aking of men
into gods and gods into men, sometimes, though more rarely, begins
during the life of the hero, but usually after death. The true history
of his life is gradually amplified and decorated with fanciful
incidents, to fit it to the new character which has been posthumously
given him. Omens and portents are now made to attend his earthly
avatara: his precocity is described as superhuman: as a babe or
lisping child he silences the wisest logicians by his divine
knowledge: miracles he produces as other boys do soap-bubbles: the
terrible energies of nature are his playthings: the gods, angels, and
demons are his habitual attendants: the sun, moon, and all the starry
host wheel around his cradle in joyful measures, and the earth thrills
with joy at having borne such a prodigy: and at his last hour of
mortal life the whole universe shakes with conflicting emotions.

Why need I use the few moments at my disposal to marshal before you
the various personages of whom these fables have been written? Let it
suffice to recall the interesting fact to your notice, and invite you
to compare the respective biographies of the Brahmanical
Krshna, the Persian Zoroaster, the Egyptian Hermes, the
Indian Gautama, and the canonical, especially the apocryphal,
Jesus. Taking Krshna or Zoroaster, as you please, as the most
ancient, and coming down the chronological line of descent, you will
find them all made after the same pattern. The real personage is all
covered up and concealed under the embroidered veils of the romancer
and the enthusiastic historiographer. What is surprising to me is that
this tendency to exaggeration and hyperbole is not more commonly
allowed for by those who in our days attempt to discuss and compare
religions. We are constantly and painfully reminded that the prejudice
of inimical critics, on the one hand, and the furious bigotry of
devotees, on the other, blind men to fact and probability, and lead to
gross injustice. Let me take as an example the mythical biographies of
Jesus. At the time when the Council of Nicea was convened for settling
the quarrels of certain bishops, and for the purpose of examining into
the canonicity of the three hundred more or less apocryphal gospels
that were being read in the Christian churches as inspired writings,
the history of the life of Christ had reached the height of absurd
myth. We may see some specimens in the extant books of the apocryphal
New Testament, but most of th