Abury, A Temple of the British Druids, With Some Others, Described

Part 10

Chapter 103,170 wordsPublic domain

All these put together, I take to be some good reasons (to omit several more for brevity’s sake) for the extraordinary veneration paid to this creature, from all antiquity. Our oldest heathen writer _Sanchoniathon_ says, the _Phœnicians_ call’d it _agathodæmon_, the good angel. _Epies_ the _Phœnician_ in _Eusebius_ pronounces it a most divine animal. _Maximus_ of _Tyre_ before quoted writes, that the serpent was the great symbol of the deity, in most nations, even among the _Indians_. _Sigismund_ in his _Muscovite_-history, says the like of the _Samogitians_, in the northern parts of that vast empire. _Gaguin_ in his _Sarmatia_, of the _Lithuanians_. So _Scaliger_ in his notes on _Aristotle_ of animals, concerning the people of _Calicut_ in the _East-Indies_; all books of travels into the _West-Indies_, the like. This sufficiently proves the notion nearly as old as mankind.

From these notions in antiquity, arose the strange humour of the ophite sect or heresy, who affirm the seducer serpent was the son of God. _Epiphanius_, _Tertullian_, St. _Augustin_ and others speak of it. They kept a serpent in a box and worshipped it.

2. We are to consider the nature of forming of symbols. The serpent simply, as it was curs’d of God, and composite, as hanging on a tree, was symbolical of Christ: according to the sense both of _Jewish_ and Christian writers.

We have seen the serpent in very advantageous light, which was in order to remove our prejudice, by the high notion its natural history presents us, to which much might have been added. But this is not necessary in the formation of symbols, for if we should think this a mean and contemptible animal, unworthy to convey to us so great an idea, I answer, it was one of the arts of the inventors of symbols and emblems, to picture out the highest things by what we may esteem the lowest subjects: a beetle, for instance, is the symbol of no less than what the heathen call _anima mundi_; and to picture out the greatest good by its contrary. Just as _Isaiah_ in the prophetical style calls that most excellent prince king _Hezekiah_, by the name of dragon, basilisk, cockatrice, and fiery flying serpent, xiv. 26. This is understood not in regard to any pravity of his own disposition, but in regard to the enemies of God’s people, to whom he was as a dragon, a divine avenger against enemies, a protector of his own. Again consider the serpent as a prophylactick symbol, and the highest of sacred characters, thought most effectually to guard against and drive off all evil power. It was the method in making these prophylactick symbols, to take the figure of the thing we want to remedy. A most remarkable and apposite instance of this nature, is the famous brazen serpent erected by _Moses_, being suspended on a cross-pole, like that on which military banners are hung. They that were bitten by the fiery serpents, were order’d to look on this, and be whole. So that manifestly the symbol is to excite faith and obedience. They are the proper cure, not the intrinsick efficacy of the symbolical figure, _Wisd._ xvi. 6, 7.

All writers _Jewish_ and Christian with one mouth assert, this was a type of the Messiah. _Philo_ is in a rapture about it; supposes somewhat extraordinary, future, is meant thereby. _Rabbi Moses Gerundinensis_ writes thus. “It seems to me, concerning this mystery, that ’tis agreeable to the course of the divine law, as to miraculous works, that the mischief should be remedied by a thing similar to that which caus’d it.” And it makes the miracle more illustrious and divine, that God should direct a snake to cure those bitten by snakes.

Others of the rabbin are of the same way of thinking, as _David Kimchi_, _Michlol_ II. And _Abarbenel_ upon the place, f. 305. And _Nachmanides_. Our Saviour applies the _Mosaic_ serpent directly to himself; no wonder then that the Christian fathers do so. _Christus veluti serpens in cruce pependit_, says St. _Ambrose_. _Moebius_ treats largely of this resemblance between _Christ_ and the serpent, _exercitatio de æneo serpente_, p. 63. Highly honour’d was the serpent, that, as it had been the instrument of introducing the greatest evil to mankind, to it was directed God’s word when he promised to us the greatest good, the Messiah, imply’d in those words, _Gen._ iii. 15. He _shall bruise thy head_: αυτος in the LXX.

Another like case is that in 1 _Samuel_ v. the ark of God was taken captive by the _Philistines_, and they dar’d to look into the venerable secrecy thereof. The nation was smote in the hinder-parts, the organs of generation, which the scripture modestly calls _emerods_, _hæmorrhoidals_. Moreover a terrible pestilence killed many, and a plague of mice at harvest-time came upon them, and devoured all the fruit of their ground. In order to make an atonement, they sent away the ark again, with golden figures of the emerods and mice, a present accompanying of costly jewels, as a consecrated λουτρον, or satisfaction to the God of the _Jews_. Here, by the way, we should be blind if we did not see the origin of the _phallus_ among the heathen.

Therefore to apply this. In regard to the seeming difficulty we at first took notice of, paying such a regard to an animal which the ancestors of mankind had so much reason to detest. Did the devil injure us under the form of a serpent? The like figure is the properest of any to symbolize the remedy, the antidote against the poison whereby the devil wrought man’s fall. Therefore, naturally, the same is to symbolize the Messiah then promised, who is to work man’s redemption. And St. _Athanasius_, Tom. II. _quæst._ 20. scruples not to make a comparison between the union of the serpent and the devil, in the fatal temptation; to the union of the divine and human nature in our blessed Saviour. The venomous serpent is his human nature, sinful, infected by the devil’s treachery; _he was made sin for us_, tho’ not contaminated himself. Tho’ not venomous, he cures the venom of our nature. I observe that the _rabbies_, tho’ they saw sufficiently, how necessarily the _Mosaic_ serpent was applicable to the Messiah, yet they were somewhat fearful therein, and of speaking their mind upon it, for fear of doing ill, in comparing him to an accursed animal. But our Saviour himself was not fearful in comparing himself to it, and the rather on that account, took it for a very express type of his crucifixion, and of his being accursed for our sakes, _Deut._ xxi. 25. _John_ iii. 14. _Galat._ iii. 13, _i. e._ devoted as a sacrifice, an expiation, that we being freed from the curse of sin, might obtain the blessing of God. So our Christian writers explain the type between our Saviour and the brazen serpent in the wilderness. _Bede_ in particular, on _John_ iii. And here we see the nature of types, where a man that undergoes the curse and punishment of the law, becomes in reality a type of the Messiah. A serpent which pictures out the evil principle, the like, 2 _Cor._ v. 21. Assuredly _Moses_, by the holy Spirit, meant it to regard Christ’s crucifixion. A fit emblem of his divinity, thro’ that remarkable quality of their throwing off old age with their skin, and returning to youth again. For so the ancients thought:

_Anguibus exuitur tenui cum pelle vetustas._ Tibullus.

A fit emblem of his resurrection from the dead, and of returning to an immortal life.

No wonder then, from such reasons as these, and others as obvious, the ancients concluded this to be the most divine of all animals, and thought it the aptest symbol of the Νους ἑτερος, the other, or second mind of _Plato_, whom they affirmed to be the creator of the world. I know not whether this notion of theirs did not farther contribute to it; they thought these animals brought forth by the mouth. They have too no limbs, or members for action, but exert their mighty power by the mouth only; whence _Horus Apollo_ says, “a serpent is the symbol of the mouth.” This well represents the omnific WORD, which _Suidas_ speaks of from _Trismegistus_, all perfect, fruitful, the workman, creator of the world.

CHAP. XII.

_The second sort of temples called_ Dracontia, _like that of_ Abury, _have been built frequently in old times. The traces of them pursued. Part of the history of_ Phut, _third son of_ Cham. _A genealogy of the most ancient sacred and heathen families._ Phut _had a fleet of ships upon the_ Mediterranean. _The_ Typhon, Typhis, Python _of antiquity, called_ Apollo Pythius _after death. He was a builder of these serpentine temples. Like the emperor_ Augustus _in countenance. He erected the first patriarchal temple at_ Delphos, _a_ Dracontium. Parnassus _originally_ Larnassus, _which is no other than our_ Hakpen _of_ Abury. _The sabbath observed there originally._ Ææas, _a son of_ Phut’_s, built the_ Dracontium _at_ Colchis. Perseus, _another son of his, bore the sacred hierogram, the circle, snake, and wings, in his shield; whence the_ Medusa’_s head._

_Zoroaster Magus, in Euseb. p. e._ II. 7. _Plato_, _Porphyry_, and others of the old philosophers, define God to be every where and no where, who fills all space, and is contain’d in none; “from whom came all things that are, and which are not yet; eternal, immutable, omnipresent, incomprehensible, immaterial, without parts, beginning or end.” If we put this definition into a geometrical figure, in order to form a symbol, we cannot possibly do it better than by describing the circle. A circle then in hieroglyphics means, divine; but particularly, as it is the most perfect and comprehensive of all geometrical figures, they design’d it for the symbol of the first and supreme being; whose resemblance we cannot find, whose center is every where, and circumference no where. It well pictur’d out, as _Abenephi_ the _Arabian_ and others assert, the divine nature of God.

Therefore this figure of the serpent and circle in their doctrine, aptly means the divine creator, or the creator descended from the supreme. For tho’ the deity was author of all things, yet more immediately this SON or WORD of the supreme was the architect of the universe.

And this we find exactly consonant to the scripture doctrine. So that it seems very evident to me, the most important of divine truths admitted in the christian church, were imparted to the first race of mankind, the patriarchal church, which two are in reality but the same.

We learn repeatedly from _Sanchoniathon_, _Porphyry_, and other ancient authors quoted by _Eusebius_ in the _præparatio evangelica_, that the first sages of the world had just and true notions of the nature of the deity, conformable to those of the Christians: That, in their hieroglyphic way of writing, they design’d the deity and the mysterious nature thereof, by the sacred figure of the circle, snake, and wings. Of these, the circle meant the fountain of all being, the invisible supreme, who had no name. The serpent symboliz’d the son, or first divine emanation from the supreme. This they called by the name of _Ptha_, which is deriv’d from the _hebrew_, meaning the WORD. The wings symboliz’d that divine person or emanation from the former, commonly called _anima mundi_, but the _Egyptians_ called him KNEPH, which in _hebrew_ signifies _winged_.

Thus the old authors that speak of these things are to be understood, though they are confus’d, not rightly apprehending the bottom of the matter. And this hieroglyphic figure, in the whole, was call’d _Knephtha_.

But this knowledge of the nature of the deity, the most valuable _depositum_ which could be communicated to mortals, was first perverted into idolatry; therefore God almighty forbore revealing himself further on that head, in an explicit manner, ’till the fulness of time arriv’d, the Christian dispensation. But those people who preserv’d themselves from idolatry, among which I reckon our Druids, retain’d that knowledge thereof which had already been imparted, of which this sacred figure of the alate and serpentiferous circle was, as it were, a seal; which they stamp’d upon these most lasting monuments, their temples. And I doubt not but they somewhat improv’d the notions they had thereof, by reasoning, in the manner I shall speak of chap. XV.

_Abury_ is not the only temple in _Britain_ form’d on this design of the circle and serpent. I saw another at _Shap_ in _Westmorland_, when I travell’d thro’ the place, _anno_ 1725, with Mr. _Roger Gale_. But I had no opportunity of examining into it.

There is another, as I take it, at _Classerness_, a village in the island of _Lewis_, between _Scotland_ and _Ireland_. I took a drawing of it from Mr. _Lwydd_’s travels; but he was a very bad designer, and having no knowledge of the purport, makes the representation still worse. The circle to which it belongs is 20 cubits in diameter. There is a central obelisc. A part of the snake remains going from it, which he calls an avenue. He did not discern the curve of it, no more than that of _Kennet_ avenue, which he likewise has drawn in the same collection, as a straight line. It seems to me that the circle was double, or two concentric. I shall print it in the succeeding volume.

No doubt but there are more in the _britannic_ isles. I propose in this chapter to deliver my notions concerning them in the more eastern parts of the world, of which are many traces in ancient writing; avoiding prolixity as much as possible.

The practice of building these serpentine temples was us’d by the patriarchs, perhaps near the beginning of the world. I have some proof of their being ancienter than the flood; but shall not at present insist on it. The first person I shall take notice of on this account is _Phut_, a brother of _Canaan_, son of _Cham_. _Phut_ was a person of much greater eminence in antiquity, than vulgarly thought. But would we know anything of the particular memoirs of this man, or of any other his relations and coevals, we have nothing left us for it but heathen story.

Tho’ the _Phœnicians_, and our Druids, as well as the _Egyptians_ too, had the earliest use of alphabet writing, yet none of these nations have transmitted to us any memoirs of themselves. And for what little knowledge we have of them, besides their monuments, we are altogether indebted to the _Greeks_, that receiv’d these arts from them. They happily improv’d art and science, sculpture and writing, so as to hand down to us most of the ancient history we know, beside the bible. Still this misfortune attended them, that they improv’d the symbolical method of writing, which they learn’d from the _Phœnicians_ and _Egyptians_, to that monstrous pitch, as to produce what we call by the general name of _mythology_. It was but very late that they came to write true history: so that the whole of the ancient history of the nations they write of, is invelop’d in this perplexing mythology.

Yet we should be highly to blame, if we absolutely neglected it. ’Tis all we can have of prophane antiquity. ’Tis more commendable for us to study to extricate it from its symbolic mystery, and find out the open truth. Those that have succeeded best therein, find much agreement between it and the scripture history, as far as they are concurrent.

’Tis from this mythology, chiefly, that I can pretend to discourse any further, concerning these great works I have been describing. I shall endeavour to do it with all the brevity and perspicuity possible, as becomes such sort of discourses. Yet I despair not of finding out a good deal of true history. I shall not answer for all. And a great deal of candour is necessary in the reader, if he would have either pleasure or instruction in it. Yea, says a predecessor in these kind of inquiries, Dr. _Dickenson_, _Delph. Phœnic._ “if we look over the _greek_ mythology with proper sagacity, we shall easily discover many footsteps of true religion.”

“A fable is an artificial discourse, consisting of the marvellous, and a philosopher, in some sort, is a lover of such,” says the great philosopher, _Metaphys._ I. 2.

There are vast treasures of ancient knowledge in mythology, especially of history both sacred and civil. ’Tis all that we have left of heathen history of the most ancient times, and ’tis worth our while to shake off the rubbish, and pick out the useful part. The learned labours of _Bochart_, _Selden_, _Marsham_, _Huetius_, _Gale_, _Cumberland_, _Banier_, and many more, shew us its utility. And we must pardon them if, in some things, they have gone beyond the golden medium, we ourselves will be content to err somewhat with those great names.

_Phut_, son of _Cham_, was a person of eminence, tho’ not taken notice of so much as he deserves. I think it much to our purpose to recite some part of his history. He is the _Apollo_ mention’d by _Sanchoniathon_, son of _Cronus_, who is _Cham_, as is demonstrated beyond doubt by bishop _Cumberland_, in his posthumous works; he is said to have been born in _Peræa_, i. e. the country towards the _Euphrates_: his third son; as likewise deliver’d by _Moses_. From the word _Phut_, he was called _Python_, by a little transposition natural in pronouncing a difficult name; and, by a like transposition, _Typhon_.

_Apollo Pythius_ was the son of _Ammon, that is Cham_, says _Lucius Ampelius_, _in libro memoriali_. _Plutarch de Isid. & Osir._ writes, that _Typhon_ was brother to _Osiris_, who was undoubtedly _Misraim_, son of _Cham_. The like by _Diodorus Siculus_.

To facilitate the understanding of antiquity, I here present the reader with a genealogical table of the great personages we are going to treat of. I could produce the evidences that prove each particular descent, in a strictly heraldical way, but it would now take up too much of our time.

DESCRIBED. _The_ GENEALOGY.

_Phut_ was the first most celebrated navigator of antiquity, built a fleet of ships, began to carry colonies into the countries on the _Mediterranean_ sea. _Strabo_ in IX. tells us the history of him from _Ephorus_, a very ancient historian. He says _Phut_ or _Apollo_ travell’d the earth, and came to the rude inhabitants of _Parnassus_. His business was to bring men to civility and manners, to use corn for their food.

_Pindar_ writes of him,

————_He travell’d o’er earth and sea, setting watch-towers on hill-tops, among the nations, consecrating temples, and building groves._

_Lycophron_ mentions _Typhon_’s watch-towers _in Arimis_, which probably is the _Peræa_ of _Sanchoniathon_, the east part of _Syria_, where _Homer_ says the ευνη, or bed of _Typhon_ was, in a field abounding with oaks. ’Tis not unusual for _Apollo_ to be represented in the character of a military captain. _Hygin. fab._ 140. And he really was a leader of a vast colony of his people into _Egypt_, then possess’d by his elder brother _Misraim_. Of this more hereafter. Of him speaks _Seneca_ in _Medea_,

_Ausus Tiphys pandere vasto Carbasa ponto, legesque novas Scribere ventis_————

Again,

_Tiphys in primis domitor profundi._

_Jerem._ xlvi. 9. the _Libyans_ of _Africa_ are in the original _Phut_. The _Lydians_ there are the people or posterity of _Lud_, _Thoth_, his brother.