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
as Minerva, Ares as Mars, and Hermes as Mercury, it is by reason of the
syncretism brought into fashion by Alexander’s conquests.
Neither must we forget that the deification of Alexander during his
lifetime brought an entirely new conception of the Divine into the
European world. The divinization of the king was indeed no new thing in
Egypt, where the Pharaoh from the earliest times was looked upon after
his enthronement as the living form of the sun-god Horus; but to the
religious ideas of the Greeks it was evidently a surprising shock. The
distinguishing attribute of a Greek god was his deathlessness or
incorruptibility; and although heroes like Theseus and Heracles were
fabled to have become immortal and therefore fit subjects for worship,
this was only because they were in the natural way the progeny of the
gods themselves, and as such were taken into heaven by their fathers
after death and the purging away of their mortal nature[78]. Alexander,
on the other hand, demanded from the Greeks as from his other subjects
divine honours during his life, and these were accorded to him with
servile readiness by the governments of Athens and other Greek
city-states, the Spartans not excepted[79]. What he meant exactly by
this demand it would be hard to say, because his supposed sonship to
Amen on which it was ostensibly based, was, as Sir Gaston Maspero has
shown, merely the form by which, on a change of dynasty, the priests of
Amen were accustomed to legitimize the accession to the throne of a king
who could show no right thereto but force[80]. It is evident, too, that
Alexander did not himself take his deification very seriously, since he
allowed its propriety to be discussed before him at a wine-party[81];
and his apologists, Arrian and Plutarch, are possibly well-founded when
they declare that it was a mere political device to secure the grudging
obedience of his Macedonian countrymen[82]. But his successors in this
matter went far beyond him. Ptolemy and Arsinoe, without any pretence of
divine descent, were proclaimed “Saviour-gods” for their Greek as well
as for their Egyptian subjects quite apart from any identification of
themselves with Horus or any other native deity. Antigonus, when
claiming to be the _strategos_ or generalissimo of the whole Empire, was
hailed as a god, which drew from the rough old king a repartee more
pointed than decent[83]. So, too, was his son, Demetrius the City Taker,
although at the time of his deification he had not even an independent
kingdom of his own, but was merely ruling Greece as the viceroy of his
father. And the barriers between the Divine and the human being thus
broken down, men’s minds soon became so familiar with the idea that they
not only thought men might become gods, but declared that the gods were
only deified men. The Athenians in the hymns that they sang to Demetrius
declared that he was the only true god, and that the others were either
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