Living God, the spiritual nature of man, and the invisible state. This is manifest from the numerous works of Plato, the most celebrated disciple of Socrates, and confessedly the philosopher who was most eminent for his knowledge of religion and morals.

This great philosopher taught that there was a Supreme. Being, the former of all things; but this Being, according to him, was neither the only eternal existence, nor in nature possessed of immeasurable perfection. He held that there were two eternal, independent causes of all things; God and matter. The latter was a substance without form or quality, but received both from the former. Human reasonings are generally inconsistent and contradictory, and Plato's were not an exception. He speaks of nature possessing a power capable of resisting the will and operation of Deity, and this he regards as the origin and necessary continuance of evil in the universe. "It cannot be that evil be destroyed, for there must always be something contrary to good. God wills, as far as it is possible, every thing good, and nothing evil." Plato seems still further to assign limits to the perfection of Deity, by the assertion that He formed a perfect world, according to eternal, immutable patterns. What is to be understood by these patterns has never been determined by the learned. Some consider them to consist of conceptions or ideas eternally existing in the Divine mind; and others, that they mean innumerable real beings, subsisting in God, and proceeding from him, actually distinct from him and matter, but employed by him to form sensible things, to be contemplated by rational beings. The latter opinion is obviously equivalent to the emanations from God, which characterised the vain philosophy of the wise men of oriental countries. This imagination probably originated another equally destitute of truth,-that each material world was endued with a soul, and, like the matter from which it was formed, eternal. It was not therefore difficult for the philosopher to believe that the soul was immortal, although he supposed it material, and on that account partaking of the imperfection and evil belonging to matter. Hence he ascribes the evident moral defects of the human race to the manner in which God originally formed the universe, and particularly to an act of these souls in some unknown remote period. "God," says Plato, "separated from the soul of the world inferior souls, equal in number to the stars, and assigned to each its proper celestial abode; but that these souls (by what means, or for

what reason does not appear) were sent down to the earth into human bodies, as into a sepulchre or prison. He ascribes to this cause the depravity and misery to which human nature is liable; and maintains, that it is only by disengaging itself from all animal passions, and rising above sensible objects to the contemplation of the world of intelligence that the soul of man can be prepared to return to its original habitation." His system of morals, of course, contained no principle tending to humble man in the presence of his Creator, nor any adequate motive to reconcile to God a heart alienated from the holiness of his nature and laws, and conscious of being justly exposed to his displeasure and vengeance. The sum of his morality was that "our highest good consists in the contemplation and knowledge of the first good, which is Mind, or God. All those things which are called good by men, are in reality such only so far as they are derived from the first and highest good. The only power in human nature which can acquire a resemblance to the Supreme Good, is reason. The minds of philosophers are fraught with valuable treasures; and, after the death of the body, they shall be admitted to Divine entertainments; so that, whilst with the gods they are employed in surveying the fields of truth, they will look down with contempt upon the folly of those who are contented with earthly shadows. Goodness and beauty consist in the knowledge of the first good and the first fair. That only what is becoming is good: therefore virtue is to be pursued for its own sake; and, because it is a Divine attainment, it cannot be taught, but is the gift of God. He alone who has attained the knowledge of the first good is happy. The end of this knowledge is, to ren der man as like to God as the condition of human nature will permit. This likeness consists in prudence, justice, sanctity, temperance."

The revolution in religious and moral principles which had been thus commenced in Greece, passed to the metropolis and chief provinces of the Roman empire, rapid as lightning, after the extension of its power to Greece and Asia. It was confessedly superficial, as our notice of it, in its nature, and inefficient to produce a radical and enduring change on the human affections, in relation to God or man. It was, however, salutary on the interests of true religion. This every one may discover who adverts to the liberty of religious thoughts and actions permitted from the time of Artaxerxes throughout nearly the whole known world. The worship

of the True God gradually and progressively spread in the empire of idols, and multitudes of their votaries became utterly regardless of their honour; and not a few joined the synagogues, and ascended occasionally to the temple of the Jews, who had been for many centuries universally hated or despised, as the enemies of the gods and of mankind.

Whence came the dim light of truth which partially illuminated the minds of the original agents of this moral revolution ? Did these men possess talents transcending their learned predecessors who were the very pillars of idolatry? Or were they naturally more disposed to seek after the One God and Saviour? No one will, on these accounts, place Anaxagoras, Socrates, and Plato, before Thales, Lycurgus, and Solon. The purer light of the former had doubtless fallen on them, as it radiated from the holy fire of Moses and the prophets, which every great event dispersed wider and wider over the inhabited world. This fire the philosophers, influenced by it, may not have perceived, or in the pride of intellect, might have disdained to acknowledge. Nor would this be surprising; for similar has been the mental condition of the philosophers and learned in the Christian age. Every truly candid man is fully persuaded that they own all their superiority over the ancients, in religion and moral ideas, to Christianity, but few among them have discerned or publicly avowed this fact. That Greece was assuming, and Rome about to take, a new position in relation to the countries in which the Jews sojourned, at the period when moral light shone on them, will, we think, be distinctly observed by all who may peruse the subsequent pages; and the extreme darkness in which the learned Greeks and Romans remained must excite the astonishment of all reflecting persons, who are not strongly persuaded of the entire aversion of the hearts of all, and especially of those who deem themselves the exclusively wise and the prudent of this world, from Jehovah the absolutely perfect and independent Being.

CHAPTER V.

THE REIGN OF DARIUS NOTHUS.

THE death of Artaxerxes Longimanus was generally lamented, for during his long reign the Persian empire, in Asia, had been, on the whole, prosperous and happy. And had his numerous subjects foreseen the calamitous events which were about to fall on them, their grief would assuredly have been more intense and universal. To the Jews especially his memory was peculiarly dear, for they had been more favoured by him than by any of his predecessors. If they, however, apprehended that his demise would prove detrimental to their interests, the pious among them doubtless soon perceived abundant reason to admire and adore the love and goodness of the God of their fathers; for the state of the empire continued for several years remarkably favourable to the interests of their nation, and of the true religion.

The royal family were the first to bewail the loss of their generous and just chief and sovereign. He had left only one son, named Xerxes, by his queen, but seventeen sons by his concubines. The former ascended the throne amidst the joyful acclamations of the people. He appears to have been more disposed to sensual gratifications then qualified to govern a great empire. His ambitious, cruel, and unnatural brother Sogdianus, taking advantage of his weakness and folly, conspired to destroy him. On a festival day the king had retired to his chamber intoxicated; he was soon followed by his treacherous brother, led on by Pharnacias, one of the king's favourite eunuchs. They easily murdered the king, and found no difficulty to proclaim Sogdianus his successor. He had scarcely taken possession of the throne when he also killed Bagorazus, the most faithful of all his father's eunuchs, and one respected by all the nobles and the army. These therefore gladly joined his brother Ochur, who raised an army in Hyrcania, the government of which had been committed to

him by their father, and hastened to the capital, with the avowed purpose to revenge the death of Xerxes. Having seized Sogdianus, he condemned him to suffer death by suf focation in ashes, a mode of punishment inflicted by the Persians on the greatest criminals, and which is thus described by ancient writers:-" A large quantity of ashes was thrown into one of the largest towers; the criminal was cast in from the top, and the ashes were, by a wheel, turned perpetually round him, till he was suffocated."

Ochus was immediately proclaimed king in less than seven months after his father's death, and changed his name to that of Darius, to which historians add Nothus, the bastard, to distinguish him from other Persian emperors named Darius. The reign of Darius Nothus, which lasted nineteen years, was far from tranquil. He first had to defend his power against a great rebellion, headed by Arsites, one of his brothers by the same mother. This prince found a fit instrument to fulfil his pleasure in Artyphius, son of Megabyzus, who had been one of the noblest servants and ablest commanders of the army of Artaxerxes. The son was probably stimulated to revolt from a desire to revenge the disgrace and sufferings inflicted on his admired father. He twice defeated the king's army, and would perhaps have finally triumphed, had not the Greeks in his army been prevailed on by bribes to desert him in the third encounter. On surrendering himself to the general, Artasyras, by whom he had been conquered, his life was spared for some time through the fatal policy of the queen Parysatis. She persuaded the king to delay the putting of the general to death, lest it should render the rebel brother desperate, and thereby prolong the rebellion. The wis dom of her advice was quickly seen; for Arsites, on learning the clemency showed Artyphius, delivered himself up to his royal brother. The queen having thus succeeded in her subtle scheme rested not till Darius after a violent struggle with his brotherly affection, yielded to her entreaties, and put to death his brother and Artyphius.

Thus occupied in subjugating or punishing with death the real or supposed rivals of his power, who lived in the provinces situated nearest the capital, the more remote most probably were left by him for a number of years to be governed according to the rules prescribed by his father. History, at least, records no change in Syria, Judea, and Phenicia, during the greater part of the reign of Darius Nothus. The Jews were every where distinguished by their fidelity to Persia.