|
Back
| Table of Contents | Forward
The Two Babylons
Alexander Hislop
Chapter II
Section II
Sub-Section I
The Child in Assyria
The original of that mother, so widely
worshipped, there is reason to believe, was Semiramis, * already referred to, who, it is
well known, was worshipped by the Babylonians, and other eastern nations, and that under
the name of Rhea, the great Goddess "Mother."
* Sir H. Rawlinson having found evidence at
Nineveh, of the existence of a Semiramis about six or seven centuries before the Christian
era, seems inclined to regard her as the only Semiramis that ever existed. But this
is subversive of all history. The fact that there was a Semiramis in the primeval ages of
the world, is beyond all doubt, although some of the exploits of the latter queen have
evidently been attributed to her predecessor. Mr. Layard dissents from Sir. H. Rawlinson's
opinion.
It was from the son, however, that she derived
all her glory and her claims to deification. That son, though represented as a child in
his mother's arms, was a person of great stature and immense bodily powers, as well as
most fascinating manners. In Scripture he is referred to (Eze 8:14) under the name of
Tammuz, but he is commonly known among classical writers under the name of Bacchus, that
is, "The Lamented one." *
* From Bakhah "to weep" or
"lament." Among the Phoenicians, says Hesychius, "Bacchos means
weeping." As the women wept for Tammuz, so did they for Bacchus.
To the ordinary reader the name of Bacchus
suggests nothing more than revelry and drunkenness, but it is now well known, that amid
all the abominations that attended his orgies, their grand design was professedly
"the purification of souls," and that from the guilt and defilement of sin. This
lamented one, exhibited and adored as a little child in his mother's arms, seems, in point
of fact, to have been the husband of Semiramis, whose name, Ninus, by which he is
commonly known in classical history, literally signified "The Son." As
Semiramis, the wife, was worshipped as Rhea, whose grand distinguishing character was that
of the great goddess "Mother," * the conjunction with her of her husband, under
the name of Ninus, or "The Son," was sufficient to originate the peculiar
worship of the "Mother and Son," so extensively diffused among the nations of
antiquity; and this, no doubt, is the explanation of the fact which has so much puzzled
the inquirers into ancient history, that Ninus is sometimes called the husband, and
sometimes the son of Semiramis.
* As such Rhea was called by the Greeks, Ammas.
Ammas is evidently the Greek form of the Chaldee Ama, "Mother."
This also accounts for the origin of the very
same confusion of relationship between Isis and Osiris, the mother and child of the
Egyptians; for as Bunsen shows, Osiris was represented in Egypt as at once the son and
husband of his mother; and actually bore, as one of his titles of dignity and honour, the
name "Husband of the Mother." * This still further casts light on the fact
already noticed, that the Indian God Iswara is represented as a babe at the breast of his
own wife Isi, or Parvati.
* BUNSEN. It may be observed that this very name
"Husband of the Mother," given to Osiris, seems even at this day to be in common
use among ourselves, although there is not the least suspicion of the meaning of the term,
or whence it has come. Herodotus mentions that when in Egypt, he was astonished to hear
the very same mournful but ravishing "Song of Linus," sung by the Egyptians
(although under another name), which he had been accustomed to hear in his own native land
of Greece. Linus was the same god as the Bacchus of Greece, or Osiris of Egypt; for Homer
introduces a boy singing the song of Linus, while the vintage is going on (Ilias),
and the Scholiast says that this son was sung in memory of Linus, who was torn in pieces
by dogs. The epithet "dogs," applied to those who tore Linus in pieces,
is evidently used in a mystical sense, and it will afterwards been seen how thoroughly the
other name by which he is known--Narcissus--identifies him with the Greek Bacchus and
Egyptian Osiris. In some places in Egypt, for the song of Linus or Osiris, a peculiar
melody seems to have been used. Savary says that, in the temple of Abydos, "the
priest repeated the seven vowels in the form of hymns, and that musicians were forbid to
enter it." (Letters) Strabo, whom Savary refers to, calls the god of that
temple Memnon, but we learn from Wilkinson that Osiris was the great god of Abydos, whence
it is evident that Memnon and Osiris were only different names of the same divinity. Now
the name of Linus or Osiris, as the "husband of his mother," in Egypt, was Kamut
(BUNSEN). When Gregory the Great introduced into the Church of Rome what are now called
the Gregorian Chants, he got them from the Chaldean mysteries, which had long been
established in Rome; for the Roman Catholic priest, Eustace, admits that these chants were
largely composed of "Lydian and Phrygian tunes" (Classical Tour), Lydia
and Phrygia being among the chief seats in later times of those mysteries, of which the
Egyptian mysteries were only a branch. These tunes were sacred--the music of the great
god, and in introducing them Gregory introduced the music of Kamut. And thus, to all
appearance, has it come to pass, that the name of Osiris or Kamut, "the husband of
the mother," is in every-day use among ourselves as the name of the musical scale;
for what is the melody of Osiris, consisting of the "seven vowels" formed into a
hymn, but--the Gamut?
Now, this Ninus, or "Son," borne in the
arms of the Babylonian Madonna, is so described as very clearly to identify him with
Nimrod. "Ninus, king of the Assyrians," * says Trogus Pompeius, epitomised by
Justin, "first of all changed the contented moderation of the ancient manners,
incited by a new passion, the desire of conquest. He was the first who carried on war
against his neighbours, and he conquered all nations from Assyria to Lybia, as they
were yet unacquainted with the arts of war."
* The name, "Assyrians," as has already
been noticed, has a wide latitude of meaning among the classic authors, taking in the
Babylonians as well as the Assyrians proper.
This account points directly to Nimrod, and can
apply to no other. The account of Diodorus Siculus entirely agrees with it, and adds
another trait that goes still further to determine the identity. That account is as
follows: "Ninus, the most ancient of the Assyrian kings mentioned in history,
performed great actions. Being naturally of a warlike disposition, and ambitious of glory
that results from valour, he armed a considerable number of young men that were brave and
vigorous like himself, trained them up a long time in laborious exercises and hardships,
and by that means accustomed them to bear the fatigues of war, and to face dangers with
intrepidity." As Diodorus makes Ninus "the most ancient of the Assyrian
kings," and represents him as beginning those wars which raised his power to an
extraordinary height by bringing the people of Babylonia under subjection to him,
while as yet the city of Babylon was not in existence, this shows that he occupied
the very position of Nimrod, of whom the Scriptural account is, that he first
"began to be mighty on the earth," and that the "beginning of his
kingdom was Babylon." As the Babel builders, when their speech was confounded, were
scattered abroad on the face of the earth, and therefore deserted both the city and the
tower which they had commenced to build, Babylon as a city, could not properly be
said to exist till Nimrod, by establishing his power there, made it the foundation and
starting-point of his greatness. In this respect, then, the story of Ninus and of Nimrod
exactly harmonise. The way, too, in which Ninus gained his power is the very way in which
Nimrod erected his. There can be no doubt that it was by inuring his followers to the
toils and dangers of the chase, that he gradually formed them to the use of arms, and so
prepared them for aiding him in establishing his dominions; just as Ninus, by training his
companions for a long time "in laborious exercises and hardships," qualified
them for making him the first of the Assyrian kings.
The conclusions deduced from these testimonies of
ancient history are greatly strengthened by many additional considerations. In Genesis
10:11, we find a passage, which, when its meaning is properly understood, casts a very
steady light on the subject. That passage, as given in the authorised version, runs thus:
"Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh." This speaks of it as
something remarkable, that Asshur went out of the land of Shinar, while yet the human race
in general went forth from the same land. It goes upon the supposition that Asshur had
some sort of divine right to that land, and that he had been, in a manner, expelled from
it by Nimrod, while no divine right is elsewhere hinted at in the context, or seems
capable of proof. Moreover, it represents Asshur as setting up in the IMMEDIATE
NEIGHBOURHOOD of Nimrod as mighty a kingdom as Nimrod himself, Asshur building four
cities, one of which is emphatically said to have been "great" (v 12); while
Nimrod, on this interpretation, built just the same number of cities, of which none is
specially characterised as "great." Now, it is in the last degree improbable
that Nimrod would have quietly borne so mighty a rival so near him. To obviate such
difficulties as these, it has been proposed to render the words, "out of that land he
(Nimrod) went forth into Asshur, or Assyria." But then, according to ordinary usage
of grammar, the word in the original should have been "Ashurah," with the sign
of motion to a place affixed to it, whereas it is simply Asshur, without any such sign of
motion affixed. I am persuaded that the whole perplexity that commentators have hitherto
felt in considering this passage, has arisen from supposing that there is a proper name in
the passage, where in reality no proper name exists. Asshur is the passive participle of a
verb, which, in its Chaldee sense, signifies "to make strong," and,
consequently, signifies "being strengthened," or "made strong." Read
thus, the whole passage is natural and easy (v 10), "And the beginning of his
(Nimrod's) kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh." A beginning
naturally implies something to succeed, and here we find it (v 11): "Out of that land
he went forth, being made strong, or when he had been made strong (Ashur), and builded
Nineveh," &c. Now, this exactly agrees with the statement in the ancient history
of Justin: "Ninus strengthened the greatness of his acquired dominion by
continued possession. Having subdued, therefore, his neighbours, when, by an accession of
forces, being still further strengthened, he went forth against other
tribes, and every new victory paved the way for another, he subdued all the peoples of the
East." Thus, then, Nimrod, or Ninus, was the builder of Nineveh; and the origin of
the name of that city, as "the habitation of Ninus," is accounted for, * and
light is thereby, at the same time, cast on the fact, that the name of the chief part of
the ruins of Nineveh is Nimroud at this day.
* Nin-neveh, "The habitation of Ninus."
Now, assuming that Ninus is Nimrod, the way in
which that assumption explains what is otherwise inexplicable in the statements of ancient
history greatly confirms the truth of that assumption itself. Ninus is said to have been
the son of Belus or Bel, and Bel is said to have been the founder of Babylon. If Ninus was
in reality the first king of Babylon, how could Belus or Bel, his father, be said to be
the founder of it? Both might very well be, as will appear if we consider who was Bel, and
what we can trace of his doings. If Ninus was Nimrod, who was the historical Bel? He must
have been Cush; for "Cush begat Nimrod" (Gen 10:8); and Cush is generally
represented as having been a ringleader in the great apostacy. * But again, Cush, as the
son of Ham, was Her-mes or Mercury; for Hermes is just an Egyptian synonym for the
"son of Ham." **
* See GREGORIUS TURONENSIS, De rerum Franc.
Gregory attributes to Cush what was said more generally to have befallen his son; but his
statement shows the belief in his day, which is amply confirmed from other sources, that
Cush had a pre-eminent share in leading mankind away from the true worship of God.
** The composition of Her-mes is, first, from
"Her," which, in Chaldee, is synonymous with Ham, or Khem, "the burnt
one." As "her" also, like Ham, signified "The hot or burning
one," this name formed a foundation for covertly identifying Ham with the
"Sun," and so deifying the great patriarch, after whose name the land of Egypt
was called, in connection with the sun. Khem, or Ham, in his own name was openly
worshipped in later ages in the land of Ham (BUNSEN); but this would have been too daring
at first. By means of "Her," the synonym, however, the way was paved for this.
"Her" is the name of Horus, who is identified with the sun (BUNSEN), which shows
the real etymology of the name to be from the verb to which I have traced it. Then,
secondly, "Mes," is from Mesheh (or, without the last radical, which is
omissible), Mesh, "to draw forth." In Egyptian, we have Ms in the
sense of "to bring forth" (BUNSEN, Hieroglyphical Signs), which is
evidently a different form of the same word. In the passive sense, also, we find Ms
used (BUNSEN, Vocabulary). The radical meaning of Mesheh in Stockii Lexicon,
is given in Latin "Extraxit," and our English word "extraction,"
as applied to birth or descent, shows that there is a connection between the generic
meaning of this word and birth. This derivation will be found to explain the
meaning of the names of the Egyptian kings, Ramesses and Thothmes, the former evidently
being "The son of Ra," or the Sun; the latter in like manner, being "The
son of Thoth." For the very same reason Her-mes is the "Son of Her, or
Ham," the burnt one--that is, Cush.
Now, Hermes was the great original prophet of
idolatry; for he was recognised by the pagans as the author of their religious rites, and
the interpreter of the gods. The distinguished Gesenius identifies him with the Babylonian
Nebo, as the prophetic god; and a statement of Hyginus shows that he was known as the
grand agent in that movement which produced the division of tongues. His words are these:
"For many ages men lived under the government of Jove [evidently not the Roman
Jupiter, but the Jehovah of the Hebrews], without cities and without laws, and all
speaking one language. But after that Mercury interpreted the speeches of men (whence an
interpreter is called Hermeneutes), the same individual distributed the nations. Then
discord began." *
* HYGINUS, Fab. Phoroneus is represented
as king at this time.
Here there is a manifest enigma. How could
Mercury or Hermes have any need to interpret the speeches of mankind when they "all
spake one language"? To find out the meaning of this, we must go to the language of
the Mysteries. Peresh, in Chaldee, signifies "to interpret"; but was pronounced
by old Egyptians and by Greeks, and often by the Chaldees themselves, in the same way as
"Peres," to "divide." Mercury, then, or Hermes, or Cush, "the son
of Ham," was the "DIVIDER of the speeches of men." He, it would seem, had
been the ringleader in the scheme for building the great city and tower of Babel; and, as
the well known title of Hermes,--"the interpreter of the gods," would
indicate, had encouraged them, in the name of God, to proceed in their presumptuous
enterprise, and so had caused the language of men to be divided, and themselves to be
scattered abroad on the face of the earth. Now look at the name of Belus or Bel, given to
the father of Ninus, or Nimrod, in connection with this. While the Greek name Belus
represented both the Baal and Bel of the Chaldees, these were nevertheless two entirely
distinct titles. These titles were both alike often given to the same god, but they had
totally different meanings. Baal, as we have already seen, signified "The Lord";
but Bel signified "The Confounder." When, then, we read that Belus, the father
of Ninus, was he that built or founded Babylon, can there be a doubt, in what sense it was
that the title of Belus was given to him? It must have been in the sense of Bel the
"Confounder." And to this meaning of the name of the Babylonian Bel, there is a
very distinct allusion in Jeremiah 50:2, where it is said "Bel is confounded,"
that is, "The Confounder is brought to confusion." That Cush was known to Pagan
antiquity under the very character of Bel, "The Confounder," a statement of Ovid
very clearly proves. The statement to which I refer is that in which Janus "the god
of gods," * from whom all the other gods had their origin, is made to say of himself:
"The ancients...called me Chaos."
* Janus was so called in the most ancient hymns
of the Salii. (MACROB, Saturn.)
Now, first this decisively shows that Chaos was
known not merely as a state of confusion, but as the "god of
Confusion." But, secondly, who that is at all acquainted with the laws of Chaldaic
pronunciation, does not know that Chaos is just one of the established forms of the name
of Chus or Cush? * Then, look at the symbol of Janus, ** (see Fig. 7) whom "the ancients called
Chaos," and it will be seen how exactly it tallies with the doings of Cush, when he
is identified with Bel, "The Confounder." That symbol is a club; and the name of
"a club" in Chaldee comes from the very word which signifies "to break in
pieces, or scatter abroad." ***
* The name of Cush is also Khus, for sh
frequently passes in Chaldee into s; and Khus, in pronunciation, legitimately
becomes Khawos, or, without the digamma, Khaos.
** From Sir WM. BETHAM'S Etruscan Literature
and Antiquities Investigated, 1842. The Etruscan name on the reverse of a
medal--Bel-athri, "Lord of spies," is probably given to Janus, in allusion to
his well known title "Janus Tuens," which may be rendered "Janus the
Seer," or "All-seeing Janus."
*** In Proverbs 25:18, a maul or club is
"Mephaitz." In Jeremiah 51:20, the same word, without the Jod, is evidently used
for a club (though, in our version, it is rendered battle-axe); for the use
of it is not to cut asunder, but to "break in pieces." See the whole passage.
He who caused the confusion of tongues was he who
"broke" the previously united earth (Gen 11:1) "in pieces," and
"scattered" the fragments abroad. How significant, then, as a symbol, is the
club, as commemorating the work of Cush, as Bel, the "Confounder"? And that
significance will be all the more apparent when the reader turns to the Hebrew of Genesis
11:9, and finds that the very word from which a club derives its name is that which is
employed when it is said, that in consequence of the confusion of tongues, the children of
men were "scattered abroad on the face of all the earth." The word there used
for scattering abroad is Hephaitz, which, in the Greek form becomes Hephaizt, * and hence
the origin of the well known but little understood name of Hephaistos, as applied to
Vulcan, "The father of the gods." **
* There are many instances of a similar change.
Thus Botzra becomes in Greek, Bostra; and Mitzraim, Mestraim.
** Vulcan, in the classical Pantheon, had not
commonly so high a place, but in Egypt Hephaistos, or Vulcan, was called "Father of
the gods." (AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS)
Hephaistos is the name of the ringleader in the
first rebellion, as "The Scatterer abroad," as Bel is the name of the same
individual as the "Confounder of tongues." Here, then, the reader may see the
real origin of Vulcan's Hammer, which is just another name for the club of Janus or Chaos,
"The god of Confusion"; and to this, as breaking the earth in pieces, there is a
covert allusion in Jeremiah 50:23, where Babylon, as identified with its primeval god, is
thus apostrophised: "How is the hammer of the whole earth cut asunder and
broken"! Now, as the tower-building was the first act of open rebellion after the
flood, and Cush, as Bel, was the ringleader in it, he was, of course, the first to whom
the name Merodach, "The great Rebel," * must have been given, and, therefore,
according to the usual parallelism of the prophetic language, we find both names of the
Babylonian god referred to together, when the judgment on Babylon is predicted: "Bel
is confounded: Merodach is broken in pieces" (Jer 1:2).
* Merodach comes from Mered, to rebel; and
Dakh, the demonstrative pronoun affixed, which makes it emphatic, signifying
"That" or "The great."
The judgment comes upon the Babylonian god
according to what he had done. As Bel, he had "confounded" the whole earth,
therefore he is "confounded." As Merodach, by the rebellion he had
stirred up, he had "broken" the united world in pieces; therefore he himself
is "broken in pieces."
So much for the historical character of Bel, as
identified with Janus or Chaos, the god of confusion, with his symbolical club. *
* While the names Bel and Hephaistos had the
origin above referred to, they were not inappropriate names also, though in a different
sense, for the war-gods descending from Cush, from whom Babylon derived its glory among
the nations. The warlike deified kings of the line of Cush gloried in their power to carry
confusion among their enemies, to scatter their armies, and to "break the
earth in pieces" by their resistless power. To this, no doubt, as well as to the
acts of the primeval Bel, there is allusion in the inspired denunciations of Jeremiah on
Babylon. The physical sense also of these names was embodied in the club given to the
Grecian Hercules--the very club of Janus--when, in a character quite different from that
of the original Hercules, he was set up as the great reformer of the world, by mere
physical force. When two-headed Janus with the club is represented, the two-fold
representation was probably intended to represent old Cush, and young Cush or Nimrod, as
combined. But the two-fold representation with other attributes, had reference also to
another "Father of the gods," afterwards to be noticed, who had specially to do
with water.
Proceeding, then, on these deductions, it is not
difficult to see how it might be said that Bel or Belus, the father of Ninus, founded
Babylon, while, nevertheless, Ninus or Nimrod was properly the builder of it. Now, though
Bel or Cush, as being specially concerned in laying the first foundations of Babylon,
might be looked upon as the first king, as in some of the copies of "Eusebius'
Chronicle" he is represented, yet it is evident, from both sacred history and
profane, that he could never have reigned as king of the Babylonian monarchy, properly so
called; and accordingly, in the Armenian version of the "Chronicle of Eusebius,"
which bears the undisputed palm for correctness and authority, his name is entirely
omitted in the list of Assyrian kings, and that of Ninus stands first, in such terms as
exactly correspond with the Scriptural account of Nimrod. Thus, then, looking at the fact
that Ninus is currently made by antiquity the son of Belus, or Bel, when we have seen that
the historical Bel is Cush, the identity of Ninus and Nimrod is still further confirmed.
But when we look at what is said of Semiramis,
the wife of Ninus, the evidence receives an additional development. That evidence goes
conclusively to show that the wife of Ninus could be none other than the wife of Nimrod,
and, further, to bring out one of the grand characters in which Nimrod, when deified, was
adored. In Daniel 11:38, we read of a god called Ala Mahozine *--i.e., the
"god of fortifications."
* In our version, Ala Mahozim is rendered
alternatively "god of forces," or "gods protectors." To the latter
interpretation, there is this insuperable objection, that Ala is in the singular. Neither
can the former be admitted; for Mahozim, or Mauzzim, does not signify "forces,"
or "armies," but "munitions," as it is also given in the margin--that
is "fortifications." Stockius, in his Lexicon, gives us the definition of
Mahoz in the singular, rober, arx, locus munitus, and in proof of the
definition, the following examples:--Judges 6:26, "And build an altar to the Lord thy
God upon the top of this rock" (Mahoz, in the margin "strong place"); and
Daniel 11:19, "Then shall he turn his face to the fort (Mahoz) of his own land."
Who this god of fortifications could be,
commentators have found themselves at a loss to determine. In the records of antiquity the
existence of any god of fortifications has been commonly overlooked; and it must be
confessed that no such god stands forth there with any prominence to the ordinary reader.
But of the existence of a goddess of fortifications, every one knows that there is
the amplest evidence. That goddess is Cybele, who is universally represented with a mural
or turreted crown, or with a fortification, on her head. Why was Rhea or Cybele thus
represented? Ovid asks the question and answers it himself; and the answer is this: The
reason he says, why the statue of Cybele wore a crown of towers was, "because she
first erected them in cities." The first city in the world after the flood (from
whence the commencement of the world itself was often dated) that had towers and
encompassing walls, was Babylon; and Ovid himself tells us that it was Semiramis, the
first queen of that city, who was believed to have "surrounded Babylon with a wall of
brick." Semiramis, then, the first deified queen of that city and tower whose top was
intended to reach to heaven, must have been the prototype of the goddess who "first
made towers in cities." When we look at the Ephesian Diana, we find evidence to the
very same effect. In general, Diana was depicted as a virgin, and the patroness of
virginity; but the Ephesian Diana was quite different. She was represented with all the
attributes of the Mother of the gods (see Fig. 8),
and, as the Mother of the gods, she wore a turreted crown, such as no one can
contemplate without being forcibly reminded of the tower of Babel. Now this tower-bearing
Diana is by an ancient scholiast expressly identified with Semiramis.*
* A scholiast on the Periergesis of
Dionysius, says Layard (Nineveh and its Remains), makes Semiramis the same as the
goddess Artemis or Despoina. Now, Artemis was Diana, and the title of Despoina given to
her, shows that it was in the character of the Ephesian Diana she was identified with
Semiramis; for Despoina is the Greek for Domina, "The Lady," the peculiar title
of Rhea or Cybele, the tower-bearing goddess, in ancient Rome. (OVID, Fasti)
When, therefore, we remember that Rhea or Cybele,
the tower-bearing goddess, was, in point of fact, a Babylonian goddess, and that
Semiramis, when deified, was worshipped under the name of Rhea, there will remain, I
think, no doubt as to the personal identity of the "goddess of
fortifications."
Now there is no reason to believe that Semiramis
alone (though some have represented the matter so) built the battlements of Babylon. We
have the express testimony of the ancient historian, Megasthenes, as preserved by
Abydenus, that it was "Belus" who "surrounded Babylon with a wall." As
"Bel," the Confounder, who began the city and tower of Babel, had to leave both
unfinished, this could not refer to him. It could refer only to his son Ninus, who
inherited his father's title, and who was the first actual king of the Babylonian empire,
and, consequently Nimrod. The real reason that Semiramis, the wife of Ninus, gained the
glory of finishing the fortifications of Babylon, was, that she came in the esteem of the
ancient idolaters to hold a preponderating position, and to have attributed to her all the
different characters that belonged, or were supposed to belong, to her husband. Having
ascertained, then, one of the characters in which the deified wife was worshipped,
we may from that conclude what was the corresponding character of the deified husband.
Layard distinctly indicates his belief that Rhea or Cybele, the "tower-crown"
goddess, was just the female counterpart of the "deity presiding over bulwarks or
fortresses" and that this deity was Ninus, or Nimrod, we have still further evidence
from what the scattered notices of antiquity say of the first deified king of Babylon,
under a name that identifies him as the husband of Rhea, the "tower-bearing"
goddess. That name is Kronos or Saturn. *
* In the Greek mythology, Kronos and Rhea are
commonly brother and sister. Ninus and Semiramis, according to history, are not
represented as standing in any such relation to one another; but this is no objection to
the real identity of Ninus and Kronos; for, 1st, the relationships of the divinities, in
most countries, are peculiarly conflicting--Osiris, in Egypt, is represented at different
times, not only as the son and husband of Isis, but also as her father and brother
(BUNSEN); then, secondly, whatever the deified mortals might be before deification, on
being deified they came into new relationships. On the apotheosis of husband and
wife, it was necessary for the dignity of both that both alike should be represented as of
the same celestial origin--as both supernaturally the children of God. Before the flood,
the great sin that brought ruin on the human race was, that the "Sons of God"
married others than the daughters of God,--in other words, those who were not
spiritually their "sisters." (Gen 6:2,3) In the new world, while the
influence of Noah prevailed, the opposite practice must have been strongly inculcated; for
a "son of God" to marry any one but a daughter of God, or his own "sister"
in the faith, must have been a misalliance and a disgrace. Hence, from a perversion
of a spiritual idea, came, doubtless, the notion of the dignity and purity of the royal
line being preserved the more intact through the marriage of royal brothers and sisters.
This was the case in Peru (PRESCOTT), in India (HARDY), and in Egypt (WILKINSON). Hence
the relation of Jupiter to Juno, who gloried that she was "soror et conjux"--"sister
and wife"--of her husband. Hence the same relation between Isis and her husband
Osiris, the former of whom is represented as "lamenting her brother
Osiris." (BUNSEN) For the same reason, no doubt, was Rhea, made the sister of
her husband Kronos, to show her divine dignity and equality.
It is well known that Kronos, or Saturn, was
Rhea's husband; but it is not so well known who was Kronos himself. Traced back to his
original, that divinity is proved to have been the first king of Babylon. Theophilus of
Antioch shows that Kronos in the east was worshipped under the names of Bel and Bal; and
from Eusebius we learn that the first of the Assyrian kings, whose name was Belus, was
also by the Assyrians called Kronos. As the genuine copies of Eusebius do not admit of any
Belus, as an actual king of Assyria, prior to Ninus, king of the Babylonians, and distinct
from him, that shows that Ninus, the first king of Babylon, was Kronos. But, further, we
find that Kronos was king of the Cyclops, who were his brethren, and who derived that name
from him, * and that the Cyclops were known as "the inventors of
tower-building."
* The scholiast upon EURIPIDES, Orest,
says that "the Cyclops were so called from Cyclops their king." By this
scholiast the Cyclops are regarded as a Thracian nation, for the Thracians had localised
the tradition, and applied it to themselves; but the following statement of the scholiast
on the Prometheus of Aeschylus, shows that they stood in such a relation to Kronos
as proves that he was their king: "The Cyclops...were the brethren of Kronos, the
father of Jupiter."
The king of the Cyclops, "the inventors of
tower-building," occupied a position exactly correspondent to that of Rhea, who
"first erected (towers) in cities." If, therefore, Rhea, the wife of
Kronos, was the goddess of fortifications, Kronos or Saturn, the husband of
Rhea, that is, Ninus or Nimrod, the first king of Babylon, must have been Ala mahozin,
"the god of fortifications." (see note below)
The name Kronos itself goes not a little to
confirm the argument. Kronos signifies "The Horned one." As a horn is a well
known Oriental emblem for power or might, Kronos, "The Horned one," was,
according to the mystic system, just a synonym for the Scriptural epithet applied to
Nimrod--viz., Gheber, "The mighty one" (Gen 10:8), "He began to be
mighty on the earth." The name Kronos, as the classical reader is well aware, is
applied to Saturn as the "Father of the gods." We have already had another
"father of the gods" brought under our notice, even Cush in his character of Bel
the Confounder, or Hephaistos, "The Scatterer abroad"; and it is easy to
understand how, when the deification of mortals began, and the "mighty" Son of
Cush was deified, the father, especially considering the part which he seems to have had
in concocting the whole idolatrous system, would have to be deified too, and of course, in
his character as the Father of the "Mighty one," and of all the
"immortals" that succeeded him. But, in point of fact, we shall find, in the
course of our inquiry, that Nimrod was the actual Father of the gods, as being the first
of deified mortals; and that, therefore, it is in exact accordance with historical fact
that Kronos, the Horned, or Mighty one, is, in the classic Pantheon, known by that title.
The meaning of this name Kronos, "The Horned
one," as applied to Nimrod, fully explains the origin of the remarkable symbol, so
frequently occurring among the Nineveh sculptures, the gigantic HORNED man-bull, as
representing the great divinities in Assyria. The same word that signified a bull,
signified also a ruler or prince. *
* The name for a bull or ruler, is in Hebrew
without points, Shur, which in Chaldee becomes Tur. From Tur, in the sense of a bull,
comes the Latin Taurus; and from the same word, in the sense of a ruler, Turannus, which
originally had no evil meaning. Thus, in these well known classical words, we have
evidence of the operation of the very principle which caused the deified Assyrian kings to
be represented under the form of the man-bull.
Hence the "Horned bull" signified
"The Mighty Prince," thereby pointing back to the first of those "Mighty
ones," who, under the name of Guebres, Gabrs, or Cabiri, occupied so conspicuous a
place in the ancient world, and to whom the deified Assyrian monarchs covertly traced back
the origin of their greatness and might. This explains the reason why the Bacchus of the
Greeks was represented as wearing horns, and why he was frequently addressed by the
epithet "Bull-horned," as one of the high titles of his dignity. Even in
comparatively recent times, Togrul Begh, the leader of the Seljukian Turks, who came from
the neighbourhood of the Euphrates, was in a similar manner represented with three horns
growing out of his head, as the emblem of his sovereignty (Fig. 9). This, also, in a remarkable way
accounts for the origin of one of the divinities worshipped by our Pagan Anglo-Saxon
ancestors under the name of Zernebogus. This Zernebogus was "the black, malevolent,
ill-omened divinity," in other words, the exact counterpart of the popular idea of
the Devil, as supposed to be black, and equipped with horns and hoofs. This name analysed
and compared with the accompanying woodcut (Fig. 10),
from Layard, casts a very singular light on the source from whence has come the popular
superstition in regard to the grand Adversary. The name Zer-Nebo-Gus is almost pure
Chaldee, and seems to unfold itself as denoting "The seed of the prophet Cush."
We have seen reason already to conclude that, under the name Bel, as distinguished from
Baal, Cush was the great soothsayer or false prophet worshipped at Babylon. But
independent inquirers have been led to the conclusion that Bel and Nebo were just two
different titles for the same god, and that a prophetic god. Thus does Kitto comment on
the words of Isaiah 46:1 "Bel boweth down, Nebo stoopeth," with reference to the
latter name: "The word seems to come from Nibba, to deliver an oracle, or to
prophesy; and hence would mean an 'oracle,' and may thus, as Calmet suggests ('Commentaire
Literal'), be no more than another name for Bel himself, or a characterising epithet
applied to him; it being not unusual to repeat the same thing, in the same verse, in
equivalent terms." "Zer-Nebo-Gus," the great "seed of the prophet
Cush," was, of course, Nimrod; for Cush was Nimrod's father. Turn now to Layard, and
see how this land of ours and Assyria are thus brought into intimate connection. In a
woodcut, first we find "the Assyrian Hercules," that is "Nimrod the
giant," as he is called in the Septuagint version of Genesis, without club, spear, or
weapons of any kind, attacking a bull. Having overcome it, he sets the bull's horns on his
head, as a trophy of victory and a symbol of power; and thenceforth the hero is
represented, not only with the horns and hoofs above, but from the middle downwards, with
the legs and cloven feet of the bull. Thus equipped he is represented as turning next to
encounter a lion. This, in all likelihood, is intended to commemorate some event in the
life of him who first began to be mighty in the chase and in war, and who, according to
all ancient traditions, was remarkable also for bodily power, as being the leader of the
Giants that rebelled against heaven. Now Nimrod, as the son of Cush, was black, in other
words, was a Negro. "Can the Ethiopian change his skin?" is in the original,
"Can the Cushite" do so? Keeping this, then, in mind, it will be seen that in
that figure disentombed from Nineveh, we have both the prototype of the Anglo-Saxon
Zer-Nebo-Gus, "the seed of the prophet Cush," and the real original of the black
Adversary of mankind, with horns and hoofs. It was in a different character from that of
the Adversary that Nimrod was originally worshipped; but among a people of a fair
complexion, as the Anglo-Saxons, it was inevitable that, if worshipped at all, it must
generally be simply as an object of fear; and so Kronos, "The Horned one," who
wore the "horns," as the emblem both of his physical might and sovereign power,
has come to be, in popular superstition, the recognised representative of the Devil.
In many and far-severed countries, horns became
the symbols of sovereign power. The corona or crown, that still encircles
the brows of European monarchs, seems remotely to be derived from the emblem of might
adopted by Kronos, or Saturn, who, according to Pherecydes, was "the first
before all others that ever wore a crown." The first regal crown appears to have been
only a band, in which the horns were set. From the idea of power contained in the
"horn," even subordinate rulers seem to have worn a circlet adorned with a
single horn, in token of their derived authority. Bruce, the Abyssinian traveller gives
examples of Abyssinian chiefs thus decorated (Fig. 11),
in regard to whom he states that the horn attracted his particular attention, when he
perceived that the governors of provinces were distinguished by this head-dress.*
* See KITTO'S Illustrated Commentary,
vol. iv. pp. 280-282. In Fig. 11, the two
male figures are Abyssinian Chiefs. The two females, whom Kitto has grouped along with
them, are ladies of Mount Lebanon, whose horned head-dresses Walpole regards as relics of
the ancient worship of Astarte. (See above - and WALPOLE'S Ansayri, vol. iii. p.
16)
In the case of sovereign powers, the royal
head-band was adorned sometimes with a double, sometimes with a triple horn. The double
horn had evidently been the original symbol of power or might on the part of sovereigns;
for, on the Egyptian monuments, the heads of the deified royal personages have generally
no more than the two horns to shadow forth their power. As sovereignty in Nimrod's case
was founded on physical force, so the two horns of the bull were the symbols of that
physical force. And, in accordance with this, we read in Sanchuniathon that "Astarte
put on her own head a bull's head as the ensign of royalty." By-and-by, however,
another and a higher idea came in, and the expression of that idea was seen in the symbol
of the three horns. A cap seems in course of time to have come to be associated
with the regal horns. In Assyria the three-horned cap was one of the "sacred
emblems," in token that the power connected with it was of celestial origin,--the
three horns evidently pointing at the power of the trinity. Still, we have indications
that the horned band, without any cap, was anciently the corona or royal crown. The
crown borne by the Hindoo god Vishnu, in his avatar of the Fish, is just an open
circle or band, with three horns standing erect from it, with a knob on the top of each
horn (Fig. 12). All the avatars are
represented as crowned with a crown that seems to have been modelled from this, consisting
of a coronet with three points, standing erect from it, in which Sir William Jones
recognises the Ethiopian or Parthian coronet. The open tiara of Agni, the Hindoo god of
fire, shows in its lower round the double horn, made in the very same way as in Assyria,
proving at once the ancient custom, and whence that custom had come. Instead of the three
horns, three horn-shaped leaves came to be substituted (Fig.
13); and thus the horned band gradually passed into the modern coronet or
crown with the three leaves of the fleur-de-lis, or other familiar three-leaved adornings.
Among the Red Indians of America there had
evidently been something entirely analogous to the Babylonian custom of wearing the horns;
for, in the "buffalo dance" there, each of the dancers had his head arrayed with
buffalo's horns; and it is worthy of especial remark, that the "Satyric dance,"
* or dance of the Satyrs in Greece, seems to have been the counterpart of this Red Indian
solemnity; for the satyrs were horned divinities, and consequently those who imitated
their dance must have had their heads set off in imitation of theirs.
* BRYANT. The Satyrs were the companions of
Bacchus, and "danced along with him" (Aelian Hist.) When it is
considered who Bacchus was, and that his distinguishing epithet was
"Bull-horned," the horns of the "Satyrs" will appear in their true
light. For a particular mystic reason the Satyr's horn was commonly a goat's horn, but
originally it must have been the same as Bacchus'.
When thus we find a custom that is clearly
founded on a form of speech that characteristically distinguished the region where
Nimrod's power was wielded, used in so many different countries far removed from one
another, where no such form of speech was used in ordinary life, we may be sure
that such a custom was not the result of mere accident, but that it indicates the
wide-spread diffusion of an influence that went forth in all directions from Babylon, from
the time that Nimrod first "began to be mighty on the earth."
There was another way in which Nimrod's power was
symbolised besides by the "horn." A synonym for Gheber, "The mighty
one," was "Abir," while "Aber" also signified a "wing."
Nimrod, as Head and Captain of those men of war, by whom he surrounded himself, and who
were the instruments of establishing his power, was "Baal-aberin," "Lord of
the mighty ones." But "Baal-abirin" (pronounced nearly in the same way)
signified "The winged one," * and therefore in symbol he was represented, not
only as a horned bull, but as at once a horned and winged bull--as showing not merely that
he was mighty himself, but that he had mighty ones under his command, who were ever ready
to carry his will into effect, and to put down all opposition to his power; and to shadow
forth the vast extent of his might, he was represented with great and wide-expanding
wings.
* This is according to a peculiar Oriental idiom,
of which there are many examples. Thus, Baal-aph, "lord of wrath,"
signifies "an angry man"; Baal-lashon, "lord of tongue,"
"an eloquent man"; Baal-hatsim, "lord of arrows," "an
archer"; and in like manner, Baal-aberin, "lord of wings," signifies
"winged one."
To this mode of representing the mighty kings of
Babylon and Assyria, who imitated Nimrod and his successors, there is manifest allusion in
Isaiah 8:6-8 "Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly,
and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah's son; now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon
them the waters of the river, strong and mighty, even the king of Assyria, and all his
glory; and he shall come up over all his banks. And he shall pass through Judah; he shall
overflow and go over; he shall reach even unto the neck; and the STRETCHING OUT OF HIS
WINGS shall FILL the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel." When we look at such figures
as those which are here presented to the reader (Figs.
14 and 15), with their great extent of expanded wing, as symbolising an
Assyrian king, what a vividness and force does it give to the inspired language of the
prophet! And how clear is it, also, that the stretching forth of the Assyrian monarch's
WINGS, that was to "fill the breadth of Immanuel's land," has that very
symbolic meaning to which I have referred--viz., the overspreading of the land by his
"mighty ones," or hosts of armed men, that the king of Babylon was to bring with
him in his overflowing invasion! The knowledge of the way in which the Assyrian monarchs
were represented, and of the meaning of that representation, gives additional force to the
story of the dream of Cyrus the Great, as told by Herodotus. Cyrus, says the historian,
dreamt that he saw the son of one of his princes, who was at the time in a distant
province, with two great "wings on his shoulders, the one of which overshadowed Asia,
and the other Europe," from which he immediately concluded that he was organising rebellion
against him. The symbols of the Babylonians, whose capital Cyrus had taken, and to whose
power he had succeeded, were entirely familiar to him; and if the "wings" were
the symbols of sovereign power, and the possession of them implied the lordship
over the might, or the armies of the empire, it is easy to see how very naturally
any suspicions of disloyalty affecting the individual in question might take shape in the
manner related, in the dreams of him who might harbour these suspicions.
Now, the understanding of this equivocal sense of
"Baal-aberin" can alone explain the remarkable statement of Aristophanes, that
at the beginning of the world "the birds" were first created, and then
after their creation, came the "race of the blessed immortal gods." This has
been regarded as either an atheistical or nonsensical utterance on the part of the poet,
but, with the true key applied to the language, it is found to contain an important
historical fact. Let it only be borne in mind that "the birds"--that is, the
"winged ones"--symbolised "the Lords of the mighty ones," and then the
meaning is clear, viz., that men first "began to be mighty on the earth";
and then, that the "Lords" or Leaders of "these mighty ones"
were deified. The knowledge of the mystic sense of this symbol accounts also for
the origin of the story of Perseus, the son of Jupiter, miraculously born of Danae, who
did such wondrous things, and who passed from country to country on wings divinely
bestowed on him. This equally casts light on the symbolic myths in regard to Bellerophon,
and the feats which he performed on his winged horse, and their ultimate disastrous issue;
how high he mounted in the air, and how terrible was his fall; and of Icarus, the son of
Daedalus, who, flying on wax-cemented wings over the Icarian Sea, had his wings melted off
through his too near approach to the sun, and so gave his name to the sea where he was
supposed to have fallen. The fables all referred to those who trode, or were supposed to
have trodden, in the steps of Nimrod, the first "Lord of the mighty ones," and
who in that character was symbolised as equipped with wings.
Now, it is remarkable that, in the passage of
Aristophanes already referred to, that speaks of the birds, or "the winged
ones," being produced before the gods, we are informed that he from whom both
"mighty ones" and gods derived their origin, was none other than the winged boy
Cupid. *
* Aristophanes says that Eros or Cupid produced
the "birds" and "gods" by "mingling all things." This
evidently points to the meaning of the name Bel, which signifies at once "the mingler"
and "the confounder." This name properly belonged to the father of Nimrod, but,
as the son was represented as identified with the father, we have evidence that the name
descended to the son and others by inheritance.
Cupid, the son of Venus, occupied, as will
afterwards be proved, in the mystic mythology the very same position as Nin, or Ninus,
"the son," did to Rhea, the mother of the gods. As Nimrod was unquestionably the
first of "the mighty ones" after the Flood, this statement of
Aristophanes, that the boy-god Cupid, himself a winged one, produced all the
birds or "winged ones," while occupying the very position of Nin or Ninus,
"the son," shows that in this respect also Ninus and Nimrod are identified.
While this is the evident meaning of the poet, this also, in a strictly historical point
of view, is the conclusion of the historian Apollodorus; for he states that "Ninus is
Nimrod." And then, in conformity with this identity of Ninus and Nimrod, we find, in
one of the most celebrated sculptures of ancient Babylon, Ninus and his wife Semiramis
represented as actively engaged in the pursuits of the chase,--"the quiver-bearing
Semiramis" being a fit companion for "the mighty Hunter before the Lord."
Note
[Back] Ala-Mahozim [Back] Ala-Mahozim
The name "Ala-Mahozim" is never, as far
as I know, found in any ancient uninspired author, and in the Scripture itself it is found
only in a prophecy. Considering that the design of prophecy is always to leave a certain
obscurity before the event, though giving enough of light for the practical guidance of
the upright, it is not to be wondered at that an unusual word should be employed to
describe the divinity in question. But, though this precise name be not found, we have a
synonym that can be traced home to Nimrod. In Sanchuniathon, "Astarte, traveling
about the habitable world," is said to have found "a star falling through the
air, which she took up and consecrated in the holy island Tyre." Now what is this
story of the falling star but just another version of the fall of Mulciber from heaven, or
of Nimrod from his high estate? for as we have already seen, Macrobius shows (Saturn.)
that the story of Adonis--the lamented one--so favourite a theme in Phoenicia, originally
came from Assyria. The name of the great god in the holy island of Tyre, as is well known,
was Melkart (KITTO'S Illus. Comment.), but this name, as brought from Tyre to
Carthage, and from thence to Malta (which was colonised from Carthage), where it is found
on a monument at this day, cast no little light on the subject. The name Melkart is
thought by some to have been derived from Melek-eretz, or "king of the earth"
(WILKINSON); but the way in which it is sculptured in Malta shows that it was really
Melek-kart, "king of the walled city." Kir, the same as the Welsh Caer, found in
Caer-narvon, &c., signifies "an encompassing wall," or a "city
completely walled round"; and Kart was the feminine form of the same word, as may be
seen in the different forms of the name of Carthage, which is sometimes Car-chedon, and
sometimes Cart-hada or Cart-hago. In the Book of Proverbs we find a slight variety of the
feminine form of Kart, which seems evidently used in the sense of a bulwark or a
fortification. Thus (Prov 10:15) we read: "A rich man's wealth is his strong city
(Karit), that is, his strong bulwark or defence." Melk-kart, then,
"king of the walled city," conveys the very same idea as Ala-Mahozim. In
GRUTER'S Inscriptions, as quoted by Bryant, we find a title also given to Mars, the
Roman war-god, exactly coincident in meaning with that of Melkart. We have elsewhere seen
abundant reason to conclude that the original of Mars was Nimrod. The title to which I
refer confirms this conclusion, and is contained in a Roman inscription on an ancient
temple in Spain. This title shows that the temple was dedicated to "Mars
Kir-aden," the lord of "The Kir," or "walled city." The Roman C,
as is well known, is hard, like K; and Adon, "Lord," is also Aden. Now, with
this clue to guide us, we can unravel at once what has hitherto greatly puzzled
mythologists in regard to the name of Mars Quirinus as distinguished from Mars
Gradivus. The K in Kir is what in Hebrew or Chaldee is called Koph, a different letter
from Kape, and is frequently pronounced as a Q. Quir-inus, therefore, signifies
"belonging to the 93 walled city," and refers to the security which was given to
cities by encompassing walls. Gradivus, on the other hand, comes from "Grah,"
"conflict," and "divus," "god"--a different form of Deus,
which has been already shown to be a Chaldee term; and therefore signifies "God of
battle." Both these titles exactly answer to the two characters of Nimrod as the
great city builder and the great warrior, and that both these distinctive characters were
set forth by the two names referred to, we have distinct evidence in FUSS'S Antiquities.
"The Romans," says he, "worshipped two idols of the kind [that is, gods
under the name of Mars], the one called Quirinus, the guardian of the city and its
peace; the other called Gradivus, greedy of war and slaughter, whose temple
stood beyond the city's boundaries."
Back
| Table of Contents | Forward
|
