labours to prove, that there were real _oracles_, and such as can never
be attributed to any artifices of the Priests or Priestesses; and that
several of these became silent in the first ages of the Church, either
by the coming of Jesus Christ, or by the prayers of the Saints. This
doctrine is confirmed by a letter from Father Bouchet, missionary to
Father Balthus; wherein it is declared, that what Father Balthus
declares of the ancient oracles, is experimented every day in the
Indies.
It appears, according to Bouchet, that the devil still delivers oracles
in the Indies; and that, not by idols, which would be liable to
imposture, but by the mouths of the priests, and sometimes of the
bye-standers; it is added that these oracles, too, cease, and the devil
becomes mute in proportion as the Gospel is preached among them.
It was Eusebius who first endeavoured to persuade the christians that
the coming of Jesus Christ had struck the oracles dumb; though it
appears from the laws of Theodosius, Gratian, and Valentinian, that the
oracles were still consulted as far back as the year 358. Cicero says
the oracles became dumb, in proportion as people, growing less
credulous, began to suspect them for cheats.
Two reasons are alleged by Plutarch for the ceasing of oracles: the one
was Apollo’s chagrin, who, it seems, “took it in dudgeon,” to be
interrogated about so many trifles. The other was, that in proportion as
the genii, or demons, who had the management of the oracles, died and
became extinct, the oracles must necessarily cease. He adds a third and
more natural cause for the ceasing of _oracles_, viz. the forlorn state
of Greece, ruined and desolated by wars. For, in consequence of this
calamity, the smallness of the gains suffered the priests to sink into a
poverty and contempt too bare to cover the fraud.
Most of the fathers of the church imagined it to be the devil that gave
_oracles_, and considered it as a pleasure he took to give dubious and
equivocal answers, in order to have a handle to laugh at them. Vossius
allows that it was the devil who spoke in oracles; but thinks that the
obscurity of his answers was owing to his ignorance as to the precise
circumstances of events. That artful and studied obscurity, wherein,
says he, answers were couched, shew the embarrassment the devil was
under; as those double meanings they usually bore provided for the
accomplishment. When the thing foretold did not happen accordingly, the
_oracle_, forsooth, was always misunderstood.
Eusebius has preserved some fragments of a Philosopher, called Oenomaus,
who, out of resentment for having been so often fooled by the oracles,
wrote an ample confutation of all their impertinences, in the following
strain: “When we come to consult thee,” says he to Apollo, “if thou
seest what is in the womb of futurity, why dost thou use expressions
that will not be understood? if thou dost, thou takest pleasure in
abusing us: if thou dost not, be informed of us, and learn to speak more
clearly. I tell thee, that if thou intendest an equivoque, the Greek
word whereby thou affirmedst that Crœsus should overthrow a great
Empire, was ill-chosen; and that it could signify nothing but Crœsus’
conquering Cyrus. If things must necessarily come to pass, why dost thou
amuse us with thy ambiguities? What dost thou, wretch as thou art, at
Delphi; employed in muttering idle prophesies!”
But Oenamaus is still more out of humour with the oracle for the answer
which Apollo gave the Athenians, when Xerxes was about to attack Greece
with all the strength of Asia. The Pythian declared, that Minerva, the
protectress of Athens, had endeavoured in vain to appease the wrath of
Jupiter; yet that Jupiter, in complaisance to his daughter, was willing
the Athenians should save themselves within wooden walls; and that
Salamis should behold the loss of a great many children, dead to their
mothers, either when Ceres was spread abroad, or gathered together. At
this Oenamaus loses all patience with the Delphian god: “This contest,”
says he, “between father and daughter, is very becoming the deities! It
is excellent, that there should be contrary inclinations and interests
in heaven! Poor wizard, thou art ignorant who the children are that
shall see Salamis perish; whether Greeks or Persians. It is certain they
must be either one or the other; but thou needest not have told so
openly that thou knewest not which. Thou concealest the time of the
battle under these fine poetical expressions, _either when Ceres is
spread abroad, or gathered together_: and thou wouldst cajole us with
such pompous language! who knows not, that if there be a seafight, it
must either be in seed-time or harvest? It is certain it cannot be in
winter. Let things go how they will, thou wilt secure thyself by this
Jupiter, whom Minerva is endeavouring to appease. If the Greeks lose the
battle, Jupiter proved inexorable to the last; if they gain it, why then
Minerva at length prevailed.”
OURAN, OR URAN, SOANGUS,
The name of an imaginary set of magicians in the island Gromboccanore,
in the East Indies.
The word implies _men-devils_; these people, it seems, having the art of
rendering themselves invisible, and passing where they please, and, by
these means, doing infinite mischief; for which reason the people hate
and fear them mortally, and always kill them on the spot when they can
take them.
In the Portuguese history, printed 1581, folio, there is mention of a
present made by the king of the island to a Portuguese officer, named
Brittio, _ourans_, with whom, it is pretended, he made incursions on the
people of Tidore, killed great numbers, &c.
To try whether in effect they had the faculty ascribed to them, one of
them was tied by the neck with a rope, without any possibility of
disengaging himself by natural means; yet in the morning it was found he
had slipped his collar. But that the king of Tidore might not complain
that Brittio made war on him with devils, it is said he dismissed them
at length, in their own island.
DREAMS, &c.
The art of foretelling future events by dreams, is called
_Brizomancy._
Macrobius mentions five sorts of dreams, viz. 1st, vision; 2d, a
discovery of something between sleep and waking; 3d, a suggestion cast
into our fancy, called by Cicero, _Vesum_; 4th, an ordinary dream; and
5th, a divine apparition or revelation in our sleep; such as were the
dreams of the prophets, and of Joseph, as also of the magi of the East.
_Origin of Interpreting Dreams._
The fictitious art of interpreting dreams, had its origin among the
Egyptians and Chaldeans; countries fertile in superstitions of all
kinds. It was propagated from them to the Romans, who judging some
dreams worthy of observation, appointed persons on purpose to interpret
them.
The believers in dreams as prognostics of future events, bring forward
in confirmation of this opinion, a great variety of dreams, which have
been the forerunners of very singular events:—among these are that of
Calphurnia, the wife of Julius Cæsar, dreaming the night before his
death, that she saw him stabbed in the capitol: that of Artorius,
Augustus’s physician, dreaming before the battle of Philippi, that his
master’s camp was pillaged; that of the Emperor Vespasian dreaming an
old woman told him, that his good fortune would begin when Nero should
have a tooth drawn, which happened accordingly.
Cæsar dreaming that he was committing incest with his mother, was
crowned Emperor of Rome; and Hippias the Athenian Tyrant, dreaming the
same, died shortly after, and was interred in his mother earth.
Mauritius the Emperor, who was slain by Phocas, dreamed a short time
previous to this event, that an image of Christ that was fixed over the
brazen gate of his palace, called him and reproached him with his sins,
and at length demanded of him whether he would receive the punishment
due to them in this world or the next; and Mauritius answering in this,
the image commanded that he should be given, with his wife and children,
into the hands of Phocas. Whereupon Mauritius, awakening in great fear,
asked Phillipus, his son-in-law, whether he knew any soldier in the army
called Phocas, he answered that there was a commissary so called; and
Phocas became his successor, having killed his wife and five children.
Arlet, during her pregnancy by William the Conqueror, dreamed that a
light shone from her womb, that illumined all England. Maca, Virgil’s
mother, dreamed that she was delivered of a laurel branch.
The ridiculous infatuation of dreams is still so prominent, even among
persons whose education should inform them better, and particularly
among the fair sex, that a conversation seldom passes among them, that
the subject of some foolish inconsistent dream or other, does not form a
leading feature of their gossip. “I dreamed last night,” says one, “that
one of my teeth dropped out.”—“That’s a sign,” replies another, “that
you will lose a friend or some of your relations.”—“I’m afraid I shall,”
returns the dreamer, “for my cousin (brother, or some other person
connected with the family or its interests,) is very ill,” &c.
_Opinions on the cause of dreams._
Avicen makes the cause of dreams to be an ultimate intelligence moving
the moon in the midst of that light with which the fancies of men are
illuminated while they sleep. Aristotle refers the cause of them to
common sense, but placed in the fancy. Averroes places it in the
imagination. Democritus ascribes it to little images, or
representations, separated from the things themselves. Plato, among the
specific and concrete notions of the soul. Albertus to the superior
influences which continually flow from the sky, through many specific
mediums. And some physicians attribute the cause of them to vapours and
humours, and the affections and cares of persons predominant when awake;
for, say they, by reason of the abundance of vapours, which are exhaled
in consequence of immoderate feeding, the brain is so stuffed by it,
that monsters and strange chimera are formed, of which the most
inordinate eaters and drinkers furnish us with sufficient instances.
Some dreams, they assert, are governed partly by the temperature of the
body, and partly by the humour which mostly abounds in it; to which may
be added, the apprehensions which have preceded the day before; which
are often remarked in dogs, and other animals, which bark and make a
noise in their sleep. Dreams, they observe, proceeding from the humours
and temperature of the body, we see the choleric dreams of fire,
combats, yellow colours, &c.; the phlegmatic, of water, baths, of
sailing on the sea, &c.; the melancholics, of thick fumes, deserts,
fantasies, hideous faces, &c.; the sanguines, of merry feasts, dances,
&c. They that have the hinder part of their brain clogged with viscous
humours, called by physicians ephialtes incubus, or, as it is termed,
night-mare, imagine, in dreaming, that they are suffocated. And those
who have the orifice of their stomach loaded with malignant humours, are
affrighted with strange visions, by reason of those venemous vapours
that mount to the brain and distemper it.
Cicero tells a story of two Arcadians, who, travelling together, came to
Megara, a city of Greece, between Athens and Corinth, where one of them
lodged in a friend’s house, and the other at an inn. After supper the
person who lodged at the private house went to bed, and falling asleep,
dreamed that his friend at the inn appeared to him, and begged his
assistance, because the innkeeper was going to kill him. The man
immediately got out of bed much frightened at the dream but recovering
himself and falling asleep again, his friend appeared to him a second
time, and desired, that as he would not assist him in time, he would
take care at least not to let his death go unpunished; that the
innkeeper having murdered him, had thrown his body into a cart and
covered it with dung; he therefore begged that he would be at the city
gate in the morning, before the cart was out. Struck with this new
dream, he went early to the gate, saw the cart, and asked the driver
what was in it; the driver immediately fled, the dead body was taken out
of the cart, and the innkeeper apprehended and executed.
FATE.
Fate, in a general sense, denotes an inevitable necessity, depending on
some superior cause. It is a term much used among the ancient
philosophers. It is formed _a fando_, from speaking; and primarily
implies the same with _effatum_, _i. e._ a word or decree pronounced by
God; or a fixed sentence, whereby the deity has prescribed the order of
things, and allotted every person what shall befal him. The Greeks
called θμαρμενη, _quasi_, θρμος, _nexus_, a change, or necessary series
of things, indissolubly linked together; and the moderns call it
PROVIDENCE. But independent of this sense of the word, in which it is
used sometimes to denote the causes in nature, and sometimes the divine
appointment, the word Fate has a farther meaning, being used to express
some kind of necessity or other, or eternal designation of things,
whereby all agents, necessary as well as voluntary, are swayed and
directed to their ends.
Some authors have divided Fate into Astrological and Stoical.
ASTROLOGICAL FATE, denotes a necessity of things and events, arising, as
is supposed, from the influence and positions of the heavenly bodies,
which give law to the elements and mixed bodies, as well as to the wills
of men.
STOICAL FATE, or FATALITY, or FATALISM, is defined by Cicero, an order
or series of causes, in which cause is linked to cause, each producing
others; and in this manner all things flow from the one prime cause.
Chrysippus defines it a natural invariable succession of all things, _ab
eterno_, each involving the other. To this fate they subject the very
gods themselves. Thus the poet observes, that the “parent of all things
made laws at the beginning, by which he not only binds other things, but
himself.” Seneca also remarks, _Eadem necessitas et deos alligat.
Irrevocabilis divina pariter et humana cursit vehit. Ipse ille omnium
conditor et rector scripsit quidam fata, sed sequitur; semel scripsit,
semper paret._ This eternal series of causes, the poets call μοιραι, and
_parcæ_, or destinies.
By some later authors Fate is divided into _Physical_ and _divine_.
The first, or Physical fate, is an order and series of physical causes,
appropriated to their effects. This series is necessary, and the
necessity is natural. The principal or foundation of this Fate is
nature, or the power and manner of acting which God originally gave to
the several bodies, elements, &c. By this Fate it is that fire warms;
bodies communicate motion to each other; the rising and falling of the
tides, &c. And the effects of this Fate are all the events and phenomena
in the universe, except such as arise from the human.
The second, or divine Fate, is what is more commonly called Providence.
Plato, in his Phædo, includes both these in one definition; as
intimating, that they were one and the same thing, actively and
passively considered. Thus, Fatum _Est ratio quædam divina, lexque
naturæ comes, quæ transiri nequeat, quippe a causa pendens, quæ superior
sit quibusvis impedimentis_. Though that of Bœtius seems the clearer of
the two:—_Fatum_, says he, _est inhærens rebus molilibus despositio per
quam providentia suis quæque nectet ordinibus_.
PHYSIOGNOMY[37], ΦΥΣΙΟΓΝΩΜΙΑ.
There seems to be something in Physiognomy, and it may perhaps bear a
much purer philosophy than these authors (see Note,) were acquainted
with. This, at least, we dare say, that of all the fanciful arts of the
ancients, fallen into disuse by the moderns, there is none has so much
foundation in nature as this. There is an apparent correspondence, or
analogy between the countenance and the mind; the features and
lineaments of the one are directed by the motions and affections of the
other: there is even a peculiar arrangement in the members of the face,
and a peculiar disposition of the countenance, to each particular
affection; and perhaps to each particular idea of the mind. In fact, the
language of the face (_physiognomy_,) is as copious, nay, perhaps, as
distinct and intelligible, as that of the tongue, (_speech_.) Thanks to
bounteous nature, she has not confined us to one only method of
conversing with each other, and of learning each other’s thoughts; we
have several:—We do not wholly depend on the tongue, which may happen to
be bound; and the ear, which may be deaf:—but in those cases we have
another resource, _viz._ the Countenance and the Eye, which afford us
this further advantage, that by comparing the reports of the tongue, (a
member exceedingly liable to deceive,) with those of the face, the
prevarications of the former may be detected.
The foundation of Physiognomy is the different objects that present
themselves to the senses, nay, the different ideas that arise on the
mind, do make some impression on the spirits; and each an impression
correspondent or adequate to its cause,—each, therefore, makes a
different impression. If it be asked how such an impression could be
effected, it is easy to answer; in short, it is a consequence of the
economy of the Creator, who has fixed such a relation between the
several parts of the creation, to the end that we may be apprized of the
approach or recess of things hurtful or useful to us. Should this not be
philosophical enough for our purpose, take the manner of the Cartesian
language, thus: _the animal spirits moved in the organ by an object,
continue their motion to the brain; from whence that motion is
propagated to this or that particular part of the body, as is most
suitable to the design of nature; having first made a proper alteration
in the face by means of its nerves, especially the_ PATHETICI _and_
MOTORES OCCULORUM. See Dr. Gurther’s work, anno 1604.
The face here does the office of a dial-plate, and the wheels and
springs, inside the machine, putting its muscles in motion, shew what is
next to be expected from the striking part. Not that the motion of the
spirits is continued all the way by the impression of the object, as the
impression may terminate in the substance of the brain, the common fund
of the spirits; the rest Dr. Gurther imagines, may be effected much
after the same manner as air is conveyed into the pipes of an organ,
which being uncovered, the air rushes in; and when the keys are let go,
is stopped again.
Now, if by repeated acts, or the frequent entertaining of a private
passion or vice, which natural temperament has hurried, or custom
dragged on to, the face is often put in that posture which attends such
acts; the animal spirits will make such passages through the nerves, (in
which the essence of a habit consists,) that the face is sometimes
unalterably set in that posture, (as the Indian religious are by a long
continued sitting in strange postures in their pagods,) or, at least, it
falls, insensibly and mechanically, into that posture, unless some
present object distort it therefrom, or some dissimulation hide it. This
reason is confirmed by observation: thus we see great drinkers with eyes
generally set towards the nose; the abducent muscles (by some called
bibatorii, or bibatory muscles,) being often employed to put them in
that posture, in order to view their beloved liquor in the glass, at the
time of drinking. Thus, also, lascivious persons are remarkable for the
_oculorum mobilis petulantia_, as Petronius calls it. Hence also we may
account for the Quaker’s expecting face, waiting the spirit to move him;
the melancholy face of most sectaries; the studious face of men of great
application of mind; revengeful and bloody men, like executioners in the
act; and though silence in a sort may awhile pass for wisdom, yet sooner
or later, St. Martin peeps through the disguise to undo all. “A
_changeable face_,” continues Dr. Gurther, “I have observed to show a
_changeable mind_, but I would by no means have what has been said be
understood as without exception; for I doubt not but sometimes there are
found men with great and virtuous souls under very unpromising
outsides.”
“Were our observations a little more strict and delicate, we might,
doubtless, not only distinguish habits and tempers, but also
professions. In effect, does there need much penetration to distinguish
the fierce looks of the veteran soldier, the contentious look of the
practised pleader, the solemn look of the minister of state, or many
others of the like kind?”
A very remarkable physiological anecdote has been given by De La Place,
in his “_Pièces Interrestantes et peu connues_.” Vol. iv. p. 8.
He was assured by a friend that he had seen a voluminous and secret
correspondence which had been carried on between Louis XIV. and his
favourite physician De la Chambre on this science: the faith of the
monarch seems to have been great, and the purpose to which this
correspondence tended was extraordinary indeed, and perhaps scarcely
credible. Who will believe that Louis XIV. was so convinced of that
talent, which De la Chambre attributed to himself, of deciding merely by
the physiognomy of persons, not only on the real bent of their
character, but to what employment they were adapted, that the king
entered into a _secret correspondence_ to obtain the critical notices of
his _physiognomist_. That Louis XIV. should have pursued this system,
undetected by his own courtiers, is also singular; but it appears by
this correspondence, that this art positively swayed him in his choice
of officers and favourites. On one of the backs of these letters De la
Chambre had written, “If I die before his majesty, he will incur great
risk of making many an unfortunate choice.”
This collection of Physiological correspondence, if it does really
exist, would form a curious publication. We, however, have heard nothing
of it.
De la Chambre was an enthusiastic physiognomist, as appears by his
works: “The Characters of the Passions,” four volumes in quarto; “The
art of Knowing Mankind;” and “the Knowledge of Animals.”
Lavater quotes his “vote and interest” in behalf of his favourite
science. It is no less curious, however, to add, that Phillip Earl of
Pembroke, under James I., had formed a particular collection of
portraits, with a view to physiognomonical studies.
The great Prince of Condé was very expert in a sort of Physiognomy which
shewed the peculiar habits, motions, and positions of familiar life, and
mechanical employments. He would sometimes lay wagers with his friends,
that he would guess, upon the Pont Neuf, what trade persons were of that
passed by, from their walk and air.
The celebrated Marshal Laudohn would have entered when young, into the
service of the great Frederick, King of Prussia; but that monarch, with
all his penetration, formed a very erroneous judgment of the young
officer, (as he himself found in the sequel,) and pronounced that he
would never do; in consequence of which Laudohn entered into the service
of the Empress-Queen, Maria Theresa, and became one of the most
formidable opponents of his Prussian Majesty. Marshal Turrene was much
more accurate in his opinion of our illustrious John Duke of
Marlborough, whose future greatness he predicted, when he was serving in
the French army as Ensign Churchill, and known by the unmilitary name of
the “handsome Englishman.”