AFTER Tully's Parts,An Introducti­on to Tully's Treatises touch­ing the Nature of the Gods. and Good Fortune, had, from a Low Beginning in Rome, advanc'd him to the Highest Ho­nours, and Offices of the Commonwealth; and that, by Caesar's Ʋsurpations upon the Publique, there was no longer place, either in the Senate, or the Hall, for the Art he had made so much his Study, and Whereof, his Orations in behalf of M. Marcellus, King Dejotarus, and Q. Ligarius, (most gratefull to the Palate of every Reader,) Had before Caesar himself, shew he was a very great Master: A Letter of his, to Sulpitius, wit­nesses, that he betook himself wholly to, the [Page ij] Common Consolation of Wise Men in Distress, Philosophy. Now, having copiously and ele­gantly Discours'd the Other Branches Hereof, in his Hortensius, his Academical, and Tus­culan Questions; as also, his Tracts upon the Ends of Goods and Ills, touching a Repub­lique, Laws, Offices, and the Rest of this Argument: He, at length, with an Industry suitable to the Divineness of the Purpose, and Difficulty of the Work, set upon Searching into, the most Religious and Sacred Part of Philo­sophy, the Nature of the Godhead. And indeed, it can never be enough admir'd, that a Common Man, amids such a Cloud of Er­rours Opposite one to another, and the thick Darknesses of a benighted Ignorance, should have the sharpness of Wit so subtly to pierce into, luckily Comprehend, and in so clear and lofty a Style Deliver such a Number of Refin'd, and Recondite Notions concerning a Deity. For, what Sublime and Arduous thing ever was, (or was possible to have been) excogi­tated by the most Sagacious, concerning the Divine Nature; that the Eloquent Oratour-Philosopher has not hit upon, explain'd, and set off with its Proper Graces and Orna­ments?

An Encomiastic Synopsis of them.In the First Book, there seems not to have been That Opinion of any one Wise Man, con­cerning God, which he has not fetch'd out of the Schools of Ancient Philosophy, and de­clar'd to the Roman Academy. Then, for Epicurus's Doctrine, of what kind soever, whether Fleeting in his Light and Invisible Atoms, or yet in his Shadowy and Pellucid Deities, he so Fixes, Confirms, and as it [Page iij] were Consolidates it, that one would think it were able to stand by it self: By and By, so Explodes and Extenuates it, that it may be hiss'd by Boys even beyond those very Innumera-Worlds, that Epicurus (sleeping) phansi'd to himself. And for his Blessed and Eternal Nature, tho' neither Doing, nor Intending ought at all, for fear of being tyr'd; This For­tunate Mormoe of a Divine Nature (I say) does he so incessantly teaze and perplex, as not to let it have the least particle, or moment of Happy Quiet. To the Second Book; the Dignity, Gravity, Elegance; the Manifold, even Infinite Learning of it; and the Religi­ous, almost Christian Theology of the Stoiques, can no Words be Equal: Tho', if it be possible for me in the least to advantage it, by a Com­mendation, the proper place will be, to bring That in as a Preamble to the Book it self. But, I hear Complaints, and allow the Justice of them. The same Nimble, and Shifting Proteus, according to the Academical Way, and Wit, in the Third Book, tears up by the very Roots that Magnificent Temple, by the Hand of the Stoique, in the Second, erected to the Divinity; and utterly extinguishes and destroys all Sense as well of True Religion as of False, by a Wretched, Licentious Volubility of Tongue. I cannot but acknowledge that he stands Convicted by his own Pen: And He is not upon any account to be Clear'd, that has pronounc'd Sentence upon himself; By affirming it a [...] of [...]t [...] Lewd, an Impious Custom to Dispute a­gainst the Gods, be it either in Jeast or Earnest. But, the Temerity has already felt some degree of Punishment; the Production [Page iv] being Maim'd, and as it were Cut off, not so much by the Injury of Time, perhaps, as a Just Judgment of the Offended Deity: Be­side that, Tully himself was so well Resolv'd, as, in the Conclusion of so long a Concertation, to incline to the Side of the Divinity.

Preliminary Considerations,But, to omit Ʋnnecessary Encomiums of a Great Work, and an Authour Celebrated in Volumes, and Ages; I come (to what may be more seasonable, and expected,) to Pre­mise a few Generals, (the Authour, the Ar­gument, the Dedication, the Distribution, the Style of these Books, the Persons of the Dialogue, the Auditours, the Place, and (lastly) the Time of holding the Disputation,) that I hope will be of Common Light to the Whole Discourse.

As for the Authour Touching the Authour of them. (then) of these Tracts; 'twas undoubtedly Marcus Tullius Cicero: A Name Famous all the Roman (and o­ther Parts of the) World over; and that, in the Present Age, by perpetual Reading be­comes every day more Illustrious than other, and grows brighter and brighter, as it were, by Using. Plutarch, among Ancient, and Lam­bin of Modern Writers, have spoken at large concerning Cicero.

The Argument The Title, and Argument. is, the Nature of the God­head. By Nature, in this place, I under­stand not barely what Philosophers term Es­sence: But, all Proprieties that flow Thence, as from a Fountain; all Qualities, (as they name them,) and whatever happens to the Deity Extrinsecally, and is done to his Honour, as Temples, Sacrifices, Ceremonies, in a [Page v] word the Whole Body of Religion; all These (I say) does not my self only, but even Tully, (in Sect. 14. of the First Book,) declare to be Comprehended under This Title of the Na­ture of the Gods.

The Dedication The Address, or Dedication [...] of them is, to Marcus Bru­tus; of the Junian Family, Noble amongst the Romans, and that produc'd Lucius Juni­us, (the First Asserter of the Roman Liber­ty,) who, upon account of the Stollidity he pru­dently counterfeited, for fear of Tarquinius Superbus, had the Sirname of Brutus affixt to him; his Posterity retaining it: Of which, was the Marcus in Question, a Man of Wise­dom, and Courage, as Cicero, his Intimate Friend, testifies. But yet, at the time our Theologue was searching into the Nature of the Immortal Gods, He was plotting the Death of Caesar; which, with the rest of the Conspiratours, he effected, in the midst of the Senate-house, and so, set the first step to his own; for, being sometime after vanquish'd in the Plains of Thessaly by Octavius, and An­thony, out of a False Bravery, lest he should fall into Their Hands, he kill'd himself; Thus, preventing the Triumph, and Mocke­ries of his Enemies, and offering up his Free Bloud for the Liberty of his Country.

The Whole Work The Distributi­on of the Whole Work. is Divided only into Three Books. In the First, Velleius Raises an Argument concerning the Deity, according to the Philosophy of Epicurus; and, is Confu­ted, by Cotta: In the Second, Balbus Dis­putes notably touching the Nature of the Gods, persuant to the Doctrine of the Stoiques, and more especially for a Providence: And, in the [Page vj] Third, the same Cotta that had Refell'd Vel­leius before, attempts again to Answer Bal­bus.

The Style and Expression The Style, and Expression. of These Books, is not Rude, and Unelegant, (as that of Philosophers for the most part uses to be;) but Smooth, Free, altogether becoming an Oratour and Philosopher both under one, and accommodate to the Manners of the Accomplisht Gentlemen that Tully, in a Form of Dialogue, has here Introduc'd Discoursing amongst them­selves.

The Persons of the Dialogue.The Menagers of the Dispute are, Caius Cotta, High Priest by Office, and, of Here­sy, an Academique: Caius Velleius, of the Senatorian Order, and, by Sect, an Epicu­rean: Quintus Lucilius Balbus, by Disci­pline, a Stoique: All Romans Born.

The Auditours. Marcus, out of Modesty, Personates only an Auditour; thô, in very Deed, he was the Doctour.

The Time And Lastly, the Time of holding the Dispute. was also very Opportune; it being the Latin Festivals: Which I shall speak to, By and By.

But, more Particularly upon the First Book; A more Particu­lar Division of the First Book. it may be Divided into Three Parts. In the First, (almost to the Bottom of p. 10.) Cicero premises certain things, that may serve as a Preface to the Whole Work: In the Se­cond, (e'en to the End of pag. 31.) Vellei­us, (an Epicurean,) after he has Rejected the Opinions of all Other Philosophers, deli­vers the Placits of Epicurus concerning the Divinity, and highly applauds them: And then, in the Third, (the rest of the Book,) [Page vij] Cotta, (of the Academy,) utterly overthrows the Doctrine of Epicurus, touching the Na­ture of the Gods, thus set up by Vell [...]ius.

Now,The Me [...]od, Observ'd by the Translat [...]r, in his Exposi [...]i­ons, Illustrati­ons, &c. since it seems not only proper to the Exposition of an Authour, but, also to En­gage the Mind, and Attention of the Reader, to prefix the Contents of each Section of the Treatise; under Examination; It shall be my First Care to doe This, in a Smaller Cha­racter, according to this Threefold Distribu­tion, and in a Division somewhat Diverse from That in the Body of the Translation: And, Then, I will immediately subjoin the Amendments, and Illustrations of each re­spective Part. This Method, to be observ'd throughout the Whole Work; as the best, the easiest, the most orderly I could think of.

BOOK I. then; PART I. Page 3.The Contents of each Section of the First Part of the First Book the Nature of the Gods. Having said Before, that the Main Disagreement of Philosophers, was, about Providence; he, Now, produces their several Opinions: First, the Epicurean, who Deni'd a Divine Providence; and so, effectually, over­threw all Religion, and Civil Society. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 4. To Epicurus' [...], opposes he the Opinion of the Stoiques, asserting a Providence: And against This, again, sets up Carneades, and the rest of the Academiques, who render the matter Doubtfull. Upon which Diversity of Opinions he observes, that All of them may be False, but that it is Impossible that more than One should be True. Thus, tacitly leaving every man to Conclude upon the Prudence, and Moderation of the Academiques, who, in so great a difficulty of discerning the Right, are not forward to yield assent to what's Doubtfull and Ʋncertain. THENCE, to lin. 5. of pag. 5. There being no Ambition without Fear, the Authour, studious of Praise, is apprehensive of Censures, upon appearing Abroad: And therefore, thinks, that Well-meant Exceptions are to be satis­fy'd, [Page viij] but Malicious Carpings Refell'd. So that, to pacifie all, he rehearses the Judgments and Reflexi­ons of the Town, upon his Books. Now, they are of Three Sorts, as appears by the Context. THENCE, to lin. 25. of pag. 5. He Answers the First Sort of Carpers, by Denying that he began to Philosophize on the sodain; urging, to strengthen the Denial, the Sententiousness of his Orations, his Familiarity and Converse with Learned Men, his Education un­der Grave Masters, and the Whole Course of his Doings, both in a Publique and Private Station. THENCE, to lin. 13. of pag. 6. His Inducements to Write, were (he says) Leisure, (by Caesar's Encroachments upon the Publique,) and a Love to his Country, which he was desirous of bringing Ho­nour to by Learned Writi [...]gs. Nor slips he an Oc­casion of giving himself his due. THENCE, to lin. 29. of the same page. A Third Motive was, Trouble of Mind, which he sought to mitigate by Philosophy: He also, in transitu, gives a hint of the excellent Method observ'd by him in Learni [...]g it. THENCE, to lin. 8. of p. 7. He prudently, and with the Genius of an Academique, reminds those that were earnest to know his Judgment; that Rea­son, not Authority, ought to sway them in their Choice of an Opinion: And takes an Occasion to Reflect upon the Pythagoreans, for attributing ov [...]r much to their Doctour, or Founder. THENCE, to lin. 26. of the same page. The Third Sort of Ob­jectours, who found fault with the Academy for as­serting nothing to be True, in that, Then, there could be no perception of any thing, he refers to his Academical Discourses; and here repeats, that Truths there are, but mixt with Falsities so like them, that 'tis very hard for a body to Distinguish betwixt them. THENCE, to lin. 16. of pag. 8. He Rep [...]ies to the Fourth Sort; who ta [...]t the Aca­demy with Obsoleteness, by subtly wiping off the Re­proach as well as he can. THENCE, to lin. 7. of p [...]g. 9. Being aware how it would be resented a­mongst a Religious People, to bring the Divine Na­ture into Doubt; he takes the Blame off himself, and his Party, and lays it upon the Disagreeing O­pinions of Other Philosophers concerning the Deity, [Page ix] which have made the Question so hard to be Ex­plain'd. And This Topique he Illustrates and Exhi­lerates with a jocular Quotation out of a Comedy. THENCE, to lin. 24. of the same page. He makes an easie Transition to his Purpose: And follows Plato, in his way of Writing; feigning the Occasion of the Dialogue, according to his Phansie, proper enough: That, being sent for, Cicero came to Cotta's House, while this same Academique, Vel­leius the Epicurean, and Lucilius the Stoique, were Disputing one with another; and was courteously W [...]llcom'd by his Friend that had Invited him. THENCE, to lin. 13. of pag. 10. Cicero applauds his good fortune in coming in so favourable a Juncture as to hear the Three Chiefs of the Three Sects of Philosophers Then in Repute: But, a Fourth, some P [...]ripatetique or other, seeming to be want­ing, he Thence takes occasion to give the Re [...]son, not in his Own, but in C [...]tta's Words, why he has Introduc'd none of That (in no wise Contemptible) Sect into this Dialogue; which is that there is little or no Disagreement betwixt the Stoical Tenets, and Theirs; (thô the Stoiques themselves will by no means allow This;) and so, no need of bringing in Two of the same Opinion. But, from this short Di­gression, he presently returns to his Purpose. THENCE, to lin. 34. of the same page. Cotta likes they should proceed in the Question prop [...]s'd; and, in Complement to Tully newly-come, briefly ex­pounds the Argument of the Dispute in hand; de­siring Vel [...]eius also, to Repeat what he had said before Cicero's coming, that so, he might not be at a loss. Velleius Consents, bearing himself up upon the Natural Confi [...]ence of the Epicurean Sect; but yet, touches Civily (thô Sh [...]rply) upon Tully: Which makes him openly declare, that he means to be an Equ [...]l and Impartial Auditour; according to the way of the Academiques. And This Ends the Preface, or First Part.

In This, [the Academical] Matter, Amendments, Explanations, &c. of the Pre­face, or First [...]ar [...] o [...] the First Bo [...]k. [way of Writing,] therefore, &c. pag. 4. lin. 17. [Page x] surpriz'd at my applying my self more particularly to, &c. lin. 34. of the same page.

that I should, so much contrary to people's Expectations, undertake, &c. pag. 5. lin. 3.

this sort of Study on the sodain, [without first spending any Time upon Learning it,] &c. lin. 7. of the same page.

pag. 5. lin. 16. our Family, &c. [that did me the Honour to frequent my House.]

Ibid.— the famous [those so▪ famous Men of their respective Sects] Diodorus (or, accor­ding to some Diodotus) &c. a Stoique. He has been particular upon all These, in his Book de claris Oratoribus.

lin. 18. under whose Tuition I was Educated [by whom I was Instructed in Philosophical Learning,] &c.

lin. 20. regard to Life, &c. [to the laudable dis­charge of the Duties, and Offices of an Honest Life:]

Ibid. Those [Philosophical Precepts,] &c. Let it be consider'd whether This be to be appli'd to his Writings, or to his Doings in a Pub­lique and Private Station.

pag. 6. lin. 9. receiv'd [learn'd] in Greek, &c.

lin. 10.This Particular [of delivering the Grecian Philosophy in the Roman Language,] &c.

to his Master's [to the Judgment of Him, of whose Sect he is a Follower,] &c.

pag. 7. lin. 1. lin. 5. Pythagoras's Country Uncer­tain. Pythagoras was a Philosopher of great Account; of Country Ʋncertain, many Pla­ces Contending for the Honour of his Birth, as for Homer's; but, according to most, of Sa­mos. See Ovid. Metam. lib. 15. and Laër­tius, lib. 8.

lin. 11.Academical Questions [about Sect. 99.] The [Page xj] Academy was a Woody place about a Mile from Athens, What the Aca­demy was, and whence it had its Name. taking its Name from Acade­mus the Owner of it; Plato first taught School here, and had many Auditours. Cicero had also a Country-House of the same Name, by the Sea-side, not far from Puteoli: Whence his Academical Questions had their Title.

it is in a manner deserted, pag. 8. lin. 2. With whom the Academical Sect fell, in Greece. even in Greece it self.] Laertius seems to intimate, as if the Academical Sect had fallen There) with Clitomachus, and begun to gain credit at Rome, soon after, by the Industry of Philo.

which He [the Academique,] &c.lin. 9.

wherein, [in which Point, lin. 20. All seem to be call'd together,] &c.

His [some or Other's,lin. 30. in the Fable of Stati­us,] &c.

Solemn Sacrifices [Sacrifices perform'd Once every Year, Solemnia Sacri­ficia what.] &c. Annual Sacrifices were Instituted to Romulus, as also, to Remus, on the Ides of May.

on Jupiter of Latium's Day. pag. 9. lin. 13. The Latin Fe­stivals what; and when Insti­tuted. Feriis La­tinis. These were certain Festivals indicted on a Set day, (the Last of March, says Man­nutius,) every Year, either by the Pontifex, or the Magistrate, wherein they Sacrific'd to Jupiter of Latium on the Hill Albanus; whi­ther the Latins resorted, and therefore they had the Name of Feriae Latinae. Tarquin, upon his Conquering Hetruria, appointed One Day for them; but, in process of time, they were gradually advanc'd to Four; upon the Ex­pulsion of the Kings, the Reconciling of the Commonalty to the Senate, &c.

Equal'd even among the Greeks.lin. 18. [that [Page xij] had made so great a Proficiency in the Stoi­cal Dogmata, that few even Grecian Sto­iques were fit to compare with him,] &c.

lin. 27. The Number of the Sects of Philosophers. pag. 10. lin. 5. The Division of Good, accor­ding to the An­cients; and the Difference of the Peripa­tetical and Sto­ical Opinions, concerning it. No Order of any Repute, &c. Authours have reckon'd up two Hundred eighty eight Sects of Philosophers, in all.

Separate the Honest from the Profitable, &c. The Ancients Divided Good, into Ho­nest, Delightfull, and Profitable. Now, the Stoiques ( [...], a Porticu, they had their Name from a Porch) separa­ted the Honest from the Commodious, (i. e. from the Pleasant, and Profitable,) in the Whole Genus; accounting upon the Honest as the Only Good, and the Profitable barely a­mongst things some way or other tending and promoting to Good. But the Peripatetiques ( [...], ab ambu­lando, so call'd from their way of Disputing, Walking; following Aristotle;) Confounded the Honest and Profitable, &c. i. e. would have the Profitable and the Delightfull Good to agree well enough in the Genus with the Honest; the Pleasant and the Profitable, a­mongst Them, being Goods, as well as the Honest, and not Differing in Substance, but only in Degree and Magnitude; they holding the Honest to be a Greater Good than the Pleasant, and That, than the Profitable: Which same Degrees the Stoiques rejected; reckoning upon all Goods as Equal, and all Ills so too.

lin. 23. already deliver'd [that so, my New-come Friend here, may not be to seek as to the Scope of what we Discourse upon,] &c.

Positive in any thing. The Acade­miques repre­hended. The Academiques allow'd that Truths there were, only they could not be Perceiv'd. An Assertion of seeming Modesty; but, in the Course of their main­taining it, they indulg'd themselves even to a most scandalous, and criminal degree of Li­centiousness; Disputing both For Truth, and Against it. This may suffice, as to the First Part.

The Epicurean Disputation concerning God, may fitly be Divided into Two Parts, The Distributi­on of the Epicu­rean Disputati­on concerning God; or, of the Second Part of the First Book. (or Sections.) In the First, Velleius Recites the Opinions of the Philosophers, and Poets, touching the Divine Nature, and either Over­throws, or some way or other Discredits them: to These subjoyning the Fables of the Aegypti­ans, Magi, and Common People, and Con­futing, only by Neglecting them. In the Other, he statelily Proposes, and somewhat at Large Declares the Opinion of Epicurus con­cerning a Deity. I shall Proceed, according to This Division.

PART II. SECT. I. FROM the Bottom of pag. 10. to lin. 14. of pag. 11.The Contents of Each Section of the First Branch of (the Second Part,) the Epicurean Disputation, touching God. He plays the True Epi­curean, beginning with Insulting and Disputing both together; and, in the very Entrance of his Argu­ment, setti [...]g light by the most Grave Philosophers, he cavils at their Opinions; at Plato's First, (who thought God to be the Architect of the Ʋniverse,) then, at Those of the Stoiques, (who Asserted a Divine Providence;) both more deserving of Vene­ration, than Exception: But yet, 'tis justly that he makes merry with the Stoiques for accounting of the World as a Divinity. THENCE, to lin. 12. of pag. 12. Velleius notes, as most Gross, that Errour of Plato's of delivering the World to have been Crea­te [...], and yet to be likely to abide for ever. Then, [Page xiv] turning to the Stoique Lucilius, he presses a Dilem­ma upon him, thô a blunt one, as but a Smatterer in Philosophy may see. THENCE, to lin. ult. of pag. 12. He disputes against Plato, and the Sto­iques, that, the World, if it was Created by God, must have been made from all Eternity; in that, there was no Cause that might either keep the Deity from Acting even from before All Time; or, being at rest, induce him, afterward, to Build it. By the way, he Describes Eternity, according to the shallow Apprehension of Man. THENCE, to lin. 28. of p. 13. The Epicurean proceeds, more at large, to shew the World not to have been Built by the Deity; in that, Then, it must have been made either for his own sake, or for Man's; both which he Re­fells. THENCE, to lin. 24. of pag. 14. The Pla­toniques held, that the World was Animated, Wise, Immortal, and Happy; which Conceipts Velleius Confutes, either only by Contempt, or with very little adoe. THENCE, to lin. 11. of pag. 15. Vel­leius concluding with himself that he has ex­ploded the Placits of Plato, and of the Stoiques, concerning the Deity; he now advances briefly to run over the Opinions of the rest of the Philosophers, touching the Divine Nature: First, of the Ionian; Then, the Italian. And in This Section, he begin [...] with (the two first of the Ionian Stock) Thales, and Anaximander. THENCE, to lin. 4. of pag. 16. He briefly Rehearses, and Confutes the Opinions of A­naximenes, and Anaxagoras, concerning God. THENCE, to lin. 23. of pag. 16. The Sense of (the Italian Philosophers) Alemaeo, and Pythagoras, concerning a Deity. THENCE, to lin. 15. of p. 17. What Xenophanes, and Parmenides▪ thought, upon the Same Subject. THENCE, to lin. 6. of pag. 18. The Theology of Empedocles, Protagoras, Demo­critus, and Diogenes of Apollonia rejected. THENCE, to lin. 26. of pag. 18. Having, con­trary to expectation and order, laid hard at Plato, upon the First Onset; he, now, falls upon him a­gain, in his proper place, and notes the Inconstancy of his Theological Opinions. THENCE, to lin. 12. of pag. 19. The Theology of Xenophon, Antisthenes, and Speusippus, THENCE, to lin. ult. of pag. 21. [Page xv] The Opinions of Xenocrates, Heraclides, Theophras­tus, and Strato, touching the Divine Nature, re­prehended. THENCE, to lin. 27. of pag. 21. Vel­leius proceeds to confute the Theology of the Sto­iques, beginning with their Founder Zeno. THENCE, to lin. 31. of pag. 22. The Epicurean sets as light by the Theological Opinions of (Zeno's Auditours,) Aristo, Cleanthes, and Persaeus, as by their Ma­ster's Dogmata. THENCE to lin. 13. of pag. 24. The Theology of the Stoique Chrysippus reported somewhat at large, and of Diogenes of Babylon toucht upon more briefly. THENCE, to lin. ult. of pag. 24. Th [...] Opinions of the Poets, Magi, Ae­gyptians, and Common people, cast together in the last place; and reprov'd of Errour, Monstrosity, Madness, Levity, and Ignorance.

Epicurus's Intermundia,Epicurus's In­termundia what. &c. (pag. 11. lin. 4.) [...]; which Epicurus himself, in his Epistle to Pythocles, Defines to be [...], Spaces be­tween Worlds; which same Distances he would have to be Voids, and the Worlds In­finite.

Nor yet to that Thinking,lin. 10. The Stoical, and Plato's Opini­ons, touching the World. &c. The Sto­iques accounted upon the World as Animated, endu'd with Understanding, of a Round Fi­gure, a Circular Ardent God of a kind of Firy Form. Plato held much what the same things before them; he terming the Universe Animal [...], and ascribing to it a Round Figure.

Whence proceeded those Five Forms,lin. 23. Plato's Five Forms what, &c. There are Three Opinions as to these same Forms; the most probable makes them to be Plato's Essentia, (or Ratio Formalis of every thing,) Idem, (whereby every thing agrees with it self First, then with others,) Alte­rum, (That wherein it differs from something [Page xvj] else,) Status, (by which it for a time reteins its proper Unity,) and Motus, (whereby it advances from Power, to Act.)

Physiology what. lin. 35. so much as a Smatterer in Physiology, &c. This Enquires into, and Discourses of, Natural Causes.

pag. 12. lin. 5, &c. Epicurus's, and Plato's Opinions as to the Dura­tion of the World. As to Pronaea, if your [the Stoiques] Pro­vidence, Lucilius, be the Same, [with Pla­to's God,] &c. Epicurus held the World to be Corruptible, because Generated; but Plato judg'd it Fram'd for Perpetuity, and to be Dissolvible only at the Will of God the Maker of it.

lin. 22. Revolution of the Orbs, [the Circular Motion of the Orbs,] &c.

lin. 25, &c. Eternity De­fin'd several ways. Thô, of what Length it was, cannot be comprehended; because, it falls not so much as within our Imagination, that a Time, &c. Eternity is express'd by Innumerable Ages, and Infinite Time; which Plato in Plutarch terms [...], a Fleeting Image of Eternity; Boetius, possessio vitae interminabilis tota simul & perfecta; a De­scription generally entertain'd at this day.

lin. 34. Aedilis Roma­nus. obey'd the Divinity, &c.

of turning City-Surveyour, &c. (pag. 13. lin. 1.) Aedilis. There were two Ranks of these Officers, amongst the Romans; the Plebeian, and the Patrician. See Rosi­nus, at large, concerning them. The Que­stions here askt by Velleius, Lucretius, (a Poet of the same Sect) had put, (lib. 5.) be­fore him: And, St. Austin (lib. 11. cap. 5. of his City of God) has Resolv'd them all, and Confuted the Epicurean Doctrine. So has Gassendus too.

Signs, [Stars,] &c. pag. 13. lin. 3.

Of Wise men, [the Good] &c. (lin. 14.) or, of Fools, [the Bad,] &c. (lin. 16.)

by their Vertues [by a Compensation of Blessings, lin. 25.] &c. a perception of Benefits, that may Recompence for the Inconveniencies.]

a Figure to which Plato ascribes more, &c.pag. 14. lin. 1: Plato's Opini­on of the Sphere. He term'd the Sphere [...], a handsom and convenient Figure: And Xenophon, in Laertius, imputes to the De­ity [...], a Substance of a Sphe­rical Figure; some making Plato to have held, that God made the World Round, because he was of a Round Form himself. A Conceipt highly unworthy (sure) of so Great a man.

a Steady [Sedate, Calm] Mind, &c.lin. 9. The Countries under the Tor­rid and Frigid Zone Ʋninhabi­ted, in the Opi­nion of Ancient Geographers. lin. 21. lin. 23, &c. Manutius Dis­sented from in This.

some of it, &c. [the Southern Parts] (lin. 16.) And some again, [the Northern.] (lin. 18.) Ancient Geographers held those Countries under the Torrid, and Frigid Zone to be Uninhabited: but Later Discoveries have prov'd This to be a Mistake.

Since These are Parcels of it, &c.

And These [Opinions] now are Yours, [the Stoical,] Lucilius! But, what Those of Others [other Philosophers] were, I will Report, down from the Last [the most An­cient] of the Higher, [of the Philosophers that were before the Times of the Stoiques.]

For, Thales of Miletum,And This Break; being an Explanation of Thales's Theology. [a City of Cala­bria, now call'd Melazo,] who was the First that searcht into [Disputed touching] mat­ters of This [a Divine] Nature, made, &c. (lin. 30, &c.) — That Wisedom [Mind.] which, &c. (lin. ult.) — the Deity [the Gods, i. e. the Principles of [Page xviij] Things, which usually had the Name of Dei­ties given them. pag. 15.] can, &c. (l. 1. of p. 15.)— or Nature; [and a Mind;] why did he assign it a Watry one? [Why joyned he the Mind to Water?] &c. (lin. 3.) This seems to be the Epicurean's First Exception to Tha­les's Doctrine, that it makes the Divinity, i. e. the Water, (a God in Thales's Opinion, as being the Principle of Things,) to be able to Subsist, without a Body, and a Mind.] [Why Water to the Mind,] if the Mind it self be, &c. (lin. 4.) [and This the Other, that the Mind can Be, separate from a Body: Neither of which Epicurus would allow.] I look upon the Original, Here, to be somewhat Imperfect: But, for Thales; having taught in Aegypt, where the Israelites once dwelt, 'tis possible he might light upon the Book of Ge­nesis, and reade (what Moses has wrote in the beginning of it,) the Spirit of God mo­ved upon the face of the Waters.

Anaximander's Theological O­pinions Ex­pounded. The Gods [the Stars, or else, the Worlds] [Nativos esse] were Born [had a Begin­ning] Rising and Setting at great Distances of time: And therefore, [i. e. because they did thus Rise and Fall,] that the Worlds were Innumerable, &c. (lin. 6, 7, 8.) Thô A­naximander was Thales's Country-man, and Intimate Acquaintance, yet he would not Sub­scribe to his Opinion, we see. And then, the Stars, in Latin, are sometimes put for Worlds: But yet, whether Stars, or Worlds Different from Stars be here intended, if so be he meant them not for some or other Secondary Deities, he cannot be clear'd from Errour.

As if that [either the Air, i. e. not That [Page xix] which we draw in breathing; Anaximenes's Doctrine, upon This Subject, Illustrated. but some other Divine Spirit (perhaps) that should, after a sort, cherish, & animate this Ʋniverse,] which, &c. (lin. 15.) — Or, how should [or, that, That which had a Beginning, should not Con­sequently be Mortal,] &c. To enlarge upon what I Hinted before. Whatever Principle or Original of Things any Philosopher Excogi­tated, That he held to be a God; (or, at least, it was commonly lookt upon as His Dei­ty;) whether it was an Efficient, or only a Material Principle, wherein some Tript; as Aristotle, and Plutarch inform. So that, when Anaximenes had deliver'd All things to be constituted out of Air, as the First Princi­ple, he was, by all, presently understood to have held the Air to be a God. But, Minu­tius Felix would not believe they really ascrib'd Divinity to the Material Principle, of what kind soever.

Him Anaxagoras both [Then; Anaxa­goras, As also, Anax­agoras's. who receiv'd his Discipline from A­naximenes, was the First,] &c. (lin. 20, & 21.) — the Model, [and Convenient Disposure] of Ʋniversal Nature [of all things,] &c. (lin. 22.) — Conjunction [and Consistency] of any, &c. (lin. 27.)— where the Soul [the Nature it self] is not affected, upon [feels not] External, &c. (lin. 29.) — So that, [And then,] if he, &c. (lin. 30.) — there ought to [will] be, &c. (lin. 32.) — take a Name [have the Name of Animal.] But, what can be [is] more, &c. (lin. 34.) — This Doctrine [Now, since This [i. e. that, this Mind, which he terms a God, should be girt about with an Ex­ternal [Page xx] Body,] will not please Him; [a Mind Naked [i. e. without the Vail, and Conjunc­tion of a Body indu'd with the power of Feeling] Single, and not join'd with any thing that may be Sensible; comes not within the force and notion of Our [i. e. Hu­man] Ʋnderstanding;] (pag. 16. lin. 1, &c.) says the Epicurean. [...]; All things were together; but, the Mind separa­ted them, and digested every one into its proper Order: Was the Beginning of Anaxa­goras's Lucubrations, say Plutarch, and La­ertius. So that, he believ'd not things to have been Created, in the Beginning; but on­ly sever'd, and brought into Order.

Alcmaeo spo­ken to. pag. 16.Alcmaeo of Cratoe, &c. Aristotle Delivers, that Alcmaeo held Contrary Principles of Things; and those Indefinite too, as White, Black; Sweet, Bitter, &c. These, now, were his Principia Rerum, but not his Dei­ties, if we give Credit to Velleins. The Scho­lar is (here) put before the Master, (Py­thagoras,) to observe the Decorum of the E­picurean Negligence, perhaps.

As also, Py­thagoras. And, that Ours were still taken from it, [where-from Ours were still taken,] any more, &c. (lin. 12.) — be Ignorant of any thing, (lin. 20.) [Epicurus was of Opi­nion, that the Deity did not Note every thing.] — This Ʋniversal Soul, [this same Deity, if it be nothing but a Spirit,] be mingled with, &c. (lin. 22.) As if the De­ity were the Soul of the World, and the World the Body of the Deity. Now, God is not mixt with the Things he Governs, any more [Page xxj] than the Pilot with the Ship he Steers; says Lactantius: Neither yet, are Our Minds Particles of the Divine Mind.

Then, Xenophanes;Xenophanes. who, together with the Mind, would have all that was Infinite beside, to be a God; is Reprehensible, touch­ing the Mind it self in the same manner with the Other: but, more vehemently, as to his Infiniteness; wherein there can be nothing Sentient, nor in Conjunction (lin. 24, &c.) He was of Colophonia: And, (says Tully, in the Fourth Book of his Academical Que­stions,) held, that All things were One, This One not Mutable, This a God, and neither having any Beginning, but Sempiter­nal, and of a Conglobated Figure.

and endu'd with, &c. [and Consists of a Continual, and Ardent Light.] (p. 17. l. 4.)— subjecting [reckoning in the Number of Deities War, Discord,] &c. This Parmenides Parmenides. pag. 17. did, in the Book that Simplicius says he wrote touch­ing the Gods, not according to his own, but the Sense of the Common People; who were generally addicted to foolish Superstitions. War was every where Consecrated in Mars and Bellona; Discord and Sedition seem to have been plac'd in the Fourth Region of the Air, amongst the Supernal Deities, thô of right they were of the Infernal: And, Cupidity I take were of be no Other than the Goddess Libenti­na. So that, if Things that are worn out by Distemper, &c. were accounted of as Dei­ties; no wonder if the Pagans held it but reasonable that what Defac'd them, Feaver, Sleep, &c. should be plac'd in the same Num­ber. Plutarch, in Placitis, is more large in [Page xxij] his account of Parmenides's Theology. And some (Eugubinus, &c.) have pretended to find out, I know not what Sacred, and Mysterious meaning in this same Circle of his; and made him the (almost) only Right Philosopher, in his Opinion touching the Deity.

p. 17. l. 16. &c. Empedocles. Empedocles was a Sicilian Philosopher, and Poet: Aristotle, in the Fourth Chapter of his First Book of Metaphysiques, notes some of his Errours; And he, Plutarch, and La­ertius give a more sincere account of his Opini­ons touching the Gods, than this Epicurean has here done.

one jote more [at all] Knowing, &c. (lin. 27.)

Democritus. Ranges the Stars, [both Images, i. e. Ide­a's, flowing from solid Bodies, but not solid themselves,] their Orbs, [Circumcursations,] and that Incorporated Vertue, [that Nature,] I know not what Corporeal, Sempiternal and Divine one (either a God, or Atoms,) that Democritus computed upon; says St. Augu­stin, in his Epistle to Dioscorus: So that, Epicurus held not all Images to be Divine, but only those that flow'd from the Deity.] Which produces [out of it self] and directs their Courses: [sends them forth,] &c. (from l. 29. to l. 33.)—any Account, [Opinion, Imagination] of him, pag. 18. &c. (p. 18. l. 3.) Laertius will fur­nish Democritus's Life, and Placits. The same Laertius writes, that Diogenes held the Air (here, pag. 18. lin. 4.) to be ( [...]) an Element, but no Deity.

Plato. of [touching] Laws, &c. (lin. 11.) — He feigns, an Impossibility [what such a Deity should be, there's no apprehending; for he [Page xxiij] would be,] &c. (lin. 15.) in the [together with the] Notion, &c. (lin. 18.) — the Air, [Skie,] Stars, &c. (lin. 21.) — all Those [scil. National, and Popular Deities] In his Timaeus, Plato says it is hard to find out this (as it were) Parent of the Uni­verse; and, When discover'd, not Convenient to publish him amongst the Multitude. He lean'd toward an Unity of the Godhead.

Xenophon was a Socratic Philosopher, pag. 18. l. 27. Xenophon. and an Historian: and of Noble Extraction, amongst the Greeks.

call'd the Naturalist, [touching Nature, Antisthenes. pag. 19.] that there, &c. (pag. 19. lin. 3.) He was the Founder of the Sect of the Cyniques; but yet he asserted the Essence of a Deity as much as any of the Philosophers.

and Govern it, [the Motion of the World] &c. (lin. 19.) — that it [the Sky] is part, &c. (lin. 22. Aristotle.) — an Agitation [So great a Celerity of Heaven,] &c. (l. 26.)— [where will all the Other Deities Dwell,] if Heaven it self be set up for one: &c. (l. 28.) Epicurus thought the Gods must needs have some House to Dwell in: And therefore, (said he) if so absurd a thing as the Divinity of Heaven (held to be the Mansion of the Godhead) be admitted, where can the rest of the Gods Live? Aristotle was the Founder of the Sect of the Peripatetiques. His Third Book of Philosophy, here Quoted, is not Ex­tant. A great many more Theological Opi­nions and Errours of His, than are Here re­counted, may be collected out of his Physiques, Metaphysiques, and other parts of his Works.

The Planets [Five of them are Nomina­ted, pag. 20. Heraclides of Pontus, in Asia. in the Planets,] Five, &c. pag. 20. l. 6.

has stuff'd his Books with sundry Childish Fables; [thô his Book be, for the Greater Part, only (Allegorical) Fables, and that he, for the Generality, treat of Lighter Mat­ters; yet, now and then, he advances to things of more weight; and] one while he will, &c. (lin. 17.)

Ʋniversal [Brute] Nature, which con­tains within it the Causes of,] &c. (lin. ult.) Strato was an Atheist; Strato. ascribing All to Brute Nature, whom he made to follow the temerarious Impulses of Chance. He Deny'd Atoms. See Laertius touching him, L. 5.

Zeno. pag. 21. was a Divinity [was Divine; and, that it was] Capacitated, &c. (pag. 21. lin. 5.)— we can have no Notion of any such [which never meets us] either in, &c. (lin. 13.)— Impulse extended [Reason, (i. e. a certain power of Ʋnderstanding,) Diffus'd] through all Natures to be Divinely affected, [indu'd with the same Qualifications, that the Di­vine is,] &c. (lin. 15, 16, 17.) — he [ut­terly] destroys the Notions of the Deities vulgarly imprinted in the Minds of Mortals; for he reckons not, &c. (lin. 22, &c.) — but teaches, that Those Names do, after a certain manner, signifie the Inanimate Things. (to lin. 26.) Now, for the Law of Nature, the Errour of the Platoniques, Stoiques, &c. with relation to it, was; that they held it to be actually the same with the Divine, and not barely to flow Thence, as from a Foun­tain. The Stoiques did not Deify this Ethe­real Body and Element of Fire, the Sky; [Page xxv] but only the Mind that they conceiv'd it to be indu'd with. And then, for their Reason diffus'd thorough every Nature, they under­stood by it a Spirit, that took a several Name according to the various Mutations of the Matter it pass'd thorough; that it accommo­dated its Operations to the Matter; but that its Principality was in the Sky. The same Stoiques held God to be One; only they as­sign'd him several Appellations, according to his various Faculties, or Offices.

to be Indiscernible [ [...]annot be Comprehen­ded,Ar [...]sto.] &c. (lin. 30.) As Xenophon had said it could not be discern'd, and therefore ought not to be enquir'd into.

with the Other (Aristo) [last mention'd] First, [...]lea [...]thes. pag. 22. &c. (lin. ult.) — the Ʋniversal Mind and Spirit [of Universal Nature,] &c. (pag. 22. lin. 2.) — that last and high­est; every way spread about and extreme, All surrounding, &c. (lin. 4.) — against Pleasure [against its being the Supreme Good, as Epicurus Understood it to be.] (lin. 7.) — at length [thinks] that, &c. (lin. 10.) — which we only know with our Ʋnderstandings, [this is said, because the Sto­iques phansy'd the Deity might [...]e discern'd even by the Eye,] and whom we, (Epi­cureans) more than any other, [...]re for cer­tainly constituting in the Notion o [...] [...]he M [...] d, as in a Print [i. e. which Notion imprint­ed in our Minds by Nature, we hold to be a most sure Argument of a Divinity, as a Foot step is a Token of an Animal,] comes not to appear at all [i. e. comes to be so distracted, and dispers'd, by Cleanthes's [Page xxvj] various and manifold Opinions concerning him, that he is not to be discern'd at all, &c. (from lin. 11. of pag. 22. to lin. 16.)

intimating as if [insomuch, that he would not barely say that they are the Inventions of the Gods; but, really Divine themselves,] &c. (lin. 23, 24.) This Philosopher's Name ought to be writ Persaeus, Persaeus. not Perseus. And, then, the Adoration of Adonis consisted chiefly in Mourning, if we believe Lucian in his Dea Syria.

Chrysippus. get any Information of them [cannot so much as guess what Form they should be of,] &c. (pag. 23. pag. 23. lin. 1.) — the Divine Vertue [Divinity] to be plac'd in Reason [or, Rational Nature, diffus'd thorough the se­veral parts of the World, (which it cherishes and conserves,) and the Noble [...] of the Stoiques,] &c. (lin. 5.) — of that Soul, &c. [the Principality of this same World, which abides in the Mind, and Rea­son] (lin. 9, 10.) — All, [and Singular] things, &c. (lin. 12.) — dark Represen­tation [the Fatal Shadow, (i. e. Fate;) and the necessity of Future Events.] (l. 13, 14.) — which do naturally flow, and per­severe [which are naturally in constant Moti­tion (Decay) and Mutation.] as the Wa­ter, &c. (lin. 18.) — that Supreme Cir­cle, which Environs the World, [the Uni­versity of Things, by which All is bound up, and preserv'd,] &c. (lin. 20, 21.) — to be [the same with Her call'd] Ceres, &c. (lin. 26.) — that [perpetual, and] eter­nal, &c. (lin. 28.) — and calls this same Immutable Decree it self [and also, terms the [Page xxvij] same] Fatal Necessity, the Sempiternal, &c. (lin. 33, 34.) — Plutarch makes Fate, and Necessity to have been Different, in the Opinion of the Stoiques. — dream'd of any such matter, [never so much as Ima­gin'd any of These things,] might [also] seem, &c. pag. 24. lin. 7, 8. pag. 24. And Lastly, Di [...]genes of Babylon.)

Imitating [in accommodating Fables to Divine Matters] in the, &c. (lin. 9.) — will not allow, &c. [separates the Story, &c. from Fable, and] reduces, &c. (l. 10, 11.) to Physiology [vulgarly Physiques, i. e. Natu­ral Philosophy] lin. 13.

Judgments of Philosophers; The Last Break of pag. 24. ex­plain'd, &c. which tru­ly [Neither (indeed) are those things so very much more Absurd, which, being Chanted by the Poets, have poyson'd,] &c. (lin. 19, &c.) — These having [who have] introduc'd, &c. lin. 23.) — prodigious [most Intemperate] Veneries, &c. (l. 28.)— with Women [with Human Kind; and Mor­tals procreated from Immortals.] (l. 29, 30.)— Superstitions [strange, and wild Opinions] of the Magi (lin. 32.) [Herodotus tells what the Persian Magi held, concerning God.] — Uncertainty, and [by reason of their] Igno­rance, &c. — (lin. 36.) Here we may ob­serve, the Authour's Division of Theology to be, into Natural, Fabulous, and Civil.The Partition of Theology. It will not be amiss, to defer the more Strict ex­amination of the Dogmata of the Stoiques, till I come to Remarque upon the Second Book.

The Contents of the Second Branch of the Second Part of the First Book.SECT. II. of the Second Part. IN this Other Branch of Velleius's Disputation, he Declares, Con­firms, and highly Extolls the Opinion of (his Au­thour) Epicurus, touching the Nature of the Gods. And, in the First place, (from pag. 25. to lin. 4. of pag. 26.) he advances This, that a Notion of the Godhead is planted in Men by Nature. THENCE, to l. 32. of p. 26. The same Nature that teaches the Existence of a Deity, speaks him also to be Blessed, and Eternal. Whence Epicurus infers, that the Gods can neither Receive, nor Doe any Harm; and, that they are without Love, and Anger: And then, he thinks two Certain Goods to arise from this Opinion; the One, that the Gods ought to be piously Worship [...]; the Other, that Human Life is thus freed, and deliver'd from all Superstitious Apprehensions. THENCE, to lin. 3. of pag. 28. After he has, in the foregoing Section, laid the Foundation of his Argument; he then, briefly pro­pounds, and divides what is remaining to be deli­ver'd concerning God. He intends to speak to the Figure, Life, and Contemplation of the Deity: And, of the Figure, First; which, here, he en­deavours, both by Nature, and Reason, to shew to be Human. THENCE, to lin 5. of pag. 29. Velleius imputes to the Subtlety of Epicurus the things that were not Intelligible in his Doctrine. Then, he De­clares (could but the dark whimsies of a Giddy man be declar'd,) which way it is, that the same Epicu­rus thought we came to discern the Nature of the Gods, but, at length, from a certain Rule of Equa­lity, which Epicurus held forth for Certain, he con­cludes, that, in the Nature of Immortal Things, there is a kind of Infinite Number, in like manner as of Mortal. THENCE, to lin. 2. of pag. 30. From the Figure of the Divinity he passes on to (the Third Head of his Proposition) his Life; which he will have to be most Happy; and therefore, absolutely at Rest, and Free from all manner of Administrati­ons, at least most undoubtedly of External: For, he teaches that, the Deity Within Himself Con­templates Himself, With Himself only Rejoyces in Himself, and is secure from all Harm. And then; against This God of His, he sets the Laborious [Page xxix] Deity of the Stoiques; that so, the Rest, and Bea­titude of Epicurus's Divinity may appear more Il­lustrious. THENCE, to lin. ult. of the same pag [...]. from the Sempiternal Cessation of the Deity, (which he would have to be necessary to his Beati [...]ude,) Epicurus, of Consequence, Inferr'd, that, the World was not Built by God; but that, by Nature, out of Atoms thronging about and together, in a Void, were Innumerable Worlds made up. Not forbears Velleius to Rally w [...]th the S [...]oiques, for Attributing the Erection of this World to God. THENCE, to lin. 32. of pag. 31. By the way, he [...]witches at the Fate, D [...]ination, and Superstition of the Stoiques; that, he may set off his Ep curus the more gloriously, upon the Opposi ion, who makes Piety toward the Gods to be Free and loos'd from all Dreads of Religion. And Then, Velleius Con [...]ludes his D scourse, with some what more Modesty than he began it.

The Folly, pag. 25. Amendment [...], Explanations, &c. of the Se­cond Branch of the Second Part of this Book. and Presumption [how Incon­siderately, and Rashly these things are deli­ver'd,] &c. (pag. 25. lin. 2.) — amongst Those [of the Number of those Gods, who, &c. (lin. 5.) — He [alone] discern'd [First] that, &c. (lin. 6.) — touching the Rule and the Judgment [touching the Instrument of Judging; his Logique, as Seneca witnes­ses,] &c. lin. 19. — to one thing [without so much as One Exception,] &c. lin. 24. — every body submit to as such [touching which, the Nature of every man consents,] &c. lin. 30. — by most [not only Philosophers, Prolepsis what. but Unlearned also,] &c. lin. 34. Chrysippus Defines Prolepsis to be a Natural Notion of Ʋniversal things: And, Suidas, out of La­ertius, Describes it at large. Quem vide.

Epicurus [himself] call'd, &c. pag. 26. pag. 26. lin. 2. — And Then, This we held fur­ther [Page xxx] [We have This same Prenotion, there­fore, that the Gods are,] &c. (lin. 5, 6.) — it was not without Reason, that [That Opi­nion was Truly set forth, by Epicurus, that, what is Blessed] And so on, in the Singular Number. (lin. 10, 11.) — Opinion [of the Divine Beatitude,] &c. (lin. 34.) — and Action [of Mind] and Agitation in the Divinity. (lin. ult.) I will, here, only note, that Nemesius gives this Reason of the Placit of Epicurus that the Deity is without Anger, [...];A Reason why Epicurus made God to be with­out Anger. because, Anger is rais'd about what is beside one's Will; but, with the Deity, there can be nothing beside his Will.

pag. 27. in part [taught] by, &c. (pag. 27. lin. 2.) — Nature tells us, [by Nature we know,] that, &c. (l. 3.) — Sleeping or Wa­king (l. 8.) [Empericus writes, that Epicurus held the Knowledge of the Deity to proceed from the Visions of Dreams;Epicurus held, that the Know­ledge of the Human Shape of the Deity was Originally drawn from the Visions of Dreams. & that, in regard there were certain mighty Images under Hu­man Form, that came into us Sleeping, there must be, in very deed, some or other Gods of Human Figure, [...] according to Plutarch, [...] with Galen, and Laertius. Neither was even the Church without her Anthropomorphites (Hereticks so call'd) also.] — to my [Friend] Cotta here, [he says now One thing, then Another,] &c. (lin. 19, 20.) — This [Shape of the Gods] is not a Carnal Body, &c. (l. 34, 35.) Had he imputed a Real Body, and Real Bloud, to his Divinity, he had made him Corruptible. Homer (in Iliad. ε.) attributes to Venus (wounded by Diomede) Bloud [Page xxxj] much what of this sort. But,Why he phan­si'd the Gods to have only as it were a Body, &c. Epicurus had also another Reason for This; which was, that he phansi'd the Gods to be made up of I­mages proceeding continually from Atoms, and gliding away in a perpetual Flux: Which same Images could not rightly be said to have a Bo­dy, but only as it were a Body, (i. e. the Form, and Resemblance of one;) just as a Man's Shadow is as it were a Man, a pain­ted Flower, as it were a Flower, &c.

who not only pry'd, pag. 28. [who not only dis­cern'd with his Mind, but even handled, just as with the Hand, dark and abstruse matters,] &c. (p. 28. l. 10, 11, 12, 13.) — Corporeal Essence [propriety] of the Divi­nity to be [such, that, First, it was] Imper­ceptible, &c. (lin. 14, 15.) — their Firmness [Firm, and Corporeal Solidity] he, &c. lin. 19. — the kinds [there be­ing Infinite Kinds of Images one like ano­ther,] &c. (lin. 22, 23.) — that continu­ally flow [and continually flowing,] &c. (lin. 24.) — upon them [these same Ima­ges, we come Thus to understand what that Blessed and Eternal Nature is] (lin. 26, 27, 28, 29.) Thô I might (perhaps) be excus'd from troubling my self about the Opini­on of a Wild Philosopher confounded in his own Subtlety; yet I'll take the pains to Ex­plain this Whole Matter; Thus. EpicurusEpicurus's means of Dis­cerning the Deity, Ex­plain'd. was most Perspicacious, in that he so evident­ly knew things very Abstruse, as if he had handled them with his Hand. He delivers the Power and Propriety of the Gods to be such, as cannot be perceiv'd by any External Sense, but only by the Ʋnderstanding: Nor [Page xxxij] yet, can This Nature be Discern'd as consist­ing of a gross, and s [...]lid Body, as are those things seen which he, in consideration of their Firm and Bodily Solidity, term'd [...]; but, this same Divine Nature, may, in a certain manner, be known by us, while we phansie in our Minds certain most Slender Images, which are the Same only in Form, and remain not so, ad numerum, since they glide away by perpetual Flux, and Transition; (Note, that Velleius Opposes Images to Soli­dity, Similitude and Transition to [...] ad nu­merum;) For, in that Infinite Images are sent forth from Innumerable Atoms, and throng on all sides into our Ʋnderstanding (no Other, with Epicurus, than Imagining) Faculty, he teaches, that we perceive what the Blessed and Eternal (i. e. the Divine) Nature is, while, with Singular Delectation, we Contemplate these Images. Now, Atoms were so call'd by Epicurus, Way Atoms were so Nam'd by him. not that they were small; but, because they were so hard, that they could not be Divided, and were free from Vacuum.

also Compleat [that All things may An­swer All; Equals be suited with Equals,] &c. (lin. 31, &c.) — Even-ballancing [E­qual Partition. From This, therefore is Concluded,] that, pag. 29. &c. (pag. 29. lin. 1.— and the Means [and, if the things that De­stroy be Innumerable, those that Preserve must necessarily be also Infinite] (lin. 4, 5.) The Reason of Epicurus's making Images, The Reason of his Makin [...] I­mages, and the Denies, to be Innumerable. and the Deities, to be Innumerable; was, because of that Equal partition which he thought was absolutely necessary in Nature: That all things [Page xxxiij] might be pois'd (as it were) in an Even Bal­lance. For, when he saw the Infinite Num­ber of Mortals, he affirm'd the Immortals were also Infinite; and, when he had before his Eyes the Innumerable Pests, bred for the Destruction of the World, and which would bring manifold Calamities, and Ruine on U­niversal Nature; he phansi'd, it ought cer­tainly to be Collected from Thence, that there were, in like manner, Innumerable Images, by the constant Approach whereof, the Decay brought upon the World might, as by an Ayd, be Repair'd.

Nought at all [no External things,] &c. (pag. 29. lin. 12.) — and also quiet [ex­empt from Offices of Trouble,] &c. lin. 26. The Stoiques not only held the World, to be a Deity; but also some or other Power within this same World: Which Velleius has regard to, in what follows in this place.

From all Employ [from bearing any Offi­ces of Magistracy, pag. 30. What Epicurus meant by Na­ture.] &c. (pag. 30. lin. 1.)— by Nature, &c. (lin. 5.) [which was no O­ther, with Epicurus, than Atoms. He also said the World was made by Fortune, be­cause his Atoms were not govern'd by Advice, but only carried by a blind Impulse. Tully in the 17th Section of his First Book de Finibus, tells how the World came to have a Being, in the Opinion of Epicurus.] — being gravel'd, and at a plunge [being unable to give the Reason of the Thing,] &c. (lin. 15.) — boundless magnitude of Regions [Infinite Void] wherein, &c. (lin. 18, 19.) — power [Multitude] of, &c. (lin. 19.) — but by [without] Bel­lows, [Page xxxiv] &c. (lin. 30.) This is only an Ironical Exaggeration;Bellows▪ &c. an Ironical Exag­geration. as was his Demand, before, of the Tools, Engins, &c. made use of by Pla­to's Deity, in Building the World.]

Hence [i. e. From this Opinion of an All-providing Lord sprang up, in your Minds, (O Stoique's!) That other, of Fate,] &c. (pag. 31. pag. 31. lin. 1.) — An Immutable Con­stitution [from an Eternal Verity, i. e. E­ternal Decree, which is ever True, because it aiways alots the Effect.] and [a] Continua­tion of, &c. (lin. 4.) — ascribes All to [thinks all things come to pass, by] Fate, &c. (lin. 8.) — or [Art of] Divination, &c. (lin. 9.) — any heed to't, [heed to You,] would, &c. (lin. 10.) — that we must down upon [fall to Worshipping your Sa­crifice-Inspecters,] &c. (lin. 12, 13, 14.)— But my Zeal [But, carried on with a Desire of Talking of a most weighty Matter, I'm affraid I have been somewhat Long:] only I, &c. (l. 27, 28.) There is a Posthumous Piece of the Learned Grotius's,Grotiu [...] 's Col­ [...]ction of Opi­nions touching Fate. that contains a Collection of all the Opinions of Philosophers, Ethnicks, Jews, Christians, touching Fate. And, Bulinger, in the First Tome of his Works, has Handled the Whole Body of the Ancient Art of Divination. Epicurus's Impieties shall be toucht upon in the Next Part.

The Contents of Each Section of the Third (and Last) Part of the First Book.PART III. In This Third (and Last) Part of the First Book, Cotia Refells Velleius. FROM near the Bottom or pag. 31. to lin. 31. of pag. 32. Immediately, in the very Entrance of his Argument, he discovers his (the Academical) Faculty to consist in Refelling, rather than Asserting, and Confirming [Page xxxv] Opinions. And then, to lessen the Envy (if any should arise) of his Intended Confutation, he Com­plements his Adversary a little, and Commends his Perspicuity, Copiousness, and Eloquence. THENCE, to l. ult. of p. 33. He compares Velleius with the Epicurean Zeno in the Faculty of Speaking; that, by a soft Assentation, he may mitigate the more heavy Censure of the Placits of Epicurus. Then, makes he, here, as great a shew of Despiciency, as Velleius had done of Confidence; observing strictly the Academical Disposition, (still Doubtfull, ever Ʋncertain,) which (indeed) he either Illustrates, or Excuses, by the Example of Simonides. THENCE, to lin. 32. of pag. 34. Cotta intending to be a lit­tle Sharper than Ordinary in his Reprehension of what Velleius had Disputed, he prudently turns the Envy of those Wild phansies from his Antagonist, upon (the Authour) Epicurus: And, setting to the First Question touching the Gods, Whether or no any such there be; he strives to overthrow, or at least render doubtfull, that most true and certain Prolepsis of Epicurus's, or, the Anteperception, (or, Innate Notion) of a certain Divine Nature, in the Minds of all men. THENCE, to lin. 7. of pag. 35. Thô, by a Rhetorical Concession, the Aca­demique admitted the Existence of a Deity; yet, he impugns the Argument of General Consent, urg'd, by Velleius, in proof of the Topique; and, by some few Instances of Atheists, shews there is not an Ʋ ­niversal Assent, in the Matter. THENCE, to lin. 31. of the same page. He Descends, from whole Nations, to Particular Men; and produces certain Wicked, and Atheistical Persons, in proof of the Falsity of Epicurus's Assumption, that All were of Opinion that Gods there are. THENCE, to lin. 27. of pag. 36. Having, in his Oratorial way, by O­mission, and Rhetorical Concession, pass'd it over, as Granted, that Gods there are; In the Whole, he Asks Five Things of Velleius: First, the Rise of the Gods, (if any there be;) Then, their Place of A­bode; Next, what kind of Body they have; Next, what sort of Mind; and Lastly, what Course of Life they lead. And First, in This Section, he comes to the First Head, the Rise, or Original of [Page xxxvj] the Deities: In Which, it is his chief business, here, briefly to confute the Atoms, and Void, that, (after Lucippus, and Democritus,) Ep [...]curus is feign'd to have made the Principles of all things. THENCE, to lin. 15. of pag. 37. He Twits Epicurean Velleius, for his Stiffness in his Heresie, for which is in vain pretended the empty Desire of a Happy Life, and of Tru [...]k. THENCE, to lin. 2. of pag. 38. Admit­ting, Atoms, in his usual way of Rhetorical Con­cession; he shews yet, that the Nature of the Gods, (such as hims [...]lf feign'd (perhaps) that the Epicu­reans phansi'd,) arising from, and consisting of Atoms, falls to ruine: For, Hence he infers, con­trary to what Those Philosophers would have, that, the Deities are not Eternal, nor Immortal. THENCE, to lin. 22. of the same page. He, then, confutes (à Simili) the Evasion of Epicurus, of as it were a Bo [...]y, and as it were Bloud, in the Divi­nity: And, shews the Foppishness of sundry Other Shif s of his, of the like sort, that are Inexplica­ble, and opposite to Common Sense, and Reason. First, That of the Declension of Atoms is, here exploded. THENCE, to lin. 9. of pag. 39. With the Same Intent he pursues the same Argu­ment, with a Similitude; and, produces two other Fictions of Epicurus's, no less Absurd, (he thinks,) than the Former. THENCE, to lin. 30. of the same page. He shews that Device of Epicurus's, as it were a Body, &c. to be not only Ridiculous, but so very Obscure, (too) that it cannot be under­stood even by the Epicureans themselves. THENCE, to lin. 4. of pag. 41. He Taxes the Epicureans in General, of a more Simple and Scandalous sort of Childishness; but, more at large pursues that vain Boast of their Founder, of pretending, he never had any Master. THENCE, to lin. ult. of the same page. After a short Excursion against the vain, and lying Arrogance of Epicurus; he again, the third tim [...], takes in hand That Wretched Dogma of his, as it were a Body, &c. presses harder upon't than ever, & lays (afresh) to Epicurus's Charge the same Obscu­rity, that he had insul [...]ingly Objected to him in the former Sections. And, in that Velleius, in Expli­cating the Figment of his Master, had made use of [Page xxxvij] the Same Words, that painted Images are usually Describ'd by; he Concludes the Gods to be (in Livius's Term) altogether Imaginary. THENCE, to lin. 1. of pag. 43. By a Rhetorical Concession, he passes on to Confute the Figure of the Gods: And, falls upon the First of the Three Arguments, before produc'd by Velleius, in proof of that same Form; teaching, that Human shape came to be At­tributed to the Deities, not in regard of that feign­ed Prel [...]psis of Epicurus's, but either by the advice of Wise men, or through the Superstition of the more Ignorant sort. THENCE, to lin. 33. of the same page. He proceeds in Confuting the Human Form of the Gods, which only the Natural Self-love of Men had feigned for them. THENCE, to lin. 25. of pag. 44. Having, lately, said there was, in Men, a False Judgment of Beauty, a ris [...]ng from Self-love; he now shews This Judgment to be very Ʋncertain, (also) since, every body pronounces upon the Form of each one, according to his own phansie and li­king. THENCE, to lin. 7. of pag. 45. From his little Digression, being return'd to the Gods; he proceeds, by the Absurdness of the Consequences, to Confirm their Form to be in no wise Human. THENCE, to lin. 27. of the same page. What Cotta seem'd to have a little before Granted Velleius, that to a man meditating upon God no other than Human Figure occurs, he now Contends to be False: both because this Shape is rather Imputable to the phansie of Peinters, than to any Notion im­press'd in us by Nature; and also, for that sundry Nations have feign'd the Deities under another Ha­bit. THENCE, to lin. 9. of pag. 46. He proceeds to overthrow the False Assumption of Velleius, of the Gods being every where feign'd under Human Form▪ First, by the Example of the Aegyptians, who Worshipt Sacred Beasts more Religiously, than the Romans either their Divine, or Human Images. THENCE, to lin. 22. of the same page. Cotta, persevering in the same purpose, upbraids to an E­picurean Man, so Devoted to Physiques, his Confir­ming by most Idle Phantasms, his grave Opinion touchi [...]g the Form of the Gods; Whence, not a few Absurdities follow, in Consequence. THENCE, [Page xxxviij] to lin. 10. of pag. 47. The Acad [...]mique presses the same thing, by a Similitude, an Absurdity, and an Indecency. THENCE, to lin. 28. of the same page. Cotta seems to introduce Velleius speaking again; and urging afresh the same Arguments with those brought before for the Human Form of the Gods. He does not, here, Confute him: But, only ar­gues Epicurus, and his Followers of Superstitious Apprehensions, contrary to the Opinion of some, who thought Epicurus to be an Atheist. THENCE, to lin. 26. of pag. 48. The Academique goes on in Vindicating Epicurus from all suspicion of Athe­ism; nay he represents him to have been more Fearfull than all other men, out of too much Su­perstition. THENCE, to lin. 29. of pag. 49. Passi [...]g by Velleius, by Dissimulancy, that he may have the freer Scope of Reprehension, he presses upon (the Master himself) Epicurus, and, by its Consequen­ces, explodes that so frigid and insulse Reason, of his, that mov'd him to deny the Divinity of the Stars, World, and Sempiternal Mind, viz. that he never Saw a Soul participating of Reason and Ʋn­derstanding, (For Epicurus held it for Certain, and Uncontrolable, that the Deity was indu'd with Sense, and Reason,) but only in Human Figure. THENCE, to lin. 15. of pag. 50. From Epicurus, he returns to Velleius; and, having noted, from the very first, the whole Sect to be generally Unseen in Logique, that so it might be less strange for Vel­leius (a Party of it) to be grosly Out in his Syllo­gisms, he shews the Argumentation he us'd, in proof of Reason to be able to abide in Human Fi­gure only, to be no way Coherent. THENCE, to lin. 11. of pag. 51. He subtly contends for our saying rather that Men are of a Divine Form, and like the Gods, than that They are of Human Figure, and like Men: And then denies that Men could come to be made like Gods by a fortuitous Concourse of Atoms. THENCE, to lin. 9. of pag. 52. As yet, the Subtle Academique had not markt any Inconveniencies in the Opinion of the Epicureans, which made the Gods to be like Men, So that, now, as if he had only pref [...]c'd, all this while, to the Confutation of the Phansie, he seems to set to Refell it in good [Page xxxix] earnest, by more Substantial Arguments: The First is deriv'd from the Authority of Philosophers, the Second from Ʋnprofitableness. THENCE, to l. 4. of pag. 53. A Digression upon the Reflecting way of the Epicureans. THENCE, to lin. 29. of the same page. He quits not even Velleius himself, whom he had handled favourably hitherto, from (the Com­mon Vice of the Party) Evil-speaking. And, from This Vice, (if so be he have Charg'd it Truly,) col­lects a great Absurdity against the Epicureans them­selves. Then, after a mighty Contempt of the Epi­curean Philosophy, he returns, from the Digression, to his Purpose; And, by the Illness of the Con­sequences, somewhat more luculently Refells the Human Form of the Deities. THENCE, to lin. 34. of pag. 54. Cotta derides the most Light Reasoning of the Epicureans; which from the Beatitude of the Deities would of Necessity collect the Human Figure of th [...]m; A [...] if Happiness could neither be in any Nature of Another Form than Human, nor separate from any Body at all. Now, in that This might easily be gainsaid, the Epicureans only An­swer'd Thus to't, that they Saw not any other thing Happy. So that, in This place, chiefly, does the Academique explode this frivolous and childish Reply. THENCE, to lin. 32. of pag. 55. Perseve­ring in Refelling the Same Form, he easily quashes the Argument by the Epicureans fetcht from Simi­litude. And then, he shews the Falsity of the Placit, by the same Phil [...]sophers assum'd, that Reason could Only be in Human Figure. THENCE, to lin. 32. of pag. 55. Human Members are Superfluous, nay even Incommodious, in the Gods; and so, ought not to be imputed to them: And, what's a Conse­quence to This, Therefore, are not the Gods of Human Form; would the Academique Mean; thô, here; his business seems to be only to set forth the Ʋnprofitable Redundancy of Members. THENCE, to lin. 13. of pag. 56. If (as the Epicureans Thought) there be no Work of the Gods, they can­not any way be Known: A great Inconvenience; which the Stoiques avoided, in collecting from the admirable Contrivance of the World the Existence of a most skilfull Architect! Thus the Academique, [Page xl] in a manner! What says Epicurus to the contrary? He has recourse to his Prelepsis; which, Cotta I­ronically amplifying, sets forth for Ridiculous. THENCE, to lin. 2. of pag. 57. He Refells the Idle Deities of Epicurus, First, by the Sense of the Common People, Next, by the Religion of the Aegyp­tians, thô unsound; Then, by Childish Estimation; and Lastly, by the Great Inconvenience Consequen­tial to the Doctrine. THENCE, to lin. 5. of pag. 59. After he has even more than Confuted the Human Figure of the Gods, by a Rhetorical Conces­sion he passes over to other Questions concerning them; that so, he may Oppress his Adversary by That (as it were) Masse of Difficulties. THENCE, to, lin. 7. of pag. 90. Of the many Questions before mov'd with Relation to the Deity of Epicurus, he, in this place, sets upon a Discussion, and Confuta­tion only of the Two Last; viz. How this same God comes to be Happy, and how Eternal. THENCE, to lin. 5. of pag. 61. He confutes the Images Invent­ed by Democritus, (and Entertain'd by the Epicure­ans,) to expound the Reason both of Seeing, and Ʋnderstanding. THENCE, to lin. 7. of pag. 62. He explodes the Eternity of those same Imag [...]s, that is to say, Deities of the Epicureans. THENCE, to lin. 25. of the same page. When he has taken a­way the Immortality of the Divinity of the Epicu­reans, he sets to destroy his Beatitude also; this be­ing the Scope of all the four Sections following. But, Here, he draws his First Argument from the Nature it self of Beatitude, which the Greater part of Philosophers would have to be plac'd in Vertue; Epicurus, contrariwise, in Corporeal Pleasures. THENCE, to lin. 30. of pag. 63 He descends to the Pleasures of each of the Senses, which he shews the Gods of the Epicureans to be without: And, that the Epicureans may not, upon This, betake themselves to the Pleasures of the Mind, and say their Deity enjoys Pleasures of That sort in Abun­dance, he deprives them of That Evasion, and Convicts them by the very Words themselves of E­picurus, and Metrodorus. So, Concluding the Deities of the Epicureans not to be Happy. THENCE, to lin. 21. of pag. 64. Cotta objecte to himself what [Page xlj] was brought by the Epicureans, both for the Beati­tude of the Gods, and the Religion of their Founder, and then wipes off the things Objected. THENCE, to lin. 6. of pag. 65. He furth [...]r opposes to himself what was urg'd in proof of Epicurus's Religion. Viz. his saying the Gods were to be worshipt for their Excellent Nature, not for any Benefits to Men; and streight overthrows it First by denying the Excellency of the Epicurean Deities. Then, by, the Absurd Consequences of the Doctrine, a Subversion of all Piety, and Sanctity. THENCE, to lin. 29. of the same page. He represses the Vanity of the E­p [...]cureans, who vaunted they had deliver'd men from Superstition, by shewing they had no other­wise done This than by extinguishing all Religion, and Divinity; a thing that the Atheists did as well as They. This is the Point he pursues, in the Three Next Sections. THENCE, to lin. 15. of pag. 66. He proceeds in recounting A heists, or men little better than Such, who, by introducing vain Deities, and Religions, (a Crime that the E­picureans were guilty of,) had destroy'd the True God, and Religion, as well as the Fear of God, which the Epicureans would have to be chiefly com­prehended under the Name of Superstition: So, leaving it to be Concluded, that the Epicureans va­lue themselves in no other respect, than wherein the Atheists Glory also. THENCE, to lin. 14. or pag. 67. Epicurus outwent his very Authour in Im­piety; For, Democritus only Stagger'd in the Na­ture of the Gods; but he absolutely took away all Religion in stripping the Deities of Help and Fa­vour. Wherefore Epicurus is not to be term'd an Extingu sher of Superstition, but of all Religion. This is the Scope of all that Cotta delivers hence­forth. THENCE, to lin. 16. of pag. 68. He strengthens himself against the Epicureans, who stript the Deity of Assistance, and Favour, by the Authority of the Stoiques, in that he tells us they allow'd of a Friendship amongst Wise Men; not such as the Epicureans reckon'd upon, which only drove at gain and benefit, but a Voluntary one, stu­dious of other mens Good. Whence he Infers, that a Friendship of This quality is also to be admitted [Page xlij] amongst the Gods. THENCE, to the End. He again takes in hand the Answer of the Epicureans, toucht upon before, that Epicurus had written a Book touching Sanctity, and so, was not to be deem'd an A [...]heist. Now, Cotta, no more here than in the other place, denies the Fact; but, as formerly, slights it, and shews Sanctity in no wise to be Consistent with the Placits of Epicurus. So concluding Epicurus to have been an Atheist in Masquerade, which he Confirms by the Authority of Posidonius, and a brief Recapitulation of the Epicurean Dogmata concerning God. And Thus much, for the Contents of the First Book.

pag. 32. Amendments, Explana [...]ions, &c. of the Third (and Last) Part of the First Book. Whence, the Toga Romana. Then why False, &c. (pag. 32. lin. 2.) Because, Falsity is Manifold, Truth, Single.

all the Roman Nobility, &c. (lin. 17.) To­gatis Omnibus: all the Romans; who, upon Enfranchisement, put on the Toga, and were stript of it again, if sentenc'd to Banishment. Tertullian, in his Book de Pallio, writes, that the Toga came from the Pelasgi to the Lydians, and from Them to the Romans.

so that having learnt [with this Intent, I believe; that, I might the better know how those things (the Epicurean Dogma­ta,) were to be Refell'd, upon hearing them Explain'd by the very Chief of the Epicureans,] &c. (lin. 33, &c.)

pag. 33. what always [often] happen'd, &c. (p. 33. lin. 6.)

Hiero spoken to. upon King Hiero's putting, &c. Tertullian, in Cap. 46. of his Apologetique, tells much what a like Story of Thales, and Craesus. Lilius, in Hist. Poet. speaks of Simonides; and Diodorus Siculus, Lib. 1. of this Hiero, Brother of Gelo the Tyrant of Syracuse.

dust it our [Dispute] with Him, &c. [Page xliij] (pag. 33. pag. 34. lin. 2.) — worthy of Philoso­phy, &c. (lin. 4.) He had before deny'd Epi­curus to have been an Oratour; now, he will not let him be a Philosopher neither.— a Priest [High Priest] my self, &c. (l. 11.)— to be not a matter of Opinion, &c. [made out, not only by the Doubtfull Opinions of Men, but by such sure Arguments as may plainly shew the real Existence of a Divinity in the Nature of Things.] (lin. 16, &c.)

Many Countries so absolutely Barbarous,pag. 35. No Country without Reli­gion. &c. (pag. 35. lin. 4.) But, no Instance of any One, Cotta; and indeed none could be produc'd. — the greatest Sophist, &c. (lin. 13.) Cicero, in the Fourth Book of his Academical Questions, A Sophist what. Defines a Sophist to be one that professes Philosophy either out of Gain, or Ostentation.

(as the Satyrist Lucilius has it,) have been guilty, &c. (lin. 24, &c.) Tubulus, &c. were Notorious Rogues amongst the Romans. Neptuni Filii who. The Poets us'd to term Stout and Good men sons of Jupiter; but Fierce and Brutish, as if sprung from the Sea, sons of Neptune; says Gellius. The Son of Neptune, here meant, might be Polyphemus, or any such Im­pious Monster. — then it seems to be, &c. (lin. 32.)

what kind of Bodies have they; what sort of Minds, &c. (pag. 36. pag. 36. lin. 3, 4.)— with your pretended [in Explicating all things by Atoms, which reign so licentiously [Page xliv] throughout the whole Philosophy of Epicurus,] &c. (lin. 7, &c.) — nothing is Incorporeal [there can be no Vacuum,] &c. (lin. 11.) — Theses, (Oracula.) Axioms, &c. (lin. 14.)

not rather forgo [and what shall one give you now, to cease to be an Epicurean, &c. (pag. 37. pag. 37. lin. 12.) — the Image [me­thod] of a, &c. (lin. 5.)

But, mindfull, &c. [But, forgetfull of that Freedom I a little before us'd toward you, I reckon up too much.] (l. 16, &c.)— all things are Compounded [consist] of, &c. (lin. 18.) — to avoid [to prove] This, you fall into great Difficulties, as into Pla­ces overrun with Bryers, &c. (lin. 3, 4.)

to salve it [the matter] by, &c. (pag. 38. pag. 38. l. 6.) naturally to [to be carried downward by their own weight,] &c. (lin. 12.) — carry'd directly (ad lineam rectam) down­ward,] &c. (lin. 18.) Epicurus phansi'd two Sorts of Motion for his Atoms, Epicurus's Mo­tion of Atoms Twofold. the One Natural, the Other Reflex; and then again divided the Natural into Perpendicular, and Oblique. The Former he had from Demo­critus, the Other was his own Device.

Shuffles he [with the same Stolidity Re­plies he to the Dialectiques,] &c. (lin. 25.)

Arcesilas (the Authour of the Middle A­cademy, as Laertius stiles him,) holding all things to be False, that were discern'd by the Senses; quarrel'd Zeno (the Founder of the Stoical Sect,) for Supposing all so per­ceiv'd not to be False, but some only: But, Epicurus being afraid that, in admit­ting the Errour of any thing so discern'd, no­thing would be True, &c. (l. ult. & l. 1, &c. [Page xlv] of pag. 39.) pag. 39. — the Concretion, &c. [in seeking to avoid making the Deities to be constituted of Atoms, lest they should be Dissoluble,] &c. (lin. 11, 12.) — of ano­ther [while he is predicting to the People,] &c. (lin. 19.) 'Twas Cato's saying. — were it Form'd, &c. [were the Question touching Images form'd in Wax, or in Clay] (lin. 23, &c.) — Stumbled up­on [through Negligence Falsly perswaded himself of] are Retail'd [are Recited by You, as Dictates.] (l. 31, 32.) Laertius says, that Epicurus enjoyn'd his Followers not only to Reade and Study what he wrote, but, like Chil­dren, to learn it by Heart too. — any Ma­ster, &c. (lin. ult.) The Greeks term'd such [...]; and Laertius tells, [...] who. that He­raclitus pretended to be one of These, as well as Epicurus.

The Lycaeum (pag. 40. lin. 7.) was a School not far from Athens; The Lycaeum what. pag. 40. Aristotle taught in it 13 Years, and had many Auditours.

For, his Father Neocles coming with the New Colony into That Isle, Epicurus, (when young) liv'd there with his said Father and Brothers, (Neocles, Chaeredemus, and Aristo­bulus:) And, the little Plot not being suf­ficient for their Sustenance, 'tis probable the same Epicurus turn'd Schoolmaster, There, &c. (lin. 16, 17, &c.)

all the rest [almost all his Physiques,] &c. (pag. 41. pag. 41. lin. 2.) — to Strangers, &c. (lin. 18.) Pythagoras distinguisht his Scho­lars, into two Ranks [...] Civiles, and [...] Externos. — such a one, &c. [we will then say of your Gods what we usu­ally [Page lxvj] do of the Picture of Venus at Cos.] (lin. 28, &c.)

allow [be perswaded of] This, which, &c. (pag. 42. [...]ag. 42. lin. 1.) — and Lineaments [Lines,] &c. (lin. 4.) Such he means, as those of Painters, upon their First Draught of a Picture in Red — erected [attributed] and, &c. (lin. 25.) [that there should be Images, which to Reverence, was to be un­derstood to be an approaching to the Deity himself,] &c. (lin. 30, &c.)

pag. 43. at liberty to [make to our selves and joyn any shape we pleas'd, would you not be of that sea Triton's swimming triumphantly with his Two Fish-Tails joyn'd to a Human Body,] &c. (lin. 28, &c.) Virgil describes Triton in lib. 10. of his Aeneads; and Pau­sanias in Book 9. — of Nature [loving her self] that a man, &c. (lin. 33.)

Flock of Boys, &c. (pag. 44. pag. 44. lin. 4.) Not onely the Babylonians of Old, but even the Greeks and Romans also kept their Boys ad delicias; Socrates, Plato, &c. seeming to approve of the Proceeding — you may laugh, &c. ['Tis a Liquourish Smile That,] (says Cotta, to Velleius Smiling,) &c. but, (&c. (l. 4, 5.) — Aleaeus (of Mitylene in the Isle of Lesbos, a Famous Poet,) held a Wart upon a Boy's (Lycus's) Knuckle, &c. (l. 10.)— Freed-man [Towns-man] Roscius (the Ad­mirable Comedian, born at Lanuvium in Italy, as was Velleius, &c. (lin. 14.) — Rising Sun. Aurora, the Rising Morn; it being Customary with the Romans to worship her; and then, Deus for Dea is usual with the Poets, &c. (lin. 16, &c.) — To Him, [Page xlvij] he was Fairer than a God, (or, the Goddess Aurora,) yet, was he Then, as he is Now, sadly Squint-ey'd, &c. (lin. 21, 22.) — to be [if not Squint, yet, at least Pink-ey'd,] &c. lin. 27. — from Imperfections, &c. (lin. 32.) Laurentius Pignorus writes, that the Aegyptians mended not their Imperfecti­ons in their Deities.

an Academy [as little Certainty, as amongst the Academiques, who hold, that nothing can be Perceiv'd,] &c. (pag. 45. pag. 45. lin. 4.) — such Absurdities [as You teach, concerning the Human Figure of the Gods,] &c. (lin. 12.) — 'tis said [you say] it has, &c. (lin. 16.) — Forms [Visages] that, &c. (lin. 19.) — Beasts in greater Reverence [and therefore, must needs conceive of the Deities under the Shape of Beasts,] &c. (lin. 25, 26.) — Harm'd a Cat [Herodotus writes it to have been Certain Death, there, for any to Hurt these, either on set purpose, or by accident,] &c. (lin. 32.) The Aegyp­tians Consecrated Divers of their Men too,Men Consecra­ted by the Ae­gyptians, &c. as well as Beasts. as well as the Greeks, and Romans: So did the Syrians also, thô indeed they worshipt Se­miramis under the Form of a Dove.

the Roman Juno and the Grecian, &c. [Pausanias, (in lib. 2. de Corinthiacis,) Describes the Grecian Juno; and Albricus, (the Philosopher,) in his Small Tract de I­maginibus Deorum, the Roman,] &c. (p. 46. pag. 46. Jupiter Capito­linus. lin. 4.) — Jupiter of the Capitol [was stampt upon their Coins Naked on his Ʋpper parts, Cover'd on his Lower; with a Thun­der-bolt in his Right hand, and a Sceptre in his Left,] &c. (lin. 8.) — Jupiter HamonJupiter Hamon. [Page xlviij] [had the Head of a Ram, all the rest of his Body Human, says Marcianus,] &c. (l. 9.)— at This rate [if you may fetch, &c. you may affirm Jupiter,] &c. (lin. 13, 14.) — Alcamenes was an Athenian Statuary (l. 17.)— who, [as he stands,] through his, &c. (lin. 18.) — the Gods to be of [those to be the Proper Names of the Gods, that the Romans give them,] &c. (lin. 23, &c.) — For, you are out [For, it is not that, as you are still call'd Velleius, whereever you come, so, Vulcan has one and the same Name in Italy, &c. (lin. 29, &c.) [he was also call'd Mulciber; by the Aegyptians, Onas,] &c. A Dark Passage Explain'd. This is Cotta's First Argument, drawn from Similitude; that, as Other Nations Vary'd from the Romans in their Appellati­ons of their Deities, so in their Forms too; therefore could not those Figures given by the Romans be the proper Forms of the Gods, (lin. 27, &c.) — [no Names at all, &c.] This, the Second, from Absurdity; that if (as the Epicureans held) they were all of a Feature, the Gods needed no Name at all: But, This seeming to be Absurd, and against the Books of Ceremonies, where some cer­tain Names were set down for them; in Con­sequence they could not all have one Human Face: This Inferr'd from these words. How much more Commendable, &c. then, to Nauseate one that blunders forth such stuff as This, and become Ʋneasie to your self, &c. (from lin. 31. of p. 46. to l. 8. of p. 47.)— And then, the Third from Indecency, is con­tain'd in the words do you believe the Gods to be like You, or Me? (lin. 9.) which is to [Page xlix] say, that, since no one man dare affirm the Gods to be like his Individual self; it follows, they are not of Human Form. This (sure) must be the Sense of this Paragraph.

are they Capable of [Do they enjoy,] &c. (p. 47. pag. 47. l. 13.)— such a Bulk [i. e. in a Nature void of all Sense,] &c. (l. 15.) — meanest of the Deities [all the very Least Images of the Gods,] &c. (l. 25.)— Fundamental Articles [proper, precipuous Opinions,] &c. (l. 32.)

Doubtfull [simple in expressing,] &c. (p. 48. pag. 48. lin. 1.) — [They observe not, that he has spoken ambiguously Here; but, in ma­ny Other places, both he, and Metrodorus as plainly, as your self ere-while,] &c. (lin. 8, &c.) — [What, could you ever see the Sun,] &c. (lin. 34, 35.) The Drift of this Argumentation is somewhat hard to find out,The Intricate Sense of ano­ther passage in the Original Clear'd. but, Cotta may mean Thus perhaps: That, since Epicurus would not allow the Sun, &c. to be a God, because he only saw, a Rational Soul in an Human Figure; 'tis here shew'd we allow of many things, thô we never dis­cern'd them with our Eyes, or any of our Senses: So, no good Inference of Epicurus's, that the Sun, Moon, &c. are altogether Destitute of Reason, only in that he never beheld them make use of any: Neither, because he saw Reason only in Human Shape, ought he to deny it to be found in any other Figure, so long as he granted that Planets there are, thô he never saw either the Substance or Motion of them. This seems to be the Sense of the Original, how perplext soever the Expression be.

two extreme Parts [i. e. the Tropick of Cancer, and That of Capricorn,] &c. (p. 49. pag. 49. [Page l] lin. 1.) — the same Course. [the Moon moves much slower than the Sun, only her Orb is Narrower, as being Next the Earth: she is in the same Zodiac with the Sun; thô not in the same Line thereof, but a more Contracted,] &c. (lin. 4.) — same Circle [i. e. the same Zodiac, which is fan­si'd to be of great Latitude,] &c. (lin. 5.)— some Nearer, &c. [Note, First, that it was the Custom, in Cicero's Days, to sepa­rate the Sun and Moon (thô wandering, as the Rest) from the Number of the Planets, in regard of their Extraordinary Light, and Influence. Then, that (the lowest) the Moon,The Di [...]tances of the Pla­nets from the Earth. is 117595 Miles distant from the Superficies of the Earth; Mercury, 226652; Venus, 597132; Sol, 4349990; Mars, 3168365; Jupiter, 51464862; Saturn, 80039436: According to a more Loose Computation This; omitting some Fractions of small moment, which Clavius, in his Commentary on the Sphere of John de Sacro Bosco, pursues more strictly (lin. 6.) — born in Seriphus, &c. (lin. 21, &c.) As the Boeotians amongst the Greeks, so the Seriphi­ans of the Islanders, were noted for much Dulness. Nierembergius his History Natu­rae maximè peregrinae may be consulted touch­ing the Beasts here mention'd; things being somewhat more Certain, there, than in Pliny.

must also be allow'd [is Coherent also,] &c. (pag. 50. pag. 50. lin. 4.) — phansy [autho­rity,] &c. (lin. 11.) — you will ask, what Difference is there? &c. lin. 18. to lin. 28. seem to be Velleius's words; and, what Cotta [Page lj] infers from them, begins at their Shape there­fore, &c. (lin. 28.)

have presum'd to grapple with [spoken a­gainst,] &c. (p. 52. pag. 52. l. 12.) — Leontium [a Woman of the Epicurean Sect; Hermachus, &c. being Famous Epicureans also,] &c. (l. 14.)— Attique [i. e. Elegant] stile (lin. 15.) — Garden has been so luxuriant [i. e. Follow­ers have been so Faulty] in this respect, &c. (lin. 17.) — Phedro [Phedrus, the Epicurean,] &c. (lin. 22.) — Elegant; [but yet] the Old man, &c. (lin. 23.) — Tart word of mine [scil. against the Epicu­reans,] &c. (lin. 24.) — under whom he profited little [of whom he would not be thought ever to have learnt,] &c. (l. 33.) —

Sylla [Syllus,] but who or what this Syllus was, Antiquity is silent,] &c. (pag. 53. pag. 5 [...] lin. 1.) the Attique Buffon [using a Latin Word, Scurra Atticus,] &c. (lin. 3.) — Chesippus [ [...], alvum exonera­re,] &c. (lin. 4.) — undertake for [ad­mit,] &c. (lin. 16.)

in our Researches, &c. (p. 54. pag. [...]4 l. 15, &c.) [when the Question is, touching the most Ex­cellent Nature, and That Blessed, and Eternal; which [scil. Beatitude, and Eternity,] are only in the Divine; [are the things, you say, that Constitute the Deity.] it cannot, &c. (lin. 17, &c.)— Then his Form, &c. (l. 24) [Cotta it should seem,An Explanation. would (from lin. 13. here, to lin. 24.) argue Thus; that, if, in any thing we be like the Gods, 'tis rather in Vertae, than in Form; but, in Vertue, even in the Judgment of you Epicureans, we are not equal to the Deity; Therefore, nor in [Page lij] Figure neither. And yet, I think, he, in ve­ry deed, only means by all This, that, the Deity, if so be he is Corporeal, far surpasses all Mortals, (yet,) in Beauty, and Excellence of Bodily Form.

is your [that] similitude [scil. betwixt God and Man,] &c. (lin. penult.) This seems to have been the Epicurean Enthymeme, There is a similitude betwixt God and Man; therefore is the Figure of the One and the O­ther alike. Now, Cotta, easily destroys the Consequence of This Syllogism, by shewing in what follows, (to lin. 11. of pag. 55.) that one thing may be like another in one re­spect, unlike in another.

to the purpose, &c. [i. e. in no wise proves the Form of the Gods, and of Man (the question in hand,) to be one and the same.] (pag. 55. pag. 55. lin. 1.) — calls it [sings,] &c. (lin. 3.) — The Elephant comes short of, &c. [and therefore, is almost like Man in Prudence] (lin. 6.) — put over all these Hard things, &c. [But, if you do gainsay all these things, Another. that may be assum'd, by another, with the same Right that You took for Certain that Reason could only be in Hu­man Figure,] (lin. 22.) — why stickle you so much for a Bare Figure? &c. [i. e. why scruple you to deny this One thing (al­so,) that, Human Figure is Necessary to the having of Reason.] (l. 23.) — of them [of a Human Body] do but, &c. (l. 30.)— For surely [unless perchance, you consider'd not,] &c. (lin. 32.)

Privities. Femen is the Inward part of the Thigh. (pag. 56. pag. 56. A Third. lin. 6.) — An Un­accountable [Page liij] Prenotion [a certain ingrafted Notion,] &c. (lin. 33.) [i. e. It were super­fluous (Replies Epicurus) to prove a Deity by any Mighty Works, so long as I have a Notion of one in my Mind.] — of a Beard­ed, &c. [i. e. You might as well tell us, E­picurus, or Velleius, (Returns Cotta, then,) that you have an Information of the whole Figure of them; their Habiliments, &c. But, This you do not think: So, nor have you any Innate Information of a Deity nei­ther, would you but confess the Truth. (lin. penult. &c.)

This Particular [scil. as to the Action of the Deity,] &c. (pag. 57. pag. 57. lin. 3.) — hear of their being [think they are altogether] Idle, &c. (lin. 10.)— decreed Divine Ho­nours to [ascrib'd in the number of Deities,] &c. (lin. 13.) — by [killing and] devou­ring, &c. (lin. 19.)— advantages they reap by their Ichneumons, Cats, and Croco­diles,The Beneficial­ness of Croco­diles, &c. to the Aegyptians. &c. (lin. 25.) The Ichneumon (or In­dian Rat) us'd to hunt out and destroy the Crocodile's Eggs. The Crocodile terrifi'd the Arabian Robbers, and the Africans from passing the Nile to Harm the Aegyptians. And, the Cat was held to be of Antidote a­gainst the Mortal Sting of the Asp.

Since [if so be] not, &c. (p. 58. pag. 58. l. 9.)— highest [Region] of all, &c. (lin. 22.)— amphibious [as it were of Uncertain Kind,] &c. (lin. 25.) — Appetites are [Fi­nal Cause is,] &c. (lin. 31.)

a Trip in any of these Particulars is a Blot [meddle with any of these Particulars now advanc'd, and you come badly off,pag. 59.] (Epi­curus,) [Page liv] &c. (pag. 59. lin. 34.) — the Figure [Image, The Nature of the Deity what, according to Epicurus. A Recapitula­tion of Epicu­rus's Doctrine concerning I­mages Ex­p [...]a [...]' [...]. nay even Nature it self; for the very Power, and Nature of the Deity was no other, in Epicurus's Opinion, than his Shape or Image, which flow'd from A­toms,] of, &c. (lin. 7.) — was effected by a similitude, &c. [i. e. that, the shape of the Deity is no otherwise to be perceiv'd, than by phansying to one Image passing a­way, and vanishing, another like it still succeeding in its place; there never being wanting an Accession of the like Images from Atoms Infinite not in Magnitude, but, in Number; and therefore it is, that while we attentively consider these things, we con­ceive this Image of the Dei [...]y arising from Atoms to be Blessed, and Eternal; in that it never fails, by reason of the Continual Suc­cession of the like Species or Images, in the place of the former vanisht.] (from lin. 10. to lin. 15.) — This, now, is a Rehearsal of what Velleius had deliver'd before; what follows is Cotta's Reply to't. Viz. What in the Name of, &c. do you Mean by all This? (lin. 15, 16, 17.) [Is there any thing either of Probability,Cotta's An­swer to it Ex­pounded also. (cries Cotta,) or worthy a Philo­sopher in all This?] For, if the Gods of Epicurus do only Exist (lin. 18.) [are on­ly to be perceiv'd] in Thought, and are ab­solutely void of Substance and Solidity (l. 20.) [have nothing of Bulk or Substance in them, that may fall under Sense;] what matters it (i. e. 'tis all one,) whether we think of an Hippocentaur, (lin. 22.) [a fictitious thing,] or of a Deity that is without swelling or Soli­dity,] &c. (to lin. 22.) — and from the [Page lv] Capitol, &c. [and, when those Assemblies are anew held in that same Temple of Jupi­ter Capitolinus,The Academi­cal and Epicu­rean Opinions touching the Images of things past. are brought again into my Mind, upon my calling those Assemblies to Remembrance.] (lin. 32, 33.) So that the Academiques (it should seem) held the Re­membrance of any thing past to be a vain Motion of the Mind, because it was conver­sant about what had no longer a Being. But, the Epicureans (on the Other side) thought perpetual Images of Times past continu'd in Nature, and were whirl'd about with Inces­sant Motion; and that, by means of these I­mages slipping into our Minds, a Remembrance of past Time was ever and anon reviv'd in us.] — That, the Case of Divine Images is not Ʋnlike this (lin. 3, 4.) [That, The Exposition of Cotta's Re­ply pursu'd. just the same way is the Deity discern'd;] — by an earnest Intention whereupon (lin. 35.) [by the frequent New Images of whom] our Minds are stirr'd up; and, from this Force, and Excitation of our Minds, we come to understand that the Deities are Happy and Immortal (lin. ult. and lin. 1. of pag. 60. pag. 60.) [we may gather, that the Minds of All are Blessed and Eternal.] — Now, supposing, &c. (from lin. 2. to lin. 7.) [Now, admit­ting (what might well be deny'd) that these kind of Images, whereby our Minds are affected, are Deities; we are Then taught indeed that God is a Species or I­mage; but (yet) in no wise shewn why this same Image should be Blessed, and Eter­nal.] yes, why Eternal; (Cotta?) because the Epicurean said before, there is a perpetual Supply of Images of the same kind from A­toms; [Page lvj] but he urg'd nothing (I confess) for the Beatitude of his Images.

The great De­votion of the Pythagoreans to their Foun­der.Cecrops [Cecrops] (lin. 24.) Thô the Word seems to be the Proper Name of a Man, yet I suspect it here put for some or other heavy and ignorant Imitatour, (That Sect, in Old Time, producing many such,) who transcrib'd the Placits of his Doctour Pythagoras (almost ad verbum) into his own Commentaries.

pag. 61. St. Augustin's account of the Reason why the Epi [...]ureans made only One Image of a Bo­dy that sends forth Innume­rable of them (as They thought) to be Discerni­ble. But, how inordinate, &c. (from l. 5. of p. 61. to l. 10.) [But, how Licentiously speak you All? There is a Transition of Images frequently flowing; and therefore, one (made up of ma­ny) comes to be perceiv'd.] The Epicurean is Introduc'd speaking This. What follows, I should blush, &c. (l. 10.) is the Academiques reply to this Doctrine. St. Augustin (to Di­oscorus) explains This Tenet after This man­ner; that, when the Epicureans were askt, why one Image might be seen, of any Body where­from Images flow Innumerably; they answer'd, in regard Images did thus frequently flow, and pass from one thing, it fell out, that, by a kind of thronging and crowding of these to­gether, there came one to be made up of many, that might be discern'd. — whirl about [flow] Incessantly, &c. (lin. 15.) — to be Eternal [for, things that flow and de­cay are not Eternal,Cotta's Consu­tation of the Isonomy of the Epicureans Explain'd.] &c. (lin. 16.) that they [that all things else should be Sempiternal? i. e. does what you tell us touching the In­numerableness of Atoms, which still furnishes out New Images, equally prove all things else in the world, to be no less Eternal than the Deities; since that same Innumera­bleness of Atoms may be able, in like man­ner, [Page lvij] to repair the whole Decay of things?] &c. (lin. 19.) — and, you say further, that as [and, since] there, &c. (lin. 28.) — ad­mit that, &c. (from lin. 27. to lin. 32.) [i. e. I grant that there are things Salutary, (for, as to the two other Consequences of your Doctrine of Isonomy, they are too ab­surd to be allow'd by any body,) as well as there are Pestiferous: But yet, those, [Ima­ginary Deities,] which you compute upon as Salutary, I deny to be so; because, in very deed, they have no being at all: Do but you, therefore shew me, first, that any such Gods there are, and I will, then, allow them to be Preservers.] (Here we may cast our thought ad Deos [...],The Ancients had Helping and Harming Deities. (in Apu­leius's term, Salutigeros,) and Vejovem, and other harmfull and destructive Demons of the Ancients.) — comes this whole mass of things [come all these Images] to arise from Atoms, &c. (lin. ult.)

consists in Action [is always doing something,] &c. (pag. 62. pag. 62. lin. 10.) — a constant supply [sufficiency] of, &c. (l. 14.) — an Hebe, or a Ganimede, [a little Girl, (the Goddess Hebe;) or a Boy] to fill their Cups, &c. (l. 32.) of this Fooling [speaking Dissemblingly,] &c. (pag. 63. pag. 63. lin. 8.) — with making sport with [your pretending to set light by] the, &c. (lin. 9.) — consider well on't, now, and toss it in your Mind, whether the Godhead does [comprehend in your Mind, now, and set before your Eyes a God, doing] nothing, &c. (lin. ult. and lin. 1. of pag. 64. pag. 64. — which way that God should be Hap­py [why this Blessed Deity of yours should [Page viij] not be in fear of Dying, being] continually, &c. (lin. 5, 6.) — that we are not be­holden to [from whom we receive nothing, &c. (lin. 29.) —

what more, in effect, did those, &c. [un­loss perchance you think Diagoras, &c. could [...]e been Superstitious] who flatly, &c. ag. 65. lin. 11, &c.) — And the Pro­ [...]agoras I mention'd before [Thô, I hold not even Protagoras to have been so,] who doubt­ed, &c. (lin. 14, 15.) — All whose, &c. [For, the Opinions of all these] were (l. 16.)— by Reason. [Did not They tear up Religion by the Roots?] Or, what, &c. (l. 26.) — and Adore? [are not These utterly void of all Religion?] (lin. 34.) — This Doc­trine [This way of coming to be Gods] Eu­hemerus [a Greek Historian whom, &c. has more especially appear'd in favour of, [has more particularly Treated of] who speaks, &c. (from lin. 24. to lin. 1. of pag. 66. pag. 66.) — And That of Hers at Samothracia, [And the (Orgia) Sacrifices of the Isle Samothracia,] too, &c. (lin. 8.) In This Isle (which is in the Aegaean Sea, near Thrace,) Mercury, Hecare, The Deities of the Isle, Samo­thra ia, and [...]emnos. the Curetes, Coribantes, and Ca­biri, were heretofore Honour'd with most Im­pure Rites, and filthy Ceremonies. Nor (again) was Lemnos (lin. 10.) far from Thrace neither; and therefore, it is not un­meet to Conceive (nay and Hesychius an An­cient Authour, who lived in the time of Ana­stasius the Emperour, witnesses) that not only the Great Mother of the Gods (call'd Lem­nos) us'd to be There Sacrifie'd to, and ap­peas'd with the Bloud of Virgins, nor yet Vul­can, [Page lix] whom they entertain'd, and honour'd with Divine Rites, when cast down from Heaven (as, Poets and Mythologists tell;) but the same Ca­brici also, and in the same shamefull manner, (too) with (their Neighbours) the Thraci­ans.— of the [of Created] things, &c. (l. 14.)— in this Particular [scil. of the Nature of the Gods] thô, &c. (l. 17.)—from whose Foun­tains, &c. [i. e. from whose Books Epicu­rus drew his Dogmata.] (lin. 19.) — who can believe, &c. [comprehend these Images in his Mind] (lin. 32.) — whence Ju­venal [Martial] says, &c. (lin. ult.)

of Power, &c. [in teaching that the Gods bring no Help to Men, nor do them any Good at all.] (pag. 67. pag. 67. lin. 2.) — how do you overshoot your selves, &c. [of how much Mischief are you the Authours, in supposing, that none love one another, but with Intent, by mutual Aid and Assistance, to relieve their proper wants, and weakness.] (from lin. 23. to lin. 26.) — to use [any one of] them, &c. (pag. 68. pag. 68. lin. ult.) — no such thing in Nature [any such Nature there cannot be] and, &c. (pag. 69. pag. 69. lin. 4.)

This, now, is sufficient (I hope) to Clear the Sense of this First Book: And, as to the Doctrine of it, and the Impieties of Epicu­rus, the Context, and my References must Content for a farther Confutation. A Judgment upon the First Book, by way of Comparison of the two Dis­putants. It only consisting with the Brevity I have propounded, to say, by way of Comparison of the two Dis­putants, that Velleius is the more Confident; Cotta, Frigid. This bears the greater shew of Despiciency; the Other, of Modesty. The Epicurean thinks nothing too much for (the [Page lx] little God) his Authour; the Academique ascribes more to his own Understanding, than to the Deity. He but badly Confirms his Tenets; This thinks all things to be In­firm. The Epicurean Scruples nothing; the Academique Determines upon Nothing. Vel­leius's Deity is known by Anticipation, before all manner of Instruction; Cotta's becomes Obscure, even after Consultation, by an In­temperate Liberty of Speaking. This is very much pleas'd with his little Fortunate Mor­moe of a Divinity; the Other is asham'd of that same Scant Beatitude; wherein, He is apprehensive of Weariness, This, of Business: Neither of them conceiving Action in Leisure, Rest in Employ to be the greatest Felicity. In a Word; They both run into desperate Er­rours, in the matter of the Godhead; the Epicurean, lest he should be thought to doubt of, or fear any thing; the Academique, that he might not seem to have ought Certain, and Assur'd. And Thus, I have done with the First Book.

HAVING made a kind of a Promise, (pag. 3.) when I Prefac'd Generally, to In­troduce my Notes, &c. upon this Second Book, A Commenda­tion of the Se­cond Book. with a Word or two in Commendati­on of it; I shall venture to say that, whatever has been usually deem'd worthy of Praise, in any Writing, is contain'd Here in the Highest Perfection: (Weight, and Loftiness of Ar­gument; an Incredible Abundance of Mat­ter; [Page lxj] and an Elegance of Style not Ʋnsuita­ble:) The Argument, is a Deity; not that Shadowy and Lineal one of the Epi­cureans; but, a God as Great as was (al­most) possible to be discern'd by the acute and subtle Understanding of the most Learned men; which same Understanding yet, is not seldom Dimm'd and Eclyps'd, (I must con­fess) by the Brightness of this Divine Sun. Plenty of Matter there is no where more in all Cicero: For, what part of the Universe, or of Learning has he left untoucht, that could any way be pierc'd into by a Sagacious Wit, and handled in Discourse? The Whole Body of the Stoical Theology is Ʋnveil'd; not cur­sorily, and in transitu, (as it were,) at the rate Velleius has pass'd over That of Epicu­rus, in the First Book; nor yet in the pincht, dry, and concise way of Speaking, the Sto­iques for the most part us'd; but, it is, in a free and flowing Disputation, explain'd, even to Pomp and Magnificence, with singular Or­nament, by a most Eloquent and Knowing Man, and a sharp Defender of the Stoical Party. Therefore may it plainly be perceiv'd, that all the Other Arts and Disciplines, as Tributaries, have brought in their preciousest Treasures, toward the beautifying and bedecking of this One Theology. Poetry scatters here and there, in the Beginning of the Discourse, Verses out of her Ancient Professors, to serve as Flowers. History statelily sets forth certain special Events, that can never enough be won­der'd at. Divination produces Celestial Im­pulses of the Divinity, and Predictions of Fu­ture and most Secret Events. Physiques, [Page lxij] (that most diligent Searcher into All Nature,) intimates whatever is abstruse and hidden in the very Bowels of Matter: First, the salutary Heat which the Stoiques deem'd to be in the Whole World and every Part thereof; Then, fetching a Compass, it brings forth, (what the Porch so highly accounted of,) that [...], or, (as Cicero renders it,) Principa­lity of the Universe. Mythology draws out its Fables full of Mystery. Geometry gives a Taste of its Figures, by the By: while A­strology, freely and at leisure ransacks every Quarter of the Heavens, and fetches Thence what contributes unspeakably to the Lustre of the Stoical Theology; gives in the Innumera­ble Multitudes of the Stars, their eternal Con­versions, Constant Orders, and Certain Ri­sings and Settings by Turns; the Infinite Pow­er of Light, and a Pulchritude that can never sate us. In short, Here it is that Univer­sal Nature uncovers her Bosom, as with Hands, and submits her whole Proportion to Open View. And, as the Eloquence of the Greatest of Oratours reigns every were through­out the Book; so, more particularly, in the last Part thereof, it grows above it self, al­most Equal to the Infiniteness of the Argument, and triumphs even to Splendour and Admira­tion: For, being got out of the Narrownesses of the Porch, and come into a Field the spa­ciousest that can be, it courses over the whole Parible world, in a Clear and Streaming Oration. First, the Stars, the Various Cour­ses of the same; the Vicissitudes of Days and Nights, and the Seasons of the Year, effected by the Sky; Next, the Elements; And Af­terward, [Page lxiij] Those usually term'd Mixt Bodies; the whole Generation of Vegetibles and Ani­mals, the Innate Vertues imparted to each Kind by the Provident Deity, as well as the Arms enabling them to defend and preserve themselves, are most admirably describ'd, in so pure and Rapid a Current of Elocution, that one would almost say, the Stars of the Night, the Moon, nay even the Sun it self receiv'd an Accession of Light from the Lustre of the Expression, that the Countenance of Na­ture was render'd more Chearfull by such an Elegance of Language; that the World it self, (than which not any thing can so much as be imagin'd to be more adorn'd) deriv'd no small Embellishment from the Splendour and Bright­ness of so Noble a Style: Last of all, he comes to Man, (the Masterpiece of God the Archi­tect;) and, when a body would expect all the Power of Rhetorique that ever Tully was Master of had been quite spent, by so long a Course of Speaking, Then it is that he sets upon Pourtraying this Admirable Piece of the Greatest Artificer: And yet, Entire Man, (I say,) from Head to Heel, Within and Without, stupendiously contriv'd with all Fa­culties and Abilities of Body and Mind, does he Represent with so unspeakable a Variety of Colours, such a Store of Matter, and so great a Plenty, even abundance of Words; that one would think he had gather'd Strength and Vigour by the very Exercise.

But, further Preface, and Exhortation a­part; (for, his Pulse must needs beat very cool toward Letters, whom what has been al­ready said excites not to a perusal of this more [Page lxiv] Human Theology, whereunto so many Famous Arts are Subservient,) I will subjoyn a Com­pendiary Synopsis, that will (at one Glance as it were) summarily and distinctly shew the Contents of the respective Branches of the whole Book. It may (then) be divided into Three Parts; The Division of the Second Book. the First is a kind of Passage to the Argument; by a commendable Contest of the Well-bred Disputants, mutually Lessen­ing themselves by turns: The Second, is the Disputation it self of Balbus, setting forth the Theology of the Stoiques at large, even to the very last Section of the Book, which is the only one Left for the Other Part: The Third, is a Brief sort of Peroration, wherein the Stoique exhorts Cotta, in the Academi­cal Liberty of Disputing rather to Defend, than to Oppugn the Deity.

The Contents of the First Part of the Second Book.PURSUANT to This Division, then; BOOK II. PART I. from page 71. to lin. 17. of pag. 72. Ci­cero passes from the Disputation of Cotta, wherein, in the Foregoing Book, he had Exploded the Theo­logy of the Epicureans, to That of Balbus: But, before Balbus, is Velleius here brought in; who, a [...] If overcome by Cotta, with a Gentile Courtesie commends both the Learning and Eloquence of his Antagonist, and Invites Balbus to speak: He, a­gain, out of Modesty, refers the Province to Cotta; exhorting him, with the same power that he took away False Gods to Introduce the True. THENCE, to lin. 11. of pag. 73. Cotta, Thus call'd upon, Ex­cuses himself; And Balbus, being desir'd a second time, gently enters upon the Disputation, which he Divides into Four Parts; and, making a Motion to let two of them alone till another time, Cotta requires to have them all spoken to.

But This, by the By.Explanations, &c. of the First Part of the Se­cond Book. pag. 72. [I will come to at another Time] i. e. I will speak of your Learning and Eloquence at another Time, Cot­ta,] &c. (pag. 72. lin. 1.) — as to things of this Quality, what should not be thought, than what should, &c. (lin. 21, 22.) This same Academical Profession of Inscience of Cotta's, upon all Occasions, and in Divine Matters more especially, seems to have some Affinity with that sort of Negative Theology profess'd by Plato Himself, in his Timaeus, Negative Theo­logy; what. where he declares he knows not What God is; but only, what he is not; no Colour, nor any thing of That Kind. And indeed, how Great soe­ver the things, attributed by Divines to the God­head (Wisedom, Goodness, &c.) may be; yet, being so Inferiour to such a Majesty, they agree with the Divine Nature only Negative­ly: That is to say, God is Deny'd to be Wise, the manner we usually speak of Men. Agree­able whereunto is a passage of Dionysius, (that [...], Bird of Heaven; as St. Chrysostome in regard of his soaring Con­templation of Divine Matters, styles him,) in C. 1. of his Mystical Theology; Viz. [...]. i. e. It is meet, in It, (the Divine Nature) as the Cause of every thing, to place and af­firm all the Positions (vulgarly Attributes) of whatever is, and more proper to Deny [Page lxvj] all those with relation to the same, as being above each one of them: And, we are not to imagine, that Affirmations are (Here) Oppo­site to Negations; but, much rather, to con­ceive it (the Divine Nature) to be above Privation, as what is beyond all Ablation, and Position. [Here observe that which comes nearer to the Mind of our Academique, that, it is more proper to Deny, than to Assert the Attributes so common in every Bodie's Mouth, with relation to the Deity.] To the same Purpose also, wrote St. Cyprian, (or whatever other ancient Authour it was, that passes under His Name) in the Introduction to the Treatise of the Cardinal Works of Christ. Thus much, for the Preamble, or First Part of this Second Book.

PƲRPOSING to proceed according to Bal­bus's Four fold Distribution of his Dispute; let me tell ye, by way of Epitome of the First Branch thereof, the Scope of which is to make out there are Gods, The Being of a Deity (the First Branch of the Stoical Dispu­tation) prov'd by Three sorts of Arguments. (i. e. the Existence of some or other Divinity;) that, he confirms the Point by Arguments of Three Sorts: the Consent of all Men, the Constancy of the Opinion, the Ap­pearance of the Gods, and the Revelation of things to come, are of the First; and, for the Second, and Third, they are plainer in the Context it self, than to need a Declaration. So that, I pass to the Contents of the First Branch; The Contents of each Section of the First Branch of (the Second Part, or,) Bal­bus's Disp [...]ta­tion. as follows.

PART II. SECT. I. From lin. 14. of pag. 73. to lin. 7. of pag. 74. Balbus, entring upon the Proof of a Deity, draws the First Argument, to that purpose, from Heaven; which being beheld, [Page lxvij] all men presently Confess that a God there is-THENCE, to lin. 27. of the same page. Another Reason, that perswades of the Existence of a Deity, is, the fixt and stable Opinion of him, in the Minds of all men; and the Religious Adoration constantly paid to his Majesty. THENCE, to lin. 33. of pag. 75. He also collects the Thing, from the Appearances of the Gods themselves. THENCE, to lin. 6. of pag. 77. He undertakes to strengthen the Credit of Divine Revelations, (which he con­ceiv'd to be of great force toward Confirming a Deity,) First, by removing all suspicion of Fiction; then, by Variety of Events, and the Punishment of some that slighted the Tokens. THENCE, to l. 20. of pag. 78. Somewhat is likewise deriv'd toward the support of Predictions, by pressing the Exam­ples of their Ancestours, who shew'd much Faith, Piety, and Constancy in their Care of the Auspicia, THENCE, to lin. 15. of pag. 80. That so Firm Prop of Divination, at First, drawn from the Event it self of the Things Divin'd, only in the General, he Now resumes, and fortifies with the Predictions of the Sibylls, and the Answers of the Southsayers, (as if found True;) but more especially, by the peculiar a [...]d notable Eact of Tib. Gracchus, which he relates at large, in the whole 10. and 11. Secti­ous almost. THENCE, to lin. 2. of pag. 81. Then, by a Brief and Clear Syllogism, (fetcht from Divi­nation,) he Concludes, that Gods there are: And, that the Conclusion might not be Infirm in any part, he Anticipates an Objection that would ruine it. In the end he again inculcates (what it was the Drift of the whole to prove,) the Existence of a Deity; Confirming it by the Testimony of Nature, as by the Seal and Suffrage of all Mortals. THENCE, to lin. 34. of the same page. He (Here) urges over again much what the same Arguments, in proof of a Deity, that he had us'd before; only they are Confirm'd by the Authority of the Princi­pals of the Stoical Sect; Cleanthes, Chrysippus, and [...]eno: And, First, of Cleanthes, who speaks of f [...]ur ways whereby men have come to a knowledge of the Deity; Three of which are set forth in This Section; the Other, in the Next. THENCE, to [Page lxviij] to lin. 20. of pag. 82. The Fourth and Chief Cause alledg'd by Cleanthes for the Impression of a Notion of the Deity in the Minds of Mortals is, the Con­templation of things Celestial: A Cause, that he (Here) Illustrates by a queint and proper Compa­rison. THENCE, to, lin. 8. of pag. 83. He pro­duces the Argumentation whereby Chrysippus col­lected the Existence of a Divinity; That, there is something or other in Universal Nature better than Man; and so, there must needs be a God. In proof of the Antecedent, Three Reasons are given; the First of them, deriv'd from the Noble Effects that exceed Human Ability, is in This Section; the other Two, in the ensuing. THENCE, to lin. 33. of the same page. What Chrysippus has prov'd in the Section above, I mean the being of something in the World that is Better than Man, does Lucilius (also) now Confirm by two Arguments; to be more at large expounded by and by. THENCE, to lin. 24. of pag. 84. The Divine Mind of the World is collected both from the Mind of Man, and from the Excel­lence it self of the Ʋniverse. THENCE, to lin. 9. of pag. 85. He moreover Confirms the Divine Mind of the Ʋniverse, First, by the Admirable Consent of the Parts of the same World; Next, by the Constant Variations of the Seasons of the Year; Then, by the Tides of the Sea, the Vicissitudinary Flux and Reflux whereof is so Certain; and Lastly, by the Course of the Stars, in so Steady an Order, for so long a time. THENCE, to lin. 33. of the same page. He strengthens the Assertion of Reason in the World, by the Authority and Arguments of Zeno; in Transitu, noting the Stoical Brevity in Disputing; and, by a decent Comparison, shewing how much Rhetorick surpasses Logique. THENCE, to lin. 20. of pag. 86. The same Zeno labours to to make out what he stickled for in the Last Para­graph, that the World is indu'd with Sense and Reason, by two Other Syllogisms, and a Double Similitude. THENCE, to lin. 6. of pag. 87. He ad­vances to the Physical Arguments made use of by the Stoiques in erecting their Divinity; and, before All, states This Principle, that, whatever has Life, Lives by the benefit of a kind of Heat. THENCE, [Page lxix] to lin. 25. of the same page. He Confirms the Positi­on of the foregoing Section, that all Life is deriv'd from the virtue of Heat, by the Authority, and Ar­guments of Cleanthes. THENCE, to lin. 18. of pag. 88. This same Vital Heat of the two Sections above, shews he more at large, by an Induction through the Four Elements, to be diffus'd into all the Parts of the Universe. THENCE, to lin. 3. of pag. 89. From the Earth, he advances to the Wa­ter, and endeavours to make appear that in It is Heat implanted by Nature. THENCE, to lin. 33. of the same page. He finishes the Induction be­fore set upon; and, far more easily demonstrates the Heat above averr'd to be included in the Bowels of the Earth, and Mingled with the Water, to a­bide also in (the two remaining Elements) the Ayr, and Fire. Whence, by a step from the Parts to the Whole, he Concludes the World it self to be in like manner preserv'd by means of the same Heat. THENCE, to lin. 15. of pag. 90. He set to demon­strating the Fiery Property, in the Sections foregoing taught to be disfus'd thorough the several Parts of the Ʋniverse, to be also indu'd with Sense and Reason, And, with This Intent, he Premises, as if Decreed, that whatever is constituted of Parts, has some or other Principality in it: Declaring This, by a short Induction; and, that the matter may be the more Plain, expounding what this same Principality is. THENCE, to lin. 32. of the same page. Having, (as in the last Paragraph,) constitu­ted the Principality of Nature; he, as is but meet, ascribes to this Nature whatever is most Excellent, and Worthy of a Prince; and, in the First place, Sense and Reas n; Both which being before impu­ted to that Fiery Property, he now proves they ought so to be by an Argument à Minori, ad Majus. THENCE, to lin. 15. of pag. 91. He goes on in­culcating, by the like kind of Argument, the Sense of the Ʋniverse; having compar'd the Heat of the World with That innate in Men, and Beasts. THENCE, to lin. 7. of pag. 92. The Excellency in the Paragraph above attributed to the Skie, of be­ing mov'd by it self, he now Illu [...]rates with the Au­thority, and Doctrine of Plato: From whence, he [Page lxx] collects the World to be Animated, Intelligent, and Wise, by a familiar Argument à Minori ad Majus, from the Parts to the Whole. THENCE, to lin. 33. of the same page. He ascends by the Four De­grees of Things that have Life, and, in the Fourth, places the Deity, or, in the Stoical Sense, the World: Vegetables are the First Degree; Beasts, the Next; the Third, Men, who come to be Good and Wise, by the guidance of Reason; and, the Other, is that of the Gods, who were Good and Wise ever. THENCE, to lin. 21. of pag. 93. He Here, by an Argument Plain in the Context, Con­firms this Fourth and Highest Degree of some or other Perfect Nature, according as the Last Section ended: THENCE, to lin. 11. of pag. 94. He Here, again and again, by the Absurdity of the Conse­quences, Inculcates, what he had taken so much pains about before, that the World is Animated, partakes of Reason, and Understanding, and lastly, is a Deity. THENCE, to lin. 13. of pag. 95. The Things as yet only Attributed to the World, he now shews to be due to it, both by the Authority, Rea­sons, and Similitudes of Chrysippus. THENCE, to lin. 5. of pag. 96. He, now, from the World in General, comes to, the more Eminent Parts there­of, the Stars; whereunto he also ascribes Divini­ty, upon account of their Noble Vertues, and In­fluences; but, before all their Other Qualifications, he is not sparing of Words to [...]onfirm the Firy Na­ture of the same Stars. THENCE, to lin. 25. of pag. 97. In that he had endeavour'd to make out the Fire of the Sun to be like the Heat in the Bodies of Living Creatures, he Concludes, the Sun is A­nimated, as also the rest of the Stars; Confirming This, by a New Argument à Minori ad Majus; Illustrating the matter also by the Glorious Name of the Great Arist [...]tle. Moreover, from the Super­excellence of the E [...]hereal Region, and of the Ali­ment those Bodies use, he Scruples not to Infer the Superexcellent Intelligence of the Stars; and, from their Ʋnderstanding, their Divinity also; clearing it by a Simile. THENCE, to lin. 4. of pag. 98. This same Divine Vertue of Ʋnderstanding impu­red to the Stars upon the score of the Excellence of [Page lxxj] their Place, and Nourishment, does he now confirm by the Certain and Immutable Order they maintain in their Eternal Courses; he rejecting those Other Causes, whereunto might be ascrib'd the Constancy of those Regular Motions. THENCE, to lin. 31. of the same page. He strengthens what he deli­ver'd in the last Section, by the Authority of Ari­stotle: And Then, upon the whole matter, Con­cludes that Gods: here are. Only, in the very end of all, he tacitly reprehends the Ignorance, Impi­ety, and Madness of the Epicureans. And so, He has Done with the First Branch; and I, with the Contents of it.

amiss, [in This Discourse,] to, &c. (pag. 73. pag. 73. Amendments, Illustrations, &c. of the First Branch of the Second Part of the Second Book. lin. 4.) — harder to make out [more weighty,] &c. (lin. 5.) — what's over our heads, [Celestial things,] then, &c. (l. 17.) — which, were it not so; [i. e. were it not per­spicuous that a Deity there is,] how could Ennius, &c. [how could Ennius have plead­ed Ʋniversal Assent, in the Case, in saying, Behold you Deity [(Coelum) Heaven] glittering, &c. (lin. 20, &c.) But yet, an Ʋniversal Assent to the Divinity of Heaven ought not to be pleaded; for,Heaven not ge­nerally allow'd to be a Deity.not only we Christians deny it, but sundry Wise Men be­fore, accounted upon a Mind that Govern'd Heaven, and not Heaven it self, to be a Dei­ty. So that, it was the Double Errour of the Stoiques, First, to Confound the Star­bearing Heaven with the Skie, or Element of Fire; and then, to Deify this same Heaven, and Invoque it, under the Appellation of Ju­piter.

Still ready to help us [still Present] i. e. both by his Immensity, and his Favour,] &c. (pag. 74. pag. 74. lin. 3.) — the [Being of the] [Page lxxij] One more evident than [That of] the Other, &c. (lin. 6, 7.) — those Goblins below [i. e. the Hell of the Poets;A future Pu­nishment, in the Opinion of the Ancients. as also, the Fu­ture Retribution, generally believ'd by the Ancients.] that, &c. (lin. 21.) — were always [in ancienter and better days] in use, &c. (lin. 25.) — is This [scil. the Pro­pagation, and Encrease of the Worship of the Gods] the Result, &c. (lin. 28.) — van­quish'd Octavius Mamilius, in the Battel of Tusculum, [in a Set Battle, There, (i. e. at Regillus,Mamilius Tus­culanus.) Overthrew Octavius Mamilius Tusculanus,] &c. He was the General of the Latins; by Nation a Latin, himself; but, of Country, a Tusculan. This Miracle of a Victory is related in Valerius Maximus, lib. 1. cap. 8. de Miraculis.

pag. 75. Pr [...]secturates, with the R­mans, what; and how many [...]arts of them. his Government [the Prefecturate,] &c. (pag. 75. lin. 8.) Sextus Pomponius Festus says, Those Places were term'd Prefecturates, in which Courts, Fairs, &c. were kept; yet had no Magistrates of their own; but Pre­fects were sent Thereinto every year, to deter­mine Controversies, &c. and, that there were two sorts of them; into one of which four Prefects (chosen by the Suffrage of the People, out of the Number of the Viginti-Sex Vi­ri) us'd to goe; The Towns of This being Capua, Cumae, &c. the Other, whereinto those went, that were every year sent, by the City-Praetor, into each respective Place, as Formiae, Reate, &c.] — speaking rashly [as one that had brought a feign'd story of the Victory of the Common Wealth] of, &c. (lin. 14.) — that he was altogether in the Right [that he had Overthrown Perses the [Page lxxiij] very day that Vatienus had told] they, &c. (lin. 17.) — also written, [deliver'd,The Years of the Overthrow of Mamilius, and of Perses.] that, &c. (lin. 20.) Petavius Writes, that Perses was overcome in the 586th year of the City; Mamilius in the 258th.

had there really been no such people [had it really rejected the Thing it self [i. e. Augurs,pag. 76. The Heathen Divination of no force to prove a Deity. or the Augural Art.] (p. 76. l. 12.) Let me say upon the whole matter now, that this same False Divination is of no more force toward the De­fence of a Deity; than are captious, and fal­lacious Sophistries, for proving the Truth: Tho' yet, the True Prophesie of the True Dei­ty is a most certain Demonstration.

of a Sow that was lost, &c. (pag. 77. pag. 77. A Scape of Tully's lin. 18.) In Sect. 30. of his First Book De Divinatione, Tully tells this Story quite ano­ther way; that it was Grape that was to be found, not a Sow: And, that the thing Happen'd under Tarquinius Priscus, &c. So that, if Navius was but a Boy then, there is no probability that Tullus Hostilius (who Reign'd before Priscus) ever made use of his Augural Art in his Wars.) — Indifference of our Noble Men,None but No­blemen Augurs, in Rome, upon the First Insti­tution. &c. (lin. 24.) They were all Patricians and Noblemen, that Romulus Instituted Augurs: And twelve Sons of the Nobility us'd every year to be sent into Etruria (the Parent of the whole Art) to be Initiated in those Sacred Mysteries. But, in Process of time, and the Decay of the Augural Disci­pline, some of the Commonalty were admit­ted into the College of Augurs.] — only a bare species of it retain'd [and it is only re­tain'd in shew,] &c. (lin. 27.)

No part of the Acumina, &c. (pag. 78. pag. 78. [Page lxxiv] lin. 1.) 'Tis variously conjectur'd what sort of Divinations What sort of Divinations the Acumina were. These should be. A Probable O­pinion is, that they were those Auspicia that us'd to be taken from the Points of their Mili­tary Ensigns; It being their Custom, upon En­camping, to stick These in the Ground, and to divine good or bad luck from them, according as they came easily or hardly out of it again.] no Southsayers are Conven'd [no Men are call'd] and so, Some particu­lar Men in the Roman Armies us'd to have Names of Good Luck, given them, as F [...]r­tunatus, Vi [...]ior, &c. and were, Then, term'd Primicerii. &c. (lin. 2, 3.) 'tis not unlikely (says Turnebus) but that these were the Viri, quibus Nomina Boni Ominis fuere, who were wont to be of great account in their Armies; the Romans commonly terming such Primicerii.] do usually give the Onset, as soon as ever they have plac'd the Auspicia [do usually begin to wage War, when, (together with their higher Offices of Magistracy;) they have quitted the Right of taking the Auspicia] Of which sort were the Proconsuls, Consuls and Pretors, some­times chosen, &c. term'd Proconsuls and Propretors, at the end of their Year; and as such, had no Power to take the Auspicia. and Propretors, who, tho' they us'd to be Commission'd to wage War, yet had they no longer authority to take the Auspicia, the time of their Consul­ship or Pretorship, (Offices that had power to Auspicate,) once expir'd.] (lin. 7, 8, 9.) — divers Prophesies of the Sibyls, &c. (lin. 22.) As to the Theology of these same Sibyls, Lac­tantius says they preacht up One God. Which appears also, by their Verses; a few whereof (out of Theophylus to Autolycus) follow. viz.

— in proof [Confirmation] of these, &c. (lin. 24.) — by matter of Fact [the Event] it self, &c. (lin. 28.) — sought to have them chosen again [went about ha­ving them elected the second time,] &c. (lin. 32.) It was a Custom in Rome, The Consul &c, Chosen in two several Assem­blies. (says Rofinus,) to have the Consuls, and other Great Officers, chosen in two several Comitia, (or Assemblies) the Centuriata, and the [Page lxxvj] Curiata — the Chief Rogator,Primus R [...]ga­tor who. &c. (lin. 34.) i. e. he that deliver'd the Suffrage of the Pre­rogative Century, which all the other still concurr'd with for the most part:] — went on with [finish'd] the Assembly, &c. (pag. 79. pag. 79. lin. 1.) — as a matter of Religi­on. [i. e. had rais'd in the people a Religi­ous Apprehension, lest the Consuls should not have been duly Elected,] &c. (lin. 4.) — he was no due (Rogator Comitiorum) Speaker of the Assembly [he had not Legally (duely) Indicted the Assembly,] &c. (lin. 12.) They had two sorts of Rogators in their Assemblies (we see;Two sorts of Regators, in the Roman Assemblies.) of the First, as many, as there were Centuries; Of the Other, only One, and he some or other of the Greater Ma­gistrates, who held the Assemblies, and had authority to preside over them. He had the Name of Rogator Comitiorum, (quia Roga­ret) from Asking the People in General, before he sent them to their Suffrages; the Common Beginning of all Action with the Peo­ple, being Velitis, Jubeatis, Quirites.] — was not duly qualifi'd, [did not hold it Rightly,] who, &c. (lin. 15.) — he found he had committed a fault, &c. [re­member'd he had taken his Tent, in Scipio's Gardens Wrong; [i. e. without Auspica­ting;] in that, [because,] when he had af­terward enter'd the Pomaerium, to Hold a Senate, as he pass'd, &c. he forgot to Aus­picate, &c. (from lin. 29. to lin. 35.)

The Manner of the Roman Au­spicia, before the Holding of their Comitia, or Assemblies.That this ancient Superstition of the Ro­mans may be somewhat more Intelligible; I say, that, after the Auspicia had been Taken, and the Sacra perform'd for the First Time; [Page lxxvij] the Magistrate, about to hold the Comitia, went forth of the City, and Took his Tent or Tabernacle, wherein to take afresh the Auspicia whereby the Former might be Con­firm'd. Now, the Taking of this same Ta­bernacle was held to be Faulty, if, before he pass'd over the Pomoerium, he either con­sulted not the Auspicia at all, or they prov'd to be Adverse: And, so very much was Imputed to these Auspicia of Taking the Tabernacle; that, if there happen'd to be any Errour at all in this matter, the whole Action was judg'd to be Faulty, and Inauspicious. But if, be­fore the Auspicia were quite finish'd, any oc­casion chanc'd to call back the Magistrate into the City, the Auspicium was to be begun anew, in the very Passage over the Pomoeri­um, when he return'd to take the Tabernacle afresh; (not that which he had taken before, but a New one, (as Plutarch in Marcello ex­presly avers,) whereby he was again to Observe from the Sky.) So that, when Ti­berius Gracchus, the Auspicia not yet Perfec­ted, was call'd back into the City, to Hold a Senate, and remember'd not to Auspicate, as thorough the Pomoerium, he went forth of the City again, to Take Another Tabernacle, the whole Creation of the Consuls, even by This one Errour, became Inauspicious, and Void.

the Consuls were not duely elected [there was a Fault in the Election,] (pag. 80. pag. 80. lin. 1.) — that so the Election might be made Void, [the Senate Decreed, that the Consuls should abdicate themselves from the Office,] which was done accordingly. [and, the Consuls did Quit it accordingly.] [Page lxxviij] what, &c. (lin. 4, &c.) — mistake [be mistaken, in Expounding] them, &c. (lin. 29.)

Stones, and [Gapings, or] sodain, &c. (pag. 81. pag. 81. lin. 18.) — Blazing Stars in the Firmament, [Meteors in the Air,] and those [Blazing Stars] which, &c. (l. 22.) — P. Africanus [Minor] another, &c. (lin. 30.) — Conversion, [Circular Motion] of, &c. (lin. ult.)

any way prejudic'd, [made any Alterati­on in,] he, &c. (pag. 82. pag. 82. lin. 16.)

pag. 84. All Philoso­phers, down from Trisme­gistus, of Opi­nion, that Hu­man Souls pro­ceeded from, and were Par­ticles of the Soul of the World. Whence, [scil. but, from the Divine Mind] had Man, &c. (pag. 84. lin. 2.) This Errour reign'd in all Schools and Aca­demies, down from Trismegistus even to the Dawn of Christianity: For He, (in Cap. 10.) delivers, that [...], from the One Soul of the Ʋniverse, do All Souls exist. Adding, [...], the Mind is not rent from the Essence of God, but as it were dis­fus'd, even as the Light of the Sun. Whence Epictetus, (One for All the Stoiques,) took occasion to say, that [...], our Souls are so ty'd and joyn'd to the Deity, as existing Particles of him, and fragments after a sort pluckt away.The E rour confuted by St. Augustin. Contrary whereunto, St. Au­gustin (in Epist. ad Optat. Milevit.) Writes, that the Original of the Soul lies hid without danger: Yet, Thus much; that, we are not to believe it to be a Particle of the [Page lxxix] Deity, but his Creature. And, He Confounds the Errour (in Cap. 2. of his Original of the Soul) by this Impregnable Argument; should the Soul be a Particle of the Divine Mind, ei­ther God would be Mutable; (wich is remote from the Divine Nature;) or, the Soul void of all Mutation; and so, would neither de­generate into Worse, nor advance to Better, nor begin to have any thing in it self, or that it had not: which is plainly False.] — and, (in short) [Lastly] that, &c. (l. 6.)— wherein we breath [which we draw in brea­thing] i. e. Attract by Aspiration, The drift of an Argument of Balbus.] &c. (lin. 10.) The Argumentation (Here) of Chrysippus (or, of our Balbus,) is Obvious. Man deriv'd the several Parts of his Body from the respective Parts of the Ʋniverse, therefore, his Mind also, from the Mind (or Soul) of the World.] — Solstices and Win­ter-Seasons, [Summer and Winter Solstices,] &c. (lin. 33.)

Rolling [Conversion] of, &c. (Pag. 85. pag. 85. lin. 2.) — contein'd [conserv'd] by, &c. (lin. 8.) — and constant Spirit [Soul, or Mind diffus'd through all the Parts of the World,] &c. (lin. 9.) — Errours [Ble­mishes] of the, &c. (lin. 19.) — And That, Thus too, [The same Zeno Argues Thus also,] &c. (lin. 33.)

more closely [scantly,] &c. (pag. 86. pag. 86. lin. 2.) — a different way of proceeding [a more Fuse way of Disputing,] &c. (lin. 21.) — from Nature, [Principles of Natural Philosophy, Fire alone, not the Authour of Vital Motion.] &c. (lin. 28.) — their Proper [Vital] Motion, &c. (lin. 34.) This is not True, unless a Soul be also present, which may [Page lxxx] Impart to the Ingenite Heat (as its Instru­ment) the Vital Power of Moving.]—But [and then] such, &c. (lin. ult.)

convenient Fervency, &c. (p. 87. pag. 87. l. 1.) [i. e. Every thing that has Life, is mov'd, not by a for­tuitous and casual motion, but by a definite; and a certain temperate rule, and in the same Tenour.] — which [and] so, &c. (l. 2.)— all Bodies [the Bodies of all Animals,] &c. (lin. 9.) — That Nature wherein this Heat is embody'd, has within it [this Nature of Heat (i. e. Fiery Property) has in it self] a certain, &c. (lin. 26, 27.) — take a view of [touch upon] the, &c. (lin. 33.)

things that spring out of the Earth [Seeds which the Earth conceives] and those Seeds themselves, &c. [and whatever things [i. e. Plants] the Ground contains, generated out of it, and fixt Therein, by their Roots;] do re­ceive, &c. of Heat [i. e. of the Heat of the Earth. A Stoical errour.] (pag. 88. pag. 88. lin. 13, &c.) — by the Contrary [by warmth,] &c. (lin. 29.)

in the same [in the Waters,] &c. (p. 89. pag. 89. lin. 12.) — every Nature, &c. [is thus extended thorough every part of the World, in as much as in It is the Power of Procrea­ting, and Faculty of Generating; From which, both] Living Creatures, &c. (l. 27, &c.) — it is [the Fiery] Nature that, &c. (lin. 34.)

void of Qualities, [Solitary,] but, &c. (pag. 90. pag. 90. lin. 2.) — [But now,] we see that [some] Parts, &c. (lin. 19.) — that Particular of it, [the Sky] wherein, &c. (lin. 23.) — admirable [lively,] &c. [Page lxxxj] (lin. 26.) — and the Powers, &c. [and all Vertues or Excellencies contein'd in the Divine Nature thereof [i. e. of the World,] &c. (lin. 32, 33.) — the Heat also of the Ʋniverse, [the Skie,] it is, &c. (lin. 34.) — lively, [active,] then, &c. (lin. 35.) — move the Senses, [create Sense,] then, &c. (lin. ult.)

of ours [plac'd in Sublunary Natures,] &c. (pag. 91. pag. 91. lin. 1.) continu'd [preserv'd in vi­gour,] &c. (lin. 2.) — agitated [caused] by, &c. (lin. 11.) — Proper, [and im­planted in the Thing mov'd,] &c. (l. 18.) — That which [what] of, &c. (lin. 19.) — the other, that [that which] is, &c. (lin. 21.) — Voluntary sort [Proper Motion,] &c. (lin. 22.) — the Heat of the World [the Skie,] &c. (lin. 26.) Plato, Plato's Ten sorts of Motion. (in his 10th Book touching Laws,) reckons up Ten kinds of Motion; Circuit, Local Transition, Condensation, Rarefaction, Augmentation, Decrease, Generation, Corruption, Muta­tion, or Alteration in another caused by ano­ther, and Mutation in it self from it self, What he meant by (the two last of them) the Proper, and the External. and made in another. Which two Latter only (as proper for his Purpose) has Lucilius here mention'd. Concerning which, the Athenien­sis Hospes of Plato, (in the Book before cited,) speaks [...], &c. There must then be One kind of Moti­on which can move other things, but not it self always: And, another, able to move both it self always, and other things: And a little after; [...], [Page lxxxij] [...], which chiefly, of all the Ten Motions, do we rightly prefer before any of the rest, as the most Prevalent, and Efficacious. Cli­nias Answers, in the same place; [...], It is necessary we Affirm, that far to Excell, which is able to move it self; and all other to be Inferiour to it. And the same Hospes Atheniensis (a few Lines after), terms that Motion, whereby any thing is mov'd by it self, [...], the most Ancient, and Powerfull Muta­tion of all. This now, is what our Stoique here produces out of Plato, in saying, that thing is more Divine, which, of its own ac­cord, &c. (lin. 20.)

of greater value, [more Perfect] than, &c. (pag. 92. pag. 92. lin. 1.)— from the Beginning [ever] a Reason, &c. (lin. 28.)

at liberty, [not hinder'd] fulfills her Course [comes to Perfection,] &c. (pag. 93. pag. 93. lin. 1.) — That (therefore) must needs be the [Therefore must there needs be a] Fourth, &c. (lin. 14.) — the Nature of all things [i. e. that Ʋniversal Nature (the World) which conteins the Perfection of all Particular Things or Natures; on which, (a Deity) in that other Causes do depend in Acting, none can be able to Impede it. The Stoiques (as I said before) Confounded God with the World, The Stoiques Confounded God with the World, the Work with the Artifi­cer; and imputed to the World what is only to be Attributed to God alone.] (lin. 17.)— In­fluence, [Page lxxxiij] [preside over] all, &c. (lin. 18.) — indu'd with Ʋnderstanding, &c. (lin. 20.) It is rightly, Administrati­on Implies Wisedom. that he concludes the power of Acting from the Act it self; that is to say, Wisedom and Understanding from the Ad­ministration of Affairs: For, it is proper to the Intelligent and Wise, to preside over the rest. Says Aristotle (in 10. Metaph. cap. 2.) [...]. For, a Wise man,Six of the Se­ven Wise Men of Greece Go­vernours of their respective Cities. is not to be Govern'd; but, to Govern. And indeed, all the Wise men of Greece (save only Thales of Miletus) are deliver'd to have presided over their respective Cities. (Cic. lib. 3. de Orat. 135)

of Perfection [of that, which is so. i. e. the World,] &c. (pag. 94. pag. 94. God not con­fin'd within the World. lin. 23.) — and every thing is contein'd therein, &c. (lin. 25.) Christians comprize not God within the Circle of the Universe, (or, the University of Created things;) as did the Stoiques.

Absolute Nature, [says the same Chrysip­pus:] But, &c. (p. 95. pag. 95. l. 4.) — properly belongs to [is the Propriety of] the, &c. (l. 7.) — Vertue is effected [by Study and Ex­ercise is Vertue acquir'd, even by] It, &c. (l. 9.) — it is Wise, &c. (l. 13.) Thô Plato attri­buted the Epithete Wise only to God: Yet the Presumptuous Stoiques absolutely joyn'd the Wise man and the Deity together;The Stoiques Confounded the Wise Man, and the Deity. Such a one with Them, being another God.] — of a Con­trary Nature,] &c. [of any other than an Ethe­rial Substance] (l. 19, &c.) This (the Etheri­al Substance, and Divinity of the Stars) was (heretofore) the Theology of Pythago­ras, Plato, the Persians, and of all the East; The Peripate­tiques made up the Stars out of a kind of Fifth Element. the Peripateticks deny'd it, and constituted them [Page lxxxiv] out of a kind of Fifth Incorruptible Essence.

Kind, to [grow, and] come, &c. (p. 96. pag. 96. l. 25.)

Humours [Vapours, and Exhalations] of, &c. (pag. 97. pag. 97. lin. 23.) — cannot be expressive of [Now, Nature cannot be the Cause of the so Constant Order, and Stability of the Stars: in that, it (the Constancy of the same Stars) is perfectly Rational,] &c. (l. 33, &c.) Which the Stoiques also understood Nature to be; so that, (here) (perhaps) he speaks according to the Sense of the Vulgar, or of the Epicureans, who thought Otherwise; and that she was only a certain Blind, and Necessary Power.] —

against Nature, [i. e. contrary to the Nature of all other things; in that They (the Stars) are neither mov'd Ʋpward, nor Downward, but in a Round,] &c. (pag. 98. pag. 98. lin. 15.) And (Here) you have the First Branch of the Dispute, Explain'd.

A Synopsis of the Second Branch of the Stoique's Dis­pute.BY way of Synopsis of the Second Branch of the Stoical Disputation, (wherein Balbus Discourses who, and what the Gods are,) let me say; that, althô it was held for certain, both by the Epicureans, and the Stoiques, that Gods there are; and, that a Notion of the Deity is impress'd in the Minds of Mortals, by Nature her self: Yet, there were (nevertheless) two things (chiefly) in Controversie between them, with relation to the same Gods; I mean their Form, and their Action. For the Epi­cureans (as Velleius taught in the First Book) phansi'd the Deities to be of Human Figure; the Stoiques, of a Round: Moreover, These would have them to be altogether Unemployed, and neither to take Care of ought in the least, [Page lxxxv] nor to be any way Beneficial to Men, for fear of Labour; the Other, (contrariwise,) ascrib'd Action, and Providence, (This Profitable, (also,) without Toil,) to their Divinities. So that, if we except but the Excursions, (as no­ted in the Contents,) this whole Branch may seem to be divided into these two (as it were) precipuous Members, the Figure, and the Ac­tion of the Gods. Now, in regard the Action of the Deities is Usefull and Beneficent; it is conveniently enough that Profitable and Benefi­cial Gods are here brought in; some from Men, and some again, from other Natural Things. Whence, a Twofold Theology arises; the One, Civil; Honouring Famous Men, and their Vertues with Divinity, and Altars; the O­ther, Natural; advancing into the Number of the Gods all Natural things that were of any Extraordinary Use, and Vertue. This same Theology (likewise) is often term'd Mytho­logy, in that it is wholly wrapt up in Fable. In the Conclusion of the Branch, is subjoyn'd a kind of short Appendix, touching the Divine Worship. Now, as for the Contents of it; PART II. SECT. II. FROM lin. 31. of pag. 98. to lin. 18. of pag. 99 Balbus proposes the Question intended to be discuss'd in this Second Br [...]nch; The Contents of each Section of the Second Branch of the Second Part of this Second Book. as also, the Difficulty thereof: And, reflects upon the Epicureans by the way, thô he omits their Errour, in that he had noted it before. Then, he makes good his passage to the Figure he means to assign to his Deity, (that is, a Round one, persuant to the Placit of the Stoiques,) by Concluding First, that the World is Animated, and also; a God. THENCE, to lin. 5. of pag. 100. He reprehends the Scoff of Epicurus, and employs the Tenet of the same Philosopher in Confirmation of the Divinity of the Ʋniverse. THENCE; to lin. 30. of the same [Page lxxxvi] page. Having done what he can to prove the World to be a God; he may have the like Privilege fur­ther to infer the Figure of the same to be the Form of the Deity. Therefore shews he it (Here) to be Worthy of the Godhead, that is to say, the most Beautifull of all Figures. THENCE, to lin. 23. of pag. 101. Another Commendation of the Sphere is deriv'd from Necessity; inasmuch as in any other Figure such an Equality of Motion, and Constancy of Order, were never to be preserv'd: Ba bus, in the mean time, not abstaining from some Gentle Touches upon the Epicureans, and (particularly,) their Authour, who, had he but consider'd the Sky, must needs, from their very Conversion, have concluded upon the Round Figure of the World, and of the Stars. THENCE, to lin. 10. of pag. 102. An Occasion (Here) offering, he Digresses, to De­scribe the Motion of the Planets; beginning with the Sun. THENCE, to lin. 28. of the same page. Next to the Sun, he sets forth the various Courses, Forms, (or Phases,) Sites, and Effects of the Moon. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 103. He considers Generally, and admires the Motions of the Other Five Planets. THENCE, to lin. 33. of the same page. He descends particularly to the Cour­ses of each of the remaining Planets; of Saturn, First; Then, of Jupiter. THENCE, to lin. 20. of pag. 104. The Courses of Mars, Mercury, and Ve­nus are Describ'd. THENCE, to lin. 9. of pag. 105. From the Constant and Convenient Motion of the Planets, he concludes them to be not only indu'd with Ʋnderstanding, but to be Divinities also. Upon the same Consideration, ascribes he Prudence and Intelligence to the Fixt Stars likewise; denies them to be mov'd together with the Sky, (or Hea­ven;) and will have them to be separate and apart from all Etherial Conjunction. THENCE, to lin. 20. of the same page. To the Fixt Stars, (in like manner as to the Wandring,) does he Arrogate a Divine Mind, together with the Consequences of it; and removes Objections. THENCE, to lin. 12. of pag. 106. To strengthen his Assertion (hitherto) of a Divine Mind's being in the Whole World, he pro­duces Zeno's Definition of Nature; who makes it [Page lxxxvij] to be indu'd not only with a Mind, but with Art too. THENCE, to lin. ult. of the same page. Over and above an Artificial Mind does he (upon Zeno's Authority likewise) attribute a Providence to the World, with whatever he imagines to be an Ap­pertenance thereof. THENCE, to l. 22 of p. 107. Here, he makes a short Recapitulation of what he had hitherto deliver'd, in this Second Branch of the Dispu ation; Wherefrom may be in a sort collected what the Quality (the Question in Proposi­tion) of the Divine Nature is; Viz. such, as acts something, and That, without any Labour too: And, why This, he shews by a Reason out of the Porch; at the same time Refelling Epicurus, who thought Otherwise. THENCE, to lin. 13. of pag. 108. He conveniently introduces, (as on the Oppo­sition, to Epicurus's Idle and Ʋnactive Deities,) a number of a sort of Profitable and Beneficent Gods, Consecrated by the Judgment, and Religion of the Wise men amongst the Greeks, and Romans. THENCE, to lin. 21. of pag. 109. He proceeds, from Things, to Persons; and Rehearses Beneficent Men accoun­ted for Gods. THE [...]CE, to lin. 6. of pag. 110. Being about to set upon an Explanation of Natural Theology, wrapt up in Fables; he takes his Begin­ning from Coelum. THENCE, to lin. 21. of the same page. Who Saturn is: Whence, his Name; according to both Greeks, and Latins: The Intent of the Fables of his Devouring his Children, and being Bound by Jupiter. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 111. The Explication of the Name, (and Sir­names) of Jupiter, Illustrated by the Authority of Wise Men. THENCE, to lin. 22. of pag. 112. The Mythology of Coelum (Heaven, the Skie,) is fol­low'd by That of the Air, Water, Earth, under the Appellations of Juno, Neptune, Dis, Proserpina, and Ceres: He (also,) by the way, shewing the Etymology of these same Names, They being expres­sive of the Vertue and Power of each respective Dei­ty. THENCE, to lin. 20. of pag. 113. The My­thology of Mars, Minerva, Janus, Vesta, and, of the Dii Penates; as also, the Original of these A­pellations noted. THENCE, to lin. 27. of pag. 114. Whence proceeded the Name of Apollo and Sol, Di­ana [Page lxxxviij] and Luna, of Menses, and of Venus: Why Lucina (or Luna, the Moon) was Phansi'd to be present at Nativities. THENCE, to lin. 20. of p. 115. He lays open the Spring of the whole Super­stition, (so Unworthy of the Gods, in his Opinion,) which is, the False Divinity ascrib'd to Natural things under a kind of Human Form: Whence it came, that in a manner all the Vices of Human Frail [...]y were imputed to the Deities in like sort as to Men. A Madness that Balbus utterly disap­proves of. THENCE, to (the End, or to) lin. 18. of pag. 116. Having in the Former Section repudia­ted Vain Deities; He, in This, Advances One, and a True God, worthy of all Worship, and Ado­ration. He shewing (opportunely) of what sort this same Worship ought to be; that is to say, Remote from Superstition. And Thus he puts an End to the Second Branch of the Dispute.

pag. 98. Amendments, Illustrations, &c. of the Se­cond Branch of the Stoical Disputation. What kind of Nature they are of [who are Gods, and What they are,] &c. (p. 98. lin. 32.) — from the Appearances of things to our Eyes, [from the Custom of the Eyes, which continually behold the Deities repre­sented under Human Form,] &c. (lin. ult.)

of it [scil. of the Opinion of the Divinity of the World,] &c. (pag. 99. pag. 99. lin. 24.) — Proves as much [Proves it,] &c. (lin. 25.)

forbear [making a shew;] bewraying the [there is a] great, &c. (p. 100. pag. 100. l. 6.) — respective Parts [Semi-diameters] Equal, &c. (lin. 27.) — the Extreme [the Cir­cumference,] &c. (lin. 28.) — That: [the Middle] &c. (lin. 29.) In Solids there is Length, Solids, and Planes, what. Bredth, and Depth; in Planes, only Length, and Bredth.

what is Best, by the Palate [but, while he is studying what is most Gratefull to the Taste, he, &c. the Palate of Heaven,] &c. (pag. 101. pag. 101. lin. 11, &c.) — by Immutable [Page lxxxix] Spaces [by Wayes which they never change,] &c. (lin. 15.) — their Motion any other way [i. e. either Ascending Higher, or Descending Lower,] &c. (lin. 16.) — from [the Conversion of] both, &c. (lin. 19.) — same [Earth; &c.] i. e. when it has sent forth, &c. it leaves the same Earth Darken'd sometimes in One [...]art of the He­misphere, sometimes in Another,Night, how oc­casion'd.] &c. (lin. 26, &c.) — of it [of the Earth] interpo­sing [obstructing, and Interposing between the Sun and Ʋs,] &c. (lin. 30.) — equal to those of Day [i. e. because they recover in Winter what they lose in Summer,] &c. (lin. 31.) — moderate approaches [tho' the Sun alwaies moves Swiftly; yet,In what Sense the Sun is said to move Swif­ter, or Slower. it nei­ther comes to, nor departs from Our Zenith, but Leisurely, and (as it were,) by degrees,] &c. (lin. 32.) — the Proportions of [i. e. the Leisurely Approaches and Retreats of the same Sun, do constitute a certain Measure or Temperament (as it were) of Heat and Cold,] &c. (lin. 33.) — of it [of the Orbs of the Sun, i. e. the Circles where it runs,] in 365 Defects of the Orbs [365 Days] — a fourth part of a Day [i. e. of a Natural Day, 6 Hours; which six hours, in every Fifth Year, make up the Dies Intercalaris, and, The Occasion of the Bis-Sex­tile or Leap-year pag. 102. Summer and Winter how ef­fected by the Sun. the Year this same Dies Intercalaris happens in, is usually term'd Bis-Sextile, or Leap-Year,] &c. (l. 35, 36.)

bending. (Inflectens,) &c. (pag. 102. lin. 2.) This is a Significant Word; because, the Sun finishes his Course thorough the Ob­lique Zodiack; and makes our Summers, when he comes to the North, and our Win­ters, [Page xc] when he retreats to the South, even as far as the Tropick of Capricorn: Ours, I say; for, (contrariwise) he causes the Summers of the Southern Line, which is Opposite to Us, when he approaches to the Tropick of Capricorn, and the Winters, in That of Cancer.] — Mutations of Sea­sons, [i. e. not the Solstices, and Equinoxes; but, Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Win­ter;] are [doe,] &c. (lin. 8.) — deriv'd [proceed,] &c. (lin. 10.) — Dimmest sight, when she comes nearest to it, &c. (lin. 13, &c.) [That Rule, the Nearer any thing is to its Agent, the more Vertue it re­ceives from it, (e. g. the Closer we are to Fire, the more it Heats us,) holds not Good in the Communication of Light: For, this is more largely diffus'd into things that are Op­posite, and at a distance from it, than that are near it:Why the Moon shines not, when in Con­junction with the Sun; and brightest of all, when furthest off from him. And, Hence it is, that the Moon, when she is near the Sun, receives the least Light, in that Then she is within the very Confine of the Sun; and in no wise over against, and Opposite to it: But, when she turns the furthest Off from the Sun, then she is illustra­ted by him with the most Light of all, because, in that Site and Position, she is di­rectly and diametrically (as I may say) on the Adverse to the Sun.] Form or Figure, &c. (lin. 16.) As to the several Phases (as they are usually term'd) of the Waxing, and Waining Moon; The several Phases of the Waxing, and Waining Moon.) the First Day, (or, in the New Moon,) (when it is in Conjuncti­on with the Sun,) it has none (is not seen) at all; the Fourth, it appears hook'd or horned; the Seventh, One exact half of it [Page xcj] is Light, the Other, Dark; the Eleventh, it is Gibbous (or Crookt) on both sides; on the Fifteenth, it is Fill'd, (vulgarly Full Moon:) On the Nineteenth, it decreases, and appears Gibbous on both sides again; the two and twentieth, it is again Half'd; the six and twentieth, Horn'd; And, on the Thirtieth, it disappears; being again in Conjunction with the Sun. And, that none may be surpriz'd at hearing of the Thirtieth day of the Course of the Moon; and object, that the Periodical Motion thereof is finish'd in a few hours more than seven and twenty days: I add, that tho' indeed the Moon do return to the same point from whence she had departed within this last Number of Days, yet, in that she finds not the Sun in the same Step she had left him in, (for he, in the mean time, has advanc'd a little on,) there are two days more spent, before she be again joyn'd with him: Therefore is the Distance of time betwixt one Conjunction and another, or, that Course of the Moon usually term'd Sy­nodical, almost thirty days; in which compass, the Synodical Motion of the Moon is perfected. Moreover, it is not only on the days I have mention'd, but every day; even each hour, and moment, that the Moon is Chang'd.] — Site and Region [i. e. her Latitude, or her Deflexion from the Ecliptick either toward the North, or the South,] &c. (lin. 19.) — Winter Solstice, &c. (lin. 23.) [because, she, (in her Monthly Course, as well as the Sun in his Annual, How the Moon may be said to have her Sol­stices, as well as the Sun.) has [...]se that Astrolo­gers name Tropicks; which, when she comes to, she is said to stand, in that, Now, she [Page xcij] goes no further. Thus, has the Moon her Bounds (as it were) and Stations, which she is not to exceed; that is to say, certain Points in the Heaven, beyond which she ad­vances not either toward the North, or South; and yet, these are not the same with those of the Sun, nor yet so fixt as they; for, sometimes she is carried some degrees Beyond her Tropick, at Others, stopt short of it.]— that which is chiefly [This (i. e. their pre­serving their Motions fixt and certain, is so much the more wonderfull, &c. in] that, &c. (lin. 35, 36.)

Abscond, Appear, [i. e. when (as we spake before of the Moon) they are joyn'd with the Sun, in Synodo, and, when they turn a­side, from it,] &c. (pag. 103. lin. 1.) — go away [scil. from the Sun,] &c. (l. 2.) — mov'd swifter,In what Sense the Pl [...]nets may be said to move fwifter or slower. &c. (l. 4.) [All do agree, that the Planets are in very deed at all times mov'd with an equal swiftness; but, yet, that, by reason of the Eccentricity of their Circles, which have a Centre divers from the Centre of the Zodiac, they, in Unequal Spaces, run over the Equal Quadrants of the same Zodiac: Whence it happens, that they seem as if they were mov'd sometimes swifter, otherwhiles slower, &c. (Which Gemînus (in cap. 1. Isagoges) clearly proves of the Sun.) So that, unless this Passage of Balbus's be understood in a mild Sense, (as here spoken of,) it is in no wise True.] — is much disputed, &c. (lin. 15.) [Achilles Tatius (in Isagoge, cap. 18.) says, i [...] the space of 350635. But, in very deed, so long it is, that 'tis hard to determine it precisely.The Great Year of Phil [...]sophers. The Great Year that [Page xciij] Censorinus, (in lib. 2. of Petavius de Doct. Temp.) avers to have been Instituted by De­mocritus, Democritus's different from it. To finish a Pe­riod; and re­turn from point to point, what. consisting of 82 years, is quite Dif­ferent from This] — and, [of all the Pla­nets,] is, &c. (lin. 18.) — compleats its period [i. e. returns again to the same Sign of the Zodiac: This being altogether diverse from what Astrologers term returning from Point to Point, or, to the same Site wherein all the Stars were, when they first began to be mov'd:] — working a great deal, [by which (I think) is only understood the so Constant Varieties of its Course, and Light; for, there is nothing else to be commended in it, being held to be a Noxious and Fatal Planet. Saturn a Noxi­ous Planet.] — fulfills [Courses] the same Orb of the Twelve Signs, &c. (lin. 20, 21.) [That is to say, the Zodiac; The Zodiac what. or, that Celestial Circle divided into twelve Parts, and distinguish'd with the like number of Signs, at the pleasure of Astro­nomers. Moreover, thô not Jupiter only, but all the Planets, move in the same Orb or Zodiac; yet are they not carried about in one and the same Line thereof; for, (as Achil­les Tatius (cap. 23.) admonishes,) the Zo­diac has Latitude; a thing not allow'd to any of the other Circles of the Sphere.

below This, &c. (pag. 104. pag. 104. The place of Sol in the Zo­d ac. lin. 2.) [not immediately, or next below it; for, the place betwixt Mars and Mercury is usually attributed to the Sun. As to the Order of the Celestial Spheres, Clavius (upon de Sa­cro Bosco's Sphere) may be consulted.] — with These [i. e. with Reason, Understand­ing,] &c. (lin. 26.) — neither have, &c. [are neither mov'd along with the Sky,] &c. [Page xciv] (lin. 33.) — for lack of Natural Knowledge [thorough Ignorance of Natural Philosophy,] &c. (lin. 35.) such a Nature [a Substance so Firm] as, &c. (lin. ult.)

force about [along with] the, &c. (pag. 105.pag. 105.lin. 2.) — indu'd with a suffusion of Heat in the Temper of it [of a moderate Heat,] &c. (lin. 3, 4.) — without any Sense [any Mind] at all, &c. (lin. 14.) Yet, Christians Christians hold not the Stars to be Deities. impute not Divinity to the Stars themselves, but only to the Authour, Preserver and Governour of Them, and all other things] — have their Course nearer [wander about] the, &c. (lin. 21.) — so that, I cannot do better, [i. e. since I have thus strongly prov'd the Great Soul of the Ʋniverse, (as taught by Zeno,) I can hardly be mistaken, if I follow the same Zeno, in these other things also,] &c. (l. 29, &c.) — Luckiest [First, Chief] of, &c. (l. 31.) — Nature, &c. (lin. 4.) [This Nature the Sto­iques accounted upon as a Deity: The Stoiques in a manner Confounded Nature with the Deity. And, in Plutarch and Stobaeus, they Define their Dei­ty (much what after the same manner with Nature, here,) to be [...] or, (as Athenagoras and Others reade it,Their Definiti­on of God.) [...]; A Mechanical or Artificial Fire, proceeding by a Way [i. e. by Reason, Counsel) in the Generation or, (if you had rather,) to the Ge­nerations of the World, containing within it self all Semin [...]l Reasons (i. e. Causes) by which every thing comes to Be, according to Fate.] — methodically [i. e. by Counsel, [Page xcv] and a certain way of acting, that leads to the end propounded,] &c. (lin. ult.)

Consonant to Art [By art, he means not (here) Created, and Human, but Divine; not having Nature for its Foundation, Divine Art. but making Nature her self; not the Imitatour of Nature, but the Authour of her,] &c. (pag. 106. pag. 106. lin. 2.) — not Artificial only, but, a Compleat Artist [i. e. not only indu'd with Art, but absolutely the First Authour, and the very Sovereign of all Art; and a prudent provider of all things [Profitable and Commodious,] &c. (lin. 15, &c.) — sup­port [Conservation] from, &c. (lin. 20.) — term'd [either Prudence, or Providence; for, in Greek, it is nam'd [...],] &c. (l. 28, 29.) — persevere [subsist,] &c. (l. 32.)

nor yet effect [but, such as are still Act­ing, thò without any the least Toil,] &c. (pag. 107. pag. 107. Ceres and Bac­chus who. lin. 5, 6.) — Thus [i. e. be­cause Corn was Invented by Ceres, the Daugh­ter of Saturn and Ops, King and Queen of Italy (as Reported,) and Wine by Liber (or Bacchus, the Son of Semele Daughter of Cadmus King of Thebes,] &c. (lin. 35.)

Whence [i. e. from which Metonimical Figure of Speech] That of Terence [in his Comedy entituled the Eunuch,] &c. (pag. 108. pag. 108. lin. 1.) — dedicated [reduc'd into the num­ber of Deities] in the Capitol [a very High Hill of Rome,] &c. (l. 8.) — the Latter [of Later Days] by Marcus Aemilius Scaurus; for [but] Faith, &c. (l. 9, 10.) who, Regulus (or Calati­nus,) and Q. Maximus, were Roman Consuls, Scaurus, Regu­lus, &c. Roman Consuls.] &c. (l. 9.) — in the War with the Lombards, [in the Ligurian War,] been, &c. (l. 13, 14.) — [Page xcvj] And so for [what need I speak of the Temples of Health,] &c. (lin. 15.) — the Efficacy [the Vertue being so Great, that they could not be Govern'd but by a God,] therefore, &c. (lin. 16, &c.) — Upon the same score are the Appellations [amongst which sort of Deities, are the Names] of, &c. (l. 20.) — Unnatural [i. e. things that Nature Insti­tuted according to Right Reason covets not,] &c. (lin. 25.) — their [Extraordinary Beneficialness, Where an Ac­count may be had of the Ro­man Deities, and Temples.] were, &c. (lin. 29.) Now, as to These same Temples; Livy, Pomponi­us Laetus, Lilius Giraldus, Rosinus, and (more particularly) Marcianus (who have ex­presly treated of Antiquities,) may be Consulted.

This was the Case of [i. e. In Considera­tion of their Benefits, were Hercules, Castor and Pollux, &c. taken up into Heaven, &c.] of [as also] Liber, &c. (pag. 109. pag. 109. lin. 4, &c.) — the Mysteries [Books of Church-Ceremonies,] &c. (lin. 11.) — Liber and Libera [i. e. Apollo and Diana, or Sol, and Luna,] &c. (lin. 14.) — not in Libe­ra [for, they term'd Sol, Liber; but, not Luna, Libera, I am not fully satisfi'd with this Explanation my self; only I see not what more tolerable one to assign the Passage,] &c. (lin. 15.) — persevere [Remain after Death] and, &c. (lin. 19.) — for that they are the Best, &c. [i. e. in regard both of their Excellency [Benefits,] and of their Eternity,How the Greeks and Romans, term'd their Demi-gods. &c. (lin. 21.) [The Romans term'd these sort of Gods, Indigetes; the Greeks, [...] ▪ Semidii Curetes. Moreover, Cicero (in Lib. 2. de Legibus,) distributes the Deities into Three Classes, viz. [Page xcvij] Stars; Things, Piety, Vertue,Tully's Three Ranks of Dei­ties.) &c. that had advanc'd Men into Heaven; and Men. (Her­cules, Liber, &c.) who had deserv'd well of Mankind. And then, for the Immortality of the Soul; the StoiquesThe Immortali­ty of the Soul, according to the Stoiques; were much Divided about it: Cleanthes phansi'd the Souls of all men to Remain till the Conflagration; but, Chrysippus, only those of the Wise. Where­as Christians are of a Stedfast Belief, and, to Chri­stianity. that the Souls both of the Bad and the Good, after Death abide for ever, These to Perpetual Joy, the Other to Eternal Torment.] — Upon another Consideration, and That a Physical one too, [From the Consideration of Natural Things] has, &c. (lin. 22.) — Involv'd Mankind in [fill'd Mens Minds with] the, &c. (lin. 26.) — Philosophi­cal Reason [Sense,] pleasant, &c. (l. 25.)

contains [Rules, Defines, Bounds] the, &c. (pag. 110. pag. 110. lin. 7.) — which is as much as to say [which same [...] signifies a space of Time,] &c. (lin. 11, 12.) As to the Fables of Saturn, and of his Father Coelus, The Fables of Saturn, &c. where handled. (or Coelum,) Natalis Comes has diligently persu'd (in Lib. 2. Mythol.) and Lactan­tius exploded them (in Lib. 1. of his False Religion] — in Adversity we call him, [whom, in Change of Inflexion, (for, the Word Jupiter makes Jovis in the Genitive Case, contrary to the General Rule,) we name Jove,] &c. (lin. 23.) — as above [as I said before] Expresses, [Names,] say­ing, [Thus,] Behold, &c. (lin. 32, 33.)

more Clearly [plainly, sup. does he ex­press Heaven] in, &c. (pag. 111. pag. 111. lin. 1.) [Page xcviij]

(lin. 3. &c.) — It is Him also, &c. [i. e. it appears, by the Discipline of the Augurs, and their way of Speaking, that, by the Name of Jupiter, Heaven, (or the Skie) is usual­ly understood,] &c. (lin. 7.) — Untem­per'd [and Immense,] &c. (lin. 13.) — Honour'd with the Appellation [Consecra­ted under the Name] of, &c. (lin. 20.) — it was suppos'd to be [they made it [i. e. Aer, a word of the Masculine Gender,] Feminine [i. e. a Goddess of the Feminine] and, &c. (lin. 24.) — by [according to] Fable, &c. (lin. 29.) Homer (Il. o.) furnishes the Division of these Kingdoms; Plutarch, Plutarch, &c. referr'd to. in the Life of the same Homer, (as also, Fulgenti­us, Bocacius, and Natalis Comes) the Phy­sical Exposition of the Fable; and, Lactan­tius, (Cap. II. de Falsa Religione,) the Historical.

pag. 112. which, [who is nam'd Dis, by the Latins, as [...], (i. e. Dives, Rich,) amongst the Greeks] because, &c. (p. 112. l. 8.) — Diminishing, [scil. the Forces of the Enemy, perhaps] — Menacing [sup. Death to the Adverse Party,] &c. (lin. 27.) — greater Power and Vertue [most Importance: It being an usual saying He that has Well Be­gun, [Page xcix] has Half Done; And, the End Crowns the Work,] &c. (lin. 30.) — to Begin with Janus [scil. because they phansi'd him to have the Command of the Beginnings and En­dings of all things,] &c. (lin. 32.)

Their [...] [i. e. Focus, a Hearth,] &c. (pag. 113. pag 113. lin. 5.) — This Power [scil. with the Goddess Ceres,] &c. (lin. 20.)

Consum'd by Fire, &c. (pag 114. pag. 114. lin. 16.) Erostratus burnt it, to get a Name.] — And, because this Goddess [Now, upon that Goddess, who comes to (has an influence up­on) all things, have Our People bestow'd] the, &c. (lin. 20, &c.)

brought down, &c. [and all the Infirmi­ties of Human Nature Imputed to the Gods,] &c. (pag. 115. pag. 115. lin. 4.) — shews himself in [passes thorough, scil. by his Immensity] the, &c. (lin. 21.) — And Others, in O­ther Cases, &c. [And Others may be under­stood, in the Other Elements; who, what they are, and, by what Name Custom has stil'd them; which] Deities we ought, &c. (lin. 23, &c.)

as it were to Collect, &c. [very often to Reade, and every where studiously as it were to Collect all] matters, &c. (pag. 116. pag. 116. lin. 7.) — the force of Reading is One [i. e. All these Words denote the same Original with the word Religiosus à Relegendo.] &c. (lin. 13.) So much for this Second Branch of the Dispute.

THIS Third Branch of the Stoiques Disputation means to Prove a Divine Provi­dence Universally. Th Su [...] ct of th [...] Br [...] [...]e [...]sp [...]. I shall not subjoyn any o­ther [Page c] Synopsis of it, than what Balbus (pag. 117, 118.) draws up himself. So that, to the Contents.

The Contents of each Section of it.PART II. SECT. III. From pag. 116. to l. 30. of pag. 117. In making a Transition to the Third Branch of the Dispute, He, First, briefly repeats what he had Treated of in the two foregoing; Then, Intimates that which he purposes to Prove in This; Next, Raises Expectation, both by the weigh­tiness of the Argument it self, and the Considerable­ness of its Opponents, And, in the Last place, after a Reproof of the Epicureans for their grosser sort of Ignorance, in that they were still Cavelling at the Divine Providence, he removes all Occasion of Ex­ception, by more clearly Proposing the Question, THENCE, to lin. 23. of pag. 118. He advances anew the Particulars he means to Handle in this Third Branch of his D [...]scourse; Divides the Branch it self into Three Parts; and forthwith proceeds to the First of them; wherein he makes the Reason (or Being) it self of a Deity to be the Leading Ar­gument of a Divine Provi [...]ence. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 119. He shews that, a Divinity once admitted, a Providence must also be allow'd; First, by the Absurd Consequence of Denying it; in that Then it follows, that something or other is more Excellent than the Deity: Secondly, by remo­ving two Obstructions of Providence, (Ignorance, and Imbecillity.) THENCE, to lin. 3. of pag. 120. He assumes This, as the Right of the Divine Essence, that the Gods are Animated, indu'd with Reason; and that, being in a kind of Civil Communion and Society one with another, they Govern the World: Whence he infers, that, there is the same Reason, Truth, and Law with the Gods, that there is in Men; and also Collects, th [...]t Reason and Ʋnder­stan [...]ing were deriv'd to Mankind from Above. Upon which Consideration, the Mind, Faith, Vert [...]e, Concord, in that they were conceiv'd to Proc [...]ed from the Powers Divine, were held to be Goddesses; which, should they not be in the Deities, were rashly worshipt in their Images. THENCE, [Page cj] to lin. 25. of the same page. He again Inculcates what he had taught in the Section foregoing, that Human Vertues are in the Deities; and, in much greater Perfection too, than in Men. Then, he as of Right Assumes, that the Gods make use of these same Vertues in administring the World, nothing being more Noble than such Administration. And, in the Last place, from the Beneficialness of the Stars, and other Divine things, in the World, he Concludes All to be Govern'd by the Providence of the Gods. THENCE, to l. 33. of pag. 121. He pro­ceeds to Another Argument of a Divine Providence, inferr'd from some or other Governing Nature. Moreover, in regard the word is of doubtfull and various signification amongst Philosophers, to make the matter the plainer, he expounds what Nature is, according to the Sense both of the Epi­cureans, and the Stoiques. THENCE, to lin. 19. of pag. 122. Having thus, from the Placits of the Stoiques, shewn What Nature is, he next makes out that the several Parts of the World do Exist, are Preserv'd, and Act, by the benefit of this same Nature, (i. e. Providence,) cohering one with ano­ther, and being join'd in a kind of Common League and Intercourse. THENCE, to lin. 10. of pag. 123. Moreover, from the conjunction of the Parts of the World, (All which tend to the Centre, and continue themselves by Mutual Conversions into one another,) he concludes the whole Universe to be administer'd by the Nature above mention'd, which is indu'd with Art, and Advice. THENCE, to lin. 31. of the same page. By a Collation of the Wo [...]l [...] wi [...]h Lesser things, he confirms it to be Go­vern'd by some or other Intelligent Nature; as also, by an Argument from the Parts to the Whole, from the Effects to the Cause. THENCE, to lin. 11. of pag. 124. He Here finishes the Course of Argu­ment ere while begun, with intent to prove the Ad­ministration of the World, wherein he contends that nothing can be found fault with. THENCE, to lin. 1. of pag. 125. From the Absolute Perfection of the World, he collects the Providence whereby it is Govern'd: And, making a kind of Induction, he, in this and the next Section, is somewhat Large [Page cij] in Argument deriv'd from things made by Art, which he had before given a Hint of. THENCE, to lin. 25. of the same page. He takes notice of the Sphere of Posidonius; and, from this so Admi­rable a Piece of Art, Concludes, by an Argument usually term'd à Minori ad Majus, (what in the Section above he had undertaken to prove,) that the World was Perfected by Reason. THE [...]CE, to lin. 27. of pag. 126. He Illustrates the Argu­ment deriv'd from things made by Art, by a passage out of the Poet Actius. THENCE, to lin. 16. of p [...]g. 127. He Convinces, by the Example of the Shepherd in Actius, that Philosophers ought to acknowledge God the Ruler and Authour of all things, by Arguments hardly to be excepted a­gainst. Toward the End, he tacitly notes the Epi­cureans of a lower sort of Stolidity. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 128. He describes the Admirable Order of the Elements, and Celestial Bodies, where­on the Health of Ʋniversal Nature so immediately Depends; and, in the next Section, shews, that this Order is to be ascrib'd to a Divi [...]e Providence. By the by, he notes the Greek Original of the words Aer, and Ae her; as also, of the Poet Pa­cuvius. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 129. From the so Beautifull Order of the Ʋniverse, (as before set forth,) he takes occasion to make an Excursion against the Epicureans, (who pretended the World to have been made by a fortuitous Con­course of Atoms,) and, refells them by a Simile, and an Argument à Minori. THENCE, to lin. 12. of pag. 130. From the short Transition, in the end of the last Section, (made in the words which is the Next Point,) he comes to propound the Third Ar­gument of a Providence, drawn from things Celesti­al, and the imbellishment of the same; Confirming it by the Authority, and Argument à Simili of A­ristotle. THENCE, to lin. 32. of the same page. He produces another Similitude much of a sort with the former Then, he reprehends the Stupid­ness of Mo [...]tal [...], wh [...], because they have the Skie continu [...]ly before h [...]ir Eyes, are not stir'd up, by the Admir [...]bleness of Celestial things, to Inquire nto the Causes of them. THENCE, to l. 16. of p. 131. [Page ciij] He has recourse to the same Arguments à Similibus, nay à Minoribus, to shew, that a Divine Providence is the Occasion of the Motion, Order, and Cohe­rence of Heaven. THENCE, to lin. 18. of pag. 132. The Stoique brings down the whole Controversie to the Judgment of the Eyes; supposing, none, that are not Blind, can Deny a Providence. There­fore, by a most Elegant Description, subjects he to the Eye the several Parts of the Ʋniverse; and, First of all, the Earth, and Earthly things. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 133. A Description of the Sea, Air, and Skie; and of the things contein­ed in them: Wherein, a Providence is most appa­rent. THENCE, to lin. 18. of pag. 134. The Courses of the Sun, and Moon, and the various Dispositions and Effects of them both, and of the rest of the Planets also, Describ'd, in Confirmati­on of a Providence. THENCE, to lin. 12. of pag. 135. The Stoique Advances to a Description of the Fixt Stars; (still with the same Intent of Confirming Providence's Governing the World;) by the way, commending Tully's Latin Version of Aratus's Greek Description of the same Stars. THENCE, to lin. 16. of pag. 136. In the Begin­ning, he briefly touches upon Both the Poles, and the Etymology of the Word. Then, he describes the two Bears that are Roll'd about the Arctic Pole; and tells their Different Names, and divers Aspects, and Ʋses. THENCE, to lin. 19. of pag. 137. He describes the Site, and Figure of the Heavenly Dragon; and the Stars, of which that Constellation is Compos'd. THENCE, to lin. 7. of pag. 139. The Description of Engonasis, the Crown, Serpen­tar [...]us, Arctophylax, and the Virgin, in Confirma­tion of a Wise Providence. THENCE, to lin. 10. of pag. 139. The Twins, Crab, Lyon, Chariotier, Kids, Bull, and Hyades are Describ'd. THENCE, to lin. 13. of pag. 141. He here describes the Royal Constellations Cepheus, Cossiopea, Andromeda; as also, the Win [...]'d Horse, Ram, and Fishes. THENCE, to lin. ult. of pag. 142. Perseus, the Virgil ae, (or Pleïades,) the Harp, Swan, Water-hearer, and Capricorn. THENCE, to lin. 17. of bag. 143. He passes from the Northern Signs to the [Page civ] Southern; Om [...]tting some, Describing others; in This Section, Orion, the Dog, Hare, Ship, River, Whale, and Fishes. THENCE, to lin. ult. of pag. 144 He proceeds in describing the Southern Signs the Altar, Centaur, Snake, Goblet, Crow, and Little Deg. THENCE, to lin. 17. of pag. 149. from this so large Description of the Stars, he at length Concludes, (against Epicurus, and Strato,) that, this Order of the Stars, and Adornment of the Sky, could never have been effected by a Fortuitous Concourse of Atoms, or by a Brute Nature; There­fore, does he, (over and above the Imbellishment of the World,) ascribe the Preservation of it also, (A­nother Argument of a Provi ence,) to the same Di­vine Providence; (to be Concluded afterward.) Moreover, he conceives, (reasonably enough,) that, 'tis a kind of Common Bond of all things, that is the sure Foundation of that Stability which is in the World. THENCE, to lin. 11. of pag. 150. What he had said of the Ʋniverse, that it is Con­serv'd by Means of its Centre, (whereunto, by a certain mighty Conjunction, it is on all sides car­ry'd, chiefly in a Round Form) does he likewise sh [...]w of the several Parts of the same Ʋniverse; (the Earth, Sea, Air, Sky;) in proof of an All. preserving Providence. THENCE, to lin. 4. of pag. 151. A Pr vidence also, in the Preservation of the Stars by a kind of Social League, their very Figure it self, and their Nourishment; (according to the Stoical Sense, This;) The Opinion of the same Stoiques, touching the Constagration, and Renovation of the World, is likewise briefly Inser­ted. THENCE, to lin. 22. of the same page. He Concludes the Topique of the Conservation of the Stars; and shews, that the Motion and Order of the Planets contribute to the safety of the Ʋni­verse: A Particular so Emphatical of a Providence, that only such as never consider'd the so Conveni­ent Harmony and Correspondence of the Celestial Bodies, can be unsatisfied of it. THENCE, to lin. 6. of pag. 152. From an Higher Nature, he Descends to a Lower; wherein the diligent Care of a Conser­ving Providence appears to Human Eyes if not so admirably as in the other, yet more plainly and grate­fully; [Page cv] in Plants, First; and, of Them, (particu­larly) in the Vine. THENCE, to lin. 26. of the same page. From Plants, he passes on to Animals; in the Preservation of whom a Providence shews it self likewise; as what has Cloth'd, Fed, and se­cur'd them, either by Weapons to repell an Enemy, or Wings to escape him; and furnish'd them with Instruments proper for Taking and Concecting their Food. THENCE, to lin. 11. of pag. 153. He pro­ceeds in relating the Faculties necessary to the Feed­ing of Animals that the Divine Providence has be­stow'd upon them. THENCE, to lin. 34. of the same page. He shews how Providence has Qualifi'd such Creatures as live by the Bloud or Flesh of O­thers; And namely, the Spider, Nacre-Fish, and Sprawn. THENCE, to lin. 25. of pag. 154. How Providence conserves Water-Creatures that abide on the Land; and feeds the Bird Plateala, which lives upon Fish, and yet cannot dive into the Wa­ter. THENCE, to lin. 18. of pag. 155. Here, the Subtilty of the Sea-Frog, Kite, Crow, and Crane, is also taken notice of, in Commendation of the Divine Providence. THENCE, to lin. 5. of p. 156. The wonderfull Care of Beasts to Preserve them­selves by Food, Shelter, and Remedies, imputable to Providence also. THENCE, to lin. 31. of the same page. Providence has furnish'd Beasts with va­rious kinds of Arms against Force, and Fear: And, moreover, been exceeding carefull that, by a con­stant Generation of Animals, each respective kind should be preserv'd and continu'd, to the Perpetual Ornament and Renovation of the World. THENCE, to lin. 21. of pag. 157. A Divine Providence is also apparent in the Conservation of every Species of Animals both by the benefit of Generation, and of Duration. THENCE, to lin. 8 of pag. 158. The Work of This Section is much the same with That of the foregoing; for, thô he make no Parti­cular mention of Providence here, yet he would In­sinuate that to It ought the Tenderness of Brutes in Educating and Keeping their Issue to be ascrib'd. THENCE, to lin. 28. of the same page. The Divine Provi [...]ence hath remitted the Conserva [...]ion of some things to the Ingenuity of Man, that they might [Page cvj] not seem to h [...]v [...] been given in vain. But then a­gai [...], sh [...] has v [...]luntarily gratify'd them with many and rear Advan ages (not only toward the relief of [...]h [...]ir N e ssi [...]rs, but the Perception of Pleasure also,) [...]hat ost them no pains at all. Hither tend the Ben [...]fits of certain Rivers Here Commended. THENCE, to lin. 7. of pag. 159. The Fruitfulness of [...]he Fi lds Plen y, Variety, and Deli [...]iousness of Provisi [...]ns, S asonableness of Annual Winds, and other Benefits, are Witnesses of the provident Affection of the Div nity toward us. THENCE, to (he E [...]d, or, to) lin. 26. of the same page. With a kind of Rhetorical Preterition, briefly and in general tou hing upon Sundry Conveniencies of Human Life, he concludes this Third Branch of the Dispute, which shews the World to be Admini­ster'd by a Divine Providence.

Amendments, &c. of the Third Branch of the Dispute. are not so much acquainted, &c. [do not so well understand in what sense each Particular is spoken:] For, you, &c. (pag. 116. pag. 116. l. 28.)

Introduc'd [into Nature] by, &c. (pag. 117. pag. 117. lin. 1.)— Particularly; [somewhat briefly;] for, &c. (lin. 6.) — I [you are to] Take it, &c. (lin. 11.) As to the Coun­cel of Ariopagus, Sigonius re­ferr'd to. Sigonius's Third Book of the Commonwealth of Athens may be Con­sulted.

pag. 118.Sensitive [to a sort of Intelligent] Nature, &c. (pag. 118. lin. 6) — Inanimate Nature [such as Strato Computed upon] or, a Necessity, &c. [i. e. that fortuitous Con­course of Atoms of Epicurus's, so full of ne­cessary concitation, whereby he would have This Ʋniversality of Things to have been at first cimented together, and to be now continu'd and govern'd, without any Rea­son at all, or Liberty, without Advice, or Providence,] &c. (lin. 27, 28.) — nor [Page cvij] Transcendent [most Powerfull, in that, it must needs be Subordinate to this or Necessi­ty, or Nature, by which Heaven, Earth, and Sea should be Govern'd.] But, &c. (l. 32.)

effected [Concluded] what, &c. (p. 119. pag. 119. lin. 15.) — that they be Animated, &c. (lin. 19.) Zeno in Laertius (Lib. 7.) De­fines,Zeno's Defini­tion of the Deity. the Deity, to be [...], an Immortal Animal, Rational, Perfect in Beatitude, Incapable of all Evil, Provident of the World, and the things that are therein: And, Lipsius, (lib. 2. Physiol. Stoic. Dissert. 7.) cites a Passage out of Eusebius, to shew the Polity of the Gods; A Steical Pas­sage quot d [...]y E [...]s [...], [...]o sh [...]w the [...]lity of the Gods. viz. [...]. The World is as it were a City made up of the Gods and of Men; of which, the Gods indeed have the Government, and Men are in Subjection: yet is there a Commu­nion betwixt them, in that they both partake of Reason, which is the Law of Nature.] — Verity to [Cognition of Truth in] both, &c. (lin. 28.) — Depulsion [Prohibition] of, &c. (lin. 30.) — it may [likewise] be, &c. (lin. 31.) — by [in the Institu­tions of,] &c. (lin. ult.)