THE NATURE OF THE GODS. 247not by sense ; that it is neither solid, nor invariable in num

ber; that it is to be discerned by similitude and transi tion, and that a constant supply of images is perpetually flowing on from innumerable atoms, on which our minds are intent ; so that we from that conclude that divine nat ure to be happy and everlasting. XXXVIII. What, in the name of those Deities concern ing whom we are now disputing, is the meaning of all this ? For if they exist only in thought, and have no solidity nor substance, what difference can there be between thinking of a Hippocentaur and thinking of a Deity? Other phi losophers call every such conformation of the mind a vain motion ; but you term it " the approach and entrance of images into the mind." Thus, when I imagine that I be hold T. Gracchus haranguing the people in the Capitol, and collecting their suffrages concerning M. Octavius, I call that a vain motion of the mind: but you affirm that the images of Gracchus and Octavius are present, which are only conveyed to my mind when they have arrived at the Capitol. The case is the same, you say, in regard to the Deity, with the frequent representation of which the mind is so affected that from thence it may be clearly un derstood that the Gods 1 are happy and eternal. Let it be granted that there are images by which the mind is affected, yet it is only a certain form that occurs ; and why must that form be pronounced happy? why eter nal? But what are those images you talk of, or whence do they proceed ? This loose manner of arguing is taken from Democritus ; but he is reproved by many people for it ; nor can you derive any conclusions from it : the whole system is weak and imperfect. For what can be more im probable than that the images of Homer, Archilochus, Rom ulus, Numa, Pythagoras, and Plato should come into my mind, and yet not in the form in which they existed ? How, therefore, can they be those persons ? And whose images are they? Aristotle tells us that there never was such a person as Orpheus the poet ; 2 and it is said that the verse

By the word Deus, as often used by our author, we arc to understand 

all the Gods in that theology then treated of, and not a single personal Deity.

The best commentators on this passage ngree that Cicero does not