LY. But many people, you say, have in repeated instances uttered true predictions; as, for example, Cassandra, when she said, “ Already is the fleet,’’ &.; and in a subsequent prophecy, “ Ah! see you not?” &. Do you then expect me to give credence to these fables? I will grant that they are as delightful as you please to call them,—that they are polished up with every conceivable beauty of language, sentiment, music, and rhythm. But we are not bound to invest fictions of this kind with any authority, or to give them any belief.
And, on the same principle, I do not think any one bound to pay any attention to such diviners as Publicius (whoever he may be), or Martius; or to the secret oracles of Apollo; of which some are notoriously false, and others uttered at ran- dom, so that they command little respect, I will not say from learned men, but even from any person of plain common sense. | “What!” you will say, “did not that old sailor of the fleet of Coponius predict truly the events which took place?” No doubt he did; but they happened to be those very things which at the time everybody thought most likely to ensue. For we were daily hearing that the two armies were situated near each other in Thessaly; and it appeared to us that Cezesar’s army had the greater audacity, inasmuch as it was ' See book i. chap. 31. 2 See book i. chap. 50.
248 ON DIVINATION, waging war against its own country, and the greater strength, being composed of veteran soldiers. And as to the battle, there was not one of us who did not dread the result, though, as brave men should, we kept our anxiety to ourselves, and expressed no alarm.. What wonder, however, was it that this Greek sailor was forced from all self possession and constancy, as is very com- mon, by the greatness of his terror and affright; and that, being driven to distraction by his own cowardice, he uttered those convictions when raving mad which he had cherished when yet sane? Which, in the name of Gods and men, is most likely; that a mad sailor should have attained to a know- ledge of the counsels of the immortal Gods, or that some one of us who were on the spot at the time—myself, for in- stance, or Cato, or Varro, or Coponius himself—could have done so? LVI. I now come to you, Apollo, monarch of the sacred centre Of the great world, full of thy inspiration, The Pythian priestesses proclaim thy prophecies. For Chrysippus has filled an entire volume with your oracles, many of which, as I said before, I consider utterly false, and many others only true by accident, as often happens in any common conversation. Others, again, are so obscure and involved, that their very interpreters have need of other interpreters; and the decisions of one lot have to be referred, to other lots. Another portion of them are so ambiguous, that they require to be analysed by the logic of dialecticians. Thus, when Fortune uttered the following oracle respecting Croesus, the richest king of Asia,— “When Croesus has the Halys cross’d, A mighty kingdom will be lost;” | that monarch expected he should ruin the power of his enemies; but the empire that he ruined was his own, And whichever result had ensued.the oracle would have been true.
- But, in truth, what reason have I to believe that such an oracle was ever uttered respecting Croesus? or why should I think Herodotus more veracious than Ennius?. Is the one less full of fictions respecting Croesus than the other is re- specting Pyrrhus? For who now believes that the following answer was given to Pyrrhus by the oracle of Apollo!— ON DIVINATION. 249 ON DIVINATION. 249 “ You ask your fate; O king, I answer you, Zacides the Romans will subdue!” For, in the first place, Apollo never uttered an oracle in Latin; secondly, this oracle is altogether unknown to the Greeks. Besides, in the days of Pyrrhus, Apollo had already left off composing verses. Lastly, although it was always the case, as is said in these lines of Ennius,— * The Alacids were but a stupid race, More warlike than sagacious,”— yet even Pyrrhus might without much difficulty have per- ceived the ambiguity ‘of the phrase, ‘« Macides the Romans will subdue;” and might have seen that it did not apply more to himself than it did to the Romans.
As to that ambiguity which deceived Croesus, it might even have deceived Chrysippus. This one could not have deluded even Epicurus.
LVII. But the chief argument is, why are the Delphic oracles altered in such a way that—I do not mean only lately in our own time, but for a long time—nothing can have been more contemptible?
When we press our antagonists for a reason for this, they say that the peculiar virtue of the spot from which those exhalations of the earth arose, under the influence and excite- ment of which the Pythian priestess uttered her oracles, has disappeared by the lapse of time. You might suppose they were speaking of wine or salt, which do lose their flavour by lapse of time; but they are talking thus of the virtue of a place, and that not merely a natural, but a divine virtue; and how is that to have disappeared? By reason of age, is your reply. But what age can possibly destroy a divine virtue ¢ and what virtue can be so divine as an exhalation of the earth which has the power of inspiring the mind, and ren- dering it so prophetic of things to come, that it can not only discern them long before they happen, but even declare them in verse and rhythm? And when did this magical virtue dis- appear? Was it not precisely at the time when men began to be less credulous?
Demosthenes, who lived nearly three hundred years ago, said that even in his time the Pythia Philippized—that is to 250 ON DIVINATION.
say, supported Philip’s influence; and his expression was meant to convey the imputation that she had been bribed by Philip. From which we may infer that other oracles besides those of Delphi were not quite immaculate. Somehow or other, certain philosophers who are very superstitious—not to say fanatical—appear to prefer anything to behaving with common sense themselves; and so you prefer asserting that that has vanished, and become extinct, which, if it ever had existed, must certainly have been eternal, rather than not believe what is wholly incredible, A) LVIII. The error with regard to the divination of dreams is another of the same kind; their arguments for which are extremly far-fetched and obscure. They affirm that the minds of men are divine, that they came from God, and that the universe is full of these consenting intelligences. ‘That, therefore, by this inherent divinity of the mind, and by its conjunction with other spirits, it may foresee future events. But Zeno and the Stoics supposed the mind to contract, to subside, to yield, and even to sleep, itself. And Pythagoras and Plato, authors of the greatest weight, advise men, with a view of seeing things more certainly in sleep, to go to bed after having gone through a certain preparatory course of food and other conduct. Pythagoras, for this reason, coun- selled his disciples to abstain from beans; with the idea that ‘this species of food excited the mind, not the stomach. In short, somehow or other, I know nothing is so absurd as not to have found an advocate in one of the philosophers.
Do we then think that the minds of men during sleep move by an intrinsic internal energy, or that, as Democritus pre- tends, they are affected with external and adventitious visions? On either supposition we may mistake during our dreams many false things for true.
For to people sailing, those things appear to be in motion which are stationary, and by a certain ocular deception, the light. of a candle sometimes seems double. Why need I in- stance the number of false appearances which are presented to the eyes of men, among those who labour under drunken ness, or maniacs?
Now, if we cannot trust such appearances as those, I know hot why we are to place any absolute reliance on the visions of dreams; for you might as well, if you pleased, argue from ON DIVINATION. 251 these errors as from dreams. Jor instance, that if stationary objects appear to move, you might say that this appearance indicated the approach of an earthquake, or some sudden flight; and that lights seen double presage wars, and discords, and seditions.: LIX. From the visions of drunkards and madmen one might, doubtless, deduce innumerable consequences by con- jecture, which might seem to be presages of future events. For what person who aims at a mark all day long will not sometimes hit it? We sleep every night; and there are very few on which we do. not. dream; can we wonder then that what we dream sometimes comes to pass!
What. is so uncertain as the cast of dice? and yet no one plays dice often without. at times. casting the point of Venus, and sometimes even twice or thrice in succession. Shall we, then, be so absurd as to attribute such an event to the impulse of Venus, rather than to the doctrine of chances? If then, on ordinary occasions, we are not bound to give credit to false appearances, [ do not see why sleep should enjoy this special privilege, that its false seemings should be honoured -as true realities, If it were an institution of nature that) men when they sleep really did the things which they dream about, it would be necessary to bind all persons going to bed both hand and. foot, for they would otherwise while dreaming perpetrate more outrages than maniacs: Now since we place no confi- dence in the visions of madmen, simply because they are delusions, [ do, not see why we should rely on those of dreamers, which are often the wilder of the two. Is it ‘because madmen do not think it worth while to relate their visions to diviners, but those who dream do? | Once more I put this question. If I feel inclined to read or write anything; or to sing or play on. an instrument, or to pursue the sciences of geometry, physics, or dialectics, am I to wait for information in these sciences from a dream, or shall I have recourse to study, without which none of those things can be either done or explained? Again, if I were to wish to take a voyage, I should never regulate my steering by my dreams. For such conduct would bring its own im- mediate punishment. | How, then, can it. be: reasonable for an invalid to. apply for 952 ON DIVINATION, relief to an interpreter of dreams rather than to a physician? Can Esculapius or Serapis, by a dream, best prescribe to us the way to obtain a cure for weak health? And cannot Neptune do the same for a pilot in his art? Or will Minerva give us medicine without troubling the doctor? And still will the Muses refuse to impart to dreamers the art of writing, reading, and the other sciences? But if the blessing of health were conveyed to us in dreams, these other good things would certainly be so too. But unfortunately the science of medicine cannot be learnt in dreams, and the other arts are in a similar predicament. And if that be the case, then all the authority of dreams is at an end.
LX. But this is only a superficial argument. Let us now penetrate the heart of this question.
_ For either some divine energy which takes care of us, gives us presentiments in our dreams; or those who explain them do, by a certain harmony and conjunction of nature which they call cuprafen (sympathy), understand by means of dreams what is suitable for everything, and what is the con- Sequence of everything; or, lastly, neither of these things is true; but there is a constant system of observation of long standing, by which it had been remarked, that after certain dreams certain events usually follow.
The first thing then for us to understand is, that there is no divine energy which inspires dreams; and this being granted, you must also grant that no visions of dreamers proceed from the agency of the Gods, For the Gods have for our own sake given us intellect sufficiently to provide for our future welfare. How few people then attend to dreams, or under- stand them, or remember them! How many, on the other hand, despise them, and think any superstitious observation of them a sign of a weak and imbecile mind!
Why then should God take the trouble to consult the interest of this man, or to warn that one by dreams, when he knows that they not only do not think them worth attending to, but they do not even condescend to remember them. For a God cannot be ignorant of the sentiments of every man, and it is unworthy of a God to do anything in vain, or without a cause; nay, that would be unworthy of even a wise man. If, therefore, dreams are for the most part disregarded, or despised, either God is ignorant of that being ON DIVINATION, 953 the fact, or employs the intimation by dreams in vain. Neither of these suppositions can properly apply to God, and therefore it must be confessed, that God gives men no inti- mations by means of dreams. | LXI, Again, let me ask you, if God gives us visions of a prophetic nature, in order to apprise us of future events, should we not rather expect them when we are awake than when we are asleep? For, whether it be some external and adventitious impulse which affects the minds of those who are asleep, or whether those minds are affected voluntarily by their own agency, or whether there is any other cause why we seem to see and hear or do anything during sleep, the sarne impulses might surely operate on them when awake. And if for our sakes the Gods effect this during sleep, they might do it for us while awake.
Especially as Chrysippus, wishing to refute the Acade- micians, makes this remark—That those inspirations, visions, and presentiments which occur to us awake, are much more distinct and certain than those which present themselves to dreamers. It would, therefore, have been more worthy of the divine beneficence while exerting its care for us, rather to favour us with clear visions when we are awake, than with the perplexed phantasms of dreams; and since that is not done, we must believe that these phantasms are not divine at all. Moreover, what is the use of such round-about and circuitous proceedings, as for it to be necessary to employ interpreters of dreams, rather than to proceed by a straight- forward course? If,God were indeed anxious for. our interests, he would say, “Do this—do not that;’ and he would give such intimations to a waking rather than to a sleeping man; but as it is, who would venture to assert that all dreams are true? Ennius says, that some dreams are prophetical; he adds also, that it does not follow that all are So., _LXIL. Now whence arises this distinction between true dreams and false ones? and if true dreams come from God, from whence come the false ones? For if these last do like- wise come from God, what can be more inconsistent than God? And what can be more ignorant conduct than to excite the minds of mortals by false and deceitful visions? But if only true dreams come from God, and the false and 254 ON DIVINATION.
groundless ones are merely human delusions, what authority have you for making such a distinction as is implied in saying, God did this, and nature that? Why not rather say either that all dreams come from God (which you deny), or all from nature? which necessarily follows, since you deny that they proceed from God. | By nature I mean that essential activity of the mind owing to which it never stands still, and is never free from some agitation or motion or other. When in consequence of the weakness of the body it loses the use of both the limbs and the Senses, it is still affected by various and uncertain visions aris- ing (as Aristotle observes) from the relics of the several affairs which employed our thoughts and labours during our waking hours; owing to the disturbances of which, marvellous varieties of dreams and visions at times arise. If some of these are false, and others true, I shall be glad to be informed by what definite art we are to distinguish the true from the false. If there be no such art, why do we consult the inter- preters? If there be any such art, then I wish to know what it is. | LXIII. But they will hesitate. For it is a matter of ques- tion, which is more probable; that the supreme and im- mortal Gods, who excel in every kind of superiority, employ themselves in visiting all night long not merely the beds, but the very pallets of men, and as soon as they find any person fairly snoring, entertain his imagination with perplexed dreams and obscure visions, which sends him in great alarm as ‘soon as daylight dawns to consult the seer and interpreter; or whether these dreams are the result of natural causes, and the ever-active, ever-working mind having seen things when awake, seems to see them again when asleep. — Which is the more philosophical course, to interpret these phenomena according to the superstitions of old women, or by natural explanations 4 ) So that even if a true interpretation of dreams could exist, it is certainly not in the possession of those who profess it, for these people are the lowest and most ignorant of the people. And it is not without reason that your friends the Stoics affirm, that no one can ever be a diviner but a wise’ Chrysippus, indeed, defines divination in these words: “ Tt ON DIVINATION. 255 is,” says he, “a power of apprehending, discerning, and ex- plaining those signs which are given by. the Gods to men as portents;’ and he adds, that the proper office of a sooth- sayer is to know beforehand the disposition of the Gods in regard to men, and to declare what intimations they give, and by what means these prodigies are to be propitiated or averted, The interpretation of dreams he also defines in this manner. “It is,” says he, “a power of beholding and revealing those things which the Gods signify to men in dreams.” Well, then, does this require but.a moderate degree of wisdom, or rather consummate. sagacity, and perfect erudition?—and a man so endowed we have never known.
LXIV. Consider, therefore, whether even if I were to concede to you that there is such a thing as divination— which I never will concede—it would still not follow that a diviner could be found to exercise it truly. But what strange ideas must the Gods have, if the intimations which they give us in dreams are such as we cannot understand of ourselves, and such, too, as we cannot find interpreters of: acting almost as wisely as the Carthaginians and Spaniards would do if they were to harangue in their native languages in our Roman senate without an interpreter.
But what is the object of these enigmas and obscurities of dreamers? For the Gods ought to wish us to under- stand those things which they reveal to us for our own sake and benefit. What! is no poet, no natural philoso- pher obscure? Euphorion certainly is obscure enough, but Homer is not; which, then, is the best? Heraclitus is very puzzling, Democritus is very lucid; are they to be compared? You, for my own sake, give me advice that I do - not understand!
What is it, then, that you are advising me to do? Suppose a medical man were to prescribe to a sick man an earth-born, grass-walking, house-carrying, unsanguineous animal, in- stead of simply saying, a snail; so Amphion in Pacuvius speaks of-—: Rugged, debased, and harsh; his head is short, His neck is serpentine, his aspect stern; He has no blood, but is an animal Inanimate, not voiceless, Se 956 ON DIVINATION, When these obscure verses had been duly recited, the Greeks cried out, We do not understand you unless you tell us plainly what animal you mean? I mean, said Pacuvius, I mean in one word, a tortoise. Could you not, then, said the questioner, have told us so at first?
LXV. We read in that volume which Chrysippus has written concerning dreams, that some one having dreamed in the night that he saw an egg hanging on his bed-post, went to consult the interpreter about it. The interpreter informed him that the dream signified that a sum of money was con- cealed under his bed. He dug, and found a little gold sur- rounded by a heap of silver. Upon this, he sent the inter- preter as much of the silver as he thought a fair reward. Then said the interpreter, “ What! none of the yolk?” For that part of the egg appeared to have intimated gold, while the rest meant silver, But did no one else ever dream of eggs; if others have, too, then why is this man the only one who ever found a treasure in consequence? How many poor people are there worthy of the help of the Gods, to whom they vouchsafe no such fortunate intimations! And, again, why did this indi- vidual receive such an obscure sign of a treasure as could be afforded by the resemblance of an egg, instead of being distinctly commanded at once to look for a treasure, in the Same way as Simonides was expressly forbidden to put to sea? ‘Therefore, obscure dreams are not at all consistent with the majesty of the Gods.
LXVI. But let us now treat of those dreams which you term clear and definite, such as that of the Arcadian whose friend was killed by the inn-keeper at Megara, or that of Simonides, who was warned not to set sail by an apparition of a man whose interment he had kindly superintended. The history of Alexander presents us with another instance of this kind, which I wonder you did not cite, who, after his friend Ptolemy had been wounded in battle by a poisoned arrow, and when he appeared to be dying of the wound, and was in great agony, fell asleep while sitting by his bed, and in his slumber is said to have seen a vision of the serpent which his mother Olympias cherished, bringing a root in his mouth, and telling him that it grew in a spot very near at hand, and that it possessed such medicinal virtue, that it would easily cure ON DIVINATION, 257 ON DIVINATION, 257 Ptolemy if applied to his wound. On awaking, Alexander related his dream, and messengers were sent to look for that plant, which, when it was found, not only cured Ptolemy, but likewise several other soldiers, who during the engagement had been wounded by similar arrows.
You have related a number of dreams of this nature bor- rowed from history. For instance, that of the mother of | Phalaris—that of King Cyrus—that of the mother of Diony- sius—that of Hamilcar the Carthaginian—that of Hannibal— that of Publius Decius—that notorious one of the president— that of Caius Gracchus—and the recent one of Cecilia, the daughter of Metellus Balearicus. But the main part of these dreams happened to strangers, and on that account we know little of their particular circumstances:—some of them may be mere fictions; for who are they vouched by? | As to those dreams that have occurred in our personal experience, what can we say about them,—about your dream respecting myself and my horse being submerged close to the bank; or mine, that Marius with the laurelled fasces ordered me to be conducted into his monument}?
LXVII. All these dreams, my brother, are of the same character, and, by the immortal Gods, let us not make so poor. a use of our reason, as to subject it to our superstition and delusions. For what do you suppose the Marius was that appeared to me? His ghost or image, I suppose, as Demo- critus would call it. Whence, then, did his image come from? For images, according to him, flow from solid bodies and. palpable forms. What body then of Marius was in exist- ence? It came, he would say, from that body which had existed; for all things are full of images. It was, then, the image of Marius that haunted me on the Atinian territory, for no forms can be imagined except by the impulsion of images. | What are we to think then? Are those images so obedient to our word that they come before us at our bidding as soon. as we wish them; and even images of things which have no reality whatsoever? For what form is there so preposterous and absurd that the mind cannot form to itself a picture of it? so much so indeed that we can bring before our minds even things which we have never seen; as, for instance, the situations of towns and the figures of men, DE NAT, ETC, 8 258. ON DIVINATION?
When, then, I dream of the walls of Babylon, or the counte- nance of Homer, is it because some physical image of them strikes my mind? All things, then, which we desire to be’ so; can be known to us, for there is nothing of which we: cannot think. Therefore, no images steal in upon the mind of the sleeper from without; nor indeed: are such external images flowing about at all; and I never’ knew any one who talked nonsense with greater authority..
The energy and nature of human minds is so vigorous that they go on exerting themselves while awake by no adven- titious impulse, but by a motion of theix own, with a most incredible celerity. When these minds are duly supported by the physical organs and senses of the body, they see and conceive and discern. all things with precision and certainty. But when this support is withdrawn, and the mind is deserted by the languor of the body, then it is put in motion by its.own force. Therefore, forms and actions belong to it; and. many things appear to be heard by; and said to it.
Then, when the mind is in a weak and.relaxed. state, many things present themselves to it commingled and varied in every kind oft manner; and most especially do the reminiscences of*those things flit before the mind and move about, which excited its interest or employed its active energies when’ awake: As, for instance, Marius at that time was often pre- sent to my mind while I recollected with what magnanimity: and constancy he had borne his sad misfortunes; and this, I imagine, ‘is the reason why I dreamed of him.
-/ LXVIII. You also were thinking of me with great anxiety, - when suddenly I appeared to you to have just escaped out of the river. For there were:in both of our minds'the traces of our waking thoughts. _In both instances, however, there were certain additional circumstances; as in mine, the visit to the temple of Marius; and in yours, the reappearance of the horse on which I was riding, and who sunk at the same time with myself. Do you think then, you will say, that any old woman would be so doting as to believe dreams if they did not sometimes and at random turn out true?
A dragon appeared. to address Alexander. Doubtless: this.
might be true, or it. might be false; but whichever the case may have been, there’ is surely nothing very wonderful about. it; for he did not hear this. serpent speaking—he only: ON DIVINATION, 959 dreamed that he heard him; and to make the story more remarkable, the serpent appeared with a branch in its mouth, and yet spoke: still nothing is difficult or impossible in a dream. |, T would ask, however, how it was that Alexander had this one dream so remarkable and so certain, though he had no such dream on any other cccasion, nor have other people seen many such. or myself, excepting that about Marius, I do not recollect having experienced one worth speaking of. I must, therefore, have wasted to no purpose as many nights, as I have slept during my long life.
Now, indeed, on account of the intermission of my forensic labours, I have diminished my evening studies, and added some noonday slumbers, in which I never indulged before. But yet, though I sleep so much more than formerly, I am never visited with a prophetic dream, which I should con- sider a singular favour now, though engaged in such weighty affairs. Nor do I seem ever to experience any more important dream than when I see the magistrates in the forum, and the senate in the senate-house. _ i LXI1X. In truth, (and this is the second branch of your division,) what connexion and conjunction of nature (which, as { have said, the Greeks term ovyrdfea,) is there of such a character, that a treasure’ is to be understood by an ego? Physicians, indeed, know of certain facts by which they perceive the approaches and increase of diseases; there are also some indications-of a return to health; so that the very: fact whether we have plenty to eat or whether we are dying of hunger, is said to be indicated by some kinds of dreams. But by what rational connexion are’ treasures, and honours; and victories, and things of that kind, joined to dreams? | They tell us, that a certain individual dreaming of sexual coition, ejected calculi: I grant that sympathy may have had . something to do in a case like this,—because, in sleeping, his imagination might have been so affected with sensual images; that such an emission took’ place by the force of nature, rather than by supernatural phantasms. But what sympathy eould have presented to Simonides the image of the person, who in a dream warned him not to put to sea? Or what. sympathy could have occasioned the vision of Alcibiades; who, a little before his death, is‘ said: to‘have dreamed. that $2 260 ON DIVINATION, he was arrayed in the robes of Timandra his mistress?) What. relation could this have with the event which afterwards happened to him; when, being slain and cast naked into the street and abandoned by all the world, his mistress took off her mantle and covered his dead body with it? Was this then fixed as a piece of futurity, and had it natural causes, or was it mere accident that the dream was seen, and came true?
LXX. Do not the conjectures of the interpreters of dreams _ rather indicate the subtlety of their own talents, than any natural sympathy and correspondence in the nature of things?
A runner, who intended to run in the Olympic games, dreamed during the night that he was being driven in a chariot drawn by four horses. In the morning he applied to an interpreter. He replied to him, You will win: that is what is intimated by the strength and swiftness of the horses. He then applied: to Antiphon, who said to him, By your dream it appears that you must lose the race; for do you not see that four reached the goal before you?
Here is another story respecting an athlete; and the books of Chrysippus and Antipater are full of such stories, How- ever, [ will return to the runner, He then went to a sooth- sayer and informed him that he had just dreamed that he was changed into an eagle. You have won your race (said the seer), for this eagle is the swiftest of all birds. He also went to Antiphon, who said to him, You will certainly be conquered; for the eagle chases and drives other birds which fly before it, and consequently is always behind the rest.
A certain matron, who was very anxious to have children, and who doubted whether she was pregnant or not, dreamed one night that her womb was sealed up; she, therefore, asked a soothsayer whether her dream signified her pregnancy? He said, No; for the sealing implied, that there could be no con- ception. But another whom she consulted said, that her — dream plainly proved her pregnancy; for vessels that have. nothing in them are never sealed at all. How delusive, then, is this conjectural art of those interpreters! Or do these stories that I have recited, and a host of similar ones which. - the Stoics have collected, prove anything else but the subtlety of men, who, from certain imaginary analogies of things, arrive at all sorts of opposite conclusions? | _ Physicians derive certain indications from the veins and.
ON DIVINATION. 261 breath of a sick man; and have many other symptoms by which they judge of the future. So, when pilots see the cuttlefish leaping, and the dolphins betaking themselves to the harbours, they recognise these indications as sure signs of an approaching storm. Such signs may be easily explained by reference to the laws of nature; but those which I was mentioning just now cannot possibly be accounted for in the same manner. | LXXI. But the defenders of divination reply, (and this is the last objection I shall answer,) that a long continuance of observations has-created an art. Can, then, dreams be expe- rimented on? And if so, how? for the varieties of them are innumerable. Nothing can be imagined so preposterous, so incredible, or so monstrous, as to be beyond our power of dreaming. And by what method can this infinite variety be either fixed in memory or analysed by reason?
Astrologers have observed the motion of the planets, for a certain order and regularity in the course of these stars has been discovered which was not suspected, But tell me, what order or regularity can be discerned in dreams? How can true dreams be distinguished from false ones; since the same dreams are followed by different results to different people, and, indeed, are not always attended by the same events in the case of. the same persons?
For this reason I am extremely surprised that, though people have wit enough to give no credit to a notorious liar, even when he speaks the truth, they still, if one single dream has turned out true, do not so much distrust one single case because of the numbers of instances in which they have been found false, as think multitudes of dreams estab- lished because of the ascertained truth of this one. | If, then, dreams do not come from God, and if there are — no objects in nature with which they have a necessary sym- pathy and connexion, and if it is impossible by experiments and observations to arrive at a sure interpretation of them, the consequence is, that dreams are not entitled to any. credit or respect whatever.: And this I say with the greater confidence, since those very persons who experience these dreams cannot by any means understand them, and those persons who pretend to interpret them, do so by conjecture, not by demonstration, And in the infinite series of ages, chance has produced many more extraordinary results in every kind of thing than it has in dreams; nor can anything be more uncertain than that con- jectural interpretation of diviners, which admits not only of several, but often of absolutely contrary senses.
7 LXXII. Let us reject; therefore, this divination of dreams, as well as all other, kinds. F or, to speak truly, that superstition has extended itself through all nations, and has oppressed the intellectual energies of almost all men, and has betrayed them into endless imbecilities: as I argued in my treatise on the Nature of the Gods, and as I have especially laboured to prove in this dialogue on Divination. Hor I thought that I shouldbe doing an immense benefit both “to myself.and to my countrymen if I could entirely eradicate all those superstitious errors.
Nor is there any fear that true religion can be endangered by the demolition. of this superstition; for it is the part of a wise man to uphold the religious institutions of our ancestors, by the maintenance of their rites and ceremonies. And the beauty of the world and the order of all celestial things com- pels us to confess that there is. an excellent and eternal mature which deserves'to be worshipped and admired by all mankind.