indeed, was derived from Orpheus is clearly testified by those two great philosophic luminaries Iamblichus and Proclus. For by them we are informed, "that what Orpheus delivered mystically through arcane narrations, this Pythagoras learned when he celebrated orgies in the Thracian Libethra, being initiated by Aglaophemus in the mystic wisdom which Orpheus derived from his mother Calliope, in the mountain Pangæus."

This sublime theology, though it was scientifically disseminated by Plato, yet conformably to the custom of the most ancient philosophers, was delivered by him synoptically, and in such a way as to be inaccessible to the vulgar; but when, in consequence of the commencement of a degraded and barren period, this theology became corrupted through the negligence and confusion of its votaries; then such of his disciples as happened to live when it was thus degraded and deformed, found it necessary to unfold it more fully, in order to prevent its becoming utterly extinct. The men by whom this arduous task was accomplished were the last of the disciples of Plato; men who, though they lived in a base age, possessed a divine genius, and who having happily fathomed the depth of their great master's works, luminously and copiously developed their recondite meaning, and benevolently communicated it in their writings for the general good.

From this golden chain of philosophers, as they have been. justly called, my elucidations of the present mystic hymns are principally derived: for I know of no other genuine sources, if it be admitted (and it must by every intelligent reader) that the theology of Orpheus is the same as that of Pythagoras and Plato. Hence I shall not take any notice of the theories of Bryant and Faber and other modern mythological writers.

That the philosophic reader therefore may be convinced of the truth of this observation, the following epitome of this theology, derived from the abovementioned sources, is subjoined. In the first place, this theology celebrates the immense principle of things, as something superior even to being itself; as exempt from the whole of things, of which it is nevertheless ineffably the source; and does not therefore think fit to connumerate it with any triad, or order of beings. Indeed, it even apologises for at

1 περι θεων Πυθαγορας ο τω Μνησάρχω τουτο εξέμαθον, οργιασθείς εν Διβηθροις τοις Θράκιοις Αγλαοφαμω τελετας μεταδοντος ως αρα Ορφευς ο Καλλίοπας κατά το Παγγαίον όρος υπό τας ματρος κινυσθείς έφα των αριθμώ ουσίαν αΐδιον είναι. Iamblichus de Vit. Pythag. p. 135.

2 Πυθαγόρειος ο Τίμαιος επεται ταις Πυθαγορείων αρχαις, αυται δε εισίν αι Ορφικαι παραδόσεις· αι γαρ Ορφευς δι' απορρητων λόγων μυστικώς παραδέδωκε, ταυτα Πυθαγόρας εξέμαθεν οργιασθείς εν Λιβηθροις τοις Θρακίοις, Αγλιοφαμου τελετάς μεταδίδοντος, ην θεων σοφίαν παρα Καλλιοπης της μητρός επινύσθη. Proclus in Tim. lib. v. p. 291.

περι

I

tempting to give an appropriate name to this principle, which is in reality ineffable, and ascribes the attempt to the imbecility of human nature, which striving intently to behold it, gives the appellation of the most simple of its conceptions to that which is beyond all knowlege and all conception. Hence Plato denominates it the one and the good; by the former of these names indicating its transcendent simplicity, and by the latter its subsistence as the object of desire to all beings. For all things desire good. But Orpheus, as Proclus well observes, "availing himself of the license of fables, manifests every thing prior to Heaven (or the intelligible and at the same time intellectual order) by names, as far as to the first cause. He also denominates the ineffable, who transcends the intelligible unities, Time." And this according to a wonderful analogy, indicating the generation, i. e. the ineffable evolution into light of all things, from the immense principle of all. For, as Proclus elsewhere observes, "where there is generation there also time has a subsistence." And in this way the celebrated Theogony of Orpheus and other Grecian theologists is to be understood.

As the first cause then is the one, and this is the same with the good, the universality of things must form a whole, the best and the most profoundly united in all its parts which can possibly be conceived for the first good must be the cause of the greatest good, that is, the whole of things; and as goodness is union, the best production must be that which is most united. But as there is a difference in things, and some are more excellent than others, and this in proportion to their proximity to the first cause, a profound union can no otherwise take place than by the extremity of a superior order coalescing through intimate alliance with the summit of one proximately inferior. Hence the first of bodies, though they are essentially corporeal, yet kara axeow, through habitude or alliance, are most vital, or lives. The highest of souls are after this manner intellects, and the first of beings are Gods. For as being is the highest of things after the first cause, its first subsistence must be according to a superessential characteristic.

Now that which is superessential, considered as participated by the highest or true being, constitutes that which is called intelligible. So that every true being depending on the Gods is a divine intelligible. It is divine indeed, as that which is deified; but it is intelligible, as the object of desire to intellect, as perfective and connective of its nature, and as the plenitude of being itself. But in the first being life and intellect subsist according to cause for every thing subsists either according to cause, or according to hyparxis, or according to participation. That is,

! In Plat. Cratyl. p. 23.

every thing may be considered either as subsisting occultly in its cause, or openly in its own order (or according to what it is), or as participated by something else. The first of these is analogous to light when viewed subsisting in its fountain the sun; the second to the light immediately proceeding from the sun; and the third to the splendor communicated to other natures by this light.

The first procession therefore from the first cause will be the intelligible triad, consisting of being, life, and intellect, which are the three highest things after the first God, and of which being is prior to life, and life to intellect. For whatever partakes of life partakes also of being but the contrary is not true, and therefore being is above life; since it is the characteristic of higher natures to extend their communications beyond such as are subordinate. But life is prior to intellect, because all intellectual natures are vital, but all vital natures are not intellectual. But in this intelligible triad, on account of its superessential characteristic, all things may be considered as subsisting according to cause and consequently number here has not a proper subsistence, but is involved in unproceeding union, and absorbed in superessential light. Hence, when it is called a triad, we must not suppose that any essential distinction takes place, but must consider this appellation as expressive of its ineffable perfection. For as it is the nearest of all things to the one, its union must be transcendently profound and ineffably occult.

All the Gods indeed, considered according to their unities, are all in all, and are at the same time united with the first God, like rays to light, or the radii of a circle to the centre. And hence they are all established in their ineffable principle (as Proclus in Parmenid. beautifully observes), like the roots of trees in the earth; so that they are all as much as possible superessential, just as trees are eminently of an earthly nature, without at the same time being earth itself. For the nature of the earth, as being a whole, and therefore having a perpetual subsistence, is superior to the partial natures which it produces. The intelligible triad therefore, from existing wholly according to the superessential, possesses an inconceivable profundity of union both with itself and its cause; and hence it appears to the eye of intellect as one simple indivisible splendor, beaming from an unknown and inaccessible fire.

The Orphic theology, however, concerning the intelligible Gods, or the highest order of divinities, is, as we are informed by Damascius,' as follows: "Time [as we have already observed] is symbolically said to be the one principle of the universe; but

! Vid. Wolfi Anecdot. Græc. tom. iii. p. 252.

4

2

ether and chaos' are celebrated as the two principles immediately posterior to this one. And being, simply considered, is represented under the symbol of an egg. And this is the first triad of the intelligible Gods. But for the perfection of the second triad they establish either a conceiving and a conceived egg as a God, or a white garment, or a cloud : because from these Phanes leaps forth into light. For indeed they philosophise variously concerning the middle triad. But Phanes here represents intellect. To conceive him however besides this, as father and power, contributes nothing to Orpheus. But they call the third triad Metis as intellect, Ericapaus as power, and Phanes as father. But sometimes the middle triad is considered according to the threeshaped God, while conceived in the egg for the middle always represents each of the extremes; as in this instance, where the egg and the three-shaped God subsist together. And here you may perceive that the egg is that which is united; but that the three-shaped and really multiform God is the separating and discriminating cause of that which is intelligible. Likewise the middle triad subsists according to the egg, as yet united; but the third according to the God who separates and distributes the whole intelligible order. And this is the common and familiar Orphic theology. But that delivered by Hieronymus and Hellanicus is as follows. According to them water and matter were the first productions, from which earth was secretly drawn forth: so that water and earth are established as the two first principles; the latter of these having a dispersed subsistence; but the former conglutinating and connecting the latter. They are silent however concerning the principle prior to these two, as being ineffable: for as there are no illuminations about him, his arcane and ineffable nature is from hence sufficiently evinced. But the third principle posterior to these two, water and earth, and which is generated from them, is a dragon, naturally endued with the heads of a bull and a lion, but in the middle having the countenance of the God himself. They add likewise that he has wings on his shoulders, and that he is called undecaying Time, and Hercules; that Necessity resides with him, which is the same as Nature, and incorporeal Adrastia, which is extended throughout the universe, whose limits she binds in amicable conjunction. But as it appears to me, they denominate this third principle as

These two principles are called by Plato, in the Philebus, bound and infinity. * This Orphic egg is the same with the mixture from bound and infinity, mentioned by Plato in the Philebus. See the third book of my translation of Proclus on the Theology of Plato.

-3

we Youy is omitted in the original.

4 μήποτε is erroneously printed instead of ποτε.

το τρίτον

is I conceive erroneously omitted in the original.

established according to essence; and assert, besides this, that it subsists as male and female, for the purpose of exhibiting the generative causes of all things.

I likewise find in the Orphic rhapsodies, that neglecting the two first principles, together with the one principle who is delivered in silence, the third principle, posterior to the two, is established by the theology as the original; because this first of all possesses something effable and commensurate to huraan discourse. For in the former hypothesis, the highly reverenced and undecaying Time, the father of ather and chaos, was the principle: but in this Time is neglected, and the principle becomes a dragon. It likewise calls triple æther, moist; and chaos, infinite; and Erebus, cloudy and dark; delivering this second triad analogous to the first this being potential, as that was paternal. Hence the third procession of this triad is dark Erebus: its paternal and summit æther, not according to a simple but intellectual subsistence but its middle infinite chaos, considered as a progeny or procession, and among these parturient, because from these the third intelligible triad proceeds. What then is the third intelligible triad? I answer, the egg; the duad of the natures of male and female which it contains, and the multitude of all-various seeds, residing in the middle of this triad: and the third among these is an incorporeal God, bearing golden wings on his shoulders; but in his inward parts naturally possessing the heads of bulls, upon which heads a mighty dragon appears, invested with the all-various forms of wild beasts. This last then must be considered as the intellect of the triad; but the middle progeny, which are many as well as two, correspond to power, and the egg itself is the paternal principle of the third triad: but the third God of this third triad this theology celebrates as Protogonus, and calls him Jupiter, the disposer of all things and of the whole world; and on this account denominates him Pan. And such is the information which this theology affords us, concerning the genealogy of the intelligible principles of things.

But in the writings of the Peripatetic Eudemus, containing the theology of Orpheus, the whole intelligible order is passed over in silence, as being every way ineffable and unknown, and incapable of verbal enunciation. Eudemus therefore commences his genealogy from Night, from which also Homer begins: though Eudemus is far from making the Homeric genealogy consistent and connected, for he asserts that Homer begins from Ocean and Tethys. It is however apparent, that Night is according to Homer the greatest divinity, since she is reverenced even by Jupiter himself. For the poet says of Jupiter, "that he feared lest he should act in a manner displeasing to swift Night." So that

* αζετο γαρ μη νυκτι θοη αποθυμια ρέζοι. So Damascius; but instead of ρεζοι, all the printed editions of Homer read epdo.