ly, thus: "In all sincerity, in all truthfulness, in consistency with the truest and purest sentiments of our nature." The other rendering, which would refer it merely to the declaration of truth, would be comparatively tame, besides producing a pleonasm in λéyɛv. Our translation is also in perfect keeping with the character of the honest and truthful Clinias, as he is, with great dramatic skill, represented to us throughout this whole argument. He uses the language of a man who never had felt a doubt on the subject. This is a favourite word with Plato, and frequently to be found in his writings in this subjective sense. For a very excellent example, see the Theætetus, 202, B.: Õтav μèv οὖν ἄνευ λόγου τὴν ἀληθῆ δόξαν τινός τις λάβῃ, ΑΛΗΘΕΥΕΙΝ μὲν αὐτοῦ τὴν ψυχὴν περὶ αὐτό, γιγνώσκειν δ' ou. The sentiment is, that the soul may be subjectively in harmony with the truth, so as cordially to embrace it in its creed before scientific knowledge, or an objective presentation of it to the speculative reason. It may have the life before it possesses a clear apprehension of the doctrine. This may be, and often undoubtedly is, the case in religion; but those who would, on this account, undervalue logical and doctrinal statements, or what they rather disdainfully style systematic theology, are in danger either of a mysti. cism, in which all clear perceptions of truth are utterly lost, or of taking opinions upon the mere testimony of others, or on the credit of a blind tradition, without either light in the reason, or any true warmth in the affections We have an illustration of this truthful state of mind in the course which Clinias pursues in the next reрlу-πрштоν μὲν γῆ καὶ ἥλιος, &c. He enters upon the argument with all the confidence of an easy victory. He appeals at once to the most obvious phenomena, not so much as scientific proofs of the Divine existence, but rather as visible representations of a manifest Divine power. "The Heavens declare (to all whose souls are prepared for it) the glory of God." But as though this had too much the appearance of speculative reasoning, he retreats again to his stronghold, the feelings of his own nature, and appeals to the common and universal sentiments of mankind. This, with the bare aspect of the heavens, he deems enough for those who were true-hearted (dλnevovTES) concerning the Gods. We are taught in the Holy Scriptures, that not only a true belief, but also unbelief in respect to the Divine existence, has its seat primarily in the affections rather than in the intellect. "The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God." The Hebrew word here is sometimes used for the understanding; still, like the Greek opéves, with all its cognates, such as φρονέω, φρόνησις, φρόνημα, &c., it generally refers to the intellect, not so much in a speculative or scientific aspect, but rather as modified by the state of the affections or moral powers. IV. The Orphic Poetry. PAGE 5, LINE 12. Οἱ μὲν ἔν τισι μέτροις, οἱ δὲ καὶ ἄνευ μέτρων. "Some in poetry and some in prose." It is very uncertain what prose writings are here referred to. Those in poetry must have been the works of Homer, Hesiod, and perhaps of Orpheus. The term яаλαιóтатоi (most ancient) would seem to refer to some productions older than the Iliad and the Theogonia. These might be styled raλaià, in comparison with the period of Grecian literature in which Plato lived, which, although many centuries posterior in time, was not separated from them by any distinct literary epoch prior to the Persian wars. They could not, however, be well entitled to the epithet яаλαιóтaтα, which, as it is introduced, and as the context shows, is meant to designate the most remote of two distinct periods, in reference to which it is intimated, there was a progression, if we may so style it, from the cosmological to the theogonic or my. thological. The first, or most ancient class, were of the former description. They were more philosophical than the latter, more taken up with the origin of things, that allabsorbing question which so engrossed the early mind: s γέγονεν ἡ ΠΡΩΤΗ ΦΥΣΙΣ οὐρανοῦ τῶν τε ἄλλων. They were pantheistic rather than polytheistic, manifesting a de. parture, but still a less departure from the primitive religion than is denoted by the latter stage. (See Note 9, page 5.) All these marks correspond well with the nature of some of the hymns styled Orphic, under which name a few fragments, whether spurious or not. have survived to our own day. Although these are generally regarded as productions of a much later age, yet, from the frequent reference made to Orpheus by the Greek poets, it would seem almost certain that a collection of hymns under this name existed in the most ancient times, forming that copious fund or storehouse of rich poetical appellations, from which Homer, and subsequently Eschylus, were supplied, besides being the source of whatever is pantheistical or mystical in the Grecian tragedies. The existence of forgeries is evidence that there must have been originals in imitation of which they were composed, and an ancient philosophy: and theology, which had once exerted great influence on the human mind, to serve as their plausible and probable foundation. In connexion with the passage before us, compare lib. iv., 716, Α.: Ὁ μὲν δὴ θεός, ὥσπερ καὶ ὁ παλαιὸς λόγος, ἀρχήν τε καὶ τελευτὴν καὶ μέσα τῶν ὄντων ἁπάντων ἔχων. This is almost the very language of one of the so-styled Orphic fragments now extant, and is directly referred to Orpheus by the scholiast on the place:—θεὸν μὲν τὸν δη μιουργὸν σαφῶς, παλαιὸν δὲ λόγον λέγει τὸν ΟΡΦΙΚΟΝ, ὅς ἐστιν οὗτος, Ζεὺς ἀρχὴ, Ζεὺς μέσσα, Διὸς δ' ἐκ πάντα τέτυκται· Should any one say that this resembles very much the language of Thales, or some of the philosophers of that period, and that, therefore, the ignorant old scholiast had been imposed upon by one who had affixed a fabulous name and given a poetical dress to some of their dogmas,—why, we would reply, may not Thales and others have derived this peculiar mode of expression from a still earlier source, and why this disposition to charge the scholiasts and Christian fathers with combining to produce such useless and yet elaborate forgeries as some critics are constantly connecting with their names? We say useless, because a philosophy and theology, such as appears in these hymns, did, beyond all question, exist at a very early period, and the poetical dress, had it not been real, would have added nothing to the argument they sought to derive from them. For places in the ancient writings, in which reference is made to Orpheus and his poems, the reader is referred to Plato, Ion, vol. iii., p. 134, Leip.; Convivium, vii., 219; De Legibus, vi., 230; Cratylus, ii., 263; Aristotle, De Anim., i, 8; Euripides, Rhesus, 947; Hippolytus, 967; Cicero, De Nat. Deor., i., 38; Diod. Sic., iv., 25; Just. Mart., Cohortat. ad Græcos, p. 17; Athenagoras, Legat. pro Christ., xv., 64, 65. I 2 ས. Plato's Regard for Antiquity and the Ancient Mythology.— His Use of the Word Θεοί. PAGE 6, LINE 1. Οὐ ῥᾴδιον ἐπιτιμᾷν παλαιοῖς οὖσιν. "It is hard to find fault with them, seeing they are ancient things." We discover, in this and similar expressions, Plato's conservative spirit and reverence for antiquity, struggling with his conviction of the importance of having the minds of the young imbued with higher notions of the Divine Nature than could be obtained from the ancient poets. The same feelings are manifested in that passage in the Republic, in which he dismisses Homer, with the rest of the poets, from his imaginary City of the Soul, although, at the same time, he sends him away with a garland of honour on his head. "Should such a one (he says) come to our city, wishing to exhibit his poems, we would, indeed, reverence him as something sacred, and wonderful, and delightfully pleasant, yet still would we say that no such man could abide with us: ἀποπέμποιμέν τε ἂν εἰς ἄλλην πόλιν, μύρον κατὰ τῆς κεφαλῆς καταχέαντες καὶ ἐρίῳ στέψαντες, and we would send him away to another state, having poured myrrh upon his head and crowned him with a wreath." Republic, 398, A. We find, however, everywhere, in his works, a strong attachment to the ancient myths, wherever they contained nothing gross or of fensive to his views of morality; a number of which, and those, too, distinguished for the feeling of awe and sublimity with which they inspire the reader, he has himself presented in some of the most important and philosophical of his dialogues. It is exceedingly interesting to contemplate the peculiar condition of this philosopher, endeavouring to reform what he felt he had no power or commission to abolish. Having no Divine warrant, like the Hebrew prophets or the apostles |