may be seen the absurdity of Hobbes's scheme of Politics, who, for the sake of the Magistrate, was for eradicating Religion.. But the ancients knew better; and so too did some of the moderns *. The question then is, whether these pretensions of the ancient Lawgivers were feigned in the first intention, for the sake of Society or of Religion? For it is no question, but that what we here shew was contrived by the Magistrate for the service of Religion, was done ultimately for the sake of Civil Government. Or in other words, the question, I say, is, Whether this pretence to inspiration was made to establish a civil or a religious Society? If a civil; the ends aimed at must be the reception of his policy, or provision for its perpetuity. I speak not here of that third end, the securing a veneration, for them, to posterity; and for a good reason, because this is the very thing I contend for; such veneration being only to be procured by the influence of Religion; the peculiar mode of which, the pretended inspiration introduces. The ends then in question, are reception for the policy; or provision for the perpetual duration of it. 1. For the reception, there would be small need of this expedient. 1. Civil laws are seen by all to be so necessary for the well-being of every individual, that one can hardly conceive any need of the belief of divine command or extraordinary assistance to bring men to embrace a scheme for associating, or • Et non è cosa piu necessaria à parere d'havere che questa ultima qualita [religione] perche gli huomini in universale giudicano piu a gli occhi che alle mani, perché tocca à vedere a ciascuno a sentire à pochi. Machiavel del Principe, c. 18. to to manifest the right they have of so doing. For (as the great Geographer says) Man was born with this inclination to associate. It is an appetite common both to Greeks and Barbarians: for, being by nature a civil animal, he lives readily under one common policy or law*. Besides several of these Legislators gave laws to a willing people, on the strength of their personal character of virtue and wisdom; and were called upon to that office, in which nothing was wanting to beget the necessary veneration to him who discharged it. And though it might possibly have happened to a people to be so far sunk into brutality, as to be disinclined towards the recovery of a reasonable nature, like those with whom it is said Orpheus had to deal; who (being savages, without the knowledge of morality or law) reduced them into society, by recommending to them piety to the Gods, and instructing them in the ways of superstition †: yet this was not the case of the generality of those with whom these Lawgivers were concerned and therefore if we would assign a cause of this pretence to revelation as extensive as the fact, it must be that which is here given. But, 2dly, we find, that where Religion was previously settled, no inspiration was pretended. On this account neither Draco nor Solon, Lawgivers of Athens, laid claim to any for they found Religion well secured by the institutions of Triptolemus and Ion. And we know, • Πέφυκε γὰρ ἔτω. Καὶ κοινόν ἐςι τῦτο καὶ τοῖς Ἕλλησι καὶ τοῖς Βαρβά ρούς· Πολιτικοὶ γὰρ ὄντις, ἀπὸ προσάγματα κοινα ζῶσιν. Strabo, Geogr. 1. xvi. Edit. Casaub. p. 524. lin. 16. * Ότι θηριώδεις ὅνας τὰς ἀνθρώπες, καὶ ἔτε ἔθη, ὅτε νόμως, εἰδότας εἰς δεισιδαιμονίαν ἀγαγῶν, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸ εὐσεβεῖν παρακαλέσας. Heraclit. de Incred. c. 23. that, that, had pretended inspiration been only, or principally, for the easier introduction and reception of civil policy, the sanguinary laws of Draco had stood in more need of the sanction of a revelation, than any other of antiquity. Indeed, Maximus Tyrius goes so far as to say, that Draco and Solon prescribed nothing in their laws, concerning the Gods, and their worship*; which, if true, would make as much against us, on the other hand. But in this he is mistaken. Porphyry quotes an express law of Draco's concerning the mode of divine worship. Let the Gods and our own country heroes be publicly worshipped, according to the established rites; when privately, according to every man's abilities, with terms of the greatest regard and reverence; with the first fruits of their labours, and with annual libations ↑. Andocides ‡ quotes another of Solon, which provides for the due and regular celebration of the ELEUSINIAN MYSTERIES. Athenæus does the same. And how considerable a part these were of divine worship, and of what importance to the very essence of religion, we shall see hereafter. 2. As to a provision for the perpetuity of national laws and institutions; This entered not into the inten * Πὲ γὰρ ̓Αθηναίοις συνιέναι,-τὶ μὲν τὸ δαιμόνιον, πῶς δὲ τιμητέον ; * γὰρ τῷ κυάμῳ λαχόντες δικαςαι χίλιοι ταῦτα ἐξελάζεσιν, ἐδὶ Σόλων τι ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν γέγραφεν, ἐδὲ οἱ Δράκολο. σεμνοί νόμοι. Dissert. xxxix. p. 383. Edit. Lugd. 1630, 8vo. † Θεὸς τιμᾶν καὶ Ἥρωας ἐχωρίας ἐν κοινῷ, ἑπομένως νόμοις πατρίοις, ἰδία κατὰ δύναμιν σὺν εὐφημίᾳ καὶ ἀπαςχαῖς καρπῶν, καὶ πελάνοις ἐπελείοις. De Abst. 1. iv. § 22. (Edit. Cantabr. 1655, 8vo.) according to the emendations of Petit and Valentinus.-The law is thus introduced, Θεσμὸς αἰώνιΘ· τοῖς ̓Αλθίδα νεμομένοις, ΚύριΘ τὸν ἅπαλα χρόνον. Orat. Пg Murgia, apud Decem Orat. tion tion of the old Greek legislation; nor, if it had, could it have been obtained by giving them a divine original. Amongst the wild projects of the barbarous eastern policy, one might find, perhaps, something like a system of immutable laws; but the Grecian Lawgivers were too well acquainted with the nature of man, the genius of Society, and the vicissitude of human things, ever to conceive so ridiculous a design. Besides, the Egyptian legislation, from which they borrowed all their civil wisdom, went upon very different principles. It directed public laws to be occasionally accommodated to the variety of times, places, and manners. But had they aimed at perpetuity, the belief of a divine imposition would not have served the turn; for it never entered their heads, that civil institutes became irrevocable by their issuing from the mouth of a God; or that the divinity of the sanction altered the mutability of their nature: the honour of this discovery is due to certain modern writers, who have found out that divine authority reduces all its commands to one and the same species. We have a notable instance of this in the conduct of Lycurgus. He was the only exception to the general method, and singular in the idle attempt of making his laws perpetual. For his whole system being forced and unnatural, the sense of that imperfection, it is probable, put him upon the expedient of tying them on an unwilling people. But then he did not apply divine authority to this purpose; for, though he pretended to inspiration like the rest, and had his revelations from Apollo, yet he well knew that the authority of Apollo would not be thought sufficient to change the nature of positive laws: and therefore he bound the People by an oath, to observe his policy till his return from a voyage, which he had determined beforehand never to bring to that period. Having shewn that there was no need of a pretence to revelation, for the establishment of civil Policy, it follows, that it was made for the sake of Religion. SECT. III. THE SECOND step the Legislators took to propagate and establish Religion, was to make the general doctrine of a Providence (with which they prefaced and introduced their laws) the great sanction of their institutes. To this, Plutarch, in his tract against Colotes the Epicurean, refers, where he observes, that Colotes himself praises it; that, in civil Institutes, the first and most important article is the belief of the Gods. And so it was (says he) that, with vows, ogths, divinations, and omens, Lycurgus sanctified the Lacedemonians, Numa the Romans, ancient Ion the Athenians, and Deucalion all the Greeks in general: And by HOPES and FEARS kept up amongst them the awe and reverence of religion*. On this practice was formed the precept of the celebrated Archytas the Pythagorean; which sect, as we shall see hereafter, gave itself up more professedly to • Αλλὰ μὲν ἧς γε καὶ Κολώτης ἐπαινεῖ διατάξεως τῶν νόμων, πρῶτον ἐστιν ἡ περὶ θεῶν δόξα, καὶ μέγισον. ᾧ καὶ Λυκέργος Λακεδαιμονίας, και Νύμας Ρωμαίος, καὶ Ἴων ὁ παλαιὸς ̓Αθηναίες, καὶ Δευκαλίων Ἕλληνας ὁμε του πάλας καθωσίωσαν εὐχαῖς, καὶ ὅρκοις, καὶ μαντεύμασι, καὶ φήμαις, ἐμπαθεῖς πρὸς τὰ θεῖα δι ̓ ἐλπίδων ἅμα καὶ φόβων καλαςήσαλες. Edit. Francof fol. 1599. p. 1225. D. |