MANNER, the ORNAMENTS, the GRACES, which fucceed in this fhape, are more arbitrary and cafual: But the merit of riper years is almoft every-where the fame; and confifts chiefly in integrity, humanity, ability, knowlege and the other more folid and ufeful qualities of the human mind.

WHAT you infift on, replied PALAMEDES, may have fome foundation, when you adhere to the maxims of common life and ordinary conduct. Experience and the practice of the world readily correct any great extravagance on either fide. But what fay you to artificial lives and manners? How do you reconcile the maxims, on which, in diferent ages and nations, these are founded?

WHAT do you understand by artificial lives and manners, faid I? I explain myself, replied he. You know, that religion had, in antient times, very little influence on common life, and that, after men had performed their duty in facrifices and prayers at the temple, they thought, that the gods left the reft of their conduct to themfelves, and were little pleafed or offended with those virtues or vices, which only affected the peace and happinefs of human fociety. In those ages, it was the bufinefs of philofophy alone to regulate men's ordinary behavior and deportment; and accordingly, we may obferve, that this being the fole principle, by which a man could elevate himself above his fellows, it acquired a mighty afcendant over many, and produced great fingularities of maxims and of conduct. At prefent, that philofophy has loft the allurement of novelty, it has no fuch extenfive influence; but feems to confine itself mostly to speculations in the closet ; in the fame manner, as the antient religion was limited to facrifices in the temple. Its place is now fupplied by the modern religion, which infpects our whole conduct, and prescribes an univerfal rule to our actions, to our words, to our very thoughts and inclinations; a rule fo much the more auftere, that it is guarded by infinite, tho' diftant, rewards and punishments; and no infraction of it can ever be concealed or difguifed.

DIOGENES is the moft celebrated model of extravagant philofophy. Let us seek a parallel to him in modern times. We fhall not difgrace any philosophic name by a comparison with the DOMINICS OF LOYOLAS, or any canonized monk or friar. Let us compare him to PASCAL, a man of parts and genius as well as DIOGENES himself; and perhaps too, a man of virtue, had he allowed his virtuous inclinations to have exerted and displayed themselves.

THE foundation of DIOGENES'S conduct was an endeavor to render himself an independent being as much as poffible, and to confine all his wants and defires and pleasures within himself and his own mind: The aim of PASCAL was to keep a perpetual sense of his dependance before his eyes, and never to forget his numberlefs wants and neceffities. The antient fupported himself by magnanimity, oftentation, pride, and the idea of his own fuperiority above his fellowcreatures. The modern made conftant profeffion of humility and abasement, of the contempt and hatred of himself; and endeavored to attain these supposed virtues, as far as they are attainable. The aufterities of the GREEK were in order to inure himself to hardships, and prevent his ever fuffering: Thofe of the FRENCHMAN were embraced merely for their own fake, and in order to fuffer as much as poffible. The philofopher indulged himself in the most beastly pleasures, even in public: The faint refufed himfelf the most innocent, even in private.

The

The former thought it his duty to love his friends, and to rail at them, and reprove them, and scold them: The latter endeavored to be abfolutely indifferent towards his nearest relations, and to love and fpeak well of his enemies. The great object of DIOGENES's wit was every kind of fuperftition, that is, every kind of religion known in his time. The mortality of the foul was his standard principle; and even his fentiments of a divine providence feem to have been very licentious. The most ridiculous fuperftitions directed PASCAL's faith and practice; and an extreme contempt of this life, in comparison of the future, was the chief foundation of his conduct.

IN fuch a remarkable contrast do these two men ftand: Yet both of them have met with general admiration in their different ages, and have been proposed as models of imitation. Where then is the univerfal standard of morals, which you talk of? And what rule fhall we establish for the many different, nay contrary fentiments of mankind?

AN experiment, faid I, which fucceeds in the air, will not always fucceed in a vacuum. When men depart from the maxims of common reafon, and affect thefe artificial lives, as you call them, no-one can answer for what will please or difplease them. They are in a different element from the rest of mankind; and the natural principles of their mind play not with the fame regularity, as if left to themselves, free from the illufions of religious fuperftition or philofophical enthufiafm.

1

THE

NATURAL HISTORY

O F

RELIGION.

INTRODUCTION.

A

S every enquiry, which regards religion is of the utmost importance, there are two queftions in particular, which challenge our principal attention, to wit, that concerning its foundation in reason, and that concerning its origin in human nature. Happily, the first queftion, which is the most important, admits of the most obvious, at least, the cleareft folution. The whole frame of nature befpeaks an intelligent author; and no rational enquirer can, after ferious reflexion, fufpend his belief a moment with regard to the primary principles of genuine Theifm and Religion. But the other queftion, concerning the origin of religion in human nature, is expofed to fome more difficulty. The belief of invifible, intelligent power has been very generally diffused over the human race, in all places and in all ages; but it has neither perhaps been fo univerfal as to admit of no exceptions, nor has it been, in any degree, uniform in the ideas, which it has fuggefted. Some nations have been discovered, who entertained no fentiments of Religion, if travellers and hiftorians may be credited; and no two nations, and scarce any two men, have ever agreed precifely in the fame fentiments. It would appear, therefore, that this preconception fprings not from an original inftinct or primary impreffion of nature, fuch as gives rife to felf-love, affection betwixt the fexes, love of progeny, gratitude, refentment; fince every inftinct of this kind has been found abfolutely univerfal in all nations and ages, and has always a precife, determinate object, which it inflexibly purfues. The first religious principles must be fecondary; fuch as may easily be perverted by various accidents and caufes, and whofe operation too, in fome cafes, may, by an extraor

Rrr2

dinary

dinary concurrence of circumftances, be altogether prevented. What thofe prinCiples are, which give rife to the original belief, and what thofe accidents and caufes are, which direct its operation, is the fubject of our prefent enquiry.

SECT. I. That Polytheism was the primary Religion of Men.

It appears to me, that if we confider the improvement of human fociety, from rude beginnings to a ftate of greater perfection, polytheifm or idolatry was, and neceffarily muft have been, the first and most antient religion of mankind. This opinion I fhall endeavor to confirm by the following arguments.

'Tis a matter of fact incontestable, that about 1700 years ago all mankind were idolaters. The doubtful and fceptical principles of a few philofophers, or the theism, and that too not entirely pure, of one or two nations, form no objection worth regarding. Behold then the clear teftimony of hiftory. The farther we mount up into antiquity, the more do we find mankind plunged into idolatry. No marks, no fymptoms of any more perfect religion. The most antient records of human race ftill prefent us with polytheifm as the popular and established syftem. The north, the fouth, the east, the weft, give their unanimous teftimony to the fame fact. What can be oppofed to fo full an evidence?

As far as writing or history reaches, mankind, in antient times, appear univerfally to have been polytheifts. Shall we affert, that, in more antient times, before the knowlege of letters, or the difcovery of any art or fcience, men entertained the principles of pure theifm? That is, while they were ignorant and barbarous, they discovered truth: But fell into error, as foon as they acquired learning and politeness.

BUT in this affertion you not only contradict all appearance of probability, but alfo our prefent experience concerning the principles and opinions of barbarous nations. The favage tribes of AMERICA, AFRICA, and ASIA are all idolaters. Not a fingle exception to this rule. Infomuch, that, were a traveller to transport himself into any unknown region; if he found inhabitants cultivated with arts and Sciences, tho' even upon that fuppofition there are odds against their being theifts, yet could he not fafely, till farther enquiry, pronounce any thing on that head But if he found them ignorant and barbarous, he might beforehand declare them idolaters; and there fcarce is a poffibility of his being mistaken.

Ir seems certain, that, according to the natural progrefs of human thought, the ignorant multitude must first entertain fome groveling and familiar notion of fuperior powers, before they ftretch their conception to that perfect Being, who bestowed order on the whole frame of nature. We may as reasonably imagine, that men inhabited palaces before huts and cottages, or ftudied geometry before agriculture; as affert that the Deity appeared to them a pure fpirit, omniscient, omnipotent, and omniprefent, before he was apprehended to be a powerful, tho' limited being, with human paffions and appetites, limbs and organs. The mind rifes gradually, from inferior to fuperior: By abftracting from what is imperfect, it forms an idea of perfection: And flowly diftinguishing the nobler parts of its frame from the groffer, it learns to transfer only the former, much elevated and refined, to its divinity. Nothing could disturb this natural progrefs of thought, but fome obvious and invincible argument, which might immediately lead the mind into the pure principles of theifm, and make it overleap, at one bound, the