DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.13851#0549
I
BOOK IV.
CHAP. I?
OF THE CARK THE GRECIANS HAD OF FUNERALS, AND OF PERSONS DESTITUTE
THEREOF,
Pr.uTO was the first who instructed the Grecians ^1) in the manner of
performing their last offices to the deceased ; which gave occasion to the
inventors of fables to assign him a vast and unbounded empire in the
shades below, and constitute him supreme monarch of ail the dead. And
since there is scarce any useful art, the inventor whereof was not reckon-
ed amongst the gods, and believed to patronize and preside over those ar-
tificers he had first instructed, no wonder, if he who taught the rude and
uncivilized ages what respect, what ceremonies, were due to the dead,
had the honour to be numbered amongst the deities of the first quality,
since the duties belonging to the dead were thought of far greater im-
portance, and the neglect of them a crime of a blacker character, than
those required by the living : for the dead were ever held sacred and in-
violable even amongst the most barbarous nations ; to defraud them of
any due respect, was a greater and more unpardonable sacrilege than to
spoil the temples of the gods ; their memories were preserved with a
religious care and reverence, and all their remains honoured with wor-
ship and adoration ; hatred and envy themselves were put to silence, for
it was thought a sign of a cruel and inhuman disposition to speak evil of
the dead, and prosecute revenge beyond the grave : no provocation was
thought sufficient to warrant so foul an action ; the highest affronts from
themselves whilst alive, or afterwards from their children, were esteem-
ed weak pretences for disturbing their peace. Offenders of this kind
were not only disbanded with disgrace and infamy, but by Solon's laws,
incurred a severe penalty (2j,
But of all the honours paid to the dead, the care of their funeral rites
was the greatest and most necessary ; for these were looked upon as a
debt so sacred, that such as neglected to discharge it were thought accurs-
ed ; hence the Romans called them justa, the Grecians Skaia, vo^ifxa,
von^ojxsva, cdi^a, ctfia, &c. all which words imply the inviolable obligations
which nature has laid upon the living to take care of the obsequies of
the dead. And no wonder if they were thus solicitous about the inter-
ment of the dead, since they were strongly possessed with an opinion, that
their souls could not be admitted into the Klysiaq shades, but were
forced to wander desolate and without company till their bodies were
committed to the earth (3) ; and if they never had the good fortune to
obtain human burial, the time of their exclusionfroni the common recep-
tacle of the ghosts, was no less than an hundred years ; whence in most
of the poets, we meet with passionate requests of dying men or their
ghosts, after death, for this favour, I will only give you one out of Ho
'1) Diodorus Siculus, lib. v. cap. 15. (2) Demostheri Orat. in Leptin. Plutarchus Sol>„w
(3) Homerus Iliad. \J
66
BOOK IV.
CHAP. I?
OF THE CARK THE GRECIANS HAD OF FUNERALS, AND OF PERSONS DESTITUTE
THEREOF,
Pr.uTO was the first who instructed the Grecians ^1) in the manner of
performing their last offices to the deceased ; which gave occasion to the
inventors of fables to assign him a vast and unbounded empire in the
shades below, and constitute him supreme monarch of ail the dead. And
since there is scarce any useful art, the inventor whereof was not reckon-
ed amongst the gods, and believed to patronize and preside over those ar-
tificers he had first instructed, no wonder, if he who taught the rude and
uncivilized ages what respect, what ceremonies, were due to the dead,
had the honour to be numbered amongst the deities of the first quality,
since the duties belonging to the dead were thought of far greater im-
portance, and the neglect of them a crime of a blacker character, than
those required by the living : for the dead were ever held sacred and in-
violable even amongst the most barbarous nations ; to defraud them of
any due respect, was a greater and more unpardonable sacrilege than to
spoil the temples of the gods ; their memories were preserved with a
religious care and reverence, and all their remains honoured with wor-
ship and adoration ; hatred and envy themselves were put to silence, for
it was thought a sign of a cruel and inhuman disposition to speak evil of
the dead, and prosecute revenge beyond the grave : no provocation was
thought sufficient to warrant so foul an action ; the highest affronts from
themselves whilst alive, or afterwards from their children, were esteem-
ed weak pretences for disturbing their peace. Offenders of this kind
were not only disbanded with disgrace and infamy, but by Solon's laws,
incurred a severe penalty (2j,
But of all the honours paid to the dead, the care of their funeral rites
was the greatest and most necessary ; for these were looked upon as a
debt so sacred, that such as neglected to discharge it were thought accurs-
ed ; hence the Romans called them justa, the Grecians Skaia, vo^ifxa,
von^ojxsva, cdi^a, ctfia, &c. all which words imply the inviolable obligations
which nature has laid upon the living to take care of the obsequies of
the dead. And no wonder if they were thus solicitous about the inter-
ment of the dead, since they were strongly possessed with an opinion, that
their souls could not be admitted into the Klysiaq shades, but were
forced to wander desolate and without company till their bodies were
committed to the earth (3) ; and if they never had the good fortune to
obtain human burial, the time of their exclusionfroni the common recep-
tacle of the ghosts, was no less than an hundred years ; whence in most
of the poets, we meet with passionate requests of dying men or their
ghosts, after death, for this favour, I will only give you one out of Ho
'1) Diodorus Siculus, lib. v. cap. 15. (2) Demostheri Orat. in Leptin. Plutarchus Sol>„w
(3) Homerus Iliad. \J
66