_ASSYRIAN MYTHOLOGY._
"But surely there is nothing improbable in the supposition, that
in the poems of Homer such vestiges may be found. Every recorded
form of society bears some traces of those by which it has been
preceded, and in that highly primitive form, which Homer has
been the instrument of embalming for all posterity, the law of
general reason obliges us to search for elements and vestiges more
primitive still.... The general proposition that we may expect
to find the relics of scriptural traditions in the heroic age of
Greece, though it leads, if proved, to important practical results,
is independent even of a belief in those traditions, as they stand
in the scheme of revealed truth. They must be admitted to have
been facts on earth, even by those who would deny them to have
been facts of heavenly origin, in the shape in which Christendom
receives them; and the question immediately before us is one of
pure historical probability. The descent of mankind from a single
pair, the lapse of that pair from original righteousness, are apart
from and ulterior to it. We have traced the Greek nation to a
source, and along a path of migration which must in all likelihood
have placed its ancestry, at some point or points, in close local
relations with the scenes of the earliest Mosaic records: the
retentiveness of that people equalled its receptiveness, and its
close and fond association with the past, made it prone indeed to
incorporate novel matter into its religion, but prone also to keep
it there after its incorporation.
"If such traditions existed, and if the laws which guide historical
inquiry require or lead us to suppose that the forefathers of
the Greeks must have lived within their circle, then the burden
of proof must lie not so properly with those who assert that
the traces of them are to be found in the earliest, that is,
the Homeric form of the Greek mythology, as with those who deny
it. What became of those old traditions? They must have decayed
and disappeared, not by a sudden process, but by a gradual
accumulation of the corrupt accretions, in which at length they
were so completely interred as to be invisible and inaccessible.
Some period, therefore, there must have been at which they would
remain clearly perceptible, though in conjunction with much corrupt
matter. Such a period might be made the subject of record, and if
such there were, we might naturally expect to find it in the oldest
known work of the ancient literature.
"If the poems of Homer do, however, contain a picture, even though
a defaced picture, of the primeval religious traditions, it is
obvious that they afford a most valuable collateral support to the
credit of the Holy Scripture, considered as a document of history.
Still we must not allow the desire of gaining this advantage
to bias the mind in an inquiry, which can only be of value if
it is conducted according to the strictest rules of rational
criticism."--_Gladstone on Tradition in "Homer and the Homeric
Age_," vol. ii. sect. i.
Having laid, as I think, in what has been premised in the last chapter,
grounds for a presumption that primitive traditions may be shrouded in
the ancient mythology, I proceed to seek traditions of the patriarch
Noah among the inscriptions and monuments of the Chaldæans; for
then we shall find ourselves in a period when the results of modern
archæological science are in contact with the events and incidents of
primitive patriarchal life recorded in Scripture; and, in seeking them
where we shall best find them, in the able and discriminating pages
of Rawlinson, we shall at least feel that we are treading on safe and
solid ground.
The deities in the Chaldæan Pantheon are thus enumerated by Professor
Rawlinson--
"The grouping of the principal Chaldæan deities is as follows:--At
the head of the Pantheon stands a god Il or Ra, of whom little
is known. Next to him is a triad, Ana, Bil or Belus, and Hea or
Hoa, who correspond closely to the classical Pluto, Jupiter, and
Neptune. Each of these is accompanied by a female principle or
wife.... Then follows a further triad, consisting of Sin or Hurki
the moon-god, San or Sanci the sun, and Vul (or Yem, or Ao, or
In, or Ina, according to various readings of the hieroglyphics)
the god of the atmosphere (again accompanied by female powers or
wives).... Next in order to them we find a group of five minor
deities, the representatives of the five planets, Nin or Ninip
(Saturn), Merodach (Jupiter), Nergal (Mars), Ishtar (Venus), and
Nebo (Mercury). [The bracket indications are Rawlinson's.]...
These principal deities do not appear to have been connected like
the Egyptian and classical divinities into a single genealogical
scheme" (i. 141).
In a note at p. 142 it is said, "These schemes themselves were probably
not genealogical at first ... but after a while given to separate
and independent deities, recognised in different places by distinct
communities, or even by distinct races" (_vide_ Bunsen's "Egypt," iv.
66; English Tran.)
Now to this opinion I venture unreservedly to adhere, and I connect it
with the statement (_id._ i. 72), that "Chaldæa in the earliest times
to which we can go back, seems to have been inhabited by four principal
tribes. The early kings are continually represented in the monuments
as sovereigns over the Kiprat-arbat, or 'Four Races' (_vide supra_, p.
30). These 'Four Races' are sometimes called the Arba Lisun or 'Four
Tongues,' whence we may conclude that they were distinguished from one
another, among other differences, by a variety in their forms of speech
... an examination of the written remains has furnished reasons for
believing that the differences were great and marked; the languages,
in fact, belonging to the four great varieties of human speech, the
Hamitic, Semitic, Aryan, and Turanian." Compare pp. 39, 40.
If it is allowed that there may have been mythological systems
corresponding to these divers nationalities, we may fairly conclude
that the deities above enumerated may not necessarily have been
different deities, but the same deities viewed in different lights, or
included in duplicate in the way of incorporation, or in recognition
of subordinate nationalities. If, therefore, I find the representation
of Noah in any one of these deities, is there not a _prima facie_
probability that I shall find the reduplication of him in others? I
consider, at least, that I shall have warrant for thus collecting the
scattered traditions concerning the patriarch who stands at the head of
the second propagation of our race.
But first as to the god Il or Ra--
IL OR RA.
The form _Ra_ represents, probably, the native Chaldæan name of
this deity, while _Il_ is the Semitic equivalent. _Il_, of course,
is but a variant of _El_, the root of the well-known biblical
_Elohim_, as well as of the Arabic Allah. It is this name which
Diodorus represents under the form of _Elus_, and Sanchoniathon, or
rather Philo Biblius, under that of Elus, or _Ilus_. The meaning of
the word is simply "God," or perhaps "The God" emphatically. _Ra_,
the Cushite equivalent, must be considered to have had the same
force originally, though in Egypt it received a special application
to the sun, and became the proper name of that particular deity.
The word is lost in the modern Ethiopic. It formed an element
in the native name of Babylon, which was _Ka-ra_, the Cushite
equivalent of the Semitic _Bab-il_, an expression signifying "the
gate of God."
Ra is a god with few peculiar attributes. He is a sort of fount
and origin of deity, too remote from man to be much worshipped, or
to excite any warm interest. There is no evidence of his having
had any temple in Chaldæa during the early times. A belief in his
existence is implied rather than expressed in inscriptions of the
primitive kings, where the Moon-god is said to be "brother's son
of Ana, and eldest son of Bil or Belus." We gather from this, that
Bel and Ana were considered to have a common father, and later
documents sufficiently indicate that that common father was Il or
Ra."--_Rawlinson_, i. p. 143.
If in the Il or Ra of the Chaldæans the primitive monotheism is not
revealed, I do not see how it can be discerned in the Zeus of the
Greeks. We have the same god in the same relation in the Scandinavian,
or at any rate in the Lapland mythology. Leems ("Account of Danish
Lapland," Pinkerton, i. 458) says--"Of the Gods inhabiting the starry
mansions the _greatest is Radien_, yet it is uncertain whether he is
over every part of the sidereal sky, or whether he governs only some
part of it. Be this as it may, I shall be bold to affirm that the
Laplanders never comprehended, under the name of this false god, the
true God; _which is obvious from this_, that some have not scrupled to
put the image or likeness of the true God by the side of their Radien,
on Runic boxes."[145] If, however, of their gods "the greatest was
Radien," they would not have placed the true God by his side until
they had become acquainted with the true God, or until they had come
to commingle Christianity and Paganism; but then would they not have
placed "Ra" by the side of the true God as His counterpart? I am
assuming that "Radien" means simply the god Ra, as I suppose Mr Max
Müller would recognise "dien" as cognate to "Dyaus" ... "Dieu."
[145] In like manner, the Peruvians recognised "Pachacamac" (_vide
infra_, p. 304), in the description which the Spaniards
gave of the true God; and in so far as they had retained the
monotheistic belief, this was true. Garcilasso de la Vega, a
most competent witness who testifies to this, adds--"If any
one shall now ask me, who am a Catholic Christian Indian, by
the infinite mercy, what name was given to God in my language,
I should say Pachacamac."--Hakluyt Society, ed. of Garcil. de
la Vega, i. 107.
Yet it has been opposed, _in limine_, to M. L'Abbe Gainet's valuable
chapter on the "Monotheisme des Peuples primitifs," "that he does not
meet the specific assertions of historians such as Rawlinson, who finds
idolatry prevalent among the Chaldæans on their first appearance on the
stage of history."
I must submit, however, that although the discovery of idolatry at this
early period may appear to disturb the particular theory, yet on closer
examination it will be found to sustain L'Abbe Gainet's argument, on
the whole, by sustaining the truth of tradition upon which his main
argument reposes; for the idolatry which we find is intimately bound
up with the worship of Belus, identified with Nimrod, whose rebellion
against the Lord has always been in tradition, and is according to
the more accepted interpretation of the sacred text. The discovery of
idolatry, therefore, under the particular circumstances, is exactly
what we should expect, and affords a remarkable confirmation of the
fidelity of tradition.
Moreover, there are Chaldæans and Chaldæans, as we have just seen in
Rawlinson (_sup._ p. 184), and as will be made more evident in the
following passage from Gainet's "Monotheisme," &c.
"It is sufficiently agreed, says Lebatteux (Mem. Acad. t. xxvii. p.
172), that the Babylonians recognised a supreme being, the Father
and Lord of all (Diod. Sic. l. ii.) St Justin Cohortat. ad gent.
Eusebi. Prep. Evan., l. iii. Porphyry (Life of Pythagoras) cites an
oracle of Zoroaster, in which the Chaldæans are coupled in encomium
with the Hebrews for the sanctity of the worship which they paid to
the Eternal King. These are the words of the oracles--The Chaldeans
alone with the Hebrews have wisdom for their share, rendering a
pure worship to God, who is the Eternal King."--_Gainet_, iii. 408.
The pure monotheism here alluded to may have been preserved in Chaldæan
families of Semitic origin, but the extract I have just given from
Rawlinson seems to prove that the knowledge was preserved also, dimly
and obscurely, among the predominant Chaldæans of Hamitic descent. This
will be more apparent from the monotheistic epithets attached to the
three next deities.
ANA.
"Ana is the head of the first triad which follows immediately after
the obscure god Ra." "Ana, like Il and Ra, is thought to have been a
word originally signifying God in the highest sense." "He corresponds
in many respects to the classical Hades, who, like him, heads[146] the
triad to which he belongs." In so far he is undistinguishable from
Il or Ra, and may only transmit the monotheistic tradition through
a different channel. But Ana has human epithets applied to him very
suggestive of hero-worship. "His epithets are chiefly such as mark
priority and antiquity." "He is the Old Ana," "the original chief,"
"the father of the gods" [_inter alia_, of Bil Nipru, _i.e._ Nimrod].
He is also called--which imports another association of ideas--"the
lord of spirits and demons," "the king of the lower world,"[147] "the
lord of darkness or death," "the ruler of the far-off city."
[146] "This is not a mere arbitrary supposition, for it is expressly
said in Holy Writ, that the first man, ordained to be 'the
father of the whole earth' (as he is then called), became,
on his reconciliation with his Maker, the wisest of all men,
and, according to tradition, the greatest of prophets, who in
his far-reaching ken, _foresaw the destinies of all mankind_
in all successive ages down to the end of the world. All this
must be taken in a strict historical sense, for the moral
interpretation we abandon to others. The pre-eminence of the
Sethites chosen by God, and entirely devoted to His service,
must be received as an undoubted historical fact, to which
we find many pointed allusions even in the traditions of the
other Asiatic nations. Nay, the hostility between the Sethites
and Cainites, and the mutual relations of these two races,
form the chief clue to the history of the primitive world, and
even of many particular nations of antiquity."--_Fred. Von
Schlegel's "Philosophy of Hist.," Robertson's trans._, p. 152.
[147] Compare these epithets, and what was said above, of
resemblance "to classical Hades," with the following verses
from the "Oracula Sybillina," lib. i. 80--
"Orcus eos cepit græco qui nomine dictus
Est _Ades_, quod primus eo descenderit _Adam_,
Expertus mortis legem," &c.
Setting aside such titles as belong exclusively to the Deity, but
assuming hero-worship--supposing man deified--who more appropriately
placed in these primitive times at the head of the list, than their
original progenitor Adam.[148] To whom would these titles, "the old
Ana,"[149] "the original chief," "the lord of darkness and death," he
who introduced death into the world, more exactly apply? Rawlinson
also says--"His position is well marked by Damascius, who gives the
three gods Anus, Illinus, and Aüs, as _next in succession to the
primeval pair_, Assorus and Missara," i. 145. Now, it will not be
contested, I think, that Assorus is the same as Alorus, the first of
the ten antediluvian (deluge of Xisuthrus) Assyrian kings enumerated
by Berosus, and which correspond to the ten antediluvian patriarchs.
Consequently Assorus = Alorus = Adam.[150]
[148] Osiris also is "the judge of the soul, or the god of the world
of spirits." "Osiris is never represented in an animal form,
but is called the Bull" (_infra_ pp. 203, 204), _vide_
Bunsen's "Egypt," iv. 332. Bunsen's own view is, that "the
history of Osiris is the history of the cycle of the year,
of the sun dying away and resuscitating himself again." Mr
Palmer ("Egyptian Chronicles," i. p. 3) says--(and I think
it as well that I should state that I had come to an almost
identical conclusion, and had written this and the following
chapter before I became acquainted with Mr Palmer's profound
and yet still neglected work, _vide_ ch. vi.)--"The first
human ('Osiris = Adam and Isis = Eve') having been thrown back
into pairs of anthropomorphous deities (p. 2), the original
Osiris and Isis, formed by the divine potter as parents of
all, disappear in name, and are represented by Seb and Nutpe,
while Osiris, Typhon, and Horus, the progeny of Seb and Nutpe,
answers rather to Cain, Abel, and Seth, in the old world,
and to the three sons of Noah in the new.... From Osiris-Seb
(whether he be viewed as Adam or Noah) are derived downwards
all the successive generations of Egyptian, gods and demigods,
patriarchs, kings, and other men" [and for a parallel
exposition of the Phoenician myth, _vide_ Palmer, p. 53 and
seq., "each dynast in turn, in the early generations, being
identifiable at once with Seb and Osiris, as father of those
following, with Osiris again by sharing the same mortality,
and with Horus as renewing his father's life and being the
hope of the coming world. _So each ancestor in turn went_, it
was said, _to the original Osiris as patriarch of the dead_,
and to his intermediate Osirified fathers, and was himself
Osirified like them, all making one collective Osiris." [I
have not space to discuss the question at what stage the
mythology became pantheistic.] "Waiting for that reunion and
restoration which was to come through successive generations
by the great expected Horus, who was to take up into himself
the old, and to be himself the new Osiris."
[149] In a note to Cardinal Wiseman's "Science and Revealed
Religion" on Conformity between Semitic and Indo-Europ.
grammatical forms, it will be seen that _Ana_ in Chaldaic is
the pronoun of the first person singular, and corresponds with
the revealed appellation of the Deity, "I Am who Am" (Exod.
iii. 14) = the [Greek: tò Egô].
[150] Max Müller, Chips i. 153, refers to Dr Windischmann's
("Zoroastrian Studies") discovery that there are ten
generations between Adam and Noah, as there are ten
generations in the Zendavesta between Yima (Adam) and
Thrâstouna (Noah), and without controverting the point. Mr
Palmer ("Egypt. Chron.," i. 45) says--"And though the fancy
of making the ten kings to begin only after 1058 years, and
to be not all named from the same city, seems to distinguish
them from Adam and the nine patriarchs his descendants, still
Xisuthrus, the tenth, being clearly identified with Noah, by
the flood and the ark, the very number ten, and the relation
of the succession in which they stand one to the other, show
that Alorus, the first of them, is no other than Adam."
Here, then, we have a reduplication, or else what I have above
referred to, the tendency to place the head of the dynasty at the
top of the list superior to gods and men. In any case, granting
this juxtaposition, would there not have been the proximate risk
and probability of the two running into one another and becoming
confounded, on the supposition that Ana and Alorus were not originally
identical?
This will become more evident when we have considered the next in the
triad--
BIL OR ENU.
But the evidence, though it will more clearly establish the fact of
hero-worship, will perhaps raise a doubt whether we have rightly
regarded Adam as the object of hero-worship in Ana, a point which we
will then consider.
Rawlinson says of this god--"He is the Illinus (Il-Enu) of Damascius."
"His name, which seems to mean merely lord" (again the primitive
monotheistic appellation) "is usually followed by a qualificative
adjunct possessing great interest. It is proposed to read this term as
Nipru, or in the feminine Niprut, a word which cannot fail to recall
the scriptural Nimrod, who is in the Septuagint Nebroth. The term
_nipru_ seems to be formed from the root _napar_, which is the Syriac
"to pursue," to "make to flee," and which has in Assyrian nearly the
same meaning. Thus Bil Nipru would be aptly translated as "the hunter
lord" or the "god presiding over the chase," while at the same time
it might combine the meaning of the "conquering lord" or "the great
conqueror."
Here, at any rate, it must be admitted that "we have, in this instance,
an admixture of hero-worship in the Chaldæan religion" (Rawlinson, i.
148). But if in one instance what _à priori_ reason is there that it
should not be so in others? Let us, then, examine further. The name of
this deity, as Bel Nipru or Nimrod, has, I consider, been completely
traced in the pages of Rawlinson (to which I must refer my readers).
But what are we to say about the alternative name of Enu? And why,
although no great stress can be laid upon the location of a deity in
a genealogy or a system, yet why is Nimrod thus placed intermediate
between Adam and the third of the triad Hoa, whom, on grounds quite
irrespective of the similarity of name, I identify with Noah?[151]
[151] Gainet (i. 211) quotes as follows from "Ceremonies Relig." i.
vii.: "The Mandans pretend that the Deluge was caused by the
white men to destroy their ancestors. The whites caused the
waters to rise to such a height that the world was submerged.
Then _the first man, whom they regard as one of their
divinities, inspired mankind with the idea of constructing,
upon an eminence, a tower and fortress of wood_, and _promised
them that the water should not rise beyond this point_." Here
seems a very analogous confused tradition of Adam and Nimrod,
the Deluge and the Tower of Babel. Comp. with the distinct
testimony to the Mandan tradition, _infra_, ch. xi.
If Ana is Adam, and Hoa Noah, why should not Enu, in another point
of view, be Enoch? There is, I admit, an absence of direct evidence,
but I think I discover a link of connection in a note in Rawlinson
(i. p. 196). "Arab writers record a number of remarkable traditions,
in which he (Nimrod) plays a conspicuous part." "Yacut declares that
Nimrod attempted to mount to heaven on the wings of an eagle, and makes
Niffers (Calneh) the scene of this occurrence (Lex. Geograph. in voc.
Niffer). It is supposed that we have here an allusion to the building
of the Tower of Babel." But I cannot help regarding it as much more
certainly like an allusion to Enoch's disappearance from the earth. At
p. 187, Prof. Rawlinson notices the confusion of Xisuthrus with Enoch,
which proves that the tradition of Enoch was amongst them, and would
have been common also to the Hamitic Arabs.[152]
[152] I find that the Egyptians had the same confused tradition
respecting Menes, who stood to them in the same relation as
Nimrod to the Assyrians (_vide_ Bunsen's Egypt, ii. p. 65).
"The statement in Manetho's lists that Menes was torn to
pieces by a hippopotamus, is probably an exaggeration of an
early legend, that he was carried away by a hippopotamus, one
of the symbols of the god of the lower world. The great ruler
was snatched away from the earth, to distinguish him from
other mortals, just as Romulus was."
I will now return to my doubt as to Ana. For although I feel tolerably
certain that Ana in his human attributes represents one or other of the
antediluvian patriarchs, it may well be that he is only a reduplication
of Enu = Enoch. If we are to seek in the translation of Enoch the clue
to the origin of the deification of man, and its commencement in the
person of Nimrod (_vide supra_, p. 160), it is likely, in the legend
of the apotheosis of Nimrod, that all the analogies should have been
sought for in the striking historical event which was in tradition.
There is, moreover, the analogy of name with Annacus, Hannachus =
Enoch.[153] If he is Enoch, he naturally also falls into his place as
second to Assorus.
[153] "Etienne de Byzance dit qu'à 'Icone' ('de urbibus' voce
'Iconium') ville de Lycaonie près du Mont Taurus dans les
régions occupées par les habitants antediluviens regnait
Annacus dont la vie alla au-déla de trois cents ans. Tous
les habitants d'alentour demandèrent à un oracle jusqu'à
quelle époque se prolongerait sa vie. L'oracle répondit que
ce patriarche étant mort, tout le monde devait s'attendre à
périr. Les Phrygiens à cette ménace jetèrent les hauts cris,
d'où est venu le proverbe: 'Pleurer sous Annacus, ce que l'on
dit de ceux qui se livrent à des grands gémissements. Or le
Déluge étant survénu tous périrent.... Dans ces récits tout
est conformé à la Bible. Annacus a vécu trois cents ans avant
le Déluge. Il a averti ses concitoyens: il est entouré du même
respect que le patriarche Noë lui-même. Annacus parait venir
d'Enoch; tout announce une identité de personnages." (Gainet,
Hist. de L'Anc. et Nouv. Test. i. 94, 95.) The connection
between the death of Enoch and the destruction of mankind may
accord as well with the traditional belief in his reappearance
at the end of the world.
Compare the Grecian tradition of Inachus, son of Oceanus
(_vide_ Bryant, ii. 268), and with it, Hor., Od. 3, lib. ii.:
"Divesne, prisco et natus ab Inacho,
Nil interest, an pauper, et infimâ
De gente," &c.
I retain, however, my original opinion, that Ana is Adam (though
possibly with some confusion with Enoch), in addition to the arguments
already urged, upon the following grounds:--
Rawlinson mentions (i. 147) "Telane," or the "_Mound_ of Ana," distinct
from Kalneh or "Kalana." We know that there has been a constant
tradition that the bones of Adam were preserved in the ark, and this
name of the "Mound of Ana" may be connected with it. If so, it will
also account for Ana (Dis = Orcus) being the patron deity of Erech,
"the great city of the dead, the necropolis of Lower Babylonia"
(Rawlinson i. 146).
The son of Ana is Vul. If Vul could be identified with Vulcan, and
Vulcan with Tubalcain, it would go far to decide the point that Ana was
Adam.
But in the matter of etymology, I do not know that we can advance
beyond the quaint phrase of old Sir Walter Raleigh in his "History
of the World," that "there is a certain likelihood of name between
Tubalcain and Vulcan." I rely more upon the wide-spread tradition of
Tubalcain in the legends of Dædalus, Vulcan, Weland, Galant, Wielant,
Wayland Smith, which approaches very nearly an identification. _Vide_
Wilson's "Archæologia of Scotland," p. 210. Compare the Phoenician
tradition, Bunsen's "Egypt," iv. 217, 219.
It is to be noted, however, that although Ana (_vide_ Rawlinson)
"like Adam had several sons, he had only two of any celebrity" (we
can suppose that Abel had died out of the Cainite tradition), "Vul
and another whose name represents 'darkness' or '_the west_,'" which
might well be the view of Seth from a Cainite point of view (and it is
traditional that the Cainite lore was preserved by Cham in the ark).
Now it is remarkable that the Scripture (Gen. iv.) expressly says that
Cain dwelt on the _east_ side of Eden.
I now come to
HEA OR HOA.
"The third god of the first triad was Hea or Hoa, the Ana of
Damascius. This appellation is perhaps best rendered into Greek
by the [Greek: Ôê] of Helladius, the name given to the mystic
animal, half man half fish, which came up from the Persian Gulf to
teach astronomy and letters to the first settlers on the Euphrates
and Tigris. It is perhaps contained in the word by which Berosus
designates this same creature--Oannes ([Greek: Ôánnês]), which
may be explained as Hoa-ana, or the god Hoa. There are no means of
strictly determining the precise meaning of the word in Babylonian,
but it is perhaps allowable to connect it provisionally with
the Arabic Hiya, which is at once life and 'a serpent,' since,
according to the best authority, 'there are very strong grounds
for connecting Hea or Hoa with the serpent of Scripture, and the
paradisaical traditions of the tree of knowledge and the tree of
life.'
"Hoa occupies in the first triad the position which in the
classical mythology is filled by Poseidon or Neptune, and in some
respects he corresponds to him. He is 'the lord of the earth,' just
as Neptune is [Greek: gaiêochos]; he is the 'king of rivers,' and
he comes from the sea to teach the Babylonians, but he is never
called the 'lord of the sea.' That title belongs to Nin or Ninip.
Hoa is the lord of the abyss or of 'the great deep,' which does
not seem to be the sea, but something distinct from it. His most
important titles are those which invest him with the character so
prominently brought out in Oë and Oannes, of the god of science and
knowledge. He is 'the intelligent guide,' or, according to another
interpretation, 'the intelligent fish,' 'the teacher of mankind,'
'the lord of understanding.' One of his emblems is the 'wedge' or
'arrow-head,' the essential element of cuneiform writing, which
seems to be assigned to him as the inventor, or at least the
patron, of the Chaldæan alphabet. Another is the serpent, which
occupies so conspicuous a place among the symbols of the gods
on the black stones recording benefactions, and which sometimes
appears upon the cylinders. This symbol here, as elsewhere, is
emblematic of superhuman knowledge--a record of the primeval
belief that 'the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the
field.' The stellar name of Hoa was Kimmut.... The monuments do
not contain much evidence of the early worship of Hoa. His name
appears on a very ancient stone tablet brought from Mugheir (Ur),
but otherwise his claim to be accounted one of the primeval gods
must rest on the testimony of Berosus and Helladius, who represent
him as known to the first settlers.... As Kimmut, Hoa was also the
father of Nebo, whose functions bear a general resemblance to his
own."--_Rawlinson's Ancient Monarchies_, i. 152.[154]
[154] _Vide_ his other epithets, _infra_, p. 239; also Rawlinson
(Herod. i. p. 600), says that "upon one of the tablets in
the British Museum there is a list of thirty-six synonyms
indicating this god (Hoa). The greater part of them relate
either to "the abyss" or to "knowledge."
Compare this with the following verses from the "Oracula
Sybillina," i. ver. 145--
"Collige, Noë, tuas vires ...
... Si scieris me
Divinæ te nulla rei secreta latebunt."
Now, without entering into the question of the authenticity of
the Sybilline verses, I may at least quote them in evidence of
the current tradition concerning Noah in the second century of
the Christian era, supposing them to have been forged at that
period.
I have said that I shall not rely too much on the resemblance of name,
Hoa; but I must draw attention to the curious resemblance which lurks
in the name "Aüs" to the words upon which the Vicomte D'Anselme has
founded an argument in the appended note.[155]
[155] "Comment le nom du premier navigateur connu, tel qu'il se
prononça en Hébreu et qu'il nous est transmis par la Génese,
'Noh, Naus, Noach,' serait-il devenu le nom d'une arche
flottante, d'un navire, en Sanscrit et en vingt autres
langues? _Nau_, sanscrit; _Naw_, armenien; _Naus_, grec;
(_Navis_, latin); _Noi_, hibernien; _Neau_, bas breton; _Nef_,
nav. franc; _Noobh_, irlandais; _Naone_, vanikoro; _Nacho_,
allemand vieux; _Naw_, timor; _Nachen_, allemand; _S'nechia_,
islandais; _S'naeca_ ou _Naca_, anglo-sax.; _S'nace_, ancien
anglais; _Sin-nau_, cambodge, &c.
"Enfin nous demandons comment le nom Hébreu de l'arche de Noë.
Tobe, prononcé comme on écrivait généralement en Orient, en
sens inverse, donne le nom d'un vaisseau dans vingt langues
qui sont des dialectes du Sanscrit? L'écriture boustrophedone,
qui fait les lignes alternativement à droite et gauche
sans interruption a pu donner naissance à cette manière de
lire:--_Boat_, anglais; _boite_, français; _bat_, anglo-saxon;
_boot_, hollandais; _bat_, suedois, _baat_, danois; _batr_,
islandais; _bad_, breton; _bote_, espagnol; _boar_, persan;
_batillo_, italien; _pota_, sanscrit." _Vide_ other similar
proofs from Vicomte d'Anselme's "Monde Païen," &c. In Gainet,
i. 223, a curious additional instance of the same word having
connections with "boat" and arc (_tobe_) might be discovered
in Kibotos, the name of a mountain in Phrygia, where the ark
is said to have rested (Gainet, i. 220). Also we have almost
the same words--ark and arc--to express (though according to a
different etymology) these dissimilar objects.
"The words oar and rudder can be traced back to Sanskrit,
and the name of the ship is identically the same in Sanscrit
(naus, nâvas), in Latin (navis), in Greek (naus), and in
Teutonic, Old High Germ. (nachs), Anglo-Saxon (naca)."--Max
Müller, "Comp. Mythol.," p. 49.
I may draw attention, as having reference to other branches
of this inquiry, to a possible affinity with the name of the
patriarch, in the term _Noaaids_, applied by the Laplanders
to their magicians (Pinkerton, i. 459, &c.); and to the term
Koader_nicks_, applied by the Samoids to the same (_id._ 532).
I own there might be danger in pushing the inquiry further,
as I might even bring the patriarch Noah into contact and
connection with Old Nick!
I may also refer to the term "Janna" (Janus), as applied to
the officer "who had the office of entertaining ambassadors"
at the court of Kenghis Khan (_id._ v. 7, p. 40; Rubruquis's
Embassy, A.D. 1253, also 56).
In the above extract from Rawlinson, although Hoa is said not to be
"the true fish-god," yet he is called "the intelligent fish," and is
associated with that mystic animal, half man half fish, which came
up from the Persian Gulf to teach astronomy and letters to the first
settlers on Euphrates and Tigris.
Let us compare this information with the following "History of
the Fish," which the Abbé Gainet, i. 199, has translated from the
Mahâbhârata. The same history has been translated from the Bhagavad
Pourana by Sir W. Jones ("Asiatic Researches"). Indeed, as the Abbé
Gainet argues, as this same history is found in all the religious poems
of India, there is a certain security that it would not have been taken
from the Hebrews.
I shall merely attempt to give the drift of the legend from the Abbé
Gainet's original translation of that portion of the Matysia Pourana
which has reference to Noah:--
"The son of Vaivaswata (the sun) was a king, and a great sage,
a prince of men, resembling Pradjapati in _eclat_. In his
strength, splendour, prosperity, and above all, his penitence,
Manou surpassed his father and his grandfather.[156]... One day a
small fish approached him, and begged him to remove him from the
water where he was, 'because the great fish always eat the little
fish--it is our eternal condition.' Manou complies, and the fish
promises eternal gratitude. After several such migrations, through
the intervention of Manou, the fish at each removal increasing in
bulk, he is at length launched in the ocean. The fish then holds
this discourse with Manou:--'Soon, oh blessed Manou, everything
that is by nature fixed and stationary in the terrestrial world,
will undergo a general immersion and a complete dissolution. This
temporary immersion of the world is near at hand, and therefore
it is that I announce to you to-day what you ought to do for your
safety.' He instructs him to build a strong and solid ship, and
to enter it with the _seven_ richis or sages.[157] He instructs
him also to take with him all sorts of seeds, according to
certain Brahminical indications. 'And when you are in the vessel
you will perceive me coming towards you, oh well-beloved of the
saints, I will approach you with a _horn_ on my head, by which
you will recognise me.' Manou did all that was prescribed to him
by the fish, and the earth was submerged accordingly, as he had
predicted. 'Neither the earth, nor the sky, nor the intermediate
space, was visible; all was water.' 'In the middle of the world
thus submerged, O Prince of Bharatidians, were seen the seven
richis or sages, Manou, and the fish. Thus, O King, did this fish
cause the vessel to sail' (with a rope tied to its horn), 'for many
years, without wearying, in this immensity of water.' At length
the ship was dragged by the fish on to the highest point of the
Himalaya. 'That is why the highest summit of the Himaran (Himalaya)
was called _Nan_bundhanam, or the place to which the ship was
attached, a name which it bears to this day--_Sache cela, O Prince
des Bharatidians._' Then _le gracieux_, with placid gaze, thus
addressed the richis--'I am Brahma, the ancestor (_l'ancestre_) of
all creatures. No one is greater than I. Under the form of a fish
I came to save you from the terrors of death. From Manou, now,
shall all creatures, with the gods, the demons (_au souras_), and
mankind, be born.... This is the ancient and celebrated history
which bears the name of the 'History of the _Fish_.'"[158]
[156] Comp. "Traditions of the New Zealanders."
[157] Do not the seven richis or sages correspond to the seven (or
eight) (Phoenician) Kabiri. (There were seven or eight
persons in the ark, accordingly as we take separate account
or not of Noah.) As regards the Kabiri, their number (seven
or eight, accordingly as we include "Æsculapius") must be
the clue to the solution of "the most obscure and mysterious
question in mythology." Bunsen ("Egypt," iv. 229) says of an
astral explanation:--"It does not enable us to explain the
details of those representations which do not contain the
number seven (or eight), and, in fact, seven brothers." It
will suffice, from our point of view, if there are numerically
seven persons. Bunsen (iv. p. 291) says--"It is quite clear
that the fundamental number of the gods in the oldest
mythologies of Phoenicia, and all Asia, as well as Egypt,
was seven. There were seven Kabiri, with the seven Titans.
There are also seven Titans mentioned in other genealogies
of the race of Kronos. Of the latter, one dies a virgin and
disappears." But as with the Kabiri we have seen the number
seven, or eight, accordingly as Æsculapius is included or
not, so (vide p. 314) we see the primitive gods of Egypt
either seven or eight, accordingly as Thoth, "the eighth,"
or Horus, figure as the "last divine king" (p. 319). When
Horus so figures, "_he_ is frequently represented as _the
eighth, conducting the bark of the gods_, with _the seven
great gods_," &c. Moreover, it is elsewhere (p. 347) said
that "the Phoenicians, in their sacred books, stated that
the Kabiri _embarked in ships_, and landed near Mount Kaison.
This legend was corroborated by the existence of a shrine
on that coast in historic times." [_Query_, The tradition
of the Deluge localised, and the shrine commemorative of
that catastrophe (_vide_ Boulanger, &c., _infra_, p. 244);
and supposing that the tradition of the number saved in the
Flood had been preserved down to a certain date, we should
then expect that the number would become rigid and fixed.
But that if the tradition of the actual survivors had become
indistinct, what more natural than that the eight principal
characters of ante-diluvian, or even post-diluvian, history
should be substituted for them, and that the same confusion
and agglomeration of legend should take place as we shall see
occurring in the tradition of Noah?]
In the Persian or Iranian legend of Shâh-nâmeh, "the three
sons of Ferêdûn--Ireg, Tur, and Selm--are mentioned as
their patriarchs, and among them the _whole earth was
divided_." But in the more ancient Gâthâs there is mention
of "the _seven_-surfaced or _seven_-portioned earth."
[_Query_--apportioned by _the eighth_?] _Vide_ Bunsen's
"Egypt," iii. 478.
For the Indian tradition compare the following from Hunter's
"Bengal" (i. p. 151)--"Another coincidence--I do not
venture to call it an analogy--is to be found in the number
of children born to the first pair. As the Santal legend
immediately divides the human species into _seven_ families,
so the Sanscrit tradition assigns the propagation of _our
race after the flood_ to _seven rishis_." I also find in
F. Schlegel's "Philosophy of History" (p. 150, Robertson's
trans.)--"The Indian traditions acknowledge and revere the
succession of the first ancestors of mankind, or the holy
patriarchs of the primitive world, under the name of the
_seven great rishis_, or sages of hoary antiquity, though they
invest their history with a cloud of fictions."
[158] Syncellus, quoting Berosus (_vide_ Abbé de Tressan,
"Mythology," p. 10), says that _Oannes_ (the mysterious fish,
_vide ante_) left some _writings_ upon the origin of the
world. These, no doubt, correspond to the "Liber Noachi." I do
not disguise that this statement is probably derived from what
is called the false Berosus. The reference, however, which
I have made to these writings at p. 139 may raise doubt
whether they did not embody true traditions.
Here we seem to see what looks like the commencement of the legendary
origin of the fish symbol; and here also we see it unmistakeably in
connection with Noah. We have, moreover, seen the connection of Hoa
with the fish.[159]
[159] I fancy it might be traced also in the Phoenician fish-god,
Dagon. The _Saturday Review_ (June 4, 1870) in its review of
Cox's "Mythology," says--"Dagon cannot be divided Dag-on,
the fish 'On,' for a Semitic syllable cannot begin with a
vowel; and if the necessary breathing 'aleph' were inserted
(which it is very unsafe to do), it would then mean 'the fish
of On,' which is not the signification required." But it is
the signification which would fit in here; moreover, might
not the terminal "aon," or "_haon_," suggested, have been
originally, _i.e._ before displacement by "boustrophedon"--Noa
or Noa_h_? I give this suggestion with all proper diffidence,
and with some genuine misgiving as to the "breathing aleph."
I find that Bryant ("Mythology," iii. p. 116) makes a similar
suggestion.
Bunsen ("Egypt," iv. 243) says--"Dagon is Dagan, _i.e._
corn. This is also implied by the Greek form of it--Sitôn,
wheat-field (comp. p. 219). We have in the Bible, Dagon, a
god of the Philistines, a name usually supposed to be derived
from 'dag,' fish; the god has a human form ending in a fish,
like the fish-shaped goddess, Derketo-Atergatis. It is clear,
from Philo's own account, that the Phoenician Poseidon was
a god of this kind, and it is difficult to find any other
name for him. Yet we cannot say that Dagon is very clearly
explained. Here is a god of agriculture, well authenticated,
both linguistically and documentally, Dagan, _i.e._ wheat,
and he is the _Zeus of agriculture_." _Vide_ p. 219. P. 261
says Dagon must not be confounded with "Dagan," but without
reconciling it with the above at p. 243, on the contrary,
we find "Dagon, Dagan = corn (the fish-man)." At p. 241,
quoting from the _text_ of Philo, it is said still more
pointedly--"Dagon, after he _had discovered corn and the
plough_, was called Zeus Arotnios." Comp. p. 204.
Believing (_vide_ ch. xii.) in the tradition of mythology,
even among savages, I could not but be much struck on coming
upon the following passage in Roggeveen's voyage, to find--in
his account of the Eastern Islanders--the same conjunction of
the bull and fish implied in the traditional names of their
idols:--"The name of the largest idol was called _Taurico_,
and the other _Dago_; at least, these were the words they
called to them by, and wherewith they worshipped them. These
savages had great respect for the two idols, _Taurico_ and
_Dago_, and approached them with great reverence ... and
to supplicate for help against us, and to call upon with a
frightful shout and howling of _Dago! Dago!_" ("Historical
Account of Voyages Round the World," 1774, i. 469, 470.)
After showing the resemblance of a feast at Argos to other
commemorative feasts of the Deluge, Boulanger (_vide infra_,
i. 83) says--"Les Argiens avoient encore une autre fête
pendant laquelle ils précipitoent dans un abîme un agneau....
ils étoient armés de javelines, ils appelloient _Bacchus_
au son des trompettes et l'invitoient _à semontrer hors de
l'eau_; cette apparition n'arrivoit pas fréquemment sans
doute" (comp. _supra_, 197, and 237). "Plutarque remarque
que lors qu'ils précipitoient l'agneau, ils avoient soin de
cacher leurs trompettes et leurs javelines. Nous ne prétendons
point expliquer tous ces mystères." Is it that they feared,
with armed weapons in their hands, to evoke the apparition of
the old man "whose conquests were all peaceful" (p. 216), and
who, as Manco Capac (p. 326), "shut his ears when they spoke
to him of war."
Let us now turn to his reduplication, as I conceive, in Nin, or Ninip,
who is said to be "the true fish god."
"His names, Bar and Nin, are respectively a Semitic and a Hamitic
term, signifying 'Lord,' or 'Master,'" (p. 166). Astronomically Nin
"should be Saturn." However, a set of epithets which _seem to point_ to
his stellar character are very difficult to reconcile with the notion
that, as a celestial luminary, he was (the dark and distant) Saturn.
We find him called, "the light of heaven and earth," "he who, _like_
the sun, the _light_ of the _gods_, irradiates the _nations_." All this
is very difficult to reconcile with legends arising out of the simple
worship of a celestial luminary, but perfectly consistent with the
supposition of the patriarch Noah, after deification, being located
in the planetary system. The phrase, "he who, like the sun, the light
of the gods, irradiates the nations," is perfectly applicable to him
who, as Oannes, we have ever regarded as "the god of science and of
knowledge;" and who "taught astronomy and letters to the first settlers
on the Euphrates and Tigris." Let us glance at the other epithets
applied to Nin in the inscriptions. He is the "lord of the brave,"
"the champion," "the warrior who subdues foes," "_he who strengthens
the hearts of his followers_." [The Scripture mentions the repeated
assurances of the Almighty to Noah, that there should not be another
Deluge; and the above is in keeping with the tradition that the early
inhabitants long hesitated to quit the mountains for the plains, and
only did so incited by the example of the patriarch.] "The destroyer
of enemies," "_the reducer of the disobedient_," "the exterminator
of rebels," "he whose sword is good." Like Nergal, or Mars, he is a
god of battle and the chase. (I shall refer later on to these warlike
epithets as applied to Noah.) At the same time he has qualities which
seem wholly unconnected with any that have been hitherto mentioned.
He is the true "fish-god" of Berosus, and is figured as such in the
Scriptures. (I hope I may persuade some reader, who may be interested
in this inquiry, to compare the figure of Nin, in Rawlinson, i.
167, with figure 23, Dupaix's "New Spain" in Lord Kingsborough's
"Mexico," representing an emblematic figure with fish[160] (as in the
representation of Nin) over a human head, which also has inverted
tusks. Compare also with representations of Neph, associated with
snake and ram's head, and also with "History of the Fish," _supra_,
p. 197.) To continue--in this point of view he (Nin) is called the
"god of the sea," "he who dwells in the deep;" and again, somewhat
curiously, "the opener of the aqueducts." Now, as applied to Noah,
this is not at all strange, and corresponds to the Scriptural phrase,
"He opened the fountains of the deeps." Subsequently to deification
we cannot be surprised to find all that was done by the Almighty
attributed to the individual to whom it was done; as in Prometheus we
have a double legend of the Creator, who created man with the vital
spark, and of Prometheus, the man who was so created. "Besides these
epithets he has many of a more general character, as 'the _powerful
chief_,' 'the supreme,' 'the _favourite_ of the _gods_,' 'the chief of
the spirits,' and the like."
[160] This closely corresponds to the description of Oannes given by
Sanchoniathon, "Ap. Euseb." (Bryant, ii. 301), _i.e._ with two
heads (comp. _infra_, p. 220), the human head being placed
below the head of a fish:--"[Greek: allên kephalên hypokatô
tês tou ichthyos kephalês]."
I must, moreover, request attention to the following from Rawlinson, i.
168,--"Nin's _emblem_ in _Assyria_ is the _man-bull_, the impersonation
of strength and power. He guards the palaces of the Assyrian kings,
who reckon him their tutelary god, and gives his name to their
capital city. We may conjecture that _in Babylonia_ his _emblem_ was
the _sacred fish_, which is often seen in different forms upon the
cylinders."[161]
[161] _Vide_ similar traditions of the man-bull in India and Japan.
Bryant, iii. 589, who adds, "We shall find hereafter that in
this (Parsee) mythology there were two ancient personages
represented under the same character, and named L'Homme
Taureau; _each_ of whom was looked upon as the _father_ of
mankind." Compare pp. 158, 189, the two Menus and the two
Osiris.
I turn to Gainet, i. 198, and I find this legend concerning the
man-bull from Bertrand's "Dict. des Religions," 38, i. ii.[162]
[162] The prayer used in the worship of Dionysos at Elis, preserved
by Plutarch, ended with "[Greek: Axie Taure--Axie Taure],"
worthy bull! (_vide_ Bunsen's "Egypt," iv. 446.) Compare p.
215 with Dionysius = Bacchus = Noah; also of the three
Samothracian names of the Kabiri--viz., Axieros, Axiokerse,
Axiokersos. Bunsen says, "the syllable Axi or Axie which is
found in all three, cannot be anything but the Greek word
'Axios,' which was used in the worship of Dionysos at Elis"
(_id., vide infra_).
On this symbol of the bull in connection with Noah and the
Ark _vide_ Bryant (ii. 416, _et seq._ 439). He says, "Every
personage that had any connection with the history of the Ark
was described with some reference to this hieroglyphic ...
that the Apis and Mnenis (Menes) were both representations
of an _ancient personage_ is certain; and who that personage
was may be known from the account given of him by Diodorus.
He speaks of him by the name of Mnenes, but confines his
history to Egypt, as the history of Saturn was limited to
Italy; Inachus and Phoroneus to Argos; Deucalion to Thessaly
... the same person who in Crete was styled Minos, Min-nous,
and whose city was Min-Noa; the same who was represented under
the emblem of Men-taur, or Mino-taurus (_Minotaur_). Diodorus
speaks of Mnenes as the _first lawgiver_," &c., &c....
[Mnenes or Menes may embody traditions of Noah and Misraim,
as Osiris does of Adam and Noah.] At p. 422-435 [plate], we
find Menes represented as a bull _with the sacred dove_....
Plutarch (Isis and Osiris) says the bulls, Apis and Mnenes,
were sacred to Osiris ... and Eustath. (in Dion. v. 308) says
of the Tauric Chersonese, "that the _Tauric_ nation was so
named from the animal Taurus or bull, which was looked upon
as a memorial of _the great husbandman_ Osiris, who first
_taught agriculture_, and to whom was ascribed _the invention_
of the _plough_." ... Lycophron (v. 209 and scholia) says,
[Greek: Tauros], [Greek: Dionysos]. Plutarch says Dionusus
(_vide supra_, p. 203) was styled [Greek: Bougenês], or
the offspring of a bull, by the people of Argos, who used to
invoke him as a _resident of the sea_, and entreat him _to
come out of the waters_. The author of the Orphic hymns calls
him "Taurogenes." [Greek: Taurogenês Dionysos euphrosunên
pore Thnêtois]. [Greek: Taurogenês], is precisely of the
same purport as [Greek: Thêbaigenês] [ark-born], and the
words of this passage certainly mean "that the ark-born deity
Dionusus restored peace and happiness to mortals." [Noah's
name in Scripture signifies "peace and consolation"--[Greek:
Nôe hebraïsianapaysis] (rest), Hesychius.]... The title given
to Diana--viz. _Taurione_, is remarkable, for "Taurus was
an emblem of the Ark, and by Taurione was signified the
arkite _dove_." _Taurus_, and _ione_ from [Greek: Oinas]
of the Greeks, and Ionas of the eastern nations = _dove_,
and curiously in an inscription in Gruter, Diana is at _the
same time_ called "Regina _undarum_," and "decus _nemorum_"
(Bryant, ii. 434). The connection of Diana, Juno, and Venus
with _the dove_ and _rainbow_ is very striking, but would
lead to too long a digression. So, too, would a discussion as
to how Noah or the Ark (secondarily) came to be associated
with the bull, as a hieroglyphic. Compare the above with the
ox-heads and bull dance in the Mandan commemoration of the
Deluge, _infra_, ch. xi.
"D'après les livres Parsis, le souverain Créateur sut que le mauvais
génie se disposait à tenter l'homme. Il ne jugea pas à propos de
l'empêcher par lui-même; il se contenta d'envoyer des anges pour
veiller sur l'homme. Cependant le mal augmenta; l'homme se perdit;
Dieu envoya un Deluge, qui dura dix jours et dix nuits et détruisit le
genre humain. L'apparition de Kaioumons (_l'homme-taureau_), le premier
homme, y est aussi précédée de la creation d'une grande eau." Here, in
a confused tradition, with Adam--just as Nin is confused with Hercules
and Saturn--the man-bull is apparently associated with a great flood.
In the curious Etruscan monument commemorative of the
Deluge--discovered in 1696--and to which Cardinal Wiseman draws
attention in his "Conferences" (_vide_ Gainet, i. 190), being a vase
supposed to represent the ark, and containing figures of twenty couples
of (12) animals, (6) birds, (2) serpents, &c., and several human
figures represented in the act of escaping from an inundation, there
were also discovered certain signets and amulets. These consisted
of hands joined, _heads_ of _oxen_, and olives. Now the olive in
connection with the Deluge will speak for itself,--the hands joined are
the symbol of Janus (_vide_ next chapter), and heads of oxen--here
unmistakably connected with the Deluge--may also be conjectured to have
allusion to the man-bull above referred to.
Thus Nin, through both his emblems (bull and fish), is brought into
contact with the Noachic tradition.[163] It is also said (Rawlinson,
i. 174) of Nergal, _vide supra_, who is clearly identified with
Nimrod,--"Again, if Nergal is the man-lion, his association in the
buildings with the man-bull would be exactly parallel with the
conjunction which we so constantly find between him and _Nin_ in the
inscriptions."
[163] Since writing the above I have found the following note
in Rawlinson's "Herodotus," i. 623, on Ninip:--"There is,
however, another explanation of the name Bar-sam or Bur-shem,
of which some notice must be taken. It has been already stated
that if the _Noachid_ triad be compared with the Assyrian, Ana
will correspond with Ham, Bel-Nimrod with Shem, and Hoa with
Japhet."
The following passage, also from Rawlinson's "Herodotus,"
i. 609, appears to me valuable in proof of the transition
from ancestral to solar worship, or at least of their
interfusion:--"The sun was probably named in Babylonia both
San and Sanei, before his title took the definite _Semitic_
form of _Shamas_, by which he is known in Assyrian and _in
all_ the languages of _that family_." Now, standing by itself,
this might not appear very significant; but compare it with
the following passages connecting _Ham_ with the sun:--"By
the Syrians the sun and heat were called ... Chamba; by the
Persians, Hama; and the temple of the sun, the temple of
_Am_mon or _Ham_mon." Mr Bryant shows that Ham was esteemed
the Zeus of Greece and the Jupiter of Latium. Mr G. Higgins'
"Anacalypsis," p. 45. Bryant says, "the worship of Ham, _or
the sun_, as it was the most ancient, so it was the most
universal of any in the world." These passages may possibly be
so interpreted as to support a solar theory, but is it not at
least suspicious to see the name of the central luminary so
apparently identified with historical characters whose memory
is distinctly preserved _aliunde_ in the traditions of their
descendants? Compare Nimrod, ch. viii. 164, _et seq._
It is true that the majority of the inscriptions, p. 169, assert that
Nin was the son of Bel-Nimrod. This may be referred to that tendency,
previously noted in ancient nations, to place the ancestor with whom
they were themselves identified at the head of every genealogy. One
inscription, however, "makes Bel-Nimrod the son of Nin instead of
his father." Nin, in any case, is unquestionably brought into close
historical relationship with Bel-Nimrod, an historical character, and
we must, in fine, choose whether we shall admit him to be Noah--to
whom all the epithets would apply--or whether, upon the more literal
construction of the inscriptions, we shall believe him to be some
nameless son or successor of Nimrod.
There is one god more in whom I fancy I see a counterpart of Noah, or
at least a counterpart of Hoa and Nin--viz.
NEBO.
I base my conclusion upon the epithets applied to him in common with
Hoa and Nin, and inconsistently applied if, according to the evidence,
p. 177, "mythologically he was a deity of no very great eminence," but
in no way conflicting with the supposition that he represented the
tradition of Noah, the counterpart to the tradition of Hoa and Nin,
among some subordinate nationality, and such appears to be the fact.
"When Nebo first appears in Assyria, it is as a foreign god, whose
worship is brought thither from Babylonia," p. 178.
Of Nebo it is said, "his name is the same or nearly so, both in
Babylonian and Assyrian, and we may perhaps assign it a _Semitic_
derivation, from the root _'nibbah,' to prophesy_. It is his special
function to preside over _knowledge_ and _learning_. He is called 'the
god who possesses intelligence'--'he who hears from afar'--'he who
_teaches_,' or 'he who teaches and instructs.' In this point of view
he of course approximates to Hoa, _whose son_ he is called in some
inscriptions, and to whom he bears a general resemblance. Like Hoa,
he is symbolised by the simple wedge or arrow-head, the primary and
essential element of cuneiform writing, to mark his _joint_ presidency
with that god over writing and literature. At the same time Nebo has,
like so many of the Chaldæan gods, a number of general titles, implying
divine powers, which, if they had belonged to him only, would have
seemed to prove him the supreme deity. He is 'the lord of lords, who
has no equal in power,' _'the supreme chief_,' '_the sustainer_,' 'the
supporter,' the 'ever ready,' 'the guardian over the heavens and the
earth,' 'the lord of the constellations,' 'the holder of the sceptre
of power,' 'he who grants to kings the sceptre of royalty for the
_governance_ of their people'" (Rawlinson, i. 177).
There is just a possibility, however, that Nebo may be Sem or Shem. He
would be the son of Hoa as Nebo was stated to be.
I think, moreover, a striking resemblance will be seen between the
above epithets and the traditions concerning _Shem_, collected by
Calmet (Dict. "Sem.")
"The Jews attribute to Sem the theological _tradition_ of the
_things which Noah taught to the first men_.... They say that he is
the same as Melchisedek.... In fine, the Hebrews believe that he
taught _men the law of justice_, the manner of counting the months
and years, and the intercalations of the months. They pretend that
_God gave him the spirit of prophecy_ one hundred years after the
Deluge, and that he continued _to prophesy_ during four hundred
years, with little fruit among mankind, who had become very
corrupt. Methodius says that he remained in the isle of the sun,
that he invented astronomy, and that he was _the first king who
ruled over the earth_."[164]
[164] Rawlinson says that there is no doubt that Nebo represents
the planet Mercury, and between the attributes of Mercury or
Hermes, the epithets of Nebo, and the traditions concerning
Shem, there is something in common. He is the god of
eloquence and persuasion--the god of alliances and peace.
"He contributed to civilise the manners and cultivate the
minds of the people." "He united them by commerce and good
laws." The Egyptian Mercury or Thaut first invented landmarks.
Finally, "He was consulted by the Titans, his relations, _as
an augur_, which gave occasion to the poets to describe him
as interpreter of the will of the gods."--_L'Abbe de Tressan,
"Mythology."_
The difficulty, however, is in understanding how the worship of Shem
came to Assyria _from_ Babylonia. I can only reconcile it upon a theory
that _all_ idolatry came from Babylonia, _i.e._ from the Hamitic race.
There remains a difficulty which will doubtless occur to every one who
has read the chapter in Rawlinson to which I must acknowledge myself
so much indebted, and it is a difficulty which I ought, perhaps, to
have dealt with before; and that is, that there is in the pages of
Rawlinson (I. vii. 184) the most distinct identification of Noah with
Xisuthrus. Of this there can be no doubt, from his direct connection
with the Deluge, the circumstances of which are perfectly recorded
in the Babylonian tradition.[165] This establishes the fact that the
tradition of Noah and the Deluge was still among them when Berosus
wrote. But if Xisuthrus is Noah, then it may be said Hoa, Oannes, and
Nin cannot be Noah. It is a _non sequitur_, but will still, I fear, be
very influential with many. It is difficult to understand the tendency
to reduplication, and still more difficult to realise how a tradition
so clear and decided could be contemporaneous with other identical
traditions so entangled and confused. I believe this explanation to
be that the account of Xisuthrus was part of the esoteric tradition
to which Rawlinson refers, and which was also the tradition of their
learned men--"Vixere fortes ante Agamemnon";--and we cannot suppose
that Berosus (of whom we should have known nothing if his works had not
been preserved to us at third or fourth hand) was the first chronicler
of his nation.[166]
[165] "Notwithstanding the difficulty of ascending to so distant a
period, there will always be found some traces by which truth
may be discovered.... The historian Josephus relates that the
Chaldæans from the _earliest_ times _carefully preserved_ the
remembrance of past events by public inscriptions on their
monuments. He says they caused these annals to be written by
the wisest men of their nation."--_L'Abbe de Tressan, "Hist.
of Heathen Mythology."_ London, 1806.
[166] I had come to the above conclusion upon the perusal of
Rawlinson, and before I had read Bryant, who, I find, had
already come to this identical conclusion. ("Mythology," iii.
109.) Speaking of Berosus' account of Oannes and Xisuthrus, he
says, "The latter was undoubtedly taken from the archives of
the Chaldæans. The former is allegorical and obscure, and was
copied from _hieroglyphical representations_ which could not
be precisely deciphered.... In consequence of his borrowing
from records so very different, we find him, without his being
apprized of it, giving _two histories of the same person_.
Under the character of _the man of the sea_, whose _name was
Oannes_, we have _an allegorical representation of the great
patriarch_; whom _in his other history he calls Sisuthrus_."
I shall pursue this inquiry into the classical mythology in the next
chapter, and then recapitulate the results as regards this inquiry.