200 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1855, by C. S. FRANCIS AND COMPANY, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Antiquity of Hindostan, 2. Anchorites, from 4 to 10. Pantheism, 10. Gods and Goddesses, from 10 to 18. Sacred Emblems, 16, 94. Bramins, 20 to 24; 47, 120, 132, 133. Castes, 19, 34, 89, 117. Transmigration, 24 to 26; 114. Heavens and Hells, 26 to 30. Sacred Books, 31 to 76. Crishna, 52; 60 to 74. Bouddha, 83 to 87. Sects, 57 to 93. Temples, 93 to 104. Holy Cities, 105 to 108. Festivals, 108, 126. Hindoo Wo- men, 109 to 113. Sacred Animals, 114 to 116. Degeneracy of Hindoos, 117. Fakeers, 118. Magic, 122. Nadac Shah, 91. Narayun Powar, Ethiopians, 139. Resemblances between Hindoos and Egyptians, 141 to 144; 183, 191. Ancient travellers to Egypt, 145. 146, 148, 188. Hieroglyphics deciphered, 147. 149 to 157; 145. Heavens and Hells, 158 to 161. Famous Buddhist Hermit, 221. Lamaism, 223. Lamas, 224, 231 to 238. Grand Lama, 223, 240, 241. Sacred Books, 222, 248. Lamaseries, or Monasteries, 224, 226 to 242. Anchorites, 228. Caste abolished, 225. Prayer-wheels, 236. Temples, 242 to 244. Buddhist Worship, 244. Pantheism, 246. Transmigration, 247. Heavens and Hells, 230, 247. Sects, 249. Date of Buddhist Religion, 250. Its rapid extension, 251. Antiquity of Chaldea, 252. Resemblances between Chaldea, Hindostan, and Egypt, 253. Priesthood, 254. Magic, 254. Gods and Goddesses, Zoroaster, 256 to 259. The Sacred Book called Zend-Avesta, 258 to 269. Gods and Spirits, 259 to 261. The Magi, 269 to 273. Sects, 273. Fire- Hesiod, 286. Homer, 287. Gods and Goddesses, 289 to 295. Heaven and Hell, 296. Priesthood, 298 to 301; 306. of Worship, 301 to 314. Festivals, 308 to 314. 314 to 322. Temples, 323 to 830. Sects of Philosophy, 330, 367. Orpheus, 333. Pythagoras, 335 to 342. Socrates, 344 to 352. Plato, 352 to 363. Resemblances between Hindoo, Egyptian, and Grecian Abraham, 381 to 387. Patriarchs, 387 to 390. Moses, 391 to 395. Manetho, 393. Resemblances between Egyptian and Hebrew Ideas, 396 to 401. The Laws and Writings of Moses, 402 to 411. Joshua, 411. Gideon, 415. Frequent Appearance of Angels, 384, 387, 416. Priest- hood, 405, 421. Idolatry, 414 to 418; 439 to 449. Times of the Judges, 414 to 422. Samuel, 421 to 425. David, 425 to 431. The Temple, 427, 431 to 438; 449. Solomon, 431 to 440. Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, 440. Book of the Law, 447. The Kings after Solomon, 440 to PREFACE. I WOULD candidly advise persons who are conscious of bigoted attachment to any creed, or theory, not to purchase this book. Whether they are bigoted Christians, or bigoted infidels, its tone will be likely to displease them. My motive in writing has been a very simple one. I wished to show that theology is not religion; with the hope that I might help to break down partition walls; to ameliorate what the eloquent Bushnell calls "baptized hatreds of the human race." In order to do this, I have endeavoured to give a concise and comprehensive account of religions, in the liberal spirit of the motto on my title page. The period embraced in my plan extends from the most ancient Hindoo records, to the complete establishment of the Catholic church. 66 While my mind was yet in its youth, I was offended by the manner in which Christian writers usually describe other religions; for I observed that they habitually covered apparent contradictions and absurdities, in Jewish or Christian writings, with a veil of allegories and mystical interpretation, while the records of all other religions were unscrupulously analyzed, or contemptuously described as childish fables," or "filthy superstitions." I was well aware that this was done unconsciously, under the influence of habitual reverence for early teaching; and I was still more displeased with the scoffing tone of sceptical writers, who regarded all religions as founded on imposture. Either way, the one-sidedness of the representation troubled my strong sense of justice. I recollect wishing, long ago, that I could become acquainted with some good, intelligent Bramin, or Mohammedan, that I might learn, in some degree, how their religions appeared to them. This feeling expanded within me, until it took form in this book. The facts it contains are very old; the novelty it claims is the point of view from which those facts are seen and presented. I have treated all religions with reverence, and shown no more favour to one than to another. I have exhibited each one in the light of its own Sacred Books; and in giving quotations, I have aimed in every case to present impartially the beauties and the blemishes. I have honestly tried never to exaggerate merits, or conceal defects. I have not declared that any system was true, or that any one was false. I have even avoided the use of the word heathen; for though harmless in its original signification, it is used in a way that implies condescension, or contempt; and such a tone is inconsistent with the perfect impartiality I have wished to observe. I have tried to place each form of worship in its own light; that is, as it appeared to those who sincerely believed it to be of divine origin. But even this candid method must necessarily produce a very imperfect picture, drawn as it is by a modern mind, so foreign to ancient habits of thought, and separated from them by the lapse of ages. The process has been exceedingly interesting; for the history of the religious sentiment, struggling through theological mazes, furnishes the most curious chapter in the strange history of mankind. I offer the results of my investigations with extreme timidity. Not because I am afraid of public opinion; for I have learned to place exceedingly little value on anything the world can give, or take away. But I have been oppressed with anxiety, lest I should not perform the important task I had undertaken in the right spirit and the most judicious manner. I have conscientiously tried to do it with great care, fearless truthfulness, perfect candour, reverence toward God, and tenderness for human nature. I have sought out facts diligently, and stated them plainly; leaving the reader to draw his own conclusions freely, uninfluenced by suggestions from me. The inferences deduced from my statements will vary according to the predominance of the reverential, or the rationalistic element in character. I have contented myself with patiently digging out information from books old and new, and presenting it with all the clearness and all the honesty of which I am capable. To write with the unbiassed justice at which I aimed, I was obliged to trample under my feet the theological underbrush, which always tangles and obstructs the path, when the soul strives to be guided only by the mild bright star of religious sentiment. It is never pleasant to walk directly through and over the opinions of the age in which one lives. I have not done it sarcastically, as if I despised them; because such is not my feeling. I have done it in a straight-forward quiet way, as if I were unconscious of their existence. I foresee that many good and conscientious people will consider it a great risk to treat religious history in this manner. If I |