PHOENICIAN, CHALDEAN, EGYPTIAN, TYRIAN,
CARTHAGINIAN, INDIAN, PERSIAN, AND OTHER
WITH AN INTRODUCTORY DISSERTATION:
AND AN INQUIRY INTO THE
PHILOSOPHY AND TRINITY OF THE ANCIENTS.
BY ISAAC PRESTON CORY, ESQ.
FELLOW OF CAIUS COLL. CAMBRIDGE
[The 2nd edition. See also the 1st and 3rd editions.]
From Berossus, Apollodorus, Abydenus, Josephus, Megasthenes, Nicolaus Damascenus,
Hestiaeus, Alexander Polyhistor, Sibylline Oracles, Epiphanius, Cedrenus, Eupolemus,
Nicolaus Damascenus, Eupolemus, Thallus, Ctesias, Diodorus Siculus, Herodotus, Alexander Polyhistor
Castor, Velleius Paterculus and Æmilius Sura, Plinius and Cicero.
DYNASTIES OF THE KINGS OF
CHALDEA, ASSYRIA, MEDIA, PERSIA, THEBES, AND EGYPT.
From Abydenus, Africanus, Eusebius, Theon, Syncellus, Eusebius, Herodotus,
Ctesias, Castor, Eratosthenes,
Ptolemaeus, Manetho, Syncellus, Josephus,
Diodorus Siculus, Herodotus, Theophilus,
Malala, Suidas, Diogenes Laertius, Dicaearchus, Artapanus,
Plato, Pomponius Mela and Bar-Hebraeus.
From the Obelisks, Manetho, Chaeremon, Diodorus Siculus,
Lysimachus, Polemo, Ptolemaeus Mendesius and Artabanus.
From Dius and Menander.
From Hanno and Hiempsal.
From Megasthenes, Clitarchus,
and the Paschal Chronicle.
From Marcellus and Euemerus.
ORACLES OF ZOROASTER.
ORPHEUS, PYTHAGOREAN AND
From the ancient and modern Hermetic Books, Horapollo,
Chæremon, Orpheus, Hesiodus, Aristophanes
Timæus Locrus, Plato, Amelius, Onomacritus,
Ion, Philoponus, Plutarchus, Ocellus, Aristoteles,
Suidas and Damascius.
From Berossus, Censorinus and Theon Alexandrinus.
[NOTE: The Greek texts have been omitted, and the inaccurate pagination has been retained.]
IN presenting this collection of ANCIENT FRAGMENTS to the
world, some explanation of what is comprehended under that title may not be
deemed unnecessary. We are accustomed to regard the Hebrew scriptures, and the
Greek and Latin writings, as the only certain records of antiquity: yet there
have been other languages, in which have been written the annals and the
histories of other nations. Where then are those of Assyria and Babylon, of
Persia and Egypt and Phœnicia, of Tyre and Carthage? Of the literature of all
these mighty empires, where are even the remains? It will, no doubt, tend to
excite some reflections of a melancholy cast, to look on this small volume as an
answer. That all such remains are contained in it, I should be unwilling to
assert: yet, with some diligence and research, I have not been able to increase
its size with other fragments, which I could consider sufficiently
It was my wish to have included in this collection all the fragments of the earlier Gentile world, which have reached us through the me- [p.ii] dium of the Greek language. Of the early historians of Greece the names only of some have come down to us; whilst of others, such as Eupolemus and Histiæus, several very interesting fragments have escaped the general wreck. In the classic ages of their literature, the acquaintance of the Greek historians with antiquity was generally confined and obscure: nor was it till the publication of the Septuagint, that they turned their attention to their own antiquities, and to those of the surrounding nations: and for this reason we meet with more certain notices of ancient history in the later, than in the earlier times of Greece. To have drawn a line then; to have inserted the earlier writers in exclusion of the later, would have been to have omitted the more valuable. To have reprinted the fragments of many authors, such as Nicolaus Damascenus, a writer of Damascus, of the Augustan age, would have introduced, with some matter worthy of attention, much of little interest. To have selected from them all, the passages relating to ancient times and foreign states, would have been a task as useless as laborious, and would have swelled the collection to a series of volumes. I have therefore, for the most part, excluded the native Greek historians—and every writer of the Augustan age and downwards—I have also omitted all fragments which bear about them the stamp of forgery, or are the productions of Hellenistic [p.iii] Jews, or of authors who have had access to the sacred Scriptures, and following the words, throw no additional light upon the subjects; under one or other of which divisions may be classed the Antediluvian books of Enoch, the fragments of Artapanus, the Sibylline Oracles, the Correspondence of Solomon and Hiram king of Tyre, the tragedy of Ezekiel in which Moses figures as the hero, with several compositions of a similar description.
The contents, then, of this volume, are Fragments which have been translated from foreign languages into Greek; or have been quoted or transcribed by Greeks from foreign authors; or have been written in the Greek language by foreigners who have had access to the archives of their own countries. Yet to render the collection more useful, and as it were a manual to the Chronologist and Mythological Antiquarian, I have added by way of Supplement such fragments and extracts as appear to have descended from more ancient sources, though they are now to be found only in the works of Greek or Latin writers. Some of these are merely illustrations of the fragments, or contain detached chronological notices, or such other curious information as may well be deemed worthy of a place. Thus I have endeavoured to comprise, in the volume, all the genuine relics of antiquity which precede the era of Grecian history; and which lie so scattered [p.iv] among the folios, chiefly of the Fathers and the Philosophers of the lower empire, as to be inaccessible to the Antiquarian, unless in the neighbourhood of some large public library.
Miscellaneous as such a collection might be at first supposed, it will be found to resolve itself into two subjects; the early History, and the ancient Theological Systems of the world. In the following pages I have endeavoured to present a sketch of both; not with a view of entering into the details, but rather as a method of connecting the fragments with one another, to facilitate an examination of their contents, by directing the attention successively to those great landmarks which stand prominently forth amidst what might otherwise be deemed a wild, pathless and interminable; and to enable the reader, by following the same order of perusal, to elicit something like a regular continued narrative. In the Scriptures we have a brief but authenticated account of the earliest ages: but among the heathen writers, with the exception of some few very valuable historical fragments, we have little more than a collection of allegories and legendary tales. Upon examination, however, most of these legends, notwithstanding their obscurity, will be found to contain references to those grand primeval events whose memory was retained among every people upon earth: and for the com- [p.v] memoration of which were ordained so many of the ceremonies and mysteries of the ancients.
From such traditions, handed down for ages before they were committed to writing, we might expect but little aid. Indeed in all the researches of the antiquarian, conjecture must very generally supply the place of science. Yet, by pursuing a proper method of investigation, we may approximate to truth, and frequently illustrate circumstances obscurely hinted at in Scripture, and even occasionally fill up the gaps of history, by supplying events which have been omitted by the sacred writers as unconnected with the immediate objects under their consideration.
Persons, Events, and Dates in History, and Systems in Theology, are the objects to be examined and ascertained. And where the subject under investigation can be so divided, that the truth must lie among some few plausible hypothesis, which can be a priori, and at once laid down: by collecting an the evidence that can be had, and examining separately, and excluding successively each of these hypothesis which shall be found inconsistent with that evidence, we may conduct the circle of conjecture, in some cases, till but one hypothesis is left; which one must be the truth, and is thus negatively rendered matter of demonstration. In other cases want of [p.vi] evidence may leave room for several different opinions, none of which can really be refuted, though one may often be more plausible than another.
Mr. Faber, in his admirable work on the Pagan Idolatry; has collected and separately examined all the different systems of the Heathen Mythology; and has shown, 'that there is such a singular, minute, and regular accordance among them, not only in what is obvious and natural, but also in what is arbitrary and circumstantial, both in fanciful speculations and in artificial observances,' as to render untenable every other hypothesis than this—'that they must all have originated from some common source.'
Having thus shown their common origin, he enumerates three hypothesis as the only three on which, he conceives, the common origination of the various systems of Paganism can be accounted for:
Either all nations agreed peaceably to borrow from one, subsequent to their several settlements.
Or all nations, subsequent to their several settlements, were compelled by arms to adopt the superstition of one.
Or all nations were once assembled together in a single place and in a single community; where they adopted a corrupt form of religion, which they afterwards respectively carried with them into the lands that they colonized.
After examining at length and shewing the utter
[p.vii] impossibility of maintaining
either the first or second of these hypothesis, he concludes that the third only
can be the truth.1
In the same manner we may ascertain the region from which mankind originally dispersed. Both in ancient and modern times the Greeks have been accused of a kind of plagiarism, which was the prevailing custom of every nation upon earth. Egypt and India, and Prœnicia, no less than Greece, have appropriated to themselves, and assigned within their own territorial limits, the localities of the grand events of primeval history, with the birth and achievements of the Gods and Heroes, the Deluge, the origin of the arts and the civilization of mankind. And their claims have found more able supporters, only because they have not been so obviously liable to refutation. Yet by rejecting each country, whose claims rest upon no better foundation than its own local histories, and retaining those only, whose pretensions are substantiated by the concurrent testimony of the rest; it may be shown, independently of Scripture, that the primitive settlements of mankind were in such places, and attended with such circumstances, as the Scripture instructs us was the case.
Of the transactions previous to the Deluge there are but few and faint memorials
among the heathens. One of the most authentic may be found in the remains of the
Prœnician History of Sanchoniatho, who is considered to be the most ancient
writer of the heathen world. In what age he wrote is uncertain: but his history
was composed in the Prœnician language, and its materials collected from the
archives of the Prœnician cities. It was translated into Greek by Philo Byblius,
and for the preservation of these fragments we are indebted to the care of
The Cosmogony I shall have occasion to refer to hereafter: as one of the most ancient, it is extremely valuable, and as it speaks more plainly than the rest, it affords a key to their interpretation.
The Generations contain many very curious passages. In the first is an allusion to the fall: in the second Genus may be Cain: after which we lose the traces of similarity: at the fifth there is an interruption. But taking up the thread of inquiry, at the end, in Taautus or Thoyth, we may recognize Athothis, the second king of Egypt, the Hermes Trismegistus, who again appears as the adviser of Cronus. His predecessor Misor [p.ix] then corresponds with Mizraïm, the first king of Egypt, the Menes and Mines of the dynasties. In the preceding generation is Amynus, Amon, or Ham, the same with the Cronus, of what by the historian is supposed to be a different but contemporary line. An ascent higher we find, Agrus, the husbandman, who was worshipped in Phœnicia as the greatest of the gods: he corresponds with Noah, the Ouranus of the other line, whose original name was Epigeus or Autochthon.
Sanchoniatho seems to have been a very diligent inquirer, and intimates at the conclusion that the generations contain the real history of those early times, stripped of the fictions and allegories with which it had been obscured by the son of Thabion, the first hierophant of Prœnicia. That such is the case, we are assured by Philo Byblius, in the remarks on Sanchoniatho with which he prefaces his translation of the work. The passage also informs us that the history thus disguised was handed down to Isiris, the brother of Chna the first Prœnician, apparently alluding to Mizraïm the brother of Canaan.
It is very remarkable that he has placed these characters in the true order of succession, though in all the traditions of the heathens they are generally confounded with one another. It is also remarkable that Sanchoniatho is almost the only [p.x] heathen writer upon antiquities who makes no direct mention of the deluge, though several obscure allusions to it may be found in the course of the fragment. Were we assured of his silence upon the point in the parts of his work that have been lost, the omission might still be accounted for from his avowed determination to suppress what he considered merely allegorical, for he would find the traditions of the deluge so intimately blended with those relating to the creation, that in endeavouring to disengage the truth from the fable he might easily be induced to suppose that they related to the same event.
For explanation of his fragment upon the mystical sacrifice of the Prœnicians, I must refer to the very curious dissertations by Bryant and Mr. Faber. Sanchoniatho wrote also a history of the serpent, a single fragment of which is preserved by Eusebius.
In the fragments of Berossus again we have perhaps some few traces of the antediluvian world. Like Sanchoniatho, Berossus seems to have composed his work with a serious regard for truth. He was a Babylonian by birth, and flourished in the reign of Alexander the Great, and resided for some years at Athens. As a priest of Belus, he possessed every advantage which the records of [p.xi] the temple and the learning and traditions of the Chaldæans could afford. He appears to have sketched his history of the earlier times from the representations upon the walls of the temple. From written and traditionary knowledge he must have learned several points too well authenticated. to be called in question; and correcting the one by the other, and at the same time blending them as usual with Mythology, he has produced the strange history before us.
The first fragment preserved by Alexander Polyhistor is extremely valuable, and contains a store of very curious information. The first book of the history apparently opens naturally enough with a description of Babylonia. Then referring to the paintings, the author finds the first series a kind of preface to the rest. All men of every nation appear assembled in Chaldæa: among them is introduced a person age who is represented as their instructor in the arts and sciences, and informing them of the events which had previously taken place. Unconscious that Noah is represented under the character of Oannes, Berossus describes him, from the hieroglyphical delineation, as a being literally compounded of a fish and a man, and as passing the natural, instead of the diluvian night in the ocean, with other circumstances indicative of his character and life.
The instructions of the Patriarch are detailed in the next series of paintings.
In the first of which, I conceive, the Chaos is pourtrayed by the confusion of
the limbs of every kind of animal: the second represents the creation of the
universe: the third the formation of mankind: others again that of animals, and
of the heavenly bodies.
The second book appears to have comprehended the history of the ante-diluvian world: and of this the two succeeding fragments seem to have been extracts. The historian, as usual, has appropriated the history of the world to Chaldæa. He finds nine persons, probably represented as kings, preceding Noah, who is again introduced under the name Xisuthrus, and he supposes that the representation was that of the first dynasty of the Chaldæan kings. From the universal consent of history and tradition he was well assured that Alorus or Orion, the Nimrod of the Scriptures, was the founder of Babylon and the first king: consequently he places him at the top, and Xisuthrus follows as the tenth. The destruction of the records by Nabonasar left him to fill up the intermediate names as he could: and who are inserted, is not easy so to determine.2
Berossus has given also a full and accurate description of the deluge, which is
wonderfully consonant with the Mosaic account. We have also a similar account,
or it may be an epitome of the same from the Assyrian history of Abydenus, who
was a disciple of Aristotle, and a copyist from Berossus. I have given also a
small extract from the Fragments of Nicholaus Damascenus, relative to the deluge
and the ark, whose wreck is said by him as well as Berossus, Chrysostom, and
other writers, to have remained upon Ararat even at the very time in which they
Mankind appear to have dwelt some time in Armenia, and the Patriarch allotted to his descendants the different regions of the earth, with commands to separate into distinct communities. His injunctions, however, were disobeyed, and great numbers, perhaps all the human race, started from Armenia in a body, and, according to the Scriptures, journied westward, but according to Berossus, travelled by a circuitous route to the plains of Shinar. By combining the two narratives, we may conclude that they followed the winding course of the Euphrates, till they halted upon those celebrated plains, where the enterprising spirit of Nimrod tempted him to as- [p.xiv] pire to the dominion of the world, and to found the Tower and City of Babel as the metropolis of his future universal empire.
Upon the Tower of Babel and the events connected with it, will be found some very interesting fragments from Abydenus, from Hestiæus, a very ancient Greek writer, from the Babylonian Sibyl, and from Eupolemus. I have added also a curious extract from the Sibylline oracles. In these fragments are detailed the erection of the Tower, the dispersion of its contrivers, and the confusion of the languages; with the additional circumstances of the violent destruction of the building,3 and the Titanian war, which forms so remarkable an event in all traditions of the heathens.
Previously to the erection of the Tower, men appear very generally to have apostatized from the patriarchal worship. About this time a further deviation from the truth took place; and upon the first and more simple corruption was engrafted an elaborate system of idolatry. Some [p.xv] account of these deviations will be found in the extracts from Epiphanius, Cedrenus, and the Paschal chronicle. What is mentioned under the name of Barbarism, was probably the primeval patriarchal worship. It was succeeded by a corrupted form of superstition which is known among the ancients under the name of Scuthism, or Scythism, which was most prevalent from the flood to the building of the Tower. The new corruption, at that time introduced by Nimrod, was denominated Ionism,4 or Hellenism: and both are still flourishing in the East under the well-known appellations of Brahmenism and Buddhism; whose priests appear to have continued in an uninterrupted succession from the Brahmanes and Germanes, the philosophical sects of India mentioned by Megasthenes and Clitarchus.
By the introduction of a more degenerate superstition, Nimrod appears to have aimed at the establishment of an universal monarchy in himself and his descendants, of which Babylon was to have been the metropolis, and the Tower, the central temple of their idolatries. All who [p. xvi] attended him seem to have entered into the project, so far as he might have thought proper to divulge it, and to have assisted in the erection of the tower and city. But subsequent events shew that the proposed form of government and system of theology, though acquiesced in by the majority, did not command universal approbation. And the whole project was marred by the miraculous interposition of the Almighty.
What concurring circumstances might have operated to the dispersion, we have no clue to in the narrative of Moses. He mentions the miraculous confusion of the languages, and that the Lord scattered the people abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off to build the city. But if we may credit the heathen accounts above referred to, with which the Hindoo, and indeed almost every remnant of traditionary lore concur; a schism, most probably both of a political and religious nature, was the result; a bitter war was carried on, or at least a bloody field was fought; from which the Scuths, defeated and excommunicated by their brethren, betook themselves, in haughty independence, to the mountains of Cashgar and the north:5 whilst some violent and supernatural catastrophe, by the overthrow of the Tower, completed the dispersion.
The Scythic nations became very generally Nomade, but sometimes settled in
various parts. Of what family they were has been a subject of long and intricate
dispute. The ancient chronologists have, almost without exception, supposed them
of the race of Japhet, the eldest son of Noah: that they were the sons of Cush
has also been insisted on with great learning and ingenuity.6 But if all the
nations, or even the upper classes of those nations, which bear the name, be the
sons of Cush, one-third of the present human race must be the descendants of
that patriarch. Indeed, before the introduction of Ionism, Epiphanius and others
appear to have included all mankind under the name of Scuths. The first apostacy
might have been introduced by Cush, and its [p.xviii] followers have borne his name; which
the succeeding heresy of Nimrod could not obliterate.
The Scythian nations of Touran and the North were generally addicted to the Scythic superstition; and whenever they rolled back the tide of war upon their ancient rivals; the idols temples and cities were the objects upon which they satiated their revenge. They were esteemed excommunicated, and of the Giant race, Nephelim, Rephaim and Anakim. The Scuths of Iran were also of the Giant race, with Nimrod as their chief. Of the Titanian war there appears to be a double aspect. When the Scuths of Touran are the Giants, the war between them and the Ionim is the subject of the legend; and they are the Giants cast out into Cimmerian darkness, and buried under mountains. The other view presents both parties conjointly before the schism, as the Nephelim, Apostates or Giants, engaged in carrying on the war against Heaven itself. And in these accounts we find more frequent allusions to the Tower and its supernatural overthrow.
The catastrophe at Babel completed the dispersion. On the division of the earth and planting of the nations, there are some very curious notices extant. But whether Nimrod and his immediate adherents survived, and retained pos- [p.xix] session of Babylon, or transferred their seat of government to Nineveh and founded the great Iranian empire, or whether that empire and city were founded by Assur and the sons of Shem, is still a subject of dispute. We find Nimrod, however, under the well-known title of Alorus, at the head of the two Chaldæan dynasties, mentioned above: but these appear rather to refer to the antediluvian patriarchs than to the proper kings of Chaldæa.
The first dynasty of Chaldæan Kings is placed by almost all chronologists as the first Iranian dynasty, that of Nimrod under the name of Evechius, and his immediate descendants. Evexius is also placed by Polyhistor as the first Chaldæan king. The dynasty of the Arabian kings of Chaldæan is placed by Eusebius, Syncellus and others, as well as by Berossus, next in the order of succession. They have likewise been supposed to be a Scythic nation, which broke in upon the empire from the Scythian settlements of Cashgar, and obtained possession either of the entire empire, or only of the city of Babylon, during the period of its desolation, with the plains of Shinar and the country round the head of the Persian gulf, from whence they were expelled, and discharged themselves upon Palestine [p.xx] as the Palli or Philistines, and upon Egypt as the Hycsos or Shepherd Kings.
Next in succession, according to Eusebius and Syncellus, or perhaps contemporary with the preceding, came the long line of the great dynasty of the Assyrian Kings, who held the empire of the world for ten or twelve centuries, till their dominion was wrested from them by the Medes in the time of Thonus Concolerus, the Sardanapalus of the Greek historians. The different catalogues of the great Assyrian succession that are extant, will be found among the Dynasties. The overthrow of the Assyrian empire was followed by several years of universal anarchy, bloodshed and revolution. And it is ascertained, that it was during this scene of confusion that Jonah was sent upon his mission to stop its progress at Nineveh.
Arbaces, the leader of the Median insurrection, though he succeeded in throwing off the Assyrian yoke, appears to have failed in his attempt to establish his own sovereignty: nor was the Median kingdom fully consolidated till the reign of Deïoces. The catalogues of the Median kings will be found among the Dynasties. Under Phraortes and Cyaxares the Medes extended their dominion over great part of Asia, but under Astyages, who was defeated and captured [p.xxi] by Cyrus, the kingdom merged in the Persian empire.
The Babylonians acquired a temporary independence at the fall of the Assyrian empire, but after two or three short reigns they were subdued by Senecherib. Syria also became an independent kingdom, and prospered for a time, till again reduced under the Assyrian yoke. Persia at the same time arose, and alone maintained its independence against the growing power of the Medes and the new Assyrian dynasty, till the successes of Cyrus raised it above them all, and vested the empire of the world in the Persian race.
The Assyrian empire revived under Nabonasar, supposed to be the same with the Salmanasar of the Scriptures. Of this dynasty three several catalogues will be found, the Ecclesiastical and Astronomical canons preserved by Syncellus, and the celebrated canon of Ptolemæus, besides some other notices of the successors of Nabonasar, among the supplemental Chaldæan fragments. The first princes of the line appear to have fixed their residence at Nineveh, and among them we may recognize the Tiglath Pileser, Senecherib, and Esar Haddon of the Scriptures. Their race appears to have terminated in Saracus, another Sardanapalus. Nabopollasar, a success- [p.xxii] ful rebel, began the last line of the Assyrian and Chaldæan monarchs. He transferred the seat of empire to Babylon, and in his reign, his celebrated son, Nebuchadnezzar, extended his conquests over the bordering kingdoms of the north and west, by the reduction of Syria, Phœnicia, Judæa, Egypt, and Arabia; an accurate account of which is transmitted by Berossus. On the death of his father, Nebuchadnezzar succeeded to the throne. Concerning him we have several very interesting fragments from Berossus, and one from Megasthenes. In these are detailed the splendour of his works at Babylon, its celebrated walls, and brazen gates; its temples, palaces, and hanging gardens. The prophesy of Nebuchadnezzar, probably alludes to the public notification of Daniel's interpretation of his vision. His successors, till the overthrow of the empire by Cyrus, are given by Berossus and Megasthenes, and will be found also among the dynasties. Among his four immediate successors we must find Belshazzar, and Darius the Mede. The latter has been generally supposed to be Nabonnedus, though some have endeavoured to identify him with Cyaxares. The conquest of the Median, Chaldæan, and Assyrian dominions by Cyrus, grandson of Astyages, and the nephew of Nebuchadnezzar, brings down the history to the [p.xxiii] authentic records of Grecian literature. The Persian line, the successors of Cyrus, will be found in several different places, both among the Chaldæan and Egyptian fragments.
The intense interest which Egyptian history has excited, from the discovery of the interpretation of the Hieroglyphics, has induced me to spare no labour or expence in rendering this part of the work as perfect as circumstances would allow.
The Laterculus or Canon of the Kings of Thebes, was compiled from the archives of that city, by Eratosthenes, the librarian of Ptolemæus Philadelphus. It is followed by the Old Egyptian Chronicle, with a Latin version of the same, from the Excerpta Barbara, and another from the Armenian Chronicle of Eusebius: they contain a summary of the dynasties of Egypt. To these succeed the Egyptian dynasties of Manetho, whose introductory letter to king Ptolemæus, given in a subsequent page, explains the nature of his work, and the materials from whence it was compiled. I have placed the six different versions of the Dynasties of Manetho that are extant confronting each other. The Canon of the kings of Egypt from Josephus, I have compiled from the historical fragments of Manetho: and [p.xxiv] I have thrown it into the form of a Canon to facilitate comparison. I have next given a very important Canon, the first part of which, from Mestraim to the end of the seventeenth dynasty, is preserved by Syncellus only: from the beginning of the eighteenth it is continued also in the fragments of Eusebius: and from hence to the conclusion, four different versions of it will be found. To these are added the Canons of all the kings of Egypt, mentioned by Diodorus Siculus and Herodotus. They were originally compiled by Scaliger, but I have corrected them and given them with several very important additions in the original words of the authors, instead of in the words of Scaliger himself. They are followed by the Canon of Theophilus Antiochenus. And after several very important chronological extracts upon the antiquities of Egypt, I have completed the Dynasties, with a Canon of the early Egyptian, Chaldæan, and Assyrian Kings, from the Syriac Chronicle of Bar-hebræus: which I have placed beside each other as they are synchonized by that author, and given them in the English letters corresponding to the Syriac, instead of adopting the Latinized names of the translators.
I have, therefore, comprised in this part [p.xxv] of the work, no less than nineteen catalogues of the Egyptian kings, with all the various readings that occur in the different versions of the same. They have been compiled with the greatest care, and I have purposely abstained from all reference to the Hieroglyphics, that I might not be misled by any preconceived opinion.
At a time, when indefatigable research is every day bringing to light new and interesting circumstances, it would be absurd to attempt to give anything but the roughest outline of Egyptian history. I shall merely observe, then, that after the dispersion from Babel, the children of Mizraim went off to Egypt, of which they appear to have continued some time in undisturbed possession. Menes Misor or Mestraim, the Mizraim of the Scriptures, and planter of the nation, is naturally placed as the first sovereign of the united realm, at the head of all the catalogues. And perhaps the dominion of Athothis was equally extensive; for his name occurs in the Laterculus of Eratosthenes, and as the Thoth or Taautus of Sanchoniatho. After him the country seems to have been divided into several independent monarchies, some of whose princes may perhaps be found among the fourteen first dynasties. That the country was so divided, and that the first dynasties were not considered successive by the ancients, we have the authority of Artapanus and Eusebius.
The first historical fragment of Manetho, from Josephus, gives an account of the
invasion and expulsion of a race of foreigners, who were styled Hycsos or
Shepherd kings; whose princes are identified with the seventeenth dynasty of all
the Canons except that given by Syncellus as the canon of Africanus, in which
they are placed as the fifteenth. Of what family they were, whence they came,
and to what country they retired, have been the subjects of almost as many
hypotheses as writers; I shall not venture a remark upon a problem, of which
there is every reason shortly to expect a satisfactory solution. Josephus and
the Fathers confound them with the Israelites, who appear rather to he referred
to by the second fragment as the lepers, who were so cruelly ill-treated by the
Egyptians, and afterwards laid waste the country, assisted by a second invasion
of the Shepherds. To these fragments I have subjoined six other very curious
notices of the exodus of the Israelites and the final expulsion of the
Shepherds; which events appear to have been connected with one another, as well
as with the emigration of the Danaan colonies to Greece, not only in time, but
by circumstances of a political nature, and to have occurred during the
sovereignty of the eighteenth dynasty. Tacitus has also noticed the exodus, but
in terms evi- [p.xxvii] dently copied from some of those which I have given: we have but few
and scanty notices of the kings of Egypt, even in Diodorus and Herodotus. Its
conquest by Nebucchadnezzar is related by Berossus, and after two or three
temporary gleams of independence, it sunk at length into a province of the
Persian empire, and from that day to the present, according to the denunciation
of the prophet, Egypt has been the basest of kingdoms, and under the yoke of
The Tyrian Annals are fragments which were quoted by Josephus from the lost histories of Dius and Menander. They agree perfectly with the scriptural accounts, and furnish some particulars in addition. The correspondence of Solomon and Hiram, the foundation of Carthage, and the invasion, conquests, and repulse of Salmanasar; the siege of Tyre by Nebuchadnessar, and its subsequent government under judges, are historical additions of great interest and importance.
The Periplus of Hanno is an account of the earliest voyage of discovery extant. It was taken from an original and apparently official document which was suspended in the temple of Saturn, at Carthage. Falconer has edited it as a separate [p.xxviii] work, and gives two dissertations on it; the first, explanatory of its contents; and the second, a refutation of Dodwell's reflections on its authenticity. I have followed Falconer both in his text and translation. With respect to its age, Falconer agrees with Bougainville in referring it to the sixth century before the Christian era.
The Periplus is prefaced by a few lines, reciting a decree of the Carthaginians, relative to the voyage and its objects: and is then continued by the commander, or one of his companions, as a narrative, which commences from the time the fleet had cleared the Straits of Gibraltar. Bougainville has given a chart of the voyage, which may be found, togetherwith the corresponding maps of Ptolemæus and D'Anville, in Falconer's treatise. It may be sufficient, however, to remark that Thymiaterium, the first of the colonies planted by Hanno, occupies a position very nearly, perhaps precisely the same with that of the present commercial city of Mogadore. The promontory of Soloeis corresponds with Cape Bojador, nearly opposite to the Canaries. Caricontichos, Gytte, Acra, Melitta and Arambys are placed between Cape Bojador and the Rio d'Ouro which is supposed to be the Lixus. Cerne is laid down as the island of Arguin under the southern Cape Blanco: the river Chretes perhaps is the St. John, and the next large river mentioned is the Senegal. Cape Palmas [p.xxix] and Cape Three Points, are supposed to correspond respectively with the Western and Southern Horns, and some island in the bight of Benin,. with that of Gorillæ. Vossius, however, supposes the Western Horn to be Cape Verd, and the Southern, Cape Palmas, in which case the Sierra Leone will answer to the Ochema Theon the Chariot of the Gods.
The description of the Troglodytæ, as men of a different form or appearance, may imply a change from the Moresco to the Negro race. Some passages, quoted by Falconer from Bruce's travels, explain the extraordinary fires and nightly merriment which alarmed the voyagers, as customs common among many of the negro tribes, and which had repeatedly fallen within the scope of his own observations. The Gorillæ are supposed to be large monkeys or wild men as the name ἄνθρωποι ἄγριοι may in fact import.
The Periplus is followed by a strange account of the African settlements, from the books of Hiempsal king of Numidia, preserved by Sallust.
Of the Indian fragments of Megasthenes, the most remarkable has already been referred to. In the two great divisions of the Philosophical sects, into the Brahmanes and Germanes, we may doubtless recognize the predecessors of the [p.xxx] present Brachmans and Buddhists of Hindostan. They are likewise mentioned by Clitarchus as the Brahmanes and Pramnæ. The castes of India are also described at length, and have continued with some variations to the present day. The antiquity of such a division is very great, and perhaps originated at the dispersion, as it prevailed chiefly among the Ionic nations, while the Scythic tribes prided themselves upon their independence, and the nobility of the whole race. Megasthenes is reputed to have been a Persian, and an officer in the army of Alexander in his expedition to India, and was employed upon several negociations of consequence.
I have next given two short notices of some celebrated islands in the Atlantic and Indian oceans. The first, upon the Atlantic island, is quoted by Proclus, from the Ethiopic history of Marcellus, in illustration of the passages of Plato in the Timæus relative to the same. Some have looked upon the relation as worthy of credit, and confirmed by the broken nature of all the islands, which lie scattered between the old and the new world, regarding them as relics of a former tract which has been absorbed. The second fragment from Euemerus may relate to the islands in the Indian Archipelago; though it is highly probable [p.xxxi] that both may refer only to the White island of the West, so celebrated in the Mythological legends of almost all nations, and in none more than in the antiquities of the British islands.
As I profess not to enter into the details, but merely to provide as it were the raw materials, I shall dwell but little upon Chronology. By far the most authentic record that has come down to us is the Canon of Ptolemæus. It commences from the Chaldæan era of Nabonasar, and is continued to the conclusion of the reign of Antoninus Pius. In calculating its chronology, however, it must be observed, that although it starts from this Chaldæan era, its years are the Sothoic years of Egypt, consisting only of three hundred and sixty-five days, without any intercalation. Among the Chronological fragments at the end of the work will be found the passage of Censorinus, so important in determining the celebrated epochs of ancient history; and likewise an extract from Theon Alexandrinus, from the manuscripts of the King of France, partly cited by Larcher in his translation of Herodotus.7 For the complete extract, I beg leave to return my thanks to Mons. Champollion Figeac, and Mons. Hase librarian to the king. Several useful chronological passages will be found scattered over [p.xxxii] the work: some also are collected at the end of the Dynasties. I have added also two short notices of the Sarus and Nerus of the Chaldæans.
It is remarkable, that the three great eras of ancient history commence within thirty years of one another, and are commonly fixed.
The first Olympiad, B.C. 777.
The foundation of Rome, B.C. 753.
And the era of Nabonasar, B.C. 747.
The commencement of the reign of Dioclesian is determined by the observed and
calculated eclipses to be in the year A. D. 284. The beginning of the great
Sothoic period of 1641, Sothoic or vague years, equivalent to 1640 Julian years,
is fixed about the year B.C. 1321, or 1325. During this great embolismic
period, the first day of the Egyptian year, called Thoth, from the omission of
the intercalation of the quarter of a day in each year, recedes through every
day of the year, till it arrives at the point whence it originally started, and
again coincides with the Heliacal rising of the Dogstar.
Having thus brought down the ancient history of the world as contained in the fragments to the times of Grecian record, I shall endeavour, in like manner, to trace a faint outline of its Theology.
From Babel, the centre of their abominations, the heathens carried off the same
objects of adoration, the same superstitious observances, and the same legendary
tales, which, however varied and confused, may without difficulty be identified
throughout the world. Among the pastoral tribes, the Scythic doctrines almost
universally prevailed; yet in subsequent times they also fell into idolatry:
while the Ionic nations carried their additions and corruptions to such a
length, that the original and more simple doctrines became obliterated among the
vulgar; and were retained only by the philosophers and priests, and sometimes
were even re-imported from abroad. The more elaborate corruptions of Ionism
appear to have prevailed originally in the Iranian territories only, and to have
passed to India and to Egypt, to have spread themselves with civilization over
Greece, and subsequently over the whole Roman world. By foreign conquest and
other circumstances, the two systems were often amalgamated into one. The more
elaborate and corrupted form of Ionism and idolatry would catch the attention of
the casual observer as the religion of the land; while the deeper doctrines,
which retained much of their primitive simplicity, were wrapped in mystery, and
communicated only to the initiated.
Most nations, in process of time, became more attached to particular parts, and retained but [p.xxxiv] fragments of the general system. But it is still in existence, and preserved almost entire, both in its Scythic and Ionic form, as the Buddhism and Brahmenism of Hindostan. By comparing all the varied legends of the west and east in conjunction, we may obtain the following outline of the theology of the ancients.
It recognizes, as the primary elements of all things, two independent principles, of the nature of male and female. And these, in mystic union as the soul and body, constitute the great Hermaphroditic deity, the One, the Universe itself, consisting still of the two separate elements of its composition, modified, though combined in one individual, of which all things were regarded but as parts. From the two, or more frequently from the male, proceeded three sons or Hypostases; which, when examined severally, are each one and the same with the principle from which they sprung: but when viewed conjointly, they constitute a triad, emanating from a fourth yet older divinity, who, by a mysterious act of self-triplication, becomes three, while he yet remains but one, each member of the triad being ultimately resolvable into the monad.8 With this is connected the doctrine of a succession of similar worlds. At the conclusion of each revolving period, the world is dissolved, alternately by [p.xxxv] flood and fire; and all its varied forms and parts are absorbed into the two primeval principles, which then remain in the loveliness of their existence. After a certain interval their re-union commences, and with it the reconstruction of another world. As before, the first production of this world is the triad, and the same heroes and persons re-appear; and the same events are again transacted, till the time arrives for another dissolution. Such was the system in its original form; it was a foundation of materialism, upon which was raised a superstructure of idolatry.
The most remarkable feature in the heathen theology is the multiplicity of its gods. The easy temper of polytheism, as it has been called, hesitated not to adopt the divinities of the surrounding nations; while the deification, not only of heroes and kings, but of the virtues and vices, with the genii of the woods and waters, mountains and cities, contributed to introduce new and strange inmates into the Pantheon. But if we eject these modern intruders, if we restore to their original seats the imported deities, such as Pan to Arcadia, Dermes to Egypt, Osiris to Memphis, Hercules to Tyre, and Dionysus to India; and if we investigate the origin of each, we shall find every nation, notwithstanding the variety of names, acknowledging the same deities and the same system of theology: and, however humble any of the deities may appear in the [p.xxxvi] Pantheons of Greece and Rome, each, who has any claim to antiquity, will be found ultimately, if not immediately, resolvable into the original God or Goddess, into one or other of the two primeval principles.
In conducting such an investigation, a very singular circumstance presents itself in the manifold character of these deities. Their human or terrestrial appearance, as mere mortals deified is the most obvious; as the sun, moon, elements, and powers of nature, they assume a celestial or physical aspect. And if we turn to the writings of the philosophers, we shall find them sustaining a character more abstract and metaphysical. Yet under all these different forms, the same general system is preserved.
In his terrestrial character, the chief Hero God, under whatever name, is claimed by every nation as its progenitor and founder. And not only is he celebrated as the king of that country in particular, but of the whole world. He is exposed to some alarming danger from the sea, or an evil principle or monster by which the sea is represented. He is nevertheless rescued by some friendly female aid, sometimes concealed in a cavern or in the moon, or preserved in a death-like sleep, borne upon a snake, or floating on an island or a lotus, though more frequently in a boat or ark. At length he awakens from his slumber, subdues his enemy, and lands upon a mountain. [p.xxxvii] He then reorganizes the world, and becomes himself the father primarily of three sons, and through them, of the human race; not unfrequently with some allusions to the dove and rainbow. In fact, in his human character he was the great father of mankind; but he may not only be identified with Noah but with Adam likewise. The one was looked upon as the re-appearance of the other, and both an incarnation of the Deity.
In his immediate celestial character the God is universally held to be the Sun; but the character of the great Goddess is of a more complex description. As the companion of the man, she is the ark; which was regarded not only as his consort, but his daughter, as the work of his own hands; and his mother, from whose womb he again emerged, as an infant, to a second life; and his preserver during the catastrophe of the deluge. As the companion of the Sun she is either the earth or moon: not that the distinctions between the human and celestial characters are accurately maintained; for they are so strangely blended together, that the adventures applicable to one are frequently, and sometimes purposely, misapplied to the other. Thus, whilst the Man is said to have entered into, been concealed in, and have again issued from the ark, the moon, and the earth, indifferently, the Sun is fabled to have been plunged into the ocean, to have sailed upon a lotus, to have taken refuge in a floating [p.xxxviii] island, and to have dwelt upon a sacred mountain left dry by the retiring flood.9
It has been often remarked, that the Theogonies and Cosmogonies of the heathens were the same. In addition to those naturally constituting a part of the work, I have given the most remarkable of the Hermetic, Orphic, and Pythagorean accounts; which will be found, with the celebrated collection from Damascius, under a separate head. By comparing these with the Cosmogonies of Sanchoniatho, Berossus, and the rest, we may, without much difficulty, arrive at the following conclusion: that the Ether and Chaos, or, in the language of the Philosophers, Mind and Matter, were the two primeval, eternal, and independent principles of the universe; the one regarded as a vivifying and intellectual principle, the other as a watery Chaos, boundless, and without form: both which continued for a time without motion, and in darkness. By a mystic union of the two was formed the great Hermaphroditic deity, the One, the universal World; of which the Chaotic matter presently became the body, and the Etherial Intellectual principle the soul. As soon as the union had commenced, from the Ether sprung forth the triad, Phanes or Eros, a triple divinity, the most prominent character of which was Light. He was the same with the Soul of the World, and the Intelligible [p.xxxix] triad so largely insisted upon by the Platonists. The gross chaotic elements of Earth and Water were formed into the terraqueous globe, while the disposing Ether, in the character of Phanes, under some three of the conditions of Light, Air, Heat, Fire, Ether, Flame, or Spirit, composed a physical trinity concentred in the Sun, the soul and ruler of the world. Or, according to the more refined speculations, it consisted of a trinity of mental powers, in which the Understanding, Reason or Intellect, the Soul, Passions, Feelings or Affections, Power, Counsel or Will, are variously combined. Viewed, therefore, either under a physical or metaphysical aspect, it is still a triad subordinate to, and emanating from the more ancient Intellectual Ether, and into which each person of the triad is again resolvable.10
With respect to the Physical triad, by comparing the heathen accounts with similar passages in the Scriptures, though not decisive, yet so preponderating does the evidence appear to me upon this point, that if the school of Hutchinson had not failed to establish their very elegant hypothesis, as to the fact that the Fire, Light, and Spirit or Air, were only three different conditions of one and the same etherial fluid, appearing as Fire at the orb of the Sun, as Light pro- [p.xl] ceeding from it, and as Spirit returning to it, I should not have hesitated to subscribe to the opinion that such was the original trinity of the Gentiles; a triad, nevertheless, subordinate to a monad, which existed in the form of Ether previously to its assuming such conditions.
The Metaphysical speculations of the ancients upon this subject can only be derived by analogical reasoning from contemplation of the microcosm of man. To point out the close analogy preserved in this particular between the Metaphysical and Physical system before explained I would observe, that Man is a being compounded of an Intellectual, and of a Material substance, both of which were conceived by the ancients to have pre-existed, before they became united in the compound individual animal, the Man. When thus united, they appear to have conceived a triad of intellectual powers, the Intellect, the Affections Feelings or Emotions, and the Will or Power of action. But for further illustration of these matters, and for such proof as can be produced, I must refer to the disquisition at the end.
Upon this subject, therefore, I cannot agree with Mr. Faber in supposing that the trinitarian speculations of the Heathens originated in the coincidence of Adam and Noah being each the father of three sons; for of the three distinct analogical systems the Metaphysical, of the [p.xli] Mind with its Faculties, and Matter,—the Physical, of the Ether with its conditions, and the Chaos,—and the Human, of the Patriarch with his three sons, and the universal mother the Ark or Earth,—the last analogy is not only the most imperfect, but according to all historical accounts, Demonolatry was introduced subsequently to the worship of nature and the elements.
From the widely dispersed traditions upon the subject, it is manifest that the circumstances of the creation and the deluge were well known to all mankind previously to the dispersion. And the writings of Moses give to the chosen people, not so much a new revelation as a correct, authenticated and inspired account of circumstances, which had then become partially obscured by time and abused by superstition. The formless watery Chaos and the Etherial substance of the heavens, enfolding and passing over its surface as a mighty wind, are the first principles both of the sacred and profane cosmogonies; but they are reclaimed by Moses as the materials, created by the immediate agency of an Almighty power. The subsequent process of formation so completely corresponds in both systems, that if they were not borrowed the one from the other, (a position which cannot be maintained,) they must each have been ultimately derived from the common source of revelation. Similar considerations upon the traditions of a Trinity, so universal [p.xlii] among the nations, and an examination of what that Trinity was composed, forces upon me the conviction, that the trinitarian doctrine, as it is now believed, was one of the original and fundamental tenets of the Patriarchal religion; that the analogy between the Microcosm, as pointed out, and the then current accounts of the creation, became the stumbling block, which set mankind to refine upon the truth; that hence they fell into the errors of attributing eternity to matter, of placing a Monad above the Trinity, with the Pantheistic opinion that the Deity was no other than the universe itself. The doctrine of the succession of worlds, the Metempsychosis, and Demonolatry would follow naturally enough by an extension of their system from the particular circumstances of the creation to those attendant upon the deluge. By the pride of false philosophy they forsook the truth of revelation, and sunk into materialism, into the worship of the elements, of man and beasts, and into idolatry with all its attendant abominations. 'When they knew God, they glorified him not as God; neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools; and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore, God [p.xliii] gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts.'11
To reclaim a world so fallen, the great manifestations of the Almighty from time to time have taken place. not only at the most civilized as well as celebrated periods of history, but upon the spots then best calculated for the general dissemination of truth among the heathens. The geographical situation of Palestine, chosen it may be for the seat of universal empire, is the most remarkable upon earth for the facility of communication which it affords with every quarter of the globe. At the time of the Advent, it formed as it were the boundary of the rival empires of Rome and Parthia, subject to Rome. but holding an intimate connexion with its colonial offspring within the Parthian dominions. And its situation was at that time not more excellently adapted for the universal diffusion of the Gospel, both in the East and West, than it was for the general instruction of mankind, in times of old, when it formed so considerable a part of the high road of communication between the empires of Egypt and Assyria. About the time of the eighteenth dynasty, the most brilliant I epoch of Egyptian history, the Exodus of the Israelites was effected: and the fame of the mi- [p.xliv] raculous exploits of Moses and Joshua was wafted with the Danaan colonies to Greece, with the fugitive Canaanites to the West, and carried by the Israelites themselves into the East. During the revolutionary violence consequent upon the downfall of the ancient Assyrian empire, the same merciful Providence kept up a communication with the kingdoms which sprung out of its ruins, by the mission of Jonah to Nineveh, by the connexion of the princes of Samaria with Syria, and by the dispersion of the ten tribes over the territories of the Medes and Assyrians by Salmanasar: and upon the full re-establishment of the empire at Babylon, a knowledge of the truth was diffused far and wide by the captivity of the Jews themselves.
The conversion of Nebuchadnezzar, and the decrees of himself and his successors, both of the Assyrian and Persian line, in favour of the truth, must have been attended with at least some temporary effect upon the religious and philosophical sentiments of the East. And such an effect may be clearly traced in the very general reformation of the systems and superstitions which about this period took place.
Among the Persians, themselves a Scythic people, this reformation appears to have re-animated their zeal and enmity against the temples and idolatry of their Ionian rivals. It may also have led them to convert the two independent [p.xlv] principles of Mind and Matter into spiritual agents in opposition to one another, and to have revived the unmingled worship of the Sun and Fire, at first but as an emblem and image of the Supreme, though it soon again degenerated into the Sabaism of old. The reformation may be traced through Assyria, India, China and Egypt, and in those amendments and refinements which were shortly afterwards imported by Pythagoras into Greece.
A summary of the Pythagorean doctrines will be found in the commencement of the celebrated treatise of Timæus Locrus. It may be observed, that the Pythagorean speculations have a tacit reference to the ancient classification of Causes, as the Efficient, the Formal or Ideal, the Material and the Final. In conformity to this division we find introduced between the two ancient independent principles of Mind and Matter, the world of Forms or abstract Ideas, to which is attributed an eternal subsistence, if not an existence independent of the Mind; whilst the τἀγαϑὸν Good in the abstract, the summum bonum, the great final cause, became the subject of perpetual discussion and inquiry among all succeeding philosophers.
The Forms and Matter were now substituted for the ancient Duad; superior to which was [p.xlvi] placed the Efficient Cause as the Monad, Deity, or Demiurgus. This Duad was, nevertheless, regarded as two eternal and independent principles, and by their combination the Deity formed the Sensible world, a living animal, composed of soul and body. Subordinate to the duad is the Pythagorean Triad, occupying the same relative situation with respect to the duad as in the more ancient systems. By this introduction of the Ideal world, and the elevation of the deity above the duad, the system lost something of the gross materialism which had hitherto obtained, but it lost, at the same time, all knowledge of the ancient triad, which was now replaced by such triads as were more conformable to the Pythagorean mode, and of which the persons were often subordinate to, or comprehended within each other, as genera and species.
The doctrines of Plato differ only in refinement from the preceding. If we admit the Parmenides and the Timæus to embrace his complete system, God and Matter, two originally independent principles, are held to be, as it were, the extremities of that chain of being which composes the universe. Subordinate to the God, we have the Intelligible world of Ideas or the Forms, commencing, as the latter Platonists insist, with the Intelligible triad: but whether Plato regarded [p.xlvii] this world of Ideas in the abstract as subsisting only within the mind of the Deity, or whether he attributed to it a distinct existence12 without the Mind, comprehending different orders of divine super-essential beings, may well be questioned. When the Deity or Demiurgus thought proper to compose the world, he looked to this ideal world as the exemplar, in whose likeness he constructed his new work. He impressed the disordered material Chaos with the Forms, and rendered the world a living animal, after the pattern of its ideal prototype, consisting of a soul endued with Intellect, and of a body of which all beings comprehended in it, Gods Men Animals or material species, are but the concrete individuals, of which the abstract ideas unalterably subsist in the intelligible world. Though still supposed to continue in existence, the Deity, as in the more ancient systems, retires as effectually from the stage as did the ancient Ether when superseded by the Phanes. And all the mundane operations are carried on as before, by the Soul of the world.
While the Stoics and other schools retained the ancient doctrines, and looked not further than [p.xlviii] the world itself, it is true that the Pythagoreans and Plato held a God superior to the world; but it is extremely doubtful whether they entertained a sublimer conception of their great immediate efficient cause, the Soul of the world, or indeed of Soul in general, than the gross materialism of a subtile ether. They discouraged, likewise, the tenet of the succession of worlds; though it was subsequently revived by the later Platonists, by whom the Deity was supposed, at the predestined time, to swallow up the world, first the sensible, then the Ideal, and lastly Phanes the Intelligible triad, and to remain in the solitude of his unity.
Much as has been said upon the Platonic trinity I must confess that I can find fewer traces of that doctrine in the writings of Plato than of his less refined predecessors, the mythologists. I have given such extracts as appear to me to relate to the subject, together with a fragment of Amelius which expressly mentions the three kings of Plato as identical with the Orphic trinity. Dr. Morgan, in his essay upon the subject, satisfactorily refutes the notion, that Plato regarded the Logos as the second person of the trinity:13 [p.xlix] and upon this refutation he denies that Plato held the doctrine at all, more particularly, as from the time of Plato to that of Ammonius Saccas in the third century, no disciple of his school seems to have been aware that such a doctrine was contained in his writings. Perhaps, however, we may trace some obscure allusions to it in the beginning of the second hypothesis of the Parmenides and in the passages which I have [p.l] given; though in the latter the doctrines appear rather to refer to the Monad and Duad than to the genuine trinity of the ancients. So far from any such doctrine being maintained by the Pythagoreans or in the Academy, we find only such vague allusions as might be expected among philosophers, who reverenced an ancient tradition, and were willing, after they had lost the substance, to find something to which they might attach the shadow.
The error which Dr. Morgan has refuted, took its rise with the fathers of the Church in the second century. They were led into the mistake by the word Logos, used by Plato and St. John, and made the Platonic Trinity to consist of God, the Logos, and the Soul of the world, and this in spite of all the professed followers of Plato, who, however they might vary among themselves, uniformly insisted upon placing the Mo- [p.li] nad and Duad, or at least a Monad, above their Triad.
In the first century of the Christian era, Philo, an Alexandrian Jew, had attempted to expound the Scripture on Platonic principles; and after the promulgation of the Gospel many of the fathers warmly adopted the same mode of exposition. The different sects of the Gnostics went far beyond the Grecian sage, and sought in the East the doctrines, to which they looked upon the writings of Plato merely as essays, introductory to the sublimer flights of the Oriental mysticism: and they treated his followers with that contempt, against which the vanity of a philosopher is seldom proof; and as long as these schools existed, a bitter enmity prevailed between them. The Gnostics gave at once a real existence to the Ideal world, and continuing the chain of being from the Supreme, through numerous orders of Eons, personified abstract ideas, of which the second and third persons of the Trinity were the first and second Eons, and from thence to the lowest material species, founded that daring heresy which so long disturbed the tranquillity of Christendom: and with this spurious Platonism of the fathers the Arian14 heresy is likewise intimately connected.
But the internal heresies of the Church were not the only ill effects which the
misguided zeal of the fathers, in forcing upon Plato the doctrine of the
Trinity, brought about. Though it is possible, that by pointing out some crude
similarity of doctrine, they might have obtained some converts by rendering
Christianity less unpalatable to the philosophical world of that day, yet the
weapon was skilfully turned against them, and with unerring effect, when the
Pagans took upon them to assert that nothing new had been revealed in
Christianity; since, by the confessions of its very advocates, the system was
previously contained in the writings of Plato.
In the third century, Ammonius Saccas, universally acknowledged to have been a man of consummate ability, taught that every sect, Christian, Heretic or Pagan, had received the truth, and retained it in their varied legends. He undertook, therefore, to unfold it from them all, and to reconcile every creed. And from his exertions sprung the celebrated Eclectic school of the later Platonists. Plotinus, Amelius, Olympius, Porphyrius, Jamblichus, Syrianus, and Proclus, were among the celebrated professors [p.liii] who succeeded Ammonius in the Platonic chair, and revived and kept alive the spirit of Paganism, with a bitter enmity to the Gospel, for near three hundred years. The Platonic schools were at length closed by the edict of Justinian; and seven wise men, the last lights of Platonism, Diogenes, Hermias, Eulalius, Priscianus, Damascius, Isidorus and Simplicius retired indignantly from the persecutions of Justinian, to realize the shadowy dreams of the republic of Plato, under the Persian despotism of Chosroes.15
From the writings of these philosophers is collected the bulk of the Oracles of Zoroaster. A few of them were first published by Ludovicus Tiletanus at Paris, with the commentaries of Pletho, to which were subsequently added those of Psellus. Chief part of them, however, were collected by Franciscus Patricius, and published with the Hermetic books at the end of his Nova Philosophia. To the labours of Mr. Taylor we are indebted for the addition of about fifty more, and for the references to the works from whence all were extracted. I have arranged them according to the subjects, which are said to be occultly discussed in the Parmenides of Plato, viz.: Cause or God, the Ideal Intelligible or Intellectual world, Particular Souls, and the Material world. And I have placed under a [p.liv] separate head the Magical and Philosophical precepts and directions. There can be no question but that many of these Oracles are spurious; all those, for instance, which relate to the Intelligible and Intellectual orders, which were confessedly obtained in answers given by dæmons, raised for that purpose by the Theurgists;16 who, as well as all the later Platonists, made pretensions to magic, not only in its refinements, which they were pleased to designate Theurgy, but also in that debased form which we should call common witchcraft. Nevertheless, several of the Oracles seem to be derived from more authentic sources, and, like the spurious Hermetic books which have come down to us, probably contain much of the pure Sabiasm of Persia, and the doctrines of the Oriental philosophy.
I have thus endeavoured to give I fear a very imperfect outline of ancient history and theology. But, as it is intended rather to assist the reader through such an heterogeneous heap of materials, by bringing forward the most prominent parts and connecting them with one another, I trust its errors will be excused, as they may be corrected by the readers better judgment from the materials themselves before him. In closing the [p.lv] subject, I beg to offer my sincerest thanks to Isaac Cullimore, Esq., to whose deep and extensive chronological researches, I am indebted for references to several very important passages in the following work, which had escaped my notice.
It is needless to take notice of the numerous forgeries, which have been issued as the productions of the authors of these fragments. There is a complete set, which was composed in Latin by Annius, a monk of Viterbo. But it is a singular circumstance, and one which might be urged with great force against the genuineness of almost the whole collection, that not only the original works have perished, but those also, through whose means these relics have been handed down. With the exception of these fragments, not only have Sanchoniatho, Berossus, and the rest passed into oblivion; but the preservers of their names have followed in the same track, and to a more unusual fate. The fragments of Philo, Abydenus, Polyhistor, Dius, and others, are generally not those of their own works, but extracts from their predecessors.
It is necessary also to advert to the numerous errors which will be found in every sheet. The fragments have been exposed to more than the common risks and accidents, to which all ancient writings have been subject. They have been either copied from the rude annals of anti- [p.lvi] quity, or sketched from historical paintings or hieroglyphic records, they have been sometimes translated from the sacred into the common language of the place, and again translated into Greek; then passed in citation from hand to hand, and lie widely scattered over the works principally of the fathers, and the writers of the Lower empire. It is matter of surprise then, not that they abound in error and uncertainty, but that so much of them has been preserved.
Several of these fragments are to be found in two or three different authors, each of whom contains a different version of the same, differing, not so much in the outline, and in the general flow of words, as in those technicalities and variations of termination, which were necessary to adapt them to the author's style; and it has been a source of some little perplexity to determine which of these various readings to prefer.
To Eusebius, Syncellus and Josephus, we are largely indebted for these relics of antiquity. For Josephus I have followed Hudson's edition. The Cologne edition of the Præparatio Evangelica of Eusebius is often considered the best: but upon close inspection and comparison I have been induced to prefer the text of Stephanus. With the exception of a mutilated translation into Latin by Hieronymus, Eusebius' Chronicle was lost. Under that title, however, Scaliger com- [p.lvii] piled a very portly folio, which, with some other Chronicles, contains a collection of all the fragments of the Greek text of Eusebius, that could be found. The recovery of the Armenian translation of this Chronicle is a great acquisition. It is regarded upon the Continent as perfectly authentic; but I am not aware that it has been examined or reviewed in England. To compress as much as possible all unnecessary observations upon the subject of materials, editions and abbreviations, I have given at the end a list of the authors cited, which will answer at once the several purposes of an index to the abbreviations, and to the editions I have used or referred to, as well as to the manuscripts and other sources from which some of those editions have been formed, or which have been consulted in the compilation of the work. I have likewise given it the form of a Chronological index, by adding the times in which the authors referred to flourished, that the reader may judge what degree of credit may be reposed in each.
The matter contained in these fragments is the only merit to which they can pretend. I have chosen what appeared to me the most genuine text, independent of all theory and system, and have given all the various readings of any consequence I have met with. I have retained Mr. Falconer's translation of Hanno's Periplus; and with this exception, and some few of the most [p.lviii] obscure of the oracles of Zoroaster, which are due to Mr. Taylor, I must be answerable for the rest. For the many errors in which they must abound, I beg leave to apologize and claim indulgence. The broken and confused state of many of the fragments, preclude the possibility of giving any translation, except upon conjecture. Many, such as the Orphic fragment from Malala, and that from Amelius, have exercised the talent and ingenuity of some of the ablest commentators, none of whom perhaps will be found to agree. In such cases, I have patiently compared their opinions, and endeavoured to investigate the circumstances under which the fragments were written and have been preserved, and what connexion they have with the passages among which they are introduced, and to give, what to the best of my judgment is, the truth.
At the conclusion of this work I have added a disquisition, which was originally designed merely to explain and illustrate what I conceive to have been the ancient Trinity of the Gentiles: but in the progress of inquiry I found it impossible to do justice to the opinion without speaking largely upon ancient and modern science. To compress it, therefore, as much as possible, and to give it something of a connected arrangement, I have thrown it altogether into the form of an inquiry [p.lix] into the Method, Objects and Result of ancient and modern Philosophy. And, as in this work I have endeavoured to bring forward several historical and theological documents, which had, in a manner, retired from public view, I trust that such an inquiry will not be deemed altogether misplaced, and that I shall be excused in an attempt to draw from the same store-house of antiquity some speculations, which have been too generally slighted or overlooked by the Metaphysician and the Philosopher, but which I believe may tend to the advancement of science, even amid the brilliant discoveries of modern times.
With respect to the fragments themselves, the classical reader will find, I fear, but poor amusement in perusing a half barbarous dialect, replete with errors and inconsistencies: to the student of divinity, however, they may not be altogether unacceptable or devoid of interest: and to the inquirer after ancient history and mythology, it must be useful to have collected into one small volume, the scattered relics for which he must otherwise search so widely.
THEOLOGY OF THE PHŒNICIANS:
HE supposes that the beginning of all things was a dark and condensed windy air, or a breeze of thick air and a Chaos turbid and black as Erebus: and that these were unbounded, and for a long series of ages destitute of form. But when this wind became enamoured of its own first principles (the Chaos), and an intimate union took place, that connexion was called Pothos:17 and it was the beginning of the creation of all things. And it (the Chaos)18 knew not its own production; but from its embrace with the wind was generated Môt; which some call Ilus (Mud), but others the putrefaction of a watery mixture. And from this sprung all the seed of the creation, and the generation of the universe.
And there were certain animals without sensation, from which intelligent animals
were produced, and these were called Zophasemin, that is, the overseers of the
heavens; and they were formed in the shape of an egg: and from Môt shone forth
the sun, and the moon, the less and the greater stars.
And when the air began to send forth light, by its fiery influence on the sea and earth, winds were produced, and clouds, and very great defluxions and torrents of the heavenly waters. And when they were thus separated, and carried out of their proper places by the heat of the sun, and all met again in the air, and were dashed against each other, thunder and lightnings were the result: and at the sound of the thunder, the before-mentioned intelligent animals were aroused, and startled by the noise, and moved upon the earth and in the sea, male and female. (After this our author proceeds to say:) These things were found written in the Cosmogony of Taautus, and in his commentaries, and were drawn from his observations and the natural signs which by his penetration he perceived and discovered, and with which he has enlightened us.
(Afterwards, declaring the names of the winds Notus, Boreas, and the rest, he makes this epilogue:)—But these first men consecrated the productions of the earth, and judged them gods, and worshipped those things, upon which they themselves lived, and all their posterity, and all before them; to these they made libations and sacrifices. (Then he proceeds:—Such were the devices of their worship in accordance with the imbecility and narrowness of their souls.)—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. I. c. 10.
Of the wind Colpias, and his wife Baau, which is interpreted Night, were
begotten two mortal men, Æon and Protogonus so called: and Æon discovered food
The immediate descendants of these were called Genus and Genea, and they dwelt in Phœnicia: and when there were great droughts they stretched forth their hands to heaven towards the Sun; for him they supposed to be [p.6] God, the only lord of heaven, calling him Beelsamin, which in the Phœnician dialect signifies Lord of Heaven, but among the Greeks is equivalent to Zeus.
Afterwards by Genus the son of Æon and Protogonus were begotten mortal children, whose names were Phôs, Pûr, and Phlox. These found out the method of producing fire by rubbing pieces of wood against each other, and taught men the use thereof.
These begat sons of vast bulk and height, whose names were conferred upon the mountains which they occupied: thus from them Cassius, and Libanus, and Antilibanus, and Brathu received their names.
Memrumus and Hypsuranius were the issue of these men by connexion with their mothers; the women of those times, without shame, having intercourse with any men whom they might chance to meet. Hypsuranius inhabited Tyre: and he invented huts constructed of reeds and rushes, and the papyrus. And he fell into enmity with his brother Usous, who was the inventor of clothing for the body which he made of the skins of the wild beasts which he could catch. And when [p.7] there were violent storms of rain and wind, the trees about Tyre being rubbed against each other, took fire, and all the forest in the neighbourhood was consumed. And Usous having taken a tree, and broken off its boughs, was the first who dared to venture on the sea. And he consecrated two pillars to Fire and Wind, and worshipped them, and poured out upon them the blood of the wild beasts he took in hunting: and when these men were dead, those that remained consecrated to them rods, and worshipped the pillars, and held anniversary feasts in honour of them.
And in times long subsequent to these; were born of the race of Hypsuranius, Agreus and Halieus, the inventors of the arts of hunting and fishing, from whom huntsmen and fishermen derive their names.
Of these were begotten two brothers who discovered iron, and the forging thereof. One of these called Chrysor, who is the same with Hephæstus, exercised himself in words, and charms and divinations; and he invented the hook, and the bait, and the fishing-line, and boats of a light construction; he was the first of all men that sailed. Wherefore he was worshipped [p.8] after his death as a God, under the name of Diamichius. And it is said that his brothers invented the art of building walls with bricks.
Afterwards, of this race were born two youths, one of whom was called Technites, and the other was called Geïnus Autochthôn. These discovered the method of mingling stubble with the loam of bricks, and of baking them in the sun; they were also the inventors of tiling.
By these were begotten others, of whom one was named Agrus, the other Agrouerus or Agrotes, of whom in Phœnicia there was a statue held in the highest veneration, and a temple drawn by yokes of oxen: and at Byblus he is called, by way of eminence, the greatest of the Gods. These added to the houses, courts and porticos and crypts: husbandmen, and such as hunt with dogs, derive their origin from these: they are called also Aletæ, and Titans.
From these were descended Amynus and Magus, who taught men to construct villages and tend flocks.
By these men were begotten Misor and Sydyc, that is, Well-freed and [p.9] Just: and they found out the use of salt.
From Misor descended Taautus, who invented the writing of the first letters: him the Egyptians called Thoor, the Alexandrians Thoyth, and the Greeks Hermes. But from Sydyc descended the Dioscuri, or Cabiri, or Corybantes, or Samothraces: these (he says) first built a ship complete.
From these descended others; who were the discoverers of medicinal herbs, and of the cure of poisons and of charms.
Contemporary with these was one Elioun, called Hypsistus, (the most high); and his wife named Beruth, and they dwelt about Byblus.
By these was begotten Epigeus or Autochthon, whom they afterwards called Ouranus (Heaven); so that from him that element, which is over us, by reason of its excellent beauty is named heaven: and he had a sister of the same parents, and she was called Ge (Earth), and by reason of her beauty the earth was called by the same name.
Hypsistus, the father of these, having been killed in a conflict with wild beasts, was consecrated, and his children offered libations and sacrifices unto him.
But Ouranus, succeeding to the kingdom of his father, contracted a marriage with
his sister Ge, and had by her four sons, Ilus who is called Cronus, and Betylus,
and Dagon, which signifies Siton (Bread-corn,) and Atlas.
But by other wives Ouranus had much issue; at which Ge, being vexed and jealous of Ouranus, reproached him so that they parted from each other: nevertheless Ouranus returned to her, again by force whenever he thought proper, and having laid with her, again departed: he attempted also to kill the children whom he had by her; but Ge often defended herself with the assistance of auxiliary powers.
But when Cronus arrived at man's estate, acting by the advice and with the assistance of Hermes Trismegistus, who was his secretary, he opposed himself to his father Ouranus, that he might avenge the indignities which had been offered to his mother.
And to Cronus were born children, Persephone and Athena; the former of whom died a virgin; but, by the advice of Athena and Hermes, Cronus made a scimitar and a spear of iron. Then Hermes addressed the allies of Cronus with magic words, and wrought [p.11] in them a keen desire to make war against Ouranus in behalf of Ge. And Cronus having thus overcome Ouranus in battle, drove him from his kingdom, and succeeded him in the imperial power. In the battle was taken a well-beloved concubine of Ouranus who was pregnant; and Cronus bestowed her in marriage upon Dagon, and, whilst she was with him, she was delivered of the child which she had conceived by Ouranus, and called his name Demarous.
After these events Cronus surrounded his habitation with a wall, and founded Byblus, the first city of Phœnicia. Afterwards Cronus having conceived a suspicion of his own brother Atlas, by the advice of Hermes, threw him into a deep cavern in the earth, and buried him.
At this time the descendants of the Dioscuri, having built some light and other more complete ships, put to sea; and being cast away over against Mount Cassius, there consecrated a temple.
But the auxiliaries of Ilus, who is Cronus, were called Eloeim, as it were, the allies of Cronus; being so called after Cronus. And Cronus, having a [p.11] son called Sadidus, dispatched him with his own sword, because he held him in suspicion, and with his own hand deprived his child of life. And in like manner he cut off the head of his own daughter, so that all the gods were astonished at the disposition of Cronus.
But in process of time, whilst Ouranus was still in banishment, he sent his daughter Astarte, being a virgin, with two other of her sisters, Rhea and Dione, to cut off Cronus by treachery; but Cronus took the damsels, and married them notwithstanding they were his own sisters. When Ouranus understood this, he sent Eimarmene and Mora with other auxiliaries to make war against Cronus: but Cronus gained the affections of these also, and detained them with himself. Moreover, the god Ouranus devised Bætulia, contriving stones that moved as having life.
And by Astarte Cronus had seven daughters called Titanides, or Artemides; by Rhea also he had seven sons, the youngest of whom was consecrated from his birth; also by Dione he had daughters; and by Astarte again he had two other sons, Pothos and Eros.
And Dagon, after he had found out bread-corn, and the plough, was called Zeus
To Sydyc, who was called the just, one of the Titanides bare Asclepius: and to Cronus there were born also in Peræa three sons, Cronus bearing the same name with his father, and Zeus Belus, and Apollo.
Contemporary with these were Pontus, and Typhon, and Nereus the father of Pontus: from Pontus descended Sidon, who by the excellence of her singing first invented the hymns of odes or praises: and Poseidon.
But to Demarous was born Melicarthus, who is also called Heracles.
Ouranus then made war against Pontus, but afterwards relinquishing the attack he attached himself to Demarous, when Demarous invaded Pontus: but Pontus put him to flight, and Demarous vowed a sacrifice for his escape.
In the thirty-second year of his power and reign, Ilus, who is Cronus, having laid an ambuscade for his father Ouranus in a certain place situated in the middle of the earth, when he had got him into his hands dismembered him over against the foun- [p.14] tains and rivers. There Ouranus was consecrated, and his spirit was separated, and the blood of his parts flowed into the fountains and the waters of the rivers; and the place, which was the scene of this transaction, is shewed even to this day.
(Then our historian, after some other things, goes on thus:) But Astarte called the greatest, and Demarous named Zeus, and Adodus who is entitled the king of gods, reigned over the country by the consent of Cronus: and Astarte put upon her head, as the mark of her sovereignty, a bull's head: and travelling about the habitable world, she found a star falling through the air, which she took up, and consecrated in the holy island of Tyre: and the Phœnicians say that Astarte is the same as Aphrodite.
Moreover, Cronus visiting the different regions of habitable world, gave to his daughter Athena the kingdom of Attica: and when there happened a plague with a great mortality, Cronus offered up his only begotten son as a sacrifice to his father Ouranus, and circumcised himself, and compelled his allies to do the same: and not long afterwards he consecrated after his death another of his sons, called [p.15] Muth, whom he had by Rhea; this (Muth) the Phœnicians esteem the same as Death and Pluto.
After these things, Cronus gave the city of Byblus to the goddess Baaltis, which is Dione, and Berytus to Poseidon, and to the Caberi who were husbandmen and fishermen: and they consecrated the remains of Pontus at Berytus.
But before these things the god Taautus, having pourtrayed Ouranus, represented also the countenances of the gods Cronus, and Dagon, and the sacred characters of the elements. He contrived also for Cronus the ensign of his royal power, having four eyes in the parts before and in the parts behind, two of them closing as in sleep; and upon the shoulders four wings, two in the act of flying, and two reposing as at rest. And the symbol was, that Cronus whilst he slept was watching, and reposed whilst he was awake. And in like manner with respect to the wings, that he was flying whilst he rested, yet rested whilst he flew. But for the other gods there were two wings only to each upon his shoulders, to intimate that they flew under the controul of Cronus; and [p.16] there were also two wings upon the head, the one as a symbol of the intellectual part, the mind, and the other for the senses.
And Cronus visiting the country of the south, gave all Egypt to the god Taautus, that it might be his kingdom.
These things, says he, the Caberi, the seven sons of Sydyc, and their eighth brother Asclepius, first of all set down in the records in obedience to the commands of the god Taautus.
All these things the son of Thabion, the first Hierophant of all among the Phœnicians, allegorized and mixed up with the occurrences and accidents of nature and the world, and delivered to the priests and prophets, the superintendants of the mysteries: and they, perceiving the rage for these allegories increase, delivered them to their successors, and to foreigners: of whom one was Isiris, the inventor of the three letters, the brother of Chna who; is called the first Phœnician.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. I. c. 10.
OF THE MYSTICAL SACRIFICE OF THE PHŒNICIANS.
It was the custom among the ancients, in times of great calamity, in [p.17] order to prevent the ruin of all, for the rulers of the city or nation to sacrifice to the avenging deities the most beloved of their children as the price of redemption: they who were devoted this purpose were offered mystically. For Cronus, whom the Phœnicians call Il, and who after his death was deified and instated in the planet which bears his name, when king, had by a nymph of the country called Anobret an only son, who on that account is styled Ieoud, for so the Phœnicians still call an only son: and when great dangers from war beset the land he adorned the altar, and invested this son with the emblems of royalty, and sacrificed him.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. I. c. 10.—lib. IV.
OF THE SERPENT.
Taautus first attributed something of the divine nature to the serpent and the serpent tribe; in which he was followed by the Phœnicians and Egyptians. For this animal was esteemed by him to be the most inspirited of all the reptiles, and of a fiery nature; [p.18] inasmuch as it exhibits an incredible celerity, moving by its spirit without either hands, or feet, or any of those external members, by which other animals effect their motion. And in its progress it assumes a variety of forms, moving in a spiral course, and darting forward with whatever degree of swiftness it pleases. It is moreover long-lived, and has the quality not only of putting off its old age, and assuming a second youth, but of receiving at the same time an augmentation of its size and strength. And when it has fulfilled the appointed measure of its existence, it consumes itself; as Taautus has laid down in the sacred books; upon which account this animal is introduced in the sacred rites and mysteries.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. I. c. 10.
FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR.
OF THE COSMOGONY AND DELUGE.
BEROSSUS, in the first book of his history of Babylonia, informs us that he
lived in the age of Alexander the son of Philip. And he mentions that there were
written accounts, preserved at Babylon with the greatest care, comprehending a
period of above fifteen myriads of years: and that these writings contained
histories of the heaven and of the sea; of the birth of mankind; and of the
kings, and of the memorable actions which they had achieved.
And in the first place he describes Babylonia as a country situated between the Tigris and the Euphrates: that it abounded with wheat, and barley, and ocrus, and sesame; and that in the lakes were produced the roots called gongæ, which are fit for food, [p.22] and in respect to nutriment similar to barley. That there were also palm trees and apples, and a variety of fruits; fish also and birds, both those which are merely of flight, and those which frequent the lakes. He adds, that those parts of the country which bordered upon Arabia, were without water, and barren; but that the parts which lay on the other side were both hilly and fertile.
At Babylon there was (in these times) a great resort of people of various nations, who inhabited Chaldæa, and lived in a lawless manner like the beasts of the field. In the first year there appeared, from that part of the Erythræan sea which borders upon Babylonia, an animal destitute19 of reason, by name Oannes, whose whole body (according to the account of Apollodorus) was that of a fish; that under the fish's head he had another head, with feet also below, similar to those of a man, subjoined to the fish's tail. His voice too, and language, was articulate and human; and a representation of him is preserved even to this day.
This Being was accustomed to pass the day among men; but took no food at that
season; and he gave them an insight into letters and sciences, and arts of every
kind. He taught them to construct cities, to found temples, to compile laws, and
explained to them the principles of geometrical knowledge. He made them
distinguish the seeds of the earth, and shewed them how to collect the fruits;
in short, he instructed them in every thing which could tend to soften manners
and humanize their lives. From that time, nothing material has been added by way
of improvement to his instructions. And when the sun had set, this Being Oannes,
retired again into the sea, and passed the night in the deep; for he was
amphibious. After this there appeared other animals like Oannes, of which
Berossus proposes to give an account when he comes to the history of the kings.
Moreover Oannes wrote concerning the generation of mankind; and of their civil
polity; and the following is the purport of what he said:
"There was a time in which there existed nothing but darkness and an abyss of waters, wherein resided most [p.24] hideous beings, which were produced of a two-fold principle. There appeared men, some of whom were furnished with two wings, others with four, and with two faces. They had one body but two heads: the one that of a man, the other of a woman: and likewise in their several organs both male and female. Other human figures were to be seen with the legs and horns of goats: some had horses' feet: while others united the hind quarters of a horse with the body of a man, resembling in shape the hippocentaurs. Bulls likewise were bred there with the heads of men; and dogs with fourfold bodies, terminated in their extremities with the tails of fishes: horses also with the heads of dogs: men too and other animals, with the heads and bodies of horses and the tails of fishes. In short, there were creatures in which were combined the limbs of every species of animals. In addition to these, fishes, reptiles, serpents, with other monstrous animals, which assumed each other's shape and countenance. Of all which were preserved delineations in the temple of Belus at Babylon.
The person, who presided over them, was a woman named Omoroca; which in the
Chaldæan language is Thalatth;20 in Greek Thalassa, the sea; but which might
equally be interpreted the Moon. All things being in this situation, Belus came,
and cut the woman asunder: and of one half of her he formed the earth, and of
the other half the heavens; and at the same time destroyed the animals within
her.21 All this (he says) was an allegorical description of nature. For, the
whole universe consisting of moisture, and animals being continually generated
therein, the deity above-mentioned took off his own head: upon which the other
gods mixed the blood, as it gushed out, with the earth; and from thence were
formed men. On this account it is that they are rational, and partake of divine
knowledge. This Belus, by whom they signify Jupiter,22 divided the darkness, and
separated the Heavens from the Earth, and reduced universe to order. But the
animals, not being able to bear the prevalence of light, died. Belus upon
[p.26] this, seeing a vast space unoccupied, though
by nature fruitful, commanded one of the gods to take off his head, and to mix
the blood with the earth; and from thence to form other men and animals, which
should be capable of bearing the air.23 Belus formed also the stars, and the sun, and the moon, and the five planets.
(Such, according to Polyhistor Alexander, is the account which Berossus gives in
his first book.)
(In the second book was contained the history of the ten kings of the Chaldæans, and the periods of the continuance of each reign, which consisted collectively of an hundred and twenty sari, or four hundred and thirty-two thousand years; reaching to the time of the Deluge. For Alexander, enumerating the kings from the writings of the Chaldæans, after the ninth Ardates, proceeds to the tenth, who is called by them Xisuthrus, in this manner:)
After the death of Ardates, his son Xisuthrus reigned eighteen sari. In his time happened a great Deluge; the history of which is thus described. [p.27] The Deity, Cronus, appeared to him in a vision, and warned him that upon the fifteenth day of the month Dæsius there would be a flood, by which mankind would be destroyed. He therefore enjoined him to write a history of the beginning, procedure, and conclusion of all things; and to bury it in the city of the Sun at Sippara; and to build a vessel, and take with him into it his friends and relations; and to convey on board every thing necessary to sustain life, together with all the different animals; both birds and quadrupeds, and trust himself fearlessly to the deep. Having asked the Deity, whither he was to sail? he was answered,24 "To the Gods:" upon which he offered up a prayer for the good of mankind. He then obeyed the divine admonition: and built a vessel five stadia in length, and two in breadth. Into this he put every thing which he had prepared; and last of all conveyed into it his wife, his children, and his friends.
After the flood had been upon the [p.28] earth, and was in time abated, Xisuthrus sent out birds from the vessel; which, not finding any food, nor any place whereupon they might rest their feet, returned to him again. After an interval of some days, he sent them forth a second time; and they now returned with their feet tinged with mud. He made a trial a third time with these birds; but they returned to him no more: from whence he judged that the surface of the earth had appeared above the waters. He therefore made an opening in the vessel, and upon looking out found that it was stranded upon the side of some mountain; upon which he immediately quitted it with his wife, his daughter, and the pilot. Xisuthrus then paid his adoration to the earth: and having constructed an altar, offered sacrifices to the gods, and, with those who had come out of the vessel with him, disappeared.
They, who remained within, finding that their companions did not return, quitted the vessel with many lamentations, and called continually on the name of Xisuthrus. Him they saw no more; but they could distinguish his voice in the air, and could hear him admonish them to pay due regard to religion; and likewise in- [p.29] formed them that it was upon account of his piety that he was translated to live with the gods; that his wife and daughter, and the pilot, had obtained the same honour. To this he added, that they should return to Babylonia; and, as it was ordained, search for the writings at Sippara, which they were to make known to all mankind: moreover that the place, wherein they then were, was the land of Armenia. The rest having heard these words, offered sacrifices to the gods; and taking a circuit, journeyed towards Babylonia.
The vessel being thus stranded in Armenia, some part of it yet remains in the Corcyræan25 mountains of Armenia; and the people scrape off the bitumen, with which it had been outwardly coated, and make use of it by way of an alexipharmic and amulet. And when they returned to Babylon, and had found the writings at Sippara, they built cities, and erected temples: and Babylon was thus inhabited again.—Syncel. Chron. 28.—Euseb. Chron. 5. 8.
OF THE CHALDÆAN KINGS.
THIS is the history which Berossus has transmitted to us. He tells us that the first king was Alorus of Babylon, a Chaldæan: he reigned ten sari: and afterwards Alaparus, and Amelon who came from Pantibiblon: then Ammenon the Chaldæan, in whose time appeared the Musarus Oannes the Annedotus from the Erythræan sea. (But Alexander Polyhistor anticipating the event, has said that he appeared in the first year; but Apollodorus says that it was after forty sari; Abydenus, however, makes the second Annedotus appear after twenty-six sari.) Then succeeded Megalarus from the city of Pantibiblon; and he reigned eighteen sari: and after him Daonus the shepherd from Pantibiblon reigned [p.31] ten sari; in his time (he says) appeared again from the Erythræan sea a fourth Annedotus, having the same form with those above, the shape of a fish blended with that of a man. Then reigned Euedorachus from Pantibiblon, for the term of eighteen sari; in his days there appeared another personage from the Erythræan sea like the former, having the same complicated form between a fish and a man, whose name was Odacon. (All these, says Apollodorus, related particularly and circumstantially whatever Oannes had informed them of: concerning these Abydenus has made no mention.) Then reigned Amempsinus, a Chaldæan from Laranchæ: and he being the eighth in order reigned ten sari. Then reigned Otiartes, a Chaldæan, from Laranchæ; and he reigned eight sari. And upon the death of Otiartes, his son Xisuthrus reigned eighteen sari: in his time happened the great deluge. So that the sum of all the kings is ten; and the term which they collectively reigned an hundred and twenty sari.—Syncel. Chron. 39.—Euseb. Chron. 5.
OF THE CHALDÆAN KINGS AND THE DELUGE.
So much concerning the wisdom of the Chaldæans.
It is said that the first king of the country was Alorus, and that he gave out a report that God had appointed him to be the Shepherd of the people: he reigned ten sari: now a sarus is esteemed to be three thousand six hundred years; a neros six hundred; and a sossus sixty.
After him Alaparus reigned three sari: to him succeeded Amillarus from the city of Pantibiblon, who reigned thirteen sari; in his time came up from the sea a second Annedotus, a semi-dæmon very similar in his form to Oannes: after Amillarus reigned Ammenon twelve sari, [p.33] who was of the city of Pantibiblon: then Megalarus of the same place reigned eighteen sari: then Daos, the shepherd, governed for the space of ten sari; he was of Pantibiblon; in his time four double-shaped personages came up out of the sea to land, whose names were Euedocus, Eneugamus, Eneuboulus, and Anementus: afterwards in the time of Euedoreschus appeared another Anodaphus. After these reigned other kings, and last of all Sisithrus: so that in the whole, the number amounted to ten kings, and the term of their reigns to an hundred and twenty sari. (And among other things not irrelative to the subject, he continues thus concerning the deluge:) After Euedoreschus some others reigned, and then Sisithrus. To him the deity Cronus foretold that on the fifteenth day of the month Desius there would be a deluge of rain: and he commanded him to deposit all the writings whatever which were in his possession, in the city of the Sun in Sippara. Sisithrus, when he had complied with commands, sailed immediately to Armenia, and was presently in- [p.34] spired by God. Upon the third day after the cessation of the rain Sisithrus sent out birds, by way of experiment, that he might judge whether the flood had subsided. But the birds passing over an unbounded sea, without finding any place of rest, returned again to Sisithrus. This he repeated with other birds. And when upon the third trial he succeeded, for the birds then returned with their feet stained with mud, the gods translated him from among men. With respect to the vessel, which yet remains in Armenia, it is a custom of the inhabitants to form bracelets and amulets of its wood.—Syncel. Chron. 38.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. 9.—Euseb. Chron. 5. 8.
OF THE TOWER OF BABEL.
They say that the first inhabitants of the earth, glorying in their own strength and size, and despising the gods, undertook to raise a tower whose top should reach the sky, in the place in which Babylon now stands: but when it approached the heaven, the [p.35] winds assisted the gods, and overthrew the work upon its contrivers: and its ruins are said to be still at Babylon: and the gods introduced a diversity of tongues among men, who till that time had all spoken the same language: and a war arose between Cronus and Titan. The place in which they built the tower is now called Babylon, on account of the confusion of the tongues; for confusion is by the Hebrews called Babel.—Euseb. Præpe Evan. lib. 9.—Syncel. Chron. 44.—Euseb. Chron. 13.
FROM JOSEPHUS, &c.26
AFTER the deluge, in the tenth generation, was a certain man among the Chaldæans renowned for his justice and great exploits, and for his skill in the celestial sciences.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. 9.
From the reign of Nabonasar only are the Chaldæans (from whom the Greek mathematicians copy) accurately acquainted with the heavenly motions: for Nabonasar collected all the mementos of the kings prior to himself, and destroyed them, that the enumeration of the Chaldæan kings [p.37] might commence with him.—Syncel. Chron. 207.
OF THE DESTRUCTION OF THE JEWISH TEMPLE.
He (Nabopollasar) sent his son Nabuchodonosor with a great army against Egypt, and against Judea, upon his being informed that they had revolted from him; and by that means he subdued them all, and set fire to the temple that was at Jerusalem; and removed our people entirely out of their own country, and transferred them to Babylon, and our city remained in a state of desolation during the interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus king of Persia. (He then says, that) this Babylonian king conquered Egypt, and Syria, and Phœnicia, and Arabia, and exceeded in his exploits all that had reigned before him in Babylon and Chaldæa.—Joseph. contr. Appion. lib. 1. c. 19.
When Nabopollasar his (Nabuchodnosor's) father, heard that the governor, whom he
had set over Egypt, [p.38] and the provinces of Cœlesyria and Phœnicia, had revolted,
he was determined to punish his delinquencies, and for that purpose entrusted
part of his army to his son Nabuchodonosor, who was then of mature age,27 and
sent him forth against the rebel: and Nabuchodonosor engaged and overcame him,
and reduced the country again under his dominion. And it came to pass that his
father, Nabopollasar, was seized with a disorder which proved fatal, and he died
in the city of Babylon, after he had reigned nine and twenty years.
Nabuchodonosor, as soon as he had received intelligence of his father's death, set in order the affairs of Egypt and the other countries, and committed to some of his faithful officers the captives he had taken from the Jews, and Phœnicians, and Syrians, and the nations belonging to Egypt, that they might conduct them with that part of the forces which had heavy armour, together with the [p.39] rest of his baggage, to Babylonia: in the mean time with a few attendants he hastily crossed the desert to Babylon. When he arrived there he found that his affairs had been faithfully conducted by the Chaldæans, and that the principal person among them had preserved the kingdom for him: and he accordingly obtained possession of all his father's dominions. And he distributed the captives in colonies in the most proper places of Babylonia: and adorned the temple of Belus, and the other temples, in a sumptuous and pious manner, out of the spoils which he had taken in this war. He also rebuilt the old city, and added another to it on the outside, and so far completed Babylon, that none, who might besiege it afterwards, should have it in their power to divert the river, so as to facilitate an entrance into it: and he effected this by building three walls about the inner city, and three about the outer. Some of these walls he built of burnt brick and bitumen, and some of brick only. When he had thus admirably fortified the city, and had magnificently adorned the gates, he added also a new palace to those in which his forefathers had dwelt, adjoining them, but exceeding them in height and splendour. [p.40] Any attempt to describe it would be tedious: yet notwithstanding its prodigious size and magnificence it was finished within fifteen days. In this palace he erected very high walks, supported by stone pillars; and by planting what was called a pensile paradise, and replenishing it with all sorts of trees, he rendered the prospect an exact resemblance of a mountainous country. This he did to gratify his queen, because she had been brought up in Media, and was fond of a mountainous situation.—Joseph. contr. Appion. lib. 1. c. 19.—Syncel. Chron. 220.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. 9.
OF THE CHALDÆAN KINGS AFTER NEBUCHADNEZZAR.
Nabuchodonosor, whilst he was engaged in building the above-mentioned wall, fell
sick, and died after he had reigned forty-three years; whereupon his son
Evilmerodachus succeeded him in his kingdom. His government however was
conducted in an [p.41] illegal and improper manner, and he fell a victim to a
conspiracy which was formed against his life by Neriglissoorus, his sister's
husband, after he had reigned about two years.
Upon his death Neriglissoorus, the chief of the conspirators, obtained possession of the kingdom, and reigned four years.
He was succeeded by his son Laborosoarchodus who was but a child, reigned nine months; for his misconduct he was seized by conspirators, and put to death by torture.
After his death, the conspirators assembled, and by common consent placed the crown upon the head of Nabonnedus, a man of Babylon, and one of the leaders of the insurrection. It was in his reign that the walls of the city of Babylon which defend the banks of the river were curiously built with burnt brick and bitumen.
In the seventeenth year of the reign of Nabonnedus, Cyrus came out of Persia with a great army, and having [p.42] conquered all the rest of Asia, advanced hastily into the country of Babylonia. As soon as Nabonnedus perceived he was advancing to attack him, he assembled his forces and opposed him, but was defeated, and fled with a few of his adherents, and was shut up in the city of Borsippus. Upon this Cyrus took Babylon, and gave orders that the outer walls should be demolished, because the city appeared of such strength as to render a siege almost impracticable. From thence he marched to Borsippus, to besiege Nabonnedus: but Nabonnedus delivered himself into his hands without holding out the place: he was therefore kindly treated by Cyrus, who provided him with an establishment in Carmania, but sent him out of Babylonia. Nabonnedus accordingly spent the remainder of his life in that country, where he died.—Joseph. contr. App. lib. 1. c. 20.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. 9.
OF THE FEAST OF SACEA.
Berossus, in the first book of his Babylonian history, says; That in the [p.43] eleventh month, called Loos, is celebrated in Babylon the feast of Sacea for five days, in which it is the custom that the masters should obey their domestics, one of whom is led round the house, clothed in a royal garment, and him they call Zoganes.—Athenæus, lib. 14.
ABYDENUS, in his history of the Assyrians, has preserved the following fragment
of Megasthenes, who says: That Nabucodrosorus, having become more powerful than
Hercules, invaded Libya and Iberia, and when he had rendered them tributary, he
extended his conquests over the inhabitants of the shores upon the right of the
sea. It is moreover related by the Chaldæans, that as he went up into his palace
he was possessed by some god; and he cried out and said: "Oh! Babylonians, I,
Nabucodrosorus, foretel unto you a calamity which must shortly come to pass,
which neither Belus my ancestor, nor his queen Beltis, have power to persuade
the Fates to turn away. A Persian mule shall come, and by the assistance of your
gods shall impose upon [p.45] you the yoke of slavery; the author of which shall be a
Mede, the vain glory of Assyria. Before he should thus betray my subjects, Oh!
that some sea or whirlpool might receive him, and his memory be blotted out for
ever; or that he might be cast out to wander through some desert, where there
are neither cities nor the trace of men, a solitary exile among rocks and
caverns where beasts and birds alone abide. But for me, before he shall have
conceived these mischiefs in his mind, a happier end will be provided."
When he had thus prophesied, he expired: and was succeeded by his son Evilmaluruchus, who was slain by his kinsman Neriglisares: and Neriglisares left Labassoarascus his son: and when he also had suffered death by violence, they crowned Nabannidochus, who had no connexion with the royal family; and in his reign Cyrus took Babylon, and granted him a principality in Carmania.
And concerning the rebuilding of Babylon by Nabuchodonosor, he writes thus: It is said that from the beginning all things were water, called the sea: that Belus caused this state of things to cease, and appointed to each its proper place: and he surrounded Babylon with a wall: but in process [p.46] of time this wall disappeared: and Nabuchodonosor walled it in again, and it remained so with its brazen gates until the time of the Macedonian conquest. And after other things he says: Nabuchodonosor having succeeded to the kingdom, built the walls of Babylon in a triple circuit in fifteen days; and he turned the river Armacale, a branch of the Euphrates, and the Acracanus: and above the city of Sippara he dug a receptacle for the waters, whose perimeter was forty parasangs, and whose depth was twenty cubits; and he placed gates at the entrance thereof, by opening which they irrigated the plains, and these they call Echetognomones (sluices): and he constructed dykes against the irruptions of the Erythræan sea, and built the city of Teredon to check the incursions of the Arabs; and he adorned the palaces with trees, calling them hanging gardens.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. 10.—Euseb. Chron. 49.
FRAGMENTS AND EXTRACTS
ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE
OF THE ARK:
FROM NICHOLAUS DAMASCENUS.28
THERE is above Minyas in the land of Armenia a very great mountain which is called Baris;29 to which, it is said, that many persons retreated at the time of the deluge, and were saved; and that one in particular was carried thither in an ark, and was landed on its summit, and that the remains of the vessel were long preserved upon the mountain. Perhaps this was the same individual of whom Moses the legislator of the Jews has made mention.—Jos. Ant. Jud. I. 3.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. 9.
OF THE DISPERSION:
THE priests who escaped took with them the implements of the worship of the Enyalian Jove, and came to Senaar in Babylonia. But they were again driven from thence by the introduction of a diversity of tongues: upon which they founded colonies in various parts, each settling in such situations as chance or the direction of God led them to occupy.—Jos. Ant. Jud. I. c. 4.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. 9.
OF THE TOWER OF BABEL:
FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR.
THE Sibyl says: That when all men formerly spoke the same language; some among them undertook to erect a large and lofty tower, that they [p.51] might climb up into heaven. But God30 sending forth a whirlwind, confounded their design, and gave to each tribe a particular language of its own: which is the reason that the name of that city is Babylon. After the deluge lived Titan and Prometheus; when Titan undertook a war against Cronus.31—Sync. 44.—Jos. Ant. Jud. I. c. 4—Eus. Præp. Evan. 9.
OF THE TOWER AND TITANIAN WAR:
FROM THE SIBYLLINE ORACLES.32
BUT when the judgements of the Almighty God
Were ripe for execution; when the Tower
Rose to the skies upon Assyria's plain,
And all mankind one language only knew:
A dread commission from on high was given
To the fell whirlwinds, which with dire alarms
Beat on the Tower, and to its lowest base
Shook it convulsed. And now all intercourse,
By some occult and overruling power,
Ceased among men: by utterance they strove
Perplexed and anxious to disclose their mind;
But their lip failed them; and in lieu of words
Produced a painful babbling sound: the place
Was thence called Babel; by th' apostate crew
Named from the event. Then severed far away
They sped uncertain into the realms unknown:
Thus kingdoms rose; and the glad world was filled.
She then mentions Cronus, Titan and Jäpetus, and the three sons of the patriarch governing the world in the tenth generation after the deluge, thus,
Καὶ τότε δὴ δεχάτη γενεὴ μερόπων ἀνϑρώπων,
’Εξ οὗπερ χαταχλυσμὸς ἐπὶ προτέρους γένετ’ ἄνδρας,
Καὶ βασίλευσε Κρόνος, χαὶ Τιτᾶν, ’Ιαπετός τε,
The triple division of the earth is afterwards mentioned, over which each of the patriarchs ruled in peace.
Τρίσσαι δὴ μέριδες γαίης χατὰ χλῆρον ἑχάδτοῦ,
Καὶ βασίλευσεν ἕχαστος ἐχὼν μέρος, οὐδὲ μάχοντο
Then the death of Noah, and lastly the war between Cronus and Titan.
Καὶ μαχέσαντο Κρόνος Τιτᾶν τε πρὸς αὑτούς.
OF SCYTHISM AND HELLENISM
The parents of all the heresies, and the prototypes from which they derive their
names, and from which all other heresies originate, are these four primary ones.
The first is Barbarism,34 which prevailed without a rival from the days of Adam through ten generations to the time of Noah. It is called Barbarism, because men had no rulers, nor submitted to any particular discipline of life; but as each thought proper to prescribe to himself; so he was at liberty to follow the dictates of his own inclination.
The second is Scythism which prevailed from the days of Noah and thence
downwards to the building of the tower and Babylon, and for a few years
subsequently to that time, that is to the days of Phalec and Ragau. But the
nations which incline upon the borders of Europe continued addicted to the
Scythic heresy, and the customs of the Scythians to the age of Thera, and
afterwards; of this sect also were the Thracians.
The third is Hellenism, which originated in the days of Seruch with the introduction of idolatry: and as men had hitherto followed each some demonolatrous superstition of his own, they were now reduced to a more established form of polity, and to the rites and ceremonies of idols. And the followers of this began with the use of painting, making likenesses of those whom they had formerly honoured, either kings or chiefs, or men who in their lives had performed actions which they deemed worthy of record, by strength or excellence of body.
The Egyptians, and Babylonians, and Phrygians, and Phœnicians were the first
propagators of this superstition of making images, and of the mysteries: from
whom it was transferred to the Greeks from the time of Cecrops downwards. But it
was not till afterwards and at a considerable interval that Cronus and Rhea,
Zeus and Apollo, and the rest were esteemed and honoured as gods.
The following extract is given in Epiphanius preceding the above.
AND from the times of Tharra the father of Abraham, they introduced images and all the errors of idolatry; honouring their forefathers, and their departed predecessors with effigies which they fashioned after their likeness. They first made these effigies of earthen ware, but afterwards according to their different arts they sculptured them in stone, and cast them in silver and gold, and wrought them in wood, and all kinds of different materials.
OF the tribe of Japhet was born Seruch, who first introduced Hellenism and the worship of idols. For he and those who concurred with him in opinion honoured their predecessors whether warriors or leaders, or characters renowned during their lives for valour or virtue with columnar statues, as if they had been their progenitors, and tendered to them a species of religious veneration as a kind of gods and sacrificed. But after this their successors, overstepping the intention of their ancestors that they should honour them as their progenitors and the inventors of good things with monuments alone, honoured them as heavenly gods and sacrificed to them as such. And the following was the form of their canonization: they inscribed their names after their decease in their sacred books and established a festival to each at certain seasons, saying that their souls had departed to the islands of the blessed and were never condemned or burnt with fire.
OF THE TOWER OF BABEL AND ABRAHAM:
THE city of Babylon owes its foundation to those who were saved from the
catastrophe of the deluge: they were the Giants, and they built the tower which
is noticed in history. But the tower being overthrown by the interposition of
God, the Giants were scattered over all the earth.
He says moreover that in the tenth generation in the city Camarina of Babylonia, which some call the city Urie, and which signifies a city of the Chaldæans, the thirteenth in descent lived Abraham, of a noble race, and superior to all others in wisdom; of whom they relate that he was the inventor of astrology and the Chaldæan magic, and that on account of his eminent piety he was esteemed by God. It is further said, that under the directions of God he removed and lived in Phœnicia, and there taught the Phœnicians the motions of the sun and moon and all other things; for which reason he was held in great reverence by their King.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. 9.
FROM NICOLAUS DAMASCENUS.
ABRAM was king of Damascus, and he came thither as a stranger with an army from that part of the country which is situated above Babylon of the Chaldæans: but after a short time he again emigrated from this region with his people and transferred his habitation to the land, which was then called Cananæa, but now Judæa, together with all the multitude which had increased with him; of whose history I shall give an account in another book. The name of Abram is well-known even to this day in Damascus: and a village is pointed out which is still called the House of Abram.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. 9.—Jos. Ant. Jud. 1. 7.
FOR the Babylonians say that the first was Belus, who is the same as Cronus. And from him descended Belus and Chanaan; and this Chanaan was the father of the Phœnicians. Another of his sons was Chum, who is called by the Greeks Asbolus, father of the Ethiopians, and the father of Mestraim, the father of the Egyptians. The Greeks say, moreover, that Atlas was the discoverer of astrology.—Eus. Pr. Ev. lib. IX.
THALLUS makes mention of Belus, the king of the Assyrians, and Cronus the Titan;
and says that Belus, with the Titans, made war against Zeus and his compeers,
who are called Gods. He says, moreover, that Gygus was smitten, and fled to
According to the history of Thallus, Belus preceded the Trojan war 322 years.—Theoph. ad Aut. 281, 282.
OF THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE:
IN like manner all the other kings succeeded, the son receiving the empire from his father, being altogether thirty in their generations to Sardanapalus. In his time the empire passed to the Medes from the Assyrians, having remained with them upwards of 136035 years, according to the account of Ctesias the Cnidian, in his second book.—Diod. Sic. lib. II. p. 77.
FROM DIODORUS SICULUS.
IN the manner above related, the empire of the Assyrians, after having continued from Ninus thirty descents, and more than 1400 years, was finally dissolved by the Medes.—Diod. Sic. lib. II. p. 81.
THE Medes were the first who began the revolt from the Assyrians after they had maintained the dominion over Upper Asia for a period of 520 years.—Lib. I. c. 95.
FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR.36
NABOPOLASAR, whom Alexander Polyhistor calls Sardanapallus, sent to Astyages the Satrap of Media, and demanded his daughter Amuïtes in marriage for his son Nabuchodonosor. He was the commander of the army of Saracus King of the Chaldæans, and, having been sent upon some expedition, turned his arms against Saracus and marched against the city of Ninus (Nineveh). But Saracus confounded by his advance set fire to his palace and burnt himself in it. And Nabopolasar obtained the empire of the Chaldæans: he was the father of Nabuchodonosor.—Euseb. Chron. 46.
OF THE CHALDÆAN AND ASSYRIAN KINGS:
FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR.
IN addition to the above Polyhistor continues thus: After the deluge Evexius
held possession of the country of the [p.60] Chaldæans during a period of four neri.
And he was succeeded by his son Comosbelus, who held the empire four neri and
five sossi. But from the time of Xisuthrus and the deluge, to that at which the
Medes took possession of Babylon, there were altogether eighty-six kings.
Polyhistor enumerates and mentions each of them by name from the volume of
Berossus: the duration of the reigns of all which kings comprehends a period of
thirty-three thousand and ninety-one years. But when their power was thus firmly
established, the Medes suddenly levied forces against Babylon to surprise it,
and to place upon the throne kings chosen from among themselves.
He then gives the names of the Median Kings, 8 in number, who reigned during the period of 224 years: and again 11 Kings during .... years. Then 49 Kings of the Chaldæans 458 years. Then 9 Kings of the Arabians 245 years. After all these successive periods of years he states that Semiramis reigned over the Assyrians. And again minutely enumerates the names of 45 [p.61] Kings, assigning to them a term of 526 years. After whom, he says there was a King of the Chaldæans, whose name was Phulus: Of whom also the historical writings of the Hebrews make mention under the name of Phulus (Pul) who they say invaded the country of the Jews.—Eu. Ar. Chron. 39.
FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR.
AFTER the reign of the brother of Senecherib, Acises reigned over the
Babylonians, and when he had governed for the space of thirty days, he was slain
by Marodach Baladanus, who held the empire by force during six months: and he
was slain and succeeded by a person named Elibus. But in the third year of his
reign Senecherib king of the Assyrians levied an army against the Babylonians;
and in a battle, in which they were engaged, routed, and took him prisoner with
his adherents, and commanded them to be carried into the land of the Assyrians.
Having taken upon himself the [p.62] government of the Babylonians, he appointed his
son Asordanius their king, and he himself retired again into Assyria.
When he received a report that the Greeks had made a hostile descent upon Cilicia, he marched against them and fought with them a pitched battle, in which, though he suffered great loss in his own army, he overthrew them, and upon the spot he erected the statue of himself as a monument of his victory; and ordered his prowess to be inscribed upon it in the Chaldæan characters, to hand down the remembrance of it to posterity. He built also the city of Tarsus after the likeness of Babylon, which he called Tharsis. And after enumerating the various exploits of Sinnecherim, he adds that he reigned 18 years, and was cut off by a conspiracy which had been formed against his life by his son Ardumusanus.—Eu. Ar. Chron. 42.
OF SENECHERIB AND HIS SUCESSORS:
FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR.
AND after him (Pul) according to Polyhistor, Senecherib was king.
(The Chaldæan historian also makes mention of Senecherib himself, and Asordanus his son, and Marodach Baladanus, as well as Nabuchodonosorus.)
And Sinecherim reigned eighteen years; and after him his son eight years. Then reigned Sammuges twenty-one years, and likewise his brother twenty-one years. Then reigned Nabupalsar twenty years, and after him Nabucodrossorus forty-three years. (Therefore, from Sinecherim to Nabucodrossorus is comprehended a period altogether of eighty-eight years.)
After Samuges, Sardanapallus the Chaldæan, reigned twenty-one years. He sent an army to the assistance of Astyages the Mede, Prince and Satrap of the family, that he might give the Amuhean daughter of Astyages to his son Nabucodrossorus. Then reigned Nabucodrossorus [p.63*] forty-three years; and he came with a mighty army, and led the Jews, and Phœnicians, and Syrians into captivity.
And after Nabucodrorossus reigned his son Amilmarudochus, twelve years.... And after him Neglisarus reigned over the Chaldæans four years; and then Nabodenus seventeen years. In his reign Cyrus, the son of Cambyses, invaded the country of the Babylonians. Nabodenus went out to give him battle, but was defeated, and betook himself to flight: and Cyrus reigned at Babylon nine years. He was killed, however, in another battle, which took place in the plain of Daas. After him reigned Cambyses eight years; then Darius thirty-six years; after him Xerxes and the other kings of the Persian line.—Eu. Ar. Chron. pp. 41, 42. 44, 45.
OF SENECHERIB AND HIS SUCCESSORS:
At the same time the twenty-fifth who was Senecherib can hardly be recognized
among the kings. It was he who subjected the city of Babylon to his power, and
defeated and sunk a Grecian fleet upon the coast of Cilicia. He built also a
temple at Athens and erected brazen statues, upon which he engraved his own
exploits. And he built the city of Tarsus after the plan and likeness of
Babylon, that the river Cydnus should flow through Tarsus, in the same manner as
the Euphrates intersected Babylon.
Next in order after him reigned Nergillus who was assassinated by his son Adramelus: and he also was slain by Axerdis (his brother by the same father, but of a different mother,) and his army pursued and blockaded in the city of Byzantium. Axerdis was the first that levied mercenary soldiers, one of whom was Pythagoras a follower of the wisdom of the Chaldæans: he also reduced under his dominion Egypt [p.64] and the country of Cælo-Syria, whence came Sardanapallus.37
After him Saracus reigned over the Assyrians, and when he was informed that a very great multitude of barbarians had come up from the sea to attack him, he sent Busalossorus as his general in haste to Babylon. But he, having with a treasonable design obtained Amuhean, the daughter of Astyages the prince of the Medes, to be affianced to his son Nabuchodrossorus, marched straightways to surprise the city of Ninus, that is Nineveh. But when Saracus the king was apprized of all these proceedings he burnt the royal palace. And Nabuchodrossorus succeeded to the empire and surrounded Babylon with a strong wall.—Eu. Ar. Chron. 53.
OF BELUS AND THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE:
BELUS (says Castor) was king of the Assyrians; and under him the Cyclops
assisted Jupiter with thunder-bolts and lightnings in his contest with the
Titans. At that time there were kings of the Titans, one of whom was Ogygus.
(After a short digression he proceeds to say, that) the Giants, in their
attempted inroad upon the Gods, were slain by the assistance of Hercules and
Dionysus, who were themselves of the Titan race.
Belus, whom we have mentioned above, after his death was esteemed a God. After him, Ninus reigned over the Assyrians fifty-two years. He married Semiramis, who, after his decease, reigned over the Assyrians forty-two years. Then reigned Zames, who is Ninyas. (Then he enumerates each of the successive Assyrian kings in order, and mentions them all, down to Sardanapallus, by their respective names: whose names, and the length of their reigns, we shall also give presently. Castor mentions them in his canon in the following words.)
We have first digested into a canon the kings of the Assyrians, commencing with Belus: but since we have no certain tradition respecting the length of his reign, we have merely set down his name, and commenced the chronological series from Ninus; and have concluded it with another Ninus, who obtained the empire after Sardanapallus; that in this manner the whole length of the time, as well as of the reigns of each king, might be plainly set forth. Thus it will be found, that the complete sum of the years amounts to 1280.—Eus. Ar. p. 81.
OF THE ASSYRIAN EMPIRE:
FROM VELLEIUS AND ÆMILIUS SURA.
THE Asiatic empire was subsequently transferred from the Assyrians, who had held it 1070 years, to the Medes, from this time, for a period of 870 years. For Sardanapalus, the king of the Assyrians, a man wallowing in luxury, being the thirty-third from Ninus and Semiramis, the founders of Babylon, from whom the kingdom had passed in a regular descent from father to son, was deprived of his empire, and put to death by Arbaces the Mede. .... Æmilius Sura also, in his annals of the Roman people, says, "That the Assyrian princes extended their empire over all nations. They were succeeded by the Medes, then by the Persians, then by the Macedonians and shortly afterwards by two kings Philip and Antiochus, of Macedonian origin, who, not long after the destruction of Carthage, were conquered by the Romans, who then obtained the empire of the world. To this time, from the beginning of the reign of Ninus, king of the Assyrians, who first obtained the empire, there has elapsed a period of 1995 years."—Hist. I. c. 6.
OF THE CHALDÆAN OBSERVATIONS:
ANTICLIDES relates that they (letters) were invented in Egypt by a person whose name was Menon, fifteen years before Phoroneus the most ancient king of Greece: and he endeavours to prove it by the monuments. On the contrary, Epigenes, a writer of first-rate authority, informs us, that among the Babylonians were preserved observations of the stars, inscribed upon baked tiles, extending to a period of 720 years. Berosus and Critodemus, who are the most moderate in their calculations, nevertheless extend the period of the observations to 480 years. Whence may be inferred the eternal use of letters among them.—Lib. VII. c. 56.
We must also contemn the Babylonians, and those who, in the region of Caucasus, pretend to have observed the heavens and courses of the stars: we must condemn them, I say, of folly, or of vanity, or of impudence, who assert that they have preserved upon monuments observations extending back during an interval of 470,000 years.—De Divin.
DYNASTIES OF THE KINGS
CHALDÆA, ASSYRIA, MEDIA, PERSIA, THEBES, AND EGYPT.
DYNASTY OF CHALDÆAN KINGS.
THE Chaldaeans were the first that assumed the title of Kings.
Of these the first was Evechius who is known to us by the name of Nebrod (Nimrod) he reigned at Babylon 6 years and one-third.
2. Chomasbelus . . 71 years.
From the foundation 13 years.
3. Porus ....35 years.
4. Nechubes, .... 43 years.
5. Nabius .... 48 years.
6. Oniballus .... 40 years.
7. Zinzerus .... 46 years.
It is to be observed that some of these names occur again as the immediate successors of Nabonasar.
DYNASTY OF THE ARABIAN KINGS OF CHALDÆA.
AFTER the six first Chaldæan kings reigned, reigned the following Arabian kings of Chaldæa.
1. Mardocentes ... 45 years.
From the foundation 45 years,
2. Mardacus .... 40 years.
3. Sisimordacus ..... 28 years.
4. Nabius .... 37 years.
5. Paramus .... 40 years.
6. Nabonnabus .... 25 years.
OF THE ASSYRIAN KINGS:
NINUS (says Abydenus) was the son of Arbelus; who was the son of Chaalus, the son of Anebus, the son of Babius, the son of Belus king of the Assyrians.
DYNASTY OF ASSYRIAN KINGS:
OF the Assyrian kings the 1st was Belus who reigned 55 years.
2. Ninus ... 52 years.
3. Semiramis ... 42.
4. Ninuas who is called Zamis the son of Ninus and Semiramis: he reigned 38 years.
5. Arius ... 30 years.
6. Aralius ... 40.
7. Xerxes ... 30.
8. Armamithres ... 38.
9. Belochus ... 35.
10. Balaeus ... 52.
11. Sethos ... 50.
12. Mamuthos .... 30.
13. Aschalius .... 28.
14. Sphaerus .... 22.
15. Mamulus ... 30.
16. Spartheos .... 42.
DYNASTY OF ASSYRIAN KINGS:
I. NINUS, quern primum universes Asiae, exceptis
Simul universa Assyriorum Dynastia juxta certos Scriptores (perduravit) annos MCCXL. juxta alios autem annos MCCC. Thonnus Concolerus, qui Greece Sardanapallus vocatur ab Arbace et Belesio devictus, seipsum igni tradidit: a quo ad primam Olympiadem (sunt) anni XL.—Eus. Chron. Ar. p. 98.
17. Ascatades.....38 years.
Sardanapalus built the cities of Tarsus and Anchiale in one day.
The Assyrian empire founded A.M. 3216. flourished 1460 years and was overthrown A.M. 4675.
DYNASTY OF ASSYRIAN KINGS.39
THEY write that the first king of the Assyrians was Bilus, whom the Assyrians, Phoenicians, and Persians, call God. In the Greek language they call him Dius.
1. Bilus, who was the first king, reigned over the Assyrians and part of Asia 62 years.
2. Afterwards reigned Ninus 52 years. He founded Nineveh, a city of the Assyrians, and coming into Asia was called Picus.
3. After him Semiramis, his wife, 42 years. She was called Rea on account of her manifold atrocities.
4. After her Zinas reigned 38 years.
5. Arius reigned 30 years.
VI. Aranus annos ... XL.
Anno isto tricessimo secunda confixus est Sol (Ilion?) ab Acheis.
|XXVIII. Euteus annos .... XI.
XXIX. Thineus .... XXIX.
XXX. Cercillus .... XL.
XXXI. Eupalus .... XXXVI.
XXXII. Lausthenus .... XLV.
XXXIII. Peritiadus .... XXX.
XXXIV. Ophrateus ..... XX.
XXXV. Ophratanus ..... L.
XXXVI. Acrapazus .... XL.
XXXVII. Tonos Conceleros qui vocatur Graece Sardanapalus annos ....XXX.
XXXVIII. Ninus ....XIX.
Simul reges XXXIX antiqui Assyriorum perseverantes annos mille quadringentos triginta. Ab istis autem in prima Olympiada, annos LXVII Assyriorum regnum.
Altogether these thirty-nine ancient kings of the Assyrians reigned 1430 years. And from them to the first Olympiad the kingdom of the Assyrians continued sixty-seven years.
CHALDEAN DYNASTY OF NABONASAR.
THE ECCLESIASTICAL CANON.
THE ecclesiastical computation of the years from Salmanasar who is the same as Nabonasar to Alexander of Macedon.
1. Nabonasar who is called in Scripture Salmanasar, reigned 25 years.... 25.
2. Nabius ....8... 33.
3. Chinzerus and Porus ....5.... 38.
4. Ilulaeus ....5 ...... 43.
5. Mardocempadus ....12 ...55.
6. Arceanus ....5 .... 60.
7. Interregnum ...2 ..... 62.
8. Belilus ....3.... 65.
9. Aparanadisus .....6 ..... 71.
10. Erigebalus .....1 .... 72.
11. Mesesimordacus ....4...... 76.
THE ASTRONOMICAL CANON.
THE Astronomical Canon of the years from Nabonasar who is the same as Salmanasar King of the Chaldaeans to the death of Alexander the founder of the Greek dynasty.
1. Nabonasarus .... 14.
2. Nabios ......2..... 16.
3. Chinzerus and Porus ....5 .....21.
4. Ilulseus ....5 .....26.
5. Mardocempadus ....12 ....38.
6. Arceanus .....5 ....43.
7. Interregnum ....2 ...... 45.
8. Belibus ......3 ......48.
9. Aparanadisus ......6 ...... 54.
10. Erigebalus .... 1.....55.
11. Mesesimordacus .....4 ..... 59.
THE ECCLESIASTICAL CANON.
12. Interregnum .....8 ......84.
13. Isarindinus ......13 ...... 97.
14. Saosduchinus ......9 ....... 106.
15. Cineladanus ......14 ...... 120.
16. Nabopalasarus .....21 ...... 141.
17. Nabuchodonosor his son .....43 .....184.
18. Euilad Marodach ......5 .....189.
19. Niriglesarus who is Baltasar ....3 ......192.
20. Nabonadius who is Astyges Darius Assuerus and Artaxerxes .....17 ..... 219.
21. Cyrus the first king of Persia .....31.
22. Cambyses the son of Cyrus ....8 .....39.
23. The Magi two brothers Smerdius and Pausoutes .....7 months.
24. Darius the son of Hystaspes .....36 .... 75.
THE ASTRONOMICAL CANON.
12. Interregnums...... 67.
13. Isarindinus .....13 ...... 80.
14. Saosduchinus..... 9...... 89.
15. Cineladalus .....14.....103.
16. Nabopalasarus the father of Nabuchodonosor .....21 ....124.
17. Nabopalasarus who is Nabuchodonosor .....43 .....167.
18. Illoarudaraus ...3 ..... 170.
19. Nirigasolasarus .....5 ...... 175.
20. Nabonadius who is Astyages ....34 .... 209.
21. Cyrus ....9 .... 218.
22. Cambyses ....8 .....226.
23. Darius ....36 ....262.
24. Xerxes ....21 ....283.
THE ECCLESIASTICAL CANON.
25. Xerxes the son of Darius 20 months ..... 77.
26. Artaxerxes the son of Xerxes, Longimanus ......43 ........ 120.
27. Xerxes the son ofArtaxerxes .....2 months.
28. Sogdianus .....7 months .....121.
29. Darius Nothus .....19 ...... 140.
30. Artaxerxes Mnemon ......40 .......... 180.
31. Ochus the son of Artaxerxes .....5 ...... 185.
32. Arses the brother of Ochus .......4 ...... 189.
33. Darius III. the son of Arsamus .....6 ..... 195.
34. Alexander of Macedon..... 6 ........ 201.
THE ASTRONOMICAL CANON.
25. Artaxerxes I...... 41..... 324.
26. Darius II. who is Nothus .....19 .....343.
27. Artaxerxes II. ....46 ..... 389.
28. Ochus .....21 .....410.
29. Sarus ....2 .....412.
30. Darius III. who is Arsarnus .....6 .....418.
31. Alexander the Great ....6...... 424.
KINGS OF THE ASSYRIANS AND MEDES.
1. Nabonassarus .... 14.
11. Mesessimordacus ...4 ....59.
KINGS OF THE PERSIANS.
21. Cyrus ....9 .....218.
22. Cambyses ....8 .... 226.
23. Darius I. .....36 .... 262.
24. Xerxes ......21 ....283.
25. Artaxerxes I. ......41 ...... 324.
26. Darius II. .....19 ..... 343.
27. Artaxerxes II. ......46 ..... 389.
28. Ochus ....21 ...... 410.
29. Arostes ....2 ....412.
30. Darius III. ....4 ..... 416.
KINGS OF THE GREEKS.
Alexander the Great 8. 424.
Philippus Aridaeus 7. 7. 431.
Alexander Ægus 12. 19. 443.
GREEK KINGS OF EGYPT.
Ptolemaeus Lagus 20. 39. 463.
Pt. Philadelphus 38. 77. 501.
Pt. Euergetes 25. 102. 526.
Pt. Philopator 17. 119. 543.
Pt. Epiphanes 24. 143. 567.
Pt. Philometor 35. 178. 602.
Pt. Euergetes II 29. 207. 631.
Pt. Soter 36. . . 243. 667.
Pt. Dionysus 29. 272. 696.
Cleopatra 22. ... 294. 718.
KINGS OF THE ROMANS.
Augustus 43. ... 337. 761.
Tiberius 22 .....359. 783.
Gaius 4 .......363. 787.
Claudius 14 ......377. 801.
Nero 14 .....391. 815.
Vespasianus 10. ..... 401. 825.
Titus 3 .....404. 828.
Dometianus 15...... 419. 843.
Nerva 1 .....420. 844.
Trajanus 19 .....439. 863.
Adrianus21. ...... 460. 884.
Antoninus 23. ..... 483. 907.
Calvisius, p. 79.
DYNASTIES OF THE MEDIAN KINGS.
OF the Median kings the first was Arbaces who overthrew the empire of the Assyrians .. .. 28 years.
Deioces the king of the Medes founded the great and celebrated city of Ecbatana.
6. Aphraartes ...... 51 years.
7. Cyaxares ....... 32.
8. Astyages Darius ......38.
I. Arbaces ....XXVIII.
II. Mandauces .....XX.
III. Sosarmus .....XXX.
IV. Articas ......XXX.
V. Dejoces ......LIV.
1 Deioces .... 53 years.
2. Phraortes ...22.
3. Cyaxares ..... 40.
4. Astyages .... 35.
1. Arbaces ...28 years.
2. Maduces ..50.
3. Sosarmus ...30.
4. Artias ....50.
5. Arbianes ....22.41
6. Arsseus ....40.
7. Artynes .... 22.
8. Artibarnas .....40.
After the death of Astibaras king of the Medes of old age, reigned 9. Aspadas his son, whom the Greeks call Astyages.—Diod. Sic. Lib. II. p. 84.
THE times of the kingdom of the Medes continued 269 years, thus: From the beginning of the reign of Abbacus, the first king of Media to Alyatus, whom Cyrus dethroned when he transferred the empire to Persia.
1. Abracus .... 28 years.
2. Sosarmus .... 4.
3. Mamythus .... 40.
4. Cardiceus .... 23.
5. Diycus .... 54.
6. Fraortus .... 24.
7. Cyaxarus .... 32.
8. Astyacus .... 38.
The kingdom of the Medes, therefore, continued 269 years, from the 15th year of Ozias, king of Judah, that is 53 years before the first Olympiad, and it ended in the 54th Olympiad, in the 308th year, in the reign of Astyagus, whom Cyrus the Persian dethroned in the 54th Olympiad.—Sc. Eu. Chron. 78.
CANON OF THE KINGS OF THEBES:
THE first who reigned was Menes the Thebinite, the Thebaean;
which is by interpretation Dionius. He reigned sixty-two years.
The 2nd of the Theban kings reigned Athothes the son of Menes, 59 years. He is called by interpretation Hermogenes.
The 3rd of the Theban Egyptian kings was Athothes, of the same name, 32 years.
The 4th of the Theban kings was Diabies the son ofAthothes, 19 years. By interpretation he is called Philetserus.
The 5th of the Theban kings was Pemphos, the son of Athothes, who
The 6th of the Theban Egyptian kings was Toegaramachus
Momchiri, the Memphite, who is called a man redundant in his members, 79 years.
The 7th of the Theban Egyptian kings, Stoechus his son, who is Ares the senseless, reigned 6 years.
The 8th of the Theban Egyptian kings Gosormies, who is called Etesipantus, reigned 30 years.
The 9th of the Theban Egyptian kings Mares, his son, who is called Heliodorus, 26 years.
The 10th of the Tbeban Egyptian kings Anoyphis, which signifies a common son, reigned 20 years.
The 11th of the Theban Egyptian kings Sirius, which signifies the son of the cheek, but according to others Abascantus reigned 18 years.
The 12th of the Theban Egyptian kings reigned Chnubus Gneurus, which is Chryses the son of Chryses, 22 years.
The 13th of the Theban Egyptian kings reigned Rauosis, which is Archicrator, 13 years.
The 14th of the Theban Egyptian kings reigned Biyris, 10 years.
The 15th of the Theban kings Saophis Comastes, or, according
to some, Chrematistes, reigned 29 years.
The 16th of the Theban kings Saophis the second, reigned 27 years.
The 17th of the Theban kings, Moscheres Heliodotus, reigned 31 years.
The 18th of the Theban kings, Musthis, reigned 33 years.
The 19th of the Theban kings, Pammes Archondes, reigned 35 years.
The 20th of the Theban kings, Apappus Maxirnus, is said to have reigned 100 years with the exception of one hour.
The 21st of the Theban kings, Echescosocaras, reigned one year.
The 22nd of the Theban sovereigns was a queen, who reigned instead of her husband; she was named Nitocris that is Athena the victorious, and reigned 6 years.
The 23rd of the Theban kings, Myrtseus Ammonodotus, reigned 22 years.
The 24th of the Theban kings, Thyosimares the robust, who is called the Sun, reigned 12 years.
The 25th of the Theban kings, Thinillus, which is the
augmenter of country's strength, reigned 8 years.
The 26th of the Theban kings, Semphrucrates, who is Hercules Harpocrates, reigned 18 years.
The 27th of the Theban kings, Chuther Taurus the tyrant, 7 years.
The 28th of the Theban kings, Meures Philoscorus, reigned 12 years.
The 29th of the Theban kings, Chomaephtha Cosmus Philephaestus, reigned 11 years.
The 30th of the Theban kings, Soecuniosochus the tyrant, reigned 60 years.
The 31st of the Theban kings, Penteathyres, reigned 16 years.
The 32nd of the Theban kings, Stamenemes the second, reigned 23 years.
The 33rd of the Theban kings, Sistosichermes, Hercules the strong, reigned 55 years.
The 34th of the Theban kings, Maris, reigned 43 years.
The 35th of the Theban kings, Siphoas, which is Hermes the
son of Hephaestus, reigned 5 years.
The 36th of the Theban kings, ...... reigned 14 years.
The 37th of the Theban kings, Phruron, which is Nilus, reigned 5 years.
The 38th of the Theban kings, Amuthantaeus, reigned 63 years.—Sync. Chron. 91. 96. 101. 104. 109. 123. 147.
THE OLD EGYPTIAN CHRONICLE.
AMONG the Egyptians there is a certain tablet called the Old Chronicle, containing thirty dynasties in 113 descents, during the long period of 3652543 years. The first series of princes was that of the Auritae; the second was that of the Mestraeans; the third of Egyptians. It runs as follows:
THE REIGN OF THE GODS
According to the Old Chronicle.
To Hephaestus is assigned no time as he is apparent both by
night and day.
Helius the son of Hephaestus reigned three myriads of years. Then Cronus and the other twelve divinities reigned 3984.
Next in order are the demigods, in number eight, who reigned
After these are enumerated 15 generations of the Cynic cycle, which extend to 443 years.
The 16th Dynasty is of the Tanites, eight descents, which lasted 190 years.
17th Memphites, 4 in descent, 103 years.
18th Memphites, 14 in descent, 348 years.
19th Diospolites, 5 in descent, 194 years.
20th Diospolites. 8 in descent, 228 years.
1st Tanites, .... . 6 in descent, 121 years.
22nd Tanites, ..... 3 in descent, 48 years.
23rd Diospolites, 2 in descent, 19 years.
24th Saites, 44 years.
25th Ethiopians, 3 in descent, 44 years.
26th Memphites, 7 in descent, 177 years.
27th Persians, 5 in descent, 124 years.
28th (Dind. leaves no space.)
29th Tanites, .... in descent, 39 years.
30th a Tanite, .... 1 in descent, 18 years.
In all, 30 Dynasties, and 36525 years.
Which number of years, resolved and divided into its constituent parts, that is to say, 25 times 1461 years, shows that it relates to the fabled periodical revolution of the Zodiac among the Egyptians and Greeks; that is, its revolution from a particular point to the same again, which point is the first minute of the first degree of that equinoctial sign which they call the Ram, as it is explained in the Genesis of Hermes and in the Cyrannian books.—Syncel. Chron. 51. Euseb. Chron. 6.
OF all kingdoms we find that of the Egyptians to be the most ancient. Of whose beginning we purpose to write according to the relation of Manetho.
The first dynasty was that of the Gods, who are classed by themselves; and I reckon their reigns thus:
Some say the God Ifestus reigned in Egypt 680 years.
After him the Sun, the son of Ifestus, 77 years.
After him Osinosiris, 420 years.
After him Oros Stoliarchus, 28 years.
After him Typhon, 45 years.
The sum of the reigns of the Gods amounts to 1550 years.
Then succeeds the kingdom of the Demi-gods, thus:
First reigned Anubes Amusim, who composed the writings of the
Egyptians, 83 years.
After him Apion Grammaticus, who reigned 77 years.
In his reign commenced the kingdom of Argos, under Inachus.44
Afterwards the kings of the Ecynii,45 by whom must be understood the Demi gods. They reigned 2100 years.
This is the end of the first [p.92] volume of Manetho, which contains a period of 2100 years.
Mineus and seven of his descendants reigned 253 years.
Then reigned eight others 302 years.
Necherocheus, and eight others, reigned 214 years.
Likewise seventeen others, 214 years.
Likewise twenty-one others, 258 years.
Othoi and seven others, 203 years.
Likewise fourteen others, 140 years.
Likewise twenty others, 409 years.
Likewise seven others, 204 years.
Dynasty of Diospolites 9 years.
Dynasty of Bubastites 153 years.
Dynasty of Tanites 184 years.
Dynasty of Sebennites 224 years.
Dynasty of Memphites 318 years.
Dynasty of Iliopolites 221 years.
Dynasty of Ermupolites 260 years.
The second volume enume- [p.92*] rates to the 17th dynasty and contains a period of 1520 years.
These are the Dynasties of Egypt.
THE first man according to the Egyptians was Hephestus, who was the inventor of fire.
From him descended the Sun.
(After whom Agathodaemon.
After)46 whom Cronus.
And then Typhon, the brother of Osiris.
After whom was Orus, the son of Osiris and Isis.
These were the first Egyptian kings.
After them the empire descended by a long succession to Bites, through a lapse of 13,900 years, reckoned, I say, in lunar years of thirty days to each: for even now they call the month a year.
After the Gods, a race of Demi-gods reigned 1255 years.
Then reigned other kings 1817 years.
After them thirty Memphite kings, 1790.
Then ten Thynite kings, 350 years.
Then came the kingdom of the Manes and Demi-gods, 5813.
The number of years altogether amounts to 11,000; which also are lunar years, that is to say, months.
All the lunar years, which the Egyptians allow to the reigns of the Gods, the Demigods, and the Manes, are 24,900.—Eu. An. 200.
EGYPTIAN DYNASTIES OF MANETHO.
DYNASTY OF THE DEMIGODS.
The 1st of the Egyptian kings was Hephaestus, who reigned 724
years and a half and 4 days.
The 2nd was Helius, the son of Hephaestus, 86 years.
3rd, Agathdaemon, who reigned 56 years and a half and 10 days.
4th, Cronus, 40 years and a half.
5th, Osiris and Isis, 35 years.
6th, ....... years.
7th, Typhon, 29 years.
8th, Orus, the demigod, 25 years.
FIRST DYNASTY OF THE KINGS OF EGYPT:
1. Mestraim who is Menes, he reigned 35 years.
The 2d of the Egyptian kings was Curodes, 63 years.
The 3rd of the Egyptian kings was Aristarchus, 34 years.
The 4th of the Egyptian kings was Spanius, 36 years.
Two others, the 5th and 6th anonymous, 72 years.
The 7th of the Egyptian kings was Serapis, 23 years.
The 8th of the Egyptian kings was Sesonchosis, 49 years.
The 9th of the Egyptian kings was Amenemes, 29 years.
THE OLD EGYPTIAN CHRONICLE.
AMONG the Egyptians there is a certain tablet called the Old Chronicle, containing thirty dynasties in 113 descents, during the long period of 36525 years. The first series of princes was that of the Auritae; the second was that of the Mestraeans; the third of Egyptians. It runs as follows:
THE reign of the gods according to the Old Chronicle.
To Hephaestus is assigned no time, as he is apparent both by
night and day.
Helius the son of Hephaestus reigned three myriads of years.
Then Cronus and the other twelve divinities reigned 3984 years.
Next in order are the demigods, in number eight, who reigned 217 years.
After these are enumerated 15 generations of the Cynic circle, which extend to 443 years.
The 16th Dynasty is of the Tanites.
17th Memphites, 4 in descent, 103 years.
18th Memphites, 14 in descent, 348 years.
19th Diospolites, 5 in descent, 194 years.
20th Diospolites, 8 in descent, 228 years.
21st Tanites, .. 6 in descent, 121 years.
22nd Tanites, . . 3 in descent, 48 years.
23rd Diospolites, 2 in descent, 19 years.
24th Sa'ites, . . 3 in descent, 44 years.
25th Ethiopians, 3 in descent, 44 years.
26th Memphites, 7 in descent, 177 years.
27th Persians, . . 5 in descent, 124 years.
29th Tanites, .. in descent, 39 years.
30th a Tanite, . . 1 in descent, 8 years.
In all, 30 Dynasties, and 36525 years.—Syncel. Chron. 51. Euseb. Chron. 6.
DYNASTIES OF EGYPT:
THE FIRST DYNASTY.
Of the demigods.
The 1st of the Egyptian kings was Hephaestus, who reigned 724
years and a half and 4 days.
The 2nd was Helius, the son of Hephaestus, 86 years.
3rd, Agathodaemon, who reigned 56 years and a half and ten days.
4th, Cronus, 40 and a half years.
5th, Osiris and Isis, 35 years.
6th, ..... years.
7th, Typhon, 29 years.
8th, Horus, the demigod, 25 years.
9th, Ares, the demigod, 23 years.
10th, Anubis, the demigod, 17 years.
11th, Heracles, the demigod, 15 years.
12th, Apollo, the demigod, 25 years.
13th, Ammon, the demigod, 30 years.
14th, Tithoes, the demigod, 27 years.
15th, Sosus, the demigod, 32 years.
16th, Zeus, the demigod, 20 years.—Syncel. Chron. 19. Euseb. Chron. 7.
THE EGYPTIAN DYNASTIES OF MANETHO.
N.B. The first column contains the dynasties of Manetho according to Africanus, from the text of Dindorf: the names and paragraphs included between the parentheses are the variations which occur in the list of Scaliger. The third column contains the dynasties according to Eusebius, from the text of the Editor of the Armenian, who for the most part has followed Goar: the variations are those of Scaliger. The fourth column is the Latin translation of the Armenian, with the variations from the fragments of the old Latin version of Hieronymus.
THE FIRST DYNASTY.
|AFTER the dead demigods the first dynasty consisted of eight kings.||POST Manes et Semideos, Primam Dynastiam VII. regum percensent. Quorum primus fuit Memes, qui nempe prsefulgens inter eos, dominationem obtinuit: a quo quaslibet regum generationes singillatim describemus: quorum successio ita prorsus est.|
|1. The first was Menes the Thinite; he reigned 62 years, and
perished by a wound received
from an hippopotamus.
2. Athothis, his son, reigned 57 years; he built the palaces at Memphis, and left the
anatomical books, for he was a physician.
|i. Memes Thynites, et hujus VII. filii, quem Herodotus
Mina nuncupavit, regnavit annis xxx. Hic vel ultra regionis limites cum exercitu
progreditur, et illustris famosusque habetur; atque ab hippopotamo raptus est.
ii. Athotis hujus films obtinuit [regnum]* annis xxvu. et in Memphi urbe regiam aedificavit; qui et mere dicinam exercuit, atque de modo cort pora dissecandi libros conscripsit.
|3. Cencenus, his son, reigned 31 years.
4. Venephes, his son, reigned 23 years. In his time a great plague raged through Egypt. He
raised the pyramids near Cochome.
5. Usaphaedus, his son, reigned 20 years.
6. Miebidus, his son, 26 years.
7. Semempses, his son, reigned 18 years. In his reign a terrible pestilence afflicted Egypt.
8. Bienaches, his son, reigned 26 years.
The whole number of years amounted to 253.
III. Cencenis istius filius, annis XXXIX.
THE SECOND DYNASTY.
|Of nine Thinite kings.||Secunda dynastia regum ix.|
1. Boethus the first reigned 38 years. During his reign a
chasm of the earth opened
I. Bochus. Sub quo ingens terrae hiatus in Bubastone factus
est, multique perierunt.
Regnaruntque [simul] annis CCXCVII.
THE THIRD DYNASTY.
|Of nine Memphite kings.||Tertia dynastia Memphitarum regum VIII.|
|1. Necherophes reigned 28 years. In his time the Libyans
revolted from the Egyptians,
but on account of an unexpected increase of the moon they submitted through fear.
2. Tosorthrus reigned 29 years. He is called Asclepius by the Egyptians, for his medical
knowledge. He built a house of hewn stones, and greatly patronized literature.
3. Tyris reigned 7 years.
4. Mesochris 17 years.
5. Soyphis 16 years.
6. Tosertasis 19 years.
7. Aches 42 years.
8. Sephuris 30 years.
9. Cerpheres 26 years.
Altogether 214 years.
|I. Necherochis, sub quo Libyes adversum Aegyptios rebellarunt: quumque Luna
importune aucta fuerit, metu ducti, seipsos rursum in servitutem dedidere.
II. Post quern Sesorthus, qui ob medicam artem Aesculapius ab Aegyptiis vocatus est.
Hie etiam sectis lapidibus sedificandi modum invenit, atque literis exarandis curam
impendit. Sex caeteri autem nihil memoratu dignum gesserunt.
Quique regnarunt annis CXCVII.
THE FOURTH DYNASTY.
|Of eight Memphite kings of a different race.||Quarta dynastia Memphitarum regum xvn. ex alia stirpe regni.|
|1. Soris reigned 29 years.
2. Suphis reigned 63 years. He built the largest pyramid which Herodotus says was
constructed by Cheops. He was arrogant towards the gods, and wrote the sacred book;
which is regarded by the Egyptians as a work of great importance.
3. Suphis reigned 66 years.
4. Mencheres 63 years.
5. Rhatceses 25 years.
6. Bicheris 22 years.
7. Sebercheres 1 years.
8. Thampthis 9 years.
|Quorum tertius Suphis, qui magnam illam pyramidem erexit, quam a Cheope factam
Herodotus dicit: qui et superbus in Deos inventus est, usquedum eum [hujusce rei]
pcenituit, et libros Sacrarii conscripsit; quos velut magnas opes habebant Aegyptii. De
caeteris vero nihil memoria dignum scriptum est. Quique regnarunt annos CCCCXLVIH.
|Altogether 284 years.|
THE FIFTH DYNASTY.
|Of nine Elephantine kings.||Quinta dynastia regum XXXI. Elephantiniorum.|
|1. Usercheres reigned 28 years.
2. Sephres 13 years.
3. Nephercheres 20 years.
4. Sisires 7 years.
5. Cheres 20 years.
6. Rhathures 44 years.
7. Mencheres 9 years.
8. Tancheres 44 years.
9. Obnus 33 years.
|Quorum primus Othius. Hic a suis satellitibus occisus est.|
|Altogether 248 years.||Quartus Phiops, sexennis regnare coepit; tenuitque usque ad annum.|
THE SIXTH DYNASTY.
|Of six Memphite kings.||Sexta dynastia.|
|1. Othoes, who was killed by his guards; reigned 30 years.
2. Phius reigned 53 years.
3. Methusuphis 7 years.
4. Phiops who began to reign at six years of age, and reigned till he had completed his
5. Menthesuphis reigned one year.
6. Nitocris, who was the most handsome woman of her time, of a florid complexion;
she built the third pyramid, and reigned 12 years.
|Mulier quaedam Nitocris nomine egnavit: quae omnium sui temporis virorum fortissima erat, atque omzonium foeminarum pulcherrima, flavo colore, et rubris genis: ipsamque ajunt, tertiam pyramidem aedificasse; quae est moles erecta collis instar.|
|Altogether 203 years.||
Qui regnaverunt annis CCIII.
THE SEVENTH DYNASTY.
|Of seventy Memphite kings, who reigned 70 days.||Septima dynastia Memphitarum regum V. qui regnaverunt annis LXXV.|
THE EIGHTH DYNASTY.
Of twenty-seven Memphite kings, who reigned 146 years.
Octava dynastia Memphitarum V. regum, qui regnarunt annis C.
THE NINTH DYNASTY.
|Of nineteen Heracleopolite kings, who reigned 409 years.||
Nona dynastia quatuor regum Heracleopolitarum, qui regnaverunt annis C.
|1. The first was Achthoes, who was worse than all his
predecessors. He did much injury
to all the inhabitants of Egypt, and being seized with madness, was killed by a crocodile.
|Quorum primus Ochthovis, omnium, qui ante eum reges fuerunt, xaxa crudelissimus fuit; itaque tot, tanta que in universa Aegypto scelera ac flagitia patravit, ut demum dementia laborans, a crocodile bestia devoratus fuerit.|
THE TENTH DYNASTY.
|Of 19 Heracleopolite kings, who reigned 185 years.||Decima dynastia Heracleopolitarum regum XIX. qui regnarunt annos CLXXXV.|
THE ELEVENTH DYNASTY.
Of sixteen Diospolite kings, who reigned 43 years. Among whom
Undecima dynastia Diopolitarum regum XVI. annis XLIII. regnantium. Post quos Ammenemes annis XVI.
|The whole number of the abovementioned kings is 192, who reigned during a space of 2300 years and 70 days.—Syncel. Chron. 54 to 59. Euseb. Chron. 14, 15.||Huc usque primum tomum producit Manethus. Simul reges CXCII. anni MMCCC.|
THE SECOND BOOK OF MANETHO.
THE TWELFTH DYNASTY.
|Of seven Diospolite kings.||Duodecima dynastia Diopolitarum regum VII.|
1. Geson Goses the son of Ammanemes. He reigned 46 years.
I. Quorum primus Sesonchosis Ammenemis films, annis XLVI.
|4. Lachares 8 years; he built the Labyrinth in the
Arsenoi'te nome as a tomb for himself.
5. Ammeres 8 years.
6. Ammenemes 8 years.
7. Scemiophris, his sister, 4 years.
|Post quern Lambares, annis VIII. qui in Arsenoite labyrinthum
sibi serpulchrum construxit.
Hujus successores regnaverunt annis XLII.
|Altogether 160 years.||Simul vero omnes regnarunt annis CCXLV.|
THE THIRTEENTH DYNASTY.
|Of 60 Diospolite kings, who reigned 453 years.||Decimatertia dynastia Diopolitarum regum LX. qui regnaverunt annis CCCCLIII.|
THE FOURTEENTH DYNASTY.47
|Of 76 Xoite kings, who reigned 184 years.||Decimaquarta dynastia Xoitarum regum LXXVI. qui regnarunt annis CCCCLXXXIV.|
THE FIFTEENTH DYNASTY.
|Of the Shepherds.||Decimaquinta dynastia Diopolitarum regum; qui regnaverunt annis CCL.|
|These were six foreign Phoenician kings; who took Memphis.|
|1. The first was Saites who reigned 19 years. The Saite nome
is so called after him. The shepherds founded a city in the Sethro'ite nome,
from whence they invaded and conquered all Egypt.
2. Beon reigned 44 years.
3. Pachnan 61 years.
4. Staan 50 years.
5. Archies 49 years.
6. Aphobis 61 years.
|Altogether 284 years.|
THE SIXTEENTH DYNASTY.
|Of 32 Hellenic Shepherd kings, who reigned 518 years.||Decimasexta dynastia Thebarum regum v. qui regnarunt annis CXC.|
THE SEVENTEENTH DYNASTY.
|Consisted of 43 Shepherd kings and 43 Theban Diospolites.
The Shepherds and Thebans reigned altogether 151 years.
|Decimaseptima dynastia Pastorum; qui erant fratres Phoenices,
peregrini reges; qui Memphim etiam ceperunt.
I. Quorum primus Sait'es regnavit annis xix. a quo et Saitarum Nonius nomen habuit. Qui
in Sethroite quo que Nomo condiderunt urbem; ex qua irruptione facta Aegyptios ipsos
II. Secundus Bnon, annis XL.
III. Post quern Archies, annis XXX.
Summa, anni CIII. Horum tempore, ut imperaret Aegyptiis, Joseph apparuit.
THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY.
|Of sixteen Diospolite kings.||Decimaoctava dynastia regum XIV. Diopolitarum.|
|1. Amos, in whose time Moses went out of Egypt as we shall
2. Chebros 13 years.
3. Amenophthis 24 years.
4. Amersis 22 years.
5. Misaphris 13 years.
6. Misphragmathosis 26 years, in whose time happened the deluge of Deucalion.
7. Tuthmosis 9 years.
8. Amenophis 31 years. He is supposed to be Memnon, to whom the musical statue is
9. Horus 37 years.
10. Acherrhes 32 years.
11. Rathos 6 years.
| I. Quorum primus Amoses, (Amoxe. sis) annis
II. Chebron, annis XIII.
III. Amophis, annis (Amenophis) XXI.
IV. Memphres, (Mephres) annis XII.
V. Myspharmuthosis, (Misphragmuthosis) annis XXVI.
VI. Tuthmosis, annis IX.
VII. Amenophis, annis XXXI. Hic est, qui Memnon existimatus fuit, lapis loquax.
VIII. Orus, annis xxvin. (XXXVIII.)
IX. Achencheres, (Anchencherres) annis XVI. (XII.)
(X. Achoris VII.)
(XI. Chencherres ann. XVIII.) Hujus setate Moyses Judaeorum ex Aegypto egressus
X. (XII.) Acherres, annis VIII.
|12. Chebres 12 years.
13. Acherrhes 12 years.
14. Armeses 5 years.
15. Ramesses 1 year.
16. Amenophath 19 years.
|XI. (XIII). Cherres, annis XV.
XII. (XVI). Armais, qui et Davonus [lege Danaus], annis V: quibus annis exactis, Aegypto pulsus, fugitivus tendit ad fratrem suum Aegyptum; [lege, fugitivus tendit a fratre suo Aegypto] adiens Helladam, Argo capta, regnat in Argivos.
XIII. Harnesses, (XV. Remesses LXVIII.) qui et Aegyptus, annis LXVIII.
XIV. Amenophis, (XVI. Menophes) annis XL.
|Altogether 263 years.||Summa, anni CCCXLVIII.|
THE NINETEENTH DYNASTY.
|Of seven Diospolite kings.||Decimanona dynastia. Diopolitarum regum V.|
|1. Sethos reigned 51 years.
2. Rapsaces 61 years.
3. Ammenephthes 20 years.
4. Rameses 60 years.
I. Sethos, annis LV.
|5. Ammenemnes 5 years.
6. Thuoris, who is called by Homer Polybus, the husband of Alcandra, under whose
reign Ilion was taken, 7 years.
|V. Thuoris, qui ab Homero Polybus vocatur, vir immanis roboris [lege, vir, sive maritus Alcandrae,] cujus tempore Ilium captum fuit, annis VII.|
|Altogether 209 years.||Summa, anni CXCIV.|
|In this second book of Manetho are contained 96 kings and 2121 years.||Insimul ex secundo Manethi tomo, XCII. regum, anni MMCXXI.|
—Syncel. Chron. 59 to 75. Euseb. Chron. 15 to 17.
THE THIRD BOOK OF MANETHO.
THE TWENTIETH DYNASTY.49
|Of 12 Diospolite kings, who reigned 135 years.||
Vicesima dynastia Diopolitarum XII. regum, qui regnaverunt aunis CLXXII.
THE TWENTY-FIRST DYNASTY.50
|Of seven Tanite kings.||Vicesima prima dynastia Tanitarum regum VII.|
|1. Smendes reigned 26 years.
2. Psusenes 46 years.
3. Nephelcheres 4 years.
4. Amenophthis 9 years.
5. Osochor 6 years.
6. Psinaches 9 years.
7. Psusennes 14 years.
|I. Smendis, annis XXVI.
II. Psusennus, annis XLI.
III. Neplrercheres, annis IV.
IV. Amenophthis, annis IX.
V. Osochor, annis VI.
VI. Psinnaches, annis IX.
VII. Psosennes, annis XXXV.
|Altogether 130 years.||
Summa, anni CXXX.
THE TWENTY-SECOND DYNASTY.
|Of nine Bubastite kings.||
Vicesima secunda dynastia trium cuv rpiuv. regum Bubastitarum.
|1. Sesonchis 21 years.
2. Osorthon 15 years.
3, 4, 5. Three others reigned 25 years.
6.. Tacelothis 13 years.
7, 8, 9. Three others 42 years.
|I. Sesonchusis, annis XXI.
II. Osorthos, annis XV.
III. Tacellothis, annis XIII.
Altogether reigned 120 years.
|Summa, anni XLIV.|
THE TWENTY-THIRD DYNASTY.
|Of four Tanite kings.||Vicesima tertia dynastia Tanitarum trium regum.|
|1. Petoubates reigned 40 years; in his time the Olympiads began.
2. Osorcho 8 years, whom the Egyptians call Hercules.
3. Psammus 10 years.
4. Zeet 31 years.
I. Petubastis, annis XXV.
|Altogether 28 years.||Summa, anni XLIV.|
THE TWENTY-FOURTH DYNASTY.
|Bochchoris the Saite reigned 6 years, in whose reign a sheep spoke.||Bocchoris Saites, annis XLIV. Sub quo agnus locutus est.|
THE TWENTY-FIFTH DYNASTY.
|Of three Ethiop kings.||Vicesima quinta dynastia regum Aethiopum trium.|
|1. Sabacon, who having taken Bochoris captive, burnt him alive, and reigned 8
2. Sebichus, his son, reigned 14 years.
3. Tarcus 18 years.
|I. Sabbacon, qui captivum duxit Bocchorem, et vivum combussit; regnavitque annis
II. Sebichos ejus filius, annis XII.
III. Taracus, annis XX.
|Altogether 40 years.||Summa, anni XLIV.|
THE TWENTY-SIXTH DYNASTY.
|Of nine Saite kings.||Vicesima sexta dynastia regum Saitarum IX.|
1. Stephinates reigned 7 years.
I. Ammeres Aethiops, annis XVIII.
|Altogether 150 years and six months.||Summa, anni CLXVII.|
THE TWENTY-SEVENTH DYNASTY.
|Of eight Persian kings.||Vicesima septima dynastia Persarum regum VIII.|
|1. Cambyses reigned over Persia, his own kingdom, 5 years,
and over Egypt 6 years.
2. Darius, the son of Hystaspes, 36 years.
3. Xerxes the Great 21 years.
4. Artabanus 7 months.
5. Artaxerxes 41 years.
6. Xerxes 2 months.
7. Sogdianus 7 months.
8. Darius the son of Xerxes, 19 years.
|I. Cambyses anno regni sui xv. [lege v.] regnavit in
Aegyptios annis III.
II. Magi, mensibus vn.
III. Darius, annis XXXVI.
IV. Xerxes Darii [filius] annis XXI.
V. Artaxerxes, annis XL.
VI. Xerxes secundus, mensibus II.
VII. Sogdianus, mensibus VII.
VIII. Darius Xerxis [filius] annis XIX.
|Altogether 124 years and four months.||Summa, anni CXX, et menses IV.|
THE TWENTY-EIGHTH DYNASTY.
|Amyrteus, the Saite, 6 years.||Vicesima octava dynastia. Amyrtaeus Saites, annis VI.|
THE TWENTY-NINTH DYNASTY.
|Of four Mendesian kings.||Vicesima nona dynastia regum IV, Mendesiorum.|
|1. Nepherites reigned 6 years.
2. Achoris 13 years.
3. Psammuthis 1 year.
4. Nephorites 4 months
|I. Nepherites, annis VI.
II. Achoris, annis XIII.
III. Psammuthes, anno I.
IV. Muthes, anno I.
V. Nepherites, mensibus IV.
|Altogether 20 years and four months.||Summa, anni XXI, et menses IV.|
THE THIRTIETH DYNASTY.
|Of three Sebennyte kings.||Tricesima dynastia regum trium Sebennitarum.|
|1. Nectanebes 18 years.
2. Teos 2 years.
3. Nectanebes 18 years.
I. Nectanebes, annis X.
|Altogether 38 years.||Summa, anni XX.|
THE THIRTY-FIRST DYNASTY.
|Of three Persian kings.||Trigesima prima dynastia Persarum.|
|1. Ochus ruled Persia twenty years, and Egypt 2 years.
2. Arses reigned 3 years.
3. Darius 4 years.
|I. Ochus, qui vicesimo regni sui Persarum anno, obtinuit Aegyptum annis
II. Post quern Arses Ochi [filius] annis IV.
II. Post quern Darius, annis VI
|And the whole number of the years in the third book 1050 years.||Quern Alexander Macedo occidit. Omnia ex tertio Manethi tomo.|
—Sync. Chron. 73 to 78.
CANON OF THE KINGS OF EGYPT
1. Salatis 19 years.
2. Beon 44 years.
3. Apachnas 36 years and 7 months.
4. Apophis 61 years.
5. Jamas 50 years and 1 month.
6. Assis 49 years and 2 months.
1. Tethmosis 25 years and 4 months.
2. Chebron 13 years.
3. Amenophis 20 years and 7 months.
4. Amesses 21 years and 9 months.
5. Mephres 12 years and 9 months.
6. Mephramuthosis 25 years and 10 months.
7. Thmosis 9 years and 8 months.
8. Amenophis 30 years and 10 months.
9. Orus 36 years and 5 months.
10. Acenchres 12 years and 1 month.
11. Rathotis 9 years.
12. Acencheres 12 years and 5 months.
13. Acencheres II. 12 years and 3 months.
14. Armais 4 years and 1 month.
15. Ramesses 1 year and 4 months.
16. Armesses the son of Miammus 66 years and 2 months.
17. Amenophis 19 years and 6 months.
18. Sethosis and Ramesses.—Jos. contr. Ap. I. 15.
Tethmosis was king when the shepherds went out of Egypt. From these (the shepherd) kings there intervenes a period of 39352 years to the two bro- [p.138] Athers Sethos and Hermaeus of whom he says Sethos was called Aegyptus, and Hermaeus Danaus. Sethos after he had expelled Hermaeus reigned 59 years. After him his eldest son Rampses reigned 66 years.—Jos. contr. Ap. 1.26.
In the 16th chapter Josephus has the following—
It is manifest from a computation of the above-mentioned years, that the Shepherds (our ancestors) were driven out from Egypt, and left that country three hundred and ninety-three years previous to the departure of Danaus to Argos.
And in the 2d chapter of the second book:—
Manetho says that the Jews (i.e. the Shepherds) left Egypt in the reign of Tethmosis three hundred and ninety-three years before the flight of Danaus to Argos. Lysimachus that it was in the reign of Bocchoris, i.e. one thousand seven hundred years before. Molo and some others place it as seems good to them. But Apion the most correct (ironically) of all, fixes it decidedly at the first year of the seventh Olympiad in which he says the Phoenicians founded Carthage.
CANON OF THE KINGS
CANON of the kings of Egypt formerly called Mestraea.
1. Mestraim who is Menes: he
reigned 35 years.
2. Curodes 63 years.
3. Aristarchus 34 years.
4. Spanius 36 years.
5. 6. Anonymous 72 years.
7. Serapis 23 years.
8. Sesonchosis 49 years.
9. Amenemes 29 years.
10. Amasis 2 years.
11. Acesephthres 13 years.
12. Anchoreus 9 years.
13. Armiyses 4 years.
14. Chamois 12 years.
15. Miamous 14 years.
16. Amesesis 65 years.
17. Uses 50 years.
18. Rhameses 29 years.
19. Rhamessomenes 15 years.
20. Usimares 31 years.
21. Rhamesseseos 23 years.
22. Rhamessameno 19 years.
23. Rhamesse Jubasse 39 years.
24. Rhamesse the son of Vaphris 29 years.
25. Concharis 5 years.
In the 5th year of Concharis, the 25th king of Egypt of the 16th dynasty, which is called by Manetho the Cynic Cycle, was completed in onto 25 reigns a period of 700 years from Mestraim the first native king of Egypt.
26. Silites 19 years, the first
of the 6 kings of the 17th dynasty according to Manetho.
27. Baeon 44 years.
28. Apachnas 36 years.
29. Aphophis 61 years.
30. Sethos 50 years.
31. Certos 29 years according to
Josephus, but according to Manetho 44.
32. Aseth 20 years.
He added the 5 intercalary days to the year: and under him the Egyptian year which had previously been reckoned 360 days only was increased to 365. Under him also the calf was deified and called Apis.
FROM SYNCELLUS AND EUSEBIUS.53
I. Amosis ann. XXV.
II. Chebron ann. XIII.
III. Amenophes XXI.
IV. Memphres XII.
V. Mispharmuthosis XLVI.
VI. Tuthmosis IX.
VII. Amenophthis XXXI.
Hic ille Amenophthis est, qui Memnon ipse creditus fuit, lapis loquax.
VIII. Orus XXXVII.
IX. Achencheres XII.
X. Athoris IX.
XI. Chencheres XVI.
XII. Acheres VIII.
XIII. Cheres xv. Cherres XV.
Armais qui et Danaus V.
XV. Aegyptus LXVIII.
XVI. Menophis Menophes XL.
I. Sethosis Sethos LV.
II. Rampses Ramses LXVI.
III. Amenophis XL.
IV. Amenemes XXV.
V. Thuoris VII.
Thuoris Aegyptiorum rex ab Homero Polybus vocatur maritus Alcandrse. De eo meminit in Odyssea.
XX DYNASTIA54 ANNIS CLXXVIII.
50. Nechepsos 19 years.
51. Psammuthis 13.
52. .... 4.
53. Certus 16.
54. Rhampsis 45.
55. Amenses who is Ammenemes
56. Ochyras 14.
XXI DYNASTIA TANITARUM.
I. Amendis XXVI.
II. Pseusenes XLI.
III. Ammenophis IX.
IV. Nephercheres IV.
V. Osochor VI.
VI. Psinaches IX.
VII. Psusennes XXXV.
XXII DYNASTIA BUBASTARUM.
I. Sesonchusis XXI.
II. Osorthon XV.
III. Tachelotis XIII.
XXIII DYNASTIA TANITARUM.
I. Petubastis XXV.
II. Osorthon IX.
III. Psammus X.
I. Bocchoris XLIV.
Bocchoris Saites XLVI.
XXV DYNASTIA AETHIOPUM.
I. Sabacon Aethiops XII.
II. Sebichus XII.
III. Tarachus XX.
XXVI DYNASTIA SAITARUM.
I. Ammeres Aethiops XII.
Ammerres Aethiops XII.
II. Stephinatis VII.
III. Nechepsus VI.
IV. Nechao VIII.
V. Psammedichus XLIV.
VI. Nechao VI.
Nechao secundus VI.
VII. Psammuthes alter qui et
Psammitichus alter qui et Psammus XII.
VIII. Vaphres XXV.
IX. Amosis XLII.
XXVII. Aegyptiorum dynastia Persae.
Obtinet quippe Aegyptum sexto regni sui anno (quinto) Cambyses; efficiuntur autem usque ad Darium Xerxis filium ann. CXXIV. (CXI.)
The kingdom of Egypt after having continued 2211 years through a series of 10 dynasties and 86 kings, was subdued by Cambyses in the reign of Amosis the 86th king from Mestraim, who is the same as Menes, [p.147] of that part of Egypt which is called the Mestraean region Egypt ... remained under the dominion of the Persians till the time of Darius the son of Xerxes. The 27th dynasty therefore is that during which the Persians held Egypt in subjection from the 5th year of Cambyses.
87. Cambyses 3 years.55
88. The Magi two brothers 7 months.
89. Darius the son of Hystaspes 36 years.
90. Xerxes 2 Of years.
91. Artebanus 7 months.
92. Artaxerxes 40 years.
93. Xerxes II. 2 months.
94. Sogdianus 7 months.
95. Darius Nothus 21 years.
Egypt revolted from Persia in the second year of Darius Nothus.
I. Amurtaeus Saites VI.
Amurtaeus Saites VI.
XXIX DYNASTIA MENDESIORUM.
II. Ephirites VI.
I. Nepherites VI.
III. Achoris XII.
II. Achoris XII.
IV. Psammuthes I.
III. Psammuthis I.
V. Nepherites menses IV.
IV. Nepherites menses IV.
XXX DYNASTIA SEBENNITARUM.
VI. Nectanebus XVIII.
VII. Teos II.
II. Teos II.
VIII. Nectanebus XVIII.
III. Nectanebos XVIII.
XXXI DYNASTIA PERSARUM.
I. Ochus IX.
II. Arses Ochi III.
Arses Ochi IV.
III. Darius VI.
Darius Arsami VI.
CANON OF THE KINGS OF EGYPT:
FROM DIODORUS SICULUS.
SOME of them fable that the Gods and Heroes first reigned in
Egypt during a period little less than eighteen thousand years; and that the
last of the gods who reigned was Horus the son of Isis. They also relate that
the kingdom was governed by men during a series of nearly fifteen thousand years
to the hundred and eightieth Olympiad in which we have visited Egypt which was
during the reign of Ptolemy who bears the title of the younger Dionysus.
The kings of Egypt were for the most part natives of the country, but the Ethiopians, Persians and Macedonians acquired the empire for some short periods.
There reigned altogether four [p.150] Ethiopians, not successively but at intervals, the length of whose reigns collectively occupied a period of nearly thirty-six years.
The Persians, under the command of Cambyses their king, subdued the nation by force of arms. They occupied the throne during a hundred and thirty-five years, inclusive of the insurrections, which the Egyptians, unable to put up with the severity of their domination, and their impiety towards the gods of the country, made from time to time. Lastly reigned the Macedonians, and their successors, two hundred and seventy-six years.
All the rest of the time was filled up with native princes, that is to say, four hundred and seventy kings and five queens.
After the gods, Menas was the first king of the Egyptians.
After him it is said that two of the descendants of the before-mentioned king reigned, and they were succeeded by fifty who altogether reigned during a period of more than one thousand four hundred years.
Then eight of his descendants, of whom the last,57 who bore
the same name with the first, founded the city which by the Egyptians is called
the city of the Sun or Diospolis, but by the Greeks Thebes.
The eighth of the descendants of this king, who bore the sirname of his father Uchoreus built the city of Memphis, the most celebrated of all the cities of Egypt.
Twelve generations of kings.
Myris, who dug the lake above the city of Memphis.
Seven generations of kings.
Sesoosis, whose exploits were the most renowned of all the kings before him. He fitted out a fleet of four hundred ships upon the Red Sea; and subdued all the islands, and all the parts of the continent bordering upon the sea as far as the Indies. And he marched with a mighty army by land, and reduced all Asia. And he passed over the Ganges and conquered all the Indies even to the ocean, and all the nations of the Scythians, and most of the islands of the Cyclades. He then invaded Europe and overran all Thrace: and Thrace he made [p.152] boundary of his military excursion. And he set up pillars in Thrace and in many other places, commemorating his conquests. He also divided Egypt into thirty parts, which the Egyptians call nomes, and appointed nomarchs over each. And after a reign of 33 years he destroyed himself on account of the failure of his eyesight.
Sesoosis the second; the son of the preceding.
Many kings succeeded him.
Amasis, who was conquered by Actisanes the Ethiopian.
Actisanes the Ethiopian.
Mendes an Egyptian, who is the same as Marrhus. He constructed the building which is called the Labyrinth as a tomb for himself.
An interregnum for 5 generations.
Cetna, who is Proteus.
Seven insignificant kings reigned of whom no work or deed worthy of history is handed down except of one [p.153] Nileus, from whom the river is called Nilus, having formerly borne the name of Ægyptus.
The eighth king was Chembres the Memphite. He reigned 50 years and built the largest of the three Pyramids.
After his death his brother Cephren received the kingdom and reigned 56 years. Some, however, say it was not the brother, but the son of the Chembres that succeeded him, and that his name was Chabryis.
Mycerinus, whom others call Cherinus, the son of the founder of the former pyramid. He undertook to raise a third, but he died before the completion of the work.
Bocchoris the Wise, the son of Tnephachthus.
After a long time Sabacon reigned over Egypt, being by race an Ethiopian.
An interregnum of two years.
Twelve chiefs 15 years.
Psammitichus, the Saite: who was one of the twelve chiefs.
After four generations reigned Apries 22 years. He was
Amasis. He died after a reign of 55 years, at the very time that Cambyses, king of the Persians, invaded Egypt, in the third year of the 63d Olympiad, in which Parmenides the Camarinsean was the victor.—Lib. II.
CANON OF THE KINGS OF EGYPT:
MENES was the first king of Egypt.
After him, the priests read out of a book the names of 330 kings. And among these were 18 Ethiopians and one woman a native Egyptian: all the rest were men and Egyptians: and the name of the woman, who reigned also over the country of Babylonia, was Nitocris.
Of the other kings nothing remarkable is in any way recorded ex- [p.155] cept the last Mæris. He dug the lake.
Sesostris. The priests said that he first sailed with a fleet of large vessels from the Arabian gulph, and conquered all the nations bordering upon the Red Sea. And that from thence he returned to Egypt, and with a mighty army he traversed the continent (of Asia) subjugating every nation that opposed him. From Asia he passed over into Europe and reduced the Scythians and Thracians.
Pheron, the son of Sesostris.
A Memphite, whose name, according to the Greek interpretation, was Proteus.
After him reigned Cheops, who inflicted upon them every kind of evil: he overthrew the temples, and was the first who put a Stop to the sacrifices. He founded the pyramid, and reigned 50 years.
Chephren, the brother of Cheops. He built a pyramid, and reigned 56 years. The Egyptians, out of hatred, decline to name these two kings, but [p.156] call the pyramids the work of the shepherd Philitis, who grazed his flocks, at this time, in that country.
Mycerinus, the son of Cheops. He also left a pyramid much less than that of his father.
Anysis, who was blind. In his reign the Ethiopians invaded Egypt with a mighty army under Sabacos their king.
Sabacos, the Ethiopian, reigned 50 years.
Anysis the blind, again.
Sethos, the priest of Hephaestus. In his reign Sanacharibus, the king of the Arabians and Assyrians, marched against Egypt with a vast army......And when Sethos and his attendants arrived at Pelusium, during the night a multitude of rats attacked their enemies, and gnawed the bowstrings from off their bows, and the thongs of their spears; so that on the morrow, as they fled unarmed, great numbers of them were slain. From the first king to Sethos the priest of Hephaestus, are 341 generations of men.
And in all these 11,34058 years, they say no God has made his appearance in the human form. And during this time they affirm that the Sun has . . . twice risen in parts different from what is his customary place, that is to say, has twice risen where he now sets, and has also twice set where he now rises.
Twelve kings reigned over Egypt, divided into twelve parts.
Psammetichus, one of the twelve, reigned 54 years. And in the 29th year of his reign he beleagued Azotus (Ashdod?) a large city of Syria, and took it by siege.
Necos, the son of Psammetichus, reigned 11 years. He was the first who undertook to cut the canal through to the Red Sea. He also marched against the Syrians and overcame them in an engagement at Magdolus (Migdol?)
And after the battle he took Kadytis,59 a large city of Syria.
Psammis, the son of Neco, 6 years.
Apries, the son of Psammis, 25 years.
Amasis, 44 years.
Psammenitus, the son of Amasis, 6 months.
CANON OF THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY OF MANETHO:
1. Amasis 25 Years 4 Months.
2. Chebron ... 13
3. Amenophis ... 20 ... 7.
4. Amesse ... 21 ... 1.
5. Mephres ... 12 ... 9.
6. Methrammuthosis ...20 ...10.
7. Tuthmoses ... 9 .... 8.
8. Damphenophis ...30 .... 10.
9. Orus ...35 ....5.
10. Their daughter ...10 .. 3.
11. Athoris .... 12 .... 3.
12. Chencheres ...30 .... 1.
13. Sethos Miammu ...6
14. Armseus ... 4 ... 2.
15. Sethos .... 1
16. Amenophis ... 19 ... 6.
17. Sethus and Rhamesses.—p. 246.
OF THE EARLY KINGS OF EGYPT AND THE EGYPTIAN
ALL the kings of the Egyptians, from Minaeus, the founder of Memphis, who lived many years before Abraham our ancestor, to Solomon, extending through an interval of more than 1300 years, bore the title of Pharaohs.—Jos. Ant. lib. VII. c. 6.
THE first king of the Egyptians was Pharao, of the tribe of Ham, the son of Noe: he is called also Naracho.—J. Maldla. lib. III.
HEPHAESTUS, a God: also Fire. After the death of Hermes, king of Egypt, Hephaestus obtained possession of the empire 1680 days, which is 4 years, 7 months, and 8 days; for the Egyptians in those times were not in the habit of measuring time by the year, but called the period of the day a year.—Suidas v. Hephæstus.
FROM DIOGENES LAERTIUS.
THE Egyptians say that Hephaestus was the son of Nilus, and that he invented philosophy, of which the followers were called Priests and Prophets. From him to the time of Alexander the Macedonian elapsed 48863 years, in which occurred 373 solar eclipses and 832 lunar eclipses.—Diog. Laert. Procem. p. 2.
DICÆARCHUS, in his first book, says, that after Orus, the son of Osiris and Isis, reigned Sesostris: and that from the reign of Sesostris to that of Nilus elapsed a period of 2500 years;60 and from the reign of Nilus to the first Olympiad 436 years; so that altogether the number of years amounted to 2936. Dicsearchus, moreover, says, that he established laws that no one should leave the profession of his fathers: for he believed that such a proceeding would be the introduction of avarice. He was the first who discovered the art of riding upon horseback. Others, however, attribute these things to Orus.—Schol. in Apoll. Rhod. Arg. Lib. IV. v. 272.
ARTAPANUS, in his work concerning the Jews, says, that after the death of Abraham and his son, as well as Mempsasthenoth, the king of the Egyptians, his son Palmanothes as- [p.162] sumed the crown, and he carried himself with great severity towards the Jews. And he compelled them first to build Kessa and to construct the temple that is therein, and also the temple in Heliopolis. He had a daughter whose name was Merris, who was married to a king named Chenephres,61 then reigning in Memphis; for there were at that time several kings in Egypt.62 And as she was barren, she brought up a child of the Jews, and named it Moyses: but when he arrived at manhood he was called, among the Greeks, Musaeus. And this is the Moyses who they say was the instructor of Orpheus.
THE transactions of this our city of Sais are recorded in our sacred writings during a period of 8000 years.—Timæus, p. 23.
FROM POMPONIUS MELA.
THE Egyptians, according to their own accounts, are the most ancient of men, and they reckon in their series of annals 330 kings who reigned above 13,000 years; and they preserve, in written records, the memory of the event, that, since the commencement of the Egyptian race, the stars have completed four revolutions, and the sun has twice set where he now rises.
THERE is a very ancient God among the Egyptians who is called Heracles: and they assert, that from his reign to that of Amasis, 17,000 years have elapsed: they reckoned Heracles among the Gods when the number was augmented from 8 to 12.—Lib. II. c. 43.
FROM DIODORUS SICULUS.
THEY say that from Osiris and Isis to the kingdom of Alexander, who founded the city of Alexandria in [p.164] Egypt, there elapsed a period of more than 10,000 years; or as some write, fact of little less than 23,000.—Diod. Sic. lib. I. p. 14.
BUT the priests of Egypt, summing up the time from the reign of the Sun to the descent of Alexander upon Asia, calculate it to be about 23,000 years. They pretend, also, in their fabulous legends, that the most ancient of the Gods reigned more than 1200 years; and those that came immediately after them in succession not less than 300. Some of them attempt to abate the incredibility of such a multitude of years, by asserting, that in former times, when the revolution of the sun was not accurately ascertained, the year consisted of one revolution of the moon.—Lib. I. p. 15.
He makes Amenophis king when this event (the second invasion) occurred, giving him a false name; and upon this account he presumes not [p.165] to define the length of his reign; though in mentioning all the other kings, he accurately gives the time of each. Here, however, he invents some fabulous relation, not remembering that he had already stated, that the exodus of the shepherds to Jerusalem took place 518 years before; for Tethmosis was king when they went out.—Jos. Contr. Ap. I. 26.
CHALDEAN AND EGYPTIAN DYNASTIES:63
1. Nmrud .... years.
1. Phanuphis ...... 68 years.
1. Bilus .... 62 years.
8. Pharoun Smunus ... 20 years.
MANETHO, CHÆREMON, LYSIMACHUS, AND OTHER WRITERS.
THE OBELISK OF HELIOPOLIS
FROM AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS.
The interpretation begins upon the southern side.
VERSE THE FIRST.
THE Sun to King Rhamestes. I have bestowed upon you to rule graciously over all the world. He whom the Sun loves is Horus the Brave, the Lover of truth, the Son of Heron, born of God, the restorer of the world: He whom the Sun has chosen, is the King Rhamestes, valiant in battle, To whom all the earth is subject by his might and bravery. Rhamestes the King, the immortal offspring of the Sun.
VERSE THE SECOND.
It is Horus the brave, who is in truth appointed the Lord of the Diadem; Who renders Egypt glorious, and possesses it; Who sheds a splendour over Heliopolis, And regenerates the rest of the world, And ho- [p.170] nours the Gods that dwell in Heliopolls: Him the Sun loves.
VERSE THE THIRD.
Horus the brave, the offspring of the Sun, all-glorious; Whom the Sun has chosen, and the valiant Ares has endowed, His goodness remains for ever, Whom Ammon loves, that fills with good the temple of the Phoenix. To him the Gods have granted life: Horus the brave, the son of Heron Rhamestes, the King of the world, He has protected Egypt and subdued her neighbours: Him the Sun loves. The Gods have granted him great length of life. He is Rhamestes, the Lord of the world, the immortal.
VERSE THE SECOND.
I, the Sun, the great God, the sovereign of heaven, Have bestowed upon you life without satiety. Horus the brave, Lord of the diadem, incomparable, The sovereign of Egypt, that has placed the statues of (the gods) in this palace, And has beautified Heliopolis, In like manner as he has honoured the Sun himself, the sovereign of heaven. The offspring of the Sun, the King immortal, Has performed a goodly work.
VERSE THE THIRD.
I, the Sun, the God and Lord of Heaven, have bestowed strength and power over all things, on King Rhamestes: he, whom Horus, the lover of truth, the Lord of the seasons, and Hephaestus, the father of the Gods, have chosen on account of his valour, is the all-gracious King, the offspring and beloved of the Sun.
TOWARDS THE EAST, VERSE THE FIRST.
The great God from Heliopolis, celestial, Horus the brave, the son of Heron, whom the Sun begot, and whom the gods have honoured, he is the ruler of all the earth; he whom the Sun hath chosen is the king, valiant in battle. Him Ammon loves. And him the all-glittering has chosen his eternal king.
OF THE SIRIADIC COLUMNS:
ALL these (the sons of Seth) being naturally of a good disposition, lived happily in the land without apostatising, and free from any evils whatsoever: and they studiously turned [p.172] their attention to the knowledge of the heavenly bodies and their configurations. And lest their science should at any time be lost among men, and what they had previously acquired should perish (inasmuch as Adam had acquainted them that a universal aphanism, or destruction of all things, would take place alternately by the force of fire and the overwhelming powers of water), they erected two columns, the one of brick and the other of stone, and engraved upon each of them their discoveries; so that in case the brick pillar should be dissolved by the waters, the stone one might survive to teach men the things engraved upon it, and at the same time inform them that a brick one had formerly been also erected by them. It remains even to the present day in the land of Siriad.—Jos. Ant. I. c. 2.
OF THE WRITINGS OF MANETHO.
IT remains, therefore, to make certain extracts concerning the dynasties of the Egyptians, from the writings of Manetho the Sebennyte, the high priest of the idolatrous temples of Egypt in the time of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus. These, according to his own account, he copied from the inscriptions which were engraved in the sacred dialect and hierographic characters, upon the columns set up in the Seriadic land, by Thoth, the first Hermes; and, after the deluge, translated from the sacred dialect into the Greek tongue, in hieroglyphic characters; and committed to writing in books, and deposited by Agathodaemon, the son of the second Hermes, the father of Tat, in the penetralia of the temples of Egypt. He has addressed and explained them to Philadelphus, the second king that bore the name of Ptolemaeus, in the [p.169*] book which he has entitled Sothis.
They are as follows:
THE EPISTLE OF MANETHO, THE SEBENNYTE, TO PTOLEMÆUS PHILADELPHUS.
To the great and august king Ptolemæus Philadelphus: Manetho, the high priest and scribe of the sacred adyta in Egypt, being by birth a Sebennyte and a citizen of Heliopolis, to his sovereign Ptolemæus, humbly greeting:
It is right for us, most mighty king, to pay due attention to all things which it is your pleasure we should take into consideration. In answer therefore to your inquiries concerning the things which shall come to pass in the world, I shall, according to your commands, lay before you what I have gathered from the sacred books written by Hermes Trismegistus, our forefather. Farewell, my prince and sovereign.—Syncel. Chron. 40.—Euseb. Chron. 6
OF THE SHEPHERD KINGS.
WE had formerly a king whose name was Timaus. In his time it came to pass, I know not how, that God was displeased with us: and there came up from the East in a strange manner men of an ignoble race, who had the confidence to invade our country, and easily subdued it by their power without a battle. And when they had our rulers in their hands, they burnt our cities, and demolished the temples of the gods, and inflicted every kind of barbarity upon the inhabitants, slaying some, and reducing the wives and children of others to a state of slavery. At length they made one of themselves king, whose name was Salatis: he lived at Memphis, and rendered both the upper and lower regions of Egypt tributary, and stationed garrisons in [p.170] places which were best adapted for that purpose. But he directed his attention principally to the security of the eastern frontier; for he regarded with suspicion the increasing power of the Assyrians, who he foresaw would one day undertake an invasion of the kingdom. And observing in the Saite nome, upon the east of the Bubastite channel, a city which from some ancient theological reference was called Avaris; and finding it admirably adapted to his purpose, he rebuilt it, and strongly fortified it with walls, and garrisoned it with a force of two hundred and fifty thousand men completely armed. To this city Salatis repaired in time, to collect his tribute, and pay his troops, and to exercise his soldiers in order to strike terror into foreigners.
And Salatis died after a reign of nineteen years: after him reigned another king, who was called Beon, forty-four years: and he was succeeded by Apachnas who reigned thirty-six years and seven months: after him reigned Apophis sixty-one [p.171] years, and Ianias fifty years and one month. After all these reigned Assis forty-nine years and two months. These six were the first rulers amongst them, and during the whole period of their dynasty, they made war upon the Egyptians with the hope of exterminating the whole race. All this nation was styled Hycsos, that is the Shepherd Kings; for the first syllable, Hyc, in the sacred dialect, denotes a king, and Sos signifies a shepherd, but this only according to the vulgar tongue; and of these is compounded the term Hycsos: some say they were Arabians. This people who were thus denominated Shepherd Kings, and their descendants retained possession of Egypt during the period of five hundred and eleven years.
After these things he relates that the kings of Thebais and of the other provinces of Egypt, made an insurrection against the Shepherds, and that a long and mighty war was carried on between them, till the Shepherds were overcome by a king whose [p.172] name was Alisphragmuthosis, and they were by him driven out of the other parts of Egypt, and hemmed up in a place containing about ten thousand acres, which was called Avaris. All this tract (says Manetho) the Shepherds surrounded with a vast and strong wall, that they might retain all their property and their prey within a hold of strength.
And Thummosis, the son of Alisphragmuthosis, endeavoured to force them by a siege, and beleaguered the place with a body of four hundred and eighty thousand men; but at the moment when he despaired of reducing them by siege, they agreed to a capitulation, that they would leave Egypt, and should be permitted to go out without molestation wheresoever they pleased. And, according to this stipulation, they departed from Egypt with all their families and effects, in number not less than two hundred and forty thousand, and bent their way through [p.173] the desert towards Syria. But as they stood in fear of the Assyrians, who had then dominion over Asia, they built a city in that country which is now called Judaea, of sufficient size to contain this multitude of men, and named it Jerusalem.
(In another book of the Egyptian histories Manetho says) That
this people, who are here called Shepherds, in their sacred books were also
After the departure of this nation of Shepherds to Jerusalem, Tethmosis, the king of Egypt who drove them out, reigned twenty-five years and four months, and then died: after him his son Chebron took the government into his hands for thirteen years; after him reigned Amenophis for twenty years and seven months: then his sister Amesses twenty-one years and nine months: she was succeeded by Mephres, who reigned twelve years and nine months: after him Mephramuthosis twenty-five years and ten months: then Thmosis reigned nine years and [p.174] eight months; after whom Amenophis thirty years and ten months: then Orus thirty six years and five months: then his daughter Acenchres twelve years and one month: afterwards her brother Rathotis nine: then Acencheres twelve years and five months; another Acencheres twelve years and three months: after him Armais four years and one month: after him reigned Harnesses one year and four months: then Armesses the son of Miammous sixty-six years and two months: after him Amenophis nineteen years and six months: and he was succeeded by Sethosis and Ramesses, he maintained an army of cavalry and a naval force.
This king (Sethosis) appointed his brother Armais his viceroy
over Egypt: he also invested him with all the other authority of a king, with
only these restrictions; that he should not wear the diadem, nor interfere with
the queen, the mother of his children, nor abuse the royal concubines. Sethosis
then made an expedition against Cyprus and Phœnicia,
and waged war with the Assyrians and Medes; and he subdued [p.175]
them all, some by force of arms, and others without a battle, by the mere terror
of his power. And being elated with his success, he advanced still more
confidently, and overthrew the cities, and subdued the countries of the East.
But Armais, who was left in Egypt, took advantage of the opportunity, and fearlessly perpetrated all those acts which his brother had enjoined him not to commit: he violated the queen, and continued an unrestrained intercourse with the royal concubines; and at the persuasion of his friends he assumed the diadem, and openly opposed his brother.
But the ruler over the priests of Egypt by letters sent an account to Sethosis, and informed him of what had happened, and how his brother had set himself up in opposition to his power. Upon this Sethosis immediately returned to Pelusium, and recovered his kingdom. The country of Egypt took its name from Sethosis, who was called also Ægyptus, as was his brother Armais known by the name of Danaus.—Joseph, contr. App. lib. I. c. 14, 15.
OF THE ISRAELITES.
This king (Amenophis) was desirous of beholding the gods, as Orus, one of his predecessors in the kingdom, had seen them. And he communicated his desire to a priest of the same name with himself, Amenophis, the son of Papis, who seemed to partake of the divine nature, both in his wisdom and knowledge of futurity: and Amenophis returned him answer, that it was in his power to behold the gods, if he would cleanse the whole country of the lepers and other unclean persons that abounded in it.
Well pleased with this information, the king gathered together out of Egypt all that laboured under any defect in body, to the amount of eighty thousand, and sent them to the quarries, which are situated on the east side of the Nile, that they might work in them and be separated from the rest of the Egyptians. And (he says) there were among them some learned priests who were affected with leprosy. And Amenophis the wise man and prophet, fearful lest the vengeance of the gods should fall both on himself and on the king, if [p.177] it should appear that violence had been offered them, added this also in a prophetic spirit; that certain people would come to the assistance of these unclean persons, and would subdue Egypt, and hold it in possession for thirteen years. These tidings however he dared not to communicate to the king, but left in writing an account of what should come to pass, and destroyed himself, at which the king was fearfully distressed.
(After which he writes thus, word for word:) When those that were sent to work in the quarries had continued for some time in that miserable state, the king was petitioned to set apart for their habitation and protection the city Avaris, which had been left vacant by the Shepherds; and he granted them their desire: now this city, according to the theology above, is a Typhonian city.
But when they had taken possession of the city, and found it well adapted for a revolt, they appointed for themselves a ruler from among the priests of Heliopolis, one whose name was Osarsiph, and they bound themselves by oath that they would be obedient. Osarsiph then, in the first place enacted this law, that they should neither worship the gods, nor [p.178] abstain from any of those sacred animals which the Egyptians hold in veneration, but sacrifice and slay them all; and that they should connect themselves with none but such as were of that confederacy. When he had made such laws as these, and many others of a tendency directly in opposition to the customs of the Egyptians, he gave orders that they should employ the multitude of hands in rebuilding the walls about the city, and hold themselves in readiness for war with Amenophis the king. He then took into his counsels some others of the priests and unclean persons: and sent ambassadors to the city called Jerusalem, to those Shepherds who had been expelled by Tethmosis: and he informed them of the position of their affairs, and requested them to come up unanimously to his assistance in this war against Egypt. He also promised in the first place to reinstate them in their ancient city and country Avaris, and provide a plentiful maintenance for their host, and fight for them as occasion might require; and assured them that he would easily reduce the country under their dominion. The Shepherds received this message with [p.179] the greatest joy, and quickly mustered to the number of two hundred thousand men, and came up to Avaris.
Now Amenophis the king of Egypt, when he was informed of their invasion, was in great consternation, remembering the prophecy of Amenophis, the son of Papis. And he assembled the armies of the Egyptians, and having consulted with the leaders, he commanded the sacred animals to be brought to him, especially those which were held in more particular veneration in the temples, and he forthwith charged the priests to conceal the images of their gods with the utmost care. Moreover he placed his son Sethos, who was also called Harnesses from his father Rampses, being then but five years old, under the protection of a faithful adherent; and marched with the rest of the Egyptians being three hundred thousand warriors, against the enemy, who advanced to meet him: but he did not attack them, thinking it would be to wage war against the gods, but returned, and came again to Memphis, where he took Apis and the other sacred animals he had sent for, and retreated immediately into Ethiopia together with all his army, and all the multitude of the Egyptians; [p.180] for the king of Ethiopia was under obligations to him. He was therefore kindly received by the king, who took care of all the multitude that was with him, while the country supplied what was necessary for their subsistence. He also allotted to him cities and villages during his exile, which was to continue from its beginning during the predestined thirteen years. Moreover he pitched a camp for an Ethiopian army upon the borders of Egypt, as a protection to king Amenophis.
In the mean time, while such was the state of things in Ethiopia, the people of Jerusalem, who had come down with the unclean of the Egyptians, treated the inhabitants with such barbarity, that those who witnessed their impieties believed that that their joint sway was more execrable than that which the Shepherds had formerly exercised alone. For they not only set fire to the cities and villages, but committed every kind of sacrilege, and destroyed the images of the gods, and roasted and fed upon those sacred animals that were worshipped; and having com- [p.181] pelled the priests and prophets to kill and sacrifice them, they cast them naked out of the country. It is said also that the priest, who ordained their polity and laws, was by birth of Heliopolis, and his name Osarsiph, from Osiris the god of Heliopolis: but that when he went over to these people his name was changed, and he was called Moyses.—Joseph, contr. App. lib. I. c. 26.
OF THE SHEPHERDS AND ISRAELITES.
(Manetho again says:) After this Amenophis returned from Ethiopia with a great force, and Rampses also, his son, with other forces, and encountering the Shepherds and the unclean people, they defeated them and slew multitudes of them, and pursued them to the bounds of Syria.—Joseph, contr. App. lib. I. c. 27.
OF THE EXODUS:
AFTER him (Manetho) I wish to examine Chæremon,
who professes to have composed a history of Egypt. He gives the same name as
does Manetho to the king Amenophis and his son Harnesses, and says as follows—
"Isis appeared to Amenophis in his dreams, rebuking him that her temple should have been overthrown in war. Upon which Phritiphantes the sacred scribe told him, that if he would clear Egypt of all polluted persons he would be delivered from these terrors. He therefore collected two hundred and fifty thousand unclean persons, and drove them out. Their leaders were two scribes called [p.183] Moyses and Josephus, the latter of whom was a sacred scribe: but their Egyptian names were, that of Moyses Tisithen, and that of Josephus Peteseph. They bent their way towards Pelusium where they met with three hundred and eighty thousand men left there by Amenophis, whom he would not suffer to come into Egypt.
With these they made a treaty and invaded Egypt. But Amenophis waited not to oppose their incursion, but fled into Ethiopia, leaving his wife pregnant: and she concealed herself in a cavern where she brought forth a child and named him Messenes, who when he arrived at manhood drove out the Jews into Syria, being about two hundred thousand, and recalled his father Amenophis from Ethiopia.—Joseph. Contr. App. lib. I. C. 32.
OF THE EXODUS:
FROM DIODORUS SICULUS.
There having arisen in former days a pestiferous disease in
Egypt, the multitude attributed the cause of the evil to the Deity: for a very
great [p.184] concourse of foreigners of every
nation then dwelt in Egypt, who were addicted to strange rites in their worship
and sacrifices; so that in consequence the due honours of the gods fell into
disuse. Whence the native inhabitants of the land inferred, that, unless they
removed them, there would never be an end of their distresses. They immediately
therefore expelled these foreigners; the most illustrious and able of whom
passed over in a body (as some say) into Greece and other places under the
conduct of celebrated leaders, of whom the most renowned were Danaus and Cadmus.
But a large body of the people went forth into the country which is now called Judæa, situated not far distant from Egypt, being altogether desert in those times. The leader of this colony was Moses, a man very remarkable for his great wisdom and valour. When he had taken possession of the land, among other cities, he founded that which is called Jerusalem which is now the most celebrated.—Lib. XL. Ecl. i. p. 921.
N.B. The rest of the fragment gives an account of the Jewish polity, laws, &c. It was the beginning of Diodorus' history of the Jewish war, and is preserved by Photius.
OF THE EXODUS OF THE JEWS:
He says, That in the reign of Bocchoris king of Egypt, the Jewish people being infected with leprosy scurvy, and sundry other diseases, took shelter in the temples where they begged for food; and that in consequence of the vast number of persons who were seized with the complaint there became a scarcity in Egypt. Upon this Bocchoris the king of the Egyptians sent persons to inquire of the Oracle of Ammon, respecting the sterility: and the god directed him to cleanse the temples of all polluted and impious men and cast them out into the desert, but to drown those that were affected with the leprosy and scurvy, inasmuch as their existence was displeasing to the Sun; then to purify the temples; upon which the land would recover its fertility. When Bocchoris had received the oracle, he assembled the priests and attendants of the altars, and commanded them to gather together all the unclean persons and deliver them over to the soldiers to lead them forth into [p.186] the desert; but to wrap the lepers in sheets of lead and cast them into the sea. After they had drowned those afflicted with the leprosy and scurvy, they collected the rest and left them to perish in the desert. But they took counsel among themselves, and when night came on lighted up fires and torches to defend themselves, and fasted all the next night to propitiate the gods to save them. Upon the following day a certain man called Moyses counselled them to persevere in following one direct way till they should arrive at habitable places, and enjoined them to hold no friendly communication with men, neither to follow those things which men esteemed good, but such as were considered evil: and to overthrow the temples and altars of the gods as often as they should happen with them. When they had assented to these proposals, they continued their journey through the desert, acting upon those rules, and after severe hardships they at length arrived in a habitable country, where, having inflicted every kind of injury upon the inhabitants, plundering and burning the temples, they came at length to the land which is now called Judæa, and founded a city and settled there. This city was named Hierosyla from [p.187] their disposition. But in after times when they acquired strength, to obliterate the reproach, they changed its name and called the city Hierosolyma, and themselves Hierosolymites.—Jos. contr. App. 34.
OF THE EXODUS:
Some of the Greeks also relate that Moses flourished in those times. Polemo in the first book of his Grecian histories says, that "In the reign of Apis the son of Phoroneus a part of the Egyptian army deserted from Egypt and took up their habitation in that part of Syria which is called Palestine not far from Arabia:" these indeed were they who went out with Moses.—Afric. cited Eus. Pr. Ev. lib. 10.
OF THE EXODUS:
FROM PTOLEMÆUS MENDESIUS.
Amosis, who lived about the same time with Inachus the Argive overthrew the city Avaris; as Ptolemaeus Mendesius has related in his chronicles.—Clemens Strom. cited Eus. Pr. Ev. lib. 10.
OF THE EXODUS OF THE JEWS:
And they (the Jews) borrowed of the Egyptians many vessels and no small quantity of raiment, and every variety of treasure, and passed over the branches of the river towards Arabia, and upon the third day's march arrived at a convenient station upon the Red Sea.
And the Memphites say that [p.189] Moyses being well
acquainted with that part of the country waited for the ebbing of the tide, and
then made the whole multitude pass through the shallows of the sea.
But the Heliopolitans say that the king pursued them with great power, and took with him the sacred animals, in order to recover the substance which the Jews had borrowed of the Egyptians. But that a divine voice instructed Moyses to strike the sea with his rod: and that when Moyses heard this he touched the waters with the rod, whereupon the waves stood apart, and the host went through along a dry path. He68 says moreover that when the Egyptians came up with them and followed after them, the fire flashed on them from before, and the sea again inundated the path, and that all the Egyptians perished either by the fire or by the return of the waters.
But the Jews escaped the danger and passed thirty years in the desert, where God rained upon them a kind of grain like that called Panic, whose colour was like snow. He says also that Moyses was ruddy with white [p.190] hair and of a dignified deportment: and that when he did these things he was in the eighty-ninth year of his age.—Eus. Pr. Ev. lib. 10.
THE TYRIAN ANNALS
DIUS AND MENANDER.
THE TYRIAN ANNALS
UPON the death of Abibalus his son Hiromus succeeded to the kingdom. He raised the eastern parts of the city, and enlarged the citadel; and joined to it the temple of Jupiter Olympius, which stood before upon an island, by filling up the intermediate space: and he adorned that temple with donations of gold: and he went up into Libanus to cut timber for the construction of the temples. And it is said that Solomon, who at that time reigned in Jerusalem, sent enigmas to Hiromus, and desired others in return, with a proposal that whichsoever of the two was unable to solve them, should forfeit money to the other. Hiromus [p.194] agreed to the proposal, but was unable to solve the enigmas, and paid treasures to a large amount as a forfeit to Solomon. And it is said that one Abdemonus, a Tyrian, solved the enigmas, and proposed others which Solomon was not able to unriddle, for which he repaid the fine to Hiromus.—Joseph. contr. Ap. lib. I. c. 17. Syncel. Chron. 182.
OF THE KINGS AND JUDGES FROM NEBUCHADNEZZAR TO CYRUS.
In the reign of Ithobalus, Nabuchodonosorus besieged Tyre for thirteen years. After him reigned Baal ten years. After him Judges were appointed who judged the people: Ecnibalus, the son of Baslachus, two months: Chelbes, the son of Abdaeus, ten months: Abbarus, the high priest, three months: Mytgonus and Gerastratus the son of Abdelemus, six years: after them Balatorus reigned one year as king: and upon his death the Tyrians sent to fetch Merbalus from Babylon: and he reigned four years: and when he died they sent for Hiromus, his bro- [p.195] other, who reigned twenty years. In his time Cyrus was king of Persia.
(The whole time therefore amounts to fifty-four years and three months. For in the seventh year of his reign Nabuchodonosorus began the siege of Tyre: and in the fourteenth year of Hiromus Cyrus the Persian assumed the government of that kingdom.)—Joseph. contr. Ap. lib. I. c. 21.
THE TYRIAN ANNALS
AFTER the death of Abibalus, Hiromus his son succeeded him in his kingdom, and reigned thirty-four years, having lived fifty-three. He laid out that part of the city which is called Eurychoron: and consecrated the golden column which is in the temple of Jupiter. And he went up into the forest on the mountain called Libanus, to fell cedars for the roofs of the temples: and having demolished the ancient temples, he rebuilt them, and consecrated the fanes of Hercules and Astarte: he constructed that of Hercules first, in the month Peritius; then that of Astarte, when he had overcome the Tityans who had refused to pay their tribute: and when he had subjected them he re- [p.197] turned. In his time was a certain young man named Abdemonus, who used to solve the problems which were propounded to him by Solomon king of Jerusalem.—Joseph, contr. Ap. lib. I. c. 18. Joseph. Antiq. Jud. lib. VIII. c. 5.
OF THE SUCCESSORS OF HIRAM.
Upon the death of Hiromus, Baleazarus his son succeeded to the kingdom; he lived forty-three years, and reigned seven: after him Abdastratus his son reigned nine years, having lived twenty-nine: against him the four sons of his nurse conspired, and slew him: of these the eldest reigned twelve years: after them Astartus, the son of Delaeastartus, reigned twelve years, having lived fifty-four: after him his brother Aserumus reigned nine years, having lived fifty-four: he was slain by his brother Pheles, who governed the kingdom eight months, having lived fifty years: he was slain by the priest [p.198] of Astarte, Ithobalus, who reigned thirty-two years, having lived sixty-eight: and he was succeeded by Badezorus his son, who reigned six years, having lived forty-five: his successor was Matgenus his son, who reigned nine years, having lived thirty-two: and he was succeeded by Phygmalion who reigned forty-seven years, having lived fifty-six: in the seventh year of his reign his sister fled from him, and founded the city of Carthage in Libya.
(Whence it appears that the sum of the whole time from the reign of Hiromus to the foundation of Carthage is 155 years and 8 months. And since the temple in Jerusalem was built in the twelfth year of the reign of Hiro- [p.199] mus, therefore from the building of the temple to the foundation of Carthage the time is a hundred and forty-three years and eight months.)—Jos. cont. Ap. lib. I. c. 18. Sync. 183.
OF THE INVASION OF SALMANASAR.
Elulaeus reigned thirty-six years: and he fitted out a fleet against the Cittaeans who had revolted, and reduced them to obedience. But Salmanasar, the king of the Assyrians, sent them assistance, and overran Phoenicia: and when he had made peace with the Phoenicians he returned with all his forces. And Sidon, and Ace (Acre), and Palaetyrus, and many other cities revolted from the Tyrians, and put themselves under the protection of the king of Assyria. But as the Tyrians still refused to submit, the king made another expedition against them: and the Phoenicians furnished him with sixty ships and eight hundred rowers: and the Tyrians attacked him with twelve ships, and dispersed the hostile fleet, and took prisoners to the amount of [p.200] five hundred men: upon which account the Tyrians were held in great respect.* But the king of Assyria stationed guards upon the river and aqueducts, to prevent the Tyrians from drawing water: and this continued five years, during all which time they were obliged to drink from the wells they dug.—Joseph. Antiq, Jud. lib. IX. c. 14.
HANNO AND HIEMPSAL.
THE PERIPLUS OF HANNO.
OF HANNO, COMMANDER OF THE CARTHAGINIANS.
ROUND the parts of Libya which lie beyond the Pillars of
Hercules, which he deposited in the temple of Saturn.
It was decreed by the Carthaginians that Hanno should undertake a voyage beyond the Pillars of Hercules, and found Libyphcenician cities. He sailed accordingly with sixty ships of fifty oars each, and a body of men and women to the number of thirty thousand, and provisions and other necessaries.
When we had passed the Pillars on our voyage, and had sailed beyond them for two days, we founded the first city, which we named Thymia- [p.204] terium. Below it lay an extensive plain. Proceeding thence towards the west, we came to Soloeis, a promontory of Libya, a place thickly covered with trees, where we erected a temple to Neptune; and again proceeded for the space of half a day towards the east, until we arrived at a lake lying not far from the sea, and filled with abundance of large reeds. Here elephants, and a great number of other wild beasts, were feeding.
Having passed the lake about a day's sail, we founded cities
near the sea, called Cariconticos, and Gytte, and Acra, and Melitta, and Arambys.
Thence we came to the great river Lixus, which flows from Libya. On its banks
the Lixitae, a shepherd tribe, were feeding flocks, amongst whom we continued
some time on friendly terms. Beyond the Lixitae dwelt the inhospitable
who pasture a wild country intersected by large mountains, from which they say
the river Lixus flows. In the neighbourhood of the mountains lived the
Troglodytse, men of various appearances, whom the Lixitae de-
[p.205] scribed as swifter in running than horses.
Having procured interpreters from them we coasted along a desert country towards the south two days. Thence we proceeded towards the east the course of a day. Here we found in a recess of a certain bay a small island, containing a circle of five stadia, where we settled a colony, and called it Cerne. We judged from our voyage that this place lay in a direct line with Carthage; for the length of our voyage from Carthage to the Pillars, was equal to that from the Pillars to Cerne.
We then came to a lake which we reached by sailing up a large
river called Chretes. This lake had three islands, larger than Cerne; from which
proceeding a day's sail, we came to the extremity of the lake, that was overhung
by large mountains, inhabited by savage men, clothed in skins of wild beasts,
who drove us away by throwing stones, and hindered us from landing. Sailing
thence we came to another river, that was large and broad, and full of
crocodiles, and river horses; whence [p.206]
returning back we came again to Cerne.
Thence we sailed towards the south twelve days, coasting the shore, the whole of which is inhabited by Ethiopians, who would not wait our approach but fled from us. Their language was not intelligible even to the Lixitæ, who were with us. Towards the last day we, approached some large mountains covered with trees, the wood of which was sweet scentedand variegated. Having sailed by these mountains for two days we came to an immense opening of the sea; on each side of which towards the continent, was a plain; from which we saw by night fire arising at intervals in all directions, either more or less.
Having taken in water there, we sailed forwards five days near the land, until we came to a large bay which our interpreters informed us was called the Western Horn. In this was a large island, and in the island a salt-water lake, and in this another island, where, when we had landed, we could discover nothing in the day-time except trees; but in the night we saw many fires burning, and heard the sound of pipes, cymbals, drums, and confused shouts. We [p.207] were then afraid, and our diviners ordered us to abandon the island. Sailing quickly away thence, we passed a country burning with fires and perfumes; and streams of fire supplied from it fell into the sea. The country was impassable on account of the heat. We sailed quickly thence, being much terrified; and passing on for four days, we discovered at night a country full of fire. In the middle was a lofty fire, larger than the rest, which seemed to touch the stars. When day came we discovered it to be a large hill called the Chariot of the Gods. On the third day after our departure thence, having sailed by those streams of fire we arrived at a bay called the Southern Horn; at the bottom of which lay an island like the former, having a lake, and in this lake another island, full of savage people, the greater part of whom were women, whose bodies were hairy, and whom our interpreters called Gorillæ. Though we pursued the men we could not seize any of them; but all fled from us, escaping over the precipices, and defending themselves with stones. Three women were however taken; but they attacked their conductors with their teeth and hands, and could not be [p.208] and brought their skins with us to Carthage. We did not sail further on, our provisions failing us.
OF THE AFRICAN SETTLEMENTS.
BUT what race of men first had possession of Africa, and who
afterwards arrived, and in what manner they have become blended with each other;
though the following differs from the report which is commonly current, yet I
will give it as it was interpreted to me from the Punic books, which are called
the books of King Hiempsal, and will explain in as few words as possible the
opinion of the inhabitants of the land itself relative to the matter in
question. But its authenticity must rest upon the credit of its authors.
The aboriginal possessors of Africa were the Gaetulians and Libyans, a rough unpolished race, whose food was flesh and venison, and the pasturage of the ground like cattle. They [p.210] were neither restrained by morals, nor law, nor any man's government; wanderers and houseless, taking up their abode wherever they might chance to be, when night came upon them.
But when Hercules perished in Spain, according to the opinion of the Africans, his army, composed of various nations, upon the loss of its leader, and from the factious attempts of many to assume the command was quickly dispersed. From its ranks the Medes, Persians, and Armenians, having passed over by shipping into Africa, occupied the parts bordering upon our sea. The Persians settled towards the Atlantic Ocean; and formed cottages of the inverted hulls of their vessels; for they could neither obtain the requisite materials in the fields, nor had the means of buying them or trafficing for them with the Spaniards: inasmuch as the magnitude of the sea, and ignorance of each others language, prevented all intercourse between them. Within a short time, by marriages, they blended themselves with the Gaetulians, and because they frequently changed their situations, and passed from one place to another, they assumed the name of Numidians. And to this day the buildings of the wild Numidians, which they call Mapalia, are of an oblong form, with roofs in- [p.211] curvated in the sides like the holds of ships.
The country occupied by the Medes and Armenians bordered upon that of the Libyans, for they occupied the parts nearer to the African sea, whilst the Gaetulians were more towards the sun, not far from the torrid zone: and they quickly built cities; for, separated from Spain only by the straits, they established a mutual commerce. Their name was presently corrupted by the Libyans, who in their barbarous language called them Mauri (Moors) instead of Medes. The affairs of the Persians in a short time became prosperous, and a colony under the name of Numidians left their original settlements on account of their numbers, and took possession of that part of the country which is next to Carthage and now called Numidia. Moreover, by mutual assistance, they subjected their neighbours to their dominion either by the force or terror of their arms, acquiring great renown and glory; those more particularly which border upon our seas, inasmuch as the Libyans are less warlike than the Gaetulians, till at length chief of the lower part of Africa was possessed by the Numidians, and all the con- [p.212] quered merged in the name and nation of the conquerors.
The Phoenicians afterwards sent forth colonies, some in order to dispose of the superfluous multitude at home, others from the ambition of extending their empire at the solicitations of the people and those who were desirous of innovation, and founded the cities of Hippo, Adrimetus, Leptis, and others upon the sea coast, which in a short time were raised to consequence, partly for defence to their parent states, and partly for their honour.—Bell. Jug.
OF THE INVASIONS OF INDIA.
MEGASTHENES also appears to be of this opinion, informing us
that no reliance can be placed upon the ancient histories of the Indians.
For, says he, there never was an army sent forth by the Indians, nor did ever a foreign army invade and conquer that country except the expeditions of Hercules and Dionysus, and this of the Macedonians. Yet Sesostris the Egyptian, and Tearcon the Ethiopian, extended their conquests as far as Europe. But Navocodrosorus, the most renowned among the Chaldaeans, exceeded Hercules, and carried his arms as far as the Pillars: to which also it is said Tearcon arrived. But Navocodrosorus led his army from Spain to Thrace and Pontus. Idanthursus, the Scythian, also, overran all Asia as far as Egypt. But none of all these ever invaded India. Semiramis died before she commenced [p.216] the undertaking. But the Persians sent the Hydracae to collect a tribute from India: but they never entered the country in a hostile manner, but only approached it, when Cyrus led his expedition against the Massagetse. Megasthenes, however, with some few others, gives credit to the narratives of the exploits of Hercules and Dionysus: but all other historians, among whom may be reckoned Eratosthenes, set them down as in credible and fabulous, and of the same stamp with the achievements of the heroes among the Greeks.—Strabo, lib. xv. 686.
OF THE CASTES OF INDIA.69
Megasthenes says That the whole population of India is
divided into seven castes: among which that of the Philosophers is held in
estimation as the first, notwithstanding their number is the smallest. The
people when they sacrifice and prepare the feasts of the dead in private, each
makes use of the services of one of them: but the kings publicly gather them
together in an assembly which is called the great synod: at which in the
commencement of each new year [p.217] all the philosophers
assemble at the gate (court) of the king; that whatever each of them may have
collected which may be of service, or may have observed relative to the increase
of the fruits and animals and of the state, he may produce it in public. And it
is a law, that if any among them be three times convicted of falsehood he shall
be doomed to silence during life: but the upright they release from tax and
The second division is the caste of the Agriculturists who are the most numerous and worthy. They pursue their occupation free from military duties and fear; neither concerning themselves with civil nor public nor any other business; and it often happens that, at the same time and place, the military class is arrayed and engaged with an enemy, whilst the agricultural, depending upon the other for protection, plough and dig without any kind of danger. And since the land is all held of the king, they cultivate upon hire, paying a rent of one fourth of the produce.
The third caste is that of the Shepherds and Hunters, whose sole occupation is hunting, grazing, and selling cattle, for which they give a premium and stipend: for clearing the land also of wild beasts and birds which [p.218] destroy the grain, they are entitled to a portion of corn from the king, and lead a wandering life, living in tents.70
After the Hunters and Shepherds, the fourth race is that of the Artizans and Innholders and bodily Labourers of all kinds: of whom some bring tribute, or instead of it, perform stated service on the public works. But the manufacturers of arms and builders of ships are entitled to pay and sustenance from the king: for they work only for him. The keeper of the military stores gives the arms out to the soldiers, and the governor of the ships lets them out for hire to the sailors and merchants.
The fifth caste is the Military; who, when disengaged, spend
the rest of their time at ease in stations properly provided by the king; in
order that whenever occasion shall require they may be ready to march forth
directly, carrying with them nothing else than their bodies.
The sixth are the Inspectors whose business it is to pry into all matters that are carried on, and report them [p.219] privately to the king, for which purpose in the towns they employ women upon the town, and the camp-followers in the camp. They are chosen from the most upright and honourable men.
The seventh class are the Counsellors and Assessors of the
king, by whom the government and laws and administration are conducted. It is
unlawful either to contract marriages from another caste, or to change one
profession or occupation for another, or for one man to undertake more than one,
unless the person so doing shall be one of the Philosophers,71 which is permitted
on account of their dignity.
Of the Governors some preside over the rural affairs, others over the civil, others again over the military. To the first class is entrusted the inspection of the rivers, and the admeasurements of the fields after the inundations, as in Egypt, and the covered aqueducts by which the water is distributed into channels [p.220] for the equal supply of all according to their wants. The same have the care of the Hunters with the power of dispensing rewards and punishments according to their deserts. They collect also the tribute and inspect all the arts which are exercised upon the land, as of wrights and carpenters and the workers of brass and other metals. They also construct the highways, and at every ten stadia place a mile-stone to point out the turnings and distances.
The governors of cities are divided into six pentads: some of whom overlook the operative works: and others have charge of all aliens, distributing to them an allowance; and taking cognizance of their lives, if they give them habitations: else they send them away, and take care of the goods of such as happen to die, or are unwell, and bury them when dead.
The third class take registers of the births and deaths, and how and when they take place; and this for the sake of the tribute, that no births either of good or evil nor any deaths may be unnoticed. The fourth has the care of the tavern-keepers and exchanges: these have charge also of the measures and qualities of the goods, that they may be sold according to the proper stamps. Nor is [p.221] any one permitted to barter more, unless he pay a double tribute. The fifth class presides over the manufactured articles, arranging them and separating the stamped from the common, and the old from the new, and laying a fine upon those who mix them. The sixth and last exact the tithe of all things sold, with the power of inflicting death on all such as cheat. Each therefore has his private duties. But it is the public business of them all to controul the private as well as civil affairs of the nation, and to inspect the repairs of the public works, and prices, and the markets and the ports and temples.
After the civil governors there is a third college which presides over military affairs, and this in like manner is divided into six pentads, of which the first is consociated with the governor of the fleet; the second with him who presides over the yokes of oxen by which the instruments are conveyed, and the food for themselves and the oxen, and all the other baggage of the army: they have with them, moreover, attendants who play upon drums and bells, together with grooms and smiths and their underworkmen: and they send forth their foragers to the sound of bells, recom- [p.222] pensing their speed with honour or punishment, and attending to their safety. The third class have the charge of the infantry. The fourth of the cavalry. The fifth of the chariots. The sixth of the elephants. Moreover there are royal stables for the horses and beasts; and a royal arsenal, in which the soldier deposits his accoutrements when he has done with them, and gives up his horse to the masters of the horse, and the same with respect to his beasts. They ride without bridles: the oxen draw the chariots along the roads: while the horses are led in halters, that their legs may not be injured, nor their spirit impaired by the draught of the chariots. In addition to the charioteer, each chariot contains two riders: but in the equipment of an elephant its conductor is the fourth, there being three bowmen also upon it.
The Indians are frugal in their diet, more particularly in the camp: and as they use no superfluities, they generally attire themselves with elegance.
The relation of Strabo is continued, with an account of the laws and customs of the Indians; containing some extracts from Megasthenes irrelative to the antiquities.
OF THE PHILOSOPHERS.
That is much more worthy of credit which Megasthenes reports,
that the rivers roll down crystals of gold; and that a tribute is collected from
thence for the king: for this also takes place in Iberia.
And speaking of the Philosophers, he says, that those who inhabit the mountains are votaries of Dionysus and point out traces of him among them, inasmuch as with them alone the vine grows naturally wild as well as the ivy, and laurel, and myrtle, and the box, and other species of the evergreens; of which beyond the Euphrates there are none except such as are kept as rarities in gardens and preserved with great care. The following are also customs of Dionysic origin, to wear linen tunics and turbans, and to use oils and perfumes; and to precede their kings with bells and drums when he goes forth upon a journey. The inhabitants of the plain however are addicted to the worship of Hercules.—Str. xv. 711.
OF THE PHILOSOPHICAL SECTS.
He makes also another division of the Philosophers, saying
that there are two races of them, one of which he calls the Brahmanes and the
Of these the Brahmanes are the more excellent, inasmuch as their discipline is preferable: for as soon as they are conceived they are committed to the charge of men skilled in magic arts, who approach under the pretence of singing incantations for the well doing both of the mother and the child; though in reality to give certain wise directions and admonitions: and the mothers, that willingly pay attention to them, are supposed to be more fortunate in the birth.
After birth they pass from the care of one master to that of another, as their increasing age requires the more superior. The Philosophers pass their time in a grove of moderate circumference, which lies in front of the city, living frugally and lying upon couches of leaves and skins: they abstain also from animal food and intercourse with females, intent upon serious discourses, and communicating them to such as wish: but it is considered improper for the auditor either to speak or to exhibit [p.225] any other sign of impatience; for, in case he should, he is cast out of the assembly for that day as one incontinent. After passing thirty-seven years in this manner they betake themselves to their own possessions where they live more freely and unrestrained, they then assume the linen tunic, and wear gold in moderation upon their hands and in their ears: they eat also flesh except that of animals which are serviceable to mankind, but they nevertheless abstain from acids and condiments. They use polygamy for the sake of large families; for they think that from many wives a larger progeny will proceed: if they have no servants their place is supplied by the service of their own children, for the more nearly any person is related to another, the more is he bound to attend to his wants.
The Brahmanes do not suffer their wives to attend their philosophical discourses, lest if they should be imprudent they might divulge any of their secret doctrines to the uninitiated: and if they be of a serious turn of mind, lest they should desert them for no one who despises pleasure and pain even to the contempt of life and death, as a person of such sentiments as they profess ought to be, would voluntarily submit to be under the [p.226] domination of another. They have various opinions upon the nature of death: for they regard the present life merely as the conception of persons presently to be born, and death as the birth into a life of reality and happiness to those who rightly philosophise: upon this account they are studiously careful in preparing for death. They hold that there is neither good nor evil in the accidents which take place among men: nor would men if they rightly regarded them as mere visionary delusions either grieve or rejoice at them: they therefore neither distress themselves nor exhibit any signs of joy at their occurrence.
Their speculations upon nature, he says, are in some respects childish: that they are better philosophers in their deeds than in their words; inasmuch as they believe many things contained in their mythologies. However they hold several of the same doctrines which are current among the Greeks; such as that the world is generated and destructible and of a spherical figure; and that the God who administers and forms it, pervades it throughout its whole extent: that the principles of all things are different, water for instance is the first principle of the fabrication of [p.227] the world; that after the four elements there is a certain fifth nature of which the heaven and stars are composed: that the earth is situated in the centre of the whole: they add much of a like nature concerning generation and the soul. They have also conceived many fanciful speculations after the manner of Plato, in which they maintain the immortality of the soul and the judgments of Hades, and doctrines of a similar description. Such is his account of the Brahmanes.
Of the Germanes he says they are considered the most honourable who are called Hylobii, and live in the woods upon leaves and wild fruits, clothing themselves with the bark of trees, and abstaining from venery and wine. They hold communication by messengers with the kings who inquire of them concerning the causes of things, and by their means the kings serve and worship the Deity.
After the Hylobii the second in estimation are the Physicians, philosophers, who are conversant with men, simple in their habits, but not exposing themselves to a life abroad, living upon rice and grain, which every one to whom they apply freely gives them and receives them into his house: they are able by the [p.228] use of medicines to render women fruitful and productive either of males or females: but they perform cures rather by attention to diet than the use of medicines. Of medicines they approve more commonly of unguents and plasters, for all others they consider not free from deleterious effects. These and some others of this sect so exercise their patience in labours and trials, as to have attained the capability of standing in one position unmoved for a whole day. There are others also who pretend to divination and inchantments, and are skilful in the concerns of the inhabitants and of their laws: they lead a mendicant life among the villages and towns; but the better class settle in the cities. They do not reject such of the mythological stories concerning Hades as appear to them favourable to virtue and piety. Women are suffered to philosophise with some of these sects, though they are required to abstain from venery.—Strabo, lib. v. 712.
OF THE INDIAN SUICIDES.
Megasthenes in his account of the Philosophers says, There is no prescribed rule for putting an end to themselves; but that those who do it are esteemed rash. The hardy by nature cast themselves upon the sword or from a precipice, those who are incapable of labour into the sea, those who are patient of hardships are strangled, while those of a fiery temperament are thrust into the fire: which last indeed was the fate of Calanus an intemperate man, and addicted to the pleasures of the table, at the court of Alexander.—Str. lib. xv. p. 718.
OF THE PHILOSOPHERS:
ACCORDING to the relation of Clitarchus, they place in opposition to the Brahmanes, the Pramnæ a contentious and argumentative set of men who deride the Brahmanes as arrogant and ridiculous on account of [p.230] their studies in physiology and astronomy. They are divided into the Mountaineer, the Naked, the Citizen, and Rural sects.
OF THE INDIAN ASTRONOMY:
FROM THE PASCHAL CHRONICLE.
ABOUT the time of the construction of the Tower, a certain Indian of the race of Arphaxad made his appearance, a wise man, and an astronomer, whose name was Andubarius; and it was he that first instructed the Indians in the science of Astronomy.—p. 36.
ATLANTIC AND PANCILEAN
MARCELLUS AND EUEMERUS.
OF THE ATLANTIC ISLAND:
THAT such and so great an island formerly existed is recorded by some of the historians who have treated of the concerns of the outward sea. For they say that in their times there were seven islands situated in that sea which were sacred to Persephone, and three others of an immense magnitude one of which was consecrated to Pluto, another to Ammon, and that which was situated between them to Poseidon; the size of this last was no less than a thousand stadia. The inhabitants of this island preserved a tradition handed down from their ancestors concerning the existence of the Atlantic island of a prodigious magnitude, which had really existed in those seas; and which, during a long period of time, governed all the islands in the Atlantic ocean. Such is the relation of Marcellus in his Ethiopian history.—Proc. in Tim.
EUEMERUS (the historian) was a favourite of Cassander the king, and being upon that account constrained by his master to undertake some useful as well as extensive voyage of discovery he says, That he travelled southwards to the Ocean, and having sailed from Arabia Felix stood out to sea several days, and continued his course among the islands of that sea; one of which far exceeded the rest in magnitude, and this was called Panchaea. He observes that the Panchaeans who inhabited it were singular for their piety, honouring the Gods with magnificent sacrifices and superb offerings of silver and gold. He says moreover that the island was consecrated to the Gods, and mentions several other remarkable circumstances relative to its antiquity and the richness of the arts [p.235] displayed in its institutions and services: some of which we have in part detailed in the books preceding this, He relates also that upon the brow of a certain very high mountain in it there was a temple of the Triphylaean Zeus, founded by him at the time he ruled over all the habitable world whilst he was yet resident amongst men. In this temple stood a golden column on which was inscribed in the Panchaean characters a regular history of the actions of Ouranus and Cronus and Zeus.
In a subsequent part of his work he relates that the first king was Ouranus, a man renowned for justice and benevolence, and well conversant with the motions of the stars: and that he was the first who honoured the Heavenly Gods with sacrifices upon which account he was called Ouranus (Heaven). He had two sons by his wife Hestia who were called Pan and Cronus; and daughters Rhea and Demetra. And Cronus reigned after Ouranus; and he married Rhea, and had by her Zeus, and Hera, and Poseidon. And when Zeus succeeded to the kingdom of Cronus he married Hera, and Demetra, and Themis, by whom he had children; by the first the Curetes; Persephone [p.236] by the second; and Athena by the third. He went to Babylon where he was hospitably received by Belus; and afterwards passed over to the island of Panchaea which lies in the Ocean, where he erected an altar to Ouranus his forefather. From thence he went into Syria to Cassius who was then the ruler of that country, from whom Mount Cassius receives its name. Passing thence into Cilicia he conquered Cilix the governor of those parts; and having travelled through many other nations he was honoured by all and universally acknowledged as a God.—Diod. Sic. Ecl. 681. cited by Euseb. Præp. Evan. II.
THE CHALDÆAN ORACLES OF ZOROASTER.
GOD, FATHER, MIND, FIRE MONAD, DUAD, TRIAD.72
1.73 But God is he that has the head of a hawk. He is the first, indestructible, eternal, unbegotten, indivisible, dissimilar; the dispenser of all good; incorruptible; the best of the good, the wisest of the wise: he is the father of equity and justice, self-taught, physical, and perfect, and wise, and the only inventor of the sacred philosophy.—Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. I. c. 10.
2.74 Theurgists assert that he75 is a God, and celebrate him as both older and
younger, as a circulating and eternal God, as understanding the whole number of
all things moved in the world, and moreover infinite through his power and of a
spiral form. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 244.—Tay.
3. The mundane god, eternal, boundless,
Young and old, of a spiral form.
4. For Eternity,76 according to the oracle, is the cause of never-failing life, of unwearied power, and unsluggish energy. T.—Tay.
5. Hence this stable God is called by the gods silent, and is said to consent with mind, and to be known by souls through mind alone. T.—Proc. in Theol. 321.—Tay.
6. The Chaldæans call the God (Dionysus or Bacchus) Iao in the Phœnician tongue
(instead of the intelligible light), and he is often called Sabaoth, signifying
that he is above the seven poles, that is the Demiurgus.—Lyd. de Mens. 83.—Tay.
7. Containing all things in the one summit of his own hyparxis, he himself subsists wholly beyond. T.—Procl. in Theol. 212.—Tay.
8. Measuring and bounding all things. T.—Proc. in Pl. Th. 386.—Tay.
9. For nothing imperfect circulates from a paternal principle. Z.—Psell. 38.—Plet.
10. The father hurled not forth fear but infused persuasion. Z.—Plet.
11. .... The Father has hastily withdrawn himself;
But has not shut up his own fire in his intellectual power. Z.—Psell. 30.—Plet. 33.
12. Such is the Mind which is there energizing before energy.
That it has not gone forth but abode in the paternal depth,
And in the adytum according to divinely-nourished silence. T.—Proc. in Tim. 167.
13. All things are the progeny of one fire.
The Father perfected all things, and delivered them over
To the second Mind, whom all nations of men call the first. Z.—Psell. 24.—Plet. 30.
14. And of the Mind which conducts the empyrean world. T.—Dam. de Prin.
15. What the Mind says, it says by understanding. Z.—Psell. 35.
16. Power is with them, but Mind is from him. T.—Proc. in Plat. Th. 365.
17. The Mind of the Father riding on attenuated rulers
Which glitter with the furrows of inflexible and implacable Fire. T.—Proc. in Crat.—Tay.
18. .... After the paternal conception
I the Soul reside, a heat animating all things.
...... For he placed
Mind in Soul and Soul in dull Body,
The Father of Gods and Men so placed them in ours. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 124.
19. Natural works coexist with the intellectual light
Of the Father. For it is the Soul, which adorned the great heaven
And which adorns it after the Father.
But her horns are established on high. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 106.
20. The Soul, being a bright fire, by the power of the father,
Remains immortal, and is mistress of life,
And fills up many of the recesses of the world. Z.—Psell. 28.—Plet. 11.
21. The channels being intermixed, she performs the works of incorruptible fire. Z. or T.—Proc. in Pl. Polit. 399.
22. For the Fire which is first beyond did not shut up his power
In matter by works but by mind:
For the framer of the fiery world is the Mind of Mind. T.—Proc. in Theol. 333.—in Tim. 157.
23. Who first sprung from Mind
Clothing fire with fire, binding them together that he might mingle
The fountainous craters, while he preserved the flower of his own fire. T.—Proc. in Parm.
24. Thence a fiery whirlwind drawing the flower of glowing fire,
Flashing into the cavities of the worlds; for all things from thence
Begin to extend downwards their admirable rays. T.—Proc. in Theol. Plat. 171. 172.
25.77 The Monad is there first where the paternal Monad subsists. T.—Proc. in Euc. 27.
26. The Monad is extended which generates two. T.—Proc. in Euc. 27.
27. For the Duad sits by this, and glitters with intellectual sections,
To govern all things, and to order each. T.—Proc. in Plat. 376.
28. The Mind of the Father said that all things should be cut into three:
His will assented, and immediately all things were cut. T.—Proc. in Parm.
29. The Mind of the eternal Father said into three,
Governing all things by Mind. T.—Proc. in Tim.
30. The Father mingled every Spirit from this Triad.—Lyd. de Men. 20.—Tay.
31. All things are governed in the bosoms of this triad.—Lyd. de Men. 20.—Tay.
32. All things are governed and subsist in these three. T.—Proc. in I. Alcib.
33. For you may conceive that all things serve these three principles. T.—Dam. de Prin.
34. From these flows the body of the Triad, being pre-existent,
Not the first, but that by which things are measured. Z. or T.—Anon.
35. And there appeared in it virtue, and wisdom,
And multiscient truth. Z. or T.—Anon.
36. For in the whole world shineth a Triad, over which a Monad rules. T.—Dam. in Parm.
37. The first is the sacred course ..., but in the middle
Air, the third the other which cherisheth the earth in fire. Z. or T.—Anon.
38. Abundantly animating light, fire, ether, worlds. Z. or T.—Simp. in Phys. 143.
INTELLIGIBLES, INTELLECTUALS, IYNGES, SYNOCHES, TELETARCHÆ, FOUNTAINS, PRINCIPLES, HECATE AND DÆMONS.
39. The Mind of the Father made a jarring noise, understanding by unwearied counsel
Omniform ideas: which flying out from one fountain
They sprung forth: for from the Father was the will and the end;
(By which they are connected with the Father
According to alternate life from several vehicles,)
But they were divided, being by intellectual fire distributed
Into other Intellectuals: For the king previously placed before the multiform world
An intellectual, incorruptible pattern, the print of whose form
Is promoted through the world, according to which things the world appeared
Beautified with all-various Ideas; of which there is one fountain,
From this the others rush forth distributed,
And separated about the bodies of the world, and are borne
Through its vast recesses like swarms
Turning themselves on all sides in every direction,
They are Intellectual conceptions from the paternal fountain,
Partaking abundantly the flower of Fire in the point of restless time,
But the primary self-perfect fountain of the Father
Poured forth these primogenial ideas. Z. or T.—Proc. in Parm.
40. These being many ascend flashingly into the shining worlds
And in them are contained three summits. T.—Dam. in Parm.
41. They are the guardians of the works of the Father
And of the one Mind, the Intelligible. T.—Proc. in Th. Plat. 205.
42.79 All things subsist together in the Intelligible world. T.—Dam. de Prin.—Tay.
43. But all Intellect understands the deity, for Intellect is not without the Intelligible,
And the Intelligible does not subsist apart from Intellect. Z. or T.—Dam.
44. For Intellect is not without the Intelligible: it does not subsist apart from it. Z. or T.—Proc. Th. Plat. 172.
45. By Intellect he contains the Intelligibles, but introduces the Soul into the worlds.
46. By Intellect he contains the Intelligibles, but introduces Sense into the worlds. T.—Proc. in Crat.
47. For the paternal Intellect, which understands Intelligibles,
And adorns things ineffable, has sowed symbols through the world. T.—Proc. in Crat.
48. This order is the beginning of all section. T.—Dam. de Prin.
49. The Intelligible is the principle of all section. T.—Dam. de Prin.
50. The Intelligible is food to that which understands. T.—Dam. de Prin.
51. The oracles concerning the orders exhibits it prior to Heaven as ineffable, and add—
It has mystic silence. T.—Proc. in Crat.—Tay.
52. The oracle calls the Intelligible causes Swift, and asserts that proceeding from the Father, they run to him. T.—Proc. in Crat.—Tay.
53.80 Those natures are both Intellectual and Intelligible, which, themselves possessing intellection, are the objects of intelligence to others. T.—Proc. Th. Plat. 179.
54. The intelligible Iynges themselves understand from the Father;
By ineffable counsels being moved so as to understand. Z.—Psell. 41.—Plet. 3l.
55. Because it is the operator, because it is the giver of life-bearing fire.
Because it fills the life-producing bosom of Hecate.
And it instils into the Synoches the enlivening strength of Fire
Endued with mighty power. T.—Proc. in Tim. 128.
56. He gave to his own whirlwinds to guard the summits,
Mingling the proper force of his own strength in the Synoches. T.—Dam. de Prin.
57. But likewise as many as serve the material Synoches. T.
58. The Teletarchs are comprehended in the Synoches. T.—Dam. de Prin.
59.81 Rhea the fountain and river of the blessed Intellectuals
Having first received the powers of all things in her ineffable bosom
Pours forth perpetual generation upon every thing. T.—Proc. in Crat.—Tay.
60. For it is the bound of the paternal depth, and the fountain of the
Intellectuals. T.—Dam. de Prin.
61...... For he is a power
Of circumlucid strength, glittering with Intellectual sections. T.—Dam.
62. He glitters with Intellectual sections, but has filled all things with love. T.—Dam.
63. To the Intellectual whirlwinds of Intellectual fire all things
Are subservient, through the persuasive counsel of the Father. T.—Proc. in Parm.
64. Oh how the world has inflexible Intellectual rulers.
65. The centre of Hecate corresponds with that of the fathers. T.
66. From him leap forth all implacable thunders,
And the whirlwind receiving bosoms of the all-splendid strength
Of the Father-begotten Hecate; and he who begirds the flower of fire
And the strong spirit of the poles, all fiery beyond. T.—Proc. in Crat.
67. Another fontal, which leads the empyreal world. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim.
68. The fountain of fountains, and the boundary of all fountains. T.—Dam. de Prin.
69. Under two minds the life-generating fountain of souls is comprehended. T.—Dam. de Prin.
70.82 Beneath them lies the principal of the immaterials. Z. or T.—Dam. in Parm.
71. Father-begotten light, for he alone having gathered from the strength of the
The flower of mind has the power of understanding, the paternal mind;
To instil into all fountains and principles the power
Of understanding, and of always remaining in a ceaseless revolution. T.—Proc. in Tim. 242.
72. All fountains and principles whirl round,
And always remain in a ceaseless revolution. Z. or T.—Proc. in Parm.
73. The Principles, which have understood the Intelligible works of the Father
He has clothed in sensible works and bodies,
Being the intermediate links standing to communicate between the Father and Matter,
Rendering apparent the images of unapparent natures,
And inscribing the unapparent in the apparent frame of the world. Z. or T.—Dam. de Prin.
74. Typhon, Echidna, and Python, being the progeny of Tartarus and Earth, which is conjoined with Heaven, form as it were [p.255] a certain Chaldaic triad, which is the inspector of the whole disordered fabrication. T.—Olymp in Phæd.—Tay.
75. Irrational dæmons derive their subsistence from the aërial rulers, wherefore the oracle says,
Being the charioteer of the aërial, terrestrial, and aquatic dogs. T.—Olymp. in Phæd.—Tay.
76. The aquatic, when applied to divine natures, signifies a government inseparable from water, and hence the oracle calls the aquatic gods water walkers. T.—Proc. in Tim. 270.—Tay.
77. There are certain aquatic dæmons whom Orpheus called Nereides in the more elevated exhalations of water such as appear in this cloudy air, whose bodies are sometimes seen, as Zoroaster thinks, by more acute eyes, especially in Persia and Africa. T.—Fic. de Im. Am. 123.—Tay.
SOUL, LIFE, MAN.
78. These things the Father conceived, and the mortal was animated for him. T.—Proc. in Tim. 336.
79. For the Father of gods and men placed the mind in soul,
But in body he placed you.
80. The paternal mind has sowed symbols in the souls. Z.—Psell. 26—Plet. 6.
81. Having mingled the vital spark from two according substances,
Mind and Divine Spirit, as a third to these he added
Holy Love, the venerable charioteer uniting all things.—Lyd. de Men. 3.—Tay.
82. Filling the soul with profound love. Z. or T.—Proc. in Pl. Theol. 4.
83. The Soul of men will in a manner clasp God to herself.
Having nothing mortal she is wholly inebriated from God,
For she glories in the harmony under which the mortal body exists. Z.—Psell. 17.—Plet. 10.
84. The more powerful souls perceive truth through themselves, and are of a more
inventive nature. "Such souls are saved through their own strength," according
to the oracle. T.—Proc. in I. Alc.—Tay.
85. The oracle says, ascending souls sing a pæan. Z. or T.—Olym. in Phæd.—Tay.
86. Of all souls those certainly are superlatively blessed
Which are poured forth from heaven to earth;
And they are happy, and have ineffable stamina,
As many as proceed from thy splendid self, O king,
Or from Jove himself, under the strong necessity of Mithus. Z. or T.—Synes de Insom. 153.
87. The souls of those who quit the body violently are most pure. Z.—Psel. 27.
88. The ungirders of the soul, which give her breathing, are easy to be loosed. Z.—Psel. 32.—Plet. 8.
89. For tho' you see this soul manumitted
The Father sends another, that the number may be complete. Z. or T.
90. .... Understanding the works of the Father
They avoid the shameless wing of fate;
They are placed in God, drawing strong torches,
Descending from the Father, from which, as they descend, the soul
Gathers of the empyreal fruits the soul-nourishing flower. Z. or T.—Proc in Tim. 321.
91. This animastic spirit, which blessed men have called the pneumatic soul, becomes a god, an all-various dæmon, and an image, and the soul in this suffers her punishments. The oracles, too, accord with this account: for they assimilate the employment of the soul in Hades to the delusive visions of a dream. Z. or T.—Synes. de Insom. p. 139.—Tay.
92. One life with another, from the distributed channels.
Passing from above through the opposite part
Through the centre of the earth; and the fifth the middle,
Another fiery channel, where the life-beaming fire descends
As far as the material channels. Z. or T.
93. Moisture is a symbol of life; hence Plato, and the gods before Plato, call it (the soul); at one time the liquid of the whole of vivification, and at another time a certain fountain of it. Z.—Proc. in Tim. 318.—Tay.
94. O man, of a daring nature, thou subtile production. Z.—Psel. 12.—Plet. 21.
95. For thy vessel the beasts of the earth shall inhabit. Z.—Psel. 36.—Plet. 7.
96. Since the soul perpetually runs and passes through all things in a certain space of time, which being performed, it is presently compelled to run back again through all things and unfold the same web of generation in the world, according to Zoroaster, who thinks that as often as the same causes return, the same effects will in like manner be returned. Z.—Ficin de Im. An. 129.—Tay.
97. According to Zoroaster, in us the ethereal vestment of the soul perpetually
revolves. Z.—Ficin de Im. An. 131.—Tay.
98. The oracles delivered by the gods celebrate the essential fountain of every soul, the empyrean, the etherial, and the material. This fountain they separate from the whole vivific goddess83; from whom also suspending the whole of fate, they make two series, the one animastic, or belonging to the soul, and the other belonging to Fate. They assert that the soul is derived from the animastic series, but that sometimes it becomes subservient to Fate, when passing into an irrational condition of being, it becomes subject to fate instead of Providence. Z. or T.—Proc. de Prov. ap. Fabr. VIII. 486.—Tay.
MATTER, THE WORLD, AND NATURE.
99. The matrix containing all things. T.
100. Wholly division, and indivisible.
101. Thence abundantly springs forth the generation of multifarious matter. T.—Proc. in Tim. 118.
102. These frame indivisibles and sensibles,
And corporiforms and things destined to matter. T.—Dam. de Prin.
103. The fontal nymphs, and all the aquatic spirits,
And the terrestrial, aerial, and glittering recesses,
Are the lunar riders and rulers of all matter,
Of the celestial, the starry, and that which lies in the abysses.—Lyd. p. 32.—Tay.
104. Evil, according to the oracle, is more frail than nonentity. Z. or T.—Proc. de Prov.—Tay.
105. We learn that matter pervades the whole world, as the gods also assert. Z. or T.—Proc. Tim. 142.
106. All divine natures are incorporeal,
But bodies are bound in them for your sakes.
Bodies not being able to contain incorporeals
By reason of the corporeal nature, in which you are concentrated. Z. or T.—Proc. in Pl. Polit. 359.
107. For the paternal self-begotten mind understanding his works
Sowed in all the fiery bond of love,
That all things might continue loving for an infinite time.
That the connected series of things might intellectually remain in all the light of the Father,
That the elements of the world might continue their course in love. T.—Proc. in Tim. 155.
108. The Maker who, self-operating, framed the world,
And there was another mass of fire: all these things
He produced self-operating, that the body of the world might be conglobed,
That the world might be manifest, and not appear membranous. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 154.
109. For he assimilates himself, professing
To cast around him the form of the images.
110. For it is an imitation of Mind, but that which is fabricated has something
of body. Z. or T.—Proc .in Tim. 87.
111. But projecting into the worlds, through the rapid menace of the Father,
The venerable name with a sleepless revolution. Z. or T.—Proc. in Crat.
112. The ethers of the elements therefore are there. Z. or T.—Olymp. in Phæd.—Tay.
113. The oracles assert, that the impression of characters, and of other divine visions, appear in the ether. Z. or T.—Simp. in Phys. 144.—Tay.
114. In this the things without figure are figured. Z. or T.—Simp. in Phys. 143.
115. The ineffable and effable impressions of the world.
116. And the light-hating world, and the winding currents
Under which many are drawn down. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 339.
117. He makes the whole world of fire, and water, and earth,
And all-nourishing ether. Z. or T.
118. Placing earth in the middle, but water in the cavities of the earth,
And air above these. Z. or T.
119. He fixed a great multitude of inerratic stars,
Not by a laborious and evil tension,
But with a stability void of wandering.
Forcing the fire to the fire. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 280.
120. For the Father congregated the seven firmaments of the world,
Circumscribing the heaven with a convex figure. Z. or T.—Dam. in Parm.
121. He constituted a septenary of erratic animals. Z. or T.
122. Suspending their disorder in well-disposed zones. Z. or T.
123. He made them six in number, and for the seventh
He cast into the midst the fire of the sun. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 280.
124. The centre from which all (lines) which way so ever are equal. Z. or T.—Proc. in Euc. 43.
125. And that the swift sun may come as usual about the centre. Z. or T.—Proc. in Plat. Th. 317.
126. Eagerly urging itself towards the centre of resounding light. T.—Proc. in Tim. 236.
127. And the great sun and the bright moon.
128. For his hairs appear like rays of light ending in a sharp point. T.—Proc. in Pl. Pol. 387.
129. And of the solar circles, and of the lunar clashings,
And of the aerial recesses,
The melody of the ether, and of the sun, and of the passages of the moon, and of the air. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 257.
130. The most mystic of discourses inform us, that the wholeness of him (the
sun) is in the supermundane orders: for there a solar world and a total light
subsist, as the oracles of the Chaldæans affirm. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 264.—Tay.
131. The more true sun measures all things by time, being truly a time of time, according to the oracle of the gods concerning it. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 249.—Tay.
132. The disk (of the sun) is carried in the starless much above the inerratic sphere: and hence he is not in the middle of the planets but of the three worlds, according to the telestic hypotheses. Z. or T.—Jul. Orat. V. 334.—Tay.
133. (The sun is a)84 fire, the channel of fire, and the dispenser of fire. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 141.
134.85 Hence Cronus.
The sun assessor beholding the pure pole.
135. The ethereal course and the vast motion of the moon
And the aerial fluxes. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 257.
136. Oh ether, sun, spirit of the moon, leaders of the air. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 257.
137. And the wide air, and the lunar course, and the pole of the sun. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 257.
138. For the goddess brings forth the great sun and the bright moon.
139. She collects it, receiving the melody of the ether,
And of the sun, and of the moon, and of whatsoever things are contained in the air.
140. Unwearied nature rules over the worlds and works,
That heaven drawing downward might run an eternal course,
And that the other periods of the sun, moon, seasons, night, and day, might be accomplished. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 4. & 323.—Tay.
141. Immense nature is exalted about the shoulders of the goddess. T.—Proc. in Tim. 4.
142. The most celebrated of the Babylonians, together with Ostanes and
Zoroaster, very properly call the starry spheres herds; whether because these
alone among corporeal magnitudes, are perfectly carried about a centre, or in
conformity to the oracles, because they are considered by them as in a certain
respect the bonds and collectors of physical reasons, which they likewise call
in their sacred discourses herds, and by the insertion of a gamma, angels.
Wherefore the stars which preside over each of these herds are considered demons
similar to the angels, and are called archangels: and they are seven in number. Z.—Anon. in Theologumenis Arithmeticis.—Tay.
143. Zoroaster calls the congruities of material forms to the reasons of the soul of the world, divine allurements. Z.—Fic. de vit. cœl. comp. 519.—Tay.
MAGICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRECEPTS.
144. Direct not thy mind to the vast measures of the earth;
For the plant of truth is not upon ground.
Nor measure the measures of the sun, collecting rules,
For he is carried by the eternal will of the father, not for your sake.
Dismiss the impetuous course of the moon; for she runs always by the work of necessity.
The progression of the stars was not generated for your sake.
The wide aerial flight of birds is not true,
Nor the dissections of the entrails of victims: they are all mere toys,
The basis of mercenary fraud: flee from these
If you would open the sacred paradise of piety
Where virtue, wisdom, and equity, are assembled. Z.—Psel. 4.
145. Stoop not down to the darkly-splendid world;
In which continually lies a faithless depth, and Hades
Cloudy, squalid, delighting in images unintelligible,
Precipitous, winding, a blind profundity always rolling,
Always espousing an opacous, idle, breathless body. Z. or T.—Synes de Insom. 140.
146. Stoop not down, for a precipice lies below the earth,
Drawing under a descent of seven steps, beneath which
Is the throne of dire necessity. Z.—Psel. 6—Plet. 2.
147. Leave not the dross of matter on a precipice,
For there is a portion for the image in a place ever splendid. Z.—Psel. 1. 2.—Plet. 14.—Syn. 140.
148. Invoke not the self-conspicuous image of nature. Z.—Psel. 15.—Plet. 23.
149. Look not upon nature, for her name is fatal. Z.—Proc. in Plat. Th. 143.
150. It becomes you not to behold them before your body is initiated,
Since by always alluring, they seduce the souls of the initiated. Z. or T.—Proc. in. Alcib.
151. Bring her86 not forth, lest in departing she retain something. Z.—Psel. 3.—Plet. 15.
152. Defile not the spirit, nor deepen a superficies. Z.—Psel. 19.—Plet. 13.
153. Enlarge not thy destiny. Z.—Psel. 37.—Plet. 4.
154. Not hurling, according to the oracle, a transcendent foot towards piety. Z. or T.—Dam. in vit. Isidori ap. Suid.—Tay.
155. Never change barbarous names,
For there are names in every nation given from God,
Having unspeakable efficacy in the mysteries. Z. or T.—Psel. 7.—Niceph.
156. Go not out when the lictor passes by. Z.—Pic. Concl.—Tay.
157. Let fiery hope nourish you in the angelic region. Z. or T.—Olym. in Phæd.—Proc. in Alcib.
158. The fire-glowing conception has the first rank,
For the mortal who approaches the fire shall have light from God,
For to the persevering mortal, the blessed immortals are swift. Z. or T.—Proc. in Tim. 65.
159. The Gods exhort us
To understand the preceding form of light. Z. or T.—Proc. in Crat.—Tay.
160. It becomes you to hasten to the light and the rays of the Father,
From whence was sent to you a soul endued with much mind. Z.—Psel. 33.—Plet. 6.
161. Seek paradise. Z.—Psel. 20.—Plet. 12.
162. Learn the Intelligible, for it subsists beyond the mind. Z.—Psel. 41.—Plet. 27.
163. There is a certain Intelligible which it becomes you to understand with the flower of Mind. Z.—Psel. 31.—Plet. 28.
164. But the paternal mind receives not her87 will
Until she has gone out of oblivion, and pronounce the word,
Assuming the memory of the pure paternal symbol. Z.—Psel. 39.—Plet. 5.
165. To these he gave the ability of receiving the knowledge of light;
Those that were asleep he made fruitful from his own strength. Z. or T.—Syn. de Insom. 135.
166.88 It is not proper to understand that Intelligible with vehemence,
But with the extended flame of an extended mind measuring all things
Except that Intelligible. But it is requisite to understand this:
For if you incline your mind you will understand it
Not earnestly, but it becomes you to bring with you a pure and inquiring eye,
To extend the void mind of your soul to the Intelligible,
That you may learn the Intelligible,
Because it subsists beyond mind. T.—Dam.
167. You will not understand it, as when understanding some particular thing. T.—Dam.
168. You, who understand, know the supermundane paternal depth. Z. or T.—Dam.
169. Things divine are not attainable by mortals who understand body,
But only as many as are lightly armed arrive at the summit. Z. or T.—Proc. in Crat.—Tay.
170. Having put on the complete-armed vigour of resounding light.
With triple strength fortifying the soul and the mind,
He must put into the mind the symbol of variety, and not walk
Dispersedly on the empyreal channels, but collectively.
171. For being furnished with every kind of armour, and armed, he is similar to the goddess. T.—Proc. in Pl. Th. 324.—Tay.
172. Explore the river of the soul, whence, or in what order,
Having become a servant to body, you may again rise
To the order from which you descended, joining works to sacred reason. Z.—Psel. 5—Plet. 1.
173. Every way to the unfashioned soul extend the reins of fire. Z.—Psel. 11.—Plet. 24.
174. Let the immortal depth of your soul lead you,
But earnestly extend your eyes upwards. Z.—Psel. 11.—Plet. 20.
175. Man, being an intelligible mortal, must bridle his soul,
That she may not incur terrestrial infelicity but be saved.—Lyd. de Men. 2.—Tay.
176. If you extend the fiery mind to the work of piety,
You will preserve the fluxible body. Z.—Psel. 22.—Plet. 16.
177. The telestic life, through a divine fire, removes all the stains, together with every foreign and irrational nature, which the spirit of the soul attracted from generation, as we are taught by the oracle to believe. Z. or T.—Procl. in Tim. 331.—Tay.
178. The oracles of the Gods declare, that, through purifying ceremonies, not the soul only, but bodies themselves become worthy of receiving much assistance and health: "for (say they) the [p.276] mortal vestment of bitter matter will, by this means, be preserved." And this, the Gods, in an exhortatory manner, announce to the most holy of Theugists. Z. or T.—Jul. Orat. V. p. 334.—Tay.
179. We should flee, according to the oracle,
The multitude of men going in a herd. Z. or T.—Proc. in I. Alc.—Tay.
180. Who knows himself knows all things in himself. Z.—1 Pic. p. 211.—Tay.
181. The oracles often give victory to our own choice, and not to the order alone of the mundane periods. As, for instance, when they say, "On beholding yourself, fear." And, again, "Believe yourself to be above body, and you are." And, still further, when they assert "That our voluntary sorrows germinate in us as the growth of the particular life we lead." Z. or T.—Proc. de Prov. p. 483.—Tay.
182. These things I revolve in the recluse temples of my mind.
183. As the oracle, therefore, says, "God is never so much turned away from man,
and never so much sends him new paths, as when he makes ascent to the most
divine of speculations, or works, in a confused or disordered manner, and, as it
adds, with unhallowed lips, or unwashed feet. For of those who are thus
negligent, the progressions are imperfect, the impulses are vain, and the paths
are dark." Z. or T.—Procl. in Parm.—Tay.
184. Not knowing that every god is good, you are fruitlessly vigilant. Z. or T.—Proc. in Pl. Pol. 355.—Tay.
185. Theurgists fall not so as to be ranked among the herd that are in subjection to fate.—Lyd. de Men.—Tay.
186. "That the number nine is divine, receiving its completion from three triads, and preserving the summits of theology according to the Chaldaic philosophy, as Porphyry informs us."—Lyd. p. 121.—Tay.
187. In the left sides of Hecate is a fountain of virtue,
Which remains entire within, not sending forth its virginity. Z.—Psel. 13.—Plet. 9.
188. And the earth bewails them even to their children. Z.—Psel. 21.—Plet. 3.
189. The furies are the constrainers of men. Z.—Psel. 25.—Plet. 19.
190. Lest being baptized in the furies of the earth, and in the necessities of nature (as some one of the gods says) it should perish. Z. or T.—Proc in Theol. 297.—Tay.
191. Nature persuades us that there are pure demons,
Even the blossoms of evil matter are useful and good. Z.—Psel. 16.—Plet. 18.
192. As yet three days ye shall sacrifice, and no longer. Z.—Pic. Concl.—Tay.
193. In the first place, the priest, who governs the works of fire,
Must sprinkle with the cold water of the loud-sounding sea. Z. or T.—Proc. in Crat.—Tay.
194. Energize about the Hecatic Strophalus. Z.—Psel. 9.—Nicep.
195. When you shall see a terrestrial demon approaching
Exclaim, and sacrifice the stone Mnizurin. Z.—Psel. 40.
196. If you often invoke me you shall see all things darkening,
For neither does the convex bulk of heaven then appear,
Nor do the stars shine, the light of the moon is hidden,
The earth stands not still, but all things appear in thunders. Z.—Psel. 10.—Plet. 22.
197. ..........From the cavities
Of the earth leap forth terrestrial dogs,
Shewing no true sign to mortal man. Z.—Psel. 23.—Plet. 17.
198. A similar fire flashingly extending itself into the waves of the air,
Or even unfigured fire, whence an antecedent voice,
Or light rich, glittering, resounding, revolved.
But when you see a horse glittering with light,
Or a boy, carried on the swift back of a horse,
Fiery, or clothed in gold, or naked,
Or shooting with a bow, or standing upon horseback.—Z. or T.—Proc. in Pl. Polit. 380.
199. When you behold a sacred fire without form
Shining flashingly through the depths of the whole world
Hear the voice of fire. Z.—Psel. 14.—Plet. 25.
HERMETIC, ORPHIC, PYTHAGOREAN,
COSMOGONIES AND THEOGONIES.
FROM THE ANCIENT HERMETIC BOOKS.
BEFORE all things that essentially exist, and before the total principles, there
is one God, prior to the first God and King, remaining immoveable in the
solitude of his unity; for neither is the Intelligible immixed with him, nor any
other thing. He is established, the exemplar of the God who is the father of
himself, self-begotten, the only father, and who is truly good. For he is
something greater, and the first; the fountain of all things, and the root of
all primary Intelligible existing forms. But out of this one, the self-ruling
God made himself shine forth; wherefore he is the father of himself, and
self-ruling: for he is the first principle and God of Gods. He is the monad from
the one; before essence, yet the first principle of essence, for from him is
entity and essence; on which account [p.284] he is celebrated as the chief of the
Intelligibles. These are the most ancient principles of all things, which Hermes
places first in order, before the ethereal and empyrean gods and the celestial.
But, according to another division, he (Hermes) places the god Emeph89 as the ruler of the celestial gods: and says that he is Intellect understanding himself, and converting other intelligences to himself. And before this he places the indivisible One, which he calls the first effigies, and denominates him Eicton; in whom, indeed, is the first intellect and the first Intelligible: and this One is venerated in silence. Besides these, other rulers are imagined to exist, which govern the fabrication of things apparent: for the demiurgic Intellect, which properly presides over truth and wisdom, when it proceeds to generation and leads forth into light the inapparent power of the secret reasons, is called Amon, according to the Egyptian tongue: and when it perfects all things not deceptively, but artificially according to truth, Phtha; but the Greeks change the word Phtha into Hephæstus, looking only to the artificial: regarded as the producer of good things, it is called [p.285] Osiris, and according to its other powers and attributes it has different appellations. There is also, according to them, another certain principle presiding over all the elements in a state of generation, and over the powers inherent in them, four of which are male, and four female; and this principle they attribute to the Sun. There is yet another principle of all nature regarded as the ruler over generation, and this they assign to the Moon. They divide the heavens also into two parts, or into four, or twelve, or thirty-six, or the doubles of these; they attribute to them leaders more or less in number; and over them they place one whom they consider superior to them all. Hence, from the highest to the last, the doctrine of the Egyptians concerning the principles, inculcates the origin of all things from One, with different gradations to the Many; which (the Many) are again held to be under the supreme government of the One: and the nature of the Boundless is considered entirely subservient to the nature of the Bounded and the supreme Unity the cause of all things. And God produced Matter from the materiality of the separated essence, which being of a vivific nature, the Demiurgus took it, and fabricated from it the harmonious and imperturbable spheres: but the dregs of [p.286] it he employed in the fabrication of generated and perishable bodies.—Jambl. sect. viii. c. 2. 3.
FROM THE MODERN HERMETIC BOOKS.
The glory of all things is God, and Deity, and divine Nature. The principle of all things existing is God, and the Intellect, and Nature, and Matter, and Energy, and Fate, and Conclusion, and Renovation. For there were boundless Darkness in the abyss, and water, and a subtile spirit, intellectual in power, existing in Chaos. But the holy Light broke forth, and the elements were produced from among the sand of a watery essence.—Serm. Sac. lib. iii.
The world appears to them (the Egyptians) to consist of a masculine and feminine nature. And they engrave a scarabæus for Athena, and a vulture for Hephæstus. For these alone of all the Gods they consider as both male and female in their nature.
Chæremon and others believe that nothing existed prior to the sensible worlds, and they place among the foremost of such opinions the sentiments of the Egyptians, who hold that there are no other gods than those which are called the planets, and the constellations of the Zodiac, and such as these. They say, also, that the honours paid to the ten great gods and those which are called heroes, whose names appear in the almanacks, are nothing else than charms for the cure of evils, and observations of the risings and settings of the stars, and prognostications of future events. For it seems that they esteem the Sun to be the demiurgus, and hold that the legends about Osiris and Isis, and all other their mythological fables, have reference either to the stars, their appearances and occultations, and the periods of their risings, or to the increase and decrease of the moon, or to the cycles of the sun, or the diurnal and nocturnal hemispheres, or to the river: in short, that every thing of the kind relates merely to physical operations, and has no connexion or reference whatever to incorporeal and living essences properly so called. Most of [p.288] them, also, suppose that some indissoluble connexion exists between our concerns and the motions of the stars, by a kind of necessity which they call Destiny, whereby all sublunary things are connected with these gods, and depend upon them. Hence they serve and honour them with temples and statues and the like, as the only beings capable of influencing Destiny.—Eus. Pr. Evan. III. c. 4.
Zeus is the first. Zeus the thunderer, is the last.
Zeus is the head. Zeus is the middle, and by Zeus all things were fabricated.
Zeus is male, Immortal Zeus is female.
Zeus is the foundation of the earth and of the starry heaven.
Zeus is the breath of all things. Zeus is the rushing of indefatigable fire.
Zeus is the root of the sea: He is the Sun and Moon.
Zeus is the king; He is the author of universal life;
One Power, one Dæmon, the mighty prince of all things:
One kingly frame, in which this universe revolves,
Fire and water, earth and ether, night and day,
And Metis (Counsel) the primeval father, and all-delightful Eros (Love).
All these things are United in the vast body of Zeus.
Would you behold his head and his fair face,
It is the resplendent heaven, round which his golden locks
Of glittering stars are beautifully exalted in the air.
On each side are the two golden taurine horns,
The risings and settings, the tracks of the celestial gods;
His eyes the sun and the Opposing moon;
His unfallacious Mind the royal incorruptible Ether.—Eus. Pr. Ev. III.—Proc. Tim.—Aristot. de Mund.
First I sung the obscurity of ancient Chaos,
How the Elements were ordered, and the Heaven reduced to bound;
And the generation of the wide-bosomed Earth, and the depth of the Sea,
And Eros (Love) the most ancient, self-perfecting, and of manifold design;
How he generated all things, and parted them from one another.
And I have sung of Cronus so miserably undone, and how the kingdom
Of the blessed Immortals descended to the thunder-loving Zeus.—Arg. 419.
First (I have sung) the vast necessity of ancient Chaos,
And Cronus, who in the boundless tracts brought forth
The Ether, and the splendid and glorious Eros of a two-fold nature,
The illustrious father of night, existing from eternity.
Whom men call Phanes, for he first appeared.
I have sung the birth of powerful Brimo (Hecate), and the unhallowed deeds
Of the earth-born (giants), who showered down from heaven
Their blood, the lamentable seed of generation, from whence sprung
The race of mortals, who inhabit the boundless earth for ever.—Arg. v. 12.
Chaos was generated first, and then
The wide-bosomed Earth, the ever stable seat of all
The Immortals that inhabit the snowy peaks of Olympus,
And the dark aerial Tartarus in the depths of the permeable Earth,
And Eros, the fairest of the immortal Gods,
That relaxes the strength of all, both gods and men,
And subjugates the mind and the sage will in their breasts.
From Chaos were generated Erebus and black Night,
And from Night again were generated Ether and Day,
Whom she brought forth, having conceived from the embrace of Erebus.
And Earth first produced the starry Heaven equal to herself,
That it might inclose all things around herself.—Theog. v. 116.
First was Chaos and Night, and black Erebus and vast Tartarus;
And there was neither Earth, nor Air, nor Heaven: but in the boundless bosoms of Erebus.
Night, with her black wings, first produced an aerial egg,
From which, at the completed time, sprang forth the lovely Eros,
Glittering with golden wings upon his back, like the swift whirlwinds.
But embracing the dark-winged Chaos in the vast Tartarus.
He begot our race (the birds),91 and first brought us to light.
The race of the Immortals was not, till Eros mingled all things together;
But when the elements were mixed one with another, Heaven was produced, and Ocean,
And Earth, and the imperishable race of all the blessed Gods.—Aristop. Aves. 698.—Suid. v. Chaos.
Chaos and a vast yawning chasm on every side.—Tay.
"Maia, supreme of Gods, Immortal Night, tell me this,
How shall I constitute the magnanimous first principles of the Immortals?"
"Surround all things with ineffable Ether, and place them
In the mid Heaven."—Proc. Tim. 63.
ORPHIC HYMN TO PROTOGONUS.
I invoke Protogonus, of a double nature, great, wandering through the ether,
Egg-born, rejoicing in thy golden wings,
Having the countenance of a bull, the procreator of the blessed gods and mortal men,
The renowned Light, the far-celebrated Ericepæus,
Ineffable, occult, impetuous, all-glittering strength;
Who scatterest the twilight clouds of darkness from the eyes,
And roamest throughout the world upon the flight of thy wings,
Who bringest forth the pure and brilliant light, wherefore I invoke thee as Phanes,
As Priapus the king, and as dazzling fountain of splendour.
Come, then, blessed being, full of wisdom and generation, come in joy
To thy sacred, ever-varying mystery. Be present with the Priests of thy Orgies.
No one has seen Protogonus with his eyes
Except the sacred Night alone: all others
Wondered when they beheld in the Ether the unexpected Light
Such as the skin of the immortal Phanes shot forth.—Hermias in Phæd. 141.
What Orpheus has asserted upon the subject is as follows: "From the beginning the Ether was manifested in time," evidently having been fabricated by God: "and on every side of the Ether was the Chaos; and gloomy Night enveloped and obscured all things which were under the Ether." by attributing to Night a priority, he intimates the explanation to be, that there existed an incomprehensible nature, and a being supreme above all others, and pre-existing, the demiurgus of all things, as well of the Ether itself (and of the night)93 as of all the creation which existed [p.297] and was concealed under the Ether. Moreover he says, "Earth was invisible on account of the darkness: but the Light broke through the Ether, and illuminated the Earth and all the material of the creation:" signifying by this Light, which burst forth through the Ether, the before-mentioned being who was supreme above all things: "and its name," which Orpheus learnt from the oracle, is Metis, Phanes, Ericepæus," which in the common Greek language may be translated will (or counsel), light, life-giver; signifying, when explained, that these three powers of the three names are the one power and strength of the only God, whom no one ever beheld, and of whose power no one can have an idea or comprehend the nature. "By this power all things were produced, as well incorporeal principles as the sun and moon, and their influences, and all the stars, and the earth and the sea, and all things [p.298] that are visible and invisible in them. And man," says he, "was formed by this God out of the earth, and endued with a reasonable soul," in like manner as Moses has revealed.—J. Malala, p. 89.—Ced.—Suidas v. Orpheus.
Metis bearing the seed of the Gods, whom the blessed
Inhabitants of Olympus call Phanes Protogonus.—In Crat.
And Metis, the first father, and all-delightful Eros.—In Tim. II. 102.
Soft Eros and inauspicious Metis.—Ib. 181.
Metis bearing the generation of the Gods, illustrious Ericepæus.—Ib.
Orpheus has the following theological speculation in allusion to Phanes. Therefore the first God bears with himself the heads of animals, many and single, of a bull, of a serpent, and of a fierce lion, and they sprung from the primeval egg in which the animal is seminally contained.—Proc. in Tim.
FROM THE ANCIENT THEOLOGISTS.
The theologist places around him the heads of a ram, a bull, a lion, and a
dragon, and assigns him first both the male and female sex.
Female and father is the mighty god Ericapæus.
To him also the wings are first given.—Proc. in Tim.
FROM THE ANCIENT THEOLOGISTS.94
They, the theologists, assert that Night and Heaven (Ouranus) reigned, and
before these their most mighty father.
Who distributed the world to Gods and Mortals,
Over which he first reigned, the illustrious Ericepæus,
After whom reigned Night,
Having in her hands the excellent sceptre of Ericepæus,
After whom Heaven (Ouranus),
Who first reigned over the Gods after his mother Night.
FROM THE ANCIENT THEOLOGISTS.
In short, that to the power of the Sun is to be referred the control and
supremacy of all things, is indicated by the theologists, who make it evident in
the mysteries by the following short invocation.
Oh, all-ruling Sun, Spirit of the world, Power of the world, Light of the world.—Macrob. Sat. lib. i. c. 23.
FROM TIMÆUS LOCRUS.
Thus says Timæus the Locrian.—The causes of all things are two; Intellect, of those which are produced according to Reason; and Necessity, of those which necessarily exist according to the powers of bodies. Of these the first is of the nature of good, and is called God, the principle of such things as are most excellent. Those which are consequent, and concauses rather than causes, may be referred to Necessity, and they consist of Idea or Form, and Matter, to which may be added the Sensible (world), which is as it were the offspring of these two. The first of these is an essence ungenerated, immoveable, and stable, of the nature of Same, and the intelligible exemplar of things generated which are in a state of perpetual change: and this is called Idea [p.302] or Form, and is to be comprehended only by Mind. But Matter is the receptacle of Form, the mother and female principle of the generation of the third essence, for, by receiving the likenesses upon itself, and being stamped with Form, it perfects all things, partaking of the nature of generation. And this Matter, he says, is eternal, moveable, and of its own proper nature, without form or figure, yet susceptible of receiving every form: it is divisible also about bodies, and is of the nature of Different. They also call Matter, Place and Situation. These two, therefore, are contrary principles; Idea or Form is of the nature of Male and Father; but Matter of the nature of Female and Mother; and things which are of the third nature are the offspring of the two. Since then there are three natures, they are comprehended in three different ways; Idea, which is the object of science, by Intellect; Matter, which is not properly an object of comprehension, but only of analogy, by a spurious kind of reasoning; but things compounded of the two are the objects of sensation, and opinion or appearance. Therefore, before the heaven was made, there existed in reality Idea, and Matter, and God the demiurgus of the better nature; [p.303] and since the nature of Elder (Continuance) is more worthy than that of Younger (Novelty,) and Order than of Disorder; God in his goodness seeing that Matter was continually receiving Form and changing in an omnifarious and disordered manner, undertook to reduce it to order and put a stop to its indefinite changes, by circumscribing it with determinate figure: that there might be corresponding distinctions of bodies, and that it might not be subject to continual variations of its own accord. Therefore he fabricated this world out of all the matter, and constituted it the boundary of essential nature, comprising all things within itself, one, only-begotten, perfect, with a Soul and Intellect (for an animal so constituted is superior to one devoid of Soul and Intellect): he gave it also a spherical body, for such of all other forms is the most perfect. Since, therefore, it was God's pleasure to render this his production most perfect, he constituted it a God, generated indeed, but indestructible by any other cause than by the God who made it, in case it should be his pleasure to dissolve it.
You say that, in my former discourse, I have not sufficiently explained to you the nature of the First. I purposely spoke enigmatically, that in case the tablet should have happened with any accident, either by land or sea, a person, without some previous knowledge of the subject, might not be able to understand its contents. This, then is the explanation, About the king of all things, all things are, and all things are on account of Him, and He is the cause of all good things. But the second is about things of the second kind, and the third about things of the third kind. Therefore the human soul, from its earnest desire to know what these things may be, examines those within itself which are akin to them, none of which it possesses in sufficient perfection. Such (imperfection) however is not the case with regard to the King and those natures of which I spoke.—Plat. Ep. II. p. 312.
Conjuring the God of all things, the ruler of those which are, and are [p.305] about to be, and the sovereign father of the ruler and cause.—Plat. Ep. VI. p. 323.
Amelius makes the Demiurgus triple, and the three Intellects the three Kings—Him that exists, Him that possesses, Him that beholds. And these are different; therefore the First Intellect exists essentially as that which exists. But the Second exists as the Intelligible in him, but possesses that which is before him, and partakes altogether of that, wherefore it is the Second. But the Third exists as the Intelligible in the Second as did the Second in the First, for every Intellect is the same with its conjoined Intelligible, and it possesses that which is in the Second, and beholds or regards that which is the First: for by how much greater the remove, by so much the less intimate is that which possesses. These three Intellects, therefore, [p.306] he supposes to be the Demiurgi, the same with the three kings of Plato, and with the three whom Orpheus celebrates under the names of Phanes, Ouranus, and Cronus, though, according to him, the Demiurgus is more particularly Phanes.—Proc. in Tim. II. 93.
Onomacritus, in the Orphics, says, that Fire, and Water, and Earth, were the first principles of all things.—Sextus. Hyp. III. 4. 136.—Phys. IX. 5. 6. 620.
This, says Ion, is the beginning of my discourse. All things are three, and nothing more or less; and the virtue of each one of these three is a triad consisting of Intellect, Power, and Chance.
Parmenides holds Fire and Earth primary principles: but Ion of Chios, the tragedian, placed them after Air.—Philoponus.
The moist nature, being the first principle and origin of all things from the beginning made the three first bodies, Earth, Air, and Fire.—Plut. de. Is.
There are three boundaries, Generation, Summit, Termination.—I. 4.
The first triad consists of Beginning, Middle, and End.—Lyd. de Mens. p. 20.
Some say that all things consist of those which are in the course of generation, those generated, and those about to be generated; the first by nature, the second by art, and the third by chance.—Plat. de Leg. X.
All things are three: for as the Pythagoreans say, the Universe and all things
are bounded by three: for the End, the Middle, and the Beginning, include the
enumeration of every thing, and they fulfil the number of the triad.—Aristot. de
The good and contemplative become so through three things; and these three are Nature, Habit, and Reason.—Aristot. Polit. VII.
All things, therefore, are three, but not one; Hyparxis, Power, and Energy.—Damas. Quæst. c. 39.
COSMOGONY OF THE TYRRHENIANS.
A certain person among them, well versed in these matters, wrote a history, in which he says: That God, the demiurgus of all things, for the sake of giving dignity to his productions, was pleased to employ twelve thousand years in their creation; and extended these years over twelve divisions, called houses. In the first thousand years he created the heaven the earth; in the second he made all this apparent firmament above us, and called it heaven; in the third, the sea and all the waters in the earth; in the fourth, the great lights, the sun and the moon, together with the stars; in the fifth, every soul of birds, and reptiles, and quadrupeds, in the air, and in the earth, and in the waters: in the sixth, man. It appears, therefore, that the first six thousand years were consumed before the formation of man; and during the other six thousand years the human race will continue, so that the full time shall be completed even to twelve thousand years.—Suid. v. Tyrrhenia.
In the rhapsodies which pass under the name of Orphic, the theology, if any, is
that concerning the Intelligible; and the philosophers thus interpret it. They
place Chronus (Time) for the one principle of all things, and for the two Ether
and Chaos: and they regard the egg as representing Being simply, and this they
look upon as the first triad.95 But to complete the second triad they imagine as
the god a conceiving and conceive egg, or a white garment, or a cloud, because
Phanes springs forth from these. But concerning this middle (subsistence)
different philosophers have different opinions. Whatever it may be they look
upon [p.311] it as Mind; but for Father and Power some of them imagine other things
which have no connexion with Orpheus. And in the third triad they substitute for
it Metis, whilst they place Ericapæus as Power, and Phanes as Father.96
But the middle triad is never to be placed according to the triformed god (Phanes) as absolutely conceived in the egg: for the middle subsistence always shadows out each of the extremes, as should this, which must partake at once both of the egg and of the triformed god. And you may perceive that the egg is the united (subsistence) or principle of union; and the triformed god, who is multiform about being, is the separated principle of the Intelligible; but the middle subsistence, being united as far as it relates to the egg, and already separated as far as it relates to the god, may be considered as existing altogether as in the act of separation: such is the common Orphic theology.
But the theology delivered by Hier- [p.312] onymus and Hellanicus is as follows:—He says that water was from the beginning, and Matter, from which the Earth was produced, so that he supposes that the two first principles were Water and Earth; the latter of which is of a nature liable to separation, but the former a substance serving to conglutinate and connect it: but he passes over as ineffable the one principle prior to these two, for its recondite nature is evinced, in that there is no manifestation appertaining to it. The third principle after these two, which is generated from them, that is from the Water and Earth, is a Dragon having the heads of a Bull and Lion naturally produced, and in the middle, between these, is the countenance of the God: he has, moreover, wings upon his shoulders, and is denominated incorruptible Chronus (Time) and Hercules. Fate also, which is the same as Nature, is connected with him, and Adrastia, which is incorporeally co-extensive with the universe, and connects its boundaries in harmony. I am of opinion that this [p.313] third principle is regarded as subsisting according to essence, inasmuch as it is supposed to exist in the nature of male and female, as a type of the generating principle of all things.
And in the rhapsodies I conceive that the (Orphic) theology, passing over the two first principles, together with the one preceding those two which is delivered in silence, establishes the third, which is properly posterior to the other two, as the first principle, inasmuch as it is the first which has something effable in its nature, and commensurate with human conversation. For the venerable and incorruptible Chronus (Time) was held in the former hypothesis to be the father of Ether and Chaos: but in this he is passed over, and a Serpent substituted: and the threefold Ether is called intellectual, and Chaos boundless, and the dark cloudy Erebus is added to them as a third. He delivers, therefore, this second triad as analogous to the first, this being potential as was that paternal. Wherefore the third subsistence of this triad is dark Erebus, and its paternal principle and summit Ether, subsisting not simply but intellectually, and the middle derived from it is boundless Chaos. But with these it is said Chronus generated the egg, for this [p.314] relation makes it a procession of Chronus, and born of these, inasmuch as from these proceeds the third Intelligible triad. What, then, is this triad? The egg, the duad of the natures of male and female contained in it, and the multitude of the all-various seeds in the middle of it; and the third subsistence in addition to these is the incorporeal god, with golden wings upon his shoulders, who has the heads of bulls springing forth from his internal parts, and upon his head an enormous serpent, invested with the varied forms of beasts. This, therefore, is to be taken as the Mind of the triad: but the middle processions, which are both the Many and the Two, must be regarded as Power, but the egg as the paternal principle of this third triad. But the third god of this third triad, the theology now under discussion celebrates as Protogonus (First-born), and calls him Dis, as the disposer of all things, and the whole world: upon that account he is also denominated Pan. Such are the hypotheses which this genealogy lays down concerning the Intelligible principles.
But the cosmogony which is delivered by the Peripatetic Eudemus as being the theology of Orpheus, passes the whole Intelligible order in silence, [p.315] as altogether ineffable and unknown, and incapable of discussion or explanation. He commences from Night, which Homer also constitutes his first principle, if we would render his genealogy consistent. Therefore we must not put confidence in the assertion of Eudemus, that Homer makes it commence from Oceanus and Tethys; for it is manifest that he regards Night as the greatest divinity, which is implied in the following line, where he says that she is reverenced by Jove himself—
He feared lest he should excite the displeasure of swift Night.
Homer, therefore, must be supposed to commence from Night.
But Hesiod, when he affirms that Chaos was the first produced, appears to me to regard Chaos as the incomprehensible and perfectly united nature of the Intelligible. From thence he deduces Earth97 as the first principle of all the generation of the gods, unless, perhaps, he may regard Chaos as the second subsistence of the two principles: in which case Earth and Tartarus, and Eros (Love), compose [p.316] the three-fold Intelligible, Eros being put for the third subsistence, considered according to its convertive nature. Orpheus also in his rhapsodies has adopted a very similar disposition, for he places the Earth for the first, being the first that was conglomerated into a compact and essential substance, while he places Tartarus as the middle, as having already, in a manner, a tendency towards disunion.
But Acusilaus appears to me to regard Chaos as the first principle and altogether unknown, and after this one to place the duad, Erebus as the male and Night as the female, the latter being substituted for infinity, and the former for bound; and from a connexion between these were generated Ether and Eros (Love), and Metis (Counsel), these three being the Intelligible hypostases, of which he places Ether as the summit, Eros as the middle in compliance with the natural intervention of love, and Metis as the third, inasmuch as it is already highly-venerable Intellect. And from these, according to the relation of Eudemus, he deduces the vast multitude of the other gods.
Epimenides affirms that the two first principles are Air and Night: whence it is
evident that he reverences in silence the one principle which is prior to the
two: from which, I conceive, he holds that Tartarus is generated regarding it as
a nature in a manner compounded of the two; for some, indeed, regard the
principle which is derived from these two as a kind of Intelligible intermediate
subsistence or mediety, properly so called, inasmuch as it extends, itself to
both extremities, the summit and the boundary; for by their connexion with one
another, an egg is generated which is properly the very Intelligible animal from
which again proceeds another progeny.
But Pherecydes Syrius considers the three first principles to be an Ever-vital subsistence, Chronus,98 and an Earthly subsistence; placing, as I conceive, the One prior to the Two, and the Two posterior to the One: and that Chronus generated from himself Fire, and Spirit, and Water, representing, I presume, the threefold nature of the Intelligible: from which, when they became distributed into five recesses, were constituted a numerous race of gods, called the five-times animated order, equivalent [p.318] to what he might call a five-fold world. But another opportunity may perhaps occur for the discussion of this part of the subject. Such and of a similar description are the hypotheses which are received by us relative to the Greek mythological fables, which are numerous and very various.
But the Babylonians, like the rest of the Barbarians, pass over in silence the One principle of the Universe, and they constitute Two, Tauthe and Apason; making Apason the husband of Tauthe, and denominating her the mother of the gods. And from these proceeds an only-begotten son, Moymis, which I conceive is no other than the Intelligible world proceeding from the two principles. From them, also, another progeny is derived, Dache and Dachus; and, again, a third, Kissare and Assorus, from which last three others proceed Anus, and Illinus, and Aus. And of Aus and Dauce is born a son called Belus, who, they say, is the fabricator of the world, the Demiurgus.
But of the Magi and all the Arion race, according to the relation of Eudemus, some denominate the Intelligible Universe and the United, Place, while others call it Time (Chronus): from whom separately [p.319] proceed a Good Divinity and an Evil Dæmon; or, as some assert, prior to these, Light and Darkness. Both the one, therefore, and the other, after an undivided nature, hold the twofold co-ordination of the superior natures as separated and distinct, over one of which they place Oromasdes as the ruler, and over the other Arimanius.
The Sidonians, according to the same writer, before all things place Chronus, and Pothus, and Omichles, (Time, Love, and Cloudy Darkness). And by a connexion between Pothus and Omichles, as the Two principles are generated Aer and Aura (Air and a Gentle Breeze), substituting Air for the summit of the Intelligible, and the Breeze arising from it for the vivifying prototype of the Intelligible. And from these two again is generated Otus (the Night Raven), representing, as I conceive, the Intelligible Mind.
But independent of the collections of Eudemus we find the mythology of the Phœnicians thus delivered according to Mochus. First was Ether and Air, which are the Two first principles; from these was produced Ulomus, the Intelligible God, and, as I conceive, the summit of the Intelligible: from whom, by a connexion [p.320] with himself, was produced Chousorus, the first expanding principle, and then the Egg: by the latter I imagine they mean the Intelligible Mind; but by Chousorus, the Intelligible Power, being the first nature which separates an unseparate subsistence, unless, perhaps, after the two principles the summit may be the one Wind; but to the middle, the two winds Lips and Notus (south-west and south), for sometimes they place these prior to Oulomus. In which case Oulomus himself would be the Intelligible Mind, and the expanding Chousorus the first order after the Intelligible, and the Egg Heaven: for it is said, that by the rupture of it into two parts heaven and earth were produced each from one of its two severed parts.
Of the Egyptian doctrines Eudemus gives us no accurate information. But the Egyptian philosophers, who are resident among us, have explained their occult truth, having obtained it from certain Egyptian discourses. According to them, then it appears to be this. The One principle of the Universe is celebrated as Unknown Darkness, and this three-times pronounced as such: and the Two principles are Water [p.321] and Sand, according to Heraïscus; but according to Asclepiades, who is the more ancient of the two, Sand and Water, from whom, and next in succession after them, is generated the first Kamephis, and from this a second, and from this again a third, which, they affirm, completes the whole Intelligible distribution. Such is the system of Asclepiades. But the more modern Heraïscus says that the third, who is named Kamephis from his father and grandfather, is the Sun, equivalent in this case to the Intelligible Mind. But greater accuracy upon the subject can only be obtained from these authors themselves. It must be observed, however, with regard to the Egyptians, that they are often wont to distribute subsistences according to union, as when they divide the Intelligible into the individualities of a multitude of gods, as may be learnt from their own writings by those who will examine them: I refer particularly to the commentary of Heraïscus upon the Egyptian doctrine addressed to Proclus the philosopher alone, and to the concordance of the Egyptian writers, begun by Asclepiades and addressed to the other Theologists.
OF THE GREAT YEAR:
BEROSSUS, who thus interprets the Babylonian tradition, says that these events take place according to the course of the stars; and affirms it so positively, as to assign the time for the Conflagration and the Deluge. He maintains that all terrestrial things will be consumed when the planets, which now are traversing their different courses, shall all coincide in the sign of Cancer, and be so placed that a straight line could pass directly through all their orbs. But the inundation will take place when the same conjunction of the planets shall occur in Capricorn. In the first is the summer, in the last the winter of the year.—Seneca Nat. Quæst. III. 29.
OF THE GREAT YEAR:
IN the great year of the Egyptians, which the Greeks call the Cynic, and we in Latin the Canicular; the Moon is not taken into consideration: inasmuch as its commencement is fixed when Canicula rises upon the first day of that month which the Egyptians call Thoth. For their civil year has only 365 days, without any intercalary day; whence the quadrennium so adjusts itself, that in the 1461st year the revolution is completed. This year is by some called the Heliacal, by others the Eniautus, or The Year. But the year which Aristotle calls the greatest, rather than the great, is that in which the sun, moon and all the planets complete their courses, and return to the same sign from which they originally started together. The Winter of this year is the Cataclysm, which we call the Deluge: but its Summer is the Ecpyrosis, that is the Conflagration of the world. For at these alternate seasons the world is burned and de- [p.324] luged. Aristarchus supposes this periodical revolution to consist of 2484 years; Aretes of Dyrrhachium of 5552; Herodotus and Linus of 10,800; of 13,984; Orpheus of 120,000; Cassandrus of 136,000. Others suppose it to be infinite in duration, and that the celestial bodies never again coincide in their original positions.—Censorinus de Natali Die.
OF THE CHRONOLOGICAL ERAS:
I WILL now treat of that interval of time which Varro calls Historic; for he divides the times into three parts. The first from the beginning of mankind to the former Cataclysm. The second, which extends to the first Olympiad, is denominated Mythic, because in it the fabulous achievements are said to have happened. The third, which extends from the first Olympiad to ourselves, is called Historic, because the actions which have been performed in it are related in authentic history.
The first period either had some beginning, or had endured from eternity; however that may be, it is impossible to make out what was the number of its years. Neither is the second period accurately determined, yet it is believed to contain about 1600 years; but from the former Cataclysm, which they call that of Ogyges to the reign of Inachus, about 400 years, from thence to the first Olympiad, something more than 400; of which alone, inasmuch as they are the last years of the Mythic period, and next within memory, certain writers have attempted more accurately to determine the number. Thus Sosibius writes that theywere 395; Eratosthenes, 407; Timaeus, 417; Orethres, 164. Many others also have different opinions, the very discrepancy of which shews the uncertainty in which it is involved.
Concerning the third interval, there was also some disagreement among different writers, though it is confined within a period of only six or seven years. Varro has, however, examined the obscurity in which it is involved, and comparing with his usual sagacity the [p.326] chronicles and annals of different states, calculating the intervals wanted, or to be added by reckoning them backwards, has at length arrived at the truth, and brought it to light. So that not only a determinate number of years, but even of days can be set forth.
According to which calculations, unless I am greatly
deceived, the present year, whose name and title is that of the consulships of
Ulpius and Pontianus, is from the first Olympiad the 1014th, reckoning from the
summer, at which time of the year the Olympic games are celebrated; but from the
foundation of Rome it is the 991st; but this is from the Palilia (21st April),
from which the years, ab urbe condita, are reckoned. But of those years,
which are called the Julian years, it is the 283d, reckoning from the Kalends of
January, from which day of the year Julius Caesar ordered the beginning of the
year to be reckoned. But of those years which are called the Augustan it is the
265th, reckoning also from the Kalends of January of that year, in which, upon
the 16th of the Kalends of February [p.327] (15th),
the son of Divus Julius Caesar was saluted Emperor and Augustus, on the motion
of Numatius Plancus, by the senate and the rest of the citizens in the
consulship of himself for the seventh time, and M. Vipsanus Agrippa.
But the Egyptians, who two years before had been reduced under the dominion of the Roman people, reckon 268 Augustan years: for by the Egyptians, in like manner as by ourselves, certain years are recorded, and they call their era the Era of Nabonnagarius, and their years are calculated from the first year of his reign, of which years the present is the 986th.
The Philippic years also are used among them, and are calculated from the death of Alexander the Great, and from thence to the present time 562 years have elapsed. But the beginning of these years are always reckoned from the first day of that month, which is called by the Egyptians Thoth, which happened this year upon the 7th of the Kalends of July, (25th of June); for a hundred years ago from the present year of the consulship of Ulpius and [p.328] Brutius, the same fell upon the 12th of the Kalends of August (21st July), on which day Canicula regularly rises in Egypt. Whence we know that of this great year which was before mentioned under the name of the Solar Canicular or Trieteris, by which it is commonly called, the present current year, must be the 100th.
I have been careful in pointing out the commencement of all these years lest any one should not be aware of the customs in this respect, which are not less various than the opinions of the Philosophers. It is commenced by some with the new Sun, that is at the winter solstice, by many at the summer solstice; others again reckon from the vernal or from the autumnal equinox. Some also begin the year from the rising or setting of Vergili (Pleides), but many from the rising of the Dogstar.
OF THE NERUS:
WHEREFORE on account of their virtue, as well as for the perfection of the arts of astronomy and geometry, [p.329] which they invented, God permitted them (the Patriarchs) a longer life: inasmuch as they would have been incapable of predicting any thing with certainty, unless they lived six hundred years : for such is the period of the completion of the great year.—Jos. Ant. lib I. c. 3.
OF THE SARUS:
SARUS: a measure and number among the Chaldaeans: for 120 Sari, make 2222 years. Each Sarus is therefore equal to 18 years and 6 months.—Suid. v. Sarus.
OF THE RISING OF THE DOGSTAR:
FROM THEON ALEXANDRINUS.
FORMULA to find the rising of the Dogstar.
For example, if we would find the rising of the Dogstar in the 100th year of Diocletianus, we take the years of Menophres to the end of the era of Augustus. These years [p.330] summed up are 1605; to which if we add the 100 years from the beginning of the reign of Diocletianus,99 we have 1705. Let us take the fourth part of these, that is 426, and taking them as days,100 add to them 5 more, and they become 431. From these deduct the quadrienniums, which are 102, and there will remain 329 days. Distribute these into months of 30 days each, from Thoth, the first day of the year, and it will thus be found that the rising of the Dogstar in the 100th year of Diocletianus, falls upon the 29th of Epiphi. Use the same rule for any other time.—MS. Ex cod. reg. Gall. gr. No. 2390, fol. 154.
METHOD, OBJECTS, AND RESULT
ANCIENT AND MODERN PHILOSOPHY,
THE TRINITY OF THE GENTILES.
In the Introductory Dissertation I have ventured to offer
some speculations upon the Trinity and Theology of the Gentiles, which differ
widely from the opinions of almost all who have written upon the subject; I
would therefore lay before the reader such grounds for the opinion as have
induced me to adopt it. But I find it impossible to do so without instituting a
short comparative inquiry into the method, objects and result of the ancient and
modern systems of Philosophy; and I trust it will not be deemed misplaced, for I
conceive that in the neglected writings of the ancients there lies concealed a
mine of metaphysical knowledge of such practical utility as would amply repay
the trouble of opening it again.
If we were to ask, what was conceived to be the great engine of invention and discovery among the ancients, it is highly probable we should be answered that it was Syllogism; and if we were to ask the same question relative to modern science, we should be unhesitatingly assured that it was Induction; and possibly at the same time we might be told, that the method of the ancients was something worse than useless. Yet, when we come to consider, that in all ages human nature has been the same, and that such admirable productions have been the result of human effort both in ancient and modern times, we shall find reason to suspect that the methods of discovery, or the tools really used in all ages, have been much alike, though their names may have been [p.334] misapplied, or they may have been used without having had any distinct appellations assigned them.
By the Inductive method we are supposed to go about to collect, by experience and observation, all the facts and circumstances within our reach, relative to the subject in hand. We must examine them in every light, compare their similarities, and mark their differences; we must reject whatever does not properly relate to the subject, and conclude upon the affirmatives that are left. By these means, from the individuals we rise to some general proposition, and we rest assured in its truth as proved experimentally.
To take a common instance: A child that has been burnt by a flame naturally expects the same result from the same cause; indeed he is said to feel sure of it from experience: and in the expectation of the same result from similar causes, he is said to reason by a species of Induction, though not founded on an enlarged experience. But by trying experiments upon all objects which have the appearance of flame, he would learn to distinguish such as are hurtful from such as are otherwise, and excluding those that are harmless, he arrives at the conclusion, that all such objects of a particular kind are hurtful.
Now, in this statement of the process, it appears to me that two very different instruments are used; the first of which seems to be Analogy, άναλογία, a reasoning upwards from the known to the unknown, the great instrument of Invention and Generalization, which provides, as it were, subjects for the exercise of Induction; which Induction, έπαγωγή, seems to be rather the collection and examination of experiments, and the drawing a conclusion therefrom; and as this conclusion cannot be extended beyond what is warranted by the experiments, the Induction is an Instrument of Proof and Limitation. A person that has been burnt by a flame is positively certain that he will be burnt again if he try it; he argues only from same to same, and is sure of it by experience; and it is upon this innate natural expectation that all physical science is founded. By analogy he argues that all flames will burn him, he argues from like to like, he generalizes [p.335] and draws an inference; and I conceive it is by this analogical reasoning that all science is advanced. The inference which he thus draws a priori, is merely an hypothesis, ΰπόϑεσις, a supposition, probable indeed, but far from satisfactory. But when he brings it to the proof by induction, and collects experiments, he either confutes, proves, or limits this hypothesis to something not quite so general.
This analogical reasoning, when it is extended only from individual to individual of the same species, is commonly called experience, and not analogy; and from the perfect uniformity of nature, perhaps not improperly: thus, we say, we know by experience that all stones gravitate to the earth. But when we extend it from species to species of the same genus, it is analogy properly so-called. If from the gravitation all stones we reason to that of apples, we reason by analogy, from like to like; we obtain a probable conclusion, not satisfactory till experiment be directed to the point, and it be proved. Having thus included apples as well as stones, we may proceed from one species to another by the same process of analogy and proof, till all bodies upon the surface of the earth be included under the general law of gravitation, whence we may rise to more general propositions. And I am inclined to think that such has been the common process of discovery in all ages of the world.
When Sir I. Newton, from the fall of an apple, was led to the consideration of the moon's gravity, he is said to have made the discovery by Induction; which is true as far as the proof of it went. But it is manifest, that at first he merely formed a probable hypothesis by Analogy, and then laboriously brought it to the test of observation; and it is highly probable that the hypothesis he formed was, that the moon gravitated to the earth with a constant force, instead of a force varying inversely as the square of the distance; which most likely was the result of another hypothesis, after he had proceeded so far as to ascertain that she did really gravitate, but not according to the law presumed.
When Harvey observed the valves in the veins he is com- [p.336] monly said to have made the discovery of the circulation of the blood, by reasoning from Final causes, or by asking of nature for what purpose such valves could be intended: but perhaps he might have asked the question for ever, unless the analogy between the valve and that of a pump had suggested a plausible hypothesis, which he proved by repeated experiments directed to the point.
Analogy, so much slighted and overlooked, and to which such an inferior part in the advancement of science has been assigned, and that too with so much suspicious caution, appears to be the great instrument of generalization and invention by which hypotheses are supplied, which are most commonly the subjects for the exercise of Induction. By Induction, as usually understood, we make it a rule to exclude all hypotheses: first of all, we collect the experiments, and having obtained these, we are next to examine them and compare them; we reject the irrelative and negative, and conclude upon the affirmatives that are left. By this means, says Lord Bacon, we question nature, and conclude upon her answers: yet I would venture to suggest, that, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, the Analogy or comparison precedes the collection of the experiments; some resemblance is observed, some hypothesis is started, which is the subject that is brought to the test of Induction. By this the hypothesis is either proved, or confuted, or more commonly limited to something less general, I would not be understood to assert that the common inductive method is barren, for, no doubt, discoveries are sometimes so made; but thousands and thousands of inventions are brought into play, the result merely of analogy and a few experiments, or a single experimentum crucis. By the common method proposed we take too wide a range, we embrace the whole subject at once, and require the completion of its natural history, but by the proper use of Analogy as a guide, we step cautiously but from one species to the next.
Induction has two instruments of operation; Experiment for all things within our reach, and Observation for those beyond us. And of these Observation is less efficient than Experiment, for it [p.337] is comprehended in it. By Induction without Analogy we first ask innumerable irrelative and impertinent questions of nature, and then make use of Observation upon the experiments in hand; but by Induction with Analogy we try Experiments for a specific purpose, and obtain specific answers to the point.
Having thus obtained a general law or fact for an entire genus, we may proceed in the same manner from this genus to the next, till the whole order be included under the same or some more general law: thus at length we may arrive at certain most general laws, beyond which it may not be within our power to proceed. And the progress of science in the ascending scale consists in rising from Individuals to Generals and Universals.
Having obtained these general laws or universals, from them we may extend discovery in what may be termed the descending scale: and here Syllogism, in its common acceptation, has its use. Thus, in the science of mixed Mathematics, having obtained certain general laws, physical facts, &c., these, with the common principles of pure mathematics, serve as data from which mathematical discovery may be extended downwards. Every mathematical demonstration by Synthesis is no other than a chain of Syllogism. And as an instrument of invention Syllogism may in this case supply corollaries; as in the former. Induction might yield discoveries without the help of analogy. Yet a very slight consideration will show, that here also Analogy is the great engine of invention by which hypotheses or suppositions are supplied; and that in the descending scale Syllogistic Demonstration, as Induction in the ascending, is the grand instrument for confuting, proving, or limiting those hypotheses.
But among the ancients Syllogism is said to be the great engine of discovery: and though I have not had sufficient opportunities of investigating the truth of the supposition, it has often struck me, that by the Syllogistic method the ancients meant neither more nor less than this combination of Analogy and Proof; and that the method of reasoning from Individuals to Universals, was supposed to be conducted by Syllogism no less than from Universals downwards. Aristotle expressly informs us that we [p.338] can learn nothing but by Induction or Demonstration; by Demonstration from universals to particulars, i.e. in the descending scale; by Induction from particulars to universals, or in the ascending scale. Hence, says he, a person who is defective in any of his senses cannot use Induction, and therefore cannot theorize to Universals, or by abstraction obtain general propositions, hence, also, his progress in the scale of Demonstration must be equally defective with his data. Now if the Syllogistic method was held to be the only method of discovery among the ancients, and this method was a process of reasoning from known to unknown, I conceive that, in this respect, the terms must have a more comprehensive signification than is generally allowed.101 Though I can find nothing to warrant the supposition, that they accurately divided their Syllogistic method into Analogy and Induction in the ascending scale, and into Analogy and Demonstration in the descending scale; yet I think they imagined, as has generally been the case in modern times, that by their method they went precisely to the point, and no further; instead of going something beyond it by too extensive a generalization, as we are led by Analogy, and then retracting to the point determined by the Proof.
The great abuse of Analogy is resting in its hypotheses without bringing them to the test, and building systems upon such hypotheses; and it is a fault of modern, as well as of ancient philosophers. But when we consider the Eleatic or Dialectic method of examining any proposed hypothesis or idea, explained by Plato in the beginning of the Parmenides, we shall find the rules of examination as strict, and perhaps more comprehensive, than any method that has been suggested in modern times.102
Another more fatal abuse of Analogy is arguing from individuals to genera, or
from genus to genus, when these genera are too remote; which is skipping to
generalities instead of cautiously proceeding from species to species. But the
most dangerous of all is arguing from Matter to Mind, between which there is no
natural similarity. Thus, the common supposition of the Mind determined by
motives, as a balance swayed by weights is false; for so far from arguing from
like to like, from species to species, we argue not even from genus to genus in
the most remote degree, but from one thing to its contrary; false, also, in as
much as the motive is a final cause, and the weight an antecedent. This
objection, however, to the use of Analogy may be pushed too far: but of the
proper use of such reasoning we have an example in one of the finest
metaphysical works in the English language, Butler's Analogy.
I would observe, also, the great laxity in the significations of the word Theory. It is sometimes used for a general law or principle obtained by Induction, and as something almost synonymous with hypothesis. In this view it might be looked upon as a proved hypothesis; in its other and more general signification it implies the chain of reasoning from general laws and principles, and sometimes the result of such a chain. Its real signification seems to be the Survey itself.103 In the descending scale the result of the survey is termed a Theorem, ϑεώρημα: and in the ascending scale the general law obtained, the result of the survey, might perhaps likewise be termed a Theorem: whilst [p.340] the Theory, ϑεαρία, the Survey itself, may be taken for the whole chain, which, as it proceeds, every now and then, as it were, deposits these theorems. From one or more general laws or data we deduce certain results or theorems, such as the different expressions for the range, velocity &c. of a shot, in the theory of Projectiles: and each of these expressions would be practically, as well as theoretically true, but for the innumerable other circumstances to be taken into consideration. It is therefore only an approximation to practical truth. From a certain other set of general laws we deduce a theory of Resistances, and by a combination of these two Theories we approximate still nearer to practical truth. And by adding theory to theory relative to the powder, form, texture, elasticity, &c. of the shot, climate, &c. &c. and other circumstances, we might still nearer approximate.104 And all these Theories taken together might be termed the Theory of Gunnery.
An Hypothetical system differs from a Theory as does an Hypothesis from a General law or Fact, and is dependant upon Hypotheses instead of Facts; and its productions are of the same description.
Thus far I have spoken of the Method of proceeding, and I have used the terms
Laws, Facts, Universals, and the like, in their common acceptation. But these
terms are so confounded with each other and with Causes and Effects, that we
scarcely know what we are in search of; and some of the ablest views of Bacon's
Novum Organum have become almost as much lost to the world, as have some
of the very finest speculations of the ancients. I would therefore say a few
words upon the Objects or Aim of science.
Causation is a subject upon which there is a strange misunderstanding between the ancients and moderns. By the word Cause the ancients appear to have understood that without the co-operation of which no sensible phenomenon could be produced:105 and they divided Causes into the Efficient, the Formal, the Material, and the Final. And this division was excellent, and in perfect keeping with a system which held a Soul of the world as the prime mover of Efficient causes. The Final cause or ultimate object and end of every action, I shall dismiss without further consideration, as less properly a cause than a motive, and equally admitted in all systems in which nothing is referred to chance, and as unconnected with the Physical subject I have now in hand.
This division of causes has been supposed to be superseded among the moderns; and, since the time of Hume, by the word Cause they seem sometimes to understand the Bond of connexion between one event and its preceding; and in this view it is asserted that no causes of things have ever been discovered; and that science lies not in the discovery of causes, but only in the discovery of the facts and general laws of nature; and the same [p.342] assertion is likewise made, because no one can pretend to have discovered the first of secondary causes. In another view the Cause is looked upon as implying nothing more than an antecedent phenomenon, and that these phenomena, under the names of Cause and Effect, are continued in an endless chain of successive connexions. For example, when we hear a clock strike, if we attend to the chains of successive causes—to go no farther back—they may be traced in the stroke of the hammer, which causes the vibration of the bell, which causes the undulatory movement among the particles of the air, which causes a vibratory motion on the organs of hearing and on the brain; a certain sensation follows, and the soul perceives that the clock has struck. Now, for the production of this ultimate effect, we may observe not only one, but three distinct chains of what the ancients would call Causes. 1st. The chain of the material substances whose matter is in contact with one another, and without which matter the phenomenon could not have been produced, viz. the matter of the hammer, of the bell, of the air, of the auditorial nerve, of the sensorium,106 and these are the successive Material causes. Again, each of these portions of matter is indued with certain qualities, without which also the effect could not have been produced; and these depend upon what the ancients would call the form, and they consist of the form, texture, elasticity, vibratory and other qualities of the bell, of the air, nerve, &c. These are the Formal causes. To these must be superadded the particular accidents by which they are affected, viz., the fall of the hammer, the vibration of the bell, and the others, by which motion is successively communicated: and of this chain of causes each accident is nothing else than motion, modified by the body through which it passes, and may be regarded as a proximate Efficient cause. In this phenomenon, therefore, we may trace the Material, Formal, and Efficient Causes of the ancients; all which are necessary for the production of the effect: and we may [p.343] perceive that the ancient and modern doctrines upon the subject of Causation may not be inconsistent with one another: but we must carefully distinguish whether the Cause be defined as the Accident itself, or the Instrument affected with the accident—the Vibration of the bell, or the Bell in the act of vibrating.
Such is a general view of this phenomenon: but we may observe still something more, relating to that Bond of connexion which has been so great a stumbling-block among the moderns. When we come more narrowly to inspect this triplicated chain of Causes, between each link there is a joint, if I may so call it: for instance, the aggregate motion of the hammer is, in the bell, converted into atomic motion. Now this cannot be performed simultaneously, though the manner or law according to which it is performed, escapes the observation of our senses. This is the Latens Processus, or the latent process which Bacon is so anxious to have investigated; and it is often noticed among the ancients, particularly by Plato in the Parmenides and Phaedo. The Latens Schematismus of Bacon, the latent form or structure, refers to the latent properties of the bodies, or other unknown circumstances, through which motion is communicated. And as grosser bodies are said to be incapable of contact, a kind of Latens Schematismus at every joint in the chain, becomes also an object of inquiry. The inquiry into the Efficient cause, the Matter, the latent process, and the latent structure, constitutes Physics, according to the notions of Bacon; which differs but little from the ancient doctrine. But, if we combine the two, we shall have Physical science to consist in investigating the Nature and the Continuity of the Material, Formal, and Efficient causes, together with the Laws according to which the chain of efficient causes is propagated, and this, not only in the Links but in the Joints.107 If it were done [p.344] through the successive links only, we should in a manner have perfected the grand outline of science, through the more delicate parts, the latent processes, and forms, and substances, at the joints, which constitute the bonds of connexion, should forever be concealed. Yet they need not be despaired of.
If it should be asked why it is thus to be presumed a priori, that this triplicated chain of causes is continued throughout nature, the only answer to it is this,—that in every branch of science which has been investigated, and is thoroughly understood, such is the case; and as we can only reason but from what we know, we reason by analogy, from this known to the unknown, and draw a strong presumption in its favour. It may be false, and it cannot be proved otherwise till all science is perfected; but the burden of finding and demonstrating an exception lies with its opponents, who might thus confute or limit it.
In modern experimental Philosophy it is often laid down as a maxim, that the laws of nature are the only proper objects of human inquiry: and all investigation of causes is stifled by the dogma which maintains, that human nature is incapable of investigating their nature—a strange fallacy, which seems to be an ignoratio elenchi. The laws of nature, or general facts, as they are called—under which obscure expressions are often included the qualities of bodies as well as their matter and the accidents by which they are affected—may be sufficient for the mathematician, as they afford the data from which his propositions may depend. He can rise no higher than his data; nor is it within the compass of his science to prove any simple physical proposition.108 In the brilliant discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton certain general laws and qualities of matter gathered by induction, together with the common principles of mathematics, form the data from which the propositions of the Principia depend. And the discoveries [p.345] deduced by mathematical operations may be pushed on by his successors to a greater degree of accuracy and approximation to the truth than they have been already, yet are they merely deductions and links in the descending chain and calculations of effects. But among the data themselves is where we must look for any great advancement of science.
In those branches of science which have attained to any degree of perfection, such as Mechanics, Acoustics and some others, we are not content with the mere fact, but we attend to the successive links in the chain of accident, tracing the motion whence it is derived, and to what it is communicated; and investigating also the law according to which it is propagated: and we trace also the chain of being, in the existence and contact of its matter, and in its qualities and form, as in the example of the Bell. But, notwithstanding the mighty strides which modern science has taken in the Operative division of Philosophy, it is manifest what little i real progress has been made in the Speculative division in the ascending scale; though every step therein opens almost a new era of discovery.
I will now turn to the Result. That Matter or Substance, by which Qualities are supported, exists, is one of the prime articles of belief among mankind, though its existence can only be inferred from the qualities which it upholds. And it is in this branch, by the chemical resolution of compound substances into more simple substances, that science has of late years made its greatest advancement.
Chief of the Qualities of Matter were resolved by the ancients into its Form: and by the union of Form with Matter the Sensible world was supposed to be produced. As I endeavour to bring forward those parts only of the ancient philosophy which may be turned to account, I omit mention of their ingenious metaphysical speculations upon the nature of Form and Matter, Bound and the Boundless, and shall merely observe that the system would naturally tend to resolve all the qualities of Matter [p.346] into the primary ones of its Extension, Form, and the absolute Hardness or Impenetrability of its component parts, substance, or atoms.109
Besides the obvious formal qualities of matter, there are certain other qualities, which may be termed supposititious, assumed or occult,110 inasmuch as the words Elasticity, Colour, Inertia, Gravity, and many others, are words conventionally assumed to express some unknown causes of effects which have been traced no higher, but which still remain desiderata to which the attention of science should be directed; for they may perhaps be resolved into some immediate formal cause, or into several intermediate links in the chain of accidental causes, latent processes &c. Sir Isaac Newton thus attempted to resolve the elasticity of Light, as far as it concerned Reflection, into a latent process, the attractions of a fluid upon the surfaces of bodies.
Again, in the phenomenon of Colour, the Metaphysical distinction drawn between
the Sensation and Perception by the Mind, and the Quality of the body, which was
the cause of that perception, between the redness with which the senses are
affected, and the supposititious quality of the body, which so operates upon
light as to produce that sensation and perception, cleared away several strange incumbrances. But the grand discovery, that redness or any other colour may be
communicated to several bodies by the mere alteration of their superficial
texture, has gone far to resolve the colouring quality into the texture or form
of the superficies, and to merge the supposititious and conventional quality
into a formal cause, one of the primary qualities of matter. From the perception
of colours we may trace the chain of antecedent causes of Matter and Form
through the optic nerve, through the eye, to the light, to the coloured body,
and again to the light. And we may trace also the descending chain of accidents
or motion from the general unmodified motions of the light, as first admitted
into a chamber, before it strikes upon the body, its alteration at the body,
every point of which becomes a centre from which a sphere of motion is
propagated, of such a nature, as, when passed through the eye and optic nerve,
to produce the perception of colour.
In England, till within the last few years, the Newtonian hypothesis of Light has had a very general ascendancy; but at present that of Huygens bids fair entirely to supplant it. From the similarity which obtains in nature between one fluid and another, I would venture to suggest, that these two hypotheses may not be altogether and fundamentally opposed, but are capable of being reconciled, at least in part; and that light has not only a progressive, but a vibratory motion also: that to its progressive motion are to be attributed the phenomena of brightness, illumination, shadow and some instances of reflection: and that upon its vibrations depend the phenomena of colour, sight and the like; and that the vibratory motion requisite for the production of Vision, is caused by the progressive, reflected, and impeded motion of the sunbeams, by a change from the aggre- [p.348] gate progressive motion of the rays into the atomic vibrations of the fluid. Such an hypothesis is afforded by the analogies of air and water, in their progressive motions of wind and streams, and in their vibratory motions of sound and waves. It is a fair hypothesis, which, if ii be confuted when brought to the test of experiment by Induction, may afford some results upon which something more plausible may be offered.
The most remarkable of the supposititious qualities of Matter are Inertia, Gravity, and Attraction. The conceptions of Sir Isaac Newton upon the subject of Gravity and Attraction are perfectly clear and defined. He uses the words—not for the effect itself, as Dr. Clarke in his controversy with Leibnitz affirms—not for any inherent quality with which matter may be endued—nor for any accidental motion with which it may be affected: but he uses them merely conventionally for the antecedent cause of the effect of gravitation: whether the cause be a formal cause, or whether it be motion or force communicated through an antecedent chain of being, or whatever it may be hereafter ascertained. By the universal effect of gravitation or the tendency itself, proved by Induction from Experiment and Observation upon bodies within our reach, and extended by Analogy confirmed by Observation to the celestial bodies and those which are beyond us, it is evident that such a cause exists: and the knowledge of its existence, and of the law according to which it acts, are sufficient for all the purposes to which in mathematics it can be applied.
Sir Isaac Newton laid down as one of the rules of philosophizing, that no other causes ought to be introduced than such as are true, and necessary to account for the phenomena. And he followed his predecessors in maintaining the Inertia of Matter as exerted in the first law of motion, as an inherent, though it may be supposititious quality. But to account for the undiminished motions of the planets he was compelled to assert a Vacuum, or at least a quasi vacuum. Yet he hesitated to maintain Gravity as an innate quality of matter, as it would be inconsistent with his own ideas of causation, as expressed in his own rule. He there- [p.349] fore left directions to succeeding philosophers to seek its cause; and pointed out as a fit subject for speculation an hypothetical subtile ether, with which the supposed vacuum might be filled, as capable of supplying the deficient links in the chain of causation. Many of his professed followers, sufficiently alive to the physical inconsistency, hesitated not to assert the absolute vacuum, and gravitation as an inherent quality of matter; not adverting to the insuperable metaphysical difficulty thus introduced, that they eventually maintained two distinct and independent chains of causation, continually crossing each other and assuming each other's offices: by one of which motion was communicated, through matter in contact, by impulse and vibration, in endless succession; and by the other through vacuum by means of occult qualities commonly so called; by either of which the same effects might be produced. Euler and most foreign philosophers, more sensible of the real difficulty of the case, rejected without a scruple such a version of Sir I. Newton's opinions, upon the express grounds, that two secondary causes of motion, one from Inertia the other from Attraction, were utterly incongruous and inadmissible: and such has generally been the opinion of all Metaphysicians. Stewart, equally sensible of the same insuperable difficulty, strangely proposes to resolve all such phenomena into attractions and repulsions, upon the principles of Boscovich. But I shall merely observe, that the experiments from which it is deduced, that the grosser bodies never come into contact, prove it only, because they prove, that there is some substance intervening.
If we turn our attention to the Chain of Occidents, we shall find that it consists of Motion, which implies Force, communicated through different portions of the material world. And here I would mark a distinction in the word Force or Power. Where motion is actually produced, the Force by which it is produced is nothing else than the Momentum, or quantity of motion communicated from one body to another in a connected succession. But there is often a Force exerted where no motion is actually produced, the Force being counteracted in its effect. It [p.350] produces, however, a continual Stress and Endeavour, and is the Cause of a continued series of such Stresses, Endeavours and Tendencies among bodies in contact, and it is only requisite that some impediment be removed, that motion may take effect.
All motion and tendencies may perhaps be ultimately traced to the forces of Animals, Gravity, Inertia, and the Etherial powers of nature.
The natural or common motion and pressure of Water is evidently resolvable into the forces of Air, Gravity and other causes. The natural or common motions and powers of the Air may be again resolved into those of Gravity, Elasticity and Heat. Galvanism, Electricity and certain Chemical phenomena, might perhaps, if science were properly directed to the investigation, with little difficulty be resolved into a chain of varied accident or motion of one and the same etherial fluid, of which fire is but another form: inasmuch as chief part of the results appear to be but the conversion of aggregate into some species of atomic motion, and the reconversion of this atomic motion into aggregate. The phenomena of Magnetism might perhaps be similarly resolved. Now in these phenomena the great dispute among philosophers does not so much concern the chain of accident and motion, as the chain of being through which the accidents are propagated; whether the motion be communicated through the grosser particles of matter, or through some subtile fluid which pervades all nature, or through several different fluids endowed with different properties, such as the Galvanic, Electric, Magnetic and other fluids. From the sameness of many of their effects, and from the consideration that they all appear equally extended throughout the universe, if we should presume that they were but one and the same fluid, we should start an hypothesis indeed, but an hypothesis particularly worthy of attention, for unless such be the case we shall have in nature several fluids co-extended through the universe, all of which can perform each other's offices, that is to say, several different causes more than are necessary for the solution of the phenomena.
Gravity, in the present state of science, is an anomaly in [p.351] nature, to which no parallel exists; for we are acquainted only with its laws, without a trace of the antecedent proximate links in the chains of Being, and Motion or Force. I have before observed, that a Vacuum is purely an hypothesis; and it is an hypothesis, resting not upon experiment or proof, nor even upon any analogy in nature, but it is a deduction by a chain of argument from the ascertained fact of the undiminished motions of the planets, from the supposititious quality of the inertia of matter, and from the unwarranted assumption, that perpetual motion can only be sustained in vacuo; an assumption, chiefly taken from a few experiments, in what may, without much difficulty, be shewn to be the absolute plenum of an air-pump. But it is far from evident that a man could move any one of his limbs if it were placed in perfect vacuo; whilst thousands of experiments prove, that even a perpetual motion111 might be preserved by Fire, Steam, Air, Electricity and other powers of nature, but for the wear and tear of the machinery, the lack of fuel and other extrinsic circumstances: and this, in many instances, in spite of friction; but in all, an absolute plenum of one or more fluids is necessary for the production of the effect.
Of the Force of Animals, it may well be questioned whence it is derived, whether it be originally communicated by the Soul of the animal itself to the material world through its connexion with the body, or whether the soul has power only to influence and divert the motion and force with which that body may be surrounded.
Of the Etherial powers of nature, I must observe, that wherever a Fire is lighted, a wonderful kind of motion commences among the elements, very different from what can be supposed to have been communicated by the agent that pro- [p.352] duced the spark, or could have resided within the spark itself. Light issues on all sides from the fire, and an incessant draft of Air sets into it; and there ensues a motion continually accumulating and increasing, and communicated to the objects around it; and instead of losing motion by such communication, the longer it continues the more violent, intense and extended it becomes, producing such a variety of movements by the descent of walls and timbers, by the overthrow of houses, trees and all obstacles within its reach, as to bid defiance to all ordinary rules of action and re-action, cause and effect: "and no man knoweth whence it cometh, or whither it goeth."
To the ancients who held the World to be their God, Matter its body, and the Etherial powers of the heavens its soul, little difficulty could occur in resolving the motions and forces of the elements and gravity, as well as all individual animal force into the powers of this present universal Deity. By such a solution, it is true that the ancients completed and perfected their bastard system of Physics; and reduced all causes to one simple triplicated chain: and the Efficient, the Formal and the Material might be successively traced from the highest intellectual operation to the lowest sensible phenomenon.
To us, however, who hold the Spiritual world perfectly distinct from the Material, it must be the grand object of Philosophy to trace the chain of causes from matter to matter, to the first of secondary causes. When a clock has struck, the vibrations are conveyed along the auditorial nerves to the Sensorium; and according to other systems besides those of the Materialists, motion is communicated to the Soul itself. Yet analogy, I may say experience upon all natural bodies, would rather lead us to presume that the motion, after a momentary concentration in the sensorium, is again communicated through the brain and skull to the surrounding air, and that no part of it can be lost to the material world by being communicated to the immaterial.
The cause of Gravitation, whatever that may be, causes a strain and tendency in every body which it does not actually put [p.353] in motion. By this a stress is exerted upon water in a vessel; by which the like stress or pressure is exerted against the sides o£ the vessel: and if one of its sides be removed, motion instantly ensues. Now it is evident that this strain or stress, as well as the motion, must be referred to the same cause. And if future discovery should ever show that the antecedent link in the chain of being through which this strain is propagated, is an etherial fluid of the heavens, we should immediately conclude, that, except where motion was actually produced, there was a continual strain.
In the legitimate use of analogy we are entitled to start such an hypothesis: and it is the business of Philosophy to bring it to the test of Experiment or Observation by Induction; by which it may be confuted, proved, or limited to something less general. But if on such an hypothesis we should argue that the unaccountable effects of fire, in its wonderful motions before observed, are to be resolved into the same force or strain impressed upon the heavens—if, supposing no motion is communicated from the material to the immaterial world, as far as we and other animals are concerned, we should argue to the reverse, that no motion is communicated from the immaterial or the souls of animals to the material,112 but that living creatures are only endowed with the faculty of diverting and appropriating the force with which they are surrounded—if we should argue that, in short, all motion among material bodies may be ultimately traced to the etherial powers of nature, so adjusted as to constitute the mainspring of the machine of the universe; that they are a fluid whose material substance pervades every thing and all space, and perfects the chain of being, endowed with no other qualities than those of form, but impressed with a continued force which is not an inherent quality, though it can be traced no higher; from which all other force and motion amongst things are borrowed, and to [p.354] which they are again returned; and into whose operations may be resolved not only the chain of accidents, but all the supposititious qualities of matter—or it, with the school of Hutchinson,113 we should resolve this force itself, this strain upon the heavens, into the expansion caused by the motions of the Solar triad of Fire, Light, and Spirit, three conditions of one etherial fluid; I say, we should be tacking one supposition to another; we should be weaving but an hypothetic system; we should be using analogy not in its legitimate province, but, as Lord Bacon calls it, for the purpose of anticipating nature; and we should be running into the common error of the ancients, of proceeding from one step to another without stopping to prove our progress.
That all force is dependant upon the powers of the heavens is no new hypothesis, but as old as Heathenism itself, for the Heathens resolved all forces, both of nature and animals, into the powers of the etherial Soul of the universe: and the hypothesis properly modified, may be even of still higher antiquity.
Nothing, perhaps, is more uniformly insisted on among the Heathen, than that their Trinity was a triad subordinate to a Monad; which monad was clearly one of those two independent principles, which were conceived to have existed before the formation of the world, and was the Etherial Intellectual principle of the Universe; which was in a manner superseded by the Triad. The Triad is likewise maintained to be Phanes or Eros, the Sun, the Soul and Ruler of the world.
To ascertain the persons of this triad, then, I shall merely place the most ancient speculations upon the subject under one another; but at the same time I would observe, that it is one of those questions which, for want of sufficient evidence, is incapable of being brought to the test of absolute demonstration.
From the different Orphic fragments we find that the Orphic Trinity consisted of
|Metis,||Phanes, or Eros,||Ericapaeus.|
which are interpreted
|Will, or Counsel,||Light, or Love,||Life, or Lifegiver.|
From Hesiod, according to Damascius,
From Pherecydes Syrius,
|Fire,||Water,||Spirit, or Air.|
From the Sidonians,
From the Phoenicians,
From the Chaldaean and Persian Oracles of Zoroaster,
From the later Platonists,
|Power,||Intellect,||Soul or Spirit.|
By the ancient Theologists, according to Macrobius, the Sun was invoked in the Mysteries, as
|Power of||Light of||Spirit of|
|the world,||the world,||the world.|
To which may perhaps be added, from Sanchoniatho, the three sons of Genus.
By omitting the Earth, Water, and other materials, which, in the formation of
the world, are elsewhere disposed of, and passing over the refinements of the
Pythagoreans, who sometimes even deviated so far as to place the
final cause, as the Monad, and the three concauses as the Triad, I think we may
find in the above enumeration sufficient ground for maintaining the
[p.356] opinion that the persons of the Trinity of
the Gentiles, viewed under a Physical aspect, were regarded as the Fire, the
Light, and the Spirit or Air of the Etherial fluid Substance of the heavens:
which in a Metaphysical aspect were held to be no other than the Power or Will,
the Intellect or Reason, and the Spirit or Affections of the Soul of the World;
accordingly as the prior Monad was contemplated in its Etherial or Intellectual
Metaphysicians have at length approximated to a truth, which, in the Metaphysics of Christianity, is laid down with as much perspicuity and decision, as is the Immortality of the Soul, or as any other of those points which have been so continually agitated among philosophers, modern as well as ancient. The distinction between the Intellect, and the Emotions or Affections, to which, simple as it may appear, such laborious approaches have been made through the mazy paths of Metaphysics, is clearly drawn; and the respective seats of them are assigned, it may be figuratively, but most naturally, to the Head and Heart.
The old division of the Mental Powers into those of the Will and the Understanding, has long been superseded by the division of the school of Reid into the Intellectual and Active Powers, But under the name of the Active Powers, the Will and some part of the Emotions have been also confounded by that school. Later writers, who have drawn the distinction between the Intellect and the Emotions, appear generally to regard the Will as a subordinate appendage to the Emotions, connected perhaps with the material structure of the Animal.
There is an ambiguity in the word Will or Volition, which may be divided into the Wish, and into the Power to act. The Soul thinks, wishes, acts; and the Power to act appears to me to be a mental Power, as distinct from the Wish or any of the Emotions, as it is independent of any material structure or combination. We may conceive a disembodied spirit with the Intellectual Powers, the Train of Thought only, without the Emotions; and again such a spirit, with the Intellect and Emotions, without the Power of action; and such a being might be susceptible of every sentiment terminating in contemplation, such [p.357] as all intellectual Tastes, Memory, Regret, and a variety of others. Stewart, in his speculations upon persons dreaming, supposes the Intellectual Powers with the Train of Thought in exercise, while the Active powers are suspended. But, of the Faculties and Powers which he confounds under that name, it is manifest that the Emotions are not suspended: and though the Power over the material frame is very generally unexercised during sleep, it is a very singular phenomenon, that when the Wish to do any particular action is notified, the Soul presently takes it for granted that the deed required is actually done, and the train of thought is influenced and diverted by some internal power, though the wish is not really gratified. And there is nothing more common in nature than to have the wish without the power to act, or the power without the wish.
I speak only of the immortal and immaterial soul: but if we look more closely into the matter we may observe, in the involuntary motions of the body, in its animal appetites, sensations, and desires, and perhaps in its perceptions, something of a material or corporeal spirit or frame of life, acting independently, though subject to the immortal soul, and whose operations appear to be carried on solely by the powers of nature. And it is this which appears to be so continually leading men astray into Materialism. And herein Plato's disposition is curious. He places the Intellect in the Head; a Soul endued with some of the passions, such as fortitude, is supposed to reside in the Chest, about the Heart: while another soul, of which the appetites, desires, and grosser passions are its faculties, about the Stomach and Spleen. The more refined Emotions he confounds with the Intellect; which I believe is likewise the case with Kant.
The numerous passages in the Scriptures in which the Persons of the Christian Trinity are shadowed forth by the same natural and mental powers which I suppose to constitute the original triad of the Gentiles, are too numerous to require to be specifically referred to.—The Father is continually typified as a Fire accepting the sacrifices, consuming and punishing the guilty, as the Lord of all power and might, to whom all prayers are com- [p.358] monly addressed;—the Son as Light, as a Mediator and a Teacher, enlightening the understanding, addressing himself more particularly to the Intellect, pointing out the distinctions between good and evil;—the Spirit, as Spirit or Air, a mighty rushing wind, operating upon the Affections, Feelings, or Emotions. We are commanded by the Christian faith to look to the Son for knowledge, to obey his instructions, and to accept the conditions of Salvation he has offered—to the Spirit, for grace to influence us in all our feelings, wishes and intentions—and to the Father, our prayers are to be directed for the power to act.
I would not presume to lay stress upon any of the hypotheses I may have advanced or adduced in this inquiry. Man is apt to indulge his fancy in building systems which he conceives may set forth the wisdom or magnify the power of his Creator; but when he brings them to the test, and finds the truth itself, he finds it infinitely more sublime than the happiest flight of his imagination. Yet as we must necessarily take all our ideas, as well as our language, from the sensible world—as we are taught that it it is a glass, in which things spiritual are purposely, but darkly, shadowed forth—and as we are assured that man is formed in the express image of his Maker; I deem that we outstep not the bounds of true philosophy, when we humbly trace, in the glorious works of the Almighty, a confirmation of his word.
This page last updated: 03/02/2013