1796. | 
flowing of the Nile, which it feems 
every year, by its rifing, to caufe. It 
was not, then, the dog which the Egyp- 
tians worfhipped, but the divinity which 
was fuppofed to inhabit the ftar, Sirius, 
and which, probably, becaufe, like a faith- 
ful dog, it warned the Egyptians of the 
approaching oyersow of the Nile, was 
reprefented by the confecrated dog “Anu- 
Dis. 
To thefe inftances, it would be eafy to 
add many others, te prove, that the wor- 
thip of animals or images, among the 
Egyptians, was, in faét, the worthip of 
the divinities which they reprefented ; 
and that the idols themfelves, whether 
animate or inanimate, were nothing more 
than fymbols. With refpect to the re- 
Jation which the confecrated animals or 
images in the temples, bore to the imagi- 
nary animals, or other figures, in the ce- 
leftial fphere, it may be difficult to deter- 
mine, whether, in fome remote period, 
not the fubje&t of hiftorical record, the 
Egyptian aftronomers marked the pe- 
. Flodical phenomena of the heavenly bo- 
dies by fymbols, which the priefts a/ter- 
wards adopted into their religious fy ftem ; 
or whether the priefts fifi confecrated 
certain animals, &c. as reprefentatives of 
the celeftial divinities in the fun, moon, 
and ftars, and then the aftronomer tran{- 
ferred them to the celeftial fphere. But 
whichever of thefe fuppofitions be admit- 
‘ted, itremains evident, that the whole ap- 
paratus of Egyptian worthip was fymbo- 
fical, and that the idolatry of the Egyp- 
tians originated in the ufe of emblema- 
tical reprefentations of the celeftial divi- 
nities. Entire credit appears to be due to 
the account given of theancient Egyptian 
‘worfhip by Lucian(0), who fays, * The 
Egyptians divided the region of the hea- 
‘yens, in which the planets move among 
‘the fixed flars, into tweive portions, re- 
.prefenting each by fome animal, chofen 
from the tribes of fifhes, men, wild 
“beafts, birds, or cattle. Hence has arifen 
2 diverfity in their religious ceremonies ; 
nor do all the Egyptians derive their 
divinations from all the twelve figns, but 
Yome make ufe of one fign, fome of 
another: thofe who are under Aries, 
worfhipping the ram; thofe under Pif- 
ces, refrainmg from fith; thofe under 
Capricorn, refufing to facrifice a goat ; 
and thofe under Taurus, paying religi- 
‘ous honours to the bull; fome propitiat- 
ing one divinity, and fome another.”’ 

(°) de Aftrol, 
The Enquirer. No. V. 
373 
A fimilar explanation may be given of 
other forms which idolatry affumed in 
ancient times. When, in the Grecian 
mythology, the powers cf nature were 
pcerfonified, and concciyed to wear a hu- 
man form, and were therefore thought 
to be properly reprefented by ftatues, the 
idolatryremained the fame,andconfecrated 
ftatues, as the emperor Julian declares (p), 
were not regarded as gods, bit 4s fgns of 
their prefence, that men might honour 
them by their means. The monftrous 
figures found in the temples of Hin- 
doftan, and among other Afiatic nations, 
are only combinations of fymbols, or em- 
blematical expreffions, of the attributes 
and aétions of the divinities worfhipped 
by the inhabitants ; and under forms the 
moft grotefque, ludicrous, or indecent, 
is allegorically concealed fome metaphy- 
fical dogma, or fome mythological tale. 
In fine, from a long feries of ‘evi- 
dence, it may be concluded, with a high 
degree of probability, that idolatry ori- 
ginated in the fymbolical worfhip of the 
divinities which were {uppofed to refide 
in the heavenly bodies ; and that whe- 
ther the idol has been a negroe fetiche, 
an Indian monfter, a Grecian ftatue, or a 
Chriftian image, it has been worfhipped, 
not as being itfelfa god, but merely as 
reprefenting, Or, perhaps, in fome In- 
ftances, as animated by, fome divine power. 
Some writers have maintained that 
idolatry origimated in the deification, 
after their deceafe, of men, who had 
diftinguifhed themfelves by military ex- 
ploits, by the imvention of ufeful arts, 
or by ether important fervices to man- 
kind; and that fome of the numerous 
families of ancient divinities had this 
origin, feems probable from the fabulous 
hiftory of Greece. But if the facts 
here adduced, and others, which are well 
known, be duly confidered, it will be 
evident, that the clafs of gods which has 
arifen from human apotheo/is, is of much 
more modern date than that of the ce- 
leftial divinities, worfhipped by fymbols 
in Egypt, and other ancient nations; and 
that the worfhip of thefe human divi- 
nities is only to be confidered as an ap- 
pendage to.that of the heavenly powers. 
When great men, after their deceafe, 
were ranked among the. gods, it was by 
Arne nowum tardis: ficus te-menjibus adidas, 
Qua locus Erizonen inter, Chelafque fequentes 
Panditur: ipfe tibi gam brachia contrahit ardens 
Scorpius, et eceli jufiaplus parte reliquit. GEORG, 

(p) Fragment. op. p. §37- 
an. 
