ends to
relate, without a blush, and without a smile, the voyage of the
goddess from the shores of Pergamus to the mouth of the Tyber, and the
stupendous miracle, which convinced the senate and people of Rome that
the lump of clay, which their ambassadors had transported over the seas,
was endowed with life, and sentiment, and divine power. For the truth
of this prodigy he appeals to the public monuments of the city; and
censures, with some acrimony, the sickly and affected taste of those
men, who impertinently derided the sacred traditions of their ancestors.

But the devout philosopher, who sincerely embraced, and warmly
encouraged, the superstition of the people, reserved for himself the
privilege of a liberal interpretation; and silently withdrew from the
foot of the altars into the sanctuary of the temple. The extravagance of
the Grecian mythology proclaimed, with a clear and audible voice, that
the pious inquirer, instead of being scandalized or satisfied with the
literal sense, should diligently explore the occult wisdom, which had
been disguised, by the prudence of antiquity, under the mask of folly
and of fable. The philosophers of the Platonic school, Plotinus,
Porphyry, and the divine Iamblichus, were admired as the most skilful
masters of this allegorical science, which labored to soften and
harmonize the deformed features of Paganism. Julian himself, who was
directed in the mysterious pursuit by AEdesius, the venerable successor
of Iamblichus, aspired to the possession of a treasure, which he
esteemed, if we may credit his solemn asseverations, far above the
empire of the world. It was indeed a treasure, which derived its value
only from opinion; and every artist who flattered himself that he had
extracted the precious ore from the surrounding dross, claimed an equal
right of stamping the name and figure the most agreeable to his peculiar
fancy. The fable of Atys and Cybele had been already explained by
Porphyry; but his labors served only to animate the pious industry of
Julian, who invented and published his own allegory of that ancient and
mystic tale. This freedom of interpretation, which might gratify the
pride of the Platonists, exposed the vanity of their art. Without a
tedious detail, the modern reader could not form a just idea of the
strange allusions, the forced etymologies, the solemn trifling, and
the impenetrable obscurity of these sages, who professed to reveal
the system of the universe. As