CHAP. XIII.l THE FABLE OF PAN INTERPRETED. 101 



principle, which is one in act, to be various and dispensable 

 in powers, and involving the seeds of all natural essences. 

 They who introduced, as Aristotle and Plato, 1 primordial 

 matter, every way disarranged, shapeless, and indifferent to 

 any form, approached nearer to a resemblance of the figure 

 of the parable. Foi they conceived matter as a courtezan, 

 and the forms as suitors; so that the whole dispute comes to 

 these two points : viz., either that nature proceeds from 

 Mercury, or from Penelope and all her suitors.? 



The third origin of Pan seems borrowed by the Greeks 

 from the Hebrew mysteries, either by means of the Egyp 

 t.ians, oi otherwise ; for it relates to the stato of the world, 

 not in its first creation, but as made subject to death 

 and corruption after the fall : and in this state it was 

 and remains the offspring of God and Sin, or Jupiter and 

 Reproach. And, therefore, these three several accounts of 

 Pan s birth may seem true, if duly distinguished in respect 

 of things and times. For this Pan, or the universal nature 

 of things, which we view and contemplate, had its origin 

 from the divine word, and contused matter, first created 

 by God himself, with the subsequent introduction of sin, ai .l 

 consequently corruption. 



The Destinies arc justlv made Pan s sisters ; for the rise, 

 preservation, and dissolution of things ; their depressions, 

 exaltations, processes, triumphs, and whatever else can bo 

 ascribed to individual natures, are called fates and destinies, 

 but generally pass unnoticed, except indeed in striking 

 examples, as in men, cities, and nations. Pan, or the nature 

 of things, is the o*use of these several changes and effects, 

 and in regard to individuals as the chain of natural 

 causes, and the thread of the Destinies, links them together. 

 The ancients likewise feigned that Pan ever lived in the 



words For if there be but one single clement or substance identical in 

 ill its parts, as the primary mover of things, it follows, as this sub- 

 stance is equally indifferent to the forms of each of the three elements, 

 that one name may attach to it quite as philosophically as the other. 

 In strict language, such a substance could not be defined by any of 

 these terms; as fire, air, or water, appear only as its accidental qualities, 

 and it is not allowable to define anything whose essential properties 

 remain undiscovered. Ed. f Plato s Timieus. 



Bacon directs his interpretation here to tU&amp;lt;? coni ised Riixtuiv of 

 things, as sung by Virgil, Kcl. vi, 31. 



