taphous, emoi men oud' ho pas an arkesei
chronos.] But, after all, these [Greek: Taphoi] were not tombs, but [Greek:
lophoi mastoeideis], conical mounds of earth; on which in the first ages
offerings were made by fire. Hence [Greek: tupho], tupho, signified to make
a smoke, such as arose from incense upon these Tupha, or eminences.
Besides, if these were deified men, who were buried under these hills; how
can we explain the difficulty of the same person being buried in different
places, and at different times? To this it is answered, that it was another
Bacchus, and another Jupiter. Yet this still adds to the difficulty: for it
is hard to conceive, that whoever in any country had the name of Jupiter,
should be made a God. Add to this, that Homer and Hesiod, and the authors
of the Orphic poetry, knew of no such duplicates. There is no hint of this
sort among the antient writers of their nation. It was a refinement in
after ages; introduced to obviate the difficulties, which arose from the
absurdities in the pagan system. Arnobius justly ridicules the idle
expedients, made use of to render a base theology plausible. Gods, of the
same name and character, were multiplied to make their fables consistent;
that there might be always one ready at hand upon any chronological
emergency. Hence no difficulty could arise about a Deity, but there might
be one produced, adapted to all climes, and to every age. [400]Aiunt
Theologi vestri, et vetustatis absconditae conditores, tres in rerum natura
Joves esse--quinque Soles, et Mercurios quinque. Aiunt iidem Theologi
quatuor esse Vulcanos, et tres Dianas; AEsculapios totidem, et Dionysos
quinque; ter binos Hercules, et quatuor Veneres; tria genera Castorum,
totidemque Musarum. But Arnobius is too modest. Other writers insist upon a
greater variety. In respect to Jupiters, Varro according to Tertullian
makes them in number three hundred. [401]Varro trecentos Joves, sive
Jupiteres, dicendum, ---- introducit. The same writer mentions forty heroes
of the name of Hercules; all which variety arose from the causes above
assigned: and the like multiplicity may be found both of kings and heroes;
of kings, who did not reign; of heroes, who never existed. The same may be
observed in the accounts transmitted of their most early prophets, and
poets: scarce any of them stand single: there are duplicates of every
denomination. On this account it is highly requisite for those, who suppose
these personages