since all people are created equal or similar to one another, and therefore independent and free, each person is the complete master and owner of their body and the results of their work.
Q. How is justice derived from these three attributes?
Q. How do these three attributes lead to justice?
A. In this, that men being equal and free, owing nothing to each other, have no right to require anything from one another only inasmuch as they return an equal value for it; or inasmuch as the balance of what is given is in equilibrium with what is returned: and it is this equality, this equilibrium which is called justice, equity;* that is to say that equality and justice are but one and the same word, the same law of nature, of which the social virtues are only applications and derivatives.
A. In this view, since all people are equal and free, and owe nothing to each other, they have no right to demand anything from one another unless they provide equal value in return; or unless what is offered is balanced by what is received. This balance, this equality, is what we call justice and fairness; in other words, equality and justice are essentially the same concept, the same natural law, of which social virtues are merely applications and offshoots.
* Aequitas, aequilibrium, aequalitas, are all of the same family.
* Aequitas, aequilibrium, aequalitas, all belong to the same family.
CHAPTER XII.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOCIAL VIRTUES.
Q. Explain how the social virtues are derived from the law of nature. How is charity or the love of one's neighbor a precept and application of it?
Q. Explain how social virtues come from the law of nature. How is charity or the love for one’s neighbor a rule and application of it?
A. By reason of equality and reciprocity; for when we injure another, we give him a right to injure us in return; thus, by attacking the existence of our neighbor, we endanger our own, from the effect of reciprocity; on the other hand, by doing good to others, we have room and right to expect an equivalent exchange; and such is the character of all social virtues, that they are useful to the man who practises them, by the right of reciprocity which they give him over those who are benefited by them.
A. Due to equality and reciprocity; because when we harm someone else, we give them the right to harm us back; therefore, by threatening our neighbor’s existence, we put our own at risk because of reciprocity. On the flip side, when we do good for others, we have the expectation and right to receive something in return. This is the essence of all social virtues: they benefit the person who practices them through the right of reciprocity that they grant over those who benefit from them.
Q. Charity is then nothing but justice?
Q. So is charity just another way of saying justice?
A. No: it is only justice; with this slight difference, that strict justice confines itself to saying, "Do not to another the harm you would not wish he should do to you;" and that charity, or the love of one's neighbor, extends so far as to say, "Do to another the good which you would wish to receive from him." Thus when the gospel said, that this precept contained the whole of the law and the prophets, it announced nothing more than the precept of the law of nature.
A. No: it’s just justice; with one small difference: strict justice simply says, “Don’t do to others what you wouldn’t want them to do to you;” whereas charity, or love for your neighbor, goes further to say, “Do for others the good that you would want to receive from them.” So when the gospel stated that this commandment sums up the entire law and the prophets, it was nothing more than the command of the law of nature.
Q. Does it enjoin forgiveness of injuries?
Q. Does it require forgiving injuries?
A. Yes, when that forgiveness implies self-preservation.
A. Yes, when that forgiveness means taking care of oneself.
Q. Does it prescribe to us, after having received a blow on one cheek, to hold out the other?
Q. Does it tell us that after getting hit on one cheek, we should turn the other cheek?
A. No; for it is, in the first place, contrary to the precept of loving our neighbor as ourselves, since thereby we should love, more than ourselves, him who makes an attack on our preservation. Secondly, such a precept in its literal sense, encourages the wicked to oppression and injustice. The law of nature has been more wise in prescribing a calculated proportion of courage and moderation, which induces us to forget a first or unpremediated injury, but which punishes every act tending to oppression.
A. No; because, first of all, it goes against the principle of loving our neighbor as ourselves, since it would mean we love more than ourselves the person who threatens our well-being. Secondly, taking such a principle literally encourages wrongdoers to oppress and commit injustices. The natural law is wiser in suggesting a balanced mix of courage and restraint, which allows us to overlook a spontaneous or unplanned injury, while still punishing any act that leads to oppression.
Q. Does the law of nature prescribe to do good to others beyond the bounds of reason and measure?
Q. Does the law of nature require us to do good for others beyond what is reasonable and measured?
A. No; for it is a sure way of leading them to ingratitude. Such is the force of sentiment and justice implanted in the heart of man, that he is not even grateful for benefits conferred without discretion. There is only one measure with them, and that is to be just.
A. No; because that’s a sure way to make them ungrateful. The way we feel about fairness and justice is hardwired into us, so we won’t even appreciate help that’s given without thought. The only standard they recognize is being fair.
Q. Is alms-giving a virtuous action?
Q. Is giving to those in need a good thing to do?
A. Yes, when it is practised according to the rule first mentioned; without which it degenerates into imprudence and vice, inasmuch as it encourages laziness, which is hurtful to the beggar and to society; no one has a right to partake of the property and fruits of another's labor, without rendering an equivalent of his own industry.
A. Yes, when it's practiced according to the first mentioned rule; without that, it turns into recklessness and wrongdoing, as it promotes laziness, which harms both the beggar and society. No one has the right to benefit from someone else's property and labor without giving something of their own in return.
Q. Does the law of nature consider as virtues faith and hope, which are often joined with charity?
Q. Does the law of nature view faith and hope, which are often associated with charity, as virtues?
A. No; for they are ideas without reality; and if any effects result from them, they turn rather to the profit of those who have not those ideas, than of those who have them; so that faith and hope may be called the virtues of dupes for the benefit of knaves.
A. No; because they are just ideas without any real substance; and if any results come from them, they tend to benefit those who don’t hold those ideas rather than those who do; therefore, faith and hope could be seen as virtues of fools that mainly serve the interests of the deceitful.
Q. Does the law of nature prescribe probity?
Q. Does the law of nature require honesty?
A. Yes, for probity is nothing more than respect for one's own rights in those of another; a respect founded on a prudent and well combined calculation of our interests compared to those of others.
A. Yes, because integrity is simply about respecting our own rights while respecting those of others; a respect based on a careful and thoughtful assessment of our interests in relation to others'.
Q. But does not this calculation, which embraces the complicated interests and rights of the social state, require an enlightened understanding and knowledge, which make it a difficult science?
Q. But doesn't this calculation, which involves the complex interests and rights of society, need an informed understanding and knowledge, making it a challenging field of study?
A. Yes, and a science so much the more delicate as the honest man pronounces in his own cause.
A. Yes, and a science that's even more delicate since the honest person speaks on their own behalf.
Q. Probity, then, shows an extension and justice in the mind?
Q. So, does probity represent an expansion and fairness in the mind?
A. Yes, for an honest man almost always neglects a present interest, in order not to destroy a future one; whereas the knave does the contrary, and loses a great future interest for a present smaller one.
A. Yes, an honest person usually overlooks a current benefit to preserve a future one; on the other hand, a dishonest person does the opposite and sacrifices a significant future benefit for a smaller present one.
Q. Improbity, therefore, is a sign of false judgment and a narrow mind?
Q. So, is dishonesty a sign of poor judgment and a narrow mindset?
A. Yes, and rogues may be defined ignorant and silly calculators; for they do not understand their true interest, and they pretend to cunning: nevertheless, their cunning only ends in making known what they are—in losing all confidence and esteem, and the good services resulting from them for their physical and social existence. They neither live in peace with others, nor with themselves; and incessantly menaced by their conscience and their enemies, they enjoy no other real happiness but that of not being hanged.
A. Yes, and rogues can be described as ignorant and foolish schemers; they don't grasp what’s really in their best interest, and they act like they're clever. However, their supposed cleverness just reveals who they truly are—causing them to lose all trust and respect, along with the benefits that come with them for their life and social connections. They don't find peace with others or themselves, and constantly threatened by their conscience and their foes, they experience no real happiness except for the fact that they haven’t been hanged.
Q. Does the law of nature forbid robbery?
Q. Does natural law prohibit robbery?
A. Yes, for the man who robs another gives him a right to rob him; from that moment there is no security in his property, nor in his means of preservation: thus in injuring others, he, by a counterblow, injures himself.
A. Yes, because when a man robs another, he gives the victim the right to rob him back; from that point on, there’s no security in his property or in how he can protect it: by hurting others, he ultimately hurts himself too.
Q. Does it interdict even an inclination to rob?
Q. Does it even prevent a tendency to steal?
A. Yes; for that inclination leads naturally to action, and it is for this reason that envy is considered a sin?
A. Yes; because that inclination naturally drives us to act, and that's why envy is seen as a sin?
Q. How does it forbid murder?
Q. How does it prohibit murder?
A. By the most powerful motives of self-preservation; for, first, the man who attacks exposes himself to the risk of being killed, by the right of defence; secondly, if he kills, he gives to the relations and friends of the deceased, and to society at large, an equal right of killing him; so that his life is no longer in safety.
A. By the strongest instincts of self-preservation; for, first, the person who attacks puts themselves at risk of being killed, under the right of self-defense; secondly, if they kill, they grant the family and friends of the deceased, as well as society as a whole, the same right to kill them; thus, their life is no longer secure.
Q. How can we, by the law of nature, repair the evil we have done?
Q. How can we, according to natural law, fix the harm we've caused?
A. By rendering a proportionate good to those whom we have injured.
A. By providing a fair compensation to those we have harmed.
Q. Does it allow us to repair it by prayers, vows, offerings to God, fasting and mortifications?
Q. Does it let us make repairs through prayers, vows, offerings to God, fasting, and self-denial?
A. No: for all those things are foreign to the action we wish to repair: they neither restore the ox to him from whom it has been stolen, honor to him whom we have deprived of it, nor life to him from whom it has been taken away; consequently they miss the end of justice; they are only perverse contracts by which a man sells to another goods which do not belong to him; they are a real depravation of morality, inasmuch as they embolden to commit crimes through the hope of expiating them; wherefore, they have been the real cause of all the evils by which the people among whom those expiatory practices were used, have been continually tormented.
A. No: all those things are unrelated to the action we wish to fix: they do not return the ox to its rightful owner, restore honor to the person we have wronged, or give life back to the one from whom it has been taken; therefore, they fail to achieve justice. They are just corrupt agreements in which one person sells to another something that isn’t theirs; they represent a true degradation of morality, as they encourage crime by offering the hope of atonement. As a result, they have been the real cause of all the suffering experienced by the people who practiced these expiatory rituals.
Q. Does the law of nature order sincerity?
Q. Does the law of nature require honesty?
A. Yes; for lying, perfidy, and perjury create distrust, quarrels, hatred, revenge, and a crowd of evils among men, which tend to their common destruction; while sincerity and fidelity establish confidence, concord, and peace, besides the infinite good resulting from such a state of things to society.
A. Yes; lying, betrayal, and false testimony create distrust, arguments, hatred, revenge, and a host of problems among people, which ultimately lead to their mutual destruction; while honesty and loyalty build trust, harmony, and peace, along with the countless benefits that come from such a state of affairs for society.
Q. Does it prescribe mildness and modesty?
Q. Does it promote gentleness and humility?
A. Yes; for harshness and obduracy, by alienating from us the hearts of other men, give them an inclination to hurt us; ostentation and vanity, by wounding their self-love and jealousy, occasion us to miss the end of a real utility.
A. Yes; because harshness and stubbornness, by driving away the goodwill of others, make them inclined to harm us; showing off and vanity, by hurting their self-esteem and triggering jealousy, cause us to lose sight of genuine usefulness.
Q. Does it prescribe humility as a virtue?
Q. Does it define humility as a virtue?
A. No; for it is a propensity in the human heart to despise secretly everything that presents to it the idea of weakness; and self-debasement encourages pride and oppression in others; the balance must be kept in equipoise.
A. No; because it’s a tendency in the human heart to secretly despise anything that suggests weakness; and putting oneself down promotes pride and oppression in others; the balance must be maintained.
Q. You have reckoned simplicity of manners among the social virtues; what do you understand by that word?
Q. You've considered simplicity in behavior to be one of the social virtues; what do you mean by that term?
A. I mean the restricting our wants and desires to what is truly useful to the existence of the citizen and his family; that is to say, the man of simple manners has but few wants, and lives content with a little.
A. I mean limiting our wants and desires to what is truly useful for the well-being of the citizen and their family; in other words, a person with simple tastes has only a few wants and is happy with just a little.
Q. How is this virtue prescribed to us?
Q. How is this virtue recommended to us?
A. By the numerous advantages which the practice of it procures to the individual and to society; for the man whose wants are few, is free at once from a crowd of cares, perplexities, and labors; he avoids many quarrels and contests arising from avidity and a desire of gain; he spares himself the anxiety of ambition, the inquietudes of possession, and the uneasiness of losses; finding superfluity everywhere, he is the real rich man; always content with what he has, he is happy at little expense; and other men, not fearing any competition from him, leave him in quiet, and are disposed to render him the services he should stand in need of. And if this virtue of simplicity extends to a whole people, they insure to themselves abundance; rich in everything they do not consume, they acquire immense means of exchange and commerce; they work, fabricate, and sell at a lower price than others, and attain to all kinds of prosperity, both at home and abroad.
A. Because of the many benefits that come from this practice for both the individual and society; a person with few needs is immediately free from a lot of worries, complications, and hard work; they avoid many arguments and disputes that come from greed and the desire for more; they save themselves from the stress of ambition, the unease of having possessions, and the discomfort of losses; finding excess everywhere, they are the truly wealthy; always satisfied with what they have, they find happiness at little cost; and other people, not fearing any rivalry from them, leave them in peace and are willing to help them when needed. Moreover, if this virtue of simplicity spreads throughout an entire community, they secure abundance for themselves; rich in everything they don’t consume, they gain vast resources for trade and commerce; they work, produce, and sell at lower prices than others and achieve various kinds of prosperity, both locally and internationally.
Q. What is the vice contrary to this virtue?
Q. What is the opposite vice to this virtue?
A. It is cupidity and luxury.
A. It is greed and excess.
Q. Is luxury a vice in the individual and in society?
Q. Is luxury a bad thing for individuals and society?
A. Yes, and to that degree, that it may be said to include all the others; for the man who stands in need of many things, imposes thereby on himself all the anxiety, and submits to all the means just or unjust of acquiring them. Does he possess an enjoyment, he covets another; and in the bosom of superfluity, he is never rich; a commodious dwelling is not sufficient for him, he must have a beautiful hotel; not content with a plenteous table, he must have rare and costly viands: he must have splendid furniture, expensive clothes, a train of attendants, horses, carriages, women, theatrical representations and games. Now, to supply so many expenses, much money must be had; and he looks on every method of procuring it as good and even necessary; at first he borrows, afterwards he steals, robs, plunders, turns bankrupt, is at war with every one, ruins and is ruined.
A. Yes, and to that extent, it could be said to cover everything else; because a person who needs many things takes on all the stress that comes with it and goes to any lengths, fair or unfair, to get them. If he has one pleasure, he wants another; despite having more than enough, he never feels wealthy. A nice home isn’t enough for him; he needs a beautiful mansion. Not satisfied with a full table, he wants rare and expensive dishes. He requires luxurious furniture, high-end clothing, a group of servants, horses, carriages, women, theatrical performances, and games. Now, to pay for all these expenses, he must have a lot of money, and he views every way to get it as justified and even essential; at first, he borrows, then he steals, robs, plunders, goes bankrupt, fights with everyone, destroys others, and ends up being destroyed himself.
Should a nation be involved in luxury, it occasions on a larger scale the same devastations; by reason that it consumes its entire produce, it finds itself poor even with abundance; it has nothing to sell to foreigners; its manufactures are carried on at a great expense, and are sold too dear; it becomes tributary for everything it imports; it attacks externally its consideration, power, strength, and means of defence and preservation, while internally it undermines and falls into the dissolution of its members. All its citizens being covetous of enjoyments, are engaged in a perpetual struggle to obtain them; all injure or are near injuring themselves; and hence arise those habits and actions of usurpation, which constitute what is denominated moral corruption, intestine war between citizen and citizen. From luxury arises avidity, from avidity, invasion by violence and perfidy; from luxury arises the iniquity of the judge, the venality of the witness, the improbity of the husband, the prostitution of the wife, the obduracy of parents, the ingratitude of children, the avarice of the master, the dishonesty of the servant, the dilapidation of the administrator, the perversity of the legislator, lying, perfidy, perjury, assassination, and all the disorders of the social state; so that it was with a profound sense of truth, that ancient moralists have laid the basis of the social virtues on simplicity of manners, restriction of wants, and contentment with a little; and a sure way of knowing the extent of a man's virtues and vices is, to find out if his expenses are proportionate to his fortune, and calculate, from his want of money, his probity, his integrity in fulfilling his engagements, his devotion to the public weal, and his sincere or pretended love of his country.
If a nation indulges in luxury, it causes widespread destruction; because it consumes all it produces, it remains poor despite having plenty. It has nothing to export to other countries, its manufacturing costs are high, and its goods are overpriced. It becomes dependent on everything it imports, weakening its status, power, and ability to defend itself while also harming its internal structure. All its citizens, eager for pleasure, find themselves in a constant battle to obtain it; many end up hurting themselves in the process. This leads to habits and actions of usurpation, which is what we call moral corruption, escalating into conflict among citizens. Luxury breeds greed, and from greed comes violent and deceitful invasions. Luxury also brings about the corruption of judges, bribery of witnesses, unfaithfulness of husbands, the degradation of wives, harshness of parents, ingratitude of children, the greed of employers, dishonesty of employees, wastefulness of managers, corruption in lawmakers, lying, treachery, perjury, murder, and all sorts of social disarray. Thus, ancient moralists rightly grounded social virtues in simplicity, limiting desires, and being content with little. A good way to gauge a person's virtues and vices is to see if their spending aligns with their wealth, and to assess, from their financial struggles, their honesty, commitment to keeping promises, service to the public good, and genuine or feigned love for their country.
Q. What do you mean by the word country?
Q. What do you mean by the term country?
A. I mean the community of citizens who, united by fraternal sentiments, and reciprocal wants, make of their respective strength one common force, the reaction of which on each of them assumes the noble and beneficent character of paternity. In society, citizens form a bank of interest; in our country we form a family of endearing attachments; it is charity, the love of one's neighbor extended to a whole nation. Now as charity cannot be separated from justice, no member of the family can pretend to the enjoyment of its advantages, except in proportion to his labor; if he consumes more than it produces, he necessarily encroaches on his fellow-citizens; and it is only by consuming less than what he produces or possesses, that he can acquire the means of making sacrifices and being generous.
A. I mean the community of citizens who, united by brotherly feelings and shared needs, combine their individual strengths into one common force, which reflects back on each of them with the noble and positive qualities of care and support. In society, citizens create a pool of interests; in our country, we create a family of close connections; it is charity, the love of one’s neighbor extended to the entire nation. Now, since charity cannot exist without justice, no family member can enjoy its benefits unless it is in proportion to their contribution; if they take more than what is produced, they are infringing on their fellow citizens; and it is only by taking less than what they produce or possess that they can gain the means to make sacrifices and be generous.
Q. What do you conclude from all this?
Q. What do you take away from all this?
A. I conclude from it that all the social virtues are only the habitude of actions useful to society and to the individual who practices them; That they refer to the physical object of man's preservation; That nature having implanted in us the want of that preservation, has made a law to us of all its consequences, and a crime of everything that deviates from it; That we carry in us the seed of every virtue, and of every perfection; That it only requires to be developed; That we are only happy inasmuch as we observe the rules established by nature for the end of our preservation; And that all wisdom, all perfection, all law, all virtue, all philosophy, consist in the practice of these axioms founded on our own organization:
A. I conclude that all social virtues are just habits of actions that benefit both society and the individuals who practice them; that they relate to the physical necessity of human survival; that nature, having instilled in us the need for that survival, has made it a law for us to follow all its consequences and a crime to deviate from it; that we contain the potential for every virtue and perfection within us; that it only needs to be nurtured; that we can only be happy to the extent that we adhere to the rules nature has laid out for our survival; and that all wisdom, perfection, law, virtue, and philosophy are based on the practice of these principles derived from our own nature.
Preserve thyself; Instruct thyself; Moderate thyself; Live for thy fellow citizens, that they may live for thee.
Take care of yourself; Educate yourself; Control yourself; Live for your fellow citizens, so they can live for you.
VOLNEY'S ANSWER TO DR. PRIESTLY.*
* In 1797, Dr. Priestly published a pamphlet, entitled, "Observation on the increase of infidelity, with animadversions upon the writings of several modern unbelievers, and especially the Ruins of Mr. Volney." The motto to this tract was:
* In 1797, Dr. Priestley published a pamphlet called, "Observations on the Rise of Unbelief, with Comments on the Works of Various Modern Skeptics, Especially Mr. Volney's Ruins." The motto for this tract was:
"Minds of little penetration rest naturally on the surface of things. They do not like to pierce deep into them, for fear of labor and trouble; sometimes still more for fear of truth."
"Minds with limited insight tend to stay on the surface of things. They don't want to dig deeper, either out of fear of effort and difficulty or, even more so, out of fear of facing the truth."
This Letter is an answer from Volney, taken from the Anti-Jacobin Review of March and April, 1799.
This letter is a response from Volney, taken from the Anti-Jacobin Review of March and April, 1799.
SIR.—I received in due time your pamphlet on the increase of infidelity, together with the note without date which accompanied it.* My answer has been delayed by the incidents of business, and even by ill health, which you will surely excuse: this delay has, besides, no inconvenience in it. The question between us is not of a very urgent nature: the world would not go on less well with or without my answer as with or without your book. I might, indeed, have dispensed with returning you any answer at all; and I should have been warranted in so doing, by the manner in which you have stated the debate, and by the opinion pretty generally received that, on certain occasions, and with certain persons, the most noble reply is silence. You seem to have been aware of this yourself, considering the extreme precautions you have taken to deprive me of this resource; but as according to our French customs, any answer is an act of civility, I am not willing to concede the advantage of politeness—besides, although silence is sometimes very significant, its eloquence is not understood by every one, and the public which has not leisure to analyze disputes (often of little interest) has a reasonable right to require at least some preliminary explanations; reserving to itself, should the discussion degenerate into the recriminative clamors of an irritated self-love, to allow the right of silence to him in whom it becomes the virtue of moderation.
SIR— I received your pamphlet on the rise of infidelity along with the undated note that came with it. My response has been delayed due to business matters and even illness, which I hope you'll understand. However, this delay isn't really a problem. The issue between us isn’t urgent: the world wouldn't be significantly impacted by my response or the presence of your book. In fact, I could have chosen not to reply at all, and I would have been justified in doing so, based on how you framed the discussion and the common belief that sometimes the best reply is silence. You seem to be aware of this, given the extreme measures you've taken to prevent me from using that option. But in line with our French customs, any response is considered polite, and I don’t want to give up that advantage. Additionally, while silence can sometimes carry great meaning, not everyone understands its significance, and the public, who may not have the time to analyze disputes (which are often quite trivial), has the right to expect at least some initial explanations. If the discussion devolves into angry accusations, it’s reasonable to grant the right of silence to the one who maintains a sense of moderation.
* Dr. Priestly sent his pamphlet to Volney, desiring his answer to the strictures on his opinions in his Ruins of Empires.
* Dr. Priestly sent his pamphlet to Volney, asking for his response to the criticisms of his views in his Ruins of Empires.
I have read, therefore, your animadversions on my Ruins, which you are pleased to class among the writings of modern unbelievers, and since you absolutely insist on my expressing my opinion before the public, I shall now fulfill this rather disagreeable task with all possible brevity, for the sake of economizing the time of our readers. In the first place, sir, it appears evidently, from your pamphlet, that your design is less to attack my book than my personal and moral character; and in order that the public may pronounce with accuracy on this point, I submit several passages fitted to throw light on the subject.
I have read your criticisms of my Ruins, which you like to categorize as part of the writings of modern unbelievers, and since you insist that I share my thoughts in public, I will reluctantly take on this rather unpleasant task as briefly as possible to save our readers' time. First of all, it’s clear from your pamphlet that your aim is more to attack my book than my personal and moral character; to help the public judge this accurately, I am including several excerpts that shed light on the matter.
You say, in the preface of your discourses, p. 12, "There are, however, unbelievers more ignorant than Mr. Paine, Mr. Volney, Lequino, and others in France say," &c.
You mention in the preface of your discussions, p. 12, "There are, however, unbelievers who are more ignorant than Mr. Paine, Mr. Volney, Lequino, and others in France say," &c.
Also in the preface of your present observations, p. 20. "I can truly say that in the writings of Hume, Mr. Gibbon, Voltaire, Mr. Volney—there is nothing of solid argument: all abound in gross mistakes and misrepresentations." Idem, p. 38—"Whereas had he (Mr. Volney) given attention to the history of the times in which Christianity was promulgated . . . he could have no more doubt . . . &c., it is as much in vain to argue with such a person as this, as with a Chinese or even a Hottentot."
Also in the preface of your current observations, p. 20. "I can honestly say that in the writings of Hume, Mr. Gibbon, Voltaire, Mr. Volney—there's nothing of solid argument: they are all full of serious mistakes and misrepresentations." Idem, p. 38—"If he (Mr. Volney) had paid attention to the history of the times when Christianity was introduced . . . he would have no more doubt . . . &c., it is just as pointless to argue with someone like this as it is with a Chinese person or even a Hottentot."
Idem, p. 119—"Mr. Volney, if we may judge from his numerous quotations of ancient writers in all the learned languages, oriental as well as occidental, must be acquainted with all; for he makes no mention of any translation, and yet if we judge from this specimen of his knowledge of them, he cannot have the smallest tincture of that of the Hebrew or even of the Greek."
Idem, p. 119—"Mr. Volney, if we can go by his many quotes from ancient writers in all the academic languages, both eastern and western, must know them all; because he doesn't mention any translations, and yet if we assess his grasp of them from this example, he clearly has very little understanding of Hebrew or even Greek."
And, at last, after having published and posted me in your very title page, as an unbeliever and an infidel; after having pointed me out in your motto as one of those superficial spirits who know not how to find out, and are unwilling to encounter, truth; you add, p. 124, immediately after an article in which you speak of me under all these denominations—
And finally, after you published my name on your title page as a nonbeliever and an infidel; after highlighting me in your motto as one of those shallow thinkers who don't know how to seek out and are unwilling to face the truth; you add, p. 124, right after an article where you refer to me with all these terms—
"The progress of infidelity, in the present age, is attended with a circumstance which did not so frequently accompany it in any former period, at least, in England, which is, that unbelievers in revelation generally proceed to the disbelief of the being and providence of God so as to become properly Atheists." So that, according to you, I am a Chinese, a Hottentot, an unbeliever, an Atheist, an ignoramus, a man of no sincerity; whose writings are full of nothing but gross mistakes and misrepresentations. Now I ask you, sir, What has all this to do with the main question? What has my book in common with my person? And how can you hold any converse with a man of such bad connexions? In the second place, your invitation, or rather, your summons to me, to point out the mistakes which I think you have made with respect to my opinions, suggest to me several observations.
"The spread of disbelief today comes with a situation that wasn’t as common in the past, especially in England: that those who reject revelation often also deny the existence and care of God, effectively becoming Atheists." So, according to you, I’m just a Chinese, a Hottentot, a nonbeliever, an Atheist, a fool; someone whose writings are filled with nothing but serious errors and distortions. Now I ask you, sir, what does any of this have to do with the main issue? What does my book have in common with me as a person? And how can you engage with someone who has such poor associations? Furthermore, your request, or rather, your demand for me to point out the errors you’ve made regarding my beliefs, brings several points to my mind.
First. You suppose that the public attaches a high importance to your mistakes and to my opinions: but I cannot act upon a supposition. Am I not an unbeliever?
First. You think that the public cares a lot about your mistakes and my opinions, but I can't base my actions on what I think might be true. Am I not a skeptic?
Secondly. You say, p. 18, that the public will expect it from me: Where are the powers by which you make the public speak and act? Is this also a revelation?
Secondly. You say, p. 18, that the public will expect it from me: Where are the powers that make the public speak and act? Is this also a revelation?
Thirdly. You require me to point out your mistakes. I do not know that I am under any such obligation: I have not reproached you with them; it is not, indeed, very correct to ascribe to me, by selection or indiscriminately, as you have done, all the opinions scattered through my book, since, having introduced many different persons, I was under the necessity of making them deliver different sentiments, according to their different characters. The part which belongs to me is that of a traveler, resting upon the ruins and meditating on the causes of the misfortunes of the human race. To be consistent with yourself you ought to have assigned to me that of the Hottentot or Samoyde savage, who argues with the Doctors, chap. xxiii, and I should have accepted it; you have preferred that of the erudite historian, chap. xxii, nor do I look upon this as a mistake; I discover on the contrary, an insidious design to engage me in a duel of self-love before the public, wherein you would excite the exclusive interest of the spectators by supporting the cause which they approve; while the task which you would impose on me, would only, in the event of success, be attended with sentiments of disapprobation. Such is your artful purpose, that, in attacking me as doubting the existence of Jesus, you might secure to yourself, by surprise, the favor of every Christian sect, although your own incredulity in his divine nature is not less subversive of Christianity than the profane opinion, which does not find in history the proof required by the English law to establish a fact: to say nothing of the extraordinary kind of pride assumed in the silent, but palpable, comparison of yourself to Paul and to Christ, by likening your labors to theirs as tending to the same object, p. 10, preface. Nevertheless, as the first impression of an attack always confers an advantage, you have some ground for expecting you may obtain the apostolic crown; unfortunately for your purpose I entertain no disposition to that of martrydom: and however glorious it might be to me to fall under the arm of him who has overcome Hume, Gibbon, Voltaire and even Frederick II., I find myself under the necessity of declining your theological challenge, for a number of substantial reasons.
Thirdly. You want me to point out your mistakes. I don’t believe I’m obligated to do that: I haven’t criticized you for them; it’s not really accurate to attribute all the opinions in my book to me, as you have done, because I’ve included many different characters, and I had to let them express a variety of views based on their distinct personalities. My role is that of a traveler, reflecting on the causes of humanity's misfortunes while resting on the ruins. To be fair, you should have assigned me the perspective of a Hottentot or Samoyedian savage, who debates with the Doctors, chap. xxiii, and I would have accepted it; instead, you chose that of the knowledgeable historian, chap. xxii, which I don’t see as a mistake; rather, I sense a crafty intention to draw me into a conflict of egos in front of the public, where you would capture the audience's interest by representing the viewpoint they support. The role you’re trying to impose on me would only bring disapproval, should I succeed. Your underhanded goal is to challenge me on my doubts about Jesus’ existence, aiming to gain the approval of every Christian sect, even though your own disbelief in his divine nature undermines Christianity just as much as the secular view that lacks historical proof according to English law. Not to mention the kind of pride you display by silently, yet obviously, comparing yourself to Paul and Christ, claiming that your work aligns with theirs, p. 10, preface. Nevertheless, since the initial impact of an attack usually gives an advantage, you might have reason to believe you can achieve an apostolic crown; unfortunately for your aim, I have no desire for martyrdom: and even if it would be glorious to fall at the hands of someone who has bested Hume, Gibbon, Voltaire, and even Frederick II., I find myself needing to decline your theological challenge for several solid reasons.
1. Because, to religious quarrels there is no end, since the prejudices of infancy and education almost unavoidably exclude impartial reasoning, and besides, the vanity of the champions becomes committed by the very publicity of the contest, never to give up a first assertion, whence result a spirit of sectarism and faction.
1. That's because religious arguments never really stop, since the biases from childhood and education usually prevent unbiased thinking. Plus, the pride of the defenders gets tied up in the public nature of the debate, which makes them reluctant to back down from their initial claims, resulting in a mentality of sectarianism and division.
2. Because no one has a right to ask of me an account of my religious opinions. Every inquisition of this kind is a pretension to sovereignty, a first step towards persecution; and the tolerant spirit of this country, which you invoke, has much less in view to engage men to speak, than to invite them to be silent.
2. Because no one has the right to demand an explanation of my religious beliefs. Any questioning like this is an assertion of power, a first step towards persecution; and the tolerant spirit of this country that you mention is more about encouraging people to stay quiet than it is about getting them to speak out.
3. Because, supposing I do hold the opinions you attribute to me, I wish not to engage my vanity so as never to retract, nor to deprive myself of the resource of a conversion on some future day after more ample information.
3. Because, even if I had the opinions you say I do, I don’t want to let my pride stop me from changing my mind or prevent myself from being able to reconsider my views later with more information.
4. And because, reverend sir, if, in the support of your own thesis, you should happen to be discomfited before the Christian audience, it would be a dreadful scandal; and I will not be a cause for scandal, even for the sake of good.
4. And because, respected sir, if you were to struggle in front of the Christian audience while defending your own argument, it would be a terrible scandal; and I won’t be a reason for scandal, even for a good cause.
5. Because in this metaphysical contest our arms are too unequal; you speaking in your mother tongue, which I scarcely lisp, might bring forth huge volumes, while I could hardly oppose pages; and the public, who would read neither production, might take the weight of the books for that of reasoning.
5. Because in this metaphysical contest our skills are too mismatched; you speaking in your native language, which I can barely manage, could produce extensive works, while I could hardly contribute a few pages; and the public, who would read neither work, might mistake the volume of the books for the strength of the arguments.
6. And because, being endowed with the gift of faith in a pretty sufficient quantity, you might swallow in a quarter of an hour more articles than my logic would digest in a week.
6. And because you have a pretty good amount of faith, you could accept more ideas in fifteen minutes than my reasoning could handle in a week.
7. Because again, if you were to oblige me to attend your sermons, as you have compelled me to read your pamphlet, the congregation would never believe that a man powdered and adorned like any worldling, could be in the right against a man dressed out in a large hat, with straight hair,* and a mortified countenance, although the gospel, speaking of the pharisees of other times, who were unpowdered, says that when one fasts he must anoint his head and wash his face.**
7. Because again, if you insisted that I attend your sermons, just like you forced me to read your pamphlet, the congregation would never believe that a man who dresses up and looks like anyone else could be right when compared to a man wearing a large hat, with straight hair, and a somber expression, even though the gospel mentions that the pharisees of the past, who didn't dress up, say that when someone fasts, they should anoint their head and wash their face.
* Dr. Priestly has discarded his wig since he went to America, and wears his own hair. Editor A. J. Reveiw. ** St. Matthew, Chapter VI. verses 16 and 17.
* Dr. Priestly has given up his wig since moving to America and now wears his own hair. Editor A. J. Reveiw. ** St. Matthew, Chapter VI. verses 16 and 17.
8. Because, finally, a dispute to one having nothing else to do would be a gratification, while to me, who can employ my time better, it would be an absolute loss.
8. Because, in the end, a conflict would be enjoyable for someone with nothing else going on, but for me, who can use my time more effectively, it would be a total waste.
I shall not then, reverend sir, make you my confessor in matters of religion, but I will disclose to you my opinion, as a man of letters, on the composition of your book. Having in former days, read many works of theology, I was curious to learn whether by any chemical process you had discovered real beings in that world of invisibles. Unfortunately, I am obliged to declare to the public, which, according to your expression, p. 19, "hopes to be instructed, to be led into truth, and not into error by me," that I have not found in your book a single new argument, but the mere repetition of what is told over and over in thousands of volumes, the whole fruit of which has been to procure for their authors a cursory mention in the dictionary of heresies. You everywhere lay down that as proved which remains to be proved; with this peculiarity, that, as Gibbon says, firing away your double battery against those who believe too much, and those who believe too little, you hold out your own peculiar sensations, as to the precise criterion of truth; so that we must all be just of your size in order to pass the gate of that New Jerusalem which you are building. After this, your reputation as a divine might have become problematical with me; but recollecting the principle of the association of ideas so well developed by Locke, whom you hold in estimation, and whom, for that reason I am happy to cite to you, although to him I owe that pernicious use of my understanding which makes me disbelieve what I do not comprehend—I perceive why the public having originally attached the idea of talents to the name of Mr. Priestly, doctor in chemistry, continued by habit to associate it with the name of Mr. Priestly, doctor in divinity; which, however, is not the same thing: an association of ideas the more vicious as it is liable to be moved inversely.* Happily you have yourself raised a bar of separation between your admirers, by advising us in the first page of your preface, that your present book is especially destined for believers. To cooperate, however, with you, sir, in this judicious design, I must observe that it is necessary to retrench two passages, seeing they afford the greatest support to the arguments of unbelievers.
I won’t make you my confessor on matters of religion, reverend sir, but I do want to share my thoughts as a man of letters about your book. Having read many theological works in the past, I was eager to find out if you had discovered any real truths in that world of the unseen through some sort of chemical process. Unfortunately, I have to tell the public, which, as you mentioned on p. 19, "hopes to be instructed, to be led into truth, and not into error by me," that I didn’t find a single new argument in your book; it’s just a rehash of what’s been repeated in thousands of volumes, which have only earned their authors a brief mention in the dictionary of heresies. You claim to prove things that still need proof. As Gibbon points out, you fire away at those who believe too much and those who believe too little, while presenting your own feelings as the exact standard of truth; this means everyone must be just like you to enter the New Jerusalem you’re building. After this, your reputation as a divine might have seemed questionable to me, but remembering the principle of the association of ideas well articulated by Locke—whom you respect and whom I’m pleased to cite, even though it’s his influence that makes me question what I don’t understand—I see why the public initially associated the idea of talent with Mr. Priestly, doctor of chemistry, and continued to do so with Mr. Priestly, doctor of divinity; but the two aren’t the same. This association of ideas is especially misleading, as it can easily go the other way.* Thankfully, you’ve set a clear divide between your fans by stating on the first page of your preface that this book is specifically meant for believers. To help you with this thoughtful goal, I must point out that two passages need to be cut, as they lend the strongest support to the arguments of unbelievers.
* Mr. Blair, doctor of divinity, and Mr. Black, doctor in chemistry, met at the coffee house in Edinburg: a new theological pamphlet written by doctor Priestly was thrown upon the table, "Really," said Dr. Blair, "this man had better confine himself to chemistry, for he is absolutely ignorant in theology:"—"I beg your pardon," answered Dr. Black, "he is in the right, he is a minister of the gospel, he ought to adhere to his profession, for in truth he knows nothing of chemistry."
* Mr. Blair, a doctor of divinity, and Mr. Black, a doctor in chemistry, met at the coffee house in Edinburgh. A new theological pamphlet written by Dr. Priestly was placed on the table. "Honestly," said Dr. Blair, "this guy should stick to chemistry because he has no clue about theology." — "I’m sorry to disagree," replied Dr. Black, "but he’s correct; he is a minister of the gospel and should focus on his profession, because honestly, he doesn’t know anything about chemistry."
You say, p. 15, "What is manifestly contrary to natural reason cannot be received by it;"—and p. 62, "With respect to intellect, men and brute animals are born in the same state, having the same external senses, which are the only inlets to all ideas, and consequently the source of all the knowledge and of all the mental habits they ever acquire."
You say, p. 15, "What is obviously against natural reason cannot be accepted by it;"—and p. 62, "In terms of intellect, humans and animals are born in the same condition, having the same external senses, which are the only gateways to all ideas and therefore the basis of all knowledge and the mental habits they will ever develop."
Now if you admit, with Locke, and with us infidels, that every one has the right of rejecting whatever is contrary to his natural reason, and that all our ideas and all our knowledge are acquired only by the inlets of our external senses; What becomes of the system of revelation, and of that order of things in times past, which is so contradictory to that of the time present? unless we consider it as a dream of the human brain during the state of superstitious ignorance.
Now, if you agree with Locke and us nonbelievers that everyone has the right to reject anything that goes against their natural reason, and that all our ideas and knowledge come only from our external senses; what happens to the system of revelation and the way things were in the past, which is so at odds with how things are now? Unless we think of it as a fantasy created by the human mind during a time of superstitious ignorance.
With these two single phrases, I could overturn the whole edifice of your faith. Dread not, however, sir, in me such overflowing zeal. For the same reason that I have not the frenzy of martyrdom, I have not that of making proselytes. It becomes those ardent, or rather acrimonious tempers, who mistake the violence of their sentiments for the enthusiasm of truth; the ambition of noise and rumor, for the love of glory; and for the love of their neighbor, the detestation of his opinions, and the secret desire of dominion.
With these two simple phrases, I could dismantle your entire belief system. But don't worry, sir, I'm not overflowing with zeal. Just as I don't have the fervor of a martyr, I also lack the urge to convert others. That kind of intensity is for those fiery, or rather bitter, personalities who confuse the strength of their feelings for the passion for truth; the desire for attention and gossip for the pursuit of fame; and instead of truly caring for others, harbor a disdain for their views and a hidden wish for control.
As for me, who have not received from nature the turbulent qualities of an apostle, and never sustained in Europe the character of a dissenter, I am come to America neither to agitate the conscience of men, nor to form a sect, nor to establish a colony, in which, under the pretext of religion, I might erect a little empire to myself. I have never been seen evangelizing my ideas, either in temples or in public meetings. I have never likewise practiced that quackery of beneficence, by which a certain divine, imposing a tax upon the generosity of the public, procures for himself the honors of a more numerous audience, and the merit of distributing at his pleasure a bounty which costs him nothing, and for which he receives grateful thanks dexterously stolen from the original donors.
As for me, who haven't been given the fiery qualities of an apostle by nature, and who have never held the role of a dissenter in Europe, I've come to America neither to stir people’s consciences, nor to create a sect, nor to set up a colony where I could, under the guise of religion, build a little empire for myself. I’ve never been seen spreading my ideas in churches or public gatherings. I also haven’t engaged in that kind of fake philanthropy where a certain preacher, taxing the generosity of the public, garners the honors of a larger audience and the praise for distributing a bounty that costs him nothing, all while receiving grateful thanks that he’s cleverly taken from the original donors.
Either in the capacity of a stranger, or in that of a citizen, a sincere friend to peace, I carry into society neither the spirit of dissension, nor the desire of commotion; and because I respect in every one what I wish him to respect in me, the name of liberty is in my mind nothing else but the synonyma of justice.
Either as a stranger or as a citizen, a genuine friend to peace, I bring into society neither the attitude of conflict nor the wish for chaos; and because I honor in everyone what I hope they will honor in me, the idea of liberty means to me nothing other than the equivalent of justice.
As a man, whether from moderation or indolence, a spectator of the world rather than an actor in it, I am every day less tempted to take on me the management of the minds or bodies of men: it is sufficient for an individual to govern his own passions and caprices.
As a man, whether out of moderation or laziness, a watcher of the world instead of a participant in it, I find myself less and less inclined to take on the responsibility of managing the thoughts or actions of others: it is enough for a person to control his own desires and whims.
If by one of these caprices, I am induced to think it may be useful, sometimes, to publish my reflections, I do it without obstinacy or pretension to that implicit faith, the ridicule of which you desire to impart to me, p. 123. My whole book of the Ruins which you treat so ungratefully, since you thought it amusing, p. 122, evidently bears this character. By means of the contrasted opinions I have scattered through it, it breathes that spirit of doubt and uncertainty which appears to me the best suited to the weakness of the human mind, and the most adapted to its improvement, inasmuch as it always leaves a door open to new truths; while the spirit of dogmatism and immovable belief, limiting our progress to a first received opinion, binds us at hazard, and without resource, to the yoke of error or falsehood, and occasions the most serious mischiefs to society; since by combining with the passions, it engenders fanaticism, which, sometimes misled and sometimes misleading, though always intolerant and despotic, attacks whatever is not of its own nature; drawing upon itself persecution when it is weak, and practising persecution when it is powerful; establishing a religion of terror, which annihilates the faculties, and vitiates the conscience: so that, whether under a political or a religious aspect, the spirit of doubt is friendly to all ideas of liberty, truth, or genius, while a spirit of confidence is connected with the ideas of tyranny, servility, and ignorance.
If, on a whim, I feel it might be useful to share my thoughts, I do so without arrogance or the pretension of unwavering faith, which you seem to ridicule, p. 123. The entire book of the Ruins that you criticize so unfairly, especially since you found it entertaining, p. 122, clearly reflects this notion. Through the differing opinions I’ve included, it conveys a spirit of doubt and uncertainty that I believe is most appropriate for the fragile nature of the human mind and is best for its growth, as it always leaves the door open for new truths. In contrast, the spirit of dogmatism and unshakeable belief restricts our progress to a single accepted idea, leaving us trapped and helpless under the burden of error or falsehood, which can cause serious harm to society. When it combines with passion, it fosters fanaticism, which, whether misled or misguiding, is always intolerant and oppressive, attacking anything that isn’t like itself; drawing persecution when it is weak and inflicting it when it is strong; creating a religion of fear that stifles abilities and corrupts conscience. Therefore, whether viewed politically or religiously, a spirit of doubt supports all concepts of freedom, truth, and genius, while a spirit of certainty is tied to tyranny, servitude, and ignorance.
If, as is the fact, our own experience and that of others daily teaches us that what at one time appeared true, afterwards appeared demonstrably false, how can we connect with our judgments that blind and presumptuous confidence which pursues those of others with so much hatred?
If, as we know, our own experiences and those of others show us every day that what once seemed true can later be clearly proven false, how can we attach to our judgments that blind and arrogant confidence that relentlessly targets others with so much hatred?
No doubt it is reasonable, and even honest, to act according to our present feelings and conviction: but if these feelings and their causes do vary by the very nature of things, how dare we impose upon ourselves or others an invariable conviction? How, above all, dare we require this conviction in cases where there is really no sensation, as happens in purely speculative questions, in which no palpable fact can be presented?
There's no doubt it's fair, and even honest, to act based on how we currently feel and what we believe: but if these feelings and their reasons change naturally, how can we force ourselves or anyone else to hold a fixed belief? And how can we, especially, demand this belief in situations where there's actually no feeling involved, like in purely theoretical questions where no concrete evidence can be shown?
Therefore, when opening the book of nature, (a more authentic one and more easy to be read than leaves of paper blackened over with Greek or Hebrew,) and when I reflected that the slightest change in the material world has not been in times past, nor is at present effected by the difference of so many religions and sects which have appeared and still exist on the globe, and that the course of the seasons, the path of the sun, the return of rain and drought, are the same for the inhabitants of each country, whether Christians, Mussulmans, Idolaters, Catholics, Protestants, etc., I am induced to believe that the universe is governed by laws of wisdom and justice, very different from those which human ignorance and intolerance would enact.
Therefore, when I open the book of nature, (a more genuine and easier read than pages filled with Greek or Hebrew,) and when I think about how even the slightest change in the material world hasn’t been affected by the many religions and sects that have existed and still exist around the globe, and that the changing of the seasons, the sun’s path, and the cycles of rain and drought are the same for everyone, whether Christians, Muslims, idolaters, Catholics, Protestants, etc., I’m led to believe that the universe operates under principles of wisdom and justice that are very different from the laws that human ignorance and intolerance might create.
And as in living with men of very opposite religious persuasions, I have had occasion to remark that their manners were, nevertheless, very analogous; that is to say, among the different Christian sects, among the Mahometans, and even among those people who were of no sect, I have found men who practise all the virtues, public and private, and that too without affectation; while others, who were incessantly declaiming of God and religion, abandoned themselves to every vicious habit which their belief condemned, I thereby became convinced that Ethics, the doctrines of morality, are the only essential, as they are only demonstrable, part of religion. And as, by your own avowal, the only end of religion is to render men better, in order to add to their happiness, p. 62, I have concluded that there are but two great systems of religion in the world, that of good sense and beneficence, and that of malice and hypocrisy.
And while living with people of very different religious beliefs, I've noticed that their behaviors were surprisingly similar. That is to say, among the various Christian denominations, among Muslims, and even among those who don't belong to any religion, I’ve found individuals who practice all the virtues, both public and private, without pretension. On the other hand, there are those who constantly talk about God and religion but indulge in every immoral habit their beliefs denounce. This led me to believe that ethics, the principles of morality, are the only essential and truly explainable part of religion. And, as you have acknowledged, the main goal of religion is to make people better and increase their happiness, p. 62, I have concluded that there are just two fundamental systems of religion in the world: one based on common sense and kindness, and the other on malice and hypocrisy.
In closing this letter, I find myself embarrassed by the nature of the sentiment which I ought to express to you, for in declaring as you have done, p. 123, that you do not care for the contempt of such as me* (ignorant as you were of my opinion), you tell me plainly that you do not care for their esteem. I leave, therefore, to your discernment and taste to determine the sentiment most congenial to my situation and your desert.
In closing this letter, I feel awkward about the sentiment I should express to you. By stating, as you did on p. 123, that you don't care for the contempt of someone like me* (not knowing my opinion), you're basically saying you don't care for their approval. So, I'll leave it to your judgment and taste to figure out the sentiment that best fits my situation and what you deserve.
* "And what does it do for me here, except, perhaps, expose me to the contempt of such men as Mr. Volney, which, however, I feel myself pretty well able to bear?" p. 124. This language is the more surprising, as Dr. Priestly never received anything from me but civilities. In the year 1791 I sent him a dissertation of mine on the Chronology of the Ancients, in consequence of some charts which he had himself published. His only answer was to abuse me in a pamphlet in 1792. After this first abuse, on meeting me here last winter, he procured me an invitation to dine with his friend Mr. Russell, at whose house he lodged; after having shown me polite attention at that dinner, he abuses me in his new pamphlet. After this second abuse he meets me in Spruce Street, and takes me by the hand as a friend, and speaks of me in a large company under that denomination. Now I ask the public, what kind of a man is Dr. Priestly?
* "And what does it do for me here, except maybe expose me to the scorn of guys like Mr. Volney, which I believe I can handle pretty well?" p. 124. This statement is even more shocking since Dr. Priestly has only ever treated me politely. In 1791, I sent him a paper on the Chronology of the Ancients because of some charts he had published. His only response was to insult me in a pamphlet in 1792. After this initial insult, when I ran into him last winter, he arranged for me to be invited to dinner at his friend Mr. Russell's house, where he was staying; after showing me nice attention at dinner, he insults me in his new pamphlet. After this second insult, he sees me on Spruce Street, shakes my hand like a friend, and refers to me as such in front of a large group. Now I ask the public, what kind of a man is Dr. Priestly?
C. F. VOLNEY.
C. F. Volney.
Philadelphia, March 10, 1797.
Philadelphia, March 10, 1797.
P. S. I do not accompany this public letter with a private note to Dr. Priestly, because communications of that nature carry an appearance of bravado, which, even in exercising the right of a necessary defence, appear to me imcompatible with decency and politeness.
P. S. I'm not sending a private note to Dr. Priestly along with this public letter because messages like that come off as arrogant, which, even when justifying a necessary defense, seem incompatible with decency and politeness to me.
THE ZODIACAL SIGNS AND CONSTELLATIONS.
Zodiac Signs and Constellations.
(Compiled by the publisher from recognized authorities.)
(Compiled by the publisher from recognized experts.)
The Zodiac is an imaginary girdle or belt in the celestial sphere, which extends about eight degrees on each side of the Ecliptic. It is divided into twelve portions, called the signs of the Zodiac, within which all the planets make their revolutions. The Zodiac is so called from the animals represented upon it, and is supposed to have originated in remote ages and in latitudes where the camel and elephant were comparatively unknown. This pictorial representation of the zodiac was probably the origin, as M. Dupuis suggests, of the Arabian and Egyptian adoration of animals and birds, and has led in the natural progress of events to the adoration of images by both Christians and pagans.
The Zodiac is an imaginary belt in the sky that extends about eight degrees on either side of the Ecliptic. It is divided into twelve sections, known as the signs of the Zodiac, where all the planets revolve. It's called the Zodiac because of the animals depicted within it and is thought to have originated in ancient times in regions where the camel and elephant were largely unknown. This visual representation of the zodiac likely sparked, as M. Dupuis suggests, the Arabian and Egyptian worship of animals and birds, and eventually contributed to the worship of images by both Christians and pagans.
"The Signs of the Zodiac, (says Godfrey Higgins in The Anacalypsis) with the exception of the Scorpion, which was exchanged by Dan for the Eagle, were carried by the different tribes of the Israelites on their standards; and Taurus, Leo, Aquarius, and Scorpio or the Eagle—the four signs of Reuben, Judah, Ephriam, and Dan—were placed at the four corners, (the four cardinal points), of their encampment, evidently in allusion to the cardinal points of the sphere, the equinoxes and solstices, when the equinox was in Taurus. (See Parkhurst's Lexicon.) These coincidences prove that this religious system had its origin before the bull ceased to be an equinoctial sign, and prove also, that the religion of Moses was originally the same in its secret mysteries as that of the Heathen, or, if my reader likes it better, that the Heathen secret mysteries were the same as those of Moses."
"The Signs of the Zodiac, as noted by Godfrey Higgins in The Anacalypsis, except for the Scorpion, which Dan replaced with the Eagle, were carried by the various tribes of the Israelites on their banners. Taurus, Leo, Aquarius, and Scorpio or the Eagle—the four signs representing Reuben, Judah, Ephraim, and Dan—were set at the four corners (the four cardinal points) of their camp, clearly referencing the cardinal points of the sphere, the equinoxes and solstices, when the equinox was in Taurus. (See Parkhurst's Lexicon.) These alignments indicate that this religious system originated before the bull stopped being an equinoctial sign and also suggest that the religion of Moses originally shared the same secret mysteries as those of the pagans, or, if you prefer, that the pagan secret mysteries were essentially the same as those of Moses."
The Ecliptic, a great circle of the sphere, (shown on the preceding map by two parallel lines), is supposed to be drawn through the middle of the Zodiac, cutting the Equator at two points, (called the Equinoctial points), at an angle with the equinoctial of 23 degrees 28 minutes, (the sun's greatest declination), and is the path which the earth is supposed to describe amidst the fixed stars in performing its annual circuit around the sun. It is called the Ecliptic because the eclipses of the sun and moon always occur under it.
The Ecliptic, a large circle on the sphere (shown on the previous map by two parallel lines), is imagined to run through the center of the Zodiac, intersecting the Equator at two points (known as the Equinoctial points), at an angle of 23 degrees 28 minutes with the equinoctial (which is the sun's maximum declination). It represents the path that the Earth is believed to take among the fixed stars as it completes its yearly orbit around the sun. It's called the Ecliptic because solar and lunar eclipses always happen along this line.
The Signs are each the twelfth part of the Ecliptic or Zodiac, (30 degrees,) and are reckoned from the point of intersection of the ecliptic and equator at the vernal equinox. They are named respectively Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricornus, Aquarius, Pisces. These names are borrowed from the constellations of the zodiac of the same denomination, which corresponded when these divisions were originally made; but in consequence of the precession, recession, or retrocession of the equinoxes, (about 50 1/10" yearly, at the rate of about 72 years to a degree, displacing an entire sign in about 2152 years, and making an entire revolution of the equinoctial in about 25,868 years), the positions of these constellations in the heavens no longer correspond with the divisions of the ecliptic of the same name, but are in advance of them. Thus, the constellation Aries is now in that part of the ecliptic called Taurus, and the stars of Taurus are in Gemini, those of Gemini in Cancer, and so on throughout the ecliptic.
The Signs each represent one-twelfth of the Ecliptic or Zodiac (30 degrees) and are counted from the intersection point of the ecliptic and equator at the vernal equinox. They are named Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricornus, Aquarius, and Pisces. These names come from the constellations of the zodiac that had the same names, which matched when these divisions were first established. However, due to the precession, recession, or retrocession of the equinoxes (about 50.1" yearly, roughly 72 years per degree, shifting an entire sign in about 2152 years, and completing one revolution of the equinoctial in around 25,868 years), the locations of these constellations in the sky no longer align with the divisions of the ecliptic that share their names, but are ahead of them. So, the constellation Aries is now located in the part of the ecliptic called Taurus, the stars of Taurus are in Gemini, those of Gemini are in Cancer, and this pattern continues throughout the ecliptic.
The relative positions of the signs and constellations in the zodiac and ecliptic seem thus to have gradually changed with the revolving years; and the worship of the three constellations, Taurus, Aries, and Pisces, with which Christianity is so intimately connected, seems to have changed in a corresponding degree. The worship of the bull of Egypt—the celestial Taurus—has given place to that of the lamb of Palestine—the celestial Aries; and under the astronomical emblem Pisces—the twelfth sign of the zodiac—the dominant faith of to-day was appropriately taught by the twelve apostolic fishermen.
The positions of the zodiac signs and constellations seem to have gradually shifted over the years; and the veneration of the three constellations, Taurus, Aries, and Pisces, which are closely linked to Christianity, also appears to have evolved in a similar way. The worship of the Egyptian bull—the celestial Taurus—has been replaced by the worship of the lamb of Palestine—the celestial Aries; and under the astrological symbol of Pisces—the twelfth sign of the zodiac—the predominant faith of today was effectively preached by the twelve apostolic fishermen.
It is from one of these chosen fishermen, St. Peter, that the Pope of Rome claims to have derived his arbitrary power for binding and loosing on earth those who are to be bound and loosed in heaven. (Matt. xvi, 19.) The grave responsibility of wielding with justice and equity this tremendous power over the future destiny of mankind, seems never to have disconcerted any of the successors of St. Peter. They have all proved to be equally arrogant and intolerant, zealous for both temporal and spiritual domination, and merciless to those who have opposed their pretensions. The present incumbent of the papal chair, who modestly claims the attribute of infallibility, seems proud of his inherited title, The Great Fisherman! and hopes in the progress of time, with the assistance of his monks, bishops, and cardinals, to entangle all nations in his net of faith, and to dictate with unquestioned authority the religious worship of the entire human race.
It is from one of these selected fishermen, St. Peter, that the Pope of Rome claims to have gained his authority to bind and loose on earth those who are bound and loosed in heaven. (Matt. xvi, 19.) The serious responsibility of wielding this enormous power over the future of humanity with fairness and justice has never seemed to trouble any of St. Peter's successors. They have all shown a similar arrogance and intolerance, eager for both political and spiritual control, and ruthless towards anyone who challenges their claims. The current Pope, who proudly claims the title of infallibility, seems to take pride in his inherited title, The Great Fisherman! He hopes that, over time, with the help of his monks, bishops, and cardinals, he can catch all nations in his net of faith and dictate the religious practices of the entire human race with unquestioned authority.
As the precession of the equinoxes still continues as of yore, and as the masses still continue credulous and devout, they may in succeeding ages be again called upon to worship the god Apis, when the sign of Taurus shall again coincide in the zodiac and the ecliptic; and Aries, "the lamb of God," may again be offered in the "fullness of time" as a sacrifice for mankind, again be crucified, and again shed his redeeming blood to wash away the sins of a believing world.
As the precession of the equinoxes continues just like it always has, and as people remain trusting and faithful, they might once again be called to worship the god Apis in future ages when the sign of Taurus aligns with the zodiac and the ecliptic. And Aries, "the lamb of God," may once again be offered in the "fullness of time" as a sacrifice for humanity, crucified again, and shed his redeeming blood to cleanse the sins of a believing world.
M. Dupuis has satisfactorily shown in The History of all Religions that the twelve labors of the god and saviour Hercules were astronomical allegories—the history of the passage of the sun through the twelve signs of the zodiac—and these labors are so similar to the sufferings of Jesus, that the Rev. Mr. Parkhurst has been obliged, much against his inclination, to acknowledge that they "were types of what the real Saviour was to do and suffer." (Parkhurst, p.47.) An intimate connection, if not identity, is thus shown between ancient and modern belief—between the paganism of the past and the orthodoxy of the present.
M. Dupuis has convincingly demonstrated in The History of all Religions that the twelve labors of the god and savior Hercules were astronomical allegories—representing the journey of the sun through the twelve signs of the zodiac. These labors are so similar to the sufferings of Jesus that the Rev. Mr. Parkhurst has been forced, against his wishes, to acknowledge that they "were types of what the real Savior was to do and suffer." (Parkhurst, p.47.) This illustrates a close connection, if not a complete identity, between ancient and modern belief—between the paganism of the past and the orthodoxy of today.
THE ZODIACAL SIGNS.
The Zodiac Signs.
ARIES, the Ram: (marked [symbol for ARIES])—A northern constellation, usually named as the first sign in the zodiac, into which, when the sun enters at the vernal equinox in March, the days and nights are of equal length. Aries has been regarded by the devout during many ages as the celestial representative, visible in the heavens, of "the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world."
ARIES, the Ram: (marked [symbol for ARIES])—A northern constellation, typically recognized as the first sign of the zodiac. When the sun enters it during the spring equinox in March, day and night are of equal length. For many ages, the faithful have seen Aries as the celestial symbol of "the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world."
TAURUS, the Bull:(marked thus, [symbol for TAURUS])—The second sign in the zodiac, which by the Arabians is called Ataur. This constellation was worshipped for ages by the idolatrous Egyptians as the heavenly representative of their god Osiris; and derives its name, according to Grecian fable, from the bull into which Jupiter transformed himself in order to carry Europa over into Crete; but the constellation was probably so named by the Egyptians to designate that period of the year, (April), in which cows mostly bring forth their young.
TAURUS, the Bull: (marked thus, [symbol for TAURUS])—The second sign in the zodiac, known as Ataur by the Arabians. This constellation was revered for centuries by idol-worshipping Egyptians as a heavenly symbol of their god Osiris. Its name, according to Greek mythology, comes from the bull that Jupiter transformed into to carry Europa to Crete. However, the Egyptians likely named the constellation to mark the time of year (April) when cows mostly give birth.
"The Rev. Mr. Maurice in his work on the antiquities of India, has shown that the May-day festival and the May-pole of Great Britain with its garlands, etc., are the remains of an ancient festival of Egypt and India, and probably of Phoenicia, when these nations, in countries very distant, and from times very remote, have all, with one consent, celebrated the entrance of the sun into the sign of Taurus at the vernal equinox."
"The Rev. Mr. Maurice, in his work on the antiquities of India, has demonstrated that the May Day festival and the Maypole of Great Britain, along with its garlands and more, are remnants of an ancient festival from Egypt and India, and likely of Phoenicia. These nations, despite being far apart and from very ancient times, all collectively celebrated the sun's entry into the sign of Taurus at the spring equinox."
GEMINI, the Twins: (marked thus, [symbol for GEMINI])—A zodiacal constellation, visible in May, containing the two bright stars Castor and Pollux, the fabled sons of Leda and Jupiter, who during their lives had cleared the Hellespont and neighboring seas of pirates, and were therefore deemed the protectors of navigators and sailors.
GEMINI, the Twins: (marked thus, [symbol for GEMINI])—A zodiac constellation, visible in May, featuring the two bright stars Castor and Pollux, the legendary sons of Leda and Jupiter, who during their lives cleared the Hellespont and nearby seas of pirates, and were thus considered the guardians of navigators and sailors.
CANCER, the Crab: (marked thus, [symbol for CANCER])—Is the fourth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters on the 21st day of June, and is thence called the summer solstice. According to Grecian fable, the crab was transported to heaven at the request of Juno, after it had been slain by Hercules during his battle with the serpent Python, but the evident design of the name is to represent the apparent backward motion of the sun in June, which is said to resemble the motions of a crab.
CANCER, the Crab: (marked thus, [symbol for CANCER])—Is the fourth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters on June 21st, marking the summer solstice. According to Greek mythology, the crab was taken to the heavens at Juno's request after being killed by Hercules during his fight with the serpent Python, but the name mainly highlights the sun's apparent backward motion in June, which is said to resemble the movements of a crab.
LEO, the Lion: ([symbol for LEO]).—Is the fifth sign in the zodiac, and contains one star of the first magnitude, called Regulus, or Cor Leonis—the Lion's Heart. The fervid heat of July, when the sun has attained its greatest power, is now symbolized in our almanacs by the figure of an enraged lion; and the feasts or sacrifices formerly celebrated among the ancients during this month, in honor of the sun, (which they also represented under the form of a lion,) were called Leonitica. The priests who performed the sacred rites were called Leones. This feast was sometimes called Mithriaca, because Mithra was the name of the sun among the Persians. The sacred writings abound with references to the "king of beasts;" among the most interesting of which is the story of the battle between the lion and Samson, the Jewish Herculus; while the most wonderful example of animal evolution on record is found in the sixty-fifth chapter of Isaiah, where we are gravely informed that "the lion shall eat straw like the bullock."
LEO, the Lion: ([symbol for LEO]).—Is the fifth sign in the zodiac and has one star of the first magnitude, called Regulus, or Cor Leonis—the Lion's Heart. The intense heat of July, when the sun reaches its peak power, is now represented in our calendars by the figure of an angry lion; and the festivals or sacrifices once celebrated by the ancients during this month, in honor of the sun (which they also depicted as a lion), were called Leonitica. The priests who carried out the sacred ceremonies were known as Leones. This festival was sometimes referred to as Mithriaca, because Mithra was the name of the sun among the Persians. The sacred texts are filled with references to the "king of beasts," one of the most fascinating being the story of the fight between the lion and Samson, the Jewish Hercules; while the most remarkable example of animal evolution on record can be found in the sixty-fifth chapter of Isaiah, where it is stated that "the lion shall eat straw like the bullock."
VIRGO, Virgin Mother, Venus, Eve, Isis, &c.—([symbol for VIRGO]).—Is the sixth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters about the 21st of August. The myths and fables regarding the virgin which abound among all nations and all religions, are both various and voluminous, and we may add somewhat improbable. They all agree, however, in this, that the female, shown on the preceding diagram, holding in her right hand a branch of ripened fruit,—the apples of Paradise,—was intended to represent the reproductive powers of nature,—the abundance, satisfaction and contentment which mortals enjoy during the happy period of harvest.
VIRGO, Virgin Mother, Venus, Eve, Isis, etc.—([symbol for VIRGO]).—Is the sixth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters around August 21. The myths and stories about the virgin exist in various forms across all nations and religions, and while they’re many and extensive, they can be a bit unlikely. However, they all agree on one point: the female figure shown in the previous diagram, holding a branch of ripe fruit—the apples of Paradise—represents the reproductive powers of nature—the abundance, satisfaction, and contentment that people experience during the joyful harvest season.
LIBRA, the Balance.—The seventh sign of the zodiac, directly opposite to Aries, from which it is distant 180 degrees. It is marked thus [symbol for LIBRA], after the manner of a pair of scales; to denote, probably, that when the sun arrives at this part of the ecliptic, the days and nights are equal, as if weighed in a balance. Hence the period when the sun enters Libra, (about September 21st,) is called the Autumnal equinox. On the 25th of September was born John the Baptist, the forerunner of his cousin Jesus, who came to his exaltation of glory on the 25th of March, the Vernal equinox. "The equinoxes and solstices," says Higgins, "equally marked the births and deaths of John and Jesus." The one preceded and prepared the way for the other, who receded. One advanced, the other declined. Jesus ascended, John descended. Astrologically speaking, "He must increase, but I must decrease." (John iii, 30.)
LIBRA, the Balance. — The seventh sign of the zodiac, directly opposite Aries, with a distance of 180 degrees between them. It is represented as [symbol for LIBRA], resembling a pair of scales; likely indicating that when the sun reaches this part of the ecliptic, days and nights are equal, as if balanced. Therefore, the period when the sun enters Libra (around September 21st) is called the Autumnal equinox. John the Baptist, who prepared the way for his cousin Jesus, was born on September 25th, while Jesus's exaltation of glory occurred on March 25th, the Vernal equinox. "The equinoxes and solstices," says Higgins, "equally marked the births and deaths of John and Jesus." One prepared the way for the other, with one advancing and the other declining. Jesus ascended, while John descended. Astrologically, "He must increase, but I must decrease." (John iii, 30.)
SCORPIO, the Scorpion.—The eighth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters on the 23d of October, is marked thus [symbol for SCORPIO]. Scorpio is fabled to have killed the great hunter Orion, and for that exploit to have been placed among the constellations. For this reason it is also said that when Scorpio rises Orion sets.
SCORPIO, the Scorpion.—The eighth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters on October 23rd, is shown like this [symbol for SCORPIO]. According to legend, Scorpio killed the great hunter Orion, and because of that achievement, it was placed among the constellations. For this reason, it is also said that when Scorpio rises, Orion sets.
SAGITTARIUS, the Archer: (marked thus, [symbol for SAGITTARIUS]) is the ninth zodiacal sign, and corresponds with the month of November. This sign is represented like a centaur and was fabled to be Crotus, the son of Eupheme, the nurse of the Muses.
SAGITTARIUS, the Archer: (marked thus, [symbol for SAGITTARIUS]) is the ninth zodiac sign and corresponds with the month of November. This sign is depicted as a centaur and is said to represent Crotus, the son of Eupheme, the nurse of the Muses.
CAPRICORNUS, the Goat.([symbol for CAPRICORNUS])—The tenth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters the 21st of December, (the longest night in the year,) called the winter solstice. This sign is drawn to represent the horns of a goat, and is fabled to have been Pan, who in the war of the giants was taken to heaven in the shape of a goat. Others claim that it was the goat of Amalthaea, which fed Jupiter with her milk. Macrobius, who calls Cancer and Capricorn the gates of the sun, makes the latter sign to represent his motion, after the manner of a goat climbing the mountains.
CAPRICORNUS, the Goat.([symbol for CAPRICORNUS])—The tenth sign of the zodiac, which the sun enters on December 21st, (the longest night of the year,) known as the winter solstice. This sign is depicted with the horns of a goat and is said to represent Pan, who was taken to heaven in the form of a goat during the giants' war. Others believe it represents the goat Amalthaea, who nurtured Jupiter with her milk. Macrobius refers to Cancer and Capricorn as the gates of the sun, with the latter sign symbolizing its movement, like a goat climbing mountains.
AQUARIUS, the Water Bearer.—A constellation in the heavens so called, because during its rising there is usually an abundance of rain. It is the eleventh sign in the zodiac, reckoned from Aries, and is marked thus, [symbol for AQUARIUS]. It rises in January and sets in February, and is supposed by the poets to be Ganymede.
AQUARIUS, the Water Bearer.—A constellation in the sky named for the fact that it often brings a lot of rain when it rises. It’s the eleventh sign in the zodiac, counted from Aries, and is represented as [symbol for AQUARIUS]. It rises in January and sets in February, and poets often associate it with Ganymede.
PISCES, the Fishes, [symbol for PISCES].—The twelfth sign of the zodiac, rises in February and is represented by two fishes tied together by the tails. These fishes are fabled by the Greeks to be those into which Venus and Cupid were changed to escape from the giant Typhon. This fable may not be true, but that wonderful miracles were once performed with two small fishes is stated in the ninth chapter of the Gospel of St. Luke, where it is said that 5000 hungry mortals were cheaply, if not sumptuously regaled with two small fishes and five loaves of bread; while a large surplus of this piscatory diet, larger indeed than the original stock, still remained intact.
PISCES, the Fishes, [symbol for PISCES].—The twelfth sign of the zodiac, which appears in February, is represented by two fish tied together by their tails. According to Greek mythology, these fish were the forms that Venus and Cupid took to escape the giant Typhon. This story may not be factual, but it's noted in the ninth chapter of the Gospel of St. Luke that amazing miracles were performed with two small fish. It tells how 5,000 hungry people were fed abundantly, if not lavishly, with just two small fish and five loaves of bread, with a large surplus of this fish-based meal remaining afterward, even exceeding the original amount.
In the vestibule or approaches to catholic churches is usually found a vase filled with water, (called Piscina,) and this water is considered holy. The Fish-days are observed as holy days, or fast days, in which Fish may be eaten and meat is forbidden; and learned writers have asserted that in the worship of Pisces may be found the true secret of the origin of the rite of baptism. The Fish-god Oannes, is said to have come out of the Erythraean Sea and taught the Babylonians all kinds of useful knowledge. Ionnes or Jonas went headlong into the sea and into a fish, and has kindly recorded for our instruction his remarkable adventures. The miraculous draughts of fishes in the apostolic age still excite the emulation of modern fishermen, who cannot even hope to rival the wonders that have been recorded. St. Peter is said to have secured ready money from the mouth of a fish that he caught with a hook and line in the sea of Galilee. (Matthew xvii, 27.) His success was justly rewarded, and to him was delegated the power of ruling the infant church. Pisces thus displaced Aries. The fisherman succeeded the shepherd. The precession of the equinoxes produced a new avatar; a new sign arose in the heavens; and a new saviour was born to save mankind.
In the entrance or approaches to Catholic churches, there's usually a vase filled with water, known as a Piscina, and this water is considered holy. Fish days are observed as holy days or fast days when fish can be eaten and meat is not allowed. Scholars have suggested that in the worship of Pisces, we can find the true origin of the baptism rite. The Fish-god Oannes is said to have emerged from the Erythraean Sea and taught the Babylonians all sorts of useful knowledge. Ionnes or Jonas jumped into the sea and ended up in a fish, and he has kindly documented his remarkable adventures for our learning. The miraculous catches of fish during the apostolic age still inspire modern fishermen, who can only dream of matching the recorded wonders. St. Peter is said to have found money in the mouth of a fish he caught with a hook and line in the Sea of Galilee (Matthew 17:27). His success was rightly rewarded, and he was given the power to lead the early church. Pisces thus took the place of Aries. The fisherman replaced the shepherd. The precession of the equinoxes brought about a new avatar; a new sign appeared in the sky; and a new savior was born to save humanity.
THE CONSTELLATIONS.
THE CONSTELLATIONS.
SIRIUS, the Dog Star.—A bright star of the first magnitude in the mouth of the constellation Canis Major. This is the brightest star that appears in our firmament, and is supposed by some to be the nearest.
SIRIUS, the Dog Star.—A bright first-magnitude star located in the mouth of the constellation Canis Major. This is the brightest star visible in our sky and is believed by some to be the closest.
LEPUS.—One of the southern constellations, placed near Orion, according to Grecian fable, because it was one of the animals which he hunted.
LEPUS.—One of the southern constellations, located near Orion, according to Greek mythology, because it was one of the animals he hunted.
ERIDANUS.—A winding southern constellation, near the Cetus, containing the bright star Achemar.
ERIDANUS.—A twisting southern constellation, close to Cetus, featuring the bright star Achemar.
CETUS, the Whale.—A southern constellation, and one of the forty-eight old asterisms. It is fabled to have been the sea monster sent by Neptune to devour Andromeda, which was killed by Perseus.
CETUS, the Whale.—A southern constellation and one of the forty-eight ancient star patterns. It is said to be the sea monster sent by Neptune to eat Andromeda, who was eventually killed by Perseus.
CRATER, the Cup.—A southern constellation, near Hydra. This is supposed by Hyainus to be the cup which Apollo gave to the Corvus, or Raven.
CRATER, the Cup.—A southern constellation, close to Hydra. Hyainus believes this is the cup that Apollo gave to the Corvus, or Raven.
CORVUS.—One of the old constellations in the southern hemisphere, near Sagittarius. This bird is fabled to have been translated to heaven by Apollo for discovering to him the infidelity of the nymph Coronis.
CORVUS.—One of the ancient constellations in the southern hemisphere, near Sagittarius. This bird is said to have been taken to the heavens by Apollo for revealing the unfaithfulness of the nymph Coronis.
ARGO NAVIS, the Ship.—A constellation near to the Canis Major, and the name of the ship which carried Jason and his fifty-four companions to Colchis in quest of the golden fleece, and was said to have been translated into the heavens.
ARGO NAVIS, the Ship.—A constellation close to Canis Major, and the name of the ship that took Jason and his fifty-four companions to Colchis in search of the golden fleece, which was said to have been placed in the sky.
CANOPUS.—The name formerly given to a star in the second bend of Eridanus. A bright star of the first magnitude in the rudder of the ship Argo, which, according to Pliny, was visible at Alexandria in Egypt.
CANOPUS.—The name previously assigned to a star in the second curve of Eridanus. A bright first-magnitude star located in the rudder of the ship Argo, which, according to Pliny, could be seen from Alexandria in Egypt.
CENTAURUS.—One of the forty-eight old constellations in the southern hemisphere, represented in the form of half man and half horse, who was fabled by the Greeks to have been Chiron, the tutor of Achilles.
CENTAURUS.—One of the forty-eight ancient constellations in the southern hemisphere, depicted as half man and half horse, who the Greeks believed was Chiron, the teacher of Achilles.
AVA, or ALTAR.—One of the old constellations, and fabled to have been that at which the giants entered into their conspiracy against the gods; wherefore Jupiter, in commemoration of the event, transplanted the altar into the heavens.
AVA, or ALTAR.—One of the ancient constellations, said to be where the giants plotted against the gods; for this reason, Jupiter, to commemorate the event, moved the altar into the sky.
PEGASUS.—One of the forty-eight old constellations of the northern hemisphere, figured in the form of a flying horse.
PEGASUS.—One of the forty-eight ancient constellations in the northern hemisphere, represented as a flying horse.
DELPHINUS, or DOLPHIN.—A northern constellation, near Pegasus. The Dolphin is fabled to have been translated to heaven by Neptune.
DELPHINUS, or DOLPHIN.—A northern constellation, located near Pegasus. The Dolphin is said to have been taken to heaven by Neptune.
AQUILA, the Eagle.—In the Arabic Altair, but in the Persian tables the Flying Vulture. This is one of the old constellations, situated near Delphinus in the northern hemisphere. According to Grecian fable, Aquila represented Ganymede or Hebe, who was transported to heaven and made cup-bearer to Jupiter.
AQUILA, the Eagle.—In Arabic, it's called Altair, but in Persian charts, it's the Flying Vulture. This is one of the ancient constellations, located near Delphinus in the northern hemisphere. According to Greek mythology, Aquila represented Ganymede or Hebe, who was taken to heaven and became Jupiter's cup-bearer.
SAGITTA—the Dart or Arrow, called by the Arabians Schahan. One of the old constellations in the northern hemisphere, near Aquila and Delphinus. It is fabled to have been the arrow with which Hercules slew the vulture that was devouring the liver of Prometheus who was, like Jesus, crucified for loving mankind.
SAGITTA—the Dart or Arrow, referred to by the Arabs as Schahan. It is one of the ancient constellations in the northern hemisphere, situated near Aquila and Delphinus. It's said to be the arrow that Hercules used to kill the vulture that was eating Prometheus's liver, who, like Jesus, was crucified for caring about humanity.
CYGNUS, the Swan.—An old constellation in the milky-way, between Equus and the Dragon. This is fabled to be the swan into which Jupiter transformed himself in order to deceive the virtuous Leda, wife of Tyndareus, king of Sparta. The Grecian matron, like the Jewish virgin, thus became the mother of a God.
CYGNUS, the Swan.—An ancient constellation in the Milky Way, located between the Horse and the Dragon. It's said to be the swan that Jupiter turned into to trick the virtuous Leda, the wife of Tyndareus, king of Sparta. This Grecian woman, like the Jewish virgin, ended up becoming the mother of a God.
LYRA.—A northern constellation between Hercules and Cygnus, containing a white star of the first magnitude.
LYRA.—A northern constellation located between Hercules and Cygnus, featuring a bright white star of the first magnitude.
MILKY-WAY.—Galaxy, or Via Lactia.—A broad luminous path or circle encompassing the heavens, which is easily discernible by its white appearance, from which it derives its name. It is supposed to be the blended light of innumerable fixed stars, which are not distinguishable with ordinary telescopes.
MILKY WAY.—Galaxy, or Via Lactea.—A wide, bright band or circle surrounding the sky, easily visible due to its white look, which is how it got its name. It's thought to be the combined light of countless fixed stars, which can't be seen with regular telescopes.
HYDRA, the Serpent.—A southern constellation of great length, which is drawn to represent a serpent. The Hydra is fabled to have been placed in the heavens by Apollo, to frighten the Raven from drinking.
HYDRA, the Serpent.—A long southern constellation that represents a serpent. According to legend, Apollo put Hydra in the sky to scare the Raven away from drinking.
ORION, the hunter.—A constellation of the southern hemisphere with respect to the ecliptic, but half southern and half northern with respect to the equinoctial. It is placed near the feet of the bull, and is composed of seventeen stars in the form of a sword, which has given occasion to the poets to speak of Orion's sword. He was described by the Greeks as a "mighty hunter," who for his exploits was placed in the heavens by Jupiter, between the Canis and the Lepus. He is believed by many to have been the "mighty hunter" spoken of in the bible, under the name of Nimrod. (See Gen. x: 8, 9; 1 Chron. i: 10; Micha v: 6, Job ix, 9; Amos v, 8.)
ORION, the hunter.—A constellation in the southern hemisphere regarding the ecliptic, but it spans both southern and northern skies when considering the equator. It is located near the feet of the bull and consists of seventeen stars arranged like a sword, which has inspired poets to mention Orion's sword. The Greeks referred to him as a "mighty hunter," and for his achievements, he was placed in the sky by Jupiter, positioned between Canis Major and Lepus. Many believe he is the "mighty hunter" mentioned in the Bible, known as Nimrod. (See Gen. x: 8, 9; 1 Chron. i: 10; Micha v: 6, Job ix, 9; Amos v, 8.)
PERSEUS.—This constellation is named from Perseus, the son of Jupiter by Danae, who was translated into the heavens by the assistance of Minerva, for having released Andromeda from her confinement on the rock to which she was chained. He is represented in the preceding illustration holding a drawn sword in his right hand and in his left the head of Medusa, the Gorgon, whose terrifying appearance changed all who beheld her into stone, and whom he had destroyed with the assistance of the wings he had borrowed from Mercury, the helmet from Pluto, the sword from Vulcan, and the shield from Minerva.
PERSEUS.—This constellation is named after Perseus, the son of Jupiter and Danae, who was taken up to the heavens with Minerva's help for rescuing Andromeda from the rock where she was chained. In the illustration above, he is shown holding a drawn sword in his right hand and in his left the head of Medusa, the Gorgon, whose frightening appearance turned anyone who looked at her into stone. He defeated her with the help of wings he borrowed from Mercury, a helmet from Pluto, a sword from Vulcan, and a shield from Minerva.
JOSEPH'S STABLE; AURIGA, the Wagoner:—A northern constellation between Perseus and Gemini, represented by the figure of an old man supporting a goat. He is said to have been taken to heaven by Jupiter after the invention of wagons.
JOSEPH'S STABLE; AURIGA, the Wagoner:—A northern constellation between Perseus and Gemini, depicted by the image of an old man holding up a goat. It's said that he was taken to heaven by Jupiter after he invented wagons.
URSA MAJOR, the Bear.—One of the prominent northern constellations, situated near the north pole. It contains the stars called the Dipper. Ursa Minor contains the pole-star, which is shown in the extremity of the tail of the bear.
URSA MAJOR, the Bear.—One of the most noticeable northern constellations, located close to the north pole. It includes the stars known as the Dipper. Ursa Minor has the pole star, which is located at the tip of the bear's tail.
ANDROMEDA.—A northern constellation, represented by a woman chained; as, according to Grecian fable, Andromeda, the daughter of Cassiopia, was bound to a rock by the Nereides, and afterwards released by Perseus. Minerva changed her into a constellation after her death, and placed her in the heavens.
ANDROMEDA.—A northern constellation depicted as a woman in chains; as, according to Greek mythology, Andromeda, the daughter of Cassiopeia, was tied to a rock by the Nereids, and later saved by Perseus. After her death, Minerva transformed her into a constellation and placed her in the sky.
DRACO OR DRAGON.—A northern constellation, supposed to represent the Dragon that guarded the Hesperian fruit, and was killed by Hercules. It is said that Juno took it up to heaven and placed it among the constellations.
DRACO OR DRAGON.—A northern constellation, thought to represent the Dragon that guarded the Hesperian fruit and was killed by Hercules. It’s said that Juno brought it up to the sky and placed it among the constellations.
BOOTIS, the Ox driver: so called because this constellation seems to follow the Great Bear as the driver follows his oxen. Bootis is represented as grasping in his right hand a sickle and in his left a club, and is fabled to have been Icarius, who was transported to heaven because he was a great cultivator of the vine; for when Bootes rises the works of ploughing and cultivation go forward.
BOOTIS, the Ox driver: named this way because this constellation appears to follow the Great Bear, just like a driver follows his oxen. Bootis is shown holding a sickle in his right hand and a club in his left, and it's said that he was Icarius, who was taken to heaven because he was an exceptional grape farmer; for when Bootes rises, farming and cultivation begin.
CORONA BOREALIS. Northern Crown.—One of the old northern constellations, between Hercules and Bootes.
CORONA BOREALIS. Northern Crown.—One of the ancient northern constellations, located between Hercules and Bootes.
CORONA AUSTRALIS—Southern Crown.—One of the old constellations in the southern hemisphere, between Sagittarius and Scorpio. The Corona were fabled to be Menippe and Metioche, two daughters of Orion, who sacrificed themselves at the suggestion of an oracle, to protect Boeotia, their native country, from the ravages of a pestilence: it being the belief of idolatrous nations that an angry god could be propitiated by human sacrifices, and that the death of the innocent might atone for the sins of the guilty. The deities of Hades were astonished, it is said, at the patriotism and devotion of these Grecian maidens, who had so generously and uselessly sacrificed their lives. After their death two stars were seen to issue from the altars that still smoked with their blood, and these stars were placed in the heavens in the form of a crown or coronet.
CORONA AUSTRALIS—Southern Crown.—One of the ancient constellations in the southern hemisphere, located between Sagittarius and Scorpio. The Corona represented Menippe and Metioche, two daughters of Orion, who sacrificed themselves at the suggestion of an oracle to protect Boeotia, their home, from a devastating plague. It was believed by idolatrous nations that an angry god could be appeased through human sacrifices, and that the death of the innocent might atone for the sins of the guilty. The gods of Hades were reportedly amazed by the patriotism and devotion of these Greek maidens, who had selflessly and pointlessly given their lives. After their death, two stars were seen to emerge from the altars that still bore traces of their blood, and these stars were placed in the sky in the shape of a crown or coronet.
CEPHEUS AND CASSIOPIA.—One of the old asterism in the northern hemisphere, near the pole. According to Grecian fables, Cassiopia and her husband Cepheus, king of Etheopia, were placed among the constellations to witness the punishment inflicted on their daughter, Andromeda.
CEPHEUS AND CASSIOPIA.—One of the ancient star groups in the northern hemisphere, close to the North Pole. According to Greek mythology, Cassiopeia and her husband Cepheus, the king of Ethiopia, were placed among the constellations to witness the punishment imposed on their daughter, Andromeda.
TRIANGULARIUM.—A name for both one of the old and new constellations in the northern hemisphere, between Andromeda and Aries.
TRIANGULARIUM.—A name for both an old and a new constellation in the northern hemisphere, located between Andromeda and Aries.
SERPENTARIUS, called Ophiucus, is a constellation in the northern hemisphere, between Scorpio and Hercules.
SERPENTARIUS, also known as Ophiucus, is a constellation in the northern hemisphere, located between Scorpio and Hercules.
HERCULES, one of the old northern constellations. In Grecian mythology it was taught and believed that Hercules, the Theban, was born of a human mother and an immortal father, like other so-called saviours of mankind. His mother, the fair Alcmena, wife of Amphitryon, having found favor in the eyes of the god Jupiter, soon fell an unwilling victim to his celestial wiles. The life of the infant Hercules, born of this unnatural union, was threatened by the jealous Juno, the same as the life of the infant Jesus was threatened by the tyrant Herod. Like Jesus, Hercules devoted his life to the benefit of the human race, and like Jesus he was also worshipped after his death as a God in heaven. He is shown in the astrological chart, enveloped in the skin of the lion he has slain, with his club upraised, and his foot placed threateningly above the head of the Dragon, as if about to fulfill the scriptural prophecy, that "the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head."
HERCULES, one of the ancient northern constellations. In Greek mythology, it is said that Hercules, the Theban, was born of a human mother and an immortal father, like other so-called saviors of humanity. His mother, the beautiful Alcmena, wife of Amphitryon, became an unwilling victim of the god Jupiter’s celestial charms. The life of the infant Hercules, born from this unnatural union, was threatened by the jealous Juno, just as the life of the infant Jesus was threatened by the tyrant Herod. Like Jesus, Hercules dedicated his life to benefiting humanity, and similarly, he was worshipped as a God in heaven after his death. He is depicted in the astrological chart, wrapped in the skin of the lion he has killed, with his club raised and his foot menacingly placed over the head of the Dragon, as if about to fulfill the scriptural prophecy that "the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head."
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!