Chapter 18

Of men, styled Zoroaster, the first was a deified personage, reverenced by some of his posterity, whose worship was styled Magia, and the professors of it Magi. His history is therefore to be looked for among the accounts transmitted by the antient Babylonians, and Chaldeans. They were the first people styled Magi; and the institutors of those rites, which related to Zoroaster. From them this worship was imparted to the Persians, who likewise had their Magi. And when the Babylonians sunk into a more complicated idolatry, the Persians, who succeeded to the sovereignty of Asia, renewed under their Princes, and particularly under Darius, the son of Hystaspes, these rites, which had been, in a great degree, effaced, and forgotten. That king was devoted to the religion styled Magia[936]; and looked upon it as one of his most honourable titles, to be called a professor of those doctrines. The Persians were originally named Peresians, from the Deity Perez, or Parez the Sun; whom they also worshipped under the title of [937]Zor-Aster. They were at different aeras greatly distressed and persecuted, especially upon the death of their last king Yesdegerd. Upon this account they retired into Gedrosia and India; where people of the same family had for ages resided. They carried with them some shattered memorials of their religion in writing, from whence the Sadder, Shaster, Vedam, and Zandavasta were compiled. These memorials seem to have been taken from antient symbols ill understood; and all that remains of them consists of extravagant allegories and fables, of which but little now can be decyphered. Upon these traditions the religion of the Brahmins and Persees is founded.

The person who is supposed to have first formed a code of institutes for this people, is said to have been one of the Magi, named Zerdusht. I mention this, because Hyde, and other learned men, have imagined this Zerdusht to have been the antient Zoroaster. They have gone so far as to suppose the two names to have been the [938]same; between which I can scarce descry any resemblance. There seem to have been many persons styled Zoroaster: so that if the name had casually retained any affinity, or if it had been literally the same, yet it would not follow, that this Persic and Indian Theologist was the person of whom antiquity speaks so loudly. We read of persons of this name in different parts of the world, who were all of them Magi, or Priests, and denominated from the rites of Zoroaster, which they followed. Suidas mentions a Zoroaster, whom he styles an Assyrian; and another whom he calls [Greek: Perso-Medes], Perso-Medes: and describes them both as great in science. There was a Zoroaster Proconnesius, in the time of Xerxes, spoken of by [939]Pliny. Arnobius mentions Zoroastres Bactrianus: and Zoroastres Zostriani nepos [940]Armenius. Clemens Alexandrinus takes notice of Zoroaster [941]Medus, who is probably the same as the Perso-Medes of Suidas. Zoroastres Armenius is likewise mentioned by him, but is styled the son of [942]Armenius, and a Pamphylian. It is said of him that he had a renewal of life: and that during the term that he was in a state of death, he learned many things of the Gods. This was a piece of mythology, which I imagine did not relate to the Pamphylian Magus, but to the head of all the Magi, who was reverenced and worshipped by them. There was another styled a Persian, whom Pythagoras is said to have [943]visited. Justin takes notice of the Bactrian [944]Zoroaster, whom he places in the time of Ninus. He is also mentioned by [945]Cephalion, who speaks of his birth, and the birth of Semiramis ([Greek: genesin Semirameos kai Zoroastrou Magou]) as of the same date. The natives of India have a notion of a Zoroaster, who was of Chinese original, as we are informed by [946]Hyde. This learned man supposes all these personages, the Mede, the Medo-Persic, the Proconnesian, the Bactrian, the Pamphylian, &c. to have been one and the same. This is very wonderful; as they are by their history apparently different. He moreover adds, that however people may differ about the origin of this person, yet all are unanimous about the time when he [947]lived. To see that these could not all be the same person, we need only to cast our eye back upon the evidence which has been collected above: and it will be equally certain, that they could not be all of the same aera. There are many specified in history; but we may perceive, that there was one person more antient and celebrated than the rest; whose history has been confounded with that of others who came after him. This is a circumstance which has been observed by [948]many: but this ingenious writer unfortunately opposes all who have written upon the subject, however determinately they may have expressed themselves. [949]At quicquid dixerint, ille (Zoroaster) fuit tantum unus, isque tempore Darii Hystaspis: nec ejus nomine plures unquam extitere. It is to be observed, that the person, whom he styles Zoroaster, was one Zerdusht. He lived, it seems, in the reign of Darius, the father of Xerxes; which was about the time of the battle of Marathon: consequently not a century before the birth of Eudoxus, Xenophon, and Plato. We have therefore no authority to suppose [950]this Zerdusht to have been the famous Zoroaster. He was apparently the renewer of the Sabian rites: and we may be assured, that he could not be the person so celebrated by the antients, who was referred to the first ages. Hyde asserts, that all writers agree about the time, when Zoroaster made his appearance: and he places him, as we have seen above, in the reign of Darius. But Xanthus Lydius made him above [951]six hundred years prior. And [952]Suidas from some anonymous author places him five hundred years before the war of Troy. Hermodorus Platonicus went much farther, and made him five thousand years before that [953]aera. Hermippus, who professedly wrote of his doctrines, supposed him to have been of the same [954]antiquity. Plutarch also [955]concurs, and allows him five thousand years before that war. Eudoxus, who was a consummate philosopher, and a great traveller, supposed him to have flourished six thousand years before the death of [956]Plato. Moses [957]Chorenensis, and [958]Cephalion, make him only contemporary with Ninus, and Semiramis: but even this removes him very far from the reign of Darius. Pliny goes beyond them all; and places him many thousand years before Moses. [959]Est et alia Magices factio, a Mose, et Jamne, et Lotapea Judaeis pendens: sed multis millibus annorum post Zoroastrem. The numbers in all these authors, are extravagant: but so much we may learn from them, that they relate to a person of the highest antiquity. And the purport of the original writers, from whence the Grecians borrowed their evidence, was undoubtedly to shew, that the person spoken of lived at the extent of time; at the commencement of all historical data. No fact, no memorial upon record, is placed so high as they have carried this personage. Had Zoroaster been no earlier than Darius, Eudoxus would never have advanced him to this degree of antiquity. This writer was at the same distance from Darius, as Plato, of whom he speaks: and it is not to be believed, that he could be so ignorant, as not to distinguish between a century, and six thousand years. Agathias indeed mentions, that some of the Persians had a notion, that he flourished in the time of one Hystaspes; but he confesses, that who the Hystaspes was, and at what time he lived, was [960]uncertain. Aristotle wrote not long after Eudoxus, when the history of the Persians was more known to the Grecians, and he allots the same number of years between Zoroaster and Plato, as had been [961]before given. These accounts are for the most part carried too far; but at the same time, they fully ascertain the high antiquity of this person, whose aera is in question. It is plain that these writers in general extend the time of his life to the aera of the world, according to their estimation; and make it prior to Inachus, and Phoroneus, and AEgialeus of Sicyon.

Huetius takes notice of the various accounts in respect to his country. [962]Zoroastrem nunc Persam, nunc Medum ponit Clemens Alexandrinus; Persomedum Suidas; plerique Bactrianuni; alii AEthiopem, quos inter ait Arnobius ex AEthiopia interiore per igneam Zonam venisse Zoroastrem. In short, they have supposed a Zoroaster, wherever there was a Zoroastrian: that is, wherever the religion of the Magi was adopted, or revived. Many were called after him: but who among men was the Prototype can only be found out by diligently collating the histories, which have been transmitted. I mention _among men_; for the title originally belonged to the Sun; but was metaphorically bestowed upon sacred and enlightened personages. Some have thought that the person alluded to was Ham. He has by others been taken for Chus, also for Mizraim, and [963]Nimrod: and by Huetius for Moses. It may be worth while to consider the primitive character, as given by different writers. He was esteemed the first observer of the heavens; and it is said that the antient Babylonians received their knowledge in Astronomy from him: which was afterwards revived under Ostanes; and from them it was derived to the [964]Egyptians, and to the Greeks. Zoroaster was looked upon as the head of all those, who are supposed to have followed his [965]institutes: consequently he must have been prior to the Magi, and Magia, the priests, and worship, which were derived from him. Of what antiquity they were, may be learned from Aristotle. [966][Greek: Aristoteles d' en protoi peri philosophias (tous Magous) kai presbuterous einai ton Aiguption.] _The Magi, according to Aristotle, were prior even to the Egyptians_: and with the antiquity of the Egyptians, we are well acquainted. Plato styles him the son of [967]Oromazes, who was the chief Deity of the Persians: and it is said of him, that he laughed upon the day on which he was [968]born. By this I imagine, that something fortunate was supposed to be portended: some indication, that the child would prove a blessing to the world. In his childhood he is said to have been under the care of [969]Azonaces: which I should imagine was a name of the chief Deity Oromazes, his reputed father. He was in process of time greatly enriched with knowledge, and became in high repute for his [970]piety, and justice. He first sacrificed to the Gods, and taught men to do the [971]same. He likewise instructed them in science, for which he was greatly [972]famed: and was the first who gave them laws. The Babylonians seem to have referred to him every thing, which by the Egyptians was attributed to Thoth and Hermes. He had the title of [973]Zarades, which signifies the Lord of light, and is equivalent to Orus, Oromanes, and Osiris, It was sometimes expressed [974]Zar-Atis, and supposed to belong to a feminine Deity of the Persians. Moses Chorenensis styles him [975]Zarovanus, and speaks of him as the father of the Gods. Plutarch would insinuate, that he was author of the doctrine, embraced afterwards by the Manicheans, concerning two prevailing principles, the one good, and the other evil[976]: the former of these was named Oromazes, the latter Areimanius. But these notions were of late [977]date, in comparison of the antiquity which is attributed to [978]Zoroaster. If we might credit what was delivered in the writings transmitted under his name, which were probably composed by some of the later Magi, they would afford us a much higher notion of his doctrines. Or if the account given by Ostanes were genuine, it would prove, that there had been a true notion of the Deity transmitted from [979]Zoroaster, and kept up by the Magi, when the rest of the gentile world was in darkness. But this was by no means true. It is said of Zoroaster, that he had a renewal of [980]life: for I apply to the original person of the name, what was attributed to the Magus of Pamphylia: and it is related of him, that while he was in the intermediate state of death, he was instructed by the [981]Gods. Some speak of his retiring to a mountain of Armenia, where he had an intercourse with the [982]Deity: and when the mountain burned with fire, he was preserved unhurt. The place to which he retired, according to the Persic writers, was in the region called [983]Adarbain; where in aftertimes was the greatest Puratheion in Asia. This region was in Armenia: and some make him to have been born in the same country, upon one of the Gordiaean [984]mountains. Here it was, that he first instituted sacrifices, and gave laws to his followers; which laws are supposed to be contained in the sacred book named Zandavasta. To him has been attributed the invention of Magic; which notion has arisen from a misapplication of terms. The Magi Were priests, and they called religion in general Magia. They, and their rites, grew into disrepute; in consequence of which they were by the Greeks called [Greek: apateones, pharmakeutai]: _jugglers, and conjurers_. But the Persians of old esteemed them very highly. [985][Greek: Magon, ton theosebe, kai theologon, kai hierea, hoi Persai houtos legousin.] _By a Magus, the Persians understand a sacred person, a professor of theology, and a Priest._ [Greek: Para Persais] [986][Greek: Magoi hoi philosophoi, kai theophiloi.] _Among the Persians, the Magi are persons addicted to philosophy, and to the worship of the Deity._ [987]Dion. Chrysostom, and Porphyry speak to the same purpose. By Zoroaster being the author of Magia, is meant, that he was the first promoter of religious rites, and the instructor of men in their duty to God. The war of Ninus with Zoroaster of Bactria relates probably to some hostilities carried on between the Ninevites of Assyria, and the Bactrians, who had embraced the Zoroastrian rites. Their priest, or prince, for they were of old the same, was named [988]Oxuartes; but from his office had the title of Zoroaster; which was properly the name of the Sun, whom he adored. This religion began in Chaldea; and it is expressly said of this Bactrian king, that he borrowed the knowledge of it from that country, and added to it largely. [989]Cujus scientiae saeculis priscis multa ex Chaldaeorum arcanis Bactrianus addidit Zoroastres. When the Persians gained the empire in Asia, they renewed these rites, and doctrines. [990]Multa deinde (addidit) Hystaspes Rex prudentissimus, Darii pater. These rites were idolatrous; yet not so totally depraved, and gross, as those of other nations. They were introduced by Chus; at least by the Cuthites: one branch of whom were the Peresians, or Persians. The Cuthites of Chaldea were the original Magi, and they gave to Chus the title of Zoroaster Magus, as being the first of the order. Hence the account given by Gregorius Turonensis is in a great degree true. [991]Primogeniti Cham filii Noe fuit Chus. Hic ad Persas transiit, quem Persae vocitavere Zoroastrem. Chus, we find, was called by this title; and from him the religion styled Magia passed to the Persians. But titles, as I have shewn, were not always determinately appropriated: nor was Chus the original person, who was called Zoroaster. There was another beyond him, who was the first deified mortal, and the prototype in this worship. To whom I allude, may, I think, be known from the history given above. It will not fail of being rendered very clear in the course of my procedure.

The purport of the term Zoroaster is said, by [992]the author of the Recognitions, and by others, to be _the living star_: and they speak of it as if it were of Grecian etymology, and from the words [Greek: zoon] and [Greek: aster]. It is certainly compounded of Aster, which, among many nations, signified a star. But, in respect to the former term, as the object of the Persic and Chaldaic worship was the Sun, and most of their titles were derived from thence; we may be pretty certain, that by Zoro-Aster was meant Sol Asterius. Zor, Sor, Sur, Sehor, among the Amonians, always related to the Sun. Eusebius says, that Osiris was esteemed the same as Dionusus, and the Sun: and that he was called [993]Surius. The region of Syria was hence denominated [Greek: Suria]; and is at this day called Souria, from Sur, and Sehor, the Sun. The Dea Syria at Hierapolis was properly Dea Solaris. In consequence of the Sun's being called Sor, and Sur, we find that his temple is often mentioned under the name of [994]Beth-Sur, and [995]Beth-Sura, which Josephus renders [996][Greek: Beth-Sour]. It was also called Beth-Sor, and Beth-Soron, as we learn from [997]Eusebius, and [998]Jerome. That Suria was not merely a provincial title is plain, from the Suria Dea being worshipped at Erix in [999]Sicily; and from an inscription to her at [1000]Rome. She was worshipped under the same title in Britain, as we may infer from an Inscription at Sir Robert Cotton's, of Connington, in Cambridgeshire.

[1001]DEAE SURIAE SUB CALPURNIO LEG. AUG. &c.

Syria is called Sour, and Souristan, at this day.

The Grecians therefore were wrong in their etymology; and we may trace the origin of their mistake, when they supposed the meaning of Zoroaster to have been vivens astrum. I have mentioned, that both Zon and [1002]Zoan signified the Sun: and the term Zor had the same meaning. In consequence of this, when the Grecians were told that Zor-Aster was the same as Zoan-Aster, they, by an uniform mode of mistake, expressed the latter [Greek: zoon]; and interpreted Zoroaster [Greek: astera zoon]. But Zoan signified the Sun. The city Zoan in Egypt was Heliopolis; and the land of Zoan the Heliopolitan nome. Both Zoan-Aster, and Zor-Aster, signified Sol Asterius. The God Menes was worshipped under the symbol of a bull; and oftentimes under the symbol of a bull and a man. Hence we read of Meno-Taur, and of Taur-Men, in Crete, Sicily, and other places. The same person was also styled simply [1003]Taurus, from the emblem under which he was represented. This Taurus was also called Aster, and Asterius, as we learn from [1004]Lycophron, and his Scholiast. [Greek: Ho Asterios houtos estin ho kai Minotauros]. _By Asterius is signified the same person as the Minotaur._ This Taur-Aster is exactly analogous to [1005]Zor-Aster above. It was the same emblem as the Mneuis, or sacred bull of Egypt; which was described with a star between his horns. Upon some of the [1006]entablatures at Naki Rustan, supposed to have been the antient Persepolis, we find the Sun to be described under the appearance of a bright [1007]star: and nothing can better explain the history there represented, than the account given of Zoroaster. He was the reputed son of Oromazes, the chief Deity; and his principal instructor was Azonaces, the same person under a different title. He is spoken of as one greatly beloved by heaven: and it is mentioned of him, that he longed very much to see the Deity, which at his importunity was granted to him. This interview, however, was not effected by his own corporeal eyes, but by the mediation of an [1008]angel. Through this medium the vision was performed: and he obtained a view of the Deity surrounded with light. The angel, through whose intervention this favour was imparted, seems to have been one of those styled Zoni, and [1009]Azoni. All the vestments of the priests, and those in which they used to apparel their Deities, had sacred names, taken from terms in their worship. Such were Camise, Candys, Camia, Cidaris, Mitra, Zona, and the like. The last was a sacred fillet, or girdle, which they esteemed an emblem of the orbit described by Zon, the Sun. They either represented their Gods as girded round with a serpent, which was an emblem of the same meaning; or else with this bandage, denominated [1010]Zona. They seem to have been secondary Deities, who were called Zoni and [1011]Azoni. The term signifies Heliadae: and they were looked upon as aethereal essences, a kind of emanation from the Sun. They were exhibited under different representations; and oftentimes like Cneph of Egypt. The fillet, with which the Azoni were girded, is described as of a fiery nature: and they were supposed to have been wafted through the air. Arnobius speaks of it in this light. [1012]Age, nunc, veniat, quaeso, per igneam zonam Magus ab interiore orbe Zoroastres. I imagine, that by Azonaces, [Greek: Azonakes], beforementioned, the reputed teacher of Zoroaster, was meant the chief Deity, the same as Oromanes, and Oromasdes. He seems to have been the supreme of those aethereal spirits described above; and to have been named Azon-Nakis, which signifies the great Lord, [1013]Azon. Naki, Nakis, Nachis, Nachus, Negus, all in different parts of the world betoken a king. The temple at Istachar, near which these representations were found, is at this day called the palace of Naki Rustan, whoever that personage may have been.

ORPHEUS.

The character of Orpheus is in some respects not unlike that of Zoroaster, as will appear in the sequel. He went over many regions of the earth; and in all places, whither he came, was esteemed both as a priest, and a prophet. There seems to be more in his history than at first sight appears: all which will by degrees be unfolded. His skill in harmony is represented as very wonderful: insomuch that he is said to have tamed the wild beasts of the forest, and made the trees follow him. He likewise could calm the winds, and appease the raging of the sea. These last circumstances are taken notice of by a poet in some fine verses, wherein he laments his death.

[1014][Greek: Houk eti koimaseis anemon bromon, ouchi chalazan,] [Greek: Ou nipheton surmous, ou patageusan hala.] [Greek: Oleo gar. kl.]

He is mentioned, as having been twice in a state of [1015]death; which is represented as a twofold descent to the shades below. There is also an obscure piece of mythology about his wife, and a serpent; also of the Rhoia or Pomegranate: which seems to have been taken from some symbolical representation at a time, when the purport was no longer understood. The Orpheans dealt particularly in symbols, as we learn from Proclus. [1016][Greek: Orphikoi dia sumbolon, Puthagoreioi dia eikonon, ta theia menuein ephiemenoi.] His character for science was very great; and Euripides takes particular notice of some antient tablets, containing much salutary knowledge, which were bequeathed to the Thracians by Orpheus: [1017][Greek: has Orpheie kategrapse gerus.] Plato styles his works [1018][Greek: biblon homadon], _a vast lumber of learning_, from the quantity, which people pretended had been transmitted from him. He one while resided in Greece; and particularly at Thebes in Boeotia. Here he introduced the rites of Dionusus, and celebrated his Orgies upon mount [1019]Cithaeron. He is said to have been the first who instituted those rites: and was the author of all mysterious worship. [1020][Greek: Protos Orpheus musteria Theon paredoken.] All these were accompanied with science of another nature: for he is reputed to have been skilled in many arts.

From Thebes he travelled towards the sea-coast of Chaonia, in order to recover his lost Eurydice; who had been killed by a serpent. According to [1021]Agatharchides Cnidius it was at Aorthon in Epirus, that he descended for this purpose to the shades below. The same account is given by [1022]Pausanias, who calls the place more truly Aornon. In the Orphic Argonauts it is said to have been performed at Taenarus in [1023]Laconia. He likewise resided in Egypt, and travelled over the regions of Libya; and every where instructed people in the rites, and religion, which he professed. In the same manner he went over a great part of the world.