Tapha, in different parts. These, beside their original name, were still
farther denominated from some title of the Deity, to whose honour they were
erected. But as it was usual, in antient times, to bury persons of
distinction under heaps of earth formed in this fashion; these Tapha came
to signify tombs: and almost all the sacred mounds, raised for religious
purposes, were looked upon as monuments of deceased heroes. Hence
[390]Taph-Osiris was rendered [Greek: taphos], or the burying place of the
God Osiris: and as there were many such places in Egypt and Arabia, sacred
to Osiris and Dionusus; they were all by the Greeks esteemed places of
sepulture. Through this mistake many different nations had the honour
attributed to them of these Deities being interred in their country. The
tumulus of the Latines was mistaken in the same manner. It was originally a
sacred hillock; and was often raised before temples, as an altar; such as I
have before described. It is represented in this light by Virgil:
[391]Est urbe egressis tumulus, templumque vetustum
Desertae Cereris; juxtaque antiqua cupressus.
In process of time the word tumulus was in great measure looked upon as a
tomb; and tumulo signified to bury. The Greeks speak of numberless
sepulchral monuments, which they have thus misinterpreted. They pretended
to shew the tomb of [392]Dionusus at Delphi; also of Deucalion, Pyrrha,
Orion, in other places. They imagined that Jupiter was buried in Crete:
which Callimachus supposes to have been a forgery of the natives.
[393][Greek: Kretes aei pseustai; kai gar taphon, o Ana, seio]
[Greek: Kretes etekteinanto, su d' ou thanes, essi gar aiei.]
I make no doubt, but that there was some high place in Crete, which the
later Greeks, and especially those who were not of the country, mistook for
a tomb. But it certainly must have been otherwise esteemed by those who
raised it: for it is not credible, however blind idolatry may have been,
that people should enshrine persons as immortal, where they had the
plainest evidences of their mortality. An inscription _Viro Immortali_ was
in a style of flattery too refined for the simplicity of those ages. If
divine honours were conferred, they were the effects of time, and paid at
some distance; not upon the spot, at the vestibule of the charnel-house.
Besides, it is evident, that most of the deified personages never existed:
but were mere titles of the Deity, the Sun; as has been, in great measure,
proved by Macrobius. Nor was there ever any thing of such detriment to
antient history, as the supposing that the Gods of the Gentile world had
been natives of the countries, where they were worshipped. They have by
these means been admitted into the annals of times: and it has been the
chief study of the learned to register the legendary stories concerning
them; to conciliate absurdities, and to arrange the whole in a
chronological series. A fruitless labour, and inexplicable: for there are
in all these fables such inconsistences, and contradictions, as no art, nor
industry, can remedy. Hence, all who have expended their learning to this
purpose, are in opposition to one another, and often at variance with
themselves. Some of them by these means have rendered their works, which
might have been of infinite use to the world, little better than the
reveries of Monsieur Voltaire. The greatest part of the Grecian theology
arose from misconceptions and blunders: and the stories concerning their
Gods and Heroes were founded on terms misinterpreted and abused. Thus from
the word [Greek: taphos], taphos, which they adopted in a limited sense,
they formed a notion of their gods having been buried in every place, where
there was a tumulus to their honour. This misled bishop Cumberland, Usher,
Pearson, Petavius, Scaliger, with numberless other learned men; and among
the foremost the great Newton. This extraordinary genius has greatly
impaired the excellent system, upon which he proceeded, by admitting these
fancied beings into chronology. We are so imbued in our childhood with
notions of Mars, Hercules, and the rest of the celestial outlaws, that we
scarce ever can lay them aside. We absolutely argue upon Pagan principles:
and though we cannot believe the fables, which have been transmitted to us;
yet we forget ourselves continually; and make inferences from them, as if
they were real. In short, till we recollect ourselves, we are semi-pagans.
It gives one pain to see men of learning, and principle, debating which was
the Jupiter who lay with Semele; and whether it was the same that outwitted
Amphitryon. This is not, says a critic, the Hermes, who cut off Argus's
head; but one of later date, who turned Battus into a stone. I fancy, says
another, that this was done, when Ioe was turned into a cow. It is said of
Jupiter, that he made the night, in which he enjoyed Alcmena, as long as
[394]three; or, as some say, as long as nine. The Abbe [395]Banier with
some phlegm excepts to this coalition of nights; and is unwilling to allow
it. But he is afterwards more complying; and seems to give it his sanction,
with this proviso, that chronological verity be not thereby impeached. _I
am of opinion_, says he, _that there was no foundation for the fable of
Jupiter's having made the night, on which he lay with Alcmena, longer than
others: at least this event put nothing in nature out of order; since the
day, which followed, was proportionably shorter, as Plautus [396]remarks._
Atque quanto nox fuisti longior hac proxima,
Tanto brevior dies ut fiat, faciam; ut aeque disparet,
Et dies e nocte accedat.
Were it not invidious, I could subjoin names to every article, which I have
alleged; and produce numberless instances to the same purpose.
It may be said, that I run counter to the opinions of all antiquity: that
all the fathers who treated of this subject, and many other learned men,
supposed the Gods of the heathen to have been deified mortals, who were
worshipped in the countries, where they died. It was the opinion of
Clemens, Eusebius, Cyril, Tertullian, Athenagoras, Epiphanius, Lactantius,
Arnobius, Julius Firmicus, and many others. What is more to the purpose, it
was the opinion of the heathen themselves; the very people, by whom these
gods were honoured: yet still it is a mistake. In respect to the fathers,
the whole of their argument turns upon this point, the concessions of the
Gentiles. The more early writers of the church were not making a strict
chronological inquiry: but were labouring to convert the heathen. They
therefore argue with them upon their own principles; and confute them from
their own testimony. The Romans had their Dii Immortales; the Greeks their
[Greek: Theoi Athanatoi]: yet acknowledged that they had been men; that
they died, and were buried. Cicero owns; [397]ab Euhemero et mortes, et
sepulturae demonstrantur deorum. It matters not whether the notion were
true; the fathers very fairly make use of it. They avail themselves of
these concessions; and prove from them the absurdity of the Gentile
worship, and the inconsistency of their opinions. Even Maximus Tyrius, the
Platonic, could not but smile, at being shewn in the same place the temple,
and tomb of the deity[398]; [Greek: hieron Theou, kai taphon Theou]. These
supposed places of sepulture were so numerous, that Clemens Alexandrinus
tells us, they were not to be counted. [399][Greek: Alla gar epionti moi
tous proskunoumenous humin taphous, emoi men oud' ho pas an arkesei
chronos.] But, after all, these [Greek: Taphoi] were not tombs, but [Greek:
lophoi mastoeideis], conical mounds of earth; on which in the first ages
offerings were made by fire. Hence [Greek: tupho], tupho, signified to make
a smoke, such as arose from incense upon these Tupha, or eminences.
Besides, if these were deified men, who were buried under these hills; how
can we explain the difficulty of the same person being buried in different
places, and at different times? To this it is answered, that it was another
Bacchus, and another Jupiter. Yet this still adds to the difficulty: for it
is hard to conceive, that whoever in any country had the name of Jupiter,
should be made a God. Add to this, that Homer and Hesiod, and the authors
of the Orphic poetry, knew of no such duplicates. There is no hint of this
sort among the antient writers of their nation. It was a refinement in
after ages; introduced to obviate the difficulties, which arose from the
absurdities in the pagan system. Arnobius justly ridicules the idle
expedients, made use of to render a base theology plausible. Gods, of the
same name and character, were multiplied to make their fables consistent;
that there might be always one ready at hand upon any chronological
emergency. Hence no difficulty could arise about a Deity, but there might
be one produced, adapted to all climes, and to every age. [400]Aiunt
Theologi vestri, et vetustatis absconditae conditores, tres in rerum natura
Joves esse--quinque Soles, et Mercurios quinque. Aiunt iidem Theologi
quatuor esse Vulcanos, et tres Dianas; AEsculapios totidem, et Dionysos
quinque; ter binos Hercules, et quatuor Veneres; tria genera Castorum,
totidemque Musarum. But Arnobius is too modest. Other writers insist upon a
greater variety. In respect to Jupiters, Varro according to Tertullian
makes them in number three hundred. [401]Varro trecentos Joves, sive
Jupiteres, dicendum, ---- introducit. The same writer mentions forty heroes
of the name of Hercules; all which variety arose from the causes above
assigned: and the like multiplicity may be found both of kings and heroes;
of kings, who did not reign; of heroes, who never existed. The same may be
observed in the accounts transmitted of their most early prophets, and
poets: scarce any of them stand single: there are duplicates of every
denomination. On this account it is highly requisite for those, who suppose
these personages to have been men, and make inferences from the
circumstances of their history, to declare explicitly which they mean; and
to give good reasons for their determination. It is said of Jupiter, that
he was the son of Saturn; and that he carried away Europa, before the
arrival of Cadmus. He had afterwards an amour with Semele, the supposed
daughter of Cadmus: and they mention his having a like intimacy with
Alcmena an age or two later. After this he got acquainted with Leda, the
wife of Tyndarus: and he had children at the siege of Troy. If we may
believe the poets, and all our intelligence comes originally from the
poets, Jupiter was personally interested in that war. But this interval
contains little less than two hundred years. These therefore could not be
the actions of one man: on which account I want to know, why Sir Isaac
Newton [402]in his chronological interpretations chooses to be determined
by the story of Jupiter and Europa, rather than by that of Jupiter and
Leda. The learned [403]Pezron has pitched upon a Jupiter above one thousand
years earlier, who was in like manner the son of Saturn. But Saturn,
according to some of the best mythologists, was but four generations
inclusive before the aera of Troy. Latinus, the son of Faunus, was alive
some years after that city had been taken; when AEneas was supposed to have
arrived in Italy. The poet tells us, [404]Fauno Picus pater: isque parentem
Te, Saturne, refert; Tu sanguinis ultimus auctor. The series amounts only
to four, Latinus, Faunus, Picus, Saturn. What authority has Pezron for the
anticipation of which he is guilty in determining the reign of Jupiter? and
how can he reconcile these contradictory histories? He ought to have given
some good reason for setting aside the more common and accepted accounts;
and placing these events so [405]early. Shall we suppose with the critics
and commentators that this was a prior Jupiter? If it were a different
person, the circumstances of his life should be different: but the person,
of whom he treats, is in all respects similar to the Jupiter of Greece and
Rome. He has a father Saturn; and his mother was Rhea. He was nursed in
Crete; and had wars with the Titans. He dethrones his father, who flies to
Italy; where he introduces an age of gold. The mythology concerning him we
find to be in all respects uniform. It is therefore to little purpose to
substitute another person of the same name by way of reconciling matters,
unless we can suppose that every person so denominated had the same
relations and connexions, and the same occurrences in life reiterated:
which is impossible. It is therefore, I think, plain, that the Grecian
Deities were not the persons [406]supposed: and that their imputed names
were titles. It is true, a very antient and respectable writer,
[407]Euhemerus, of whom I have before made mention, thought otherwise. It
is said, that he could point out precisely, where each god departed: and
could particularly shew the burying-place of Jupiter. Lactantius, who
copied from him, says, that it was at Cnossus in [408]Crete. Jupiter, aetate
pessum acta, in Creta vitam commutavit.--Sepulchrum ejus est in Creta, et
in oppido Cnosso: et dicitur Vesta hanc urbem creavisse: inque sepulchro
ejus est inscriptio antiquis literis Graecis, [Greek: Zan Kronou]. If
Jupiter had been buried in Crete, as these writers would persuade us, the
accounts would be uniform about the place where he was deposited.
Lactantius, we find, and some others, say, that it was in the city Cnossus.
There are writers who mention it to have been in a cavern upon [409]Mount
Ida: others upon Mount [410]Jasius. Had the Cretans been authors of the
notion, they would certainly have been more consistent in their accounts:
but we find no more certainty about the place of his burial, than of his
birth; concerning which Callimachus could not determine.
[411][Greek: Zeu, se men Idaioisin en ouresi phasi genesthai,]
[Greek: Zeu, se d' en Arkadiei.]
He was at times supposed to have been a native of Troas, of Crete, of
Thebes, of Arcadia, of Elis: but the whole arose from the word [Greek:
taphos] being, through length of time, misunderstood: for there would have
been no legend about the birth of Jupiter, had there been no mistake about
his funeral. It was a common notion of the Magnesians, that Jupiter was
buried in their country upon Mount Sipylus. Pausanias says, that he
ascended the mountain, and beheld the tomb, which was well worthy of
[412]admiration. The tomb of [413]Isis in like manner was supposed to be at
Memphis, and at Philae in Upper Egypt: also at Nusa in Arabia. Osiris was
said to have been buried in the same places: likewise at Taphosiris, which
is thought by Procopius to have had its name, [414]because it was the place
of sepulture of Osiris. The same is said of another city, which was near
the mouth of the Nile, and called Taphosiris parva. But they each of them
had their name from the worship, and not from the interment of the Deity.
This is plain from the account given of the [Greek: taphos Osiridos], or
high altar of Osiris, by Diodorus; from whom we learn that Busiris and
Osiris were the same. [415]_The Grecians_, says this author, _have a
notion, that Busiris in Egypt used to sacrifice strangers: not that there
was ever such a king as Busiris; but the_ [Greek: taphos], _or altar, of
Osiris had this name in the language of the natives_. In short, Busiris was
only a variation for Osiris: both were compounded of the Egyptian term
[416]Sehor, and related to the God of day. Hence the altars of the same
Deity were called indifferently the altars of Osiris, or Busiris, according
as custom prevailed.
I have in a former chapter taken notice of the Tarchons and Dracontia in
Syria, and other parts: which consisted of sacred ground inclosed with a
wall, and an altar or two at the upper part. Such an inclosure is described
by Pausanias, which must have been of great antiquity: hence the history of
it was very imperfectly known in his time. He is speaking of Nemea in
Argolis; [417]_near which_, says he, _stands the temple of Nemean Jupiter,
a structure truly wonderful, though the roof is now fallen in. Round the
temple is a grove of cypress; in which there is a tradition that Opheltes
was left by his nurse upon the grass, and in her absence killed by a
serpent.--In the same place is the tomb of Opheltes, surrounded with a wall
of stone; and within the inclosure altars. There is also a mound of earth
said to be the tomb of Lycurgus, the father of Opheltes._ Lycurgus is the
same as Lycus, Lycaon, Lycoreus, the Sun: and Opheltes, his supposed
offspring, is of the same purport. To say the truth, [418]Opheltes, or, as
it should be expressed, Ophel-tin is the place; and Ophel the Deity, Sol
Pytho, whose symbol was a serpent. Ophel-tin was a Taphos with a [Greek:
temenos], or sacred inclosure: it was a sacred mound to the Ophite Deity;
like that which was inclosed and fortified by [419]Manasseh king of Judah;
and which had been previously made use of to the same purpose by
[420]Jotham. A history similar to that of Opheltes is given of Archemorus;
who was said to have been left in a garden by his nurse Hypsipyle, and in
her absence slain by a serpent. Each of them had festivals instituted,
together with sacred games, in memorial of their misfortune. They are on
this account by many supposed to have been the same person. But in reality
they were not persons, but places. They are, however, so far alike, as they
are terms which relate to the same worship and Deity. Opheltin is the
place, and altar of the Ophite God above-mentioned: and Archemorus was
undoubtedly the antient name of the neighbouring town, or city. It is a
compound of Ar-Chemorus; and signifies the city of Cham-Orus, the same who
is styled Ophel. In many of these places there was an antient tradition of
some person having been injured by a serpent in the beginning of life;
which they have represented as the state of childhood. The mythology upon
this occasion is different: for sometimes the personages spoken of are
killed by the serpent: at other times they kill it: and there are instances
where both histories are told of the same person. But whatever may have
been the consequence, the history is generally made to refer to a state of
childhood. Hercules has accordingly a conflict with two serpents in his
cradle: and Apollo, who was the same as Python, was made to engage a
serpent of this name at Parnassus, when he was a child;
[421][Greek: Kouros, eon, ETI GYMNOS, eti plokamoisi gegethos.]
Near mount Cyllene in Arcadia was the sacred Taphos of [422]AEputus, who was
supposed to have been stung by a serpent. AEputus was the same as Iapetus,
the father of mankind. In the Dionusiaca the priests used to be crowned
with serpents; and in their frantic exclamations to cry out [423]Eva, Eva;
and sometimes Evan, Evan: all which related to some history of a serpent.
Apollo, who is supposed by most to have been victor in his conflict with
the Pytho, is by Porphyry said to have been slain by that serpent:
Pythagoras affirmed, that he saw his tomb at Tripos in [424]Delphi; and
wrote there an epitaph to his honour. The name of Tripos is said to have
been given to the place, because the daughters of Triopus used to lament
there the fate of Apollo. But Apollo and the Python were the same; and
Tripus, or Triopus, the supposed father of these humane sisters, was a
variation for Tor-Opus, the serpent-hill, or temple; where neither Apollo,
nor the Python were slain, but where they were both worshipped, being one
and the same Deity. [425][Greek: Puthoi men oun ho Drakon ho Puthios
threskeuetai, kai tou Opheos he paneguris katangelletai Puthia.] _At
Python_ (the same as Delphi) _the Pythian Dragon is worshipped; and the
celebrity of the serpent is styled Pythian_. The daughters of Triopus were
the priestesses of the temple; whose business it was to chant hymns in
memory of the serpent: and what is very remarkable, the festival was
originally observed upon the seventh [426]day.