Part 14

Further, we must remove, in this kind of reasoning, all the imperfection of different sexes, as well as time, which is in human generations; and all such gross ideas incompatible with the most pure and perfect divine nature. The whole of this our reasoning further confirms, that the son is necessarily existing. It was necessary for God to be actively good always, and begetting his son was the greatest act of divine goodness, and the first, necessarily. But the word _first_ is absurd, betraying our own imperfection of speech and ideas, when we treat of these matters; for there could be no _first_, where no beginning. And the very names of father and son are but relative and oeconomical; so far useful, that we may be able to entertain some tolerable notion in these things, so far above our understanding.

But tho’ it be infinitely above our understanding, yet we reach so far, as to see the necessity of it. And we can no otherwise cure that immense _vacuum_, that greatest of all absurdities, the indolence and uselesness of the supreme being, before creation. And all this the Druids might, and I may venture to say, did arrive at, by ratiocination. And we can have no difficulty of admitting it, if we do but suppose, there were obscure notions of such being the nature of the deity, handed down from the beginning of the world. Whence in _Chronicon Alexandrinum_, _Malala_, and other authors, we read, for instance, “in those times (the most early) among the _Egyptians_ reigned, of the family of _Misraim_, _Sesosiris_, that is, the branch or offspring of _Osiris_, a man highly venerable for wisdom, who taught, there were three greatest energies or persons in the deity, which were but one.” This man was _Lud_, or _Thoth_, son of _Misraim_ or _Osiris_, and for this reason, when idolatry began, he was consecrated by the name of _Hermes_, meaning one of those divine energies, which we call the Holy Spirit.

This is a short and easy account of that knowledge which the ancients had of the nature of the deity, deduc’d from reason in a contemplative mind, and which certainly was known to all the world from the beginning, and rightly call’d a mystery. For our reason is strong enough to see the necessity of admitting this doctrine, but not to see the manner. The _how_ of an eternal generation is only to be understood by the deity itself.

The Druids would pursue this notion from like reasoning a little further, in this manner. Tho’ from all that has been said, there is a necessity of admitting an eternal generation, yet the person so generated, all-perfect God, does not multiply the deity itself, tho’ he is a person distinct from his father. For addition or subtraction is argument of imperfection, a thing not to be affirmed of the nature of the deity. They would therefore say, that tho’ these two, the father and the son, are different divine personalities, yet they cannot be called two Gods, or two godheads; for this would be discerping the deity or godhead, which is equally absurd and wicked.

That mankind did formerly reason in this wise, is too notorious to need my going about formally to prove it. ’Tis not to be controverted; very many authors have done it substantially. And when there was such a notion in the world, our Druids, who had the highest fame for theological studies, would cultivate it in some such manner as I have deliver’d, by the mere strength of natural reason. Whether they would think in this manner _ex priori_, I cannot say; but that they did so think, we can need no weightier an argument than the operose work of _Abury_ before us; for nought else could induce men to make such a stamp, such a picture of their own notion, as this stupendous production of labour and art.

As our western philosophers made a huge picture of this their idea, in a work of three miles’ extent, and, as it were, shaded by the interposition of divers hills; so the more eastern sages who were not so shy of writing, yet, chose to express it in many obscure and enigmatic ways. _Pythagoras_, for instance, affirmed, the original of all things was from unity and an infinite duality. _Plutarc. de plac. philos._ _Plato_ makes three divine authors of all things, the first or supreme he calls king, the good. Beside him, he names the cause, descended from the former; and between them he names _dux_, the leader, or at other times he calls him the _mind_. Just in the same manner, the _Egyptians_ called them _father_, _mind_, _power_. Therefore _Plato_, in his VIth epistle, writing to _Hermias_ and his friends, to enter into a most solemn oath, directs it to be made before “God the leader or prince of all things, both that are, and that shall be; and before the Lord, the father of that leader or prince; and of the cause: all whom, says he, we shall know manifestly, if we philosophize rightly, as far as the powers of good men will carry us.” And in _Timæus_ he makes MIND to be the son of GOOD, and to be the more immediate architect of the world. And in _Epinomis_ he writes, “the most divine LOGOS or WORD made the world,” the like as _Philo_ wrote; which is expressly a christian verity.

’Tis not to be wonder’d at, that the ancients wrap’d up this doctrine in an abstruse and symbolic way of speaking, of writing, and in hieroglyphic characters and works, as we have seen. It was communicated to them in the same manner; they did not, could not comprehend it any more than we, but they held it as a precious depositum of sacred wisdom.

We may therefore make this deduction from what has been said, that the christian doctrine of distinct personalities in the deity, is so far from being contrary to reason, as some would have it, or above human reason as others, that ’tis evidently deducible therefrom, at least highly agreeable thereto, when seriously propos’d to our reason. And when most undoubtedly the ancients had such a notion, even from the creation, those minds that were of a contemplative turn, would embrace it and cultivate it, as being the most exalted knowledge we are capable of. Of such a turn were our Druids, as all accounts agree.

CHAP. XVI.

_Of the third species of patriarchal temples, form’d in the resemblance of a circle and wings. A description of one of this sort on the banks of the_ Humber _in_ Lincolnshire. _A very remarkable sort of barrows there, like to beds. This figure of the alate circle, the_ Egyptians _call’d by the name of_ CNEPH; _authors mistake in telling us it was the name of God. ’Tis indeed the symbol of the third divine emanation from the supreme, call’d the_ anima mundi. CNEPH _is an oriental word, from_ canaph, _to_ fly, עוף. _The entire symbol, circle, snake and wings, was call’d_ CNEPHPTHA. Ptha _more particularly meant the serpent, or symbol of the second divine person. The supreme, they held to be ineffable, as well as invisible, therefore symboliz’d him by the circle. The Neptune of the_ Greeks _deriv’d from_ CNEPH, דניא dunia, _a circle added to_ Cneph, _is_ circulus alatus. _He was president of the waters, from_ Gen. i. 2. and the divine spirit moved upon the face of the waters. _Hence this temple set on the edge of the_ Humber. _Of the_ Egyptian Canopus. _Another of these alate temples on_ Navestock-common _in_ Essex. _The word_ ganaph _preserv’d in the name of the town._ Knave, gnavus _and_ knap, _a teutonic word, all from the_ hebrew. _Mr._ Toland _mentions an alate temple of the Druids in the_ hebrid _islands, but does not altogether understand it. Of_ Abaris _the hyperborean Druid, a friend of_ Pythagoras’_s. That the directive virtue of the magnetic needle was known anciently. The bed barrows on the_ Humber _banks explain’d. A metaphysical disquisition concerning the Druids’ knowledge of a third emanation or divine person, from the supreme; a truth agreeable to reason. This was the_ Mercury _of the ancients, as well as_ Neptune. _The names which the Druids gave to the three divine persons. Conclusion. They were in effect Christians._

When I wrote my _Itinerary_, I travelled a good deal of the _Hermen-street_ road, and the _Foss_ road, having Mr. _Samuel Buck_ in my company. At that time I engag’d him to take in hand the work, which he has so laudably pursued, and sav’d the remembrance of innumerable antiquities in our island, by that collection of elegant prints which he has publish’d. When we were on the banks of the _Humber_, the name of _Barrow_ invited my curiosity, and it was fully answer’d, by finding that most noble antiquity there of the old Druids, upon the _marsh_, call’d _Humbers castle_.

A rivulet rises near the town of _Barrow_, and when it falls off the high ground, and enters on the level marshes on the _Humber_ shore, it turns a mill. Just there, upon the edge of the marsh, upon a gentle eminence, nearly overflow’d by high spring-tides, and between the salt and fresh water, is the work we are to speak of, made of great banks of earth thrown up, in an odd manner, which gives it the denomination of castle. I observ’d all about it, and in the adjacent marshes, many long _tumuli_ of different sizes, but all of a particular shape, such as I had never seen elsewhere, being form’d like a bed. I immediately set to work in digging into several of them, and we found burnt bones, ashes, bits of urns, and such kind of matters, all extremely rotten and decay’d; and the very same appearances as I had so often seen, in digging the barrows about _Stonehenge_ and _Abury_.

This satisfied me that the work must belong to the most ancient inhabitants of the island, notwithstanding its unusual form. And when I attentively consider’d those banks, and made a plan of them, I was very agreeably surpriz’d in discovering the purport and meaning, which was to represent the _circulus alatus_ or winged circle, an ancient hieroglyphic well known to those more particularly conversant with _Egyptian_ monuments; and what they rightly call the symbol of the _anima mundi_, or _spirit pervading the universe_; in truth, the divine spirit.

I had no hesitation in adjudging this to be a temple of our Druids. All reasons imaginable concurr’d. Tho’ instead of stones, they have made this work with mounds of earth; I suppose for want of stones, lying on the surface of the ground. It makes the third kind of the Druid temples which I proposed to describe. The vertical line of it is north-east and south-west, the upper part being directly north-east; and the barrows generally conform to this line, being either upon it, or at right angles with it; the head of the barrow sometimes one way, sometimes the other.

The circle was 120 cubits in diameter. The wings 100 cubits broad, 150 long; but the eastern wing was more extended than the other. For the design of it is somewhat in perspective, as ’tis sometimes seen on _Egyptian_ antiquities.

This very extraordinary work, which I could not sufficiently admire, has very often entertain’d my thoughts. We see an uniformity in human nature throughout all ages. We build our churches, especially cathedrals, in a cross, the symbol or cognizance of Christianity; the first builders of churches did it in the symbol of the deity, which was pictur’d out with great judgment, and that (most likely) from the beginning of the world.

The circle and wings was the picture of the deity, which the old _Egyptian_ hierophants call’d CNEPH. As there were three varieties in this figure, so they had more names than one for it, I mean the whole figure, the circle, serpent, and wings. And sometimes they used one word, sometimes another, and sometimes conjoin’d them. _Eusebius_ in _pr. ev._ III. 3. writes, “that the _Egyptians_ painted God, whom they call’d _Kneph_, like a man in a blue garment, holding a circle and serpent (not scepter, for no such figure ever appears) and on his head, feathers or wings.” Now this very figure is seen on the portals of the _Persian_ temple of _Chilminar_. Authors are not sufficiently accurate in these matters, for want of a more perfect knowledge of them. _Cneph_ is properly the alate circle; yet sometimes they call the whole figure by that name. So a feather or two, or wings, are often plac’d on the heads of the _Egyptian_ deities; but the picture above-mention’d at _Chilminar_ has the wings, as more commonly, annexed to the circle.

_Phtha_ was another name of one of these figures, which they sometimes join’d to the preceding, and made the word _Cnephtha_. _Kircher_ erroneously calls it _Hemptha_; for before him _Iamblichus_ err’d in calling _Cneph_, _Emeph_. _Strabo_ calls _Cneph_, _Cnuphis_, and says his temple was at _Syene_, XVII. Undoubtedly a temple some way of this form. _Athenagoras in Eroticis_ VI. calls him Κνεφαιος, _Cnepheus_; and says, “he can’t be seen by our eyes, nor comprehended by our mind.” _Hesychius_, and the etymologist _Suidas_, _voce_ κνεφυς, interpret the word, _obscure_, _hidden_, _not to be seen or understood_. _Iamblichus_ and _Proclus_ the like, who make _Amûn_ and _Phtha_ the same, _Prov._ viii. 30. The truth is, the word _Cneph_ comes from the _hebrew_ ענף _ganaph volare_, to _fly_, קנף a _wing_, _Psal._ xviii. 11. _He rode upon the cherubim, and did fly._

_Phtha_, in _Suidas_ called φθάς, is deriv’d, on the authority of _Kircher_ and _Huetius_, from the _hebrew_ פתה the same as the _greek_ word πειθω, to _persuade_, _suada_ in _latin_. It regards more particularly the serpent, the emblem of eloquence, and the divine WORD. In _Arabic_ it signifies the _son_. So that _Cnephtha_ means the entire figure, the circle, snake and wings. The supreme had no name. They held him ineffable, as well as invisible. Whence they call’d the _Jehovah_ of the _jews_ an uncertain or unknown deity, or the deity without a name. _Herodotus in Euterpe_ writes, “he heard from the priests of _Dodona_, that the ancient _Pelasgians_ made their prayers and sacrifices to the deity without any name or sirname, for at that time they knew none.” _Iamblichus_’s interpretation of _Phtha_ is very little different. He says, “It signifies him that performs all things in truth, and without lying.” The _Egyptians_ called this _Phtha Vulcan_, and say, he was the son of the supreme God; whom _Cicero_ makes the guardian god of _Egypt_, who was the author of all the philosophy of the _Egyptians_, according to _Diogenes Laertius in proem._ And this is that most ancient deity of the _Egyptians_ who was particularly design’d by the serpent. And hence the fables of the _greeks_ make _Vulcan_ the only son of _Juno_, without the help of her husband. Again, they make _Pallas_ produc’d out of _Jupiter_’s brain, who wore the _Ægis_ or snaky breast-plate, which originally was no other than our great prophylactic hierogramma, the circle and snake, us’d by the most ancient warriors as a sacred preservative. _Medusa_’s head is the very same, a circle, wings, and snakes. But the delicate _greeks_ new drest it, and made the circle into a beautiful face, more agreeable to their taste of things. And its turning men into stones means, at the bottom, nothing but the making our serpentine temples in that form by the first heroes, who bore this cognizance in their shields.

But to return to CNEPH, the deity to whom these winged temples are dedicate. It became the chief and more famous name. Whence _Porphyry_ in _Eusebius_’s _pr. ev._ III. 11. calls this _Cneph_ the creator, _Plutarch, de Is. & Os._ testifies, “the inhabitants in _Thebais_, or the remotest part of _Egypt_, worshipped only the eternal God _Cneph_, and paid nothing toward the charge of idolatrous worship in the other parts of that kingdom.” Thus we see, those countries farthest separated from the busy part of the world, such as _Thebais_ and _Britain_, retain’d the pure and ancient religion: which bishop _Cumberland_ too asserts, _Sanchon._ p. 15. of _Thebais_, before _Abraham_’s time. _Strabo_ says, “there was a temple of _Cnuphis_ (as he writes it) at _Syene_, the farther part of _Thebais_:” which must be understood of one of our winged temples originally, tho’ probably afterwards built upon, cover’d, and become idolatrous. “Hence the _Ethiopians_, neighbours to those of _Thebais_, living still in the upper regions of _Egypt_,” says _Strabo_, “worship two gods, the one the immortal creator, the other mortal, who has no name, nor is easily to be apprehended.” Here we find they have a notion of the supreme and his son. Their opposite neighbours across the _red sea_, worshipped only two gods, τον Διον καὶ τον Διονυσον, _Jovem & Jovem Nysæum_, God, and the God of _Nysa_. This is what is meant by the two principles of _Pythagoras_, mention’d by _Plutarch de plac. philos._ unity and indefinite duality, the sacred _Dyas_ of _Plato_. Whence _Diodorus_ in his I. writes, “that the _Egyptians_ declar’d there were two first eternal Gods.” These they express’d by the names of _unity_ and _duality_. I do not believe that they found this out by their own understanding and reasoning, but had it from patriarchal tradition. And then their own reasoning would confirm it. For it is altogether agreeable to reason, arguing from the fecundity of the first cause. The _Greeks_ turned _Cneph_ into their _Neptune_, the sovereign of the waters, from what the _hebrew_ legislator writes in the beginning of his _cosmogony_; “and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” The word _Neptune_ comes from _Cneph_ and דניא _Dunia_, _orbis_, _circulus_, the _winged circle_. And this probably will give us some light into the reason, why we find our winged temple of _Barrow_ upon the banks of that noble æstuary, the _Humber_. I wonder’d indeed how it should come about, that the Druids should so studiously place this work under the verge of the high land, and upon the brink of the salt marsh; so that every high tide washes or overflows the skirts of it, whilst the freshwater brook runs close under it. At this time it must have presented them with the agreeable picture of the sacred hieroglyphic, hovering over both fresh and salt-water.

I observ’d a line, or little bank and ditch, cast up above our figure, which I judg’d to be done with an intent to keep off the inundation of the ocean at the times of sacrifice, which seems to have been perform’d within that inclos’d area, where I have set the figure of the compass in the engraven view. Likewise just without that line, eastward, I remarked three little square plots, which perhaps were habitations of the Druids who were keepers of the temple.

’Tis not from the purpose to take notice of one of the greatest fix’d stars of the heavens, at the bottom of the constellation call’d the _ship_, having the name of _Canopus_, which is no other than our word _Cneph_. This star had this name given it by the _Egyptians_, as appearing to them just above the edge of the southern horizon. And in their spheres, we may very well presume, they painted it as a winged circle, and because it always appear’d as hovering over the horizon or great ocean.

————_O numen aquarum Proxima cui cœlo cessit, Neptune, potestas._ Ov. Met. IV.

So that originally the ancients understood the spirit or soul of the universe, or more properly the divine spirit, by this figure which they call’d KNEPH, which the _European_ nations call’d _Neptune_, sovereign of the waters. So often by the poets call’d Ενοσιχθων, Ενοσιγαιων, the _shaker of the earth_; for the waters in _Moses_ means the _Hyle_, or moist matter of chaos whence the universe was made.

Two of the quarterly solemnities or general sacrifices of the Druids were on the two equinoxes, when are the highest tides. A curious observer being upon the spot, for some years together, at these times, might possibly make some notable discovery concerning the difference of the surface of the sea, since the current of 5 or 6000 years: for I persuade myself this temple was made by the very first inhabitants of the isle, and not long after the flood, on account of the interment here of some great hero, that advanc’d so far in peopling the country. And if our reasonings and testimonies hitherto be any whit agreeable to truth, we may point out the species of many of these most ancient temples built at the place of sepulture of heroes, spoken of in writings of those times. For instance, we infer a serpentine temple was made by the _tumulus_ of _Orpheus_, from the fable of a serpent offering to devour his head, which serpent was turn’d into stone.

_Hic ferus expositum peregrinis anguis arenis Os petit, & sparsos stillanti rore capillos Lambit, & hymniferos inhiat divellere vultus. Tandem Phœbus adest, morsusque inferre parentem Congelat, & patulos, ut erant, indurat hiatus._

Again, we may reasonably suppose that an alate temple was built by the tomb of _Memnon_, said to be buried in _Phrygia_, who was turn’d into a bird on the funeral pile, at the request of his mother _Aurora_. We see some hints of it even from _Ovid_’s telling the story. This was done at the request of his mother _Aurora_, who petitions _Jupiter_ for this favour to her son, for herself she desires none. Thus she begins:

_Omnibus inferior, quas sustinet aureus æther_ (_Nam mihi sunt totum rarissima templa per orbem_,) _Diva tamen venio: non ut delubra, diesque Des mihi sacrificos, caliturasque ignibus aras_, &c.

He was turn’d into a bird, and a flock of the same birds, call’d _Aves Memnoniæ_, arose from the same funeral pile, which immediately divided into two companies, and fought till they destroy’d each other. And that a like flight of the same birds came on the same day every year from _Ethiopia_, went thrice round his monument, and then divided and fought in honour of their ancestor.

What can we understand by this, but an assembly of his people and descendants to celebrate his anniversary, as was the custom of antiquity toward great men. The story is entirely of a piece with that told of _Cadmus_, and must be interpreted in the same way.

In this sense we are treating of, are we to understand authors when they tell us, that _Cadmus_ built a temple to _Neptune_ in the island of _Rhodes_. This was not a cover’d temple with elegant pillars, nor an idolatrous one, which were matters of after-times; but one of our alate temples. _Phut_ had built a _Dracontium_ there before.

_Antoninus Liberalis_ XII. speaks of the lake _Canopus_, which I suppose had its name from a _Cneph_ or alate temple near it, built by a hero, _Cygnus_, son of _Phut_, “who, the fable says, was turn’d into a bird there,” and _Phylius_ his sepulchral monument was by it.

In this sense, _Strabo_ II. speaks of _Hercules_ being call’d _Canopeus_, from building such a temple. And we may now understand that hitherto abstruse _Egyptian_ antiquity called _Canopus_, a vase which they us’d for preserving of water in their temples and in their families, with a cover to it. In order to insure the blessing of heaven to this most necessary element, they frequently consign’d it with the sacred prophylactic character of the _Kneph_ or _circulus alatus_, which is the _greek Neptune_, the _dominator aquarum_. Many of these vases are still remaining in the cabinets of antiquarians. Such a one pictur’d in _Kircher_.

And, by the by, I may mention that some of these vases are adorn’d with a _scarabeus_ with expanded wings, and this is entirely of the same meaning as the alate circle. But this is not a place to discourse larger on these matters.

I suspect _Geneva_ and _Geneffa_ have their names from such temples. As _Gnaphalus_ a bird mention’d by _Aristotle_. _Simias_ the _Rhodian_ celebrates our _Cneph_, in his poem compos’d in the form of wings: as the author of motion and creation: hence the word _Nebula_, νεφέλη and perhaps _Nebulo_.