|
[Back | Home | Contents | Next]
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 figure 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 Figure
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 (see Figure 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
(see Figure 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 (see Figure 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 Figure 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 (see Figure 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 (see Figure 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 (see Figure 14 and Figure 15 below), 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."
Ala-Mahozim
NOTE: 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 | Home | Contents | Next]
|
