Part 19

Those of the community, who survived the disaster, fled down the Hebrus to Lesbos; where they either found, or erected, a temple similar to that which they had quitted. Here the same worship was instituted; and the place grew into great reputation. They likewise settled at Lenmos. This island lay at no great distance from the former; and was particularly devoted to the Deity of fire. It is said by Hecatæus, that it received the name of Lemnos from the Magna Dea, Cybele. She was styled by the natives [Greek: Lêmnos], and at her shrine they used to sacrifice young persons. [1050][Greek: Apo megalês legomenês Theou; tautêi de kai parthenous ethuon.] They seem to have named the temple at Lesbos Orphi, and Orpheï caput: and it appears to have been very famous on account of its oracle. Philostratus says, that the Ionians, and Æolians, of old universally consulted it: and, what is extraordinary, that it was held in high estimation by the people of [1051]Babylonia. He calls the place the head of Orpheus: and mentions, that the oracle proceeded from a cavity in the earth; and that it was consulted by Cyrus, the Persian. That the Babylonians had a great veneration for a temple named Orphi, I make no doubt: but it certainly could not be the temple at Lesbos. During the Babylonish empire, Greece, and its islands, were scarcely known to people of that country. And when the Persians succeeded, it is not credible, that they should apply to an oracle at Lesbos, or to an oracle of Greece. They were too refined in their religious notions to make any such application. It is notorious, that, when Cambyses, and Ochus, invaded Egypt, and when Xerxes made his inroad into Greece, they burnt and ruined the temples in each nation, out of abomination to the worship. It was another place of this name, an oracle of their own, to which the Babylonians, and Persians, applied. For it cannot be supposed, in the times spoken of, that they had a correspondence with the western world. It was Ur, in Chaldea, the seat of the antient Magi, which was styled Urphi, and Orphi, on account of its being the seat of an oracle. That there was such a temple is plain from Stephanus Byzantinus, who tells us, [1052][Greek: Manteion echein autous (Chaldaious) para barbarois, hôs Delphoi par' Hellêsi.] _The Chaldeans had an oracle as famous among the people of those parts, as Delphi was among the Grecians_. This temple was undoubtedly styled Urphi. I do not mean, that this was necessarily a proper name; but an appellative, by which oracular places were in general distinguished. The city Edessa in Mesopotamia seems likewise to have had the name of Urphi, which was given on account of the like rites, and worship. That it was so named, we may fairly presume from its being by the natives called [1053]Urpha, at this day. It was the former temple, to which the Babylonians, and Persians had recourse: and it was from the Magi of these parts, that the Orphic rites and mysteries were originally derived. They came from Babylonia to Egypt, and from thence to Greece. We accordingly find this particular in the character of Orpheus, [1054][Greek: einai de ton Orphea mageusai deinon], _that he was great in all the mysteries of the Magi_. We moreover learn from Stephanus Monachius, that Orphon, a term of the same purport as Orpheus, was one of the appellations, by which the Magi were called. [1055]Orphon, quod Arabibus Magum sonat. In short, under the character of Orpheus, we have the history both of the Deity, and of his votaries. The head of Orpheus was said to have been carried to Lemnos, just as the head of Osiris used to be wafted to Byblus. He is described as going to the shades below, and afterwards returning to upper air. This is similar to the history of Osiris, who was supposed to have been in a state of death, and after a time to have come to life. There was moreover something mysterious in the death of Orpheus; for it seems to have been celebrated with the same frantic acts of grief, as people practised in their lamentations for Thamuz and Osiris, and at the rites of Baal. The Bistonian women, who were the same as the Thyades, and Mænades, used to gash their arms with knives, and besmear themselves with [1056]blood, and cover their heads with ashes. By this display of sorrow we are to understand a religious rite; for Orpheus was a title, under which the Deity of the place was worshipped. He was the same as Orus of Egypt, whom the Greeks esteemed both as Apollo, and Hephaistus. That he was a deity is plain from his temple and oracle abovementioned: which, we find, were of great repute, and resorted to by various people from the opposite coast.

As there was an Orpheus in Thrace, so there appears to have been an Orpha in [1057]Laconia, of whose history we have but few remains. They represent her as a Nymph, the daughter of Dion, and greatly beloved by Dionusus. She was said, at the close of her life, to have been changed to a tree. The fable probably relates to the Dionusiaca, and other Orphic rites, which had been in early times introduced into the part of the world abovementioned, where they were celebrated at a place called Orpha. But the rites grew into disuse, and the history of the place became obsolete: hence Orpha has been converted to a nymph, favoured of the God there worshipped; and was afterwards supposed to have been changed to one of the trees, which grew within its precincts.

Many undertook to write the history of Orpheus; the principal of whom were Zopurus of Heraclea, Prodicus Chius, Epigenes, and Herodorus. They seem all to have run into that general mistake of forming a new personage from a title, and making the Deity a native, where he was inshrined. The writings, which were transmitted under the name of Orpheus, were innumerable: and are justly ridiculed by Lucian, both for their quantity, and matter. There were however some curious hymns, which used to be of old sung in Pieria, and Samothracia; and which Onomacritus copied. They contain indeed little more than a list of titles, by which the Deity in different places was addressed. But these titles are of great antiquity: and though the hymns are transmitted in a modern garb, the person, through whom we receive them, being as late as [1058]Pisistratus, yet they deserve our notice. They must necessarily be of consequence, as they refer to the worship of the first ages, and afford us a great insight into the Theology of the antients. Those specimens also, which have been preserved by Proclus, in his dissertations upon Plato, afford matter of great curiosity. They are all imitations, rather than translations of the antient Orphic poetry, accompanied with a short comment. This poetry was in the original Amonian language, which grew obsolete among the Helladians, and was no longer intelligible: but was for a long time preserved in [1059]Samothracia, and used in their sacred rites.

CADMUS.

Although I have said so much about Dionusus, Sesostris, and other great travellers, I cannot quit the subject till I have taken notice of Cadmus: for his expeditions, though not so extensive as some, which I have been mentioning, are yet esteemed of great consequence in the histories of antient nations. The time of his arrival in Greece is looked up to as a fixed æra: and many circumstances in chronology are thereby determined. He is commonly reputed to have been a Phenician by birth; the son of Agenor, who was the king of that country. He was sent by his father's order in quest of his sister Europa; and after wandering about a long time to little purpose, he at last settled in Greece. In this country were many traditions concerning him; especially in Attica, and Boeotia. The particular spot, where he is supposed to have taken up his residence, was in the latter province at Tanagra upon the river Ismenus. He afterwards built Thebes: and wherever he came, he introduced the religion of his country. This consisted in the worship of [1060]Dionusus; and in the rites, which by the later Greeks were termed the Dionusiaca. They seem to have been much the same as the Cabyritic mysteries, which he is said to have established in Samothracia. He fought with a mighty dragon; whose teeth he afterwards sowed, and produced an army of men. To him Greece is supposed to have been indebted for the first introduction of [1061]letters; which are said to have been the letters of his country Phenicia, and in number sixteen. He married Harmonia, the daughter of Mars and Venus: and his nuptials were graced with the presence of all the Gods, and Goddesses; each of whom conferred some gift upon the bride. He had several children; among whom was a daughter Semele, esteemed the mother of Bacchus. After having experienced great vicissitudes in life, he is said to have retired with his wife Harmonia to the coast of Illyria, where they were both changed to serpents. He was succeeded at Thebes by his son Polydorus, the father of Labdacus, the father of Laius. This last was the husband of Jocasta, by whom he had Oedipus.

Bochart with wonderful ingenuity, and equal learning, tries to solve the ænigmas, under which this history is represented. He supposes Cadmus to have been a fugitive Canaanite, who fled from the face of Joshua: and that he was called Cadmus from being a Cadmonite, which is a family mentioned by Moses. In like manner he imagines, that Harmonia had her name from mount Hermon, which was probably in the district of the Cadmonites. The story of the dragon he deduces from the Hevæi, or Hivites; the same people as the Cadmonites. He proceeds afterwards with great address to explain the rest of the fable, concerning the teeth of the dragon, which were sown; and the armed men, which from thence arose: and what he says is in many particulars attended with a great shew of probability. Yet after all his ingenious conjectures, I am obliged to dissent from him in some points; and

## particularly in one, which is of the greatest moment. I cannot be induced

to think, that Cadmus was, as Bochart represents him, a Phenician. Indeed I am persuaded, that no such person existed. If Cadmus brought letters from Phenicia, how came he to bring but sixteen; when the people, from whom he imported them, had undoubtedly more, as we may infer from their neighbours? And if they were the current letters of Greece, as Herodotus intimates; how came it to pass, that the tablet of Alcmena, the wife of Amphitryon, the third in descent from Cadmus, could not be understood, as we are assured by [1062]Plutarch? He says, that in the reign of Agesilaus of Sparta, a written tablet was found in the tomb of Alcmena, to whom it was inscribed: that the characters were obsolete, and unintelligible; on which account they sent it to Conuphis of Memphis in Egypt, to be decyphered. If these characters were Phenician, why were they sent to a priest of a different country for interpretation? and why is their date and antiquity defined by the reign of a king in Egypt? [1063][Greek: Tous tupous einai tês epi Prôtei basileuonti grammatikês.] _The form of the letters was the same as was in use when Proteus reigned in that country._ Herodotus, indeed, to prove that the Cadmians brought letters into Greece, assures us, that he saw specimens of their writing at Thebes, in the temple of Apollo [1064]Ismenius: that there was a tripod as antient as the reign of Laius, the son of Labdacus; with an inscription, which imported, that it had been there dedicated by Amphitryon upon his victory over the Teleboæ. I make no doubt, but that Herodotus saw tripods with antient inscriptions: and there might be one with the name of Amphitryon: but how could he be sure that it was the writing of that person, and of those times? We know what a pleasure there is in enhancing the antiquity of things; and how often inscriptions are forged for that purpose. Is it credible that the characters of Amphitryon should be so easy to be apprehended, when those of his wife Alcmena could not be understood? and which of the two are we in this case to believe, Herodotus or Plutarch? I do not mean that I give any credence to the story of Alcmena and her tablet: nor do I believe that there was a tripod with characters as antient as Amphitryon. I only argue from the principles of the Greeks to prove their inconsistency. The Pheneatæ in Arcadia shewed to Pausanias an inscription upon the basis of a brazen statue, which was dedicated to [1065]Poseidon Hippius. It was said to have been written by Ulysses, and contained a treaty made between him and some shepherds. But Pausanias acknowledges that it was an imposition; for neither statues of brass, nor statues of any sort, were in use at the time alluded to.

It is said of Cadmus, that he introduced the rites of [1066]Bacchus into Greece. But how is this possible, if Bacchus was his descendant, the son of his daughter Semele? To remedy this, the latter mythologists suppose, that there was a prior Bacchus, who was worshipped by Cadmus. This is their usual recourse, when they are hard pressed with inconsistencies. They then create other personages, to help them out of their difficulties. They form, with great facility, a new Semiramis, or Ninus; another Belus, Perseus, Minos, Hermes, Phoroneus, Apis, though to little purpose: for the mistake being fundamental, the inconveniencies cannot be remedied by such substitutes. We are told that Cadmus was a Phenician: but Diodorus Siculus speaks of him as assuredly of Egypt; and mentions moreover, that he was a native of the Thebaïs: [1067][Greek: Kadmon ek Thêbôn onta tôn Aiguptiôn]. Pherecydes Syrus also, from whom most of the mythology of Greece was borrowed, makes Cadmus an [1068]Egyptian, the son of Agenor and Argiope, who was the daughter of Nilus. By others he is said to have been the son of Antiope, the daughter of Belus: consequently he must originally have been of Babylonish extraction. His father Agenor, from whom he is supposed to have been instructed in the sciences, is represented by Nonnus as residing at Thebes.

[1069][Greek: Patria thespesiês dedaêmenos orgia technês,] [Greek: Aiguptiês sophiês metanastios, êmos Agênôr] [Greek: Memphidos ennaetês hekatompulon ôikee Thêbên.]

We learn the same from the Scholiast upon Lycophron, who styles the king Ogugus. [1070][Greek: Kai ho Ôgugos Thêbôn Aiguptiôn ên Basileus, hothen ho Kadmos huparchôn, elthôn en Helladi tas Heptapulous ektise.] _Moreover Ogugus was king of Thebes in Egypt: of which country was Cadmus, who came into Greece, and built the city styled Heptapulæ_. It was from the same part of the world, that the mysteries were imported, in which Cadmus is represented as so knowing: and here it was, that he was taught hieroglyphics, and the other characters, which are attributed to him. For he is said to have been expert [1071][Greek: Cheiros opisthoporoio charagmata loxa charassôn.] These arts he carried first to the coast of Sidon, and Syria; and from thence he is supposed to have brought them to Greece: for, before he came to Hellas, he is said to have reigned in conjunction with Phoenix, both at Sidon and Tyre. [1072][Greek: Phoinix kai Kadmos, apo Thêbôn tôn Aiguptiôn exelthontes eis tên Surian Turou kai Sidônos ebasileusan.] _Phoenix and Cadmus came from Thebes in Egypt, and reigned at Tyre and Sidon._

Thus I have taken pains to shew, that Cadmus was not, as has been generally thought, a Phenician. My next endeavour will be to prove that no such person existed. If we consider the whole history of this celebrated hero, we shall find, that it was impossible for one person to have effected what he is supposed to have performed. His expeditions were various and wonderful; and such as in those early times would not have been attempted, nor could ever have been completed. The Helladians say little more, than that he built Thebes, and brought letters into Greece: that he slew a dragon, from the teeth of which being sowed in the ground there arose an army of earthborn men. The writers of other countries afford us a more extensive account: among the principal of which are to be esteemed Herodotus, Diodorus, Strabo, and Pausanias. Some of them had their [1073]doubts about the reality of this adventurer: and from the history which they have transmitted, we may safely infer, that no such person existed, as has been described under the character of Cadmus.

He is said to have sailed first to [1074]Phenicia and Cyprus; and afterwards to [1075]Rhodes. Here he instructed the people in the religion which he professed; and founded a temple at Lindus, where he appointed an order of priests. He did the same [1076]at Thera, and afterwards was at [1077]Thasus: and proceeding in his travels partook of the Cabiritic mysteries in [1078]Samothracia. He visited [1079]Ionia, and all the coast upwards to the Hellespont and Propontis. He was at Lesbos, which he named [1080]Issa: where some of his posterity were to be found long after. He was also at Anaphe, one of the Sporades; which island was denominated Membliaros from one of his [1081]followers. Mention is made of his being upon the [1082]Hellespont, and in Thrace. Here he resided, and found out a mine of [1083]gold, having before found one of copper in [1084]Cyprus. Hence he is said to have procured great wealth. [1085][Greek: Hode Kadmou ploutos peri Thrakên, kai to Pangaion oros.] We hear of him afterwards in [1086]Euboea; where there are to be found innumerable traces of him, and his followers. He was likewise at [1087]Sparta, as we may infer from the Heroüm erected to him by Eurotas, and his brethren, the sons of Huræus. He must have resided a great while in [1088]Attica; for there were many edifices about Athens attributed to him. He settled at Tanagra in Boeotia; where he lost all his companions, who were slain by a dragon. He afterwards built Thebes. Here he was king; and is said to have reigned sixty-two [1089]years. But as if his wanderings were never to be terminated, he leaves his newly founded city, and goes to Illyria. Here we find him again in regal state. [1090][Greek: Basileuei Kadmos tôn Illuriôn.] He reigns over the country which receives its name from his son. [1091][Greek: Illuria--apo Illuriou tou Kadmonos paidos.] Now whoever is truly acquainted with antiquity, must know, that, in the times here spoken of, little correspondence was maintained between nation and nation. Depredations were very frequent; and every little maritime power was in a state of [1092]piracy: so that navigation was attended with great peril. It is not therefore to be believed, that a person should so often rove upon the seas amid such variety of nations, and reside among them at his pleasure: much less that he should build temples, found cities, and introduce his religion, wherever he listed; and this too in such transient visits. Besides, according to the Egyptian accounts, the chief of his adventures were in Libya. He married Harmonia at the lake [1093]Tritonis; and is said to have founded in that part of the world no less. than an hundred cities:

[1094][Greek: Libustidi Kadmos arourai] [Greek: Dômêsas poliôn hekatontada.]

Some of these cities seem to have been situated far west in the remoter parts of Africa.

[1095][Greek: Kai Libues stratoônto par' Hesperion klima gaiês,] [Greek: Anchinephê naiontes Alêmonos astea Kadmou.]

Carthage itself was of old called [1096]Cadmeia: so that he may be ranked among the founders of that city. [Greek: Karchêdôn, Mêtropolis Libuês--ekaleito de Kainê polis, kai Kadmeia.] He is mentioned by Moses Chorenensis to have settled in [1097]Armenia, where there was a regio Cadmeia not far from Colchis. He reigned here; and is said to have been of the giant race, and to have come from [1098]Babylonia. And as the city Carthage in Libya was called Cadmeia, so in this region Cadmeia, there was a city Carthage: [1099][Greek: Karchêdôn polis Armenias.]

Such are the expeditions of Cadmus. But is it credible that any person could have penetrated into the various regions, whither he is supposed to have gone? to have founded colonies in Phenicia, Cyprus, Rhodes, Thera, Thasus, Anaphe, Samothracia? to have twice visited the Hellespont? to have worked the mines in the Pangean mountains, and in other places? to have made settlements in Euboea, Attica, Boeotia, and Illyria? and, above all, to have had such territories in Afric? He is represented as heir to the kingdom of Egypt: this he quitted, and obtained a kingdom in Phenicia. He leaves this too; and after much wandering arrives in Greece; where he founds several cities, and reigns sixty-two years. After this, hard to conceive! he is made king in Illyria. He must also have reigned in Afric: and his dominions seem to have been considerable, as he founded an hundred cities. He is represented as a king in Armenia; and had there too no small territory. Sure kingdoms in those times must have been very cheap, if they were so easily attainable. But the whole is certainly a mistake; at least in respect to [1100]Cadmus. No person could possibly have effected what is attributed to him. They were not the achievements of one person, nor of one age. And place Cadmus at any given æra, and arrange his history, as may appear most plausible; yet there will arise numberless inconsistencies from the connexions he must have in respect to time, place, and people; such as no art nor disposition can remedy.