FOOTNOTES

Judaism.

22.By Judaism we mean here the way of thinking which was prevalent in the Jewish world from the date of the return from Babylon to that of the destruction of Jerusalem. Judaism was of course by no means restricted to the soil of Palestine; it was carried by the diffusion of the Jewish race to all the coasts of the Mediterranean; besides its national centre at Jerusalem, it included a great centre of learning at Alexandria, and its branches, as we have seen[55], extended to the south of Egypt. The chief external impulse which affected it was the spread of Persism. The two systems agreedin their belief in a God of heaven, and in their dislike to idol-worship; and it can be no matter of wonder if one party at least among the Jews readily accepted the more strictly Persian doctrines of the ministry of angels, the struggle between good and evil, the immortality of the soul, and the reward after death, as well as such observances as the washing of hands[56]. Strong Persian influence has been traced in the book of Daniel[57], and as Jewish speculation developed at Alexandria, it took up the use of the Greek language, and so came into touch with the influences that were moulding thought throughout Asia Minor[58]. The most interesting and elevated production of Alexandrine Judaism is the book known as theWisdom of Solomon, probably composed in the first centuryB.C.[59]

‘The Wisdom of Solomon.’

23.The author of this book, whilst himself a firm adherent of monotheism, shews a not altogether intolerant appreciation of those systems in which either the heavenly bodies or the elements seem to occupy the most important place:—

1.For verily all men by nature were but vain who had no perception of God,And from the good things that are seen they gained not power to know him that is,Neither by giving heed to the works did they recognise the artificer;2.But either fire, or wind, or swift air,Or circling stars, or raging water, or the luminaries of heaven,They thought to be gods that rule the world.3.And if it was through delight in their beauty that they took them to be the gods,Let them know how much better than these is their sovereign Lord:For the first author of beauty created them:4.But if it was through astonishment at their power and influence,Let them understand from them how much more powerful is he that formed them:5.For from the greatness of the beauty even of created thingsIn like proportion does man form the image of their first maker.6.But yet for these men there is but small blame,For they too peradventure do but go astrayWhile they are seeking God and desiring to find him.Wisdom of Solomon, xiii 1-6.

For verily all men by nature were but vain who had no perception of God,

And from the good things that are seen they gained not power to know him that is,

Neither by giving heed to the works did they recognise the artificer;

2.But either fire, or wind, or swift air,Or circling stars, or raging water, or the luminaries of heaven,They thought to be gods that rule the world.

But either fire, or wind, or swift air,

Or circling stars, or raging water, or the luminaries of heaven,

They thought to be gods that rule the world.

3.And if it was through delight in their beauty that they took them to be the gods,Let them know how much better than these is their sovereign Lord:For the first author of beauty created them:

And if it was through delight in their beauty that they took them to be the gods,

Let them know how much better than these is their sovereign Lord:

For the first author of beauty created them:

4.But if it was through astonishment at their power and influence,Let them understand from them how much more powerful is he that formed them:

But if it was through astonishment at their power and influence,

Let them understand from them how much more powerful is he that formed them:

5.For from the greatness of the beauty even of created thingsIn like proportion does man form the image of their first maker.

For from the greatness of the beauty even of created things

In like proportion does man form the image of their first maker.

6.But yet for these men there is but small blame,For they too peradventure do but go astrayWhile they are seeking God and desiring to find him.

But yet for these men there is but small blame,

For they too peradventure do but go astray

While they are seeking God and desiring to find him.

Wisdom of Solomon, xiii 1-6.

The same author rises to still greater heights when he personifies Wisdom or Philosophy as a Spirit attendant upon, and almost identified with the deity. Here his language resembles that of the Avestic hymns, describing the angels attendant upon Ahura Mazdā[60]:—

22.For there is in Wisdom a spirit quick of understanding, holy,Alone in kind, manifold,Subtil, freely moving,Clear in utterance, unpolluted,Distinct, unharmed,Loving what is good, keen, unhindered,23.Beneficent, loving toward man,Stedfast, sure, free from care.All-powerful, all-surveying,And penetrating through all spiritsThat are quick of understanding, pure, most subtil:24.For wisdom is more mobile than any motion:Yea, she pervadeth and penetrateth all things by reason of her pureness.25.For she is a breath of the power of God,And a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty:Therefore can nothing defiled find entrance into her.26.For she is an effulgence from everlasting light,And an unspotted mirror of the working of God,And an image of his goodness.27.And she, being one, hath power to do all things:And remaining in herself, reneweth all things,And from generation to generation passing into holy soulsShe maketh men friends of God, and prophets;29.For she is fairer than the sun,And above all the constellations of the stars.Wisdom of Solomon, vii 22-29.

22.For there is in Wisdom a spirit quick of understanding, holy,Alone in kind, manifold,Subtil, freely moving,Clear in utterance, unpolluted,Distinct, unharmed,Loving what is good, keen, unhindered,

22.

For there is in Wisdom a spirit quick of understanding, holy,

Alone in kind, manifold,

Subtil, freely moving,

Clear in utterance, unpolluted,

Distinct, unharmed,

Loving what is good, keen, unhindered,

23.Beneficent, loving toward man,Stedfast, sure, free from care.All-powerful, all-surveying,And penetrating through all spiritsThat are quick of understanding, pure, most subtil:

23.

Beneficent, loving toward man,

Stedfast, sure, free from care.

All-powerful, all-surveying,

And penetrating through all spirits

That are quick of understanding, pure, most subtil:

24.For wisdom is more mobile than any motion:Yea, she pervadeth and penetrateth all things by reason of her pureness.

24.

For wisdom is more mobile than any motion:

Yea, she pervadeth and penetrateth all things by reason of her pureness.

25.For she is a breath of the power of God,And a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty:Therefore can nothing defiled find entrance into her.

25.

For she is a breath of the power of God,

And a clear effluence of the glory of the Almighty:

Therefore can nothing defiled find entrance into her.

26.For she is an effulgence from everlasting light,And an unspotted mirror of the working of God,And an image of his goodness.

26.

For she is an effulgence from everlasting light,

And an unspotted mirror of the working of God,

And an image of his goodness.

27.And she, being one, hath power to do all things:And remaining in herself, reneweth all things,And from generation to generation passing into holy soulsShe maketh men friends of God, and prophets;

27.

And she, being one, hath power to do all things:

And remaining in herself, reneweth all things,

And from generation to generation passing into holy souls

She maketh men friends of God, and prophets;

29.For she is fairer than the sun,And above all the constellations of the stars.

29.

For she is fairer than the sun,

And above all the constellations of the stars.

Wisdom of Solomon, vii 22-29.

Philo the Jew.

24.The fusion of Greek and Judaic modes of thought is most complete in the works of Philo the Jew (c. 20B.C.-54A.D.). This writer in commenting upon the books of the Old Testament, finds himself able by way of interpretation to introduce large parts of Greek philosophies. The place of Wisdom in the writer last named is taken in his works by the Logos or ‘Word[61]’; and the ‘Word’ is many times described as an emanation of the deity, after the Persian fashion[62]. Without anticipating the further discussion of this philosophical conception, we may well notice here how characteristic it is of an age which paid boundless homage to reason, and how it supplies a counterpoise to conceptions of the deity which are rigidly personal. But Philo is of still more direct service to the study of Stoicism, because he had so completely absorbed the system that, where other authorities fail us, we may often trust to his expositions for a knowledge of details of the Stoic system.

Another work of about the same period is theFourth book of the Maccabees, in which Stoic ethics, only slightly disguised, are illustrated from Jewish history. In this fusion of Hebraic and Hellenistic thought, unfortunately interrupted by political convulsions, eminent modern Jews have recognised the natural development of the teaching of the Hebrew prophets[63].

Christianity.

25.The foregoing discussions will already have suggested that Christianity is bound by intimate ties to the other world-religions; though it is beyond our present purpose to examine the precise nature of those ties. It is pre-eminently concerned with the breaking down of Jewish nationalism, and its constant appeal to ‘the truth’ is essentially the same as the appeal of kindred systems to ‘wisdom’ or ‘philosophy.’ The Lord’s Prayer, addressed to the ‘Father in heaven,’ and with its further references to ‘The Name,’ ‘The Kingdom,’ ‘The Will,’ ‘temptation,’ and ‘the Evil One,’ reflectsthe principal conceptions of Persism, of which we are again reminded in the Apocalypse by the reference to the ‘seven spirits of God[64].’ The Sermon on the Mount has been, not without reason, compared to the Buddhist sermon of Benares. With Stoicism Christianity has special ties, both direct and indirect. Its chief apostle was Paul of Tarsus, who was brought up in a city from which more than one eminent Stoic teacher had proceeded[65], and whose ways of thinking are penetrated by Stoic conceptions. The most profound exponent of its theology (the author of theGospel according to John) placed in the forefront of his system the doctrine of the ‘Word’ which directly or (more probably) indirectly he derived from Stoic sources. The early church writers felt the kinship of thought without perceiving the historical relation. To them Cicero in his Stoic works was ‘anima naturaliter Christiana’; and they could only explain the lofty teachings of Seneca by the belief that he was a secret convert of the apostle Paul[66]. Parallelism between Stoic and Christian phraseology is indeed so frequently traced that it may be well to emphasize the need of caution. It is not by single phrases, often reflecting only the general temper of the times, that we can judge the relation of the two systems; it is necessary also to take into account the general framework and the fundamental principles of each.

Druidism.

26.Of the systems named by Aristotle far the least known to us is Druidism. It appeared to Caesar and other Romans to be the national religion of the Gauls and Britons, exactly as Magism appeared to the Greeks to be the national religion of the Persians. But other evidence indicates that Druidism was a reformed religion or philosophy, not unlike Persism in its principles. The training of Druidical students was long and arduous; it claimed to introduce them to a knowledge of heavenly deities denied to the rest of the world,and to reveal to them the immortality of the soul. Our best authority is the Latin poet Lucan:—

‘To you alone it has been granted to know the gods and the powers of heaven; or (it may be) to you alone to know them wrongly. You dwell in deep forests and far-away groves: according to your teaching the shades do not make their way to the still regions of Erebus or the grey realm of Dis below; the same spirit guides a new body in another world; if you know well what you say, then death is but an interlude in life. If not, at least the peoples, on whom the northern star gazes directly, are happy in their illusion; for the greatest of terrors, the fear of death, is nothing to them. Hence it comes that their warriors’ hearts are ready to meet the sword, and their souls have a welcome for death, and they scorn to be thrifty with life, in which they can claim a second share[67].’

Druidism, like Stoicism, seems to have prepared its adherents for a specially ready acceptance of Christianity.

The goal not reached yet.

27.The story of the world-religions, with their countless prophets, teachers, confessors and martyrs, has its tragic side. We ask what was attained by so much study and self-denial, such courageous defiance of custom and prejudice, such bold strivings after the unattainable, so many hardly spent lives and premature deaths, and feel puzzled to find a reply. To the problems proposed the world-religions gave in turn every possible answer. Some found life sweet, others bitter; some bowed before the inexorable rule of destiny, others believed in a personal and benevolent government of the universe; some looked forward to a life after death, others hoped for annihilation. Their theories crystallized into dogmas, and as such became the banners under which national hatreds once more sought outlet in bloodshed. Their adherents sacrificed everything in the hope of reaching certain and scientific truth, and, at the end of all, religion still appears the whole world over to be in conflict with science, and the thousand years during which Wisdom was counted more precious than riches are often looked back upon as a time of human aberration and childishness. It is not to be denied that thousands of noble spirits set out during this period for a goal that they never reached; and those who are inclined to destructive criticism may plausibly characterise their enterprise as vanity.

The path still onward.

28.It is the task of literary research to pierce through this limited view, and to trace the real effect of philosophical effort on the life of individuals and nations. All over the civilized world it raised a race of heroes, struggling not for power or splendour as in the epoch of barbarism, but for the good of their fellow-men. It gave a new value to life, and trampled under foot the fear of death. It united the nations, and spread the reign of law and justice. Where its influence has weakened, the world has not changed for the better; so that the very failures of the world-religions most attest their value. India has relapsed from Buddhism, its own noblest work, to its earlier creeds, and they still bar its path against social progress. Europe, no longer united by the sentiment of a catholic religion, and increasingly indifferent to literary sympathies, is falling back into the slough of frontier impediments and racial hatreds. From all this there is no way out except in the old-fashioned quest of truth and good will.

Estimates of Stoicism.

29.Both in ancient and in modern times the importance of Stoicism has been very variously estimated, according as the critic has set up a purely literary standard, or has taken into account historical influence. To those who look upon philosophy as it is embodied in books, and forms a subject for mental contemplation and aesthetic enjoyment, the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle have always seemed of far higher rank. As contributions to the progress of humanity, in politics and law, in social order and in the inventive adaptation of material surroundings, they can hardly claim to approach any one of the systems discussed in this chapter. But it is with no wish to depreciate the great masterpieces of Hellenic culture that we now set against the criticisms of some of its ardent advocates the maturer judgment of writers who have approached with greater sympathy the study of the Hellenistic and Roman worlds. ‘In Plato and Aristotle,’ says Zeller, ‘Greek philosophy reached its greatest perfection[68].’ ‘Its bloom was short-lived[69].’ ‘Greece was brought into contact with the Eastern nations, whereby it became subject to a back-current of Oriental thought[70].’ ‘With the decline of political independence themental powers of the nation were broken past remedy[71].’ ‘What could be expected in such an age, but that philosophy would become practical, if indeed it were studied at all[72]?’ To minds of another temper it does not seem so fatal that ‘philosophy should become practical.’ ‘It should be insisted,’ says Prof. Mahaffy, ‘that the greatest practical inheritance the Greeks left in philosophy was not the splendour of Plato, or the vast erudition of Aristotle, but the practical systems of Zeno and Epicurus, and the scepticism of Pyrrho. In our own day every man is either a Stoic, an Epicurean, or a Sceptic[73].’ The greatness of Stoicism in particular was eloquently recognised by a French writer of the eighteenth century: ‘elle seule savait faire les citoyens, elle seule faisait les grands hommes, elle seule faisait les grands empereurs[74]!’ With these tributes may be compared that paid by a writer who approaches the subject from the standpoint of modern philosophy and theology. ‘[Stoicism] has perennial fascination; and there are not wanting signs that it appeals with special attractiveness to cultured minds at the present day. It has both speculative and practical value; its analysis of human nature and its theory of knowledge, no less than its ethical teaching, giving insight into the problems of the universe and the right mode of guiding life. As an important stage in the march of philosophical thought, and as a luminous chapter in the history of natural theology, it solicits our attention and will repay our study[75].’

Interpretative Stoicism.

30.Judgments so contradictory reveal the fact that ancient divergencies of philosophic sympathies have their counterparts to-day; and perhaps in studying and judging the systems of antiquity a little more is needed of the sympathy and interpretative elasticity which every man unconsciously uses in maintaining the political, philosophic and religious views to which he is attracted by inheritance or personal conviction. Thus to understand Stoicism fully a man must himself become for the time being a Stoic. As such hewill no longer bind himself by the letter of the school authorities. In many a phrase they use he will recognise an obsolete habit of thought, an exaggerated opposition, a weak compliance in the face of dominant opinions, or a mistaken reliance upon what once seemed logical conclusions. At other points he will see difficulties felt to which an answer can now easily be supplied. At each step he will ask, not so much what the Stoics thought, but what a Stoic must necessarily think. Whilst constantly referring to the original authorities, he will allow much to be forgotten, and in other cases he will draw out more meaning than the writers themselves set in their words. If he can walk, boldly but not without caution, on this path, he will assuredly find that Stoicism throws light on all the great questions to which men still seek answers, and that to some at least it still holds out a beckoning hand.

FOOTNOTES[1]See below, §441.[2]Diog. L. Prooem. 1.[3]Gomperz,Greek Thinkers, ii p. 161; and below, §94.[4]‘principes Chaldaei, qui in patentibus campis colebant, stellarum motus et vias et coetus intuentes, quid ex his efficeretur observaverunt’ Gellius,N. A.xiv 1, 8.[5]Sir E. Walter Maunder, in theNineteenth Centuryfor September 1900.[6]‘quinque stellarum potestates Chaldaeorum observatio excepit’ Seneca,N. Q.ii 32, 6.[7]This is well described by Cicero, translating from a Stoic source: ‘cum fato omnia fiant, si quis mortalis possit esse, qui colligationem causarum omnium perspiciat animo, nihil eum profecto fallat. qui enim teneat causas rerum futurarum, idem necesse est omnia teneat quae futura sint’Div.i 56, 127. It seems reasonable to suppose that this general conception of ‘fate’ or ‘destiny’ is deduced from the unchanging movements of the heavenly bodies.[8]‘videbis quinque sidera diversas agentia vias; ex horum levissimis motibus fortunae populorum dependent’ Sen.Dial.vi 18, 3.[9]‘aiunt quadringenta septuaginta milia annorum in periclitandis experiundisque pueris, quicunque essent nati, Babylonios posuisse’ Cic.Div.ii 46, 97. I assume that the original tradition named the smaller number suggested above.[10]‘duo apud Chaldaeos studuisse se dicunt, Epigenes et Apollonius Myndius’ Sen.N. Q.vii 4, 1; ‘Diogenes Stoicus [Chaldaeis] concedit, aliquid ut praedicere possint’ Cic.Div.ii 43, 90. Seneca concludes against their authority, observing (i) that a proper horoscope should include all the stars in the heaven at the moment of birth, and (ii) that twins should always have the same fortune, which is obviously untrue; seeN. Q.ii 32, 6 to 8,Ben.vii 1, 5.[11]‘tu ne quaesieris (scire nefas), quem mihi, quem tibi | finem di dederint, Leuconoe, nec Babylonios | temptaris numeros’ Hor.C.i 11, 1-3.[12]See the interesting tale of Thrasyllus and Tiberius in Tac.Ann.vi 21, to which the author affects to give some credit.[13]e.g., ‘seu Libra seu me Scorpios adspicit | formidulosus, pars violentior | natalis horae, seu tyrannus | Hesperiae Capricornus undae, | utrumque nostrum incredibili modo | consentit astrum’ Hor.C.ii 17, 17-22.[14]‘Eudoxus, qui inter sapientiae sectas clarissimam utilissimamque [artem magicam] intellegi voluit, Zoroastrem hunc sex millibus annorum ante Platonis mortem fuisse prodidit: sic et Aristoteles’ Pliny,N. H.xxx 2, 1; cf. Diog. L. Prooem. 2 and 8.[15]Williams-Jackson,Zoroaster, p. 161.[16]ib.p. 174.[17]K. Geldner,Encycl. Brit.ed. x, article ‘Zoroaster.’[18]Williams-Jackson, p. 7.[19]‘Magiam ... cuius scientiae saeculis priscis multa ex Chaldaeorum arcanis Bactrianus addidit Zoroastres’ Amm. Marc. xxiii 6, 32.[20][Zoroastres] ‘primus dicitur mundi principia siderumque motus diligentissime spectasse’ Justinus,Hist. Phil.i 1, 9 (Williams-Jackson, p. 237): ‘astris multum et frequenter intentus’ Clem. Rom.Recogn.iv 27.[21]‘tradunt Zoroastrem in desertis caseo vixisse’ Pliny,N. H.xi 97.[22]‘[Ahura Mazdā] created the paths of the sun and the stars; he made the moon to wax and wane’ (Yasna43, 3); ‘he made the light and the darkness’ (ib.5); ‘he is the father of the good’ (ib.46, 2).[23]‘Ζωροάστρης ὁ μάγος ... προσαπεφαίνετο, τὸν μὲν ἑοικέναι φωτὶ μάλιστα τῶν αἰσθητῶν, τὸν δ’ ἔμπαλιν σκότῳ καὶ ἀγνοίᾳ’ Plut.Isid. et Osir.46.[24]‘Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia:—all the kingdoms of the earth hath the Lord, the God of heaven, given me; and he hath charged me to build him an house in Jerusalem’ Ezra i 2.[25]See the interesting papyri records recently discovered in Elephantine, and published by Dr Sachau of Berlin. A general account of them is given by Prof. Driver in the LondonGuardianfor Nov. 6, 1907.[26]Cicero rightly appreciated the religious character of the Persian invasions: ‘delubra humanis consecrata simulacris Persae nefaria putaverunt; eamque unam ob causam Xerxes inflammari Atheniensium fana iussisse dicitur, quod deos, quorum domus esset omnis hic mundus, inclusos parietibus contineri nefas esse duceret’Rep.iii 9, 14. So Themistocles as represented by Herodotus: ‘the gods and heroes grudged that one man should become king both of Asia and of Europe, and he a man unholy and presumptuous, one who made no difference between things sacred and things profane, burning and casting down the images of the gods’Historyviii 109 (Macaulay’s translation).[27]See below, §41.[28]‘Images and temples and altars they do not account it lawful to erect, nay, they even charge with folly those who do these things; and this, as it seems to me, because they do not account the gods to be in the likeness of men, as do the Hellenes. But it is their wont to perform sacrifices to Zeus, going up to the most lofty of the mountains, and the whole circle of the heavens they call Zeus: and they sacrifice to the Sun and the Moon and the Earth, to Fire and to Water and to the Winds; these are the only gods to whom they have sacrificed ever from the first’Historyi 131 (Macaulay’s translation).[29]Cic.Sen.22, 79 to 81, after Xen.Cyr.viii 7.[30]In the hymns of Zarathustra we can only trace the beginnings of this system, as in the following: ‘All-wise Lord, all-powerful one, and thou Piety, and Righteousness, Good Mind and the Kingdom, listen ye to me and prosper my every beginning’Yasna33, 11.[31]Yashtxix 15, 16. The translation follows Geldner,Drei Yasht aus dem Zendavesta, p. 15.[32]Ancient Greek hymn, φῶς ἱλαρὸν ἁγίας δόξης, translated by J. Keble.[33]J. H. Newman.[34]‘Zoroaster taught the Persians neither to burn their dead, nor otherwise to defile fire.’ Xanthos (B.C.465-425), as quoted by Nicolaus of Damascus (1st centuryB.C.).[35]See §10, note 28; Strabo xv 3, 16.[36]‘Zarathustra said:—the earthly demon is water derived from earth; the heavenly demon is fire mixed with air’ Origen,contra haereses, i col. 3025.[37]‘The Persians first worshipped fire as a god in heaven’ Clemens Romanus,Hom.ix 4 f.[38]‘Zoroaster the Magian says:—God is the primal, the incorruptible, the eternal, the unbegotten, the indivisible, the incomparable, the charioteer of all good, he that cannot be bribed, the best of the good, the wisest of the wise; he is also the father of good laws and justice, the self-taught, the natural, perfect, and wise, the only discoverer of the sacred and natural’ Euseb.Praep. ev.i 10.[39]‘From the writings of Zoroaster it is inferred that he divided philosophy into three parts, physics, economics, and politics’ Schol. onFirst Alcibiades, p. 122A(Williams-Jackson, p. 231).[40]‘They educate their children, beginning at five years old and going on till twenty, in three things only; in riding, in shooting, and in speaking the truth’ Herod. i 136.[41]See above, §3.[42]Alexander had reached the river Hyphasis, the modern Bias.[43]Plutarch’sLife of Alexander, ch. lxiv (translation by Aubrey Stewart and George Long, London, 1892).[44]Mahāvagga i 6, 19 to 22, after H. Oldenberg,Buddha, p. 139, and the translation inS. B. E.xiii pp. 95, 96.[45]Dhammapada i 5 and xvii 123 (S. B. E.x pp. 5, 58).[46]Mahaffy,Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 164. These alternative interpretations of the doctrine ofNirvanamust not be accepted as uncontroversial.[47]Mahaffy,Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 163; V. A. Smith,Açoka, p. 174.[48]See Gomperz,Greek Thinkers, ii pp. 155-162, and below, §52.[49]Epict.Disc.iii 24, 64 to 66 (Long’s translation).[50]ib.iii 22, 45 to 50.[51]‘The system that stood to Pagan Rome more nearly than anything else in the place of a religion’ Crossley,M. Aurelius, iv Pref. p. xii. ‘Its history resembles that of a religion rather than a speculative system’ Rendall,M. Aurelius, Pref. p. xv.[52]See below, §173.[53]‘Patricians, as we call them, only too often fail in natural affection’ M. Aurel.To himself, i 12 (Rendall’s translation). See also below, §§442,443.[54]‘Dying, [Stoicism] bequeathed no small part of its disciplines, its dogmas, and its phraseology to the Christianity by which it was ingathered’ Rendall,M. Aurelius, Pref. p. xv. ‘The basis of Christian society is not Christian, but Roman and Stoical’ Hatch,Hibbert Lectures, p. 170. ‘[The post-Aristotelian period] supplied the scientific mould into which Christianity in the early years of its growth was cast, and bearing the shape of which it has come down to us’ O. J. Reichel in his Preface to the translation of Zeller’sStoics, etc.[55]See above, §9.[56]It is not admitted by the best authorities that the term ‘Pharisee’ is in any way connected with the name of ‘Persian’ or its modern equivalent ‘Parsee.’ But the resemblance in beliefs and habits is very striking, especially if we contrast the Pharisees with their Sadducee opponents. ‘The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess both’ Acts xxiii 8.[57]D. A. Bertholet, ‘The value of the history of religions,’Homiletic Review, Nov. 1908.[58]See Fairweather,Background of the Gospels, ch. vii (on ‘the apocalyptic movement and literature’).[59]ib.p. 337.[60]See above, §12.[61]Heinze,Lehre vom Logos, pp. 251, 252.[62]‘The Logos is related to God as Wisdom, and is the full expression of the Divine mind. He is the sheckinah or glory of God, the first-born Son of God, the second God’ Fairweather,Background of the Gospels, p. 358.[63]Friedländer,Die religiösen Bewegungen innerhalb des Judaïsmus, 1905.[64]‘There were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God’ Revelation iv 5.[65]Of these Antipater of Tarsus is the best known, for whom see §110; others are Heraclides, Archedemus, Zeno of Tarsus, Nestor, Athenodorus, etc., for whom see Index of Proper Names.[66]Winckler,Der Stoicismus, p. 2; Lightfoot,Philippians, pp. 270, 271.[67]Lucan,Phars.i 452-462.[68]Stoics, etc., p. 1.[69]ib.p. 10.[70]ib.pp. 13, 14.[71]ib.p. 15.[72]ib.p. 16.[73]Greek Life and Thought, Introd., pp. xxxvii, xxxviii.[74]Montesquieu,Esprit des lois, ii 24.[75]W. L. Davidson,The Stoic Creed, p. v.

[1]See below, §441.

[2]Diog. L. Prooem. 1.

[3]Gomperz,Greek Thinkers, ii p. 161; and below, §94.

[4]‘principes Chaldaei, qui in patentibus campis colebant, stellarum motus et vias et coetus intuentes, quid ex his efficeretur observaverunt’ Gellius,N. A.xiv 1, 8.

[5]Sir E. Walter Maunder, in theNineteenth Centuryfor September 1900.

[6]‘quinque stellarum potestates Chaldaeorum observatio excepit’ Seneca,N. Q.ii 32, 6.

[7]This is well described by Cicero, translating from a Stoic source: ‘cum fato omnia fiant, si quis mortalis possit esse, qui colligationem causarum omnium perspiciat animo, nihil eum profecto fallat. qui enim teneat causas rerum futurarum, idem necesse est omnia teneat quae futura sint’Div.i 56, 127. It seems reasonable to suppose that this general conception of ‘fate’ or ‘destiny’ is deduced from the unchanging movements of the heavenly bodies.

[8]‘videbis quinque sidera diversas agentia vias; ex horum levissimis motibus fortunae populorum dependent’ Sen.Dial.vi 18, 3.

[9]‘aiunt quadringenta septuaginta milia annorum in periclitandis experiundisque pueris, quicunque essent nati, Babylonios posuisse’ Cic.Div.ii 46, 97. I assume that the original tradition named the smaller number suggested above.

[10]‘duo apud Chaldaeos studuisse se dicunt, Epigenes et Apollonius Myndius’ Sen.N. Q.vii 4, 1; ‘Diogenes Stoicus [Chaldaeis] concedit, aliquid ut praedicere possint’ Cic.Div.ii 43, 90. Seneca concludes against their authority, observing (i) that a proper horoscope should include all the stars in the heaven at the moment of birth, and (ii) that twins should always have the same fortune, which is obviously untrue; seeN. Q.ii 32, 6 to 8,Ben.vii 1, 5.

[11]‘tu ne quaesieris (scire nefas), quem mihi, quem tibi | finem di dederint, Leuconoe, nec Babylonios | temptaris numeros’ Hor.C.i 11, 1-3.

[12]See the interesting tale of Thrasyllus and Tiberius in Tac.Ann.vi 21, to which the author affects to give some credit.

[14]‘Eudoxus, qui inter sapientiae sectas clarissimam utilissimamque [artem magicam] intellegi voluit, Zoroastrem hunc sex millibus annorum ante Platonis mortem fuisse prodidit: sic et Aristoteles’ Pliny,N. H.xxx 2, 1; cf. Diog. L. Prooem. 2 and 8.

[15]Williams-Jackson,Zoroaster, p. 161.

[16]ib.p. 174.

[17]K. Geldner,Encycl. Brit.ed. x, article ‘Zoroaster.’

[18]Williams-Jackson, p. 7.

[19]‘Magiam ... cuius scientiae saeculis priscis multa ex Chaldaeorum arcanis Bactrianus addidit Zoroastres’ Amm. Marc. xxiii 6, 32.

[20][Zoroastres] ‘primus dicitur mundi principia siderumque motus diligentissime spectasse’ Justinus,Hist. Phil.i 1, 9 (Williams-Jackson, p. 237): ‘astris multum et frequenter intentus’ Clem. Rom.Recogn.iv 27.

[21]‘tradunt Zoroastrem in desertis caseo vixisse’ Pliny,N. H.xi 97.

[22]‘[Ahura Mazdā] created the paths of the sun and the stars; he made the moon to wax and wane’ (Yasna43, 3); ‘he made the light and the darkness’ (ib.5); ‘he is the father of the good’ (ib.46, 2).

[23]‘Ζωροάστρης ὁ μάγος ... προσαπεφαίνετο, τὸν μὲν ἑοικέναι φωτὶ μάλιστα τῶν αἰσθητῶν, τὸν δ’ ἔμπαλιν σκότῳ καὶ ἀγνοίᾳ’ Plut.Isid. et Osir.46.

[24]‘Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia:—all the kingdoms of the earth hath the Lord, the God of heaven, given me; and he hath charged me to build him an house in Jerusalem’ Ezra i 2.

[25]See the interesting papyri records recently discovered in Elephantine, and published by Dr Sachau of Berlin. A general account of them is given by Prof. Driver in the LondonGuardianfor Nov. 6, 1907.

[26]Cicero rightly appreciated the religious character of the Persian invasions: ‘delubra humanis consecrata simulacris Persae nefaria putaverunt; eamque unam ob causam Xerxes inflammari Atheniensium fana iussisse dicitur, quod deos, quorum domus esset omnis hic mundus, inclusos parietibus contineri nefas esse duceret’Rep.iii 9, 14. So Themistocles as represented by Herodotus: ‘the gods and heroes grudged that one man should become king both of Asia and of Europe, and he a man unholy and presumptuous, one who made no difference between things sacred and things profane, burning and casting down the images of the gods’Historyviii 109 (Macaulay’s translation).

[27]See below, §41.

[28]‘Images and temples and altars they do not account it lawful to erect, nay, they even charge with folly those who do these things; and this, as it seems to me, because they do not account the gods to be in the likeness of men, as do the Hellenes. But it is their wont to perform sacrifices to Zeus, going up to the most lofty of the mountains, and the whole circle of the heavens they call Zeus: and they sacrifice to the Sun and the Moon and the Earth, to Fire and to Water and to the Winds; these are the only gods to whom they have sacrificed ever from the first’Historyi 131 (Macaulay’s translation).

[29]Cic.Sen.22, 79 to 81, after Xen.Cyr.viii 7.

[30]In the hymns of Zarathustra we can only trace the beginnings of this system, as in the following: ‘All-wise Lord, all-powerful one, and thou Piety, and Righteousness, Good Mind and the Kingdom, listen ye to me and prosper my every beginning’Yasna33, 11.

[31]Yashtxix 15, 16. The translation follows Geldner,Drei Yasht aus dem Zendavesta, p. 15.

[32]Ancient Greek hymn, φῶς ἱλαρὸν ἁγίας δόξης, translated by J. Keble.

[33]J. H. Newman.

[34]‘Zoroaster taught the Persians neither to burn their dead, nor otherwise to defile fire.’ Xanthos (B.C.465-425), as quoted by Nicolaus of Damascus (1st centuryB.C.).

[35]See §10, note 28; Strabo xv 3, 16.

[36]‘Zarathustra said:—the earthly demon is water derived from earth; the heavenly demon is fire mixed with air’ Origen,contra haereses, i col. 3025.

[37]‘The Persians first worshipped fire as a god in heaven’ Clemens Romanus,Hom.ix 4 f.

[38]‘Zoroaster the Magian says:—God is the primal, the incorruptible, the eternal, the unbegotten, the indivisible, the incomparable, the charioteer of all good, he that cannot be bribed, the best of the good, the wisest of the wise; he is also the father of good laws and justice, the self-taught, the natural, perfect, and wise, the only discoverer of the sacred and natural’ Euseb.Praep. ev.i 10.

[39]‘From the writings of Zoroaster it is inferred that he divided philosophy into three parts, physics, economics, and politics’ Schol. onFirst Alcibiades, p. 122A(Williams-Jackson, p. 231).

[40]‘They educate their children, beginning at five years old and going on till twenty, in three things only; in riding, in shooting, and in speaking the truth’ Herod. i 136.

[41]See above, §3.

[42]Alexander had reached the river Hyphasis, the modern Bias.

[43]Plutarch’sLife of Alexander, ch. lxiv (translation by Aubrey Stewart and George Long, London, 1892).

[44]Mahāvagga i 6, 19 to 22, after H. Oldenberg,Buddha, p. 139, and the translation inS. B. E.xiii pp. 95, 96.

[45]Dhammapada i 5 and xvii 123 (S. B. E.x pp. 5, 58).

[46]Mahaffy,Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 164. These alternative interpretations of the doctrine ofNirvanamust not be accepted as uncontroversial.

[47]Mahaffy,Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 163; V. A. Smith,Açoka, p. 174.

[48]See Gomperz,Greek Thinkers, ii pp. 155-162, and below, §52.

[49]Epict.Disc.iii 24, 64 to 66 (Long’s translation).

[50]ib.iii 22, 45 to 50.

[51]‘The system that stood to Pagan Rome more nearly than anything else in the place of a religion’ Crossley,M. Aurelius, iv Pref. p. xii. ‘Its history resembles that of a religion rather than a speculative system’ Rendall,M. Aurelius, Pref. p. xv.

[52]See below, §173.

[53]‘Patricians, as we call them, only too often fail in natural affection’ M. Aurel.To himself, i 12 (Rendall’s translation). See also below, §§442,443.

[54]‘Dying, [Stoicism] bequeathed no small part of its disciplines, its dogmas, and its phraseology to the Christianity by which it was ingathered’ Rendall,M. Aurelius, Pref. p. xv. ‘The basis of Christian society is not Christian, but Roman and Stoical’ Hatch,Hibbert Lectures, p. 170. ‘[The post-Aristotelian period] supplied the scientific mould into which Christianity in the early years of its growth was cast, and bearing the shape of which it has come down to us’ O. J. Reichel in his Preface to the translation of Zeller’sStoics, etc.

[55]See above, §9.

[56]It is not admitted by the best authorities that the term ‘Pharisee’ is in any way connected with the name of ‘Persian’ or its modern equivalent ‘Parsee.’ But the resemblance in beliefs and habits is very striking, especially if we contrast the Pharisees with their Sadducee opponents. ‘The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess both’ Acts xxiii 8.

[57]D. A. Bertholet, ‘The value of the history of religions,’Homiletic Review, Nov. 1908.

[58]See Fairweather,Background of the Gospels, ch. vii (on ‘the apocalyptic movement and literature’).

[59]ib.p. 337.

[60]See above, §12.

[61]Heinze,Lehre vom Logos, pp. 251, 252.

[62]‘The Logos is related to God as Wisdom, and is the full expression of the Divine mind. He is the sheckinah or glory of God, the first-born Son of God, the second God’ Fairweather,Background of the Gospels, p. 358.

[63]Friedländer,Die religiösen Bewegungen innerhalb des Judaïsmus, 1905.

[64]‘There were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God’ Revelation iv 5.

[65]Of these Antipater of Tarsus is the best known, for whom see §110; others are Heraclides, Archedemus, Zeno of Tarsus, Nestor, Athenodorus, etc., for whom see Index of Proper Names.

[66]Winckler,Der Stoicismus, p. 2; Lightfoot,Philippians, pp. 270, 271.

[67]Lucan,Phars.i 452-462.

[68]Stoics, etc., p. 1.

[69]ib.p. 10.

[70]ib.pp. 13, 14.

[71]ib.p. 15.

[72]ib.p. 16.

[73]Greek Life and Thought, Introd., pp. xxxvii, xxxviii.

[74]Montesquieu,Esprit des lois, ii 24.

[75]W. L. Davidson,The Stoic Creed, p. v.

Back to Index Next