The _Tuath-de-danaans_, or Mahabadeans, being thus far proved as the first
occupiers of Iran, it may be asked, How happens it that no Persian
historians, anterior to Mohsan Fani, have noticed their existence? In the
first place, I answer that _they all_ have mentioned them, however
_unconsciously_ by themselves, or _inadvertently_ by others. And even had
this not been the fact--had not a single syllable been recorded, bearing
reference to their name, the remote era, in itself, of their detachment
from that country, would be the best possible apology for the omission.
The professed writers upon Persia belong all to a recent period; and the
magazines which they consulted, for the scanty information which they
furnish, were either Arabs or Greeks--the former a body of predatory
warriors, whose only insight into letters arose from the opportunities
which their rapines had supplied them; and the latter, a community who,
insensible to the beauties of moral truth, took delight in distorting even
the most commonplace occurrences into the most unnatural incredibilities
and misshapen incongruities.
But independently of these causes, another more powerful one had before
long co-operated. A rival dynasty, starting up from amongst themselves,
succeeded, by the issue of a religious revolution, to effect their
expulsion; and that once ascertained--the doors of admission ever after
closed against their return--the victors were not satisfied with the
monopoly of civil power, but they must wreak their vengeance still more,
by the erasure of every vestige of the former sway.
In this devastating course, the Round Towers, as the temples of their
figurative veneration, were particularly obnoxious; and, accordingly, we
may be assured, that it was owing to the durability of those edifices, and
not to the clemency of the assailants, that any one of them has been able
to survive the hurricane.
Who, you will ask, were those destroyers? They were the _Pish-de-danaans_.
And so energetically did they prosecute their extinguishing plan, aided,
besides, by the antiquity of its remote occurrence, that all writers upon
that country, before the compilers of the _Dabistan_, have set them down
as its first dynasty, making the Kaianians, the Askanians, and the
Sassanians, their successors.
Here I am obliged, in compliance with the justice of my subject, to expose
an error of a gentleman, whom I would rather have overlooked.
“The _Tuatha-dadan_ of the Irish,” says Vallancey, “are the _Pish-dadan_
of the Persians”; which he pretends to prove as follows:--“First, then,”
says he, “_Tuath_ and _Pish_ are synonymous in the Chaldee, and both
signify mystery, sorcery, prophets, etc.; they are both of the same
signification in the Irish; therefore by _Pish-dadan_ and _Tuatha-dadan_,
I understand the Dadanites, descended of Dedan, who had studied the
necromantic art, which sprang from the Chesdim, or Chaldeans.”
Of a piece with this was his assertion that _Nuagha Airgiodlamh_ of the
Irish, was _Zerdust_ of the Persians! And wherefore, think you, reader?
Because, forsooth, _Airgiodlamh_ signifies _silver_-hand, and Zerdust,
_gold_-hand! Yes, but he made out another analogy, and it is worth while
to hear it, viz. that Nuagha had his _hand cut off_ by a Fir-Bolg
_general_; while Zerdust’s _life was taken away_ by a Turanian
_chieftain_!!!
This is but an _item_ in that great ocean of incertitude in which that
enterprising etymologist had, unfortunately, been swallowed up. Having
perceived by the perusal of the manuscripts of our country, that there
must have been a time when it basked in the _sunshine_ of literary
superiority; yet unable tangibly to grapple with it, having no _clue_ into
the _origin_ of its _sacred_ repute, or the collateral particulars of its
_date_, _nature_, or _promoters_, he was tossed about by the ferment of a
_parturient_ imagination, without the saving ballast of a _discriminating_
faculty.
The General’s work, accordingly, is one which must be read with great
reserve; not because that it does not offer many valuable hints, but
because that its plan is so _crude_, and its matter so
_ill-digested_,--the same thing being _contradicted_ in one place, which
was _affirmed_ in another, or else _repeated_ interminably, without regard
to _method_ or to _style_,--that when you have waded through the whole,
you feel you have derived from it no other benefit than that of whetting
your avidity for a _correct_ insight into those subjects, of which the
author, you imagine, must have had some _idea_, but which also, it is
evident, however indefatigable he was in the attempt, he had not, himself,
the power to penetrate.
The great praise, therefore, which I would award to this writer, is that,
with one leg almost in the grave, he sat down, in the enthusiasm of a
youthful aspirant, to master the difficulties of the Irish tongue, which,
_mutilated_ though it be, and _begrimed_ by disuse, he knew was,
notwithstanding, the only sure inlet to the _genius_ of the people, as
well as to the _arcana_ of their antiquities, the most precious, as they
are, and fruitful, of any country on the surface of the globe.
But though his perseverance had rendered him the best _Irishian_ of his
age, and of many ages before him, yet has he committed _innumerable
blunders_, even in the exposition of the most simple words; and the
question now in point will verify this declaration, with as much
exactitude as any other that could be adduced.
_Tuath_, then, and _pish_ are by no means _synonymous_; neither do they
signify _mystery_ or _prophets_, except in a secondary light. In their
original acceptation, they are the _antipodes_ of each other, as much as
_male_ is to _female_, and as _relative_ is to _correlative_.[268]
They are the distinctive denominations for the _genital organs_ of both
sexes, respectively--_Tuath_ signifying _Lingam_; and _Pish_, _Yoni_.
I have already explained that _Tuath_ is but a modification of the word
_Budh_--the final _dh_ of the latter having been changed into the final
_th_ of the former, only for euphony; because that prefixed to _de-danaan_
the collision of the two _d’s_--as _Bud_-de-danaan--would not sound well;
it was, therefore, made _Buth_-de-danaan; and--the initials _b_ and _t_
being always convertible,--hence became _Tuath_-de-danaan.
The case was exactly _opposite_ with respect to _pish_: I mean so far as
the alteration of two of its letters is concerned. _Pith_ is the _usual_
method of pronouncing that term: nor is it, except when followed by a _d_,
that it assumes the other garb. But as _dh_, in the former instance, was
commuted into _th_, so _th_, in this latter, is still further into _sh_;
therefore, instead of _Pith_-de-danaan, we make it _Pish_-de-danaan.
To screen those two ligaments of _sexual_ familiarity from the peril of
profane and irreverent acceptations, all the investiture of _magic_ was
shrouded upon them. The vocabulary of _love_ and of _religion_ became one
and the same: _mystery_ and _enchantment_ were identified, and the
_negotiations_ of the earth, and the _revolutions_ of the heavens, were
blended with the _witchery_ of _amative sway_.
In this universality of domain, no one of those dear _helpmates_ had a
greater portion of honour assigned to it than the other. They were equal
in power, and alike in attributes. And to set this _equality_ beyond the
contingencies of doubt, it was withal arranged, that while _each,
primarily_, retained its _distinct sexual_ interpretation, they should
_both, secondarily_, harmonise under another _mutual_ exposition; and what
more appropriate one could be devised than that of the _influence_ which
they exercised? and of the _veil_ with which they were guarded?
_Magic_, therefore, and _mystery_, were the two _secondary_ imports, in
which both were _united_; and the _ambiguity_ thus occasioned was what
cast Vallancey upon that shoal, which proved similarly fatal to many a
preceding speculator.
To exemplify--_Budh_, or _Tuath_, in its literal and substantive
acceptation, implies the _Lingam_; collaterally, _magic_; and by
convention, _mystery_, _prophets_, _legislators_, etc. _Pish_, in like
manner, or _Pith_, denotes, literally, the _Yoni_; collaterally, _magic_;
and by convention, _mystery_, _prophets_, _legislators_, etc. And the
offshoots of either, in an inferior and deteriorated view, such as
_Budh-og_ from the former, and _Pish-og_ from the latter, intimate,
indiscriminately, _witchcraft_, _wizard_, or _witch_.
Now the words _De-danaans_, having been already illustrated as meaning
_God-Almoners_, if we prefix to them, severally, _Tuath_ and _Pish_, they
will become _Tuath_-de-danaans, and _Pish_-de-danaans; the former
expressing, literally, _Lingam_-God-Almoners; and the latter, literally,
_Yoni_-God-Almoners; and both equally, by convention,
_Magic_-God-Almoners.
As we have had exhibited numerous representations of the homage paid to
the _paternal_ member of this theocracy, perhaps I may be permitted to
adduce a single quotation demonstrative of the honours shown to his
_maternal_ colleague.
“The Chinese,” says the author of _Rites and Ceremonies_, “worship a
goddess, whom they call _Puzza_, and of whom their priests give the
following account:--They say that three nymphs came down from heaven to
wash themselves in a river, but scarce had they got into the water before
the herb _Lotos_[269] appeared on one of their garments, with its coral
fruit upon it. They were surprised to think whence it could proceed; and
the nymph upon whose garment it was could not resist _the temptation of
indulging herself in tasting it_. But by thus eating some of it, she
became _pregnant_, and was delivered of a boy, whom she brought up, and
then returned to heaven. He afterwards became a great man, a conqueror and
legislator, and the nymph was afterwards worshipped under the name of
_Puzza_.”[270]
And thus we see that _Budh_ and _Pish_ were the actual regulators of the
solar universe.
Time, however, dissolved the chain which linked together those _mysterious
absolutes_: or, rather, the _zealots_ of each contrived to sever an
attachment, which was intended by nature to be reciprocal and mutual.[271]
War, devastating, desecrating war, spread abroad over the plain! Human
energies were evoked into an unknown activity! Men’s passions, always
inflammable by the jealousy of partisanship, were here furthermore
stimulated by the rancour of religion! And hearts were lacerated, and
countries were depopulated in sustainment of the consequences of a
physiological disquisition!!!
But what do you conceive to have been the topic at issue? Verily, it was
whether the _male or the female contributed more largely to the act of
generation_!--those who voted for the _female_ side ranging themselves
under the banners of _Pish_, and those for the _male_ under the standard
of _Budh_, while both equally appealed to heaven for adjudication of
their suit, by arrogating to themselves the adjunct of _De-danaans_, or
God-Almoners.
“Not but the human fabric from its birth
Imbibes a flavour of its parent earth,
As various tracts enforce a various toil,
The manners speak the idiom of the soil.”
Whether or not, however, the result is to be considered as decisive of the
matter in dispute, one thing at least is certain, namely, that the
_Pish_-God-Almoners obtained the victory; and the _Budh_-God-Almoners were
thrown upon the ocean; over whose bosom, wafted to our genial shores, they
did not only import with them all the culture of the East, with its
accompanying refinement and polished civilisation; but they raised the
isle to that pinnacle of literary and religious beatitude which made it
appear to the fancies of distant and enraptured hearers more the day-dream
of romance than the sober outline of an actual locality.
I shall now illustrate a part of those truths by the Indian history of the
circumstances, as copied from their Puranas, by one who had no
anticipation of my differently-drawn conclusions, and one, in fact, who
did not know either the _scene_ or the _substance_ of the occurrence which
he thus transcribes.
“Yoni, the _female nature_, is also,” says Wilford, “derived from the same
root (_yu_, to mix). Many Pundits insist the Yavanas were so named from
their obstinate assertion of a superior influence in the _female_ over the
_linga_ or _male nature_, in producing a perfect offspring. It may seem
strange that a question of mere physiology should have occasioned not only
a vehement religious contest, but even a bloody war; yet the fact appears
to be historically true, though the Hindu writers have dressed it up, as
usual, in a veil of historical allegories and mysteries, which we should
call obscene, but which they consider as awfully sacred.
“There is a legend in the Servarasa, of which the figurative meaning is
more obvious. When Sati, after the close of her existence as the daughter
of Dascha, sprang again to life in the character of Parvati, or Mountain
Spring, she was reunited in marriage to Mahadeva. This divine pair had
once a dispute on the comparative influence of the sexes in producing
animated beings, and each resolved, by mutual agreement, to create apart a
new race of men.[272] The race produced by Mahadeva were very numerous,
and devoted themselves exclusively to the worship of the _male deity_; but
their intellects were dull, their bodies feeble, their limbs distorted,
and their complexions of many different hues. Parvati had, at the same
time, created a multitude of human beings, who adored the _female power_
only, and were all well shaped, with sweet aspects and fine complexions. A
furious contest ensued between the two races, and the _Lingajas_ were
defeated in battle; but Mahadeva, enraged against the _Yonijas_, would
have destroyed them with the _fire of his eye_, if Parvati had not
interposed and spared them;[273] but he would spare them only on
condition that they should instantly leave the country, with a promise to
see it no more; and from the _Yoni_, which they adored as the sole cause
of their existence, they were named Yavanas.”
It is evident that a mistake has been committed in the above narrative,
making the _victors_ the persons who were obliged to quit! and we know
from testimony, adduced upon a different occasion, that instances of such
confusion were neither unfrequent nor uncommon.[274] But even admitting it
to be accurate, the apparent contradiction is easily reconciled; as it is
probable that the contest was protracted for a _long period of time_,
before it was ultimately decided in favour of one party; and, in the
alternations of success, one side being up to-day, and another uppermost
to-morrow, what could be more natural than that a colony of the _Yavanas_,
or _Pish-de-danaans_,--which is the same,--should have fled for shelter to
India, before that the auspices of their arms, propelled by the _fair
cause_ which they vindicated, had, at length, accomplished the overthrow
of their adversaries.
This object, however, once obtained,--full masters of their wishes, and
sole arbiters of Iran,--they were not satisfied with the mere extinction
of all the symbols of their predecessors,--save and except the _Towers_
which stood proof to their attacks,--but they established there instead a
code, as well political as moral, more consonant with their own
prejudices: and the wonder would be great, indeed, if, after this
triumphant assertion of _female_ power, gratitude and religion should not
both combine in making the _type_ of that influence--the sacred
_crescent_, or _yoni_--the personification of their doctrines; and _woman
herself_, all-lovely and all-attractive, the concentrated temple of their
divinity upon earth!
Such was the commencement of the Pish-de-danaan dynasty in Persia; and its
influence still operating, after a long interval of time, is what the
historian unconsciously describes in the following terms, viz.:--
“If we give any credit to Ferdosi, most of the laws of modern honour
appear to have been understood and practised with an exception in favour
of the ancient Persians, whose duels, or combats (which were frequent),
were generally with the most distinguished among the enemies of their
country or the human race. The great respect in which the female sex was
held was, no doubt, the principal cause of the progress they had made in
civilisation. These were at once the cause of generous enterprise and its
reward. It would appear that in former days the women of Persia had an
assigned and honourable place in society; and we must conclude that an
equal rank with the male creation, which is secured to them by the
ordinances of Zoroaster, existed long before the time of that reformer,
who paid too great attention to the habits and prejudices of his
countrymen, to have made any serious alterations in so important a usage.
We are told by Quintus Curtius, that Alexander would not sit in the
presence of Sisy-gambis till told to do so by that matron, because it was
not the custom in Persia for sons to sit in presence of their mothers.
There can be no stronger proof than this anecdote affords, of the great
respect in which the female sex were held in that country at the period of
his invasion.”[275]
“Without thee, what were unenlightened man?
A savage roaming through the woods and wilds
In quest of prey; and with the unfashioned fur
Rough clad; devoid of every finer art,
And elegance of life. Nor happiness
Domestic, mixed of tenderness and care,
Nor moral excellence, nor social bliss,
Nor grace, nor love, were his.”[276]