94 ON THE ORIGIN OF CREMATION, 
plied with the customs of other nations, as to erect a funeral 
pile at the entrance of the tomb, which they might burn in ho- 
nour of the dead, containing nothing save spices and odorife- 
rous woods, or having an image of the deceased prince substi- 
tuted for the body. It cannot reasonably be thought,’ that 
they would have accounted that an honour to their kings, 
which was deemed a disgrace to every other person. Not on- 
ly in the more early period of their history *, but even towards 
the dissolution of the monarchy, the burning of the dead body was 
viewed as a sort of posthumous punishment, expressive of the 
greatest contempt and detestation. For Josran, we are in- 
formed, “ burned the bones of the priests of Baat upon their 
“ altars f.” 
4. It tended greatly to facilitate the reception of this custom, 
that it seemed the most certain plan for protecting the dead 
body from those indignities to which it might otherwise have 
been subjected. It is highly probable, indeed, that the danger 
to which the bodies of departed relations was exposed, of be- 
ing disfigured or devoured by beasts of prey, first suggest- 
ed the idea of covering their graves with heaps of stones; and 
that this course had been followed in a very early stage of so- 
ciety. But when war had begun to extend its cruel ravages, 
when man had become as unfeeling to his fellows as the tyger 
or the hyzena, when his ferocity reached even beyond the hal- 
lowed precincts of the tomb; it would be found necessary 
to devise some more effectual plan for securing rest to the 
dead. 
It has been observed, accordingly, in another dissertation, 
that, as Priny informs us, the Romans adopted cremation in 
consequence of being engaged in distant wars; and also, that 
SYLLA, 
* Josu, vii, 25. + 2 Chron. xxxiv. 5. 
