In the limits here prescribed for the development of our _outline_--which even the most heedless must have observed, instead of being compressed, as intended within the compass of one volume could more easily have been dilated to the magnitude of four--it cannot be supposed that I could dwell, with much minuteness, upon the several collateral particulars to which I may incidentally refer. As, however, that _twofold tenour_ to which I have above alluded, may require something more in the way of illustration, I shall take any two of the aggregate of names there collected, and in them exemplify what has been said. Suppose them to be _Militta_ and _Astarte_. Of these, then, the first means _appetency_, such as is natural between the sexes; and the second _dalliance_, of the same _mutual_ sort; and while both alike typify the _delights_ of _love_, they both equally personate the _mistress_ of the _starry_ firmament whose influence was courted for the maturity of all such connection, as the season of her splendour is the most suitable for its gratification. From _Astarte_ (Ασταρτη), the Greeks formed _Aster_ (Αστηρ) a star, thereby retaining but one branch of this duplicity. The Irish deduced from it the well-known endearment, _Astore_; and I believe I do not exaggerate when I affirm that, in the whole circuit of dialectal enunciations, there exists not another sound calculated to convey to a native of this country so many commingling ideas of _tender pathos_, and of _exalted adventure_, as this syllabic representation of the _lunar_ deity.[234] Such was _Sabaism_,--composed of love, religion, and astrology: such too was _Budhism_, as I have already shown; and _Phallism_ being but another name, equivalent with this latter, it follows that the whole three--_Sabaism_, _Budhism_, and _Phallism_--are, to all intents and purposes, but _identically one_. This being about to be demonstrated, a few pages forwards, as _the oldest species of worship recognised upon earth_, it were needless, one would hope, to enter into a comparison in point of antiquity between it and any of its living derivatives. But as many learned men, misled by that cloud which heretofore enveloped the subject, have promulgated the belief that _Brahminism_ was the parent stock, whence _Budhism_, with its adjuncts, diverged as a scion, I shall, omitting others, address myself to the consideration of Mr. Colebrooke’s arguments, which I select from the mass in deference to a character so honourably interwoven with the revival of Eastern literature. “The mythology of the orthodox Hindus,” says this venerable and good man, “their present chronology, adapted to astronomical periods, their legendary tales, and their mystical allegories, are abundantly extravagant, but the Jains and the Bauddhas surpass them in monstrous exaggerations of the same kind. In this rivalship of absurd fiction it would not be unreasonable to pronounce that to be the most modern which has outgone the rest.”