who with their brethren the Pelethim or Palli submitted to the rule of the CHAP. IV. Israelites.'

Some writers adopt, as a literal historical matter of fact, the account of Jupiter being an ancient sovereign of Crete: but this seems to me alike contrary to reason and evidence. It is incredible, that a petty Cretan prince should at the same time be king of the whole world, and that he should be venerated as the chief of gods in so many different countries: for it is well known, that he was claimed as a local deity, not only by the Cretans, but by the inhabitants of all those different regions where he was worshipped. To say nothing of Arcadia, Egypt, and Phenicia, which I have just mentioned, Pausanias informs us, that it would be almost impossible to enumerate every nation, which pretended that Jupiter was born within its particular territory. * Why then should the claim of the Cretans; the Cretans ever liars, as Callimachus calls them when speaking of this very claim urged from the exhibition of the pretended tomb of the god-king: why should the claim of the Cretans be specially allowed to the exclusion of the parallel claim of almost every other people?'

The truth of the matter was this: wherever the arkite priests and nobility with their idolatrous adherents were scattered from the tower of Babel, or wherever they might migrate in subsequent ages, they carried along with them traditions of the polyonymous great father, the ship Argo or Theba, the mountain Ida or Meru, the Titans and Typhon, the sacred dove and the deluge. These, though they equally concerned all mankind, the vanity of each people, apparently warranted by local commemorative ordinances, constantly appropriated to their own country. Agreeably to such an opinion, Jupiter was both thought to have been king of the whole world, though the Cretans pretended that he fixed his seat of empire in their island; and was likewise supposed to have travelled over every part of the earth, destroying robbers and giants, and establishing just and equal laws. In this particular

Sanchon. apud Euseb. Præp. Evan. lib. i. c. 10. Joseph. Ant. Jud. lib. v. c. 1. Joseph, de bell. Jud. lib. vii. c. 24. Bochart. Chanaan. lib. i. c. 15. p. 422. Macrob. Saturn. lib. i,

c. 21.

2 Paus. Messen. p. 278.

3 Callim. Hymn. in Jov. i. ver. 8,

• Diod. Bibl. lib. iii. p. 194. lib. v. p. 338.

BOOK IV. he coincides with Hercules, Deo-Naush, Bacchus, Osiris, and Buddha: nor is it without reason that he does so; for these various deities, under whatever superstition they may be arranged, are all equally and fundamentally the same primeval universal sovereign, who reappearing after the flood became the common parent of the second race of mankind.

(3.) Considered then as Noah, we find Jupiter both esteemed the father of the three most ancient Cabiri, and himself also reckoned the first of the two primitive Cabiri, Bacchus being associated with him as the younger.' This however is a mere reduplication, for Jupiter and Bacchus are the same person: and they seem to have been joined together in the Samothracian Orgies, much in the same manner as Osiris and Horus are connected in the Mysteries of Isis. Hence Jupiter bore the title of Sabazius as well as Bacchus: a word, not derived from the Hebrew Sabaoth as some have imagined, but from Siva or Seba which is a name of the Indian Iswara,2

That such is the real origin of the word, as I have already had occasion to intimate, appears to me sufficiently evident from the manner in which it may be traced to Greece. Cicero tells us, that the Sabazian Bacchus was a king of Asia; by which was meant the large tract of country that the ancients called India or Indian Ethiopia, for the Asiatic Bacchus was doubtless the far-famed Indian Deo-Naush. But, if Bacchus-Sabazius were an Indian deity, then his foreign title Sabazius must be sought for among the Hindoos, not surely among the Israelites. And, in this case, since the god BacchusSabazius is clearly the same as the god Bagis-Siva, I see not how we can well avoid concluding, that the names Bacchus and Sabazius are respectively the names Bagis and Siva. The very same appellation was in use among the Thracians, from whom the Greeks borrowed a large part of their theology for Macrobius tells us, that they venerated Bacchus under the name

Schol. in Apoll. Argon. lib. i. ver. 917.

2 Valer. Maxim, lib. i. c. 3. Diod. Bibl. lib. iv. p. 212. Orph. Hymn. xlvii. Etym. Magn. Zabalos.. The opinion, that Sabazius is derived from the Hebrew Sabaoth, appears to have arisen, partly from the similarity of the words, and partly from the circumstance of the Rabbins and some of the early heretics bestowing the name of Sabaoth upon an eastern demongod. What they hebraized into Sabaoth was, I believe, no other than the Indian Seba. 3 Cicer. de nat. deor. lib. iii. c. 23.

I

of Sebadius; and all writers agree, that the words Sabazius, Sabizo, and Saboi, are of barbaric origin. Now the Thracians were a branch of the Scuths; whose grand settlement was on the northern frontier of India, who are there known by the denomination of Chasas or Chusas or Indo-Scythæ, and who thence spread themselves into many different regions of the earth. But, if the Greeks received the name Sabazius from the Thracians, since they brought it from India into Europe, the word must obviously be of Indian extraction.

As Jupiter and Bacchus each bore the title of Sabazius; so there was a tradition, that each of them was preserved by Thetis from the rage of his inveterate enemy. By Thetis, the goddess of the ocean, was meant the Ark : for Thetis was the same as Venus, Isis, Astartè, Derceto, Theba, or Argha. (4.) Perhaps it is scarcely necessary to point out the coincidence between the taurine form under which Jupiter is feigned to have carried off Europa, and the white bull of Siva: because that animal was the symbol of the great father in every part of the globe; and therefore, although the coincidence may serve to prove the identity of Jupiter and Siva, it does not peculiarly prove it, inasmuch as it equally proves the ultimate and fundamental identity of Jupiter, Siva, Bacchus, Osiris, Molech, Baal, Mithras, and Hu. But there is another point, which must by no means be omitted: since, from its arbitrary nature, it is curiously decisive of the matter now under consideration; and likewise serves to shew, that the three persons of the classical triad melt into each other just in the same manner as the three persons of the Hindoo triad. The god Siva is represented with three eyes; doubtless, I think, from the circumstance of his virtually containing within himself the essence of the triple Indian divinity, whose three persons imperceptibly (as it were) are blended in one.3 Now there was a very ancient Jupiter, called the native Jupiter of the Trojans; who, according to Pausanias, was similarly depicted with three eyes: whence he bore the title of Triophthalmus, as Siva is for the same reason denominated Trilochan.

'Macrob. Saturn. lib. i. c. 18. Etym. Magn. Zaßalos. Hesych. Lex. Zaßaley, Eaßaζιος. Suid. Lex. Σαβάζιος.

2 Hom. Iliad. lib. i. ver. 394. Phurn. de nat. deor. c. 17. Heraclid. Pont. Alleg. Hom. p. 437, 438. Nonni Dionys. lib. xx.

3 Asiat. Res. vol. i. p. 248.

CHAP. IV.

BOOK IV.

He
All

The cause, assigned by the Greek writer for this mode of representation, is highly worthy of notice; and it certainly appears to be the true one. says, that three eyes were assigned to Jupiter on the following account. men agree, that Jupiter reigns in heaven: but he also reigns in Hades, and is therefore the same as Pluto; whence Homer speaks of the infernal Jupiter, whom he connects with Proserpine: he moreover reigns in the sea, and is therefore the same as Neptune; whence Eschylus the son of Euphorion calls the god who presides over the ocean by the name of Jupiter. Such being the case, says Pausanias, the artist gave three eyes to the deity, by way of shewing, that it is one and the same person, who is alike supreme in those three great divisions of the world."

2

In this conjecture, I have no doubt that he is right; because the fact on which it is built, namely that Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto, melt into each other, like Brahma, Vishnou, and Siva, is clear and indisputable. The conjecture also perfectly corresponds with the mode of symbolizing used by the Egyptians. They were wont, as we are told by Plutarch, to represent Osiris, the sovereign lord of the world, under the hieroglyphic of an eye and a sceptre. Hence, when the world was divided into three parts, and when the great father was thought to have multiplied himself into three sons who were yet esteemed only variations of one primeval Nous, the obvious mode of representing the triplicated deity would be by the image of a sceptred prince having three eyes. Agreeably to this mystic theocrasy, Pluto is called the infernal Jupiter, and Jupiter himself is identified with Hades: and again, while Jupiter is declared to be the primeval Nous, who (according to the Platonic and Orphic theology) produced from himself three younger Noës; he is yet represented, as presiding over the sea in the character of Neptune.❜

2. From the figurative mode, adopted in the Mysteries, of describing the entrance of Noah into the Ark, and his subsequent egress to the light of heaven, the chief deity of the Gentiles, as I have often had occasion to

Paus. Corinth. p. 129.

2

Plut. de Isid. p. 354. Macrob. Saturn. lib. i. c. 21.

Max. Tyr.

3 Orph. Hymn. xvii. Orph. Fragm. apud Macrob. Saturn. lib. i. c. 18. Dissert. xxix. p, 290. Cicer. de nat, deor. lib. iii. c. 25. August. de civ. Dei. lib. iv. c. 11,

observe, was either esteemed an infernal god, or was thought to have descended into Hades and afterwards to have returned from it. Hence we may conclude, that Pluto, or the Stygian Jupiter, is the great father while mystically dead, or, in plain terms, while concealed within the ship of the deluge; and that the celestial Jupiter is the same person, when he returns to light and life by quitting the place of his dark temporary confinement, which the hierophant was wont to style his floating coffin. With this supposition the whole character of Pluto will be found to agree.

(1.) The Cabiric gods, whose number is variously represented according to the various lights in which, they were viewed, are certainly the diluvian family, sometimes including and sometimes excluding the Ark itself. This sufficiently appears from the whole of their fabulous history. Now the Cabiri of Samothrace are said by Mnaseas to have been called Arieros, Axiocersa, and Axiocersus; and he severally identifies them with Ceres, Proserpine, and Pluto. To these he adds a fourth, whom he makes the minister or officiating priest of the other three; and applies to him the appellation of Casmilus, which is equivalent to the infernal Mercury. Pluto therefore, being a Cabiric god, must as such be also a diluvian god.

He is exhibited in the very same character by the mythologists of Hindostan for I hesitate not to identify the classical Pluto with the Indian Yama or infernal Siva. We are told, that in Patala or Hades resides the sovereign queen of the serpents, by name Asyoruca. To Samudr or the Ocean she bore a daughter, called Asyotcersha or Asyotcrishta; who is beautiful as the day, but who like a jewel remains concealed in the sea. With these are associated Dharma-Rajah or the king of justice and his servant Carmala or Cashmala. The former is the sovereign of the Pitris or seven patriarchal spirits, and the prince of the infernal regions. He is also called Atcersa, which is a word of the same import as Asyotcersa: and hẹ holds a court of justice, with certain kings for his assessors, to determine the fate of the departed.*

Here we have obviously the prototypes of the Samothracian Cabiri, as

'Mnas. apud Schol. in Apoll. Argon. lib. i. ver. 917.

2 Asiat. Res. vol. v. p. 297-299.

CHAP. IV.