[333] BERNARDAKIS adopts Bentley’s emendation βαπτισμούς, which _might_ be an allusion to Christianity, but would more probably refer to such a process as that already described in the words βάπτισον σεαυτὸν εἰς θάλασσαν. We have previously discussed the general question involved (see p. 45), but may here add the opinion of so unprejudiced a Christian writer as Archbishop Trench, “_strange to say. Christianity is to him (Plutarch) utterly unknown._”—(See also note, p. 202). [334] 166 B. [335] 166 B. [336] 168 F. [337] Bello primo, Aristodemum Messeniorum regem per superstitionem animum ac spes omnes despondisse, seque ipsum interfecisse, narrat etiam Pausanias, iv. 3.—WYTTENBACH. [338] 169 C. _Iliad_, vii. 193, 194. [339] 170 A. Trench quotes Seneca _Epist._, 123—“Quid enim interest utrum deos neges, an infames?” [340] 170 F. [341] To the numerous citations made by Gréard (p. 209), we may add an expression of opinion by Dr. Tholuck, given with special reference to Plutarch’s views on Superstition:—“Wir haben in Alterthum einen hohen Geist, Plutarch, welcher dem, was das Alterthum Aberglaube nannte, viele Betrachtungen gewidmet hat, dem Gegenstande zwar nicht auf den Grund gekommen, _aber in der Betrachtuug desselben doch so tiefe religiöse Wahrheiten ausgesprochen_, dass wir nicht umhin können, ihn hier ausführlicher dem Leser vorzuführen” (_Ueber Aberglauben und Unglauben_). [342] WYTTENBACH bases this possibility on the 150th entry in the Lamprian catalogue, “_On Superstition, against Epicurus._” (Entry No. 155 in the catalogue as given in BERNARDAKIS, vol. vii. pp. 473-7.) But the discussion on this point in the _Non posse suaviter_ forms so important a part of that tract that the title “_On Superstition, against Epicurus_” would be no inapt title for the whole treatise. [343] The view taken in the text as to the character of this strenuous and noble sermon on _Superstition_ is, of course, quite at variance with the opinion of Prof. Mahaffy, who regards it as “one of those sophistical exercises practised by every one in that age—I mean, the defence of a paradox with subtlety and ingenuity, _taking little account of sober truth in comparison with dialectical plausibility_.”—_Greeks under Roman Sway_, p. 318. [344] _Pharsalia_, viii. 831. [345] APULEIUS, _Meta_: Lib. xi. Lucius (a descendant of Plutarch, by the way), in his pious gratitude, enters the service of the goddess who had _uncharmed_ him.—Rursus donique, quam raso capillo, _collegi vetustissimi et sub illis Sullæ temporibus conditi_ munia, non obumbrato vel obtecto calvitio, sed quoquoversus obvio, gaudens obibam. [346] 364 E. [347] 354 C. [348] 355 B. [349] Cf. _De Pyth. Orac._, 400 A. [350] 355 D. [351] 358 E. Mr. Andrew Lang justly remarks, “Why these myths should be considered ‘more blasphemous’ than the rest does not appear” (_Myth, Ritual, and Religion_, vol. ii. pp. 116, 117).