A debt is due me neither new nor small,[2]

where you interpret ὀφέλλεται to mean _increases_. And again, when he

calls the night quick and sharp, you will needs have him to mean by

this word, that the shadow of the earth being round groweth sharp at

the end like the body of a cone. Again, who is he that, denying small

things to be the signs and proofs of great, will allow what physicians

tell us, namely, that we may prognosticate a pestilent summer when

great numbers of spiders are seen, and also when the fig leaves in the

spring resemble crows’ feet? And who will permit us to measure the

greatness of the sun’s body by a pint or gallon of water, or will grant

that a small table like a tile, making a sharp angle leaning on a plane

superficies, can show the just measure of the elevation of the pole

from the horizon which is ever to be seen in our hemisphere? And this

is what the priests may allege in favor of what they affirm; so that we

must offer other arguments against them, if we will maintain the course

of the sun to be fixed and unchangeable, as we here hold it to be.

4. Not only of the sun, cried out aloud the philosopher Ammonius, who

was there present, but also of the whole heaven; for, if the years

really decrease, the passage which the sun makes from one tropic to

another must of necessity be shortened, so that it shall not take up

so great a part of the horizon as the mathematicians do imagine, but

become less and shorter as the southern part approaches the northern.

Whence consequently the summer will fall out to be shorter and the

temperature of the air colder, by reason of the sun’s turning more

inwardly, and describing greater parallels within the signs of the

tropics than it now does in the longest day in summer and the shortest

in winter. It would moreover also follow, that the pins of the dials

in the city of Syene will no longer appear shadowless at the summer

solstice, and some fixed stars will run under the horizon, and others

against one another, for want of room. And should it be alleged that

all the other celestial bodies keep their courses and ordinary motions

without any change, they will never be able to cite any cause which

shall hasten his motion alone above all the rest; but they will be

forced to confound and disorder all evident appearances which do

clearly show themselves to our eyes, and especially those of the moon.

So that there will be no need of observing these measures of oil to

know the difference of the years; because the eclipses will do this, if

there be any, seeing the sun does oft meet with the moon, and the moon

as oft falls within the shadow of the earth; so that we need not any

longer hold arguing on this matter.

But, says Cleombrotus, I myself have seen the measure of the oil, for

they have shown it several years; but that of the present is far less

than that of ancient times. Unto which Ammonius answered: How comes it

to pass then that other people who have an inextinguishable fire in

veneration, and have preserved it even time out of mind, could never

remark this? And granting what you say concerning this measure of oil,

is it not better to attribute the cause of this to some coldness or

dampness of air; or, on the contrary, to some heat or dryness, by which

the fire in the lamp being weakened needs not so much nourishment, and

could not consume the same quantity? For it is well known that fire

burns better in winter than in summer, its heat being drawn in and

enclosed by the cold; whereas in great heats and dry weather it is

weakened, lying dead and languishing without any strength; and if it be

kindled in the sunshine, its efficacy is small, for it hardly catches

hold of the wood, and slowly consumes the fuel But we may with greater

probability attribute the circumstance of the oil to the oil itself;

for oil formerly was of less nutriment, as squeezed out of olives

which grew upon young trees; but being since better ordered, as coming

of plants more fully grown, it must needs be more effectual to the

nourishing and keeping of the fire. And this is the best way of saving

the credit of the Ammonian priests in their supposition, which will not

endure the test of reason.

5. Ammonius having finished his discourse, I pray, said I, Cleombrotus,

give us some account of the oracle; for it ever has been in great

esteem in those parts till these times, wherein its divinity and

reputation seem to be decayed. Unto which Cleombrotus making no answer,

but looking down to the ground, Demetrius took up the discourse,

saying: You need not busy yourself in enquiries after the oracles in

those parts, seeing we find the oracles in these parts to fail or (to

speak better) to be totally silenced, except two or three; so that it

would be more to the purpose to search into the cause of this silence.

But we are more concerned in Boeotia, which, although formerly famous

throughout all the world for oracles, is now like a fountain dried

up, so that at present we find them dumb. For at this day there is no

place in all Boeotia, unless in the town of Lebadea, where one can draw

out any divination, all other parts being become silent and forsaken.

Yet in the time of the war against the Persians, the oracle of Apollo

Ptoüs was in request, as also that of Amphiaraus; for both of them

were tried. The priest of Apollo Ptoüs, who was always wont to return

the oracle’s answers in Aeolic Greek, spake to him that was sent from

the barbarians in their own barbarous language, so that none of the

assistants understood a word; whereby they were given to understand,

that it was not lawful for the barbarians to have the use of the Greek

tongue to serve their pleasure. And as to that of Amphiaraus, the

person that was sent thither, having fallen asleep in the sanctuary,

dreamed that he heard the minister of that God bidding him be gone out

of the temple and saying that the God forbade him to remain, and that

he presently shoved him out thence with both his hands; and seeing he

still stopped by the way, he took up a great stone and struck him with

it on the head. And what was this but a prediction and denunciation of

what was to come to pass? For Mardonius was not long after defeated

by Pausanias, who was no king, but only the king of Lacedaemonia’s

guardian and minister, and the then lieutenant of the Grecians’ army,

and was with a stone flung out of a sling felled to the ground, just

as the Lydian servant thought he was struck in his dream. In the same

manner also flourished the oracle near Tegyra, where it is said Apollo

himself was born; and in effect, there are two streams that glide

near the place, one of which is still called the Palm-tree, and the

other the Olive-tree. And at this oracle, in the time of the Medes’

war, Echecrates being then the prophet, the God Apollo answered by his

mouth, that the honor and profit of this war would fall to the Greeks’

share. And during the Peloponnesian war, the Delians having been driven

out of their island, they had word brought them from the oracle of

Delphi, that they should search for the place where Apollo was born,

and there make some certain sacrifice. At which they marvelling, and

demanding whether Apollo was born elsewhere than in their parts, the

prophetess Pythia moreover told them that a crow would show them the

place. These deputies from the Delians, in their return home, passed by

chance through the city of Chaeronea, where they heard their hostess

at the inn talking to some travellers about the oracle of Tegyra, to

which they were going, and at their parting they heard them say to

her Adieu, Dame Corone.[3] By this they comprehended the meaning of

Pythia’s answer; and having offered their sacrifices at Tegyra, they

were soon after restored and established in their own country. Yet

there have been given later answers from these oracles than those you

have mentioned; but now they have wholly ceased, so that it will not be

besides the matter, seeing we are near by Apollo Pythius, to enquire

after the cause of this change.

6. Thus discoursing together, we left the temple, and were come as far

as the Cnidian Hall, where entering in, we found our friends which we

looked for, being set down in expectation of our coming. All the rest

were at leisure, by reason of the time of the day, and did nothing

but anoint their bodies, or gaze on the wrestlers who were exercising

themselves. Whereupon Demetrius laughing said to them: It seems to me

that you are not discoursing of any matter of great consequence, for I

see you labor not under deep thoughts. It is true, replied Heracleon

the Megarean, we are not a disputing, whether the verb Βάλλω in his

future tense loses one of his λλ, nor from what positive or primitive

are formed or derived these two comparatives, χεῖρον and βέλτιον, and

these two superlatives, χείριστον and βέλτιστον; for such questions

as these make people knit their brows. A man may discourse of all

other matters, especially of philosophy, without these frowning angry

looks that put the by-standers into a fright. Receive us then, said

Demetrius, into your company, and, if you please, the question too

which has been now agitated amongst us, which does well agree with the

place where we are, and, relating to the God Apollo, concerns therefore

all that are here; but, however, let us have no knitting of the brows

or frowning looks.

7. Being then all set down close together, and Demetrius having

proposed the question we were upon, Didymus the Cynic philosopher,

surnamed Planetiades, getting upon his feet and striking the ground

two or three times with his stick, cried out: O Jupiter! what a hard

question do you offer! What a difficult matter do you propose! For

is it any wonder, the whole world wallowing in wickedness, and Shame

and Retributive Justice having departed from men (as Hesiod long ago

predicted), that the Gods should no longer suffer their oracles to be

among them, as heretofore? For my part, I wonder there is so much as

one left, and that Hercules or some other of the Gods has not long

since plucked up and carried away the tripod whereon are offered such

base and villainous questions to Apollo; some coming to him as a

mere paltry astrologer, to try his skill and impose on him by subtle

questions, others asking him about treasures buried under ground,

others about incestuous marriages. So that Pythagoras is here soon

convinced of his mistake, when he affirmed that the time when men are

honestest is when they present themselves before the Gods; for those

filthy passions, which they dare not discover before a grave mortal

man, they scruple not to utter to Apollo. He had gone further, if

Heracleon had not pulled him by the sleeve; and myself, who was better

acquainted than any in the company besides, thus spake to him: Cease,

friend Planetiades, from angering Apollo against thee, seeing he is

sharp and choleric and not easily reconciled; although, as Pindar says.

Mortals to favor, Heaven has him enjoined.

And whether he be the sun, or the master of the sun and father of it,

being above all visible natures, it is not to be supposed he disdains

to hold any further intercourse with men at this time, seeing he gives

them their birth, nourishment, subsistence, and reason. Neither is it

credible that the Divine Providence (who, like a kind and indulgent

mother, produces and conserves all things for our use) should show

herself malevolent only in the matter of divination, or deprive us

of it having once given it us; as if, when there were more oracles

than there are now in the world, men were not then as wicked. But let

us make a Pythian truce (as they say) with vice, which you are always

sharply reprehending, and sit down here together to try whether we can

find out any other cause of the ceasing of oracles; and let me only

advise you, by the way, to remember that you keep this God propitious

and move him not to wrath. Planetiades was so moved with these

speeches, that he went away immediately, without speaking a word.

8. The company remaining a while in silence, Ammonius, addressing

himself to me, said: Prithee, Lamprias, let us take care of what we

say, and not be rash in our assertions; for we do not well when we make

the God to be little or no cause of these oracles ceasing; for he that

attributes the failing of them to any other cause than the will and

decree of the God gives occasion to suspect him of believing that they

never were nor are now by his disposition, but by some other means.

For there is no other more excellent and noble cause and power which

can destroy and abolish divination, if it be the work of a God. And

as for Planetiades’s discourse, it does not at all please me, as well

for the inequality and inconstancy which he attributes to the God, as

for other reasons. For he makes him sometimes rejecting and detesting

vice, and sometimes admitting and receiving it, just as a king, or

rather a tyrant, who drives wicked people out of one gate, and receives

them through another, and negotiates with them. But the greatest and

most perfect work, that will admit of no additions, is that which

agrees best with the dignity of the Gods. By supposing this, we may

in my judgment affirm that in this common scarcity of men, occasioned

by the former wars and seditions over all the world, Greece has most

suffered; so that she can with much difficulty raise three thousand

men, which number the single city of Megara sent heretofore to Plataea.

Wherefore if the God now forsakes several oracles which anciently

were frequented, what is this but a sign that Greece is at this time

very much dispeopled, in comparison of what it was heretofore; and he

that will affirm this shall not want for arguments. For of what use

would the oracle be now, which was heretofore at Tegyra or at Ptoum?

For scarcely shall you meet, in a whole day’s time, with so much as

a herdsman or shepherd in those parts. We find also in writing, that

this place of divination where we now are, and which is as ancient

as any, and as famous and renowned as any in all Greece, was for a

considerable time deserted and inaccessible, by means of a dangerous

creature that resorted hither, namely a dragon. Yet those that have

written this did not well comprehend the occasion of the oracle’s

ceasing; for the dragon did not make the place solitary, but rather the

solitude of the place occasioned the dragon to repair hither. Since

that time, when Greece became populous and full of towns, they had two

women prophetesses, who went down one after another into the cave.

Moreover, there was a third chosen, if need were; whereas now there is

but one, and yet we do not complain of it, because she is sufficient.

And therefore we do not well to repine at Providence, seeing there is

no want of divinations, where all that come are satisfied in whatever

they desire to know. Homer tells us, Agamemnon had nine heralds, and

yet with these could he hardly keep in order the Greeks, they being so

many in number; but you will find here that the voice of one man is

sufficient to be heard all over the theatre. The oracles then spake

by more organs or voices, because there were then a greater number of

men. So that we should think it strange, if the God should suffer the

prophetical divination to be spilt and run to waste like water, or

everywhere to resound, as in solitary fields we hear the rocks echoing

the voices of shepherds and bleating cattle.

9. Ammonius having said these words, and I returning no answer,

Cleombrotus took up the discourse, and addressed himself to me. Hast

thou then, said he, confessed that it is the God who makes and unmakes

oracles? Not I, said I; for I maintain that God was never the cause

of taking away or abolishing any oracle or divination; but, on the

contrary, whereas he produces and prepares several things for our use,

so Nature leads them into corruption, and not seldom into a privation

of their whole being. Or, to speak better, matter, which is itself

privation or negation, often flies away, and dissolves what a more

excellent being than herself had wrought. So that I am of opinion,

there are other causes which obscure and extinguish these prophetic

spirits. For though God does give to men several good and excellent

things, yet he gives to none of them the power to exist eternally; for,

though the Gods never die, yet their gifts do, as Sophocles speaks. It

were then well becoming philosophers who exercise themselves in the

study of Nature and the first matter, to enquire into the existence,

property, and tendency of those things, but to leave the origin and

first cause to God, as is most reasonable. For it is a very childish

and silly thing, to suppose that the God himself does, like the spirits

speaking in the bowels of ventriloquists (which were anciently called

Euryclees, and now Pythons), enter into the bodies of the prophets, and

speak by their mouths and voices, as fit instruments for that purpose.

For he that thus mixes God in human affairs has not that respect and

reverence which is due to so great a majesty, as being ignorant of his

power and virtue.

10. Cleombrotus then answered: You say very well; but it is a hard

matter to comprehend and define how far this providence does extend

itself. They seem both alike faulty to me, who will have him simply

the cause of nothing at all in the world, and who will have him to be

concerned in all things; for both of these are run into extremes. But

as those say well who hold that Plato, having invented the element

on which spring up the qualities,—which we sometimes call the first

matter, and sometimes Nature,—has thereby delivered the philosophers

from several great difficulties; so it seems to me, that those who have

ranked the genus of Daemons between that of Gods and men have solved

greater doubts and difficulties, as having found the knot which does,

as it were, join and hold together our society and communication with

them. It is uncertain whence this opinion arose, whether from the

ancient Magi by Zoroaster, or from Thrace by Orpheus, or from Egypt,

or Phrygia; as may be conjectured from the sight of the sacrifices

which are made in both countries, where amongst their holy and divine

ceremonies there is seen a mixture of mortality and mourning. And as

to the Greeks, Homer has indifferently used these two names, terming

sometimes the Gods Daemons, and other whiles Daemons Gods. But

Hesiod was the first that did best and most distinctly lay down four

reasonable natures, the Gods, the Daemons (being many in number, and

good in their kind), heroes, and men; for the Demi-gods are reckoned

amongst heroes. Others say, there is a transmutation of bodies as well

as of souls; and that, just as we see of the earth is engendered water,

of the water the air, and of the air fire, the nature of the substance

still ascending higher, so good spirits always change for the best,

being transformed from men into heroes, and from heroes into Daemons;

and from Daemons, by degrees and in a long space of time, a few souls

being refined and purified come to partake of the nature of the

Divinity. But there are some that cannot contain themselves, but rove

about till they be entangled into mortal bodies, where they live meanly

and obscurely, like smoke.

11. And moreover, Hesiod imagines that the Daemons themselves, after

certain revolutions of time, do at length die. For, introducing a Nymph

speaking, he marks the time wherein they expire:

Nine ages of men in their flower doth live

The railing crow; four times the stags surmount

The life of crows; to ravens doth Nature give

A threefold age of stags, by true account;

One phoenix lives as long as ravens nine.

But you, fair Nymphs, as the daughters verily

Of mighty Jove and of Nature divine,

The phoenix’s years tenfold do multiply.

Now those which do not well understand what the poet means by this word

γενεά (_age_) do cause this computation of time to amount to a great

number of years. For the word means a year; so that the total sum makes

but 9720 years, which is the space of the age of Daemons. And there are

several mathematicians who make it shorter than this. Pindar himself

does not make it longer when he says, Destiny has given Nymphs an equal

life with trees; and therefore they are called Hamadryades, because

they spring up and die with oaks. He was going on, when Demetrius

interrupting him thus said: How is it possible, Cleombrotus, that you

should maintain that a year was called by this poet the age of a man,

seeing it is not the space of his flower and youth, nor of his old age?

For there are divers readings of this place, some reading ἡβώντων,

others γηρώντων,—one signifying _flourishing_, the other _aged_. Now

those that understand hereby “flourishing” reckon thirty years for the

age of man’s life, according to the opinion of Heraclitus; this being

the space of time in which a father has begotten a son who then is apt

and able to beget another. And those that read “aged” allow to the age

of man a hundred and eight years, saying that fifty-four years are

just the half part of a man’s life, which number consists of unity,

the first two plane numbers, two squares, and two cubes (i.e. 1 + 2

+ 3 + 4 + 9 + 8 + 27); which numbers Plato himself has appropriated

to the procreation of the soul. And it seems also that Hesiod by these

words intimated the consummation of the world by fire; at which time it

is likely the Nymphs, with the rivers, marshes, and woods where they

inhabit, shall be consumed.

Such as in woods, or grotto’s shady cell,

Near sacred springs and verdant meadows dwell.[4]

12. I have heard, says Cleombrotus, this alleged by several, and find

that the Stoical conflagration hath intruded itself not only upon the

works of Heraclitus and Orpheus, but also upon Hesiod’s, imposing such

meanings on their words as they never thought of. But I cannot approve

of the consummation of the world which they maintain, nor of the other

impossible matters; and especially what they say about the crow and the

stag would force us to believe in the most excessive numbers. Moreover,

the year, containing in itself the beginning and end of all things

which the seasons bring and the earth produces, may, in my opinion, be

not impertinently called the age of man. For you yourselves confess

that Hesiod does somewhere call the life of man γενεά (_age_). What

say you, does he not? Which Demetrius confessing, he proceeded in

this manner: It is also certain that we call the vessels whereby we

measure things by the names of the things measured in them; as a pint,

a quart, or a bushel. As we then call a unit a number, though it be

but the least part and measure and the beginning of a number; so has

he called a year the age of man, because it is the measure wherewith

it is measured. As for those numbers which those others describe, they

be not of such singularity and importance. But the sum of 9920 is thus

composed. The four numbers arising in order from one, being added

together and multiplied by four, amount to forty; this forty being

tripled five times makes up the total of the forecited number. But as

to that it is not necessary to enter into a debate with Demetrius; for

whether it be a short or a long time, certain or uncertain, wherewith

Hesiod limits the soul of a Daemon and the life of a Demi-god, either

of those will prove, by ancient and evident testimonies, that there are

natures neuter and mean, and as it were in the confines of the Gods and

men, subject to mortal passions and necessary changes; which natures,

according to the tradition and example of our predecessors, it is

fitting we should call Daemons, giving them all due honor.

13. To which purpose Xenocrates, one of the familiar friends of Plato,

was wont to allege the example of triangles, which agree very well with

the subject; for that triangle which has equal sides and equal angles

he compared unto the divine and immortal nature; and that which has all

three unequal, to the human and mortal nature; and that which has two

equal and one unequal, to the nature of Daemons, which is endued with

the passions and perturbations of the mortal nature, and the force and

power of the divine. Even Nature has set before us sensible figures

and resemblance of this; of the Gods, the sun and the stars; of mortal

men, the comets, flashings in the night, and shooting-stars. And this

similitude is taken up by Euripides, when he saith:

He that but now was fleshy, plump, and gay,

As a fall’n star his glories melt away;

Like that extinguished on the ground he lies,

Breathing his soul into the ambient skies.

And for a mixed body representing the nature of Daemons, we have the

moon; which some, observing it to be subject to increase and decrease

and wholly to disappear, have thought very agreeable to the mutable

condition of Daemons; and for this reason they have termed her a

terrestrial star, others Olympic earth, and others the inheritance and

possession of Hecate, both heavenly and earthly. As one then that

should take from the world the air, and remove it from between the

moon and the earth, would dissolve the continuation and composition

of the universe, by leaving an empty place in the midst, without any

contexture to hold the two parts together; so those that do not allow

Daemons oppose all communication and conference of the Gods with men,

seeing they destroy that nature (as Plato says) which serves as an

interpreter and messenger between them both; or else they constrain

us to perplex and confound all things together, by mixing the divine

nature with human passions, and plucking it down from heaven, as the

women of Thessaly are said to do the moon. Even this fiction has met

with belief in some women, because Aglaonice, the daughter of Hegetor,

being skilful in astrology, made the vulgar believe, whenever the moon

was eclipsed, that by means of some charms and enchantments she brought

it down from heaven. But as to us, let us not think there are any

oracles or divinations without some divinity, or that the Gods are not

pleased with sacrifices, and our services, and other ceremonies. And,

on the other hand, let us not think that God is present in them, or

employs himself personally about them; but rather believe that he does

commit them to his officers, the Daemons, who are the spies and scouts

of the Gods, wandering and circuiting about at their commands,—some

beholding and ordering the sacred ceremonies and oblations offered

to the Gods, others being employed to revenge and punish the high

misdemeanors and enormous injustices of men. There are, moreover,

others, to whom Hesiod gives a very venerable name, calling them the

distributers of riches and donors of largesses among mortals; for

the Gods have allowed them the privilege, and granted them a royal

commission to see them duly distributed. He informs us here, by the

way, that to be beneficent and liberal of favors is the proper office

of a king. For there is a difference of virtue between these Daemons,

as much as between men. For there are some of them in whom still

there are some small remains (though weak and scarcely discernible)

of the sensitive and irrational soul, which, like a small quantity of

excrements and superfluities, stay still behind. Others there are, in

whom there abideth a greater measure of these gross humors, the marks

and traces of which are to be seen in many places, in the odd and

singular ceremonies and sacrifices and the strange fables which prevail.

14. As to the mysteries and secret ceremonies, by which we may more

clearly than by any other means understand the nature of Daemons, let

me keep a religious silence, as Herodotus says. But as to the certain

feasts and direful sacrifices which are held as unfortunate and

mournful days, and are celebrated by eating raw flesh and tearing the

skin with the nails, or days wherein they fast and smite their breasts,

and in several places utter filthy and dishonest words during the

sacrifices,

Wagging their heads in frantic wise,

With strange alarms and hideous cries,—

I will never think these done on any of the Gods’ account, but rather

to avert, mollify, and appease the wrath and fury of some bad Daemons.

For it is not likely there ever was a God that expected or required men

to be sacrificed to him, as has been anciently done, or who received

such kind of sacrifices with approbation. Neither must we imagine it

was for nothing, that kings and great men have delivered their own

children to be sacrificed, or that they sacrificed them themselves

with their own hands; but they intended hereby to avert and appease

the malice and rancor of some evil spirits, or to satisfy the violent

and raging lusts of some, who either could not or would not enjoy them

with their bodies or by their bodies. Even as Hercules besieged the

city of Oechalia for a wench that was therein, so these powerful and

tyrannical Daemons, requiring some human soul which is still compassed

with a body, and yet not being able to satisfy their lust by the body,

do therefore bring the plague and famine into towns, raise wars and

seditions, till such time as they obtain and enjoy that which they

love. Others, on the contrary (as I remember I observed in Crete, for I

was some considerable time there) celebrate a feast in which they show

the figure of a man without a head, calling it Molus, the father of

Meriones, who, having violently laid hands on the Nymph, was afterwards

found without a head.

15. The rapes committed on boys or girls, the long voyages, flights,

banishments, and voluntary services of the Gods, which are sung by

the poets, are passions fitting to be attributed not to Gods, but to

Daemons, whose fortunes were recorded in memorial of their virtue and

power. Neither is Aeschylus in the right, when he says,

Divine Apollo banished from the sky;

nor Admetus in Sophocles, saying of a God,

My cock by crowing led him to the mill.

The divines of Delphi were far from the truth when they asserted that

there was a combat between Apollo and a Dragon about the possession of

this oracle. No less are they to blame who suffer the poets or orators

in the open theatres to act or speak of such matters; whereby they

seem to condemn those things which themselves perform in their sacred

solemnities. Philippus (for this man was an historian, and then present

in the company), wondering at what was last said, enquired what divine

solemnities they contradicted and condemned who contended one against

another in the theatres. Even those, quoth Cleombrotus, which concern

the oracle of Delphi, by which this city has lately admitted into these

ceremonies and sacrifices all the Greeks without Thermopylae, including

those that dwell as far as the vale of Tempe. For the tabernacle or

hut, which is set up every ninth year within the court-yard of this

temple, is not a representation of the Dragon’s den, but of some king

or tyrant; as likewise the assaulting of it in great silence, by the

way termed Dolonia, in which they lead hither a youth whose father

and mother are still living, with torches burning; and having set

this tabernacle on fire and overthrown the table, they run away as

fast as they are able through the doors of the temple, never looking

behind them. In fine, this boy’s wanderings, together with his servile

offices, and all the expiatory sacrifices about Tempe, seem to declare

the commission of some horrid crime in this place. For it looks silly

to affirm that Apollo, for having killed the Dragon, was forced to fly

to the farthest parts of Greece to be cleansed and purified; and that

he there made certain offerings and libations, as men do when they

design the appeasing those vindictive spirits whom we call Alastores

and Palamnaei, which is to say, the revengers of such crimes as cannot

be forgotten but must have punishment. It is true, indeed, that the

relation which I have heard touching this flight is very strange and

wonderful; but if there be any truth in it, we must not suppose it was

an ordinary and common matter which happened then about this oracle.

Yet lest I should be thought, as Empedocles says,

Starting new heads, to wander from the text,

And make the theme we have in hand perplext,

I entreat you to let me put a fit conclusion to my discourse (for

now the time requires it), and to say what several have said before

me, that when the Daemons who are appointed for the government and

superintendency of oracles do fail, the oracles must of necessity fail

too; and when they depart elsewhere, the divining powers must likewise

cease in those places; but when they return again, after a long time,

the places will begin again to speak, like musical instruments handled

by those that know how to use them.

16. Cleombrotus having said thus much, Heracleon took up the discourse,

saying: We have never an infidel among us, but are all agreed in our

opinions touching the Gods; yet let us have a care, Philippus, lest in

the heat and multiplicity of our words we unawares broach some false

doctrine that may tend to impiety. Well! but, saith Philippus, I hope

Cleombrotus has not said any thing which may occasion this caution.

His asserting (says Heracleon) that they be not the Gods who preside

over the oracles (because we are to suppose them free from all worldly

care), but Daemons, or the Gods’ officers or messengers, does not

scandalize me; but to attribute to these Daemons all the calamities,

vexations, and plagues which happen to mortal men,—snatching these

violently (we may almost say) from the verses of Empedocles,—and in

the end to make them to die like them, this, in my mind, savors of

bold presumption. Cleombrotus, having asked Philippus who this young

man was, and being informed of his name and country, proceeded in this

manner: I know very well, Heracleon, that the discourse I used may

bear an absurd construction; but there is no speaking of great matters

without laying first great foundations for the proof of one’s opinion.

But, as for your part, you are not sensible how you contradict even

that which you allow; for granting, as you do, that there be Daemons,

but not allowing them to be vicious and mortal, you cannot prove there

are any at all. For wherein do they differ from Gods, supposing they be

incorruptible and impassible and not liable to error?

17. Whilst Heracleon was musing, and studying how to answer this,

Cleombrotus went on, saying: It is not only Empedocles who affirms

there are bad Daemons, but even Plato, Xenocrates, and Chrysippus;

yea, and Democritus, when he prayed he might meet with good spirits,

which shows that he thought there were bad as well as good Daemons.

And as to their mortality, I have heard it reported from a person that

was neither fool nor knave, being Epitherses, the father of Aemilianus

the orator, whom some of you have heard declaim. This Epitherses was

my townsman and a schoolmaster, who told me that designing a voyage to

Italy, he embarked himself on a vessel well laden both with goods and

passengers. About the evening the vessel was becalmed about the Isles

Echinades, whereupon their ship drove with the tide till it was carried

near the Isles of Paxi; when immediately a voice was heard by most of

the passengers (who were then awake, and taking a cup after supper)

calling unto one Thamus, and that with so loud a voice as made all the

company amazed; which Thamus was a mariner of Egypt, whose name was

scarcely known in the ship. He returned no answer to the first calls;

but at the third he replied, Here! here! I am the man. Then the voice

said aloud to him, When you are arrived at Palodes, take care to make

it known that the great God Pan is dead. Epitherses told us, this voice

did much astonish all that heard it, and caused much arguing whether

this voice was to be obeyed or slighted. Thamus, for his part, was

resolved, if the wind permitted, to sail by the place without saying a

word; but if the wind ceased and there ensued a calm, to speak and cry

out as loud as he was able what he was enjoined. Being come to Palodes,

there was no wind stirring, and the sea was as smooth as glass.

Whereupon Thamus standing on the deck, with his face towards the land,

uttered with a loud voice his message, saying, The great Pan is dead.

He had no sooner said this, but they heard a dreadful noise, not only

of one, but of several, who, to their thinking, groaned and lamented

with a kind of astonishment. And there being many persons in the ship,

an account of this was soon spread over Rome, which made Tiberius the

Emperor send for Thamus; and he seemed to give such heed to what he

told him, that he earnestly enquired who this Pan was; and the learned

men about him gave in their judgments, that it was the son of Mercury

by Penelope. There were some then in the company who declared they had

heard old Aemilianus say as much.

18. Demetrius then related, that about Britain there were many small

and desolate islands, some of which were called the Isles of Daemons

and Demi-gods; and that he himself, at the command of the Emperor,

sailed to the nearest of those places for curiosity’s sake, where he

found few inhabitants; but that they were all esteemed by the Britains

as sacred and divine. Not long after he was arrived there, he said, the

air and the weather were very foul and tempestuous, and there followed

a terrible storm of wind and thunder; which at length ceasing, he says,

the inhabitants told him that one of the Daemons or Demi-gods was

deceased. For as a lamp, said he, while it is lighted, offends nobody

with its scent, but when it is extinguished, it sends out such a scent

as is nauseous to everybody; so these great souls, whilst they shine,

are mild and gracious, without being troublesome to anybody; but when

they draw to an end, they cause great storms and tempests, and not

seldom infect the air with contagious distempers. They say farther,

that Saturn is detained prisoner in one of those islands, and guarded

by Briareus, being in a sound sleep (for that is the device to hold him

captive), and that he has several of those Daemons for his valets and

attendants.

19. Thus then spake Cleombrotus: I could, says he, relate several such

stories as these; but it is sufficient that what has been said as yet

does not contradict the opinion of any one here. And we all know, the

Stoics believe the same as we do concerning the Daemons, and that

amongst the great company of Gods which are commonly believed, there

is but one who is eternal and immortal; all the rest, having been born

in time, shall end by death. As to the flouts and scoffing of the

Epicureans, they are not to be regarded, seeing they have the boldness

to treat divine providence with as little reverence, calling it by no

better a name than a mere whimsy and old wives’ fable. Whereas we, on

the contrary, assert that their Infinity is fabulous and ridiculous,

seeing among such endless numbers of worlds there is not one governed

by reason or divine providence, they having been all made and upheld by

chance. If we cannot forbear drolling even in matters of philosophy,

they are most to be ridiculed who bring into their disputes of natural

questions certain blind, dumb, and lifeless images, which appear they

know not where nor when, which, they say, proceed from bodies, some of

which are still living, and others long since dead and rotten. Now,

such people’s opinions as these must needs be exploded and derided by

all rational men; yet these very people shall be offended and angry at

a man’s saying there be Daemons, and that they subsist both by reason

and by Nature, and continue a long time.

20. Here Ammonius began to speak, saying: In my opinion, Theophrastus

was in the right, and spoke like a philosopher and a divine; for

whoever shall deny what he alleges must also reject many things

which may happen, though we understand not the reasons why they do

so. And granting what he offers to be true, it carries with it many

things called impossible and unreal. But as to what I have heard the

Epicureans allege against the Daemons which Empedocles brings in,—as,

that it is impossible they can be happy and long-lived if they be

bad and viciously affected, because vice in its own nature is blind

and naturally precipitates itself into such mischiefs as destroy

life,—that, I must tell you, is vain and idle. For if this reasoning

be good, it will then follow that Epicurus was a worse man than Gorgias

the sophister, and Metrodorus than Alexis the comic actor; for Alexis

lived twice as long as Metrodorus, and Gorgias a third longer than

Epicurus. For it is in another regard we say virtue is strong and vice

weak, not in reference to the continuance or dissolution of the body;

for we know there are many animals which are dull, slow, and heavy,

and many disorderly and lustful, which live longer than those that are

more sagacious and quicker of sense. And therefore they are much in the

wrong in saying the divine nature is immortal because it avoideth the

things which are ill and mischievous; for they should have supposed the

divine nature free from all possibility of falling into corruption and

alteration. But perhaps it will be thought not fair to dispute against

those that are absent; I would have therefore Cleombrotus to resume his

discourse touching the vanishing and transmigration of Daemons from one

place to another.

21. With all my heart, answered Cleombrotus; but I shall now say

something which will seem more absurd than any thing I have heretofore

offered, although it seems to be grounded on natural reason; and Plato

himself has touched upon it, not positively affirming it, but offering

it as a probable opinion, although among other philosophers it has

been much cried out against. And seeing that we are fallen into a free

discourse, and that a man cannot light into better company and a more

favorable auditory to test the story, as if it were foreign coin, I

shall therefore tell you a story which I heard from a stranger, whose

acquaintance has cost me no small sum of money in searching after him

in divers countries, whom at length, after much travel I found near

the Red Sea. He would converse with men but once a year, all the rest

of his time (as he told me) he spent among the Nymphs, Nomades, and

Daemons. He was very free with me, and extremely obliging. I never saw

a more graceful person in all my life; and that which was very strange

in him was, that he was never subject to any disease; once every month

he ate the bitter fruit of a certain medicinal herb. He spake several

languages perfectly well; his discourse to me was in the Doric dialect;

his speech was as charming as the sweetest music, and as soon as ever

he opened his mouth to speak, there issued out of it so sweet and

fragrant a breath, that all the place was filled with it. Now, as to

human learning, such as history, he retained the knowledge thereof all

the year; but as to the gift of divination, he was inspired therewith

only one day in the year, in which he went down to the sea-side, and

there foretold things to come. And thither resorted to him the princes

and great men of all the country, or else their secretaries, who there

attended his coming at a prefixed day, and then returned. This person

attributed divination to the Daemons, and was well pleased to hear what

we related concerning Delphi. Whatsoever we told concerning Bacchus and

the sacrifices which are offered to him, he knew it all, saying that,

as these were great accidents which happened to Daemons, so also was

that which was related of the serpent Python. And he affirmed, that he

who slew him was not banished for nine years, neither did he fly into

the Valley of Tempe, but was driven out of this world into another,

from whence, after nine revolutions of the great years, being returned,

cleansed, and purified, and become a true Phoebus,—that is to say,

clear and bright,—he had at length recovered the superintendence of

the Delphic oracle, which in the mean time had been committed to the

charge of Themis. He said as much concerning what is related of Typhon

and the Titans. For he affirmed, they were the battles of Daemons

against Daemons, and the flights and banishments of those that had been

vanquished, or the punishments inflicted by the Gods on those who had

committed such acts as Typhon is said to have done against Osiris,

and Saturn against Uranus, whose honors are much obscured, or wholly

lost, by being translated into another world. For I know that the

Solymeans, who are borderers to the Lycians, did greatly honor Saturn;

but since he killed their princes, Arsalus, Dryus, and Trosobius, he

fled into some other country, they knew not where, and he now is in

a manner forgotten. But they called these three—Arsalus, Dryus, and

Trosobius—the severe Gods, and the Lycians do at this day curse people

in their names, as well in private as in public. Several other such

like examples may a man find in the records of the Gods. And if we call

any of the Daemons by the usual and common names of the Gods, on whom

they do depend, it is no marvel at all, said the stranger; for they

like to be called by the Gods on whom they do depend, and from whom

they have received their honor and power; even as amongst us men one is

named Diius, another Athenae, another Apollonius, another Dionysius,

and still another Hermaeus. And there are some who have names imposed

on them, as it were, by chance, which yet do well agree with their

tempers; whereas some carry the names of the Gods which do not at all

suit with their weaknesses.

22. Here Cleombrotus having paused, his discourse seemed strange to

all the company, and Heracleon demanded of him, how all this concerned

Plato, and how he had given occasion to this discourse. Unto which

Cleombrotus answered: You do well to put me in mind of it; for first,

Plato ever rejected the infinity of worlds, yet would determine nothing

positively touching the precise number of them. And granting the

probability of their opinion who affirmed there were five, one for

each element, as to his own part, he kept to one, which seems to be

his genuine opinion; whereas all other philosophers have been afraid

to receive and admit the multitude of worlds as if those who did not

limit matter to one must needs fall into troublesome and boundless

infinity. But was this stranger, said I, of the same opinion with

Plato, touching the number of the worlds? Or did you not all the while

ask his opinion in that matter? I was far from failing herein, says

Cleombrotus, seeing I found him so communicative and affable to me. He

told me, that neither was the number of the worlds infinite, neither

was there but only one, nor five; but a hundred and eighty-three, which

were ranged in a triangular form, every side containing sixty worlds;

and of the three remaining, every corner had one. That they were so

ordered, that one always touched another in a circle, like those who

dance in a ring. That the plain within the triangle is, as it were, the

foundation and common altar to all those worlds, which is called the

Plain of Truth, in which lie the designs, moulds, ideas, and invariable

examples of all things which were, or ever shall be; and about these

is Eternity, whence flowed Time, as from a river, into these worlds.

Moreover, that the souls of men, if they have lived well in this world,

do see these ideas once in ten thousand years; and that the most holy

mystical ceremonies which are performed here are no more than a dream

of this sacred vision. And further, that all the pains which are taken

in the study of philosophy are to attain to a sight of those beauties;

otherwise they were all lost labors. I heard him, said he, relate all

these things as perfectly, as if they had been some religious rites

wherein he would have instructed me; for he brought me no proof or

demonstration to confirm what he said.

23. Here, turning myself to Demetrius, I asked him what were the words

which the wooers of Penelope spake in Homer, when they saw Ulysses

handling his bow. And Demetrius having put me in mind of them, I said:

It came into my thoughts to say as much of this wonderful man. He was

indeed “an observer and a cunning thief” of opinions and discourses,

and a person conversant in all sorts of learning, being a Greek

born, and perfectly well skilled in the studies of his country. For

this number of worlds shows us that he was neither an Indian nor an

Egyptian; but his father was a Dorian Greek of the country of Sicily,

named Petron, born in the city of Himera, who wrote a little book on

this subject, which I indeed never saw, nor can tell whether it be

extant. But Hippys, a native of Rhegium, mentioned by Phanias the

Eresian, tells us, it was the doctrine of Petron that there were a

hundred and eighty-three worlds, tacked to one another in their first

principle; but he does not explain to us what this phrase means, nor

does he offer any reason to prove this. It is certain, says Demetrius,

that Plato himself, bringing no argument to evince this point, does

hereby overthrow this opinion. Yet, says Heracleon, we have heard

you grammarians say that Homer was the first author of this opinion,

as having divided the universe into five worlds, heaven, water, air,

earth, and that which he calls Olympus; of which he leaveth two to

be common,—the earth to all beneath, and Olympus to all above,—but

the three in the midst between them he attributes unto three several

Gods. In the like manner Plato, assigning unto the principal parts

of the universe the first forms and most excellent figures of the

bodies, calls them five worlds,—those of the earth, water, air, and

fire, and finally, of that which comprehended all the others, which he

calls Dodecaedron (which is to say, with twelve bases), which, amply

extending, is of easy motion and capacity, its form and figure being

very fit and proper for the revolutions and motions of the souls. What

need is there then, cried Demetrius, of bringing in good old Homer? For

we have had fables enough already. But Plato is far from calling the

different elements five worlds; for even where he disputes against

those who assert an infinite number of worlds, he affirms, there is

only one created of God and satisfying him, consisting of the entire

corporeal Nature, perfect, endued with self-sufficiency, and wanting

nothing; and therefore we may well think it strange that the truth

which he spake should occasion the extravagancy of others. For had he

not maintained the world’s unity, he would in some sort have given a

foundation to those who affirm an infinite number of worlds; but that

he asserted precisely five, this is marvellously strange and far from

all probability, unless you can (says he, turning himself to me) clear

this point. How! (said I) are you then resolved to drop here your first

dispute about oracles, and to take up another of no less difficulty?

Not so, replied Demetrius; yet we must take cognizance of this, which

does, as it were, hold out its hand to us, though we shall not remain

long upon it, but treat of it by the way, and soon return to our first

discourse.

24. First of all then, I say, the reasons which hinder us from

asserting an infinite number of worlds do not hinder us from affirming

that there are more than one; for as well in many worlds as in one

there may be Providence and Divination, while Fortune intervenes only

in the smallest things; but most part of the grand and principal things

have and take their beginnings and changes by order, which could not be

in an infinite number of worlds. And it is more conformable to reason

to say that God made more than one world; for, being perfectly good,

he wants no virtue, and least of all justice and friendship, for they

do chiefly become the nature of the Gods. Now God hath nothing that is

superfluous and useless; and therefore there must be other inferior

Gods proceeding from him, and other worlds made by him, towards whom

he must use these social virtues; for he cannot exercise those virtues

of justice and benignity on himself or any part of himself, but on

others. So that it is not likely this world should float and wander

about, without either friend, neighbor, or any sort of communication,

in an infinite vacuum. For we see Nature includes all single things in

genera and species, like as in vessels or in husks of seeds; for there

is nothing to be found in Nature—and nothing can have a common notion

or appellation—which is not qualified both in common and in particular.

Now the world is not said to be such in common, but in particular,

for its quality is derived from its being an harmonious whole made up

of different parts. But yet, there being no such thing in Nature as

one man alone, one horse, one star, one God, one Daemon, why may we

not believe that there is not in Nature one only world and no more,

but several? And if any one shall object against me that this world

hath likewise but one earth and one sea, I can answer him, he is much

deceived by not understanding the evidence afforded by like parts. For

we divide the earth into similar parts of the same denomination; for

all the parts of the earth are earth, and so of the sea; but no part of

the world is still the world, it being composed of divers and different

natures.

25. For as to the inconvenience which some do seem to fear, and in

respect of which they confine all the matter within one world, lest,

there remaining any thing without, it should disturb the composition

of this, by the resistances and jars which it would make against

it,—they have no need to dread this. For, there being many worlds,

and each of them in particular having one definite and determinate

measure and limit of its substance and matter, no part thereof will be

without order and good disposition, nothing will remain superfluous

or be cast out as an excrement. For the reason which belongeth to

each world, being able to rule and govern the matter that is allotted

thereto, will not suffer that any thing shall run out of course and

order, and rencounter and jumble another world, nor likewise that any

thing from another shall justle or disturb it, there being nothing

in Nature infinite and inordinate in quantity, nor in motion without

reason and order. And if perhaps there be any influence that passes

from the one to the other, this is a fraternal communication, whereby

they mix themselves together, like the light of the stars and the

influence of their temperatures, and whereby they themselves do rejoice

in beholding one another with a benign aspect, and give to the Gods

(who are good and many in number in every world) an opportunity of

knowing and caressing one another. For there is nothing in all this

that is impossible, or fabulous, or contrary to reason; though some

may think so because of the opinion of Aristotle, who saith that all

bodies have their proper and natural places, by which means the earth

must on all sides tend to the midst, and the water must rest upon it,

serving by its weight for a foundation to the other lighter elements.

Were there then many worlds, the earth would be often found above the

airy and fiery regions, and as often under them; while air and water

would be sometimes in their natural places, and sometimes in others

which are their unnatural; which things being impossible, as he thinks,

it follows then, there are neither two nor more worlds, but one only,

which is this here, consisting of all kinds of elements, disposed

according to Nature, agreeably to the diversity of bodies.

26. But in all this there is more probability than truth. For consider,

friend Demetrius; when he saith that some bodies tend towards the

midst, which is to say, downwards, the others from the midst, that

is, upward, and a third sort move round about the midst, what does

he mean by the midst? This cannot be understood in respect of a

vacuum, there being no such thing in Nature, as he says himself; and,

moreover, those that do allow it say that it can have no middle, no

more than beginning and end; for beginning and end are extremities,

but that which is infinite, everybody knows, is without an end. But

supposing we should be necessitated to admit a middle in a vacuum,

it is impossible to comprehend and imagine the difference in the

motions of bodies towards it, because there is neither in this vacuum

any power attractive of the body, nor in the bodies any inclination

or affection to tend on all sides to this middle. And it is no less

difficult to imagine that bodies can move of themselves towards an

incorporeal place, or receive any motion from it. This middle then

must be understood not locally, but corporeally. For this world being

a mass and union consisting of different bodies joined together, this

diversity of them must beget different motions from one another; which

appears in that each of these bodies changing its substance does at the

same time change its place. For subtilization and rarefaction dissipate

the matter which springeth from the midst and ariseth upwards; whereas,

on the contrary, condensation and constipation depress and drive it

down towards the middle.

27. On these points it is not necessary to discourse any longer in this

place. For whatever cause a man supposes shall produce such passions

and changes, that very cause will contain each of these worlds in

itself; because each of them has its sea and land, each its proper

middle, and each its passions and change of bodies, and the nature and

power which contain and preserve each in its place and being. For that

which is without, whether it be nothing at all or an infinite vacuum,

cannot allow any middle, as we have already said. But there being

several worlds, each has its proper middle apart; so that in each of

them there will be motions proper to bodies, some tending down to the

midst, others mounting aloft from the midst, others moving round about

it, according as they themselves do distinguish motions. And he who

asserts there are many middles, and that heavy bodies from all sides

do tend unto one alone, is like to him who shall affirm that the blood

of several men runs from all parts into one vein, or that all their

brains should be contained within one and the same membrane; supposing

it absurd, that all natural bodies which are solid should not be in

one place, and the rare in another. He that thus thinketh is certainly

a mean philosopher; and no better is he who will not allow the whole

to have all parts in their order, rank, and natural situation. What

could be more foolish, than for a man to call that a world which had a

moon within it so situated, as if a man should have his brains in his

heels, and his heart in his forehead? Whereas there is no absurdity or

inconveniency, if, in supposing several distinct worlds separated from

one another, a man should distinguish and separate their parts. For in

each of them the earth, sea, and sky will be placed and situated in

their proper places, and each of these worlds may have its superior,

inferior, circular, and middle part, not in respect of another world,

nor in reference to what is without, but to what is within itself.

28. And as to the argument which some do draw from a stone supposed to

be placed without the world, it neither proves rest nor motion; for

how could it remain suspended, seeing it is by nature heavy, or move

towards the midst of the world, as other ponderous bodies, seeing it

is neither part of it nor like it? And as to that earth which is fixed

and environed by another world, we must not wonder, considering its

weightiness, if it does not drop down, seeing it is upheld by a certain

natural force pertaining to it. For if we shall take high and low not

within the world but without, we shall find ourselves involved in the

same difficulties as Epicurus was when he made his little indivisible

atoms to move and tend to those places which are under foot, as if

the vacuum had feet, or its infinite space would permit one to talk of

high or low. Indeed, a man would marvel what should cause Chrysippus to

say, that the world was placed and situated directly in the midst, and

that the matter thereof, from all eternity having possessed itself of

the midst, yet is so compacted together that it remains for ever. For

he writes this in his Fourth Book of Possible Things, vainly imagining

there is a middle in that vast emptiness, and still more absurdly

attributing unto that middle, which is not, the cause of the world’s

stability and continuance; he having often said in other writings of

his that the substance is upheld and governed, partly by the motions

tending to the midst of it, and partly by others parting from the midst

of it.

29. As to the other oppositions which the Stoics make, who should fear

them? As when they demand, how it is possible to maintain a fatal

destiny and a divine providence, and how it can be otherwise but that

we must admit of several Jupiters, when we assert the plurality of

worlds. Now if there be an inconveniency in admitting many Jupiters,

their opinions will appear far more absurd; for they imagine there

are suns, and moons, Apollos, Dianas, and Neptunes innumerable, in

innumerable changes and revolutions of worlds. But where is the

necessity which lies upon us to grant that there must be many Jupiters

if there be many worlds, seeing that each of them may be subject to a

sovereign governor of the whole, a God endued with a suitable mind and

ability, like to him whom we name the Lord and Father of all things?

Or what shall hinder us from asserting that the several worlds must

be subject to the providence and destiny of Jupiter, and that he has

an eye to all things, directing all, and administering to them the

principles, seeds, and causes of all things which are made? For, while

we often see here a body composed of several other distinct bodies,—for

example, the assembly of a town, an army, or a chorus,—in each of

which bodies there is life, prudence, and understanding; so it cannot

be impossible that, in the whole universe, ten or fifty or a hundred

worlds which may be in it should all use the same reason, and all

correspond with the same principle. For this order and disposition is

very suitable to the Gods; for we must not make them kings of a swarm

of bees who never stir out of their hives, or keep them fast imprisoned

in matter, like those who affirm the Gods to be certain dispositions of

the air, and powers of waters and fire, infused and mixed within, which

arise and spring up together with the world, and in time are to be

burnt and end with it,—not affording them the liberty of coachmen and

pilots, but nailing them down to their bases like statues and images.

For they enclose the Gods within matter, and that in so strict a manner

as makes them liable to all the changes, alterations, and decays of it.

30. It is certainly more agreeable to the nature of the Gods to say

that they are wholly at liberty, like Castor and Pollux, ready to

succor such as are overtaken by bad weather at sea; for when they

appear, the winds cease and the waves are calmed. Not that they

navigate and are partakers of the same peril; but they only appear in

the sky, and the danger is over. Thus do the Gods visit each world, and

rule and provide for all things in them. Jupiter in Homer cast not his

eyes far from the city of Troy into Thrace, and to the nomad Scythians

along the river Ister; but the true Jupiter has several seemly and

agreeable passages for his majesty from one world into another, not

looking into the infinite vacuum without, nor regarding himself and

nothing else, as some have imagined, but weighing the deeds of Gods and

men, and the motions and revolutions of the stars. For the Divinity

does not hate variety and changes, but takes great pleasure in them,

as one may conjecture by the circuits, conversions, and mutations

observable in the heavens. And therefore I conclude that the infinite

number of worlds is a chimera, which has not the least probability

of truth, and which cannot by any means admit of any God, but must

be wholly guided by chance and fortune. Whereas the government and

providence of a certain definite number of worlds has nothing in it

that seems more laborious and unworthy than that which is employed in

the direction of one alone, which is transformed, renewed, and reformed

an infinite number of times.

31. Having said this, I paused. And Philippus immediately cried out:

Whether this be certain or not, I will not be too positive; but if we

carry God beyond one world, it would more gratify me to know why we

should make him the Creator only of five worlds and no more, and what

proportion this number bears to that of the worlds, than to know why

the word ~ΕΙ~ was inscribed upon this temple. For this is neither a

triangular, a quadrate, a perfect, nor a cubic number, neither does it

yield any elegancy to such as are delighted in this kind of sciences.

As to what concerns the argument drawn from the number of elements,

which Plato seems to have touched upon, it is obscure and improbable,

and will not afford this consequence,—that, as there are formed from

matter five sorts of regular bodies, which have equal angles and equal

sides, and are environed with equal superficies, so there were from the

beginning five worlds, made and formed of these five bodies.

32. Yet Theodorus the Solian, said I, when he reads Plato’s mathematics

to his scholars, both keeps to the text and clearly expounds it, when

he saith, the pyramid, octahedron, dodecahedron, icosahedron (which

Plato lays down as the first bodies) are all beautiful both in their

proportions and equalities; Nature cannot contrive and make better than

these, nor perhaps so good. Yet they have not all the same constitution

and origin; for the least and slightest of the five is the pyramid;

the greatest, which has most parts, is the dodecahedron; and of the

other two, the icosahedron is greater than the octahedron by more than

twofold, if you compare their number of triangles. And therefore it

is impossible they should be all made at once, of one and the same

matter; for the smallest and most subtile have been certainly more

pliable to the hand of the workman who moved and fashioned the matter,

and consequently were sooner made and shaped, than those which have

stronger parts and a greater mass of bodies, and whose composition was

more laborious and difficult, like the dodecahedron. Whence it follows

that the pyramid was the first body, and not one of the others, which

were by nature last produced. Now the way also to avoid this absurdity

is to separate and divide matter into five worlds; here the pyramid

(for she is the first and most simple), there the octahedron, and there

the icosahedron; and out of that which exists first in every one of

these the rest draw their original by the concretion of parts, by which

every thing is changed into every thing, as Plato himself shows us

by examples throughout. But it will suffice us briefly to learn thus

much. Air is engendered by the extinction of fire, and the same being

subtilized and rarefied produceth fire. Now by the seeds of these two

we may find out the passions and transmutations of all. The seminary

or beginning of fire is the pyramid, consisting of twenty-four first

triangles; and the octahedron is the seminary of the air, consisting

of forty-eight triangles of the same kind. So that the one element of

air stands upon two of fire, joined together and condensed. And again,

one body or element of air is divided into two of fire, which again,

becoming thick and hard, is changed into water; so that, throughout,

that which comes first into light gives easily birth unto the rest by

transmutation. And so it comes to pass, that there is not merely one

first principle of all things; but one thing is so mixed with the

origin of another, in the several changes and alterations of nature by

motion, that the same name and denomination belong equally to all.

33. But here Ammonius interrupted him, and said: Notwithstanding

that those things are so peremptorily and so pompously asserted by

Theodorus, yet I shall wonder if he be not forced to make use of such

suppositions as are destructive of themselves and one of another. For

he will have it, that the five worlds he speaks of were not composed

all at one time, but that that which was subtilest, and which gave

least trouble in the making, came out first into being. And as if

it were a consequent, and not a repugnant thing, he supposes that

the matter does not always drive out into existence that which is

most subtile and simple, but that sometimes the thickest, grossest,

and heaviest parts do anticipate the more subtile in generation.

But besides this, supposing that there be five primitive bodies or

elements, and consequently that there be as many worlds, there are but

four of those orders which he discourses rationally concerning. For

as to the cube, he takes it away and removes it, as it were in a game

of counters; for it is naturally unfit either to turn into any thing

besides itself, or to yield that any of those other bodies be converted

into it, inasmuch as the triangles of which they consist be not of

the same sort. For all the rest consist in common of demi-triangles

(or halves of equilateral triangles); but the proper subject of which

the cube is particularly composed is the right isosceles triangle,

which admits no inclination to a demi-triangle, nor can possibly be

united and incorporated with it. If there be then five bodies, and

consequently five worlds, and in each of these worlds the principle

of generation be that body which is first produced, it must happen

that, where the cube is the first in generation, none of the rest can

possibly be produced, it being contrary to its nature to change into

any of them. Not to insist here, that Theodorus and those of his mind

make the element or principle of which the dodecahedron is composed

to be different from the rest, it not being that triangle which is

termed scalene, with three unequal sides, out of which the pyramid,

octahedron, and icosahedron, according to Plato, are produced; so that

(said Ammonius laughing) you must solve these objections, or offer

something new concerning the matter in debate.[5]

34. And I answered him, that, for my part, I knew not at present how

to say any thing which carried more probability. But perhaps (said

I) it is better for a man to give an account of his own opinion than

of another’s. Therefore I say that, there being supposed from the

beginning of things two several natures contrary to each other,—the

one sensible, mutable, subject to generation, corruption, and change

every way, the other spiritual and intelligible, and abiding always

in the same state,—it would be very strange, my friends, to say that

the spiritual nature admitteth of division and hath diversity and

difference in it, and to be angry if a man will not allow the passible

and corporeal nature to be wholly united in itself, without dividing it

into many parts. For it is most suitable to the permanent and divine

natures to be tied and linked to each other, and to avoid, as much as

is possible, all division and separation; and yet, amongst incorporeal

natures the power of diversity works greater differences in regard to

essential forms and reason, than those of distance of place in the

corporeal world. And therefore Plato, refuting those who hold this

proposition, that all is one, asserts these five grounds and principles

of all,—entity, identity, diversity, motion, and rest; which five

immaterial principles being admitted, it is no marvel if Nature have

made every one of these to be an imitation, though not exact, yet as

perfect and agreeable as could be drawn, of a correspondent principle

in the corporeal mystery, partaking, as much as can be, of its power

and virtue. For it is very plain that the cube is most proper and

agreeable to repose and rest, by reason of the stability and firmness

of those plain surfaces of which it consists. And as to the pyramid,

everybody soon sees and acknowledges the nature of fire in it, by the

slenderness of its decreasing sides, and the sharpness of its angles;

and the nature of the dodecahedron, apt to comprehend all the other

figures, may seem more properly to be the corporeal image of Ens, or

Being in the general, indifferent to this or that particular form or

shape. And of the other two which remain, the icosahedron resembleth

the principle of diversity, and the octahedron principally partakes of

the identical nature. And thus from one of these the air is produced,

which partakes of and borders upon every substance, under one and the

same outward form and appearance; and the other has afforded us the

element of water, which by mixture may put on the greatest diversity

of qualities. Therefore if Nature requires a certain uniformity and

harmony in all things, it must be then that there are neither more

nor fewer worlds in the corporeal nature than there are patterns or

samples in the incorporeal, to the end that each pattern or sample

in the invisible nature may have its own primary position and power,

answering to a secondary or derivative in the different constitution or

composition of bodies.

35. And this may serve for an answer to those that wonder at our

dividing Nature, subject to generation and alteration, into so

many kinds. But I entreat you all further, attentively to consider

with yourselves that, of the two first and supreme principles of

all things,—that is to say, the unity, and the indefinite binary

or duality,—this latter, being the element and chief origin of all

deformity and disorder, is termed infinity, and on the contrary, the

nature of unity, determining and limiting the void infinity, which has

no proportion nor termination, reduces it into form, and renders it

in some manner capable of receiving a denomination which belongs only

to sensible and particular things. Now these two general principles

appear first in number; for the multitude is indeed no number, unless

a certain form of the matter resulting out of indeterminate infinity

is cut off, and bounded within respective limits, either shorter

or longer. For then each multitude is made number, when once it is

determined and limited by unity; whereas, if we take away unity, then

the indeterminate duality brings all into confusion, and renders it

without harmony, without number or measure. Now, the form not being

the destruction of matter, but rather the order and the beauty of it,

both these principles therefore must be within number, from whence

ariseth the chief disparity and greatest difference. For the infinite

and indeterminate principle is the cause of the even number; and the

other better principle, which is the unity, is the father (as it were)

of the odd number. So that the first even number is two, and the first

odd number is three; of which is composed five by conjunction, which

is by its composition common to both, but of power or nature not even

but odd. For, since sensible and corporeal nature is divided into

several parts, on account of its inborn necessity of diversity, it was

necessary that the number of these parts should not be either the first

even number, nor yet the first uneven or odd, but a third, consisting

of both; to the end that it might be procreated out of both principles,

viz. of that which causeth the even number, and of that which produceth

the odd; for the one cannot be parted from the other, inasmuch as both

have the nature, power, and force of a principle. These two principles

being then joined together, the better one being mightier prevails over

the indeterminate infinity or duality, which divideth the corporeal

nature; and thus the matter being divided, the unity interposing itself

between has hindered the universe from being divided and parted into

two equal portions. But there has been a multitude of worlds caused

by the diversity and disagreement of the infinite Nature; but this

multitude was brought into an odd number by the virtue and power of

identity, or the finite principle; and it was therefore odd, because

the better principle would not suffer Nature to stretch itself further

than was fitting. For if there had been nothing but pure and simple

unity, the matter would have known no separation; but being mixed

with the dividing nature of duality, it has by this means suffered

separation and division; yet it has stopped here, by the odd numbers

being the superior and master to the even.

36. This is the reason why the ancients were used to express numbering

or reckoning by πεμπάσασθαι, _to count by fives_. And I am of opinion

that that word πάντα, _all_, is derived from πέντε, which is to say

_five_, five being compounded of the first numbers. For all the other

numbers being afterwards multiplied by others, they produce numbers

different from themselves; whereas five, being multiplied by an even

number, produceth a perfect ten, and multiplied by an odd number,

representeth itself again; not to insist that it is composed of the

two first tetragons or quadrate numbers (unity and four), and that,

being the first number whose square is equivalent to the two squares

before it, it composeth the fairest of right angled triangles, and

is the first number which containeth the sesquilateral proportion.

Perhaps all these reasons are not very pertinent to the discourse of

the present dispute, it being better to allege that in this number

there is a natural virtue of dividing, and that nature divideth many

things by this number. For in ourselves she has placed five senses, and

five parts of the soul, the vital, the sensitive, the concupiscible,

the irascible, and the rational; and as many fingers on each hand;

and the most fruitful seed disperseth itself but into five, for we

read nowhere of a woman that brought forth more than five at a birth.

And the Egyptians also tell us that the Goddess Rhea was delivered of

five Gods, giving us to understand in covert terms that of the same

matter were procreated five worlds. And in the universe, the earth is

divided into five zones, the heaven into five circles,—two arctics, two

tropics, and one equinoctial in the midst. There are five revolutions

of planets or wandering stars, inasmuch as the Sun, Venus, and Mercury

make but one and the same revolution. And the construction of the world

consists of an harmonical measure; even as our musical chords consist

of the posture of five tetrachords, ranged orderly one after another,

that is to say, those called ὑπάτων, μέσων, συνημμένων, διεζευγμένων,

and ὑπερβολαίων.[6] The intervals also which are used in singing are

five, diesis, semitone, tone, the tone and a half, and the double tone;

so that Nature seems to delight more in making all things according to

the number five, than she does in producing them in a spherical form,

as Aristotle writeth.

37. But it will perhaps be demanded, why Plato refers the number of

worlds to the five regular bodies or figures, saying that God made use

of the number five in the fabric of the world, as it were transcribing

and copying this; and then, having proposed a doubt and question of

the number of the worlds, whether there be five, or one only, thereby

clearly shows that his conjecture is grounded on this conceit of the

five regular bodies. If now we may make a probable conjecture as to

his opinion, we may believe that of necessity, with the diversity of

these figures and bodies, there must presently ensue a difference and

diversity of motions; as he himself teacheth, affirming that whatever

is subtilized or condensed does, at the same time with its alteration

of substance, alter and change its place. For if from the air there is

engendered fire, when the octahedron is dissolved and vanished into

pyramids, or, on the contrary, if the air be produced from the fire

pressed and squeezed up into the form of the octahedron, it is not

possible it should remain there where it was before, but it flies and

runs to another place, forcing and combating whatever stands in the

way to oppose it. And he shows this more clearly and evidently by an

example and similitude of fans, and such like things as drive away the

chaff from the corn; for thus the elements driving the matter, and

being driven by it, do always bring like to like, some taking up this

place, others that, before the world was digested as now it is. The

matter then being in that condition in which it is likely every thing

is where God is not present, the five first qualities, or first bodies,

having each their proper and peculiar inclinations and motions, went

apart, not wholly and altogether, nor throughly divided and separated

one from another; for when all was huddled in confusion, such as were

surmounted went continually against their nature with the mightier. And

therefore, some going on one side and others going on the other, hence

it has happened that there have been as many portions and distinctions

as there are divers kinds of first bodies; one of fire, not wholly

pure, but inclining towards the form of fire; another of an ethereal

nature, yet not wholly so, but inclining thereto; another of earth,

not simple and mere earth, but inclining to the form of earth. But

especially there was a communication of water and air; for these, as

we have already mentioned, went their ways, replenished with divers

other kinds. For God did not separate and distribute the matter, but

having found it thus carelessly dissipated in itself, and each part

being carried away in such great disorder and confusion, he ranged and

ordered it into symmetry and proportion; and setting reason over each

as a guardian and governor, he made as many worlds as there were first

bodies. However, in respect to Ammonius, let these Platonical notions

pass for what they are worth. For my part, I will never be over-zealous

in this precise number of worlds; but this I will say, that those who

hold there are more than one, yet not an infinite number, have as good

grounds as others, seeing the matter does naturally spread itself

and is diffused into many parts,—not resting in one, while yet it is

contrary to reason that it should be infinitely extended. In short,

let us here especially be mindful of the wise precepts of the Academy,

and preserve ourselves upon such slippery ground as the controversy

concerning the infinity of worlds, by refusing a too confident assent.

38. And when I had finished this discourse, Demetrius said: Lamprias is

very much in the right; for the Gods deceive us with multiplicities,

not of shadows and impostures (as Euripides[7] expresseth it), but even

of realities and substances themselves, when we presume to be positive,

as if we understood them in things of such weight and moment. But we

must, as he advises us, return to our first question, which we seem to

have forgotten. For what was said concerning the oracles remaining dumb

and useless when the Daemons who presided over them were departed, even

as we see musical instruments yield no harmony when the musician does

not handle them,—this, I say, brings a greater question into debate,

namely touching the cause and power by which these Daemons use to make

their prophets and prophetesses to be ravished with enthusiasm and

filled with fantastical imaginations. For to say the oracles are silent

as being forsaken by the Daemons is nothing, unless we be first shown

how (when they are present and govern them) they set them at work and

make them prophesy.

Ammonius then taking up the discourse, Do you think said he, that the

Daemons are any thing else