Forerunners and rivals of Christianity : $b being studies in religious history from 330 B.C. to 330 A.D., Vol. 1 (of 2)Legge, Francis
Religion
Forerunners and rivals of Christianity : $b being studies in religious history from 330 B.C. to 330 A.D., Vol. 1 (of 2)
Legge, Francis
Christianity and other religions; Religions
it surprising that his name alone of all the conquerors of the East has
endured through all changes of creed and culture, that the fierce chiefs
of the Central Asian tableland still boast of him as their progenitor,
and that the whole Mahommedan world still hold him the king of the
believing Genii? No Caesar, Attila, or Genghiz Khan has ever thus
impressed the imagination of future ages[65].
Thus Alexander’s coming gave an enormous impulse to that monarchical
principle of government which from his time onward was to reign supreme
for nearly two thousand years. Philosophers and sophists hastened to
declare that democracy—as was indeed the fact—had proved itself
incapable of governing, and that in the rule of one man was to be found
the natural order of things and the only security for a well-ordered
State[66]. Every one of the Diadochi or Successors of Alexander hurried
in turn to assume the diadem, and Rome had no sooner contrived to crush
her rival republic of Carthage than she too fell under the sway, first
of dictators whose power was admittedly despotic, and then of emperors
whose constitutional limitations were about the same as those of
Alexander. That this was certain in time to react upon the universal
conception of the Divine, followed directly from the law underlying
religious phenomena which had been enunciated by Aristotle: but, before
this could make way among the Greeks, thus suddenly promoted to the
position of the ruling race, it was necessary that their own gods should
be assimilated to those of their eastern fellow-subjects, or in other
words, should be shown to be the same divinities under different names.
Now, a movement with this object, even before Alexander’s coming, had
been set on foot in Greece itself, and was in fact the natural outcome
of the ideas as to the origin and governance of the universe brought
there by the philosophers of Ionia[67]. It was all very well for the
masses—then as now, much given to pragmatism or the reduction of every
abstract idea to its most material and practical expression—to believe
that the power of every god was limited to an area of so many square
feet surrounding his image or sanctuary; but how could such a notion be
held by philosophers who had sought out the causes of things, by
travellers who had visited neighbouring countries in pursuit of
knowledge, or by soldiers who had fought there, and had found it
necessary to pay reverence to gods other than their own? It is said that
in naturalistic religions like those of Greece, there is always a
tendency to consider as identical divinities with the same or like
characteristics—to consider for instance all gods with solar attributes
as but different forms of the sun-god—and the Greeks of the fourth
century B.C. had thus taken many foreign gods into their pantheon. It
was, as Socrates found out to his cost, an offence to bring the worship
of new gods into the city; but the difficulty was got over by the theory
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account