H‎ > ‎

Hislop, Rev Alexander

The Two Babylons or 
THE PAPAL WORSHIP

Proved to be THE WORSHIP OF NIMROD AND HIS WIFE

WITH SIXTY-ONE WOODCUT ILLUSTRATIONS FROM NINEVEH, BABYLON, EGYPT, POMPEII, etc.

By the late Rev. Alexander Hislop

EVANGELIUM ETERNUM—MEDIUM GRATIS
THE EVERLASTING GOSPEL—A CHANNEL OF GRACE

Contents


The Editions of Works--Quoted or Referred to in this Volume.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 06:04 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 06:20 by Stephen OldPaths ]



Editions of Works

Quoted or Referred to in this Volume.

A

Adam's Roman Antiquities,

London,

1835

Æliani Historias,

Rome,

1545

Ælianus de Nat. Animal,

Tubingen,

1768

Æschylus,

Paris,

1557

Æschylus,

 

1552

Agathias (Corp. Script. Byzant.),

Bonn,

1828

Alford's Greek Test,

London,

1856

Ambrosii Opera,

Paris,

1836

Ammianus Marcellinus,

Paris,

1681

Anacreon,

Cambridge,

1705

Apocalypse, Original Interpretation,

London,

1857

Apocriphi (Diodati, Bibbia),

London,

1819

Apollodorus,

Gottingen,

1803

Apuleius,

Leipsic,

1842

Arati Phoenomena,

Leipsic,

1793

Aristophanes,

Amsterdam,

1710

Arnobius,

Paris,

1836

Athemasus,

Leyden,

1612

Athenagoras,

Wurtzburg,

1777

Asiatic Journal,

London,

1816

Researches,

London,

1806

Augustine's City of God, with Lud. Vives's Comment,

London,

1620

Augustini Opera Omnia,

Bassano,

1807

Aulus Gellius,

Leyden,

1666

Aurelius Victor,

Utrecht,

1696

Ausonii Opera,

Amsterdam,

1669

B

Barker and Ainsworth's Lares and Tenates of Cilicia,

London,

1853

Barker's Hebrew Lexicon,

London,

1811

Baronii Anales,

Cologne,

1609

Bede's Works,

Cambridge,

1722

Begg's Handbook of Popery,

Edinburgh,

1856

Bell's (Robert) Wayside Picture,

London,

1849

(John) Italy,

Edinburgh,

1825

Berosus,

Leipsic,

1825

Betham's Etruria Celtica,

Dublin,

1842

Gael and Cyrnbri,

Dublin,

1834

Bilney (British Reformers),

London,

S. D.

Bion (Poet. Grasc. Min.),

Cambridge,

1661

Blakeney's Popery in its Social Aspect,

Edinburgh,

S. D.

Borrow's Gipsies,

London,

1843

Bower's Lives of the Popes,

London,

1750

Bryant's Mythology,

London,

1807

Bulwark, The,

Edinburgh

1852-53

Bunsen's Egypt,

London,

1848

C

Cassar,

London,

1770

Callimachus,

Utrecht,

1697

Catechismus Romanus,

Lyons,

1659

Catlin's American Indians, .

London,

1841

Catullus,

Utrecht,

1659

Cedreni Compendium,

Bonn,

1838

Charlotte Elizabeth's Personal Recollections,

London,

1847

Charlotte Elizabeth's Sketches of Irish History,

Dublin,

1844

Chesney's Euphrates Expedition,

London,

1850

Chronicon Paschale,

Bonn,

1832

Chrysostomi Opera Omnia,

Paris,

1738

Ciceronis Opera Omnia,

Paris,

1740

Clemens Alexandrinus, Opera,

Wurtzburg,

1778

Clemens Protrepticos,

Lutetuce,

1629

Clerious (Johannes) de Chaldasis et de Sabasis,

Amsterdam,

1700

Clinton, Fasti Hellenici,

Oxford,

1834

Codex Theodosianus,

Bonn,

1842

Coleman's Hindoo Mythology,

London,

1832

Cory's Fragments,

London,

1732

Courayer's Council of Trent,

London,

1736

Covenanter, Irish,

Belfast,

1862

Crabb's Mythology,

London,

1854

Crichton's Scandinavia,

Edinburgh,

1838

Cummianus (Patr. Patrum),

Paris,

1851

D

Daubuz's Symbolical Dictionary,

London,

1842

D'Aubignes Reformation,

Brussels,

1839

David's Antiquites Etrusques, &c,

Paris,

1787

Davies's Druids,

London,

1809

Davies's (Sir J. F.) China,

London,

1857

Didron's Christian Iconography,

London,

1851

Diodori Bibliotheca,

Paris,

1559

Diogenes Laertius,

London,

1664

Dionysius Afer,

London,

1658

Dionysius Halicarn,

Oxford,

1704

Dryden's Virgil,

London,

1709

Dupuis, Origine de tous les Cultes,

Paris,

1822

Dymock's Classical Dictionary,

London,

1833

E

Elliott's Horas Apocalypticas,

London,

1851

Ennodii Opera,

Paris,

1611

Epiphanii Opera Omnia,

Cologne,

1682

Eunapius,

Geneva,

1616

Euripides,

Cambridge,

1694

Eusebii Preepar. Evangel.,

Leipsic,

1842

Eusebii Chronicon,

Venice,

1818

„,

Basle,

1529

v^lllOll.,

 

Paris,

1677

 

Eustace's Classical Tour,

London,

1813

Eutropius (Rom. Hist. Script. Grasc. Min.),

Frankfort,

1590

Evangelical Christendom,

London,

1853

Evangelical Christendom,

London,

1855

F

Firmicus, Julius,

Oxford,

1678

Flores Seraphici,

Colonice,

1818

Flores Seraphici,

Agrippince,

1529

Furniss's What Every Christian must Know,

London,

S.D.

Fuss's Roman Antiquities,

Oxford,

1840

G

Garden of the Soul,

Dublin,

1850

Garden of the Soul,

London,

S.D.

Gaussen's Daniel,

Paris,

1848-49

Gebelin, Monde Primitif,

Paris,

1773-82

Gesenii Lexicon,

London,

1855

Gibbon's Decline and Fall,

Dublin,

1781

Gibson's Preservative,

London,

1848

Gieseler's Eccles. History,

Edinburgh,

1846

Gill's Commentary,

London,

1852-54

Gillespie's Sinim,

Edinburgh,

1854

Golden Manual,

London,

1850

Gregorii Nazianzeni Opera,

Antwerp,

1612

Greswell's Dissertation,

Oxford,

1837

Guizot's European Civilisation,

London,

1846

H

Hammer's Chronographia; appended to translation of Eusebius, &c,

London,

1636

Hardy, Spence, Buddhism,

London,

1853

Harvet, Dr. Gent., Review of Epistle of,

London,

1598

Hay's Sincere Christian,

Dublin,

1783

Heathen Mythology,

London,

S.D.

Herodoti Historia,

Paris,

1592

Hesiodus,

Oxford,

1737

Hesyclii Lexicon,

Leyden,

1688

Hieronymi Opera,

Paris,

1643

Hislop's Light of Prophecy,

Edinburgh,

1846

Homer,

Cambridge,

1711

(pope's),

London,

1715

Horapollo's Hieroglyphics,

Amsterdam,

1835

Horatius,

Paris,

1691

Hue's Voyage dens la Tartarie et Thibet,

Paris,

1857

Humboldt's Mexican Researches,

London,

1814

Hurd's Rites and Ceremonies,

London,

S. D.

Hyde's Religio Persarum,

Oxford,

1700

Hygini Fabulas,

Leipsic,

1856

I

Irenasi Opera,

Leipsic,

1853

J

Jamblichus on the Mysteries,

Chiswick,

1821

Jamieson's Scottish Dictionary,

Edinburgh,

1808

Jewell (British Reformers),

London,

S. D.

Jones's (Sir W.) Works,

London,

1807

Josephus (Greece),

Basle,

1544

Justini Hist. (Hist. Rom. Script.),

Aurelii,

1609

Justini Hist. (Hist. Rom. Script.),

Allobrog

Justinus Martyr,

Wurtzburg,

1777

Justus Lipsius,

London,

1698

Juvenal,

London,

1728

K

Kennedy's Ancient and Hindoo Mythology,

London,

1831

Kennett's Roman Antiquities,

London,

1696

Kitto's Cyclopeedia,

Edinburgh,

1856

Kitto's Illustrated Commentary,

London,

1840

Knox (British Reformers),

London,

S. D.

Knox's History Reformation,

Edinburgh

1846-48

L

Lactantius,

Cambridge,

1685

Lafitan, Mcaurs des Sauvages Americains,

Paris,

1724

Landseer's Sabean Researches,

London,

1823

Layard's Babylon and Nineveh,

London,

1853

Nineveh

London,

1849

Livius,

Amsterdam,

1710

Lorimer's Manual of Presbytery,

Edinburgh,

1842

Luoan. de Bell. Civ.,

Leyden,

1658

Lucianus,

Amsterdam,

1743

Lucretius,

Oxford,

1695

Lycophron (Poet. Green. Min.),

Geneva,

1814

M

Macrobius,

Sanct. Colon.

1521

M'Gavin's Protestant, .

Glasgow,

1850

Maimonides More Nevoehim,

Basle,

1629

Maitland on the Catacombs,

London,

1846

Mallet,

London,

1847

Mallet's Northern Antiquities,

London,

1770

Manilius,

Berlin,

1846

Martialis Epigrammata,

Leyden,

1656

Massy, Memoir of Rev. G.,

London,

1859

Maurice's Indian Antiquities,

London,

(See Note)

Mede's Works,

London,

1672

Middleton's Letter from Rome,

London,

1741

Milner's Church History,

London,

1712

Milton's Paradise Lost,

London,

1695

Minutius Felix,

Leyden,

1672

Missals Romanum,

Paris,

1677

Missals Romanum,

Vienna,

1506

Missionary Record of Free Church,

Edinburgh,

1855

Moor's Hindoo Panttheon,

London,

1810

Morgan's (Lady) Italy,

London,

1824

Moses of Chorene,

London,

1736

Mullet's Dorians,

Oxford,

1830

Mulled Fragmenta,

Paris,

1846-51

N

Newman's Development,

London,

1846

Niebuhr's Roman History,

London,

1855

Nonnus de Phil. Oriental, et Dionysiaca,

Leipsic,

1857

O

Orphic Hymns (Poet. Graasc.),

Paris,

1556

Ouvaroff s Eleusinian Mysteries,

London,

1817

Ovidii Opera,

Leyden,

1661

P

Pancarpium Marie,

Antwerp,

1618

Paradisus Sponsi et Sponsas,

Antwerp,

1618

Parkhurst's Heb. Lexicon,

London,

1799

Parson's Japhet,

London,

1787

Pausanias,

Leipsic,

1696

Paxton's Illustrations, Geography,

Edinburgh,

1842

Persius,

Leyden,

1696

Petri Suavis Polani, Concilium Tridentinum,

Gorinchemi,

1658

Pfeiffer's (Ida), Iceland,

London,

1853

Photii Bibliotheca,

Berlin,

1824

Lexeon Synagogb,

London,

1822

Pindarus,

Oxford,

1697

Pinkerton's Voyages,

London,

1808-14

Platonic Opera,

Paris,

1578

Plinii Opera,

Frankfort,

1599

Plutarchi Opera,

Frankfort,

1599

Pococke's India in Greece,

London,

1852

Pompeii,

London,

1831

Pontificale Romanum,

Venice,

1543

Pontificale Romanum,

Venice,

1572

Poor Man's Manual,

Dublin,

S. D.

Porphyrius de Antro Nympharum,

Utrecht,

1785

Potter's Greek Antiquities,

Oxford,

1697

Prescott's Conquest of Peru,

London,

1855

Mexico,

London,

1843

Prisoiani Opera,

Leipsic,

1819

Proclus in Timaeo,

Vratislavicas,

1847

 

London,

1818

 

Propertius,

Utrecht,

1659

Q

Quarterly Journal of Prophecy,

London,

1852

Quintus Curtius,

Amsterdam,

1684

R

Redhouse's Turkish Dictionary,

London,

1856

Rome in the Nineteenth Century,

London,

1823

Russell's Egypt,

Edinburgh,

1831

Ryle's (Rev. J.) Commentary,

Ipswich,

1858

S

Salverte, Eusebe, Sciences Occultes,

Paris,

1856

Essai sur les Noms,

Paris,

1824

Sanchuniathon,

Bremen,

1837

Savary's Letters on Egypt,

London,

1786

Scottish Protestant,

Glasgow

1852

Septuagint,

Paris,

1628

Servius,

Gottingen,

1826

Seymour's Evenings with Romanists,

London,

1854

Sinclair's (Sir George) Letters to Protestants,

Edinburgh,

1852

Smith's Classical Dictionary,

London,

1859

Socrates Eoolesiastious,

Paris,

1686

Sophocles,

London,

1747

Stanley's History of Philosophy,

London,

1887

Statius,

Leyden,

1671

Stephen's Central America, .

London,

1841

Stookii Clavis,

Lipsim,

1753

Strabo,

Basle,

1649

Suidas,

Geneva,

1619

Symmachi Epistolm,

Douai,

1587

T

Tacitus,

Dublin,

1730

Taylor's Mystic Hymns of Orpheus,

Chiswick,

1824

Pausanias,

London,

1794

Tertulliani Opera,

Paris,

1844

Theocritus (Poet. Graec. Min.),

Cambridge,

1661

Theopompus (Mtiller),

Paris,

1853

Thevenot, Voyages,

Paris,

1689

Thuani Historia,

London,

1733

Todd's Western India,

London,

1839

Toland's Druids,

Edinburgh,

1815

Tooke's Pantheon,

London,

1806

Trim en's Architecture,

London,

1849

Tragus Pompeius (Hist. Rom. Script.),

Aurl.

1609

Tragus Pompeius (Hist. Rom. Script.),

Allobrog.

1609

Turner's Anglo-Saxons,

London,

1823

U

Usher's Sylloge,

Dublin,

1632

V

Valerius Maximus,

Venice,

1605

Vaux's Nineveh,

London,

1861

Antiquities of the British Muveum.

London,

1851

Virgilius,

Paris,

1675

Vitruvius de Architecture,

Leipsic,

1807

Vossius de Idololatria,

Amsterdam,

1668

W

Walpole's Ansayri,

London,

1849

Wilkinson's Egyptians,

London,

1837-41

Williams's Missionary Enterprises,

London,

1847

Wilson's India 3000 Years Ago,

Bombay,

1858

 

Bombay,

1843

 

Wylie's Great Exodus,

London,

1862

X

Xenophontis Opera,

Paris,

1625

Z

Zonaras,

Bonn,

1841

Zosimus (Rom. Hist. Script. Graeci. Min.),

Frankfort,

1590

Note.—Of Maurice's "Indian Antiquities" in the copy quoted, except where otherwise stated, the 1st, 2nd, and 7th vols, are 1806; the 3rd, 1794; the 4th, and 6th, 1800, and the 6th, 1812.

 

List of Illustrations

1

Woman with Cup from Babylon,

2

Woman with Cup from Rome,

3

Triune Divinity of Ancient Assyria,

4

Triune Divinity of Pagan Siberians,

5

Goddess Mother and Son, from Babylon,

6

Goddess Mother and Son, from India,

7

Janus and his Club,

8

Diana of Ephesus,

9

Three-Horned Head of Togrul Begh,

10

Assyrian Hercules, or Zernebogus,

11

Horned Head-Dresses,

12

Three-Horned Cap Vishnu,

13

Tyrian Hercules,

14

Winged Bull from Nimrud,

15

Winged Bull from Persepolis,

16

Centaur from Babylonia,

17

Centaur from India,

18

Osiris of Egypt,

19

Egyptian High Priest,

20

Egyptian Calf-Idol,

21

Assyrian Divinity, with Spotted Fallow-Deer,

22

Bacchus, with Cup and Branch,

23

An Egyptian Goddess, and Indian Crishna, crushing the Serpent's Head,

24

Baal-Berith, Lord of the Covenant,

25

Dove and Olive Branch of Assyrian Juno,

26

Circe, the Daughter of the Sun,

27

The Yule Log,

28

Roman Emperor Traian burning Incense to Diana,

29

Egyptian God Sob, and Symbolic Goose,

30

The Goose of Cupid,

31

Sacred Egg of Heliopolis, and Typhon's Egg,

32

Mystic Egg of Astarte,

33

Juno, with Pomegranate,

34

Two-Headed God,

35

Cupid with Wine-Cup and Ivy Garland of Bacchus,

36

Woman with Cup from Babylon,

37

Woman with Cup from Rome,

38

Triune Divinity of Ancient Assyria,

39

Triune Divinity of Pagan Siberians,

40

Goddess Mother and Son, from Babylon,

41

Goddess Mother and Son, from India,

42

Janus and his Club,

43

Diana of Ephesus,

44

Three-Horned Head of Togrul Begh,

45

Assyrian Hercules, or Zernebogus,

46

Horned Head-Dresses,

47

Three-Horned Cap Vishnu,

48

Tyrian Hercules,

49

Winged Bull from Nimrud,

50

Winged Bull from Persepolis,

51

Centaur from Babylonia,

52

Centaur from India,

53

Osiris of Egypt,

54

Egyptian High Priest,

55

Egyptian Calf-Idol,

56

Assyrian Divinity, with Spotted Fallow-Deer,

57

Bacchus, with Cup and Branch,

58

An Egyptian Goddess, and Indian Crishna, crushing the Serpent's Head,

59

Baal-Berith, Lord of the Covenant,

60

Dove and Olive Branch of Assyrian Juno,

61

Circe, the Daughter of the Sun,

62

The Yule Log,

63

Roman Emperor Traian burning Incense to Diana,

64

Egyptian God Sob, and Symbolic Goose,

65

The Goose of Cupid,

66

Sacred Egg of Heliopolis, and Typhon's Egg,

67

Mystic Egg of Astarte,

68

Juno, with Pomegranate,

69

Two-Headed God,

70

Cupid with Wine-Cup and Ivy Garland of Bacchus,

71

Symbols of Nimrod and Baal-Berith,

72

Cores, Mother of Bar, "the Son," and of Bar, "the Corn",

73

Sun-Worship in Egypt,

74

Popish Image of "God," with Clover Crown,

75

Cupid, with Symbolic "Heart",

76

Vishnu, with same,

77

Lion of Mithra, with Bee in its Mouth,

78

The Cruciform T or Tau of Ancient Nations,

79

Ancient Pagans adorned with Crosses,

80

Bacchus, with Head-Band covered with Crosses,

81

Various Examples of Pagan Crosses,

82

Egyptian Pontiff-King (under a Canopy) borne on Men's Shoulders,

83

Assyrian Dagon, with Fish-Head Mitre,

84

Maltese God with similar Mitre,

85

The Sacrificial Mitre of Chinese Emperor, as Pontifex Maximus of the Nation,

86

Babylonian Crosier,

87

The Deified Serpent, or Serpent of Fire,

88

Roman Fire-Worship and Serpent-Worship combined,

89

Hindu Goddess Devaki, with the Infant Crishna at her breast,

90

The Ram-Headed God of Egypt,

91

The Ram-Headed Boy-God of Etruria,

92

Indian Goddess Lakshmi, sitting in a Lotus-flower, borne by a Tortoise,

93

Virgin and Child sitting in Cup of Tulip,

94

Popish Image of" God," with bandaged Globe of Paganism,

95

The Serpent of Esculapius, and the Flv-Destroying Swallow, the Symbol of Beel-zebub, from Pompeii,

96

Supreme Divinity of Ancient Persia, with bands of Cybele, "the Binder with Cords".


Note R.—Appendix—Attes, the Sinner—Page 274.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:41 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:42 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE R. Page 274.

Attes, the Sinner.

WE have seen that the name Pan signifies "to turn aside," and have concluded that as it is a synonym for Hata, "to sin," the proper generic meaning of which is "to turn aside from the straight line," that name was the name of our first parent, Adam. One of the names of Eve, as the primeval goddess, worshipped in ancient Babylon, while it gives confirmation to this conclusion, elucidates also another classical myth in a somewhat unexpected way. The name of that primeval goddess, as given by Berosus, is Thalatth, which, as we have seen, signifies "the rib." Adam's name, as her husband, would be "Baal-Thalatth," "Husband of the rib;" for Baal signifies Lord in the sense frequently of "Husband." But "Baal-Thalatth," according to a peculiar Hebrew idiom already noticed (p. 38, Note), signifies also "He that halted or went sideways." [1] This is the remote origin of Vulcan's lameness; for Vulcan, as the "Father of the gods," [2] needed to be identified with Adam, as well as the other "fathers of the gods," to whom we have already traced him. Now Adam, in consequence of his sin and departure from the straight line of duty, was, all his life after, in a double sense "Baal-Thalatth," not only the "Husband of the rib," but "The man that halted or walked sideways." In memory of this turning aside, no doubt it was that the priests of Baal (1 Kings 18:26) "limped at the altar," when supplicating their god to hear them (for that is the exact meaning in the original of the word rendered "leaped”—see KITTO's Bib. Cyclop, vol. i. p. 261), and that the Druidic priests went sideways in performing some of their sacred rites, as appears from the following passage of Davies: "The dance is performed with solemn festivity about the lakes, round which and the sanctuary the priests move sideways, whilst the sanctuary is earnestly invoking the gliding king, before whom the fair one retreats upon the veil that covers the huge stones" (Druids, p. 171). This Davies regards as connected with the story of Jupiter, the father of the gods, violating his own daughter in the form of a serpent (p. 561). Now, let the reader look at what is on the breast of the Ephesian Diana, as the Mother of the gods (ante, p. 29), and he will see a reference to her share in the same act of going aside; for there is the crab, and how does a crab go but sideways? This, then, shows the meaning of another of the signs of the Zodiac. Cancer commemorates the fatal turning aside of our first parent from the paths of righteousness, when the covenant of Eden was broken.

 [[@Page:323]]The Pagans knew that this turning aside or going sideways, implied deatli—the death of the soul—("In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die"); and, therefore, while at the spring festival of Cybele and Attes, there were great lamentations for the death of Attes, so on the Hilaria or rejoicing festival of the 25th of March—that is, Lady-day, the last day of the festival—the mourning was turned into joy, "on occasion of the dead god being restored to life again" (DUPUIS, Origine de tous les Cultes, torn. iv. pt. 1, p. 253, Paris L'an hi. de la Republique [1794]). If Attes was he that by "his turning aside" brought sin and death into the world, what could the life be to which he was so speedily restored, but just that new and divine life which enters every soul when it is "born again," and so "passes from death unto life." When the promise was given that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head, and Adam grasped it by faith, that, there can be no doubt, was evidence that the divine life was restored, and that he was born again. And thus do the very Mysteries of Attes, which were guarded with special jealousy, and the secret meaning of which Pausanias declares that he found it impossible, notwithstanding all his efforts to discover (Lib. vii., Achaica, cap. 17), bear their distinct testimony, when once the meaning of the name of Attes is deciphered, to the knowledge which paganism itself had of the real nature of the Fall, and of the essential character of that death, which was threatened in the primeval covenant.

This new birth of Attes laid the foundation for his being represented as a little child, and so being identified with Adonis, who, though he died a full-grown man, was represented in that very way. In the Eleusinian Mysteries, that commemorated the rape of Proserpine, that is, the seduction of Eve, the lamented god, or Bacchus, was represented as a babe, at the breast of the great Mother, who by Sophocles is called Deo (Antigone, v. 1121, Oxon. 1808). As Deo or Demete, applied to the Great Mother, is evidently just another form of Idaia Mater, "The Mother of Knowledge" (the verb "to know" being either Daa or Idaa), this little child, in one of his aspects, was no doubt the same as Attes, and thus also Deoius, as his name is given (ante, p. 20). The Hilaria, or rejoicing festival of the 25th of March, or Lady-day, owed its gladness to the Annunciation of a birth yet to come, even the birth of the woman's seed; but, at the same time, the joy of that festival was enhanced by the immediate new birth that very day of Attes, "The sinner," or Adam, who, in consequence of his breach of the covenant, had become dead in "trespasses and sins."



[1]         The Chaldee Thalatth, "a rib" or a "side," comes from the verb Thalaa, the Chaldee form of Tzalaa, which signifies "to turn aside," "to halt," "to sidle," or "to walk sideways."

[2]          For Vulcan as "the first of the gods," see Minutius Felix, Octavius, p. 163.


Note Q.—Appendix—The Slaying of the Witnesses—Page 268.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:38 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:39 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE Q, Page 268.

The Slaying of the Witnesses.

IS it past, or is it still to come? This is a vital question. The favourite doctrine at this moment is, that it is past centuries ago, and that no such dark night of suffering to the saints of God can ever come again, as happened just before the era of the Reformation. This is the cardinal principle of a work that has just appeared, under the title of The Great Exodus, which implies, that however much the truth may be assailed, however much the saints of God may be threatened, however their fears may be aroused, they have no real reason to fear, for that the Red Sea will divide, the tribes of the Lord will pass through dry shod, and all their enemies, like Pharaoh and his host, shall sink in overwhelming ruin. If the doctrine maintained by many of the soberest interpreters of Scripture for a century past, including such names as Brown of Haddington, Thomas Scott, and others, be well founded-viz., that the putting down of the testimony of the witnesses is till to come, this theory must not only be a delusion, but a delusion of most fatal tendency—a delusion that by throwing professors off their guard, and giving them an excuse for taking their ease, rather than standing in the high places of the field, and bearing bold and unflinching testimony for Christ, directly paves the way for that very extinction of the testimony which is predicted. I enter not into any historical disquisition as to the question, whether, as a matter of fact, it was true that the witnesses were slain before Luther appeared. Those who wish to see an historical argument on the subject may see it in the Red Republic, which I venture to think has not yet been answered. Neither do I think it worth while particularly to examine the assumption of Dr. Wylie, and I hold it to be a pure and gratuitous assumption, that the 1260 days during which the saints of God in Gospel times were to suffer for righteousness' sake, has any relation whatever, as a half period, to a whole, symbolised by the "Seven times" that passed over Nebuchadnezzar when he was suffering and chastened for his pride and blasphemy, as the representative of the "world power." [1] But to this only I call the reader's attention, that even on the [[@Page:321]]theory of Dr. Wylie himself, the witnesses of Christ could not possibly have finished their testimony before the Decree of the Immaculate Conception came forth. The theory of Dr. Wylie, and those who take the same general view as he, is, that the "finishing of the testimony," means "completing the elements" of the testimony, bearing a full and complete testimony against the errors of Rome. Dr. Wylie himself admits that "the dogma of the 'Immaculate Conception' [which was given forth only during the last few years]declares Mary truly 'divine,' and places her upon the altars of Rome as practically the sole and supreme object of worship" (The Great Exodus). This was Never done before, and therefore the errors and blasphemies of Rome were not complete until that decree had gone forth, if even then. Now, if the corruption and blasphemy of Rome were "incomplete" up to our own day, and if they have risen to a height which was never witnessed before, as all men instinctively felt and declared, when that decree was issued, how could the testimony of the witnesses be "complete" before Luther's day! It is nothing to say that the principle and the germ of this decree were in operation long before. The same thing may be [[@Page:322]]said of all the leading errors of Rome long before Luther's day. They were all in essence and substance very broadly developed, from near the time when Gregory the Great commanded the image of the Virgin to be carried forth in the processions that supplicated the Most High to remove the pestilence from Rome, when it was committing such havoc among its citizens. But that does in no wise prove that they were "complete," or that the witnesses of Christ could then "finish their testimony" by bearing a full and "complete testimony" against the errors and corruptions of the Papacy. I submit this view of the matter to every intelligent reader for his prayerful consideration. If we have not "understanding of the times," it is vain to expect that we "shall know what Israel ought to do." If we are saying "Peace and safety," when trouble is at hand, or underrating the nature of that trouble, we cannot be prepared for the grand struggle when that struggle shall come.



[1]             The author does not himself make the humiliation of the Babylonian king a type of the humiliation of the Church. How then can he establish any typical relation between the "seven times" in the one case, and the "seven times" in the other? He seems to think it quite enough to establish that relation, if he can find one point of resemblance between Nebuchadnezzar, the humbled despot, and the "world-power" that oppresses the Church during the two periods of "seven times" respectively. That one point is the "madness" of the one and the other. It might be asked, Was, then, the "world-power" in its right mind before "the seven times" began? But waiving that, here is the vital objection to this view: The madness in the case of Nebuchadnezzar was simply an affliction; in the other it was sin. The madness of Nebuchadnezzar did not, so far as we know, lead him to oppress a single individual; the madness of the "world-power," according to the theory, is essentially characterised by the oppression of the saints. Where, then, can there be the least analogy between the two cases? The "seven times" of the Babylonian king were seven times of humiliation, and humiliation alone. The suffering monarch cannot be a type of the suffering Church; and still less can his "seven times" of deepest humiliation, when all power and glory was taken from him, be a type of the "seven times" of the "world-power," when that "world-power" was to concentrate in itself all the glory and grandeur of the earth. This is one fatal objection to this theory. Then let the reader only look at the following sentence from the work under consideration, and compare it with historical fact, and he will see still more how unfounded the theory is: "It follows undeniably," says the author (pp. 184-185), "that as the Church is to be tyrannised over by the idolatrous power throughout the whole of the seven times, she will be oppressed during the first half of the 'seven times,' by idolatry in the form of Paganism, and during the last half by idolatry in the form of Popery." Now, the first half, or 1260 years, during which the Church was to be oppressed by Pagan idolatry, ran out exactly, it is said, in AD 530 or 532; when suddenly Justinian changed the scene, and brought the new oppressor on the stage. But I ask where was the "world-power" to be found up to 530, maintaining "idolatry in the form of Paganism"! From the time of Gratian at least, who, about 376, formally abolished the worship of the gods, and confiscated their revenues, where was there any such Pagan power to persecute? There is certainly a very considerable interval between 376 and 532. The necessities of the theory require that Paganism, and that avowed Paganism, be it observed, shall be persecuting the Church straight away till 532; but for 156 years there was no such thing as a Pagan "world-power" in existence to persecute the Church. "The legs of the lame," says Solomon, "are not equal;" and if the 1260 years of Pagan persecution lack no less that 156 years of the predicted period, surely it must be manifest that the theory halts very much on one side at least. But I ask, do the facts agree with the theory, even in regard to the running out of the second 1260 years in 1792, at the period of the French Revolution? If the 1260 years of Papal oppression terminated then, and if then the Ancient of days came to begin the final judgment on the beast, He came also to do something else. This will appear from the language of Daniel 7:21-22: "I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom." This language implies that the judgment on the little horn, and the putting of the saints in possession "of the kingdom" are contemporaneous events. Long has the rule of the kingdoms of this world been in the hands of worldly men, that knew not God nor obeyed Him; but now, when He to whom the kingdom belongs comes to inflict judgment on His enemies, He comes also to transfer the rule of the kingdoms of this world from the hands of those who have abused it, into the hand of those that fear God and govern their public conduct by His revealed will. This is evidently the meaning of the Divine statement. Now, on the supposition that 1792 was the predicted period of the coming of the Ancient of days, it follows that, ever since, the principles of God's Word must have been leavening the governments of Europe more and more, and good and holy men, of the spirit of Daniel and Nehemiah, must have been advanced to the high places of power. But has it been so in point of fact? Is there one nation in all Europe that acts on Scriptural principles at this day? Does Britain itself do so? Why, it is notorious that it was just three years after the reign of righteousness, according to this theory, must have commenced that that unprincipled policy began that has left hardly a shred of appearance of respect for the honour of the "Prince of the Kings of the earth" in the public rule of this nation. It was in 1795 that Pitt, and the British Parliament, passed the Act for the erecting of the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth, which formed the beginning of a course that, year by year, has lifted the Man of Sin into a position of power in this land, that threatens, if Divine mercy do not miraculously interfere, to bring us speedily back again under complete thraldom to Antichrist. Yet, according to the theory of The Great Exodus, the very opposite of this ought to have been these.


Note P.—Appendix—The Roman Imperial Standard of the Dragon a Symbol of Fire-worship—Page 238.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:34 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:36 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE P, Page 238

The Roman Imperial Standard of the Dragon a Symbol of Fire-worship.

THE passage of Ammianus Marcellinus, that speaks of that standard, calls it "purpureum signum draconis" (lib. xvi. cap. 12, p. 145). On this may be raised the question, Has the epithet purpureum, as describing the colour of the dragon, any reference to fire? The following extract from Salverte may cast some light upon it: "The dragon figured among the military ensigns of the Assyrians. Cyrus caused it to be adopted by the Persians and Medes. Under the Roman emperors, and under the emperors of Byzantium, each cohort or centuria bore for an ensign a dragon" (Des Sciences occultes, Appendix. Note A. p. 486). There is no doubt that the dragon or serpent standard of the Assyrians and Persians had reference to fire-worship, the worship of fire and the serpent being mixed up together in both these countries (see LAYARD's Nineveh and its Remains, vol. ii. pp. 468-469). As the Romans, therefore, borrowed these standards evidently from these sources, it is to be presumed that they viewed them in the very same light as those from whom they borrowed them, especially as that light was so exactly in harmony with their own system of fire-worship. The epithet purpureus or "purple" does not indeed naturally convey the idea of fire-colour to us. But it does convey the idea of red; and red in one shade or another, among idolatrous nations, has almost with one consent been used to representee. The Egyptians (BUNSEN, vol. i. p. 290), the Hindoos (MOOR's Pantheon, "Brahma," p. 6), the Assyrians (Layard's Nineveh, &c, vol. ii. chap. 3, p. 312, Note), all represented fire by red. The Persians evidently did the same, for when Quintus Curtius describes the Magi as following "the sacred and eternal fire," he describes the 365 youths, who formed the train of these Magi, as clad in "scarlet garments" (lib. iii. cap. 3, p. 42), the colour of these garments, no doubt, having reference to they're whose ministers they were. Puniceus is equivalent to purpureus, for it was in Phenicia [six]that the purpura, or purple-fish, was originally found. The colour derived from that purple-fish was scarlet, and it is the very name of that Phoenician purple-fish, "arguna," that is used in Daniel 5:16, 19, where it is said that he that should interpret the handwriting on the wall should "be clothed in scarlet" (see Kitto's illustrated Commentary on Exodus Exodus 35:35, vol. i. p. 215). The Tyrians had the art of making true purples, as well as scarlet; and [[@Page:320]]there seems no doubt that purpureus is frequently used in the ordinary sense attached to our word purple. But the original meaning of the epithet is scarlet; and as bright scarlet colour is a natural colour to representee, so we have reason to believe that that colour, when used for robes of state among the Tyrians, had special reference to fire; for the Tyrian Hercules, who was regarded as the inventor of purple (BRYANT, vol. iii. p. 485), was regarded as "King of Fire," ἀ ᾠὰ πυρὸς (NONNUS, Dionysiaca, lib. xl. 1. 369, vol. ii. p. 223). Now, when we find that the purpura of Tyre produced the scarlet colour which naturally represented fire, and that puniceus, which is equivalent to purpureus, is evidently used for scarlet, there is nothing that forbids us to understand purpureus in the same sense here, but rather requires it. But even though it were admitted that the tinge was deeper, and purpureus meant the true purple, as red, of which it is a shade, is the established colour of fire, and as the serpent was the universally acknowledged symbol of fire-worship, the probability is strong that the use of a red dragon as the Imperial standard of Rome was designed as an emblem of that system of fire-worship on which the safety of the empire was believed so vitally to hinge.


Note O.—Appendix—The Story of Phaethon—Page 230.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:32 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:33 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE O, Page 230.

The Story of Phaethon.

THE identity of Phaethon and Nimrod has much to support it besides the prima facie evidence arising from the statement that Phaethon was an Æthiopian or Cushite, and the resemblance of his fate, in being cast down from heaven while driving the chariot of the sun, as "the child of the Sun," to the casting down of Molk-Gheber, whose very name, as the god of fire, identifies him with Nimrod.

1.     Phaethon is said by Apollodorus (vol. i. p. 354) to have been the son of Tithonus; but if the meaning of the name Tithonus be examined, it will be evident that he was Tithonus himself. Tithonus was the husband of Aurora (DYMOCK, sub voce). In the physical sense, as we have already seen, Aur-ora signifies "The awakener of the light;" to correspond with this Tithonus signifies "The kindler of light," or "setter on fire." Now "Phaethon, the son of Tithonus," is in Chaldee "Phaethon Bar Tithon." But this also signifies "Phaethon, the son that set on fire." Assuming, then, the identity of Phaethon and Tithonus, this goes far to identify Phaethon with Nimrod; for Homer, as we have seen (Odyssey, lib. v. 1. 121, p. 127), mentions the marriage of Aurora with Orion, the mighty Hunter, whose identity with Nimrod is established. Then the name of the celebrated son that sprang from the union between Aurora and Tithonus, shows that Tithonus, in his original character, must have been indeed the same as "the mighty hunter" of Scripture, for the name of that son was Memnon (MARTIAL, lib. viii., s. 21, p. 440, and OVID, Metam. lib. xiii. 1. 517, vol. ii. p. 467), which signifies "The son of the spotted one," [1] thereby identifying the father with Nimrod, whose emblem was the spotted leopard's skin. As Ninus or Nimrod, was worshipped as the son of his own wife, and that wife Aurora, the goddess of the dawn, we see how exact is the reference to Phaethon, when Isaiah, speaking of the King of Babylon, who was his representative, says, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning" (Isaiah 14:12). The marriage of Orion with Aurora; in other words, his setting up as "The kindler of light," or becoming the "author of fire-worship," is said by Homer to have been the cause of his death, he having in consequence perished under the wrath of the gods. (Odyss. lib. v. 1. 124, p. 127)

2.     That Phaethon was currently represented as the son of Aurora, the common story, as related by OVID, sufficiently proves. While Phaethon claimed to be the son of Phoebus, or the sun, he was reproached with being only the son of Merops—i.e., of the mortal husband of his mother Clymene (Ovid, Metam. lib. ii. 11. 179-184, and Note). The story implies that that mother gave herself out to be Aurora, not in the physical sense [[@Page:318]]of that term, but in its mystical sense; as "The woman pregnant with light;" and, consequently, her son was held up as the great "Light-bringer" who was to enlighten the world,—"Lucifer, the son of the morning," who was the pretended enlightener of the souls of men. [2] The name Lucifer, in Isaiah, is the very word from which Eleleus, one of the names of Bacchus, evidently comes. It comes from "Helel," which signifies "to irradiate" or "to bring light," and is equivalent to the name Tithon. Now we have evidence that Lucifer, the son of Aurora, or the morning, was worshipped in the very same character as Nimrod, when he appeared in his new character as a little child; for there is an inscription extant in these word:—

"Bone Deo Puero Phosphoro."

(See Wilkinson, vol. iv. P. 410.)

This Phaethon, or Lucifer, who was cast down is further proved to be Janus; for Janus is called "Pater Matutinus" (HORACE); and the meaning of this name will appear in one of its aspects when the meaning of the name of the Dea Matuta is ascertained. Dea Matuta signifies "The kindling or Light-bringing goddess," [3] and accordingly, by Priscian, she is identified with Aurora: "Matuta, quce significant Aurorame" (Priscian, ii. p. 591, apud Sir WILLIAM Betham's Etruria, vol. ii. p. 53). Matutinus is evidently just the correlate of Matuta, goddess of the morning; Janus, therefore, as Matutinus, is "Lucifer, son of the morning." But further, Matuta is identified with Ino, after she had plunged into the sea, and had, along with her son Melikerta, been changed into a sea-divinity {Gradus ad Parnassum, sub voce "INO"). Consequently her son Melikerta, "king of the walled city," is the same as Janus Matutinus, or Lucifer, Phaethon, or Nimrod.

There is still another link by which Melikerta, the sea-divinity, or Janus Matutinus, is identified with the primitive god of the fire-worshippers. The most common name of Ino, or Matuta, after she had passed through the waters, was Leukothoe (Ovid, Metam. lib iv. 11. 541-542). Now, Leukothoe or Leukothea has a double meaning, as it is derived either from "Lukhoth," which signifies "to light," or "set on fire," [4] or from Lukoth "to glean." In the Maltese medal given (ante, p. 160), the reader will see both of these senses exemplified. The ear of corn, at the side of the goddess, which is more commonly held in her hand, while really referring in its hidden meaning to her being the Mother of Bar, "the son," to the uninitiated exhibits her as Spicilega, or "The Gleaner,"—"the popular name," says Hyde (De Religione, Vet. Pers., p. 392), "for the female with the ear of wheat represented in the constellation Virgo." In Bryant (vol. hi. p. 245), Cybele is represented with two or three ears of corn in her hand; for as there were three peculiarly distinguished Bacchuses, there were [[@Page:319]]consequently as many "Bars," and she might therefore be represented with one, two, or three ears in her hand. But to revert to the Maltese medal just referred to, the flames coming out of the head of Lukothea, the "Gleaner," show that, though she has passed through the waters, she is still Lukhothea, "the Burner," or "Light-giver." And the rays around the mitre of the god on the reverse entirely agree with the character of that god as Eleleus, or Phaethon—in other words, as "The Shining Bar." Now, this "Shining Bar," as Melikerta, "king of the walled city," occupies the very place of "Ala-Mahozim," whose representative the Pope is elsewhere (ante, p. 252) proved to be. But he is equally the sea-divinity, who in that capacity wears the mitre of Dagon (compare woodcuts pp. 160 and 216. where different forms of the same Maltese divinity are given). The fish-head mitre which the Pope wears shows that, in this character also, as the "Beast from the sea," he is the unquestionable representative of Melikerta.


[1]             From Tzet or Tzit, "to kindle," or "set on fire," which in Chaldee becomes Tit, and Thon, "to give. 2 From Mem or Mom, "spotted," and Non, "a son."

[2]             The reader will see, from the following extracts from the Pancarpium Marianum that the Virgin of Rome is not only called by the name of Aurora, but that that name is evidently applied to her in two district senses specified in the text. "O Aurora Maria, quas a lumine incepisti, crevisti cum lumine, et nunquam lumine privaris. Sicut lux meridiana clara es. Dominum concepisti, que dixit, Lux sum mundi"

[3]             Matuta comes from the same word as Tithonus—i.e., Tzet, Tzit, or Tzut, which in Chaldee becomes Tet, Tit, or Tut, "to light" or "set on fire." From Tit, "to set on fire," comes the Latin Titio, "a firebrand;" and from Tut, with the formative M prefixed, comes Matuta—-just as from Nasseh, "to forget," with the same formative prefixed, comes Manasseh, "forgetting," the name of the eldest son of Joseph (Genesis 41:51). The root of this verb is commonly given as "Itzt;" but see Baker's Lexicon (p. 176), where it is also given as "Tzt." It is evidently from this root that the Sanscrit "Suttee" already referred to comes.

[4]             In Hebrew, the verb is Lhth, but the Hebrew l"He" frequently becomes in Chaldee Heth, with the power of kh.


Note N.—Appendix—Zoroaster, the Head of the Fire-Worshippers—Page 228.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:28 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:31 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE N, p. 228.

Zoroaster, the Head of the Fire-Worshippers.

That Zoroaster was head of the fire-worshippers, the following, among other evidence, may prove. Not to mention that the name Zoroaster is almost a synonym for a fire-worshipper, the testimony of Plutarch is of weight: "Plutarchus agnoscit Zoroastrem apud Chaldseos Magos instituisse, Persse etiam sus habuerunt. [1] Arabica quoque Historia (ab Erpenio edita) tradit Zaradussit nonprimum instituisse, sed reformasse religionem Persarum et Magorum, qui divisi errant in plures sectas" (Clericus, lib. i. De Chaldceis, sect. i. cap. 2, vol. ii. p. 195); "Plutarch acknowledges that Zoroaster among the Chaldsens instituted the Magi, in imitation of whom the Persians also had their (Magi). The Arabian History also relates that Zaradussit, or Zerdusht, did not for the first time institute, but (only) reform the religion [[@Page:314]]of the Persians and Magi, who had been divided into many sects." The testimony of Agathias is to the same effect. He gives it as his opinion that the worship of fire came from the Chaldeans to the Persians, lib. ii. cap. 25, pp. 118-119. That the Magi among the Persians were the guardians of "the sacred and eternal fire" may be assumed from Curtius (lib. hi. cap. 3, pp. 41-42), who says that fire was carried before them "on silver altars;" from the statement of Strabo (Geograph., lib. xv. p. 696), that "the Magi kept upon the altar a quantity of ashes and an immortal fire," and of Herodotus (lib. i. p. 63), that "without them, no sacrifice could be offered." The fire-worship was an essential part of the system of the Persian Magi (WILSON, Par see Religion, pp. 228-235). This fire-worship the Persian Magi did not pretend to have invented; but their popular story carried the origin of it up to the days of Hoshang, the father of Tahmurs, who founded Babylon (WILSON, pp. 202-203, and 579)—i.e., the time of Nimrod. In confirmation of this, we have seen that a fragment of Apollodorus (MULLER, 68) makes Ninus the head of the fire-worshipper, Layard, quoting this fragment, supposes Ninus to be different from Zoroaster (Nineveh and its Remains, vol. ii. p. 443, Note); but it can be proved, that though many others bore the name of Zoroaster, the lines of evidence all converge, so as to demonstrate that Ninus and Nimrod and Zoroaster were one. The legends of Zoroaster show that he was known not only as a Magus, but as a Warrior (ARNOBIUS, lib. i. p. 327). Plato says that Eros Armenius (whom CLERICUS, De Chaldaeis, states, vol. ii. p. 195, to have been the same as the fourth Zoroaster) died and rose again after ten days, having been killed in battle; and that what he pretended to have learned in Hades, he communicated to men in his new life (PLATO, De Republica, lib. x. vol. ii. p. 614). We have seen the death of Nimrod, the original Zoroaster, was not that of a warrior slain in battle; but yet this legend of the warrior Zoroaster is entirely in favour of the supposition that the original Zoroaster, the original Head of the Magi, was not a priest merely, but a warrior-king. Everywhere are the Zoroastrians, or fire-worshippers, called Guebres or Gabrs. Now, Genesis 10:8 proves that Nimrod was the first of the "Gabrs."

As Zoroaster was head of the fire-worshippers, so Tammuz was evidently the same. We have seen evidence already that sufficiently proves the identity of Tammuz and Nimrod; but a few words may still more decisively prove it, and cast further light on the primitive fire-worship.

1.     In the first place, Tammuz and Adonis are proved to be the same divinity. Jerome, who lived in Palestine when the rites of Tammuz were observed, up to the very time when he wrote, expressly identifies Tammuz and Adonis (vol. ii. p. 353), in his Commentary on Ezekiel, Ezekiel 8:14, where the Jewish women are represented as weeping for Tammuz; and the testimony of Jerome on this subject is universally admitted. Then the mode in which the rites of Tammuz or Adonis were celebrated in Syria was essentially the same as the rites of Osiris. The statement of Lucian (De Dea Syria, vol. iii. p. 454) strikingly shows this, and Bunsen (vol i. p. 443) distinctly admits it. The identity of Osiris and Nimrod has been largely proved in the body of this work. When, therefore, Tammuz or Adonis is identified with Osiris, the identification of Tammuz with Nimrod follows of course. And then this entirely agrees with the language of Bion, in his Lament for Adonis, where he represents Venus as going in a frenzy of grief, like a Bacchant, after the death of Adonis, through the woods and valleys, and "calling upon her Assyrian husband." (BION Idyll, Id. I. v. 24, in Poetce Minores Grceci, p. 304) It equally agrees with the statement of Maimonides, that when Tammuz was put to death, the grand scene of weeping for that death was in the temple of Babylon (see [[@Page:315]]ante, p. 62).

2.     Now, if Tammuz was Nimrod, the examination of the meaning of the name confirms the connection of Nimrod with the first fire-worship. After what has already been advanced, there needs no argument to show that, as the Chaldeans were the first who introduced the name and power of kings (SYNCELLUS, vol. i. p. 169), and as Nimrod was unquestionably the first of these kings, and the first, consequently, that bore the title of Moloch, or king, so it was in honour of him that the "children were made to pass through the fire to Moloch." But the intention of that passing through the fire was undoubtedly to purify. The name Tammuz has evidently reference to this, for it signifies "to perfect," that is, "to purify" [2] "by fire;" and if Nimrod was, as the Paschal Chronicle (vol. i. pp. 50-51), and the general voice of antiquity, represent him to have been, the originator of fire-worship, this name very exactly expresses his character in that respect. It is evident, however, from the Zoroastrian verse, elsewhere quoted, that fire itself was worshipped as Tammuz, for it is called the "Father that perfected all things." In one respect this represented fire as the Creative god; but in another, there can be no doubt that it had reference to the "perfecting" of men by "purifying" them. And especially it perfected those whom it consumed. This was the very idea that, from time immemorial until very recently, led so many widows in India to immolate themselves on the funeral piles of their husbands, the woman who thus burned herself being counted blessed, because she became Suttee [3]i.e., "Pure by burning." And this also, no doubt, reconciled the parents who actually sacrificed their children to Moloch, to the cruel sacrifice, the belief being cherished that the fire that consumed them also "perfected” them, and made them meet for eternal happiness. As both the passing through the fire, and the burning in the fire, were essential rites in the worship of Moloch or Nimrod, this is an argument that Nimrod was Tammuz. As the priest and representative of the perfecting or purifying fire, it was he that carried on the work of perfecting or purifying by fire, and so he was called by its name.

When we turn to the legends of India, we find evidence to the very same effect as that which we have seen with regard to Zoroaster and Tammuz as head of the fire-worshippers. The fifth head of Brahma, that was cut off for inflicting distress on the three worlds, by the "effulgence of its dazzling beams," referred to in the text of this work, identifies itself with Nimrod. The fact that that fifth head was represented as having read the Vedas, or sacred books produced by the other four heads, shows, I think, a succession. [4] Now, coming down from Noah, what would that succession [[@Page:316]]be? We have evidence from Berosus, that, in the days of Belus—that is, Nimrod—the custom of making representations like that of two-headed Janus, had begun. [5] Assume, then, that Noah, as having lived in two worlds, has his two heads. Ham is the third, Cush the fourth, and Nimrod is, of course, the fifth. And this fifth head was cut off for doing the very thing for which Nimrod actually was cut off. I suspect that this Indian myth is the key to open up the meaning of a statement of Plutarch, which, according to the terms of it, as it stands, is visibly absurd. It is as follows: Plutarch (in the fourth book of his Symposiaca, Qusest. 5, vol. ii. p. 670, B) says that "the Egyptians were of the opinion that darkness was prior to light, and that the latter [viz. light]was produced from mice, in the fifth generation, at the time of the new moon" In India, we find that "a new moon" was produced in a different sense from the ordinary meaning of that term, and that the production of that new moon was not only important in Indian mythology, but evidently agreed in time with the period when the fifth head of Brahma scorched the world with its insufferable splendour. The account of its production runs thus: that the gods and mankind were entirely discontented with the moon which they had got, "Because it gave no light" and besides the plants were poor and the fruits of no use, and that therefore they churned the White sea [or, as it is commonly expressed, "they churned the ocean"], when all things were mingled—i.e., were thrown into confusion, and that then a new moon, with a new regent, was appointed, which brought in an entirely new system of things (Asiatic Researches, vol. ix. p. 98). From MAURICE'S Indian Antiquities (vol. ii. sect. 6, pp. 264-266), we learn that at this very time of the churning of the ocean, the earth was set on fire, and a great conflagration was the result. But the name of the moon in India is Soma, or Som (for the final a is only a breathing, and the word is found in the name of the famous temple of Sonmsaxt, which name signifies "Lord of the Moon"), and the moon in India is male. As this transaction is symbolical, the question naturally arises, who could be meant by the moon, or regent of the moon, who was cast off in the fifth generation of the world? The name Som shows at once who he must have been. Som is just the name of Shem; for Shem's name comes from Shorn, "to appoint," and is legitimately represented either by the name Som, or Sem, as it is in Greek; and it was precisely to get rid of Shem (either after his father's death, or when the infirmities of old age were coming upon him) as the great instructor of the world, that is, as the great diffuser of spiritual light, that in the fifth generation the world was thrown into confusion and the earth set on fire. The propriety of Shem's being compared to the moon will appear if we consider the way in which his father Noah was evidently symbolised. The head of a family is divinely compared to the sun, as in the dream of Joseph (Genesis 37:9), and it may be easily conceived how Noah would, by his posterity in general, be looked up to as occupying the paramount place as the Sun of the world; and accordingly Bryant, Davies, Faber, and others, have agreed in recognising Noah as so symbolised by Paganism. When, however, his younger son—for Shem was younger than Japhet— (Genesis 10:21) was substituted for his father, to whom the world had looked up in comparison of the "greater light," Shem would naturally, especially by those who disliked him and rebelled against him, be compared to "the lesser light," or the moon. [6]

Now, the [[@Page:317]]production of light by mice at this period, comes in exactly to confirm this deduction. A mouse in Chaldee is "Aakbar;" and Gheber, or Kheber, in Arabic, Turkish, and some of the other eastern dialects, becomes "Akbar," as in the well-known Moslem saying, "Allar Akbar," "God is Great." So that the whole statement of Plutarch, when stripped of its nonsensical garb, just amounts to this, that light was produced by the Guebres or fire-worshippers, when Nimrod was set up in opposition to Shem, as the representative of Noah, and the great enlightener of the world.



[1]             The great antiquity of the institution of the Magi is proved from the statement of Aristotle already referred to, as preserved in Theopompus, which makes them to have been "more ancient than the Egyptians," whose antiquity is well known. (Theopompi Fragmenta in Muller, vol. i. p. 280.)

[2]             From tarn, "to perfect," and muz, "to burn." To be "pure in heart" in Scripture is just the same as to be "perfect in heart." The well-known name Deucalion, as connected with the flood, seems to be a correlative term of the water-worshippers. Dukh-kaleh signifies "to purify by washing," from Dikh, "to wash" (Clavis Stockii, p. 233), and Khaleh, "to complete," or "perfect." The noun from the latter verb, found in 2 Chronicles 4:21, shows that the root means "to purify," "perfect gold" being in the Septuagint justly rendered "pure gold." There is a name sometimes applied to the king of the gods that has some bearing on this subject. That name is "Akmon." What is the meaning of it? It is evidently just the Chaldee form of the Hebrew Khmn, "the burner," which becomes Akmon in the same way as the Hebrew Dem, "blood," in Chaldee becomes "Adem." Hesychius says that Akmon is Kronos, sub voce "Akmon." In Virgil (JEneid, lib. viii. L. 425) we find this name compounded so as to be an exact synonym for Tammuz, Pyracmon being the name of one of the three famous Cyclops whom the poet introduces. We have seen that the original Cyclops were Kronos and his brethren, and deriving the name from "Pur," the Chaldee form of Bur, "to purify," and "Akmon," it just signifies "The purifying burner."

[3]             Moor's Pantheon, "Siva," p. 43. The epithet for a woman that burns herself is spelled "Sati," but is pronounced "Suttee," as above.

[4]             The Indian Vedas that now exist do not seem to be of very great antiquity as written documents; but the legend goes much further back than anything that took place in India. The antiquity of writing seems to be very great, but whether or not there was any written religious document in Nimrod's day, a Veda there must have been; for what is the meaning of the word "Veda"? It is evidently just the same as the Anglo-Saxon Edda with the digamma prefixed, and both alike evidently come from "Ed" a "Testimony," a "Religious Record," or "confession of Faith." Such a "Record" or "Confession," either "oral" or "written," must have existed from the beginning.

[5]             Berosiana in Bunsen, vol. i. p. 708.

[6]             "As to the kingdom, the Oriental Oneirocritics, jointly say, that the sun is the symbol of the king, and the moon of the next to him in power." This sentence extracted from Daubuz's Symbolical Dictionary (p. 115), illustrated with judicious notes by my learned friend, the Rev. A. Forbes, London, shows that the conclusion to which I had come before seeing it, in regard to the symbolical meaning of the moon, is entirely in harmony with Oriental modes of thinking.


Note M.—Appendix—The Stripping of the Clothes of the Initiated in the Masteries—Page 183.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:21 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:26 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE M, Page 183.

The Stripping of the Clothes of the Initiated in the Masteries.

ΤΗE passage given at the above page from Proclus is differently rendered by different translators. As I have quoted it, it is nearly the Same as rendered by Taylor in his translation of Proclus Taylor departs from the rendering of the Latin translator of the edition of Hamburgi, 1618, in regard to the word rendered "divested of their garments." That translator renders the word, which, in the original, is γυμνιτας, by "velites," or "light armed soldiers." But, on a careful examination of the passage, it will be found that Taylor's version, in regard to the meaning and application of this word, is perfectly correct, and that to interpret it as "light armed soldiers" entirely confounds the sense. In DONNEGAN'S Greek Lexicon, γυμνιτας is made synonymous with γυμνης, which in its primary signification is said to mean naked. In LiDDELL and SCOTT's Lexicon, γυμνιτης is not given, but γυμνήτης and there γυμνήτης is said, when a noun, to mean a [[@Page:313]]light armed soldier, but when an adjective, to signify naked. Now, the context shows that yv\i\ixaq, or yv\i\r\xaq, must be used as an adjective. Further, the context, before and after, makes it evident that it must mean "stripped" or "divested of garments." The sentence itself states a comparison. I give the words of the comparison from the Latin version already referred to: "Et quemadmodum. … [and then here come in the words I have quoted in the text]eodem modo puto et in ipsa rerum universarum contemplatione rem so habere." Now, in the sentence before, the soul or person who properly gives himself to the contemplation of the universe and God, is said to do so thus:" "Contrahens se totam in sui ipsius unionem, et in ipsum centrum universse vitro, et multitudinem et varietatem omnigenarum in ea comprehensarum facultatem AMOVENS, in ipsam summam ipsorum Entium speculam ascendit." Then, in the passage following the sentence in question, the same idea of the removing of everything that may hinder perfect union of soul is represented, "et omnibus OMISSIS atque NEGLECTIS," &c. Here the argument is, that as the initiated needed to be stripped naked, to get the full benefits of initiation, so the soul needs to divest itself of everything that may hinder it from rising to the contemplation of things as they really are.

There is only one other thing to be noticed, and that is the doubt that may arise in regard to the parenthetic words, "as they would say," whether, as they stand in the original, and as they are given by Taylor, they qualify the words preceding, or that follow after. As given in Taylor's translation, the words appear thus:" "divested of their garments, as they would say, participate of divine nature." Here it is not clear which clause they must be held to affect. This can be ascertained only from the uses loquendi. Now, the uses loquendi in Proclus is very decisive in showing that they qualify what follows. Thus, in lib i. cap. 3, p. 6, we find the following, καὶ πάντες (ὡς Σεσι) τὸ ἄνθος The summit of the soul, and as (they say) the flower;" and again {Ibid. cap. 7, p. 16), καὶ πάντες (ὡς εἰπεῖν) τῆς ἐνθέου σοφίας μετειλήφασι and all (so to speak) have partaken of the inspired wisdom." From these passages the usage of Proclus is clear, and, therefore, while keeping the words of Taylor's translation, I have arranged the last clause so as to bring out more clearly the real meaning of the original author.


Note L.—Appendix—The Identity of the Scandinavian Odin and Adon of Babylon—Page 133.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:14 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:17 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE L, Page 133.

The Identity of the Scandinavian Odin and Adon of Babylon.
  1. Nimrod, or Adon, or Adonis, of Babylon, was the great war-god. Odin, as is well known, was the same.

  2. Nimrod, in the character of Bacchus, was regarded as the god of wine; Odin is represented as taking no food but wine. For thus we read in the Edda: "As to himself he [Odin]stands in no need of food; wine is to him instead of every other aliment, according to what is said in these verses: The illustrious father of armies, with his own hand, fattens his two wolves; but the victorious Odin takes no other nourishment to himself than what arises from the unintermitted quaffing of wine" (MALLET, 20' Fable).

  3. The name of one of Odin's sons indicates the meaning of Odin's own name. Balder, for whose death such lamentations were made, seems evidently just the Chaldee form of Baal-zer, "The seed of Baal;" for the Hebrew z, as is well known, frequently, in the later Chaldee, becomes d. Now, Baal and Adon both alike signify "Lord;" and, therefore, if Balder be admitted to be the seed or son of Baal, that is as much as to say that he is the son of Adon; and, consequently, Adon and Odin must be the same. This, of course, puts Odin a step back; makes his son to be the object of lamentation and not himself; but the same was the case also in Egypt; for there Horus the child was sometimes represented as torn in pieces, as Osiris had been. Clemens Alexandrinus says (Cohortatio, vol. i. p. 30), "they lament an infant torn in pieces by the Titans." The lamentations for Balder are very plainly the counterpart of the lamentations for Adonis; and, of course, if Balder was, as the lamentations prove him to have been, the favourite form of the Scandinavian Messiah, he was Adon, or "Lord," as well as his father.

  4. Then, lastly, the name of the other son of Odin, the mighty and warlike Thor, strengthens all the foregoing conclusions. Ninyas, the son of Ninus or Nimrod, on his father's death, when idolatry rose again, was, of course, from the nature of the mystic system, set up as Adon, "the Lord." Now, as Odin had a son called Thor, so the second Assyrian Adon had a son called Thouros (Cedrenus, vol. i. p. 29). The name Thouros seems just to be another form of Zoro, or Doro, "the seed;" for Photius tells us that among the Greeks Thoros signified "Seed" (Lexicon, pars i. p. 93). The D is often pronounced as Th,—Adon, in the pointed Hebrew, being pronounced Athon.

Note K.—Appendix—Oannes and Souro—Page 124.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:11 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:12 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE K, Page 124.

Oannes and Souro.

THE reason for believing that Oannes, that was said to have been the first of the fabulous creatures that came up out of the sea and instructed the Babylonians, was represented as the goat-horned fish, is as follows: First, the name Oannes, as elsewhere shown, is just the Greek form of He-annesh, or "The man," which is a synonym for the name of our first [[@Page:311]]parent, Adam. Now, Adam can be proved to be the original of Pan, who was also called Inuus (see DYMOCK, sub voce "Inuus"), which is just another pronunciation of Anosh without the article, which, in our translation of Genesis 5:7, is made Enos. This name, as universally admitted, is the generic name for man after the Fall, as weak and diseased. The o in Enos is what is called the vau, which sometimes is pronounced o, sometimes w, and sometimes v or w. A legitimate pronunciation of Enos, therefore, is just Enus or Enws, the same in sound as Inuus, the Ancient Roman name of Pan. The name Pan itself signifies "He who turned aside." As the Hebrew word for "uprightness" signifies "walking straight in the way," so every deviation from the straight line of duty was Sin; Hata, the word for sin, signifying generically "to go aside from the straight line." Pan, it is admitted, was the Head of the Satyrs—that is, "the first of the Hidden Ones," for Satyr and Satur, "the Hidden One," are evidently just the same word; and Adam was the first of mankind that hid himself. Pan is said to have loved a nymph called Pitho, or, as it is given in another form, Pitys (SMITH, sub voce "Pan"); and what is Pitho or Pitys but just the name of the beguiling woman, who, having been beguiled herself, acted the part of a beguiler of her husband, and induced him to take the step, in consequence of which he earned the name Pan, "The man that turned aside." Pitho or Pitys evidently come from Peth or Pet, "to beguile," from which verb also the famous serpent Python derived its name. This conclusion in regard to the personal identity of Pan and Pitho is greatly confirmed by the titles given to the wife of Faunus. Faunus, says Smith, (Ibid.) is "merely another name for Pan." [1] Now, the wife of Faunus was called Oma, Fauna, and Farua, (Ibid., sub voce "Bona Dea") which names plainly mean "The mother that turned aside, being beguiled." [2] This beguiled mother is also called indifferently "the sister, wife, or daughter" of her husband; and how this agrees with the relations of Eve to Adam, the reader does not need to be told.

Now, a title of Pan was Capricomus, or "The goat-horned" (DYMOCK, sub voce "Pan"), and the origin of this title must be traced to what took place when our first parent became the Head of the Satyrs—the "first of the Hidden ones." He fled to hide himself; and Berkha, "a fugitive," signifies also "a he-goat." Hence the origin of the epithet Capricomus, or "goat-horned," as applied to Pan. But as Capricomus in the sphere is generally represented as the "Goat-fish," if Capricomus represents Pan, or Adam, or Oannes, that shows that it must be Adam, after, through virtue of the metempsychosis, he had passed through the waters of the deluge: the goat, as the symbol of Pan, representing Adam, the first father of mankind, combined with the fish, the symbol of Noah, the second father of the human race; of both whom Nimrod, as at once Kronos, "the father of the gods," and Souro, "the seed," was a new incarnation. Among the idols of Babylon, as represented in KITTO'S Must. Commentary, vol. iv. p. 31, we find a representation of this very Capricomus, or goat-horned fish; and Berosus tells us ("Berosiana," in BUNSEN, vol. i. p. 708), that the well known representations of Pan, of which Capricomus is a modification, were found in Babylon in the most ancient times. A great deal more of evidence might be adduced on this subject; but I submit to the reader if the above statement does not sufficiently account for the origin of the remarkable figure in the Zodiac, "The goat-horned fish."


[1] In Chaldee the same letter that is pronounced P is also pronounced Ph, that is F, therefore Pan is just Faun.

[2]             The name Fatua evidently comes from the same verb as Pitho or Pitys, that is pet, or Phet. In the active sense we find Fatuus in common use in the well-known expression Ignis Fatuus. In the passive sense it is seen in the phrase "A Fatuous person."


Note J.—Appendix—The Meaning of the Name Astarte—Page 110.

posted 6 Apr 2014, 05:08 by Stephen Chaffer   [ updated 6 Apr 2014, 05:09 by Stephen OldPaths ]



APPENDIX—NOTE J, Page 110.

The Meaning of the Name Astarte.

THAT Semiramis, under the name of Astarte, was worshipped not only as an incarnation of the Spirit of God, but as the mother of mankind, we have very clear and satisfactory evidence. There is no doubt that "the Syrian goddess" was Astarte (LAYARD'S Nineveh and its Remains, vol. ii. p. 456). Now, the Assyrian goddess, or Astarte, is identified with Semiramis by Athenagoras (Legatio, vol. ii. p. 179), and by Lucian (De Dea Syria, vol. hi. p. 382). These testimonies in regard to Astarte, or the Syrian goddess, being, in one aspect, Semiramis, are quite decisive.

1.     The name Astarte, as applied to her, has reference to her as being Rhea or Cybele, the tower-bearing goddess, the first as Ovid says (Opera, vol. hi., fasti, lib. iv. 11. 219-220), that "made (towers) in cities;" for we find from Layard that in the Syrian temple of Hierapolis, "she [Dea Syria or Astarte]was represented standing on a lion crowned with towers" Now, no name could more exactly picture forth the character of Semiramis, as queen of Babylon, than the name of "Ash-tart," for that just means "The [[@Page:308]]woman that made towers." It is admitted on all hands that the last syllable "tart" comes from the Hebrew verb "Tr." It has been always taken for granted, however, that "Tr" signifies only "to go round." But we have evidence that, in nouns derived from it, it also signifies "to be round," "to surround," or "encompass." In the masculine, we find "Tor" used for "a border or row of jewels round the head" (see PARKHURST, sub voce No. ii., and also GESENIUS). And in the feminine, as given in Hesychius (Lexicon, p. 925), we find the meaning much more decisively brought out: τυρις ὁ περίβολος τοῦ τείχουςTuris is just the Greek form of Turit, the final t, according to the genius of the Greek language, being converted into s. Ash-rurit, then, which is obviously the same as the Hebrew "Ashtoreth," is just "The woman that made the encompassing wall." Considering how commonly the glory of that achievement, as regards Babylon, was given to Semiramis, not only by OVID {Opera Metam., lib. iv. fab. 4,1. 58, vol. ii. p. 177), but by Justin, Dionysius, Afer, and others, both the name and mural crown on the head of that goddess were surely very appropriate. In confirmation of this interpretation of the meaning of the name Astarte, I may adduce an epithet applied to the Greek Diana, who at Ephesus bore a turreted crown on her head, and was identified with Semiramis, which is not a little striking. It is contained in the following extract from Livy (lib. xliv. cap. 44, vol. vi. Pp. 57-58): "When the news of the battle [near Pydna]reached Amphipolis, the matrons ran together to the temple of Diana, whom they style Tauropolos, to implore her aid." Tauropolos, from Tor, "a tower," or "surrounding fortification," and Pol, "to make," plainly means the "tower-maker," or "maker of surrounding fortifications;" and P53 to her as the goddess of fortifications, they would naturally apply when they dreaded an attack upon their city.

Semiramis, being deified as Astarte, came to be raised to the highest honours; and her change into a dove, as has been already shown (p. 79), was evidently intended, when the distinction of sex had been blasphemously attributed to the Godhead, to identify her, under the name of the Mother of the gods, with that Divine Spirit, without whose agency no one can be born a child of God, and whose emblem, in the symbolical language of Scripture, was the Dove, as that of the Messiah was the Lamb. Since the Spirit of God is the source of all wisdom, natural as well as spiritual, arts and inventions and skill of every kind being attributed to Him (Exodus 31:3; 35:31), so the Mother of the gods, in whom that Spirit was feigned to be incarnate, was celebrated as the originator of some of the useful arts and sciences (DlODORUS SlCULUS, lib. hi. P. 134). Hence, also, the character attributed to the Grecian Minerva, whose name Athena, as we have seen reason to conclude, is only a synonym for Beltis, the well known name of the Assyrian goddess (see anti, pp. 20-21, Note). Athena, the Minerva of Athens, is universally known as the "goddess of wisdom," the inventress of arts and sciences.

2.     The name Astarte signifies also the "Maker of investigations;" and in this respect was applicable to Cybele or Semiramis, as symbolised by the Dove. That this is one of the meanings of the name Astarte may be seen from comparing it with the cognate names Asterie and Astraea (in Greek Astraia), which are formed by taking the last member of the compound word in the masculine, instead of the feminine, Teri, or Tri (the latter being pronounced Trai or Trse), being the same in sense as Tart. Now, Asterie was the wife of Perseus, the Assyrian (HERODOTUS, lib. vi. P. 400), and who was the founder of Mysteries (BRYANT, vol. hi. pp. 267-268). As Asterie was further represented as the daughter of Bel, this implies a position similar to that of Semiramis. Astrsea, again, was the goddess of justice, who is identified with the heavenly virgin Themis, the name Themis signifying "the perfect one," [[@Page:309]]who gave oracles (OVID, Metam., lib. i. fab. 7, vol. ii. p. 30), and who, having lived on earth before the Flood, forsook it just before that catastrophe came on (Ibid. Note). Themis and Astrsea are sometimes distinguished and sometimes identified; but both have the same character as goddesses of justice (see Gradus ad Parnassian, sub voce "Justotia"). The explanation of the discrepancy obviously is, that the Spirit has sometimes been viewed as incarnate and sometimes not. When incarnate, Astrsea is daughter of Themis. What name could more exactly agree with the character of a goddess of justice, than Ash-trai-a, "The maker of investigations," and what name could more appropriately shadow forth one of the characters of that Divine Spirit, who "searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God"? As Astrsea, or Themis, was "Fatidica Themis," "Themis the prophetic," this also was another characteristic of the Spirit; for whence can any true oracle, or prophetic inspiration, come, but from the inspiring Spirit of God? Then, lastly, what can more exactly agree with the Divine statement in Genesis in regard to the Spirit of God, than the statement of Ovid, that Astraea was the last of the celestials who remained on earth, and that her forsaking it was the signal for the down-pouring of the destroying deluge? The announcement of the coming Flood is in Scripture ushered in with these words (Genesis 6:3): "And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years." All these 120 years, the Spirit was striving; when they came to an end, the Spirit strove no longer, forsook the earth, and left the world to its fate. But though the Spirit of God forsook the earth, it did not forsake the family of righteous Noah. It entered with the patriarch into the ark; and when that patriarch came forth from his long imprisonment, it came forth along with him. Thus the Pagans had an historical foundation for their myth of the dove resting on the symbol of the ark in the Babylonian waters, and the Syrian goddess, or Astarte—the same as Astrsea—coming forth from it. Semiramis, then, as Astarte, worshipped as the dove, was regarded as the incarnation of the Spirit of God.

As Baal, Lord of Heaven, had his visible emblem, the sun, so she, as Beltis, Queen of Heaven, must have hers also—the moon, which in another sense was Asht-tart-e, "The maker of revolutions;" for there is no doubt that Tart very commonly signifies "going round." But, 4th, the whole system must be dovetailed together. As the mother of the gods was equally the mother of mankind, Semiramis, or Astarte, must also be identified with Eve; and the name Rhea, which, according to the Paschal Chronicle, vol. i. p. 65, was given to her, sufficiently proves her identification with Eve. As applied to the common mother of the human race, the name Astarte is singularly appropriate; for, as she was Idaia mater, "The mother of knowledge," the question is, "How did she come by that knowledge?" To this the answer can only be: "by the fatal investigations she made." It was a tremendous experiment she made, when, in opposition to the Divine command, and in spite of the threatened penalty, she ventured to "search" into that forbidden knowledge which her Maker in his goodness had kept from her. Thus she took the lead in that unhappy course of which the Scripture speaks—"God made man upright, but they have SOUGHT out many inventions" (Ecclesiastes 7:29). Now Semiramis, deified as the Dove, was Astarte in the most gracious and benignant form. Lucius Ampelius (in Libro adMacrinum apud BRYANT, vol. hi. p. 161) calls her "deam benignam et misericordem hominibus advitam bonam," "the goddess benignant and merciful to me" (bringing them) "to a good and happy life." In reference to this benignity of her character, both the titles, Aphrodite and Mylitta, are evidently attributed to her. The first I have elsewhere explained as "The wrath-subduer," (ante; p. 158), and the second is in [[@Page:310]]exact accordance with it. Mylitta, or, as it is in Greek, Mulitta, signifies "The Mediatrix." The Hebrew Melitz, which in Chaldee becomes Melitt, is evidently used in Job 33:23, in the sense of a Mediator; "the messenger, the interpreter" (Melitz), who is "gracious" to a man, and saith, "Deliver from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom," being really "The Messenger, the Mediator." Parkhurst takes the word in this sense, and derives it from "Mltz," "to be sweet." Now, the feminine of Melitz is Melitza, from which comes Melissa, a "bee" (the sweetener, or producer of sweetness), and Melissa, a common name of the priestesses of Cybele, and as we may infer of Cybele, as Astarte, or Queen of Heaven, herself; for, after Porphyry, has stated that "the ancients called the priestesses of Demeter, Melissse," he adds, that they also "called the Moon Melissa." (De antro Nympharum, p. 18) We have evidence, further, that goes far to identify this title as a title of Semiramis. Melissa or Melitta (APPOLODORUS, vol. i. lib. ii. p. 110)—for the name is given in both ways—is said to have been the mother of Phoroneus, the first that reigned, in whose days the dispersion of mankind occurred, divisions having come in among them, whereas before, all had been in harmony and spoke one language (Hyginus, fab. 143, p. 114). There is no other to whom this can be applied but Nimrod; and as Nimrod came to be worshipped as Nin, the son of his own wife, the identification is exact. Melitta, then, the mother of Phoroneus, is the same as Mylitta, the well known name of the Babylonian Venus; and the name, as being the feminine of Melitz, the Mediator, consequently signifies the Mediatrix. Another name also given to the mother of Phoroneus, "the first that reigned," is Archia (LEMPRIERE; see also SMITH p. 572). Now Archia signifies "Spiritual" (from "Rkh," Heb. "Spirit," which in Egyptian also is "Rkh" [BUNSEN, vol. i. p. 516, No. 292]; and in Chaldee, with the prosthetic prefixed becomes Arkh). [1] From the same root also evidently comes the epithet Architis, as applied to the Venus that wept for Adonis. [2] Venus Architis is the spiritual Venus. [3] Thus, then, the mother-wife of the first king that reigned was known as Archia and Melitta, in other words, as the woman in whom the "Spirit of God" was incarnate; and thus appeared as the "Dea Benigna," "The Mediatrix" for the sinful mortals. The first form of Astarte, as Eve, brought sin into the world; the second form before the Flood, was avenging as the goddess of justice. This form was "Benignant and Merciful." Thus, also, Semiramis, or Astarte, as Venus the goddess of love and beauty, became "The HOPE of the whole world," and men gladly had recourse to the "mediation" of one so tolerant of sin.


[1]             The Hebrew Dem, blood, in Chaldee becomes Adem; and, in like manner, Rkh becomes Arkh.

[2]             Macrobius, Satural, lib. i. cap. 21, p. 70, F.

[3]             From Ouvaroff (Sect. 6, p. 102, Note) we learn that the mother of the third Bacchus was Aura, and Phaëthon is said by Orpheus to have been the son περιμήκεος ἠέρος the "wide extended air" (Lactantius, lib. i. cap. 5, p. 10). The connection in the sacred language between the wind, the air, and the spirit, sufficiently accounts for these statements, and shows their real meaning.


1-10 of 31