CHAPTER III.

THE ORIGIN OF SERPENT-WORSHIP.

The subject to be discussed in the present chapter is one of the

most fascinating that can engage the attention of anthropologists.

It is remarkable, however, that although so much has been written in

relation to it, we are still almost in the dark as to the origin of the

superstition in question. The student of mythology knows that certain

ideas were associated by the peoples of antiquity with the serpent,

and that it was the favourite symbol of particular deities; but why

that animal rather than any other was chosen for the purpose is yet

uncertain. The facts being well known, however, I shall dwell on them

only so far as may be necessary to support the conclusions based upon

them.

We are indebted to Mr. Fergusson for bringing together a large array

of facts, showing the extraordinary range which serpent-worship had

among ancient nations. It is true that he supposes it not to have been

adopted by any nation belonging to the Semitic or Aryan stock; the

serpent-worship of India and Greece originating, as he believes, with

older peoples. However this may be, the superstition was certainly not

unknown to either Aryans or Semites. The brazen serpent of the Hebrew

exodus was destroyed in the reign of Hezekiah, owing to the idolatry to

which it gave rise. In the mythology of the Chaldeans, from whom the

Assyrians seem to have sprung, the serpent occupied a most important

position. Among the allied Phœnicians and Egyptians it was one of the

most divine symbols. In Greece, Hercules was said “to have been the

progenitor of the whole race of serpent-worshipping Scythians, through

his intercourse with the serpent Echidna;” and when Minerva planted

the sacred olive on the Acropolis of Athens, she placed it under the

care of the serpent-deity Erechthonios. As to the Latins, Mr. Fergusson

remarks that “Ovid’s ‘Metamorphoses’ are full of passages referring to

the important part which the serpent performed in all the traditions

of classic mythology.” The superstitions connected with that animal

are supposed not to have existed among the ancient Gauls and Germans;

but this is extremely improbable, considering that it appears to

have been known to the British Celts and to the Gothic inhabitants

of Scandinavia. In Eastern Europe there is no doubt that the serpent

superstition was anciently prevalent, and Mr. Fergusson refers to

evidence proving that “both trees and serpents were worshipped by the

peasantry in Esthonia and Finland within the limits of the present

century, and even with all the characteristics possessed by the old

faith when we first became acquainted with it.”

The serpent entered largely into the mythology of the ancient Persians,

as it does into that of the Hindus. In India it is associated with

both Siva-ism and Vishnuism, although its actual worship perhaps

belonged rather to the aboriginal tribes among whom Buddhism is

thought by recent writers to have originated. The modern home of the

superstition, however, is Western Africa, where the serpent is not

merely considered sacred, but is actually worshipped as divine. On the

other side of the Indian Ocean traces of the same superstition are met

with among the peoples of the Indian islands and of Polynesia, and also

in China. The evidences of serpent-worship on the American Continent

have long engaged the attention of archæologists, who have found it to

be almost universal, under one form or another, among the aboriginal

tribes. That animal was sculptured on the temples of Mexico and Peru,

and its form is said by Mr. Squier to be of frequent occurrence among

the mounds of Wisconsin. The most remarkable of the symbolic earthworks

of North America is the great serpent mound of Adam’s county, Ohio,

the convolutions of which extend to a length of 1,000 feet. At the

Edinburgh meeting of the British Association, in 1871, Mr. Phené

gave an account of his discovery in Argyllshire of a similar mound

several hundred feet long, and about fifteen feet high by thirty feet

broad, tapering gradually to the tail, the head being surmounted by a

circular cairn, which he supposes to answer to the solar disc above the

head of the Egyptian uræus, the position of which, with head erect,

answers to the form of the Oban serpent-mound. This discovery is of

great interest, and its author is probably justified in assuming that

the mound was connected with serpent-worship. It may be remarked, in

evidence of the existence of such structures in other parts of the old

world, that the hero of one of the Yaçnas of the Zend Avesta is made

to rest on what he thinks is a bank, but which he finds to be a great

green snake, doubtless a serpent-mound. Another ancient reference

to these structures is made by Iphicrates, who, according to Bryant,

“related that in Mauritania there were dragons of such extent, that

grass grew upon their backs.”

Let us now see what ideas have been associated with the serpent by

various peoples. Mr. Fergusson mentions the curious fact that “the

chief characteristic of the serpent throughout the East in all ages

seems to have been their power over the wind and rain.” According to

Colonel Meadows Taylor, in the Indian Deccan, at the present day,

offerings are made to the village divinities (of whom the nâg, or

snake, is always one) at spring time and harvest for rain or fine

weather, and also in time of cholera or other diseases or pestilence.

So, among the Chinese, the dragon is regarded as the giver of rain, and

in time of drought offerings are made to it. In the spring and fall

of the year it is one of the objects worshipped, by command of the

Emperor, by certain mandarins. The Chinese notion of the serpent or

dragon dwelling above the clouds in spring to give rain reminds us of

the Aryan myth of Vritra, or Ahi, the throttling snake, or dragon with

three heads, who hides away the rain-clouds, but who is slain by Indra,

the beneficent giver of rain. “Whenever,” says Mr. Cox, “the rain is

shut up in the clouds, the dark power is in revolt against Dyaus and

Indra. In the rumblings of the thunder, while the drought still sucks

out the life of the earth, are heard the mutterings of their hateful

enemy. In the lightning flashes which precede the outburst of the

pent-up waters are seen the irresistible spears of the god, who is

attacking the throttling serpent in his den; and in the serene heaven

which shone out when the deluging clouds are passed away, men beheld

the face of the mighty deity who was their friend.” Mr. Cox elsewhere

remarks that Vritra, “the enemy of Indra, reappears in all the dragons,

snakes, or worms slain by all the heroes of Aryan mythology.”

Whether the great serpent be the giver or the storer of rain, the

Aryans, like all Eastern peoples, suppose it to have power over the

clouds. This, however, is only one of its attributes. It is thought

to have power over the wind as well as the rain, and this also is

confirmed by reference to Aryan mythology. Mr. Cox has well shown that

Hermes is “the air in motion, or wind, varying in degree from the

soft breath of a summer breeze to the rage of the growing hurricane.”

In these more violent moods he is represented by the Maruts, the

“crushers” or “grinders,” who are also the children of Rudra, the

“Father of the Winds,” and himself the “wielder of the thunderbolt” and

the “mightiest of the mighty.” Rudra is also “the robber, the cheat,

the deceiver, the master thief,” and in this character both he and

Hermes agree with the cloud-thief Vritra.

Notwithstanding the fact that in the Mahabharata, Rudra, like Hercules,

is described as the “destroyer of serpents,” he is in the same poem

identified with Mahadeva, and hence he is evidently the same as Siva,

who has the title of King of Serpents. The primitive character of

Siva, as the Vedic Rudra, is now almost lost, but the identity of the

two deities may be supported by reference to an incident related in

the myth of Hermes and Apollo. It is said that, in return for the

sweet-sounding lyre, Apollo gave to Hermes the magical “three-leafed

rod of wealth and happiness.” Sometimes this rod was entwined with

serpents instead of fillets, and there is no difficulty in recognising

in it the well-known emblem of Siva, which also is sometimes encircled

by serpents. It can be shown that the Hindu deity is a form of

Saturn, one of the Semitic names for whom was Set or Seth. It was the

serpent-symbol of this God[216] which was said to have been elevated

in the wilderness for the healing of the people bitten by serpents,

and curiously enough Rudra (Siva) was called not only the _bountiful_,

the _strong_, but the _healer_. The later Egyptian title of the god

Set was Typhon, of whom Mr. Breal says that “Typhon is the monster who

obscures the heaven, a sort of Greek Văritra.” The myth of Indra and

Vritra is reproduced in Latin mythology as that of Hercules and Căcus.

Căcus also is analogous to Typhon, and as the former is supposed to

have taken his name from, or given it to, a certain wind which had the

power of clothing itself with clouds, so the latter bore the same name

as a very destructive wind which was much dreaded by the Phœnicians

and Egyptians. Moreover, the name Typhon was given by the Egyptians to

anything tempestuous, and hence to the ocean; and in Hebrew the allied

word “Suph” denotes a “whirlwind.” There is another point of contact,

however, between Siva and the god Set or Typhon, who was known to

the Egyptians also as the serpent Aphôphis, or the giant. An ancient

writer states that one of the names of El, or Chronos, was Typhon,

and the serpent and pillar symbols of the Phœnician deity confirm

the identification between Set or Saturn, and the Siva of the Hindu

Pantheon.

One of the leading ideas connected with the serpent was, as we have

seen, its power over the rain, but another equally influential was

its connection with health. Mr. Fergusson remarks that “when we first

meet with serpent-worship, either in the wilderness of Sinai, the

groves of Epidaurus, or in the Sarmatian huts, the serpent is always

the Agatho-dæmon, the bringer of health and good fortune.”[217] The

Agatho-dæmon, which in ancient Egypt presided over the affairs of men

as the guardian spirit of their houses,[218] was the Asp of Rânno, the

snake-headed goddess who is represented as nursing the young princes.

That the idea of health was intimately associated with the serpent is

shown by the crown formed of the asp, or sacred _Thermuthis_, having

been given particularly to Isis, a goddess of life and healing. It was

also the symbol of other deities with the like attributes. Thus on

a papyri it encircles the figure of Harpocrates, who was identified

with the serpent god Æsculapius; while not only was a great serpent

kept alive in the temple of Serapis, but on later monuments this

deity is represented by a great serpent, with or without a human

head. Sanchoniathon says of that animal—“It is 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.” The serpent, therefore, was a fit emblem of Rudra,

“the healer;” and the gift which Apollo presented to Mercury could

be entwined by no more appropriate object than the animal which was

supposed to be able to give the health without which even Mercury’s

magic-staff could not confer wealth and happiness. It is remarkable

that a Moslem saint of Upper Egypt is still thought to appear under the

form of a serpent, and to cure the diseases which afflict the pilgrims

to his shrine.

Ramahavaly, one of the four national idols of the Malagasy, bears a

curious analogy to the serpent gods of wisdom and healing. One of his

titles is _Rabiby_, signifying “animal,” and denoting “the god of

beasts;” and his emissaries are the serpents which abide in Madagascar,

and are looked upon with superstitious fear by the inhabitants.

Ramahavaly is, moreover, regarded as the Physician of Imerina, and

is thought to preserve from, or expel, epidemic diseases. Mr. Ellis

says that he is sometimes described “as god, sacred, powerful, and

almighty; who kills and makes alive; who heals the sick, and prevents

diseases and pestilence; who can cause thunder and lightning to strike

their victims or prevent their fatality; can cause rain in abundance

when wanted, or can withhold it so as to ruin the crops of rice. He is

also celebrated for his knowledge of the past and future, and for his

capacity of discovering whatever is hidden or concealed.”

It is probable that the association with the serpent of the idea of

healing arose from the still earlier recognition of that animal as a

symbol of life. We have already referred to the representations in

the Egyptian temples of the young princes being nursed by a woman

having the head of an asp. It is interesting to find that in India at

the present day serpent-worship is expressly resorted to on behalf

of children, and “the first hair of a child which is shaved off when

it has passed teething and other infantine ailments is frequently

dedicated to a serpent.” This animal in both cases is treated as the

guardian of life, and therefore the crown given to Egyptian sovereigns

and divinities was very properly formed of the asp of Rânno. Another

snake-headed Egyptian goddess has the name _Hih_ or _Hoh_, and Sir

Gardner Wilkinson mentions that the Coptic word _Hof_ signifies the

viper, analogous to the _hye_ of the Arabs. The Arabic word _hiya_,

indeed, means both life and a serpent. This connection is supported by

the association, already pointed out, between the serpent and the gods

of the life-giving wind, and by the fact that these also possess the

pillar symbol of life. This belongs as well to Siva the destroyer, the

preserver, and the creator, as to Set or Saturn, to Thoth-Hermes, and

El or Chronos. Both the serpent and the pillar were assigned also to

many of the personifications of the sun, the deified source of earthly

life. Probably the well-known figure representing the serpent with

its tail in its mouth was intended to symbolise endless life rather

than eternity, an idea which does not appear to have been associated

with that animal by the Egyptians. Agreeably with this view, Horapollo

affirms that Kneph-Agatho-dæmon denoted immortality.

One of the best-known attributes of the serpent is wisdom. The Hebrew

tradition of the fall speaks of that animal as the most subtle of

the beasts of the field; and the founder of Christianity tells his

disciples to be as wise as serpents, though as harmless as doves. Among

the ancients the serpent was consulted as an oracle, and Maury points

out that it played an important part in the life of several celebrated

Greek diviners in connection with the knowledge of the language of

birds, which many of the ancients believed to be the souls of the dead.

The serpent was associated with Apollo and Athené, the Grecian deities

of wisdom, as well as with the Egyptian Kneph,[219] the ram-headed god

from whom the Gnostics are sometimes said to have derived their idea

of the _Sophia_. This personification of divine wisdom is undoubtedly

represented on Gnostic gems under the form of the serpent. In Hindu

mythology there is the same association between the animal and the

idea of wisdom. Siva, as Sambhu, is the patron of the Brahmanic order,

and, as shown by his being three-eyed, is essentially a god possessing

high intellectual attributes. Vishnu also is a god of wisdom, but of

the somewhat lower type which is distinctive of the worshippers of

truth under its feminine aspect. The connection between wisdom and the

serpent is best seen, however, in the Hindu legends as to the Nagas.

Mr. Fergusson remarks that “the Naga appears everywhere in Vaishnava

tradition. There is no more common representation of Vishnu[220]

than as reposing on the Sesha, the celestial seven-headed snake,

contemplating the creation of the world. It was by his assistance that

the ocean was churned and Amrita produced, He everywhere spreads his

protecting hood over the god or his avatars; and in all instances it

is the seven-headed heavenly Naga, not the earthly cobra of Siva.”

The former animal, no doubt, is especially symbolical of wisdom, and

it is probably owing to his intellectual attributes, rather than to

his destructive or creative power, that Siva is sometimes styled the

King of Serpents. The Upanishads refer to the science of serpents, by

which is meant the wisdom of the mysterious Nagas, who, according to

Buddhistic legend, reside under Mount Méru, and in the waters of the

terrestrial world. One of the sacred books of the Tibetan Buddhists is

fabled to have been received from the Nagas, who, says Schlagentweit,

are “fabulous creatures of the nature of serpents, who occupy a place

among the beings superior to man, and are regarded as protectors of the

law of the Buddha. To these spiritual beings Sâkyamuni is said to have

taught a more philosophical religious system than to men, who were not

sufficiently advanced to understand it at the time of his appearance.”

So far as this has any historical basis, it can mean only that

Gautama taught his most secret doctrines to the Nagas, or aboriginal

serpent-worshippers, who were the first to accept his teaching, and

whose religious ideas had probably much in common with those of Gautama

himself. Mr. Fergusson refers to the fact that a king of the Naga race

was reigning in Magadha when Buddha was born in 623 B.C.; and he adds

that the dissemination of his religion “is wholly due to the accident

of its having been adopted by the low caste kings of Magadha, and to

its having been elevated by one of them to the rank of the religion of

the state.” It would appear, indeed, that according to a Hindu legend,

Gautama himself had a serpent lineage.

The “serpent-science” of Hindu legend has a curious parallel in

Phœnician mythology. The invention of the Phœnician written character

is referred to the god Taaut or Thoth, whose snake-symbol bears his

name Têt, and is used to represent the ninth letter of the alphabet

(_teta_), which in the oldest Phœnician character has the form of the

snake curling itself up. Philo thus explains the form of the letter

_theta_, and that the god from whom it took its name was designated

by the Egyptians as a snake curled up, with its head turned inwards.

Philo adds that the letters of the Phœnician alphabet “are those

formed by means of serpents; afterwards, when they built temples, they

assigned them a place in the adytums, instituted various ceremonies and

solemnities in honour of them, and adored them as the supreme gods,

the rulers of the universe.” Bunsen thinks the sense of this passage

is “that the forms and movements of serpents were employed in the

invention of the oldest letters, which represent the gods.” He says,

however, that “the alphabet does not tally at all with the Phœnician

names,” and the explanation given by Philo, although curious as showing

the ideas anciently associated with the serpent, is reliable only so

far as it confirms the connection between that animal and the inventor

of the written characters. According to another tradition, the ancient

theology of Egypt was said to have been given by the Agatho-dæmon, who

was the benefactor of all mankind.

The account given of the serpent by Sanchoniathon, as cited by

Eusebius, is worth repetition as showing the peculiar notions anciently

current in connection with that animal. The Phœnician writer says:

“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 inspired

of all the reptiles, and of a fiery nature, 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 forwards 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.” In India at the present day some Brahmans always keep

the skin of a nâg, or snake, in one of their sacred books, probably

from some idea connected with the casting by the serpent of its skin

referred to in the preceding passage.

We have now seen that the serpent was anciently the symbol of wisdom,

life, and healing, and also that it was thought to have power over

the wind and rain. This last attribute is easily understood when the

importance of rain in the east is considered, and the ideas associated

by the ancients with the air and moisture are remembered. The Hebrew

tradition which speaks of the creative spirit moving over the face of

the waters embodies those ideas, according to which the water contains

the elements of life and the wind is the vivifying principle. The

attribute of wisdom cannot so easily be connected with that of life.

The power of healing is certainly an evidence of the possession of

wisdom,[221] but as it is only one phase of it, probably the latter

attribute was antecedent to the former, or at least it may have had

an independent origin. What this origin was may perhaps be explained

by reference to certain other ideas very generally entertained in

relation to the serpent. Among various African tribes this animal

is viewed with great veneration, under the belief that it is often

the re-embodiment of a deceased ancestor. This notion appears to be

prevalent also among the Hindus, who, like the Kafirs, will never

kill a serpent, although it is usually regarded with more dislike

than veneration. Mr. Squier remarks that “many of the North American

tribes entertain a superstitious regard for serpents, and particularly

for the rattlesnake.[222] Though always avoiding they never destroy

it, ‘lest,’ says Barham, ‘the spirit of the reptile should excite its

kindred to revenge.’” Mr. Squier adds that, “according to Adair, this

fear was not unmingled with veneration. Charlevoix states that the

Natchez had the figure of a rattlesnake, carved from wood, placed among

other objects upon the altar of their temple, to which they paid great

honour. Heckwelder relates that the Linni Linape called the rattlesnake

‘grandfather,’ and would on no account allow it to be destroyed. Hemy

states that the Indians around Lake Huron had a similar superstition,

and also designated the rattlesnake as their ‘grandfather.’ He also

mentions instances in which offerings of tobacco were made to it, and

its parental care solicited for the party performing the sacrifice.

Carver also mentions an instance of similar regard on the part of

a Menominee Indian, who carried a rattlesnake constantly with him,

‘treating it as a deity, and calling it his great father.’”

The most curious notion, however, is that of the Mexicans, who always

represented the first woman, whose name was translated by the old

Spanish writers “the woman of our flesh,” as accompanied by a great

male serpent. The serpent is the sun-god _Tonacatle-coatl_, the

principal deity of the Mexican Pantheon, and his female companion,

the goddess mother of mankind, has the title _cihua-cohuatl_, which

signifies “woman of the serpent.” With the Peruvians, also, the

principal deity was the serpent-sun, whose wife, the female serpent,

gave birth to a boy and a girl from whom all mankind were said to be

descended. It is remarkable that the serpent origin thus ascribed to

the human race is not confined to the aborigines of America. According

to Herodotus, the primeval mother of the Scyths was a monster, half

woman and half serpent. This reminds us of the serpent parentage

ascribed to various personages of classical antiquity.[223] Among the

Semites, Zohák, the traditional Arabian conqueror of Central Asia,

is represented as having two snakes growing at his back; and Mr.

Bruce mentions that the line of the Abyssinian kings begins with “The

Serpent,” _Arwe_, who is said to have reigned at Axum for 400 years,

showing that the royal descent was traced from this animal. From the

position assigned to the dragon in China, it probably was formerly

thought to stand in a similar relation to the Emperor, of whom it is

the special symbol.

The facts cited prove that the serpent superstition is intimately

connected with ancestor-worship, probably originating among uncultured

tribes, who, struck by the noiseless movement and the activity of the

serpent, combined with its peculiar gaze and power of casting its skin,

viewed it as a spirit embodiment. As such, it would be supposed to have

the superior wisdom and power ascribed to the denizens of the invisible

world, and from this would originate also the ascription to it of

the power over life and health, and over the moisture on which those

benefits are dependent. The serpent-spirit may, however, have made

its appearance for a good or a bad purpose, to confer a benefit or to

inflict punishment for the misdeeds of the living. The notion of there

being good and evil serpent-spirits would thus naturally arise. Among

ancestor-worshipping peoples, however, the serpent would be viewed as a

good being who busied himself about the interests of the tribe to which

he had once belonged. When the simple idea of a spirit-ancestor was

transformed into that of the Great Spirit, the father of the race, the

attributes of the serpent would be enlarged. The common ancestor would

be relegated to the heavens, and that which was necessary to the life

and well-being of his people would be supposed to be under his care.

Hence the great serpent was thought to have power over the rain and the

hurricane, with the latter of which he was probably often identified.

When the serpent was thus transferred to the atmosphere, and the

superstition lost its simple character as a phase of ancestor-worship,

its most natural association would be with the solar cult. It is

not surprising, therefore, to find that _Quetzalcoatl_, the divine

benefactor of the Mexicans, was an incarnation of the serpent-sun

_Tonacatlcoatl_, who thus became the great father, as the female

serpent _Cihua-coatl_ was the great mother, of the human race. It is

an interesting inquiry how far the sun-gods of other peoples partook

of this double character. Bunsen has a remarkable passage bearing on

the serpent nature of those deities. He says that “Esmun-Esculapius

is strictly a Phœnician god. He was especially worshipped at Berytus.

At Carthage he was called the highest god, together with Astarté and

Hercules. At Babylon, according to the above genealogy of Bel, Apollo

corresponded to him. As the snake-god he must actually be Hermes,

in Phœnician Têt, Taautes.... In an earlier stage of cosmogonical

consciousness he is Agatho-dæmon-Sôs, whom Lepsius has shown to be the

third god in the first order of the Egyptian Pantheon.” The serpent

deity who was thus known under so many forms was none other than the

sun-god Set or Saturn, who has already been identified with Siva and

other deities having the attributes usually ascribed to the serpent.

Bunsen asserts that Set is common to all the Semites and Chaldeans,

as he was to the Egyptians, but that “his supposed identity with

Saturn is not so old as his identity with the sun-god, as Sirius

(Sôthis), because the sun has the greatest power when it is in Sirius.”

Elsewhere the same writer says that “the Oriento-Egyptian conception of

Typhon-Set was that of a drying-up parching heat. Set is considered as

the sun-god when he has reached his zenith, the god of the summer sun.”

The solar[224] character of the serpent-god appears therefore to

be placed beyond doubt. But what was the relation in which he was

supposed to stand to the human race? Bunsen, to whose labours I am so

much indebted, remarks that Seth “appears gradually among the Semites

as the background of their religious consciousness,” and not merely

was he “the primitive god of northern Egypt and Palestine,” but his

genealogy as “the Seth of Genesis, the father of Enoch (the man),

must be considered as originally running parallel with that derived

from the Elohim, Adam’s father.” Seth is thus the divine ancestor of

the Semites, a character in which, but in relation to other races,

the solar deities generally agree with him. The kings and priests of

ancient peoples claimed this divine origin, and “children of the sun”

was the title of the members of the sacred caste. When the actual

ancestral character of the deity is hidden he is regarded as “the

father of his people” and their divine benefactor. He is the introducer

of agriculture, the inventor of arts and sciences, and the civiliser of

mankind; “characteristics,” says Faber, “which every nation ascribed to

the first of their gods or the oldest of their kings.” This was true

of Thoth, Saturn, and other analogous deities, and the Adam of Hebrew

tradition was the father of agriculture, as his representative Noah was

the introducer of the vine.

Elsewhere I have endeavoured to show that the name of the great

ancestor of Hebrew tradition has been preserved by certain peoples who

may thus be classed together as Adamites. He appears, indeed, to be

the recognised legendary ancestor of the members of that division of

mankind whose primeval home we can scarcely doubt was in Central Asia,

answering in this respect to the Seth of the Semites. According to the

tradition, however, as handed down to us by the Hebrews, Seth himself

was the son of Adam. From this, it would seem to follow that, as Seth

was the serpent sun-god (the Agatho-dæmon), the legendary ancestor

of the Adamites must himself have partaken of the same character.

Strange as this idea may appear it is not without warrant. We have

already seen that the Mexicans ascribed that nature to _Tonacatlcoatl_

and his wife, the mother of mankind, and that a similar notion was

entertained by various peoples of the old world. The Chaldean god _Héa_

who, as the “teacher of mankind,” and the “lord of understanding,”

answers exactly to the divine benefactor of the race before referred

to, was “figured by the great serpent which occupies so conspicuous

a place among the symbols of the gods on the black stones recording

Babylonian benefactions.” The name of the god is connected with the

Arabic _Hiya_, which signifies a serpent as well as life, and Sir

Henry Rawlinson says that “there are very strong grounds indeed for

connecting him with the serpent of Scripture, and with the Paradisaical

traditions of the tree of knowledge and the tree of life.” The god Héa

was, therefore, the serpent revealer of knowledge, answering in some

respects to the serpent of the fall. He was, however, the Agatho-dæmon,

and in the earlier form of the legend doubtless answered to the great

human ancestor himself. It is curious that, according to Rabbinical

tradition, Cain was the son, not of Adam, but of the serpent-spirit

Asmodeus, who is the same as the Persian Ahriman, “the great serpent

with two feet.”[225] In the name of Eve, the mother of mankind, we

have, indeed, direct reference to the supposed serpent-nature of our

first parents. Clemens Alexandrinus long since remarked that the

name _Hevia_, aspirated, signifies a female serpent. The name Eve is

evidently connected with the same Arabic root as that which we have

seen to mean both “life” and “a serpent,” and the Persians appear to

have called the constellation _Serpens_ “the little Ava,” that is

_Eve_, a title which is still given to it by the Arabs. But if Eve was

the serpent mother, Adam must have been the serpent father. In the old

Akkad tongue _Ad_ signifies “a father,” and the mythical personages

with whom Adam is most nearly allied, such as Seth or Saturn, Taaut

or Thoth, and others, were serpent deities. Such would seem to have

been the case also with the deities whose names show a close formal

resemblance to that of Adam. Thus the original name of Hercules was

_Sandan_ or _Adanos_, and Hercules, like the allied god Mars, was

undoubtedly often closely associated with the serpent. This notion

is confirmed by the identification of Adonis and Osiris as _Azar_ or

_Adar_, according to Bunsen the later Egyptian _Sar-Apis_, who is

known to have been represented as a serpent. The _Abaddon_ of St. John,

the old dragon Satan, was probably intended for the same serpent-god.

It is interesting to compare the ideas entertained as to the great

dragon in the Book of Revelation and those held by the Chinese in

relation to probably the same being. Mr. Doolittle says: “The dragon

holds a remarkable position in the history and government of China.

It also enjoys an ominous eminence in the affections of the Chinese

people. It is frequently represented as the greatest benefactor of

mankind. It is the dragon which causes the clouds to form and the rain

to fall. The Chinese delight in praising its wonderful properties and

powers. It is the venerated symbol of good.”

This was probably the view originally taken by the Egyptians, who were

all followers of the serpent cult. In Egypt two kinds of serpents were

the objects of peculiar veneration, and of an almost universal worship.

All the gods were more or less symbolised or crowned by serpents,

while all the goddesses were hieroglyphically represented by serpents.

The animal used for these purposes was the cobra de copello, or

uræus, which, according to Mr. W. R. Cooper,[226] “from its dangerous

beauty, and in consequence of ancient tradition asserting it to have

been spontaneously produced by the rays of the sun,” was universally

assumed as the “emblem of divine and sacro-regal sovereignty.” The

uræus appears to be always represented on the Egyptian monuments, in

the feminine form, and it was used as a symbol of fecundity, agreeably

to which idea the generative power of the solar beams is typified by

pendent uræi. The uræus, moreover, symbolised life and the power of

healing, and it was the emblem of immortality. Mr. Cooper remarks that

in the Egyptian religious system the principle of good was typically

represented by a serpent, while under the form of an entirely different

serpent was figured a monstrous _personal_ evil being who maintained

a constant spiritual warfare with the spirit of good. The serpent

embodiment of the principle of evil was called Hof, Rehof, or Aphôphis,

and it was a species of coluber of large size. It is described as “the

destroyer, the enemy of the gods, and the devourer of the souls of

men;” and it was thought to dwell in the depths of “that mysterious

ocean upon which the Baris, or boat of the sun, was navigated by the

gods through the hours of day and night, in the celestial regions.”

The idea of an antagonism between the giant serpent Aphôphis and the

good serpent, as the “soul of the world,” constantly occurs in the

Ritual of the Dead, and the aid of every divinity in turn is sought

by the deceased in his conflict with the evil being. It is remarkable

that the “soul of the world,” Chnuphis, or Bait, is represented as a

coluber, and that it appears to be identified with Aphôphis in one

chapter of the Ritual. Mr. Cooper states that, although a large coluber

which is figured as being worshipped resembles Aphôphis, it cannot

be him, as there is no example of direct worship paid to Aphôphis,

“unless, indeed, we identify it with Sutekh, as the Shepherd Kings,

the last but one of whom was named Aphôphis, appear to have done.”

The serpent Aphôphis is sometimes represented with the crown of Lower

Egypt upon his head, and at one period he was identified with Set or

Seth, the national deity of the Hyksos or Shepherd tribes. All traces

of the worship of Set was obliterated from the Egyptian monuments, but

one representation has been preserved in which Set is figured with

Horus, united as one divinity, between the triple serpent of good.

This shows that Set, and probably, therefore, his serpent emblem, was

originally not considered evil. Lower Egypt was largely populated by

Semitic peoples, whose national deity was their legendary ancestor

Seth, and the detestation with which the Egyptians regarded Set and

the serpent Aphôphis identified with him was probably the result of

national enmity. Mr. Cooper points out that the serpent of good is

always represented by the Egyptians as upright and the serpent of evil

as crawling, this being generally the only distinction made. The god

Chnuphis, the “soul of the world,” is usually figured as a Serpent

(Coluber) walking upon two human legs, and curiously enough this is

the form taken by the evil principle of Persian mythology, the great

serpent walking on two feet. A similar inversion of ideas occurs in the

religious mythology of the Naga peoples of the East. Near the ruined

temples of Cambodia, as on the Buddhist Topes of India, are sculptured

gigantic serpents with voluminous folds supported by human figures, as

the gigantic Aphôphis is represented on the Egyptian monuments. There

must have been some special reason why the great serpent was regarded

so differently by various peoples, and this was probably the result of

race antagonism.

It is remarkable that one of the most ancient people of whom we have

any written record—the primitive inhabitants of Chaldea—not only bore

the name of the traditional father of mankind, but were especially

identified with the serpent. The predecessors of the _Akkad_, in

Chaldea, were the Medes, or _Mad_, of Berosus, and the distinctive

title of at least the later Medes was _Már_, which in Persian means “a

snake.” This Sir Henry Rawlinson supposes to have given rise “not only

to the Persian traditions of Zohák and his snakes, but to the Armenian

traditions, also, of the dragon dynasty of Media.” The Medes of Berosus

belonged almost certainly to the old Scythic stock of Central Asia,

to whom the Chaldeans, the Hebrews, and the Aryans have alike been

affiliated by different writers. When, therefore, Mr. Fergusson says

that serpent-worship characterised the old Turanian Chaldean Empire, he

would seem to trace it to the old Asiatic centre. Probably to the same

source must be traced the serpent tradition of the Abyssinian kings.

Bryant long since asserted that that superstition originated with the

Amonians or Hamites, who also would seem to have been derived from the

Scythic stock. The facts brought together in the preceding pages far

from exhaust the subject, but they appear to justify the following

conclusions:—

First, The serpent has been viewed with awe or veneration from primeval

times, and almost universally as a re-embodiment of a deceased human

being, and as such there were ascribed to it the attributes of life

and wisdom, and the power of healing.

Secondly, The idea of a simple spirit re-incarnation of a deceased

ancestor gave rise to the notion that mankind originally sprang from a

serpent, and ultimately to a legend embodying that idea.

Thirdly, This legend was connected with nature—or rather

sun-worship—and the sun was, therefore, looked upon as the divine

serpent-father of man and nature.

Fourthly, Serpent-worship, as a developed religious system, originated

in Central Asia, the home of the great Scythic stock, from whom all the

civilised races of the historical period sprang.

Fifthly, These peoples are the Adamites, and their mythical ancestor

was at one time regarded as the Great Serpent, his descendants being in

a special sense serpent-worshippers.

* * * * *

_Note._—At page 88, the Malagasy idol Ramahavaly is spoken of as still

existing. As a fact, however, in 1869 all the Malagasy national idols

were, by order of the Government, publicly burned. Many other idols and

charms were at the same time destroyed by their owners.—_Madagascar and

its People_, by the Rev. James Sibree, Jun., p. 481.

FOOTNOTES:

[216] Theodoret did not distinguish between an Egyptian sect called

_Sethians_ and the Gnostic _Ophites_ or serpent-worshippers.

[217] The heavenly serpent, _Danh_, of the Dahomans, is said by Captain

Burton to be the god of wealth. “His earthly representative is esteemed

the supreme bliss and general good.” The Slavonian Morlacchi still

consider that the sight of a snake crossing the road is an omen of good

fortune.—Wilkinson’s “Dalmatia and Montenegro,” vol. ii., p. 160.

[218] Mr. Lane states that each quarter of Cairo is supposed to have

its guardian genius, or Agatho-dæmon, in the form of a serpent.—Vol.

i., p. 289.

[219] Warburton supposes that the worship of the One God Kneph was

changed into that of the dragon or winged-serpent Knuphis.

[220] Vishnu is often identified with Kneph.

[221] According to Gaelic and German folklore, the white snake when

boiled has the faculty of conferring medicinal wisdom. The white snake

is venerated as the king of serpents by the Scottish Highlanders as

by certain Arab tribes, and it would appear also by the Singhalese of

Ceylon.

[222] The snake is one of the Indian tribal _totems_.

[223] Pausanias, iv., 14, mentions Aristodama, the mother of Aratus,

as having had intercourse with a serpent, and the mother of the great

Scipio was said to have conceived by a serpent. Such was the case also

with Olympias, the mother of Alexander, who was taught by her that he

was a god, and who in return deified her.—_Le Mythe de la Femme et du

Serpent_, par Ch. Schoebel, 1876, p. 84.

[224] Mr. Robert Brown, jun., says that the serpent has six principal

points of connection with Dionysos:—1, As a symbol of, and connected

with, wisdom; 2, As a solar emblem; 3, As a symbol of time and

eternity; 4, As an emblem of the earth-life; 5, As connected with

fertilising moisture; 6, As a Phallic emblem.—_The Great Dionysiak

Myth_, 1878, ii., 66.

[225] Mr. Cooper states (_loc. cit._, p. 390) that prominent in the

Egyptian religious system was the belief in a monstrous _personal_ evil

being typically represented as a serpent, and that the principle of

good was there likewise represented by an entirely different serpent, a

constant spiritual warfare being maintained between the two.

[226] “The Serpent Myths of Ancient Egypt,” published in the

“Transactions of the Victoria Institute,” vol. vi., 1872.

Serpent-Worship, and Other Essays, with a Chapter on Totemism · 第 4 / 14 章